The Strange Case of Ralph Eberhart

[spooked911]

http://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2010/06/actions-and-inactions-of-commander-in.html

General Ralph Eberhart was the commander in chief of NORAD--the military organization responsible for defending U.S. airspace--when the 9/11 attacks occurred. Considering that NORAD failed to intercept any of the four aircraft targeted in the attacks and successfully defend New York and Washington, one would reasonably expect Eberhart to have been somehow held to account. And yet that did not happen.

In fact, nine years on, we still know very little about what Eberhart did while the 9/11 attacks were taking place. From what we do know, his actions seem far from reassuring. Eberhart at least gave the impression of having an unclear picture of what was going on. Accounts of his actions reveal no decisive attempts to respond to the attacks. He appears to have been particularly slow to order a plan that would give the military control of U.S. airspace and get all aircraft grounded. Furthermore, in the middle of the attacks, he decided to drive from his office at Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado, to NORAD's operations center in Cheyenne Mountain--a journey that apparently put him out of the loop for about an hour.
---------

Particularly odd:
Eberhart updated (General Richard) Myers on the crisis, telling him the two WTC towers had been hit and there were "several hijack codes in the system." This, according to Myers, meant "that the transponders in the aircraft talking to the ground, and they're saying ... we're being hijacked." <4> However, if Myers's recollection is correct, Eberhart was apparently either mistaken or deliberately giving false information: None of the pilots of the four flights targeted that morning keyed the code that would indicate a hijacking into their plane's transponder. <5> There should have been no "hijack codes in the system" at that time.

[SDuderstadt]

1. All you've demonstrated is that...

you have no fucking idea how NORAD operated prior to 9/11, dude. Why do you keep embarrassing yourself?

[deconstruct911]

2. Lighten up

We’re all just here to use the 9 11 forum. If it were up to you, the forum probably wouldn't exist.

Exactly what do you expect people to talk about in this forum? Just a bunch of threads about how smart al Qaeda is and how easy it is to pull off a 9 11 attack? It's quite apparent almost all the threads are related to what didn't happen on 9 11.... That is the official story.... Embarrassing? Well the question will be how much can you take?

[SDuderstadt]

3. Dude....

your "questions" have answers, if you're open-minded to listen to them. Judging from the absolute nonsense you post, I'm willimg to bet you have no more clue how NORAD operated on 9/11 than Spooked does.

[deconstruct911]

6. No actually we went over that many times

they certainly do not have answers to my specific questions.

[SDuderstadt]

7. Yes, we do, dude...

you just don't like the answers because they sink your goofy bullshit.

[spooked911]

8. So NORAD routinely pretends there were hijack codes in the system when there were none?

But, then again, what do you care? You're only here to mock anything that deviates from the OCT.

[jberryhill]

9. "if Myers's recollection is correct, Eberhart was apparently either mistaken or deliberately...."

I gather, spooked, that you read the document cited as footnote 4 - an summary of an interview with Myers several years after the event.

No, his recollection could not possibly be faulty (although his memory relative to any conversations with Eberhart is clearly spotty, as noted in the interview notes).

[spooked911]

12. what is your point?

Of course, he could have made a mistake. That is why I didn't really draw any firm conclusions from this evidence. But the overall story of Eberhart on 9/11 is odd.

[SDuderstadt]

10. Did you actually read the section of...

the 9/11 Commission Report that deals with this? Did you read the footnotes? Did you read the MFRS?

Better question: have you actually ever read the 9/11 Commission Report? There is a reason virtually no one here takes you seriously, dude. Eventually, it will sink in.

[spooked911]

11. Yes, I looked it over a few years back

but why don't you enlighten us on what it says?

[SDuderstadt]

13. If you actually read it...

why would I need to enlighten you on what it says, dude? Wouldn't you know?

Duh.

[LARED]

4. If this is not a smoking gun, nothing is

Eberhart at least gave the impression of having an unclear picture of what was going on.

That is just shocking. I mean nearly everyone had an perfectly clear picture of what was going on during the event, except him of course. Probably just trying to establish plausible deniablity.

Accounts of his actions reveal no decisive attempts to respond to the attacks.

Maybe, just a wild thought here, that had something to do with having an unclear picture.


He appears to have been particularly slow to order a plan that would give the military control of U.S. airspace and get all aircraft grounded.

Frankly I'm OK with a guy that is uncomfortable handing over the US airspace to the military and wants to make sure he understands the situation prior to doing so.

Furthermore, in the middle of the attacks, he decided to drive from his office at Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado, to NORAD's operations center in Cheyenne Mountain--a journey that apparently put him out of the loop for about an hour.

I know the idea of a command structure seems to not exist in the CT'ers world, where people follow procedures and protocol without direct orders from superiors, but it happens all the time.

Spooked you really must be getting desperate to post this malarkey.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[defendandprotect]

14. There's nothing about NORAD and 9/11 which isn't suspicious . . .

thanks for asking the questions which our government should be asking!!

Myers is -- IMO -- knee deep in 9/11 --