Was there another sinister reason for those fake 9-11 exercises?

Did the planned joint CIA/NORAD simulation exercies scheduled for September 11, 2001 serve more than one purpose?

Many people now believe that the exercises were planned as a cover for the actual conspiracy. I think so, too. However; in my opinion, they served a second, equally vital, little-talked about purpose: To trick some loyal, patriotic Americans into doing something they would never consciously agree to - participate in the deadly self-attacks of 9-11.

One realistic possibility is somewhat analogous to the idea in a firing squad, where only one rifle contains a bullet and no-one knows which rifle it's in.

There might well have been two separate teams working on the (fake) simulation attack exercises, and members of the teams had no knowledge of their counterparts.

I haven't thought through exactly how all of this could have played out, and it's possible that only one team was used. Maybe the second team was so compartmentalized that the members had no idea that they were even participating in a simulated terrorist attack or accidental crash into the Pentagon.

Regardless of how many teams there were, and the details of how the exercises were carried out, the bottom line is that the simulation exercises made it very easy to trick people into particpating in a deadly conspiracy they wouldn't have otherwise willingly joined.

Your thoughts?

The concern for the particular event should have been concerned with air defense. That is what that scenario is a result of - failed defense.

So if it really were what it said it was it would have been a different exercise. There's really no acceptable excue as to why there was no air defense.

squad is that there is only one BLANK used, so nobody could be certain that they had actually killed. Perhaps someone here is more familiar with "execution etiquette" than I am.

Even so, YOU aren't even sure about YOUR point...which is not only minor
and even if it's correct, wouldn't change the issue of using the alleged planned simulation attacks as a means of tricking people into taking part in a conspiracy; thus it's not only minor and by your own admission, possibly wrong, but also it's irrelevant to the topic and it's implications.

Do me a favor next time, please: Whenever you come across a minor point or one that you feel or know is inaccurate, but irrelevant...purge the urge to point it out in public. Bringing it up will only encourage certain people here to respond to troublesome issues by turning your attention away from the more important, real issues.

Know what I mean?

sharing information, and even civilly disagreeing over issues both great and small seem to be a regular feature of DU. It's certainly one of the reasons why I come here. I tried to politely ask a question with no ill intent towards anyone.

As to my belief that one blank is used in an execution, I based it on Norman Mailer's description of the process of executing Gary Gilmore in "The Executioner's Song". With Gilmore, there were four "shooters" and only three real bullets. I do not know if that is just the way that Utah did it or whether there is some sort of tradition about whether and how many blanks should be used, which is why I did not claim any special knowledge.

Taking a thread "off topic" is also a frequent occurrence here. Sometimes the best posts have very little to do with the topic which started it. I'm not suggesting that my post was particularly insightful, just that it was well within bounds.

I'm not sure what "encourage certain people here to respond to troublesome issues by turning your attention away from the more important, real issues" is supposed to mean. Am I wrong because I focused on a minor point, rather than the issue you raised or are you telling me that I'd better shut up or I'm not welcome here?

No offense was intended and I don't know why any was taken.

...if you don't want angry replies (or any replies, for that matter) just ask them about something substantive.

...are those crickets I hear?

Welcome to DU, by the way!

:hi:

"I'm not sure what "encourage certain people here to respond to troublesome issues by turning your attention away from the more important, real issues" is supposed to mean. Am I wrong because I focused on a minor point, rather than the issue you raised or are you telling me that I'd better shut up or I'm not welcome here?"

You're aren't "wrong" about anything (different firing squads use different methods to achieve the same result...people doing things without being able to know the results of their action).

Next time, if your only contribution must be about a minor point; how about making it a minor point that is related to the TOPIC ...which in this case is the sinister use of "V.G." exercises to get ordinary people to join in a conspiracy without their knowledge.

Certain people are here NOT to learn the truth about what happened on 9-11; but rather for the purpose of promoting the Official Conspiracy Theory and using various rhetorical devices to deflect attention away from ideas and information that might undermine their sales pitch for the "Wacky Cavepeople Acted Alone" Conspiracy Theory.

You can always start a thread about firing squads, if you happen to have a particular interest in that subject. There's even a forum dedicated to guns and related mattters.

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

What I find odd is how this was never part of the official story for why our defense failed that day. If that was, in fact, the reason...why wasn't this offered up as the excuse? As far as I know, it's never been offered up as such. I do recall Cheney went ballistic when sigintel picked up a message on 9/10 that said something to the efeect that the match was on tomorrow....he ended up ordering lie detector tests for the members of the Intelligence Committee to find the leaker. I wonder why.

Still no excuse for the Pentagon getting hit 52 minutes after the 2nd WTC crash.

If Mike Ruppert is right ( and he doesn´t fool around a lot, I believe ), there was exercices going on that we haven´t been told about.

" I have obtained an on-the-record statement from someone in NORAD, which confirmed that on the day of 9/11 The Joint Chiefs (Myers) and NORAD were conducting a joint, live-fly, hijack Field Training Exercise (FTX) which involved at least one (and almost certainly many more) aircraft under US control that was posing as a hijacked airliner. That is just the tip of what I have uncovered."

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/060704_tripod_fema.html

He was in Max Cleland's office was most of the attacks that day. Hmmmm, I wonder if that's why they've not promoted this exercise as the reason for the military standdown?

I guess Rupperts saying that the Joint Chieffs and Norad was conducting it, is not the same as saying that the Joint Chieffs was participating in it,(at least not on that very time and hour) ?

Amalgam Virgo is a joint-service, cruise-missile defense exercise at Tyndall AFB.

Fast, low-flying cruise missiles are hard to detect. To practice their part in defending the U.S. from these missiles, members of the 513th Air Control Group deployed to Florida for the "Amalgam Virgo" cruise missile defense exercise. The multi-service exercise tested the defense and response capabilities to a cruise missile attack on Tyndall Air Force Base, Fla., June 1-4, 2001.

Full article here: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/amalgam-virgo.htm

Amalgam: A combination of diverse elements; a mixture: an amalgam of strength, reputation, and commitment to ethical principles.

Virgo: A sign of the zodiac which the sun enters about the 21st of August, until the 22th of September marked thus <[Virgo>] in almanacs.

Thus we have a drill that brought diverse elements together under the sign of Gemini, May 22 to June 22.

Was this drill in fact the practice run for the real thing that most certainly did happen under the sign of Virgo as the name of the drill seemingly predicts?

I think you are probably exactly right. You have a very good mind.

Welcome, and please add any other thoughts you have about anything related to finding out the truth of 9-11.

Was an exercise supposedly to be held on Sept 12, 2001.

Giuliani's revelation to the Kean Commission on May 19 of a planned
Sept. 12 New York City BIO-warfare emergency exercise drill, called
"Tripod" (Part II), which had PIER 92 AS ITS COMMAND CENTER,
validated Tom Kenney's early claim that FEMA emergency personnel
arrived in NY City THE DAY BEFORE the attack, on Sept. 10…

Because FEMA personnel came into NY City from out of state,
including Kenney who came in from Boston; because putting up large numbers of out-of-state personnel is extremely costly at a time of belt tightening; and because ALL THESE OTHER wargames/exercises/drills took place ON Sept. 11,it is highly likely that the BIO-warfare response exercise Tripod was ALSO scheduled to begin Sept. 11, NOT SEPT. 12; or, at the very least, that Sept. 11was to have been the first of a TWO-day, or multiple-day, drill.

Full article here:
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/060704_tripod_fema.html


So now we have a drill that would simulate a response to a SUCCESSFUL attack, supposedly pre-scheduled so near the real attacks. This is after NORAD had done a drill on interceptions in June 2001.


Also I am very suspicious of the amount of time and effort going into the discrediting of the Dan Rather - Tom Kenney issue (FEMA arrived late Monday night interview). I don't believe that anyone thinks that this is the "Smoking Gun" that proves complicity of the US Govt in the 9/11 attacks. Why is so much effort being put into trying to debunk it?

... NOT for 9/11. My NJ OEM (Office Of Emergency Management) was informed in advanced of the Tripod exercise and was given a stand-down due to our zone (proximity to NYC) and critical weekday manpower numbers, but our associate OEMs in the zone closer to NYC were to order their fire departments to provide auxillary SCBA (Self Contained Breathing Apparatus) for Tripod.

FEMA drills are common. NYC is in the eastern states FEMA Red Zone. FEMA personnel are brought in from within the Red Zone and also from the central states White Zone and western states Blue Zone all the time as observers, trainers, and etc. There are several FEMA drills each and every year. Some are just table top, others are field. The last field drill just before 9/11 was a train scenario - a chemical tank car spill. FYI: A previous September FEMA field drill for NYC was cancelled by the arrival of Hurricane Floyd.

On 9/11 my OEM mobilized northern NJ fire departments into NYC, provided firefighting foams and mobile light tower equipment. Previous drills made these tasks run smoother.

on edit: Flights, hotels, ground transportation rentals, and other expenses for FEMA staff assigned to drills is already budgeted and is not a consideration or a factor as is being suggested.

Long Debunked "Rumor" Validated by Giuliani

FEMA in NYC prior to 9-11 for Project TRIPOD terror drill, scheduled for
9-12
By Gregor Holland

As of this writing, June 2, 2004, the transcript of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani's testimony to the 9-11 Commission during the May 18-19, 2004 hearings in New York is the only transcript of that hearing omitted from the Commission website ( http://www.9-11commission.gov).

Did Rudy say something wrong?

In case you missed it live, you can listen to his testimony in full at the WNYC radio website at: http://www.wnyc.org/news/articles/28147. As Giuliani recounts his experience of the day of 9/11, and the evolving location of the Emergency Command Center that morning, you might want to pay special attention to what he says at the end of his prepared statement:

"... the reason Pier 92 was selected as a command center was because on the next day, on September 12, Pier 92 was going to have a drill, it had hundreds of people here, from FEMA, from the Federal Government, from the State, from the State Emergency Management Office, and they were getting ready for a drill for biochemical attack. So that was gonna be the place they were going to have the drill. The equipment was already there, so we were able to establish a command center there, within three days, that was two and a half to three times bigger than the command center that we had lost at 7 World Trade Center. And it was from there that the rest of the search and rescue effort was completed."

Readers may remember that on the days immediately after 9/11/01 there was a nasty little rumor running around the internet that FEMA had arrived in NYC on Monday September 10, thus implying foreknowledge of the disaster. The source of the rumor was a September 13, 2001 interview between CBS News anchor Dan Rather and Tom Kennedy (later corrected to Kenney) of FEMA National Urban Search and Rescue. Here is a transcript of the brief interview:

Rather: "Tom Kennedy... Kenney, a rescue worker with the National Urban Search and Rescue, it's part of FEMA... "

Kennedy: "We're currently one of the first teams that was deployed to support the city of New York for this disaster. We arrived on late Monday night, and went into action on Tuesday morning. And not until today did we get a full opportunity to work the entire site."

Full article: http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/archive/scoop/stories/fc/88/200406030034.f9b501af.html

Command center all ready to go ,complete with personel and equipment, for the "bioterror drill".

.... statement are "... we were able to establish a command center there, within three days ..."

From my limited role in OEM (having received and made calls to and from NYC OEM for equipment, manpower, lighting, firefighting foams and etc) I'll state that on the morning of 9-11 OEM at 7 Trade Center was functional until personnel relocated to 1 Police Plaza. After that #7 was shut down. Pier 92 CCC (Command and Control Center) wasn't activated until a couple of days later, and only after the struggle for 'who was in charge' was over.

I recall reading awhile back that jurisdiction in this type of event was to be given automatically to the FDNY. However, the loss of so many senior personnel in the collapse of the south tower led to (or confused) the ensuing "power struggle". Any thoughts on this?

... and I may be wrong, but the most serious power struggles over command and control really were not between NYC agencies, but were instead between City agencies and those of NY State and the federal government.

There were a couple of glitches and a few missed heartbeats but initial requests and other exchanges to and from City agencies by phone, fax and some but only a little email got through and were generally pretty clear and concise; but there were head scratching confusing moments (duplications and misdirected requests for example) when the State and the federal guys first got involved.

In my opinion, even with the loss of rank and file firefighters, line officers and Chiefs, the FDNY did an excellent job or balancing act handling their needs at the Trade Center while still providing fire protection to the rest of the City. They had to do a recall of all off duty presonell and initiate mutual aid response from NJ, Westchester and from the Island. Under the direction and command of FDNY several of my local NJ volunteer fire departments for example went to NYC, occupied vacated fire stations and responded as FDNY would to fire emergencies, or provided logistical support.

My own dealings were just with their OEM personell. OEM is morphed from the old 1950s Civil Defense Prepardedness Programs. OEM is never in charge, it just plans for and provides logistical support and resources to first responders during catastrophic events. Until 9/11 all my OEM ever encountered was blackouts, hurricanes and blizzards. On 9/11 and the days thereafter my OEM received requests for and provided helicopter landing zones, additional ambulances, large diameter (5 inch) firefighting hose, firefighting foams, lighting equipment, lists for generators, heavy equipment (cranes) and flat bed and dump trucks, diesel fuel delivery tank trucks, oxy-acetelyene compressed gasses, work gloves, respirators, bottled drinking water, and for finding additional refrigerated locations for use as temporary morgues.

Some of the above requests were from FDNY, NYPD, EMS and Health and Hospital, DOT, or the FBI; but ALL came through the OEM Center. That's how I know when and where it was located after #7 had to be vacated.

Many people now believe that the exercises were planned as a cover for the actual conspiracy.

How does a simulated response to an emergency act as a cover for the so called "actual" conspricy?

Please respond.

People of NYC should be greatful that FEMA has such good timing in the scheduling of training exercises. EVEN IF there was a sinister purpose to them.


http://www.xymphora.blogspot.com/

plywood and toilet paper folks ... aka FEMA ... Abe.

FEMA isn't a command or control organization .... they're support ... they come with $$$ ... they only come when called ... even though they're officed in every major city 24/7.

FEMA is top heavy with high paid politically appointed pencil pushing bean counting white shirt and plain blue tie geeks ... all field personnell are drawn from local county or city agencies, and other than yearly stripends field crews are only paid when working for FEMA. The top guys will say or do anything ... kiss as much ass as necessary to keep their jobs salaries bennies and pensions ... hey, didn't they publish that insulting ass first collapse report? See? Say anything ... do anything.

Q: Know why FEMA is called in by mayors of cities ... know why cities hold drills with FEMA?
A: To get money from FEMA. That's why. That's the only reason. If there was no $$ they'd laugh at FEMA to their faces instead of behind their backs ... which all the cities are doing ... laughing ... long and hard at FEMA.

The toilet paper and plywood folks .... you're over rating these idiots ... and idiots they are ... they couldn't find water if they fell out of a boat.

Your message doesn't have anything to do with the fact that FEMA's little exercise was conveniently planned so that they would already be on the scene when the BIG Show took place.

and the point is that FEMA does not plan or conduct drills or exercises. They just participate. This was NYC's drill; NOT a FEMA drill. They were just one of numerous agencies that would participate. Until the LA earthquakes, Columbia mudslides and Mexico City collapse incidents all FEMA really ever did was just help clean up, come with cash and supply "toilet paper and plywood" after hurricanes. I think the point being made is that it was a NYC Emergency Services drill; not a FEMA drill.

The CDC (Center for Disease Control) was also in NYC for the same drill. Does that mean we should call it a CDC drill? Heck no. FEMA's NYC office had extra people called in for a drill, and that's just an SOP, Standard Operating Procedure.

I think lots of folks overate FEMA's power and their function in general, and misunderstand FEMA's role.

I guess people interested in the minutia of bureaucratic infighting might enjoy reading reading posts bashing one acronym over another, but the point of THIS thread is:

* Planned exercises were a cover for the REAL THING (9-11 attacks)...and to be on hand to mop-up after the hits.

* Planned exercises involving the Military was a clever way of getting patriotic Americans to do things that wouldn't have otherwise done.

... and finally see your point.


Just some information about FEMA: My dealings with FEMA were 5 years ago when Hurricane Floyd hit NJ. They could not come until the governor asked, and then only after she declared it a disaster area due to the flooding. FEMA was two guys in a Chevy van from Newark. All they did was speed things up. As OEM I was trying to get boats, sandbags, pumps, potable water, food and generators, but I found that the storm had far over taxed the local municipal mutual aid systems and other county wide assistance agreements. Vendors could supply my needs, but first wanted to know who was paying - and when. That was my major problem; funds, my needs were triple my budget. When those two guys from FEMA rolled in with blank checks all those problems disappeared.

Since then a trickle of FEMA funds replaced or repaired all broken and damaged equipment, paid for upgrades, reimbursed expenses, and assisted with planning; but to get these funds - and to keep them coming - my municipality had to adopt FEMA's computerized emergency incident reporting system and have them in for drills; some field drills, but most just table top. FEMA takes a back seat in these drills; they observe, they only rovide material and other support when asked, and then after FEAM will critique and offer suggestions. FEMA does not run the show.

I can happily add that FEMA's involvement also has eliminated political appointments. Important municipal positions were often given to friends of elected officials who had no training or experience in disaster management. FEMA funding requires a great deal of training for these positions, so gone are the knuckleheads who got their appointments because they "knew somebody."

to my question

How does a simulated response to an emergency act as a cover for the so called "actual" conspricy?

BTW, I'm not real convinced that FEMA had much of an impact on 9/11 anyway because they were in town that day. They are not first responders, and as such likely did not provide much direct support on 9/11. FEMA being in town possibly helped get resources a little quicker, but there is no reason to think that they would have been a significant difference if they were 500 miles away or 1 mile away.

Now perhaps you could answer my question or do I have to wait another 18 days?

The fact that you are having such a difficult time grasping the relatively minor point of how exercises were planned for 9-11 are just too convenient to be (in Disinfo/PR talk) coincidental...tells me that you must be auditioning for a new job. Otherwise, please accept my apology. I didn't have it in mind to make fun of people who are a little slower than the rest of us, and that is how you seem to be taking it. Sorry.

Abe, you old hyperbolic spinner. Do you really think you can continue changing the subject to avoid answering the question?

To make sure you follow rememder, let me repost the issue.

Abe stated;

Many people now believe that the exercises were planned as a cover for the actual conspiracy.

My question;

How does a simulated response to an emergency act as a cover for the so called "actual" conspiracy?

So here we are again. You making outrageous claims, based on nothing but wild speculation. Me asking you explain your claims. To provide some evidence, some critical thought process, to validate your claims; and me winding up with only spin.

Come'on Abe try discourse. Can you do it? Or is staying on message the only thing you are permitted to do?

Abe, the link just rehashed the same stuff about the mixed up dates and how having FEMA nearby was somehow a good idea if you are going to knock down a building. Abe, my old buddy, this doesn't answer the question. It just parrots back the same stuff you are saying or visa-versa.

Lets post it one more time

Abe stated;

Many people now believe that the exercises were planned as a cover for the actual conspiracy.

My question;

How does a simulated response to an emergency act as a cover for the so called "actual" conspiracy?

"lared" -- How does your phony posturing act as a cover for your real purpose in being here?

Many people now believe that the exercises were planned as a cover for the actual conspiracy.

one would think you could come up with at one reason a simulated response to an emergency acts as a cover for the so called "actual" conspiracy?

I guess not.

Thank you.

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

I hope that you will find it convenient to get up to speed on important issues like these. Hopefully, after you do that, you'll be willing to go ahead and acknowledge before everyone here that you've always had a suspicion about the Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory, but you can no longer, in good conscience, give "them" the benefit of the doubt.

n/t

Abe stated;

Many people now believe that the exercises were planned as a cover for the actual conspiracy.

My question;

How does a simulated response to an emergency act as a cover for the so called "actual" conspiracy?

if i understand the questions, maybe like this:

with fake hijacked planes in the air and non-existent hijacked planes on radar screens as blips (both as part of the exercises), it would be extra confusing for ATCs and whoever else to focus attention on the actual four hijacked planes. the odds of responding to one of the real planes gets smaller.

how's that? is that even a starting piint?

it doesn't provide for the fact that the radar tapes were reviewed many times after the crashes. "Confusing" ATCs by putting a bunch of unidentified targets in the area is a possibility, but with unlimited time to review the tapes, it's unreasonable to believe that the reviewers would experience any confusion.

Where? Link? You have read that radar tapes were reviewed many times, perhaps in the 9/11 report?

Radar tapes are being recorded 24/7. Any significant event gets reviewed...multiple times, if necessary.

You ASSUME SOP was followed, after 9/11, if not on the day.
Where's the evidence?

that they reviewed them. Since that's SOP, I don't see any reason to disbelieve that it happened.

LARED:

Here is a demonstration of how those war games obscured those ATC's and how the 9/11 Ommission is more than happy to keep things obscured.....

NEADS ordered to battle stations the TWO F-15 alert aircraft at otis airforce base in falmouth,massachusetts,153 miles away from new york city.The air defence of america began with this call.
9/11 CR.
Page 20.

.......and here is the real quantity of F-15's that were airborne from otis AFB..........

"I thought it was very strange to see EIGHT F-15 fighter jets taking off on each other's tail, a sight I have not seen since I moved here in 1999. Usually only 2 to 4 of them are ever out at the same time. I got home to turn on the television to see that "a plane" had hit the World Trade Center. As I was taking it all in, the second plane hit."
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/special/sept11/feedback/feedback_responses01.html

First I've heard that there were 8 planes flying out of Otis.

I recall back in the weeks proceeding 9/11 that the point was made the US only had 15 fighters on station to cover the entire continent. Were 1/2 of those located at Otis?

The attacks were planned to utilize the confusion created by making the exercise real. It was to be expected that there would be a substantial reaction delay when all of a sudden an imaginary exercise turns real. That's why everyone in the intelligence community was freaking out. They believe that Osama had somehow used the wargames to his advantage and the failure was so complete that they needed to hide how effective it really was. This is the grand cover-up that people think they're covering. It's not but this is how they were drawn into the conspiracy and some unwittingly aided it.

These execrises happen every year. It's part of NORAD's training cycle. The scope of the exercise and the scenarios change but the fact that these events were planned does not mean the planners were in on the conspiracy. What this shows is that the plans were comprimised and the attacks were engineered to coincide with the exercise, not the other way around.