1
   

NORAD had drills of jets as weapons 2 years before 9/11

 
 
Reply Sun 18 Apr, 2004 11:59 pm
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,383 • Replies: 25
No top replies

 
saintsfanbrian
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 07:07 am
And this suprises you? Didn't you see the movie Wargames back in the 80's? Essentially the military is constantly playing war games. And this is a good thing. It keeps them skilled to be able to do their jobs.

Or are you just trying to do a See I told you we knew it was going to happen?
0 Replies
 
infowarrior
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 07:19 am
Such action by NORAD is standard boiler plate response in order to ensure the safety of the American people.

Nothing new here.

However, what is criminal is that NORAD didn't take to the skies the morning of Sept. 11, 2001 when not 1, but 4 commercial airliners veered from their filed flight path.

The question that remains unanswered and I fear will never be answered is, who gave the command to NORAD to not fly that morning?
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 07:32 am
Correct me if I'm woring, but I seem to recall reading that on 11th September, 2001 NORAD was running an exercise that had them on full alert, and armed interceptors were already in the air in many parts of the country.
0 Replies
 
infowarrior
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 07:39 am
In the immediate days after 9/11, I recall seeing a man who flew for NORAD on TV say something about being given orders not to fly when the word came that 4 commercial airliners had veered from their filed flight path.

Naturally, this truth warrior was quickly silenced and his voice hasn't been heard since.

Expect the usual cast of right-wing characters to scream "conspiracy theory" just as they did when numerous people in Oklahoma City reported seeing an Arab looking man in the Ryder truck with Timothy McVeigh.

Now we know there was an al Qaida cell in Oklahoma City, and the eye witness reports were quite true.
0 Replies
 
L R R Hood
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 07:40 am
It seems as though government does more harm than good these days.
0 Replies
 
Acquiunk
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 07:45 am
Armed interceptors were ordered out of Otis Air Base on Cape Cod on the morning of 9/11. They were minutes from NYC when the second tower was hit. These were the closest interceptors available at the time. The claim that the airforce was ordered not to respond to the hijackings is in my opinion criminal. You have to keep in mind that until 9/11 the focus of national defense was outward for a very good reason. No one wanted to create a system where the military could conceivably be used for internal political purposes. This has been the policy of this nation since the founding of the republic.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 07:48 am
found this:
So far the government simply has not answered basic questions, brought not by politicians but by families of the victims. Mindy Kleinberg, who lost her husband at the WTC, has pointed out to the commission that NORAD was not contacted by the FAA until 32 minutes after the loss of contact with Flight 11. And she called it "more baffling still" that fighters weren't scrambled from the nearest air force bases to intercept the hijacked airliners. Kleinberg noted that planes of NORAD's North East Air Defense Sector (NEADS) were actually on maneuvers that morning that should have made them immediately available. Nevertheless, at 9:41 a.m., one hour and 11 minutes after NORAD confirmed that the first plane was hijacked, the skies over D.C. were unprotected and Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. Fighter jets, she pointed out, were still miles away.
0 Replies
 
infowarrior
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 08:00 am
dyslexia-

I am curious, since you mentioned the Pentagon.

This is a very busy, bustling area of the Washington DC area of Virgina, with roads clogged with cars, stopped at red lights at intersections, and people on foot hurrying to work.

Unlike the World Trade Center crashes, I have never read or heard an eye witness account of seeing the American 767 flying at near ground level before smashing into Pentagon. No one has reported to my knowledge hearing the scream of the huge jet engines of the Boeing wide-body either.

Am I alone in finding this a little suspect?
0 Replies
 
saintsfanbrian
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 08:04 am
Okay - The government wanted 3000 people to die so we could go to war with Iraq.

Is that what you really think happened?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 08:06 am
Questions.

i According to a 1999 CNN article, presidential approval is needed to shoot down civilian aircraft. In a report about why Payne Stewart's flight had not been shot down, it had explained, "military planes could not take aim and pull the trigger unless they received permission from the White House because only the president has the authority to order a civilian aircraft shot down." Why is it then that no one sought his authorization until 9:55 - 1 hour and 9 minutes after the first jet hit the World Trade Center and fourteen minutes after Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon?

ii Why did the president remain in the classroom while all of this was going on?

iii George Bush's location at the Florida elementary school could have easily been targeted by terrorists because his schedule for that day was publicly known. During such an unprecedented event in history why is it that George Bush was not scuttled away by Secret Service during all the mayhem, as was Dick Cheney?

iv Why is it that George Bush didn't seem all that concerned?

v Why wasn't General Myers more informed about what was going on?

vi Why were military officials in the Pentagon "urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to do" when there is a standard procedure to follow in the event of a hijacking?
0 Replies
 
infowarrior
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 08:16 am
Excellent questions all.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 08:22 am
I don't think an airliner would have been shot down, imagine the outrage from survivors of the passengers...
0 Replies
 
Piffka
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 08:22 am
It's just so darn curious...
0 Replies
 
saintsfanbrian
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 08:30 am
I think the president might have stayed in the classroom so as not to make a panic for small children and their parents.

Why didn't he seem concerened? At the time do you know what information he had? I don't think so.

Rather than placing blame. Why not do something about it. Donate your time and money to help out the families or something.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 08:48 am
saintsfanbrian
saintsfanbrian, my time donation to the Families today is to wonder why some folks continue to support and defend Bush and his administration in spite of the corruption information pouring in from many sources and from all sides?

Then, back to the topic of this tread: The Norad issue.
0 Replies
 
Piffka
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 09:03 am
from another forum:

Quote:
As recorded on the Whitehouse press release,

Quote:
I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on. And I used to fly, myself, and I said, well, there's one terrible pilot. I said, it must have been a horrible accident. ... Andy Card, my Chief of Staff, who is sitting over here, walked in and said, "A second plane has hit the tower, America is under attack."


Now, it's a well known fact that the first airplane hitting the world trade center was not shown live on television, so this story clearly cannot be true as told. Many people choose to think of this a another example of GWB lying, but I'd like to be a bit more generous...

We all know that human memory plays tricks with us; that we don't always remember as clearly as we would think. What we seem to do is to recreate a narrative of the past events from significant fragments that we do retain; thinking back and 'remembering' the past is a mixture of recalling and retelling.

So, I won't call Bush a liar on this one. It's easy enough to imagine, for instance, that he heard about the first plane hitting the tower while he was waiting to go in, and then later saw the images on the TV, and those two memories have merged together to become the story that he told.

What fascinates me, though, about the story as Bush tells it, is that he tells it as if it were reasonable; as if, in this sequence of events, he behaved in a way consistent with his position as president. Whereas in fact, it would have shown a terrible dereliction of duty.

The President of the United States sees an aircraft - a passenger jet - crash into the side of a major building in the financial heart of the United States. Even if he assumes pilot error, an accident, as Bush says he did (assuming in the confusion he forget everything he knew about flying, about air traffic control, as he would have had to to come to this conclusion), what would a President do next? Go on into a classroom of kids and read to them?

Even as an accident, the first plane hitting the world trade center was a national emergency. There were clearly hundreds, probably thousands, dead; the markets were about to open in panic; the city could be descending into chaos; critical decisions would be needed, many of which would have national and international impact. Important though early reading lessons are, did the President of the United States really not think he might need to go and take control?

As I say, this narrative clearly isn't what really happened. But the fact remains that if we credit George W Bush with telling the story as he remembers it, then what he remembers is that he ignored the first major emergency of his tenure, and that he thinks that is an ok way for the President to act.
0 Replies
 
greenumbrella
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 09:37 am
Why has the US government never released the photgraph taken from the parking lot security camera next to the Pentagon that allegedly shows the airliner plowing into the building?

I do not subscribe to the notion the American people can't handle seeing this event. Or, for that matter, any people.

We survived seeing the images of the WTC crashes.
0 Replies
 
saintsfanbrian
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 11:38 am
ACtually I have seen that video tape. I cannot locate it at this time but I have seen it.
0 Replies
 
infowarrior
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2004 03:27 pm
saint-

Then you're the only one.

The government has released a time-frame picture of a blast explosion that appears to be coming out of the Pentagon which is opposite of what would be expected of an airliner crashing into a building.

When the 2 airliners went into the World Trade Centers, the blast pattern was inward.

If you have actually seen a photo of the 767 going into the Pentagon, please post it because you're he only one with such access.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » NORAD had drills of jets as weapons 2 years before 9/11
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/30/2025 at 12:22:09