"THE GROUND TRUTH" by John Farmer

[njslim]

Was reading through John Farmer's , counsel to 911 Commission, new book
on FAA/NORAD activities on 911 - in particular when did FAA inform Norad
of hijackings. Our friend, CHEAP SHOT, is mentioned in several places as
military liason at Boston ATC.

Learned several new things

1) United airlines broadcast the ATC traffic over the in flight headphones
on channel 9

2) The NYC - Washington attacks were synchronized in pairs with American
airline flights going in first. It was conjectured that the hijackers would be listening to the ATC traffic on the United flight - presumably to see if hijackings had been detected and if any measures were in place to stop them

Any else have any thoughts on this.

[Reheat]

The hijackers were able to listen to ATC radio traffic in the cockpit, no need for any other method or any specific Airline.

What would they have done differently with knowledge gained from radio traffic? This theory doesn't make sense to me

[progge]

The hijackers were able to listen to ATC radio traffic in the cockpit, no need for any other method or any specific Airline.

What would they have done differently with knowledge gained from radio traffic? This theory doesn't make sense to me

I´m still waiting for the arrival of my copy of Farmer´s book, but I know the channel-9 hypothesis from elsewhere. The point is that through channel 9 al-Sheehi on UA 175 probably would have been able to hear Atta´s first transmission, while still sitting in his his passenger seat (not in the cockpit!), and therefore would have known that Atta and his muscle hijackers succeeded in entering the cockpit of AA 11. In other words, Atta´s first transmission could have been part of an arrangement between Atta and al-Sheehi.
I´m not entirely convinced by this hypothesis, but it would explain some events (like Atta making a transmission to the passengers which could be heard by many people outside the plane).
Boone knows a lot more about this.

[T.A.M.]

just ordered my copy from Barnes & Noble.

TAM:)

[Reheat]

I´m not entirely convinced by this hypothesis, but it would explain some events (like Atta making a transmission to the passengers which could be heard by many people outside the plane).
Boone knows a lot more about this.

Now that you've twigged my memory, I recall hearing of this before. I wasn't convinced then, so it had slipped my mind. I'm not convinced now either.

[Boone 870]

Any else have any thoughts on this.


Channel 9 is part of United's in-flight entertainment and can be turned on and off at the pilot's discretion. If the pilot had the feature turned on and the hijackers were listening, they would have heard Atta's first two transmissions.

American 11 switched frequencies to 127.82 at 8:07 and remained on that frequency until 8:34 when Atta made his third and final radio transmission.

United 175 changed frequencies to 127.82 at 8:22 and remained there until 8:27.

It is possible that al Shehhi overheard Atta speaking on the frequency and used those transmissions as confirmation that the plan was working.

This is one of those "what if" questions that will most likely remain unanswered.

[MikeW]

Ramzi Binalshibh told Yosri Fouda that the separate groups of hijackers were communicating and encouraging each other, although he didn't say how.

[jaydeehess]

Unfortunately there is no one alive who can tell us if the ATC radio traffic was turned on on in flight channel 9 or if the hijackers made their move on flt 175 in seeming coordination with hearing Atta's transmission.

Its interesting speculation though.

[jaydeehess]

"encouraging each other"
What were Atta's exact words? Something like " we are returning to the airport"? Since we are speculating ,,, that could be code for "We are heading to the target".

[Cheap Shot]

"encouraging each other"
What were Atta's exact words? Something like " we are returning to the airport"? Since we are speculating ,,, that could be code for "We are heading to the target".

I always found it coincidental, that UAL175 was hijacked on the frequency transfer to ZNY Center. I pretty much always thought it was just a coincidence, but maybe they were waiting for that I don't know. If we had known sooner that UAL175 was hijacked we would have reacted faster towards UAL175, and maybe we would have grounded aircraft sooner, UAL93 may never have departed. A lot of "what ifs" I guess you can "what if" yours elf until you are blue in the face.

Bought the book and passed through it quickly, I hope to read some of this over weekend.

[Boone 870]

"encouraging each other"
What were Atta's exact words? Something like " we are returning to the airport"? Since we are speculating ,,, that could be code for "We are heading to the target".



8:24:38- "We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you'll be okay. We are returning to the airport."

8:24:56- "Nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane."

8:33:59- "Nobody move please. We are going back to the airport. Don't try to make any stupid moves."

Source (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc05.pdf)

[ElMondoHummus]

I always found it coincidental, that UAL175 was hijacked on the frequency transfer to ZNY Center. I pretty much always thought it was just a coincidence, but maybe they were waiting for that I don't know.

Well, the obvious question is, how would they have known? Would that be something they could determine by listening in on Channel 9?

[KDLarsen]

I seriously doubt it was something the hijackers counted on. It might have been a "If the pilot has turned it on, it might be worth listening out for" situation, but given that it's a toss up if it's on or not, and the chance of delays leading to the two planes not being on the same frequency at the same time, I really doubt it was planned.

Also, why risk exposing the plot? Especially if there were far safer methods for communication between the cell members (ie. cell phones). Wasn't it pretty much due to Atta's slip-up that the controllers realised it was a hijacking and not just an aircraft gone astray?

[jaydeehess]

8:24:38- "We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you'll be okay. We are returning to the airport."

8:24:56- "Nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane."

8:33:59- "Nobody move please. We are going back to the airport. Don't try to make any stupid moves."

Source (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc05.pdf)

Its all pure conjecture and guesswork but we do have the the notion that they are speaking to and encouraging each other so these messages to the passengers could in fact be messages to the other aircraft.

8:24:38- "We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you'll be okay. We are returning to the airport."
We are in command of our plane. You are clear to make your own move. We are heading to the target"

8:24:56- "Nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane."
the first hijacking is still going as plannedassuming they could see the towers from 22 minutes out?

8:33:59- "Nobody move please. We are going back to the airport. Don't try to make any stupid moves."
We have the target in sight

[Reheat]

Too much is being made of this. The intercom panel can be confusing in that it's easy to make switchology errors. Even veteran pilots do it on occassion. I seriously doubt that was one of the items they studied in detail anyway. The panels are not standard, each airline uses different models of Intercoms for the same type of aircraft, so how would they obtain that info? It's more plausible to me that Atta simply made a switchology error

[Boone 870]

It's more plausible to me that Atta simply made a switchology error.

I tend to agree with you about this, Reheat. There are too many "what if's" in the equation to form an opinion that the hijackers intentionally broadcast over the frequency. Just thinking out loud, so to speak.

[ElMondoHummus]

You're most likely right, Reheat, but what would the internet be without obsessive contemplation over minituae? :D

Besides 10,000 times less crowded, that is. :boggled:

;)

[Mr.Herbert]

I bought the book last night. 100 pages in, it is a good read. Nothing earth shattering as of yet, but very interesting.

[progge]

I bought the book last night. 100 pages in, it is a good read. Nothing earth shattering as of yet, but very interesting.

Indeed. I´m gone through most of the book and, to be honest, I´m not impressed. OK, part 4 was good. Farmer presents the wrong NORAD timelines and states reasons for the conclusion that NORAD knowingly lied to the public. Has some new details on NORAD logs, but much of what is told is already known due to the NARA publication of the 9/11 Commission documents. However, this chapter was an interesting read.
Part 1-2 mainly consists of information from the writings of Coll, Wright, Zegart, and the 9/11 CR. And people who aren´t familiar with the NORAD Tapes will learn something while reading part 3. Haven´t read part 5 yet.

[T.A.M.]

I bought the book last night. 100 pages in, it is a good read. Nothing earth shattering as of yet, but very interesting.

yah I figure it will read like a more detailed version of Shenon's "The commission". Can't wait for it to arrive.

TAM:)

[jaydeehess]

Would it be proper to say that, in general, Farmer's claim is that there was incompetance being covered up in the gov't reaction to the events of 911?

[progge]

Would it be proper to say that, in general, Farmer's claim is that there was incompetance being covered up in the gov't reaction to the events of 911?

In some degree, yes. Farmer describes the era from the end of the Cold War to 9/11 as a "collapse of Government competence", leading to a bureaucratic apparatus of irrelevant rules, insufficient protocols and the like. His primer example for the consequence of this collapse is the NORAD reaction on 9/11, but there are other examples like Dick Clarke´s videoconference, which in Farmer´s opinion didn´t have any significant effect on what happened that day. IMO, Farmer in general echoes the results of the 9/11 CR. He just re-phrases them more harshly (and adds detail, of course).
As to Farmer´s comments on the aftermath of 9/11, it´s more a mixture of cover-up and a pinch of denial.
It´s a worth reading book. I just expected there to be more new information.

[jaydeehess]

In some degree, yes. Farmer describes the era from the end of the Cold War to 9/11 as a "collapse of Government competence", leading to a bureaucratic apparatus of irrelevant rules, insufficient protocols and the like. .

Thanks progge. I am 'discussing' 911 with a conspiracist on another forum and he brought up Farmer's book. I don't have it and neither does our local library. I have read what others have said about it and the excerpts that have been quoted.
Your above quote from Farmer is exactly what I have been saying to this conspiracist as my take on what Farmer at least suggests in the book. If "collapse of Government competence", is a direct quote from the book could you, please(a bother I know) tell me what chapter (or page) it can be found in.

[progge]

Thanks progge. I am 'discussing' 911 with a conspiracist on another forum and he brought up Farmer's book. I don't have it and neither does our local library. I have read what others have said about it and the excerpts that have been quoted.
Your above quote from Farmer is exactly what I have been saying to this conspiracist as my take on what Farmer at least suggests in the book. If "collapse of Government competence", is a direct quote from the book could you, please(a bother I know) tell me what chapter (or page) it can be found in.

It wasn’t a direct quote. Here’s a direct quote from p. 8 et seq. (= Introduction):

The response on the ground on 9/11 was the trailing consequence of those post-Cold War policy debates, the dysfunctional choices they produced, and the government-wide failure to interdict the 9/11-plot. It is the most powerful challenge to the claims of the departing Clinton administration that it had successfully “reinvented government” to meet post-Cold War challenges and that terrorism had been its highest national security priority, and of the Bush administration that it had mobilized to counter the threat. Given the state of national preparedness that I shall describe, and the way the national defense was conducted, those claims simply cannot be true. The failure to anticipate the attacks of 9/11 was, indeed, as the Commission concluded, a “failure of imagination”, but it was more than that; it was a collapse of competence, and an exposure of the continuing need for fundamental change in the ways in which departments of government are permitted to function.

Cf. p. 290 (= ch. 4):

Taken as a whole, the government’s response to the emerging threat of terrorist attack was a stunning collapse of competence; 9/11 was its trailing consequence.

However, better don’t argue about a book you haven’t read.;) Bad enough that some truthers do.

[jaydeehess]

He is backing away from farmer's book. He has not read it either, so we are on equal footing. When I stated that Farmer was saying that there was incompetance displayed by gov't on 911 he stated that such was not the case.

Obviously he is incorrect. Of course as a conspiricist is is soley and only interested in the fact that Farmer says that the 911CR was somewhat incomplete.

[ImANiceGuy]

Thank god the Department of Homeland Security was created to avoid such future incompetencies.

[twinstead]

Thank god the Department of Homeland Security was created to avoid such future incompetencies.

Yea, I suppose intelligent discussion and narratives of 9/11 and its lead up that don't include an "inside job" complete with nanothermite and faked DNA can be quite boring.

[jaydeehess]

In light of what Farmer actually says I asked The poster on the BV if e is now throwing Farmer under the bus. He so far will not answer preferring to try to change the subject(OMG where did he get that tactic from?).

[triforcharity]

Thank god the Department of Homeland Security was created to avoid such future incompetencies.

And how many more terrorist attacks have occured on American Soil since 9/11???


Hummm...............


1.....nao.........2....nah,..........7......nah, Oh, thats right NOT ONE!!

Thanks for playing.

[noah]

The senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission – John Farmer – says that the government agreed not to tell the truth about 9/11, echoing the assertions of fellow 9/11 Commission members who concluded that the Pentagon were engaged in deliberate deception about their response to the attack.

Farmer served as Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (officially known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States), and is also a former New Jersey Attorney General.




John Farmer

Farmer’s book about his experiences working for the Commission is entitled The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11, and is set to be released tomorrow.

The book unveils how “the public had been seriously misled about what occurred during the morning of the attacks,” and Farmer himself states that “at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened.”

[TruthersLie]

The senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission – John Farmer – says that the government agreed not to tell the truth about 9/11, echoing the assertions of fellow 9/11 Commission members who concluded that the Pentagon were engaged in deliberate deception about their response to the attack.

Farmer served as Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (officially known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States), and is also a former New Jersey Attorney General.




John Farmer

Farmer’s book about his experiences working for the Commission is entitled The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11, and is set to be released tomorrow.

The book unveils how “the public had been seriously misled about what occurred during the morning of the attacks,” and Farmer himself states that “at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened.”

and what does he say about 9/11 twoofs? Oh that you are full of crap and wrong. Doh.

datamining quotes is a wonderful thing.. it would help if you actually READ any of the quotes in FULL CONTEXT

[JAStewart]

Maybe noah doesn't understand.

If Dad tells you when you are visiting Grandma in the nursing home that she looks awful but you should say she's looking great, you don't walk in and go "W T F GRANDMA?!".

[jaydeehess]

The senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission – John Farmer – says that the government agreed not to tell the truth about 9/11, echoing the assertions of fellow 9/11 Commission members who concluded that the Pentagon were engaged in deliberate deception about their response to the attack.
Farmer served as Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (officially known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States), and is also a former New Jersey Attorney General.




John Farmer

Farmer’s book about his experiences working for the Commission is entitled The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11, and is set to be released tomorrow.

The book unveils how “the public had been seriously misled about what occurred during the morning of the attacks,” and Farmer himself states that “at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened.”

I now bring your attention to the quotes in post 24 (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5156172&postcount=24) above.

Now using all of these quotes together what do you conclude is Farmer's assertion about what was not the 'truth'?

[progge]

Just found a small, but interesting story which I haven´t heard about before, and had the desire to share it. Sorry if this is common knowledge already.

Anyway, remember United´s in-flight entertainment programm channel 9 (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5119370&postcount=6)? Passengers can listen to ATC transmissions via channel 9.
One passenger on UAL Flight 1523, Michael A. McNeil, witnessed the loss of United 93.

On September 11, 2001, McNeil, a free lance television engineer-sports was a passenger on United Airline UAL Flight 1523 from LaGuardia New York Airport to Denver in seat 6A, when he overheard the flight communications from his plane, Cleveland Center and UAL Flight 93; sometime after 9:00. He had been Iistening with earphones since he defarted. He had been in New York working the U.S. Tennis Open in Flushing Meadows, New York.
While listening, he heard that New York area airspace was closed. He heard two ten second bursts of unintelligible yelling and altercation. Cleveland Center asked for a repeat and identification. Cleveland Center began a roll call of aircraft in the air space. He next heard what sounded like, "I" or "We have a bomb." The piiot or co-pilot on UAL 93 must have had keyed open the microphone. Cleveland Center said, "Come back." A Continental flight crew member responded with an interpretation, "He said he had a bomb." Cleveland Center began
to instruct planes away from the area. The crew of his flight turned off the passenger monitoring system.
Source (http://www.scribd.com/doc/15072623/T1A-B33-Four-Flights-Phone-Calls-and-Other-Data-Fdr-Entire-Contents-FBI-302s-843)

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

...since he defarted...

:dl:

Lets hope he did fart before going on the plane.

I know its just a typo but that's just too damn funny.

Ok, back OT! Good source though!

[Sword_Of_Truth]

And how many more terrorist attacks have occured on American Soil since 9/11???


Hummm...............


1.....nao.........2....nah,..........7......nah, Oh, thats right NOT ONE!!

Thanks for playing.

Fort Hood Texas, november 5th 2009. 13 killed in mass shooting attack by islamic terrorist.

[gumboot]

I think way too much is being made of the fact you could listen in on ATC traffic.

Firstly, as pointed out it relies on the pilot leaving it open - something that couldn't be relied on.

More importantly, Atta's transmissions were at 0824 and UA175 wasn't hijacked until 0842 (at the earliest). What was the message meant to be in Atta's transmission? "18 minutes till go"?

Finally, the surface explanation for Atta's transmission - a message to the passengers - makes much more sense and is in keeping with the other flights (for example the fake bomb on UA93).

The objective - clearly - was for the hijackers to convince passengers and ATC that they were undertaking a regular hijacking - flying to an airport, landing, and negotiating. By the time anyone worked out what was going on it would be too late. There's plenty anecdotal evidence they went to great lengths to prevent passengers seeing the pilots were dead. There's plenty of reports of them directly telling passengers they had a bomb and to cooperate, going to the airport, etc...

The "secret message to other hijackers" explanation just makes no sense whatsoever.

[Thunder]

Fort Hood Texas, november 5th 2009. 13 killed in mass shooting attack by islamic terrorist.

this was not a terrorist attack. it was a lone nut acting out of insanity and religious stupidity.

terrorist attacks are coordinated with terrorist groups.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Membership in a group is not a requirement to be a terrorist.

Sorry, Parky.

[Thunder]

Membership in a group is not a requirement to be a terrorist.

Sorry, Parky.

never heard of a "lone wolf"? this is what intelligent people are classifying the Fort Hood guy as.

he was not a member of any terror organization or took orders from any terror groups. his act was his decision, he acted alone, planned alone, and provided the weapon to himself.

hence...lone wolf.

....ok..I did some further reading, and it does appear that the Govt. has for some time classified these people as "lone wolf terrorists". they act alone and outside of any command structure. the most linkage they have is inspiration.

point is, can the attack on Fort Hood be blamed on any known groups? no. no more then the murder of Yitzhak Rabin can be blamed on Likud....or the assassination of JFK can be blamed on the Cubans.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Someone who is a muslim, who holds extreme views, who shouts "Allahu Akbar" while discharging a firearm into a crowd of Americans, is a radical islamist terrorist.

I'm sorry that this tickles your inner islamist apologist, but it's the truth.

[Thunder]

Someone who is a muslim, who holds extreme views, who shouts "Allahu Akbar" while discharging a firearm into a crowd of Americans, is a radical islamist terrorist.

I'm sorry that this tickles your inner islamist apologist, but it's the truth.

that's fine. then I guess you therefore have no problem with me calling Baruch Goldstein a Jewish extremist terrorist?

[Sword_Of_Truth]

that's fine. then I guess you therefore have no problem with me calling Baruch Goldstein a Jewish extremist terrorist?

I don't know who Baruch Goldstein is. But you call everything that the Israeli government does or says terrorism, so I just tune you out.

[Thunder]

But you call everything that the Israeli government does or says terrorism, so I just tune you out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman_argument

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/think/strawman.htm

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-straw-man-argument.htm

I posted several links just so there would be little confusion.

:D

Baruch Goldstein was the right-wing fundamentalist Jew who ran into the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron and massacred like 50 Muslim worshippers. Clearly a Jewish-extremist terrorist.

[gumboot]

To be classified as a terrorist, there needs to be some political or ideological issue behind the attack, and the attacker has to intend that their attack will have some sort of impact on that issue.

Until such time as an investigation can determine the motivation of the Ft Hood shooter (assuming they ever do) it seems a little premature to label him a terrorist.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Right... that cry of "Allahu Akbar" as he was mass murdering US servicemen could have been a reference to anything. :rolleyes:

[Sword_Of_Truth]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman_argument

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/think/strawman.htm

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-straw-man-argument.htm

I posted several links just so there would be little confusion.

:D

Baruch Goldstein was the right-wing fundamentalist Jew who ran into the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron and massacred like 50 Muslim worshippers. Clearly a Jewish-extremist terrorist.

You prove my point, Parky. You've proven incapable of discussing radical islam without attempting to derail the discussion and turn it into bashing Israel.

So I'm tuning you out.

[triforcharity]

Fort Hood Texas, november 5th 2009. 13 killed in mass shooting attack by islamic terrorist.

Sorry if I am uninformed, as work sometimes keeps me away from things, but has this been confirmed??

I know there was some specualtion on that issue, but as of yet to my knowledge, it hasn't been confirmed.

PS, I see it from both sides. Both parky and SOT are right. He did terrorize our nation, but I believe he acted on his own accord, and not in connection with AQ or OBL. I could be wrong though. Wouldn't be the first time.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

point is, can the attack on Fort Hood be blamed on any known groups? no. no more then the murder of Yitzhak Rabin can be blamed on Likud....or the assassination of JFK can be blamed on the Cubans.


Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols weren't part of any group (in the context of the bombing), yet they are generally considered to be domestic terrorists.

[Thunder]

well, then i believe the proper term for these men is "lone wolf terrorist". to me, being a terrorist suggests involvement with a movement.

[BigAl]

well, then i believe the proper term for these men is "lone wolf terrorist". to me, being a terrorist suggests involvement with a movement.

The phase "leaderless resistance" is used by anti-government Militia folks and the people that try to keep track of the militia movement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaderless_resistance

I see no reason why the phrase "leaderless terrorism" isn't valid.

[gumboot]

Right... that cry of "Allahu Akbar" as he was mass murdering US servicemen could have been a reference to anything. :rolleyes:


It's presumably a reference to the Muslim god. He might have committed the shootings because he's a Muslim and hates Americans. Unless he intended for his shootings to have some impact outside the immediate killings, it's still not terrorism - just religiously motivated mass murder.

Here's the formula for how terrorism works:

X did Y so that A would B.

Where X is the terrorist, Y is the terrorist act, A is a third-party entity, and B is some action desired by X.

Unless you can fill in all the blanks, it can't be terrorism. In this case:

"The Fort Hood shooter" did "a shooting rampage" so that A would B."

We need A and B before we can decide if he's a terrorist or not.

[Redtail]

Right... that cry of "Allahu Akbar" as he was mass murdering US servicemen could have been a reference to anything. :rolleyes:

:eye-poppi Wow... I had no idea my teammate Munif was committing an act of terrorism before every football game! Or that Husam was when he played spades. Or Aafreen when she had an orgasam....