An explicit stand down order would be too obvious, one would think. Judging by the Vanity Fair article, the military never did receive clearance, earlier, to shoot down any of the hijacked planes either.
But, lo and behold, here it is – although, as we shall see, it not yet clear what relevance, if any, it may actually have as evidence, given the alleged timing and the alleged context. The orders from higher headquarters are to identify by aircraft type and tail number, and nothing more. Not that this mattered, because none of the hijacked planes were ever even intercepted.
It also seems very unlikely to me that anyone in either the Boston FAA Center or the New York FAA Center would have been lax about communicating with the military about Flight 175, after Flight 11 crashed into WTC 1.
Griffin then suggests that the tapes could have been fabricated via voice-morphing.
As one pilot later told the commission, “I reverted to the Russian threat — I’m thinking cruise-missile threat from the sea.” At NEADS, a 28-year-old staff sergeant named William Huckabone, staring at his Green Eye, is the first to notice that the Langley jets are off course. We’re not gonna take ’em in Whiskey 386 [military training airspace over the ocean]. Instead of taking handoffs to us and us handing ’em back, just tell Center they’ve got to go to Baltimore. It’s also strange that there would not have been scramble-ready planes at Andrews Air Force Base, the base nearest to Washington, D. Anyhow, after discovering that the NORAD tapes contained an actual, explicit no-shoot order, I wondered what other people have said about it, if anything.
His voice is a mix of stress and dread as he and the controller next to him, Master Sergeant Steve Citino, order a navy air-traffic controller who’s handling the fighters to get them turned around toward Baltimore to try to cut off the phantom American 11. C.: You’ve got [the fighters] moving east in airspace. So I Googled: A page on claims that Michael Bronner’s Vanity Fair article has “debunked” two “conspiracy theories,” including “(2) That the air force was ordered to ‘stand down’ on 9/11.” What????
Furthermore, the 9/11 Commission’s tapes-based account differs from all previous accounts in an amazingly consistent way, consistently placing 100% of the blame upon the FAA, whereas all previous accounts consistently do not place 100% of the blame upon the FAA.
According to the 9/11 Commission’s tapes-based account, the military was not informed at all about any of Flights 175, Flight 77, or Flight 93 until after they had crashed.
According to the 9/11 commission, the Langley pilots were never briefed by anyone at their base about why they were being scrambled, so, despite having been given the order from NEADS to fly to Washington, the pilots ended up following their normal training flight plan out to sea — a flight plan dating from the Cold War. HUCKABONE: Have him contact us on auxiliary frequency 2-3-4 decimal 6. As noted in recent posts, there are plenty of odd things about the behavior of high officials on that day.As far as I am aware, no families or co-workers of the passengers have ever expressed any doubts about the authenticity of those calls.And a convincing voice-morph would have required lengthy voice samples plus familiarity with the person’s idiosyncrasies.On the other hand, in all previous accounts, from the military as well as from the FAA, the military was notified about at least Flights 175 and Flight 77 (and, in many accounts, Flight 93 too) before they crashed.In all previous accounts, the military also tried to do something about each flight they heard about before it crashed.But for now I’ll assume that the timestamp is accurate. FOX: I’m not really worried about code words at this point. But the above conversation, together with the lack of any earlier clearance to shoot, does seem to confirm both Jim Hoffman’s and David Ray Griffin’s speculation that Cheney’s “orders,” spoken of in Mineta’s testimony, were orders not to fire, not orders to fire, as Mineta had assumed. The last line — “I think this is a damn input” — is a reference to the exercise, meaning a simulations input. Was this confusion purely “natural,” based on just an innocent miscommunication?Even so, I was startled to come across the no-shoot order, because I’ve seen plenty of references to Michael Bronner’s Vanity Fair article before, but, in the sources I’ve seen that referred to it, never a mention that it contained an explicit stand-down order, albeit a belated one. This would seem to be the case regardless of the time at which Cheney issued these orders. The Vanity Fair article interprets the remark as follows: “It’s either gallows humor or wishful thinking. Or was it deliberately created or intensified somehow?This is possible, but I think it more likely that some of the timestamps may have been massaged a bit.Doctoring the timestamps would have been simpler to accomplish than a convincing voice-morph.As we shall see later, there is reason to question the timestamp. Delta 1989 and the Canadian scare turn out to be false alarms. And the fast-moving target near the White House that the armed fighters are racing to intercept turns out to be a friendly—a mistake by a civilian controller who was unaware of the military’s scrambles, as weapons techs Huckabone and Citino, and their senior director, Fox, suddenly realize.Perhaps the no-shoot order might actually have been given earlier, at a time when it could actually have caused harm? Admittedly too, what I’ve found here doesn’t, in and of itself, prove that the pilots would not have been given clearance to shoot after ID’ing a plane, if only they had succeeded in intercepting one of the hijacked planes. According to the timestamp, the above conversation occurred four minutes before the Pentagon was struck.