All NORTH Americans must see "United 93"

[Jay]

I'm worried Aeon might turn into a suicide bomber.

 

[Johnny Utah]

Re: RE: All NORTH Americans must see "United 93"

I'm worried Aeon might turn into a suicide bomber.

If Aeon did become one I wouldn't be surprised.

 

[Jersay]

I am actually watching you conservative guys. Islamicfascist guys, they are right wing guys just like the right-wing Americans or Europeans or Canadians so I will be watching you guys closely.

 

[zoofer]

I am actually watching you conservative guys.

Good you may learn something useful.
Like differentiating between Leftwing nutters and Principled Conservatives.

 

[I think not]

I am actually watching you conservative guys. Islamicfascist guys, they are right wing guys just like the right-wing Americans or Europeans or Canadians so I will be watching you guys closely.

Make sure you dust off the picture you have of Mao, he's watching you also.

 

[Alberta'sfinest]

RE: All NORTH Americans

I'd say that the whole story was fabricated. The family members claiming to have been called by their family members from their cell phones were lieing. How do I know this? North American cellphones can't work from an airplane. The whole story is total crap because of this fact. If you don't believe me, try and make a call next time you fly. I turned mine on during a flight to see if it was true, it said no signal. Those family members lied. Those passengers, just like the ones on the other flights were probably oblivious to what was going on. Even if they were aware the plane had been hijacked, they would have just sat there believing that the situation was going to be worked out and they'd get to go home, like on TV. Those passengers had no clue where that plane was heading unless the terrorists told them, which they wouldn't, as it's not a James Bond movie. People are soo gullible.

 

[Johnny Utah]

Re: RE: All NORTH Americans

I'd say that the whole story was fabricated. The family members claiming to have been called by their family members from their cell phones were lieing. How do I know this? North American cellphones can't work from an airplane. The whole story is total crap because of this fact. If you don't believe me, try and make a call next time you fly. I turned mine on during a flight to see if it was true, it said no signal. Those family members lied. Those passengers, just like the ones on the other flights were probably oblivious to what was going on. Even if they were aware the plane had been hijacked, they would have just sat there believing that the situation was going to be worked out and they'd get to go home, like on TV. Those passengers had no clue where that plane was heading unless the terrorists told them, which they wouldn't, as it's not a James Bond movie. People are soo gullible.

There is more then enough evidence the passengers of Flight 93 stopped the Terrorists from reaching their target. So keep believing your Moonbat Conspiracy Theory if it helps you sleep at night. :roll:

 

[zoofer]

Satellite Services
Communicate from anywhere on the globe
http://www.roadpost.com/

 

[zoofer]

GPS Cell Phones
by Sandy Berger
Today’s tech vocabulary includes words like e-files, e-shopping, and e-learning. Soon you will be hearing a new phrase, E-911.

E-911 is the high-tech label for a federal mandate known as Enhanced 911 that requires all US wireless phone companies to begin offering improved location capabilities on their networks. This mandate is a response to a large number of emergency calls being made on cell phones. When 911 emergency calls are made from a landline, an address appears on an operator’s screen. However, if the call comes from a mobile phone, the 911 dispatcher cannot locate the position of the caller. Therefore, the FCC is now requiring wireless companies to accurately locate mobile 911 callers. Carriers will be required to have 100 percent of all new handsets able to provide location information by the end of 2002.

The first segment of the FCC’s phased program had a deadline of October 1. Due to difficulty in obtaining the necessary technology and handsets, many wireless companies have not met that target and have requested an extension. Sprint is the only carrier to meet the October deadline. This week Sprint PCS began selling mobile telephones with a location capability. Sprint is offering a $149.00 Samsung Electronics’ mobile phone, the SPH-N300 that uses the global position system network of satellites to pinpoint a caller’s precise location. Although Sprint’s phones are on the market, they will not be functional until November and then only in the Rhode Island market. There will be significant lag time in getting coast-to-coast coverage for this service since the activation of the service has to be coordinated with public safety agencies.

In addition to location information for emergencies, cell phone customers hope to use this new technology to enjoy other services such as driving directions and entertainment information. Location-based services like finding nearby restaurants and checking traffic and weather updates keyed to a precise location are certain to be popular.

The true value of cell phones has recently come to the forefront as we acknowledge the important part wireless communication played in our country's response to the September 11th terrorist attack. The compact size of cell phones has made them more convenient to carry in a pocket, and, now, with the ability to pinpoint a caller’s location, the cell phone can become a customized lifeline. Technology will be doing its part to enhance our feeling of security as the new e-911-enabled phones become standard during the next few years.
http://www.compukiss.com/populartopics/tech_gadgetshtm/article691.htm

 

[zoofer]

Friday, April 07, 2006
Can Cell Phones on Planes Be Dangerous?
Studies continue on the safety of using cell phones on airplanes, while most experts agree that concerns are overblown.

By Daniel Turner
A few years ago I was caught in the roughest descent I'd ever experienced in a commercial airplane. As the pilot's voice came on, informing us that San Francisco was unapproachable and we were being redirected to Oakland, passengers began making cell-phone calls to their rides -- hiding the phones from flight attendants, of course, since a federal law prohibits cellular calls on an airplane.

After some jarring and tense minutes, we landed: in San Jose. Once again, the cell phones came out -- still in violation of the regulations -- as people called to apologize to loved ones.

But soon these furtive maneuvers might not be necessary. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is currently reviewing a proposal to lift the ban on using cell phones in flight. Although there is no date set for its decision, both telecommunications companies and airlines are anxious to provide more services.

So why not allow cell phones anyway? Are they actually a danger? The FCC is evaluating the possibility that cell phones could either block satellite signals or disrupt ground-based towers. To most observers, though, other potential safety issues are more worrisome. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is concerned that cell phones might produce significant radio frequency interference, possibly disrupting avionics, including a plane's Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver.

These worries were inflamed recently by an article in the March 2006 issue of IEEE Spectrum, the monthly publication of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. The article, "Unsafe at Any Airspeed?", by Bill Strauss, M. Granger Morgan, and Daniel Stancil, researchers at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU), recapped Strauss's 2003 PhD thesis, which revealed that people do sneak cell-phone calls during flight -- and that it could, in some circumstances, lead to interference with avionics systems through a process known as intermodulation.

Intermodulation occurs when two radio signals of different frequencies interact, potentially causing spikes in new frequency ranges. As Strauss and his colleagues pointed out in their article, signals within the two main cell-phone frequency ranges used in the United States (the cellular band at 824 to 849 megahertz range, and PCS at 1850 to 1910 megahertz) do not interfere with those used by most aircraft navigation aviation systems. Yet Strauss, who carried radio-monitoring equipment on several commercial flights, reported seeing intermodulation effects from cell-phone signals "in the frequency bands used by an aircraft's GPS and distance-measuring equipment."

However, according to David Carson, a lead engineer in cabin systems engineering at Boeing, the CMU report does not justify the hysteria evident in some articles on the topic. Carson is also co-chair of a special committee on portable electronic devices for RTCA, a private, nonprofit aviation consulting organization in Washington, DC. The FAA has commissioned the RTCA committee to produce a report on the inflight use of cell phones and other portable devices. The report, which examines "intentionally transmitting" devices, including cell phones and computers with Wi-Fi cards, will be completed in December 2006.

Carson notes that Strauss was a founding member of the special committee in 2003, and that part of his work there became his PhD thesis. "The thesis was an inflight study of whether transmissions from cell phones occurred," Carson said. "And the conclusion was, yeah, people do use cell phones on airplanes despite the ban."

Carson says that "the potential to have interference with airplane systems is real." But he adds that the few airplane systems that could be affected by radio frequency interference, such as the public address system and wireless tire pressure gauges, are not critical to flight safety. The RTCA released studies of earlier portable-electronics technologies in 1963, 1988, 1996, and 2004, Carson says, and each time the airline industry responded by placing better shielding around airplane electronics and adopting other mitigation strategies. As a result, no airline crash has ever been attributed to radio emissions from devices brought onboard by passengers.

http://38.113.17.100/read_article.aspx?id=16675&ch=infotech

 

[aeon]

I am actually watching you conservative guys.

Good you may learn something useful.
Like differentiating between Leftwing nutters and Principled Conservatives.

LOl i admit you are funny to read.

 

[aeon]

Re: RE: All NORTH Americans must see "United 93"

I'm worried Aeon might turn into a suicide bomber.

Don t worry, quebec isnt illegally occupied, so i have no reason to do it.

 

[aeon]

All Americans must see "United 93"
By Dennis Prager
Apr 18, 2006

Universal's new movie, "United 93," is about United Airlines Flight 93, hijacked on 9-11 by Islamic terrorists shortly after leaving Newark, N.J., for San Francisco. The terrorists intended to fly the plane to Washington, D.C., and crash it into the Capitol. Instead, the passengers fought back and forced the plane down in Pennsylvania, thereby saving the lives of any number of people on the ground in Washington and saving America from a devastating blow to its image.


http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/dennisprager/2006/04/18/194005.html

Reason not to see it?

United 93, was shot down.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30682

Sorry Sport that Conspiracy Theory doesn't fly anymore!
Text of Flight 93 Recording.
April 12, 2006
Foxnews.com
The following is a transcript of the cockpit voice recorder aboard United Airlines Flight 93.
This proves Flight 93 wasn't shot down! Take your Conspiracy Theories and get a Life! :wink:

taken from fox news, which was taken from the movie, isnt really strong as an argument, when in fact we have witnesses who saw a second military plane, nice try , all you get is :roll:

 

[Johnny Utah]

All Americans must see "United 93"
By Dennis Prager
Apr 18, 2006

Universal's new movie, "United 93," is about United Airlines Flight 93, hijacked on 9-11 by Islamic terrorists shortly after leaving Newark, N.J., for San Francisco. The terrorists intended to fly the plane to Washington, D.C., and crash it into the Capitol. Instead, the passengers fought back and forced the plane down in Pennsylvania, thereby saving the lives of any number of people on the ground in Washington and saving America from a devastating blow to its image.


http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/dennisprager/2006/04/18/194005.html

Reason not to see it?

United 93, was shot down.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30682

Sorry Sport that Conspiracy Theory doesn't fly anymore!
Text of Flight 93 Recording.
April 12, 2006
Foxnews.com
The following is a transcript of the cockpit voice recorder aboard United Airlines Flight 93.
This proves Flight 93 wasn't shot down! Take your Conspiracy Theories and get a Life! :wink:

taken from fox news, which was taken from the movie, isnt really strong as an argument, when in fact we have witnesses who saw a second military plane, nice try , all you get is :roll:

It wasn't only on Foxnews it was all over the Media, but hey keep denying the Passengers stopped the Hijackers on Flight 93 because I think the 9/11 Hijackers are Heroes to you. :wink:

 

[Alberta'sfinest]

RE: All NORTH Americans

Here's some science for you johnny. The metal fuselage of an airplane is made out of aluminum. Cell-phones use microwaves to send out their signals, which aluminum blocks. We actually use something similar to this called a pharadae cage to block out radio signals in lab settings, and to protect very expensive electronics. The only way for the signal to escape would be through the windows, but the beam would be limited. At lower speeds and altitudes, a cellphone would pick up a signal, especially in if flying over a city with multiple towers. While cellphones project more of a 3D signal going in all directions, the towers put off and recieve from a more horizontal plane, and are uneffective more than a mile up. Flight 93 was nowhere near a city, flying at cruising altitude and speed, and therefore a cell-phone signal would not work and no calls could have been made from that plane. It's simply the science of high-frequency waves. Ever drive into a low area and you're phone loses it's signal, same thing but your too high instead. I'm not crack pot, I just know it's bullshit because science and pesonal experience of trying to use a cell-phone at altitude says so.