We've been asked this question by some thoughtful people and haven't been able to provide a real answer. Some contend that war games are going on every day and we haven't demonstrated that there was anything "abnormal" or coincidental about the ones on 9/11/01.
TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum
Number of wargames on an average day? (3 posts)
-
Posted 16 years ago #
-
This is a good question, and deserves some good firsthand research.
However, my immediate response is that the wargames on 9/11 had several distinct characteristics that hindered or confused the air response and also are unlikely to occur on a regular basis (I imagine some branch of the US military is in fact wargaming at any given time). The better question is probably, "How often do wargames of the type that occurred on 9/11 occur?"
The wargames involved the annual training exercise Global Guardian which involved a somewhat serious confrontation/coordination with the Russian military.
They involved NORAD, which is responsible for air defense from outside and inside threats, and also included the use of "injects" onto their screens.
The now infamous "is this real world or exercise?" quote suggests that the scope of these wargames included the possibility of hijacked civilian airliners.
Posted 16 years ago # -
Reference
Much of our understanding of the military training exercises comes from "Crossing the Rubicon". And Ruppert relies quite a bit in his analysis upon testimony provided by Richard Clarke in his book, "Against All Enemies". You could argue that this data is hearsay, and Clarke's book is biased having the implicit intent of fingering the Administration while making the CIA look like it did the best it could, I think attempting to obscure a long standing covert relationship between the two. But Ruppert went to the trouble of verifying the existence of Vigilant Guardian, a live-fly hijacking drill.
The training exercises constitute one of our strongest arguments for opportunity. Cheney had given himself authority overseeing all national training exercises a few months before 9/11. According to Clarke's book, he had military command authority on 9/11. He personally had the direct opportunity to confuse our military response on that day, knowing the nature of all exercises, and would have been directly responsible for the transition between exercise and real-world response. And from a more mainstream point of view, he is directly responsible for one of the worst failures of military response in our history, and yet has not himself claimed that the training exercises were in any way responsible for what happened that day.
Some pundit got on the news saying that the 'wargames' actually increased our response time, being very careful to only mention Global Guardian, as that exercise does not contradict Condi's testimony that no one in the Administration could have ever thought that terrorist would try to fly planes into building. It was a controlled release in order to satisfy the base that the issue had been dealt with. "Helped response time" is now in every conservative's internal talking points list.
And Wikipedia does the mainstream a service by confusing Global Guardian and Vigilant Guardian. Ruppert commented on this occurrence in his book.
I'm thinking maybe we need a Command Authority page where we spell out this process of who was in charge that day a bit better, possibly highlighting personnel swaps, and the whole issue of a statistically improbable coincidence of mass incompetence that day, followed by promotions. We need to shoot down the incompetence argument very explicitly. Specific people were responsible for what did and did not happen that day. And few if any of them have provided comprehensive or comprehensible testimony about their actions.
Posted 16 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.