The entire military chain of command was missing on 9/11.
General Montague Winfield, a general at the National Military Command Center, was missing.
General Tom Canavan was missing.
President George W. Bush was missing, attending an elementary school or preschool reading session. The Secret Service was not protecting him. He was there for 35 minutes after the attacks began. It was highly publicized in there. So he was taken out of the picture by just sitting there reading "My Pet Goat" to the children.
The Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, 2001-2006, was the next line in the military chain of command, and he went missing as well. He didn't know anything about what was going on, he said, until the Pentagon was attacked at which point he went out into the parking lot and tried to help with stretchers for more than 30 minutes and couldn't be contacted. These are incredible stories but they're true.
19:00 And the next person in the military chain of command was Hugh Shelton, 14th Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 1997-2001, and he was out of the country, just gone to Europe mysteriously. And then Winfield Montague and Canavan were out, everybody was out just for that morning, just for those hours. So that's another reason why things didn't go very well, but . . . . One of the more important reasons was that there were military exercises going on 9/11 that not only mimicked the event but they obstructed the response.
19:40, RYAN. So before 9/11 and a couple of years before 9/11, there were 28 hijack exercise scenarios that the military practiced. And about 1/4 of those were suicide missions into high-value targets. So people don't hear about this very often but if you research you'll find out that the information is there, that the military practiced this and they practiced this on 9/11. There was an exercise called Vigilant Guardian 2001 that was practiced on 9/11 and had been going on for a couple of days when on September 9th, they had practiced the hijacking for a suicide attack against the United Nations Building in New York City just a few blocks from the World Trade Center. That's 2 days before 9/11. On September 11, they conducted similar hijacking events in which they were inserting simulated hijackings into the live air surveillance system, so they called it SIM Over Live. The simulated injections were confusing the people who were supposedly responding, they all thought it was an exercise. In their testimony with the 9/11 Commission, they say, "We thought the exercise had started early." The evidence shows that the simulated injections continued until after the attacks and definitely disrupted the response.
21:13, MORRIS. So you have all of these high-ranking members of the military, the chain of command, gone, missing; all of these folks at the FAA, missing, gone. You have these simulated attacks being injected and being run on that particular day, 9/11, which seems like the perfect, you have what many believe, we on this show as well, with the experts that we've had on this show, what many believe that these aircraft were remote-controlled. They were not piloted by these morons. They couldn't pilot a Cessna. They didn't know what they were doing . . . with precision guidance . . . absolutely not. So these were remote-controlled aircraft being manipulated on that particular day and that's why we don't have jets scrambling to get close to the cockpit to confirm that these pilots are not actually piloting the plane. It all seems, I mean you look at Occam's Razor, all of these things point to a massive, massive cover-up, no?
22:05, RYAN. It definitely does, and you can see the different ways that the 9/11 official account is false and they all look very much like it was a cover-up. You may know that in the 9/11 Commission Report, they didn't even mention some of the major events that happened that day, like the destruction of World Trade Center Building 7. Didn't even show up in the report. The testimony of 9/11 hero, William Rodriguez. Or the FBI whistleblower, Sibel Edmonds. These are critical testimonies that never showed up in the report. And this cover-up of the air defenses was really had to come down to just "Well, everybody was just lying. They weren't tracking the planes." I can say that 2 years after the 9/11 Commission Report came out, they justified this new account through an article in the magazine called Vanity Fair. And you may remember something they called 9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes. They suddenly found some tapes that somehow explained away that they didn't really know about it, and the communications failures were the big problem. This reporter had gotten privileged access to these NORAD tapes that apparently NORAD didn't even know about. That's amazing in itself. So they tried to years later to justify it, but really they never came down to the explanation of why would all these people be lying in order to make themselves look bad? So if you think about this, that's exactly what it is. If they were never notified, they would have just said "We were never notified. How can we have possibly intercepted the jets." But that's not what they said. They said, "Yes, we were notified with 20 minutes on Flight 175, 14 minutes on Flight 177, and 47 minutes on Flight 93." And we were tracking these planes in detail; they give detailed testimony to this, and generals and colonels, people we just wouldn't expect to be lying for any reason, particularly for a reason that makes them look bad ultimately.
24:27, MORRIS. Also, I remember on that day news stations were reporting about the flight over Pennsylvania and tracking it in real-time. It had gone missing. Where was it? It wasn't over Pennsylvania, so even news reports. Even if you want to discount NORAD or being notified, even NBCNews, The Today Show, and others were reporting about this flight. So they would have been fully aware of this.
24:54, RYAN. That's right. Not only that but air-traffic controllers were taking notes. So FOIA released documents that showed that air-traffick controllers were writing notes about having been, like Flight 93, having been hijacked and where it was going on the Ohio and Pennsylvania border long before it crashed. So why would they all create these fictional accounts? It makes no sense whatsoever. It really . . . unless psychology you really need to believe the official account, which is the case for a lot of people. I think psychologically, they really need to believe the official account, so whatever way they can do that they're willing to accept.
25:48, MORRIS. Yeah, I think there's a cognitive dissonance out there, they want the official story to be one particular way, the one shooter, and they don't want discussions about a conspiracy, which we now know verifiably is the case, whether it's the assassination attempt on President Trump or the 9/11 attacks. So it's unbelievable to me that the American populous would sit back and say, "That's okay. In this 9/11 Commission Report, you've left out critical testimony on purpose, FBI whistleblowers, and others about these pilots, all sorts of critical information, you've purposefully left out of the 9/11 Commission Report, or you purposefully didn't interview individuals or ask them critical questions. That's all missing from the official 9/11 Report, and I remember the time when the 9/11 Report came out [July 22, 2004]
