Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The OP link is wrong. Whoever wrote the OP link has editorialized. Notice that the 9/11 Commission's statement DOES NOT back up what the OP claims.
That could be because during hearings cell phones were stated, as well as several news reports. I do agree the article is incorrect to state the 9E CR states it was a cell phone as the Report fails to provide any evidence of what kind of phone was used.
So what's the point of this thread then? Since we have established that all your other claims in the OP are based on incorrect information, is the only thing left to discuss the statement from Coburn as being correct or incorrect?
It is in the O
P link.....not to mention several news reports right after the events......
Right. So I clicked on the link you provided and read the paragraph about Flight 77's calls. Here isthe quote from that link:
The only part I see that mentions CELL calls is this statement from the quote above:
To which you even admitted that there was no mention of cell calls in the CR:
You're absolutely correct about the final report as it does not definitively provide proof how the calls were made nor where they came from. I apologize for claiming the CR said May's calls came from a cell. I believe I had read that regarding one of the Hearings but it was not included in the final report.
So why are you continuing to post bogus information that you yourself have admitted to being incorrect?
I'm not "continuing" to post bogus info. I'm pointing out Olson claimed his wife called on a cell and several news reports were may and olson both used cells. The CR fails to mention any of that as well as provide any actual evidence of the calls themselves.
That could be because during hearings cell phones were stated, as well as several news reports. I do agree the article is incorrect to state the 9E CR states it was a cell phone as the Report fails to provide any evidence of what kind of phone was used.
So what's the point of this thread then? Since we have established that all your other claims in the OP are based on incorrect information, is the only thing left to discuss the statement from Coburn as being correct or incorrect?
There is no hard evidence of the calls.
Right. So I clicked on the link you provided and read the paragraph about Flight 77's calls. Here isthe quote from that link:
The only part I see that mentions CELL calls is this statement from the quote above:
To which you even admitted that there was no mention of cell calls in the CR:
So why are you continuing to post bogus information that you yourself have admitted to being incorrect?
I'm not "continuing" to post bogus info. I'm pointing out Olson claimed his wife called on a cell and several news reports were may and olson both used cells. The CR fails to mention any of that as well as provide any actual evidence of the calls themselves.
You're pointing out that OLSON claimed his wife called on a cell? Changing your claim now in mid-debate?
Tell you what. I'm a forgiving person. Please go back through this thread and give me one quote from you that specifically states you were talking, at any point in this thread, about the Olson call.
I'll wait here...
I'm not "continuing" to post bogus info. I'm pointing out Olson claimed his wife called on a cell and several news reports were may and olson both used cells. The CR fails to mention any of that as well as provide any actual evidence of the calls themselves.
You're pointing out that OLSON claimed his wife called on a cell? Changing your claim now in mid-debate?
Tell you what. I'm a forgiving person. Please go back through this thread and give me one quote from you that specifically states you were talking, at any point in this thread, about the Olson call.
I'll wait here...
Not changing anything. Take a look at the op and show where I said it is only about may? Did I even mention renee may in the op? If you wrongly assume the op is only about may then that is your fault. The op is about the calls from 77.
Well, that was the claim from some guy working for Popular Mechanics. He never supports that claim, but since he said it then it must be true! Unfortunately, the facts do not support his claim. The HC is running its old bullshit "look at 9E" which is really just airwave fodder for people gullible and insecure enough to simply accept what the government says and to not question such stellar publications such as Poopular Mekanics.
Here's some info:
"Travelers could be talking on their personal cellphones as early as 2006. Earlier this month [July 2004], American Airlines conducted a trial run on a modified aircraft that permitted cell phone calls." (WP,July 27, 2004)
Aviation Week (07/20/04) described this new technology in an authoritative report published in July 2004:
"Qualcomm and American Airlines are exploring [July 2004] ways for passengers to use commercial cell phones inflight for air-to- ground communication. In a recent 2-hr. proof-of-concept flight, representatives from government and the media used commercial Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) third-generation cell phones to place and receive calls and text messages from friends on the ground. For the test flight from Dallas-Fort Worth, the aircraft was equipped with an antenna in the front and rear of the cabin to transmit cell phone calls to a small in-cabin CDMA cellular base station. This "pico cell" transmitted cell phone calls from the aircraft via a Globalstar satellite to the worldwide terrestrial phone network"
Needless to say, neither the service, nor the "third generation" hardware, nor the "Picco cell" CDMA base station inside the cabin (which so to speak mimics a cell phone communication tower inside the plane) were available on the morning of September 11, 2001."
The 9/11 Cell Phone Calls
Wow. There was not a whole lot of buzz about those announcements. How do OCTAs defend the claim cell calls were possible?
I went on about 6 flights between Boston and Nebraska between 2005 and 2006 and my cell signal dropped shortly after take off and didn't come back until after landing and this was the usual for other passengers trying to use their cells as well. Personal experiences aside, there is no evidence cell phones would have been operational on 9/11 from those altitudes and speeds. For flight 77 the first claimed cell call occurred at 9:12 am. According to the flight path by the 9E CR, flight 77 would have been too high and traveling too fast for calls to be possible.
I have no doubt nobody can prove cell phones were capable of conversational operations on 9/11 on flight 77 at 9:12 am. Is there anyone who can prove that was possible? I've provided evidence it was not possible. I anticipate two usual events: the usual dickless whiny wonders of fizzbitch, Snitch Bitch, Diveass, and Candyass will do nothing but try to distract and nobody will provide actual evidence showing the cell call from flight 77 at 9:12am was technologically possible.
" [at 9.12] Renee May called her mother, Nancy May, in Las Vegas. She said her flight was being hijacked by six individuals who had moved them to the rear of the plane."
At some point between 9:16 and 9:26, Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, the solicitor general of the United States. [using an airphone]
I'm pointing out Olson claimed his wife called on a cell...
At some point between 9:16 and 9:26, Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, the solicitor general of the United States. [using an airphone]
I'm pointing out Olson claimed his wife called on a cell...
Just so you understand where you fucked up, I'll post it again. Either you can't read or you change information around to make it support your views.
The 9/11 Cell Phone Calls
The article that you link to clearly states that Olson's call was made from an Airphone:
At some point between 9:16 and 9:26, Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, the solicitor general of the United States. [using an airphone]
Yet you claim that it was made from a CELL PHONE
How'd you mess that one up?
Are you serious? Because I point to the first claimed time of a cell call that somehow means the op is endemic to May only? Wtf?
I'm pointing out Olson claimed his wife called on a cell...
Just so you understand where you fucked up, I'll post it again. Either you can't read or you change information around to make it support your views.
The 9/11 Cell Phone Calls
The article that you link to clearly states that Olson's call was made from an Airphone:
At some point between 9:16 and 9:26, Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, the solicitor general of the United States. [using an airphone]
Yet you claim that it was made from a CELL PHONE
How'd you mess that one up?
Please try to keep up. It was ted olson who made the cell phone and airphone claims.
Right. So I clicked on the link you provided and read the paragraph about Flight 77's calls. Here isthe quote from that link:
The only part I see that mentions CELL calls is this statement from the quote above:
To which you even admitted that there was no mention of cell calls in the CR:
So why are you continuing to post bogus information that you yourself have admitted to being incorrect?
I'm not "continuing" to post bogus info. I'm pointing out Olson claimed his wife called on a cell and several news reports were may and olson both used cells. The CR fails to mention any of that as well as provide any actual evidence of the calls themselves.
You're pointing out that OLSON claimed his wife called on a cell? Changing your claim now in mid-debate?
Tell you what. I'm a forgiving person. Please go back through this thread and give me one quote from you that specifically states you were talking, at any point in this thread, about the Olson call.
I'll wait here...
I'm not "continuing" to post bogus info. I'm pointing out Olson claimed his wife called on a cell and several news reports were may and olson both used cells. The CR fails to mention any of that as well as provide any actual evidence of the calls themselves.
You're pointing out that OLSON claimed his wife called on a cell? Changing your claim now in mid-debate?
Tell you what. I'm a forgiving person. Please go back through this thread and give me one quote from you that specifically states you were talking, at any point in this thread, about the Olson call.
I'll wait here...
I specifically pointed out Olson changing his story by quoting you.....but you want to claim I never talked about Olson? Okay.
(your post)
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2038894-post68.html
(my response)
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2040868-post121.html
What other distractions do you have in mind?
So basically Curvelight,
Your OP has been boiled down to Coburn's statement concerning the 50,000 foot claim. All the other bullshit has been proven incorrect because you can't provide ANY verified claims that calls were made from CELL PHONES and not AIRPHONES and that you admitted twice that your information garnered from other sources was NOT correct in the first place.
Do I have this correct?
Just so you understand where you fucked up, I'll post it again. Either you can't read or you change information around to make it support your views.
The 9/11 Cell Phone Calls
The article that you link to clearly states that Olson's call was made from an Airphone:
Yet you claim that it was made from a CELL PHONE
How'd you mess that one up?
Please try to keep up. It was ted olson who made the cell phone and airphone claims.
No, YOU keep up. The article you posted as proof to back your claims says Olson's wife made the call from an AIRPHONE, not a cell phone.
Get it right for once.
You're pointing out that OLSON claimed his wife called on a cell? Changing your claim now in mid-debate?
Tell you what. I'm a forgiving person. Please go back through this thread and give me one quote from you that specifically states you were talking, at any point in this thread, about the Olson call.
I'll wait here...
I specifically pointed out Olson changing his story by quoting you.....but you want to claim I never talked about Olson? Okay.
(your post)
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2038894-post68.html
(my response)
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2040868-post121.html
What other distractions do you have in mind?
So why are you arguing that cell phone calls from planes are next to impossible when there is no proof whatsoever that the calls you reference to as not being possible were made from either cell phones or airphones?
Are you serious? Because I point to the first claimed time of a cell call that somehow means the op is endemic to May only? Wtf?
What other phone call happened at 9:12 am and on flight 77?!?!?!
You fucking mentioned it three times in your OP for Christ's sake as an example of a call that couldn't have happened. Then you you get your ass handed to you, where you had to admit not ONCE, but TWICE that your information was incorrect, you add Olson's call into the mix.
You even fucked THAT one up as you link you provided as proof to back your claims mentions that the Olson call was made from an AIRPHONE and not a CELL PHONE!
3. Olson changes his story several times between his wife calling him from a cell phone, direct airphone, then collect calls from an airphone.
You're absolutely correct about the final report as it does not definitively provide proof how the calls were made nor where they came from. I apologize for claiming the CR said May's calls came from a cell. I believe I had read that regarding one of the Hearings but it was not included in the final report.
That could be because during hearings cell phones were stated, as well as several news reports. I do agree the article is incorrect to state the 9E CR states it was a cell phone as the Report fails to provide any evidence of what kind of phone was used.
Are you serious? Because I point to the first claimed time of a cell call that somehow means the op is endemic to May only? Wtf?
What other phone call happened at 9:12 am and on flight 77?!?!?!
You fucking mentioned it three times in your OP for Christ's sake as an example of a call that couldn't have happened. Then you you get your ass handed to you, where you had to admit not ONCE, but TWICE that your information was incorrect, you add Olson's call into the mix.
You even fucked THAT one up as you link you provided as proof to back your claims mentions that the Olson call was made from an AIRPHONE and not a CELL PHONE!
Again....I pointed to when the FIRST call was made. Who the hell would twist that into saying the op is only about the FIRST call?
