Guest Orlando8687 Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 This month, Charles Goyette interviewed author David Ray Griffin. During the interview Griffin stated that FBI Says Barbara Olsen Did Not Call Ted Olsen. Why would the Bush Solicitor General lie like that. What would be reason? ebunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory (Paperback) Charles Goyette is an American talk radio show host based in Phoenix, Arizona. His show broadcasts locally from KFNX AM 1100, weekday mornings 6 am to 9 am PT (9 am to 12 pm ET | 13:00 to 16:00 GMT). Charles Goyette is a familiar voice to radio listeners all across Arizona and increasingly to listeners across the country. Thanks to his outspokenness and the clarity of his positions, radio listeners everywhere are finding they can’t get enough of “America’s Most Independent Talk Show Host!” He is often called "America's Most Independent Talk Show Host" because of his criticism of both major political parties and his nonpartisan outlook. David Ray Griffin (born 1939) is a retired professor of philosophy of religion and theology. Most recently, he proposes 9/11 conspiracy theories that contradict the mainstream account of events. Griffin's theories implicate some elements of the United States government in the attacks. Barbara Olson (December 27, 1955 – September 11, 2001) was a conservative American television commentator who worked for Fox News Channel, CNN and several other outlets. She was a passenger on American Airlines Flight 77 en route to a taping of television show Politically Incorrect when it was flown into the Pentagon in the September 11, 2001 attacks. Olson was a passenger on American Airlines Flight 77 on her way to a taping of Politically Incorrect in Los Angeles (host Bill Maher left a panel seat vacant during the first week the show aired after the attacks), when it was flown into the Pentagon in the September 11, 2001 attacks. (She had been scheduled to take an earlier flight, but switched to that Flight 77 on that Tuesday, her husband's 61st birthday, in order to celebrate over dinner the night before.) She twice called her husband, Theodore Olson, from one of the phones in a passenger's seat, about 20 minutes before the plane hit the Pentagon, asking him "What can I do?" Theodore Bevry Olson (born September 11, 1940) was the 42nd United States Solicitor General, serving from June 2001 to July 2004. Zacarias Moussaoui (Arabic: زكريا موسوي Zakariyyā Mūsawiy) (born May 30, 1968 in St Jean de Luz) is a French citizen of Moroccan descent who was convicted of conspiring to kill Americans as part of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. As a result of his conviction, he is serving a life sentence at the Federal ADX Supermax prison in Florence, Colorado. see United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui, http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/...rosecution.html Exhibit Number P200054 According to the Moussauoi trial data. There were 4 very long calls that came from Flight 77, none of them with an identified caller Summary of Flight 77 depicting: the identity of pilots and flight attendants, seat assignments of passengers, and telephone calls from the flight [Listener discretion is advised. This exhibit also includes information about the other three flights hijacked on September 11 9:14:57 - Unconnected Call 9:15:34 - 102 seconds - Unknown Number 9:20:15 - 274 seconds - Unknown Number 9:25:48 - 159 seconds - Unknown Number 9:30:56 - 260 seconds - Unknown Number 9:18:58 - 0 Seconds - Barbara Olson - 202-514-XXXX - Unconnected Call - Source: Department of Justice http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/...ts/P200054.html At 9:15 a.m. and at 9:26 a.m., Flight 77 passenger Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, and spoke to him for about one minute before the call was cut off. Barbara Olson reported that the flight had been hijacked by hijackers wielding knives and box cutters and that all the passengers were in the back of the plane. At 9:20 a.m. and 9:31 a.m., Barbara Olson again called and spoke to her husband, Ted Olson. She reported that the pilot had announced that the flight had been hijacked. Ted Olson asked Barbara her location, and she replied that the plane was flying over houses. Ted Olson told his wife of the two previous hijackings and crashes. At 9:29 a.m., Flight 77 was flying at 7,000 feet and was approximately 38 miles west of the Pentagon. The auto pilot was turned off. The only call on record, from the trial data, attributed to Barbara Olsen is an unconnected call that lasts 0 seconds. http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/ Former U.S. Solicitor General Ted Olson represented Matthew Cooper, an American journalist associated with the leaking of CIA agent Valerie Plame's name. Lots of rumors floating about that the administration is backing off appointing Ted Olson as Attorney General because of Democratic objections. Look, he was my lawyer in the CIA leak case for my Supreme Court appeal. I had some disagreements with him which I chronicled in Portfolio. And if I was president, I wouldn't appoint him Attorney General because I'm not a hard-core conservative. But this president is. And Ted Olson, unlike Alberto Gonzales, is incredibly well qualified, maybe the best qualified person, to take the job under a Republican president. What's more, he's right wing but not, I think, reflexively so. After all, he sided with former Associate Attorney General James Comey in that showdown with Alberto Gonzales and Andy Card at John Ashcroft's hospital room. http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/capit...e-for-ted-olson Olson reports about the conversations with his wife are both vague and self-contradictory". "Vague" -- why is this a surprise? Is it possible that Olson was upset at the time, that he was misquoted at some point, that he remembered other details later? What's more, the reasons for calling his recollections "vague" are unconvincing. For example: "Olson' recollection of the call's timing is extremely vague, saying it "must have been 9:15 or 9:30. Someone would have to reconstruct the time for me."" (from a CNN report) So he didn't remember exactly when the call was made. Are you 100% sure that you would, in similar circumstances? But there's more: In one account, Barbara Olson calls from inside a bathroom. [Evening Standard, 9/12/01] I found out later that she was having, for some reason, to call collect and was having trouble getting through. You know how it is to get through to a government institution when you're calling collect." He says he doesn't know what kind of phone she used, but he has "assumed that it must have been on the airplane phone, and that she somehow didn't have access to her credit cards. Otherwise, she would have used her cell phone and called me." [Fox News, 9/14/01] Olson faults his memory and says that he "tends to mix the two [calls] up because of the emotion of the events." [CNN, 9/14/01 ©] In another account, she is near a pilot, and in yet another she is near two pilots. [boston Globe, 11/23/01] In another account she used a cell phone and that she may have gotten cut off "because the signals from cell phones coming from airplanes don't work that well." [CNN, 9/14/01 ©] Six months later, he claims she called collect "using the phone in the passengers' seats." [London Daily Telegraph, 3/5/02] This revised version of his story has evidently gone virtually unnoticed in the American press. A year after 9/11, for example, CNN was still reporting that Barbara Olson used a cell phone.7 Nevertheless, Ted Olson’s statement to the Federalist Society and the Telegraph---that she called collect using a passenger-seat phone---was apparently his final word on the matter. The claim that she must have called collect because she did not have her credit card, however, does not make any sense, because a credit card is needed in order to activate a passenger-seat phone.8 If she did not have a credit card, therefore, she could not have used a passenger-seat phone, whether to call collect or otherwise. Find links to the entire interviews of February 19, 2008, at: http://www.911blogger.comSPAM13946 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke_Wilbur Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 We have not had a good conspiracy story in months. I went to Mr. Griffin's web site and read the following statement: In the spring of 2003, near the end of my 31-year teaching career at the Claremont School of Theology, I began writing a book about 9/11, which would be published as The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11. I have often been asked why I, as a Christian theologian, would write such a book. one of our main tasks as theologians is to comment on current events in light of the fact that our first allegiance must be to God, who created and loves all people, indeed all forms of life. If we believe that our political and military leaders are acting on the basis of policies that are diametrically opposed to the divine purposes, it is incumbent upon us to say this. This is especially the case if we live in a rich and powerful country, the policies of which affect the welfare of other peoples, even other species. This is all the more true if these leaders are claiming divine support for their policies, as did Vice President Cheney in sending out a Christmas card with the statement: “And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?” http://www.anthonyflood.com/griffin911xnth...ansresponse.htm I may be wrong, but it appears that Mr. Griffin thinks considers Vice President Cheney is taking a Machiavellian idea that the greater good may require one to do immoral things in order to achieve ones goals. Accordingly, when I came to the conclusion that the Bush-Cheney administration had orchestrated 9/11 in order to promote this empire under the pretext of the “war on terror,” I decided that I needed to say so by means of summarizing the evidence for this conclusion. http://www.anthonyflood.com/griffin911xnth...ansresponse.htm When Benjamin Franklin to the Constitutional Convention in 1787 the framers were in deliberation over State representation. Franklin understood the words of Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli and debated vigorously against the ideas of a Prince. Franklin in my opinion believed in true utilitarian values of people working together for a greater goal. Franklin also believed that God would only help virtuous people. In this situation of this assembly, groping as it were in the dark to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when presented to us, how has it happened, sir, that we have not hithero once thought of applying to the Father of Lights to illuminate our understandings? In the beginning of the contest with Britain, when we were able to sense danger, we had daily prayers in this room for the Divine protection! Our prayers, sir, were heard, and were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending Providence in our favor. To that kind Providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful Friend? Or do we imagine we no longer need assistance? I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth -- that God Governs the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured sir, in the sacred writings that 'except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this, and I also believe that without His concurring aid we shal succeed in this political building no better than the building no better than the builders of Babel - Benjamin Franklin It is very difficult to look into a mind of an individual. It is even more difficult looking into the mind of a leader. What to me is interesting is your statement appears true. 9:14:57 - Unconnected Call 9:15:34 - 102 seconds - Unknown Number 9:20:15 - 274 seconds - Unknown Number 9:25:48 - 159 seconds - Unknown Number 9:30:56 - 260 seconds - Unknown Number 9:18:58 - 0 Seconds - Barbara Olson - 202-514-XXXX - Unconnected Call - Source: Department of Justice But, this next statement is quite confusing At 9:15 a.m. and at 9:26 a.m., Flight 77 passenger Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, and spoke to him for about one minute before the call was cut off. Barbara Olsonreported that the flight had been hijacked by hijackers wielding knives and box cutters and that all the passengers were in the back of the plane. At 9:20 a.m. and 9:31 a.m., Barbara Olson again called and spoke to her husband, Ted Olson. She reported that the pilot had announced that the flight had been hijacked. Ted Olson asked Barbara her location, and she replied that the plane was flying over houses. Ted Olson told his wife of the two previous hijackings and crashes. At 9:29 a.m., Flight 77 was flying at 7,000 feet and was approximately 38 miles west of the Pentagon. The auto pilot was turned off. Are you saying that somewhere between 9:15 and 9:26 Barbara Olson communicated with her husband the first time? And somewhere between 9:20 am and 9:31 Barbara contacted he husband a second time? Are you stating that Barbara Olson would have to have been the person that was speaking two times to an Unknown Number? Is it possible that Theodore Olson had a normal cell line that he used for family purposes and another secure number for government communication? Is it possible that Barbara first tried to contact her husband on his personal line and when he did not pick up she then called his secured government line.? I truly hope Orlando that we all find what is the real truth. Keep searching. But, I would not jump to conclusions. Thanks for sharing and I hope to read more of your ideas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts