Merged E-4B flying around pentagon / Norman Mineta timeline

[Hornit]

Anyone know anything about this? I'm tackling the typical debunking nightmare of truthers jumping topics every three seconds. I have never heard this particular one. Interested if anyone else has.

I have not watched all of Loose change (any of them) and not sure if its in one of those Icons of investigatory prowess

By the way, I am at it again with a vengeance over at the Peak Oil forums, its actually entertaining on some level for me now.

Have learned a TON here.

 

[Arus808]

Hornit, the best way to counter is to ask them to provide proof of the claim. Dont let them control the way the debate is going.

If they claim that an e-4b was flying around, then have them link to a source that says this happened.

Source should be from a Newspaper online, or a witness testimony etc.

 

[Hornit]

Exactly what I did!

Just trying to glean some more info on it..searching here also at the same time.

This place is an EXCELLENT resource.

 

[DavidJames]

Hornit, the best way to counter is to ask them to provide proof of the claim. Dont let them control the way the debate is going.

If they claim that an e-4b was flying around, then have them link to a source that says this happened.

Source should be from a Newspaper online, or a witness testimony etc.

Exactly....

I would then add, even if there was one flying around, so what? Have them document specifically what the plane has to do with 9/11.

 

[Arus808]

Exactly what I did!

Just trying to glean some more info on it..searching here also at the same time.

This place is an EXCELLENT resource.

well, its a new claim and so it would be the person who is claiming it to provide
source
why its important to 9/11/2001

remember, before and after the pentagon was hit, there were several planes that were instructed to be on the look out for it.

 

[DGM]

well, its a new claim and so it would be the person who is claiming it to provide
source
why its important to 9/11/2001

remember, before and after the pentagon was hit, there were several planes that were instructed to be on the look out for it.

Actually it's not that new. It surfaced back in 2006. I haven't got the time now but there a pictures showing one flying around. The question to ask is, why would it be unusual for one to be around on that day. The funny thing is it goes against the "truther" argument that the military was doing nothing.

 

[Hornit]

The claim is that it was "flying circles around the WH" before, during, and after the Pentagon was hit.

Its just too easy....

 

[DGM]

The claim is that it was "flying circles around the WH" before, during, and after the Pentagon was hit.

Its just too easy....

That's just plain false. After, yes. If I get time later I'll find the story (although someone else will likely beat me to it).

 

[Sunray Breaker]

The E-4B claim was verified in a report by Andersoon Cooper a couple of days after 9/11 on CNN. The clip is in LC Final Cut. Iwas fanatical for a while about this flick, so I remember what he's refferring to. The report itself explains why it would be flying around the White House. It's mainly for continuity of government. It keeps the essential government personnel in the sky, away from harm, in the event of an attack.

So even if it was there, it was supposed to be.

 

[KDLarsen]

The E4B (callsign VENUS 77) took off from Andrews at 9:43 as a direct result of the attack on the Pentagon. It was initially vectored towards Offutt AFB in Omaha, but the pilot subsequently let ATC know that he wanted to fly to Wright-Patterson AFB near Dayton, Ohio instead.

It then turned west, flew just north of the no-fly area around Washington D.C and decided against Wright-Patterson, instead chosing to remain in holding position south of Washington, which it was cleared to do at 9:47. It then held over Richmond, Virginia.

John Farmer notes, that the administration deemed information about the plane and its flightpath to be confidential, which is why it was not mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report.

ETA: Radar returns plotted in Google Earth combined with ATC recording


EATA: The Anderson Cooper bit

 

[Hornit]

Excellent. Much Thanks!!!

 

[Kestrel]

John Farmer notes, that the administration deemed information about the plane and its flightpath to be confidential, which is why it was not mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report.

They didn't really need to do this. The existence of these aircraft and why they were built was never really a secret.

 

[Reheat]

They didn't really need to do this. The existence of these aircraft and why they were built was never really a secret.

No one has said so. But, their schedule and route of flight is classified......rightfully so.

 

[Kestrel]

No one has said so. But, their schedule and route of flight is classified......rightfully so.

Before the flight, that makes sense. After the flight, there is no reason to keep it secret.

 

[Reheat]

Before the flight, that makes sense. After the flight, there is no reason to keep it secret.

Well, since the take-off time and general route of flight was posted earlier it is obviously no longer secret. The transcripts of ATC communications and the radar track are available to everyone who is interested.

In case you don't know the only FOIA request to DoD (of which I am aware) was for the aircraft that violated P-56 airspace. Since this aircraft or any other did not violate P-56 airspace DoD indicated they had no knowledge of any such aircraft. That was a true statement.

In case you want to pursue this further, perhaps you should first learn about espionage techniques employed by our enemies instead of depending on what might at superficial perusal be common sense. For any sensitive asset owned and operated by DoD, in this case the Air Force, the established policy is to not discuss it via the technique of neither affirming or denying that it even exists. This is a policy based on many years of experience and it is not going to be changed by the whining of conspiracy theorists or the expression of curiosity from a citizen. You or I simply do not have a need to know and it is best for National Security to keep it that way.

 

[Kestrel]

In case you want to pursue this further, perhaps you should first learn about espionage techniques employed by our enemies instead of depending on what might at superficial perusal be common sense. For any sensitive asset owned and operated by DoD, in this case the Air Force, the established policy is to not discuss it via the technique of neither affirming or denying that it even exists. This is a policy based on many years of experience and it is not going to be changed by the whining of conspiracy theorists or the expression of curiosity from a citizen. You or I simply do not have a need to know and it is best for National Security to keep it that way.

It's about as pointless as denying the existence of Air Force One. Anyone with internet access or a library card can access basic facts about this aircraft. By remaining silent, they did nothing but fuel the conspiracy theorists.

It's as silly as the days when the CIA exit on the George Washington Parkway didn't have a sign.

 

[Reheat]

It's about as pointless as denying the existence of Air Force One. Anyone with internet access or a library card can access basic facts about this aircraft. By remaining silent, they did nothing but fuel the conspiracy theorists.

It's as silly as the days when the CIA exit on the George Washington Parkway didn't have a sign.

You're not absorbing what I've said. If schedules and flight paths were published (even after the fact) a pattern could possibly be determined. For example under what circumstances do they launch. Can their flight path be predicted, etc.

Stuff that can be accessed via the Internet or a Library Card is not sensitive information, what we are discussing are things such as schedules and flight paths whether it's prior to or after the event. It simply is not the business of anyone else what they do or when they do it.

Again, common sense is not so common as you seem to presume. Espionage agent look for patterns and little bits of information accumulated over time can lead to establishing a pattern.

I could care less about conspiracy theorists. They will develop delusions no matter what is said or done. If you want to continue to argue, do it with some one else as I'm not inclined to beat dead horses. In that you are continuing to argue is indicative that you've never had any experience dealing with sensitive National assets. I have, and the policy regarding them is sound whether you agree with them or not.

 

[Kestrel]

You're not absorbing what I've said. If schedules and flight paths were published (even after the fact) a pattern could possibly be determined. For example under what circumstances do they launch. Can their flight path be predicted, etc.

Confirming that the aircraft spotted over Washington, DC on 9/11 shortly after the Pentagon attack was an Air Force plane does nothing of the sort.

 

[Reheat]

Confirming that the aircraft spotted over Washington, DC on 9/11 shortly after the Pentagon attack was an Air Force plane does nothing of the sort.

Do you have a source for who has asked the right question? You seem to know already, so what's the problem? Do you want it published in the NY Times or would some other publication be more satisfactory?

 

[triforcharity]

For the same reason that the grocery bills for cubmarines are classified.

They can be used to determine approx. how long a sub will be underway and underwater.