URL for this article: http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/indict-1.htm Alternative address is http://emperor.vwh.net/indict/indict-1.htm
Join our email list at http://emperors-clothes.com/f.htm. Receive about one article/day.
Click here to email the link to this article to a friend. We encourage readers to reprint and repost any Emperor's Clothes article. Please include the article's Web address.
www.tenc.net
[Emperor's Clothes]
======================================
GUILTY FOR 9-11: BUSH, RUMSFELD, MYERS
Introduction & Section 1, Part 1
by Illarion Bykov and Jared Israel
[Posted 14 November 2001]
Dedicated to the firemen of New York.
=======================================
INTRODUCTION TO SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE
Andrews Air Force Base is a huge military installation just 10 miles from the Pentagon.
On 11 September there were two entire squadrons of combat-ready fighter jets at Andrews. Their job was to protect the skies over Washington D.C. They failed to do their job. Despite over one hour's advance warning of a terrorist attack in progress, not a single Andrews fighter tried to protect the city.
The FAA, NORAD and the military have cooperative procedures by which fighter jets automatically intercept commercial aircraft under emergency conditions. These procedures were not followed.
Air Force officials and others have tried to explain away the failures:
"Air Force Lt. Col. Vic Warzinski, another Pentagon spokesman, [said]: 'The Pentagon was simply not aware that this aircraft was coming our way, and I doubt prior to Tuesday's event, anyone would have expected anything like that here.'"
--'Newsday,' 23 September 2001 (1)
Using information from the mass media and official Websites, we will show that this is a lie.
Some of what happened on 9-11, such as planes flying into buildings, is unusual. But most of what happened, such as commercial jets flying off-course, transponder failures and possible hijackings, are common emergencies. We will show that these emergencies are routinely handled with expert efficiency based on clear rules.
The crash of the first hijacked jet into the World Trade Center made it clear the United States was faced with an extraordinary situation. This should have intensified the emergency responses of the air safety and defense systems.
The whole country was aware. For example, at 9:06 AM the NY Police broadcast:
" 'This was a terrorist attack. Notify the Pentagon.'"
--'Daily News' (New York) 12 September 2001 (2)
'American Forces Press Service' reported that ordinary people working at the Pentagon worried they could be next:
"'We were watching the World Trade Center on the television,' said a Navy officer. 'When the second plane deliberately dove into the tower, someone said, 'The World Trade Center is one of the most recognizable symbols of America. We're sitting in a close second.'"
--'DEFENSELINK News', Sept. 13, 2001 (3)
U.S. air safety and air defense emergency systems are activated in response to problems every day. On 9-11 they failed despite, not because of, the extreme nature of the emergency. This could only happen if individuals in high positions worked in a coordinated way to make them fail.
Such operatives would almost surely have failed if they tried to disrupt and abort routine protection systems without top-level support. The failure of the emergency systems would be noticed immediately. Moreover, given the catastrophic nature of the attacks, the highest military authorities would be alerted. Acting on their own, the operatives could expect that their orders would be countermanded and that they themselves would be arrested.
The sabotage of routine protective systems, controlled by strict hierarchies, would never have been contemplated let alone attempted absent the involvement of the supreme U.S. military command. This includes at least U.S. President George Bush, U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and the then-Acting Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General Richard B. Myers.
In the following summary of evidence we will demonstrate probable cause for charging the above-named persons with treason for complicity in the murders of thousands of people whom they had sworn to protect.
The summary of evidence covers the following areas:
* Andrews Air Force Base and the myth of 'no available planes;'
* The air safety/air defense systems and the myth that they were not prepared;
* The actions of George Bush on 9-11 that clearly violated his positive legal and constitutional obligations and demonstrated consciousness of guilt;
* The testimony of General Richard B. Myers at Senate hearings on his nomination as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In these hearings, the contents of which were reported accurately by one lone journalist, General Myers attempted to cover up what had happened 9-11 when he was Acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. He offered three mutually contradictory cover stories and demonstrated consciousness of guilt;
* The cover story floated by CBS evening news,
September 14th.
Until that time, officials reported that no planes had been
'scrambled' to intercept the hijacked planes. But following Gen. Myers
disastrous Senate testimony, CBS broadcast an improved version of 9-11.
In the new script, fighter jets from Otis and Langley Air Force Bases
did try, but failed, to intercept the hijacked planes. This is now
presented as the official NORAD story and has been repeated uncritically
by media and government officials alike. We will demonstrate that this
cover story is both weak and incriminating.
SECTION 1, PART 1: Why did no fighter jets 'scramble' to protect Washington D.C.?
LIE #1: 'NO COMBAT READY FIGHTERS WERE STATIONED NEAR THE PENTAGON'
As noted, Andrews Air Force base is 10 miles from the Pentagon. The media has mainly avoided talking about Andrews. An exception is 'USA Today,' the second-highest circulation newspaper in America. On one day it published two contradictory stories to explain the failure to scramble jets from Andrews prior to the Pentagon crash:
FIRST 'USA TODAY' STORY:
"Andrews Air Force Base, home to Air Force One, is only 15 miles [sic!] away from the Pentagon, but it had no fighters assigned to it. Defense officials won't say whether that has changed."
--'USA TODAY,' 17 September 2001 (4)
SECOND 'USA TODAY' STORY:
"The District of Columbia National Guard maintained fighter planes at Andrews Air Force Base, only about 15 miles [sic!] from the Pentagon, but those planes were not on alert and not deployed."
--'USA TODAY' September 17, 2001 (5)
Both stories are false.
Only one newspaper told the truth. That was the 'San Diego Union-Tribune':
"Air defense around Washington is provided mainly by fighter planes from Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland near the District of Columbia border. The D.C. Air National Guard is also based there and equipped with F-16 fighter planes, a National Guard spokesman said.
"But the fighters took to the skies over Washington only after the devastating attack on the Pentagon..."
--'San Diego Union-Tribune' 12 September 2001. (6)
Andrews Air Force Base is a huge installation. It hosts two 'combat-ready' squadrons:
* the 121st Fighter Squadron (FS-121) of the 113th Fighter Wing (FW-113), equipped with F-16 fighters;
* the 321st Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA-321) of the 49th
Marine Air Group, Detachment A (MAG-49 Det-A), equipped
with
F/A-18 fighters.
These squadrons are served by hundreds of full-time personnel.
THE 121st FIGHTER SQUADRON, 113th FIGHTER WING
"…as part of its dual mission, the 113th provides capable and ready response forces for the District of Columbia in the event of a natural disaster or civil emergency. Members also assist local and federal law enforcement agencies in combating drug trafficking in the District of Colombia. [They] are full partners with the active Air Force"
--DC Military (7)
THE 321st MARINE FIGHTER ATTACK SQUADRON (VMFA-321)
"In the best tradition of the Marine Corps, a 'few good men and women' support two combat-ready reserve units at Andrews AFB.
"Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA) 321, a Marine Corps Reserve squadron, flies the sophisticated F/A-18 Hornet. Marine Aviation Logistics Squadron 49, Detachment A, provides maintenance and supply functions necessary to maintain a force in readiness. "
--DC Military (7)
So Andrews AFB had at least two 'combat-ready' squadrons.
The above quotes are from http://www.dcmilitary.com/, a private Website authorized by the military to provide information for members of the armed forces. We discovered it 24 September. A month later we found that the address had been changed and the Andrews information posted in the smallest type size. Similarly, the official Andrews AFB Website has been 'down' since mid-September. Fortunately, it can still be accessed by going to http://www.archive.org/ and entering http://www.andrews.af.mil/ .
On the Andrews main page, front and center there is a direct link to
DC Military. The information on the Andrews Website confirms the
information on DC military. We urge everyone to check these links and
download the pages as soon as possible because they may be moved or
removed yet again. For Andrews, go to http://www.archive.org/
and then enter http://www.andrews.af.mil/
[Note: a few days after this Emperor's
Clothes article was posted, the http://www.andrews.af.mil/
website went back up with the note: "This Page was last modified
September 12, 2001." The new Andrews website no longer links to the
most relevant information regarding 9-11. The most relevant web pages
"cannot be found." Fortunately, they are still available
through http://www.archive.org/.
The original addresses (now dead) are: http://www.dcandr.ang.af.mil/113wing/pa/html/wg_units.html
and
http://www.dcandr.ang.af.mil/hq/index.htm
The direct links to the archives of these pages are:
http://web.archive.org/web/20010306223457/http://www.dcandr.ang.af.mil/113wing/pa/html/wg_units.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20010408230859/www.dcandr.ang.af.mil/hq/index.htm
We also have a backup copies of the pages at:
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/dcandr.htm
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/dcandr2.htm
]
Our research has been carried out mainly by volunteers. Newspapers and TV news departments have full-time research staffs. The important media have bureaus in Washington DC, just a few miles from the Andrews airbase. Why haven't newspapers and TV news programs reported the truth: that Andrews job was to protect DC?
This failure is especially striking because some media did report that fighters scrambled from Andrews, but only after the Pentagon was hit. Thus they were aware that Andrews was supposed to defend D.C.:
For example:
" Within minutes of the attack American forces around the world were put on one of their highest states of alert - Defcon 3, just two notches short of all-out war - and F-16s from Andrews Air Force Base were in the air over Washington DC."
--'Sunday Telegraph,' (London), 14 September 2001 (8)
And:
"WASHINGTON - …an audible gasp went up from the rear of the audience as a large black plume of smoke arose from the Pentagon. Terrorism suddenly was at the doorstep and clearly visible through the big glass windows overlooking the Potomac River. Overhead, fighter jets scrambled from Andrews Air Force Base and other installations and cross-crossed the skies…
"A thick plume of smoke was climbing out of the hollow center of the Pentagon. Everyone on the train understood what had happened moments before."
--'Denver Post,' 11 September 2001 (9)
And:
"It was after the attack on the Pentagon that the Air Force then decided to scramble F-16s out of the DC National Guard Andrews Air Force Base to fly cover, a--a protective cover over Washington, DC."
--NBC Nightly News, (6:30 PM ET) 11 September 11 2001 (10)
The media should have demanded to know the truth about why fighter jets assigned to protect Washington didn't scramble an hour BEFORE the Pentagon was hit.
Besides fighters, tanker planes and AWACS were also readily available.(An AWACS is a flying communication center equipped with radar which can scan at least 250 miles. This is almost the full distance from the West-Virginia/Ohio/Kentucky border, where American Air Flight 77 turned around before flying back to DC.) Both General Myers and Vice President Cheney admit that these planes did not go into the air over Washington until after the Pentagon was hit.
Here is General Myers, testifying 13th September:
"When it became clear what the threat was, we did scramble fighter aircraft, AWACS, radar aircraft and tanker aircraft to begin to establish orbits in case other aircraft showed up in the FAA system that were hijacked."
--Gen. Richard B. Myers at Senate confirmation hearing 13 September 2001 (11)
And Richard Cheney on 'Meet the Press':
"VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, the--I suppose the toughest decision was this question of whether or not we would intercept incoming commercial aircraft.
"MR. RUSSERT: And you decided?'
"VICE PRES. CHENEY: We decided to do it. We'd, in effect, put a flying combat air patrol up over the city; F-16s with an AWACS, which is an airborne radar system, and tanker support so they could stay up a long time." --NBC, 'Meet the Press' (10:00 AM ET) 16 September 2001 (12)
As we shall see, Mr. Cheney's statement that "the toughest decision was this question of whether or not we would intercept incoming commercial aircraft" is a lie. Publicly available FAA documents prove that fighter jets routinely intercept commercial aircraft under certain designated circumstances without requiring or asking for approval from the White House.
Summary of evidence is CONTINUED IN SECTION I, PART II
FOOTNOTES:
(1) 'Newsday'
23 September 2001, "Air
Attack on Pentagon Indicates Weaknesses" by
Sylvia Adcock, Brian Donovan and Craig Gordon
Web version at::
http://www.newsday.com/ny-uspent232380681sep23.story
Backup at:
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/nd923.htm
(2) 'Daily News' (New York), 12 September 2001, Wednesday,
NEWS SECTION; Pg. 24: 'THE TRAGIC TIMELINE The sad events of the day.'
the full text is available at:
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/dn912.htm
(3) 'DEFENSELINK News,' "It Was Business as Usual, Then
'Boom'" By Jim Garamone, 'American Forces Press Service,' Sept. 13,
2001
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Sep2001/n09132001_200109132.html
Backup at
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/def.htm
(4) 'USA TODAY,' 17 September 2001, Pg. 5A, "Military now
a presence on home front," by Andrea Stone.
Web version is at:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/16/military-home-front.htm
Backup at:
http:/.emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/usa-1.htm
(5) 'USA TODAY,' September 17, 2001 Monday, FINAL EDITION, Pg.
5A, "Shoot-down order issued on morning of chaos," by Jonathan
Weisman, WASHINGTON
Web version is at:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/16/pentagon-timeline.htm
Backup at
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/usa2.htm
(6) 'San Diego Union-Tribune,' 12 September 2001. Homepage
at: http://www.signonsandiego.com/ Article at: http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/sandiego/main/document.html?QDesc=&FMTS=FT&QVPID=&FrameName=&QCPP=&QIID=000000080620146&FMT=FT
Backup at:
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/sd.htm
(7) Current DC Military weblink is:
http://www.dcmilitary.com/baseguides/airforce/andrews/partnerunits.html:
Backup of the November 2001 web page at:
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/dcmil.htm
Backup of how the page looked on September 2001
at:
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/dcmilsep.htm
(8) 'Sunday Telegraph,' (London), 14 September 2001
Web article at:
http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/16/wcia16.xml
Backup article at:
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/tel16.htm
(9) 'Denver Post,' 11 September 2001
To view this article on the Web, search for Article ID: 1075896 on:
http://www.denverpost.com
Backup article at:
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/dp11.htm
(10) 'NBC Nightly News,' "Attack on America," (6:30
PM ET) 11 September 2001, "Tuesday President Bush returns to
White House on Marine One," Anchor: Tom Brokaw, Jim Miklaszewski
reporting.
See transcript at:
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/nbc911cover.htm
(11) Gen. Richard B. Myers at Senate confirmation hearing
13 September 2001
Full transcript at:
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/mycon.htm
This particular quotation was also reprinted by many mainstream media
sources.
(12) 'NBC, Meet the Press' (10:00 AM ET) Sunday 16 September
2001.
Full transcript at:
http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/629714.asp?cp1=1
Backup transcript at:
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/nbcmp.htm
=======================================
Emperor's Clothes can use your
help.
=======================================
-
You can donate using PayPal -
at https://www.paypal.com/xclick/business=emperors1000@aol.com&no_shipping=1
-
Or go to our secure server at
http://emperors-clothes.com/howyour.html#donate
-
Or Mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton, MA 02461-0321. (USA)
-
Or call the donation line, (U.S.) 617 916-1705.
http://www.tenc.net/ * [Emperor's Clothes]
This Website is mirrored at http://emperor.vwh.net/ and at http://globalresistance.com