Author Topic: 9/11 Cell Phones  (Read 14206 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
9/11 Cell Phones
« on: September 14, 2010, 05:05:08 pm »
BTW...this is a very needed commission:

Careful, David Ray Griffin says the 9/11 cell phone calls were faked.

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,239
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #1 on: September 14, 2010, 05:16:32 pm »
Careful, David Ray Griffin says the 9/11 cell phone calls were faked.

I'm pretty sure that's Alex's view as well. If anyone has verifiable information to the contrary, I'd love to see it.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #2 on: September 14, 2010, 05:18:56 pm »
JimD says that is absurd.

Good interview with David Ray griffin re. the phone calls on CBC "Fifth Estate" (recent):

http://www.bushstole04.com

Scroll down for Youtube video link.

found on yesterday's whatreallyhappened.com

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,239
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #3 on: September 14, 2010, 05:43:26 pm »
JimD says that is absurd.

Good interview with David Ray griffin re. the phone calls on CBC "Fifth Estate" (recent):

http://www.bushstole04.com

Scroll down for Youtube video link.

found on yesterday's whatreallyhappened.com

Mike Rivero thinks the whole HAARP issue is "absurd" and accordingly belongs in the same category is Bigfoot and the Loch Ness monster. That dismissive attitude may itself be enough to persuade certain people, but not me.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #4 on: September 14, 2010, 05:54:40 pm »
I don't agree with Rivero on HAARP, I only brought it up becasue he at least did have a link to Griffin's interview.

Actually, I already started a thread for the interview, but if mods felt this was off-topic, OK.

Offline Scootle

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,260
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #5 on: September 15, 2010, 03:11:38 pm »
I don't question the phone calls... the 'impossible altitudes' claim is debatable and largely irrelevant since most of the calls were from airphones. I don't believe the emotional phone calls were fake. Not one single family member of victims on the planes has ever questioned the legitimacy of the calls they recieved, and most are offended by the claims that they were fake. Right or wrong, the fake phone call stuff is an offensive distraction that can't be proven either way and only hurts the movement. There's massive amounts of other evidence - we should stick to that, drop the phone call stuff and cease these pointless debates in my opinion.
The truth will set you free
From global tyranny
Wake up American slobs
9/11 was an inside job
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OntBg2qwk_M&fmt=35

Century of Manipulation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mujq-C1UAw0

... Here's Tom with the weather!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CCIcjIngLA

Offline Aoss

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 308
    • If Everyone Knew
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #6 on: September 15, 2010, 03:31:09 pm »
I don't question the phone calls... the 'impossible altitudes' claim is debatable and largely irrelevant since most of the calls were from airphones. I don't believe the emotional phone calls were fake. Not one single family member of victims on the planes has ever questioned the legitimacy of the calls they recieved, and most are offended by the claims that they were fake. Right or wrong, the fake phone call stuff is an offensive distraction that can't be proven either way and only hurts the movement. There's massive amounts of other evidence - we should stick to that, drop the phone call stuff and cease these pointless debates in my opinion.

Agreed.  I also think we should step away from the squibs that you see on video... I'm fairly convinced that it's air being forced out the lower floors as the upper floors collapse.  It has to go somewhere.

We still have plenty to go on though.

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #7 on: September 15, 2010, 04:09:24 pm »
According to Griffin, and I have not double-checked it, the planes in question did not have the airphones at the time.

Offline Scootle

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,260
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #8 on: September 15, 2010, 04:26:28 pm »
Agreed.  I also think we should step away from the squibs that you see on video... I'm fairly convinced that it's air being forced out the lower floors as the upper floors collapse.  It has to go somewhere.

We still have plenty to go on though.

I disagree with the compressed air theory, but I agree that squibs are our weakest evidence for demolition. Whenever the media does a hitpiece on 9/11 truth, they always mention the squibs, they never mention the much more damning features such as the rate of fall or the pulverization of concrete or the horizontal ejections of steel beams. It's almost as if they deliberately mistimed some of the squibs as kind of psyop to get us to use them as evidence, for them to later use as a strawman. Maybe I'm giving them too much credit but it is highly convenient.
The truth will set you free
From global tyranny
Wake up American slobs
9/11 was an inside job
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OntBg2qwk_M&fmt=35

Century of Manipulation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mujq-C1UAw0

... Here's Tom with the weather!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CCIcjIngLA

Anti_Illuminati

  • Guest
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #9 on: September 15, 2010, 05:26:21 pm »
Allow me to introduce some interesting food for thought that diverges from this direct topic to make a point:

What is the purpose of a hijacker?  It is to take control away from someone who is supposed to have control, so that they can do things with whatever they hijack that the legitimate controllers would never do.

It took more than actions on the planes themselves to pull off the false flag.

1)  It took a massive coordination of drills to overwhelm the normal command and control systems/non-traitorous personnel from being able to stop the attack from taking place.

2)  It required HIJACKING of the FAA and NORAD computer systems to be able to achieve this goal.  

3)  HIJACKING of the FAA and NORAD's systems was done remotely, via software override, creation of FAKE air traffic control information to ensure that the planes hit their targets without being inhibited.

4)  The entire National Airspace System was undergoing a full re-engineering, based on demands of wanted interoperability, provided by Ptech's enterprise architecture building capability.  One of the co-engineers of this architecture was a company that provided "security" to the twin towers during the 1993 false flag bombing of them, SAIC.

5)  Because of the above, the NAS, and all necessary systems at FAA, NORAD, as well as the NMCC, were fully blueprinted--exposing all weaknesses and points that could be exploited within the systems.  John Zackman warned about this.

Real hijackers on the planes would have been in the best interest to use, because they served as perfect plausbile deniability to take ALL FOCUS away from the FACT that computer systems were TAKEN OVER in order to make sure there was no effective air defense response.

Even a Russian General said a day after 9/11 that the attacks on the U.S. should have been IMPOSSIBLE.  And he is right, THEY WERE IMPOSSIBLE as we were told they occured.

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #10 on: September 15, 2010, 06:27:32 pm »
Well, I'm not really sure where I stand on this just yet, but Griffin has been one of the real lights of the 9/11 truth movement and I kind of felt like someone of his stature deserved at least to be heard out.  I don't think he was ever formally trained in acoustic forensics (undersatelment).  His trainign was in theology as I understand it.

As far as the whole LIHOP/MIHOP/LIHOP-MIHOP thing is concerned, I totlaly get what you and JimD are essentially saying about plausibel deniability, and it would have been a very good reason to time a MIHOP stule demo of the WTC with a very real LIHOP attack.

Some questions remain, even in that case.  Who were the highjackers, for instance?  Were they really the nineteen (mostly Saudi?) men identified by the gov't.?  If not, who were they and where were they from?  What were there real motives?  Were they really religiously motivated -- real "radical jihadists"?

There is some evidence that some or all of these people are still alive and never boarded the flights -- the government has yet to provide proof they did.

Who did highjack the planes in that case?

Offline jimd3100

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,457
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #11 on: September 15, 2010, 08:28:39 pm »
In a nutshell, DRG bases his entire fake phone call theory on two things. Voice morphing technology and an experiment by a person named AK Dewdney, who claims you can't make
cell phone calls from airplanes, unless very low and then rarely.

His experiment no doubt was a thorough one..... ::)

"flight plan: The flight plan consisted of four “laps,” elongated circuits
(shaped like a paperclip) over London, Ontario airspace.
Each lap was about seven to eight miles long and two to
three miles wide. The laps would have a vertical
separation of approximately one thousand feet."

http://www.physics911.net/pdf/Achilles.pdf

Not exactly the same as the flight plan of AA Flight 77, but pretty darn close.....wouldn't you say? I wouldn't. I'd call it an experiment by a quack.

I did my own experiment, it didn't cost as much but I thought it was interesting anyway. I call the experiment "googling"........

Here's what I found out from that experiment. It turns out that the Airlines were always saying to not use cell phones on the plane and the reason was because it was
considered dangerous, you know the signals might mess things up, but it turns out most likely that is BS, the real reason is they want people to use the air phones so they can
get more money. They never said cell phones don't work.

How come cell phones worked in 1996?......

"The pilot departed San Jose, California, on a cross-country flight to Sisters, Oregon. He obtained a standard preflight weather briefing. Visual flight was not recommended.
Cumulus buildups were reported to the pilot. The pilot indicated that he may be overflying the cloud tops. He did not file a flight plan. The pilot's wife was driving to the
same location and they talked by cell phone while en route. When the pilot failed to arrive at the destination a search was started. According to radar data, the aircraft was
at 15,400 feet when it started a rapid descent."

http://www.aircraftone.com/aircraft/accidents/20001208X06269.asp

How come people flying on planes on 9/11 could use their cell phones on other planes, but according to DRG they can't on the planes that were hijacked?  


"Downs, a software salesman, learned of the terrorist attacks while on a commercial flight returning home from South America. The captain explained that "terrorist attacks on
airplanes" meant they were making an emergency landing. People on board using cell phones soon discovered the true nature of the day's events."
"We found out from people using their phones that the World Trade Center was hit, and some unspecified area in Washington," Downs recalls."

http://news.cnet.com/Cell-phones-to-take-flight---page-2/2100-1039_3-5727009-2.html?tag=st.next

Using cell phones on planes is nothing extraordinary.....

"Over the course of three months in late 2003, we investigated the possibility that portable electronic devices interfere with a plane's safety instruments by measuring the RF
spectrum inside commercial aircraft cabins. What we found was disturbing. Passengers are using cellphones, on the average, at least once per flight, contrary to FCC and FAA
regulations,"

http://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/aviation/unsafe-at-any-airspeed

They prefer you not use cell phones...not because you can't.....

"Sunday, July 22, 2001
But a study commissioned by the FAA in 1996 failed to find a single instance in which equipment was affected by a wireless phone. Nevertheless, electricity from cellular
phones can, in theory, interfere with aircraft systems. For this reason, Boeing and the FAA support the FCC ban."


It's because they want your money......

Sunday, July 22, 2001
"Although many airplanes have public "air phones," passengers flinch at the fee of $6 per minute. (Airlines get a cut of the profits, which casts suspicion on why airlines
want to keep cell phones turned off in the air.)"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/07/22/TR48093.DTL

How come people used cell phones 2 months before 9/11, and other passengers used them on 9/11, but if someone on the hijacked plane used one it's suddenly suspicious? Because
the whole theory is BS is why...

Sunday, July 22, 2001
"I've seen passengers hunkered in their seats, whispering into Nokias. I've watched frequent fliers scurry for a carry-on as muffled ringing emanates from within. Once, after
the lavatory line grew to an unreasonable length, I knocked on the door. A guilt- ridden teenager emerged. She admitted that she'd been in there for half an hour, talking to
her boyfriend on a cell phone."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/07/22/TR48093.DTL

Sunday, July 22, 2001
"In 1999, oil worker Neil Whitehouse refused to switch off his mobile phone on a British Airways flight. When a cabin attendant advised him to turn off the unit because it
could interfere with navigation systems, Whitehouse replied, "Why? Are we going to get lost?"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/07/22/TR48093.DTL

Published: July 7, 1999
There is no indication of when -- or if -- cell phone use might ever be allowed on airlines in flight. Though no airline official likes to discuss this, on-board telephones
available at airline seats generate revenue that is lost when customers use personal phones.

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/07/07/business/business-travel-some-airlines-are-allowing-customers-use-cell-phones-while-plane.html

Posted on ZDNet News: Oct 5, 1999
"The airlines are misleading the traveling public," says John Sheehan, who headed the RTCA study and says he has often used his own cell phone in the sky. "There is no real
connection between cell-phone frequencies and the frequencies of the navigation" or communications systems."

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-95986.html?legacy=zdnn

How come one or two of these calls didn't show up on the phone bill, that was the one and only thing that ever really puzzled me, but thanks to my cheap experiment I found a
reasonable explanation from an expert....

"The cellular signal from the air is also especially strong, since it is unimpeded by buildings or other ground clutter. That often means it can jump on a frequency already in
use on the ground, causing interruptions or hang-ups. And airborne cellular calls are sometimes free because the signal is moving so fast between cells that the software on
the ground has difficulty recording the call, says Bentley Alexander, a senior engineer at AT&T's wireless unit."

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-95986.html?legacy=zdnn

How come cell phones could be used in 1999, and even on 9/11 but not on the hijacked flights?
Because the whole theory is BS and is backed with zero evidence.......

Oct 5, 1999
Carr, a pilot, says he regularly used his cell phone while flying on commercial planes in the late 1980s. He says he is convinced the airline ban was, and is, "bogus" and not
founded in science.
Sheehan, who is also a certified pilot, notes that cell phones are regularly used on private and corporate planes "thousands of times every day" without incident. He says he
has dialed from the air on many occasions. When asked whether cell phones should be included among the list of devices such as laptop computers that are now permitted above
10,000 feet, he says "that would be OK. It's not a problem."

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-95986.html?legacy=zdnn

"We found out from people using their phones that the World Trade Center was hit, and some unspecified area in Washington," Downs recalls.
http://news.cnet.com/Cell-phones-to-take-flight---page-2/2100-1039_3-5727009-2.html?tag=st.next

"but we were on the Delta flight [1989], the one out of three 8am flights departing Logan that did not get hijacked. Instead, we were forced to make an emergency landing in
Cleveland because there were reports that a bomb or hijacking was taking place on our plane. The pilot had radioed that there was suspicious activity in the cabin since one of
the passengers was speaking urgently on his cellphone and ignored repeated flight attendant requests to stop using his cell phone while in flight"

http://256.com/gray/thoughts/2001/20010912/delta_flight_1989_9_11/travel.shtml

In other words....saying the calls were fake because you can't use cell phones on planes is not only BS, it's very easy to prove. And not only that most of the calls were from
Air Phones. So who cares?

Moving on to the most famous so called "fake calls".....
Beliefs Always Trump Truth and Perception Always Trumps Reality

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #12 on: September 15, 2010, 08:35:10 pm »
O.K., Jim, I'm skeptical about this, too. But we were discussing it and the whole DRG thing broke, so I wanted to see what people thought.

But who in your opinion were the hijackers?  This is what really puzzles me.  I actually find your scenario (and Anti_Illuminati's) very believable.  I'm just trying to make everything fit as it were -- or as much as possible.

Offline jimd3100

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,457
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #13 on: September 15, 2010, 08:36:41 pm »
According to David Ray Griffin the 2 most important calls, and the ones that "bust the official story" are Mark Bingham and Barbara Olson. First off, all the calls are
important, and these are NOT the most important, IMO, the most important calls were the first ones from the flight attendants calling at 8:19 from AIRPHONES begging for help.
But once again "9-11 truthers" blindly following "their leaders" only helps the Bush administration get away with their crimes. We could be using the calls as proof, they knew
the first plane was a hijacking...not a "weird accident" but noooooo our GOD DRG said this is all fake, the families were "fooled" just like everyone at the pentagon was
"fooled" when they watched a passenger jet fly into it. The only people being "fooled" are the ones falling for this nonsense. I am not going along with it. Call me an
"operative" I don't care.


David Ray Griffin says....

"In addition to the question of the feasibility of cellphone calls from UA 93, the content of some of the messages makes their authenticity seem highly improbable. In the most
notorious case, a man claiming to be Mark Bingham called Bingham’s mother. When she answered, he said: “Mom? This is Mark Bingham.” Have any of us, even in the most stressful
situation, identified ourselves to our own mothers by giving our last name?"

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=2006091418303369

First off, DRG might want to read the actual FBI report which shows it wasn't a cell phone call...it was an AIR PHONE call.....

"BINGHAM then said, "I'm on a flight from Newark to San
Francisco and there are three guys who have taken over the plane, and
they say they have a bomb. I'm calling you from the air phone."

BINGHAM then stated to his mother, "You've got to
believe me. It's true. "

http://intelfiles.egoplex.com/2001-09-19-FBI-FD302-mark-kendall-bingham.pdf

Second, he used his first and last name..that is proof that 9-11 was an inside job....no..that's f**king stupid. I have an idea....let's ask his mom if she thought that was
weird. Her name is Alice Hoglan, and no...it wasn't odd at all according to her...but what does she know right?...she's just his mom that's all.......

Alice Hoglan...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6144691019226059520#

Yes, DRG and Dewdney make fools of themselves......

Check it out starting at the 6:30 mark.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVBWbICVw-o&feature=player_embedded

How was that not embarrassing? These people DO NOT REPRESENT ME.

On to Barbara Olson and her calls.....

According to DRG...

"Olson’s Story 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."

http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=75&contentid=5011&page=2

He is referring to this....



But doesn't want to show you this...5 "unknown" calls from the same flight....



Yes, the FBI is part of the Department of Justice, and 2 years before the Moussaoui trial all this info was known to them, and the Department of Justice confirmed Olson’s
story. DRG claims the FBI’s report “undermined” Olson’s claim to have received two calls from his wife. However this document seems to prove otherwise.....

"Event: Department of Justice briefing on cell and phone calls from AA Flight 77"

"Date: May 20, 2004"

"This work was conducted in support of the U.S. Justice Department's criminal case against Zacarias Moussaoui."
"While there was no direct evidence with respect to the "unknown calls," interviews with recipients (especially Lori Keyton who was answering the phone in Ted Olson's office
on 9/11), plus interviews of family members of other Flight 77 passengers, has lead to the conclusion that all of these unknown calls were from Barbara Olson to her husband
Ted's office
."

http://www.scribd.com/doc/18886083/T7-B12-Flight-93-Calls-General-Fdr-52004-DOJ-Briefing-on-Cell-and-Phone-Calls-From-AA-77-408

DRG doesn't talk about that does he? Let's look at the FBI file on this.......

Keyton was working in Ted Olson's Office this morning. She
is regularly called there to cover the telephones. At approximately
9:00am, she received a series of approximately six (6) to eight
collect telephone calls. Each of the calls was an automated collect
call. There was a recording advising of the collect call and
requesting she hold for an operator. A short time later another
recording stated that all operators were busy, please hang up and try
your call later.


Keyton then received a collect call from a live operator.
The operator advised that there was an emergency collect call from
Barbara Olsen for Ted Olsen. Keyton advised that she would accept the
call. Barbara Olsen was put through and sounded hysterical. Barbara
Olsen said, "Can you tell Ted .. " Keyton cut her off and said, "I'll
put him on the line."
There was a second telephone call a few to five (5) minutes
later. This time Barbara Olsen was on the line when she answered. She
called direct. It was not a collect call. Barbara Olsen said, "It's
Barbara." Keyton said, "he's on the phone with the command center,
I'll put you through."

Keyton advised that there is no caller identification feature
on the phone she was using. Keyton didn't know if Barbara Olson was
calling from the phone on the plane or from her cell phone.

http://intelfiles.egoplex.com/2001-09-14-FBI-FD302-lori-lynn-keyton.pdf

B Olson was trying several times to get through by way of an operator using collect calls, 2 got connected long enough for her to talk to Ted. After the first went through do
you really expect to believe even though the operator now knows that planes are being flown into buildings, and she has on the line a person, on yet another plane, who is
claiming it also has been hijacked, and she has already confirmed that, yes, they will accept the collect call, and pay the charges, that she would still, even though the
person probably only has moments to live, is going to keep her on hold, while she asks again "will you accept this collect call and the charges? Or is it more likely, that
since she already knows they will accept the charges, and calls are being dropped constantly, (lots of calls were being dropped at the time especially on the east coast)she
will simply put her through directly, in which Keyton wouldn't hear a recording, or an operator, only Barbara herself, which would lead her to think possibly it was a direct
call. This can be solved by talking to all involved, which is what the FBI did. This is obvious in the documents.

Was an operator really trying to put Barbara Olson through? Yes, an operator really was and the FBI talked to them, there were two Teresa Gonzalez and Mercy Lorenzo they work
for AT&T. How do I know this? Because I actually looked into this believe it or not. I have a weird idea, how about we stop telling witnesses, and victims family members they
were "fooled" and start facing reality? The reason Barbara Olson was on that plane was because she was supposed to be on Bill Maher's show that evening on the other coast. She
left as late as she could because she wanted to be with her husband that morning so they could at least have breakfast together, because even though she had to be in LA that
day, she stayed as long as she could because 9-11 was Ted Olson's birthday. She at least wanted to have breakfast with him before leaving for the west coast. His wife is dead
because she wanted to be with him on his birthday. After his wife was murdered on 9-11, his birthday DRG led the "9-11 truth" charge calling Olson a liar and mass murder
accomplice. I happen to find that rather offensive and disgusting. I guess, I'm just an asshole...what can I say? I'm also going to do something else outrageous, I want it on
the record that Ted Olson has my sincere condolences. His wife is dead because of 9-11, and he's been treated like sh*t by some in the so called "9-11 truth movement", so has,
Lloyde England, Mike Walter, Keith Wheelhouse and others, and every one of them are completely innocent. Some of you won't believe this. I don't care. Beliefs mean nothing. You
can believe I'm a three headed unicorn if you want, it means nothing, when you turn off your computer and walk out your door reality is still going to be there. Believe
whatever you want, but I'm still not a three headed unicorn, the phone calls were not fake, and planes really did fly into buildings on 9-11.
Beliefs Always Trump Truth and Perception Always Trumps Reality

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #14 on: September 15, 2010, 09:41:25 pm »
AJ interviews ex-Col arms dealer:  No Hijackers on 911

http://www.infowars.com/transcripts/degranpres.htm

This is what I'm talking about.  This is why I'm still undecided about the idea that there were real hijackings that day versus MIHOP.

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,435
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #15 on: September 15, 2010, 10:00:37 pm »
Only one problem Jimd, there is absolutely no certifiable FAA air disaster investigation evidence, whatsoever in any way shape nor form  that AA FLIght 77 ever came anywhere near the Pentagon on Sept 11 2001. In fact, none of the parts of any of all of the four of the aircraft supposedly involved in the air disasters of that day were ever recovered, examined nor reconstructed other than the alleged recordings from some alleged flight recorders.

Those calls could have all been made from a bank in the Cayman Islands for all we know.

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #16 on: September 15, 2010, 10:02:11 pm »
In the interview with Jones, de Grand-Pre made several stunning assertions, among them:
  
· There were no hijackers on the 9/11 killer jets. And he said the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (Richard Myers) agrees with him.
  
In response to a caller to Alex Jones' radio show, de Grand-Pre noted: "... the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs himself has agreed, there were no hijackers. There were no cell phone calls. Everybody aboard that aircraft, pilots and crew, were unconscious within 8 to 18 minutes after take-off. And you can take it from there. I've got it covered in books 2 and 3, what actually happened."
  
"These planes were being piloted by remote control, probably an AWACs aircraft taking over that airplane or airplanes or drones, unmanned drones. And flying them at 5 and 8 G-force that no pilot could withstand. So, in short, and if you read books 2 and 3, you will discover how and why this came about."
  
· The 9/11 planes that took off full of passengers are now at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean. "And I'm telling you that we are knowledgeably speculating," said de Grand-Pre in response to another caller. "Those aircraft carrying crew and passengers went over the Atlantic and that was all she wrote."
  
· Talk of a military coup - to reverse what he calls the administrative coup d'etat that happened on 9/11 - are rife within the corridors of the Pentagon.
  
In his various interviews and publications, deGrand-Pre has called 9/11 "an administrative coup d'etat." He suggests the only way the neocons can be stopped is by a military coup d'etat, and estimates 70 percent of key military personnel are in favor of such a step. But the possibility is complicated, he says, by the large number of key military players who have gone over to the Council on Foreign Relations team. Some of these players, including three- and four-star generals, however, may side with the military while pretending to be on the side of the neocons. de Grand-Pre insists he is in personal contact with members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
  
The truly patriotic members of the military have had to sit there and take all these wild schemes by corporate-controlled politicians. de Grand-Pre's prediction? "I think those days are coming to an end. The military ain't going to take it any longer."
  
In the interview with Jones, de Grand-Pre also asserted:
  
· It is common knowledge at the Pentagon that Israel fired nuclear weapons at Iraq during the first Gulf War.
  
· A commercial aircraft did not hit the Pentagon. Most likely it was a cruise missile or a Global Hawk.
  
· Flight 93, the jetliner that supposedly crashed in Pennsylvania after courageous passengers struggled with armed hijackers, was shot down by the North Dakota Air Guard. "I know the pilot who fired those two missiles to take down 93," de Grand-Pre insisted, adding that the order to shoot down the plane came from the Adjutant General of North Dakota.
  
· Most likely it was U.S. forces that tried to kill Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz when he visited Iraq recently.
  
· Military tribunals will try current U.S. public officials when the military decides to take over, de Grand-Pre predicts. "And Cheney, I reiterate, is toast." de Grand-Pre named Cheney as the one man who knows the most about 9/11.
  
In earlier interviews, de Grand-Pre has recounted that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Richard Myers, had 500 copies of the 24-page report made and sent out, including, to the White House.
  
Assessing Myers' reaction, de Grand Pre said, "I'm quite sure that he believed in it. I think that he still believes in it. You can understand the difficulties. The civilian administration, of course, won't recognize it as such.
  
"There's a definite cleavage between the military of the Pentagon and the civilian hierarchy - and never the twain shall meet."
  
Jones triggered a response from de Grand Pre when he mentioned a 2002 article in the Washington Times that said morale at the Pentagon had never been lower.
  
De Grand-Pre responded: "I can verify that from Col. Dick Schultz, who is a friend of mine in the Joint Chiefs. Morale was not only low but he said some of the troops are ready to mutiny. If it wasn't for the fact that the government, the civilian hierarchy, has control over retirements, they would probably be blood in the streets by now."
  
When other news outlets began checking on this story angle, Jones noted that Pentagon officials were apoplectic. "... they panicked and flew the officers on jets to luxury vacations and had these focus groups. It even talked about a possible mutiny. People were just totally distraught. What would make them become distraught overnight in the Pentagon?"
  
de Grand-Pre's answer was chilling, and revealed the possibility of a military coup d'etat has been simmering in the corridors of the Pentagon for some time.
  
"It wasn't an overnight thing. You see, as I outline in book 1, and I carry that on in book 2, as well as book 3, we were on the verge of a military coup d'etat. And this was long in the planning and even after the 78 days of bombing Kosovo, it became critical. And we were close to a coup d'etat at that time. In my survey of the reports and the pilots who worked with that, a coup was a possibility.
  
"In fact, a coup d'etat was pulled on the morning of September 11th. Only it was an administrative or what we call a cold coup d'etat."
  
Jones' translation of that was "a counter-revolutionary junta."
  
de Grand-Pre concurred, and added: "And as we delved into that, we found that the culprits, including Rumsfeld, were part of a neocon group that had been planning this thing for literally years prior to September 11th."
  
In a previous interview that appeared on Michael Rivero's What Really Happened website, de Grand-Pre had already outlined his conclusions about 9-11.
  
"The 9-11 activity and horrific destruction of US property and lives was intentionally meant to trigger a psychological and patriotic reaction on the part of the US citizens, which is paving the way for "combined UN activity" (using the fig leaf of NATO) for striking key targets in both the Middle East/ South Asia and the Balkans. The goal continues to be ultimate destruction of all national sovereignty
and establishment of a global government.
  
"The trigger for the 9-11 activity was the imminent and unstoppable world-wide financial collapse, which can only be prevented (temporarily) by a major war, perhaps to become known as WW 111. To bring it off (one more time), martial law will probably be imposed in the United States. de Grand-Pre had also sounded the same themes on Jackie Patru's Radio Sweet Liberty Webcast.
  
"The so-called terrorist attack was in fact a superbly executed military operation against the United States, requiring the utmost professional military skill in command, communications and control. It was flawless in timing, in the choice of selected aircraft to be used as guided missiles, and in the coordinated delivery of those missiles to their pre-selected targets.
  
As a tactical military exercise against two significant targets (world financial center and the citadel of world strategic military planning), the attack, from a psychological impact on the American public, equalled the Japanese "surprise" attack on Pearl Harbor
7 Dec 1941.
  
But the overriding question of that original group of pilots was: If we are at war, who is the enemy?
  
The group determined that the enemy is within the gates, that he has infiltrated into the highest policy-making positions at the federal level, and has absolute control, not only of the purse strings, but of the troop buildup and deployment of our military forces, including active, reserve and National Guard units.

http://www.rense.com/general49/no911.htm

AND, again:

http://www.infowars.com/transcripts/degranpres.htm

Offline jimd3100

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,457
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #17 on: September 15, 2010, 10:30:27 pm »
Only one problem Jimd, there is absolutely no certifiable FAA air disaster investigation evidence, whatsoever in any way shape nor form  that AA FLIght 77 ever came anywhere near the Pentagon on Sept 11 2001. In fact, none of the parts of any of all of the four of the aircraft supposedly involved in the air disasters of that day were ever recovered, examined nor reconstructed other than the alleged recordings from some alleged flight recorders.

Nope, they didn't find any airplane parts anywhere, because there was no planes on 9-11. Or,....... they did find airplane parts, but they never confirmed the serial numbers so they were probably different planes, than the ones they were supposed to be. Gotcha......you just proved 9-11 was an inside job. Congratulations...I'm feeling really silly right now. Thanks for the info, well done.

Quote
Those calls could have all been made from a bank in the Cayman Islands for all we know.
Yup, that's probably where the mysterious member of the NWO was when he was f**king with the victims families on the phone and calling the FAA at 8:19 which nearly f**cked up the whole operation. Probably drunk soaking up the sun...damn elitist.
Beliefs Always Trump Truth and Perception Always Trumps Reality

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,435
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #18 on: September 15, 2010, 10:34:44 pm »

Those calls could have all been made from a bank in the Cayman Islands for all we know.

But, of course, "we all" have the (LOL) "authentic long distance billing records" from a "reputable" and completely independent Israeli company called Amdocs to absolutely certify from which ATC and/or Cell Tower each alleged 9/11 passenger call was relayed and thus "billed"...  ??

How could anyone ever dare think calls might be faked..

Offline jimd3100

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,457
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #19 on: September 15, 2010, 10:41:39 pm »
In the interview with Jones, de Grand-Pre made several stunning assertions, among them:
  
· There were no hijackers on the 9/11 killer jets. And he said the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (Richard Myers) agrees with him.
 
So Richard Myers is a truther...gosh who would have known? That is very believable too. Thanks for that. I believe it. Don't you? Why wouldn't I? This proves 9-11 was an inside job. Nice going!

Quote
In response to a caller to Alex Jones' radio show, de Grand-Pre noted: "... the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs himself has agreed, there were no hijackers. There were no cell phone calls. Everybody aboard that aircraft, pilots and crew, were unconscious within 8 to 18 minutes after take-off. And you can take it from there. I've got it covered in books 2 and 3, what actually happened."
 
The Joint Chiefs are all 9-11 truthers! That is good news. Thanks for that...very informative.



Quote
Talk of a military coup - to reverse what he calls the administrative coup d'etat that happened on 9/11 - are rife within the corridors of the Pentagon.

I wonder why that never happened?  I mean since the Joint Chiefs are all on our side? Hmmmm...This all has to be true, right?..... so I wonder what happened?
  

Quote
In the interview with Jones, de Grand-Pre also asserted:
  
· A commercial aircraft did not hit the Pentagon. Most likely it was a cruise missile or a Global Hawk.

No parts from this and no witnesses saw this but he must be right...this proves 9-11 was an inside job. Nicely done!
  

Quote
· Most likely it was U.S. forces that tried to kill Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz when he visited Iraq recently
.

No doubt.
  
Quote
· Military tribunals will try current U.S. public officials when the military decides to take over, de Grand-Pre predicts. "And Cheney, I reiterate, is toast." de Grand-Pre named Cheney as the one man who knows the most about 9/11.

I wonder why this never happened? This man obviously knows allot and so can't be wrong about anything....odd isn't it?
  
Quote
In earlier interviews, de Grand-Pre has recounted that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Richard Myers, had 500 copies of the 24-page report made and sent out, including, to the White House.
 
Yup..it's nice to have General Myers on our side isn't it?

 




Beliefs Always Trump Truth and Perception Always Trumps Reality

Offline jimd3100

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,457
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #20 on: September 15, 2010, 10:44:18 pm »
But, of course, "we all" have the (LOL) "authentic long distance billing records" from a "reputable" and completely independent Israeli company called Amdocs to absolutely certify from which ATC and/or Cell Tower each alleged 9/11 passenger call was relayed and thus "billed"...  ??

How could anyone ever dare think calls might be faked..

Yup, the calls are fake. They just have to be, this proves 9-11 was an inside job. Nicely done. And as de Grand-Pre said, a missile, or some other thing besides what almost every witness claims is what actually hit the pentagon, this proves 9-11 was an inside job. I feel pretty silly right now. I might be an undercover operative sent here to throw you off the real truth......you have to admit...it is possible! It certainly seems that way doesn't it? It looks like my cover might have been blown by agentbluescreen and citizenx...again...nicely done.
Beliefs Always Trump Truth and Perception Always Trumps Reality

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,435
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #21 on: September 15, 2010, 11:05:32 pm »
Jimd I don't wish to debate you. I am merely pointing out at every turn here, again and again how nobody is proving nor has proven anything unless and until a totally complete and unhindered, unobstructed and impartial criminal investigation of all pertinent evidence and participants has been fully undertaken and fully completed, and the full honest and complete facts and all persons involved have been fully pursued, investigated and their stories vetted and those found wanting been brought before the courts as appropriate.

The simple fact that such has never been done makes all of our dissenting views as equally valid and worthy of serious consideration as any other, all that is, except those passages from your 911 Omission bible which you keep cutting and pasting here
 

BTW i agree about cellphones working in airplanes (and about them likely SERIOUSLY screwing up ILS guidance controllers too) I disagree about where such calls originated from and by whom they were made and under what circumstances and/or for what motives and/or reasons they were made however.

ANd I shall strongly always reject the ridiculous notion that any airliner (or anything even remotely similar to one) ever hit the Pentagon.

Offline jimd3100

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,457
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #22 on: September 15, 2010, 11:14:14 pm »

The simple fact that such has never been done makes all of our dissenting views as equally valid and worthy of serious consideration as any other, all that is, except those passages from your 911 Omission bible which you keep cutting and pasting here
 

Yup, "all views are equally valid and worthy of serious consideration as any other". I'm currently working on a writeup where I conclusively prove sorta.... that lizard people from the planet Marduk using super advanced energy ray guns took over the planes in flight, made them disappear, and then flew one over the pentagon as it was invisible at the same an Israeli warship shot a missile from the Mediterranean perfectly timed to hit the pentagon. This will prove 9-11 was an inside job. Being as Dick Cheney is the lord of these Mardukian lizard people, and loves Israel. BTW....the WTC towers were holograms too. Look forward to that, and I'm glad to know you will back me up on this possibility.  Then perhaps I can regain some credibility and not be such an obvious "agent".
Beliefs Always Trump Truth and Perception Always Trumps Reality

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #23 on: September 15, 2010, 11:30:00 pm »
JimD, I certainly don't think you are an undercover operative sent here to throw us off the track.  I do have some legitimate questions about Col.'s interview with AJ.  AJ evidently felt he had enbough credibility to bring him on the show.  I wonder what AJ thinks about this old interview now in retrospect.

And again, Jim, no disrespect -- but who do you think did hijack the airplanes?  Was it exactly the nineteen hijackers identified by the gov't.  What do you honestly think?

I don't disrespect you at all, though you seem to think so.  If I gave you that impression, I'm sorry.  I'll say so right here.  But I honestly have some (stupid?) questions.


Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,435
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #24 on: September 15, 2010, 11:33:40 pm »
Yup, "all views are equally valid and worthy of serious consideration as any other". I'm currently working on a writeup where I conclusively prove sorta.... that lizard people from the planet Marduk using super advanced energy ray guns took over the planes in flight, made them disappear, and then flew one over the pentagon as it was invisible at the same an Israeli warship shot a missile from the Mediterranean perfectly timed to hit the pentagon. This will prove 9-11 was an inside job. Being as Dick Cheney is the lord of these Mardukian lizard people, and loves Israel. BTW....the WTC towers were holograms too. Look forward to that, and I'm glad to know you will back me up on this possibility.  Then perhaps I can regain some credibility and not be such an obvious "agent".

Another minor point, again about the Pentagon Pegasys JPADS missile strike. On a planet named Earth where a neo-fascist, Satan-worshipping administration owed its very existence in office to the legal debt of one Ted Olsen, in either a MIHOP OR LEHOP scenario, his wife (of all the damned anthropoids on the rock) would have been a completely unacceptable martyr to any inside job, Bill Maher be hanged, on Ted's birthday no less!

If Congosleeze-ball Rice could be letting the cat out of the bag warning the (damned ???) "Mayor of San Francisco" not to fly that day, it is totally ludicrous to even suggest that the Olsens (of all people) would have been "out of the loop".

The only conclusion therefore, is that they were not, and that she (Also a most loyal and loudmouthed fascist excusenik of great note and reverence to neocons in her own right)  is therefore, also, somehow not really dead.

This sure-bet good guess leaves us with ony a few other possible options, and sure enough, all the available evidence about the completely unbelievable High Priesthood's "Pentagon Fable" seems to point directly to them.

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,239
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #25 on: September 16, 2010, 10:26:18 am »
Bottom line: a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and the weakest link in the government's official fairy tale about 9/11 is not the cell phone calls but Building 7, which would explain why the former got far more media coverage than the latter.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

kushfiend

  • Guest
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #26 on: September 16, 2010, 10:40:03 am »
Bottom line: a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and the weakest link in the government's official fairy tale about 9/11 is not the cell phone calls but Building 7, which would explain why the former got far more media coverage than the latter.

or as supreme court justices call it, building what?

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
Re: 9/11 Cell Phones
« Reply #27 on: September 16, 2010, 04:30:34 pm »
Bottom line: a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and the weakest link in the government's official fairy tale about 9/11 is not the cell phone calls but Building 7, which would explain why the former got far more media coverage than the latter.
Agred about that.  Building 7 woke my best buddy in Korea, Ron, up.  It works.