Humint Events Online: The Logic and Unlikeliness of “FBI Agent Tony’s” Alleged Comment’s on TV Fakery on An Alleged Phone Call

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

The Logic and Unlikeliness of “FBI Agent Tony’s” Alleged Comment’s on TV Fakery on An Alleged Phone Call

by The Anonymous Physicist

The alleged comments recently purported to be made on a telephone call to the FBI’s New York Headquarters by a Canadian 911 truther needs careful and logical analysis. The phone call allegedly has an FBI agent say his name is Tony, and that the FBI is “looking into” TV fakery on 9/11. But the whole phone call sounds patently absurd. I have had some personal experience in such matters, and also communications with the FBI are a matter of public record. Note that I am not disputing the issue of TV fakery, as the videos clearly show the alleged plane of the second hit has a wing that blinks in and out of existence, and is thus clearly only a CGI image. I have also written that the second “plane hit” is devoid of the laws of physics, including my own analysis written that a shock wave would have traveled down the plane at the speed of sound in aluminum (11,000 mph), and would have collapsed or deformed the rear of the plane almost instantaneously (with the contact of the front and WTC2) which, of course, is not on the CGI videos. Nonetheless this phone call appears to be improbable, as follows.

Some of the absurdities include the following. The FBI would have first insisted on getting all the information from the caller (as the caller himself could always be a “terrorist,” and as SOP [Standard Operating Procedure.] The caller would have been forced to first provide his full name, address, phone number and social security number, or Canadian equivalent. Without getting all this, the FBI would have likely hung up on him, or have gotten his number for a call back. It is highly unlikely that an agent would speak to any unidentified person. Also, on the phone, an FBI agent likely would not have given any information on himself. But if he did, he would likely have said “Special Agent” Smith, or such, not “Tony.” And it is extremely unlikely that he would have volunteered anything about the FBI’s 9/11 investigation to an unknown, Canadian person, that wasn’t already public knowledge. The FBI would have likely detected that the caller was from Canada from their electronic equipment. It is also highly unlikely that an FBI agent would have let the caller be in control of the conversation and scream at him, “Come on Man”, etc. Rather the FBI agent, if he took the call at all, would have gotten the caller to talk about himself as much as possible--especially since the caller said his call was about “terrorism”, and would not have given his own opinions or details of the FBI’s non-public investigations, or anything “new” to someone unidentified. And the FBI would have made this a very short call, as there was nothing here for them-- in all likelihood it would have been regarded as a crank call. Curiously here even the FBI now has an agent that acts just as the caller’s other “callees” have acted in the past. I.e., they all seem to threaten to hang up, but never do! A whole lot of coincidence, if you catch my drift.

It is fascinating how the alleged call contains-- in a way-- an air of legitimacy, when the first attempted call is hung up on by the FBI-- AFTER the caller said it was about terrorism. In other words, the showing of great bureaucratic ineptitude by the FBI cleverly appears to lend an air of legitimacy to this matter. As improbable or absurd as the whole alleged call appears to be, I can think of one possible scenario whereby the call could be real. And that would entail the FBI and the caller conspiring together to promote this. I am not saying I am certain that this is the case, although I think the probability may be greater than the probability that this call really took place between the caller and “Special Agent Tony” of the FBI. Of course, if this matter is not legitimate, it would be classified as “Audio Fakery.”

The bottom line, is that the extreme unlikeliness of this call demands that others attempt to duplicate it. It is also curious that with all the “911 truthers” out there, no one has either tried or succeeded in this-- again lending an air of unbelievability to it.


Blogger Ningen said...

"It is also highly unlikely that an FBI agent would have let the caller be in control of the conversation and scream at him, 'Come on Man', etc."

This is what made me suspicious. I'm not sure if I would call it screaming, but it was a really strong tone.

I hadn't thought of your other good points.

So what do you think is the purpose of calls like this?

5:36 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger