Drills on the same day as terrorist attacks

SR1419

Senior Member.
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.

The original claim was the FBI staged terrorist attacks. No attacks took place. Hence, the claim is false.

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 doesn't require an actual attack. Please view the dictionary definition provided below, and it should dissuade you of this notion

Shall we play again??


v. staged, stag·ing, stag·es
v.tr.
1. To exhibit or present on or as if on a stage: stage a boxing match.
2. To produce or direct (a theatrical performance).

3. To arrange and carry out: stage an invasion.

4.
Medicine To determine the extent or progression of (a cancer, for example).
v.intr.
1. To be adaptable to or suitable for theatrical presentation.
2. To stop at a designated place in the course of a journey: "tourists from London who had staged through Warsaw" (Frederick Forsyth).


You are twisting. You want to impart political motives where it could very well they- the FBI- felt they were simply doing their job.

Someone willing to commit violence IS a real threat- whether they were duped by the FBI or not.

If you looked past the opinion piece into each individual incident you will see some real potential to commit acts of violence.
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
The thwarted attack in Dallas, is a good example. The young man thought he had a car bomb that would go off with a signal from a cell phone. He drove the truck into the parking garage, came out, was picked up by his 'friends, the FBI agents' and he sent the signal.

If it had been a real bomb, folks would have died. He was willing to kill. Is there a chance he would have backed out if he had not encountered the agents? Of course there is, is there a good chance he wouldn't have, Yes.

It was only reported after he had been arrested. The FBI did the right thing.

It is unfortunate that you would prefer folks to be killed to advance the agenda of a useless government.
 

Grieves

Senior Member
Shall we play again??
v. staged, stag·ing, stag·es
v.tr.
1. To exhibit or present on or as if on a stage: stage a boxing match.
2. To produce or direct (a theatrical performance).

3. To arrange and carry out: stage an invasion.
yayyyy points...!
Again, you're stuck, apparently deliberately, on one narrow definition. That's in pretty bold defiance of the English language in general. In this case, the use of 'staged' refers, as stated previously, both to how the FBI planned these events (execution is not a requirement), and to the fact that they were contrivances; 'staged' attacks, performances for the 'suspects' and presentations for the public with no risk of wide-scale harm. Please, for the love of reason, can we get past this 'I say staged means only this, and therefor you are wrong!' argument...?

The thwarted attack in Dallas, is a good example. The young man thought he had a car bomb that would go off with a signal from a cell phone. He drove the truck into the parking garage, came out, was picked up by his 'friends, the FBI agents' and he sent the signal.

If it had been a real bomb, folks would have died. He was willing to kill. Is there a chance he would have backed out if he had not encountered the agents? Of course there is, is there a good chance he wouldn't have, Yes.

It was only reported after he had been arrested. The FBI did the right thing.
Emphasis added for SR's benefit. 'Thwarted attack' is how the events were meant to be perceived. The FBI staged (as in contrived) a terrorist attack, which they then 'thwarted'.

The FBI provided the 'bombs'. The FBI provided the cellphone. The FBI provided the detonators. The FBI told the guy what to do with it all. The FBI advocated and encouraged his actions, making him feel as though he were part of a group. The FBI drove the guy out there. Who's to say he'd have been willing to kill without all that encouragement? Maybe he would have been, but in that case, wouldn't direct intervention in the wake of discovering his rhetoric rather than a highly expensive and complex entrapment scheme be better for almost everyone; the suspect, the tax payer, the average jane/joe? So why go through the show? Who does the big, loud production benefit? Not all that complicated to come to a reasonable conclusion there.

It is unfortunate that you would prefer folks to be killed to advance the agenda of a useless government.
Pardon my french, but what in the flying fuck are you talking about here? Where in the world do you read that into what I've said?
 
Last edited:

Cairenn

Senior Member.
Because he went looking for a bomb maker and contacts.

You and your 'buddies', don't want any surveillance, any 'spying', any intervention that would prevent an attack. It seems to me, that there would be only one reason for that, and that would be so that you can show how useless the government is, and thus that it needs to be replaced with one you chose. Maybe y'all don't think that far ahead (is thinking that some may--my own form of a conspiracy theory? it may be--) but the result would be the same thing. The Nazis were elected, and part of that was because they convinced folks that it was useless to vote, since all 'parties were the same'. Many non Nazi Germans were used to help them get in power.

Let me ask you this, do you also oppose police or FBI agents posing as young girls in chat rooms, in order to find pedophiles?
 

Grieves

Senior Member
Because he went looking for a bomb maker and contacts.

You and your 'buddies', don't want any surveillance, any 'spying', any intervention that would prevent an attack. It seems to me, that there would be only one reason for that, and that would be so that you can show how useless the government is, and thus that it needs to be replaced with one you chose. Maybe y'all don't think that far ahead (is thinking that some may--my own form of a conspiracy theory? it may be--) but the result would be the same thing. The Nazis were elected, and part of that was because they convinced folks that it was useless to vote, since all 'parties were the same'. Many non Nazi Germans were used to help them get in power.
Your position here has absolutely nothing to do with the current thread, and is generally ridiculous. How did 'the FBI staged terror attacks to sway public opinion, and that's a very bad thing' turn into 'lay down all authority and succumb to the rule of TROOTHERS!' in your mind? Now you're comparing me to a Nazi? Because I'm against gestapo-like tactics in general? Mind-bogglingly silly.

Let me ask you this, do you also oppose police or FBI agents posing as young girls in chat rooms, in order to find pedophiles?
That has no bearing on what we're discussing here, but no I don't.

I would however be -highly- opposed to the FBI posing as a pedophile ring, supporting and encouraging a pedophile to go out and abduct an actual child, and then assisting/allowing him/her to make the attempt in order to catch him/her in the act in a public display. I wouldn't give a damn how many precautions were taken to prevent him/her from escaping with the child. It remains wrong on several levels. Using an actual child as 'bait', actively encouraging an individual to engage in a sexual assault/rape, escalating the public fear of pedophilia with sensationalism.... all of it very, very wrong.

What's alright about using actual citizens as 'bait', actively encouraging an individual to engage in terrorism/murder, and then escalating the public fear of terrorism with sensationalism? It's wrong, and by definition fits the description of terrorism.
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
yayyyy points...!
Again, you're stuck, apparently deliberately, on one narrow definition. That's in pretty bold defiance of the English language in general. In this case, the use of 'staged' refers, as stated previously, both to how the FBI planned these events (execution is not a requirement), and to the fact that they were contrivances; 'staged' attacks, performances for the 'suspects' and presentations for the public with no risk of wide-scale harm. Please, for the love of reason, can we get past this 'I say staged means only this, and therefor you are wrong!' argument...?


They didn't stage any attacks. They staged fake attacks for the entrapment of individuals.
 

Grieves

Senior Member
They didn't stage any attacks. They staged fake attacks for the entrapment of individuals.
Getting a little worried here. Do you not see the redundancy in your own position? "They didn't stage any attacks. They staged fake attacks"? Staged means faked, man. Faked with intent.
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
Getting a little worried here. Do you not see the redundancy in your own position? "They didn't stage any attacks. They staged fake attacks"? Staged means faked, man. Faked with intent.

Stage means "faked"???- where in ANY of the definitions posted does it say stage means "faked"

the ORIGINAL CLAIM was that the "FBI staged terrorists attacks"- implying or otherwise meaning the FBI carried out terror attacks- how hard is that to understand??

As we have both shown "staged" has a range of meanings...you- hypocritically- want to push your favored definition to make it seem like you are right...when that fails you make up meanings.

Good luck with that.

The truth is the only thing the FBI staged was entrapment.
 

Grieves

Senior Member
Stage means "faked"???- where in ANY of the definitions posted does it say stage means "faked"
The original definition of staged I posted? The one I encouraged you to reference twice, and explained on three occasions? Here it is again, with context, in case you were struggling with the meaning of 'contrived'.
staged
[steyjd] stage.
2.
contrived for a desired impression: It was a staged, rather than spontaneous, demonstration of affection.
con·trived
[kuhn-trahyvd] Show IPA
adjective
obviously planned or forced; artificial; strained: a contrived story.


the ORIGINAL CLAIM was that the "FBI staged terrorists attacks"- implying or otherwise meaning the FBI carried out terror attacks- how hard is that to understand??
apparently rather terribly so. And in fact, the original comment which brought this on was 'Kinda like how the FBI stages terror attacks.'
Tell me, when someone stages their own death, have they committed suicide?
If that doesn't clear this up, you're keeping it muddy intentionally.

As we have both shown "staged" has a range of meanings...you- hypocritically- want to push your favored definition to make it seem like you are right...when that fails you make up meanings.


Good luck with that.
I went with the definition most directly pertinent to the context of the conversation. Staged terrorist attacks were indeed carried out by the FBI under 'my' definition, and 'my' definition is an entirely accurate usage of the term. Do you continue to deny this?
 
Last edited:

SR1419

Senior Member.
I went with the definition most directly pertinent to the context of the conversation. Staged terrorist attacks were not carried out by the FBI under 'my' definition, and 'my' definition is an entirely accurate usage of the term. Do you deny this?

v. staged, stag·ing, stag·es
v.tr.

3. To arrange and carry out: stage an invasion.

Carry on.
 

Grieves

Senior Member
Tell me, when someone stages their own death, have they committed suicide?
didn't touch that one, I see.

I went with the definition most directly pertinent to the context of the conversation.
Obviously you didn't, if your chosen definition contradicts the original statement and mine is in perfect harmony with it, given the original statement is the context of this conversation. You went with the definition most pertinent to your personal position, and dismissed all others, some very recently as even existing.
 
Last edited:

SR1419

Senior Member.
Obviously you didn't, if your chosen definition contradicts the original statement and mine is in perfect harmony with it, given the original statement is the context of this conversation. You went with the definition most pertinent to your personal position, and dismissed all others, some very recently as even existing.

No- it doesn't "contradict" the original statement- its your OPINION of "perfect harmony"

So, you want to use the definition that means the FBI faked terror attacks...feel free.

I prefer the definition that means to arrange and carry out....which they didn't.

Am I wrong?

Shall we continue to circle?
 

Grieves

Senior Member
So, you want to use the definition that means the FBI faked terror attacks...feel free.

I prefer the definition that means to arrange and carry out....which they didn't.

Am I wrong?

Shall we continue to circle?
Yes! You're very, very wrong! Because you're using the wrong definition, obviously!!! The question in regard to the word 'staged', asinine as I find it, is over WHAT WAS MEANT WHEN IT WAS SAID, not what it CAN POSSIBLY MEAN TO ANY INDIVIDUAL. When you read 'The FBI stages terrorist attacks', you jumped to the conclusion that meant 'the FBI sets off bombs and kills civilians intentionally', and thus have adamantly argued against a premise that you misinterpreted in the first place, and have completely ignored the abundant evidence that what you think was meant wasn't meant at all.

No- it doesn't "contradict" the original statement- its your OPINION of "perfect harmony"
WHhaaaaaat!? Your whole argument up until this point has been that it does! That the FBI couldn't possibly have 'staged', and certainly never 'stages' terrorist attacks, as by your definition of 'staged' and 'stages', a bomb would have to go off and people would have to die! What I'm telling you is that your whole argument is based on the misinterpretation of what 'staged' means! And unless you were completely bullshitting me with this post
Stage means "faked"???- where in ANY of the definitions posted does it say stage means "faked"
you didn't even have a full understanding of the word's usage in the context of this conversation until a few moments ago..!!! To stage something, or for something to be staged, DOES mean that it's faked to give a false impression! Thus, to say the FBI stages terrorist attacks is 100% accurate, when not taken out of context, as you did!
It's ok, man. You misinterpreted something. I do it too sometimes. But don't try and hide it under a mountain of bullshit.
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
The FBI didn't promote the thought, They didn't go into a mosque and encourage folks to commit terrorist acts. That would be "actively encouraging' folks.

Let's take this example into a non terrorist context. A man gets drunk in a bar and asks if there is anyone there that will kill his wife. Say the bartender tells him he might. The bartender calls the police and they have an undercover cop pose as a hit man. The man is now sober, and he tells the cop that he has a big insurance policy on his wife and that is why he wants her killed. There are limits on what the cop can say because of the possibility of entrapment. When he pays the cop for her death, then he has committed a crime.

In the case of a car bombing, the suspect has to ACT, before there is a crime. If I remember the local case, the FBI asked him before he used the cell phone. "Do you want to do this? There will be people killed." The guy could have backed out right there.

It seems to me that you don't want any attacks stopped. Why is that?
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
Facilitation
In contrast to preventive operations, facilitative ones attempt to encourage the commission of an offense, either through strengthening suspects or by
weakening potential victims. This may be done by the provision of aid, encouragement, goods, resources, or markets for the suspect.
...
1.
Providing opportunities In facilitative operations, the police furnish a simulated environment that can be as elaborate as the
establishment of a false business or as simple as the presentation of a false identity as an especially vulnerable victim.

Many of these facilitative activities would constitute crimes had the police agents not been given the authorization to commit them

Content from External Source
http://legalworkshop.org/2010/02/24...e-it-undercover-police-participation-in-crime
 

Grieves

Senior Member
It seems to me that you don't want any attacks stopped. Why is that?
A combination of prejudice and delusion, or maybe the decision to cook up nonsensical accusations and character-judgements in order to cover the ill-informed nature of your position? I don't know, really. I can't begin to determine why things seem the way they do to you. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me at all a fair percentage of the time.
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
What I'm telling you is that your whole argument is based on the misinterpretation of what 'staged' means! And unless you were completely bullshitting me with this post

What?? now you making things ups. I clearly showed the definition of "staged" meaning "plan and carry out". Do you deny that staged can mean that per the definition.

You are interpreting the meaning to fit what YOU believe to be the case...if you want to continue to dwell on different interpretations of the meaning...

So be it...
 

Grieves

Senior Member
What?? now you making things ups.
Like I was 'making up' the definitions of 'staged', right...?
I clearly showed the definition of "staged" meaning "plan and carry out". Do you deny that staged can mean that per the definition.
Of course not. It definitely can mean that. No question whatsoever. But that is not what was meant when the statement 'Kinda like how the FBI stages terror attacks.' was made. This is obvious. The FBI doesn't actively conduct senseless bombings on civilian targets, claiming credit for the deaths. Couple that with the fact that the FBI has on several occasions faked terrorist attacks. Clearly, the definition of 'stages' as 'fakes' instead of 'carries out' is without question the correct usage in this context, as the former usage makes perfect sense, and the latter usage makes next to none. This is a really, really stupid argument that's only gone on this long because you can't acknowledge you read something into a comment that wasn't there. Given you didn't know 'stages' can mean 'fakes', this is and understandable mistake... but continuing with this now that you're better informed doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Tell me, when someone stages their own death, have they committed suicide?

can't repeat this enough, as it makes my case clear as day.
 
Last edited:

SR1419

Senior Member.
Like I was 'making up' the definitions of 'staged', right...? Of course not. It definitely can mean that. No question whatsoever. But that is not what was meant when the statement 'Kinda like how the FBI stages terror attacks.' was made. This is obvious. The FBI doesn't actively conduct senseless bombings on civilian targets, claiming credit for the deaths. Couple that with the fact that the FBI has on several occasions faked terrorist attacks. Clearly, the definition of 'stages' as 'fakes' instead of 'carries out' is without question the correct usage in this context, as the former usage makes perfect sense, and the latter usage makes next to none. This is a really, really stupid argument that's only gone on this long because you can't acknowledge you read something into a comment that wasn't there. Given you didn't know 'stages' can mean 'fakes', this is and understandable mistake... but continuing with this now that you're better informed doesn't make a whole lot of sense.



can't repeat this enough, as it makes my case clear as day.

You are entitled to your interpretation...but to suggest that I am wrong simply because I used a different yet logical and well understood meaning of the word is an exercise in petty futility on your part. To be expected I guess.

And yes, if someone plans and carries out their suicide plan then yes, they can be considered to have staged their own death.
 
Last edited:

Cairenn

Senior Member.
I think that Grieves would rather argue than agree with anyone that doesn't share his conspiracy theories of the world. He can't seem to understand why preventing an attack is better than allowing one to happen.
 

Grieves

Senior Member
You are entitled to your interpretation...but to suggest that I am wrong simply because I used a different yet logical and well understood meaning of the word is an exercise in petty futility on your part. To be expected I guess.

And yes, if someone plans and carries out their suicide plan then yes, they can be considered to have staged their own death.
It's increasingly apparent that conversing with you in general is an exercise in futility, but we all have our petty pass-times. Still, your last sentence is hilarious. Surely you're trolling.

I think that Grieves would rather argue than agree with anyone that doesn't share his conspiracy theories of the world. He can't seem to understand why preventing an attack is better than allowing one to happen.
Well at least I'm not a Nazi who wants terrorists to kill people in order to criticize and eventually overthrow the government anymore. Movin' on up..! :rolleyes:
 
Sometimes there are drills. Sometimes there are disasters. Sometimes they coincide.

Look into them in depth, they are generally unrelated to the thing that happened on the same day. It's just cherry picking.
@Mick
Aplagies if you have already anwered this but I have not read thru the full thread. Are you saying that of the terrorists incidents in America since 9/11, only a few have had similiar drills/excerices occurring at the same time the real terror event went down? That not every terror event has coincincided with the government running an similiar if not identical scenario to the event? If the answer is yes could you list a few examples?

Thanks
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
@Mick
Aplagies if you have already anwered this but I have not read thru the full thread. Are you saying that of the terrorists incidents in America since 9/11, only a few have had similiar drills/excerices occurring at the same time the real terror event went down? That not every terror event has coincincided with the government running an similiar if not identical scenario to the event? If the answer is yes could you list a few examples?

Thanks

I'm saying what I said in the bit you quoted.

What would you classify as a terrorist incident in America. Fort Hood?
 

Josh Heuer

Active Member
You are entitled to your interpretation...but to suggest that I am wrong simply because I used a different yet logical and well understood meaning of the word is an exercise in petty futility on your part. To be expected I guess.

And yes, if someone plans and carries out their suicide plan then yes, they can be considered to have staged their own death.
Ehhh, I don't really want to fuel this ridiculous argument about the meaning of the word 'staged' and what was meant by it...but in all fairness, when someone 'stages their own death' they don't actually kill themselves. It's staged; it's set up to LOOK like they did it. Grieves has a point here.
Watch the last episode of season 4 X-Files, then the first episode of season 5. Spoiler alert: Mulder STAGES his suicide. Everyone thinks he killed himself. In fact, he's still alive. Staged.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Ehhh, I don't really want to fuel this ridiculous argument about the meaning of the word 'staged' and what was meant by it...but in all fairness, when someone 'stages their own death' they don't actually kill themselves. It's staged; it's set up to LOOK like they did it. Grieves has a point here.
Watch the last episode of season 4 X-Files, then the first episode of season 5. Spoiler alert: Mulder STAGES his suicide. Everyone thinks he killed himself. In fact, he's still alive. Staged.

"Stage" does not necessarily imply fake, it implies there was some deliberate presentation factor. Like staging a protest, or staging a sporting event.

Example of staged suicide with actual suicide attempt:
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/worl...ed-group-suicide-attempt-in-beijing-1.1495313

Political self-immolation is a generally a staged suicide where the person dies.

But in general if there's dispute over the meaning of a word, the best thing to do is to re-phrase what you are saying.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I agree, to avoid all of these shenanigans maybe Grieves' original point needs to be reworded.

Oh, I think it was quite worked over in the subsequent posts. And the original usage was from Thane Cesar, Grieves just gave an example based what he (quite reasonably) though "staged" meant (faked), SR1419 though it meant staging an actual attack. Greives responded that they were presented as actual attacks that were stopped by the FBI (kind of a double fake). Things devolved from there.

The focus should have been on what actually happened, not if it met a disputed definition of a word.
 

Grieves

Senior Member
Oh, I think it was quite worked over in the subsequent posts. And the original usage was from Thane Cesar, Grieves just gave an example based what he (quite reasonably) though "staged" meant (faked), SR1419 though it meant staging an actual attack. Greives responded that they were presented as actual attacks that were stopped by the FBI (kind of a double fake). Things devolved from there.

The focus should have been on what actually happened, not if it met a disputed definition of a word.
Didn't want the conversation to go where it did, just couldn't let it slide... at least not until things got truly absurd. A voice of reason from the debunking side of things would have probably resolved the 'debate' much sooner, though. ;)
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
Still, your last sentence is hilarious. Surely you're trolling.

"Stage" does not necessarily imply fake, it implies there was some deliberate presentation factor. Like staging a protest, or staging a sporting event.

Example of staged suicide with actual suicide attempt:
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/worl...ed-group-suicide-attempt-in-beijing-1.1495313

Political self-immolation is a generally a staged suicide where the person dies.

Thanks Mick for pointing out that one can, in fact, "stage" their own death and actually have committed suicide.


Just some food for thought....pretty sure these attacks were real...planned and carried out.


LATEST UPDATE: 22/07/13
- AL QAEDA - IRAQ - PRISONS - SUICIDE BOMBING
Iraqi insurgents stage deadly prison attacks

Some 25 people were killed Sunday when insurgents blew up cars at the gates of two major Iraqi prisons in co-ordinated attacks that the Islamist assailants claim freed “thousands” of prisoners while police put the number at at least 500.

By FRANCE 24 (text)

http://www.france24.com/en/20130722-iraq-insurgents-deadly-prison-attacks-taji-abu-ghraib

Insurgents Stage Deadly Attacks Across Iraq
By The Associated Press September 9, 2012 Updated Sep 09, 5:38 pm

Gunmen stage deadly attack on north Nigeria church

Militants stage deadly attack on Pakistani army headquarters
http://www.cleveland.com/world/index.ssf/2009/10/militants_stage_deadly_attack.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:

hiper

Active Member
Sometimes there are drills. Sometimes there are disasters. Sometimes they coincide.

Look into them in depth, they are generally unrelated to the thing that happened on the same day. It's just cherry picking.

What are the odds of a real terrorist attack coinciding with a anti-terror drill? These things have been coinciding to much to be coincidental.

drill during the London bombings :


FEMA drill during 9/11 :


drill during Sandy hook :


...
 
Last edited:

Cairenn

Senior Member.
Can you provide the information that is in the YouTubes please. I know that me and others have asked before for that courtesy.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
What are the odds of a real terrorist attack coinciding with a anti-terror drill?
...
Well you need to know the number of drills per year, and the number of terrorist attacks per year.
Personally thinking it's unlikely means nothing if you're not familiar with the data relating to it.
 

Landru

Moderator
Staff member
What are the odds of a real terrorist attack coinciding with a anti-terror drill? These things have been coinciding to much to be coincidental.

drill during the London bombings :

[media removed for space]

FEMA drill during 9/11 :

[media removed for space]

It was not a FEMA drill. Go to this.

[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]
Content from External Source
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.


Federal Region II
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10278-0002
Telephone: (212) 680-3600​
Content from External Source
drill during Sandy hook :

[media removed for space]

...

It is not a FEMA exercise but a FEMA class.

http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/IS/courseOverview.aspx?code=is-366
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)
Content from External Source
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.

All this was covered on the first page of this thread. Did you read it?
 
Last edited:

jaydeehess

Senior Member.
Well you need to know the number of drills per year, and the number of terrorist attacks per year.
Personally thinking it's unlikely means nothing if you're not familiar with the data relating to it.
Its akin to the incredulity that people have when they discover another person with the same birthday.

Its just not particularly significant, or surprising.
 
Top