Harvester
22-07-2004, 10:20
http://www.repubblica.it/2004/g/sezioni/esteri/11set/11set/11set.html
:muro: :muro: :muro: :muro: :muro: :muro: :muro: :muro:
:muro: :muro: :muro: :muro: :muro: :muro: :muro: :muro:
View Full Version : [11/09] potevano beccarne qualcuno.......
ShadowThrone
22-07-2004, 10:36
resto in silenzio.. sennò me bannano!
Chromo
22-07-2004, 10:50
Ma si è mai saputo che armi avessero questi? Come mai non le hanno trovate ai controlli? Servono veramente questi controlli? Non potrebbero farci imbarcare in 10 minuti tanto, comunque, se qualcuno vuole far passare un arma la fa passare lo stesso?!?!?!?
Harvester
22-07-2004, 10:52
Originariamente inviato da Chromo
Ma si è mai saputo che armi avessero questi? Come mai non le hanno trovate ai controlli? Servono veramente questi controlli? Non potrebbero farci imbarcare in 10 minuti tanto, comunque, se qualcuno vuole far passare un arma la fa passare lo stesso?!?!?!?
allora erano molto meno severi. quando giovedì scorso sono andato a bruxelles mi hanno fatto spogliare quasi completamente
Ma si è mai saputo che armi avessero questi? Come mai non le hanno trovate ai controlli? Servono veramente questi controlli? Non potrebbero farci imbarcare in 10 minuti tanto, comunque, se qualcuno vuole far passare un arma la fa passare lo stesso?!?!?!?
allora erano molto meno severi. quando giovedì scorso sono andato a bruxelles mi hanno fatto spogliare quasi completamente
Everyman
22-07-2004, 10:54
Fermo e restando che i terroristi le impiccherei per le palle:) , non riesco ancora a capire come siano riusciti a sfuggire ai controlli.
Qualcuno mi spiega?:confused:
Qualcuno mi spiega?:confused:
Nevermind
22-07-2004, 10:58
Originariamente inviato da Everyman
Fermo e restando che i terroristi le impiccherei per le palle:) , non riesco ancora a capire come siano riusciti a sfuggire ai controlli.
Qualcuno mi spiega?:confused:
O anche perchè non sono intervenuti subito i caccia militari pper scortare/abbattere gli aerei.
Ma poi non avevano detto che erano i piloti stessi degli aeri i kamikaze? :boh: qui vengono fatti passare per passeggeri qualsiasi.:confused:
Saluti.
Fermo e restando che i terroristi le impiccherei per le palle:) , non riesco ancora a capire come siano riusciti a sfuggire ai controlli.
Qualcuno mi spiega?:confused:
O anche perchè non sono intervenuti subito i caccia militari pper scortare/abbattere gli aerei.
Ma poi non avevano detto che erano i piloti stessi degli aeri i kamikaze? :boh: qui vengono fatti passare per passeggeri qualsiasi.:confused:
Saluti.
Chromo
22-07-2004, 11:04
Originariamente inviato da Harvester
allora erano molto meno severi. quando giovedì scorso sono andato a bruxelles mi hanno fatto spogliare quasi completamente
Non dirlo a me... il 10 settembre 2001 ero all'Aeroporto Charles de Gaulle alle 10.00, e l'allerta era appena arrivato.
Per ripartire ci ho messo 6 ore.
Però, a quanto riesco a vedere dalle foto, sono passati almeno in un metal detector ed hanno subito una perquisizione corporale e del bagaglio a mano. Cosa caspita avevano? Armi in ceramica smontate?
allora erano molto meno severi. quando giovedì scorso sono andato a bruxelles mi hanno fatto spogliare quasi completamente
Non dirlo a me... il 10 settembre 2001 ero all'Aeroporto Charles de Gaulle alle 10.00, e l'allerta era appena arrivato.
Per ripartire ci ho messo 6 ore.
Però, a quanto riesco a vedere dalle foto, sono passati almeno in un metal detector ed hanno subito una perquisizione corporale e del bagaglio a mano. Cosa caspita avevano? Armi in ceramica smontate?
Wagen
22-07-2004, 11:07
Originariamente inviato da Nevermind
O anche perchè non sono intervenuti subito i caccia militari pper scortare/abbattere gli aerei.
Ma poi non avevano detto che erano i piloti stessi degli aeri i kamikaze? :boh: qui vengono fatti passare per passeggeri qualsiasi.:confused:
Saluti.
hanno detto che poi li hanno pilotati i terroristi dopo averli dirottati, non che erano i piloti degli aerei i terroristi.
O anche perchè non sono intervenuti subito i caccia militari pper scortare/abbattere gli aerei.
Ma poi non avevano detto che erano i piloti stessi degli aeri i kamikaze? :boh: qui vengono fatti passare per passeggeri qualsiasi.:confused:
Saluti.
hanno detto che poi li hanno pilotati i terroristi dopo averli dirottati, non che erano i piloti degli aerei i terroristi.
Harvester
22-07-2004, 11:07
Originariamente inviato da Chromo
Non dirlo a me... il 10 settembre 2001 ero all'Aeroporto Charles de Gaulle alle 10.00, e l'allerta era appena arrivato.
Per ripartire ci ho messo 6 ore.
Però, a quanto riesco a vedere dalle foto, sono passati almeno in un metal detector ed hanno subito una perquisizione corporale e del bagaglio a mano. Cosa caspita avevano? Armi in ceramica smontate?
quelle non fanno scattare il metal detector. forse avevano quei tessuti che nascondono gli oggetti metallici.
in tutto ciò, però, mi sembra che ancora non sia chiaro che armi avessero
Non dirlo a me... il 10 settembre 2001 ero all'Aeroporto Charles de Gaulle alle 10.00, e l'allerta era appena arrivato.
Per ripartire ci ho messo 6 ore.
Però, a quanto riesco a vedere dalle foto, sono passati almeno in un metal detector ed hanno subito una perquisizione corporale e del bagaglio a mano. Cosa caspita avevano? Armi in ceramica smontate?
quelle non fanno scattare il metal detector. forse avevano quei tessuti che nascondono gli oggetti metallici.
in tutto ciò, però, mi sembra che ancora non sia chiaro che armi avessero
gpc
22-07-2004, 13:41
Mi ero ripromesso di non partecipare più a questi thread perchè si trasformano puntualmente nella fiera della paranoia e dell'antiamericanismo...
Comunque, per dovere di cronaca:
- tutti hanno fatto scattare il metal detector e tutti sono stati controllati, ma all'epoca non c'era divieto di portare lamette o taglierini (TG5 di oggi);
- si era parlato di armi di vetro o di plastica, tipo coltellini di vetro;
- i terroristi hanno preso il comando degli aerei, infatti si erano addestrati per il volo;
- quando gli aerei sono stati dirottati non sono state prese misure drastiche perchè nessun pazzo aveva mai usato degli aerei come delle bombe e si pensava a "normali" dirottamenti;
- i caccia non si sono alzati subito in volo per il modivo di cui sopra e perchè non era previsto un attacco sul suolo americano, ergo, non erano semplicemente pronti;
- le norme molto severe sono state introdotte dopo gli attentati, quindi non si può dire, a mia mamma hanno sequestrato il kit del manicure (vero), come mai a loro non hanno preso i taglierini? Semplice, non era vietato.
Comunque, per dovere di cronaca:
- tutti hanno fatto scattare il metal detector e tutti sono stati controllati, ma all'epoca non c'era divieto di portare lamette o taglierini (TG5 di oggi);
- si era parlato di armi di vetro o di plastica, tipo coltellini di vetro;
- i terroristi hanno preso il comando degli aerei, infatti si erano addestrati per il volo;
- quando gli aerei sono stati dirottati non sono state prese misure drastiche perchè nessun pazzo aveva mai usato degli aerei come delle bombe e si pensava a "normali" dirottamenti;
- i caccia non si sono alzati subito in volo per il modivo di cui sopra e perchè non era previsto un attacco sul suolo americano, ergo, non erano semplicemente pronti;
- le norme molto severe sono state introdotte dopo gli attentati, quindi non si può dire, a mia mamma hanno sequestrato il kit del manicure (vero), come mai a loro non hanno preso i taglierini? Semplice, non era vietato.
Wagen
22-07-2004, 13:50
Originariamente inviato da gpc
- le norme molto severe sono state introdotte dopo gli attentati, quindi non si può dire, a mia mamma hanno sequestrato il kit del manicure (vero), come mai a loro non hanno preso i taglierini? Semplice, non era vietato.
alla mia ragazza 2 anni fa sul volo madrid-roma nn si accorsero che ce lo aveva nello zaino (passato dai raggi X regolarmente), mentre glielo fecero buttare sulla coincidenza roma-firenze!
Viva i controlli itliani! :)
- le norme molto severe sono state introdotte dopo gli attentati, quindi non si può dire, a mia mamma hanno sequestrato il kit del manicure (vero), come mai a loro non hanno preso i taglierini? Semplice, non era vietato.
alla mia ragazza 2 anni fa sul volo madrid-roma nn si accorsero che ce lo aveva nello zaino (passato dai raggi X regolarmente), mentre glielo fecero buttare sulla coincidenza roma-firenze!
Viva i controlli itliani! :)
IpseDixit
22-07-2004, 13:52
Originariamente inviato da Wagen
hanno detto che poi li hanno pilotati i terroristi dopo averli dirottati, non che erano i piloti degli aerei i terroristi.
Si sapevano pilotare un aereo, oltre tutto un loro istruttore si ricordava bene di un allievo che era interessato solo al volo e alle virate e non a decollo e atteraggio.:oink:
hanno detto che poi li hanno pilotati i terroristi dopo averli dirottati, non che erano i piloti degli aerei i terroristi.
Si sapevano pilotare un aereo, oltre tutto un loro istruttore si ricordava bene di un allievo che era interessato solo al volo e alle virate e non a decollo e atteraggio.:oink:
gpc
22-07-2004, 13:53
Originariamente inviato da Wagen
alla mia ragazza 2 anni fa sul volo madrid-roma nn si accorsero che ce lo aveva nello zaino (passato dai raggi X regolarmente), mentre glielo fecero buttare sulla coincidenza roma-firenze!
Viva i controlli itliani! :)
Oh beh, in Spagna non hanno controllato nemmeno i documenti a me... :rolleyes: Fatto il checkin bastava avere in mano la carta d'imbarco, non guardavano nemmeno se corrispondeva la carta d'identità con il nome sul biglietto. Potevo andarlo a fare io e passarlo a chiunque e non se ne accorgevano...
alla mia ragazza 2 anni fa sul volo madrid-roma nn si accorsero che ce lo aveva nello zaino (passato dai raggi X regolarmente), mentre glielo fecero buttare sulla coincidenza roma-firenze!
Viva i controlli itliani! :)
Oh beh, in Spagna non hanno controllato nemmeno i documenti a me... :rolleyes: Fatto il checkin bastava avere in mano la carta d'imbarco, non guardavano nemmeno se corrispondeva la carta d'identità con il nome sul biglietto. Potevo andarlo a fare io e passarlo a chiunque e non se ne accorgevano...
lellopisello
22-07-2004, 13:53
Spero facciano tutti la fine che meritano.
Sono solo dei vigliacchi!!!!
Sono in grado di agire solamente nell'ombra...come vermi notturni
Sono solo dei vigliacchi!!!!
Sono in grado di agire solamente nell'ombra...come vermi notturni
gpc
22-07-2004, 13:54
Originariamente inviato da IpseDixit
Si sapevano pilotare un aereo, oltre tutto un loro istruttore si ricordava bene di un allievo che era interessato solo al volo e alle virate e non a decollo e atteraggio.:oink:
E infatti uno, se non ricordo male, era stato anche segnalato come sospetto proprio per questo motivo... ma poi, per i problemi di mancata comunicazione tra le agenzie di sicurezza e di disorganizzazione che sono emersi dalle inchieste, non se ne fece nulla...
Si sapevano pilotare un aereo, oltre tutto un loro istruttore si ricordava bene di un allievo che era interessato solo al volo e alle virate e non a decollo e atteraggio.:oink:
E infatti uno, se non ricordo male, era stato anche segnalato come sospetto proprio per questo motivo... ma poi, per i problemi di mancata comunicazione tra le agenzie di sicurezza e di disorganizzazione che sono emersi dalle inchieste, non se ne fece nulla...
gpc
22-07-2004, 13:54
Originariamente inviato da lellopisello
Spero facciano tutti la fine che meritano.
:mbe: Concordo ma... direi che la fine l'hanno già fatta...
Spero facciano tutti la fine che meritano.
:mbe: Concordo ma... direi che la fine l'hanno già fatta...
Chromo
22-07-2004, 13:58
Originariamente inviato da gpc
Mi ero ripromesso di non partecipare più a questi thread perchè si trasformano puntualmente nella fiera della paranoia e dell'antiamericanismo...
Ma cazz se sei prevenuto! :muro:
Comunque, per dovere di cronaca:
- tutti hanno fatto scattare il metal detector e tutti sono stati controllati, ma all'epoca non c'era divieto di portare lamette o taglierini (TG5 di oggi);
Grazie del dettaglio, non vedo i TG in ufficio. ;)
- si era parlato di armi di vetro o di plastica, tipo coltellini di vetro;
Questo cozza con l'affermazione precedente o sbaglio? :confused:
- i caccia non si sono alzati subito in volo per il modivo di cui sopra e perchè non era previsto un attacco sul suolo americano, ergo, non erano semplicemente pronti;
Questa è na cazzata.
Mi ero ripromesso di non partecipare più a questi thread perchè si trasformano puntualmente nella fiera della paranoia e dell'antiamericanismo...
Ma cazz se sei prevenuto! :muro:
Comunque, per dovere di cronaca:
- tutti hanno fatto scattare il metal detector e tutti sono stati controllati, ma all'epoca non c'era divieto di portare lamette o taglierini (TG5 di oggi);
Grazie del dettaglio, non vedo i TG in ufficio. ;)
- si era parlato di armi di vetro o di plastica, tipo coltellini di vetro;
Questo cozza con l'affermazione precedente o sbaglio? :confused:
- i caccia non si sono alzati subito in volo per il modivo di cui sopra e perchè non era previsto un attacco sul suolo americano, ergo, non erano semplicemente pronti;
Questa è na cazzata.
lnessuno
22-07-2004, 14:05
Originariamente inviato da gpc
:mbe: Concordo ma... direi che la fine l'hanno già fatta...
:D
:mbe: Concordo ma... direi che la fine l'hanno già fatta...
:D
gpc
22-07-2004, 14:06
Originariamente inviato da Chromo
Ma cazz se sei prevenuto! :muro:
E' mooolto sottile la linea che separa la prevenzione dall'esperienza... :D
Se fossi stato prevenuto non sarei intervenuto; ho esperienza perchè ho visto come sono finiti gli altri, ma non sono prevenuto perchè ho postato lo stesso ;)
Questo cozza con l'affermazione precedente o sbaglio? :confused:
Questa cosa dei taglierini di vetro erano notizie che erano uscite, se non ricordo male, subito dopo gli attentati. Che fossero ipotesi per spiegare il perchè non fossero stati fermati o che ci fosse qualcosa di più fondato, sinceramente non lo so... Certo che, vedendo i filmati, credo che fosse più che altro un'ipotesi iniziale. Evidentemente quello che gli ha permesso di passare è stato proprio il fatto che quegli oggetti non venivano considerati come armi...
Questa è na cazzata.
Boh, sarà, ma credo che fossero stati postati anche documenti a proposito qui sul forum...
Ma cazz se sei prevenuto! :muro:
E' mooolto sottile la linea che separa la prevenzione dall'esperienza... :D
Se fossi stato prevenuto non sarei intervenuto; ho esperienza perchè ho visto come sono finiti gli altri, ma non sono prevenuto perchè ho postato lo stesso ;)
Questo cozza con l'affermazione precedente o sbaglio? :confused:
Questa cosa dei taglierini di vetro erano notizie che erano uscite, se non ricordo male, subito dopo gli attentati. Che fossero ipotesi per spiegare il perchè non fossero stati fermati o che ci fosse qualcosa di più fondato, sinceramente non lo so... Certo che, vedendo i filmati, credo che fosse più che altro un'ipotesi iniziale. Evidentemente quello che gli ha permesso di passare è stato proprio il fatto che quegli oggetti non venivano considerati come armi...
Questa è na cazzata.
Boh, sarà, ma credo che fossero stati postati anche documenti a proposito qui sul forum...
lnessuno
22-07-2004, 14:07
Originariamente inviato da Chromo
Questa è na cazzata.
ma no... è che i piloti stavano giocando a beach volley bullandosi della propria spacconeria con le dolci fanciulle che li ammiravano ai bordi del campo (top gun docet), se i terroristi non li hanno avvertiti prima non è mica colpa loro... :O
Questa è na cazzata.
ma no... è che i piloti stavano giocando a beach volley bullandosi della propria spacconeria con le dolci fanciulle che li ammiravano ai bordi del campo (top gun docet), se i terroristi non li hanno avvertiti prima non è mica colpa loro... :O
Marlex
22-07-2004, 14:18
Originariamente inviato da gpc
...
- quando gli aerei sono stati dirottati non sono state prese misure drastiche perchè nessun pazzo aveva mai usato degli aerei come delle bombe e si pensava a "normali" dirottamenti;
- i caccia non si sono alzati subito in volo per il modivo di cui sopra e perchè non era previsto un attacco sul suolo americano, ergo, non erano semplicemente pronti;
...
:D
scusa, ma questa è veramente SPASSOSA !!!
il 9/11 le autorità aeroportuali e la difesa erano all'erta sul dirottamento CONTEMPORANEO di 4 aerei di linea (MAI SUCCESSO PRIMA) fin dalle 8.15 :rolleyes:
alle 8.46 (mezz'ora dopo) il primo aereo si schianta sul WTC... il tutto mentre si è perfettamente al corrente che altri TRE aerei sono dirottati e puntano su NY e Washington... :rolleyes:
VENTI minuti dopo il secondo aereo colpisce il WTC... le autorità erano quindi già al corrente del pericolo da 50 MINUTI, e vi sono basi aeree militari a meno di dieci minuti di volo sia da NY che da Washington (p.s. gli USA si vantano che il loro "tempo di reazione" x il decollo di un F16 è di circa 6 minuti... :rolleyes: )
ma non basta... :rolleyes:
alle 9.37 ovvero almeno UN'ALTRA MEZZ'ORA DOPO il terzo aereo colpisce il pentagono...
il tutto senza che nessuno si accorgesse del pericolo e nessuno prendesse contromisure? :muro:
...
- quando gli aerei sono stati dirottati non sono state prese misure drastiche perchè nessun pazzo aveva mai usato degli aerei come delle bombe e si pensava a "normali" dirottamenti;
- i caccia non si sono alzati subito in volo per il modivo di cui sopra e perchè non era previsto un attacco sul suolo americano, ergo, non erano semplicemente pronti;
...
:D
scusa, ma questa è veramente SPASSOSA !!!
il 9/11 le autorità aeroportuali e la difesa erano all'erta sul dirottamento CONTEMPORANEO di 4 aerei di linea (MAI SUCCESSO PRIMA) fin dalle 8.15 :rolleyes:
alle 8.46 (mezz'ora dopo) il primo aereo si schianta sul WTC... il tutto mentre si è perfettamente al corrente che altri TRE aerei sono dirottati e puntano su NY e Washington... :rolleyes:
VENTI minuti dopo il secondo aereo colpisce il WTC... le autorità erano quindi già al corrente del pericolo da 50 MINUTI, e vi sono basi aeree militari a meno di dieci minuti di volo sia da NY che da Washington (p.s. gli USA si vantano che il loro "tempo di reazione" x il decollo di un F16 è di circa 6 minuti... :rolleyes: )
ma non basta... :rolleyes:
alle 9.37 ovvero almeno UN'ALTRA MEZZ'ORA DOPO il terzo aereo colpisce il pentagono...
il tutto senza che nessuno si accorgesse del pericolo e nessuno prendesse contromisure? :muro:
Correx
22-07-2004, 14:19
gpc scusa, la fiera della paranoia e dell'antiamericanismo.... ma accettare la storia dei coltellini di vetro è troppo! E' quasi un insulto! E' quasi peggio del passaporto immacolato del dirottatore trovato dentro le torri ! :D :D
Correx
22-07-2004, 14:23
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
:D
...
il tutto senza che nessuno si accorgesse del pericolo e nessuno prendesse contromisure? :muro:
come no, c'era Bxxh in visita ad una scuola elementare che raccontava la storia di una capretta, il suo assistente gli dice all'orecchio che stava succedendo un bel casino...e lui continua a raccontare tranquillamente la sua storia :eek: :D
:D
...
il tutto senza che nessuno si accorgesse del pericolo e nessuno prendesse contromisure? :muro:
come no, c'era Bxxh in visita ad una scuola elementare che raccontava la storia di una capretta, il suo assistente gli dice all'orecchio che stava succedendo un bel casino...e lui continua a raccontare tranquillamente la sua storia :eek: :D
Phantom II
22-07-2004, 14:25
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
:D
scusa, ma questa è veramente SPASSOSA !!!
il 9/11 le autorità aeroportuali e la difesa erano all'erta sul dirottamento CONTEMPORANEO di 4 aerei di linea (MAI SUCCESSO PRIMA) fin dalle 8.15 :rolleyes:
alle 8.46 (mezz'ora dopo) il primo aereo si schianta sul WTC... il tutto mentre si è perfettamente al corrente che altri TRE aerei sono dirottati e puntano su NY e Washington... :rolleyes:
VENTI minuti dopo il secondo aereo colpisce il WTC... le autorità erano quindi già al corrente del pericolo da 50 MINUTI, e vi sono basi aeree militari a meno di dieci minuti di volo sia da NY che da Washington (p.s. gli USA si vantano che il loro "tempo di reazione" x il decollo di un F16 è di circa 6 minuti... :rolleyes: )
ma non basta... :rolleyes:
alle 9.37 ovvero almeno UN'ALTRA MEZZ'ORA DOPO il terzo aereo colpisce il pentagono...
il tutto senza che nessuno si accorgesse del pericolo e nessuno prendesse contromisure? :muro:
Lessi pure io su diverse riviste di aviazione che la difesa aerea fece acqua da tutte le parti.
:D
scusa, ma questa è veramente SPASSOSA !!!
il 9/11 le autorità aeroportuali e la difesa erano all'erta sul dirottamento CONTEMPORANEO di 4 aerei di linea (MAI SUCCESSO PRIMA) fin dalle 8.15 :rolleyes:
alle 8.46 (mezz'ora dopo) il primo aereo si schianta sul WTC... il tutto mentre si è perfettamente al corrente che altri TRE aerei sono dirottati e puntano su NY e Washington... :rolleyes:
VENTI minuti dopo il secondo aereo colpisce il WTC... le autorità erano quindi già al corrente del pericolo da 50 MINUTI, e vi sono basi aeree militari a meno di dieci minuti di volo sia da NY che da Washington (p.s. gli USA si vantano che il loro "tempo di reazione" x il decollo di un F16 è di circa 6 minuti... :rolleyes: )
ma non basta... :rolleyes:
alle 9.37 ovvero almeno UN'ALTRA MEZZ'ORA DOPO il terzo aereo colpisce il pentagono...
il tutto senza che nessuno si accorgesse del pericolo e nessuno prendesse contromisure? :muro:
Lessi pure io su diverse riviste di aviazione che la difesa aerea fece acqua da tutte le parti.
gpc
22-07-2004, 14:25
Tutti agenti della CIA qui dentro, eh? :D
Sentiamo allora, o esseri onniscienti, come sono andate realmente le cose? Le prenotazioni le ha fatte la casa bianca? :D
Sentiamo allora, o esseri onniscienti, come sono andate realmente le cose? Le prenotazioni le ha fatte la casa bianca? :D
gpc
22-07-2004, 14:26
Originariamente inviato da Phantom II
Lessi pure io su diverse riviste di aviazione che la difesa aerea fece acqua da tutte le parti.
Tra l'altro se non ricordo male gli aerei avevano anche staccato i transponder per non essere rilevati dai radar del traffico aereo, no?
Lessi pure io su diverse riviste di aviazione che la difesa aerea fece acqua da tutte le parti.
Tra l'altro se non ricordo male gli aerei avevano anche staccato i transponder per non essere rilevati dai radar del traffico aereo, no?
Marlex
22-07-2004, 14:29
Originariamente inviato da gpc
Tra l'altro se non ricordo male gli aerei avevano anche staccato i transponder per non essere rilevati dai radar del traffico aereo, no?
secondo te la Difesa Aerea USA si basa sui radar del traffico aereo???
;)
aggiungo:
se così fosse come mai son riusciti a beccare il quarto (ed inutile) ? :rolleyes:
Tra l'altro se non ricordo male gli aerei avevano anche staccato i transponder per non essere rilevati dai radar del traffico aereo, no?
secondo te la Difesa Aerea USA si basa sui radar del traffico aereo???
;)
aggiungo:
se così fosse come mai son riusciti a beccare il quarto (ed inutile) ? :rolleyes:
Phantom II
22-07-2004, 14:29
Originariamente inviato da gpc
Tra l'altro se non ricordo male gli aerei avevano anche staccato i transponder per non essere rilevati dai radar del traffico aereo, no?
M i pare proprio di si. Su Aeronautica & Difesa ne hanno parlato in diversi numeri di quanto accaduto. Ad ogni modo le carenze dell'aviazione le trovo tutto sommato comprensibili (ma non giustificabili) da quando è caduta l'URSS le cose sono nettamente cambiate.
Tra l'altro se non ricordo male gli aerei avevano anche staccato i transponder per non essere rilevati dai radar del traffico aereo, no?
M i pare proprio di si. Su Aeronautica & Difesa ne hanno parlato in diversi numeri di quanto accaduto. Ad ogni modo le carenze dell'aviazione le trovo tutto sommato comprensibili (ma non giustificabili) da quando è caduta l'URSS le cose sono nettamente cambiate.
Phantom II
22-07-2004, 14:30
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
secondo te la Difesa Aerea USA si basa sui radar del traffico aereo???
;)
So basa anche su quello oltre che sulla rete del NORAD.
secondo te la Difesa Aerea USA si basa sui radar del traffico aereo???
;)
So basa anche su quello oltre che sulla rete del NORAD.
Marlex
22-07-2004, 14:31
Originariamente inviato da Phantom II
... oltre che sulla rete del NORAD.
;)
bingo !!!
... oltre che sulla rete del NORAD.
;)
bingo !!!
Jok3r
22-07-2004, 14:38
http://www.luogocomune.net/lc/modules/news/article.php?storyid=119l
posto questo sito a solo titolo informativo, quindi nn cominciate a dirmi comunista terrorista e altre cose... :)
posto questo sito a solo titolo informativo, quindi nn cominciate a dirmi comunista terrorista e altre cose... :)
gpc
22-07-2004, 14:39
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
secondo te la Difesa Aerea USA si basa sui radar del traffico aereo???
;)
aggiungo:
se così fosse come mai son riusciti a beccare il quarto (ed inutile) ? :rolleyes:
Il quarto aereo, mi ricordo male io, o è precipitato perchè i passeggeri, avendo saputo cos'era successo, si sono ribellati?
E' vero che la difesa si basa anche sul norad, ma tieni presente che nessuno pensava ad un attacco usando gli aerei come bombe. Non è una premessa da poco.
Comunque, come dicevo prima, disorganizzazione e incapacità di comunicazione sono fuor di dubbio e sono emerse anche dalle inchieste.
secondo te la Difesa Aerea USA si basa sui radar del traffico aereo???
;)
aggiungo:
se così fosse come mai son riusciti a beccare il quarto (ed inutile) ? :rolleyes:
Il quarto aereo, mi ricordo male io, o è precipitato perchè i passeggeri, avendo saputo cos'era successo, si sono ribellati?
E' vero che la difesa si basa anche sul norad, ma tieni presente che nessuno pensava ad un attacco usando gli aerei come bombe. Non è una premessa da poco.
Comunque, come dicevo prima, disorganizzazione e incapacità di comunicazione sono fuor di dubbio e sono emerse anche dalle inchieste.
Nevermind
22-07-2004, 14:52
Originariamente inviato da gpc
Il quarto aereo, mi ricordo male io, o è precipitato perchè i passeggeri, avendo saputo cos'era successo, si sono ribellati?
E' vero che la difesa si basa anche sul norad, ma tieni presente che nessuno pensava ad un attacco usando gli aerei come bombe. Non è una premessa da poco.
Comunque, come dicevo prima, disorganizzazione e incapacità di comunicazione sono fuor di dubbio e sono emerse anche dalle inchieste.
Se un aereo viene dirottato è la prassi alzare i caccia, in passato è stato fatto pure per scortare aerei civili....
Comunque a parte questo, qui si parlava di ben 4 veivoli contemporaneamente, insomma se fosse dipeso da me anche se non fosse la prassi avreio ugualmente fatto decollare imediatamente i caccia.
Un normale dirottamento simultaneo di 4 veivoli statisticamente parlando penso sia alquanto improbabile :D
Saluti.
Il quarto aereo, mi ricordo male io, o è precipitato perchè i passeggeri, avendo saputo cos'era successo, si sono ribellati?
E' vero che la difesa si basa anche sul norad, ma tieni presente che nessuno pensava ad un attacco usando gli aerei come bombe. Non è una premessa da poco.
Comunque, come dicevo prima, disorganizzazione e incapacità di comunicazione sono fuor di dubbio e sono emerse anche dalle inchieste.
Se un aereo viene dirottato è la prassi alzare i caccia, in passato è stato fatto pure per scortare aerei civili....
Comunque a parte questo, qui si parlava di ben 4 veivoli contemporaneamente, insomma se fosse dipeso da me anche se non fosse la prassi avreio ugualmente fatto decollare imediatamente i caccia.
Un normale dirottamento simultaneo di 4 veivoli statisticamente parlando penso sia alquanto improbabile :D
Saluti.
Nevermind
22-07-2004, 14:52
Originariamente inviato da gpc
Il quarto aereo, mi ricordo male io, o è precipitato perchè i passeggeri, avendo saputo cos'era successo, si sono ribellati?
...
Si, questa è la versione ufficiale.
Saluti.
Il quarto aereo, mi ricordo male io, o è precipitato perchè i passeggeri, avendo saputo cos'era successo, si sono ribellati?
...
Si, questa è la versione ufficiale.
Saluti.
IpseDixit
23-07-2004, 10:45
DIFESA AEREA IMPREPARATA - Secondo la Commissione inoltre la difesa aerea del territorio degli Stati Uniti era «disastrosamente impreparata» agli attacchi e l'11 settembre reagì in modo «lento e confuso»: l'ordine del vice presidente Dick Cheney, che autorizzava l'abbattimento degli aerei dirottati, raggiunse i piloti dei caccia quando il quarto aereo era già precipitato in Pennsylvania, in seguito ad una lotta fra alcuni passeggeri e i dirottatori.
Il presidente americano George W. Bush sarebbe stato avvertito più di un mese prima dell'11 settembre che sostenitori di Osama Bin Laden preparavano un attacco con esplosivi nel territorio americano e volevano dirottare aerei.
http://www.corriere.it/Primo_Piano/Esteri/2004/04_Aprile/10/bush.shtml
http://www.corriere.it/Primo_Piano/Esteri/2004/06_Giugno/16/commissione.shtml
Il presidente americano George W. Bush sarebbe stato avvertito più di un mese prima dell'11 settembre che sostenitori di Osama Bin Laden preparavano un attacco con esplosivi nel territorio americano e volevano dirottare aerei.
http://www.corriere.it/Primo_Piano/Esteri/2004/04_Aprile/10/bush.shtml
http://www.corriere.it/Primo_Piano/Esteri/2004/06_Giugno/16/commissione.shtml
lunaticgate
23-07-2004, 11:18
Io sono partito il 18 Settembre 2001 per Tokyo, esattamente una settimana dopo l'11 Settembre!
A Parigi mi hanno controllato abbastanza ma immaginavo molto di più visto quello che era successo, e poi quando sono salito sull'aereo, quell'intelligentoni ci hanno fornito stoviglie in ferro!:eek:
A Tokyo i controlli sono stati più accurati!
A Napoli e a Roma non mi hanno pensato per niente!
:muro:
A Parigi mi hanno controllato abbastanza ma immaginavo molto di più visto quello che era successo, e poi quando sono salito sull'aereo, quell'intelligentoni ci hanno fornito stoviglie in ferro!:eek:
A Tokyo i controlli sono stati più accurati!
A Napoli e a Roma non mi hanno pensato per niente!
:muro:
evelon
23-07-2004, 12:48
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
il 9/11 le autorità aeroportuali e la difesa erano all'erta sul dirottamento CONTEMPORANEO di 4 aerei di linea (MAI SUCCESSO PRIMA) fin dalle 8.15 :rolleyes:
alle 8.46 (mezz'ora dopo) il primo aereo si schianta sul WTC... il tutto mentre si è perfettamente al corrente che altri TRE aerei sono dirottati e puntano su NY e Washington... :rolleyes:
VENTI minuti dopo il secondo aereo colpisce il WTC... le autorità erano quindi già al corrente del pericolo da 50 MINUTI, e vi sono basi aeree militari a meno di dieci minuti di volo sia da NY che da Washington (p.s. gli USA si vantano che il loro "tempo di reazione" x il decollo di un F16 è di circa 6 minuti... :rolleyes: )
ma non basta... :rolleyes:
alle 9.37 ovvero almeno UN'ALTRA MEZZ'ORA DOPO il terzo aereo colpisce il pentagono...
il tutto senza che nessuno si accorgesse del pericolo e nessuno prendesse contromisure? :muro:
Ma gli stai dando ragione....
All'inizio nessuno pensò che fosse un attentato e nessuno diede l'allarme istantaneo agli f16 proprio perchè nessuno si aspettava una cosa del genere..
Tra l'altro anche quando si alzarono l'ordine di abbattere non venne subito sempre perchè era del tutto incredibile una cosa del genere.
Se non ricordo male quando arrivò l'ordine per il terzo aereo(quello del pentagono), quando era ormai chiaro che i dirottamenti erano parte di un unico piano con lo scopo di usarli come missili, questo era quasi al suo bersaglio mentre l'ultimo venne abbattuto (secondo le prime voci da un missile, poi da una collutazione a bordo).
il 9/11 le autorità aeroportuali e la difesa erano all'erta sul dirottamento CONTEMPORANEO di 4 aerei di linea (MAI SUCCESSO PRIMA) fin dalle 8.15 :rolleyes:
alle 8.46 (mezz'ora dopo) il primo aereo si schianta sul WTC... il tutto mentre si è perfettamente al corrente che altri TRE aerei sono dirottati e puntano su NY e Washington... :rolleyes:
VENTI minuti dopo il secondo aereo colpisce il WTC... le autorità erano quindi già al corrente del pericolo da 50 MINUTI, e vi sono basi aeree militari a meno di dieci minuti di volo sia da NY che da Washington (p.s. gli USA si vantano che il loro "tempo di reazione" x il decollo di un F16 è di circa 6 minuti... :rolleyes: )
ma non basta... :rolleyes:
alle 9.37 ovvero almeno UN'ALTRA MEZZ'ORA DOPO il terzo aereo colpisce il pentagono...
il tutto senza che nessuno si accorgesse del pericolo e nessuno prendesse contromisure? :muro:
Ma gli stai dando ragione....
All'inizio nessuno pensò che fosse un attentato e nessuno diede l'allarme istantaneo agli f16 proprio perchè nessuno si aspettava una cosa del genere..
Tra l'altro anche quando si alzarono l'ordine di abbattere non venne subito sempre perchè era del tutto incredibile una cosa del genere.
Se non ricordo male quando arrivò l'ordine per il terzo aereo(quello del pentagono), quando era ormai chiaro che i dirottamenti erano parte di un unico piano con lo scopo di usarli come missili, questo era quasi al suo bersaglio mentre l'ultimo venne abbattuto (secondo le prime voci da un missile, poi da una collutazione a bordo).
gpc
23-07-2004, 12:57
Originariamente inviato da evelon
Ma gli stai dando ragione....
All'inizio nessuno pensò che fosse un attentato e nessuno diede l'allarme istantaneo agli f16 proprio perchè nessuno si aspettava una cosa del genere..
Tra l'altro anche quando si alzarono l'ordine di abbattere non venne subito sempre perchè era del tutto incredibile una cosa del genere.
Se non ricordo male quando arrivò l'ordine per il terzo aereo(quello del pentagono), quando era ormai chiaro che i dirottamenti erano parte di un unico piano con lo scopo di usarli come missili, questo era quasi al suo bersaglio mentre l'ultimo venne abbattuto (secondo le prime voci da un missile, poi da una collutazione a bordo).
Aggiungo: lgli aereoporti di NY sono dentro NY. Un aereo anche dirottato che voglia atterrare a NY, deve passare sulla città, per cui non era pensabile che venissero usati come missili.
Ma gli stai dando ragione....
All'inizio nessuno pensò che fosse un attentato e nessuno diede l'allarme istantaneo agli f16 proprio perchè nessuno si aspettava una cosa del genere..
Tra l'altro anche quando si alzarono l'ordine di abbattere non venne subito sempre perchè era del tutto incredibile una cosa del genere.
Se non ricordo male quando arrivò l'ordine per il terzo aereo(quello del pentagono), quando era ormai chiaro che i dirottamenti erano parte di un unico piano con lo scopo di usarli come missili, questo era quasi al suo bersaglio mentre l'ultimo venne abbattuto (secondo le prime voci da un missile, poi da una collutazione a bordo).
Aggiungo: lgli aereoporti di NY sono dentro NY. Un aereo anche dirottato che voglia atterrare a NY, deve passare sulla città, per cui non era pensabile che venissero usati come missili.
conti1968
23-07-2004, 13:26
Dai,non diam colpe agli americani..
O meglio,dopo il primo aereo schiantato,non era facile comprender cio' che stava accadendo.
Non avete( e ho)minimamente idea cosa significhi dirottare 4 aerei,pilotarli(i piloti si fanno ammazzare piuttosto che schiantarsi su un palazzo,morto per morto..)e mantenere un segreto cosi' senza che l'intelligence venisse a saperlo(solo i 4 piloti suicidi potevan sapere mentre gli altri dirottatori non sapevano nulla,logico)..Quindi,al primo impatto poteva esser benissimo un dirottamento,e sorvolando la citta durante una colluttazione,malore o altro dei piloti ufficiali,l'aereo sarebbe schiantato proprio la'..
Al secondo aereo si comprende un dirottamento suicida senza precedenti.
A quel punto,chi poteva dar l'ordine di abbattere tutti gli aerei di linea che potessero esser potenziali missili??
Avete idea di quanti aerei sorvolano NY??
E a che punto,i terroristi erano organizzati??
Potevano anche aver esplosivo a bordo,simulare trasmissioni o altro..
A questo punto,o si abbattevan tutti gli aerei sospetti(immaginate cosa significhi??E poi,i rottami cadon in citta,mica galleggiano..e quanti morti innocenti senza esser realmente dirottati??)o si è scelto di aspettare sperando fossero solo 2 gli aerei..
poi 3..poi 4 e tutto fini..
Il presidente,di certo ha preferito cosi',che dar un'ordine mai giunto da nessun capo di governo,che abbattere decine di aerei(con gravissime ripercussioni in tutti i fronti,e che a conti fatti avrebbe peggiorato di ben oltre la situazione a noi conosciuta)
Se il presidente,e i vertici militari fossero composte da gente istintiva come"noi",la terza guerra mondiale sarebbe gia storia di 30anni fa'..
Chi avrebbe saputo far di meglio???Io,non do' colpe,ma slo forse si sarebbe potuto salvare con un po' piu' di fortuna delle persone..
purtroppo,non è stato cosi'..:rolleyes:
O meglio,dopo il primo aereo schiantato,non era facile comprender cio' che stava accadendo.
Non avete( e ho)minimamente idea cosa significhi dirottare 4 aerei,pilotarli(i piloti si fanno ammazzare piuttosto che schiantarsi su un palazzo,morto per morto..)e mantenere un segreto cosi' senza che l'intelligence venisse a saperlo(solo i 4 piloti suicidi potevan sapere mentre gli altri dirottatori non sapevano nulla,logico)..Quindi,al primo impatto poteva esser benissimo un dirottamento,e sorvolando la citta durante una colluttazione,malore o altro dei piloti ufficiali,l'aereo sarebbe schiantato proprio la'..
Al secondo aereo si comprende un dirottamento suicida senza precedenti.
A quel punto,chi poteva dar l'ordine di abbattere tutti gli aerei di linea che potessero esser potenziali missili??
Avete idea di quanti aerei sorvolano NY??
E a che punto,i terroristi erano organizzati??
Potevano anche aver esplosivo a bordo,simulare trasmissioni o altro..
A questo punto,o si abbattevan tutti gli aerei sospetti(immaginate cosa significhi??E poi,i rottami cadon in citta,mica galleggiano..e quanti morti innocenti senza esser realmente dirottati??)o si è scelto di aspettare sperando fossero solo 2 gli aerei..
poi 3..poi 4 e tutto fini..
Il presidente,di certo ha preferito cosi',che dar un'ordine mai giunto da nessun capo di governo,che abbattere decine di aerei(con gravissime ripercussioni in tutti i fronti,e che a conti fatti avrebbe peggiorato di ben oltre la situazione a noi conosciuta)
Se il presidente,e i vertici militari fossero composte da gente istintiva come"noi",la terza guerra mondiale sarebbe gia storia di 30anni fa'..
Chi avrebbe saputo far di meglio???Io,non do' colpe,ma slo forse si sarebbe potuto salvare con un po' piu' di fortuna delle persone..
purtroppo,non è stato cosi'..:rolleyes:
Marlex
23-07-2004, 13:41
ehm, ne siete proprio convinti... ?
proviamo cosi (consiglio di leggere attentamente) ;) :
L’USAF ha una serie di regole ben collaudate per affrontare l’attività aerea non programmata. L’attivazione di queste non richiede ordini superiori. E’ una pratica di routine rispondere all’attività aerea imprevista, intercettando gli aerei che danno problemi con aerei da caccia.
E’ importante capire che l’intercettazione non implica necessariamente alcuna intenzione di abbattere l’aereo, sebbene crei l’opportunità di tale azione se ritenuta necessaria.
Nella grande maggioranza dei casi che richiedono intercettazione, non viene percepita alcuna intenzione ostile da parte dell’aereo intercettato, e non si pensa affatto di abbatterlo.
In questi casi, lo scopo dell’intercettazione include l’aiuto nelle comunicazioni o nelle difficoltà di navigazione, raccogliendo informazioni sulla situazione dell’aereo in difficoltà, un avvio necessario per le operazioni di soccorso, se dovessero essere necessarie nel caso di caduta, e protezione nel caso si pensi che possa essere minacciato da altro aereo ostile.
Di questo vi sono numerosi esempi. Il recente caso di un passeggero che che si sostiene tentasse di di far esplodere un aereplano con esplosivo nascosto nelle scarpe, si è concluso con l’aeroplano scortato dai caccia. Non vi è mai stata alcuna intenzione di abbatterlo.
Il giocatore di golf Payne Stewart morì col suo aereo schiantatosi al suolo dopo aver volato attraverso gli USA in maniera incontrollata. Si pensa che tutti coloro che erano a bordo fossero morti a causa di problemi pressurizzazione. L’aereo di Stewart venne intercettato e scortato durante gran parte del volo dai caccia non appena noto che vi fosse un problema.
Gli USA hanno una rete di basi dell’aeronautica militare attraverso il paese che hanno lo scopo di fornire una ragionevole possibilità di essere in grado di intercettare, entro breve tempo, qualsiasi velivolo che dovesse richiedere tale azione. Naturalmente non è possibile garantire la copertura assoluta di tutti i possibili scenari ad ogni tempo e luogo, ma il sistema vi arriva molto vicino, come ci si può ragionevolmente aspettare.
Vi è la prova incontrovertibile che la mattina dell’11 settembre questo sistema sia stato lasciato a terra, attraverso tutto il paese, e rimesso in moto solamente dopo gli attacchi.
Ciascuno degli aerei dirottati doveva, e normalmente sarebbe successo, far scattare le procedure di intercettazione persino prima che fosse evidente che vi erano intenzioni ostili.
Nel caso dei primi due aerei, si potrebbe argomentare che i caccia non sarebbero arrivati in tempo per completare l’intercettazione prima dell’impatto sul WTC, ma non vi è dubbio che in entrambe i casi i tentativi di intercettazione sarebbero stati già ben avviati all’ora in cui la collisione ebbe luogo. Non vi è scusa per il fatto che l’intercettazione non venne nemmeno tentata.
Nel caso degli altri due aerei non vi è assolutamente nessuna scusa per non averli intercettati prima del momento finale.
Il caso dell’aeroplano che colpì il Pentagono è particolarmente spettacolare. Dopo aver saputo che l’aereo aveva un problema, fu nientemeno che in grado di cambiare rotta e dirigersi su Washington, per circa 45 minuti, volare oltre la Casa Bianca e schiantarsi sul Pentagono con nemmeno un tentativo di intercettazione, con due squadroni da caccia stazionati proprio a 10 miglia dal suo possibile bersaglio.
A meno che non si pensi a complicità, tale scenario non è possibile con alcuno sforzo di immaginazione, nemmeno nel caso che quel giorno non fosse successo altro.
Ulteriormente sensazionale aggiunta a questo scenario è il fatto che l’aereo compì azioni che normalmente avrebbero fatto scattare l’intercettazione di routine, dopo che un aereo si era schiantato contro il WTC.
Inoltre, esso continuò a volare, senza nessun tentativo di intercettazione per circa altri 40 minuti dopo che il secondo aereo aveva colpito il WTC.
Un raffronto eloquente: l’incidente del gennaio 2002, nel quale un ragazzo di 15 anni diresse un piccolo aereoplano verso la sede della Bank of America di Tampa, in Florida, dopo essere inaspettatamente decollato dalla scuola di volo senza autorizzazione:
Secondo il Daily Telegraph di Sidney dell’8/1/2002 l’aereo rimase in aria per 9 minuti prima dello schianto. Questo fu sufficiente perché venisse inseguito da due aerei da caccia ed un elicottero militare. Essi non riuscirono ad impedire la caduta ma entrarono in azione molto rapidamente.
Fatto: Nell’unico attacco sul suolo USA, con i caccia della difesa aerea in servizio permanente a 10 minuti, con almeno 40 minuti di preavviso, i militari USA permisero che il loro “centro nevralgico” venisse attaccato senza nemmeno tentare una reazione.
Vi sono precedenti di falle isolate nella sicurezza. L’Unione Sovietica venne messa in imbarazzo dall’intrusione di un aereoplano privato nella Piazza Rossa nel 1989. Venne data ampia copertura dai mezzi di informazione su come tale errore potesse essere accaduto, ma il fallimento molto più grande, deliberato oppure no, delle misure di sicurezza l’11/9, che ebbe tragiche conseguenze che non vi furono per l’incidente del 1989, non è stato affrontato come si sarebbe dovuto.
Ciò dovrebbe essere uno scandalo sia nazionale che internazionale.
Se il successo degli attacchi in America è stato il risultato di impotenza dei militari o dei servizi di informazione americani, perche non vi è stata una completa pubblica inchiesta e rivelazione?
Chi ha interesse nel trattenere informazioni e perché?
E’ nell’interesse della sicurezza nazionale proteggere l’incompetente e/o il maligno cospiratore?
Hanno (almeno) gli americani il diritto di sapere perché il loro gigantesco apparato militare è capace di scortare un errante giocatore di golf ma non di proteggere il Pentagono ed una delle più grandi città degli Stati Uniti?
...questo per quanto riguarda la cosiddetta "impossibilità" di intervento :rolleyes: :muro:
per quanto riguarda la "imprevedibilità" :
il libro "Potere Esecutivo" di Tom Clancy del 1996 (libro scritto quindi BEN 5 anni prima da uno dei maggiori scrittori MONDIALI) racconta di terroristi che usano aerei di linea come missili contro edifici istituzionali americani, in particolare... la casa Bianca... :rolleyes:
imprevedibile? ;)
per finire, mi spiace ma gli aerei di linea NON passano su manatthan... proprio per la pericolosità della rotta e per lasciare via libera agli elicotteri di polizia, e servizi d'ordine in genere... ;)
...quindi, per concludere
è INCONFUTABILE che tutti i più banali sistemi di sicurezza abbiano "fallito" o siano stati ignorati la mattina del 11 sett. 2001... il resto è ormai storia ;)
proviamo cosi (consiglio di leggere attentamente) ;) :
L’USAF ha una serie di regole ben collaudate per affrontare l’attività aerea non programmata. L’attivazione di queste non richiede ordini superiori. E’ una pratica di routine rispondere all’attività aerea imprevista, intercettando gli aerei che danno problemi con aerei da caccia.
E’ importante capire che l’intercettazione non implica necessariamente alcuna intenzione di abbattere l’aereo, sebbene crei l’opportunità di tale azione se ritenuta necessaria.
Nella grande maggioranza dei casi che richiedono intercettazione, non viene percepita alcuna intenzione ostile da parte dell’aereo intercettato, e non si pensa affatto di abbatterlo.
In questi casi, lo scopo dell’intercettazione include l’aiuto nelle comunicazioni o nelle difficoltà di navigazione, raccogliendo informazioni sulla situazione dell’aereo in difficoltà, un avvio necessario per le operazioni di soccorso, se dovessero essere necessarie nel caso di caduta, e protezione nel caso si pensi che possa essere minacciato da altro aereo ostile.
Di questo vi sono numerosi esempi. Il recente caso di un passeggero che che si sostiene tentasse di di far esplodere un aereplano con esplosivo nascosto nelle scarpe, si è concluso con l’aeroplano scortato dai caccia. Non vi è mai stata alcuna intenzione di abbatterlo.
Il giocatore di golf Payne Stewart morì col suo aereo schiantatosi al suolo dopo aver volato attraverso gli USA in maniera incontrollata. Si pensa che tutti coloro che erano a bordo fossero morti a causa di problemi pressurizzazione. L’aereo di Stewart venne intercettato e scortato durante gran parte del volo dai caccia non appena noto che vi fosse un problema.
Gli USA hanno una rete di basi dell’aeronautica militare attraverso il paese che hanno lo scopo di fornire una ragionevole possibilità di essere in grado di intercettare, entro breve tempo, qualsiasi velivolo che dovesse richiedere tale azione. Naturalmente non è possibile garantire la copertura assoluta di tutti i possibili scenari ad ogni tempo e luogo, ma il sistema vi arriva molto vicino, come ci si può ragionevolmente aspettare.
Vi è la prova incontrovertibile che la mattina dell’11 settembre questo sistema sia stato lasciato a terra, attraverso tutto il paese, e rimesso in moto solamente dopo gli attacchi.
Ciascuno degli aerei dirottati doveva, e normalmente sarebbe successo, far scattare le procedure di intercettazione persino prima che fosse evidente che vi erano intenzioni ostili.
Nel caso dei primi due aerei, si potrebbe argomentare che i caccia non sarebbero arrivati in tempo per completare l’intercettazione prima dell’impatto sul WTC, ma non vi è dubbio che in entrambe i casi i tentativi di intercettazione sarebbero stati già ben avviati all’ora in cui la collisione ebbe luogo. Non vi è scusa per il fatto che l’intercettazione non venne nemmeno tentata.
Nel caso degli altri due aerei non vi è assolutamente nessuna scusa per non averli intercettati prima del momento finale.
Il caso dell’aeroplano che colpì il Pentagono è particolarmente spettacolare. Dopo aver saputo che l’aereo aveva un problema, fu nientemeno che in grado di cambiare rotta e dirigersi su Washington, per circa 45 minuti, volare oltre la Casa Bianca e schiantarsi sul Pentagono con nemmeno un tentativo di intercettazione, con due squadroni da caccia stazionati proprio a 10 miglia dal suo possibile bersaglio.
A meno che non si pensi a complicità, tale scenario non è possibile con alcuno sforzo di immaginazione, nemmeno nel caso che quel giorno non fosse successo altro.
Ulteriormente sensazionale aggiunta a questo scenario è il fatto che l’aereo compì azioni che normalmente avrebbero fatto scattare l’intercettazione di routine, dopo che un aereo si era schiantato contro il WTC.
Inoltre, esso continuò a volare, senza nessun tentativo di intercettazione per circa altri 40 minuti dopo che il secondo aereo aveva colpito il WTC.
Un raffronto eloquente: l’incidente del gennaio 2002, nel quale un ragazzo di 15 anni diresse un piccolo aereoplano verso la sede della Bank of America di Tampa, in Florida, dopo essere inaspettatamente decollato dalla scuola di volo senza autorizzazione:
Secondo il Daily Telegraph di Sidney dell’8/1/2002 l’aereo rimase in aria per 9 minuti prima dello schianto. Questo fu sufficiente perché venisse inseguito da due aerei da caccia ed un elicottero militare. Essi non riuscirono ad impedire la caduta ma entrarono in azione molto rapidamente.
Fatto: Nell’unico attacco sul suolo USA, con i caccia della difesa aerea in servizio permanente a 10 minuti, con almeno 40 minuti di preavviso, i militari USA permisero che il loro “centro nevralgico” venisse attaccato senza nemmeno tentare una reazione.
Vi sono precedenti di falle isolate nella sicurezza. L’Unione Sovietica venne messa in imbarazzo dall’intrusione di un aereoplano privato nella Piazza Rossa nel 1989. Venne data ampia copertura dai mezzi di informazione su come tale errore potesse essere accaduto, ma il fallimento molto più grande, deliberato oppure no, delle misure di sicurezza l’11/9, che ebbe tragiche conseguenze che non vi furono per l’incidente del 1989, non è stato affrontato come si sarebbe dovuto.
Ciò dovrebbe essere uno scandalo sia nazionale che internazionale.
Se il successo degli attacchi in America è stato il risultato di impotenza dei militari o dei servizi di informazione americani, perche non vi è stata una completa pubblica inchiesta e rivelazione?
Chi ha interesse nel trattenere informazioni e perché?
E’ nell’interesse della sicurezza nazionale proteggere l’incompetente e/o il maligno cospiratore?
Hanno (almeno) gli americani il diritto di sapere perché il loro gigantesco apparato militare è capace di scortare un errante giocatore di golf ma non di proteggere il Pentagono ed una delle più grandi città degli Stati Uniti?
...questo per quanto riguarda la cosiddetta "impossibilità" di intervento :rolleyes: :muro:
per quanto riguarda la "imprevedibilità" :
il libro "Potere Esecutivo" di Tom Clancy del 1996 (libro scritto quindi BEN 5 anni prima da uno dei maggiori scrittori MONDIALI) racconta di terroristi che usano aerei di linea come missili contro edifici istituzionali americani, in particolare... la casa Bianca... :rolleyes:
imprevedibile? ;)
per finire, mi spiace ma gli aerei di linea NON passano su manatthan... proprio per la pericolosità della rotta e per lasciare via libera agli elicotteri di polizia, e servizi d'ordine in genere... ;)
...quindi, per concludere
è INCONFUTABILE che tutti i più banali sistemi di sicurezza abbiano "fallito" o siano stati ignorati la mattina del 11 sett. 2001... il resto è ormai storia ;)
jumpermax
23-07-2004, 13:45
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
ehm, ne siete proprio convinti... ?
proviamo cosi (consiglio di leggere attentamente) ;) :
...questo per quanto riguarda la cosiddetta "impossibilità" di intervento :rolleyes: :muro:
per quanto riguarda la "imprevedibilità" :
il libro "Potere Esecutivo" di Tom Clancy del 1996 (libro scritto quindi BEN 5 anni prima da uno dei maggiori scrittori MONDIALI) racconta di terroristi che usano aerei di linea come missili contro edifici istituzionali americani, in particolare... la casa Bianca... :rolleyes:
imprevedibile? ;)
per finire, mi spiace ma gli aerei di linea NON passano su manatthan... proprio per la pericolosità della rotta e per lasciare via libera agli elicotteri di polizia, e servizi d'ordine in genere... ;)
...quindi, per concludere
è INCONFUTABILE che tutti i più banali sistemi di sicurezza abbiano "fallito" o siano stati ignorati la mattina del 11 sett. 2001... il resto è ormai storia ;)
Beh si fanno migliaia di ipotesi di attentati, difficile capire quali possono essere davvero messi in pratica, facile trovare le corrispondenze a cose fatte ;)
ehm, ne siete proprio convinti... ?
proviamo cosi (consiglio di leggere attentamente) ;) :
...questo per quanto riguarda la cosiddetta "impossibilità" di intervento :rolleyes: :muro:
per quanto riguarda la "imprevedibilità" :
il libro "Potere Esecutivo" di Tom Clancy del 1996 (libro scritto quindi BEN 5 anni prima da uno dei maggiori scrittori MONDIALI) racconta di terroristi che usano aerei di linea come missili contro edifici istituzionali americani, in particolare... la casa Bianca... :rolleyes:
imprevedibile? ;)
per finire, mi spiace ma gli aerei di linea NON passano su manatthan... proprio per la pericolosità della rotta e per lasciare via libera agli elicotteri di polizia, e servizi d'ordine in genere... ;)
...quindi, per concludere
è INCONFUTABILE che tutti i più banali sistemi di sicurezza abbiano "fallito" o siano stati ignorati la mattina del 11 sett. 2001... il resto è ormai storia ;)
Beh si fanno migliaia di ipotesi di attentati, difficile capire quali possono essere davvero messi in pratica, facile trovare le corrispondenze a cose fatte ;)
a2000
23-07-2004, 13:46
ma non ne hanno beccato nessuno .....
gpc
23-07-2004, 13:46
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
per finire, mi spiace ma gli aerei di linea NON passano su manatthan... proprio per la pericolosità della rotta e per lasciare via libera agli elicotteri di polizia, e servizi d'ordine in genere... ;)
...quindi, per concludere
è INCONFUTABILE che tutti i più banali sistemi di sicurezza abbiano "fallito" o siano stati ignorati la mattina del 11 sett. 2001... il resto è ormai storia ;)
Guarda, io non so quante volte tu sia atterrato a NY, ma io l'ho fatto per due volte e ho una vaga idea di come siano disposti gli aereoporti rispetto alla città. Un aereo passa Manhattan in una manciata di secondi, per cui non puoi sapere dove vuole andare finchè non è arrivato.
Un aereo dirottato non segue le normali rotte, e quindi nessuno poteva immaginare quello che è successo (beh a parte gli agenti della CIA qui del forum; ricorda molto Men in Black comunque il tuo modo di trovare fonti... che Il Pianeta Delle Scimmie descriva i risultati della politica americana? ).
Ma, siamo concreti: dove vuoi arrivare?
per finire, mi spiace ma gli aerei di linea NON passano su manatthan... proprio per la pericolosità della rotta e per lasciare via libera agli elicotteri di polizia, e servizi d'ordine in genere... ;)
...quindi, per concludere
è INCONFUTABILE che tutti i più banali sistemi di sicurezza abbiano "fallito" o siano stati ignorati la mattina del 11 sett. 2001... il resto è ormai storia ;)
Guarda, io non so quante volte tu sia atterrato a NY, ma io l'ho fatto per due volte e ho una vaga idea di come siano disposti gli aereoporti rispetto alla città. Un aereo passa Manhattan in una manciata di secondi, per cui non puoi sapere dove vuole andare finchè non è arrivato.
Un aereo dirottato non segue le normali rotte, e quindi nessuno poteva immaginare quello che è successo (beh a parte gli agenti della CIA qui del forum; ricorda molto Men in Black comunque il tuo modo di trovare fonti... che Il Pianeta Delle Scimmie descriva i risultati della politica americana? ).
Ma, siamo concreti: dove vuoi arrivare?
a2000
23-07-2004, 13:48
gpc hai già segnalato oggi o no ? :D
Marlex
23-07-2004, 13:50
Originariamente inviato da gpc
Ma, siamo concreti: dove vuoi arrivare?
a questo :
è INCONFUTABILE che tutti i più banali sistemi di sicurezza abbiano "fallito" o siano stati ignorati la mattina del 11 sett. 2001... il resto è ormai storia
... e ci sono già "arrivato", thanks ;)
tutto il resto è :mc: ...
Ma, siamo concreti: dove vuoi arrivare?
a questo :
è INCONFUTABILE che tutti i più banali sistemi di sicurezza abbiano "fallito" o siano stati ignorati la mattina del 11 sett. 2001... il resto è ormai storia
... e ci sono già "arrivato", thanks ;)
tutto il resto è :mc: ...
a2000
23-07-2004, 13:51
adesso le due torri sono state abbattute ... è inutile.
pensiamo al futuro ! :)
pensiamo al futuro ! :)
gpc
23-07-2004, 13:52
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
a questo :
... e ci sono già "arrivato", thanks ;)
tutto il resto è :mc: ...
Ok, visto che sei arrivato adesso puoi anche andare, grazie :D
(abbiamo pareri diversi su cosa sia :mc: , almeno io non mi baso sulle trame dei film :D )
a questo :
... e ci sono già "arrivato", thanks ;)
tutto il resto è :mc: ...
Ok, visto che sei arrivato adesso puoi anche andare, grazie :D
(abbiamo pareri diversi su cosa sia :mc: , almeno io non mi baso sulle trame dei film :D )
gpc
23-07-2004, 13:54
Comunque, a parte gli scherzi, ho scritto fin dall'inizio che la disorganizzazione ha avuto il suo peso.
Ma da questo a dire che erano prevedibili... c'è un oceano... ;)
Ma da questo a dire che erano prevedibili... c'è un oceano... ;)
a2000
23-07-2004, 13:54
Originariamente inviato da a2000
adesso le due torri sono state abbattute ... è inutile.
pensiamo al futuro ! :)
:D
adesso le due torri sono state abbattute ... è inutile.
pensiamo al futuro ! :)
:D
conti1968
23-07-2004, 13:54
Ok,ammesso e concesso il fallimento dei sistemi di sicurezza,che essendoci stati come sostieni,questo non implica un discorso del tipo"è stata tutta una sceneggiatura per creare il pretesto per attaccare"
Sicuramente ci son state delle negligenze(il 4 aereo,doveva esser abbattuto,come quello arrivato sul pentagono),ma dobbiam ammettere che è stato un qualcosa di imprevedibile.
Anche la terza guerra mondiale è stata predetta da tanti scrittori,ma fortunatamente(ci siam andati vicinissimi con le basi missilistiche a cuba)non è avvenuta.
Sul perchè aerei caccia non sian decollati,non credo sia dovuto ad un deficit della struttura militare,ma piuttosto a motivi interni a noi sconosciuti.
Come per dire,che anche Osama Bin Laden ha la sua rete di intelligence infiltrata,e la data 11 settembre non è stata casuale,ma questo è cosa che nessuno sapra' mai ufficiosamente.
p.s. Logico che è una mia illazione...basata su una possibilita come tante altre..
Sicuramente ci son state delle negligenze(il 4 aereo,doveva esser abbattuto,come quello arrivato sul pentagono),ma dobbiam ammettere che è stato un qualcosa di imprevedibile.
Anche la terza guerra mondiale è stata predetta da tanti scrittori,ma fortunatamente(ci siam andati vicinissimi con le basi missilistiche a cuba)non è avvenuta.
Sul perchè aerei caccia non sian decollati,non credo sia dovuto ad un deficit della struttura militare,ma piuttosto a motivi interni a noi sconosciuti.
Come per dire,che anche Osama Bin Laden ha la sua rete di intelligence infiltrata,e la data 11 settembre non è stata casuale,ma questo è cosa che nessuno sapra' mai ufficiosamente.
p.s. Logico che è una mia illazione...basata su una possibilita come tante altre..
Marlex
23-07-2004, 14:18
Originariamente inviato da gpc
Ok, visto che sei arrivato adesso puoi anche andare, grazie :D
vado, vado, non ti preoccupare... ;)
comunque mi sento molto + sicuro ora che so che il sistema di difesa della nazione più potente al mondo non è preparato contro gli "imprevisti"... wow :mc: :mc:
ciao ;)
Ok, visto che sei arrivato adesso puoi anche andare, grazie :D
vado, vado, non ti preoccupare... ;)
comunque mi sento molto + sicuro ora che so che il sistema di difesa della nazione più potente al mondo non è preparato contro gli "imprevisti"... wow :mc: :mc:
ciao ;)
evelon
23-07-2004, 14:54
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
ehm, ne siete proprio convinti... ?
proviamo cosi (consiglio di leggere attentamente) ;) :
Scusa ma tu l'hai letto ? :confused:
A parte che non citi la fonte (essendo quotato presumo che sia proveniente da altra parte) cmq si cita come "esempio lampante" di questa teoria:
Il recente caso di un passeggero che che si sostiene tentasse di di far esplodere un aereplano con esplosivo nascosto nelle scarpe, si è concluso con l’aeroplano scortato dai caccia. Non vi è mai stata alcuna intenzione di abbatterlo.
Ma questo non è successo DOPO l'11/09 ?
Un raffronto eloquente: l’incidente del gennaio 2002, nel quale un ragazzo di 15 anni diresse un piccolo aereoplano verso la sede della Bank of America di Tampa, in Florida, dopo essere inaspettatamente decollato dalla scuola di volo senza autorizzazione:
idem come sopra...
E' logico che sia tutto più "pronto all'azione" dopo un 11/09 no?
Se c'erano falle nella catena di comando, nelle procedure (che ricordiamolo, sono create da un uomo e quindi non perfette), nelle disposizioni etc.. che si sono evidenziate in quel giorno mi pare più che normale che abbiano rivisto "qualcosa" o no ?
Insomma questi esempi non dimostrano nulla anzi direi che tolgono credibilità alla fonte (qualunque essa sia)..
Come toglie credibilità alla fonte la supposizione che i generali dovrebbero essere degli accaniti lettori di romanzi di fantapolitica e poi creare delle difese attorno a ciò che è scritto in questi romanzi...
il libro "Potere Esecutivo" di Tom Clancy del 1996 (libro scritto quindi BEN 5 anni prima da uno dei maggiori scrittori MONDIALI) racconta di terroristi che usano aerei di linea come missili contro edifici istituzionali americani, in particolare... la casa Bianca...
... insomma tanto vale chiudere le scuole di guerra :D:D
E questa poi ?
L’USAF ha una serie di regole ben collaudate per affrontare l’attività aerea non programmata. L’attivazione di queste non richiede ordini superiori. E’ una pratica di routine rispondere all’attività aerea imprevista, intercettando gli aerei che danno problemi con aerei da caccia.
Sinceramente non credo che sia così ma magari qualche esperto di aereonautica può confermare..
Altrimenti se "non richiede ordini superiori" vorrei sapere perchè ho sentito che c'è un ufficiale rappresentante dell'aereonautica militare nelle torri di controllo degli aeroporti civili (esubero di personale da parte dell'USAF ? :D )
Vi è la prova incontrovertibile che la mattina dell’11 settembre questo sistema sia stato lasciato a terra, attraverso tutto il paese, e rimesso in moto solamente dopo gli attacchi.
Quale prova incontrovertibile ?
Al max ci sono evidenze che si è mosso male.
Il 3° aereo non è stato abbattuto ma è stata almeno tentata l'intercettazione, il 4° è stato abbattuto.
Qual è questa prova incontrovertibile che tutta la difesa aerea statunitense sia stata messa a terra la mattina del 11/09 ?
Citare una prova e non produrla toglie ancora credibilità al tutto...o ci dobbiamo fidare sulla parola ? :asd:
A meno che non si pensi a complicità, tale scenario non è possibile con alcuno sforzo di immaginazione, nemmeno nel caso che quel giorno non fosse successo altro.
Questa salta fuori ad intervalli più o meno regolari ma ogni volta si scioglie come neve al sole ogni volta che si fà una domanda: prove ?
Cmq il meglio lo si dà quì:
Se il successo degli attacchi in America è stato il risultato di impotenza dei militari o dei servizi di informazione americani, perche non vi è stata una completa pubblica inchiesta e rivelazione?
Chi ha interesse nel trattenere informazioni e perché?
E’ nell’interesse della sicurezza nazionale proteggere l’incompetente e/o il maligno cospiratore?
Peccato che l'inchiesta ci sia stata....:asd:... e che abbia addirittura reso pubblici tutti gli atti.
In vendita in qualunque libreria statunitense al prezzo di 10$ .
LOL
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
...questo per quanto riguarda la cosiddetta "impossibilità" di intervento :rolleyes: :muro:
In effetti quella fonte non ha portato nulla di concreto.
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
per quanto riguarda la "imprevedibilità" :
:rolleyes:
imprevedibile? ;)
Direi...
Scusa parlare "dopo" è facile.
Tu sai dire, motivandolo con prove certe, quale sarà il prossimo paese, dove e come verrà colpito ?
No eh ?
In effetti non è facile nemmeno ora che l'allarme è alto, figurarsi allora...
Se mi parli di una sottovalutazione degli avvertimenti dei servizi, della mancanza di coordinazione delle agenzie ti dò ragione ma da lì a "prevedere" che ci sarà un attentato di tipo mai visto prima, con conseguenze mai viste prima, perpetrato ed organizzato in un modo mai visto prima....ne corre...
ehm, ne siete proprio convinti... ?
proviamo cosi (consiglio di leggere attentamente) ;) :
Scusa ma tu l'hai letto ? :confused:
A parte che non citi la fonte (essendo quotato presumo che sia proveniente da altra parte) cmq si cita come "esempio lampante" di questa teoria:
Il recente caso di un passeggero che che si sostiene tentasse di di far esplodere un aereplano con esplosivo nascosto nelle scarpe, si è concluso con l’aeroplano scortato dai caccia. Non vi è mai stata alcuna intenzione di abbatterlo.
Ma questo non è successo DOPO l'11/09 ?
Un raffronto eloquente: l’incidente del gennaio 2002, nel quale un ragazzo di 15 anni diresse un piccolo aereoplano verso la sede della Bank of America di Tampa, in Florida, dopo essere inaspettatamente decollato dalla scuola di volo senza autorizzazione:
idem come sopra...
E' logico che sia tutto più "pronto all'azione" dopo un 11/09 no?
Se c'erano falle nella catena di comando, nelle procedure (che ricordiamolo, sono create da un uomo e quindi non perfette), nelle disposizioni etc.. che si sono evidenziate in quel giorno mi pare più che normale che abbiano rivisto "qualcosa" o no ?
Insomma questi esempi non dimostrano nulla anzi direi che tolgono credibilità alla fonte (qualunque essa sia)..
Come toglie credibilità alla fonte la supposizione che i generali dovrebbero essere degli accaniti lettori di romanzi di fantapolitica e poi creare delle difese attorno a ciò che è scritto in questi romanzi...
il libro "Potere Esecutivo" di Tom Clancy del 1996 (libro scritto quindi BEN 5 anni prima da uno dei maggiori scrittori MONDIALI) racconta di terroristi che usano aerei di linea come missili contro edifici istituzionali americani, in particolare... la casa Bianca...
... insomma tanto vale chiudere le scuole di guerra :D:D
E questa poi ?
L’USAF ha una serie di regole ben collaudate per affrontare l’attività aerea non programmata. L’attivazione di queste non richiede ordini superiori. E’ una pratica di routine rispondere all’attività aerea imprevista, intercettando gli aerei che danno problemi con aerei da caccia.
Sinceramente non credo che sia così ma magari qualche esperto di aereonautica può confermare..
Altrimenti se "non richiede ordini superiori" vorrei sapere perchè ho sentito che c'è un ufficiale rappresentante dell'aereonautica militare nelle torri di controllo degli aeroporti civili (esubero di personale da parte dell'USAF ? :D )
Vi è la prova incontrovertibile che la mattina dell’11 settembre questo sistema sia stato lasciato a terra, attraverso tutto il paese, e rimesso in moto solamente dopo gli attacchi.
Quale prova incontrovertibile ?
Al max ci sono evidenze che si è mosso male.
Il 3° aereo non è stato abbattuto ma è stata almeno tentata l'intercettazione, il 4° è stato abbattuto.
Qual è questa prova incontrovertibile che tutta la difesa aerea statunitense sia stata messa a terra la mattina del 11/09 ?
Citare una prova e non produrla toglie ancora credibilità al tutto...o ci dobbiamo fidare sulla parola ? :asd:
A meno che non si pensi a complicità, tale scenario non è possibile con alcuno sforzo di immaginazione, nemmeno nel caso che quel giorno non fosse successo altro.
Questa salta fuori ad intervalli più o meno regolari ma ogni volta si scioglie come neve al sole ogni volta che si fà una domanda: prove ?
Cmq il meglio lo si dà quì:
Se il successo degli attacchi in America è stato il risultato di impotenza dei militari o dei servizi di informazione americani, perche non vi è stata una completa pubblica inchiesta e rivelazione?
Chi ha interesse nel trattenere informazioni e perché?
E’ nell’interesse della sicurezza nazionale proteggere l’incompetente e/o il maligno cospiratore?
Peccato che l'inchiesta ci sia stata....:asd:... e che abbia addirittura reso pubblici tutti gli atti.
In vendita in qualunque libreria statunitense al prezzo di 10$ .
LOL
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
...questo per quanto riguarda la cosiddetta "impossibilità" di intervento :rolleyes: :muro:
In effetti quella fonte non ha portato nulla di concreto.
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
per quanto riguarda la "imprevedibilità" :
:rolleyes:
imprevedibile? ;)
Direi...
Scusa parlare "dopo" è facile.
Tu sai dire, motivandolo con prove certe, quale sarà il prossimo paese, dove e come verrà colpito ?
No eh ?
In effetti non è facile nemmeno ora che l'allarme è alto, figurarsi allora...
Se mi parli di una sottovalutazione degli avvertimenti dei servizi, della mancanza di coordinazione delle agenzie ti dò ragione ma da lì a "prevedere" che ci sarà un attentato di tipo mai visto prima, con conseguenze mai viste prima, perpetrato ed organizzato in un modo mai visto prima....ne corre...
twinpigs
23-07-2004, 15:04
Originariamente inviato da IpseDixit
sapevano pilotare un aereo, oltre tutto un loro istruttore si ricordava bene di un allievo che era interessato solo al volo e alle virate e non a decollo e atteraggio.:oink:
si e mio cuggino mi ha detto che una volta è morto!
io credo fermamente che che quegli aerei andavano col pilota automatico infatti hanno virato perfettamente ed hanno seguito INDISTURBATI PER MEZZ'ORA una traiettoria PERFETTAMENTE LINEARE che li ha portati allo schianto
perchè? semplice ... scatole nere non ritrovate e/o non divulgate
mentre hanno ritrovato le CARTE D'IDENTITA' di uno o due "terroristi"
ecc.
ecc.
ecc.
sapevano pilotare un aereo, oltre tutto un loro istruttore si ricordava bene di un allievo che era interessato solo al volo e alle virate e non a decollo e atteraggio.:oink:
si e mio cuggino mi ha detto che una volta è morto!
io credo fermamente che che quegli aerei andavano col pilota automatico infatti hanno virato perfettamente ed hanno seguito INDISTURBATI PER MEZZ'ORA una traiettoria PERFETTAMENTE LINEARE che li ha portati allo schianto
perchè? semplice ... scatole nere non ritrovate e/o non divulgate
mentre hanno ritrovato le CARTE D'IDENTITA' di uno o due "terroristi"
ecc.
ecc.
ecc.
jumpermax
23-07-2004, 15:17
Originariamente inviato da twinpigs
si e mio cuggino mi ha detto che una volta è morto!
io credo fermamente che che quegli aerei andavano col pilota automatico infatti hanno virato perfettamente ed hanno seguito INDISTURBATI PER MEZZ'ORA una traiettoria PERFETTAMENTE LINEARE che li ha portati allo schianto
perchè? semplice ... scatole nere non ritrovate e/o non divulgate
mentre hanno ritrovato le CARTE D'IDENTITA' di uno o due "terroristi"
ecc.
ecc.
ecc.
si certo, e le telefonate dei passeggeri a bordo degli aerei dove le metti?
si e mio cuggino mi ha detto che una volta è morto!
io credo fermamente che che quegli aerei andavano col pilota automatico infatti hanno virato perfettamente ed hanno seguito INDISTURBATI PER MEZZ'ORA una traiettoria PERFETTAMENTE LINEARE che li ha portati allo schianto
perchè? semplice ... scatole nere non ritrovate e/o non divulgate
mentre hanno ritrovato le CARTE D'IDENTITA' di uno o due "terroristi"
ecc.
ecc.
ecc.
si certo, e le telefonate dei passeggeri a bordo degli aerei dove le metti?
twinpigs
23-07-2004, 15:22
Originariamente inviato da jumpermax
si certo, e le telefonate dei passeggeri a bordo degli aerei dove le metti?
:confused: non erano quelle delle torri bensì quello dell pensylvania e poi si dice che quelle sono state taroccate
si certo, e le telefonate dei passeggeri a bordo degli aerei dove le metti?
:confused: non erano quelle delle torri bensì quello dell pensylvania e poi si dice che quelle sono state taroccate
evelon
23-07-2004, 15:38
Originariamente inviato da twinpigs
si e mio cuggino mi ha detto che una volta è morto!
io credo fermamente che che quegli aerei andavano col pilota automatico infatti hanno virato perfettamente ed hanno seguito INDISTURBATI PER MEZZ'ORA una traiettoria PERFETTAMENTE LINEARE che li ha portati allo schianto
perchè? semplice ... scatole nere non ritrovate e/o non divulgate
mentre hanno ritrovato le CARTE D'IDENTITA' di uno o due "terroristi"
ecc.
ecc.
ecc.
Possibile che abbiamo impostato il pilota automatico per il volo.
Ma questo che cambia ? :confused:
Mi pare che una delle scatole nere era stata ritrovata.
Cmq ritrovata o no mi pare ovvio che sia stata segretata.
si e mio cuggino mi ha detto che una volta è morto!
io credo fermamente che che quegli aerei andavano col pilota automatico infatti hanno virato perfettamente ed hanno seguito INDISTURBATI PER MEZZ'ORA una traiettoria PERFETTAMENTE LINEARE che li ha portati allo schianto
perchè? semplice ... scatole nere non ritrovate e/o non divulgate
mentre hanno ritrovato le CARTE D'IDENTITA' di uno o due "terroristi"
ecc.
ecc.
ecc.
Possibile che abbiamo impostato il pilota automatico per il volo.
Ma questo che cambia ? :confused:
Mi pare che una delle scatole nere era stata ritrovata.
Cmq ritrovata o no mi pare ovvio che sia stata segretata.
jumpermax
23-07-2004, 15:45
Originariamente inviato da twinpigs
:confused: non erano quelle delle torri bensì quello dell pensylvania e poi si dice che quelle sono state taroccate
si dice si dice. Se le prove a sfavore le cancelli a priori e basi il tuo giudizio su una congettura (per giunta abbastanza priva di consistenza, anche se fosse? ) puoi concludere che siano stati anche gli alieni mi sa.... :D
:confused: non erano quelle delle torri bensì quello dell pensylvania e poi si dice che quelle sono state taroccate
si dice si dice. Se le prove a sfavore le cancelli a priori e basi il tuo giudizio su una congettura (per giunta abbastanza priva di consistenza, anche se fosse? ) puoi concludere che siano stati anche gli alieni mi sa.... :D
jumpermax
23-07-2004, 15:47
Originariamente inviato da evelon
Possibile che abbiamo impostato il pilota automatico per il volo.
Ma questo che cambia ? :confused:
Mi pare che una delle scatole nere era stata ritrovata.
Cmq ritrovata o no mi pare ovvio che sia stata segretata.
appunto. Ma c'è una commissione parlamentare che ha avuto a disposizione tutto il materiale oltre che ovviamente tutti quelli che si sono occupati delle indagini. L'argomento non regge nemmeno come ipotesi
Possibile che abbiamo impostato il pilota automatico per il volo.
Ma questo che cambia ? :confused:
Mi pare che una delle scatole nere era stata ritrovata.
Cmq ritrovata o no mi pare ovvio che sia stata segretata.
appunto. Ma c'è una commissione parlamentare che ha avuto a disposizione tutto il materiale oltre che ovviamente tutti quelli che si sono occupati delle indagini. L'argomento non regge nemmeno come ipotesi
jumpermax
23-07-2004, 18:38
Originariamente inviato da twinpigs
:confused: non erano quelle delle torri bensì quello dell pensylvania e poi si dice che quelle sono state taroccate
http://www.repubblica.it/2004/g/sezioni/esteri/11set/larivol/larivol.html
Nuove rivelazioni dalla Commissione sull'11 settembre
"Anche i passeggeri del volo 175
si rivoltarono contro i terroristi"
"Mio figlio mi chiamò e disse: devo lasciarti,
stiamo attaccanto la cabina di comando"
La relazione
della Commissione
NEW YORK - I passeggeri tentarono di ribellarsi ai dirottatori anche sul volo 175 da Boston a Los Angeles, che si schiantò sulla Torre Sud del World Trade Center. Ancora rivelazioni e nuovi particolari dal rapporto della Commissione sull'11 settembre pubblicato ieri a Washington. A far precipitare il volo 93 su un campo della Pennsylvania non furono i passeggeri, ma gli stessi kamikaze, ormai sul punto di essere sopraffatti.
Le informazioni sul volo 175 sono state date ai commissari da Louise Sweeney, la madre di Brian David Sweeney, uno dei 56 passeggeri partiti alle 8:14 dall'aeroporto Logan di Boston.
Sweeney chiamò la madre sul cellulare e le disse che i passeggeri stavano pensando di fare irruzione in cabina per neutralizzare i terroristi ai comandi dell'aereo. L'operazione non andò in porto: alle 9:00 del mattino, tre minuti prima dello schianto sulla Torre Sud del World Trade Center, un altro passeggero, Lee Hanson, chiamò il padre Peter a Groton Massachusetts.
Un passeggero: "Se moriamo sarà velocissimo "- "Le cose si mettono male papà, una hostess è stata pugnalata. Hanno coltelli, dicono di avere una bomba. La gente vomita e si sente male. L'aereo fa movimenti strani. Non sono i piloti a guidarlo. Penso che precipitiamo. Penso che vogliono andare a Chicago o altrove e schiantarsi su un grattacielo...Non ti preoccupare, papà. Se succede sarà velocissimo..". La comunicazione si interrompe bruscamente col grido di una donna. "Lee Hanson accese la televisione, come aveva fatto Louise Sweeney: videro entrambi il secondo aereo che si schiantava contro il World Trade Center", si legge nel rapporto dei commissari.
PUBBLICITA'
Il rapporto della Commissione 11/9 getta nuova luce anche sulla drammatica battaglia nei cieli del volo 93 partito da Newark con destinazione San Francisco. Contrariamente a quanto ritenuto finora, l'aereo rimase sempre nelle mani dei dirottatori che riuscirono a bloccare l'invasione della cabina di pilotaggio da parte dei passeggeri.
Il Volo 93 - Ai comandi del Boeing, Ziad Jarrah cominciò a far rollare l'aereo a destra e a sinistra per far perdere l'equilibrio ai rivoltosi ordinando a un altro kamikaze di bloccare la porta della cabina. Jarrah mandò il jet in picchiata e lo fece risalire bruscamente. E quando ormai sembrava che i passeggeri avrebbero avuto la meglio, girò il volante di controllo sulla destra facendo capovolgere il Boeing prima di farlo precipitare sui campi della Pennsylvania mentre un complice accanto a lui gridava: "Allah è grande".
Il rapporto rivela che la rivolta del volo 93 cominciò alle 9:57, sette minuti prima della fine. Rivela anche che la frase "Let's Roll" di uno dei passeggeri, finora interpretato come un grido generico di rivolta abbia invece a che fare con un carrello dei pasti che gli insorti avrebbero tentato di usare per speronare la porta della cabina.
A bordo del volo 93 c'erano 37 passeggeri. 'Stanno correndo tutti in prima classe, devo andare, ciao, dice una di loro nell'ultima telefonata alla famiglia.
Subito dopo Jarrah, ai comandi, comincia a mandare l'aereo sulle montagne russe per sbilanciare i rivoltosi. Poco dopo le dieci si sente una voce in cabina: "E' cosi? Dobbiamo finirla?". Un altro dirottatore risponde: "No, non ancora, la finiremo quando arrivano tutti".
Si sentono rumori come di una rissa, piatti e bicchieri rotti, e Jarrah manda l'aereo in picchiata poi lo fa risalire.
"Nella cabina di pilotaggio! Se non lo facciamo moriremo!", grida un passeggero.
Poi un'altro grida: "Let's roll!". Alle 10:01 Jarrah si rivolge a un complice: "E' finita? Voglio dire, lo dobbiamo far precipitare?". L'altro risponde di sì. Ottanta secondi dopo si sente un dirottatore: "Fallo schiantare, fallo schiantare" e un altro "Allah è grande". Ed è la fine.
(23 luglio 2004)
ti basta?
:confused: non erano quelle delle torri bensì quello dell pensylvania e poi si dice che quelle sono state taroccate
http://www.repubblica.it/2004/g/sezioni/esteri/11set/larivol/larivol.html
Nuove rivelazioni dalla Commissione sull'11 settembre
"Anche i passeggeri del volo 175
si rivoltarono contro i terroristi"
"Mio figlio mi chiamò e disse: devo lasciarti,
stiamo attaccanto la cabina di comando"
La relazione
della Commissione
NEW YORK - I passeggeri tentarono di ribellarsi ai dirottatori anche sul volo 175 da Boston a Los Angeles, che si schiantò sulla Torre Sud del World Trade Center. Ancora rivelazioni e nuovi particolari dal rapporto della Commissione sull'11 settembre pubblicato ieri a Washington. A far precipitare il volo 93 su un campo della Pennsylvania non furono i passeggeri, ma gli stessi kamikaze, ormai sul punto di essere sopraffatti.
Le informazioni sul volo 175 sono state date ai commissari da Louise Sweeney, la madre di Brian David Sweeney, uno dei 56 passeggeri partiti alle 8:14 dall'aeroporto Logan di Boston.
Sweeney chiamò la madre sul cellulare e le disse che i passeggeri stavano pensando di fare irruzione in cabina per neutralizzare i terroristi ai comandi dell'aereo. L'operazione non andò in porto: alle 9:00 del mattino, tre minuti prima dello schianto sulla Torre Sud del World Trade Center, un altro passeggero, Lee Hanson, chiamò il padre Peter a Groton Massachusetts.
Un passeggero: "Se moriamo sarà velocissimo "- "Le cose si mettono male papà, una hostess è stata pugnalata. Hanno coltelli, dicono di avere una bomba. La gente vomita e si sente male. L'aereo fa movimenti strani. Non sono i piloti a guidarlo. Penso che precipitiamo. Penso che vogliono andare a Chicago o altrove e schiantarsi su un grattacielo...Non ti preoccupare, papà. Se succede sarà velocissimo..". La comunicazione si interrompe bruscamente col grido di una donna. "Lee Hanson accese la televisione, come aveva fatto Louise Sweeney: videro entrambi il secondo aereo che si schiantava contro il World Trade Center", si legge nel rapporto dei commissari.
PUBBLICITA'
Il rapporto della Commissione 11/9 getta nuova luce anche sulla drammatica battaglia nei cieli del volo 93 partito da Newark con destinazione San Francisco. Contrariamente a quanto ritenuto finora, l'aereo rimase sempre nelle mani dei dirottatori che riuscirono a bloccare l'invasione della cabina di pilotaggio da parte dei passeggeri.
Il Volo 93 - Ai comandi del Boeing, Ziad Jarrah cominciò a far rollare l'aereo a destra e a sinistra per far perdere l'equilibrio ai rivoltosi ordinando a un altro kamikaze di bloccare la porta della cabina. Jarrah mandò il jet in picchiata e lo fece risalire bruscamente. E quando ormai sembrava che i passeggeri avrebbero avuto la meglio, girò il volante di controllo sulla destra facendo capovolgere il Boeing prima di farlo precipitare sui campi della Pennsylvania mentre un complice accanto a lui gridava: "Allah è grande".
Il rapporto rivela che la rivolta del volo 93 cominciò alle 9:57, sette minuti prima della fine. Rivela anche che la frase "Let's Roll" di uno dei passeggeri, finora interpretato come un grido generico di rivolta abbia invece a che fare con un carrello dei pasti che gli insorti avrebbero tentato di usare per speronare la porta della cabina.
A bordo del volo 93 c'erano 37 passeggeri. 'Stanno correndo tutti in prima classe, devo andare, ciao, dice una di loro nell'ultima telefonata alla famiglia.
Subito dopo Jarrah, ai comandi, comincia a mandare l'aereo sulle montagne russe per sbilanciare i rivoltosi. Poco dopo le dieci si sente una voce in cabina: "E' cosi? Dobbiamo finirla?". Un altro dirottatore risponde: "No, non ancora, la finiremo quando arrivano tutti".
Si sentono rumori come di una rissa, piatti e bicchieri rotti, e Jarrah manda l'aereo in picchiata poi lo fa risalire.
"Nella cabina di pilotaggio! Se non lo facciamo moriremo!", grida un passeggero.
Poi un'altro grida: "Let's roll!". Alle 10:01 Jarrah si rivolge a un complice: "E' finita? Voglio dire, lo dobbiamo far precipitare?". L'altro risponde di sì. Ottanta secondi dopo si sente un dirottatore: "Fallo schiantare, fallo schiantare" e un altro "Allah è grande". Ed è la fine.
(23 luglio 2004)
ti basta?
von Clausewitz
23-07-2004, 20:59
le solite miserabili discussioni condite dalle solite miserabili sciocchezze
che la difesa USA e ancor prima i vari servizi di sicurezza abbiano fallito è un fatto incontrovertibile
ma ciò è successo rispetto a un evento che non ha precedenti in 50 e passa d'anni d'aviazione civile, cioè degli aerei di linea civile lanciati a mo di kamikaze (i kamikaze conosciuti precedentemente invece erano aerei militari usati contro beragli militari in una guerra) si lanciavano contro edifici situati in degli agglomerati urbani in tempo di pace
così come non ha avuto precedenti si spera che nel futuro viste le precauzioni adottate, non abbia a ripetersi, cioè l'11 settembre rappresenta un unicum senza possibilità di replica (almeno per quanto riguarda i grandi aerei di linea come quelli usati in quegli attentati)
l'impreparazione della difesa USA è spiegabile anche dal fatto che essendo isolata da due oceani una minaccia aerea dall'esterno contro il territorio degli Stati Uniti era reputata impossibile, è in effetti lo era, infatti la minaccia si concretizzo non dall'esterno, ma dall'interno stesso del suo territorio, e con quelle modalità, cosa che nessuno aveva pensato e previsto
ciò nonostante un F16 arrivò su Manatthan con grande disperazione del pilota che riscontrò l'appena avvenuto secondo schianto
il caos che è seguito fu indescrivibile, si arrivò a bloccare tutto il traffico aereo negli areoporti, e si trattava di centinaia e centinaia di voli con centinaia di aerei
che la difesa USA e ancor prima i vari servizi di sicurezza abbiano fallito è un fatto incontrovertibile
ma ciò è successo rispetto a un evento che non ha precedenti in 50 e passa d'anni d'aviazione civile, cioè degli aerei di linea civile lanciati a mo di kamikaze (i kamikaze conosciuti precedentemente invece erano aerei militari usati contro beragli militari in una guerra) si lanciavano contro edifici situati in degli agglomerati urbani in tempo di pace
così come non ha avuto precedenti si spera che nel futuro viste le precauzioni adottate, non abbia a ripetersi, cioè l'11 settembre rappresenta un unicum senza possibilità di replica (almeno per quanto riguarda i grandi aerei di linea come quelli usati in quegli attentati)
l'impreparazione della difesa USA è spiegabile anche dal fatto che essendo isolata da due oceani una minaccia aerea dall'esterno contro il territorio degli Stati Uniti era reputata impossibile, è in effetti lo era, infatti la minaccia si concretizzo non dall'esterno, ma dall'interno stesso del suo territorio, e con quelle modalità, cosa che nessuno aveva pensato e previsto
ciò nonostante un F16 arrivò su Manatthan con grande disperazione del pilota che riscontrò l'appena avvenuto secondo schianto
il caos che è seguito fu indescrivibile, si arrivò a bloccare tutto il traffico aereo negli areoporti, e si trattava di centinaia e centinaia di voli con centinaia di aerei
gpc
23-07-2004, 21:04
Originariamente inviato da von Clausewitz
il caos che è seguito fu indescrivibile, si arrivò a bloccare tutto il traffico aereo negli areoporti, e si trattava di centinaia e centinaia di voli con centinaia di aerei
Non solo: aerei a metà oceano si videro negato l'accesso allo spazio USA e dovettero tornare indietro, chi poteva, oppure dirigersi verso il Canada. Praticamente mezzo traffico mondiale è stato bloccato appena si è capito cosa stava succedendo.
PS: Comunque ti adoro quando fai il diplomatico, mi fai impazzire :D :rotfl: :smack:
il caos che è seguito fu indescrivibile, si arrivò a bloccare tutto il traffico aereo negli areoporti, e si trattava di centinaia e centinaia di voli con centinaia di aerei
Non solo: aerei a metà oceano si videro negato l'accesso allo spazio USA e dovettero tornare indietro, chi poteva, oppure dirigersi verso il Canada. Praticamente mezzo traffico mondiale è stato bloccato appena si è capito cosa stava succedendo.
PS: Comunque ti adoro quando fai il diplomatico, mi fai impazzire :D :rotfl: :smack:
von Clausewitz
23-07-2004, 21:11
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
:D
scusa, ma questa è veramente SPASSOSA !!!
il 9/11 le autorità aeroportuali e la difesa erano all'erta sul dirottamento CONTEMPORANEO di 4 aerei di linea (MAI SUCCESSO PRIMA) fin dalle 8.15 :rolleyes:
alle 8.46 (mezz'ora dopo) il primo aereo si schianta sul WTC... il tutto mentre si è perfettamente al corrente che altri TRE aerei sono dirottati e puntano su NY e Washington... :rolleyes:
VENTI minuti dopo il secondo aereo colpisce il WTC... le autorità erano quindi già al corrente del pericolo da 50 MINUTI, e vi sono basi aeree militari a meno di dieci minuti di volo sia da NY che da Washington (p.s. gli USA si vantano che il loro "tempo di reazione" x il decollo di un F16 è di circa 6 minuti... :rolleyes: )
ma non basta... :rolleyes:
alle 9.37 ovvero almeno UN'ALTRA MEZZ'ORA DOPO il terzo aereo colpisce il pentagono...
il tutto senza che nessuno si accorgesse del pericolo e nessuno prendesse contromisure? :muro:
veramente ridicola la tua ricostruzione
ridicolo soprattutto il fatto che tu dica che gli aerei non furono dirottati contemporeanamente, invece lo furono a scaglioni successivi in un ridotto spazio temporale
che dei dirottamenti si sapesse fin dalle 8.15 sei tu a sostenerlo
invece è vero che tutti realizzarono che si trattava di attentati su larga scala solo dopo il secondo schianto sul WTC
molti pensarono per il primo schianto a un incidente
:D
scusa, ma questa è veramente SPASSOSA !!!
il 9/11 le autorità aeroportuali e la difesa erano all'erta sul dirottamento CONTEMPORANEO di 4 aerei di linea (MAI SUCCESSO PRIMA) fin dalle 8.15 :rolleyes:
alle 8.46 (mezz'ora dopo) il primo aereo si schianta sul WTC... il tutto mentre si è perfettamente al corrente che altri TRE aerei sono dirottati e puntano su NY e Washington... :rolleyes:
VENTI minuti dopo il secondo aereo colpisce il WTC... le autorità erano quindi già al corrente del pericolo da 50 MINUTI, e vi sono basi aeree militari a meno di dieci minuti di volo sia da NY che da Washington (p.s. gli USA si vantano che il loro "tempo di reazione" x il decollo di un F16 è di circa 6 minuti... :rolleyes: )
ma non basta... :rolleyes:
alle 9.37 ovvero almeno UN'ALTRA MEZZ'ORA DOPO il terzo aereo colpisce il pentagono...
il tutto senza che nessuno si accorgesse del pericolo e nessuno prendesse contromisure? :muro:
veramente ridicola la tua ricostruzione
ridicolo soprattutto il fatto che tu dica che gli aerei non furono dirottati contemporeanamente, invece lo furono a scaglioni successivi in un ridotto spazio temporale
che dei dirottamenti si sapesse fin dalle 8.15 sei tu a sostenerlo
invece è vero che tutti realizzarono che si trattava di attentati su larga scala solo dopo il secondo schianto sul WTC
molti pensarono per il primo schianto a un incidente
von Clausewitz
23-07-2004, 21:14
Originariamente inviato da evelon
....(secondo le prime voci da un missile, poi da una collutazione a bordo).
la faccenda dell'abbattimento dell'aereo in pennsylvania pare che sia una cosa che è circolata principalmente in Italia
http://www.eurit.it/Eurplace/euradiophoria/3/gramaglia_int.htm
7) Qui si ha l'impressione di una incongruenza nella copertura mediatica dell'evento. Da un lato all'inizio un'immediata diffusione di suoni, immagini, amatoriali anche. Poi improvvisamente si è avuta la sensazione di un maggior controllo nella comunicazione dell'evento. È autocensura dell'informazione oppure è un'informazione condizionata dal potere?
Anche qui direi che dobbiamo fare due distinguo. Il condizionamento del potere sull'informazione forse in America è meno palese che altrove però abbiamo due elementi. In uno centra il potere.
Nell'altro centra l'autocensura. L'autocensura è quella delle immagini che non sono mai offensive, certo le immagini iniziali sono scioccanti, e quelle non erano controllate, non lo sarebbero state perché sarebbero comunque andate, le immagini degli aerei che sbattono contro le torri, le immagini del fuoco.
La caduta, quella polvere che divora la gente che corre per Manhattan, che era l'amplificazione all'ennesima potenza della polvere del crollo a S.Francesco d'Assisi che divorava le povere persone rimaste nella chiesa dopo il terremoto. Bene, quelle erano immagini che nessuno avrebbe censurato e che vengono continuamente trasmesse e ritrasmesse dalle televisioni americane. Ma la censura c'è sull'immagine della morte, del dolore, quelle che potrebbero offendere non tanto le vittime che ormai non possono più offendersi, ma i familiari delle vittime. E infatti questa è una tragedia, come tante altre tragedie americane, come lo fu la guerra del Golfo. Una tragedia senza immagini di morti. Non c'è praticamente l'immagine di una vittima, negli scavi, nel recupero delle macerie. Non si vede mai la vittima, e questa è senz'altro una forma di autocensura, però probabilmente anche una forma di civiltà dell'informazione, almeno a mio giudizio.
L'altro aspetto è quello delle indagini. Sulle indagini c'è ritenzione di informazioni, FBI, Cia danno soltanto le informazioni che ritengono non danneggiare le indagini. I giornalisti americani stanno cercando molte informazioni vengono fuori dal giornalismo di inchiesta, però attenzione, non scambiamo la ritenzione di informazione col dare notizie false. Quando sui media italiani esplode la notizia che il volo United Airlines 93 è stato abbattuto dai caccia americani, non è una informazione che l'informazione ufficiale americana nega, è una bufala che viene ingigantita ma che non è vera e che quindi nessuno negli Stati Uniti dà, se non per smentirla una volta che rimbalzi da qualche parte come voce.
8) Qui in Italia in effetti la notizia dell'abbatimento del quarto aereo da parte dei caccia americani è rimbalzata come una notizia plausibile.
Altro che plausibile viene data come notizia vera. Viene data alla televisione davanti a 25 milioni di telespettatori come una notizia vera e non si ha neppure la decenza di smentirla quando arriva una smentita, non solo convincente, ma che rende la notizia persino più bella.
Perché se quell'aereo fosse stato abbattuto dai caccia americani, non c'era niente di scandaloso, per evitare che col sacrificio di 50 persone se ne risparmiassero di più.
Non c'era niente di scandaloso e gli americani lo avrebbero detto. Ma se quell'aereo cade perché i passeggeri si ribellano ai pirati e ingaggiano una colluttazione e nella confusione l'aereo cade, è una notizia ancora più bella. Quindi non c'è neppure bisogno di sacrificare una bella notizia perché la realtà più grigia, la realtà è più bella e chi si inventa la notizia non ha nessun bisogno di farlo.
....(secondo le prime voci da un missile, poi da una collutazione a bordo).
la faccenda dell'abbattimento dell'aereo in pennsylvania pare che sia una cosa che è circolata principalmente in Italia
http://www.eurit.it/Eurplace/euradiophoria/3/gramaglia_int.htm
7) Qui si ha l'impressione di una incongruenza nella copertura mediatica dell'evento. Da un lato all'inizio un'immediata diffusione di suoni, immagini, amatoriali anche. Poi improvvisamente si è avuta la sensazione di un maggior controllo nella comunicazione dell'evento. È autocensura dell'informazione oppure è un'informazione condizionata dal potere?
Anche qui direi che dobbiamo fare due distinguo. Il condizionamento del potere sull'informazione forse in America è meno palese che altrove però abbiamo due elementi. In uno centra il potere.
Nell'altro centra l'autocensura. L'autocensura è quella delle immagini che non sono mai offensive, certo le immagini iniziali sono scioccanti, e quelle non erano controllate, non lo sarebbero state perché sarebbero comunque andate, le immagini degli aerei che sbattono contro le torri, le immagini del fuoco.
La caduta, quella polvere che divora la gente che corre per Manhattan, che era l'amplificazione all'ennesima potenza della polvere del crollo a S.Francesco d'Assisi che divorava le povere persone rimaste nella chiesa dopo il terremoto. Bene, quelle erano immagini che nessuno avrebbe censurato e che vengono continuamente trasmesse e ritrasmesse dalle televisioni americane. Ma la censura c'è sull'immagine della morte, del dolore, quelle che potrebbero offendere non tanto le vittime che ormai non possono più offendersi, ma i familiari delle vittime. E infatti questa è una tragedia, come tante altre tragedie americane, come lo fu la guerra del Golfo. Una tragedia senza immagini di morti. Non c'è praticamente l'immagine di una vittima, negli scavi, nel recupero delle macerie. Non si vede mai la vittima, e questa è senz'altro una forma di autocensura, però probabilmente anche una forma di civiltà dell'informazione, almeno a mio giudizio.
L'altro aspetto è quello delle indagini. Sulle indagini c'è ritenzione di informazioni, FBI, Cia danno soltanto le informazioni che ritengono non danneggiare le indagini. I giornalisti americani stanno cercando molte informazioni vengono fuori dal giornalismo di inchiesta, però attenzione, non scambiamo la ritenzione di informazione col dare notizie false. Quando sui media italiani esplode la notizia che il volo United Airlines 93 è stato abbattuto dai caccia americani, non è una informazione che l'informazione ufficiale americana nega, è una bufala che viene ingigantita ma che non è vera e che quindi nessuno negli Stati Uniti dà, se non per smentirla una volta che rimbalzi da qualche parte come voce.
8) Qui in Italia in effetti la notizia dell'abbatimento del quarto aereo da parte dei caccia americani è rimbalzata come una notizia plausibile.
Altro che plausibile viene data come notizia vera. Viene data alla televisione davanti a 25 milioni di telespettatori come una notizia vera e non si ha neppure la decenza di smentirla quando arriva una smentita, non solo convincente, ma che rende la notizia persino più bella.
Perché se quell'aereo fosse stato abbattuto dai caccia americani, non c'era niente di scandaloso, per evitare che col sacrificio di 50 persone se ne risparmiassero di più.
Non c'era niente di scandaloso e gli americani lo avrebbero detto. Ma se quell'aereo cade perché i passeggeri si ribellano ai pirati e ingaggiano una colluttazione e nella confusione l'aereo cade, è una notizia ancora più bella. Quindi non c'è neppure bisogno di sacrificare una bella notizia perché la realtà più grigia, la realtà è più bella e chi si inventa la notizia non ha nessun bisogno di farlo.
von Clausewitz
23-07-2004, 21:19
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
;)
bingo !!!
si, e magari totogol, tris, lotteria, lotto, superenalotto, totocalcio, totogol ecc.
ma che ne vorrrai sapere tu del sistema difensivo americano
ma smettila con le fanfaronate :rolleyes:
;)
bingo !!!
si, e magari totogol, tris, lotteria, lotto, superenalotto, totocalcio, totogol ecc.
ma che ne vorrrai sapere tu del sistema difensivo americano
ma smettila con le fanfaronate :rolleyes:
von Clausewitz
23-07-2004, 21:24
Originariamente inviato da Nevermind
Si, questa è la versione ufficiale.
Saluti.
e la tua invece cos'è?
la controversione non ufficiale?
almeno quella ha il crisma dell'ufficialità
la tua che crisma ha?
quello della non ufficialità?
ma poi tu non eri quello della versione che piloti degli aerei erano gli stessi kamikaze, i quali sempre secondo la tua versione non erano passeggeri essendo essi stessi i piloti ufficiali degli aereomobili?
e questa che versione sarebbe? :rolleyes:
Si, questa è la versione ufficiale.
Saluti.
e la tua invece cos'è?
la controversione non ufficiale?
almeno quella ha il crisma dell'ufficialità
la tua che crisma ha?
quello della non ufficialità?
ma poi tu non eri quello della versione che piloti degli aerei erano gli stessi kamikaze, i quali sempre secondo la tua versione non erano passeggeri essendo essi stessi i piloti ufficiali degli aereomobili?
e questa che versione sarebbe? :rolleyes:
von Clausewitz
23-07-2004, 21:31
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
ehm, ne siete proprio convinti... ?
proviamo cosi (consiglio di leggere attentamente) ;) :
...questo per quanto riguarda la cosiddetta "impossibilità" di intervento :rolleyes: :muro:
per quanto riguarda la "imprevedibilità" :
il libro "Potere Esecutivo" di Tom Clancy del 1996 (libro scritto quindi BEN 5 anni prima da uno dei maggiori scrittori MONDIALI) racconta di terroristi che usano aerei di linea come missili contro edifici istituzionali americani, in particolare... la casa Bianca... :rolleyes:
imprevedibile? ;)
per finire, mi spiace ma gli aerei di linea NON passano su manatthan... proprio per la pericolosità della rotta e per lasciare via libera agli elicotteri di polizia, e servizi d'ordine in genere... ;)
...quindi, per concludere
è INCONFUTABILE che tutti i più banali sistemi di sicurezza abbiano "fallito" o siano stati ignorati la mattina del 11 sett. 2001... il resto è ormai storia ;)
se per quello Tom Clancy scrisse in uno dei suoi libri anche lo scenario di una guerra mondiale con l'URSS
che si fa, ci si prepara alla guerra con i russi? :rolleyes:
cmq su una cosa però hai ragione, il resto è storia, invece le tue sono solo emerite fregnacce :rolleyes:
ps tu dici che gli aerei di linea NON passano su manatthan, a parte la opinabilità di questa asserzione, gli aerei in questione non sono infatti passati su manatthan, sono andati a schiantarsi a tutta velocità su manatthan
non so se ti sfugge la "sottile" differenza fra questi due verbi
poi certo anche un piper non doveva passare a bassima quota sul centro di milano un paio d'anni fa
invece c'è passato ed è pure andato a schiantarsi sul pirellone
hai qualche tua "illuminante" deduzione a riguardo? :rolleyes: :muro:
ehm, ne siete proprio convinti... ?
proviamo cosi (consiglio di leggere attentamente) ;) :
...questo per quanto riguarda la cosiddetta "impossibilità" di intervento :rolleyes: :muro:
per quanto riguarda la "imprevedibilità" :
il libro "Potere Esecutivo" di Tom Clancy del 1996 (libro scritto quindi BEN 5 anni prima da uno dei maggiori scrittori MONDIALI) racconta di terroristi che usano aerei di linea come missili contro edifici istituzionali americani, in particolare... la casa Bianca... :rolleyes:
imprevedibile? ;)
per finire, mi spiace ma gli aerei di linea NON passano su manatthan... proprio per la pericolosità della rotta e per lasciare via libera agli elicotteri di polizia, e servizi d'ordine in genere... ;)
...quindi, per concludere
è INCONFUTABILE che tutti i più banali sistemi di sicurezza abbiano "fallito" o siano stati ignorati la mattina del 11 sett. 2001... il resto è ormai storia ;)
se per quello Tom Clancy scrisse in uno dei suoi libri anche lo scenario di una guerra mondiale con l'URSS
che si fa, ci si prepara alla guerra con i russi? :rolleyes:
cmq su una cosa però hai ragione, il resto è storia, invece le tue sono solo emerite fregnacce :rolleyes:
ps tu dici che gli aerei di linea NON passano su manatthan, a parte la opinabilità di questa asserzione, gli aerei in questione non sono infatti passati su manatthan, sono andati a schiantarsi a tutta velocità su manatthan
non so se ti sfugge la "sottile" differenza fra questi due verbi
poi certo anche un piper non doveva passare a bassima quota sul centro di milano un paio d'anni fa
invece c'è passato ed è pure andato a schiantarsi sul pirellone
hai qualche tua "illuminante" deduzione a riguardo? :rolleyes: :muro:
von Clausewitz
23-07-2004, 21:43
Originariamente inviato da Marlex
tutto il resto è :mc: ...
ma stai sempre parlando della storia o di quello che scrivi tu?
:confused: :asd:
tutto il resto è :mc: ...
ma stai sempre parlando della storia o di quello che scrivi tu?
:confused: :asd:
von Clausewitz
23-07-2004, 21:45
Originariamente inviato da gpc
Non solo: aerei a metà oceano si videro negato l'accesso allo spazio USA e dovettero tornare indietro, chi poteva, oppure dirigersi verso il Canada. Praticamente mezzo traffico mondiale è stato bloccato appena si è capito cosa stava succedendo.
PS: Comunque ti adoro quando fai il diplomatico, mi fai impazzire :D :rotfl: :smack:
e ma se ci fossero state le menti "previdenti" che ci sono su questo forum tutto quello non sarebbe successo
il bello è che ne sono anche convinti :asd:
ps grazie vedrò di non deluderti anche per il futuro :D ;)
Non solo: aerei a metà oceano si videro negato l'accesso allo spazio USA e dovettero tornare indietro, chi poteva, oppure dirigersi verso il Canada. Praticamente mezzo traffico mondiale è stato bloccato appena si è capito cosa stava succedendo.
PS: Comunque ti adoro quando fai il diplomatico, mi fai impazzire :D :rotfl: :smack:
e ma se ci fossero state le menti "previdenti" che ci sono su questo forum tutto quello non sarebbe successo
il bello è che ne sono anche convinti :asd:
ps grazie vedrò di non deluderti anche per il futuro :D ;)
GioFX
23-07-2004, 22:35
Originariamente inviato da gpc
Tra l'altro se non ricordo male gli aerei avevano anche staccato i transponder per non essere rilevati dai radar del traffico aereo, no?
il transponder fornisce SOLO l'identificativo del velivolo, gp... la tracciatura radar non ha bisogno di trasponder e le rotte sono note al 100%. dico, ma sai come funziona un radar? :fagiano:
Tra l'altro se non ricordo male gli aerei avevano anche staccato i transponder per non essere rilevati dai radar del traffico aereo, no?
il transponder fornisce SOLO l'identificativo del velivolo, gp... la tracciatura radar non ha bisogno di trasponder e le rotte sono note al 100%. dico, ma sai come funziona un radar? :fagiano:
GioFX
23-07-2004, 22:41
Originariamente inviato da von Clausewitz
ciò nonostante un F16 arrivò su Manatthan con grande disperazione del pilota che riscontrò l'appena avvenuto secondo schianto
ma dico, sai bene come sono andati gli eventi, o racconti le solite finiculate? :D
Percortesia, informarsi prima...
http://www.unansweredquestions.org/timeline/timeline_dayof911.html
http://www.911timeline.net/
ciò nonostante un F16 arrivò su Manatthan con grande disperazione del pilota che riscontrò l'appena avvenuto secondo schianto
ma dico, sai bene come sono andati gli eventi, o racconti le solite finiculate? :D
Percortesia, informarsi prima...
http://www.unansweredquestions.org/timeline/timeline_dayof911.html
http://www.911timeline.net/
GioFX
23-07-2004, 22:47
Selected time: Day of 9/11
Points to keep in mind regarding entries of the day of 9/11:
The scrambling (sending into the air) of fighter aircraft at the first sign of trouble is a routine phenomenon. During the year 2000, there are 425 “unknowns”—pilots who didn't file or diverted from flight plans or used the wrong frequency. Fighters are scrambled in response 129 times in cases where problems are not immediately resolved. After 9/11, such scrambles go from about twice a week to three or four times a day. [ Calgary Herald, 10/13/01 ] Between September 2000 and June 2001, fighters are scrambled 67 times. [ Associated Press, 8/13/02 ] General Ralph E. Eberhart, NORAD Commander in Chief, says that before 9/11, “Normally, our units fly 4-6 sorties a month in support of the NORAD air defense mission.” [ FNS, 10/25/01 ]
“Consider that an aircraft emergency exists…when: … There is unexpected loss of radar contact and radio communications with any... aircraft.” [ FAA regulations (1) ]
“If…you are in doubt that a situation constitutes an emergency or potential emergency, handle it as though it were an emergency.” [ FAA regulations (2) ]
“Pilots are supposed to hit each fix with pinpoint accuracy. If a plane deviates by 15 degrees, or two miles from that course, the flight controllers will hit the panic button. They'll call the plane, saying ‘American 11, you're deviating from course.’ It's considered a real emergency, like a police car screeching down a highway at 100 miles an hour. When golfer Payne Stewart's incapacitated Learjet missed a turn at a fix, heading north instead of west to Texas, F-16 interceptors were quickly dispatched.” [ MSNBC, 9/12/01 ]
“A NORAD spokesman says 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, 9/15/01 ]
“In October [2002], Gen. Eberhart told Congress that ‘now it takes about one minute’ from the time that the FAA senses something is amiss before it notifies NORAD. And around the same time, a NORAD spokesofficer told the Associated Press that the military can now scramble fighters ‘within a matter of minutes to anywhere in the United States.’” [ Slate, 1/16/02 ]
The commander-in-chief of the Russian Air Force, Anatoli Kornukov, says the day after 9/11: “Generally it is impossible to carry out an act of terror on the scenario which was used in the USA yesterday…. As soon as something like that happens here, I am reported about that right away and in a minute we are all up.” [ Pravda, 9/12/01 ]
Supposedly, on 9/11, there are only four fighters on ready status in the Northeastern US, and only 14 fighters on permanent ready status in the entire US. [ BBC, 8/29/02 ] However, any number of additional fighters could be in the air or ready to fly at the time the 9/11 attacks begin, but exact numbers are not known.
Additionally, the Air Traffic Services Cell (ATSC), an office designed to facilitate communications between the FAA and the military, had just been given a secure Internet (Siprnet) terminal and other hardware six weeks earlier, “greatly enhancing the movement of vital information.” [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/10/02 ]
(5:53 a.m.): Hijackers Mohamed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari board a Colgan Air flight from Portland, Maine, to Boston. They are filmed going through security in Portland. This is the only footage of the hijackers in airports on 9/11, and it's not even one of the suicide flights. [ Time, 9/24/01 ] [5:45, New York Daily News, 5/22/02 , 5:45, FBI, 10/4/01 , 5:53, Miami Herald, 9/22/01 , strangely, the photos show two time stamps, one showing 5:45, the other showing 5:53]
(6:00 a.m.): Mohamed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari's flight from Portland, Maine to Boston takes off. [ FBI, 10/4/01 ] Two passengers later say Atta and Alomari board separately from each other, keep quiet, and don't draw attention to themselves. [ Washington Post, 9/16/01 , Chicago Sun-Times, 9/16/01 ]
(6:00 a.m.): President Bush has just spent the night at Colony Beach and Tennis Resort on Longboat Key, Florida. Surface-to-air missiles have been placed on the roof of the resort. [ Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 9/10/02 ] Bush wakes up around 6:00 a.m. and is preparing for his morning jog. [ MSNBC, 10/27/02 , New York Times, 9/16/01 , Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] A van occupied by men of Middle Eastern descent pull up to the Colony stating they have a “poolside” interview with the president. They are turned away for not having an appointment. [ Longboat Observer, 9/26/01 ] [ Time, 8/4/02 (B) ]
NORAD's war room in Cheyenne, Wyoming [Discover]
(6:30 a.m.): Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins and other NORAD employees at NEADS (NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector that covers the Washington and New York areas) are starting their work day. NORAD is unusually prepared on 9/11, because it is conducting a week-long semiannual exercise called Vigilant Guardian. [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] NORAD is thus fully staffed and alert, and senior officers are manning stations throughout the US. The entire chain of command is in place and ready when the first hijacking is reported. An article later says, “In retrospect, the exercise would prove to be a serendipitous enabler of a rapid military response to terrorist attacks on Sept. 11.” [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 ] ABC News later reports that because NORAD is “conducting training exercises [it] therefore [has] extra fighter planes on alert.” [ ABC News, 9/14/02 ] Colonel Robert Marr, in charge of NEADS, says, “We had the fighters with a little more gas on board. A few more weapons on board.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] The exercise poses “an imaginary crisis to North American Air Defense outposts nationwide.” [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] Accounts by participants vary on if 9/11 was the second, third, or fourth day of the exercise. [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 , Ottawa Citizen, 9/11/02 , Code One Magazine, 1/02 ]
(6:30 a.m.): A man has an argument with five Middle Eastern men over a parking space in the parking lot of Boston's Logan Airport. Later in the day he reports the event, and the car is discovered to have been rented by Mohamed Atta. Inside, police find a ramp pass, allowing access to restricted airport areas. [“About 6.30,” News of the World, 9/16/01 , time unknown, Miami Herald, 9/22/01 ]
The Colony Beach and Tennis Resort, where Bush stays the night before 9/11. [Colony Resort website]
(6:31 a.m.): Bush goes for a four-mile jog around the golf course at the Colony Beach and Tennis Resort. [6:30, Washington Post, 1/27/02 , 6:30, MSNBC, 10/27/02 , 6:32, Washington Times, 10/7/02 ]
(6:45 a.m.): “Approximately two hours prior to the first attack”, at least two workers at the instant messaging company Odigo receive messages warning of the WTC attack. This Israeli owned company has its headquarters two blocks from the WTC. [ Washington Post, 9/28/01 , Ha'aretz, 9/26/01 ]
6:50 a.m.: Mohamed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari's flight from Portland arrives on time at Boston's Logan Airport. [The book Inside 9-11: What Really Happened, 2/02]
(7:45 a.m.): Mohamed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari board Flight 11. Atta's bags contain airline uniforms and many other remarkable things, but are checked through to his final destination, making them unusable for the attacks. The bags are not loaded onto the plane in time and are later found by investigators. [ Boston Globe, 9/18/01 ] But at least two other hijackers on Flight 11 are able to use stolen uniforms and IDs to board the plane. [ Sunday Herald, 9/16/01 ] There is speculation that the bags were meant to be left behind and found. [ New Yorker, 10/1/01 ]
(Before 7:59 a.m.): Supposedly, nine of the 19 hijackers are selected for special screening before they board their planes. None of their names are known [ Washington Post, 3/2/02 (B) ], but one article makes clear hijackers Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi, already on a terrorist watch list for international flights, are not selected. [ Cox News, 10/21/01 ] Six of the nine are chosen for extra scrutiny by a computerized screening system, prompting a sweep of their checked baggage for explosives or unauthorized weapons. Two of the nine are chosen because of irregularities in their identification documents, and one is chosen for traveling with someone having such documents. After screening, all are allowed to board. [ Washington Post, 3/2/02 (B) ]
(Before 7:59 a.m.): Hijacker Mohamed Atta on Flight 11 calls hijacker Marwan Alshehhi in Flight 175 as both planes sit on the runway. They confirm the plot is on. [“Just before 8:00,” Time, 8/4/02 (B) ]
Flight 11's intended and actual routes. Why did the plane go so far northwest (before turning south), for seemingly no reason? [USA Today]
(7:59 a.m.): Flight 11 takes off from Boston's Logan Airport, 14 minutes after scheduled departure. [7:45 (actually the scheduled time), Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01 , 7:59, ABC News, 7/18/02 , 7:59, CNN, 9/17/01 , 7:59, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 7:59, Washington Post, 9/12/01 (C) , 8:00, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:00, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 8:00, Newsday, 9/10/02 ]
(8:00 a.m.): Bush sits down for his daily intelligence briefing. “The President's briefing appears to have included some reference to the heightened terrorist risk reported throughout the summer” but contained nothing serious enough to call National Security Adviser Rice. The briefing ends at about 8:20. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
United Airlines Flight 93, a Boeing 757.
8:01 a.m.: Flight 93 is delayed for 41 minutes on the runway in Newark, finally taking off at 8:42. The Boston Globe credits this delay as a major reason why this was the only one of the four flights not to succeed in its mission. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] [ Newsweek, 9/22/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ] Apparently Flight 93 has to wait in a line of about a dozen planes before it can take off. [ USA Today, 8/12/02 ]
8:13 a.m.: The last routine communication between ground control and the pilots of Flight 11. The pilot responds when told to turn right. But almost immediately afterwards he fails to respond to a command to climb. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , 8:13:31, New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) ]
American Airlines Flight 11, a Boeing 767.
(8:13 a.m.): Flight 11 is hijacked around this time. One flight controller says the plane is hijacked over Gardner, Massachusetts, less than 50 miles west of Boston. [ Nashua Telegraph, 9/13/01 ] The storming of the cockpit doesn't appear to happen until after 8:21, yet communication with ground control stops now. Fifteen minutes after takeoff, Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01 , “A few minutes into the flight,” ABC News, 7/18/02 ] As the Boston Globe put it, “It appears that the hijackers' entry was surprising enough that the pilots did not have a chance to broadcast a traditional distress call,” a button that would have taken only a few seconds to press. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ]
Flight 11's manifest. Such details on other flights haven't been released. [Edited, from AP and Sydney Morning Herald]
(After 8:13 a.m.): Shortly after flight controllers ask Flight 11 to climb to 35,000 feet, the transponder stops transmitting. The transponder is the electronic device that identifies the jet on the controller's screen, gives its exact location and altitude, and also allows a four-digit emergency hijack code to be sent. Air traffic manager Glenn Michael says later, “We considered it at that time to be a possible hijacking.” [“When given permission to climb to 35,000 feet,” Associated Press, 8/12/02 , “8:13:47—46R: AAL11, now climb maintain FL350,” New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) , shortly after trying emergency frequencies, Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01 ] “Just moments” after radio contact is lost (which is discussed by flight controllers at 8:15), the transponder is turned off. [ MSNBC, 9/15/01 ] NORAD officially says it is not notified the plane is hijacked until 8:40—27 minutes later, though one NORAD employee contradicts this (see 8:31 a.m. and (8:40 a.m.)). [ NORAD, 9/18/01 ] Colonel Robert Marr, head of NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector, later claims the transponder is turned off some time after 8:30. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
(After 8:14 a.m.): At some point after the hijacking begins, the pilot of Flight 11, John Ogonowski, activates the talk-back button, enabling Boston flight controllers to hear what is being said in the cockpit. A controller says, “The button was being pushed intermittently most of the way to New York.” An article later notes that “his ability to do so also indicates that he was in the driver's seat much of the way” to the WTC. Such transmissions continue until about 8:38. [ Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01 , MSNBC, 9/15/01 ]
Flight 175's intended and actual routes. [USA Today]
8:14 a.m.: Flight 175 takes off from Boston's Logan Airport, 16 minutes after the scheduled departure time. [ CNN, 9/17/01 , Washington Post, 9/12/01 , Guardian, 10/17/01 , Associated Press, 8/19/02 , Newsday, 9/10/02 ]
(8:15 a.m.): Boston flight control tries but fails to contact the pilots of Flight 11, even using emergency frequencies. [8:14, Guardian, 10/17/01 ] A Boston flight controller states of Flight 11, “He won't answer you. He's nordo roger thanks”. Nordo means “no radio.” [8:15, New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) , “over the Hudson river,” CNN, 9/17/01 ]
8:20 a.m.: Flight 11 stops transmitting its IFF (identify friend or foe) beacon signal. [ CNN, 9/17/01 ]
(8:20 a.m.): Flight 11 starts to veer dramatically off course around this time. [USA Today flight path image, on this page] Recall that if a plane goes two miles off course, it should be considered an emergency situation. [ MSNBC, 9/12/01 ]
(8:20 a.m.): Boston flight control decides that Flight 11 has probably been hijacked, but apparently it doesn't notify other flight control centers for another five minutes, and don't notify NORAD for about another 20 minutes. [“About 8:20,” Newsday, 9/23/01 , “about 8:20,” New York Times, 9/15/01 (C) ] ABC News will later say, “There doesn't seem to have been alarm bells going off, traffic controllers getting on with law enforcement or the military. There's a gap there that will have to be investigated.” [ ABC News, 9/14/01 ]
Flight 77's intended and actual routes. Note the strange loop off course about halfway along the route to the west. This loop doesn't show on most flight route maps. [USA Today]
(8:20 a.m.): Flight 77 departs Dulles International Airport near Washington, ten minutes after the scheduled departure time. [8:20, CNN, 9/17/01 , 8:20, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 8:20, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:21, Associated Press, 8/19/02 ]
Daniel Lewin.
(Before 8:21 a.m.): Four hijackers get up from their seats and stab or shoot passenger Daniel Lewin, who once belonged to the Israel Defense Force, Sayeret Matkal, a top-secret counter-terrorist unit. He was sitting in front of one of the three hijackers in business class. A very preliminary FAA memo says Lewin is shot by Satam Al Suqami at 9:20. Clearly the time is a typo; perhaps 8:20 is meant? [ ABC News, 7/18/02 , UPI, 3/6/02 , Washington Post, 3/2/02 (B) ]
(8:21 a.m.): Inside Flight 11 and near the back of the plane, flight attendant Betty Ong calls Vanessa Minter at American Airlines reservations in North Carolina, using a seatback GTE Airfone. She begins relaying information to manager Craig Marquis at American Airlines' operations center in Fort Worth, but she can't transfer the call. Another supervisor named Nydia Gonzales also listens in from 8:27. Ong talks for 25 minutes, until the plane crashes. The FBI says that only the first four minutes were recorded, but won't release the tape. Other flight attendants relay information about what is happening in the front. She says the hijackers sprayed something in the first-class cabin to keep people out of the front of the plane. It burns her eyes and she is having trouble breathing. In hushed tones, she tells of a passenger dead (presumably Daniel Lewin) and a crew member dying. [“25 minute phone call until crash,” ABC News, 7/18/02 , Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , USA Today, 8/13/02 ]
Flight attendants Amy Sweeney (left) and Betty Ong (right).
(8:21 a.m.): Another Flight 11 attendant, Amy Sweeney, calls American Airlines ground manager Michael Woodward and speaks calmly to him for 25 minutes until the plane crashes. Supposedly the call is not recorded but Woodward took notes. [ ABC News, 7/18/02 ] However, the Boston Globe says it has a transcript of the call. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] Her first comment is, “Listen, and listen to me very carefully. I'm on Flight 11. The airplane has been hijacked.” She identifies four hijackers (not the five said to be on the plane) and gives the seat numbers for them. Even before the plane crashes, staff are able to determine the names, phone numbers, addresses, and credit card information for these four hijackers, including Mohamed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari. She reports that two flight attendants have been stabbed and a passenger has had his throat slashed. She says the hijackers seem to be of Middle Eastern descent. [“Over the next 25 minutes,” ABC News, 7/18/02 , Associated Press, 10/5/01 ]
(After 8:21 a.m.): While flight attendant Amy Sweeney is relating details on the phone about the hijackers, the men are storming the front of the plane. She says they “just gained access to the cockpit.” It's probable she calls just after the storming begins, and it is during this struggle when the hijackers stab the two first-class flight attendants nearest to the cockpit, Barbara Arestegui and Karen Martin. Sweeney says the hijackers have a bomb with yellow wires attached. [ ABC News, 7/18/02 , Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01 ] If so, he would have begun the hijack around 8:13, but would only received reinforcements and had Mohamed Atta take over the flying of the plane around now. [ Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01 , Associated Press, 10/5/01 , ABC News, 7/18/02 ]
Flight 11 pilot John Ogonowski.
(8:24 a.m.): The pilot of Flight 11, John Ogonowski, activates the talk-back button, enabling Boston flight controllers to hear a hijacker on Flight 11 say to the passengers: “We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you will be OK. We are returning to the airport.” A controller responds, “Who's trying to call me?” The hijacker continues, “Everything will be OK. If you try to make any moves you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet.” [8:24:38, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:24:38, New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) , 8:24, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , 8:28, New York Times, 9/12/01 , before 8:28, Channel 4 News, 9/13/01 ] Immediately after hearing this voice, the controller “knew right then that he was working a hijack.” [ Village Voice, 9/13/01 ] Ben Sliney, the FAA's National Operations Manager, soon hears of the message “We have some planes” and later says the phrase haunts him all morning. [ USA Today, 8/13/02 ]
8:25 a.m.: 2004-04-08 Boston flight controllers notify other flight control centers of the Flight 11 hijacking, but supposedly they don't notify (NORAD for another 6 or 15 minutes (see 8:31 a.m. and (8:40 a.m.)). [8:25:00, Guardian, 10/17/01 ] Note that this means the controllers working Flights 77 and Flight 93 would have been aware of Flight 11's hijacking from this time. [ Village Voice, 9/13/01 ]
8:28 a.m.: Boston flight control radar sees Flight 11 making an unplanned 100-degree turn to the south (they're already way off-course). Flight controllers say they never lost sight of the flight, though they could no longer determine altitude once the transponder was turned off. [ Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01 ] Before this turn, the FAA had tagged Flight 11's radar dot for easy visibility, and at American Airlines headquarters at least, “All eyes watched as the plane headed south. On the screen, the plane showed a squiggly line after its turn near Albany, then it straightened.” [ Wall Street Journal, 10/15/01 ] “Boston Center could still track it on primary radar….” [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] Boston flight controller Mark Hodgkins later says, “I watched the target of American 11 the whole way down.” [ ABC, 9/6/02 ] Clearly, an early report stating, “Boston airport officials said they did not spot the plane's course until it had crashed, and said the control tower had no unusual communication with the pilots or any crew members” [ Washington Post, 9/12/01 (C) ], is incorrect, as is another account that says flight controllers only find Flight 11 at 8:42. [ Newsday, 9/10/02 ] But apparently NEADS, part of NORAD, has different radar, and even at 8:40 they cannot find Flight 11. Boston has to periodically update NEADS on Flight 11's position by telephone until NEADS finally finds it a few minutes before it crashes into the WTC. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 , ABC News, 9/11/02 , Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ]
8:30 a.m.: The FAA's Air Traffic Control System Command Center in Herndon, Virginia has their usual daily senior staff meeting. The national operations manager interrupts the meeting to report a possible hijacking in progress. Later, a supervisor interrupts the meeting to report a flight attendant on the hijacked aircraft may have been stabbed. The meeting breaks up before the first WTC crash at 8:46.
Secretary of State Colin Powell leaves Lima, Peru after hearing the news. [AFP]
(Around 8:30 a.m.): Just prior to learning about the 9/11 attacks, many of the US's leaders are scattered across the US and overseas. Vice President Cheney and National Security Advisor Rice are at their offices in the White House. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld is at his office in the Pentagon, meeting with a delegation from Capitol Hill. Secretary of State Powell is in Lima, Peru. CIA Director Tenet is at breakfast with his old friend and mentor, former senator David Boren (D), at the St. Regis Hotel, three blocks from the White House. General Henry Shelton, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is flying across the Atlantic on the way to Europe. Attorney General Ashcroft is flying to Milwaukee. FBI Director Mueller is in his office at FBI headquarters on Pennsylvania Avenue. [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ] Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta is at his office at the Department of Transportation. [ Senate Commerce Committee, 9/20/01 ] Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Joe Allbaugh is at a conference in Montana. [ ABC News, 9/14/02 (B) ] George Bush Sr. is supposedly on a flight from Washington to St. Paul, Minnesota, and has his plane diverted to Milwaukee when the air ban begins. [ Time, 9/24/01 (C) ]
8:31 a.m.: 2004-04-08 NORAD employee Lt. Colonel Dawne Deskins later says that Boston flight control notifies NORAD of Flight 77's hijacking at this time, not at 8:40 as has been widely reported, even by Deskins previously (see (8:40 a.m.)) or another account claiming 8:34 (see 8:34 a.m.). [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Another later report states, “Shortly after 8:30 a.m., behind the scenes, word of a possible hijacking [reaches] various stations of NORAD.” [ ABC News, 9/14/02 ]
8:33 a.m.: Flight controllers hear a hijacker on Flight 11 say to the passengers: “Nobody move, please, we are going back to the airport. Don't try to make any stupid moves.” [8:33, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , 8:33:59, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:33:59, New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) ]
8:34 a.m.: FAA Administrator Jane Garvey later testifies that NORAD is notified Flight 11 has been hijacked. [ New York Times, 12/30/03 ] This contradicts both the account of one NORAD employee who says it happens three minutes earlier (see 8:31 a.m.), and NORAD's official account, which claims it happens six minutes later (see (8:40 a.m.)).
Air National Guard troops at NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) try to locate hijacked aircraft. [Aviation Week and Space Technology]
(8:35 a.m.): Bush's motorcade leaves for Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Florida. [8:30, Washington Post, 1/27/02 , 8:35, Sarasota Magazine, 9/19/01 , 8:39, Washington Times, 10/7/02 ] He said farewell to the management at the Colony Beach and Tennis Resort at 8:20. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
(8:36 a.m.): On Flight 11, flight attendant Betty Ong reports that the plane tilts all the way on one side and then becomes horizontal again. Flight attendant Amy Sweeney then reports on her phone that the plane has begun a rapid descent. [“About 15 minutes” after the calls began, ABC News, 7/18/02 ]
8:37 a.m.: Flight controllers ask the Flight 175 pilots to look for a lost American Airlines plane 10 miles to the south—a reference to Flight 11. They respond that they can see it. They are told to keep away from it. [8:37:08, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:37, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , the incident is not included in New York Times flight controller transcript of New York Times, 10/16/01 (B) ]
(8:38 a.m.): Flight 11 pilot John Ogonowski's periodic activation of the talk-back button, begun around 8:14, stops around this time. It is suggested that means this is when the hijackers replace him as pilot. [ Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01 , MSNBC, 9/15/01 ]
NORAD commander Larry Arnold. [Code One]
(8:40 a.m.): 2004-04-08 Boston flight control supposedly notifies NORAD that Flight 11 has been hijacked (another accounts say it happens earlier (see 8:31 a.m. and 8:34 a.m.). [8:38, CNN, 9/17/01 , 8:38, Washington Post, 9/12/01 (B) , 8:40, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 8:40, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 8:40, Newsday, 9/10/02 ] Tech. Sgt. Jeremy Powell, a member of the Air National Guard at NEADS, part of NORAD, takes the call from Boston Center. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 , Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] He gives the phone to Lt. Colonel Dawne Deskins, regional Mission Crew Chief for the Vigilant Guardian exercise: “I picked up the line and I identified myself to the Boston Center controller, and he said, we have a hijacked aircraft and I need to get you some sort of fighters out here to help us out.” Deskins then tells Colonel Robert Marr, head of NEADS, “I have FAA on the phone, the shout line, Boston Center. They said they have a hijacked aircraft.” Marr then calls Major General Larry Arnold at NORAD's command Center in Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida, and says, “Boss, I need to scramble [fighters at] Otis [Air National Guard Base].” Arnold later says, “I said go ahead and scramble them, and we'll get the authorities later.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Deskins later says that initially she and “everybody” else at NEADS thought the call was part of the Vigilant Guardian exercise. After the phone call she had to clarify to everyone that it was not a drill. [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] NORAD commander Major General Larry Arnold in Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida, also says that when he hears of the hijacking at this time, “The first thing that went through my mind was, is this part of the exercise? Is this some kind of a screw-up?” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
(8:40 a.m.): Major Daniel Nash (codenamed Nasty) and Lt. Col. Timothy Duffy (codenamed Duff) are the two F-15 pilots who would scramble after Flight 11 and then Flight 175. Nash says that at this time, a colleague at the Otis Air National Guard Base tells him that a flight out of Boston has been hijacked, and to be on alert. [ Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02 ] NEADS senior technician Jeremy Powell also later says that he telephones Otis Air Base and tells it to upgrade its “readiness posture.” [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] Duffy also says he is told in advance about the hijacking by the FAA in Boston. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 ] Nash and Duffy put on their flight gear and get ready. [ Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02 ] They are already halfway to their jets when “battle stations” are sounded. Duffy briefs Nash on what he knows, and, “About 4-5 minutes later, we [get] the scramble order and [take] off.” [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 ]
United Airlines Flight 175, a Boeing 767.
8:41 a.m.: The pilots of Flight 175 tell ground control about Flight 11, “We figured we'd wait to go to your center. We heard a suspicious transmission on our departure out of Boston. Someone keyed the mike and said: ‘Everyone stay in your seats.’ It cut out.” [8:41, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:41, Newsday, 9/10/02 , 8:41:32, New York Times, 10/16/01 (B) ] An alternate version: “We heard a suspicious transmission on our departure from B-O-S [Boston's airport code]. Sounds like someone keyed the mike and said, ‘Everyone, stay in your seats.’” [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] The last transmission from Flight 175, still discussing this message, comes a few seconds before 8:42. [ New York Times, 10/16/01 (B) ]
Flight 93's intended and actual routes. [USA Today]
(8:42 a.m.): Flight 93 takes off from Newark International Airport, bound for San Francisco. It leaves 41 minutes late because of heavy runway traffic. [ MSNBC, 9/3/02 ] [8:41, Newsweek, 9/22/01 , 8:41, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 8:42, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 , 8:42, CNN, 9/17/01 , 8:42, Guardian, 10/17/01 ]
8:42 a.m.: Flight 175 veers from its official course. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] (An early CNN reports says the deviation happens at 8:50, but that's probably when the plane, already off-course, makes a complete U-turn north.) [ CNN, 9/17/01 ]
8:42 a.m.: A flight controller says of Flight 175, “… looks like he's heading southbound but there's no transponder no nothing and no one's talking to him.” [ New York Times, 10/16/01 (B) ]
Brian Sweeney, right, and Peter Hanson, left, both called from Flight 175.
(Before 8:43 a.m.): At some unknown time period, businessman Peter Burton Hanson calls his father from Flight 175 and says, “Oh, my God! They just stabbed the airline hostess. I think the airline is being hijacked.” Despite being cut off twice, he manages to report how men armed with knives are stabbing flight attendants, apparently in an attempt to force crew to unlock the doors to the cockpit. He calls again and says good-bye just before the plane crashes. [ Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 , BBC, 9/13/01 ]
8:43 a.m.: NORAD is notified that Flight 175 has been hijacked. [8:43, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 8:43, CNN, 9/17/01 , 8:43, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 8:43, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 8:43, Newsday, 9/10/02 ] Apparently NORAD doesn't need to be notified, because by this time NEADS technicians have their headsets linked to the FAA in Boston to hear about Flight 11, and so NORAD learns instantly about Flight 175. [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ]
8:44 a.m.: The pilot of US Airlines Flight 583 tells flight control, regarding Flight 175, “I just picked up an ELT [emergency locator transmitter] on 121.5 it was brief but it went off.” The controller responds, “O.K. they said it's confirmed believe it or not as a thing, we're not sure yet…” [ New York Times, 10/16/01 (B) ]
8:44 a.m.: 2004-04-08 Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld is talking about terrorism in the Pentagon. According to Representative Cox, at the meeting, Rumsfeld says, “Let me tell ya. I've been around the block a few times. There will be another event.” He then repeats it for emphasis, “There will be another event.” [ Associated Press, 9/16/01 (C) , Rep. Cox Statement, 9/11/01 ] According to Rumsfeld himself, “I had said at an 8:00 o'clock breakfast that sometime in the next two, four, six, eight, ten, twelve months there would be an event that would occur in the world that would be sufficiently shocking that it would remind people again how important it is to have a strong healthy defense department that contributes to—That underpins peace and stability in our world.” [ CNN, 12/5/01 ]
F-15 pilot Major Daniel Nash. []
(8:45 a.m.): Just prior to the crash of Flight 11, flight attendant Amy Sweeney is asked on the phone if she can recognize where she is. She says, “I see the water. I see the buildings. I see buildings,” then after a pause, a quiet “Oh, my God!” Mere seconds later the line goes dead. Meanwhile, flight attendant Betty Ong ends her call repeating the phrase “Pray for us” over and over. Apparently there is quiet instead of screaming in the background. [ ABC News, 7/18/02 ]
8:46 a.m.: Two little known French documentary filmmakers are filming a documentary on New York City firefighters about ten blocks from the WTC. One of them hears a roar, looks up, and captures a distant image of the first WTC crash. They continue shooting footage nonstop for many hours, and their footage is first shown that evening on CNN. [ New York Times, 1/12/02 , Atlanta Journal and Constitution, 9/19/01 ] So Bush's claim that he sees the first attack live on TV is technically impossible (see (9:01 a.m.)).
(8:46 a.m.): Two F-15 fighters are ordered to scramble from Otis Air National Guard Base in Massachusetts to find Flight 11, approximately 190 miles from the known location of the plane and 188 miles from New York City. Fighters in nearer bases are not scrambled. [8:39, Channel 4 News, 9/13/01 , 8:44, CNN, 9/17/01 , 8:44, Washington Post, 9/15/01 , 8:44, Los Angeles Times, 9/17/01 , 8:46, NORAD, 9/18/01 ] Supposedly, the scramble order comes after only one phone call—the decision is made to act first and get clearances later. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 ] According to the two pilots, Major Daniel Nash and Lt. Col. Timothy Duffy, they are geared up and walking toward their planes when this alarm to scramble sounds. As soon as they strap in, the green light to launch goes on, and they're up even before their jets' radar kicks in. [ Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02 ]
Flight 11 hits the WTC North Tower at 8:46. Note that few images exist of this hit. [Gamma Press]
8:46:26 a.m.: 2004-04-08 Flight 11 slams into the north tower, 1 World Trade Center. [8:45, CNN, 9/12/01 , 8:45, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 8:46, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 8:46, CNN, 9/17/01 , 8:46, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 8:46, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 8:46, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 8:46, USA Today, 9/3/02 , 8:46, USA Today, 8/13/02 , 8:46, Newsday, 9/10/02 , 8:47:00, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:48, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 8:46:26, New York Times, 9/11/02 , 8:46:26, seismic records, USA Today, 12/20/01 ] Investigators believe the plane still has about 10,000 gallons of fuel and is traveling 470 mph. [ New York Times, 9/11/02 ] It strikes the 93rd through 98th floors in the 110 story building. At the crash point and above, approximately 1,360 people die and none survived. Below the crash line, approximately 72 die and more than 4,000 survive. Both towers are slightly less than half full, with between 5,000 to 7,000 in each tower. This is mainly because many office workers haven't shown up to work yet and tourists to the observation deck opening at 9:30 have yet to arrive. USA Today, 12/20/01 ]
The hole caused by the Flight 11 crash [Reuters]
(8:46 a.m.): Flight 175 stops transmitting its transponder signal, according to some reports. It is 50 miles north of New York City, headed toward Baltimore. [8:46:18, Guardian, 10/17/01 , “about the same time” as Flight 11 crash, Newsday, 9/10/02 ] Note that at 8:42, a flight controller said, “There's no transponder no nothing.” [ New York Times, 10/16/01 (B) ] However, the transponder is turned off for only about 30 seconds, then changed to a signal that is not designated for any plane on that day. [ Newsday, 9/10/02 ] This “allow[s] controllers to track the intruder easily, though they couldn't identify it.” [ Washington Post, 9/17/01 ]
8:46 a.m.: At the time of the first WTC crash, three F-16s assigned to Andrews Air Force Base 10 miles from Washington are flying an air-to-ground training mission on a range in North Carolina, 207 miles away. Eventually they are recalled to Andrews and land there at some point after Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02 ]
American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757.
(8:46 a.m.): Flight 77 from Washington goes severely off course. It heads due north for a while, then flies due south and gets back on course. It is off course by around 15 miles, and stays off course for about five minutes, judging from flight path maps. [See USA Today's Flight 77 flight path]
(After 8:46 a.m.): Bush will say in a speech later that evening: “Immediately following the first attack, I implemented our government's emergency response plans.” [ White House.gov, 9/11/01 ]
(After 8:46 a.m.): Shortly after the WTC is hit, the FAA has an open telephone line with the Secret Service, keeping them informed of all events. [Cheney: “The Secret Service has an arrangement with the FAA. They had open lines after the World Trade Center was… ”—he stops himself before finishing the sentence, NBC, Meet the Press, 9/16/01 ]
(After 8:46 a.m.): Brigadier General Montague Winfield is in command of the National Military Command Center (NMCC), “the military's worldwide nerve center.” [ CNN, 9/4/02 ] According to NORAD command director Captain Michael Jellinek, at some point not long after the WTC hit, telephone links are established with the National Military Command Center (NMCC) located inside the Pentagon (but on the opposite side from where the Pentagon explosion will happen), Canada's equivalent command center, Strategic Command, theater commanders, and federal emergency-response agencies. An Air Threat Conference Call is initiated. At one time or another, Bush, Cheney, key military officers, leaders of the FAA and NORAD, the White House, and Air Force One are heard on the open line. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 , CNN, 9/4/02 , ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Says Winfield, “All of the governmental agencies there that, that were involved in any activity that was going on in the United States at that point, were in that conference.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] The call continues right through the Pentagon explosion, as the NMCC doesn't even feel the impact. [ CNN, 9/4/02 ] However, despite being in the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld doesn't join the NMCC or the call until 10:30 (see 10:30 a.m.).
(After 8:46 a.m.): A few minutes after the 8:46 WTC crash, CIA Director Tenet is told of the crash while he is eating breakfast with former Senator David Boren. Boren says Tenet is told that the WTC has been attacked by an airplane: “I was struck by the fact that [the messenger] used the word attacked.” Tenet then hands a cell phone back to an aide and says to Boren, “You know, this has bin Laden's fingerprints all over it.” [ ABC News, 9/14/02 ]
(Between 8:46-9:03 a.m.): As soon as Boston flight controllers hear news that a plane might have hit the WTC, they know it was Flight 11. They have been tracking it continually since it began behaving erratically. It takes “several minutes” for Boston to report to NORAD that Flight 11 is responsible. [ New York Times, 9/13/01 (F) , Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] However, flight controllers in New York City complain that they aren't given a conclusive report of what happened to Flight 11 until just before Flight 175 crashes at 9:03. “We had 90 to 120 seconds; it wasn't any 18 minutes,” says one controller, referring to the actual elapsed time between the two crashes. Another controller says: “They dove into the airspace. By the time anybody saw anything, it was over.” [ New York Times, 9/13/01 (F) ]
In this map, the yellow star is roughly where Bush's motorcade is when Flight 11 crashes at 8:46, and the orange star is where he is when told about the crash a few minutes later. [Made with Yahoo Maps]
(Between 8:46-8:55 a.m.): When Flight 11 hits the WTC at 8:46, Bush's motorcade is crossing the John Ringling Causeway on the way to Booker Elementary from the Colony Beach & Tennis Resort on Longboat Key. [ Washington Times, 10/8/02 ] Sarasota Magazine claims that Bush is on Highway 301, just north of Main Street when he is told that a plane had crashed in New York City. [ Sarasota Magazine, 9/19/01 ] Around the same time, news photographer Eric Draper is riding in another car in the motorcade with Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, and overhears Fleischer say on a cell phone, “Oh, my God, I don't believe it. A plane just hit the World Trade Center.” Fleischer is told he will be needed on arrival to discuss reports of the crash. [ Christian Science Monitor, 9/17/01 , Albuquerque Tribune, 9/10/02 ] Fleischer is told this “just minutes” after the first news reports. [ MSNBC, 10/27/02 ] Congressman Dan Miller also says he is told about the crash just before meeting Bush at Booker at 8:55. [ Sarasota Magazine, 9/19/01 ] Some reporters waiting for him to arrive also learn of the crash just minutes after it happens. [ CBS, 9/11/02 (B) ]
(8:48 a.m.): 2004-04-08 The first news reports appear on TV and radio that a plane may have crashed into the WTC. [ New York Times, 9/15/01 (C) , CNN, 9/11/01 ] Many reports don't come until a few minutes later. For instance ABC first breaks into regular programming with the story at 8:52. [ ABC News, 9/14/02 ]
Joint Chiefs of Staff Vice Chairman Richard Myers (left) fills in for Chairman Harry Shelton (right), who is out of contact. [Reuters]
(After 8:48 a.m.): Air Force General Richard Myers, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, sees the first WTC crash on television. Myers will be acting Chairman of the US military during the 9/11 crisis because Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army General Henry Shelton is flying in a plane across the Atlantic. He sees the TV in an outer office of Senator Max Cleland, but he says, “They thought it was a small plane or something like that,” so he goes ahead and meets with Cleland. He says “nobody informed us” about the second WTC crash, and remains oblivious that there is an emergency, only leaving the meeting with Cleland right as the Pentagon explosion takes place at 9:38. [ AFPS, 10/23/01 , ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Yet, in testimony on September 13, 2001, he states, “after the second tower was hit, I spoke to the commander of NORAD, General Eberhart. And at that point, I think the decision was at that point to start launching aircraft.” [ General Myers' Senate confirmation hearing, 9/13/01 ] NORAD claims the first fighters are scrambled even before the first WTC hit. [ NORAD, 9/18/01 ]
8:50 a.m.: The last radio contact with Flight 77 is made when the pilots ask for clearance to fly higher. But then they fail to respond to a routine instruction. [ Guardian, 10/17/01 , Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , 8:50:51, New York Times, 10/16/01 (D) ]
(After 8:50 a.m.): “During the hour or so that American Airlines Flight 77 [is] under the control of hijackers, up to the moment it struck the west side of the Pentagon, military officials in [the Pentagon's National Military Command Center (see (After 8:46 a.m.))] [are] urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to do.” [ New York Times, 9/15/01 (C) ]
(8:50 a.m.): Rich “Doc” Miles, manager of United's Chicago system operations center, receives a call from a mechanic at an airline maintenance center in San Francisco that takes in-flight calls from flight attendants about broken items. The mechanic says a female flight attendant from Flight 175 just called and said, “Oh my God. The crew has been killed, a flight attendant has been stabbed. We've been hijacked.” Then the line went dead. A dispatcher monitoring the flight then sends messages to the plane's cockpit computer but gets no response. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ]
A typical F-15.
8:52 a.m.: Two F-15s take off from Otis ANG Base, six minutes after being ordered to go after Flight 11, which has already crashed. [8:52, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 8:52, CNN, 9/17/01 , 8:53, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 8:52, Washington Post, 9/15/01 , 8:52, ABC News, 9/11/02 ] This is 38 minutes after flight controllers lost contact with the plane. They go after Flight 175 instead. According to Lt. Col. Timothy Duffy, one of the pilots, before takeoff, a fellow officer had told him “This looks like the real thing.” He says, “It just seemed wrong. I just wanted to get there. I was in full-blower all the way.” A NORAD commander has said the planes were stocked with extra fuel as well. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 ] An F-15 can travel over 1875 mph. [ Air Force News, 7/30/97 ] Duffy later says, “As we're climbing out, we go supersonic on the way, which is kind of nonstandard for us.” He says his target destination is over Kennedy airport in New York City. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] According to Major Gen. Paul Weaver, director of the Air National Guard, “The pilots [fly] ‘like a scalded ape,’ topping 500 mph but [are] unable to catch up to the airliner.” [ Dallas Morning News, 9/16/01 ] ABC News later says, “The fighters are hurtling toward New York at mach 1.2, nearly 900 miles per hour.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] NORAD commander Major General Larry Arnold says they head straight for New York City at about 1100 to 1200 mph. [ MSNBC, 9/23/01 (C) , Slate, 1/16/02 ] “An F-15 departing from Otis can reach New York City in 10 to 12 minutes, according to an Otis spokeswoman.” [ Cape Cod Times, 9/16/01 ] At an average speed of 1125 mph, they would reach the city in 10 minutes—9:02. So if NORAD commander Arnold's speed is correct, these fighters should reach Flight 175 just before it crashes.
(After 8:52 a.m.): William Wibel, principal of a school inside Otis Air National Guard Base in the Cape Cod region of Massachusetts, is inside the Otis base preparing for a meeting. He hears about the WTC attack and is told the meeting is canceled. He says, “As I drove away, and was listening to the news on the radio, the 102nd was scrambling into duty.” [ Cape Cod Times, 9/12/01 ]
8:53 a.m.: A flight controller says to other airplanes in the sky regarding Flight 175, “We may have a hijack. We have some problems over here right now.” [ Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:53:23, New York Times, 10/16/01 (B) ]
White House Situation Room Director Deborah Loewer.
(Before 8:55 a.m.): Captain Deborah Loewer, director of the White House Situation Room, is traveling in Bush's motorcade toward a Saratoga elementary school. She receives a message from her deputy in the White House Situation Room about the first WTC crash. As soon as the motorcade reaches the school, she runs from her car to Bush's car, and passes the message on to Bush. [ Catholic Telegraph, 12/7/01 , Associated Press, 11/26/01 ] However, it appears Bush already knows (see (Between 8:46-8:55 a.m.)).
Bush's motorcade arrives at Booker Elementary. [A still from Booker video]
(8:55 a.m.): Bush's motorcade arrives at Booker Elementary School. [8:46, ABC News, 9/11/02 , 8:55, Washington Times, 10/7/02 , 8:55, Sarasota Magazine, 9/19/01 , “just before 9:00,” Telegraph, 12/16/01 , “shortly before 9:00,” Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 9/10/02 , “just before 9:00,” New York Times, 9/16/01 , 9:00, Albuquerque Tribune, 9/10/02 ] The trip is said to take 20 minutes, which confirms he arrives around 8:55, if it is true he left around 8:35. [ New York Times, 9/16/01 , St. Petersburg Times, 9/8/02 (B) , MSNBC, 10/27/02 ]
(8:55 a.m.): 2004-04-08 A public announcement is broadcast inside the WTC South Tower, saying that the building is secure and people can return to their offices. [ New York Times, 9/11/02 , click on interactive popup] Such announcements continue until a few minutes before the building is hit, and “may [lead] to the deaths of hundreds of people.” No one knows exactly what is said (though many later recall the phrase “the building is secure”) or who gives the authority to say it. [ USA Today, 9/3/02 ] Additionally, security agents inside the building repeated similar messages. For instance, one survivor recounts hearing, “Our building is secure. You can go back to your floor. If you're a little winded, you can get a drink of water or coffee in the cafeteria.” [ New York Times, 9/13/01 (G) ] Another survivor recalls a crowd actually running over a man with a bullhorn encouraging them to return to their desks. [ Newsday, 9/12/01 ] However, despite messages to the contrary, about two-thirds of the tower's occupants evacuate during the 17 minutes between the attacks. [ USA Today, 12/20/01 ]
Karl Rove [Reuters], Andrew Card [AP], and Dan Bartlett.
(Between 8:55 and 9:00 a.m.): Just after the WTC crash, the beepers of politicians' aides are going off with news of the first WTC crash as Bush arrives and enters Booker Elementary School. According to photographer Eric Draper, standing nearby, Bush advisor Karl Rove rushes up, takes Bush aside in a corridor, and tells him about the calamity. Rove says the cause of the crash was unclear. Bush replies, “What a horrible accident!” Bush also suggests the pilot may have had a heart attack. [ Daily Mail, 9/8/02 ] Dan Bartlett, White House Communications Director, also says he is there when Bush is told: “[Bush] being a former pilot, had kind of the same reaction, going, was it bad weather? And I said no, apparently not.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] One account explicitly says that Rove tells Bush the WTC has been hit by a large commercial airliner. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] However, Bush later remembers Rove saying it appeared to be an accident involving a small, twin-engine plane. [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ] In a later recollection, Bush recalls that it is chief of staff Andrew Card who first warns him and says, “‘Here's what you're going to be doing; you're going to meet so-and-so, such-and-such.’ And Andy Card says, ‘By the way, an aircraft flew into the World Trade Center.’” [ Washington Times, 10/7/02 ] Says a reporter who was standing nearby, “From the demeanor of the President, grinning at the children, it appeared that the enormity of what he had been told was taking a while to sink in.” [ Daily Mail, 9/8/02 ] [“Shortly before 9:00,” Daily Mail, 9/8/02 , “just before 9:00,” Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
Booker Elementary principal Gwen Tose-Rigell. [A still from Booker video]
(Between 8:55-9:00 a.m.): Just after Bush arrives at Booker Elementary School and is briefly told of the WTC crash, he is whisked into a holding room and updated on the situation via telephone by National Security Advisor Rice. [ Christian Science Monitor, 9/17/01 , ] Rice later claims, “He said, what a terrible, it sounds like a terrible accident. Keep me informed.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] School principal Gwen Tose-Rigell is then summoned to a room to talk with the President: “He said a commercial plane has hit the World Trade Center, and we're going to go ahead and go on, we're going on to do the reading thing anyway.” [ Associated Press, 8/19/02 (D) ] One local reporter notes that at this point, “He could and arguably should have left Emma E. Booker Elementary School immediately, gotten onto Air Force One and left Sarasota without a moment's delay.” [ Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 9/12/01 (B) ]
(8:56 a.m.): Flight 77's transponder signal is turned off. [8:56, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:56, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , “six minutes before” Flight 175 hits WTC, Newsday, 9/23/01 ] Just prior to this, Flight 77 turns around over northeastern Kentucky, and starts heading back toward Washington. [ Washington Post, 9/12/01 , Newsday, 9/23/01 ] For some minutes the plane is missing because flight controllers are looking for the radar signal toward the west and don't realize the plane is headed east. Rumors circulate that the plane might have exploded in midair. [ Newsday, 9/23/01 ]
(8:56 a.m.): The New York Times later writes, “‘American 77, Indy,’ the controller said, over and over. ‘American 77, Indy, radio check. How do you read?’ By 8:56 a.m., it was evident that Flight 77 was lost.” Yet the same newspaper then points out NORAD is not notified about it for another 28 minutes and doesn't find that strange! [ New York Times, 10/16/01 (D) ] Another New York Times article points out that flight controllers learn Flight 77 has been hijacked “within a few minutes” of 8:48. [ New York Times, 9/15/01 (C) ]
8:58 a.m.: Brian Sweeney on Flight 175 tries to call his wife but can only leave a message. “We've been hijacked, and it doesn't look too good.” He calls his mother and tells her what's happening onboard. [ Hyannis News, 9/13/01 , ]
9:00 a.m.: The Pentagon moves its alert status up one notch from normal to Alpha. It stays on Alpha until after Flight 77 hits, and then goes up two more notches to Charlie later on in the day. [ USA Today, 9/16/01 ]
(After 9:00 a.m.): United warns all of its aircraft of the potential for cockpit intrusion and to take precautions to barricade cockpit doors. Flight 93 pilots acknowledge the message. [“Just after 9:00,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 ]
(9:01 a.m.): Bush later makes the following statement: “And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower—the TV was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, ‘There's one terrible pilot.’ And I said, ‘It must have been a horrible accident.’ But I was whisked off there—I didn't have much time to think about it.” [ ] He has repeated the story on other occasions. [ White House, 1/5/02 , CBS, 9/11/02 ] However, it has been noted that Bush doesn't have access to a television until 15 or so minutes later. [ Washington Times, 10/7/02 ] A Boston Herald article later says, “Think about that. Bush's remark implies he saw the first plane hit the tower. But we all know that video of the first plane hitting did not surface until the next day. Could Bush have meant he saw the second plane hit—which many Americans witnessed? No, because he said that he was in the classroom when Card whispered in his ear that a second plane hit.” The article points out that Bush had told the story more than once, and asks, “ How could the commander-in-chief have seen the plane fly into the first building—as it happened?” [ Boston Herald, 10/22/02 ]
(9:01 a.m.): An unidentified woman in the La Guardia control tower speaks to a Port Authority police officer. La Guardia is one of a couple major New York City airports, and the Port Authority patrol both the WTC and the city's airports. The woman asks the officer what has happened at the WTC, and the officer replies he's learned from the news that a plane crashed into it. [ New York Times, 12/30/03 ] Around the same time, one flight controller in the tower says to another, “But you don't know anything.” The other responds, “We don't know. We're looking at it on Channel 5 right now.” [ Bergen Record, 1/4/04 ] “Nothing on the [later released transcripts] shows that the La Guardia controllers knew that the planes flying into their airspace had been seized by terrorists, or that military aircraft were screaming in pursuit over the Hudson River.” Port Authority officials appear to be equally oblivious (see also 9:13 a.m.). [ New York Times, 12/30/03 ]
(Between 9:01-9:03 a.m.): Flight 175 is an unmarked blip to flight controllers in New York City. One controller stands up in horror. “No, he's not going to land. He's going in!” “Oh, my God! He's headed for the city,” another controller shouts. “Oh, my God! He's headed for Manhattan!” [ ]
(Before 9:02): At some point before the second WTC crash, FAA's command center sets up a teleconference with FAA facilities in the New York area. Also on the same floor of the same building is “the military cell”—the Air Traffic Services Cell, created by the FAA and the Defense Department for use when needed to coordinate priority aircraft movement during warfare or emergencies. “The Pentagon staffs it only three days per month for refresher training, but Sept. 11 happen[s] to be one of those days.” [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 12/17/01 ]
Flight 175 an instant before it hits the WTC south tower. [AP]
9:02:54 a.m.: 2004-04-08 Flight 175 hits the south tower, 2 World Trade Center. [9:02, CNN, 9/17/01 , 9:02, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 9:02, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 9:03, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 9:03 (based on seismic data), New York Times, 9/12/01 , 9:03, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 9:03, CNN, 9/12/01 , 9:03, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 9:03, Newsday, 9/10/02 , 9:03, USA Today, 9/3/02 , 9:03, USA Today, 8/13/02 , 9:05, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 9:05, Washington Post, 1/27/02 , 9:02:54, New York Times, 9/11/02 , 9:02:54, seismic records, USA Today, 12/20/01 ] Millions watch the crash live on television. The plane strikes the 78th through 84th floors in the 110 story building. Approximately 100 people are killed or injured in the initial impact; 600 people in the tower eventually die. All but four work above the crash point. The death toll is far lower than in the north tower because about two-thirds of the tower's occupants get out in the 17 minutes after the first tower is struck (see also (8:55 a.m.)). [ USA Today, 12/20/01 ] F-15 fighter jets from Otis Air National Guard Base are still 71 miles or eight minutes away when the tower is hit. [ NORAD, 9/18/01 ]
Flight 175 hits the WTC south tower at 9:03.
(9:03 a.m. and After): The minute Flight 175 hits the south tower, F-15 pilot Major Daniel Nash says that clear visibility allows him to see smoke pour out of Manhattan, even though NORAD says he is 71 miles away. However, he says he can't recall actually being told of the Flight 11 hit. [ Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02 ] He isn't told about the danger of Flight 175 until after it too has crashed and he is 60 miles away. [ ABC News, 9/14/02 ] And instead of being ordered to New York City, the two F-15s are ordered to hover in a 150-mile chunk of air space off the coast of Long Island. Nash states,“Neither the civilian controller or the military controller knew what they wanted us to do.” But then a few minutes later, they receive orders to head to Manhattan for combat air patrol, and they do that for the next four hours. At no point are these pilots given permission to shoot down any airliners. Nash points out that even if he had reached New York City before Flight 175, he couldn't have shot it down because only the President could make that decision and he was indisposed at a public event. [ Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02 ] The pilot of the other fighter, Lt. Col. Timothy Duffy, says that after Flight 175 has crashed, “at that point they [say] the second aircraft just hit the World Trade Center. That was news to me. I thought we were still chasing American 11.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
(9:03 a.m.): According to Sarasota County Sheriff Bill Balkwill, just after Bush enters a Booker Elementary classroom, a Marine responsible for carrying Bush's phone walks up to Balkwill, who is standing in a nearby side room. While listening to someone talk to him in his earpiece, the Marine asks, “Can you get me to a television? We're not sure what's going on, but we need to see a television.” Three Secret Service agents, a SWAT member, the Marine and Balkwill turn on the television in a nearby front office just as Flight 175 crashes into the WTC. “We're out of here,” the Marine tells Balkwill. “Can you get everyone ready?” [ Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 9/10/02 ]
Bush meets teacher Sandra Kay Daniels. [A still from Booker video]
(9:03-9:06 a.m.): Bush enters Sandra Kay Daniels' second-grade class for a photo-op to promote Bush's education policies. [ Daily Mail, 9/8/02 ] Numerous reporters who travel with the president, as well as members of the local media, watch from the back of the room. [ Associated Press, 8/19/02 (D) ] Altogether there about 150 people in the room, 16 of them the children in the class. He is introduced to the children and poses for a number of staged pictures. The teacher then leads the students through some reading exercises (video footage shows this lasts about three minutes). [ Salon, 9/12/01 (B) ] Bush later claims that while he is doing this lesson, he is thinking what he will say about the WTC crash. “I was concentrating on the program at this point, thinking about what I was going to say. Obviously, I felt it was an accident. I was concerned about it, but there were no alarm bells.” [ Washington Times, 10/7/02 ] The children are just getting their books from under their seats to read a story together when Chief of Staff Andrew Card comes in to tell Bush of the second WTC crash (see (9:06 a.m.)). [ Daily Mail, 9/8/02 ] [9:02, Washington Times, 10/8/02 , 9:03, Telegraph, 12/16/01 , 9:04, Daily Mail, 9/8/02 , according to photographer Eric Draper, who is in the room] Note that Card comes in at the conclusion of the first half of the planned lesson, and “[seizes] a pause in the reading drill to walk up to Mr. Bush's seat.” [ Washington Times, 10/7/02 , Washington Times, 10/8/02 ]
(9:03-9:08 a.m.): 2004-04-08 In a series of stages, flight control managers ban aircraft from flying near the cities used by the hijackers. First, takeoffs and landings in New York City are stopped within a minute of the Flight 175 crash, without asking for permission from Washington. Boston and Newark follow suit in the next few minutes. Around 9:08, departures nationwide heading to or through New York and Boston airspace are canceled. [ Associated Press, 8/12/02 , Newsday, 9/10/02 , Associated Press, 8/19/02 , USA Today, 8/13/02 ] The actual order to stop all planes from taking off at New York's La Guardia airport is given to the airplanes on the ground at 9:07. [ New York Times, 12/30/03 ] Also “a few minutes” after the Flight 175 crash into the WTC at 9:03, all takeoffs from Washington are stopped. [ USA Today, 8/12/02 , USA Today, 8/13/02 ]
(After 9:03 a.m.): Controllers at the New York traffic center are briefed by their supervisors to watch for airplanes whose speed indicated that they are jets, but which either are not responding to commands or have disabled their transponders. “Controllers in Washington [get] a similar briefing, which [help] them pick out hijacked planes more quickly.” [ New York Times, 9/13/01 (F) ]
Vice President Cheney (pointing finger) with Rice and others in the underground bunker Cheney was carried into. This facility is called the Presidential Emergency Operations Center. [White House]
(After 9:03 a.m.): Secret Service agents burst into Vice President Cheney's White House office. They carry him under his arms—nearly lifting him off the ground—and propel him down the steps into the White House basement and through a long tunnel toward an underground bunker. [“Just after 9:00,” ABC News, 9/14/02 (B) , around 9:06 when Bush is being told of the second WTC hit, New York Times, 9/16/01 , same time Bush is being told, Telegraph, 12/16/01 , shortly after Bush's speech at 9:30, CBS, 9/11/02 , 9:32, Washington Post, 1/27/02 ] At about the same time, National Security Adviser Rice is told to go to the bunker as well. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Accounts of when this happens vary widely, from around 9:03 to 9:32. But since ABC News claims Cheney is in the bunker when he is told Flight 77 is 50 miles away from Washington, accounts of this taking place after 9:27 appear to be incorrect (see (9:27 a.m.)). The one eyewitness account, David Bohrer, a White House photographer, says it takes place just after 9:00. [ ABC News, 9/14/02 (B) ]
NEADS commander Robert Marr. [BBC]
(After 9:03 a.m.): Shortly after the second WTC crash, calls from fighter units start “pouring into NORAD and sector operations centers, asking, ‘What can we do to help?’ At Syracuse, New York, an ANG commander [tells Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) commander Robert] Marr, ‘Give me 10 min. and I can give you hot guns. Give me 30 min. and I'll have heat-seeker [missiles]. Give me an hour and I can give you slammers [Amraams].’” Marr replies, “I want it all.” [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 ] Supposedly, Marr says, “Get to the phones. Call every Air National Guard unit in the land. Prepare to put jets in the air. The nation is under attack.” [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] Canadian Major General Eric Findley, based in Colorado and in charge of NORAD that day, supposedly has his staff immediately order as many fighters in the air as possible. [ Ottawa Citizen, 9/11/02 ] Yet another account says those calls don't take place until about an hour later: “By 10:01 a.m., the command center began calling several bases across the country for help.” In fact, it appears the first fighters don't take off from Syracuse until 10:44. This is over an hour and a half after Syracuse's initial offer to help, and not long after a general ban on all flights, including military ones, is lifted (see (9:26 a.m.) and 10:31 a.m.). These are apparently the first fighters scrambled from the ground aside from three at Langley, two at Otis, an unknown number of fighters from Andrews near Washington, and two fighters that take off from Toledo at 10:16. [ Toledo Blade, 12/9/01 ]
(After 9:03 a.m.): Brigadier General Montague Winfield, commander of the NMCC, the Pentagon's emergency response center, later says, “When the second aircraft flew into the second tower, it was at that point that we realized that the seemingly unrelated hijackings that the FAA was dealing with were in fact a part of a coordinated terrorist attack on the United States.” [ ABC News, 9/14/02 ]
(After 9:03 a.m.): A few minutes after 9:03 a.m., the Secret Service calls Andrews Air Force Base, located 10 miles from Washington. They are notified to get F-16s armed and ready to fly. Missiles are still being loaded onto the F-16s when the Pentagon is hit over half an hour later. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02 ] The problem with this account is that prior to 9/11, the District of Columbia Air National Guard (located at Andrews) had a publicly stated mission “to provide combat units in the highest possible state of readiness.” Shortly after 9/11 this mission statement on its website is changed, so it merely has a “vision” to “provide peacetime command and control and administrative mission oversight to support customers, DCANG units, and NGB in achieving the highest levels of readiness.” [ DCANG Home Page (before and after the change)]
(9:05 a.m.): West Virginia flight control notices a new eastbound plane entering its radar with no radio contact and no transponder identification. They are not sure it is Flight 77. Supposedly they wait another 19 minutes before notifying NORAD about it. [“About 9:05”, Newsday, 9/23/01 ]
9:06 a.m.: All air traffic facilities nationwide are notified that the Flight 11 crash into the WTC was probably a hijacking. [ House Committee, 9/21/01 , Newsday, 9/23/01 ]
Andrew Card tells Bush the second WTC tower has been hit. See a video of Bush's reaction here: [White House via AP]
(9:06 a.m.): Bush is in a Booker Elementary School second-grader classroom. His chief of staff, Andrew Card, enters the room and whispers into his ear, “A second plane hit the other tower, and America's under attack.” [ New York Times, 9/16/01 ] [9:05, New York Times, 9/16/01 , 9:05, Telegraph, 12/16/01 , 9:05, Albuquerque Tribune, 9/10/02 , 9:07, Washington Times, 10/8/02 , ABC News reporter Ann Compton, who is in the room, says she is struck “So much so that I [write] it down in my reporter's notebook, by my watch, 9:07 a.m.,” ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Intelligence expert James Bamford describes Bush's reaction: “Immediately [after Card speaks to Bush] an expression of befuddlement passe[s] across the President's face. Then, having just been told that the country was under attack, the Commander in Chief appear[s] uninterested in further details. He never ask[s] if there had been any additional threats, where the attacks were coming from, how to best protect the country from further attacks…. Instead, in the middle of a modern-day Pearl Harbor, he simply turn[s] back to the matter at hand: the day's photo op.” [Body of Secrets, James Bamford, 4/02 edition, p. 633] Bush continues listening to the goat story. Then, in an event noticeable in its absence, as one newspaper put it, “For some reason, Secret Service agents [do] not bustle him away.” [ Globe and Mail, 9/12/01 ] Bush later says of the experience, “I am very aware of the cameras. I'm trying to absorb that knowledge. I have nobody to talk to. I'm sitting in the midst of a classroom with little kids, listening to a children's story and I realize I'm the Commander in Chief and the country has just come under attack.” [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] Bush continues to listen to the goat story for about ten more minutes (see (9:06-9:16 a.m.)). The reason given is that, “Without all the facts at hand, George Bush ha[s] no intention of upsetting the schoolchildren who had come to read for him.” [ MSNBC, 10/27/02 ]
9:10 a.m.: According to released transcripts, a caller from the Port Authority police desk tells a La Guardia Airport control tower employee, that “they are considering [the crashes into the WTC] a criminal act.” the control tower employee replies, “We believe that, and we are holding all aircraft on the ground.” [ Associated Press, 12/29/03 ] La Guardia is one of a couple major New York City airports, and the Port Authority patrol both the WTC and the city's airports.
Bush listens to the Pet Goat story.
(9:06-9:16 a.m.): Bush, having just been told of the second WTC crash (see (9:06 a.m.)), does not leave the Sarasota, Florida, classroom he entered around 9:03. Rather, he stays and listens as 16 Booker Elementary School second-graders take turns reading a story called Pet Goat, about a girl's pet goat. [ AFP, 9/7/02 ] They are just about to begin reading when Bush is warned of the attack. One account says that the classroom is then silent for about 30 seconds, maybe more. Bush then picks up the book and reads with the children “for eight or nine minutes.” [ Tampa Tribune, 9/1/02 ] In unison, the children read out loud, “The—Pet—Goat. A—girl—got—a—pet—goat. But—the—goat—did—some— things—that—made—the—girl's— dad—mad.” And so on. Bush mostly listens, but does ask the children a few questions to encourage them. [ Washington Times, 10/7/02 ] At one point he says, “Really good readers, whew! … These must be sixth-graders!” [ ] In the back of the room, Press Secretary Ari Fleischer catches Bush's eye and holds up a pad of paper for him to read, with “DON'T SAY ANYTHING YET” written on it in big block letters. [ Washington Times, 10/7/02 ] CNN reported in 1999, “Only the president has the authority to order a civilian aircraft shot down.” [ CNN, 10/26/99 ] The pilot of one of the planes flying to catch Flight 175 notes that it wouldn't have mattered if he caught up with it, because only Bush could order a shootdown, and Bush is at a public event at the time. [ Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02 ]
9:09 a.m.: Supposedly, NORAD orders F-16s at Langley Air Force Base, Virginia, on battle stations alert. Around this time, the FAA command center reports 11 aircraft either not in communication with FAA facilities, or flying unexpected routes. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 ] One of the pilots who actually takes off from Langley later says the battle stations alert isn't sounded until 9:24. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 64-65]
9:13 a.m.: A flight controller at La Guardia Airport in New York City is called by a Port Authority police officer. The officer asks, “They are inquiring whether or not you can call Kennedy's tower, because they can't get through, and inquire whether or not they had any contact with these aircrafts.” The flight controller responds, “At this time, we do not think that anyone in the F.A.A. had any contact with them.” [ New York Times, 12/30/03 ] “Kennedy” is a reference to John. F. Kennedy Airport, another major airport in New York City. Port Authority police, who patrol both the WTC and the airports, seek information from the controllers about the hijackers. But the controllers are unable to offer any news (see also (9:01 a.m.)). [ New York Times, 12/30/03 ]
9:15 a.m.: American Airlines orders no new takeoffs in the US; United Airlines follows suit five minutes later. [ Wall Street Journal, 10/15/01 ]
9:16 a.m.: The FAA informs NORAD that Flight 93 may have been hijacked. No fighters are scrambled in specific response, now or later (there is the possibility some fighters sent after Flight 77 later head toward Flight 93). Although this is what CNN is told by NORAD, its not clear why NORAD claims the flight is hijacked at this time (and NORAD's own timeline inexplicably fails to say when the FAA told them about the hijack, the only flight for which they fail to provide this data). [ CNN, 9/17/01 , NORAD, 9/18/01 ] However, there may be one explanation: Fox News later reports, “Investigators believe that on at least one flight, one of the hijackers was already inside the cockpit before takeoff.” Cockpit voice recordings indicate that the pilots believed their guest was a colleague “and was thereby extended the typical airline courtesy of allowing any pilot from any airline to join a flight by sitting in the jumpseat, the folded over extra seat located inside the cockpit.” [ Fox News, 9/24/01 ]
9:17 a.m.: 2004-04-08 The FAA shuts down all New York City area airports. [ CNN, 9/12/01 , New York Times, 9/12/01 ] A flight controller at La Guardia airport reports the taxiways, runways, and airspace completely clear at 9:37. [ New York Times, 12/30/03 ]
Bush with his Pet Goat book in Sandra Kay Daniels' elementary school classroom. [Eric Draper]
(9:16 a.m.): Bush leaves the Sarasota classroom where he has been since about 9:03. The children finish their lessons and put away their readers. [ Sarasota Magazine, 9/19/01 ] Bush advises the children to stay in school and be good citizens. [ Tampa Tribune, 9/1/02 , St. Petersburg Times, 9/8/02 (B) ] He also tells the children, “Thank you all so very much for showing me your reading skills.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] One student also asks Bush a question, and Bush gives a quick response on his education policy. [ New York Post, 9/12/02 ] A reporter asks, “Mr. President, are you aware of the reports of the plane crash in New York? Is there any…” This question is interrupted by an aide who has come into the room, saying, “All right. Thank you. If everyone could please step outside.” Bush then says, “We'll talk about it later.” [ CBS, 9/11/02 (B) ] Bush then tells school principal Gwen Tose-Rigell, who is in the room, about the terror attacks and why he has to leave. [ Washington Times, 10/7/02 ] He then goes into an empty classroom next door and meets with his staff there. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Bush's program with the children was supposed to start at 9:00 and end 20 minutes later. [ Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 9/16/01 ]
Bush in a holding room before giving his speech. Communications director Dan Bartlett points to the TV, and the clock reads 9:25. [White House]
(Between 9:16-9:29 a.m.): Bush works with his staff to prepare a speech he will deliver at 9:29. He intermittently watches the television coverage in the room. [ Albuquerque Tribune, 9/10/02 ] He also speaks on the phone to advisors, first calling National Security Advisor Rice, then Vice President Cheney, then New York Governor George Pataki. [ Daily Mail, 9/8/02 ]
9:21 a.m.: The New York City Port Authority closes all bridges and tunnels in New York City. [ MSNBC, 9/22/01 , CNN, 9/12/01 , New York Times, 9/12/01 , Associated Press, 8/19/02 ]
9:24 a.m.: The FAA notifies NORAD that Flight 77 “may” have been hijacked and appears to be headed toward Washington. [9:24, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 9:24, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 9:25, CNN, 9/17/01 , 9:25, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 9:25, Guardian, 10/17/01 ] CNN notes that “after the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) warned the military's air defense command that a hijacked airliner appeared to be headed toward Washington, the federal government failed to make any move to evacuate the White House, Capitol, State Department or the Pentagon.” [ CNN, 9/16/01 ] A Pentagon spokesman says, “The Pentagon was simply not aware that this aircraft was coming our way.” Even Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and his top aides in the Pentagon remain unaware of any danger up to the moment of impact 14 minutes later. [ Newsday, 9/23/01 ] Most senators and congresspeople are in the Capitol building, which is not evacuated until 9:48 (see 9:48 a.m.). Only Vice President Cheney, National Security Advisor Rice and possibly a few others, are evacuated to safety a few minutes after 9:03 (see (After 9:03 a.m.)). Yet, since at least the Flight 11 crash, “military officials in a command center [the National Military Command Center] on the east side of the [Pentagon] [are] urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to do.” [ New York Times, 9/15/01 (C) ]
9:24 a.m.: A fighter pilot codenamed Honey who flew one of the F-16s from Langley offers a different story than the official one. He claims that at this time a battle stations alert sounds, and two other pilots are given the order to climb into their F-16s and await further instructions. Then, Honey, who is the supervisor, goes and talks to the two other pilots. Then, “five or ten minutes later,” a person from NORAD calls, and Honey speaks to him at the nearby administrative office. He is told that all three of them are ordered to scramble. Honey goes to his living quarters, grabs his flight gear, puts it on, runs to his plane, and takes off. It's hard to know exactly how long all of this takes, but clearly his recollection doesn't jibe with the official timeline, that NORAD orders the fighters scrambled at 9:27 and they take off at 9:30. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 64-65]
Ted Olson. [Salon] Since 9/11 he has been trying to prevent the release of Vice President Cheney's energy task force papers. [Telegraph, 3/5/02]
(9:25 a.m.): A passenger on Flight 77, Barbara Olson, calls her husband, Theodore (Ted) Olson, who is Solicitor General at the Justice Department. Ted Olson is in his Justice Department office watching WTC news on television when his wife calls. A few days later, he says, “She told me that she had been herded to the back of the plane. She mentioned that they had used knives and box cutters to hijack the plane. She mentioned that the pilot had announced that the plane had been hijacked.” [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) ] He tells her that two planes have hit the WTC. [ Telegraph, 3/5/02 ] She feels nobody is taking charge. [ CNN, 9/12/01 ] He doesn't know if she was near the pilots, but at one point she asks, “What shall I tell the pilot? What can I tell the pilot to do?” [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) ] Then she gets cut off without warning. [ Newsweek, 9/29/01 ] Ted Olson' recollection of the call's timing is extremely vague, saying it “must have been 9:15 or 9:30. Someone would have to reconstruct the time for me.” [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) ] Other accounts place it around 9:25. [About 9:25, Miami Herald, 9/14/01 , about 9:25, New York Times, 9/15/01 (C) , “by 9:25,” ] The call is said to have lasted about a minute. [ Washington Post, 9/12/01 (B) ] By some accounts, his warning of that planes have hit the WTC comes later in a second phone call (see (After 9:30 a.m.)). [ ] In one account, Barbara Olson calls from inside a bathroom. [ Evening Standard, 9/12/01 ] In another account, she is near a pilot, and in yet another she is near two pilots. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] Three days after 9/11, he says, “I found out later that she was having, for some reason, to call collect and was having trouble getting through. You know how it is to get through to a government institution when you're calling collect.” He says he doesn't know what kind of phone she used, but he has “assumed that it must have been on the airplane phone, and that she somehow didn't have access to her credit cards. Otherwise, she would have used her cell phone and called me.” [ Fox News, 9/14/01 ] But in another interview on the same day, he says that she used a cell phone and that she may have gotten cut off “because the signals from cell phones coming from airplanes don't work that well.” [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) ] Six months later, he claims she called collect “using the phone in the passengers' seats.” [ Telegraph, 3/5/02 ] Many other details are conflicting, and Olson faults his memory and says that he “tends to mix the two [calls] up because of the emotion of the events.” [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) ] The couple liked to joke that they were at the heart of what Hillary Clinton famously called a “vast, right-wing conspiracy.” Ted Olson was a controversial choice as Solicitor General, since he argued on behalf of Bush before the Supreme Court in the 2000 presidential election controversy before being chosen. Barbara Olson was known for her extremely partisan attacks on President Clinton. For instance, a few weeks before 9/11 she had called Clinton's mother a “barfly” who let herself be used by men. [ Telegraph, 3/5/02 ] Some have questioned if Ted Olson can be trusted in his account of the call, since he has stated that lying to the public is justifiable. [ Sydney Morning Herald, 3/20/02 ]
(After 9:25 a.m.): Theodore (Ted) Olson, the Justice Department's Solicitor General, calls the Justice Department's control center to tell about his wife's call from Flight 77 (see (9:25 a.m.)). Accounts vary whether the Justice Department already knows of the hijack or not. [ Washington Post, 9/12/01 (B) , Channel 4 News, 9/13/01 , New York Times, 9/15/01 (C) ] Olson merely says, “They just absorbed the information. And they promised to send someone down right away.” He assumes they then “pass the information on to the appropriate people.” [ Fox News, 9/14/01 ]
FAA Administrator Jane Garvey
(9:25 a.m.): The Flight 93 pilots check in with Cleveland flight control, uttering “good morning.” [ Newsweek, 11/25/01 ]
FAA National Operations Manager Ben Sliney [USA Today]
(9:26 a.m.): 2004-04-08 Jane Garvey, head of the FAA, “almost certainly after getting an okay from the White House, initiate[s] a national ground stop, which forbids takeoffs and requires planes in the air to get down as soon as reasonable. The order, which has never been implemented since flying was invented in 1903, applie[s] to virtually every single kind of machine that can takeoff—civilian, military, or law enforcement.” Military and law enforcement flights are allowed to resume at 10:31 a.m. A limited number of military flights—the FAA won't reveal details—are allowed to fly during this ban. [ Time, 9/14/01 ] Garvey later calls it “a national ground stop … that prevented any aircraft from taking off.” [ House Committee, 9/21/01 ] However, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta later says he was the one to give the order: “As soon as I was aware of the nature and scale of the attack, I called from the White House to order the air traffic system to land all aircraft, immediately and without exception.” [ State Department, 9/20/01 ] 4,452 planes are flying in the continental US at the time. A later account says Ben Sliney, the FAA's National Operations Manager, makes the decision without consulting his superiors, like Jane Garvey, first. It would be remarkable if Sliney was the one to make the decision, because 9/11 is Sliney's first day on the job as National Operations Manager, “the chess master of the air traffic system.” [ USA Today, 8/13/02 ] When he had accepted the job a couple of months earlier, he had asked, “What is the limit of my authority?” The man who had promoted him replied, “Unlimited.” [ USA Today, 8/13/02 (B) ] Yet another account, by Linda Schuessler, manager of tactical operations at the FAA Command Center where Sliney was located, says, “…it was done collaboratively… All these decisions were corporate decisions. It wasn't one person who said, Yes, this has got to get done.” [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 12/17/01 ] About 500 planes land in the next 20 minutes, and then much more urgent orders to land are issued at 9:45 a.m. [ USA Today, 8/13/02 ] [9:25, Time, 9/14/01 , 9:25, USA Today, 8/13/02 , 9:26, House Committee, 9/21/01 , 9:26, Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 , 9:26, Newsday, 9/23/01 , 9:26, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 9:26, Newsday, 9/10/02 ]
(Before 9:27 a.m.): On Flight 93, at least three of the hijackers stand up and put red bandanas around their heads. Two of them force their way into the cockpit. One takes the loudspeaker microphone, apparently unaware it could also be heard by flight controllers, and announces that someone has a bomb onboard and the flight is returning to the airport. He tells them he is the pilot, but speaks with an accent. [“The best estimation is about 40 minutes into the flight” (9:22), Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) , “about 40 minutes into its flight,” Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , “about 9:28,” Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 208]
Flight controller Danielle O'Brien. [ABC]
(9:27 a.m.): Vice President Cheney and National Security Advisor Rice, in their bunker below the White House, are told by an aide that an airplane is 50 miles outside Washington and headed toward it. The plane is Flight 77. Federal Aviation Deputy Chief Monty Belger says, “Well we're watching this target on the radar, but the transponder's been turned off. So we, have no identification.” They are given further notices when the plane is 30 miles away, then 10 miles away, until it disappears from radar (time unknown, but the plane is said to be traveling about 500 mph and was 30 miles away at 9:30, so 50 miles would be about 3 minutes before that). [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] The Dulles tower flight controller who is said to first spot Flight 77's appearance near Washington, Danielle O'Brien, previously claims she doesn't find its radar blip until it is around 12 and 14 miles from Washington, and that Cheney is notified only after that. [ ABC, 10/24/01 , ABC, 10/24/01 (B) ]
(9:27 a.m.): NORAD orders three F-16 fighters scrambled from Langley Air Force Base in Virginia to intercept Flight 77. Langley is 129 miles from Washington. Ready aircraft at Andrews Air Force Base, 15 miles away, are not scrambled. [ Newsday, 9/23/01 ] [9:24, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 9:27, CNN, 9/17/01 , 9:25, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 9:35, CNN, 9/17/01 , 9:35, Washington Post, 9/15/01 ] One of the three pilots, Major Dean Eckmann, later says he is told before scrambling that the WTC has been hit by a plane. [ Associated Press, 8/19/02 (C) ]
Tom Burnett.
(9:27 a.m.): Tom Burnett calls his wife Deena and says, “I'm on United Flight 93 from Newark to San Francisco. The plane has been hijacked. We are in the air. They've already knifed a guy. There is a bomb on board. Call the FBI.” Deena connects to emergency 911. [9:27, “she scribbled down what Tom told her and noted the time,” Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 107, ABC News, 9/12/01 , “within minutes” of 9:28, MSNBC, 7/30/02 , “She recalls it was around 6:20 a.m.–9:20 Eastern time,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) , “shortly after” Jeremy Glick's call, Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 ] His wife Deena wonders if the call might have been before the cockpit was taken over, because he spoke quickly and quietly as if he was being watched. He also had a headset like phone operators use, so he could have made the call unnoticed. Note that original versions of this conversation appear to have been censored. The most recent account has the phone call ending with, “We are in the air. The plane has been hijacked. They already knifed a guy. One of them has a gun. They're saying there is a bomb onboard. Please call the authorities.” [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 107] The major difference from earlier accounts, of course, is the mention of a gun. The call wasn't recorded, but Deena's call immediately afterwards to 911 was, and she states on that, “They just knifed a passenger and there are guns on the plane.” [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 108] This is the first of over 30 additional phone calls by passengers inside the plane. [ MSNBC, 7/30/02 ]
(9:28 a.m.): On Flight 93, “there are the first audible signs of problems, in background cockpit noise.” Flight controllers hear the sound of screaming and scuffling over an open mike. They then hear hijackers speaking in Arabic to each other. Yet this is at least 12 minutes after at least one hijacker has taken over the cockpit and done something to cause the FAA to notify NORAD of a hijacking. [9:28, Guardian, 10/17/01 , after 9:25, Newsweek, 11/25/01 ]
(9:28 a.m.): On Flight 93, flight controllers hear someone say, “Get out of here,” through an open microphone in the cockpit. The mike goes off and comes back on. Scuffling is heard in the background. Somebody again yells, “Get out of here!” Eventually there are a total of four murky radio transmissions, which include lots of non-English phrases, “bomb on board” twice, “our demands” and “keep quiet.” [“probably around the time the plane was taken over,” Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , 9:28, MSNBC, 7/30/02 , 9:30, Observer, 12/2/01 , 9:32: “90 minutes into the flight,” Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 ] Newsweek repeats possibly the same story, but suggests it happened at 9:58: “The last transmission from the cockpit records someone, probably a hijacker, screaming ‘Get out of here. Get out of here.’ Then grunting, screaming and scuffling. Then silence.” [ Newsweek, 9/22/01 ]
President Bush speaks at 9:29 in the library of Booker Elementary School. [From Booker Elementary website]
9:29 a.m.: Still inside Booker Elementary School, Bush gives a brief speech in front of about 200 students, plus many teachers and reporters. [ Daily Mail, 9/8/02 ] He says, “Today we've had a national tragedy. Two airplanes have crashed into the World Trade Center in an apparent terrorist attack on our country” (see the text of the speech here [ Federal News Service, 9/11/01 ]). [9:24, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 9:28, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 9:30, CNN, 9/12/01 , 9:30, New York Times, 9/12/01 , speech begins at 9:29:55 according to an ABC News timing device, advanced schedule 9:30 in Federal News Service, 9/10/01 ]
9:30 a.m.: United begins landing all of its flights inside the US. American Airlines follows suit five minutes later. [ Wall Street Journal, 10/15/01 ]
A typical F-16.
9:30 a.m.: Radar tracks Flight 77 as it closes to within 30 miles of Washington. [ CBS News, 9/21/01 ]
9:30 a.m.: The three F-16s scrambled toward Flight 77 get airborne. [9:30, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 9:30, ABC News, 9/11/02 , 9:35, Washington Post, 9/12/01 ] The pilots' names are Major Brad Derrig, Captain Craig Borgstrom, and Major Dean Eckmann, all from the North Dakota Air National Guard's 119th Fighter Wing but stationed at Langley. [ Associated Press, 8/19/02 (C) , ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
(9:30 a.m.): The FAA's emergency operations center gets up and running, five minutes after the FAA issued an order grounding all civilian, military, and law enforcement aircraft. [ Time, 9/14/01 ]
(9:30 a.m.): Chris Stephenson, the flight controller in charge of the Washington airport tower, says that he is called by the Secret Service around this time. He is told an unidentified aircraft is speeding toward Washington. Stephenson looks at the radarscope and sees Flight 77 about five miles to the west. He looks out the tower window and sees the plane turning to the right and descending. He follows it until it disappears behind a building in nearby Crystal City, Virginia. [ USA Today, 8/12/02 ] However, according to another account, just before 9:30 a.m., a controller in the same tower has an unidentified plane on radar, “heading toward Washington and without a transponder signal to identify it. It's flying fast, she says: almost 500 mph. And it's heading straight for the heart of the city. Could it be American Flight 77? The FAA warns the Secret Service.” [ USA Today, 8/13/02 ] So does the Secret Service warn the FAA, or vice versa?
(9:30 a.m.): Flight controllers mistakenly suspect that Delta Flight 1989, flying west over Pennsylvania, has been hijacked. The controllers briefly suspect the sound of hijackers' voices in Flight 93 is coming from this plane, only a few miles away. The flight “joins a growing list of suspicious jets. Some of their flight numbers will be scrawled on a white dry-erase board throughout the morning” at FAA headquarters. Miscommunications lead to further suspicion of Flight 1989 even after the source of the hijacker's message is confirmed to come from Flight 93. The flight lands in Cleveland at 10:10. Eventually, about 11 flights will be suspected, with four of them actually hijacked. [ USA Today, 8/13/02 (B) ]
(9:30 a.m.): The transponder signal from Flight 93 ceases and radar contact is lost. [9:30, MSNBC, 9/3/02 , 9:40, CNN, 9/17/01 ] However, the plane can still be tracked, and is tracked at least at United headquarters until shortly before the final crash (the exact time is not mentioned). However, altitude can no longer be determined. The plane's speed begins to vary wildly, moving between 600 and 400 mph before eventually settling around 400 mph. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 77, 214]
(9:30 a.m.): The hijackers make an announcement to the passengers on Flight 77, telling them to phone their families as they are “all going to die”. They also tell the passengers that they are going to hit the White House. [“When they took over the controls,” Sunday Herald, 9/16/01 , “around 9:30,” Cox News, 10/21/01 ]
Right wing author and political commentator Barbara Olson. [CNN]
(After 9:30 a.m.): About five minutes after Barbara Olson called her husband Ted Olson, the Justice Department's Solicitor General, she calls again (note the timing of both calls is extremely vague.) [About 9:30, five minutes after first call, Miami Herald, 9/14/01 ] A few days later, Ted Olson describes the conversation: “She said the plane had been high hijacked shortly after takeoff and they had been circling around, I think were the words she used. She reported to me that she could see houses. I asked her which direction the plane was going. She paused—there was a pause there. I think she must have asked someone else. She said I think it's going northeast…. She told me that [the hijackers] did not know she was making this phone call.” [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) ] She doesn't mention the nationality, number, or other details of the hijackers. Then the phone goes dead, he doesn't know why. [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) , Washington Post, 9/12/01 (B) ] He also says that she said, “The pilot had announced that the plane had been hijacked. She said it had been hijacked shortly after takeoff.” [ Fox News, 9/14/01 ] Her last words before she was cut off were, “What do I tell the pilots to do?” [ BBC, 9/13/01 ] She had asked this already in her first phone call. [ Washington Post, 9/12/01 (B) ] Then the phone goes dead supposedly “moments before” the plane crashes [ Newsweek, 9/29/01 ], but actually Ted Olson's timing recall is so vague that it isn't clear if this is when the call happens, and he says he doesn't know why the call ends (see [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) ]). The call is originally said to last about a minute [ Washington Post, 9/12/01 (B) ], but Olson later says it could have lasted up to four minutes. [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) ]
Flight attendant Debbie Welsh is apparently stabbed.
(After 9:31 a.m.): A few minutes after 9:31, a hijacker on board Flight 93 can be heard on the cockpit voice recording ordering a woman to sit down. A woman, presumably a flight attendant, implores, “Don't, don't.” She pleads, “Please, I don't want to die.” Patrick Welsh, the husband of flight attendant Debbie Welsh, is later told that a flight attendant was stabbed early in the takeover, and it is strongly implied it was his wife. She was a first-class attendant, and he says, “knowing Debby,” she would have resisted. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 207]
9:32 a.m.: The New York Stock Exchange closes. [ MSNBC, 9/22/01 ]
9:33 a.m.: According to the New York Times, Flight 77 becomes lost at 8:56 when it turns off its transponder, and stays lost until now. Washington flight controllers see a fast moving blip on their radar at this time and send a warning to Dulles Airport in Washington. [ New York Times, 10/16/01 (D) ] However, at 9:24 the FAA notifies NORAD Flight 77 is headed toward Washington (see 9:24 a.m.), and Vice President Cheney is told around 9:27 that radar is tracking Flight 77 heading toward Washington (see (9:27 a.m.)).
(9:33-9:38 a.m.): Radar data shows Flight 77 crossing the Capitol Beltway and headed toward the Pentagon. But the plane, flying more than 400 mph, is too high when it nears the Pentagon at 9:35, crossing the Pentagon at about 7,000 feet up. [ CBS News, 9/21/01 , Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] The plane then makes a difficult high-speed descending turn. It makes a “downward spiral, turning almost a complete circle and dropping the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes. The steep turn is so smooth, the sources say, it's clear there [is] no fight for control going on.” [ CBS News, 9/21/01 ] It gets very near the White House during this turn. “Sources say the hijacked jet … [flies] several miles south of the restricted airspace around the White House.” [ CBS News, 9/21/01 ] The Telegraph later writes, “If the airliner had approached much nearer to the White House it might have been shot down by the Secret Service, who are believed to have a battery of ground-to-air Stinger missiles ready to defend the president's home. The Pentagon is not similarly defended.” [ Telegraph, 9/16/01 ]White House spokesman Ari Fleischer suggests the plane goes even closer to the White House, saying, “That is not the radar data that we have seen. The plane was headed toward the White House.” [ CBS News, 9/21/01 ]
(9:34 a.m.): Bush's motorcade leaves Booker Elementary School and heads toward Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport. [9:34, Washington Times, 10/8/02 , 9:35, Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] A few days after 9/11, Sarasota's main newspaper reports, “Sarasota barely skirted its own disaster. As it turns out, terrorists targeted the president and Air Force One on Tuesday, maybe even while they were on the ground in Sarasota and certainly not long after. The Secret Service learned of the threat just minutes after Bush left Booker Elementary.” [ Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 9/16/01 ] A year later, Chief of Staff Andrew Card says, “As we were heading to Air Force One, we did hear about the Pentagon attack, and we also learned, what turned out to be a mistake, but we learned that the Air Force One package could in fact be a target.” [ MSNBC, 9/9/02 ]
(9:34 a.m.): A hijacker says over the radio to Flight 93's passengers: “Ladies and gentlemen, here it's the captain, please sit down. Keep remaining sitting. We have a bomb aboard.” Apparently Cleveland flight controllers can understand about a minute of screams, then a voice saying something about a “bomb on board.” A hijacker says in broken English that they are returning to the airport. [9:32, MSNBC, 9/3/02 , 9:34, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 , 9:35, Newsweek, 9/22/01 ]
9:34 a.m.: Tom Burnett calls his wife Deena a second time. He says, “They're in the cockpit.” He has checked the pulse of the man who was knifed (later identified as Mark Rothenberg, sitting next to him in seat 5B) and determined he is dead. She tells him about the hits on the WTC. He responds, “Oh my God, it's a suicide mission.” As they continue to talk, he tells her the plane has turned back. By this time, Deena is in constant communication with the FBI and others, and a policeman is at her house. [“Again, Deena noted the time,” Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 110]
A map of Flight 93's route with times roughly estimated. [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette] The USA Today's map shown earlier appears to have a much more accurate flight path.
9:35 a.m.: Flight 93 climbs without authorization. [ Guardian, 10/17/01 , USA Today, 8/13/02 ]
(9:36 a.m.): Flight 93 files a new flight plan with a final destination of Washington, reverses course and heads toward Washington. [9:35, “turned around near Cleveland,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 , “turns off course,” 9:36:01, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 9:36, MSNBC, 9/3/02 , 9:36, “made an ominous turn,” Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 219] Radar shows the plane turning 180 degrees. [ CNN, 9/13/01 (B) ] The new flight plan schedules the plane to arrive in Washington at 10:28. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 78]
A typical C-130.
9.36 a.m.: The national airport instructs a military C-130 (Golfer 06) that has just departed Andrews Air Force Base to intercept Flight 77 and identify it. [ Guardian, 10/17/01 , New York Times, 10/16/01 (D) ] Remarkably, this C-130 is the same C-130 that is 17 miles from Flight 93 when it later crashes into the Pennsylvania countryside. [ Minneapolis Star Tribune, 9/11/02 , Pittsburgh Channel, 9/15/01 ] The pilot, Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien, claims he took off around 9:30, planning to return to Minnesota after dropping supplies off in the Caribbean. He later describes his close encounter: “When air traffic control asked me if we had him [Flight 77] in sight, I told him that was an understatement—by then, he had pretty much filled our windscreen. Then he made a pretty aggressive turn so he was moving right in front of us, a mile and a half, two miles away. I said we had him in sight, then the controller asked me what kind of plane it was. That caught us up, because normally they have all that information. The controller didn't seem to know anything.” O'Brien reports that the plane is either a 757 or 767 and its silver fuselage means it is probably an American Airlines plane. “They told us to turn and follow that aircraft—in 20-plus years of flying, I've never been asked to do something like that.” [ Minneapolis Star Tribune, 9/11/02 ]
(9:37 a.m.): The blip representing Flight 77 that radar technicians have been watching on their screens disappears. Its last known position is six miles from the Pentagon and four miles from the White House. [ CBS News, 9/21/01 , Newhouse News, 1/25/02 , ABC News, 9/11/02 , USA Today, 8/13/02 ] Supposedly, just before radar contact is lost, FAA headquarters is told, “The aircraft is circling. It's turning away from the White House.” The plane is said to be traveling 500 mph, or a mile every seven seconds. [ USA Today, 8/13/02 ]
Jeremy Glick.
(9:37 a.m.): Jeremy Glick calls his wife Lyz from Flight 93. He describes the hijackers as Middle Eastern, Iranian looking. They put on red headbands and the three of them stood up and yelled and ran into the cockpit. He was sitting in the front of the coach section, but was sent to the back with most of the passengers. They claimed to have a bomb, which looked like a box with something red around it. He says the plane has turned around. Family members immediately call emergency 911 on another line. New York state police get patched in midway through the call. Glick finds out about the WTC towers. Two others onboard also learn about the WTC at about this time. Glick's phone remains connected until the very end of the flight. [9:37, Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 143, MSNBC, 7/30/02 , “just before 9:30,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) , no time explanation, Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 ]
This picture of Rumsfeld (center), taken from the US Army website, is captioned, “Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld returns to Pentagon inner offices Tuesday morning after surveying the damage from the hijacked plane which crashed into the building moments before.” This contradicts his claim that he was helping victims for nearly an hour after the attack. [US Army]
(9:38 a.m.): 2004-04-08 Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld is in the Pentagon meeting with Representative Cox (R), and is apparently completely oblivious of the approaching Flight 77. As he watches TV coverage of the WTC, he says, “Believe me, this isn't over yet. There's going to be another attack, and it could be us.” Supposedly, “moments later, the plane hit.” [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] Rumsfeld's office is on the fourth floor of the Pentagon, relatively near the impact. He later says that just after the explosion, “I went downstairs and went outside. And around the corner and of course, there it was.” He claims he immediately began helping the wounded: “There was a, a young woman bleeding, sitting on the ground, and I think she said to me, she didn't know who I was, she said, she could see people holding, drips going into people, IV of some kind, and she said, something to the effect, if people would, if someone could bring that person over, I could hold it.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] He helps load the wounded into ambulances until 10:30 (see 10:30 a.m.). [ Minneapolis Star Tribune, 9/12/01 , CNN, 12/5/01 ]
Internet researchers have put together this image showing how an object the size of a jumbo jet clips a number of light poles and then destroys columns inside the Pentagon. [From this website]
(9:38 a.m.): As fireman Alan Wallace is walking in front of the Pentagon, he looks up and sees Flight 77 coming straight at him. It is about 25 feet off the ground, no landing wheels visible, a few hundred yards away, and closing fast. He runs about 30 feet and dives under a nearby van. [“About 9:40,” ] The plane is traveling at about 460 mph, and flying so low that it clips the tops of street lights. [ CBS News, 9/21/01 ]
9:38 a.m.: Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon. Approximately 125 on the ground are later determined killed or missing. [9:37, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 9:37, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 9:38, CNN, 9/17/01 , 9:38, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 9:38, USA Today, 8/13/02 , 9:38, ABC News, 9/11/02 , 9:38, CBS, 9/11/02 (B) , 9:39, Washington Post, 1/27/02 , 9:40, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 9:43, CNN, 9/12/01 , 9:43, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 9:43, MSNBC, 9/3/02 , 9:43, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 9:45, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , At 9:39:02 on NBC News, reporter Jim Miklaszewski states that, “Moments ago, I felt an explosion here at the Pentagon,” Television Archive, WDCN 9:30 ] Flight 77 strikes the only portion of the Pentagon that had been recently renovated. “It was the only area of the Pentagon with a sprinkler system, and it had been reconstructed with a web of steel columns and bars to withstand bomb blasts. The area struck by the plane also had blast-resistant windows—2 inches thick and 2,500 pounds each—that stayed intact during the crash and fire. While perhaps 4,500 people normally would have been working in the hardest-hit areas, because of the renovation work only about 800 were there….” More than 25,000 people work at the Pentagon. [ Los Angeles Times, 9/16/01 (C) ]
This photo was taken mere moments after the Pentagon crash. [SIPA]
9:38 a.m.: NORAD states the fighters scrambled after Flight 77 took off from Langley at 9:30, 129 miles away, yet when Flight 77 crashes they are still 105 miles away. [ Newsday, 9/23/01 , NORAD, 9/18/01 ] The F-16 pilot codenamed Honey later offers a different explanation of where the F-16s are at 9:38. He says they are flying toward New York, when they see a black column of smoke coming from Washington, about 30 or 40 miles to the west. He is then asked over the radio by the North East Air Defense Sector of NORAD if he can confirm the Pentagon is burning. He confirms it. The F-16s are then ordered to set up a defensive perimeter above Washington. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 76] One of the three pilots, Major Brad Derrig later claims their target destination all along is Reagan National Airport, in Washington near the Pentagon. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Another pilot, Major Dean Eckmann, also later claims their destination all along was Washington. [ Associated Press, 8/19/02 (C) ] NORAD officer Major James Fox says he dispatches the jets without targets. “That would come later.” [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] (Additionally, subtract 8-10 miles (Sidewinder missile) or 12-20 miles (Sparrow missile) from the flight distance required for the fighters. [ Slate, 1/16/02 ])
The Pentagon explosion.
9:38 a.m.: A C-130 transport plane that has been sent to follow Flight 77 flies a short distance from Flight 77 as it crashes. This curious C-130 is the same C-130 that is 17 miles from Flight 93 when it later crashes into the Pennsylvania countryside. [ Minneapolis Star Tribune, 9/11/02 , Pittsburgh Channel, 9/15/01 ] A number of people see this plane fly remarkably close to Flight 77:
Kelly Knowles says that seconds after seeing Flight 77 pass, she sees a “second plane that seemed to be chasing the first [pass] over at a slightly different angle.” [ Daily Press, 9/15/01 ]
Keith Wheelhouse says the second plane was a C-130, two others aren't certain. [ Daily Press, 9/15/01 ] Wheelhouse “believes it flew directly above the American Airlines jet, as if to prevent two planes from appearing on radar while at the same time guiding the jet toward the Pentagon.” As Flight 77 descends toward the Pentagon, the second plane veers off west. [ Daily Press, 9/14/01 ]
USA Today reporter Vin Narayanan, who saw the Pentagon explosion, says, “I hopped out of my car after the jet exploded, nearly oblivious to a second jet hovering in the skies.” [ USA Today, 9/17/01 ]
USA Today Editor Joel Sucherman sees a second plane. [ eWeek, 9/13/01 ]
Brian Kennedy, press secretary for a congressman, and others also see a second plane. [ Sacramento Bee, 9/15/01 ]
An unnamed worker at Arlington national cemetery “said a mysterious second plane was circling the area when the first one attacked the Pentagon.” [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 12/20/01 ]
John O'Keefe is driving a car when he sees the Pentagon crash. “The first thing I did was pull over onto the shoulder, and when I got out of the car I saw another plane flying over my head…. Then the plane—it looked like a C-130 cargo plane—started turning away from the Pentagon, it did a complete turnaround.” [ New York Law Journal, 9/12/01 ]
The pilot of the C-130, Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien, is later interviewed, but his account differs from the on-the-ground eyewitnesses. He claims that just before the explosion, “With all of the East Coast haze, I had a hard time picking him out,” implying he is not nearby. He also says that just after the explosion, “I could see the outline of the Pentagon,” again implying he is not nearby. He then asks “the controller whether [I] should set up a low orbit around the building,” but he is told “to get out of the area as quickly as possible. ‘I took the plane once through the plume of smoke and thought if this was a terrorist attack, it probably wasn't a good idea to be flying through that plume.’” [ Minneapolis Star Tribune, 9/11/02 ]
(After 9:38 a.m.): A few minutes after Flight 77 crashes, the Secret Service commands fighters from Andrews Air Force Base, 10 miles from Washington, to “Get in the air now!” [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02 ] Almost simultaneously, a call from someone else in the White House declares the Washington area “a free-fire zone.” Says one pilot, “That meant we were given authority to use force, if the situation required it, in defense of the nation's capital, its property and people.” Lt. Col. Marc H. (Sass) Sasseville and a pilot only known by the codename Lucky sprint to their waiting F-16s armed only with “hot” guns and 511 rounds of “TP”—nonexplosive training rounds. The pilots later say that, had all else failed, they would have rammed into Flight 93. Meanwhile, the three F-16s flying on a training mission 207 miles away return to their home at Andrews Air Force Base. Major Billy Hutchison's fighter still has enough gas to take off again immediately; the other two need to refuel. He supposedly takes off with no weapons. “Hutchison was probably airborne shortly after the alert F-16s from Langley arrive over Washington, although 121st FS pilots admit their timeline-recall ‘is fuzzy.’” This would mean Hutchison doesn't even leave Andrews until after 9:49 (see (9:49 a.m.)). His is said to be the first fighter to reach Washington. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02 ] There are multiple reports of Andrews fighters at the Pentagon before and of the above fighters were reported to have taken off. For instance, “Within minutes of the [Pentagon] attack … F-16s from Andrews Air Force Base were in the air over Washington DC.” [ Telegraph, 9/16/01 ] “A few moments [after the Pentagon attack] … overhead, fighter jets scrambled from Andrews Air Force Base and other installations.” [ Denver Post, 9/11/01 ] A year later, ABC News reports, “High overhead [the Pentagon], jet fighters arrive. Just moments too late.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Yet other newspaper accounts deny fighters from Andrews were deployed [ USA Today, 9/16/01 ], and some deny Andrews even had fighters at all! [ USA Today, 9/16/01 (B) ] NORAD commander Major General Larry Arnold has said, “We [didn't] have any aircraft on alert at Andrews.” [ MSNBC, 9/23/01 (C) ]
(9:39 a.m.): The hijackers probably inadvertently transmit over radio: “Hi, this is the captain. We'd like you all to remain seated. There is a bomb on board. And we are going to turn back to the airport. And they had our demands, so please remain quiet.” [9:38, MSNBC, 9/3/02 , 9:39, Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 209, no time marker, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ]
9:41 a.m.: From Flight 93, Marion Birtton calls a friend. She tells him two people have been killed and the plane has been turned around. [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 ]
Where is the security covering Bush in this picture around 9:43 a.m.? [AP] Around 3:00 p.m., Bush is “guarded by soldiers clad in fatigues and gripping machine guns” when he emerges from Air Force One. [Salon, 9/12/01]
9:42 a.m.: From Flight 93 Mark Bingham calls his mother and says, “I'm on a flight from Newark to San Francisco and there are three guys who have taken over the plane and they say they have a bomb.” [9:42, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ] In an alternate version, he says, “I'm in the air, I'm calling you on the Airfone. I'm calling you from the plane. We've been taken over. There are three men that say they have a bomb.” [“Just before dawn in San Francisco,” Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 , 9:42, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ]
A thorough security check before boarding Air Force One delays takeoff. [AFP]
9:43 a.m.: Bush's motorcade arrives at Sarasota's airport and pulls up close to Air Force One. He learns a plane has hit the Pentagon as the motorcade gets near the airport. Bush immediately boards the plane. [ Washington Times, 10/8/02 , Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] Security then does an extra-thorough search of all the baggage for the other passengers, delaying takeoff until 9:55. [ St. Petersburg Times, 9/8/02 (B) ]
(After 9:44 a.m.): According to F-16 pilot Honey's account, at some point after the F-16s had set up a defensive perimeter over Washington, the lead pilot receives a garbled message about Flight 93 that isn't heard by the other two pilots. “The message seemed to convey that the White House was an important asset to protect.” Honey says he is later told the message is, “Something like, ‘Be aware of where it is, and it could be a target.’” The other pilot, codenamed Lou, says the unnamed lead pilot tells him, “I think the Secret Service told me this.” [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 76] Both Lou and Honey state they are never given orders to shoot down any plane that day. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 222]
9:45 a.m.: Tom Burnett calls his wife Deena for the third time. She tells him about the crash into the Pentagon. Tom speaks about the bomb he'd mentioned earlier, saying, “I don't think they have one. I think they're just telling us that.” He says the hijackers are talking about crashing the plane into the ground. “We have to do something.” He says that he and others are making a plan. “A group of us.” [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 111] Even by his second call, the FBI was listening in. [ Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 ]
Todd Beamer.
9:45 a.m.: After having some trouble with his phone, passenger Todd Beamer is able to speak to Verizon phone representative Lisa Jefferson, with the FBI listening in. He talks for about 15 minutes. Beamer says he has been herded to the back of the plane along with nine other passengers and five flight attendants. A hijacker who says he has a bomb strapped to his body is guarding them. 27 passengers are being guarded by a hijacker in first class, which is separated by a curtain. One hijacker has gone into the cockpit. One passenger is dead (that leaves one passenger unaccounted for—presumably the man who made a call from the bathroom). The two pilots are apparently dead. [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/16/01 , Newsweek, 9/22/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ] (A conflicting version [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] states that 27 were in the back, and that he saw four hijackers)
Secret Service with automatic weapons directing people away from the White House. [AP]
(9:45 a.m.): The White House begins a general evacuation. This is 21 minutes after the FAA warned a hijacked plane appeared to be headed toward Washington (see 9:24 a.m.) and about 40 minutes after Vice President Cheney has been evacuated from the White House (see (After 9:03 a.m.)). [9:43, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 9:45, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 9:45, Washington Post, 1/27/02 , 9:45, Telegraph, 12/16/01 , 9:45, CNN, 9/12/01 , 9:48, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 9:48, Associated Press, 8/19/02 ] Initially the evacuation is orderly, but soon the Secret Service agents are yelling that everyone should run. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta. [BBC]
(9:45 a.m.): Ben Sliney, FAA's National Operations Manager, orders the entire nationwide air traffic system shut down. All flights at US airports are stopped. 3,949 flights are still in the air at the time. Sliney makes the decision without consulting FAA head Jane Garvey, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, or other bosses, but they quickly approve. [ USA Today, 8/13/02 , USA Today, 8/13/02 (B) ] [9:40, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 9:40, CNN, 9/12/01 , 9:40, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 9:45, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 9:45, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 9:45, Newsday, 9/10/02 , 9:45, USA Today, 8/13/02 , 9:49, Washington Post, 9/12/01 ] 75 percent of the planes land within one hour of the order. [ USA Today, 8/12/02 (C) ] The Washington Post has reported that it was Mineta who told Monte Belger at the FAA: “Monte, bring all the planes down,” even adding, “[Expletive] pilot discretion.” [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ] However, it is later reported by a different Post reporter that Mineta didn't even know of the order until 15 minutes later. This reporter “says FAA officials had begged him to maintain the fiction.” [ Slate, 4/2/02 ]
(9:46 a.m.): According to the Flight 93 voice recording, around this time one hijacker in the cockpit says to another, “Let the guys in now.” A vague instruction is given to bring the pilot back in. It's not clear if this is a reference to an original pilot or a hijacker pilot. Investigators aren't sure if the original pilots were killed or allowed to live. [“About midway”, through a 31-minute recording that starts at 9:31, Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 208] Also by this time, “everyone” in the United Airlines crisis center “now knew that a flight attendant on board had called the mechanics desk to report that one hijacker had a bomb strapped on and another was holding a knife on the crew.” [ Wall Street Journal, 10/15/01 ]
(9:47 a.m.): On Flight 93, Jeremy Glick is still on the phone with his wife Lyz. He tells her that the passengers are taking a vote if they should try to take over the plane or not. [About the same time as a different phone call, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ] He later says that all the men on the plane have voted to attack the hijackers. [No time marker, Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 ] When asked about weapons, he says they don't have guns, just knives. His wife Lyz got the impression from him that the hijacker standing nearby claiming to hold the bomb would be easy to overwhelm. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 153-154]
9:48 a.m.: The Capitol building in Washington begins evacuation, 24 minutes after the FAA has warned a hijacked plane appeared to be headed toward Washington (see 9:24 a.m.). [ Associated Press, 8/19/02 ] Senator Tom Daschle, majority leader of the Senate, later states, “Some capitol policemen broke into the room and said, we're under attack. I've got to take you out right away.” Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, third in line of succession to the presidency behind Vice President Cheney, is in the Capitol building with other congresspeople. Only after this time are Hastert and others in the line of succession moved to secure locations. Some point after this, Hastert and other leaders are flown by helicopter to secret bunkers. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
9:49 a.m.: The FAA orders the Pittsburgh control tower evacuated. Shortly before, Cleveland flight controllers called Pittsburgh flight control and said a plane was heading toward Pittsburgh and refusing to communicate. [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/23/01 (B) ]
(9:49 a.m.): Three F-16s scrambled from Langley 129 miles away at 9:30 reach the Pentagon. The planes, armed with heat-seeking, Sidewinder missiles, are authorized to knock down civilian aircraft. According to NORAD, they were flying at 650 mph. The official maximum speed for F-16s is 1500 mph. [9:49, CNN, 9/17/01 , 9:49, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 9:56: “15 minutes after Flight 77 hit the Pentagon,” New York Times, 9/15/01 , “just before 10:00,” CBS, 9/14/01 CBS News, 9/14/01 ]
Sandra Bradshaw.
9:50 a.m.: Sandra Bradshaw calls her husband from Flight 93. She says, “Have you heard what's going on? My flight has been hijacked. My flight has been hijacked with three guys with knives.” [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] She tells him that they are in the rear galley filling pitchers with hot water to use against the hijackers. [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ]
(After 9:50 a.m.): Shortly after the Langley fighters arrive over Washington, three F-16s from Andrews also arrive. The first is probably piloted by Major Billy Hutchison. F-16s flown by Lt. Col. Marc H. (Sass) Sasseville and codename Lucky arrive shortly thereafter. Only Sasseville's plane has ammunition. Supposedly, these three fighters remain ignorant that three Langley F-16s are flying over Washington at the same time, at a higher altitude. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02 ]
9:53 a.m.: The NSA reportedly intercepts a phone call from one of bin Laden's operatives in Afghanistan to a phone number in the Republic of Georgia. The caller says he has “heard good news” and that another target is still to come (presumably, Flight 93). Tenet tells Rumsfeld about the intercept two hours later. [ CBS, 9/4/02 ]
9:53 a.m.: The hijackers in the cockpit of Flight 93 grow concerned that the passengers might retaliate. One urges that the plane's fire ax be held up to the door's peephole to scare the passengers. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 209-210]
9:54 a.m.: Tom Burnett calls his wife Deena for the fourth and last time. In early reports of this call, he says, “I know we're all going to die. There's three of us who are going to do something about it.” [No time marker, Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 , no time marker, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] However, in a later and much more complete account, he sounds much more upbeat. “It's up to us. I think we can do it.” “Don't worry, we're going to do something.” He specifically mentions they plan to regain control of the airplane over a rural area. [9:54, “again Deena noted the time,” Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 118]
Air Force One departs Sarasota. [AP]
(9:56 a.m.): Bush departs from the Saratoga, Florida, airport on Air Force One. [9:54, Dallas Morning News, 8/28/02 , 9:55, New York Times, 9/16/01 , 9:55, Daily Mail, 9/8/02 ,9:55, Washington Post, 1/27/02 , 9:55, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 9:55, Associated Press, 9/12/01 (D) , 9:55, ABC News, 9/11/02 , 9:57, CBS, 9/11/02 (B) , 9:57, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 9:57, CNN, 9/12/01 , 9:57, Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] Amazingly, his plane takes off without any fighters protecting it. “The object seemed to be simply to get the President airborne and out of the way,” says an administration official. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] There are still 3,520 planes in the air over the US. [ USA Today, 8/13/02 (B) ] About half of the planes in the region of Florida where Bush is are still in the air. [ St. Petersburg Times, 9/7/02 ]
(After 9:56 a.m.): After flying off in Air Force One, Bush talks to Vice President Cheney on the phone. Cheney recommends that Bush authorize the military to shoot down any plane under control of the hijackers. “I said, ‘You bet,’” Bush later recalls. “We had a little discussion, but not much.” [“After Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon,” Newsday, 9/23/01 , time unknown, USA Today, 9/16/01 , “Once airborne, Bush spoke again to Cheney,” Washington Post, 1/27/02 , after Bush is airborne, CBS, 9/11/02 ] Flight 93 is still in the air, and fighters are given orders to intercept it and possibly shoot it down. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
(After 9:56 a.m.): At some point after the F-16s are in the air, someone from the Secret Service gets on the radio and tells the pilots, “I want you to protect the White House at all costs.” [ New York Times, 10/16/01 ]
(9:56-10:40 a.m.): Air Force One takes off and quickly gains altitude. One passenger later says, “It was like a rocket. For a good 10 minutes, the plane was going almost straight up.” [ CBS, 9/11/02 (B) ] Once the plane reaches cruising altitude, it flies in circles. Journalists on board sense this, because the television reception for a local station generally remains good. “Apparently Bush, Cheney and the Secret Service argue over the safety of Bush coming back to Washington.” [ Salon, 9/12/01 (B) , Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
(After 9:56-10:06 a.m.): Inside his White House bunker, a military aide asks Vice President Cheney, “There is a plane 80 miles out. There is a fighter in the area. Should we engage?” Cheney immediately answers “Yes.” [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ] An F-16 fighter near Washington heads in pursuit of Flight 93. [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ] However, a different explanation says, “The closest fighters are two F-16 pilots on a training mission from Selfridge Air National Guard Base near Detroit.” These are ordered after Flight 93, even though but they supposedly aren't armed with any weapons. It is claimed they are supposed to crash into Flight 93 if they cannot persuade it to land. [ ABC News, 8/30/02 , ABC News, 9/11/02 ] In either case, as the fighter (or fighters) gets nearer to Flight 93, Cheney is asked twice more to confirm if the fighter should engage, and he responds yes both times. [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ] Montague Winfield, in charge of the Pentagon's command center, later says, “At some point, the closure time [between the fighter and Flight 93] came and went, and nothing happened, so you can imagine everything was very tense at the NMCC.” [] Yet Major Gen. Paul Weaver, director of the Air National Guard, had previously claimed that no military planes were sent after Flight 93. [ Seattle Times, 9/16/01 ] And the pilots flying over Washington that have spoken say that all of them didn't even learn about Flight 93 or any plane crashing in Pennsylvania until they returned to base in the afternoon. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 222]
9:57 a.m.: One of the hijackers in the cockpit asks if anything is going on, apparently meaning outside the cockpit. “Fighting,” the other one says. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 210] An analysis of the flight recorder suggests that the passenger struggle actually started in the front of the plane (where Bingham and Burnett were sitting) about a minute before a struggle in the back of the plane (where Beamer was sitting). [ Observer, 12/2/01 ] Officials later theorize that the Flight 93 passengers did actually reach the cockpit using a food cart as a battering ram and a shield. They claim that digital enhancement of the cockpit voice recorder reveals the sound of plates and glassware crashing around 9:57. [ Newsweek, 11/25/01 ]
(9:57 a.m. and After): “In the cockpit! In the cockpit!” is heard. Hijackers are reportedly heard telling each other to hold the door. In English, someone outside shouts, “Let's get them.” The hijackers are also praying “Allah o akbar” (God is great). One of the hijackers suggests shutting off the oxygen supply to the cabin (which apparently wouldn't have had an effect since the plane was already below 10,000 feet). A hijacker says, “Should we finish?” Another one says, “Not yet.” The sounds of the passengers get clearer, and in unaccented English “Give it to me!” is heard. “I'm injured,” someone says in English. Then something like “roll it up” and “lift it up” is heard. Passengers' relatives believe this sequence proves that the passengers did take control of the plane. [ MSNBC, 7/30/02 , Telegraph, 8/6/02 , Newsweek, 11/25/01 , Observer, 12/2/01 , Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 270-271]
9:58 a.m.: Todd Beamer ends his long phone call saying that they plan “to jump” the hijacker in the back who has the bomb. In the background, the phone operator already could hear an “awful commotion” of people shouting, and women screaming, “Oh my God,” and “God help us.” He lets go of the phone but leaves it connected. His famous last words are said to nearby passengers: “Are you ready guys? Let's roll” (alternate version: “You ready? Okay. Let's roll”). [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 204, Newsweek, 9/22/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ]
CeeCee Lyles.
9:58 a.m.: CeeCee Lyles says to her husband, “Aah, it feels like the plane's going down.” Her husband Lorne says, “What's that?” She replies, “I think they're going to do it. They're forcing their way into the cockpit” (an alternate version says, “They're getting ready to force their way into the cockpit”). A little later she screams, then says, “They're doing it! They're doing it! They're doing it!” Her husband hears more screaming in the background, then he hears a “whooshing sound, a sound like wind,” then more screaming, and then the call breaks off. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 180, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ]
9:58 a.m.: Sandy Bradshaw tells her husband, “Everyone's running to first class. I've got to go. Bye.” She had been speaking with him since 9:50. [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) , Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ]
Edward Felt.
9:58 a.m.: A man calls 911 from a bathroom on the plane, crying, “We're being hijacked, we're being hijacked!” [ Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 ], then reports that “he heard some sort of explosion and saw white smoke coming from the plane and we lost contact with him.” [ ABC News, 9/11/01 (B) , ABC News, 9/11/01 (C) , Associated Press, 9/12/01 (B) ] One minute after the call began, the line goes dead. [ Pittsburgh Channel, 12/6/01 ] Investigators believe this was Edward Felt, the only passenger not accounted for on phone calls. He was sitting in first class, so he probably was in the bathroom near the front of the plane. At one point he appears to have peeked out the bathroom door. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 193-194, 196] The mentions of smoke and explosions on the recording of his call are now denied. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 264] The person who took Felt's call is not allowed to speak to the media. [ Mirror, 9/13/02 ]
WTC south tower collapses at 9:59. [AP]
9:59 a.m.: The south tower of the World Trade Center collapses. It was hit by Flight 175 at 9:02. [9:50, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 9:59, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 9:59, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 9:59, ABC News, 9/11/02 , 9:59 (based on seismic data), New York Times, 9/12/01 , 10:05, CNN, 9/12/01 , 10:05, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 9:59:39, US Army authorized seismic study , 9:59:04, , USA Today, 12/20/01 ]
(Between 9:59 a.m. and 10:28 a.m.): At some point between the collapse of the two WTC towers, it is said that fire chiefs order for the firefighters to come down. It has not been reported exactly who issued this order or when. Witnesses claim that scores of firefighters were resting on lower floors in the minutes before the second tower collapsed, unaware of the danger. “Some firefighters who managed to get out said they had no idea the other building had already fallen, and said that they thought that few of those who perished knew.” At least 121 firefighters in the tower die. The fire department blames equipment failure with a radio repeater. However, the Port Authority claims that later transcripts of radio communications show the repeaters worked. [ New York Times, 11/9/02 (B) ]
A fighter and helicopter both fly directly above the Pentagon on 9/11. [AFP]
(Before 10:00 a.m.): Defense officials initially say, “There were no military planes in the skies over Washington until 15 to 20 minutes after the Pentagon was hit”—9:53 to 9:58. [ Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 9/14/01 ] But several sources later report that fighters were above Washington within “minutes” or “moments” of the Pentagon explosion. [ Denver Post, 9/11/01 , Telegraph, 9/16/01 , ABC News, 9/11/02 ] ABC News later reports that by 10:00, “Dozens of fighters are buzzing in the sky. F-16s scrambled at Andrews Air Force Base in nearby Maryland” (the exact time is not given, but the account is placed between 9:45 and 10:00 in a later ABC News chronology of 9/11). [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Another account says the first two F-16s from Andrews that are armed with missiles arrive ten minutes after the three F-16s from Andrews arrived at 9:49 (see (9:49 a.m.)). [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02 ] In contradiction to this, a few days after 9/11, the New York Times reports, “In the White House Situation Room and at the Pentagon, the response seemed agonizingly slow. One military official recalls hearing ‘words to the effect of, ‘Where are the planes?’’ The Pentagon insists it had air cover over its own building by 10 a.m., 15 minutes after the building was hit. But witnesses, including a reporter for The New York Times who was headed toward the building, did not see any until closer to 11.” [ New York Times, 9/16/01 ]
Elizabeth Wainio.
(10:00 a.m.): Elizabeth Wainio says to her stepmother, “Mom, they're rushing the cockpit. I've got to go. Bye,” then hangs up. This may have been a delayed reaction to events, since her stepmother says that in their ten-minute call Elizabeth was in a trance-like state, appeared to have resigned herself to death, was breathing in a strange manner, and even said she felt she was leaving her body. [“Shortly after 10:00,” MSNBC, 7/30/02 , “sometime shortly before 10,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ]
(10:00 a.m.): Bill Wright is flying a small plane when a flight controller asks him to look around outside his window. He sees Flight 93 three miles away—close enough to see the United Airlines colors. Flight control asks him the plane's altitude, then commands him to get away from the plane and land immediately. Wright sees the plane rock back and forth three or four times before he flies from the area. He speculates that the hijackers were trying to throw off the attacking passengers. [Time unknown, Pittsburgh Channel, 9/19/01 ]
Potential pilots Don Greene and Andrew Garcia.
(Between 10:00-10:06 a.m.): During this time, there apparently are no calls from Flight 93. Several cell phones left on record only silence. For instance, Todd Beamer doesn't hang up, but nothing more is heard after he puts down the phone, suggesting things are quiet in the back of the plane. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 218] The only exception is Richard Makely, who is listening to the Jeremy Glick open phone line after Glick went to attack the hijackers. A reporter summarizes Makely explaining that, “The silence last[s] two minutes, then there [is] screaming. More silence, followed by more screams. Finally, there [is] a mechanical sound, followed by nothing.” [ San Francisco Chronicle, 9/17/01 ] The second silence lasts between 60 and 90 seconds. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 219] Near the end of the cockpit voice recording, loud wind sounds can be heard. [ CNN, 4/19/02 , Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 270-271] “Sources claim the last thing heard on the cockpit voice recorder is the sound of wind—suggesting the plane had been holed.” [ Mirror, 9/13/02 ] If the passengers had taken over the plane, there was at least one passenger, Don Greene, who was a professional pilot, who had learned to fly at age 14, as well as Andrew Garcia, a former flight controller. [ Newsweek, 9/22/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) , Telegraph, 8/6/02 ]
Someone falling from the WTC. [Allsport] “Probably well over 50” jumped or fell from the North Tower, none from the South Tower. [New York Times, 9/11/02]
10:01 a.m.: The FAA orders F-16 fighters to scramble from Toledo, Ohio. Although the base has no fighters on standby alert status, it manages to put fighters in the air 16 minutes later, a “phenomenal” response time—but still 10 minutes after the last hijacked plane has crashed. [ Toledo Blade, 12/9/01 ]
10:02 a.m.: The Sears Tower in Chicago begins evacuation. Other prominent tall buildings and landmarks begin evacuating about an hour later. [ Ottawa Citizen, 9/11/01 ]
10:03 a.m.: According to the US government, Flight 93 crashes at 10:03. [ NORAD, 9/18/01 ] The cockpit voice recording was recorded on a 30 minute reel, which means that as new tape was recorded the old tape was being erased. The government has let relatives listen to this tape, which begins at 9:31 and runs for 31 minutes. [ CNN, 4/19/02 , Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 206-207] So it sounds like the recording ends a minute before the official crash time. However, a seismic study authorized by the US Army to determine when the plane crashed concludes the crash happens at 10:06:05. [ US Army authorized seismic study ] The discrepancy is so puzzling, the Philadelphia Daily News has an article on the issue, called “Three-Minute Discrepancy in Tape.” It notes that leading seismologists agree that Flight 93 crashed last Sept. 11 at 10:06:05 a.m., give or take a couple of seconds, and government officials won't explain why they say the plane crashed at 10:03. [ Philadelphia Daily News, 9/16/02 ]
(Before 10:06 a.m.): CBS television reports at some point before the crash that two F-16 fighters are tailing Flight 93. [ Independent, 8/13/02 ] Shortly after 9/11, a flight controller in New Hampshire ignores a ban on controllers speaking to the media, and it is reported he claims “that an F-16 fighter closely pursued Flight 93… the F-16 made 360-degree turns to remain close to the commercial jet, the employee said. ‘He must've seen the whole thing,’ the employee said of the F-16 pilot's view of Flight 93's crash.” [ Associated Press, 9/13/01 , Nashua Telegraph, 9/13/01 ]
(Before 10:06 a.m.): In the tiny town of Boswell, about 10 miles north and slightly to the west of Flight 93's crash site, Rodney Peterson and Brandon Leventry notice a passenger jet lumbering through the sky at about 2,000 feet. They realize such a big plane flying so low in that area is odd. They see the plane dip its wings sharply to the left then to the right. The wings level off and the plane keeps flying south, continuing to slowly descend. Five minutes later they hear news that the plane has crashed. Other witnesses also later describe the plane flying east-southeast, low and wobbly. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 205-206, New York Times, 9/14/01 ] “Officials initially say that it looks like the plane was headed south when it hit the ground.” [ Cleveland Newschannel 5, 9/11/01 ]
A map of the countryside near the Flight 93 crash. [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette]
(Before 10:06 a.m.): Numerous eyewitnesses see and hear Flight 93 just before its crash:
Terry Butler, at Stoystown: He sees the plane come out of the clouds, low to the ground. “It was moving like you wouldn't believe. Next thing I knew it makes a heck of a sharp, right-hand turn.” It banks to the right and appears to be trying to climb to clear one of the ridges, but it continues to turn to the right and then veers behind a ridge. About a second later it crashes. [ St. Petersburg Times, 9/12/01 ]
Ernie Stuhl, the mayor of Shanksville: “I know of two people—I will not mention names—that heard a missile. They both live very close, within a couple of hundred yards… This one fellow's served in Vietnam and he says he's heard them, and he heard one that day.” He adds that based on what he has learned, F-16s were “very, very close.” [ Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01 ] Accounts of the plane making strange noises:
Laura Temyer of Hooversville: “I didn't see the plane but I heard the plane's engine. Then I heard a loud thump that echoed off the hills and then I heard the plane's engine. I heard two more loud thumps and didn't hear the plane's engine anymore after that.” (She insists that people she knows in state law enforcement have privately told her the plane was shot down, and that decompression sucked objects from the aircraft, explaining why there was a wide debris field.) [ Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01 ]
Charles Sturtz, a half mile from the crash site: The plane is heading southeast and has its engines running. No smoke can be seen. “It was really roaring, you know. Like it was trying to go someplace, I guess.” [ WPXI Channel 11, 9/13/01 ]
Michael Merringer, two miles from the crash site: “I heard the engine gun two different times and then I heard a loud bang…” [ Associated Press, 9/12/01 (B) ]
Tim Lensbouer, 300 yards away: “I heard it for 10 or 15 seconds and it sounded like it was going full bore.” [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/12/01 (B) ] Accounts of the plane flying upside down:
Rob Kimmel, several miles from the crash site: He sees it fly overhead, banking hard to the right. It is 200 feet or less off the ground as it crests a hill to the southeast. “I saw the top of the plane, not the bottom.” [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 210-211]
Eric Peterson of Lambertsville: He sees a plane flying overhead unusually low. The plane seemed to be turning end-over-end as it dropped out of sight behind a tree line. [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/12/01 ]
Bob Blair of Stoystown: He sees the plane spiraling and flying upside down before crashing. Its not much higher than the treetops. [ Daily American, 9/12/01 ] Accounts of a sudden plunge and more strange sounds:
An unnamed witness says he hears two loud bangs before watching the plane take a downward turn of nearly 90 degrees. [ Cleveland Newschannel 5, 9/11/01 ]
Another unnamed witness sees the plane overhead. It makes a high-pitched, screeching sound. The plane then makes a sharp, 90-degree downward turn and crashes. [ Cleveland Newschannel 5, 9/11/01 ]
Tom Fritz, about a quarter-mile from the crash site: He hears a sound that “wasn't quite right” and looks up in the sky. “It dropped all of a sudden, like a stone,” going “so fast that you couldn't even make out what color it was.” [ St. Petersburg Times, 9/12/01 ]
Terry Butler, a few miles north of Lambertsville: “It dropped out of the clouds.” The plane rose slightly, trying to gain altitude, then “it just went flip to the right and then straight down.” [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/12/01 (B) ]
Lee Purbaugh, 300 yards away: “There was an incredibly loud rumbling sound and there it was, right there, right above my head—maybe 50 feet up…. I saw it rock from side to side then, suddenly, it dipped and dived, nose first, with a huge explosion, into the ground. I knew immediately that no one could possibly have survived.” [ Independent, 8/13/02 ] Upside down and a sudden plunge:
Linda Shepley: She hears a loud bang and sees the plane bank to the side. [ ABC News, 9/11/01 (C) ] She sees the plane wobbling right and left, at a low altitude of roughly 2,500 feet, when suddenly the right wing dips straight down, and the plane plunges into the earth. She says she has an unobstructed view of Flight 93's final two minutes. [ Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01 ]
Kelly Leverknight in Stony Creek Township of Shanksville: “There was no smoke, it just went straight down. I saw the belly of the plane.” It sounds like it is flying low, and it's heading east. [ Daily American, 9/12/01 , St. Petersburg Times, 9/12/01 ]
Tim Thornsberg, working in a nearby strip mine: “It came in low over the trees and started wobbling. Then it just rolled over and was flying upside down for a few seconds … and then it kind of stalled and did a nose dive over the trees.” [ WPXI Channel 11, 9/13/01 ]
Flight 93 crash site. North is to the top. Note the impact point north of the road, and the burned trees to the south of it.
Other passenger planes hit by missiles continued to fly for several minutes before crashing. For instance, a Korean Airline 747 was hit by two Russian missiles in 1983, yet continued to fly for two more minutes. [ KAL Cockpit Voice Recorder transcript ]
(Before 10:06 a.m.): Flight 93 apparently starts to break up before it crashes, because debris is found very far away from the crash site. [ Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01 ] The plane is generally obliterated upon landing, except for one half-ton piece of engine found over a mile away. [ Independent, 8/13/02 ] One story calls what happened to this engine “intriguing,” because “the heat-seeking, air-to-air Sidewinder missiles aboard an F-16 would likely target one of the Boeing 757's two large engines.” [ Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01 ] Smaller debris fields are also found two, three, and eight miles away from the main crash site. [, Mirror, 9/13/02 ] Eight miles away, local media quote residents speaking of a second plane in the area and burning debris falling from the sky. [ Reuters, 9/13/01 (C) ] Residents outside Shanksville reported “discovering clothing, books, papers and what appeared to be human remains. Some residents said they collected bags-full of items to be turned over to investigators. Others reported what appeared to be crash debris floating in Indian Lake, nearly six miles from the immediate crash scene. Workers at Indian Lake Marina said that they saw a cloud of confetti-like debris descend on the lake and nearby farms minutes after hearing the explosion….” [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/13/01 ] Moments after the crash, Carol Delasko initially thinks someone had blown up a boat on Indian Lake: “It just looked like confetti raining down all over the air above the lake.” [ Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 9/14/01 (B) ] Investigators say that far-off wreckage “probably was spread by the cloud created when the plane crashed and dispersed by a 10 mph southeasterly wind.” [ Delaware News Journal, 9/16/01 ]
Flight 93 crashes in the Pennsylvania countryside.
10:06 a.m.: Flight 93 crashes just north of the Somerset County Airport, about 80 miles southeast of Pittsburgh, 124 miles or 15 minutes from Washington DC. [10:00, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 10:03, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 10:06, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 10:06, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 , 10:06, MSNBC, 9/3/02 , 10:06, Mirror, 9/13/02 , 10:06, USA Today, 8/13/02 , 10:07, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 10:10, CNN, 9/12/01 , 10:10, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 10:10, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 10:10, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , 10:06:05, US Army authorized seismic study ] Little information about the crash has been made public.
The Flight 93 crater. Notice the destruction of the airplane is nearly total. [Reuters]
(Before and After 10:06 a.m.): “At least half a dozen named individuals … have reported seeing a second plane flying low and in erratic patterns, not much above treetop level, over the crash site within minutes of the United flight crashing. They describe the plane as a small, white jet with rear engines and no discernible markings.” [ Independent, 8/13/02 ]
Lee Purbaugh: “I didn't get a good look but it was white and it circled the area about twice and then it flew off over the horizon.” [ Mirror, 9/13/02 ]
Susan Mcelwain: Less than a minute before the Flight 93 crash rocked the countryside, she sees a small white jet with rear engines and no discernible markings swoop low over her minivan near an intersection and disappear over a hilltop, nearly clipping the tops of trees lining the ridge. [ Bergen Record, 9/14/01 ] She later adds, “There's no way I imagined this plane—it was so low it was virtually on top of me. It was white with no markings but it was definitely military, it just had that look. It had two rear engines, a big fin on the back like a spoiler on the back of a car and with two upright fins at the side. I haven't found one like it on the internet. It definitely wasn't one of those executive jets. The FBI came and talked to me and said there was no plane around…. But I saw it and it was there before the crash and it was 40 feet above my head. They did not want my story—nobody here did.” [ Mirror, 9/13/02 ]
Dennis Decker and
Rick Chaney, Decker speaking: “As soon as we looked up [after hearing the Flight 93 crash], we saw a midsized jet flying low and fast. It appeared to make a loop or part of a circle, and then it turned fast and headed out.” Decker and Chaney described the plane as a Learjet type, with engines mounted near the tail and painted white with no identifying markings. “It was a jet plane, and it had to be flying real close when that 757 went down. If I was the FBI, I'd find out who was driving that plane.” [ Bergen Record, 9/14/01 ]
Jim Brandt sees a small plane with no markings stay about one or two minutes over the crash site before leaving. [ Pittsburgh Channel, 9/12/01 ]
Tom Spinelli: “I saw the white plane. It was flying around all over the place like it was looking for something. I saw it before and after the crash.” [ Mirror, 9/13/02 ]
The FBI later says this was a Fairchild Falcon 20 business jet, directed after the crash to fly from 37,000 feet to 5,000 feet and obtain the coordinates for the crash site to help rescuers. [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/16/01 , Pittsburgh Channel, 9/15/01 ] The FBI also says there was a C-130 military cargo aircraft flying at 24,000 feet about 17 miles away, but that plane wasn't armed and had no role in the crash. [ Pittsburgh Channel, 9/15/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/16/01 ] Note that this is the same C-130 that flies very close to Flight 77 right as that planes crashes into the Pentagon (see 9:38 a.m.).
(After 10:06 a.m.): Just after Flight 93 crashes, “Up above, a fighter jet streak[s] by.” [ ABC News, 9/15/02 ]
(After 10:06 a.m.): At some point after Flight 93 crashes, NORAD diverts “unarmed Michigan Air National Guard fighter jets that happened to be flying a training mission in northern Michigan since the time of the first attack.” [ Associated Press, 8/30/02 ]
(10:08 a.m.): Bush is told of the crash of Flight 93 a few minutes later. Because of Cheney's earlier order, he asks, “Did we shoot it down or did it crash?” Several hours later, he is assured it crashed. [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ]
10:08 a.m.: Armed agents deploy around the White House. [ CNN, 9/12/01 ]
10:10 a.m.: All US military forces are ordered to Defcon Three (or Defcon Delta), “The highest alert for the nuclear arsenal in 30 years.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Supposedly Rumsfeld makes the order, but its hard to see how he could have done this since he was assisting the wounded in the Pentagon explosion until 10:30 (see 10:30 a.m.). [ ABC News, 9/11/02 , CNN, 9/4/02 ] Another account says Defcon Delta doesn't happen until about noon. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
10:12 a.m.: CNN reports an explosion at Capitol Hill. CNN determines this is untrue 12 minutes later. [ Ottawa Citizen, 9/11/01 ]
10:13 a.m.: Federal buildings in Washington begin evacuation. The UN building evacuates first; others follow later. [ CNN, 9/12/01 , New York Times, 9/12/01 ]
10:15 a.m.: p The section of the Pentagon reportedly hit by the crash of Flight 77 collapses. [10:10, CNN, 9/12/01 , 10:10, New York Times, 9/12/01 , recorded live on WDCC-TV at 10:15, Television Archive, WDCC 10:00 ] A few minutes prior to its collapse, firefighters saw warning signs and sounded a general evacuation tone. No firefighters were injured. [ NFPA Journal, 11/1/01 ]
10:19 a.m.: 2004-04-08 There are reports on television of a fire at the State Department. At 10:20 a.m. and apparently again at 10:33 a.m. it is reported this was caused by a car bomb. [10:00, Ottawa Citizen, 9/11/01 , 10:19, Broadcasting and Cable, 8/26/02 , 10:20, Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] At 10:23, the Associated Press reports, “A car bomb explodes outside the State Department, senior law-enforcement officials say.” [ Broadcasting and Cable, 8/26/02 ] Secretary of State Richard Armitage sees this on television, goes outside the building to see if it true, finds out it isn't, and calls his colleagues to inform them that the reports are false. [ ABC News, 9/15/02 (B) ] There are numerous other false reports, including explosions at the Capitol building and USA Today headquarters. [ Broadcasting and Cable, 8/26/02 ]
(10:24 a.m.): Jane Garvey, head of the FAA, orders the diversion of all international flights to the U.S. Most flights are diverted to Canada. [10:41, Time, 9/14/01 , 10:24, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 10:24, CNN, 9/12/01 , 10:24, New York Times, 9/12/01 ]
WTC north tower collapses at 10:28. The collapse takes only about four seconds. [Reuters]
10:28 a.m.: The World Trade Center's north tower collapses. It was hit by Flight 11 at 8:46. [10:28, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 10:28, CNN, 9/12/01 , 10:28, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 10:28, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 10:28 (based on seismic data), New York Times, 9/12/01 , 10:29, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 10:28:31, ] The death toll could have been much worse—an estimated 15,000 people made it out of the WTC to safety. [ ]
10:30 a.m.: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld finally enters the Pentagon's National Military Command Center (NMCC), where the military's response to the 9/11 attacks is being coordinated. [ CNN, 9/4/02 ] Rumsfeld was supposedly in the Pentagon meeting with Representative Cox (R) about missile defense and terrorism until the Pentagon explosion. [ Associated Press, 9/16/01 (C) , Rep. Cox Statement, 9/11/01 ] He then went outside to help the wounded of the attack until this time (see (9:38 a.m.)). Brigadier General Montague Winfield later says, “For 30 minutes we couldn't find him. And just as we began to worry, he walked into the door of the National Military Command Center.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
10:31 a.m.: “The FAA [allows] military, and law enforcement flights to resume (and some flights that the FAA can't reveal that were already airborne).” All civilian, military and law enforcement flights were ordered to land as soon as reasonably possible about one hour earlier (see (9:26 a.m.)). [ Time, 9/14/01 ]
10:32 a.m.: Cheney calls Bush and tells him of a threat to Air Force One. He is told it would take between 40 minutes and 90 minutes to get a protective fighter escort up to Air Force One. His plane turns toward Louisiana soon after. [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ] Many doubt the existence of this threat. For instance, Representative Martin Meehan (D) says, “I don't buy the notion Air Force One was a target. That's just PR, that's just spin.” [ Washington Times, 10/8/02 ] A later account calls the threat “completely untrue,” and says Cheney probably made the story up. A well-informed, anonymous Washington official says, “It did two things for [Cheney]. It reinforced his argument that the President should stay out of town, and it gave George W an excellent reason for doing so.” [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
(10:35 a.m.): Air Force One turns toward Louisiana. It has been decided Bush cannot go directly to Washington. [About 10:30, CBS, 9/11/02 (B) , about 10:42, Washington Post, 1/27/02 ]
(10:42 a.m.): Roughly around this time, the FAA tells the White House that it still cannot account for three planes in addition to the four that have crashed. It takes the FAA another hour and a half to account for the three other aircraft. [ Time, 9/14/01 ] Vice President Cheney later says, “That's what we started working off of, that list of six, and we could account for two of them in New York. The third one we didn't know what had happened to. It turned out it had hit the Pentagon, but the first reports on the Pentagon attack suggested a helicopter and then later a private jet.” [ Los Angeles Times, 9/17/01 ] Amongst false rumors during the day are reports of a bomb aboard a United Airlines jet that just landed in Rockford, Illinois. “Another plane disappears from radar and might have crashed in Kentucky. The reports are so serious that [FAA head Jane] Garvey notifies the White House that there has been another crash. Only later does she learn the reports are erroneous.” [ USA Today, 8/13/02 (B) ]
(10:55 a.m.): Colonel Mark Tillman, pilot of Air Force One, is told there is a threat to Bush's plane. Tillman has an armed guard placed at his cockpit door while the Secret Service double-checks the identity of everyone on board. Then traffic controllers warn that a suspect airliner is dead ahead. Says Tillman, “Coming out of Sarasota there was one call that said there was an airliner off our nose that they did not have contact with.” Tillman takes evasive action, pulling his plane high above normal traffic. [ CBS, 9/11/02 (B) ] Reporters on board notice the rise in elevation. [10:55 according to a reporter who writes it in her notebook, Dallas Morning News, 8/28/02 , “just before 11:00,” Salon, 9/12/01 (B) ]
(Between 10:55-11:30 a.m.): No fighters escort Bush's Air Force One until somewhere in this time period. At 10:32, Cheney said it would take until about 11:10 to 12:00 to get a fighter escort to Air Force One. [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ] According to one account, around 10:00 Air Force One “is joined by an escort of F-16 fighters from a base near Jacksonville, Florida,” but this is contradicted by Cheney's comment reported a month later. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] Another account says, “At 10:41, … Air Force One headed toward Jacksonville to meet jets scrambled to give the presidential jet its own air cover.” [ New York Times, 9/16/01 ] But apparently when Air Force One takes evasive action around 10:55 there is still no fighter escort (see (10:55 a.m.)). NORAD commander Major General Larry Arnold later says, “We scrambled available airplanes from Tyndall [near Tallahassee, not Jacksonville, Florida] and then from Ellington in Houston, Texas,” but he doesn't say when. [ Code One Magazine, 1/02 ] In another account, two F-16s eventually arrive, piloted by Shane Brotherton and Randy Roberts, from the Texas Air National Guard, not from any Florida base. [ CBS, 9/11/02 ] By 11:30 there are six fighters protecting Air Force One. [ Sarasota Magazine, 9/19/01 ]
(11:00 a.m.): Evacuations are ordered at the tallest skyscrapers in several cities, and major tourist attractions are closed, including Walt Disney World, Philadelphia's Liberty Bell and Independence Hall, Seattle's Space Needle, and the Gateway Arch in St. Louis. [ Times Union, 9/11/01 ]
(11:00 a.m.): FAA's command center is told that all the flights over the United States are accounted for and complying with controllers. Every commercial flight in US airspace—about a quarter of the planes still in the air—is within 40 miles of its destination. Others are still over the oceans, and many are heading toward Canada. [ USA Today, 8/13/02 (B) ] There are 923 planes still in the air over the US. [ USA Today, 8/13/02 (B) ]
11:08 a.m.: A message sent from Korean Air Flight 85 is misinterpreted to indicate a possible hijacking. At 1:24 p.m. the pilots accidentally issue a hijacking alert as the plane nears Alaska on its way to Anchorage, Alaska. Two fighters tail the plane, and it is told it will be shot down unless it avoids populated areas. Strategic sites are evacuated across Alaska. The plane eventually lands safely in Whitehorse, Canada, at 2:54 p.m. [ USA Today, 8/12/02 (B) ]
11:30 a.m.: General Wesley Clark, former supreme commander of NATO, says on television, “This is clearly a coordinated effort. It hasn't been announced that its over…. Only one group has this kind of ability and that is Osama bin Laden's.” [ Ottawa Citizen, 9/11/01 ]
11:45 a.m.: Air Force One lands at Barksdale Air Force base near Shreveport, Louisiana. “The official reason for landing at Barksdale was that Bush felt it necessary to make a further statement, but it isn't unreasonable to assume that—as there was no agreement as to what the President's movements should be—it was felt he might as well be on the ground as in the air.” [ Salon, 9/12/01 (B) , New York Times, 9/16/01 , Telegraph, 12/16/01 , CBS, 9/11/02 ]
(12:00 Noon): Bush arrives at the Barksdale Air Force base headquarters in a Humvee escorted by armed outriders. Reporters and others are not allowed to say where they are. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
(12:00 Noon): Sen. Orrin Hatch (R), a member of both the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees, says he has just been “briefed by the highest levels of the FBI and of the intelligence community.” He says, “They've come to the conclusion that this looks like the signature of Osama bin Laden, and that he may be the one behind this.” [ Salon, 9/12/01 (B) ] At 12:05, CIA Director Tenet tells Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld that a message from a bin Laden agent celebrating the attacks was intercepted two hours earlier (see 9:53 a.m.). Rumsfeld writes in his notes that the lead is “vague,” that it “might not mean something,” and that there is “no good basis for hanging hat.” More evidence suggesting an al-Qaeda link comes several hours later (see (2:40 p.m.)). [ CBS, 9/4/02 ]
12:15 p.m.: The US closes some border crossings with Canada and Mexico. [ MSNBC, 9/22/01 ]
12:16 p.m.: US airspace is clear except for military and emergency flights. Only a few transoceanic flights were still landing in Canada. [ USA Today, 8/12/02 (C) ] At 12:30, the FAA reports about 50 flights still flying in US airspace, but none are reporting problems. [ CNN, 9/12/01 , New York Times, 9/12/01 ]
12:36 p.m.: Bush gives a short speech that is taped and played by the networks at 1:04 p.m. [“Just after 12:30,” Salon, 9/12/01 (B) , 12:36, Washington Times, 10/8/02 ] In a speech at Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana, President Bush announces that security measures are being taken and says: “Make no mistake, the United States will hunt down and punish those responsible for these cowardly acts.” [ MSNBC, 9/22/01 , CNN, 9/12/01 , New York Times, 9/12/01 ] He also states, “Freedom itself was attacked this morning by a faceless coward. And freedom will be defended.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
(12:58 p.m.): Bush spends most of his time at Barksdale Air Force base arguing on the phone with Cheney and others over where he should go next. “A few minutes before 1 p.m.,” he agrees to fly to Nebraska. As earlier (see 10:32 a.m.), there are rumors of a “credible terrorist threat” to Air Force One. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
(1:02 p.m.): New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani orders an evacuation of Manhattan south of Canal Street. [1:02 PM, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 11:00 AM, Associated Press, 8/19/02 ]
1:04 p.m.: President Bush puts the US military on high alert worldwide. [ CNN, 9/12/01 , Associated Press, 8/19/02 ]
1:27 p.m.: A state of emergency is declared in Washington. [ CNN, 9/12/01 , New York Times, 9/12/01 ]
(1:30 p.m.): President Bush leaves Barksdale Air Force Base for Nebraska's Offutt Air Force Base, home to the US Strategic Command. [1:15, Telegraph, 12/16/01 , 1:31, Salon, 9/12/01 (B) , 1:44, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 1:48, CNN, 9/12/01 ] He travels with Chief of Staff Andrew Card, senior advisor Karl Rove, communications staffers Dan Bartlett, Ari Fleischer and Gordon Johndroe, and a reduced number of reporters. [ Salon, 9/12/01 (B) ]
1:44 p.m.: The Navy dispatches aircraft carriers and guided missile destroyers to New York and Washington. Around the country, fighters, airborne radar, and refueling planes scramble. The North American Aerospace Defense Command go to its highest alert. [ MSNBC, 9/22/01 , CNN, 9/12/01 ]
(2:00 p.m.): F-15 fighter pilot Major Daniel Nash returns to base around this time, after chasing Flight 175 and patrolling the skies over New York City. He says that when he got out of the plane, “he was told that a military F-16 had shot down a fourth airliner in Pennsylvania, a report that turned out to be incorrect.” [About 1:30, Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02 , about 2:30, Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 ]
(2:40 p.m.): By this time, the CIA determines from airplane passenger manifests that three of the hijackers were suspected al-Qaeda operatives. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld begins planning an attack against bin Laden. In his notes composed at this time (which are leaked almost one year later), he writes he wants the “best info fast. Judge whether good enough hit S.H. [Saddam Hussein] at same time. Not only UBL. [Usama bin Laden] Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not.” [ CBS, 9/4/02 ]
(2:50 p.m.): Air Force One lands at Offutt Air Force Base near Omaha, Nebraska. Bush stays on the plane for about 10 minutes before entering United States Strategic Command at 3:06. [ Salon, 9/12/01 (B) ] Bush is taken into an underground bunker designed to withstand a nuclear blast. There, he uses an advanced strategic command and communications center to teleconference directly with Vice President Cheney, National Security Advisor Rice, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, and members of the National Security Council. The meeting ends at 4:15. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 , Washington Times, 10/8/02 ] [2:50, Daily Mail, 9/8/02 , 2:50, Telegraph, 12/16/01 , 2:50, Salon, 9/12/01 (B) , 3:07, Associated Press, 8/19/02 ] Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, CIA Director Tenet, and Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta also participate in the teleconference. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
4:00 p.m.: CNN reports that US officials say there are “good indications” that Saudi militant bin Laden, suspected of coordinating the bombings of two US embassies in 1998, is involved in the attacks, based on “new and specific” information developed since the attacks. [ CNN, 9/12/01 ]
4:10 p.m.: Building 7 of the WTC complex is reported on fire. [ CNN, 9/12/01 ]
This photo of Bush speaking to Cheney shortly after leaving Offutt is later used for Republican fundraising. [White House]
(4:33 p.m.): President Bush leaves Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska for Washington. [4:30, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 4:30, CNN, 9/12/01 , 4:36, Telegraph, 12/16/01 , 4:36, Washington Times, 10/8/02 ]
5:20 p.m.: Building 7 of the WTC complex, a 47-story tower, collapses from ancillary damage. No one is killed. [5:20, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 5:20, CNN, 9/12/01 , 5:25, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 5:25, Associated Press, 8/19/02 ]
(6:54 p.m.): Bush arrives back at the White House, after exiting Air Force One at 6:42 and flying across Washington in a helicopter. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] [6:34, Salon, 9/12/01 (B) , 6:54, Washington Times, 10/8/02 , 6:54, CNN, 9/12/01 , 6:54, Telegraph, 12/16/01 , 7:00, Associated Press, 8/19/02 ]
(7:00 p.m.): Secretary of State Powell returns to Washington from Lima, Peru. Ten hours after the attacks began, he is finally able to speak to Bush for the first time when they both arrive at the White House at about the same time. Powell later says of his flight, “And the worst part of it, is that because of the communications problems that existed during that day, I couldn't talk to anybody in Washington.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] The Telegraph later theorizes, “Why so long? In the weeks before September 11 Washington was full of rumors that Powell was out of favor and had been quietly relegated to the sidelines…” [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
8:30 p.m.: Bush addresses the nation on live TV. [ CNN, 9/12/01 ] In what will later be called the Bush Doctrine, he states,“We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.” [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ]
9:00 p.m.: Bush meets with his full National Security Council, followed roughly half an hour later by a meeting with a smaller group of key advisers. Bush and his advisors have already decided bin Laden is behind the attacks. CIA Director Tenet says that al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan are essentially one and the same. Bush says, tell the Taliban we're finished with them. [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ]
(11:30 p.m.): Before going to sleep, Bush writes in his diary, “The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today. … We think it's Osama bin Laden.” [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ]
Points to keep in mind regarding entries of the day of 9/11:
The scrambling (sending into the air) of fighter aircraft at the first sign of trouble is a routine phenomenon. During the year 2000, there are 425 “unknowns”—pilots who didn't file or diverted from flight plans or used the wrong frequency. Fighters are scrambled in response 129 times in cases where problems are not immediately resolved. After 9/11, such scrambles go from about twice a week to three or four times a day. [ Calgary Herald, 10/13/01 ] Between September 2000 and June 2001, fighters are scrambled 67 times. [ Associated Press, 8/13/02 ] General Ralph E. Eberhart, NORAD Commander in Chief, says that before 9/11, “Normally, our units fly 4-6 sorties a month in support of the NORAD air defense mission.” [ FNS, 10/25/01 ]
“Consider that an aircraft emergency exists…when: … There is unexpected loss of radar contact and radio communications with any... aircraft.” [ FAA regulations (1) ]
“If…you are in doubt that a situation constitutes an emergency or potential emergency, handle it as though it were an emergency.” [ FAA regulations (2) ]
“Pilots are supposed to hit each fix with pinpoint accuracy. If a plane deviates by 15 degrees, or two miles from that course, the flight controllers will hit the panic button. They'll call the plane, saying ‘American 11, you're deviating from course.’ It's considered a real emergency, like a police car screeching down a highway at 100 miles an hour. When golfer Payne Stewart's incapacitated Learjet missed a turn at a fix, heading north instead of west to Texas, F-16 interceptors were quickly dispatched.” [ MSNBC, 9/12/01 ]
“A NORAD spokesman says 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, 9/15/01 ]
“In October [2002], Gen. Eberhart told Congress that ‘now it takes about one minute’ from the time that the FAA senses something is amiss before it notifies NORAD. And around the same time, a NORAD spokesofficer told the Associated Press that the military can now scramble fighters ‘within a matter of minutes to anywhere in the United States.’” [ Slate, 1/16/02 ]
The commander-in-chief of the Russian Air Force, Anatoli Kornukov, says the day after 9/11: “Generally it is impossible to carry out an act of terror on the scenario which was used in the USA yesterday…. As soon as something like that happens here, I am reported about that right away and in a minute we are all up.” [ Pravda, 9/12/01 ]
Supposedly, on 9/11, there are only four fighters on ready status in the Northeastern US, and only 14 fighters on permanent ready status in the entire US. [ BBC, 8/29/02 ] However, any number of additional fighters could be in the air or ready to fly at the time the 9/11 attacks begin, but exact numbers are not known.
Additionally, the Air Traffic Services Cell (ATSC), an office designed to facilitate communications between the FAA and the military, had just been given a secure Internet (Siprnet) terminal and other hardware six weeks earlier, “greatly enhancing the movement of vital information.” [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/10/02 ]
(5:53 a.m.): Hijackers Mohamed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari board a Colgan Air flight from Portland, Maine, to Boston. They are filmed going through security in Portland. This is the only footage of the hijackers in airports on 9/11, and it's not even one of the suicide flights. [ Time, 9/24/01 ] [5:45, New York Daily News, 5/22/02 , 5:45, FBI, 10/4/01 , 5:53, Miami Herald, 9/22/01 , strangely, the photos show two time stamps, one showing 5:45, the other showing 5:53]
(6:00 a.m.): Mohamed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari's flight from Portland, Maine to Boston takes off. [ FBI, 10/4/01 ] Two passengers later say Atta and Alomari board separately from each other, keep quiet, and don't draw attention to themselves. [ Washington Post, 9/16/01 , Chicago Sun-Times, 9/16/01 ]
(6:00 a.m.): President Bush has just spent the night at Colony Beach and Tennis Resort on Longboat Key, Florida. Surface-to-air missiles have been placed on the roof of the resort. [ Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 9/10/02 ] Bush wakes up around 6:00 a.m. and is preparing for his morning jog. [ MSNBC, 10/27/02 , New York Times, 9/16/01 , Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] A van occupied by men of Middle Eastern descent pull up to the Colony stating they have a “poolside” interview with the president. They are turned away for not having an appointment. [ Longboat Observer, 9/26/01 ] [ Time, 8/4/02 (B) ]
NORAD's war room in Cheyenne, Wyoming [Discover]
(6:30 a.m.): Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins and other NORAD employees at NEADS (NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector that covers the Washington and New York areas) are starting their work day. NORAD is unusually prepared on 9/11, because it is conducting a week-long semiannual exercise called Vigilant Guardian. [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] NORAD is thus fully staffed and alert, and senior officers are manning stations throughout the US. The entire chain of command is in place and ready when the first hijacking is reported. An article later says, “In retrospect, the exercise would prove to be a serendipitous enabler of a rapid military response to terrorist attacks on Sept. 11.” [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 ] ABC News later reports that because NORAD is “conducting training exercises [it] therefore [has] extra fighter planes on alert.” [ ABC News, 9/14/02 ] Colonel Robert Marr, in charge of NEADS, says, “We had the fighters with a little more gas on board. A few more weapons on board.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] The exercise poses “an imaginary crisis to North American Air Defense outposts nationwide.” [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] Accounts by participants vary on if 9/11 was the second, third, or fourth day of the exercise. [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 , Ottawa Citizen, 9/11/02 , Code One Magazine, 1/02 ]
(6:30 a.m.): A man has an argument with five Middle Eastern men over a parking space in the parking lot of Boston's Logan Airport. Later in the day he reports the event, and the car is discovered to have been rented by Mohamed Atta. Inside, police find a ramp pass, allowing access to restricted airport areas. [“About 6.30,” News of the World, 9/16/01 , time unknown, Miami Herald, 9/22/01 ]
The Colony Beach and Tennis Resort, where Bush stays the night before 9/11. [Colony Resort website]
(6:31 a.m.): Bush goes for a four-mile jog around the golf course at the Colony Beach and Tennis Resort. [6:30, Washington Post, 1/27/02 , 6:30, MSNBC, 10/27/02 , 6:32, Washington Times, 10/7/02 ]
(6:45 a.m.): “Approximately two hours prior to the first attack”, at least two workers at the instant messaging company Odigo receive messages warning of the WTC attack. This Israeli owned company has its headquarters two blocks from the WTC. [ Washington Post, 9/28/01 , Ha'aretz, 9/26/01 ]
6:50 a.m.: Mohamed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari's flight from Portland arrives on time at Boston's Logan Airport. [The book Inside 9-11: What Really Happened, 2/02]
(7:45 a.m.): Mohamed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari board Flight 11. Atta's bags contain airline uniforms and many other remarkable things, but are checked through to his final destination, making them unusable for the attacks. The bags are not loaded onto the plane in time and are later found by investigators. [ Boston Globe, 9/18/01 ] But at least two other hijackers on Flight 11 are able to use stolen uniforms and IDs to board the plane. [ Sunday Herald, 9/16/01 ] There is speculation that the bags were meant to be left behind and found. [ New Yorker, 10/1/01 ]
(Before 7:59 a.m.): Supposedly, nine of the 19 hijackers are selected for special screening before they board their planes. None of their names are known [ Washington Post, 3/2/02 (B) ], but one article makes clear hijackers Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi, already on a terrorist watch list for international flights, are not selected. [ Cox News, 10/21/01 ] Six of the nine are chosen for extra scrutiny by a computerized screening system, prompting a sweep of their checked baggage for explosives or unauthorized weapons. Two of the nine are chosen because of irregularities in their identification documents, and one is chosen for traveling with someone having such documents. After screening, all are allowed to board. [ Washington Post, 3/2/02 (B) ]
(Before 7:59 a.m.): Hijacker Mohamed Atta on Flight 11 calls hijacker Marwan Alshehhi in Flight 175 as both planes sit on the runway. They confirm the plot is on. [“Just before 8:00,” Time, 8/4/02 (B) ]
Flight 11's intended and actual routes. Why did the plane go so far northwest (before turning south), for seemingly no reason? [USA Today]
(7:59 a.m.): Flight 11 takes off from Boston's Logan Airport, 14 minutes after scheduled departure. [7:45 (actually the scheduled time), Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01 , 7:59, ABC News, 7/18/02 , 7:59, CNN, 9/17/01 , 7:59, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 7:59, Washington Post, 9/12/01 (C) , 8:00, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:00, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 8:00, Newsday, 9/10/02 ]
(8:00 a.m.): Bush sits down for his daily intelligence briefing. “The President's briefing appears to have included some reference to the heightened terrorist risk reported throughout the summer” but contained nothing serious enough to call National Security Adviser Rice. The briefing ends at about 8:20. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
United Airlines Flight 93, a Boeing 757.
8:01 a.m.: Flight 93 is delayed for 41 minutes on the runway in Newark, finally taking off at 8:42. The Boston Globe credits this delay as a major reason why this was the only one of the four flights not to succeed in its mission. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] [ Newsweek, 9/22/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ] Apparently Flight 93 has to wait in a line of about a dozen planes before it can take off. [ USA Today, 8/12/02 ]
8:13 a.m.: The last routine communication between ground control and the pilots of Flight 11. The pilot responds when told to turn right. But almost immediately afterwards he fails to respond to a command to climb. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , 8:13:31, New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) ]
American Airlines Flight 11, a Boeing 767.
(8:13 a.m.): Flight 11 is hijacked around this time. One flight controller says the plane is hijacked over Gardner, Massachusetts, less than 50 miles west of Boston. [ Nashua Telegraph, 9/13/01 ] The storming of the cockpit doesn't appear to happen until after 8:21, yet communication with ground control stops now. Fifteen minutes after takeoff, Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01 , “A few minutes into the flight,” ABC News, 7/18/02 ] As the Boston Globe put it, “It appears that the hijackers' entry was surprising enough that the pilots did not have a chance to broadcast a traditional distress call,” a button that would have taken only a few seconds to press. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ]
Flight 11's manifest. Such details on other flights haven't been released. [Edited, from AP and Sydney Morning Herald]
(After 8:13 a.m.): Shortly after flight controllers ask Flight 11 to climb to 35,000 feet, the transponder stops transmitting. The transponder is the electronic device that identifies the jet on the controller's screen, gives its exact location and altitude, and also allows a four-digit emergency hijack code to be sent. Air traffic manager Glenn Michael says later, “We considered it at that time to be a possible hijacking.” [“When given permission to climb to 35,000 feet,” Associated Press, 8/12/02 , “8:13:47—46R: AAL11, now climb maintain FL350,” New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) , shortly after trying emergency frequencies, Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01 ] “Just moments” after radio contact is lost (which is discussed by flight controllers at 8:15), the transponder is turned off. [ MSNBC, 9/15/01 ] NORAD officially says it is not notified the plane is hijacked until 8:40—27 minutes later, though one NORAD employee contradicts this (see 8:31 a.m. and (8:40 a.m.)). [ NORAD, 9/18/01 ] Colonel Robert Marr, head of NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector, later claims the transponder is turned off some time after 8:30. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
(After 8:14 a.m.): At some point after the hijacking begins, the pilot of Flight 11, John Ogonowski, activates the talk-back button, enabling Boston flight controllers to hear what is being said in the cockpit. A controller says, “The button was being pushed intermittently most of the way to New York.” An article later notes that “his ability to do so also indicates that he was in the driver's seat much of the way” to the WTC. Such transmissions continue until about 8:38. [ Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01 , MSNBC, 9/15/01 ]
Flight 175's intended and actual routes. [USA Today]
8:14 a.m.: Flight 175 takes off from Boston's Logan Airport, 16 minutes after the scheduled departure time. [ CNN, 9/17/01 , Washington Post, 9/12/01 , Guardian, 10/17/01 , Associated Press, 8/19/02 , Newsday, 9/10/02 ]
(8:15 a.m.): Boston flight control tries but fails to contact the pilots of Flight 11, even using emergency frequencies. [8:14, Guardian, 10/17/01 ] A Boston flight controller states of Flight 11, “He won't answer you. He's nordo roger thanks”. Nordo means “no radio.” [8:15, New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) , “over the Hudson river,” CNN, 9/17/01 ]
8:20 a.m.: Flight 11 stops transmitting its IFF (identify friend or foe) beacon signal. [ CNN, 9/17/01 ]
(8:20 a.m.): Flight 11 starts to veer dramatically off course around this time. [USA Today flight path image, on this page] Recall that if a plane goes two miles off course, it should be considered an emergency situation. [ MSNBC, 9/12/01 ]
(8:20 a.m.): Boston flight control decides that Flight 11 has probably been hijacked, but apparently it doesn't notify other flight control centers for another five minutes, and don't notify NORAD for about another 20 minutes. [“About 8:20,” Newsday, 9/23/01 , “about 8:20,” New York Times, 9/15/01 (C) ] ABC News will later say, “There doesn't seem to have been alarm bells going off, traffic controllers getting on with law enforcement or the military. There's a gap there that will have to be investigated.” [ ABC News, 9/14/01 ]
Flight 77's intended and actual routes. Note the strange loop off course about halfway along the route to the west. This loop doesn't show on most flight route maps. [USA Today]
(8:20 a.m.): Flight 77 departs Dulles International Airport near Washington, ten minutes after the scheduled departure time. [8:20, CNN, 9/17/01 , 8:20, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 8:20, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:21, Associated Press, 8/19/02 ]
Daniel Lewin.
(Before 8:21 a.m.): Four hijackers get up from their seats and stab or shoot passenger Daniel Lewin, who once belonged to the Israel Defense Force, Sayeret Matkal, a top-secret counter-terrorist unit. He was sitting in front of one of the three hijackers in business class. A very preliminary FAA memo says Lewin is shot by Satam Al Suqami at 9:20. Clearly the time is a typo; perhaps 8:20 is meant? [ ABC News, 7/18/02 , UPI, 3/6/02 , Washington Post, 3/2/02 (B) ]
(8:21 a.m.): Inside Flight 11 and near the back of the plane, flight attendant Betty Ong calls Vanessa Minter at American Airlines reservations in North Carolina, using a seatback GTE Airfone. She begins relaying information to manager Craig Marquis at American Airlines' operations center in Fort Worth, but she can't transfer the call. Another supervisor named Nydia Gonzales also listens in from 8:27. Ong talks for 25 minutes, until the plane crashes. The FBI says that only the first four minutes were recorded, but won't release the tape. Other flight attendants relay information about what is happening in the front. She says the hijackers sprayed something in the first-class cabin to keep people out of the front of the plane. It burns her eyes and she is having trouble breathing. In hushed tones, she tells of a passenger dead (presumably Daniel Lewin) and a crew member dying. [“25 minute phone call until crash,” ABC News, 7/18/02 , Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , USA Today, 8/13/02 ]
Flight attendants Amy Sweeney (left) and Betty Ong (right).
(8:21 a.m.): Another Flight 11 attendant, Amy Sweeney, calls American Airlines ground manager Michael Woodward and speaks calmly to him for 25 minutes until the plane crashes. Supposedly the call is not recorded but Woodward took notes. [ ABC News, 7/18/02 ] However, the Boston Globe says it has a transcript of the call. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] Her first comment is, “Listen, and listen to me very carefully. I'm on Flight 11. The airplane has been hijacked.” She identifies four hijackers (not the five said to be on the plane) and gives the seat numbers for them. Even before the plane crashes, staff are able to determine the names, phone numbers, addresses, and credit card information for these four hijackers, including Mohamed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari. She reports that two flight attendants have been stabbed and a passenger has had his throat slashed. She says the hijackers seem to be of Middle Eastern descent. [“Over the next 25 minutes,” ABC News, 7/18/02 , Associated Press, 10/5/01 ]
(After 8:21 a.m.): While flight attendant Amy Sweeney is relating details on the phone about the hijackers, the men are storming the front of the plane. She says they “just gained access to the cockpit.” It's probable she calls just after the storming begins, and it is during this struggle when the hijackers stab the two first-class flight attendants nearest to the cockpit, Barbara Arestegui and Karen Martin. Sweeney says the hijackers have a bomb with yellow wires attached. [ ABC News, 7/18/02 , Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01 ] If so, he would have begun the hijack around 8:13, but would only received reinforcements and had Mohamed Atta take over the flying of the plane around now. [ Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01 , Associated Press, 10/5/01 , ABC News, 7/18/02 ]
Flight 11 pilot John Ogonowski.
(8:24 a.m.): The pilot of Flight 11, John Ogonowski, activates the talk-back button, enabling Boston flight controllers to hear a hijacker on Flight 11 say to the passengers: “We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you will be OK. We are returning to the airport.” A controller responds, “Who's trying to call me?” The hijacker continues, “Everything will be OK. If you try to make any moves you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet.” [8:24:38, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:24:38, New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) , 8:24, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , 8:28, New York Times, 9/12/01 , before 8:28, Channel 4 News, 9/13/01 ] Immediately after hearing this voice, the controller “knew right then that he was working a hijack.” [ Village Voice, 9/13/01 ] Ben Sliney, the FAA's National Operations Manager, soon hears of the message “We have some planes” and later says the phrase haunts him all morning. [ USA Today, 8/13/02 ]
8:25 a.m.: 2004-04-08 Boston flight controllers notify other flight control centers of the Flight 11 hijacking, but supposedly they don't notify (NORAD for another 6 or 15 minutes (see 8:31 a.m. and (8:40 a.m.)). [8:25:00, Guardian, 10/17/01 ] Note that this means the controllers working Flights 77 and Flight 93 would have been aware of Flight 11's hijacking from this time. [ Village Voice, 9/13/01 ]
8:28 a.m.: Boston flight control radar sees Flight 11 making an unplanned 100-degree turn to the south (they're already way off-course). Flight controllers say they never lost sight of the flight, though they could no longer determine altitude once the transponder was turned off. [ Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01 ] Before this turn, the FAA had tagged Flight 11's radar dot for easy visibility, and at American Airlines headquarters at least, “All eyes watched as the plane headed south. On the screen, the plane showed a squiggly line after its turn near Albany, then it straightened.” [ Wall Street Journal, 10/15/01 ] “Boston Center could still track it on primary radar….” [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] Boston flight controller Mark Hodgkins later says, “I watched the target of American 11 the whole way down.” [ ABC, 9/6/02 ] Clearly, an early report stating, “Boston airport officials said they did not spot the plane's course until it had crashed, and said the control tower had no unusual communication with the pilots or any crew members” [ Washington Post, 9/12/01 (C) ], is incorrect, as is another account that says flight controllers only find Flight 11 at 8:42. [ Newsday, 9/10/02 ] But apparently NEADS, part of NORAD, has different radar, and even at 8:40 they cannot find Flight 11. Boston has to periodically update NEADS on Flight 11's position by telephone until NEADS finally finds it a few minutes before it crashes into the WTC. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 , ABC News, 9/11/02 , Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ]
8:30 a.m.: The FAA's Air Traffic Control System Command Center in Herndon, Virginia has their usual daily senior staff meeting. The national operations manager interrupts the meeting to report a possible hijacking in progress. Later, a supervisor interrupts the meeting to report a flight attendant on the hijacked aircraft may have been stabbed. The meeting breaks up before the first WTC crash at 8:46.
Secretary of State Colin Powell leaves Lima, Peru after hearing the news. [AFP]
(Around 8:30 a.m.): Just prior to learning about the 9/11 attacks, many of the US's leaders are scattered across the US and overseas. Vice President Cheney and National Security Advisor Rice are at their offices in the White House. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld is at his office in the Pentagon, meeting with a delegation from Capitol Hill. Secretary of State Powell is in Lima, Peru. CIA Director Tenet is at breakfast with his old friend and mentor, former senator David Boren (D), at the St. Regis Hotel, three blocks from the White House. General Henry Shelton, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is flying across the Atlantic on the way to Europe. Attorney General Ashcroft is flying to Milwaukee. FBI Director Mueller is in his office at FBI headquarters on Pennsylvania Avenue. [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ] Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta is at his office at the Department of Transportation. [ Senate Commerce Committee, 9/20/01 ] Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Joe Allbaugh is at a conference in Montana. [ ABC News, 9/14/02 (B) ] George Bush Sr. is supposedly on a flight from Washington to St. Paul, Minnesota, and has his plane diverted to Milwaukee when the air ban begins. [ Time, 9/24/01 (C) ]
8:31 a.m.: 2004-04-08 NORAD employee Lt. Colonel Dawne Deskins later says that Boston flight control notifies NORAD of Flight 77's hijacking at this time, not at 8:40 as has been widely reported, even by Deskins previously (see (8:40 a.m.)) or another account claiming 8:34 (see 8:34 a.m.). [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Another later report states, “Shortly after 8:30 a.m., behind the scenes, word of a possible hijacking [reaches] various stations of NORAD.” [ ABC News, 9/14/02 ]
8:33 a.m.: Flight controllers hear a hijacker on Flight 11 say to the passengers: “Nobody move, please, we are going back to the airport. Don't try to make any stupid moves.” [8:33, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , 8:33:59, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:33:59, New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) ]
8:34 a.m.: FAA Administrator Jane Garvey later testifies that NORAD is notified Flight 11 has been hijacked. [ New York Times, 12/30/03 ] This contradicts both the account of one NORAD employee who says it happens three minutes earlier (see 8:31 a.m.), and NORAD's official account, which claims it happens six minutes later (see (8:40 a.m.)).
Air National Guard troops at NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) try to locate hijacked aircraft. [Aviation Week and Space Technology]
(8:35 a.m.): Bush's motorcade leaves for Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Florida. [8:30, Washington Post, 1/27/02 , 8:35, Sarasota Magazine, 9/19/01 , 8:39, Washington Times, 10/7/02 ] He said farewell to the management at the Colony Beach and Tennis Resort at 8:20. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
(8:36 a.m.): On Flight 11, flight attendant Betty Ong reports that the plane tilts all the way on one side and then becomes horizontal again. Flight attendant Amy Sweeney then reports on her phone that the plane has begun a rapid descent. [“About 15 minutes” after the calls began, ABC News, 7/18/02 ]
8:37 a.m.: Flight controllers ask the Flight 175 pilots to look for a lost American Airlines plane 10 miles to the south—a reference to Flight 11. They respond that they can see it. They are told to keep away from it. [8:37:08, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:37, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , the incident is not included in New York Times flight controller transcript of New York Times, 10/16/01 (B) ]
(8:38 a.m.): Flight 11 pilot John Ogonowski's periodic activation of the talk-back button, begun around 8:14, stops around this time. It is suggested that means this is when the hijackers replace him as pilot. [ Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01 , MSNBC, 9/15/01 ]
NORAD commander Larry Arnold. [Code One]
(8:40 a.m.): 2004-04-08 Boston flight control supposedly notifies NORAD that Flight 11 has been hijacked (another accounts say it happens earlier (see 8:31 a.m. and 8:34 a.m.). [8:38, CNN, 9/17/01 , 8:38, Washington Post, 9/12/01 (B) , 8:40, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 8:40, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 8:40, Newsday, 9/10/02 ] Tech. Sgt. Jeremy Powell, a member of the Air National Guard at NEADS, part of NORAD, takes the call from Boston Center. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 , Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] He gives the phone to Lt. Colonel Dawne Deskins, regional Mission Crew Chief for the Vigilant Guardian exercise: “I picked up the line and I identified myself to the Boston Center controller, and he said, we have a hijacked aircraft and I need to get you some sort of fighters out here to help us out.” Deskins then tells Colonel Robert Marr, head of NEADS, “I have FAA on the phone, the shout line, Boston Center. They said they have a hijacked aircraft.” Marr then calls Major General Larry Arnold at NORAD's command Center in Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida, and says, “Boss, I need to scramble [fighters at] Otis [Air National Guard Base].” Arnold later says, “I said go ahead and scramble them, and we'll get the authorities later.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Deskins later says that initially she and “everybody” else at NEADS thought the call was part of the Vigilant Guardian exercise. After the phone call she had to clarify to everyone that it was not a drill. [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] NORAD commander Major General Larry Arnold in Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida, also says that when he hears of the hijacking at this time, “The first thing that went through my mind was, is this part of the exercise? Is this some kind of a screw-up?” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
(8:40 a.m.): Major Daniel Nash (codenamed Nasty) and Lt. Col. Timothy Duffy (codenamed Duff) are the two F-15 pilots who would scramble after Flight 11 and then Flight 175. Nash says that at this time, a colleague at the Otis Air National Guard Base tells him that a flight out of Boston has been hijacked, and to be on alert. [ Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02 ] NEADS senior technician Jeremy Powell also later says that he telephones Otis Air Base and tells it to upgrade its “readiness posture.” [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] Duffy also says he is told in advance about the hijacking by the FAA in Boston. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 ] Nash and Duffy put on their flight gear and get ready. [ Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02 ] They are already halfway to their jets when “battle stations” are sounded. Duffy briefs Nash on what he knows, and, “About 4-5 minutes later, we [get] the scramble order and [take] off.” [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 ]
United Airlines Flight 175, a Boeing 767.
8:41 a.m.: The pilots of Flight 175 tell ground control about Flight 11, “We figured we'd wait to go to your center. We heard a suspicious transmission on our departure out of Boston. Someone keyed the mike and said: ‘Everyone stay in your seats.’ It cut out.” [8:41, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:41, Newsday, 9/10/02 , 8:41:32, New York Times, 10/16/01 (B) ] An alternate version: “We heard a suspicious transmission on our departure from B-O-S [Boston's airport code]. Sounds like someone keyed the mike and said, ‘Everyone, stay in your seats.’” [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] The last transmission from Flight 175, still discussing this message, comes a few seconds before 8:42. [ New York Times, 10/16/01 (B) ]
Flight 93's intended and actual routes. [USA Today]
(8:42 a.m.): Flight 93 takes off from Newark International Airport, bound for San Francisco. It leaves 41 minutes late because of heavy runway traffic. [ MSNBC, 9/3/02 ] [8:41, Newsweek, 9/22/01 , 8:41, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 8:42, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 , 8:42, CNN, 9/17/01 , 8:42, Guardian, 10/17/01 ]
8:42 a.m.: Flight 175 veers from its official course. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] (An early CNN reports says the deviation happens at 8:50, but that's probably when the plane, already off-course, makes a complete U-turn north.) [ CNN, 9/17/01 ]
8:42 a.m.: A flight controller says of Flight 175, “… looks like he's heading southbound but there's no transponder no nothing and no one's talking to him.” [ New York Times, 10/16/01 (B) ]
Brian Sweeney, right, and Peter Hanson, left, both called from Flight 175.
(Before 8:43 a.m.): At some unknown time period, businessman Peter Burton Hanson calls his father from Flight 175 and says, “Oh, my God! They just stabbed the airline hostess. I think the airline is being hijacked.” Despite being cut off twice, he manages to report how men armed with knives are stabbing flight attendants, apparently in an attempt to force crew to unlock the doors to the cockpit. He calls again and says good-bye just before the plane crashes. [ Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 , BBC, 9/13/01 ]
8:43 a.m.: NORAD is notified that Flight 175 has been hijacked. [8:43, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 8:43, CNN, 9/17/01 , 8:43, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 8:43, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 8:43, Newsday, 9/10/02 ] Apparently NORAD doesn't need to be notified, because by this time NEADS technicians have their headsets linked to the FAA in Boston to hear about Flight 11, and so NORAD learns instantly about Flight 175. [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ]
8:44 a.m.: The pilot of US Airlines Flight 583 tells flight control, regarding Flight 175, “I just picked up an ELT [emergency locator transmitter] on 121.5 it was brief but it went off.” The controller responds, “O.K. they said it's confirmed believe it or not as a thing, we're not sure yet…” [ New York Times, 10/16/01 (B) ]
8:44 a.m.: 2004-04-08 Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld is talking about terrorism in the Pentagon. According to Representative Cox, at the meeting, Rumsfeld says, “Let me tell ya. I've been around the block a few times. There will be another event.” He then repeats it for emphasis, “There will be another event.” [ Associated Press, 9/16/01 (C) , Rep. Cox Statement, 9/11/01 ] According to Rumsfeld himself, “I had said at an 8:00 o'clock breakfast that sometime in the next two, four, six, eight, ten, twelve months there would be an event that would occur in the world that would be sufficiently shocking that it would remind people again how important it is to have a strong healthy defense department that contributes to—That underpins peace and stability in our world.” [ CNN, 12/5/01 ]
F-15 pilot Major Daniel Nash. []
(8:45 a.m.): Just prior to the crash of Flight 11, flight attendant Amy Sweeney is asked on the phone if she can recognize where she is. She says, “I see the water. I see the buildings. I see buildings,” then after a pause, a quiet “Oh, my God!” Mere seconds later the line goes dead. Meanwhile, flight attendant Betty Ong ends her call repeating the phrase “Pray for us” over and over. Apparently there is quiet instead of screaming in the background. [ ABC News, 7/18/02 ]
8:46 a.m.: Two little known French documentary filmmakers are filming a documentary on New York City firefighters about ten blocks from the WTC. One of them hears a roar, looks up, and captures a distant image of the first WTC crash. They continue shooting footage nonstop for many hours, and their footage is first shown that evening on CNN. [ New York Times, 1/12/02 , Atlanta Journal and Constitution, 9/19/01 ] So Bush's claim that he sees the first attack live on TV is technically impossible (see (9:01 a.m.)).
(8:46 a.m.): Two F-15 fighters are ordered to scramble from Otis Air National Guard Base in Massachusetts to find Flight 11, approximately 190 miles from the known location of the plane and 188 miles from New York City. Fighters in nearer bases are not scrambled. [8:39, Channel 4 News, 9/13/01 , 8:44, CNN, 9/17/01 , 8:44, Washington Post, 9/15/01 , 8:44, Los Angeles Times, 9/17/01 , 8:46, NORAD, 9/18/01 ] Supposedly, the scramble order comes after only one phone call—the decision is made to act first and get clearances later. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 ] According to the two pilots, Major Daniel Nash and Lt. Col. Timothy Duffy, they are geared up and walking toward their planes when this alarm to scramble sounds. As soon as they strap in, the green light to launch goes on, and they're up even before their jets' radar kicks in. [ Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02 ]
Flight 11 hits the WTC North Tower at 8:46. Note that few images exist of this hit. [Gamma Press]
8:46:26 a.m.: 2004-04-08 Flight 11 slams into the north tower, 1 World Trade Center. [8:45, CNN, 9/12/01 , 8:45, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 8:46, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 8:46, CNN, 9/17/01 , 8:46, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 8:46, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 8:46, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 8:46, USA Today, 9/3/02 , 8:46, USA Today, 8/13/02 , 8:46, Newsday, 9/10/02 , 8:47:00, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:48, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 8:46:26, New York Times, 9/11/02 , 8:46:26, seismic records, USA Today, 12/20/01 ] Investigators believe the plane still has about 10,000 gallons of fuel and is traveling 470 mph. [ New York Times, 9/11/02 ] It strikes the 93rd through 98th floors in the 110 story building. At the crash point and above, approximately 1,360 people die and none survived. Below the crash line, approximately 72 die and more than 4,000 survive. Both towers are slightly less than half full, with between 5,000 to 7,000 in each tower. This is mainly because many office workers haven't shown up to work yet and tourists to the observation deck opening at 9:30 have yet to arrive. USA Today, 12/20/01 ]
The hole caused by the Flight 11 crash [Reuters]
(8:46 a.m.): Flight 175 stops transmitting its transponder signal, according to some reports. It is 50 miles north of New York City, headed toward Baltimore. [8:46:18, Guardian, 10/17/01 , “about the same time” as Flight 11 crash, Newsday, 9/10/02 ] Note that at 8:42, a flight controller said, “There's no transponder no nothing.” [ New York Times, 10/16/01 (B) ] However, the transponder is turned off for only about 30 seconds, then changed to a signal that is not designated for any plane on that day. [ Newsday, 9/10/02 ] This “allow[s] controllers to track the intruder easily, though they couldn't identify it.” [ Washington Post, 9/17/01 ]
8:46 a.m.: At the time of the first WTC crash, three F-16s assigned to Andrews Air Force Base 10 miles from Washington are flying an air-to-ground training mission on a range in North Carolina, 207 miles away. Eventually they are recalled to Andrews and land there at some point after Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02 ]
American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757.
(8:46 a.m.): Flight 77 from Washington goes severely off course. It heads due north for a while, then flies due south and gets back on course. It is off course by around 15 miles, and stays off course for about five minutes, judging from flight path maps. [See USA Today's Flight 77 flight path]
(After 8:46 a.m.): Bush will say in a speech later that evening: “Immediately following the first attack, I implemented our government's emergency response plans.” [ White House.gov, 9/11/01 ]
(After 8:46 a.m.): Shortly after the WTC is hit, the FAA has an open telephone line with the Secret Service, keeping them informed of all events. [Cheney: “The Secret Service has an arrangement with the FAA. They had open lines after the World Trade Center was… ”—he stops himself before finishing the sentence, NBC, Meet the Press, 9/16/01 ]
(After 8:46 a.m.): Brigadier General Montague Winfield is in command of the National Military Command Center (NMCC), “the military's worldwide nerve center.” [ CNN, 9/4/02 ] According to NORAD command director Captain Michael Jellinek, at some point not long after the WTC hit, telephone links are established with the National Military Command Center (NMCC) located inside the Pentagon (but on the opposite side from where the Pentagon explosion will happen), Canada's equivalent command center, Strategic Command, theater commanders, and federal emergency-response agencies. An Air Threat Conference Call is initiated. At one time or another, Bush, Cheney, key military officers, leaders of the FAA and NORAD, the White House, and Air Force One are heard on the open line. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 , CNN, 9/4/02 , ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Says Winfield, “All of the governmental agencies there that, that were involved in any activity that was going on in the United States at that point, were in that conference.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] The call continues right through the Pentagon explosion, as the NMCC doesn't even feel the impact. [ CNN, 9/4/02 ] However, despite being in the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld doesn't join the NMCC or the call until 10:30 (see 10:30 a.m.).
(After 8:46 a.m.): A few minutes after the 8:46 WTC crash, CIA Director Tenet is told of the crash while he is eating breakfast with former Senator David Boren. Boren says Tenet is told that the WTC has been attacked by an airplane: “I was struck by the fact that [the messenger] used the word attacked.” Tenet then hands a cell phone back to an aide and says to Boren, “You know, this has bin Laden's fingerprints all over it.” [ ABC News, 9/14/02 ]
(Between 8:46-9:03 a.m.): As soon as Boston flight controllers hear news that a plane might have hit the WTC, they know it was Flight 11. They have been tracking it continually since it began behaving erratically. It takes “several minutes” for Boston to report to NORAD that Flight 11 is responsible. [ New York Times, 9/13/01 (F) , Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] However, flight controllers in New York City complain that they aren't given a conclusive report of what happened to Flight 11 until just before Flight 175 crashes at 9:03. “We had 90 to 120 seconds; it wasn't any 18 minutes,” says one controller, referring to the actual elapsed time between the two crashes. Another controller says: “They dove into the airspace. By the time anybody saw anything, it was over.” [ New York Times, 9/13/01 (F) ]
In this map, the yellow star is roughly where Bush's motorcade is when Flight 11 crashes at 8:46, and the orange star is where he is when told about the crash a few minutes later. [Made with Yahoo Maps]
(Between 8:46-8:55 a.m.): When Flight 11 hits the WTC at 8:46, Bush's motorcade is crossing the John Ringling Causeway on the way to Booker Elementary from the Colony Beach & Tennis Resort on Longboat Key. [ Washington Times, 10/8/02 ] Sarasota Magazine claims that Bush is on Highway 301, just north of Main Street when he is told that a plane had crashed in New York City. [ Sarasota Magazine, 9/19/01 ] Around the same time, news photographer Eric Draper is riding in another car in the motorcade with Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, and overhears Fleischer say on a cell phone, “Oh, my God, I don't believe it. A plane just hit the World Trade Center.” Fleischer is told he will be needed on arrival to discuss reports of the crash. [ Christian Science Monitor, 9/17/01 , Albuquerque Tribune, 9/10/02 ] Fleischer is told this “just minutes” after the first news reports. [ MSNBC, 10/27/02 ] Congressman Dan Miller also says he is told about the crash just before meeting Bush at Booker at 8:55. [ Sarasota Magazine, 9/19/01 ] Some reporters waiting for him to arrive also learn of the crash just minutes after it happens. [ CBS, 9/11/02 (B) ]
(8:48 a.m.): 2004-04-08 The first news reports appear on TV and radio that a plane may have crashed into the WTC. [ New York Times, 9/15/01 (C) , CNN, 9/11/01 ] Many reports don't come until a few minutes later. For instance ABC first breaks into regular programming with the story at 8:52. [ ABC News, 9/14/02 ]
Joint Chiefs of Staff Vice Chairman Richard Myers (left) fills in for Chairman Harry Shelton (right), who is out of contact. [Reuters]
(After 8:48 a.m.): Air Force General Richard Myers, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, sees the first WTC crash on television. Myers will be acting Chairman of the US military during the 9/11 crisis because Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army General Henry Shelton is flying in a plane across the Atlantic. He sees the TV in an outer office of Senator Max Cleland, but he says, “They thought it was a small plane or something like that,” so he goes ahead and meets with Cleland. He says “nobody informed us” about the second WTC crash, and remains oblivious that there is an emergency, only leaving the meeting with Cleland right as the Pentagon explosion takes place at 9:38. [ AFPS, 10/23/01 , ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Yet, in testimony on September 13, 2001, he states, “after the second tower was hit, I spoke to the commander of NORAD, General Eberhart. And at that point, I think the decision was at that point to start launching aircraft.” [ General Myers' Senate confirmation hearing, 9/13/01 ] NORAD claims the first fighters are scrambled even before the first WTC hit. [ NORAD, 9/18/01 ]
8:50 a.m.: The last radio contact with Flight 77 is made when the pilots ask for clearance to fly higher. But then they fail to respond to a routine instruction. [ Guardian, 10/17/01 , Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , 8:50:51, New York Times, 10/16/01 (D) ]
(After 8:50 a.m.): “During the hour or so that American Airlines Flight 77 [is] under the control of hijackers, up to the moment it struck the west side of the Pentagon, military officials in [the Pentagon's National Military Command Center (see (After 8:46 a.m.))] [are] urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to do.” [ New York Times, 9/15/01 (C) ]
(8:50 a.m.): Rich “Doc” Miles, manager of United's Chicago system operations center, receives a call from a mechanic at an airline maintenance center in San Francisco that takes in-flight calls from flight attendants about broken items. The mechanic says a female flight attendant from Flight 175 just called and said, “Oh my God. The crew has been killed, a flight attendant has been stabbed. We've been hijacked.” Then the line went dead. A dispatcher monitoring the flight then sends messages to the plane's cockpit computer but gets no response. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ]
A typical F-15.
8:52 a.m.: Two F-15s take off from Otis ANG Base, six minutes after being ordered to go after Flight 11, which has already crashed. [8:52, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 8:52, CNN, 9/17/01 , 8:53, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 8:52, Washington Post, 9/15/01 , 8:52, ABC News, 9/11/02 ] This is 38 minutes after flight controllers lost contact with the plane. They go after Flight 175 instead. According to Lt. Col. Timothy Duffy, one of the pilots, before takeoff, a fellow officer had told him “This looks like the real thing.” He says, “It just seemed wrong. I just wanted to get there. I was in full-blower all the way.” A NORAD commander has said the planes were stocked with extra fuel as well. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 ] An F-15 can travel over 1875 mph. [ Air Force News, 7/30/97 ] Duffy later says, “As we're climbing out, we go supersonic on the way, which is kind of nonstandard for us.” He says his target destination is over Kennedy airport in New York City. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] According to Major Gen. Paul Weaver, director of the Air National Guard, “The pilots [fly] ‘like a scalded ape,’ topping 500 mph but [are] unable to catch up to the airliner.” [ Dallas Morning News, 9/16/01 ] ABC News later says, “The fighters are hurtling toward New York at mach 1.2, nearly 900 miles per hour.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] NORAD commander Major General Larry Arnold says they head straight for New York City at about 1100 to 1200 mph. [ MSNBC, 9/23/01 (C) , Slate, 1/16/02 ] “An F-15 departing from Otis can reach New York City in 10 to 12 minutes, according to an Otis spokeswoman.” [ Cape Cod Times, 9/16/01 ] At an average speed of 1125 mph, they would reach the city in 10 minutes—9:02. So if NORAD commander Arnold's speed is correct, these fighters should reach Flight 175 just before it crashes.
(After 8:52 a.m.): William Wibel, principal of a school inside Otis Air National Guard Base in the Cape Cod region of Massachusetts, is inside the Otis base preparing for a meeting. He hears about the WTC attack and is told the meeting is canceled. He says, “As I drove away, and was listening to the news on the radio, the 102nd was scrambling into duty.” [ Cape Cod Times, 9/12/01 ]
8:53 a.m.: A flight controller says to other airplanes in the sky regarding Flight 175, “We may have a hijack. We have some problems over here right now.” [ Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:53:23, New York Times, 10/16/01 (B) ]
White House Situation Room Director Deborah Loewer.
(Before 8:55 a.m.): Captain Deborah Loewer, director of the White House Situation Room, is traveling in Bush's motorcade toward a Saratoga elementary school. She receives a message from her deputy in the White House Situation Room about the first WTC crash. As soon as the motorcade reaches the school, she runs from her car to Bush's car, and passes the message on to Bush. [ Catholic Telegraph, 12/7/01 , Associated Press, 11/26/01 ] However, it appears Bush already knows (see (Between 8:46-8:55 a.m.)).
Bush's motorcade arrives at Booker Elementary. [A still from Booker video]
(8:55 a.m.): Bush's motorcade arrives at Booker Elementary School. [8:46, ABC News, 9/11/02 , 8:55, Washington Times, 10/7/02 , 8:55, Sarasota Magazine, 9/19/01 , “just before 9:00,” Telegraph, 12/16/01 , “shortly before 9:00,” Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 9/10/02 , “just before 9:00,” New York Times, 9/16/01 , 9:00, Albuquerque Tribune, 9/10/02 ] The trip is said to take 20 minutes, which confirms he arrives around 8:55, if it is true he left around 8:35. [ New York Times, 9/16/01 , St. Petersburg Times, 9/8/02 (B) , MSNBC, 10/27/02 ]
(8:55 a.m.): 2004-04-08 A public announcement is broadcast inside the WTC South Tower, saying that the building is secure and people can return to their offices. [ New York Times, 9/11/02 , click on interactive popup] Such announcements continue until a few minutes before the building is hit, and “may [lead] to the deaths of hundreds of people.” No one knows exactly what is said (though many later recall the phrase “the building is secure”) or who gives the authority to say it. [ USA Today, 9/3/02 ] Additionally, security agents inside the building repeated similar messages. For instance, one survivor recounts hearing, “Our building is secure. You can go back to your floor. If you're a little winded, you can get a drink of water or coffee in the cafeteria.” [ New York Times, 9/13/01 (G) ] Another survivor recalls a crowd actually running over a man with a bullhorn encouraging them to return to their desks. [ Newsday, 9/12/01 ] However, despite messages to the contrary, about two-thirds of the tower's occupants evacuate during the 17 minutes between the attacks. [ USA Today, 12/20/01 ]
Karl Rove [Reuters], Andrew Card [AP], and Dan Bartlett.
(Between 8:55 and 9:00 a.m.): Just after the WTC crash, the beepers of politicians' aides are going off with news of the first WTC crash as Bush arrives and enters Booker Elementary School. According to photographer Eric Draper, standing nearby, Bush advisor Karl Rove rushes up, takes Bush aside in a corridor, and tells him about the calamity. Rove says the cause of the crash was unclear. Bush replies, “What a horrible accident!” Bush also suggests the pilot may have had a heart attack. [ Daily Mail, 9/8/02 ] Dan Bartlett, White House Communications Director, also says he is there when Bush is told: “[Bush] being a former pilot, had kind of the same reaction, going, was it bad weather? And I said no, apparently not.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] One account explicitly says that Rove tells Bush the WTC has been hit by a large commercial airliner. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] However, Bush later remembers Rove saying it appeared to be an accident involving a small, twin-engine plane. [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ] In a later recollection, Bush recalls that it is chief of staff Andrew Card who first warns him and says, “‘Here's what you're going to be doing; you're going to meet so-and-so, such-and-such.’ And Andy Card says, ‘By the way, an aircraft flew into the World Trade Center.’” [ Washington Times, 10/7/02 ] Says a reporter who was standing nearby, “From the demeanor of the President, grinning at the children, it appeared that the enormity of what he had been told was taking a while to sink in.” [ Daily Mail, 9/8/02 ] [“Shortly before 9:00,” Daily Mail, 9/8/02 , “just before 9:00,” Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
Booker Elementary principal Gwen Tose-Rigell. [A still from Booker video]
(Between 8:55-9:00 a.m.): Just after Bush arrives at Booker Elementary School and is briefly told of the WTC crash, he is whisked into a holding room and updated on the situation via telephone by National Security Advisor Rice. [ Christian Science Monitor, 9/17/01 , ] Rice later claims, “He said, what a terrible, it sounds like a terrible accident. Keep me informed.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] School principal Gwen Tose-Rigell is then summoned to a room to talk with the President: “He said a commercial plane has hit the World Trade Center, and we're going to go ahead and go on, we're going on to do the reading thing anyway.” [ Associated Press, 8/19/02 (D) ] One local reporter notes that at this point, “He could and arguably should have left Emma E. Booker Elementary School immediately, gotten onto Air Force One and left Sarasota without a moment's delay.” [ Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 9/12/01 (B) ]
(8:56 a.m.): Flight 77's transponder signal is turned off. [8:56, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 8:56, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , “six minutes before” Flight 175 hits WTC, Newsday, 9/23/01 ] Just prior to this, Flight 77 turns around over northeastern Kentucky, and starts heading back toward Washington. [ Washington Post, 9/12/01 , Newsday, 9/23/01 ] For some minutes the plane is missing because flight controllers are looking for the radar signal toward the west and don't realize the plane is headed east. Rumors circulate that the plane might have exploded in midair. [ Newsday, 9/23/01 ]
(8:56 a.m.): The New York Times later writes, “‘American 77, Indy,’ the controller said, over and over. ‘American 77, Indy, radio check. How do you read?’ By 8:56 a.m., it was evident that Flight 77 was lost.” Yet the same newspaper then points out NORAD is not notified about it for another 28 minutes and doesn't find that strange! [ New York Times, 10/16/01 (D) ] Another New York Times article points out that flight controllers learn Flight 77 has been hijacked “within a few minutes” of 8:48. [ New York Times, 9/15/01 (C) ]
8:58 a.m.: Brian Sweeney on Flight 175 tries to call his wife but can only leave a message. “We've been hijacked, and it doesn't look too good.” He calls his mother and tells her what's happening onboard. [ Hyannis News, 9/13/01 , ]
9:00 a.m.: The Pentagon moves its alert status up one notch from normal to Alpha. It stays on Alpha until after Flight 77 hits, and then goes up two more notches to Charlie later on in the day. [ USA Today, 9/16/01 ]
(After 9:00 a.m.): United warns all of its aircraft of the potential for cockpit intrusion and to take precautions to barricade cockpit doors. Flight 93 pilots acknowledge the message. [“Just after 9:00,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 ]
(9:01 a.m.): Bush later makes the following statement: “And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower—the TV was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, ‘There's one terrible pilot.’ And I said, ‘It must have been a horrible accident.’ But I was whisked off there—I didn't have much time to think about it.” [ ] He has repeated the story on other occasions. [ White House, 1/5/02 , CBS, 9/11/02 ] However, it has been noted that Bush doesn't have access to a television until 15 or so minutes later. [ Washington Times, 10/7/02 ] A Boston Herald article later says, “Think about that. Bush's remark implies he saw the first plane hit the tower. But we all know that video of the first plane hitting did not surface until the next day. Could Bush have meant he saw the second plane hit—which many Americans witnessed? No, because he said that he was in the classroom when Card whispered in his ear that a second plane hit.” The article points out that Bush had told the story more than once, and asks, “ How could the commander-in-chief have seen the plane fly into the first building—as it happened?” [ Boston Herald, 10/22/02 ]
(9:01 a.m.): An unidentified woman in the La Guardia control tower speaks to a Port Authority police officer. La Guardia is one of a couple major New York City airports, and the Port Authority patrol both the WTC and the city's airports. The woman asks the officer what has happened at the WTC, and the officer replies he's learned from the news that a plane crashed into it. [ New York Times, 12/30/03 ] Around the same time, one flight controller in the tower says to another, “But you don't know anything.” The other responds, “We don't know. We're looking at it on Channel 5 right now.” [ Bergen Record, 1/4/04 ] “Nothing on the [later released transcripts] shows that the La Guardia controllers knew that the planes flying into their airspace had been seized by terrorists, or that military aircraft were screaming in pursuit over the Hudson River.” Port Authority officials appear to be equally oblivious (see also 9:13 a.m.). [ New York Times, 12/30/03 ]
(Between 9:01-9:03 a.m.): Flight 175 is an unmarked blip to flight controllers in New York City. One controller stands up in horror. “No, he's not going to land. He's going in!” “Oh, my God! He's headed for the city,” another controller shouts. “Oh, my God! He's headed for Manhattan!” [ ]
(Before 9:02): At some point before the second WTC crash, FAA's command center sets up a teleconference with FAA facilities in the New York area. Also on the same floor of the same building is “the military cell”—the Air Traffic Services Cell, created by the FAA and the Defense Department for use when needed to coordinate priority aircraft movement during warfare or emergencies. “The Pentagon staffs it only three days per month for refresher training, but Sept. 11 happen[s] to be one of those days.” [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 12/17/01 ]
Flight 175 an instant before it hits the WTC south tower. [AP]
9:02:54 a.m.: 2004-04-08 Flight 175 hits the south tower, 2 World Trade Center. [9:02, CNN, 9/17/01 , 9:02, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 9:02, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 9:03, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 9:03 (based on seismic data), New York Times, 9/12/01 , 9:03, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 9:03, CNN, 9/12/01 , 9:03, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 9:03, Newsday, 9/10/02 , 9:03, USA Today, 9/3/02 , 9:03, USA Today, 8/13/02 , 9:05, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 9:05, Washington Post, 1/27/02 , 9:02:54, New York Times, 9/11/02 , 9:02:54, seismic records, USA Today, 12/20/01 ] Millions watch the crash live on television. The plane strikes the 78th through 84th floors in the 110 story building. Approximately 100 people are killed or injured in the initial impact; 600 people in the tower eventually die. All but four work above the crash point. The death toll is far lower than in the north tower because about two-thirds of the tower's occupants get out in the 17 minutes after the first tower is struck (see also (8:55 a.m.)). [ USA Today, 12/20/01 ] F-15 fighter jets from Otis Air National Guard Base are still 71 miles or eight minutes away when the tower is hit. [ NORAD, 9/18/01 ]
Flight 175 hits the WTC south tower at 9:03.
(9:03 a.m. and After): The minute Flight 175 hits the south tower, F-15 pilot Major Daniel Nash says that clear visibility allows him to see smoke pour out of Manhattan, even though NORAD says he is 71 miles away. However, he says he can't recall actually being told of the Flight 11 hit. [ Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02 ] He isn't told about the danger of Flight 175 until after it too has crashed and he is 60 miles away. [ ABC News, 9/14/02 ] And instead of being ordered to New York City, the two F-15s are ordered to hover in a 150-mile chunk of air space off the coast of Long Island. Nash states,“Neither the civilian controller or the military controller knew what they wanted us to do.” But then a few minutes later, they receive orders to head to Manhattan for combat air patrol, and they do that for the next four hours. At no point are these pilots given permission to shoot down any airliners. Nash points out that even if he had reached New York City before Flight 175, he couldn't have shot it down because only the President could make that decision and he was indisposed at a public event. [ Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02 ] The pilot of the other fighter, Lt. Col. Timothy Duffy, says that after Flight 175 has crashed, “at that point they [say] the second aircraft just hit the World Trade Center. That was news to me. I thought we were still chasing American 11.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
(9:03 a.m.): According to Sarasota County Sheriff Bill Balkwill, just after Bush enters a Booker Elementary classroom, a Marine responsible for carrying Bush's phone walks up to Balkwill, who is standing in a nearby side room. While listening to someone talk to him in his earpiece, the Marine asks, “Can you get me to a television? We're not sure what's going on, but we need to see a television.” Three Secret Service agents, a SWAT member, the Marine and Balkwill turn on the television in a nearby front office just as Flight 175 crashes into the WTC. “We're out of here,” the Marine tells Balkwill. “Can you get everyone ready?” [ Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 9/10/02 ]
Bush meets teacher Sandra Kay Daniels. [A still from Booker video]
(9:03-9:06 a.m.): Bush enters Sandra Kay Daniels' second-grade class for a photo-op to promote Bush's education policies. [ Daily Mail, 9/8/02 ] Numerous reporters who travel with the president, as well as members of the local media, watch from the back of the room. [ Associated Press, 8/19/02 (D) ] Altogether there about 150 people in the room, 16 of them the children in the class. He is introduced to the children and poses for a number of staged pictures. The teacher then leads the students through some reading exercises (video footage shows this lasts about three minutes). [ Salon, 9/12/01 (B) ] Bush later claims that while he is doing this lesson, he is thinking what he will say about the WTC crash. “I was concentrating on the program at this point, thinking about what I was going to say. Obviously, I felt it was an accident. I was concerned about it, but there were no alarm bells.” [ Washington Times, 10/7/02 ] The children are just getting their books from under their seats to read a story together when Chief of Staff Andrew Card comes in to tell Bush of the second WTC crash (see (9:06 a.m.)). [ Daily Mail, 9/8/02 ] [9:02, Washington Times, 10/8/02 , 9:03, Telegraph, 12/16/01 , 9:04, Daily Mail, 9/8/02 , according to photographer Eric Draper, who is in the room] Note that Card comes in at the conclusion of the first half of the planned lesson, and “[seizes] a pause in the reading drill to walk up to Mr. Bush's seat.” [ Washington Times, 10/7/02 , Washington Times, 10/8/02 ]
(9:03-9:08 a.m.): 2004-04-08 In a series of stages, flight control managers ban aircraft from flying near the cities used by the hijackers. First, takeoffs and landings in New York City are stopped within a minute of the Flight 175 crash, without asking for permission from Washington. Boston and Newark follow suit in the next few minutes. Around 9:08, departures nationwide heading to or through New York and Boston airspace are canceled. [ Associated Press, 8/12/02 , Newsday, 9/10/02 , Associated Press, 8/19/02 , USA Today, 8/13/02 ] The actual order to stop all planes from taking off at New York's La Guardia airport is given to the airplanes on the ground at 9:07. [ New York Times, 12/30/03 ] Also “a few minutes” after the Flight 175 crash into the WTC at 9:03, all takeoffs from Washington are stopped. [ USA Today, 8/12/02 , USA Today, 8/13/02 ]
(After 9:03 a.m.): Controllers at the New York traffic center are briefed by their supervisors to watch for airplanes whose speed indicated that they are jets, but which either are not responding to commands or have disabled their transponders. “Controllers in Washington [get] a similar briefing, which [help] them pick out hijacked planes more quickly.” [ New York Times, 9/13/01 (F) ]
Vice President Cheney (pointing finger) with Rice and others in the underground bunker Cheney was carried into. This facility is called the Presidential Emergency Operations Center. [White House]
(After 9:03 a.m.): Secret Service agents burst into Vice President Cheney's White House office. They carry him under his arms—nearly lifting him off the ground—and propel him down the steps into the White House basement and through a long tunnel toward an underground bunker. [“Just after 9:00,” ABC News, 9/14/02 (B) , around 9:06 when Bush is being told of the second WTC hit, New York Times, 9/16/01 , same time Bush is being told, Telegraph, 12/16/01 , shortly after Bush's speech at 9:30, CBS, 9/11/02 , 9:32, Washington Post, 1/27/02 ] At about the same time, National Security Adviser Rice is told to go to the bunker as well. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Accounts of when this happens vary widely, from around 9:03 to 9:32. But since ABC News claims Cheney is in the bunker when he is told Flight 77 is 50 miles away from Washington, accounts of this taking place after 9:27 appear to be incorrect (see (9:27 a.m.)). The one eyewitness account, David Bohrer, a White House photographer, says it takes place just after 9:00. [ ABC News, 9/14/02 (B) ]
NEADS commander Robert Marr. [BBC]
(After 9:03 a.m.): Shortly after the second WTC crash, calls from fighter units start “pouring into NORAD and sector operations centers, asking, ‘What can we do to help?’ At Syracuse, New York, an ANG commander [tells Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) commander Robert] Marr, ‘Give me 10 min. and I can give you hot guns. Give me 30 min. and I'll have heat-seeker [missiles]. Give me an hour and I can give you slammers [Amraams].’” Marr replies, “I want it all.” [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 ] Supposedly, Marr says, “Get to the phones. Call every Air National Guard unit in the land. Prepare to put jets in the air. The nation is under attack.” [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] Canadian Major General Eric Findley, based in Colorado and in charge of NORAD that day, supposedly has his staff immediately order as many fighters in the air as possible. [ Ottawa Citizen, 9/11/02 ] Yet another account says those calls don't take place until about an hour later: “By 10:01 a.m., the command center began calling several bases across the country for help.” In fact, it appears the first fighters don't take off from Syracuse until 10:44. This is over an hour and a half after Syracuse's initial offer to help, and not long after a general ban on all flights, including military ones, is lifted (see (9:26 a.m.) and 10:31 a.m.). These are apparently the first fighters scrambled from the ground aside from three at Langley, two at Otis, an unknown number of fighters from Andrews near Washington, and two fighters that take off from Toledo at 10:16. [ Toledo Blade, 12/9/01 ]
(After 9:03 a.m.): Brigadier General Montague Winfield, commander of the NMCC, the Pentagon's emergency response center, later says, “When the second aircraft flew into the second tower, it was at that point that we realized that the seemingly unrelated hijackings that the FAA was dealing with were in fact a part of a coordinated terrorist attack on the United States.” [ ABC News, 9/14/02 ]
(After 9:03 a.m.): A few minutes after 9:03 a.m., the Secret Service calls Andrews Air Force Base, located 10 miles from Washington. They are notified to get F-16s armed and ready to fly. Missiles are still being loaded onto the F-16s when the Pentagon is hit over half an hour later. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02 ] The problem with this account is that prior to 9/11, the District of Columbia Air National Guard (located at Andrews) had a publicly stated mission “to provide combat units in the highest possible state of readiness.” Shortly after 9/11 this mission statement on its website is changed, so it merely has a “vision” to “provide peacetime command and control and administrative mission oversight to support customers, DCANG units, and NGB in achieving the highest levels of readiness.” [ DCANG Home Page (before and after the change)]
(9:05 a.m.): West Virginia flight control notices a new eastbound plane entering its radar with no radio contact and no transponder identification. They are not sure it is Flight 77. Supposedly they wait another 19 minutes before notifying NORAD about it. [“About 9:05”, Newsday, 9/23/01 ]
9:06 a.m.: All air traffic facilities nationwide are notified that the Flight 11 crash into the WTC was probably a hijacking. [ House Committee, 9/21/01 , Newsday, 9/23/01 ]
Andrew Card tells Bush the second WTC tower has been hit. See a video of Bush's reaction here: [White House via AP]
(9:06 a.m.): Bush is in a Booker Elementary School second-grader classroom. His chief of staff, Andrew Card, enters the room and whispers into his ear, “A second plane hit the other tower, and America's under attack.” [ New York Times, 9/16/01 ] [9:05, New York Times, 9/16/01 , 9:05, Telegraph, 12/16/01 , 9:05, Albuquerque Tribune, 9/10/02 , 9:07, Washington Times, 10/8/02 , ABC News reporter Ann Compton, who is in the room, says she is struck “So much so that I [write] it down in my reporter's notebook, by my watch, 9:07 a.m.,” ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Intelligence expert James Bamford describes Bush's reaction: “Immediately [after Card speaks to Bush] an expression of befuddlement passe[s] across the President's face. Then, having just been told that the country was under attack, the Commander in Chief appear[s] uninterested in further details. He never ask[s] if there had been any additional threats, where the attacks were coming from, how to best protect the country from further attacks…. Instead, in the middle of a modern-day Pearl Harbor, he simply turn[s] back to the matter at hand: the day's photo op.” [Body of Secrets, James Bamford, 4/02 edition, p. 633] Bush continues listening to the goat story. Then, in an event noticeable in its absence, as one newspaper put it, “For some reason, Secret Service agents [do] not bustle him away.” [ Globe and Mail, 9/12/01 ] Bush later says of the experience, “I am very aware of the cameras. I'm trying to absorb that knowledge. I have nobody to talk to. I'm sitting in the midst of a classroom with little kids, listening to a children's story and I realize I'm the Commander in Chief and the country has just come under attack.” [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] Bush continues to listen to the goat story for about ten more minutes (see (9:06-9:16 a.m.)). The reason given is that, “Without all the facts at hand, George Bush ha[s] no intention of upsetting the schoolchildren who had come to read for him.” [ MSNBC, 10/27/02 ]
9:10 a.m.: According to released transcripts, a caller from the Port Authority police desk tells a La Guardia Airport control tower employee, that “they are considering [the crashes into the WTC] a criminal act.” the control tower employee replies, “We believe that, and we are holding all aircraft on the ground.” [ Associated Press, 12/29/03 ] La Guardia is one of a couple major New York City airports, and the Port Authority patrol both the WTC and the city's airports.
Bush listens to the Pet Goat story.
(9:06-9:16 a.m.): Bush, having just been told of the second WTC crash (see (9:06 a.m.)), does not leave the Sarasota, Florida, classroom he entered around 9:03. Rather, he stays and listens as 16 Booker Elementary School second-graders take turns reading a story called Pet Goat, about a girl's pet goat. [ AFP, 9/7/02 ] They are just about to begin reading when Bush is warned of the attack. One account says that the classroom is then silent for about 30 seconds, maybe more. Bush then picks up the book and reads with the children “for eight or nine minutes.” [ Tampa Tribune, 9/1/02 ] In unison, the children read out loud, “The—Pet—Goat. A—girl—got—a—pet—goat. But—the—goat—did—some— things—that—made—the—girl's— dad—mad.” And so on. Bush mostly listens, but does ask the children a few questions to encourage them. [ Washington Times, 10/7/02 ] At one point he says, “Really good readers, whew! … These must be sixth-graders!” [ ] In the back of the room, Press Secretary Ari Fleischer catches Bush's eye and holds up a pad of paper for him to read, with “DON'T SAY ANYTHING YET” written on it in big block letters. [ Washington Times, 10/7/02 ] CNN reported in 1999, “Only the president has the authority to order a civilian aircraft shot down.” [ CNN, 10/26/99 ] The pilot of one of the planes flying to catch Flight 175 notes that it wouldn't have mattered if he caught up with it, because only Bush could order a shootdown, and Bush is at a public event at the time. [ Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02 ]
9:09 a.m.: Supposedly, NORAD orders F-16s at Langley Air Force Base, Virginia, on battle stations alert. Around this time, the FAA command center reports 11 aircraft either not in communication with FAA facilities, or flying unexpected routes. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 ] One of the pilots who actually takes off from Langley later says the battle stations alert isn't sounded until 9:24. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 64-65]
9:13 a.m.: A flight controller at La Guardia Airport in New York City is called by a Port Authority police officer. The officer asks, “They are inquiring whether or not you can call Kennedy's tower, because they can't get through, and inquire whether or not they had any contact with these aircrafts.” The flight controller responds, “At this time, we do not think that anyone in the F.A.A. had any contact with them.” [ New York Times, 12/30/03 ] “Kennedy” is a reference to John. F. Kennedy Airport, another major airport in New York City. Port Authority police, who patrol both the WTC and the airports, seek information from the controllers about the hijackers. But the controllers are unable to offer any news (see also (9:01 a.m.)). [ New York Times, 12/30/03 ]
9:15 a.m.: American Airlines orders no new takeoffs in the US; United Airlines follows suit five minutes later. [ Wall Street Journal, 10/15/01 ]
9:16 a.m.: The FAA informs NORAD that Flight 93 may have been hijacked. No fighters are scrambled in specific response, now or later (there is the possibility some fighters sent after Flight 77 later head toward Flight 93). Although this is what CNN is told by NORAD, its not clear why NORAD claims the flight is hijacked at this time (and NORAD's own timeline inexplicably fails to say when the FAA told them about the hijack, the only flight for which they fail to provide this data). [ CNN, 9/17/01 , NORAD, 9/18/01 ] However, there may be one explanation: Fox News later reports, “Investigators believe that on at least one flight, one of the hijackers was already inside the cockpit before takeoff.” Cockpit voice recordings indicate that the pilots believed their guest was a colleague “and was thereby extended the typical airline courtesy of allowing any pilot from any airline to join a flight by sitting in the jumpseat, the folded over extra seat located inside the cockpit.” [ Fox News, 9/24/01 ]
9:17 a.m.: 2004-04-08 The FAA shuts down all New York City area airports. [ CNN, 9/12/01 , New York Times, 9/12/01 ] A flight controller at La Guardia airport reports the taxiways, runways, and airspace completely clear at 9:37. [ New York Times, 12/30/03 ]
Bush with his Pet Goat book in Sandra Kay Daniels' elementary school classroom. [Eric Draper]
(9:16 a.m.): Bush leaves the Sarasota classroom where he has been since about 9:03. The children finish their lessons and put away their readers. [ Sarasota Magazine, 9/19/01 ] Bush advises the children to stay in school and be good citizens. [ Tampa Tribune, 9/1/02 , St. Petersburg Times, 9/8/02 (B) ] He also tells the children, “Thank you all so very much for showing me your reading skills.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] One student also asks Bush a question, and Bush gives a quick response on his education policy. [ New York Post, 9/12/02 ] A reporter asks, “Mr. President, are you aware of the reports of the plane crash in New York? Is there any…” This question is interrupted by an aide who has come into the room, saying, “All right. Thank you. If everyone could please step outside.” Bush then says, “We'll talk about it later.” [ CBS, 9/11/02 (B) ] Bush then tells school principal Gwen Tose-Rigell, who is in the room, about the terror attacks and why he has to leave. [ Washington Times, 10/7/02 ] He then goes into an empty classroom next door and meets with his staff there. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Bush's program with the children was supposed to start at 9:00 and end 20 minutes later. [ Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 9/16/01 ]
Bush in a holding room before giving his speech. Communications director Dan Bartlett points to the TV, and the clock reads 9:25. [White House]
(Between 9:16-9:29 a.m.): Bush works with his staff to prepare a speech he will deliver at 9:29. He intermittently watches the television coverage in the room. [ Albuquerque Tribune, 9/10/02 ] He also speaks on the phone to advisors, first calling National Security Advisor Rice, then Vice President Cheney, then New York Governor George Pataki. [ Daily Mail, 9/8/02 ]
9:21 a.m.: The New York City Port Authority closes all bridges and tunnels in New York City. [ MSNBC, 9/22/01 , CNN, 9/12/01 , New York Times, 9/12/01 , Associated Press, 8/19/02 ]
9:24 a.m.: The FAA notifies NORAD that Flight 77 “may” have been hijacked and appears to be headed toward Washington. [9:24, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 9:24, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 9:25, CNN, 9/17/01 , 9:25, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 9:25, Guardian, 10/17/01 ] CNN notes that “after the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) warned the military's air defense command that a hijacked airliner appeared to be headed toward Washington, the federal government failed to make any move to evacuate the White House, Capitol, State Department or the Pentagon.” [ CNN, 9/16/01 ] A Pentagon spokesman says, “The Pentagon was simply not aware that this aircraft was coming our way.” Even Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and his top aides in the Pentagon remain unaware of any danger up to the moment of impact 14 minutes later. [ Newsday, 9/23/01 ] Most senators and congresspeople are in the Capitol building, which is not evacuated until 9:48 (see 9:48 a.m.). Only Vice President Cheney, National Security Advisor Rice and possibly a few others, are evacuated to safety a few minutes after 9:03 (see (After 9:03 a.m.)). Yet, since at least the Flight 11 crash, “military officials in a command center [the National Military Command Center] on the east side of the [Pentagon] [are] urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to do.” [ New York Times, 9/15/01 (C) ]
9:24 a.m.: A fighter pilot codenamed Honey who flew one of the F-16s from Langley offers a different story than the official one. He claims that at this time a battle stations alert sounds, and two other pilots are given the order to climb into their F-16s and await further instructions. Then, Honey, who is the supervisor, goes and talks to the two other pilots. Then, “five or ten minutes later,” a person from NORAD calls, and Honey speaks to him at the nearby administrative office. He is told that all three of them are ordered to scramble. Honey goes to his living quarters, grabs his flight gear, puts it on, runs to his plane, and takes off. It's hard to know exactly how long all of this takes, but clearly his recollection doesn't jibe with the official timeline, that NORAD orders the fighters scrambled at 9:27 and they take off at 9:30. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 64-65]
Ted Olson. [Salon] Since 9/11 he has been trying to prevent the release of Vice President Cheney's energy task force papers. [Telegraph, 3/5/02]
(9:25 a.m.): A passenger on Flight 77, Barbara Olson, calls her husband, Theodore (Ted) Olson, who is Solicitor General at the Justice Department. Ted Olson is in his Justice Department office watching WTC news on television when his wife calls. A few days later, he says, “She told me that she had been herded to the back of the plane. She mentioned that they had used knives and box cutters to hijack the plane. She mentioned that the pilot had announced that the plane had been hijacked.” [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) ] He tells her that two planes have hit the WTC. [ Telegraph, 3/5/02 ] She feels nobody is taking charge. [ CNN, 9/12/01 ] He doesn't know if she was near the pilots, but at one point she asks, “What shall I tell the pilot? What can I tell the pilot to do?” [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) ] Then she gets cut off without warning. [ Newsweek, 9/29/01 ] Ted Olson' recollection of the call's timing is extremely vague, saying it “must have been 9:15 or 9:30. Someone would have to reconstruct the time for me.” [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) ] Other accounts place it around 9:25. [About 9:25, Miami Herald, 9/14/01 , about 9:25, New York Times, 9/15/01 (C) , “by 9:25,” ] The call is said to have lasted about a minute. [ Washington Post, 9/12/01 (B) ] By some accounts, his warning of that planes have hit the WTC comes later in a second phone call (see (After 9:30 a.m.)). [ ] In one account, Barbara Olson calls from inside a bathroom. [ Evening Standard, 9/12/01 ] In another account, she is near a pilot, and in yet another she is near two pilots. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] Three days after 9/11, he says, “I found out later that she was having, for some reason, to call collect and was having trouble getting through. You know how it is to get through to a government institution when you're calling collect.” He says he doesn't know what kind of phone she used, but he has “assumed that it must have been on the airplane phone, and that she somehow didn't have access to her credit cards. Otherwise, she would have used her cell phone and called me.” [ Fox News, 9/14/01 ] But in another interview on the same day, he says that she used a cell phone and that she may have gotten cut off “because the signals from cell phones coming from airplanes don't work that well.” [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) ] Six months later, he claims she called collect “using the phone in the passengers' seats.” [ Telegraph, 3/5/02 ] Many other details are conflicting, and Olson faults his memory and says that he “tends to mix the two [calls] up because of the emotion of the events.” [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) ] The couple liked to joke that they were at the heart of what Hillary Clinton famously called a “vast, right-wing conspiracy.” Ted Olson was a controversial choice as Solicitor General, since he argued on behalf of Bush before the Supreme Court in the 2000 presidential election controversy before being chosen. Barbara Olson was known for her extremely partisan attacks on President Clinton. For instance, a few weeks before 9/11 she had called Clinton's mother a “barfly” who let herself be used by men. [ Telegraph, 3/5/02 ] Some have questioned if Ted Olson can be trusted in his account of the call, since he has stated that lying to the public is justifiable. [ Sydney Morning Herald, 3/20/02 ]
(After 9:25 a.m.): Theodore (Ted) Olson, the Justice Department's Solicitor General, calls the Justice Department's control center to tell about his wife's call from Flight 77 (see (9:25 a.m.)). Accounts vary whether the Justice Department already knows of the hijack or not. [ Washington Post, 9/12/01 (B) , Channel 4 News, 9/13/01 , New York Times, 9/15/01 (C) ] Olson merely says, “They just absorbed the information. And they promised to send someone down right away.” He assumes they then “pass the information on to the appropriate people.” [ Fox News, 9/14/01 ]
FAA Administrator Jane Garvey
(9:25 a.m.): The Flight 93 pilots check in with Cleveland flight control, uttering “good morning.” [ Newsweek, 11/25/01 ]
FAA National Operations Manager Ben Sliney [USA Today]
(9:26 a.m.): 2004-04-08 Jane Garvey, head of the FAA, “almost certainly after getting an okay from the White House, initiate[s] a national ground stop, which forbids takeoffs and requires planes in the air to get down as soon as reasonable. The order, which has never been implemented since flying was invented in 1903, applie[s] to virtually every single kind of machine that can takeoff—civilian, military, or law enforcement.” Military and law enforcement flights are allowed to resume at 10:31 a.m. A limited number of military flights—the FAA won't reveal details—are allowed to fly during this ban. [ Time, 9/14/01 ] Garvey later calls it “a national ground stop … that prevented any aircraft from taking off.” [ House Committee, 9/21/01 ] However, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta later says he was the one to give the order: “As soon as I was aware of the nature and scale of the attack, I called from the White House to order the air traffic system to land all aircraft, immediately and without exception.” [ State Department, 9/20/01 ] 4,452 planes are flying in the continental US at the time. A later account says Ben Sliney, the FAA's National Operations Manager, makes the decision without consulting his superiors, like Jane Garvey, first. It would be remarkable if Sliney was the one to make the decision, because 9/11 is Sliney's first day on the job as National Operations Manager, “the chess master of the air traffic system.” [ USA Today, 8/13/02 ] When he had accepted the job a couple of months earlier, he had asked, “What is the limit of my authority?” The man who had promoted him replied, “Unlimited.” [ USA Today, 8/13/02 (B) ] Yet another account, by Linda Schuessler, manager of tactical operations at the FAA Command Center where Sliney was located, says, “…it was done collaboratively… All these decisions were corporate decisions. It wasn't one person who said, Yes, this has got to get done.” [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 12/17/01 ] About 500 planes land in the next 20 minutes, and then much more urgent orders to land are issued at 9:45 a.m. [ USA Today, 8/13/02 ] [9:25, Time, 9/14/01 , 9:25, USA Today, 8/13/02 , 9:26, House Committee, 9/21/01 , 9:26, Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 , 9:26, Newsday, 9/23/01 , 9:26, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 9:26, Newsday, 9/10/02 ]
(Before 9:27 a.m.): On Flight 93, at least three of the hijackers stand up and put red bandanas around their heads. Two of them force their way into the cockpit. One takes the loudspeaker microphone, apparently unaware it could also be heard by flight controllers, and announces that someone has a bomb onboard and the flight is returning to the airport. He tells them he is the pilot, but speaks with an accent. [“The best estimation is about 40 minutes into the flight” (9:22), Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) , “about 40 minutes into its flight,” Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , “about 9:28,” Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 208]
Flight controller Danielle O'Brien. [ABC]
(9:27 a.m.): Vice President Cheney and National Security Advisor Rice, in their bunker below the White House, are told by an aide that an airplane is 50 miles outside Washington and headed toward it. The plane is Flight 77. Federal Aviation Deputy Chief Monty Belger says, “Well we're watching this target on the radar, but the transponder's been turned off. So we, have no identification.” They are given further notices when the plane is 30 miles away, then 10 miles away, until it disappears from radar (time unknown, but the plane is said to be traveling about 500 mph and was 30 miles away at 9:30, so 50 miles would be about 3 minutes before that). [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] The Dulles tower flight controller who is said to first spot Flight 77's appearance near Washington, Danielle O'Brien, previously claims she doesn't find its radar blip until it is around 12 and 14 miles from Washington, and that Cheney is notified only after that. [ ABC, 10/24/01 , ABC, 10/24/01 (B) ]
(9:27 a.m.): NORAD orders three F-16 fighters scrambled from Langley Air Force Base in Virginia to intercept Flight 77. Langley is 129 miles from Washington. Ready aircraft at Andrews Air Force Base, 15 miles away, are not scrambled. [ Newsday, 9/23/01 ] [9:24, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 9:27, CNN, 9/17/01 , 9:25, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 9:35, CNN, 9/17/01 , 9:35, Washington Post, 9/15/01 ] One of the three pilots, Major Dean Eckmann, later says he is told before scrambling that the WTC has been hit by a plane. [ Associated Press, 8/19/02 (C) ]
Tom Burnett.
(9:27 a.m.): Tom Burnett calls his wife Deena and says, “I'm on United Flight 93 from Newark to San Francisco. The plane has been hijacked. We are in the air. They've already knifed a guy. There is a bomb on board. Call the FBI.” Deena connects to emergency 911. [9:27, “she scribbled down what Tom told her and noted the time,” Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 107, ABC News, 9/12/01 , “within minutes” of 9:28, MSNBC, 7/30/02 , “She recalls it was around 6:20 a.m.–9:20 Eastern time,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) , “shortly after” Jeremy Glick's call, Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 ] His wife Deena wonders if the call might have been before the cockpit was taken over, because he spoke quickly and quietly as if he was being watched. He also had a headset like phone operators use, so he could have made the call unnoticed. Note that original versions of this conversation appear to have been censored. The most recent account has the phone call ending with, “We are in the air. The plane has been hijacked. They already knifed a guy. One of them has a gun. They're saying there is a bomb onboard. Please call the authorities.” [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 107] The major difference from earlier accounts, of course, is the mention of a gun. The call wasn't recorded, but Deena's call immediately afterwards to 911 was, and she states on that, “They just knifed a passenger and there are guns on the plane.” [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 108] This is the first of over 30 additional phone calls by passengers inside the plane. [ MSNBC, 7/30/02 ]
(9:28 a.m.): On Flight 93, “there are the first audible signs of problems, in background cockpit noise.” Flight controllers hear the sound of screaming and scuffling over an open mike. They then hear hijackers speaking in Arabic to each other. Yet this is at least 12 minutes after at least one hijacker has taken over the cockpit and done something to cause the FAA to notify NORAD of a hijacking. [9:28, Guardian, 10/17/01 , after 9:25, Newsweek, 11/25/01 ]
(9:28 a.m.): On Flight 93, flight controllers hear someone say, “Get out of here,” through an open microphone in the cockpit. The mike goes off and comes back on. Scuffling is heard in the background. Somebody again yells, “Get out of here!” Eventually there are a total of four murky radio transmissions, which include lots of non-English phrases, “bomb on board” twice, “our demands” and “keep quiet.” [“probably around the time the plane was taken over,” Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , 9:28, MSNBC, 7/30/02 , 9:30, Observer, 12/2/01 , 9:32: “90 minutes into the flight,” Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 ] Newsweek repeats possibly the same story, but suggests it happened at 9:58: “The last transmission from the cockpit records someone, probably a hijacker, screaming ‘Get out of here. Get out of here.’ Then grunting, screaming and scuffling. Then silence.” [ Newsweek, 9/22/01 ]
President Bush speaks at 9:29 in the library of Booker Elementary School. [From Booker Elementary website]
9:29 a.m.: Still inside Booker Elementary School, Bush gives a brief speech in front of about 200 students, plus many teachers and reporters. [ Daily Mail, 9/8/02 ] He says, “Today we've had a national tragedy. Two airplanes have crashed into the World Trade Center in an apparent terrorist attack on our country” (see the text of the speech here [ Federal News Service, 9/11/01 ]). [9:24, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 9:28, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 9:30, CNN, 9/12/01 , 9:30, New York Times, 9/12/01 , speech begins at 9:29:55 according to an ABC News timing device, advanced schedule 9:30 in Federal News Service, 9/10/01 ]
9:30 a.m.: United begins landing all of its flights inside the US. American Airlines follows suit five minutes later. [ Wall Street Journal, 10/15/01 ]
A typical F-16.
9:30 a.m.: Radar tracks Flight 77 as it closes to within 30 miles of Washington. [ CBS News, 9/21/01 ]
9:30 a.m.: The three F-16s scrambled toward Flight 77 get airborne. [9:30, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 9:30, ABC News, 9/11/02 , 9:35, Washington Post, 9/12/01 ] The pilots' names are Major Brad Derrig, Captain Craig Borgstrom, and Major Dean Eckmann, all from the North Dakota Air National Guard's 119th Fighter Wing but stationed at Langley. [ Associated Press, 8/19/02 (C) , ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
(9:30 a.m.): The FAA's emergency operations center gets up and running, five minutes after the FAA issued an order grounding all civilian, military, and law enforcement aircraft. [ Time, 9/14/01 ]
(9:30 a.m.): Chris Stephenson, the flight controller in charge of the Washington airport tower, says that he is called by the Secret Service around this time. He is told an unidentified aircraft is speeding toward Washington. Stephenson looks at the radarscope and sees Flight 77 about five miles to the west. He looks out the tower window and sees the plane turning to the right and descending. He follows it until it disappears behind a building in nearby Crystal City, Virginia. [ USA Today, 8/12/02 ] However, according to another account, just before 9:30 a.m., a controller in the same tower has an unidentified plane on radar, “heading toward Washington and without a transponder signal to identify it. It's flying fast, she says: almost 500 mph. And it's heading straight for the heart of the city. Could it be American Flight 77? The FAA warns the Secret Service.” [ USA Today, 8/13/02 ] So does the Secret Service warn the FAA, or vice versa?
(9:30 a.m.): Flight controllers mistakenly suspect that Delta Flight 1989, flying west over Pennsylvania, has been hijacked. The controllers briefly suspect the sound of hijackers' voices in Flight 93 is coming from this plane, only a few miles away. The flight “joins a growing list of suspicious jets. Some of their flight numbers will be scrawled on a white dry-erase board throughout the morning” at FAA headquarters. Miscommunications lead to further suspicion of Flight 1989 even after the source of the hijacker's message is confirmed to come from Flight 93. The flight lands in Cleveland at 10:10. Eventually, about 11 flights will be suspected, with four of them actually hijacked. [ USA Today, 8/13/02 (B) ]
(9:30 a.m.): The transponder signal from Flight 93 ceases and radar contact is lost. [9:30, MSNBC, 9/3/02 , 9:40, CNN, 9/17/01 ] However, the plane can still be tracked, and is tracked at least at United headquarters until shortly before the final crash (the exact time is not mentioned). However, altitude can no longer be determined. The plane's speed begins to vary wildly, moving between 600 and 400 mph before eventually settling around 400 mph. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 77, 214]
(9:30 a.m.): The hijackers make an announcement to the passengers on Flight 77, telling them to phone their families as they are “all going to die”. They also tell the passengers that they are going to hit the White House. [“When they took over the controls,” Sunday Herald, 9/16/01 , “around 9:30,” Cox News, 10/21/01 ]
Right wing author and political commentator Barbara Olson. [CNN]
(After 9:30 a.m.): About five minutes after Barbara Olson called her husband Ted Olson, the Justice Department's Solicitor General, she calls again (note the timing of both calls is extremely vague.) [About 9:30, five minutes after first call, Miami Herald, 9/14/01 ] A few days later, Ted Olson describes the conversation: “She said the plane had been high hijacked shortly after takeoff and they had been circling around, I think were the words she used. She reported to me that she could see houses. I asked her which direction the plane was going. She paused—there was a pause there. I think she must have asked someone else. She said I think it's going northeast…. She told me that [the hijackers] did not know she was making this phone call.” [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) ] She doesn't mention the nationality, number, or other details of the hijackers. Then the phone goes dead, he doesn't know why. [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) , Washington Post, 9/12/01 (B) ] He also says that she said, “The pilot had announced that the plane had been hijacked. She said it had been hijacked shortly after takeoff.” [ Fox News, 9/14/01 ] Her last words before she was cut off were, “What do I tell the pilots to do?” [ BBC, 9/13/01 ] She had asked this already in her first phone call. [ Washington Post, 9/12/01 (B) ] Then the phone goes dead supposedly “moments before” the plane crashes [ Newsweek, 9/29/01 ], but actually Ted Olson's timing recall is so vague that it isn't clear if this is when the call happens, and he says he doesn't know why the call ends (see [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) ]). The call is originally said to last about a minute [ Washington Post, 9/12/01 (B) ], but Olson later says it could have lasted up to four minutes. [ CNN, 9/14/01 (C) ]
Flight attendant Debbie Welsh is apparently stabbed.
(After 9:31 a.m.): A few minutes after 9:31, a hijacker on board Flight 93 can be heard on the cockpit voice recording ordering a woman to sit down. A woman, presumably a flight attendant, implores, “Don't, don't.” She pleads, “Please, I don't want to die.” Patrick Welsh, the husband of flight attendant Debbie Welsh, is later told that a flight attendant was stabbed early in the takeover, and it is strongly implied it was his wife. She was a first-class attendant, and he says, “knowing Debby,” she would have resisted. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 207]
9:32 a.m.: The New York Stock Exchange closes. [ MSNBC, 9/22/01 ]
9:33 a.m.: According to the New York Times, Flight 77 becomes lost at 8:56 when it turns off its transponder, and stays lost until now. Washington flight controllers see a fast moving blip on their radar at this time and send a warning to Dulles Airport in Washington. [ New York Times, 10/16/01 (D) ] However, at 9:24 the FAA notifies NORAD Flight 77 is headed toward Washington (see 9:24 a.m.), and Vice President Cheney is told around 9:27 that radar is tracking Flight 77 heading toward Washington (see (9:27 a.m.)).
(9:33-9:38 a.m.): Radar data shows Flight 77 crossing the Capitol Beltway and headed toward the Pentagon. But the plane, flying more than 400 mph, is too high when it nears the Pentagon at 9:35, crossing the Pentagon at about 7,000 feet up. [ CBS News, 9/21/01 , Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] The plane then makes a difficult high-speed descending turn. It makes a “downward spiral, turning almost a complete circle and dropping the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes. The steep turn is so smooth, the sources say, it's clear there [is] no fight for control going on.” [ CBS News, 9/21/01 ] It gets very near the White House during this turn. “Sources say the hijacked jet … [flies] several miles south of the restricted airspace around the White House.” [ CBS News, 9/21/01 ] The Telegraph later writes, “If the airliner had approached much nearer to the White House it might have been shot down by the Secret Service, who are believed to have a battery of ground-to-air Stinger missiles ready to defend the president's home. The Pentagon is not similarly defended.” [ Telegraph, 9/16/01 ]White House spokesman Ari Fleischer suggests the plane goes even closer to the White House, saying, “That is not the radar data that we have seen. The plane was headed toward the White House.” [ CBS News, 9/21/01 ]
(9:34 a.m.): Bush's motorcade leaves Booker Elementary School and heads toward Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport. [9:34, Washington Times, 10/8/02 , 9:35, Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] A few days after 9/11, Sarasota's main newspaper reports, “Sarasota barely skirted its own disaster. As it turns out, terrorists targeted the president and Air Force One on Tuesday, maybe even while they were on the ground in Sarasota and certainly not long after. The Secret Service learned of the threat just minutes after Bush left Booker Elementary.” [ Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 9/16/01 ] A year later, Chief of Staff Andrew Card says, “As we were heading to Air Force One, we did hear about the Pentagon attack, and we also learned, what turned out to be a mistake, but we learned that the Air Force One package could in fact be a target.” [ MSNBC, 9/9/02 ]
(9:34 a.m.): A hijacker says over the radio to Flight 93's passengers: “Ladies and gentlemen, here it's the captain, please sit down. Keep remaining sitting. We have a bomb aboard.” Apparently Cleveland flight controllers can understand about a minute of screams, then a voice saying something about a “bomb on board.” A hijacker says in broken English that they are returning to the airport. [9:32, MSNBC, 9/3/02 , 9:34, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 , 9:35, Newsweek, 9/22/01 ]
9:34 a.m.: Tom Burnett calls his wife Deena a second time. He says, “They're in the cockpit.” He has checked the pulse of the man who was knifed (later identified as Mark Rothenberg, sitting next to him in seat 5B) and determined he is dead. She tells him about the hits on the WTC. He responds, “Oh my God, it's a suicide mission.” As they continue to talk, he tells her the plane has turned back. By this time, Deena is in constant communication with the FBI and others, and a policeman is at her house. [“Again, Deena noted the time,” Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 110]
A map of Flight 93's route with times roughly estimated. [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette] The USA Today's map shown earlier appears to have a much more accurate flight path.
9:35 a.m.: Flight 93 climbs without authorization. [ Guardian, 10/17/01 , USA Today, 8/13/02 ]
(9:36 a.m.): Flight 93 files a new flight plan with a final destination of Washington, reverses course and heads toward Washington. [9:35, “turned around near Cleveland,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 , “turns off course,” 9:36:01, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 9:36, MSNBC, 9/3/02 , 9:36, “made an ominous turn,” Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 219] Radar shows the plane turning 180 degrees. [ CNN, 9/13/01 (B) ] The new flight plan schedules the plane to arrive in Washington at 10:28. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 78]
A typical C-130.
9.36 a.m.: The national airport instructs a military C-130 (Golfer 06) that has just departed Andrews Air Force Base to intercept Flight 77 and identify it. [ Guardian, 10/17/01 , New York Times, 10/16/01 (D) ] Remarkably, this C-130 is the same C-130 that is 17 miles from Flight 93 when it later crashes into the Pennsylvania countryside. [ Minneapolis Star Tribune, 9/11/02 , Pittsburgh Channel, 9/15/01 ] The pilot, Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien, claims he took off around 9:30, planning to return to Minnesota after dropping supplies off in the Caribbean. He later describes his close encounter: “When air traffic control asked me if we had him [Flight 77] in sight, I told him that was an understatement—by then, he had pretty much filled our windscreen. Then he made a pretty aggressive turn so he was moving right in front of us, a mile and a half, two miles away. I said we had him in sight, then the controller asked me what kind of plane it was. That caught us up, because normally they have all that information. The controller didn't seem to know anything.” O'Brien reports that the plane is either a 757 or 767 and its silver fuselage means it is probably an American Airlines plane. “They told us to turn and follow that aircraft—in 20-plus years of flying, I've never been asked to do something like that.” [ Minneapolis Star Tribune, 9/11/02 ]
(9:37 a.m.): The blip representing Flight 77 that radar technicians have been watching on their screens disappears. Its last known position is six miles from the Pentagon and four miles from the White House. [ CBS News, 9/21/01 , Newhouse News, 1/25/02 , ABC News, 9/11/02 , USA Today, 8/13/02 ] Supposedly, just before radar contact is lost, FAA headquarters is told, “The aircraft is circling. It's turning away from the White House.” The plane is said to be traveling 500 mph, or a mile every seven seconds. [ USA Today, 8/13/02 ]
Jeremy Glick.
(9:37 a.m.): Jeremy Glick calls his wife Lyz from Flight 93. He describes the hijackers as Middle Eastern, Iranian looking. They put on red headbands and the three of them stood up and yelled and ran into the cockpit. He was sitting in the front of the coach section, but was sent to the back with most of the passengers. They claimed to have a bomb, which looked like a box with something red around it. He says the plane has turned around. Family members immediately call emergency 911 on another line. New York state police get patched in midway through the call. Glick finds out about the WTC towers. Two others onboard also learn about the WTC at about this time. Glick's phone remains connected until the very end of the flight. [9:37, Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 143, MSNBC, 7/30/02 , “just before 9:30,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) , no time explanation, Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 ]
This picture of Rumsfeld (center), taken from the US Army website, is captioned, “Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld returns to Pentagon inner offices Tuesday morning after surveying the damage from the hijacked plane which crashed into the building moments before.” This contradicts his claim that he was helping victims for nearly an hour after the attack. [US Army]
(9:38 a.m.): 2004-04-08 Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld is in the Pentagon meeting with Representative Cox (R), and is apparently completely oblivious of the approaching Flight 77. As he watches TV coverage of the WTC, he says, “Believe me, this isn't over yet. There's going to be another attack, and it could be us.” Supposedly, “moments later, the plane hit.” [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] Rumsfeld's office is on the fourth floor of the Pentagon, relatively near the impact. He later says that just after the explosion, “I went downstairs and went outside. And around the corner and of course, there it was.” He claims he immediately began helping the wounded: “There was a, a young woman bleeding, sitting on the ground, and I think she said to me, she didn't know who I was, she said, she could see people holding, drips going into people, IV of some kind, and she said, something to the effect, if people would, if someone could bring that person over, I could hold it.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] He helps load the wounded into ambulances until 10:30 (see 10:30 a.m.). [ Minneapolis Star Tribune, 9/12/01 , CNN, 12/5/01 ]
Internet researchers have put together this image showing how an object the size of a jumbo jet clips a number of light poles and then destroys columns inside the Pentagon. [From this website]
(9:38 a.m.): As fireman Alan Wallace is walking in front of the Pentagon, he looks up and sees Flight 77 coming straight at him. It is about 25 feet off the ground, no landing wheels visible, a few hundred yards away, and closing fast. He runs about 30 feet and dives under a nearby van. [“About 9:40,” ] The plane is traveling at about 460 mph, and flying so low that it clips the tops of street lights. [ CBS News, 9/21/01 ]
9:38 a.m.: Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon. Approximately 125 on the ground are later determined killed or missing. [9:37, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 9:37, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 9:38, CNN, 9/17/01 , 9:38, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 9:38, USA Today, 8/13/02 , 9:38, ABC News, 9/11/02 , 9:38, CBS, 9/11/02 (B) , 9:39, Washington Post, 1/27/02 , 9:40, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 9:43, CNN, 9/12/01 , 9:43, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 9:43, MSNBC, 9/3/02 , 9:43, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 9:45, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , At 9:39:02 on NBC News, reporter Jim Miklaszewski states that, “Moments ago, I felt an explosion here at the Pentagon,” Television Archive, WDCN 9:30 ] Flight 77 strikes the only portion of the Pentagon that had been recently renovated. “It was the only area of the Pentagon with a sprinkler system, and it had been reconstructed with a web of steel columns and bars to withstand bomb blasts. The area struck by the plane also had blast-resistant windows—2 inches thick and 2,500 pounds each—that stayed intact during the crash and fire. While perhaps 4,500 people normally would have been working in the hardest-hit areas, because of the renovation work only about 800 were there….” More than 25,000 people work at the Pentagon. [ Los Angeles Times, 9/16/01 (C) ]
This photo was taken mere moments after the Pentagon crash. [SIPA]
9:38 a.m.: NORAD states the fighters scrambled after Flight 77 took off from Langley at 9:30, 129 miles away, yet when Flight 77 crashes they are still 105 miles away. [ Newsday, 9/23/01 , NORAD, 9/18/01 ] The F-16 pilot codenamed Honey later offers a different explanation of where the F-16s are at 9:38. He says they are flying toward New York, when they see a black column of smoke coming from Washington, about 30 or 40 miles to the west. He is then asked over the radio by the North East Air Defense Sector of NORAD if he can confirm the Pentagon is burning. He confirms it. The F-16s are then ordered to set up a defensive perimeter above Washington. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 76] One of the three pilots, Major Brad Derrig later claims their target destination all along is Reagan National Airport, in Washington near the Pentagon. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Another pilot, Major Dean Eckmann, also later claims their destination all along was Washington. [ Associated Press, 8/19/02 (C) ] NORAD officer Major James Fox says he dispatches the jets without targets. “That would come later.” [ Newhouse News, 1/25/02 ] (Additionally, subtract 8-10 miles (Sidewinder missile) or 12-20 miles (Sparrow missile) from the flight distance required for the fighters. [ Slate, 1/16/02 ])
The Pentagon explosion.
9:38 a.m.: A C-130 transport plane that has been sent to follow Flight 77 flies a short distance from Flight 77 as it crashes. This curious C-130 is the same C-130 that is 17 miles from Flight 93 when it later crashes into the Pennsylvania countryside. [ Minneapolis Star Tribune, 9/11/02 , Pittsburgh Channel, 9/15/01 ] A number of people see this plane fly remarkably close to Flight 77:
Kelly Knowles says that seconds after seeing Flight 77 pass, she sees a “second plane that seemed to be chasing the first [pass] over at a slightly different angle.” [ Daily Press, 9/15/01 ]
Keith Wheelhouse says the second plane was a C-130, two others aren't certain. [ Daily Press, 9/15/01 ] Wheelhouse “believes it flew directly above the American Airlines jet, as if to prevent two planes from appearing on radar while at the same time guiding the jet toward the Pentagon.” As Flight 77 descends toward the Pentagon, the second plane veers off west. [ Daily Press, 9/14/01 ]
USA Today reporter Vin Narayanan, who saw the Pentagon explosion, says, “I hopped out of my car after the jet exploded, nearly oblivious to a second jet hovering in the skies.” [ USA Today, 9/17/01 ]
USA Today Editor Joel Sucherman sees a second plane. [ eWeek, 9/13/01 ]
Brian Kennedy, press secretary for a congressman, and others also see a second plane. [ Sacramento Bee, 9/15/01 ]
An unnamed worker at Arlington national cemetery “said a mysterious second plane was circling the area when the first one attacked the Pentagon.” [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 12/20/01 ]
John O'Keefe is driving a car when he sees the Pentagon crash. “The first thing I did was pull over onto the shoulder, and when I got out of the car I saw another plane flying over my head…. Then the plane—it looked like a C-130 cargo plane—started turning away from the Pentagon, it did a complete turnaround.” [ New York Law Journal, 9/12/01 ]
The pilot of the C-130, Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien, is later interviewed, but his account differs from the on-the-ground eyewitnesses. He claims that just before the explosion, “With all of the East Coast haze, I had a hard time picking him out,” implying he is not nearby. He also says that just after the explosion, “I could see the outline of the Pentagon,” again implying he is not nearby. He then asks “the controller whether [I] should set up a low orbit around the building,” but he is told “to get out of the area as quickly as possible. ‘I took the plane once through the plume of smoke and thought if this was a terrorist attack, it probably wasn't a good idea to be flying through that plume.’” [ Minneapolis Star Tribune, 9/11/02 ]
(After 9:38 a.m.): A few minutes after Flight 77 crashes, the Secret Service commands fighters from Andrews Air Force Base, 10 miles from Washington, to “Get in the air now!” [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02 ] Almost simultaneously, a call from someone else in the White House declares the Washington area “a free-fire zone.” Says one pilot, “That meant we were given authority to use force, if the situation required it, in defense of the nation's capital, its property and people.” Lt. Col. Marc H. (Sass) Sasseville and a pilot only known by the codename Lucky sprint to their waiting F-16s armed only with “hot” guns and 511 rounds of “TP”—nonexplosive training rounds. The pilots later say that, had all else failed, they would have rammed into Flight 93. Meanwhile, the three F-16s flying on a training mission 207 miles away return to their home at Andrews Air Force Base. Major Billy Hutchison's fighter still has enough gas to take off again immediately; the other two need to refuel. He supposedly takes off with no weapons. “Hutchison was probably airborne shortly after the alert F-16s from Langley arrive over Washington, although 121st FS pilots admit their timeline-recall ‘is fuzzy.’” This would mean Hutchison doesn't even leave Andrews until after 9:49 (see (9:49 a.m.)). His is said to be the first fighter to reach Washington. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02 ] There are multiple reports of Andrews fighters at the Pentagon before and of the above fighters were reported to have taken off. For instance, “Within minutes of the [Pentagon] attack … F-16s from Andrews Air Force Base were in the air over Washington DC.” [ Telegraph, 9/16/01 ] “A few moments [after the Pentagon attack] … overhead, fighter jets scrambled from Andrews Air Force Base and other installations.” [ Denver Post, 9/11/01 ] A year later, ABC News reports, “High overhead [the Pentagon], jet fighters arrive. Just moments too late.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Yet other newspaper accounts deny fighters from Andrews were deployed [ USA Today, 9/16/01 ], and some deny Andrews even had fighters at all! [ USA Today, 9/16/01 (B) ] NORAD commander Major General Larry Arnold has said, “We [didn't] have any aircraft on alert at Andrews.” [ MSNBC, 9/23/01 (C) ]
(9:39 a.m.): The hijackers probably inadvertently transmit over radio: “Hi, this is the captain. We'd like you all to remain seated. There is a bomb on board. And we are going to turn back to the airport. And they had our demands, so please remain quiet.” [9:38, MSNBC, 9/3/02 , 9:39, Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 209, no time marker, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ]
9:41 a.m.: From Flight 93, Marion Birtton calls a friend. She tells him two people have been killed and the plane has been turned around. [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 ]
Where is the security covering Bush in this picture around 9:43 a.m.? [AP] Around 3:00 p.m., Bush is “guarded by soldiers clad in fatigues and gripping machine guns” when he emerges from Air Force One. [Salon, 9/12/01]
9:42 a.m.: From Flight 93 Mark Bingham calls his mother and says, “I'm on a flight from Newark to San Francisco and there are three guys who have taken over the plane and they say they have a bomb.” [9:42, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ] In an alternate version, he says, “I'm in the air, I'm calling you on the Airfone. I'm calling you from the plane. We've been taken over. There are three men that say they have a bomb.” [“Just before dawn in San Francisco,” Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 , 9:42, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ]
A thorough security check before boarding Air Force One delays takeoff. [AFP]
9:43 a.m.: Bush's motorcade arrives at Sarasota's airport and pulls up close to Air Force One. He learns a plane has hit the Pentagon as the motorcade gets near the airport. Bush immediately boards the plane. [ Washington Times, 10/8/02 , Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] Security then does an extra-thorough search of all the baggage for the other passengers, delaying takeoff until 9:55. [ St. Petersburg Times, 9/8/02 (B) ]
(After 9:44 a.m.): According to F-16 pilot Honey's account, at some point after the F-16s had set up a defensive perimeter over Washington, the lead pilot receives a garbled message about Flight 93 that isn't heard by the other two pilots. “The message seemed to convey that the White House was an important asset to protect.” Honey says he is later told the message is, “Something like, ‘Be aware of where it is, and it could be a target.’” The other pilot, codenamed Lou, says the unnamed lead pilot tells him, “I think the Secret Service told me this.” [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 76] Both Lou and Honey state they are never given orders to shoot down any plane that day. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 222]
9:45 a.m.: Tom Burnett calls his wife Deena for the third time. She tells him about the crash into the Pentagon. Tom speaks about the bomb he'd mentioned earlier, saying, “I don't think they have one. I think they're just telling us that.” He says the hijackers are talking about crashing the plane into the ground. “We have to do something.” He says that he and others are making a plan. “A group of us.” [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 111] Even by his second call, the FBI was listening in. [ Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 ]
Todd Beamer.
9:45 a.m.: After having some trouble with his phone, passenger Todd Beamer is able to speak to Verizon phone representative Lisa Jefferson, with the FBI listening in. He talks for about 15 minutes. Beamer says he has been herded to the back of the plane along with nine other passengers and five flight attendants. A hijacker who says he has a bomb strapped to his body is guarding them. 27 passengers are being guarded by a hijacker in first class, which is separated by a curtain. One hijacker has gone into the cockpit. One passenger is dead (that leaves one passenger unaccounted for—presumably the man who made a call from the bathroom). The two pilots are apparently dead. [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/16/01 , Newsweek, 9/22/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ] (A conflicting version [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] states that 27 were in the back, and that he saw four hijackers)
Secret Service with automatic weapons directing people away from the White House. [AP]
(9:45 a.m.): The White House begins a general evacuation. This is 21 minutes after the FAA warned a hijacked plane appeared to be headed toward Washington (see 9:24 a.m.) and about 40 minutes after Vice President Cheney has been evacuated from the White House (see (After 9:03 a.m.)). [9:43, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 9:45, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 9:45, Washington Post, 1/27/02 , 9:45, Telegraph, 12/16/01 , 9:45, CNN, 9/12/01 , 9:48, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 9:48, Associated Press, 8/19/02 ] Initially the evacuation is orderly, but soon the Secret Service agents are yelling that everyone should run. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta. [BBC]
(9:45 a.m.): Ben Sliney, FAA's National Operations Manager, orders the entire nationwide air traffic system shut down. All flights at US airports are stopped. 3,949 flights are still in the air at the time. Sliney makes the decision without consulting FAA head Jane Garvey, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, or other bosses, but they quickly approve. [ USA Today, 8/13/02 , USA Today, 8/13/02 (B) ] [9:40, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 9:40, CNN, 9/12/01 , 9:40, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 9:45, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 9:45, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 9:45, Newsday, 9/10/02 , 9:45, USA Today, 8/13/02 , 9:49, Washington Post, 9/12/01 ] 75 percent of the planes land within one hour of the order. [ USA Today, 8/12/02 (C) ] The Washington Post has reported that it was Mineta who told Monte Belger at the FAA: “Monte, bring all the planes down,” even adding, “[Expletive] pilot discretion.” [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ] However, it is later reported by a different Post reporter that Mineta didn't even know of the order until 15 minutes later. This reporter “says FAA officials had begged him to maintain the fiction.” [ Slate, 4/2/02 ]
(9:46 a.m.): According to the Flight 93 voice recording, around this time one hijacker in the cockpit says to another, “Let the guys in now.” A vague instruction is given to bring the pilot back in. It's not clear if this is a reference to an original pilot or a hijacker pilot. Investigators aren't sure if the original pilots were killed or allowed to live. [“About midway”, through a 31-minute recording that starts at 9:31, Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 208] Also by this time, “everyone” in the United Airlines crisis center “now knew that a flight attendant on board had called the mechanics desk to report that one hijacker had a bomb strapped on and another was holding a knife on the crew.” [ Wall Street Journal, 10/15/01 ]
(9:47 a.m.): On Flight 93, Jeremy Glick is still on the phone with his wife Lyz. He tells her that the passengers are taking a vote if they should try to take over the plane or not. [About the same time as a different phone call, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ] He later says that all the men on the plane have voted to attack the hijackers. [No time marker, Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 ] When asked about weapons, he says they don't have guns, just knives. His wife Lyz got the impression from him that the hijacker standing nearby claiming to hold the bomb would be easy to overwhelm. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 153-154]
9:48 a.m.: The Capitol building in Washington begins evacuation, 24 minutes after the FAA has warned a hijacked plane appeared to be headed toward Washington (see 9:24 a.m.). [ Associated Press, 8/19/02 ] Senator Tom Daschle, majority leader of the Senate, later states, “Some capitol policemen broke into the room and said, we're under attack. I've got to take you out right away.” Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, third in line of succession to the presidency behind Vice President Cheney, is in the Capitol building with other congresspeople. Only after this time are Hastert and others in the line of succession moved to secure locations. Some point after this, Hastert and other leaders are flown by helicopter to secret bunkers. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
9:49 a.m.: The FAA orders the Pittsburgh control tower evacuated. Shortly before, Cleveland flight controllers called Pittsburgh flight control and said a plane was heading toward Pittsburgh and refusing to communicate. [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/23/01 (B) ]
(9:49 a.m.): Three F-16s scrambled from Langley 129 miles away at 9:30 reach the Pentagon. The planes, armed with heat-seeking, Sidewinder missiles, are authorized to knock down civilian aircraft. According to NORAD, they were flying at 650 mph. The official maximum speed for F-16s is 1500 mph. [9:49, CNN, 9/17/01 , 9:49, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 9:56: “15 minutes after Flight 77 hit the Pentagon,” New York Times, 9/15/01 , “just before 10:00,” CBS, 9/14/01 CBS News, 9/14/01 ]
Sandra Bradshaw.
9:50 a.m.: Sandra Bradshaw calls her husband from Flight 93. She says, “Have you heard what's going on? My flight has been hijacked. My flight has been hijacked with three guys with knives.” [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] She tells him that they are in the rear galley filling pitchers with hot water to use against the hijackers. [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ]
(After 9:50 a.m.): Shortly after the Langley fighters arrive over Washington, three F-16s from Andrews also arrive. The first is probably piloted by Major Billy Hutchison. F-16s flown by Lt. Col. Marc H. (Sass) Sasseville and codename Lucky arrive shortly thereafter. Only Sasseville's plane has ammunition. Supposedly, these three fighters remain ignorant that three Langley F-16s are flying over Washington at the same time, at a higher altitude. [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02 ]
9:53 a.m.: The NSA reportedly intercepts a phone call from one of bin Laden's operatives in Afghanistan to a phone number in the Republic of Georgia. The caller says he has “heard good news” and that another target is still to come (presumably, Flight 93). Tenet tells Rumsfeld about the intercept two hours later. [ CBS, 9/4/02 ]
9:53 a.m.: The hijackers in the cockpit of Flight 93 grow concerned that the passengers might retaliate. One urges that the plane's fire ax be held up to the door's peephole to scare the passengers. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 209-210]
9:54 a.m.: Tom Burnett calls his wife Deena for the fourth and last time. In early reports of this call, he says, “I know we're all going to die. There's three of us who are going to do something about it.” [No time marker, Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 , no time marker, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ] However, in a later and much more complete account, he sounds much more upbeat. “It's up to us. I think we can do it.” “Don't worry, we're going to do something.” He specifically mentions they plan to regain control of the airplane over a rural area. [9:54, “again Deena noted the time,” Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 118]
Air Force One departs Sarasota. [AP]
(9:56 a.m.): Bush departs from the Saratoga, Florida, airport on Air Force One. [9:54, Dallas Morning News, 8/28/02 , 9:55, New York Times, 9/16/01 , 9:55, Daily Mail, 9/8/02 ,9:55, Washington Post, 1/27/02 , 9:55, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 9:55, Associated Press, 9/12/01 (D) , 9:55, ABC News, 9/11/02 , 9:57, CBS, 9/11/02 (B) , 9:57, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 9:57, CNN, 9/12/01 , 9:57, Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] Amazingly, his plane takes off without any fighters protecting it. “The object seemed to be simply to get the President airborne and out of the way,” says an administration official. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] There are still 3,520 planes in the air over the US. [ USA Today, 8/13/02 (B) ] About half of the planes in the region of Florida where Bush is are still in the air. [ St. Petersburg Times, 9/7/02 ]
(After 9:56 a.m.): After flying off in Air Force One, Bush talks to Vice President Cheney on the phone. Cheney recommends that Bush authorize the military to shoot down any plane under control of the hijackers. “I said, ‘You bet,’” Bush later recalls. “We had a little discussion, but not much.” [“After Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon,” Newsday, 9/23/01 , time unknown, USA Today, 9/16/01 , “Once airborne, Bush spoke again to Cheney,” Washington Post, 1/27/02 , after Bush is airborne, CBS, 9/11/02 ] Flight 93 is still in the air, and fighters are given orders to intercept it and possibly shoot it down. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
(After 9:56 a.m.): At some point after the F-16s are in the air, someone from the Secret Service gets on the radio and tells the pilots, “I want you to protect the White House at all costs.” [ New York Times, 10/16/01 ]
(9:56-10:40 a.m.): Air Force One takes off and quickly gains altitude. One passenger later says, “It was like a rocket. For a good 10 minutes, the plane was going almost straight up.” [ CBS, 9/11/02 (B) ] Once the plane reaches cruising altitude, it flies in circles. Journalists on board sense this, because the television reception for a local station generally remains good. “Apparently Bush, Cheney and the Secret Service argue over the safety of Bush coming back to Washington.” [ Salon, 9/12/01 (B) , Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
(After 9:56-10:06 a.m.): Inside his White House bunker, a military aide asks Vice President Cheney, “There is a plane 80 miles out. There is a fighter in the area. Should we engage?” Cheney immediately answers “Yes.” [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ] An F-16 fighter near Washington heads in pursuit of Flight 93. [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ] However, a different explanation says, “The closest fighters are two F-16 pilots on a training mission from Selfridge Air National Guard Base near Detroit.” These are ordered after Flight 93, even though but they supposedly aren't armed with any weapons. It is claimed they are supposed to crash into Flight 93 if they cannot persuade it to land. [ ABC News, 8/30/02 , ABC News, 9/11/02 ] In either case, as the fighter (or fighters) gets nearer to Flight 93, Cheney is asked twice more to confirm if the fighter should engage, and he responds yes both times. [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ] Montague Winfield, in charge of the Pentagon's command center, later says, “At some point, the closure time [between the fighter and Flight 93] came and went, and nothing happened, so you can imagine everything was very tense at the NMCC.” [] Yet Major Gen. Paul Weaver, director of the Air National Guard, had previously claimed that no military planes were sent after Flight 93. [ Seattle Times, 9/16/01 ] And the pilots flying over Washington that have spoken say that all of them didn't even learn about Flight 93 or any plane crashing in Pennsylvania until they returned to base in the afternoon. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 222]
9:57 a.m.: One of the hijackers in the cockpit asks if anything is going on, apparently meaning outside the cockpit. “Fighting,” the other one says. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 210] An analysis of the flight recorder suggests that the passenger struggle actually started in the front of the plane (where Bingham and Burnett were sitting) about a minute before a struggle in the back of the plane (where Beamer was sitting). [ Observer, 12/2/01 ] Officials later theorize that the Flight 93 passengers did actually reach the cockpit using a food cart as a battering ram and a shield. They claim that digital enhancement of the cockpit voice recorder reveals the sound of plates and glassware crashing around 9:57. [ Newsweek, 11/25/01 ]
(9:57 a.m. and After): “In the cockpit! In the cockpit!” is heard. Hijackers are reportedly heard telling each other to hold the door. In English, someone outside shouts, “Let's get them.” The hijackers are also praying “Allah o akbar” (God is great). One of the hijackers suggests shutting off the oxygen supply to the cabin (which apparently wouldn't have had an effect since the plane was already below 10,000 feet). A hijacker says, “Should we finish?” Another one says, “Not yet.” The sounds of the passengers get clearer, and in unaccented English “Give it to me!” is heard. “I'm injured,” someone says in English. Then something like “roll it up” and “lift it up” is heard. Passengers' relatives believe this sequence proves that the passengers did take control of the plane. [ MSNBC, 7/30/02 , Telegraph, 8/6/02 , Newsweek, 11/25/01 , Observer, 12/2/01 , Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 270-271]
9:58 a.m.: Todd Beamer ends his long phone call saying that they plan “to jump” the hijacker in the back who has the bomb. In the background, the phone operator already could hear an “awful commotion” of people shouting, and women screaming, “Oh my God,” and “God help us.” He lets go of the phone but leaves it connected. His famous last words are said to nearby passengers: “Are you ready guys? Let's roll” (alternate version: “You ready? Okay. Let's roll”). [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 204, Newsweek, 9/22/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ]
CeeCee Lyles.
9:58 a.m.: CeeCee Lyles says to her husband, “Aah, it feels like the plane's going down.” Her husband Lorne says, “What's that?” She replies, “I think they're going to do it. They're forcing their way into the cockpit” (an alternate version says, “They're getting ready to force their way into the cockpit”). A little later she screams, then says, “They're doing it! They're doing it! They're doing it!” Her husband hears more screaming in the background, then he hears a “whooshing sound, a sound like wind,” then more screaming, and then the call breaks off. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 180, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ]
9:58 a.m.: Sandy Bradshaw tells her husband, “Everyone's running to first class. I've got to go. Bye.” She had been speaking with him since 9:50. [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) , Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ]
Edward Felt.
9:58 a.m.: A man calls 911 from a bathroom on the plane, crying, “We're being hijacked, we're being hijacked!” [ Toronto Sun, 9/16/01 ], then reports that “he heard some sort of explosion and saw white smoke coming from the plane and we lost contact with him.” [ ABC News, 9/11/01 (B) , ABC News, 9/11/01 (C) , Associated Press, 9/12/01 (B) ] One minute after the call began, the line goes dead. [ Pittsburgh Channel, 12/6/01 ] Investigators believe this was Edward Felt, the only passenger not accounted for on phone calls. He was sitting in first class, so he probably was in the bathroom near the front of the plane. At one point he appears to have peeked out the bathroom door. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 193-194, 196] The mentions of smoke and explosions on the recording of his call are now denied. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 264] The person who took Felt's call is not allowed to speak to the media. [ Mirror, 9/13/02 ]
WTC south tower collapses at 9:59. [AP]
9:59 a.m.: The south tower of the World Trade Center collapses. It was hit by Flight 175 at 9:02. [9:50, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 9:59, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 9:59, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 9:59, ABC News, 9/11/02 , 9:59 (based on seismic data), New York Times, 9/12/01 , 10:05, CNN, 9/12/01 , 10:05, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 9:59:39, US Army authorized seismic study , 9:59:04, , USA Today, 12/20/01 ]
(Between 9:59 a.m. and 10:28 a.m.): At some point between the collapse of the two WTC towers, it is said that fire chiefs order for the firefighters to come down. It has not been reported exactly who issued this order or when. Witnesses claim that scores of firefighters were resting on lower floors in the minutes before the second tower collapsed, unaware of the danger. “Some firefighters who managed to get out said they had no idea the other building had already fallen, and said that they thought that few of those who perished knew.” At least 121 firefighters in the tower die. The fire department blames equipment failure with a radio repeater. However, the Port Authority claims that later transcripts of radio communications show the repeaters worked. [ New York Times, 11/9/02 (B) ]
A fighter and helicopter both fly directly above the Pentagon on 9/11. [AFP]
(Before 10:00 a.m.): Defense officials initially say, “There were no military planes in the skies over Washington until 15 to 20 minutes after the Pentagon was hit”—9:53 to 9:58. [ Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 9/14/01 ] But several sources later report that fighters were above Washington within “minutes” or “moments” of the Pentagon explosion. [ Denver Post, 9/11/01 , Telegraph, 9/16/01 , ABC News, 9/11/02 ] ABC News later reports that by 10:00, “Dozens of fighters are buzzing in the sky. F-16s scrambled at Andrews Air Force Base in nearby Maryland” (the exact time is not given, but the account is placed between 9:45 and 10:00 in a later ABC News chronology of 9/11). [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Another account says the first two F-16s from Andrews that are armed with missiles arrive ten minutes after the three F-16s from Andrews arrived at 9:49 (see (9:49 a.m.)). [ Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02 ] In contradiction to this, a few days after 9/11, the New York Times reports, “In the White House Situation Room and at the Pentagon, the response seemed agonizingly slow. One military official recalls hearing ‘words to the effect of, ‘Where are the planes?’’ The Pentagon insists it had air cover over its own building by 10 a.m., 15 minutes after the building was hit. But witnesses, including a reporter for The New York Times who was headed toward the building, did not see any until closer to 11.” [ New York Times, 9/16/01 ]
Elizabeth Wainio.
(10:00 a.m.): Elizabeth Wainio says to her stepmother, “Mom, they're rushing the cockpit. I've got to go. Bye,” then hangs up. This may have been a delayed reaction to events, since her stepmother says that in their ten-minute call Elizabeth was in a trance-like state, appeared to have resigned herself to death, was breathing in a strange manner, and even said she felt she was leaving her body. [“Shortly after 10:00,” MSNBC, 7/30/02 , “sometime shortly before 10,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) ]
(10:00 a.m.): Bill Wright is flying a small plane when a flight controller asks him to look around outside his window. He sees Flight 93 three miles away—close enough to see the United Airlines colors. Flight control asks him the plane's altitude, then commands him to get away from the plane and land immediately. Wright sees the plane rock back and forth three or four times before he flies from the area. He speculates that the hijackers were trying to throw off the attacking passengers. [Time unknown, Pittsburgh Channel, 9/19/01 ]
Potential pilots Don Greene and Andrew Garcia.
(Between 10:00-10:06 a.m.): During this time, there apparently are no calls from Flight 93. Several cell phones left on record only silence. For instance, Todd Beamer doesn't hang up, but nothing more is heard after he puts down the phone, suggesting things are quiet in the back of the plane. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 218] The only exception is Richard Makely, who is listening to the Jeremy Glick open phone line after Glick went to attack the hijackers. A reporter summarizes Makely explaining that, “The silence last[s] two minutes, then there [is] screaming. More silence, followed by more screams. Finally, there [is] a mechanical sound, followed by nothing.” [ San Francisco Chronicle, 9/17/01 ] The second silence lasts between 60 and 90 seconds. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 219] Near the end of the cockpit voice recording, loud wind sounds can be heard. [ CNN, 4/19/02 , Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 270-271] “Sources claim the last thing heard on the cockpit voice recorder is the sound of wind—suggesting the plane had been holed.” [ Mirror, 9/13/02 ] If the passengers had taken over the plane, there was at least one passenger, Don Greene, who was a professional pilot, who had learned to fly at age 14, as well as Andrew Garcia, a former flight controller. [ Newsweek, 9/22/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 (B) , Telegraph, 8/6/02 ]
Someone falling from the WTC. [Allsport] “Probably well over 50” jumped or fell from the North Tower, none from the South Tower. [New York Times, 9/11/02]
10:01 a.m.: The FAA orders F-16 fighters to scramble from Toledo, Ohio. Although the base has no fighters on standby alert status, it manages to put fighters in the air 16 minutes later, a “phenomenal” response time—but still 10 minutes after the last hijacked plane has crashed. [ Toledo Blade, 12/9/01 ]
10:02 a.m.: The Sears Tower in Chicago begins evacuation. Other prominent tall buildings and landmarks begin evacuating about an hour later. [ Ottawa Citizen, 9/11/01 ]
10:03 a.m.: According to the US government, Flight 93 crashes at 10:03. [ NORAD, 9/18/01 ] The cockpit voice recording was recorded on a 30 minute reel, which means that as new tape was recorded the old tape was being erased. The government has let relatives listen to this tape, which begins at 9:31 and runs for 31 minutes. [ CNN, 4/19/02 , Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 206-207] So it sounds like the recording ends a minute before the official crash time. However, a seismic study authorized by the US Army to determine when the plane crashed concludes the crash happens at 10:06:05. [ US Army authorized seismic study ] The discrepancy is so puzzling, the Philadelphia Daily News has an article on the issue, called “Three-Minute Discrepancy in Tape.” It notes that leading seismologists agree that Flight 93 crashed last Sept. 11 at 10:06:05 a.m., give or take a couple of seconds, and government officials won't explain why they say the plane crashed at 10:03. [ Philadelphia Daily News, 9/16/02 ]
(Before 10:06 a.m.): CBS television reports at some point before the crash that two F-16 fighters are tailing Flight 93. [ Independent, 8/13/02 ] Shortly after 9/11, a flight controller in New Hampshire ignores a ban on controllers speaking to the media, and it is reported he claims “that an F-16 fighter closely pursued Flight 93… the F-16 made 360-degree turns to remain close to the commercial jet, the employee said. ‘He must've seen the whole thing,’ the employee said of the F-16 pilot's view of Flight 93's crash.” [ Associated Press, 9/13/01 , Nashua Telegraph, 9/13/01 ]
(Before 10:06 a.m.): In the tiny town of Boswell, about 10 miles north and slightly to the west of Flight 93's crash site, Rodney Peterson and Brandon Leventry notice a passenger jet lumbering through the sky at about 2,000 feet. They realize such a big plane flying so low in that area is odd. They see the plane dip its wings sharply to the left then to the right. The wings level off and the plane keeps flying south, continuing to slowly descend. Five minutes later they hear news that the plane has crashed. Other witnesses also later describe the plane flying east-southeast, low and wobbly. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 205-206, New York Times, 9/14/01 ] “Officials initially say that it looks like the plane was headed south when it hit the ground.” [ Cleveland Newschannel 5, 9/11/01 ]
A map of the countryside near the Flight 93 crash. [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette]
(Before 10:06 a.m.): Numerous eyewitnesses see and hear Flight 93 just before its crash:
Terry Butler, at Stoystown: He sees the plane come out of the clouds, low to the ground. “It was moving like you wouldn't believe. Next thing I knew it makes a heck of a sharp, right-hand turn.” It banks to the right and appears to be trying to climb to clear one of the ridges, but it continues to turn to the right and then veers behind a ridge. About a second later it crashes. [ St. Petersburg Times, 9/12/01 ]
Ernie Stuhl, the mayor of Shanksville: “I know of two people—I will not mention names—that heard a missile. They both live very close, within a couple of hundred yards… This one fellow's served in Vietnam and he says he's heard them, and he heard one that day.” He adds that based on what he has learned, F-16s were “very, very close.” [ Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01 ] Accounts of the plane making strange noises:
Laura Temyer of Hooversville: “I didn't see the plane but I heard the plane's engine. Then I heard a loud thump that echoed off the hills and then I heard the plane's engine. I heard two more loud thumps and didn't hear the plane's engine anymore after that.” (She insists that people she knows in state law enforcement have privately told her the plane was shot down, and that decompression sucked objects from the aircraft, explaining why there was a wide debris field.) [ Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01 ]
Charles Sturtz, a half mile from the crash site: The plane is heading southeast and has its engines running. No smoke can be seen. “It was really roaring, you know. Like it was trying to go someplace, I guess.” [ WPXI Channel 11, 9/13/01 ]
Michael Merringer, two miles from the crash site: “I heard the engine gun two different times and then I heard a loud bang…” [ Associated Press, 9/12/01 (B) ]
Tim Lensbouer, 300 yards away: “I heard it for 10 or 15 seconds and it sounded like it was going full bore.” [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/12/01 (B) ] Accounts of the plane flying upside down:
Rob Kimmel, several miles from the crash site: He sees it fly overhead, banking hard to the right. It is 200 feet or less off the ground as it crests a hill to the southeast. “I saw the top of the plane, not the bottom.” [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 210-211]
Eric Peterson of Lambertsville: He sees a plane flying overhead unusually low. The plane seemed to be turning end-over-end as it dropped out of sight behind a tree line. [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/12/01 ]
Bob Blair of Stoystown: He sees the plane spiraling and flying upside down before crashing. Its not much higher than the treetops. [ Daily American, 9/12/01 ] Accounts of a sudden plunge and more strange sounds:
An unnamed witness says he hears two loud bangs before watching the plane take a downward turn of nearly 90 degrees. [ Cleveland Newschannel 5, 9/11/01 ]
Another unnamed witness sees the plane overhead. It makes a high-pitched, screeching sound. The plane then makes a sharp, 90-degree downward turn and crashes. [ Cleveland Newschannel 5, 9/11/01 ]
Tom Fritz, about a quarter-mile from the crash site: He hears a sound that “wasn't quite right” and looks up in the sky. “It dropped all of a sudden, like a stone,” going “so fast that you couldn't even make out what color it was.” [ St. Petersburg Times, 9/12/01 ]
Terry Butler, a few miles north of Lambertsville: “It dropped out of the clouds.” The plane rose slightly, trying to gain altitude, then “it just went flip to the right and then straight down.” [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/12/01 (B) ]
Lee Purbaugh, 300 yards away: “There was an incredibly loud rumbling sound and there it was, right there, right above my head—maybe 50 feet up…. I saw it rock from side to side then, suddenly, it dipped and dived, nose first, with a huge explosion, into the ground. I knew immediately that no one could possibly have survived.” [ Independent, 8/13/02 ] Upside down and a sudden plunge:
Linda Shepley: She hears a loud bang and sees the plane bank to the side. [ ABC News, 9/11/01 (C) ] She sees the plane wobbling right and left, at a low altitude of roughly 2,500 feet, when suddenly the right wing dips straight down, and the plane plunges into the earth. She says she has an unobstructed view of Flight 93's final two minutes. [ Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01 ]
Kelly Leverknight in Stony Creek Township of Shanksville: “There was no smoke, it just went straight down. I saw the belly of the plane.” It sounds like it is flying low, and it's heading east. [ Daily American, 9/12/01 , St. Petersburg Times, 9/12/01 ]
Tim Thornsberg, working in a nearby strip mine: “It came in low over the trees and started wobbling. Then it just rolled over and was flying upside down for a few seconds … and then it kind of stalled and did a nose dive over the trees.” [ WPXI Channel 11, 9/13/01 ]
Flight 93 crash site. North is to the top. Note the impact point north of the road, and the burned trees to the south of it.
Other passenger planes hit by missiles continued to fly for several minutes before crashing. For instance, a Korean Airline 747 was hit by two Russian missiles in 1983, yet continued to fly for two more minutes. [ KAL Cockpit Voice Recorder transcript ]
(Before 10:06 a.m.): Flight 93 apparently starts to break up before it crashes, because debris is found very far away from the crash site. [ Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01 ] The plane is generally obliterated upon landing, except for one half-ton piece of engine found over a mile away. [ Independent, 8/13/02 ] One story calls what happened to this engine “intriguing,” because “the heat-seeking, air-to-air Sidewinder missiles aboard an F-16 would likely target one of the Boeing 757's two large engines.” [ Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01 ] Smaller debris fields are also found two, three, and eight miles away from the main crash site. [, Mirror, 9/13/02 ] Eight miles away, local media quote residents speaking of a second plane in the area and burning debris falling from the sky. [ Reuters, 9/13/01 (C) ] Residents outside Shanksville reported “discovering clothing, books, papers and what appeared to be human remains. Some residents said they collected bags-full of items to be turned over to investigators. Others reported what appeared to be crash debris floating in Indian Lake, nearly six miles from the immediate crash scene. Workers at Indian Lake Marina said that they saw a cloud of confetti-like debris descend on the lake and nearby farms minutes after hearing the explosion….” [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/13/01 ] Moments after the crash, Carol Delasko initially thinks someone had blown up a boat on Indian Lake: “It just looked like confetti raining down all over the air above the lake.” [ Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 9/14/01 (B) ] Investigators say that far-off wreckage “probably was spread by the cloud created when the plane crashed and dispersed by a 10 mph southeasterly wind.” [ Delaware News Journal, 9/16/01 ]
Flight 93 crashes in the Pennsylvania countryside.
10:06 a.m.: Flight 93 crashes just north of the Somerset County Airport, about 80 miles southeast of Pittsburgh, 124 miles or 15 minutes from Washington DC. [10:00, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 10:03, NORAD, 9/18/01 , 10:06, Guardian, 10/17/01 , 10:06, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01 , 10:06, MSNBC, 9/3/02 , 10:06, Mirror, 9/13/02 , 10:06, USA Today, 8/13/02 , 10:07, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 10:10, CNN, 9/12/01 , 10:10, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 10:10, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 10:10, Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , 10:06:05, US Army authorized seismic study ] Little information about the crash has been made public.
The Flight 93 crater. Notice the destruction of the airplane is nearly total. [Reuters]
(Before and After 10:06 a.m.): “At least half a dozen named individuals … have reported seeing a second plane flying low and in erratic patterns, not much above treetop level, over the crash site within minutes of the United flight crashing. They describe the plane as a small, white jet with rear engines and no discernible markings.” [ Independent, 8/13/02 ]
Lee Purbaugh: “I didn't get a good look but it was white and it circled the area about twice and then it flew off over the horizon.” [ Mirror, 9/13/02 ]
Susan Mcelwain: Less than a minute before the Flight 93 crash rocked the countryside, she sees a small white jet with rear engines and no discernible markings swoop low over her minivan near an intersection and disappear over a hilltop, nearly clipping the tops of trees lining the ridge. [ Bergen Record, 9/14/01 ] She later adds, “There's no way I imagined this plane—it was so low it was virtually on top of me. It was white with no markings but it was definitely military, it just had that look. It had two rear engines, a big fin on the back like a spoiler on the back of a car and with two upright fins at the side. I haven't found one like it on the internet. It definitely wasn't one of those executive jets. The FBI came and talked to me and said there was no plane around…. But I saw it and it was there before the crash and it was 40 feet above my head. They did not want my story—nobody here did.” [ Mirror, 9/13/02 ]
Dennis Decker and
Rick Chaney, Decker speaking: “As soon as we looked up [after hearing the Flight 93 crash], we saw a midsized jet flying low and fast. It appeared to make a loop or part of a circle, and then it turned fast and headed out.” Decker and Chaney described the plane as a Learjet type, with engines mounted near the tail and painted white with no identifying markings. “It was a jet plane, and it had to be flying real close when that 757 went down. If I was the FBI, I'd find out who was driving that plane.” [ Bergen Record, 9/14/01 ]
Jim Brandt sees a small plane with no markings stay about one or two minutes over the crash site before leaving. [ Pittsburgh Channel, 9/12/01 ]
Tom Spinelli: “I saw the white plane. It was flying around all over the place like it was looking for something. I saw it before and after the crash.” [ Mirror, 9/13/02 ]
The FBI later says this was a Fairchild Falcon 20 business jet, directed after the crash to fly from 37,000 feet to 5,000 feet and obtain the coordinates for the crash site to help rescuers. [ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/16/01 , Pittsburgh Channel, 9/15/01 ] The FBI also says there was a C-130 military cargo aircraft flying at 24,000 feet about 17 miles away, but that plane wasn't armed and had no role in the crash. [ Pittsburgh Channel, 9/15/01 , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/16/01 ] Note that this is the same C-130 that flies very close to Flight 77 right as that planes crashes into the Pentagon (see 9:38 a.m.).
(After 10:06 a.m.): Just after Flight 93 crashes, “Up above, a fighter jet streak[s] by.” [ ABC News, 9/15/02 ]
(After 10:06 a.m.): At some point after Flight 93 crashes, NORAD diverts “unarmed Michigan Air National Guard fighter jets that happened to be flying a training mission in northern Michigan since the time of the first attack.” [ Associated Press, 8/30/02 ]
(10:08 a.m.): Bush is told of the crash of Flight 93 a few minutes later. Because of Cheney's earlier order, he asks, “Did we shoot it down or did it crash?” Several hours later, he is assured it crashed. [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ]
10:08 a.m.: Armed agents deploy around the White House. [ CNN, 9/12/01 ]
10:10 a.m.: All US military forces are ordered to Defcon Three (or Defcon Delta), “The highest alert for the nuclear arsenal in 30 years.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] Supposedly Rumsfeld makes the order, but its hard to see how he could have done this since he was assisting the wounded in the Pentagon explosion until 10:30 (see 10:30 a.m.). [ ABC News, 9/11/02 , CNN, 9/4/02 ] Another account says Defcon Delta doesn't happen until about noon. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
10:12 a.m.: CNN reports an explosion at Capitol Hill. CNN determines this is untrue 12 minutes later. [ Ottawa Citizen, 9/11/01 ]
10:13 a.m.: Federal buildings in Washington begin evacuation. The UN building evacuates first; others follow later. [ CNN, 9/12/01 , New York Times, 9/12/01 ]
10:15 a.m.: p The section of the Pentagon reportedly hit by the crash of Flight 77 collapses. [10:10, CNN, 9/12/01 , 10:10, New York Times, 9/12/01 , recorded live on WDCC-TV at 10:15, Television Archive, WDCC 10:00 ] A few minutes prior to its collapse, firefighters saw warning signs and sounded a general evacuation tone. No firefighters were injured. [ NFPA Journal, 11/1/01 ]
10:19 a.m.: 2004-04-08 There are reports on television of a fire at the State Department. At 10:20 a.m. and apparently again at 10:33 a.m. it is reported this was caused by a car bomb. [10:00, Ottawa Citizen, 9/11/01 , 10:19, Broadcasting and Cable, 8/26/02 , 10:20, Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] At 10:23, the Associated Press reports, “A car bomb explodes outside the State Department, senior law-enforcement officials say.” [ Broadcasting and Cable, 8/26/02 ] Secretary of State Richard Armitage sees this on television, goes outside the building to see if it true, finds out it isn't, and calls his colleagues to inform them that the reports are false. [ ABC News, 9/15/02 (B) ] There are numerous other false reports, including explosions at the Capitol building and USA Today headquarters. [ Broadcasting and Cable, 8/26/02 ]
(10:24 a.m.): Jane Garvey, head of the FAA, orders the diversion of all international flights to the U.S. Most flights are diverted to Canada. [10:41, Time, 9/14/01 , 10:24, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 10:24, CNN, 9/12/01 , 10:24, New York Times, 9/12/01 ]
WTC north tower collapses at 10:28. The collapse takes only about four seconds. [Reuters]
10:28 a.m.: The World Trade Center's north tower collapses. It was hit by Flight 11 at 8:46. [10:28, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 10:28, CNN, 9/12/01 , 10:28, New York Times, 9/12/01 , 10:28, Associated Press, 8/19/02 , 10:28 (based on seismic data), New York Times, 9/12/01 , 10:29, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 10:28:31, ] The death toll could have been much worse—an estimated 15,000 people made it out of the WTC to safety. [ ]
10:30 a.m.: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld finally enters the Pentagon's National Military Command Center (NMCC), where the military's response to the 9/11 attacks is being coordinated. [ CNN, 9/4/02 ] Rumsfeld was supposedly in the Pentagon meeting with Representative Cox (R) about missile defense and terrorism until the Pentagon explosion. [ Associated Press, 9/16/01 (C) , Rep. Cox Statement, 9/11/01 ] He then went outside to help the wounded of the attack until this time (see (9:38 a.m.)). Brigadier General Montague Winfield later says, “For 30 minutes we couldn't find him. And just as we began to worry, he walked into the door of the National Military Command Center.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
10:31 a.m.: “The FAA [allows] military, and law enforcement flights to resume (and some flights that the FAA can't reveal that were already airborne).” All civilian, military and law enforcement flights were ordered to land as soon as reasonably possible about one hour earlier (see (9:26 a.m.)). [ Time, 9/14/01 ]
10:32 a.m.: Cheney calls Bush and tells him of a threat to Air Force One. He is told it would take between 40 minutes and 90 minutes to get a protective fighter escort up to Air Force One. His plane turns toward Louisiana soon after. [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ] Many doubt the existence of this threat. For instance, Representative Martin Meehan (D) says, “I don't buy the notion Air Force One was a target. That's just PR, that's just spin.” [ Washington Times, 10/8/02 ] A later account calls the threat “completely untrue,” and says Cheney probably made the story up. A well-informed, anonymous Washington official says, “It did two things for [Cheney]. It reinforced his argument that the President should stay out of town, and it gave George W an excellent reason for doing so.” [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
(10:35 a.m.): Air Force One turns toward Louisiana. It has been decided Bush cannot go directly to Washington. [About 10:30, CBS, 9/11/02 (B) , about 10:42, Washington Post, 1/27/02 ]
(10:42 a.m.): Roughly around this time, the FAA tells the White House that it still cannot account for three planes in addition to the four that have crashed. It takes the FAA another hour and a half to account for the three other aircraft. [ Time, 9/14/01 ] Vice President Cheney later says, “That's what we started working off of, that list of six, and we could account for two of them in New York. The third one we didn't know what had happened to. It turned out it had hit the Pentagon, but the first reports on the Pentagon attack suggested a helicopter and then later a private jet.” [ Los Angeles Times, 9/17/01 ] Amongst false rumors during the day are reports of a bomb aboard a United Airlines jet that just landed in Rockford, Illinois. “Another plane disappears from radar and might have crashed in Kentucky. The reports are so serious that [FAA head Jane] Garvey notifies the White House that there has been another crash. Only later does she learn the reports are erroneous.” [ USA Today, 8/13/02 (B) ]
(10:55 a.m.): Colonel Mark Tillman, pilot of Air Force One, is told there is a threat to Bush's plane. Tillman has an armed guard placed at his cockpit door while the Secret Service double-checks the identity of everyone on board. Then traffic controllers warn that a suspect airliner is dead ahead. Says Tillman, “Coming out of Sarasota there was one call that said there was an airliner off our nose that they did not have contact with.” Tillman takes evasive action, pulling his plane high above normal traffic. [ CBS, 9/11/02 (B) ] Reporters on board notice the rise in elevation. [10:55 according to a reporter who writes it in her notebook, Dallas Morning News, 8/28/02 , “just before 11:00,” Salon, 9/12/01 (B) ]
(Between 10:55-11:30 a.m.): No fighters escort Bush's Air Force One until somewhere in this time period. At 10:32, Cheney said it would take until about 11:10 to 12:00 to get a fighter escort to Air Force One. [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ] According to one account, around 10:00 Air Force One “is joined by an escort of F-16 fighters from a base near Jacksonville, Florida,” but this is contradicted by Cheney's comment reported a month later. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ] Another account says, “At 10:41, … Air Force One headed toward Jacksonville to meet jets scrambled to give the presidential jet its own air cover.” [ New York Times, 9/16/01 ] But apparently when Air Force One takes evasive action around 10:55 there is still no fighter escort (see (10:55 a.m.)). NORAD commander Major General Larry Arnold later says, “We scrambled available airplanes from Tyndall [near Tallahassee, not Jacksonville, Florida] and then from Ellington in Houston, Texas,” but he doesn't say when. [ Code One Magazine, 1/02 ] In another account, two F-16s eventually arrive, piloted by Shane Brotherton and Randy Roberts, from the Texas Air National Guard, not from any Florida base. [ CBS, 9/11/02 ] By 11:30 there are six fighters protecting Air Force One. [ Sarasota Magazine, 9/19/01 ]
(11:00 a.m.): Evacuations are ordered at the tallest skyscrapers in several cities, and major tourist attractions are closed, including Walt Disney World, Philadelphia's Liberty Bell and Independence Hall, Seattle's Space Needle, and the Gateway Arch in St. Louis. [ Times Union, 9/11/01 ]
(11:00 a.m.): FAA's command center is told that all the flights over the United States are accounted for and complying with controllers. Every commercial flight in US airspace—about a quarter of the planes still in the air—is within 40 miles of its destination. Others are still over the oceans, and many are heading toward Canada. [ USA Today, 8/13/02 (B) ] There are 923 planes still in the air over the US. [ USA Today, 8/13/02 (B) ]
11:08 a.m.: A message sent from Korean Air Flight 85 is misinterpreted to indicate a possible hijacking. At 1:24 p.m. the pilots accidentally issue a hijacking alert as the plane nears Alaska on its way to Anchorage, Alaska. Two fighters tail the plane, and it is told it will be shot down unless it avoids populated areas. Strategic sites are evacuated across Alaska. The plane eventually lands safely in Whitehorse, Canada, at 2:54 p.m. [ USA Today, 8/12/02 (B) ]
11:30 a.m.: General Wesley Clark, former supreme commander of NATO, says on television, “This is clearly a coordinated effort. It hasn't been announced that its over…. Only one group has this kind of ability and that is Osama bin Laden's.” [ Ottawa Citizen, 9/11/01 ]
11:45 a.m.: Air Force One lands at Barksdale Air Force base near Shreveport, Louisiana. “The official reason for landing at Barksdale was that Bush felt it necessary to make a further statement, but it isn't unreasonable to assume that—as there was no agreement as to what the President's movements should be—it was felt he might as well be on the ground as in the air.” [ Salon, 9/12/01 (B) , New York Times, 9/16/01 , Telegraph, 12/16/01 , CBS, 9/11/02 ]
(12:00 Noon): Bush arrives at the Barksdale Air Force base headquarters in a Humvee escorted by armed outriders. Reporters and others are not allowed to say where they are. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
(12:00 Noon): Sen. Orrin Hatch (R), a member of both the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees, says he has just been “briefed by the highest levels of the FBI and of the intelligence community.” He says, “They've come to the conclusion that this looks like the signature of Osama bin Laden, and that he may be the one behind this.” [ Salon, 9/12/01 (B) ] At 12:05, CIA Director Tenet tells Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld that a message from a bin Laden agent celebrating the attacks was intercepted two hours earlier (see 9:53 a.m.). Rumsfeld writes in his notes that the lead is “vague,” that it “might not mean something,” and that there is “no good basis for hanging hat.” More evidence suggesting an al-Qaeda link comes several hours later (see (2:40 p.m.)). [ CBS, 9/4/02 ]
12:15 p.m.: The US closes some border crossings with Canada and Mexico. [ MSNBC, 9/22/01 ]
12:16 p.m.: US airspace is clear except for military and emergency flights. Only a few transoceanic flights were still landing in Canada. [ USA Today, 8/12/02 (C) ] At 12:30, the FAA reports about 50 flights still flying in US airspace, but none are reporting problems. [ CNN, 9/12/01 , New York Times, 9/12/01 ]
12:36 p.m.: Bush gives a short speech that is taped and played by the networks at 1:04 p.m. [“Just after 12:30,” Salon, 9/12/01 (B) , 12:36, Washington Times, 10/8/02 ] In a speech at Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana, President Bush announces that security measures are being taken and says: “Make no mistake, the United States will hunt down and punish those responsible for these cowardly acts.” [ MSNBC, 9/22/01 , CNN, 9/12/01 , New York Times, 9/12/01 ] He also states, “Freedom itself was attacked this morning by a faceless coward. And freedom will be defended.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
(12:58 p.m.): Bush spends most of his time at Barksdale Air Force base arguing on the phone with Cheney and others over where he should go next. “A few minutes before 1 p.m.,” he agrees to fly to Nebraska. As earlier (see 10:32 a.m.), there are rumors of a “credible terrorist threat” to Air Force One. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
(1:02 p.m.): New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani orders an evacuation of Manhattan south of Canal Street. [1:02 PM, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 11:00 AM, Associated Press, 8/19/02 ]
1:04 p.m.: President Bush puts the US military on high alert worldwide. [ CNN, 9/12/01 , Associated Press, 8/19/02 ]
1:27 p.m.: A state of emergency is declared in Washington. [ CNN, 9/12/01 , New York Times, 9/12/01 ]
(1:30 p.m.): President Bush leaves Barksdale Air Force Base for Nebraska's Offutt Air Force Base, home to the US Strategic Command. [1:15, Telegraph, 12/16/01 , 1:31, Salon, 9/12/01 (B) , 1:44, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 1:48, CNN, 9/12/01 ] He travels with Chief of Staff Andrew Card, senior advisor Karl Rove, communications staffers Dan Bartlett, Ari Fleischer and Gordon Johndroe, and a reduced number of reporters. [ Salon, 9/12/01 (B) ]
1:44 p.m.: The Navy dispatches aircraft carriers and guided missile destroyers to New York and Washington. Around the country, fighters, airborne radar, and refueling planes scramble. The North American Aerospace Defense Command go to its highest alert. [ MSNBC, 9/22/01 , CNN, 9/12/01 ]
(2:00 p.m.): F-15 fighter pilot Major Daniel Nash returns to base around this time, after chasing Flight 175 and patrolling the skies over New York City. He says that when he got out of the plane, “he was told that a military F-16 had shot down a fourth airliner in Pennsylvania, a report that turned out to be incorrect.” [About 1:30, Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02 , about 2:30, Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02 ]
(2:40 p.m.): By this time, the CIA determines from airplane passenger manifests that three of the hijackers were suspected al-Qaeda operatives. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld begins planning an attack against bin Laden. In his notes composed at this time (which are leaked almost one year later), he writes he wants the “best info fast. Judge whether good enough hit S.H. [Saddam Hussein] at same time. Not only UBL. [Usama bin Laden] Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not.” [ CBS, 9/4/02 ]
(2:50 p.m.): Air Force One lands at Offutt Air Force Base near Omaha, Nebraska. Bush stays on the plane for about 10 minutes before entering United States Strategic Command at 3:06. [ Salon, 9/12/01 (B) ] Bush is taken into an underground bunker designed to withstand a nuclear blast. There, he uses an advanced strategic command and communications center to teleconference directly with Vice President Cheney, National Security Advisor Rice, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, and members of the National Security Council. The meeting ends at 4:15. [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 , Washington Times, 10/8/02 ] [2:50, Daily Mail, 9/8/02 , 2:50, Telegraph, 12/16/01 , 2:50, Salon, 9/12/01 (B) , 3:07, Associated Press, 8/19/02 ] Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, CIA Director Tenet, and Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta also participate in the teleconference. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
4:00 p.m.: CNN reports that US officials say there are “good indications” that Saudi militant bin Laden, suspected of coordinating the bombings of two US embassies in 1998, is involved in the attacks, based on “new and specific” information developed since the attacks. [ CNN, 9/12/01 ]
4:10 p.m.: Building 7 of the WTC complex is reported on fire. [ CNN, 9/12/01 ]
This photo of Bush speaking to Cheney shortly after leaving Offutt is later used for Republican fundraising. [White House]
(4:33 p.m.): President Bush leaves Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska for Washington. [4:30, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 4:30, CNN, 9/12/01 , 4:36, Telegraph, 12/16/01 , 4:36, Washington Times, 10/8/02 ]
5:20 p.m.: Building 7 of the WTC complex, a 47-story tower, collapses from ancillary damage. No one is killed. [5:20, MSNBC, 9/22/01 , 5:20, CNN, 9/12/01 , 5:25, Washington Post, 9/12/01 , 5:25, Associated Press, 8/19/02 ]
(6:54 p.m.): Bush arrives back at the White House, after exiting Air Force One at 6:42 and flying across Washington in a helicopter. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] [6:34, Salon, 9/12/01 (B) , 6:54, Washington Times, 10/8/02 , 6:54, CNN, 9/12/01 , 6:54, Telegraph, 12/16/01 , 7:00, Associated Press, 8/19/02 ]
(7:00 p.m.): Secretary of State Powell returns to Washington from Lima, Peru. Ten hours after the attacks began, he is finally able to speak to Bush for the first time when they both arrive at the White House at about the same time. Powell later says of his flight, “And the worst part of it, is that because of the communications problems that existed during that day, I couldn't talk to anybody in Washington.” [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ] The Telegraph later theorizes, “Why so long? In the weeks before September 11 Washington was full of rumors that Powell was out of favor and had been quietly relegated to the sidelines…” [ Telegraph, 12/16/01 ]
8:30 p.m.: Bush addresses the nation on live TV. [ CNN, 9/12/01 ] In what will later be called the Bush Doctrine, he states,“We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.” [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ]
9:00 p.m.: Bush meets with his full National Security Council, followed roughly half an hour later by a meeting with a smaller group of key advisers. Bush and his advisors have already decided bin Laden is behind the attacks. CIA Director Tenet says that al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan are essentially one and the same. Bush says, tell the Taliban we're finished with them. [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ]
(11:30 p.m.): Before going to sleep, Bush writes in his diary, “The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today. … We think it's Osama bin Laden.” [ Washington Post, 1/27/02 ]
GioFX
23-07-2004, 22:50
Ad esempio questo, per il nostro sapientone che racconta un sacco di fraccate...
8:13 a.m.: The last routine communication between ground control and the pilots of Flight 11. The pilot responds when told to turn right. But almost immediately afterwards he fails to respond to a command to climb. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , 8:13:31, New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) ]
(8:13 a.m.): Flight 11 is hijacked around this time. One flight controller says the plane is hijacked over Gardner, Massachusetts, less than 50 miles west of Boston. [ Nashua Telegraph, 9/13/01 ] The storming of the cockpit doesn't appear to happen until after 8:21, yet communication with ground control stops now. Fifteen minutes after takeoff, Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01 , “A few minutes into the flight,” ABC News, 7/18/02 ] As the Boston Globe put it, “It appears that the hijackers' entry was surprising enough that the pilots did not have a chance to broadcast a traditional distress call,” a button that would have taken only a few seconds to press. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ]
(After 8:13 a.m.): Shortly after flight controllers ask Flight 11 to climb to 35,000 feet, the transponder stops transmitting. The transponder is the electronic device that identifies the jet on the controller's screen, gives its exact location and altitude, and also allows a four-digit emergency hijack code to be sent. Air traffic manager Glenn Michael says later, “We considered it at that time to be a possible hijacking.” [“When given permission to climb to 35,000 feet,” Associated Press, 8/12/02 , “8:13:47—46R: AAL11, now climb maintain FL350,” New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) , shortly after trying emergency frequencies, Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01 ] “Just moments” after radio contact is lost (which is discussed by flight controllers at 8:15), the transponder is turned off. [ MSNBC, 9/15/01 ] NORAD officially says it is not notified the plane is hijacked until 8:40—27 minutes later, though one NORAD employee contradicts this (see 8:31 a.m. and (8:40 a.m.)). [ NORAD, 9/18/01 ] Colonel Robert Marr, head of NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector, later claims the transponder is turned off some time after 8:30. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
(After 8:14 a.m.): At some point after the hijacking begins, the pilot of Flight 11, John Ogonowski, activates the talk-back button, enabling Boston flight controllers to hear what is being said in the cockpit. A controller says, “The button was being pushed intermittently most of the way to New York.” An article later notes that “his ability to do so also indicates that he was in the driver's seat much of the way” to the WTC. Such transmissions continue until about 8:38. [ Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01 , MSNBC, 9/15/01 ]
8:13 a.m.: The last routine communication between ground control and the pilots of Flight 11. The pilot responds when told to turn right. But almost immediately afterwards he fails to respond to a command to climb. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , 8:13:31, New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) ]
(8:13 a.m.): Flight 11 is hijacked around this time. One flight controller says the plane is hijacked over Gardner, Massachusetts, less than 50 miles west of Boston. [ Nashua Telegraph, 9/13/01 ] The storming of the cockpit doesn't appear to happen until after 8:21, yet communication with ground control stops now. Fifteen minutes after takeoff, Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01 , “A few minutes into the flight,” ABC News, 7/18/02 ] As the Boston Globe put it, “It appears that the hijackers' entry was surprising enough that the pilots did not have a chance to broadcast a traditional distress call,” a button that would have taken only a few seconds to press. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ]
(After 8:13 a.m.): Shortly after flight controllers ask Flight 11 to climb to 35,000 feet, the transponder stops transmitting. The transponder is the electronic device that identifies the jet on the controller's screen, gives its exact location and altitude, and also allows a four-digit emergency hijack code to be sent. Air traffic manager Glenn Michael says later, “We considered it at that time to be a possible hijacking.” [“When given permission to climb to 35,000 feet,” Associated Press, 8/12/02 , “8:13:47—46R: AAL11, now climb maintain FL350,” New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) , shortly after trying emergency frequencies, Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01 ] “Just moments” after radio contact is lost (which is discussed by flight controllers at 8:15), the transponder is turned off. [ MSNBC, 9/15/01 ] NORAD officially says it is not notified the plane is hijacked until 8:40—27 minutes later, though one NORAD employee contradicts this (see 8:31 a.m. and (8:40 a.m.)). [ NORAD, 9/18/01 ] Colonel Robert Marr, head of NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector, later claims the transponder is turned off some time after 8:30. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
(After 8:14 a.m.): At some point after the hijacking begins, the pilot of Flight 11, John Ogonowski, activates the talk-back button, enabling Boston flight controllers to hear what is being said in the cockpit. A controller says, “The button was being pushed intermittently most of the way to New York.” An article later notes that “his ability to do so also indicates that he was in the driver's seat much of the way” to the WTC. Such transmissions continue until about 8:38. [ Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01 , MSNBC, 9/15/01 ]
gpc
24-07-2004, 00:24
E' arrivato il coordinatore degli agenti della CIA del forum.
Dai allora Gio, tu che sai tutto e tutto conosci, dicci come sono veramente andate le cose. Confermaci che sono stati gli americani a minare le torri per farle crollare, orsù, converti noi poveri infedeli...
Dai allora Gio, tu che sai tutto e tutto conosci, dicci come sono veramente andate le cose. Confermaci che sono stati gli americani a minare le torri per farle crollare, orsù, converti noi poveri infedeli...
GioFX
24-07-2004, 00:53
Originariamente inviato da gpc
E' arrivato il coordinatore degli agenti della CIA del forum.
Dai allora Gio, tu che sai tutto e tutto conosci, dicci come sono veramente andate le cose. Confermaci che sono stati gli americani a minare le torri per farle crollare, orsù, converti noi poveri infedeli...
perchè mandare a puttane il 3d dicendo ste fregnacce? (c) by von
chi ha mai detto sta stronzata della colpa degli americani? io?
la mia era una risposta alle fanfalucche di von... leggiti la timeline degli eventi, altrimenti non ha senso... e poi ne discutiamo, eh?
E' arrivato il coordinatore degli agenti della CIA del forum.
Dai allora Gio, tu che sai tutto e tutto conosci, dicci come sono veramente andate le cose. Confermaci che sono stati gli americani a minare le torri per farle crollare, orsù, converti noi poveri infedeli...
perchè mandare a puttane il 3d dicendo ste fregnacce? (c) by von
chi ha mai detto sta stronzata della colpa degli americani? io?
la mia era una risposta alle fanfalucche di von... leggiti la timeline degli eventi, altrimenti non ha senso... e poi ne discutiamo, eh?
Phantom II
24-07-2004, 01:32
Da quello che ho letto su numerose riviste di aeronautica praticamente tutti sono concordi nell'ammettere che le "stranezze" nell'operato della difesa aerea Usa, siano la regola nel loro stumento difensivo post crollo dell'Unione Sovietica. Al giorno d'oggi gli Stati Uniti sono difesi da alcuni Squdrons di F-15 ed F-16 suddivisi tra Active Force, Air Force Reserve e Air National Guard, il grosso dei mezzi è impiegato in operazioni volte al mantenimento degli interessi americani all'estero, eccezion fatta per l'Alaska che è l'unico settore continentale nel quale si registra un'attività aerea difensiva considerevole.
Qui è riportata la cronologia degli avvenimenti di quella mattina
07.59 Il volo American Airlines AA11 decolla dal Logan lnternational Airport di Boston.
08.14 Il volo United Airlines UA175 decolla dal Logan lnternational Airport di Boston.
08.20 Il volo American Airlines AA11 interrompe la trasmissione dei segnali IFF mentre sorvola il fiume Hudson.
08.20 Il volo American Airlines AA77 decolla dal Dulles lnternational Airport vicino Washington.
08.38 Il centro dei controllo dei traffico aereo di Boston comunica al NORAD che il volo American Airlines AA11 è stato dirottato.
08.42 Il volo United Airlines UA93 decolla dal Newark lnternational Airport, vicino New York.
08.43 La FAA (Federal Aviation Agency - ente federale per l'aviazione commerciale) informa il NORAD che il volo United Airlines UA175 è stato dirottato.
08.44 Dalla base della Air National Guard di Otis, Massachusetts, viene dato l'ordine di decollo (scramble) a due caccia F-15.
08.46 Il Boeing 767-200 dei volo American Airlines AA11 si abbatte sulla Torre Nord del World Trade Center.
08.47 Il NORAD viene informato che un aereo si è abbattuto sul World Trade Center.
08.50 Il volo United Airlines UA1 75 devia dalla rotta dei proprio piano di volo 08.52 Due caccia F-15 Eagle decollano dalla base di Otis per intercettare i velivoli dirottati dopo che il primo aereo si è abbattuto sul World Trade Center.
09.02 Il volo United Airlines UA175 si abbatte sulla Torre Sud dei Worid Trade Center mentre i due caccia F-15 decollati dalla base di Otis sono ancora distanti circa 110 km.
09.16 La FAA informa il NORAD che il volo United Airlines UA93 può essere stato dirottato.
09.25 La FAA comunica al NORAD che il volo American Airlines AA77 potrebbe essere stato dirottato.
09.27 circa Il NORAD ordina il decollo su scramble a due caccia F-16 dalla Langley AFB, Virginia, per intercettare il volo AA77.
09.35 Tre caccia F-16 decollano dalla Langley AFB in direzione dell'area di Washington.
09.37 Il volo American Airlines AA77 scompare dagli schemi dei radar.
09.38 Il Boeing 757-200 del volo American Airlines AA77 si abbatte sul Pentagono, a Washington.
09.40 I segnali dei transponder dei volo UA93 si interrompono e il velivolo scompare dagli schermi radar.
09.49 I caccia F-16 partiti da Langley AFB arrivano su Washington per effettuare una missione CAP (Cornbat Air Patrol) sulla città; i caccia avevano superato la barriera dei suono e viaggiato alla velocità di circa 1.300 kmlh percorrendo circa 240 km in 14 minuti.
10.02 Un segnale radar dei volo United Airlines UA93 viene rilevato vicino Shanksville, in Pennsylvania.
10.10 Il Boeing 757-200 (volo United Airlines UA93) precipita a Stony Creek Twp., vicino Pittsburg, in Pennsylvania.
Se ci avete fatto caso gli intercettori ci hanno messo una vita ad arrivare in zona operazioni, a me questa pare impreparazione bella e buona secondo me dettata dalla troppa sicurezza di sentirsi intoccabili perchè fisicamente lontani da possibili nemici.
Qui è riportata la cronologia degli avvenimenti di quella mattina
07.59 Il volo American Airlines AA11 decolla dal Logan lnternational Airport di Boston.
08.14 Il volo United Airlines UA175 decolla dal Logan lnternational Airport di Boston.
08.20 Il volo American Airlines AA11 interrompe la trasmissione dei segnali IFF mentre sorvola il fiume Hudson.
08.20 Il volo American Airlines AA77 decolla dal Dulles lnternational Airport vicino Washington.
08.38 Il centro dei controllo dei traffico aereo di Boston comunica al NORAD che il volo American Airlines AA11 è stato dirottato.
08.42 Il volo United Airlines UA93 decolla dal Newark lnternational Airport, vicino New York.
08.43 La FAA (Federal Aviation Agency - ente federale per l'aviazione commerciale) informa il NORAD che il volo United Airlines UA175 è stato dirottato.
08.44 Dalla base della Air National Guard di Otis, Massachusetts, viene dato l'ordine di decollo (scramble) a due caccia F-15.
08.46 Il Boeing 767-200 dei volo American Airlines AA11 si abbatte sulla Torre Nord del World Trade Center.
08.47 Il NORAD viene informato che un aereo si è abbattuto sul World Trade Center.
08.50 Il volo United Airlines UA1 75 devia dalla rotta dei proprio piano di volo 08.52 Due caccia F-15 Eagle decollano dalla base di Otis per intercettare i velivoli dirottati dopo che il primo aereo si è abbattuto sul World Trade Center.
09.02 Il volo United Airlines UA175 si abbatte sulla Torre Sud dei Worid Trade Center mentre i due caccia F-15 decollati dalla base di Otis sono ancora distanti circa 110 km.
09.16 La FAA informa il NORAD che il volo United Airlines UA93 può essere stato dirottato.
09.25 La FAA comunica al NORAD che il volo American Airlines AA77 potrebbe essere stato dirottato.
09.27 circa Il NORAD ordina il decollo su scramble a due caccia F-16 dalla Langley AFB, Virginia, per intercettare il volo AA77.
09.35 Tre caccia F-16 decollano dalla Langley AFB in direzione dell'area di Washington.
09.37 Il volo American Airlines AA77 scompare dagli schemi dei radar.
09.38 Il Boeing 757-200 del volo American Airlines AA77 si abbatte sul Pentagono, a Washington.
09.40 I segnali dei transponder dei volo UA93 si interrompono e il velivolo scompare dagli schermi radar.
09.49 I caccia F-16 partiti da Langley AFB arrivano su Washington per effettuare una missione CAP (Cornbat Air Patrol) sulla città; i caccia avevano superato la barriera dei suono e viaggiato alla velocità di circa 1.300 kmlh percorrendo circa 240 km in 14 minuti.
10.02 Un segnale radar dei volo United Airlines UA93 viene rilevato vicino Shanksville, in Pennsylvania.
10.10 Il Boeing 757-200 (volo United Airlines UA93) precipita a Stony Creek Twp., vicino Pittsburg, in Pennsylvania.
Se ci avete fatto caso gli intercettori ci hanno messo una vita ad arrivare in zona operazioni, a me questa pare impreparazione bella e buona secondo me dettata dalla troppa sicurezza di sentirsi intoccabili perchè fisicamente lontani da possibili nemici.
StErMiNeiToR
24-07-2004, 01:35
...
gpc
24-07-2004, 09:16
Originariamente inviato da Phantom II
Se ci avete fatto caso gli intercettori ci hanno messo una vita ad arrivare in zona operazioni, a me questa pare impreparazione bella e buona secondo me dettata dalla troppa sicurezza di sentirsi intoccabili perchè fisicamente lontani da possibili nemici.
Qualcuno ha detto il contrario?
I problemi sono stati due: impossibilità di prevedere quello che stava succedendo, impreparazione per un attacco dall'interno.
Credo che sia dalla prima pagina che lo si ripete... Poi sono arrivati quelli che sapevano tutto già da cinque anni prima, e il resto si conosce... :D
Se ci avete fatto caso gli intercettori ci hanno messo una vita ad arrivare in zona operazioni, a me questa pare impreparazione bella e buona secondo me dettata dalla troppa sicurezza di sentirsi intoccabili perchè fisicamente lontani da possibili nemici.
Qualcuno ha detto il contrario?
I problemi sono stati due: impossibilità di prevedere quello che stava succedendo, impreparazione per un attacco dall'interno.
Credo che sia dalla prima pagina che lo si ripete... Poi sono arrivati quelli che sapevano tutto già da cinque anni prima, e il resto si conosce... :D
GioFX
24-07-2004, 09:35
Originariamente inviato da gpc
Qualcuno ha detto il contrario?
I problemi sono stati due: impossibilità di prevedere quello che stava succedendo, impreparazione per un attacco dall'interno.
Credo che sia dalla prima pagina che lo si ripete... Poi sono arrivati quelli che sapevano tutto già da cinque anni prima, e il resto si conosce... :D
Dai non diciamo fregnacce (c) gippino... è proprio quello che anch'io andavo dicendo... se ti rileggi la dettagliatissima timeline degli eventi, basata su aventi e fatti descritti dai media nazionali e dagli organi ufficiali, si evince proprio questo.
The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (http://www.9-11commission.gov/)
Final 9/11 Commission Report (http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf)
PS: Io tra l'altro ricordo ancora i commenti di molti dei neocon qui presenti che difendevano a spada tratta l'intelligence e le altre agenzie governative statunitensi dicendo che tutte le storie sui ritardi, sulla mancata considerazione dei moltissimi avvertimenti precisi circa un attacco su larga scala contro gli stati uniti, anche con l'uso di aerei civili, erano le solite fregnacce degli antiamericani e puttanate varie... ora andatevi a leggere il final report se ne avete il coraggio... perchè va bene glissare sugli eventi e i fatti reali, ma addirittura non credere agli stessi vertici politici americani...
Qualcuno ha detto il contrario?
I problemi sono stati due: impossibilità di prevedere quello che stava succedendo, impreparazione per un attacco dall'interno.
Credo che sia dalla prima pagina che lo si ripete... Poi sono arrivati quelli che sapevano tutto già da cinque anni prima, e il resto si conosce... :D
Dai non diciamo fregnacce (c) gippino... è proprio quello che anch'io andavo dicendo... se ti rileggi la dettagliatissima timeline degli eventi, basata su aventi e fatti descritti dai media nazionali e dagli organi ufficiali, si evince proprio questo.
The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (http://www.9-11commission.gov/)
Final 9/11 Commission Report (http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf)
PS: Io tra l'altro ricordo ancora i commenti di molti dei neocon qui presenti che difendevano a spada tratta l'intelligence e le altre agenzie governative statunitensi dicendo che tutte le storie sui ritardi, sulla mancata considerazione dei moltissimi avvertimenti precisi circa un attacco su larga scala contro gli stati uniti, anche con l'uso di aerei civili, erano le solite fregnacce degli antiamericani e puttanate varie... ora andatevi a leggere il final report se ne avete il coraggio... perchè va bene glissare sugli eventi e i fatti reali, ma addirittura non credere agli stessi vertici politici americani...
GioFX
24-07-2004, 10:10
Originariamente inviato da Proteus
Facile, la solita trascuratezza che gli impiegati pubblici mettono nell'eseguire il loro lavoro. Se avessero indagato sul fatto che i metal detectors avevano suonato perquisendo accuratamente tutta la compagnia, invece uno è addirittura andato a prendere la borsa senza passare per il detector, come avrebbero dovuto fare le cose sarebbero quyasi certamente andate in modo differente.
Non erano impiegati pubblici, Proteus... come tu sai era una diffusa prassi prima dell'11 settembre e, in parte, ancora oggi, di dare in appalto a privati la sicurezza di aeroporti e altri luoghi a rischio alto di sicurezza.
Facile, la solita trascuratezza che gli impiegati pubblici mettono nell'eseguire il loro lavoro. Se avessero indagato sul fatto che i metal detectors avevano suonato perquisendo accuratamente tutta la compagnia, invece uno è addirittura andato a prendere la borsa senza passare per il detector, come avrebbero dovuto fare le cose sarebbero quyasi certamente andate in modo differente.
Non erano impiegati pubblici, Proteus... come tu sai era una diffusa prassi prima dell'11 settembre e, in parte, ancora oggi, di dare in appalto a privati la sicurezza di aeroporti e altri luoghi a rischio alto di sicurezza.
von Clausewitz
24-07-2004, 12:48
Originariamente inviato da GioFX
ma dico, sai bene come sono andati gli eventi, o racconti le solite finiculate? :D
Percortesia, informarsi prima...
http://www.unansweredquestions.org/timeline/timeline_dayof911.html
http://www.911timeline.net/
ah giusto furono degli F15 ad arrivare sopra il cielo di New York poco dopo il secondo schianto
l'F16 fu sguinzagliato dietro al volo 77 che si schianto sul Pentagono
e allora, nella sostanza cambia qualcosa? :confused: :rolleyes:
ma dico, sai bene come sono andati gli eventi, o racconti le solite finiculate? :D
Percortesia, informarsi prima...
http://www.unansweredquestions.org/timeline/timeline_dayof911.html
http://www.911timeline.net/
ah giusto furono degli F15 ad arrivare sopra il cielo di New York poco dopo il secondo schianto
l'F16 fu sguinzagliato dietro al volo 77 che si schianto sul Pentagono
e allora, nella sostanza cambia qualcosa? :confused: :rolleyes:
von Clausewitz
24-07-2004, 13:08
Originariamente inviato da GioFX
Ad esempio questo, per il nostro sapientone che racconta un sacco di fraccate...
8:13 a.m.: The last routine communication between ground control and the pilots of Flight 11. The pilot responds when told to turn right. But almost immediately afterwards he fails to respond to a command to climb. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , 8:13:31, New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) ]
(8:13 a.m.): Flight 11 is hijacked around this time. One flight controller says the plane is hijacked over Gardner, Massachusetts, less than 50 miles west of Boston. [ Nashua Telegraph, 9/13/01 ] The storming of the cockpit doesn't appear to happen until after 8:21, yet communication with ground control stops now. Fifteen minutes after takeoff, Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01 , “A few minutes into the flight,” ABC News, 7/18/02 ] As the Boston Globe put it, “It appears that the hijackers' entry was surprising enough that the pilots did not have a chance to broadcast a traditional distress call,” a button that would have taken only a few seconds to press. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ]
(After 8:13 a.m.): Shortly after flight controllers ask Flight 11 to climb to 35,000 feet, the transponder stops transmitting. The transponder is the electronic device that identifies the jet on the controller's screen, gives its exact location and altitude, and also allows a four-digit emergency hijack code to be sent. Air traffic manager Glenn Michael says later, “We considered it at that time to be a possible hijacking.” [“When given permission to climb to 35,000 feet,” Associated Press, 8/12/02 , “8:13:47—46R: AAL11, now climb maintain FL350,” New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) , shortly after trying emergency frequencies, Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01 ] “Just moments” after radio contact is lost (which is discussed by flight controllers at 8:15), the transponder is turned off. [ MSNBC, 9/15/01 ] NORAD officially says it is not notified the plane is hijacked until 8:40—27 minutes later, though one NORAD employee contradicts this (see 8:31 a.m. and (8:40 a.m.)). [ NORAD, 9/18/01 ] Colonel Robert Marr, head of NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector, later claims the transponder is turned off some time after 8:30. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
(After 8:14 a.m.): At some point after the hijacking begins, the pilot of Flight 11, John Ogonowski, activates the talk-back button, enabling Boston flight controllers to hear what is being said in the cockpit. A controller says, “The button was being pushed intermittently most of the way to New York.” An article later notes that “his ability to do so also indicates that he was in the driver's seat much of the way” to the WTC. Such transmissions continue until about 8:38. [ Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01 , MSNBC, 9/15/01 ]
con questo cosa vuoi dimostrare?
che alle ore 08-13 antimeridiane un autorità americana, una qualsiasi autorità americana sapesse che nei cieli americani c'erano 4 (che poi in volo erano 3, il volo 77 destinato al pentagono decollerà alle 08-20) aerei pronti a schiantarsi su obiettivi civili?
no, alle 08-13 c'è solo l'ultimo contato ufficiale della torre di controllo di Boston col volo 11
i minuti seguenti trascorreranno con la torre di controllo che cercherà invano di contattare il volo 11 per altre istruzioni e per cercare di capire cosa stava succedendo al volo 11
dopo che hanno capito che il volo è stato dirottato comunicheranno questa notizia al NORAD solo alle 08-40, e solo del dirottamento del volo 11, degli altri voli si capirà dopo come è riportato nellla didascalia cronologica
e allora, si può sapere cosa volevi dimostrare o renderci edotti rispetto a quello che ho scritto io, cioè che nessun autorità americana alle 08-15 aveva cognizione di alcun dirottamento nei suoi cieli, questo perchè tutti erano impreparati a un eventualità del genere?
senti Gio, invece di continuare a farti seghe mentali andando a cercare per il web mondiale, riscontri verosimili come in questo caso o più spesso fregnacce per dimostrare non si capisce che cosa o l'indimostrabile, prenditi una bella vacanza
eviteresti di perdere tempo tu e di farlo perdere agli altri :rolleyes:
Ad esempio questo, per il nostro sapientone che racconta un sacco di fraccate...
8:13 a.m.: The last routine communication between ground control and the pilots of Flight 11. The pilot responds when told to turn right. But almost immediately afterwards he fails to respond to a command to climb. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 , 8:13:31, New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) ]
(8:13 a.m.): Flight 11 is hijacked around this time. One flight controller says the plane is hijacked over Gardner, Massachusetts, less than 50 miles west of Boston. [ Nashua Telegraph, 9/13/01 ] The storming of the cockpit doesn't appear to happen until after 8:21, yet communication with ground control stops now. Fifteen minutes after takeoff, Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01 , “A few minutes into the flight,” ABC News, 7/18/02 ] As the Boston Globe put it, “It appears that the hijackers' entry was surprising enough that the pilots did not have a chance to broadcast a traditional distress call,” a button that would have taken only a few seconds to press. [ Boston Globe, 11/23/01 ]
(After 8:13 a.m.): Shortly after flight controllers ask Flight 11 to climb to 35,000 feet, the transponder stops transmitting. The transponder is the electronic device that identifies the jet on the controller's screen, gives its exact location and altitude, and also allows a four-digit emergency hijack code to be sent. Air traffic manager Glenn Michael says later, “We considered it at that time to be a possible hijacking.” [“When given permission to climb to 35,000 feet,” Associated Press, 8/12/02 , “8:13:47—46R: AAL11, now climb maintain FL350,” New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) , shortly after trying emergency frequencies, Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01 ] “Just moments” after radio contact is lost (which is discussed by flight controllers at 8:15), the transponder is turned off. [ MSNBC, 9/15/01 ] NORAD officially says it is not notified the plane is hijacked until 8:40—27 minutes later, though one NORAD employee contradicts this (see 8:31 a.m. and (8:40 a.m.)). [ NORAD, 9/18/01 ] Colonel Robert Marr, head of NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector, later claims the transponder is turned off some time after 8:30. [ ABC News, 9/11/02 ]
(After 8:14 a.m.): At some point after the hijacking begins, the pilot of Flight 11, John Ogonowski, activates the talk-back button, enabling Boston flight controllers to hear what is being said in the cockpit. A controller says, “The button was being pushed intermittently most of the way to New York.” An article later notes that “his ability to do so also indicates that he was in the driver's seat much of the way” to the WTC. Such transmissions continue until about 8:38. [ Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01 , MSNBC, 9/15/01 ]
con questo cosa vuoi dimostrare?
che alle ore 08-13 antimeridiane un autorità americana, una qualsiasi autorità americana sapesse che nei cieli americani c'erano 4 (che poi in volo erano 3, il volo 77 destinato al pentagono decollerà alle 08-20) aerei pronti a schiantarsi su obiettivi civili?
no, alle 08-13 c'è solo l'ultimo contato ufficiale della torre di controllo di Boston col volo 11
i minuti seguenti trascorreranno con la torre di controllo che cercherà invano di contattare il volo 11 per altre istruzioni e per cercare di capire cosa stava succedendo al volo 11
dopo che hanno capito che il volo è stato dirottato comunicheranno questa notizia al NORAD solo alle 08-40, e solo del dirottamento del volo 11, degli altri voli si capirà dopo come è riportato nellla didascalia cronologica
e allora, si può sapere cosa volevi dimostrare o renderci edotti rispetto a quello che ho scritto io, cioè che nessun autorità americana alle 08-15 aveva cognizione di alcun dirottamento nei suoi cieli, questo perchè tutti erano impreparati a un eventualità del genere?
senti Gio, invece di continuare a farti seghe mentali andando a cercare per il web mondiale, riscontri verosimili come in questo caso o più spesso fregnacce per dimostrare non si capisce che cosa o l'indimostrabile, prenditi una bella vacanza
eviteresti di perdere tempo tu e di farlo perdere agli altri :rolleyes:
von Clausewitz
24-07-2004, 13:15
i miei ultimi contributi in questa discussione, finita nel sciocchezzaio come al solito
per quanto riguarda l'aereo "abbattuto" :rolleyes: in Pennsylvania
http://www.google.it/search?q=cache:FzGP9HZXsrIJ:www.lettere.unipd.it/ebla/archivio/beltramin.pdf+ansa+Pennsylvania+aereo&hl=it&lr=lang_it
Il secondo esempio di buon giornalismo che troviamo in questa sede è ancora più notevole; il coraggioso titolo di apertura di pagina 8 afferma infatti: “Volo kamikaze fermato dai passeggeri”. Più dettagliato, naturalmente, il sommario: “Dopo il dirottamento i viaggiatori a bordo del Boeing precipitato in Pennsylvania hanno provato a sopraffare gli attentatori. La colluttazione offrirebbe una spiegazione plausibile all’incidente dell’unico jet che non è riuscito a raggiungere l’obbiettivo prefissato dai terroristi. Nuove prove emergeranno dall’analisi della scatola nera”. La voce che si era diffusa in tarda serata sull’“eroismo del volo 93” era sembrata troppo poco plausibile alle grandi testate per meritare uno spazio adeguato: la versione più accreditata risulta praticamente ovunque quella dell’abbattimento dell’aereo da parte dei caccia militari statunitensi nel timore di una nuova strage; i giornali più a sinistra, “Manifesto” e “Liberazione”, mostrando ancora una volta faziosità, non accennano nemmeno all’ipotesi del sacrificio volontario dei passeggeri. “L’Avvenire”, invece, unico a credere davvero a questa possibilità, decide di puntare tutto sull’ipotesi più coraggiosa e nei fatti pubblica un vero e proprio scoop.
qui ecco la cronologia del volo 93:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&day_of_911=ua93
e la foto del punto d'impatto
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/images/flight93crashsite.jpg
:rolleyes:
per quanto riguarda l'aereo "abbattuto" :rolleyes: in Pennsylvania
http://www.google.it/search?q=cache:FzGP9HZXsrIJ:www.lettere.unipd.it/ebla/archivio/beltramin.pdf+ansa+Pennsylvania+aereo&hl=it&lr=lang_it
Il secondo esempio di buon giornalismo che troviamo in questa sede è ancora più notevole; il coraggioso titolo di apertura di pagina 8 afferma infatti: “Volo kamikaze fermato dai passeggeri”. Più dettagliato, naturalmente, il sommario: “Dopo il dirottamento i viaggiatori a bordo del Boeing precipitato in Pennsylvania hanno provato a sopraffare gli attentatori. La colluttazione offrirebbe una spiegazione plausibile all’incidente dell’unico jet che non è riuscito a raggiungere l’obbiettivo prefissato dai terroristi. Nuove prove emergeranno dall’analisi della scatola nera”. La voce che si era diffusa in tarda serata sull’“eroismo del volo 93” era sembrata troppo poco plausibile alle grandi testate per meritare uno spazio adeguato: la versione più accreditata risulta praticamente ovunque quella dell’abbattimento dell’aereo da parte dei caccia militari statunitensi nel timore di una nuova strage; i giornali più a sinistra, “Manifesto” e “Liberazione”, mostrando ancora una volta faziosità, non accennano nemmeno all’ipotesi del sacrificio volontario dei passeggeri. “L’Avvenire”, invece, unico a credere davvero a questa possibilità, decide di puntare tutto sull’ipotesi più coraggiosa e nei fatti pubblica un vero e proprio scoop.
qui ecco la cronologia del volo 93:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&day_of_911=ua93
e la foto del punto d'impatto
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/images/flight93crashsite.jpg
:rolleyes:
GioFX
24-07-2004, 16:22
Originariamente inviato da von Clausewitz
ah giusto furono degli F15 ad arrivare sopra il cielo di New York poco dopo il secondo schianto
l'F16 fu sguinzagliato dietro al volo 77 che si schianto sul Pentagono
e allora, nella sostanza cambia qualcosa? :confused: :rolleyes:
che il primo aereo fu dichiarato dirottato alle 08:13.
ah giusto furono degli F15 ad arrivare sopra il cielo di New York poco dopo il secondo schianto
l'F16 fu sguinzagliato dietro al volo 77 che si schianto sul Pentagono
e allora, nella sostanza cambia qualcosa? :confused: :rolleyes:
che il primo aereo fu dichiarato dirottato alle 08:13.
GioFX
24-07-2004, 16:26
Originariamente inviato da von Clausewitz
con questo cosa vuoi dimostrare?
semplicemente quello che sta scritto anche nel final report, niente altro, e cioè che ci furono una serie di ritardi e di inefficienze dell'intero sistema di difesa americano...
e allora, si può sapere cosa volevi dimostrare o renderci edotti rispetto a quello che ho scritto io, cioè che nessun autorità americana alle 08-15 aveva cognizione di alcun dirottamento nei suoi cieli, questo perchè tutti erano impreparati a un eventualità del genere?
ALLE 8:13 LE AUTORITA' DI VOLO CAPIRONO CHE IL VOLO 77 ERA DIROTTATO. La pianti di dire le solite fanfalucche?!?
senti Gio, invece di continuare a farti seghe mentali andando a cercare per il web mondiale, riscontri verosimili come in questo caso o più spesso fregnacce per dimostrare non si capisce che cosa o l'indimostrabile, prenditi una bella vacanza
eviteresti di perdere tempo tu e di farlo perdere agli altri :rolleyes:
Dimmi che c'è di falso in quella che è una ricostruzione della timeline degli eventi fatta con tutta la documentazione che puoi consultare, non c'è un cazzo di top secret, vonny...
io non voglio dimostrare un cazzo di nulla, se non che tu spari sempre un sacco di fanfaluccate allucinanti.
con questo cosa vuoi dimostrare?
semplicemente quello che sta scritto anche nel final report, niente altro, e cioè che ci furono una serie di ritardi e di inefficienze dell'intero sistema di difesa americano...
e allora, si può sapere cosa volevi dimostrare o renderci edotti rispetto a quello che ho scritto io, cioè che nessun autorità americana alle 08-15 aveva cognizione di alcun dirottamento nei suoi cieli, questo perchè tutti erano impreparati a un eventualità del genere?
ALLE 8:13 LE AUTORITA' DI VOLO CAPIRONO CHE IL VOLO 77 ERA DIROTTATO. La pianti di dire le solite fanfalucche?!?
senti Gio, invece di continuare a farti seghe mentali andando a cercare per il web mondiale, riscontri verosimili come in questo caso o più spesso fregnacce per dimostrare non si capisce che cosa o l'indimostrabile, prenditi una bella vacanza
eviteresti di perdere tempo tu e di farlo perdere agli altri :rolleyes:
Dimmi che c'è di falso in quella che è una ricostruzione della timeline degli eventi fatta con tutta la documentazione che puoi consultare, non c'è un cazzo di top secret, vonny...
io non voglio dimostrare un cazzo di nulla, se non che tu spari sempre un sacco di fanfaluccate allucinanti.
GioFX
24-07-2004, 16:28
Originariamente inviato da von Clausewitz
i miei ultimi contributi in questa discussione, finita nel sciocchezzaio come al solito
per quanto riguarda l'aereo "abbattuto" :rolleyes: in Pennsylvania
http://www.google.it/search?q=cache:FzGP9HZXsrIJ:www.lettere.unipd.it/ebla/archivio/beltramin.pdf+ansa+Pennsylvania+aereo&hl=it&lr=lang_it
Il secondo esempio di buon giornalismo che troviamo in questa sede è ancora più notevole; il coraggioso titolo di apertura di pagina 8 afferma infatti: “Volo kamikaze fermato dai passeggeri”. Più dettagliato, naturalmente, il sommario: “Dopo il dirottamento i viaggiatori a bordo del Boeing precipitato in Pennsylvania hanno provato a sopraffare gli attentatori. La colluttazione offrirebbe una spiegazione plausibile all’incidente dell’unico jet che non è riuscito a raggiungere l’obbiettivo prefissato dai terroristi. Nuove prove emergeranno dall’analisi della scatola nera”. La voce che si era diffusa in tarda serata sull’“eroismo del volo 93” era sembrata troppo poco plausibile alle grandi testate per meritare uno spazio adeguato: la versione più accreditata risulta praticamente ovunque quella dell’abbattimento dell’aereo da parte dei caccia militari statunitensi nel timore di una nuova strage; i giornali più a sinistra, “Manifesto” e “Liberazione”, mostrando ancora una volta faziosità, non accennano nemmeno all’ipotesi del sacrificio volontario dei passeggeri. “L’Avvenire”, invece, unico a credere davvero a questa possibilità, decide di puntare tutto sull’ipotesi più coraggiosa e nei fatti pubblica un vero e proprio scoop.
qui ecco la cronologia del volo 93:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&day_of_911=ua93
e la foto del punto d'impatto
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/images/flight93crashsite.jpg
:rolleyes:
Grazie al cazzo che l'avvenire pensasse al miracolo e al coraggio dei passeggeri... ma dai... non furono certo solo i giornali dell'internazionale socialista ad affermare che il volo UA 93 potesse essere stato abbattuto, ma anche il Times e il WP.
Informarsi prima.
i miei ultimi contributi in questa discussione, finita nel sciocchezzaio come al solito
per quanto riguarda l'aereo "abbattuto" :rolleyes: in Pennsylvania
http://www.google.it/search?q=cache:FzGP9HZXsrIJ:www.lettere.unipd.it/ebla/archivio/beltramin.pdf+ansa+Pennsylvania+aereo&hl=it&lr=lang_it
Il secondo esempio di buon giornalismo che troviamo in questa sede è ancora più notevole; il coraggioso titolo di apertura di pagina 8 afferma infatti: “Volo kamikaze fermato dai passeggeri”. Più dettagliato, naturalmente, il sommario: “Dopo il dirottamento i viaggiatori a bordo del Boeing precipitato in Pennsylvania hanno provato a sopraffare gli attentatori. La colluttazione offrirebbe una spiegazione plausibile all’incidente dell’unico jet che non è riuscito a raggiungere l’obbiettivo prefissato dai terroristi. Nuove prove emergeranno dall’analisi della scatola nera”. La voce che si era diffusa in tarda serata sull’“eroismo del volo 93” era sembrata troppo poco plausibile alle grandi testate per meritare uno spazio adeguato: la versione più accreditata risulta praticamente ovunque quella dell’abbattimento dell’aereo da parte dei caccia militari statunitensi nel timore di una nuova strage; i giornali più a sinistra, “Manifesto” e “Liberazione”, mostrando ancora una volta faziosità, non accennano nemmeno all’ipotesi del sacrificio volontario dei passeggeri. “L’Avvenire”, invece, unico a credere davvero a questa possibilità, decide di puntare tutto sull’ipotesi più coraggiosa e nei fatti pubblica un vero e proprio scoop.
qui ecco la cronologia del volo 93:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&day_of_911=ua93
e la foto del punto d'impatto
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/images/flight93crashsite.jpg
:rolleyes:
Grazie al cazzo che l'avvenire pensasse al miracolo e al coraggio dei passeggeri... ma dai... non furono certo solo i giornali dell'internazionale socialista ad affermare che il volo UA 93 potesse essere stato abbattuto, ma anche il Times e il WP.
Informarsi prima.
/\/\@®¢Ø
24-07-2004, 18:19
Originariamente inviato da IpseDixit
Il presidente americano George W. Bush sarebbe stato avvertito più di un mese prima dell'11 settembre che sostenitori di Osama Bin Laden preparavano un attacco con esplosivi nel territorio americano e volevano dirottare aerei.
E' da quando che son nato che mi hanno avvertito che devo morire, non per questo mi aspetto che accada proprio oggi :D
:sperem:
Il presidente americano George W. Bush sarebbe stato avvertito più di un mese prima dell'11 settembre che sostenitori di Osama Bin Laden preparavano un attacco con esplosivi nel territorio americano e volevano dirottare aerei.
E' da quando che son nato che mi hanno avvertito che devo morire, non per questo mi aspetto che accada proprio oggi :D
:sperem:
von Clausewitz
24-07-2004, 18:45
Originariamente inviato da GioFX
che il primo aereo fu dichiarato dirottato alle 08:13.
chi lo dichiarò dirottato?
è Paul Thompson nella sua ricostruzione che fa ascendere a quel momento il dirottamento
quando nell'ultima comunicazione pock prima e sempre alle 08-13 il pilota dell'aereo rispondeva che virava a destra, ma poi poco dopo non rispose alla richiesta del controllore di volo di ascendere a 35.000 piedi
che il volo 11 sia stato dichiarato dirottato da qualcuno alle 08-13 di quella mattina esiste solo a livello delle tue connessioni neuroniche rispetto a ciò
nella realtà nessuno ha dichiarato niente alle 08-13
anche perchè nessuno aveva capito ancora nulla
tu invece finalmente hai capito qualcosa rispetto a quegli avvenimenti? :rolleyes:
che il primo aereo fu dichiarato dirottato alle 08:13.
chi lo dichiarò dirottato?
è Paul Thompson nella sua ricostruzione che fa ascendere a quel momento il dirottamento
quando nell'ultima comunicazione pock prima e sempre alle 08-13 il pilota dell'aereo rispondeva che virava a destra, ma poi poco dopo non rispose alla richiesta del controllore di volo di ascendere a 35.000 piedi
che il volo 11 sia stato dichiarato dirottato da qualcuno alle 08-13 di quella mattina esiste solo a livello delle tue connessioni neuroniche rispetto a ciò
nella realtà nessuno ha dichiarato niente alle 08-13
anche perchè nessuno aveva capito ancora nulla
tu invece finalmente hai capito qualcosa rispetto a quegli avvenimenti? :rolleyes:
von Clausewitz
24-07-2004, 18:53
Originariamente inviato da GioFX
semplicemente quello che sta scritto anche nel final report, niente altro, e cioè che ci furono una serie di ritardi e di inefficienze dell'intero sistema di difesa americano...
ALLE 8:13 LE AUTORITA' DI VOLO CAPIRONO CHE IL VOLO 77 ERA DIROTTATO. La pianti di dire le solite fanfalucche?!?
Dimmi che c'è di falso in quella che è una ricostruzione della timeline degli eventi fatta con tutta la documentazione che puoi consultare, non c'è un cazzo di top secret, vonny...
io non voglio dimostrare un cazzo di nulla, se non che tu spari sempre un sacco di fanfaluccate allucinanti.
nella ricostruzione che hai postato della timeline non c'è niente che ho contestato
non ho alcuna documentazione in merito per poterlo fare e neanche m'interessa farlo, anche perchè mi sembra abbastanza verosimile e quindi la prendo per buona
sei tu che non hai capito mlolto di quella ricostruzione, rileggitela almeno un paio di volte, così forse la capisci meglio
un conto è nella ricostruzione far ascendere il momento in cui verosimilmente è avvenuto il dirottamento, un altro è quando le autorità a terra hanno capito cosa stava succedendo
hai capito ora?
sarà la volta buona che la finirai di sparare fregnacce? :rolleyes:
dai che è la volta buona che la finisci almeno in questa discussione ;) :sofico: :D
semplicemente quello che sta scritto anche nel final report, niente altro, e cioè che ci furono una serie di ritardi e di inefficienze dell'intero sistema di difesa americano...
ALLE 8:13 LE AUTORITA' DI VOLO CAPIRONO CHE IL VOLO 77 ERA DIROTTATO. La pianti di dire le solite fanfalucche?!?
Dimmi che c'è di falso in quella che è una ricostruzione della timeline degli eventi fatta con tutta la documentazione che puoi consultare, non c'è un cazzo di top secret, vonny...
io non voglio dimostrare un cazzo di nulla, se non che tu spari sempre un sacco di fanfaluccate allucinanti.
nella ricostruzione che hai postato della timeline non c'è niente che ho contestato
non ho alcuna documentazione in merito per poterlo fare e neanche m'interessa farlo, anche perchè mi sembra abbastanza verosimile e quindi la prendo per buona
sei tu che non hai capito mlolto di quella ricostruzione, rileggitela almeno un paio di volte, così forse la capisci meglio
un conto è nella ricostruzione far ascendere il momento in cui verosimilmente è avvenuto il dirottamento, un altro è quando le autorità a terra hanno capito cosa stava succedendo
hai capito ora?
sarà la volta buona che la finirai di sparare fregnacce? :rolleyes:
dai che è la volta buona che la finisci almeno in questa discussione ;) :sofico: :D
von Clausewitz
24-07-2004, 18:58
Originariamente inviato da GioFX
Grazie al cazzo che l'avvenire pensasse al miracolo e al coraggio dei passeggeri... ma dai... non furono certo solo i giornali dell'internazionale socialista ad affermare che il volo UA 93 potesse essere stato abbattuto, ma anche il Times e il WP.
Informarsi prima.
prego non c'è di che
un conto è illustrarla come possibilità che però non trova conferme
un altro è quella di spacciarla come realmente accaduta senza però avere nessun elemento concreto a sostegno di questa tesi
come è successo cialtronescamente in Italia
anche qui, hai capito la differenza e il perchè mi sono soffermato su questo punto?
ps da che pulpito viene l'invito a informarsi prima
forse è prorpio il caso che t'informi prima tu, ma soprattutto che t'informi bene
parlando in generale, informarsi con fregnacce non equivale proprio a informarsi, semmai a disinformarsi :rotfl: :sofico:
Grazie al cazzo che l'avvenire pensasse al miracolo e al coraggio dei passeggeri... ma dai... non furono certo solo i giornali dell'internazionale socialista ad affermare che il volo UA 93 potesse essere stato abbattuto, ma anche il Times e il WP.
Informarsi prima.
prego non c'è di che
un conto è illustrarla come possibilità che però non trova conferme
un altro è quella di spacciarla come realmente accaduta senza però avere nessun elemento concreto a sostegno di questa tesi
come è successo cialtronescamente in Italia
anche qui, hai capito la differenza e il perchè mi sono soffermato su questo punto?
ps da che pulpito viene l'invito a informarsi prima
forse è prorpio il caso che t'informi prima tu, ma soprattutto che t'informi bene
parlando in generale, informarsi con fregnacce non equivale proprio a informarsi, semmai a disinformarsi :rotfl: :sofico:
GioFX
24-07-2004, 19:38
Originariamente inviato da von Clausewitz
è Paul Thompson nella sua ricostruzione che fa ascendere a quel momento il dirottamento
quando nell'ultima comunicazione pock prima e sempre alle 08-13 il pilota dell'aereo rispondeva che virava a destra, ma poi poco dopo non rispose alla richiesta del controllore di volo di ascendere a 35.000 piedi
che il volo 11 sia stato dichiarato dirottato da qualcuno alle 08-13 di quella mattina esiste solo a livello delle tue connessioni neuroniche rispetto a ciò
ma sai leggere?
American Airlines Flight 11, a Boeing 767.
(8:13 a.m.): Flight 11 is hijacked around this time. One flight controller says the plane is hijacked over Gardner, Massachusetts, less than 50 miles west of Boston. [ Nashua Telegraph, 9/13/01 ]
nella realtà nessuno ha dichiarato niente alle 08-13
anche perchè nessuno aveva capito ancora nulla
tu invece finalmente hai capito qualcosa rispetto a quegli avvenimenti? :rolleyes:
SCUSA UN SECONDO, NELLA TIMELINE VIENE RIPORTATA LA FONTE? Tu che fonte hai per dire che non è stato dichiarato dirottato alle 8:13?
Ad ogni modo, 2 fottutissimi minuti dopo:
(8:15 a.m.): Boston flight control tries but fails to contact the pilots of Flight 11, even using emergency frequencies. [8:14, Guardian, 10/17/01 ] A Boston flight controller states of Flight 11, “He won't answer you. He's nordo roger thanks”. Nordo means “no radio.” [8:15, New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) , “over the Hudson river,” CNN, 9/17/01 ]
è Paul Thompson nella sua ricostruzione che fa ascendere a quel momento il dirottamento
quando nell'ultima comunicazione pock prima e sempre alle 08-13 il pilota dell'aereo rispondeva che virava a destra, ma poi poco dopo non rispose alla richiesta del controllore di volo di ascendere a 35.000 piedi
che il volo 11 sia stato dichiarato dirottato da qualcuno alle 08-13 di quella mattina esiste solo a livello delle tue connessioni neuroniche rispetto a ciò
ma sai leggere?
American Airlines Flight 11, a Boeing 767.
(8:13 a.m.): Flight 11 is hijacked around this time. One flight controller says the plane is hijacked over Gardner, Massachusetts, less than 50 miles west of Boston. [ Nashua Telegraph, 9/13/01 ]
nella realtà nessuno ha dichiarato niente alle 08-13
anche perchè nessuno aveva capito ancora nulla
tu invece finalmente hai capito qualcosa rispetto a quegli avvenimenti? :rolleyes:
SCUSA UN SECONDO, NELLA TIMELINE VIENE RIPORTATA LA FONTE? Tu che fonte hai per dire che non è stato dichiarato dirottato alle 8:13?
Ad ogni modo, 2 fottutissimi minuti dopo:
(8:15 a.m.): Boston flight control tries but fails to contact the pilots of Flight 11, even using emergency frequencies. [8:14, Guardian, 10/17/01 ] A Boston flight controller states of Flight 11, “He won't answer you. He's nordo roger thanks”. Nordo means “no radio.” [8:15, New York Times, 10/16/01 (C) , “over the Hudson river,” CNN, 9/17/01 ]
GioFX
24-07-2004, 19:39
Originariamente inviato da von Clausewitz
nella ricostruzione che hai postato della timeline non c'è niente che ho contestato
non ho alcuna documentazione in merito per poterlo fare e neanche m'interessa farlo, anche perchè mi sembra abbastanza verosimile e quindi la prendo per buona
sei tu che non hai capito mlolto di quella ricostruzione, rileggitela almeno un paio di volte, così forse la capisci meglio
un conto è nella ricostruzione far ascendere il momento in cui verosimilmente è avvenuto il dirottamento, un altro è quando le autorità a terra hanno capito cosa stava succedendo
hai capito ora?
sarà la volta buona che la finirai di sparare fregnacce? :rolleyes:
dai che è la volta buona che la finisci almeno in questa discussione ;) :sofico: :D
che cazzo di fregnacce avrei postato, adolf?
nella ricostruzione che hai postato della timeline non c'è niente che ho contestato
non ho alcuna documentazione in merito per poterlo fare e neanche m'interessa farlo, anche perchè mi sembra abbastanza verosimile e quindi la prendo per buona
sei tu che non hai capito mlolto di quella ricostruzione, rileggitela almeno un paio di volte, così forse la capisci meglio
un conto è nella ricostruzione far ascendere il momento in cui verosimilmente è avvenuto il dirottamento, un altro è quando le autorità a terra hanno capito cosa stava succedendo
hai capito ora?
sarà la volta buona che la finirai di sparare fregnacce? :rolleyes:
dai che è la volta buona che la finisci almeno in questa discussione ;) :sofico: :D
che cazzo di fregnacce avrei postato, adolf?
GioFX
24-07-2004, 19:40
Originariamente inviato da von Clausewitz
prego non c'è di che
un conto è illustrarla come possibilità che però non trova conferme
un altro è quella di spacciarla come realmente accaduta senza però avere nessun elemento concreto a sostegno di questa tesi
come è successo cialtronescamente in Italia
anche qui, hai capito la differenza e il perchè mi sono soffermato su questo punto?
ps da che pulpito viene l'invito a informarsi prima
forse è prorpio il caso che t'informi prima tu, ma soprattutto che t'informi bene
parlando in generale, informarsi con fregnacce non equivale proprio a informarsi, semmai a disinformarsi :rotfl: :sofico:
vuoi che ti trovi gli articoli del NYT?
prego non c'è di che
un conto è illustrarla come possibilità che però non trova conferme
un altro è quella di spacciarla come realmente accaduta senza però avere nessun elemento concreto a sostegno di questa tesi
come è successo cialtronescamente in Italia
anche qui, hai capito la differenza e il perchè mi sono soffermato su questo punto?
ps da che pulpito viene l'invito a informarsi prima
forse è prorpio il caso che t'informi prima tu, ma soprattutto che t'informi bene
parlando in generale, informarsi con fregnacce non equivale proprio a informarsi, semmai a disinformarsi :rotfl: :sofico:
vuoi che ti trovi gli articoli del NYT?
Tensor
24-07-2004, 19:46
Originariamente inviato da twinpigs
si e mio cuggino mi ha detto che una volta è morto!
io credo fermamente che che quegli aerei andavano col pilota automatico infatti hanno virato perfettamente ed hanno seguito
mi pare che tu non sappia nemmeno vagamente cosa sia un pilota automatico...:oink:
si e mio cuggino mi ha detto che una volta è morto!
io credo fermamente che che quegli aerei andavano col pilota automatico infatti hanno virato perfettamente ed hanno seguito
mi pare che tu non sappia nemmeno vagamente cosa sia un pilota automatico...:oink:
GioFX
24-07-2004, 23:52
Da Nytimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/national/25PANE.html?hp):
Correcting the Record on Sept. 11, in Great Detail
By PHILIP SHENON
Published: July 25, 2004
This article was reported by Philip Shenon, Douglas Jehl and David Johnston and written by Mr. Shenon.
WASHINGTON, July 24 — When the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States set to work early last year to prepare the definitive history of the events of Sept. 11, 2001, it seemed that much of the hard work of the so-called 9/11 commission was already done, because so much of the horrifying story seemed to be known.
At the time, it was understood that all of the hijackers had entered the country legally and done nothing to draw attention to themselves; Osama bin Laden had underwritten the plot with his personal fortune but had left the details to others; American intelligence agencies had no warning that Al Qaeda was considering suicide missions using planes; President Bush had received a special intelligence briefing weeks before Sept. 11 about Al Qaeda threats that focused on past, not current, threats.
But 19 months later, the commission released a final, unanimous book-length report last Thursday that, in calling for a overhaul of the way the government collects and shares intelligence, showed that much of what had been common wisdom about the Sept. 11 attacks at the start of the panel's investigation was wrong.
In meticulous detail, the 567-page report, including 116 pages of detailed footnotes in tiny, eye-straining type, rewrote the history of Sept. 11, 2001, correcting the historical record in ways large and small and shattering myths that might otherwise have been accepted as truth for generations.
The commission's report found that the hijackers had repeatedly broken the law in entering the United States, that Mr. bin Laden may have micromanaged the attacks but did not pay for them, that intelligence agencies had considered the threat of suicide hijackings, and that Mr. Bush received an August 2001 briefing on evidence of continuing domestic terrorist threats from Al Qaeda.
"Our work, we believe, is the definitive work on 9/11," said Thomas H. Kean, the former Republican governor of New Jersey who was chairman of the commission, and whose consensus-building talents are credited by other commissioners as the reason the panel's report was unanimous. If there are unanswered questions, Mr. Kean said, it is mostly because "the people who were at the heart of the plot are dead."
The Hijackers
For the commission of five Democrats and five Republicans, the work of correcting the record began with an understanding of how 19 young Arab terrorists managed to enter the United States unnoticed, hiding in plain sight in the weeks and months before they joined in an attack that left more than 3,000 people dead.
This was the subject of the first of what would be series of riveting public hearings held by the commission this year. The first fact-finding hearing in January showed just how wrong - and self-serving -much of the government's information about the Sept. 11 plot had been. And it suggested just how aggressive the commission intended to be in setting the record straight.
Immediately after Sept. 11 and in the months that followed, the F.B.I., the C.I.A. and other counterterrorism agencies defended their failure to detect the plot by insisting that the hijackers had gone out of their way to enter the United States legally and to avoid detection in the months preceding the attacks.
"Each of the hijackers, apparently purposely selected to avoid notice, came easily and lawfully from abroad," Louis J. Freeh, the former director of the F.B.I., testified to Congress in October 2002. "While here, the hijackers effectively operated without suspicion, triggering nothing that alerted law enforcement."
But in its final report, the commission found that as many as 13 of the hijackers had entered the United States with passports that had been fraudulently altered, using criminal methods previously associated with Al Qaeda.
The commission found that the visa applications of many of the hijackers had been filled out improperly; in several cases, the hijackers had provided demonstrably false information on the forms. The names of at least three of the terrorists were found after Sept. 11 in the databases of American intelligence and counterterrorism agencies.[b]
After entering the United States, several of the hijackers should have drawn the attention of law enforcement agencies but did not.
[b]Mohamed Atta, the plot's Egyptian-born ringleader, overstayed his tourist visa. One of the terrorist pilots, Ziad al-Jarrah, attended school in 2000 in violation of his immigration status, which should have been enough to block him from re-entering the United States; he left and re-entered the country at least six more times before Sept. 11.
Imagining the Unimaginable
In trying to explain why the nation had left itself so vulnerable on Sept. 11, the leaders of the nation's law enforcement and intelligence agencies have insisted publicly that they never considered the nightmare of passenger planes turned into guided missiles.
"I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center," Condoleezza Rice, President Bush's national security adviser, said in May 2002. As recently as this April, in testimony to the Sept. 11 commission, Mr. Freeh said that he "never was aware of a plan that contemplated commercial airliners being used as weapons."
But in its investigation, the commission found that an attack described as unimaginable had in fact been imagined, repeatedly. The commission said that several threat reports circulated within the government in the late 1990's raised the explicit possibility of an attack using airliners as missiles.
Most prominent among those reports, the commission said, was one circulated in September 1998, based on information provided by a source who walked into an American consulate in East Asia, that ''mentioned a possible plot to fly an explosives-laden aircraft into a U.S. city." In August of the same year, it said, an intelligence agency received information that a group of Libyans hoped to crash a plane into the World Trade Center.
The North American Aerospace Defense Command had gone so far as to develop exercises to counter the threat and, according to a Defense Department memorandum unearthed by the commission, planned a drill in April 2001 that would have simulated a terrorist crash into the Pentagon.
Bin Laden's Role
American intelligence agencies had known for years that the United States had much to fear from Osama bin Laden, but it was fear based more on Mr. bin Laden's power as a global symbol of Islamic fundamentalist rage than as a terrorist logistician.
A senior State Department official testified to the Senate in 2001 that the bin Laden terror network was "analogous to a multinational corporation, bin Laden as C.E.O.," leaving the details of the terrorist attacks to others.
But the commission found that far from being the disengaged leader of his terror network, Mr. bin Laden was described by captured Qaeda colleagues as a hands-on executive who wanted to be involved in almost every detail of the Sept. 11 plot, choosing the hijacking team himself and selecting targets. He was reported to have been eager to hit the White House.
The report describes information obtained from the interrogation of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Mr. bin Laden's former chief of operations, who said that "bin Laden could assess new trainees very quickly, in about 10 minutes, and that many of the 9/11 hijackers were selected in this manner."
American intelligence analysts had long believed that Mr. bin Laden had a vast personal fortune that bankrolled Al Qaeda; news accounts described the bin Laden fortune as totaling as much as $300 million, with real estate holdings in London, Paris and the Côte d'Azur.
But the commission reached a far different conclusion, finding that Mr. bin Laden was cut off from his family's wealth after the early 1990's and that he financed Al Qaeda's operations through a core group of wealthy Muslim donors, mainly in the Persian Gulf. The report said that from 1970 to 1994, Mr. bin Laden received about $1 million a year from family funds - a sizable sum, but not nearly enough to finance such an ambitious terrorist network.
The Iraq Connection
The Bush administration has long maintained that there was a close working relationship between Al Qaeda and Iraq. In October 2002, with the invasion of Iraq only months away, President Bush said in a speech in Cincinnati that ''high-level contacts" between Iraq and Al Qaeda "go back a decade," and that "we've learned that Iraq has trained Al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases."
As recently as last month, Vice President Dick Cheney said there was reason to believe a disputed Czech intelligence report that Mohamed Atta had met with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in April 2001, suggesting a tie between Iraq and the Sept. 11 plot.
But in its most contentious effort to set the record straight about the origins of the plot, the bipartisan commission's final report found no evidence of close collaboration between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, appearing to undermine a justification for the Iraq war.
The commission found no credible evidence to suggest that the Prague meeting took place and no evidence of any kind to show Iraqi involvement in attacks by Al Qaeda against the United States. While there had indeed between periodic contacts in the late 1990's between Al Qaeda representatives and Iraqi officials, principally in Sudan, the commission found, those contacts did not amount to much.
"To date we have seen no evidence that these or the earlier contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship," the commission wrote.
A footnote buried on page 470 of the commission's report provided a clue to some of the false claims: "Although there have been suggestions of contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda regarding chemical weapons and explosive trainings, the most detailed information alleging such ties came from an Al Qaeda operative who recanted much of his original information."
The commission attempted to lift suspicion that the leaders of another Arab government, that of Saudi Arabia, had underwritten Al Qaeda, and to knock down widely circulated theories that the Bush administration had improperly assisted the Saudis by allowing members of the extended bin Laden clan to flee the United States on charter flights at a time when all commercial air traffic was shut down after the attacks.
''Saudi Arabia has long been considered the principal source of Al Qaeda financing," the commission wrote in its final report. "But we have found no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials individually funded the organization."
The Evidence
In the first hours after the Sept. 11 attacks and ever since, the White House has consistently insisted that President Bush and his deputies had no credible evidence before the attacks to suggest that Al Qaeda was about to strike on American soil.
But the assertion has been questioned as a result of the commission's digging. After its most heated showdown with the Bush administration over access to classified information, the commission pressured the White House to declassify and make public a special intelligence briefing that had been presented to the president at his Texas ranch on Aug. 6, 2001, a month before the attacks.
The existence of the document - but not its detailed contents - had been known about since 2002, when the White House confirmed news reports that President Bush had received an intelligence report before Sept. 11 warning of the possibility that Al Qaeda might hijack American passenger planes.
In testimony this April to the Sept. 11 commission, before it was made public, Ms. Rice insisted that the report was "historical."
"It did not, in fact, warn of attacks inside the United States," she testified. "It was historical information based on old reporting. There was no new threat information.''
But there were gasps in the audience in the hearing room when she disclosed the name of the two-page briefing paper: "Bin Laden Determined to Attack in U.S."
The document was made public several days later and contained passages referring to F.B.I. reports of "suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York." It noted that a caller to the United States Embassy in the United Arab Emirates that May had warned that "a group of bin Laden supporters was in the U.S.," planning attacks with explosives.
The commission's final report revealed that two C.I.A. analysts involved in preparing the brief had wanted to make clear to Mr. Bush that, far from being only a historical threat, the threat that Al Qaeda would strike on American soil was "both current and serious."
Correcting the Record on Sept. 11, in Great Detail
By PHILIP SHENON
Published: July 25, 2004
This article was reported by Philip Shenon, Douglas Jehl and David Johnston and written by Mr. Shenon.
WASHINGTON, July 24 — When the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States set to work early last year to prepare the definitive history of the events of Sept. 11, 2001, it seemed that much of the hard work of the so-called 9/11 commission was already done, because so much of the horrifying story seemed to be known.
At the time, it was understood that all of the hijackers had entered the country legally and done nothing to draw attention to themselves; Osama bin Laden had underwritten the plot with his personal fortune but had left the details to others; American intelligence agencies had no warning that Al Qaeda was considering suicide missions using planes; President Bush had received a special intelligence briefing weeks before Sept. 11 about Al Qaeda threats that focused on past, not current, threats.
But 19 months later, the commission released a final, unanimous book-length report last Thursday that, in calling for a overhaul of the way the government collects and shares intelligence, showed that much of what had been common wisdom about the Sept. 11 attacks at the start of the panel's investigation was wrong.
In meticulous detail, the 567-page report, including 116 pages of detailed footnotes in tiny, eye-straining type, rewrote the history of Sept. 11, 2001, correcting the historical record in ways large and small and shattering myths that might otherwise have been accepted as truth for generations.
The commission's report found that the hijackers had repeatedly broken the law in entering the United States, that Mr. bin Laden may have micromanaged the attacks but did not pay for them, that intelligence agencies had considered the threat of suicide hijackings, and that Mr. Bush received an August 2001 briefing on evidence of continuing domestic terrorist threats from Al Qaeda.
"Our work, we believe, is the definitive work on 9/11," said Thomas H. Kean, the former Republican governor of New Jersey who was chairman of the commission, and whose consensus-building talents are credited by other commissioners as the reason the panel's report was unanimous. If there are unanswered questions, Mr. Kean said, it is mostly because "the people who were at the heart of the plot are dead."
The Hijackers
For the commission of five Democrats and five Republicans, the work of correcting the record began with an understanding of how 19 young Arab terrorists managed to enter the United States unnoticed, hiding in plain sight in the weeks and months before they joined in an attack that left more than 3,000 people dead.
This was the subject of the first of what would be series of riveting public hearings held by the commission this year. The first fact-finding hearing in January showed just how wrong - and self-serving -much of the government's information about the Sept. 11 plot had been. And it suggested just how aggressive the commission intended to be in setting the record straight.
Immediately after Sept. 11 and in the months that followed, the F.B.I., the C.I.A. and other counterterrorism agencies defended their failure to detect the plot by insisting that the hijackers had gone out of their way to enter the United States legally and to avoid detection in the months preceding the attacks.
"Each of the hijackers, apparently purposely selected to avoid notice, came easily and lawfully from abroad," Louis J. Freeh, the former director of the F.B.I., testified to Congress in October 2002. "While here, the hijackers effectively operated without suspicion, triggering nothing that alerted law enforcement."
But in its final report, the commission found that as many as 13 of the hijackers had entered the United States with passports that had been fraudulently altered, using criminal methods previously associated with Al Qaeda.
The commission found that the visa applications of many of the hijackers had been filled out improperly; in several cases, the hijackers had provided demonstrably false information on the forms. The names of at least three of the terrorists were found after Sept. 11 in the databases of American intelligence and counterterrorism agencies.[b]
After entering the United States, several of the hijackers should have drawn the attention of law enforcement agencies but did not.
[b]Mohamed Atta, the plot's Egyptian-born ringleader, overstayed his tourist visa. One of the terrorist pilots, Ziad al-Jarrah, attended school in 2000 in violation of his immigration status, which should have been enough to block him from re-entering the United States; he left and re-entered the country at least six more times before Sept. 11.
Imagining the Unimaginable
In trying to explain why the nation had left itself so vulnerable on Sept. 11, the leaders of the nation's law enforcement and intelligence agencies have insisted publicly that they never considered the nightmare of passenger planes turned into guided missiles.
"I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center," Condoleezza Rice, President Bush's national security adviser, said in May 2002. As recently as this April, in testimony to the Sept. 11 commission, Mr. Freeh said that he "never was aware of a plan that contemplated commercial airliners being used as weapons."
But in its investigation, the commission found that an attack described as unimaginable had in fact been imagined, repeatedly. The commission said that several threat reports circulated within the government in the late 1990's raised the explicit possibility of an attack using airliners as missiles.
Most prominent among those reports, the commission said, was one circulated in September 1998, based on information provided by a source who walked into an American consulate in East Asia, that ''mentioned a possible plot to fly an explosives-laden aircraft into a U.S. city." In August of the same year, it said, an intelligence agency received information that a group of Libyans hoped to crash a plane into the World Trade Center.
The North American Aerospace Defense Command had gone so far as to develop exercises to counter the threat and, according to a Defense Department memorandum unearthed by the commission, planned a drill in April 2001 that would have simulated a terrorist crash into the Pentagon.
Bin Laden's Role
American intelligence agencies had known for years that the United States had much to fear from Osama bin Laden, but it was fear based more on Mr. bin Laden's power as a global symbol of Islamic fundamentalist rage than as a terrorist logistician.
A senior State Department official testified to the Senate in 2001 that the bin Laden terror network was "analogous to a multinational corporation, bin Laden as C.E.O.," leaving the details of the terrorist attacks to others.
But the commission found that far from being the disengaged leader of his terror network, Mr. bin Laden was described by captured Qaeda colleagues as a hands-on executive who wanted to be involved in almost every detail of the Sept. 11 plot, choosing the hijacking team himself and selecting targets. He was reported to have been eager to hit the White House.
The report describes information obtained from the interrogation of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Mr. bin Laden's former chief of operations, who said that "bin Laden could assess new trainees very quickly, in about 10 minutes, and that many of the 9/11 hijackers were selected in this manner."
American intelligence analysts had long believed that Mr. bin Laden had a vast personal fortune that bankrolled Al Qaeda; news accounts described the bin Laden fortune as totaling as much as $300 million, with real estate holdings in London, Paris and the Côte d'Azur.
But the commission reached a far different conclusion, finding that Mr. bin Laden was cut off from his family's wealth after the early 1990's and that he financed Al Qaeda's operations through a core group of wealthy Muslim donors, mainly in the Persian Gulf. The report said that from 1970 to 1994, Mr. bin Laden received about $1 million a year from family funds - a sizable sum, but not nearly enough to finance such an ambitious terrorist network.
The Iraq Connection
The Bush administration has long maintained that there was a close working relationship between Al Qaeda and Iraq. In October 2002, with the invasion of Iraq only months away, President Bush said in a speech in Cincinnati that ''high-level contacts" between Iraq and Al Qaeda "go back a decade," and that "we've learned that Iraq has trained Al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases."
As recently as last month, Vice President Dick Cheney said there was reason to believe a disputed Czech intelligence report that Mohamed Atta had met with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in April 2001, suggesting a tie between Iraq and the Sept. 11 plot.
But in its most contentious effort to set the record straight about the origins of the plot, the bipartisan commission's final report found no evidence of close collaboration between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, appearing to undermine a justification for the Iraq war.
The commission found no credible evidence to suggest that the Prague meeting took place and no evidence of any kind to show Iraqi involvement in attacks by Al Qaeda against the United States. While there had indeed between periodic contacts in the late 1990's between Al Qaeda representatives and Iraqi officials, principally in Sudan, the commission found, those contacts did not amount to much.
"To date we have seen no evidence that these or the earlier contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship," the commission wrote.
A footnote buried on page 470 of the commission's report provided a clue to some of the false claims: "Although there have been suggestions of contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda regarding chemical weapons and explosive trainings, the most detailed information alleging such ties came from an Al Qaeda operative who recanted much of his original information."
The commission attempted to lift suspicion that the leaders of another Arab government, that of Saudi Arabia, had underwritten Al Qaeda, and to knock down widely circulated theories that the Bush administration had improperly assisted the Saudis by allowing members of the extended bin Laden clan to flee the United States on charter flights at a time when all commercial air traffic was shut down after the attacks.
''Saudi Arabia has long been considered the principal source of Al Qaeda financing," the commission wrote in its final report. "But we have found no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials individually funded the organization."
The Evidence
In the first hours after the Sept. 11 attacks and ever since, the White House has consistently insisted that President Bush and his deputies had no credible evidence before the attacks to suggest that Al Qaeda was about to strike on American soil.
But the assertion has been questioned as a result of the commission's digging. After its most heated showdown with the Bush administration over access to classified information, the commission pressured the White House to declassify and make public a special intelligence briefing that had been presented to the president at his Texas ranch on Aug. 6, 2001, a month before the attacks.
The existence of the document - but not its detailed contents - had been known about since 2002, when the White House confirmed news reports that President Bush had received an intelligence report before Sept. 11 warning of the possibility that Al Qaeda might hijack American passenger planes.
In testimony this April to the Sept. 11 commission, before it was made public, Ms. Rice insisted that the report was "historical."
"It did not, in fact, warn of attacks inside the United States," she testified. "It was historical information based on old reporting. There was no new threat information.''
But there were gasps in the audience in the hearing room when she disclosed the name of the two-page briefing paper: "Bin Laden Determined to Attack in U.S."
The document was made public several days later and contained passages referring to F.B.I. reports of "suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York." It noted that a caller to the United States Embassy in the United Arab Emirates that May had warned that "a group of bin Laden supporters was in the U.S.," planning attacks with explosives.
The commission's final report revealed that two C.I.A. analysts involved in preparing the brief had wanted to make clear to Mr. Bush that, far from being only a historical threat, the threat that Al Qaeda would strike on American soil was "both current and serious."
GioFX
25-07-2004, 00:13
guarda caso, la stessa analisi che facevano altri già da tempo, come il comunista chomsky, vero phon?
Phantom II
25-07-2004, 00:19
Originariamente inviato da gpc
Qualcuno ha detto il contrario?
I problemi sono stati due: impossibilità di prevedere quello che stava succedendo, impreparazione per un attacco dall'interno.
Credo che sia dalla prima pagina che lo si ripete... Poi sono arrivati quelli che sapevano tutto già da cinque anni prima, e il resto si conosce... :D
Io trovo sia deprimente un simile modo di agire per la più grande potenza mondiale, manco noi avremmo fatto di peggio. Mi piacerebbe sapere quante teste sono saltate per una simile disorganizzazione. Per non parlare degli F16, sarebbero queste le prestazioni del miglior caccia bombardiere degli ultimi 30 anni? :muro:
Qualcuno ha detto il contrario?
I problemi sono stati due: impossibilità di prevedere quello che stava succedendo, impreparazione per un attacco dall'interno.
Credo che sia dalla prima pagina che lo si ripete... Poi sono arrivati quelli che sapevano tutto già da cinque anni prima, e il resto si conosce... :D
Io trovo sia deprimente un simile modo di agire per la più grande potenza mondiale, manco noi avremmo fatto di peggio. Mi piacerebbe sapere quante teste sono saltate per una simile disorganizzazione. Per non parlare degli F16, sarebbero queste le prestazioni del miglior caccia bombardiere degli ultimi 30 anni? :muro:
Phantom II
25-07-2004, 09:44
Originariamente inviato da Proteus
Del senno di poi son piene le fosse usava affermare, a ragion veduta, l'antica saggezza popolare. Che il "modo di agire" della maggior potenza mondiale, io punterei il dito sui soliti che svolgono il loro compito con superficialità, male a cui vanno soggetti molti ed in maggior quantità proprio coloro che svolgono pubblici compiti, più che sulla "maggior potenza mondiale".
Qui non c'è stata solo la superficialità dei "soliti", questo discorso va bene per le mancate misure di sicurezza a terra, ma nel caso della difesa aerea è tutto il sistema che è andato a bagno. Le regole di ingaggio erano chiarissime, bastava darsi una mossa e metterle in atto.
Mi piacerebbe sapere cosa ci azzeccano le prestazioni dell'F16 con tutto questo, una macchina è una macchina ed un suo eventuale fallimento è sempre da ascrivere ai signori sopracitati, troppo comodo scaricare su meccanismi responsabilità proprie di chi è deputato a gestirli.
Ci azzeccano eccome, la prestazione da intercettore che ha fornito è del tutto deludente, se all'incompetenza della catena di comando ci aggiungi la lentezza dell'aereo a raggiungere l'obbiettivo il risultato che ottieni è che i mezzi sono arrivati dove dovevano essere quando tutto era già finito da un pezzo.
In poche parole voglio dire che l'F16 non è un mezzo molto adeguato per certi tipi di compiti, soprattutto quando si richiede una reazione rapida e tempestiva, tutto qui.
Del senno di poi son piene le fosse usava affermare, a ragion veduta, l'antica saggezza popolare. Che il "modo di agire" della maggior potenza mondiale, io punterei il dito sui soliti che svolgono il loro compito con superficialità, male a cui vanno soggetti molti ed in maggior quantità proprio coloro che svolgono pubblici compiti, più che sulla "maggior potenza mondiale".
Qui non c'è stata solo la superficialità dei "soliti", questo discorso va bene per le mancate misure di sicurezza a terra, ma nel caso della difesa aerea è tutto il sistema che è andato a bagno. Le regole di ingaggio erano chiarissime, bastava darsi una mossa e metterle in atto.
Mi piacerebbe sapere cosa ci azzeccano le prestazioni dell'F16 con tutto questo, una macchina è una macchina ed un suo eventuale fallimento è sempre da ascrivere ai signori sopracitati, troppo comodo scaricare su meccanismi responsabilità proprie di chi è deputato a gestirli.
Ci azzeccano eccome, la prestazione da intercettore che ha fornito è del tutto deludente, se all'incompetenza della catena di comando ci aggiungi la lentezza dell'aereo a raggiungere l'obbiettivo il risultato che ottieni è che i mezzi sono arrivati dove dovevano essere quando tutto era già finito da un pezzo.
In poche parole voglio dire che l'F16 non è un mezzo molto adeguato per certi tipi di compiti, soprattutto quando si richiede una reazione rapida e tempestiva, tutto qui.
gpc
25-07-2004, 09:58
Originariamente inviato da Phantom II
Qui non c'è stata solo la superficialità dei "soliti", questo discorso va bene per le mancate misure di sicurezza a terra, ma nel caso della difesa aerea è tutto il sistema che è andato a bagno. Le regole di ingaggio erano chiarissime, bastava darsi una mossa e metterle in atto.
Regole d'ingaggio?
Ma che stai addì?
Te proprio non hai afferrato il concetto: son tutti bravi DOPO a dire che era chiaro cosa stesse succedendo. Se ti ricordi, fino a quando non s'è schiantato anche il secondo aereo, non si sapeva nemmeno se fosse stato un incidente o meno.
La difesa aerea è ovvio che fosse impreparata, perchè un attacco aereo sul territorio degli USA era la cosa meno pensabile.
Inoltre, forse non ricordi, ma quando giravano le voci di un abbattimento del quarto aereo, qui c'erano i soliti cori di indignazione contro gli "spietati assassini" americani. E adesso vieni a dire che le regole di ingaggio erano chiare?
Ci azzeccano eccome, la prestazione da intercettore che ha fornito è del tutto deludente, se all'incompetenza della catena di comando ci aggiungi la lentezza dell'aereo a raggiungere l'obbiettivo il risultato che ottieni è che i mezzi sono arrivati dove dovevano essere quando tutto era già finito da un pezzo.
In poche parole voglio dire che l'F16 non è un mezzo molto adeguato per certi tipi di compiti, soprattutto quando si richiede una reazione rapida e tempestiva, tutto qui.
Ma questi sono deliri...
Qui non c'è stata solo la superficialità dei "soliti", questo discorso va bene per le mancate misure di sicurezza a terra, ma nel caso della difesa aerea è tutto il sistema che è andato a bagno. Le regole di ingaggio erano chiarissime, bastava darsi una mossa e metterle in atto.
Regole d'ingaggio?
Ma che stai addì?
Te proprio non hai afferrato il concetto: son tutti bravi DOPO a dire che era chiaro cosa stesse succedendo. Se ti ricordi, fino a quando non s'è schiantato anche il secondo aereo, non si sapeva nemmeno se fosse stato un incidente o meno.
La difesa aerea è ovvio che fosse impreparata, perchè un attacco aereo sul territorio degli USA era la cosa meno pensabile.
Inoltre, forse non ricordi, ma quando giravano le voci di un abbattimento del quarto aereo, qui c'erano i soliti cori di indignazione contro gli "spietati assassini" americani. E adesso vieni a dire che le regole di ingaggio erano chiare?
Ci azzeccano eccome, la prestazione da intercettore che ha fornito è del tutto deludente, se all'incompetenza della catena di comando ci aggiungi la lentezza dell'aereo a raggiungere l'obbiettivo il risultato che ottieni è che i mezzi sono arrivati dove dovevano essere quando tutto era già finito da un pezzo.
In poche parole voglio dire che l'F16 non è un mezzo molto adeguato per certi tipi di compiti, soprattutto quando si richiede una reazione rapida e tempestiva, tutto qui.
Ma questi sono deliri...
Phantom II
25-07-2004, 10:08
Originariamente inviato da gpc
Regole d'ingaggio?
Ma che stai addì?
Te proprio non hai afferrato il concetto: son tutti bravi DOPO a dire che era chiaro cosa stesse succedendo. Se ti ricordi, fino a quando non s'è schiantato anche il secondo aereo, non si sapeva nemmeno se fosse stato un incidente o meno.
La difesa aerea è ovvio che fosse impreparata, perchè un attacco aereo sul territorio degli USA era la cosa meno pensabile.
Inoltre, forse non ricordi, ma quando giravano le voci di un abbattimento del quarto aereo, qui c'erano i soliti cori di indignazione contro gli "spietati assassini" americani. E adesso vieni a dire che le regole di ingaggio erano chiare?
Mi pare sia prassi comune un pò dappertutto intercettare gli aerei dirottati e scortarli, almeno per fare quello una mossa potevano darsela. Non capisco cosa ci sia di male nel dire che la difesa aerea americana ha fatto schifo, solo a loro è concesso bacchettare noi europei per le nostre inefficienze in questo campo?
Ma questi sono deliri...
Non sono deliri sono considerazioni sulla filosofia con cui sono stati costruiti gli aerei militari degli ultimi 25 anni, se non le capisci perchè non ne sai nulla non so cosa farci.
Regole d'ingaggio?
Ma che stai addì?
Te proprio non hai afferrato il concetto: son tutti bravi DOPO a dire che era chiaro cosa stesse succedendo. Se ti ricordi, fino a quando non s'è schiantato anche il secondo aereo, non si sapeva nemmeno se fosse stato un incidente o meno.
La difesa aerea è ovvio che fosse impreparata, perchè un attacco aereo sul territorio degli USA era la cosa meno pensabile.
Inoltre, forse non ricordi, ma quando giravano le voci di un abbattimento del quarto aereo, qui c'erano i soliti cori di indignazione contro gli "spietati assassini" americani. E adesso vieni a dire che le regole di ingaggio erano chiare?
Mi pare sia prassi comune un pò dappertutto intercettare gli aerei dirottati e scortarli, almeno per fare quello una mossa potevano darsela. Non capisco cosa ci sia di male nel dire che la difesa aerea americana ha fatto schifo, solo a loro è concesso bacchettare noi europei per le nostre inefficienze in questo campo?
Ma questi sono deliri...
Non sono deliri sono considerazioni sulla filosofia con cui sono stati costruiti gli aerei militari degli ultimi 25 anni, se non le capisci perchè non ne sai nulla non so cosa farci.
Phantom II
25-07-2004, 10:15
Originariamente inviato da Proteus
Secondo te se chi doveva prendere le decisioni stava dormendo in piedi o sul suo scranno oppure era italianamente "fuori stanza" mi dici che significato ha il tuo discorso ?. Le decisioni le prendono sempre gli uomini e se essi si comportano in modo svogliato e superficiale senza prendere, forse per la troppa assuefazione agli allarmi fasulli, sul serio il loro compito accadimenti simili accadranno ancora e non solo negli USA. Io sostemgo da molto tempo che chi svolge certi compiti delicati in cui si richiede reazione pronta dovrebbe essere sostituito frequentemente, ino di questi compiti è la gestione delle centrali nucleari, per combattere l'abitudine che addormenterebbe chiunque.
A me pare che giri intorno al discroso, la difesa aerea ha dato una prestazione pessima, questo è un fatto che non si giustifica certo dicendo c'è stata inefficienza da parte di qualcuno soprattutto quando accade alla nazione più potente del mondo che in base al ruolo che ricopre, crete mancanze non se le può permettere.
Non puoi affermare che un aereo come lquello in questione è stato lento perchè non dispone di velocità e potenza sufficienti, il tuo è un discorso insensato. I tempi sono dettati da chi da ordini e istruzioni, qualsiasi macchina, anche un aereo che volasse a 20 mach, è soggetta, quale ne sia la velocità, a queste limitazioni e se la catena di comando si interrompe hai voglia di andare veloce, rimani sempre al palo. Trovo disdicevole invocare prestazioni di un mezzo a discarico di chi doveva decidere ed ha mancato il suo compito quali ne siano i motivi che non sono certo ascrivibili ad un mezzo meccanico perchè quyesto nulla ha a che fare con le decisioni in quanto solo mezzo meccanico.
Ciao.
P.S. Ribadisco che è bene operare distinzioni ben precise tra ritardi dovuti a decisioni non prese e prestazioni, indiscutibili, dei mezzi a disposizione. Stessa cosa sarebbe se in discussione fosse un Mig29 Fulcrum è un Su27 Flanker, sarebbe ridicolo gettare sulle prestazioni di simili mezzi colpe ascrivibili ai soli uomini.
Io mi baso solamente sui numeri, 13 minuti per arrivare in zona operazioni sono troppi per un aereo da intercettazione.
Secondo te se chi doveva prendere le decisioni stava dormendo in piedi o sul suo scranno oppure era italianamente "fuori stanza" mi dici che significato ha il tuo discorso ?. Le decisioni le prendono sempre gli uomini e se essi si comportano in modo svogliato e superficiale senza prendere, forse per la troppa assuefazione agli allarmi fasulli, sul serio il loro compito accadimenti simili accadranno ancora e non solo negli USA. Io sostemgo da molto tempo che chi svolge certi compiti delicati in cui si richiede reazione pronta dovrebbe essere sostituito frequentemente, ino di questi compiti è la gestione delle centrali nucleari, per combattere l'abitudine che addormenterebbe chiunque.
A me pare che giri intorno al discroso, la difesa aerea ha dato una prestazione pessima, questo è un fatto che non si giustifica certo dicendo c'è stata inefficienza da parte di qualcuno soprattutto quando accade alla nazione più potente del mondo che in base al ruolo che ricopre, crete mancanze non se le può permettere.
Non puoi affermare che un aereo come lquello in questione è stato lento perchè non dispone di velocità e potenza sufficienti, il tuo è un discorso insensato. I tempi sono dettati da chi da ordini e istruzioni, qualsiasi macchina, anche un aereo che volasse a 20 mach, è soggetta, quale ne sia la velocità, a queste limitazioni e se la catena di comando si interrompe hai voglia di andare veloce, rimani sempre al palo. Trovo disdicevole invocare prestazioni di un mezzo a discarico di chi doveva decidere ed ha mancato il suo compito quali ne siano i motivi che non sono certo ascrivibili ad un mezzo meccanico perchè quyesto nulla ha a che fare con le decisioni in quanto solo mezzo meccanico.
Ciao.
P.S. Ribadisco che è bene operare distinzioni ben precise tra ritardi dovuti a decisioni non prese e prestazioni, indiscutibili, dei mezzi a disposizione. Stessa cosa sarebbe se in discussione fosse un Mig29 Fulcrum è un Su27 Flanker, sarebbe ridicolo gettare sulle prestazioni di simili mezzi colpe ascrivibili ai soli uomini.
Io mi baso solamente sui numeri, 13 minuti per arrivare in zona operazioni sono troppi per un aereo da intercettazione.
gpc
25-07-2004, 10:18
Originariamente inviato da Phantom II
Mi pare sia prassi comune un pò dappertutto intercettare gli aerei dirottati e scortarli, almeno per fare quello una mossa potevano darsela. Non capisco cosa ci sia di male nel dire che la difesa aerea americana ha fatto schifo, solo a loro è concesso bacchettare noi europei per le nostre inefficienze in questo campo?
Guarda, io non so più cosa fare, lo metterò in sign...
E' dal PRIMO post che ho fatto che sto dicendo che la difesa americana ha fatto acqua e che ci sono stati gravi problemi di coordinamento. E' dall'inizio che lo dico, quindi fai a meno di tirare fuori frasi " solo a loro è concesso bacchettare noi europei per le nostre inefficienze in questo campo?" che oltre a non stare nè in cielo nè in terra fanno solo capire che non ti sei preso nemmeno la briga di leggere gli interventi altrui.
Quello che sostengo è che è facile DOPO dire che tutto era prevedibile, cosa si poteva fare, quando e come. Mentre qui c'è gente che sapeva già da ben cinque anni quello che sarebbe successo, perchè l'ha letto sui libri. ( :rolleyes: )
Non sono deliri sono considerazioni sulla filosofia con cui sono stati costruiti gli aerei militari degli ultimi 25 anni, se non le capisci perchè non ne sai nulla non so cosa farci.
Ah sì certo, o conosci e sai e sei d'accordo, o, se non sei d'accordo, è perchè non capisci una sega. Non fa una grinza, complimenti, sei un vero oratore :D
Mi pare sia prassi comune un pò dappertutto intercettare gli aerei dirottati e scortarli, almeno per fare quello una mossa potevano darsela. Non capisco cosa ci sia di male nel dire che la difesa aerea americana ha fatto schifo, solo a loro è concesso bacchettare noi europei per le nostre inefficienze in questo campo?
Guarda, io non so più cosa fare, lo metterò in sign...
E' dal PRIMO post che ho fatto che sto dicendo che la difesa americana ha fatto acqua e che ci sono stati gravi problemi di coordinamento. E' dall'inizio che lo dico, quindi fai a meno di tirare fuori frasi " solo a loro è concesso bacchettare noi europei per le nostre inefficienze in questo campo?" che oltre a non stare nè in cielo nè in terra fanno solo capire che non ti sei preso nemmeno la briga di leggere gli interventi altrui.
Quello che sostengo è che è facile DOPO dire che tutto era prevedibile, cosa si poteva fare, quando e come. Mentre qui c'è gente che sapeva già da ben cinque anni quello che sarebbe successo, perchè l'ha letto sui libri. ( :rolleyes: )
Non sono deliri sono considerazioni sulla filosofia con cui sono stati costruiti gli aerei militari degli ultimi 25 anni, se non le capisci perchè non ne sai nulla non so cosa farci.
Ah sì certo, o conosci e sai e sei d'accordo, o, se non sei d'accordo, è perchè non capisci una sega. Non fa una grinza, complimenti, sei un vero oratore :D
Phantom II
25-07-2004, 10:26
Originariamente inviato da gpc
Guarda, io non so più cosa fare, lo metterò in sign...
E' dal PRIMO post che ho fatto che sto dicendo che la difesa americana ha fatto acqua e che ci sono stati gravi problemi di coordinamento. E' dall'inizio che lo dico, quindi fai a meno di tirare fuori frasi " solo a loro è concesso bacchettare noi europei per le nostre inefficienze in questo campo?" che oltre a non stare nè in cielo nè in terra fanno solo capire che non ti sei preso nemmeno la briga di leggere gli interventi altrui.
Quello che sostengo è che è facile DOPO dire che tutto era prevedibile, cosa si poteva fare, quando e come. Mentre qui c'è gente che sapeva già da ben cinque anni quello che sarebbe successo, perchè l'ha letto sui libri. ( :rolleyes: )
Gli inteventi me li sono letti tutti, infatti mi sono limitato a dire che una simile inefficienza non è accettabile. Non ho mai scritto che la situazione era prevedibile, ho detto che ci si poteva dare da fare intercettando sti aerei cosa che di certo non si è cominciata a fare dopo l'11 settembre.
Ah sì certo, o conosci e sai e sei d'accordo, o, se non sei d'accordo, è perchè non capisci una sega. Non fa una grinza, complimenti, sei un vero oratore :D
Se per te la prestazione fornita dagli F16 è degna di un intercettore, hai ben poco chiara l'idea di cosa voglia dire intercettare un aereo.
Guarda, io non so più cosa fare, lo metterò in sign...
E' dal PRIMO post che ho fatto che sto dicendo che la difesa americana ha fatto acqua e che ci sono stati gravi problemi di coordinamento. E' dall'inizio che lo dico, quindi fai a meno di tirare fuori frasi " solo a loro è concesso bacchettare noi europei per le nostre inefficienze in questo campo?" che oltre a non stare nè in cielo nè in terra fanno solo capire che non ti sei preso nemmeno la briga di leggere gli interventi altrui.
Quello che sostengo è che è facile DOPO dire che tutto era prevedibile, cosa si poteva fare, quando e come. Mentre qui c'è gente che sapeva già da ben cinque anni quello che sarebbe successo, perchè l'ha letto sui libri. ( :rolleyes: )
Gli inteventi me li sono letti tutti, infatti mi sono limitato a dire che una simile inefficienza non è accettabile. Non ho mai scritto che la situazione era prevedibile, ho detto che ci si poteva dare da fare intercettando sti aerei cosa che di certo non si è cominciata a fare dopo l'11 settembre.
Ah sì certo, o conosci e sai e sei d'accordo, o, se non sei d'accordo, è perchè non capisci una sega. Non fa una grinza, complimenti, sei un vero oratore :D
Se per te la prestazione fornita dagli F16 è degna di un intercettore, hai ben poco chiara l'idea di cosa voglia dire intercettare un aereo.
gpc
25-07-2004, 10:34
Originariamente inviato da Phantom II
Se per te la prestazione fornita dagli F16 è degna di un intercettore, hai ben poco chiara l'idea di cosa voglia dire intercettare un aereo.
Guarda, puoi avere anche superman in persona che si lancia, branca l'aereo e lo riporta a terra, ma se lo fai partire tardi, arriverà sempre tardi. Anche se è superman :D
Se per te la prestazione fornita dagli F16 è degna di un intercettore, hai ben poco chiara l'idea di cosa voglia dire intercettare un aereo.
Guarda, puoi avere anche superman in persona che si lancia, branca l'aereo e lo riporta a terra, ma se lo fai partire tardi, arriverà sempre tardi. Anche se è superman :D
von Clausewitz
25-07-2004, 13:01
Originariamente inviato da GioFX
ma sai leggere?
dici sul serio?
non è che per caso quello che non legge o non sa leggere invece sei tu?
(8:20 a.m.): Boston flight control decides that Flight 11 has probably been hijacked, but apparently it doesn't notify other flight control centers for another five minutes, and don't notify NORAD for about another 20 minutes.
per favore qualcuno vuole rendere edotto GioFX del significato in italiano delle due righe in inglese sopra?
ma sai leggere?
dici sul serio?
non è che per caso quello che non legge o non sa leggere invece sei tu?
(8:20 a.m.): Boston flight control decides that Flight 11 has probably been hijacked, but apparently it doesn't notify other flight control centers for another five minutes, and don't notify NORAD for about another 20 minutes.
per favore qualcuno vuole rendere edotto GioFX del significato in italiano delle due righe in inglese sopra?
von Clausewitz
25-07-2004, 13:03
Originariamente inviato da GioFX
guarda caso, la stessa analisi che facevano altri già da tempo, come il comunista chomsky, vero phon?
adesso cosa c'entrano le fregnacce di chomsky? :confused:
guarda che sommando fregnacce non ottieni una cosa vera, semmai una megafregnaccia :sofico: :rotfl:
guarda caso, la stessa analisi che facevano altri già da tempo, come il comunista chomsky, vero phon?
adesso cosa c'entrano le fregnacce di chomsky? :confused:
guarda che sommando fregnacce non ottieni una cosa vera, semmai una megafregnaccia :sofico: :rotfl:
dbpass
25-07-2004, 13:13
This laaaaaaaaaaand belongsssssss to youu and meeeeeeeee (http://www.jibjab.com/)
GioFX
25-07-2004, 13:14
Originariamente inviato da von Clausewitz
adesso cosa c'entrano le fregnacce di chomsky? :confused:
guarda che sommando fregnacce non ottieni una cosa vera, semmai una megafregnaccia :sofico: :rotfl:
che è, fai finta di non arrivarci?
chomsky su "11 settembre" e "dopo l'11 settembre" scrisse praticamente le stesse cose che sono riportate nel final report.
Hai letto l'articolo del NYT? Hai letto il final report che ho linkato?
adesso cosa c'entrano le fregnacce di chomsky? :confused:
guarda che sommando fregnacce non ottieni una cosa vera, semmai una megafregnaccia :sofico: :rotfl:
che è, fai finta di non arrivarci?
chomsky su "11 settembre" e "dopo l'11 settembre" scrisse praticamente le stesse cose che sono riportate nel final report.
Hai letto l'articolo del NYT? Hai letto il final report che ho linkato?
von Clausewitz
25-07-2004, 13:18
quanto alla capacità previsionale di attentati terroristici o criminali o incidentali che riguarda noi italiani, francamente ci sarebbe da dubitarne grandemente
per esempio dopo l'attentato a Falcone era presumibile che sarebbe toccato a ruota a Borsellino e che quindi bisognava approntare un servizio di sicurezza e intelligence completamente diverso da quello che si continuò a dare
non ci voleva certo un genio per capire e prevedere (io che l'avevo previsto certo non lo sono) una cosa del genere, eppure le nostre autorità continuarono nella solita inerzia sino al giorno dell'attentato
oppure venendo a fatti recenti, la torre di controllo di milano sino all'ultimo non capì cosa stesse facendo Fasullo sopra il centro di milano a bassisima quota
neanche dopo che si schiantò sul pirellone si capì subito cosa era successo
eppure eravamo in piena era post 11 settembre
insomma si vuole capire o no che quei dirottamenti dell'11 settembre furono anomali e completamente differenti da tutti gli altri dirottamenti di aerei civili avvenuti in passato?
e che se anche gli aerei militari USA avessero raggiunto in tempo quegli aerei il problema gravissimo sul che fare gli si sarebbe cmq presentato e che Cheney dette l'autorizzazione ufficiale all'abbattimento solo dopo il secondo schianto sul WTC?
per esempio dopo l'attentato a Falcone era presumibile che sarebbe toccato a ruota a Borsellino e che quindi bisognava approntare un servizio di sicurezza e intelligence completamente diverso da quello che si continuò a dare
non ci voleva certo un genio per capire e prevedere (io che l'avevo previsto certo non lo sono) una cosa del genere, eppure le nostre autorità continuarono nella solita inerzia sino al giorno dell'attentato
oppure venendo a fatti recenti, la torre di controllo di milano sino all'ultimo non capì cosa stesse facendo Fasullo sopra il centro di milano a bassisima quota
neanche dopo che si schiantò sul pirellone si capì subito cosa era successo
eppure eravamo in piena era post 11 settembre
insomma si vuole capire o no che quei dirottamenti dell'11 settembre furono anomali e completamente differenti da tutti gli altri dirottamenti di aerei civili avvenuti in passato?
e che se anche gli aerei militari USA avessero raggiunto in tempo quegli aerei il problema gravissimo sul che fare gli si sarebbe cmq presentato e che Cheney dette l'autorizzazione ufficiale all'abbattimento solo dopo il secondo schianto sul WTC?
von Clausewitz
25-07-2004, 13:22
Originariamente inviato da GioFX
che è, fai finta di non arrivarci?
chomsky su "11 settembre" e "dopo l'11 settembre" scrisse praticamente le stesse cose che sono riportate nel final report.
Hai letto l'articolo del NYT? Hai letto il final report che ho linkato?
Gio adesso stai divagando o fingi di divagare :D
l'unica cosa da leggere erano quelle due righe che ti ho postato io
il resto è aria fritta in cui non ho la minima intenzione d'inoltrarmi ;)
che è, fai finta di non arrivarci?
chomsky su "11 settembre" e "dopo l'11 settembre" scrisse praticamente le stesse cose che sono riportate nel final report.
Hai letto l'articolo del NYT? Hai letto il final report che ho linkato?
Gio adesso stai divagando o fingi di divagare :D
l'unica cosa da leggere erano quelle due righe che ti ho postato io
il resto è aria fritta in cui non ho la minima intenzione d'inoltrarmi ;)
GioFX
25-07-2004, 13:45
Originariamente inviato da von Clausewitz
Gio adesso stai divagando o fingi di divagare :D
l'unica cosa da leggere erano quelle due righe che ti ho postato io
il resto è aria fritta in cui non ho la minima intenzione d'inoltrarmi ;)
CVD, è aria fritta vero... non un dettaglio come se il primo aereo fosse stato DICHIARATO dirottato alle 8:13, alle 8:15 o alle 8:20, ma l'articolo di ieri del NYT o il Final Report della commissione del congresso degli Stati Uniti sull'11 settembre è un dettaglio... già, solo perchè ti rode che i comunisti come chomsky fossero arrivati alle stesse conclusioni un pò prima....
Ripeto, leggiti almeno i documenti ufficiali, o sono fregnacce pure quelle?!? ti ricordo che tu hai sempre asserito che non vi era alcuna previsione di un attentato di quella dimensione e con quelle modalità... beh, dicevi fregnacce caro mio, tanto per cambiare. :D
Gio adesso stai divagando o fingi di divagare :D
l'unica cosa da leggere erano quelle due righe che ti ho postato io
il resto è aria fritta in cui non ho la minima intenzione d'inoltrarmi ;)
CVD, è aria fritta vero... non un dettaglio come se il primo aereo fosse stato DICHIARATO dirottato alle 8:13, alle 8:15 o alle 8:20, ma l'articolo di ieri del NYT o il Final Report della commissione del congresso degli Stati Uniti sull'11 settembre è un dettaglio... già, solo perchè ti rode che i comunisti come chomsky fossero arrivati alle stesse conclusioni un pò prima....
Ripeto, leggiti almeno i documenti ufficiali, o sono fregnacce pure quelle?!? ti ricordo che tu hai sempre asserito che non vi era alcuna previsione di un attentato di quella dimensione e con quelle modalità... beh, dicevi fregnacce caro mio, tanto per cambiare. :D
von Clausewitz
29-07-2004, 00:31
Originariamente inviato da GioFX
CVD, è aria fritta vero... non un dettaglio come se il primo aereo fosse stato DICHIARATO dirottato alle 8:13, alle 8:15 o alle 8:20, ma l'articolo di ieri del NYT o il Final Report della commissione del congresso degli Stati Uniti sull'11 settembre è un dettaglio... già, solo perchè ti rode che i comunisti come chomsky fossero arrivati alle stesse conclusioni un pò prima....
Ripeto, leggiti almeno i documenti ufficiali, o sono fregnacce pure quelle?!? ti ricordo che tu hai sempre asserito che non vi era alcuna previsione di un attentato di quella dimensione e con quelle modalità... beh, dicevi fregnacce caro mio, tanto per cambiare. :D
ancora non hai ben compreso cosa è scritto in quelle due righe da TE postate
e dire che passi per un discreto anglofono.... :rolleyes:
pazienza, per questo come per il resto (le conclusioni della commissione del congresso sull'11 settembre), capisci un po' quello che ti pare a te, secondo la tua libera e arbitraria interpretazione
poi quello che credi o pensi di aver capito lo vorresti anche imporre agli altri
ma per cortesia....
CVD, è aria fritta vero... non un dettaglio come se il primo aereo fosse stato DICHIARATO dirottato alle 8:13, alle 8:15 o alle 8:20, ma l'articolo di ieri del NYT o il Final Report della commissione del congresso degli Stati Uniti sull'11 settembre è un dettaglio... già, solo perchè ti rode che i comunisti come chomsky fossero arrivati alle stesse conclusioni un pò prima....
Ripeto, leggiti almeno i documenti ufficiali, o sono fregnacce pure quelle?!? ti ricordo che tu hai sempre asserito che non vi era alcuna previsione di un attentato di quella dimensione e con quelle modalità... beh, dicevi fregnacce caro mio, tanto per cambiare. :D
ancora non hai ben compreso cosa è scritto in quelle due righe da TE postate
e dire che passi per un discreto anglofono.... :rolleyes:
pazienza, per questo come per il resto (le conclusioni della commissione del congresso sull'11 settembre), capisci un po' quello che ti pare a te, secondo la tua libera e arbitraria interpretazione
poi quello che credi o pensi di aver capito lo vorresti anche imporre agli altri
ma per cortesia....
GioFX
29-07-2004, 01:05
Originariamente inviato da von Clausewitz
ancora non hai ben compreso cosa è scritto in quelle due righe da TE postate
e dire che passi per un discreto anglofono.... :rolleyes:
pazienza, per questo come per il resto (le conclusioni della commissione del congresso sull'11 settembre), capisci un po' quello che ti pare a te, secondo la tua libera e arbitraria interpretazione
poi quello che credi o pensi di aver capito lo vorresti anche imporre agli altri
ma per cortesia....
poi sarei io quello che non capisce?!?
DI NUOVO: LO HAI LETTO IL RAPPORTO O PARLI SOLO PER PROPAGANDA (tanto per cambiare... :O)?
ancora non hai ben compreso cosa è scritto in quelle due righe da TE postate
e dire che passi per un discreto anglofono.... :rolleyes:
pazienza, per questo come per il resto (le conclusioni della commissione del congresso sull'11 settembre), capisci un po' quello che ti pare a te, secondo la tua libera e arbitraria interpretazione
poi quello che credi o pensi di aver capito lo vorresti anche imporre agli altri
ma per cortesia....
poi sarei io quello che non capisce?!?
DI NUOVO: LO HAI LETTO IL RAPPORTO O PARLI SOLO PER PROPAGANDA (tanto per cambiare... :O)?
von Clausewitz
29-07-2004, 01:42
Originariamente inviato da GioFX
poi sarei io quello che non capisce?!?
DI NUOVO: LO HAI LETTO IL RAPPORTO O PARLI SOLO PER PROPAGANDA (tanto per cambiare... :O)?
non l'ho letto completamente, solo qualche accenno, ma non mi puoi biasimare se non mi fido delle tue conclusioni :O
notte :)
poi sarei io quello che non capisce?!?
DI NUOVO: LO HAI LETTO IL RAPPORTO O PARLI SOLO PER PROPAGANDA (tanto per cambiare... :O)?
non l'ho letto completamente, solo qualche accenno, ma non mi puoi biasimare se non mi fido delle tue conclusioni :O
notte :)
GioFX
29-07-2004, 08:39
ad ogni modo basta che almeno leggessi quell'articolo del NYT che ho postato, clausy...
:mc: :nono:
:mc: :nono:
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.