"We Know in 2001 Cell Phones Worked Up To 50,000 Feet and..."

[Ravi]

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?

No where near correct.

1. Popular Mechanics claimed on the HC documentary cell phone technology in 2001 allowed for cell phones to work on planes up to 50,000 feet.

2. First reports from the media, and ted olson himself, is the calls from 77 were made via 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.

4. There is no evidence proving seatback phones on 77 were operational. In fact, there is quite a bit of evidence, including a maintenance manual from AA, showing the seatback phones were not operational on their 757s in Sept 01.

5. The CR fails to include any of this information in its final report. It simply states the calls were made but provides absolutely no hard evidence.

6. The airline, phone companies (either cell or airphone), credit card companies (a cc is needed to even activate a seatback phone), the FBI, nor the DOJ, can provide a single piece of hard evidence showing calls came from flight 77.

Please provide a link to the pertinent information on the History Channel. All you have provided is quotes from people posting comments on a blog claiming this statement about 50,000 feet was made.

Also, where are your quotes of what exactly Mr. Olsen said about the phone calls?

 

[CurveLight]

I see. I'm responsible for your assumptions.

 

[Gamolon]

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?

Because you made mention of the call at 9:12 am AND flight 77 THREE TIMES as an example of a call that wouldn't have worked!!!

What the fuck do you not understand?

I mean seriously. If I made a claim and then pointed out a specific instance THREE times as proof that the total claim was correct, why wouldn't you argue against my example? Especially when you found my SPECIFIC example to be incorrect? Your example was bogus because there is NO proof that it was made from a CELL PHONE.

You so, trying to validate your claim that cell phone usage from 50,000 feet is not possible by using the call from 9:12 am on flight 77 and INSINUATING that it was made from a CELL PHONE (even though you have no proof) is bullshit.

Get it now?

 

[candycorn]

3. Olson changes his story several times between his wife calling him from a cell phone, direct airphone, then collect calls from an airphone.

I get it now. It's ok for YOU to change your story and admit mistakes, but nobody ELSE can right?

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.

You get the feeling that it takes Curvelight something like 45 minutes to order a burger? I'm glad she makes them quicker than that.

 

[Ravi]

I read the various things that Ted Olsen said about phones. It is apparent he never knew if his wife called from a cell phone or an airphone and was merely speculating. She called him at work, and apparently had to go through the office switchboard to speak to him.

A really funny link I found claimed that 757s didn't have airphones and as evidence the conspiracist linked to a forum post authored by someone with the screen name [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]“the Paradroid”

I see what happens here. These nuts read something and because someone wrote it and they want to believe it they take it for the truth.

There is probably someone on another forum linking to CurveLight's posts as examples of facts.


[/FONT]

 

[CurveLight]

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?

No where near correct.

1. Popular Mechanics claimed on the HC documentary cell phone technology in 2001 allowed for cell phones to work on planes up to 50,000 feet.

2. First reports from the media, and ted olson himself, is the calls from 77 were made via 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.

4. There is no evidence proving seatback phones on 77 were operational. In fact, there is quite a bit of evidence, including a maintenance manual from AA, showing the seatback phones were not operational on their 757s in Sept 01.

5. The CR fails to include any of this information in its final report. It simply states the calls were made but provides absolutely no hard evidence.

6. The airline, phone companies (either cell or airphone), credit card companies (a cc is needed to even activate a seatback phone), the FBI, nor the DOJ, can provide a single piece of hard evidence showing calls came from flight 77.

Please provide a link to the pertinent information on the History Channel. All you have provided is quotes from people posting comments on a blog claiming this statement about 50,000 feet was made.

Also, where are your quotes of what exactly Mr. Olsen said about the phone calls?

Coburn said it on the HC documentary and I've looked for the video but won't waste anymore time on it. Anyone who has watched the whole documentary knows he said it....which is why there are several links pointing out what he said.

As for olson, plenty of sources:

Ted Olson's Report of Phone Calls from Barbara Olson on 9/11: Three Official Denials

 

[Gamolon]

3. Olson changes his story several times between his wife calling him from a cell phone, direct airphone, then collect calls from an airphone.

I get it now. It's ok for YOU to change your story and admit mistakes, but nobody ELSE can right?

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.

You get the feeling that it takes Curvelight something like 45 minutes to order a burger? I'm glad she makes them quicker than that.

Well, she has to make sure she doesn't fuck up anymore. She has to pick her words CAREFULLY now so as not to have admit any more mistakes.

God forbid that we start to compare her to Olson and how THAT story changed so many times...

 

[CurveLight]

I read the various things that Ted Olsen said about phones. It is apparent he never knew if his wife called from a cell phone or an airphone and was merely speculating. She called him at work, and apparently had to go through the office switchboard to speak to him.

A really funny link I found claimed that 757s didn't have airphones and as evidence the conspiracist linked to a forum post authored by someone with the screen name [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]“the Paradroid”

I see what happens here. These nuts read something and because someone wrote it and they want to believe it they take it for the truth.

There is probably someone on another forum linking to CurveLight's posts as examples of facts.


[/FONT]

Then show us seatback phones on AA 77 were operational.

As for olson, he claimed it as fact and not speculation but good job trying to cover up for him. The DOJ could have easily proved where the call came from if it produced its phone records for that morning.

 

[Gamolon]

I read the various things that Ted Olsen said about phones. It is apparent he never knew if his wife called from a cell phone or an airphone and was merely speculating. She called him at work, and apparently had to go through the office switchboard to speak to him.

A really funny link I found claimed that 757s didn't have airphones and as evidence the conspiracist linked to a forum post authored by someone with the screen name [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]“the Paradroid”

I see what happens here. These nuts read something and because someone wrote it and they want to believe it they take it for the truth.

There is probably someone on another forum linking to CurveLight's posts as examples of facts.


[/FONT]

Then show us seatback phones on AA 77 were operational.

As for olson, he claimed it as fact and not speculation but good job trying to cover up for him. The DOJ could have easily proved where the call came from if it produced its phone records for that morning.

So are you going to admit that you three examples of Renee May's calls were bogus proof to back your claim that cell phone calls could not have been made since there is no PROOF her calls were made from a cell phone?

 

[Ravi]

I read the various things that Ted Olsen said about phones. It is apparent he never knew if his wife called from a cell phone or an airphone and was merely speculating. She called him at work, and apparently had to go through the office switchboard to speak to him.

A really funny link I found claimed that 757s didn't have airphones and as evidence the conspiracist linked to a forum post authored by someone with the screen name [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]“the Paradroid”

I see what happens here. These nuts read something and because someone wrote it and they want to believe it they take it for the truth.

There is probably someone on another forum linking to CurveLight's posts as examples of facts.


[/FONT]

Then show us seatback phones on AA 77 were operational.

As for olson, he claimed it as fact and not speculation but good job trying to cover up for him. The DOJ could have easily proved where the call came from if it produced its phone records for that morning.

CNN reported that he said cell phones...but they didn't quote him so it is more than possible that CNN was mistaken.

And later in his interview with Brit Hume he clearly stated that he didn't know what phone she called him from.

Somehow I'm not surprised that you won't find the portion of the video about 50,000 feet...I am now positive that it doesn't exist.

Great job building up a conspiracy out of nothing.

 

[Ravi]

I read the various things that Ted Olsen said about phones. It is apparent he never knew if his wife called from a cell phone or an airphone and was merely speculating. She called him at work, and apparently had to go through the office switchboard to speak to him.

A really funny link I found claimed that 757s didn't have airphones and as evidence the conspiracist linked to a forum post authored by someone with the screen name [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]“the Paradroid”

I see what happens here. These nuts read something and because someone wrote it and they want to believe it they take it for the truth.

There is probably someone on another forum linking to CurveLight's posts as examples of facts.


[/FONT]

Just to highlight the idiocy out there on the internets, this is what I was talking about above.

In this silly blog, Ted Olson's Report of Phone Calls from Barbara Olson on 9/11: Three Official Denials

is the statement:

[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]A 9/11 researcher, knowing that AA Flight 77 was a Boeing 757, noticed that AA’s website indicated that its 757s do not have passenger-seat phones. After he wrote to ask if that had been the case on September 11, 2001, an AA customer service representative replied: “That is correct; we do not have phones on our Boeing 757. The passengers on flight 77 used their own personal cellular phones to make out calls during the terrorist attack.”8[/FONT]

When you click on the notation [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]8 you discover that the source of this "fact" about the passenger seat phones is this:
[/FONT]

[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]See the submission of 17 February 2006 by “the Paradroid” on the Politik Forum (http://forum.politik.de/forum/archive/index.php/t-133356-p-24.html). It is quoted in David Ray Griffin, 9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press (Northampton: Olive Branch, 2008), 75. [/FONT]

TFF!

 

[SFC Ollie]

I read the various things that Ted Olsen said about phones. It is apparent he never knew if his wife called from a cell phone or an airphone and was merely speculating. She called him at work, and apparently had to go through the office switchboard to speak to him.

A really funny link I found claimed that 757s didn't have airphones and as evidence the conspiracist linked to a forum post authored by someone with the screen name [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]“the Paradroid”

I see what happens here. These nuts read something and because someone wrote it and they want to believe it they take it for the truth.

There is probably someone on another forum linking to CurveLight's posts as examples of facts.


[/FONT]

That's a scary thought.

 

[candycorn]

I read the various things that Ted Olsen said about phones. It is apparent he never knew if his wife called from a cell phone or an airphone and was merely speculating. She called him at work, and apparently had to go through the office switchboard to speak to him.

A really funny link I found claimed that 757s didn't have airphones and as evidence the conspiracist linked to a forum post authored by someone with the screen name [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]“the Paradroid”

I see what happens here. These nuts read something and because someone wrote it and they want to believe it they take it for the truth.

There is probably someone on another forum linking to CurveLight's posts as examples of facts.


[/FONT]

Then show us seatback phones on AA 77 were operational.

As for olson, he claimed it as fact and not speculation but good job trying to cover up for him. The DOJ could have easily proved where the call came from if it produced its phone records for that morning.

CNN reported that he said cell phones...but they didn't quote him so it is more than possible that CNN was mistaken.

And later in his interview with Brit Hume he clearly stated that he didn't know what phone she called him from.

Somehow I'm not surprised that you won't find the portion of the video about 50,000 feet...I am now positive that it doesn't exist.

Great job building up a conspiracy out of nothing.

As I am positive that the means of transmission were very important given the circumstances of the call. Every thing she brings up is pure trivia.

 

[DiveCon]

I read the various things that Ted Olsen said about phones. It is apparent he never knew if his wife called from a cell phone or an airphone and was merely speculating. She called him at work, and apparently had to go through the office switchboard to speak to him.

A really funny link I found claimed that 757s didn't have airphones and as evidence the conspiracist linked to a forum post authored by someone with the screen name [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]“the Paradroid”

I see what happens here. These nuts read something and because someone wrote it and they want to believe it they take it for the truth.

There is probably someone on another forum linking to CurveLight's posts as examples of facts.


[/FONT]

well, if its on the internet, it MUST be true, right

 

[DiveCon]

Then show us seatback phones on AA 77 were operational.

As for olson, he claimed it as fact and not speculation but good job trying to cover up for him. The DOJ could have easily proved where the call came from if it produced its phone records for that morning.

CNN reported that he said cell phones...but they didn't quote him so it is more than possible that CNN was mistaken.

And later in his interview with Brit Hume he clearly stated that he didn't know what phone she called him from.

Somehow I'm not surprised that you won't find the portion of the video about 50,000 feet...I am now positive that it doesn't exist.

Great job building up a conspiracy out of nothing.

As I am positive that the means of transmission were very important given the circumstances of the call. Every thing she brings up is pure trivia.

more like minutia

 

[CurveLight]

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?

Because you made mention of the call at 9:12 am AND flight 77 THREE TIMES as an example of a call that wouldn't have worked!!!

What the fuck do you not understand?

I mean seriously. If I made a claim and then pointed out a specific instance THREE times as proof that the total claim was correct, why wouldn't you argue against my example? Especially when you found my SPECIFIC example to be incorrect? Your example was bogus because there is NO proof that it was made from a CELL PHONE.

You so, trying to validate your claim that cell phone usage from 50,000 feet is not possible by using the call from 9:12 am on flight 77 and INSINUATING that it was made from a CELL PHONE (even though you have no proof) is bullshit.

Get it now?

I did not use May's call as evidence cells from high altitudes are not possible. The op link uses several sources from phone companies pointing out it is not reasonable or even plausible cell calls in 01 could be made from high altitudes.

There are several reports saying may's call was made from a cell. Why do you ignore that? The CR never even attempts to prove where the calls came from so if we are to understand how the calls were made we have to look at what facts support what media was used.

There are also OCTAs on here who have also claimed may used a cell so don't try to claim it is a troofer fantasy it was claimed may used a cell phone.

I've also repeatedly explained one reason for the 50,000 foot quote is to show how unbelievably biased Poop Mechanics is about that day.

 

[CurveLight]

I read the various things that Ted Olsen said about phones. It is apparent he never knew if his wife called from a cell phone or an airphone and was merely speculating. She called him at work, and apparently had to go through the office switchboard to speak to him.

A really funny link I found claimed that 757s didn't have airphones and as evidence the conspiracist linked to a forum post authored by someone with the screen name [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]“the Paradroid”

I see what happens here. These nuts read something and because someone wrote it and they want to believe it they take it for the truth.

There is probably someone on another forum linking to CurveLight's posts as examples of facts.


[/FONT]

Then show us seatback phones on AA 77 were operational.

As for olson, he claimed it as fact and not speculation but good job trying to cover up for him. The DOJ could have easily proved where the call came from if it produced its phone records for that morning.

CNN reported that he said cell phones...but they didn't quote him so it is more than possible that CNN was mistaken.

And later in his interview with Brit Hume he clearly stated that he didn't know what phone she called him from.

Somehow I'm not surprised that you won't find the portion of the video about 50,000 feet...I am now positive that it doesn't exist.

Great job building up a conspiracy out of nothing.

CNN didn't quote olson? Are you serious? That is your explanation? Once again it is proven when OCTAs don't like contradictory information they dismiss it with absolutely nothing.

Your statement you are positive the 50,000 foot quote doesn't exist shows how your agenda is also a blind fold. I don't care if you believe it or not because even if I wasted more time to dig up the transcript or found the video clip it wouldn't make any difference. You would find some way to dismiss it as you white washed the CNN article. Or are you saying you would admit PM is obviously biased if you saw the clip?

 

[CurveLight]

I read the various things that Ted Olsen said about phones. It is apparent he never knew if his wife called from a cell phone or an airphone and was merely speculating. She called him at work, and apparently had to go through the office switchboard to speak to him.

A really funny link I found claimed that 757s didn't have airphones and as evidence the conspiracist linked to a forum post authored by someone with the screen name [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]“the Paradroid”

I see what happens here. These nuts read something and because someone wrote it and they want to believe it they take it for the truth.

There is probably someone on another forum linking to CurveLight's posts as examples of facts.


[/FONT]

Then show us seatback phones on AA 77 were operational.

As for olson, he claimed it as fact and not speculation but good job trying to cover up for him. The DOJ could have easily proved where the call came from if it produced its phone records for that morning.

CNN reported that he said cell phones...but they didn't quote him so it is more than possible that CNN was mistaken.

And later in his interview with Brit Hume he clearly stated that he didn't know what phone she called him from.

Somehow I'm not surprised that you won't find the portion of the video about 50,000 feet...I am now positive that it doesn't exist.

Great job building up a conspiracy out of nothing.

Let's put your "CNN was mistaken" to bed. Olson said it on Larry King:

"OLSON: We are -- we segued back and forth between expressions of feeling for one another and this effort to exchange information. And then the phone went dead. I don't know whether it just got cut off again, because the signals from cell phones coming from airplanes don't work that well, or whether that was the impact with the Pentagon."
CNN.com - Transcripts

That confirms CNN correctly quoted him on 9/11 and he repeats the claim she used a cell on 9/14 as shown with the LK transcript.

 

[CurveLight]

I read the various things that Ted Olsen said about phones. It is apparent he never knew if his wife called from a cell phone or an airphone and was merely speculating. She called him at work, and apparently had to go through the office switchboard to speak to him.

A really funny link I found claimed that 757s didn't have airphones and as evidence the conspiracist linked to a forum post authored by someone with the screen name [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]“the Paradroid”

I see what happens here. These nuts read something and because someone wrote it and they want to believe it they take it for the truth.

There is probably someone on another forum linking to CurveLight's posts as examples of facts.


[/FONT]

Just to highlight the idiocy out there on the internets, this is what I was talking about above.

In this silly blog, Ted Olson's Report of Phone Calls from Barbara Olson on 9/11: Three Official Denials

is the statement:

[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]A 9/11 researcher, knowing that AA Flight 77 was a Boeing 757, noticed that AA’s website indicated that its 757s do not have passenger-seat phones. After he wrote to ask if that had been the case on September 11, 2001, an AA customer service representative replied: “That is correct; we do not have phones on our Boeing 757. The passengers on flight 77 used their own personal cellular phones to make out calls during the terrorist attack.”8[/FONT]

When you click on the notation [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]8 you discover that the source of this "fact" about the passenger seat phones is this:
[/FONT]

[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]See the submission of 17 February 2006 by “the Paradroid” on the Politik Forum (http://forum.politik.de/forum/archive/index.php/t-133356-p-24.html). It is quoted in David Ray Griffin, 9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press (Northampton: Olive Branch, 2008), 75. [/FONT]

TFF!

That is stark naked rank hypocrisy. The CR says calls from 77 were made but provides no hard evidence and you accept it without question.

 

[Fizz]

I read the various things that Ted Olsen said about phones. It is apparent he never knew if his wife called from a cell phone or an airphone and was merely speculating. She called him at work, and apparently had to go through the office switchboard to speak to him.

A really funny link I found claimed that 757s didn't have airphones and as evidence the conspiracist linked to a forum post authored by someone with the screen name [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]“the Paradroid”

I see what happens here. These nuts read something and because someone wrote it and they want to believe it they take it for the truth.

There is probably someone on another forum linking to CurveLight's posts as examples of facts.


[/FONT]

Just to highlight the idiocy out there on the internets, this is what I was talking about above.

In this silly blog, Ted Olson's Report of Phone Calls from Barbara Olson on 9/11: Three Official Denials

is the statement:

When you click on the notation [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]8 you discover that the source of this "fact" about the passenger seat phones is this:
[/FONT]

[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]See the submission of 17 February 2006 by “the Paradroid” on the Politik Forum (http://forum.politik.de/forum/archive/index.php/t-133356-p-24.html). It is quoted in David Ray Griffin, 9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press (Northampton: Olive Branch, 2008), 75. [/FONT]

TFF!

That is stark naked rank hypocrisy. The CR says calls from 77 were made but provides no hard evidence and you accept it without question.

people receiving the phone calls is evidence enough for me that they were made. especially when the phone calls triggered a further chain of events such as the call by the May's parents to american airlines.

if you had any evidence at all that the calls were not made then i would consider your claims. so far you are simply full of shit.