Top-secret 9-11 conf. call may shed new light on Bush's shoot-down order

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/030908/usnews/8sept11.htm

Nation & World 9/8/03
Pieces of the Puzzle
A top-secret conference call on September 11 could shed new light on the terrorist attacks


...Shoot-down order. The transcript may also shed light on the military's response to Dictator Bush's unprecedented order to shoot down any hijacked civilian airplane. Pentagon sources say Bush communicated the order to Cheney almost immediately after Flight 77 hit the Pentagon and the FAA, for the first time ever, ordered all domestic flights grounded. "There are unanswered questions," says Richard Ben-Veniste, a commission member and former federal prosecutor, as to whether the shoot-down order "had been rehearsed for, whether it had been prepared for, and what measures were in place to protect the Capitol," believed to be the hijackers' original target for Flight 77.

-Lori Price
Petition to Senate - Investigate Oddities of 9/11:
http://www.petitiononline.com/11601TFS/petition.html

The command, buried in a mountain in Colorado Springs, Colo., was dependent on radars operated by the Federal Aviation Administration for information about the four fuel-heavy aircraft hijacked by the terrorists. NORAD even had to rely on FAA satellites to track military jets inside U.S. airspace, officials say. The transcript could help explain why it took the FAA 14 minutes to notify NORAD that American Airlines Flight 77--originally bound for Los Angeles from Washington's Dulles International Airport, but way off course over West Virginia--had been hijacked and was headed back toward Washington. Could the military, in those 14 minutes, have scrambled fighter jets and diverted the plane before it slammed into the Pentagon?

If NORAD and the FAA were working togheter to monitor any airbourne threats inside US borders, why would it take 14 minutes to convey the information re: a plane off-course and headed toward DC? U.S. News is implying there's a reasonble excuse to not lay blame on NORAD and/or the FAA.

What I did get out of this article is that our superstructure in regard to national safety was weak, and still is weak, thanks to people, agencies being given supposedly plausible reasons to be let off the hook.

"What I did get out of this article is that our superstructure in regard to national safety was weak, and still is weak, thanks to people, agencies being given supposedly plausible reasons to be let off the hook."

I can't figure out what you are trying to say in the above sentence, but the whole thing sounds like an attempt to help bolster what the WHouse would consider a worse case scenario (LIHOP). The idea being to divert attention away from MIHOP scenarios, and if necessary, make it seem like 9/11 resulted from the term Clinton used to use: "bureaucratic snafu."

Would you buy that? Me neither.

I've signed the petition and am passing it on. There are many, many questions still unanswered.

Thank you for signing it and for passing the petition along.
:)-Lori

Thanks

>>Dictator Bush's unprecedented order to shoot down any hijacked civilian airplane

Even if it was true, I am not sure that given the unprecedented attack it would have been the wrong thing to do...tough call to make, but like I said, under the circumstances on 9/11 probably only reasonable thing to do....glad it didn't come to that. Hope it never does.

"unprecedented attack"

You know about Pearl Harbor, Remember The Maine, Gulf Of Tonkin etc., right? 9/11 wasn't unprecedented. To the Bunnypants crowd, it was very necessary, to galvanize the public for a war to steal oil in the ME etc.

Of all the things the Bush admin has done, shooting down a plane in Penn is the one thing I am willing to let them off the hook for. It was a stark yet clear choice, if it happened. Any Pres would have to be given the sake to not have his brand image hurt by the order of shooting down a plane full of US citizens.

As far as wrecking the economy and having several generations left to pay for it, changing the Home of the Brave to the land of the scared pre-emptive warfare bit, tack on the cost of Iraq to do what we need to do and look at hundreds of billions, and acting like a dumbass the whole way through????

Not willing to let him off the hook for that or the tax cuts for the greediest among us during a time our country is on the brink.

but it did. we shot down the plane over pennsylvania.

No way will I be convinced of SNAFU. What I do find interesting was the response from the AF to various base commanders calling in for instructions. One base commander volunteered that he could have hot cannons in 5 minutes, A-A missles in 20...he was told to get them completely loaded....why? Wouldn't cannon ammunintion suffice for the 1st interceptors? I assume they'd close in and make visuals before firing anyway....so why the need for "everything" when the facts told the AF that interceptors would be delayed 20 minutes?

Unfortunately, the guy who gave the orders died last year....

I think the actual details can be found at: www.cooperativeresearch.org

They should have to explain why standard operating procedure was NOT followed on 9-11.

Asking why S.O.P. wasn't followed on 9/11 is a good question, but first, let's find out what DID happen on 9/11.

Actually, the fact that S.O.P. wasn't followed is a strong suggestion of MIHOP.

Stories recounting the events of 9-11 never mention the fact that on that fateful morning Dick Cheney was managing a National Reconnaisance Office drill-exercise that featured an aircraft crashing into a government building. Cheney was in the Situation Room that morning, for that stated purpose.

And oddly enough, the pilot of the plane that crashed into the Pentagon had, as his last Navy mission, helped craft Pentagon response plans in the event of a commercial ariliner hitting the Pentagon. Charles Burlingame.

Some info on these matters at http://www.questionsquestions.net/docs04/0514_coincidence.html

1st I've heard about that Grasswire. You have to wonder about all these coincidences, they just keep piling up and up.

Yet given that they can trash the Constitution,
creating their own law would suffice.

I have seen a few people mention the possibility that on Sept 11 George Bush was EXCLUDED from the decision making process. I have not concentrated on this aspect before because there seemed to be no evidence for it.

However, this transcript seems to provide that evidence. So the question I would like to see answered is:

Why wasn't President Bush involved in this conference call? If, as they claim, President Bush would be required to authorise a shoot down, why would he not be personally involved in the long conference call that addressed this issue?

Surely this one call was the most important decsision to be made by Bush that day, even more important than the response to the attacks, because it involved the immediate defense of the US, something that could not be put off for a day or even an hour.

That is why I question the accusation that Bush ran and hid during the attack. It seems possible that rather than Bush hiding, what was really going on was Bush being kept out of the way. Is it possible that Bush was not the commander in chief on Sept 11? Is it possible that Cheney usurped Bush and is possibly STILL usurping Bush?

Is George W Bush really the President, or has Cheney assumed that role?

On edit: I forgot to say did you notice that they are calling it "President Bush's unprecedented order to shoot down any hijacked civilian airplane", when in fact Bush wasn't even involved in this conference call, and the only person I have heard mention a shootdown order was Cheney?

yes, yes.

Still no one seems too interested in the fact that Cheney was running an exercise involving aircraft on that fateful morning. Was it a cover for MIHOP? It certainly explains the standing down and the confusion here and there.

that was intercepted from the ???? who had said that the exercise was on and tomorrow would be the day for the attack). Wasn't that leak the one that sent Chenney on a hunt for the Senator who leaked this intelligene? I think he wanted to give them all lie detector tests, IIRC....maybe getting a little to close to the truth?

together in the White House, and that Bush Sr left very early that morning before the media showed up - as if he knew they would have a reason for being there.

The Vice President doesn't live at the White House, and it's a little odd that Daddy Bush should drop in for a visit, since Junior was in Florida at the time.

Could Poppy & Uncle Dick have been plotting out their strategy for the next morning?

Look, I have a firm belief that Bushco has a lot to answer for, and is hiding a lot. But in LBN, don't change the actual headline and don't alter actual quotes from the piece. I'd like to count on DU's LBN forum as a solid, objective news source. My 2 cents.

Hence, I reproduced the exact headline in *this* area a well as the snippet from the piece.

I altered one word: as to calling Bush 'president', that I cannot do. I guess you don't have a problem with calling Bush your president, LOL.

Cheers,
-Lori Price

The one over Pennsylvania....I don't know the exact timeline, but it crashed well after the planes hit the WTC. If they DIDN'T shoot it down, my question is, why NOT? They SHOULD have.

n/t