CELLPHONES ON 11/09/01

is THE NATION controlled by the state? is it a periodical that is structured to capture a political sentimentality: then once having captured individuals with that sentimentality, seduces them by the slickest sophistry to tailor their suit of perceptions.

in fits and starts, i have been a long-term subscriber. but on several occasions, i have canceled my subscription.

one cancellation involved RADIO NATION employing marc cooper while he worked as a censor, in concert with mark schubb, at the LA PACIFICA STATION, KPFK. oh, and i made sure that THE NATION knew why i was cancelling.

when i noticed that RADIO NATION had ceased using cooper as the host, i revitalized my sub.

but cancelled it again some months back when they aired the most fraudulently-written-edited essay on conspiracy theories. JFK-MLK-RFK-RMN-JEC-WJC students/researchers were labeled in a pejorative manner. the conclusion of the essay was inescapable: the government of the united states is always telling you the truth...accept its explanations, shut up, stop researching, move on.

i cancelled that subscription within minutes of reading that bit of ferocious agitprop.

and stopped reading that bit of agitprop.

but, a few days ago, i encountered a site that posted a recent THE NATION essay on 9-11 conspiracists. hmmmmmmm. once again, the nation has cared to try and instruct its readers to believe the state.

was it written by a christopher hayes[shays]? what i thought interesting was that it used a technique that THE NATION has used when discrediting the researchers of events that i label EXECUTIVE ACTIONS.

for example, the author assaults the researchers for disputes concerning cell phone communication capabilities at certain altitudes. and because of these disputes, the researchers have no legitimacy.

that is the purest example of sophistry that you may ever encounter.

let us talk about cellphone capabilities in 2001. let us talk about the realities that THE NATION preferred to ignore. i cannot speculate on the motive[s]. but there is no speculation concerning the OBJECTIVE[S] - DO ANYTHING TO DESCREDIT THOSE WHO ARE INVESTIGATING THE OFFICIAL STORY CONCERNING THE EVENTS OF 11 SEPTEMBER 2001.

everyone in the cellphone industry, with any technical knowledge, knows that the cellphone communications that occurred involving those aircraft could not have occurred.

AND IT IS NOT A MATTER OF ALTITUDE.

it is a matter of speed. and route of the aircraft.

and that the 911 commission failed to investigate these aspects of the day should inform you that the commission was a COVER-UP. COVERING-UP WHAT IS THE ISSUE.

why are the cellphone conversations so important? because they are the only proof that has been proferred by the usg that arabs hijacked four aircraft. without those cellphone conversations, there is no evidence of any arab men boarding these airliners. let alone hijacking them.

can you imagine that this commission refused to fly aircraft at similar speeds, route of travel, with passengers using cellphones? well, they did refuse to conduct that investigation.

but here is the technology limitations as they existed in september 2001. as they still exist.

cellphone communications from aircraft is primarily a "handshaking" problem.

you must understand, terrestrial cell towers have been positioned on the proposition that the initiating tower will be able to complete the "handshaking".

successful "handshaking" requires that the cellphone be within some mileage radius of the tower, be in line of sight of the antenna focus of the cell tower, and not be moving beyond it at speeds exceeding double the double nickel[beyond max legal, or possible, highway speeds]. 110mph.

aircraft-involved cell communications were never contemplated in the design and engineering of these towers, these networks. depending upon the height of a tower, line of sight could range from ground level to 5,000 - 8,000 ft.

but it is the SPEED of the commercial airliners that prevent successful "handshaking". NOT ALTITUDE.

UNLESS THESE CELLPHONE COMMUNICATIONS WERE CONDUCTED FROM WITHIN A COMMERCIAL AIRLINER CIRCLING A TERRESTRIAL CELL TOWER, NEITHER "HANDSHAKING" NOR A LONG-TERM CONVERSATION COULD EVER HAVE OCCURRED.

and as the "published" flight paths and timings reveal, such "circlings" of cell towers did not occur.

therefore, there were no legitimate cell phone conversations from the "hijacked" airliners. the records of those conversations are inventions["legends"].

and THE NATION could have learned this. had its editors wanted to learn the truth.

very easy investigation to conduct, missy. you have the money. just charter a lear 35. run the routes as they have been noted. take along an independent observer. tell us when you finish these runs if you can establish, sustain a cellphone conversation.

you say you cannot find an observer? i volunteer. and if you don't want to fund the investigation from your fortune, or THE NATION'S, i shall try to raise the dough. i think that there are a lot of us out there who would love to contribute to this bit of proof. proving THE NATION a stooge organization. proving the 911 COMMISSION another bunch of stooges.

but this research must be accomplished under THE NATION's auspices.

AND THE RESULTS MUST BE PUBLISHED IN THE NEXT ISSUE FOLLOWING THE ACQUISITION OF THE RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION.

but, here is how i care to close this, THE NATION will not conduct this investigation. it will be no more interested in reality than was the 911 commission.

there were no cellphone conversations from these airliners on that day. when the state tells you that there were such communications, you should recognize that the state is lying to you. BIG TIME.

and that is just concerning the state's lies concerning cellphone communications. and since that is so monstrously false, how monstrously false is the rest of the story that they have foisted upon you?