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: 1508
Comments: 113
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-46) not displayed.
.
.
.
#47. To: Original_Intent (#46)
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".
The government maintains Tom Burnett made 3 GTE Airfone calls. www.tomburnettfamilyfound...omburnett_transcript.html The Tom Burnett Family Foundation maintains Tom made four cell phone calls. Who are you going to believe? Did the family make up the transcripts?
Transcript of Tom’s last calls to Deena 6:27 a.m.( pacific time) First cell phone call from Tom to Deena * Deena: Hello 6:31 Deena calls 911 6:34 The phone rang in on call waiting, Tom’s second cell phone call. * Deena: Hello 6:45 a.m. Third cell phone call from Tom to Deena * Tom: Deena 6:54 a.m. Fourth cell phone call to Tom to Deena * Deena: Tom?
I believe you just found another smoking gun in the 9/11 case! Good work. I still think WTC7 is the ultimate smoking gun, but this now qualifies as one too IMO.
God is always good!
The only problem with this is you have to wonder why they made a new card up when they could have just used her old one. She would have had it on her I assume.
God is always good!
And also perfectly normal to find whole (or mostly whole) bodies still strapped into seats, fuselage, tail section, landing gear, etc, lying all over the crash scene.
I shall not vote for evil, lesser or otherwise.
Comments (87 - 113) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest...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)
#81. To: All (#79)
#82. To: All (#81)
#83. To: All (#82)
* Tom: Deena
* Deena: Tom, are you O.K.?
* Tom: No, I’m not. I’m on an airplane that has been hijacked.
* Deena: hijacked?
* Tom: Yes, They just knifed a guy.
* Deena: A passenger?
* Tom: Yes.
* Deena: Where are you? Are you in the air?
* Tom: Yes, yes, just listen. Our airplane has been hijacked. It’s United Flight 93 from Newark to San Francisco. We are in the air. The hijackers have already knifed a guy, one of them has a gun, they are telling us there is a bomb on board, please call the authorities. He hung up.
* Tom: They’re in the cockpit. The guy they knifed is dead.
* Deena: He’s dead?
* Tom: Yes. I tried to help him, but I couldn’t get a pulse.
* Deena: Tom, they are hijacking planes all up and down the east coast. They are taking them and hitting designated targets. They’ve already hit both towers of the World Trade Center.
* Tom: They’re talking about crashing this plane. (a pause) Oh my God. It’s a suicide mission…(he then tells people sitting around him)
* Deena: Who are you talking to?
* Tom: My seatmate. Do you know which airline is involved?
* Deena: No, they don’t know if they’re commercial airlines or not. The newsreporters are speculating cargo planes, private planes and commercial. No one knows.
* Tom: How many planes are there?
* Deena: They’re not sure, at least three. Maybe more.
* Tom: O.K….O.K….Do you know who is involved?
* Deena: No.
* Tom: We’re turning back toward New York. We’re going back to the World Trade Center. No, wait, we’re turning back the other way. We’re going south. * Deena: What do you see?
* Tom: Just a minute, I’m looking. I don’t see anything, we’re over a rural area. It’s just fields. I’ve gotta go.
* He hung up.
* Deena: Tom, you’re O.K. (I thought at this point he had just survived the Pentagon plane crash).
* Tom: No, I’m not.
* Deena: They just hit the Pentagon.
* Tom: (tells people sitting around him “They just hit the Pentagon.”)
* Tom: O.K….O.K. What else can you tell me?
* Deena: They think five airplanes have been hijacked. One is still on the ground. They believe all of them are commercial planes. I haven’t heard them say which airline, but all of them have originated on the east coast.
* Tom: Do you know who is involved?
* Deena: No
* Tom: What is the probability of their having a bomb on board? I don’t think they have one. I think they’re just telling us that for crowd control.
* Deena: A plane can survive a bomb if it’s in the right place.
* Tom: Did you call the authorities?
* Deena: Yes, they didn’t know anything about your plane.
* Tom: They’re talking about crashing this plane into the ground. We have to do something. I’m putting a plan together.
* Deena: Who’s helping you?
* Tom: Different people. Several people. There’s a group of us. Don’t worry. I’ll call you back.
* Tom: Hi. Anything new?
* Deena: No
* Tom: Where are the kids?
* Deena: They’re fine. They’re sitting at the table having breakfast.
They’re asking to talk to you.
* Tom: Tell them I’ll talk to them later
* Deena: I called your parents. They know your plane has been hijacked. * Tom: Oh…you shouldn’t have worried them. How are they doing?
* Deena: They’re O.K.. Mary and Martha are with them.
* Tom: Good. (a long quiet pause) We’re waiting until we’re over a rural area. We’re going to take back the airplane.
* Deena: No! Sit down, be still, be quiet, and don’t draw attention to yourself! (The exact words taught to me by Delta Airlines Flight Attendant Training).
* Tom: Deena! If they’re going to crash this plane into the ground, we’re going to have do something!
* Deena: What about the authorities?
* Tom: We can’t wait for the authorities. I don’t know what they could do anyway.
* It’s up to us. I think we can do it.
* Deena: What do you want me to do?
* Tom: Pray, Deena, just pray.
* Deena: (after a long pause) I love you.
* Tom: Don’t worry, we’re going to do something.
* He hung up
#84. To: honway, *9-11* (#79)
#85. To: honway (#79)
#86. To: Cynicom (#51)
I have witnessed large aircraft crashes, with fires and explosions. It was common to find all sorts of personal items scattered around, perfectly normal.
.
.
.