Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (25224)	7/13/2003 10:54:46 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 25898

You don't seem to be coming up with anything conclusive about why NORAD stood down on 9/11. Stood down? They were slow to respond, IMO.. They should have scrambled fighters immediately, even if they didn't know the eventual destination of the planes. But since most of these planes were destined for the west coast, why scramble planes from the east coast to intercept them? Here's NORAD's testimony from two months ago. They don't claim to have "stood down".. And nothing in the record indicates they "stood down". And they certainly found themselves facing increasing time delays in receiving reports from FAA. Without those reports, they didn't know which aircraft were potential targets for intercept, and which were not. unansweredquestions.net And I know the sonic boom I heard while I was watching the smoke rise from the Pentagon literally shook the entire neighborhood like an earthquake.. It was easily the loudest sonic boom I've ever heard, meaning that pilot was definitely at a speed well above Mach 1+ Hawk