Barbara Olson/FLIGHT 77 Washington D.C., like no other metropolitan center in the world is heavily guarded by the most sophisticated defenses ever created. Its surveillance capabilities are highly refined having the ability to detect incoming craft at low levels and locking on to multiple targets simultaneously with a 99 % probability of interception. Surface to air missile batteries and fighter interceptors are on standby 24 hours a day and with the assistance of satellite surveillance and GPS guidance fighter planes can intercept intruders within minutes of scrambling. Only the most militarily proficient groups would dare challenge the Washington defenses. The alleged phone calls from Barbara Olson to her husband, United States Solicitor General Ted Olson, alleged to have been made sometime between 9:15 a.m. and 9:25 a.m., were widely publicized—and widely questioned. Ted Olson said that his wife, a passenger on the plane, called him twice at his Department of Justice office using her cell phone. She informed him that Flight 77 had been hijacked, its passengers and crew threatened with knives and box cutters and confined to the rear of the airliner. She requested her husband to contact the pilot to instruct him what to do. Government authorities concluded that Barbara Olson’s call from Flight 77 never happened. The calls to Ted Olson were fabricated, they said. His claim about receiving two calls from his wife aboard Flight 77 was not true and unless he was the victim of a hoax, he was lying. The account that Barbara was the only passenger—having been herded to the back of the plane by hijackers—who was able to run into the aisle, grab a seat phone that didn’t exist and make a call—and then make a second call lacks credibility. This fact alone is sufficient reason to believe that Barbara Olson could not have called her husband from Flight 77. Washington D.C., like no other metropolitan center in the world is heavily guarded by the most sophisticated defenses ever created. Its surveillance capabilities are highly refined having the ability to detect incoming craft at low levels and locking on to multiple targets simultaneously with a 99 % probability of interception. Surface to air missile batteries and fighter interceptors are on standby 24 hours a day and with the assistance of satellite surveillance and GPS guidance fighter planes can intercept intruders within minutes of scrambling. Only the most militarily proficient groups would dare challenge the Washington defenses. If FAA was not able to track Flight 77 how was it possible to establish its course? If FAA refused to disclose information on Flight 77 where did the flight path data come from? Who other than the FAA would have this information? The dotted-line course was widely publicized as the flight path of Flight 77 into Washington. In a subdued reference that was easily missed the course was characterized as “reconstructed.” But it could not have been the actual path of Flight 77 since radar and transponder data were not available and the plane at that point was considered to be missing. The general public was wrongly led to believe the depicted dotted line presented by the media to be the true course of Flight 77 that led directly to Washington and to the Pentagon. The National Transportation Safety Board, NTSB, stated that they reviewed Flight 77’s flight data recorder and derived its speed and altitude. How did NTSB manage to obtain that information from a flight data recorder? Whatever, if anything, crashed into the Pentagon virtually vaporized itself and everything in it. No wreckage. No luggage. No bodies. No scattered effects or papers. And most certainly, no flight data recorder. From takeoff of Flight 77 until its alleged impact at the Pentagon the Boeing 757 was airborne for about one and a half hours. At normal speed it would have flown at least 700 miles in that time, taking into account the process of take-off, ascent to altitude and getting clearance for its course. At the point the airliner disappeared from radar and allegedly turned around toward Washington it had traveled only 220 miles. The return trip of 220 miles indicates that the airliner would have traveled a total of only 440 miles from takeoff to impact in the 1 hour and thirty minutes it was airborne. The average speed for Flight 77 that day, which should have been in excess of 500 miles per hour, was just 293 mph according to the official account. But the unpublicized fact is that the airliner could easily have traveled about 300 miles more in that time. And if it was not the craft that impacted at the Pentagon it could have done just that, which raises more questions. If the airliner were flying “on the deck” on its return to the Capital to avoid radar detection Air Defense radars specifically designed for low-altitude detection would have picked up the intruder. Also, a low flying airliner roaring toward Washington in this relatively populated area of Virginia on a morning that had traumatized the entire nation with the images of hijacked airliners crashing into buildings, the sight of a roaring airliner flying at low level toward Washington would have elicited numerous reports from alarmed citizens. But there were no ATC reports of unidentified aircraft, no Air Defense alerts and there were no reports from outlying areas of low-flying airliners. Short of being a silent, invisible phantom craft transparent to radar detection Flight 77 could not have penetrated Washington’s defense perimeter. If highly effective Air Defense detection systems, surveillance satellites, Air Traffic Control monitoring and visual sightings from the ground failed to pick up the intruder one could rightly conclude that Flight 77 was not in the air space minutes away from Washington contrary to the stated claims of unnamed government officials and a contrived, reconstructed dotted line course drawn on a map of the state of Virginia as presented by the television networks. A plane crash into a building would not produce such an explosion or a massive amount of smoke. The huge Russian AN-124 that crashed into a building and an El Al Boeing 747 crashing into a 12-story apartment complex in Amsterdam produced no large explosions or billowing clouds of smoke and flame. Earlier, the government’s position was that no calls were made from Flight 77 simply because Barbara Olson did not have the opportunity to make any phone calls being held captive at the rear of the plane by hijackers and cell phones were inoperable from an airliner in flight and seat phones were not present. That should have ended the dispute. But with the FBI’s astonishing announcement that four calls had been made from Flight 77 the issue became more complicated. Apparently a record of four calls from Flight 77 was found—whether true or false—and had to be accounted for. The government probably chose to take the quickest way out of the dilemma by attributing the four calls to Barbara Olson. So from the strong evidence that Barbara could not have called from the airliner, a position that the government originally held, they now said that she made all four calls. An embarrassing question that was ignored was how were those four calls from Flight 77 made if cell phone use was not possible and passenger seat phones were not available? Ted Olson remained silent on the government’s claim of four calls from Barbara. He did not press the claim that he had received only two calls from his wife. Ted Olson was a team player. He would pull out all the stops to achieve an important outcome. Sophisticated security devices, surveillance cameras, quadrant sensors and other scanning devices would be expected to be positioned in and around all government buildings and facilities. The Pentagon, the powerful muscle, the heart and brain of United States military might—a high priority target for any enemy—would be expected to be ringed with even more elaborate detection devices including high-resolution, continuous scan devices and infra red versions for night surveillance. Official Washington must have been stunned by the news that an intruding aircraft had been able to penetrate the multi-layered defenses in place that day. The FBI’s revelation of the four calls made from Flight 77 presents an intriguing and perhaps an illuminating scenario. It could be the crack in the wall of silence that explains critical elements in the Flight 77 mission. It is important to note that neither Ted Olson nor any other official source was able to verify the approximate time the calls were made. They could have been made at any time after the airliner’s takeoff and even after the explosion at the Pentagon. There is very good reason to believe that Flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon but continued its flight after it disappeared from radar and turned off its transponder at the Ohio-West Virginia line. If any calls were made from the airborne Flight 77 there was only one way of doing so. Cell phones were useless in flight and seat phones were unavailable. The calls had to be made from the cockpit of the Boeing 757 using radio channels dedicated to private or proprietary communications. For example, a regional American Airlines office or other designated ground station would be contacted by radio. The caller, the pilot or co-pilot, would request a phone patch to the number he wished to reach. The ground operator would dial up the number. The four calls from Flight 77 could have been made in this way including any calls from Barbara Olson. .
After much searching and looking to some specifics, such as steel weakinging point ( not melting ) etc etc, I still ask, where is Barbara Olsen.......Where are the rest of the passangers? Untill that is answered I think the conspiracy thingy is just a paranoid movement. -------------------------------------------------- So you'd hinge the whole thing on their location? I'm submit they ain't around any more. Don't you think if there were such elaborate schemes going on that day (the war games, etc), don't you think it'd be easy enough to get rid of a plane? (that one our military couldn't find for an hour and a half until it OOPS, crashed into the Pentagon) I mean, they just killed 3000 people. What's a few more? After this plane flew around fro an hour and a half, it just cruised on into restricted airspace, past all the automated defenses ,and just happened to crash into the least occupied part of the building. Oh...and the section the "plane" hit just happened to contain the folks that were auditing the books looking for the missing 2 TRILLION dollars announced by Rumsfeld on september 10th? Lastly...you Obama bashers...the lost 2 trillion was no big deal I guess..sure wasn't any big deal made of it..Everyone's too pre-occupied w/now post 911 to worry about a lousy 2 trillion dollars..right? How convienient.
Muslim terrorists perpetrated 9/11/01...just like their actions that followed in London and Madrid and 1,000's of other places since! It is part of their religion...it is part of their history and yes, it is part of their ACTIONS that make them do what "true" islam is all about. I am not going to sit back and let whacked-out wishful thinking conspiracy idiots try to tell us differant when the evidence is clear. The opportunity is clear. The mode of operation is clear. The Motive is DEFINITELY clear (per the koran and 1,400 years of terrorism). And last but not least...Bin Laden released a video in April of 2002 with Ayman al-Zawahiri (his terrorist deputy), seated next to him, this muslim terrorist spoke about the 9/11 attacks and praised the “19 martyrs.” In speaking about 9/11, Zawahiri uses the words “our” (”It [the victory] is not a result of our skills or expertise, rather it is purely through Allah’s Grace”) and “we” (”the victory that we enjoy today”). In doing so, Zawahiri essentially admits that muslim terrorists were responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
The mainstream meda? Are you serious? These people love to apologize and appease muslims. They are the first ones to drag out some muslim cleric proclaiming islam is a religion of peace while later, that same muslim is calling for a jihad. The main stream media is doing everything possible to defend muslims such as, dropping the terms: terror, islamic, jihadists, radicals and so forth. If anything, these people would love nothing more than to blame Bush for everything that occured on 9/11/01. So Bin Laden is dead...oh really...so when did that happen? It wasn't before 9/11/01 because this muslim animal was bragging how proud he was of the 19 MUSLIM hijackers who committed the largest islamic terrorist attack on U.S. soil...to date! Thank God for natural selection...
Corona, all I can say is that you have been reading (and taking seriously) way too many works of fiction. Use all the convoluted science, math, whatever you choose and cite all the loony left websites you want but the bottom line is that if this trully a conspiracy on the scale you believe then it would have to involve thousands of people all over the world & across all spectrums. Just wouldn't happen, my friend. Let it go & rejoin the real world.
Tom I realy do hate to agree with David but just how do you think any administration would be able to orchestrate such agrand cover up, what happend to all those involved? were they murderd if so then by who and what happed to the ones who were doing the murdering LOL it just is not feasable
Holy Cow, David, Steve and I all agree ???????? Thats great. I have spent a little time on this research, but every claim from the truthers is easily counter opinioned. It is difficult digging so called facts. I agree on the thousand person conspiracy theory...it just ain't happening. Untill FACTS can be presented, this is the best info I can provide from the truther corner: Not at all saying some things are not to be questioned, just so many of the claims are so easily racked up as opinions by spurious scientists, and so easily countered by the other side. This thread reminds me of an Art Bell show
When was all this planned? It had to be more than the nine months that Bush was Prez. We at work(I told them about this crap)think the conspiracy goes way back in politics. In the case of flight 93; William Penn laid the foundation for this to happen. Sir, even Oliver Stone shakes his head at this one.
So you didn't come right out and say it, but you are insinuating that Bush had called in a favor to his cousin to assist the President in blowing up the building he was paid to protect. Is that correct? You expect me to believe that everyone including security and surveillance were prohibited from the building so that outside contractors could work on the elevators. And, of course you have written documentation of this obvious lie. Who gave you that information, the truther fairy. Then you are contending that these contractors were actually government agents sent to plant nano thermite charges to bring the buildings down in conjunction with the impending terrorist attack of which they had knowledge. Now for the most important question which has never been answered by any truther ever. What was the motive of the government to kill thousands of Americans, destroy billions of dollars in US property, and cause a worldwide recession?
For the last time Tom. Temperatures of structure fires exceed the annealing temperature of steel routinely. You can ignore it, disagree with it, or just continue to post the melting point of steel if you want, but none of those change the truth. Once the critical anneal temperature is reached, the change in micorstructure is very rapid. I am sure that the fires were oxygen starved with an enormous hole in the side of the building. And no the entire structure would not need to fail simultaneously. Once the area where the fire existed failed, the enormous weight of the upper floors collapsed on top of the buliding. The force of this caused every successive lower floor support to fail. I promise that no engineer designed any part of the building to withstand millions of pounds of metal falling on it. So how many people planted nano thermite charges in the WTC Tom? They were able to accomplish this feat in just 4 days! It had to be the government since nobody else has access to nano thermite.
I don't like the fact that the government hides things under the guise of national security, but don't pretend as if the Bush Administration invented the practice. And no, I don't trust the government. However, no level of distrust would ever cause me to believe that the government blew up the WTC when I saw two terrorist hi-jacked airplanes crash into the buildings with my own eyes.
Tom, Please tell me more about flight 93 and the technology regarding cellphones at high altitudes. I was not aware of this and would like to know more. When did the technology change and what was the altitude limit on a cellphone in 2001?
National Geographic Channel just ran a program debunking the nanothermite carp and all the ponts brought up here.....the NGC is as " lefty " as it gets....they still proved the points as false.
Maybe this was addressed further back in this thread. I don't have time to read it all right now. But this was my post that I got a warning for on the CT side and that was deleted from that thread: I think most people have tried to look at it objectively and have arrived at a conclusion one way or another, based on whatever documentary or write up they want to believe. It is more comforting to believe that there was no foul play involved behind the attacks so naturally, most people will gravitate to that viewpoint. It is a safe viewpoint. In addition, there are so many theories out there ranging from the completely wild to much more subtle ones and the people who refuse to believe any foul play could have been involved are always anxious to lump the so-called truthers into the same 'extreme' category and of course criticize them. To tell you the truth, I desperately would like to believe the official story. I would like to accept it all and let it go. The reason I can't is because of building #7. No, it was not anywhere near the foot of the towers and this was a large, 33 story concrete building. It did not suffer any direct impact from the towers. Somehow, burning debris traveled over to it and caught a floor on fire. Maybe several floors. Which burned primarily to one side based on the smoke seen immediately before it went down. I'm sure it burned very hot. In a relatively short amount of time, the entire building collapsed to rubble. The entire footprint collapses in on itself to dust. While smaller structures that WERE at the foot of the towers, are heavily damaged but for the most part were still standing! I've seen the pictures. Now I'm not saying that it would be impossible (although still highly unlikely since it is unprecedented) for 'portions' of building #7 to collapse because of fire and structural stress. But for the whole thing to collapse perfectly and evenly at an exact moment from an imperfect fire seems VERY unlikely. The problem is, most of the structure was completely undamaged! The undamaged portions should have held together in large chunks, some of which should have still been standing. I can't figure out why people are comfortable with this? I assume they just don't know. I have never seen or heard someone adequately debunk what happened with building 7. I have watched most all the documentaries. The people who always want to rush in to debunk what happened with that building never have much to bring to the argument but their belief that a short lived fire will collapse a concrete building to the equivalent of a controlled demolition with not a single structural piece left standing!! I'm not trying to cause outrage here. It's just a question that is left unanswered for me. I would like to see someone do a 3D computer model based off the blueprints of that building and see how exactly the whole thing went down at an exact moment (without being impacted by anything of course). I don't believe any engineer would want to touch that expirament with a 10 ft pole.
