Flight 93 on The History Channel now--History being altered

[Horse with no Name]

as we speak.
The Ministry of Truth very hard at work.
I still don't understand how those cell phones worked in middair and I can barely get reception in the airport...

[pooja]

1. Hi mom, this is _______ ____________, just in case you forgot

my name and voice..

[LeftCoast]

2. Depending on the coverage below you, you can receive up to ~10k feet

I know this from personal experience.

[Atman]

3. TODAY or in 2001?

Cell technology has changed considerably. No way in hell could cell phone calls been completed in air. AND, even if they had, why does our government know what was in these calls? I thought we didn't start wire-tapping everyone until AFTER 9/11?

Oops...sorry. Don't ask questions. Nothing to see here, citizen. Move along.

[Gabi Hayes]

4. I hate movie like this with all my soul, but...

weren't there families that were contacted on the ground during the flight?

that should be easily verifiable, one way or the other

if it happened the way they said it happened, that's OK with me

and if the plane was shot down, wouldn't there have been debris scattered all over the place?

never followed this, so I have no idea what the forensics were like, but I did see shots of the crash site, and wasn't it just a big HOLE in the ground, with not much else anywhere?

thx

[Atman]

6. No, the debris was scattered for miles

It was NOT just a hole in the ground. It was a wide, wide debris field.

AND, as for the cell phones, it is certainly plausible that the passengers used the in-flight telephone. Very common back then. Cell phone calls from planes -- not so much. Either way, why did the government have records of the calls if they didn't start monitoring us until after 9/11?

[LeftCoast]

5. The first time I tried was in 2001

It worked then. Believe me or not, it's up to you.

:shrug:

[Atman]

7. For a split second, or a long drawn out phone call?

I'm not denying that a connection could have been completed, but at 500 mph, you'd be flying past/over/through "cells" faster than the relay equipment could keep up with your call.

[LeftCoast]

9. Depends one the coverage area below me

If I'm over a high density area, say the LA basin, the connection's pretty steady. If over less urban areas the calls are dropped pretty quickly. Based on my experience I would say it's fairly plausible that someone on one of the WTC planes could've made a phone call.

For the record, I haven't seen the movie the OP is talking about, I'm just addressing the issue of cell phones in flight.

[Atman]

10. Again, in 2001?

You couldn't pull out of your driveway without dropping the call.

.

[LeftCoast]

11. Yep, 2001 and since

:shrug:

[Blackthorn]

13. What altitude?

A study was conducted in a light aircraft, with people trying to make calls every 1000 or something feet. I lost all my links during my recent computer hoohaa, but they found once you hit 10,000 feet there chances of a successful connection start to fall away dramatically to the point where at 35,000 (cruising altitude) you have less than 1 tenth of a percent chance of a connection.

Ask in the 9/11 dungeon. Someone will be able to help you out.

[bluestateguy]

8. I saw that movie

I didn't detect any particularly toxic political bias in it. I thought it was good.

[FARAFIELD]

12. I saw United 93 as well

Im connected to the crash in a way, I even carry UNITED93 as my license plate. Those people did what they could to take back the plane. Some got to call home, it wasnt shot down it basically nosedived after the hijacker rocked it too violently for one of the engines to stay on. Needless to say, the phone calls were made. I dont understand why there is even talk of a conspiracy or what not. That plane was crusiing at less that 7500 feet in which case it would get a signal, Todd beamer made his famous call from an airphone which would work almost anywhere. The worst conspiracy about U93 is that they were trying to crash it, which they werent. Im sure it crossed their minds that it would be a by product of trying to take it back, but in the calls the relatives definately said they are trying to take it back, probably because there was a passanger that was a pilot, and a person that had ten years of training as an Air Traffic Controller. Kudos to U93, go to that crash site and get some perspective and come back with the wild conspriracy theorys. Im a progressive, but the right wings crime is not that they orchastrated 9/11 or knew about it, just that they politicized it.

[DocSavage]

14. Don't be rational

around here on that subject. People will think you are a conservative or somthing. I found nodding my head and moving on is the way to deal with the conspiracy crowd.

[zreosumgame]

17. uh dude, they were just asking

take your snotty attitude and shove it

[karlrschneider]

19. Chill out a little bit. I've used my cell phone on the plane I fly

well above 18000 ft. for 8 years. In 01 it wasn't real good in sparsely populated areas but worked
fine in the crowded eastern 'midwest'.

[Horse with no Name]

16. Regardless of what you thought of the movie

or the circumstances surrounding, it was fiction. Another "docudrama" being played on THE HISTORY CHANNEL.
So how are you going to feel when the Path to 911 plays on THE HISTORY CHANNEL?

[Subdivisions]

18. They knew it was going to happen. George Tenet

told Condi Rice in July of 2001 that the likelihood of attack inside the US was a "10 on a scale of 1 to 10". And then there was the infamous PDB entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike Inside US" the the president received at his Crawford, Texas, ranch on August 6, 2001, just 36 days before the attack on 9/11.

Both of these events are confirmed. The Rice/Tenet meeting was found in the National Archive. The PDB was admitted to by Rice in her testimony before the 9/11 Commission.

[Garbo 2004]

20. The July 10 briefing did not say the attack would be inside the US.

Tenet/CIA were convinced there would be an attack, couldn't exclude an attack on the US itself, but their thinking was that it was most likely going to be on US interests/assets abroad as previous attacks had been:

Tenet gave testimony about the July 2001 meeting with Rice at his Langley headquarters office on Jan. 28, 2004, occasionally referring to charts and slides. Philip Zelikow, who at the time was the commission's executive director and now works for Rice, was present along with other commission staff members, according to Ben-Veniste and to a portion of the transcript, which was read to The Washington Post by an official with access to it.

At one point in the lengthy session, Tenet recalled a briefing he was given on July 10 by Black and his staff, according to the transcript. He said the information was so important that he quickly called for a car and telephoned Rice to arrange for a White House meeting to share what he had just learned, according to the transcript and Ben-Veniste.

According to the transcript, Tenet told Rice there were signs that there could be an al-Qaeda attack in weeks or perhaps months, that there would be multiple, simultaneous attacks causing major human casualties, and that the focus would be U.S. targets, facilities or interests. But the intelligence reporting focused almost entirely on the attacks occurring overseas, Tenet told the commission. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/02/AR2006100200187_pf.html

Then there's also Richard Clarke's book, confirming that CIA/Tenet conclusions/focus were that attacks would be made on US interests overseas.

Hell, I recall an alarming AP story in June/July 2001 that said the same thing, citing US intel sources that chatter indicated a major terrorist attack was planned but it was thought to be most likely against US assets abroad.

[high density]

15. I tried watching that once

The acting was so bad that I gave up after 20 minutes or so...