NewsMine — 9-11 — norad-faa-response — Viewing Item

Insiders misdirect military { May 27 2002 } American Free Press May 27, 2002 Did Insiders Misdirect Military Reaction to 9-11? Nobody in authority has dared to ask why the U.S. military failed to respond on the morning of Sept. 11. By the Staff of American Free Press Serious questions have been raised about the response of this nation's leaders to the first attack on the Trade Center towers on Sept. 11, all from the public record. Why did the military fail to scramble planes over Washington when the second explosion at the World Trade Center made it obvious that a terrorist attack was under way? Why are there so many conflicting "official explanations" of the failure? At 9:06 a.m. on that fateful day, New York police broadcast that "this was a terrorist attack - notify the Pentagon," the New York Daily News reported." American Forces Press Service quoted a Navy officer inside the Pentagon: "We were watching the World Trade Center on television. When the second plane deliberately dove into the tower, someone said, ‘the World Trade Center is one of the most recognizable symbols of America. We're sitting in a close second.'" Nearly an hour after the New York attack, terrorists crashed their plane into the Pentagon as military planes that were supposed to protect D.C. at Andrews Air Force Base - 10 miles from the nation's capital - sat idle. Despite the warning from New York, Newsday quoted Air Force Lt. Col. Vic Warzinski, a Pentagon spokesman: "The Pentagon was simply not aware that this aircraft was coming our way, and i doubt prior to Tuesday's event anyone would have expected anything like that here." How could the Pentagon be "not aware?" The London Sunday Telegraph reported on Sept. 14: "Within minutes of the attack American forces around the world were put on one of their highest states of alert - Defcon 3, just two notches short of all-out war - and F-16s from Andrews Air Force Base were in the air over Washington, D.C. Many in the mainstream media reported that Andrews has no fighter planes or role in protecting Washington but The San Diego Union-Tribune got it right on Sept. 12: "Air defense around Washington is provided mainly by fighter planes from Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland near the District of Columbia border. The D.C. Air National Guard is also based there and equipped with F-16 fighter planes...But the fighters took to the skies over Washington only after the devastating attack on the Pentagon." NBC Nightly News reported on Sept.11: "It was after the attack on the Pentagon that the Air Force then decided to scramble F-16s out of the D.C. National Guard Andrews Air Force Base to fly cover - a protective cover over Washington. While the mainstream media mostly ignored the fact that Andrews Air Force Base is supposed to protect Washington, USA Today gave conflicting reports on Sept. 17: "Andrews Air Force Base, home to Air Force One...had no fighters assigned to it." and in a later edition: "The District of Columbia National Guard maintained fighter planes at Andrews Air Force base... but those planes were not on alert and not deployed.

67 af scrambles year before 911 67 fighter chase suspicious aircraft year before 911 911 coup operated by cheney 911 panel set to detail flaws in air defenses { April 25 2004 } Af guilty 911 { November 14 2001 } Af pentagon tracked 1999 flight { October 26 1999 } Af scrambled from andrews airforce base Af standdown Af there 5 minutes Air security seriously flawed commission says { July 23 2004 } Airforce chasing phantoms { June 18 2004 } Airforce tries to explain mystery plane on 911 { September 12 2007 } Andrews air force intercepts stray plane 2003 Andrews fighters intercept in 2005 threat { June 29 2005 } Cheney erroneously scrambled langley jets { June 18 2004 } Cheney stand down order { May 23 2003 } Cheney told bush air force one is in danger Colonel marr refused aircraft on 911 Commision probe failures of air defenses { June 1 2004 } Complain airline emergency procedures 911 lawsuit { March 31 2003 } Delay notifying law enforcement to be investigated { September 14 2001 } Faa considered possible hijacking Faa regulation loss radar Fighters 8 minutes away Flight 11 controllers tale { September 13 2001 } Flight 11 loses contact 814 am { October 17 2001 } Insiders misdirect military { May 27 2002 } Jeb bush plane intercepted Jesse ventura wonders about air force response { July 1 2005 } Jets from langley sent towards atlantic ocean Jets kept armed and fueled by NORAD { June 15 2004 } Jets took to skies { August 29 2002 } No planes ready 911 { August 29 2002 } Norad informed 840 am Norad not instantly notified Norad not notified { August 12 2002 } Norad ready { September 19 2001 } Norad response google cache [htm] Norad response times [jpg] Norad thought hijacking excercise Otis base 153 miles away { August 30 2002 } Panel hears ciritic delays in air defenses on 911 { June 1 2004 } Panelsubpoenas norad airforce response Payne stewart jets scrambled { October 26 1999 } Pentagon deceives commission on 911 response { August 2 2006 } Planes not scrambled { September 11 2001 } Planes take off from andrews { May 24 2003 } Post 911 practice downing hijacked jets { October 3 2003 } Prepared to order aircraft shoot down Private plane in 1999 gets jet fighter escort { October 26 1999 } Probe reconstructs horror Radar lost pentagon flight 77 Response to attacks { June 3 2002 } Scambled messages no fighters Scrambled jets on 911 { September 15 2001 } Scrambled messages Shoot down order issued Shootdown order given Shootdown order never given to pilots { June 18 2004 } Sonic boom scrambled jets { January 25 2003 } Transcript flight 11 { October 16 2001 } Two faa executives lied to 911 commission { September 2 2006 } Two jets from andrews { February 6 2003 } Two jets from andrews { July 26 2002 } Where was the air force { September 11 2001 } White house orders all military machines down Files Listed: 66

Correction/submissions

CIA FOIA Archive

National Security Archives

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purpose of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.