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

Originally posted by Pigraphia
reply to post by hooper

 

Careful now you are asking people be reasonable and use logic.
It's far safer to believe something more complex and less likely than a simple solution.

That's another thing, the conspiracies say it's logical and more simple to have the conspiracy.
No the conspiracy is needlessly convoluted.

I'm willing to admit there are things about 9/11 we may never know, but to hang the proverbial hat on this of all things is really out there.

It's not that another conspiracy is needed but it's more like the whole sentence is wrong.like a line from the twilight zone.

As a mother and a daughter I would never announce myself that way on the phone to my parents and a majority of people wouldn't either.Especially when your in an emotional state,his mother would automatically know her childs voice no doubt about it.If the plane was hijacked,wouldn't Mark be a bit more worried about getting his message out as quickly as possible not knowing how much time he had on the phone,because I'm sure the hijacker didn't hand him the phone to call his Mother.

Could he have spoken that way?It's possible but chances are slim that he did,like someone else said in a panic situation one would cut to the chase to get out what you need to say as quickly as you can,no time for formalities.

In my opinion if Mark Bingham had the good sense to plan a counter attack,he had the sense to speak more efficiently to his mother,and not be worried about getting the speaking points out for the sake of the American public.

When I hear that call I expect him to follow up with his address and phone number.It sounds that formal to me.

reply to post by Pigraphia


It's not just 'saying their entire name' as you would like to make less of this than it really is.

It's about identifying yourself...to your mother of 30-something years.....by first and last name.....then ending the call by asking: 'you believe me don't you?'

Now unless Mark and mother had a very tumultuous, strenuous and mistrusting relationship, I can understand this.

But if I'm not mistaken, Mrs B was one of the first ones to make the circuit rounds and explaining away this unusual event that people wondered about.
She said it was a behavior very typical of Mark because he was always 'formal'. I remember her using that word and thought at the time, now THAT'S very unusual. What 30-year old is THAT formal? Even a preppie or a soldier aren't THAT formal.

You believe your truth and I'm perfectly fine for believing mine.
Been 10 years and nothing is likely to change it.

Originally posted by TWILITE22

Could he have spoken that way?It's possible but chances are slim that he did,like someone else said in a panic situation one would cut to the chase to get out what you need to say as quickly as you can,no time for formalities.

He was in a panic his brain wasn't working right so it went into automatic and he had a job answering and making calls all day.
His automatic included his name.

It's just just the likely or unlikeliness of using his name.
If this call was part of the grand conspiracy it would have been planned out to the very syllable.
Psychologists would have been involved in developing the script in order to convey the right emotions.
If using the name is so weird that it raises so many flags with so many people and this was planned than that would have been left out of the script.

That's what makes it unlikely, if this was part of a huge conspiracy there wouldn't be screw ups.
It would have been prerecorded and gone over ad nausium again and again.
It would have been plugged into a system that could make logical guesses and come up with alternate replies if the call was picked up by someone else.

The fact that it's so weird and so unconvincing does more to prove it was a random human quirk than something planned.

reply to post by Pigraphia


But every call....just like every plane had a problem, issue or wasn't making sense.

We didn't start off as conspirators concerning 9-11. They showed themselves.

Marks call...then the flight attendant who couldn't identify Manhattan and Olsen (to name a few) raised a lot of eye brows. (Olsen made a cell call. Then made an airfone call. Then talked to husband. Then left message. Then no call)
Couple this portion of the event with planes landing in Ohio (confirmed!) and no plane in Shanksville...along with a questionable at BEST, plane at the Pentagon....Mark Bingham's call certainly becomes suspicious. Not alone. As a whole.

Originally posted by Human_Alien
Marks call...then the flight attendant who couldn't identify Manhattan and Olsen (to name a few) raised a lot of eye brows. (Olsen made a cell call. Then made an airfone call. Then talked to husband. Then left message. Then no call)
Couple this portion of the event with planes landing in Ohio (confirmed!) and no plane in Shanksville...along with a questionable at BEST, plane at the Pentagon....Mark Bingham's call certainly becomes suspicious. Not alone. As a whole.

...and from our perspective, this is entirely a case of "you want these conspiracy claims of yours to be true so you're specifically rooting through garbage cans and underneath every rock looking for anything that sounds vaguely 'suspicious' regardless of how much of a stretch it is."

So flipping what if the guy said "Hi Mom, it's me, Mark Bingham"? His mother confirmed it was definitely her son so unless you want to prop up your claims with that adolescent "armies of sinister secret agents" crutch it necessarily had to have been a legitimate call from Bingham regardless of how much of an affront to your senses his manners were.

Originally posted by Human_Alien
But every call....just like every plane had a problem, issue or wasn't making sense.

I don't know how many life or death situations you've been in.
I've been in a few.
I'm not surprised the calls have issues or don't make sense at all.

If you expect coherence in that situation you must have ice in your veins.

Originally posted by canselmi
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".

'Mark Bingham ' never existed! His mother is an actor! There were no terrorists, no
plane crashes, and few if any real victims on 9/11, most (like 'Mark') being computer
generated entities with no basis in reality.
9/11 was a demolition job disguised inside of a hollywood style action movie narrative. The
fake victims were introduced into the narrative to galvanise an outraged public (see Pearl
Harbour) into supporting any subsequent 'actions' deemed necessary by the perpetrators of the con!

All 9/11 'for public consumption' interactions and narratives were scripted!

"He said his last name, therefore it must be an inside job".

You have not seen the tons and tons of damning evidence gathered below, I take it.
Mark was an only child and by all accounts had an extremely close relationship with his mom!
Even more ridiculous so, the notion that he referred to himself as 'Mark Bingham'!

Mark Bingham proven to be a fraud

The 9/11 hoax/con exposed:
www.cluesforum.info
letsrollforums.com...

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Tholidor

I do, however, question the ability of someone who can't even demonstrate basic proficiency in a Cessna being able to perform complex manuevers in a B-757 using only consumer grade simulator software. Perhaps not impossible but certainly very improbable.

What exctly is so complex about crashing an airplane? I'm not a pilot and even I could do it.

there goes dave again trying anything possible to get this thread de-railed......

I have got to give him credit where credit is due ......he is very persistent for sure.

Regards, Iwinder

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by L00kingGlass

 

I noticed that you're very persistent and unrelenting with your views, very admirable. I've always wondered why some people care so much about what others think of 911.

Look no farther than the Norway mass killings.
Some people get so worked up over perceived injustice that they lose it and do something stupid.

Norway, like 9/11 was another Faked/Staged/Hoaxed event!
162 Pages of Evidence Proving
The Complete Fakery Of Last Years 'Events' In Norway!

Conclusive, if you can bother your arse to take the time!

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by dubiousone

 

Ah, come on Dave!! That's comes near to being the dumbest comment you have posted on a 911 thread. What a waste of bandwidth. Granted, not much bandwidth, but a waste none-the-less.

...and yet the question still stands- what exactly is so complex about crashing an airplane? The truthers are notorious for chanting "complex and intricate flight maneuvers" and "exceptionally lucky pilots" like they were religious mantras, but the most complex and intricate thing the hijackers did was to fly a plane in a circle. As for being exceptionally lucky, they crashed a plane and were all killed. This is about as "lucky" as a drunk guy crashing his car into a telephone pole.

If you think this is stupid for me to point out, don't blame me. All I'm doing is stripping the flowery prose and eloquent verbosity those damned fool conspiracy web sites use to sucker people into swallowing their drivel, because at the end of the day, a bunch of inexperienced pilots hijacked a number of airplanes and wound up crashing them. What did you expect would happen, that they would fly up into outer space?

Pay attention people, GOD (Good Old Dave) has been trying to drift this thread from the phone call question to how to crash a jet liner.....

Seriously see how off topic he his and how it takes everyone with him to another topic of how to crash Jet Liners but not one word about calling Mom and saying a full name just in case Mom does not know who you are.

Regards, Iwinder

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by Merlin Lawndart
I have never once in my life ever addressed either of my parents in such a manner. Just another turd added to the bucket of BS.

So know all you have to prove is that no one else, in the modern history of telecommunications, has ever addressed a close relative on the phone using their last name.

I'll be waiting.

But don't bother. I do it on occasion. Have a cousin with the same first name. When I talk to my folks I sometimes have to use my last name because we sound a little a like on the phone.

Is that a fact Hooper????


Your mother must have loved you dearly because even a mouse can recognize their babies squeaks as their own.

Regards, Iwinder

To me, it is strange indeed. I don't, nor anyone I know even have to say who we are when calling our parents. At most, a first name if it is from a noisy place. Especially following the greeting, "Hi mom", that certainly narrows it down. Maybe if this was octomom or something, but hell, even when my pops called his mother, who had 14 kids, 7 boys, never even had to say "hi mom, this is 'full name'"

reply to post by thedman


What is suspicious here? Look at this and you will see why people think something isn't right:

1. That nobody presents themselves with full name to their own mother over the phone, unless it's to deliberately fake the callers identity.

*snip*

Presumably anyone holding the view that the Mark Bingham calls were faked must also believe that all the calls from UA 93 were faked. After all, why take the risk of faking his when there were many other natural genuine calls ?

It is when you consider all the calls being faked that absurdity gets piled on absurdity. This is what Dr Papcun, founder of voice morphing technology says would have been required :-

sites.google.com...

It is just common sense really but you will see that not only are extensive voice samples required but you need to know pet names, family details etc.

In the circumstances of UA 93 nearly half the passengers were late bookers. Either the day before or on the morning of 9/11 itself. Mark Bingham was actually due to travel on 9/10 but postponed for 24 hours because he was feeling fragile after a friends party.Even then he nearly missed flight 93. Nonetheless it still seems to be being alleged by some that the wicked perps were all geared up with not only extensive samples of his voice but with the knowledge that his mother would be at his uncles that morning and not at home.

Lauren Grandcolas was originally booked on flight 91, due to leave 1 hour 20 min after flight 93 but when her service car got her to the airport early she switched to the earlier flight. And yet she called her husband from flight 93 when even she didn't know she would be on it until immediately before.

Linda Gronlund phoned her sister Elsa Strong from flight 93 and, amongst other things, told her where her will was in a safe in a closet and told her the combination.

Perhaps anyone who persists in believing in fakery can explain to me how extensive voice samples were obtained from people who didn't know themselves that they would be on flight 93 until shortly before .And, while they are about it, explain how the wicked perps knew where Mark Bingham's mother would be on that morning and what Linda Gronlund's safe combination was.

Needless to say, none of the recipients of any of these calls has expressed any doubts that they were speaking to their loved ones.

I think his mom is a paid government agent to be honest (my sincere apologies if I am wrong), but she just seems fake.

Originally posted by whathappenedoverthere
I think his mom is a paid government agent to be honest (my sincere apologies if I am wrong), but she just seems fake.

Would that be just Mark Bingham's mother who is a paid government agent or all relatives who received calls from UA 93, or all relatives who received calls from any 9/11 flight or all relatives who received any calls at all including from the Towers ?

Oh, and some evidence for that please.

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by whathappenedoverthere
I think his mom is a paid government agent to be honest (my sincere apologies if I am wrong), but she just seems fake.

Would that be just Mark Bingham's mother who is a paid government agent or all relatives who received calls from UA 93, or all relatives who received calls from any 9/11 flight or all relatives who received any calls at all including from the Towers ?

Oh, and some evidence for that please.

My personal view is (evidence comes from the modus operandi outlined in Operation Northwoods) that the flight was taken over by remote control, and landed in a remote government base, where most of the passengers where executed.

But a few (small enough to keep a conspiracy) were paid government agents who made the calls to their unsuspecting family. But a few of the family members that were called were in on it (Bingham's mom, etc).

See here: www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by whathappenedoverthere

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by whathappenedoverthere
I think his mom is a paid government agent to be honest (my sincere apologies if I am wrong), but she just seems fake.

Would that be just Mark Bingham's mother who is a paid government agent or all relatives who received calls from UA 93, or all relatives who received calls from any 9/11 flight or all relatives who received any calls at all including from the Towers ?

Oh, and some evidence for that please.

My personal view is (evidence comes from the modus operandi outlined in Operation Northwoods) that the flight was taken over by remote control, and landed in a remote government base, where most of the passengers where executed.

But a few (small enough to keep a conspiracy) were paid government agents who made the calls to their unsuspecting family. But a few of the family members that were called were in on it (Bingham's mom, etc).

See here: www.youtube.com...

Just so I am sure what you think, is this the position ? You propose that an airliner under Air Traffic Control observation and physically sighted by crews of other aircraft before crashing was in fact landed at a secret base and no-one saw anything ?

You have passengers, who are really paid government agents, making phony lying calls to their loved ones knowing that they can never see them or their children or any other family and friends ever again but are looking forward to a pay check. Similarly, you have some relatives conniving in the murders of their nearest and dearest in return for a pay check. All goes down and no-one says anything ever and nobody ever queries why these people are on the government payroll. What budget do you think it comes from ?

I won't even get into dna identified body parts of passengers and crew recovered at Shanksville plus the flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder.

Do you really think your scenario sounds more plausible than hi-jackers taking over an aircraft and passengers making desperate calls to their loved ones ?

Originally posted by whathappenedoverthere

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by whathappenedoverthere
I think his mom is a paid government agent to be honest (my sincere apologies if I am wrong), but she just seems fake.

Would that be just Mark Bingham's mother who is a paid government agent or all relatives who received calls from UA 93, or all relatives who received calls from any 9/11 flight or all relatives who received any calls at all including from the Towers ?

Oh, and some evidence for that please.

My personal view is (evidence comes from the modus operandi outlined in Operation Northwoods) that the flight was taken over by remote control, and landed in a remote government base, where most of the passengers where executed.

But a few (small enough to keep a conspiracy) were paid government agents who made the calls to their unsuspecting family. But a few of the family members that were called were in on it (Bingham's mom, etc).

See here: www.youtube.com...

Have you forgotten how Faked Victims and Faked Victim funerals featured in the
deceptions proposed for Operation Northwoods?
This is a vital aspect to '1st' world psyops, where an 'educated' population with easy access
to litigation and mass communications would soon scupper any false-flag schemes involving
real victims (especially such a huge number as 3000), with the inevitable involvement of
many thousands of aggrieved and highly embittered family members and relatives, all vying
for blood. Real victims are a no-no!

Do you think that alfie and hooper and goodolddave etc. believe for a second what
they are posting or have posted over the course of years?
Come on! They are clearly too bright for that!
They know full well that 9/11 was hoaxed from top to bottom! And they, like the myriad
other actors/players/hired hands in the 9/11 extravaganza, would much sooner participate
(being well compensated) in a mass-hoax over a mass-murder!
You see, alfie and hooper and goodolddave etc. are not so bad afterall!

46 relevant drills and exercises on 9/11. Pass simulation footage off as reality, with the
vital assistance of an already owned and sold out main stream media! Generate fake
victim identities and employ actors to play the roles of grieving family members! Fake
video will take care of the 'plane crashes' and collapse sequences, while the demolition
of the WTC can proceed in private. Keep investigators chasing their tails for years, analysing
faked video as if it were real.
How long is it before the Statute of Limitations runs out for fraud, and fraud alone?


9/11 Hoax Exposed:
www.cluesforum.info
letsrollforums.com...

There are no excuses left for our ignorance on this matter!
We were suckered. Big Time!