| February 25, 2002 -- With so much controversy
swirling around NORAD's tardy response on 9-11, have you considered
that maybe NORAD did not respond at all?
Have you considered that maybe the American generals who claim to
have been in charge that day are lying, and that others were directing
events? Many untrue claims are made about "Americans" and "American
actions." (See Footnote 1
Have you considered that maybe the American generals are just the
dumb blondes, the pretty faces, sent out to decorate the 9-11 front desk,
sent out there for us to oggle?
I've considered those things. Allow me to share my considerations
Meet The First Dumb Blonde:
Richard B. Myers
On September 13, 2001, the Vice Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, Richard B. Myers, showed up to the Senate Armed Services
Committee for his confirmation as Chairman of JCS. Yes, the Senate
did confirm his appointment. He is now the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
Myers was commander of NORAD from August, 1998 to February, 2000
before becoming Vice Chairman of JCS. You can read background on
Even though emperors-clothes gives no source URL for its document,
I have relied upon
for a record of the question and answer period during Myers September
13 hearing. I have backed the emperors clothes file up at:
Myers Was "Deeply Involved"
In Military Response To 9-11
The Washington Post reported Myers' appearance in its September
14 article, "Fighter Response After Attacks Questioned." According
to the Post, Myers "was deeply involved in the military's [9-11] response
this week from the outset ..."
Given that Myers was a past commander of NORAD, was Vice Chairman
of the JCS on 9-11 and had been "deeply involved" in the military response,
and given that the hearings occurred just two days after the attack when
people were both outraged and puzzled at NORAD's non-performance, Gen.
Myers might have anticipated he would be asked some questions.
Hey, no problem. Just tell the truth, right? Shouldn't
be hard, especially because Myers is on speaking terms with NORAD's commander
(Ralph E. Eberhart), and was on the phone with him after the New York
Military people, quite properly, are sticklers for precision.
You can't run an army with soldiers who rendezvous "sometime around noon."
The military keeps precise military time. Military actions are
recorded in meticulous detail, in logs and reports which are reviewed
So knowing the military's precise ways, and knowing how puzzled
and outraged folks were that NORAD didn't show, you'd think Myers would
arrange to have NORAD logs faxed over to him so he could give the senators
the facts. When was NORAD notified? When did the jets
take off? After all, there were just a handful of jets involved
in NORAD's response, right? We are not talking about a big deal,
just a page from a log.
And even if his fax machine wasn't working, surely Myers could have
called over to Eberhart, asked for a few details, and jotted the information
down on some index cards. And even if Myers was too busy, we know
he has gofers who could have done the job for him.
But guess what? Myers arrived at the hearing without faxes,
without logs, without index cards. He came with his memory . .
Even so, Myers' memory should be pretty good. You don't get
to be Vice Chairmanof the JCS if you have Alzheimers. And the
big event happened just two days before.
Sen. Levin made this timid inquiry: "General Myers, just a
very brief request. When I asked you what time it was that the FAA or the
FBI notified the Defense Department after the first World Trade -- the
two crashes into the World Trade Center and you indicated you didn't know
the time. Could you ask someone on your staff to try to get us that
time, so that we will have that either before this session here or for executive
Imagine that. Levin asked Myers when the DoD was notified
of events at the WTC, and he didn't know. Well, OK, Levin used
the phrase "DoD" rather than "NORAD," but let's not split hairs.
We all wanted to know what went wrong with NORAD on September 11, why they
did not show up, and here is Levin obviously trying to find out why.
Realize that NORAD is not only a military organization -- it is
an intelligence organization, commanding sophisticated electronic and
satellite surveillance equipment, and even clocks and wristwatches.
NORAD knows what time they were called on 9-11, and who called them.
It's all in the logs.
NORAD Scramble: Story Number One
Again, Sen. Nelson: "You said earlier in your testimony
that we had not scrambled any military aircraft until after the Pentagon
was hit. And so, my question would be: Why?"
Myers: "I think I had that right, that it was not until then.
I'd have to go back and review the exact timelines."
Right. Myers could not remember this vital piece of information
even though he was "deeply involved" with the military's response that
day, and even though most anyone would anticipate the Senate might
be interested in the details of this huge military catastrophe.
Myers agreement that the NORAD jets were sent aloft "after the Pentagon
was hit" does not tell us much. The Pentagon was hit at 9:40 a.m.
Did NORAD scramble its jets at 9:41, 9:45, 10:00, or noon?
Allow us to assist Gen. Myers. The Pentagon was hit at 9:40
a.m. We will express Myers' statement this way:
Story Number One:
NORAD jets were (allegedly) sent aloft some time after 9:40 a.m.
NORAD Scramble: Story Number One Again
Sen. Nelson made another pass and asked why, after the WTC was hit,
military aircraft were not scrambled when the two more aircraft (Flights
77 and 93) went off course. After scampering around a little, Myers
pulled the same bad memory routine:
"... if my memory serves me -- and I'll have to get back
to you for the record -- my memory says that we had launched on the one
that eventually crashed in Pennsylvania. I mean, we had gotten
somebody close to it, as I recall. I'll have to check that out.
I do not recall if that was the case for the one that had taken off from
Very interesting comments: The plane that crashed in Pennsylvania
was Flight 93. As you will see, when NORAD issued a press release
on September 18, it made no mention of sending a defensive jet to Flight
93. However, witnesses in Pennsylvania on September 11 reported seeing
a military jet near Flight 93 and burning debris falling from the sky.
During September 11 TV coverage, Flight 93 was reported to have been shot
down by a military jet (more below.)
Return to Myers' words: "... if my memory serves me . .
. " Nelson and his co-conspirators allowed Myers to get away with
it. No one said: "General, are you serious? You turn up at your
confirmation hearing after a military disaster like 9-11, and you don't
have the basic facts at your fingertips?" But never mind. This
is America, we're the greatest nation on earth, and we love dumb blondes.
Still, something had been established: Twice now, Myers did
not dispute Story Number One: No military aircraft were scrambled until
after the Pentagon was hit (9:40 a.m.).
NORAD Scramble: Story Number One Enhanced
Sen. Nelson then played the tough-guy and expressed incredulity that
no jets were scrambled sooner. In response, Myers exhibited his
rhetorical skill by changing the subject.
Myers said: "... after the second tower was hit, I spoke to the
commander of NORAD, General Eberhart. And at that point, I think
the decision was at that point to start launching aircraft."
Again, notice that Myers did not refer to NORAD records. Again,
the senators were not given an exact time the NORAD aircraft took off.
Once again Myers relied on his conveniently unreliable memory. But
let's add this last Myers utterance to Story Number One: NORAD decided
to scramble its jets sometime after 9:03 a.m. but did not get them up
until sometime after 9:40 a.m.
Story Number One Enhanced:
NORAD (allegedly) decided to scramble after 9:03 a.m.
NORAD jets were (allegedly) scrambled after 9:40 a.m.
"I Don't Know That Time"
Look at more faulty memory by searching for these words, uttered
by Myers, in the text of the hearings: "At the time of the first impact
on the World Trade Center, we stood up our crisis action team. that was
done immediately. So we stood it up. And we started talking
to the federal agencies. The time I do not know is when NORAD responded
with fighter aircraft. I don't know that time." About now most of
us would be wondering if Myers was out on the golf course when it all happened,
and hadn't had time to catch up before he dropped in to see Levin and the
NORAD Didn't Know What to Do
Myers made an excuse for NORAD's non-performance this way:
"... it's not just a question of launching aircraft, it's launching
to do what? You have to have a specific threat. We're pretty
good if the threat's coming from outside. We're not so good if the
threat's coming from the inside ..."
In Part I, we discussed NORAD's interception of hijacked aircraft,
but let's revisit the subject. You can read FAA/NORAD regulations
(FAA Order 7610.4, Special Military Operations, Effective Date November
3, 1998) at: http://www.faa.gov/Atpubs/MIL
(You may want to download for safekeeping, as we did.)
See Chapter 4 (4-8-1, 4-8-2): "NORAD has a requirement to flush/disperse
interceptor and E-3 aircraft to initiate early attack against a hostile
You may want to read Chapter 7 of the above-cited FAA Order, which
deals with the escort of hijacked aircraft. In addition, read the
discussion of military interception of civilian aircraft in "Mr. Cheney's
Cover Story," by Bykov & Israel. Look at the discussion of
how NORAD jets force troublesome aircraft to land.
In fact, NORAD tested and practiced its hijacking routines
regularly. Six weeks after Gen. Myers claimed NORAD didn't know what
to launch, the NORAD commander, Gen. Eberhart appeared before this Committee,
and said NORAD practiced its hijacking routines "day in and day out." By
the context of the remarks, it is very clear he is talking about NORAD practices
prior to September 11, 2001.
I don't know about you, but I just don't buy it. I don't buy
that Myers would sincerely show up to his confirmation hearing without
records, without faxes, without logs, without index cards, and then claim
he could not quite remember. I don't buy that NORAD didn't know what
to launch or what to do or which end was up.
But I do suspect no defensive jets were launched at all that day.
The NORAD Press Release
Five days after Myers went to see the Senate, NORAD issued this press
Note in that version of events, the FAA notified NORAD about Flight
11 at 8:40 a.m. NORAD order jets to scrambled at 8:46 a.m..
Jets were in the air at 8:52. We now have two stories:
Story Number One:
Story Number Two (as contained in the NORAD press release) is almost
the exact reverse of Myers' story on September 13. Myers said
that a jet was sent to Pennsylvania and reached Flight 93), but no jets
were launched until after Flights 11, 175, and 77 had crashed (New York
and Pentagon crashes).
NORAD decided to scramble after 9:03 a.m.
NORAD jets were scrambled after 9:40 a.m.
Story Number Two:
NORAD was notified at 8:40 a.m.
NORAD ordered scramble at 8:46 a.m.
NORAD jets were scrambled at 8:52 a.m.
Look at the facts/factoids contained in the NORAD release.
Very few, very simple. NORAD got the jets up in about six minutes.
Yet it took them a week (September 18) to get the press release out. Wonder
why it took so long to be issued?
Meet The Second Dumb Blonde:
Now let's turn our attention to the testimony of Ralph E. Eberhart,
the commander of NORAD on September 11. Gen. Eberhart testified before
the Senate Armed Services Committee on October 25, 2001, six weeks after
Myers appeared. You can find background on Eberhart at:
Ralph E. Eberhart
You can find a transcript of the October 25 question and answer period
Now let's see what Eberhart said about the NORAD scramble.
NORAD Scramble: Story Number Two Again
Eberhart did not hand out the NORAD September 18 press release to
the gathered senators. Perhaps he did not have it on him, but why
not? He should have anticipated he'd be asked about details.
Sen. Allard asked Eberhart, "... And how was the FAA interacting
with NORAD in that whole situation, starting with that first plane that
you deployed heading toward New York City?"
"Yes sir, The first flight I think was American flight
11. The FAA, once they notified us and we issued a scramble order
almost simultaneously to the first crash, tragically. That flight
of two [sic] out of Otis Air Force base, out of Cape Cod ..."
This Eberhart account checks out with the NORAD release, or Story
Number Two. But here is Eberhart, ostensibly the commander of NORAD,
saying, "The first flight I think was American Flight 11." Six weeks
after this military catastrophe, Eberhart says "I think" the first plane
to hit the WTC was Flight 11? Does that sound like a commander talking?
Don't Notice The Obvious
The Command, Control, and Communication center of
the US is Washington, DC, home of the White House, Congress, and the Pentagon.
Washington DC is the most obvious military target in the US. The strategic
importance of Washington DC is so obvious that In 1994 and 1996 novelist
Tom Clancy published two bestsellers in which malcontents purposely crashed
jets into the Capitol building, killing members of Congress and the President.
Once NORAD knew the WTC towers had been attacked, simple prudence
demanded the immediate dispatch of protective air cover over Washington
D.C. and surrounding areas. The skies should have been filled with
fighter jets from nearby Air Force bases, including Andrews Air Force base,
just 10 miles away.
But NORAD did not send protective cover; it left the Washington
DC area wide open even though the country was under attack. Thus
Flight 77 had a clear shot at the Pentagon.
Don't Ask the Obvious
How often have you known congresscritters to be unconcerned
with their own skin? Not often. Yet none of the senators
questioning Myers or Eberhart uttered a peep about NORAD treating them
like sitting ducks. No senator asked Myers or Eberhart this obvious
"General, why didn't you people immediately send jets from Andrews
to protect Washington DC skies as soon as you knew we were under attack?
Don't you care about the safety of your government officials? Don't
you people in the military read Tom Clancy?" These would have been
among the first questions asked -- had the Senate hearings been anything
more than a charade.
Eberhart The Casual
More on Eberhart's casual approach to 9-11. We've
already heard him saying: "The first flight I think was American flight
11." Here are is words about the Pentagon crash:
"I think it's 77 that crashed into the Pentagon."
Or how about Eberhart's reference to Flight 93:
"Now the last flight was a little bit different.
I think it's flight 93 -- United Airlines flight 93 in Pennsylvania."
"At that time we were trying to decide, initially,
if that flight was going to continue west and if there was some other
target for that flight. Was it Chicago? Was it St. Louis? And what might
we do to launch an aircraft to intercept it?"
Launching interceptor aircraft is NORAD's job, of course. See
Sen. Allard asked: "So FAA knew before it deviated
its flight pattern that it was hijacked."
"Yes. What we really knew is it was headed
west, sir. It dropped off their radar scope. So it was headed west .
. . "
Flight 93 left Newark bound for San Francisco.
It should have been headed west. So it dropped off the radar screens
while it was still on course? Note that Eberhart did not say that
the transponder was turned off, he says it dropped off the radar scope.
What would cause Flight 93 to drop from the radar scope while it was still
on course? None of the flight paths shown in the USA Today, Time,
or Newsweek depict Flight 93's drop from the radar screens.
And not one senator expressed any curiosity. They were not
supposed to ask real questions, and they obviously knew it.
I don't believe Eberhart was truly "in charge" of NORAD on September
11. He does not walk, or talk, or quack like a commander.
He can scarcely recall which planes flew into which targets.
Nor do I believe the senators were sincere in their inquiries that
day. If the senators sincerely believed Eberhart was sincerely speaking
the truth, they should have recommended he be tested for Alzheimers, retired
immediately, and put into a nice nursing home.
The senators don't want truth to come out. For if it did,
the pretext for the war against Israel's enemies would be undone.
That's not what senators are paid to do.
NORAD vs. FAA -- Who Sees What?
Operation 9-11 was used as a pretext for the War
on Islam. The success of Operation9-11 depended on NORAD not showing
up on time and leaving the skies wide open for attack. But NORAD's
role had to be hidden. It needed plausible denial. NORAD needed
a plausible explanation for why it failed to show up that day.
The solution? Blame the FAA. Claim the FAA did not notify
NORAD of the hijackings in a timely manner and -- pooof!
Therefore it was important to establish that NORAD was totally dependent
on the FAA for information on air traffic within the US, that NORAD was
blind to internal US airspace, and (2) the FAA failed to notify NORAD of
its problems in a timely fashion.
Sen. Allard asked the question that set up the "NORAD can't see
in" excuse: "My understanding now (sic) that NORAD has made some
effort to get direct access to FAA radar data. In the past, you've not
had access to that? What's the status of that?"
Allard thus implied that NORAD did not have radar access of its
own and depended on the FAA. Eberhart follows this lead and responds
with obfuscation and a tap dance. He says, in part:
"Yes, sir. Again, in the past,
we've had access to what we call the Joint Surveillance System, which
is that system that rings the United States and looks out. It looks for
that foreign threat. It looks for someone coming into our airspace
that's not authorized."
Let's stop right there. Eberhart is implying
NORAD can't see within US airspace, that NORAD "looks out" only.
Lets turn to Chapter 7 of FAA Order 7610.4, Special Military Operations,
Effective Date November 3, 1998)
. Chapter 7 deals exclusively with hijacking procedures.
Section 7-4-2 s says in part: "When the hijacking activity is within
coverage of the NORAD surveillance system ..." Obviously the
FAA/NORAD surveillance jurisdictions overlap.
Section 7-4-3 says in part "When the hijacking activity takes place
outside NORAD radar coverage within the continental United States . .
. " Obviously NORAD does have radar coverage of at least some part
of the continental US.
Both sections indicate that NORAD conducts airspace surveillance
within the United States. Yet Eberhart said NORAD just "looks out."
So we know Eberhart is not telling the truth. Consider the following:
- "NORAD uses a network of ground-based
radars, sensors and fighter jets to detect, intercept and, if necessary,
engage any threats to the continent," say the Canadians. They should
know, they're part of NORAD. To confirm, visit the Canadian Defense
website, "Canada-United States Defense Regulations."
- Eberhart wants us to believe that once
an "unauthorized aircraft" (a foreign bomber, perhaps) crossed into the
U.S or Canada, NORAD could not see the bomber anymore, for NORAD only
"looks out." We are supposed to believe, perhaps, NORAD called upon
the FAA and depended on civilians to track the bomber? Recall what the
Canadian Defence website tells us: "NORAD uses a network of ground-based
radars, sensors and fighter jets to detect, intercept and, if necessary,
engage any threats to the continent." No, NORAD must have been
able to continuously track the bomber to direct fighter jets or missiles
to intercept it or shoot it down. NORAD must have been able to see
internal US airspace.
- NORAD may have monitored all aircraft
entering US and Canadian airspace, even "authorized" aircraft. Consider
this scenario: A foreign bomber pilot, whose craft was equipped with
a transponder, could have conceivably fooled the FAA into believing his
craft was a commercial passenger jet. Where would we be then?
What would happen if NORAD was ignorant of a craft? Or does Eberhart
want us to believe NORAD never thought of such a scenario?
- If an enemy ICBM or space-launched vehicle
were to enter US airspace, it could enter from high in the earth's atmosphere.
NORAD would have to track such a missile as it traveled towards its target.
NORAD's radar and sensors must have been able to see and monitor internal
US airspace. Or are we are supposed to believe NORAD planned
to call upon the FAA to track the ICMB? Once again, to quote the
Canadians; "NORAD uses a network of ground-based radars, sensors and
fighter jets to detect, intercept and, if necessary, engage any threats
to the continent."
- In his October 25 testimony, Gen. Eberhart
mentions that over the years, NORAD has "moved" 200 NORAD personnel to
the FAA to operate FAA radars. Were those NORAD personnel on duty
on at FAA radar stations on September 11, and what part did they play in
the 9-11 events?
- According to a NORAD web page, NORAD's
Space Command controls a fleet of satellites "that provide ballistic
missile warning, communications, weather and navigation, and positioning
support for America's armed forces." Notice that NORAD even watches the
weather. So certainly NORAD watches internal US airspace.
- Tyndall Air Force Base tells us that
"With advanced technology and sensors, NORAD 'weighed-in' on the war
on drugs in 1989 and now works hand-in-hand with law enforcement agencies
detecting and tracking airborne drug smugglers."
Obviously NORAD watched suspicious aircraft flying into US airspace
from Mexico and points south. Or are we to believe NORAD programmed
its surveillance apparatus to black out signals once the craft entered US
airspace and then called upon the FAA for help?
Look at the specifics listed above. From these, a conclusion:
Of course NORAD watched US airspace. Of course NORAD looked "inward"
over the United States.
Remember, Eberhart is testifying before the Senate Armed Services
Committee. Members of that committee should have a vague idea of
NORAD's capabilities. Yet none spoke up to ask Eberhart any questions.
What NORAD could see on September 11 was glossed over.
It had to be. For if anyone questioned Eberhart's statements
about NORAD's vision, the cover story justifying the War on Islam would
begin to unravel.
Enter The FAA
OK. So now we know NORAD is blind as a
bat. Can't see nuttin.' Here the next element needed in the NORAD
plausible denial story: The bungling FAA.
Sen. Levin: "General Eberhart, there's been some confusion
about the sequence of events on September 11 that maybe you can clear
up for us. The time line that we've been given is that at 8:55 on September
11, American Airlines Flight 77 began turning east, away from its intended
course. And at 9:10, Flight 77 was detected by the FAA radar over West Virginia
heading east. That was after the two planes had struck the World Trade
Levin continues: "Then 15 minutes later, at 9:25, the FAA
notified NORAD that flight 77 was headed toward Washington. Was
that the first notification -- the 9:25 notification -- that NORAD or
the DOD had that flight 77 was probably being hijacked? And if it was,
do you know why it took 15 minutes for the FAA to notify NORAD?"
Look at Levin's last question: "... do you know why
it took 15 minutes for the FAA to notify NORAD?" If Eberhart has only a
sketchy memory of NORAD's business, what good will it do to ask him about
FAA business? Sen. Levin is just doing his part in the cover-up by
changing the subject from NORAD to the FAA.
Eberhart replies: "Sir, there is one minor difference. I show
it was 9:24 that we were notified, and that's the first notification
that we received. I do not know, sir, why it took that amount of
time for FAA. I hate to say it, but you'll have to ask FAA."
How interesting. Eberhart cites a specific time -- "9:24"
for NORAD's notification. Notice that "9:25" -- the time cited
by Sen. Levin -- is not quite precise enough for Eberhart.
Compare this precision with Eberhart's trouble in remembering which plane
crashed into which target.
Let's say it again. While our attention is focused on the
FAA's dereliction of duty, we fail to think about the obvious:
Washington DC is the hub in the wheel. You don't have to be Tom Clancy
to know that. NORAD should have had complete sky coverage of the Washington
DC area from the first moments we realized we were under attack at 8:45
a.m. NORAD left the skies open for Flight 77. Had NORAD been
doing its job, Flight 77 would not have been able to get anywhere near
Patsy Not Even Invited To The Hanging
We just saw that Gen. Eberhart recommended Sen.
Levin ask the FAA questions about its (alleged) slow response to the 9-11
emergency. On February 13, this writer called Sen. Levin's office
to see if Sen. Levin followed through. I spoke to Levin aide Jeb
Mr. Stoffel told me Sen. Levin had not contacted the FAA director
Jane Garvey, but said he wanted to consult his notes to make sure.
Mr. Stoffel was off the line for a minute or so to come back to confirm
what he had already said: Sen. Levin had not contacted FAA Administrator
Jane Garvey concerning events of September 11.
Meet The "Face" of the FAA: Jane Garvey
Jane Garvey was appointed administrator of the
FAA in 1997. Coincidentally, she served a stint as director of Boston's
Logan Airport, the origination point of Flights 11 and 175 that ran into
the WTC towers. What a coincidence. See:
The press, like Sen. Levin, has apparently not asked Ms. Garvey
to answer any potentially embarrassing questions either. On September
24 Jane Garvey flew from Dulles Airport to Kennedy in New York.
Her trip was the subject of a puff piece published by Time on September
27 which you can read at:
Garvey, like every other passenger,
stood in longer lines, got grilled by newly assertive security guards, and
had to show photo identification repeatedly, and was twice 'swept' by a guard
with a sensitive metal detector ...
And then, that afternoon, as Garvey stood in front of a small group
of FAA staff in the New York field office, near walls peppered with the
tragic images of the burning World Trade Center Towers and dozens of American
flags, she began to explain how grateful she was for the professionalism
of the employees ...
"I just came to thank you," said Garvey, who is known for being
meticulously prepared for official appearances. She is the pubic
face of the FAA. Today was no different -- despite 20 hour days,
Garvey was sharply dressed in a pinstripe suit and her makeup was in order
... Her voice caught. Tears came to her eyes, "I know those
of you have lost friends and family ..." Finally, help came from just
those Garvey was trying to comfort. "That's okay, it makes us cry
too," someone said. A few minutes later, Garvey said simply, "We're
all still recovering."
When the going gets rough, those in charge
make sure their make-up is perfect. And then they utter platitudes.
If 9-11 moves Ms. Jane to tears, why doesn't she open up and tell America
what she knows? But no, Ms. Jane keeps her silence, allowing her
agency to take the blame for a catastrophe without uttering a peep in its
Recall that in his October 25 testimony, Gen. Eberhart mentioned
that NORAD "moved" 200 personnel to the FAA to operate FAA radars over
the years. It is unlikely Garvey knows where any of those NORAD radar
people were working on September 11, and whether they played a role in
the 9-11 events. It is unlikely Garvey knows the names of the air traffic
controllers who directed the jets that day and unlikely she has asked them
It is likely that Garvey is just an ambitious yuppie, a figurehead
who merely serves as the "face" of the FAA: An attractive hood ornament
for those who really run the agency.
Another dumb blonde ...
Senate Praises NORAD's Readiness
Lt's go back to the Eberhart Senate testimony
again: After a display like that, most of us would want to have
Eberhart tried for treason or dereliction of duty. Instead, Sen.
Allard thanks Gen. Eberhart in this fashion:
"OK. Well, I just want to thank
you and your people for, I know, I think a tremendous effort in light of
some totally unexpected circumstances. And at least, I, for one, appreciate,
you know, the readiness that was displayed."
Can you believe it? This remark is nothing
short of IN-YOUR-FACE MOCKERY OF OUR DEAD. With Allard's simpering
obsequiousness, one must wonder: For whom does he think Eberhart is working?
Certain not the people of the United States of America or the Old Republic.
No Witnesses To Defensive Jets
Now that you have seen the compilation of
lies, how much faith are you willing to put in NORAD's report that it
sent out any defensive jets on September 11?
There are no media reports that any of the jets NORAD allegedly
sent to New York and the Pentagon were ever sighted. On the other
hand, NORAD's press release shows it did not send a jet to respond to
Flight 93 (Pennsylvania crash)
Yet a military jet was sighted in that area. ("Stories swirl
around Pa. crash; black box found," USA Today, September 14, 2001).
"Local residents said they had been a second plane in the area, possibly
an F-16 fighter, and burning debris falling from the sky."
Put It Together
NORAD is hired to guard the American skies
but doesn't watch them. The FAA has all the answers but no one asks them
any questions. Congressional oversight senators tip-toe around
the subject, praising what is at the very least criminal negligence.
Two seventeen-star generals can scarcely remember their own names, and they
give different versions of world-shaking events in which they claim to
have been decision-makers and on-the-spot witnesses.
But Myers and Eberhart are obviously not decision-makers.
They are just pretty faces, dumb blondes, like pretty face Jane
Gavey over at the FAA. Myers and Eberhart are the "spokespersons"
who dazzle the sycophants with their braid and their ribbons, while the
people who really run the show, Wolfowitz's and Perle's people, are concealed.
Myers and Eberhart are errand boys, so unimportant that their Israeli
bosses didn't even bother to write believable lies for them to tell when
Put that together with the following:
- NORAD created the opportunity for
the attack by inexplicably failing to show up.
- "Real" hijackers would have expected
NORAD to be on the job and show up promptly. "Real" hijackers could
not have predicted NORAD's failure to show. "Real" hijackers would
not have made plans around NORAD's failure to show.
- Real hijackers, expecting NORAD to
show, would have completed the job quickly, taking off from airports
close to the targets and hitting the targets soon after take-off.
- NORAD waited week to come out with
a defense action time line, and by the time it was released, it had already
been contradicted by Myers' testimony.
- After NORAD failed to show, NORAD
misrepresented verifiable facts -- facts like its ability to look internally
into US airspace.
- NORAD and the US Senate staged a
shadow-boxing match, pointing the finger of blame for 9-11 at the FAA.
- The Senate conducted no follow-up
investigation of the FAA.
- The FAA accepted the blame by default,
never uttering a peep in self-defense.
- The American generals don't know
what happened on 9-11 and can't tell a straight story.
- The beneficiary of the 9-11 events
is Israel. September 11 is being used as a pretext to eradicate
threats to Zionist hegemony.
- The 19 Muslims accused of hijacking
the four aircraft, according to their trainers, were "dumb and dumber"
and incapable of flying a Cessna.
- A wealth of evidence indicates the
"suicide jets" were remotely controlled, and not piloted by the Muslims.
- NORAD has had decades of experience
installing remote control systems in aircraft and guiding those craft in
sophisticated maneuvers, including combat practice. Guiding the "suicide"
jets into their targets on September 11 would have been a piece of cake
for NORAD personnel.
- Israel also has remote control expertise.
- Treason on behalf of Israel has become
institutionalized in US public life. See discussion of President
Johnson's and Secretary of Defense McNamara's treason in 1967. Johnson
and McNamara sided with Israel when Israeli attacked USS Liberty.
- Every administration since the time
of the Liberty attack has cooperated in the treason by failing to investigate,
punish, or label the traitors. See also "The Traitors Among Us"
- Israeli agents are ruthless and cunning,
capable of targeting Americans and blaming on the Arabs, according to
the Army's School of Advanced Military Studies.
As shown in "Merry Christmas, and OFF WITH YOUR HEAD!
Sen. Levin and other powerful political forces don't want a real investigation
of NORAD's role in 9-11. Sen. Levin and other Jewish Supremacists are
establishing a Jewish world-wide theocracy, and events of 9-11 are being
used to make it all happen.
Put together, the
conclusion is unavoidable: NORAD -- or more likely Israeli
operatives using NORAD as a cover -- sent the remote control suicide jets
crashing into their targets on 9-11.
Footnote 1: It has just been revealed that the late "American" journalist
Daniel Pearl was an Israeli citizen. This news was revealed by the
Israeli press; the American press knew the truth, but kept the news secret
at the request of Pearl's family. See Mark Bruzonsky's Pearl
was Israeli Citizen, February 23, 2002. Bruzonsky cites Ha'aretz.