Interesting tidbits about the many phone calls supposedly made on 911. In one particular case, (Todd Beamer on Flight 93), many calls were made from his phone well AFTER the supposed crash of Flight 93. How's that happen? Did his phone jump out before the plane buried itself underground, and then patiently wait, and then start calling people? Or, is the whole Flight 93 tale just one big "official" BS story? You read. You decide. http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20130520121139699
Gotta love those truther dichotomies. You have a choice, false, or ridiculously false. Does anyone want to pick? You know you're a shill if you don't pick correctly. I have a better choice. Is the truther analysis of the phone record suspect? OR Is this the one Jenga piece that will tear apart reality?
Same old "protectors" of the "story". Nothing has any credibility except the whatever the OCTers say that it is. Gotta love those "official" BS story protectors.
truther claims still failing? Sure seems so. The calls were made during the hijackings. To say they were made days after... I think Todd Beamers mother would have noticed if she got a phone call from her dead son 2 days after the crash. You f*ing idiot.
Have you ever stopped to think that the reason it's the "same old 'protectors'" of the story is because we're the only people bored enough, or interested enough in the topic to give a (*)(*)(*)(*)? Here's a fact for you, most of America doesn't know "truthers" even exist. A majority of the others don't care. A few of us (there's maybe 6 of us) come here for different reasons. Some respect the dead Some enjoy sharing technical knowledge Some hate truthers pissing on the graves of the dead Some just hate liars Some enjoy the entertainment of seeing truthers wiggle like worms when they sort through their lies Take your pick, but the reason it's the same old people is because you're movement was garbage before it got started. The only people left on the truthers side are the ones that are making money from it.
You should read what you link to. His phone was being called after the crash, as the Verizon records show.
One incoming call, as the record shows in the link. The rest were "outgoing". Not bad for a dead man, or some "special" phone, that magically survived the "crash" with everything else obliterated. Helluva phone there.
Incoming to Verizon from his phone ... before he even boarded the plane. Look at the timestamps. The outgoing (from the Verizon switchboard in NJ to his cell) calls are most likely his friends and family calling to hear his voice on voicemail one last time. Note that each call lasts less than or equal to one minute. Here's the Verizon record. Officially. http://intelfiles.egoplex.com/2001-09-29-FBI-phone-records.pdf
http://intelfiles.egoplex.com/2001-09-29-FBI-phone-records.pdf Yup...just as I said. One incoming, and the rest OUTGOING. Unless of course, the FBI is lying here (which is possible, I'll concede).
Outgoing from the Verizon hub in NJ to Beamer's phone. Most likely his loved ones calling his cell number again and again. Truther's law: When analyzing anomalies, the most complex explanation is the truth.
Translation: 'You cannot believe your eyes. You did not clearly see aircraft slam into the Twin Towers. In actual fact, what you saw was a controlled explosion, and hallucinogens put in the water supply made you think you saw two planes slam into the towers. Don't believe your own eyes, or experts in the situation. No, no, believe me'.
Planes clearly hit the two buildings in NYC. Not so "clear" in Washington, or Pennsylvania (or the lands of "evaporating" magical jets). The use of drones has become quite a thing these days, or so I hear.
Further translation: 'Ignore the debris that was found and the damage caused by what was clearly an aircraft. Believe me, a person who was not there to witness either of the two situations and who has no expertise in the field of crime scene investigations, when I tell you that you cannot believe what people who know what they are talking about tell you. Then, permit me to throw in an ominous, yet useless tidbit about drones which, whilst entirely irrelevant to the discussion, are the flavour of the month'.
Gotta love the confidence with which a truther displays his ignorance. Here's the FOIA release. http://intelfiles.egoplex.com/2001-09-29-FBI-phone-records.pdf Look at the line item marked "incoming" in the log. The number is 908-202-4940. That's the same number as the subscriber account number. Are you suggesting that's an INCOMING call FROM that particular phone number? Do you really mean to suggest that Todd called himself for 21 minutes?
No bro. It suggests that Beamer's phone was active after the supposed "crash" (for one). The incoming call was the only one marked as such. Can you read? Notice the time stamps. How does a phone make outgoing calls from a man, on a supposed flight, that supposedly crashed AFTER it crashed? O.U.T.G.O.I.N.G. after the supposed time of the "crash".
You guys keep wanting me to see something that isn't there. It's kinda like the whole 911 things itself. What you see, you didn't see. You guys are good. On the document being discussed, it says "calls made on..." specifying ONE as incoming. The rest are calls being made FROM said phone. With the exception on the ONE incoming call, the rest of the calls ORIGINATED FROM said phone. The ONE incoming call? Well, my cell service lists my incoming calls, made from the same phone as call VOICEMAIL. All others were outgoing, after the voicemail call, AFTER the supposed "crash" and FROM (not TO) said phone. How's that work? Did the phone survive the crash and "butt call" a number every 45 mins to an hour afterwards? OR....was "somebody" placing calls OUTBOUND on the phone approximately every hour, figuring the phone would be considered destroyed and nothing more would have been made of it? If the phone survived the "crash", and that's what you want to advocate, then just say that, and we can go from there. Enough with the dance already.
Speaking of seeing things that aren't there, where does it say 'outgoing' on that document? Are you trying to argue that Beamer's voicemail called him (as this was the 'incoming' call)? What is the more likely (common sense) scenario: 1) Beamer's cell phone made a bunch of one minute calls after it was destroyed in a plane crash. The FBI then released the data via FOIA. or 2) 'Fraud doesn't know how to read this document, and the listed calls were made to Beamer's phone after it was destroyed in the crash of UA93.
