How 9/11 was done

[9/11-investigator]

911 investigator-
did they trace the signals from the phones off the towers they bounced off of?? this would clear things up perhaps.

Hi Senenmut, nice to see you again!

I have no idea. I do know this recent article by David Ray Griffin, who says about the calls:

Many people reported having received cell phone calls from loved ones or flight attendants on the airliners, during which they were told that Middle Eastern hijackers had taken over the planes. One recipient, Deena Burnett, was certain that her husband had called her several times on his cell phone because she had recognized his number on her Caller ID. But the calls to Burnett and most of the other reported calls were made when the planes were above 30,000 feet, and evidence presented by the 9/11 truth movement showed that, given the technology of the time, cell phone calls from high-altitude airliners had been impossible. By the time the FBI presented a report on phone calls from the planes at the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui in 2006, it had changed its story, saying that there were only two cell phone calls from the flights, both from United 93 after it had descended to 5,000 feet

The FBI basically confirms that the story that my opponents here still try to sell was BS.

But this was 2006. The original story had fulfilled it purpose to kick start the propaganda machine that the US-media are and brainwash the American people (and the rest of the world) for 5 years that the Arabs had done 9/11. 5 years later nobody cares anymore about 'little details' like how many calls were really made. The US had crossed the Rubicon and from then on there was no way back.

But the stories about the 'Arabs with box cutters' and the 'Let's roll legend' were born and stayed alive.

 

[WildCat]

I have no idea. I do know this recent article by David Ray Griffin, who says about the calls:

David Ray Griffith huh? The man couldn't tell the truth if his life depended on it.

Hint: Some calls were cell phones, some were made by Airphones.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

But the FBI didn't change its story and it didn't change the number of calls to 2. They stated that only 2 of the calls were made from cell phones. And this was not a change. The rest were from airfones.

A good example of DRGs lying to sell his books.

 

[twinstead]

Face it 9/11-investigator. All we have to find is ONE example of a cell phone being used on a flight around 2001 and your claim that it is impossible is shot. An honest investigator would then remove any theory that relies on the cell phones being impossible.

The bottom line is that those calls were made. You have NO evidence that they were faked. You also have no evidence that the COULD have been faked. Like all your other bits of 'evidence', you are wrong. You are accusing people of mass murder with NO real evidence, making stuff up along the way to deal with the inconsistencies and uncomfortable contrary evidence. What kind of an investigator are you?

This is about ideology, not about facts. If you were older, I'm sure you would have been one of those guys running around painting little red A's with circles around them all over Germany when I lived there, right?

 

[9/11-investigator]

A properly constructed experiment that makes a credible attempt to reproduce the specific conditions under which the phone calls were made, would be a good start. Dewdney didn't succeed in doing that, as has been pointed out in the posts you ignored in favour of replying to mine.

Let's go through a quick tutorial on mobile phone cell systems. Different towers use different radio wavelengths, so that signals don't get picked up in error by more than one phone tower. However, the number of wavelengths available is limited, so the transmitter power and the receiver sensitivity has to be kept low enough that the signals from the next nearest neighbour cell, which may be using the same wavelength, are weak enough not to be picked up. Therefore, the more densely packed the cellphone towers, the shorter their range.

Dewdney's experiment was done over a city, where the transmission power and receiver sensitivity of the mobile phone reception equipment is deliberately set low so that signals aren't picked up from next-nearest-neighbour cells which may be as close as a hundred metres away. In that environment it's not surprising that calls can't be made from above 8,000 feet. The cellphone calls made on 9/11 were at low altitudes anyway, and they were made over rural areas, where the spacing between towers was several kilometres and the tower range proportionately greater. The fact that Dewdney seems unaware of this distinction demonstrates that, whatever his general level of physics understanding, he knows very little about the workings of cellular telephony systems. The majority of the 9/11 calls were made on airphones, which are designed to work from airliners at altitude because that's their primary purpose.

For more information, as usual, 9/11 Myths has a wealth of links and quotes. For example, on http://www.911myths.com/html/mobiles_at_altitude.html, you'll find a number of statements from various people outlining the capabilities and limitations of cellphone use from aircraft in flight.

The end result is that it can't be proved that all the calls definitely could have been made, but neither is it possible to prove that they couldn't, and in fact it's not particularly surprising that some, though not all, of the attempts to make calls from cellphones on 9/11 had some limited degree of success. That's a little more complex than simply reading one source that claims that cellphones can't be used from airliners and taking it as irrefutable fact. Unfortunately, that's reality for you; it's complex and sometimes counter-intuitive, and it can't be relied on to support your predetermined conclusions.

Dave

Shall we skip this discussion since even the FBI admitted in 2006 that only 2 calls came through? The discussion has become superfluous. Thanks.

 

[twinstead]

Many people reported having received cell phone calls from loved ones or flight attendants on the airliners, during which they were told that Middle Eastern hijackers had taken over the planes. One recipient, Deena Burnett, was certain that her husband had called her several times on his cell phone because she had recognized his number on her Caller ID. But the calls to Burnett and most of the other reported calls were made when the planes were above 30,000 feet, and evidence presented by the 9/11 truth movement showed that, given the technology of the time, cell phone calls from high-altitude airliners had been impossible. By the time the FBI presented a report on phone calls from the planes at the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui in 2006, it had changed its story, saying that there were only two cell phone calls from the flights, both from United 93 after it had descended to 5,000 feet

So are these loved ones lying, in on it, or so stupid they can't tell the difference between super secret Jew technology and actually talking to people they knew intimately?

 

[ElMondoHummus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0GHVEKrhng

The dog and pony show better known as NIST finally admitted that WTC7 did come down with free fall speed. They had to.

In minute 2:45 a NIST immigrant worker (doing work Americans do not want to do?) explains to us, after some hesitation, that gravity applies to all objects on earth and not just in Ground Zero.

(Where would we be without the giants from NIST I ask you? Thanks Dr. Sundar for telling us. Now please carry on...)

7:27 look at the body language of the NIST employee, he is really feeling uncomfortable! The last time I looked like that was when I was 7 years old and had to admit to my mother that I had taken a cookie from the jar without permission.

8:40 Thank god another immigrant worker comes to the aid of mr Gross and promises that they will correct the mistake in a next version of the report.

Poor NIST. They finally admitted that they do understand the difference between constant velocity and constant acceleration after all.

That was August. In December (after more than 7 years of cover-up) they did come up with a new report in which they finally conceded that during 2.5 seconds there was free fall speed. This has the following implications:

http://media.libsyn.com/media/visibility911/visibility911_chandler.mp3

mp3 21:00 - This means that the WTC7 building acted as if for an equivalent of 7-8 stories the 28 steel columns were basically removed. And the only way for this to happen is in a situation of controlled demolition.

And that means that the OCT is out and my opponents are out of business.

Everybody knew this by just looking at the imploding building. Here again is the reaction of a Dutch demolition expert who brings down buildings on a daily basis. And this also fits perfectly with the BBC who told the world that WTC7 had collapsed while it was still visible behind the lovely reporter. ... proving without a shadow of a doubt that the implosion of WTC7 was a scripted event, just like the implosions of WTC1/2 had been scripted events, given the behavior of the 'dancing Israelis'.

As Ryan Mackey has noted, for some odd reason, conspiracy peddlers think that any amount of free fall time validates their fantasy. When in fact, it can't: Why would there only be a limited period of free fall? Did they only rig some of the building?

The answer is no, they didn't. The small period was actually explained in the NIST report already; it is an indication of ignorance that truthers think it means anything. You need to read the following thread to get caught up:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128194

For the third time, I urge you to compare your claims against what has already been discussed, or is currently under discussion. You might have realized the problems behind this specific criticism you post if you had taken time to do that.

Getting back on the former topic of discussion: Do you concede you were in error regarding the falsity of the calls yet? The evidence is against you, and citing Dewdney does not help, not in the face of all the other evidence validating the ability to make such calls, not to mention the fact that many calls were made by airphones instead. And the fact that family members have validated the calls.

 

[DGM]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0GHVEKrhng

The dog and pony show better known as NIST finally admitted that WTC7 did come down with free fall speed. They had to.

In minute 2:45 a NIST immigrant worker (doing work Americans do not want to do?) explains to us, after some hesitation, that gravity applies to all objects on earth and not just in Ground Zero.

(Where would we be without the giants from NIST I ask you? Thanks Dr. Sundar for telling us. Now please carry on...)

7:27 look at the body language of the NIST employee, he is really feeling uncomfortable! The last time I looked like that was when I was 7 years old and had to admit to my mother that I had taken a cookie from the jar without permission.

8:40 Thank god another immigrant worker comes to the aid of mr Gross and promises that they will correct the mistake in a next version of the report.

Poor NIST. They finally admitted that they do understand the difference between constant velocity and constant acceleration after all.

That was August. In December (after more than 7 years of cover-up) they did come up with a new report in which they finally conceded that during 2.5 seconds there was free fall speed. This has the following implications:

http://media.libsyn.com/media/visibility911/visibility911_chandler.mp3

mp3 21:00 - This means that the WTC7 building acted as if for an equivalent of 7-8 stories the 28 steel columns were basically removed. And the only way for this to happen is in a situation of controlled demolition.

And that means that the OCT is out and my opponents are out of business.

Everybody knew this by just looking at the imploding building. Here again is the reaction of a Dutch demolition expert who brings down buildings on a daily basis. And this also fits perfectly with the BBC who told the world that WTC7 had collapsed while it was still visible behind the lovely reporter. ... proving without a shadow of a doubt that the implosion of WTC7 was a scripted event, just like the implosions of WTC1/2 had been scripted events, given the behavior of the 'dancing Israelis'.

All ready covered in this thread;
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128194

Try to keep up. You should be aware however that none of this is news, it was covered in the original draft (just not with numbers).

 

[Dr Adequate]

Hi Senenmut, nice to see you again!

I have no idea. I do know this recent article by David Ray Griffin, who says about the calls:

Many people reported having received cell phone calls from loved ones or flight attendants on the airliners, during which they were told that Middle Eastern hijackers had taken over the planes. One recipient, Deena Burnett, was certain that her husband had called her several times on his cell phone because she had recognized his number on her Caller ID. But the calls to Burnett and most of the other reported calls were made when the planes were above 30,000 feet, and evidence presented by the 9/11 truth movement showed that, given the technology of the time, cell phone calls from high-altitude airliners had been impossible. By the time the FBI presented a report on phone calls from the planes at the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui in 2006, it had changed its story, saying that there were only two cell phone calls from the flights, both from United 93 after it had descended to 5,000 feet

So David Ray Griffin doesn't know the difference between cell phones and airphones either.

Yes, there were only a few cellphone calls. The other were from airphones. The number of phone calls made is not the same as the number of cell phone calls made. The FBI did not change its story. David Ray Griffin is pretending that there's a contradiction between saying that lots of calls were made and that only a few cellphone calls were made. For more information, see document P200055 from the Moussaoui trial.

I notice that he managed to sucker you despite the fact that we've carefully explained this to you already.

You notice also how he's lying about Truthers having "proved" that making cellphone calls is from planes is impossible? You have read this thread, yes, you know he's lying about that?

The FBI basically confirms that the story that my opponents here still try to sell was BS.

They "basically" confirm it do they? Why is that completely different from, y'know, actually confirming it?

 

[LashL]

Just as an illustration with what kinda guy we are dealing here:

NEW YORK (Associated Press) - A judge says developer Larry Silverstein cannot recover more from the aviation industry than the $2.8 billion value of the World Trade Center if his lawsuits succeed.

Federal Judge Alvin Hellerstein made the determination in a ruling filed Thursday. The decision carried Wednesday's date.

Hellerstein rejected Silverstein's claims that his company would be entitled to as much as $16.2 billion from American Airlines, United Airlines and other aviation defendants.

Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning.

Actually, there were legitimate questions of law to be adjudicated upon in the motion for summary judgment and, in my view, the judge properly determined them.

The main questions were whether WTC Properties is entitled to recover from the aviation defendants for lost rental income and expenses (i.e. replacement cost) as opposed to the dimunition of value (i.e. market value) of its leasehold interest at the time of the attacks, and whether WTC Properties' claims against the aviation defendants are to be offset against collateral payments from its insurers.

These questions are/were proper questions to be determined by a court, although the second question could not properly be determined in a motion for summary judgment and will instead proceed to trial.

Under NY law, the general rule is that the plaintiff may recover the lesser of the dimunition of the property's value and its replacement cost, but there is an exception for "specialty properties", so the court had to make a decision on whether the WTC constituted a "speciality property". The court decided that it did not, so it granted summary judgment on that particular issue in favour of the aviation defendants, limiting their potential exposure, therefore, to ~$2.8 billion (or some other figure to be determined by February 28, 2009).

On the offset question, the court denied the aviation defendant's motion for summary judgment. That question cannot be determined without a trial (or settlement prior to trial) but it is probable that the ~$4.1 billion that the insurers have paid or are expected to pay, will not cover the future costs, expenses and losses associated with the destruction of buildings 1, 2, 4 and 5 so, in the event that the aviation defendants are found to be negligent and liable to WTC Properties, it is unlikely that their offset argument will prevail, and more likely that a court would find that their exposure, while capped at ~$2.8 billion (or some other number to be determined by February 28, 2009), will not be offset by the collateral payments (insurance proceeds).

You really should read the actual decision on the motion for summary judgment and educate yourself a bit before making unfounded allegations.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

Shall we skip this discussion since even the FBI admitted in 2006 that only 2 calls came through? The discussion has become superfluous. Thanks.

You depend on Griffin too much for your information. The FBI was only referring to Flight 93, not all the flights.

...when the Government was in court, where its claims might have been challenged, it was not willing to risk having to defend the claim that nine or more cell phone calls had been made from Flight 93, most of which would have been from six miles up. It suddenly reduced the claim to only two calls.
Chapter 1, Debunking 9/11 Debunking, David Ray Griffin

Furthermore, the claim of "only two calls" was only in the context of what was presented at the Moussaoui trial, not what was actually made.

You've demonstrated a reluctance to refer to original information, depending instead on predigested analyses from known conspiracy peddlers. This is bad; it leads people into believing distortions. I urge you to refer to primary information instead.

 

[Trojan]

Here is my list of conspirators with which I can explain (so far) the events of 9/11. I never said that the American of even Israeli government ever conspired regarding 9/11. That does not mean that both governments where not both very 'receptive' about the events. They accepted the challenge that came with it whole heartedly.

And Hellerstein is a judge, not 'the government'. The central idea about 9/11 was not to make Larry rich (that was a nice spin-off, like that pre-9/11 airline put options were), but to enable the US to attempt a global coup d'état and for Israel to get the services of 200,000 American military personnel for free to 'muck out' the Middle East (that's 1 million man year since 2003 to be paid by the American tax payer. That's you).

Maybe that Hellerstein, who is Jewish himself, is somewhat more sensitive than Silverstein and does not want to rock the boot too much and provoke 'anti-semitism'.

How many conspirators after the fact would be required? Investigators turning a blind eye to signs of explosives? FBI, CIA, NSA, etc. would all have to agree to hide evidence. It takes a lot more than 12.

How about all the security guards who were told to let these Mossad operatives to have unfettered access? Not one honest man among them has come forward?

You have more holes than you think.

 

[Senenmut]

this is from the tom burnett foundation website:
http://www.tomburnettfoundation.org/tomburnett_transcript.html

from the transcript, there were 4 "cell phone" calls made by tom to deenna. the first looks like about 627 pacific time. i believe there is a 2 hr difference in the time and that would be before the plane even took off.the plane was delayed and did not take off until 842. anyway, here is what the trial had to say:

Would you tell us who that caller was.
Yes, sir, this is Thomas Burnett, Jr. Records, airphone records indicate that Mr. Burnett made three phone calls from rows 24 A, B, and C and 25 A, B, and C. However, Thomas's wife, Deena, reported that there may have been additional cell phone calls made to her.
So, she spoke to her husband repeatedly that day, is that correct?
Yes, sir.
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Image:Moussaoui_Trial_Transcript_April_11_2006.pdf

id like to know what towers these airphones bounced off of and how they knew at the mossaoui trial that he called 3 times on airphones. with the cell phone calls, there should be a list on their bill of who called who. i wonder if it went through amdocs??? it would be interesting to see what towers the cell phone went through.

 

[Senenmut]

misread about the time change. it wasnt before it took off.

 

[TjW]

Here is my list of conspirators with which I can explain (so far) the events of 9/11. I never said that the American of even Israeli government ever conspired regarding 9/11. That does not mean that both governments where not both very 'receptive' about the events. They accepted the challenge that came with it whole heartedly.

And Hellerstein is a judge, not 'the government'. The central idea about 9/11 was not to make Larry rich (that was a nice spin-off, like that pre-9/11 airline put options were), but to enable the US to attempt a global coup d'état and for Israel to get the services of 200,000 American military personnel for free to 'muck out' the Middle East (that's 1 million man year since 2003 to be paid by the American tax payer. That's you).

Maybe that Hellerstein, who is Jewish himself, is somewhat more sensitive than Silverstein and does not want to rock the boot too much and provoke 'anti-semitism'.

So the U.S. government is only divided into two branches, Executive and Legislative? The Judicial branch is not part of the government?
I seem to recall learning it differently in my Civics class, and I don't recall it changing.

Still, you want to be careful here. If you allow the Judicial branch to not be a co-conspirator, then to be consistent, then you should accept that decisions made by most judges, absent actual evidence to the contrary, are honest decisions made on the weight of the evidence presented in court.

Also, I'm a little confused by your statement on cell phone usage from airplanes.
Do you now agree that cell phone calls can be made from airplanes?

 

[9/11-investigator]

I mentioned earlier that the experiments by the Canadian professor AKD were later repeated, financed by a Japanese film crew. I just found the program they made:

part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEimCGjEmr8

part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPG6WURLC7Y

The program is mainly about the incredibility of the official story regarding the phone calls.

In part 2 join the professor in his Cessna in the skies of Ontario and witness a voice morphing demonstration for Japanese television.

 

[dtugg]

In part 2 join the professor in his Cessna in the skies of Ontario and witness a voice morphing demonstration for Japanese television.

Just because he couldn't do it in 2008 (or whenever this was) in Canada doesn't mean that is was impossible to do in 2001 in the US. Also, I must wonder if cell phone calls from planes were impossible, why didn't they just use the airphones for all of the? Please answer this question. I bet you can't.

Did the voice morphing convince people's loved ones they were talking to them when they weren't?

 

[9/11-investigator]

How many conspirators after the fact would be required? Investigators turning a blind eye to signs of explosives? FBI, CIA, NSA, etc. would all have to agree to hide evidence. It takes a lot more than 12.

How about all the security guards who were told to let these Mossad operatives to have unfettered access? Not one honest man among them has come forward?

You have more holes than you think.

Conspirator in my definition means somebody who really has to do something: come up with an integral plan in the first place (Zakheim), get a lease for WTC (Silverstein), instruct the Mossad to take action (Bibi, Olmert), persuade the US-gov to go to war and accept (prefabricated) Patriot Act (Cheney), play the local hero (Giulliani), let Menahem Atzmon organize that specific people have access to the planes in Boston to change the software and place canisters with gas and let the Israelis who checked in escape via a side exit and post the pictures of the 'hijackers' to the media. Let Jerome Hauer 'do the media' on 9/11. Let the Kroll brothers who became responsible for the WTC security make sure that specific vans get access to the parking garage in the basement and that specific elevators are put out of operation for 'maintenance purposes'. Let a team around demotion expert Peer Segalovitz mount the charges into the elevator shafts. Let Pete Zalewski "while trying to establish contact with the planes" send a new flight plan up via the ACARS system to the planes after he has ascertained that nobody in the cockpits respond to him anymore (and he can assume that the pilots are dead). Let Dominic Sutter handle the war room where the phone calls are being fabricated.

Where are the holes?

 

[twinstead]

I think you should worry about the holes in your theory, 9/11 investigator. A good question was asked of you today: If using cell phones on planes is IMPOSSIBLE, why did the evil perpetrators even have cell phone calls in their plan? Don't you find that a stupid mistake for the planners of this incredibly complex mission?

 

[twinstead]

Where are the holes?

It's easy to 'not have holes' in a theory you can just make up as you go.