Please Debunk: The Drills (conflicting info from 2 reputable sources)

Alchemist

Banned
Banned
This article is from Boston Globe.... and this is from the article:

"Officials from a dozen agencies had been meeting for months to plan the scenario. They behaved much like movie producers, recruiting students from Northeastern University and the Boston Police Academy to play the parts of terrorists and witnesses.

The basic plot was this: Half a dozen members of Free America Citizens wanted to gauge police response to a bomb scare. They would plant hoax devices, then stay on the scene to watch and record the bomb squad and detectives as they responded, as a dry run to a larger attack.

The participating detectives, however, would not have known they were being watched. They would only be told that they were responding to an urgent terrorist threat. The goal of the training was for them to figure out the motives of Free America Citizens as they investigated the case, the official said.

The planned exercise has eerie similarities to the police investigation that led to the capture of the alleged Boston Marathon bombers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, whose images were caught on video cameras and who were captured after a car chase and shoot-out with police."

They admit the plan included backpack bombers and a manhunt resembling the manhunt that actually happened.

They're claiming that the real event happened before the drill was to take place... HOWEVER according to eyewitness reports, there was a drill going on that exact day at the same exact time... here is a local TV station covering it:



Local15 was given the order to take down the story from the website, but here is the cache version:
http://web.archive.org/web/20130430...Spotters-on-Roofs/BrirjAzFPUKKN8z6eSDJEA.cspx

From the interview:
"They kept making announcements to the participants do not worry, it's just a training exercise," Coach Ali Stevenson told Local 15.

This slideshow from Boston authorities used Boston Marathon as a location for a "mass casualty event"
http://www.integratedtrainingsummit...nned_mass_casualty_event_-_serino_richard.pdf

It even specifies how to collaborate and work with the media.

Such drills mirroring exactly what was occuring happened during 9/11, 7/7, Madrid bombings, Sandy Hook & during the Reagan assassination attempt... this is an inteview with a contractor who was part of the drill during 7/7 (just a minute long)

 
Anyone other than Ali Stevenson back that up? Out of the tens of thousands of people he was the only one who noticed?
 
Not sure... but he seems like a reputable witness to me

Here's more coverage of things overlooked by corporate media
 
So you've replaced corporate media with Russian government-funded media. Good move.
It's a sad day when you can no longer trust your own news corps and have to rely on other sources for more rounded views... US is more like USSR right now... lol @ US having to promise Russia that they won't torture Snowden
 
Why can you no longer trust them? Apart from the general decline in presentation and the move to 'entertainment news' formats (I loathe the fact that our own national news started to emulate the cheesy and intellect insulting American format with ticker tapes at the bottom of the screen and dual presenters and even the stand up and walk around crap), what evidence is there they can't be trusted? (as opposed to just making mistakes in rushing to get news out?)

PBS was still relatively informed as a news service last time I saw it.

You should question sources that tell you something you like just because it contradicts or embarrasses the American version - it may be true, or they may just be spinning it for their own agenda. And you can be sure Russia has an agenda with regards to America.
 
Why can you no longer trust them? Apart from the general decline in presentation and the move to 'entertainment news' formats (I loathe the fact that our own national news started to emulate the cheesy and intellect insulting American format with ticker tapes at the bottom of the screen and dual presenters and even the stand up and walk around crap), what evidence is there they can't be trusted? (as opposed to just making mistakes in rushing to get news out?)

PBS was still relatively informed as a news service last time I saw it.

You should question sources that tell you something you like just because it contradicts or embarrasses the American version - it may be true, or they may just be spinning it for their own agenda. And you can be sure Russia has an agenda with regards to America.
The thing is more than 95% of the information that you receive is owned by just 6 corporations. So you will never hear any news or information that goes against corporate paradigms or agendas. These corporations do not have America's interest at heart -- that's just a lie that we all believe. Was it in the American people's interest to lie about and cheerlead the war in Iraq? Just follow the money....

Here is an example:
 
So are you saying that there were absolutely no media reports in America of doubts of the soundness of an Iraq invasion? No questions were asked? Apart from the bad joke that is Fox of course.
 
How do you know what and how much information I "receive"?
So are you saying that there were absolutely no media reports in America of doubts of the soundness of an Iraq invasion? No questions were asked? Apart from the bad joke that is Fox of course.
No SERIOUS questions were asked. They all paraded behind the war and may have had some critics on here and there.
 
Not to quibble but you said "more than 95% of the information that you receive" ...Your article said 90% of "media" in America.

"information" and "media" are not the same thing.

The companies in that article provide a very little percentage of the information I receive.
ok fair enough I stand corrected
 
There is PBS, the BBC and other sources available. With the help of a search engine, you can often find that 'study that shows that 'Unicorns are ALIVE, in Kaladon' ". You don't have to take any one else's word for it.
 
Back
Top