Just for starters on the scrambled jets issue...And, Ruppert has cited approvingly the work of far rightist (so far right the Hoover Inst. found him embarrassing an fired him) Anthony Sutton, "Trilaterials Over Washington) and Chossudovsky has reprinted in his magazine and website, pieces from LaRouche's EIR, as well as long ridiculous pieces on HAARP as weather modification.
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/2000-July/003833.html [R-G] Re: GUILTY FOR 9-11: BUSH, RUMSFELD, MYERS by Jared Israel and Illarion Bykov Bob Enoch bobenoch at shaw.ca Tue Jul 4 23:24:13 MDT 2000
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Pugliese"
> Message: 12
> Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 22:04:42 -0000
> From: "chipberlet" <cberlet at igc.org>
> Subject: Re: Trilaterals Over Washington by Anthony Sutton
>
> "Combat Ready" is a term used by the U.S. military to describe a
> unit
> with a sufficient number of properly trained troops; and a full
> inventory of equipment and ordanance that is functional and with the
> proper maintenance, so as to be able to be deployed into combat. It
> DOES NOT mean the people in the unit are sitting around on their
>
> butts on benches ready to leap into tanks and jets in ten minutes.
>
> Many "combat ready" units are Reserve units or National Guard units
> and most of the people in those units hold full-time jobs outside of
> their military commitment. Some "combat ready" units are part of the
> full-time military and live on or near their bases, but even in
> these
> units some people are on leave or off duty.
>
> NONE OF THESE PEOPLE ARE AUTOMATICALLY ON DUTY FOR ANYTHING UNLESS
> THEY ARE ASSIGNED TO A SPECIFIC TASK.
>
> We can agree that it would have been a good idea to have several jet
> pilots and several jet planes assigned to alert duty and on call for
> a scramble (5-10 minutes to be airborne) at Andrews field. There
> were
> not. It is certainly appropriate to ask why not.
>
> Nontheless, the duty assigments on 9/11 for scramble alert jet
> aircraft on the east coast were Langley in coastal Virginia to cover
> Washington, D.C. and Otis on the coast on the Cape in Massachusetts
> to cover New York City (and Boston).
>
> How do I know this? Because the pilots have given interviews
> describing their duty assignment and how the were scrambled on 9/ 11.
> Were their other bases with scramble-ready jets? Quite probably
> there were.
>
> My argument is that the article claiming that there were actually
> jets ready to scramble and take off at Andrews (because some web
> page
> described some of the jet units stationed there as "combat ready") is
> flat out wrong and based on total ignorance of the meaning of the
> term "combat ready." There are plenty of DOD documents explaining
> the
> term "combat ready." And "combat ready 24/7" is just a slogan to
> keep units on their toes as a goal, because in actual practice, when
> a "combat ready" unit is called up from the Reserves or National
>
> Guard, the DOD goal is 24-72 hours before embarcation. Even an
> active duty full time military unit can take many hours to get
> assembled for transport.
>
> There is NO EVIDENCE that has been produced so far that demonstrates
> that there were jets ready to scramble at Andrews.
>
> -Chip Berlet
An attempt, at least.....thank you.
The DCANG, based at Andrews, describes its mission as "the defense of the
District of Columbia"
Now, it could be that they meant to say "defense against attacks that take
24-72 hours to develop" That's possible.
Maybe the "Home of Air Force One" sends ALL their pilots home at the same
time,
I guess that's possible too.(all ang units retain a nucleus of trained
personnel at all times)
So if it seems to you reasonable to believe that the main base for the
defense of the capital was
incapacitated because all their personnel were too busy, or all off duty at
the same time,
then I guess Americans should be very afraid.
Not much of a return on all those trillions......
None of this, however, explains why none of those bases "chip" describes as
being "up" that day (Langley and Otis)
managed to scramble a single fighter until it was too late.
Militaries have procedures for things for good reason. They mean that the
Command can set procedures in advance, so that the danger of enemy surprise
is reduced .
Surprise attacks are designed to exploit existing procedures, so far as they
are known.
This one succeeded because sop was NOT followed.There is no doubt that sop
for a highjacking, or even an un-explained course deviation, is (of course)
to get up in the air and go have a look
How could any terrorist organization assume that the USAF, having procedures in place which would have foiled the attempt, would somehow fail to carry out the most obvious of these measures, such as scrambling a plane or two? Is Osama(remember him?) a mind reader, or possessed of psychic powers? Almost two hours passed with highjacked planes filling the skies, and nary an F-16 in sight. This violates not only common sense but the regs. of the FAA, NATO, and the USAF. It is therefore difficult to avoid the inference that someone senior ordered the jets to stay put. Bob