"Do the orders still stand?" - Person identified

[The Platypus]

There are many suspicious things about 9/11.

No there aren't.

 

[beachnut]

... Not anti-government. Anti-corruption. I want the truth and to fulfill our oath "to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign or domestic."

There are many suspicious things about 9/11. No one should be criticized for being a skeptic. If the wars were for oil profits for corporations who don't want us to develop solor energy or electric cars, resulting in dead or no-legged soldiers, then they are not friends of the American public.

Gaining knowledge before spewing nonsense and misleading fellow Americans is part of your oath. Don't use your oath like McVeigh. If you don't like war, making up and supporting lies about 911 is not living up to your oath. Protest the wars, don't' support lies on 911.

Electric cars? Go get Physics for future Presidents!!! quick! Education is the cure for fantasy on 911. http://muller.lbl.gov/teaching/physics10/pffp.html

There is nothing suspicious about 911, that knowledge can't cure.

different viewpoints to evaluate

You are looking for viewpoints and ignoring the evidence. You are manufacturing suspicious things on 911 due to ignorance.

 

[gumboot]

You know, I must not be too smart. For the life of me I can't figure out what the significance of the whole "Do the orders still stand?" thing in the first place. At the time this took place, the twin towers and the Pentagon had been attacked by suicide pilot types with hijacked commercial aircraft. OTIS fighters were stationed over NYC with Langley fighters racing to put a cap over DC and Andrews scrambling to catch up. The TSD is still showing UAL93 on a course for the DC area although the plane had crashed earlier in Pennsylvania. If I recall correctly, the context of all of this was the 'count-down' based on the TSD track that resulted in the Pentagon area being evacuated after it had already been hit. So I can only assume that the question is related to the shoot-down order that had just been given.

So what is the big deal? I would certainly hope that by this time the President had issued such an order. How many more planes and buildings were we willing to deal with that day? I would also expect that the guy who asked the darn question does not have the authority to discuss things related to national defense and the PEOC unless it has been cleared by higher-ups for him to do so.

Nothing to see here ... move along.

To understand the significance you have to know the entire claim. Because it's not just about what the order is, and who said it. It's when it happened, and what aircraft it related to.

The people who blindly claim it's important also cling desperately, like drowning men, to the Mineta account that this happened in relation to AA77 some time around 0920ish.

If the conversation relates to AA77 the ramifications are obvious. But therein lies the problem; we don't need to know about the conversation because we have ample other evidence to eliminate the possibility that it was AA77. In fact, once you go through all the data, the only logical conclusion you can come to is that this was a ghost track for UA93 on the TSD.

Given that, clearly the conversation is irrelevant; who cares what the "order" was for an aircraft that didn't even exist anymore?

The "Do the orders still stand?" claim is a classic example of Conspiracy Theorists not being able to see the forest for the trees.

 

[Dave Rogers]

There are many suspicious things about 9/11.

If so, you have failed to identify any of them correctly so far.

Dave

 

[Sabrina]

IIRC, in CE's initial post in this thread, it is clearly stated that the debriefing done during the 9/11 Commission on this topic to this individual (can't be bothered to go back and find out his name right now) is still classified. It is entirely possible that Mr. Mineta overstepped the bounds of his clearance in mentioning that episode, and it is also entirely possible that this individual is merely obeying the dictates of the classification of his interview in declining to elaborate further as to the "orders" in question. If the interview is classified, then the individual is likely bound by that classification to not comment further on it, hence him stating clearly "I have nothing further to say on that".

Very little that is sinister about that extremely likely possibility; instead we merely have someone obeying the dictates he was bound by when he swore an oath to protect the US Government from all enemies, foreign and domestic. The fact that truthers see something sinister in that is entirely on them. There are laws that protect whistleblowers; if this gentleman truly felt the orders were unlawful, he'd be protected if he chose to violate the classification and state what the orders were. Clearly that is not the case.

An old thread was bumped for THIS? That is so ridiculous.

 

[A W Smith]

Silence is not an acceptable response for skeptics.

If the "orders" were innocuous, like "do the pizza delivery orders still stand?"
then Cochran should have cleared it up once and for all.

You realize of course that it was a damn phone call and he wasn't on the stand in federal court. correct? He could have easily responded thus.

What questions do you have Jeff? I'm here for my own purpose, not yours, and not anyone else's, to find out WTF is up with the stupid truth movement.

 

[alienentity]

"Do the orders still stand?"

"Have you heard anything to the contrary? We've GOT to keep a lid on the 200 MPG carburetor at all costs!"

RR
200mpg? Hell, according to the internet you can run your car on water vapour for free!

 

[The Big Dog]

I'm not ignoring intelligent answers, like BCR and MikeW's very helpful post about PentTBom .com which I much appreciate and am in the process of viewing. New info is what I came to JREF for.

You don't own this forum. You just have more time to hang out here and "claim" it. If people "come and go", it is because they found no useful information here.

Some of you try to make me the topic of the forum, and make childish comments, evidently trying to get me to leave. Get a life. Look at the OP and stick to it. Focus on and debate the message, not the messenger.

Man, that is a lot of words to justify why you posted questions in another thread, got answers, ignored them, raised the same points here a couple of days later, got more answers and then started whing up a storm.

Hey sport, don't tell me to stick to the OP, which has nothing to do with your rank ignorance of the status of the videotapes at the pentagon with which you have hijecked this thread.

And truthers left because (like you) we exposed their bull **** lies about "having an open mind."

By the way, completely irrelevant appeal to emotion and poisoning the well in your last paragraph noted, and ignored. We don't cotton to logical fallacies around here, champ, so I suggest you start confining yourself to real argument.

Thanks.

 

[achimspok]

If he'd said that the order in question was a shoot-down order and the whole exchange referred to the projected track of flight 93, would any conspiracy theorists believe him?

Dave

Of course, given the 8 mile debris field. But the order wasn't about flight 93.

 

[DGM]

Of course, given the 8 mile debris field. But the order wasn't about flight 93.

Sorry but, a chorus was needed. (It's better than my first choice )

 

[BCR]

If the conversation relates to AA77 the ramifications are obvious. But therein lies the problem; we don't need to know about the conversation because we have ample other evidence to eliminate the possibility that it was AA77. In fact, once you go through all the data, the only logical conclusion you can come to is that this was a ghost track for UA93 on the TSD.

I notice the original video linked by CE is no longer active, so for reference here is Mineta's testimony.



I was going to save this for the book, but I guess I really need to get some feedback since the "ramifications are obvious". If this has been discussed already and I missed it, then my bad.

Timeline for AAL77 based on radar to correlate with Mineta's testimony.

9:26 - AAL77 was 50 nautical miles out from DC
9:30 - 30 nautical miles out
9:33 - 10 nautical miles out

If this is what Mineta was talking about, then the question to the VP would be after this at some point.

Here are the notes from a Secret Service log done for the 911 Commission and recently released by NARA.

I hate to say it, but at first glance this seems to confirm Mineta's account that the plane in question was AAL77.

Original Document

 

[DGM]

I was going to save this for the book, but I guess I really need to get some feedback since the "ramifications are obvious". If this has been discussed already and I missed it, then my bad.

Were they (the bunker) actually aware of where flight 77 was at the time? I was under the impression they were not (along with the FAA).

You don't have to "hate to say it". My understanding is there was no assets in the area anyway (so it's still a wash).

 

[alphahelix]

Yes, what about the videos at the Pentagon. Why can't we see more than a few fuzzy frames?

I came to this forum expecting to find critical thinking, new ideas, and interesting information. You write like a junior high school student, making false assumptions (there are plenty of witnesses to a plane) and ad hominems. Fact? What evidence do you have I'm "ignoring the answers". If you write as an adult, I'll read your responses.

Well there are several part to a security system but I'll give you the short version.

If the recording device (tape recoder, security recoder, DVR) is taking raw video and directly recording it, the camera's shutter speed determines frames/images/pictures per second

Or you can have a camera with a high shutter speed with the recording device only recording so many fps/ips/pps.

Or you can have a combination of the above setups.

Also depending on how many cameras, colors, resolution, scan lines, interlacing and how the recording device stores the video, its not cost effiecient to record multiple videos, full resolution, full color, full frame rate all of the time.

And some recorders average out a overall recording rate over all cameras (ie 240 max fps divided among x number of cameras)

So unless someone knows the models of the cameras, recorders, storage space options and sizes. Nobody can tell you exactly why a video is low resolution low frame rate.

Except maybe that back in 2001 it was cheaper to have a setup like we see in the pentagon video so that it can record slow moving vehicles and persons and not a honking jet tearing thru.

Which somewhere in another thread they did all the neccessary calculations to show why the camera never got the "clear" shot of the jet

 

[MikeW]

I hate to say it, but at first glance this seems to confirm Mineta's account that the plane in question was AAL77.

Well, I don't think it's definitive enough to say confirms... More "is consistent with", in some areas.

In others, maybe not. What does "9:37 - VP" mean, for instance? In the "official story" this would mark his arrival at the PEOC. If that's what it means here then it contradicts, rather than confirms Mineta's account.

 

[BCR]

Were they (the bunker) actually aware of where flight 77 was at the time? I was under the impression they were not (along with the FAA).

You don't have to "hate to say it". My understanding is there was no assets in the area anyway (so it's still a wash).

Well, I hate to say it because I was pretty much convinced that what Mineta was referring to was the UAL93 TSD track. This pretty much shows that no, there was a feed of information to the SS which would of course be conveyed to other interested parties.

I have additional support for the earlier observations of AAL77, but I do have to save something for the book

 

[BCR]

Well, I don't think it's definitive enough to say confirms... More "is consistent with", in some areas.

In others, maybe not. What does "9:37 - VP" mean, for instance? In the "official story" this would mark his arrival at the PEOC. If that's what it means here then it contradicts, rather than confirms Mineta's account.

Confirms his 'countdown' account. As far as his being in the PEOC at the time and hearing it there, I agree, 'consistent with'.

 

[DGM]

I have additional support for the earlier observations of AAL77, but I do have to save something for the book

Did you're publisher tell you to "release" this fact?



Hurry you're ass up and finish it!

(old joke: How do you keep a moron in suspense? I'll tell you later)

 

[BCR]

Did you're publisher tell you to "release" this fact?



Hurry you're ass up and finish it!

(old joke: How do you keep a moron in suspense? I'll tell you later)

No, my publisher told me to "Hurry your ass up and finish it!" I am so far behind schedule

 

[DGM]

No, my publisher told me to "Hurry your ass up and finish it!" I am so far behind schedule

Well, put me in for a copy (I planned on it anyway), You know how to get in touch with me.

 

[Animal]

Well there are several part to a security system but I'll give you the short version.

If the recording device (tape recoder, security recoder, DVR) is taking raw video and directly recording it, the camera's shutter speed determines frames/images/pictures per second

Or you can have a camera with a high shutter speed with the recording device only recording so many fps/ips/pps.

Or you can have a combination of the above setups.

Also depending on how many cameras, colors, resolution, scan lines, interlacing and how the recording device stores the video, its not cost effiecient to record multiple videos, full resolution, full color, full frame rate all of the time.

And some recorders average out a overall recording rate over all cameras (ie 240 max fps divided among x number of cameras)

So unless someone knows the models of the cameras, recorders, storage space options and sizes. Nobody can tell you exactly why a video is low resolution low frame rate.

Except maybe that back in 2001 it was cheaper to have a setup like we see in the pentagon video so that it can record slow moving vehicles and persons and not a honking jet tearing thru.

Which somewhere in another thread they did all the neccessary calculations to show why the camera never got the "clear" shot of the jet

Back in 2000ish time frame, I remember storage costs being the issue WRT security systems for a few of my clients. They would spend money on the better cameras but save on storage by reducing the FPS that were stored.