Norad?

[gumboot]

There's been a number of conversations in threads recently relating to NORAD and the events of 9/11.

I'd like to invite anyone who has suspicious, doubts, concerns, or allegations about NORAD's activities on 9/11 to discuss them here with me, one topic at a time. That means no hopping about like you're on hot coals. We start with a single topic, and we discuss that topic civilly and logically, until a definitive conclusion is reached, then we move on.

I'm quite familiar with the events of 9/11 from NORAD's perspective, and I'd like to invite Cheap Shot to join me in this thread as his experience and input into this topic is vital.

I offer up this as an opportunity to clear some confusion without the swarm of answers that send the discussion careening into dozens or different topics, making following them impossible.

I post infrequently these days, so you might have to wait a bit between replies. I hope you can accept that.

I'd like to suggest that we initiate the discussion with the topic a thread was recently created for - namely the nature of the NORAD exercise or exercises that was/were scheduled for 9/11/2001. This is only a suggestion, of course, and any conspiracy theorist is welcome to offer up any topic relating to the OP as an initiating topic.

Anyone up to the challenge?

-Gumboot

 

[A-Train]

Navy ATC?

Gumboot,

I have learned from one of your posts that it was actually Navy ATC controlling the fighters scrambled from Otis and Langley.

At NEADS, Staff Sergeant William Huckabone is the first to notice on his radar scope that the three fighters launched from Langley Air Force Base are off course. Reportedly, they have headed east into a military training airspace over the ocean, instead of north toward the Baltimore area as instructed . Along with Master Sergeant Steve Citino, another controller who is sitting next to him, Huckabone orders a Navy air traffic controller who is handling the fighters to get them turned around. The Navy controller appears not to understand the urgency of the situation. He responds, “You’ve got [the fighters] moving east in airspace. Now you want ‘em to go to Baltimore?” Huckabone replies yes, and says, “Have him contact us on auxiliary frequency 2-3-4 decimal 6. Instead of taking handoffs to us and us handing ‘em back, just tell Center they’ve got to go to Baltimore.” The Navy controller says, “Stand by. We’ll get back to you.” Citino retorts, “What do you mean, ‘We’ll get back to you’? Just do it!” Huckabone jokes, “I’m gonna choke that guy!”

Who exactly were the Navy controllers who were handling the fighters? Who was the guy Huckabone wanted to choke? Do we know their names? What is their story? Where were they based? Were they housed inside the NEADS complex in upstate New York? Or were they out to sea at the time?

Cheap Shot, I would like to hear your input on this as well.

 

[BigAl]

There's been a number of conversations in threads recently relating to NORAD and the events of 9/11.

9/11 wasn't the FAA or NORAD's finest hour and it seems that they obfuscated their testimony to the 9/11 commission. Someone at NORAD did cut up some audio tape. This, of course, provides endless fuel for the twoofers.

An author at Vanity Fair has dug into it. Here are the kinks to a radio interview and a link to the Vanity article.

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/08/norad200608
http://www.wnyc.org/shows/bl/911.html

For the record, I don't think that there anything to do with air defense on 9/11 that can't be explained by FUD and incompetency.

 

[Gravy]

9/11 wasn't the FAA or NORAD's finest hour and it seems that they obfuscated their testimony to the 9/11 commission. Someone at NORAD did cut up some audio tape. This, of course, provides endless fuel for the twoofers.

An author at Vanity Fair has dug into it. Here are the kinks to a radio interview and a link to the Vanity article.

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/08/norad200608
http://www.wnyc.org/shows/bl/911.html

For the record, I don't think that there anything to do with air defense on 9/11 that can't be explained by FUD and incompetency.

gumboot will fill you in about things. He's an authority on NORAD and 9/11, hence his invitation for people with questions to ask.

It was an FAA supervisor who cut up the audio tape. It was an interview tape he had made after the attacks. The FBI interviewed the same people. He shouldn't have disposed of this evidence, but here's no indication that any valuable information was lost.

I think you misjudge the competence of NORAD and FAA workers and underestimate the intelligence of the terrorists.

 

[Reheat]

9/11 wasn't the FAA or NORAD's finest hour and it seems that they obfuscated their testimony to the 9/11 commission. Someone at NORAD did cut up some audio tape. This, of course, provides endless fuel for the twoofers.

For the record, I don't think that there anything to do with air defense on 9/11 that can't be explained by FUD and incompetency.

It appears that Gumboot has gone to bed, but I'm sure he will pick up where there are holes in the discussion.

I strongly disagree with these statements above that there was incompetency on the part of either NORAD or the FAA. There was momentary confusion and a few human mistakes, but not incompetency at all. Since forever more NORAD'S mission has been the protection of the ADIZ from an EXTERNAL source, not a source within the internal US. Swallow that, digest it and remember it throughout this discussion as it is one of the most relevant issue in this series of events.

Fighters don't travel at warp speed as in Star Trek movies or video games. They must be deconflicted with an enormous amount of other traffic in the NE US. There simply was just not enough time to do anything substantive about the two aircraft that hit the WTC. Pre-9/11 hijack procedures called for visual ID and possible diversion of hijacked aircraft. Even if the two Otis fighter had intercepted either of the two aircraft in time, they still would likely have been unable to prevent their eventual crash into the WTC.

NEADS made a good decision to launch the Langley fighter and IMHO, it was timely. However, referring back to the NORAD mission of looking OUTWARD not inward precipitated the fighters flying Eastward as opposed to North or North East. The F-16 flight leader at Langley and Norfolk Departure both followed SOP with a standard departure to a point 60 miles east over the Atlantic. Neither knew the urgency of the situation as they did not have a SPECIFIC TARGET at launch. Yes, there was confusion regarding AA11 which was caused by a controller in the BOSTON ARTCC. Once the FAA or NORAD knew the proximity of AA77 near Washington, there was little anyone could have done at that point to prevent the eventual attack on the Pentagon.

Departure Control out of Langley AFB is normally handled by Norfolk RAPCON, an FAA facility in Norfolk, VA. I suspect that since the fighters were flying east bound as was standard SOP without a specific target, they were handed off to the RAPCON at NAS Norfolk who controlled the Oceanic airspace. There are several airports in that vicinity, both civilian and military, so it's my guess that the airspace was divided among the various facilities in that area. This is simply standard procedure all over the US where there are both civilian and military facilities in close proximity.

There is NOTHING and I mean NOTHING at all suspicious about anything the FAA, NORAD, or the NAVY ATC referenced in the Vanity Fair article did or did not do.

This is my opinion after some 25 years of flying fighters or trainers in the US, Canada, Europe, and Asia.

If there is reasonable evidence that there was something wrong that occurred , please present it up front either with either a credible opinion based on experience or a credible source that specifies what it is.....

 

[BigAl]

I think you misjudge the competence of NORAD and FAA workers and underestimate the intelligence of the terrorists.

I look forward to seeing more information. IMO, the pilots and their supervisors did everything that could be done given the assets and the unknowns of the day.

 

[Myriad]

Post deleted, I misunderstood who was addressing whom.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[Loss Leader]

I'd like to invite anyone who has suspicious, doubts, concerns, or allegations about NORAD's activities ... to discuss them here with me, one topic at a time.

I have had questions for some time about a NORAD incident in 1983. It seems after some failures by personnel to launch their missiles in drill scenerios, the US briefly put the entire system completely under computer control.

I have seen evidence that a young high school student was able to hack into the War Operation Plan Response computer at NORAD and convince it to run a simulation of global thermonuclear war. This began a chain of events that came seconds from ending in the launch of a comprehensive nuclear first strike against the Soviets.

My information indicates that NORAD was utterly unable to control its own systems and, in the end, the same teenager was the only one who could disable the computer.

Can you honestly deny this?

 

[MG1962]

I have had questions for some time about a NORAD incident in 1983. It seems after some failures by personnel to launch their missiles in drill scenerios, the US briefly put the entire system completely under computer control.

I have seen evidence that a young high school student was able to hack into the War Operation Plan Response computer at NORAD and convince it to run a simulation of global thermonuclear war. This began a chain of events that came seconds from ending in the launch of a comprehensive nuclear first strike against the Soviets.

My information indicates that NORAD was utterly unable to control its own systems and, in the end, the same teenager was the only one who could disable the computer.

Can you honestly deny this?

Yes that was a very famous incident - here is a link for more information

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086567/

 

[mortimer]

I have had questions for some time about a NORAD incident in 1983. It seems after some failures by personnel to launch their missiles in drill scenerios, the US briefly put the entire system completely under computer control.

I have seen evidence that a young high school student was able to hack into the War Operation Plan Response computer at NORAD and convince it to run a simulation of global thermonuclear war. This began a chain of events that came seconds from ending in the launch of a comprehensive nuclear first strike against the Soviets.

My information indicates that NORAD was utterly unable to control its own systems and, in the end, the same teenager was the only one who could disable the computer.

Can you honestly deny this?

Deny it? I'd piss on a spark plug if I thought'd do any good!

 

[boloboffin]

We know that some of the initial accounts told to the 9/11 Commission regarding the responses of various entities were false. When the truth came out, the commission members remarked that the truth put everyone in a better light. As I understand it, the truth is what was included in the 9/11 CR, since this was exposed during the investigation.

Which leads to the question of where and why the false stories were told. It seems to me that the false stories inflate the abilities of the pre-9/11 entities to respond and communicate. A plausible reason for this, in my opinion, is to ward off any potential terrorist attacks by putting out misinformation about how close the US came to intercepting the flights. I welcome any comments yea or nay on this.

 

[Reheat]

I have had questions for some time about a NORAD incident in 1983. It seems after some failures by personnel to launch their missiles in drill scenerios, the US briefly put the entire system completely under computer control.

I have seen evidence that a young high school student was able to hack into the War Operation Plan Response computer at NORAD and convince it to run a simulation of global thermonuclear war. This began a chain of events that came seconds from ending in the launch of a comprehensive nuclear first strike against the Soviets.

My information indicates that NORAD was utterly unable to control its own systems and, in the end, the same teenager was the only one who could disable the computer.

Can you honestly deny this?

Since when has NORAD had any control over nuclear assets?

The acronym is North American Air Defense Command. They have had some missiles over the years, but the Nike Hercules were long gone by 1983. NORAD was responsible for the DEW Line and Pine Tree Line in Canada, but none were nuclear capable. There may be a few other types now under NORAD, but I don't think so. The Patriot system is under the control of the US Army, not NORAD.

During the 1950's and perhaps into the 1960's there were some small nuclear tipped air defense missile which could be fired from aircraft. I can't recall the name at the moment, but someone may remember. That's the only Nuclear assets that NORAD has controlled during it's history to my knowledge.

I seem to recall a movie with a similar plot that you've described, so that may be what you're thinking about.

Add: I was active duty AF in 1983 and in a position to have knowledge if anything like this actually occurred. It did not.

The name of the movie was Fail Safe as has been posted by someone else, see above.

 

[Reheat]

I have had questions for some time about a NORAD incident in 1983.

Continuing from my last post......

While NORAD has never been in control of nuclear assets, you could be referencing the Strategic Air Command which did have control of ICBMs etc.

That was probably the subject of the movie rather than NORAD.

I did not happen except in the movie.

 

[brodski]

Since when has NORAD had any control over nuclear assets?

The acronym is North American Air Defense Command. They have had some missiles over the years, but the Nike Hercules were long gone by 1983. NORAD was responsible for the DEW Line and Pine Tree Line in Canada, but none were nuclear capable. There may be a few other types now under NORAD, but I don't think so. The Patriot system is under the control of the US Army, not NORAD.

During the 1950's and perhaps into the 1960's there were some small nuclear tipped air defense missile which could be fired from aircraft. I can't recall the name at the moment, but someone may remember. That's the only Nuclear assets that NORAD has controlled during it's history to my knowledge.

I seem to recall a movie with a similar plot that you've described, so that may be what you're thinking about.

Add: I was active duty AF in 1983 and in a position to have knowledge if anything like this actually occurred. It did not.

The name of the movie was Fail Safe as has been posted by someone else, see above.

Unless LossLeader has recently suffered severe head trauma, I think he was yanking our chains.
The trouble is, most twoofers are indistinguishable from parody, so it's nonrefundable that you would have taken his post at face value.

 

[beachnut]

We know that some of the initial accounts told to the 9/11 Commission regarding the responses of various entities were false. When the truth came out, the commission members remarked that the truth put everyone in a better light. As I understand it, the truth is what was included in the 9/11 CR, since this was exposed during the investigation.

Which leads to the question of where and why the false stories were told. It seems to me that the false stories inflate the abilities of the pre-9/11 entities to respond and communicate. A plausible reason for this, in my opinion, is to ward off any potential terrorist attacks by putting out misinformation about how close the US came to intercepting the flights. I welcome any comments yea or nay on this.

When I heard the bs of the false stories, I checked. It was bs. The guys who spoke made mistakes. I could not find a single credible reason the errors or mistakes made a difference. It was just news bs for me. But I stopped investigating when I figured out Lou Dobbs was just manufacturing news. News stories suck, you have to use judgment just like with 9/11 truth stories. The news actually includes some facts, sometimes, 9/11 truth is too pure bs to use facts.

 

[Reheat]

Which leads to the question of where and why the false stories were told. It seems to me that the false stories inflate the abilities of the pre-9/11 entities to respond and communicate. A plausible reason for this, in my opinion, is to ward off any potential terrorist attacks by putting out misinformation about how close the US came to intercepting the flights. I welcome any comments yea or nay on this.

I would agree that this is a very real possibility. Any information regarding capabilities/limitations and force structure is always very sensitive information. That's why there was/is some reluctance to go into great detail about the events of that day. I'm actually surprised there has been as much information published as there has been. Of course, this is an issue that has allowed the CT's a "hay day" with their paranoid suspicions about anything not published or not scrutinized in public in great detail.

It is very highly possible that the delay in details occurred in order to allow time to implement changes in the system since 9/11. You will not find me or anyone else who knows discussing changes that have been made or current capability at all.

 

[Reheat]

Unless LossLeader has recently suffered severe head trauma, I think he was yanking our chains.
The trouble is, most twoofers are indistinguishable from parody, so it's nonrefundable that you would have taken his post at face value.

Guess I swallowed that one, huh!

If it helps any I spit it out and won't fall for it again, until next time!

If I responded to most of the stuff from twoofers like I really wanted, I'd have already been banned from this place!

 

[Loss Leader]

Deny it? I'd piss on a spark plug if I thought'd do any good!

Mortimer, you just became my person of the week. You and Barry Corbin.

 

[gumboot]

Gumboot,

I have learned from one of your posts that it was actually Navy ATC controlling the fighters scrambled from Otis and Langley.

Who exactly were the Navy controllers who were handling the fighters? Who was the guy Huckabone wanted to choke? Do we know their names? What is their story? Where were they based? Were they housed inside the NEADS complex in upstate New York? Or were they out to sea at the time?

Cheap Shot, I would like to hear your input on this as well.

Thanks for you patience.

I don't know what the actual name of the ATC controller is. They were neither at Rome, NY with NEADS, nor "out to sea". They were manning the TRACON for the numerous military airfields in the vicinity of Langley.

They were not "controlling" either the Otis or Langley fighters. They were merely responsible for airspace. The area around Langley AFB is home to Newport News - one of the largest naval yards in the US. It's also home to a number of Naval Air Stations including Oceana and Chambers.

-Gumboot

 

[gumboot]

9/11 wasn't the FAA or NORAD's finest hour and it seems that they obfuscated their testimony to the 9/11 commission. Someone at NORAD did cut up some audio tape. This, of course, provides endless fuel for the twoofers.

An author at Vanity Fair has dug into it. Here are the kinks to a radio interview and a link to the Vanity article.

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/08/norad200608
http://www.wnyc.org/shows/bl/911.html

For the record, I don't think that there anything to do with air defense on 9/11 that can't be explained by FUD and incompetency.

NORAD's performance on 9/11 was exemplary. They went from a DEFCON 5 peacetime situation to implementation of SCATANA in a matter of hours - a phenomenal feat. They established a CAP over Washington DC in less than half an hour - again an exceptional feat.

The failure of interception is not to any form of incompetence on the part of either the FAA or NORAD. The system was not designed to respond to a threat of that nature, and simply could not do so. That they got as close as they did is a testament to the efforts of the staff at NEADS and (in particular) Boston ARTCC that day.

No audio tapes at NORAD were cut up. Indeed it was the NORAD tapes (conspicuously un-cut-up) that revealed the truth of what happened that day, when the 9/11 Commission uncovered them.

Tapes at New York ARTCC were destroyed. These were taped interview with four controllers who handled flights on 9/11, and the purpose of the tapes was to allow them to capture their experience directly after events so that they could use those recordings to later produce their written reports of what happened. The tapes were created under the understanding that they would be destroyed after the written reports were produced. This is what happened.

No ATC communication recording, NORAD communication recording, or Radar recording of any kind were destroyed.

-Gumboot