Anyone reasonably familiar with the details of what allegedly took place during the 9/11 terror attacks of 2001 may recall some of the many stories the government and media told about personal cell phone calls made from the hijacked airliners.
Despite the self-admittedly, interest-conflicted and failed 9/11 Commission neglecting to define which of the calls mentioned were made via personal cell phones or “seat-back” phones, only mentioning it once in their final report that “both had been used,” by then declassified government documents and the media had already well-documented many of those circumstances for them.
Such as the calls Tom Burnett, of Flight 93, supposedly made to his wife from his personal cell phone, according to the FBI and the San Francisco Chronicle, not long after the plane had been hijacked and still at or near cruising altitude and speed. Or the calls multiple people, including flight attendants and passengers, made from personal cell phones on Flight 11, according to the Houston Chronicle, while it too was still at very high altitudes and speeds. Or the calls Renee May, flight attendant from Flight 77, made to her parents, according to a Las Vegas Review-Journal article, while also freshly hijacked and still at or near cruising altitude and speed. Detailing, in stories like these and others, such elaborate situations as passengers borrowing each other’s cell phones to make multiple, successive calls and the recipients of some of those calls recognizing their doomed loved ones cell phone numbers “on their caller IDs,” etc.
But among the many easily arguable aspects of the official September 11, 2001 terrorist attack story that simply do not make sense, one was these very calls and almost every other personal cell phone call supposedly made from those infamous flights. Simply because of the timeline of when they were supposed to have been made and at what altitude and speed, it has been long-since argued that it is very unlikely any of those calls could have been possible and were likely fabricated. If for nothing else than for effect and to elicit an emotional response from the public. (Psychologists explain 9/11 truth denial)
But it wasn’t just the thousands who’d already unsuccessfully attempted to make personal cell phone calls while on commercial airline flights prior to 9/11, people who’d already done their own post-9/11 testing, or individuals already understanding the risks involved in trusting the establishment, or its media, that were weary of the legitimacy of these cell phone stories, however. Even experts and professionals within the wireless and cellular industry who deal with that very technology on a daily basis were caught off guard with what we were all told about the heart-wrenching stories that were concocted for public consumption. Finding no other choice, because cell phone signals are extremely unlikely to connect to cell phone towers while on commercial airline flights, but to attempt rationalizing the government’s/media’s version of the events, rather than question them. No different than the dumbfounded and/or willfully ignorant officials interviewed, by equally oblivious or complicit media personnel, about some of those same calls afterward.
As if that alone wasn’t already enough to raise serious red flags about the legitimacy of these alleged events, Dubya’s Solicitor General at the time, Ted Olsen, whose wife was said to have ironically perished on Flight 77 when it allegedly struck the Pentagon, raised even more questions than what already existed. After flipping multiple times back and forth between knowing it was his wife who called from the airplane, because he too “recognized her cell phone number on the caller ID,” to a much more emotional (and official story-aligning) tale where she must have been forced to use a “seat-back phone” to make the calls, due to likely being “separated from her purse during the hijacking,” as he framed it.
Until it emerged, that is, that the seat-back phone systems on all Boeing 757s and most 767s had been decommissioned many months prior to 9/11. Due to the cell phone industry ironically causing an irreversible loss of revenue for Airfone, according to USA Today. Which is probably why the government didn’t claim they had been used on Flight 77 in particular, during the 2006 Zacarias Moussaoui trial.
So if the truth about 9/11 and all of the magic cell phone calls that were supposedly made from the airplanes were the sundae to those attempting to help the rest of the slumbering public understand what didn’t and couldn’t have happened on 9/11, perhaps the cherry on top would be the latest gem that was to be yet another unrelated/accidental admission from those most trusted and/or closest to the industry.
While visiting FOX News for a few minutes to offer what was likely an inadvertent diversional aid to the national media’s over-the-top attempt to jam the airwaves with as much wall-to-wall Malaysian Flight 370 propaganda that could fit into as many back-to-back 24-hour periods they could get away with, Jeff Skiles, one of the heroes of US Airways Flight 1549 (aka, “The Miracle on the Hudson”), helped FOX News prove once again why it’s almost impossible to keep the truth hidden forever, no matter how hard you try.
Because just as their 5-minute interview was about to end, Martha MacCallum of “America’s Newsroom” made the fateful decision to ask Skiles his expert opinion on why he thinks none of the passengers from Flight 370 were able to get a text or call off to officials or loved ones before disappearing. Perhaps oblivious to the implications of what the real answer to that question would mean, when comparing it to what allegedly took place on 9/11. At least, as far as all of the dramatic cell phone calls that were supposed to have been made are concerned.
At which time, while explaining the basic science behind his reasoning, he replied, “Because cell phones don’t work over 5000 ft.”
Making even clearer that what we were all told about what happened on 9/11, especially with regard to cell phone calls made from commercial airline flights at or near cruising altitude and speed, was nothing more than stories only the media, Hollywood producers, opportunistic politicians, war-related corporations and masochists could enjoy.