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.

 

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

page: 11
9
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   

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..


Sorry to burst your bubble, but I am not subject to your rules of debate. You and I are both subject to the ATS rules of debate, and their rules of debate say that the topic of discussion always pertains to the OP of the thread, in this case, whether or not Ted Olson was lying to cover up the murder of his wife. If you stray from this subject your posts will be removed. You know that and so do I.

Besides, there's simply too much material supporting the legitimacy of his statement so I would hardly call it "leaving it in the dust" when you can't even resolve the contradiction of all these other witnesses backing up everything Ted Olson is reporting (I.E. his secretary, the AT&T operator, the flight attendant's mother, etc). Running away from having to answer a difficult question may be in your lexicon of "leaving it in the dust" but it isn't in mine.




posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 01:11 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Davy boy , you derailng again the thread
back on goverment site

www.vaed.uscourts.gov...

Exhibit Number P200054

it's weird, i show you goverment sites , you are showing me conspiracy sites



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by xavi1000
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Davy boy , you derailng again the thread
back on goverment site

www.vaed.uscourts.gov...

Exhibit Number P200054

it's weird, i show you goverment sites , you are showing me conspiracy sites


I don't know what manner of children's game you're playing here, but I really don't care. You're the one who introduced this conspiracy web site, not me. Remember...


Originally posted by xavi1000
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 





What did you think a web site with a name like 911research.wtc7.net was going to contain, anyway? You posted a link to this graphic claiming it's what the FBI says, and I'm simply asking you how you found it and what it even means. So far, getting a straight answer out of you is akin to nailing jam to the wall so you'll excuse me when I say your credibility is lacking.

You know, now that I know you're behaving this suspiciously I am going to make a point to download this and listen to it when I get home, just to make sure it really says what you're claiming it says. I will ask again- when I listen to this thing, is it SPECIFICALLY going to show the FBI said Barbara Olson only made one call out from flight 77, or is it simply going to discuss one of the numerous calls she made and you're just making the rest of this up on your own?



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by ATH911
Why did no men call from Flight 77?

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


I'd like to know why everyone thinks the unknown calls had to have been Barbara.

Let's see. Out of 54 people only 2 are smart enough or had the insight to call their loved ones? Especially if seatback phones were available.

Why is Barbara the automatic phoner out of 52 other people?

G-O-D: Is it possible that those unknown calls were made from others?
edit on 7-1-2011 by Nutter because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nutter

Originally posted by ATH911
Why did no men call from Flight 77?

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


I'd like to know why everyone thinks the unknown calls had to have been Barbara.

Let's see. Out of 54 people only 2 are smart enough or had the insight to call their loved ones? Especially if seatback phones were available.

G-O-D: Is it possible that those unknown calls were made from others?
edit on 7-1-2011 by Nutter because: (no reason given)


I can't speak for everyone else, but as mentioned previously Lori Lynn Keyton was handling the phones at the DOJ when she received six to eight (she's not certain how many) automated collect calls that were disconnected at the caller's end. She then received a live operator requesting acceptance of a collect call, which turned out to be from Barbara Olson. A second call came in from Barbara Olson herself.

I don't think it needs to be proven that if a woman needed to contact her husband in an emergency...which the hijacking certainly was...she wouldn't simply try to call out and give up after one or two attempts. She's going to keep calling again and again until she gets through. The likelihood that a blizzard of disconnected telephone calls happened to be coming into Ted Olson's office at the same time that a blizzard of disconnected phone calls were coming from flight 77...and their being made by two different people...is pretty low, especially since it's proven there really was someone on flight 77 who was trying to call him collect.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
The likelihood that a blizzard of disconnected telephone calls happened to be coming into Ted Olson's office at the same time that a blizzard of disconnected phone calls were coming from flight 77


How do we know an unknown call is going to Ted's office?

Or is it just unknown as to the originator?



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nutter
How do we know an unknown call is going to Ted's office?

Or is it just unknown as to the originator?


They were all unknown COLLECT calls, as in the caller needed to get permission from whoever was being called to accept the charges. In the prior calls, it was an automated request. Later on, another collect call came in but it was from a live operator. This is proof that Barbara Olson was in fact making collect calls.

I don't work at the DOJ so I don't know, but I would think the odds that someone else would be making a blizzard of collect calls to the DOJ all at once on that particular day and time, and minutes before Barbara Olson made an identical collect call herself, would be pretty low.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 04:21 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nutter

Originally posted by ATH911
Why did no men call from Flight 77?

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


I'd like to know why everyone thinks the unknown calls had to have been Barbara.

Let's see. Out of 54 people only 2 are smart enough or had the insight to call their loved ones? Especially if seatback phones were available.

Why is Barbara the automatic phoner out of 52 other people?

G-O-D: Is it possible that those unknown calls were made from others?
edit on 7-1-2011 by Nutter because: (no reason given)


The only relatives to say they had calls from AA 77 were Ted Olson and Renee May's parents.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by loveguy
It's not about "joining" us damn fool conspiracy theorists in our fight for resolution that you should let keep you from continued forward progress in these baby-steps to the justice side of the fence.

Ted might have loved her incomprehensibly to those who are not familiar with such a bond.

His testimony was flawed, and without a "proper" investigation, the OS is subjective conjecture.

Do you not agree?


Do I agree we should have more investigations? Certainly. It's one of the most critical moments of US and world history so it should be documented as closely as we can. Heck, we know what happened to the Titanic but subsequent expeditions to the wreck are finding out more and more details all the time, like how the thing was build out of an inferior grade of steel, and that modern steel would laugh off such an impact. What if, somehow, we were able to determine that Hani Hanjour was high on heroin at the time of the hijacking? Wouldn't THAT be a matter of discussion?

Ted Olson's testimony being flawed OTOH is entirely subjective...and mainly from your side. All the OTHER evidence corroborates what Tel Olson says (the phone records, the testimony of Ted Olson's secretary, flight attendant Renee May calling her parents and telling them flight 77 had been hijacked, etc) so insisting Ted Olson's testimony is flawed strikes me as being faith based logic.

It's patently obvious this whole "Ted Olson is lying to cover up the murder of his wife" bit is driven entirely out of the need to believe something else other that flight 77 hit the Pentagon, rather than from any perceived irregularities over the facts. Tell me something, if Ted Olson is lying on those grounds, then doesn't it necessarily mean that Nancy May (the mother of flight attendant Renee May) is lying to cover up the murder of her daughter as well?


Thanks for your reply Dave.

I find it conceivable that these individuals were intimidated into making such claims, to corroborate with doctor-ments.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Nutter
 


To whom? The FBI interviewed all of the families and employers of the people on Flight 77. No one else reported receiving calls. Then again, there is the other evidence that Barbara Olson attempted at least 5 phone calls and completed four of them......but for some reason, you keep ignoring it....



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by Nutter

Originally posted by ATH911
Why did no men call from Flight 77?

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


I'd like to know why everyone thinks the unknown calls had to have been Barbara.

Let's see. Out of 54 people only 2 are smart enough or had the insight to call their loved ones? Especially if seatback phones were available.

Why is Barbara the automatic phoner out of 52 other people?

G-O-D: Is it possible that those unknown calls were made from others?
edit on 7-1-2011 by Nutter because: (no reason given)


The only relatives to say they had calls from AA 77 were Ted Olson and Renee May's parents.


I'm not discounting you. But, why out of 54 people were only 2 trying to phone home? If you were on a plane that is hijacked and saw 2 people speaking with their loved ones (while you are all hoarded to the back.....from Barbara's own words) on a cell phone or seatback phone, would you: a) sit there and let them talk while they are not connecting? Or b) grab the phone and try to dial YOUR loved ones instead?

Serious question:

Really ...............only 2 out of 54? Come on.

And tell me how these two women got priority over the 30 men that were on the plane also? No offense to women, but, when it comes to life or death, the weaker woman will lose 95% of the time.
edit on 7-1-2011 by Nutter because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
To whom? The FBI interviewed all of the families and employers of the people on Flight 77. No one else reported receiving calls. Then again, there is the other evidence that Barbara Olson attempted at least 5 phone calls and completed four of them......but for some reason, you keep ignoring it....


I'm actually not ignoring anything. But, not to get too into a conspiracy, but, aren't we involving the US gov in complicity? If so, would the FBI be reliable?

2)....The calls are classified as "unknown". To me that means "unknown caller to unknown receiver"....unless there are more acurate data logs of the calls?....which I've seen none.













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

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



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 11:15 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 11:56 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 02:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by kaya82
are you going to answer my question dave or continue to dodge it as per usual. Why are people engaging inhis thread he wants to decrease thruther credibiity so we argue amongst are selves dont give him the time of day


I didn't dodge it. I have the facts on my side so I have no need to dodge anyone. I simply didn't see it.

I have said this already...first, ATS isn't a conspiracy web site. It's a conspiracy forum, where people supporting or refuting pretty much every conspiracy there is can come and discuss them. True conspiracy websites I.E. Loose Change have an in-house conspiracy they're peddling and they will promote it jealously up to and including outright censorship. If you don't believe me, log onto the Loose Change web site and start promoting "No Planes" conspiracies, and see how long it takes Dylan Avery to ban you.

Second,, I'm here to point out these conspiracies of yours are NOT based upon any sincere review of the facts, but entirely upon some drivel being shovelled out by those very damned fool conspiracy web sites and it's deliberately causing false public unrest. Your conspiracy movement is so chock full of just plain BAD information, from "No interceptors were scrambled", "no fires in WTC 7", "all the WTC bomb dogs were withdrawn", and now, "it wasn't flight 77 that hit the Pentagon", and from the way it's being edited and presented it's obvious the con artists pushing this stuff out know they're being dishonest.. I'm not here to insult you or to make you feel bad. I'm here to show you how you're being suckered and suckered badly.

Come on, now, in all honestly, doesn't it strike you how odd it is that there are more supposed explanations for this "blatantly a conspiracy" than there were antitrust lawsuits against Microsoft?



i am already a member of loose change i browse alot of different forums and sites and they all have the exact same contents so yes dave ats IS a conspiracy site what ever way you want to twist it around

whats your obsession with dylan avery? as you seem to mention the guys name in most of your posts

iv no idea who made up this no plane theory but it definately is not suported by the truth movement no matter how many times you try to discredit it

you go on about the 911 commission report do you realise that if it wasnt for the efforts of a group women who lost their husbands that day who didnt believe the governments story of what happened that there wouldnt of even been a commssion! which was a farce anyway a large percentage of the questions the family members wanted answering were simply ignored

we are not being suckered into anything dave and you are never going to convince us other wise im touched by your concern but really your wasting your time

thanks for you explanation i can now sleep at night



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 07:03 AM
link   
Thread Topic...


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




Please focus further responses on the actual topic of discussion and Not on individual perceptions of fellow members' characters and/or persons


Thank You



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 07:04 AM
link   
**ATTENTION ** The topic of this thread is " Ted Olson LIED to cover up his wife's murder?!?". Please stay on-topic and debate the merits of the thread topic, and not each other.

Thank you.




top topics



 
9
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join