FAA and NORAD Changed Records to Accord with Cheney Lies

[babylonsister]

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/11/14/faa-and-norad-changed-records-to-accord-with-cheney-lies/

FAA and NORAD Changed Records to Accord with Cheney Lies
By: emptywheel Saturday November 14, 2009 7:51 am


A senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission, John Farmer, has written a book exposing the degree to which our response to 9/11 was disorganized and and outdated–geared to respond to an attack from Russia rather than from terrorists. Most significantly, Farmer reveals that FAA and NORAD altered their chronologies of the day only after a briefing at the White House.

Perhaps nothing perturbs Farmer more than the contention that high-ranking officials responded quickly and effectively to the revelation that Qaeda attacks were taking place. Nothing, Farmer indicates, could be further from the truth: President George W. Bush and other officials were mostly irrelevant during the hijackings; instead, it was the ground-level commanders who made operational decisions in an ad hoc fashion.

{snip}

Yet both Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and Vice President Dick Cheney, Farmer says, provided palpably false versions that touted the military’s readiness to shoot down United 93 before it could hit Washington. Planes were never in place to intercept it. By the time the Northeast Air Defense Sector had been informed of the hijacking, United 93 had already crashed. Farmer scrutinizes F.A.A. and Norad rec­ords to provide irrefragable evidence that a day after a Sept. 17 White House briefing, both agencies suddenly altered their chronologies to produce a coherent timeline and story that “fit together nicely with the account provided publicly by Deputy Defense Secretary Wolfowitz and Vice President Cheney.”

We’ve know for a long time that the FAA records, in particular, were politicized. Given already documented proof that Cheney lied to hide the fact that he violated the chain of commend on 9/11 it’s not surprising that that politicization served Dick Cheney’s false narrative of leadership.

But we can add this book to the long list of proof that Cheney’s a big liar trying to hide his own incompetence.

[mnhtnbb]

1. This is not surprising. It became the MO for the Bushies--certainly

in the run-up to the Iraq War. They had no problem altering facts to fit their political goals.

[havocmom]

2. K&R

[Peace Patriot]

3. Rumsfeld had drawn all NORAD decisions into his own hands in June, three months before

the attack. I think that is the single most important fact of the entire event, even including the "magic passport" and why Bldg 7 (not hit by any airplane) collapsed in the same way that the two towers did. NORAD has been perfectly capable of responding quickly to ANYTHING untoward in the skies over the U.S. The question is: Why were they incapable on 9/11, and only on 9/11? And the question is NOT Cheney's or Rumsfeld's "competence." They were perfectly "competent" at shredding our Constitution, slaughtering a million innocent people to steal their oil, reversing 50 years of US policy (the Geneva accords, the UN charter, the Uniform Code of Military Justice) on torture, and looting us blind unto the 7th generation. They are competent at what they WANT to be competent at.

NORAD was set up to fail that day, with a confusing, similar war game, a sudden, last minute (that day) change of command, and Rumsfeld--who had taken NORAD decision-making into his own hands--AWOL during the attack. (He was "in a meeting," he said, and didn't know what was happening.) Rumsfeld was in charge of NORAD. And Cheney was in charge of the political spin for war on Iraq.

I think they were VERY competent--horrifyingly competent.

[ljm2002]

8. Kicking for this reply...

...these facts are indeed key to understanding what happened that day, IMO.

[blackbart99]

37. anyone who thinks we were ONLY attacked....

by 19 hijackers that day really needs to pull their head out the sand. This was coordinated from inside
as well as out. Rumsfeld and Cheney made sure the attack went all the way thru. They knew they needed
another pearl harbor to grab all the power that their black little hearts required. This story just
shows their cover up. Bush was sent out of town so he would have probable deniability(sp)...he was complicit but made to look innocent. They are all the spawn of satan.
:mad: :grr: :tinfoilhat: :hide: :yoiks:

[dixiegrrrrl]

11. 100 % agree, word for word.

[frebrd]

14. All of which is completely understandable......

Considering how useful the atacks were for the purposes of the Bush administration.

The only question is:

LIHOP (with prior knowledge) or MIHOP?

[democraticinsurgent]

20. It has to be MIHOP

The only way they would have known to rearrange the command structure and have the military exercises coincidental to the attacks is with prior knowledge. This to me is the latest turning point away from democracy. JFK, RFK, MLK and Wellstone were others.

When we wonder where the real die-hard liberals are, and when we wonder why even the best of them that we have left sometimes don't take strong positions against power, we need to remember what has happened to our best liberal leaders of the past 50 years.

Death.

[Orrex]

41. Chuck Norris gets a kick out of your post

[Raster]

86. I agree with you. I support the truth.

And I do believe Wellstone was assassinated.

[Nostradammit]

15. Yes. Exactly.

Horrifyingly competent describes them to a T. The thought that they couldn't scramble planes
from the nearest AFB because NORAD didn't have the phone number is preposterous.

And how come no one was fired? Why was Condoleeza Rice promoted?

I live for the day when all the mendacity comes to light and the perpetrators are brought to justice.

[bleever]

16. +1.

[glitch]

21. Thank you for NEVER FORGETTING, and keeping history REAL. nt

[nashville_brook]

23. amen.

[Bluebear]

24. That's about the time John Ashcroft was urged not to fly commercial flights.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/07/26/national/main303601.shtml

Fishing rod in hand, Attorney General John Ashcroft left on a weekend trip to Missouri Thursday afternoon aboard a chartered government jet, reports CBS News Correspondent Jim Stewart.

In response to inquiries from CBS News over why Ashcroft was traveling exclusively by leased jet aircraft instead of commercial airlines, the Justice Department cited what it called a "threat assessment" by the FBI, and said Ashcroft has been advised to travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term.

"There was a threat assessment and there are guidelines. He is acting under the guidelines," an FBI spokesman said. Neither the FBI nor the Justice Department, however, would identify what the threat was, when it was detected or who made it.

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

65. So let me see if I have this right

The Bush Administration - July 26, 2001 happens to pay attention to the FBI and a threat assessment. On July 10, 2001 The National Security Adviser receives word from The CIA Director G. Tenet about an immanent threat from al Qaeda that she doesn't recall getting. This was also given to Attorney General Ashcroft.

So we have the Phoenix Memo - The Phoenix Memo is a letter sent to FBI headquarters on July 10, 2001, which the FBI does nothing about, under the direction of the Justice Department who Ash croft is the Attorney General of.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Condensed Regarding Phoenix Memo http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a072701phoenixheadquarters

Phoenix, Arizona, FBI agent Ken Williams sends a memorandum warning about suspicious activities involving a group of Middle Eastern men taking flight training lessons in Arizona. The memo is titled: “Zakaria Mustapha Soubra” because it focuses on Zakaria Soubra, a Lebanese flight student in Prescott, Arizona, and his connection with a terror group in Chechnya that has ties to al-Qaeda.

It is subtitled: “Osama bin Laden and Al-Muhjiroun supporters attending civil aviation universities/colleges in Arizona.” Williams’ memo is based on an investigation of Sorba that Williams had begun in 2000, but he had trouble pursuing because of the low priority the Arizona FBI office gave terror investigations. (John McCain - Senator of Arizona)

Additionally, Williams had been alerted to suspicions about radical militants and aircraft at least three other times. In the memo, Williams does the following:

Names nine other suspect students from Pakistan, India, Kenya, Algeria, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia. Hijacker Hani Hanjour, attending flight school in Arizona in early 2001 and probably continuing into the summer of 2001, is not one of the students, but, as explained below, it seems two of the students know him.

Notes that he interviewed some of these students, and heard some of them make hostile comments about the US. Additionally, he noticed that they were suspiciously well informed about security measures at US airports.
Notes an increasing, “inordinate number of individuals of investigative interest” taking flight lessons in Arizona.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, when it came to listening to the FBI warnings and their own skin the Bush Administration was all ears and took all precautions. When it came to the same Administration heeding warnings about al Qaeda and bin Laden from the FBI regarding the safety of the general public, these warnings were Ignored.

Is that about right?

btw, my Birthday is July 10. :party:
:redbox: :tv:

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

66. The Memo

http://www.scribd.com/doc/941768/The-Phoenix-Memo

[Bluebear]

76. Why, yes, I think you have it.

Disgusting ain't it?

[dmr]

27. This is one of the reasons why I worry they won't pull another stunt on Obama's watch

just to prove their point that the President is making us more vulnerable with his policy changes.

I cringed yesterday hearing the GOPpers belly-aching after Holder's press conference. Proclaiming how unsafe we all will be by allowing terrorism trials in our own courts in NY.

The Cheney cabal has their own 'sleepers' within our government agencies and departments. I think about them sabotaging Obama, just as they did against Carter, making him look weak during the hostage crisis, while they're having clandestine meetings and making unlawful deals with the enemy.

All the current leaks from the Pentagon and State; statements like 'dithering'; and all the other inappropriate bullshit is meant only to defeat Obama's credibility while building up their own.

To capitalize on this, there are the special interest groups, RNC Congressional leaders, and Fox (which btw more than 5% is owned by a Saudi prince) to prime the public into a wicked frenzy of fear and loathing.

There's a reason why Cheney set up office in Virgina, & not retire to Montana.

[BlueMTexpat]

32. Thank God ... he was NEVER from Montana ....

it's Wyoming that he didn't retire to. Poor Wyoming!

[Enthusiast]

52. +1 You have it!

What you have described is not some paranoia or crazy tin foil hat conspiracy theory. This is what is happening-right now.

Why President Obama continues to 'make nice' with these perpetrators of the greatest act of treason in our history makes no sense to me.

[Altoid_Cyclist]

39. I'm a day late, but 100% dead-on reply.

In this case, competent at what they were doing equals competent at being the embodiment of pure evil.

That will forever be the legacy of this country during the reign of Clown George II.

[bbgrunt]

45. +1 They are horrifyingly competent.

[Enthusiast]

53. "They are" is right.

Because they are still active. This is the first thing we must acknowledge.

[dotymed]

46. Be Careful, Peace Patriot

I happen to a "truther" and whenever I pose
questions about 9-11, I am harangued by most DU'ers. I have
even been "officially" reprimanded for my opinions.
Personally, I believe that we should always question and
pursue (especially obvious) evidence. Good luck.

[fascisthunter]

58. ignore them

they are idiots

[Enthusiast]

50. Zactly!

It has NOTHING to do with competency!

[MrMickeysMom]

56. Well, I agree with you, and I can see where this thread is going to be moved, too-

But before that, and in recognition to anyone here calling themselves a "truther", I have to tell you that that term is rather confusing to me. I've been accused of being one, for having an interest beyond the obvious, that we have too many missing pieces of information (mine primarily happens to be why the first responders were LIED to and are without medical compensation- 6,000 policemen with early retirement due to long term post ground zero exposure, including an awful lot of lung disease!)

Getting back to "they were VERY competent"... yes, very focused. AND YET- you have many, many people here in Pennsylvania who would cut you to the quick for opening up pandora's box on flight 93. How can we get passed this unbelievable LIE?

Thanks BabSis, and PeacePatriot... K&R :patriot:

[dana_b]

64. interesting

fact about Rumsfeld. It does make one question what the hell they knew going into 9/11.

[Flatulo]

70. "NORAD has been perfectly capable of responding quickly to ANYTHING"

Bullshit. Read up on Payne Stewart's doomed Lear Jet.

[Peace Patriot]

79. I'm not sure what you mean.

"About 14 minutes after departing Orlando, air traffic controllers were unable to contact the aircraft. A U.S. Air Force F-16 was ... vectored toward the aircraft, and after visually sighting the aircraft, the pilot was unable to contact the Learjet. The pilot also reported that both engines were operating and that the cockpit windows were obscured by condensation or frost. Four other F-16s observed the flight at various times, including the final descent and impact of the aircraft."

http://www.airsafe.com/stewart.htm

"On October 25, 1999, a month after the American team rallied to win the 1999 Ryder Cup in Brookline, Massachusetts, and four months after his U.S. Open victory at Pinehurst No. 2, Stewart was killed in the depressurization of a Learjet flying from Orlando to Dallas, Texas for the year-ending tournament, The Tour Championship, held at Champions Golf Club in Houston that year. Stewart was planning to stop off in Dallas to discuss building a new home course for the SMU golf program.<3> The last communication received from the pilots was at 9:27 AM EDT, and the plane made a right turn at 9:30 AM EDT that was probably the result of human input. At 9:33 AM EDT the pilots did not respond to a call to change radio frequencies, and there was no further contact from the plane. The plane, apparently still on autopilot and angled off-course, was observed by several U.S. Air Force and Air National Guard F-16 Fighting Falcon fighter aircraft<4> as it continued its flight over the southern and midwestern United States. The military pilots observed frost or condensation on the windshield (consistent with loss of cabin pressure) which obscured the cockpit, and no motion was visible through the small patch of windshield that was clear."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payne_Stewart

(my emphases)


I've googled around and I can't find a clue to what you're talking about. Care to illuminate?

Sounds to me like the Air Force did its job, accompanied the stricken aircraft, tried to get visuals to determine what was going on, followed it all the way down and presumably (although I don't know for sure) could have shot it out of the sky if it threatened a populated area. NONE of these standard procedures occurred with regard to THREE of the aircraft on 9/11. Why? One of the four may have been shot down, but why were the other three--especially the one headed for our nation's capitol, after the twin towers were hit--not subjected to these standard procedures? And if the fourth was not shot down, why was it not subjected to standard procedures?

I think the answer lay in Rumsfeld's taking all NORAD decisions into his own hands three months before this event, and his subsequent causing or permitting of unprecedented confusion in NORAD's systems that day. He was in charge. NORAD's standard procedures were not followed. Case closed. At the very least, he should have been fired for the most gross malfeasance of any Secretary of Defense, ever. ("In a meeting," he said; didn't know what was happening.) But at worst--and I believe the worst, in this case--he should have been tried for treason.

Nothing. Nada. No answers.

The USAF/NORAD is perfectly capable of protecting U.S. skies. I'm married to a former USAF jet fighter pilot, and I know this to be true. The systems of protection are automatically followed in situations like this, of potentially out of control aircraft. NORAD didn't get to step one that day, getting jets off the ground and up next to the planes. Why? They couldn't even defend the capitol of our country! They couldn't even defend the Pentagon!

Not believable. Heads should have rolled, and none did! That is absolutely off-the-charts outrageous.

[Flatulo]

83. An analysys of the NTSB report on Stewart's intercepted jet

shows that it actually took 1 hour and 20 minutes to intercept. This was commonly reported to be only 20 minutes because a time zone shift was neglected.

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Payne_Stewart

[Raster]

87. So it took 1 hour and 20 minutes to intercept a private jet with no

commercial ties or protocol, NOT flying in the most protected airspace on the planet. There was NEVER a suggestion of hijacking of the Stewart jet. This jet was NEVER considered a threat. To compare the response to the Stewart jet and the situation on 9/11 is disingenuous.

The point is that the actual response to the Stewart situation--even though threat was not considered--was greater than for four actual hijacked commercial airliners in the most protected airspace on the planet.

[Flatulo]

88. "...in the most protected airspace on the planet."

Please document this extraordinary claim for us.

[Raster]

89. The eastern corridor, Washington/New York? Surely you jest?

[Flatulo]

90. Surely I do not jest. The information is out there, so why don't you just

tell us how many fighter aircraft were available and where they were? It's all in the 9/11 Commission Report.

You will be surprised. With the end of the Cold War, just who were we defending against? Jamaica?

[Raster]

91. There you go with the "9/11 Report." Ranks right up there with the Bible when it comes to fiction.

You have a nice day!

[Flatulo]

93. Thanks - I'll take that as a concession that you have no data whatsover to back your claim.

For anyone responding to this thread who has an interest in separating fact from bullshit, you can research this yourself. You don't even need the 9/11 CR.

Or you can life in 9/11 Conspiracy World, where reality is only a minor inconvenience.

[Peace Patriot]

94. Thanks for answering my question, but the link provides only 2 US examples

of USAF/NORAD response times similar to 9/11, and neither case was similar in any other way to 9/11 (four errant commercial aircraft, one and possibly two of them heading for Washington DC). We would need to have all examples of USAF/NORAD response times to make any reasonable judgment of this matter. Two examples does not suffice. And other National Security/Defense information would help as well. As far as I know, NO defense of our nation's capitol was mounted--neither USAF/NORAD nor anything else (missiles, for instance). The Pentagon was attacked, with considerable warning time that something in the vicinity (the White House? Congress? the Supreme Court? the Pentagon?) was going to be hit, and no steps were taken to defend the Pentagon or any other structure. Goddammit, I want to know where the Secretary of Defense really was, at that moment--he who took all NORAD decisions into his own hands three months before.

To me, that is still the most important fact of that day--where was Rumsfeld? And, considering his fiat of pulling all NORAD decisions into his now blood-drenched hands, I don't buy the argument of "incompetence." That's something else I want investigated. What right did he have to take over NORAD, what reasons did he give for doing so (if any), did anyone object, and how in the name of God could he have been unavailable ("in a meeting") with that decision-making responsibility in his hands?

[Flatulo]

95. It's two examples, but the point to take away is that there were no

threats *internally* that we were prepared to deal with on short notice. Our entire Cold War defense posture was geared towards intercepting Soviet Bear bombers, not hijacked domestic aircraft.

I agree that the past administration was filled with bad, bad people, and no doubt lots of heads need to roll (I think Tenet's more than anyone else). The 9/11 CR never placed any blame, and in that regard it was a failure.

I'm just doing my little part to point out inaccuracies when I see them. I don't do this with any malice, and I'm just some guy on the internet, so you don't have to believe me, but I've been waiting 8 years for the smoking gun that the 9/11 Truth movement needs to show any kind of -HOP except incompe-HOP and cover-yer-ass-HOP. I've yet to see it.

[defendandprotect]

4. k i c k

[Swamp Rat]

5. k&r

[jpak]

6. STOP BEING MEAN TO CHENEY - YOU BIG LIBERAL MEANIES!!!11111

:cry:


















:evilgrin:

[gratuitous]

26. I'm sure the dick-in-the-box will pop up any time now

He and his lovely daughter were ubiquitous a little earlier this year. I'm sure they'll be out again real soon to explain this away, so that the American people needn't worry their pretty little heads.

[Amonester]

28. While I wish the contrary, they will never have to explain this away.

No one in the m$m, the corrupt press inc., nor anyone in the current administration of injustice will ever bring it up to them.

Maybe in the far-future ebooks of History (looking forward)...

[Overseas]

7. K&R. Glad to see a bit more truth emerging. //nt

[Overseas]

25. Many other people changed govt records at Cheney's behest, it seems.

How refreshing it would be to clear up those discrepancies.

I really feel that a thorough prosecution of Bush Gang treasonous activities would be very useful for our country. I think the problem is that the malfeasance is so widespread that it is hard to know where to start. So here's another piece of news emerging from the "Now wait a second-- did I just hear that?" category into the strong-empirical-evidence group. There have been a lot of those, and if getting used to the layers of apparent incompetence requires revelation in dribs and drabs that may be okay. But we risk losing focus this way.

We may need a more immediate and dramatic acknowledgment that We The People understand the crimes that the Bush Gang perpetrated in our name. We may need to prosecute them for violating the Geneva Conventions. They crossed the lines of human decency by redrawing those lines. We need to get Geneva back. We can't expect our president's abundant appeal to do all the work. He needs a team of courageous Democratic legislators to lead the way to prosecute some of the Bush Gang's war crimes as a demonstration to the world that we are really serious about reclaiming our national honor.

We need to make some major changes in the way we conduct our warfare, national security and multinational enterprises as we move into this century, to combat the climatic destabilization engendered by our reckless industrialization and reliance on "cheap" energy (only cheap because its true costs were removed from the calculations).

I think it would help our country make those changes if we thoroughly examined just how depraved our country allowed itself to become during the Bush Gang's rule. We will need to work cooperatively with other countries to clean up our atmosphere and establish more sustainable, decentralized energy sources worldwide. Acknowledging how we allowed our government to be hijacked by war criminals, trying them for their crimes, while re-establishing paper-ballot auditable elections and other laws to prevent such a disastrous hijacking of our ship of state ever again, would go a long way toward reestablishing our credibility within the community of nations.

[Sinti]

72. Absolutely - this should be a whole separate post n/t

[Peace Patriot]

81. Great post, Overseas! Thanks! It's good to reminded what CAN be done,

rather than just ranting about the dreadful crimes that have been committed. It's going to be hard; it's probably going to take a long time and a lot of effort--but we CAN reclaim our democracy and our credibility in the world. It IS possible. Others have done it--after episodes of horror and suffering equal to, if not far greater than, our own. Look at South America, which is transforming itself from the grass roots up, after decades of the most brutal oppression. One of the keys to their success has been their long hard work on transparent vote counting and honest, fair elections. If they can do it, so can we!

:bounce: :patriot: :bounce:

[Overseas]

85. Thank you. //nt

[AzDar]

9. K & R

:kick:

[Bill219]

10. Randi Rhodes has always asked why the FAA tapes were destroyed

Now we know why.

[Enthusiast]

55. Exactly how certain are we

that FAA tapes were destroyed? If we have absolute evidence the tapes were destroyed is it a significant smoking gun? How often are these tapes destroyed? Is it a regular thing. Does it give the Bush Administration plausible deniability?

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

12. When will we see a response?

Like a committee of something to investigate further and press charges? This is at least as important as Ken Starr's $80 million dollar Whitewater thing, isn't it? :sarcasm:

[bl968]

13. Charge them

Charge them with a Criminal Conspiracy

[PufPuf23]

17. The NY trial of 9-11 perps

should be interesting.

Hopefully, much fact and interesting and sobering facts will emerge.

Regardless, the trial will be a weathervane of our current status as a free people in a Nation for the people and a a clue to the future in domestic and international matters.

[disndat]

68. Agree absolutely.

That's why the Republican heads + Lieberman's, are exploding. What if Obama has the whole scenario of 9/11, and he is reeling it out bit by bit? I am giddy thinking about the possibility. The detainee trial to be held in NYC with all the possible revelatory side-effects may be the start.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

18. Kicked and recommended... for the 41'st time. n/t

[bananas]

19. k&r

btl

[pleah]

22. K&R

[Puppyjive]

29. What North American Defense?

We don't have any North American Defense. It's all deployed to other countries. It's been deployed to other countries long before 9/11 occurred. Our military readiness is in serious jeopardy right now, and if we don't get out of this state of perpetual war, we will get attacked again. We need to focus on who is coming into this country, not the poppy fields in Afghanistan. There is no strategy for occupying Afghanistan, unless you talk to a government contractor. I hope the Commander and Chief realizes this and acts accordingly. What's at stake here is Haliburton, KBR, Blackwater and all those government contractors who are going to bankrupt this nation.

[Amonester]

30. Big Oil CEO$, board member$, shareholder$, war $treet, pen$ion plan$...

They have pipelines blueprints ready somewhere...

Don't bet too much on this (if you bet).

Sorry. Reality (greed of a few) trump$ peace.

[pitchforksandtorches]

31. Bastids! All of 'em!!

[snot]

33. K&R'd for the replies as much as for the OP.

[winyanstaz]

34. K & R....

So..umm when is the trial?

[leveymg]

35. This is another limited hangout - ignores Cheney's larger role in events on 9/11

I had some hope for Farmer, the 9/11 Commission staffer who's come forward to say that Cheney basically lied to the panel about what his actions were that morning. But, Farmer (and the NYT book review that reports this) is preoccupied with a little corner of the story, and doesn't touch the bigger deception about Cheney's role in the attacks. Transportation Secretary Mineta tells us what Cheney did that morning, but the 9/11 Commission simply glossed over his testimony, and it was left to Woodward and another WaPo reporter to put a gloss of outright deception on the story:

Here are the two interpretations of Transportation Secretary Mineta's account (Wiki):

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. In one colloquy testified by Mineta, the vice president refers to orders to shoot 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, <3>

Mineta's testimony to the Commission on Flight 77 differs rather significantly from the account provided in the January 22, 2002 edition of the Washington Post, as reported by Bob Woodward and Dan Balz in their series "10 Days in September"

“ 9:32 a.m.
The Vice President in Washington: Underground, in Touch With Bush

Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta, summoned by the White House to the bunker, was on an open line to the Federal Aviation Administration operations center, monitoring Flight 77 as it hurtled toward Washington, with radar tracks coming every seven seconds. Reports came that the plane was 50 miles out, 30 miles out, 10 miles out-until word reached the bunker that there had been an explosion at the Pentagon.

Mineta shouted into the phone to Monte Belger at the FAA: "Monte, bring all the planes down." It was an unprecedented order-there were 4,546 airplanes in the air at the time. Belger, the FAA's acting deputy administrator, amended Mineta's directive to take into account the authority vested in airline pilots. "We're bringing them down per pilot discretion," Belger told the secretary.

" pilot discretion," Mineta yelled back. "Get those planes down."

Sitting at the other end of the table, Cheney snapped his head up, looked squarely at Mineta and nodded in agreement.
”
—Dan Balz and Bob Woodward, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42754-20 ...


This same article also reports that the conversation between Cheney and the aide occurred at 9:55 am, about 30 minutes later than the time Mineta cited (9:26 am) during his testimony to the 9/11 Commission.

This remains an unanswered question, and Farmer sheds no light on it, other than another, "Look at the shiny object over here" side-issue. Disgusting.

[chimpymustgo]

43. Interesting take - limited hangout. But if people start THINKING about the BALONEY they've tried to

feed us, the bullshit will fall apart before their eyes.

It really doesn't take any level of genius to see the truth.

MIHOP.

[sce56]

63. Cheney knew about an incoming flight! Listen to Mineta's Testimony on YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDfdOwt2v3Y

The thing that sticks out = Cheney knew about an incoming flight! What were the orders? If it was for a shoot down, why weren't the Pentagon, Capitol building and White House evacuated... What if the orders were to let the incoming aircraft hit?

"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."

The orders to shoot down did not come out until 93 was already down.
So what were the orders the Airman was questioning the VP about I would love to hear his testimony!

[leveymg]

84. This wasn't about 93. It was about Flt 77 that hit the Pentagon. Draw your own conclusions

Cheney's stament makes no sense in conjunction with the plane that crashed in PA. But, it does if he was referencing a jet approaching DC.

[sce56]

96. You got that right!

The plane the airman was talking about was Flt#77 and the Airman was questioning the orders on that approaching plane! The orders to shoot down were given just after #93 went down so they say. So what were the orders that they gave prior to #77 hitting the pentagon that is the question that we would love to hear from the airman!

The Day of the Attack
Cheney Authorized Shooting Down Planes

By Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 18, 2004; Page A01

At 10:39 on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, Vice President Cheney, in a bunker beneath the White House, told Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld in a videoconference that he had been informed earlier that morning that hijacked planes were approaching Washington.

"Pursuant to the president's instructions, I gave authorization for them to be taken out," Cheney told Rumsfeld, who was at the Pentagon. Informing Rumsfeld that the fighter pilots had received orders to fire, Cheney added, "It's my understanding they've already taken a couple of aircraft out."

Cheney's comments, which were soon proved erroneous, were detailed in a report issued yesterday by the commission investigating the terrorist attacks. The comments are part of the considerable confusion that surrounded top government officials as the tense drama unfolded.

(Between 9:20 a.m. and 9:27 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Transportation Secretary Mineta Reaches Bunker, Meets Vice President Cheney


Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta arrives at the White House bunker—the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC)—containing Vice President Dick Cheney and others. Mineta will tell NBC News that he arrives there at “probably about 9:27,” though he later says to the 9/11 Commission that he arrives at “about 9:20 a.m.” He also later recalls that Cheney is already there when he arrives. This supports accounts of Cheney reaching the bunker not long after the second WTC crash (see (9:10 a.m.) September 11, 2001). Questioned about this in 2007 by an activist group, Mineta will confirm that Cheney was “absolutely… already there” in the PEOC when he arrived, and that “This was before American Airlines went into the Pentagon,” which happens at 9:37. Yet, while admitting there is “conflicting evidence about when the vice president arrived” in the PEOC, the 9/11 Commission will conclude that the “vice president arrived in the room shortly before 10:00, perhaps at 9:58.” Mineta also later claims that when he arrives in the PEOC, Mrs. Lynne Cheney, the wife of the vice president, is already there. Yet the 9/11 Commission will claim she only arrives at the White House at 9:52 (see (9:52 a.m.) September 11, 2001). <9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 40; 911truthseattle (.org), 6/26/2007> Once in the PEOC, Mineta establishes open phone lines with his office at the Department of Transportation and with the FAA Operations Center.

WHAT WERE THE ORDERS? STAND DOWN?

[Politicalboi]

36. This wasn't incompetence

This was how they planed it. Cheney's never had to answer as to why NORAD failed 4 times that day, or why the Pentagon wasn't protecting D.C and itself from attack. The Pentagon should have shot ANY plane out of the D.C area that day. One would assume the Pentagon has such capabilities.

[TheUnspeakable]

38. k & r

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Botany]

42. And just by chance we were running "war games" on 9/11/01 that simulated

.... hijacked planes used as weapons & all our fighter cover was gone. D.C. is the most protected airspace in the
world and we spend more then the rest of the world combined on defense and yet somehow 3 slow planes turned
around and all hit their targets? Please! In 1999 one little old lear jet owned by golfer Payne Stewart lost pressure
and flew on auto pilot across much of the U.S. and jets were scrambled and it was shadowed with in minutes of the
plane going off it's flight plan but 4 loaded passenger planes and not one jet was scrambled after them. D.C. was hit
long after the WTC towers were hit too.

[dbt]

44. Oh, my!

Kill my post without the courtesy of telling me whodunit.

:evilgrin:

[dotymed]

47. I am really surprised and happy to see

that comments from people who don't buy the official 9-11
story are more tolerated than before. When Bill Maher trashed
people for speaking about it, it seemed to be the "party
line" here that you were a nut if you thought 9-11 was an
inside job. Kudos for open minds...

[Orrex]

62. The problem is one of percentages and perception

For every reasonable person who doubts the official story, there are 50 loudmouths who shriek that the planes were holographic projections and that WTC7 was brought down by a tactical nuclear implosion bomb, etc.

[Raster]

69. The old thieves adage: "sometimes the best place to hide something is in plain sight."

The 9/11 disassemblers adage: "make sure the most preposterous, over-blown, obviously concocted talking points get all the discussion time. That way the real elements of truth are buried in the bullshit."

[Orrex]

73. Perhaps, but the sad part...

is that many self-described Liberals are more than happy to get behind the most preposterous claims, so that they drown out even other cool-headed people who claim some degree of LIHOP/MIHOP.

[Raster]

77. While I can appreciate what you're saying, I don't agree.

I am a solid member of the MIHOP crowd. I do not believe in space weapons, no planes or mass hypnosis. Those things are fiction, as are the naive notion 15 Saudis with boxcutters defeated the worlds most sophisticated national security system, attacking the world's alpha superpower in its financial center AND capital city. And again I say, I believe that some of the people with the most "preposterous claims" purposely muddy the water to obscure the truth. Just like I don't believe the persons and entities behind the "birther" bullshit truly believe that President Obama is not legally the President of the United States. It is a deliberate distraction, to focus attention from more pressing, factual matters.

[Orrex]

82. That's because you're a big stupid dummy-head.

Hardy har har.

Actually, you've articulated your position more effectively than I've heard others explain it.

[tomp]

48. it's beyond incompetence, it's MIHOP. nt

[Enthusiast]

49. Okay, Sister, I agree with all that.

But why haven't Bush Administration criminals been prosecuted for malfeasance?

This is my only question. It creates serious doubts in my mind with regard to the very integrity of the Obama Administration.

It is not enough to say "We need to look forward."

[myrna minx]

51. K&R n/t

[Autumn Colors]

54. K&R for truth (nt)

[fascisthunter]

57. they should be hunted down like animals and sent to the Hague

after a long trial in front of the people of this nation, that absolutely exposes their treasonous acts.

[mother earth]

59. Calling Cheney incompetent is presupposing he was acting

as an elected official serving in a gov't that represents the people. What everyone glosses over is the first crime BEFORE 911, the stolen 2000 election, our gov't did not represent us, it didn't for 8 years, note also the 2004 stolen election. But somehow we are still true believers in a gov't that is clearly broken. They have been covering their collective asses for years, all the while breaking laws at will whilst claiming executive privilege and still we don't get the all encompassing picture. This is old news, but kicking for what it's worth.

When the cry from all of us equals the crimes perpetrated, perhaps then we will see some form of justice.

[The Backlash Cometh]

60. I hope Obama is getting the right people involved to update our response.

[avaistheone1]

61. This book speaks to the incompetence of the 9/11 Commission.

The Commission should have been carefully verified all the records and testimony they were charged with. Instead it appears they painstakingly took every effort not to do so.

[tinrobot]

67. Pretty convinced that Cheney did it.

After reading this article, is seems very plausible that Cheney was at the center of it.

1. Means - Dick Cheney and the Secret Service: Dick Cheney was running a completely separate chain of Command & Control via the Secret Service, assuring the paralysis of Air Force response on 9/11. The Secret Service has the technology to see the same radar screens the FAA sees in real time. They also have the legal authority and technological capability to take supreme command in cases of national emergency. Dick Cheney was the acting Commander in Chief on 9/11. (Click here for a summary of these points)

2. Motive - Peak Oil: At some point between 2000 and 2007, world oil production reaches its peak; from that point on, every barrel of oil is going to be harder to find, more expensive to recover, and more valuable to those who recover and control it. Dick Cheney was well aware of the coming Peak Oil crisis at least as early as 1999, and 9/11 provided the pretext for the series of energy wars that Cheney stated, "will not end in our lifetime." (Click here for a summary of these points)

3. Opportunity - 9/11 War Games: The Air Force was running multiple war games on the morning of 9/11 simulating hijackings over the continental United States that included (at least) one "live-fly" exercise as well as simulations that placed "false blips" on FAA radar screens. These war games eerily mirrored the real events of 9/11 to the point of the Air Force running drills involving hijacked aircraft as the 9/11 plot actually unfolded. The war games & terror drills played a critical role in ensuring no Air Force fighter jocks - who had trained their entire lives for this moment - would be able to prevent the attacks from succeeding. These exercises were under Dick Cheney's management. (Click here for a summary of these points)

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/011805_simplify_case.shtml

[sce56]

74. The Big Picture Apocalypse now: 'Collapse' and the end of the world as we know it

Here is a film just out by Michael Ruppert, Author of Crossing the Rubicon and the Founder of from the wilderness.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/the_big_picture/2009/11/when-it-comes-to-doomsday-prophecies-2012-is-just-the-tip-of-the-iceberg-.html

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0128756d6b7d970c-500wi

But what is surely the strangest film about our doomsday fantasies arrives this Friday(. Called "Collapse," it features a spell bindingly weird one-man monologue by Michael Ruppert, a former LAPD officer and investigative journalist who believes that we are about to run out of oil, an event sure to plunge the world into a state of collapse since Ruppert is convinced that our entire world economy is built on an unsustainable addiction to petrol. If you ever thought it was impossible to top Beck's over-the-top fantasies, listen to Ruppert, who says that "what I see now is the end of a paradigm that is as cataclysmic as the asteroid event that killed almost all the life on Earth, and certainly the dinosaurs."

The film is directed by Chris Smith, who has made a number of documentaries about oddball characters pursuing impossible dreams -- his 1999 film "American Movie" chronicled the story of a hapless slacker trying to make a $3,000 homemade horror film. But what makes "Collapse" so sneakily compelling is that we have no inkling of what Smith thinks of his subject. Filmed with one camera over the course of two days in the basement of an abandoned meatpacking plant in downtown L.A., "Collapse" is a hermetically sealed package, open to whatever interpretation we might bring to it. It allows us the same freedom we have in watching Beck's show -- we can take it as gospel, be appalled by its wild, undocumented claims or simply watch bemused, appreciating Ruppert's gifts as a performer.

<snip>
To say that Ruppert is Beck's psychic twin would be an understatement. Beck comes from the right and Ruppert seems to live on the left -- he believes, for example, that we invaded Iraq for its oil reserves, arguing that we have no intention of ever leaving the country since "we built an embassy compound in Baghdad that's bigger than Vatican City." But both men transcend politics, since no amount of partisan posturing could justify their gloomy certainty about the future.

Asked by Smith at one point in the film if he's ever been called a conspiracy theorist, Ruppert offers the kind of answer you'd expect from Beck. "Of course," he says triumphantly. "But I don't deal in conspiracy theory. I deal in conspiracy fact." Once you get past his brisk dismissals of every form of alternative energy ("Ethanol is an absolute joke -- it takes more energy to make ethanol than you can make burning it"), Ruppert's view of the future isn't so different from Beck's. Neither man is an optimist. If they were optimists, they'd be out of business. What fuels them is a chronic pessimism that is surely born out of years of personal anxieties and career setbacks. Beck is a recovering alcoholic with ADHD while Ruppert, even though Smith offers us little personal biographical information, is clearly a man without family ties who appears to live alone with his dog.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJ3r93ELuB4&feature=player_embedded

This is his book which explains a lot about 9-11 and the Financial markets manipulation leading up to it.

[tinrobot]

80. Ruppert's been pretty spot-on about a lot of things.

[dysfunctional press]

92. if anyone, it was poppy bush.

but cheney was his man in the administration.

[Desertrose]

71. K & R for this post....

and all the really good & informative replies that follow.

I still say the truth will come out...piece by painful piece.

(Can't believe this is still in GD!)

[nadinbrzezinski]

75. More confirmation, we knew of this as early as 2001

Randhi Rhodes spoke on her show repeatedly on how these things were changed and logs actually destroyed.

You may or may not like her show, but to me the destruction of logs and changing of events points to either a complete failure or I hate to say it LIHOP.

[Raster]

78. LIHOP at the least. There were far too many coincidental failures.

The persons that actually green-lighted the events of 9/11 knew EXACTLY what state the national defense systems were in, specifically NORAD and their "exercises." For 9/11 to have succeeded, too many separate smaller pieces of the puzzle all had to "click" together at the right time. Not to mention all of the warnings, from friend and foe stating the same thing--jets being hijacked and used as weapons-- that were deliberately ignored. So now we know that NORAD changed their logs, the FAA changed their logs, the tapes containing THE ONLY RECORD of the debriefing sessions with the air traffic controllers that were on duty during 9/11 were systematically destroyed. The more we learn about 9/11, the worse it smells.