This is a very complex and confused issue. [NORAD] and the FAA are in conflict with the evidence they have given. Official military statements conflict with evidence from air traffic controllers and military officers. President Bush and senior political appointees have made statements that are in conflict with recorded history.
On Sept. 11th there was an unprecedented number and variety of exercises in swing. Exercise wise, you’d be hard put to find another day in the history of US defence when they were so occupied with so many different scenarios. This is said by many to have been one cause of confusion between air defence networks. But all the BBC can say is “There happened to be a routine defence training exercise taking place that day". [More]The BBC at first offers precise information, confidently: [8:23] (CC) "57 minutes later" FAA notifies of possible hijack, NORAD "thought the report was part of the exercise" [8:35] "in the confusion it was 9 minutes before interceptors were scrambled". Official statements and published articles, in the public domain, refute this history. (CC) Caroline Catz, the voice of the BBC, simple tells us [11:50] "They found plenty of evidence of confusion and chaos" ......... so why is Caroline Catz so confident of her information conveyed to viewers as fact? because it's in the script? [More]
[11:39] (CC) presents the BBC’s defence of the official excuse of confusion and chaos in military and civilian radar tracking centres - the “human error in fog of war” argument. No alternative opinion is presented by the BBC. No investigation is attempted, just the official story line repeated from people presented as independent voices.
[9:45] (CC) interviews Davin Coburn “no passenger airline has been hijacked since 1979..”
In the US that's correct but NORAD and FAA frequently track and intercept planes deviating from procedure and/or course. In 2001 till 11th Sept. US air defence scrambled fighters to intercept planes deviating from their course 67 times. Interception time usually within 10 minutes.
WARNING: This claim of 67 scrambles/intercepts has become another diversionary debate. David Ray Griffin was the broker of this information quoting a Major Douglas Martin. Evidence is still required to verify that USAF fighters frequently scramble and intercept irregular flights over the continental United States. It seem incredible that they did not. However we need sincere journalists and researchers and a BBC honestly committed to the Royal Charter, to delve deeper into these issues.
[10:30] Davin Coburn “hijackers don’t attempt to disappear ... they turned off the transponders. When air traffic control tried to find them there were like 4500 blips that looked identical across the United States” then [10:40] (DC) “air traffic control was looking west ....” [8:50] (CC) “even as they took off the pilots were still unclear as to exactly where they were supposed to go .... flew wrong way ......” [11:59] (CC) “according to defence officials .... air threat would come from overseas”.
This is misleading or factually incorrect: Both the military and civilian air traffic control have sophisticated radar monitoring of air traffic by limited local regions. No controller would have massive numbers of blips on their screens. All 4 planes should have been clearly identifiable according to military insiders. 911 Commission’s Jamie Gorelick contradicts the BBC assertion stating that one of NORAD’s missions “is control of the airspace above the domestic United States”
Soviet bombers would not be expected to leave their transponders on. Even if a plane turned its transponder off it would be “monitored like a hawk”.
Pilots for Truth
The only thing that is surpassed by the level of deceptive confusion created by the way the BBC has dealt with the issue of the biggest defence failure in US history is the deafening silence from the media on these five fundamental issues:
(1) The scale of the military exercises/operations.
(2) warning of planes to be used as weapons.
(3) the sophistication of military radar.
(4) who notified who when and how.
(5) military operating procedure.
President Bush stated, “Never did anybody’s thought process about how to protect America did we ever think that the evil-doers would fly not one, but four commercial aircraft into precious US targets—never.” Diametrically opposed to recorded history [More]
The information is there, in the public domain but one has to take time to absorb it.
The links below are to comprehensive web sites covering a mix of the five issues. They are well reference to published material. (If you get a request to pay to access New York Times articles go to "Free Preview" and you will often find the whole article.)
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/essay.jsp?article=essayairdefense
Lengthy highly informative article on the number of explicit clear warning that planes were being used and would be used as weapons by militants "No Warnings at All?" ALSO "The Response to the 9/11 Hijackings" do a page find for this section half way through the article. Outlines the published "public record" statements as to timing of alert, notification, response.
http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/defense/index.html
A site that accepts that a plane hit the Pentagon. Featured article: "Multiple Failures of the Air Defense Network" offers overview of conflicts of evidence, links to 911 Commission Report and host of other information that is in the public domain.
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20051205150219651 David Ray Griffin, Ph.D. Article "The 9/11 Commission's Incredible Tales" Summary here of the second half, of his book, "The 9/11 Commission Report: Ommissions and Distortions", particularly the inability of the US military to intercept any of the hijacked planes on 9/11.
The radar was working according to Transport Secretary Norman Mineta ….
Mineta's testimony to the 9/11 Commission about his experience in the Presidential Emergency Operating Center with Vice President Cheney as American Airlines flight 77 approached the Pentagon was not included in the 9/11 Commission Report.[4] In one colloquy testified by Mineta, the vice president refers to orders concerning the plane approaching the Pentagon:
There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, 'The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out.' And when it got down to, 'The plane is 10 miles out,' the young man also said to the vice president, 'Do the orders still stand?' And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, 'Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?' Well, at the time I didn't know what all that meant.
— Norman Mineta,
No comments:
Post a Comment