To debunk your claim:
1. This article dated Feb 6, 2002 states that AA would discontinue in flight phone systems by March 31.
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1033-831093.html
2. All but 2 of the 64 calls came from in-flight phones.
To debunk your claim:
1. This article dated Feb 6, 2002 states that AA would discontinue in flight phone systems by March 31.
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1033-831093.html
2. All but 2 of the 64 calls came from in-flight phones.
Admittedly, I don't know much about the calls, but I'm trying to figure out why you referenced the mother having a different last name? What does that have to do with the post that you responded to? It seems like you've done that in a few others, as well. If the caller actually did refer to themselves in full name to their own mother, that is very strange.
Linsanity wrote:
Ha....better yet, Make a Youtube video for loose change and post it for foundational reasons.
PS...Mark Bingham's mother had a different last name.
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Mom,_this_is_Mark_Binghamdun-no 'bout it wrote:
Admittedly, I don't know much about the calls, but I'm trying to figure out why you referenced the mother having a different last name? What does that have to do with the post that you responded to? It seems like you've done that in a few others, as well.
If the caller actually did refer to themselves in full name to their own mother, that is very strange.
Linsanity wrote:Ha....better yet, Make a Youtube video for loose change and post it for foundational reasons.
PS...Mark Bingham's mother had a different last name.
She says it happened often, as she explains. I certainly do not find this strange at all. Mark is certainly a common name and her having a different last name, I'm sure he wanted to make sure there was no confusion. As my parents get older, I certainly have to pause a moment after I call them and tell them my name, compounded by how many kids they have.
But again, go ahead, make a video of you calling Alice Hogan and telling her the voice was fake. I'm sure she would appreciate that. Please post it then so we can have proof that the phone calls were indeed fake..
I'm not saying that it wasn't him... just saying that 'Mom' would know who it was just by the reference. Why say your last name? That is very odd.
No, you will not wrote:
You have been provided with links throughout the entire discussion. A building goes down completely into its own footprint...
Um no. The debris from the WTC buildings went way, way beyond "its own footprint". Only watching on TV did it seem that the building fell within its own footprint. If you were there, you would know the debris cloud was miles wide.
what he/she said wrote:
So, you're telling me that a plane can fly off course and loop over Washington DC, unnoticed? No surface to air defense? An hour after the 2nd plane strikes, the skies over DC are as open as ever? You're telling me that an hour later, there were military units in the THE most important city on the planet that were not on high alert?
I mean, really?
Prior to 9/11? Yes. Things were different.
Linsanity wrote:
[quote]K5 wrote:
Let's put Silverstein under sodium pentathol and get to the
It was investigated....9/11 commission said: -A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10. Similarly,much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades...
Yes, that's what the commission said but it makes no sense.
What does no ties to Al Qaeda have to do with foreknowledge?
The bets for and against the airlines are generally 50/50. In this case, however:
•A jump in UAL (United Airlines) put options 90 times (not 90 percent) above normal between September 6 and September 10, and 285 times higher than average on the Thursday before the attack.
-- CBS News, September 26
•A jump in American Airlines put options 60 times (not 60 percent) above normal on the day before the attacks.
-- CBS News, September 26
•No similar trading occurred on any other airlines.
What kind of "strategy" was this?
Not only did the betting all go in one direction, the trading volume on bets on these two airlines skyrocketed. Further, nobody came to collect their profits!
Further, these bets were placed in Chicago, but also in Germany and Canada..ignored by the Commission.
Someone knew and the investigation uncovered who. And who has the kind of juice to make this cover-up? You can bet your bottom dollar it was Israeli loyalists in the USA. Nobody else has it like that.
"Kevin" on American Idol is actually a chick.
K5 wrote:
Linsanity wrote:[quote]K5 wrote:
Let's put Silverstein under sodium pentathol and get to the
It was investigated....9/11 commission said: -A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10. Similarly,much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades...
Yes, that's what the commission said but it makes no sense.
What does no ties to Al Qaeda have to do with foreknowledge?
The bets for and against the airlines are generally 50/50. In this case, however:
•A jump in UAL (United Airlines) put options 90 times (not 90 percent) above normal between September 6 and September 10, and 285 times higher than average on the Thursday before the attack.
-- CBS News, September 26
•A jump in American Airlines put options 60 times (not 60 percent) above normal on the day before the attacks.
-- CBS News, September 26
•No similar trading occurred on any other airlines.
What kind of "strategy" was this?
Not only did the betting all go in one direction, the trading volume on bets on these two airlines skyrocketed. Further, nobody came to collect their profits!
Further, these bets were placed in Chicago, but also in Germany and Canada..ignored by the Commission.
Someone knew and the investigation uncovered who. And who has the kind of juice to make this cover-up? You can bet your bottom dollar it was Israeli loyalists in the USA. Nobody else has it like that.
This "strategy" is very common. Buying stock and covering it with options, it is employed every day. The airlines had released bad data the week before as well.
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Put_OptionsThere is an account of the commission's finding and they do give mention of who it was, to some extent.
Linsanity wrote:
[quote]K5 wrote:
What does no ties to Al Qaeda have to do with foreknowledge?
The bets for and against the airlines are generally 50/50. In this case, however:
•A jump in UAL (United Airlines) put options 90 times (not 90 percent) above normal between September 6 and September 10, and 285 times higher than average on the Thursday before the attack.
-- CBS News, September 26
•A jump in American Airlines put options 60 times (not 60 percent) above normal on the day before the attacks.
-- CBS News, September 26
•No similar trading occurred on any other airlines.
What kind of "strategy" was this?
Not only did the betting all go in one direction, the trading volume on bets on these two airlines skyrocketed. Further, nobody came to collect their profits!
Further, these bets were placed in Chicago, but also in Germany and Canada..ignored by the Commission.
Someone knew and the investigation uncovered who. And who has the kind of juice to make this cover-up? You can bet your bottom dollar it was Israeli loyalists in the USA. Nobody else has it like that.
This "strategy" is very common. Buying stock and covering it with options, it is employed every day. The airlines had released bad data the week before as well.
NONSENSE. A strategy that targets the two airlines involved in 911 to bet against in overwhelming numbers while doing no such betting on any other airlines? Without knowing what was coming? NO CHANCE IN HELL THAT IS TRUE. Which means cover-op. the facts leave no doubt whatsoever
Did you actually read the account from the SEC and FBI?
95% of the option volume was traced to one guy.
One of the most interesting sources for information on 9/11 are the FDNY oral histories, published in many places, including the New York Times.
Read a few. It's an education.
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/met_WTC_histories_01.html
These were only released after a FOAI lawsuit by the NY Times.
Linsanity wrote:
Did you actually read the account from the SEC and FBI?
95% of the option volume was traced to one guy.
Who?
thermite paint wrote:
911 was an inside job!!!
Whoah! That's deep. Really profound! And backed up with such excellent arguments!
Linsanity wrote:
Did you actually read the account from the SEC and FBI?
95% of the option volume was traced to one guy.
One guy who selected only the two airlines that were to be involved in 911 to place massive bets against...along with the insurers also hit by 911...and he had no foreknowledge.
That makes a lot of sense.
And I suppose each of the three Silversteins not showing up for work that day but knowing nothing in advance also makes a ton of sense.
And the Israeli Mossad agents who followed the alleged hi-jackers around for months before 911 posing as art students knew nothing either?
And the Israelis arrested seen cheering the attack in NYC who stated they were there to document the event....?
And the Israelis arrested in a van filled with explosives on the GW Bridge later that day on 911?