Guilty For 9-11:
Bush, Rumsfeld, Myers
by Illarion Bykov and Jared Israel
[Posted 14 November 2001]
[Updated 17 November 2001]
Dedicated to the firefighters of New York.
(note by felix quigley: as I understand it this book was not published back then, but feel that it is urgent that it is now published, becausde 1. we have to ALWAYS have the truth and 2. antisemitic conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones and many others have used conspiracy theory to drive the truth movement into antisemitism, and also into a crude form of anti americanism. This has happened espicially on the pro Islam left. 4international says that 9.11 happened as part of the alliance of Islam with the US and British elite who are driving for dictatorship over the working class, as the world economic crisis in capitalism deepens. The questions raised by tenc must be explored further)
* Upcoming Book *
“Who did it? Solving the mystery of 9-11”
‘Guilty for 9-11, Part I’ was the first article to document the charge that the US Air Force was made to stand down on 9-11. The research in this and other EC articles on 9-11 has been used around the world, though not always with proper attribution.
Emperor’s Clothes will soon publish Editor Jared Israel’s book, ‘Who did it? Solving the mystery of 9-11.’ This book builds on the research published by Emperor’s Clothes, dealing with new issues and putting 9-11 in a global perspective.
For advance notice of publication, write
In order to print and distribute the book we need your help. Please make a donation to our Book Fund!
Anyone donating $35.00 or more now will be mailed an autographed copy of the book. Your donation will help bring out the truth!
— John Flaherty
– Introduction to Summary of Evidence –
Andrews Air Force Base is a huge military installation just 10 miles from the Pentagon.
On 11 September Andrews had two squadrons of fighter jets with the job of protecting the skies over Washington D.C. They failed to do their job. Despite over one hour’s advance warning of a terrorist attack in progress, not a single Andrews fighter took off (or scrambled) to protect the city.
The FAA, NORAD and the military have cooperative procedures by which fighter jets intercept commercial aircraft under emergency conditions. These procedures were not followed.
Air Force officials and others have tried to explain away the failures:
“Air Force Lt. Col. Vic Warzinski, another Pentagon spokesman, [said]: ‘The Pentagon was simply not aware that this aircraft was coming our way, and I doubt prior to Tuesday’s event, anyone would have expected anything like that here.'”
–‘Newsday,’ 23 September 2001 (1)
Using information from the mass media and official Websites, we will show that this is a lie.
Some of what happened on 9-11, such as planes flying into buildings, is unusual. But most of what happened, such as commercial jets flying off-course, transponder failures and possible hijackings, are everyday emergencies. We will show that these emergencies are routinely handled with expert efficiency based on clear rules.
The crash of the first hijacked jet into the World Trade Center made it clear the United States was faced with an extraordinary situation. This should have intensified the emergency responses of the air safety and air defense systems.
The whole country was aware. For example, at 9:06AM the NY Police broadcast:
” ‘This was a terrorist attack. Notify the Pentagon.'”
–‘Daily News‘ (New York) 12 September 2001 (2)
‘American Forces Press Service’ reported that ordinary people working at the Pentagon worried they could be next:
“‘We were watching the World Trade Center on the television,’ said a Navy officer. ‘When the second plane deliberately dove into the tower, someone said, ‘The World Trade Center is one of the most recognizable symbols of America. We’re sitting in a close second.'”
–‘DEFENSELINK News‘, Sept. 13, 2001 (3)
U.S. air safety and air defense emergency systems are activated in response to problems every day. On 9-11 they failed despite, not because of, the extreme nature of the emergency. This could only happen if individuals in high positions worked in a coordinated way to make them fail.
Such operatives would almost surely have failed if they tried to disrupt and abort routine protection systems without top-level support. The failure of the emergency systems would be noticed immediately. Moreover, given the catastrophic nature of the attacks, the highest military authorities would be alerted. Acting on their own, the operatives could expect that their orders would be countermanded and that they themselves would be arrested.
The sabotage of routine protective systems, controlled by strict hierarchies, would never have been contemplated let alone attempted absent the involvement of the supreme U.S. military command. This includes at least U.S. President George Bush, U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and the then-Acting Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General Richard B. Myers.
In the following summary of evidence we will demonstrate probable cause for charging the above-named persons with treason for complicity in the murders of thousands of people whom they had sworn to protect.
The summary of evidence covers the following areas:
* Andrews Air Force Base and the myth of ‘no available planes;’
* The air safety/air defense systems and the myth that they were not prepared;
* The actions of George Bush on 9-11 that clearly violated his positive legal and constitutional obligations and demonstrated consciousness of guilt;
* The testimony of General Richard B. Myers at Senate hearings on his nomination as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In these hearings, the contents of which were reported accurately by one lone journalist, General Myers attempted to cover up what had happened 9-11 when he was Acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. He offered three mutually contradictory cover stories and demonstrated consciousness of guilt;
* The cover story floated by CBS evening news, September 14th.
Until that time, officials reported that no planes had been ‘scrambled’ to intercept the hijacked planes. But following Gen. Myers disastrous Senate testimony, CBS broadcast an improved version of 9-11. In the new script, fighter jets from Otis and Langley Air Force Bases did try, but failed, to intercept the hijacked planes. This is now presented as the official NORAD story and has been repeated uncritically by media and government officials alike. We will demonstrate that this cover story is both weak and incriminating.
Part 1: Why did no fighter jets ‘scramble’ to protect Washington D.C.?
Lie #1: ‘No Combat Ready Fighters Were Stationed Near The Pentagon’
As noted, Andrews Air Force base is 10 miles from the Pentagon. The media has mainly avoided talking about Andrews. An exception is ‘USA Today,’ the second-highest circulation newspaper in America. On one day it published two contradictory stories to explain the failure to scramble jets from Andrews prior to the Pentagon crash:
FIRST ‘USA TODAY’ STORY:
“Andrews Air Force Base, home to Air Force One, is only 15 miles [sic!] away from the Pentagon, but it had no fighters assigned to it. Defense officials won’t say whether that has changed.”
–‘USA TODAY,’ 17 September 2001 (4)
SECOND ‘USA TODAY’ STORY:
“The District of Columbia National Guard maintained fighter planes at Andrews Air Force Base, only about 15 miles [sic!] from the Pentagon, but those planes were not on alert and not deployed.”
–‘USA TODAY‘ September 17, 2001 (5)
Both stories are false.
Only one newspaper told the truth. That was the ‘San Diego Union-Tribune’:
“Air defense around Washington is provided mainly by fighter planes from Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland near the District of Columbia border. The D.C. Air National Guard is also based there and equipped with F-16 fighter planes, a National Guard spokesman said.
“But the fighters took to the skies over Washington only after the devastating attack on the Pentagon…”
–‘San Diego Union-Tribune‘ 12 September 2001. (6)
Andrews Air Force Base is a huge installation. It hosts two ‘combat-ready’ squadrons:
* the 121st Fighter Squadron (FS-121) of the 113th Fighter Wing (FW-113), equipped with F-16 fighters;
* the 321st Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA-321) of the 49th Marine Air Group, Detachment A (MAG-49 Det-A), equipped with
These squadrons are served by hundreds of full-time personnel.
THE 121st FIGHTER SQUADRON, 113th FIGHTER WING
“…as part of its dual mission, the 113th provides capable and ready response forces for the District of Columbia in the event of a natural disaster or civil emergency. Members also assist local and federal law enforcement agencies in combating drug trafficking in the District of Colombia. [They] are full partners with the active Air Force”
—DC Military (7)
THE 321st MARINE FIGHTER ATTACK SQUADRON (VMFA-321)
“In the best tradition of the Marine Corps, a ‘few good men and women’ support two combat-ready reserve units at Andrews AFB.
“Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA) 321, a Marine Corps Reserve squadron, flies the sophisticated F/A-18 Hornet. Marine Aviation Logistics Squadron 49, Detachment A, provides maintenance and supply functions necessary to maintain a force in readiness. ”
—DC Military (7)
So Andrews AFB had at least two ‘combat-ready’ squadrons.
(www.dcmilitary.com is a private Website authorized by the military to provide information for members of the armed forces. Please see note just before “Footnotes.”)
Our research has been carried out mainly by volunteers. Newspapers and TV news departments have full-time research staffs. The important media have bureaus in Washington DC, just a few miles from the Andrews airbase. Why haven’t newspapers and TV news programs reported the truth: that Andrews job was to protect DC?
This failure is especially striking because some media did report that fighters scrambled from Andrews, but only after the Pentagon was hit. Thus they were aware that Andrews was supposed to defend D.C.:
” Within minutes of the attack American forces around the world were put on one of their highest states of alert – Defcon 3, just two notches short of all-out war – and F-16s from Andrews Air Force Base were in the air over Washington DC.”
–‘Sunday Telegraph,’ (London), 14 September 2001 (8)
“WASHINGTON – …an audible gasp went up from the rear of the audience as a large black plume of smoke arose from the Pentagon. Terrorism suddenly was at the doorstep and clearly visible through the big glass windows overlooking the Potomac River. Overhead, fighter jets scrambled from Andrews Air Force Base and other installations and cross-crossed the skies…
“A thick plume of smoke was climbing out of the hollow center of the Pentagon. Everyone on the train understood what had happened moments before.”
–‘Denver Post,’ 11 September 2001 (9)
“It was after the attack on the Pentagon that the Air Force then decided to scramble F-16s out of the DC National Guard Andrews Air Force Base to fly cover, a–a protective cover over Washington, DC.”
—NBC Nightly News, (6:30 PM ET) 11 September 11 2001 (10)
The media should have demanded to know the truth about why fighter jets assigned to protect Washington didn’t scramble an hour BEFORE the Pentagon was hit.
Besides fighters, tanker planes and AWACS were also readily available. (An AWACS is a flying communication center equipped with radar which can scan at least 250 miles. This is almost the full distance from the West-Virginia/Ohio/Kentucky border, where American Air Flight 77 turned around before flying back to DC.) Both General Myers and Vice President Cheney admit that these planes did not go into the air over Washington until after the Pentagon was hit.
Here is General Myers, testifying 13th September:
“When it became clear what the threat was, we did scramble fighter aircraft, AWACS, radar aircraft and tanker aircraft to begin to establish orbits in case other aircraft showed up in the FAA system that were hijacked.”
–Gen. Richard B. Myers at Senate confirmation hearing 13 September 2001 (11)
And Richard Cheney on ‘Meet the Press’:
“VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, the–I suppose the toughest decision was this question of whether or not we would intercept incoming commercial aircraft.
“MR. RUSSERT: And you decided?’
“VICE PRES. CHENEY: We decided to do it. We’d, in effect, put a flying combat air patrol up over the city; F-16s with an AWACS, which is an airborne radar system, and tanker support so they could stay up a long time.” –NBC, ‘Meet the Press‘ (10:00 AM ET) 16 September 2001 (12)
As we shall see, Mr. Cheney’s statement that “the toughest decision was this question of whether or not we would intercept incoming commercial aircraft” is a lie. Publicly available FAA documents prove that fighter jets routinely intercept commercial aircraft under certain designated circumstances without requiring or asking for approval from the White House.