It is not a FEMA exercise but a FEMA class.6) Sandy Hook:
On the day of the event, starting at 9.00 am, a FEMA exercise ‘Planning for the Needs of Children in Disasters’ took place in Connecticut not far from Sandy Hook. Some conjecture that this got moved and happened at the school, which would account for the presence of Federal troops there seemingly much too early.
This is a program for a school terror-drill. ‘FSE’ ‘Full-Scale Exercise’ means actors are being used, etc. To quote from a Department of Homeland Security brochure about the school terror-drills: ‘Each participating city is eligible for a one-time grant of 280,000 dollars for the acquisition of training equipment related to WMD domestic preparedness…’
You can take the course yourself. The course deals with the specific needs of children in disasters such as different food, the need to screen potential registered sex offenders from congregant shelters involving children, etc. It is not an exercise and did not involve crisis actors.
Course Overview
The purpose of this course is to provide guidance for Emergency Managers and implementers of children’s programs about meeting the unique needs that arise among children as a result of a disaster or emergency.
The course includes the following lessons:
- Lesson 1: Course Overview
- Lesson 2: Unique Needs of Children in Disasters
- Lesson 3: Critical Components of a Child’s World
- Lesson 4: Mitigation
- Lesson 5: Preparedness
- Lesson 6: Response
- Lesson 7: Recovery
- Resources Toolkit (downloadable PDF file)
1) THE "PLANE-INTO-BUILDING" DRILL OF 9/11:
On 9/11, an agency of the Department of Defense and the CIA was conducting a terror scenario in which an imaginary airplane from Washington's Dulles International Airport was to crash into one of the four towers of the suburban campus of the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) in Chantilly, Virginia, just a few miles from the Pentagon. The plane that allegedly crashed into the Pentagon, American Airlines Flight 77, departed from the same airport at 8:20 a.m. on 9/11.
When the terror scenario became real in New York and at the Pentagon, the NRO exercise was cancelled and nearly all its three thousand employees, the people who operate the nation's "eye in the sky," were sent home.
As the agency that operates the nation's spy satellites, the NRO personnel come from the military and the CIA. When the attacks occurred, however, most of the three thousand people who work at the agency were sent home. Why would they do that?
The fact that the spy agency had planned such a drill was casually leaked in an announcement for a Homeland Security conference in Chicago in 2002. In a promotion for speaker John Fulton, a CIA officer assigned as chief of NRO's strategic gaming division, the announcement said:
On the morning of September 11, 2001, Mr. Fulton and his team ... were running a pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building. Little did they know that the scenario would come true in a dramatic way that day.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/press-...9-11-commission-and-operation-able-danger/965
I'm here for the chemtrails. I'll post my observations on other topics if they seem relevant.
How exceptionally crass and generally heartless. I hope you're just trolling, and not so dreadful a human being as all that. In any event, if the violent murders which catalyzed the entire modern North American ethos are so terribly dull to you, perhaps you could keep out of related threads.
I'll gladly take the ban on this one if that's the case, Cairenn. I've got much harsher language for anyone who thinks of the brutal mass-murder which entirely redefined our society as 'boring'. Shit's callous to an extreme degree.
No idea. Perhaps you could assist me in that regard? I've had a search about the web, but I can't find any figures on the subject. If there's a record of other, uneventful days in which multiple hijacking and terrorist attack drills and exorcises were concentrated prior to Sept. 11th, then it would indeed seem rather significantly less suspicious. Again, all I've heard from the debunking side on this is 'well, lots of drills in America, y'know...' and never with anything to back that up.
So the drills in your area are scheduled based on the expected or likely weather patterns around that time of year, and being prepared for those expected/likely weather patterns, just in case? I don't see how this strengthens your position that related drills scheduled for/around 9/11 aren't evidence of expectation/preparation/foreknowledge. Unless you're not even talking about a bad-weather drill, and are just commenting on how it frequently rains on this event of yours... in which case I don't see the relevance.
I'm sorry, I don't understand the relevance of this anecdote, nor the point you're trying to make with it. Could you explain how you perceive my reasoning here?
I am certain there is a record of drills but not centralised and kept at local level by which ever authority requested/ran it.
Most drills are just drills, but every once in a while a drill becomes a real disaster.
It's not the event that is boring, it's the circular arguments that insistently play out that are - there's a difference between finding that boring and finding the event itself boring.
If he wants to correct himself, allow him too. He said what he said, and it's not what you're saying here. You don't have to leap to his defense, it's not a team-sport.
If that's the case, could someone make a reach for these 'limits', and actually provide a mote of substantiation? Like, actually SHOWING that terrorist attack and hijacking drills are indeed as common as you say? That's all I keep hearing, over and over again on this subject, "Oooohh, the US runs lots of drills, so it's perfectly normal." Well that's great to say and all, but I've yet to see any evidence of it. Yes, surely, lots of drills were run in America in any given month prior to 9/11. But WERE they typically as concentrated as they were on 9/11, and WERE they frequently involving terrorist attacks/hijacked planes? Was it unusual or not, and on what are you basing the presumption that it isn't? All I'm getting here is 'we're assuming so, and that should be good enough."
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/o...ped-along-by-the-fbi.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 here you go. It's actually something of an acknowledged fact.
There's nothing at all wrong with an anecdote when it has bearing on the subject at hand. I understand how there would be no shortage of drills and exorcises taking place with various emergency services throughout the year in the UK, likely on an almost daily basis. That said, the drill taking place on the day of the London bombings, as claimed by the man orchestrating it, was meant to simulate response to bombings at the exact same sites where the bombings actually took place. That seems a rather cosmic-scale coincidence, doesn't it? Can it really be explained by "Well, folks were brain-storming about 9/11, guess they just got lucky..!"
The media coverage of these instances of entrapment sell them to the American people as actual terrorist attacks, thwarted by the FBI. If a majority of Americans are lead to believe these were actual attacks which threatened actual lives, and experience any amount of fear/distrust/paranoia as a result which influenced their opinions or their votes, that qualifies as terrorism, doesn't it? If not, why?
I just related to his statement, in that the arguing around this event alternately frustrates, aggravates, and bores me, and so gave my opinion of the statement's meaning as one who feels the same.
I don't know if this is what you're looking for (I suspect it wont be no matter what anyway) but here is a list of Fema drills I found on above top secret
I just related to his statement, in that the arguing around this event alternately frustrates, aggravates, and bores me, and so gave my opinion of the statement's meaning as one who feels the same.
I don't know if this is what you're looking for (I suspect it wont be no matter what anyway) but here is a list of Fema drills I found on above top secret
http://www.globalresearch.ca/press-conference-of-rep-curt-weldon-9-11-commission-and-operation-able-danger/965
Your link doesn't mention 9/11
Yep they planned ahead, pre 2001.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_MASCAL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_government_operations_and_exercises_on_September_11,_2001
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?entity=global_guardian
Nothing to due with terrorism. This is a yearly exercise.Global Guardian is an annual training exercise sponsored by the United States Strategic Command in conjunction with Air Force Space Command and NORAD. Its main purpose is to test the military's command and control procedures in the event of nuclear warfare.
http://www.911myths.com/html/nro_drill.html
Your previous link did a better job explaining this.
FEMA observed a NY OEM exercise related to bioterrorism. FEMA was in New York City before 9/11 though. Way before. The FEMA Region II office is in NYC.On September 12, 2001, there was due to take place the second part of an exercise known as Operation Tripod, set up to "test the plan to distribute antibiotics to the entire city population during a bioterrorism attack"[13] Richard Sheirer, director of the New York City mayor's Office of Emergency Management (OEM), had hired "over 1,000 Police Academy cadets and Fire Department trainees to play terrified civilians afflicted with various medical conditions, allergies, and panic attacks." Various individuals were invited to watch, including Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, the police and fire commissioners, and representatives of the FBI and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).[14]
Federal Region II
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10278-0002
Telephone: (212) 680-3600
Sure they did. The FBI very actively and physically orchestrated terrorist attacks. The attacks were simply 'thwarted', and never involved real tangible danger of wide-scale physical harm. These are instances in which the FBI orchestrated and encouraged a 'terrorist attack', in order to 'foil' it and influence public opinion. That the danger was never real is besides the point. These are instances in which the FBI used the threat of violence to influence political opinions, which is terrorism by the book, isn't it?
I didn't twist his statement in the slightest, I took it at face-value. You're just giving him the benefit of the doubt, which is fine, but involves more 'twisting' than I've done.
Then you didn't read the article, or research any of the cases mentioned. These wren't dudes with a plan to blow something up given dummy bombs, these 'attacks' were, from the PLANNING stage, orchestrated by FBI agents. These weren't FBI agents sitting in an AlQueda chat-room under the moniker 'OBL<34U' waiting for terrorists to message them and say "Hey, I've got a bomb plot, wanna get on it...?!" This was the FBI seeking out people with terrorist sympathies and organizing/supplying/encouraging/transporting them in an effort to carry out attacks on targets which the FBI itself selected.
You keep completely dismissing the crucial point. When these fake terrorist attacks were thwarted, the American people were told that real and potentially deadly terrorist threats had existed, and could have been carried out without the protection of the FBI. The FBI orchestrated a threat of violence themselves in order to politically manipulate the American people. The use of threats and violence to manipulate public political opinion is the definition of a terrorist act.
So your argument here boils down to your personal interpretation of the usage of the word 'staged'? Well....
emphasis added in the hopes of putting semantics soundly behind us.
The FBI has admitted to what we're discussing Cairenn. Look to the article linked a few posts back.
So, to repeat myself, your argument here boils down to the semantics of the term 'staged', and how you personally choose to read the word. You seem to feel the usage requires an actual explosion/injuries/deaths. Please view the dictionary definition provided above, and it should dissuade you of this notion. Orchestrating, encouraging, providing materials, scheduling of, and transport for a terrorist attack is a process carried out in planned stages. A contrived terrorist attack meant to entrap someone with jihadist leanings is a staged event. The term fits on several levels.
I don't think I'm doing that much twisting at all. The FBI orchestrated, supported, funded, and facilitated dummy terrorist attacks. The mislead patsies carrying these attacks out aside, the American People were not immediately informed there was no real threat. The exact opposite in fact is true: the American people were told these were real threats to their safety. In a Country where the deaths of 3000 people to a terrorist attack remains a salted wound of the subconscious, what else but fear, uncertainty, and compliance with growing authority could result of all these reported terrorists eagerly hatching plots in our midst? What cause would they have to make these contrivances public as threats, other than to inspire fear, uncertainty, and an environment conducive to growing authority? And is the definition of terrorism not the use of violence/the threat of violence to inspire fear and sway opinion?
