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.

 

Critique of David Ray Griffin’s 9/11 Fake Calls Theory by Erik Larson

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 06:51 AM
link   
911blogger.com...

from the article/blog

Beginning with his book New Pearl Harbor (2004) David Ray Griffin raised questions concerning the veracity of reports of phone calls from the 9/11 hijacked airliners, specifically, Ted Olson’s account. Since at least 2006, he has promoted a theory that the 9/11 plane passenger phone calls were faked, and has speculated this was done with ‘voice-morphing’ technology. He’s done this in many different articles, in books, in speaking appearances, in interviews on radio and television, and in a debate with Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone magazine. In his 1/12/10 essay, Phone Calls from the 9/11 Airliners: Response to Questions Evoked by My Fifth Estate Interview, David Ray Griffin gives the most comprehensive overview of this theory to date, as well as a response to critics, which include people who support a new 9/11 investigation. A Professor Emeritus and skilled rhetorician, Griffin makes a case that is seemingly compelling. However, as I show in this essay, there is no actual evidence the phone calls were faked, while there is a substantial body of evidence demonstrating the calls were not only possible, but did happen.

*** Eric Larson seems to be saying the calls did happen and that David Ray Griffin is wrong on these points, the article is well written with lots of sources and seems to confirm the idea that the calls were not fake or some sort of 'voice-morphing' technology which although it exists would be too difficult to work in a real world situation. Larson's argument is dependent on the flight in question actually existing,

I was of the opinion that the flight was faked to provide the whole 'Let's Roll' American hero narrative, that and the visual footage does not add up, see ATS for links and threads about this. Now I am in a difficult position of thinking the calls were real and the flight was fake which obviously does not tally so I need to have a think and re-evaluate my views.

Of course, if Griffin is wrong on this issue it does not follow he is wrong about every issue but as I am sure is true on ATS we are on a search of the truth


Peace




posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by yyyyyyyyyy
 
The FBI goes beyond saying they or fake or really. FBI testifies in court under oath that Ted Olson did not even get any phone calls from his wife. Now, Ted Olson, Solicitor General of United State, under Bush Adm., was on TV news days after 9/11 saying that his wife called him twice from the plane and stated they were of musliums and they had Box cutters. Now that is the only evidence that they were musliums with box cutters. His wife that died on the plane that hit the Twin Towers is the only one that said anything about the highjackers. So is Ted Olson lying about the phone calls from his wife, or is the FBI lying under oath that he never recieved any calls from his wife.?????????



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Excuse me it was the Plane that supposedly hit the Pentagon that she was on. Here is Ted Olson on Larry King talking about the calls. That the FBI says he never got.




posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 08:21 AM
link   
Phone calls from planes at the time could only happen on the ground (cell) and in the air (airphone) the "cell phone calls" from the 9/11 planes couldn't happen because of the way cell technology works.

A cell phone triangulates to the nearest towers and must complete a handshake to authenticate to the tower to connect, at altitude and speed, this can't happen. Now planes have a special antenna I think in the nose, that allow cell phones to work from the air, these were not in place on 9/11. by the time the phone connects to the tower, it's out of range and hitting a different tower.

still not sure of the voice morphing, the tech demos I've seen simply wouldn't pass muster for me.

Ted Olsen said he got a call, flip flopped about it being airphone or cell, fbi records say he got 1 call that lasted 0 seconds.
edit on 14-2-2011 by phishyblankwaters because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by coolottie
reply to post by yyyyyyyyyy
 
The FBI goes beyond saying they or fake or really. FBI testifies in court under oath that Ted Olson did not even get any phone calls from his wife. Now, Ted Olson, Solicitor General of United State, under Bush Adm., was on TV news days after 9/11 saying that his wife called him twice from the plane and stated they were of musliums and they had Box cutters. Now that is the only evidence that they were musliums with box cutters. His wife that died on the plane that hit the Twin Towers is the only one that said anything about the highjackers. So is Ted Olson lying about the phone calls from his wife, or is the FBI lying under oath that he never recieved any calls from his wife.?????????



The FBI has never said Ted Olson did not receive any calls from his wife on AA 77 the morning of 9/11 . If you want to maintain differently please post your evidence.

What was put in evidence at the Moussaoui trial was that one call from AA 77 of 0 sec duration was directly attributable to Barbara Olson, presumably an unsuccessful attempt to use her personal cell phone, but that there were 4 airfone calls from unidentified callers of 102 secs, 274 secs, 159 secs and 260 secs.Any or all of them could have been made by Barbara Olson.

You also seem to be unaware, or avoiding, that Ted Olson never took any calls directly. They were received by a DoJ secretary Lori Keyton who told Ted Olson's assistant Helen Voss that Barbara was on the line and the calls were then put through.Lori Keyton made a statement to the FBI on 9/11 itself as here :-

intelfiles.egoplex.com...

All this has been covered on the recent thread " Ted Olson LIED to cover up his wife's murder ?!?" The allegations that the calls were faked are as distasteful as they are ridiculous.

How was every single relative fooled ? How could calls be morphed for people who only joined flights last minute ? Like passengers who only joined UA 93 on the very morning of 9/11 because they switched from Flight 91 ? How could the wicked perp who faked Linda Gronlund's call from UA 93 know to tell her sister the combination of the safe in her closet ? How did Mark Bingham's faker know his mother would be at her brother's that morning and not at home ?



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by yyyyyyyyyy
I was of the opinion that the flight was faked to provide the whole 'Let's Roll' American hero narrative, that and the visual footage does not add up, see ATS for links and threads about this. Now I am in a difficult position of thinking the calls were real and the flight was fake which obviously does not tally so I need to have a think and re-evaluate my views.


Let's face it, there's only one reason and one reason only why Griffin is trying to muddy the water with his "faked phone calls" claim- he doesn't want to believe it was flight 77 that hit the Pentagon. Not only is it intellectually dishonest in that it deliberately ignores the hordes of eyewitnesses who specifically saw that it was a passenger jet that hit the Pentagon, it's utterly pointless to be staging some alternative reality stunt when we know full well the conspirators had two or more disposable passenger jets under their control that they were flinging into buildings elsewhere. It's inventing conspiracies entirely for conspiracy's sake.

The very moment, nay, the very billionth of a second, that someone attempts to introduce some super secret technology exists or that hordes of secret gov't agents are planted everywhere, that's when we know that person is a BS artist making up crap off the top of their head. It isn't proof of anything; it's circular logic in that he's repeating the original claim in different terms in an attempt to prove itself. If anyone in the 9/11 commission attempted to pull a stunt like that you'd be on them like Rosie O'Donnell on a chocolate cake. You know that and so do I.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Why do people keep bringing up the same factoids, even after they are proved to be untrue?

I regularly read that the FBI allege that Olson received on call from his wife, but they don't say that at all.

Why is it then constantly repeated? And why, if the FBI are not to be trusted, would one take their word anyway?
edit on 15-2-2011 by TrickoftheShade because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
2

log in

join