Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Flight 93: Cell Call Exposed
Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum > Flight Number > United 93
georgie101


http://youtube.com/watch?v=RjNB9MGSoWc

Anyone seen this yet?
Music is too loud IMO.
Sanders
QUOTE (georgie101 @ Aug 3 2008, 02:47 AM) *
Anyone seen this yet?
Music is too loud IMO.


Yeah I know, the video is saying to listen carefully to the end of the call yet there's that crazy brass-section ending of a Radio-Head song playing in the background doh1.gif

But "you did great" is pretty clearly audible once you pick it out. Chilling.

Thanx for the link georgie.
eti1777
Hi,

you can hear it without music in the Moussaoui exibit zip, although i'm not sure it's really 'you did great' that has been said...
The husband's testimony is more damning IMO, confirming she called from her cellphone...

edit: After converting it in mp3 and re-loop-listening it sounds like "you did great". blush.gif There's also another sound, after she knocks the phone for the first time at the end, something like "all right dear", "call received"? Can't make it out.
eti1777
And how about Waleska Martinez, seated in the middle of the plane, alledgedly calling from the back, to some brokers company, Dratel Group Inc, ..., but without making any contact. How do they know it was her calling?
honway
From Moussaoui trial exhibits:

hturt
At around 18-20 Seconds there is noise in the back ground that is very faint, would need someone that knows how to analyze audio to bring it out. Also, is that call rather unnoisy from a plane in descent?
albertchampion
could someone tell me why this board is still giving "air" to the cell phone issue.

technicallly, this is a "decided" issue, i think. unless a passenger had a window seat, unless the aircraft was below 5,000 ft and circling a cell tower, no cell phone connections could be made. and definitely no extended conversation could be implemented.

anyone who attempts to assert that any cell phone conversations occurred from the "involved" aircraft that day is either ignorant or a disinformation agent.

what has always fascinated me is how it has been that no one[s] seem to know about the cell phone system in the areas traversed by 77,93.

in that area of the usa, this area where cell phone calls purportedly were made, is the worst cell tower covered area in the usa. that was the case in 2001. and it is still the case. and that is for individuals on the ground and stationary.

i frequently put my sales engineers into this territory. when in that territory, as far as cellphone communications are concerned, they are out of it. only when they can get to a landline can they communicate with my offices.
amazed!
Good post Albert. I agree.
hturt
Did the GTE phones in the seat backs work differently?
eti1777
QUOTE (albertchampion @ Jul 30 2008, 02:07 AM) *
could someone tell me why this board is still giving "air" to the cell phone issue.

technicallly, this is a "decided" issue, i think. unless a passenger had a window seat, unless the aircraft was below 5,000 ft and circling a cell tower, no cell phone connections could be made. and definitely no extended conversation could be implemented.

anyone who attempts to assert that any cell phone conversations occurred from the "involved" aircraft that day is either ignorant or a disinformation agent.

what has always fascinated me is how it has been that no one[s] seem to know about the cell phone system in the areas traversed by 77,93.

in that area of the usa, this area where cell phone calls purportedly were made, is the worst cell tower covered area in the usa. that was the case in 2001. and it is still the case. and that is for individuals on the ground and stationary.

i frequently put my sales engineers into this territory. when in that territory, as far as cellphone communications are concerned, they are out of it. only when they can get to a landline can they communicate with my offices.


Hi albertchampion,

I don't think there's any "air" given to the cellphones-working-on-a-plane issue. I'm convinced they didn't. I should have been clearer. The husband saying he saw her cellphone number appearing on his phone makes me believe that the call made from CeeCee Lyles cellphone was not made from the plane, or any planes, but from the ground.
hturt
ahh you're right he does say he saw her CallerID. The AttaZIP file posted by eti1777 says she made the call from a GTE airphone. They can't have it both ways.
eti1777
QUOTE (hturt @ Jul 30 2008, 06:06 PM) *
ahh you're right he does say he saw her CallerID. The AttaZIP file posted by eti1777 says she made the call from a GTE airphone. They can't have it both ways.


there's alledgedly one from the GTE airphone, left on the answering-machine, and one from her cellphone afterwards to her husband.
albertchampion
no apologies, but i must admit that i can sound snippy concerning this topic.

if you will recall, it was ted olson[solicitor genereral of the usa], that promoted the prevarications of an "end-of-life" phone call[S] from his fascist-broadcaster wife, barbara, in which he stated that she had told him that "arabic hijackers" had seized AA77.

it must never be forgotten that it was this "report" by the counsel, an attorney-an officer of the court, to the bush administration, that was, has been, remains the only linkage of hijackings of commercial airliners on that day.

ted olson was, has been, is, will always be a gauleiter of the amerikan nazi party. his wife was an amerikan nazi agitprop agent.

knowing what i knew about cell phones/air phones, i wrote some scathing analyses of ted olson's very consequential prevarications. they were the prevarications that caused the usa to invade afghanistan, iraq. these were "aired" at rense.com within days of 11/09/01.

when i would discuss these "comm issues" with friends[sic] and associates, they would respond by calling me a "conspiracy theorist" or a tin-foil madhatter.

it was very disconcerting. people denying realities. were they bushits? yes, by and large. did they want to learn about cell and airphone comm realities? they did not. they were very comfortable to go and start the mass killing of non-combatants. i must say, however, that i found demtillians as reluctant to accommodate realities...they were just as keen on signing up for mass-murder[just as long as their children would be exempted from service in the military].

even more disconcerting was how everyone in the comm industry kept their mouths shut. but i guess, by now, we know why...the managements of all those companies were, in the main, also reptillian fascist bastids.

and even now, as a matter of politics, the grotesque lies stemming from 11/09/01 that led us into two essentially genocidal invasions of sovereign nations are not going to be a subject of election politics. the treason[s] at the jcs, executive branch, legistlative branch, judicial branch levels that created the events of that day, that have created the new totalitarian state of amerika, will not be a topic for the forthcoming elections.

this presidential election will be like most elections in the past. it will continue to be the model that enron exploited in its energy trading scheme.....all a punch and judy show.
Johnny Angel
Discussing this cell phone topic, 2006, five years after 911,, A fellow worker while on a jet passenger plane flying from pittsburg to Miami, claims that he sucessfully made cell phone calls from high above the clouds.. Using his personnell phone, not the Airlines phone..

I have read that by 2004 the Airlines have added, technology to allow personell cell phone to be used. Some type of receiver on the plane which receives calls and uses a more powerful signal to get the call to a land base.

This is the place to get the correct answer... Thanks..
simba
QUOTE (albertchampion @ Aug 1 2008, 06:07 AM) *
could someone tell me why this board is still giving "air" to the cell phone issue.

technicallly, this is a "decided" issue, i think. unless a passenger had a window seat, unless the aircraft was below 5,000 ft and circling a cell tower, no cell phone connections could be made. and definitely no extended conversation could be implemented.

anyone who attempts to assert that any cell phone conversations occurred from the "involved" aircraft that day is either ignorant or a disinformation agent.

what has always fascinated me is how it has been that no one[s] seem to know about the cell phone system in the areas traversed by 77,93.

in that area of the usa, this area where cell phone calls purportedly were made, is the worst cell tower covered area in the usa. that was the case in 2001. and it is still the case. and that is for individuals on the ground and stationary.

i frequently put my sales engineers into this territory. when in that territory, as far as cellphone communications are concerned, they are out of it. only when they can get to a landline can they communicate with my offices.


I tried it personally when airborne especially when in a holding pattern at 210 kts or family vfr flights at 120 kts at low altitudes around big Dutch cities and we have a very good cell phone infrastructure but making mobile calls is impossible above 1000 ft and can say that most of the time above 500 ft is impossible to stay connect longer then 5 seconds when switching from pole to pole. I never had spoken any pilot here that really can…. Just my 2 cents…
amazed!
Fascinating story Albert.

The Nazis are in control, no doubt.

As for the cellphone thing, the differences between 2001 and now are fairly significant, in terms of technology. I can remember a guy when they first came out that owned a Cessna 414 which I used to fly. Once he used his cellphone from the cabin, and got all sorts of complaints from the carrier. Anyway, in certain locations and altitudes the older technology would work in an airplane, but only under certain conditions related to keeping the airplane relative to the antenna.

I just finished flying a helicopter for 6 years, and at 1500 feet, the cellphone goes "No Signal".

The other day I flew a guy in a Baron, he's got the latest and greatest blackberry, and he is getting messages at 9500 feet. My guess is somehow the satellites are involved.
Ricochet
QUOTE (Johnny Angel @ Aug 2 2008, 01:01 PM) *
Discussing this cell phone topic, 2006, five years after 911,, A fellow worker while on a jet passenger plane flying from pittsburg to Miami, claims that he sucessfully made cell phone calls from high above the clouds.. Using his personnell phone, not the Airlines phone..

I have read that by 2004 the Airlines have added, technology to allow personell cell phone to be used. Some type of receiver on the plane which receives calls and uses a more powerful signal to get the call to a land base.

This is the place to get the correct answer... Thanks..

It's called Picocell, which is an access point base station—is a small cellular base station within the aircraft. It captures the cell signal amplifies and directs it to a ground station relay. The APBS protects the aircrafts instumentation from signal interference. The technology for the airline industry did not come out until after 2002 and was still then mostly experimental.
albertchampion
ah, i have written about this perviously on this board. but to reiterate.....

since 1998, i have routinely flown from iah - lax - iah.

i did this at least 4-8 times a year. until 2005. now i only do it 3-4 times a year.

after sept 2001, however, i made a point of tracking cell phone capabilities on that route. as you may know, the commercial air traffic essentially flies over I-10. and I-10 has sprint cell towers virtually every hundred miles.

in a first class window seat, bulkhead row, i have kept my cellphone on for virtually everyone of these flights. here is a recap of my experiences...

departing iah, cell phone signal is lost within 2-4 minutes on climb-out.

before departing, i had voicemail msg left for me.

until june 2007, no cell service connected with me enroute to relay this voicemail msg.

first cell signal connection was not made until just crossing the 405 on final to lax.

in 2007, something changed. and i knew beforehand that it had changed. sprint had erected a cell tower 2x-3x taller outside el paso. so, virtually over el paso, sprint connected with my cellphone to report a voicemail msg. i immediately attempted to retrieve the msg. that never happened. by the time i made that attempt, the continental 737-900 was out of range.

and that is the problem with cell connections from "vehicles" traveling at more than 100-200 mph. "handshaking" can neither be completed nor a connection maintained with the connection-initiating cell tower.

at palm springs, in the descent into lax, the airliner's altitude is approx 10,000 ft. and once again, my cell phone got a connection noting a voice mail msg. but as i instantly tried to retrieve that msg, the signal was lost.

and though flying into lax, over a well cell-towered, heavily populated metropolis, no signal was noticed, no connection made until we were virtually on the ground.

on the return flights from lax-iah, same story.

so, my conclusions have always been that all attempts to conduct cell phone conversations from commercial airliners at cruising altitudes, traveling linearly at cruising speeds will fail. and that anyone who says otherwise is a disinfo agent.

these iah-lax-iah flights may be the best covered routes with cell phones in north america. the aircraft is always above a cell tower circuit. still, until 2007 with the erection of two taller towers[el paso, palm springs] no signals could be received in a first class window seat.

and by the way, in a friendly environment, i had a difficult time monitoring my cell phone without the flight attendants noticing. imagine the situation with hijackers roaming the cabin.

and lastly, in any seat other than a window seat, i think i would never have received any signals at el paso, palm springs in 2007.

and as to airphones, it must never be forgotten that there is a switch that disables them. would hijackers have failed to shut-off that service?

but i have related my airphone experiences previously. i shall not bore you again.

occam's razor would say that there were no long-winded telephonic communications conducted from the 4 aircraft that day.


and why is it that i think the fbi agrees with me?
Ricochet
thumbsup.gif albertchampion
Another curious question. If Cee Cee Lyles was a former policewomen, why wouldn't she join in the asault on the suppossed hijackers?
ogrady
Like the OK City bombing (large explosive devices removed by bomb trucks - news footage of first reports - never played or mentioned again) and WTC bombs (news footage of bomb witnesses, audio recordings of large explosives, fireman's testimony of bombs, etc. - shown in first reports - never played again), it is by the initial reports - which are quickly excised and deposited in Memory Hole - that we can identify the cover-up.

Flight 93 Lands in Cleveland - (from Cleveland Mayor and United spokesman). Cleveland Airport Evacuated. Google this story and you will be told - This story does not exist. Well, it existed in the initial reports on 911.

My conclusion. Flight 93 landed in Cleveland. There's no reason not to believe the initial reports that slipped through the cracks and every reason not to believe any of the subsequent lies.

Similarly, the Barbara Olsen phone calls (from which we get ALL of our information about hijackers with plastic boxcutters) - never existed according to the FBI. If these calls were never placed (Olsen's calls have been exhaustively researched elsewhere - but Moussaui trial evidence dismisses them entirely) where do we get the info about the boxcutters?

The perps have painted themselves into a corner at every turn. Why don't more people want to know?
openminded
QUOTE (ogrady @ Aug 5 2008, 12:20 PM) *
Like the OK City bombing (large explosive devices removed by bomb trucks - news footage of first reports - never played or mentioned again) and WTC bombs (news footage of bomb witnesses, audio recordings of large explosives, fireman's testimony of bombs, etc. - shown in first reports - never played again), it is by the initial reports - which are quickly excised and deposited in Memory Hole - that we can identify the cover-up.

Flight 93 Lands in Cleveland - (from Cleveland Mayor and United spokesman). Cleveland Airport Evacuated. Google this story and you will be told - This story does not exist. Well, it existed in the initial reports on 911.

My conclusion. Flight 93 landed in Cleveland. There's no reason not to believe the initial reports that slipped through the cracks and every reason not to believe any of the subsequent lies.

Similarly, the Barbara Olsen phone calls (from which we get ALL of our information about hijackers with plastic boxcutters) - never existed according to the FBI. If these calls were never placed (Olsen's calls have been exhaustively researched elsewhere - but Moussaui trial evidence dismisses them entirely) where do we get the info about the boxcutters?

The perps have painted themselves into a corner at every turn. Why don't more people want to know?

I am trying to follow this correctly. Are you saying that the phone calls that were or were not made on flight 93 before the crash never took place betwwen spouses? There was more than 1 woman who lost her husband in the crash, isn't this true. They never came home after the "proposed landing elsewhere". Now its not just a cover up or mistakes of information, but regular civilians would have to be part of all of this as well?? I'm sure these people would love to have their spouses back , but as of the many interviews with the surviving spouses since 911, those on flt 93 still have not come home. Can you help me with this???
dMz
QUOTE (openminded @ Sep 9 2008, 08:02 PM) *
Can you help me with this???

Hi openminded, have you ever heard that old AC/DC song... goes something like "Concrete shoes... cyanide..."

Ever hear of one James Hoffa? The Atlantic Ocean? Frank Olson? Gary Webb? John "Jack" F. Kennedy? His son John, Jr.? His brother Bobby? Senator Paul Wellstone? TWA800? Dan "DB" Cooper? The definition of "covert op?" The "Kansas City Shuffle?"

Have you ever heard about the often-daily "finds" in the border states of TX and AZ, or South Central Los Angeles and/or Compton for that matter?

Have you ever heard of the Cleveland "UA93" landing on Tues. Sept. 11, 2001? Delta flights 1989 and "89"- same day, same airport?
Leslie Landry
QUOTE (openminded @ Sep 9 2008, 10:02 PM) *
I am trying to follow this correctly. Are you saying that the phone calls that were or were not made on flight 93 before the crash never took place betwwen spouses? There was more than 1 woman who lost her husband in the crash, isn't this true. They never came home after the "proposed landing elsewhere". Now its not just a cover up or mistakes of information, but regular civilians would have to be part of all of this as well?? I'm sure these people would love to have their spouses back , but as of the many interviews with the surviving spouses since 911, those on flt 93 still have not come home. Can you help me with this???



These people are "professionals". We need to get this straight...they are not ALWAYS great at what they do as you can tell they got a bit sloppy on 911, but the fact is, they "knew" they were going to get away with this..why? because they can. The Government is like the mofia...mid as well be at least in my eyes. The phone calls, May not even had come from the apparent people who were to be on the plane that day. They have ways of copying voices, or finding people who sound like them....who knows what really happened when it comes to the passengers. That will remain a mystery till the end of time, or until Rudy Giuliani has another slip of the tongue.

All we know is that something is REALLY WRONG with the evidence and if the Evidence is clear, then that means these phone calls need to be explained as well as everything else.

There are even people on both ends who say..."well, if it was an inside job. are you telling me that all 3,000 people who apparently died are all in on it and are all living well on a beach somewhere?" NO! the people that died in the buildings, died in the buildings. when it comes to the planes, we don't know for sure about the passengers. The people that say, "well, if the plane didn't crash in the pentagon, then explain all the body parts found?". And my answer to that is, of course you are going to find body parts...people died there...but doesn't prove that these people were on the plane?. "well, what about the DNA matches from all the people that were said to be on the plane that day?" My answer to that would be, prove to me that the DNA was found at the pentagon.

Here's something for you to read if you already havent.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=7591
Leslie Landry
Hi Mom This is Mark Bingham






Here is Also a recording or CeeCee Lyles phone call without the music.

amazed!
For me the big question is whether the people named as passengers, other than the CIA assets such as defense workers, were killed or bought.

Of course it is possible they were killed, but the husband of Lyles has left the town they lived in. And went to school in.

I'm thinking the cooperative ones were bought, and that's why the "surviving" family members are so reluctant to talk to investigators. And didn't they sign some sort of contract with the government?

Contract was probably written by Paulson. laughing1.gif
dMz
My searches just found an older cell phone thread. I didn't read much, but there looked to be some good info at:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=1948

And amazed, not all defense workers are CIA assets... (Some are higher "pay grade" that that! laugh.gif )

EDIT: Links to much more cell/air phone info can be found at:

T. Beamer Cell
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=13003

Madeline Sweeney's Phone Call, Something strange
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=1702

One More Cell Phone Comment, Unless I think of another one
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=3253

The Cell Phones Again
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=1948

What About Phone Calls Made From Flight 93
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=3892
JackD
Amazed!

i'm as much a skeptic of the OCT as anyone.
however, real people, with real families, who were listed as passengers on UA175 and other flights disappeared that day.

Check out Ellen Mariani's husband. Check out Chic Burlingame, pilot.

I agree wholeheartedly that a bunch of the passengers seem to have spooky backgrounds (an israeli counterterror commando slash tech CEO?) -- and some dont check out well at all -- but some, in fact, do.

note that i dont claim they were killed in plane crashes on 9/11/01 - but they have not been seen since that day.

you could maybe split passengers into three groups --

1) the "real" missing

2) the 'spooky' defense/ intel connected people (Raytheon, etc)

3) the "we cant figure out if these are real or fake people"


check out team8plus.org for deeper looks at passengers and backgrounds/

btw -- agreement phone calls are wacky -- but the big thing wrong with the "mark bingham" call is NOT the "hello, mom, it's mark bingham_ -- given the multiple mark thing, saying his last name may not be a big deal --- but rather the times he says "mom, you believe me, don't you?"
THAT and the impossibility of cell phone calls from fast-moving objects like planes.

try and maintain a cell conversation at 450 mph on the ground, where signal is good -- m,uch less at 10-30,000 feet where it is bad.
amazed!
JackD

Yes, we are in complete agreement.

Thanks for the team8 link--I shall check it out.
albertchampion
jackd gets it accurately, it is the speed that governs cell phone connections.

at any speed over 100nph, no connection can be completed. nor sustained.

unless, at those speeds, you are circling a cell tower.
tinynate
tried using my cell phone at 10' off the ground, to 500', to 1000', to 10k, to 35k in last month app. 20xs, never once went thru, leaving seattle and vegas ... tried texting, never worked ... why does anyone think it would on 9/11 ... voice morphing and lies by paid off loved ones for the bankers cabal to destroy america and the world...
amazed!
Yes, voice morphing gets my vote.
keroseneaddict
QUOTE (tinynate @ Oct 26 2008, 02:15 AM) *
tried using my cell phone at 10' off the ground, to 500', to 1000', to 10k, to 35k in last month app. 20xs, never once went thru, leaving seattle and vegas ... tried texting, never worked ... why does anyone think it would on 9/11 ... voice morphing and lies by paid off loved ones for the bankers cabal to destroy america and the world...



I have found, sitting in the front of the airplane, that after 8K to 12K in altitude, little or no service.......at lower altitudes, speed makes a big diff.....VOR's/VORTAC's (nav transmitting staions) either are high altitude or low, depending on transmitting power. VORTACS transmit in a cone, I think cell dipolar antenna transmit horizontally.......Any RF engineers here?
albertchampion
i recognize that this will tax some beliefs in the honor, the magnanimity of the usg.

but, it must be acknowledged: the state will kill to advance its interests[the interests of its puppeteers].

as i have observed, as i have writtten on this and other sites, the state will go to great lengths to promote fictions as historical truths.

my guess is that most individuals who tune into this board are as young and as ignorant of history as those on other boards. on the other hand, perhaps it is the case that the inculcation of false history has been so profound, become so deeply entrenched, that very few really know very much about the past.

i have also learned that age has nothing to do with self-imposed ignorance. you could be 62 , 90, and be as ignorant as a 21 year old. ignorance has no statute of limitations.

i know that there is/has been an energetic efffort in the usa to manipulate the historical record. to create and bulwark the illusion that the usa has been the greatest thing since sliced bread for the inhabitants of planet earth.

the usa has been a criminal conspiracy from the get go.

the declaration of independence, the constitution, the bill of rights - all advertising it would seem. all presidents have known that. since washington. that is how it was that george walker bush finally told the truth - all those purportedly noble documents: "just a bunch of [toilet] paper".

and the bulk of the amerikan populace seem to have agreed with him. they have accepted that assessment. and have relinquished their affection for, allegiance to, those documents and the precepts that they promote.

it is a sad time in the usa. let me restate that, it continues to be a sad time in the usa.

as it has been for so many decades, the us electorate continues to be a bunch of homicidal maniacs. and what is even more astonishing, a large number of these individuals consider themselves to be christians. sadduces, pharisees and roman legionnaires would be a more accurate identification.

i know amerika. exhort for peace and brotherhood. the christian zionist amerikan electorate will crucify you with as much alacrity as they crucified joshua. and tell you that they are doing the lord's work as they drive that spike through your wrist.

amerika has been on this race to be tyrannized for decades. it is the undiscussed aspect of the usa. on the whole, it really doesn't want liberty. it wants money - and will excuse any anti-democratic activities if those activities will advance that acquisition of lucre.

i care to close this initial section of this rant this way....i call them obombya and mcclusterbomb.

neither one will be terminating the homicidal ways of the usa. in fact, as we should know, they are both agents of global death and desruction.

perhaps the only diiffference is that one of these candidates will kill more people faster[john mcclusterbomb?]. but that isn't necessarily so, that previous democratic president, bill clinton was as keen on genocidal mass murdering as that german reichskancellor[what was his name, again?].

all the same, both of these candidates have declared their affection for killing citizens of other sovereign nations. citizens of nations that did nothing to the usa.

and, ineluctably, that is what this election is about: who will it be that will govern the usa to kill more muslim noncombatants faster.

that is the distillation of the contest: i can kill more muslims faster. and acquire more weapons to kill them.

this election has become the contest of mossadists.

i must confess, when i listen to obombya, mcclusterbomb, and then i listen to cynthia mckinney, i have become a green.

we should all be writing in cynthia...the real anti-statist candidate. a woman. a black woman. who, publicly, has always refused to believe the official conspiracy story concerning the events of 11/09/01.

the only candidate that considers the official story and says, BULLSHIT.

THE ONLY CANDIDATE WHO HAS THE COURAGE TO GO PUBLIC WITH THAT ACCURATE UNDERSTANDING.

and she gets no ink. no air.

let's talk about that.

cspan did give cynthia air. i thought her to be well-spoken. and more knowledgeable than ron paul[who is a goddam twit]. now, why do i say that about ron paul? he opposes abortion. i say, we haven't had enough abortions. think about it.....wouldn't we be better off had ronald raygun, bill clinton, george bush[both] been aborted?

and he believes in the bushit story concerning the events of 11/09/01.

so it goes.
amazed!
Too true Albert, too true.

I just voted for Bob Barr last week, but I have my fingers crossed that Obama might be good, and not too compromised.

She might not be willing to serve, but it seems to me that Cynthia would be an excellent cabinet member.
Obwon
QUOTE (openminded @ Sep 9 2008, 09:02 PM) *
I am trying to follow this correctly. Are you saying that the phone calls that were or were not made on flight 93 before the crash never took place betwwen spouses? There was more than 1 woman who lost her husband in the crash, isn't this true. They never came home after the "proposed landing elsewhere". Now its not just a cover up or mistakes of information, but regular civilians would have to be part of all of this as well?? I'm sure these people would love to have their spouses back , but as of the many interviews with the surviving spouses since 911, those on flt 93 still have not come home. Can you help me with this???


You probably haven't noted that the CIA, FBI have been long at creating fictitious people.
This is something they must do all the time, to infiltrate and/or plant their operatives,
inside crime and foreign organizations of interest.

Does this help?

Obwon
albertchampion
here is a project for some young seeker of truth....start investigating how the survivors of certain commercial airline catastrophes were compensated for their loss.

we know something about the families of the victims of panam 103, but i think we don't know how it has been in the last few years that some important members of that group[the swire family?] have begun to question the official story.

what happened to the families of the survivors of twa 800, aa 587, sr111, ea990?

and the catastrophe that continues to engage my curiosity, as261. how was it that the survivors failed to subpoena the controller tapes involving that flight for that day?

could it be that there is a "plaintiff's" bar that is owned and controlled by the usdoj?

that the number of firms[attorneys] that involve themselves in this avenue of litigation are "spooks"?

i have long held the opinion that if an earnest investigator were to have followed ted olson after 11/09/01, that the investigator would have found barbara.

along with a number of other "victims". the usg has facilities scattered all over this planet to "store" inconvenient citizens. or have you been missing that reality?
zoeken
QUOTE (albertchampion @ May 15 2011, 09:48 PM) *
i have long held the opinion that if an earnest investigator were to have followed ted olson after 11/09/01, that the investigator would have found barbara.


I am not 100% convinced that we have not seen Barbara (Lady Booth).
tnemelckram
Hi Albert!

I'll try to use my experience to provide at least my opinions but perhaps even answers to some of your law related questions. I'll assume that the people who are allowed to bring wrongful death and survival actions as a result of the deaths at made a demand for some amount of money, and then agreed to a settlement for that or some lesser but satisfactory amount before filing a legal action that allowed them to use compulsory legal process such as subpoenas and discovery, or filed an action, used that process, and then reached a satisfactory settlement before the case was publicly tried in court. In any settlement, there would be a Settlement Agreement that contains releases of any and all claims related to the crash, confidentiality provisions, and other miscellaneous terms. The plaintiffs have to sign the agreement to get the money, and any defendant would be crazy to pay the money without insisting on such an Agreement in return. Basically, no case is ever settled amicably without some such an Agreement, so there is nothing unusual about such an Agreement being part of the settlement of any specific case.


QUOTE
how was it that the survivors failed to subpoena the controller tapes involving that flight for that day?


If the case settled before an action was filed, the plaintiffs, who could not yet use compulsory process, likely never got hold of the tapes. Among the reasons why the defendants would cough up a satisfactory amount of compensation would be that they were afraid to release the tapes to anyone.

If the case was settled after an action was filed, the plaintiffs almost surely and right off the bat issued compulsory discovery requests for the tapes. Then two things would have happened.

First, the defendants, fearing the release of the tapes, coughed up enough money to avoid having to release them, and the parties signed a Settlement Agreement containing confidentiality provisions requiring everybody to keep quiet about the terms of the settlement. In this case the defendant's biggest concern would be to keep the amount secret so other plaintiffs could not use it as a barometer for the amount of their settlement.

Or second, the defendants released the tapes to the plaintiffs via compulsory discovery process. But then, fearing their contents becoming public knowledge at trial, the defendants coughed up enough money and the parties signed a Settlement Agreement. In this case the defendants would not just require confidentiality about the amount of money, they would also insist that the plaintiffs agree to not publicize anything they learned in discovery, including from the tapes. Often, when the case is in court, a judge supervises the settlement, and the Settlement Agreement is incorporated into an Order of Court.


QUOTE
Could it be that there is a "plaintiff's" bar that is owned and controlled by the usdoj?


I would say not owned, but definitely controlled, and not by the Department Of Justice, but by the Federal courts. The mechanism of control is the confidentiality provisions in the Settlement Agreement, which in sensitive or sensational cases are tied into an Order Of Court. Thus if the plaintiffs or their lawyers talk about things they learned in discovery, such as the tapes, it is not just a breach of the Agreement, it is a violation of a Court Order and the violator of a court order risks being imprisoned and/or fined for contempt of court. So that is the main way the plaintiff's bar is controlled and how this kind of information never becomes public knowledge.


QUOTE
that the number of firms[attorneys] that involve themselves in this avenue of litigation are "spooks"?


Not spooks, but to some extent whores. If you want to settle a juicy death case and get a big fee, you are ready and willing to tie your tongue in the above manner. If the clients, who are your boss, are happy with their money and the confidentiality obligations, then because they are the boss, then the lawyer has no choice but to do what the client wants. You will be disbarred if you fail to follow the client's instructions to settle the case. So this is a second form of control that the system itself exerts over the plaintiff's bar.

As a result of this, there is a third control. Whatever the amount of money might be, it will always look bigger to the client than it does to the big corporation paying it. Such defendants are assured that at some point, they can always prevent public knowledge of things like the contents of the tapes by buying silence..


QUOTE
i have long held the opinion that if an earnest investigator were to have followed ted olson after 11/09/01, that the investigator would have found barbara.


I agree, but the veil of emotional OCT horse shit was maintained long enough to allow the trail to go cold before anyone could get on it.
Obwon
QUOTE (hturt @ Aug 1 2008, 09:57 AM) *
Did the GTE phones in the seat backs work differently?


As far as I've read they did and they were so unreliable that either AA or UL was
in the process of canceling the contract.

Obwon
onesliceshort
QUOTE (Obwon @ Jun 24 2011, 05:05 PM) *
As far as I've read they did and they were so unreliable that either AA or UL was
in the process of canceling the contract.

Obwon


http://pilotsfor911truth.org/amrarticle.html

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/AA757AMM.html




This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.