See other 9/11 Articles
Title: No Airfones on Flight 77 - DRG on Jack Blood
Source:
http://911blogger.com/node/8247
URL Source: http://911blogger.com/node/8247
Published: May 2, 2007
Author: Reprehensor
Post Date: 2007-05-02 18:31:14 by Kamala
Ping List: *9-11* Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: 911
Views: 139
Comments: 10
No Airfones on Flight 77 - DRG on Jack Blood ( Home » No Airfones on... ) Submitted by Reprehensor on Tue, 05/01/2007 - 3:49pm. airfones | David Ray Griffin | Flight 77 | Jack Blood (Edited for clarity.) Jack http://Blood.com You can D/L the April 24 Jack Blood show at http://nw0.info - follow the "radio" link. File is .ogg which is the http://www.videolan.org format - (VLC player). This excerpt starts at the 54:27 mark. Transcript by "ratcat" at http://LibertyForum.org; Jack Blood Radio Show Apr. 24, 2007 Interview with Prof. David Ray Griffin Excerpt Discussion of Prof. David Ray Griffin’s latest book on 9/11: Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory Griffin: Let me tell you a new thing that most people don’t know. This was dug up by Rowland Morgan and Ian Henshall who wrote wrote the book, “9/11 Revealed.” ... it has to do with the alleged phone calls from Barbara Olson. Now you know and many of your listeners know that Ted Olson, her husband, who claims he got the call from her from……… Blood: They say he is going to be the new AG (Attorney General). I just had to thump that in. That’s the rumor going around [crosstalk] Griffin: Yeah, more than likely. But he claims that he got this call from Barbara, his wife, from Flight 77 but he was unclear. First he would say it was from cell phone and then he would say, well no it was from one of the seat back phones. And he’s gone back and forth. So, it turns out now we know that cell phone calls were not possible. So, that makes everybody say, well sure maybe she did it on airfones. It turns out that particular Boeing, American Boeing 757 that Flight 77 was, was not equipped with airfones. This was a stunning development. Blood: This was a stunning development. How come I haven’t heard that before, David? Griffin: Because Roland’s book hasn’t got much attention. It’s a shame because it’s such a great book. Blood: So it only could have been done by cell phone. They had no in flight phones on 77. Is that what you are saying? Griffin: That’s right. And they checked and they double-checked and I quote all of their correspondence with American on that issue. Blood: Did we have people on the record, David, saying that people used in-flight phones on that flight where there were no in-flight phones? Do we have them on the record trying to manipulate previous information to that level? Griffin: Well, it was the call from Barbara Olson that some people have claimed was on the in-flight. I don’t know about other callers. Comment: » add new comment | printer friendly version » reply | 7 pointsNew Theodore Olson’s own words Theodore Olson’s own words indicate that he would be prepared to do rather more than that. On March 21, 2002 on its page A35, the Washington Post newspaper printed an article titled “The Limits of Lying” by Jim Hoagland, who writes that a statement by Solicitor General Theodore Olson in the Supreme Court has the ring of perverse honesty. Addressing the Supreme Court of the United States of America, US Solicitor General Theodore Olson said it is "easy to imagine an infinite number of situations . . . where government officials might quite legitimately have reasons to give false information out." http://www.vialls.com/lies911/lies.htm Submitted by Chris on Tue, 05/01/2007 - 3:51pm
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Kamala (#0)
(Edited)
I believe 9-11 was an inside job. However, I would like to SEE this guy's correspondence with American. 757's and 767's, as well as smaller narrow bodies, have had flight fones for many years. This is a 1st party known fact. I need them to prove this one to me. The only way it would not have been equipped with phones is if it was one of TWA's old planes that American got when it bought TWA that wasn't remodelled yet...and I'll have to research that because I don't remember what year that was.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition Even CO had flight phones on NARROW body aircraft in 1987 which was 14 years before 9-11/ I do not believe this 757 had no phones unless this guy SHOWS me the letter from American that says that. Otherwise he is making monkeys out of the Truth movement!!!!!
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition Sounds fishy, but I'd thought I would post it anyway.
Mark "I was real close to Building 7 when it fell down... That didn't sound like just a building falling down to me while I was running away from it. There's a lot of eyewitness testimony down there of hearing explosions. [..] and the whole time you're hearing "boom, boom, boom, boom, boom." I think I know an explosion when I hear it... — Former NYC Police Officer and 9/11 Rescue Worker Craig Bartmer
Thanks..that never hurts...as far as the cell phone issue being impossible, we need for someone to easily proove or disprove that to keep our credibility. I'd go up in a small plane but they go so slow, they would work for sure...someone needs to go up in a JET and clandestinely open their cell phone at altitude and hit speed dial to someone waiting on the other end and time how long the call remains open.. SIMPLE! Wonder why that hasn't been done yet??
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition The demise of the Verizon Airfone The 20th anniversary of the launch of Verizon Airfones was in 2004. It’s not looking like it will see another 20, says the president of the company in an interview with me. If you’ve been traveling at all since the early 80s, you may recall when the Airfones were being installed on airplanes, in the seat backs, arm rests and breezeways of many domestic airlines. Back then – before BlackBerrys and PDAs and free nationwide cell phone roaming – they were called GTE Airfones. But that was a corporate merger or two ago. I can recall being on flights where people actually used the darned things, just not recently. Even I used them once or twice, more to get a kick from making a call from an airplane than for any real practical purpose. I think back then they were 10 bucks for the first minute, or something equally hideous. But when was the last time you saw someone use them on a flight? The decline of the Airfone, says Bill Pallone, president of Verizon Airfone, is directly linked to the wide-spread availability of cell phones with free nationwide roaming combined with their use on planes while at the gate or taxiing to it. “Put all those factors together it drove our usage down quite a bit,” said Pallone. “Back when we had our peak usage, roaming rates were fairly comparable to what we were charging.” Peak usage was on average about 16 users per aircraft per day, he said. Now, there may be 6-8. Lowering rates to make them more competitive with cell phones wouldn’t work. “It just wasn’t financially viable,” he said. The increase in use necessary to make up for the lost revenue wasn’t technologically possible, given that a maximum of eight simultaneous calls can be made on a plane at a time. So now Verizon is looking to get into the in-air Internet access business using its existing ground transmission network. Pallone predicts that once Internet access becomes readily available on planes, airlines will begin removing the underused phones to save weight and thus fuel. It signals the end of one era, and the beginning of another.
Sometime between 2001 and a few years ago, all GTE airfones were removed from American Airlines airplanes.
I'm reserving judgment on the issue. It's possible, though. I'm afraid of this turning out to be a trap-door spider, of some sort. The particular aircraft may have been old enough that retro-fitting it - or the 757 fleet - might have been deemed too expensive. I don't have that answer.
Hmm..you may be right. I'd still like to SEE the so-called documentation these guys say they have from AA saying it had no seat phones on this flight. When they throw this out, but can't add a simploe quote from AA, it makes me suspicious. Now, on May 2, 2007, AA has Inflight Satellite phones on all 777 and 767 aircraft only. I don't know when it changed... HOWEVER, this simple elusive detail has no bearing on the fact that 9-11 was defintely an inside job!
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition I have tested a digital cell phone on an airliner many times. I can say with 100% certainty that a digital cell phone will not work on an airliner above 20,000 feet. Normally airliners cruise above 20,000 feet. The so-called debunkers claim that analog cell phones were common in 2001 and the performance of analog cell phones and digital cell phones is different. The debunkers claim it is impossible to reproduce the conditions today that existed in 2001 because the cell phone industry is different as the near complete conversion to digital technology has occurred. However, if it could be established the type of cell phones that were used on 9/11, then this would be an area worth pursuing. If anyone claims a digital cell phone was used to talk to someone on the ground while the plane was above 20,000 feet, they are wrong. It could not happen.
That would make perfect sense. I spoke simplex to another ham radio unit on my ham radio handy-talkie from Pikes Peak to a vehicle well N of Denver [calculated range 120 miles] SIMPLEX...no repeater...but that was with FIVE WATTS and obviously perfect solar and atmospheric conditions and standing outside. Cellphones even in 2001 no longer used anywhere near 5 watts. 3/10ths of a watt maybe...? And THEN the signal had to get OUTside of a large aluminum insulator [airplane]...which is why a ham radio handy-talkie with 5 watts and a rubber duck antenna will transmit about noplace inside a car without being hooked to a roofmount antenna. The car shields the signal!! Just think how much an airplane tube would shield a radio signal with much less power to begin with?
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
#2. To: skydrifter (#1)
PING
#3. To: IndieTX (#1)
#4. To: Kamala (#3)
(Edited)
#5. To: IndieTX (#1)
757's and 767's, as well as smaller narrow bodies, have had flight fones for many years. This is a 1st party known fact. I need them to prove this one to me.
#6. To: All (#5)
#7. To: IndieTX, Jethro Tull, Christine, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Red Jones, Diana, Kamala, All (#2)
#8. To: honway (#6)
#9. To: IndieTX, *9-11* (#4)
(Edited)
I'd go up in a small plane but they go so slow, they would work for sure...someone needs to go up in a JET and clandestinely open their cell phone at altitude and hit speed dial to someone waiting on the other end and time how long the call remains open.. SIMPLE! Wonder why that hasn't been done yet??
#10. To: honway (#9)
(Edited)
I can say with 100% certainty that a digital cell phone will not work on an airliner above 20,000 feet. Normally airliners cruise above 20,000 feet.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest