Were Barbara Olson's calls to Ted pre-recorded?

[NowHearThis]

When Ted Olson gave his accounts of what his wife said in those famous calls, was he merely repeating what he heard on a recording
of her voice?

Does that explain why he never said what he told HER in response to what she said? She asked him what she should tell the pilot,
but unless I'm mistaken, whenever he talked about the calls, he never said what, if anything, he said to HER.

As I said, I could be mistaken about this, but unless I am, I think the reason he didn't "tell her what to say to the pilot" is
because he wasn't having an actual conversation with her. He was merely listening to a recording.

Calls to the U.S. Solicitor General are probably recorded. If so, that would explain why no recording of their conversation
has ever been released. Because if it was merely a recording of her voice that he heard, then obviously he wouldn't release
such an "incriminating-to-the-OCTheory" telephone recording.

[Bolo Boffin]

1. Was Renee May's phone call to her mother pre-recorded?

Both Renee and Barbara called from Flight 77.

[NowHearThis]

2. Maybe. Do you have a link to a transcript of her call?

In Ted's case, there's little or no indication that he said anything back to his wife. Did Renee's mother respond to Renee or did
she merely describe what Renee told her?

[SDuderstadt]

3. I honestly hope you find yourself alone with a family member of a 9/11 victim and...

you say some of the stupid shit you say here. You'll deserve whatever you get.

[NowHearThis]

6. Hi. Can you provide a link to a transcript of the Renee call?

Thanks.

[Bolo Boffin]

9. Hi. Can you provide a link to a transcript of the Bushco meetings where the plot was discussed?

Thanks.

[Subdivisions]

13. You say lots of stupid shit yourself, duder. n/t

[whatchamacallit]

19. I'd love to see you do your shtick in front of the Jersey Girls

I'm sure they'd just LOVE your act.

[SDuderstadt]

20. I'm sure the Jersey Girls and I would get along just fine, dude...

you don't seem to able to distinguish between legitimate questions about the preparedness of the Bush administration (they were asleep at the wheel, in my opinion), as well as their gross overreaction (as evidenced by invading Iraq) and wild-eyed, goofy CT claims that aren't supported by either facts or logic. I don't know it for a fact, but I'm pretty sure the Jersey Girls don't believe that no planes were hijacked or crashed on 9/11.

On the other hand, I believe they would have a real problem with those here who espouse goofy CT claims that have the net effect of delegitimizing the 9/11 truth movement and mock the pain and suffering of many of the victims by claiming or implying they must've been "in on it" too. I mean, does anyone seriously believe the victims of AA 77 never boarded the flight, were part of some "secret military hijacking exercise", were whisked to the Pentagon and were killed when someone flew a jet OVER the Pentagon and exploded bombs instead with a large loss of life.

With all due respect, I don't believe the Jersey Girls would give you the time of day, dude.

[whatchamacallit]

21. Well "dude"

The theories you name aren't mine. The reason I want a new investigation (something most OCT don't want) is because the official story is goofy bullshit.

[SDuderstadt]

22. Maybe if you stopped all the hyperbole...

you'd find more adherents to your cause. It's rather silly to claim that all of the "OCT" (whatever that is) is goofy bullshit, when prominent scientists and structural engineers, first responders and victims and their families contributed facts and information to the "OCT". I despised the Bush administration and believe their lack of preparedness for 9/11 and their reckless actions after 9/11 deserve indictment, prosecution and conviction. However, that doesn't amount to either LIHOP or MIHOP and, maybe, if some "truthers" would refrain from going around bellowing that "9/11 was an inside job", the "truth movement" might find some new adherents.

[whatchamacallit]

23. Once again I don't belong to "the truth movement" and I am not responsible for swelling their ranks

I am simply a citizen who feels a deep disconnect between what I witnessed and the official story. I support the efforts of any group whose intention is getting to the truth of 9/11, but their beliefs and methods are not mine by default. As far as adherents are concerned, as I travel around cyberspace I find more and more people waking up every day. Great numbers of people like me with doubts and suspicions who have no particular affiliation with organized groups. They're not sure what really happened, but they know they've been had. I'm no more a member of the truth movement than you are a Bush Gate Keeper.

[SDuderstadt]

24. Cool...

but I have two questions. Doubts and suspicions about what? And, if those doubts and suspicions are quelled, can you help stem the flood of misinformation that flows from some in the "truth movement"? For example, I have never been able to understand why some of the more erstwhile "truthers" here don't challenge the goofy claims that emanate from some DUers (this OP, for example). It would go a long way towards developing a venue to learn more of what actually happened that day. I have never claimed the 9/11 CR was perfect, nor do I blindly embrace all the elements of the "OCT" (again, whatever that actually is). One thing for sure, though, is that I am more on the side of the "OCT" than I am on the side of the "9/11 was an inside job" crowd.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ghost in the Machine]

46. Wow! This is the goofiest fucking claim about 9-11 I've ever read... goofier than no planes theories

"as well as their gross overreaction (as evidenced by invading Iraq)"

You honestly think that invading Iraq was an "overreaction"??? :spray: :rofl: :spray: :rofl:

My god, SDud, just how deep have you had your head buried in the sand? Invading Iraq and removing Saddam Hussein had been a goal of PNACer neocons since their inception in 1997...


"as well as their gross overreaction (as evidenced by invading Iraq)"


Simply fucking amazing by god... simply fucking amazing!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

38. the widows of 9/11 didn't get much support

[Bolo Boffin]

4. Why would a transcript make any difference here?

The call lasted for 2.5 minutes. Do you think Renee's parents listened to a recording of Renee without responding for 2.5 minutes? Does that make sense to you?

[NowHearThis]

5. So you can't provide a transcript?

What is the source for the length of the call?

[SDuderstadt]

7. Dude...

why is it when we make a claim, you demand a transcript or other proof but, when YOU make a claim, you contend it is your opponent's duty to seek the evidence? In fact, in another thread, I challened you to provide a link to any post of yours in which you provided evidence that was requested for one of your goofy claims. I'll take your silence on the matter as an admission that you cannot provide the link because such a post simply doesn't exist.

[Bolo Boffin]

8. The parents who talked to her. Phone records. That is the source of 2.5 minutes. n/t

[NowHearThis]

10. I'm surprised you'd post unsupported claims.

As a senior member (probably the MOST senior member) of the brigade, I expected that you, of all people, would certainly be able to offer more than hearsay.
You're slipping. Badly. Are you feeling okay these days?

[SDuderstadt]

11. " I'm surprised you'd post unsupported claims."

This has got to be the most unintentionally ironic post of all time.

[NowHearThis]

12. Check out that article about Specter. I think it'll open your eyes.

He's a politician: (POLITICIAN, n. An eel in the fundamental mud upon which the superstructure of organized society is reared. When he wriggles he mistakes the agitation of his tail for the trembling of the edifice. As compared with the statesman, he suffers the disadvantage of being alive.)

[Ghost in the Machine]

14. No one can provide an accurate transcript of Renee May's call to her parents...

.... unless they were recording the call, which is never mentioned that they were. All we have is what her parents, Ronald & Nancy May, have told us that she said.

Renee May's phone call
At 9:12, Renee May called her mother, Nancy May, in Las Vegas. May said that there were six hijackers, and that the passengers had been moved to the rear of the plane. She also asked her mother to contact American Airlines, and inform them of the situation. The call, which lasted for 2 minutes, 38 seconds, was then disconnected. May's parents then contacted American Airlines.
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/American_Airlines_Flight_77_-_Phone_calls

Notice also that she said there were 6 hijackers. Why do the official reports mention only 5? What happened to the 6th guy?

You're chasing shadows looking for this transcript, dude...


Peace,

Ghost

[Kesha]

15. Interesting...

According to American Airlines, their 757 are/were not equipped with
airphones.

[greyl]

16. Too bad cellphones weren't invented until 2005.

Do you have a definitive source for your unambiguous claim?

[Ghost in the Machine]

17. Cell phones were invented in 1973.... as for a source...

This was the reply received by “the Paradroid” (except that his real name has been crossed out):




Dear Mr. XXXXXXXX:




Thank you for contacting Customer Relations. I am pleased to have the opportunity to assist you.




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. However, the pilots are able to stay in constant contact with the Air Traffic Control tower.




Mr. XXXXXXXX, I hope this information is helpful. It is a privilege to serve you.




Sincerely,
Chad W. Kinder
Customer Relations
American Airlines

{snip}

In the third place, RB, after some difficulty in discovering whether American Airlines actually had an employee named “Chad Kinder,” was able to contact him by telephone on May 31 (2007). After reading the two letters to Kinder, RB asked if he had indeed written the reply. Kinder answered that he could not specifically recall having written it---he writes so many letters, he explained, and this one would have been written over a year earlier. But, he added: “That sounds like an accurate statement.” Kinder indicated, in other words, that it was a letter he might well have written, because what it said---that AA 757s in 2001 did not have onboard phones, so the passengers on AA 77 had to use cell phones---was, to the best of his present knowledge, accurate.




The 757 Aircraft Maintenance Manual: Besides learning about and confirming this letter from Kinder, we also obtained another piece of evidence supporting the conclusion that passengers on AA 77 could not have used onboard phones. One of RB’s colleagues sent him a page from the Boeing 757 Aircraft Maintenance Manual (757 AMM) dated January 28, 2001. This page states that the passenger phone system for the AA 757 fleet had (by that date) been deactivated.24 According to the 757 AMM, in other words, the onboard phones had been deactivated at least seven and a half months prior to 9/11.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/amrarticle.html

[greyl]

31. No, you're kidding! I had no idea!

Right over your head.

Additionally, David Ray Griffin and Rob Balsamo are not reliable sources.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kesha]

25. See Post #17

..and AA`s statement.

[Bolo Boffin]

18. According to AA flight servicing records, the airphones weren't taken out until 2002.

What's your evidence that United Airlines didn't have them?

[Kesha]

26. According to AA`s CR department, their 757s had no air phones

and Olson flew AA, not UA... didn`t she?

Lame attempt, to be polite.

[Bolo Boffin]

30. The customer service agent vs. the actual paperwork telling the engineers to take them out

I'm going with the paperwork.

How many passengers called from United 93, Kesha?

[Kesha]

34. Me too.. my specific paper against a unspecific one on your part

My AA paper tells that AA had no air phones on 757s in 2001, while yours says that AA finally removed air phones
from their Boeing fleet in 2002. Their is no doubt that their 767 were partially equipped with GTE air phones.

UA is a different story. It`s a different carrier, you know?

[SDuderstadt]

35. "Truther Logic"

The "perps" were smart enough to pull off 9/11, but forgot to make sure the airplanes had airphones.

[Kesha]

49. I`m no Truther, I`m just German

After discussing the question if AA77 was equipped with airphones or not,
we simply decided to ask American Airlines. They said no.

I`d call this a quite efficient modus operandi.

[Bolo Boffin]

36. Nope. The paperwork said that the airphones began to be taken out in 2002.

Try again.

[Kesha]

50. ...taken out of which model?

All, only 757, or also 767 and 777?

Thx for a link to your source.

[Bolo Boffin]

51. " there is no documentation in that particular aircraft’s records that indicate the phones had been

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2782116#post2782116

"there is no documentation in that particular aircraft’s records that indicate the phones had been disabled or removed by 9/11"

A decision had been made prior to 9/11 to take those phones out. That is completely different from the actual removal of the phones, which would show up in the documentation of each aircraft.

What you have is documentation on HOW the phones should be removed, NOT that they were.



That's the order to actually begin removing the phones. It's March 2002. This is for 757s, and that's what Flight 77 was.

Here's the dates phones were removed from American 757s.



All dates in April 2002.

Flight 77 had airphones.

ETA: Images fixed.

[Kesha]

52. Got a link to an official source for these facsimilies?

I own a scanner, too.

Let`s see.
There is an official statement by AA in my Outlook in-box that Flight 77, a 757, had no Airfones on board. After beeing forwarded to Griffin, this mail has never been denied by
American Airlines, even after he published it in his book. After all, it doesn`t even matter, as the FBI published evidence in 2006 that Mrs Olson talked 0.0 seconds.

Your answer: A scan, without any credible source.

You won`t solve the Bermuda Triangle Mystery this way, Joseph. In fact, you are part of it.


Just my 0,02 €

[able1]

29. How about this?

IF they were pre-recorded, then the gov. must have been involved either directly or indirectly - and IF that's true, surely,
the U.S. Gov't could have arranged for calls to have been made or recorded on an airphone EVEN if the phone was on the ground.

What I'm saying is, REGARDLESS whether the calls were pre-recorded or not, they could have been dialed from an airphone...which
I assume could have been set up so it could be used even on the ground, inside a plane or inside a building.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

39. since there was no flight 77

'the calls' must have been made elsewhere

[SDuderstadt]

40. Jesus, here we go again...

unfuckingbelievable.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

41. there wasn't

[SDuderstadt]

42. Yeah, right...

no offense, but I don't waste time with no-planers.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

44. there there wasn't a plane period

so you needn't waste your time thinking that there was!

[able1]

45. What's your take on the parking lot video images?

Missile? Something else? Just fuzzy pixels?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

48. after all there are those who saw the whole thing

[aldo]

27. No, it never happened

It was just written into the novel. (I don't care about her whereabouts, it's not the logical responsibility of 911/truthers, for those who understand logic.)

[SDuderstadt]

28. Yeah, like you have no responsibility to postulate a...

coherent, plausible alternative hypothesis, right? And you wonder why people don't take the "9/11 truth movement" seriously...unbelievable.

[wildbilln864]

33. obviously...

people do! Else you wouldn't have this forum to brighten your days.

[Ghost in the Machine]

37. What's your alternative hypothesis for "Little Red Riding Hood" or "Goldielocks"?

How about for "God" or the bible?

We don't have to have an alternative hypothesis to disbelieve a fairy tale, that's just another one of your goofy claims.

[able1]

47. Just out of curiousity, what makes you so sure it didn't. EOM