Quote Originally Posted by derF
Do you question the credibility of the source?
I question wether the source reporting is non-baised or skewed toward their desired ends.

For Instance little tidbit - smacks of conspiracy thoery without any substance.

The exercise fulfils several different goals. It acts as a cover for the small compartamentalized government terrorists to carry out their operation without the larger security services becoming aware of what they're doing, and, more importantly, if they get caught during the attack or after with any incriminating evidence they can just claim that they were just taking part in the exercise.

This is precisely what happened on the morning of 9/11/2001. The CIA was conducting drills of flying hijacked planes into the WTC and Pentagon at 8:30 in the morning.
Do you really believe that someone that works for the government of the United Kingdom - on purpose planned the operation, developled the scenerio, gathered the resources, put together the team, planned a simulatous civilian operation to serve as cover, - and prevent a leak of the operation before hand. Followed by a individual with intergity not blowing the wistle on the whole operation.

And right the CIA flew the plans into the WTC.


What is more likely is that the operation by the British government got leaked by some unkown and stupid governmental employee and if the operation mention does indeed exist the "terrorist" bombers happen to decide to use Englands Civil Defense against them.

See two can play the alternative scenerio situation. Its really not hard. Take a few facts, spin a few what if's, play into peoples distrust of the government, or distrust of whatever. And bingo you have a viable conspricacy theory with little to no effort.