Loose Change - Part III

[XXX]

OK, just want to make sure before I start blasting this guy...no tapes of phone calls from the planes, other than Betty Ong's, have ever been released, right? I can't find any.

 

[dubfan]

OK, just want to make sure before I start blasting this guy...no tapes of phone calls from the planes, other than Betty Ong's, have ever been released, right? I can't find any.

Just as a further safety check: I'm not aware of any BUT, it would seem to me that any of the calls placed by Flight Attendants to the Ops Centers of the respective airlines would've been taped. If I'm not mistaken there were other FAs besides Betty who called.

I would check the 911 Commission Report (chapter 1) and look at the footnotes.

 

[gumboot]

Another thing to consider with these [rule8]s' claims about what they'd do in such a situation...

We know that on UA93, for example, all the hijackers were in the cockpit - none in the passenger cabin.

In addition, on Betty Ong's flight they didn't even KNOW the plane was hijacked - all they knew was people had been stabbed. This again suggests the hijackers are in the cockpit.

If the hijackers were in the cockpit on every flight, obviously there is nothing to stop the passengers rallying around, gathering up credit cards galore, and making airphone calls to their hearts' content.

These [rule8]'s just don't think, at all... they become practically orgasmic (can I say that?) over every single little minute detail that seems "out of place" but meanwhile ignore a tonne of other details that connect everything together.

-Andrew

EDT. Sorry... the CTs used to annoy me and amuse me. Now they're started to make me angry...*breathe*

 

[Brainster]

OK, just want to make sure before I start blasting this guy...no tapes of phone calls from the planes, other than Betty Ong's, have ever been released, right? I can't find any.

Why not put it on him--ask him whose conversations he's heard? The CBS News article does mention that one of the flight attendants on UA 93 left a message on her husband's answering machine which was also played in court; it's possible that's out there as well, although I would give you very high odds against her identifying herself with both her first and last name.

This is a problem for the Truthers, this continual desire to make the story a little better. It's not enough that Mark Bingham got flustered and identified himself to his mom with his full name; everybody had to do it (preferrably in an eerily robotic sounding voice). It's not enough that the steel came down in sections 30 feet long (yes, even that's nonsense), but Dylan's gotta claim it was no more than "a couple feet long". It's not enough that the cable spools in front of the Pentagon showed relatively minor damage; they were "untouched". There are at least a dozen more examples of this irresistable urge to exaggerate.

 

[XXX]

I did that Brainster, decided first to ask him where he heard these tapes and where I could here them too. Then when he can;t produce them I'll blast him.

Remember, he said "government released tapes" of the hijacked plane's phone calls, and that "every tape he heard" had the person making the call using their first and last names. I think he is just putting together a bad post based on his remembering the whole Mark Bingham thing, and also has assumed that there actually are tapes out there that have been listened to.

 

[gumboot]

Just a question for everyone...this is mere musing...

How much is Hollywood to blame?

Seems to me, every film involving any sort of government agent is the same - the one lone good FBI/CIA/NSA/whatever agent, struggling for the truth against the corrupt and evil organisation they work for.

Hell, even in films about FIREMEN they're corrupt! (Think Backdraft...).

Is it possible Hollywood has encoded the younger generation with a subconscious belief that ALL government agencies, all police, all authority, are evil and corrupt?

-Andrew

 

[Kent1]

"In addition, on Betty Ong's flight they didn't even KNOW the plane was hijacked - all they knew was people had been stabbed. This again suggests the hijackers are in the cockpit."

I think she knew. I don't know how many of the passangers knew.
Here is an audio of her phone call from the plane
http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/911-ong-tape.htm

 

[XXX]

Oh, this is fun. First he tells me that the tapes are not hard to track down, then when pressed further he says that he has "heard excerpts on numerous radio talk shows when the govt "approved" tapes were released months ago ...".

EDIT : LOL, I'm now being told to "do my homework". He hasn't pointed out a single one of these tapes yet.

 

[Brainster]

Just a question for everyone...this is mere musing...

How much is Hollywood to blame?

Seems to me, every film involving any sort of government agent is the same - the one lone good FBI/CIA/NSA/whatever agent, struggling for the truth against the corrupt and evil organisation they work for.

Hell, even in films about FIREMEN they're corrupt! (Think Backdraft...).

Is it possible Hollywood has encoded the younger generation with a subconscious belief that ALL government agencies, all police, all authority, are evil and corrupt?

-Andrew

There's a lot of truth to that analysis of Hollywood (and books).

Also note that in Three Days of the Condor, The Bourne Identity, The Parallax View, JFK, Conspiracy Theory... you name it, the paranoid nutters are always right. About the only one I can think of who's a harmless crank is the Dan Ackroyd character in Sneakers.

 

[JamesB]

There's a lot of truth to that analysis of Hollywood (and books).

Also note that in Three Days of the Condor, The Bourne Identity, The Parallax View, JFK, Conspiracy Theory... you name it, the paranoid nutters are always right. About the only one I can think of who's a harmless crank is the Dan Ackroyd character in Sneakers.

I love that character.

Now what are you saying, the NSA killed Kennedy?
No, they shot him but they didn't kill him. He's still alive.

 

[Brainster]

I love that character.

Now what are you saying, the NSA killed Kennedy?
No, they shot him but they didn't kill him. He's still alive.

Cattle mutilations are up 150% this year.

 

[dubfan]

There's a lot of truth to that analysis of Hollywood (and books).

Also note that in Three Days of the Condor, The Bourne Identity, The Parallax View, JFK, Conspiracy Theory... you name it, the paranoid nutters are always right. About the only one I can think of who's a harmless crank is the Dan Ackroyd character in Sneakers.

I disagree that Hollywood's to blame. I think Hollywood's just a reflection. I think the real-life events of Watergate & Vietnam (possibly the perception more so than the reality in the case of VN) did more to undermine trust in the government than anything. Hollywood just sort of picked up the ball and ran with it.

That narrative (the Vietnam/Watergate story) is still playing out today in a lot of different venues. CTs is just one of them.

I don't want this to get political, so that's all I'll say.

 

[gumboot]

Good point dubfan...

That was my other consideration, that Hollywood was a reflection. So it could be a bit of both perhaps? (as option three) Real events create spark, which Hollywood jumps on (makes great stories). It becomes a staple of Hollywood, to the point that it influences the world view of those of, for example, my generation.

I mean, let's face it, people like Dylan Avery get their reality from TV. They show over and over that their command of other world events throughout history (what was that other country Hitler invaded...?) is pitiful. And they don't seem to be an exception. Most of my friends - in this same age group - are just the same. They base their sense of reality on what they see on TV (and no I'm not talking the news). The only "reality" based stabiliser of their world view (aside from my own struggles) is their parents, who would fit into the "believe government is corrupt due to real world events" category described by dubfan.

-Andrew

 

[dubfan]

Good point dubfan...

That was my other consideration, that Hollywood was a reflection. So it could be a bit of both perhaps? (as option three) Real events create spark, which Hollywood jumps on (makes great stories). It becomes a staple of Hollywood, to the point that it influences the world view of those of, for example, my generation.

I mean, let's face it, people like Dylan Avery get their reality from TV. They show over and over that their command of other world events throughout history (what was that other country Hitler invaded...?) is pitiful. And they don't seem to be an exception. Most of my friends - in this same age group - are just the same. They base their sense of reality on what they see on TV (and no I'm not talking the news). The only "reality" based stabiliser of their world view (aside from my own struggles) is their parents, who would fit into the "believe government is corrupt due to real world events" category described by dubfan.

-Andrew

I think each generation has defining events that shape & color the worldview for people of that generation. For a lot of people who came of age in the 60s and 70s, it was Vietnam & Watergate.

I'm a little younger than that -- I came of age during Carter/Reagan. The Iranian hostage crisis and Desert One and Klinghoffer and Stethem and Beirut colored my view of American government and foreign policy more than Watergate & Vietnam did.

People of Dylan's age don't even remember the Cold War. They don't remember Reagan, weren't even alive for Carter. The Iranian hostage crisis means nothing to them. Desert One, they've never heard of. Same for Klinghoffer & Stethem. The defining event of their era so far is the disputed 2000 election.

 

[Gravy]

The defining event of their era so far is the disputed 2000 election.

(Psst! 9/11.)

 

[realitybites]

(Psst! 9/11.)

Well of course 9/11. But if you look back.... 9/11 would never have happened if Bush didn't steal the election.

Ergo, the 2000 election is what defines this generation.

 

[gumboot]

I think he meant "defining event" in terms of government = evil corruption.

But people of my age, by 2000, already had their basic world view established. (And unlike events like Desert One and "Nam", I don't think the 2000 election thing had as big an impact on non-American youths, yet if anything their attitude is even stronger)

P.S. The Iranian hostage crises means something to me, and I have heard of Desert One... (Yeah, I know I'm not typical of my age group in that regard...)

-Andrew

 

[dubfan]

(Psst! 9/11.)

Yes, but 9/11 viewed in what way? They view it thru the lens of what they perceive was a stolen election. Poke at that scab long enough with any CTer and that's what you'll find.

 

[gumboot]

But if you look back.... 9/11 would never have happened if Bush didn't steal the election.

Of course it would have... it is very well established that both parties are part of the evil illuminati/neocon/jooo plot... and the CIA/NSA/DoD/FBI/FAA/NORAD/CNN/PBS/ABC/XYZ would still be there, regardless of who was in power.



-Andrew

 

[JamesB]

According to Paul Krugman it will be Enron...