Military insider reveals 9/11 stand-down!

[Jazzz]

This is dynamite!

... From 1995 till 2002 I was a Sergeant in the United States Army. Not only this, but I was stationed at United States Central Command, which is located at MacDill AFB in Tampa Florida. I was on active duty when 9-11 happened. In the days prior to the tragedies, we were involved in many exercises. Some of these exercises included the scenarios of hijacked planes crashing into, our building the world trade center, the White House, Sears Tower, and the Pentagon. These drills or exercises as we called them, where classified Top Secret. Having a Top Secret rated clearance I was dumbfounded that they would ever push a training exercise above the level of Secret. Over my 8 years in the Army, I had participated in many exercises around the world, none of which were ever classified over the Secret level.

Ill start by saying a few months prior it was announced by President Bush that Dick Cheney would be heading up operations over NORAD our North American Aerospace Defense Command. Along with many of my peers, we were shocked. Over the years, if you research NORAD, it has always been under the command of a Military officer. It was done this way because the defense of this country has always been in the hands of such. Prior to the months before 9-11 this was all of the sudden changed. Like I said, if you research NORAD and the command structure you will find that it was imposed long ago that the military should be in control of the order to scramble planes in the defense of American air space. For some strange reason, Bush changed this and gave that power to a civilian person on his Staff team yes I know, very interesting.

...

So, I was standing in the SCIF (Secure Compartmented Information Facility), which is basically this underground bunker command post for USCENTCOM, when the first plane hit. We were watching the fly patterns of all the planes on the aerospace grid. This contained not only all commercial flights at the time, but all military flights, and fake enemy planes that were supposedly put on there for the exercise. Many of the planes sent to intercept the fake blips were scrambled from Andrews which is an air defense AFB for the East Coast. They were sent across the US and left very few planes to defend the capital. After the first plane hit the tower we were all in disbelief. After the initial shock was over, our questions were what are the odds this could happen for real, during a training exercise thats covering the same scenario? We were all at wits end. Then to top all of this off, Cheney gave NORAD the order to stand down scrambling jets to intercept. A few moments later tower 2 was hit. Only after the Pentagon was hit, did he give the orders to scramble the jets to intercept the plane bound for the White House.

...(more)

Seargent Lauro 'LG' Chavez posting on 'Veterans for 9/11 Truth'

 

[FreddyB]

I'm not saying it's fake but has this bloke been verified by anyone outside of the 9/11 truth lot?

I could register here as wing commander freddy and claim the RAf piloted the planes on 9/11 iswhat I'm getting at.

 

[two sheds]

the RAf piloted the planes on 9/11 iswhat I'm getting at.

You got a link for that????

 

[kyser_soze]

Ummm...all this does is reconfirm some of the stuff that came out in the 9/11 hearings and the recent stuff about how both military and civilian ATC completely fucked up on 9/11 - the point about Cheney is new, but I'd prefer to see this as a sworn affadavit that has legal weight, and ideally someone that can offer supporting testimony (and would be easily verified under and FOI request to the Pentagon). Incidentally, this actually contradicts a lot of the 9/11 ATC tapes and the picture that emerged from them, the 9/11 Commission's revalation that NORADs internal airspace radar system wasn't working properly etc.

As for the 'training excercise' - well for something that was 'Top Secret' it became pretty fucking well known about 1 day after 9/11 since, way back in the early post-9/11 period the fact that that precise scenario was played out in training was one of the pieces of 'evidence' used to support the conspiracy theories.

Far from 'dynamite' Jazz - there's one possibly new piece of verifiable evidence here (and TBH that may already have been recorded somewhere in the 9/11 litertature), but nothing that serves as some kind of 'smoking gun'.

 

[FreddyB]

As for the 'training excercise' - well for something that was 'Top Secret' it became pretty fucking well known about 1 day after 9/11 since, way back in the early post-9/11 period the fact that that precise scenario was played out in training was one of the pieces of 'evidence' used to support the conspiracy theories.

This makes the 9/11 conspiracy thing really frustrating, on the one hnd people say that if it was a conspiracy then lots of people would have to be in on it knowingly or otherwise to some extent, then something that's top secret is revealed people say that it can't have been top secret.

 

[Jazzz]

Ummm...all this does is reconfirm some of the stuff that came out in the 9/11 hearings and the recent stuff about how both military and civilian ATC completely fucked up on 9/11 - the point about Cheney is new, but I'd prefer to see this as a sworn affadavit that has legal weight, and ideally someone that can offer supporting testimony (and would be easily verified under and FOI request to the Pentagon). Incidentally, this actually contradicts a lot of the 9/11 ATC tapes and the picture that emerged from them, the 9/11 Commission's revalation that NORADs internal airspace radar system wasn't working properly etc.

As for the 'training excercise' - well for something that was 'Top Secret' it became pretty fucking well known about 1 day after 9/11 since, way back in the early post-9/11 period the fact that that precise scenario was played out in training was one of the pieces of 'evidence' used to support the conspiracy theories.

Far from 'dynamite' Jazz - there's one possibly new piece of verifiable evidence here (and TBH that may already have been recorded somewhere in the 9/11 litertature), but nothing that serves as some kind of 'smoking gun'.

Someone saying that Cheney gave the stand-down order is new, and indeed dynamite. There is plenty else in there too - sorry Kyser, don't agree at all. And if you knew about the training exercises the day after 9/11, you must have been involved in them, because it was years before they became public knowledge.

 

[Dubversion]

ka-boom?

whimper

 

[Jazzz]

I'm not saying it's fake but has this bloke been verified by anyone outside of the 9/11 truth lot?

I could register here as wing commander freddy and claim the RAf piloted the planes on 9/11 iswhat I'm getting at.

There's a document posted up with his post entitled 'proof of Lauro's military record'. He's also been on the Alex Jones show

CENTCOM Sergeant Details Traitorous Stand Down Orders On 9/11

 

[kyser_soze]

Thing is there was nothing 'Top Secret' about those excercises - there's records that indicate that the idea of running wargame excercises that included plane attacks was in fact only seriously considered in 2000/2001.

 

[kyser_soze]

because it was years before they became public knowledge.

No it wasn't - from the earliest days of 9/11 conspiracy one of the key pieces of 'evidence' was that the USM was conducting wargames which involved planes being used as missiles (you yourself mentioned it frequently)

And I'm sorry, but this guy manages to repeat all the 'soft spots' on the conspiracies to date - planned demolition, deliberate stand down of the planes etc. As a military commander, he would be fully aware that Rummy's order to stand down would be available if he were to put in an FOI request...why does he provide NO CORROBORATION of anything he says?

 

[Jazzz]

Thing is there was nothing 'Top Secret' about those excercises - there's records that indicate that the idea of running wargame excercises that included plane attacks was in fact only seriously considered in 2000/2001.

You've got your facts badly wrong Kyser. The war games were unknown about until years later - 2004 I think - when broken by Mike Ruppert and others.

 

[RaverDrew]

ka-boom?

whimper

Another great useful comment by Dubversion

Well done

 

[Jazzz]

No it wasn't - from the earliest days of 9/11 conspiracy one of the key pieces of 'evidence' was that the USM was conducting wargames which involved planes being used as missiles (you yourself mentioned it frequently)

And I'm sorry, but this guy manages to repeat all the 'soft spots' on the conspiracies to date - planned demolition, deliberate stand down of the planes etc. As a military commander, he would be fully aware that Rummy's order to stand down would be available if he were to put in an FOI request...why does he provide NO CORROBORATION of anything he says?

Have you ever tried putting in a FOIA request? I've had one turned down myself on the basis of national security, and that was over the Birmingham affair where there was apparently no danger to national security. Go figure.

For years the refrain from editor on these boards has been 'if this was really what happened, where are the all the whistleblowers?' well here's one, and you are now asking for documented proof?

 

[WouldBe]

But without documented information and Cheney being new to the job how do we know Cheney didn't mean to 'stand down' the exercise i.e. call the exercise off as far more important things were happening.

 

[kyser_soze]

Have you ever tried putting in a FOIA request? I've had one turned down myself on the basis of national security, and that was over the Birmingham affair where there was apparently no danger to national security. Go figure.

For years the refrain from editor on these boards has been 'if this was really what happened, where are the all the whistleblowers?' well here's one, and you are now asking for documented proof?

Possibly because whistleblowers usually blow the whistle with corroborating evidence, not just a post on several websites.

And apols regarding the excercises - I was thinking of a publicly released think tank document that covered the same ground. Will check dates next time

 

[editor]

For years the refrain from editor on these boards has been 'if this was really what happened, where are the all the whistleblowers?' well here's one, and you are now asking for documented proof?

So, how come none of his many, many work colleagues are lining up to back him up and corroborate his amazing story?

And if it was all a big invisible-missile-explodin' conspiracy and this guy is supposedly blowing the lid on it all, why haven't the govt shut him up in double quick time?

 

[poster342002]

So, how come none of his many, many work colleagues are lining up to back him up and corroborate his amazing story?

Whether any of this is true or not I really don't know - but what I will say is that people rarely ever back-up whistleblowers (in any scenario) on account of protecting their own backsides. It just simply isn't worth it for most people.

 

[goldenecitrone]

Hmm, his surname certainly rings a bell. Chavez, Chavez, you don't think...nah, he's not that much of a prankster.

 

[editor]

You've got your facts badly wrong Kyser. The war games were unknown about until years later - 2004 I think - when broken by Mike Ruppert and others.

Actually, you've got our facts badly wrong according to this bonkers site: http://911review.com/means/wargames.html

(it has credible sources for its claims but I can't be arsed to look them up)

This might, however, clarify it for you:
http://internetdetectives.biz/case/loose-change

 

[editor]

Whether any of this is true or not I really don't know - but what I will say is that people rarely ever back-up whistleblowers (in any scenario) on account of protecting their own backsides. It just simply isn't worth it for most people.

Except how many people would be prepared to keep quiet if they discovered that they'd been party to the biggest-ever mass slaughter of US citizens in a terrorist attack, the destruction of two of America's most prestigious buildings and what amounted to a humiliating attack on the country they love?

 

[poster342002]

Except how many people would be prepared to keep quiet if they discovered that they'd been party to the biggest-ever mass slaughter of US citizens in a terrorist attack, the destruction of two of America's most prestigious buildings and what amounted to a humiliating attack on the country they love?

God knows, but I was merely describing the presures people can come under when considering whether to support a whistle-blower or or keep their job, house, marriage etc etc.

 

[slaar]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

I wouldn't say one uncorroborated testimony repeated on random websites counts as extraordinary proof.

 

[kyser_soze]

Painful tho it is I agree with poster - it's very rare for whistleblowers to come in groups (altho often if one person stands up in a court situation others will follow), but my scepticism comes from the lack of corroborative evidence, that we just take this guy at his word.

As I've said before, if you are going to accuse the USG of active collusion with 9/11, which has led to a period of international strife I can't remember seeing since the 1970s, dragged the US into 2 wars; indirectly affected the situation in Israel and made life a lot worse for the Palestinians and used as a justfication for the Lebanese assault; seen several acts of brutal terrorism; and a global death toll that is probably around the 150K mark by now, if not higher (OK, not as high as Sudan has managed all on it's own but that's another bugbear)...then I want to be as damned sure as possible that those providing the evidence and the evidence itself is absolutely and utterly beyond reproach.

And that's before you even look at the concept of 'innocent until proven guilty', but habeus corpus is another matter altogether...

 

[poster342002]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

To obtain which, you need extraordinary investigation. What one normally gets, however, is bog-standard whitewash that works backwards to reach a pre-determined conclusion.

 

[kyser_soze]

To obtain which, you need extraordinary investigation. What one normally gets, however, is bog-standard whitewash that works backwards to produce a pre-determined "conclusion".

True, but that's no different from the conspiracy mob either - they are working backwards from the proposition 'Obviously the USG did it'

 

[editor]

God knows, but I was merely describing the presures people can come under when considering whether to support a whisltebloweror or keep their job, house, marriage etc etc.

Sure, but nothing's happened to this bloke - he's still free to go on the wonderful Alex Jones show and babble away to the loons.

I'd also suggest that most people would find it nigh-on impossible to hold back forever from speaking out if they discovered that they'd been part of an horrific murderous plot to slaughter thousands of innocent civilians and blow up a large chunk of NYC.

 

[Dubversion]

Another great useful comment by Dubversion

Well done

it was a gag, drew, much like the gags you sometimes post. Why is it different if i do it? and why are you giving me quite so much shit lately?

 

[RaverDrew]

it was a gag, drew, much like the gags you sometimes post. Why is it different if i do it? and why are you giving me quite so much shit lately?

I'm not just having a pop at you, I've been doing it to everyone recently.

I think I'm turning into a grumpy old man.

 

[poster342002]

Like I say, I've no idea about this particular claim. I'm trying to keep an open mind about it all, really. I don't buy into "lizards" or anything like that, but do try to maintain an enquiring mind.

What I do think, however, is that whenever officialdom exonnerates itslelf with yet another whitewash investigation into something - and predictably "finds no evidence" of it's own wrongdoing, I tend to raise an eyebrow and not take it at face value.

 

[kyser_soze]

I think we're in the same boat on this TBH - don't believe the official account, but don't think the conspiracy types have a credible narrative or evidence to support it.