( PDF | ASCII text formats )
The following is mirrored from its source at: http://www.rense.com/general18/atcd.htm
There is now irrefutable evidence which proves massive complicity on the part of the highest levels of government -- along with numerous accomplices and co-conspirators in the military, intelligence and administrative sectors -- in the September 11 atrocities perpetrated against the American people.
Here's the deal.
- Dozens of Air Force and Air National Guard bases are located within ten to thirty minutes intercept time of both 9.11 target locations. (List of bases provided below.)
- Most of these installations have, at the ready, fighter jets such as F-16s to be scrambled on a moment's notice, for intercepting troubled or problem aircraft.
- Air defense units did receive alerts from Air Traffic Controller (ATC) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) officials on a number of aircraft across the East Coast which had broken communications and deviated radically from established flight paths on the morning of September 11.
- Standard intercept procedures for dealing with these kinds of situations are totally established, in force and on-line in the United States 365 days a year, 7 days a week, 24 hours a day.
- Air National Guard and Air Force air defense units of the United States were prohibited from carrying out their standard intercept procedures (detailed in the following list of FAA documentation) on the morning of 9.11; after they had received the alerts from ATC and FAA.
Regarding rules governing Instrument flight rules (IFR) requirements, see:
- FAA Order 7400.2E, Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters Effective Date: December 7, 2000, (Includes Change 1, effective July 7, 2001), Part 4. Terminal and En Route Airspace, "Chapter 14 Designation of Airspace Classes" Section "14-1-2. Definitions". (Full text at: http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIR/air1401.html#14-1-2)
- Aeronautical Information Manual, Guide to Basic Flight Information and ATC Procedures (Includes Change 3, Effective: July 12, 2001), "Chapter 5 Air Traffic Procedures", "Section 6. National Security and Interception Procedures", "Section 5-6-4. Interception Signals" (http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIM/Chap5/aim0506.html#5-6-4)
- FAA Order 7110.65M, Air Traffic Control, (Includes Change 3, Effective: July 12, 2001), "Chapter 10. Emergencies,"
- "Section 1. General," "10-2-1. Emergency Determinations" (http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/ATC/Chp10/atc1001.html#10-1-1)
- "Section 2. Emergency Assistance," "10-2-5. Emergency Situations" (http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/ATC/Chp10/atc1002.html#10-2-5)
- FAA Order 7610.4J Special Military Operations, (Effective Date: November 3, 1998; Includes: Change 1, effective July 3, 2000; Change 2, effective July 12, 2001)
- "Chapter 4 FAA/NORAD/PACAF PROCEDURES FOR CONTROL OF AIR DEFENSE AIRCRAFT," "Section 5. AIR DEFENSE LIAISON OFFICERS (ADLO'S)," "Air Defense Liaison Officers (ADLO's)" (http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/MIL/Ch4/mil0405.html)
- "Chapter 7 ESCORT OF HIJACKED AIRCRAFT," "Section 1. GENERAL," "7-1-2. Requests for Service" (http://faa.gov/ATpubs/MIL/Ch7/mil0701.html#7-1-2)
- Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction 3610.01A, 1 June 2001, "Aircraft Piracy (Hijacking) and Destruction of Derelict Airborne Objects," "4. Policy (page 1). PDF at: http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/cjcsd/cjcsi/3610_01a.pdf. Backup at: http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/3610_01a.pdf
- For a clear and detailed description of flight plans, fixes, and Air Traffic Control, see: `Direct-To Requirements' by Gregory Dennis and Emina Torlak at: http://sdg.lcs.mit.edu/atc/D2/D2Requirements.htm
Absolutely no executive-level input of any kind is required for standard intercepts to be scrambled.
There was no indication in any alerts received by air defense units that "shoot-downs" may be required as opposed to intercepts -- i.e. that the planes were definitely under control of "hostile" forces -- because ATC/FAA could not have known that.
When the first alerts were received from Air Traffic Control, all that air defense units were required to do was scramble standard interceptors to make contact with the incommunicado and off-course jets. F-16s and other fighter planes would have overtaken every single hijacked plane on September 11, before they had reached their targets! (See below for locations of air bases.)
If, at the time of interception, it was determined the aircraft were under hostile control and likely to impact targets, high-level air defense commanders at the Pentagon's National Military Command Center (NMCC) are fully authorized under existing and established regulations and procedures to authorize a shoot-down, in order to protect the United States of America from attack.
Yet air defense units that were ready and waiting on 9.11 at dozens of nearby installations were ordered not to scramble interceptors: they were ordered to stand down from carrying out even the first stage of standard intercept procedures.
These orders came from the executive office of the president as well as from complicit individuals in the aforementioned NMCC.
There is no question that if these interceptors had been scrambled at the time alerts were received, they would have intercepted the hijacked planes before targets were approached in every instance.
And there is no way that the office of the President or the NMCC could have known through any standard means that these incommunicado flights required anything other than standard interceptions, because ATC and FAA alerts did not relay any such information. The alerts simply requested that standard intercept procedures be implemented and that interceptors be scrambled forthwith.
Some disingenuous excuse-makers say things like: "Well, there was no air defense response because the U.S. had no procedures for dealing with such `attacks,' because the U.S. had never been `attacked' this way before."
This is sheer, complete nonsense. Fully established procedures for dealing with intercepts of all kinds, including of hostile aircraft, existed on September 11, as detailed above.
Furthermore, when those first alerts were received from ATC/FAA, there was no mention of any "attack" and no need for "unusual" procedures. There was only a need for standard, first-stage interceptions to be scrambled, and higher authorities prevented that.
Other disingenuous excuse-makers then say: "Well, of course higher authorities stepped in, because they had to see what was going on with the whole situation, as `America was under attack.'"
Again, America was not "under attack" when those first alerts were received. Certainly ATC and FAA had no way of knowing so early in the proceedings that the jets which had broken communications and gone off-course were part of any "attack."
So why did the executive branch and high-level military authorities deliberately order the air defense interceptors to stand down? Nobody could have known that early in the proceedings that "America was under attack" . . . or could they have known?
Obviously, those who ordered the stand-down did know that early in the proceedings that "America was under attack" because they were complicit in the attack, and took all possible steps to ensure that the attack would take place, unimpeded by the air defenses of the United States.
True patriots in this land who have sworn to protect and defend our Republic must consider these irrefutable facts and set about unswervingly to bring these complicit individuals to justice.
Subject: USAF ON 11/9/01
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 02:19:23 -0600
As I may have told you long ago, I am a tyro at questioning the state. And such a task is not my principal activity. I am a small, specialty manufacturer who has gotten caught up in being disgusted by my government's lies. And that has caused me to look at certain events more closely than those who are thought to be responsible for that scrutiny.
As you know by now, I have also been outraged by the monstrous lies that the government has foisted on the public, with the cooperation of the press, concerning the failure of the us military to interdict and prevent the murderously damaging conclusion of 3 or 4 commercial airliners on 11/9/01.
Just by searching NYT archives, I found the policy and the methodology for intercepting a runaway Lear 35 [Payne Stewart's charter]. The story clearly establishes that F16's were scrambled to intercept this bizjet within 25 minutes of its failure to report to controllers upon its reaching its cleared altitude of 39,000 ft. These F16's were scrambled only upon the loss of a radio communication: the transponder never ceased to function.
The way I view the intercept, the F16 out of Eglin, 500 miles behind the lear 35, travelling at its posted max speed, mach 2+, caught the lear 35 in 30 minutes.
For all of us who care about relating how the attempted coup was facilitated, and care to reveal 11/9/01 as a coup for posterity, then it seems to me essential that this technical record be established . . . an F16 can catch a 767 within 30 minutes [if it is ordered to do so].
With that understanding, since no one else has done it, I thought it would be of interest to see how many Air Force [including Air National Guard, Air Force Reserve] facilities might have been within 500 miles of the "terror" airliners on 11/9/01.
Here are the facilities that I found on the USAF website[s].
- Andrews AFB [11 miles SE of DC].
- Bolling AFB [3 miles south of US CAPITOL].
- Dover AFB [3 miles southeast of Dover, Delaware]
- Hanscom AFB [17 miles northwest of Boston]
- Langley AFB [3 miles north of Hampton, VA]
- McGuire AFB [18 miles southeast of Trenton,NJ]
These are the major, active Air Force facilities that could have launched intercepts with the commandeered airliners. All of them, if ordered in a timely fashion, could have intercepted and prevented the collisions with the WTC and the Pentagon.
Then there are these minor, active Air Force facilities. I don't know how they function, but for the sake of history, let us note their existence within the umbrella of intercept before any collision with civilians could occur.
- Cape Cod, MA AFS
- New Boston, NH AFS
And then there are the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Bases.
- Atlantic City Airport, NJ [10 miles west of Atlantic City]
- Barnes Municipal Airport, MA [3 miles northwest of Westfield]
- Bradley International Airport, Conn [Windsor Locks]
- Byrd Field, VA [4 miles southeast of Richmond]
- Eastern West Virginia Regional Airport [4 miles south of Martinsburg]
- Frances S. Gabreski Airport, NY [Westhampton Beach]
- Greater Pittsburgh International Airport, PA [15 miles nw of Pittsburgh]
- Harrisburg International Airport, PA [10 miles east of Harrisburg]
- Martin State Airport, MD [8 miles east of Baltimore]
- New Castle County Airport, DE [5 miles south of Wilmington]
- Otis ANGB, MA [7 miles northeast of Falmouth]
- Pease ANGS, NH [Portsmouth]
- Quonset State Airport, RI [Providence]
- Rickenbacker ANGB, OH [Columbus, Oh]
- Stewart International Airport, NY [Newburgh, NY]
- Westover ARB, MA [5 miles northeast of Chicopee]
- Willow Grove Naval Air Station, PA [14 miles north of Philadelphia]
- Eager Airport, WVA [4 miles northeast of Charleston]
- Youngstown-Warren Regional Airport ARS, OH [16 miles north of Youngstown]
I am not so naive as to think that all of these installations were prepared to put up intercept, or take-down aircraft that morning. But some number of them may have been able to do that.
And the question has to be, why didn't they? Because all that were prepared to intercept and terminate could have done so. What prevented them from even launching intercept aircraft?
That is the question. Have we just watched a 7 Days In May? Wouldn't you like to see the orders that caused all of these aircraft to stand down?
I sure would. Because based on the Payne Stewart story, such orders had to have been given. as has been admitted, the automatic response would ordinarily be to intercept and to shoot down.
And based on the Payne Stewart story, we can only conclude that elements within our government, or the shadow government behind it, prevented the intercept and shootdown of the terrorist-commandeered airliners.
Can that be viewed as anything other than treason?
There, I have said it. Anyone care to contest that appraisal? I invite the argument.
I regret that I gave you some reason to doubt the thoroughness of my thinking.
Wishing you a peaceful holiday season.