Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [osint] Re: Why were no fighters scrambled on 0911?

Expand Messages
  • Mike Schneider
    ... A full hour elapsed between the first and last targeted crashes: http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/chronology.attack/ September 11: Chronology of terror
    Message 1 of 22 , Jan 31, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      At 12:18 AM -0500 2/1/02, RV Head wrote:
      >From: "rwoods9230" <rwoods9230@...>
      >
      > > > In the almost two hours of the total drama not a single U.S. Air Force
      > > > interceptor turns a wheel until it's too late. Why?
      > >
      > > What would you have them do? Go up and start shooting down airliners?
      > > When you don't know what the enemy is going to do its damn hard to
      > > defend. I'm retired military and I can tell you there ain't no way
      > > that many GI's could keep their traps shut for this long. It wasn't
      > > the first time an airplane blew up because of bad wiring.
      >
      >Huh? You're shifting gears in mid-paragraph. LONG before the third plane
      >hit the Pentagon, everybody in American knew that four planes had been
      >hijacked, that two of them had been flown into the WTC and that the third
      >was approaching Washington. WHY were there no fighters scrambled to take
      >that plane out before it hit the Pentagon?



      A full hour elapsed between the first and last targeted crashes:

      http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/chronology.attack/

      September 11: Chronology of terror

      September 12, 2001 Posted: 12:27 PM EDT (1627 GMT)

      8:45 a.m. (all times are EDT): A hijacked passenger jet, American
      Airlines Flight 11 out of Boston, Massachusetts, crashes into the north
      tower of the World Trade Center, tearing a gaping hole in the building
      and setting it afire.

      9:03 a.m.: A second hijacked airliner, United Airlines Flight 175 from
      Boston, crashes into the south tower of the World Trade Center and
      explodes. Both buildings are burning.

      9:17 a.m.: The Federal Aviation Administration shuts down all New York
      City area airports.

      9:21 a.m.: The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey orders all
      bridges and tunnels in the New York area closed.

      9:30 a.m.: President Bush, speaking in Sarasota, Florida, says the
      country has suffered an "apparent terrorist attack."

      9:40 a.m.: The FAA halts all flight operations at U.S. airports, the
      first time in U.S. history that air traffic nationwide has been halted.

      9:43 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon,
      sending up a huge plume of smoke. Evacuation begins immediately.

      snip

      10:10 a.m.: United Airlines Flight 93, also hijacked, crashes in
      Somerset County, Pennsylvania, southeast of Pittsburgh.



      ------ http://USFamily.Net/info - Unlimited Internet - From $8.99/mo! ------
    • RV Head
      Leaving personal aside, can you answer the questions raised by the Canadian TV piece I quoted? From: vojvoda13
      Message 2 of 22 , Feb 1 6:47 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Leaving personal aside, can you answer the questions raised by the Canadian
        TV piece I quoted?


        From: "vojvoda13" <vojvoda13@...>

        > This is old news that was "shot down" early on look in the postings
        > around the 18th of Sept. I would go on but those of you that do not
        > get it will never get it. This story is something like our Inside
        > Edition or Access Hollywood etc. No documents or hard evidence just
        > rumor and supposition. Come on get real. Planes were sent to
        > intercept the fourth aircraft. True our defenses strategy had changed
        > in regards to planes on strip alert since the Cold War. The "fighter
        > wings" at Andrews I don't think exist. I have not been over there in
        > five or six months but I am on the flight track for Andrews and I
        > only hear fast movers on average two or three times a week. If you
        > like I can drive over there tomorrow and count the aircraft on the
        > flight line. But then again I was former Military and you would not
        > believe me...
        > VR
        > James Mattes
        >
        >
        >
        > --- In osint@y..., "RV Head" <4whp@h...> wrote:
        > > Canadian TV Breaks 9-11 / CIA Complicity Story
        > > http://www.visiontv.ca
        > > 1-30-2002
        > >
        > > For four months I've been waiting in vain for the North American
        > media to
        > > pursue questions about the startling events of September 11th.
        > Here's what I
        > > want to know:
        > >
        > > The multiple hijackings are unprecedented. The first occurs at 7:45
        > in the
        > > morning. It's a full hour before the first plane hits the World
        > Trade
        > > Center. But it's an hour and 20 minutes -- and after the second
        > plane
        > > hits -- that the President allegedly becomes informed. Think about
        > that.
        > >
        > > Then, he gives no orders. Why? He continues to listen to a student
        > talk
        > > about her pet goat. Why?
        > >
        > > It's another 25 minutes until he makes a statement, even as flight
        > 77 is
        > > making a bee-line for Washington, DC.
        > >
        > > In the almost two hours of the total drama not a single U.S. Air
        > Force
        > > interceptor turns a wheel until it's too late. Why? Was it total
        > > incompetence on the part of aircrews trained and equipped to
        > scramble in
        > > minutes?
        > >
        > > Well, unlike the U.S. Air Force, I'll cut to the chase. Simply to
        > ask these
        > > few questions is to find the official narrative frankly
        > implausible. The
        > > more questions you pursue, it becomes more plausible that there's a
        > > different explanation: namely, that elements within the top U.S.
        > military,
        > > intelligence and political leadership -- which are closely
        > intertwined --
        > > are complicit in what happened on September the 11th.
        > >
        > > Why U.S. complicity, you ask?
        > >
        > > Well, to stampede public opinion into supporting the so-called war
        > on
        > > terrorism, to justify a war on Afghanistan for a future oil
        > pipeline, the
        > > grab for Middle East oil, big budget increases for the military,
        > and the
        > > general drive for global domination by the American Empire.
        > >
        > > I know it sounds incredible.
        > >
        > > But here's some historical context from this book, Body of Secrets.
        > Its
        > > author is James Bamford. Bamford until recently was Washington
        > Investigative
        > > Producer for ABC's World News tonight with Peter Jennings. I
        > learned of this
        > > book on ABC's website.
        > >
        > > Bamford's information comes from interviews. With, for instance,
        > the former
        > > dean of the U.S. intelligence community. And from government
        > documents. It
        > > takes 80 pages to list Bamford's more than 600 information sources.
        > >
        > > Here's the story. It's 1962. John F. Kennedy is U.S. president.
        > Robert
        > > McNamara is Secretary of Defence. And Admiral Lyman Lemnitzer heads
        > the U.S.
        > > Joint Chiefs of Staff. The CIA has failed in its illegal Bay of Pigs
        > > invasion of Cuba.
        > >
        > > JFK decides, Bamford writes, to back away from military solutions
        > to the
        > > Cuban problem.
        > >
        > > But Lemnitzer, the CIA and others at the top remain obsessed with
        > Cuba.
        > > Writes Bamford: "As the Kennedy brothers appeared to suddenly 'go
        > soft' on
        > > Cuba, Lemnitzer could see his opportunity to invade - quickly
        > slipping
        > > away. -attempts to provoke the Cuban public to revolt seemed dead -"
        > >
        > > Continues Bamford: "Lemnitzer and the other chiefs knew there was
        > only one
        > > option left that would ensure their war. They would have to trick
        > the
        > > American public and world opinion -"
        > >
        > > Lemnitzer comes up with Operation Northwoods.
        > >
        > > "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba-
        > casualty
        > > lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national
        > > indignation."
        > >
        > > "We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami
        > area, in
        > > other Florida cities and even in Washington."
        > >
        > > An elaborate variation: create "an exact duplicate for a civil
        > registered
        > > aircraft-" "At a designated time the duplicate would be-loaded with-
        > selected
        > > passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual
        > > registered aircraft would be converted to a drone [a remotely
        > controlled
        > > unmanned aircraft]" - "the destruction of (that) aircraft will be
        > triggered
        > > by radio signal."
        > >
        > > The Cubans would be blamed.
        > >
        > > Finally, another variation is described by Bamford: "On February
        > 20th, 1962
        > > (John) Glenn was to lift off from Cape Canaveral-on his historic
        > journey.
        > > Lemnitzer "proposed - that should the rocket explode and kill
        > Glenn, the
        > > objective is to provide irrevocable proof that-the fault lies with
        > (Cuba)-"
        > > "by manufacturing various pieces of evidence which would prove
        > electronic
        > > interference on the part of the Cubans."
        > >
        > > Thus, Bamford notes, "as NASA prepared to send the first American
        > into
        > > space, the Joint Chiefs of Staff were preparing to use John Glenn's
        > possible
        > > death as a pretext to launch a war."
        > >
        > > The Operation Northwoods plan shows the Pentagon was capable,
        > according to
        > > Bamford, "of launching a secret and bloody war of terrorism against
        > their
        > > own country in order to trick the American public into supporting a
        > (war on
        > > Cuba)."
        > >
        > > Can we be sure, therefore, that complicity by the Pentagon in the
        > events of
        > > Sept. 11th is entirely out of the question?
        > >
        > > Next week, a more precise look at the events of that fateful day.
        > >
        > > And what about bin Laden? I'll have more on him too. And the
        > arrests of
        > > people named as terrorists around the world.
        > >
        > > PART 2
        > >
        > > Next, more troubling questions. Part 2 in my series of commentaries
        > about
        > > the events of September 11th.
        > >
        > > As you've heard in the panel discussion, a common explanation as to
        > why no
        > > U.S. military interceptors took to the skies on September 11th
        > until it was
        > > too late, is that it was "simple incompetence."
        > >
        > > Well, let me deal with the "incompetence theory." By first taking
        > you back
        > > to October 26th, 1999. That is the day the chartered Learjet
        > carrying golfer
        > > Payne Stewart crashes, killing all on board. This from the official
        > National
        > > Transportation Safety Board crash report:
        > >
        > > 9:19 a.m.: the flight departs
        > > 9:24: The Learjet's pilot responds to an instruction from air
        > traffic
        > > control
        > > 9:33: The controller radios another instruction. No response from
        > the pilot.
        > > For 4 minutes the controller tries to establish contact.
        > > 9:38: Having failed, the controller calls in the military. Note
        > that he did
        > > not
        > > seek, nor did he require, the approval of the President of the
        > United
        > > States,
        > > or indeed anyone. It's standard procedure, followed routinely, to
        > call in
        > > the
        > > Air Force when radio contact with a commercial passenger jet is
        > lost, or the
        > > plane departs from its flight path, or anything along those lines
        > occurs.
        > > 9:54: 16 minutes later -- the F-16 reaches the Learjet at 46,000
        > feet and
        > > conducts a visual inspection. Total elapsed time: 21 minutes.
        > >
        > > So what does this prove? Well, it proves that standing routines
        > exist for
        > > dealing with all such emergencies, for instance loss of radio
        > contact. All
        > > personnel in the air and on the ground are trained to follow the
        > routines,
        > > which have been fine-tuned over decades, as the Learjet incident
        > > illustrates.
        > >
        > > For large scheduled aircraft, tracked throughout on radar, to depart
        > > extravagantly from their flight paths, would trigger numerous calls
        > to the
        > > military, especially after two have hit the World Trade Centre and
        > now one
        > > is speeding toward Washington, D.C.
        > >
        > > It flies over the White House, turns sharply and heads toward the
        > Pentagon.
        > > Everyone - and I mean everyone - now knows these planes are very
        > bad news.
        > > It's been reported on all TV networks for more than half an hour
        > that this
        > > is a terrorist attack.
        > >
        > > Now, Andrews Air Force Base is a huge installation. It's home to
        > Air Force
        > > One, the President's plane. It's home base for two combat-ready
        > squadrons of
        > > jet interceptors mandated to ensure the safety of the U.S. capital.
        > Andrews
        > > is only 12 miles from the White House.
        > >
        > > On September 11th the squadrons there were: The 121st Fighter
        > Squadron of
        > > the 113th Fighter Wing, equipped with F-16s The 321st Marine
        > Fighter Attack
        > > Squadron of the 49th Marine Air Group, Detachment A, equipped F/A-
        > 18s.
        > >
        > > This information was on the website of the base on September 11th.
        > [POSSIBLE
        > > (cuts)] On September 12th, Andrews chose to update its website. I
        > find it
        > > odd that after the update there's no mention of the F-16 and F-18
        > fighters.
        > > The base becomes, according to the website, home to a transport
        > squadron
        > > only.
        > >
        > > Yet at 6:30 the evening of September 11th NBC Nightly News, along
        > with many
        > > outlets, reported: "It was after the attack on the Pentagon that
        > the Air
        > > Force then decided to scramble F-16s out of the DC National Guard
        > Andrews
        > > Air Force Base to fly - a protective cover over Washington, D.C."
        > >
        > > Throughout the northeastern United States are many air bases. But
        > that
        > > morning no interceptors respond in a timely fashion to the highest
        > alert
        > > situation.
        > >
        > > This includes the Andrews squadrons which have the longest lead
        > time and are
        > > 12 miles from the White house.
        > >
        > > Whatever the explanation for the huge failure, there have been no
        > reports,
        > > to my knowledge, of reprimands. This further weakens
        > the "Incompetence
        > > Theory."
        > >
        > > Incompetence usually earns reprimands.
        > >
        > > This causes me to ask - and other media need to ask - if there
        > were "stand
        > > down" orders.
        > >
        > > * Next week, bin Laden was a longtime close ally of the CIA,
        > according to
        > > the
        > > CIA itself. Why did he suddenly turn against them? Or did he?
        > >
        > > http://www.rense.com/general19/cmp.htm
        >
        >
        >
        > --------------------------
        > Brooks Isoldi, editor
        > bisoldi@...
        >
        > http://www.intellnet.org
        >
        > Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
        > Subscribe: osint-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > Unsubscribe: osint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
      • RV Head
        From: Howling Patriot ... This is the first answer I ve seen, though the www.tenc.com people claim that there were quite a few
        Message 3 of 22 , Feb 1 7:15 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          From: "Howling Patriot" <howling_patriot@...>

          > >WHY were there no fighters scrambled to take that
          > >plane out before it hit the Pentagon?>
          >
          > WHY? Because there were NO PLANES AVAILABLE. It is as simple as that.
          >
          > There is no conspiracy here, only stupidity.

          This is the first answer I've seen, though the www.tenc.com people claim
          that there were quite a few air bases from which fighters could have and
          should have been scrambled. It is a little hard to believe that the plane
          which hit the Pentagon could get to DC from Kentucky before fighters could
          get to DC from wherever they were based - Were there NO fighters AT ALL in
          New England?

          > There may very well have been a "peace dividend"
          > available to America as a member of the winning team
          > of the cold war. But it was so rapidly and recklessly
          > pursued that the only planes available on the east
          > coast that day available to protect the White House,
          > and Congress, were at Otis Air National Guard Base on
          > Cape Cod, Mass.

          Fighters could not get to DC from Massachusetts at Mach 2 before the
          civilian aircraft got there from Kentucky? Everybody in America if not the
          world knew that there had been four planes hijacked and that two of them had
          been flown into the WTC and that one of them was headed for DC. The DCANG
          web page lied when it said that air protection of DC is its mission in
          addition to training?

          > According to Vote.com, of over 57,000 people polled,
          > over 87% of those polled blamed the former
          > administration for the holocaust of September 11th.

          Surely you're aware of the scientific value of "polls" like this?

          > How many of those same people who voted for the
          > clintons would admit it and agree that a tiny base on
          > Cape Cod should be entrusted with the protection of
          > the most important city in the world?

          The Base Closing Commission was supposed to be insulated from politics, and
          indeed the SecDef was one of its strongest supporters, IIRC.

          > Mr and Mrs Clinton, hindsight is 20-20...But only if You Survive.

          Yeah, and Bill Clinton is personally responsible for the heartbreak of
          psorrhiasis too. He was out of office for eight and a half months by the
          time 0911 happened.
        • rwoods9230
          ... To add a litle more, if one of our fighters had shot down one of those airliners the critics would have hounded the issue to the point that the pilot would
          Message 4 of 22 , Feb 1 8:05 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            > > >WHY were there no fighters scrambled to take that
            > > >plane out before it hit the Pentagon?>


            To add a litle more, if one of our fighters had shot down one of
            those airliners the critics would have hounded the issue to the point
            that the pilot would have been brought up on charges. Even today if
            it happens there will be those that ask the question "How can we be
            sure that the airliner was really a danger?". There was no oplan for
            taking down hijacked airliners with air to air weapons. Who in their
            right mind would have forseen airplanes flying into towers? We were
            not ready for the style of war we are in, this is new territory for
            the military. A military that has been cut to the bone and
            disrespected, especially by the last group that was in power for 8
            years, undertrained and underfunded for too many years. I retired in
            82 and some of the airplanes (tailnumbers) I flew in the 60's in Viet
            Nam are still being flown today, by crews that are younger than the
            planes they fly.
          • Mike Schneider
            ... RV, you may be on to something with your timetable arguments; you really shouldn t dilute by forays into administrative political blame. It takes
            Message 5 of 22 , Feb 1 10:29 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              At 10:15 AM -0500 2/1/02, RV Head wrote:
              >From: "Howling Patriot" <howling_patriot@...>
              >
              > > Mr and Mrs Clinton, hindsight is 20-20...But only if You Survive.
              >
              >Yeah, and Bill Clinton is personally responsible for the heartbreak of
              >psorrhiasis too. He was out of office for eight and a half months by the
              >time 0911 happened.


              RV, you may be on to something with your timetable arguments; you
              really shouldn't dilute by forays into administrative political
              blame. It takes considerably longer than a year for a new president
              to get money approved via appropriations bills, and for said spending
              to work its way through the whole sausage-making factory to appear as
              shiny new fighter jets on the tarmac.



              ------ http://USFamily.Net/info - Unlimited Internet - From $8.99/mo! ------
            • Mike Schneider
              ... I seriously doubt it. Within a day, it was *official policy*, and everybody in the country intuitively understood the necessity of it. ... This is
              Message 6 of 22 , Feb 1 10:36 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                At 4:05 PM +0000 2/1/02, rwoods9230 wrote:
                > > > >WHY were there no fighters scrambled to take that
                > > > >plane out before it hit the Pentagon?
                >
                >To add a litle more, if one of our fighters had shot down one of
                >those airliners the critics would have hounded the issue to the point
                >that the pilot would have been brought up on charges.


                I seriously doubt it. Within a day, it was *official policy*, and
                everybody in the country intuitively understood the necessity of it.


                >82 and some of the airplanes (tailnumbers) I flew in the 60's in Viet
                >Nam are still being flown today, by crews that are younger than the
                >planes they fly.


                This is off-topic to the discussion, but I'd add that the reason old
                birds like these are kept in the air is because they met the
                "performance threshold" for most of the parameters of their mission.
                By analogy, the computer market boomed in the 90's because newer ones
                were always more capable than the old, but now it's in a slump
                because most people are satisfied with what they have. Ditto with
                Viet era planes.



                ------ http://USFamily.Net/info - Unlimited Internet - From $8.99/mo! ------
              • Mike Schneider
                ... Fat wings full of gas and a pressurized cabin? I have high confidence in the ability of a fighter armed only with machinegun or 20mm canon to blow a civy
                Message 7 of 22 , Feb 1 10:46 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  At 12:12 PM +0000 2/2/02, Moray Pickering wrote:

                  >2 - The point about the fighters at Andrews is true. Andrews is the
                  >home to squadron of ANG F-16s and Marine F/A-18s. However, these are
                  >not fighter wings as such and therefore have a lower state of
                  >readiness than an active duty squadron. Although they may well have
                  >planes on standby ready to take off on a few minutes notice, it is
                  >unlikely that they would be armed with missiles and you would have
                  >to doubt the ability of a canon to stop an airliner.


                  Fat wings full of gas and a pressurized cabin? I have high confidence
                  in the ability of a fighter armed only with machinegun or 20mm canon
                  to blow a civy out of the sky



                  ------ http://USFamily.Net/info - Unlimited Internet - From $8.99/mo! ------
                • pirate97006
                  This conspiracy theory is getting so old. On one hand we have presented to us a US cover up of shooting down flt. 93, on the other hand we have a
                  Message 8 of 22 , Feb 1 11:44 AM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    This "conspiracy theory" is getting so old. On one hand we have
                    presented to us a "US cover up" of shooting down flt. 93, on the
                    other hand we have a declaration of our military incompetence for not
                    scrambling fighters. Which is it to be? We responded or we didn't? If
                    any one would look at the time line of events for 9/11, things would
                    become obvious.

                    7:59AM Flt 11 departs Boston for LA
                    8:14 AM Flt 175 departs Boston for LA
                    8:20 AM Flt 77 departs Dulles for LA
                    8:40 FAA notifies NORAD that Flt 11 has been hijacked
                    8:42 Flt 93 departs Newark for San Fran.
                    8:43 FAA notifies NORAD that Flt 175 has been hijacked
                    8:45 Flt 11 crashes into Tower 1 (five minutes after we knew it was
                    hijacked)
                    8:46 Fighters are scrambled out of Otis ANG Base in Fallmouth, Mass.
                    9:03 Flt 175 crashes into Tower 2 (17 minutes after the ANG was
                    scrambled, hardly enough time to locate Flt 175, let alone stop it)
                    9:24 FAA notifies NORAD that Flt 77 has been hijacked.(Now we start
                    to get the feeling somethings up)
                    9:25 FAA orders shut down of all air ports ntion wide.
                    9:31 Bush makes a statement from an elementary school in Fla. calling
                    the crashes an apparent terrorist attack.
                    9:35 NORAD scrambles two F-16 from Langley AFB, Virginia (Thats near
                    Washington)
                    9:40 Flt 77 hits the Pentagon (five minutes after the scramble order
                    at Langley, hardly enough time for a take off let alone an intercept.
                    9:45 A telephone operator receives a cell phone call saying Flt 93
                    has been hijacked and the passengers are going to fight back.
                    9:48 The White House and Capital are evacuated.
                    9:54 Bush leaves Fla.
                    9:55 The F 16 scrambled from Langley reach DC
                    10:37 Flt 93 crashes. Now if you will notice, the FAA never notified
                    NORAD that 93 was hijacked. Only a cell operator knew. Also note that
                    no fighters in the area of Pennsyvania or Flt 93 were ever scrambled.
                    Just fighters from Mass going to NY and from Langley going to DC.

                    Before 9/11 there hadn't been a hijacking on US soil in over twenty
                    years. Our mind set in the case of a hijacking up til this time was
                    to sit back and wait for the hijackers demands. The FAA/NORAD
                    response was to locate and follow between 8:43 when the first
                    hijacking was reported and 10:37 when the last flight crashed; a
                    period of time of less than two hours we were supposed to change the
                    policies of twenty years? And also the conspiratists would have us
                    believe that inthis same less-than two hour time frame the government
                    cooked up a cover up? I ain't buying it, sorry. As they say in
                    Missouri, that dog don't hunt.

                    Pirate

                    --- In osint@y..., "Moray Pickering" <moray_pickering@b...> wrote:
                    > I have a couple of points to make about things said in this
                    article. Although I am aware that it is just another conspiracy
                    theory and therefore probably not going to be taken seriously be the
                    majority of people, I think it is still worthwhile to point out some
                    of the inaccurracies. Also, it was mentioned by someone else that
                    this issue has already been addressed previously - I am a new member
                    of this list so I apologise if I am repeating anything that has
                    already been said.
                    >
                    > My points are:-
                    >
                    > 1 - The authour compares the third hijacked plane with the case of
                    Payne Stewart and his death on on a private jet. There are a number
                    of reasons why Stewart's plane was intercepted so quickly. Firstly,
                    he was flying over Nebraska if memory serves, as opposed to the
                    airliners on 9/11 which were over the heavily congested eastern
                    seaboard at one of the busiest times of the day, therefore making it
                    a lot easier to find Stewart's plane.
                    >
                    > Also, when the hijackers took control of the planes they switched
                    off the plane's transponders, which is the primary way in which
                    civilian aircraft are located. Without the transponder it would have
                    been almost impossible for air traffic controllers to accuratley
                    locate the airliner, as civilian radars cannot give out things like
                    the altitude of a plane, even if they find it. Stewart's plane still
                    had its transponder on therefore making it a relatively simple task
                    for interceptors to be vectored in.
                    >
                    > 2 - The point about the fighters at Andrews is true. Andrews is the
                    home to squadron of ANG F-16s and Marine F/A-18s. However, these are
                    not fighter wings as such and therefore have a lower state of
                    readiness than an active duty squadron. Although they may well have
                    planes on standby ready to take off on a few minutes notice, it is
                    unlikely that they would be armed with missiles and you would have to
                    dount the ability of a canon to stop an airliner.
                    >
                    > The planes that intercepted Stewart's planes were also almost
                    certainly unarmed, therefore it is likely that all the fighters out
                    of Andrews could have done was watch the plane crash into the
                    Pentagon. However, that does not excuse the fact that they appear not
                    to have been scrambled at all.
                    >
                    > In conclusion, the US Armed Forces did not shoot down the third
                    hijacked plane because of a CIA conspiracy, but because of a
                    combination of the fact that they could not accurately locate the
                    plane and they were not at a state of readiness in terms of armament
                    to be able to shoot the plane down, even if they could find it in
                    time.
                    >
                    > For those of you that may be wondering my credentials are that I
                    work in the aviation media industry for a military aviation
                    publishing group in the UK.
                    >
                    > Moray
                    >
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • toni thatcher
                    ... _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
                    Message 9 of 22 , Feb 1 11:57 AM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      > -----Original Message-----
                      > From: RV Head [mailto:4whp@...]
                      >
                      > This is the first answer I've seen, though the www.tenc.com people claim
                      > that there were quite a few air bases from which fighters could have and
                      > should have been scrambled. It is a little hard to believe that the plane
                      > which hit the Pentagon could get to DC from Kentucky before fighters could
                      > get to DC from wherever they were based - Were there NO fighters AT ALL in
                      > New England?



                      From: NYTimes, September 27, 2001, THE LAST RESORT, 1. Generals Given Power
                      to Order Downing of Jets, By ERIC SCHMITT excerpts: (The whole article
                      follows)

                      ["But on Sept. 11, that vaunted defense turned out to be a modern Maginot
                      line, blind to terrorist attacks originating in the United States that war
                      planners never dreamed could pose a threat.

                      "If somebody had called us and said, we have a hijacking 100 miles out
                      coming from Europe or South America, there are terrorists on board and
                      they've taken over the airplane, that's a scenario we've practiced,"
                      said General Eberhart, a Vietnam veteran. "We did not practice - and I
                      wish to God we had - a scenario where this takes off out of Boston, and
                      minutes later crashes into New York City. This is a whole new
                      ballgame."

                      Since the attacks, commanders at Norad's nerve center here have quickly
                      turned their sights to new threats inside the country."

                      "Since Sept. 11, there has been no such thing here as a routine
                      in-flight problem. Any commercial airliner with a radio failure or a
                      silent transponder is immediately suspect, and fighters have been
                      scrambled several times in the last two weeks to investigate what turned out
                      to be false alarms."]
                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                      NYTimes, SEP 15, 2001, (2.) Pentagon Tracked Deadly Jet but Found No Way to
                      Stop It.
                      By MATTHEW L. WALD, WASHINGTON, Sept. 14:["The United States is signatory to
                      a treaty that appears to bar using force against civilian airplanes.
                      Congress has voted against letting the military shoot down suspected drug
                      planes trying to cross into the United States. Whether those restrictions
                      would apply to a plane showing clearly hostile intent has never been spelled
                      out. An F.A.A. spokeswoman said earlier this week that there was a policy
                      for shooting down civilian airliners but would not divulge it.

                      And shooting down a jet as large as a Boeing 757 or 767 raises other
                      problems. One F.A.A. official said, "If you keep it from hitting a
                      government building, it's going to hit something else." That was clearly
                      true for the planes that hit the World Trade Center, which flew over other
                      parts of Manhattan, and the plane that hit the Pentagon, which flew over
                      urbanized Northern Virginia.

                      John S. Carr, president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association,
                      the controllers' union, said: "Our system of unfettered access and freedom
                      has limitations in terms of responding to a case like this. We've created a
                      system for transportation, not defense."]




                      NYTimes
                      September 27, 2001
                      THE LAST RESORT
                      (1.) Generals Given Power to Order Downing of Jets
                      By ERIC SCHMITT
                      CHEYENNE MOUNTAIN, Colo., Sept. 26 - President Bush has authorized two
                      midlevel Air Force generals to order commercial airliners that threaten
                      American cities shot down without checking first with him, a senior
                      military officer said today.

                      The senior officer, Gen. Ralph E. Eberhart of the Air Force, the head
                      of the North American Aerospace Defense Command, said in an interview
                      that such life-or-death decisions would be made by the generals only as
                      a last resort when an attack was seconds away and there was not enough
                      time to consult with General Eberhart, a four-star officer, or the
                      president.

                      Vice President Dick Cheney revealed this month that in the hours after
                      the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Mr. Bush had
                      ordered the downing of any passenger jets that imperiled Washington.
                      But days after the Sept. 11 hijackings, Mr. Bush, Defense Secretary
                      Donald H. Rumsfeld and the Joint Chiefs of Staff approved new rules of
                      engagement that reflected the heightened concern over possible new terrorist
                      strikes and how to confront them swiftly, General Eberhart said.

                      Before the attacks there were no formal rules on how the military should
                      deal with an airliner hijacked over the United States, flown by what in
                      essence are suicide bombers.

                      "If there's time, we'd go all the way to the president," said General
                      Eberhart, who also leads the United States Space Command. "Otherwise,
                      the standing orders have been pushed down to the regional level."

                      Maj. Gen. Larry K. Arnold, a two- star officer at Tyndall Air Force
                      Base, Fla., would have that authority for the continental United
                      States. Lt. Gen. Norton A. Schwartz, a three- star officer at Elmendorf Air
                      Force Base, Alaska, would have authority for Alaska. Hawaii is covered by
                      the United States Pacific Command, headed by Adm. Dennis Blair, instead of
                      NORAD.

                      Citing security concerns, General Eberhart declined to sketch a course
                      of events that would result in the decision to down a civilian airliner
                      being made by someone other than the president.

                      The change in the rules of engagement regarding shooting down civilian
                      aircraft is part of the rethinking of the North American Aerospace
                      Defense Command, better known as Norad, which was born during the cold
                      war and has always been oriented toward external threats. For more than 40
                      years in a bunker deep inside this granite peak, elite Norad
                      specialists with early-warning radars have peered out over America's
                      borders to alert the nation to an incoming enemy air strike.

                      But on Sept. 11, that vaunted defense turned out to be a modern Maginot
                      line, blind to terrorist attacks originating in the United States that
                      war planners never dreamed could pose a threat.

                      "If somebody had called us and said, we have a hijacking 100 miles out
                      coming from Europe or South America, there are terrorists on board and
                      they've taken over the airplane, that's a scenario we've practiced,"
                      said General Eberhart, a Vietnam veteran. "We did not practice - and I
                      wish to God we had - a scenario where this takes off out of Boston, and
                      minutes later crashes into New York City. This is a whole new
                      ballgame."

                      Since the attacks, commanders at Norad's nerve center here have quickly
                      turned their sights to new threats inside the country.

                      More than 100 fighter jets at 26 bases nationwide stand ready to take
                      off on 10 minutes' notice, up from 14 planes at seven bases on comparable
                      alert the day of the attacks. F-15's and F-16's fly round-the-clock over
                      Washington and New York, and randomly over dozens of other cities. Last
                      Sunday, fighters flew over several National Football League games although
                      officials would not say which ones.

                      Since Sept. 11, there has been no such thing here as a routine
                      in-flight problem. Any commercial airliner with a radio failure or a
                      silent transponder is immediately suspect, and fighters have been
                      scrambled several times in the last two weeks to investigate what turned out
                      to be false alarms.

                      "Everyone is very twitchy right now," said Brig. Gen. J. D. Hunter,
                      a Canadian Air Force officer who is vice commander of the mountain's
                      operations center.

                      Some Federal Aviation Administration radars are not compatible with
                      Norad military radars that gaze out 200 miles beyond United States
                      territory, General Eberhart said. So Norad is moving nearly a dozen
                      mobile ground radars around the country to expand its coverage of the
                      interior United States. Awacs surveillance planes also patrol the
                      skies.

                      At the operations center inside this durable fortress outside Colorado
                      Springs, air battle management officers, as they are called, monitor
                      giant multihued radar images for the tell-tale blip of incoming
                      attacks. But the officers also have new computers whose screens display
                      a tiny turquoise dot for each of the thousands of commercial and private
                      flights the F.A.A. is tracking at any given moment. A few keystrokes yields
                      information on any of them.

                      Norad has also opened a direct telephone line to the F.A.A. If a
                      problem arises, Norad officials here and at regional commands quickly
                      hold a teleconference with aviation officials to assess the situation.
                      The aviation administration now has a liaison in the Norad operations
                      center.

                      "We've improved our ability to communicate with the F.A.A.," said Brig.
                      Gen. Michael C. Gould of the Air Force, the operations center
                      commander. "We really never had the need to respond like this before."

                      Indeed, the air defense mission here is at the forefront of the renewed
                      focus on homeland defense. At the height of the cold war, air defenses
                      under joint Canadian and American control operated 3,600 fighter jets.
                      But with a declining threat, shrinking Pentagon budgets and higher-priority
                      missions to monitor ballistic missile launchings around
                      the world, Norad's air defense role dwindled to the 20 fighters - 14 in
                      the continental United States - on alert two weeks ago.

                      Norad's fight against terrorism is coordinated from inside a cavernous
                      complex bored 1,700 feet into this mountainside. When the bunker was
                      completed in 1966, it was designed to withstand a 31-megaton Soviet
                      nuclear strike.

                      American officials concede that the far more destructive weapons now
                      available would turn this mountain into a valley if it suffered a direct
                      hit.

                      But commanders persist in keeping up appearances. A pair of 25-ton
                      steel doors swung open to allow the first public visitor since the
                      terrorist attacks to enter a 4.5-acre city of 12 three-story buildings
                      erected on a metal base sitting atop giant metal coils. Designers
                      figured that if the Big One ever hit, the command post would sway on its
                      massive shock absorbers and lead a retaliatory strike.

                      Nowhere is the contrast between the pre-attack and post-attack visions
                      more striking than in the command's air warning center, which before
                      Sept. 11 was a quiet, three- person office tucked away down one of the many
                      corridors in the labyrinthine subterranean complex.

                      The office has been rechristened the Norad Battle Management Center, and
                      bustles with more than 40 military specialists who track weather,
                      monitor security at the air bases where fighters are stationed, and
                      evaluate the effects of potential attacks from chemical or biological
                      weapons.

                      Other crews monitor not only the 7,000 daily flights into the United
                      States from abroad, but also any domestic flights of concern.

                      "It's good if it keeps us more on top of what's happening," said Staff
                      Sgt. Claudette Johnson, 31, an instructor pressed into service to monitor
                      the air-traffic control chatter on the open line to the F.A.A. "Advanced
                      notice can never be a bad thing."

                      General Eberhart and other commanders say there is no let up in sight.
                      They expect air combat patrols to secure the skies over major sporting
                      attractions, like the World Series, as well as other big events, like
                      launchings of the space shuttle.

                      "We're trying to game this out," said General Gould, "and anticipate
                      where terrorists could strike next."

                      (2.) NYTimes
                      SEP 15, 2001
                      Pentagon Tracked Deadly Jet but Found No Way to Stop It
                      By MATTHEW L. WALD

                      WASHINGTON, Sept. 14 - During the hour or so that American Airlines Flight
                      77 was under the control of hijackers, up to the moment it struck the west
                      side of the Pentagon, military officials in a command center on the east
                      side of the building were urgently talking to law enforcement and air
                      traffic control officials about what to do.

                      But despite elaborate plans that link civilian and military efforts to
                      control the nation's airspace in defense of the country, and despite two
                      other jetliners' having already hit the World Trade Center in New York, the
                      fighter planes that scrambled into protective orbits around Washington did
                      not arrive until 15 minutes after Flight 77 hit the Pentagon. Even if they
                      had been there sooner, it is not clear what they would have done to thwart
                      the attack.

                      The Federal Aviation Administration has officially refused to discuss its
                      procedures or the sequence of events on Tuesday morning, saying these are
                      part of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's inquiry. But controllers in
                      New England knew about 8:20 a.m. that American Airlines Flight 11, bound
                      from Boston to Los Angeles, had probably been hijacked. When the first news
                      report was made at 8:48 a.m. that a plane might have hit the World Trade
                      Center, they knew it was Flight 11. And within a few minutes more,
                      controllers would have known that both United 175 (the second plane to hit
                      the World Trade Center) and American 77 (which hit the Pentagon) had
                      probably been hijacked.

                      Flight 77, which took off from Dulles International Airport outside
                      Washington shortly after 8 a.m., stayed aloft until 9:45 a.m. and would have
                      been visible on the F.A.A.'s radar system as it reversed course in the
                      Midwest an hour later to fly back to Washington. The radars would have
                      observed it even though its tracking beacon had been turned off.

                      By 9:25 a.m. the F.A.A., in consultation with the Pentagon, had taken the
                      radical step of banning all takeoffs around the country, but fighters still
                      had not been dispatched. At that same time, the government learned from
                      Barbara Olson, a political commentator who was a passenger on Flight 77,
                      that the plane had been hijacked. She twice called her husband, Solicitor
                      General Theodore B. Olson, on her cellular phone to tell him what was
                      happening.

                      Despite provisions for close communication between civilian and military
                      traffic officials, and extensive procedures for security control over air
                      traffic during attacks on the United States, it does not appear that anyone
                      had contemplated the kind of emergency that was unfolding.

                      The procedures, first devised in the 1950's, cover how to send fighter
                      planes to shadow a hijacked plane on its way, perhaps, to Cuba. They tell
                      how to intercept a plane entering the nation's airspace through the air
                      defense zone along the Atlantic Coast, but not what to do with kamikazes.

                      "There is no category of `enemy airliners,' " a recently retired F.A.A.
                      official said. He and others said they could not recall any instance in
                      which a military plane fired on a civilian one in the United States, though
                      in 1983 a F-4 Phantom fighter that scrambled to intercept an unidentified
                      target off Cherry Point, N.C., accidentally rammed it. That plane was a
                      private twin-engine propeller plane on the way home from the Bahamas,
                      carrying seven people.

                      The United States is signatory to a treaty that appears to bar using force
                      against civilian airplanes. Congress has voted against letting the military
                      shoot down suspected drug planes trying to cross into the United States.
                      Whether those restrictions would apply to a plane showing clearly hostile
                      intent has never been spelled out. An F.A.A. spokeswoman said earlier this
                      week that there was a policy for shooting down civilian airliners but would
                      not divulge it.

                      And shooting down a jet as large as a Boeing 757 or 767 raises other
                      problems. One F.A.A. official said, "If you keep it from hitting a
                      government building, it's going to hit something else." That was clearly
                      true for the planes that hit the World Trade Center, which flew over other
                      parts of Manhattan, and the plane that hit the Pentagon, which flew over
                      urbanized Northern Virginia.

                      John S. Carr, president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association,
                      the controllers' union, said: "Our system of unfettered access and freedom
                      has limitations in terms of responding to a case like this. We've created a
                      system for transportation, not defense."

                      Today officials were trying to reconstruct that system. Ronald Reagan
                      National Airport - with approaches that are within a few hundred yards of
                      the Pentagon and just seconds, at jet speeds, from the heart of Washington -
                      remains closed, "temporarily and indefinitely." Private planes were allowed
                      to resume flying at 4 p.m. today, but only under air traffic control.

                      Combat aircraft are patrolling the skies; an aircraft carrier is at sea off
                      Washington and another off New York to provide air defense.

                      Military officials have offered vague descriptions in public about their
                      procedures against airborne terrorists. In a confirmation hearing on
                      Wednesday before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Gen. Richard B. Myer
                      of the Air Force, who has been nominated to be chairman of the Joint Chiefs
                      of Staff, said he did not know whether the F.A.A. had contacted the Pentagon
                      about the hijackings.

                      "When it became clear what the threat was, we did scramble fighter aircraft,
                      AWACS, radar aircraft and tanker aircraft to begin to establish orbits in
                      case other aircraft showed up in the F.A.A. system that were hijacked," he
                      said. He added that once the fighters were aloft, it was not necessary to
                      use force.

                      In part, that was because American Airlines Flight 77 had already hit the
                      Pentagon, and the hijacked flight from Newark, its target unknown, had
                      crashed in Pennsylvania.

                      Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, said today that the Pentagon
                      had been tracking that plane and could have shot it down if necessary; it
                      crashed about 35 minutes after the Pentagon crash.




                      _________________________________________________________
                      Do You Yahoo!?
                      Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com
                    • Mike Schneider
                      ... Now [at 9:24] we start to get the feeling something s up ...? This *confession of incompetence* reminds me of something Billy Beck (who some of you may
                      Message 10 of 22 , Feb 1 12:30 PM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        At 7:44 PM +0000 2/1/02, pirate97006 wrote:
                        >This "conspiracy theory" is getting so old. On one hand we have
                        >presented to us a "US cover up" of shooting down flt. 93, on the
                        >other hand we have a declaration of our military incompetence for not
                        >scrambling fighters. Which is it to be? We responded or we didn't? If
                        >any one would look at the time line of events for 9/11, things would
                        >become obvious.
                        >
                        >7:59AM Flt 11 departs Boston for LA
                        >8:14 AM Flt 175 departs Boston for LA
                        >8:20 AM Flt 77 departs Dulles for LA
                        >8:40 FAA notifies NORAD that Flt 11 has been hijacked
                        >8:42 Flt 93 departs Newark for San Fran.
                        >8:43 FAA notifies NORAD that Flt 175 has been hijacked
                        >8:45 Flt 11 crashes into Tower 1 (five minutes after we knew it was
                        >hijacked)
                        >8:46 Fighters are scrambled out of Otis ANG Base in Fallmouth, Mass.
                        >9:03 Flt 175 crashes into Tower 2 (17 minutes after the ANG was
                        >scrambled, hardly enough time to locate Flt 175, let alone stop it)
                        >9:24 FAA notifies NORAD that Flt 77 has been hijacked.(Now we start
                        >to get the feeling somethings up)


                        "Now [at 9:24] we start to get the feeling something's up"...?

                        This *confession of incompetence* reminds me of something Billy Beck
                        (who some of you may have met in rec.aviation.military) wrote awhile
                        back. Study it carefully, and don't let the salt throw you:


                        The Big Picture With The Big Crayon
                        To: American_Liberty@yahoogroups.com
                        At 9/15/01, Billy Beck <wjb3@...> wrote:

                        > From: Don Linsenbach [mailto:dlinsenbach@...]
                        > Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 8:49 AM

                        > > Billy Beck wrote:
                        > >
                        > > Last night, I went on a bloody screaming tirade at CAS. Briefly:
                        > > there was a detailed news story relating how ARTCC ("Air Route
                        > > Traffic Control Center") controllers at Nashua Center *knew* that: 1)
                        > > there were two hijackings in progress; 2) saw the North Tower strike
                        > > on broadcast television, and; 3) were "caught completely off guard"
                        > > by the second strike, eighteen full minutes later.
                        > >
                        > > Now, that is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of, in a
                        > > life surrounded by the galloping dumbs, and I am completely enraged
                        > > over it. Every time I even try to think about what it means that
                        > > these *fucking useless chimps* sat there and watched everything that
                        > > happened and were "caught completely off guard" by the second strike,
                        > > I can't help it: I am seized with an intense fury over the basic fact
                        > > of StoopidPeeple posing-around as functioning human beings in a place
                        > > that was once the pinnacle of human evolution.
                        >
                        > Explain why the 2nd strike catching them (ATC) off guard was stupid ?
                        > I must say, that as I sat and watched the 1st tower burn and the 2nd plane
                        > come in from screen-right, I was taken aback. I think my exact words were,
                        > "What the hell is that plane doing over there?"
                        >
                        > I'm of the opinion that the first strike was so stunning, that no one
                        > *could* possibly foresee, or imagine, that another strike was coming.
                        > But then, I was a spectator, and am not familiar with large
                        > aircraft or the ATC.

                        "HELL-O!! What's wrong with this picture? No frame...<tap-tap> no
                        glass... you're *in* it!"

                        Am I the *only* person who understood that this was a deliberate attack
                        as soon as I laid eyes on the very first video-frame of it? Is that
                        really possible?

                        When the story first came up on ABC, to which I was tuned, they were
                        jabbering about some kind of "small commuter plane" that had crashed
                        into the building. While some fuckin' useless ditz is saying that, I'm
                        lookin' at the hole in the building and saying, "*Bullshit*. That's a
                        deliberate strike with an airliner."

                        Now, I guess I might have a leg-up on some people because I understand
                        air transport operations in an airspace like that. Maybe that's it, but
                        it's not all there is. You see, I just looked at the damage to the
                        building with my own two eyes and understood that this airplane was not
                        out of control, because of the perpendicular impact. A broken airplane
                        -- the way they fly around there -- might have spiralled out of control
                        into the area, but it would have been a one-in-a-million shot that it
                        would hit that building that cleanly.

                        Of course, nobody here has to take my word for it that I knew what had
                        happened.

                        What I *didn't* know was what the controllers at Nashua Center had
                        already known for over half an hour: that this first one was a hijcking,
                        and that there was a *second* hijacking in progress and headed south
                        toward New York.

                        They bloody knew that, and there is no excuse in the world for them
                        being "caught off guard" by the second strike.

                        Rotten useless fat-ass cheez-sucking bureaubot idiot motherfuckers: they
                        sat there for eighteen whole minutes -- when people who died, badly,
                        could have been running for their lives -- and did *nothing* to warn
                        anyone, when they could have.

                        Now, that's my story, based on the facts related, and I'm sticking to
                        it.

                        Billy


                        [reply to follow-up]
                        > From: Michael J. Schneider [mailto:mike1@...]
                        > Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 4:36 PM
                        > At 12:45 PM -0400 9/15/01, Billy Beck wrote:

                        > >What I *didn't* know was what the controllers at Nashua Center
                        > >had alreadyknown for over half an hour: that this first one was a
                        >> hijcking, and that there was a *second* hijacking in progress
                        >> and headed south toward New York.
                        >
                        > Weren't the transponders turned off? After the first impact, there
                        > should have been every reason in the world for them to expect
                        > another, but did they actually *know* the second flight had altered
                        > course to New York?

                        They were getting primary radar returns.

                        > I had the television on for eight straight hours yesterday and didn't
                        > hear a thing about this. I also don't know exactly when controllers
                        > became aware of the fact that their "missing" airplanes were
                        > *hijacked*. Any info?

                        I would have to go wade through the astonishing mass of incoming data
                        over the past four day in order to sort out a precise Eastern Standard
                        Time for you, but they knew from just about the moment that the first
                        airplane turned south. Something to keep in mind here is that there
                        were multiple indications, to include open cockpit mics through which
                        they heard the actual voices of the hijackers and their assertions that
                        "We have other airplanes". Now, I can see how a remark like that one
                        might have been mysterious prior to the first strike, but it should have
                        been a dead-giveaway, after.

                        For long years, now, I have been a pain-in-the-ass at pointing out that
                        people no longer know how to think, and that that's a bad thing. I
                        could not have dreamed a more direct demonstration of what I've been
                        talking about in the literal fact: there are people all around us who
                        simply cannot perform the most elementary mental integrations, even when
                        the direst consequences hang in the balance. The problem can quickly
                        become relegated to the domain of "ivory-tower" idle abstraction when,
                        for instance, I'm pointing it out in a bug like Scott Erb in Usenet, but
                        I assure you that I have always had in mind the necessary fact that
                        people must think in order to survive. Ayn Rand was perfectly correct
                        when she pointed out that "Man's mind is his only means of survival,"
                        and I maintain that -- her unfortunately necessary assertion of the fact
                        notwithstanding in any case -- what we have in this case is the logical
                        conclusion of her other various assertions of an attack on the capacity
                        and efficacy of reason, itself, over the last century, at least.

                        In myriad ways, people have told that their minds don't work, and it
                        doesn't matter anyway, and I'm telling you that this episode is just one
                        example of the necessary end of that training.


                        "Who's holding the head while we're fucking this pig?"

                        Figure it out.

                        (And I should correct one thing here: I've been referring to "Nashua
                        Center", and that's not correct. Boston Air Route Traffic Control
                        Center is in Nashua, New Hampshire, and is known to pilots as "Boston
                        Center".)


                        [reply to follow-up]
                        From: "Billy Beck" <wjb3@...>
                        Reply-To: American_Liberty@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: Re: The Big Picture With The Big Crayon (III)

                        "Saskia" <saskia49@...> wrote:
                        >"Billy Beck" <wjb3@...> wrote...
                        >> >Actually, Beck, you do have a leg-up. Knowing what you do
                        >> >about flying made it a lot easier for you to know it for what it
                        >> >was.
                        >>
                        >> You know what? The guys in that ARTCC center knew more
                        >> about this particular episode than I did, at the time. That's a
                        >> crucial fact that goes to the heart of what I'm saying.
                        >>
                        >> They had everything necessary to solve the "2+2" equation
                        >> for the second strike, and couldn't get to the answer.
                        >
                        >Scary stuff. I'm sure that going forward they're not going to
                        >hesitate to act. Hard lesson learned.

                        I have very little patience with it.

                        Let me tell you something: I come from *performance*. "Goddammit: do
                        your job or hit the road, and if you can't do it as well as I do mine,
                        I'll see to it that you're peddling pencils on a streetcorner. Period.
                        Full-stop."

                        My old pal Steve Dunaway just called me. We haven't laid eyes on each
                        other for years now, but every time there's a major breaking story with
                        serious political implications, we're on the phone. It took nearly a
                        week in this case just because it's so big and it took that long for us
                        to clear our respective decks, take a breath, and pick up the phone. He
                        was on my mind at least three days ago, and he finally beat me to it.

                        Steve and I used to move big rock lights together. We're older now, and
                        into what we used to call "white-glove" gigs: we don't marshall
                        tractor-trailers and ramrod crews across the country for months at time,
                        anymore; we leave that to people under us in the food chains, now. But
                        we *could*, to this day, and the reason is that the principles of
                        *action* in the heat of battle never change, and once you understand
                        that sort of thing, you never forget it. And the hook to my analysis of
                        what I've been talking about here is that people who know their work
                        don't *fuck up* when the chips are down. There are crucial moments when
                        the aces are naturally high and that's where you want 'em, but it
                        shouldn't take a moment like that to reveal twerps, dinks, and losers
                        who can't hack the program.

                        And I'm goddamned sick and tired of touchy-feelie excuses for losers in
                        this culture.

                        Take a look at this:

                        >It makes sense *now*. You know, Beck, I think that being on TV, the
                        >sense of scale isn't as obvious to most people. After the first building
                        >fell, people in the office were trying to grasp the idea of exactly how big
                        >a 110 story building is. The biggest downtown building here is only
                        >about 50 odd stories...the rest topping out at 25 stories and under. They
                        >were doing that "if you pile this building on top of that building" thing.
                        >
                        >It occurred to me that initial reactions to this whole thing are a matter of
                        >trying to put it into a framework of what *we* know. I've never seen a
                        >building that tall and it's hard to grasp the scale.
                        >
                        >> >The first pictures they ran didn't have much smoke coming out, and
                        >> >you really couldn't see the extent of the damage.
                        >>
                        >> I could.
                        >
                        >The burden of knowledge.

                        That's right: I'm essentially talking about the burden of knowing where
                        the *action* is.

                        Now, when I started on this whole rag in the CAS list, I was shortly
                        taken-up by an ARTCC controller, believe it or not, who didn't have
                        anything to do with this episode, but who was irritated that I had the
                        temerity to point out that a couple of his bretheren were *fucking
                        losers*, and you know what? "Look into my eye," and see if I give a
                        damn that he's offended. Go ahead. Good luck.

                        "Get the fuck outta here."

                        I was offered nonsense like "an Achilles' Heel in the Information Age",
                        and all kinds of bloody crap, and I won't have it.

                        This was an instance of StoopidPeeple -- just the way they've been
                        raised to be -- and I say we're lookin' at death on two legs,
                        everywhere, as a natural result of the general abdication of reason.

                        Get it straight: this is not some crumpet-parlor game. It's philosophy
                        in action, and it's literally killing people.


                        Billy

                        VRWC Fronteer
                        http://www.mindspring.com/~wjb3/free/



                        ------ http://USFamily.Net/info - Unlimited Internet - From $8.99/mo! ------
                      • pirate97006
                        After posting my timeline refuting this article, I went back and reread it and still had issues. here is the link for the time line on 9/11 that I used to
                        Message 11 of 22 , Feb 1 1:05 PM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          After posting my timeline refuting this article, I went back and
                          reread it and still had issues. here is the link for the time line on
                          9/11 that I used to build mine in case anyone wants a fuller look at
                          the days
                          happenings.http://www.patriotresource.com/wtc/timeline/sept11.html

                          Please note that the Canadian article uses liberal reading off the
                          times in making their case, for instance it says the first hijacking
                          occured at 7:45 am when the flight left at 7:59. Now if you want to
                          interput the departure time as the hijack time, that would be
                          correct, but notice that the FAA didn't know the flight was hijacked
                          until 8:40 and at 8:45 it hit the first tower. And 3 minutes later,
                          at 8:43 the second hijacking was reported to NORAD and three minutes
                          later, at 8:46 NORAD scrambled the National Guard out of Otis, one
                          minute too late for the first tower. And 17 minutes later, 20 minutes
                          after being reported as hijacked, the second flight hits tower two.
                          The second flight, 175, was way ahead of the scrambled fighters.
                          Okay, I'll let the readers compare the time line to the article
                          concerning 9/11. But the article uses very liberal interputations of
                          the Payne Stewart incedence as well. He states that the controler
                          called the Air Force at appx. 9:38 and scrambled the fighters, not
                          needing th approval of the Presidenrt etc...well no one is saying the
                          President has to scramble the fighters. It ias SOP for the FAA
                          (controlers) to Notify NORAD (not necessarily the Air Force) further
                          more the plane that intercepted Stewarts plane at 9:54 or as the
                          author put it 16 minutes later. What the author fails to state from
                          the NTSB report found here

                          http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2000/AAB0001.htm

                          is that the the F 16 that intercepted Stewarts plane was already in
                          the air on another mission when the FAA notified NORAD. In fact the F
                          16 was piloted by a test pilot from the 40th Flight Test Sq. out of
                          Eglin AFB which incedentaly is in the flight path from Jacksonville,
                          an advantage that the Otis Pilots and the Langley pilots didn't have.
                          But the point here is that it was a Test Pilot in a test F 16, hardly
                          the choice to intercept "bad guys", at the risk of using sarcasm,
                          what was a test pilot going to do? Barrell role him in to making a
                          landing? No, the test pilot just happened to be in the area, already
                          in the air when the call came in. And the "target" was coming into
                          his flight path, heading towards him and it took 20 minutes to
                          intercept. And even then, nobody shot him down. They handed him off
                          to the Squadron from Okla. and finally followed him until he ran out
                          of fuel.

                          All of these inaccuracies and misuse of the facts make it hard to
                          hold the rest of the authors findings in a good light, at least in my
                          book.

                          Pirate

                          --- In osint@y..., "RV Head" <4whp@h...> wrote:
                          > Canadian TV Breaks 9-11 / CIA Complicity Story
                          > http://www.visiontv.ca
                          > 1-30-2002
                          >
                          > For four months I've been waiting in vain for the North American
                          media to
                          > pursue questions about the startling events of September 11th.
                          Here's what I
                          > want to know:
                          >
                          > The multiple hijackings are unprecedented. The first occurs at 7:45
                          in the
                          > morning. It's a full hour before the first plane hits the World
                          Trade
                          > Center. But it's an hour and 20 minutes -- and after the second
                          plane
                          > hits -- that the President allegedly becomes informed. Think about
                          that.
                          >
                          > Then, he gives no orders. Why? He continues to listen to a student
                          talk
                          > about her pet goat. Why?
                          >
                          > It's another 25 minutes until he makes a statement, even as flight
                          77 is
                          > making a bee-line for Washington, DC.
                          >
                          > In the almost two hours of the total drama not a single U.S. Air
                          Force
                          > interceptor turns a wheel until it's too late. Why? Was it total
                          > incompetence on the part of aircrews trained and equipped to
                          scramble in
                          > minutes?
                          >
                          > Well, unlike the U.S. Air Force, I'll cut to the chase. Simply to
                          ask these
                          > few questions is to find the official narrative frankly
                          implausible. The
                          > more questions you pursue, it becomes more plausible that there's a
                          > different explanation: namely, that elements within the top U.S.
                          military,
                          > intelligence and political leadership -- which are closely
                          intertwined --
                          > are complicit in what happened on September the 11th.
                          >
                          > Why U.S. complicity, you ask?
                          >
                          > Well, to stampede public opinion into supporting the so-called war
                          on
                          > terrorism, to justify a war on Afghanistan for a future oil
                          pipeline, the
                          > grab for Middle East oil, big budget increases for the military,
                          and the
                          > general drive for global domination by the American Empire.
                          >
                          > I know it sounds incredible.
                          >
                          > But here's some historical context from this book, Body of Secrets.
                          Its
                          > author is James Bamford. Bamford until recently was Washington
                          Investigative
                          > Producer for ABC's World News tonight with Peter Jennings. I
                          learned of this
                          > book on ABC's website.
                          >
                          > Bamford's information comes from interviews. With, for instance,
                          the former
                          > dean of the U.S. intelligence community. And from government
                          documents. It
                          > takes 80 pages to list Bamford's more than 600 information sources.
                          >
                          > Here's the story. It's 1962. John F. Kennedy is U.S. president.
                          Robert
                          > McNamara is Secretary of Defence. And Admiral Lyman Lemnitzer heads
                          the U.S.
                          > Joint Chiefs of Staff. The CIA has failed in its illegal Bay of Pigs
                          > invasion of Cuba.
                          >
                          > JFK decides, Bamford writes, to back away from military solutions
                          to the
                          > Cuban problem.
                          >
                          > But Lemnitzer, the CIA and others at the top remain obsessed with
                          Cuba.
                          > Writes Bamford: "As the Kennedy brothers appeared to suddenly 'go
                          soft' on
                          > Cuba, Lemnitzer could see his opportunity to invade - quickly
                          slipping
                          > away. -attempts to provoke the Cuban public to revolt seemed dead -"
                          >
                          > Continues Bamford: "Lemnitzer and the other chiefs knew there was
                          only one
                          > option left that would ensure their war. They would have to trick
                          the
                          > American public and world opinion -"
                          >
                          > Lemnitzer comes up with Operation Northwoods.
                          >
                          > "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba-
                          casualty
                          > lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national
                          > indignation."
                          >
                          > "We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami
                          area, in
                          > other Florida cities and even in Washington."
                          >
                          > An elaborate variation: create "an exact duplicate for a civil
                          registered
                          > aircraft-" "At a designated time the duplicate would be-loaded with-
                          selected
                          > passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual
                          > registered aircraft would be converted to a drone [a remotely
                          controlled
                          > unmanned aircraft]" - "the destruction of (that) aircraft will be
                          triggered
                          > by radio signal."
                          >
                          > The Cubans would be blamed.
                          >
                          > Finally, another variation is described by Bamford: "On February
                          20th, 1962
                          > (John) Glenn was to lift off from Cape Canaveral-on his historic
                          journey.
                          > Lemnitzer "proposed - that should the rocket explode and kill
                          Glenn, the
                          > objective is to provide irrevocable proof that-the fault lies with
                          (Cuba)-"
                          > "by manufacturing various pieces of evidence which would prove
                          electronic
                          > interference on the part of the Cubans."
                          >
                          > Thus, Bamford notes, "as NASA prepared to send the first American
                          into
                          > space, the Joint Chiefs of Staff were preparing to use John Glenn's
                          possible
                          > death as a pretext to launch a war."
                          >
                          > The Operation Northwoods plan shows the Pentagon was capable,
                          according to
                          > Bamford, "of launching a secret and bloody war of terrorism against
                          their
                          > own country in order to trick the American public into supporting a
                          (war on
                          > Cuba)."
                          >
                          > Can we be sure, therefore, that complicity by the Pentagon in the
                          events of
                          > Sept. 11th is entirely out of the question?
                          >
                          > Next week, a more precise look at the events of that fateful day.
                          >
                          > And what about bin Laden? I'll have more on him too. And the
                          arrests of
                          > people named as terrorists around the world.
                          >
                          > PART 2
                          >
                          > Next, more troubling questions. Part 2 in my series of commentaries
                          about
                          > the events of September 11th.
                          >
                          > As you've heard in the panel discussion, a common explanation as to
                          why no
                          > U.S. military interceptors took to the skies on September 11th
                          until it was
                          > too late, is that it was "simple incompetence."
                          >
                          > Well, let me deal with the "incompetence theory." By first taking
                          you back
                          > to October 26th, 1999. That is the day the chartered Learjet
                          carrying golfer
                          > Payne Stewart crashes, killing all on board. This from the official
                          National
                          > Transportation Safety Board crash report:
                          >
                          > 9:19 a.m.: the flight departs
                          > 9:24: The Learjet's pilot responds to an instruction from air
                          traffic
                          > control
                          > 9:33: The controller radios another instruction. No response from
                          the pilot.
                          > For 4 minutes the controller tries to establish contact.
                          > 9:38: Having failed, the controller calls in the military. Note
                          that he did
                          > not
                          > seek, nor did he require, the approval of the President of the
                          United
                          > States,
                          > or indeed anyone. It's standard procedure, followed routinely, to
                          call in
                          > the
                          > Air Force when radio contact with a commercial passenger jet is
                          lost, or the
                          > plane departs from its flight path, or anything along those lines
                          occurs.
                          > 9:54: 16 minutes later -- the F-16 reaches the Learjet at 46,000
                          feet and
                          > conducts a visual inspection. Total elapsed time: 21 minutes.
                          >
                          > So what does this prove? Well, it proves that standing routines
                          exist for
                          > dealing with all such emergencies, for instance loss of radio
                          contact. All
                          > personnel in the air and on the ground are trained to follow the
                          routines,
                          > which have been fine-tuned over decades, as the Learjet incident
                          > illustrates.
                          >
                          > For large scheduled aircraft, tracked throughout on radar, to depart
                          > extravagantly from their flight paths, would trigger numerous calls
                          to the
                          > military, especially after two have hit the World Trade Centre and
                          now one
                          > is speeding toward Washington, D.C.
                          >
                          > It flies over the White House, turns sharply and heads toward the
                          Pentagon.
                          > Everyone - and I mean everyone - now knows these planes are very
                          bad news.
                          > It's been reported on all TV networks for more than half an hour
                          that this
                          > is a terrorist attack.
                          >
                          > Now, Andrews Air Force Base is a huge installation. It's home to
                          Air Force
                          > One, the President's plane. It's home base for two combat-ready
                          squadrons of
                          > jet interceptors mandated to ensure the safety of the U.S. capital.
                          Andrews
                          > is only 12 miles from the White House.
                          >
                          > On September 11th the squadrons there were: The 121st Fighter
                          Squadron of
                          > the 113th Fighter Wing, equipped with F-16s The 321st Marine
                          Fighter Attack
                          > Squadron of the 49th Marine Air Group, Detachment A, equipped F/A-
                          18s.
                          >
                          > This information was on the website of the base on September 11th.
                          [POSSIBLE
                          > (cuts)] On September 12th, Andrews chose to update its website. I
                          find it
                          > odd that after the update there's no mention of the F-16 and F-18
                          fighters.
                          > The base becomes, according to the website, home to a transport
                          squadron
                          > only.
                          >
                          > Yet at 6:30 the evening of September 11th NBC Nightly News, along
                          with many
                          > outlets, reported: "It was after the attack on the Pentagon that
                          the Air
                          > Force then decided to scramble F-16s out of the DC National Guard
                          Andrews
                          > Air Force Base to fly - a protective cover over Washington, D.C."
                          >
                          > Throughout the northeastern United States are many air bases. But
                          that
                          > morning no interceptors respond in a timely fashion to the highest
                          alert
                          > situation.
                          >
                          > This includes the Andrews squadrons which have the longest lead
                          time and are
                          > 12 miles from the White house.
                          >
                          > Whatever the explanation for the huge failure, there have been no
                          reports,
                          > to my knowledge, of reprimands. This further weakens
                          the "Incompetence
                          > Theory."
                          >
                          > Incompetence usually earns reprimands.
                          >
                          > This causes me to ask - and other media need to ask - if there
                          were "stand
                          > down" orders.
                          >
                          > * Next week, bin Laden was a longtime close ally of the CIA,
                          according to
                          > the
                          > CIA itself. Why did he suddenly turn against them? Or did he?
                          >
                          > http://www.rense.com/general19/cmp.htm
                        • vojvoda13
                          One point of clarification here 9:35 NORAD scrambles two F-16 from Langley AFB, Virginia (Thats near Washington) Langley is located in outside of Hampton Va
                          Message 12 of 22 , Feb 1 2:33 PM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            One point of clarification here


                            9:35 NORAD scrambles two F-16 from Langley AFB, Virginia (Thats near
                            Washington)

                            Langley is located in outside of Hampton Va near Norfolk. 130 miles
                            or so as the crow flies. It is often confused with Langley inside the
                            beltway because of its proximity to CIA HQ. There are no active Air
                            Force Squadrons of Fighter Aircraft stationed on Andrews. The Air
                            assets there are Air National Guard and Marine reserve. "Analysis" is
                            based on experience and knowledge. I have seen too many young Lts and
                            SO CALLED experts who have no ground experience or operational time
                            in a Headquarters of any type try and sell some cockamamie ideas
                            because of something that they had read in a book. I will take
                            ground experience any day of the week.
                            VR
                            James Mattes

                            --- In osint@y..., "pirate97006" <pirate97006@y...> wrote:
                            > This "conspiracy theory" is getting so old.
                          • pirate97006
                            My point was that Langley FB wasn t in PA, or NY, but that it was the closest asset to the DC area. Good clarification. ... near ... miles ... the ... is ...
                            Message 13 of 22 , Feb 1 2:47 PM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              My point was that Langley FB wasn't in PA, or NY, but that it was the
                              closest asset to the DC area. Good clarification.

                              --- In osint@y..., "vojvoda13" <vojvoda13@y...> wrote:
                              > One point of clarification here
                              >
                              >
                              > 9:35 NORAD scrambles two F-16 from Langley AFB, Virginia (Thats
                              near
                              > Washington)
                              >
                              > Langley is located in outside of Hampton Va near Norfolk. 130
                              miles
                              > or so as the crow flies. It is often confused with Langley inside
                              the
                              > beltway because of its proximity to CIA HQ. There are no active Air
                              > Force Squadrons of Fighter Aircraft stationed on Andrews. The Air
                              > assets there are Air National Guard and Marine reserve. "Analysis"
                              is
                              > based on experience and knowledge. I have seen too many young Lts
                              and
                              > SO CALLED experts who have no ground experience or operational time
                              > in a Headquarters of any type try and sell some cockamamie ideas
                              > because of something that they had read in a book. I will take
                              > ground experience any day of the week.
                              > VR
                              > James Mattes
                              >
                              > --- In osint@y..., "pirate97006" <pirate97006@y...> wrote:
                              > > This "conspiracy theory" is getting so old.
                            • RV Head
                              From: vojvoda13 ... This is good. I m glad to see some actual facts on this issue. The question arises as to why were fighters not
                              Message 14 of 22 , Feb 1 5:33 PM
                              • 0 Attachment
                                From: "vojvoda13" <vojvoda13@...>

                                > 9:35 NORAD scrambles two F-16 from Langley AFB, Virginia (Thats near
                                > Washington)
                                >
                                > Langley is located in outside of Hampton Va near Norfolk. 130 miles
                                > or so as the crow flies. It is often confused with Langley inside the
                                > beltway because of its proximity to CIA HQ. There are no active Air
                                > Force Squadrons of Fighter Aircraft stationed on Andrews. The Air
                                > assets there are Air National Guard and Marine reserve.

                                This is good. I'm glad to see some actual facts on this issue. The question
                                arises as to why were fighters not scrambled until 9:35, and what was their
                                intercept vector, given their top speed (is it Mach 2, as I've read?)

                                > "Analysis" is based on experience and knowledge. I have seen too many
                                young Lts and
                                > SO CALLED experts who have no ground experience or operational time
                                > in a Headquarters of any type try and sell some cockamamie ideas
                                > because of something that they had read in a book. I will take
                                > ground experience any day of the week.

                                Why was the DCANG web site taken down after 0911 and put back up with no
                                mention of their Homeland Defense mission? (www.archive.org has the old,
                                pre-0911 site, as does www.tenc.com).
                              • judith weaver
                                Atomic Whispers THE FISHERMAN dragging an inflated bag approaches the coast of Florida. He drags the bag ashore, conceals it between some rocks, gets dressed
                                Message 15 of 22 , Feb 2 12:01 AM
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Atomic Whispers

                                  THE FISHERMAN dragging an inflated bag approaches the
                                  coast of Florida. He drags the bag ashore, conceals it
                                  between some rocks, gets dressed and leaves.

                                  It is a few minutes before midday. Across the border
                                  in Mexico a man of political Islamic convictions nods
                                  to his aides and says, "It is time". They bring him a
                                  small box that looks like the remote control of a TV.
                                  His fingers tremble as he presses the keys and
                                  together they say a prayer. Then they turn on the TV
                                  to CNN.

                                  http://www.nuclear-radiation.com

                                  __________________________________________________
                                  Do You Yahoo!?
                                  Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions!
                                  http://auctions.yahoo.com
                                • Moray Pickering
                                  I have a couple of points to make about things said in this article. Although I am aware that it is just another conspiracy theory and therefore probably not
                                  Message 16 of 22 , Feb 2 4:12 AM
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    I have a couple of points to make about things said in this article. Although I am aware that it is just another conspiracy theory and therefore probably not going to be taken seriously be the majority of people, I think it is still worthwhile to point out some of the inaccurracies. Also, it was mentioned by someone else that this issue has already been addressed previously - I am a new member of this list so I apologise if I am repeating anything that has already been said.

                                    My points are:-

                                    1 - The authour compares the third hijacked plane with the case of Payne Stewart and his death on on a private jet. There are a number of reasons why Stewart's plane was intercepted so quickly. Firstly, he was flying over Nebraska if memory serves, as opposed to the airliners on 9/11 which were over the heavily congested eastern seaboard at one of the busiest times of the day, therefore making it a lot easier to find Stewart's plane.

                                    Also, when the hijackers took control of the planes they switched off the plane's transponders, which is the primary way in which civilian aircraft are located. Without the transponder it would have been almost impossible for air traffic controllers to accuratley locate the airliner, as civilian radars cannot give out things like the altitude of a plane, even if they find it. Stewart's plane still had its transponder on therefore making it a relatively simple task for interceptors to be vectored in.

                                    2 - The point about the fighters at Andrews is true. Andrews is the home to squadron of ANG F-16s and Marine F/A-18s. However, these are not fighter wings as such and therefore have a lower state of readiness than an active duty squadron. Although they may well have planes on standby ready to take off on a few minutes notice, it is unlikely that they would be armed with missiles and you would have to dount the ability of a canon to stop an airliner.

                                    The planes that intercepted Stewart's planes were also almost certainly unarmed, therefore it is likely that all the fighters out of Andrews could have done was watch the plane crash into the Pentagon. However, that does not excuse the fact that they appear not to have been scrambled at all.

                                    In conclusion, the US Armed Forces did not shoot down the third hijacked plane because of a CIA conspiracy, but because of a combination of the fact that they could not accurately locate the plane and they were not at a state of readiness in terms of armament to be able to shoot the plane down, even if they could find it in time.

                                    For those of you that may be wondering my credentials are that I work in the aviation media industry for a military aviation publishing group in the UK.

                                    Moray


                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.