L.I.H.O.P. Question

[SoDesuKa]

What is the reason being offered to explain why no F-16's intercepted Flight 11? That's the plane that hit the north tower, the first one. One possible explanation is that somebody high up suspended ordinary procedures, but I'm talking about the reasons put out for public consumption.

I'm hearing stuff to the effect that by sheerest coincidence no jets were available to intercept Flight 11. Of course it's nonsense, but the details of the story are that there were only 14 fighter jets throughout the entire country. Help me out. Are there sources that refute the argument that Flight 11 went unchallenged because there were no fighter jets in the area? I know it's bullshit, but I want to know if it's been actively refuted.

[Must_B_Free]

1. here's the official answer

because we were running a drill for the exact scenario we said we had no concept of, the jets were ordered to stand down.

Cheney was supposedly at a drill in the Pentagon where they were simulating the event of a jet crashing into the Pentagon.

I shit you not.

WASHINGTON -- In what the government describes as a bizarre coincidence, one U.S. intelligence agency was planning an exercise last Sept. 11 in which an errant aircraft crashed into one of its buildings. But the cause wasn't terrorism -- it was to be a simulated accident.

"It was just an incredible coincidence that this happened to involve an aircraft crashing into our facility," Haubold said. "As soon as the real world events began, we canceled the exercise."

http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/cia-simulation.htm

here are pics of the preparation:

http://www.mdw.army.mil/news/news_photos/Contingency_Planning_Photos.html

[SoDesuKa]

2. Oh, Go On

I shit you not.

You've gotta be shitting me. That's so lame no wonder they're keeping it quiet.

How about: "They were too busy intercepting little green men ..."?

[Minstrel Boy]

10. Here's a thread about this, ahem, "bizarre coincidence":

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1298401

[Syrinx]

4. this IS true

[seabeyond]

8. plane into building simulated accident

if it wasnt a terrorist exercise but an assident, then they wouldnt need to call up planes, cause with the accident it would be done and no other planes to get. and an accident, wouldnt know it was going into building so no reason to shoot down cause there wouldnt be intent to hurt people with plane.

so what was the reason in accident and a plane going into buidling did they have in calling up fighters

[MoonRiver]

9. Used under the assumption that nobody could possibly imagine

*ies would make up such an bizarre excuse. Good thinking, Rove.

[izzie]

3. I am sure this is all a movie and we are the extras.

Real people do not act like this.

[alittlelark]

5. I have felt this was all a bad 'B' movie for a few years now

I'm hoping Kerry can yell 'CUT'!

[gandalf]

6. If there were some sort of lame explanation

you would find it in this timeline:
http://www.complete911timeline.org.

You might also look at the 9/11 commission's hearing on May 23, 2003, transcript, around page 78.

(look in the archives of 9-11commission.gov)

[dbt]

7. Kick!

This is the ONE question that NOBODY in the Regime is willing to touch:

Where were the Interceptors?

Every time I hear bu$h or Condo Lizard say "there's nothing we could have done," I scream at the TV:

You could have damn well scrambled the Interceptors! Where the HELL were THE INTERCEPTORS!!!!!!

:argh:
dbt

[LeftHander]

11. Remember Payne Stewart?

His plane was intercepted minutes after it went off it's flight plan.

[davekriss]

13. 1 hour an 18 minutes after it went off flight plan, no?

If you read the NTSB report, it appears that a jet intercepted the Payne Stewart flight one hour and 18 minutes after it flew off flight plan (actually, from the point it was being handed off from one flight control center to another and was not responding to instructions). Be careful, the NTSB report makes a subtle switch from eastern time to central time, making it easy to erroneously assume intercepts were there within 18 minutes.

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

(I've made this error before and had to eat crow.)

[Q]

12. Several websites have a map...

...showing the many military and air forces bases on the flight path of the hijacked planes. The area they flew through is one of the most heavily 'defended' in the US.

[PATRICK]

14. Coincidental dates

Dots coming to the surface afterward. yes we had "non-actionable alerts" and therefore word was put on on dates significant only to Americans such as the fourth of July- when the usual pattern is to choose dates of vengeance significant to the attackers(MCVeigh for one did this).

By comparing actions and patterns of WH behavior on truly significant dates(important to Muslim terrorists) before and after 911, I think a more interesting timeline pattern will develop, one where the WH is poised and the nation's best guard is down as much as is possible to get away with. After 911 it would be exceedingly oblique and difficult to "stand down" or ignore threats.

That on the date 9/11 there was development of this exact scenario with NO idea of the significance of the dangers on particular date I would find this double ignorance and far-sightedness so mind-boggling that at the very very least an intense investigation would have to be done.

Also the cherry picking of ignorance and knowledge as the truth comes out is equally if not more mind-boggling than any theory of coincidence.

Left to our devices to interpret madness it is no wonder that in the general darkness everyone is just holding onto their seats. Credible explanations suggest gross disorganization and rudderless incompetence- but there are to be no consequences except to those daring to admit mistakes or point fingers at the WH. That is dogmatic to the "investigation" and has been from Ground Zero, Day One. Credible explanations include the unthinkable because thinking has nothing to do with the explanations of 9/11. Excluded facts just may point out a LOGICAL reason for these coincidences with a snafu or two thrown in. Again the pattern of calculation and snafu in the WH now has a long and bloody history with unrepentant lying and propaganda to destroy any benefit we should extend to them on 9/11.

If the Intel and the ops from the CIA were all over the map, either they were not brought together by the WH, for which they are extremely reluctant to admit as the easiest way out. (And taking that way might be seen by them as only a first step to uncovering worse).
OR(sorry for the broken sentence) there was a Big Picture developed in the upper reaches of the Cheney/Bush WH(the gathering of Pakistani and Saudis into the US) that could play the pieces in very certain way to insure the terrorists would have no interference. That would suggest very specific knowledge indeed, even down to the choice of particular targets- which in the way they early came out with a preposterous list of "symbolic" targets- suggests they are lying about unspecified pre-knowledge. the fly in the ointment was the overlong accidental delay of the last plane. Any footdragging AT ALL by that point would draw forth the most active members in such a heinous conspiracy.

Because taking Congress out would mean none of these investigations or criticisms or faltering agendas would ever be plaguing the WH now and any crime with plausible deniability could be dared with absolute impunity(another pattern we see even with intense opposition). The FUBAR theory that well-wishing questioners would settle for as a cloak around the "mess" may also extend to the incompleteness of the attacks. Remember, prior to 9/11 ideological cons in Congress were very uppity and demanding and not on track to further the agenda and bow to Bush whom they felt owed them big time. Jeffords met with a somewhat subdued Bush as some sort of funereal distraction, just another expression of the Executive's handling of Congress. if they had some favorites in the Congress they would like to survive they couldn't risk much by way of warning. But were things suggesting leaks or whiffs of possibilities? The stock trading incident certainly hints at such as does the placement of assorted people.

Because it is offensive, institution shattering and unimaginable by members of the Foggy Bottom club it is almost guaranteed to escape investigation even if tripping over weapons, suspects and corpses with the eyes fixed on the stars above.

Some would say the mess of the Kennedy assassination plays the same way in having the goal of limiting the investigation, pre-ordaining the conclusion, absolutizing the pablum. If the mess is too great settle for the unprosecutable cloud. For all the connections and lies and coverups crying for investigation- the public gets nothing but rival theories groping in the dark with the official self-cleansing version(occasionally reinforced by a newly ingratiating expert or two) sitting on the throne- untouched. Unlike those times such a plot today would not involve Democrats, the mob or an Armageddon ready USSR. Such a plot, were in not for the sheepish Democrats, could be uncovered with no one suffering except the WH Coup leaders, since possibly even Right wing Congressional leaders were to be "sacrificed".

Why con-men flourish in America is the blind idealism of basically decent people and misplaced pragmatism in "working with" the enemy within. When that becomes predictable the temptation to go for it is as overwhelming as seems invitingly devoid of any real consequences.