portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary global

9.11 investigation

911 stand down

NORAD was unusually prepared on 9/11, because it was conducting a week-long semiannual exercise called Vigilant Guardian.

On 9/11, North American Aerospace Defense Command's (Norad) Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) was fully staffed, its key officers and enlisted supervisors already manning the operations center "battle cab." [Aviation Week]

COLONEL ROBERT MARR, US AIR FORCE: We had the fighters with a little more gas on board. A few more weapons on board. [...] We had 14 aircraft on alert, seven sites, two aircraft at each site. [ABC News]

That's a ratio of 3.5 'hot' fighter jets per hijacked airliner.
The US military has spent billions of dollars developing stealth aircraft which are invisible to radar so they can mount surprise attacks on adversaries, but it seems they should have saved their money and bought a fleet of airliners because they appear to be far more effective.

On 9/11 the world's only military superpower was apparently oblivious to the location of rogue airliners in it's airspace for more than an hour, and military commanders were left totally perplexed on how to deal with the situation of hijackers using these planes as flying bombs. This confusion resulted in fighter jets staying on the ground whilst the hierarchy fully assessed what was going on, and this total lack of cohesion ultimately led to the loss of nearly 3000 lives.

All that was required to overcome America's military might on 9/11 were 19 hijackers on 4 airliners.

Does this sound plausible to you?

It's what you're expected to believe.
more here
 http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911stand.html
Right on! 23.Jun.2004 13:50

Tony Blair's dog

;-d

thanks 23.Jun.2004 14:54

we need to keep hearing about this

I just logged onto the website you linked here, very helpful.
Everyone should be looking at this more closely. Bush and his friends are truly evil.

The U.S. Navy found it nearly impossible to sink half a ship 23.Jun.2004 17:23

Pravda or Consequences

"WALDPORT, Ore. (Associated Press with The Cargo Letter) -- Three hundred miles offshore, the wreck of M/V New Carissa finally sank on 11 March 1999 after a Navy destroyer fired 70 shells into the oil-laden hulk and a submarine drilled it with a torpedo.
First, remote-controlled explosive charges blew holes in the hull of the wreck that has plagued the Oregon coast for more than a month, fouling miles of beaches. When that failed to sink the ship, the destroyer U.S.S. David R. Ray opened up a barrage of artillery fire from its 5-inch-54 guns, and then the nuclear sub U.S.S. Bremerton fired a torpedo shot into the hulk.

Finally, 2 hours after demolition experts began their efforts, the stubborn wreck slipped under the water back-end first and began its descent two miles to the sea floor. ``It had nine lives and it was not willing to cooperate with us,'' said Navy Cmdr. Cliff Perkins, the destroyer's commanding officer. 'This thing seems to have a life of its own.'"

What good is the military when it can't even sink a fucking empty boat?

Interception usually "automatic" 23.Jun.2004 21:56

Me

Interception of off-course aircraft or planes flying where they shouldn't be or not following proper procedure is pretty much automatic and doesn't depend on some agency bureaucrat issuing an instruction for the intercept. It's never happened to me, but two private pilot friends of mine got the shocks of their lives when they suddenly found themselves within spitting distance of military fighters eyeballing them. The first incident resulted when Frank inadvertantly flew his rented non-transponder-equipped Piper Cherokee into the ADIZ (Atlantic Defense Identification Zone) - he suddenly saw something to his left and there was an F-15 tracking him at 120 knots (practically stall-speed for that aircraft). He was instructed to land and there was hell to pay. In the second incident, Bill flew his rented Cessna 172 into protected airspace near Quantico and they were on him like hornets in about two minutes.

These were tiny little planes that obviously wouldn't have constituted much of a threat, yet the response was almost immediate. It's impossible to believe that huge airliners that they KNEW had been hijacked weren't intercepted after almost an hour, particularly when the courses they were flying provided a pretty good indication of where they were headed. If someone in government didn't actually help plan the attacks themselves, then they HAD to have been complicit in creating the intercept-free time window that allowed the planes to reach their targets unimpeded. Interception is automatic, whereas NON-interception can only be explained by some kind of order or deliberate act of omission on the part of someone pretty high up the food chain. The mealy-mouthed "mistakes were made" excuses and obfuscations we've heard thus far ain't gonna cut it.

my ACTUAL Stand Down Order - admirable, and frequently ignored! 24.Jun.2004 07:58

Jane Garvey

At 9:25, [Jane] Garvey, in an historic and admirable step, and almost certainly after getting an okay from the White House, initiated a national ground stop, which forbids takeoffs and requires planes in the air to get down as soon as reasonable. The order, which has never been implemented since flying was invented in 1903, applied to virtually every single kind of machine that can takeoff - civilian, military, or law enforcement.

The Herndon command center coordinated the phone call to all major FAA sites, the airline reps in the room contacted all airlines, and so-called NOTAMS —notices to airmen — were also sent out.

The FAA had stopped the world.

...at 10.31, the FAA allowed all military and law enforcement flights to resume. (and some flights that the FAA can't reveal that were already airborne).

Time, September 14, 2001
 http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,174912,00.html

Check this site! 24.Jun.2004 19:44

BD

 http://www.letsroll911.org/

If we keep up the fight for truth!
We will win!

NEVER STOP THE FIGHT FOR TRUTH!

X on Garvey, she is likely part of the standdown--definitely the coverup 24.Jun.2004 23:46

more

wasn't garvey, that's the gov't press spin, someone else did it. Govermnet begs the press to actually keep up the fiction, though it came out:

 http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/index.jsp