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: 9
24
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


I dont give a # about the olson call tbh. Like I said If one part of the story is a farce, the whole story is crap. We know for a fact at least one of the calls did not take place like they said it did, caller ID doesent mix numbers up.




posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 02:46 PM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 05:26 PM
link   
When pre-planning a controlled demolition, it's not hard to use the echelon spy grid or one of many naurus fibre sniffers (as leaked in an AT&T near you), in various exchanges to record ridiculous amounts of data then computer filter it. Just like the new law now in New Zealand pretty much legalising this behaviour. Learning almost everything you communicate electronically, recording it, listening to it, learning and adapting. Not hard to see how impossible phone calls are made at all.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


And as I pointed out, that question was not a valid one because it was based on David Ray Griffin twisting the facts of what the FBI said during the trial. But since the FBI testified that Barbara did indeed call her husband that day, then no, I do not think they lied. Feel better?



Just to clarify swampy--
You do mean the FBI said she called her husband from the aircraft??



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


Yes, that is the sworn testimony of the FBI in the Moussaoui trial as referenced earlier in this thread. Dr Griffin, didnt bother to check all the evidence before he shot his mouth off.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 09:22 PM
link   
reply to post by jprophet420
 


Again, over and over, proof is given, real proof, but you dismiss it. You guys are putting your faith in people who shift the truth for effect.

FACT - Cell calls could be made from planes in 2001
FACT - Of the 30 plus call made from 93 only 2 were cell phones
FACT - Both cell calls came in the last few minutes under a 10k ceiling
FACT - There is audio from a dead passenger that she left for her husband minutes before the crash
FACT - DL from a victim that was on board and killed who left the message


These are all facts. You cannot deny them. You can CHOOSE not to believe them but it is showing the ignorance of someone who is some wanting to find the truth.

They were not faked. I mean, if you do not have the technology to make a call how are they going to 'fake' a call and why? Makes no sense. Why put another thing into the mix that could not go right. If the government is so incompetent HOW could they have pulled off 9/11. This is the thing that has always puzzled me.

The truthers/non OS view that The government is a bunch of retards but they could pull of the greatest terror attack in history and there is NOT ONE leak.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 



And as I pointed out, that question was not a valid one because it was based on David Ray Griffin twisting the facts of what the FBI said during the trial. But since the FBI testified that Barbara did indeed call her husband that day, then no, I do not think they lied. Feel better?


Why don’t you enlighten us to were David Ray Griffin twisted the facts?

All you are doing is throwing out your opinions and crying it’s the facts, but you will not back up your sources except to use a well known disinformation website, because no other websites on the internet supports your twisted story, in fact the gov.org websites don’t support all your twisted stories.

The FBI testified that Ted Olsen did not get any calls from Barbra Olsen. We are in here to try to find the truth and no one creditable is supporting your twisted nonsense.



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

A center piece of the increasingly apparent BS story our government and corporate media have fed us for six long years was a complete fabrication!


We were fed a lie by Ted Olsen who served as Solictor General for the Bush Administration, when on 9/11 he held a press conference to tell America and the world that his dead wife had called him before her demise from the jet she was on that had just been hijacked.

Personally, I thought it was odd at the time that a man would decide to hold a press conference minutes after hearing of his own wife’s death, when it happened on 9/11. If my own wife had just died, the last thing I’d want to do would be to talk to anyone, let alone call a press conference. It didn’t “smell” right.


Now we know why it didn’t smell right. It was a lie. The FBI has reported that no such call between Barbara Olsen and
Ted Olsen ever took place on 9/11/2001
.


It was part of the rapidly unraveling scam that is the official story of 9/11.


In fact, Griffin went on to explain that there is zero evidence that any hijackers had commandeered a plane at all. True Bush believers will say, whao, wait a minute, we all know they did. How do you know? Because Bush told you.


But, as Griffin rightly points out, in this interview, there is no “EVIDENCE” of their existence.


Which also reveals that mis-information shill, Popular Mechanics, in their 9/11 interview on the Charles Goyette Show months ago, lied when they told us there was DNA evidence of the so-called Muslim hijackers. LIES, all lies.


Find links to the entire interviews of February 19, 2008, at:
When will corporate media stop their participation in a criminal cover up? If the former Solicitor General lying to America by creating a complete fabrication he spread around the world through corporate media, is not a story worthy of CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS, Democracy Now, The Nation, Rolling Stone, PBS, NPR, and all the other fourth estate . . . then they have no right to refer to themselves as media.


They should forever in the future refer to themselves as “The Propaganda Ministry.”

So, how can we break through the hijacking of our media in America? How can we get the mass culture to be exposed to hard questions around 9/11?


We must use guerilla tactics, and take opportunities when they come


www.opednews.com...

Just because, George Bush said there were hijacking why anyone would want to take the word of a proven lair, that is beyond me. Remember this proven GWB said he saw the first plane hit the WTC on 911, however, that film was not released that day, it was the next day. That is proof enough for me, and do not forget his biggest lie, the granddaddy of all lies, the Lies of the WMD, lies.





[edit on 17-1-2010 by impressme]



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 



Yes, that is the sworn testimony of the FBI in the Moussaoui trial as referenced earlier in this thread. Dr Griffin, didnt bother to check all the evidence before he shot his mouth off.


If there was any Truth to you claim, you would have given us a creditable sources to prove this is true.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 


FACT - Cell calls could be made from planes in 2001
FACT - Of the 30 plus call made from 93 only 2 were cell phones
FACT - Both cell calls came in the last few minutes under a 10k ceiling
FACT - There is audio from a dead passenger that she left for her husband minutes before the crash
FACT - DL from a victim that was on board and killed who left the message


Just because you say they are facts, it does not mean they are facts.

I can make phony claims to, and not give any sources. Anyone can make a claim but can you prove your claim, where are your creditable sources?



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


I posted a copy of the transcript from the trial where the agent is testifying that Barbara Olson called her husband four times.



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 12:48 AM
link   
Funny how some have stated that they used the plane's phones. Funny thing is that AA’s website indicated that its 757s do not
have passenger-seat phones.

After inquiring to ask if that
had been the case on September 11, 2001, an AA customer
service representative replied: “That is correct we do not
have phones on our Boeing 757s.

SOURCE: American Airlines regarding the aircraft involved on September 11, 2001.

[edit on 18-1-2010 by mikelee]



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by impressme
 


I posted a copy of the transcript from the trial where the agent is testifying that Barbara Olson called her husband four times.

Hey swampy,
I feel a little guilty for startin this up.
I joined in a little late. would you mid pulling that post up about the FBI testimony?



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 12:58 AM
link   
Barbara Olsen's phone call...

The following tables summarize the data contained in Zacarias Moussaoui Prosecution Trial Exhibit number P200055

B.Olsen call

Olsen's phone call questioned by 3 official sources

Excert:

By finally settling on this story, Olson avoided a
technological pitfall. Given the cell phone system employed
in 2001, high-altitude cell phone calls from airliners were
impossible, or at least virtually so (Olson’s statement that
“the signals from cell phones coming from airplanes don’t
work that well” was a considerable understatement). The
technology to enable cell phone calls from high-altitude
airline flights was not created until 2004.


[edit on 18-1-2010 by mikelee]



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 





Engineers at our primary Maintenance & Engineering base in Tulsa tell me that they cannot find any record that the 757 aircraft flown into the Pentagon on 9/11 had had its seatback phones deactivated by that date. An Engineering Change Order to deactivate the seatback phone system on the 757 fleet had been issued by that time... It is our contention that the seatback phones on Flight 77 were working because there is no entry in that aircraft’s records to indicate when the phones were disconnected




John Hotard, Corporate Communications, American Airlines





Airline grounds in-flight phone service

American Airlines will discontinue its AT&T in-flight phone service by March 31, (2002) a spokesman for the airline said Wednesday.


news.cnet.com...

Lets see, no maintenance records showing the removal, news articles saying that AA didnt stop its phone service till 2002, GTE having records of the calls being made....against an email supposedly from a customer service rep.....hmmmmmmmm



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 01:13 AM
link   
And....


The Pentagon historians, in any case, did
not accept the Olson story, according to which Burlingame
and his co-pilot did give up their plane and were in the
back with the passengers and other crew members. They
instead wrote that “the attackers either incapacitated or
murdered the two pilots.”


Not saying ANY calls were faked (no offense to the OP at all) just trying to get some people who still believe in the OS through some of the smoke & mirrors.



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 01:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


US Attorney David Raskin examining FBI Special Agent James Fitzgerald



At 9:15 a.m. and at 9:26 a.m., Flight 77 passenger Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, and spoke to him for about one minute before the call was cut off. Barbara Olson reported that the flight had been hijacked by hijackers wielding knives and box cutters and that all the passengers were in the back of the plane.


At 9:20 a.m. and 9:31 a.m., Barbara Olson again called and spoke to her husband, Ted Olson. She reported that the pilot had announced that the flight had been hijacked. Ted Olson asked Barbara her location, and she replied that the plane was flying over houses. Ted Olson told his wife of the two previous hijackings and crashes.


cryptome.org... pages 330-331


David Ray Griffin based his entire argument on the flash applet used during the trial that showed Barbara Olson's attempt to use her personal cell phone that never connected. Plus, he did not bother to research the other applet that showed Airfone calls made from Flight 77. More specific, this listed five "unknown" calls (4 connected, 1 not connected) made from Flight 77. Based on the records from GTE, the four connected calls all went to the same phone number, (202)514-2201. On Sept 11, 2001, (202) 514-2201 was the phone number of the Solicitor General's office....Ted Olson. Also, Mercy Lorenzo, an operator for AT&T gave the FBI a statement that she connected a collect call from a female on Flight 77 to the 514 number. In addition, Lori Lynn Keyton, a DoJ secretary confirms those phone calls....and she also confirms that the person on the other end was Barbara Olson.


For now, I will end this post so certain posters can jump in and scream that everybody lied.



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 02:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 



I posted a copy of the transcript from the trial where the agent is testifying that Barbara Olson called her husband four times.


You did? Where, when and what website did you retrieve this from?

I hope you didn’t get it from “911 Myths” because, that website has been debunked.



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 04:09 AM
link   

Shortly before 8:14 a.m., Boston Air Route Traffic
18 Control Center, or Boston Center, directed the cockpit of Flight
19 11 to "turn 20 degrees right" and the cockpit responded in the
20 affirmative. This was the last routine communication received
21 from Flight 11. Seconds later air traffic control radioed Flight
22 11 to climb to 35,000 feet. The cockpit did not respond. Over
23 the next ten minutes, air traffic control tried nine times to
24 contact Flight 11. All attempts were unsuccessful.
25 At 8:19 a.m., a flight attendant onboard Flight 11

contacted the American Airlines Southeastern Reservations Center
2 in Cary, North Carolina by air-telephone to report an emergency
3 onboard the flight. The flight attendant, Betty Ong, O-n-g,
4 stated "The cockpit's not answering, somebody's been stabbed in
5 business class and...I think there's mace....that we can't
6 breathe...I don't know, I think we have -- I think we're getting
7 hijacked." Ms. Ong's air-telephone call with the reservations
8 office lasted 25 minutes, until 8:44 a.m., the approximate time of
9 Flight 11's collision into the North Tower.
10 At 8:21 a.m., the transponder of Flight 11 was turned
11 off in the cockpit, making it more difficult for air traffic
12 control centers to identify the flight and monitor its flight
13 path.
14 Also at 8:21 a.m., one of the American Airlines
15 employees in the Reservations Office who was speaking with Ms. Ong
16 on the air-telephone named Nydia Gonzalez, simultaneously
17 established telephone contact with a manager on duty at American
18 Airlines System Operations Control or SOC center in Fort Worth,
19 Texas named Craig Marquis. Ms. Gonzalez then maintained telephone
20 contact with both Ms. Ong onboard Flight 11 and Mr. Marquis, until
21 Flight 11 collided with the North Tower.
22 At 8:23 a.m., an American Airlines dispatcher sent a
23 text message to Flight 11 over the Aircraft Communications and
24 Reporting System, also known as ACARS, a ground-to-cockpit e-mail
25 system. Flight 11 did not respond




Ms. Ong's air-telephone call with the reservations
8 office lasted 25 minutes, until 8:44 a.m., the approximate time of
9 Flight 11's collision into the North Tower.


cryptome.org...



So according to this transcript which any “paid writer” could have type up considering most of us have a distrust for our “government word” anymore.

Ms. Ong’s air- telephone call lasted 25 minutes. I think NOT! Someone is flat out lying. I can understand maybe getting an operator, and losing a connection heck maybe even getting her call though, but holding a long conversation for 25 minutes at a flight level of 35,000 feet, traveling at a air speed of 320 knots, it is impossible considering our telephone technology in 2001.

What do you know another impossibility happened on 911.

Given the fact that, of the approximately 15 calls from the 9/11 airliners that were originally described as cell phone calls, the FBI accepted this description for only the two that reportedly occurred at a relatively low altitude, it seems reasonable to conclude that the FBI implicitly agreed, in its report to the Moussaoui trial, that calls from high-altitude airliners were impossible – or at least too improbable to affirm.


www.globalresearch.ca...



The Number of People Who Reported Receiving Cell Phone Calls

As we saw, people on the ground reported receiving cell phone calls from UA 93 flight attendant Sandra Bradshaw; UA 93 passengers Marion Britton, Tom Burnett, Jeremy Glick, and Elizabeth “Honor” Wainio; from UA 175 passengers Peter Hanson and Brian Sweeney; from AA 77 flight attendant Renee May; and, according to the best-known version of Ted Olson’s account, AA 77 passenger Barbara Olson. However, the FBI, in its report to the Moussaoui trial, declared that all of those calls were made from onboard phones.

If that is true, how would the FBI explain why so many people reported that they had been called from cell phones?

People do, of course, make mistakes, especially in stressful situations. They may misunderstand, or misremember, what they were told. But is it plausible that so many people would have made the same mistake, wrongly thinking that they had been told by the people calling them that they were using cell phones? (Ted Olson, as we saw earlier, and Renee May’s parents, as we will see below, both said they were uncertain what kind of phone had been used, so they can be excluded from the list of people who would need to be accused of having made that mistake.) Should we not look for some more plausible explanation?


www.globalresearch.ca...

Then it turns out that Ted Olsen phone call never happened.
If the government lied about one call, then they cannot be trusted to be telling the truth. One has to ask one self if they lied about one call (Barbra Olsen phone call) then what else are they lying about.


Third, the suspicion that the tape was not made in 2001 is further increased by a Los Angeles Times story of September 20, 2001, which said:
“FBI officials in Dallas [-Fort Worth], where American Airlines is based, were able, on the day of the terrorist attacks, to piece together a partial transcript and an account of the phone call. American Airlines officials said such calls are not typically recorded, suggesting that the FBI may have reconstructed the conversation from interviews.”61

Why would FBI officials have needed to “piece together a partial transcript” if officials at AA .quarters had a recording of Wyatt’s virtually verbatim account of Woodward’s virtually word-for-word account of what Sweeney had said? Surely, even if these AA officials had somehow forgotten about the existence of this recording over the years, they could not have already forgotten about it later in the day on 9/11 itself. Also, why would AA officials have said “such calls are not typically recorded” if, in this case, they did have a recording – albeit an indirect one – of the call? Finally, it is also inconceivable that the AA officials would, while knowing about this recording, have withheld it from the FBI.62

Fourth, there is no indication that Michael Woodward mentioned the creation of this recording when he was interviewed by FBI agent James Lechner on 9/11. Besides not being mentioned in Lechner’s affidavit, the existence of such a tape is also not mentioned in the summary of the FBI interview with Woodward the following day, which ends by saying:

“Woodward took notes while he was talking to Sweeney which he signed and dated and gave to the interviewing Agent.”63 But surely, if Woodward had, only hours earlier, repeated Sweeney’s report to Nancy Wyatt, who had in turn repeated it to Ray Howland down in Texas, Woodward would have said something like: “You don’t need to rely entirely on my notes, because there is a recording of a virtually verbatim repetition of Sweeney’s statements down in Texas at American .quarters.”
Fifth, if Woodward had repeated to Nancy Wyatt Sweeney’s statement that she had used “an AirFone card, given to her by another flight attendant,” he surely would not have told Lechner, only a few hours later, that she had been “using a cellular telephone.”

Finally, the new story is even internally inconsistent. The conversation between Sweeney and Woodward, we were told, lasted from 8:32 until 8:44 AM. And yet, according to the aforementioned staff report of the 9/11 Commission, Nancy Wyatt did not start relaying the call to American .quarters in Texas until 8:40 AM.64 If she was on the phone with Ray Howland in Texas for only the final 4 minutes of the 12-minute call, during which she was, as Gail Sheehy reported, “simultaneously transmitting Ms. Sweeney's words to the airline's Fort Worth .quarters,” how could this call have resulted in a virtually verbatim transcript of the entire Sweeney-Woodward call – rather than simply the final four minutes?

To sum up: We have six good reasons to conclude that the alleged recording of Nancy Wyatt’s verbatim repetition of Amy Sweeney’s alleged phone call from American Flight 11 is a late fabrication, which was created in order – perhaps among other reasons – to change the description of this 12-minute call, so that it would no longer be portrayed as a cell phone call. By thus implicitly admitting that the call as portrayed in the FBI’s 2001 affidavit could not have happened, the FBI in 2004 implicitly admitted, it seems to me, that the reported call from Sweeney to Woodward was fabricated.


www.globalresearch.ca...

I agree, if the FBI fabricated these calls then it is a good chance they fabricated all the other calls.



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 04:15 AM
link   

Cell Phone Numbers Recognized on Caller ID

In spite of what has been said above, some people may be able to accept the idea that everyone who reported receiving cell phone calls from the 9/11 airliners – except perhaps for those who reported the 9:58 calls from Felt and Lyles – had misunderstood what they had been told. But even if so, they face a still more difficult problem: If all the calls (except the two at 9:58) were made from onboard phones, as the FBI’s report for the Moussaoui trial says, why did some of the calls produce the supposed caller’s cell phone number on the recipient’s Caller ID?

Cell Phone Numbers Recognized on Caller ID

In spite of what has been said above, some people may be able to accept the idea that everyone who reported receiving cell phone calls from the 9/11 airliners – except perhaps for those who reported the 9:58 calls from Felt and Lyles – had misunderstood what they had been told. But even if so, they face a still more difficult problem: If all the calls (except the two at 9:58) were made from onboard phones, as the FBI’s report for the Moussaoui trial says, why did some of the calls produce the supposed caller’s cell phone number on the recipient’s Caller ID?

Tom Burnett: The best-known case of this type involves the reported calls from Flight 93 passenger Tom Burnett to his wife, Deena Burnett. As we saw earlier, she told the FBI agent that she had received three to five calls from her husband that morning. The FBI report then added:

“Burnett was able to determine that her husband was using his own cellular telephone because the caller identification showed his number, 925 980-3360. Only one of the calls did not show on the caller identification as she was on the line with another call.”65
According to the report presented to the Moussaoui trial, however, Tom Burnett completed three calls, all of which were made using a passenger-seat phone (the rows from which he allegedly made the calls are indicated).66

It is instructive to compare the FBI’s treatment of Deena Burnett’s testimony with its treatment of the testimony of Lorne Lyles, the husband of CeeCee Lyles. The FBI’s summary of its interview with him says: “At 9:58 AM, Lorne Lyles received a call at home from her celular [sic] telephone. Lyles was in a deep sleep at the time. . . . Lyles commented that CeCe [sic] Lyles’ telephone number 941-823-2355 was the number on the caller ID.”67 When the FBI turned in its telephone report for the Moussaoui trial, it reflected Lorne Lyles’s testimony that his spouse had used a cell phone.
But even though Deena Burnett provided the same evidence – that her spouse’s cell phone number had appeared on her phone’s Caller ID – the FBI’s report for the Moussaoui trial did not reflect her testimony, but instead said that her husband had used a seat-back phone. This contrast provides further evidence that the FBI’s report was tailored to avoid affirming any high-altitude cell phone calls.

In any case, how can anyone say that the FBI’s treatment of the reported calls from Tom Burnett does not provide insuperable evidence against the truth of the official story? If he had actually called from an onboard phone, as the FBI now says, how could his home phone’s Caller ID have possibly indicated that the calls came from his cell phone? Some people reject as “unwarranted speculation” the suggestion that this shows that the calls were faked. But until someone comes up with an alternative explanation, this is the only hypothesis that accounts for the facts.

One cannot avoid the problem, moreover, by assuming that the FBI agent who wrote the report of the interview misinterpreted her. She repeated her statement about the Caller ID a year later to McClatchy reporter Greg Gordon,68 and five years later she repeated it again in a book, in which she said: “I looked at the caller ID and indeed it was Tom’s cell phone number.” She said, incidentally, that she realized that this was problematic, writing: “I didn't understand how he could be calling me on his cell phone from the air.”69 She, nevertheless, reported what she had seen.

www.globalresearch.ca...


So, the FBI cannot get their fact straight! Not only does the FBI want us to believe the unbelievable, but phone calls at 25,000 or 35,000 feet for 12 to 25 minutes at air speed at 325 knots without losing any connections, and now we clearly see the FBI can’t tell the truth if these were cell phones air seats phones.
I find it amazing that there is little to no information about the air phone technology back in 2001 and what the true capabilities really were.

I am still looking.


3. Questions about Onboard Phones on American Flight 77
Prior to learning about the FBI 2006 report to the Moussaoui trial, which indicated that Barbara Olson had attempted only one call and that it was “unconnected” so that it lasted for “0 seconds,” members of the 9/11 Truth Movement already had reasons for doubting the truth of Ted Olson’s claim that she had made two calls to him from Flight 77, during each of which they had conversations. One of those reasons was that it seemed that the calls could not have been made from either a cell phone or an onboard phone.


www.globalresearch.ca...

There you go folks this is from the report of the Moussaoui trial, “Barbara Olson had attempted only one call and that it was “unconnected.”
Here my take on this phone call, how did the FBI even know if Barbra Olen even tried to make a phone call? If there was no connection then there is no real recorded, therefore there is no proof.
The FBI fabricated the story of Barbra Olsen phone call it is that simple. Just common sense tells you this.

I am not finished with this yet, I will continue this tomorrow.



CRYPTOME

SUPPORT WELCOMED By generous donation or $25 for two DVDs of the Cryptome 13-year collection of 43,000 files from June 1996 to June 2009 (~7 GB). Click Paypal or mail check/MO made out to John Young, 251 West 89th Street, New York, NY 10024. The collection includes all files of cryptome.org, cryptome.info, jya.com, cartome.org, eyeball-series.org and iraq-kill-maim.org, and 24,000 pages of counter-intelligence dossiers declassified by the US Army Intelligence and Security Command, dating from 1945 to 1985.The DVDs will be sent anywhere worldwide without extra cost.
Cryptome received on December 10, 2009, 878 additional pages (126MB) for US Army Intelligence and Security Command dossier "Federal Intelligence Services, ZF010117W," now added to the DVD listed above.


cryptome.org...

You debunkers are crying how all Truthers websites are only out to make money, but look here! what do I see! Is swampy using a website to “support his claims” that sells DVDs, Oh my, these people just want to make money. Looks like the Debunkers think it is ok for their websites to make money and I do not care how they make their money or what they are selling it is the fact that they are making money on selling information.




[edit on 18-1-2010 by impressme]



posted on Jan, 18 2010 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


US Attorney David Raskin examining FBI Special Agent James Fitzgerald



At 9:15 a.m. and at 9:26 a.m., Flight 77 passenger Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, and spoke to him for about one minute before the call was cut off. Barbara Olson reported that the flight had been hijacked by hijackers wielding knives and box cutters and that all the passengers were in the back of the plane.


At 9:20 a.m. and 9:31 a.m., Barbara Olson again called and spoke to her husband, Ted Olson. She reported that the pilot had announced that the flight had been hijacked. Ted Olson asked Barbara her location, and she replied that the plane was flying over houses. Ted Olson told his wife of the two previous hijackings and crashes.


cryptome.org... pages 330-331


David Ray Griffin based his entire argument on the flash applet used during the trial that showed Barbara Olson's attempt to use her personal cell phone that never connected. Plus, he did not bother to research the other applet that showed Airfone calls made from Flight 77. More specific, this listed five "unknown" calls (4 connected, 1 not connected) made from Flight 77. Based on the records from GTE, the four connected calls all went to the same phone number, (202)514-2201. On Sept 11, 2001, (202) 514-2201 was the phone number of the Solicitor General's office....Ted Olson. Also, Mercy Lorenzo, an operator for AT&T gave the FBI a statement that she connected a collect call from a female on Flight 77 to the 514 number. In addition, Lori Lynn Keyton, a DoJ secretary confirms those phone calls....and she also confirms that the person on the other end was Barbara Olson.


For now, I will end this post so certain posters can jump in and scream that everybody lied.



Neat link, thanks
The pages you point out do describe some phone calls being read off a prepared paper by an FBI agent. This is what is known as hearsay.
None of the principal were in court or cross examined.
Very cool link though



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join