Friends,

I continue to work on this thesis, as I have from 9/11 when I was an earwitness and could not believe there was no response. Do not forget nearby Bolling AFB as well as Anacostia Naval Air Station (DCANG) and Andrews AFB, and the 177th Air Wing in Pomona, NJ which covers both DC and NY, and Otis AFB where two planes did scramble only to arrive too late to intercept the planes that hit the twin towers.

However, I have this from a source whose son serves at Otis and talked to the pilots. They told him that after the second tower was hit they knew about Flight 77 headed for Washington, and they turned to target it. They were called back to base. That is a stand down!

Pilots at the 177th told one researcher that they were taken down off regular scrambling maneuvers and flights two weeks prior to 9/11, and as a result the planes did not have air-to-air missiles loaded, which they claim takes half an hour. I find that less than credible, but a plane can intercept even without a full complement of attack weapons.

Have any of you come across an article saying that half the scramble-ready fighters were taken off readiness three days before 9/11? A free-lance Pentagon correspondent in DC last October told me this was reported in the New York Times, and used it to explain the lack of response that day. I said, "Are you making your argument or mine?" If this can be traced and verified, it also is very important.

In addition to scramblers, other air defenses were not used, such as ground-to-air missiles at the White House and Pentagon, and radar at the Pentagon that was "watching for planes" back in 1997 according to the head of building security then.

At a minimum from 9:05 am to 9:45 am, with a known hostile plane headed to DC, and no other conclusion possible than it would be used as a weapon here, with public and even the employees at the Pentagon forewarned and being evacuated, "there was no mechanism" for defending themselves? This single point is where the whole matter unravels.

This is the "advance knowledge" that cannot be denied, because we all knew it, and this is the "stand down" that cannot be explained. Perhaps that's why the disinformation story being spread from France across the internet, that Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon, is being pushed. But it is patently untrue. I have talked to people who watched it hit, who ducked as it flew over them. The wings are full of fuel, they exploded.

A good friend of mine, and fellow researcher, was a flight attendant almost every day on Flight 77, and she survived. She was taken into the Pentagon and saw the wreckage of the plane, parts of which she knew intimately. She was also shown a photo of a severed arm with a bracelet that belonged to her best friend at work, who died that day. There were autopsies done on the bodies of the crew.

Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, alright. But it could have been stopped or delayed. It could have been intercepted or shot down. It came into the most restricted air space in the country with plenty of advance warning, and it went wherever it wanted to go. It did not even fly straight to the Pentagon, but looped around and dived into the empty side, 270 degrees out of its way. That sort of flying would turn off a simulator, and required a very experienced and competent pilot.

There is much we still do not know about what happened and who was responsible for 9/11. Meanwhile, we descend into world war. Thanks for all you are doing.

John Judge