Thread: 9/11 was an inside job

Originally Posted by Fluke

The aerolanes were traveling at such a low altitude, that the ground receivers would have been able to pick them up

Even travelling at street level, walking pace, there comes a time that you can't get a signal. Whereas you expect some to believe a plane flying at 500 mph, at altitude, has uninterupted contact?

Todd Beamer's Odd Phone Call and the Silent Crash of Flight 93

I found the most interesting things to be the following 2 excerpts:
(1)
*****
A further oddity was Todd Beamer's remarkable calmness, despite the catastrophic situation he was in. Jefferson recalled: "Todd, when he came to me, he was calm. ... [H]e stayed calm through the entire conversation." [6] In her 2006 book, Called, Jefferson wrote: "[H]is voice was devoid of any stress. In fact, he sounded so tranquil it made me begin to doubt the authenticity and urgency of his call." [7] She 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." [8]
*****

(2)
*****
THE SILENT CRASH OF FLIGHT 93
Perhaps the oddest aspect of the call is what happened after 9:58, when Todd Beamer put the phone down to join the passenger revolt against the hijackers. Jefferson has recalled: "After he said, 'Let's roll,' he left the phone, and I would assume that's at the point that they went to charge the cockpit. And I was still on the line and the plane took a dive, and by then, it just went silent. I held on until after the plane crashed--probably about 15 minutes longer and I never heard a crash--it just went silent because--I can't explain it. We didn't lose a connection because there's a different sound that you use. It's a squealing sound when you lose a connection. I never lost connection, but it just went silent." [18]

Now how is this possible? Firstly, how could the call have remained connected after the plane crashed? According to the summary of passenger phone calls presented at the Moussaoui trial, Beamer's call lasted "3,925 seconds." [19] This would mean it did not end until 10:49 a.m., about three-quarters of an hour after Flight 93 supposedly crashed. And, secondly, how could there have been silence when the crash occurred?

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

how could the call have remained connected after the plane crashed?

Exactly as happened when MH370 was supposed to have run out of fuel and crashed. Cellphones remained connected.

https://sites.google.com/site/911guide/voicemorphing

Washingtonpost.com: dot.mil

Originally Posted by Pragmatic

Exactly as happened when MH370 was supposed to have run out of fuel and crashed. Cellphones remained connected.

But they say the Shanksville flight hit virtually vertically, and with such devastation that there was no debris whatsoever and everything was vapourised?

Even in those conditions a mobile stays on for 15 minutes?



(everything else was vapourised remember)

Originally Posted by Pragmatic

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

how could the call have remained connected after the plane crashed?

Exactly as happened when MH370 was supposed to have run out of fuel and crashed. Cellphones remained connected.

No they didnt .
When people rang the phones numbers, the ringing sound came , but that sound came from their own telephone and NOT the phone being rung .
That was established ages ago, do keep up

Originally Posted by Fluke

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Originally Posted by Pragmatic

LD I asked for one person who's heard a phone ring onboard a flight to come forward.

I fly a lot, and must attest that I have never heard a phone ringing on a flight, even on commuter flights where the plane flies over land all the way and not too high.

When I fly cattle class, I rarely hear phones going off , but flying First class I quite often hear peoples phones ringing

Don't think I have ever flown economy - even as a kid is was business class. Not stupid enough to fly first unless its an upgrade. Remembering the pictures of your slum gaff in Isaan though, flake, I ponder if you might have been better not blowing your money on first class flights and saving a little. A fool and his money, flakey boy, are easily parted. Unless of course...you are telling fibs. Are you the second cumming of Rick"Rambo"Thai?

THE ODD PHONE CALL

For 13 minutes, Beamer had spoken with Lisa Jefferson, a customer service supervisor at GTE Airfone's Chicago call center. He explained to her that his plane had been hijacked, and, assisted by a flight attendant sitting next to him, provided details about the flight. He also talked about his pregnant wife and two young sons. Being a devout Christian, he asked Jefferson to recite the Lord's Prayer with him, and then recited the 23rd Psalm. Before declaring his famous last words, Beamer said some of the passengers were going to try and seize control of the plane. At around 9:58 a.m., he put the phone down and was heard saying to someone else: "You ready? OK. Let's roll." [4]

The first thing that was odd about this call is the simple fact that Beamer was able to talk to Jefferson continuously for 13 minutes. In her 2002 book, his wife Lisa Beamer revealed that Jefferson had informed her "it was a miracle that Todd's call hadn't been disconnected." The reason: "Because of the enormous number of calls that day, the GTE systems overloaded and lines were being disconnected all around her as she sat at the operator's station outside of Chicago, talking to Todd. [Jefferson] kept thinking, This call is going to get dropped! Yet Todd stayed connected ... all the way to the end." [5] Very fortunate indeed this was, because if the call had become disconnected there would have been no "Let's roll" slogan for the war on terror.

A further oddity was Todd Beamer's remarkable calmness, despite the catastrophic situation he was in. Jefferson recalled: "Todd, when he came to me, he was calm. ... [H]e stayed calm through the entire conversation." [6] In her 2006 book, Called, Jefferson wrote: "[H]is voice was devoid of any stress. In fact, he sounded so tranquil it made me begin to doubt the authenticity and urgency of his call." [7] She 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." [8]

WHY DIDN'T BEAMER TALK TO HIS WIFE?

At some point during the call, Beamer said he did not think he was going to survive, telling Jefferson: "I know we're not going to make it out of here." [9] He gave her his home phone number and said: "If I don't make it out of this, would you please call my family and let them know how much I love them?" [10] Yet he refused offers to be put through to his wife. Jefferson has recalled: "I asked if he wanted to be connected to his wife." But, "he said no, that he did not want to upset her as they were expecting their third child in January." [11]

However, before reaching the call center, Todd Beamer had supposedly been trying to call his wife, but was simply unable to get through. [12] According to a summary of passenger phone calls presented at the 2006 trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, Beamer tried making this call just before 9:44 a.m., but it had been "terminated upon connection." [13] His wife has recalled that she heard her phone ring twice before stopping, and then, moments later, ringing once more. She said: "When I picked it up, it was dead air. I feel fairly confident that it was Todd. It would be on his mind to call me, to protect me." [14] According to some accounts, he reached the call center because his call was automatically routed there when his attempt at reaching his wife failed. [15] (However, other accounts claim he'd reached it by dialing "0" on the Airfone. [16])

The question remains: If Todd Beamer really did not want to talk to his wife because she was pregnant and he was afraid he might upset her, why had be been trying to phone her in the first place? Even if we somehow accept that he'd changed his mind over the space of a few minutes, another question arises: Why had Beamer not instead asked Jefferson to try and put him through to his parents, or one of his sisters, or another relative, or a friend? Instead, he'd apparently been content to talk with a stranger, explaining to Jefferson: "I just want to talk to somebody and just let someone know that this is happening." [17]

THE SILENT CRASH OF FLIGHT 93

Perhaps the oddest aspect of the call is what happened after 9:58, when Todd Beamer put the phone down to join the passenger revolt against the hijackers. Jefferson has recalled: "After he said, 'Let's roll,' he left the phone, and I would assume that's at the point that they went to charge the cockpit. And I was still on the line and the plane took a dive, and by then, it just went silent. I held on until after the plane crashed--probably about 15 minutes longer and I never heard a crash--it just went silent because--I can't explain it. We didn't lose a connection because there's a different sound that you use. It's a squealing sound when you lose a connection. I never lost connection, but it just went silent." [18]

Now how is this possible? Firstly, how could the call have remained connected after the plane crashed? According to the summary of passenger phone calls presented at the Moussaoui trial, Beamer's call lasted "3,925 seconds." [19] This would mean it did not end until 10:49 a.m., about three-quarters of an hour after Flight 93 supposedly crashed. And, secondly, how could there have been silence when the crash occurred?

WAS BEAMER'S CALL RECORDED?

Considering that Todd Beamer's call is central to the official 9/11 narrative, it would be helpful if a recording of it were available to be properly analyzed. However, all that supposedly exists is a summary written by Jefferson. According to journalist and author Jere Longman: "GTE-Verizon did not routinely tape its telephone calls. As a supervisor, [Jefferson] would have been the one to monitor the taping, but she did not want to risk losing the call." [20] In her own book, Jefferson claimed she had "not had a chance to press the switch in my office that initiates the taping of a conversation." [21] Rowland Morgan has pointed out that this means the evidence of Beamer's call is "single-sourced, unsubstantiated hearsay of which there was no record. ... [Jefferson] had no idea what Beamer's voice sounded like, and she would never hear it again to judge whether he had actually been speaking to her." [22] However, a week after 9/11 the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette had claimed otherwise, stating that, "because it was to an operator," the call "was tape-recorded." [23] If a recording of the call indeed exists, it has been kept well hidden.

Todd Beamer's call in fact only came to light five days after the attacks, in a report in the Post-Gazette. [24] Beamer's wife first learned of it three days after the attacks, in a phone call from United Airlines. Until then, the FBI had been keeping the information private until it had an opportunity to review it. (Yet how long does it take to review a written summary of a 13-minute phone call?) [25] An FBI agent had phoned Lisa Jefferson on the afternoon of 9/11. She recalled: "I was told to maintain secrecy. In fact, he stressed the importance of keeping the matter under wraps." [26] But why? What was there to hide?

Shoestring 9/11: Todd Beamer's Odd Phone Call and the Silent Crash of Flight 93

No, it's not a good clip. It demonstrates the straws that conspiracy theorists are grasping at.

A MISSILE fired just SPLIT-SECONDS before impact ?
And "evidenced" by such grainy, pixelated images ?


And regarding the phone call,

" how could there have been silence when the crash occurred ? "

This is a very, very stupid question.


Once again, this attention to the detail of the actual attack detracts from the real questions about foreknowledge.

Originally Posted by Latindancer

And regarding the phone call,

" how could there have been silence when the crash occurred ? "

This is a very, very stupid question.

Why's that?

Originally Posted by Latindancer

No, it's not a good clip. It demonstrates the straws that conspiracy theorists are grasping at.

A MISSILE fired just SPLIT-SECONDS before impact ?
And "evidenced" by such grainy, pixelated images ?

Yup, the "official" evidence,....grainy, pixelated images of a plane who's wings morph off and on, slicing cleanly into a building like a hot knife through butter,.....no debris scattered from the impact,....all disappeared into tjhe tower,....unlike the Pentagon mock-up where tjhere was tons of confetti scattered around the lawn,....but no clean-cut slice into the building there,....magic!

...same with the photoshopped images of people waving from smoke engulfed towers,....grainy, pixelated, and windows that opened!!!!

Couldn't have been videos of the WTC tower, their windows weren't designed to open,....and they weren't big enough to allow two people at once in their apertures, either.

Really bad photoshopping, all those WTC images of planes and towers and stuff.

Originally Posted by ENT

Originally Posted by Latindancer

No, it's not a good clip. It demonstrates the straws that conspiracy theorists are grasping at.

A MISSILE fired just SPLIT-SECONDS before impact ?
And "evidenced" by such grainy, pixelated images ?

Yup, the "official" evidence,....grainy, pixelated images of a plane who's wings morph off and on, slicing cleanly into a building like a hot knife through butter,.....no debris scattered from the impact

No debris scattered from the impact. Uh huh. What's that then? Particularly heavy humidity?

^

I mean look at that picture.


As usual it makes ENT look like a total friggin dick.

Please. Do me a favour and watch this.



No stupid shit - talk about the video and the evidence it presents.

Let's get to the bottom of this shit.

Regular programming will be resumed in 5..4..3..2..1..

世ã�®ä¸[at]を生暖ã�‹ã��見守るブãƒ[at]ã‚°

This is where that picture comes from Harry, - what is the site? do you use it regularly? Where is it hosted, who owns it? etc etc etc

Does this image come up on google images ?

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

This is where that picture comes from Harry

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=wo...w=1280&bih=615

Never seen a google image result like that.

One in a million?

Inside Job more like eh

Does look a tad much flame for burning office furniture, Jim

This guy speculates that 9/11 failed. One of the planes was supposed to hit congress, at which point Marshall law could have been declared. It didn't, they couldn't and some more people in the world started thinking "This is crazy".

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by ENT

Originally Posted by Latindancer

No, it's not a good clip. It demonstrates the straws that conspiracy theorists are grasping at.

A MISSILE fired just SPLIT-SECONDS before impact ?
And "evidenced" by such grainy, pixelated images ?

Yup, the "official" evidence,....grainy, pixelated images of a plane who's wings morph off and on, slicing cleanly into a building like a hot knife through butter,.....no debris scattered from the impact

No debris scattered from the impact. Uh huh. What's that then? Particularly heavy humidity?

ASA usual, you're taking words out of context and twisting them around to suit your funny little brown-nosing agenda.

No aircraft debris scattered on impact, specifically on the impacted face of the towers, was the implication.

But of course, you and tweerrry are too thick to figure that one out.

So here's the plane hitting the tower, with no debris scatter, on impact.




Plenty of stuff exploding afterwards,....but you and your type are too dense to figure out how that happened too,....

If you can spare 15 minutes then this is worth a read. I'm sure Harry, and the likes, won't bother? An Interesting Day:President Bush's Movements and Actions on 9/11, Allan Wood and Paul Thompson

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

Nutter central..

The loonies will always see shit that isn't there.