Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
Steven Gaal

911 Deep background Simulations

Recommended Posts

September 1997: 1st Air Force Operation Centers to Be Modernized; Computer Software Allows Simulations for Training

A modernization program of the 1st Air Force’s air operation centers, which include NORAD’s Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS), is started. Over the next several years, Litton Data Systems is tasked with computerizing the way the Air National Guard accomplishes its air sovereignty mission, which is the surveillance of US skies in coordination with the FAA. Until now, flight plans from the FAA have been “compiled in logs and have to be searched by hand to identify aircraft,” according to National Guard magazine. “The new system will mean fewer manual inquiries and phone contact with FAA officials about commercial aircraft. The FAA flight plan is now hooked up via computer with the new R/SAOCs [Regional/Sector Air Operation Centers] so operators can easily track friendly aircraft through our air space without having to get someone on the phone or thumb through written log books of flight plans. Composite air pictures are now shown in real time on the screen with no delay in transmission. Plans on the screen are shown as they are happening.” The software also allows computer simulations to be used for training purposes, so operators can “go through a situation at their terminals as if it were happening.” Col. Dan Navin, the special assistant to the commander of 1st Air Force, says, “It will enhance our ability to do what many say is the most important job of the Air Force, and that is air sovereignty.” The new systems should be fully operational in all seven 1st Air Force air operation centers by 2003. [National Guard, 9/1997] It is possible that this software is being used on the morning of 9/11, when a NORAD training exercise will include simulated information, known as “inject,” being shown on its radar screens (see (9:00 a.m.) September 11, 2001). [Toronto Star, 12/9/2001]

################################################

1998-2001: Secret Service Simulates Planes Crashing into the White House

The US Secret Service runs training exercises that involve computer simulations of plane

crashing into the White House, in order to test security there. [Nenninger, 2005, pp. 175]

Plane Crash Scenarios Test White House Security - Secret Service agent Paul Nenninger has, since 1997, been assigned to the Secret Service’s James J. Rowley Training Center in Beltsville, Maryland, where he serves as program manager in charge of the Security and Incident Modeling Lab (SIMLAB). [Nenninger, 2005, pp. 299] In a 2005 book, he will write that from 1998 up until the time of the 9/11 attacks, the Rowley Training Center is “crashing planes into the White House… on a simulation program provided by the military.” This is done “to test the security responses of the various agencies that interact to provide security and support to the White House.” [Nenninger, 2005, pp. 175] The plane crash scenarios are perhaps inspired by an incident in 1994, when a suicidal pilot crashed a Cessna into the White House grounds (see September 11, 1994). Time magazine reported at the time that “security officials have long feared in private [that] the White House is vulnerable to sneak attack from the air.” [Time, 9/26/1994; New York Times, 10/3/2001]

Exercises Held Based on 'Terrorist Attacks on the White House' - Nenninger will not state whether the simulated plane crashes are imagined to be part of a terrorist attack. However, he will comment that simulations “allow you to practice scenarios that can be attempted by a terrorist or other deranged individual.” [Nenninger, 2005, pp. 177-178] And in May 2001, Secretary of the Treasury Paul O’Neill testifies that the Secret Service “holds interagency tabletop exercises in preparation for terrorist attacks on the White House.” However, it is unclear if he is referring to the same exercises as those described by Nenninger. [US Department of the Treasury, 5/8/2001]

Secret Service Uses Advanced Analytical Software - For the simulations, the Secret Service has what Nenninger will describe as “a very good piece of analytical software” called the Joint Conflict and Tactical Simulation (JCATS). This program was developed by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in California. It was released by LLNL in 1998 and distributed to the Secret Service by the Joint Warfighting Center at Fort Monroe, Virginia. [Science and Technology Review, 9/2000; Nenninger, 2005, pp. 176] JCATS can handle things like “alarms” and “FAA radar” in the simulations, according to Nenninger. The computer simulations are particularly popular with the Secret Service’s special operations units, which request “more and more time in SIMLAB.” [Nenninger, 2005, pp. 184-185]

Colleague Says 'You Know All about That' in Response to Attack on WTC - On the morning of September 11, 2001, Nenninger is at the Secret Service headquarters in Washington, DC, for a board meeting. When he and the others there for the meeting learn that a plane has crashed into the World Trade Center, another Secret Service agent in the room points at Nenninger and, referring to the computer simulations he has been involved with, comments, “You know all about that.” [Nenninger, 2005, pp. 175]

###############################################

(8:38 a.m.) September 11, 2001: ’Hubbub’ at NEADS Thought to Be Result of Exercise Scenario

270_neads_troops2050081722-9148.jpgNational Guard troops stationed at NORAD’s Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) in Rome, New York. [source: Rome Sentinel]At NORAD’s Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS), a huddle of people is gathered around one of the radar scopes. NEADS Commander Robert Marr initially thinks this hubbub is due to the NORAD training exercise (presumably Vigilant Guardian) that is taking place on this day (see (6:30 a.m.) September 11, 2001). He will later recall: “I’ve seen many exercises… and as I saw that huddle I said, ‘There’s got to be something wrong, something is happening here.’ You usually see that whenever they find a track on the scope that looks unusual; it’s usually an indicator that something is getting ready to kick off.” [Filson, 2003, pp. 55] According to author Lynn Spencer, Marr thinks the day’s exercise “is kicking off with a lively, unexpected twist.… His bet is that his simulations team has started off the exercise by throwing out a ‘heart attack card’ to see how the troops respond to a first-aid call from a fellow soldier, testing their first responder training.” [Spencer, 2008, pp. 26] He sends Lieutenant Colonel Dawne Deskins, the regional mission crew commander for the exercise, to check out what is going on. [Filson, 2003, pp. 55] Deskins speaks briefly over the phone with the FAA’s Boston Center about the Flight 11 hijacking (see (8:37 a.m.) September 11, 2001). [Spencer, 2008, pp. 26] She then runs back to the “battle cab”—the glass-walled room that overlooks the NEADS operations floor—and speaks to Marr with urgency in her voice. [Filson, 2003, pp. 55] She tells him: “It’s a hijacking, and this is real life, not part of the exercise. And it appears that the plane is heading toward New York City.” Although Deskins has specifically stated, “not part of the exercise,” Marr reportedly thinks, “This is an interesting start to the exercise.” According to Spencer, he thinks “This ‘real-world’ mixed in with today’s simex [simulated exercise] will keep [his staff members] on their toes.” Regardless of whether the crisis is real or not, Marr decides to instruct that the two alert F-15s at Otis Air National Guard Base be ordered to battle stations (see (8:40 a.m.) September 11, 2001). [Spencer, 2008, pp. 26-27]

##########################################

9:34 a.m. September 11, 2001: NEADS Surveillance Technicians Instructed to Remove Simulated Information from Radar Screens

FYQ-93_2050081722-34170.jpgNORAD’s air defence computer system, the AN/FYQ-93. [source: Federation of American Scientists]A technician at NORAD’s Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) instructs personnel on the NEADS operations floor to turn off their “sim switches,” apparently so as to remove from their radar screens simulated information for a training exercise that was being conducted this morning. [Northeast Air Defense Sector, 8/23/2001; 9/11 Commission, 2004]

Staffer Complained, 'Let's Get Rid of This Goddamn Sim' - A few minutes earlier, at 9:30 a.m., a member of staff on the operations floor complained about simulated information—presumably false tracks—appearing on NEADS radar screens. He said: “You know what, let’s get rid of this godd_mn sim. Turn your sim switches off. Let’s get rid of that crap.” [North American Aerospace Defense Command, 9/11/2001; North American Aerospace Defense Command, 9/11/2001] (A “sim switch” presumably allows simulated material on radar scopes to be turned on or off.)

Technician Instructs, 'Turn Off Your Sim Switches' - Now a member of NEADS staff, who according to a 9/11 Commission document is Technical Sergeant Jeffrey Richmond, gives an instruction to the NEADS surveillance technicians, “All surveillance, turn off your sim switches.” Seconds later, apparently in response to this instruction, someone on the operations floor tells a colleague, “You got your sim switches down.” [9/11 Commission, 2004]

Sim Switches Turned On for Day's Exercise - Simulated material (“sim”) is apparently appearing on NEADS radar screens because of the NORAD training exercise, Vigilant Guardian, that was being conducted this morning (see (6:30 a.m.) September 11, 2001). Former Deputy Secretary of Defense John Hamre has revealed that NORAD has the capacity to inject simulated material into the system, “as though it was being sensed for the first time by a radar site.” In a training exercise in December 1998, for example, NORAD ran “30 different simulations, some of them being mass attacks, some of them being single missiles.” An information page on the current exercise stated, “All of NEADS, operations personnel are to have their sim switches turned ‘on’ starting at 1400Z 6 Sept. 01 till endex [the end date of the exercise].” Since Vigilant Guardian was originally scheduled to continue until September 13, this would mean NEADS personnel had their sim switches turned on this morning. [US Department of Defense, 1/15/1999; Northeast Air Defense Sector, 8/23/2001]

Radar Equipment Set to Display 'Sim Tracks' - A memo outlining special instructions for Vigilant Guardian participants further detailed how NORAD equipment needed to be set to display simulated material during the exercise. It stated: “The exercise will be conducted sim over live on the air sovereignty string. The Q-93 must be placed in the mixed mode to allow the telling [i.e. the communicating of information between facilities] of sim tracks.” [Northeast Air Defense Sector, 8/23/2001] The Q-93 is a piece of equipment used by NORAD, which is described as “a suite of computers and peripheral equipment configured to receive plot data from ground radar systems,” and which “performs track processing.” [General Accounting Office, 12/24/1992 pdfbw.png; Federation of American Scientists, 4/23/2000] The Q-93 also “receives flight plans from the FAA, and has bi-directional communications with NORAD headquarters and a real-time link to AWACS [Airborne Warning and Control System planes].” [Satterthwaite, Corman, and Herm, 6/2002]

Exercise Supposedly Canceled Earlier On - While NEADS radar scopes are still displaying simulated material as late as 9:34 a.m., some accounts will claim the Vigilant Guardian exercise was canceled shortly after 9:03 a.m., when the second World Trade Center tower was hit (see (Shortly After 9:03 a.m.) September 11, 2001). [Airman, 3/2002; Filson, 2003, pp. 59] And according to a report in the Toronto Star, “Any simulated information” for the exercise was “purged from the [radar] screens” at NORAD’s operations center in Cheyenne Mountain, Colorado, shortly before the second WTC tower was hit (see (9:00 a.m.) September 11, 2001). [Toronto Star, 12/9/2001] However, NEADS will receive a phone call from the operations center at 10:12 a.m. in which the caller asks it to “terminate all exercise inputs coming into Cheyenne Mountain” (see 10:12 a.m. September 11, 2001). [North American Aerospace Defense Command, 9/11/2001]

Edited by Steven Gaal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's been military contingency planning for thousands of years.

"No battle plan survives first contact with the enemy".

Always have a Plan "B" ready for when Plan "A" fails....and a Plan "C". And "D". And "E"....Through to Plan "xyz".

Remember "Plan Red"? I wonder when they'll act on that one?

They got plans for lots of xxxx they don't really expect to happen, but it's better to have a plan for something and not need it, than have xxxx happen to you, and put you on the back foot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Addressed repeatedly in other threads; no evidence this significantly delayed response times. This is a classic example of crackpot thinking; raise a point half a dozen times, if some only responds five proclaim victory and claim it was “Unaddressed”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“All of NEADS, operations personnel are to have their sim switches turned ‘on’ starting at 1400Z 6 Sept. 01 till endex [the end date of the exercise].” Since Vigilant Guardian was originally scheduled to continue until September 13, this would mean NEADS personnel had their sim switches turned on this morning. [US Department of Defense, 1/15/1999; Northeast Air Defense Sector, 8/23/2001]

###########################

While NEADS radar scopes are still displaying simulated material as late as 9:34 a.m., some accounts will claim the Vigilant Guardian exercise was canceled shortly after 9:03 a.m., when the second World Trade Center tower was hit (see (Shortly After 9:03 a.m.) September 11, 2001). [Airman, 3/2002; Filson, 2003, pp. 59] And according to a report in the Toronto Star, “Any simulated information” for the exercise was “purged from the [radar] screens” at NORAD’s operations center in Cheyenne Mountain, Colorado, shortly before the second WTC tower was hit (see (9:00 a.m.) September 11, 2001). [Toronto Star, 12/9/2001] However, NEADS will receive a phone call from the operations center at 10:12 a.m. in which the caller asks it to “terminate all exercise inputs coming into Cheyenne Mountain” (see 10:12 a.m. September 11, 2001). [North American Aerospace Defense Command, 9/11/2001]

######################################

CONFUSION CAUSED BY EXERCISES >>>>>YES <COLBY SAYS NO.

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

911research

NORAD Stand-Down

The Prevention of Interceptions of the Commandeered Planes

It is standard operating procedure (SOP) to scramble jet fighters whenever a jetliner goes off course or radio contact with it is lost. Between September 2000 and June 2001, interceptors were scrambled 67 times. 1 In the year 2000 jets were scrambled 129 times. 2

There are several elements involved in domestic air defense. The air traffic control system continuously monitors air traffic and notifies NORAD of any deviations of any aircraft from their flight-paths or loss of radio contact. NORAD monitors air and space traffic continuously and is prepared to react immediately to threats and emergencies. It has the authority to order units from the Air National Guard, the Air Force, or other armed services to scramble fighters in pursuit of jetliners in trouble.

Routine interception procedures were not followed on September 11th, 2001.

Layered Failures

The air defense network had, on September 11th, predictable and effective procedures for dealing with just such an attack. Yet it failed to respond in a timely manner until after the attack was over, more than an hour and a half after it had started. The official timeline describes a series of events and mode of response in which the delays are spread out into a number of areas. There are failures upon failures, in what might be described as a strategy of layered failures, or failure in depth. The failures can be divided into four types.

  • Failures to report: Based on the official timeline, the FAA response times for reporting the deviating aircraft were many times longer than the prescribed times.
    • Failures to scramble: NORAD, once notified of the off-course aircraft, failed to scramble jets from the nearest bases.
      • Failures to intercept: Once airborne, interceptors failed to reach their targets because they flew at small fractions of their top speeds and/or in the wrong directions.
        • Failures to redeploy: Fighters that were airborne and within interception range of the deviating aircraft were not redeployed to pursue them.

        Had not there been multiple failures of each type, one or more parts of the attack could have been thwarted. NORAD had time to protect the World Trade Center even given the unbelievably late time, 8:40, when it claims to have first been notified. It had time to protect the South Tower and Washington even given its bizarre choice of bases from which to scramble planes. And it still had ample opportunity to protect both New York City and Washington even if it insisted that all interceptors fly subsonic, simply by redeploying airborne fighters.

        Failures to Report

        Comparing NORAD's timeline to reports from air traffic control reveals inexplicable delays in the times the FAA took to report deviating aircraft. The delays include an 18-minute delay in reporting Flight 11 and a 39-minute delay in reporting Flight 77. The delays are made all the more suspicious given that, in each case, the plane failed to respond to communications, was off-course, and had stopped emitting its IFF signal.

        Failures to Scramble

        No plausible explanation has been provided for failing to scramble interceptors in a timely fashion from bases within easy range to protect the September 11th targets. Fighters that were dispatched were scrambled from distant bases. Early in the attack, when Flight 11 had turned directly south toward New York City, it was obvious that New York City and the World Trade Center, and Washington D.C. would be likely targets. Yet fighters were not scrambled from the bases near the targets. They were only scrambled from distant bases. Moreover there were no redundant or backup scrambles.

        New York City

        Flight 11 had been flying south toward New York City from about 8:30 AM. Yet no interceptors were scrambled from nearby Atlantic City, or La Guardia, or from Langley, Virginia. Numerous other bases were not ordered to scramble fighters.

        Washington D.C.

        No interceptors were scrambled from Andrews Air Force Base to protect the capital, at least not before the Pentagon was hit. Andrews Air Force Base had two squadrons of fighters on alert, and is only about 10 miles from the Pentagon.

        Failures to Intercept

        Even though the interceptors were not dispatched from the most logical bases, the ones that were scrambled still had adequate time to reach their assigned planes. Why didn't they? Because they were only flying at a small fraction of their top speed. That is the conclusion implicit in NORAD's timeline. North Tower, and just 9 minutes before Flight 175 hit the South Tower.

        According to NORAD, at the time of the South Tower Impact the two F-15s from Otis were still 71 miles away. Otis is 153 miles east-northeast of the WTC. That means the F-15s were flying at: (153 miles - 71 miles)/(9:03 - 8:52) = 447 mph That is around 23.8% of their top speed of 1875 mph.

        At 9:11 the F-15s finally reached the World Trade Center. Their average speed for the trip was: 153/(9:11 - 8:52) = 483 mph That is around 25.8% of their top speed.

        Langley to the Pentagon

        The F-16s from Langley reached the Pentagon at 9:49. It took them 19 minutes to reach Washington D.C. from Langley AFB, which is about 130 miles to the south. That means the F-16s were flying at: 130 miles/(9:49 - 9:30) = 410.5 mph That is around 27.4% of their top speed of 1500 mph. [/url]

        Failures to Redeploy

        Fighters that were in the air when the attack started were not redeployed to intercept the deviating planes. When fighters scrambled to protect Manhattan arrived there too late, they were not redeployed to protect the capital even though they had plenty of time to reach it before the Pentagon was hit. 3 [/url]<a name="langley" shape="rect">

        WTC to the Pentagon

        By the time the two F-15s from Otis reached Manhattan, the only jetliner still flying with its IFF transponder off had just made a 180-degree turn over southern Ohio and had been headed for Washington D.C. for 12 minutes. It was still 34 minutes before the Pentagon was hit. Had the fighters been sent to protect the capital, they could have traveled the approximately 300 miles in: 300 miles/1875 mph = 9.6 minutes They even could have made it to the capital in time to protect the Pentagon if they had continued to fly at only 500 mph.

        References

        1. [cached]

        2. [/url][cached]

        3. [/url]'I Thought It Was the Start of World War III', Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02[cached]

Edited by Steven Gaal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

911research

NORAD Stand-Down

The Prevention of Interceptions of the Commandeered Planes

It is standard operating procedure (SOP) to scramble jet fighters whenever a jetliner goes off course or radio contact with it is lost. Between September 2000 and June 2001, interceptors were scrambled 67 times. 1 In the year 2000 jets were scrambled 129 times. 2

And of course fighters were scrambled on 9/11. The 2000 – 9/10/01 scrambles were all in response to plane coming into US/Canadian airspace. The claim that “it is standard operating procedure (SOP) to scramble jet fighters whenever a jetliner goes off course or radio contact with it is lost” is almost certainly false because “In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999”

http://www.911myths....intercepts.html

There are several elements involved in domestic air defense. The air traffic control system continuously monitors air traffic and notifies NORAD of any deviations of any aircraft from their flight-paths or loss of radio contact. NORAD monitors air and space traffic continuously and is prepared to react immediately to threats and emergencies. It has the authority to order units from the Air National Guard, the Air Force, or other armed services to scramble fighters in pursuit of jetliners in trouble.

It is my understanding they can only order alert squadrons to scramble and can request assistance from other units. Hoffman produce no evidence to the contrary.

Routine interception procedures were not followed on September 11th, 2001.

The cited source was another page by the same author, it provided no evidence in support of the claim.

Layered Failures

The air defense network had, on September 11th, predictable and effective procedures for dealing with just such an attack. Yet it failed to respond in a timely manner until after the attack was over, more than an hour and a half after it had started. The official timeline describes a series of events and mode of response in which the delays are spread out into a number of areas. There are failures upon failures, in what might be described as a strategy of layered failures, or failure in depth. The failures can be divided into four types.

The author failed to provide any evidence response time were longer than for previous incidents.

·

: Based on the official timeline, the FAA response times for reporting the deviating aircraft were many times longer than the prescribed times.

Author failed to provide evidence in support of this claim.

5]
"
: NORAD, once notified of the off-course aircraft, failed to scramble jets from the nearest bases."

“The nearest bases…” had no alert squadrons and the author provided no evidence plane from them could have been scrambled in a timely matter

: Once airborne, interceptors failed to reach their targets because they flew at small fractions of their top speeds and/or in the wrong directions."

As previously noted “the fighters were capable of supersonic speeds but "Rules in effect … on 9/11, prohibited supersonic flight on intercepts" he also underestimated the distance from OTIS to the WTC.

: Fighters that were airborne and within interception range of the deviating aircraft were not redeployed to pursue them."

Author failed to provide evidence in support of this claim.

"Andrews Air Force Base had two squadrons of fighters on alert,"

BS

http://www.911myths....ndrews_afb.html

Edited by Len Colby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This page from the Andrews AFB web site (removed 9/12) shows the base had F-16 fighter jets which could have intercepted Flight 77.

Instead, F-16s were scrambled from Langley AFB which is 120 miles south of the Pentagon at 9:30 a.m.

f16.jpg

A typical F-16.

At first, the planes were directed toward New York at top speed, and probably reached 600 m.p.h. within two minutes, General Haugen said [obviously they were on a

go-slow]. Then, flying in formation, they were vectored toward the west and given a new flight target: Reagan National Airport. [New York Times]

Why didn't the E-4B order the fighters to defend Washington?

Radar shows Flight 77 did a downward spiral, turning almost a complete circle and dropping the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes. [CBS News]

At 09:38 the Pentagon was hit:

"We heard what sounded like a missile, then we heard a loud boom," said Tom Seibert, 33, a network engineer at the Pentagon. "We were sitting there and watching this thing from New York, and I said, you know, the next best target would be us. And five minutes later, boom." [Guardian]

The plane was flown with incredible precision by a pilot who could barely fly a Cessna, and it hit the newly renovated Pentagon wedge.

pentagonapproach.jpg

Question: How was a plane which was known to be hostile able to have an unimpeded 48 minute joyride around US airspace before slamming into the heart of the US military?

Answer: Stand down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The USAF response against Flight 77 = ABOUT ZERO

The US military knew Flight 77 had been hijacked at approximately 08:50:

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. [New York Times]

A "mystery plane" had a birds eye view of the Pentagon...

doomsday_plane.jpg

"About ten minutes ago there was a white jet circling overhead. Now, you generally don't see planes in the area over the White House. That is restricted airspace." ... "[C]omparison of the CNN video and an official Air Force photo suggests the mystery plane is among the military's most sensitive aircraft, an Air Force E-4B. ... There are many commercial versions of the 747, obviously, that look similar, but I don't think any of them that have the communications pod like the E-4, the Air Force E-4 does behind the cockpit." [CNN]

Flight 77's approach into Washington was tracked on radar:

Eight minutes before the crash, at 9:30 a.m. EDT, radar tracked the plane as it closed to within 30 miles of Washington. [CBS News]

radar.jpg "There was an unidentified plane to the south of Dulles moving at a very high rate of speed" ... Traveling at 750 km/h the plane is headed straight for the protected airspace covering the capital and the White House...

WMV video download (878kB)

This map shows Andrews AFB is roughly 11 miles from the Pentagon:

andrewsmap.gif

Edited by Steven Gaal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The USAF response against Flight 11

None

The USAF response against Flight 175

8:45 a.m. - United Airlines Flight 175 is taken over by five hijackers who use knives, Mace and the threat of a bomb. Both pilots are killed and the plane is diverted southward to New York City.

8:53 a.m. - Unaware that their intended target has already crashed into the World Trade Center, the F-15s from Otis Air Force Base are sent to military-controlled airspace off Long Island and ordered to remain in a holding pattern until between 9:09 and 9:13 a.m. [National Geographic]

Flight 11 had crashed into World Trade Center 1, and Flight 175 was hijacked and heading toward New York.

Fighter jets were ordered to stay in a holding pattern off Long Island.

Why weren't they ordered to protect New York?

The USAF response against Flight 93

The last moments of Flight 93 were viewed from another aircraft...

"Executive 956: OK, I think we got him in sight." [Memory Hole]

...so it stands to reason that other planes reported seeing Flight 93 during its flight, therefore the military could have easily located the plane. That being said, why didn't the FAA and military locate of all of the hijacked aircraft through planes which were known to be in their vicinities?

Maybe they did, but we might never know...

At least six air traffic controllers who dealt with two of the hijacked airliners on Sept. 11, 2001, made a tape recording that day describing the events, but the tape was destroyed by a supervisor without anyone making a transcript or even listening to it, the Transportation Department said today.

The taping began before noon on Sept. 11 at the New York Air Route Traffic Control Center, in Ronkonkoma, on Long Island, but it was later destroyed by an F.A.A. quality-assurance manager, who crushed the cassette in his hand, cut the tape into little pieces and dropped them in different trash cans around the building, according to a report made public today by the inspector general of the Transportation Department. [New York Times 5/6/04]

"Be careful what we say on the loop, because these are being recorded and these tapes will be handed over."

See also: Boston Air Traffic Controller Says 9/11 An Inside Job

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And of course fighters were scrambled on 9/11. The 2000 – 9/10/01 scrambles were all in response to plane coming into US/Canadian airspace. The claim that “it is standard operating procedure (SOP) to scramble jet fighters whenever a jetliner goes off course or radio contact with it is lost” is almost certainly false because “In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999”

http://www.911myths....intercepts.html // END Colby

#########################################################

COLBY AT HIS SUPER BEST BS. Question: Colby MYTHBUSTER OR xxxxx BALLBUSTER ??????

Sixty seven times in the year before 9/11/01 planes were off course and fighter jets responded, so where were the fighter jets on 9/11? It's more than incompetent, it's criminal"

WMV video download (199kB)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

War Games: The Key to a

9/11 USAF Stand Down

On 9/11 there was no reaction from the USAF as hijacked aircraft flew through US airspace and plowed into buildings. This lack of response is inconceivable unless the USAF was stood down.

Careful planning made this easy to achieve.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction CJCSI 3610.01A (dated 1 June 2001) changed the protocol so that any requests for "potentially lethal support" had to come explicitly from the secretary of defense, leaving commanders in the field unable to respond to hijackings in any meaningful fashion.

Five military exercises were held on 9/11, and this resulted in flight controllers, commanders and pilots being unable to distinguish real world events from exercise scenarios.

Even if a hostile plane was identified it couldn't be fired upon because secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld was "out of the loop" during the attacks (as was the acting head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff).

Chaos reigned supreme on 9/11 thanks to the above... wargames3.jpg

screen.jpg

COLBY CONTENDS WAR GAMES HAD NO EFFECT ON AIRFORCE RESPONSE TO 911 ...you decide

VOICE TWO: Do we want to think about scrambling aircraft?

VOICE ONE: Oh, God, I don't know.

VOICE TWO: That's a decision somebody's going to have to make probably in the next ten minutes.

VOICE ONE: Oh, you know, everybody just left the room.

...and this effectively stood down the USAF when it was needed most.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Dr. Robert Bowman, a man so decorated with medals and honors they could fill a patriotic Christmas tree, has joined the ranks of those who are declaring that the attacks on 9/11 were an inside job. As right wing world comes tumbling down, more prominent individuals are coming forward with their doubts and concerns with the official report. Some have little more than the powers of their own deduction, others are expert engineers and physicists. Dr. Bowman has inside knowledge of military protocol, and has stated that it is apparent to him that the massive military exercises that took place on September 11, 2001 were intentionally staged to confuse civil defenses.

Edited by Steven Gaal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And of course fighters were scrambled on 9/11. The 2000 – 9/10/01 scrambles were all in response to plane coming into US/Canadian airspace. The claim that “it is standard operating procedure (SOP) to scramble jet fighters whenever a jetliner goes off course or radio contact with it is lost” is almost certainly false because “In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999”

http://www.911myths....intercepts.html // END Colby

#########################################################

COLBY AT HIS SUPER BEST BS. Question: Colby MYTHBUSTER OR xxxxx BALLBUSTER ??????

Sixty seven times in the year before 9/11/01 planes were off course and fighter jets responded, so where were the fighter jets on 9/11? It's more than incompetent, it's criminal"

WMV video download (199kB)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

-

I have a challenge for you Mr. Gaal. I will donate $ 5000 to the charity of your choice if you provide a reliable citation of a NORAD intercept of a flight that originated in the contiguous 48 states between the Payne Stewart incident and 9/11 and $ 1000 for a NORAD scramble in response to such a flight during the same period. This is NOT a bet; there is no risk to you. And I will make it to the cause of your choice, whether it be your church, a Creationist organization or even ‘What Really Happened’, the Holocaust denying site you are so enamored with.

Edited by Len Colby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We’ve been over all this crap a few times except for this part:

COLBY CONTENDS WAR GAMES HAD NO EFFECT ON AIRFORCE RESPONSE TO 911 ...you decide

VOICE TWO: Do we want to think about scrambling aircraft?

VOICE ONE: Oh, God, I don't know.

VOICE TWO: That's a decision somebody's going to have to make probably in the next ten minutes.

VOICE ONE: Oh, you know, everybody just left the room.

...and this effectively stood down the USAF when it was needed most.

However there is no indication that the exercises had anything to do with the absence of others in “the room”, in fact we would expect the opposite more people would be present during an exercise. But such speculation is irrelevant because the following conversation did NOT take place in facility with an ongoing military exercise; in fact it wasn’t even from a military facility. It was from the FAA command center at about 9:49, well after the WTC and Pentagon crashes. They were talking about flight 93.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism/jan-june04/day_06-17.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And of course fighters were scrambled on 9/11. The 2000 – 9/10/01 scrambles were all in response to plane coming into US/Canadian airspace. The claim that “it is standard operating procedure (SOP) to scramble jet fighters whenever a jetliner goes off course or radio contact with it is lost” is almost certainly false because “In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999”

http://www.911myths....intercepts.html // END Colby

#########################################################

COLBY AT HIS SUPER BEST BS. Question: Colby MYTHBUSTER OR xxxxx BALLBUSTER ??????

Sixty seven times in the year before 9/11/01 planes were off course and fighter jets responded, so where were the fighter jets on 9/11? It's more than incompetent, it's criminal"

WMV video download (199kB)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

-

I have a challenge for you Mr. Gaal. I will donate $ 5000 to the charity of your choice if you provide a reliable citation of a NORAD intercept of a flight that originated in the contiguous 48 states between the Payne Stewart incident and 9/11 and $ 1000 for a NORAD scramble in response to such a flight during the same period. This is NOT a bet; there is no risk to you. And I will make it to the cause of your choice, whether it be your church, a Creationist organization or even ‘What Really Happened’, the Holocaust denying site you are so enamored with.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ These were well-practiced routines. With more than 4,500 aircraft continuously sharing U.S. airspace, between September 2000 and June 2001 the Pentagon launched fighters on 67 occasions to escort wayward aircraft. [FAA news release Aug/9/02; AP Aug13/02] MY Church works with 23 other Churches in maintaining a MANS and also a WOMANS shelter. Your 5000 will be appreciated. Edited by Steven Gaal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×