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.

 

'Hi Mom. It's Me, Mark Bingham.'

page: 7
59
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by olliemc84
My uncle lives in Newburgh, NY, and lives very close to Stewart ANGB. He pretty much knows the ins and outs of the flightpaths coming in and out of the airport. On 9/11 he saw two airliners flying in what his words was "an extremely low altitude" considering they weren't landing at Stewart. He saw BOTH jets screaming down the Hudson River.

Two planes hit the WTC building. A cruise missile hit the Pentagon, and IMHO flight 93 was intended to crash somewhere in the middle of Pennsylvania. Nothing like a harrowing story of a group of civilians fighting the big bad terrorists for the good of the country.

And IF 93 had an intended target, it was probably either a) building #7 or b) Indian Point Energy Center.


If your uncle saw two airliners together he wasn't seeing the WTC flights.


The way he tells the story is that he went out after his first cup of coffee to mow the grass. While riding down the length of his front yard he noticed an airliner flying south down the Hudson that didn't look like any flightpath he has ever seen out of Stewart. He parked the lawnmower in the garage and as he exited he heard another jet. He looked south again to see another jet on a similar flightpath as the first.




posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 01:10 AM
link   
reply to post by olliemc84
 


He is mistaken or the washingtonpost.com is lieing.

I really don't know who to trust but here is the flight paths that Washington Post has pictured.

The first plane did come down the Hudson. The second didn't. There is no way your grandfather saw the second plane like he said because it came from south west. Maybe grandpa has bionic eyes or he's just telling fish stories.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 01:58 AM
link   
Totally obvious. 9/11 is a big scam. If you do not understand that then you are a complete idiot. The real question is who done it?



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 05:40 AM
link   
A whole range of things could factor into his use of language.

1- He wanted to provide his full name, so whoever picked up the phone knew who it was immediately.

2- He was in a highly stressful situation, his brain could have been anywhere.

There are many many more



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by pshea38
 


If you guys were to look up the voice records from the Waco TX shootout right before the compound was set on fire the voices recorded really seemed to use the word "Fuel" alot. For those that dont know or cant remember I`m talking about David Koresh and the Branch Dividians. Torwards the end of the whole thing the compound was set on fire and the FBI would have you believe that the Dividians started the fire but recorded voices from planted bugs inside you can hear them keep saying "Fuel" in every sentence and i believe the same voice changing tech was used there to make it look as if they started the fire that killed all those ppl including several children.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 07:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by daaskapital
A whole range of things could factor into his use of language.

1- He wanted to provide his full name, so whoever picked up the phone knew who it was immediately.

2- He was in a highly stressful situation, his brain could have been anywhere.

There are many many more



Stressful yet cognitively thoughtful?

Here. I'll help.

1) Amnesia.
2) Brain fog
3) Cabin Pressure
4) Reading from forced script
5) Told by Arab hijacker at plastic-knife point
6) Dialed wrong number
7) Wanted to hear his name out loud for the last time


Nah.
I'll go with bogus call!
Carry on OP..........................



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 08:18 AM
link   
reply to post by StratosFear
 


Hasn't that been debunked?

I remember vividly in HS my history professor and huge conspiracy guy tracking down several live news feeds showing an armored vehicle manned by the FBI shooting flames at the building.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 08:43 AM
link   
While there are many things about that day which cast serious doubt on the "official story", I don't really see the Mark Bingham call as being one of them.

Telephone protocols quickly become habitual over time. In this case, it has been stated that Mr. Bingham was in an occupation wherein he initiated and recieved many phone calls per day. In a business setting, it quickly becomes second nature to identify yourself by both first and last name when using the phone. Even under normal circumstances this learned behavior quickly becomes automatic. Under stress this hard-wired procedure is almost impossible to avoid no matter who you are calling.

Case in point: As Air Traffic Controllers we were trained to end every call on the landline/intercom with our two letter "operating initials" (usually first and last initial of our names). This was for ID purposes should the communication tapes need to be reviewed after an incident. It took almost six months (and a LOT of kidding from friends and family) after leaving the job for me to stop ending every phone call with "WB".

It really does not matter where Mr. Binghams mom was when she received the call, as it has been stated that the call was made to HER mobile phone.

Again, there were so many suspicious occurances on 9/11 that it is hard to list them but the Bingham phone call doesn't seem to be one of them in my opinion.
edit on 2-3-2012 by Tholidor because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-3-2012 by Tholidor because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tholidor
Case in point: As Air Traffic Controllers we were trained to end every call on the landline/intercom with our two letter "operating initials" (usually first and last initial of our names). This was for ID purposes should the communication tapes need to be reviewed after an incident. It took almost six months (and a LOT of kidding from friends and family) after leaving the job for me to stop ending every phone call with "WB".


I completely forgot about the whole job/trained automatic response.
Anyone who has ever had a job where the majority of the day they answer incoming calls from out of the office will occasionally give the spiel to their family and friends when picking up.
I know I certainly did after 12 hour over night shifts.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Pigraphia
 


LOL Yup! After I wrote that it occured to me that there must be hundreds of examples of, for example, news reporters who have dialed their mother or wife and after a momentary distraction as the phone is answered opened the conversation with "Hi! This is John Smith with the Herald.." or something similar..hehehe



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tholidor
While there are many things about that day which cast serious doubt on the "official story", I don't really see the Mark Bingham call as being one of them.

Telephone protocols quickly become habitual over time. In this case, it has been stated that Mr. Bingham was in an occupation wherein he initiated and recieved many phone calls per day. In a business setting, it quickly becomes second nature to identify yourself by both first and last name when using the phone. Even under normal circumstances this learned behavior quickly becomes automatic. Under stress this hard-wired procedure is almost impossible to avoid no matter who you are calling.

Case in point: As Air Traffic Controllers we were trained to end every call on the landline/intercom with our two letter "operating initials" (usually first and last initial of our names). This was for ID purposes should the communication tapes need to be reviewed after an incident. It took almost six months (and a LOT of kidding from friends and family) after leaving the job for me to stop ending every phone call with "WB".

It really does not matter where Mr. Binghams mom was when she received the call, as it has been stated that the call was made to HER mobile phone.

Again, there were so many suspicious occurances on 9/11 that it is hard to list them but the Bingham phone call doesn't seem to be one of them in my opinion.
edit on 2-3-2012 by Tholidor because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-3-2012 by Tholidor because: (no reason given)



By starting out with "MOM" instinctually let's your inner mind know who you're talking to. It's usually the first and most repeated word one has since the day you were born. Mom. Mommy. Mother. Ma. Mum. It's like no other. This is deep within our DNA. Unless you're estranged from your parents and providing your mother is alive your entire life.

If 5000 other questionable events weren't linked to that day (prior and post too) then there wouldn't be that much attention drawn to this. But as a parent and having parents, there is no logical excuse or explanation for this in my mind.

That day..... in all likelihood..... did not go down the way we were told.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:20 AM
link   
drone
I do not doubt that plans were Hijacked.
Calls Were Made.

drone
but who CRASHED the planes into WTC, Pentagon, and into the Ground.

drone
if you look at how those plans were flying at the last few seconds.... Drone Precision. A Computer Crashed those Planes.

drone



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien
If 5000 other questionable events weren't linked to that day (prior and post too) then there wouldn't be that much attention drawn to this. But as a parent and having parents, there is no logical excuse or explanation for this in my mind.

That day..... in all likelihood..... did not go down the way we were told.


You must have failed logic if you don't think adrenalin, fear, confusion cabin pressure and a plethora of other factors weren't messing with his brains ability to process a conversation.

Thinking back I've actually said "Ma it's (my name)" before when I am totally out of it.

If you want to question the entire day go ahead, but don't use this as a pillar for that questioning and than claim it's logical.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:22 AM
link   
I've answered my home phone with my work greeting in the past.

What I don't get is, if it was a fake recording, and everyone on here says 'No one ever says that' why would they fake someone saying something no one ever says? In fact why even make the call?
edit on 2-3-2012 by khimbar because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:23 AM
link   
No one has answered Why the government would fake a call to a passenger's mother? What would be the point? The only details the call delivered was that the plane was hi-jacked. Now if the caller had said that bin Laden was on speaker phone talking to the hi-jackers and that Iraq had WMD, then I might buy that the goverment faked the call.
But until someone points out a logical reason why the goverment would go through the trouble of picking a passenger, researching his family, finding out his mother was staying at her brother's house, get that phone number, then call and pretend to be Mark, I'll have trouble saying "He said his last name, therefore it must be an inside job".



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Pigraphia
 


That i`m not sure of, i havent really looked into the whole Waco incident in detail. I saw something about it the other day on TV and this thread reminded me of the supposed voices of the Dividians inside the compound and i know they were far from "Normal" but they seemed to keep saying fuel very clearly in the sentences that i heard and it didnt make sense to me as to why they would put so much emphasis on the word "fuel". You`d think that being in Texas you would hear them refer to it as gasoline or gas. But there is no doubt in my mind that the FBI started that fire and were more than likely involved in the Sept 11 event. Untrained pilots cannot fly big jets like that.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Hi H_A! It's been a while.

I agree that including his last name when identifying himself to his mom is illogical bordering on the bizarre. But I also think that under extreme stress the mind will default to a learned/trained response as a defense mechanism. If you include your last name whenever you use your first name 20 times a day while holding a phone, the very act of holding a phone will trigger that learned response no matter who you are talking to - even your mother. Once that first name leaves your lips, it becomes almost impossible to prevent yourself from completing the trained phrase, even though you may not be consciously aware of saying it. This would be amplified by the stress of the situation.

Again, just my opinion based on personal experience.

Good to see you again!



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Tholidor
 



It really does not matter where Mr. Binghams mom was when she received the call, as it has been stated that the call was made to HER mobile phone.


Actually made calls to his uncles house, Vaughn Hoglan

Look at this table of AirFone calls from Flight 93



Bingham made several attempts - only one was sucessful lasting 166 seconds

Calls are listed as having been made to Vaughn Hoglan, his mother's brother who she was visting

Bring up any question for the mentally challenged - if calls were faked how did "THEY" know to call his uncles house



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by StratosFear
 


You would actually be surprised what can be done through training on flight simulators these days.

Don't forget this is the generation of the video game which is essentially fly by wire.

I would put money on the fact that when they got here they not only had flight simulator on their computers but at least a play station or whatever system was out back then that had lots of flight based games.

Sure it wouldn't make them experts, but if the control towers can talk down people who have only had 1 or 2 classes then someone on a mission could at least crash it into a building.

Personally I think it was terrorists, now whether those terrorists were manipulated and weren't exactly working for who they thought they were is another story which I am still unsure of.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


Thanks for the clarification - I stand corrected. Actually I had forgotten the details of the call log and based that statement on a previous comment in this thread.

I don't think that the call was phony or staged in any way. It was just a guy under a lot of stress reaching out in what would prove to be the last minutes of his life.

On the other hand, most of the official story of that day simply cannot pass the "smell test". I fear we may never have all the answers but that should in no way prevent a rational questioning of the circumstances as they have been presented.




top topics



 
59
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join