Testifying before the 9/11 Commission General Richard Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the commission in response to a question on NORAD’s failure to anticipate the 9/11 attacks, “I can’t answer the hypothetical. It’s more – it’s the way that we were directed to posture, looking outward.”(1) This is utterly false. As we will see below NORAD, since its inception in 1958, was tasked to monitor and intercept aircraft flying over American and Canadian air space seven days a week, 24 hours a day.
Members of the 9/11 Truth Movement found General Myers’ testimony on the capabilities of NORAD on 9/11 to be surprising, since it was long assumed that NORAD’s mission was more than “looking outward”. However, the 9/11 Truth Movement has been negligent in producing any documents that would confirm their suspicion that NORAD was tasked with watching over and intercepting errant aircraft in American skies before 9/11; that NORAD’s mission was more robust than “looking outward”. The following pre-9/11 citations conclusively documents the true capabilities of NORAD on the morning of 9/11.
The article NORAD: Air National Guard manning stations across the country (National Guard Association of the United States, Sep. 1997) explains how NORAD’s six battle management and command centers identify commercial aircraft as these aircraft are being monitored flying through our air space, “Aircraft flying over our air space are monitored seven days a week, 24 hours a day. Much of the identifying process is done by hand.
Flight plans from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are compiled in logs and have to be manually searched to identify aircraft.
Unlike current operating procedures, the new system will mean fewer manual inquiries and phone contact with FAA officials about commercial aircraft. The FAA flight plan is now hooked up via computer with the new R/SAOCs so operators can easily track friendly aircraft through our air space without having to get someone on the phone or thumb through written log books of flight plans.” –(http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3731/is_199709/ai_n8766326.).
“The NORAD mission is threefold. NORAD’s first responsibility is to provide SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL [emphasis mine] of the airspace covering North America, specifically the airspace of Canada and the United States. This mission is based on agreements between the two governments…
The second part of NORAD’s mission is to provide the NCAs with tactical warning and attack assessment of an aerospace attack against North America. This information is essential to providing those in command with information to aid them in making decisions on how to respond to an attack against North America.
NORAD’s third responsibility is to provide an appropriate response TO ANY FORM OF AN AIR ATTACK [emphasis mine]. NORAD was created to provide a defense against the threat from air-breathing aircraft, specifically the threat from long-range bombers. However, over the years the threat has changed. Now NORAD must provide an appropriate response to a multitude of threats, to include the air-launched cruise missile (ALCM) and the sea-launched cruise missile (SLCM).” — NORAD AIR DEFENSE OVERVIEW; Northeast Parallel Architectures Center, Syracuse University, pre-1995(2) (http://www.npac.syr.edu/projects/civ/vanguard/C2Demo/OPRef.html).
Monitoring and controlling the airspace covering North America is called air sovereignty.
“One ongoing mission of the Battle Management Center is to coordinate “air sovereignty” efforts, MONITORING EVERY AIRCRAFT THAT ENTERS [emphasis mine] U.S. or Canadian airspace — some 2.5 million a year. NORAD is asked to INVESTIGATE [emphasis mine] aircraft that do not file flight plans, contact ground controllers or identify themselves with TRANSPONDERS [emphasis mine].” — Cheyenne Mountain: America’s underground watchtower; CNN Interactive, 1999 (http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/experience/the.bomb/route/01.cheyenne/).
“NORAD defines “sovereign airspace” as: the airspace over a nation’s territory, internal waters, and territorial seas. NORAD’s territorial seas extend 12 miles from the continental United States, Alaska, and Canada. Sovereign airspace above a nation’s territory is unlimited.” — NORAD AIR DEFENSE OVERVIEW; Northeast Parallel Architectures Center, Syracuse University, pre-1995 (http://www.npac.syr.edu/projects/civ/vanguard/C2Demo/OPRef.html).
“The Air Operations Center (AOC) (also known as the Air Defense Operations Center — ADOC) maintains CONSTANT SURVEILLANCE OF NORTH AMERICAN AIRSPACE TO PREVENT OVERFLIGHT [emphasis mine] by hostile aircraft. It TRACKS [emphasis mine] over 2.5 million aircraft annually. The ADOC collects and consolidates surveillance information on suspected drug-carrying aircraft entering or operating WITHIN [emphasis mine] North America, and provides this information to counternarcotics agencies.” — Cheyenne Mountain Complex; Federation of American Scientists, 1999 (http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/c3i/cmc.htm); Cheyenne Mountain Trivia; NORAD, April, 1997 (http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/usspc-fs/cmoctrivia.htm).
“In 1998, Canada posses the ability to detect, identify, and if necessary intercept aircraft over Canadian territory. The “Canadianisation” of NORAD operations over Canada is complete. Though we still rely heavily on the Americans for the Integrated Tactical Warning and Attack Assessment and mutual defense, we have successfully transitioned on at least one of the three core functions of NORAD [surveillance and control of the airspace covering Canada].” — Canadian Aerospace Sovereignty: In Pursuit of a Comprehensive Capability, by Maj FranÃ§ois Malo; Department of National Defence (Canada), 1998 (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/canada/0056.htm).
As is plainly obvious from the pre-9/11 literature quoted above on the capabilities of NORAD (for both the United States and Canada), the official accounts of NORAD’s capabilities on 9/11 were a lie; a monstrous story concocted by the Pentagon and its controllers in the White House to explain away the non-response of NORAD on 9/11.
ENDNOTES, Part I:
2. NORAD AIR DEFENSE OVERVIEW was written before January 1995 as determined by the following dated information within the chapter, “The four CONR sectors are designated as the Southeast, Northeast, Northwest, and the Southwest sectors. Each sector has a Sector Operations Control Center (SOCC) which is responsible for operations within its geographical area of responsibility and which reports directly to the CONUS ROCC.” On January 1, 1995 the Northwest Air Defense Sector consolidated with the Southwest Air Defense Sector, its counterpart at March Air Force Base, California, to become the Western Air Defense Sector, hence NORAD AIR DEFENSE OVERVIEW was written before January 1995.
The NORAD Papers II
Originally published June 4, 2008
In The NORAD Papers we learned from documents dating from the 1990s that NORAD had three core missions since its creation in 1958. These are:
a. surveillance and control of the airspace covering the United States and Canada;
b. providing the NCAs with tactical warning and attack assessment of an aerospace attack against North America; and
c. providing an appropriate response to any form of an air attack.
The last two missions constitute NORAD’s “outward” search for hostile aircraft approaching the North American continent. NORAD’s first mission, however, tasks the agency to monitor and control all aircraft within the United States’ and Canada’s air space. This is what NORAD calls “air sovereignty”. Let’s take a closer look at what constitutes “air sovereignty”.
As reported by the Government Accountability Office in 1994 (then called the General Accounting Office) “NORAD defines air sovereignty as providing surveillance and control of the territorial airspace, which includes:
1. intercepting and destroying uncontrollable air objects;
2. tracking hijacked aircraft;
3. assisting aircraft in distress;
4. escorting Communist civil aircraft; and
5. intercepting suspect aircraft, including counterdrug operations and peacetime military intercepts.”(1)
The GAO report also addresses NORAD’s air sovereignty responsibilities ‘post’ USSR:
“…the force [NORAD] has refocused its activity on the air sovereignty mission, concentrating on intercepting drug smugglers. However, anti-drug smuggling activities at some units and alert sites have been minimal and at others almost nonexistent. Overall, during the past 4 years, NORAD’s alert fighters took off to intercept aircraft (referred to as scrambled) 1,518 times, or an average of 15 times per site per year. Of these incidents, the number of suspected drug smuggling aircraft averaged one per site, or less than 7 percent of all of the alert sites’ total activity. The remaining activity generally involved visually inspecting unidentified aircraft and assisting aircraft in distress.”(2)
We learn from the GAO report that NORAD’s first core mission, surveillance and control of territorial airspace, consists mostly of “visually inspecting unidentified aircraft and assisting aircraft in distress”(3) within the United States.
What was the most drastic action NORAD was capable of performing on the morning of 9/11 if an errant aircraft flying over United States air space defied NORAD’s commands? To what ends would NORAD go in enforcing its charter to control United States airspace? Let’s allow NORAD spokesman, Major Mike Snyder, for NORAD headquarters in Colorado Springs, Colorado tell us from a 1999 interview he gave what actions NORAD is mandated by law to perform in order to ensure control of United States air space when confronting a non-compliant pilot:
“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.”(4)
In 1996 NORAD prepared and practiced “its charter through continuous training and a realistic exercise program. Probably the biggest of these exercises is Amalgam Warrior, which is held twice annually in the fall for the East Coast and in the spring for the West Coast. The five-day fall Amalgam Warrior put Americans and Canadians through their paces, challenging forces in three areas coinciding with the command’s aerospace warning, AIR SOVEREIGNTY [emphasis mine] and air defense missions.
The exercise was conducted in real time with a fictitious world political scenario, which prompted NORAD forces to transition from a peacetime posture to a war-fighting stance. The threat escalated from TRACKING [emphasis mine] unknown aircraft, which filed bad flight plans or wandered off course, and in-flight emergencies [all four hijacked aircraft on 9/11 were also in-flight emergencies(5)] to TERRORIST AIRCRAFT ATTACKS [emphasis mine] and large-scale bomber strike missions.”(6)
How important is the “air sovereignty” mission to the Air Force? Colonel Dan Navin, special assistant to the commander of 1st Air Force in 1997 speaks to this question when he commented,”…many say [it] is the most important job of the Air Force, and that is air sovereignty.”(7)
As Commander-in-Chief, North American Aerospace Defense Command from August 1998 to February 2000, General Richard Myers would have known that NORAD’s mission included surveillance and control of the air space within the United States.(8) Therefore when the former commander of NORAD stated in testimony he gave before the 9/11 Commission pertaining to NORAD’s failure to anticipate the 9/11 attacks, “I can’t answer the hypothetical. It’s more – it’s the way that we were directed to posture, looking outward” (9) he knowingly committed perjury. As such, the United States Department of Justice now has the duty to charge General Richard Myers with perjury and determine why he committed perjury.
ENDNOTES, Part II:
6. http://www.af.mil/news/airman/0196/border.htm (The Border Guards, NORAD: The Eyes and Ears of North America was written before 1997 as determined by the interview in the article with NORAD’s commander-in-chief Gen. Joseph W. Ashy. On October 1, 1996 Gen. Joseph W. Ashy retired from the United States Air Force, hence The Border Guards, NORAD: The Eyes and Ears of North America was written before 1997.)
The NORAD Papers III
Originally published July 23, 2008
In The NORAD Papers and The NORAD Papers II we learned from government/military documents, media reports, university curricula, etc. dating from before 1995 to 1999 that NORAD since its founding in 1958 was tasked with three missions:
1. surveillance and control of the airspace covering the United States and Canada;
2. providing the NCAs [National Command Authorities] with tactical warning and attack assessment of an aerospace attack against North America; and
3. providing an appropriate response to any form of an air attack.(1)
The last two missions constitute NORAD’s “outward” search for hostile aircraft approaching the North American continent. NORAD’s first mission, however, tasks the agency to monitor and control all aircraft within the United States’ and Canada’s air space. This is what NORAD calls “air sovereignty”. As reported by the General Accounting Office in 1994, “NORAD defines air sovereignty as providing surveillance and control of the territorial airspace, which includes:
1. intercepting and destroying uncontrollable air objects;
2. tracking hijacked aircraft;
3. assisting aircraft in distress;
4. escorting Communist civil aircraft; and
5. intercepting suspect aircraft, including counterdrug operations and peacetime military intercepts.”(2)
As Commander-in-Chief of NORAD between August 1998 and February 2000, General Richard Myers(3) would, of course, have known what NORAD’s three missions were on the morning of September 11, 2001. He would have known that NORAD provided surveillance and control of the territorial airspace of the United States as well as watching outside the United States for an aerospace attack. Therefore when the former commander of NORAD stated in testimony he gave before the 9/11 Commission pertaining to NORAD’s failure to anticipate the 9/11 attacks, “I can’t answer the hypothetical. It’s more – it’s the way that we were directed to posture, looking outward”(4), he knowingly committed perjury.
In point of fact, not only was NORAD postured to look inward on the morning of 9/11, but not long after the ‘collapse’ of the USSR NORAD’s inward mission’air sovereignty’was to become the raison d’etre for its continued existence. A NORAD strategy review emphasized a new justification for its core forces soon after the ‘demise’ of the USSR’that of peacetime air sovereignty:
“The dramatically changed threat and . . . development of post-Cold War defense policies suggest real possibilities for shifting NORAD’s focus from deterring massive nuclear attack to defending both nations [Canada and the United States] by maintaining air sovereignty . . . . The size of the core force would equate to that required to perform the peacetime Air Sovereignty mission.”(5)
By the mid-1990s the shift in NORAD’s focus was complete, as reported by the General Accounting Office:
“According to the Chairman [Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff], the air defense force was structured to intercept the former Soviet Union’s long-range bomber force if it attacked over the North Pole. Since that threat has largely disappeared, the United States no longer needs a dedicated continental air defense force, and the force has refocused its activity on the air sovereignty mission . . .”(6)
We learn that by 1995 NORAD had changed its priorities. NORAD’s main mission of defending the continent against a massive nuclear attack would now take a back seat to the less glamorous inward mission of air sovereignty.
ENDNOTES, Part III:
To get a FREE copy of the GAO report on NORAD (Continental Air Defense: A Dedicated Force Is No Longer Needed) go to http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/ordtab.pl and copy and paste NSIAD-94-76 into the first field. International requests are also FREE.
Source URL: http://www.dnotice.org/ DNotice.org also has an excellent selection of links to whistleblowers and other important and valuable information on the front page. Also published in Rock Creek Free Press, September 2008 issue, http://www.rockcreekfreepress.com/CreekV2No9-Web.pdf