Difference between revisions of "Hijacking Drill"

From 911myths
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(No difference)

Latest revision as of 13:59, 29 June 2012

It's often argued that there are too many suspicious "coincidences" around 9/11 for the 9/11 Commission account to be true. The Pentagon has seen its share of these events, and one of them relates to an exercise carried out the previous year:


However, things aren't quite as they seem.

This wasn't some major exercise on the ground, for instance; note that the quote refers to "Pentagon officials" only. The entire drill took place in a few rooms at the Pentagon, where the attendees effectively played games designed to try out different scenarios.

There was a plane crash scenario included, but it was only a crash, not a hijacking, so doesn't display quite as much foreknowledge as we're being told. Even articles critical of the Government accept that:


Further, that scenario was just one of several, which included "a terrorist incident at the Pentagon Metro stop and a construction accident".

A November 2000 DCMilitary.com report provides more details.


This hasn’t stopped people trying to make the most of the story, though.


Here the Scholars for 911 Truth press release is written in such a way that it could leave the reader thinking the exercise simulated a plane being used as a weapon, yet without them saying that explicitly. Another good reason to question not only the facts and references presented in what you read, but any implied meanings, too.

This kind of distortion is odd, especially as there's more explicit talk of a May 2001 exercise involving a hijacked plane:

However other accounts are less specific, talking just of a plane crashing into the building:


Note also that Major Brown says "we made up the scenario", not that it was something imposed on them by the conspirators.

And why would the idea of a downed plane come to mind? The Pentagon being right next to a major airport might have something to do with it:


John Jester, chief of the Pentagon's Defence Protective Service explained how this came about to the 9/11 Commission:


There's nothing here about the use of planes as weapons, then. Even a scenario where a plane was hijacked doesn't necessarily mean that; being that close to the airport, any crash could simply have been an accident, and using the idea as the basis for an exercise makes a lot of sense. No foreknowledge of 9/11 is required.