MR. CHENEY'S COVER STORY
Section 2 of 'GUILTY FOR 9-11: BUSH, RUMSFELD, MYERS'
[Posted 20 November 2001]
[Updated 21 November 2001]

Dedicated to the firefighters of New York.

=======================================
In Section 1 we demonstrated that Andrews Air Force base, 10 miles from the Pentagon, had combat-ready fighter squadrons on September 11th. Why didn't jets scramble from Andrews until after the Pentagon was hit?
(To read Part 1, Section 1, go to:
http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/indict-1.htm )

LIE # 2: PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORIZATION WAS NEEDED TO SCRAMBLE JETS TO INTERCEPT FLIGHT 77

On Sunday, September 16th, Vice-President Richard Cheney was interviewed on NBC TV's 'MEET THE PRESS.' During that interview he created the impression that the military would have needed presidential authorization to scramble fighter jets to intercept American Airlines Flight 77 before it hit the Pentagon.

Mr. Cheney did not present this lie in a straightforward manner. Instead he did two things. First, he avoided discussing the failure to intercept Flight 77. Instead he talked only about the choices Mr. Bush supposedly made after the Pentagon was hit.

Second, he took it for granted that presidential approval was required to intercept a commercial jet, as if this were an accepted fact. Then based on this false foundation, he emitted a fog of emotional misinformation to confuse the millions of Americans who wanted to know: why didn't jet fighters scramble to intercept Flight 77 before it crashed into the Pentagon? Doesn't the U.S. have radar and an Air Force anymore?

It is common for officials attempting to cover-up a capital crime to put the blame on a subordinate. However Mr. Cheney used a different approach on 'MEET THE PRESS.' Relying on his skills in public deception, Cheney tried to create the impression that nothing improper had occurred, that faced with horrendous choices a brave President had done the right thing.

But as soon as one sees through this verbiage, one realizes Mr. Cheney has actually placed the responsibility for the failure to intercept American Flight 77 on George W. Bush.

Here is the relevant excerpt from 'MEET THE PRESS':

"MR. RUSSERT: What's the most important decision you think he made during the course of the day?
"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...
"It doesn't do any good to put up a combat air patrol if you don't give them instructions to act, if, in fact, they feel it's appropriate.
"MR. RUSSERT: So if the United States government became aware that a hijacked commercial airline[r] was destined for the White House or the Capitol, we would take the plane down?
"VICE PRES. CHENEY: Yes. The president made the decision...that if the plane would not divert...as a last resort, our pilots were authorized to take them out. Now, people say, you know, that's a horrendous decision to make. Well, it is. You've got an airplane full of American citizens, civilians, captured by...terrorists, headed and are you going to, in fact, shoot it down, obviously, and kill all those Americans on board?
"...It's a presidential-level decision, and the president made, I think, exactly the right call in this case, to say, "I wished we'd had combat air patrol up over New York."
--NBC, 'Meet the Press' 16 September 2001 (1)

* * *

Note that Mr. Cheney has performed a sleight of hand here. First he says, "the toughest decision was...whether we would intercept incoming commercial aircraft."

Later he says, "The president made the decision... that if the plane would not divert as a last resort, our pilots were authorized to take them out..." that is, "shoot it down."

But "intercept": and "shoot it down" do not mean the same thing.

"in·ter·cept
"in·ter·cept (în´ter-sèpt¹) verb, transitive
in·ter·cept·ed, in·ter·cept·ing, in·ter·cepts
"1. a. To stop, deflect, or interrupt the progress or intended course of"
--'
American Heritage Dictionary'
"shoot·down " shoot·down (sh¡t¹doun´) noun

"Destruction of a flying aircraft by a missile attack or gunfire."
--'
American Heritage Dictionary'

Mr. Cheney deliberately confused these terms to stop people from asking: why weren't any of the hijacked planes intercepted?

Since "stopping, deflecting, or interrupting the progress or intended course of" a hijacked airplane does not necessarily involve violence, there could be no moral obstacle to scrambling fighter jets to intercept Flight 77.

Therefore Mr. Cheney shifted quickly to the morally charged question of whether to shoot down "an airplane full of American citizens".

By creating this emotional link between interception (not necessarily violent) and shooting down a commercial jet (very violent), Cheney hoped to create sympathy for a President forced to make this "horrendous" choice: to intercept or not to intercept.

 (continued below)

 

S E C T I O N 14.0

Why was this executive order called on September 7, 2001 which was four days BEFORE the September 11 horror?

Government > Search > Executive Orders Search > #2001-261

EXECUTIVE ORDER NUMBER 01-261

WHEREAS, the Florida National Guard has the statutory responsibility to provide support to law-enforcement personnel and emergency-management personnel in the event of civil disturbances or natural disasters; and

WHEREAS, the Florida National Guard has the responsibility to provide training support to law-enforcement personnel and community-based organizations relating to counter drug operations; and

WHEREAS, the Florida National Guard must train to meet such responsibilities; and

WHEREAS, the Florida National Guard is funded for any such training by budgetary appropriation or grants before any such training; and

WHEREAS, the Florida National Guard must conduct such training in active service of the state, as defined by Section 250.27, Florida Statutes (also known as active military service and state active duty) for members of the Florida National Guard to be covered by Section 250.34, Florida Statutes; and

WHEREAS, as Governor, I may delegate the authority contained in Section 250.06(4), Florida Statutes, to order training to help respond to civil disturbances, natural disasters, and counter drug operations to The Adjutant General of the State of Florida; and

WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the State of Florida that I delegate such authority, so that the Florida National Guard is adequately trained to meet its obligation to help respond to civil disturbances, natural disasters, and counter drug operations and so that members of the Florida National Guard performing such training are covered by Section 250.34, Florida Statutes; and

WHEREAS, the Governor may order the Florida National Guard to provide extraordinary support to law enforcement upon request and such a request has been received from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) to assist FDLE in performing port security training and inspections.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, JEB Bush, as Governor of Florida, by virtue of the authority vested in me by Article IV, Section 1(a) of the Florida Constitution, and by Section 250.06(4), Florida Statutes, and all other applicable laws, do hereby promulgate the following Executive Order, to take immediate effect:

Section 1. Based upon the foregoing, I hereby find that the public welfare requires that the Florida National Guard train to support law-enforcement personnel and emergency-management personnel in the event of civil disturbances or natural disasters and to provide training support to law-enforcement personnel and community-based organizations relating to counter drug operations.

Section 2. I hereby delegate to The Adjutant General of the State of Florida all necessary authority, within approved budgetary appropriations or grants, to order members of the Florida National Guard into active service, as defined by Section 250.27, Florida Statutes, for the purpose of training to support law-enforcement personnel and emergency-management personnel in the event of civil disturbances or natural disasters and to provide training support to law-enforcement personnel and community-based organizations relating to counter drug operations.

Section 3. The Florida National Guard may order selected members on to state active duty for service to the State of Florida pursuant to Section 250.06(4), Florida Statutes, to assist FDLE in performing port security training and inspections. Based on the potential massive damage to life and property that may result from an act of terrorism at a Florida port, the necessity to protect life and property from such acts of terrorism, and inhibiting the smuggling of illegal DRUGS into the State of Florida, the use of the Florida National Guard to support FDLE in accomplishing port security training and inspections is "extraordinary support to law enforcement" as used in Section 250.06(4), Florida Statutes.

Section 4. The Adjutant General shall not place members of the Florida National Guard into active service for longer than necessary to accomplish the purposes declared herein.

Section 5. This Executive Order supersedes Executive Order Number 01-17. Executive Order Number 01-17 is hereby revoked.

Section 6. This Executive Order shall remain in full force and effect until the earlier of its revocation or June 30, 2003.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and have caused the Great Seal of the State of Florida to be affixed at Tallahassee, the Capitol, this 7th day of September 2001.



copvcia.com

"- A jump in UAL put options 90 times (not 90 percent) above normal between Sept. 6 and Sept.10, and 285 times higher than average on the Thursday before the attack– [CBS News, Sept. 26]

- A jump in American Airlines put options 60 times (not 60 percent) above normal on the day before the attacks. [CBS News, Sept. 26]

- No similar trading occurred on any other airlines. [Bloomberg Business Report, the Institute for Counterterrorism (ICT), Herzliyya, Israel citing data from the CBOE]

- Morgan Stanley saw, between Sept. 7 and Sept.10, an increase of 27 times (not 27 percent) in the purchase of put options on its shares. [ICT Report, Mechanics of Possible Bin-Laden Insider Trading Scam, Sept. 21, citing data from the CBOE].

- Merrill-Lynch saw a jump of more than 12 times the normal level of put options in the four trading days before the attacks. [Ibid]"

cyberexpose.net 1

S E C T I O N 15.0

We know it is difficult to understand that there are people who love this country and love the constitution but are opposed to the U.S. government bombing in Afghanistan. Why? Consider the following:

1. The U.S. planned to invade Afghanistan in October of this year even prior to the WTC tragedy.

2. Osman bin Laden has worked directly with the agency for 15 to 20 years. He was trained by the agency to fight the Afghani-Soviet war. He was paid by the agency to destabilize the economy of the USSR - later resulting in the collapse of their economy. He was paid to provide weapons and men to train KLA soldiers in the Balkans.

3. The U.S. has had long-standing plans to install a gas pipeline and an oil pipeline through Afghanistan. The Clinton administration was unable to get it done, despite installing the (agency planned) Taliban government which was supposed to be fully cooperative in the plan.

4. The tunnels and caves used by bin Laden was partly constructed and modified by the agency using taxpayers dollars.

If you care to research these matters, you will find that everything I have said here is true. Osman bin Laden (actually agent Tim Ossman) is the best terrorist that the U.S. government could CREATE and buy. He is worth his weight in gold to the U.S. government because he is enabling legislation to be passed such as the USA "Patriot" Bill which eliminates the Fourth Amendment - PERMITTING HOMES TO BE SEARCHED AND ITEMS TO BE SEIZED WITHOUT A WARRANT, in any case not necessarily relating to terrorism. Our government is using the terrorism card to take away your freedom, forever.

Don't be so quick to fight for the bankers and the oil companies - because THAT'S WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT. Yes, terrorists killed 5000+ people on 9/11, but who allowed those terrorists into the country and provided them free latitude to do whatever they wanted, despite the efforts of some bureau agents who tried to stop them but were not permitted to do so. It hard to believe that your government is so corrupt and evil, but it is - and it doesn't take much research to reveal it.

Wanting to replace the corrupt people in high government offices doesn't mean we are anti-American, rather it means

 

WE CARE A GREAT DEAL ABOUT AMERICA and want to preserve this republic, its sovereignty and its liberties for another generation of Americans. THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE GIVE UP THEIR LIBERTIES FOR A FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY. If they have their way, you will see the rise of a global government and the loss of our republican form of government. The children of those who died on 9/11 deserve better than that from us. We owe them something - and that is to seek the truth and to deal with it.

The elected politicians who sit in DC today are only temporary representatives of our government. Eventually they leave office or die of old age. What makes our government great is the constitution, the balance of powers, equal justice under the law, the rights of individuals to determine their own destiny. It's our system of government that we love, respect and defend - not the people who are temporarily representatives of it and decision-makers within it.

Right now we have people in government who are not acting in the best interests of this nation or its people - for various reasons. These congressmen are virtually unremovable because they have set up a system whereby they are ensured millions of dollars to keep themselves in power. Unless we can vote them out of office in the next two elections, our nation and our system of government that we love so much will be gone and we will have lost what our forefathers fought and died to preserve for us. We have to forget about party affiliations, we have to select men and women for government office who will act in the best interests of the nation and who will honor their oaths to protect and defend the constitution.

 

Subscribe to our free newsletter at http://emperors-clothes.com/f.htm
Receive articles from Emperor's Clothes.

Please forward this text or the link to this article to a friend.
http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/indict-2.htm

Feel free to reprint and repost Emperor's Clothes articles for any non-commercial purpose as long as we are given full credit, including authors' names and the Web address. Please quote what we have written rather than paraphrasing.

* Special Announcement - 30 April 2003 * Coming Soon! Our book on 9-11!

Working title: "Conspiracy, Blunders, and Cover-up: What Really Happened on 9-11?"

Mystery within a mystery: what explains the strange behavior of George Bush at the Booker School on 9-11? As discussed in articles on Emperor's Clothes, his actions make *no* sense unless he was privy to the attack plans for 9-11. But if he *did* know the plans, why did he act in a manner that so obviously betrayed consciousness of guilt? "Conspiracy, Blunders, and Cover-up" answers this and other key questions.

Note that Cheney is speaking only of the period after Flight 77 hit the Pentagon. By confusing the issues of "intercepting" vs. "shooting down" AFTER the Pentagon was hit, Cheney was trying to get his listeners to forget the real issue: that nothing had been done BEFORE the Pentagon was hit. Mr. Cheney attempted to hide the jump from "intercept" to "shoot down" by means of the following connecting sentence:

"It doesn't do any good to put up a combat air patrol if you don't give them instructions to act, if, in fact, they feel it's appropriate."

This is disinformation. Mr. Cheney was treating his viewers like fools.

First, as anyone with a computer and basic knowledge of the Internet can find out, Air Traffic Controllers request military jets to intercept commercial aircraft on a routine basis. Sometimes the purpose is to tell a commercial pilot that his plane has gone off course; other times the interceptor goes up in order to observe the situation directly - for instance, to see who is flying the plane. None of this requires presidential approval.

Second, military interceptors (or 'escorts') already have clear "instructions to act." These instructions can be read online in detailed manuals from the FAA and the Department of Defense. The instructions cover everything from minor emergencies to hijackings. If a problem is serious, high-ranking military officers from the National Military Command Center (NMCC) in the Pentagon can take charge.

Let us consider the procedures used in intercepting commercial aircraft.

An Air Traffic Controller (ATC) may request military jets to intercept (or 'escort') a commercial aircraft in response to any serious problem which the Air Traffic Controller cannot solve through radio contact. Perhaps the most common problem is that a commercial jet has deviated from its authorized flight path.

Every commercial jet is required to follow IFR, or Instrument Flight Rules. IFR requires pilots to file a flight plan with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) before takeoff.
(FAA Order 7400.2E
14-1-2) (2)

"Commercial flights fly according to predefined flight plans. These flight plans are intended to provide quick routes that take advantage of favorable winds while avoiding the routes traveled by other aircraft. The usual flight plan is a series of three connected routes: a standard instrument departure (SID) route, an en route path, and a standard instrument arrival (STAR). Each route consists of a sequence of geographic points, or fixes, which, when connected, form a trajectory from the point of departure to the point of arrival."
--'Direct-To Requirements' by G. Dennis & E. Torlak (3)

If a plane deviates from its flight plan, for example if it makes the wrong turn at one of its 'fixes,' an Air Traffic Controller (ATC) contacts the pilot. If the ATC cannot make contact, he or she will request an escort - that is, a military jet - to scramble and check out the situation. This is called 'interception.'

As you can see, interception is not necessarily an aggressive act. Usually it is requested because routine communication has become impossible.

For example, when the Lear jet chartered by Payne Stewart, the famous golf pro, went off course, and the pilot did not respond by radio, the FAA contacted the military:

"Several Air Force and Air National Guard fighter jets, plus an AWACS radar control plane, helped the Federal Aviation Administration track the runaway Learjet and estimate when it would run out of fuel."
--'CNN,' 26 October 1999 (4)

The FAA online manual describes how an escort (i.e., a fighter jet) might communicate with a commercial airliner which fails to respond to radio contact. The FAA has a chart entitled:

"INTERCEPTING SIGNALS
"Signals initiated by intercepting aircraft and responses by intercepted aircraft."

According to the chart, which is available on-line, if a commercial jet is intercepted in daytime, the escort fighter jet may communicate by:

"...Rocking wings from a position slightly above and ahead of, and normally to the left of, the intercepted aircraft..."

This conveys the message, "You have been intercepted." The commercial jet should respond by rocking its wings, indicating it will comply.

The escort then makes a

"slow level turn, normally to the left, on to the desired heading [direction]."

The commercial jet is supposed to respond by following the escort.
(FAA 'AIM'
5-6-4) (5)

When a commercial jet deviates from its approved flight path, it creates a potentially deadly hazard: it could collide with another jet. It is therefore reassuring that the FAA has an exacting standard for what constitutes an emergency:

"Consider that an aircraft emergency exists ... when: ...There is unexpected loss of radar contact and radio communications with any ...aircraft."
--FAA Order 7110.65M 10-2-5 (6)

And:

"EMERGENCY DETERMINATIONS
"If ... you are in doubt that a situation constitutes an emergency or potential emergency, handle it as though it were an emergency."
--FAA Order 7110.65M
10-1-1-c (7)

A high-ranking FAA official - called an Air Defense Liaison Officer (ADLO) - is stationed in the headquarters of NORAD, the North American Aerospace Defense Command. The purpose: to help the FAA and the military work together to handle emergencies as quickly as possible. (8) Escorts are usually scrambled from NORAD bases, such as the Otis Air Force Base on Cape Cod, Massachusetts, or the air base at Langley, Virginia. But not always:

"Normally, NORAD escort aircraft will take the required action. However, for the purpose of these procedures, the term "escort aircraft" applies to any military aircraft assigned to the escort mission. "
--FAA Order 7610.4J 7-1-2 (9)

Thus when Payne Stewart's Lear jet went off course:

"First, a fighter jet from Tyndall, Fla., was diverted from a routine training flight to check out the Learjet. Two F-16s from another Florida base then picked up the chase, later handing it over to two Air National Guard F-16s from Oklahoma, which handed it over to two F-16s from Fargo, North Dakota."
--'ABC News,' 25 October 1999 (10)

During a serious emergency, or if there is any possibility that a hijacking has occurred:

"The escort service will be requested by the FAA hijack coordinator by direct contact with the National Military Command Center (NMCC)."
--FAA Order 7610.4J 7-1-2 (9)

A Defense Department manual makes the same point:

"In the event of a hijacking, the NMCC will be notified by the most expeditious means by the FAA. The NMCC will, with the exception of immediate responses,...forward requests for DOD [Department of Defense] assistance to the Secretary of Defense for approval."
--CJCSI 3610.01A, 1 June 2001 (11)

Located in the Pentagon, the NMCC can tap into radar stations and thus monitor dangerous emergencies and hijackings. For example, during the Payne Stewart incident:

"...officers on the Joint Chiefs were monitoring the Learjet on radar screens inside the Pentagon's National Military Command Center."
--'CNN,' 26 October 1999 (4)

When dealing with potentially hostile situations, escorts can adopt more aggressive behavior:

"Small Private Plane Ordered to Land in Vicinity of Bush Ranch
"A small private plane flying unauthorized in the vicinity of President Bush's ranch near Crawford was ordered by the military to land Thursday, a sheriff's deputy said....
"The Federal Aviation Administration declared that the plane was unauthorized and ordered its occupants detained, Plemons said. At that point military officials, flying in two jets beside the plane, got on the pilot's radio frequency and ordered the Cessna to land...
"The plane landed on a private landing strip near State Highway 6, about eight miles from the Bush ranch near Crawford....
"In [a second incident, in] Wood County, Sheriff's senior Dispatcher Rodney Mize said a private plane was forced down by two military pilots in A-10 Warthog jets about 11:30 a.m. The jets flew one above and one below until the private plane's pilot landed at Wisener Field near Mineola."
--'AP,' 13 September 2001 (12)

The 'Boston Globe' reported that:

"[Marine Corps Major Mike] Snyder, the NORAD spokesman, said its fighters routinely intercept aircraft.
"When planes are intercepted, they typically are handled with a graduated response. The approaching fighter may rock its wingtips to attract the pilot's attention, or make a pass in front of the aircraft. Eventually, it can fire tracer rounds in the airplane's path, or, under certain circumstances, down it with a missile."
--'Boston Globe,' 15 September 2001 (13)

Now, let us return to Mr. Cheney and his interview on 'MEET THE PRESS.'

As you will recall, he said:

"It doesn't do any good to put up a combat air patrol if you don't give them instructions to act, if, in fact, they feel it's appropriate."

Mr. Cheney is attempting to misinform by pretending that intercept pilots need 'instructions' from the President, when he knows perfectly well that clear instructions and a whole organizational network exist to handle intercept emergencies.

Moreover, Mr. Cheney's implicit argument - that there is no point in sending up an escort unless the pilot has clearance to shoot down a commercial jet - is absurd.

Why would such a decision have to be made in advance of scrambling the escort? Even if an airliner has been taken over by a terrorist with a suicide mission, how could Mr. Cheney, Mr. Bush or anyone else other than God Himself possibly predict how the hijacker would respond to an intercept by military jets? Even if a hijacker were ready to die for the glory of crashing into the Pentagon, does that mean he would also be ready to die for the glory of ignoring a military pilot's order to land?

So even if the military had no authority to shoot down Flight 77, why not send up escorts planes? Isn't that in fact how police and the military routinely handle hijack situations - by mobilizing a potentially overwhelming force in the hope of getting the hijacker to surrender?

Why, as Mr. Cheney claims, would there have been "no point" in trying this tactic in the case of Flight 77? Weren't many human lives at stake? Isn't that "a point"?

A DEFENSE THAT BACKFIRES

What about the rest of Mr. Cheney's remarks, his contention that only President Bush could authorize the military to actually shoot down a hijacked plane? In all probability this is true. But as we shall see in a later section, this comment, as well as other things Mr. Cheney said on 'MEET THE PRESS,' will prove damning to George W. Bush when he goes on trial for treason.

Summary of evidence is CONTINUED IN PART 1, SECTION 3 http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/indict-3.htm

* Footnotes and Further Reading follows

===============

Please forward this text or the link to this article to a friend.
http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/indict-2.htm

Subscribe to the Emperor's Clothes email list.
Receive texts posted at Emperor's Clothes.
To subscribe, go to:

http://www.emperors-clothes.com/f.htm

 Footnotes and Further Reading

================

For a map of Washington showing the distance from Andrews Air Force base to the Pentagon go to: http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/andrewsmap.htm

(1) '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

(2) Regarding rules governing IFR requirements, see FAA Order 7400.2E 'Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters,' Effective Date: December 7, 2000 (Includes Change 1, effective July 7, 2001), Chapter 14-1-2.
Full text posted at:
http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIR/air1401.html#14-1-2

(3) For a clear and detailed description of flight plans, fixes, and Air Traffic Control, see: 'Direct-To Requirements' by Gregory Dennis and Emina Torlak at:
http://sdg.lcs.mit.edu/atc/D2/D2Requirements.htm

(4) 'CNN,' 26 October 1999 "Pentagon never considered downing Stewart's Learjet," Web posted at: 8:27 p.m. EDT (0027 GMT)
Full text posted at:
http://www.cnn.com/US/9910/26/shootdown/
Backup at:
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/cnnlearjet.htmhttp://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/cnnlearjet.htm

(5) FAA 'Aeronautical Information Manual: Official Guide to Basic Flight Information and Air Traffic Control (ATC) Procedures,' (Includes Change 3 Effective: July 12, 2001) Chapter 5-6-4 "Interception Signals"
Full text posted at:
http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIM/Chap5/aim0506.html#5-6-4

(6) FAA Order 7110.65M 'Air Traffic Control' (Includes Change 3 Effective: July 12, 2001), Chapter 10-2-5 "Emergency Situations"
Full text posted at:
http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/ATC/Chp10/atc1002.html#10-2-5

(7) FAA Order 7110.65M 'Air Traffic Control' (Includes Change 3 Effective: July 12, 2001), Chapter 10-1-1 "Emergency Determinations"
Full text posted at:
http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/ATC/Chp10/atc1001.html#10-1-1

(8) FAA Order 7610.4J 'Special Military Operations' (Effective Date: November 3, 1998; Includes: Change 1, effective July 3, 2000; Change 2, effective July 12, 2001), Chapter 4, Section 5, "Air Defense Liaison Officers (ADLO's)"
Full text posted at:
http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/MIL/Ch4/mil0405.html#Section%205

(9) FAA Order 7610.4J 'Special Military Operations' (Effective Date: November 3, 1998; Includes: Change 1, effective July 3, 2000; Change 2, effective July 12, 2001), Chapter 7, Section 1-2, "Escort of Hijacked Aircraft: Requests for Service"
Full text posted at:
http://faa.gov/ATpubs/MIL/Ch7/mil0701.html#7-1-2

(10) 'ABCNews,' 25 October 1999 "Runaway Plane Crashes in S.D.; Golfer, at Least Four Others Killed," by Geraldine Sealey
Full text posted at:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/plane102599.html
Backup at:
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/abclearjet.htm

(11) 'Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction 3610.01A,' 1 June 2001, "Aircraft Piracy (Hijacking) and Destruction of Derelict Airborne Objects," 4.Policy (page 1)
PDF available at:
http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/cjcsd/cjcsi/3610_01a.pdf
Backup at:
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/3610_01a.pdf

(12) 'The Associated Press State & Local Wire' 13 September 2001, Thursday, BC cycle, "Small private plane ordered to land in vicinity of Bush ranch"
Full text posted at:
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/bushranch.htm

(13) 'The Boston Globe,' Saturday 15 September 2001 Third Edition Page A1, "Facing Terror Attack's Aftermath: Otis Fighter Jets Scrambled Too Late to Halt The Attacks" by Glen Johnson.
Full text posted at:
http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/bg915.htm

Working title: "Conspiracy, Blunders, and Cover-up: What Really Happened on 9-11?"

Mystery within a mystery: what explains the strange behavior of George Bush at the Booker School on 9-11? As discussed in articles on Emperor's Clothes, his actions make *no* sense unless he was privy to the attack plans for 9-11. But if he *did* know the plans, why did he act in a manner that so obviously betrayed consciousness of guilt?

"Conspiracy, Blunders, and Cover-up" answers this and other key questions.

www.emperors-clothes.com or www.tenc.net

This Website is mirrored at http://emperor.vwh.net/ and at http://globalresistance.com

#37--Why is it that $65 million was invested in investigating Clinton's penis, and $50 million allocated to investigate the Columbia shuttle disaster, yet only $3 million was allocated to investigate 9-11?

#38--Why has the Justice Dept. consistently refused to supply information to Congress on how the USA PATRIOT Act is being implemented, especially in light of the fact that passage of the act was conditional upon adequate oversight by Congress?

Because Congress has no right to know anything. If they have a problem, they can go to the Supreme Court! (heh-heh!)

#39--Why is Mr. Bush so anxious to seal records that are nearly 20 years old?

Because Poppy said so!

#40--Why did the President renege on his campaign promise to support the Kyoto Treaty on global warming?

Because Poppy said so!

#41--Where were you, Mr. Bush, between 1972 and 1973 when you were supposed to be in the national guard? (more info)

Ummm...I really don't remember...spent some time in Mexico, Florida, Alabama...you know, youthful indescretions!

#42--How do you justify the budget cuts for veterans benefits at precisely the time you are ramping up the military for permanent war?

They cut my benefits when I deserted...so what?

#43--Is it true that you are recruiting soldiers in Mexico?

Am I?? Better check with Karl on that one.

#44--What exactly did you mean when you referred to 9-11 as "hitting the trifecta?"

Heehee! Ask Bill Bennet about that one!
Seriously...I said I wouldn't touch Social Security unless in the case of war, National disaster, or recession. If that ain't a trifecta, I don't know what is!

#45--Why did the White House start taking Cipro right after 9/11 and why didn't they advise the American people that an attack was imminent?

Ari will field that one in the morning!

#46--Why did anthrax only go to Democrats and media enemies?

I dunno...why do you think Tom daschale is at my every beck and call right now?

#47--Why doesn't the press ask and follow up on these questions?

Refer to #46.

#49--Mr. Bush has been reported as saying to a common man in Philadelphia, "who cares what you think?" Is this view of Mr. Bush's reserved for "little" people, or everyone?

Refer to # 46

#50--Mr. Bush*, do you still "not give a damn" where Osama Bin Laden is?

Osama bin Laden does not concern me...

#52--More importantly, why are people rounded up and arrested before protests, held without charges, and then released?

Those people should just be glad they weren't sent to Gitmo!

#53--In 1989, you reportedly said that you are a media creation. Has anything changed?

As a matter of fact, yes! 14 years later I AM THE MEDIA!!!

#54--Why have people started saying "be careful what you say?"

Cuz they know what's good for them!

#55--Why would Mr. Bush rather play golf on lushly watered greens in the desert than talk to citizens at a town meeting?

Becuz, unlike Clinton, I'm a damn good golfer!

#56--Why redact information about 9-11 by classifying it when it is on videotape and has already been printed in the newspaper?

What's that word mean?

#57--Do you feel it is an abuse of power to classify 9-11 documents in order to avoid embarrassment for the administration about evidence that it failed to act?

Yer startin' to bug me...remember #46?

#58--On the morning of 9-11, why was Cheney hustled to a secure location while Bush was not?

It was a damn good goat story...wait a second...I was hustled out of harms way. I went to Alabama, and then Nebraska until it was assured the attacks were over. I mean, I was trying to get out of harm's way!

#59--Why is broadcasting knowingly false news legal in America but illegal in England?

I've seen Englandish TV...all they watch is Monty Python, and some show about Missus Slocumb.

#60--Who exactly was with Cheney in his secret underground government? Rummy? Perle? Wolfowitz? Powell?

None of your damn business. Besides, if I knew, I wouldn't tell you anyway!

#61--What is the LEGAL definition of a "shadow government?"

That's none of your concern. If I say it's legal, than it is.

#62--Is it true that it cost $800,000 to $1 million for the "Top Gun" photo op on the aircraft carrier?

Damn the costs! I looked damn good, didn't I?http://www.geocities.com/secretspyy *** http://www.geocities.com/jdombrasqu *** http://www.new-world-odor.com