|
Do you believe there is a U.S. government cover-up surrounding 9/11? (pg. 204)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| pkcRAISTLIN |
whatever you reckon.
| quote: |
The story...
In May of 2001, by presidential order, Cheney was handed direct control of all wargame and drill operations. This meant he was solely in charge of the overlapping NORAD drills and wargames on the morning of 9/11, that prevented Standard Operating Procedure from being implemented, and any of the hijacked planes being intercepted.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/article...rgamescover.htm
Our take...
There's no source given for the claim that Cheney was solely in charge of NORAD on 9/11, which is a pity as it seems a little implausible that he'd be running everything from his White House office. Perhaps Mike Ruppert can supply more details:
On May 8, 2001 - four months prior to 9/11 - the president placed Dick Cheney in charge of "[A]ll federal programs dealing with weapons of mass destruction consequence management within the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Justice, and Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, and other federal agencies…" This included all "training and planning" which needed to be "seamlessly integrated, harmonious and comprehensive" in order to "maximize effectiveness." This mandate created the Office of National Preparedness in FEMA, overseen by Dick Cheney. 15
Dick Cheney was placed directly in charge of managing the seamless integration of all training exercises throughout the entire federal government and all military agencies. On 9/11 Cheney oversaw multiple war games and terror drills, including several exercises of NORAD, the Air Force agency whose mandate is to "watch the sky."
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/fr...lify_case.shtml
This seems a little clearer, although it's still not exactly proof. Cheney being given the task of overseeing the "Office of National Preparedness" surely doesn't demonstrate that he was personally involved with everything they did. Still, at least we now have a reference to the mandate that supposedly gave Cheney all this power. Here’s what it says.
Statement by the President
Domestic Preparedness Against Weapons of Mass Destruction
Protecting America's homeland and citizens from the threat of weapons of mass destruction is one of our Nation's important national security challenges. Today, more nations possess chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons than ever before. Still others seek to join them. Most troubling of all, the list of these countries includes some of the world's least-responsible states -- states for whom terror and blackmail are a way of life. Some non-state terrorist groups have also demonstrated an interest in acquiring weapons of mass destruction.
Against this backdrop, it is clear that the threat of chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons being used against the United States -- while not immediate -- is very real. That is why our Nation actively seeks to deny chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons to those seeking to acquire them. That is why, together with our allies, we seek to deter anyone who would contemplate their use. And that is also why we must ensure that our Nation is prepared to defend against the harm they can inflict.
Should our efforts to reduce the threat to our country from weapons of mass destruction be less than fully successful, prudence dictates that the United States be fully prepared to deal effectively with the consequences of such a weapon being used here on our soil.
Today, numerous Federal departments and agencies have programs to deal with the consequences of a potential use of a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapon in the United States. Many of these Federal programs offer training, planning, and assistance to state and local governments. But to maximize their effectiveness, these efforts need to be seamlessly integrated, harmonious, and comprehensive.
Therefore, I have asked Vice President Cheney to oversee the development of a coordinated national effort so that we may do the very best possible job of protecting our people from catastrophic harm. I have also asked Joe Allbaugh, the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, to create an Office of National Preparedness. This Office will be responsible for implementing the results of those parts of the national effort overseen by Vice President Cheney that deal with consequence management. Specifically it will coordinate all Federal programs dealing with weapons of mass destruction consequence management within the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Justice, and Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, and other federal agencies. The Office of National Preparedness will work closely with state and local governments to ensure their planning, training, and equipment needs are addressed. FEMA will also work closely with the Department of Justice, in its lead role for crisis management, to ensure that all facets of our response to the threat from weapons of mass destruction are coordinated and cohesive. I will periodically chair a meeting of the National Security Council to review these efforts.
No governmental responsibility is more fundamental than protecting the physical safety of our Nation and its citizens. In today's world, this obligation includes protection against the use of weapons of mass destruction. I look forward to working closely with Congress so that together we can meet this challenge.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/rele...5/20010508.html
Where are the references to NORAD? It mentions the Department of Defence, yes, but only in connection with “programs dealing with weapons of mass destruction consequence management “. These seems to be more about planning and training for what might happen if a WMD were to be used in a US city. To claim this let Cheney take charge of NORAD exercises on 9/11 is reaching, to put it politely. So how does Ruppert justify it?
This press release was issued May 8, 2001, about a month prior to the change in NORAD’s intercept protocols. While a bit vague in some areas, it does establish certain things. Dick Cheney was charged to oversee the creation of an approach that was “seamlessly integrated and harmonious.” He was also placed in a supervisory management role over the activities of the entire effort, which were operational under FEMA’s supreme command. “Planning and training” were specifically addressed so this would automatically include war game exercises like Tripod II and all the NORAD/Joint Chiefs wargames of 9/11: Vigilant Guardian, Vigilant Warrior, Northern Vigilance, etc.
Page 414
Crossing the Rubicon
Mike Ruppert
His assumption is based solely on the talk of “planning and training”, but those words occur in this context (from the above link):
Today, numerous Federal departments and agencies have programs to deal with the consequences of a potential use of a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapon in the United States. Many of these Federal programs offer training, planning, and assistance to state and local governments. But to maximize their effectiveness, these efforts need to be seamlessly integrated, harmonious, and comprehensive.
So the mandate is talking about planning and training that relates to “programs to deal with the consequences of a potential use of a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapon in the United States” (our emphasis). It’s disaster planning, not NORAD exercises.
Can we get confirmation of this? Yes, as it happens. In April 2002 the House of Representatives held a hearing to discuss the new Office, and here's the background they provided:
The Office of National Preparedness
Recognizing a need for greater coordination among federal agencies in responding to a terrorist attack, President Bush administratively created the ONP on May 8, 2001. Understanding its key role and experience as the coordinating agency for natural disasters in the Federal Response Plan, the President located the ONP within FEMA.
The ONP has as its mission the task of providing “…leadership in the coordination and facilitation of all federal efforts to assist state and local emergency management and emergency response organizations with planning, training, equipment and exercises necessary to build and sustain capability to respond to any emergency or disaster.”
In carrying out this mission statement, the ONP is focusing on three general areas that include equipping first responders, improving coordination, and increased accountability of the agencies involved. Each of these areas represents an important key in the nation’s ability to respond, and the ONP is working to develop an initiative to address each of these concerns.
FEMA and the Office of Homeland Security are completing and analyzing data from a nationwide review of the operational status of state and local first response agencies. The ONP will use these reviews to determine what equipment and training each of these response agencies will need to become operational. The primary source of the funds for this effort will be the Administration’s $3.5 billion First Responder Grant Initiative, proposed in the FY 2003 budget request.
ONP will also be working to improve coordination among federal agencies, state and local responders, and independent response groups (such as the American Red Cross). It has been widely known for a number of years that a significant amount of duplication and overlap exists within the federal government when it comes to funding first responders. Over 40 agencies and departments are engaged in some type of activity relating to equipping and training first responders. To accomplish this task, the ONP is working with detailees from many of these agencies to identify programs and activities that can be either consolidated or eliminated.
The final general area of focus that ONP will be working on is improved accountability. The ONP will be working to improve financial accountability, to ensure that money provided to states and locals is being spent in an efficient manner. In addition, the ONP will also be working with the Office of Homeland Security to develop and implement a testing and training regimen to ensure that the first responder initiative is being conducted efficiently. They will also be developing measures of evaluation to determine how the training and equipment is being used so that changes can be made where necessary.
http://www.house.gov/transportation...-11-02memo.html
Again, this is all about helping first responders. It's consequence management, ensuring that the emergency services and other organisations can respond to such disasters properly. Please don't just believe us, follow the link and read the testimonies from various witnesses for yourself.
To review, then, these claims seem based on two ideas: the first being that the Office of National Preparedness could take charge of NORAD exercises, the second that Cheney being given oversight of the ONP meant he was "solely in charge of the overlapping NORAD drills and wargames on the morning of 9/11". Big ideas, then, but look at the details and you see there's minimal or no supporting evidence. They just don't stand up to scrutiny. |
http://www.911myths.com/html/cheney...e_of_norad.html |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
culorot, have you ever been to Washington, DC? The Pentagon is less than a mile from the runway at Washington National airport - planes fly directly overhead at very low altitude on their approach every day... it would be extraordinarily difficult to determine if the plane was deviating from a normal approach unless it turned to break DC airspace, which wouldn't be necessary to hit the Pentagon.
You don't think it is at all possible that given the lack of radio contact and the fact that the plane had not deviated from a normal approach, that it was attempting to land at National? If they'd shot down the plane, I'm sure that's the conspiracy you'd be espousing - that they shot down a perfectly normal plane of citizens to play up a threat on the Pentagon. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
culorot, have you ever been to Washington, DC? The Pentagon is less than a mile from the runway at Washington National airport - planes fly directly overhead at very low altitude on their approach every day... it would be extraordinarily difficult to determine if the plane was deviating from a normal approach unless it turned to break DC airspace, which wouldn't be necessary to hit the Pentagon.
You don't think it is at all possible that given the lack of radio contact and the fact that the plane had not deviated from a normal approach, that it was attempting to land at National? If they'd shot down the plane, I'm sure that's the conspiracy you'd be espousing - that they shot down a perfectly normal plane of citizens to play up a threat on the Pentagon. |
what's even stupider is that culorot doesn't even believe that a plane DID hit the pentagon. he loves to have his cake and eat it too though. openly calling the VP a manipulative murderer whilst at the same time arguing that there was no plane.
an impressive example of the truth movement's logical approach dont you think? |
|
|
| LazFX |
people should let this thread die
most of it has become the "panhandler" mentality anyway.... |
|
|
| culorut |
The problem is that this thread is the most active one here, and for a very good reason.
Way too many holes and omissions in the official story. |
|
|
| {b.s.e.} |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
what's even stupider is that culorot doesn't even believe that a plane DID hit the pentagon. he loves to have his cake and eat it too though. openly calling the VP a manipulative murderer whilst at the same time arguing that there was no plane.
an impressive example of the truth movement's logical approach dont you think? |
suppose that plane approaching fired a missle? last word from me on this. period :wtf: |
|
|
| culorut |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
what's even stupider is that culorot doesn't even believe that a plane DID hit the pentagon. he loves to have his cake and eat it too though. openly calling the VP a manipulative murderer whilst at the same time arguing that there was no plane.
an impressive example of the truth movement's logical approach dont you think? |
Actually I do believe something hit the Pentagon, just not Flight 77.
In fact if Flight 77 did hit the Pentagon then show us the proof, and I do not mean some random pieces of bull scattered on the lawn. Show us the plane in the many video's, serial numbers, actual proof not just talk.
BTW you have so many grammar errors in your last post. Did you go to school? |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
Actually I do believe something hit the Pentagon, just not Flight 77.
In fact if Flight 77 did hit the Pentagon then show us the proof, and I do not mean some random pieces of bull scattered on the lawn. Show us the plane in the many video's, serial numbers, actual proof not just talk.
BTW you have so many grammar errors in your last post. Did you go to school? |
Ok then...Where are the missile parts? Where are the explosives residues? Where is the eye-witness testimony sighting a missile being airborne?... ESPECIALLY in a highly populated urban center such as Washington DC... |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
Actually I do believe something hit the Pentagon, just not Flight 77.
In fact if Flight 77 did hit the Pentagon then show us the proof, and I do not mean some random pieces of bull scattered on the lawn. Show us the plane in the many video's, serial numbers, actual proof not just talk.
BTW you have so many grammar errors in your last post. Did you go to school? |
Wait, now you have me confused. Did an unidentified flying object hit the Pentagon, or did Dick Cheney fail to authorize shooting down Flight 77 as it approached the Pentagon?
Inconsistency in arguments is quickly becoming a pet peeve of mine. |
|
|
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
Actually I do believe something hit the Pentagon, just not Flight 77.
In fact if Flight 77 did hit the Pentagon then show us the proof, and I do not mean some random pieces of bull scattered on the lawn. Show us the plane in the many video's, serial numbers, actual proof not just talk.
BTW you have so many grammar errors in your last post. Did you go to school? |
grammar errors?
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
Actually, I do believe something hit the Pentagon, just not Flight 77.
In fact, if Flight 77 did (it is unnecesary to say 'did hit' when hit works well) hit the Pentagon then show us the proof;, and I do not mean some random pieces of bull scattered on the lawn. Show us the plane in the many videos as well as some video's (nice use of the possessive - and you should try attaching the modifier 'many' to just videos, instead of both videos and serial numbers), serial numbers: actual proof, not just talk.
BTW, you made so many grammatical errors have (you don't have errors, you make errors) so many grammar errors in your last post. Did you go to school? |
you should probably polish your fine work before criticizing the grammar of other people. |
|
|
| culorut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Ok then...Where are the missile parts? Where are the explosives residues? Where is the eye-witness testimony sighting a missile being airborne?... ESPECIALLY in a highly populated urban center such as Washington DC... |
More like where is Flight 77?, I never said a missile hit the Pentagon. If the plane crashed there where the fuk is it? |
|
|
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
More like where is Flight 77?, I never said a missile hit the Pentagon. If the plane crashed there where the fuk is it? |
i'm sure boeing built the planes to stay intact after a 500 mph crash into the ground. |
|
|
|
|
