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.

 

FLIGHT 93 - The Biggest 911 Smoking Gun!

page: 70
24
<< 67  68  69    71  72  73 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 01:02 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
The problem is the calls were recorded and there are transcripts of those conversations. Not one of the called parties had any doubt about who they were talking to and like I explained earlier it goes beyond simply matching the tone of a voice. Say a caller asked his wife something benign like 'how are the kids' and she's actually only got one or no children or they're away with grandparents or whatever - that's the sort of slip that would give it away but it didn't happen.




posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 01:15 AM
link   
I never mentioned anything about fake calls and morphin whatever, thats disinfo.


This next story is real. Calls took place, passengers thought hijacking was real, bomb on board, Just like " FLight 93 "

Did Flight 93 became flight 1989?


SOURCE Traveling on Delta Flight 1989 on 9/11
My spouse] and I and six other fellow [...] employees were on the 8 am flight from Boston to Los Angeles on Tuesday, but we were on the Delta flight [1989], the one out of three 8am flights departing Logan that did not get hijacked. Instead, we were forced to make an emergency landing in Cleveland because there were reports that a bomb or hijacking was taking place on our plane. The pilot had radioed that there was suspicious activity in the cabin since one of the passengers was speaking urgently on his cellphone and ignored repeated flight attendant requests to stop using his cell phone while in flight. Also, there was an irregularity in the passenger manifest because there were two people [with the same middle eastern name] who were listed but only one aboard.


Now this is the interesting part and may answer the calls from the airplanes.


S/he confirmed that the pilot gave them permission to make one call while they were on the plane. S/he remembers it as being while they were still in the air while her initial letter says that it was after they landed. Either there were 2 calls allowed, their memory (5 years later) differs from what happened, or s/he was incorrect in the initial letter. Remember that s/he wasn't, at the time, writing for posterity but to reassure family and friends. S/he doesn't remember what time s/he was able to make a call(s) that was but for reason thinks it was closer to 1000. It was around the time the first tower collapsed. That was one piece of the information they got while still in the air. They were later able to make more calls after they had landed in Cleveland.
They were told to make one call but people might have snuck more. S/he remembers thinking that it was a very inappropriate joke when someone mentioned one of the WTC towers collapsing.


Those calls probably sounded like " Mom, Mom!, I think we are being Hijacked, you belive me dont you?"

Flight 93 CVR " Hello this is tha Captain, please remain seated, we have a bomb on board and are landing at the nearest airport!"


The pilot had radioed that there was suspicious activity in the cabin since one of the passengers was speaking urgently on his cellphone and ignored repeated flight attendant requests to stop using his cell phone while in flight. Also, there was an irregularity in the passenger manifest because there were two people [with the same middle eastern name] who were listed but only one aboard


Mabey This was the incident where Mark Beamer and friends "letsroll'd" to restrain the 2 people with the "Same Middle Eastern Name".

SHocking simulatrity.

Could it of been one the mock hijacking occuring that day?









[edit on 11-1-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 01:25 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


That mom call, alleged by a female, sounds very familiar, and too familiar to be coincidental. It sounds very much like the alleged Mark Bingham call. "Hello, mom, this is your son Mark Bingham. We are being hijacked. You believe me, don't you?"

Why would adult children have to ask their parents if they believe them, if their voice tells their parents something is desperately wrong? It should be in their voice, and the way they are reacting in panic, or some level of fear, if that is what actually happened.

Why would any child have to give a first and last name to a parent? I did not read Mrs. Bingham (mom) was mental incapacitated in any way to warrant that from her adult child.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana
This is what it should of looked like.
img204.imageshack.us...


Just out of interest, where does the tailplane in that image come from? I'd quite like to know, since so far, your idea of any 'real' plane crash hasn't involved speeds greater than around 300 miles per hour, so lets have the source of that image.

[edit on 11-1-2008 by apex]



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana
This is what it should of looked like.


[edit on 10-1-2008 by IvanZana]



?



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:18 AM
link   
What I fail to understand, on any of those alleged calls, who was calling the authorities to let them know what was happening? Or at least tell to whomever they were speaking, to call the authorities ASAP, and given details of approximately where the flight was.

Correction: Mark Bingham's mother's name is Alice Hoglan.

The following is only one of 4 different versions concerning Mark Bingham. Mr. Bingham knew his mother was at her brother's, but mom did not know Mark was going to be flying on 9/11/01? :

killtown.911review.org...

"► Flight 93: Forty lives, one destiny

"Alice Hoglan was visiting her sister-in-law, Kathy Hoglan, in Saratoga, Calif., when the phone rang. It was 9:42 Eastern time. Kathy's nephew, Mark Bingham was on the line.

"Alice, talk to Mark," Kathy said, handing her the phone. "He's been hijacked."

"Mom? This is Mark Bingham," the voice said. It sounded strange for her son to introduce himself by his full name. She knew he was flustered.
"I want to let you know that I love you. I'm on a flight from Newark to San Francisco and there are three guys who have taken over the plane and they say they have a bomb," he said.
"Who are these guys?" Alice Hoglan asked.
There was a pause. Hoglan heard murmurs of conversation in English. Mark's voice came back.
"You believe me, don't you?" he asked.
"Yes, Mark. I believe you. But who are these guys?"
There was a pause. Alice heard background noise. The line went dead." - Pittsburg Post-Gazette (10/28/01)

On the listing we have been presented, this appears:

Mark Bingham 9:36:10 - 5 (call duration)
Mark Bingham 9:37:53 - 166 (call duration
Mark Bingham 9:41:20 - 0 (duration)
Mark Bingham 9:41:52 - 3 (call duration)

Anyone besides me see anything wrong with the above picture? Please do not tell me that someone borrowed Mark Bingham's credit card, because that is the only way it could work out according to the "official" report.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:21 AM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 


What I just noticed on the list, all of those calls alleged to be from Mark Bingham, were placed to Vaughn Hoglan.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
What I fail to understand, on any of those alleged calls, who was calling the authorities to let them know what was happening? Or at least tell to whomever they were speaking, to call the authorities ASAP, and given details of approximately where the flight was.


256.com...

S/he confirmed that the pilot gave them permission to make one call while they were on the plane. S/he remembers it as being while they were still in the air while her initial letter says that it was after they landed. Either there were 2 calls allowed, their memory (5 years later) differs from what happened, or s/he was incorrect in the initial letter. Remember that s/he wasn't, at the time, writing for posterity but to reassure family and friends. S/he doesn't remember what time s/he was able to make a call(s) that was but for reason thinks it was closer to 1000. It was around the time the first tower collapsed. That was one piece of the information they got while still in the air. They were later able to make more calls after they had landed in Cleveland.
They were told to make one call but people might have snuck more. S/he remembers thinking that it was a very inappropriate joke when someone mentioned one of the WTC towers collapsing.


[edit on 11-1-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:41 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


The one called Delta 1989 had people going into the Hopkins terminial. Why they would have to make calls when landed and still on the plane is beyond me. As I recall, there was no delay unloading passengers off Delta 1989. It was sitting right by the terminal. The TV crews filmed it sitting there and not elsewhere. That was the plane reported to have been told to land, and no bomb report came from that plane on 9/11/2001.

It was another plane off by itself, and also flimed by TV crews on 9/11/2001. That was the plane we were told had the bomb threat and called Flight 93. It was also the plane stated to have no bomb on board after the bomb squad arrived. That was on 9/11/2001. The next day - the Plain Dealer reported 9/11/2001 from the TV news. By 9/13/2001, all media was reporting only 1 plane landed - Delta 1989 - and that was the plane reporting a bomb threat, on which no bomb was found.

The one called Flight 93 did not film passengers leaving the plane. It filmed the plane with the passenger door open, and we were told they had been shuttled off across the freeway, to the NASA center. Delta was already causing too much overload in the terminal at the time.

They both arrived very close to one another.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:46 AM
link   
http://256.com/gray/thoughts/2001/20010912/delta_flight_1989_9_11/scrapbook/020.jpg



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by IvanZana
 


As I recall, there was no delay unloading passengers off Delta 1989. It was sitting right by the terminal. The TV crews filmed it sitting there and not elsewhere. That was the plane reported to have been told to land, and no bomb report came from that plane on 9/11/2001.



After our emergency landing, our plane was directed to go to an isolated area of the airport, and we waited for over two hours in quarantine before FBI agents and bomb sniffing dogs came out to the plane. Just after we landed, the pilot gave us permission to make one very brief telephone call before we were banned from any further telephone use. The sixty or so passengers were thus able to gather some alarming details of the unbelievable fates of the other two LA-bound planes and the collapse of the World Trade Center towers, the suicide bombing of the Pentagon as well as reports of other plane crashes in PA and LA (LA proved unfounded) before we were cut off from any further communication. Unfortunately, all this information only added to the alarm and confusion we felt as we waited for over two hours far away from the gates of the airport



Who are these people on the plane telling everyone to not use the phone?

Not one call on 911 described ever seeing a terrorist or hijacker except for Flight 11, but that was from Babara Olsen and has been proven fake.

Makes me wonder about the 3 planes with the distress signals over the Atlantic on 911. Were they the real planes?

[edit on 11-1-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:51 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


Yes, that one. Where did that tailplane come from? What crash, or is it entirely photoshopped, in which case, you could have got a United one.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:52 AM
link   
Here is how a Cleveland NASA spokesperson tried to explain away that extra plane. They said a KC-135. carrying a team of scientists from Houston, had been ordered to land in Cleveland, and they had to put the scientists up at a hotel. They apologized for any confusion that made have caused. That was no KC-135 sitting by itself on a Hopkins runway - far from the terminal.

What would a team of NASA scientists from Houston be doing traveling on a KC-135?

And people wonder why the "official" reports make no logical sense at all?



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:58 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


Is there any way to determine the date of the paper?



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:59 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


Delta was sitting close to the terminal. There is no grass up by the terminal.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 03:02 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


The one called Flight 93 was turned the other way. We could see the passenger door was wide open. That is where the grass be seen because it was on a runway not up by the terminal.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by IvanZana
 


The one called Flight 93 was turned the other way. We could see the passenger door was wide open. That is where the grass be seen because it was on a runway not up by the terminal.


I lost ya.

What?

I just try to stick to the facts, loosly.

Do you have any evidence of flight 93 on the tarmak?

The clipping is here Dated Sept 12,2001.SOURCE



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 03:37 AM
link   



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 04:19 AM
link   
I would hink it much more disrepectful if say people were taken out and murdered to gain control over thier families. From what i can see on the whole scenario, regardless of the minor points, is that something is wrong with it. What can be done about it? nothing. Until humanity can think as one, then it needs to be babysat.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 04:21 AM
link   
oh by the way, does this cancel out the old saying "it takes 2 to fight"? that would be awesome to say to my mom and tell her she owes me reprimand for all those groundings



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 67  68  69    71  72  73 >>

log in

join