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.

 

Phone Calls from the 9/11 Airliners, Faked!

page: 4
24
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 05:16 PM
link   
So let me get this straight just so I understand. Everyone on the 9/11 Commission report was bad? If they had left Kissinger in charge I could understand your accusation but it was a bi-partisan committee which was even given additional funding for more research. Many of the things that were not allowed to be released at the time were part of a trial for another terrorist but most sites won;t tell you that. After the Moussaui(sp) trial there were a multitude of documents that were released because they were used as evidence and could not be revealed until then so nothing is secret.

If you happened to read the commission report you may have some insight as to just how screwed up your country really is. It showed that we basically had our pants down and did not think anyone would actually attack us and....they did. That is what all of the intel reports thats were ignored contained. A real threat. So please tell me how a real threat (that you say was withheld) is also associated with a government plot with all the hijackers still alive and all the evidence created and planted?

It is time to realize that there is a man behind the curtain but he is making decisions that will affect your children's children. Our history was written for the next 100 years after WW2 with the baby boom and instilling fear of nuclear destruction.

There has been sufficient evidence provided (just like you asked) that explain that there were phone calls that day...and those people weer real...and died.




posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 

Thanks for the BTS data - should be easy to find the date - 6 days after my entry into the US at SFO (had a weeks meeting befor going on to DFW)

Ill dig out my old passport.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Mobile Phone Technology for Airplanes, Introduced Till September 2007
Mobile phone calls will be a common thing on planes.
The high-altitude telecom equipment will turn phone calls on planes highly common, as another 2-3 operators are developing the technology.

The new technology will be used only above 3,000 m (9,000 ft), four minutes after takeoff and kept until 10 minutes before landing.




news.softpedia.com...

Will only be used under 9,000 ft Oh, why not at 30,000 feet like all the calls on 911 that were made. Hmmm one has to wonder

It appears that the technology in the cell phone industry was not that good in 2001.

If it was so great why would the airline companies want to spend million of dollars on something they don’t need in 2007?



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme

Mobile Phone Technology for Airplanes, Introduced Till September 2007
Mobile phone calls will be a common thing on planes.
The high-altitude telecom equipment will turn phone calls on planes highly common, as another 2-3 operators are developing the technology.

The new technology will be used only above 3,000 m (9,000 ft), four minutes after takeoff and kept until 10 minutes before landing.




news.softpedia.com...

Will only be used under 9,000 ft Oh, why not at 30,000 feet like all the calls on 911 that were made. Hmmm one has to wonder

It appears that the technology in the cell phone industry was not that good in 2001.

If it was so great why would the airline companies want to spend million of dollars on something they don’t need in 2007?




Again, the cell calls were made a lower altitude on 9/11. 30,000 is a cruising altitude and the calls were made in a last few minutes. Eyewitness accounts put the jet under a 10k ceiling by that point.

Look into US cell service and not Europe. Also, it says The new technology will be used only above 3,000 m (9,000 ft), four minutes after takeoff and kept until 10 minutes before landing. ABOVE 9000 feet. Again, you have posted something that debunks yourself.
Do you not proof read nor do your star givers?

[edit on 14-1-2010 by esdad71]



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 06:54 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


Air Fone used a multiplexed VHF (thats Very High Frequency) radio link -
to communicate with ground stations linked into the telephone system

The phones were in a cradle in the seat backs . People could use a credit
card to place calls from the aircraft.

It is not a cell phone !

Smashed Air Fone recovered from Flight 93 scene



So what is your problem....?



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Its too bad you dont want to go through the documents. They asnwer a lot of questions. However, here are a few spots you can look in this document for answers.

911myths.com...

Page 4...notes on interview with Craig Marquis, employee of American Airlines, about his phone call from Betty Ong.

Page 23...notes on interview with Phyllis Johnson, Verizon/GTE Airfone customer service, on receiving a call which her system indicated originated from Flight 93.

Pages 45-52...notes/documentation on calls made, including credit card numbers used.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Its too bad you dont want to go through the documents. They asnwer a lot of questions. However, here are a few spots you can look in this document for answers.


I did go through them. I saw lots of garbage. I assumed that if there was something specific I should be looking for, it could be pointed out to me. I simply asked for direction, not to be spoon fed.


911myths.com...

Page 4...notes on interview with Craig Marquis, employee of American Airlines, about his phone call from Betty Ong.

Page 23...notes on interview with Phyllis Johnson, Verizon/GTE Airfone customer service, on receiving a call which her system indicated originated from Flight 93.

Pages 45-52...notes/documentation on calls made, including credit card numbers used.



Wow! You did it and I bet you survived. Thanks, I will look these over.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 


Again, the cell calls were made a lower altitude on 9/11. 30,000 is a cruising altitude and the calls were made in a last few minutes. Eyewitness accounts put the jet under a 10k ceiling by that point.


LOL I disagree with your nonsense, if this is your lame opinion then say it is, but if you are stating this is a fact, LOL then please provide creditable proof to your ridiculous claim that all theses phone calls were all done at 10,000 feet?


I will be waiting for your answers with creditable sources.



Look into US cell service and not Europe. Also, it says The new technology will be used only above 3,000 m (9,000 ft), four minutes after takeoff and kept until 10 minutes before landing. ABOVE 9000 feet. Again, you have posted something that debunks yourself.
Do you not proof read nor do your star givers?




The new technology will be used only above 3,000 m (9,000 ft), four minutes after takeoff and kept until 10 minutes before landing.


news.softpedia.com...

This is a new technology in 2007 NOT in 2001.

I have asked you and everyone to show proof that cell phone calls could be made in 2001 at 25,000 or 30,000 feet without being cut off. Remember one of the calls lasted 12 minutes before you all say OH they were all made below 10,000 feet then I would like to see proof of this with creditable sources.

Esdad71 your opinions that all the calls where made below 10,000 feet are your opinions. Now, lets see some facts to back up your claim.

Remember we are talking about phone services in 2001 not now.

Here is what I have found that supports the information in my OP.


Altitude and Cellphone Transmission
According to industry experts, the crucial link in wireless cell phone transmission from an aircraft is altitude. Beyond a certain altitude which is usually reached within a few minutes after takeoff, cell phone calls are no longer possible.
In other words, given the wireless technology available on September 11 2001, these cell calls could not have been placed from high altitude.
The only way passengers could have got through to family and friends using their cell phones, is if the planes were flying below 8000 feet. Yet even at low altitude, below 8000 feet, cell phone communication is of poor quality.
The crucial question: at what altitude were the planes traveling, when the calls were placed?
While the information provided by the Commission is scanty, the Report's timeline does not suggest that the planes were consistently traveling at low altitude. In fact the Report confirms that a fair number of the cell phone calls were placed while the plane was traveling at altitudes above 8000 feet, which is considered as the cutoff altitude for cell phone transmission.
Let us review the timeline of these calls in relation to the information provided by the Report on flight paths and altitude.
United Airlines Flight 175
Continue reading…


www.globalresearch.ca...


Concluding Remarks
A large part of the description, regarding the 19 hijackers relies on cell phone conversations with family and friends.
While a few of these calls (placed at low altitude) could have got through, the wireless technology was not available. On this issue, expert opinion within the wireless telecom industry is unequivocal.
In other words, at least part of the Commission's script in Chapter 1 on the cell phone conversations, is fabricated.
According to the American Airline / Qualcomm announcement, the technology for cell phone transmission at high altitude will only be available aboard commercial aircraft in 2006. This is an inescapable fact.
In the eyes of public opinion, the cell phone conversations on the Arab hijackers is needed to sustain the illusion that America is under attack.
The "war on terrorism" underlying the National Security doctrine relies on real time "evidence" concerning the Arab hijackers. The latter personify, so to speak, this illusive "outside enemy" (Al Qaeda), which is threatening the homeland.

Embodied into the Commission's "script" of 911, the narrative of what happened on the plane with the Arab hijackers is therefore crucial. It is an integral part of the Administration's disinformation and propaganda program. It constitutes a justification for the anti-terror legislation under the Patriot acts and the waging of America's pre-emptive wars against Afghanistan and Iraq.


www.globalresearch.ca...

I agree the information the government gave concerning these phone calls, were no different as the WMD to get their war.
The FBI had to come clean about Barbra Olsen’s phony phone calls to Ted Olsen. Remembers, Ted Olsen work in the Bush administration and he lied to the American people.

Why did Ted Olsen lie? Perhaps, it's because he was helping the Bush administration in their "false flag operation" and deceiving the American people. Why this man has not been arrested is beyond me.




[edit on 14-1-2010 by impressme]



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 09:26 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 





Why did Ted Olsen lie?


Well if you still think he lied, then you also think that the other four people who were on the phone with Barbara that morning are also lying. Again, we get back to your habit of calling everyone who disagrees with you a liar.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 



Air Fone used a multiplexed VHF (thats Very High Frequency) radio link -
to communicate with ground stations linked into the telephone system

The phones were in a cradle in the seat backs . People could use a credit
card to place calls from the aircraft.

It is not a cell phone !

Smashed Air Fone recovered from Flight 93 scene



So what is your problem....?


Thank you thedman, none of us knew that. What a lovely picture!

Could you tell me who took that photo and what time of day it was taken and what day it was taken, and where in the location to this alleged crash site was the picture taken of this object.
Can you tell me to what plane that this alleged phone came out of, and perhaps you could even give us the seat number to where this phone was installed at?



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 



Why did Ted Olsen lie?

Well if you still think he lied, then you also think that the other four people who were on the phone with Barbara that morning are also lying. Again, we get back to your habit of calling everyone who disagrees with you a liar.




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

www.opednews.com...


Could Barbara Olson Have Made Those Calls?


pilotsfor911truth.org...



Pentagon 9/11: Barbara olson's Phone Calls Didn't Happen!

topic posted Thu, December 3, 2009 - 1:39 AM by Solari




Back on 9/11, the FBI itself had interviewed Olson. A report of that interview indicates that Olson told the FBI agents that his wife had called him twice from Flight 77.10 And yet the FBI’s report on calls from Flight 77, presented in 2006, indicated that no such calls occurred.



This was an amazing development: The FBI is part of the Department of Justice, and yet its report undermined the well-publicized claim of the DOJ’s former solicitor general that he had received two calls from his wife on 9/11.

Olson’s Story Also Rejected by Pentagon Historians

Ted Olson’s story has also been quietly rejected by the historians who wrote Pentagon 9/11, a treatment of the Pentagon attack put out by the Department of Defense.11


tribes.tribe.net...



U.S. Solicitor General Ted Olson Lied about 9/11: FBI Now Admits his Wife Couldn’t Have Called Him from Hijacked Plane

Ted Olson’s Report of Phone Calls from Barbara Olson on 9/11: Three Official Denials


afpakwar.com...



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

eldib.wordpress.com...


And you want to call me a lair?


I thought it IS against ATS rules to insult and call people names.


*ATT Mods!*










[edit on 14-1-2010 by impressme]



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:00 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:14 PM
link   
The personal comments will cease now. Please post to the topic and not the individual. This is the first warning after which further actions will occur.

Thank you.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by impressme
 


but I can't help but wonder if there isn't a profit motive behind some of this tomfoolery.



The "Truthless Movement" was all started to make CASH. You will notice the loudest people screaming it was an inside job, are the ones selling some BOOK or DVD with their lame ass ideas.

The thing that bugs me is many people eat it up and belive it. (Much like a cult). they begin wearing the websites clothing, getting others to 'join the truth movement'. Sounds just like a cult to me. lol. and a cult based on a few peoples lies. How sad. IMO, the people that think it's an inside job, and are NOT selling their DVDs or books, their brain cannot accept what took place on 9|11, so their mind creates this fantasy.. It happens in War a lot. Instead of buying these books and DVDs, go see a doctor and deal with your pain.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock
The personal comments will cease now. Please post to the topic and not the individual. This is the first warning after which further actions will occur.

Thank you.



Sorry about that, missed your post.

second line



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 




Ah the usual response of a truther when confronted by something which
punctures their fantasy..

Make up some reason to deny the evidence

So you want to know who took photo, the seat it came from ?

How about asking for the serial numbers like others from the looney fringe
are demanding from AA77?

Perhaps should dust it for prints? Maybe can find the NWO operative who
planted it.....



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:42 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


I think its ironic and a little suspicious that the only "debris" that survives the lies of the OS are that of which can assist them to perpetuate it further. No charring. No burn marks. Yet the rest of the plane except for a few well placed peices is nothing but confetti.

The OS = Operational Suitability.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:47 PM
link   
Where were any of the four hijackers when the passengers were allegedly making the phone calls? Were all of the hijackers in the cockpit taking turns flying the plane?

Was cellphone service overloaded on the East Coast and were there phone outages on 9/11 due to the large volume of calls being attempted? One would think this may affect the success rate in the calls going through, if they were able to go through at that altitude to begin with.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 11:01 PM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join