Conspiranoids: nuclear attack imminent

The apparent reality that a mock bombing drill on the London Underground was scheduled for the morning of 7-7 has got the conspiranoids seeing patterns. They also point to Pentagon terror drills on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001 (see e.g., Prison Planet). We also recently noted a FEMA drill apparently slated for New York City the day after 9-11.

Now, the Pentagon Northern Command is about to undertake a drill simulating an attempt to smuggle a nuclear weapon into Charleston, SC. “Journalist” Leland Lehrman claims on the conspiranoid Alex Jones Show (PrisonPlanetTV) that anonymous sources in the military told him the warhead in the drill was originally intended to “go live”—that is, the drill would be used as the cover for a real “false flag” nuclear attack. Lehrman also claimed that Army Gen. Kevin Byrnes, recently relieved of his command for having an extra-marital affair (even though he is long-separated from his wife—a very quaint anachronism in the age of Abu Ghraib), was actually sacked for dissenting from the “live” drill. Says Lehrman:

“Speculation exists that he had potentially discovered the fact that it was gonna go live and that he was trying to put a stop to it or also speculation indicates that he may be part of a military coup designed to prevent the ridiculous idea of doing a nuclear war with Iran.”

“Speculation indicates.” Well said.

Greg Szymanski makes similar claims on Arctic Beacon. More at Total Information Analysis,

Bye-bye, Charleston?

  1. Patterns
    It’s a shame you have to respond to arguments or concerns about issues with ad hominem attacks, which are as you must realize fallacious and irrelevant.

    Using a news source to create an article, generate hits and keep your blog going while at the same time distancing yourself from it personally in order to make certain your audience knows you’re mainstream and normal, seems quite pointless and hypocritical. Is the real news story here that “paranoid conspiracy theorists” (what your portmanteau suggests) are being paranoid and engaging in conspiracy theories? How can that possibly be news, given both the definition of news and of your label?

    Additionally, a pattern requires more than one point of connection in order to establish. Why didn’t you then mention, for the sake of sensibility, that the CIA ran drills of crashing jets into buildings on the morning of 9/11/2001 or that Vladimir Putin’s FSB used the excuse of drills when caught planting the bombs that sealed Putin’s rise to power? The Madrid bombing of 3/11 also has several hallmarks of an intelligence operation.

    I’m sure it’s easier to sleep at night when you mindlessly dismiss information so as not to rock the boat. Peer pressure is a well-documented psychological phenomenon. However, ridiculing others doesn’t make them wrong, no matter how many else in the herd are engaging in it along with you. Once, it was commonplace to laugh at those that believed the world was round and that the Earth was not the center of the universe. That didn’t make that view correct.

    1. Patterns of dogmatism and ignorance
      And around it goes. No the CIA didn’t run drills of crashing jets into buildings on the morning of 9-11, as we have repeatedly pointed out. It was the National Reconnaissance Office (a much less sexy agency, sorry), and the building in question was the NRO’s office in Chantilly, VA, not either the Pentagon or the WTC, contrary to the incessant bleating of the conspiranoiacs (again, sorry). And you would make a far more convincing case if you would tell us what “hallmarks of an intelligence operation” 3-11 bore (as we did, if you were paying attention) rather than just expecting us to accept your assertion on blind faith.

      If I wasn’t concerned with the anomalies surrounding the terror attacks, I wouldn’t bother to air these theories at all. But you guys always shoot yourselves in the foot with your inaccuracies and dogmatism (a very bad combination).

      For instance, you bait me for “sleeping well at night,” when I am a chronic insomniac. Why don’t you check out the facts before you mouth off, wiseguy?

      Today it is commonplace to laugh at those who believe the world is flat. Does that make the flat-earthers correct?

      1. -CIA running drills:
        -CIA running drills:
        From the NRO website: “A DoD agency, the NRO is staffed by DoD and CIA personnel”. It is a fair assertion to say that the CIA would have been involved with coordinating a significant training operation such as this, especially since their staff would be intimately involved with coordinating DoD assets. This would not likely have been run by DoD folks alone.
        Oh, and it’s worth mentioning that the Alex Jones websites say “CIA were running drills of crashing planes into buildings on the morning of 9/11”.

        -NORAD drills (bypassing the CIA/Chantilly issue as a whole)
        The 9/11 commission report concedes that on 9/11, as critics have observed, NORAD (the North American Aerospace Defense Command) conducted a “military exercise, Vigilant Guardian, which postulated [i.e. simulated] a bomber attack from the former Soviet Union.” This exercise, which occurs once or twice a year, was initially blamed for NORAD’s failure to respond on 9/11: “Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins, regional mission crew chief for the Vigilant Guardian exercise, said that everyone at the North East Air Defense Sector, part of NORAD, initially thought the first call they received about the real 9/11 hijackings was part of the war games scenario.”
        True again that it was not WTC specifically, but North East Air Defense Sector certainly includes WTC, obviously being a high-value target.

        Biowarfare Exercise Tripod II (ignoring planes as a whole):
        In the 9/11 commission report, Guiliani mentions that FEMA showed up on 9/10 to setup for a bioterror drill. Here’s Tom Kenney, of FEMA’s National Urban Search and Rescue Team, also confirming this drill.

        1. I haven’t preached in vain!

          “True again that it was not WTC specifically, but North East Air Defense Sector certainly includes WTC, obviously being a high-value target.”

          And a bomber attack rather than a hijacking.

          Well, I’m glad I finally managed to shame you into some exactitude. Always the same conspiranoid game: fudge the details to make it sound better and hope you won’t get called out on it.

          Now could you please tell us the source for the Lt. Col. Deskins quote?

          1. n. The state or quality of being exact.
            Wow…as far as I’ve noticed, the only thing you’ve preached is your own pride and fear. I assure you I’m not trying to attack you, but simply trying to help show you some information you may not have spent the time to review in detail. Choose to do with it what you will. I love to debate points of fact, but personal character attack will do nothing for the truth, especially when totally unfounded.

            “finally managed to shame you into some exactitude” – please show me where my post was not exact (p.s. the above post “CIA running drills” was my first here). I can assure you the only shame I have is being associated with the conditioned state of the American public.

            Now as far as the original comment (not written by me) and it’s exactitude:
            “CIA ran drills of crashing jets into buildings on the morning of 9/11/2001”.
            This is an accurate statement. He never said into WTC.

            Deskins quote (actually the entire article & scenario from Newport News):

            “And a bomber attack rather than a hijacking.” – actually the information regarding the scenario etc has been very sketchy. In some places I have read it was a hijacking scenario as well. We do know that it’s intention was to test national air response systems. As stated before, Russians bombers was one ‘postulate’ of what the scenario was, not defacto. In this article, you can see the type of ambiguous environment these drills create. “There were about a dozen personnel on the floor that morning, as well as several higher ranking military and civilian participants for a scheduled exercise. Most had no idea what the exercise would entail, so they were ready for anything.”

            However, the fact remains that it is suspect when 2-3 different drills had serious similarities and timing to the events which actually took place. This still certainly does not answer why NORAD did not officially shoot any of the flights down, among many other things.
            In addition, in the 7/7 event, drills were run by Visor at _the exact_ time/locations as the actual bombings.
            POWER: “At half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now.”
            Audio clip:

            I will not try to predict when another staged state sponsored terror event might happen and subsequently scare the people into giving up liberties for protection. But based on the ‘patterns’ provided here, wouldn’t it make sense to keep a close eye on similar drills, in an attempt to catch the perpetrators red-handed (rather than take spoon fed garbage from cable news, like poorly trained cave dwellers simultaneously hijacking jetliners, bypassing NORAD & flying jets @400+mph into some of the most strategic targets on the planet)?

            P.S. I recommend watching “Loose Change” by Dylan Avery if you want to see a great breakdown of the facts at hand about 9/11 on video. He’s done a great job compiling a ton of video footage and made it semi-entertaining to keep the average American attention span. It also shies away from purporting any motives, only inconsistencies between the official story and the facts.

            1. Apologies
              I meant “you” in the plural, as in “you conspiranoids.” I falsely assumed you were the same person who posted earlier, and were one of the “them” who have been assaulting this blog with relentless sheep-baiting for months because I have the nerve to air the anomalies without lining up with their dogma. I was mistaken: you are not one of “them.” You present facts with exactitude indeed, and use sources from the mainstream media, not other conspiracy blogs. You use appropriate words like “suspect” rather than assuming a constant tone of j’accuse. You seem to be a fellow truth-seeker and not a dogma-peddler. I salute you.

              And I agree. It is suspect, and we would do well to watch such “exercises” very closely. That’s why I posted this in the first place. But the conspiranoids don’t treat these facts as suspicious anomalies, but as irrefutable proof of their theories. For instance, it is always assumed that someone at high levels of government arranged the exercises as part of the conspiracy, rather than that al-Qaeda had its own intelligence sources and exploited the pre-scheduled exercises. Real truth-seekers don’t pretend to know more than they can—that’s how you can tell the difference.

              Carry on, sir.

  2. Now presenting Andy Dick’s Conspiranoids
    I’d like to know why I picture you sounding like commedian Andy Dick, giving soundbites about what was horrible about the eighties on VH-1. I’d like to know why Andy Dick who is MUCH more deserving of marginalization from cable television than your “Conspiranoids,” appears time after time again on “People” style shows talking about what’s up with Paris Hilton as if any of us cared.

    Keep in mind that we have had a Democrat Senator CLOSE HIS OFFICE and GO HOME amid reports of FEMA running a similar drill in DC. Well, you can’t call me paranoid for “believing” it happened– it was reported on CNN. If I feel like looking into it further, I’m sure I can call his office.

    We’ve seen strange things happening in America. Very bogus elections, even more bogus appearances by first “President Elect” Dubya. We can remember in 2000 that with each appearance on television the number of flags behind Mr. Bush increased. And since that first inauguration day, we’ve seen that protestors- even the kind that don’t throw raw eggs, have been screened away from view, and replaced with hand-picked supporters, sure to pose for the camera. Could one even picture Clinton hiding like this?

    Only Andy Dicks like you seem to ignore it. Only the sneering, sniveling cheerleaders of what’s ‘vogue’ in news seem to bother caring that conspiracies do happen. That the Ukranian president was poisoned. It’s apparently so out-of-style to even ASK “what the hell’s happening?” that we get Andy Dicks telling us we’re conspiranoids.

    Don’t be a Dick.


    1. You guys are really funny
      We air the anomalies without buying into either the conspiracy dogma or the consensus dogma. And we call out both for denying the inconsistencies of their position. But that isn’t good enough for you guys. Either we’re with you or we’re against you. Does this sound familiar?

      And get with the progam, Yushchenko is the American stooge in the conspiranoid worldview, so we aren’t supposed to talk about the fact that he was poisoned. (Unless of course he was poisoned by the CIA to discredit the Soviet-nostalgists–in that case I guess it’s OK to talk about it.)

      Now, who was this Democrat senator who closed his office in response to a FEMA drill? I am not going to accept this on blind faith unless you produce some documentation.

      And I am sufficiently out of touch with pop culture that I have no idea who Andy Dicks is or why I supposedly resemble him. Sorry.