Sceptics re:9/11 only: viable, unanswered questions regarding 9/11

Muckar-duva

Thinker
Muckar-duva
Joined
Sep 28, 2006
Messages
167
If we may. We all know there are some flaws in official reports- there always will be concerning matters as important, but regardless- but what do YOU find, in the CT assortment (or in plain lack of addressing issues from official reports) to be unanswered questions?
 

99074546c81a23400.gif
 
Muckar-duva said:
If we may. We all know there are some flaws in official reports- there always will be concerning matters as important, but regardless- but what do YOU find, in the CT assortment (or in plain lack of addressing issues from official reports) to be unanswered questions?
Click to expand...


The major one for me surrounds Bush.

I'd like to hear an explanation for his actions. I don't mean "tell us what you were thinking" - he has done that.

I'd like to know what was happening behind the scenes with his staff. What did they determine was the best course of action once they knew an attack was underway? How much did they actually know?

Who made the decisions? What did they tell the President? How did he respond.

And so forth.

-Gumboot
 
gumboot said:
The major one for me surrounds Bush.

I'd like to hear an explanation for his actions. I don't mean "tell us what you were thinking" - he has done that.

I'd like to know what was happening behind the scenes with his staff. What did they determine was the best course of action once they knew an attack was underway? How much did they actually know?

Who made the decisions? What did they tell the President? How did he respond.

And so forth.

-Gumboot
Click to expand...

That is kind of an intersting question to be asked. I'm kinda curious as to the chain of information that went to the president. Actually, while people like to say the "The buck stops here" with regards to the Presidency, Wouldn't the emergency personell have some more authority, at least leyway, to make decisions? Like would the president really be trained with how to deal with emergency crews & response, knowledge of which squadrons to deploy, etc? Talking to the American People, after the fact, would be his job, sure, but during the goings-on, I'd assume his job was to get somewhere safe, and keep up with what was happening, but hands-off otherwise.

obviously, it's all conjecture and the like, But I figure his reaction when told about the attacks while reading to the kids wasn't so much as not knowing what he should do, but in fact that HE shouldn't do anything, and should leave it to the people who are supposed to handle it.
 
There were reports that the phone on air force 1 did not work. Dick Cheney was next in line to order the military and he was unreachable, because he went to Pentagon crash site to help. VP Cheney was giving commands for the most part. He was probably getting bits of info from the FAA and Norad similiar in fashion between the FAA and NORAD.
 
Im interested to see what the USA patriot act has given various departments regarding privacy issues of which they did not have before, can anyone comment?

To me, before or after 9/11 security/privacy is of little concern to me on the level that I never feel its an intrusion at all. Heightened security and random searches at places is not an intrusion of my freedom, it is just part and parcel of a changing world.

How has 9/11 affected the flow of security and personal information in the USA? I hear lots of gossip but have done little searching myself. Anyone comment? keep it civil.

Cheers
 
Sorry, my question was a bit of a derailment, however I agree with gumboot, be good to hear the issues that went on internally in the office. Even howard was involved at the time, though not that directly. Im sure it would make a best seller. Highly emotional and political decisions
 
hellaeon said:
Sorry, my question was a bit of a derailment, however I agree with gumboot, be good to hear the issues that went on internally in the office. Even howard was involved at the time, though not that directly. Im sure it would make a best seller. Highly emotional and political decisions
Click to expand...

I am sure Bob Woodward is waiting for Bush to get out to publish it.
 
CptColumbo said:
Approximately how much fuel was left in the planes when they crashed?
Click to expand...


I believe NIST mention an estimate of UA175's fuel payload at impact in their fireball analysis.

I don't know where those statistics come from however...

I would imagine, for someone with some detailed knowledge, given departure time, total flight time, and initial fuel load, they could calculate how much (roughly) was consumed during the flights (I am, here, assuming the rough total used in a "typical" departure is known).

NIST cited UA175 as 10,000 gallons I think.

-Gumboot
 
I'm interested in more on the idea that some/much of the fire proofing material that was supposed to be used in the construction of the WTC wasn't actually there, possibly due to mob connections with the construction companies/inspectors, contributing to the weakening of the steel in the fires. At least as conspiracies go, that one makes some sense, since it's pretty much exclusively about greed.
 
I read that 9/11 chronology website, which seemed at least to reject a priori nonsense about missiles, and simply projected the events as recorded in the mainstream media. To me the glaring items are:
  • Bush just sitting there in the classroom.
  • No orders issued to locate and shoot down hijacked planes until over an hour after the initial attacks, long after the Pentagon was hit. Within ten minutes of the WTC being hit, and the knowledge that there were two more planes out there, that should have been the first order of business.
Some of you are thinking, "Oh, god another woo-woo." But this is what I think those actions of the leadership in those first crucial minutes indicate: cowardice. Bush and Cheney clearly did not want to be on the line for themselves having killed American citizens, and the result was a successful damaging of the heart of America's military and security resource, and what the hey, the people on the other plane sorted it out for themselves without any help from the government, God love 'em. (So ironic when you consider that was the plane intended for the goddam White House).

Bush and Cheney were derelict in their duties and violated their oath to protect the Constitution and citizens of the United States. It wouldn't have saved 3000 lives, but imagine if the planes had hit their targets in a different order: then the fact that nothing was done to prevent the WTC strike after the White House and Pentagon had been hit, and those thousands of deaths in the heart of Manhattan would have been the first thing people realised was something that was preventable. And I think rightful criticism of the Government's actions on that day would have deprived Bush of all credibility and might even have cost him the aught-four election.
 
Larry Lovage said:
God love 'em. (So ironic when you consider that was the plane intended for the goddam White House).
Click to expand...
That's my question:

Was United 93 heading for the White House or the Capitol Building? I keep hearing both from different sources, although I have to say that the latter would probably be easier.

Larry Lovage said:
...the aught-four election.
Click to expand...
And Larry, you get a gold star for using "aught".
 
Cheney did NOT have the authority to give a shoot down order. Only Bush and Rumsfeld did. Bush was in the classroom and Air Force 1 where phones didn't work. Rumsfeld went directly to the crash site when 77 crashed. He was not contactable for 93 and anythiing else which may have existed. They didn't know it was just 4 planes at that time. Rumsfeld thought the attack was over after the 2nd plane.
 
I'm wondering what went on with Bush and Cheney and the shoot down order as well.

And I'm curious as to why the NORAD cover-up happened.
 
Mark Roberts Takes On the Fantasists

I have invited Mark Roberts to appear on 'Hardfire' for two shows (to be taped in December) and he has accepted. I will attempt to find a suitable opponent for him, but I'm guessing that the loons will not exactly be lining up for the opportunity to be ripped, pummeled, and smashed.
Years ago, William F. Buckley was asked why Bobby Kennedy always avoided appearing on 'Firing Line.' Buckley replied, "Why does bologna reject the grinder?"

I'll keep everyone posted on the response of the tinfoil-hat brigade to my offer providing them with a platform for sharing their sacred "truths" with the rest of us.
 
Welcome to JREF Ron!

You could always have Les Jameison back on. The guy had no idea he was being taken to school :)
 
pomeroo said:
<snip>

I'll keep everyone posted on the response of the tinfoil-hat brigade to my offer providing them with a platform for sharing their sacred "truths" with the rest of us.
Click to expand...

Are they allowed to bring bullhorns?
 
pomeroo said:
I have invited Mark Roberts to appear on 'Hardfire' for two shows (to be taped in December) and he has accepted. I will attempt to find a suitable opponent for him, but I'm guessing that the loons will not exactly be lining up for the opportunity to be ripped, pummeled, and smashed.
Years ago, William F. Buckley was asked why Bobby Kennedy always avoided appearing on 'Firing Line.' Buckley replied, "Why does bologna reject the grinder?"

I'll keep everyone posted on the response of the tinfoil-hat brigade to my offer providing them with a platform for sharing their sacred "truths" with the rest of us.
Click to expand...
Try getting Griffin or something.
 
pomeroo said:
I have invited Mark Roberts to appear on 'Hardfire' for two shows (to be taped in December) and he has accepted. I will attempt to find a suitable opponent for him, but I'm guessing that the loons will not exactly be lining up for the opportunity to be ripped, pummeled, and smashed.
Years ago, William F. Buckley was asked why Bobby Kennedy always avoided appearing on 'Firing Line.' Buckley replied, "Why does bologna reject the grinder?"

I'll keep everyone posted on the response of the tinfoil-hat brigade to my offer providing them with a platform for sharing their sacred "truths" with the rest of us.
Click to expand...

RE: pomeroo : Welcome to the forums.

All,

Not trying to be an ass, just a thorough critical thinker; Gravy can you confirm this please?
 
Were there any other hijackings planned for that day?

Were there "just" the four we know about, or were there other would-be hijackers waiting to take off from the West Coast when those flights were cancelled?

Was United 93 heading for the White House or the Capitol Building? I keep hearing both from different sources, although I have to say that the latter would probably be easier.
Click to expand...

IMHO the 3rd and 4th flights were intended for the Capitol - easy to find, since the mall points you right at it. I think the Pentagon was at best a secondary target, more likely a convenient place to crash once Hanjour found out he couldn't control the plane all that well. But this is only speculation on my part: the people who would know aren't in any position to answer (and I don't really trust Moussari on this)
 
I think it's possible that Hanjour thought he didn't have much time and needed to hit something before the fighters arrived.

I also wonder how it is that tips about flight students who didn't want to bother with landing planes got passed to the FBI and nothing was ever done with the info. I'd like to know whatever happened to the FBI agent that screwed THAT pooch.
 
Retrograde said:
Were there any other hijackings planned for that day?

Were there "just" the four we know about, or were there other would-be hijackers waiting to take off from the West Coast when those flights were cancelled?



IMHO the 3rd and 4th flights were intended for the Capitol - easy to find, since the mall points you right at it. I think the Pentagon was at best a secondary target, more likely a convenient place to crash once Hanjour found out he couldn't control the plane all that well. But this is only speculation on my part: the people who would know aren't in any position to answer (and I don't really trust Moussari on this)
Click to expand...

I would speculate that (as far as I am aware) there is nothing to rule out the possibility that there could have been more planned attacks than the four which actually took place. I mean, once the ATC started clearing the skies it would seem obvious that the terrorists are going to realise they have missed their chance. If this were the case then all those stupid probability calculations some people have been trotting out recently will be shot to buggery.

Likewise there is always the possibility that the pentagon wasn't a target, though I suspect it was simply because there would be logic in attacking the Financial, Military and Political centres of the US.

But they might also have had plans to hit the Entertainment centre (las vegas? Hollywood? Just imagine the panic then!), Religious (any nice big cathedrals make tempting targets?) and even Scientific (Kennedy space centre?)

But certainly the Pentagon, Capitol Building (or whitehouse) and some symbol of the financial heart would be logical targets.
 
Retrograde:

IMHO the 3rd and 4th flights were intended for the Capitol - easy to find, since the mall points you right at it. I think the Pentagon was at best a secondary target, more likely a convenient place to crash once Hanjour found out he couldn't control the plane all that well. But this is only speculation on my part: the people who would know aren't in any position to answer (and I don't really trust Moussari on this)

As one of the captured AL Queda planners stated later WTC towers were
called the "TOWERS of the JEWS", the Pentagon was the "TOWER of WAR"
and the Capitol was the "TOWER of LAW"

The White House has been mentioned often as one of the targets, but an
aerial shot shows it would have been difficult to hit as is fairly small and
surrounded by trees and other buildings . A hijacker with minimal training in
controlling a large jetliner would have trouble trying to line up on it travelling
at 450-500 kts.
 
njslim said:
Retrograde:

IMHO the 3rd and 4th flights were intended for the Capitol - easy to find, since the mall points you right at it. I think the Pentagon was at best a secondary target, more likely a convenient place to crash once Hanjour found out he couldn't control the plane all that well. But this is only speculation on my part: the people who would know aren't in any position to answer (and I don't really trust Moussari on this)

As one of the captured AL Queda planners stated later WTC towers were
called the "TOWERS of the JEWS", the Pentagon was the "TOWER of WAR"
and the Capitol was the "TOWER of LAW"

The White House has been mentioned often as one of the targets, but an
aerial shot shows it would have been difficult to hit as is fairly small and
surrounded by trees and other buildings . A hijacker with minimal training in
controlling a large jetliner would have trouble trying to line up on it travelling
at 450-500 kts.
Click to expand...

I shall 'pull' my theory then.
(Duck!) :duck:
 
Larry Lovage said:
I read that 9/11 chronology website, which seemed at least to reject a priori nonsense about missiles, and simply projected the events as recorded in the mainstream media. To me the glaring items are:
  • Bush just sitting there in the classroom.
  • No orders issued to locate and shoot down hijacked planes until over an hour after the initial attacks, long after the Pentagon was hit. Within ten minutes of the WTC being hit, and the knowledge that there were two more planes out there, that should have been the first order of business.
Some of you are thinking, "Oh, god another woo-woo." But this is what I think those actions of the leadership in those first crucial minutes indicate: cowardice. Bush and Cheney clearly did not want to be on the line for themselves having killed American citizens, and the result was a successful damaging of the heart of America's military and security resource, and what the hey, the people on the other plane sorted it out for themselves without any help from the government, God love 'em. (So ironic when you consider that was the plane intended for the goddam White House).

Bush and Cheney were derelict in their duties and violated their oath to protect the Constitution and citizens of the United States. It wouldn't have saved 3000 lives, but imagine if the planes had hit their targets in a different order: then the fact that nothing was done to prevent the WTC strike after the White House and Pentagon had been hit, and those thousands of deaths in the heart of Manhattan would have been the first thing people realised was something that was preventable. And I think rightful criticism of the Government's actions on that day would have deprived Bush of all credibility and might even have cost him the aught-four election.
Click to expand...

Its too easy to say about the orders. Most hijackings are not expected to have the plane flown full speed into a countries monuments. I tend to think they reacted to an unprecedented situation, next time im sure things will be different.
 
Larry Lovage said:
[*]Bush just sitting there in the classroom.
[*]No orders issued to locate and shoot down hijacked planes until over an hour after the initial attacks, long after the Pentagon was hit. Within ten minutes of the WTC being hit, and the knowledge that there were two more planes out there, that should have been the first order of business.
Click to expand...

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2050959&postcount=29

Larry Lovage said:
Some of you are thinking, "Oh, god another woo-woo." But this is what I think those actions of the leadership in those first crucial minutes indicate: cowardice. Bush and Cheney clearly did not want to be on the line for themselves having killed American citizens, and the result was a successful damaging of the heart of America's military and security resource, and what the hey, the people on the other plane sorted it out for themselves without any help from the government, God love 'em. (So ironic when you consider that was the plane intended for the goddam White House).

Bush and Cheney were derelict in their duties and violated their oath to protect the Constitution and citizens of the United States. It wouldn't have saved 3000 lives, but imagine if the planes had hit their targets in a different order: then the fact that nothing was done to prevent the WTC strike after the White House and Pentagon had been hit, and those thousands of deaths in the heart of Manhattan would have been the first thing people realised was something that was preventable. And I think rightful criticism of the Government's actions on that day would have deprived Bush of all credibility and might even have cost him the aught-four election.
Click to expand...

Wonderful display of Monday morning Quarterbackin'. Yup, Dubya and Buckshot should've hot tailed back to the white house on air force one, stripped down to their skull & bones speedos and defiantly held hands on the front steps.
 
Larry Lovage said:
I read that 9/11 chronology website, which seemed at least to reject a priori nonsense about missiles, and simply projected the events as recorded in the mainstream media. To me the glaring items are:
  • Bush just sitting there in the classroom.
  • No orders issued to locate and shoot down hijacked planes until over an hour after the initial attacks, long after the Pentagon was hit. Within ten minutes of the WTC being hit, and the knowledge that there were two more planes out there, that should have been the first order of business.
Click to expand...



  • First, welcome to the forums. :)

    I am half in agreement, and half not. I believe the major problem on 9/11 was information sharing. This is not surprising. It goes back a long way.

    The US failed to close down Al Qaeda through the 90's because of a lack of information sharing between the FBI and CIA. Likewise for stopping the terrorists once they were in country.

    Then, on 9/11, information sharing between ATC, FAA, and NORAD resulted in crucial delays (NEADS only found out about UA93 and AA77 by accident!). Additional poor information sharing between these facilities and the executive delayed THEIR responses (for example, did Bush/Cheney/Rumsfield even know about the "We have some planes" comment? Did they know about the 11 hijacking alerts that NEADS received in the first 90 minutes? And in New York, poor information sharing between FDNY and NYPD resulted in over 400 first responder deaths that should not have been lost)

    Lack of rapid and clear information sharing was a major factor in 9/11, at multiple levels of government. If I was an American, my PRIMARY concern would be knowing that my government was addressing this MAJOR issues.

    So, on that count I agree with you. HOWEVER. My research has led me to the conclusion that a shoot-down order would have been pointless. Given the conditions on 9/11, and NORAD's configuration, their chance of intercepting ANY of the flights was virtually zero.

    As it happened, there WERE aircraft in the air on 9/11 that DID have permission to shoot down any hijacked flights. And it didn't make any difference.



    Peephole said:
    And I'm curious as to why the NORAD cover-up happened.
    Click to expand...


    This, fortunately, is fairly straight forward. They presented an argument that NORAD was in position to shoot down UA93, had the passengers not intervened. This was not true, and in fact NORAD only learnt about UA93 after it had crashed (having said that, in the time it took UA93 to reach Washington DC, the Langley F-16's could have performed a successful intercept IMHO).



    Retrograde said:
    Were there any other hijackings planned for that day?

    Were there "just" the four we know about, or were there other would-be hijackers waiting to take off from the West Coast when those flights were cancelled?
    Click to expand...


    I have heard unconfirmed reports that there was a separate operation planned for London at the same time. However the operatives were delayed, and saw broadcasts from the USA regarding the 9/11 attacks, on their way to the airport. Shocked at the scale of destruction, they panicked and chickened out (this would support my long-held suspicion that only the pilot hijackers actually knew the mission was a suicide one).

    -Gumboot
 
According to the commission report, an early plan of simultaneous attacks in Asia was abandoned due to it being too hard to coordinate the two attacks.

I also read somewhere (and this annoys me to no end) that boxcutters and/or knives were found on other planes, and I think this was supposedly in the states. But again, not in any way confirmed.
 
dissonance said:
I'm interested in more on the idea that some/much of the fire proofing material that was supposed to be used in the construction of the WTC wasn't actually there
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Most of my questions involve the Towers and what could have realistically been done to keep them standing for X minutes longer to evacuate that many more people. Obviously, no one realized the extent of the damage that the towers would take day, but knowing what was done wrong (or what wasn't done at all) is the type of information that could save lives.
 
pomeroo said:
I have invited Mark Roberts to appear on 'Hardfire' for two shows (to be taped in December) and he has accepted.
Click to expand...

It would be way better if Gravy was going to face off against the conspiracy theorists in Crossfire, the rapid fire shoot-out game.

At least that way I could sing the commercial jingle.
 
I'm currently reading "The five unanswered questions of 9/11", a comment on the commission report. So far, it has been interesting and well worth a read (although I haven't even finished the first chapter yet, so...who knows). I have read a very interesting chapter on FAA and airline security, where a lot of FAA "whistleblowers" have written reports and come forward BEFORE 9/11, to talk about how FAA was more or less toothless and how profit was more important than security.

It will be interesting to read this books chapters on WTC. As far as conspiracies go, I find petty greed in numerous cases to be more believable than the ultrapowerful superdominating overwhelmingly smart Bush administration of baby-eaters.

I can only hope that this book doesn't nut out on me- it's interesting to spend some time on the failures.
 
Larry Lovage said:
I read that 9/11 chronology website, which seemed at least to reject a priori nonsense about missiles, and simply projected the events as recorded in the mainstream media. To me the glaring items are:
  • Bush just sitting there in the classroom.
  • No orders issued to locate and shoot down hijacked planes until over an hour after the initial attacks, long after the Pentagon was hit. Within ten minutes of the WTC being hit, and the knowledge that there were two more planes out there, that should have been the first order of business.
Some of you are thinking, "Oh, god another woo-woo." But this is what I think those actions of the leadership in those first crucial minutes indicate: cowardice. Bush and Cheney clearly did not want to be on the line for themselves having killed American citizens, and the result was a successful damaging of the heart of America's military and security resource, and what the hey, the people on the other plane sorted it out for themselves without any help from the government, God love 'em. (So ironic when you consider that was the plane intended for the goddam White House).

Bush and Cheney were derelict in their duties and violated their oath to protect the Constitution and citizens of the United States. It wouldn't have saved 3000 lives, but imagine if the planes had hit their targets in a different order: then the fact that nothing was done to prevent the WTC strike after the White House and Pentagon had been hit, and those thousands of deaths in the heart of Manhattan would have been the first thing people realised was something that was preventable. And I think rightful criticism of the Government's actions on that day would have deprived Bush of all credibility and might even have cost him the aught-four election.
Click to expand...

Lets rush the president to the airport? Is the airport safe?

Lets panic and jump around? We have no idea what is going on, lets panic!

Too bad we all did not have a script like Tom Cruise in War of the Worlds so we could all get our beam weapons and shoot the terrorist.

My hat goes off the passengers of flight 93. They were the first to take action that day to stop the terrorist.

Flight 93 passengers stood up and they were the first Americans in a position to do something. They were the first ones to have the knowledge, the judgement and the means to take action!

All the rest of us did what?

It is a big system event. The things that happened on 9/11 are too complicated to figure out in few hours. The passengers of 93 did it first.

How come flight 93 passengers are smarter and braver than all the CT truth movement on 9/11. They figured out 9/11 in one short flight.

CT leaders and lemmings will never figure it out.
 
beachnut said:
My hat goes off the passengers of flight 93. They were the first to take action that day to stop the terrorist.

Flight 93 passengers stood up and they were the first Americans in a position to do something. They were the first ones to have the knowledge, the judgement and the means to take action!

All the rest of us did what?
Click to expand...

Apparently, many of us who were sitting in the safety of their home posting CTs about the Kennedy Assassination and switched to 9/11, and began demonizing anyone who did do something that day. Passengers on United 93, FDNY, NYPD, Arlington and surrounding areas FD & PD, people at the sites who helped, those that gave blood, and the volunteers who drove thousands of miles to help, as Stephen Colbert would say "you're the heroes."
 
pomeroo said:
I have invited Mark Roberts to appear on 'Hardfire' for two shows (to be taped in December) and he has accepted. I will attempt to find a suitable opponent for him, but I'm guessing that the loons will not exactly be lining up for the opportunity to be ripped, pummeled, and smashed.
Years ago, William F. Buckley was asked why Bobby Kennedy always avoided appearing on 'Firing Line.' Buckley replied, "Why does bologna reject the grinder?"

I'll keep everyone posted on the response of the tinfoil-hat brigade to my offer providing them with a platform for sharing their sacred "truths" with the rest of us.
Click to expand...

Ron, welcome aboard. This place is a wealth of knowledge if your looking for the science and facts behind 9/11. People here can point you to the answers to just about any answerable question re: 9/11.

My suggestion for an opponent worth Mark's knowledge and skill would be a David Griffin, or a Jim Hoffman. The rest, like Alex Jones and James Fetzer, simply spue off ream after ream of the same old well debunked shaite, that most anyone now knows to be so. Steven Jones might also be worthy, though he may have a greater scientific education set in terms of physics, than Gravy (I am guessing here).

Still, it would be nice to see Gravy give one of the more publicly know nutbars an debating "body slam".

TAM:D
 
beachnut said:
My hat goes off the passengers of flight 93. They were the first to take action that day to stop the terrorist.
Click to expand...


That's not really true. Boston ATC Centre and NEADS were the first ones to do something... ;)



senorpogo said:
Most of my questions involve the Towers and what could have realistically been done to keep them standing for X minutes longer to evacuate that many more people.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it would have made any difference.

Had the towers not collapsed, I suspect the only significant difference in the death toll would have been the first responders who survived. And they weren't trying to evacuate because they didn't hear the orders to do so on their radios.

Almost everyone who *could* evacuate had done so before collapse. Even had the buildings not collapsed, it's highly unlikely the people trapped above the impact zone would have survived - it would have taken rescuers hours and hours and hours to reach them. All the time, the floors getting hotter and less stable and filled with more smoke.

-Gumboot
 
jhunter1163 said:
I think it's possible that Hanjour thought he didn't have much time and needed to hit something before the fighters arrived.

I also wonder how it is that tips about flight students who didn't want to bother with landing planes got passed to the FBI and nothing was ever done with the info. I'd like to know whatever happened to the FBI agent that screwed THAT pooch.
Click to expand...
How is it that 2 terrorists were followed by the CIA but the CIA failed to tip off the FBI that they were in the US now so the FBI could dontinue tracking them?

How is it those same 2 terrorists lived with an FBI informant and the FBI never knew?
 
The reluctance to issue a shoot-down order was due to the unprecedented nature of the threat, the ramifications of the order itself and the wildly inaccurate information being fed to NORAD by the FAA. NORAD had limited resources and could not order intercept ROEs without a clear picture of the battle space - one which was never really painted until it was too late. Had NORAD shot down every reported hijack after the second tower was hit, the death toll that day would have topped 4,000.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom