CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
Introduction and Disclaimer
The purpose of this book is to examine actions of United States government officials and/or agencies, according to official and mainstream media sources, for failures or potential failures to perform one or more of the following: 

     1. Properly execute justice
     2. Operate with reasonable transparency
     3. Appropriately address instances of dereliction of duty
     4. Appropriately address instances of corruption

Every detail found in each section can also be found in one or more of the sources listed at the end of that section. Meaningful rebuttals, counter-rebuttals, etc., to the main points covered in this book have been included to the best of my ability and awareness.

This book does not assert that every detail of every section is true. In fact, every detail cannot possibly be true since some details contradict others. This book also does not assert that all sources cited espouse the overall narrative of their sections or the book as a whole. In fact, occasionally sources cited are skeptical or derisive of said narratives.

The method of research used for developing this book has been called “open-source intelligence” because intelligence agencies develop most of their insights by searching through publicly available repositories of information. In the 2006 film, “9/11 Press for Truth,” which documents the creation of the 9/11 Commission, veteran CIA analyst Ray McGovern stated:

“The whole mystique of intelligence is that you acquire this very valuable information covertly. [However] if the truth be told, about 80 percent of the information that one needs is available in open-source materials.”

Open-source intelligence involves accumulating seemingly unrelated or loosely related data points from articles/books which are often given low priority/visibility in daily news cycles. However, once assembled they can form accurate narratives that may differ greatly from narratives being promoted by a given country’s government.

This book contains copyrighted material such as media excerpts that have not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This material is included to advance the education of criminal justice, historical, political, and economic issues. I believe this constitutes a “fair use” of such material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. However, if the copyright owner believes my use of such material does not constitute fair use and would like it removed, please contact me through my website, www.danielbecklessons.com, and I will accommodate all reasonable requests.

This book is available free of charge through my website, www.danielbecklessons.com. If you benefit from this and other books/papers/articles I’ve written, please consider supporting my work with a donation through my website. Regardless of whether you donate, thank you sincerely for taking the time to familiarize yourself with this important information.

How To Find Original Sources
As stated, every detail found in each section can also be found in one or more of the sources listed at the end of that section. The reader can determine from which source any given detail originates by examining the language included in the body (such as “according to the New York Times in September of 2001”) and then finding the source name, date, and title at the end of the section that most natural fits the language provided in the body. I also occasionally list supplementary sources that are not mentioned by name in the body of their sections.

For media article sources, I typically include the outlet name, date, and title. I only include the name of the journalist when I draw specific attention to him or her in the body of the section. I do not list URLs because they frequently change over time.

Most of the sources cited in this book (not including copyrighted books) can currently be found at these links:

https://archive.org/details/httpsarchive.orgdetailswar-on-terror-according-to-msm-and-us-govt-support-material
https://archive.org/download/httpsarchive.orgdetailswar-on-terror-according-to-msm-and-us-govt-support-material

These links can also be accessed through my website, www.danielbecklessons.com. Public domain sources are not password protected. Copyrighted media articles/excerpts are contained in a password-protected Microsoft Word file. The password is: flightofficial.

Sometimes authors of online content offer to e-mail media article text to interested parties rather than publicly posting copyrighted material. Password protecting the aforementioned Word file is my alternative attempt to provide access to original sources to interested parties without making them publicly accessible, per se, but also without burdening myself with perpetual e-mail replies. In any event, I believe all articles cited are legitimate candidates for “Fair Use” coverage since they are valuable for the advancement of education in criminal justice, historical, political, and economic issues related to 9/11 and the war on terror. Nevertheless, if the copyright owner objects to my offering such access, please contact me through my website, www.danielbecklessons.com, and I will accommodate all reasonable requests.

If at any point in the future the links shown above not active, most sources I cite can easily be found online by copying and pasting the title of the article/book/paper – enclosed in quotes – in a search engine such as DuckDuckGo or Google. For example, one might perform a quote-enclosed search for the following phrase to find the New York Times article with this title:

“Pentagon Tracked Deadly Jet But Found No Way to Stop It”

Enclosing a word or phrase in quotes causes a search engine to look for the exact wording entered rather than everything related to that word or phrase.

If searching for the title of the article does not work, a second step is to perform a quote-enclosed search for an excerpt from the article/book/paper. This is one reason I include copious excerpts (in addition to highlighting or substantiating key points). For example, if the search engine one used had trouble finding the aforementioned New York Times headline, one could copy part of the following excerpt from that article, enclose it in quotes, and perform the search:

“During the hour or so that American Airlines Flight 77 was under the control of hijackers, up to the moment it struck the west side of the Pentagon, military officials in a command center on the east side of the building were urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to do.”

Note that some news media articles have been removed from the outlet’s website archives. However, in such cases, all or part of the article has often been reproduced by other websites.

If the first two steps don’t work, a third step is to perform searches of different combinations of keywords. For example, to find the aforementioned New York Times headline, one might enter different combinations of the following keywords (not enclosed in quotations) into a search engine such as DuckDuckGo or Google:

flight 77 pentagon military crash 9/11 new york times

If none of these steps work, a fourth step is to go to the website https://archive.org/ and retry the first three steps using its homepage search engine. This repository website sometimes has media articles that are difficult to find elsewhere on the internet even when using top-tier search engines.

I cite/quote numerous 9/11 Commission reports, public hearing transcripts, interviews, and memoranda for the record (MFR’s) throughout this book. Here are some useful URLs that are functional as of 2021 for finding such material.

9/11 Commission Website and Transcripts of Several Public Hearings
http://www.9-11commission.gov/
https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/archive/hearing12/9-11Commission_Hearing_2004-06-17.htm
https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/archive/hearing2/9-11Commission_Hearing_2003-05-23.htm
https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/archive/hearing12/9-11Commission_Hearing_2004-06-17.htm
https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/archive/hearing8/9-11Commission_Hearing_2004-03-24.htm
https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/archive/hearing7/9-11Commission_Hearing_2004-01-26.htm

Archives of 9/11 Commission MFR’s (Memoranda for the Record) and Other Related Documents/Information
https://www.scribd.com/directory/documents/t/1/144
https://www.scribd.com/directory/documents/d/13/149
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/9-11_Commission_Records#Box_DH.1
http://www.scribd.com/911DocumentArchive
https://www.archives.gov/research/9-11/commission-series.html
https://www.archives.gov/research/9-11/commission-memoranda.html

As stated, some news media articles have been removed from the outlet’s website archives, but have been reproduced in full or in part by other websites. Here are five journalistic-themed websites that are useful for finding such reproductions. The first link – historycommons – is a completely neutral, searchable timeline of events with journalistic/academic/official citations for every detail it documents. It is the single most powerful research tool for War on Terror-related topics on the internet. The second link – 911myths – advocates mostly official narratives and contains a series of articles with useful journalistic/academic/official citations and excerpts. The third and fourth links – wanttoknow and newsmine – advocate mostly anti-official narratives and contain long lists of categorized mainstream media excerpts. The fifth link – consensus911 – advocates anti-official narratives and contains a series of articles with useful journalistic/academic/official citations and excerpts.

Useful, Journalistic-Themed 9/11 Websites
http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline
http://www.911myths.com/index.php?title=Main_Page
https://www.wanttoknow.info/911information
http://newsmine.org/content.php?folder=9-11
https://www.consensus911.org/

A Condensed Version in Less Than One Hour
The remainder of this chapter is comprised of short summaries of every chapter that follows. Collectively, these summaries take less than one hour to read for the average reader and contain vital and often shocking narratives which most people have never heard.

The goal of these summaries is brevity. Therefore, they necessarily do not address every meaningful rebuttal or counter-rebuttal contained in the body of the book. However, in my opinion, a large majority of these points are equally provocative or more provocative when read in their full context.

Not everyone is interested in history or willing to spend several hours reading a full-length history book such as this one. However, virtually every person on earth has been affected politically, financially, and/or psychologically by 9/11 and the subsequent war on terror. Therefore, I am convinced it is a worthwhile investment for any person with access to this book to spend the less than one hour required to read these summaries.

After reading these summaries, the reader should be able to easily navigate to any chapter/section of the book from which he or she would like to learn more information. Take note that similar or identical summaries also appear as the introductions of most chapters. Therefore, chapter introductions can certainly be skipped for those who do not wish to read them a second time.

For this chapter only, I list all sources at the end rather than after each section because my greater priority is seamless readability rather than immediate visibility of the sources. However, because the sources are still essential, I include them in the body of the writing as bold, abridged text in parenthesis after each detail or group of details. Here are some acronyms I make use of:

Media Outlets
ABC =American Broadcasting Corporation
AP = Associated Press
BBC = British Broadcasting Corporation
CBC = Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
CBS = Columbia Broadcasting System
CNN = Cable News Network
LAT = Los Angeles Times
NBC = National Broadcasting Corporation
NYT = New York Times
PBS = Public Broadcasting System
UPI = United Press International
WAPO = Washington Post

9/11 Commission/Congress Acronym
Com = 9/11 Commission
Test = Public Hearing Testimony
MFR = Memorandum for the Record

Government Entities
DOD = Department of Defense
DOJ = Department of Justice
DOT = Department of Transportation
FAA = Federal Aviation Administration
FBI = Federal Bureau of Investigation
NEADS = Northeast Air Defense Sector (part of NORAD)
NORAD = North American Aerospace Defense Command
NMCC = National Military Command Center (U.S. military headquarters inside Pentagon)
NTSB = National Transportation Safety Board
OIG = Office of Inspector General

For books or papers, I include only the author’s last name. For example:

Bush = President George W. Bush
Clark = White House Terrorism Advisor Richard Clark
Shenon = New York Times investigative journalist Philip Shenon
Kean/Hamilton = 9/11 Commission Chairmen Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton

When citing a firsthand interview or quotation, I include both the source and the last name of the interviewee. For example:

ABC-Winfield = ABC’s interview with Brigadier General Montague Winfield
Com-Belger Test = FAA Deputy Administrator Monte Belger’s 9/11 Commission public hearing testimony
Com-Garvey MFR = FAA Administrator Jane Garvey’s 9/11 Commission staff interview memorandum

When citing the 9/11 Commission Report, I include pages numbers and footnote numbers, if applicable. For example:

Com-pg. 39, 458 FN 116 = Pages 30 and 458, footnote 116 of the 9/11 Commission Report

Finally, some media outlets which are not commonly known in the 2020s were nevertheless considered household names in the early 2000s. Examples include Newhouse News and Newsday.

Summary of Chapter 2 (The 9/11 Commission)
(1) The Bush administration actively opposed an independent investigation into the 9/11 attacks, arguing that it would expose sensitive intelligence and interfere with the war on terror (CBS, CNN, Newsweek). It eventually succumbed to public pressure and agreed to the formation of the 9/11 Commission, which was comprised of ten bipartisan Commissioners headed by two Chairmen, and a research staff headed by an Executive Director (Time). The Commission was allocated a tiny budget ($3 million) and a short timeline (18 months) (Time), which later prompted both Chairmen to say that it was set up to fail (CBC, C-SPAN). President Bush and Vice President Cheney both refused to speak to the Commissioners publicly or on the record (CBS, NYT).

(2) In 2008, New York Times investigative journalist Philip Shenon wrote a book entitled, “The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation,” which was subsequently covered by numerous media outlets. This worked it cited frequently hereafter. Philip Zelikow was appointed the Executive Director of the Commission. Zelikow was a member of Bush’s White House transition team (NYT) and had worked closely with White House National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice since the 1980s (AP). During the transition, Zelikow worked to demote perennial (since the 1980s) White House Terrorism Advisor Richard Clarke and restrict his access to the president and his cabinet (ABC, AP, Clarke, Guardian, Shenon (NYT journalist), UPI, WAPO), despite having two years earlier written about the possibility of a terrorism attack destroying the World Trade Center towers followed by an erosion of civil liberties and a ramp-up in government surveillance of citizens (Foreign Affairs). Zelikow also authored the administration’s war on terror declaration and the Bush preemptive war doctrine, which became the primary justification for the Iraq War (C-SPAN, NYT Mag, Shenon, WAPO).

(3) None of Zelikow’s links to Rice or the Bush administration was included on his resume for the Executive Director position or disclosed at the time of his appointment (ABC, AP, Guardian, Shenon). When these links were later discovered, both the Commission staff and the victims’ relatives called for his removal. However, the Chairmen only agreed to recuse him from a small slice of the investigation (NTY, Shenon). The Commission staff jested about how Zelikow’s conflicts of interest could possibly be any more glaring and he was often perceived by them as trying to shield the White House from criticism (AP, Shenon).

(4) Zelikow exercised full control over who to hire for staff and all communications between the staff and the Commissioners. He developed a complete outline of the final report after three months even though the investigation had barely begun (Shenon). He also regularly broke the formal ban against private phone calls with top White House officials and then ordered his assistant not to log the calls (AP, Shenon).

(5) Despite months of subpoena warnings in 2003, the administration withheld intelligence documents from most of the Commissioners and instead only provided vetted summary notes (AP, NYT). The Commissioners again threatened subpoena in 2004 when the administration withheld copies of the President’s pre-9/11 daily intelligence briefs. However, Zelikow worked 48 straight hours to prepare White House-vetted summary notes in lieu of the briefs themselves, which the Commissioners accepted under pressure from the administration, to the victims’ families’ dismay (Shenon).

(6) In December of 2014, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence completed a report on enhanced CIA interrogation techniques used on 9/11 detainees and publicly released an executive summary despite CIA resistance. The techniques included simulated drowning, medically unnecessary “rectal feeding,” being forced to remain awake for up to 7.5 days straight while shackled standing up, being kept naked and in total darkness and isolation for days at a time with occasional ice baths and beatings, being tied tightly into painful positions for hours at a time with the bonds tightened every hour, being severely beaten while wearing hoods, being forced to stand on broken limbs for hours at a time, being threatened with the rape and murder of parents and children, being forced to unwittingly participate in mock executions and games of Russian Roulette, and being forced into extremely small spaces (sometimes filled with insects) for long time periods (ABC (12/9/2014), Guardian (12/9/2014), NBC x2 (12/9/2014)). Several of these techniques were used on Khalid Sheik Mohammed, whose testimony was most central to the official 9/11 narrative (NBC (12/9/2014)).

The Senate Select Committee concluded that the enhanced interrogation techniques were either useless or counterproductive in convincing detainees to reveal accurate information that they would have otherwise withheld (NBC (12/9/2014)). Several detainees confessed outright to telling interrogators whatever they thought they wanted to hear to make the interrogations stop. At least one detainee was told the interrogations would not stop until he signed a confession he was not even allowed to read (NBC News (1/30/2008)).

The Senate report also found that the CIA for years justified the enhanced interrogation techniques to Congress, the Justice Department, the press, and the public with false information about the results it yielded. Furthermore, the CIA actively opposed national security by disallowing access to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other high-value detainees by the FBI, Congress, the State Department, the 9/11 Commission, the Director of National Intelligence, and even the CIA’s own inspector general. This was despite FBI Director Robert Mueller insisting such access would help the FBI understand threats to U.S. cities (NBC x2 (12/9/2014)).

Testimony extracted using the CIA’s methods is not legally admissible in courtrooms due to the likelihood of false confessions. Therefore, the CIA detainees were ineligible to be criminally prosecuted (NBC News (1/30/2008), LAT (6/5/2008), MSNBC, 10/24/2006, LAT (6/5/2008)). Both Vice President Cheney (LAT, 12/16/2008, CBS News, 12/16/2008) and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld (MSNBC, 10/24/2006) personally approved the interrogation methods.

All of this is devastating to the credibility of the 9/11 Commission Report. 441 of the 9/11 Commission final report’s 1700-plus footnotes were based on the CIA enhanced interrogation techniques. The 441 footnotes served as the foundation for the report’s most crucial three chapters, which covered initial planning, hijacker arrivals into the United States, and execution of the attacks (NBC News (1/30/2008)). The Senate report likewise called into question the accuracy of the 9/11 Commission report (NBC (12/9/2014)). However, the 9/11 Commission Report did not mention the suspect interrogation methods or the doubtful reliability of the responses they elicited (Newsweek, 3/13/2009).

CIA Director Tenet, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, the Justice Department, and the White House refused to allow the 9/11 Commission access to the detainees or even to observe them being questioned through one-way glass. The CIA refused to answer the 9/11 Commission’s questions about how they assessed the credibility of the detainees’ responses (NYT (12/8/2007, 1/2/2008)). Furthermore, the CIA destroyed several 92 tapes of detainees being interrogated years after telling the 9/11 Commission it turned over all material related to the interrogations (NYT (12/8/2007), Newsweek (3/13/2009)), which prompted the Chairmen to call for a criminal probe (NYT (1/2/2008)).

The Guantanamo Bay translator used in the interrogations failed his basic translator proficiency exam. However, public testimony of this fact in court was said to jeopardize national security and thus disallowed (USA Today (11/26/2006)). Further, Al Qaeda spies infiltrated the Pentagon’s Islamic chaplaincy and translator programs and gained access to 9/11 detainees (ABC News (9/29/2003), MSNBC (10/23/2003), NBC (10/23/2003), Newsweek (10/1/2003)).

Summary of Chapter 3 (NORAD, the Pentagon and the FAA)
NORAD fighters were regularly scrambled dozens of times per year to intercept aircraft which lost radio contact, turned off a transponder, and/or deviated off course (AP, Calgary Herald). Shortly before 9/11, the Bush administration removed NORAD commanders’ decades-long unilateral authority to launch fighter jets (NY Observer) and sought to decrease the number of U.S. fighter jets on 24-hour alert (LAT). The FAA had no formal communication channel directly to NORAD. To obtain assistance from the military, the FAA was required for over 30 years to use the “hijack net” phone bridge with Pentagon’s National Military Command Center (NMCC) to gain the Defense Secretary’s approval and liaison with NORAD (Com-Belger Test, NYT). Other federal agencies such as the White House/Secret Service and FBI likewise joined the hijack net during a hijacking (Com-Belger Test).

Summary of Chapter 4 (The Start Time)
FAA Crisis Management Supervisor Mike Weikert opened the hijack net at 8:50 after hearing of the first WTC impact (Com-Weikert MFR). This early start time was corroborated by statements from numerous FAA/White House/NORAD sources, including:

• FAA Deputy Administrator Monte Belger (firsthand witness) (Com-Belger MFR+Test)

• FAA Federal Security Manager Pete Falcone (firsthand witness) (Com-Falcone MFR)

• FAA Emergency Operations Staff Manager (formerly FAA liaison to Air Force) Dan Noel Garvey (firsthand witness) (Com-Noel MFR)

• FAA Administrator Jane Garvey (firsthand witness) (Com-Garvey MFR+Test)

• FAA Manager Lynn Asmus (Com-Asmus Test)

• FAA Manager Linda Schuessler (Com-Schuessler Test)

• FAA Chronology ADA-30 (official 9/11 chronology) (FAA)

• Air Force official 9/11 history entitled “Air War Over America” (Air Force)

• Air Force Vice Commander Colonel William Scott (Com-Scott Test)

• Air Force Secretary General Craig McKinley (Com-McKinley Test)

• NORAD Continental Commander Major General Arnold (firsthand witness) (Com-Arnold Test)

• Vice President Cheney (NYT-Cheney)

 
Various agencies (Weikert listed FBI, State Department, White House situation room, DOD) joined the hijack net promptly (Com-Weikert MFR). However, the NMCC – a formally required liaison between the FAA and NORAD – forsook its thirty-year history of prompt participation and did not join until half an hour later at 9:20 (Com-Weikert MFR, Com-Belger MFR+Test, Com-Falcone MFR, FAA).

However, the 9/11 Commission lied and said the hijack net did begin or link in any other government agencies before 9:20 (Com-pg. 36, 462). Chronologies of the hijack net were generated (Com-Weikert MFR, Com-Belger MFR). However, the Justice Department withheld them from the public domain and the 9/11 Commission did not cite them as sources (Com-Belger MFR).

Summary of Chapter 5 (The Witnesses)
Over two dozen sources provided broad agreement that the FAA provided useful, timely information regarding Flights 77 and 93 to NORAD, the White House/Secret Service, and the Pentagon and that fighter jets were scrambled from Langley Air Base at 9:24 in response to one or both of these flights. Every one of these sources is quoted – sometimes extensively – in Chapter 5. Several are official FAA/NORAD/Air Force records or chronologies. Several others are highly detailed firsthand accounts by FAA/NORAD/White House/Secret Service officials. The sources include: 

1. FAA Administrator Jane Garvey (Com-Garvey Test)

2. FAA Deputy Administrator Monte Belger (firsthand witness) (Com-Belger MFR+Test)

3. FAA Crisis Management Supervisor Michael Weikert (firsthand witness) (Com-Weikert MFR)

4. FAA Federal Security Manager Pete Falcone (Com-Falcone MFR)

5. FAA Emergency Operations Staff Manager Dan Noel (Com-Noel MFR)

6. FAA Manager Lynn Asmus (Com-Asmus Test)

7. FAA Manager Linda Schuessler (Com-Schuessler Test)

8. FAA Head of Presidential Movements Terry Van Steenbergen (Com-Steenbergen MFR)

9. FAA Chronology ADA-30 (FAA)

10. FAA Chronology of Events on September 11, 2001 press release (FAA)

11. NORAD Response Times press release (NORAD)

12. NORAD Commander General Eberhart (Congress-Eberhart Test)

13. Air Force Vice Commander Colonel William Scott (Com-Scott Test)

14. Air Force Secretary General Craig McKinley (Com-McKinley Test)

15. NORAD Continental Commander Major General Arnold (firsthand witness) (Com-Arnold Test, Air Force-Arnold)

16. Air Force Official 9/11 History (Air Force)

17. NEADS Commander Colonel Robert Marr (firsthand witness) (Com-Marr MFR, Air Force-Marr, ABC-Marr, Newhouse News-Marr)

18. NEADS Lieutenant Jeremy Powell (firsthand witness) (Com-Powell MFR)

19. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta (firsthand witness) (Com-Mineta Test, ABC-Mineta, MSNBC-Mineta)

20. Secret Service Agent Barbara Riggs (firsthand witness) (Cornell University-Riggs)

21. Vice President Cheney (NYT-Cheney)

22. Secret Service Agent Nelson Garabito (firsthand witness) (Com-Garabito MFR)

23. White House Terrorism Advisor Richard Clarke (firsthand witness) (Clarke-book, ABC-Clarke)

24. NMCC DDO Brigadier General Montague Winfield (firsthand witness) (ABC-Winfield, ABC)

25. Acting Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff General Myers (firsthand witness) (Myers, Congress-Myers)

26. Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff General Hugh Shelton (Shelton)

27. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz (firsthand witness) (PBS-Wolfowitz, Pentagon-Wolfowitz, NYT-Wolfowitz)

28. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations Robert Andrews (Naval Post Graduate School-Andres)

 
Here is a chart to help visualize these sources and the accounts they shared:

These accounts can be distilled into nine key assertions: 

1. Timely, useful information concerning Flights 77 and 93 was shared by the FAA over the hijack net.

2. Timely, useful information concerning Flights 77 and 93 was shared by the FAA over the White House teleconference.

3. The military learned that Flight 77 was hijacked before it crashed.

4. The military learned that Flight 93 was hijacked before it crashed.

5. The 9:24 Langley scramble was in response to information shared by the FAA with the military regarding Flights 77 and 93.

6. Brigadier General Winfield was the NMCC Deputy Director of Operations during the attacks and was involved in timely efforts inside the NMCC to track Flight 93 before it crashed.

7. Acting Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Richard Myers joined the White House teleconference and was involved in timely efforts inside the NMCC to track Flight 93 before it crashed.

8. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld joined the White House teleconference and was involved in timely efforts to track Flight 93 before it crashed.

9. Vice President Cheney was in the PEOC well in advance of Flight 77’s approach to Washington D.C. He received and passed on the presidential shoot-down authorization prior to the Flight 93 crashing. And he was involved in timely efforts to track Flight 93 before it crashed.

 
However, the 9/11 Commission Report asserted that virtually every detail of every one of these accounts was false. Specifically, the 9/11 Commission claimed:

1. No timely, useful information concerning Flights 77 and 93 was shared by the FAA over the hijack net (Com-pg. 36).

2. No timely, useful information concerning Flights 77 and 93 was shared by the FAA over the White House teleconference (Com-pg. 36).

3. The military did not learn that Flight 77 was hijacked before it crashed (Com-pg. 36).

4. The military did not learn that Flight 93 was hijacked before it crashed (Com-pg. 36).

5. The 9:24 Langley scramble was not in response to Flight 77 or 93, but to an erroneous report that Flight 11 did not hit the WTC North Tower at 8:46, but continued on toward Washington D.C. (Com-pg. 34).

6. Brigadier General Winfield was not the NMCC Deputy Director of Operations during the attacks and was not involved in timely efforts inside the NMCC to track Flight 93 before it crashed (Com-pgs. 37, 447, 463 FN 192).

7. Acting Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Richard Myers did not join the White House teleconference and was not involved in timely efforts inside the NMCC to track Flight 93 before it crashed (Com-pg. 38).

8. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld did not join the White House teleconference and was not involved in timely efforts to track Flight 93 before it crashed (Com-pg. 38).

9. Vice President Cheney did not enter the PEOC until about 10 AM. He did not receive or pass presidential shoot-down authorization until after Flight 93 crashed. He was not involved in timely efforts to track Flight 93 before it crashed (Com-pg. 40).

 
Summary of Chapter 6 (The Hijack Net)
As we have seen, the 9/11 Commission Report rejected broad agreement amongst FAA/NORAD/White House/Secret Service/Pentagon sources about the FAA hijack net providing useful, timely information on Flights 77 and 93. This rejection was based on a staff interview of one low-level NMCC officer – Major Charles Chambers – who contradictorily said both that no useful information was shared over the FAA hijack net and that he only monitored it periodically (Com-pg. 36). Chambers further claimed that he and the up to two hundred other officers/civilians working in the NMCC (NYT) had more important things to do than pay attention (Com-pg. 36) to the only, formal, required channel by which the FAA could obtain assistance from the military for over three decades (Com-Belger Test).

The 9/11 Commission then lied and said FAA Crisis Management Supervisor Mike Weikert agreed with Chambers that the hijack net played no role in coordinating a response to the attacks (Com-pg. 36) when in fact Weikert plainly told the Commission staff precisely the opposite (Com-Weikert MFR).

The 9/11 Commission accepted Chambers’ implausible claim that no recording or transcript of the FAA hijack net existed (Com-Chambers MFR) even though attack-response communications at numerous FAA and NORAD facilities were recorded (Kean/Hamilton, Rutgers, NYT). In fact, the hijack net content could largely have been reconstructed from these other facilities’ recordings since so many of them participated in it (Com-Belger Test, Com-Garvey Test).

The FAA made the same implausible claim, but Transportation Department Inspector General Kenneth Mead told the 9/11 Commission staff a hijack net recording did exist and was taken into the custody of the Department of Justice (Com-FAA Site Visit MFR). This aligned with Monte Belger’s assertion that he received prepared chronologies of the hijack net, which the Justice Department then classified (Com-Belger MFR).

Summary of Chapter 7 (The White House Teleconference)
White House Terrorism Advisor Richard Clarke led the White House teleconference and said its participants – including Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, Acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Myers, and later Deputy Defense Secretary Wolfowitz – were warned by the FAA via Administrator Jane Garvey of Flight 93 before the Pentagon impact and received presidential shoot-down authorization via Vice President Cheney between 9:42 and 9:54 (Clarke). The 9/11 Commission rejected all of these points, never sought to question Clark about them when he testified or afterward, and did not quote cite any recording or transcript of the teleconference (Com-pg. 36-41, Com-Clark Test) even though there were participants known to have recorded their communications (Rutgers, NYT, Com-Belger Test, Com-Garvey Test) by which the White House teleconference content could have been reconstructed.

Summary of Chapter 8 (The Flight 77 Alert)
As we have seen, the 9/11 Commission rejected broad agreement amongst FAA/NORAD/White House/Secret Service/Pentagon sources – in addition to media reports (NYT, Newsday, WAPO) – concerning the military’s early notification of Flight 77. Instead, the 9/11 Commission claimed the military never heard Flight 77 was hijacked until after it hit the Pentagon (Com-pg. 25-26, 34).

To support its position, the 9/11 Commission cited one 9:34 call in which a Washington controller told a NEADS technician Flight 77 was lost (Com-pg. 27). This call by itself did not come close to proving all other sources were inaccurate, particularly the highly detailed, sourced-cited testimonies of Colonel Scott and Major General McKinley (Com-Scott Test, Com-McKinley Test) and the harmonious firsthand accounts of NORADS’ entire command chain – Continental Commander Major General Larry Arnold, NEADS Commander Colonel Marr, and NEADS technician Jeremy Powell – that the 9:24 Langley scramble was precipitated by FAA reports of both Flight 77 and Flight 93 (Com-Arnold Test, Com-Marr MFR, Com-Powell MFR, Com-OIG Letter). Nevertheless, the 9/11 Commission publicly released the one phone call that supported its narrative and withheld all contradictory evidence cited (Rutgers, NYT).

The 9/11 Commission used unknown, non-credentialed contractors to review all FAA documents, transcripts, and tape recordings related to Flight 77 (Com-pg. 460 FN 144). It then generated zero documentation of interviews with these contractors insofar as their names (John and Charles Thomas) are listed nowhere in the 9/11 Commission’s online MFR (Memoranda for the Record) archives (National Archives) or in its 145-page “Finding Aid” which purports to list all interview subjects and materials (Com-Finding Aid). It also blatantly sought to draw attention away from the FAA’s Washington region through which Flight 77 traveled for most of its 36-minute approach to Washington D.C. First, it spent several paragraphs going into detail about what Indianapolis controllers were thinking and doing after Flight 77’s transponder turned off, but never once mentioned the Washington flight controllers in whose region Flight 77 traveled (Com-pg. 25-26). Second, its FAA Air Traffic Control Center map left the Washington Center’s entire region unshaded and unlabeled, in contrast to every other northeast Air Traffic Control region where hijacked planes flew on 9/11 (Com-pg. 15).

Summary of Chapter 9 (The Flight 93 Alert)
As we have seen, the 9/11 Commission rejected broad agreement amongst FAA/NORAD/White House/Secret Service/Pentagon sources – in addition to media reports (AP, CBS, WAPO) – concerning the military’s early notification of Flight 93. Of particular interest were the highly specific and harmonious firsthand accounts by NORAD’s command chain consisting of NORAD Continental Commander Arnold (Com-Arnold Test, Air Force-Arnold), NEADS Commander Marr (Com-Marr MFR, Air Force-Marr, ABC-Marr, Newhouse News-Marr, Com-OIG Letter), and NEADS Technician Powell (Com-Powell MFR) of tracking Flight 93 as it headed west, expressing concern that it might hit a target in Chicago or Detroit, watching it turn back toward Washington D.C. radar, and ordering the Langley scramble in response. While all NEADS conversations were always recorded (Kean/Hamilton), Powell specifically said this Flight 93 tracking conversation was recorded (Com-Powell MFR).

Of additional interest are somewhat specific and harmonious firsthand accounts of Brigadier General Winfield (ABC-Winfield), Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Myers (Myers, Congress-Myers), and Defense Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz (PBS-Wolfowitz, Pentagon-Wolfowitz, NYT-Wolfowitz) tracking and preparing to shoot down Flight 93 from within the NMCC. Cleveland flight controllers were in a position to corroborate their reports, but were gagged by the government (Independent).

Instead, the 9/11 Commission claimed the military never learned about Flight 93 until after it crashed – over half an hour after it was hijacked (Com-pg. 30, 34). To support this position, it cited one 10:07 call in which a Cleveland controller told a NEADS technician Flight 93 was hijacked (Com-pg. 30). This call by itself did not come close to proving all other sources were inaccurate. Nevertheless, the 9/11 Commission publicly released the one phone call that supported its narrative and withheld all contradictory evidence cited (Rutgers, NYT).

The 9/11 Commission’s narrative also ridiculously implied that the FAA Command Center personnel never mentioned Flight 93 over the hijack net for over half an after learning about it (Com-pg. 28), military liaisons there never reached out to the other military personnel for over half an hour (Com-Belger Test), and the military liaisons at the Cleveland Center never reached out to other military personnel for over half an hour (Com-pg. 28, 30) – all in the middle of a known terrorist attack involving multiple hijacked commercial airliners.

The 9/11 Commission claimed Flight 93 was proceeding normally at 9:16 to support its assertion that the widely reported 9:16 alert could not have happened (Com-pg. 34). However, no aircraft in the northeastern United States were proceeding normally due to the FAA’s unprecedented measures to clear the skies in the entire region (Air Force), which resulted in course deviations and may have contributed to the numerous erroneous hijack reports that morning (Com-pg. 28, Clarke, Belger-MFR). However, even if the 9:16 alert was not due to a course deviation, it is highly likely it was identified as an early potential hijack by the FBI/FAA through the use of passenger profiling, just like Delta 1989 was considered a possible hijack due to passenger profiling around the same time (Com-Weikert MFR), Com-Belger Test, Com-Garvey MFR).

Summary of Chapter 10 (The Langley Scramble)
As we have seen, the 9/11 Commission rejected broad agreement amongst FAA/NORAD/White House/Secret Service/Pentagon sources that Flight 77 and/or Flight 93 were the cause of the Langley scramble. Of particular interest were the harmonious firsthand accounts of the NORAD command chain consisting of NORAD Continental Commander Arnold (Com-Arnold Test, Air Force-Arnold), NEADS Commander Marr (Com-Marr MFR, Air Force-Marr, ABC-Marr, Newhouse News-Marr), and NEADS Technician Powell (Com-Powell MFR) who authorized, ordered, and executed the scramble. Also of interest were the harmonious firsthand accounts of FAA hijack net managers Belger (Com-Belger MFR) and Weikert (Com-Weikert MFR).

The 9/11 Commission instead claimed the scramble was caused by an erroneous report that Flight 11, which hit the World Trade Center at 8:46, was still airborne and heading toward Washington D.C. (Com-pg. 34). To support its position, it cited/quoted a 9:21 call between NEADS and the Boston Center’s military liaison concerning the phantom Flight 11 and a brief exchange between NEADS personnel (Com-pg. 26-27), which did not by itself come close to proving that prior awareness of Flights 77 and 93 was not the main driver of the scramble – particularly because both Arnold and Marr affirmed their awareness of the erroneous phantom Flight 11 report, but insisted it was not a main driver of the scramble order (Com-Marr MFR, Air Force-Marr, Air Force-Arnold). Nevertheless, the 9/11 Commission publicly released the aforementioned recorded exchanges that supported its narrative and omitted all contradictory evidence cited (Rutgers, NYT).

The 9/11 Commission dubiously claimed it could not discover the origin of the Boston Center’s erroneous phantom Flight 11 report (Com-pg. 26). This was despite all Boston Center communications having been recorded (Rutgers, NYT) and despite NEADS technicians (where all communications were likewise recorded (Kean/Hamilton)) having been linked in to Boston controllers’ headsets so they could hear everything Boston heard in real-time (Newhouse News).

The 9/11 Commission only asserted that the report must have been the FAA’s mistake, not the military’s (Com-pg. 26). This was perhaps to draw attention away from the fact that on 9/11, NORAD was in the midst of a days-long exercise known as “Vigilant Guardian”, which simulated multiple hijackings and even inserted false radar blips onto NEADS screens in the middle of the attacks. Thirty hours of audiotape from the NEADS’ control room released for the production of the Hollywood film “United 93” and analyzed by Vanity Fair revealed that the NEADS crew engaged in chases of multiple phantom hijackings due to exercise-related misinformation that peaked during the actual attacks. It is highly probable the phantom Flight 11 report was attributable to the exercise (Vanity Fair). However, the 9/11 Commission ridiculously claimed that the exercise “expedited” NORAD’s response to the 9/11 attacks (Com-pg. 458 FN 116), as we will discuss in more detail shortly.

The 9/11 Commission falsely claimed the military omitted any mention of the phantom Flight 11 report in official documents (implying a cover-up) (Com-pg. 34), when in fact the official Air Force 9/11 history quoted both Arnold and Marr verbatim as being aware of it (Air force-Marr, Air Force-Arnold).

Under credible threat of prosecution, the 9/11 Commission successfully convinced NORAD Commander Eberhart (Com-Eberhart MFR+Test) and NORAD Continental Commander Arnold (Com-Arnold MFR+Test) (but not Air Force Vice Commander Colonel Scott (Com-Scott MFR) or Air Force Secretary General McKinley (Com-McKinley MFR)) to flip flop and invited only them to the public unveiling of its new narrative during the June of 2004 public hearing so they could formalize their endorsement of it (Com-Eberhart Test, Com-Arnold Test).

Summary of Chapter 11 (Brigadier General Winfield)
Army Brigadier General Montague Winfield (ABC-Winfield) and acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Richard Myers (Myers) gave detailed firsthand accounts of Winfield serving as the NMCC Deputy Director of Operations (DDO) while tracking and preparing to shoot down Flight 93 as it approached Washington D.C. on presidential authorization that was passed from Vice President Cheney. Their accounts harmonized with news reports by ABC and CNN, as well as the official JPAC (Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command) military website.

However, the 9/11 Commission rejected this narrative and instead accepted the word of Winfield’s backup Captain Charles Joseph Leidig (Com-Leidig MFR+Test) and his assistant Commander Patrick Gardner (Com-Gardner MFR) that Leidig filled in for Winfield even though there was no corroborating entry in the DDO Pass Down Log (Com-Winfield MFR). As to why he filled in for Winfield, Leidig ridiculously claimed that Winfield could not be disturbed during the 9/11 attacks because he was in an important meeting to discuss Air Force officer ratings (Com-Leidig MFR, Com-NMCC Site Visit MFR).

The 9/11 Commission classified its staff interview with Winfield in which they asked him about his detailed firsthand account on ABC news, the NMCC’s awareness of Flight 93, and why there was no DDO Pass Down Log entry (Com-Winfield MFR). The 9/11 Commission then invited only Leidig and not Winfield to the public unveiling of its new narrative that the military never learned of Flight 93’s hijacking pre-impact so Leidig could formalize his endorsement of it (Com-Leidig Test).

Summary of Chapter 12 (General Richard Myers)
Acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) General Myers unequivocally claimed the month after 9/11 that he was away from the Pentagon and did not hear of the 2nd WTC impact until the Pentagon strike (Military-Myers), but then backpedaled and said he heard just after it happened (Myers, Com-Myers MFR, NBC-Myers). However, White House Terrorism advisor Richard Clarke (Clark), CJCS General Hugh Shelton (Shelton), and Army Secretary Thomas White (PBS-White) all said Myers was present at the Pentagon before and/or during the Pentagon strike.

Myers also gave a highly detailed firsthand account of Brigadier General Winfield acting as the NMCC DDO and receiving presidential shoot-down authorization via Vice President Cheney while tracking Flight 93 unmistakably before 10 AM (Myers) – all of which was corroborated by Winfield (ABC-Winfield) and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz (PBS-Wolfowitz, Pentagon-Wolfowitz, NYT-Wolfowitz). However, Myers also absurdly told the 9/11 Commission that he didn’t arrive at the NMCC until after 10 AM (Com-Myers MFR) and publicly endorsed its narrative that Winfield was not the DDO and the military never learned about Flight 93 pre-impact (Com-Myers Test).

Summary of Chapter 13 (Defense Secretary Rumsfeld)
The 9/11 Commission accepted Defense Secretary Rumsfeld’s testimony that he chose not to report to the NMCC or coordinate a military response for nearly an hour and a half (Com-Rumsfeld Test, Com-pg. 38) after realizing America was under attack (CBS-Rumsfeld), despite knowing no fighter jets could be launched (New York Observer, Com-pg. 17-18) and no commercial airlines could be shot down without his approval (Com-pg. 17). Instead, he continued a routine briefing (Com-Rumsfeld Test, Com-pg. 37), resisted calls to action by his staff (Pentagon-V. Clarke), and jeopardized himself and the nation’s security apparatus by going out to the Pentagon crash site after the Flight 77 crash (Pentagon-Jester, NYT, Com-pg. 37).

However, White House Terrorism Advisor Richard Clarke (Clarke), Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations Robert Andrews (Naval Postgraduate School- Andrews), Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz (Pentagon-Wolfowitz), and Army Secretary Thomas White (PBS-White) all said Rumsfeld was engaged in the military’s response much earlier via a teleconference studio near his office and/or the NMCC. Clarke and Wolfowitz specifically said he was involved in tracking and preparing to shoot down Flight 93.

Summary of Chapter 14 (The Fake Transcript)
The 9/11 Commission asserted that the NMCC never engaged with either the FAA hijack net or White House teleconference, but rather initiated its own separate teleconference at 9:29 – 26 minutes after knowing the nation was under attack (Com-pg. 36-37). The 9/11 Commission further asserted that the NMCC’s teleconference failed to bring in anyone with useful knowledge from the FAA during the attacks (Com-pg. 36-37). The transcript from this teleconference was cited as the key piece of evidence to support the 9/11 Commission’s narrative that the NMCC did not track or prepare to shoot down Flight 93 while it was still airborne and that Winfield, Myers, Rumsfeld, and Cheney never engaged with the military’s response to the 9/11 attacks before Flight 93 crashed (Pentagon, Com-pg. 36-37, 463 FN 194-196, 198, 200). However, this transcript was completely re-written by the offices of the Defense Secretary and the Joint Chiefs of Staff to make it “more accurate” than the original real-time recordings/transcript (Pentagon), which was never released to the public despite containing very little sensitive information that could easily have been redacted (NYT).

Summary of Chapter 15 (Vice President Cheney)
(1) Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta said in testimony and media interviews that he observed Vice President Dick Cheney in the PEOC shortly after 9:20 being given intermittent real-time information about Flight 77’s location as it approached Washington D.C. At the same time, Mineta spoke on the phone with FAA Deputy Administrator Monte Belger, who corroborated the same locations. Cheney then confirmed an order he gave before Mineta entered the room. Mineta inferred this to be a shoot-down order (Com-Mineta MFR, ABC-Mineta, MSNBC-Mineta), while others alleged it was a stand-down order, as we will discuss shortly. The 9/11 Commission omitted Mineta’s testimony from its report and removed it from its archives (MSNBC-Ventura).

Mineta’s timeline harmonized with numerous eyewitnesses and media reports which said that Cheney was evacuated from his office just after the second plane hit the World Trade Center at 9:03 and/or arrived in the PEOC before Flight 77 hit the Pentagon at 9:37. Sources included the New York Times, Telegraph, President Bush’s personal secretary Ashley Estes (CBS-Estes), White House Photographer David Bohrer (ABC-Bohrer), White House advisor Karl Rove (NBC-Rove), and White House Terrorism Advisor Richard Clarke (Clarke, ABC-Clark).

(2) Nevertheless, the 9/11 Commission said Cheney remained in his office until just before the Flight 77 impact and then sat on a bench in the tunnel leading to the PEOC talking on the phone with President Bush until nearly 10 AM (Com-pg. 39-40) despite the PEOC being equipped with all the latest communications technology for coordinating America’s defenses (NYT-Cheney). To support its narrative, the 9/11 Commission cited informal remarks by Bush, the Cheney’s, Rice, and classified Secret Service sources (Com-pg. 39-40, 463-464 FN 204, 208-210, 213). The 9/11 Commission staff did not believe Cheney’s account but was pressured by the White House not to convey their skepticism (Newsweek). The Chairman acknowledged a lack of certainty and documentation to corroborate the 9/11 Commission’s narrative (CBC-Hamilton).

(3) As we have already seen, numerous sources agreed that the FAA, the White House/Secret Service, and the military tracked Flight 77 in real-time during its approach to Washington D.C., which would logically have led to Cheney’s immediate evacuation to the PEOC by the Secret Service. However, the 9/11 Commission claimed the opposite, citing one interview with a low-level NMCC officer (Major Chambers) and one phone 10:34 phone call between a Washington controller and a NEADS technician that did not prove the 9/11 Commission’s narrative.

We have also already seen that numerous sources agreed that the FAA, the White House/Secret Service, and the military tracked Flight 93 in real-time during its approach to Washington D.C. and that Cheney passed on timely presidential shoot-down authorization to one or more fighters which were in a position to shoot down Flight 93 just before crashed. (Two additional media sources which reported timely shoot-down authorization include CNN and U.S. News and World Report.)

However, the 9/11 Commission said the Secret Service did not become aware that Flight 93 was approaching Washington D.C. until about the time it crashed, citing alternative classified Secret Service sources and the NMCC teleconference “transcript” (Com-pg. 41. 464 FN 217). As we have seen, this “transcript” was completely rewritten by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Defense Secretary’s office to make it “more accurate” than the original real-time transcript, which remains classified.

The 9/11 Commission also claimed Cheney did not receive presidential shoot-down authorization until he called Bush after entering the PEOC at 10 AM, despite there being no documentary evidence to confirm the existence of the call (Com-pg. 40-41, 464 FN 216). The 9/11 Commission then ridiculously claimed Cheney mistakenly ordered the shoot-down of Flight 93 about fifteen minutes after it crashed, while he, the Secret Service, the PEOC, the NMCC, and all parties on the NMCC teleconference somehow mistakenly believed they were tracking the location of Flight 93 in real-time as being first 60 miles then 80 miles from a NORAD fighter jet (Com-pg. 40-41). To support this sequence, the 9/11 Commission cited informal remarks by Bush, the Cheney’s, Scooter Libby, Ari Fleischer, and Josh Bolton. It also cited NMCC teleconference “transcript” (Com-pg. 464-465 FN 218-222).

Citing an interview with an unknown, undocumented, non-credentialed individual named Tim Grovack, the 9/11 Commission dubiously speculated that the NMCC teleconference participants must have been watching a projection of where Flight 93 would have been had it not crashed instead of its actual radar return (Com-pg. 41, 464 FN 217). Like John and Charles Thomas (who purportedly reviewed all Flight 77 evidence,) Tim Grovack’s name is found nowhere in the 9/11 Commission’s online MFR (Memoranda for the Record) archives (National Archives) or in its 145-page “Finding Aid” which purports to list all interview subjects and materials (Com-Finding Aid).

(4) Numerous notable individuals alleged that Cheney and/or the military may have deliberately stood down America’s defenses during the 9/11 attacks, echoing about 36 percent of Americans polled in 2006 (Associated Press, Washington Post, New York Post, San Francisco Chronicle). Several of those individuals were members of the “Consensus 9/11 Panel” – an organization whose indictments of official 9/11 narratives have been covered by numerous media outlets such as NBC News, New York Times, Washington Post, Guardian, Daily Mail, Telegraph, Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle, PR Newswire, and MarketWatch. The organization has analyzed a series of “Consensus 9/11 Points” upon which all members agree there are insurmountable inconsistencies between public domain evidence and current official narratives.

Consensus 9/11 Panel members have included: 

• David Ray Griffin (Nobel Prize nominee, theology professor, author of numerous 9/11 books)

• Morgan Reynolds (Department of Labor Chief Economist under President George W. Bush)

• Robert Bowman (directed the “Star Wars” missile defense program under Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter)

• Steven Jones (BYU Physics Professor, Principle Researcher for US Department of Energy’s Division of Advanced Energy Projects 1982-1991)

• Andreas von Buelow (German Parliament member, and Secretary of State for the German Ministry of Defense) (Consensus 9/11)

Additionally, stand down allegations have been leveled by:

• Barbara Honegger (White House Policy Analyst under President Ronald Reagan, Senior Military Affairs Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School, author of the famous 1989 political exposé, October Surprise) (Honegger)

• Michael Meacher (British Cabinet Member and perennial Parliament Member) (Guardian-Meacher)

• Jesse Ventura (former Minnesota State Governor) (Ventura, MSNBC- Ventura)

 
(5) Barbara Honegger (Honegger) and media reports by Washington Post, Time, and Telegraph asserted surface-to-air missiles were ready to shoot down airborne threats in Washington D.C., but the Defense Department (DOD) and White House Terrorism Advisor Richard Clark (Com-Clarke Test) made statements to the contrary. President Bush’s location was repeatedly protected by surface-to-air missiles in the months leading up to 9/11, including in response to reports that Al Qaeda was planning to assassinate him and other world leaders using hijacked commercial airliners (CNN, Los Angeles Times, Sarasota Herald-Tribune).

Summary of Chapter 16 (The Inspectors General)
NORAD and the FAA withheld real-time audio recordings and transcripts of their responses to the 9/11 attacks until they were forced under subpoena to release them to the 9/11 Commission in late 2003 (Kean and Hamilton, WAPO, NYT). Upon receipt, the 9/11 Commission claimed the tapes proved that the FAA never alerted the military to the Flight 175, 77, and 93 hijacks before they crashed (Com-pg. 21), despite years of official NORAD/FAA chronologies, media statements, and official testimony to the contrary, as we have already seen, or will soon see in the case of Flight 175.

9/11 Commission Chairmen Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton, other Commissioners such as Bob Kerry, and senior counsel/lead investigator John Farmer (former New Jersey Attorney General, Rutgers Law School Dean) made numerous public statements lambasting NORAD and FAA for collaborating to advance lies for years (Shenon, Farmer, Vanity Fair-Farmer, WAPO-Farmer, Kean/Hamilton, WAPO-Kean), Com-Farmer Test, Com-Zelikow Test). Strangely, the Commission chose not to pursue criminal charges against the officials they said lied and/or falsified official records, eliciting sharp criticism in the media (CNN x2). However, this choice was critical in maintaining the 9/11 Commission’s narrative since contradictory evidence would likely have been forced into the public domain when the accused NORAD/FAA officials filed for discovery, as we will see momentarily.

The 9/11 Commission eventually publicized all the recordings/transcripts that supported its narrative via Rutgers Law School (of which 9/11 Commission Lead Investigator John Farmer was the Dean) (Rutgers, NYT). As a reminder (and preview of Flight 175), these included:

• The 9:03 call between NEADS and the New York Center as the military’s first notification of Flight 175

• The 9:34 call between NEADS and the Washington Center as the first notification that Flight 77 was lost, not hijacked

• The 9:21 call between NEADS and the Boston Center’s military liaison concerning phantom Flight 11 and a subsequent exchange between NEADS personnel as precipitating the Langley scramble

• The 10:07 call between NEADS and the Cleveland Center’s military liaison as the military’s first notification of Flight 93

 
However, the 9/11 Commission omitted all recordings/transcripts that reportedly would have debunked its narrative. As a reminder (and preview of Flight 175), these included: 

• Communications by gagged Boston Flight controllers and NEADS’ Master Sergeant Maureen Dooley’s team in the vicinity of 8:43 when they all reportedly first learned of Flight 175’s hijacking

• Communications by Washington controllers beginning with Flight 77’s 9:10 reentry into Washington’s airspace

• Communications down the NORAD chain of command from Arnold to Marr to Powell concerning the Langley scramble in response to Flight 77 and 93

• Communications by gagged Cleveland Center controllers concerning the tracking and near shoot-down of Flight 93

• Communications between Arnold, Marr, Powell concerning the tracking and near shoot-down of Flight 93

• Communications made over the centrally important FAA hijack net and White House teleconference

 
Instead of seeking criminal charges (lest the aforementioned omitted evidence be forced into the public domain when the accused NORAD/FAA officials filed for discovery), the 9/11 Commission asked the Defense and Transportation Department Inspectors General (Com-OIG Letter) (which have no power to file criminal charges) to internally investigate the officials who provided the documented and testimonial evidence it rejected. Both Inspectors General quietly spent more than two years (longer than the entire 9/11 Commission investigation) before claiming in classified reports that the FAA/NORAD documentation and testimony the 9/11 Commission rejected was the result of unintentional errors due to the agencies’ poor record-keeping capabilities (DOD, DOT, NYT, WAPO). This claim was nonsensical since all applicable communications were recorded in real-time.

Summary of Chapter 17 (The Accusations)
(1) The original FAA/NORAD timeline implicated the military as being derelict on 9/11. NEADS’ 8:43 notification of the Flight 175 hijack (as we will see shortly) meant Otis F-15’s could very well have reached that flight before its 9:03 WTC impact. (F-15’s can fly 1,875 mph (Slate) and Otis is 129 miles from New York (Clarke).) And NORAD’s 9:16 alert to Flight 93 and 9:24 alert to Flight 77 resulted in Langley F-16’s being scrambled at 9:24 which could have reached Flight 77 before its Pentagon impact and certainly Flight 93 before its 10:03 Pennsylvania impact. (F-16’s can fly 1500 mph (Slate) and Langley is 129 miles from Washington (Clarke).)

However, as we have seen, the 9/11 Commission claimed the evidence it obtained under subpoena showed the military was not derelict because it actually never received these timely alerts from the FAA. Then the 9/11 Commission chose not to prosecute the officials it said testified falsely, instead referring the matter to the DOT/DOD Inspectors General, who nonsensically claimed the false testimony was the result of poor record-keeping capabilities.

The Consensus 9/11 Panel argued that this sequence suggests the 9/11 Commission served as an ally to the military by helping cover up its dereliction and/or complicity (Consensus 9/11) in the attacks while creating the façade of being its opponent by accusing it and the FAA of lying for years about its awareness of the last three hijacked flights.

(2) One Consensus 9/11 Panel member, David Ray Griffin (Nobel Prize nominee, theology professor, author of numerous books on 9/11), suggested the audio clips cited by the 9/11 Commission as evidence of the military’s supposed ignorance of the hijacked flights could have been fabricated using military voice morphing technology which was developed with psychological operations in mind (Griffin, WAPO).

(3) Interestingly, the Flight 93 cockpit voice recorder tape also came under tampering allegations after the ending played for the victims’ family members in April of 2002 was completely different than ending played for the jury in the 2006 Zacarias Moussaoui trial (Philadelphia Daily News, CNN, Daily Mail).

(4) Similarly, 15 audio tapes purported to be Osama bin Laden released between 2001 and 2007 were said to be authentic by the U.S. government. However, researchers at the Dalle Molle Institute for Perceptual Artificial Intelligence in Switzerland, using state of the art voice recognition systems used for banking security, found that 14 of the tapes not only were not Osama bin Laden, but were not even the same individual (BBC, Guardian, Chicago Tribune, The American Spectator-Codevilla).

(5) Further, according to CIA legend Robert Baer, even the majority of the CIA team devoted to tracking bin Laden was not convinced the tapes were authentic (NPR- Baer). Interestingly, some of the disputed tapes were extremely well-timed for the Bush administration insofar as one handed him the 2004 presidential election (BBC, Reuters, Telegraph) and another helped make his case for the Iraq War (BBC, CNN, Guardian).

Summary of Chapter 18 (The Pentagon Crash Site)
(1) Flight 77 took off from Dulles near Washington D.C. at 8:20. Shortly before 9 AM, it was hijacked, its transponder turned off, and it did a U-turn (Com-pg. 9, NYT) inside a small, anomalous gap in the U.S. primary radar system, causing FAA flight controllers to lose track of it. Officials mysteriously acknowledged the hijackers might have known about the radar gap (WAPO (11/3/2001)).

(2) Flight 77 hijacker pilot Hani Hanjour was so incompetent that he could not adequately fly a single-engine Cessna a month before 9/11 (WAPO (9/10/2002), Newsday). A Pan-Am flight school marveled that he had a commercial pilot’s license and brought him to the attention of the FAA five times a few months prior, but the FAA took no action (ABC (5/10/2002), CBS (5/10/2002), NYT). The FAA later refused to say where or how he obtained his license (WAPO (10/15/2001)). Despite his abject incompetence, Hanjour inexplicably performed a stunning aviation maneuver on 9/11 (CBS (9/11/2001), WAPO (9/10/2002, 9/12/2001)) that caused flight controllers to think they were observing a military jet (ABC (10/24/2001)).

(3) The Consensus 9/11 Panel (PR Newswire, MarketWatch) and a few of media outlets (Time, Daily Mail, London Times) skeptically questioned how Hanjour could have performed this maneuver.

(4) The plane coincidentally struck the Pentagon Budget Office, destroying evidence and auditors (Arlington County After-Action Report, Mount Vernon Gazette) trying to reconcile $2.3 trillion in untraceable Defense Department transactions announced by Donald Rumsfeld the previous day (CBS).

(5) Over the next 14 years, that number grew to at least $21 trillion (NYT, Nation, Forbes). When Congress ordered an audit of the Pentagon in 2018 (which it was legally required to do annually, but never did) it failed miserably when third-party corporate accounting firms found so many errors that completing the audit was impossible. The auditors further found that the Pentagon annually committed massive fraud by making up numbers (Nation). Less than one year later, the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB) quietly changed federal agency accounting rules in the name of national security so that any of the over 150 federal agencies could classify all of its expenditures and show the public completely different expenditures (FASAB, Rolling Stone).

(6) Extensive evidence indicated an explosion occurred at the Pentagon at 9:31 or 9:32 in the same location as the official 9:37 Flight 77 impact site. Evidence included eyewitness testimony from Secret Military Specialist April Gallop (WAPO, Reuters, PR Newswire), multiple stopped Pentagon clocks, eyewitness Denmark Foreign Minister Per Stig Moller, eyewitness Secretary of Defense for Special Operations Robert Andrews, White House Counsel/Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, one official FAA chronology document (Honegger), and numerous Pentagon employees who distinctly smelled the explosive cordite fumes instead of jet fuel (Time, Honegger). April Gallop attempted to sue Bush administration officials, but the suit was dismissed by a three-judge panel that included President Bush’s first cousin (PR Newswire).

(7) The Pentagon withheld from the public all footage from security cameras mounted to its primary structure (DOD x2, San Francisco Chronicle). A number of cameras that would normally have captured the Flight 77 impact were purportedly either being changed out during the attack or “down” to due construction or renovation projects (DOD, Washington Times). In response to a FOIA request, the FBI eventually publicized 5 frames from a low-quality security camera mounted to a nearby kiosk which showed an unidentifiable white blur followed by an explosion (CBS, Fox, PR Newswire).

(8) Some media outlets and government officials (including Honegger and CIA Department Director Bill Christison argued that the debris, damage, and size of the hole in the Pentagon were inconsistent with a Boeing 757 (WAPO, Time, Daily Mail, Honegger, Christison). Honegger alleged that the wreckage at the Pentagon crash site was from a remote-controlled U.S. Air Force A−3 Sky Warrior drone that targeted the auditors of the missing $2.3 trillion. She also asserted that the radar blip which flight controllers thought was a military jet was precisely that (Honegger).

(9) Dozens of eyewitnesses interviewed by mainstream media outlets saw an aircraft strike the Pentagon, with about a dozen of them specifying that they saw an American Airlines logo. Half a dozen described the size as being potentially consistent with a Boeing 757 (which Flight 77 was), while another five described the size as being significantly smaller and potentially consistent with a Boeing 737 and/or an A3 Sky Warrior (Albuquerque Tribune, CBS, CNN, Fox, Guardian, WAPO, etc.).

(10) The Flight 77 Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR; ie. “Black Box”) data was deemed unrecoverable despite its remarkably robust design for plane crash survival (NTSB, NPR). The Flight Data Recorder (FDR; also part of the “Black Box”) data was recoverable. However, when it was released (via FOIA request) and analyzed by over a dozen experienced commercial/military pilots in the “Pilots for 9/11 Truth” organization, the data contradicted the official flight path narrative in terms of both direction and altitude (PR Newswire).

(11) The military secretly incinerated flight remains from the Pentagon impact site, leaving no physical evidence that it was hit by Flight 77 (WAPO, BBC, Daily Mail). The government also refused to publicly release an inventory of plane wreckage/debris collected (PR Newswire) and Senator Bob Graham, who co-chaired the 2002 Congressional Inquiry into 9/11, acknowledged there was a collaborative effort by federal agencies to keep information out of the public’s hands (BBC).

(12) The FBI briefly released 27 crash site photos to the public after ten years, immediately withdrew them again before the military’s secret evidence incineration was reported, then released them again after another six years (ABC, Time, Politico).

(13) Some observers theorized that aspects of 9/11 paralleled Operation Northwoods from the early 1960s in which the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed staging commercial airliner hijackings, the destruction of a commercial airliner, and/or bombs detonated in U.S. cities to galvanize support for an invasion of Cuba (Joint Chiefs of Staff, San Francisco Chronicle, Daily Mail).

Summary of Chapter 19 (The Pennsylvania Crash Site)
(1) Varying sources put the Flight 93 crash time sometime between 10:03 and 10:10. This was an eternity for an air disaster since timelines are ordinarily dissected to the thousandth of a second (New York Observer). Early mainstream media reports unanimously said 10:10 (NYT, CNN, WAPO). This was based in part on interviews of flight controllers from multiple FAA regions (New York Observer). The FAA almost a year later said 10:07 (FAA). DOD-contracted seismologists concluded 10:06 (San Francisco Chronicle, Daily Mail-Morgan, Philadelphia Daily News). However, the 9/11 Commission said 10:03 (Com-30, 461-462 FN 168), based partly on a cockpit voice recorder tape which came under tampering allegations, as we will discuss shortly. An authoritative researcher of anti-official Flight 93 arguments is Rowland Morgan, former journalist for the Independent and Guardian and co-author of the 2006 book, “Flight 93: What Really Happened On The Heroic 9/11 ‘Let’s Roll’ Flight,” which was adapted for an August of 2006 article he wrote for the Daily Mail. This article will be cited frequently (Daily Mail-Morgan).

(2) The Flight 93 crash site was a crater in the ground with some trash and no recognizable plane parts such as an engine, tail, wings, or large fuselage parts. Numerous witnesses said it resembled a tiny commercial dump site and contained no discernable indicators that it was a plane crash site (AP, WAPO, CNN, Boston Globe, Newseum, Daily Mail-Morgan, Independent, Philadelphia Daily News, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review). The plane was said to have completely incinerated upon impact (Independent), but some plane crash experts were baffled by the lack of wreckage (Daily Mail-Morgan). Despite the incineration narrative, the FBI belatedly announced that it had recovered a red bandana and a passport belonging to the hijackers, which were presented in the 2006 Zacarias Moussaoui trial (Daily Mail-Morgan).

(3) Debris fields from the Flight 93 crash were found two, six, and eight miles away from the main crash site. Several witnesses saw trash raining down from the sky like confetti for miles, including clothes, books, paper, and human remains (Reuters, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review). The FBI cordoned off three and six to eight mile wide areas to search for evidence (CNN). A one-ton engine piece was found over a mile away from the crash site (Independent, Philadelphia Daily News, Daily Mail-Morgan). A piece of fuselage the size of a dining room table was recovered two miles from the crash site (Daily Mail-Morgan).

(4) Several local residents heard a missile, whistling, and/or loud explosions just before Flight 93 went down (WAPO, Boston Globe, Philadelphia Daily News). Other witnesses saw smoke trailing from the flight (Mirror). Others saw an F-16 fire missiles and catch one of Flight 93’s engines before it plummeted (Daily Mail-Morgan). However, a smaller number of additional witnesses said they saw the plane dive into the ground intact with nothing wrong with it, including a local scrap yard worker who was widely reported to have been the nearest eyewitness of all (Philadelphia Daily News, Daily Mail-Morgan). However, those witnesses strangely omitted from their narratives the well-established fact that the plane (or Flight Data Recorder) was upside when it impacted (Daily Mail-Morgan, NYT, USA Today).

(5) The FBI initially did not rule out a shoot-down, despite vigorous military denials (Reuters). However, the next day the FBI switched positions and said there was nothing inconsistent about the crash site with the plane going into the ground intact (Pittsburgh Tribune Review, Independent), despite strong doubts expressed by aviation experts (Independent, Daily Mail-Morgan).

(6) When the FBI was forced in April of 2002 to let the relatives of the deceased listen to the cockpit voice recorder tape, it ended with struggling sounds followed by a loud rushing sound (Philadelphia Daily News, Daily Mail-Morgan). However, when the judge of the 2006 Zacarias Moussaoui trial ordered the FBI to play it to the jury, it ended with the hijackers shouting praises to Allah (CNN). This added to the already-present allegations of tape-tampering and suggestions that the rushing sound resulted from a hole in the plane caused by a missile strike. Interestingly, unlike the other three hijacked flights of 9/11, the FBI was in charge of the Flight 93 investigation rather than the National Transportation Safety Board (Daily Mail-Morgan).

(7) One dozen witnesses saw a low-flying, small, white, unmarked military-style jet flying in the vicinity before Flight 93 crashed. After the crash, the plane circled the crash site and departed (Philadelphia Daily News, Mirror, Independent, Daily Mail-Morgan). The description fit planes used by U.S. Customs for aerial drug shipment interdictions (Independent). The FBI initially denied any other planes were in the area at the time of the crash (Mirror, Independent, Daily Mail-Morgan). However, after numerous witnesses came forward over the next few days following the attacks, the FBI backtracked and announced that a Fairchild Falcon 20 business jet was asked by the military to descend from 37,000 ft to 5,000 ft to assist emergency responders by providing crash site coordinates (Pittsburg Post-Gazette, Independent, Daily Mail-Morgan).

This explanation did not harmonize with the witnesses’ accounts of a military jet that flew very low to the ground and was in the area before Flight 93 crashed. Furthermore, this was more than half an hour after all non-military aircraft in the United States had been ordered to land at the nearest airport due to the unfolding 9/11 attacks. Therefore, it was made no sense for the military to ask an unlawfully airborne civilian jet for such help at a moment when no one knew whether there were additional hijacked aircraft in the sky (Independent, Philadelphia Daily News). Furthermore, such help was unnecessary due to the extremely high density of emergency phone calls emanating from near the crash site (Daily Mail-Morgan). Finally, neither the FBI nor the military ever identified the pilot or the passengers aboard the purported Fairchild Falcon 20, nor did any come forward (Independent, Philadelphia Daily News).

(8) Minutes before the Flight 93 crash, passenger Edward Felt called 911 from his cell phone and told the dispatch supervisor Glenn Cramer that there had been an explosion and white smoke was coming from the plane (AP, CNN, WAPO, Philadelphia Daily News). Felt’s wife and family members later listened to the call and confirmed this (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette) after the New York Times lied and claimed she said the opposite (NYT). FBI agents immediately confiscated the tape of Felt’s 911 call (WAPO) and Cramer was legally gagged (Mirror, Independent) after briefly speaking to the media about what he heard.

(9) Local electricity flickered and went out before and/or during the Flight 93 crash. Contrasting claims attributed this to either to a fighter jets’ weapons system’s electromagnetic pulsing or the shock wave sent from the impact site (Pittsburgh Tribune-Review). Others suggested Flight 93 could have been brought down using a militarized electromagnetic interference system since the FBI acknowledged there was also a C-130 Air Force cargo plane within 25 miles of Flight 93 when it crashed and at least twenty-eight C-130 Air Force cargo planes were known to be equipped with this technology (Independent, New York Times Magazine).

(10) In July and August of 2002, the Air Force and Army secretly incarnated remains from Flight 93 (WAPO), resulting in subsequent rejected requests by the media to observe plane wreckage, debris, or an inventory of these things (BBC, PR Newswire). Regarding this action, Senator Bob Graham, Chairman of the 2002 Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 acknowledged that federal agencies were collaborating to keep information out of the public’s hands (BBC).

Summary of Chapter 20 (The First Two Flights)
(1) Flight 11 (the first hijack, which hit the WTC North Tower at 8:46) was considered to be a possible hijacking by Boston Flight Control at 8:15 (AP) and known with certainty at 8:24 (Com-pg. 19, NYT, Guardian). FAA protocol called for immediate notification up the FAA chain and over to the NMCC at the first 8:15 suspicion (FAA, MSNBC, Com-pg. 17-18, Guardian). However, as we have already seen, the FAA did not open up its standard protocol “hijack phone bridge” with the NMCC until after the first WTC impact at 8:46 and the NMCC did not join it until 9:20, departing from its 30-plus year track record of immediate promptness.

Nevertheless, NORAD’s northeastern facility – NEADS – became aware of the Flight 11 hijack sometime between 8:31 and 8:40 when Boston Flight Control made one or more out-of-protocol phones call directly to NEADS (NORAD, Com-pg. 20, Com-FAA HQ Site Visit MFR, ABC News). NEADS then gave an out-of-protocol scramble order to Otis Air National Guard Base (Com-pg. 20) (188 miles east of New York City (Clarke)) at 8:46 (the same time that Flight 11 impacted WTC North Tower), which put two F-15 fighters in the air by 8:53 (Com-pg. 20).

(2) At 8:42, New York Air Traffic Control realized that Flight 175’s radio contact ceased, the transponder was turned off, and the plane veered off course. This was immediately noticed by New York controllers (FAA, NYT). However, the 9/11 Commission ridiculously claimed that New York controllers did not notice an issue with Flight 175 until between 8:47 to 8:51 (Com-pg. 7) despite publicly available controller transcripts to the contrary (FAA, NYT).

The fact that New York controllers noticed Flight 175’s emergency status at 8:42 almost certainly means it was also noticed by Boston controllers since Flight 175 was still in Boston’s region at the time (NTSB). Correspondingly, the FAA notified NEADS at 8:43 that Flight 175 was hijacked (NORAD, WAPO). This notification was almost certainly due to the fact that the NEADS tech team responsible for facilitating FAA-NEADS communications (Vanity Fair) linked their headsets into the Boston Center, in whose region Flight 175 was still traveling, so they could hear everything Boston controllers heard/said in real-time, according to Newhouse News’ interview with the head of that team, Master Sergeant Maureen Dooley (Newhouse News-Dooley).

Despite all this, the 9/11 Commission ridiculously claimed the first NEADS notification of Flight 175 came from New York controllers at 9:03 (Com-pg. 23).

(3) The 9/11 Commission omitted from public release any NEADS or Boston controller tapes or transcripts in the vicinity of 8:43 (Rutgers, NYT) and the FAA legally gagged Boston controller from speaking publicly about the events of 9/11 (New York Observer). In fact, it also omitted any NEADS or Boston controller tapes or transcripts from 8:33 onward (Rutgers, NYT) even though the first hijacked flight – Flight 11 – traveled in Boston’s region for almost its entire post-hijack approach to the World Trade Center before impacting at 8:46 (NTSB). There appears to have been a concerted effort to keep from the public what was known and what was discussed inside the Boston Air Traffic Control Center during this rgb(0, 0, 0)out period.

(4) As stated, NEADS put two Otis Air National Guard Base F-15 fighters in the air by 8:53. The F-15’s were capable of reaching New York in approximately ten minutes (Boston Globe, Cape Cod Times, Slate), meaning they may have had enough time to intercept Flight 175 before it impacted the South Tower at 9:03. They did not have permission to shoot down, but NORAD’s standard response to a hijacking is a graduated one. A fighter can first rock the plane’s wingtips or make a pass in front of it or fire tracer rounds in its path, potentially spooking the hijackers and forcing them to turn out to sea (Slate).

(5) Conflicting reports said they fighters flew anywhere between 1200 and under 600 mph (ABC, BBC, MSNBC, NORAD) – the latter being slower than the cruising speed of a commercial airliner. Regardless, the 9/11 Commission said the Otis fighters were sent to a holding pattern at sea because they were never given information about their targets (Com-pg. 20). It then said the NEADS tapes of the technicians who controlled the Otis scramble were unavailable due to a technical issue (Com-pg. 459 FN 120).

(6) At the New York Air Traffic Control Center, after the 9/11 attacks concluded, six air traffic controllers who dealt with the hijacked airliners were recorded sharing their recollections of the morning’s events. The tape was to be sent to the FBI. The FAA issued an order for all such material to be preserved. However, a Quality Assurance Manager shredded the tape and discarded it into multiple trash cans around the building (NYT (x2), WAPO (x2)). The Transportation Department Inspector General gave him a slap on the wrist 20-day suspension, would not speculate on his motivation, and implied the tape contained nothing to hide (U.S. DOT).

(7) In a bizarre anomaly, not one of the eight commercial airline pilots killed on 9/11 punched the standard 4-digit hijack code into their transponders – an action which takes only seconds (ABC, CNN, FAA, Christian Science Monitor).

(8) According to U.S. Army Magazine, the Director of the New York State Emergency Management Office, and multiple mainstream media reports (UPI, Philadelphia Daily News, Counterpunch) citing two reputable eyewitnesses (NYT) and an unnamed source at the National Transportation Safety Board, the FBI recovered 3 of the 4 rgb(0, 0, 0) boxes from Flights 11 and 175. However, the 9/11 Commission Report, FBI, and National Transportation Safety Board officially claimed no rgb(0, 0, 0) boxes were ever recovered.

(9) Days after 9/11, the passport of one of the terrorists aboard Flight 11 was found unsinged on the street blocks away from ground zero (AP, ABC, CNN, Guardian).

Summary of Chapter 21 (The Phone Calls)
(1) Following the 9/11 attacks, mainstream media outlets reported that numerous cell phone calls had been made from passengers aboard the hijacked planes. Examples include calls made by Barbara Olson, Mark Bingham, Jeremy Glick, Peter Hanson, Thomas Burnett, Brian Sweeney, and Marion Britton (AP (x2), CNN, BBC, CBS, WAPO (x3), NYT, Sacramento Bee, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette). In the case of the last four, the cell phone media reports were corroborated by FBI interviews of the recipients of their calls (FBI-Burnett, FBI-Hanson, FBI-Sweeney, FBI-Britton contact, FBI-Hanson, FBI-Olson)

(2) Thomas Burnett’s wife Deena even specifically said that she knew the calls were from Thomas because the caller ID feature on her phone flashed his cell phone number (FBI-Deena Burnett). Plus, the FBI was actively listening in to the majority of Thomas’ multiple calls to Deena in real-time (AP 9/12). Further, Deena was perfectly consistent that the calls came from her husband’s cell phone in a media interview two years later (CBS). And, in the case of Brian Sweeny, the FBI listened to the message he left on the answering machine of his wife Julie in which he specifically said he was calling from his cell phone (FBI-Sweeny).

(3) All of the aforementioned calls took place when the planes from which they were purportedly made were above 20,000 feet, many of them from 35,000 to 40,000 feet (NTSB x2, Com-pgs. 11-12, 29, DOJ). However, a number of news reports stated that in 2001 cell phone calls from high altitude airliners were highly unlikely or impossible (WAPO, NYT, SF Chronicle, QUALCOMM, San Diego Metropolitan).

(4) The 9/11 Commission Report appeared to endorse the cell phone media reports and FBI interviews (Com-pg. 12, 454-456 FN 48, 49, 58, 80), but a later-released supplementary report said they were all made from GTE (“backseat”) airphones (Com-untitled staff report), as did a series of Justice Department memoranda (DOJ) provided to the 9/11 Commission. The FBI then flipped flopped from its original position and likewise said all the aforementioned calls were GTE airphone calls during the 2006 Zacarias Moussaoui trial (FBI-Moussaoui Trial). Neither the 9/11 Commission nor the FBI ever publicly released the billing or location data associated with the cell phones of the reported 9/11 cell phone users (PR Newswire).

(5) CNN commentator Barbara Olson purportedly, repeatedly called her husband, US Solicitor General Theodore “Ted” Olson at the Department of Justice, from Flight 77 before it crashed into the Pentagon (CNN, Com-pg. 455 FN 57). Her calls became a primary piece of evidence for the 9/11 Commission’s narrative that just three or four Flight 77 hijackers were able to subdue two pilots and 60 passengers with nothing more than knives and box cutters (CNN, Com-pgs. 9, 455 FN 57, 58). However, the hijackers were slender, between 5’5″ and 5’7″ in height, and not physically imposing (Com-Staff Statement #16), while one of the pilots was a former Navy pilot, weightlifter and boxer – all of which prompted the Consensus 9/11 Panel to call the 9/11 Commission’s narrative implausible (Consensus 9/11).

(6) In media interviews Olsen repeatedly flip-flopped about whether the call came from Barbara’s cell phone or an airphone (CNN (x3), FOX, Telegraph, FBI-Olsen). The FBI eventually conclude an airphone (FBI-Moussaoui Trial), but the Consensus 9/11 Panel cited documentation showing that the Boeing 757 airphone system had been deactivated the previous January (Consensus 9/11, Boeing). Further, the Department of Justice determined that Barbara Olson only made one call that was “unconnected” and lasted “0 seconds” (DOJ). This same evidence was presented by the FBI during the 2006 Zacarias Moussaoui trial (FBI-Moussaoui Trial, PR Newswire). 

(7) Todd Beamer reportedly led a passenger revolt against the Flight 93 hijackers, which led to the plane crashing in a Pennsylvania field rather than a high-profile target in Washington D.C. A statement he purportedly uttered just before the revolt began – “Are you guys ready? Okay, let’s roll.” – was subsequently used by President Bush in a November 2001 speech to rally support for the burgeoning War on Terror (Time). 

GTE Verizon supervisor Lisa Jefferson reportedly had a now-famous 13-minute conversation with Beamer before the crash. The phone call contained several strange features.

First, Beamer told Jefferson not to patch him through to his wife because he didn’t want to worry her with bad news. Yet the only reason Beamer’s call was routed to Jefferson in the first place was because his repeated attempts to call his wife failed (Jefferson-pg. 47-48)).

Second, phone records cited by both the 9/11 Commission and FBI showed Beamer’s call lasted over an hour – way beyond after Flight 93 crashed (DOJ, FBI-Moussaoui Trial, PR Newswire, Consensus 9/11).

Third, Jefferson considered it miraculous the call was not dropped because GTE airphone calls were constantly being dropped all over the country due to high call volume during the attacks (Jefferson-pg. 217).

Fourth, despite the circumstances, Beamer sounded so tranquil and devoid of stress that Jefferson recalled doubting the caller’s authenticity (Jefferson-pg. 36), Telegraph, Beamer-pg. 211)).

Fifth, in a breach of convention, Beamer’s call was not recorded either by Jefferson or by the adjacent Airfone Operations Surveillance Center (AOSC), to whom Jefferson immediately reported the call. As a result, no one who knew Todd could confirm that it was his voice on the call (Daily Mail-Morgan).

Sixth, Beamer’s Verizon cell phone records obtained by the FBI showed that 19 outgoing calls were placed from Beamer’s phone that same day after Flight 93 crashed (FBI-Moussaoui Trial, PR Newswire, Consensus 9/11). 

Seventh, there is no first-hand evidence of the famous line – “Are you guys ready? Let’s roll!” – was ever spoken by Beamer or anyone. In fact, Jefferson specifically told the FBI another passenger initiated the revolt, not Beamer (FBI-Jefferson).

Eighth, the 9/11 Commission Report said Flight 93 was hijacked at 9:28. This included a physical struggle for control of the cockpit which caused the plane to fly erratically (Com-pgs. 11, 14, 456 FN 70-71). However, Beamer’s phone records and Jefferson’s FBI interview agree that Beamer called at 9:48 and they spoke several minutes before the hijackers attempted to enter the cockpit, at which point the aircraft flew erratically (FBI-Moussaoui Trial, FBI-Jefferson).

Ninth, Jefferson told the FBI she never heard any sounds of the passenger revolt, the plane diving or crashing, or of passengers reacting to their imminent deaths. In fact, after a passenger other than Todd Beamer supposedly initiated the revolt, she heard nothing at all. Nevertheless, the call remained inexplicably connected for another twenty minutes, long past the time of the plane crash (FBI-Jefferson).

(8) Days after 9/11, the government recovered the Flight 93 cockpit voice recorder, which might have gone long way toward substantiating the accuracy of the phone calls reportedly made from that flight (Guardian, NYT). In April of 2002, the FBI was forced to let the relatives of the deceased listen to the tape under heavy security. The relatives later reported that the tape ended with struggling sounds followed by a loud “rushing sound.” The tape then went silent at 10:03 with no sound of impact (Daily Mail-Morgan).

In April of 2006, the jury of the Zacarias Moussaoui trial heard the final minutes of the Flight 93 cockpit voice recorder, which ended completely differently – with the hijackers shouting praises to Allah (CNN). For some, this confirmed suspicions of tape-tampering (Daily Mail-Morgan).

Ten years after 9/11, the Flight 93 cockpit voice recorder tape remained classified (NYT). Numerous media outlets pointed out that the dramatic accounts of the final moments of Flight 93 were necessarily pure conjecture due to the government’s concealment of the tape (Independent-citing NYT & Newsweek, Guardian-citing Time & CNN)).

Summary of Chapter 22 (The Drills)
(1) During the 9/11 attacks, NORAD was in the midst of a days-long exercise known as “Vigilant Guardian”, which simulated multiple hijackings (Com-NORAD Exercises). When the NEADS Head of Operations learned of the first 9/11 hijack, he thought it was part of the exercise (Vanity Fair).

Thirty hours of audiotape from the NEADS’ control room released to Vanity Fair (used in the production of the 2006 Hollywood film United 93) revealed that the NEADS crew engaged in chases of multiple phantom hijackings due to exercise-related misinformation that peaked during the actual attacks. The Commander of NEADS at one point received reports of 29 different hijackings. NEADS technicians asked the question “Is this real-world or exercise?” over and over. When NEADS officers learned the second hijacked airliner hit the World Trade Center they thought it was only one of the false blips that were deliberately inserted into military radar screens as part of the exercise (Vanity Fair).

The erroneous phantom Flight 11 report to which the 9/11 Commission tried to attribute the Langley scramble (Com-pg. 26-27, 34) appears to have been caused by the exercise (Vanity Fair), but the 9/11 Commission claimed it could never find out how the false report originated – only that the blame lay with the FAA rather than the military (Com-pg. 26).

Simultaneous to Vigilant Guardian was another large drill called Global Guardian, plus five additional drills that accompanied it. Each drill involved all levels of command. This made 9/11 the busiest morning of aerial military exercises in United States history, despite the fact that each of these drills was traditionally run in October or November. Many of the fighter jets and pilots that were typically on call in the northeastern United States were unavailable during the 9/11 attacks because they were supporting exercises in Alaska, Canada, and other regions of the United States (Consensus 9/11). However, the 9/11 Commission did not disclose this information or suggest that the drills negatively affected the military’s response to the attacks.

In fact, the 9/11 Commission ridiculously claimed that the exercises helped NORAD respond more effectively (Com-pg. 458 FN 116). NORAD Commander General Eberhart (Com-Eberhart Test) and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Richard Myers (Congress-Myers Test) claimed likewise. By contrast, the Consensus 9/11 Panel said the exercises’ impact should be re-investigated (Consensus 9/11) and Barbara Honegger (White House Policy Analyst under President Ronald Reagan) suggested the exercises may have been planned to facilitate a deliberate military stand down (Honegger).

(2) Tangentially, while it may be a striking coincidence for a real-life terrorist attack to take place at the same time as a drill simulating a similar or identical attack, 9/11 is not the only time this has happened. On the morning of July 7th, 2005, terrorists executed suicide bombings of three underground train stations across London during rush hour. At the same time, over 1,000 people in the public and private sectors were simultaneously running an exercise that simulated precisely the same scenario that unfolded in real life (BBC Radio).

There were several other strange or suspicious facets of the bombing as well. All four bombs used in the attacks were high-grade military explosives (London Times, Guardian). When Al Qaeda purportedly claimed responsibility for the attacks on a popular Islamic militant website, the statement contained an implausible error in one of the Quranic verses it cited (NBC). Prime Minister Tony Blair repeatedly refused to commission a government investigation into bombings (Financial Times, BBC). Two of the bombers had been under surveillance by British intelligence for a year before the bombings (BBC). And the purported mastermind of the bombings filed a lawsuit claiming British intelligence forced him into a false confession by torturing him and threatening to rape and murder his loved ones (BBC, Guardian, Daily Mail).

(3) Interestingly, military planners know full well that exercises can be used as a cover for real operations. In fact, the massive 1983 Cold War exercise known as “Able Archer 83,” nearly led to a real nuclear exchange between NATO and the USSR (National Security Archive (x2), Slate).

Summary of Chapter 23 (General Eberhart)
It is standard operating procedure for NORAD to intercept a flight if it has lost radio contact, turned off its transponder, and/or deviated off course (Guardian). NORAD scrambled fighters dozens of times per year to this end (AP, Calgary Herald). All four of the 9/11 flights lost radio contact, turned off their transponders, and went wildly off course, yet NORAD did not intercept any of them. As the Commander of NORAD on 9/11, General Eberhart was ultimately responsible for NORAD’s failures. Nevertheless, Eberhart was never held accountable or even criticized.

After the second WTC impact at 9:03, it was obvious the nation was under attack. Nevertheless, at 9:30 (shortly before Flight 77 hit the Pentagon) Eberhart inexplicably decided to take a 45-minute drive from NORAD headquarters to the Cheyenne Mountain Operations Center despite knowing that he would be unreachable due to poor cell phone reception (Com-Eberhart MFR, WAPO, Denver Post).

As we’ve already discussed Eberhart flip-flopped to accommodate the 9/11 Commission’s narrative regarding the cause of the Langley scramble and the timing of NORAD’s awareness to Flights 77 and 93 (Congress-Eberhart Test, Com-Eberhart MFR). He also ridiculously claimed that the massive military exercises held on 9/11 helped NORAD respond to the attacks (Com-Eberhart Test, Com-pg. 465 FN 228).

Summary of Chapter 24 (Andrews Air Base)
On 9/11, the military airbase closest to Washington was Andrews Air Force Base – just 10 miles away. Andrews was not part of NORAD. It reported directly to the White House and worked closely with the Secret Service (WAPO). Astonishingly, on 9/11, no Andrews fighter jets were scrambled until 10:38 – a whole hour after Flight 77 hit the Pentagon (Com-pg. 44).

This was despite the fact that the senior Secret Service agent in charge of coordinating the President’s movements (Nelson Garabito) and his FAA counterpart (Terry Van Steenbergen) discussed two additional hijacked aircraft posing threats to Washington D.C. shortly after the 2nd WTC impact at 9:03, immediately asked Andrews to launch fighters, and received shoot-down authorization from Vice President Cheney (Com-Garabito MFR, Com-Steenbergen MFR). It was also despite the fact that pilots at Andrews were instantly ready to scramble upon learning of the second WTC impact (WAPO, Com-Cain MFR, Filson-Rasmussen).

The cause of the delay was Andrews’ Commander, Brigadier General David Wherley, who remained in his office and performed no action until after Flight 77 struck the Pentagon (WAPO, Com-Wherley MFR). Only then did he make the several hundred-yard trip across the base to the fighter squadron’s headquarters, at which point he refused repeated requests by the Secret Service speaking on the Vice President’s behalf to launch fighters to protect Washington D.C., instead unnecessarily asking to speak to someone of higher rank (Com-Wherley MFR). In a notable deviation from all other staff interviews, Wherley was interviewed one-on-one by the 9/11 Commission’s Executive Director Philip Zelikow, who was also Wherley’s professor at Harvard (Com-Wherley MFR).

Summary of Chapter 25 (President Bush)
(1) On 9/11, President Bush arrived at Emma E. Booker Elementary School just before 9 AM, at which point he learned from brief conversations with his senior staff both in person and at the White House only that a twin-engine airplane aircraft had hit World Trade Center (Com-pg. 35). Every person in President Bush’s entourage and the people in Washington D.C. that they were in contact with claimed to be unaware that any hijacking had taken place at this time (Com-pg. 35, MSNBC x4, CNN). This was remarkable for three reasons. One, the communications capabilities of the presidential limousine were duplicative of the White House itself (Saint Petersburg Times (now Tampa Bay Times)). Two, as we have already seen, NORAD fighters had already been launched certainly in response at least to the Flight 11 hijack and strong evidence indicates NORAD also became aware of Flight 175 at 8:43. Three, as we have already seen, the Secret Service (which is responsible for protecting the president) joined the FAA hijack net when it opened at 8:50 and therefore certainly knew of the hijack.

(2) For months after 9/11, President Bush repeatedly made the impossible claim that he saw footage of Flight 11 hitting the World Trade Center while waiting to enter the classroom even though no such footage surfaced until the following day (Boston Herald, Saint Petersburg Times, Wall Street Journal, WH Press Secretary).

While in the classroom, at 9:05 Bush learned of the 2nd WTC impact at 9:03. Both he and everyone present immediately understood America was under attack (Com-pg. 38). Only Bush and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld had national command authority, meaning they could order the destruction of a passenger plane (Com-pg. 17). Nevertheless, Bush remained in the classroom until almost 9:15, prepared a speech until 9:30, and delivered the speech live from the school until 9:35. During this time period, neither Bush nor anyone in his entourage purportedly sought to contact the Pentagon to coordinate a military response. Also during this time, neither Bush nor anyone in his entourage was purportedly aware of the hijackings of Flights 77 and 93 (Com-pg. 38-39). This was despite knowledge of the Flight 77 and 93 hijackings being widely disseminated amongst top White House/Secret Service, military, and FAA officials, as we have seen.

(3) Both Bush and the Secret Service were heavily criticized for their collective inaction despite knowing the nation was under attack (Saint Petersburg Times, MSNBC, Bamford). Numerous parties in Bush’s entourage, including Secret Service members, immediately realized Bush’s location had been public information for days and hijackers may target the school in an attempt to decapitate the government (Politico, Daily Mail, NBC News affiliate WFLA-TV). Bush later claimed he did not immediately evacuate the school because he didn’t want to scare the children (who would all have been killed if the school was successfully targeted) or cause Americans to panic (Bush). The Consensus 9/11 Panel argued that this breach in protocol by Bush and the Secret Service suggested insider knowledge that the president was never in danger (Consensus 9/11).

President Bush spoke on the phone from Air Force One with Vice President Cheney between 9:42 and 9:50 (Com-pg. 39). As we have seen, numerous media reports and White House/Pentagon/NORAD officials agree that the president passed shoot-down authorization to Cheney during or before this call, resulting in the near shoot-down of Flight 93. However, the 9/11 Commission said this authorization was passed during another Bush-Cheney phone call between 10:10 and 10:15 (well after Flight 93 crashed) for which there was no documentary evidence the call ever took place (Com-pg. 40-41).

Summary of Chapter 26 (Summary Matrices)
(1) As we come to the end, here is an updated and expanded version of the chart shown previously. The following four column headings have been added: 

• FAA Tracked 77 9:10-9:24

• NORAD Learned of 175 Pre-Crash

• Cheney Evacuated from Office and/or In PEOC Early

• NMCC Learned of 77 Within Minutes of 9:20

• 93 Nearly Shot Down

 
Also, the following three evidence sources have been added: 

• White House Senior Advisor Karl Rove

• President Bush’s Personal Secretary Ashley Estes

• White House Photographer David Bohrer

(2) Finally, here is a supplementary chart that highlights a handful of media sources we have covered that reported anti-official narratives:

Summary of Chapter 2 (The 9/11 Commission)

(1) Sources:
C-SPAN, 9/11/2006 (9/11 Commission Vice Chairman Thomas Kean Press Conference)
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, 8/21/2006, “9/11: Truth, Lies and Conspiracy,” (Interview with 9/11 Commission Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton)
CBS News, 5/15/2002, “Bush Opposes 9/11 Query Panel”
CBS News, 4/28/2004, “Bush & Cheney, Behind Closed Door”
CNN, 1/29/2002, “Bush Asks Daschle to Limit Sept. 11 Probes”
New York Times, 4/28/2004, “Bush-Cheney 9/11 Interview Won’t Be Formally Recorded”
Newsweek, 2/3/2002, “The Battle Back Home”
Time Magazine, 3/26/2003, “9-11 Commission Funding Woes” 

(2) Sources:
ABC News, 4/8/2004, “Point Proved” Richard Clarke interviewed by Peter Jennings
ABC News, 1/30/2008, “Ex-9/11 Panel Chief Denies Secret White House Ties”
Associated Press, 2/4/2008, “Book: 911 Commission Executive Director Had Closer White House Ties Than Publicly Disclosed”
Foreign Affairs, November/December 1998, “Catastrophic Terrorism: Tackling the New Danger,” co-authored by Philip D. Zelikow
Guardian, 3/25/2004, “Bush’s Brand New Enemy is the Truth: Clarke’s Claims Have Shaken the White House to its Foundations”
New York Times, 3/20/2004, “Clinton Aids Plan to Tell of Warning to Bush Team on Qaeda”
Philip Shenon (New York Times investigative journalist), 2008, “The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation,” pgs. 40-41, 63-65
United Press International, 4/9/2004, “9/11 Panel Director ‘Helped Demote Clark’”
Richard Clarke, 2004, “Against All enemies: Inside America’s War on Terror,” pgs. 230-231
Washington Post, 1/20/2002, “A Strategy’s Cautious Evolution” (This article has been removed from the Washington Post’s archives.)
Washington Post, 2/4/2008, “The White House Mole” 

(3) Sources:
ABC News, 1/30/2008, “Ex-9/11 Panel Chief Denies Secret White House Ties”
Associated Press, 2/4/2008, “Book: 911 Commission Executive Director Had Closer White House Ties Than Publicly Disclosed”
New York Times, 3/20/2004, “Clinton Aids Plan to Tell of Warning to Bush Team on Qaeda”
Philip Shenon (New York Times investigative journalist), 2008, “The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation,” pgs. 40-41 

(4) Sources:
Associated Press, 2/4/2008, “Book: 911 Commission Executive Director Had Closer White House Ties Than Publicly Disclosed”
Philip Shenon (New York Times investigative journalist), 2008, “The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation,” pgs. 69-70, 81-86, 107, 171-172, 388-389 

(5) Sources:
Associated Press, 11/13/2003, “9/11 Panel to Get Access to Withheld Data”
New York Times, 10/26/2003, “9/11 Commission Could Subpoena Oval Office Files”
Philip Shenon (New York Times investigative journalist), 2008, “The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation,” pgs. 224-225 

(6) Sources:
ABC News, 9/29/2003, “Pentagon Reviewing Va. Chaplain School”
ABC News, 12/9/2014, “CIA Torture Report: The Most Stunning Findings”
CBS News, 12/16/2008, “Cheney Was Key in Clearing CIA Interrogation Tactics”
Guardian, 12/9/2014, “Rectal Rehydration and Waterboarding: the CIA Torture Report's Grisliest Findings”
Los Angeles Times, 5/4/2006, “No Trials for Key Players”
Los Angeles Times, 6/5/2008, “Officer Calls Sept. 11 Cases Tainted”
Los Angeles Times, 12/16/2008, “Cheney OK’s Harsh CIA Tactics”
MSNBC, 10/23/2003, “Countdown with Keith Olberman,” John Loftus interview
MSNBC, 10/24/2006, “Can the ‘20th Hijacker’ of Sept. 11 Stand Trial?”
NBC News, 10/23/2003, “Muslim Leader with D.C. Ties Indicted”
NBC News, 1/30/2008, “9/11 Commission Controversy”
NBC News, 12/9/2014, “‘Rectal Hydration’: Inside the CIA's Interrogation of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed”
NBC News, 12/9/2014, “Senate Report Finds CIA Interrogation Tactics Were Ineffective”
New York Times, 12/8/2007, “Congress Looks Into Obstruction as Calls for Justice Inquiry Rise”
New York Times, 1/2/2008, “Stonewalled by the C.I.A.”
Newsweek, 10/1/2003, “Who, and What, Does He Know?”
Newsweek, 3/13/2009, “The 9/11 Commission’s Blind Spot”
USA Today, 11/26/2006, “‘State Secret Privilege’ Blocks Fired Translator from Suing FBI” 

Summary of Chapter 3 (NORAD, the Pentagon and the FAA)
Sources:
Associated Press, 8/14/2002, “Scrambling to Prevent Another 9/11”
Calgary Herald, 10/13/2001, “NORAD on Heightened Alert: Role of Air Defense Agency Rapidly Transformed in Wake of Sept. 11 Terrorist Attacks”
Los Angeles Times, 9/15/2001, “Fighter Jets Assume Protective New Role”
New York Observer, 6/21/2004, “9/11 Tapes Reveal Ground Personnel Muffled Attacks”
New York Times, 3/25/2007, “First Chapter: ‘Rumsfeld’,” by Andrew Cockburn
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 17-18
9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004, Public Hearing (Transcript: FAA Deputy Administrator Monte Belger Testimony) 

Summary of Chapter 4 (The Start Time)
Sources:
FAA, 9/11/2001, “Chronology ADA-30, Sept. 11, 2001.”
Leslie Filson, 2003, “Air War Over America: Sept. 11 Alters Face of Air Defense Mission,” pgs. 59, 71-73, published by Tyndall Air Force Base Public Affairs Office
New York Times, 9/16/2001, “Text of Vice President Cheney's Remarks on ‘Meet the Press’”
9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003, Public Hearing (Transcript: Commissioner Ben-Veniste reading FAA document entitled, “FAA Communications with NORAD on September 11th, 2001,” prepared by FAA Administrator Jane Garvey, Mr. Asmus, Ms. Schuessler)
9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003, Public Hearing (Transcript: Colonel William Scott, Major General Craig McKinley, Major General Larry Arnold Testimonies)
9/11 Commission, 10/21/2003, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with [FAA Administrator] Jane Garvey”
9/11 Commission, 4/20/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with [FAA Deputy Administrator] Monte Belger” (including handwritten notes)
9/11 Commission, 4/28/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with [FAA Emergency Operations Staff Manager] Dan Noel”
9/11 Commission, 5/7/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with [FAA Crisis Management Supervisor] Michael Weikert”
9/11 Commission, 5/11/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with [FAA Federal Security Manager] Pete Falcone”
9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004, Public Hearing (Transcript: FAA Deputy Administrator Monte Belger Testimony)
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 36, 462 (Ch. 1 FN 188) 

Summary of Chapter 5 (The Witnesses)
Sources:
ABC News, 9/11/2002, “9/11: Interviews by Peter Jennings” (Interviews of Transportation Secretary Mineta, Army Brigadier General Montague Winfield, NEADS Commander Colonel Marr)
ABC News, 11/29/2003, “Cheney Wields Unprecedented V.P. Power” (includes excerpts of Richard Clarke interview by Ted Koppel)
Cornell University, Spring 2006 Alumni Newsletter, “President’s Council of Cornell Women: Spotlight On: [Deputy Director of the Secret Service] Barbara Riggs”
Drs. Alfred Goldberg and Rebecca Cameron, 4/19/2001, “Pentagon Attack Interview with Paul Wolfowitz” (transcript)
FAA, 8/12/2002, “Fact Sheet: Chronology of Events on September 11, 2001 (August 2002)”
Leslie Filson, 2003, “Air War Over America: Sept. 11 Alters Face of Air Defense Mission,” pgs. 59, 63, 68, 71-73, published by Tyndall Air Force Base Public Affairs Office
MSNBC, 9/11/2002, “Norman Mineta 9/11 Interview” by Robert Hager
Naval Post Graduate School Newsletter, Volume 1, Issue 10, September 2004, “Special Operations Policy Expert and Veteran Robert Andrews Gives Distinguished Visiting Guest Lectures at NPS”
New York Times, 9/15/2001, “AFTER THE ATTACKS: SKY RULES; Pentagon Tracked Deadly Jet But Found No Way to Stop It”
New York Times, 9/16/2001, “Text of Vice President Cheney's Remarks on ‘Meet the Press’”
Newhouse News Service, 3/31/2005, “Commander of 9/11 Air Defenses Retires”
NORAD, 9/18/2001, “NORAD’S Response Times, Sept. 11, 2001” (press release)
PBS News, 9/14/2001, “Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz Interview with PBS NewsHour”
Richard Clarke, March 2004, “Against All Enemies,” (pgs. 1-7)
Richard Myers, 2009, “Eyes on the Horizon: Serving on the Front Lines of National Security,” pgs. 151-152
U.S. Congress; Senate Armed Services Committee, 9/13/2001, “U.S. Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) Holds Hearing On Nomination of General Richard Myers to be Chairman of The Joint Chiefs of Staff”
U.S. Congress, 10/25/2001, “Senate Armed Services Committee Holds Hearing on Role of Defense Department in Homeland Security” (Transcript: NORAD Commander Eberhart testimony)
9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003, Public Hearing (Transcript: Commissioner Ben-Veniste reading FAA document entitled, “FAA Communications with NORAD on September 11th, 2001,” prepared by FAA Administrator Jane Garvey, Mr. Asmus, Ms. Schuessler)
9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003, Public Hearing (Transcript: Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, Colonel William Scott, Major General Craig McKinley, Major General Larry Arnold Testimonies)
9/11 Commission, 9/28/2003, “USSS Statement and Interview Reports” (contains Nelson Garabito interview notes)
9/11 Commission, 10/27/2003, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview of Lt. Jeremy Powell”
9/11 Commission, 1/23/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview of NEADS Commander Colonel Robert Marr”
9/11 Commission, 4/20/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with [FAA Deputy Administrator] Monte Belger”
9/11 Commission, 5/7/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with [FAA Crisis Management Supervisor] Michael Weikert”
9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004, Public Hearing (Transcript: FAA Deputy Administrator Monte Belger Testimony)
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 39
9/11 Commission, 7/29/2004, untitled letter from the Commissioners and Executive Director Philip Zelikow to DoD Inspector General Joseph Schmitz and DoT Inspector General Kenneth Mead (includes Colonel Marr’s e-mail to Colonel Scott) 

Summary of Chapter 6 (The Hijack Net)
Sources:
New York Times, 3/25/2007, “First Chapter: ‘Rumsfeld’,” by Andrew Cockburn
New York Times, 9/7/2011, “Newly Published Audio Provides Real-Time View of 9/11 Attacks”
Rutgers University Law Review, 9/7/2011, “Full Audio Transcript”
Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton (9/11 Commission Chairmen), 2007, “Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission,” pgs. 85-88
9/11 Commission, 2/6/2003, “Memorandum for the Record: FAA OPS Center Visit”
9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003, Public Hearing (Transcript: Commissioner Ben-Veniste reading FAA document entitled, “FAA Communications with NORAD on September 11th, 2001,” prepared by FAA Administrator Jane Garvey, Mr. Asmus, Ms. Schuessler)
9/11 Commission, 4/20/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with [FAA Deputy Administrator] Monte Belger”
9/11 Commission, 4/23/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with Major Charles Chambers” (includes an appended 4/30/2004 memorandum signed by Chambers stating there is “no documentation of the length or content” of the FAA hijack net)
9/11 Commission, 5/7/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with [FAA Crisis Management Supervisor] Michael Weikert”
9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004, Public Hearing (Transcript: FAA Deputy Administrator Monte Belger Testimony)
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 36, 462 (Ch. 1 FN 188) 

Summary of Chapter 7 (The White House Teleconference)
Sources:
New York Times, 9/7/2011, “Newly Published Audio Provides Real-Time View of 9/11 Attacks”
Richard Clarke, 2004, “Against All Enemies,” pgs. 1-8
Rutgers University Law Review, 9/7/2011, “Full Audio Transcript”
9/11 Commission, 3/24/2004, Public Hearing Transcript: Testimony of Former National Coordinator for Counterterrorism, National Security Council Richard A. Clarke
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 36, 41 

Summary of Chapter 8 (The Flight 77 Alert)
Sources:
National Archives Website, “9/11 Commission Memoranda for the Record (MFRs)”
New York Times, 9/15/2001, “AFTER THE ATTACKS: SKY RULES; Pentagon Tracked Deadly Jet But Found No Way to Stop It”
New York Times, 9/7/2011, “Newly Published Audio Provides Real-Time View of 9/11 Attacks”
Newsday, 9/23/2001, “Air Attack on Pentagon Indicates Weaknesses”
Rutgers University Law Review, 9/7/2011, “Full Audio Transcript”
Washington Post, 9/12/2001, “Timeline in Terrorist Attacks of Sept. 11, 2001”
9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003, Public Hearing (Transcript: Colonel William Scott, Major General Craig McKinley, Major General Larry Arnold Testimonies)
9/11 Commission, 10/27/2003, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview of Lt. Jeremy Powell”
9/11 Commission, 1/23/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview of NEADS Commander Colonel Robert Marr”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 15, 25-27, 34, 460 (Ch. 1 Footnote 144)
9/11 Commission, undated, “The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States; Finding Aid: Series Descriptions and Folder Title Lists”
9/11 Commission, 7/29/2004, untitled letter from the Commissioners and Executive Director Philip Zelikow to DoD Inspector General Joseph Schmitz and DoT Inspector General Kenneth Mead (includes Colonel Marr’s e-mail to Colonel Scott) 

Summary of Chapter 9 (The Flight 93 Alert)
Sources:
ABC News, 9/11/2002, “9/11: Interviews by Peter Jennings” (Interviews of Army Brigadier General Montague Winfield, NEADS Commander Colonel Marr)
Associated Press, 9/13/2001, “Passengers May Have Thwarted Hijackers”
CBS News, 9/12/2001, “Feds Would Have Shot Down Pa. Jet”
Drs. Alfred Goldberg and Rebecca Cameron, 4/19/2001, “Pentagon Attack Interview with Paul Wolfowitz” (transcript)
Independent, 8/13/2002, “Unanswered questions: The mystery of Flight 93”
Leslie Filson, 2003, “Air War Over America: Sept. 11 Alters Face of Air Defense Mission,” pgs. 60, 63, 73, published by Tyndall Air Force Base Public Affairs Office
New York Times, 9/15/2001, “AFTER THE ATTACKS: SKY RULES; Pentagon Tracked Deadly Jet But Found No Way to Stop It”
Newhouse News Service, 3/31/2005, “Commander of 9/11 Air Defenses Retires”
PBS News, 9/14/2001, “Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz Interview with PBS NewsHour”
Richard Clarke, 2004 book, “Against All Enemies,” (pgs. 1-7)
Richard Myers, 2009, “Eyes on the Horizon: Serving on the Front Lines of National Security,” pgs. 151-152
Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton (9/11 Commission Chairmen), 2007, “Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission,” pgs. 85-88
Washington Post, 1/27/2002, “America's Chaotic Road to War”
9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003, Public Hearing (Transcript: Colonel William Scott, Major General Craig McKinley, Major General Arnold Testimonies)
9/11 Commission, 10/21/2003, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with [FAA Administrator] Jane Garvey”
9/11 Commission, 10/27/2003, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview of Lt. Jeremy Powell”
9/11 Commission, 1/23/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview of NEADS Commander Colonel Robert Marr”
9/11 Commission, 4/20/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with [FAA Deputy Administrator] Monte Belger” (including handwritten notes)
9/11 Commission, 5/7/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with FAA Manager Michael Weikert”
9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004, Public Hearing Transcript (FAA Deputy Administrator Monte Belger Testimony)
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 28, 30, 34
9/11 Commission, 7/29/2004, untitled letter from the Commissioners and Executive Director Philip Zelikow to DoD Inspector General Joseph Schmitz and DoT Inspector General Kenneth Mead (includes Colonel Marr’s e-mail to Colonel Scott) 

Summary of Chapter 10 (The Langley Scramble)
Sources:
ABC News, 9/11/2002, “9/11: Interviews by Peter Jennings” (Interview of NEADS Commander Colonel Marr)
Leslie Filson, 2003, “Air War Over America: Sept. 11 Alters Face of Air Defense Mission,” pgs. 59, 63, 71-73, published by Tyndall Air Force Base Public Affairs Office
New York Times, 9/7/2011, “Newly Published Audio Provides Real-Time View of 9/11 Attacks”
Newhouse News, 1/25/2002, “Amid Crisis Simulation, ‘We Were Suddenly No-Kidding Under Attack’”
Newhouse News Service, 3/31/2005, “Commander of 9/11 Air Defenses Retires”
Rutgers University Law Review, 9/7/2011, “Full Audio Transcript”
Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton (9/11 Commission Chairmen), 2007, “Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission,” pgs. 85-88
U.S. Congress, 10/25/2001, “Senate Armed Services Committee Holds Hearing on Role of Defense Department in Homeland Security” (Transcript: NORAD Commander Eberhart Testimony)
Vanity Fair, 10/17/2006, “9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes”
9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003, Public Hearing (Transcript: Colonel William Scott, Major General Craig McKinley, Major General Larry Arnold Testimonies)
9/11 Commission, 10/27/2003, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview of Lt. Jeremy Powell”
9/11 Commission, 1/23/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview of NEADS Commander Colonel Robert Marr”
9/11 Commission, 2/3/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview of General Craig McKinley”
9/11 Commission, 2/3/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview of Major General Larry Arnold”
9/11 Commission, 2/4/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview of Colonel William [or Alan] Scott”
9/11 Commission, 3/1/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview of General Edward Eberhart”
9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004, Public Hearing (Transcript: General Eberhart, Major General Larry Arnold Testimonies)
9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004, Public Hearing (Transcript: Remarks by Lead Staff Investigator John Farmer, Executive Director Philip Zelikow, Commissioner Ben-Veniste)
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 26-27, 34, 458 (Footnote 116)
9/11 Commission, 7/29/2004, untitled letter from the Commissioners and Executive Director Philip Zelikow to DoD Inspector General Joseph Schmitz and DoT Inspector General Kenneth Mead (Requesting investigations into the cause of public statements made by NORAD and FAA officials deemed by the 9/11 Commission to be false)

Summary of Chapter 11 (Brigadier General Winfield)
Sources:
ABC News, 9/11/2002, “9/11: Interviews by Peter Jennings”
CNN, 9/4/2002, “‘The Pentagon Goes to War’: National Military Command Center”
General Richard Myers, 2009, “Eyes on the Horizon: Serving on the Front Lines of National Security,” pg. 151-152
U.S. Military; JPAC (Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command) Website, 10/11/2004, “Brigadier General W. Montague ‘Que’ Winfield, Commander, JPAC”
9/11 Commission, 7/21/2003, “Memorandum for the Record: Orientation and Tour of the National Military Command Center (NMCC) and National Military Joint Intelligence Center (NMJIC)”
9/11 Commission, 4/26/2004, “WITHDRAWL NOTICE; ACCESS RESTRICTED; General Winfield Interviews, Handwritten Notes”
9/11 Commission, 4/29/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Captain Charles Joseph Leidig, U.S.N., Commandant of Midshipmen, U.S. Naval Academy”
9/11 Commission, 5/5/2004 and 5/12/2004, Handwritten Notes of interview with Commander Patrick Gardner
9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004, “Statement of Capt. Charles J. Leidig, Jr., Commandant of Midshipmen United States Naval Academy before the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States”
9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004, “9/11 Commission Public Hearing” (transcript)
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pg. 37 

Summary of Chapter 12 (General Richard Myers)
Sources:
Armed Forces Radio and Television Services, 10/17/2001, “Interview: General Richard B. Myers”
Drs. Alfred Goldberg and Rebecca Cameron, 4/19/2001, “Pentagon Attack Interview with Paul Wolfowitz” (transcript)
General Hugh Shelton, 2009, “Without Hesitation: The Odyssey of an American Warrior,” pgs. 432-33
New York Times, 9/15/2001, “AFTER THE ATTACKS: SKY RULES; Pentagon Tracked Deadly Jet But Found No Way to Stop It”
PBS Frontline, 10/26/2004, “Rumsfeld’s War”
PBS News, 9/14/2001, “Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz Interview with PBS NewsHour”
Richard Clarke, 2004, “Against All Enemies: Inside America’s War on Terror,” pgs. 3-5
Senate Armed Services Committee, 9/13/2001, “U.S. Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) Holds Hearing On Nomination of General Richard Myers to be Chairman of The Joint Chiefs of Staff”
NBC News, 9/11/2002, “General Richard Myers Interview with Jim Miklaszewski”
NBC Today Show, 3/12/2009, “An Insider’s Look at the Global War on Terror”
Richard Myers, 2009, “Eyes on the Horizon: Serving on the Front Lines of National Security,” pgs. 151-152
9/11 Commission, 2/17/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview of General Richard Myers”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 34, 38, 463 (Ch. 1 Footnote 199, citing 2/17/2004 Myers interview) 

Summary of Chapter 13 (Defense Secretary Rumsfeld)
Sources:
CBS, 9/8/2002, “Face the Nation”, interview with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
Drs. Alfred Goldberg and Rebecca Cameron, 4/19/2001, “Pentagon Attack Interview with Paul Wolfowitz” (transcript)
Historical Office, Office of the Secretary of Defense, 7/2/2002, “Interview with Victoria Clark”
Historical Office, Office of the Secretary of Defense, 10/19/2001, “Interview with John Jester”
Naval Post Graduate School Newsletter, Volume 1, Issue 10, September 2004, “Special Operations Policy Expert and Veteran Robert Andrews Gives Distinguished Visiting Guest Lectures at NPS”
New York Observer, 6/21/2004, “9/11 Tapes Reveal Ground Personnel Muffled Attacks”
New York Times, 3/25/2007, “First Chapter: ‘Rumsfeld’,” by Andrew Cockburn
PBS Frontline, 10/26/2004, “Rumsfeld’s War”
Richard Clarke, March 2004, “Against All Enemies”
9/11 Commission, 3/23/2004, Public Hearing (Transcript: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld Testimony)
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 17-18, 37-38 

Summary of Chapter 14 (The Fake Transcript)
Sources:
Department of Defense, 9/11/2001, “Air Threat Conference and DDO Conference”
New York Times, 9/7/2011, “Newly Published Audio Provides Real-Time View of 9/11 Attacks”
Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, 10/20/2003, “Subject: 9-11 Air Threat Conference Call Transcription”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 36-37, 463 (footnotes 194-196, 198, 200) 

Summary of Chapter 15 (Vice President Cheney)
(1) Sources:
ABC News, 9/11/2002, “9/11: Interviews by Peter Jennings,” interviews of Secretary Mineta and White House Photographer David Bohrer
ABC News, 9/14/2002, “Moment of Crisis (Part 2): Sept. 11 Scramble,” quoting White House Photographer David Bohrer
ABC News, 11/29/2003, “Cheney Wields Unprecedented V.P. Power” (includes excerpt of Richard Clarke interview with Ted Koppel)
CBS’ 60 Minutes II, 8/29/2002, “Interview with Ashley Estes”
MSNBC, 9/11/2002, “Norman Mineta 9/11 Interview” by Robert Hager
MSNBC, 3/8/2010, “Jesse Ventura Claims Gov’t Involved in 9/11”
NBC News, 9/11/2002, “Karl Rove: 9/11 Interview” with Campbell Brown
New York Times, 9/13/2001, “Inside the Bunker”
Richard Clarke, 2004 book, “Against All Enemies,” (pgs. 1-8)
Telegraph, 12/16/2001, “Revealed: What Really Went on During Bush’s ‘Missing Hours’”
9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003, Public Hearing Transcript (Testimony of Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta) 

(2) Sources:
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, 8/21/2006, “9/11: Truth, Lies and Conspiracy,” (interview of 9/11 Commission Chairman Lee Hamilton)
New York Times, 9/16/2001, “Text of Vice President Cheney's Remarks on ‘Meet the Press’”
Newsweek, 2/26/2006, “The Shot Heard Round the World”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 39-40, 463-464 (FN 204, 208-210, 213) 

(3) Sources:
CNN, 9/4/2002, “‘The Pentagon Goes to War’: National Military Command Center”
National Archives Website, “9/11 Commission Memoranda for the Record (MFRs)”
U.S. News and World Report, 8/31/2003, “Pieces of the Puzzle – A Top-Secret Conference Call on September 11 Could Shed New Light on the Terrorist Attacks”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 40-41, 463-464 (FN 216-222)
9/11 Commission, undated, “The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States; Finding Aid: Series Descriptions and Folder Title Lists” 

(4) Sources:
Associated Press, 9/1/2006, “Religious Book Points 9/11 Finger at Bush”
Barbara Honegger, 9/6/2006, “THE PENTAGON ATTACK PAPERS; Seven Hours in September: The Clock that Broke the Lie”
Consensus 9/11 Website, 2021, “Panel Members”
Consensus 9/11 Website, 2020, “Point MC-3: The Claim about the Time of Dick Cheney’s Entry into the White House Bunker”
Daily Mail, 9/5/2006, “Fury as Academics Claim 9/11 was ‘Inside Job’”
Daily Mail, 2/9/2007, “An Explosion of Disbelief”
Guardian, 9/6/2003, “This War on Terrorism is Bogus,” by Michael Meacher, British Parliament Member and Environment Minister (Cabinet Member) 1997 to 2003
Guardian, 9/5/2006, “Who Really Blew Up the Twin Towers”
Los Angeles Times, 8/28/2005, “Getting Agnostic About 9/11”
MarketWatch, 6/5/2012, “Expert Panel Reports False Accounts of U.S. Political and Military Leaders on 9/11”
MSNBC, 3/8/2010, “Jesse Ventura Claims Gov’t Involved in 9/11”
NBC, 11/16/2005, “Questioning What Happened on 9/11”
New York Post, 11/24/2001, “Blame U.S. for 9/11: ‘Plots’ Thicken in Shocking Poll”
New York Times, 9/2/2006, “2 U.S. Reports Seek to Counter Conspiracy Theories About 9/11”
PR Newswire, 3/1/2006, “Experts Call for Release of 9/11 Evidence”
PR Newswire, 5/6/2011, “Obama Says ‘Justice Has Been Done’: Bin Laden Scholar Says No”
PR Newswire, 9/9/2011, “New Investigative Panel Releases 13 Consensus Statements of Evidence Opposing the Official Account of 9/11”
San Francisco Chronicle, 9/3/2006, “The Conspiracy to Rewrite 9/11,” (opinion)
Telegraph, 11/20/2003, “German Sept 11 Theory Stokes Anti-US Feeling”
Washington Post, 9/8/2006, “The Disbelievers”
Washington Post, 10/2/2010, “9/11 Conspiracy Theories Rife in Muslim World” 

(5) Sources:
Barbara Honegger, 9/6/2006, “THE PENTAGON ATTACK PAPERS; Seven Hours in September: The Clock that Broke the Lie”
CNN, 7/18/2001, “Genoa Braces for G8 Summit”
Department of Defense, 2007 (completed; published 2013), “Pentagon 9/11,” pg. 152
Los Angeles Times, 9/27/2001, “Italy Tells of Threat at Genoa Summit”
Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 9/10/2002, “The Day Before Everything Changed, President Bush Touched Locals’ Lives”
Telegraph, 9/16/2001, “Israeli Security Issued Urgent Warning to CIA of Large-Scale Terror Attacks”
Washington Post, 12/12/1983, “Magazine Says White House Protected by Ground-to-Air Missiles”
9/11 Commission, 3/24/2004, Public Hearing Transcript: Testimony of Former National Coordinator for Counterterrorism, National Security Council Richard A. Clarke 

Summary of Chapter 16 (The Inspectors General)
Sources:
CNN, 8/2/2006, “The Situation Room” (transcript)
CNN, 8/9/2006, “Lou Dobbs Tonight”
John Farmer, 9/8/2009, “The Ground Truth: The Untold Story of America Under Attack on 9/11,” pgs. 283-289
New York Times, 9/2/2006, “Report Urges F.A.A. to Act Regarding False 9/11 Testimony”
New York Times, 9/7/2011, “Newly Published Audio Provides Real-Time View of 9/11 Attacks”
Philip Shenon, 2008, “The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation,” pgs. 204-210
Rutgers University Law Review, 9/7/2011, “Full Audio Transcript”
Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton (9/11 Commission Chairmen), 2007, “Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission,” pgs. 85-88
U.S. Department of Defense; Inspector General, 9/12/2006, “Memorandum for Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence: Report on Review of Testimony to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States”
U.S. Department of Transportation; Office of the Inspector General (Todd Zinser), 8/31/2006, “Memorandum: Results of OIG Investigation of 9/11 Commission Staff Referral”
Vanity Fair, 10/17/2006, “9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes”
Washington Post, 8/2/2006, “9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon: Allegations Brought to Inspectors General”
Washington Post, 9/2/2006, “No Intent to Mislead Panel Found in Aviation Officials’ 9/11 Errors”
9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004, Public Hearing (Transcript: Remarks by Staff Lead John Farmer, Executive Director Philip Zelikow, Commissioner Bob Kerry)
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pg. 21
9/11 Commission, 7/29/2004, untitled letter from the Commissioners and Executive Director Philip Zelikow to DoD Inspector General Joseph Schmitz and DoT Inspector General Kenneth Mead (Requesting investigations into the cause of public statements made by NORAD and FAA officials deemed by the 9/11 Commission to be false) 

Summary of Chapter 17 (The Accusations)
(1) Sources:
Consensus 9/11 Panel Website, 2021, “Point MC-9: The Activities of General Ralph Eberhart During the 9/11 Attacks”
Richard Clarke, 2004, “Against All Enemies: Inside America’s War on Terror,” pg. 5
San Francisco Chronicle, 9/3/2006, “The Conspiracy to Rewrite 9/11,” (opinion)
Slate, 1/16/2002, “IGNORAD: The Military Screw-Up Nobody Talks About” 

(2) Sources:
Dr. David Ray Griffin, 9/14/2006, “9/11 Live or Fabricated: Do the NORAD Tapes Verify The 9/11 Commission Report?”
Washington Post, 2/1/1999, “When Seeing and Hearing Isn’t Believing” 

(3) Sources:
CNN, 4/13/2006, “On Tape, Passengers Heard Trying to Retake Cockpit; 9/11 Jury Relives Final Minutes of Hijacked United Flight 93”
Daily Mail, 8/19/2006, “Flight 93 ‘Was Shot Down’ Claims Book,” by Rowland Morgan
Philadelphia Daily News, 9/16/2002, “Three-Minute Discrepancy in Tape; Cockpit Voice Recording Ends Before Flight 93's Official Time of Impact”

(4) Sources:
BBC, 11/13/2002, “Analysis: New Fears Over Bin laden Tape”
BBC, 11/18/2002, “Bin Laden Tape ‘Genuine’”
BBC, 11/29/2002, “Bin Laden Tape ‘Not Genuine’”
Chicago Tribune, 11/14/2002, “U.S. Treats Bin Laden Tape as Genuine”
Guardian, 11/29/2002, “Swiss scientists 95% Sure that Bin Laden Recording was Fake”
Huffington Post, 3/17/2009, “Osama Bin Elvis”
The American Spectator, 3/13/2009, “Osama Bin Elvis” by Professor Angelo M. Codevilla 

Note: In March of 2009, Professor Angelo Codevilla wrote an essay entitled, “Osama Bin Elvis,” for the publication, The American Spectator, for which he was the acting editor-in-chief. The essay was also covered by the Huffington Post. Codevilla is a former State Department Intelligence Officer who oversaw transition of the State Department and CIA into the Reagan era as part of President Reagan’s transition team. He was also a former U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee staff member, a Stanford University Senior Research Fellow, a political author, and an op-ed writer for various mainstream media outlets such as the New York Times, Washington Post, Forbes, and Foreign Affairs Magazine. See examples below: 

Forbes, 2/20/2013, “As Country Club Republicans Link Up with the Democratic Ruling Class, Millions of Voters Are Orphaned,” by Angelo Codevilla
Foreign Affairs, Authors: “Angelo Codevilla”
Hoover Institute (Stanford University), Contributor Profiles: “Angelo Codevilla”
New York Times, 8/19/1990, “Don’t Destroy the CIA – Renovate It,” by Angelo Codevilla
The American Spectator, Authors: “Angelo Codevilla”
Washington Post, 1/2/1999, “Justice and Jonathan Pollard,” by Angelo Codevilla 

(5) Sources:
BBC, 2/11/2003, “‘Bin Laden’ Condemns Iraq Plans”
BBC, 1/31/2005, “Kerry Blames Defeat on Bin Laden”
Guardian, 2/12/2003, “Bin Laden offers tips to defend Iraq”
NPR, 10/2/2008, “Ex-CIA Operative Discusses ‘The Devil We Know’”
Reuters, 2/28/2006, “Bush Says Bin Laden Tape Aided Re-Election: Report”
Telegraph, 10/31/2004, “Bush Takes a Six-Point Lead After New Bin Laden Tape” 

Summary of Chapter 18 (The Pentagon Crash Site)
(1) Sources:
New York Times, 10/16/2001, “Transcript of American Airlines Flight 77”
Washington Post, 11/3/2001, “Pentagon Crash Highlights a Radar Gap”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pg. 9 

(2) Sources:
ABC News, 10/24/2001, “‘Get These Planes on the Ground’: Air Traffic Controllers Recall Sept. 11”
ABC News, 5/10/2002, “FAA Received Alert About 9/11 Hijacker”
CBS News, 9/11/2001, “Primary Target”
CBS News, 5/10/2002, “FAA Was Alerted To Sept. 11 Hijacker”
New York Times, 6/19/2002, “TRACES OF TERROR: THE F.B.I.; For Agent in Phoenix, the Cause of Many Frustrations Extended to His Own Office”
Newsday, 9/23/2001, “Tracing the Trail of Hijackers”
Washington Post, 9/10/2002, “Mysterious Trip to Flight 77 Cockpit”
Washington Post, 9/12/2001, “On Flight 77: ‘Our Plane Is Being Hijacked’”
Washington Post, 10/15/2001, “Hanjour a Study in Paradox” 

(3) Sources:
Daily Mail, 8/6/2005, “9/11 on Trial”
Daily Mail, 2/9/2007, “An Explosion of Disbelief”
MarketWatch, 5/6/2011, “The 9/11 Hijackers: Fraud in Official Video Exhibits Uncovered by Expert Panel”
PR Newswire, 9/9/2011, “New Investigative Panel Releases 13 Consensus Statements of Evidence Opposing the Official Account of 9/11”
PR Newswire, 5/6/2011, “Obama Says ‘Justice Has Been Done’: Bin Laden Scholar Says No”
Sunday Times, 9/4/2005, “9/11 Revealed: Challenging the Facts behind the War on Terror”
Time Magazine, 9/3/2006, “Why The 9/11 Conspiracies Won’t Go Away” 

(4) Sources:
Arlington County, 2002, “Arlington County After-Action Report on the Response to the September 11 Terrorist Attack on the Pentagon,” page A-86
CBS, 1/29/2002, “The War on Waste”
Mount Vernon Gazette, 9/4/2002, “An Engineer’s Expertise Joins A Firefighter’s Nightmare” 

(5) Sources:
Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board, 10/4/2018, “News Release: FASAB Issues Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards 56, Classified Activities”
Forbes, 12/8/2017, 12/8/2017, “Has Our Government Spent $21 Trillion Of Our Money Without Telling Us?”
Forbes, 7/21/2018, “Is Our Government Intentionally Hiding $21 Trillion In Spending?”
New York Times, 12/3/2018, “The Misleading Claim That $21 Trillion in Misspent Pentagon Funds Could Pay for ‘Medicare for All’”
Rolling Stone, 1/16/2019, “Has the Government Legalized Secret Defense Spending?”
The Nation, 11/27/2018, “Exclusive: The Pentagon’s Massive Accounting Fraud Exposed: How US Military Spending Keeps Rising Even as the Pentagon Flunks its Audit.” 

(6) Sources:
Barbara Honegger, 9/6/2006, “THE PENTAGON ATTACK PAPERS; Seven Hours in September: The Clock that Broke the Lie”
PR Newswire, 3/23/2011, “Amidst Growing World Doubts About 9/11, Career Army Officer Takes Bush Administration Officials to Court April 5th Represented by the Center for 9/11 Justice”
PR Newswire, 4/7/2011, “Extraordinary Conflict of Interest: Bush Cousin Presides Over Federal Court Case Against Former Bush Administration Officials”
Reuters, 2/2/2012, “Court Sanctions Lawyers Behind September 11 Conspiracy Case”
Time Magazine, 9/3/2006, “Why The 9/11 Conspiracies Won’t Go Away”
Washington Post, 9/9/2011, “After 9/11, Woman Who Was at Pentagon Remains Skeptical” 

(7) Sources:
CBS News, 5/16/2006, “Pentagon Makes Public 9/11 Footage”
Department of Defense, 11/9/2006, “Oral History Interview with Brian Austin and Steve Pennington by Diane Putney”
Department of Defense, 2007 (completed; published 2013), “Pentagon 9/11”
Fox News, 5/16/2006, “Pentagon Releases Video of Plane Hitting Building on 9/11”
PR Newswire, 3/1/2006, “Experts Call for Release of 9/11 Evidence”
San Francisco Chronicle, 9/3/2006, “The Conspiracy to Rewrite 9/11”
Washington Times, 9/21/2001, “Inside the Ring” 

(8) Sources:
Barbara Honegger, 9/6/2006, “THE PENTAGON ATTACK PAPERS; Seven Hours in September: The Clock that Broke the Lie”
Bill Christison, 8/14/2006, “Stop Belittling the Theories About September 11”
Daily Mail, 8/6/2005, “9/11 on Trial”
Time, 9/3/2006, “Why The 9/11 Conspiracies Won’t Go Away”
Washington Post, 10/7/2004, “Conspiracy Theories Flourish on the Internet” 

(9) Sources:
Albuquerque Tribune/Scripps Howard News Service, 9/12/2001, “Mournful Church Bells Toll, Police Sirens Soar as D.C. Explodes Into Panic”
CBS, 9/13/2001, “The Early Show,” Interview of Colonel Mitch Mitchell
CNN, 9/11/2001, “America Under Attack: Israeli Prime Minister, Foreign Minister Offer Condolences to the American People,” Interview of Mike Walter of “USA Today Live”
Fox News/Associated Press, 9/11/2001, “Hijacked Planes Used in Coordinated Attacks Upon New York, Washington”
Guardian, 9/12/2001, “‘Everyone Was Screaming, Crying, Running. It’s Like a War Zone’”
Washington Post, 9/11/2001, “‘Extensive Casualties’ in Wake of Pentagon Attack”
Washington Post (online video), 9/11/2001, “Eyewitness to Pentagon Attack: Washington area residents Allen Cleveland and Meseidy Rodriguez were riding the metro and saw the plane that apparently crashed into the Pentagon.”
Washington Post, 9/12/2001, “Loud Boom, Then Flames In Hallways”
Washington Post, 9/20/2001, “‘The Terrorists Cannot Kill Our Spirit’” 

(10) Sources:
National Transportation Safety Board, 4/30/2002, “Specialist’s Factual Report of Investigation: [Flight 77] Cockpit Voice Recorder”
NPR, 3/11/2014, “What Would It Take To Destroy A Black Box?”
PR Newswire, 6/21/2007, “New Study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 Hit the Pentagon” 

(11) Sources:
BBC News, 2/14/2007, “9/11 questions”
Daily Mail, 2/9/2007, “An Explosion of Disbelief”
PR Newswire, 3/1/2006, “Experts Call for Release of 9/11 Evidence”
Washington Post, 2/28/2012, “Portions of 9/11 Victims’ Remains Taken to Landfill, Report Says” 

(12) Sources:
ABC News, 3/31/2017, “FBI Re-Releases 9/11 Pentagon Photos”
Time, 3/31/2017, “FBI Releases Never-Before-Seen Photos From 9/11 Pentagon Attack”
Politico, 3/31/2017, “FBI Releases Never-Before-Seen Photos From 9/11 Pentagon Attack” 

(13) Sources:
Daily Mail, 8/6/2005, “9/11 on Trial”
San Francisco Chronicle, 9/3/2006, “The Conspiracy to Rewrite 9/11”
The Joint Chiefs of Staff, 3/13/1962, “Memorandum for the Secretary of Defense; Subject: Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba,” A.K.A “Northwoods” 

Summary of Chapter 19 (The Pennsylvania Crash Site)
(1) Sources:
CNN, 9/12/2001, “September 11: Chronology of Terror”
Daily Mail, 8/19/2006, “Flight 93 ‘Was Shot Down’ Claims Book,” by Rowland Morgan
FAA, 8/12/2002, “Fact Sheet: Chronology of Events on September 11, 2001 (August 2002)”
New York Observer, 2/16/2004, “Stewardess ID’d Hijackers Early, Transcripts Show”
New York Times, 9/13/2001, “AFTER THE ATTACKS: UNITED FLIGHT 93; On Doomed Flight, Passengers Vow to Perish Fighting”
New York Times, 10/16/2001, “‘We Have Some Plane,’ Hijacker Told Controller”
Philadelphia Daily News, 9/16/2002, “Three-Minute Discrepancy in Tape; Cockpit Voice Recording Ends Before Flight 93's Official Time of Impact”
Rowland Morgan, 2006, “Flight 93: What Really Happened On The Heroic 9/11 ‘Let’s Roll’ Flight”
San Francisco Chronicle, 12/9/2002, “H-Bomb Sensor Yield New Benefits/Cold War-Era Instruments Useful in ‘Forensic Seismology’”
Washington Post, 9/12/2001, “Timeline in Terrorist Attacks of Sept 11, 2001”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pg. 30, 461-462 Footnote 168 

(2) Sources:
Associated Press, 9/11/2001, “Hijacked Passenger Called 911 on Cell Phone”
Boston Globe, 9/12/2001, “Frantic 911 Call Preceded Crash Outside Pittsburgh”
Daily Mail, 8/19/2006, “Flight 93 ‘Was Shot Down’ Claims Book,” by Rowland Morgan
Independent, 8/13/2002, “Unanswered Questions: The Mystery of Flight 93”
Newseum (Washington D.C. based journalism-themed nonprofit organization), 7/16/2002, “Running Toward Danger: Stories Behind the Breaking News of 9/11” (forward by Tom Brokaw)
Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/2001, “We Know It Crashed, But Not Why: FBI is Silent, Fueling ‘Shot Down’ Rumors”
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/12/2001, “Outside Tine Shanksville, A Fourth Deadly Stroke”
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 9/12/2001, “Homes, Neighbors Rattled by Crash”
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 9/12/2001, “Scene of Utter Destruction”
Washington Post, 5/12/2002, “Hallowed Ground” 

(3) Sources:
CNN, 9/13/2001, “‘Black Box’ from Pennsylvania Crash Found”
Daily Mail, 8/19/2006, “Flight 93 ‘Was Shot Down’ Claims Book,” by Rowland Morgan
Independent, 8/13/2002, “Unanswered Questions: The Mystery of Flight 93”
Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/2001, “We Know It Crashed, But Not Why: FBI is Silent, Fueling ‘Shot Down’ Rumors”
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/13/2001, “Investigators Locate ‘Black Box’ from Flight 93: Widen Search Area in Somerset Crash”
Pittsburg Post-Gazette, 9/14/2001, “Flight Data Recorder May Hold Clues to Suicide Flight”
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 9/14/2001, “Crash Debris Found 8 Miles Away”
Reuters, 9/13/2001, “FBI Does Not Rule Out Shootdown” 

(4) Sources:
Boston Globe, 9/12/2001, “Frantic 911 Call Preceded Crash Outside Pittsburgh”
Daily Mail, 8/19/2006, “Flight 93 ‘Was Shot Down’ Claims Book,” by Rowland Morgan
Mirror, 9/12/2002, “What Did Happen to Flight 93?”
New York Times, 9/11/2002, “FLIGHT 93; Refusing To Give In Without A Fight”
Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/2001, “We Know It Crashed, But Not Why: FBI is Silent, Fueling ‘Shot Down’ Rumors”
USA Today, 9/11/2019, “The Holy Ground of Flight 93, One of 9/11’s Enduring Mysteries”
Washington Post, 9/12/2001, “Jetliner Was Diverted Toward Washington Before Crash in Pa.” 

(5) Sources:
Daily Mail, 8/19/2006, “Flight 93 ‘Was Shot Down’ Claims Book,” by Rowland Morgan
Independent, 8/13/2002, “Unanswered Questions: The Mystery of Flight 93”
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 9/14/2001, “Crash Debris Found 8 Miles Away”
Reuters, 9/13/2001, “FBI Does Not Rule Out Shootdown” 

(6) Sources:
CNN, 4/13/2006, “On Tape, Passengers Heard Trying to Retake Cockpit; 9/11 Jury Relives Final Minutes of Hijacked United Flight 93”
Daily Mail, 8/19/2006, “Flight 93 ‘Was Shot Down’ Claims Book,” by Rowland Morgan
Independent, 8/13/2002, “Unanswered Questions: The Mystery of Flight 93”
Philadelphia Daily News, 9/16/2002, “Three-Minute Discrepancy in Tape; Cockpit Voice Recording Ends Before Flight 93's Official Time of Impact” 

(7) Sources:
Daily Mail, 8/19/2006, “Flight 93 ‘Was Shot Down’ Claims Book,” by Rowland Morgan
Independent, 8/13/2002, “Unanswered Questions: The Mystery of Flight 93”
Mirror, 9/12/2002, “What Did Happen to Flight 93?”
Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/2001, “We Know It Crashed, But Not Why: FBI is Silent, Fueling ‘Shot Down’ Rumors”
Pittsburg Post-Gazette, 9/16/2001, “2 Planes Had No Part In Crash of Flight 93”
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 9/14/2001, “Black Box Recovered at Shanksville Site” 

(8) Sources:
CNN/Associated Press, 9/11/2001, “Hijacked Passenger Called 911 on Cell Phone”
FBI, 9/12/2001, Glen Cramer Interview Notes
Independent, 8/13/2002, “Unanswered Questions: The Mystery of Flight 93”
Mirror, 9/12/2002, “What Did Happen to Flight 93?”
New York Times, 3/27/2002, “A NATION CHALLENGED: THE PENNSYLVANIA CRASH; Cockpit Tape Offers Few Answers but Points to Heroic Efforts”
Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/2001, “We Know It Crashed, But Not Why: FBI is Silent, Fueling ‘Shot Down’ Rumors”
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 4/21/2002, “‘It Hurt to listen’: A Wife Describes Pain of Hearing 911 Call from Flight 93”
Washington Post, 9/12/2001, “Jetliner Was Diverted Toward Washington Before Crash in Pa.” 

(9) Sources:
Independent, 8/13/2002, “Unanswered Questions: The Mystery of Flight 93”
New York Times Magazine, 11/19/2000, “Professor Scarry Has a Theory”
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 9/12/2001, “Homes, Neighbors Rattled by Crash”
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 9/14/2001, “Black Box Recovered at Shanksville Site” 

(10) Sources:
BBC News, 2/14/2007, “9/11 questions”
PR Newswire, 3/1/2006, “Experts Call for Release of 9/11 Evidence”
Washington Post, 2/28/2012, “Portions of 9/11 Victims’ Remains Taken to Landfill, Report Says” 

Summary of Chapter 20 (The First Two Flights)
(1) Sources:
ABC News, 9/11/2002, “9/11: Interviews by Peter Jennings” (transcript)
Associated Press, 8/12/2002, “FAA Controllers Detail Sept. 11 Events”
FAA Order JO 7110.65Y (“Air Traffic Control”), Section 1 (“General”), Paragraph 10-1-1 (“Emergency Determinations”)
FAA Order JO 7110.65Y (“Air Traffic Control”), Section 2 (“Emergency Assistance”), Paragraph 10-2-5 (“Emergency Situations”)
Guardian, 10/17/2001, “‘We Have Plane. Stay Quiet’ – Then Silence”
Guardian, 9/6/2003, “This War on Terrorism is Bogus”
MSNBC, 9/12/2001, “What Was Needed to Halt the Attacks”
New York Times, 10/16/2001, “‘We Have Some Planes,’ Hijacker Told Controller”
NORAD, 9/18/2001, “NORAD’s Response Times” press release
Richard Clarke, 2004, “Against All Enemies: Inside America’s War on Terror,” pg. 5
9/11 Commission, 2/6/2003, “Memorandum for the Record: FAA OPS Center Visit”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pg. 17-20 

(2) Sources:
FAA, 9/17/2001, “Summary of Air Traffic Hijack Events”
National Transportation Safety Board, 2/19/2002, “Flight Path Study – United Airlines Flight 175”
New York Times, 10/16/2001, “Transcript of United Airlines 175”
Newhouse News, 1/25/2002, “Amid Crisis Simulation, ‘We Were Suddenly No-Kidding Under Attack’”
NORAD, 8/18/2001, “NORAD’s Response Times” (press release)
Vanity Fair, 10/17/2006, “9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes”
Washington Post, 9/12/2001, “Timeline in Terrorist Attacks of Sept. 11, 2001” 

(3) Sources:
National Transportation Safety Board, 2/19/2002, “Flight Path Study – American Airlines Flight 11”
New York Observer, 6/21/2004, “9/11 Tapes Reveal Ground Personnel Muffled Attacks”
New York Times, 10/16/2001, “Transcript of United Airlines 175”
Rutgers University Law Review, 9/7/2011, “Full Audio Transcript” 

(4) Sources:
Boston Globe, 9/11/2005, “Two Pilots Revisit Their 9/11”
Cape Cod Times, 8/21/2002, “‘I Thought It Was the Start of World War III’”
Slate, 1/16/2002, “IGNORAD: The Military Screw-Up Nobody Talks About” 

(5) Sources:
ABC News, 9/11/2002, “9/11: Interviews by Peter Jennings” (transcript)
BBC, 9/1/2002, “Clear the Skies”
MSNBC, 9/23/2001, “Chain of Events at NORAD on September 11”
NORAD, 8/18/2001, “NORAD’s Response Times” (press release)
9/11 Commission, 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pg. 20, 476 (footnote 120) 

(6) Sources:
New York Times, 5/6/2004, “F.A.A. Official Scrapped Tape of 9/11 Controllers’ Statements”
New York Times, 5/7/2004, “Tape of Air Traffic Controllers Made on 9/11 Was Destroyed”
Washington Post, 5/6/2004, “FAA Managers Destroyed 9/11 Tape”
Washington Post, 5/7/2004, “Controllers’ 9/11 Tape Destroyed, Report Says”
U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Inspector General, 5/4/2004, “Destruction of Audiotape – Summary Findings and Recommendations” 

(7) Sources:
ABC News, 6/3/2005, “Hijack Code a Secret Signal of Distress”
Christian Science Monitor, 9/12/2001, “The Nation Reels”
CNN, 9/12/2001, “America Under Attack: How Could It Happen?”
FAA, 7/12/2001, “Order 7610.4J: Special Military Operations, Chapter 7. ESCORT OF HIJACKED AIRCRAFT”

(8) Sources:
Army Magazine, February 2002, “AMC: Accelerating the Pace of Transformation” 
Counterpunch, 12/19/2005, “9/11: Missing Black Boxes in World Trade Center Attacks Found by Firefighters, Analyzed by NTSB, Concealed by FBI”
New York State Emergency Management Office, 9/18/2001, “World Trade Center Plane Crash” (memorandum from Director Edward Jacoby to Governor George Pataki)
Philadelphia Daily News, 10/28/2004, “New Cover-up revealed? 9/11 Black Boxes Found”
United Press International, 10/28/2004, “UPI Hears…”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” Ch. 1 Footnote 76, pg. 456 

(9) Sources:
Associated Press, 9/16/2001, “Suspected Hijacker’s Passport Found”
ABC News, 9/16/2001, “No Signs of Survivors, Recovery Efforts Intensify; FBI Launches ‘Grid’ Search”
CNN, 9/18/2001, “Ashcroft Says More Attacks May Be Planned”
Guardian, 3/18/2002, “Uncle Sam’s Lucky Finds”
9/11 Commission, 8/21/2004, “9/11 and Terrorist Travel” (Staff Report) 

Summary of Chapter 21 (The Phone Calls)
(1) Sources:
Associated Press, 9/11/2001, “Experts, U.S. Suspect Osama bin Laden, Accused Architect of World’s Worst Terrorist Attacks”
Associated Press, 9/12/2001, “Passengers May Have Thwarted Hijackers”
BBC, 9/12/2001, “‘I know we’re all going to die’”
CBS News, 9/10/2003, “Two Years Later…” 
CNN, 9/12/2001, “Wife of Solicitor General Alerted Him of Hijacking from Plane”
FBI, 9/11/2001, Interview of Deena Burnett
FBI, 9/11/2001, Interview of Eunice Hanson
FBI, 9/11/2001, Interview of Julie Sweeney
FBI, 9/11/2001, Interview of Marion Britton contact [name redacted]
FBI, 9/11/2001, Interview of Peter Hanson
FBI, 9/11/2001, Interview of Theodore Olson (U.S. Solicitor General)
New York Times, 9/22/2001, “A NATION CHALLENGED: THE INVESTIGATION; Tape Reveals Wild Struggle On Flight 93”
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/22/2001, “13-Minute Call Bonds Her Forever with Hero”
Sacramento Bee, 9/11/2002, “Widow Tells of Poignant Last Calls”
Washington Post, 9/13/2001, “Bid to Thwart Hijackers May Have Led to Pa. Crash”
Washington Post, 9/16/2001, “September 11, 2001,” (reposted 9/20 with different title)
Washington Post, 9/20/2001, “Another workday becomes a surreal plane of terror” 

(2) Sources:
Associated Press, 9/12/2001, “Passengers May Have Thwarted Hijackers”
CBS News, 9/10/2003, “Two Years Later…” 
FBI, 9/11/2001, Interview of Deena Burnett
FBI, 9/11/2001, Interview of Julie Sweeney 

(3) Sources:
National Transportation Safety Board, 2/19/2002, “Flight Path Study – United Airlines Flight 93”
National Transportation Safety Board, 2/19/2002, “Flight Path Study – American Airlines Flight 77”
New York Times, 4/18/2008, “Era of In-Flight Mobile Phone Use Begins In Europe”
QUALCOMM, 7/15/2004, “American Airlines and QUALCOMM Complete Test Flight to Evaluate In-Cabin Mobile Phone Use” (Press Release)
San Diego Metropolitan, October 2001, interview with Marco Thompson, President of the San Diego Telecom Council
San Francisco Chronicle, 12/15/2004, “Can You Hear Me On A 747? / FCC Set To Consider In-Flight Cell Phones”
Washington Post, 12/9/2004, “Cell Phones In Flight Considered” 
9/11 Commission, 4/26/2004, U.S. Department of Justice response “to the Commission’s Document Request No. 14 to the Department, which requested documents that describe cell phone and airphone calls placed by passengers and crew aboard American Airlines Flight No. 11, American Airlines Flight No. 11, United Airlines Flight No. 175, and United Airlines Flight No. 93 on September 11, 2001.”
9/11 Commission, 5/13/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Department of Justice Briefing on Cell and Phone Calls from UA Flight 93”
9/11 Commission, 5/20/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Department of Justice Briefing on Cell and Phone Calls from AA Flight 77”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 11-12, 29 

(4) Sources:
FBI, 2006, “United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui, Exhibit Number P200055”
PR Newswire, 5/16/2013, “The 9/11 Phone Calls: Disturbing Irregularities Uncovered in the Calls that Flashed around the World"
9/11 Commission, 4/26/2004, U.S. Department of Justice response “to the Commission’s Document Request No. 14 to the Department, which requested documents that describe cell phone and airphone calls placed by passengers and crew aboard American Airlines Flight No. 11, American Airlines Flight No. 11, United Airlines Flight No. 175, and United Airlines Flight No. 93 on September 11, 2001.”
9/11 Commission, 5/13/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Department of Justice Briefing on Cell and Phone Calls from UA Flight 93”
9/11 Commission, 5/20/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Department of Justice Briefing on Cell and Phone Calls from AA Flight 77”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pg. 12, 454-456 (Footnotes 48, 49, 58, 80)
9/11 Commission, 8/24/2004, untitled staff report, “Part 1: ‘We Have Some Planes’: The Four Flights – a Chronology,” pg. 45 

(5) Sources:
Consensus 9/11 Panel Website, “Point PC-2: The Reported Phone Calls from Barbara Olson”
CNN, 9/12/2001, “Wife of Solicitor General Alerted Him of Hijacking from Plane”
9/11 Commission, 6/16/2004, “Staff Statement No. 16: Outline of the 9/11 Plot”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 9, 455 (Footnotes 57, 58) 

(6) Sources:
Boeing Corporation, 1/28/2001, “757 Aircraft Maintenance Manual (757 AMM)”
Consensus 9/11 Panel Website, “Point PC-2: The Reported Phone Calls from Barbara Olson”
CNN, 9/12/2001, “Wife of Solicitor General Alerted Him of Hijacking from Plane”
CNN’s Larry King Live, 9/14/2001, “America’s New War: Recovering from Tragedy” (Interview with Ted Olsen)
CNN, 9/10/2002, “On September 11, Final Words of Love”
FBI, 9/11/2001, Interview of Theodore Olson (U.S. Solicitor General)
FBI, 2006, “United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui, Exhibit Number P200055”
Fox News’ Hannity & Colmes, 9/14/2001, Interview with Ted Olsen
PR Newswire, 5/16/2013, “The 9/11 Phone Calls: Disturbing Irregularities Uncovered in the Calls that Flashed around the World”
Telegraph, 3/5/2002, “She Asked Me How to Stop the Plane” 
9/11 Commission, 5/20/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Department of Justice Briefing on Cell and Phone Calls from AA Flight 77” 

(7) Sources:
Daily Mail, 8/19/2006, “Flight 93 ‘Was Shot Down’ Claims Book”
FBI, 2006, “United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui, Exhibit Number P200055”
Lisa Beamer and Ken Abraham, 2002, “Let’s Roll: Ordinary People, Extraordinary Courage,” pgs. 211, 217
Lisa Jefferson and Felicia Middlebrooks, July 2006, “Called,” pgs. 33, 36, 47-48
PR Newswire, 5/16/2013, “The 9/11 Phone Calls: Disturbing Irregularities Uncovered in the Calls that Flashed around the World”
Telegraph, 10/21/2001, “The Extraordinary Last Calls of Flight UA93”
Time, 11/9/2001, “Bush: ‘My Fellow Americans, Let’s Roll’”
9/11 Commission, 9/11/2001, FBI Interview of Lisa Jefferson
9/11 Commission, 9/29/2001, FBI Document (heading is redacted); states: “Lead Control Number NK 5381… Todd Beamer… On September 11, 2001 the below-listed calls were made on cellular telephone (908) 202-4940.”
9/11 Commission, 5/13/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Department of Justice Briefing on Cell and Phone Calls from UA Flight 93”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 11, 14, 456 (Footnotes 70-71) 

(8) Sources:
CNN, 4/13/2006, “On Tape, Passengers Heard Trying to Retake Cockpit”
Daily Mail, 8/19/2006, “Flight 93 ‘Was Shot Down’ Claims Book”
Guardian, 2/18/2008, “Imagined Valour”
Independent, 8/13/2002, “Unanswered Questions: The Mystery of Flight 93”
New York Times, 9/22/2001, “A NATION CHALLENGED: THE INVESTIGATION; Tape Reveals Wild Struggle On Flight 93”
New York Times, 9/9/2011, “Newly Published Audio Provides Real-Time View of 9/11 Attacks”
Telegraph, 10/21/2001, “The Extraordinary Last Calls of Flight UA93” 

Summary of Chapter 22 (The Drills)
(1) Sources:
Barbara Honegger, 9/6/2006, “THE PENTAGON ATTACK PAPERS; Seven Hours in September: The Clock that Broke the Lie”
C-SPAN, 3/10/2005, “Fiscal Year 2006 Defense Budget Hearing,” (Transcript of Representative Cynthia McKinney’s Exchange with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Richard Myers)
Consensus 9/11 Website, “Point ME-2: The Claim that the Military Exercises Did Not Delay the Response to the 9/11 Attacks”
Vanity Fair, 10/17/2006, “9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes”
9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004, Public Hearing Transcript: NORAD Commander General Eberhart and Acting Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Myers Testimonies
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pg. 26-27, 34, 458 (Footnote 116)
9/11 Commission, undated, “NORAD EXERCISES Hijack Summary” spreadsheet (National Archives website, 9/11 Commission Series, Team 8 Files) 

(2) Sources:
BBC 5 Drive Radio Program, 7/7/2005, Interview with Visor Consultants Managing Director Peter Power
BBC News, 5/2/2007, “Blair Rejects 7/7 Inquiry Calls”
BBC, 6/25/2009, “British Man Details Torture Claim”
CNN, 11/6/2013, “July 7 2005 London Bombings Fast Facts”
Daily Mail, 5/28/2009, “MI5 Hit by New Claim of Torture Collusion as Briton to Sue Home Secretary Over ‘Beatings’”
Daily Mail, 6/25/2009, “‘If I Didn't Confess to 7/7 Bombings MI5 Officers Would Rape My Wife,’ Claims Torture Victim – 7/7 Bombings”
Financial Times, July 2005, “Blair Rejects Calls for Probe Into Bombings”
Guardian, 7/11/2005, “Terror Cell ‘Capable of Further Attacks’”
Guardian, 6/25/2009, “Briton Claims He Was Tortured As 7/7 ‘Mastermind’”
NBC, 7/7/2005, “Islamic group Claims London Attack”
Sunday Times (London), 7/12/2005, “Terrorist Gang ‘Used Military Explosives’” 

(3) Sources:
National Security Archive, “The Able Archer 83 Sourcebook”
National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 533, 10/24/2015, “The 1983 War Scare Declassified and For Real”
Slate, 4/13/2017, “The Week the World Almost Ended” 

Summary of Chapter 23 (General Eberhart)
Sources:
Associated Press, 8/14/2002, “Scrambling to Prevent Another 9/11”
Calgary Herald, 10/13/2001, “NORAD on Heightened Alert: Role of Air Defense Agency Rapidly Transformed in Wake of Sept. 11 Terrorist Attacks”
Denver Post, 7/27/2006, “Military to Put Cheyenne Mountain on Standby” 
Guardian, 9/6/2003, “This War on Terrorism is Bogus”
U.S. Congress, 10/25/2001, “Senate Armed Services Committee Holds Hearing on Role of Defense Department in Homeland Security” (transcript)
Washington Post, 7/29/2006, “Military to Idle NORAD Compound”
9/11 Commission, 3/1/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with NORAD Commander General Eberhart”
9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004, Public Hearing Transcript: General Eberhart Testimony
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” Ch. 1 Footnote 228, pg. 465 

Summary of Chapter 24 (Andrews Air Base)
Sources:
Washington Post, 4/8/2002, “Flights of Vigilance Over the Capital”
9/11 Commission, 7/28/2003, “USSS Statements and Interview Reports” Garabito Statement and Interview Notes
9/11 Commission, 8/28/2003, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with David Wherley”
9/11 Commission, 3/8/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with Major John Daniel Caine”
9/11 Commission, 3/30/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with Terry Van Steenbergen”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pgs. 44 

Summary of Chapter 25 (President Bush)
(1) Sources:
CNN, 9/11/2006, “The Situation Room,” (transcript)
MSNBC, 9/11/2002, “Andrew Card: 9/11 Interview”
MSNBC, 9/11/2002, “Dr. Condoleezza Rice: 9/11 Interview”
MSNBC, 9/11/2002, “Karen Hughes: 9/11 Interview”
MSNBC, 9/11/2002, “Karl Rove: 9/11 Interview”
Saint Petersburg Times (now Tampa Bay Times), 7/4/2004, “Of Fact, Fiction: Bush on 9/11”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pg. 35 

(2) Sources:
Boston Herald, 10/22/2002, “What Did Bush See and When Did He See It?”
Office of the Press Secretary, 12/4/2001, Remarks by the President in Town Hall Meeting, Orange County Convention Center Orlando, Florida; “President Meets with Displaced Workers in Town Hall Meeting”
Office of the Press Secretary, 1/5/2002, Remarks by the President in Town Hall Meeting with Citizens of Ontario, Ontario Convention Center, Ontario, California; “President Holds Town Hall Forum on Economy in California”
Saint Petersburg Times (now Tampa Bay Times), 7/4/2004, “Of Fact, Fiction: Bush on 9/11”
Wall Street Journal, 3/22/2004, “Government Accounts of 9/11 Reveal Gaps, Inconsistencies”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pg. 17, 38-39 

(3) Sources:
Daily Mail, 9/8/2002, “The Day the President Went Missing”
George Bush, 2010, “Decision Points” pg. 127
James Bamford, 2002, “Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency” pg. 633
MSNBC (Phil Donahue Show), 8/13/2002, “911 Debate Opened Wide On Donahue,” interview with Kristen Breitweiser
Politico Magazine, 9/9/2016, “We’re the Only Plane in the Sky”
Saint Petersburg Times (now Tampa Bay Times), 7/4/2004, “Of Fact, Fiction: Bush on 9/11”
WFLA-TV (NBC News affiliate), 9/11/2013, “Sarasota County Played a Pivotal Role in 9/11.”
9/11 Commission, July 2004, “9/11 Commission Report,” pg. 39-41 

Summary of Chapter 26 (Summary of Matrices)

(1) Sources:

1) 9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003, Public Hearing (Transcript: Commissioner Ben-Veniste reading FAA document entitled, “FAA Communications with NORAD on September 11th, 2001,” prepared by FAA Administrator Jane Garvey, Mr. Asmus, Ms. Schuessler)
9/11 Commission, 10/21/2003, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with [FAA Administrator] Jane Garvey”

2)      9/11 Commission, 4/20/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with [FAA Deputy Administrator] Monte Belger” (including handwritten notes)
9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004, Public Hearing (Transcript: FAA Deputy Administrator Monte Belger Testimony)

3)      9/11 Commission, 5/7/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with [FAA Crisis Management Supervisor] Michael Weikert”

4)      9/11 Commission, 5/11/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with [FAA Federal Security Manager] Pete Falcone”

5)      9/11 Commission, 4/28/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with [FAA Emergency Operations Staff Manager] Dan Noel”

6)      9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003, Public Hearing (Transcript: Commissioner Ben-Veniste reading FAA document entitled, “FAA Communications with NORAD on September 11th, 2001,” prepared by FAA Administrator Jane Garvey, Mr. Asmus, Ms. Schuessler)

7)      9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003, Public Hearing (Transcript: Commissioner Ben-Veniste reading FAA document entitled, “FAA Communications with NORAD on September 11th, 2001,” prepared by FAA Administrator Jane Garvey, Mr. Asmus, Ms. Schuessler)

8)      9/11 Commission, 3/30/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with Terry Van Steenbergen”

9)      FAA, 9/11/2001, “Chronology ADA-30, Sept. 11, 2001.”

10)   FAA, 8/12/2002, “Fact Sheet: Chronology of Events on September 11, 2001 (August 2002)”

11)   NORAD, 9/18/2001, “NORAD’S Response Times, Sept. 11, 2001” (press release)

12)   U.S. Congress, 10/25/2001, “Senate Armed Services Committee Holds Hearing on Role of Defense Department in Homeland Security” (Transcript: NORAD Commander Eberhart Testimony)
9/11 Commission, 3/1/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview with NORAD Commander General Eberhart”
9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004, Public Hearing (Transcript: NORAD Commander Eberhart Testimony)

13)   9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003, Public Hearing (Transcript: Colonel William Scott Testimony)

14)   9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003, Public Hearing (Transcript: Major General Craig McKinley Testimony)

15)   9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003, Public Hearing (Transcript: Major General Larry Arnold Testimony)
9/11 Commission, 2/3/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview of Major General Larry Arnold”
9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004, Public Hearing (Transcript: Major General Larry Arnold Testimony)

16)   Leslie Filson, 2003, “Air War Over America: Sept. 11 Alters Face of Air Defense Mission,” pgs. 59, 63, 68, 71-73, published by Tyndall Air Force Base Public Affairs Office

17)   9/11 Commission, 1/23/2004, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview of NEADS Commander Colonel Robert Marr”
ABC News, 9/11/2002, “9/11: Interviews by Peter Jennings” (Interview of NEADS Commander Colonel Marr)
Newhouse News Service, 3/31/2005, “Commander of 9/11 Air Defenses Retires”

18)   9/11 Commission, 10/27/2003, “Memorandum for the Record: Interview of Lt. Jeremy Powell”

19)   9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003, Public Hearing (Transcript: Testimony of Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta)
ABC News, 9/11/2002, “9/11: Interviews by Peter Jennings” (Interview of Transportation Secretary Mineta)
MSNBC, 9/11/2002, “Norman Mineta 9/11 Interview” by Robert Hager

20)   Cornell University, Spring 2006 Alumni Newsletter, “President’s Council of Cornell Women: Spotlight On: [Deputy Director of the Secret Service] Barbara Riggs”

21)   New York Times, 9/16/2001, “Text of Vice President Cheney's Remarks on ‘Meet the Press’”

22)   9/11 Commission, 9/28/2003, “USSS Statement and Interview Reports” (contains Nelson Garabito’s statement and interview notes)

23)   Richard Clarke, March 2004, “Against All Enemies: Inside America’s War on Terror,” (pgs. 1-8)
ABC News, 11/29/2003, “Cheney Wields Unprecedented V.P. Power” (includes excerpts of Richard Clarke interview by Ted Koppel)

24)   NBC News, 9/11/2002, “Karl Rove: 9/11 Interview” with Campbell Brown

25)   CBS’ 60 Minutes II, 8/29/2002, “Interview with Ashley Estes”

26)   ABC News, 9/14/2002, “Moment of Crisis (Part 2): Sept. 11 Scramble,” quoting White House Photographer David Bohrer

27)   ABC News, 9/11/2002, “9/11: Interviews by Peter Jennings” (Interview of Army Brigadier General Montague Winfield)

28)   General Richard Myers, 2009, “Eyes on the Horizon: Serving on the Front Lines of National Security,” pgs. 151-152

29)   General Hugh Shelton, 2009, “Without Hesitation: The Odyssey of an American Warrior,” pgs. 432-33

30)   Drs. Alfred Goldberg and Rebecca Cameron, 4/19/2001, “Pentagon Attack Interview with Paul Wolfowitz” (transcript)
PBS News, 9/14/2001, “Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz Interview with PBS NewsHour”
New York Times, 9/15/2001, “AFTER THE ATTACKS: SKY RULES; Pentagon Tracked Deadly Jet But Found No Way to Stop It”

31)   Naval Post Graduate School Newsletter, Volume 1, Issue 10, September 2004, “Special Operations Policy Expert and Veteran Robert Andrews Gives Distinguished Visiting Guest Lectures at NPS” 

(2) Sources:

1. ABC News, 9/11/2002, “9/11: Interviews by Peter Jennings”

2. Associated Press, 9/13/2001, “Passengers May Have Thwarted Hijackers”

3. CBS News, 9/12/2001, “Feds Would Have Shot Down Pa. Jet”

4. CNN, 9/4/2002, “‘The Pentagon Goes to War’: National Military Command Center”

5. New York Times, 9/13/2001, “Inside the Bunker”

6. New York Times, 9/15/2001, “AFTER THE ATTACKS: SKY RULES; Pentagon Tracked Deadly Jet But Found No Way to Stop It”

7. Newhouse News, 1/25/2002, “Amid Crisis Simulation, ‘We Were Suddenly No-Kidding Under Attack’”

8. Newsday, 9/23/2001, “Air Attack on Pentagon Indicates Weaknesses”

9. Telegraph, 12/16/2001, “Revealed: What Really Went on During Bush’s ‘Missing Hours’”

10. U.S. News and World Report, 8/31/2003, “Pieces of the Puzzle – A Top-Secret Conference Call on September 11 Could Shed New Light on the Terrorist Attacks”

11. Washington Post, 9/12/2001, “Timeline in Terrorist Attacks of Sept. 11, 2001”

12. Washington Post, 1/27/2002, “America's Chaotic Road to War”