Ted Olson LIED to cover up his wife's murder?!?

the fact that the OSers cant reference the commission report for all their information, and have to keep sourcing this "9/11myths" site should tell you somefhing. you rarely acknowledge a 9/11 conspiracy site, why should we accept that conspiracy site? your investigation and report should explain everything.. if it dosnt, well its WRONG then isnt it? yeah

thought so

Originally posted by xavi1000
reply to post by Alfie1

 

Again derailing my post .Why It is hard to imagine one without the other ? I don't ask questions about Renee,or any other calls. Questions is about Barbara, and she did not say anything to describe the hijackers, but did refer to them as "they". She told him "they" had knives and box cutters.

I am sorry but I don't see how I am de-railing anything. The only known calls from AA 77 were from Barbara Olson and Renee May so they are inextricably linked right there. If you are suggesting that Barbara Olson's calls to her husband were voice morphed but Renee May's to her parents, which conveyed the same message that AA 77 had been hi-jacked, werent, what was the point ?

Originally posted by Myendica
the fact that the OSers cant reference the commission report for all their information, and have to keep sourcing this "9/11myths" site should tell you somefhing. you rarely acknowledge a 9/11 conspiracy site, why should we accept that conspiracy site? your investigation and report should explain everything.. if it dosnt, well its WRONG then isnt it? yeah

thought so

OK, what in the Commision report refutes Barbara Olson's calls to her husband ? It is just that the report is long and not easy to reference to specific parts.

reply to post by Alfie1


What was the point is question here Alfie . If i know it for sure i will posted it here long time ago .

Originally posted by Aliensun

 

As dozens of others probably have pointed out, your basic assumption is wrong. First,what point does that term "cover-up" serve?
The only sense to be make of his words without a vastly, vastly complex conspiracy plot is that he was trying to make her and himself heros in that awful tragedy. He evidently thought who can this hurt if I make these claims and ch-chings were sounding loudly in his ears.

So how do you explain that there were other people who corroborate that Barbara Olson called out from flight 77 (Ted Olson's secretary and the AT&T operator), and that other people corroborate the same report of flight 77 being hijacked that Barbara Olson told him (flight attendent Renee May calling her mother Nancy). I think it's a given all these occurances didn't just happen all at the same time as Ted Olson's event by coincidence, so if Ted Olson is lying, than all these other people are lying too, but of all these other people are telling the truth, then Ted Olson is telling the truth.

FYI the only person documented to have heard ch-ching sounding loudly in his ears was French author Thierry Meyssan. He's the one who invented the whole, "flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon" conspiracy to begin with in order to sell his conspiracy books. The thing was supposedly printed in a dozen languages so he literally made a profit off of other people's suffering.

Originally posted by xavi1000
reply to post by Alfie1

 

What was the point is question here Alfie . If i know it for sure i will posted it here long time ago .

The last point I was making to you was :- If you suppose Barbara Olson's calls to Ted Olson were voice-morphed then surely the same must be applied to the only other known caller out from AA 77. Renee May who reported the same thing to her parents. i.e. flight 77 had been hi-jacked.

But, Renee May was, sadly for her, only assigned to AA 77 on the morning of 9/11 so how could anyone voice-morph her ?

reply to post by Alfie1


well the commission should have discussed it clearly, in and out.. so surely after the commission was done there should have been very little questions or doubt with the results.. and if we just argued 10 pages on one very minor detail, well they failed.. and you have to reference this conspiracy 911myth site, and expect us to accept it, and not raise questions..

what do you have against a real investigation?
what do you have to lose with a real investigation?

reply to post by Alfie1


Why would applied to any other member who calls from on AA 77 ? Ted Olson story was medium hyped . Ted Olson story among the first mentioned box cutters and knives.Ted Olson is solicitor general and public face.....

Originally posted by Myendica
the fact that the OSers cant reference the commission report for all their information, and have to keep sourcing this "9/11myths" site should tell you somefhing. you rarely acknowledge a 9/11 conspiracy site, why should we accept that conspiracy site? your investigation and report should explain everything.. if it dosnt, well its WRONG then isnt it? yeah

thought so

If you had read the 9/11 commission report you will know it wasn't meant to document the physical process of the collapse of the towers, why phone records were time stamped in Central time vs eastern standard time, the exact model of Rolls Royce engine flight 77 was using, the name of the photographer who took the photos of the wreckage on the Pentagon lawn, or any of that crap I've seen you conspiracy theorists demanding to know. The 9/11 report was set up to document who did it, how they did it, and what the gov't did up to and during the attack, as well as some recommendations. All this bickering over the precise number of disconnected calls Barbara Olson tried to make is entirely of your making so of course we're going to have to go to alternative sources to look that stuff up. YOU are the ones making much ado over those things, not us, so your complaining that we need to go to alternative sources to find answers to your questions the 9/11 report doesn't cover is ridiculous. What is your point with that observation, anyway?

...but if you want me to acknowledge a conspiracy site, fine- when is that imminent war Alex Jones predicted Bush was going to incite with Iran going to start? Prison Planet had a counter counting down the seconds and everything.

Originally posted by Myendica
reply to post by Alfie1

 

well the commission should have discussed it clearly, in and out.. so surely after the commission was done there should have been very little questions or doubt with the results.. and if we just argued 10 pages on one very minor detail, well they failed.. and you have to reference this conspiracy 911myth site, and expect us to accept it, and not raise questions..

what do you have against a real investigation?
what do you have to lose with a real investigation?

The Commission was satisfied, and the FBI was satisfied, that Barbara Olson's calls were amongst those recorded as from " unknown callers " on AA 77.

I don't care whether there is any new investigation or not. I am not a US citizen so I wont have to pay for it.I suppose on balance I would favour it as it may shut some people up, but I doubt it.

But what truthers need is some evidence. AA 77 or UA 93 on the bed of the Atlantic Ocean or someone credible saying they transported or installed explosives at the WTC. An investigation would then follow automatically but it hasn't happened yet.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


and they failed. everyone who screwed up got promoted.. you brought up this thread.. so you should have soured what the report said.. your picking fights and distorting members responses.. case closed


dave, have i ever sourced alex jones? have i ever promoted alex jones?

get out of here.. you arguement is baseless and you just want to confuse and conquer.. you still havent giving me facts why you cherish the OS and would never consider investigating.. and you never will..

Originally posted by xavi1000
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

This graphic is of dubious value to you. It is apparently being used to support the higher level page commentary of the phone calls, and the web page says verbatim:

"Renee May's phone call: Flight attendant Renee May uses a cell phone to call her mother at 9:12. May's mother then calls American Airlines to inform them that the flight has been hijacked.

Barbara Olson's calls: Barbara Olson allegedly placed two calls to her husband, Ted Olson, at some time between 9:16 and 9:26. The only known evidence of these calls are statements by Olson, the first on September 12th."

This second claim is patently false. As I know you're already aware, Ted Olson's secretary received two calls from Barbara Olson, plus,an AT&T operator had spoken to Barbara who in turn spoke to Ted Olson's secretary to place that collect call. Likewise, the information Ted Olson got from Barbara matches the information Nancy May got from her flight attendant daughter Renee, and Sept 12 would have been too early for him to have known about the details of any other call.

The web page I'm referring to is here: 9/11 Research "evidence".

What page is referencing that graphic you're providing, and what does it even mean? It didn't come from American Airlines becuase the seating arrangement graphic has nothing to do with the caller information graphic. For one thing, if they know where the seats were that the "unknown calls" were made from, then they'd know who was making the calls from the passenge rmanifest. Isn't that the location of where the hijackers were sitting?

reply to post by GoodOlDave


You ask me what FBI presented on Mousaoui trial acording to reffered goverment site in upper post.

Originally posted by Myendica
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

and they failed. everyone who screwed up got promoted.. you brought up this thread.. so you should have soured what the report said.. your picking fights and distorting members responses.. case closed

Who screwed up and got promoted, specifically? Bush and Cheney were the ones who ultimately screwed up and they're no longer in office. The head of the FBI at the time resigned and was replaced, too, though I forget his name.

dave, have i ever sourced alex jones? have i ever promoted alex jones?

No, but you ARE promoting and sourcing Thierry Meyssan, whether you happen to acknowledge it or not. He's the POS who invented this whole "it wasn't flight 77 that hit the Pentagon" drivel you're promoting to begin with. Let's face it, the only reason you people are insisting Ted Olson is lying is becuase you want to believe Meyssan is right.

get out of here.. you arguement is baseless and you just want to confuse and conquer.. you still havent giving me facts why you cherish the OS and would never consider investigating.. and you never will..

Yes I have, many times. I see with my own eyes the anguish that Islamic fundamentalism is inflicting on the world, from a car bombing attempt in NYC to a christmas bombing attempt in Oregon to massive rioting over cartoons of Mohammed in Danish newspapers to a suicide bombing of a wedding party at a hotel in Jordan to a suicide bombing in Sweden of all places, plus a recent suicide bombing of a Catholic church in Egypt. Right now, people in Indonesia are being murdered becuase they're using the word, "Allah" to descrive the Christian god, and in case you didn't know, the captain of the Iraqi Olympic tennis team was murdered becuase he wore shorts. If you want to discuss and iron out the discrepencies of the 9/11 commission report, fine, as even Lee Hamilton agrees the report was a first draft...but anyone who actually believes Islamic fundamentalists couldn't be responsible for the 9/11 attack is being uninformed and ignorant as hell, IMHO.

Islamic fundamentalists HAVE hijacked aircraft, Islamic fundamentalists HAVE committed suicide attacks, and Islamic fundamentalists HAVE attacked and killed innocent civilians to promote terrorism, and if you're claiming they haven't then you're lying through your teeth. Why it's so difficult to comprehend how Islamic fundamentalists could eventually think of putting them all together is beyond me.

Originally posted by xavi1000
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

You ask me what FBI presented on Mousaoui trial acording to reffered goverment site in upper post.

edit on 7-1-2011 by xavi1000 because: (no reason given)

I also asked you what web page on that site was referencing that graphic. They didn't just dump that graphic there for no reason. Some other web page was using it as a reference to whatever it was they were claiming. I want to know what it was they were claiming, because the graphic by itself is rather vague. How are those seats in yellow connected to the calls coming from flight 77, anyway?

There's no way that graphic came from the FBI. They wouldn't just slap some vague thing together and leave everyone else scratching their heads at what the heck it means. Someone on 9/11 research put it together.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


This graphic was my short reply to you about what you will download and hear (similar ) from that goverment site in upper post. I never said this was FBI graphic.


And web page is in the link of picture .

reply to post by GoodOlDave


dave, we moved on to other aspects. we left this ted olsen in the dust.. YOU brought it up. dispute something else.. start a new thread..

Originally posted by Myendica
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

dave, we moved on to other aspects. we left this ted olsen in the dust.. YOU brought it up. dispute something else.. start a new thread..

Does that mean you are no longer saying Ted Olson was complicit in murdering his wife ?

Originally posted by xavi1000
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

This graphic was my short reply to you about what you will download and hear (similar ) from that goverment site in upper post. I never said this was FBI graphic.

This makes no sense. The graphic and the the gov't site have nothing to do with each other. The gov't site references the phone calls, obviously, but if I look up the seats on that graphic am I going to find where the passengers making the calls are sitting, or am I going to find where the hijackers were sitting? Do you even know?

And web page is in the link of picture

No it isn't. It's the URL of the graphic itself. There's another page on that web site that references this graphic in some way. I want to see what that web page referencing this graphic says so that I won't read it out of context. For all I know, that URL points to a dumping ground for any Tom, Dick, and Harry to put their homemade graphics like the one ATS has.

If you didn't find this graphic by browsing through the web site, then how did you find it?

Why did no men call from Flight 77?

There was reportedly 30 adult men on that flight, 6 more than women.