Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > 9/11
Register FAQ Chat Social Groups Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-05-2012, 01:48 PM   #1
wake_up_bomb
Senior Member
 
wake_up_bomb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,997
Default The Forty-Six 9/11 Drills

Let me preface this with the barefaced lies of George W. Bush and Condoleeza Rice:


See below the forty-six exercises and drills related to 9/11 type scenarios.



I will post more information on these in the near future.
wake_up_bomb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 04:54 PM   #2
porridge
Senior Member
 
porridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: emigrating to Scotland..
Posts: 8,045
Default

great post
porridge is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 04:57 PM   #3
marky78
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 984
Default

interesting info, thanks WUB.
marky78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 05:00 PM   #4
lobuk
Moderator
 
lobuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Roger That
Posts: 14,406
Default

Another interesting thread that was instantly voted 1 star by the in house OS muppet squad.

Thanks for the great info WUB. Appreciate your efforts.
__________________
lobuk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 05:06 PM   #5
marky78
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 984
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lobuk View Post
Another interesting thread that was instantly voted 1 star by the in house OS muppet squad.

Thanks for the great info WUB. Appreciate your efforts.

with all these new threads I expect a few 'new members' will be joining the forum to keep up with it all
marky78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 05:18 PM   #6
lobuk
Moderator
 
lobuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Roger That
Posts: 14,406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by marky78 View Post
with all these new threads I expect a few 'new members' will be joining the forum to keep up with it all
Indeed my friend.
__________________
lobuk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 07:47 PM   #7
wispy
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,968
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wake_up_bomb View Post
Let me preface this with the barefaced lies of George W. Bush and Condoleeza Rice:

9/11 NORAD Rehearsed Crashing Hijacked Planes Into The World Trade Center Years Before - YouTube

See below the forty-six exercises and drills related to 9/11 type scenarios.



I will post more information on these in the near future.
Well who'd have thought.

The military and security services carrying out training excercises.

I thought they all joined up to just march around parade grounds.
wispy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 08:40 PM   #8
porridge
Senior Member
 
porridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: emigrating to Scotland..
Posts: 8,045
Default

Going off topic, its funny we had training exercises going on on 7/7 in all the stations.

And again we have passports turning up at the scene of the crime, how convenient.

For anyone knew to this & wants to get know classic symptoms of government terrorist false flag attacks, I suggest you check out this site:

http://julyseventh.co.uk/


Also on 911 we had FEMA doing exercises in NY just like when the OKC bombing took place, again classic symptoms.

"Trolls need not reply"
porridge is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 08:56 PM   #9
lobuk
Moderator
 
lobuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Roger That
Posts: 14,406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by porridge View Post
Going off topic, its funny we had training exercises going on on 7/7 in all the stations.

And again we have passports turning up at the scene of the crime, how convenient.

For anyone knew to this & wants to get know classic symptoms of government terrorist false flag attacks, I suggest you check out this site:

http://julyseventh.co.uk/

Peter Power Terrorist!

Also on 911 we had FEMA doing exercises in NY just like when the OKC bombing took place, again classic symptoms.

"Trolls need not reply"
The thing that amazes me the most about the 7/7 Drills coinciding with the attack is the probability caculations of it being coincidence. The chances of it being coincidence are so extreme and so close to impossible that the number is 42 digits and unpronounceable.

The Drills were not real world and were office based but they were still based upon the exact same stations and at the same time and day. Take a look at this calculation which is just based upon a 10 year mean.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/Lon...coinciding.htm

Quote:
Probability of 7/7 Drill and Attack Coinciding

Infowars.com | July 13, 2005


Comment:
This is absolutely mind boggling. The chances for these two events taking place at the same time, let alone in the same locations are astronomical (numbers so big we had to look up how to say them). And these estimates are within a very conservative five year mean. In other words, most statistical analysis that is designed to create the impression of a similarly incredible improbability is usually framed within a greater amount of time: 50 years since England began experiencing bombings, 130 years since the Tube first opened, etc. We don't need to frame these results in that way because the chance is so low that these events would ever occur simultaneously without some sort of intervention that one might go so far as to call it impossible.

Probability of 7/7 Drill and Attack Coinciding

LU Stations: 274

RELATED:

Explosions In London

Probability of one attack by hour (5yr mean): One chance in 9,474,920

Open Hours per Day: 19

Probability of 3 station terror hit (5yr mean):
One chance in 850,602,500,906,920,000,000

Open Days a Year: 364

Mean Sample frequent (yrs) 5 Probability of one attack by hour (10yr mean):
One chance in 18,949,840

Mean Sample frequent (yrs) 10 Probability of 3 station terror hit (10yr mean):
One chance in 6,804,820,007,255,360,000,000

Same Time 3

LU Stations: 274

Probability of drill on 1 stations per hour:
One chance in 817,342

Open Hours per Day: 19

Probability of drill on 3 stations per hour:
One chance in 546,023,643,432,766,000

Open Days a Year: 157

Same Time 3

PROBABILITY OF DRILL AND TERROR ATTACK COINCIDING BY CHANCE (10yr mean):
One chance in 3,715,592,613,265,750,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000


Estimate of Grains of sand in the whole world:
7,500,000,000,000,000,000


(http://www.miamisci.org/tripod/whysand.html)

In context: If I go to a beach, or a desert, or under the sea and pick a single grain of sand. What chance is there of you going to the same part of the world by chance and picking up the same grain? You are trillions of times more likely to do this that the London drill coinciding with this attack at that hour

I wonder why the media aren't reporting the drill??
__________________

Last edited by lobuk; 04-05-2012 at 09:20 PM.
lobuk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 09:05 PM   #10
dogsmilk
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Surreality
Posts: 7,498
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by porridge View Post
Going off topic, its funny we had training exercises going on on 7/7 in all the stations.

And again we have passports turning up at the scene of the crime, how convenient.

For anyone knew to this & wants to get know classic symptoms of government terrorist false flag attacks, I suggest you check out this site:

http://julyseventh.co.uk/

Peter Power Terrorist!

Also on 911 we had FEMA doing exercises in NY just like when the OKC bombing took place, again classic symptoms.

"Trolls need not reply"
See what gets me is the way people seem determined to leap on stuff without sitting back to think if they may be jumping the gun.

If memory serves (happy to be corrected, ages since I looked at 7/7 stuff), Powers was basically doing stuff with people sat around in a room - it wasn't 'a mock terror drill' in the sense of people out in the world doing some kind of big pretend stunt. I've never got why people don't want to consider the notion Powers was basically doing a spot of opportunistic self-promotion in a rather tasteless way.
dogsmilk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 09:24 PM   #11
wake_up_bomb
Senior Member
 
wake_up_bomb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,997
Default

A DRILL FOR EVERY KEY COMPONENT OF 9/11

The rule of thumb that a drill which coincides with or mimics the details of an actual terror act within a reasonable time frame is almost certainly the vehicle for that terror act is well established, and the inevitable objections of coincidence theorists need not concern us here. In these cases, small but decisive changes have been made to the legally authorized drill. The drill is thus taken live, or flipped live. Depending on how we wish to count them, we can identify and enumerate at about 46 drills and exercises that either directly preceded 9/11 and are linked to it, or else were actually taking place on the morning of 9/11, or were scheduled for soon after 9/11, or which bear on 9/11 in some other direct way. Even more dramatic is the fact that virtually every important aspect of 9/11 corresponds to one or more of the drills we know about so far. There is a drill for every big event of the day, for every theme or meme of the myth. All the main foci were simulated by drills, often in real time. We must therefore proceed from the working hypothesis that the 9/11 terror events were largely camouflaged, assisted, conducted, conduited, and bootlegged through these drills. This is the most dramatic possible validation of the MIHOP thesis regarding 9/11, the one that asserts that a privately controlled network or faction inside the US government directly caused and created 9/11. [10]

A first group of drills reflects the need of the coup faction to secure control over certain key military facilities, a number of them in the Washington DC area. These drills and related measures included stricter controls on those entering and exiting the bases, and they started in the months directly before 9/11.

THE PUTSCHISTS LOCK DOWN MILITARY BASES FOR GREATER SECRECY

Forts Hamilton, Meade (NSA), Belvoir, Ritchie, Myer, and McNair, Virginia: Starting August 15, 2001, Army limited public access to bases near Washington DC, allegedly as part of nationwide security clampdown because of terrorist threat.

Fort Meyer, VA, Fort McNair, DC, 3rd US Infantry: September 5, 2001: US Army bases near Washington DC implemented “full access control.” Fort McNair is the Headquarters of the Army Military District of Washington DC.

Fort Meyer, VA: A “force protection exercise” was scheduled for week after 9/11.

Fort Belvoir, VA: September 11, 2001 was the second Tuesday of a “garrison control exercise,” allegedly to “test the security at the base in case of a terrorist attack.” [11]

In Dr. Strangelove, the first thing Gen. Jack Ripper does before launching his B-52s against the USSR is to put his base on maximum security lock down; he even wants to take pocket radios away from the base personnel. The same lockdown measures are taken at the desert headquarters of the putschist ECONCOM in Seven Days in May, who are very strict about who can go in and out. Even a senator who wants to investigate is arrested by base security. The 9/11 putschists thought along the same lines, and as an elementary precaution imposed comprehensive controls on military bases, especially the highly sensitive posts around Washington DC; it would be indispensable to control these in case of unexpected resistance to the provocation they were about to stage. For if anything went wrong, a battle for the control of the capital city might involve controlling these bases and using them for staging areas.

Drills were also used to divert existing security and intelligence assets far away from what was shortly to be the actual base of operations.

DIVERSION OF COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE

FBI training exercise in Monterey, California: the FBI/CIA Anti-Terrorist Task Force was massed at this drill, and was therefore absent from its usual Washington DC headquarters on 9/11.

In Oliver Stone’s JFK, an integral part of the coup faction’s preparations to kill President Kennedy is to send the character representing Col. Fletcher Prouty of military intelligence to accompany a delegation of bigwigs to the South Pole just before November 22, 1963. He reads of the Kennedy assassination as he is coming back, by way of New Zealand. This allows the assassins to remove a supplementary security screen which otherwise would have enveloped the President with a layer of additional protection in case of failure by the Secret Service. On 9/11 the FBI had deployed “all of its anti-terrorist and top special operations agents at a training exercise (complete with all associated helicopters and light aircraft)” in Monterey, California. Therefore, on 9/11, “the chief federal agency responsible for preventing such crimes [was] AWOL.” [12] Because all commercial flights had been grounded, these personnel were stranded in California and thus out of the picture for several days. A layer of anti-terror capability had in effect been stripped.

SABOTAGE OF AIR DEFENSE AND SIMULATION OF MULTIPLE HIJACKINGS

A critical set of drills involves the suppression of air defense in the Boston to Washington DC corridor on that fateful morning. The overall impact of these drills and operations was to multiply the number of possible hijacked aircraft, and to radically diminish the number of interceptor aircraft available to deal with them. Vigilant Guardian, in particular, included real commercial and real military aircraft which were airborne and signaling that they were hijacked. In addition, a NORAD office was able to introduce injects or inputs – fake blips -- onto the radar screens at the Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) at Griffiss AFB near Rome, New York. These were supposed to represent hijacked aircraft.

Some of the simulated hijacks were represented by false blips made to appear on FAA and NORAD radar screens as part of the exercises that have been discussed. Other hijacks would have been accounted for by the actual military aircraft which were playing the roles of hijacked aircraft in the drills. Blips and dummy hijacks combined to create an insuperable confusion. This would have made the predicament of any loyal air defense commanders even more difficult. In his book, Richard Clarke recalls being told by an official on the morning of 9/11, “we have reports of eleven aircraft off course or out of communication, maybe hijacked.” Clarke said he repeated this number, “Eleven.” (Clarke 4) But Colonel Robert Marr, commanding NEADS on 9/11, reported, “At one time I was told that across the nation there were some 29 different reports of hijackings.” USAF Major General Larry Arnold, for his part, claimed that 21 planes were reported hijacked. [13] In his book, Richard Clarke recalls being told by an official on the morning of 9/11, “we have reports of eleven aircraft off course or out of communication, maybe hijacked.” Clarke said he repeated this number, “Eleven.” (Clarke 4)

NORAD annual readiness drill: at Cheyenne Mountain bunker near Colorado Springs, Colorado, was happening on 9/11: NORAD was at “full ‘battle staff’ levels for a major annual exercise to test every facet of the organization.” This drill appears to coincide with Vigilant Guardian. [14] Were the false blips seen at NEADS generated here?

Operation Northern Watch, also ongoing on 9/11, represented actual air combat; not a drill; six fighters and 115 personnel had been sent from Langley AFB to Incirlik AFB, Turkey, to impose an illegal northern no-fly zone over northern Iraq.

Operation Southern Watch involved about 100 members of 174th Fighter Wing, New York Air National Guard, who had been deployed to Sultan Air Base, Saudi Arabia, to impose the no-fly zone over southern Iraq, August-September 2001. In addition, “at the time of the 9/11 attacks, the 94th Fighter Squadron, which is stationed at Langley Air Force Base in Virginia, is away on a 90-day combat deployment to Saudi Arabia for Operation Southern Watch, to enforce the no-fly zone over southern Iraq.” [15]

Vigilant Guardian: Air defense against hijacking. From what is known about Vigilant Guardian, it is clear that it closely mimicked the actual events of 9/11. Vigilant Guardian was thus the source of much confusion among the non-witting NORAD personnel. NORAD personnel were bewildered as to whether the reports they were getting represented fictitious events within the exercise, or whether they were dealing with a real emergency. (Aviation Week and Space Technology, June 3, 2002) This was a joint US-Canada exercise, and was designed to test the coordination of the two defense establishments. According to GlobalSecurity.org: “The VIGILANT GUARDIAN (VG) is a VIGILANT OVERVIEW Command Post Exercise (CPX) conducted in conjunction with USCINCSTRAT-sponsored GLOBAL GUARDIAN and USCINCSPACE-sponsored APOLLO GUARDIAN exercises. The exercise involves all HQ NORAD levels of command and is designed to exercise most aspects of the NORAD mission. One VG is scheduled each year and the length will vary depending on the exercise scenario and objectives.” [16] According to another source, “The planning for Vigilant Guardian Exercise-2001 probably began in 2000; and it was responding to a growing uneasiness of the US government and intelligence reports, world-wide – including NORAD – about plans for terrorist seizure of commercial air planes to be used as missiles against American targets.” [17]

Vigilant Guardian ranks among the four principal exercises held yearly by NORAD. Most of these exercises include a hijack scenario. [18] Ken Merchant, NORAD’s joint exercise design manager, testified before the 9/11 Commission in 2003 that he could not “remember a time in the last 33 years when NORAD has not run a hijack exercise.” [19]

The 9/11 commission had this to say about Vigilant Guardian: “On 9/11, NORAD was scheduled to conduct a military exercise, Vigilant Guardian, which postulated a bomber attack from the former Soviet Union.” This is a deliberately misleading definition of the drill in question. The 9/11 commission continues: “We investigated whether military preparedness for the large-scale exercise compromised the military’s response to the real-world terrorist attack on 9/11. According to NORAD supremo General Eberhart, ‘it took about 30 seconds to make the adjustment to the real-world situation.’ (9/11 commission, Ralph Eberhart testimony, June 17, 2004). We found that the response was, if anything, expedited by the increased number of staff at the sectors and at NORAD because of the scheduled exercise. See Robert Marr interview (Jan. 23, 2004)” (911 commission 458 n. 116) Eberhart’s braggadocio was transparent, and the commission’s verdict was a lie.

On the morning of September 11, the staff of NORAD’s Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) at Griffiss Air Force Base in Rome, New York, were preparing to carry out a Vigilant Guardian drill based on a plane hijacking scenario. Here is one example of the profound confusion engendered by the simultaneous occurrence of drill and real emergency:

FAA: Hi. Boston Center TMU [Traffic Management Unit], we have a problem here. We have a hijacked aircraft headed towards New York, and we need you guys to, we need someone to scramble some F-16s or something up there, help us out.

NEADS: [Staff Sergeant Jeremy Powell, Air National Guard] Is this real-world or exercise?

FAA: No, this is not an exercise, not a test. (9/11 commission report 20)

Here is the same scene of confusion at NEADS as described from the standpoint of another participant. This was Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins, the regional mission crew chief for the Vigilant Guardian exercise, who worked alongside Col. Marr and Major Kevin Nasypany, whom we will meet later:

On Sept. 11, as Americans watched horror rain upon New York and Washington, command teams at a little-known military outpost in Rome, N.Y., worked feverishly to restore safe skies and rouse a slumbering homeland defense.

At the Northeast Air Defense Sector, radar operators who constantly scan the continent’s boundaries suddenly faced a threat from within and a race they could not win.

Four months after the terrorist attacks, there are still untold stories. This is one.

6 A.M.: WAR GAMES

Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins figured it would be a long day.

Sept. 11 was Day II of “Vigilant Guardian,” an exercise that would pose an imaginary crisis to North American Air Defense outposts nationwide. The simulation would run all week, and Deskins, starting her 12-hour shift in the Operations Center as the NORAD unit’s airborne control and warning officer, might find herself on the spot.

Day I of the simulation had moved slowly. She hoped the exercise gathered steam. It made a long day go faster.

8:40 A.M.: REAL WORLD

In the Ops Center, three rows of radar scopes face a high wall of wide-screen monitors. Supervisors pace behind technicians who peer at the instruments. Here it is always quiet, always dark, except for the green radar glow.

At 8:40, Deskins noticed senior technician Jeremy Powell waving his hand. Boston Center was on the line, he said. It had a hijacked airplane.

“It must be part of the exercise,” Deskins thought.

At first, everybody did. Then Deskins saw the glowing direct phone line to the Federal Aviation Administration.

On the phone she heard the voice of a military liaison for the FAA’s Boston Center.

“I have a hijacked aircraft,” he told her.

Three minutes later, the drill was still a factor of confusion for Lt. Deskins in the form of a simulated hijacked plane heading for JFK Airport in New York City:

Deskins ran to a nearby office and phoned 1st Air Force Chief Public Affairs Officer Major Don Arias in Florida. She said NEADS had a hijacked plane now, not the simulation likely heading for JFK.

“The entire floor sensed something wrong,” Chief of Operations Control Lt. Col. Ian Sanderson said. “The way this unfolded, everybody had a gut sense this wasn’t right.” [20]

It is not clear from this account whether the “simulation” in question was an artificial radar blip inserted on the NEADS screens, or an actual aircraft (piloted or remote controlled) going towards the New York airport. A hijacked plane headed for JFK might represent the original scenario for Vigilant Guardian that day – the pretend hijacking that was superseded by real hijackings.

VIGILANT GUARDIAN: KAMIKAZE AIRLINER, WMD AT UN HEADQUARTERS

NORAD (NEADS) Exercises, October 16 and October 23, 2000: this drill had a scenario of a kamikaze airliner crashing into United Nations Headquarters, New York City, followed by an airborne WMD attack on the UN.

There were two scenarios, one each for October 16 and October 23, 2000 as part of NORAD’s annual Vigilant Guardian drill. All of NORAD, including its Northeast Air Defense Sector based in Rome, New York, took part in this exercise. JCS chief General Richard Myers (USAF) testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee on August 17, 2004 about the scenario used in the October 16 drill: “Due to recent arrests involving illegal drug trafficking in Maine, an individual steals a Federal Express plane and plans a suicide attack into the United Nations building in New York City.” [21] Meyers then told the senator that the October 23 exercise assumed “weapons of mass destruction directed at the United Nations. An individual steals a Federal Express aircraft and plans a suicide attack on the United Nations building in New York City.” [22]

NORAD (NEADS) exercise, September 6, 2001: Terrorists hijack an airliner going from Japan to Alaska and threaten to explode it, probably over a city, probably as part of Vigilant Guardian. The Complete 9/11 Timeline finds that this drill

…involves the hijacking of a Boeing 747 bound from Tokyo, Japan, to Anchorage, Alaska. According to a document later produced by the 9/11 Commission, the scenario involves the “[t]hreat of harm to [the plane’s] passengers and possibly [a] large population within [the] US or Canada.” It includes what is apparently a fictitious Asian terrorist group called “Mum Hykro,” which is threatening to “rain terror from the skies onto a major US city unless the US declares withdrawal from Asian conflict.” During the hijacking scenario, some of the plane’s passengers are killed. The plane’s course is changed to take it to Vancouver, Canada, and then to San Francisco, California. (9/11 Commission: NORAD Exercises: Hijack Summary, 2004) [23]

NORAD (NEADS) drill, September 6, 2001. This exercise is also thought to be a part of Vigilant Guardian; in this scenario,

… 10 members of another fictitious terrorist group, “Lin Po,” seize control of a Boeing 747 bound from Seoul, South Korea, to Anchorage. The hijackers have weapons on board that were smuggled onto the plane in small tote bags by ground crew members prior to takeoff. Gas containers were also smuggled onto the aircraft by baggage handlers before takeoff. Arming devices are attached to these containers, which can be remotely detonated. The terrorist group issues demands and threatens to blow up the plane if these are not met. The CIA and NSA caution that the group has the means and motivation to carry out a chemical and biological attack. The group kills two of the plane’s passengers and threatens to use the gas it has on board in some manner. In response to the simulated hijacking, NORAD directs fighter jets to get in a position to shoot down the hijacked airliner, and orders [Alaska region] to intercept and shadow it. In the scenario, the 747 eventually lands in Seattle, Washington. (9/11 Commission: NORAD Exercises: Hijack Summary, 2004) [24]

NORAD (NEADS) Exercise, September 9, 2001: Terrorists hijack a jet coming from Great Britain and threaten to blow it up over New York City. This drill was carried out by NEADS of Rome, New York, and is thought to belong to the Vigilant Guardian series.

In the scenario, the fictitious hijackers take over a McDonnell Douglas DC-10 aircraft bound from London to JFK International Airport in New York…. the terrorist hijackers have explosives on the plane and “plan to detonate them over NYC.” As the scenario plays out, a “Blue Force” is able to divert the hijacked aircraft. When the terrorists then realize they are not near New York, they “detonate [the] explosives over land near the divert location.” There are no survivors. (9/11 Commission: NORAD Exercises: Hijack Summary, 2004) [25]

NORAD (SEADS) drill, September 10, 2001: Cubans hijack a Cuban airliner coming from Havana and demand political asylum in New York. This drill was assigned to the Southeast Air Defense Sector (SEADS), Panama City, Florida. In this exercise, “…hijackers take over an Ilyushin IL-62 jet airliner that took off from Havana, Cuba. The hijackers, who are “demanding political asylum, demand to be taken to” New York City, according to a document later produced by the 9/11 Commission. As the scenario plays out, the FAA requests support from NORAD. The FAA directs the plane toward Jacksonville, Florida, but the hijackers then demand to be taken to Atlanta, Georgia. Finally, the hijacked plane lands safely at Dobbins Air Force Base in Georgia.” (9/11 Commission: NORAD Exercises: Hijack Summary, 2004) [26]

NORAD in general and the NEADS personnel in particular had thus held several hijack drills over the days just before 9/11– two on September 6, 2001, and one on September 9. By the time they were getting ready for the September 11 drill, they had become inured to drills. But the next drill was destined to go live, when some of them least expected it.

Vigilant Warrior, a NORAD drill: This drill was identified by Richard Clarke in his memoir. The “warrior” designation is taken to mean that this drill was under the authority of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the nation’s top military leaders. Here is Clarke’s narrative:

“I turned to the Pentagon screen. ‘JCS, JCS. I assume NORAD has scrambled fighters and AWACS. How many? Where?’

‘Not a pretty picture, Dick.’ Dick Meyers, himself a fighter pilot, knew that the days when we had scores of fighters on strip alert had ended with the Cold War. ‘We are in the middle of Vigilant Warrior, a NORAD exercise, but…Otis has launched two birds toward New York. Langley is trying to get two up now. The AWACS are at Tinker and not on alert’ Otis was an Air National Guard base on Cape Cod. Langley Air Force Base was outside Norfolk, Virginia. Tinker AFB, home to all of America’s flying radar stations, was in Oklahoma.”

‘Okay, how long to CAP over DC?’ Combat Air Patrol, CAP, was something we were used to placing over Iraq, not over our nation’s capital.

‘Fast as we can. Fifteen minutes?’ Myers asked, looking at the generals and colonels around him. It was now 9:28.” (Clarke 5)

Myers was an accomplished actor, as he later showed at the 9/11 Commission hearings. At the same time, fighter interceptors were sent far away, to Alaska, northern Canada, Iceland, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia. Three of those that remained were sent to North Carolina for the morning. As a result of these movements, two thirds of the Langley AFB fighter plane contingent, the closest to Washington, was outside of the US on 9/11.

Operation Northern Vigilance: NORAD deployed fighters to Alaska and northern Canada allegedly to counter ongoing Russian bomber drill. [27]

Operation Northern Vigilance undoubtedly reduced the number of interceptors available to defend the lower 48. Northern Vigilance was supposedly mounted by NORAD to counter a Russian maneuver going on at the same time. It could have been planned in advance, provided the timing of the Russian drill had also been known in advance. It was announced publicly in a NORAD press release of September 9, 2001 under the headline “NORAD Maintains Northern Vigilance.” NORAD stated:

CHEYENNE MOUNTAIN AFS, Colo. – The North American Aerospace Defense Command shall deploy fighter aircraft as necessary to Forward Operating Locations (FOLS) in Alaska and Northern Canada to monitor a Russian air force exercise in the Russian arctic and North Pacific ocean. “NORAD is the eyes and ears of North America and it is our mission to ensure that our air sovereignty is maintained,” said Lieutenant-General Ken Pennie, Deputy Commander-in-Chief of NORAD. “Although it is highly unlikely that Russian aircraft would purposely violate Canadian or American airspace, our mission of vigilance must be sustained.” NORAD-allocated forces will remain in place until the end of the Russian exercise. NORAD conducted operation Northern Denial from December 1 to 14, 2000 in response to a similar, but smaller scale, Russian deployment of long-range bombers at northern Russian air bases. NORAD-allocated forces were deployed to three FOLS, two in Alaska and one in Canada. More than 350 American and Canadian military men and women were involved in the deployment.

It is not known exactly how many planes moved north.

Northern Guardian: This was actual air defense; not a drill. From late August to early December 2001, fighter planes from Langley Air Force Base (Virginia) deployed to Keflavik AFB, Iceland, allegedly to counter Russian strategic bombers. [28]

Red Flag Exercise, Nevada: On September 11, most of the F-15s of the 71st Fighter Squadron Stationed at Langley Air Force Base in Virginia, were also away from the nation’s capital due to their participation in the Red Flag exercise held in Nevada between late August and September 17, 2001. [29]

According to the Complete 9/11 Timeline:

Red Flag is a realistic combat training exercise that involves the air forces of the US and its allies. It is managed by the Air Warfare Center through the 414th Combat Training Squadron. Most of the aircraft and personnel that are deployed for Red Flag are part of the exercise’s “Blue Forces,” which use various tactics to attack targets that are defended by an enemy “Red Force,” which electronically simulates anti-aircraft artillery, surface-to-air missiles, and electronic jamming equipment. A variety of aircraft are involved in the exercise. Red Flag is held four times a year at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada. It is usually composed of two or three two-week periods. The current exercise began on August 11, and involves more than 100 pilots in total. The timing of the Red Flag exercise may reduce the ability of the District of Columbia Air National Guard (DCANG) to respond to the 9/11 attacks. The 121st Fighter Squadron is stationed at Andrews Air Force Base, which is located 10 miles southeast of Washington, DC. [30]

Local exercise of Andrews AFB, near Washington DC: Three F-16s were sent to North Carolina for air to ground training mission. This took them away from the national capital airspace. [31]

FAA HIJACK DRILLS, 2000-2001: “PRETTY DAMN CLOSE TO THE [9/11] PLOT”

John Hawley of the Federal Aeronautics Administration’s intelligence division and FAA liaison to the State Department told the 9/11 commission that some FAA drill scenarios tried out in December 2000 were “pretty damn close to [the] 9/11 plot.” He added that “one of the scenarios may have had something to do with a chartered flight out of Ohio that had turned the transponder off.” Hawley thought such scenarios “really forced you to think outside the box.” Hawley testified that FAA Security Director Mike Canavan was the official who ran these scenarios. (9/11 Commission, October 8, 2003) [32]

FAA Exercise, summer 2001, featured a Varig airliner of Brazilian origin being hijacked over Florida. The Complete 9/11 Timeline provides the following details:

The FAA takes part in a training exercise based around the hijacking of a Boeing 767, the same kind of aircraft as those that hit the Twin Towers on 9/11. The exercise is conducted as part of efforts to update the strategy for dealing with hijackings. Its participants include the FAA, the FBI’s Miami field office, Miami-Dade County Police Department, a SWAT team, and Varig Airlines, and it utilizes a 767. Further details are unknown, but the hijacking exercise presumably takes place somewhere in the Miami area of Florida…. (9/11 commission, September 15, 2003) [33]

Were actors employed in these drills? Was Mohammed Atta, or any of the other 9/11 patsies, among the participants?

Canavan, in his testimony to the 9/11 commission, denied that there had ever been US exercises in which a commercial airliner was used as a weapon. Standard procedure was that, in case of a hijacking, the FAA had to call the Pentagon to request assistance. But this was not done, as the 9/11 commission noted. The Complete 9/11 Timeline points out that FAA security director “Mike Canavan, who would normally be the FAA’s hijack coordinator, is away in Puerto Rico this morning, and it is unclear who—if anyone—is standing in for him in this critical role.” [34]

And just who was this Canavan? He was a former Army lieutenant general – of Special Forces. According to New York journalist Pete Hamill, Canavan “spent 34 years in the U.S. Army, enlisting during Vietnam and serving much of his time with Special Forces – not a very reassuring resume. He worked on special operations in northern Iraq, Liberia and Bosnia, and when he retired, had risen to the rank of three-star general.” There are many grave problems with Canavan’s role on 9/11, and with his absurd testimony that there had never been a drill using commercial airliners as weapons – when this had been drilled repeatedly. Canavan either quit or was fired by the FAA in October 2001. [35]

AMALGAM VIRGO

Amalgam Virgo 2002 was a multi-agency, live-fly homeland security exercise sponsored by NORAD. One of the military officers who had been responsible for organizing Amalgam Virgo ‘01 was Colonel Alan Scott. Scott testified on May 23, 2003 at the 9/11 commission hearings:

...MR. ALAN SCOTT: Yes, sir. Specifically Operation Amalgam Virgo, which I was involved in before I retired, was a scenario using a Third World united – not united – uninhabited aerial vehicle launched off a rogue freighter in the Gulf of Mexico.

MR. BEN-VENISTE: That was Operation Amalgam Virgo. In fact, this exercise – in this exercise we used actual drones – NQM-107 drones, which are about the size of a cruise missile, to exercise our fighters and our radars in a Gulf of Mexico scenario….

MR. BEN-VENISTE: You are referring to Amalgam 01, are you not?

MR. SCOTT: Yes, sir, Amalgam 01.

MR. BEN-VENISTE: I am referring to Amalgam 02, which was in the planning stages prior to September 11th, 2001, sir. Is that correct?

MR. SCOTT: That was after I retired, and I was not involved in 02.

MR. BEN-VENISTE: Will you accept that the exercise involved a simultaneous hijacking scenario?

MR. SCOTT: I was not involved in 02.

GEN. MCKINLEY: Sir, I do have some information on 02, if you would allow me to read it for the record.

MR. BEN-VENISTE: Please.

GEN. MCKINLEY: [Reads from briefing book.] Amalgam Virgo in general, 02, was an exercise created to focus on peacetime and contingency NORAD missions. One of the peacetime scenarios that is and has been a NORAD mission for years is support to other government departments. Within this mission falls hijackings. Creativity of the designer aside, prior motivations were based on political objectives – i.e., asylum or release of captured prisoners or political figures. Threats of killing hostages or crashing were left to the script writers to invoke creativity and broaden the required response of the players.

What this means is that the scenario papers prepared for the officers participating in the drill by collaborating writers included crashing airborne vehicles into targets; these papers were evidently an integral part of the drill. McKinley is explicitly acknowledging that the drills did indeed include the concept of aircraft being used as weapons. Ben-Veniste, feigning not to understand this, thought McKinley’s answer was “fatuous,” and added ironically “It wasn’t in the minds of script writers when the Algerians had actually hijacked the plane, when they were attempting to fly into the Eiffel Tower….Don’t you agree we could have been better prepared?” [36] But Amalgam Virgo was not fatuous, it was sinister. Here was an exercise which included some key elements which were put into practice on 9/11. Amalgam Virgo thus provided the witting putschists with a perfect cover for conduiting the actual live fly components of 9/11 through a largely non-witting military bureaucracy. Under the cover of this confusion, the most palpably subversive actions could be made to appear in the harmless and even beneficial guise of a drill. In addition, a red herring was built in for the purpose of confusing investigators arriving after the fact: the hijacked planes involved were generally imagined as coming outside of the United States. But even that covering detail was dubious.

Amalgam Virgo 2002: This was to be a large-scale deployment of real aircraft for air defense, interception, surveillance, and pursuit. The scenario called for a Delta Boeing 757 with actual Delta pilots, and actors posing as passengers, to fly from Salt Lake City, Utah, to Honolulu, Hawaii. It was to be “hijacked” by FBI agents posing as terrorists. A DC-9 was to be hijacked by Canadian police near Vancouver BC. All this was scheduled for June 2002. [37]

These exercises came up again in the April 2004 hearings of the 9/11 commission. In her much-touted appearance, NSC director Condoleezza Rice repeated her well-known and discredited contention that the White House had not contemplated hijacked airliners being used as weapons. Bush himself had chimed in, asserting that “Nobody in our government, at least, and I don’t think the prior government, could envision flying airplanes into buildings on such a massive scale.” As the hearings showed, during the two years before the 9/11 attacks, NORAD conducted exercises using hijacked airliners as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties. Another scenario involved crashing an airliner into the Pentagon, but this was not conducted after the Defense Department objected that it was too unrealistic. But it was done as a staff exercise – one might say, as a rehearsal. Perhaps it was realistic, but too revealing.

A NORAD statement issued in April 2004 confirmed that “Numerous types of civilian and military aircraft were used as mock hijacked aircraft. These exercises test and track detention and identification; scramble and interception; hijack procedures; internal and external agency coordination and operational security and communications security procedures.” According to NORAD, these were regional drills, not regularly scheduled continent-wide drills. (USA Today, April 18, 2004) Not surprisingly, there is absolutely no mention of Amalgam Virgo in the final report of the 9/11 commission.

References

[10] For media sources on the drills, see the Complete 9/11 Timeline, Military Exercises Up to 9/11, at cooperativeresearch.org, hereafter C9/11T, to which we are indebted for much of the data cited in this chapter.

[11] Washington Post, August 15, 2001, Military District of Washington News Service, 8/3/2001, MDW News Service, 7/2001, MDW news service, 8/2000; GlobalSecurity.org, 11/28/2001; MDW News Service, 7/2001; C9/11T.

[12] Evote.com, September 11, 2001, NBC 4 New York, 9/11/2001, C9/11T.

[13] Newhouse News Service, March 31, 2005, C9/11T.

[14] Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/2002, C9/11T.

[15] “September 2001: Fighters from Langley Air Force Base, Virginia, Deployed to Saudi Arabia for Operation Southern Watch,” C9/11T.

[16] http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...t-guardian.htm

[17] www.911teachin.net/L5A.html

[18] USA Today, April 18, 2004; C9/11T.

[19] http://www.historycommons.org/contex...etonateovernyc

[20] “Amid Crisis Simulation, ‘We Were Suddenly No-Kidding Under Attack,”’ Newhouse News Service, January 25, 2002.

[21] C9/11T: See also Arkin, 545; GlobalSecurity.org, 4/27/2005.

[22] http://www.historycommons.org/contex...etonateovernyc

[23] C9/11T.

[24] C9/11T.

[25] C9/11T.

[26] C9/11T

[27] First revealed by the Toronto Star, December 9, 2001. See also Washington Times, 9/11/2001, C9/11T.

[28] First revealed by the Toronto Star, December 9, 2001.

[29] Virginian-Pilot, 9/24/2001, C9/11T.

[30] GlobalSecurity.org, 10/19/2002; Arkin, 2005, 476; Las Vegas Review-Journal, 7/28/2001 and 8/22/2001; GlobalSecurity.org, 8/21/2005 and 1/21/2006; C9/11T.

[31] Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/2002.

[32] http://www.historycommons.org/contex...00faaexercises

[33] http://www.historycommons.org/contex...a01faaexercise

[34] http://www.historycommons.org/contex...00faaexercises

[35] New York Daily News, October 15, 2001.

[36] This is a reference to Air France Flight 8969, which was hijacked on December 24, 1994 by members of the Algerian GIA terrorist organization, who intended to crash it into the Eiffel Tower in Paris. When the plane landed at Marseille, it was successfully stormed by the French GIGN special police.

[37] CNN, 6/4/2002; American Forces Press Service, 6/4/2002; Associated Press, 6/5/2002; USA Today, 4/18/2004, C9/11T.

More material regarding the drills and exercises will follow in due course.
wake_up_bomb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 10:39 PM   #12
porridge
Senior Member
 
porridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: emigrating to Scotland..
Posts: 8,045
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dogsmilk View Post
See what gets me is the way people seem determined to leap on stuff without sitting back to think if they may be jumping the gun.

If memory serves (happy to be corrected, ages since I looked at 7/7 stuff), Powers was basically doing stuff with people sat around in a room - it wasn't 'a mock terror drill' in the sense of people out in the world doing some kind of big pretend stunt. I've never got why people don't want to consider the notion Powers was basically doing a spot of opportunistic self-promotion in a rather tasteless way.
Mock terror exercises at all the stations DOG.

Just like the year before 7/7 on Panorama a mock terror show with pretty much the same scenario as what happened a year later, with all the usual suspects on board.

Then I suggest you look into Mr Powers career. The guys is SERIOUSLY suspect & if there was any real investigation I wouldn't fancy his chances!

But Iam sure you will say these are just more coincidences & not hidden in plain sight psyops & terrorism of the public.



I dont post this for you anyway, I post it for anyone genuinely interested in 911 / 7/7 & how they are being played.

But thanks for your help!
porridge is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 10:49 PM   #13
unionjack1967
Senior Member
 
unionjack1967's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 513
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by porridge View Post
Going off topic, its funny we had training exercises going on on 7/7 in all the stations.

And again we have passports turning up at the scene of the crime, how convenient.

For anyone knew to this & wants to get know classic symptoms of government terrorist false flag attacks, I suggest you check out this site:

http://julyseventh.co.uk/

Peter Power Terrorist!

Also on 911 we had FEMA doing exercises in NY just like when the OKC bombing took place, again classic symptoms.

"Trolls need not reply"
Funny you should mention that, didnt they have `drills` leading up to the Madrid bombings also?

How peculiar !!

:UJ:
unionjack1967 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 10:54 PM   #14
porridge
Senior Member
 
porridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: emigrating to Scotland..
Posts: 8,045
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lobuk View Post
The thing that amazes me the most about the 7/7 Drills coinciding with the attack is the probability caculations of it being coincidence. The chances of it being coincidence are so extreme and so close to impossible that the number is 42 digits and unpronounceable.

The Drills were not real world and were office based but they were still based upon the exact same stations and at the same time and day. Take a look at this calculation which is just based upon a 10 year mean.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/Lon...coinciding.htm
Well its pretty probable that Powers was the command center for all this or a smokescreen, which is usually the case, but it does explain how these kids got involved & set up as patsys, infact its pretty overwhelmingly probable that's what happened, as they didn't fit the profile atall. Unless they were sent down to play the part, which would make much more sense & probably was them that got executed in Canary Warf.

Like 911 nothing makes sense on 7/7 or after with the execution of Charles Mendez another blatant coverup.

And as you point out the coincidences just like 9/11 are astounding.

An objective look at Peter Power's career
porridge is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 11:02 PM   #15
porridge
Senior Member
 
porridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: emigrating to Scotland..
Posts: 8,045
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by unionjack1967 View Post
Funny you should mention that, didnt they have `drills` leading up to the Madrid bombings also?

How peculiar !!

:UJ:
Im not sure wouldn't surprise.

The Madrid bombings they tried to say was the dreaded alquida, but turned out was separatists. Just more lies to spread & install the fear of the dreaded Alquida.
porridge is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 11:04 PM   #16
dan duchaine
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,239
Default

Bookmarked for reading later, great post.
dan duchaine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 01:45 AM   #17
Dude111
Senior Member
 
Dude111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 15,204
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wispy
Well who'd have thought.

The military and security services carrying out training excercises.
Yup just like in mexico when they were HAVING AN EARTHQUAKE DRILL and one just happend to occur!
Dude111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 08:48 AM   #18
wispy
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,968
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dude111 View Post
Yup just like in mexico when they were HAVING AN EARTHQUAKE DRILL and one just happend to occur!
You mean the Mexicans who live in a country prone to earthquakes happend to be having an excercise as to how to deal with earthquakes when coincidently an earthquake happened.

Or do you mean,

The Mexican govt' started an earthquake just so they can have a realistic excercise, or even for another darker reason?

So from this are you suggesting that in 1991 or some time before 2001 the US Gov't decided to have excercises and drew up plans called 'Drills to Deal with 9/11/2001 Hijack Attacks on World Trade Centre, Pentagon and Somewhere Were We Are Not Clear About Yet But We'll Have a Fourth Plane to Shoot Down'?
wispy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 09:35 AM   #19
wake_up_bomb
Senior Member
 
wake_up_bomb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,997
Default

Just to remind people what Bush and Rice said about the events of 9/11:


I will post more information on the drills and exercises in due course.

Last edited by wake_up_bomb; 05-05-2012 at 09:36 AM.
wake_up_bomb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2012, 12:04 PM   #20
wake_up_bomb
Senior Member
 
wake_up_bomb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,997
Default

MULTIPLE EXERCISES CREATE CHAOS

For the low-level, non-witting subjectively loyal NEADS personnel, everything was vastly complicated by the endless confusion between drill and reality. This is reflected in the initial exchange of Sergeant Powell cited above; after which we have this exchange among other NEADS staffers:

8:37:56 WATSON: What? DOOLEY: Whoa! WATSON: What was that? ROUNTREE: Is that real-world? DOOLEY: Real-world hijack. WATSON: Cool!

The question of drill or reality is repeated many times during these conversations. Later another NEADS staffer comments: 08:43:06 FOX: I've never seen so much real-world stuff happen during an exercise. Major Mark Nasypany of NEADS at one point exclaimed “Somebody started the exercise early — the hijack's not supposed to be for another hour.” Here we are very close to the heart of the matter: the events of 9/11 in fact represent a hijack drill which has gone live, and has turned into a real hijack.

As the crisis worsened, this same officer attempted some grim humor: 08:57:11 NASYPANY: Think we put the exercise on the hold. What do you think? [Laughter.] Another NEADS staffer complains about a fake blip on his radar screen: 09:04:50—I think this is a damn input, to be honest. The NEADS staffers were also much confused about American 11, probably due to the fact that there were at least two American 11s airborne. [38]

NOT NORMAL COMMERCIAL AVIATION, BUT DRILLS GONE WILD

Using documentation from press reports, Woody Box et al. concluded that two distinct aircraft took off from Boston on the morning of September under the designation of American Flight 11. “Where did Flight 11 start?” writes Box. “There are two answers: Gate 26 and Gate 32. And both answers resist any attempt to refute them.” American 11’s departure was regularly scheduled for 7:45 AM from Terminal B, Gate 32 of Boston’s Logan Airport. This was American 11’s departure gate on 9/11, as shown in a transcript of radio communications between American 11 and the Logan tower published in the New York Times: “7:45:48 — Ground Control 1: American eleven heavy Boston ground gate thirty two you’re going to wait for a Saab to go by then push back” (New York Times, October 16, 2001) But many press reports indicate that passengers on American 11 embarked at Gate 26 (Washington Post, September 15, 2001, and other newspapers) Gate 26 is located in another wing of Terminal B, and is about 1000 feet away from Gate 32. Gate 26 is the majority view.

One paper, the Boston Globe, mentioned both gates on successive days. In an extra of the Boston Globe published on September 11, we find: “One airport employee, who asked not to be identified, said the American flight left on time from Gate 32 in Terminal B, and that nothing unusual was apparent.” One day later, in the Boston Globe article entitled “Crashes in NYC had grim origins at Logan,” we read: “The American flight left from Gate 26 in Terminal B, and the United flight from Gate 19 in Terminal C. One airport employee said nothing unusual was apparent when the American flight left.” Was this the same employee as the day before? The Gate 26 flight pushed back later than its scheduled departure time of 7:45 AM.

Was one of these two flights a dummy flight, a decoy being used in one of the live fly hijacking exercises described above? Did its unannounced presence contribute even more to the confusion that reigned in US airspace on the morning of 9/11? Or was there some other, more devious purpose?

There are also reports of another mystery flight landing in Cleveland. And then there is a cryptic remark by Richard Clarke in his White House narrative of the morning of 9/11. Clarke reports hearing: “We have a report of a large jet crashed in Kentucky, near the Ohio line.” (Clarke 13)

DRILL SUPERVISION AND COORDINATION?

Who in the Pentagon coordinates military maneuvers, be they of the command post or live fly variety? There must be some focal point where alternative dates are weighed, conflicts foreseen, and the need of maintaining a minimum distribution of assets so as not to compromise defense capabilities calculated. Whatever office in the bowels of the Pentagon does this, it is an urgent candidate for being swept for the presence of moles. However, even these insights do not by any means explain the failure to deploy fighter interceptors on 9/11. Any military commander would have realized that all available assets had to be scrambled, at the latest by the point at which the second WTC tower was hit. In particular, any military commander would have been alert to the imminent threat of the decapitation of the national command structure centered in Washington. All the commanders running the show had been schooled in the Cold War, when a Soviet submarine-launched ballistic missile detonating over Washington was regarded as the most plausible overture for the third world war. The eight lanes of superhighway leading from Washington DC to Dulles Airport are monuments to the all-encompassing concern of the US federal bureaucracy for its center in Washington. The autonomic reaction of the military establishment would normally have been to place at least one pair of jets over Washington, whatever else was done or not done. The fact that even this was not done until well after the Pentagon had been hit indicates a remarkable density of moles at high levels of the US command structures.

The NEADS operational commander that day, Colonel Bob Marr, did not concentrate his assets over Washington, nor did he take measures to defend New York. At a certain point Col. Marr received a request to send two planes from Langley Air Force Base to New York City, but Marr refused this. He ordered the fighters to be ready, but not to launch. Marr’s absurd excuse: "The problem there would have been I'd have all my fighters in the air at the same time, which means they'd all run out of gas at the same time." Marr later explained. When these fighters were finally launched, they went out eastward over the Atlantic Ocean to a training zone called Whiskey 386, and not towards Washington DC, which was clearly threatened. Col. Marr is one of many NORAD Air Force Officers whose role in the 9/11 coup has aroused suspicion.

Air Force generals working for NORAD were guilty of numerous counts of perjury before the 9/11 commission. Kean and Hamilton convened a secret meeting of their staff to discuss possible criminal referrals for perjury, but decided to do nothing. “The Sept. 11 commission, which uncovered the inconsistencies in the Pentagon’s account, made a formal request in July 2004 for the inspector general to investigate why senior military officials who testified to the commission had made so many inaccurate statements.” The Defense Department Inspector General, William P. Goehring, predictably came back with a whitewash. [39]

CRUISE MISSILE OR PILOTLESS PLANE ATTACK ON PENTAGON

It has long been clear to all serious observers that no commercial airliner struck the Pentagon, but most likely a cruise missile or drone aircraft, quite possibly supplemented by explosions within the building. The scenario for Positive Force 2001, which included hijacking a commercial airliner and flying it into the Pentagon, is said to have been developed by a team of officers of the Army Special Forces command (SOCOM) who are trained to “think like terrorists.” It would be interesting to know a great deal more about this group, and what further directions their terrorist-style thinking may have taken, this may be a group of moles who can also function as technicians. [40]

The military exercise called Amalgam Virgo 2001 bore a close relationship to certain events of 9/11, especially to the events at the Pentagon. Amalgam Virgo was a military drill that had to do with hijacked airliners, sometimes from inside the United States, and sometimes with airborne vehicles used as weapons. [41] A cruise missile was included at least once. The best working hypothesis is that Amalgam Virgo was the cover story under which the 9/11 strike on Pentagon advanced through the bureaucracy. Preparations for carrying out this key aspect of 9/11 were conducted under the cover of being preparations for Amalgam Virgo. Most of those who took part in Amalgam Virgo could hardly have been aware of this duplicity.

Amalgam Virgo 2001: NORAD, SEADS. In this US-Canada multi-agency drill held June 1-2, 2001, the scenario involves a Third World uninhabited aerial vehicle (UAV) [42] most likely an NQM-107 drone launched from a rogue freighter in the Gulf of Mexico or a cruise missile from a barge in Atlantic Ocean. In the summary of the Complete 9/11 Timeline, this “exercise takes place at Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida. Drones simulating cruise missiles are launched from Tyndall, head out to sea, circle a ship as if they are being launched from there, and then head back to land. Air Force F-16s, Navy gunners, and Army missile defense units attempt to find and track the drones. The Coast Guard attempts to catch the ship serving as the dummy launch site.” In another scenario drilled, a Haitian man suffering from AIDS crashes a small plane into the SEADS headquarters at Tyndall AFB. (Col. Alan Scott, 9/11 commission, May 23, 2003, American Forces Press Service, June 4, 2002). [43]

Amalgam Virgo 2001 represents a close approximation of what actually occurred at the Pentagon: its scenario of a rogue launch of a cruise missile of unmanned aerial vehicle against a land target in the US looks like the vehicle for the cruise missile or drone. Such a vehicle could have been launched from an air launcher at very high or very low altitude, or from a ground launcher, or perhaps from a ship or barge on a body of water, be it one of the Great Lakes, a river, etc. It could even have been launched from a submarine or other underwater location in Lake Erie, etc. The Amalgam Virgo 2001 program prepared by NORAD features a photograph of Osama Bin Laden on its front cover; the back cover shows an aircraft flying west to east towards a line across the United States which ends at the dome of the US Capitol building in Washington DC. These materials were published well before 9/11.

Positive Force 2001, April 17-26, 2001: This was a worldwide exercise by a dozen agencies, including NORAD, to drill plans for “continuity of operations” (or COG) to maintain ability to respond under attack; includes “a series of simulated attacks against the maritime, surface and aviation sectors.”

Continuity of operations, or continuity of government (COG), refers to the secret programs which aim at maintaining the US national command authority intact and functioning under extreme conditions of surprise attack and the like. It has long been suspected of providing a cover story for the installation of a military regime or other dictatorship. The Complete 9/11 Timeline reports that the Positive Force series is based on “various scenarios, including non-combatant evacuation operations, cyber attacks, rail disruption, and power outages. It includes ‘a series of simulated attacks against the maritime, surface and aviation sectors” of America’s national security transportation infrastructure.’”

Of decided relevance to 9/11 is the following:

One of the scenarios that was considered for this exercise involved “a terrorist group hijack[ing] a commercial airliner and fly[ing] it into the Pentagon.” But the proposed scenario, thought up by a group of Special Operations personnel trained to think like terrorists, was rejected. Joint Staff action officers and White House officials said the additional scenario is either “too unrealistic” or too disconnected to the original intent of the exercise. [44]

One original scenario involved “a terrorist group hijack[ing] a commercial airliner and fly[ing] it into the Pentagon,” but this was allegedly rejected by the Joint Staff as “too unrealistic.” [45]

PLANES IMPACTING SKYSCRAPERS

A central theme of 9/11 was crashing airliners into skyscrapers. This vital component of the 9/11 orchestration had been thoroughly drilled in the decade before 9/11, and was being drilled in the very hour that it actually happened.

NORAD Exercise (no code name known) simulated a kamikaze crash into US building: Between 1991 and 2001, one of the NORAD regions simulates a foreign hijacked airliner crashing into a prominent but undisclosed building in the United States. [46]

White House training exercise (no code name known) chaired by terror czar Richard Clarke, 1998: anti-US terrorists load a Lear jet with explosives, and seek to strike Washington DC in a suicide attack. [47]

NORAD Exercises, 1999 -2001: “In the two years before the Sept. 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace Defense Command conducted exercises simulating what the White House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties… numerous types of civilian and military aircraft” were used as mock hijacked aircraft,” One target is the World Trade Center. [48]

National Reconnaissance Office Drill, Chantilly, Virginia: "Top U.S. Intelligence Agency was to simulate plane crash into government building on September 11, 2001. U.S. intelligence agency was planning an exercise last Sept. 11 in which an errant aircraft would crash into one of its buildings.” [49]

The National Reconnaissance Office drill simulated an airplane crashing into the headquarters of the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) in Chantilly, Virginia, near Dulles Airport. It meant that the employees of the NRO were evacuated from their buildings just as the 9/11 attacks were actually taking place. The NRO was a super-secret agency responsible for spy satellites and other eavesdropping from space. It was created in 1960, and its existence was not officially acknowledged for some 32 years. The NRO draws its personnel from the military and the Central Intelligence Agency and has a budget equal to the combined budgets of both the CIA and the National Security Agency. On 11 September 2001, the NRO director was Keith R. Hall, who had headed the agency since 1996. In his capacity as DNRO, Hall was responsible for the acquisition and operation of all United States space-based reconnaissance and intelligence systems. At the same time Hall also served as Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Space. Booz Allen Hamilton was reportedly a prominent subcontractor for the NRO. The obvious effect of evacuating the NRO was at least temporarily to blind institutional US intelligence to events which could have been monitored from space. NRO could have provided a real time view of the air space over North America; as a result of the evacuation, this may not have been available. The advantages for the perpetrators are obvious.

Great interest naturally attaches to the NRO drill, since it corresponds in real time to the airplanes which impacted the World Trade center. The NRO is a co-production of CIA, NSA, and the rest of the US intelligence community; its task is to maintain US spy satellites. It is accordingly well able to follow the movements of airliners without recourse to radars of any kind. With the help of Global Hawk drone technology, it could also steer these airliners by remote control. This drill was under the command of John Fulton, the chief of the NRO’s strategic war gaming office, and his CIA cohorts. The organizers claim that “as soon as the real world events began, we cancelled the exercise,” and the NRO’s 3,000 personnel were told to go home – an extremely unlikely scenario for a country supposedly under foreign attack. What happened in the NRO buildings after the employees had left? Did a skeleton crew remain? The guess here is that, with parts of the NRO building possibly empty, flying planes into buildings kept going as flying planes into buildings – in Manhattan.

AIRLINE CRASHES, COLLAPSING BUILDINGS IN NEW YORK CITY

The collapse of buildings was also the object of a drill which had been recently held in New York City. This time the sponsor was not the federal government, but the City of New York under the adventurer Mayor Rudolph Giuliani.

Red Ex was a “Recognition, Evaluation, and Decision-Making Exercise, ”New York City: It was a scenario of plane crashes and building collapses drilled by the NYC Office of Emergency Management (OEM), Fire Department of New York (FDNY), New York City Police Department (NYPD), FBI, FEMA, May 11, 2001. [50]

Red Ex was the precursor to Tripod II on the part of the Giuliani administration of the City of New York. It drilled the most spectacular aspect of 9/11: the collapse of buildings. It was so realistic that, in the words of one participant, “five minutes into that drill, everybody forgot it was a drill.” According to Richard Sheirer, the New York OEM Director, “Operation RED Ex provided a proving ground and a great readiness training exercise for the many challenges the city routinely faces, such as weather events, heat emergencies, building collapses, fires, and public safety and health issues.” Later, Giuliani’s corrupt crony Bernard Kerick, the New York Police Commissioner (who was too dirty to become Secretary of Homeland Security, and was later jailed), told the 9/11 Commission that among the emergencies the city prepared for were specifically “building collapses” and “plane crashes.” [51] Here is the perfect vehicle and cover for the controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and Building Seven of the World Trade Center, otherwise demonstrated by the work of Professor Steven Jones. More research is needed to determine exactly how the simulation of building collapses might be linked to the proven reality of controlled demolition.

A related question is whether New York Mayor Giuliani’s advance knowledge that the towers would collapse derived from Red Ex, Tripod II, or some other drill. There is no doubt that Giuliani had advanced warning that the towers would fall. The Mayor told Peter Jennings of ABC news on the afternoon of 9/11: “I went down to the scene and we set up headquarters at 75 Barclay Street, which was right there, with the police commissioner, the fire commissioner, the head of emergency management, and we were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was going to collapse. And it did collapse before we could actually get out of the building, so we were trapped in the building for ten, 15 minutes, and finally found an exit and got out, walked north, and took a lot of people with us.” [52]

Of course, hundreds of office workers, cops, firemen, and others in the South Tower never got the warning that Giuliani said he received. Instead, they were told to stay put, and many of them died. Loud speakers announced: “Our building is secure. You can go back to your floor. If you’re a little winded, you can get a drink of water or coffee in the cafeteria.” [53]

Why was Giuliani warned, and not these office workers? Giuliani was confronted in the Bronx on May 31, 2007 by Sabrina Rivera, a truth activist whose boyfriend’s father was a fireman who died on 9/11. She asked Giuliani why he and his staff had received a special warning that the twin towers of the World Trade Center were going to collapse, when the people in the buildings never got that warning. Giuliani’s response contradicted everything he has ever said about 9/11 – he denied that he had ever received a warning that the twin towers were going to come down. We never though the towers would implode, stammered Giuliani. [54]

References

[38] “9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes,” Vanity Fair, September, 2006.

[39] New York Times, August 5, 2006.

[40] Washington Post, April 14, 2004, C9/11T.

[41] American Forces Press Service, 6/4/2002; Arkin, 2005, 253; GlobalSecurity.org, 4/27/2005, C9/11T.

[42] Cfr. the NORAD account at http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/...algumVirgo.pdf

[43] See C9/11T for a fuller list of sources.

[44] C9/11T; Air Force Times, 4/13/2004; Boston Herald, 4/14/2004; Washington Post, 4/14/2004; New York Times, 4/14/2004; Guardian, 4/15/2004.

[45] “One of [NORAD’s] imagined targets was the World Trade Center. In another exercise, jets performed a mock shootdown over the Atlantic Ocean of a jet supposedly laden with chemical poisons headed toward a target in the United States. In a third scenario, the target was the Pentagon — but that drill was not run after Defense officials said it was unrealistic, NORAD and Defense officials say.” (USA Today, April 18, 2004); Guardian, 4/15/2004; Air Force Times, 4/13/2004; Boston Herald, 4/14/2004; Washington Post, 4/14/2004; New York Times, 4/14/2004; Guardian, 4/15/2004; C9911T.

[46] CNN, 4/19/2004, C9/11T.

[47] Slate, 7/22/2004; 9/11 Commission, 345, 457-458, C9/11T.

[48] USA Today, April 18, 2004, C9/11T.

[49] Associated Press, August 21, 2002; UPI August 22, 2002; C9/11T.

[50] New York Sun, 12/20/2003; C9/11T.

[51] 9/11 Commission, 5/18/2004, C9/11T.

[52] ABC News, 9/11/2001.

[53] New York Times, September 13, 2001, C9/11T.

[54] The Sabrina Rivera intervention was covered by New York City stations WNBC channel 4, WCBS channel 2 (in both local news telecasts and website postings), and Hannity and Colmes on Fox, as well as Rawstory and other internet sites.
wake_up_bomb is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:54 PM.