Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
"Shockingly Calm" Phone Calls on 9/11; Were the calls from the planes real?
Topic Started: Jul 5 2008, 09:24 AM (4,444 Views)
Shoestring
Member Avatar

Here's my latest blog posting, which shows how numerous reports have described that, during the phone calls from the supposedly hijacked planes on 9/11, the caller remained inexplicably calm, despite their circumstances. This evidence appears to further support the theory that the calls were faked by the 9/11 perpetrators, presumably using voice morphing technology. The original blog posting is here:
http://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2008/07/shockingly-calm-phone-calls-from-planes.html

"Shockingly Calm": The Phone Calls From the Planes on 9/11

A number of people received phone calls the morning of September 11, 2001 that they believed were made by individuals on board the planes that crashed in New York, Washington, and Pennsylvania. Descriptions of these calls, however, reveal something odd. According to the official story we have been told, the callers were in an unprecedented crisis, stuck on planes under the control of murderous terrorists, and with no knowledge of whether they were going to be allowed to live or die. Yet in many of the phone calls, the caller appears to have been remarkably calm. Perhaps if just a few of them--for example, those with specific personal experiences, like the flight attendant who was a former police officer--had maintained their composure, then this would be less remarkable. Yet the large majority of the callers displayed this same calmness. In their recollections, some of the people who received the calls have indeed commented on this fact, apparently surprised by it. Some of them have also commented on the absence of panic, screaming, or other sounds of chaos in the background.

At the very least, these details appear highly unusual. As with much else about the events of 9/11, these phone calls raise serious questions. Were they really being made from the four planes targeted that morning, by passengers and crew members? Or is it possible the perpetrators of the attacks were faking them, in a cruel deception intended to help establish the official story, and this was why the callers were able to maintain such calmness? The calls need to be subjected to far closer and more critical scrutiny than has so far occurred, as part of a real investigation into the attacks, in order to establish the truth.

The following summary shows how odd the calls appear to be:

FLIGHT 11
A computer presentation shown during the 2006 trial of Zacarias Moussaoui summarized the phone calls allegedly made from the four flights targeted on 9/11. According to this presentation, two people successfully made calls from Flight 11, the first plane to supposedly be taken over by hijackers: flight attendants Betty Ong and Madeline "Amy" Sweeney. [1]

Betty Ong called the American Airlines Southeastern Reservations Office in North Carolina, and spoke for about 25 minutes with employees there. Ong said she thought her plane was being hijacked, that two flight attendants had been stabbed and injured, and that a passenger had perhaps been fatally stabbed. She said Mace spray had been used, and "we can't breathe." [2] Despite these harrowing circumstances, as the New York Times described, Ong "could not have sounded much calmer." [3] Nydia Gonzalez, one of the American Airlines employees who received the call, described Ong as speaking in "a very calm, professional, and poised demeanor," and added, "Betty was calm, professional, and in control throughout the call." [4] Reportedly, when Ong's family heard the recording of her call, they "couldn't believe the calm in Betty's voice." [5] In the plane's final moments, when Ong asked those on the other end of her call to "pray for us," she was still speaking "in a composed voice." [6] As the plane approached the World Trade Center, according to Vanessa Minter, another of the employees receiving Ong's call: "You didn't hear hysteria in the background. You didn't hear people screaming." [7]

Amy Sweeney contacted the American Airlines Flight Services Office at Boston's Logan Airport. After her first calls got broken off, she was finally able to speak for 13 minutes, up to about 8:45. Sweeney reported "that the plane had been hijacked; a man in first class had his throat slashed; two flight attendants had been stabbed ... the flight attendants were unable to contact the cockpit; and there was a bomb in the cockpit." [8] Michael Woodward, the manager with whom Sweeney talked, later told the FBI that despite reporting such horrific events, "during the entire conversation," Sweeney's voice "remained calm and even." [9] Even just before Flight 11 crashed, Sweeney retained her composure. After reporting that her plane was flying very low, Woodward recalled, she "took a very slow, deep breath and then just said, 'Oh, my God!' Very slowly, very calmly, very quietly. It wasn't in panic." [10] Furthermore, Woodward noted, he "did not hear any noise in the background during the conversation." [11]

FLIGHT 175
Three people reportedly made successful phone calls from Flight 175, the plane that hit the South Tower of the WTC: one flight attendant and two passengers. While brief descriptions are available of the call made by the attendant--thought to be Robert Fangman--these reveal no details of his level of composure. [12] Some relevant information is available regarding the other calls from this aircraft.

Passenger Brian Sweeney left a short message on his wife's answering machine, and then called his mother. [13] In his message to his wife, Julie, he stated, "The plane I'm on has been hijacked, and it doesn't look good." According to Julie Sweeney, Brian "sounded calm. ... He was not crying." [14] Details of his composure during the call to his mother are unstated. The other passenger, Peter Hanson, twice called his father, and told him about the hijacking. [15] According to the Los Angeles Times, "In the first call, Peter was calm." According to Hanson's father, "His voice was soft, not too nervous." Whether he was also calm in his second call is unstated. [16]

FLIGHT 77
Two individuals have been reported as making phone calls from the third hijacked plane, Flight 77: attendant Renee May and passenger Barbara Olson. No details have been revealed of whether Renee May remained calm during her call. But, according to Newsweek, Barbara Olson phoned her husband and "was calm and collected as she told him how hijackers had used boxcutters and knifes to take control of the plane and had herded the passengers and crew to the back." [17] Her husband Ted Olson--who at that time was the United States solicitor general--described to CNN: "She sounded very, very calm. ... In retrospect, enormously, remarkably, incredibly calm." [18]

FLIGHT 93
The majority of the phone calls made from the planes allegedly came from Flight 93, the aircraft said to have crashed in Pennsylvania after passengers attempted to retake control from the hijackers. At least 12 individuals reportedly made calls. Most of them displayed a surprising degree of calmness.

1) Flight attendant Sandy Bradshaw phoned the United Airlines maintenance facility in San Francisco and reported her plane had been hijacked, and that the hijackers had pulled a knife and killed a flight attendant. The manager who took the call later described Bradshaw as being "shockingly calm." [19] Bradshaw subsequently phoned her husband, who later recalled, "She sounded calm, but like her adrenaline was really going." [20]

2) Another flight attendant, CeeCee Lyles--who was a former police officer--called her husband. He described, "She was surprisingly calm," considering the screaming he heard in the background. [21]

3) Passenger Mark Bingham called his family, and talked to his aunt and his mother. His aunt found him sounding "calm, matter-of-fact." His mother recalled: "His voice was calm. He seemed very much composed, even though I know he must have been under terrible duress." [22] She also said a background discussion between passengers she could hear, about taking back the plane from the hijackers, sounded like a "calm boardroom meeting." [23]

4) Another passenger, Tom Burnett, called his wife Deena four times. Deena Burnett later recalled his third call: "It was as if he was at Thoratec [the company he worked for], sitting at his desk, and we were having a regular conversation. It was the strangest thing because he was using the same tone of voice I had heard a thousand times. It calmed me to know he was so confident." [24] According to journalist and author Jere Longman, in his fourth call, Tom was "speaking in a normal voice, calm." [25]

5) Passenger Lauren Grandcolas called her husband, Jack, and left a message on the answering machine. Jack Grandcolas later recalled, "She sounded calm." [26] According to Jere Longman, "It sounded to Jack as if she were driving home from the grocery store or ordering a pizza." [27] Furthermore, Jack Grandcolas has described: "There is absolutely no background noise on her message. You can't hear people screaming or yelling or crying. It's very calm, the whole cabin, the background, there's really very little sound." [28]

6) Jeremy Glick called his wife, Lyz, and told her his plane had been hijacked. She recalled, "He was so calm, the plane sounded so calm, that if I hadn't seen what was going on on the TV, I wouldn't have believed it." [29] She has added: "I was surprised by how calm it seemed in the background. I didn't hear any screaming. I didn't hear any noises. I didn't hear any commotion." [30]

7) Todd Beamer talked for 13 minutes with GTE-Verizon supervisor Lisa Jefferson. According to Jefferson, Beamer "was amazingly calm and composed as he told her of the hijacking of Flight 93 and passengers' plans to rush their captors." [31] Jefferson said he "stayed calm through the entire conversation. He made me doubt the severity of the call." [32] She later told Beamer's wife, "If I hadn't known it was a real hijacking, I'd have thought it was a crank call, because Todd was so rational and methodical about what he was doing." [33]

8) Honor Elizabeth Wainio spoke with her stepmother, Esther Heymann. Heymann has said that Wainio "really was remarkably calm throughout our whole conversation." [34] According to Jere Longman, when Wainio was not talking, Heymann "could not hear another person. She could not hear any conversation or crying or yelling or whimpering. Nothing." [35]

9) Linda Gronlund left a voice mail message at the home of her sister, saying that terrorists who said they had a bomb had hijacked her plane. [36] Her sister has described that, during the call, Gronlund "got real calm and said, 'Now my will is in my safe and my safe is in my closet. And this is the combination.'" [37]

10) Edward Felt spoke with 911 dispatcher John Shaw just minutes before Flight 93 reportedly crashed, and said his plane had been hijacked. According to Shaw, Felt "was crying ... frightened, scared, and anxious." But Felt's brother Gordon, who heard the recording of the call, has disputed this, saying: "My brother was not scared. He was very composed, under the circumstances." [38] Felt's wife, who heard the recording of the 911 call and also the Flight 93 cockpit voice recording, said Edward "was very calm in the face of death." [39]

Indeed, author Jere Longman said he'd "heard tapes of a couple of the phone calls made from [Flight 93] and was struck by the absence of panic in the voices." [40]

Only two other people are reported to have made successful calls from Flight 93. Passenger Marion Britton appears to be the only clear example of a caller sounding panicked. She called her friend Fred Fiumano. According to Fiumano, Britton "was crying and--you know--more or less crying and screaming and yelling." [41] Fiumano said he heard a lot of screaming in the background near the end of the call. [42] Joseph DeLuca, also a passenger, called his father and reported there were terrorists on his plane. But he has been described simply as having "sounded sad" during the call. [43]

NOTES
[1] U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, "Summary From Flight 93 Depicting: The Identity of Pilots and Flight Attendants, Seat Assignments of Passengers, and Telephone Calls From the Flight." July 31, 2006.
[2] Public Hearing. 9/11 Commission, January 27, 2004; 9/11 Commission, The 9/11 Commission Report: Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (Authorized Edition). New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2004, p. 5.
[3] Philip Shenon, "A Calm Voice as Disaster Unfolded in the Sky." New York Times, January 28, 2004.
[4] Public Hearing. 9/11 Commission, January 27, 2004.
[5] Jennifer Julian, "One of the Last Calls." ABC11 Eyewitness News, September 11, 2002.
[6] Steven Knipp, "Sept. 11: An Angel Named Betty Ong." Pacific News Service, September 8, 2004.
[7] "Calm Before the Crash." ABC News, July 18, 2002.
[8] 9/11 Commission, The 9/11 Commission Report, pp. 6 and 453; U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, "Summary From Flight 93."
[9] "FBI FD-302, Michael Woodward." Federal Bureau of Investigation, September 14, 2001.
[10] "Calm Before the Crash."
[11] "FBI FD-302, Michael Woodward."
[12] Scott McCartney and Susan Carey, "American, United Watched and Worked in Horror as Sept. 11 Hijackings Unfolded." Wall Street Journal, October 15, 2001; "The Four Flights: Staff Statement No. 4." 9/11 Commission, January 27, 2004; 9/11 Commission, The 9/11 Commission Report, pp. 7-8; 9/11 Commission, Staff Report. August 26, 2004, p. 21.
[13] 9/11 Commission, Staff Report, p. 22; U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, "Summary From Flight 93."
[14] K. C. Myers, "Message From Air is Final Goodbye." Cape Cod Times, September 12, 2001.
[15] 9/11 Commission, Staff Report, pp. 21-23.
[16] Richard A. Serrano, "Moussaoui Jury Hears the Panic From 9/11." Los Angeles Times, April 11, 2006.
[17] Michael Isikoff, "'I Can't Just Sit Back.'" Newsweek, September 19, 2001.
[18] "Recovering From Tragedy." Larry King Live, CNN, September 14, 2001.
[19] 9/11 Commission, Staff Report, p. 40; United States of America v. Zacarias Moussaoui. United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division, April 11, 2006.
[20] Angie Cannon, "Final Words From Flight 93." U.S. News & World Report, October 29, 2001.
[21] Brad Townsend, Chip Brown, and Gerry Fraley, "Trapped in the Skies, Captives Fought Back." Dallas Morning News, September 17, 2001.
[22] "World Leaders Express Horror, Outrage." CNN, September 12, 2001; Jere Longman, Among the Heroes: United Flight 93 and the Passengers and Crew Who Fought Back. New York: HarperCollins, 2002, pp. 129-130.
[23] Phil Hirschkorn, "More 9/11 Families Testify for Moussaoui." CNN, April 21, 2006.
[24] Deena Burnett with Anthony Giombetti, Fighting Back: Living Life Beyond Ourselves. Altamonte Springs, FL: Advantage Books, 2006, p. 66.
[25] Jere Longman, Among the Heroes, p. 118.
[26] David Segal, "A Red Carpet Tragedy." Washington Post, April 26, 2006.
[27] Jere Longman, Among the Heroes, p. 128.
[28] United 93: The Families and the Film. Directed by Kate Solomon, Working Title Films, 2006.
[29] Matthew Brown, "Hero's Family Perseveres." Bergen Record, October 5, 2001.
[30] Jane Pauley, "No Greater Love." NBC News, September 11, 2006.
[31] Jim McKinnon, "13-Minute Call Bonds her Forever With Hero." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, September 22, 2001.
[32] Wendy Schuman, "'I Promised I Wouldn't Hang Up.'" Beliefnet, 2006.
[33] Lisa Beamer and Ken Abraham, Let's Roll!: Ordinary People, Extraordinary Courage. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2002, p. 211.
[34] "Stories of Flight 93." Larry King Live, CNN, February 18, 2006.
[35] Jere Longman, Among the Heroes, pp. 171-172.
[36] 9/11 Commission, Staff Report, p. 44.
[37] Jane Pauley, "No Greater Love."
[38] Richard Gazarik, "Felt Reaches 911 Just Before Crash." Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, September 8, 2002.
[39] Chuck Biedka, "911 Dispatcher Recalls Frantic Cell Phone Call From Flight 93." Valley News Dispatch, September 11, 2002.
[40] Jere Longman, Among the Heroes, p. xi.
[41] Jane Pauley, "No Greater Love."
[42] "FBI FD-302, Unidentified Person re: Marion Britton." Federal Bureau of Investigation, September 20, 2001; United States of America v. Zacarias Moussaoui.
[43] Jere Longman, Among the Heroes, p. 161.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DoYouEverWonder

One possibility to consider, that most of the people who were able to make 'phone calls' did indeed make the calls themselves and were members of the hijacking teams.

Quote:
 
For example, Brian Sweeney – Passenger / Flight 175

Military Experience: Former Navy "Top Gun" Pilot
Radar intercepting officer aboard F-14 Tomcat fighter planes in the VF-211 "Bounty Hunters" squadron
Served on the USS Nimitz and USS Ranger aircraft carriers
Staff instructor at the Navy's prestigious Fighter Weapons School in Miramar, Calif

Employer: Lockheed Martin Corp.


Flight 11: Sweeney made 3 phone calls from Flight 175. One to his wife's answering machine and two to his mother. Sweeney was the main source for info about what happened on Flight 11.

All of the Planes Had Extra Pilots

This guy was a Top Gun Fighter Pilot and he's got time to make 3 phone calls. In most of the stories about what was happening aboard Flight 175 after it was hijacked, Sweeney last words are that they are going to try to take over the cockpit. Yet, they never bother to mention that if he had succeeded he would have had no problem flying a Boeing.


Then of course there's the Barbara Olsen calls from Flight 77 and the Let's Roll Team calls from Flight 93, that are suspect for different reasons.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
French St

Excellent work Shoestring. I also recommend reading your work on the phone call of Todd Beamer from United Airlines Flight 93 because the phone call of Todd Beamer contains several implausibilities, not only the "shockingly calm":

http://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2007/10/todd-beamers-odd-phone-call-and-silent.html

On the Web:

http://www.911blogger.com/node/16498

I read : "Couldn't the "calmness"... Be attributed to the fact that they didn't want to bring attention to themselves for fear of one of the "hijackers" hearing them, hereby putting themselves in danger"

Note: this argument is wrong. Take the example of telephone calls of Betty Ong and Todd Beamer. If they had been afraid of standing out by the "hijackers, is what Betty Ong allegedly made a telephone call with a duration of 25 minutes and Todd Beamer a call for a period of Todd Beamer of 13 minutes. When Todd Beamer discusses all with a stranger on the phone during 13 minutes, how is it to discuss with other passengers on the attack on the cockpit of Flight 93?.

I am french, sorry if I speak English poorly.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Shopnut

Shoestring
Jul 5 2008, 09:24 AM
Here's my latest blog posting, which shows how numerous reports have described that, during the phone calls from the supposedly hijacked planes on 9/11, the caller remained inexplicably calm, despite their circumstances. This evidence appears to further support the theory that the calls were faked by the 9/11 perpetrators, presumably using voice morphing technology.
That a person is able to remain calm in a possibly life threatening situation is commendable. That someone would seize upon this good behavior and use it to further a stance that renders the person’s good conduct irrelevant is despicable in my opinion.

I remember when I was a young Sailor on my first submarine. The ship ran a jam dive drill. A jam dive occurs when the stern planes jam in the dive position and the sub can be forced into a steep dive beyond the depths it was designed for. The drill monitors did not anticipate actions being taken in the engine room, so no observers were placed on my watch station. I distinctly recall being calm during this casualty when I took local control of the planes and restored them to the neutral position. Only later did I find out the ship was running a drill and in no danger. I would have greatly resented anyone suggesting that I was not actually participating in the casualty but simulating my actions and reports on the phone.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Shopnut

French St
Jul 7 2008, 06:12 PM
Note: this argument is wrong. Take the example of telephone calls of Betty Ong and Todd Beamer. If they had been afraid of standing out by the "hijackers, is what Betty Ong allegedly made a telephone call with a duration of 25 minutes and Todd Beamer a call for a period of Todd Beamer of 13 minutes. When Todd Beamer discusses all with a stranger on the phone during 13 minutes, how is it to discuss with other passengers on the attack on the cockpit of Flight 93?.

I am french, sorry if I speak English poorly.
I do not quite understand what you are getting at here. Are you saying the length of the calls makes them suspect? Can you say it differently?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Reggie_perrin

Did the team of voice morphing experts forget to make the callers sound panicked ?, thats a bit sloppy of them, a bit like the team of CGI experts making Bin Laden look to fat or to thin or to gaunt or to healthy looking etc etc etc.

I have to be honest, and i appreciate the work you put in to this, but this is one of the aspects that i would imagine would be a bit of a slap in the face to the family members, and is pretty distasteful, especially when you hear David Ray Griffin kind of snigger when telling audience members about the guy who said his full name to his mother.

Obviously the phone calls are a bit of a obstacle for 9/11 truthers to get around, so of course, they were faked, this is just one more example of truthers not wanting to take on board things that do not fit in with a big conspiracy, this is not just some game where you get to make shit up, and the more you try to make up reasons for things that don't fit with your theory the more outlandish the entire inside job theory becomes.

Phone calls from the planes contradict my theory, how do i get around them ? i know I'll say they're faked, do i have evidence for this ? ah yes, voice morphing technology exists so therefore they were faked, thats the all the evidence there is that they were faked, the technology exists to do it so therefore they must have used it in this case, it's also great because people who try and argue your new theory cannot dispute it, because there is no evidence to dispute, just someones speculation.
Edited by Reggie_perrin, Aug 2 2008, 02:25 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
French St

Quote: "I do not quite understand what you are getting at here. Are you saying the length of the calls makes them suspect? Can you say it differently?"

"Betty Ong" says notably "Our Number 1 got stabbed. Our purser is stabbed...."

If the telephone call of Betty Ong takes only two minutes for example, there is less risk for her to be noticed in the process of call by a terrorist that where his phone call lasts 25 minutes!

If the terrorist realizes that she phone outwards it can move towards it in order to stab it!


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Shopnut

French St
Aug 2 2008, 11:01 AM
"Betty Ong" says notably "Our Number 1 got stabbed. Our purser is stabbed...."

If the telephone call of Betty Ong takes only two minutes for example, there is less risk for her to be noticed in the process of call by a terrorist that where his phone call lasts 25 minutes!

If the terrorist realizes that she phone outwards it can move towards it in order to stab it!


All the more reason to admire her then. It is very sloppy and insulting to suggest that just because she was calm, it must have been fake.

She took a great personal risk by calling. Would you insult the memory of a soldier who fell on a grenade to protect his comrades? Betty Ong risked a quicker death to spread the word on one of the most terrifying incidents to happen on American soil. That someone would suggest she did not do it without hard evidence to prop up a theory is very low indeed.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Woody Box

Shopnut
Aug 2 2008, 01:16 PM

She took a great personal risk by calling. Would you insult the memory of a soldier who fell on a grenade to protect his comrades? Betty Ong risked a quicker death to spread the word on one of the most terrifying incidents to happen on American soil. That someone would suggest she did not do it without hard evidence to prop up a theory is very low indeed.

Shame on you, Shopnut.

You're the one who insults Betty Ong by misusing her victim status to propagate the official story, which is precisely not backed by "hard evidence".

I don't believe in voice-morphing, by the way. There is plenty of evidence that Flight 11 was part of the wargames, and Betty's call might well have been part of the wargame script, too. She certainly didn't know that the wargames were going to degenerate into a gigantic crime.




Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Shopnut

Woody Box
Aug 2 2008, 02:08 PM
You're the one who insults Betty Ong by misusing her victim status to propagate the official story, which is precisely not backed by "hard evidence".





You are saying that I support the official story by saying that Ong made the call? That is weak. That is like saying a person supports Bush because they both agree that 2+2=4.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Woody Box

Shopnut
Aug 2 2008, 02:31 PM
Woody Box
Aug 2 2008, 02:08 PM
You're the one who insults Betty Ong by misusing her victim status to propagate the official story, which is precisely not backed by "hard evidence".





You are saying that I support the official story by saying that Ong made the call? That is weak. That is like saying a person supports Bush because they both agree that 2+2=4.

No, I don't. Listen carefully what I said:

You're the one who insults Betty Ong by misusing her victim status to propagate the official story.

The question is not who the caller was (almost certainly Betty Ong) but where it came from (Flight 11???) and in which context (wargames???). Raising to question that she "risked a quicker death" with this call is not low, as you insinuate, but a citizen's duty, given the meagre evidence that the hijackings occurred at all.



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Shopnut

So are you suggesting that Ong made the call while not on the airliner; that she was part of something else besides a hi-jacking victim? If so, then where is she now?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JackD

many of those who have not studied the evidence and timelines of 9/11 events and anomalies (which means me, a few years ago) -- have a very natural tendency to assume the truth of all 9/11 official reports.

such as "Betty Ong made a long phone call from onboard AA11, which was in the midst of a hijacking"

so did Amy Sweeney.

What is odd about both calls is that they seem to describe different scenes, almost different hijackings.
Whatever the circumstances of her death, I am sure Betty was brave.
simply put, there are many things both said in her call, and many things that are lacking (such as upset passengers, screams, terror, a mention of mace/pepperspray that Amy insisted on, a mention of a bomb, which amy's call refers to, etc.)

It is verified that drills were indeed taking place on 9/11/01, at the same time as alleged hijackings, and some of these counter-terror drills may have included a scenario of a hijacked plane.

it is a very open question -- tough to answer -- but "were calls alleged from AA11 part of a hijacking drill script? if so, were the calls really placed from onboard the planes? if not, from where?"

there is a huge psychological resistance to addressing the issue of calls possibly being voice morph, faked, or as in Amy/Betty situation, part of a scripted drill.

we do honor to Betty & Amy's death by unflinchingly seeking out the answers to her death -- we do the same for death of Pat Tillman, of Private LaVena Johnson, who died in Afghanistan & Iraq -- and in both cases, the first, widely-repeated stories about their deaths proved to be a tissue of lies.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Shopnut

JackD
Aug 2 2008, 07:31 PM
What is odd about both calls is that they seem to describe different scenes, almost different hijackings.
Whatever the circumstances of her death, I am sure Betty was brave.
simply put, there are many things both said in her call, and many things that are lacking (such as upset passengers, screams, terror, a mention of mace/pepperspray that Amy insisted on, a mention of a bomb, which amy's call refers to, etc.)
I do not think it is suspicious that two people calling at different times and describing the same hi-jacking can have descriptions that do not appear to be the same. The atmosphere and attitudes of the passengers, crew and hi-jackers can vary greatly in a short period of time. The perceptions of the two people describing the scene can also vary a lot.

While stationed on a submarine I had the opportunities to participate in various drill scenarios. It was not unusual to get differing opinions on the actions of the crew even from two drill monitors standing next to each other observing the actions of the crew. It does not mean that one was right and the other was wrong. It was usually just two different view points.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
French St

There are other contradictions about these phone calls. Let us suppose that the passengers of flight 93 had a heroic behaviour, that Betty Ong and Todd Beamer notably had a heroic behaviour, then why the passengers of flight 77 had no the same heroic behaviour? See the report of the " National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States" Link:

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.htm

Quote: " The Hijacking of American 77 - The hijacking began between 8:51 and 8:54. As on American 11 and United 175, the hijackers used knives (reported by one passenger) and moved all the passengers (and possibly crew) to the rear of the aircraft (reported by one flight attendant and one passenger).

The flight attendant was Renee May and the passenger was Barbara Olson.

Quote of the same report: "At 9:12, Renee May called her mother, Nancy May, in Las Vegas. She said her flight was being hijacked by six individuals who had moved them to the rear of the plane. She asked her mother to alert American Airlines. Nancy May and her husband promptly did so.56

At some point between 9:16 and 9:26, Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, the solicitor general of the United States. She reported that the flight had been hijacked, and the hijackers had knives and box cutters. She further indicated that the hijackers were not aware of her phone call, and that they had put all the passengers in the back of the plane. About a minute into the conversation, the call was cut off. Solicitor General Olson tried unsuccessfully to reach Attorney General John Ashcroft.57

Shortly after the first call, Barbara Olson reached her husband again. She reported that the pilot had announced that the flight had been hijacked, and she asked her husband what she should tell the captain to do. Ted Olson asked for her location and she replied that the aircraft was then flying over houses. Another passenger told her they were traveling northeast. The Solicitor General then informed his wife of the two previous hijackings and crashes. She did not display signs of panic and did not indicate any awareness of an impending crash. At that point, the second call was cut off."

Other link: "Ted Olson's Report of Phone Calls from Barbara Olson on 9/11: Three Official Denials by David Ray Griffin"

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8514

Quote:

Olson’s Story Also Rejected by Pentagon Historians

Ted Olson’s story has also been quietly rejected by the historians who wrote Pentagon 9/11, a treatment of the Pentagon attack put out by the Department of Defense.11

According to Olson, his wife had said that “all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers.”12 This is an inherently implausible scenario. We are supposed to believe that 60-some people, including the two pilots, were held at bay by three or four men (one or two of the hijackers would have been in the cockpit) with knives and boxcutters. This scenario becomes even more absurd when we realize that the alleged hijackers were all small, unathletic men (the 9/11 Commission pointed out that even “[t]he so-called muscle hijackers actually were not physically imposing, as the majority of them were between 5’5” and 5’7” in height and slender in build”13), and that the pilot, Charles “Chic” Burlingame, was a weightlifter and a boxer, who was described as “really tough” by one of his erstwhile opponents.14 Also, the idea that Burlingame would have turned over the plane to hijackers was rejected by his brother, who said: “I don't know what happened in that cockpit, but I'm sure that they would have had to incapacitate him or kill him because he would have done anything to prevent the kind of tragedy that befell that airplane.”15

The Pentagon historians, in any case, did not accept the Olson story, according to which Burlingame and his co-pilot did give up their plane and were in the back with the passengers and other crew members. They instead wrote that “the attackers either incapacitated or murdered the two pilots.”

It is important to emphasize that not only Barbara Olson, but also Renee May said that the hijackers had moved the passengers to the rear of the aircraft, so why the FBI said that the phone call of Barbara Olson has never happened? David Ray Griffin - quote:

"The most serious official contradiction of Ted Olson’s story came in 2006 at the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 20th hijacker. The evidence presented to this trial by the FBI included a report on phone calls from all four 9/11 flights. In its report on American Flight 77, the FBI report attributed only one call to Barbara Olson and it was an “unconnected call,” which (of course) lasted “0 seconds.”9 According to the FBI, therefore, Ted Olson did not receive a single call from his wife using either a cell phone or an onboard phone."







Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DoYouEverWonder

Shopnut
Aug 2 2008, 05:49 PM
So are you suggesting that Ong made the call while not on the airliner; that she was part of something else besides a hi-jacking victim? If so, then where is she now?
Dead or maybe she was 'raptured'.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Shopnut

French St
Aug 3 2008, 04:00 AM
According to the FBI, therefore, Ted Olson did not receive a single call from his wife using either a cell phone or an onboard phone."







So does anyone claim that Ted Olson received a call from his wife from another source? I have not heard of any such claim.

It would seem that Ted Olson is lying for some reason; if the FBI is to be believed
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
French St

Shopnut - Quote : " It would seem that Ted Olson is lying for some reason; if the FBI is to be believed"

Theodore Bevry Olson (born September 11, 1940) was the 42nd United States Solicitor General, serving from June 2001 to July 2004.

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

I think that the lie in a criminal case must be punished by American law, therefore if ted olson took the risk of lying, it is because he had reasons, what were his reasons?

When Ted Olson has informed CNN about the content of phone calls of his wife, if he lied he should already know the details of the phone call from Renee May. Is this the case?

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/pentagon.olson/

http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2001/Sep-13-Thu-2001/news/16989631.html

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Shopnut

I may have made an error in my last post. One call was attributed to Olson, two to another woman, and 5 calls from an unidentified person. Is there any reason why Mrs Olson could not have have been two of the unidentified calls?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Grit1645

People have suggested the use of voice-morphing technology, but the idea never goes beyond a vague hand-waving suggestion of possibility. What would have had to transpire before and during the event in order for this technology to be used? Has anyone ever walked through the scenario, minute by minute?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
look-up
Member Avatar

Grit1645
Aug 22 2008, 10:29 AM
People have suggested the use of voice-morphing technology, but the idea never goes beyond a vague hand-waving suggestion of possibility. What would have had to transpire before and during the event in order for this technology to be used? Has anyone ever walked through the scenario, minute by minute?
that's why no one states unoquivocally that it definitely happened...

if we did, your criticism would be even greater.

we state what we know..

voice morphing is possible.

they COULD have used it.

there's not reason why they couldn't have used it.

Does that mean they used it? No

Does that mean that the calls were what they appeared to be? No
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JackD

Let the supporters of the official story research and defend the validity of each call, particularly the cell phone calls, one by one.

That is the most instructive way to debunk the phone calls --- and JohnDoeII has done good work on it--

take each call, by Bingham, Burnett, Beamer, Lyles, etc, place it in timeline as to who else was calling at same time, what movement plane was making, and dissect contents.

nearly every call requires a long explanation of coincidence, excuses, & what-ifs.

just start with the Babara Olson calls, for which no log or record was produced -- and that Ted Olson claims first it was cell phone call, then claims airfone (then mentions somethign about credit card) then goes back to cell phone story. he claims wife said "what should i tell the pilots?" -- as if pilots are also herded into back of plane, too.

then look at CeeCee Lyles' call. which was from cell phone. and look at Burnett's 4 calls. etc. to defend the possibility that cell phone calls got through is hard enough, then defenders must explain the contradictions inherent in each call (based especially on timeline of calls) -- you end up doing insane acrobatics to try to defend official story.

there is no need to create some expert scenario of voice-morphing. it is enough to say that "the official story phone call record is so problematic as to be considered untrue" -- let the official story defenders establish its veracity.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
look-up
Member Avatar

good advice JackD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Grit1645

JackD
 
"there is no need to create some expert scenario of voice-morphing. it is enough to say that "the official story phone call record is so problematic as to be considered untrue" -- let the official story defenders establish its veracity"

I don't agree, Jack. If one is going to propose some alternate explanation, then he should be willing to examine it thoroughly, allowing for others to play devil's advocate. Voice-morphing technology may exist, but it doesn't follow that it could have been used for the calls allegedly made on 9/11. Why dodge away from looking at that?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Miragememories
Member Avatar

JackD
 
"there is no need to create some expert scenario of voice-morphing. it is enough to say that "the official story phone call record is so problematic as to be considered untrue" -- let the official story defenders establish its veracity"

Grit1645
 
"I don't agree, Jack. If one is going to propose some alternate explanation, then he should be willing to examine it thoroughly, allowing for others to play devil's advocate. Voice-morphing technology may exist, but it doesn't follow that it could have been used for the calls allegedly made on 9/11. Why dodge away from looking at that?"

A thorough examination would be part of a full 9/11 Investigation.

MM
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Investigate 9/11 · Next Topic »
Add Reply