Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

BREAKING 9/11 NEWS: FBI Says Barbara Olsen Did Not Call Ted Olsen. Bush Solicitor General LIED !!

page: 5
46
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 3 2008 @ 10:33 AM
link   
So, seems clear now that the phone calls that allegdly came from thos alleged flights were actually real calls from the mock hijacking exercises taking place on 9/11.

The operation was called Vigilante Guardian.




posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by darkbluesky
reply to post by IvanZana
 

Did Ted Olsen's "lie" about speaking to his wife help bomb the WTC in 1993? Did it help attack the USS Cole in Yeman? Did it help blow up US Embassies in Africa? Did it help kill huindreds of United State Marines in Beruit?





Umm no, his lie proves that barbara olsen was not on flight 77.

[edit on 27-3-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 11:44 PM
link   
I found this great page tonight: intelfiles.egoplex.com...
It has a lot of FBI source files from that day.

Here's the one about Ted Olson:
intelfiles.egoplex.com...


In it he states he called the DOJ between two calls from his wife, however in a 911 Staff Report from 2004 (www.archives.gov...) footnote #268 it states the DOJ logs this call at 9:33. The last call from the flight was at 9:30:56 and lasted until 9:35:16. So, unless he put his wife on hold to call the DOJ, there's much more to the story.



posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 11:57 PM
link   
I also found many more anomalies in these files concerning the other phone calls:

Thomas Burnett Call
Source: intelfiles.egoplex.com...
between 9:37 and 9:39 - Tom reports the highjackers are already talking about "flying the plane into the ground" (this was reported taking place in his second call while his wife suspected he already knew about the WTC crashes - why would he state into the ground? weren't they supposedly headed to Washington?)

Jeremy Glick's Call
Source: intelfiles.egoplex.com...
at 10:15 - Reported that Jeremy was still on the phone

from intelfiles.egoplex.com...
approx. 10:30 or later - Jeremy Glick is currently on phone (reported as Jeremy Lnu)


Todd Beamer Call
Source: intelfiles.egoplex.com...
10 people remained in first class (others reported they were all moved to the back - this is confirmed by Sandra Bradshaw below)

Source: intelfiles.egoplex.com...
after 9:43 - Todd reports "the airplane was about to be highjacked" also states the highjackers "were preparing to take control of the flight" (Tom Burnett reported they had highjacked before 9:30)

approximately 9:50 - Todd states that two hijackers entered the cockpit and one stayed behind in the main cabin (but the CVR already has two highjackers in the cockpit at 9:40 or sooner)


Peter Hanson call
Source: intelfiles.egoplex.com...
nothing strange in the interview with his father but in the Chicago's FBI timeline at 10:20am Central Time it was reported that Peter Hanson called Connecticut while the plane was still on the ground and reported "he had just seen a stewardess shot" (this is most likely the result of Peter's father calling the local police after talking with Peter...just proves you shouldn't trust a story after it's been through so many hands)


Sandra Bradshaw's Call to her husband
Source: intelfiles.egoplex.com...
after 9:50 - She states there were three highjackers and one was "seated in first class" and the others were seated in the back of the plane (all the highjackers' reserved seats were in first class, so if she meant this is where they were during the call, the CVR has two highjackers recorded in the cockpit starting at 9:40 or sooner)

She also states there were 27 people "in the back of the plane with her" (so 6 passengers were still in First class, but how could these 6 make calls from phones in the back as stated in the Moussaui trial evidence)


Amy Sweeney Call with Michael Woodward
Source: intelfiles.egoplex.com...
Amy reports hijackers sat in 9B, 10C, 9G, 9E... I won't mention the numbers are off... but what's really strange is there are no "C"'s or "E"'s in Business or First Class... they are labeled A, B, D, G, H, J

after 8:29 - Amy reports "the highjackers had just gained access to the cockpit"



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 09:03 PM
link   
nice find.

People would do well to research the links rather than except the opinions of ignorant people.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 09:16 PM
link   
I beleive Charles Goyette. KFYI's Icon before he one evening questioned the war, he was fired like a dog and i was a witness to it all.

To get back to the real story, I beleive Barbara Olsen along with many met a very harsh fate on that day.
I dont think we will ever know- furthermore, the relatives must know something went amiss on that day, and it wasnt the plane crash. At least not on the flight they were on.

MHO.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana




Umm no, his lie proves that barbara olsen was not on flight 77.

[edit on 27-3-2008 by IvanZana]

So then this means the airline and its employees are all in on the plot too then. Does this seem plausible that they would all lie an fake records? Remember that many were her friends.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by NIcon
I found this great page tonight: intelfiles.egoplex.com...
It has a lot of FBI source files from that day.

Here's the one about Ted Olson:
intelfiles.egoplex.com...


In it he states he called the DOJ between two calls from his wife, however in a 911 Staff Report from 2004 (www.archives.gov...) footnote #268 it states the DOJ logs this call at 9:33. The last call from the flight was at 9:30:56 and lasted until 9:35:16. So, unless he put his wife on hold to call the DOJ, there's much more to the story.


That end time does not mean it was the actual end of the call. If the call gets disconnected, the receiving end may not know right away that the call is dropped. not to mention the discrepancy between the two clocks for the different logs.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by snoopy
 

snoopy, I think you're missing the point. Ted Olson said on that day that he called the DOJ and after that his wife called again. The DOJ says he called at 9:33. No phone call from flight 77 was made after 9:33, therefore he could not have talked to his wife after talking with DOJ. Also, I'm not buying discrepancies in the time logs as it is incredibly easy to synchronize servers with SNTP time servers, and I see many reasons for the DOJ and the phone company to keep theirs synched to a time server.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 12:12 PM
link   
Ivan, make up your mind about the phones on the plane.
one post you give us the customer service rep saying those planes don't have phones and then in your other post you cut and paste where it says they did have the phones.
To me it is the only issue that needs to be resolved. For me to read another thread of yours I am going to need a good clarification from you why you are advancing both positions without retracting at least one of them.
Once again I am stuck between the Truther's and the Debunker's and finding it hard as hell to find the truth inbetween.

...Are some of you suggesting that there is enough evidence of a criminal conspiracy and there is not one attorney in the United States willing to take this evidence to a grand jury? (the chance for a prosecutor making $48K a year to jump into the headlines is just too tempting by the ego to not have been attempted)
If flight 77 had seat phones then this is a moot argument. If they did not have phones then the debunkers have absolutely nothing left to argue, they lose.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by NIcon
reply to post by snoopy
 

snoopy, I think you're missing the point. Ted Olson said on that day that he called the DOJ and after that his wife called again. The DOJ says he called at 9:33. No phone call from flight 77 was made after 9:33, therefore he could not have talked to his wife after talking with DOJ. Also, I'm not buying discrepancies in the time logs as it is incredibly easy to synchronize servers with SNTP time servers, and I see many reasons for the DOJ and the phone company to keep theirs synched to a time server.



but that's not a very strong argument. how can you rule out that Ted simply isn't misremembering or that Barb also called from a cell phone? And who knows what other possibilities that are all much more believable than Ted being part of some caper that involved needlessly killing his wife.

But let's suppose Ted was lying. How does that prove that the whole thing was an inside job? Let's remember this is probably the smallest piece of evidence in the entire pile.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:17 PM
link   
I'd also like to point out that there are already threads on this forum that have clearly debunked the claim that there were no phones on flight 77 and those same threads exposed Rob in his attempt to manufacture evidence to make his claim that there weren't phones. Not only do those threads include pictures of the actual records proving there were indeed phones on that plane, but also a press release from the airline confirming that there were. So let's end this no phones nonsense. Just use the search function.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by snoopy
 

Snoopy, I never said this showed Ted Olson was in on a conspiracy. I just think he is not a credible witness. Barbara could have called from a cell phone, and in the file I linked to it even lists her number, so I would hope the FBI would have checked the logs for that to either confirm or deny if she used hers. So this doesn't prove an "inside job" or "no plane hit the pentagon", but I think it does show Ted Olson's account doesn't make sense and should be disregarded. I do believe his assistant was not making up that she forwarded calls to him, but as to the circumstances of them I will not accept Ted Olson's word. If he's misremembering then it's as worthless as if he was totally making it up.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by snoopy
And who knows what other possibilities that are all much more believable than Ted being part of some caper that involved needlessly killing his wife.


I know plenty of men who would be more than willing to be a part of a caper to needlessly kill their wife. Hell, it happens every day. It's called domestic homicide.

I'm not choosing sides here, but to claim to know someone's true intentions of something is not very open minded IMO. For all we know, Ted could have despised his wife and wanted her gone. I'm not saying that he did, just that it could be a possibility.


Summary of Large Cities' Domestic Homicide Rates

City 1995, 1996, 1997
New York City, NY 29 31 30



www.silentwitness.net...



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by NIcon
reply to post by snoopy
 

Snoopy, I never said this showed Ted Olson was in on a conspiracy. I just think he is not a credible witness. Barbara could have called from a cell phone, and in the file I linked to it even lists her number, so I would hope the FBI would have checked the logs for that to either confirm or deny if she used hers. So this doesn't prove an "inside job" or "no plane hit the pentagon", but I think it does show Ted Olson's account doesn't make sense and should be disregarded. I do believe his assistant was not making up that she forwarded calls to him, but as to the circumstances of them I will not accept Ted Olson's word. If he's misremembering then it's as worthless as if he was totally making it up.



Well, I don't consider any eyewitness testimony credible on it's own. It's well known that people make mistakes and mis-remember things. And this is why during investigations such testimony is the last resort and simple there for reinforcement. I don't think that Ted's testimony is being used as any kind of strong point, but more so just a detail. The case is not balancing on his or anyone's testimony.

I think the testimony should be taken with a grain of salt. I think it's also fair to ismiss his testimony. I don't think your reasons for this are out of line. However there are many who woul use this to claim an inside job. Something along the lines of what the CIT guys do. Find the witness testimony that doesn't match everything else, and use it to dismiss everything else. But I see this is not the case with your argument and I think you have a very valid point.



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 02:34 AM
link   
reply to post by darkbluesky
 


Maybe Barb used another cell phone from another passenger ?
So there is no record then ?

Come on man,
Ted was using a phone, was that a NSA hotline phone like in GOOD SHEPHERD ?

The proof lays with Ted's tall claims and 4 different telephone stories.

"The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House".
by Barbara Olson (Author) to be published on 9/13/01
www.amazon.com...=dp_proddesc_0?ie=UTF8&n=283155&s=books



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 09:01 AM
link   
This fact is just that ....fact..... Fbi says no calls came from flight 77, airphone or cell.

So the cnn reporter, Barbara Olsen, and an attorney general lied about 911. Selling the story makes you an accesory. Rico act?



posted on Dec, 15 2008 @ 06:09 AM
link   
Found this piece for you guys in US to chew on (Doubletree, Flower Mound!!??):
Barbara Olson
HOMEMAKER
HOMEMAKER
Updated
Q3/2008
John McCain
$225
1904 DOUBLETREE TRAIL
Flower Mound TX
fundrace.huffingtonpost.com...



posted on Dec, 15 2008 @ 08:50 AM
link   

posted by IvanZana
Call them and find out for yourself. Research this yourself.

You want proof to come in the form of a link from Cnn, not going to happen.

This has been researched and posters coming on and saying "I dont understand", "it cant be real", "nothing to see here" should really be ignored till you research all information for yourself.


posted by GLDNGUN
I'm not the one calling the US Solicitor General a liar. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. So far your "proof" is a supposed email to a "Mr XXXXXX." Wow, way to make your case.

On the contrary, I have researched it. You just don't like my results because it doesn't fit your agenda.

Again, you are the one selectively picking parts of the FBI sworn testimony and record to believe, while calling them liars when they say something that doesn't fit that agenda of yours.

And, once again, NOTHING the FBI said contradicts Ted Olsen's story.

Buy, hey, if "Mr. XXXXXX" has something to say that fits your agenda...knock yourself out.

Actually the AA 757 maintenance manual from 2001 (at the bottom) states the back-of-seat airphones was deactivated from AA 757s.

Page from American Airlines maintenance manual



Proprietary information has been removed.
Top left date 01/28/2007 refers to the software revision date used to read this document on American Airlines Computer system.
757 Aircraft Maintenance Manual page date found in lower right. Page of manual is 23-19-00-0.
Work Order ECO-F0878 dated prior to above 757 AMM page could not be located.
We did locate ECO's dated mid and late 2002 which order the removal of the phone system. However, none dated prior to the above 757 AMM as noted.
"Replacement" refers to major maintenance events being done on aircraft that requires full removal of phone system. Phone Company Personnel only are allowed to remove/re-install full system until removed permanently. However, the phones were deactivated (no service) during this time according to above 757 AMM.
Actual Size Document
Update 09/18/07: A new document has emerged on the internet through an anonymous source which orders the phones deactivated dated March 2002. This new document is not referenced in the above 757 AMM page as the deactivation order. The document contradicts American Airlines Customer Relations Representative Chad Kinder, American Airlines Public Relations Representative John Hotard who states the deactivation order was issued prior to 9/11/2001 and of course the above 757 AMM page. We are currently in the process of analyzing the conflicts and will update this article as more information becomes available.

pilotsfor911truth.org...



posted on Dec, 15 2008 @ 10:33 AM
link   
So why all the lies about Barbara Olson?
The government claims that Barbara Olson was located here:




The primary suspects controlled the crime scene and the DNA. There was lots of DNA from the targeted Pentagon personnel all over the crime scene. A lot of the alleged 'passenger' DNA was found way up past the Exit Hole. Initially the report was that the aircraft nose cone created the Exit Hole which is comical. Then the embarrassed perps changed it to a landing gear. Since the alleged 'passenger' DNA was inside the fuselage and the landing gear is outside the fuselage and under the wings or under the nose cone, then how did that DNA reach the A&E Drive in that supposedly hot jet fuel burning hell? Then some clown claimed a jet engine made the Exit Hole; but no titanium/steel engines either. The latest propaganda is that an explosive jet fuel fireball created the Exit Hole which demands even more; "But how did fragile DNA get way out there and survive the heat?" DNA is destroyed with just a few hundred degrees of heat. Of course April Gallup 35 feet from the place of impact with her baby boy, stated there was NO JET FUEL. My oh my, these 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY faithful believers are having a difficult time defending their fairy tale.



Where the Pentagon DNA Was Allegedly Found on the 1st Floor

So how did all of that DNA get all the way over to the Exit Hole?
Answer: It didn't. No aircraft crashed into the Pentagon.
It was all a military psyops mission and a lot of people were had.





new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join