(NOTICE AND UPDATE!!!: Many of you were kind enough to comment in the comments below this blog that this was NOT an article by the WSJ, but rather, a press release that, for whatever reason, was claiming such! I am posting this notice that this was my oversight as I did not see this at the time I composed this blog. Thank you to all of you who caught the mistake... due to computer problems I have only now been able to get around to posting this preface to the blog. So Again, this was someone's PRESS RELEASE and NOT the WSJ article. Nonetheless, the cell phone problem remains. Thanks again folks for the heads up!)
For those of you who've been following the long 9/11 truth movement saga, and the various scenarios that have made the rounds since then - inside job, controlled demolitions, nanothermite, directed energy weapons, or even (my favorite in the "Really Far Out" category), "mini-nukes" (and in this case folks, "mini" in some circles denotes a "mere" 150 kilotons... an order of magnitude greater than the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs) - then one of the things you'll have noted along the way were the phone call anomalies.
One of those anomalies was the fact that then, apparently, cellphone calls were not possible at altitudes greater than 10,000 feet, yet, apparently, some of those calls were made at altitudes exceeding that. No...never mind, nothing to see here, just another crazy conspiracy theory, move along.
Now, ordinarily I've avoided commenting very much on 9/11 simply for the reason of all the above-mentioned "noise" surrounding the subject, though I still retain my conviction that, rather than an "op within an op" or to give it the other more popular characterization, an "inside job", 9/11 has certain aspects that appear to present the idea of an "op within an op within an op."
But in any case, there are still those disturbing phone calls.
Well, now it's "official," or at least, being seriously entertained by some seriously-minded people whose feet are on the ground and whose eyes are firmly on the balance sheets: The Wall Street Journal:
Now, in addition to the WSJ noting that the whole scenario of jet fuel burning concrete-and-steel-reinforced load bearing columns in the center of the World Trade Center and a "pancake" model of near-free-fall collapse - a feat that defies any ordinary physics I ever learned - is now even being mentioned in the prestigious newspaper, there are these rather interesting summations of the "phone call problem":
" The 9/11 Consensus Panel now offers four evidence-based Points about the alleged phone calls from the 9/11 flights.
"The famous "let's roll" drama of the passenger revolt on UA 93 was relayed by passenger Todd Beamer's 13-minute unrecorded seat-back call to GTE telephone supervisor Lisa Jefferson, who reported Beamer as strangely tranquil, declining to speak to his wife. Eerily, Beamer's line remained open for 15 minutes after the crash.
"Oddly, the Verizon wireless record shows that 19 calls were made from Beamer's cell phone long after the crash of UA 93.
"Initial media reports and FBI interviews detailed more than a dozen cell phone calls from the planes at high elevation.
"Yet in 2001, a telephone spokesperson stated that sustained mobile calls were not possible above 10,000 feet.
"During the 2006 Moussaoui Trial, the FBI (under oath) reduced the number of cell phone calls to two calls made from 5,000 feet, and presented evidence of only one (not two) "unconnected" call from Barbara Olson, lasting "0 seconds."
"In another twist, two other women reported that Caller-ID showed their husband's cell numbers on their answering machines, which while lasting several minutes, had been made from elevations of 25,000 and 35,000 feet."
Phone calls from people that were, according to the official scenario, already dead? For the WSJ to mention things of this sort is to point out the obvious: serious problems in the official scenario are now being noticed by serious people.
Which raises as many questions as it answers, the most important of which is: why now? The above noted discrepancies have been circulating among various researchers of the whole 9/11 official scenario - with its "Warren Commission" version, with its magic airplane fuel that can magically remove the load bearing columns of two steel-and-concrete cantilevered buildings, and "dustify" over 500,000 tons of building, each - for many years. Why now? The phone call discrepancies were some of the earliest anomalies reported. So, again, why now?
I suspect the reason lies in the fact that there is some "deep linkage" or "dot connecting" being done now by most people, with the IRS-NSA revelations, many are drawing the conclusion that there is some rogue element in the US government. Eisenhower warned us of it, even Nikita Khrushchev warned us of it.
Suppose, for example, all that spying (woops, "data mining") began before 9/11? Wouldn't it be interesting to know what the "phone records" would then show. But what they show now is serious enough: there are manifold and serious problems with the bill-of-goods the Bush administration sold to the American people and to the world. Finally, someone in the "mainstream" is beginning to notice. Now....watch for the "documentaries" to appear, subtly favoring the "official scenario".
Add magic airplane fuel to magic bullets. While you're adding those two things, never forget that domestic state sponsored terrorism has been a part of the oligarchical playbook since...oh...well...since the Venetian "republic." Can you say gladio?
See you on the flip side.