9/11 Commission to subpoena NORAD information

There are well established protocols in place to deal with aircraft over US soil, and NORAD is the lynch pin.

What was NORAD told and when, and what did they do ab out it, or not.

Answer those items and it gets easier to track down where things went wrong and why.

Of course we will ilkely never learn any of this since the Bushistas will keep a lid on this.

Is this the same story?

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=2&u=/ap/20031107/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/sept__11_commission

WASHINGTON - A federal commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks voted Friday to subpoena the Pentagon (news - web sites) for documents related to the activities of U.S. air defenses on the day of the terrorist hijackings.

The independent commission said it was "especially dismayed" by incomplete document production on the part of the North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, the part of the Defense Department responsible for protecting North American airspace.

The commission's broad investigation includes questions about how, and how quickly, the Federal Aviation Administration (news - web sites) notified U.S. air defenses about hijacked planes on Sept. 11, 2001. The commission's first subpoena, issued last month, was to the FAA.

running a exercise that week in the Northeast. The exercise would have include AF jets.

But after seeing that once, I have not seen it any more.

He has a busy schedule. He's been in court, all last week and all this week. We had him on about a year ago. He's Stanley Hilton. He was brutally attacked by the big government pimps Hannity and Colmes. He was a senior advisor for Bob Dole, counsel for Bob Dole and others in the Republican Party. He's an expert on government-sponsored terrorism and has written a book about it, throughout history. And he now has new revelations never before revealed from his depositions of witnesses involved in and around 9/11. He represents over 400 of the victims of 9/11's families and he has been given almost no attention. While some of the other groups headed by well-known PR bureaucrats, we've had them on the show, as well, are trying to suppress this information. Joining us is Stanley Hilton. We are honored to have you on the show Stanley.

<snip>
Suddenly, they had a cover story and two AP articles in the New York Daily News, all in the film, where they said, "Lo and behold, 8:30 in the morning, the CIA was running a drill of flying jetliners into buildings in New York and D.C." It just so happened at that very minute they were running this that NORAD stood down for an hour and half, the 58 minutes in different cases. . . .
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/SH031403.html

And then there's this:
Agency planned exercise on Sept. 11 built around a plane crashing into a building
By John J. Lumpkin, Associated Press

WASHINGTON — In what the government describes as a bizarre coincidence, one U.S. intelligence agency was planning an exercise last Sept. 11 in which an errant aircraft would crash into one of its buildings. But the cause wasn't terrorism -- it was to be a simulated accident.

Officials at the Chantilly, Va.-based National Reconnaissance Office had scheduled an exercise that morning in which a small corporate jet would crash into one of the four towers at the agency's headquarters building after experiencing a mechanical failure.

The agency is about four miles from the runways of Washington Dulles International Airport.

Agency chiefs came up with the scenario to test employees' ability to respond to a disaster, said spokesman Art Haubold. No actual plane was to be involved -- to simulate the damage from the crash, some stairwells and exits were to be closed off, forcing employees to find other ways to evacuate the building.

"It was just an incredible coincidence that this happened to involve an aircraft crashing into our facility," Haubold said. "As soon as the real world events began, we canceled the exercise."
http://www.boston.com/news/packages/sept11/anniversary/wire_stories/0903_plane_exercise.htm

may not be a phony outfit after all. Do you think they may really go after the truth, and then tell us what it is, even with people like BFEE servant Lee Hamilton (the commission's leading Democrat and, Vice-chair) sitting on the panel? I won't get my hopes up too much ...

but at least the questions will be asked. Where was our air defense and who ordered them to stand down?

Specifically, do the powers-that-be really destroy everything? Or do they only destroy the "surface" documents and let the most crucial evidence survive on the assumption that no one will ever be able to obtain them? I've often wondered what might come to light if the archives of the Federal Government, the CIA, and so forth would be opened to the public. I'm thinking less about things like 9/11 and the Kennedy Assassination than stories no one has ever dreamed of.

I tend to believe (maybe it's just wishful thinking) that critical documents will be preserved, partly for the reason mentioned above (i.e., that the "wrong people" are never supposed to obtain access) and partly because I think that the eminences gris truly believe the machinations they undertake are right and noble and that future generations will properly evaluate their deeds when they have claimed their rightful place as titans of history.

As an example, the Nazis had no initial reluctance whatsoever in documenting the extermination of the Jews and horrific medical experiments on prisoners of war. They fully expected to be praised and honored by future generations for their glorious contributions to humankind. It wasn't until they knew they were going to get the crap kicked out of them that they frantically began trying to conceal the evidence of their crimes.

Here is a quote from Joseph Goebbels, delivered to his Ministry staff two weeks before the end: "Gentlemen, in a hundred years' time they will be showing a fine color film of the terrible days we are living through. Wouldn't you like to play a part in that film? Hold out now, so that a hundred years from now the audience will not hoot and whistle when you appear on the screen."

Françoise

...as described in its two interim reports does not at all address the issues of the anthrax attacks on Congress and the press nor the obvious link between domestic commercial institutions and the events of 911 and anthrax. The domestic rabbit trails are to be left deliberately unexplored because they lead in directions other than those that can be controlled with canned responses from government offices.