Interesting observation about 9/11 documentaries. Some of them seem to be quite biased. One on the History Channel (which, much as I watch it, we do tend to call the Revisionist History Channel) seemed hell-bent on making Bush look bad. Constant replays in slow motion of his “oh shit” moment after being told about the second plane. Positioning his desire to return to DC as stupid and reckless. But, most notably, completely changing the story of the fighter jets that were scrambled.
From what I can tell from other documentaries, there were two sets of fighter jets scrambled (because I’ve seen two sets of pilots, two with the air national guard, and two with the air force). One set was sent over NYC and one set was sent up just in general and then were redirected to look for flight 93 and shoot it down. They had to wait for the correct permissions to come through proper channels (this IS the military) before really doing much, and most documentaries I’ve watched have said that the fighters over NYC originally headed over the ocean because they needed permission to fly in NYC airspace. Once they had it, they patrolled NYC.
This one biased documentary didn’t include any interviews with the pilots themselves, but the commentator said that they flew over the ocean due to “confusion” and following “outdated cold war protocols.” They also seemed to be trying to make the point that maybe the fighters could have stopped the second plane had they been in position, but what could they have really done? Shot it down over Manhattan? I don’t think that’s necessarily a better option than what actually happened.
I was just struck by how different this one documentary positioned nearly everything, compared to the 8-10 other documentaries I’ve watched in the last few weeks about 9/11.