Saturday, August 24, 2002

Finally, we get to hear from a pilot of a U. S. F-15 that was scrambled out of Otis Air National Guard Base on Cape Cod. The pilot, 'Nasty', flew one of the two planes that were sent after the two hijacked planes that flew into the two World Trade Center towers. These types of interviews are very useful as the pilots don't usually understand the full implications of what they say. I note the following:

  1. 'Nasty' informs us that the two planes were scrambled at 8:46 a. m., coincidentally the same time that Flight 11 hit the first of the two towers. Remember that Flight 11 was hijacked around 8:15 a. m. (see the detailed timeline), but NORAD wasn't notified about a problem until about 8:38. That means that the flight was scrambled 8 minutes after NORAD was supposedly notified. NORAD, presumably now on high alert, was notified at the latest at 9:24 (which itself seems absurdly late, given that air traffic control lost all contact with Flight 77 around 8:56) of the hijacking of Flight 77 (see the timeline - both these timelines are well worth reading, and even the most loyal subject of the Empire can see clearly that the potential intercepting planes were deliberately held back). That means that intercepting flights of Flight 77 should have been in the air at least by 9:32 (and one might ask why weren't planes already scrambled to protect all significant targets along the Eastern Seaboard, particularly targets in Washington). Flight 77 supposedly crashed into the Pentagon at 9:41. Where were the interceptors? Still supposedly miles away! Even on the obviously manipulated times supplied by government officials, Flight 77 should have been intercepted.

  2. 'Nasty' was of the opinion that he would have needed a Presidential order to shoot down the planes, as they had no standing order to do such a thing. The Cape Cod Times, which interviewed 'Nasty' said: "Besides, the only person who could have ordered them to be shot down was the president, and he was still at a public event when the second tower was hit." What does this mean? We know Bush was in full contact with his staff, Air Force One, and all the usual communications facilities the President would normally have. He was immediately informed of the crashes into the World Trade Center. Did they not want to interrupt his telling of a children's story? None of this makes the slightest sense.

  3. The article states: "'If we had shot down four airliners on Sept. 11, we wouldn't have been heroes,' Nasty says. 'You don't have the choice of outcomes. They're all bad.'" Now it is too bad that 'Nasty' might not have been a hero, but the difference between shooting down the planes and not shooting down the planes is thousands of lives, billions of dollars in damage to the fabric of New York and possibly hundreds of billions of dollars damage to the U. S. economy, a multi-billion dollar war in Afghanistan, a never-ending 'war on terror', the complete dismembering of the U. S. Constitution, and incalculable damage to the psychology of the whole country.

  4. The article states: "While the unit always had two pilots on alert, much of the regular flying time was devoted to training high over the Atlantic." Do all such bases have pilots on this type of alert? The apologists for the government inactivity seem to suggest that pilots are not usually on such alert. Why not?

  5. Even though there had not been an official call for a scramble, when the pilots heard from a colleague that a flight had been hijacked at 8:40, they immediately started to get ready. It is commendable that they were so on top of things. What were the pilots at other bases doing? These pilots had lots of time to get ready.

  6. The article states: "As soon as he climbed off his jet, Nasty was told by a crew member on the ground that another airliner had smashed into the Pentagon. And he was told that a military F-16 had shot down a fourth airliner in Pennsylvania, a report that turned out to be incorrect." Since the official story is that we don't know what happened to Flight 93, how do we know that this is incorrect?

In order that the truth come out on what really happened on September 11, all the pilots involved have to be interviewed under oath. At the moment, all evidence points to the fact that at least the interceptors for Flight 77 must have been intentionally held back.