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.

 

8 Planes Were Hijacked on 9 11

page: 1
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 02:48 AM
link   
Intelligence sources told the msm that 8 planes were hijacked on 9 11 2001. We know two hit the twin towers, one went into the pentagon and the other was shot down according to the government's official story, what happened to the other 4 planes? What were their intended targets, why was it canceled? if they landed, where did they land, who was aboard these other planes.


Still reporting on 8 hijacked planes
9/11 Hijacked Plane Flying Over Dulles Airport, Three Hijacked Planes Still Missing


On a side note I also found this interesting that Flight 93 had actually landed in cleveland..


Since when are CNN and Fox affiliates? why are they using the same video stream.



Ted Olson's report was very important. It provided the only evidence that American 77, which was said to have struck the Pentagon, had still been aloft after it had disappeared from FAA radar around 9:00 AM (there had been reports, after this disappearance, that an airliner had crashed on the Ohio-Kentucky border). Also, Barbara Olson had been a very well-known commentator on CNN. The report that she died in a plane that had been hijacked by Arab Muslims was an important factor in getting the nation's support for the Bush administration's "war on terror." Ted Olson's report was important in still another way, being the sole source of the widely accepted idea that the hijackers had box cutters.

However, although Ted Olson's report of phone calls from his wife has been a central pillar of the official account of 9/11, this report has been completely undermined.

Olson began this process of undermining by means of self-contradictions. He first told CNN, as we have seen, that his wife had "called him twice on a cell phone." But he contradicted this claim on September 14, telling Hannity and Colmes that she had reached him by calling the Department of Justice collect. Therefore, she must have been using the "airplane phone," he surmised, because "she somehow didn't have access to her credit cards." However, this version of Olson's story, besides contradicting his first version, was even self-contradictory, because a credit card is needed to activate a passenger-seat phone.

Later that same day, moreover, Olson told Larry King Live that the second call from his wife suddenly went dead because "the signals from cell phones coming from airplanes don't work that well." After that return to his first version, he finally settled on the second version, saying that his wife had called collect and hence must have used "the phone in the passengers' seats" because she did not have her purse.

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.
However, Olson's second story, besides being self-contradictory, was contradicted by American Airlines.

A 9/11 researcher, knowing that AA Flight 77 was a Boeing 757, noticed that AA's website indicated that its 757s do not have passenger-seat phones. After he wrote 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 757. The passengers on flight 77 used their own personal cellular phones to make out calls during the terrorist attack."

In response to this revelation, defenders of the official story might reply that Ted Olson was evidently right the first time: she had used her cell phone. However, besides the fact that this scenario is rendered unlikely by the cell phone technology employed in 2001, it has also been contradicted by the FBI.

The most serious official contradiction of Ted Olson's story came in 2006 at the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 20th hijacker. The evidence presented to this trial by the FBI included a report on phone calls from all four 9/11 flights. In its report on American Flight 77, the FBI report attributed only one call to Barbara Olson and it was an "unconnected call," which (of course) lasted "0 seconds."

According to the FBI, therefore, Ted Olson did not receive a single call from his wife using either a cell phone or an onboard phone.

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. 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.

FBI exhibit (P200054) from the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui contradicts the Solicitor General's account. It shows that Barbara Olson made only one phone call -- it did not connect, and it lasted for 0 seconds.

Evidence: United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui
Criminal No. 01-455-A
Prosecution Trial Exhibits
Exhibit Number Description
P200054 Summary of Flight 77 depicting: the identity of pilots and flight attendants, seat assignments of passengers, and telephone calls from the flight.

the evidence goes on and on... inside job? most likely..
edit on 20-9-2011 by DemonicUFO because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 03:10 AM
link   
I never heard anything from any relatives or friends of those that died in the pentagon "plane crash". You know, testimony from real people. Not a concocted story from one person that was put up to it. How about a full passenger list and interviews of people that knew these people were on this "flight".

I'm as empathetic as anyone to those who suffered tragedy that day. And I know such a thing would be difficult for relatives and friends (if the said event were real), but some emotional discomfort is worth truth about an event of such importance.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 03:18 AM
link   
It makes me very sad that even though there are so many unanswered questions people forget and let time slip by with the lies slowly fading away.....

The fact that these questions are never asked by foreign governments tells me that this attack is either so vile and evil that noone wants to burn his hands OR noone simply cares.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 03:51 AM
link   
Ted Olsen's wife did make the calls.

She was on the 'other' Flight 77.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 03:53 AM
link   
yeah there's a lot of unanswered questions about 911 but I don't know that this angle really says a whole lot.

I mean the first video is just initial information, which tends to be incorrect some times. Looks like they cleared it up later.

I don't see how the second video shows a plane landing in cleveland?

the third video is actually kind of interesting, but maybe its possible they were sharing the same stream...I dunno?

by the time I got to the fourth video I wasn't interested anymore so I cant really comment on it, but it looks like more suspect details of the 911 saga.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 03:55 AM
link   
who hijacked them ? i have not read through the whole thread , but through my studys of Islam i know that Muslims who commit suicide ,don't go out and party the night before ..i am just saying



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 04:09 AM
link   
Just after 9/11, I was watching CNN and a message scrolled along the bottom that there may have been 8 planes hijacked as there were reports of 4 leaving US airspace somewhere.

Can't remember exactly what it said, but I did see that message.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 04:09 AM
link   
reply to post by DemonicUFO
 

I don't agree with the 8 planes idea OP, but the olson saga is one of the unanswered questions of 9/11.

So the question for the OS believers is this: If we have the box cutters as part of the OS and yet the FBI proved the call (with the infamous box cutters) never went through; which is it? Did the FBI lie or did Ted Olson (the Solicitor General) lie? It has to be one or the other. If Olson lied, then the box cutters don't exist and we still need to figure out how the terrorists highjacked the planes. Ideas OS believers?



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 04:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Baby Seal Club
So the question for the OS believers is this: If we have the box cutters as part of the OS and yet the FBI proved the call (with the infamous box cutters) never went through;

The FBI neither proved nor claimed any such thing. It's a truther myth. And by myth I mean, euphemistically, lie.


which is it? Did the FBI lie or did Ted Olson (the Solicitor General) lie? It has to be one or the other. If Olson lied, then the box cutters don't exist and we still need to figure out how the terrorists highjacked the planes.

Other callers reported the knives, mace, and fake bomb(s) used by the hijackers. Even without Olson's call, we know how the planes were hijacked. ("We" should not be construed to include truthers, who seem to know very little of the events of 9/11.) See page 7.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 04:51 AM
link   
All the reports about 9/11 are hoaxes. remember the fake telephone calls from the planes??

The technology for cell phone transmission at high altitude will only be available aboard commercial aircraft in 2006.

Here is an overview about the calls and what was said.
source

just for the record, flight ual 175 was still flying after it was reported flying into the south tower.

edit on 20-9-2011 by DutchBigBoy because: video inserted



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 05:11 AM
link   



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 05:13 AM
link   
reply to post by DutchBigBoy
 


great find, thanks for posting this, i've never seen that one before.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by DemonicUFO
 


Not sure about 8 planes but I read somewhere about a fifth plane.

I am still convinced that a "plane" was intended for WTC7.

But the plan went wrong. Was the Shanksville plane intended for WTC7?

How can falling debris cause fires on separate floors of WTC7?

I believe that the fires were planned and set off when the plan to crash a "plane" into WTC7 went wrong.
Then the decision to "pull" WTC7 was made even without the "plane" crash.
A wrong decision by the perpetraitors, which made the incident a "smoking gun".

I use the word "plane" in quotes because it too would probably have been CGI.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 07:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli

Originally posted by The Baby Seal Club
So the question for the OS believers is this: If we have the box cutters as part of the OS and yet the FBI proved the call (with the infamous box cutters) never went through;

The FBI neither proved nor claimed any such thing. It's a truther myth. And by myth I mean, euphemistically, lie.


which is it? Did the FBI lie or did Ted Olson (the Solicitor General) lie? It has to be one or the other. If Olson lied, then the box cutters don't exist and we still need to figure out how the terrorists highjacked the planes.

Other callers reported the knives, mace, and fake bomb(s) used by the hijackers. Even without Olson's call, we know how the planes were hijacked. ("We" should not be construed to include truthers, who seem to know very little of the events of 9/11.) See page 7.


Just so I follow you correctly; are you saying that the FBI did not submit the exhibit or that 2 of the 4 unknowm phone calls from flt. 77 were from Barbara Olson?

It's true that other callers reported those things but what's being called into question is the account of the Solicitor General.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 07:41 AM
link   
reply to post by DemonicUFO
 



....one went into the pentagon and the other was shot down according to the government's official story....


Can you please show us the official documents that indicate Flight 93 was shot down, officially?



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 07:41 AM
link   
Give me a break! There were so many erroneous reports given on 9-11 that this thread isn't even funny. There were reports of a plane on the ground with hijackers at Allegheny County Airport in West Mifflin (KDKA radio), reports of a hijacked plane landing at Johnstown Airport (KDKA radio), and the reports of a hijacked plane landing in Cleveland (CNN). I blame this on the media's desire to be the first to report anything. There is no effort made to verify anything until later, so all people hear is the initial report, they don't remember the clarification later because it isn't given the same priority as the original report.

On 9-11 I also heard reports of planes crashing in Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas and Los Angeles. These reports were later changed.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 07:46 AM
link   
This is a perfect example of some one new to the boards.

Another round of rehashing the same old stuff.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 07:56 AM
link   
It was reported on British TV that "the whole eastern seaboard of the United States is under attack".

Not sure it was though.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 09:13 AM
link   
8 planes makes perfect sense in 2 ways:
1) - If the original flights were swapped with other aircraft, or -
2) - If the radar images were part of the exercise that was using hijacked planes scenario (which would account for the false image of Flt. 175 after the collapse of WTC 2.

What is starting to add up strangely is the number of unsubstantiated (later shown to be false) reports of:
8 hijacked planes
Fire at the Treasury Dept (D.C)
Bomb at the State Dept (D.C.)
"credible" threats to airforce one
Anthrax attack (NYC)
Bomb in truck on George Washington bridge (NY)
Bomb in van near WTC (NYC)
Threat at Capitol building (D.C.)
Etc, etc. etc

Where did they all come from?
News departments rely on "credible" sources, who was feeding them this stuff?
edit on 20-9-2011 by Asktheanimals because: added comments



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 



News departments rely on "credible" sources, who was feeding them this stuff?

I think that may be a bit off. When you're talking about print or electronic media doing long term in depth stories such as the failure of Enron or review of a Supreme Court decision most journalist will attempt to get both credilble and/or confirmed accounts. However, with 24/7 news channels reporting on a breaking story, particularly one that may have immeadiate and real implications for anyone watching I think they default to reporting just about everything and then letting time sort out the difference. Would you want to be the station that didn't report a story about, say a bridge being blown out, and later find that had you reported unconfirmed information it may have saved lives? As to who was feeding them info - I don't think anyone has just one source.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join