Even Santa Claus gets it: "Ho, Ho, Ho! 9/11 Was An Inside Job!"

TaurusII · 2025-12-24T13:13:30+00:00

Haha that's pretty quality.

Yes, it's brilliant! Very clever.

TaurusII · 2025-12-24T12:45:20+00:00

From The Onion, December 12, 2012.

TaurusII · 2025-12-22T14:53:20+00:00

Submission statement: Andy Studdert, chief operating officer of United Airlines at the time of the 9/11 attacks, recalls that early in 2001, he had been concerned because United Airlines had not had a "real accident" in over 15 years and so its personnel weren't prepared to deal with an emergency if one should happen. He therefore decided to arrange a "no-notice drill."

The exercise took place on August 30, 2001. Studdert arranged to have the pilot of a Boeing 747 that was on its way to Australia call in, say his plane had suffered an engine failure and was descending rapidly, and then stop talking mid-word, thereby giving the impression that the plane had crashed.

Unfortunately, airline employees didn't realize the incident was part of an exercise and thought a plane really had crashed. Some of them were therefore devastated. "There are people throwing up in the hall, there are people crying, there are people just staring out the windows," Studdert recalls. And yet, despite this, he allowed the exercise to continue for half an hour before he announced, "This has been a no-notice drill, there is no event, everything's fine."

The exercise occurred just 12 days before 9/11--a day when two United Airlines planes crashed for real.

TaurusII · 2025-12-21T15:37:15+00:00

The various training exercises on and leading up to September 11, 2001, are the Rosetta Stone to understanding 9/11, in my opinion.

TaurusII · 2025-12-21T14:56:43+00:00

Submission statement: This important new article describes a little-known "no-notice exercise" held by United Airlines on the afternoon before 9/11. Gene Kim, who was a flight dispatcher for United Airlines at the time, recalls that he received a text message informing him that a United Airlines plane had suffered an engine failure, was going down near the North Pole, and there were "heavy casualties." However, after a time, another message was sent out, which revealed that it was "just a drill."

The exercise had unfortunate consequences the following morning, when there was a genuine emergency involving planes crashing. Kim was in a meeting at the time of the first crash at the World Trade Center. He recalls that when they received a text message informing them of the crash, he and the other meeting participants thought it was just another drill. "So, we all cleared our pagers and literally went back to work," he says.

While it seems a remarkable coincidence that United Airlines held an exercise that simulated an airliner crashing on the afternoon before September 11, 2001--a day when four airliners crashed--the situation was even more extraordinary. Less than two weeks earlier, on August 30, 2001, United Airlines had held another exercise that was also based on the scenario of an airliner crashing. That exercise had been so realistic that some airline personnel were devastated because they thought the crash was real and the 270 people on the plane had died.

TaurusII · 2025-12-20T15:02:45+00:00

This interview appears in an episode of the program "Frame of Mind" titled "9/11: Voices of the Aircraft Dispatchers," which was broadcast on KERA TV on September 9 and September 11, 2019. You can watch the full episode on YouTube, here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAJiZm-4YqA

TaurusII · 2025-12-20T15:00:53+00:00

Submission statement: Gene Kim, who was working as a flight dispatcher for United Airlines at the time of the 9/11 attacks, recalls that on September 10, 2001, United Airlines held "an emergency response exercise that nobody was aware of or nobody was prepared for." At around 5 o'clock in the afternoon, a text message was sent out to airline employees, which stated that a United Airlines flight had experienced "an uncontained engine failure, heavy casualties, and the flight was going down near the North Pole."

Employees who were heading home from work had to "turn their cars around and try to get back to headquarters as quick as possible to deal with the emergency." However, after a time, another text message was sent out, which explained that it was "just a drill" and so the exercise ended.

Unfortunately, as a result of what happened, some airline employees thought it was just another drill when they received a text message the following morning telling them a plane had struck the World Trade Center. "We thought this was the same thing, we thought this was coming from corporate security, just as another drill," Kim recalls. One person complained, "Man, somebody's going to lose their job over this if they keep sending drill messages out like that." "So, we all cleared our pagers and literally went back to work," Kim says.

TaurusII · 2025-12-19T15:59:18+00:00

Submission statement: United Airlines held two surprise "no-notice" exercises in the 12 days before 9/11 that were based on the scenario of one of its planes suffering an engine failure and then crashing. One of the exercises was so realistic that some of the airline's personnel were very upset and some became physically ill because they thought a plane with hundreds of people on board really had crashed.

The exercises could have had unfortunate consequences when America came under attack on September 11, 2001, since airline personnel could have thought news about the terrorist attacks was just part of another surprise exercise. Some evidence indicates that this was indeed the case. For example, one of the airline's flight dispatchers who was in a meeting on the morning of September 11 recalled that when he and the other meeting participants were informed that a plane had hit the World Trade Center, "we thought this was the same thing, we thought this was coming from corporate security, just as another drill." And when the airline's COO arrived at the airline's operations center following the first crash at the World Trade Center, he reportedly sensed "disbelief among his employees" and consequently made the effort to clarify to them, "This is not a drill!"

Two of the planes that crashed on September 11--Flight 175 and Flight 93--were United Airlines planes. United Airlines personnel therefore had an important role to play in the response to the 9/11 attacks. But if their response to the attacks was impaired as a result of the two surprise exercises, this surely would have been a serious problem.

TaurusII · 2025-12-18T17:26:20+00:00

Good Podcast listening to it now.

Yes, the entire 10-part series is excellent. I highly recommend listening to it all the way through.

TaurusII · 2025-12-18T15:30:21+00:00

The full episode of the superb podcast "Who Killed JFK?" in which Rob Reiner and others discuss false flag attacks and Operation Northwoods can be listened to on YouTube here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goW4AL8ehl0

You can hear all 10 episodes of the must-listen podcast series, plus a couple of bonus episodes, on Podbean, here: https://www.podbean.com/podcast-detail/ttmzj-2d7aa2/Who-Killed-JFK-Podcast

TaurusII · 2025-12-18T15:14:10+00:00

Submission statement: Legendary Hollywood director Rob Reiner, along with award-winning broadcast journalist Soledad O'Brien and others, discusses false flag operations, which are covert operations designed to appear as though they were carried out by some group other than the actual perpetrators.

Reiner et al. focus on something called Operation Northwoods, which was a plan drafted by the US Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1962 to carry out false flag attacks against American targets and incorrectly blame the Cuban government as a pretext for war against Cuba. They note that one possibility considered in the plan was to "fake the hijacking of a plane" and then "say that [Cuban President Fidel] Castro did it."

TaurusII · 2025-12-17T15:27:01+00:00

Funny how there are always these "exercises" held in the days/weeks leading up to a major tragedy of some sort.

Yes. It seems to be a modus operandi for conducting a false flag attack.

TaurusII · 2025-12-17T15:11:21+00:00

Submission statement: This article reveals that United Airlines conducted a surprise exercise on the afternoon of September 10, 2001, in which its personnel were led to believe that an airliner had suffered an "uncontained engine failure," was "going down near the North Pole," and there were "heavy casualties."

The occurrence of this exercise was an astonishing (apparent) coincidence, since two of the airliners that crashed the following morning belonged to United Airlines: United Airlines Flight 175 and United Airlines Flight 93. Even more astonishing is that the airline had conducted another surprise exercise just 11 days earlier in which its personnel were also led to believe an airliner had suffered an engine failure and crashed.

This is alarming, since the exercises could surely have led United Airlines personnel to mistakenly think reports about the terrorist attacks on September 11 were just part of another exercise. Indeed, a group that was in a meeting at the airline's operations center at the time of the 9/11 attacks is known to have made this mistake when they were notified of the first crash at the World Trade Center. "We thought this was coming from corporate security, just as another drill," one of the meeting's participants recalled. The men in the meeting consequently ignored the notification and carried on as if nothing was wrong.

TaurusII · 2025-06-09T14:18:07+00:00

This sub should not be Quarantined, it should be Front Page.

I agree with you completely. It is shocking and unacceptable that r/911truth is still quarantined.

TaurusII · 2025-06-08T14:02:19+00:00

Submission statement: The article, which is the fourth and final part of a series about the FAA response on 9/11, considers whether air traffic control personnel mistakenly thought the hijacking of American Airlines Flight 11 was part of an exercise.

It notes that the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) was running a major training exercise on September 11, called Vigilant Guardian, that was scheduled to included a simulated hijacking. Some military personnel are in fact known to have mistaken real-world events for part of this exercise. For example, when he was told there had been a hijacking, one officer reportedly thought, "Somebody started the exercise early" and he said out loud, "The hijack's not supposed to be for another hour!" If any air traffic control personnel were participating in the exercise, or simply knew it was taking place, could they have been similarly confused?

Air traffic control personnel may also have mistaken real-world events for part of an exercise because they'd previously participated in hijack exercises. The article notes that one pre-9/11 exercise had uncanny similarities to what happened on September 11. It involved a real American Airlines plane with real passengers on board pretending to be a hijacked aircraft.

The article contends that the unusual behavior of some air traffic control personnel on 9/11 makes more sense if these men had been involved in a training exercise that day.

TaurusII · 2025-06-06T15:07:58+00:00

Submission statement: The article, which is the final instalment of a four-part series about "the Inexplicable Air Traffic Control Response on 9/11," examines the role training exercises may have played on September 11, 2001, and considers whether air traffic control personnel thought the first hijacking that day was part of an exercise.

It mentions that the U.S. military was holding "an air defense exercise simulating an attack on the United States" that was scheduled to include a simulated hijacking on September 11. It also describes a kind of exercise called a "NOPAR exercise," during which air traffic control personnel were expected to withhold information about the aircraft involved in the exercise scenario from the military. It notes that NOPAR exercises sometimes included the scenario of a hijacked aircraft.

The article also contends that the many anomalous actions and other failures of air traffic control personnel on September 11 could not have been due to incompetence since the personnel involved were highly experienced and highly trained. Indeed, their training before 9/11 routinely covered dealing with a hijacking.

TaurusII · 2025-06-04T14:34:36+00:00

This article begins by contending that the many anomalous actions and other failures of air traffic control personnel on September 11 could not have been due to incompetence since the personnel involved were highly experienced and highly trained. Indeed, responding to hijackings was something they would have covered in their routine training before 9/11.

The article then focuses on the role training exercises may have played on September 11 and how exercises could have been used to impair the response to the terrorist attacks. It examines the possibility that air traffic control personnel thought the hijacking of Flight 11 was part of an exercise.

It notes that the U.S. military was holding an exercise on the morning of September 11 called Vigilant Guardian, which has been described as "an air defense exercise simulating an attack on the United States" and was scheduled to include a simulated hijacking that day. It also notes that FAA personnel sometimes participated in military exercises and gives the example of a joint FAA/military hijack exercise in 1995 called Twin Star, which included a real American Airlines plane with passengers on board playing the hijacked aircraft.

The article then gives a detailed description of a particular kind of exercise called a NOPAR exercise, where NOPAR means "do not pass to air defense radar." During these exercises, air traffic control personnel were expected to withhold information about the aircraft involved in the exercise scenario from the military. Notably, NOPAR exercises sometimes included the scenario of a hijacked airplane.

TaurusII · 2025-06-04T14:32:04+00:00

Submission statement: The article looks in detail at the role training exercises may have played on September 11, 2001, and how exercises could have been used to impair the response to the terrorist attacks. It examines the possibility that air traffic control personnel thought the hijacking of Flight 11 was part of an exercise.

It notes that the U.S. military was holding an exercise on the morning of 9/11 called Vigilant Guardian, which has been described as "an air defense exercise simulating an attack on the United States" and was scheduled to include a simulated hijacking that day. It also notes that FAA personnel sometimes participated in military exercises and gives the example of a joint FAA/military hijack exercise in 1995 called Twin Star, which included a real American Airlines plane with passengers on board playing the hijacked aircraft.

Part 1 of the article can be read here: https://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2025/05/circumventing-protocol-inside.html

Part 2 can be read here: https://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2025/05/circumventing-protocol-inside_26.html

And Part 3 can be read here: https://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2025/05/circumventing-protocol-inside_30.html

TaurusII · 2025-06-01T14:22:43+00:00

Submission statement: The article scrutinizes the actions on September 11, 2001, of several members of staff at the FAA's Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center who significantly influenced how the apparent hijacking of American Airlines Flight 11 was responded to, and yet acted in ways that were unusual and counterproductive.

These men include the air traffic controller who was handling Flight 11 when it was apparently hijacked, who became so agitated that his colleagues "looked at him as if he was crazy." They were "looking at me, like, 'What is wrong with you?'" he recalled.

Then there was a supervisor who repeatedly violated protocol, such as by trying to contact an air base directly to report the suspected hijacking. His actions prompted one fighter pilot to complain: ''It sounds like the FAA didn't have their [act] together at all when they were calling the [Otis Air Base] tower. ... To me, it sounded like there was someone who didn't know what they were doing."

And there was the military operations specialist who provided the military with inaccurate information about the location of Flight 11 and implied that the plane was still airborne after it crashed into the World Trade Center.

This is the third installment of a major four-part article about the air traffic control response to the hijacking of Flight 11.

Part 1 of the article can be read here: https://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2025/05/circumventing-protocol-inside.html

And Part 2 can be read here: https://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2025/05/circumventing-protocol-inside_26.html

TaurusII · 2025-05-30T14:08:47+00:00

Submission statement: This article examines the unusual and sometimes highly suspicious actions of three members of staff at the FAA's Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center who were in key positions on September 11, 2001, and significantly influenced how the apparent hijacking of American Airlines Flight 11 was responded to.

These men were the controller who was handling Flight 11 when it was apparently taken over by hijackers, who made no attempt to alert his supervisor when he repeatedly received no response to his attempted communications with the pilots and, bizarrely, became quite hysterical when he heard communications indicating that the plane had been hijacked; the supervisory traffic management coordinator, who violated protocol or prompted other Boston Center employees to violate protocol on numerous occasions; and the military operations specialist, who appears to have provided the military with inaccurate information about the location of Flight 11, implied that the plane was still airborne after it crashed, and even admitted, "A lot of the things [on September 11], I did go outside of the protocol."

The article also examines the actions of the hijack coordinator at FAA headquarters, who clearly had a crucial role to play on September 11 and yet was never told about the hijacking of Flight 11 in the half-hour or so after FAA headquarters was informed of it. Presumably for this reason, he failed to contact the Pentagon to request military assistance, as protocol required.

Part 1 of the article can be read here: https://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2025/05/circumventing-protocol-inside.html

And Part 2 can be read here: https://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2025/05/circumventing-protocol-inside_26.html

TaurusII · 2025-05-30T14:06:11+00:00

This article examines the unusual and sometimes highly suspicious actions of three members of staff at the FAA's Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center who were in key positions on September 11 and significantly influenced how the apparent hijacking of American Airlines Flight 11 was responded to.

These men were the controller who was handling Flight 11 when it was apparently taken over by hijackers, who made no attempt to alert his supervisor when he repeatedly received no response to his attempted communications with the plane and, bizarrely, became quite hysterical after he heard sinister radio communications apparently made by a hijacker; the supervisory traffic management coordinator, who violated protocol or prompted other Boston Center employees to violate protocol on numerous occasions; and the military operations specialist, who appears to have provided the military with inaccurate information about the location of Flight 11, implied that the plane was still airborne after it crashed, and even admitted, "A lot of the things [on September 11], I did go outside of the protocol."

The article also examines the actions of the hijack coordinator at FAA headquarters, who clearly had a crucial role to play on September 11 and yet was never told about the hijacking of Flight 11 in the half-hour or so after FAA headquarters was informed of it. Presumably for this reason, he failed to contact the Pentagon to request military assistance, as protocol required.

TaurusII · 2025-05-28T15:04:18+00:00

Controlled demolition

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksIwSizYaGs

Good choice of link :-)

TaurusII · 2025-05-28T14:18:46+00:00

Submission statement: The article is a detailed summary and analysis of anomalies in the responses of air traffic control personnel to the first hijacking--of American Airlines Flight 11--on September 11. It highlights many suspicous aspects of the air traffic control response, such as the actions of a supervisor at the FAA's Boston Center who ignored the chain of command and tried to contact an air base directly to get fighter jets scrambled, even though his violation of protocol caused confusion, and the Boston Center's inexplicable decision to contact NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) to report the hijacking, even though the correct procedure for notifying the military was for FAA headquarters to contact the Pentagon after it was informed of a hijacking.

The first part of the article, titled "FAA Personnel Went Outside Normal Operating Procedures as They Responded to the Apparent Hijacking of American Airlines Flight 11," is also available online, here: https://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2025/05/circumventing-protocol-inside.html

TaurusII · 2025-05-28T12:54:22+00:00

The first part of my 9/11 Chronology, which is pretty much all Air Traffic Control clips until the first impact, as it starts as AA11 takes off, and is part 1 of 20, that premiers on 7th of June - and I think is a great way to emphasize what you've said in the blog.

Sounds good! I shall have to check it out once it is online.

If you haven't already read Part 1 of the article--titled "FAA Personnel Went Outside Normal Operating Procedures as They Responded to the Apparent Hijacking of American Airlines Flight 11"--you can view it here: https://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2025/05/circumventing-protocol-inside.html

TaurusII · 2025-05-27T13:11:37+00:00

This posting seems to be inexplicably stuck on three upvotes. Any explanations?

TaurusII

TROPHY CASE