How do 9/11 CT nutjobs explain the passenger calls from the planes describing the hijacking in progress?

Question

"...with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged"

Col. George Nelson, MBA
http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/

`
This guy claims that a plane didn't cause the hole, yet people called from the plane before they took on the hijackers AND eyewitnesses SAW the plane just before it crashed.

FACT: Radar showed the San Francisco-bound Boeing 757 from Newark, N.J., had nearly reached Cleveland when it made a sharp left turn and headed back toward Pennsylvania, crashing in a grassy field

http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010911paplanep3.asp

regerugged (below) I get it. Any question that does not point out Bush's faults are sensible... LOL

Given2Fly (below) Speed is relative to distance. 500 MPH from 10 to 20k feet is not 500 to the stationary object on the ground such as a cell tower with line of site. Look at it like a cone of opportunity as long as the passenger has line of site heading toward and away from the object.

answerman2006 (below) If saying your full name WHILE UNDER STRESS is all you need to believe, I have a bridge in MN to sell you.

Kelvinistic (below) LOLOLOL That's it??? Voice cloning?? LOLOLOL

Question, so waht happened to the bodies of the several hundred missing passengers? Were they kidnapped on their way to the airport? Were they all fake people who were actually covert agents? Were their families plants as well? Get real.....

They were business people with steady jobs and families, and now they have vanished. Where???

`
kelvinistic (below) is claiming that they used voice cloning for the calls and gave this link. LOLOL
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/dotmil/arkin020199.htm

Answer 1

WOW, excellent question, I hadn't thought of that. Definately will use that point in the future. Thank you for sharing it!

Answer 2

Let's debunk this again too! Read the whole damn link before you stick your foot in your mouth! "Calls Flight attendant Robert Fangman, as well as two passengers (Peter Hanson and Brian David Sweeney) made phone calls from United Airlines Flight 175, using GTE airphones, from the rear of the aircraft. Airphone records also indicate that Garnet Bailey made four phone call attempts, trying to reach his wife.[17][18] Flight attendant Robert Fangman called a United Airlines office in San Francisco at 08:52, and spoke with Marc Policastro. Fangman reported the hijacking, and said that the hijackers were likely flying the plane. He also said that both pilots were dead, and that a flight attendant was stabbed.[10] After a minute and 15 seconds, Fangman's call was disconnected.[17] Policastro subsequently made attempts to contact the aircraft's cockpit using the Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) message system.[2] Brian David Sweeney tried calling his wife, Julie, at 08:58, but ended up leaving a message, telling her that the plane had been hijacked. He then called his parents at 9:00 a.m., and spoke with his mother, Louise. Sweeney told his mother about the hijacking, and mentioned that passengers were considering storming the cockpit and taking control of the aircraft, as the passengers aboard United Airlines Flight 93, which had not yet been hijacked, would.[10] At 08:52, Peter Hanson called his father, Lee Hanson in Easton, Connecticut, telling him of the hijacking. The family was originally seated in Row 19, in seats C, D, and E, however Peter placed the call to his father from seat 30E. Hanson was traveling with his wife, Sue, and 2½ year old daughter, Christine. Speaking softly, Hanson said that the hijackers had commandeered the cockpit, that a flight attendant had been stabbed, and possibly someone else in the front of the aircraft had been killed. He also said that the plane was flying erratically. Hanson asked his father to contact United Airlines, but Lee could not get through and instead called the police.[10][19] Peter Hanson made a second phone call to his father at 09:00: “ It's getting bad, Dad. A stewardess was stabbed. They seem to have knives and Mace. They said they have a bomb. It's getting very bad on the plane. Passengers are throwing up and getting sick. The plane is making jerky movements. I don't think the pilot is flying the plane. I think we are going down. I think they intend to go to Chicago or someplace and fly into a building. Don't worry, Dad. If it happens, it'll be very fast....Oh my God... oh my God, oh my God."[15] ” As the call abruptly ended, Hanson's father heard a woman screaming.[15]"

Answer 3

who said phone calls were made? the government? It has already proven that the "Let's Roll" bit was a lie. What else is the Bush government lying about?

As far as the radar tracking goes, it is very easy to doctor up radar images.

Why can't the government just answer a few simple questions?

Answer 4

Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former Political-Military Affairs Officer in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Also served on the staff of the Director of the National Security Agency. 20-year Air Force veteran. Member adjunct faculty, Political Science Department, James Madison University. Instructor, University of Maryland University College and American Public University System. Author of African Crisis Response Initiative: Past Present and Future (2000) and Expeditionary Air Operations in Africa: Challenges and Solutions (2001).
Contributor to 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out 8/23/06: Account of Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, Pentagon employee and eyewitness to the events at the Pentagon on 9/11. "I believe the Commission failed to deeply examine the topic at hand, failed to apply scientific rigor to its assessment of events leading up to and including 9/11, failed to produce a believable and unbiased summary of what happened, failed to fully examine why it happened, and even failed to include a set of unanswered questions for future research. ...

It is as a scientist that I have the most trouble with the official government conspiracy theory, mainly because it does not satisfy the rules of probability or physics. The collapses of the World Trade Center buildings clearly violate the laws of probability and physics. ...

There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked [Pentagon] lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner. This visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the secretary of defense [Donald Rumsfeld], who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a "missile". ...

I saw nothing of significance at the point of impact - no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the Pentagon. ... all of us staring at the Pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected to see was not evident.

The same is true with regard to the kind of damage we expected. ... But I did not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 or 40 minutes, with the roof line remaining relatively straight.

The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would expect if a missile had struck the Pentagon. ...

.More information is certainly needed regarding the events of 9/11 and the events leading up to that terrible day."


Editor's note: For more information on the impact at the Pentagon, see General Stubblebine, Colonel Nelson, Commander Muga, Lt. Col. Latas, Major Rokke, Capt. Wittenberg, Capt. Davis, Barbara Honegger, April Gallop, Colonel Bunel, and Steve DeChiaro.


Member: Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven Association Statement: "We have found solid scientific grounds on which to question the interpretation put upon the events of September 11, 2001 by the Office of the President of the United States of America and subsequently propagated by the major media of western nations."


Bio: http://militaryweek.com/

Answer 5

That is a good one. I had never thought about that one before. It would be very hard to fake those since many of these people called family or friends to say goodbye. That is not something you can impersonate or force a person to do effectively (and not reveal a whole lot more).

Answer 6

What? You posed a sensible question! Well, surprise me. I live less than 50 miles from the PA crash site. I was home, on vacation at the time. All of the news reports covering what happened are correct.

Answer 7

BS, BS and more BS. the calls were fake. why would someone call their parents and say "hello mom, this is bob jefferson."...lol. would u really have to say your full name to your mom? you need to examine what the news reported that day. check any 911truth link or use keywords. it was nothing there. a big hole someone dug, no smoke, no plane, no nothing. pleeeease consider this: A; those who say 911 was a goverment operation did the research and came to shocking conclusion. B: those who say 911 cant be a goverment cover-up, simply speculate that the U.S would never do that. research it yourself. the news reporters didnt lie in beginning because they didnt know to cover it up. now they lie. only truthful organazations have footage of news coverage that day. pleeease look it up. science dont lie. government agents do.

Answer 8

don't know how a 'nut job' explains anything, possibly to "nuke the whole middle east into a glass parking lot so as to get to those Araaabs who did that on 9/11!!! "

but if you're honestly seeking the truth instead of acting like an arrogant ignoramus you could start here! (this as you see is 1999 technology)

and if you want to say that it could not be possible, you'll need to explain why!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/dotmil/arkin020199.htm

as reply to you :
the joke's on you buddy - the limitation is in your imagination - not in the evidence presented!

voice morphing technology could have made it possible for GW to be "phoning home" despite him sitting in a classroom in Florida- get it now, duh!!!!!

reply to your second:

it's obvious that you've refused to answer why it is not possible. - as well as lacking imagination and creativity you seem to be short on honesty and courage -how sad!

Answer 9

Most of the CT nutjobs seem to believe that we bombed Pearl Harbor ourselves as well.

I've actually heard that in here.

I about fell out of my chair in disbelief!

Any of these people that start talking about conspiracy's by the government on it's own people I just automatically tune out. They obviously have nothing better to do with their lives so they begin to invent things.
One thing I've noticed about people like that. The more they spew their lies, the more they actually begin to believe them.

Answer 10

I would like to know how it's possible to make a cell phone call from a vehicle traveling at 500mph. It's technically impossible - the cell would have no time to handshake with the cell towers before it would be out of range.