It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Were the callers on Flight 93 real people? Is there proof?

page: 3
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 06:36 AM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


Source? (If it's from some whackjob site, forget it. Verified solid sources please)




posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 07:02 AM
link   
Ted Olson admits he never got any call from Barbara.

Oh, well. He got his reward, got to be Solicitor General under Bush.

They probably weren't getting along anyway.

Either that, or she's off living on some island getting a sun tan.

These people are all paid liars, without conscience, laughing at us for being so gullible as to think people actually mean what they say and that nobody would be so low as to pull of a scam like 9/11 with a straight face.

The worst criminal looks righteous next to these people.



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 08:11 AM
link   

posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
reply to post by SPreston
 


Source? (If it's from some whackjob site, forget it. Verified solid sources please)



I already gave the source; for both posts. You did not bother to read the post? Again? You did not bother to download the trial flash files and look at them yourself? What kind of a searcher for truth are you?

I will be the first to admit that the Moussaoui kangeroo trial was a joke, and that evidence or testimony derived under torture should never be allowed in an American courtroom.

However the evidence I linked to was official government 9-11 evidence searched out by the FBI and other official government entities. I figured a person like you would practically worship government 'evidence'. Would it matter to you that the Moussaoui trial was technically illegal under US law? The flash files cover all four aircraft and many other aspects of 9-11. You surely do not believe that OUR wonderful government would 'cook' the evidence do you?

Perhaps I might agree with you that many official government sources are 'whackjob sites' and not too verifiably solid sources of believable 9-11 information.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


I wonder if you have noticed the one striking error in that phone listing supposedly from Todd Beamer's phone....




How is it that the GTE Airfone you allude to in the link above, kept working 45 minutes AFTER Flight 93 allegedly was destroyed at 10:03 am?


You must have missed the part about "line left open". Or you have never bothered to check out the testimony from GTE about the call....

[edit on 1-3-2009 by Swampfox46_1999]



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston

posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
reply to post by SPreston
 


Source? (If it's from some whackjob site, forget it. Verified solid sources please)



I already gave the source; for both posts. You did not bother to read the post? Again? You did not bother to download the trial flash files and look at them yourself? What kind of a searcher for truth are you?

I will be the first to admit that the Moussaoui kangeroo trial was a joke, and that evidence or testimony derived under torture should never be allowed in an American courtroom.

However the evidence I linked to was official government 9-11 evidence searched out by the FBI and other official government entities. I figured a person like you would practically worship government 'evidence'. Would it matter to you that the Moussaoui trial was technically illegal under US law? The flash files cover all four aircraft and many other aspects of 9-11. You surely do not believe that OUR wonderful government would 'cook' the evidence do you?

Perhaps I might agree with you that many official government sources are 'whackjob sites' and not too verifiably solid sources of believable 9-11 information.



Yawn. I'll take it as a no then, that you can not answer my question rationally.

The Israeli link proves...what?

A person like me? You know nothing of me. I'd suggest you keep personal speculation down to a minimum. Worship government evidence? No. But I take it alot more seriously than blind rants from questionable sources. Straight from the horses mouth is the best place to find information.

And yes, I read the little slide presentation. The calls in question state the lines were left open. In otherwords, they had not been disconnected. So what? Cellphones and the like have been known to survive major accidents. Hell, several pieces of luggage and personal items survived intact.

It also states that several of the phone calls were disconnected a few times.

There is far more evidence that flight 93 was shot down than there are for all these ridiculous "no plane, no people" theories.

What you present is speculation on facts, not facts themselves.



new topics

 
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join