• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Todd Beamer cell phone log.

This is similar to my first impression:

jimd3100 said:
OK so the guy that runs the site emailed me back--he is being very helpfull, so any accusations that he is a shill or trying to "cover it up" is just stupid. His take on it...I'd like to just copy the email, but is that like bad etiquette? Huh

Anyway his take is that he believes on the report the incoming calls are actually outgoing calls,...they have it reversed. The reason he believes this is the 21 minute conversation that is reported in the document as incoming, is at 7:43 which he said the famous conversation between Beamer and the airline and was at 8:43-- and that would be an outgoing call. Time zones accounting for the difference. He thinks the woodbridge calls(being incoming instead of outgoing )might be someone-- NTSB possibly, trying to locate the wreckage by calling this phone, or maybe something else. He also states that "they don’t hesitate to cut out anything they please, so I tend to suspect that anything they release is generally either 1) innocuous or 2) obscure enough that they don’t know it’s important. In this case, the weirdness is not obscure, so I would tend to think it’s probably innocuous. ;-)"

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=37809.0
Click to expand...

jimd3100 said:
he might be correct, when he says the outgoing calls are incoming calls, and the incoming calls are outgoing calls.

http://intelfiles.egoplex.com/2001-09-29-FBI-phone-records.pdf

The reason being the report is from his carrier, verizon. So when their customer (Beamer) makes outgoing call, it goes to them to send, so to them it is incoming, when someone calls Beamer it goes to them to send to him, so it's outgoing....

The famous conversation was not 21 minutes but 13 minutes.

http://intelfiles.egoplex.com/2001-09-22-FBI-post-gazette-beamer.pdf

http://intelfiles.egoplex.com/2001-09-22-FBI-FD302-todd-beamer-mrs.pdf

Call made by gte airphone

The 21 minute call was placed by Beamer at 7:43 just like the time says...he was from Cranbury NJ so he would be on Eastern time. Probably discussing the late plane takeoff, as the plane was supposed to leave at 8:00 but was late and left at 8:42.

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=37809.0
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Heck...if I had to speculate (why not? Its all the Truthers do) I'd submit that those calls were the result of a damaged phone automatically dialing or trying to contact some number or some electronic cellular hiccup doing some sort of dial-out - the regularity and timing of those calls are just too uniform for anyone to seriously think they are from actual human usage.

However...it does seem to be "Truther Logic" to assume that Beamer, after faking his death in western Pennsylvania, would pull out his real cell phone in Woodbridge, NJ and make a series of 1 minute phone calls over the following 12 hours.
 
I think the Woodbridge calls are somebody trying to call Beamer as well. His phone was no longer working for obvious reasons and calls were being routed directly to his voicemail. His cell had a NJ area code. My cell detail shows my voicemail routes to San Bruno, CA because I have a 650 area code.

If I were to guess who was making the calls? I'd say Mrs Beamer, Probably holding out hope that somehow her husband made it. Chicks, eh? They do stuff like that, bless their hearts.
 
Truther Manual explains it all...

Griffin's law:
When analyzing anomalies, the most complex explanation is the truth.

TAM;)
 
AJM8125 said:
I think the Woodbridge calls are somebody trying to call Beamer as well. His phone was no longer working for obvious reasons and calls were being routed directly to his voicemail. His cell had a NJ area code. My cell detail shows my voicemail routes to San Bruno, CA because I have a 650 area code.

If I were to guess who was making the calls? I'd say Mrs Beamer, Probably holding out hope that somehow her husband made it. Chicks, eh? They do stuff like that, bless their hearts.
Click to expand...

I agree.
 
Pinch said:
However...it does seem to be "Truther Logic" to assume that Beamer, after faking his death in western Pennsylvania, would pull out his real cell phone in Woodbridge, NJ and make a series of 1 minute phone calls over the following 12 hours.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the assumption that the FBI would just release this incriminating evidence because someone made a FOIA request.

Mind you, the same assumption applies to the Flight 77 FDR apparently so why should the truthers believe any different?!
 
double_o said:
This file was posted by a truther on another forum, it's Todd Beamer cell phone log obtained through FOIA. He claims that it shows that Beamer made calls after UA93 crashed and therefore the "Official story" is a lie.
Does anybody know how to read it or what does it mean?
Click to expand...


Hey, I have an idea. Since you guys are so interested in exposing frauds, why don't you show where I claim..."it shows that Beamer made calls after UA93 crashed and therefore the "Official story" is a lie"? I'd like to see that. Get your facts straight. What I said as anyone can see is this....


"Frankly I never really thought these phone calls are all that important or mean anything anyway. But I am puzzled by one thing....."


And Later in the thread this...

"The reason being the report is from his carrier, verizon. So when their customer (Beamer) makes outgoing call, it goes to them to send, so to them it is incoming, when someone calls Beamer it goes to them to send to him, so it's outgoing...."

"So he made no calls on his cell during the flight."

I have always said a large plane hit the pentagon, but you sherlocks in here try and say I'm a pentagon no planer, and I had to correct you. I've always said the phone calls are not to be a so called "truther" talking point because they were almost all airphone calls, and I don't believe in the voice morphing BS.

Now, show me where I said "Beamer made cell phone calls after the crash proving the official story is a lie?"
 
Last edited:
jimd3100 said:
Hey, I have an idea. Since you guys are so interested in exposing frauds, why don't you show where I claim..."it shows that Beamer made calls after UA93 crashed and therefore the "Official story" is a lie"? I'd like to see that. Get your facts straight. What I said as anyone can see is this....


"Frankly I never really thought these phone calls are all that important or mean anything anyway. But I am puzzled by one thing....."


And Later in the thread this...

"The reason being the report is from his carrier, verizon. So when their customer (Beamer) makes outgoing call, it goes to them to send, so to them it is incoming, when someone calls Beamer it goes to them to send to him, so it's outgoing...."

"So he made no calls on his cell during the flight."

I have always said a large plane hit the pentagon, but you sherlocks in here try and say I'm a pentagon no planer, and I had to correct you. I've always said the phone calls are not to be a so called "truther" talking point because they were almost all airphone calls, and I don't believe in the voice morphing BS.

Now, show me where I said "Beamer made cell phone calls after the crash proving the official story is a lie?"
Click to expand...

Excuse me, have we talked before?

Because you aren't the one I was talking about, unless you are posting under a different nickname in other forums?
 
jimd3100: If the OP was referring to your post, then it misrepresented your views. But it gave no link and did not identify the poster; are you the only person who has posted the link on a web forum? I agree with your theory and I posted your original comments in my post above (with a link to Prison Planet).
 
Last edited:
jimd3100 said:
Hey, I have an idea. Since you guys are so interested in exposing frauds, why don't you show where I claim..."it shows that Beamer made calls after UA93 crashed and therefore the "Official story" is a lie"? I'd like to see that. Get your facts straight. What I said as anyone can see is this....


"Frankly I never really thought these phone calls are all that important or mean anything anyway. But I am puzzled by one thing....."


And Later in the thread this...

"The reason being the report is from his carrier, verizon. So when their customer (Beamer) makes outgoing call, it goes to them to send, so to them it is incoming, when someone calls Beamer it goes to them to send to him, so it's outgoing...."

"So he made no calls on his cell during the flight."

I have always said a large plane hit the pentagon, but you sherlocks in here try and say I'm a pentagon no planer, and I had to correct you. I've always said the phone calls are not to be a so called "truther" talking point because they were almost all airphone calls, and I don't believe in the voice morphing BS.

Now, show me where I said "Beamer made cell phone calls after the crash proving the official story is a lie?"
Click to expand...

1. You should address this to those who accused you of something, not generally everyone.
2. You sound reasonable to a degree, so may be even further explanation would help.
3. A link to your actual posting would help, as none of us were provided with it, and were commenting based on someones interpretation.

Welcome to the forum.

TAM:)
 
JIMD3100 has been involved in a personal pity party ever since he was nominated for a Stundie last May.
 
Mr.Herbert said:
JIMD3100 has been involved in a personal pity party ever since he was nominated for a Stundie last May.
Click to expand...

Well, Mr Herbert, I would encourage anyone here to read my post history since I only have six, it should not be to difficult, and to anyone who does, it would be clear that not only are you being dishonest by the term "pity party" but I was very pleased and looking forward to my Stundie award(that I never got) because it showed how useless and insignificant it is, since my award would be for being a pentagon no planer when I never have been. But what should I expect since you think we are hated for our freedoms. Is that pretty much all you do is lie about people on here. Gee sounds fun.

And to moongoose T.A.M and double o--My quotes being posted after the OP where I did post the same link seemed to imply I was being referenced in the OP. If I wasn't -I just wanted to make clear where I stood on the issue.
I think it's cleared up. Mr Herbert here seems to want to take it to another level or keep some kind of animosity going for whatever reason. Most people would call that a personality flaw.
 
Okay, but the only reason why I quoted you was that I agreed with your explanation and found it worth repeating. I wasn't at all implying that you were the one being referenced. It was more like, "Hey, here's a guy who has something interesting to say about it, check this out."
 
I personally missed your name in the Mangoose quote (I tend not to get too concerned over who was quoted unless it is relevant), but I see it now.

TAM:)
 
In case my words in my first post were misunderstood:

"This is similar to my first impression" = "What this guy says is pretty much what I thought when I looked at the document."
 
Mangoose said:
In case my words in my first post were misunderstood:

"This is similar to my first impression" = "What this guy says is pretty much what I thought when I looked at the document."
Click to expand...

So we have agreed, Mangoose is to blame.

Oh if only I had a nickel for every time we've had to say that!

imagine smiley style face here
 
Please let's not perslonalise this thread. Focus on the topic at hand, rather than a member.
Thank you, as always.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom