911 Conspiracy
U.S. Could Have, Should Have Deployed Effective Countermeasures -- Chronology, Intelligence and
Common Sense
Late and ineffective scrambling designed to convey image of valiant attempt
Follow-up to:
U.S. was capable of intercepting NY and DC planes
- - - - - - -
by Bradley Jordan
Copyright © Patriot Saints
September 28, 2001
Looking at the chronology of events of September 11, and considering the civil defense
capabilities of the United States' Military, reveals that there could and should have been a
different outcome than what unfolded on that dark day. Even given the most basic sources of
information such as television live coverage and FAA monitoring, the military had enough
intelligence at their disposal, which, combined with their response capabilities, should have
enabled them to deter at least the plane that hit the Pentagon, if not also stopping the plane that
hit the second World Trade Center tower.
Let's consider, as the representative example, the chronology provided at ABC News' website. (Reference.)
And interspersed, we will note the capabilities of the military as reported by a Navy Nuclear
Reactor Operator. (Reference.)
Chronology:
7:59 a.m. -8:14 a.m. the four fated airlines take off. (ABC lists each departure
time.)
8:28 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 11 makes an unexpected hard left turn, heading not
toward Los Angeles, but over New York. The transponder, which normally allows controllers to
identify the plane, disappears. Now it's just a blip on their radar screen. A pilot
leaves his radio microphone open. "That pilot was desperately trying to get word out that
something was very, very wrong."
[~8:28 a.m.:] Within moments, air traffic controllers notice something is very wrong
with United Flight 175. Instead of going west to California, it takes a U-turn over New Jersey and
heads northeast to Manhattan's World Trade Center.
Here's the commentary in ABC's report on the chronology:
<QUOTE>
But, says ABCNEWS' John Miller, "There doesn't seem to have been alarm bells going off,
traffic controllers getting on with law enforcement or the military. There's a gap there that will
have to be investigated, but it's very doubtful you could have done anything anyway."
<END QUOTE>
A gap. Let's look at their two assertions, which seem to have been the mantra of the day in
regards to this question.
- (1) "there doesn't seem to have been alarm bells going off,"
and
- (2) "it's very doubtful you could have done anything anyway."
Contrary to public statements by the federal government, the documented evidence is that (1) U.S.
intelligence was well aware, even years in advance, of a terrorist plan to use airplanes as suicide
missiles into key targets in the U.S. and elsewhere.
see index of documentation that U.S. Intelligence knew
of threat www.patriotsaints.com/News/911/Conspiracy/IntelligenceKnew/
and (2) given the Star-Wars-like technology of the defense department, they could have
evoked any number of counter measures.
With these facts in mind, the above ABC quote seems more like intentional misinformation.
The believing American public takes them at their word on this. However, the above two facts
contradict the public statements.
Here comes the first plane.
8:45 a.m.: Flight 11 slams into the North Tower of the World Trade Center, hitting at
about the 100th floor of the 110-story building.
What America doesn't know, but U.S. intelligence does, via the FAA for starters, is that there is
at least one other planes in the air, off its designated course; and they probably had confirmation,
beyond common sense suspicion, that this planes was headed to a similar fate.
As the intelligence information that morning unfolded, the military had sufficient cause, and had
the capability to scramble jets to intercept these subsequent planes, ideally diverting them to a
safe landing, and if that wasn't possible, to secondarily take them down well outside the range of
highly populated centers. At a minimum, they could have at least been on their tails, ready to
take them out when their destinations became apparent and no alternatives were left.
9:03 a.m.: Eighteen minutes later, United Airlines Flight 175 crashes into the South
Tower at about the 90th floor.
Later that morning, some scrambling attempts were made in the case of the Pennsylvania flight
that crashed on the ground as well as the flight that hit the Pentagon. But the planes came
too late and could not catch up in time. Were they deployed too late on purpose, so as to
give the public the appearance of a valiant attempt? Given their intelligence and
capabilities, they could have been deployed much earlier, and could have averted at least the
Pentagon attack, if not also the second tower hit earlier.
We have a historical precedent and a likely parallel to this scenario in the case of Pearl
Harbor. When the attack took place, the men fought valiantly despite the odds purposely
stacked against them. They did not go down without a fight. As was finally reported in
the mainstream press by the Discover channel recently, the pending Japanese attack was known in
advance by President Roosevelt, and he calculated that allowing it to proceed would serve in the
long-term interest of the nation to galvanize them to action, bringing them at long last into the
war. It had that effect. America united behind the President, and through her determined
muscle, the war was finally victoriously ended.
What is the purpose this time?
Even if the military was telling the public the truth in saying the attack caught them completely
by surprise, the first plane's collision into the south tower of the WTC should have been more than
ample intelligence (shown on televisions internationally within minutes) for the alarm bells of the
military to kick into highest alert (if they weren't already), knowing as they did by then that one,
two, then three other planes were also off course and probably all hijacked as well, having similar
destinies intended.
At the time of the first collision, with knowledge of another rogue plane in the air, the
military would have only needed seven minutes to fly a fighter jet at mach 2 into position from
McGuire AFB in New Jersey to intercept the second plane that collided at 9:03 a.m. They had
twice the time needed, more than enough time, given the military's 24-7 constant alertness, to get
pilots into the planes and off the ground and to the target.
9:30 a.m.: Someone aboard United Airlines Flight 93 from Newark to San Francisco tells
controllers the pilot wants to change their flight plan.
9:43 a.m.: The horror arrives at the doorstep of the Pentagon, when American Flight 77
crashes into the west side of nation's military intelligence headquarters.
Beginning at least by 8:28 AM, U.S. Intelligence knew of two planes off course, which should have
placed them on highest alert for the possibility of terrorist activities. They had one hour
and fifteen minutes to respond to the plane that ended up hitting the Pentagon. They had
intercept capabilities that they could have scrambled in a matter of minutes. They didn't do
it. Why?
The fact that they did scramble some planes goes a long way in placating the general public that
the military acted in good faith. Hence the reason why this question has not been hot on the
minds of the public.
When I called around to various news and government agencies to try and get some kind of official
response to the question as to why there were not any effective countermeasures deployed, all I got
was the run-around and blank stares on the phone. No phone calls were returned from messages
left on answering machines or with secretaries. Not one. I called the FBI, ABC, FAA,
Department of Defense, the Pentagon, the State Department, MSNBC, Atlanta A.P., New York A.P.,
Washington A.P., House Armed Service Committee, Salt Lake Tribune, Deseret News and even the local
sheriff, to try and cover the gamut of knowledge and insight.
When I asked the reporter at the Washington Associated Press office if I could quote him saying
"we have no information on this matter," he requested an end to the conversation and
referred me to the New York office, who had just referred me to the Washington
office. The only helpful information I received toward the end of the day was from a
secretary at CBS who located three transcripts relevant to the subject, discussing the nearness of
some military bases and the supposed difficulty of deploying planes.
My call to Senator Hatch's office, was probably the most representative of the sentiment held by
Americans in general. The secretary there said that she had carefully watched coverage
throughout the day on September 11, including interviews with military and FAA personnel, who
fielded questions as to what they had done or were doing in this whole process. She said she
was satisfied that the government had done everything they could and that the terrorists were able
to penetrate notwithstanding, catching the entire country by surprise.
The fact that the U.S. had the military capability and sufficient intelligence to act
sooner and decisively is not known by the public, nor by this well-meaning yet ill-informed
secretary. Then again, we must give people a break for not questioning the information being
given to them by the highest officials in the land. Who wants to contemplate the ramifications
of purposeful disinformation in this land of the free and home of the brave?
As was commented on the day of the attack and subsequently in the mainstream press, September 11
was indeed another Pearl Harbor. It was staged specifically to arouse the public to bring the
country into a war desired by the powers that be. It worked, perhaps even better than those
who planned it might have expected. The citizens of the country have rallied in near unison
around the President. His mandate is strong and convincing.
Time will tell what the powers that be want this war to accomplish. Is it to eradicate
terrorism, as they proclaim, or are their public statements cloud cover for darker motives, at least
for some of them.
What the Americans do not realize, is that the most sinister enemies are not the terrorists, but
are some of those within our own government, as well as those behind the scenes pulling the strings,
who use events like this to promote their objective of establishing a world police state, governed
by elites such as themselves.
America, when will you awaken?
The greatest enemies are within, not without.
- - - - - - - -
MAIN SOURCES:
Navy Nuclear Reactor Operator
U.S. was capable of intercepting NY and DC planes
/News/911/Conspiracy/MilitaryHamstrung/capable.htm
ABC 911 Chronology:
Reproductions of this page permitted so long as original URL is included.
/News/911/Conspiracy/MilitaryHamstrung/chronology.htm
Feedback
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 23:32:26 -0400
From: "Dolores Schatz" <>
Subject: Re: Why weren't effective countermeasures deployed by U.S. Military Sept. 11?
These kind of operations are known only at the highest levels. Even the next level down must
be kept in the dark about it.
It is important to keep it that way. First of all, they must actually not know to make it
look like no one saw it coming, and if any do suspect something or something leaks out, there must
be those to "poo-poo" these ideas to keep the plans from going awry.
See also
return to Military Could Have Averted but Didn't (index)
return to main 911 Conspiracy index
Page created by SDA
Sept. 27, 2001
Last updated September 07, 2003
![]()
|
LinkExchange contents not
necessarily endorsed by GreaterThings |
![]()
|
| 
