| Welcome! You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! |
| Scatana; The contradictions of NORADboss Eberhart | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 8 2008, 04:14 PM (1,855 Views) | |
| Woody Box | Jul 8 2008, 04:14 PM Post #1 |
|
SCATANA (Security Control of Air Traffic and Air Navigation Aids) is an emergency plan that gives the military basic control over civilian air traffic: Under the provisions of the SCATANA Plan, the military will direct the action to be taken-in regard to landing, grounding, diversion, or dispersal of aircraft and the control of air navigation aids in the defense of the U.S. during emergency conditions. http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/AIM/Chap5/aim0506.html SCATANA was - no surprise - implemented on 9/11, by General Ralph Eberhart. The surprise comes when you try to find out when it was implemented. According to Aviation Week & Space Technology (June 3, 2002) it triggered the FAA national ground stop from 9:45: Gen. Ralph E. Eberhart, Norad commander-in-chief, was in the Cheyenne Mountain battle center by then. He and his staff suggested, via an open command link, implementing a limited version of Scatana--a federal plan designed to take emergency control of all domestic air traffic and navigation aids. Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta immediately concurred and gave the order to get all aircraft on the ground as soon as possible. That action probably saved many lives, but without unnecessary, paralyzing restrictions of a full Scatana order. Mineta's decision--and the military recommendation that triggered it--may have been prompted by a few airline pilots reporting terrorists on the radio, talking about other hijacked aircraft. American Flight 77 had hit the Pentagon, and United Flight 93 was being tracked, heading for Chicago or Cleveland, then Washington, prompting the F-16s' scramble. http://tinyurl.com/5fzb89 According to Leslie Filson's book "Air War over America", SCATANA was ordered before the crash of Flight 93, in accordance to the AW&ST article: The decison was made during the air threat conference call and was backed by Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta. A pilot recalls the SCATANA order coming at about 9:30, roughly matching the first two sources. About 6:30AM PST the surprise command came over the radio. “SCATANA.” Later, Dan’s co-pilot, who had never heard the phrase, said Dan’s face turned ashen. In Dan’s military flight days, he learned all about the priority code word SCATANA. In extreme emergencies, the FAA takes control - a Security Control of Air Traffic and Navigation Aids. It is to aviation what CODE BLUE is to hospital medicine. It’s the ultimate emergency alert. While Dan learned the definitions for the exams and the certifications, he never thought he would hear the term utilized for any other purpose than an emergency drill. This was no drill. SCATANA. It meant that the United States was under attack, that all navigational systems fell under the immediate and complete control of the federal government and that every domestic aircraft should immediately find the nearest runway and set down their aircraft without delay. http://www.kenkemp.com/leaderfocus/LFNOV18_01.htm BUT NOW. When Eberhart was questioned by the 9/11 Commission, he's asked if SCATANA was ordered at 11:00 (it is not clear where Ms. Gorelick got this information from), and, while not explicitly confirming the time, tries to explain the two hour gap and so implicitly confirms it: MS. GORELICK: I'm struck by two times. After the second World Trade Center was hit, and 9:03, I think everybody concluded we were under attack. And as I understand it, you have the authority to put in place something that I don't know what it stands for, called SCATANA which is essentially that you, military, take control of the skies from the civilians, FAA, and that you did that at around 11:00. And my question for you is why that gap? And, whose decision would that have been? GEN. EBERHART: SCATANA is a procedure that, as you say, allows us to take control of the airspace. It's a procedure that was designed, again, to counter the Soviet Union and their long-range bombers. It's a procedure that -- that if I had tried and -- and as the people approached me with "declare SCATANA" the problem was that we could not control the air space that day with the radars we had and all the aircraft that were airborne -- four to five thousand airplanes airborne. So, if I suddenly say, "We've got it, we will control the airspace," we would have had worse problems than we had that morning because I cannot provide traffic deconfliction like the FAA has. What mine is designed to do is we see a bomber coming from a long range, we tell everybody to get the aircraft down, safely, then nothing flies and we control the airspace. We are prepared to do that, but we're not prepared suddenly to take control of the airspace and say we have it, because now we're talking in terms of safety and security of air travel. We're talking about a bad situation getting worse. http://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/hearing12/9-11Commission_Hearing_2004-06-17.htm This late time is confirmed in the book "Touching History" by Lynn Spencer: North American Aerospace Defense Command Center, Cheyenne Mountain, Colorado, 11:30 a.m. The 3-foot-thick, 25-ton steel blast doors at Cheyenne Mountain have closed for the first time in history. Locked inside NORAD’s command center, Gen. Ralph “Ed” Eberhart has been participating in the National Military Command Center’s teleconference. His chief of air defense operations now wants to implement SCATANA, short for Security Control of Air Traffic and Navigation Aids. SCATANA is a plan that was developed in the 1960s to clear the skies in the event of a confirmed missile attack from the Soviet Union. The plan shuts down all the navigational aids in the country and closes the airspace so that bombers, missiles, airborne command posts, and support aircraft can operate unencumbered. http://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/911_The_Saga_of_the_Skies.html?c=y&page=2 So why did Eberhart change his version? Why did he fiddle with the embarassing 2 hour gap in front of the commission instead of simply stating what he said in 2002 - that SCATANA was issued before the FAA national ground stop? Personally, I believe the airliner pilot - that SCATANA and the FAA ground stop came at the same time (and were basically the same order). Eberhart must have had a very important reason to present a different version to the 9/11 Commission. What kind of reason could that have been? Edited by Woody Box, Jul 8 2008, 04:16 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Woody Box | Jul 10 2008, 06:10 AM Post #2 |
|
USA Today confirms that SCATANA was issued at the same time when the FAA ordered all aircrafts to come down ASAP; moreover, it identifies SCATANA with the FAA order: After the first two jets were hijacked and flown into the World Trade Center, FAA managers had directed all planes out of New York airspace. Next they had stopped takeoffs nationwide. Minutes after a third jet hit the Pentagon, they had ordered controllers nationwide to undertake the most massive effort in aviation history: clearing the skies. Now they face an unprecedented challenge. They must land as fast as possible almost 4,500 planes in or headed toward U.S. airspace. Their goal is to bring 350,000 passengers and crew safely to the ground. But the order carries with it another prospect. By ordering all jets to land, controllers may discover more planes that don't respond. Jets that are in the hands of terrorists. Jets the U.S. military might have to shoot down. No one has ever contemplated such a scenario. Not since the days of the Cold War have controllers even simulated landing the fleet. The plan then was called SCATANA, an acronym for "security control of air traffic and navigation aids." Its intent: to empty the skies and give control of the nation's airspace to the military in the event of an attack by the Soviet Union. http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2002-08-12-hijacker-daytwo_x.htm I'm absolutely sure that SCATANA was a key element in the false flag attack. Neither Ruppert, nor Tarpley, nor Griffin, nor Thompson nor anybody else seems to have paid any attention to it and recognized its relevance. Here's why I think it's so important: Imagine you are an Operation Northwoods plotter. It's 9:40 a.m. Three drones have fulfilled their respective missions (WTC 1 hit, WTC 2 hit, Pentagon pseudo-hit). The country is paralyzed by "shock and awe". Everything is going fine. The biggest problem you now have to cope with are the planes with the passengers - the passengers who allegedly died at the WTC/Pentagon, but in fact are still onboard other planes still in the air. How do you get rid of the passengers without alerting air traffic control? Answer: Take control of the airspace. Create confusion by ordering all planes to land at the nearest airport. And, most important: Seize the airport towers and long-range ATC facilities (ARTCC) where you're going to let the planes with the passengers land, i.e replace the controllers by people that are under your control. And guess what? Exactly that happened on 9/11. SCATANA was ordered at about 9:40. CLEVELAND CENTER was evacuated at about 9:45. BOSTON CENTER was evacuated at about 9:45. PITTSBURGH AIRPORT TOWER was evacuated at about 9:49. JOHNSTOWN AIRPORT TOWER was evacuated at about 9:55. CLEVELAND AIRPORT TOWER "went to a minimum staffing level" at about 10:10. The circumstances of these evacuations - especially Cleveland Center - are pretty obscure. My friend John Doe II has gathered evidence here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x26505 He asks: Cleveland, Pittsburgh and Johnstown Towers are evacuated. Why? My answer: SCATANA. |
![]() |
|
| JackD | Jul 11 2008, 01:50 AM Post #3 |
|
... so, Woody, if I folllow you... you postulate that the 9/11/01 air attack is loosely based on the Operation Northwoods model, where a drone aircraft is involved, as a substitute for the 'real' flight with passengers on it. there are many ways these subsitute planes could have come into airspace to be drones, but what your point is that after the drones crashed, the "real" flights AA11, UA175, UA93 (or whatever they had officially converted to) with possibly real passengers on them are now still flying. which would make for awkward story if they landed and out walked Chuck Burlingame, John Ogonowski etc. so the SCATANA order is not just the sanitizing of airspace, but also a seizure of command and control of FAA navigation aids and towers. It seems complicated to do so (close ccertain towers, replace with your people) but it does appear that the control towers near the UA93 flight path, Cleveland Pittsburgh Johnstown were evacuated. That would mean that there are fewer, or perhaps none of the wrong "eyes" watching the planes or helping get them down, who might give stories that contradict official line, later. I can't help but be reminded of the situation at the NRO, where the spy satellite coordination building was evacuated at about 9:00am (?) on 9/11/01 -- for a reason that doesnt really make sense--- john fulton says they were practicing a drill evacuation of the chantilly, VA NRO facility, simulating a offcourse Dulles plane having hit the NRO building. When they discovered/heard about the real plane attacks, they "sent home all non essential personnel" there is a similar theme of getting rid of lots of eyeballs, if you will, many people who might "see" via satellite pass the entire North American airspace, including planes, doing odd things. the seizure of key surveillance and communication structures by an "emergency order" such as SCATANA or the clearing of the NRO facility means that perhaps only certain crews were able to take control. The fact that so much of NRO activiity (belongs to NSA and CIA and DoD) is contracted to private companies liek BoozAllen means that it is even harder to figure out who was in control doing what. Look to see if there are any private company contractors who manage aspects of FAA emergency protocols such as SCATANA ... having a private company as the command-control virtually eliminates potential oversight or investigation. ditto control of places like the NASA Glenn Hangar... |
![]() |
|
| Woody Box | Jul 11 2008, 02:55 PM Post #4 |
|
Yeah, Jack, you follow me right, and thanks for finding better words than I. I was probably a bit too scant with explaining what I have in mind. I detected the SCATANA stuff two hours before I opened this thread, so this is a shot out of the hip, if you like. But I'm sure it has massive implications, and I will certainly publish something soon. What's most suspicious is that Eberhart didn't discount the 11:00 time when asked by Gorelick (where did she get this time from? NORAD, where else?). Why? This makes me thinking. If SCATANA was ordered at 11:00, it was only a redundant formality, because most planes were grounded anyway, and the remaining ones were on their way to the next airport. If however SCATANA was ordered at 9:40 - and this is as matters stand - the military basically seized control over the FAA. So Eberhart obviously wants to downplay the relevance of SCATANA, leading me to the conclusion that it was very relevant. The evacuation times of the FAA centers simply leap to the eye. Cleveland Center was evacuated at 9:45 for murky reasons - an obscure small plane, UA 93, Delta 1989, an anonymous threat - there are dozens of versions. Boston Center was at the very same time evacuated, too - for a similar reason. Coincidence? I know from a controller of Oberlin (Cleveland Center) - indirectly, via another person - that the controller crew was substituted by some guys from Cleveland they didn't know. Pittsburgh Airport was evacuated at 9:49, but at 9:59, controllers returned already. Was it the same crew that returned? I bet it wasn't. I believe this so-called evacuations were in fact substitutions. |
![]() |
|
| JackD | Jul 11 2008, 06:59 PM Post #5 |
|
You noted that Jamie Gorelick named 11:00am as the time of the airspace sanitization or SCATANA order, which Eberhart, as NORAD chief was in charge of. was the 11am time simply in error? why did Eberhart not correct her if he knew SCATANA was issued earlier? is this a simple goof? I doubt it. The commissioners, time and time again, direct the questions, even providing answers, which creates the SHOW of an inquiry, while in truth formalizing things that are wrong or deceptive. I dont know if Gorelick got her (inaccurate) info from NORAD or she created it on her own -- either way, Gorelick is no fool -- these aren't mistakes -- the WHOLE POINT of the commission was to enshrine the official story, and hide all the bodies. Gorelick is a masterwork and on boards of many groups http://www.muckety.com/Jamie-S-Gorelick/2302.muckety For Eberhart's role as NORAD chief -- if we can believe the official story, his NORAD failed, and failed, and failed again. what happened to Eberhart? He was promoted to head of NORTHCOM. so it appears he actually 'succeeded' not failed, in whatever his mission was. and if part of his mission was to cover-up what happened, and the significance of NORAD actions or non-actions, Jamie Gorelick's line of questioning about the SCATANA events is a nice two-person dance that hides everything adequately. I looked over the 2004 forum back-forth with JohnDoe2 on DU. if you draw a map of US with the location of the 'evacuated or substituted' airports (Boston, Ptt Johnstown Cleveland...) Reagan airport, too -- or other places where there was "unusual" activity, and superimpose the alleged flight paths of UA93, or DAL1989, you end up with an interesting coincidence... the evacuated/substituted ATC areas are very close to the flight paths of these curious flights. if the ATC were subsituted with other men, this is highly suspicious. that implies that the evacuation was NOT for the ATC personal safety (which could be justified, i suppose, but it would come at cost of being unable to help land 1000s of planes in emergency) -- but rather, some other purpose. what other purpose would there be? This would be like substituting the Bank security guards and police, DURING the actual bank robbery. a bit suspicious. why not leave the qualified ATC and tower control personnel there? is there usually some military A-team of control experts ready to subsitute at moment's notice, and help direct emergency air traffic? |
![]() |
|
| Woody Box | Jul 19 2008, 03:18 PM Post #6 |
|
Here's an interesting account from Colin Scoggins (Boston Center) aka cheap shot: We thought everybody had left, but there were some guys in the bottom of the building who never heard the speaker system to evacuate. One of them came up stairs and boy was he surprised that no one was there. We all came back in about 20 minutes. The plane that was reported to be aimed at us was 140 Nm southeast of us a Coast Guard aircraft that originally was unidentiified, but that we had identified 10 minutes before we evacuated. There was so much more stuff going on than most people know. Nothing that I precieve as a CT item, but I'm sure others could interpret it the other way. To this day I have no idea what happened with the bomb threats. I don't know if any of them were uncovered. http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=85286&page=7 Hmmm? Some cloth-eared guys in the bottom of the building who didn't evacuate? One of them came up into the control room??? So the crew was not evacuated, but substituted for 20 minutes????? |
![]() |
|
| JackD | Jul 19 2008, 07:16 PM Post #7 |
|
from CheapShot..
What tapes were the FBI grabbing? Why did the Boston Center ATC (actually located in Nashua, NH) evacuate? Was it due to an unidentified aircraft which was allegedly targeting the Center (in Nashua) from the southeast, and how could they be so sure? curiously, Martha's Vineyard ATC were also evacuated, due to threat from white jet flying at 2000 ft... CheapShot's recollection (in 2007) of the timing of the Boston Center evacuation.
What strikes me as odd is that a plane on a heading toward Nashua NH, out of the southeast, supposedly, could be taken seriously enough as a threat to evacuate a key air traffic control center, on a day when 1000's of planes needed fulltime help being landed at nearest airport, rerouted. this wasnt just evacuating any public building , it is the key nerve center for an entire north east sector. who was still inside, assisting with the air threat emergency? why was Scoggins, as the military liason with the FAA, also evacuated? You would think the military would really, really want to have all hands on deck at 9:40am, at 45' into the realization that this was a major attack on US. there is confusion over the idea of bomb threat vs air threat, but either way, an interesting theme emerges of key nodes and key air traffic control centers being evacuated during the 9/11 crisis. Why was either NO ONE AT ALL, or a substitute special team, in charge of air security during a short window on 9/11/01 at so many airports and ARTCC? Who were the "replacements?" |
![]() |
|
| JackD | Jul 20 2008, 02:32 PM Post #8 |
|
The commander of the Continental United States NORAD Region, Maj. Gen. Larry Arnold, may shed some light on the TIMING of SCATANA -- saying the national ground stop happened "shortly before" -- implying that the Dept of Defense takeover of domestic airspace happened soon there after. IF groundstop = 9:25 or 9:30am at latest, then was SCATANA issued at 9:40, or 9:45am approximately, by estimate>? http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives/2002/articles/jan_02/defense/ Was the 1st Air Force involved in the orders to ground all aircraft? "We are all trying to determine the sequence of events. First, the NORAD commander issued a SCATANA order, or security control of air traffic and navigation aids, which gave him the authority to ground commercial air traffic. But I believe the FAA shut down all aircraft from coming into the United States shortly before the SCATANA order was given. The FAA also stopped all air traffic from taking off. Aircraft already airborne were then diverted from large cities into secondary locations. Many airports in Canada had lots of diverted airplanes on their ramps. We have a photo taken over Halifax, Nova Scotia, that shows forty-one airliners sitting on an inactive runway with about 6,000 people waiting to be cleared to get off." - Arnold ---- This account tells us that aircraft were diverted to secondary locations, and Canada. The problem I have with SCATANA is that it would essentially turn off all navigational aids, so that Soviet bombers could not use them to pilot missions against us. I am not sure if SCATANA means necessarily all Nav Aids off, or just that all Nav Aids etc get transferred to Pentgon control. Eberhart backpedals in his 2nd account, and implies to 9/11 commission that he used an improvised, limited SCATANA that was more like an ESCAT, since "he didnt want a bad situation to go to worse" -- Moving into pure speculation territory, based on the small shreds of evidence laying about: To answer Woody's question, my guess about why Eberhart changed his version of the story is that ON THE DAY OF 9/11, Eberhart wants very much to hide deeper truths of that day, from the 9/11 commission, as well as control the story to leave all possible blame to FAA, which seems to be NORAD's tactic. What is Eberhart covering up? I think on 9/11/01 AM there were two main groups at odds with each other -- the "military 9/11 coup plotters and technicians" -- who were the inside-job team, and then a separate group at NORAD and FAA, etc, who were simply trying to do their absolute best to follow procedure and respond. T hen, after the fact, no matter who is the culprit and who is just 'following orders' -- I think you get a general cover-up going on, where all military officials concerned do the 'usual routine' of obfuscating timelines, giving contradictory information, lying when necessary, destroying evidence, so that the truth cannot come out, and a different 'controlled information' picture is given to Congress, the public. That's what the 9/11 commission became. Who was the "inside-job team?" I dont know. I don't know who was "in" on the "9/11 plot" on the inside, if Eberhart, Myers, or Arnold, or Marr had a witting role, BUT I do see a major failure at Myers & Eberhart & Winfield's seat (NMCC chair) -- none of these men seemed to do their jobs that day, with Winfield specifically putting a rookie in his chair from 8:30am to 10:30am, as if to say "i know what you are doing, and i dont want it to be on my watch, so get your dirty business done while Capt Leidig sits on for me" The picture that emerges to explain Eberhart's change is that he is fully aware that, behind the curtain of the information presented to us, there was a whole separate chain of events occuring, which we are not supposed to see. Something was quite wrong with military response, whether it was because they would not want to admit there was a war-game going on in which computer network attacks (CNA) by 'red team and rogue insider' -- disabled their communications systems. Perhaps more sinister -- Eberhart needed to cover for the fact that NORAD, meaning Pentagon, was in control of air traffic and landing planes -- meaning that they had an operational window to "direct, land & recover" certain specific planes which were elements of the 9/11 plot -- and then return air traffic control to FAA after they did the necessary plumbing fixes. ---------------------------- What else was happening that day behind the scenes? Strikes me odd that Cheyenne's SAC base would seal its blast doors -- for defense against errant hijacked jet?? Or was there a deeper worry about a coup within the entire Strategic Command? Certainly, with a simulated high level Global Guardian exercise which was ready to escalate into potential nuclear conflict, if needed, (see Global Guardian description) -- there was a whole different level of events happening behind the scenes we did not hear much about, Bush flying to StratCom bases Barksdale, then Offutt AFB. Perhaps my thinking is too conspiratorial, but my "take" on 9/11 is that events were a military operation, conducted by a faction from within the military, and that the 'cover story' of hijacked planes was necessary to give a public 'terror' face to the story. of course, since it was not really a spontaneous terrorist hijacking event, the planners & controllers have to necessarily fudge a lot of timelines, feign ignorance and confuson, and fog of war, etc to give cover to the story. Eberhart, by the way, claimed that during the attack he got in car and drove from Peterson AFB to Cheyenne SAC, 12 miles away, and lost his cell phone link to VP. Kinda fishy -- like Myers story that he was in Meeting with Cleland at Pentagon hit, but Richard Clarke sees him on teleconference at 9"15am in PEntagon. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Investigate 9/11 · Next Topic » |







2:07 PM Jul 11