Weldon: 9/11 Commission Denial "Absolutely Unbelievable

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Weldon: 9/11 Commission Denial "Absolutely Unbelievable

Postby proldic » Fri Sep 16, 2005 10:09 am

Tampa Tribune 9/16/05<br><br>Weldon: Atta Papers Destroyed on Orders <br><br>By DONNA DE LA CRUZ <br>Associated Press Writer<br><br>WASHINGTON (AP) -- A Pentagon employee was ordered to destroy documents that identified Mohamed Atta as a terrorist two years before the 2001 attacks, a congressman said Thursday.<br><br>The employee is prepared to testify next week before the Senate Judiciary Committee and was expected to identify the person who ordered him to destroy the large volume of documents, said Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa.<br><br>Weldon declined to identify the employee, citing confidentiality matters. Weldon described the documents as "2.5 terabytes" - as much as one-fourth of all the printed materials in the Library of Congress, he added.<br><br>A Senate Judiciary Committee aide said the witnesses for Wednesday hearing had not been finalized and could not confirm Weldon's comments.<br><br>Army Maj. Paul Swiergosz, a Pentagon spokesman, said officials have been "fact-finding in earnest for quite some time."<br><br>"We've interviewed 80 people involved with Able Danger, combed through hundreds of thousands of documents and millions of e-mails and have still found no documentation of Mohamed Atta," Swiergosz said.<br><br>He added that certain data had to be destroyed in accordance with existing regulations regarding "intelligence data on U.S. persons."<br><br>Weldon has said that Atta, the mastermind of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and three other hijackers were identified in 1999 by a classified military intelligence unit known as "Able Danger," which determined they could be members of an al-Qaida cell.<br> <br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>On Wednesday, former members of the Sept. 11 commission dismissed the "Able Danger" assertions. One commissioner, ex-Sen. Slade Gorton, R-Wash., said, "Bluntly, it just didn't happen and that's the conclusion of all 10 of us."<br><br>Weldon responded angrily to Gorton's assertions.<br><br>"It's absolutely unbelievable that a commission would say this program just didn't exist," Weldon said Thursday.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>Pentagon officials said this month they had found three more people who recall an intelligence chart identifying Atta as a terrorist prior to the Sept. 11 attacks.<br><br>Two military officers, Army Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott, have come forward to support Weldon's claims.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SEPT_11_HIJACKERS?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2005-09-16-07-24-41">customwire.ap.org/dynamic...6-07-24-41</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
proldic
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Weldon: 9/11 Commission Denial "Absolutely Unbeliev

Postby heath7 » Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:36 pm

Boy oh boy, this just won't go away!<!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :D --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/happy.gif ALT=":D"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br><br>Given Weldon's politics, I wonder what he's trying to accomplish with his refusal to be silent about 'Able Danger'.<br><br>Is it too early to get our hopes up that this could topple the 9/11 house of cards? <p></p><i></i>
heath7
 
Posts: 293
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 9:44 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Do you remember

Postby proldic » Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:37 pm

Senator Dayton about Norad, and how he moved his office for awhile because he felt in danger?<br><br>Wonder where he fits in all this. <p></p><i></i>
proldic
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: BUDDY BUDDY

Postby seemslikeadream » Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:48 pm

BUDDY BUDDY<br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://www.gsnmagazine.com.nyud.net:8090/images/aug_05/atta.jpg" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--><br><br>DO THE MATH <br><br>24 MINUTES<br><br>THERE MUST HAVE BEEN A MILITARY ORDER<br><br>http://www.bushflash.com/buddy.html <br><br><br>http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/8/24/124834/678<br><br>DIA Agents were ordered to put yellow Post-its over Atta's face and the face's of 3 other 9/11 terrorists<br><br>"We were directed to take those 3M yellow stickers and place them over the faces of Atta and the other terrorists and pretend they didn't exist," the intelligence officer told GSN."<br><br>Intel agents Michael Shaffer and Scott Philpott have confirmed Rep. Weldon's claims that a chart with Atta's face, soon the photos of 3 other members of the 9-11 terror team, were known to DIA team Able Danger by early 2000. <br><br>This diary will show that Pete Schoomaker and Philip Zelikow are two of the main Perpetraitors in this scandal, that they deliberately withheld information from the President of the United States that would have prevented 9/11, that they and their neo-con rulers Let It Happen On Purpose.<br><br>Of this there can no longer be any doubt. <br><br><br><br>MUST READ - RE: ABLE DANGER INFO<br>http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4447706<br>Hopsicker: Able Danger Intel Exposed "Protected" Heroin Trafficking<br>http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x149481<br><br>Able Danger: Short Time-line<br>http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4441903<br>Was Able Danger Shut Down After It Detected Condi-PRC Spy Ring?<br>http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4494524<br><br><br>Senate May Hold Hearings on Able Danger, Info Sharing <br>Thursday, August 25, 2005<br><br><br>Able Danger (search) is the code name for a military-intelligence unit that apparently learned a year before the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks that lead hijacker Mohamed Atta (search) and other terrorists were already in the United States.<br><br>One of the central Able Danger claims — that military lawyers blocked the sharing of the Atta information from the FBI in the late summer and early fall of 2000 — will be a focus of the committee's if a hearing takes place, FOX News has confirmed.<br><br>Some analysts involved with Able Danger have recently gone public with their findings, saying they were discouraged from looking further into Atta, and their attempts to share their information with the FBI were thwarted, because Atta was a legal foreign visitor at the time.<br><br>"This story needs to be told. The American people need to be told what could have been done to prevent 3,000 people from losing their lives," said Rep. Curt Weldon (search), R-Pa.<br><br>Weldon drew attention to Able Danger by speaking about it on the House floor and publicly calling for the Sept. 11 commission to explain why the intelligence information wasn't detailed in its final report.<br><br>Some Able Danger analysts, including Army Reserve Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer (search) and Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott (search), claim that in October 2003, they told commission staffers of the presence of Al Qaeda operatives in the United States in 2000.<br><br><br>more<br>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,166800,00.html <br><br><br>Senate May Hold Hearings on Able Danger, Info Sharing <br>http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1727804&mesg_id=1727804<br><br><br><br>Condi in Middle of Able Danger ‘Cover Up’" <br> <br>Weldon is now saying that the Pentagon cover up of able danger “will shake the country to its roots."<br><br>...<br><br>If the claims made by the Able Danger participants and Rep. Weldon are confirmed, former National Security Adviser Rice and other Bush Administration officials will face a barrage of questions. First would likely be an inquiry into why the administration unceremoniously axed the Able Danger project in May of 2001. <br><br>During an August 20th interview on C-Span’s Washington Journal, Able Danger member Lt. Col. Schaffer posed a question of his own:<br><br>"The American public should ask themselves: Why would the leadership of DoD shut down, terminate, a project which was aimed at targeting al-Qaeda offensively? ...<br><br>"Why would they shut that down, four months before 9/11? That’s the big question right now, we have to ask that. I don’t know the answer to that question because I know my side of the story, I know that when a 2 star general got in my face and said, “I’m a 2 star general and you are not. You are to stop your support of Able Danger.” That’s what I know personally. But the question has to be: Who told him to do that? ...<br><br>"And why did the rest of the project, I’m talking about Special Operations Command and the Army portion of this, why was that terminated? <br><br>"Those are the questions that need to be asked."<br><br><br>more... <br><br>http://www.theinternationalpost.com/z30082005.html <br><br>Congressman Weldon -- Why now? Why ever?<br>http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4500623<br><br>Three more assert Pentagon knew of 9/11 ringleader By Will Dunham <br><br>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Three more people associated with a secret U.S. military intelligence team have asserted that the program identified September 11 ringleader Mohammed Atta as an Al Qaeda suspect inside the United States more than a year before the 2001 attacks, the Pentagon said on Thursday. <br><br>The Pentagon said a three-week review had turned up no documents to back up the assertion, but did not rule out that such documents relating to the classified operation had been destroyed.<br><br>Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott and Army Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer last month came forward with statements that a secret intelligence program code-named "Able Danger" had identified Atta, the lead hijacker in the attacks that killed 3,000 people, in early 2000. Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Curt Weldon (news, bio, voting record), vice chairman of the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee, also went public with the allegations.<br><br>Pat Downs, a senior policy analyst in the office of the undersecretary of defense for intelligence, told reporters that as part of the review, the Pentagon interviewed 80 people.<br><br>Downs said that three more people, as well as Phillpott and Shaffer, recalled the existence of an intelligence chart identifying Atta by name. Four of the five recalled a photo of Atta accompanying the chart, Downs said.<br><br>Pentagon officials declined to identify the three by name, but said they were an analyst with the military's Special Operations Command, an analyst with the Land Information Warfare Assessment Center and a contractor who supported the center.<br><br>Downs said all five were considered "credible people."<br><br>But officials said an exhaustive search of tens of thousands of documents and electronic files related to Able Danger failed to find the chart or other documents corroborating the identification of Atta. Phillpott has said Atta was identified by Able Danger by January or February of 2000.<br><br>"We have not discovered that chart," Downs said.<br>http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050901/pl_nm/security_attacks_pentagon_dc<br><br>Three more assert Pentagon knew of 9/11 ringleader<br>http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1744982&mesg_id=1744982<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Weldon can not blame Clinton - Clinton was NEVER told <br> Able Danger is a Pandora's Box that will blow up in the RW's face. <br>Re-open the 9/11 investigation? BRING IT ON! Here's why: <br><br>So the responsibility for stopping DIA program Able Danger, which had Identified Atta and 3 other hijackers and linked them to 56 other al-Queda terrorists overseas, has been laid at the feet of Bill Clinton--except he and Richard Clarke were never told about it at all. <br><br>That's right. Bill Clinton was never told about Able Danger and the ID of Atta because Richard Clarke was never told about AD. How do I know? He never wrote about it in his book, nor did he testify about it's existence before the 9-11 Commission! <br><br>You see Richard Clarke was known for being obsessed with Osama Bin Laden and HE was the guy the neo-con moles did not want to find out about Atta and the gang. Schoomaker and the neo-cons knew telling the FBI would inform Clarke and then Mr. Laser Beam himself, President of the United State William Jefferson Clinton, would have gotten involved--and the Pearl Harbor-type attack would never take place (the neo-cons talked about the need for a Pearl Harbor-type attack before the PNAC Plan would be accepted by the American people--so when one presented itself, they let it happen).<br><br>General Pete Schoomaker, who were later heavily rewarded by the neo-cons in the Bush Administration, blocked the upward motion of the DIA information by having Shaffer and Philpott meet with Pentagon lawyers opinions--lawyers who were rubberstamping ridiculous legal opinions to carry out the neo-con plan. These certain people were neo-cons in the Clinton Administration, covertly carrying out the PNAC plan to let a Pearl Harbor-type attack occur so Iraq and 6 other countries could be invaded.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br> <br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=seemslikeadream@rigorousintuition>seemslikeadream</A> at: 9/16/05 12:51 pm<br></i>
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

ROVER RETIRING?/

Postby dbeach » Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:58 pm

<!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://bushspeaks.com/home.asp?did=202&dir=b">bushspeaks.com/home.asp?did=202&dir=b</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
dbeach
 
Posts: 2650
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 7:40 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: BUDDY BUDDY

Postby dbeach » Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:59 pm

<!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://bushspeaks.com/home.asp?did=202&dir=b">bushspeaks.com/home.asp?did=202&dir=b</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>quick laff from the evil jester of king georges court.<br><br>King George Bush the second= KGB II <p></p><i></i>
dbeach
 
Posts: 2650
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 7:40 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Weldon: 9/11 Commission Denial "Absolutely Unbeliev

Postby mourningdove » Fri Sep 16, 2005 5:23 pm

When I had 1st read of Able Danger, I had thought it might be Weldon's intention to lay the blame on Clinton. His major point had seemed to be that the Pentagon prevented the FBI from being given information. I had wondered how that would work, considering the following:<br><br>The August 6, 2001 PDB had mentioned that there were approximately 70 full field bin Laden-related investigations.<br><br>Agent Ken Williams and the Phoenix memo.<br><br>Coleen Rowley and the blocked investigation into Moussaoui's apartment and computer.<br><br>Attorney David Schippers claims of knowing the date, method, and targets of the attack weeks previous, but Ashcroft ignoring his multiple attempts to contact him. Robert Wright was the agent involved with Schippers and his investigation into funding was blocked early 2001.<br><br>John O'Neil, Richard Clarke, etc.<br><br>So apparently the claim that the FBI wasn't aware that something was going down was ridiculous.<br>C-Span, both yesterday and today, had shown Weldon's smackdown of the 9/11 Commission. He had made quite a few interesting comments, such as that Jamie Gorelick had phoned his office after the article re: Able Danger was published, to state that she was not involved. He also stated that much more evidence will be available at Wednesday's hearing unless gag orders are placed on individuals between now and then...<br>He had mentioned a 3 hour briefing between Chiefs of Staff, attended partially by a Richard Shiffron, Stephen Carbone, and an Admiral Wilson. I think I have the names right, but the spelling may be incorrect. Weldons mention of this briefing was to bring to attention that information was discussed in 2001, and will potentially be harmful to both the Clinton and bush administration. <br>He had also made statements regarding Rice and Stanford, something about the Chinese. I'll have to go back and watch that section...<br>I haven't read Weldon's book, and have no plans to. I had read of his claims re: Iran, and had the impression that he was just a mouthpiece for the administration, pressing for another invasion.<br>But listening to him at the conference, and hearing him say that one of the people that had perished was his neighbor and former classmate, has me thinking that perhaps he is sincerely trying to get to the bottom of why information is being suppressed. <br>I don't think he thinks 9/11 was an "inside job", but any further investigations have to eventually lead to that conclusion. <br>Wednesday's hearing should be interesting, and I commend Specter for allowing it to commence. <br><br> <br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
mourningdove
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2005 5:51 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Weldon: 9/11 Commission Denial "Absolutely Unbeliev

Postby seemslikeadream » Fri Sep 16, 2005 5:29 pm

Thanks mourningdove<br><br>I didn't see all of that press conference.<br><br>Did you understand about the "2.5 terabytes" ?<br><br>It sounded to me that he wasn't saying it was all destroyed but that they just couldn't account for it all. And that someone just didn't want the fact that Condi's name was mentioned with the Chinese stuff <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Weldon: 9/11 Commission Denial "Absolutely Unbeliev

Postby mourningdove » Fri Sep 16, 2005 8:09 pm

I didn't see it all either, but yesterday I believe that Weldon had stated that he was relying on information given to him about the amount of data because he didn't understand the terms used. <br>Today I was able to record some of the briefing and here is some loosely transcribed sections relevant to what you had asked:<br><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr> What was in that 3 hour briefing prepared for General Hugh Shelton, Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff in January 01 and where is that brief? Since it would still have existed even though the bulk of the data would have been destroyed in the summer of ‘00. What materials did Richard Shiffron discuss in a briefing that was held with Shaffer, Steve Cambone, and Admiral Wilson in the Doorhock (?) Galley briefing in the winter of ‘01? What was the Able Danger material discussed in that meeting? <br>And finally, and most importantly, why did the 9/11 Commission, charged by the Congress with my support, choose to ignore the work of Able Danger, and why did they not pursue the people I pursued over the last 35-40 days? That would have provided them the same information that I provided.<br>We today do not have a clear picture of what happened before 9/11, because this vacuum exists. <br>I’m offering no conspiracy theories, I’m not making any allegations. As a member of Congress, as the vice-chair of two security and arms committees, the Armed Services and Homeland Security, all I want is answers for the American people. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <br><br>Was interesting to hear that Shaffer's security clearance was revoked (during which time he was promoted and still paid) and when he got it back he had e-mails missing. E-mails that he had discussed previous to the revocation.<br><br>Here is what was said regarding Rice:<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Q: This is just off tangential but do you think this has something to do with, perhaps, do you feel like this might have anything to do with information that was discovered having to do with China?<br>CW: Well I know this because I was very heavily involved with the LEWA? What happened was, as the chairman of the R&D subcommittee, back in the late ‘90’s, and I was briefed on the information dominant centers of the services, with the armies being the LEWA, I was very supportive and I saw them doing amazing things. And I had a discussion with John Hamry, deputy Department of Defense, I said, “John you have to go and see what they are doing down there, it’s amazing”. He went down and John came back, and we had a discussion, and he said “you’re right, Congressman, this is amazing”. He tasked them to do a special briefing on Chinese proliferation. I was aware of that, and I was aware that when that briefing was done there were some very sensitive human person issues that had come up. Because the technology that China was acquiring through researchers that were here in our country, were in many cases at Stanford University and other universities in America. And because of that the 2 names surfaced that were reported in the press….Condaleeza Rice and Bill Perry. And I’m not saying that they did anything wrong, absolutely and unequivocally, they were simply associated with Stanford. And Stanford was one of the most significant schools where Chinese post-doctoral students and researchers were focusing on very, very specific technology for our military that was being used in sensitive military programs. There were other universities as well. When that information reached Congress, it caused an uproar. And you can imagine the pressure the army got because the army, in most peoples minds, are not supposed to be doing that. This is a prototype capability. At the time that was being done, there was an operation, there was an effort, and I understand the effort, to suppress that from coming out. And that was misread by some people as though there was an attempt to, to destroy data. <br>Sam Johnson, Congressman Johnson’s son, Dr. Bob Johnson, was working for Raytheon down in Texas, and special forces command was setting up a separate operation for data mining at Garland, TX, separate from the LEWA, partly because the army was getting cold feet because of the pressure they were realizing. <br>Dr. Bob Johnson told his father that the military was deliberately destroying data. Sam Johnson came to a number of members including Dan Burton, and as a chairman for the government oversight committee, Dan Burton subpoenaed documents and files. That caused a major uproar back and forth. And so that did contribute to the ending of the LEWA, and my understanding is, correct me if I’m wrong, but Richard Shiffron, was the individual who ordered the destruction or the stoppage of the LEWA, is that correct? <br>Richard Shiffron, the same lawyer that was in the same briefing as Cambone in the winter of ‘01, was the lawyer who caused the data mining at LEWA to stop. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <br><br>Forgive the punctuation and spelling errors. I'm not going to try to correct...quite tired of typing :-)<br>Peace. <p></p><i></i>
mourningdove
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2005 5:51 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

anybody know

Postby proldic » Sat Sep 17, 2005 11:48 am

what's up w/ Republican Senator Mark Dayton?<br>He's the one who questioned NORAD's response and implied something fishy was up. <br>It would seem that putting Weldon & Dayton together adds up to something more than just either one of them. <p></p><i></i>
proldic
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: anybody know

Postby seemslikeadream » Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:02 pm

Thanks so much for taking the time mourningdove, I really appreciate it.<br><br>proldic<br><br>Mark Dayton is a Democrat from Minnesota and is not running again, I think he knows way too much and just can't deal with it.<br><br><br> <br> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Democrat Mark Dayton

Postby proldic » Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:56 pm

do you remember -- what was his exact statement about NORAD?<br>Do you know of anybody that tried to help him out or interview him? <p></p><i></i>
proldic
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Weldon On Fox

Postby proldic » Sat Sep 17, 2005 1:32 pm

"<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>There's something very sinister going on here</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> that really troubles me," Weldon told FOX News on Thursday, blasting the Sept. 11 commission (search) for not taking the claims more seriously. He said some panel members were trying to smear Shaffer and Able Danger.<br><br>"What's the Sept. 11 commission got to hide?" Weldon asked. "The commission is trying to spin this because they're embarrassed about what's coming out. In two weeks with two staffers, I've uncovered more in this regard than they did with 80 staffers and $15 million of taxpayer money."<br><br>Sept. 11 commission Chairman Thomas Kean recently told FOX News that the panel is waiting for a response from the Pentagon. Until then, the commission has stood by its work, maintaining that no documents they received from the military backed up the Atta claims.<br><br>Weldon added that at least five people on the federal payroll will testify under oath about the validity of the Able Danger intelligence.<br><br>"<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>When this is over, the Sept. 11 commission is going to have egg all over their face</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->," he said.<br> <p></p><i></i>
proldic
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re:Dayton transcript

Postby seemslikeadream » Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:27 pm

Senator Dayton: NORAD Lied About 9/11<br><br>Sunday, August 1, 2004<br>By Nicholas Levis<br><br><br><br>Mark Dayton has become the first U.S. senator to challenge the rush to consensus that "The 9/11 Commission Report" settles the open questions of Sept. 11, 2001. <br><br>In hearings last Friday, Sen. Dayton (D-MN) raised an obvious point: if the timeline of air defense response as promoted in the Kean Commission's best-selling book is correct, then the timeline presented repeatedly by NORAD during the last two years was completely wrong. Yet now no one at NORAD is willing to comment on their own timeline! <br><br>When the official story of 9/11 can be changed repeatedly without anyone ever being held accountable, we have no right to ever again expect honest government. Please read the following story and do your part to support Sen. Dayton for highlighting the contradiction, and to encourage the media to follow up. <br><br><br><br>Transcript of Sen. Dayton's remarks on NORAD<br><br><br>Friday, July 31, 2004 at Congressional hearings on "The 9/11 Commission Report"<br><br>(Transcribed by Kyle Hence of 9/11 Citizens' Watch)<br><br>Senator Dayton: Thank you Madame Chairman, and I , I also want to commend you for holding this hearing in quick response to the 9/11 Commission's Report. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Co-chairman, I want to say again to you that we are all indebted to you, to the other eight members of the Commission and the staff for this critically important work that you have provided the nation.<br><br>It is a profoundly disturbing report because it chronicles in excruciating detail the terrible attack against our homeland, the despicable murder of so many American citizens and the horrible destruction to countless other lives and liberties throughout this nation.<br><br>And because of the utter failure to defend them [American citizens] by their federal government, by their leaders, and the institutions that were entrusted to do so and because of serious discrepancies between the facts that you've set forth and what was told to the American people, to members of Congress, and to your own Commission by those, some of those authorities.<br><br>There's way too much to cover here but I will begin.<br><br>According to your report the first of the four airliner hijackings occurred on September 11th at 8:14 Eastern time. At 10:03 AM, almost two hours later, an hour and forty-nine minutes to be exact, the fourth and last plane crashed before reaching its intended target, the U.S. Capitol, because of the incredible heroism of its passengers, including Minnesota native Thomas Burnett Jr. During those entire 109 minutes to my reading of this report this country and its citizens were completely undefended.<br><br>Yes, it was a surprise attack. It was unprecedented. Yes, it exposed serious flaws and as you noted our imagination, our policies, capabilities and our management designs but what I find much more shocking and alarming were the repeated and catastrophic failures of the leaders of the leaders in charge, and the other people responsible, to do their jobs.<br><br>To follow established procedures.<br><br>To follow direct orders from civilian and military commanders.<br><br>And then they failed to tell us the truth later.<br><br>It doesn't matter whether they were Republicans, Democrats or neither, it matters what they did or did not do. According to your findings, FAA authorities failed to the inform military command, NORAD, the North American Aerospace Defense Command, about three of the four hijackings until after the planes had crashed into their targets at the second World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the ground in Pennsylv÷in Pennsylvania which was not their target.<br><br>The direct FAA notification of the military regarding the first plane twenty-three minutes after it was hijacked and only nine minutes before it struck the first World Trade Tower.<br><br>NORAD then scrambled one of only two sets of fighter planes on alert in the entire eastern third of the country, one in Massachusetts and one in Virginia but it didn't know where to send them; because the hijackers has turned off the plane's transponder so NORAD couldn't locate them on their radar and they still looking for it when it exploded into its target at 8:46AM.<br><br>The second hijacking began, according to your report, one minute later. NORAD wasn't notified until the same minute the same plane struck the second World Trade tower. It was five more minutes before NORAD's mission commander learned about that explosion; which was five minutes after thousands [probably millions] of Americans saw it on live television. By this time the third plane's transponder was off; communication had been severed, yet it was fifteen minutes before the flight controller decided to notify the regional FAA center which in turn did not inform FAA headquarters for another fifteen minutes.<br><br>So at that point 9:25 AM FAA's National Command Center knew that there were two hijacked planes that had crashed into the two World Trade Centers and a third plane had stopped communicating and disappeared from its primary radar yet no one in FAA headquarters asked for military assistance with that plane either. NORAD was unaware that the plane had even been hijacked until after it crashed into the Pentagon at 9:34.<br><br>This is just unbelievable negligence. It doesn't matter if we spend $550 billion annually on our national defense, if we reorganize our intelligence or if we restructure congressional oversight if people don't pick up the phone to call one another. If we're not told if somebody needs a new radar system and doesn't stall it when it's provided. And this was not an occasional human or failure. This is nothing but human error and failure to follow established procedures and to use common sense.<br><br>Unfortunately, the chronicle is not over. The NORAD mission commander ordered his only three other planes on alert in Virginia to scramble and fly north to Baltimore. Minutes later when he was told that a plane was approaching Washington he learned that the planes were flying East over the Atlantic Ocean away from Baltimore and Washington so that when the third plane struck the Pentagon NORAD's fighters were 150 miles away, farther than they were before they took off.<br><br>By then FAA's Command Center had learned of the fourth hijacking and called FAA Headquarters specifically asking that they contact the military at 9:36AM and at 9:46AM the FAA Command Center updated FAA headquarters that United Flight 93 was "29 minutes out of Washington, D.C." Three minutes later your document records this following conversation between the Command Center and FAA headquarters.<br><br>Command center - 'Uh, do we want to, uh, think about scrambling aircraft?' - FAA headquarters - 'Oh God, I don't know.' - Command center - 'Uh, that's a decision somebody's going to have to make probably in the next 10 minutes.' - FAA headquarters - 'Uh, yeah, you know, everybody just left the room."<br><br>At 10:03 United Flight 93 crashed into the Pennsylvania farm soil and nobody from the FAA headquarters had contacted the military. NORAD didn't know that this fourth plane was hijacked until after it crashed 35 minutes later. The fighter planes that reached Washington seven minutes after that crash they were told by the Mission Commander, "negative clearance to shoot the aircraft" over the Nation's Capitol. <br><br>Yet one week, yet one week after 9/11, in response to initial reports that the military failed to defend our domestic airspace during the hijacks NORAD issued an official chronology that stated that the FAA notified NORAD of the second hijacking at 8:43, wrong, FAA notified NORAD of the third hijacking at 9:24, according to your report wrong, FAA notified NORAD of the fourth hijacking at an unspecified time and that prior to the crash in Pennsylvania Langley F-16 combat air patrol planes were in place, remaining in place, to protect Washington, D.C.. <br><br>All untrue. <br><br>In public testimony before your 9/11 Commission in May of 2003 NORAD officials stated, I assume under oath [ED; they were NOT UNDER OATH], that at 9:16 they had received the hijack notification of United Flight 93 from the FAA. That hijacking did not occur until 9:28; there was a routine cockpit transmission recovered at 9:27. <br><br>And in that testimony before you NORAD officials stated also that at 9:24 they received notice of the hijacking of the third plane, American flight 77, also untrue according to your report; which states that NORAD was never notified that flight was hijacked. <br><br>NORAD officials testified that they scrambled the Langley, Virginia fighters to respond to those two hijackings yet taped recordings of both NORAD and FAA both reportedly documented that the order to scramble was a response to an inaccurate FAA report that American Flight 11 had not hit the first World Trade tower and was headed to Washington. That erroneous alert was transmitted by the FAA at 9:24AM, thirty-eight minutes after that airplane had exploded into the World Trade tower. Yet NORAD's public chronology of 9/18/01 and their Commission testimony 20 months later covered up those truths. They lied to the American people, they lied to Congress and they lied to your 9/11 Commission to create a false impression of competence, communication, coordination and protection of the American people. <br><br>And we can set up all the oversight possible at great additional cost to the American taxpayers and it won't be worth an Enron pension if the people responsible lie to us; if they take the records and doctor them into falsehoods, and if they get away with it. For almost three years now NORAD officials and FAA officials have been able to hide their critical failures that left this country defenseless during two of the worst hours in our history. <br><br>And I believe that President Bush must call them, those responsible for those representations to account. [clapping in gallery] If the Commission's accounts are correct, he should fire whoever at FAA, at NORAD or anywhere else who betrayed the public trust by not telling us the truth. <br><br>And then he should clear up a few discrepancies of his own. <br><br>Four months after September 11th on January 27th 2002, the Washington Post's Dan Balls and Bob Woodward authored an insider's retrospective on top administration officials' actions on 9/11 and thereafter. They reported that very shortly after the Pentagon was struck at 9:34 quote Pentagon officials ordered up the airborne command post used only in national emergencies; they sent up combat air patrol in the Washington area and a fighter escort for Air Force One. Secretary Rumsfeld was portrayed as "taking up his post at the National Military Command Center." And all that reportedly occurred before 9:55AM. Right thereafter "Bush then talked to Rumsfeld to clarify the procedures military pilots should follow before firing on attack planes. With Bush's approval Rumsfeld passed the order down the chain of command." <br><br>This was supposedly taking place according to that article before the fourth plane crashed in Pennsylvania at 10:03. Looks very impressive. The President acting swiftly and decisively; giving orders to the Secretary of Defense and on down the chain of command, combat air patrol planes are patrolling Washington directed by an airborne command post all before 10:03AM; however, according to your commission, President Bush spoke to Secretary Rumsfeld for the first time that morning shortly after 10AM. Based on White House notes and Ari Fleischer notes of the conversation the Commission's report states that it was a brief call in which the subject of the shootdown authority was not discussed. <br><br>The Commission then states that the Secretary of Defense did not join the NMCC's [air threat] conference call until just before 10:30AM. The Secretary of Defense himself told the Commission he was just gaining situation awareness when he spoke with the Vice-President at 10:39AM. That transcript is on page 23, page 43. My time is out but it reflects the Vice-President's honest mistaken(ly) belief that he had been given an order, after talking with the President, to shoot down any plane that would not divert, yet incredibly÷the NORAD commander <br><br>Senator Collins (Chairwomen): The Senator's time has expired. <br><br>Senator Dayton: I am just going to finish this if I may. Yet incredibly the NORAD commander did not pass that order to the fighter planes because he was "unsure how the pilots would or should proceed with this guidance." As you say Mr. Chairman, 'the situation is urgent' but we don't get protected in those circumstances but it's even worse when it's covered-up.<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20040805095600503">www.911truth.org/article....5095600503</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)


Return to 9/11

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests