UPDATE YOUR FILES: No Barbara Olson Phone Call - It was a LIE!

... and could someone explain what happened to donny4million's post which is blocked?

what is the nature of this "extreme violation"?

Shouldn't we at least know which one of the T&Cs was violated? I could not find a "No Outlet" in the T&C... Is that the violation or does that just mean that the post was blocked?

(apart from a brief exchange a few hours ago, I don't know d4m)

I am sorry if the answer is apparent to everyone else.

Originally posted by rick1
Also 2 out of the four of my posts were one sentence.

6 on this page alone are one line posts. This is exactly the kind of thing that makes these threads worthless. This is part of the reason they are being moderated so heavily. Someone posts 6 - SIX - one line posts in a row and on the same page blatantly lies and says it was only 2. What is the point of even posting on ATS if that basic level of honesty can not even be achieved?

reply to post by GoldenFleece


Thanks, that is the first I have read into Olson's story. Enlightening for me, very damning for the official story. Of course by now the lie has been repeated so many times, the truth will be ignored or called a lie.

found this on wiki and thought id share it with you all on ats At around 3:40 a.m on September 14, a paramedic and a firefighter who were searching through the debris of the impact site found two dark boxes, about 1.5 by 2 feet long. They called for an FBI agent, where did the boxes go from the site and where are the recordings?

[edit on 7-4-2010 by killer4281]

[edit on 7-4-2010 by killer4281]

I have a request here for forum members. I wanted to find some of the CNN footage of Barbara Olson for picture comparison studies. Oddly, I could not find a single video of her as a "commentator on CNN." Perhaps it is because her name has so many 911 stories attached to it, it makes them hard to find.

Can anyone find a few videos of Barbara Olson on CNN? Or even one? And not the one where they show her talking but dub out the sound and talk over the video.

Thanks-
Phil

Whats even more interesting is the near identical nature of Barbara Olson and lady Evelyn Booth. It is things like this that will eventually piss people off enough that will will actually do the impossible and unthinkable, and seemingly un-American these days. They will DEMAND ANSWERS and NOT take "NO" for an answer.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/52154c130e42.jpg[/atsimg]

I want an answer on the Booth question. Yes, or no. and I also want an answer on the other alleged 264 passenger families as well. Mike Rivero is identical to John Wenckus, Barbara Olson is identical to Lady Booth.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

Cheers-
Phil

And apparently I am not allowed to post anything regarding the FACT that Flight 93 was boarded twice. Unimportant data I guess. Or too important data. You be the judge, as my thread was deleted after only 30 minutes AND THIS after getting an applause by a moderator here. God forbid any of us should clear the confusion and actually answer some of the mysteries on 9/11.

reply to post by Phil Jayhan


How come Lady Evelyn Booth was appearing in court in 2000 when you claim she was Barbara Olson ?

scholar.google.com...

reply to post by Phil Jayhan


"FACT", huh?

Originally posted by Phil Jayhan
...the FACT that Flight 93 was boarded twice.

Along with your assertion of this 'Lady' Booth, you are batting Zero, here.

The Barbara Olson/'Lady' Booth connection is completely blown apart, and therefore the allegations in the OP don't hold water.

There is NO evidence at all as to your claim about UAL 93 being "boarded twice". It seems the entirety of these other claims of yours are without merit, and have no substantiation of any kind -- other than a misrepresentation of the facts, whether through a simple misunderstanding, or intentionally for some other purpose, I do not yet know.

There exist certain 'havens' wherein some of these notions may receive coddling, and garner a few advocates, but in the real world the majority of people can see falsehoods when they are presented.

reply to post by Phil Jayhan


Wow - you really think the two persons shown in those photos look alike, really?

If so then I have some Van Gogh paintings I would like to seel to you.

Originally posted by Phil Jayhan

Whats even more interesting is the near identical nature of Barbara Olson and lady Evelyn Booth.

WOW!!!

Sorry. Not identical AT ALL. Two different ladies completely!!!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/52154c130e42.jpg[/atsimg]

I want an answer on the Booth question. Yes, or no.

NO.

Mike Rivero is identical to John Wenckus, Barbara Olson is identical to Lady Booth.

WONG ON BOTH. They are different people.

And I also want an answer on the other alleged 264 passenger families as well.

What is the answer you seek on the 264 pax. families??

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

I agree completely. Enough is enough. Please stop making stuff up.

Originally posted by Phil Jayhan
Whats even more interesting is the near identical nature of Barbara Olson and lady Evelyn Booth.

As shown above they are not the same person. Some similarities, but can you fault a guy for having a "type". Most of us do.

I want an answer on the Booth question. Yes, or no.

That would be a big NO, consider your question answered.

reply to post by Phil Jayhan

Your enthusiasm & enterprise are to be admired, Phil, but you have to ask yourself how a group of conspirators could spend no doubt years planning a massive operation, utilising highly advanced technology, a massive attack - four attacks - every last element of which, no matter how seemingly insignificant would have been painstakingly gone over again & again, yet...they made this horrendous gaffe over a phone call.

They can morph voices, send covert teams into the WTC and rig these massive skyscrapers without anyone seeing anything, silence the thousands who were either involved in the plot or who know about it, - but for some reason they're scrambling around over this vital phone call?

You say that the cell phone calls couldn't have been made. So what are the conspirators thinking after the fact? Damn it! If only we had someone on board who knew something about cell phone technology. That was our big error.

Fundamental errors like this from individuals as sophisticated & ruthless as any hypothetical cabal that really carried out 9/11 are inconceivable, and as to this notion that a celebrity had to be involved because 3000 nobodies dying wouldn't be enough, this is dime-store psychology.

reply to post by Phil Jayhan


American Airlines has stated there were no activated onboard phones in 2001, on their 757's. Cell phone connections could not be made over 5,000 feet in 2001, and at higher speeds.

reply to post by rush969



There may have been onboard phones, (American states there weren't), but they were inactivated in March of 2001, on the 757's. Mr. Olson is either lying, or he was duped.

Originally posted by aero56
American Airlines has stated there were no activated onboard phones in 2001, on their 757's.

They have not actually...

"Engineers at our primary Maintenance & Engineering base in Tulsa tell me that they cannot find any record that the 757 aircraft flown into the Pentagon on 9/11 had had its seatback phones deactivated by that date. An Engineering Change Order to deactivate the seatback phone system on the 757 fleet had been issued by that time... It is our contention that the seatback phones on Flight 77 were working because there is no entry in that aircraft’s records to indicate when the phones were disconnected.
John Hotard, Corporate Communications, American Airlines"
www.911myths.com...

But as you get your information from a damn fool conspiracy site, it being wrong is not surprising!

reply to post by dereks


I don't recall stating where I got that information, so as far as you know, I may work for American Airlines.

reply to post by GoldenFleece


Good ole Rummy. He also stated that Flight 93 was "shot down". Who gave the order for that? Cheney?

reply to post by killer4281


What's left? Well, if the phone calls never took place, or at least not the way Ted Olson states, this could blow open the whole trial! If an official from the DOJ is lying, than it could be perceived that all of the officials are lying!

reply to post by aero56


No, a public relations hack said the phones were deactivated when he made his original statement.

The engineers and maintenance people who would actually know, say the phones were still there and in active service. The phone records show that (both the records from 9/11 and the records from the calls made from that plane in the days PRIOR to 9/11).

In addition to the sad sacks that continue to perpetuate the lie that Barbra Olson never called her husband are just too silly to believe. She didnt call straight to his desk, her call took a route through at least one airfone operator and a secretary (who knew Barbra) before her call got to her husband.

So now, for this fantasy to be true, the airline maintenance people are lying, the airfone company people are lying, the DoJ secretaries are lying.....

ANOTHER prime example of the "truth" movement not thinking through their cockamanie beliefs.

reply to post by aero56


Flight 93 was shot down! A couple of days after 9/11, I volunteered with the Red Cross in NYC and was helping sort out names of missing 9/11 victims, matching up names, removing repeat names from the database…etc The guy in charge (an older man who was in the service when he was younger) told us that his buddy was on the scene (still in the service) and told him that Flight 93 was shot down!

This was all BEFORE the OS was even being questioned and people were still in shock. There was no reason for this older man to lie. He got the info straight from his close friend on the scene. I couldn't even understand what he was saying at that time. It didn't make any sense at all. But years later, this all makes too much sense.