View Full Version : NORAD lied
9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon
Allegations Brought to Inspectors General
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 2, 2006; A03
Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate.
Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources. Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission, hoping to hide the bungled response to the hijackings, these sources said.
In the end, the panel agreed to a compromise, turning over the allegations to the inspectors general for the Defense and Transportation departments, who can make criminal referrals if they believe they are warranted, officials said.
"We to this day don't know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us," said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. "It was just so far from the truth. . . . It's one of those loose ends that never got tied."
How many 'loose ends' are there in the 9/11 report?
What does it mean when the pentagon/NORAD/GW are more interested in covering their 'mistakes' than co-operating with an investigation into how to protect the country from another attack? [ GW was against having a 9/11 comission!]
08-27-2006, 11:30 AM
Qtec I have always maintained, how can the idiots in charge can say their tough on terror when they couldn't send planes in the air when 4 planes went off course on 9/11.
All I can say it was a good thing George Bush had a change of underwear with him on 9/11####
08-27-2006, 06:15 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DickLeonard:</font><hr> Qtec I have always maintained, how can the idiots in charge can say their tough on terror when they couldn't send planes in the air when 4 planes went off course on 9/11.
All I can say it was a good thing George Bush had a change of underwear with him on 9/11#### <hr /></blockquote>
Have you read the commission report? It's about 600 pages, so it does take some effort.
GW had been in office for 9 months. The Air Traffic Control system, NORAD and other agencies involved have been in place for years, yet none of them knew what the other was doing, was supposed to be doing, or is some cases, what they themselves were supposed to be doing. It's quite possible that some, if not all, of the hijacked planes could have been diverted or prevented from reaching their intended targets, if inter-agency communication had been better. That was a problem that existed prior to the mid '90s when Al-Q began planning this specific attack.
If you haven't read the 9-11 report, you really should. You can't understand what is in there by reading the "Cliff Notes" provided by the media.
08-28-2006, 05:58 AM
Pooltchr when George W Bush fought investigating 911 I knew the Report would be a Whitewash. I knew if John Kerry was Prsident the FBI reports wouldn't have been put on the bottom never to be acted on. It took the Widows of 911 to get the Government to act[Sorry Ann].####
08-28-2006, 06:30 AM
"according to several commission sources." ????
Geez Q, this is a stretch even for you. NORAD basically has two jobs. Blow things up and shoot things down. This did not include civilian aircraft. They don't even watch those.
Could they have shot those planes down? Absolutely. All you have to do is get them on the phone. The Air Traffic Controllers knew something was wrong. So how do you get NORAD on the phone....in ten minutes?
How can you expect anyone to accept the unbelievable and then do the unthinkable, all in under thirty minutes?
Gayle in MD
08-28-2006, 07:31 AM
I think the statements made by the 9/11 commission after the investigation was long over, regarding this administration's response to how to prevent a future attack, and what should be altered within our government agencies, is far more revealing of incompetence on the part of Bush, and the Republicans, than the investigation itself.
Richard Clarke's book is far more revealing of why 9/11 happened, and why it wasn't stopped by Bush's Administration, than the Whitewash 9/11 Investigation.
The ultimate responsibility for 9/11 lies right in George Bush, and Dick Cheney's laps. Hence, they tried to stop it. They were warned of an impending attack, by alQaeda, involving hijacking of aircraft, yet they continued to send the message to all intelligence officials that they were not interested in hearing about any foreign affair issues outside of Iraq. Iraq was their focuss, and many intellitgence experts have written that the administration refused to heed the warnings they were recieving, particularly, Rice.
Although there is no doubt that men who directed the various top positions in the Pentagon, the C.I.A. and the F.B.I. were more interested in keeping their knowledge to themselves, rather than sharing it with other agencies, strictly out of egoism, and that the agencies saw one another as being in competition, rather than working together to insure safety, there is no question the warnings were there, and no question that 9/11 could have been prevented had Bush, Rice, and Cheney taken the warnings serious, and not been totally focussed on how they were going to launch a war in Iraq. Iraq, IOW, was their only focuss regarding issues of National Security.
Gayle in Md.
We still do not have a unified list of potential terrorists among our transportation departments.
08-28-2006, 09:17 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DickLeonard:</font><hr> Pooltchr when George W Bush fought investigating 911 I knew the Report would be a Whitewash. I knew if John Kerry was Prsident the FBI reports wouldn't have been put on the bottom never to be acted on. It took the Widows of 911 to get the Government to act[Sorry Ann].#### <hr /></blockquote>
You forgot to answer the question. Have you read the report?
Gayle in MD
08-28-2006, 09:54 AM
You'll have to start compensating for some others who are unable to add 1 + 1 = 2. Gee, I wonder what excuse the right came up with for themselves when the Bush Administration turned Washington upside down trying to stop the investigation.
Time after time during the investigation top level officials admitted to not knowing many things which it was their job to know.
Recently, on Meet The Press, and other news programs, Keane, and others who were on the panel, have admitted letting the New York Governor, and others, off the hook while in front of the cameras in an effort not to look as though they were criticising the supposed heros of 9/11.
IMO, The families of the victims of 9/11, the brave firemen and police officers of that day, and the passengers who crashed the plane in Pennsylvania, were the heros. Richard Clarke, was the only government official who earned that title after the fact.
Gayle in Md.
Gayle in MD
08-28-2006, 09:59 AM
"It was just so far from the truth. . . . It's one of those loose ends that never got tied."
Another new Republican euphemism for the word lies?
/ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gifgayle in Md.
08-29-2006, 07:37 AM
Pooltchr it is on my Bookshelf along with the Bible and my Billiard Enclyepedia.. I am saving them for my death bed reading.####
Gayle in MD
08-29-2006, 08:24 AM
I was there. I have read the report, and even given page numbers out of it for reference, here. I was also at the hearings, and watched the Government try to stiffle the demands of those families who had to fight to get our officials to agree to go forward with the investigation. I think I posted about that, long ago. You must have missed it.
Gayle in Md.
08-29-2006, 08:39 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DickLeonard:</font><hr> Pooltchr it is on my Bookshelf along with the Bible and my Billiard Enclyepedia.. I am saving them for my death bed reading.#### <hr /></blockquote>
Does this mean you don't think it very important to get the facts on an issue before you form an opinion? I think by going straight to the source, rather than depending on information that has been filtered through someone else, it makes it easier to make an intelligent decision. It also helps to make sure that I know what I am talking about before I share my opinions with others.
But that's just me....
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.