AggiEE said:
Satellite of Love said:
AggiEE said:
You've failed to indicate what is "gross" about it. What in particular do you disagree with when it comes to the evidence of that call?
My followup sentence stating their claim that Beamer was not on the plane. They are saying it was all faked. That they were given a script then another plane was crashed. Yea that is gross.
Also you ignored my followup FBI document (as you did through out when people brought up evidence).
They also are making the claim that the Airfone calls were in fact cell phone calls. That is pretty dumb considering they can relay where each call came from and had cell phone records to back it up. Again, relying on those who were contacted as the source that they were cell phone calls. The family members probably assumed that since they were calls from an airplane. Again, video taking a lot of liberties outside of known information from the flight. It's half assed research on their part.
So you have to choose which source you believe. The phones of those receiving the calls or the FBI. Certainly the government would never lie or fabricate evidence or omission?
Odd that Beamer's call is still connected after the plane is alleged to have crashed
But here is the thing, they are ignoring other data that exists and ONLY relying on the interview later in the day.
We have 2 sources. One at 9:45 ( that states the plane was hijacked. Another source says 9:52 (interview). Does it really matter if the plane was hijacked at 9:28 or 9:52? How does that change the outcome of the event?
When in isolation, sure that sure does seem suspicious to the offical narrative....but when including other facts of the day it appears to be an anomoly that could be grounded in someone's clerical error.
Your source doesn't jive with other phone calls made prior to 9:52.
Tom Burnett: 9:30 - tells his wife that hijackers talked about flying the plane into the ground
Unid'd FA: 9:32 contacts UA on a speed dial number. Nothing about what was talked about is known. This number is used for in flight problems
Sandy Bradshaw: 9:35 contacts UA maintenance facility and talks about the hijackers. They pulled a knife and killed another FA.
Mark Bingham: 9:37 - 2nd try phone call. Talks to his mother and tells her the plane he is on has been hijacked.
There are 22 additional phone calls until 9:50. This points to something happening on the plane inbetween 9:30 and 9:50. Your source claims nothing happened until 9:52. Do you see a problem yet with them relying on the interview source?
Another issue is with the flight's altitude data. You saw it several pages ago, but let's put it here to refresh memories:
Just before 9:30 there is a downward jolt of nearly 1,000'. Something happens here. Up until there the plane was cruising at 35,000' without issues. It could be a hijacking, but we aren't entirely sure. Now look above and see the first phone call comes from the plane at 9:30 from Tom Burnett. Seems like a hijacking could have occured at the jolt with two pieces of evidence.
Your source claims the hijacking could be at 9:52. Looking at the plane's data, the plane is in a quick descent and around 13,000' and still falling. Would that make sense for the moment of a hijacking?
Another piece of evidence is the communications to controllers in Cleveland. At 9:28 am there was a call to the controllers, but it was unitelligible sounds. 35 seconds later they get a call stating "Mayday! Mayday! Get out of Here! Get out of here!" Boy that sure does sound like something is happening in the cockpick well before 9:52.
At 9:31 a man comes on and tells the passengers "Ladies and gentlemen: here the captain. Please sit down, keep remaining seating. We have a bomb on board. So Sit." Again another piece of evidence showing the hijacking began around 9:28.
The source I am choosing to believe is in line with a lot of the other evidence we have from the plane. It seems more plausible than what they chose to show.
What is funny is earlier in the video they go over the phone calls tryiing to discredit them all as cell phone calls. They seem to take the FBI's word that two of the calls were from cell phones but the other 33 phone calls HAD to be cell phones and the FBI is covering it up under the guise of GTE AirFone calls. So they are picking and choosing which part of the FBI's investigation is real (for them) and clearly fake (to mislead everyone else).
