Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 3:40 am
yeah those phones in the seats are dragging miles of phone line out the back of the plane.Freakaloin wrote:yeah but the official story is most of the calls were made by cell phones...look it up jackass...
Quake3World
Your world is waiting...
https://quake3world.com/forum/
9-11 conspiracy documentary on google vids
Page 4 of 4
Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 3:43 am
it uses wireless technology n00b
there is an antenna in the nose of the plane that tranmits and receives the phone signals
there is an antenna in the nose of the plane that tranmits and receives the phone signals
Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 3:47 am
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3067652
From the back of the plane, Todd Beamer tries to use his credit card
on an Airfone installed in one of the seatbacks, but cannot get authorization.
His call is automatically routed to the Verizon customer-service center in
Oakbrook, Ill. Although operators are used to crank calls from seatback phones,
it is clear to the operator that Beamer’s report of a hijacking is genuine.
His call is immediately sent to Verizon supervisor Lisa Jefferson who alerts
the FBI.
http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/cellonplanes.html
why consider allowing people to use them if it is impossible anyway?
From the back of the plane, Todd Beamer tries to use his credit card
on an Airfone installed in one of the seatbacks, but cannot get authorization.
His call is automatically routed to the Verizon customer-service center in
Oakbrook, Ill. Although operators are used to crank calls from seatback phones,
it is clear to the operator that Beamer’s report of a hijacking is genuine.
His call is immediately sent to Verizon supervisor Lisa Jefferson who alerts
the FBI.
http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/cellonplanes.html
why consider allowing people to use them if it is impossible anyway?
Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 5:05 am
MORON ALERT!!!...andyman wrote:it uses wireless technology n00b
there is an antenna in the nose of the plane that tranmits and receives the phone signals
Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 5:20 am
Outside Washington on September 11, American Airlines Flight 77 was hurtling toward the Pentagon while passengers were herded into the rear of the passenger compartment.
Unbeknown to the hijackers, passenger and political commentator Barbara Olson, 45, was able to call her husband -- Solicitor General Ted Olson -- on her cellular phone.
Barbara Olson called her husband, U.S. Solicitor General Ted Olson, from American Airlines Flight 77 shortly before it crashed into the Pentagon.
First, Barbara Olson told her husband that her plane had been hijacked.
"We then both reassured one another, this plane was still up in the air, this plane was still flying," Ted Olson recalled during an interview broadcast on CNN's "Larry King Live" on December 25, 2001.
"And this was going to come out OK. I told her it's going to come out OK. She told me it was going to come out OK. She said, 'I love you. ...'
"We segued back and forth between expressions of feeling for one another, and this effort to exchange information. And then the phone went dead."
Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, killing 184 passengers, crew members and people inside the Pentagon.
Another hijacked airliner, United Flight 93, also carried passengers who phoned loved ones.
Mark Bingham, 31 -- one of a group of passengers who tried to overpower the hijackers and regain control of the plane -- called his mother to say goodbye.
"He said, 'I want you to know I love you very much, and I'm calling you from the plane. We've been taken over. There are three men who say they've got a bomb,'" recalled his mother, Alice Hoglan.
Fifteen minutes later, Flight 93 crashed in a field in rural Somerset County, Pennsylvania, killing 40 crew members and passengers.
Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 6:21 am
yup...we were so shocked and awed by their 911 we still believe anything they tell us...moron alert to everyone...
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 7:31 pm
Did you not take those pics, or is WhatReallyHappened using your photos without permission?hate wrote: the scattered 'missle' debris
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hunthoax.html
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 7:37 pm
we were all brainwashed...some r waking up though...make sure to read part 2...
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=205
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=205
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 7:59 pm
What follows is information from experienced civilian and military pilots who were invited by Col. Donn de Grand Pré (ret. Air Force) to a meeting to discuss and evaluate the 9/11 attack. Here are excerpts from the colonel’s report (portions not in quote marks belong to de Grand Pré) entitled "The Enemy Is Inside the Gates:"0
The so-called terrorist attack was in fact a superbly executed military operation . . . requiring the utmost professional military skill in command, communications and control. It was flawless in timing, in the choice of selected aircraft to be used as guided missiles, and in the coordinated delivery of those missiles to their pre-selected targets.
. . . the attack, from a psychological impact on the American public, equaled the Japanese "surprise" attack on Pearl Harbor 7 Dec 1941.
One General officer remarked, "I seriously question whether these novices [the alleged hijackers] could have located a target dead-on 200 miles removed from takeoff point . . .
The extremely skillful maneuvering of the three aircraft at near mach speeds, each unerringly hitting their targets was superb. As one Air force officer – a veteran of over 100 sorties over North Vietnam – explained, "Those birds (commercial airliners) either had a crack fighter pilot in the left seat, or they were being maneuvered by remote control."
Another comment: "If there was an AWACS on station over the targeted area, did it have a Global Hawk capability? I mean, could it convert the commercial jets to robotic flying missiles?
A hotly debated question: Who would be in command of such an Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS)? Chinese? Russians? Saudis? Israelis? NATO? All of these countries possess AWACS-type aircraft. All (except the Saudis) have the capability to utilize electro-magnetic pulsing (EMP) to knock out on-board flight controls and communications of targeted aircraft, and then, to fly them by remote control.
Captain Kent Hill (American Airlines) said, " . . . Not one of the planes alerted ground control that they were being hijacked." How come?
"The fact is, all the transponders were turned off on the doomed flights virtually at the same time."
He [Hill] is convinced none of the pilots had control of their aircraft when they were flown into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The question then becomes, who was really in control?
" Even if I had a gun at my head, I’d never fly a plane into a building . . . and I’d be searing the h___ out of them (the hijackers) by flying upside down first," Hill said.
In fact, the pilot has the best weapon in his hand when threatened with imminent death by a hijacker, namely, the airplane.
Another airline pilot stated: "On hearing a major scuffle in the cabin, the pilot should have inverted the aircraft and the hijackers end up with broken necks." That none of the four pilots executed such a maneuver points toward the fact that none of them had control of their aircraft, but had been overridden by an outside force, which was flying them by remote control.
As an old and not so bold pilot, I became more convinced that the four commercial jets were choreographed by a "conductor" from a central source, namely an airborne warning and control system (AWACS). They have the electronic capability to engage several aircraft simultaneously, knock out their on-board flight controls by EMP (electro-magnetic pulsing) and assume command and remote control of these targeted aircraft.
As we consider all the options – and enemies . . . China, Russia, Israel, an Islamic country, or NATO), we must also consider that the enemy may be within the gates.
The so-called terrorist attack was in fact a superbly executed military operation . . . requiring the utmost professional military skill in command, communications and control. It was flawless in timing, in the choice of selected aircraft to be used as guided missiles, and in the coordinated delivery of those missiles to their pre-selected targets.
. . . the attack, from a psychological impact on the American public, equaled the Japanese "surprise" attack on Pearl Harbor 7 Dec 1941.
One General officer remarked, "I seriously question whether these novices [the alleged hijackers] could have located a target dead-on 200 miles removed from takeoff point . . .
The extremely skillful maneuvering of the three aircraft at near mach speeds, each unerringly hitting their targets was superb. As one Air force officer – a veteran of over 100 sorties over North Vietnam – explained, "Those birds (commercial airliners) either had a crack fighter pilot in the left seat, or they were being maneuvered by remote control."
Another comment: "If there was an AWACS on station over the targeted area, did it have a Global Hawk capability? I mean, could it convert the commercial jets to robotic flying missiles?
A hotly debated question: Who would be in command of such an Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS)? Chinese? Russians? Saudis? Israelis? NATO? All of these countries possess AWACS-type aircraft. All (except the Saudis) have the capability to utilize electro-magnetic pulsing (EMP) to knock out on-board flight controls and communications of targeted aircraft, and then, to fly them by remote control.
Captain Kent Hill (American Airlines) said, " . . . Not one of the planes alerted ground control that they were being hijacked." How come?
"The fact is, all the transponders were turned off on the doomed flights virtually at the same time."
He [Hill] is convinced none of the pilots had control of their aircraft when they were flown into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The question then becomes, who was really in control?
" Even if I had a gun at my head, I’d never fly a plane into a building . . . and I’d be searing the h___ out of them (the hijackers) by flying upside down first," Hill said.
In fact, the pilot has the best weapon in his hand when threatened with imminent death by a hijacker, namely, the airplane.
Another airline pilot stated: "On hearing a major scuffle in the cabin, the pilot should have inverted the aircraft and the hijackers end up with broken necks." That none of the four pilots executed such a maneuver points toward the fact that none of them had control of their aircraft, but had been overridden by an outside force, which was flying them by remote control.
As an old and not so bold pilot, I became more convinced that the four commercial jets were choreographed by a "conductor" from a central source, namely an airborne warning and control system (AWACS). They have the electronic capability to engage several aircraft simultaneously, knock out their on-board flight controls by EMP (electro-magnetic pulsing) and assume command and remote control of these targeted aircraft.
As we consider all the options – and enemies . . . China, Russia, Israel, an Islamic country, or NATO), we must also consider that the enemy may be within the gates.
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 8:15 pm
jesus...even the bible thumpers know 911 was an iside job...
http://www.etherzone.com/2005/rose101705.shtml
http://www.etherzone.com/2005/rose101705.shtml