See other 9/11 Articles
Title: Flight 93: Cell Call Exposed 9/11:"You did great"
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjNB ... com/ceecee-lyles-t17044p2.html
Published: Jul 26, 2008
Author: CanadianVandal
Post Date: 2008-07-26 17:48:52 by honway
Ping List: *9-11* Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: None
Views: 1378
Comments: 113
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-40) not displayed.
.
.
.
#41. To: honway (#36)
That is an incomplete proof. It offers little in the way of scientific evidence with respect to this case. It is further diluted by the fact that you are trying to support your case with your own evidence. Links posted to this thread sourcing independent evidence that cell phones never work at high altitude would be useful, possibly, if we agree that she was at high altitude during that phone call, which would take a whole different set of proofs to validate.
Did you watch the video? Did you see her identification found at the crash site totally intact? Did you know not even the plane was left that intact nor any passengers? It is stretching credulity to believe that somehow her identification and paper items in her pocket survived when no person or piece of the plane that big did. No, this is not the smoking gun the 9/11 truth movement should tell people about first, WTC7 is, but if all information in this video is correct it defintely is another piece of evidence of an inside job.
God is always good!
The video is useless as a vehicle for persuading anyone rational to reconsider his opinions about 9/11, so tainted it is with hysteria and leading conclusions. The discovery of personal effects around the WTC site is also suspicious. So what, we have some valid concerns tucked in with a huge dose of hysteria. Guess what? This video has just illustrated to anyone not considering 9/11 as a suspicious event that 9/11 truthers are irrational, illogical, and prone to succumb to the vilest type of propaganda. Who wins? Not the truth. Truth combined with lies is still in the service of lies.
And what did Alex Jones have to do with the production of this piece?
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
The user links back to his site. Jones has covered material on the cell phone issue before. (And: flight 77.)
Alex Jones is not the only, nor the first, to explore the liklihood that the cell calls are fraudulent. A couple of experiments have been run - low budget affairs since the government is not going to shoot holes in their own cover story. There are several factors that suggest the liklihood of the cell calls being made is unlikely: 1. The low power of a cell phone transmitter which has to push the signal through the metal skin of the aircraft - which will attenuate the signal. 2. The distance from any cell tower at 20,000 feet combined with signal attenuation. 3. The speed of the aircraft which would make it difficult, at best, to be able to complete the "handshake" protocols with a tower before being out of its range. No handshake = no connection = no call. While I won't go so far as to say it is impossible the calls were made as billed it nevertheless strikes me as being about as likely as winning the Power Ball two weeks running.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
Unfortunately, your haunches don't really offer any proofs in a scientific sense. It would help to have some engineering studies to back up these notions, but it's illegal to test wireless phones in the air. So we definitely don't have any solid proof here that the plane wasn't where the official time line indicated it was. The hasty conclusions exposed in this video, and the following hysteria seen right here on this thread become poison pills to serious efforts to research 9/11. With hyperbole coming over the airwaves day in and day out, the Alex Jones audience is not given any real semblance of research rigor through his own examples, and the exhortation to "do your own research" means very little to the typical Alex Jones listener. This phenomena is about as destructive as it gets to the process of uncovering the truth about 9/11. No reputable analyst would want to be associated with his form of populist analysis.
This is where common sense really should take over. The Marriott Rewards card and the ID endures the crash, but the substantial landing gear does not. Is there an idiot on this planet that would believe that?
Number 48 submitted for your consideration.
The government presents "evidence" and you accept it at face value? What conclusions would you like to reach from this government "evidence?" The same goes for a lot of the other material Alex Jones and his merry band of investigators unearth. What sort of focus is there on the sources of the material, and who leaks/publishes/releases/broadcasts it?
I have witnessed large aircraft crashes, with fires and explosions. It was common to find all sorts of personal items scattered around, perfectly normal.
That's a good point, and it only serves to illustrate the sad fact that we're being encouraged to reach sweeping conclusions before we know really a good dealabout the evidence cited.
I'm part of the LIHOP crowd and this audio tells me nothing. A flight attendant who is trained to be calm in the face of complete panic and chaos is able to place a call to her husband. Listen to that again and again without the help of the video and you can hear the panic in that woman's voice even though she is projecting calm. If I were in her shoes and had one last call to make to my spouse, mark it down and take it to the bank, my words would almost be identical to hers attempting to project calm in a sea of chaos.
"What began in Russia will end in America."- 1930, Elder Ignatius of Harbin, Manchuria.
I've often wondered if that isn't his sole purpose.
Motivations are hard to fathom. I would welcome a more circumspect approach from him, in any case. His popularity comes with responsibility.
This is where common sense really should take over. The Marriott Rewards card and the ID endures the crash, but the substantial landing gear does not. Is there an idiot on this planet that would believe that? An airplane, and all its passengers, are 'vaporized,' but some pieces of plastic and paper are found intact? Please, people, get a grip.
Same thing happens with someone's passport from the WTC attacks. Odd, yes. But neither situation proves that the people on flight 93 were on the ground when CeeCee made her call.
Buck - I guess that you've flown, sometime. How would you ever know that you were headed anywhere? Especially if you were going along at 550mph? At which speed your cell phone could never make, or keep, a connection? Just my take, and belief on this scam.
I don't know. That's the point. We have to know things before we start suggesting the kinds of conclusions inferred here, namely that CeeCee was on the ground when her husband (allegedly) says he was told over the phone that she was in the air. We really don't have all the facts before us in this matter. Knowing things and wondering about them are very different matters. When people start drawing massive conclusions with a scant amount of information, that's dangerous. What's the point of leading people to believe that the plane was on the ground when the calls were supposedly made? Hysteria. Is hysteria a useful sentiment at a time like this?
Where's her purse? Her ID and "pocket litter" would be inside a wallet inside a purse. Women don't just carry their license in their back pocket, after all.
Usually it's common to find seats, bodies, and parts of the fuselage, too, even if the plane hits the side of a mountain at 600 mph. But not in Shanksville.
At Shanksville given the very small impact pattern, that is understandable. I do not recall reading what was found there.
www.historycommons.org/en...nett&printerfriendly=true 9:27 a.m. September 11, 2001: Flight 93 Passenger Tom Burnett Calls Wife Using Cell Phone; Reports that His Plane Has Been Hijacked Tom Burnett, a passenger on board Flight 93, calls his wife Deena Burnett at their home in San Ramon, California. (Longman 2002, pp. 106-107) She looks at the caller ID and recognizes the number as being that of his cell phone. She asks him if he is OK, and he replies: “No, I’m not. I’m on an airplane that’s been hijacked.” He says, “They just knifed a guy,” and adds that this person was a passenger. ------------------------------------------------------------- According to Deena Burnett, her husband called her on a cell phone at altitude. This was a physical impossibility. It was so significant, the government lied to cover it up. The government claimed Burnett used an Airphone. Who would you believe? The wife of the man on the plane or the government that has a history of lies concerning events of mass murder like Waco and the OKC bombing? If she saved the cell phone bill or could get the records, that would indeed be a smoking gun, since the government is on record in the Moussaoui trial claiming the call came from a GTE Airphone.
Quick questions, honway. What was the length of time of her recorded cell phone call to her husband? During that period of time, approximately how many miles would Flight 93 have traveled? I think the answers to those further backs up your judgment that her use of the cell phone was impossible - in the aircraft anyway.
CeeCee's call was 41 seconds. I will try to find out the speed from the FDR data. My rough estimate is that she traveled about 3.8 miles. As far as Tom Burnett's calls, according to the government there were three: Comparing the reported times to the government released FDR data,we have: 9:30 .......28 seconds.......35,000 feet 9:37........62 seconds.......39,000 feet 9:44........54 seconds.......24,000 feet. I will search for the FDR data concerning the speed, but at 35,000 feet and 39,000 feet, a normal range for ground speed would be in the range of 400 to 480 mph,depending on the winds. An interesting thing from CeeCee's call is prior to and during the call the aircraft descended from 40,000 feet to 20,000 feet in about 7 minutes,according to the FDR data. That descent rate is more than is normally used. The reason I mention that is there is no way a flight attendant would not recognize the plane was in a descent and to flight attendants, a descent like that would mean they were about to land and the flight was about to be over. She did not mention that in the message and that was very odd,imo.
In case you're wondering why I posted the info on Barbara Olson's supposed phone call, I was implying that her call could ALSO have been made from the ground, as suggested here in regards to the CeeCee Lyles call. It is VERY interesting, to me at least, that her husband, Solicitor General Ted Olson, changed his story from her calling on a cell phone to a sky phone and then back to cell phone call, yet the FBI says that there were NO calls at all. It would mean that either Olson is lying, or the FBI is. Either case PROVES that there is complicity here on the part of the government.
Thanks. I guesstimated that the distance would have been much further but I was incorrect.
Thanks for the information filled post. The information in the article and links is very significant,imo. Thanks again.
You're very welcome my friend, and thank YOU for posting this article.
www.vaed.uscourts.gov/not...tion/flights/P200055.html
Original source: Prosecution Trial exhibit
Yes, and also finding parts from the landing gear and/or wheels is normal. What is not normal is the landing gear vaporizing. The gear is designed to support 198,000 lbs contacting the runway at 700 feet per minute. It is very substantial and would not vaporize on impact.
It's also not normal to find the engines over a mile away. The claim is they bounced! LOL! Also parts of the plane were found over a very large area. That flight was shot down. The "crash scene" more than likely was just a separate explosion which produced a hole in the ground. There was no evidence of any plane there whatsoever. Flight 93 or some plane was shot down, but I doubt the passengers were on board. 9/11 was totally scripted, everything went as planned except for the early leak about WTC7 collapsing.
God is always good!
www.post-gazette.com/head...0011230flight931230p3.asp Around Thanksgiving, Jerry and Beatrice Guadagno of Ewing, N.J., received word that their son Richard's credentials and badge from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had been found by the FBI at the crash site. "It was practically intact," Richard's sister, Lori, said of the credentials, which were returned in their wallet. "It just looked like it wasn't damaged or hadn't gone through much of anything at all, which is so bizarre and ironic.
That's true. I am often surprised at how the "that's normal" crowd deal with facts like that, claims of engine's bouncing great distances.
When she says "there's three guys, they've hijacked the plane" her tone is almost sing-song, not believable at all. She seems to realize this immediately and so the next thing she says is she's "trying to be calm", or maybe it's the next thing on a list she has. The impression I get is she was not completely prepared to leave the message but wrote a list of things to say, and she had a last minute discussion about the list with other people there before calling, which discussion ended up generating rough notes on the list or mental notes. One of the last-minute changes apparently was to emphasize that she's on the plane (said three times), which comes right after "listen to me carefully". I'm guessing the starting list is just a goodbye-type list with nothing about the plane or any "hijackers".
Sounds like another woman says "sorry" in a high-pitched voice at the very end, with a very strong NYC- type accent.
I didn't notice that before. Yes, someone says sorry.
God is always good!
Anybody familiar with getting a name changed on a driver's license? Do you get a new issue date with a new license or do you keep the original issue date? Any newlyweds out there?
To me it doesn't sound like "you did great" as much as "you did stray".
Comments (81 - 113) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestI have tested the ability of cell phones to operate on airliners a number of times.
#42. To: buckeye (#40)
(Edited)
This whole thread is a testimony to the damage Alex Jones has done to conspiracy research.
#43. To: RickyJ (#42)
#44. To: buckeye (#40)
This whole thread is a testimony to the damage Alex Jones has done to conspiracy research.
#45. To: Original_Intent (#44)
Flight 93: Cell Call Exposed
http://www.infowars.net/articles/july...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_A...
Honors
#29 - Most Discussed (Today) - News & Politics
#21 - Top Favorites (Today) - News & Politics
#45 - Top Rated (Today) - News & Politics #89 - Top Favorites (This Week) - News & Politics
thanks!
#46. To: buckeye (#45)
#47. To: Original_Intent (#46)
...it nevertheless strikes me as being about as likely as winning the Power Ball two weeks running.
#48. To: RickyJ (#42)
Did you watch the video? Did you see her identification found at the crash site totally intact?
#49. To: All, *9-11* (#48)
#50. To: honway (#48)
#51. To: honway, buckeye (#49)
#52. To: Cynicom (#51)
#53. To: honway, buckeye (#30)
This is in fact a recorded audio received by the husband of CeeCee Lyles, a flight attendant on United Flight 93.
#54. To: buckeye (#40)
This whole thread is a testimony to the damage Alex Jones has done to conspiracy research.
#55. To: Ncturnal (#54)
#56. To: honway, all (#48)
Did you watch the video? Did you see her identification found at the crash site totally intact?
#57. To: lodwick (#56)
#58. To: buckeye (#57)
#59. To: lodwick (#58)
#60. To: honway (#48)
The Marriott Rewards card and the ID endures the crash, but the substantial landing gear does not.
Powered By Sex Toy Shop
#61. To: Cynicom (#51)
It was common to find all sorts of personal items scattered around, perfectly normal.
Powered By Sex Toy Shop
#62. To: Indrid Cold (#61)
#63. To: buckeye, *9-11* (#22)
(Edited)
As for the husband, he's an unreliable witness due to the emotional nature of the event.
#64. To: honway (#0)
#65. To: Fred Mertz (#64)
(Edited)
What was the length of time of her recorded cell phone call to her husband? During that period of time, approximately how many miles would Flight 93 have traveled?
#66. To: honway (#0)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#67. To: honway (#65)
#68. To: FormerLurker (#66)
#69. To: honway (#68)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#70. To: All (#68)
#71. To: All (#70)
(Edited)
U.S. v. Moussaoui trial
#72. To: Cynicom (#51)
(Edited)
It was common to find all sorts of personal items scattered around, perfectly normal.
#73. To: honway (#72)
What is not normal is the landing gear vaporizing.
#74. To: All (#72)
#75. To: RickyJ (#73)
It's also not normal to find the engines over a mile away.
#76. To: honway (#71)
(Edited)
#77. To: honway (#71)
#78. To: nobody (#77)
Sounds like another woman says "sorry" in a high-pitched voice at the very end, with a very strong NYC- type accent.
#79. To: RickyJ, all, *9-11* (#78)
#80. To: honway (#71)
.
.
.