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 )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
What About Phone Calls Made From Flight 93

localbod
post Jan 12 2007, 02:25 PM
Post #1





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 37
Joined: 12-January 07
From: UK
Member No.: 433



im new to the whole conspiracy / things arent right with 911 trail ,but the more i read the more ad more plausible a government conspiracy seems.
I live in UK and have some friends who are pilots and i know how serious , real and not prone to fantasy pilots are-which is why i joined this site.
I guess i trust your word and opinion more than anyone else when it comes to what happened on that tragic day.I have to say i dont buy into the theory that the second airliner to hit the WTC was super-imposed via cgi , and that also seems to go against eye witness statements / amateur video footage.
What i would like to know is if flight 93 really landed at an airport under the guise of a suspected bom on board , where did all the frantic telephone calls from passengers on board to loved ones originate?
Or am i being dumb and missing something obvious abd or not got my facts right.

Localbod.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cary
post Jan 12 2007, 02:30 PM
Post #2


Ragin Cajun


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



Welcome to the forum localbod. We've got several threads in the appropriate forums to answer your question.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
George Hayduke
post Jan 12 2007, 02:36 PM
Post #3


Got aliens?


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 2,052
Joined: 21-October 06
Member No.: 120



QUOTE (localbod @ Jan 12 2007, 07:25 PM)
What i would like to know is if flight 93 really landed at an airport under the guise of a suspected bom on board , where did all the frantic telephone calls from passengers on board to loved ones originate?

A place called the National Coordinating Center, NCC, which was the fusion of government and corporate media is the point of origin of the calls. The NCC houses executives from all the major cable and satellite systems providers, all the television stations alongside managerial level folks from the DoD, the CIA and other government agencies. NCC was established so the military could essentially hijack the countries private satellite systems in the event of an emergency.

Check it:

http://www.sonsanddaughtersofliberty.net/bullhorn/ncc.html

thumbsup.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
georgie101
post Jan 12 2007, 03:43 PM
Post #4



Group Icon

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



welcome localbod, nice to have another fellow brit here. check out the section on flight 93, theres also a few other threads on phone calls, no one can give you a definative answer, but we are discussing it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
localbod
post Jan 13 2007, 01:19 PM
Post #5





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 37
Joined: 12-January 07
From: UK
Member No.: 433



QUOTE (George Hayduke @ Jan 12 2007, 02:36 PM)
QUOTE (localbod @ Jan 12 2007, 07:25 PM)

What i would like to know is if flight 93 really landed at an airport under the guise of a suspected bom on board , where did all the frantic telephone calls from passengers on board to loved ones originate?

A place called the National Coordinating Center, NCC, which was the fusion of government and corporate media is the point of origin of the calls. The NCC houses executives from all the major cable and satellite systems providers, all the television stations alongside managerial level folks from the DoD, the CIA and other government agencies. NCC was established so the military could essentially hijack the countries private satellite systems in the event of an emergency.

Check it:

http://www.sonsanddaughtersofliberty.net/bullhorn/ncc.html

thumbsup.gif

thanks for the info George.
Ive really been taken by the idea that gw bush and his fascist cronies were up to something ever since i did some investigation into the construction and design of wtc towers and the principles of gravity , steel melting point , mechanics etc...
A good friend of mine who is naturally mistrusting of any state /government be it that of the UK or the US , always supports the underdog and is as likely as anyone to buy into the idea of a conspiracy or cover-up , looks at me like im some kind of crazy fanatic thats deluded and paranoid whenever i raise the subject of the flights that day that were taken over by hijackers as not all necessarily ending up where and when and how the FAA or CIA or FBI or NSA(you guys love your TLA's!)say they did.
He always gets back to me with - yeah but what about all of the family members who spoke to their wives and husbands and sons and daughters who were on those flights , are all those families in on the conspiracy then? , and i'd love to be able to convince him enough just to atleast check out some of the video evidence that is out there.
You ofcourse know exactly what i mean , i guess once you stop the think and question 911 , because of the enormity and scale of the whole thing it kind of becomes an obsession for more and more knowledge and understanding.
I will check your link out now ,thanks again- Localbod.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tarya
post Jan 13 2007, 01:55 PM
Post #6


Library Team


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 170
Joined: 16-October 06
From: Middle Earth
Member No.: 82



Hi localbod and welcome!

Our Cell phone / Air-phone topic in the library might help you find what you are looking for. Also, if you are up for a long read try this article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO408B.html
QUOTE
While serious doubts regarding the cell calls were expressed in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, a new landmark in the wireless telecom industry has further contributed to upsetting the Commission's credibility. Within days of the release of the 9/11 Commission Report in July, American Airlines and Qualcomm, proudly announced the development of a new wireless technology --which will at some future date allow airline passengers using their cell phones to contact family and friends from a commercial aircraft (no doubt at a  special rate aerial roaming charge) (see http://www.qualcomm.com/press/releases/200...testflight.html )

    "Travelers could be talking on their personal cellphones as early as 2006. Earlier this month [July 2004], American Airlines conducted a trial run on a modified aircraft that permitted cell phone calls." (WP, July 27, 2004)

Aviation Week (07/20/04) described this new technology in an authoritative report published in July 2004:

    "Qualcomm and American Airlines are exploring [July 2004] ways for passengers to use commercial cell phones inflight for air-to-ground communication. In a recent 2-hr. proof-of-concept flight, representatives from government and the media used commercial Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) third-generation cell phones to place and receive calls and text messages from friends on the ground.

    For the test flight from Dallas-Fort Worth, the aircraft was equipped with an antenna in the front and rear of the cabin to transmit cell phone calls to a small in-cabin CDMA cellular base station. This "pico cell" transmitted cell phone calls from the aircraft via a Globalstar satellite to the worldwide terrestrial phone network"

Needless to say, neither the service, nor the "third generation" hardware, nor the "Picco cell" CDMA base station inside the cabin (which so to speak mimics a cell phone communication tower inside the plane) were available on the morning of September 11, 2001.

The 911 Commission points to the clarity and detail of these telephone conversations. 

In substance, the Aviation Week report creates yet another embarrassing hitch in the official story.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Truthseekers
post Jan 13 2007, 02:00 PM
Post #7





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 405
Joined: 15-October 06
From: Outside the sheep pen.
Member No.: 66



Emirates became or will soon be so, the first ever airline to introduce cell phone calls to be made on flights. The first ever. No mobile/cell calls could ever have been made on 93, as they had not had the gadgets installed to allow this, surely.


*edit* changed 73 to 93 tongue.gif

This post has been edited by BoneZ: Jan 13 2007, 06:25 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Jan 13 2007, 03:56 PM
Post #8





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



Well, the NCC and DCA are interesting, as is their complex that was up and running that day.

Injecting cell phone calls would have been a cakewalk, for sure.

And if the video was injected for the strike of 175, that might possibly explain why the aircraft was banked so hard. I have never been able to figure out why it was banked so hard! If it was a manned aircraft, the guy almost missed, which seems weird somehow.

But other videos show an airplane striking the south tower, so I guess I am confused as ever. dunno.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Jan 13 2007, 05:49 PM
Post #9



Group Icon

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



Hey localbod, welcome to the forum.

Just added that article Tarya posted, and another good one about Barbara Olson's call(s), 'Mother of All Lies About 9/11' by Joe Vialls in the Library.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum...dpost&p=4988163

There are mysteries connected to every aspect of 9/11 - what really hit the Pentagon? why did a bomb go off there at 9:32? If a real plane hit the towers, how did it slice through the steel grid and enter whole? How were the phone calls manufactured? Etc. etc. etc. People have made some inroads into getting some answers, but without more clues all we can do is speculate. As for the calls, you're really faced with one of three possibilities ... either passengers were somehow manipulated into thinking they were victims of a hijack and into making some calls (from a low enough altitude ?), or the calls were faked, or the official story is true and the laws of physics were suspended on 9/11. Not too many options - two things to remember, many of the passengers were either somehow connected to the military-industrial complex, DoD or White House, or were fictional.
Secondly, the people who did this undoubtedly had access to (and made use of) some advanced technologies we can barely imagine.

salute.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
George Hayduke
post Jan 13 2007, 07:19 PM
Post #10


Got aliens?


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 2,052
Joined: 21-October 06
Member No.: 120



QUOTE (localbod @ Jan 13 2007, 06:19 PM)
QUOTE (George Hayduke @ Jan 12 2007, 02:36 PM)
QUOTE (localbod @ Jan 12 2007, 07:25 PM)

What i would like to know is if flight 93 really landed at an airport under the guise of a suspected bom on board , where did all the frantic telephone calls from passengers on board to loved ones originate?

A place called the National Coordinating Center, NCC, which was the fusion of government and corporate media is the point of origin of the calls. The NCC houses executives from all the major cable and satellite systems providers, all the television stations alongside managerial level folks from the DoD, the CIA and other government agencies. NCC was established so the military could essentially hijack the countries private satellite systems in the event of an emergency.

Check it:

http://www.sonsanddaughtersofliberty.net/bullhorn/ncc.html

thumbsup.gif

thanks for the info George.
Ive really been taken by the idea that gw bush and his fascist cronies were up to something ever since i did some investigation into the construction and design of wtc towers and the principles of gravity , steel melting point , mechanics etc...
A good friend of mine who is naturally mistrusting of any state /government be it that of the UK or the US , always supports the underdog and is as likely as anyone to buy into the idea of a conspiracy or cover-up , looks at me like im some kind of crazy fanatic thats deluded and paranoid whenever i raise the subject of the flights that day that were taken over by hijackers as not all necessarily ending up where and when and how the FAA or CIA or FBI or NSA(you guys love your TLA's!)say they did.
He always gets back to me with - yeah but what about all of the family members who spoke to their wives and husbands and sons and daughters who were on those flights , are all those families in on the conspiracy then? , and i'd love to be able to convince him enough just to atleast check out some of the video evidence that is out there.
You ofcourse know exactly what i mean , i guess once you stop the think and question 911 , because of the enormity and scale of the whole thing it kind of becomes an obsession for more and more knowledge and understanding.
I will check your link out now ,thanks again- Localbod.

Probably wasn't that big of an operation. Just seems that way. One or two private military contractors probably carried out the actual attacks.

Now the coverup on the other hand. That was big. The media is still at it.

Anyway, welcome aboard. I like to hear that you are recruiting folks. Keep it up. Numbers. We need numbers.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JackD
post Jan 13 2007, 08:38 PM
Post #11





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 295
Joined: 13-November 06
Member No.: 238



Hayduke! you still NBBT?

My Webpage

I have pursued both BB@T and NBB@T, as parallel hypotheses.

See the above links for odd witnesses and "spooks corner"

at the end of the day, my position on the witness accounts is this -- if the s--t went down like they said it did, there'd be NO NEED FOR ALL THE "SPINNING" in the media with prepped, faked, etc, 'eyewitnesses' whether at WTC or Pentagon.

in fact, you';d do better getting a naive witness, rather than a plant.

so why so many planted 'eyewitnesses?' see similiar links at

http://911logic.blogspot.com/2006/12/911-e...t-cards_12.html

and the WTC1 and WTC2 sections of this forum

Jack
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
e-dog
post Jan 14 2007, 08:22 AM
Post #12


ITacHI^ - The Truth Will Set You Free.


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 707
Joined: 15-October 06
From: Sittard
Member No.: 74



Hi and welcome to the forum localbod. biggrin.gif

1 question: Have you done any investigation on the London bombings? If not, I strongly recommend you to do so.

Here is a good Documentary about the NWO (It also covers the London Bombings):
TERRORSTORM (Alex Jones)

Welcome again m8 cheers.gif


IT--

This post has been edited by e-dog: Jan 14 2007, 08:23 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tocarm
post Jan 14 2007, 12:42 PM
Post #13





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 430
Joined: 14-December 06
Member No.: 329



A very simple truth regarding the nature of human beings and how to get them to utilize/employ/direct their God-given spiritual faculty of "Free Will" within a 'Cause & Effect' time/space/matter/energy Realm in which they all move, live and have their being:

CONTROL what people a) know, and B) believe - and viola! - you get them all doing whatever it is that you want for them TO DO for you.

"Simon sez do this. Simon sez do that. Simon sez do that other thing."

- tocarm
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Jan 14 2007, 03:17 PM
Post #14





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



I was always a little bit suspicious about about that Barbara Olson call. I never realized she used to work for CNN.

It's amazing how many people were in on this fraud. sh*t, and it took me 4 years to figure out I was spoofed. dunno.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JackD
post Jan 14 2007, 07:43 PM
Post #15





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 295
Joined: 13-November 06
Member No.: 238



see JohnDoeII's analyses of the phone call timing and contents. (google up JohnDoeII... dont have link)

my study of the phone calls suggests that SOME of them may be real, esp Ed Felt's call from UA93.

Beamer and Burnett and Bingham calls from UA93 do not match up well with each other.

AA77 had few calls, and the Barbara Olson to Ted Olson calls are VERY problematic. as in, hard to show they took place - -and we must take the word of Ted Olson, who is quoted as saying that Gov'ts sometimes have to lie as an order of business.

But the phone calls are VERY CONVINCING to the general public, which is why they were emphasized in the PsyOp called 9/11 -- deniers often wail "But what happned to the planes, and are you saying the phone calls were fake?"

i dont know what happened to the planes. and i cant prove that ALL the calls were faked. but it does seem that much about MANY if not MOST of the phone calls doesnt make sense when you really get down to cases...- see killtown's website for analyses and timing ...

Obviously, that 9/11 was a full MIHOP inside job does not hinge on a phone call or two -- it's easy enough to show the massive holes in the official story without even mentioning the phone calls.

Hayduke's direction to NCC is an intriguing place to start in terms of trying to piece together how call fakery could be done.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Jan 15 2007, 10:17 AM
Post #16





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



I remember the 93 story in a strange way because that was within months of my acquiring my first computer and learning about the internet.

I read at what I remember to be the Atlantic Monthly website about the Flight 93 cell phone calls and debris trail for 8 miles. There was a statement from the Johnstown PA 911 operator that he had received a phone call or two from pax onboard, but that before the day was done, FBI agents had come by and confiscated all his tapes.

A man who I worked with at the time also read those stories at the same website, after I had told him about it. We each read it several times over a period of days.

Then one day, the articles were GONE from the website, completely. Neither of us could find a trace of the stories--they no longer existed there.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Culper721
post Jan 22 2007, 11:49 PM
Post #17





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 210
Joined: 2-January 07
Member No.: 396



As soon as someone can show me how and why Flt 93 knew where to turn and when turn off its transponder; I'll consider the phone calls.

But until then, legally speaking, the phone calls are secondary or tertiary matters of relevance at best.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
albertchampion
post Mar 1 2007, 08:35 PM
Post #18





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 1,843
Joined: 1-March 07
Member No.: 710



IAH-LAX: 20/12/06

there are these individuals that continue to assert that on 11/09/01 cell phone calls could have occurred from the airliners.

and even more astonishing, that lengthy conversations occurred.

these conversations could not have occurred in 2001.

they could not occur today, in 2006.

once again, i thought that i would conduct an investigation into the capabilities of cell phones in airliners. i have done this many times over the last 5 years, but since the disinformation agents are infiltrating purportedly "anti-fascist" blogs[eschaton, for instance], and since i was flying from IAH - LAX today, i thought i would violate the strictures concerning cellphones[once again] and keep mine on for the entirety of the flight...so that i could monitor connectivity[handshaking] from an airliner moving at cruising speeds at altitude along a route of travel with lots of cell towers.

i departed IAH on a 737-900. i had a window seat way up front, 2A. best position imaginable for cell connection and audibility.

launched at 13:30 cst. had a connection at launch.

within 5 minutes of climb-out, signal lost. and signal stayed lost across texas. this is pretty interesting because the route of travel is above interstate 10, which sprint has wallpapered with cell towers.

according to the pilot, we were cruising at 33,000 ft. we were on top of weather until we passed san antonio, then all was clear.

a new tower must have been erected on the eastern edge of el paso within the last few months. i say that because on the eastern periphery of el paso, at 14:00 mst, my phone came alive - handshaked - telling me that i had a voicemail msg. i immediately called to retrieve the msg. within 1-2 minutes, handshaking could not occur. the msg could not be retrieved. no connection could be effected.

i wish that i had my sectional charts. so that i could figure out what little town i was over, because at 14:25 mst, my cell phone indicated signal strength. again, i think a new tower has been erected. i tried to call my voicemail to retrieve my msg, but no connection could be established. the airliner had run beyond the range of the tower.

remember what i told you previously....it is speed that prevents cell phone conversations from airliners. that was true in 2001. and remains true in 2006. anyone who tells you otherwise is a disinformation agent for the state.

after this spike of signal strength, no signal could be attracted during the remainder of the flight.

overflying palm springs, when we began to descend, no signal. no connection.

at 14:34 pst, this aircraft was below 10,000' and beginning its final descent to LAX. no signal.

14:41 pst, gear down, just east of the palos verde peninsula. no signal.

14:43 no signal.

14:44 crossing the 405, final approach, suddenly a signal. 3 bars.

14:45 touch down. 5 bars.


does this inform you how impossible it was that any cell phone conversations occurred on 11/09/01?

it if doesn't, then you really have a problem. or you are an agent of the state.

remember this, if cell phone conversations could not have been conducted that day[and technically, they couldn't have been] then no proofs have been furnished us that any airliners were hijacked. and that being the reality, all of what you think you know about that day - you don't know.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cary
post Mar 2 2007, 11:53 AM
Post #19


Ragin Cajun


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



Welcome to the forum albertchampion. Thanks for the personal account of how cellphones don't work at high altitudes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andrewkornkven
post Mar 4 2007, 01:54 PM
Post #20





Group: Newbie
Posts: 52
Joined: 17-October 06
Member No.: 105



QUOTE (albertchampion @ Mar 2 2007, 01:35 AM)
remember this, if cell phone conversations could not have been conducted that day[and technically, they couldn't have been] then no proofs have been furnished us that any airliners were hijacked. and that being the reality, all of what you think you know about that day - you don't know.

The whole issue of whether cell phone calls were or were not possible from airliners in 2001 is completely irrelevant to the debate about 9/11. The reason is that even if cell phone calls were impossible, that may only mean that all the calls were made on the seatback airphones that we all agree were available on all four flights.

Note that according to the evidence released by the government for the Zacaria Moussoui trial, the number of cell phone calls from UAL93 is ZERO:

http://www.911research.wtc7.net/planes/evi.../PhoneCalls.jpg

Should we trust this evidence provided by the government? Probably not. It is not reassuring that almost all phone calls made in the US are routed through an Israeli company called AMDOCS.

However, to the best of my knowledge, the government has never maintained that any of the calls were from cell phones. That element of the official story was provided by the media, who reported some of the calls as cell calls.

These reports may have been honest mistakes on the part of the call recipients who thought their loved ones were calling on cell phones. They may have been honest mistakes made by the reporters who covered the calls. They may have been intentional disinformation designed to confuse the truth movement. Or, most likely, they were a combination of all three.

But for us it really doesn't matter. If none of the calls were cell phone calls that only means they were all airphone calls.

These calls are real, folks. And they do indicate hijackings by real people. The question for us is, who were these hijackers. The hijackers were consistently described by the callers as "Middle Eastern looking," which means one of two things: they were Arabs, or they were agents who looked like Arabs who were acting like Arabs for the purpose of framing Arabs.

I'll take the latter.

This post has been edited by andrewkornkven: Mar 4 2007, 01:55 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
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: 22nd October 2017 - 04:00 PM