"The New York Wing was the first aircraft in the air over ground zero after September 11"

If we reflect the complete stop of air traffic it seems to be a lot of exemptions:
- the C130 and EC130
- the helicopters in New York
- the white plane in Washinton
- the Saudi evacuation planes
- and now these CAP units

http://washtimes.com/national/20070302-012443-6934r.htm

In due respect of the Civilians - but why not hand over the NORAD to the head of the firebrigades ?

Thes try to cover up who was responsible for the air security. Air policing is done by the military - and they did not do their job. It is as simple as that.

But I'll tell you, I've never heard of Military air patrols prior to 9/11. Where did they patrol?

Thanks in advance.

air policing is the official military terminus tecnicus. It does not mean to be in the air all the time - but to be on Quick Reaction Alert.
Ready to investigate, escort, threaten, shoot or simply have a look on a situation.

The history is decades old . especially in europe we were all very aware of that in times of cold war. But the U.S.A. has its own history of air policing too. Remember the times of "UFOs" and the hijacking of planes to Cuba (unteill the U.S.A. and cuba vice versa agreed to threaten ANY hijacker with lifelong sentences. Yes there are agreements, believe it or not.)

There are many institutions in this world which exist but we are not aware of every day. I.e. a financial police. Or laws concerning the outer space.

Although well trained and equipped the U.S. air defence did not fulfill their task.

this cannot have been known by any hijacker, it cannot be part of any planning that an institution fails to do its work.

No arsonist can imagine that 4 (four)firebrigades come too late, have no water, lost a tire, are sick or whatever.

Four times failure. And who was held responsible ? Compare it with the firebrigades: the public would call for responsibilies ....

In a normal society in a modern state it has nothing to do with it. So why does the Bush administration organize a mixtire of responsibilities in every part of life ?

It reminds me to Nazi times when Blockwart and any party member tried to intervene in the society.

in war times it was a daily situation that i.e. a SS-general and a Wehrmacht general were descussing their authority in the special cases. It happened on every level. In the end it was a question of "leadership", that is the brutality of using the own power. This as a principal destroys ever society because rules do not weigh anymore. In teh above case we observe a lane back in time and into the future. The lane back seems to cover up the air policing regulations, the future is up to the American people. I did my warning here by characterizing the principal, the rest is not my business.

The CAP has been around since WWII. Bush has nothingto do with it.

Civil Air Patrol was founded in December 1941, one week before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, by more
than 150,000 citizens who were concerned about the defense of America's coastline. Under the jurisdiction of
the Army Air Forces, CAP pilots flew more than one-half million hours, were credited with sinking two enemy
submarines and rescued hundreds of crash survivors during World War II. On July 1, 1946, President Harry
Truman established CAP as a federally chartered benevolent civilian corporation, and Congress passed Public
Law 557 on May 26, 1948, making CAP the auxiliary of the new U.S. Air Force. CAP was charged with three
primary missions – aerospace education, cadet programs and emergency services.

http://www.cap.gov/documents/CAP_Fact_Sheet_1206.pdf

"Bush has nothingto do with it"
With the sheer existence sine WWII. For sure not.

We are talking about the appearance at 9/11 and nowadays. It is not necessary to rewrite what I could read in the article which I linked myself.

Tell me instead why we do not hear anything about airpolicing and who was responsible and why CAP shall do new duties as if they had not existed before.

You LARED tell us. I told and you asked untill now - now it is your turn.

You found it interesting that the CAP was allowed to fly right after 9/11? So what?

You seem to think the military routinely did some sort of policing of the skies, prior to 9/11. That is not accurate.

You seem to believe there was some cover up of who provides air security. It is not clear how you came to that belief. Somehow the CAP seems to fit into your thought process.

I guess the bottom line is you think the Military screwed up on 9/11. I guess that's a fair assessment, but frankly they were not in the business of watching for hijacked airliners being flown into buildings, so the failure is not exactly a surprise.

Sorry - i saw you as an experienced Duer.

- some capabilities of F-16: http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=534760255699570420

- airpolicing in general:
http://www.luftwaffe.de/portal/a/luftwaffe/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMnMz0vM0Y_QjzKLN483CTMHSUGYxvqRaGIBhgihoJRUfW99X4_83FT9AP2C3NCIckdHRQAoGL3H/delta/base64xml/L2dJQSEvUUt3QS80SVVFLzZfN19MOU4!?yw_contentURL=/01DB060000000001/W26NSAVU930INFODE/content.jsp

- Quick Reaction Alert in general:
http://www.luftwaffe.de/portal/a/luftwaffe/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMnMz0vM0Y_QjzKLN483CTMHSUGYxvqRaGIBhgihoJRUfW99X4_83FT9AP2C3NCIckdHRQAoGL3H/delta/base64xml/L2dJQSEvUUt3QS80SVVFLzZfN19MOU8!?yw_contentURL=/01DB060000000001/W26NSBC5498INFODE/content.jsp

- responsibilities in the U.S.A.:
"Besides Homestead, alert birds also sit armed and ready at Tyndall; Langley AFB, Va.; Otis Air National Guard Base, Mass.; Portland International Airport, Ore.; March ARB, Calif.; and Ellington Field, Texas.
"http://www.af.mil/news/airman/1299/home2.htm




- normal business in the U.S.A.: 67 intercepts in the year BEFORE 9/11:
http://www.wanttoknow.info/020812ap

And your statement, Lared,

"You seem to think the military routinely did some sort of policing of the skies, prior to 9/11. That is not accurate."

is not only unfounded, just a blabber in the air,
but astonishingly also WRONG.

The CT'er seem to believe in some level of complicity because on 9/11 the military should have been able to stop the airliners but did not. Prior to 9/11 they basically monitored restricted airspace and helped out during aircraft incidents. There had never been an air based attacked on American soil until 9/11.

The reality of it is that on 9/11 the military was focused on enemies coming from outside the border. No operational personnel were ready to deal with the event on 9/11. Hijacked planes landed, they were not crashed into buildings. incidents in the sky were singular events, not four at a time.

Somehow CT'er expect perfection out of civilian and military functions on 9/11 or it indicates not human failure, but a government covert action. The reason they expect perfection is because we spend a lot of money on these things. As if spending money makes everything work better, even though we have thousands of years of recorded history telling us it doesn't work that way.

It really boils down to do you believe we (the American institutions) got caught asleep and the wheel on 9/11, or we acted as a conduit of 9/11. I like the KISS theory - we were not prepared.

Answer we this, why would our military be prepared for a 9/11 style attack. Forget the money argument?

I am not interested in beliefs of CTers or your belief about their belief.

I stated some facts With .mil URLs.

You in comparison tell us the OCT like
"... the military was focused on enemies coming from outside the border." Proof ?

It is completely irrelevant anyway because air policing is never focused on enemies but on air emergencies including enemies. But also: sick pilots, eletric failure, escort needs and so on. Indeoendent of directions of the aircraft.

Or this one: "There had never been an air based attacked .." -completely irrelevant. The interceptors did not even scramble - so who cares about "perfection" or the kind of attack ?

Again compare it with four firebrigades not even opening the doors to get out to the streets. It is irrelevant if they are later unable to stop the fire - they did not appear to try to do their duty.

In comparison to what you say I tell a fact: when i.e. C-130 was able to monitor two places of crime no interceptor was seen there. Helicopters were above Manhattan (do you really need one of the thousands of vidoe clips to prove that ?) but no fighter jet.

You are a CTer - an OCTer. With the theory of "lack of perfection", "focussed somewhere else" and so on. I have no theory. It is you.

You said:


I would think the attack on Pearl Harbor by the Japanese would qualify.

Pardon and enlighten me - but as much as I know Hawaii was not a part of the U.S.A until the end of the fifties.

Only to be exact. I agree in the understanding that the U.S. airforce was always aware of possible attacks from anywhere. See i.e. the possibility of submarine launched missiles very close to the coast border or - like in WWII, see the initial article - from submarines even in the mississippi.

but it was annexed by the U.S. in 1898. It was a territory in the interim period - a status that is sort of a limited version of a state. The territory generally has limited self-government, but the inhabitants don't have representation in the national legislative bodies. There are still a handful of U.S. territories - Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are the only ones I can think of off-hand.

It says that the status is dubious in international law. If you compare it with the french terriitories of Martinique, the Portuguese Azores, the Dutch Carribean islands, the Spanish Mellila and Ceuta and so on. They are all European, represented, got the Euro and so on. In the Japanese view they attacked a fleet on an occupied territory, they did not at all attack the U.S.A.

But that is only BTW. :-)))

I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find someone who claims that U.S. embassies in other countries are "U.S. soil", whether or not that is an internationally accepted interpretation.

puerto rico isnt a territory, it is a commonwealth. it has more self governing rights than a territory.

I confess I don't understand all the various non-state systems we (the U.S.A.) employ. There seem to be quite a few different types with some having distinctly different rights from each other.

I forgot about Hawaii and it was 60 odd years ago. My point still stands that pre 9/11 no operational people were considering a 9/11 type of attack.

who just on 9/11 coincidentally visited the CIA headquarters in Langley to confer about 9/11 like attacks.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=a910clarkeconference

Counterterrorism “tsar” Richard Clarke, directing a video conference with top officials, asks Joint Chiefs of Staff Vice Chairman Richard Myers, “I assume NORAD has scrambled fighters and AWACS. How many? Where?” Myers replies, “Not a pretty picture, Dick. We are in the middle of Vigilant Warrior, a NORAD exercise, but… Otis has launched two birds toward New York. Langley is trying to get two up now . The AWACS are at Tinker and not on alert.” Vigilant Warrior may be a mistaken reference to either the on-going war game Vigilant Guardian, or perhaps another exercise called Amalgam Warrior (see 9:28 a.m. September 11, 2001).

Otis Air National Guard Base is in Massachusetts, 188 miles east of New York City; Langley is in Virginia, 129 miles south of Washington; Tinker Air Force Base is in Oklahoma. Clarke asks, “Okay, how long to CAP over D.C.?” Myers replies, “Fast as we can. Fifteen minutes?” Note that according to Clarke, Myers is surrounded by generals and colonels as he says this (which contradicts Myers’ own accounts of where he is and what he’s doing). The first fighters don’t reach Washington until 30 minutes or more later.

Entity Tags: Amalgam Warrior, North American Aerospace Defense Command, Vigilant Warrior, Richard B. Myers, Vigilant Guardian, Otis Air National Guard Base, Richard A. Clarke