Iraq and 9/11

I've only seen "injects" mentioned in a toronto star article:

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/thestar/426239581.html?did=426239581&FMT=ABS
http://www.911readingroom.org/bib/whole_document.php?article_id=92

If anyone has more good sources on the war games being conducted, don't hesitate to list them here because I'm working on the wikipedia article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_games_in_progress_on_September_11,_2001


Try this document written by me... :)

In brief, NORAD was involved in a single exercise on 9/11. This was a "Vigilant Overview" type exercise - that is a NORAD-wide ("Vigilant"), Joint Chiefs of Staff approved Command-in-Chief NORAD sponsored Command Post Exercise ("Overview").

The unique exercise name is "Guardian" and it is held 2x every year.

The exercise is held in conjunction with US Strategic Command ("Global") and US Space Command ("Apollo"), however Space Command does not take part every year, and did not appear to do so in September 2001 (Space Command are not directly involved in NORAD operations).

It was comfirmed by Richard Myers - The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff - in an exchange with Cynthia McKinney on March 11, 2005 that there were two CPXs underway on 9/11 - these being Global Guardian and Vigilant Guardian.

Oft cited is Richard Clarke's mention of an "Vigilant Warrior" exercise - he postulates it was an OPFOR "live-fly" element of the NORAD exercises - that is actual aircraft in the air functioning as enemy aircraft.

Note that a CPX is distinct from a FIX or "live-fly", and does not involve operational units.

"Vigilant Warrior" does not accurately reflect NORAD exercise naming regulations - the correct name would be "Amalgam Warrior". Amalgam Warrior is held every second year, and was held in 2000 and 2002, not 2001.

"Vigilant Warrior" was in fact the name of two operations in the Gulf in 1994 (Vigilant Warrior I) and 1995 (Vigilant Warrior II). These were in response to a build-up of Iraqi ground forces along the Kuwait border.

Lastly, there was a NORAD operation ongoing on 9/11. Operation Northern Vigilance commenced on 9 September 2001, and was in response to a large Russian long-range bomber exercise in Siberia. It has been standard practise since the Cold War, that when either "bloc" undertakes a major exercise, the other "bloc" deploys their forces to "shadow" the exercise, in case it is a cover for an attack.

Within a short time of the 9/11 attacks commencing, US and Russian officials contacted each other and the Russians called off their exercise, allowing the NORAD forces to return to their bases.

Operation Northern Vigilance was not an exercise, as can be determined from the prefix "Operation". Despite this, numerous media outlets have repeatedly identified it (incorrectly) as a "wargame". This has resulted in wide misinformation in the CTer camp.

My document contains more detail on these topics as well as links to source material such as the regulations that determine exercise names.

-Gumboot
 
The day Clinton handed over power to Bush, was he drunk or not? I think he was :)

Strictly speaking, Clinton didn't hand power to anybody. It was never his power to hand over. Bush became President at 12:00 p.m., January 20 because it was 12:00 p.m., January 20. It wouldn't have mattered what Clinton did or didn't do.

I heard a story that during Nixon's last days, one high ranking official had said to another to be prepared for Nixon to seize the military and refuse to leave office. Nixon is supposed to have said years later that the thought never even flickered through his mind.

And I remember that before the Bush/Kerry election, there was some rumbling rumors that maybe Bush would cite national security and delay the election. I asked my father what he would do in that situation. He said he guessed we would have to go steal some guns.

This post has no purpose.

Nominate it.
 
I didn't remember this being in the report, so I searched the PDF for "inject," "blip," "screen," and checked all occurrences of "radar," and did not come up with the information Unusual Subject insists is there.
I also searched the pdf (before I read Gravy's post). Here are specifics:
"false radar blips" 0 hits
"radar blips" 0 hits
"blips" 0 hits
"radar" 84 hits (BTW, about half in the notes)

I read the surronding paragraph or note for all 84 hits. There is nothing there about false radar blips.

'Jes call me Gravy, Jr. :)
 

Back
Top Bottom