Phone Calls from the 9/11 Airliners, Faked!

If any took the itme to read the 9/11 commission report it is all in there. It explains the training of the terrorists and how they did the dry runs and how they were in specific seats and used pepper spray on the flights. It is, just as the NISt investigation, a way to make sure this does not occur again not trying to lay blame. That is for the courts.

I am not stating opinions and you, the OP, have been given facts however you fail to concede and accept it. You posted the opposite of what you are fighting about for goodness sake and then people applaud you for it. If that is not blind faith in ignorance please let me know what is.

I am not sure about the 12 minute call you are referring to with Flight 93 because it is in no official record. I already told you, the TWO cell calls that are known to have been made by 93 were in the last minutes of flight WELL below 30000 feet. there are eyewitness accounts of the last few minutes of Flight 93 but no one wants to research or listen to them. Instead lets follow blindly someone who wants me to buy a DVD....

93 was shot down. Look into Cheney and Mineta. That is all that was needed and this is the biggest conspiracy. There is SO much wrong with 93 that the calls are the last thing to look into which, again, makes me think it is nothing more than disinfo. In the end we will find out that many of those associated with the 'truth' movement were the actual government plants.

They had the technology to transmit cell signals from planes in 2000 on Virgin Atlantic so it is not new technology. The reason that it is difficult to receive a cell signal from the sky is because instead using tower to tower on a land based phone the signal can hit multiple towers at once which could affect service and connectivity.



[edit on 15-1-2010 by esdad71]

reply to post by esdad71

If any took the itme to read the 9/11 commission report it is all in there.

Thank you, I did and this is what I found?

9/11 Commissioners say "Official Story" a Lie

The co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission (Thomas Keane and Lee Hamilton) said that the CIA (and likely the White House) “obstructed our investigation”.
The co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission also said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements, yet didn’t bother to tell the American people (free subscription required).
Indeed, the co-chairs of the Commission now admit that the Commission largely operated based upon political considerations.
9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says “I don’t believe for a minute we got everything right”, that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, that the 9/11 debate should continue, and that the 9/11 Commission report was only “the first draft” of history.
9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that “There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn’t have access . . . .”
9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said “We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting”
Former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal”; “This investigation is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”.
9/11 Commissioner John Lehman said that “We purposely put together a staff that had - in a way - conflicts of interest“.
The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry, said “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.”

www.beyondleftright.com...

9/11 Commission Primer
July 20, 2004

After months of research and testimony, this week the bipartisan National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (9/11 Commission) will release its final report on the events surrounding 9/11 and recommendations for protecting our country from future attacks. This is a moment the Bush administration sought to prevent. The 9/11 Commission Primer by the Center for American Progress reminds its readers of the administration's attempts to obstruct and discredit the work of the Commission, and abdicate responsibility for protecting our country.
• Obstructing the Investigation
• Stonewalling the Commission
• Attacking the Commission and Its Members
• Abdicating Responsibility

www.americanprogress.org...

I am not stating opinions and you, the OP, have been given facts however you fail to concede and accept it.

This is untrue, and I disagree with you. As far as the rest of your post I disagree with you and your wrong.

www.globalresearch.ca...

This is some very well researched and documented details, that exposes the lies from the FBI about the onboard phone calls from these hijack planes.

Please read the entire thread before responding. I will be *expecting sources * by those who are debunking David Ray Griffin work.
Please treat everyone with respect even if you disagree with them.

It is pretty much proven those phone calls were faked.

Now we are on page five and not one of you debunkers or should I say OS believers have proved Griffins work is wrong, none of you. Perhaps, I should email him and let him know the debunkers cannot refute his facts.








[edit on 15-1-2010 by impressme]

impressme

If you are so sure the phone calls were all faked can you please answer my question on page 3 , nobody else has ?

Four individuals, amongst others, joined flight UA 93 late and unexpectedly :=

Tom Burnett, Edward Felt, Mark Bingham and flight attendant Sandra Bradshaw.

But they all made phone calls from the flight. How did the perps accomplish faking their calls ?

Originally posted by Alfie1
impressme

If you are so sure the phone calls were all faked can you please answer my question on page 3 , nobody else has ?

the "truthers" cannot answer that, as it totally destroys their silly conspiracy theory if they could answer it

How did the perps accomplish faking their calls ?

They did not fake them, so those 4 made them themselves

Please read the entire thread before responding. I will be *expecting sources * by those who are debunking David Ray Griffin work.
Please treat everyone with respect even if you disagree with them.

It is pretty much proven those phone calls were faked.

www.globalresearch.ca...


Now we are on page five and not one of you debunkers or should I say OS believers have proved Griffins work is wrong, none of you. Perhaps, I should email him and let him know the debunkers cannot refute his facts.

For all of your question the answers are in the OP read the given sources. now back to the Op topic.

Again, I have yet to see anyone discredit David Ray Griffin work of how he has prove the phone call are fake.

This thread is not about the messenger, so please keep your comments to the OP.

Thank you.




[edit on 15-1-2010 by impressme]

Originally posted by Alfie1
impressme

If you are so sure the phone calls were all faked can you please answer my question on page 3 , nobody else has ?

Four individuals, amongst others, joined flight UA 93 late and unexpectedly :=

Tom Burnett, Edward Felt, Mark Bingham and flight attendant Sandra Bradshaw.

But they all made phone calls from the flight. How did the perps accomplish faking their calls ?

By the time the phone calls were made, the perps had access to the current passenger manifest. No one has answered it because it is a dumb question.

This thread is quite embarrassing for impressme, especially the response to Weedwhacker's source about the GTE technology.

- first he got excited about the things only working under 9000 feet when the source clearly stated that it would operate only OVER that altitude. When this was pointed out he breezed on, ignoring his error and stated that

- the source was from 2007, and therefore didn't apply to 9/11. Ironically for someone who loves to s'n-word' at others' "reading comprehension" he hadn't even bothered to check the date stated by WW. Which was 1999.

Both of these facts significantly damage your assertion in the OP. You can't just wave them away and say "yeah, but the 9/11 REPORT IS LIES". You must try harder.

reply to post by SphinxMontreal

Where were any of the four hijackers when the passengers were allegedly making the phone calls? Were all of the hijackers in the cockpit taking turns flying the plane?

Was cellphone service overloaded on the East Coast and were there phone outages on 9/11 due to the large volume of calls being attempted? One would think this may affect the success rate in the calls going through, if they were able to go through at that altitude to begin with.

Where were hijackers ? - according to information from passengers phone
calls, the ones you deny occured, 2 were in cockpit flying plane, one was in coach cabin watching passengers who had been herded there. One hijacker was shuttling back - forth from cockpit checking on passangers and relying instructions to hijacker there.

The hijacker watching passengers had a fake bomb, seemed unconcerned
that passengers were making calls, not realizing that would get information about what happened in NY.

As for overloaded cell network - should pay attention

Only 2 calls were made with CELL PHONES, rest by Air Fone which are not affected . Also Shanksville PA is not on East Coast, it is in western PA
it is rural far from most cities so call volume would not be a problem

reply to post by Lillydale


Another "I dont like the evidence so will hand wave it away"

Mark Bingham boared at last possible second - Flight attendents were closing the door when ran up.

He was not on original manifest because gate agents did not have time to
update it

Since was not on original manifest how did they fake phone calls from him?

One passenger was late. Mark Bingham had overslept and his friend, Matthew Hall, drove madly from Manhattan to Newark. They screeched to a halt outside Terminal A at 7:40. Bingham leapt from the car, lugging the old, blue-and-gold canvas bag he'd used as a rugby player at the University of California at Berkeley a decade earlier.

United attendants reopened the door to the boarding ramp and let him on the plane.

Bingham slipped into a seat in aisle 4-D, next to Thomas Burnett. Nine minutes after Hall dropped him off, Bingham picked up his cell phone.

"Hey, it's me," he said. "Thanks for driving so crazy to get me here. I'm in first class, drinking a glass of orange juice."

Copy of manifest obtained from FBI

Mark Bingham is not included on our list. We can only guess as to why: could his late arrival have been a reason?

Mark Bingham was last to board the plane, having arrived late and nearly missed the flight.

Another possibility suggested to us is that he flew on a “buddy pass”, thanks to his links with United Airlines (his mother was a UA flight attendant). That’s just a guess, too, however it’s worth noting that the five passengers missing from the Flight 175 list also had links to UA. And whatever the reason for their omission on this list, all were included on the official United Airlines passenger lists released in the days after the attack

Originally posted by Lillydale

Originally posted by Alfie1
impressme

If you are so sure the phone calls were all faked can you please answer my question on page 3 , nobody else has ?

Four individuals, amongst others, joined flight UA 93 late and unexpectedly :=

Tom Burnett, Edward Felt, Mark Bingham and flight attendant Sandra Bradshaw.

But they all made phone calls from the flight. How did the perps accomplish faking their calls ?

By the time the phone calls were made, the perps had access to the current passenger manifest. No one has answered it because it is a dumb question.

So, the perps can fake voices and have all the necessary personal information to hand to completely fool spouses or parents within minutes ?
How ?

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by impressme

 

Sorry, guy --- this has already been thoroughly beaten to death, and the only thing David Griffin is doing that's "new" is hoping no one will notice that he's lying, and distorting the facts.

www.debunk911myths.org...

Timeline

9:30:32 - Thomas Burnett Jr, 28 seconds, call to his wife

9:35:40 - Sandy Bradshaw, 5 minutes, 53 seconds (353 seconds), call to United Airlines

9:37:03 - Mark Bingham, 2 minutes, 46 seconds (166 seconds), call to his mother

9:37:41 - Jeremy Glick, line left open (7,565 seconds)

9:37:53 - Thomas Burnett Jr, 62 seconds, called his wife

9:39:21 - Lauren Grandcolas, 46 seconds, call to her husband, left a message.

9:43:03 - Joseph DeLuca, 2 minutes, 10 seconds (130 seconds), called his parents

9:43:48 - Todd Beamer, line left open (3,925 seconds), spoke with GTE operator, Lisa Jefferson.

9:44:23 - Thomas Burnett Jr, 54 seconds, called his wife

9:46:05 - Linda Gronlund, 1 minute, 11 seconds (71 seconds), called her sister, Elsa Strong.

9:47:57 - CeeCee Lyles, 56 seconds, called her husband from an airphone.

9:49:12 - Marion Britton, 3 minutes, 52 seconds, called a friend, Fred Fiumano

9:50:04 - Sandy Bradshaw, 7 minutes, 50 seconds (470 seconds), call to her husband

9:53:43 - Honor Wainio, 4 minutes, 29 seconds (269 seconds), call to her parents

9:58:00 - Ed Felt, 911 call to Westmoreland County dispatcher (see also cell phones about this call)

9:58:00 - CeeCee Lyles called her husband with her cell phone (see also cell phones about this call)

www.debunk911myths.org...

There you have the truth, NOT the baloney made up by Mr. Griffin.

The link mentioned to "see also cell phones" is the one up above.


"impressme", I am sorry you are barking up so many wrong trees, so diligently.

BUT, it is the nature of this so-called 'truth movement' to completely get it wrong, each and every time. Sometimes (maybe) entirely sincerely, but I can't help but wonder if there isn't a profit motive behind some of this tomfoolery.

I am reminded of a certain poster's incredible assertion regarding Boeing 767 tankers having been used --- that was shown to be false, since they did NOT exist in 2001. Too many such instances, and all for naught.

However anyone who had actually tried this prior to 911 failed. On a 2g network (which was what was in place then) the chances of placing a cell phone call to completion were nil. Griffin hasn't proven anything or been disproven, and everyone paying attention knows the score.

reply to post by jprophet420


This is simply not true. We are not talking 2G data. We are talking about VHF airphones and TWO, only TWO, cell calls that made a connection because it is so difficult to get a signal. Also, those calls were both made within the final minutes where they would have been low enough to catch a tower signal briefly which is what happened and the call dropped. There was NO 12 minute cell call on 93 that I am aware of.

To impressme, it is your job to defend the garbage you posted in stating that there were no calls from airliners that day. You did not ask a question, you made a statement which does not open dialogue it attracts rebuttal and you are not doing a very good job.

You did not read the commission report, you are picking 'pieces' that you are grabbing off of a web site in which many times the truth is distorted before you even post it.

The technology was there in 2001 it is just that most people could not afford it nor had the hardware. If you are rich enough, you can have anything.

and as far as the perps changing the voices after the changed manifests...WOW, you are reaching...

The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry, said “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.”

As usual, someone is playing fast and loose with their quotes and the meaning.

John Farmer, during an interview about his book

JF- Well, let me just say that I think the report is, uh, extremely accurate, and- and sets forth the facts of 9/11. And we actually did point out in the report the discrepancies between the accounts that were given and what we actually found.

911reports.wordpress.com...

I would suggest reading the whole transcript. Now, onto his book which talks about why the "I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described"

Summerized from p. 255 of his book....
"This official version departed from the facts of the day in four critical respects.

First, the official version indicated that the Langley fighters were scrambled in response to American 77, and thus omitted completely the pivotal report of the morning and the source of the Langley scramble: the report that American 11, the first hijack, was still airborne and heading for Washington.

Second, the administration insisted that the military was tracking United 93 and, as a consequence, was positioned to intercept the flight if it approached Washington. This was untrue; the military could not locate the flight to track it because it had crashed by the time of notification.

Third, the official version insisted that President Bush had issued an authorization to shoot down hijacked commercial flights, and that the order had been processed through the chain of command and passed to the fighters. This was untrue.

Fourth, the administration version implied, where it did not state implicitly, that the chain of command had been functioning on 9/11, and that the critical decisions had been made by the appropriate top officials. Thus, the president issued the shoot-down order; top FAA Headquarters officials coordinated closely with the military; Transportation secretary Norman Mineta issued the order to land all airplanes; NORAD Commanding General Eberhart monitoring closely the decisions taken at NEADS and CONR; and so on. None of this captures how things actually unfolded on the day."


In other words, his problems arent about Al Qaeda or Osama or the hijackers or their actions that day. His problem was discovering that the government was a disorganized charlie foxtrot in its actions that morning and not the smoothly flowing organization that we had been led to believe.


SO, once again, reality and what "truthers" believe are two separate roads.

Originally posted by Alfie1
So, the perps can fake voices and have all the necessary personal information to hand to completely fool spouses or parents within minutes ?
How ?

You OS pushers sure must have strong legs. You leap like you are escaping a volcano. I suppose anyone that says "explosives" is really saying "laser space weapons!" One, yes they could have all the personal info at hand. You are talking about the government - who would actually have access to such things in an instant. You are going to have to tell me where I said they faked anyone's voice. I was simply responding to correct the post I was replying to. Responding back about voice changers is funny; pointless, sad, desperate, stupid, weak ,etc. You get it. Alfie, you have not even really tried here and it seems your efforts would be best spent in a thread about rocks on Mars that are supposed to be fantastic cities. Please do not waste my time with responses that just make crap up that I never said just to try to make me look bad based on your straw-men.

Originally posted by Lillydale

Originally posted by Alfie1
impressme

If you are so sure the phone calls were all faked can you please answer my question on page 3 , nobody else has ?

Four individuals, amongst others, joined flight UA 93 late and unexpectedly :=

Tom Burnett, Edward Felt, Mark Bingham and flight attendant Sandra Bradshaw.

But they all made phone calls from the flight. How did the perps accomplish faking their calls ?

By the time the phone calls were made, the perps had access to the current passenger manifest. No one has answered it because it is a dumb question.

It is not a stupid question you just do not have an answer. If they got access to the passenger manifest then as you stated then they could have faked the calls as you are implying. No one said anything about voice changers we were calling you out about your bs posting.

For ONCE, please answer the question. HOW did your perps fake the calls? You tell us someone did something then you had better be able to back ot up better than the OP did with this latest try to confuse and lie to the public about 9/11.

reply to post by Lillydale

I suppose anyone that says "explosives" is really saying "laser space weapons!"

Only in the truth movement.

One, yes they could have all the personal info at hand. You are talking about the government - who would actually have access to such things in an instant.

If you really think the government is that powerful, you are sadly mistaken.

You are going to have to tell me where I said they faked anyone's voice.

Then you are going to have to explain why you think the calls were faked. Because the only way the calls could have been faked, would have been to fake everyone's voices.









[edit on 15-1-2010 by Swampfox46_1999]

Originally posted by Lillydale

Originally posted by Alfie1
So, the perps can fake voices and have all the necessary personal information to hand to completely fool spouses or parents within minutes ?
How ?

You OS pushers sure must have strong legs. You leap like you are escaping a volcano. I suppose anyone that says "explosives" is really saying "laser space weapons!" One, yes they could have all the personal info at hand. You are talking about the government - who would actually have access to such things in an instant. You are going to have to tell me where I said they faked anyone's voice. I was simply responding to correct the post I was replying to. Responding back about voice changers is funny; pointless, sad, desperate, stupid, weak ,etc. You get it. Alfie, you have not even really tried here and it seems your efforts would be best spent in a thread about rocks on Mars that are supposed to be fantastic cities. Please do not waste my time with responses that just make crap up that I never said just to try to make me look bad based on your straw-men.

The initial question I put out there was how the calls from UA 93 could have been faked when some people who made them only got on UA 93 last minute ? i.e. how could the perps have prepared for this ?

You chose to answer my question by saying "that the perps had access to the current passenger list. " What exactly am I supposed to infer other than that is your explanation how the perps did it ?

Now you seem to be saying you never suggested anyone faked anyone's voice so I am not quite sure what you are suggesting and why you attempted to answer my question as you did.

You do say that the perps would have had all personal information to hand because they are the government. So, are you saying that the perps had collated all the deeply personal information necessary in respect of the potential millions who might have booked late for UA 93 , including for example those who switched from Flight 91 that morning ? We are not talking tax return information here but pet names, family details, manners of speaking etc.

Is it the case then that you cannot answer my question any more than any other truther has ?

reply to post by impressme


The spooks make me hurl and I admire you for putting these folks in their proper place.
I have never seem them in such numbers, There are attacking you on this thread like
a band of Indians with no arrows.
Here is some good news posted on a thread by ProtoplasmicTraveler.

The entire thread is dedicated to the 911 spook invasion.
Hopefully someone will pull the URL up here.

An Obama associate has called for "cognitive infiltration"
of inter net web sites dealing with Government conspiracies like
911 and others.
It is totally obvious that you have landed theses spooks one square in the cahoons.
Good work Sand F

If they had to fake phone calls, hide passengers, use fake planes, destroy the original planes, load three skyscrapers with bombs and keep it all a secret, why not just drive another truck in to the basement using their FAKE credentials and bring down the WTC and kill 20k people instead of a ruse that could be discredit on prisonplanet?

They would have had carte blanche to glass ANYTHING on the planet and it would have involved less than 6 people in total.

I think enough evidence has been shown to you, the OP, that this thread will soon be dead like so many others when real questions are asked.

reply to post by Lillydale

You OS pushers sure must have strong legs. You leap like you are escaping a volcano. I suppose anyone that says "explosives" is really saying "laser space weapons!" One, yes they could have all the personal info at hand. You are talking about the government - who would actually have access to such things in an instant. You are going to have to tell me where I said they faked anyone's voice. I was simply responding to correct the post I was replying to. Responding back about voice changers is funny; pointless, sad, desperate, stupid, weak ,etc. You get it. Alfie, you have not even really tried here and it seems your efforts would be best spent in a thread about rocks on Mars that are supposed to be fantastic cities. Please do not waste my time with responses that just make crap up that I never said just to try to make me look bad based on your straw-men.

Wow - lot of stuff here...

So explain how the Gubmint would know that

Mark Bingham would make the flight - he did by 5 min after missing it day
before

Mark Bingham would call his mother

Know that his mother would be staying at her brothers (his uncle house)

Or that

Linda Gronlund would call her sister

Give her the combination to her safe

Or

that Todd Beamer not wanting to upset his pregnant wife would talk to
the Lisa Jefferson the GTE

Considering that the same Gubmint could not keep the "underwear bomber" off a plane after being warned by his own father was up to something!

Any other case of "hand waving" ....