IPBFacebook




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Betty Crooning On The Phone At 430 Knots

bgaede
post Sep 11 2011, 03:33 PM
Post #1





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 13
Joined: 11-September 11
Member No.: 6,245



Betty Ong's dialogue with Nydia Gonzalez occurs while AA11 is practically in free fall.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRp4lULPAIc
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BarryWilliamsmb
post Sep 11 2011, 08:55 PM
Post #2





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 243
Joined: 29-September 07
From: Regina, Sask, Canada
Member No.: 2,278



I shouldn't be in this room.

I'm on too many drugs.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Topher
post Sep 16 2011, 06:38 PM
Post #3





Group: Newbie
Posts: 4
Joined: 15-September 11
From: Cedar Rapids, IA
Member No.: 6,276



This is very interesting, but does the documentary clip in the video depict UA175 instead?

Regardless, this is very substantial evidence to show that the phone calls were indeed fake. Betty and Amy would have never experienced speeds like that because they were borderline VNE. Ms. Ong and Ms. Sweeney should have been screaming their heads off. crybaby2.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Sep 17 2011, 02:33 PM
Post #4





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,158
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



The OCT just doesn't add up--all the evidence works against it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tit2
post Sep 18 2011, 12:44 PM
Post #5





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 146
Joined: 27-April 07
Member No.: 999



QUOTE (Topher @ Sep 14 2011, 10:38 PM) *
This is very interesting, but does the documentary clip in the video depict UA175 instead?

Regardless, this is very substantial evidence to show that the phone calls were indeed fake. Betty and Amy would have never experienced speeds like that because they were borderline VNE. Ms. Ong and Ms. Sweeney should have been screaming their heads off. crybaby2.gif



Dave Bottiglia speaks of flight 175. See:

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?...858rapiddescent

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1doqa_91...-anomalies_news

(8:58 a.m.-9:03 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Controllers Watch Flight 175 Descending 10,000 Feet per Minute.

« Air traffic controllers at the FAA’s New York Center who are watching Flight 175 on the radar screen see the aircraft descending at an astonishing rate of up to 10,000 feet per minute. From 8:58 a.m., Flight 175 is constantly descending toward New York. One of the New York Center controllers, Jim Bohleber, is looking at his radar scope and calls out the plane’s rate of descent every 12 seconds, each time the screen updates, saying: “It’s six thousand feet a minute. Now it’s eight. Now ten.” Dave Bottiglia, the controller responsible for monitoring Flight 175, will later comment that 10,000 feet per minute is “absolutely unheard of for a commercial jet. It is unbelievable for the passengers in the back to withstand that type of force as they’re descending. [The hijackers are] actually nosing the airplane down and doing what I would call a ‘power dive.’” While Flight 175 is in this rapid descent, it heads directly into the paths of several other aircraft, and narrowly avoids a mid-air collision with flight Midex 7. »

According to the FBI report, there were two phone calls from Brian Sweeney, a passenger of Flight 175, occurring at 08:58:45, lasting 27 seconds, and at 9:00:02, lasting 60 seconds.

http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/...ts/P200055.html

Brian Sweeney said:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_175

« Brian David Sweeney tried calling his wife, Julie, at 08:58, but ended up leaving a message, telling her that the plane had been hijacked. He then called his parents at 9:00 a.m., and spoke with his mother, Louise. Sweeney told his mother about the hijacking, and mentioned that passengers were considering storming the cockpit and taking control of the aircraft, as the passengers aboard United Airlines Flight 93, which had not yet been hijacked, would. »

The rapid descent to the ground of Flight 175 is not mentioned by Brian Sweeney.

Peter Hanson made a second phone call to his father at 09:00 and he says: “It's getting bad, Dad. A stewardess was stabbed. They seem to have knives and Mace. They said they have a bomb. It's getting very bad on the plane. Passengers are throwing up and getting sick. The plane is making jerky movements. I don't think the pilot is flying the plane. I think we are going down. I think they intend to go to Chicago or someplace and fly into a building. Don't worry, Dad. If it happens, it'll be very fast....Oh my God... oh my God, oh my God." As the call abruptly ended, Hanson's father heard a woman screaming ».

Peter Hanson reports events that are not reported by Brian Sweeney (A stewardess was stabbed, passengers are throwing up and getting sick, the plane is making jerky movements) and, unlike Brian David Sweeney, he does not indicate that “ passengers were considering storming the cockpit and taking control of the aircraft”.

The FBI report indicates that the last phone call of Peter Hanson began at 09:00:03 and lasted 192 seconds, so until 9:03:15. This means that the last phone call of Peter Hanson survived approximately 15 seconds at the impact of aircraft on the south tower :

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xd9ojv_cr...9-09-03-00_news

Of course, all this indicates that the phone calls were faked.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
poppyburner
post Jan 25 2014, 01:36 AM
Post #6





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 194
Joined: 10-October 13
From: South West London, UK
Member No.: 7,552



QUOTE (bgaede @ Sep 11 2011, 08:33 PM) *
Betty Ong's dialogue with Nydia Gonzalez occurs while AA11 is practically in free fall.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRp4lULPAIc


'...her[Ong's] call was held ... until 8:45:47, 53 seconds before Flight 11 crashed at
8:46:40 AM.'


~ http://www.globalresearch.ca/9-11-what-the...ls-at-all/26594

'During the final 15 seconds of flight, the aircraft descends to 1000 feet altitude and impacts
World Trade Center tower #1 at approximately 430 knots groundspeed.'
@ 3:43


So this rapid descent, began 38 seconds after Ong became unresponsive.

This post has been edited by poppyburner: Jan 25 2014, 01:41 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Jan 25 2014, 06:02 PM
Post #7





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 667
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (poppyburner @ Jan 25 2014, 01:36 AM) *
'...her[Ong's] call was held ... until 8:45:47, 53 seconds before Flight 11 crashed at
8:46:40 AM.'


~ http://www.globalresearch.ca/9-11-what-the...ls-at-all/26594


Elizabeth Woodworth starts off writing what seems to be good a very good investigative piece.
However she drops the ball with the CeeCee Lyles call.

"Other reasons to suggest that this phone call was simulated include CeeCee Lyles’ apparently simulated Florida driver’s license that was allegedly found at the crash site of Flight 93. This license was a duplicate, issued in 1997 under her married name to Lyles. However...

In summary, if people were at work simulating calls for the September 11th flights, some of these simulations could have been prepared in advance...

The CeeCee Lyles call, which has a scripted, unreal quality to it, [41] would fit the description of a call prepared in this manner."

Elizabeth concludes her article saying that all the phone calls that went through were most likely simulated from voice samples of the victims.

But we now know from the recording left by CeeCee Lyles that she did in fact make the call herself (likely from the ground).
Why else on earth would a perp making a simulated call leaving a smoking gun clue at the end of the call, whispering "It's a frame." ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
poppyburner
post Jan 25 2014, 10:55 PM
Post #8





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 194
Joined: 10-October 13
From: South West London, UK
Member No.: 7,552



Imo, technically, that which you're describing, could be deemed a simulated call.
It's unlikely that (from the ground) Lyles was persuaded to make a genuine distress call to her
husband.

I also do not believe that the message was sampled; as her husband Lorne, claimed that minutes
later, CeeCee continued her report, in a conversation with him, via her cellular phone.

This post has been edited by poppyburner: Jan 25 2014, 10:57 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Jan 26 2014, 12:31 AM
Post #9





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 667
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (poppyburner @ Jan 25 2014, 10:55 PM) *
Imo, technically, that which you're describing, could be deemed a simulated call.
It's unlikely that (from the ground) Lyles was persuaded to make a genuine distress call to her
husband.

I also do not believe that the message was sampled; as her husband Lorne, claimed that minutes
later, CeeCee continued her report, in a conversation with him, via her cellular phone.



It is not clear what you are saying.
How could calls that Lyles and the others were 'persuaded' to make be deemed a simulated call?

The author, Elizabeth is referring to simulated calls, as in using software/machinery to fake a person's voice.

Whether CeeCee and the rest made the calls voluntarily or they were coerced, doesn't change the fact that they used their own, real voices.
ie., no simulation.
Capiche?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
poppyburner
post Jan 26 2014, 02:02 AM
Post #10





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 194
Joined: 10-October 13
From: South West London, UK
Member No.: 7,552



QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Jan 26 2014, 05:31 AM) *
How could calls that Lyles and the others were 'persuaded' to make be deemed a simulated call?


'simulate
vb (tr)
...
2. to reproduce the conditions of (a situation, etc), as in carrying out an experiment: to simulate weightlessness.
'

~ http://www.thefreedictionary.com/simulate

QUOTE
The author, Elizabeth is referring to simulated calls, as in using software/machinery to fake a
person's voice.


Rightly or wrongly, from your last post, I interpreted a feigning of calls (e.g. voicemail messages, with audio recordings), rather than voices.


Btw, I should have mentioned the need for someone to have relayed Lorne Lyles' side of the conversation,
to his wife, in another voice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
poppyburner
post Feb 12 2014, 12:03 AM
Post #11





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 194
Joined: 10-October 13
From: South West London, UK
Member No.: 7,552



I suspect that Woodworth's miscomprehended Betty Ong's AT&T phone record [page 007].

Imo, she's divided the logged call 'Duration' of '1620', by 60 (-seconds i.e. 1 minute), which results as a neat 27 minutes;
then logically assumed that those 27 minutes, began from the 'Start Time.............=Tue Sep 11 06:18:47 2001' [-08:18:47 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time].

But if one instead begins those 27 minutes, from the stated 'Billing Start' time (08:19:03 A.M.); then they'll find, that they conclude exactly at the listed 'Event Time': 08:46:03 A.M..

Which I believe is when Ong's call, truly ended.

I don't find in the log, Woodworth's figure of: 08:45:47, anywhere.

Therefore, if the aforementioned crash time of 8:46:40 A.M. is accurate; then Ong's call actually terminated 37 seconds earlier.

Only a small difference.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th September 2017 - 04:21 AM