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 )

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
The Cell Phones Again

LizzyTish
post Nov 17 2006, 09:18 PM
Post #1





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,362
Joined: 8-November 06
Member No.: 215



My apologies if this has been mentioned 100 times before, but I've never seen it and it's always bothered me.

This is the text of a fourth phone call between Tom Burnett (on Flight UA93) and his wife Deena. Is this another government 'oops' or is this just the way his wife recalled the conversation after the fact?

QUOTE
CALL A4: Once again, just before 10:00 am, Deena Burnett received a fourth phone call.

Caller: "A group of us are going to do something."

Deena: "No, Tom. Just sit down and don't draw attention to yourself."

Caller: "Deena, if they're going to crash the plane into the ground, we have to do something. We can't wait for the authorities. We have to do something now."

Caller: "Pray. Just pray, Deena. We're going to do something."


What's wrong with this picture? If the scenario of the day was crashing planes into buildings, why would he mention crashing the plane into the ground, which is what ultimately happened, so we've been told?

Quote from: http://www.physics911.net/cellphoneflight93.htm
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
p.w.rapp
post Nov 18 2006, 04:11 AM
Post #2





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,744
Joined: 19-October 06
From: European Protectorate
Member No.: 110



Excellent find, Lizzy thumbsup.gif

You know, the UA93 script including the cell-phone BS has been set up for the intellectual level of sheep.

THEY consider all of us to be sheep. Just look at the TV-commercials, for example.

And only the smartes among the sheep are able to 'think'.
They will see the Shanksville crater without debris of a plane and 'think':
"Must be true that the plane has completely disappeared into the soft ground, 'cause Tom Burnett also said, <Deena, if they're going to crash the plane into the ground...>"

The rest of the sheep are happy with that explanation (or have not bothered anyway) and continue munching their grass with a dumb look on their faces.



You are among the last of the Mohicans, who for some reason have not mutated into sheep and have kept enough resistance against the Big Brainwash to be able to (really) think in a complex, 3 dimensional way.

I only hope, that there is more of your kind, who will brake the silence and stand up against Tyranny.

Rgds Z.


P.S.: sorry about some of my wordings, but I have just watched the video of the stun gunned student and thought of how some of the pathetic security agents on JFK Airport were commanding passengers (=customers???) around when I was there early this month.

Tyranny – that is the exact word – and it starts with the BIG BRAINWASH. And the Big Brainwash is on full throttle, outside America as well.


typos, wording

This post has been edited by Zapzarap: Nov 18 2006, 04:15 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Beached
post Nov 18 2006, 02:46 PM
Post #3





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 802
Joined: 20-October 06
Member No.: 117



The more I think about the calls and their peculiar nature, the more I can't help but wonder if the callers even existed. Not only was the occupancy of all four airliners suspiciously low, but a large number of the passengers were either connected to the military or to the media. Also, if we contrast the responses of the passengers families to those of actual vicitims from the WTC disaster there is quite a difference in their attitudes, as well as some of the people they have supported.

Consider the case of Ellen Mariani. Ellen's husband was allegedly aboard UA175 which hit the South Tower. She has long been involved in supporting the 9/11 Truth Movement, and much of that time spent in support of Tom Flocco. For those who are unfamilier with Tom Flocco, he poses as an investigative journalist, however, none of his articles are ever sourced. In fact, just about everything Flocco writes is a lie, which can only lead us to believe that he is a disinformant. However, despite this Ellen claims that Flocco is a wonderful and honest person. She does not tolerate any criticism of him or his work! How could anyone praise someone whose bogus articles could be debunked with the minimal amount of research?

There are many genuine researchers out there who have made great leaps in uncovering 9/11, yet Ellen ignores all of these and instead seems to give her unconditional support to Flocco. This leads me to wonder if she really is as gullable as she seems. She has been supporting Flocco long enough to have at least discovered that most, if not all of his articles are entirely bogus.

Is Ellen really a victim of 9/11? Or did her husband change his identity and move abroad? Maybe she is merely pretending to be a victim in order to make the 9/11 attack appear realistic, and draw those of us who question the official story towards the disinformants.

Her husband, Louis Neil Mariani, was described as an Air Force veteran. If we consider the declassified Northwoods documents, it details scenarios in which government employees/agents would fake their own deaths, and so maybe he is faking his. Maybe he changed his indentity or "boarded" the aircraft under his real name and was later given a new identity?

Of course this is mere speculation, however, when we consider Ellen's attitiude, then at the very least we have to wonder about her and some of the other "victims".

This post has been edited by Beached: Nov 18 2006, 05:54 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JerryB9105
post Nov 18 2006, 09:26 PM
Post #4





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 453
Joined: 23-October 06
From: Maryland
Member No.: 139



Here's something you might find of interest in this regard:

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr88.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Nov 19 2006, 12:06 AM
Post #5



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



I can think of only 2 rationals for this - one, the "dumbing down of America" campaign has bit the perps in their own @ss - that there were people 'hired' to fabricate scripted cell phone calls that were just not that bright, despite their experience in whatever field they're in (this sort of thing is epidemic in the US, college graduates who should be qualified but can't find the US on a map), or, two, there is someone who was involved @ some low level writing scripts for fake phone calls who was trying to blow the whistle. (I kinda think the later)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Timothy Osman
post Nov 19 2006, 01:34 AM
Post #6





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 903
Joined: 18-October 06
Member No.: 107



QUOTE (JerryB9105 @ Nov 19 2006, 02:26 AM)
Here's something you might find of interest in this regard:

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr88.html

QUOTE
That claim, as it turns out, is also rather easily debunked. On September 30, 2001, less than three weeks after the attacks, the Chicago Tribune published the following report: “In the cabin, passengers frantically began making calls, 23 from the seat-back phones alone from 9:31 to 9:52 a.m. Others passed cell phones to people who had been strangers just minutes before.” (Kim Barker, Louise Kiernan and Steve Mills “Heroes Stand Up Even in the Hour of Their Deaths,” Chicago Tribune, September 30, 2001)  The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette had already said much the same thing a week and a half earlier when it was noted that Todd Beamer’s call “was one of nearly two dozen in-flight calls from Flight 93 between 9 and 10 a.m. EDT that day.” (Jim McKinnon “GTE Operator Connects With, Uplifts Widow of Hero in Hijacking,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, September 19, 2001) Even earlier than that, within just a day or two of the attacks, it had been reported that Mark Bingham called his mother “from the air phone in the seat in front of him,” and that Jeremy Glick “got on a seat phone to his wife, Lyzbeth.” (Jaxon Van Derbeken “Bay Area Man’s Last Seconds of Bravery,” San Francisco Chronicle, September 12, 2001 and Stacy Finz, Jaxon Van Derbeken and Sam McManis “Passengers on S.F. Flight Died Heroes,” San Francisco Chronicle, September 13, 2001)


What is a seatback phone? All I ever see is a tray table and the back of someones head.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
p.w.rapp
post Nov 19 2006, 05:23 AM
Post #7





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,744
Joined: 19-October 06
From: European Protectorate
Member No.: 110



QUOTE (Timothy Osman @ Nov 19 2006, 07:34 AM)
What is a seatback phone? All I ever see is a tray table and the back of someones head.

Very good question!

I've never seen this kind of phones so far. All I have read about is there can be ONE in the back of the PLANE and certainly not in each seatback.

Anyone know from own experience?

And what was the situation in 2001? Which Airlines had Air-phones and on which planes?



@Sanders
"this sort of thing is epidemic in the US, college graduates who should be qualified but can't find the US on a map..."

started laughing and stopped instantly, when I realized that this dumbing down programm is fully operational here in Europe too. We might be a few years behind, but...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Nov 19 2006, 08:18 AM
Post #8



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,830
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1





Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cary
post Nov 19 2006, 05:11 PM
Post #9


Ragin Cajun


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,691
Joined: 14-August 06
From: Baton Rouge, LA
Member No.: 5



Yep, I've been on a number of planes that had a phone in the back of every seat. You need a credit card to use them and it ain't cheap. Harder than hell to hear with all the noise though. But then again, I'm half deaf. The phones look like the ones Rob posted.

EDIT: And yes, these phones were widely available before 9/11. I was in NYC in May 2001 and stayed at the WTC Marriott. There were "seat phones" on the flights to and from NYC.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
p.w.rapp
post Nov 19 2006, 05:58 PM
Post #10





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,744
Joined: 19-October 06
From: European Protectorate
Member No.: 110



QUOTE (Cary @ Nov 19 2006, 11:11 PM)
Yep, I've been on a number of planes that had a phone in the back of every seat.  You need a credit card to use them and it ain't cheap.  Harder than hell to hear with all the noise though.  But then again, I'm half deaf.  The phones look like the ones Rob posted.

EDIT: And yes, these phones were widely available before 9/11.  I was in NYC in May 2001 and stayed at the WTC Marriott.  There were "seat phones" on the flights to and from NYC.

Thanks Cary,

I'm meanwhile busy researching, whether these seat phones were available on UA 93.
Funny thing - there is no more photos of the 9/11 planes on airliners.net
at least I can't find them. I had photos of UA175 over at LC with the tail-number and I remember, that I couldn't find a plane for flight UA93 searching airliners.net at that time.
Now it seems all of them have gone. So no tail number, no information about the year of construction and the equipment...

Anybody can help?

rgds
Z.

This post has been edited by Zapzarap: Nov 19 2006, 06:00 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
behind
post Nov 19 2006, 06:37 PM
Post #11





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 388
Joined: 25-August 06
Member No.: 13



You can find something about tail number information about the year of construction etc at Wiki

(click on tail number to the right... and the other planes are at the bottom of the page)

(...and for example flight 93 N591UA had a Cancel Date 09/28/2005 unsure.gif

This post has been edited by behind: Nov 19 2006, 06:43 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
p.w.rapp
post Nov 19 2006, 06:44 PM
Post #12





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,744
Joined: 19-October 06
From: European Protectorate
Member No.: 110



QUOTE (behind @ Nov 20 2006, 12:37 AM)
You can find something about tail number information about the year of construction etc at Wiki

(click on tail number to the right... and the other planes are at the bottom of the page)

(...and for example flight 93 N591UA had a Cancel Date 09/28/2005 unsure.gif

Thanks, behind!
Will check !
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Timothy Osman
post Nov 20 2006, 01:09 AM
Post #13





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 903
Joined: 18-October 06
Member No.: 107



QUOTE (johndoeX @ Nov 19 2006, 01:18 PM)



Well there you go. What a wonderful invention, must have been developed by Bastards Incorporated themselves. Still doesn't answer the cell phone question which has too many variables IMO when compared to the other evidence.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
georgie101
post Nov 20 2006, 06:11 AM
Post #14



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 1,227
Joined: 20-October 06
From: south london, uk
Member No.: 114



great point lizzy,
something i have always thought was strange about the calls from the planes is how calm they were, no emotion in their voices. telling close relatives their full names, some almost sound as if they are read from a script.
i also agree with what beached said, did the callers really exist? with all the other set up activities on that morning, it wouldn't have been too much trouble to throw in a few fake phone calls aswell would it.
and, what a massive difference from the call made from the wtc, just before it fell, by kevin cosgrove. the emotion and fear in his voice is awful, one of the worst things i have ever heard. so from what i have seen the calls from the trade centers have emotion and everything else you would expect, and the calls from the planes seriously lack emotion and they just seem odd.
it just doesn't add up.

edited coz i'm a twat!

This post has been edited by georgie101: Nov 20 2006, 06:13 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
p.w.rapp
post Nov 20 2006, 07:16 AM
Post #15





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,744
Joined: 19-October 06
From: European Protectorate
Member No.: 110



QUOTE (georgie101 @ Nov 20 2006, 12:11 PM)
and, what a massive difference from the call made from the wtc, just before it fell, by kevin cosgrove. the emotion and fear in his voice is awful, one of the worst things i have ever heard. so from what i have seen the calls from the trade centers have emotion and everything else you would expect, and the calls from the planes seriously lack emotion and they just seem odd.
it just doesn't add up.

edited coz i'm a twat!

Excellent and sensitive analysis worthy.gif


@ all guys:

you see a typical example of how important it is to have t..
(err... sorry, Georgie I disagree with your edit) girls in the team.

Girls are from Venus
Guys are from Mars

...totally different languages, different ways of thinking.

And whatever BS they tell you about equality -

Girls are better (when they're wearing their strong suit) - and veeeeeery few of us, guys, speak their language...



[smiley sending a kiss to Georgie]
Z.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
georgie101
post Nov 20 2006, 07:26 AM
Post #16



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 1,227
Joined: 20-October 06
From: south london, uk
Member No.: 114



wub.gif
xx thanks xx

it's true we (men v woman) are so different, but when united, can offer each other so much of what the other does not have.

in other words, can't live with them, can't live without them!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
LizzyTish
post Nov 20 2006, 08:06 AM
Post #17





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,362
Joined: 8-November 06
Member No.: 215



QUOTE (georgie101 @ Nov 20 2006, 06:11 AM)
something i have always thought was strange about the calls from the planes is how calm they were, no emotion in their voices. telling close relatives their full names, some almost sound as if they are read from a script.

I agree 100% georgie. Under those circumstances, the last thing I'd be doing would be calling my mother and identifying myself by my full name. I freak when a plane I'm on hits a tiny air pocket. Had I been on UA93, I might have taken a moment to think that if we somehow made it down safely, someone was going to have to do a major cleaning job on my seat! blink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
behind
post Nov 24 2006, 03:56 PM
Post #18





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 388
Joined: 25-August 06
Member No.: 13



About the cell phone call... (and some of the phone call 9/11 was cell phone calls) then it is very hard to understand how it could work for example in flight 93, at about 30.000 feet.

www.conspiracyresearch.org/wiki/index.php/Dubious_Airline_Phone_Calls
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
conspiracy_chest...
post Nov 25 2006, 05:11 PM
Post #19





Group: Newbie
Posts: 463
Joined: 22-November 06
Member No.: 252



QUOTE (JerryB9105 @ Nov 18 2006, 09:26 PM)
Here's something you might find of interest in this regard:

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr88.html

This reads like a disinformation article to me.

And it's not even subtle.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
conspiracy_chest...
post Nov 25 2006, 05:13 PM
Post #20





Group: Newbie
Posts: 463
Joined: 22-November 06
Member No.: 252



QUOTE (Zapzarap @ Nov 19 2006, 05:23 AM)
QUOTE (Timothy Osman @ Nov 19 2006, 07:34 AM)

What is a seatback phone? All I ever see is a tray table and the back of someones head.


Seat-back phones have been around for years. I saw them on planes in the 90's.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
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: 16th October 2017 - 09:09 PM