When Terror Drills
9-11, the London Bombings
& the Sinking of Estonia
Solving 9-11 - Chapter 3
Written by Christopher Bollyn
The past two decades have
been marked by a large number of man-made terror events which remain
unsolved to this day. Several of these events, which involve heinous
crimes of mass murder, are similar in a most remarkable way. These
are the disasters which occurred during security drills or military
exercises in which the scenario was incredibly similar, if not
identical to the real-life terror attack.
Understanding the nature of
the exercises that created the background and framework for these
attacks is essential to understanding how the attacks were carried
out. The fact that these real-life terror events occurred within the
context of virtually identical terrorism/security exercises has been
completely ignored by the media -- as if the exercises had never
Of the major terror events
that occurred during such exercises, we will look at three specific
examples: the aerial attacks of 9-11, the bombings of the London
Underground and a bus in 2005, and the sinking of the Baltic ferry
Estonia in 1994.
While there certainly have
been other major disasters that occurred within the context of
military exercises, the sinking of the Russian submarine Kursk
in 2000, for example, and the 1988 downing of Iran Air Flight 655 by
the USS Vincennes in the Persian Gulf, the three events
being discussed here involved attacks on civilian transportation
systems far from any war zone.
The three disasters were all
handled in the same way by their respective governments and
media. In each case, before a real investigation could begin to
establish the facts and examine the evidence, a politically
acceptable explanation was put forward by government officials and
repeated, without question, by the mass media. Evidence and facts
that contradict the "official" version of events have been
confiscated, destroyed, or simply ignored.
The extremely hasty and
improper sale of the steel from the World Trade Center to distant
Asian smelters, for example, must rank as the most egregious case of
destruction of evidence from a crime scene in American history.
SELLING THE EVIDENCE
- The steel from the WTC, the most critical evidence to determine
what really caused the towers to collapse, was quickly destroyed
after being sold to Asian smelters. Alan D. Ratner of Metal
Management and the New York-based Hugo Neu Schnitzer East profited
from this criminal destruction of evidence. Ratner sold the WTC
steel to Chinese companies, reportedly selling more than 50,000 tons
of steel to a Shanghai steel company for $120 per ton. Ratner had
paid about $70 per ton for the steel. (See Bollyn article entitled
"Seismic Evidence of Underground Explosions" for details.)
Likewise, during the
official dive for evidence to the wreck of Estonia, on
which more than 852 people are known to have died, the crucial
locking bolt from the bow visor, which officials blame for having
caused the catastrophe, was thrown back into the sea.
The bolt from the Atlantic
lock had been detached by divers and brought to the surface for
investigation only to be thrown back to the sea by Börje Stenström,
the Swedish navy commander who was the head of the technical group
of the international investigation commission.
Stenström's throwing the
bolt back to the sea was clearly the destruction of "one of the most
important pieces of evidence," according to his own scenario of what
had caused the sinking.
THE CULT OF
THE BOW VISOR - Estonia's
bow visor, seen open here, is blamed by corrupt investigators for
causing the sinking. The crucial evidence that would prove otherwise
was thrown back into the sea. The Swedish government's effort to
support their "official lie" with a computer simulation of the
sinking has failed because the model of the vessel simply won't sink
absent a hole below the waterline.
The first rule in
maintaining a cover-up is to control access to the evidence. The
second rule is to destroy any and all evidence that contradicts the
official version of events.
The fact that these three
disasters occurred during very similar terror scenarios being staged
as part of an exercise has been ignored by the mass media, which has
treated these extremely uncanny coincidences as complete
Information about the
exercises has been kept hidden from the public. The government
cover-ups have been greatly facilitated by the compliant mass media
which has consistently ignored the fact that several mega-disasters
occurred within the context of strikingly similar terrorism
The terrorist attacks, for
example, that struck New York and Washington on 9-11 and the London
bombings of July 7, 2005, were the realization, i.e. the making
real, of computer-based scenarios that were being staged in the same
place at the same time. Would a truly free press ignore the
conspicuous fact that both events occurred within the context of
very similar terror exercises?
"The easiest way to carry
out a false flag attack is by setting up a military exercise that
simulates the very attack you want to carry out," Captain Eric H.
May, a former military intelligence officer from the U.S. Army wrote
in a recent article entitled "False Flag Prospects, 2008 - Top Three
U.S. Target Cities."
False flag terror attacks
are designed and carried out with the intention of having the blame
assigned to a targeted foe in order to manipulate public opinion,
cause conflict and foment war. The complicity of the media is
necessary for such false flag terrorism to succeed.
"This is exactly how government
perpetrators in the US and UK handled the 9/11 and 7/7 'terror'
attacks," May writes, "which were in reality government attacks
blamed on 'terrorists'."
THE GRIM FAIRY TALE
OF 9-11 – The alleged hijackers of 9-11, according to the
government and controlled media version. But why has the mass media
shown no interest in interviewing the families of these men in order
to document and support the official story? How can it be than
several of them are even reported to be alive and the media doesn't
Captain May, a Texan from
Houston, certainly knows what he is talking about. He is an expert
in military exercises involving simulations. May completed advanced
courses at the U.S. Army's school for military intelligence officers
at Fort Huachuca, Arizona, and served five years with the U.S.
Army's 75th Division as an Opposing Forces Controller, where he ran
May's aim, he says, as a
former military intelligence officer who spent five years conducting
war games, is to warn the public that the " 'next 9/11' --
constantly promised by officials and the media -- is likely to be
carried out under the guise of future military exercises.
"If the American people are
aware of pending exercises and the danger they represent," May says,
"then the exercises cannot 'go live' and effect the very terror
events that they are supposed to be rehearsing against."
9-11 and the July 7, 2005
bombings in London "have smoking guns proving that the mass
murderers were not foreign terrorists but domestic tyrants," May
writes. The "smoking guns," he says, are the terror exercises that
simulated the attacks that actually occurred.
While the terrorism/security
drills created the "contrarian scenario" framework within which the
real terror attacks occurred, it does not necessarily follow that
the agency running the exercise is the actual terrorist. The true
culprit is much more likely to be a foreign agency, who is covertly,
but intimately aware of the planning of the exercise. By having
access to the critical computer networks involved in the exercise
this outside agency has the ability to hijack the drill and make it
While the real terrorists
could be from any agency that is involved in the drill, they could
also be from a foreign intelligence organization that has gained
"back door" access to the computer networks on which the exercise is
planned and carried out.
intelligence, for example, which has long been engaged in supplying
enterprise software, e.g. Ptech, and network security personnel and
programs to the U.S. government and military, undoubtedly has "back
door" access to these most sensitive computer networks.
As May says, the "smoking
gun" terror drills disprove the official fairy tale that "Islamic
terrorists" are responsible for these false flag terror attacks. The
Arabs and Muslims who have been wrongly blamed for 9-11 and the
London bombings have simply been framed, like Lee Harvey Oswald, as
part of the deception.
KILLING THE PATSY – Jacob
Rubinstein, a.k.a. Jack Ruby, a violent Jew from Chicago with close
ties to the Jewish organized crime network, shoots the patsy of the
Kennedy assassination, Lee Harvey Oswald, in Dallas. Ruby's father,
an alcoholic carpenter and deserter from the Russian army, came to
America from Sokolov, a Zionist hotbed near Warsaw with his brother,
Abraham. Rubinstein's mother, Fannie, was a Yiddish-speaking
illiterate who was unable to learn to even sign her own name after
35 years in the United States. The Rubinstein children spent time in
foster homes due to neglect, while Fannie spent time in the mental
hospital in Elgin, Illinois.
(NOTE ON THE CHICAGO
CONNECTION – Itzhak Rabin, a senior Israeli military officer and
ally of Shimon Peres, also happened to be in Dallas on the day
President John F. Kennedy was killed. So, pray tell, exactly what
business did the Israeli military officer Itzhak Rabin have in
Dallas on November 22, 1963?
On January 1, 1964, Rabin
was promoted to Chief of Staff after returning from Dallas. Rabin's
father, Nehemiah, had lived some 13 years in Chicago's West Side
Yiddish-speaking Jewish community, some of that time at 2734 Crystal
Street with a Solomon Turovlin of the Jewish Daily Forward, the
Yiddish language paper. The elder Rabin (said to have been born
Rubitzov, although not one record has been found in that name) was
involved in the same Yiddish-speaking Zionist community, which the
Rubinstein family was also part of, before migrating to Palestine as
a member of the "Jewish Legion" sometime after September
1918. Rabin's father from Chicago engaged in fighting in the Jordan
Valley of Palestine and was one of the founders of the underground
Zionist militia, the Haganah, in Jerusalem in 1920.
Why has the U.S. media
ignored the extensive ties between Zionists like Rabin and
Rubinstein to the world of Jewish organized crime?)
LONDON – JULY 7, 2005
At the exact time of the
terror bombings of the London Underground and a bus at Tavistock
Square, a man named Peter Power was, with his crisis management
company, Visor Consultants Ltd., conducting a terrorism drill for a
mysterious un-named client. The Visor exercise was precisely
identical to the bombings that occurred. Just how likely is such a
Peter Power had previously
worked at Scotland Yard, the Anti Terrorist Branch, and as a police
superintendent in West Dorset, England. In 1993, Power was himself
the subject of a criminal investigation which, in April 1993, led to
his suspension and retirement from the police.
Superintendent Power was
suspended following an internal police inquiry, which resulted in a
file being submitted to the Director of Public Prosecution. Oddly,
the details of the Power investigation have been kept
classified. After a five-month investigation, Power retired from the
police force in September 1993, at the age of 42, "on health
POWER - The July Seventh Truth Campaign in Britain has revealed
Power's troubled past and his links with previous terror incidents
in Britain. But the details of the criminal investigation into Peter
Power have been kept secret since 1993. What did he do in Dorset and
who was the mysterious un-named company with whom he planned and
conducted the terror exercise on July 7?
"THIS IS THE REAL ONE"
Just hours after the London
bombings, Power explained the incredible coincidences with the drill
his company was conducting in a radio interview with Peter Allen on
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.
To get this quite straight, you were running an exercise to see
how you would cope with this and it happened while you were
running the exercise?
Precisely, and it was about half past nine this morning, we
planned this for a company and for obvious reasons I don't want
to reveal their name but they're listening and they'll know it.
And we had a room full of crisis managers, for the first time
they'd met, and so within five minutes we made a pretty rapid
decision, "this is the real one" and so we went through the
correct drills of activating crisis management procedures to
jump from slow time to quick time thinking and so on.
WHO CHOSE A SCENARIO
Later on July 7, Power
appeared in a television interview on ITV News in which he revealed
more about the nature of the operation:
Today we were running an exercise for a company - bearing in
mind I'm now in the private sector - and we sat everybody down,
in the city - 1,000 people involved in the whole organisation -
but the crisis team. And the most peculiar thing was we based
our scenario on the simultaneous attacks on an underground and
mainline station. So we had to suddenly switch an exercise from
'fictional' to 'real'. And one of the first things is, get that
bureau number, when you have a list of people missing, tell
them. And it took a long time.
ITV Host: Just
to get this right, you were actually working today on an
exercise that envisioned virtually this scenario?
Er, almost precisely. I was up to 2 o'clock this morning,
because it's our job, my own company Visor Consultants, we
specialise in helping people to get their crisis management
response. How do you jump from 'slow time' thinking to 'quick
time' doing? And we chose a scenario - with their assistance -
which is based on a terrorist attack because they're very close
to, er, a property occupied by Jewish businessmen, they're in
the city, and there are more American banks in the city than
there are in the whole of New York - a logical thing to do. And
it, I've still got the hair....
One would think that such
astounding revelations of a British terrorism expert about how the
terror bombings were "almost precisely" like the exercise he had
been conducting for a mysterious company would be of great interest
to the media. That has, however, not been the case.
There has been virtually no
discussion in the "mainstream" media that the London bombings, or
other terror atrocities and disasters like 9-11 and the sinking of
Estonia, occurred within the context of security drills
that were very similar to what actually happened. Why has this
crucial background information been censored? Astonishing first-hand
accounts, like Peter Power's, from people engaged in these exercises
were reported shortly after the events occurred, yet these important
stories were confined to local news outlets and not reported in the
major national and international news outlets, in newspapers like
the New York Times, for example, whose motto is: "All the
news that's fit to print."
Power's comments about the
amazing coincidences with his security drill were censored by the
BBC in the same way as the eyewitness report of Stephen Evans, their
reporter who was at the World Trade Center on 9-11.
Evans was on the ground
floor of the South Tower when planes struck the complex. When he
appeared on BBC World television shortly after the collapse of the
twin towers, Evans repeatedly described a "series of explosions" he
had seen and felt at the base of the tower before it was
STEPHEN EVANS - The BBC reporter and eyewitness to the destruction
of the World Trade Center on 9-11. When Evans went on BBC television
shortly after the collapses all he talked about was the "series of
explosions" he had witnessed. The producers in London were clearly
not interested in discussing that subject. How did the BBC editors
know that explosions were something that should not be
discussed? Why did they censor Evans' eyewitness account?
From the first minute Evans
spoke, however, it was quite obvious that his eyewitness report was
being censored by the higher powers at the BBC. When the BBC
revisited the events of 9-11 with Evans, there was absolutely no
mention of the "series of explosions" he had witnessed on the
morning of the attacks. How can that be? Such blatant and
intentional omissions are properly defined as censorship.
eyewitness account from 9-11 was evidently dropped into the "memory
hole" at the BBC. Peter Power's revealing comments about the London
bombings met the same fate. For independent journalists to question
the controlled-media's version of events, from which such
significant first-hand accounts have been censored, is to risk being
branded a "conspiracy theorist."
The public is now told that
eyewitness accounts can not be trusted – at least when they differ
from the official version. Eyewitness reports from people who were
in the disaster or who saw it with their own eyes can not be
considered as reliable testimony, we are told. How very odd.
Such was the case with the
downing of TWA Flight 800 off Long Island, New York in 1996, when
more than 100 eyewitnesses reported seeing what appeared to be a
missile streak from the surface of the ocean, strike the aircraft,
and cause an explosive fireball.
I attended the final
presentation of the official TWA 800 report by the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) in 2000, when David Mayer, whose
only credential as a panel member was a Ph.D. in Applied
Experimental Psychology from Rice University, audaciously dismissed
the reports of more than 100 eyewitnesses as the collective
hallucinations of intoxicated New Yorkers, based solely on the fact
that it was a summer weekend evening!
At that point, it was
abundantly clear that there was something seriously wrong with the
NTSB and their investigation of the downing of TWA 800. The cover-up
could hardly have been more obvious.
DRILL OF 9-11
On 9-11, an agency of the
Dept. of Defense and the CIA was conducting a terror scenario in
which an imaginary airplane from Washington's Dulles International
Airport was to crash into one of the four towers of the suburban
campus of the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) in Chantilly,
Virginia, just a few miles west of the Pentagon.
The plane that allegedly
crashed into the Pentagon, American Airlines Flight 77, departed
from the very same airport at 8:20 a.m. on 9-11. When the terror
scenario became real in New York and at the Pentagon, the NRO
exercise was cancelled and nearly all its three thousand employees,
the people who operate the nation's "eye in the sky," were sent
The government said it was a
"bizarre coincidence" that the NRO, a military intelligence agency
working under the Dept. of Defense and CIA, had planned a simulated
exercise with a mock "plane-into-building" crash on the morning of
"It was just an incredible
coincidence that this happened to involve an aircraft crashing into
our facility," spokesman Art Haubold told the Associated Press in
August 2002. "As soon as the real world events began, we canceled
As the agency that operates
many of the nation's spy satellites, the NRO personnel come from the
military and the CIA. When the attacks occurred, however, most of
the 3,000 people who work at the agency were sent home. Why would
they do that? Does it make any sense at all for a nation to shut
its eyes while it is under attack?
The fact that the spy agency
had planned such a drill was casually leaked in an announcement for
a homeland security conference in Chicago in 2002. In a promotion
for speaker John Fulton, a CIA officer assigned as chief of NRO's
strategic gaming division, the announcement said:
On the morning of
September 11, 2001, Mr. Fulton and his team ... were running a
pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues
that would be created if a plane were to strike a building.
Little did they know that the scenario would come true in a
dramatic way that day.
The most pressing questions about why the U.S. military air defense
system failed to intercept the four hijacked planes on 9-11 are
obviously of crucial importance. Captain May writes that "even
official apologists call [9-11] the greatest defense failure in
How could the most modern
and expensive air force in the world fail to intercept four
airliners, three of which roamed wild for hundreds of miles before
striking landmark buildings in New York and Washington?
Why was the U.S. air defense
system unable to intercept several large, slow-moving planes before
they struck the nation's largest city and its capital? If the U.S.
Air Force couldn't intercept lumbering civilian planes, how could
they possibly stop a hostile invasion of fighter jets or missiles?
These crucial questions have
never been raised by the government appointed commissions or the
media, which have all avoided discussing the military exercises of
9-11. It's not that these drills were not reported, but rather that
their connection to the disasters has not been openly discussed and
Four months after 9-11, the
Post-Standard of Syracuse, New York, published an article
by Hart Seely that featured first-hand accounts of the military
radar operators of the Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) at the
former Griffiss Air Force Base in Rome, New York. These radar
operators were the eyes of the U.S. air defense system for the
eastern part of the nation on 9-11.
In Seely's article, the
NEADS personnel explained how a North American Aerospace Defense (NORAD)
exercise called Vigilant Guardian, which they were participating in,
had caused systemic confusion which prevented an effective military
response to the real emergency.
The confusion at NEADS was
evident from the moment Boston Flight Control informed them that a
plane had been hijacked.
At 8:38 a.m. an air traffic
controller telephoned Sergeant Jeremy Powell at NEADS to inform him
that one of their planes had been hijacked and was headed to New
"Is this real-world or
exercise?" Powell asked.
"No. This is not an
exercise; not a test," Powell was told, according to transcripts of
the 9-11 Commission report.
Seely's informative article
described the context -- and the confusion -- at NEADS:
IT MUST BE PART OF THE
6 a.m.: WAR GAMES
Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins figured it would be a long day. Sept. 11 was
Day 2 of "Vigilant Guardian," an exercise that would pose an
imaginary crisis to North American Air Defense outposts nationwide.
The simulation would run all week, and Deskins, starting her 12-hour
shift in the Operations Center as the NORAD unit's airborne control
and warning officer, might find herself on the spot.
Day 1 of the simulation had
moved slowly. She hoped the exercise gathered steam. It made a long
day go faster.
8:40 a.m.: REAL WORLD
In the Ops Center, three
rows of radar scopes face a high wall of wide-screen monitors.
Supervisors pace behind technicians who peer at the instruments.
Here it is always quiet, always dark, except for the green radar
At 8:40, Deskins noticed
senior technician Jeremy Powell waving his hand. Boston Center was
on the line, he said. It had a hijacked airplane.
"It must be part of the
exercise," Deskins thought. At first, everybody did. Then Deskins
saw the glowing direct phone line to the Federal Aviation
On the phone she heard the
voice of a military liaison for the FAA's Boston Center: "I have a
hijacked aircraft," he told her.
American Airlines Flight 11,
headed to Los Angeles, had veered off course, apparently toward New
York. The liaison said to get "some F-16s or something" airborne.
Forty-one minutes earlier,
Flight 11 had left Logan Airport with 81 passengers. For the last 27
minutes, it had not responded to ground control.
Deskins requested Flight
11's latest position, which an operator put up on the screen. Flight
11 wasn't there. Someone had turned off its transponder, the device
that identifies the plane to ground control. Boston Center could
still track it on primary radar, but the operators in Rome would be
hard-pressed to find it amid the jumble of blips on their screens.
We'll direct the intercept,
the liaison told Deskins. Just get something up there.
Deskins ran up a short
flight of stairs to the Battle Cab and reported the hijacked plane -
real world, not a simulation.
NEADS RADAR OPERATORS
– These were the military radar
personnel who were confused on 9-11 because of the Vigilant Guardian
simulation. Did Ali Baba and the 40 Thieves, a.k.a. Osama bin Laden
and the 19 flight school drop outs, know all about the NORAD and NRO
simulations and possess the "super-user" ability to hack into the
military, FAA, and NORAD computer systems to manipulate the data in
order to cause confusion and thwart an effective response?
The real perpetrators of 9-11 certainly did.
NOT A SIMULATION
What is most peculiar is
that Seely's informative article about the confusion among the
critical military radar operators at NEADS was never published or
referenced by any national newspaper in the United States. The
New York Times, for example, has never even mentioned
"Vigilant Guardian," the air defense exercise that contributed to
the confusion behind the military's failure to protect New York City
Oddly, among the national
newspapers and news magazines of the United States, Vigilant
Guardian has only been mentioned once, very briefly, in a
Washington Post book review of the 9-11 Commission report.
The review began with the
painfully obvious truth: "If the 9-11 report had been written as a
novel, nobody would believe it. The story is too far-fetched."
The Post only
mentioned Vigilant Guardian when it quoted "a little-noticed
footnote" from the report:
When FAA officials
realize (late) that planes are being hijacked, they can't
monitor them - or decide what to do. The vice president thinks
he has issued orders to shoot down civilian planes, but the
pilots in the air don't get the word. The military's air-defense
command isn't sure whether it's dealing with an exercise or a
real event. Incredibly, according to a little-noticed footnote
in the report, "On 9/11, NORAD was scheduled to conduct a
military exercise, Vigilant Guardian, which postulated a bomber
attack from the former Soviet Union."
Vigilant Guardian obviously
confused the military because simulated hijackings and false
"injects," which are radar indications of non-existent planes, were
reportedly part of the exercise. This is why Deskins and others were
initially uncertain whether the reports of hijacked planes were
"real world" or simulation.
"First thing that went
through my mind was, 'Is this part of the exercise? Is this some
kind of a screw-up?' " Air Force Maj. Gen. Larry Arnold, who was at
a command center at the Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida, told
The military's inability to
respond effectively to the rogue aircraft of 9-11 was evidently
caused, at least in part, by the NORAD exercise. The fact that a
similar exercise, involving a plane striking a military facility
near the Pentagon, was being staged on the morning of 9-11,
indicates that the computer-based exercises played key roles in the
actual terror attacks that occurred. Is this why the controlled
media has ignored them?
What role the military
exercises played in the 9-11 terror attacks and how they could have
been hijacked, and by whom, are all questions that need to be
answered, but these are questions that will be addressed in greater
detail in a subsequent chapter.
The unexplained sinking of
the Baltic ferry Estonia on its way to Stockholm from
Tallinn in late September 1994 is the third mega-disaster (not in
chronological order) that occurred within the framework of a
The day before it sank
Estonia had also been the scene of a terrorism exercise in
which the scenario was a terror bombing of the ferry. Looking at the
NATO military assets that were assembled nearby and the terrorism
drill that had just been conducted on the ship, the stage was
clearly set and the actors were in place for what turned out to be a
catastrophe is Europe's worst
maritime disaster since World War II.
852 people are known to have died
when Estonia sank in the early hours of September 28, 1994,
but more than 1,000 may have perished, if, as reported, some 150
Iraqi Kurds were being smuggled to Sweden in one of the trucks on
its car deck.
Scores of people died in the
frigid water of the Baltic Sea waiting for rescue boats and
helicopters that came too late. More than ninety bodies were
retrieved from the life rafts.
THE TOLL - The bodies
of some of the
victims retrieved from the
NATO'S "SEARCH & RESCUE"
Although it is seldom
mentioned, the Estonia catastrophe occurred on the first
day of a 10-day NATO naval exercise called
Cooperative Venture 94,
in which more than 15 ships and "a number of maritime aircraft" were
prepared to conduct "humanitarian and search and rescue operations"
in nearby waters.
The NATO exercise,
which involved 10 NATO member states and the Baltic "partner"
nations of Russia, Sweden, Poland, and Lithuania, was to be staged
in the Skagerrak, between Denmark and Norway, and the Norwegian Sea,
according to the
NATO press release
about the exercise from September 16, 1994.
The NATO nations who
participated in the exercise were Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Germany,
Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, United Kingdom, and the
United States. Many other allies and partners sent observers to the
exercise, according to the NATO press release.
The fact that Estonia
sank as the submarines, ships, planes, personnel, and satellites
from the navies of 14 nations were preparing to begin their 10-day
"search and rescue operations" exercise off the coast of Sweden
raises several obvious questions that deserve to be answered: First
and foremost, if NATO had 15 ships and a number of aircraft
assembled and prepared to conduct "search and rescue operations,"
why didn't NATO assist in the early morning rescue operation for the
victims from the Estonia catastrophe?
The Swedish rescue
helicopters were ill-prepared and ill-equipped, which resulted in a
fatal delay for those waiting to be rescued.
specially-equipped rescue helicopters or other aircraft that could
have assisted?" Drew Wilson, author of The Hole (2006), a
book about the Estonia catastrophe, wrote:
Survivors who didn't die from hypothermia while floating on upturned
boats or flotsam in the biting water waited four-six hours for
rescue. NATO search-and-rescue personnel and equipment could have
saved some lives. Flying time was under 1 hour. Why didn't they
respond to the distress traffic? What happened?
The evidence indicates that
the Mayday signals from Estonia had been jammed, as were
all radio communications in the area.
"A series of comprehensive
malfunctions in regional communication systems all at once, and all
at the exact time the ferry had sunk suggest involvement by a
military or intelligence services," Wilson writes in The Hole.
"Was a distress call intentionally blocked? If so, why?
Communications throughout the Northern Baltic Sea were disrupted
during the time of the accident."
As Wilson documents, VHF
Channel 16, the international Mayday channel, and Channel 2182 were
blocked. "Signal jamming of all radio communications apparently
occurred on the Southern coastline of Finland as the accident
The NSA of the United
States, the intelligence and spy agency which monitors signal
intelligence around the world, reportedly has a file of documents
about the Estonia
catastrophe which remain classified more than 13 years after the
passenger and car ferry supposedly sank due to a faulty bow visor.
Why would the NSA maintain top-secret files about an innocent ship
wreck in the Baltic Sea in 1994?
Werner Hummel, the German investigator, said that his Group had
documentation showing that the regional telephone network servicing
the catastrophe site failed just as it was needed most. The
malfunction was truly a startling coincidence. The telephone company
stated its entire radio communications network, for unknown reasons,
had been down from 1:03 to 1:58 a.m. – almost exactly the time the
Estonia first encountered trouble until the time it
disappeared from radar.
Didn't the NATO
communications units prepared for the "search and rescue" exercise
overhear the distress calls coming from Estonia? NATO, with
state-of-the-art satellite and airborne surveillance assets in place
over the Baltic Sea certainly must know who was blocking the SOS
Why has this information
been kept secret since 1994? Blocking SOS calls and jamming distress
signals is a violation of international law. Why has this crime not
The intentional blocking of
the Mayday signals from Estonia points to complicity in
mass murder. "Naval exercises are meant to be as realistic as
possible," Olivier Schmidt, author of The Intelligence Files:
Today's Secrets, Tomorrow's Scandals, writes.
What was the "search and
rescue" scenario of NATO's Cooperative Venture 94 exercise, which
was commanded at sea by the Dutch submarine commander Gijsbert
I sent a series of pertinent
questions to Robert Pszczel, NATO's press officer for Baltic issues,
about NATO's response to the Estonia catastrophe:
Did NATO have any naval
assets in the Baltic Sea on the night of September 27-28, 1994 and
what actions did NATO take in the immediate aftermath of the
Did NATO pick up the Mayday
signals being sent (and jammed) from Estonia? Why didn't
NATO assist, given the urgent need to retrieve hundreds of freezing
people from life rafts? What was the scenario of NATO's search and
Despite telephone calls and
email exchanges with the press office at NATO headquarters, Robert
Pszczel failed to respond to a single question about NATO's response
to the Estonia catastrophe for this article.
Drew Wilson ran into the
same wall of silence at NATO when he asked questions about
Estonia for his book The Hole.
If NATO has a reasonable
explanation for its failure to respond and assist during Europe's
worst maritime disaster since World War II, why is it unwilling to
provide it? To whom is this organization accountable?
NATO had 14 ships, submarines, aircraft, and personnel from the
United States, Europe, Sweden, and Russia assembled near the scene
of the sinking of Estonia,
Europe's worst maritime disaster since World War II. The purpose of
the NATO exercise included "search and rescue" operations, yet when
disaster struck, NATO did nothing to help. Why? What was NATO doing
that was more important than saving the lives of their citizens? Why
won't they even talk about it? If not the citizens, to whom is NATO
accountable? What kind of organization is this?
The Estonia ferry
had been the object of bomb threats and had participated in at least
two terror bomb exercises in 1994, one in February and another just
the day before it sank.
On February 2, 1994,
Estonia was the subject of a major mock bomb exercise conducted
with RITS, Sweden's maritime fire and rescue agency, and the
Stockholm police. The Stockholm police had requested to take part in
the exercise and used bomb-sniffing dogs to find explosives. The
terror simulation involved a scenario in which "bombs" had been
placed in the sauna and swimming pool area on the lowest deck, below
the waterline in the bow of the ship. A second "bomb" was placed in
the sleeping quarters on the first deck, also below the waterline.
In the Estonia
terrorism scenario, the explosives in the sauna were to be found by
the dogs, while the second "bomb" was to explode. The purpose of
this terrorism drill was to train with the ship's crew and include
shore-based terrorism experts and police with bomb-sniffing dogs,
brought to the ship by helicopter. In the simulation, the "bombs"
were set to explode about half way between the Estonian and Swedish
coasts, which is where the ship actually sank in September 1994
after a similar mock bomb threat exercise.
When Estonia sank,
another mock bomb exercise on the ship had just been
concluded. Survivors from the sinking actually reported hearing two
huge explosions immediately before the ship listed to
starboard. Several crew members testified to having heard the coded
fire alarm "Mr. Skylight to No. 1 and 2" over the ferry's public
address system at about 1:02 a.m. after the vessel had listed
This is the exact same
message for the crew that was used during the previous bomb drill in
February 1994. "Mr. Skylight" was a signal for the fire fighters to
proceed to their fire stations 1 and 2 and prepare for damage
control. The fact that this coded alarm was given indicates that
there was damage caused by a fire or explosion that required
immediate attention. The ferry sank within 30 minutes.
Eyewitness testimony from
survivors plus the fact that the ship sank extremely quickly
strongly suggest that explosives were used to tear a large hole in
the hull below the waterline. Swedish policemen who had just
conducted training involving a mock bomb threat on the ferry were
returning home when Estonia sank. Of the 70 policemen, only
was being used to ferry drugs and
Soviet military contraband,
which probably included advanced space weapons technology, when she
sank. The highest officials in Swedish customs, the government, and
military were aware of the sensitive and illegal shipments that put
the ferry at risk. Is this why they are so dedicated to protecting
the lies about the sinking?
Copyright 2008 Christopher Bollyn
All Rights Reserved
support Bollyn's research
and the writing of Solving 9-11,
please send a donation by PayPal to
This e-mail address is being protected
Thank you very
Sources and Recommended Reading
ABC News, "Terror
Hits the Towers: How Government Officials Reacted to Sept. 11
Attacks" September 14, 2002.
Solving 9-11, Chapter 1, "The Planes of 9-11" October 15,
Solving 9-11, Chapter 2, "America The Target"
Solving 9-11, Special Chapter, "How Did Israeli Spy
Software Get In Critical FAA Computers" January 28, 2008
Bollyn, Christopher, "Mysterious
Middle Eastern Connection with Weapons Smuggling on Estonia"
December 2, 2005
Bollyn, Christopher, "Seismic
Evidence of Underground Explosions Causing WTC Collapse"
August 28, 2002
Bollyn, Christopher, "Was
the NRO's 9/11 Drill Just a Coincidence?"
November 1, 2002
May, Capt. Eric H., "False
Flag Prospects, 2008 - Top Three US Target Cities"
February 23, 2008
Holtappels, Dr. Peter
and Hummel, Capt. Werner, The Group of German Experts Estonia
Investigation Report, Chapter 27, "The
Diving Investigation" 1999
Holtappels and Hummel,
Section 7.3, "Safety
Organisation" especially 7.3.4, "Training
and Drills" and the summary of the
RITS Exercise on Estonia, February 2, 1994
J7: The July 7th Truth
7/7 Terror Rehearsal"
J7: The July 7th Truth
Power Dorset Police Suspension & the DPP File"
February 7, 2008
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon
the United States
9-11 Commission Staff Statement No. 17, June 17, 2004
NATO Press Release
Cooperative Venture 94"
September 16, 1994
The Intelligence Files: Today's
Secrets, Tomorrow's Scandals, Chapter 9, "The Sinking of the
Kursk and 'Retired' US Navy Spy Edmond Pope," ADI, 2005
Seely, Hart, "Untold
Stories: 'We were suddenly no kidding under attack'"
The Post-Standard, Syracuse,
New York, January 20, 2002 and The
Patriot-News, Harrisburg, Penn., February 3, 2002
The Hole – Another Look at the
Sinking of the Estonia Ferry on September 28, 1994, Diggory
Press, Cornwall, UK, 2006
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 26
March 2008 )
Reproduced From Christopher Bollyn's Excellent