Garden Plot / CONPLAN 2502 (Civil Disturbance Operations)
Use of the military to support civil
authorities stems from core national values as expressed in the Constitution.
Article I, Section 8 states, “Congress shall have power... to provide for calling forth the
Militia to execute laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections, and repel
Invasions.” Article II, Section 3 states the President, “...shall take care
that the Laws be faithfully executed.” The 10th Amendment reads, “The powers not
delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it, are
reserved to the States respectively...,” providing the basis that Federal
government support, including DoD assistance, is provided in support of State
and local authorities.
The President is authorized by the
Constitution and Title 10 (10 USC 331–334) to suppress insurrections,
rebellions, and domestic violence. After issuing a Cease and Desist Order, the
President issues an executive order that directs the Attorney General
and
the SECDEF to take appropriate steps to disperse insurgents and restore law and
order. The Attorney General is then responsible to coordinate the federal
response to domestic civil disturbances. The restrictions of the Posse
Comitatus Act no longer apply to federal troops executing the orders of the
President to quell the disturbance in accordance with Rules of the Use of Force
(RUF) approved by the DoD General Counsel and the Attorney General.
USNORTHCOM Concept Plan (CONPLAN)
2502 (Civil Disturbance Operations), is the plan for supporting state and local
authorities during civil disturbances. This plan serves as the foundation for
any CDO operation and standardizes most activities and command relationships.
Tasks performed by military forces may include joint patrolling with law
enforcement officers; securing key buildings, memorials, intersections and
bridges; and acting as a quick reaction force. The JTF commander, a general
officer, coordinates all DoD support with the Senior Civilian Representative of
the Attorney General (SCRAG). DoD will usually establish a JTF headquarters
near where the Attorney General’s local representative is based.
Garden Plot is the DoD Civil Disturbance Plan,
the generic Operations Plan [OPLAN] for military support related to domestic
civil disturbances. The department of the Army Civil Disturbance Plan (DA
GARDEN PLOT), is the governing publication for planning, deployment,
employment, and redeployment of federal military resources involved in
countering domestic civil disturbances. Military assistance to Federal, State,
and local government (including government of U.S. territories) and their law enforcement agencies
for civil disturbances and civil disturbance operations, including response to
terrorist incidents, are referred to cumulatively as "Military Assistance
for Civil Disturbances (MACDIS)."
The DoD Strategy for Homeland Defense and
Civil Support (2005) defines Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA) as,
“DoD support, including federal military forces, the Department’s career
civilian and contractor personnel, and DoD agency and component assets, for
domestic emergencies and for designated law enforcement and other activities.”
It notes that DSCA is also often referred to as Civil Support.
There has been discussion in some DoD offices
of distinguishing between the two terms: Civil Support as a total force
construct with DSCA involving Federal support only and not include the National
Guard in Title 32 or State Active Duty status. But as of 2008 they remained
essentially synonymous.
Until the 2005 DoD Strategy for Homeland
Defense and Civil Support, the term Military Assistance to Civil Authorities
(MACA) was essentially synonymous with Civil Support and served as an
overarching construct that included three subordinate mission sets: Military
Support to Civil Authorities (MSCA), Military Assistance to Civil Disturbances
(MACDIS) and Military Assistance to Civil Law Enforcement Agencies(MSCLEA).
Defense Support of Civil Authority (DSCA) has replaced MACA. The term MACDIS
has been replaced by Civil Disturbance Operations (CDO).
Civil disturbances are riots, acts of
violence, insurrections, unlawful obstructions or assemblages, or other
disorders prejudicial to public law and order. The term civil disturbance
includes all domestic conditions requiring or likely to require the use of
Federal Armed Forces pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 15 of Title 10,
United States Code.
The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 (PCA),
subsequent amendments and policy decisions prohibits the use of federal
military forces (to include Reserve forces) to perform internal police
functions. PCA thus restricts the type of support DoD can provide domestic law
enforcement organizations. There are a wide variety of exceptions to the PCA
and the law essentially gives the President all the authority he needs to employ
DoD forces inside the U.S. although there may appropriately be political
consequence that would inhibit such employment.
The term posse comitatus [po.si komitei.tAs,
-tius , [med. (Anglo) L., force of the county: see prec. and county.] applies
to the 'The force of the county’; the body of men above the age of fifteen in a
county (exclusive of peers, clergymen, and infirm persons), whom the sheriff
may summon or ‘raise’ to repress a riot or for other purposes; also, a body of
men actually so raised and commanded by the sheriff.
In the United States the posse comitatus was
perhaps most important on the Western frontier (there known as a posse), but it
has been preserved as an institution in many states. Sheriffs and other peace
officers have the authority to summon the power of the county. In some counties
it is a crime to refuse assistance. In general, members of a posse comitatus
have been permitted to use force if necessary to achieve a posse’s legitimate
ends, but state laws differ as to the legal liability of one who in good faith
aids an officer himself acting beyond his authority.
Congress sought to terminate the prevalent use
of federal soldiers in civilian law enforcement roles in the South during the
Reconstruction Period following the Civil War. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878
created general prohibition against use of military personnel in civilian law
enforcement. The most renowned statutory exception has been traditionally
referred to as The Insurrection Acts (10 USC 331–334) that were modified and
renamed to Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order by the 2007 National
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The new language clarifies Presidential
authority to invoke the acts for situations resulting from natural disasters
and other emergencies.
The President is authorized by the
Constitution and laws of the United States to employ the Armed Forces of the
United States to suppress insurrections, rebellions, and domestic violence
under various conditions and circumstances. Planning and preparedness by the
Federal Government and the Department of Defensefor
civil disturbances are important due to the potential severity of the
consequences of such events for the Nation and the population.
Military resources may be employed in support
of civilian law enforcement operations in the 50 States, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the U.S. territories and
possessions only in the parameters of the Constitution and laws of the United
States and the authority of the President and the Secretary of Defense,
including delegations of that authority through this Directive or other means.
The primary responsibility for protecting life
and property and maintaining law and order in the civilian community is vested
in the State and local governments. Supplementary responsibility is vested by
statute in specific Agencies of the Federal Government other
than the Department of Defense. The President has additional powers and
responsibilities under the Constitution of the United States to ensure that law
and order are maintained.
The mission at NORTHCOM is to anticipate
events in the homeland and to be prepared to respond, to either prevent the
attacks or defeat them if they occur and then to mitigate the consequences of
those attacks should they occur. In addition, NORTHCOM has a secondary mission
to provide defense support to civil authorities. It's an old mission that the
Army used to lump together under the Garden Plot scenario, in that there was
always a brigade that was prepared to respond to civil disturbances.
The secretary of the Army is the Executive
Agent for DOD in matters pertaining to civil disturbances. The U. S. Army
Director of Military Support (DOMS) is the action agent and the DOD point of
contact in all such matters.
The Secretary of the Army as the DOD Executive
Agent, will, in the event of a civil disturbance within CONUS, exercise through
the Chief of Staff, U.S. Army, the direction of those forces committed to him
by the military services. In the event of civil disturbances in U. S.
territories and possessions and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico outside CONUS,
the DOD Executive Agent exercises the direction of those forces assigned or
committed to the commanders of unified or specified commands.
The Coast Guard,
as well as the other Services, is required to maintain support plans. GARDEN
PLOT is the name applicable to such service plans. Standard Operating
Procedures (SOPs) of operational commanders should reflect guidance herein.
Military assistance to civil authorities is a peacetime matter, not to be
confused with military support of civil defense (MSCD), which is a wartime
function.
DOD task force operations to quell civil
disturbances off military property can be initiated only by Presidential order.
Cases of such initiation in the past occurred during the urban political and
racial unrest in the Vietnam era when federal troops were deployed on a number
of occasions. GARDEN PLOT operations may include terrorist incidents, though
the FBI, not the Army, will then be the lead agent. In the event of civil
unrest upon the high seas and waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United
States, where in the Coast Guard has standing statutory responsibility, Coast
Guard units will in all likelihood be legitimately involved in law enforcement
operations well before any Presidential invocation of civil disturbance plans.
The Coast Guard character for law enforcement
and cooperation with civil authorities is much broader than that of DOD
services. DOD services are subject to law enforcement restrictions that are not
applicable to the Coast Guard. For policy reasons (i.e., to ensure unity of
command and control), there may be instances when these restrictions are
imposed upon Coast Guard personnel under a DOD task force commander's
operational control.
Cooperation with other services in GARDEN PLOT
operations is paramount and requires particular understanding of task force
constitution and chains of command. Civil disturbance planning cannot be
deliberate in that force mix and locales are obviously indeterminate. Guidance
herein will provide a basis for Coast Guard participation and related area and
district supplemental instructions or other directives. Actual Coast Guard
participation will in all likelihood be the logical extension of traditional
law enforcement functions.
The right of the United States to use federal
forces to protect federal property and functions is an accepted principle of
government. However, this use of federal forces is warranted only when the need
for protection of Federal property or functions clearly exists and State or
local authorities cannot or will not give adequate protection. Prior to the
designation of a civil disturbance objective area and employment of federal
forces by Presidential order, the Army may reinforce other federal forces
defending federal property.
Elements of the U. S. Army Intelligence and
Security Command (USAINSCOM) maintain liaison with federal, state, and
municipal investigative and police agencies and on order of Department of the
Army, collect and report civil disturbance information in response to requests
from DA, the Personal Liaison Officer for the Chief of Staff, Army (PLOCSA),
task force commanders, CONUS Army commanders, and other specified commands.
Military intelligence units have a very
limited role during domestic support operations other than civil disturbance
operations. U.S. Dep't of Defense, Reg. 5240.1-R, Procedures Governing the
Activities of DOD Intelligence Components that Affect United States Persons
(Dec. 1982)[hereinafter DOD 5240.1-R], does not apply to DOD intelligence
components when they perform authorized law enforcement activities, including
civil disturbance activities. In such cases, DOD intelligence components may
collect, report, process, and store information on the activities of persons
and organizations not affiliated with the Department in accordance with U.S.
Dep't of Defense, Dir. 5200.27, Acquisition of Information Concerning Persons
and Organizations Not Affiliated with the Department of Defense (7 Jan. 1980)
and U.S. Dep't of Defense Civil Disturbance Plan (GARDEN PLOT) (15 Feb. 1991).
The Insurrection Act permitted the President
to call the militia into Federal service to suppress insurrections and to
enforce the law, including when State authorities were unable or unwilling to
secure the Constitutional rights of their citizens. Rarely in U.S. history has
this authority been employed. In fact, the National Guard has been federalized
under the provisions of the Insurrection Act only ten (10) times since World
War II.
U.S. Presidents invoked the Insurrection Act
when a Governor requested such a decree or when State authorities were clearly
unable or unwilling to secure the Constitutional rights of their citizens. When
this authority is employed it takes control of a state’s National Guard from
the Governor and places command and control within the Federal government. This
requires the federalized National Guard forces to perform missions assigned by
the federal government, where and when specified, which may not be consistent
with a Governor’s direction that these forces conduct lifesaving, law
enforcement or other critical emergency functions in support of the State
emergency management agencies and incident commanders.
Controversy over civil rights and the
unpopular war in Vietnam during the 1960s and 1970s resulted in one of the most
turbulent periods in American histry. During this same time, major riots
occurred in Los Angeles in 1965; Detroit in 1967; Chicago in 1968 during the
Democratic National Convention; Santa Barbara, California, in 1970; East Los
Angeles, California, in 1970 and 1971; and Attica, New York, in 1971, during a
major prison riot. Violent rioting once again erupted across the country on
April 29,1992, when four police officers were acquitted after being accused of
beating a black suspect (Rodney King). Also in recent years, issues such as
abortion, gay rights, immigration, and gun control have generated great public
debate and resulted in many mass assemblies and demonstrations.
The Active Army has often led federalized
forces of the various state ARNGs during periods of domestic disturbance, such
as the several Garden Plot operations to restore order in major urban areas in
the 1960s.
The ability of the Reserve Components to
conduct operations to control civil disturbances was increased during fiscal
year 1970; 375,000 National Guardsmen and 14,000 Army Reservists had been
trained in riot control as the year closed. The Army National Guard conducted,
at the expense of regular training, sixteen hours of refresher civil
disturbance training. Some states also carried out civil disturbance command
post exercises in conjunction with local and state civil authorities.
The Army Reserve had three infantry brigades
which were part of the federal military contingency force for the control of
civil disturbances. These units also conducted sixteen hours of refresher civil
disturbance training at the expense of primary training.
This additional responsibility of the Reserve
Components called for their immediate availability in times of natural
disasters, civil disturbances, and other emergencies. The Army National Guard
bore the brunt of these requirements because of its responsibility to the
respective state governments. From July 1, 1969, to June 30, 1970, individual
National Guard units were called in by state governors on ninety-two different
occasions in thirty-one states and the District of Columbia. These included
civil disturbances at Chicago, Illinois; Madison, Wisconsin; Charleston, South
Carolina; Berkeley, California; and Columbus and Kent, Ohio.
In response to the US invasion of Cambodia,
student unrest broke out. Under Operation "Garden Plot," from 30
April through 04 May 1970 9th Air Force airlift units transported civil
disturbance control forces from Ft Bragg to various locations throughout the
eastern US. Such deployments were commonplace during the unrest of the late
1960s and early 1970s.
The 943d Rescue Group participated in
Operation Garden Plot in support of Republican and Democratic conventions in
1972.
The anti-war and civil right protests picked
up momentum in 1968. On 20 May 1972, the 10th Transportation Battalion assumed
a secondary mission and provided 650 for a civil disturbance task force. The
task force conducted garden Plot exercise on 6 and 7 September 1972 and 1st US
Army commended the Soldiers for their professionalism. It conducted another
Garden Plot Exercise from 18 to 20 January 1973. In February 1973, the US and
North Vietnamese sign the Peace Accords in Paris and the US agreed to withdraw
ground units from Vietnam. With troops out of the war, the need for a civil
disturbance task force diminished. They conducted another Garden Plot Exercise
on 28 June and 19 December 1973. During the past decade, millions of
activists have been working to awaken the American and global publics to the
evidence that 9/11 was an American Reichstag Fire. Polls show that 36% of
Americans – roughly 100 million people – think it likely that 9/11 was an
inside job. Many of these truth-seekers are highly-accomplished scientists,
engineers, military and intelligence officers, and other experts.
Since the corporate
mainstream media and the foundation-funded pseudo-alternative media have
refused to report the facts about 9/11, roughly 100 million Americans consider
the media moguls pathological liars. Even among the almost 200 million
Americans who are not up-front 9/11 skeptics, the vague sense that something is
wrong, and that the media and the politicians are lying, is widespread. A
recent Pew Research poll, for example, showed that Americans’ trust in
government has fallen to an all-time low: Fewer than one-third of Americans
trust the government, while more than two-thirds do not.
Though it is too
early to know for sure, the Boston bombings featured the most important
telltale sign of a false-flag op: A terror drill running simultaneously,
mirroring the actual attack. As Webster Tarpley has explained in his book 9/11
Synthetic Terror: Made in USA, false-flag attacks such as 9/11 and 7/7 are
designed as drills that suddenly “go live.” This allows insiders to plot and
execute the attacks under cover of the drills, with the “Team B” bad guys
actually carrying out the attacks they were supposedly going to feign.
Note: Two days after Boston Marathon bombing, proponents
of the failed Senate amendment that called for expanding the background check
system reacted with sharp disappointment Wednesday after the Senate defeated the
measure in a 54-46 vote. Meanwhile, those who opposed the amendment expressed
satisfaction and pride, claiming victory for voting down a provision they
claimed would infringe on Second Amendment rights.
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, co-chair of Mayors
Against Illegal Guns: "Today's vote is a
damning indictment of the stranglehold that special interests have on
Washington. More than 40 U.S. senators would rather turn their backs on the 90
percent of Americans who support comprehensive background checks than buck the
increasingly extremist wing of the gun lobby. Democrats – who are so quick to
blame Republicans for our broken gun laws – could not stand united. And
Republicans – who are so quick to blame Democrats for not being tough enough on
crime – handed criminals a huge victory, by preserving their ability to buy
guns illegally at gun shows and online and keeping the illegal trafficking
market well-fed.
September 11th, 2001
had been previously designated as by far the biggest special operations day in
US history, with a total of 46 pre-planned drills and exercises, including
live-fly planes-into-buildings exercises, providing cover for the insider
attacks. (Google “Tarpley 46 drills of 9/11” for details.)
July 7th, 2005 also
featured terror drills that went live. Peter Power, the UK’s biggest terror
consultant, admitted on live television that all of the actual bombs that
devastated London that day exploded at the exact times and places envisioned in
the drills.
Visor Consultants is
a company specialising in crisis management.
Here's a transcript
of what Visor Managing Director Peter Power had to say to Radio Five Live on
the day of the 7/7 attacks:
POWER: ...at
half-past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for, er, over,
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 upright!
PETER ALLEN (Radio
Five Live): 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?
POWER: Precisely, and
it was, er, 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.
Remember that company
that hired Visor Consultants to help participate in exercises involving bombs
going off at the same time and place as the ones on 7/7?
"Tubelines and
Metronet are the Underground’s maintenance and upgrade contractors, but unlike
Metronet, Tubelines operates the emergency response teams for the whole
underground network. As such its staff were responsible for everything from
assessing damage to evacuating those caught up in the blasts."
They don't come out
and say they were doing an exercise involving bombs. However, this is the ONLY
group that would hire Visor, as Tubelines takes care of emergency operations
for the WHOLE of the LU. So, not only did this company have people on the
ground doing exercises that mirrored the event of that tragic day, they were
also the first on the crime scene before the police. Heck, they told the police
when they could come in and check the site. Great opportunity to remove any
evidence.
Managing the teams
that undertake the complex work on our lines requires strong leadership, and we
have a wealth of skilled managers working closely with the Senior Executive
Team.
Jon
Lamonte –
Chief Executive
Chief Executive for
Transport for Greater Manchester, integrating all forms of transport for the
people of Greater Manchester. CEO for Tube Lines Ltd, maintaining and upgrading
London's Underground, delivering exceptional performance during the Queen's
Diamond Jubilee and the London 2012 Olympics and Paralympics. Delivered the
Jubilee Line Upgrade, the award winning Green Park station upgrade, secured new
work including the impending Northern Line extension to Battersea. Previously
Director General Finance for annual £17 Bn budget in DE&S. Strong experience
in leading change, particularly in leading work in two major Defence reviews.
Commanded at Station and Squadron levels, also in Gulf, for over 4500 personnel
at the RAF's largest base. Flown transports and air to air refuelling aircraft
since 1983. Substantial MOD planning and
programming experience. Companion of the Chartered Management
Institute. International medal-winner in Diploma in Accountancy and Finance.
Main Board experience as Finance Director. Chartered Mathematician. Chartered
Director and Fellow Institute of Directors. Interviewer for prospective
Chartered Directors and member of Professional Review Group. Former Chairman of
Bath and Wilts IoD.
Specialties:
Strategy, planning, programming, finance, aviation, governance, risk management,
compliance, procurement, logistics, leadership and command.
Stuart Harvey –
Director of Projects
Lee Jones – Director
of Operations
Stuart Munro –
Director of Finance and Commercial
Diarmaid O’Tuathail –
Director of Health, Quality, Safety and Environment
On July 7, 2005, and
the following days, consultant Peter Power reveals
that his company, Visor Consultants, a private security and crisis management
firm, was staging a terrorism exercise involving explosions in the exact same
three London subway stations at the same time that real 7/7 London bombings
occurred (see July 7, 2005). He says his company’s client is a City firm but
does not otherwise identify it. Power insists it is a coincidence, but many are
incredulous.
Power was a
high-ranking police officer in Dorset when he left the force after an
investigation into drug trafficking allegations. He was not indicted and the
results of the investigation were not released. [SUNDAY TIMES (LONDON),
8/8/1993] Power took part in a May 2004 BBC program entitled “Panorama: London
Under Attack,” which staged a mock terrorist attack in London to test emergency
preparedness. The sequence of events in that program also bears an uncanny
resemblance to the 7/7 bombings: three subway explosions timed closely together,
followed by an above ground explosion about an hour later. The main difference
is the fourth explosion is a chlorine tanker while in the real bombings it is a
bus.
Peter Power was born
in the UK in 1951. He served in the 10 Battalion Parachute Regiment Territorial
Army 1969 - 1971 before joining the Metropolitan Police in 1971. His service in
that force included the Special Patrol Group and attachments to the
Metropolitan Police Anti-Terrorist Branch and other front line units. In 1990
he transferred on promotion to Dorset. He retired from Dorset in 1993. In 1995
Power set up his own company in central London, Visor Consultants. He received
several commendations[citation needed] for leadership etc.[clarification
needed]. and in 1985 became a key architect/ promulgator of the Gold Silver
Bronze command structure and also designed several mnemonics for dealing with
terrorist bombs during the Provisional Irish Republican Army campaign[citation
needed]. He is quoted in the UK government guide, "A Guide to GIS Applications
in Integrated Emergency Management"
and he is the author of many other advice guidebooks including the
original UK government (Department of Trade and Industry) booklet
"Business Continuity Management - Preventing Chaos in a Crisis". On
23 November 1984 Power was trapped with others on the London Underground during
a serious Oxford Circus fire that started at that station and spread along the
Victoria Line. He helped to prevent panic amongst other passengers and
subsequently led many people to safety.
In 1984, in London,
Police Constable Yvonne Fletcher was shot dead outside the Libyan people’s
Bureau.
In April 1996,
Britain's Channel Four programme Dispatches revealed that Fletcher had been
murdered by elements of British and American intelligence.
"The purpose of
the slaying ... was to 'shape' public opinion and, importantly, pre-empt
Parliamentary indignation for the later bombing of Tripoli by British based US
warplanes."
The official inquest
concluded that WPC Fletcher was killed by someone firing a 9mm calibre
automatic weapon from a lower floor in the Libyan embassy.
But this verdict has
been disputed by a number of experts, including the British Army's senior
ballistics officer Lieutenant Colonel George Styles and Home Office pathologist
Hugh Thomas.
Dorset Police, like
Peter Power, are suspiciously uncommunicative on the issue of Peter Power's
suspension from the force. They would neither confirm nor deny even the
information that they had already released to the press in 1993 in response to
a Freedom of Information request:
I request the
following information:
1. Whether, at any
time between 1990 and 1995, an officer named Peter Power served in the Dorset
Police Force. (To assist you with my request, I have information which
indicates he may have held the rank of Superintendent with particular
responsibility for West Dorset).
If Peter Power was an
officer in the Dorset Police Force, I request the following further
information:
2. The month and year
which he joined the force.
3. The month and year
which he left the force.
4. The reason he left
the force.
5. Whether he was
suspended in 1993.
6. If he was
suspended, whether he was re-instated and if so the month and year he was
re-instated.
The response to this
FOI request was as follows:
REFERENCE NO:
300/11/07
I write in connection
with your request for information sent on 20th November 2007, and received by
Dorset Police the following day, regarding someone who may or may not have
served with Dorset Police.
You specifically
asked:
Whether, at any time
between 1990 and 1995, an officer named - served in the Dorset Police Force.
If - was an officer
in the Dorset Police Force, I request the following further information:
2. The month and year
which he joined the force?
3. The month and year
which he left the force?
4. The reason he left
the force.
5. Whether he was
suspended in 1993.
6. If he was
suspended, whether he was re-instated and if so the month and year he was re-instated.
Your request for
information has now been considered and I am not obliged to supply the
information that you have requested.
Section 17 of the
Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires Dorset Police, when refusing to
provide such information (because the information is exempt) to provide you the
applicant with a notice which: (a) states that fact, (b) specifies the
exemption in question and (c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent)
why the exemption applies.
In this case Dorset
Police can neither confirm nor deny that it holds the information you
requested, as the duty in Section 1(1) a of the Freedom of Information Act 2000
does not apply, by virtue of the exemptions defined under Sections 31(3) – Law
Enforcement, 38(2) – Health and Safety, 40(5) – Personal Information, 41(2) –
Information Provided in Confidence and 44(2) – Prohibitions on Disclosure.
Under the Freedom of
Information Act, information that is disclosed is published without
restriction, not in confidence to the individual applicant. As such, Dorset
Police would not wish to confirm or deny to the public at large whether
information is held about an individual or individuals.
In accordance with
the Act, this letter represents a Refusal Notice for this particular request. This action cannot be taken as confirmation
or denial that Dorset Police holds, or does not hold, the information you have
asked for.
Please contact me if
you would like to discuss any aspect of this response. I would like to take
this opportunity to thank you for your interest in Dorset Police.
At the time of the
London bombings, Peter Power was Managing Director of Visor Consultants Ltd., a
London-based "crisis management" firm. Power is the former police
chief from West Dorset (Southern England). Power was suspended from the force
in April 1993 and forced to retire in September 1993 after an investigation
which remains confidential.
As the British press
reported in 1993:
The Crown Prosecution
Service has been sent details of an investigation into a senior police officer
with the Dorset force. Dorset police confirmed yesterday that Superintendent
Peter Power, the officer in charge of the west of the county, has been suspended
on full pay since April but refused to outline the allegations against him. Power, who was involved in the Iranian embassy siege and
King's Cross fire, transferred to Dorset in 1990 after serving 19 years in the
Metropolitan police.
There has been virtually
no discussion in the "mainstream" media that the London bombings or
other terror atrocities and disasters occurred within the context of nearly
identical security drills.
Astonishing
first-hand accounts from people engaged in these exercises, like Peter Power,
were reported shortly after the events occurred, yet these extremely important
stories remained confined to local news outlets and were never published in the
major national and international news outlets, in newspapers like the New York
Times, for example. (The motto of the New York Times is "All the news
that's fit to print.)
The New York Times
has not reported one word about the amazing comments of Peter Power in relation
to the London bombings of 2005, although Power is
connected to Mayor Giuliani and his consulting company. Power serves on a
Canadian advisory board with the mysterious Richard J. Sheirer (or Scheirer),
Giuliani's vice president and the former director of New York City's Office of
Emergency Management (OEM) originally created by Jerome Hauer.
The censorship of
this story by the New York Times appears to be in line with the paper's motto.
The New York Times has not reported one word about Vigilant Guardian, the
exercise that was on-going in New York on 9-11. How can that not be newsworthy?
The comments of Peter
Power were treated by the BBC in the same way as Stephen Evans' first-hand
report of "the series of explosions" he witnessed at the World Trade
Center on 9-11.
Evans was on the
ground floor of the South Tower when planes struck the complex. He gave his
eyewitness account live to the BBC's radio and television networks.
When Evans went on
the air on BBC World television shortly after the collapse of the twin towers,
he repeatedly described the series of explosions he had seen and felt at the
base of WTC 2, prior to the collapse of the tower. From the very first minute
he spoke on television, Evan's account of explosions has been stifled by the
BBC. When the BBC revisited 9-11 with Evans, there was no mention of the "series
of explosions" he talked about on the day of the attacks. Such omissions
are defined as censorship.
Evidently, the
astonishing eyewitness account of Stephen Evans on 9-11 was dropped into the
memory hole at the BBC. The revealing comments of Peter Power were destined to
the very same fate. To question the media version of events, which omits these
very significant first-hand accounts, is to risk being branded a
"conspiracy theorist."
Giuliani
Partners LLC is a management consulting and security consulting business
founded by former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani in January 2002
Peter
Powers is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Giuliani Partners; he replaced
Giuliani in this role in June 2007, as Giuliani was in midst of his campaign
for president. Peters was formerly a deputy mayor of New York, and many of the
managing partners and executives of Giuliani Partners are former New York City
officials, counsels, emergency services leaders, etc. from Giuliani's time as
mayor. There is a subsidiary of the partnership, Giuliani Security & Safety
LLC (before 2005, Giuliani-Kerik), which focuses on security consulting,
especially regarding buildings; its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer is
Pasquale J. D'Amuro, a former Assistant Director in Charge in the Federal
Bureau of Investigation's New York office and an Inspector in Charge following
the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Other subsidiaries include Giuliani
Safety & Security Asia and Giuliani Compliance Japan.
Giuliani’s colleagues
at Giuliani Partners have included founding member and Vice President Matthew
Mahoney, a former Deputy Director of Advance for the Mayor’s Office; Bernard Kerik, Giuliani's former police
commissioner, who was later accused of having ties to organized crime and left
the firm in 2004; former FBI man D'Amuro, who
admitted taking six non-evidentiary artifacts from Ground Zero as mementos, but
against whom no action was taken by the FBI; and Monseignor Alan Placa, a high school friend of
Giuliani and a former Roman Catholic priest who was accused of sexually molesting numerous children and of
covering up molestation in the church. Giuliani Partners has stated that
Giuliani "believes that Alan Placa has been unjustly accused," and
that the firm has no plans to dismiss him.
Investigation
Regarding Removal of a Tiffany Globe from the Fresh Kills Recovery Site
Attached is the
Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report of investigation regarding an
allegation that a Special Agent (SA) from the Minneapolis office of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI), committed misconduct by removing a Tiffany &
Co. crystal globe paperweight (globe) from the Fresh Kills site that was
processing materials from the World Trade Center.
This investigation
was based on a complaint that the OIG received from Minneapolis FBI Special
Agent Jane Turner. Around the same time, the Minneapolis FBI office reported
the allegation to the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility (FBI OPR),
which also referred the matter to the OIG.
[REDACTED] was part
of the Minneapolis Evidence Recovery Team (ERT) that worked at the Fresh Kills
landfill in Staten Island, New York, along with other ERTs , to sift through
the material from the World Trade Center. [REDACTED] and the Minneapolis ERT
were deployed to New York from September 23, 2001, to October 8, 2001. They
worked the first week at Ground Zero inspecting trucks leaving the site. During
the second week, they were assigned to Fresh Kills to sort through materials
that came from Building 7 of the World Trade Center complex. Building 7 housed
the offices of the [REDACTED] and the United States Secret Service (USSS).
[REDACTED] and the
ERT were assigned to search through the debris of Building 7 for items such as
guns, money, classified information, and body parts, as well as personal items
that could be attributable to individuals. As part of the review process of
sorting through the Building 7 debris, a front-end loader would bring loads of
debris and spread them out over a field. The 30 to 50 people working in the
area (including the 8 member Minneapolis ERT) would rake and dig through the
debris to find the items described above. The remaining items were picked up by
the front loader and put in the rubble pile, which were later taken to another
area of the landfill by the New York Department of Sanitation and buried.
The retained items
were placed into separate buckets for each category of items. The buckets
containing items were that potentially belonged to the USSS and [REDACTED] were
reviewed by their representatives at the site. The buckets containing human
remains were turned into the FBI Command Post, where the items were reviewed
and turned over to the New York City Medical Examiner's Office. The buckets
containing personal effects were cleaned and reviewed by the FBI and then given
to the New York Police Department, which had the responsibility of cataloging
them and finding their owners. The FBI retained and cataloged the items in the
buckets containing evidence of terrorism.
[REDACTED] said that
while raking and inspecting through the material he found what looked like a
globe that one would find on a person's desk. He said that the globe was
chipped and cracked, and that he did not realize that it was from Tiffany. He
admitted that he took the globe from Fresh Kills as a souvenir. He said he also
took three rocks and a metal bolt as souvenirs. [REDACTED] claimed to the OIG
that he did not think that the globe had any value or that it was an item that
could be attributed to anyone. He said he believed that the item was rubble,
and if he had thought the item had value he would not have taken it.
[REDACTED]
acknowledged, however, that he thought the globe was "interesting"
and that he showed it to several other Minneapolis ERT employees at Fresh Kills
when he found it. Several of them confirmed to the OIG that [REDACTED] had
shown them the globe. One of them remembered him stating something to the
effect "Can you believe this survived?" We determined that the globe,
when new, sells for $350. ( We did not determine the value of the globe as an
artifact from the World Trade Center, but it certainly was much higher than
$350.)
When [REDACTED]
returned from Fresh Kills to Minneapolis, he gave the globe to the secretary
for his squad. The secretary said that after he gave it to her, he often joked
with her "Don't ever sell this on eBay." She displayed the globe on
her desk. She said that, several months later, she noticed the Tiffany
inscription on the bottom of the globe, and she pointed out the inscription to
[REDACTED] told the OIG that it then dawned on him hat "it could be a
possible problem." However, he said he did not discuss the globe at that
point with FBI managers because he had already given it to the secretary and it
had been on her desk for everyone to see.
[REDACTED] asserted
that he and other ERT members were told at Fresh Kills that they could remove
"non-evidentiary items" from the rubble to take home as souvenirs. In
support of this claim, he said that an unknown male had told him and others
that if they wanted to take a piece of rubble as a memento they could. He said
he did not know who the individual was or whether he even worked for the FBI.
We interviewed other
Minneapolis ERT members assigned to Fresh Kills to determine what they
remembered being told about the removal of items. We found a divergence among
them about what they thought they could take. However, several said that they
were told there was a designated pile of marble and granite building pieces
that they could take as memento, and several acknowledged taking such items.
We also investigated
whether ERT employees from other FBI offices assigned to Fresh Kills and Ground
Zero had taken mementos, and what they said they were told about this
practice.1 We found that FBI OPR had conducted an investigation of an Oklahoma
City ERT employee who had removed 70 to 80 pounds of materials from Fresh
Kills, mostly rocks and rivets, but also a rusted pliers, an electrical outlet,
and two patches that said "World Trade Center Security" removed from
uniforms. We determined that a marble building piece was the most common
memento taken from Fresh Kills by FBI personnel.
In addition, we found
that the FBI had no written policy on what could be taken from recovery sites.
One person from another ERT at Fresh Kills, identified by two members of the
Minneapolis ERT as the individual who said they could take souvenirs, told us
that there was an "informal policy" that permitted ERT members to
take small pieces of the granite building facade as mementos. He said he
thought that ERT members also could take what he called "tourist
trash," which he described as small items such as refrigerator magnets
with the WTC logo.
When we interviewed
the FBI Quantico ERT Unit Chief, he said that he would not have a problem with
an ERT member taking a rock, bolt, or soil that was
"non-evidentiary," but he thought it was improper to take anything of
value or anything that may belong to someone, even if it had been discarded or
had no evidentiary value. In contrast, New York Division ERT and other New York
employees who we interviewed said that they did not think anything should be
taken from the site, because the ERT members were not there to take souvenirs.
Terror drills are not
unknown in London, but other coincidences may be the involvement of Peter Power
in several high profile tragic events before 7/7, such as the Kings Cross fire
of 1987 and the Libyan Embassy siege of 1984, and the strong links that he has
with the police and the Government.
Additionally, Peter
Power had previous experience of rehearsing bombs on the Underground. He helped
create the BBC's Panorama programme London Under Attack months before July 2005
and in which London fell victim to a terrorist attack underground, followed by
the explosion of a land-based vehicle, a situation not entirely dissimilar to
his July 7th rehearsal operation and the events of that day.
He is a former
Detective Inspector in counter-terrorism and is a close associate of Sir Ian
Blair, the Metropolitan Police Chief. He was also selected by the Government to
write the Best Management Practice Guide on Crisis & Business Continuity
Planning & Risk Management.
Peter Power also has
connections to former New York Mayor, Rudi Giuliani; he served on the Advisory Board to the Canadian Centre for Emergency
preparedness(CCEP), alongside the senior Vice President of Giuliani
and Partners, Richard Sheirer, who was also Director of the New York Mayor’s
office of Emergency Management, overseeing the rescue and recovery operations
following the September 11th attacks. Giuliani and partners is a security
consultancy and Investment Bank and Mr. Giuliani
himself, by another coincidence, happened to be in London for a conference and
just yards away from Liverpool Street station when the blast occurred there on
the morning of July 7th.
Exercise
2004 as Preparation for Exercise 2005
Giuliani
in London to MSNBC: 'It seems to me that the emergency services here in London
were prepared for this. I don't mean prepared for the exact day, but prepared
for something like this happening. I think they expected this to happen.
Unfortunately, they didn't know the day or the hour, but they expected this to
happen." The planners of the London
exercise-that-coincidentally-became-reality were not totally unprepared. In
April of this year a transatlantic exercise was held 'which included 'bombs'
being placed on buses and explosives left on the London underground', wrote The
Observer: 'The anti-terror drill, codenamed Exercise Atlantic Blue [...]
concentrated on testing security weaknesses in the transport system.'
Peter Power acts as
an independent security consultant to the media examining the impact of
terrorism on London. It would not be unrealistic that he would be conducting an
anti-terror exercise, but it is strange that it happened to be on the same day,
at the same time, and involving the same stations. Peter Power himself admits
this, even when attempting to downplay the coincidence. It arouses suspicion
when considering the ‘Wargames’ exercises of the morning of September 11th,
involving the same scenarios that later occurred. The chances of these
situations being simple coincidence appear quite slim.
Mr. Peter J. Powers
founded Powers Global Strategies LLC, and has been the President and Chief
Executive Officer of since 1998. Mr. Powers served as Campaign Manager and
Transition Chair of Mayor Rudolph Giuliani. Mr. Powers serves as the Chairman
and Director of Giuliani Partners LLC. He served as the Chairman of the New
York City Public Initiatives Corporation. Mr. Powers has been a Director of
ArcelorMittal USA Inc. since March 11, 2004. Mr. Powers serves as a Director of
The Partnership for New York City Inc. He serves as a Member of Advisory Board
of School of Public Affairs, Baruch College. He serves as a Member of the Board
of Advisors of Global Bay Mobile Technologies Inc. He serves as a Member of the
Board of Trustees of Manhattan College and Director of Chamber of Commerce, as
well as the Central Park Conservancy and Victim Services Agency. He serves as
an outside Member of the Board of Directors of various publicly and privately
held companies. He served as an Independent Director of Collegiate Funding
Services Inc. since July 15, 2005. He served as First Deputy Mayor of the City
of New York from 1994 to 1996. He served as an Independent Non-Executive
Director of NDS Group Plc from January 2000 to August 2008. He also served as
Director at International Steel Group Inc. Mr. Powers served as a Director of
Fox Entertainment Group Inc., since February 2003.
Peter J. Powers
Born: c. 1945
Gender: Male
Race or Ethnicity:
White
Sexual orientation:
Straight
Occupation: Attorney,
Government
Party Affiliation:
Republican [1]
Nationality: United
States
Executive summary:
First Deputy Mayor of New York City, 1994-96
Friend of Rudy
Giuliani since high school.
[1] Campaign Manager,
Rudy Giuliani for Mayor, 1989 and 1993.
Wife: (two daughters)
High School: Bishop Loughlin High School,
Brooklyn, NY
University: BA, Manhattan College
Law School: JD, New York University Law
School
Administrator: Trustee, Manhattan College
Administrator: Advisory Board, School of
Public Affairs, Baruch College
Powers Global Strategies Founder & CEO
(1998-)
New York City Official Charter Revision
Commission (1998)
New York City Official First Deputy Mayor
(1995-96)
New York City Official Deputy Mayor for
Operations (1994)
Member of the Board of Collegiate Funding
Services (2005)
Member of the Board of Fox Entertainment
Group (2003-)
Member of the Board of High View Investment
Corporation (as Chairman 1996-98)
Member of the Board of Mittal Steel (2004-)
Member of the Board of NDS Group (2000-)
Member of the Board of Powers Global
Strategies (as Chairman)
Bush-Cheney '04
Central Park Conservancy
Friends of Giuliani Exploratory Committee
New York City Public Initiatives
Corporation Chairman
Partnership for New York City Board of
Directors
Romney Victory Inc.
Rudy Giuliani Presidential Committee
The Canadian Centre
for Emergency Preparedness (CCEP) was
established in 1993
as a federally incorporated not-for-profit
organization. CCEP
advocates and promotes disaster management
principles &
practices to individuals, communities and
organizations, in
both government and the private sector, with
the aim of reducing
the risk, impact and cost of natural, human-
induced and
technological disasters.
Adrian
Gordon
Title: Chief Executive Officer
London, July 2005:
Giuliani and ex-CIA Agent Robert Kiley
Giuliani was 'just
yards from Liverpool Street [...] station, when the bombs went off', wrote Fox
News. When asked how he felt Giuliani said in London: 'I'm not sure, Lester. I
don't know. There is a certain question I have in my mind: Why was I so close
both times? ... Obviously there was no connection, but only God can answer
questions like that, I guess.' Fox News quotes Giuliani when he says about the
bombings: '"They are a very eerie reminder of Sept. 11. I was right near
Liverpool [Street] station when the first bombing took place, so I could hear
the sirens and then kept hearing reports of different bombings, in different
parts of the city," he told Sky News television. Mr. Giuliani was in the
City as the Underground system was evacuated and roads were closed in a rush of
emergency vehicles and evacuations.'
That things ran as smoothly as Giuliani said may be due in part
to Bob Kiley, currently Commissioner of Transport for London, in earlier days a
fairly high-ranking CIA agent. Giuliani is no stranger to Kiley, the
savior of the London Underground; more than that, he really likes him: 'London
Mayor Ken Livingstone today welcomed the intervention of his New York
counterpart after he backed London's Transport Commissioner Bob Kiley. New York
Mayor Rudolph Giuliani defended Transport Commissioner Robert Kiley after Deputy
Prime Minister John Prescott's office released figures claiming the New York
subway was far less safe than the Tube. Mayor Giuliani's press secretary said
Mr Kiley was "an incredible asset to New York City"', according to
this press release from the mayor of London. Speaking
of the CIA and the London Underground: the CIA and Bechtel have often
collaborated; Bechtel is part of a trio of firms that the Underground is going
to freshen up.
BECHTEL UNVEILED
" BECHTEL
(pronounced BECK-tul) founded in San Francisco in 1898, has become a
super-secret corporate octopus. Some say that the firm is really a shadow
government, an arm of the CIA. It is the largest construction and engineering
outfit in the world, (and some say beyond). Former Bechtel officials hold the
most important posts in the US Government. They are part of 'The Web', (an
interconnected control system, not the Internet), which links Tri-Lateralist
plans, the CFR, the orders of Illuminism, the Cult of the All Seeing Eye, and
other interlocking groups. Bechtel is in fact one of the most powerful
Reptilian Corporations!" David 'am I bonkers' Ike.
A great way to get
one of the most secretive politico-corporates into the public eye, but here's
some more reliable info. :-)
Bechtel began in 1898
as a railroad company, soon after it expanded into general construction of
bridges, roads and industrial and commercial buildings. By the 1930's it was a
major corporation having played a crucial role in the construction of the
Hoover Dam (dams have been a favourite of theirs ever since, as has the power
industry in general, Bechtel is now a major player in both the fossil fuel and
nuclear industries).
Today Bechtel
(http://www.bechtel.com) is estimated to be the 20th largest corporation in
America (smaller only than the its huge banking, oil conglomerates, and other
industrial giants such as GEC and IBM, many of whom are Bechtel dependent
clients), and the Bechtel family which still owns it, one of its richest clans
(exact figures are hard to get though as the Bechtel family refuses to divulge
its profits and wealth, as other corporations do, and refuses to be listed in
any top 100 corporations list). When its many international subsidiaries,
supported 'ally companies' and 'breakaway' businesses (still often run by
Bechtel family members) are taken into consideration it is probably even
bigger. However if this wasn't enough it is more powerful institution than even
this ranking suggests. Where as most of today's corporations are owned by
shareholders, Bechtel is still an entirely private company (possibly the
world's largest private company) and is entire under the control of the Bechtel
family and their top employees. This makes it a highly directional and powerful
entity. It is thus sometimes refereed to as *The* Corporation.
In the International
arena, Bechtel is certainly one of the world's largest construction companies,
and when combined with its partner companies (such as bin Laden Construction,
the Bechtel family are very tight with the bin Laden clan) far outstrips
competitors. Some do try to compete of course, though when one company did so
in Boston, for a particularly lucrative contract, they were allegedly
threatened in an anonymous phone call, "If you want to work in this state
again, don't play games with Bechtel!"
A ruthlessly
capitalistic enterprise (also the centre of years of allegations of racial
prejudice towards and exploitation of its work force) Bechtel is in the
forefront of the drive for deregulation and privatisation. Currently Bechtel is
a leading player in the World Bank's project for the privatisation of water. To
the point that, in 1999, small farmers in Cochambamba, Bolivia, had to buy
permits (and pay Bechtel) to gather rainwater on their own property! Some have
suggested the 'evil corporation' that privatised Martian air in the film Total
Recall was based on Bechtel.
One of Bechtel's most
famous projects in Britain was probably the Channel Tunnel, but they also built
many of the largest North Sea oil platforms. In fact Bechtel is the company of
choice with the oil industry, many of the worlds largest oil rigs and pipelines
were (and are) built by them (including the Iraq - Syria pipeline recently in
the news). Bechtel is also called to put out oil fires, as they did the Kuwaiti
fires after the first Gulf War. Perhaps there only service to the environment,
as environmental groups claim Bechtel's industrial projects and nuclear power
stations are some of the most environmentally damaging to be found anywhere.
While Bechtel now
builds many types of large scale structure, from vast power stations and
hospitals to major international airports, and even whole cities (hence their
new contract to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure), one of their main
specialisation's (along with their incestuous relationship with the oil
industry) are highly secret military projects. Not only did they construct most
of the military's current infrastructure, they were (and are) also heavily
involved in building and maintaining its nuclear programs. Bechtel not
surprisingly thus became one of the most influential US corporations within the
so-called Military Industrial Complex. In fact, given its power, many regard it
as the backbone of the MIL-IND Complex. Bechtel's senior staff have
historically also had close links with the RAND Corporation, the primary
military think tank responsible for Cold War planning.
Bechtel still
secretly specialises in the construction of military bases, especially
underground bunkers. Responsible not only for the construction and maintenance
of many of America's, and it's allies, army and airbases, including the famous
Area 51/Groom Lake, the NORAD complex inside Cheyenne mountain and a host of
top secret underground facilities, Bechtel also built Saddam Hussein's bunkers
in Iraq when he was a US 'ally'.
Bechtel is also
highly security conscious. Even before September 11 cast a spotlight on
national security, Bechtel's Nevada Test Site north of Las Vegas was taking aim
at terrorism. Managed by Bechtel Nevada for the U.S. Department of Energy's
National Nuclear Security Administration, the site supports national security
and U.S. intelligence and defence efforts, designs emergency response programs,
monitors consequences of terrorist acts, and develops technologies to fight terrorism.
At the Weapons of Mass Destruction Training Program, for example, police,
fire-fighters, and other "first responders" from across the United
States learn how to react quickly to terrorist attacks in populated areas.
Technologies developed by site researchers include equipment for detecting and
predicting the path of airborne hazardous material, as well as new ways to
protect buildings from biological and chemical weapons. The site also operates
Remote Sensing and Special Technologies laboratories. Immediately following
September 11, officials from Bechtel Nevada and the National Nuclear Security
Administration proposed creating a National Centre for Combating Terrorism.
Based at the Nevada Test Site, the centre is expected to build on the programs already
in place there.
Due to its
involvement in these areas it should not be a surprise to discover the number
of military and intelligence personal who have been senior Bechtel directors.
The most famous being CIA directors John McCone (in charge of the CIA at the
time of the JFK assassination and invasion of Chile. And also Chairman of the
Atomic Energy Commission (1958-1961), and a director of ITT), and William Casey
(Reagan's CIA chief, and earlier the OSS officer in charge of operation Paper
Clip and the rescue of Nazi scientists). Most recently former Chief of Staff
Colin Powell is the most prominent military figure to be associated with
Bechtel's. The majority of the Defence Policy Board (formerly led by Richard
Perle) which was the force behind the Pentagon's push for the invasion of Iraq
have also been Bechtelites. It is thus not surprising that in San Francisco, a
city that has become a centre for U.S. anti-war protests, the international
construction giant has found its headquarters there a main destination for
protesters -- because it is competing for lucrative contracts to rebuild Iraq
and role in fermenting the war.
Politically it is
said Bechtel gave close to $1.3 million in campaign contributions, mostly to
Republicans, between 1999 and 2002. In addition, former U.S. Secretary of State
George Schultz now sits on Bechtel's board of directors.
Bechtel's reputation
for having political clout is old and enduring. In 1988 it was the subject of a
book, "Friends in High Places," in which author Laton McCartney
suggested it profited from its close government connections from the turn of
the century through the time of the Reagan administration.
After Steve Bechtel
was appointed to the advisory board of the Export-Import Bank in 1969, generous
Exim loans were available for Bechtel projects in the Philippines, Egypt,
Algeria, Indonesia, USSR, and nuclear power plants in Brazil and elsewhere.
When Ronald Reagan needed help at the White House, all he had to do was to
place a call to Bechtel and ask to have George Shultz and Caspar Weinberger
transferred to his administration. According to the
Multinational Monitor
the Bechtel Corporation paid bribes to the Korean government between 1978 and
1980 to win nuclear power plant contracts. At the time, Caspar Weinberger and
George Shultz were at Bechtel.
Recently Bush slipped
the $680 million Iraq contract to the Bechtel Group. The deal puts the company
in position to receive a big part of the $100 billion estimated total cost of
Iraqi reconstruction. According to the Centre for Responsive Politics, Bechtel
gave Republican candidates, including Bush, about $765,000 in PAC, soft money
and individual campaign contributions between 1999 and 2002.
The Bush Junta is
stuffed with Bechtelites, Donald Rumsfeld once served as a liaison between
Bechtel and the Iraqi government to finesse the building of an oil pipeline.
And former Secretary of State George Shultz, a member of the board of directors
of Bechtel, is also chairman of the advisory board of the Committee for the Liberation
of Iraq, a strongly pro-war organisation with influence in the White House.
Colin Powell is also a former Bechtel director.
Bin Laden's estranged
family, a sprawling, extraordinarily wealthy Saudi Arabian dynasty, is a
substantial investor in a private equity firm founded by the Bechtel Group of
San Francisco. In a closed competitive bidding process, the United States
Agency for International Development chose Bechtel to rebuild the major
elements of Iraq's infrastructure, including its roads, railroads, airports,
hospitals, and schools, and its water and electrical systems. In the first
phase of the contract, the U.S. government will pay Bechtel nearly thirty-five
million dollars, but experts say that the cost is likely to reach six hundred
and eighty million during the next year and a half.
When the contract was
awarded, two weeks ago, the Administration did not mention that the bin Laden
family has an ongoing relationship with Bechtel. The bin Ladens have a
ten-million-dollar stake in the Fremont Group, a San Francisco-based company
formerly called Bechtel Investments, which was until 1986 a subsidiary of
Bechtel. The Fremont Group's Web site, which makes no mention of the bin
Ladens, notes that "though now independent, Fremont enjoys a close relationship
with Bechtel." A spokeswoman for the company confirmed that Fremont's
"majority ownership is the Bechtel family." And a list of the
corporate board of directors shows substantial overlap. Five of Fremont's eight
directors are also directors of Bechtel. One Fremont director, Riley Bechtel,
is the chairman and chief executive officer of the Bechtel Group, and is a
member of the Bush Administration: he was appointed this year to serve on the
President's Export Council. In addition, George Shultz, the Secretary of State
in the Reagan Administration, serves as a director both of Fremont and of the
Bechtel Group, where he once was president and still is listed as senior
counsellor.
Rick Kopf, the
general counsel of the Fremont Group, which manages some eleven billion dollars
in assets, confirms that the bin Laden family invested about ten million
dollars in one of Fremont's private funds before September 11, 2001. He noted
that the bin Laden family has not enlarged its stake since then, but he
declined to provide additional details about its association with the firm. He
also chose not to discuss the origin or the nature of the relationship between
the bin Laden and Bechtel families, both of which made fortunes in huge
construction projects in the Arab world. The Fremont Group evidently does not
go in for connecting the dots. As Kopf said, "Ownership is private and is
not disclosed."
Two men meeting in
Kuwait recently to plan Iraqi reconstruction -- Jay Garner and Terry Valenzano
-- work for the very same public/private alliance that lobbied Saddam two
decades ago. Today, Defense Secretary Rumsfield heads up the Pentagon, which is
paying Garner's salary, while Shultz is a board member of the Bechtel Company
who is paying Valenzano's bills.
That's not all: Jack
Sheehan, a senior vice president at Bechtel, is a member of the Defense Policy
Board, a government-appointed group that advised the Pentagon on the war.
Meanwhile Bechtel also advises both the federal agencies that provide loans and
insurance to American companies overseas. Daniel Chao, another Bechtel senior
vice president, serves on advisory board of the US Export-Import Bank, while
Ross J. Connelly, a 21-year veteran of Bechtel Group, is the chief operating
officer for the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC).
Indeed, Andrew
Natsios, the administrator of USAID, which awarded the reconstruction contract
for Iraq, was overseeing Bechtel just two years ago as the chairman of the
Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, which hired the company to complete the
Boston Central Artery project.
Activists say that
the incestuous relationship between Bechtel and the US government bodes ill for
the Iraqi people. "Bechtel and privatization go hand in hand. As people
learned the hard way in Bolivia and around the world, when Bechtel comes to
town, you can expect costs to soar and accountability and local control to
evaporate," says Juliette Beck, senior organizer at Public Citizen's
Oakland office.
Bechtel recently
brought a $25 million lawsuit against Bolivia for cancelling a contract to
manage the Cochabamba water system, which resulted in skyrocketing rates for
local people.
Boston taxpayers have
been just as unlucky. The Boston Central Artery tunnel project (popularly known
as the 'Big Dig') is wrapping up reconstructing Interstate 93 underneath the
surface of the city. In 1985 the price tag of the project was an estimated $2.5
billion. This figure has been spiralling upwards every year. The latest price
tag for the project was a whopping $14.6 billion or $1.8 billion a mile, making
it the world's most expensive highway.
And California
citizens are still paying the bills for the cost over-runs at the San Onofre
nuclear power plant in northern San Diego County where Bechtel installed one of
the reactors backwards. Meanwhile the local environmental costs continue to
mount every day as the plant sucks in huge quantities of plankton, fish and
even seals with the water to cool the reactors. The reactor also destroys miles
of kelp on the seabed by discharging the heated water back into the ocean.
Other construction
boondoggles by Bechtel include the Ok Tedi gold mine in Papua New Guinea where
the dam Bechtel was building to contain mining waste collapsed before gold was
even extracted in 1984. In 1996 when the local people took them to court, BHP,
the Australian operators of the mine agreed to spend up to $115 million to
contain the toxic waste that they were dumping into the Fly river at a rate of
80,000 tons a day from the mine.
And for the
conspiracy buffs, the Bechtel Family, still resident in San Francisco, are said
to be the most influential people behind the cities' infamous Bohemian Grove
gatherings (some claim they control it). These secret 'hedonistic' (and often
pseudo-occult) gatherings are in reality secret networking parties for the
'elite' where political and business deals are initiated. Mostly Republican
territory, allegedly every Republican President in the 20th century was
nominated here, some Democrat supporters such as the Rockerfellars have been
frequent guests. The Bechtel family is said to have gained most of its
influence at the Grove, and its camp there, the Mandalay Lodge is the most
prestigious, with not only the past and present Bechtelites mob gathering there
last year, but also special guests Gerald Ford and Henry Kissinger (an
architect of the 'clash of civilisations' anti Islamic doctrine). Incidentally
many in the Bechtel network are also prominent Freemasons, not unusual in a
construction company.
Not surprisingly
Bechtel are also very close to the House of Morgan, that banking dynasty that
also arose from the age of the railroads, and now is one of the dominant right
wing influences within the East Coast foreign policy establishment. A direct
link to the CFR and the Bilderburg Group and that conspiratorial malarkey.
If this is all new to
you, it is not surprising the Bechtel Family operate under a policy of strict
secrecy and pay people a fortune to keep them out of the media's attention. In
addition they also maintain a private security agency and counter-terrorist
unit, staffed by former special forces personnel, to protect them from would be
'assassins and kidnappers'. Some claim they have their own intelligence agency,
but given their CIA and Pentagon connections it is not clear why they should
need it.
Giuliani's Right-Hand
Man Associated with Peter Power
The statements of
Peter Power -the man behind the exercise-that-coincidentally-became-reality in
London- figured centrally in the last two parts of this article series. Rudolph
Giuliani and Peter Power have a mutual friend, namely Richard Sheirer. Sheirer
was Giuliani's right-hand man and on and around September 11, 2001 was the boss
of OEM, 'the major's Office of Emergency Management', writes Mike Ruppert on
page 406 of his book Crossing the Rubicon. 'He's the guy Giuliani calls
"the man behind the curtain." He's the wizard of OEM', writes New
York Metro. Sheirer and Power sat together on the advisory commission CCEP, the
Canadian Centre for Emergency Preparedness.Knight Commander of the Order of the
British Empire. Sheirer is Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British
Empire. And: 'Mr. Sheirer is a Senior Vice President at Giuliani Partners
Giuliani is '.
Suspected Roles of
Giuliani and Sheirer on September 11
On September 11
Giuliani was operating out of the Emergency Command Center on the 23rd floor of
World Trade Center Building 7. The command center had its own air supply, fuel
tanks and bomb-proof windows. WTC 7 was a large building over forty storeys
high, was not hit and yet fell in on itself, straight down in the manner of a
controlled demolition [see video 1 2, WMV]. As if he had foreseen this drama,
Giuliani and his team could simply continue functioning because by chance a large
backup-operation center had been created in connection with the Tripod II
exercise scheduled to take place the following day, also under the direction of
Giuliani and Sheirer. Also earlier on 9/11 Giuliani must have enjoyed a sort of
prophetic power, namely concerning the collapse of the WTC towers. Considering
the solid structure of the towers, their collapse was unimaginable, and the
collapse remains contested to this day because bombs would be what brought the
WTC towers down. 'Before either of the twin towers collapsed, Mayor Rudolph
Giuliani and his associates were told to leave the headquarters they had set up
within Building 7. 'We were operating out of there when we were told that the
World Trade Center was gonna collapse,' Rudolph Giuliani told Peter Jennings of
ABC News that morning, "and it did collapse before we could get out of the
building." Despite this, Giuliani fled WTC 7 at least eight hours before
it collapsed. How did he know that the twin towers were going to collapse if it
was such an unprecedented occurance? Why didn't the firefighters on the ground
get the same warning?', wrote Prison Planet.
Giuliani and Anthrax
Another Giuliani
company participated in the cleanup of the anthrax sent to the tabloid Sunday;
the attack on the paper was part of a series of attacks that for a time
terrorized the U.S. CBS wrote: 'The cleanup is being led by BioONE, a company
established by former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and Sabre Technical
Services, which decontaminated other buildings hit by anthrax attacks.' Earlier
we wrote that according to the Washington Post the anthrax spores were
consistent with those from the Army base Fort Detrick. This correlation of
attacks and Army may be read about also in a section of the previous part of our
series on the bombings in London: Bombs Made with Military Explosives.
Were the Boston
bombings a drill that went live?
The 7 July 2005
London bombings (often referred to as 7/7) were a series of co-ordinated
suicide attacks in London which targeted civilians using the public transport
system during the morning rush hour.
On the morning of
Thursday, 7 July 2005, four Islamist home-grown terrorists detonated four
bombs, three in quick succession aboard London Underground trains across the
city and, later, a fourth on a double-decker bus in Tavistock Square. Fifty-two
civilians and the four bombers were killed in the attacks, and over 700 more
were injured.
The explosions were
caused by homemade organic peroxide–based devices packed into rucksacks. The
bombings were followed exactly two weeks later by a series of attempted
attacks.
A fictional
“scenario” of multiple bomb attacks on London’s underground took place at
exactly the same time as the bomb attack on July 7, 2005.
Peter Power, Managing
Director of Visor Consultants, a private firm on contract to the London
Metropolitan Police, described in a BBC interview how he had organized and
conducted the anti-terror drill, on behalf of an unnamed business client.
The fictional
scenario was based on simultaneous bombs going off at exactly the same time at
the underground stations where the real attacks were occurring:
A survey of 500
British Muslims undertaken by Channel 4 News found that 24% believed the four
bombers blamed for the attacks did not perform them. In 2006, the government
had refused to hold a public inquiry, stating that "it would be a
ludicrous diversion". Prime Minister Tony Blair said an independent
inquiry would "undermine support" for MI5, while the leader of the
opposition, David Cameron, said only a full inquiry would "get to the
truth". In reaction to revelations about the extent of security service
investigations into the bombers prior to the attack, the Shadow Home Secretary,
David Davis, said: "It is becoming more and more clear that the story
presented to the public and Parliament is at odds with the facts."
However, the decision against an independent public inquest was later reversed.
A full public inquest into the bombings was subsequently begun from October
2010. Coroner Lady Justice Hallett stated that the inquest would examine how
each victim died and whether MI5, if it had worked better, could have prevented
the attack.
There have been
various conspiracy theories proposed about the bombings, including the
suggestion that the bombers were 'patsies', based on claims about timings of
the trains and the train from Luton, supposed explosions underneath the
carriages, and allegations of the faking of the one time-stamped and dated
photograph of the bombers at Luton station. Claims made by one theorist in the
Internet video 7/7 Ripple Effect were examined by the BBC documentary series
The Conspiracy Files, in an episode titled "7/7" first broadcast on
30 June 2009, which debunked many of the video's claims.
On the day of the
bombings Peter Power of Visor Consultants gave interviews on BBC Radio 5 Live
and ITV saying that he was working on a crisis management simulation drill, in
the City of London, "based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at
the railway stations where it happened this morning", when he heard that
an attack was going on in real life. He described this as a coincidence. He
also gave an interview to the Manchester Evening News where he spoke of
"an exercise involving mock broadcasts when it happened for real".
After a few days he dismissed it as a "spooky coincidence" on
Canadian TV.
University of
Mobile’s Cross Country Coach, who was near the finish line of the Boston
Marathon when a series of explosions went off, said he thought it was odd there
were bomb sniffing dogs at the start and finish lines.
“They kept making
announcements on the loud speaker that it was just a drill and there was
nothing to worry about,” Coach Ali Stevenson told Local 15. “It seemed like
there was some sort of threat, but they kept telling us it was just a drill.”
At 12:53 pm local
time, the Boston Globe newspaper tweeted: “Officials: There will be a
controlled explosion opposite the library within one minute as part of bomb
squad activities.”
Then almost two hours
later, at 2:50 p.m., bombs exploded near the finish line of the Boston
Marathon, killing three people and injuring more than 100 others.
Just a coincidence?
Maybe. But since all of the biggest “terror attacks” in recent US history, including
the two World Trade Center bombings and the Oklahoma City bombing, have been
inside jobs, and since most of the “terror plots” discovered in the US since
9/11 have been created by the FBI, we have every right to be suspicious.
Terror bombings have only
one beneficiary: Governments, and the wealthy families that own them.
What’s not yet being
reported by the mainstream media is that a “controlled explosion” was under way
on the same day as the marathon explosion.
As the Boston Globe
tweeted today, “Officials: There will be a controlled explosion opposite the
library within one minute as part of bomb squad activities.”
Some people believe
this explosion might have been part of the demolition of another bomb. It seems
unlikely, however, that a bomb at the library, one mile away, could be so
quickly located and rigged to be exploded by the bomb squad in less than one
hour following the initial explosions at the marathon.
On September 11,
2001, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) was involved in an
ongoing operation which involved deploying fighter aircraft to northwestern
North America. The US Military and NORAD had also planned to conduct several
military exercises and a drill was being held by the National Reconnaissance
Office, a Department of Defense agency. The operations, exercises and drills
were all canceled following the September 11 attacks.
Aside from military
exercises, a National Reconnaissance Office drill was being conducted on
September 11, 2001. In a simulated event, a small aircraft would crash into one
of the towers of the agency's headquarters after experiencing a mechanical
failure. The NRO is the branch of the Department of Defense in charge of spy
satellites. According to its spokesman Art Haubold: "No actual plane was
to be involved -- to simulate the damage from the crash, some stairwells and
exits were to be closed off, forcing employees to find other ways to evacuate
the building." He further explained: "It was just an incredible
coincidence that this happened to involve an aircraft crashing into our
facility, as soon as the real world events began, we canceled the
exercise." Most of the agency's personnel were sent home after the
attacks.
On September 12,
2001, there was due to take place the second part of an exercise known as
Operation Tripod, set up to "test the plan to distribute antibiotics to
the entire city population during a bioterrorism attack" Richard Sheirer,
director of the New York City mayor's Office of Emergency Management (OEM), had
hired "over 1,000 Police Academy cadets and Fire Department trainees to
play terrified civilians afflicted with various medical conditions, allergies,
and panic attacks." Various individuals were invited to watch, including
Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, the police and fire commissioners, and representatives
of the FBI and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Pier 92 was set
up as a model distribution station where the "victims" of the mock attack
who needed to receive antibiotics would be treated. The exercise was a
follow-up to a previous training exercise in New York, called RED Ex, which
took place on May 21, 2001. According to the MTI Report Saving City Lifelines:
Lessons Learned in the 9-11 Terrorist Attacks, "September 11 was going to
be a busy day at the OEM. Staff members arrived early to prepare for Operation
Tripod."
When the September
11, 2001 attacks began, Operation Tripod was immediately canceled as attentions
turned to the real ongoing emergency. Because Pier 92 had been set up ready for
the exercise, OEM staff were able to move there and quickly convert it into a
large emergency operations center when their original command center (in WTC
Building 7) was evacuated and later destroyed. Thus, within 31 hours of the
attacks, OEM had a functional facility able to manage the search and rescue
effort, just four miles north-northwest of the WTC site. The exercise was later
rescheduled and took place on May 22, 2002.
In late October 2000
(more than ten months prior to 9/11), a military exercise was conducted which
consisted in establishing the scenario of a simulated passenger plane crashing
into the Pentagon. The Defense Protective Services Police and the Pentagon's
Command Emergency Response Team coordinated the exercise. According to a
detailed report by Dennis Ryan of Fort Myer Military Community's Pentagram,
"the Pentagon Mass Casualty Exercise, as the crash was called, was just
one of several scenarios that emergency response teams were exposed to on Oct.
24-26 [2000]":
The fire and smoke
from the downed passenger aircraft billows from the Pentagon courtyard. Defense
Protective Services Police seal the crash sight. Army medics, nurses and
doctors scramble to organize aid. (…) Don Abbott, of Command Emergency Response
Training, walks over to the Pentagon and extinguishes the flames. The Pentagon
was a model and the "plane crash" was a simulated one.
In Britain, there
were several documented exercises of terror attacks on London's underground
system.
In addition to the
7/7 exercise conducted by Visor Consultants, a similar mock terror drill on
London's transportation system entitled "Atlantic Blue" was held in
April 2005, barely three months prior to the real attacks. In 2003, a mock
terror drill labelled OSIRIS 2 was conducted. It consisted, according to Peter
Power in testing the "equipment and people deep in the Underground of
London". It involved the participation of several hundred people.
(Interview with Peter Power, CTV, 11 July 2005).
"Atlantic
Blue" was part of a much larger US sponsored emergency preparedness
exercise labelled TOPOFF 3, which included the participation of Britain and
Canada. It had been ordered by the UK Secretary of State for the Home
Department, Mr. Charles Clarke, in close coordination with his US counterpart
Michael Chertoff.
The assumptions of
the Visor Consultants mock drill conducted on the morning of July 7th were
similar to those conducted under "Atlantic Blue". This should come as
no surprise since Visor Consultants was involved, on contract to the British
government, in the organisation and conduct of Atlantic Blue and in
coordination with the US Department of Homeland Security.
As in the case of the
9/11 simulation organized by the CIA, the July 7, 2005 Visor mock terror drill,
was casually dismissed by the media, without further investigation, as a mere
"coincidence", with no relationship to the real event.
According
to a report of the Associated Press correspondent in Jerusalem, the Israeli embassy
in London had been advised in advance by Scotland Yard of an impending bomb
attack:
Just before the
blasts, Scotland Yard called the security officer at the Israeli Embassy to say
they had received warnings of possible attacks, the official said. He did not
say whether British police made any link to the economic conference.(AP, 7 July
2005)
Israeli Finance
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was warned by his embassy not to attend an attend
an economic conference organized by the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange (TASE) in
collaboration with the Israeli embassy and Deutsche Bank.
Netanyahu was staying
at the Aldridge Hotel in Mayfair. The conference venue was a few miles away at
the Great Eastern Hotel close to the Liverpool subway station, where one of the
bomb blasts occurred.
Rudolph Giuliani, who
was mayor of New York City at the time of the 9/11 attacks, was staying at the
Great Eastern hotel on the 7th of July, where TASE was hosting its economic
conference, with Israel's Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as keynote
speaker.
Giuliani was having a
business breakfast meeting in his room at the Great Eastern Hotel, close to
Liverpool Street station when the bombs went off:
QUOTE
"I didn't hear
the Liverpool Street bomb go off," he explains. "One of my security
people came into the room and informed me that there had been an explosion. We
went outside and they pointed in the direction of where they thought the
incident had happened. There was no panic. I went back in to my breakfast. At
that stage, the information coming in to us was very ambiguous." (quoted
in the Evening Standard, 11 July 2005.)
Israeli Finance
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Rudolph Giuliani knew each other. Giuliani had
officially welcomed Netanyahu when he visited New York City as Prime Minister
of Israel in 1996. There was no indication, however, from news reports that the
two men met in London at the Great Eastern. On the day prior to the London
attacks, July 6th, Giuliani was in North Yorkshire at a meeting.
After completing his
term as mayor of New York City, Rudi Giuliani established a security outfit:
Giuliani Security and Safety. The latter is a subsidary of Giuliani Partners
LLC. headed by former New York head of the FBI, Pasquale D'Amuro.
After
9/11, D'Amuro was appointed Inspector in Charge of the FBI's investigation of
9/11. He later served as Assistant Director of the Counterterrorism Division at
FBI Headquarters and, Executive Assistant Director for Counterterrorism and
Counterintelligence. D'Amuro had close links to the Neocons in the Bush
adminstration.
It is worth noting
that Visor Consultants and Giuliani Security and Safety LLC specialize in
similar "mock terror drills" and "emergency preparedness"
procedures. Both Giuliani and Power were in London at the same time within a
short distance of one of the bombing sites. While there is no evidence that
Giuliani and Power met in London, the two companies have had prior business
contacts in the area of emergency preparedness. Peter Power served on the
Advisory Board to the Canadian Centre for Emergency Preparedness (CCEP),
together with Richard Sheirer, Senior Vice President of Giuliani and Partners.
who was previously Commissioner at the NYC Office of Emergency Management, and
Director of New York City Homeland Security.
"The crimes
alleged in today's superseding indictment are truly jaw dropping," said
Baharara. "They reveal one of the most elaborate and massive schemes to
defraud the city ever charged." The city's Department of Investigation,
led by Rose Gill Hearn, initiated the case and brought it to Baharara's office
on the sprawling case.
The irony here is
rich. "The massive scheme" started as an outsourced city contract to
design a payroll system that would precisely track the hours worked by city
employees. After a couple of false starts with other vendors, defense
contractor Scientific Applications International Corporation was awarded the
job in a no-bid contract by the Giuliani Administration.
Under Mayor
Bloomberg, the contract ballooned from $63 million where it had started out in
the Giuliani years , to more than $700 million. Federal prosecutors now say at
least $600 million of that was "tainted." At every level, federal
prosecutors allege grafters had honeycombed CityTime in to a paragon of
corruption.
"Between 2003
and 2010, the CityTime payroll project served as a vehicle for an unprecedented
fraud, which appears to have metastasized over time," said Baharara.
The prime contractor
was the defense contractor Scientific Applications International Corporation.
The city's contract database notes SAIC has been the subject of "multiple
investigations by the Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of Justice,
NASA and the General Services Administration." Citing the criminal probe,
SAIC had no comment for this story.
Back in 2005,
prosecutors say SAIC got a whistleblower tip about company employee Gerald
Denault, SAIC's CityTime manager, saying Denault was deliberately slowing down
the project and raised the possibility he was taking kickbacks from
subcontractors.
April 17, 2013
A letter believed to
have been laced with the deadly substance ricin was intercepted in a Maryland
post office yesterday before it could reach it’s intended destination – the
desk of a Senator who has been fiercely critical of gun control legislation,
yet voted to block a filibuster on the issue.
In a statement late
Tuesday, the U.S. Capitol Police said that further tests on the package, which
had a Memphis, Tennessee, postmark, are being conducted at the Army’s
biomedical research laboratory at Fort Detrick, Maryland.
Though false
positives of ricin in letters to elected reps. have been recorded in the recent
past, the analysis conducted so far seems to conclusively show that the deadly
toxin was present in the letter.
The intended target
of the letter was Sen. Roger Wicker, a Republican from Mississippi, who in
recent weeks has vowed to block any legislation that would further tighten
firearms regulation.
“I have an A+ rating
from the NRA and have consistently worked to protect Second Amendment rights,’
Wicker wrote on his Facebook page last week. “I have never voted for gun
control and will not do so… I will filibuster.” the Senator, and former 12 year
Congressman noted.
Despite his staunch
opposition to gun control, Wicker was one of only 16 Republicans who last week
voted to end the filibuster on the legislation and invite debate on the matter.
“This begins a debate
to put the Senate on record about a basic constitutional freedom.” Wicker
stated at the time.
In justifying his
vote, Wicker pointed to “the opportunity to vote on measures to strengthen gun
rights, such as an amendment to protect veterans from unfair restrictions when
trying to purchase a firearm.”
Wicker reiterated
that he “will filibuster passage of a final bill if it contains gun
restrictions or a weapons ban.”
Because of Wicker’s
vote to end the filibuster last week, some have suggested that he may have been
targeted by an extremist right wing pro-gun group or individual:
Although not out of
the question, this would be somewhat of a stretch, given that Senator Wicker
is, despite his vote last week, still a staunch critic of gun control
legislation.
As we reported
yesterday, a media driven narrative is beginning to emerge that paves the way
to level blame for the Boston attack at the feet of anti-government, “patriot”,
tea party types.
Politico reported
that the ricin letter contained a warning that read “You haven’t listen to me
before. Now you will, even if people have to die.”
An FBI bulletin
obtained by Fox News also stated that the letter contained the sentence “To see
a wrong and not expose it, is to become a silent partner to its continuance.”
Both letters were
reportedly signed, “I am KC and I approve this message.”
The same bulletin
also noted that a second letter containing the same phrase was also sent to the
president. It is not clear whether the letter to Obama also contained ricin.
Police and the FBI
have refused to comment on the situation. However, Sen. Claire McCaskill,
D-Mo., told the Associated Press that police have a suspect in mind.
“The person that is a
suspect writes a lot of letters to members,” McCaskill told reporters as she
emerged from a classified briefing.
Senator Wicker, who
has served in the Senate since 2007, has been assigned a protective detail,
according to police sources.
“This matter is part
of an ongoing investigation by the United States Capitol Police and FBI,’
Wicker said in a statement released late Tuesday. ‘I want to thank our law
enforcement officials for their hard work and diligence in keeping those of us
who work in the Capitol complex safe.”
The timing of the
attempted attack on Senator Wicker, just one day after the bombing in Boston,
has recalled the 2001 anthrax attacks, where deadly letters were sent to
elected representatives and newsrooms in the days following 9/11.
The FBI’s official
narrative on those attacks has since been proven extremely doubtful at best,
and has been seriously questioned by leading scientists and world authorities
on the composition of Anthrax.
Nice way for the
Repubs to showcase Guiliani as the one man who can clean up after terrorists -
would he step in if Cheney takes a dive and 'clean up' the Repub ticket in time
for November?
Take a look at that
first Guiliani quote, in bold:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&nci...
The cleanup is being
led by BioONE, a company established by former New York City Mayor Rudolph
Giuliani and Sabre Technical Services, which decontaminated other buildings hit
by anthrax attacks. "It will be a symbol that we can deal with these new risks
that we live with in our new world," Giuliani said.
After a call of
"Let's go" from Giuliani, workers started the flow of chlorine
dioxide, a chemical used to disinfect drinking water, into the American Media
Inc. building to kill the spores. A high concentration of the chemical is kept
in the sealed building for 12 hours to be effective.
BioONE then plans to
occupy the space as the headquarters for its new crisis management venture. The
company hopes to move in by the end of the year.
A real estate investor
bought the building for a paltry $40,000 and then made plans to lease it to
BioONE. The financial terms of the agreement have not been disclosed, though
the decontamination at the larger Brentwood Post Office in Washington cost $130
million.
Mayor of New York
Rudolph Giuliani admits to Peter Jennings that he got a warning that the South
Tower was about to collapse.
Why is this
important?
No steel framed
building had ever collapsed from fire damage before in history. The event was
unprecedented. To know the building was about to collapse would require inside
knowledge of 'the 9/11 script' and how it was supposed to unfold on that
fateful day.
Remember, right
before the building collapsed, firefighters reported minimal fires which they
could quickly and easily extinguish.
June 10, 2005
The on-and-off
anthrax cleanup of the former American Media Inc. building is off again.
This time, the delay
stopped the company hired to decontaminate the first building in the country
attacked with anthrax just weeks away from finishing the job.
Bio-ONE officials
walked off the Boca Raton property on Broken Sound Boulevard after a May 31
contract deadline passed without an extension, once more clouding the future of
the building in the Arvida Park of Commerce.
Karen Cavanagh,
Bio-ONE general counsel and chief operating officer, said the company couldn't
agree to extend the contract with building owner David Rustine because of
"economic" terms.
The company planned a
gala June opening with former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who
co-founded Bio-ONE. Company officials wanted Giuliani and an employee sickened
in the anthrax attack, Ernesto Blanco, to be the first people to walk into the
anthrax-free building.
The Palm Beach County
Health Department quarantined the building after the Oct. 5, 2001, death of an
AMI photo editor, Bob Stevens, who inhaled the biological agent from a
contaminated letter.
Company officials
also planned to move into the building and make it their headquarters. However,
the contract dispute puts that move in doubt.
"Right now, a
move into the building or any lease relationship is moot," Cavanagh said.
"In some ways, we need to sit down and start over again."
Tim O'Connor, county
Health Department spokesman, said the building owner is responsible for the
cleanup, and health officials won't lift the quarantine until all the boxes
inside the building are decontaminated.
"At this point,
it's in the same position as it was," he said about the building.
Rustine, president of
Crown Companies, could not be reached Thursday afternoon despite attempts by
phone.
Bio-ONE completed the
interior fumigation of the former home of the publisher of Star, National
Enquirer and Weekly World News, among other publications, July 12 with chlorine
dioxide gas. Company officials said the cleanup was successful. The original
plan called for the building's contents, packed up hastily in about 12,000
boxes, to be incinerated.
But cleanup was
stalled by a dispute over ownership of freelance photographers' photos in those
boxes. The tabloid photo collection contains historic images of the jet set and
celebrities such as James Cagney, Cary Grant, Jacqueline
Kennedy Onassis, Princess Diana and Elvis Presley.
After months of
delays, Bio-ONE and Rustine, who bought the building two years ago for $40,000,
agreed to decontaminate the photographs and everything else in the boxes. The
company created a decontamination chamber in the building's basement level to
fumigate about 305,500 pounds of files, photos, employees' personal belongings
and mundane office items.
Crews unloaded boxes
in April and started treating the contents with chlorine dioxide gas. Last
month, Bio-ONE hired a medical-waste company to help disinfect boxes that held
less-sensitive materials.
MANHATTAN — Richard
Sheirer, the former head of the city's Office of Emergency Management during
the 9/11 terror attacks, died Thursday of a heart attack on his way to work in
Manhattan.
Sheirer, 65, an
affable public servant who began public service decades ago as a FDNY fire
dispatcher, was named OEM chief in 2000 by Mayor Rudolph Giuliani.
He responded to the
burning Twin Towers with Giuliani and the two barely survived the harrowing
collapse when they ducked into a building as the 110 story south tower came
down around them. Sheirer was captured in an iconic photograph with a
surgical-masked Giuliani escaping the destruction as a cloud of dust engulfed
them.
Over the next year,
Sheirer helped guide the city’s sensitive overlapping responsibilities of
cleaning up massive destruction while ensuring the priority to the search for
the remains of thousands of victims including hundreds of firefighters and
cops.
After leaving his
city post, he joined Giuliani Partners as a senior vice president. He was
heading to work when he suffered a heart attack.
He was not the only
Sheirer to nearly die in the service of the city.
Sheirer’s son,
Andrew, 29, a firefighter, survived a fiery Brooklyn building collapse a few
years ago — an event that Sheirer described as more frightening for him that
his own brush with death on 9/11.
Since the attacks of
September 11th, a growing chorus of 9/11 researchers have cited Mayor
Giuliani's Office of Emergency Management (OEM) bunker on the 23rd floor of WTC
7 as a possible operations center for the 9/11 conspirators — a convenient
location from which to guide the "hijacked" planes to their targets
and fine-tune the demolition strategies for the Twin Towers. But this
intriguing (and, some might think, bizarre) hypothesis has always relied a
little too heavily on vague and circumstantial evidence. Here is what we do
know.
In 1996, by executive
order, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani created the Office of Emergency Management (OEM),
an agency designed to develop strategies and resources to deal with any
catastrophic event that might threaten the welfare of the city and its people.
Possible threats included natural disasters and terrorist attacks.
In June 1999 Giuliani
completed his $13 million emergency command bunker on the 23rd floor of World
Trade Center Building 7. This reinforced emergency control center — complete
with its own air, water and power supply — was intended to provide a secure
command post for leadership should such a disaster occur.
From the outset, the
location for the facility provoked controversy. The Police Commissioner's Chief
of Staff, Richard Sheirer, clashed bitterly with OEM director Jerry Hauer over
the planned site. Hauer's decision to locate the emergency command retreat in
the midst of the number one terrorist target in the western hemisphere — a
place likely to be destroyed (as it was) in the event of an actual attack —
was, Sheirer felt, surely an act of lunacy.
During the 9/11
Commission hearings, Senator Tim Roemer revisited this point: "Mr. Sheirer
... there was a decision made to locate the [bunker] right in the nest of where
the terrorists had struck in 1993. Why put it in one of the most likely places
where people are going to come back and hit us again ... ?" In response,
Sheirer was diplomatic: "I did not agree with it for the very reasons that
you said. I did not agree with it simply because it was on the 23rd floor of a
building. And do I look like a guy that wants to walk up 23 flights?"
Amazingly, when Roemer questioned Hauer himself the next day, he never
mentioned a word about the location of the OEM.
Sheirer's prophetic
concern, that an above-ground facility could sustain damage rendering it
inaccessible (and its elevators inoperable), was echoed in a NY Daily News
article that described the command post in WTC 7 as being "the first-ever
aerie-style bunker," the vast majority (or, apparently, all) of similar
facilities naturally having been built underground (and well removed from
potential hot spots).
We also know that one
of the two small fires later blamed for the collapse of the huge steel-framed
WTC 7 was on its seventh floor, the location of the OEM's emergency generators.
It's commonly thought by 9/11 researchers that these fires were ignited to
serve as "cover" for the building's forthcoming but utterly
inexplicable collapse. The fact that 1) this fire occurred on a floor that was
presumably secured and accessible only by OEM personnel, and 2) floor 7 housed
not only OEM generators but a "day" tank, presumably of diesel fuel,
is, some feel, additional evidence linking the OEM to the attacks.
But the point most
often promulgated in support of the theory at hand is the obvious controlled
demolition of WTC 7 itself. It's been argued that if the OEM was really just a
front for the conspirator's operations center, the facility would then need to
be destroyed should evidence of its existence be discovered. To adherents of
this theory, the intentional destruction of Building 7 was meant to dispense
with this problem and, most likely, a host of others.
There are two
tangential points worth mentioning as well. First, there have always been
questions as to why Flight 175 (or rather, the plane alleged to be UA Flight
175 in the official story) hit the South Tower at such a sharp angle, so unlike
the impact of (alleged) Flight 11. Once the "terrorists" had
determined the optimum trajectory for the impacts of the planes, you'd think they
would use the same plan for each building. But if Flight 175 hit the South
Tower high up and straight on, as Flight 11 did, the possibility that tons of
flaming debris might pass right through the building and impact WTC 7 is not
unreasonable. Look at the videos of the crash and examine the site diagram. The
dramatic images of rocketing debris passing through the South Tower (and
harmlessly off to the northeast) seem to confirm this possibility.
The second point
might help to resolve a question that's lingered in the years since the
attacks: Why did the South Tower collapse first when it was the second one to
be hit? Well, if you were in the OEM bunker putting the finishing touches on
the explosive systems in the Twin Towers, which one would you bring down first;
the dangerously close North Tower or the safely distant South Tower?
This point resonates
best when linked to a new and compelling theory: that personnel stationed in
the OEM bunker, first, demolished the South Tower and then exited WTC 7 to
prepare for the near simultaneous demolition of the North Tower and WTC 7 from
a secondary location — an attempt by the conspirators to complete the demo job
on the entire WTC in one fell swoop. Their efforts in regard to the North Tower
came off without a hitch. But when they attempted to "pull" Building
7 several minutes later — when its obvious demolition would be completely
hidden beneath the North Tower's enormous debris cloud — the demolition system
failed and the building remained intact. This controversial theory (see link
below) would certainly explain WTC 7's incongruous survival when every other
WTC building lay in ruins.
Whatever the case may
be, the priorities of psychopaths naturally tend toward self-preservation, and
the two peripheral (though intriguing) points mentioned above may be an
expression of this noble concern.
The fortuitous timing
of the OEM's construction — shortly before the most spectacular and audacious
terrorist attack in human history — seems, in retrospect, suspiciously
convenient. It's reminiscent of another similar "coincidence" often
cited by 9/11 skeptics; the acquisition of the entire WTC by Manhattan
developer Larry Silverstein just six weeks before 9/11 — the first time the WTC
had changed hands in thirty years and the first time it had ever come under
private control.
9/11 skeptics
naturally connect the suspiciously anomalous features of Giuliani's OEM with
their many other sober and well-researched doubts about the attacks. Whether or
not these points prove conclusively that the mayor's bunker was, in reality, a
nest of 9/11 conspirators, they would certainly appear to explain the poor
choice of locations for a command retreat that oddly rewrote the rules set in
place for similar facilities in the past.
At minimum, the
appalling lack of sound judgment on the part of Giuliani and Co. in regard to
the location of the OEM bunker is scandalous in and of itself. It would appear
that "America's Mayor" and "Man of the Year" Rudy
Giuliani's "relentless preparation" left much to be desired. Not
surprisingly, he sees it differently; "But if you have prepared for
everything else, all of a sudden you will appear like a genius when you answer
the unexpected question." Genius indeed.
The strange circumstances
surrounding the unusual collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 have become a
focal point for the researchers, writers and activists who have committed
themselves to reopening the books on 9/11. Many of these people believe that
the anomalous collapse of Building 7 is a 9/11 smoking gun, the Achilles' heel
in the official version of what occurred on that day. The obvious controlled
demolition of the building, proven so conclusively in several videos we have of
its collapse, has been supported by other key pieces of evidence as well. These
points taken together have proven to the satisfaction of most 9/11 researchers
that WTC 7 was brought down not by fires weakening its superstructure, as
claimed by the authorities, but was instead destroyed by an explosive system
that could only have been installed in the building prior to 9/11.
After allegedly being
struck by the North Tower's plummeting debris, fires were said to have been
ignited in WTC 7 that grew throughout the day and finally compromised the
building's steel structure, causing it to suddenly drop like a stone late in
the afternoon. But gaping holes in this scenario have done nothing but arouse
suspicion and disbelief in those who've carefully examined the evidence. Rather
than presenting a viable scenario for Building 7's destruction, the
inexplicable features of its collapse have instead helped to fuel broader
speculation that 9/11 was essentially an inside job, an attempt by traitors
within our own ranks to generate support for imperialist agendas that could
otherwise never withstand the light of day.
So, for those who
agree that WTC 7 was indeed brought down with a preplanted explosives system —
the last act in a "psy-op" that included the destruction of the
entire World Trade Center complex on 9/11 — then the next question becomes: Why
did the conspirators wait until the end of the day to do it? What possible
reason would they have to keep WTC 7 up all day long? In the four years or so
since the unofficial citizens investigation into 9/11 began, no one has offered
any sensible answers to this question. But the list of compelling reasons why
waiting seven hours after the attacks to bring Building 7 down was not a good
idea is long and hard to ignore.
If keeping WTC 7 up
for so long after the attacks has proven so threatening to the plot's success
and its subsequent coverup, why would the plotters have done it? Only two
possibilities logically present themselves; 1) there was some absolutely
critical but, as yet, undetermined reason to keep the building intact for so
long, or 2) it wasn't originally meant to come down when it did. Since
absolutely no compelling case has been made for the former possibility,
circumstances appear to support the latter. Is it possible that WTC 7's
explosive system didn't operate as planned, a disastrous glitch in an otherwise
well conceived plan? The following is a presentation of points that appear to
support this theory, one that paints a dramatically different picture of what
theorists previously thought had occurred throughout the day on 9/11.
Piecing together a
factual account of what happened that afternoon is certainly difficult without
confirmation from inside sources, but surely the known facts support a scenario
similar to this one: The conspirators, possibly operating out of the mayor's
Office of Emergency Management (OEM) on the 23rd floor of WTC 7, first,
orchestrated the collision of the planes into their targets, igniting fires
that spread throughout the upper floors of both towers and allegedly causing
structural damage to the building's steel superstructure. They then armed and
programmed the explosive system in the safely distant South Tower and, at the
optimum moment, pushed the button and brought the building crashing to the
ground.
Next, they programmed
the explosives in the North Tower and, if the conspirators were indeed situated
in the mayor's emergency bunker, chose this moment to exit WTC 7 and move to a
secure location before taking the next steps in their plan. This scenario is
supported by comments Rudy Giuliani made to ABC News and Peter Jennings;
"We were operating out of there [the OEM] when we were told that the World
Trade Center was gonna collapse, and it did collapse before we could get out of
the building." This confirms that Giuliani was indeed manning his OEM
bunker and that Tower Two (the first building to fall) collapsed before the
mayor and his people were able to (or chose to) exit WTC 7.
The perpetrators, now
relocated to a backup position, then prepared for the demolition of the North
Tower and WTC 7. This secondary control center may also have been referred to
in another report that the mayor was operating out of "a makeshift command
post at 75 Barkley Street," just north of and adjacent to WTC 7. There,
the conspirators waited for the appropriate moment and then remotely detonated
the explosives in the North Tower and brought it down as well, the building
shredding itself in a way oddly identical to the South Tower's collapse.
As the North Tower
fell, a massive cloud of debris shot into the sky and enshrouded most of lower
Manhattan, much as it had after the collapse of the South Tower. In seconds,
this dense cloud of powdered debris rose and obscured the surrounding
buildings. Then, when most of WTC 7 was hidden from view, the conspirators
pushed the button on the explosive system in this building as well, the thick
cloud of debris obscuring any signs that WTC 7 was being intentionally
demolished.
After the smoke had
cleared and the events of the day were relegated to history, any lingering
questions as to why WTC 7 came down seconds after Tower One's collapse would be
easily fielded with a list of invented but plausible excuses that, in the
absence of visual evidence to the contrary, would be quite believable. In the wake
of the attacks, the stories about debris from Tower One impacting the
electrical substation and 40,000 gallon deisel tank located on Building 7's
ground floors — causing massive internal explosions that kicked the building's
feet out from under it — would've made good sense, providing a satisfactory if
implausible excuse for those who had doubts about Building 7's demise. The 32
story Marriott Vista hotel, located between the Twin Towers, was completely
leveled by the collapse of these buildings and has been all but forgotten in a
world that barely recalls the life and times of WTC 7.
But, as fate would
have it, things didn't go according to plan. Incredibly, when the conspirators
pushed the button on WTC 7, nothing happened. For whatever reason, the explosive
system in WTC 7 had failed and the building stubbornly remained intact. In an
instant, the success of an elaborate plot to entirely destroy a New York City
landmark (one that, according to many people who lived and worked in the area,
had been obsolete for years and become a blight on lower Manhattan) had fallen
into confusion.
Faced with a plan
that had gone terribly awry, the conspirators then scrambled to bring the
demolition system in WTC 7 back online, a task that may have taken hours, well
past the time when the handy cloud of debris had dissipated. In the meantime, a
new scenario had to be concocted to "cover" what would otherwise be
the forthcoming but completely unexplained collapse of WTC 7. In their
desperation and haste, the perps finally made the decision to reenter Building
7 and set fires that they hoped would spread and eventually serve as a pretext
for the building's collapse. The fire-caused-the-collapse scenario would likely
serve them well considering the fact that they'd used the same scheme in the
towers earlier that day.
Though its difficult
to pin down exactly what happened next, some facts support the following
scenario, or variations thereof: The perpetrators reentered WTC 7 and climbed
to the 7th floor, the location of the OEM's emergency generators (this floor
would become the scene of the lower of the two fires that were soon to be
burning in the building). If, as many theorists suggest, the conspirators were
indeed OEM men, they would not only have had access to this floor (in a
building that had been evacuated and presumably secured), they would also have
had deisel fuel in abundance to use as an accellerant to spark their dummy
fire.
Next, they ascended
to floor 12, one of three floors occupied by the SEC, and sparked blazes in
this location as well (floor 12 was the location of the upper of the two fires
that were photographed burning in the building). Besides creating another flash
point for fire, this may have been done to assure that, in case the explosive
system failed again, incriminating evidence in this location was certain to be
destroyed no matter what might occur. The conspirators then exited the building
and watched the fires grow, hopefully to a crescendo that would serve as a
plausible pretext for the building's collapse.
Eventually the
explosive system was brought back online and the only thing left to do was wait
for the fires to build. But, as we saw, the fires never grew to convincing
proportions. Despite their best efforts and training, the conspirators were
completely unprepared for this contingency, and it showed. Even as late as 3
PM, the fires in WTC 7 were still marginal and struggling. Unlike the towers,
these fires were oxygen starved by windows that hadn't been shattered and
couldn't be opened. In fact, the fires remained so small they were barely
visible from outside the building until quite late in the day and never
approached the size necessary to pass them off as the catalyst for the building's
collapse.
The insignificant
fires burning in WTC 7 have always been a sticking point for 9/11 researchers
who rightfully doubt that fires so small could ever have brought the building
down. Indeed, in all the history of firefighting, no steel-framed high-rise has
ever collapsed due to fire. Even in the case of major infernos that entirely
engulfed such buildings in the past, no office fire had ever burnt hot enough
to compromise the strength of the massive steel beams that support these
structures. The physics simply do not support this phenomenon — that is, of
course, with one exception. On 9/11, the laws of physics were apparently
suspended and three such anomalies occurred. Those who argue that the towers
fell because the planes caused structural damage in addition to fire damage
cannot, however, apply this theory to the anomalous collapse of WTC 7.
But, despite the
difficulties confronting the perpetrators, the bottom line was that Building 7
had to go. If WTC 7 was indeed an operations and control center for this
sprawling conspiracy, it was, essentially, a crime scene that needed to be
destroyed. It was also the only WTC building left standing, making the plan to
level the entire complex incomplete. This theory is supported by the fact that,
throughout the day, absolutely no effort was made to save this extremely
sensitive and valuable building (one that housed several key governmental and
intelligence agencies) that was being threatened by only modest fires. This is
all the more baffling when you consider that WTC 7 must have had a built in
fire suppression system of some kind as well, one that presumably would have
made short work of such a marginal threat.
So, despite the fact
that, even towards the end of the day, the fires in WTC 7 remained barely
significant (from a fire engineering standpoint), the culprits finally made the
decision to pull the plug on WTC 7 and rely on their formidable propaganda
machinery to bulldoze any doubts that might arise. The conspirators couldn't
logically wait any longer because a burgeoning army of firefighters and rescue
workers had recovered from their shock and were descending on Ground Zero to
begin the lengthy search and rescue effort that began that evening. For those
who desperately needed the building destroyed, it was then or never and, in an
effort to finally wrap things up, they put the demolition process in motion by
clearing personnel from around the base of Building 7. Then, when they could
wait no longer, they put an end to the spectacle at 5:25 PM, dropping Building
7 neatly within its footprint, an obvious controlled implosion so perfect it
would have earned any demolition company a bonus.
Needless to say, the
theory outlined above is a significant departure from beliefs previously held
by the broad community of 9/11 conspiracy advocates concerning what happened to
WTC 7 that afternoon. Any paradigm shift of this magnitude relating to an event
as grave as 9/11 will likely undergo intense scrutiny, as it should. But we
needn't go far to find precedent for the scenario outlined above. All we need
do is go back in time six years, to 1995.
There are many
intriguing correlations between the September 11th attacks on the WTC and the
bombing of the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City. Both events enabled draconian
domestic security provisions to be signed into law shortly thereafter. Both
sites were quickly and discretely cleaned up by the same company, Controlled
Demolition, Inc., whose conduct, in both cases, sparked criticism from fire
investigators who felt that not enough had been done to examine the evidence.
In addition, both attacks employed much the same scheme: a primary event
"covered" the real cause of the destruction — explosive systems
preplanted in the buildings. In OK City, a rental truck packed with crude
explosives "covered" the simultaneous detonation of bombs planted in
the Murrah Building. In Manhattan, two passenger jets caused destruction that
"covered" the tower's eventual demolition — again, the result of
bombs previously planted throughout the Twin Towers.
But there's another
parallel that bears examination, one that does much to support the theory at
hand. After the smoke had cleared in downtown OK City, it was discovered that
two of the bombs planted in the Murrah Building had failed to explode, a fact
that was reported nightly on local TV news programs for a week or two after the
bombing. And these reports were more than just rumors. Sources included FBI
agents, police and firefighters. The OK City bomb squad was called out as well
and got to work disarming these charges before they could do any more damage.
Even Oklahoma governor Frank Keating confirmed the story to the media before it
disappeared from the airwaves forever (Alex Jones presents an excellent montage
of these reports in his video 9/11 The Road to Tyranny).
Consider how this
astonishing fact conflicts with what are by now historical accounts that the
building was destroyed only by the crude fertilizer bomb constructed and
detonated by lone wolf Timothy McVeigh. And any allusions we may have had that
the guys who orchestrated the attacks of 9/11 were criminal masterminds who had
covered every angle is neatly dispelled when we consider this previously
botched job. Certainly this kind of breakdown on the part of shady, covert operatives,
or "asteroids," is not unprecedented.
Imagine the state of
mind of the conspirators as they watched their plan to destroy one of the
world's most recognizable landmarks (and, of course, violently murder thousands
of innocent people) unfold before their eyes. Even the most jaded covert
operative wouldn't likely remain unrattled after having perpetrated such an
outrage. Again, the idea that these guys were able to calmly meet every
contingency or work magic under that kind of pressure certainly shouldn't be
taken for granted. And let's not forget what Deepthroat said to Bob Woodward
during his investigation into yet another botched "op": "Truth
is, these aren't very bright guys and things got out of hand."
And well they may
have. Reentering Building 7 in a spur of the moment attempt to ignite crude
fires is a potentially dangerous enterprise. Whatever the conspirators may have
used to spark their fires, the potential for trouble with an ill-considered
plan for arson is high. Reports that a body was found in the remains of
Building 7 are intriguing for a number of reasons, not the least of which is
that other reports claim that there were no casualties in WTC 7 whatsoever.
Nonetheless, the US House of Representatives website posts a tribute to Secret Service
Special Officer Craig Miller whose body was found in the rubble of Building 7
after he'd apparently perished during the "rescue effort" that day.
But what really happened to Officer Miller — Secret Service Special Officer
Miller? Not a firefighter. Not a rescue worker or cop — a secret service
special agent.
Who on earth were you
rescuing, Officer Miller? WTC 7 had been evacuated. Could this man have been an
amateur arsonist who got too close to his fire? Could he have sabotaged the
explosive system in WTC 7 because he got cold feet about his role in one of the
cruelest deceptions in history and paid for it with his life? This man's
autopsy records might shed some light on the matter. The story of WTC lessee
Larry Silverstein claiming to have 'pulled' WTC 7 is well known among 9/11
researchers. The only explanation that's ever been offered in his defense was
that he meant 'pull' the firefighters out of the "dangerously
burning" building. But if that were true, why didn't Officer Miller get
the message?
Not only were the
suspicious facts of his death ignored by the media but Officer Miller was then
posthumously granted hero status as someone who had allegedly died during the
phantom "rescue effort" in this empty building. We saw this phenomenon
applied to many key governmental figures in the wake of 9/11 — officials who,
instead of being held accountable for their criminal negligence in regard to
the attacks, were afterwards sold as "American heroes" and sometimes
even promoted. And, as you'll see, nowhere was this ploy more at work than in
the case of "Man of the Year" and "America's Mayor," Rudy
Giuliani.
WTC 7, or the Solomon
Brothers Building, had been owned by Manhattan real estate mogul Larry
Silverstein since the '80s and was the HQ for his development company,
Westfield America, for years. Building 7 was also the NYC home of the Secret
Service, SEC, DoD, IRS, CIA and a handful of private financial institutions.
But WTC 7 also housed Rudy Giuliani's Office of Emergency Management (OEM),
long considered by theorists as a possible operations center for the attacks.
This $13 million doomsday bunker, meant to be used in the event of a
catastrophe like a terrorist attack or natural disaster, was oddly located in
the midst of the number one terrorist target in the western hemisphere. Isn't
one ill-advised to locate their emergency command facility where it will likely
be destroyed in the event of an actual emergency? This incomprehensible choice
of venues for the mayor's emergency bunker is even more troubling when you
consider the fact that the WTC had already been attacked once in 1993. This
extremely unheroic plan to locate the OEM at the WTC then went on to prove its
absurdity on 9/11 when, according to the official account, the occupants of the
OEM were forced to abandon it after the first tower collapsed. This and other
compelling points support the hypothesis mentioned above, that the OEM was just
a front for the conspirators attack operations center. Now that would explain
the poor choice of locations.
Many researchers
believe that shadowy elements within the agencies housed in WTC 7 are prime
suspects in this sprawling conspiracy. To these theorists, Building 7 is a kind
of nexus for the planning and execution of what may well have been the most
audacious "black-op" or, more accurately, "false flag"
operation in the history of covert actions. If they are correct, Building 7 was
literally a nest of suspicious activity and its remaining intact may well have
been a catastrophe for those who were counting on its destruction.
As 9/11 researchers
are well aware, Larry Silverstein took over control of the entire World Trade
Center just a few weeks before the attacks of 9/11, the first time the WTC had
changed hands in thirty years and the first time it had come under private
control. In an interview in a 2002 PBS documentary called America Rebuilds, he
described being on the phone with the FDNY commander on the afternoon of 9/11
and coming to the conclusion that there had "been such terrible loss of
life maybe the smartest thing to do is, is 'pull' it," (referring to WTC
7). Then, according to Silverstein, "they made that decision to 'pull' and
we watched the building collapse" (the same documentary quotes a demo worker,
"well, we're getting ready to 'pull' building 6," moments before its
burnt out carcass was demolished — a comment that appears to connect the word
"pull" even more closely to the actual act of demolition).
Many have asked how
he could possibly have been so careless as to make such an admission publicly.
But what if circumstances compelled him to do so? What if his comments were a
discrete response to growing suspicions surrounding the botched attempt to
'pull' WTC 7 earlier in the day? The powers-that-be have brazenly used PBS
programming to spin other aspects of 9/11. The NOVA program that espoused the
theory of the "pancaking" of the Twin Tower's floors is infamous in
the 9/11 skeptics community. PBS programs relating to 9/11 typically feature
"experts" who unanimously support the party line.
With WTC 7's obvious
demolition caught on film from at least three excellent perspectives, it's an
understatement to say that the conspirators had a big problem on their hands.
Could it be that Silverstein's comments about 'pulling' WTC 7 were a carefully
choreographed "hang out" of the issue? Using Karl Rove-like sleight
of hand, he offers a vague accounting of the anomaly delivered to us on an
almost subconscious level. Paradoxically, his comments may have been intended
to steer us in the exact opposite direction — that, despite how it may have
appeared, heroes in high places stepped up and made the tough choices.
The expression 'pull'
relates to the word 'demolition' in much the same way that the expression 'wind
up' relates to the word 'pitch.' In this sense, Silverstein's use of the word
'pull' to mean 'demolition' seems clear and may also have served to cover the
sudden and suspicious evacuation of personnel from around the base of WTC 7
shortly before its bizarre suicide. A photographer on the scene described the
evacuation of firefighters as they "prepared for the collapse of Building
7...I was 150 yards away when I saw the firefighters raising the flag."
What? It's understandable that, given the events of the day, the authorities
might consider preparing for this extremely remote possibility, just to be
safe. But for these guys to 'pull' Building 7 and then have it come down right
on cue when there's absolutely no precedent for such a phenomenon is just too
much coincidence to stomach.
There are other
factors to be considered as well. The alleged damage to Building 7's south
face, caused by debris from the collapse of Tower One, was the official cause
of the fires that the authorities then sanctioned as being the
"likely" cause of the building's collapse. Hundreds of photos of
Ground Zero taken throughout the day show every detail of the devastation, yet
pictures of Building 7's damaged south face, "raging" fires and
billowing smoke are conspicuously absent. Certainly this spectacle would have
caught the eye of any photographer recording the aftermath of the attacks.
Doesn't this lack of photographic evidence support the idea that, after things
went wrong that morning, photographers on the scene would have their materials
confiscated and vetted by the authorities, much as they had been at the
Pentagon (and Oklahoma City for that matter)? Any photographs of the suspicious
lack of damage to Building 7 (evidence that would prove the official account
untenable) would disappear forever. Isn't it extremely suspicious that
absolutely no pictures of WTC 7's south face have ever been released to the
public, an astounding revelation when you consider the key role this alleged
debris damage played in the days events.
In addition, aerial
photos of Ground Zero appear to confirm that the debris raining down from Tower
One's collapse fell well short of WTC 7. These photos show a huge crater in the
roof of WTC 6 (the low-rise building standing between Tower One and Building
7), the result of damage caused by this debris. This crater provides a clear
imprint of the limits of the destruction and, despite some bits and pieces of
rubble that made their way across a full city block to WTC 7's location, the
bulk of the truly destructive wreckage clearly fell safely short of Building 7.
Another even more
stunning fact is that pictures of the two buildings flanking WTC 7 clearly show
that they were barely scratched by the debris that had somehow, according to
Popular Mechanics magazine, "scooped out" 25% of Building 7's depth.
In fact, both of these structures still stand in near pristine condition,
shoulder to shoulder with WTC 7, despite their being well within the same
radius of destruction. And what about the debris from the identical South Tower
(or Tower Two)? Did it cause similar damage to its neighbors? Apparently not.
The photos in question also show that the Banker's Trust Building, a building
similar in size to WTC 7 (but not a WTC building), standing just across the
street from the South Tower, suffered no such catastrophic damage and it
certainly didn't catch on fire and collapse.
And another thing. We
all remember 9/11. The eyes of the world were focused on lower Manhattan.
Helicopters were circling the area all day long, the television coverage never
let up, not even for commercials. Are we really to believe that no aerial video
exists of WTC 7 going down, especially when the FDNY was apparently preparing
for its collapse — film clips that would surely tell the story of what happened
to Building 7 and clearly show the damage (or lack thereof) on the south face
of WTC 7? As mentioned before, Building 7's fires (meager though they were) and
its billowing cloud of black smoke would surely have attracted the attention of
videographers recording the aftermath of the attacks from above — dramatic
images reminiscent of the smoking towers aired earlier that day. It's always
been a keen frustration to 9/11 researchers (and a chilling example of media
suppression) that the only videos we do have of Building 7 falling to the
ground were all distant shots taken from the north, precisely the wrong angle
to shed light on the matter.
If dropping Building
7 late in the day on 9/11 was really part of the original plan, wouldn't the
plotters have concocted a far more believable and well-constructed scenario to
"cover" its collapse (much as they had for the Twin Towers and the
Murrah Building), especially when they knew that Ground Zero would be center
stage on every TV and computer screen on the planet that night? Instead we got
tiny, insignificant fires, and a long list of nagging questions that have only
served to arouse widespread suspicion.
What does the body of
a Secret Service Special Agent in the rubble of WTC 7 most likely indicate; 1)
that a well-planned scheme had just gone off without a hitch, or 2) that some
kind of major breakdown had occurred that day? How could Officer Miller have
died except by malfeasance? WTC 7 had been evacuated before it was hit by
falling debris and the lazy fires building in its belly couldn't possibly have
caught a healthy Secret Service agent off-guard. Under the circumstances, isn't
the absurd claim that this man died during the "rescue effort" that
day clearly a smokescreen for something that's being carefully kept under
wraps?
Isn't it odd that the
FDNY seemingly just gave up on such an exceedingly important and valuable
building as WTC 7, one that had only marginal fires burning on two floors?
Wouldn't the conspirators have preferred wrapping things up in one fell swoop
that morning rather than prolonging the spectacle any longer than necessary?
Why wasn't Rudy Giuliani kept well away from what was obviously an attack on
lower Manhattan? And the bewildering notion that the conspirators originally planned
to spend the day in the OEM orchestrating the aftermath of the attacks in the
upper floors of a burning building is really stretching credulity to the
breaking point.
All of the anomalies
listed above and the many disturbing questions following in the wake of WTC 7's
suspicious collapse would have been neatly and easily dispensed with had the
building been demolished while hidden beneath the dust cloud kicked up by Tower
One's collapse. But with clear video footage of Building 7's belated and obvious
demolition, the talk of the electrical substation and deisel tank exploding and
causing the collapse has always rung hollow and has generated rather than
mollified suspicion.
Nothing about WTC 7
remaining intact throughout the day before finally and obviously being
demolished has ever made any sense at all. But if WTC 7 was brought down as it
was hidden by the debris cloud rising from the rubble of Tower One, no one
would have asked another question about it and what many theorists consider to
be a 9/11 smoking gun would have vanished into obscurity. Certainly this theory
is supported by the evidence and deserves consideration by the broad community
of 9/11 skeptics.
9/11 conspiracy
theories dispute the widely accepted account that the September 11 attacks were
perpetrated solely by al-Qaeda[1] without any detailed advance knowledge on the
part of any government agency.[2] Proponents of these conspiracy theories claim
there are inconsistencies in the official conclusions, or evidence which was
overlooked.[3] In a 2008 global poll of 16,063 people in 17 countries,
majorities in only nine countries believe al Qaeda was behind the attacks. 46%
of those surveyed believed al-Qaeda was responsible for the attacks, 15%
believed the U.S. government was responsible, 7% believed Israel was and
another 7% believed some other perpetrator, other than al-Qaeda, was
responsible. The poll found that respondents in the Middle East were especially
likely to name a perpetrator other than al-Qaeda.[4]
The most prominent
conspiracy theory is that the collapse of the Twin Towers and 7 World Trade
Center were the result of a controlled demolition rather than structural
failure due to impact and fire.[5][6] Another prominent belief is that the
Pentagon was hit by a missile launched by elements from inside the U.S.
government[7][8] or that a commercial airliner was allowed to do so via an
effective standdown of the American military.[9][10] Possible motives claimed
by conspiracy theorists for such actions include justifying the invasions of
Afghanistan and Iraq as well as geostrategic interests in the Mideast, such as
pipeline plans launched in the early 1990s by Unocal and other oil
companies.[11] Other conspiracy theories revolve around authorities having
advance knowledge of the attacks and deliberately ignoring or helping to assist
the attackers.[3][12][13]
The National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the technology magazine
Popular Mechanics have investigated and rejected the claims made by 9/11
conspiracy theories.[14][15] The civil engineering community accepts that the
impacts of jet aircraft at high speeds in combination with subsequent fires,
not controlled demolition, led to the collapse of the Twin Towers.[16] This
also was the conclusion of the 9/11 Commission, chaired by Governor Thomas
Kean.
It has been claimed
that Israeli agents may have had foreknowledge of the attacks. Four hours after
the attack, the FBI arrested five Israelis who had been filming the smoking
skyline from the roof of a white van in the parking lot of an apartment
building, for "puzzling behavior". The Israelis were videotaping the
events, and one bystander said they acted in a suspicious manner: "They
were like happy, you know ... They didn't look shocked to me. I thought it was
very strange."[80][81][82] While The Forward, a New York Jewish news
magazine, reported that the FBI concluded that two of the men were Israeli
intelligence operatives, a spokesperson for the Israeli Embassy in the United
States said that they had not been involved in any intelligence operation in
the United States.[80] The FBI eventually concluded that the five Israelis had
no foreknowledge of the attacks.
A directed-energy
weapon (DEW) emits energy in an aimed direction without the means of a
projectile. It transfers energy to a target for a desired effect. Intended
effects may be non-lethal or lethal. The technology has been available for
several decades in the United States Department of Energy National
Laboratories,[1] NATO and Czech Ministry of Defence.[2] Currently, the
technology is being considered for non-military use to protect Earth from
asteroids.[3]
The energy can come
in various forms:
Electromagnetic
radiation, in lasers or masers
Particles with mass,
in particle beam weapons (Technically a form of micro-projectile weapon)
Sound, in sonic
weapons
In science fiction,
these weapons are sometimes known as death rays or rayguns and are usually
portrayed as projecting energy at a person or object to kill or destroy. Many
modern examples of science fiction have more specific names for directed energy
weapons, due to research advances. Flamethrowers do not fall into this
category, as they are actually projectile weapons; the projectile (gas or
liquid) is simply on fire.
John Hutchison's life
changed drastically in 1979 when, upon starting up an array of high-voltage
equipment, he felt something hit his shoulder. He threw the piece of metal back
to where it seemed to have originated, and it flew up and hit him again. This
was how he originally discovered fundamental frequencies can shield gravity.
When his Tesla coils, electrostatic generator, and other equipment created a
complex electromagnetic field, heavy pieces of metal levitated and shot toward
the ceiling, and some pieces shredded. Upon analysis and thorough
investigation, the Canadian government dubbed this phenomenon the
Hutchison-Effect. What is the Hutchison effect? As with much of the new-energy
field, no one can say for sure. Some theorists think the effect is the result
of opposing electromagnetic fields canceling each other out, creating a
powerful flow of space energy. The Canadian government also reported invisible
samples phasing in and out of existence. A Vancouver businessman, George
Hathaway, heard about the Hutchison Effect in 1980, contacted Hutchison, and
brought in a consulting engineer from Boeing Aerospace, and the Canadian
government to form a company that would promote technology developed from the
effect. Many different political factors ensured Hutchison would not be allowed
to continue in his research unless he signed agreements with either the
Canadian government or the U.S. military. John refused. During one of John's
overseas trips to Germany, the Canadian government seized the opportunity to
acquire all of John's priceless replications of Nikola Tesla's equipment by
paying off his "partner" George Liscazis upwards of 70 million
dollars and creating a false PCB scandal so they could use the local press to
justify their actions and hide the true nature of what the government was
actually removing from John's Lab located at 13th and Kingsway, Vancouver B.C.
After many more years of experiments, demonstrations and lectures in other
countries such as U.S.A. Germany and Japan, Hutchison returned to Vancouver in
1991. Piece by piece, he built out of surplus Navy equipment what now had
become a landmark in New Westminster, British Colombia. John has built himself
an apartment laboratory second to none. It took several years before he could
reestablish his collection, however despite many obstacles , most political,
John, until recently had his apartment lab equipped to perform for all types of
media demonstrating the Hutchison Effect. The Mayor of New Westminster forced
him to cease in 2006, then in 2010 John was forcibly removed by order of the
Mayor directing the fire marshal to remove him from his famous apartment lab on
5th Ave. Under the Experiments Section, you will find John and friends are
still developing new ideas, and historically engineering suppressed and lost
technologies for release and scrutiny by the general public. The Egyptian
Technology Section, and the Atlantean Technology Section are favorite topics,
of ours and the fans. In John's newsletter, he has released never before seen,
previously classified documentation from his own works as well as some of the
Department of Defense documentation he has acquired over the years. from
government sources, with or without official authorization. Please enjoy this
independent scientist's website and all it has to offer. John has remained
independent regardless of multi million dollar offers to conceal his findings
from the general public. NASA is among the agencies he has turned down, as well
as both the superpowers offerings to privatize and or militarize his
inventions. John believes in a world of free energy and the marvels of anti-
gravity for the general public, not just those in positions of power. Now that
the government has destroyed his third laboratory, and again taken his home
from him, where did John end up with his tiny fixed income and boxes of his
broken dreams? A German research team gave him enough seed money to take his
whole show on the road with his new wife Nancy. As John travels the U.S.A. in
his newly converted S.W.A.T. bus, he treats polluted waters of the gulf with
the Hutchison Effect and researches different possible pollution solutions from
his mobile command center. He also remains hopeful his inventions one day will
ease the burden and suffering, and enrich all of mankind all around the world,
rich or poor.
NOTE: See The
Hutchison Effect - iron bar warping video on youtube
In his article “False
Flag Operations, 9-11 and the Exopolitical Perspective” Dr. Michael E. Salla
states, “The fourth exopolitical factor [of false flag operations] concerns the
use of weather modification technologies that former Secretary of State William
Cohen confirmed as existing in 1997.” The “weather modification technologies”
Dr. Salla is referring to include directed energy weapons which, by the
evidence, have been used in scalar, weather warfare and seismic false flag
operations such as December 26, 2004 (Boxing Day) Indonesian Tsunami, the China
earthquake of May 12, 2008, the Haiti earthquake of January 12, 2010, and the
Chile earthquake of February 27, 2010.
Dr. Judy Wood, a
former assistant professor at Clemson University, has developed compelling
evidence that a directed energy weapon turned the physical matter of the World
Trade Center towers into nanoparticles through the process of molecular
dissociation. Dr. Wood demonstrates
clear evidence that cannot be accounted for by the official 9/11 Commission
explanation or alternative theory of military planes, cruise missiles, or other
projectiles hitting the World Trade Center buildings, or a controlled
demolition caused solely by "advanced explosive nano-thermitic composite
material found in the World Trade Center dust," or solely by 4th
generation mini-nukes.
In a February 22,
2010 Washington Times article, Richard Gage, a San Francisco architect and
founder of the nonprofit Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, states,
"’Government officials will be notified that 'Misprision of Treason,' U.S.
Code 18 (Sec. 2382), is a serious federal offense, which requires those with
evidence of treason to act,’
CNN and BBC announce
the collapse of WTC building 7 a half-hour before its collapse?
Garden Plot / CONPLAN 2502 (Civil Disturbance Operations)
Use of the military to support civil
authorities stems from core national values as expressed in the Constitution.
Article I, Section 8 states, “Congress shall have power... to provide for calling forth the Militia to execute laws of the Union, suppress
Insurrections, and repel Invasions.” Article II, Section 3 states the
President, “...shall take care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” The 10th
Amendment reads, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by it, are reserved to the States
respectively...,” providing the basis that Federal government support,
including DoD assistance, is provided in support of State and local
authorities.
The President is authorized by the
Constitution and Title 10 (10 USC 331–334) to suppress insurrections,
rebellions, and domestic violence. After issuing a Cease and Desist Order, the
President issues an executive order that directs the Attorney General and the SECDEF to take appropriate steps to disperse
insurgents and restore law and order. The Attorney General is then responsible
to coordinate the federal response to domestic civil disturbances. The
restrictions of the Posse Comitatus Act no longer apply to federal troops
executing the orders of the President to quell the disturbance in accordance
with Rules of the Use of Force (RUF) approved by the DoD General Counsel and
the Attorney General.
USNORTHCOM Concept Plan (CONPLAN) 2502 (Civil Disturbance Operations), is the plan
for supporting state and local authorities during civil disturbances. This plan
serves as the foundation for any CDO operation and standardizes most activities
and command relationships. Tasks performed by military forces may include joint
patrolling with law enforcement officers; securing key buildings, memorials,
intersections and bridges; and acting as a quick reaction force. The JTF
commander, a general officer, coordinates all DoD support with the Senior
Civilian Representative of the Attorney General (SCRAG). DoD will usually
establish a JTF headquarters near where the Attorney General’s local
representative is based.
Garden Plot is the DoD Civil Disturbance Plan,
the generic Operations Plan [OPLAN] for military support related to domestic
civil disturbances. The department of the Army Civil Disturbance Plan (DA
GARDEN PLOT), is the governing publication for planning, deployment,
employment, and redeployment of federal military resources involved in
countering domestic civil disturbances. Military assistance to Federal, State,
and local government (including government of U.S. territories) and their law enforcement agencies for civil disturbances and civil disturbance
operations, including response to terrorist incidents, are referred to
cumulatively as "Military Assistance for Civil Disturbances
(MACDIS)."
The DoD Strategy for Homeland Defense and
Civil Support (2005) defines Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA) as,
“DoD support, including federal military forces, the Department’s career
civilian and contractor personnel, and DoD agency and component assets, for
domestic emergencies and for designated law enforcement and other activities.”
It notes that DSCA is also often referred to as Civil Support.
There has been discussion in some DoD offices
of distinguishing between the two terms: Civil Support as a total force
construct with DSCA involving Federal support only and not include the National
Guard in Title 32 or State Active Duty status. But as of 2008 they remained
essentially synonymous.
Until the 2005 DoD Strategy for Homeland
Defense and Civil Support, the term Military Assistance to Civil Authorities
(MACA) was essentially synonymous with Civil Support and served as an
overarching construct that included three subordinate mission sets: Military
Support to Civil Authorities (MSCA), Military Assistance to Civil Disturbances
(MACDIS) and Military Assistance to Civil Law Enforcement
Agencies(MSCLEA).
Defense Support of Civil Authority (DSCA) has replaced MACA. The term MACDIS
has been replaced by Civil Disturbance Operations (CDO).
Civil disturbances are riots, acts of
violence, insurrections, unlawful obstructions or assemblages, or other disorders
prejudicial to public law and order. The term civil disturbance includes all
domestic conditions requiring or likely to require the use of Federal Armed
Forces pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 15 of Title 10, United States
Code.
The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 (PCA),
subsequent amendments and policy decisions prohibits the use of federal
military forces (to include Reserve forces) to perform internal police
functions. PCA thus restricts the type of support DoD can provide domestic law
enforcement organizations. There are a wide variety of exceptions to the PCA
and the law essentially gives the President all the authority he needs to
employ DoD forces inside the U.S. although there may appropriately be political
consequence that would inhibit such employment.
The term posse comitatus [po.si komitei.tAs,
-tius , [med. (Anglo) L., force of the county: see prec. and county.] applies
to the 'The force of the county’; the body of men above the age of fifteen in a
county (exclusive of peers, clergymen, and infirm persons), whom the sheriff
may summon or ‘raise’ to repress a riot or for other purposes; also, a body of
men actually so raised and commanded by the sheriff.
In the United States the posse comitatus was
perhaps most important on the Western frontier (there known as a posse), but it
has been preserved as an institution in many states. Sheriffs and other peace
officers have the authority to summon the power of the county. In some counties
it is a crime to refuse assistance. In general, members of a posse comitatus
have been permitted to use force if necessary to achieve a posse’s legitimate
ends, but state laws differ as to the legal liability of one who in good faith
aids an officer himself acting beyond his authority.
Congress sought to terminate the prevalent use
of federal soldiers in civilian law enforcement roles in the South during the
Reconstruction Period following the Civil War. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878
created general prohibition against use of military personnel in civilian law
enforcement. The most renowned statutory exception has been traditionally
referred to as The Insurrection Acts (10 USC 331–334) that were modified and
renamed to Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order by the 2007 National
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The new language clarifies Presidential
authority to invoke the acts for situations resulting from natural disasters
and other emergencies.
The President is authorized by the
Constitution and laws of the United States to employ the Armed Forces of the
United States to suppress insurrections, rebellions, and domestic violence
under various conditions and circumstances. Planning and preparedness by the
Federal Government and the Department of Defensefor
civil disturbances are important due to the potential severity of the
consequences of such events for the Nation and the population.
Military resources may be employed in support
of civilian law enforcement operations in the 50 States, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the U.S. territories and
possessions only in the parameters of the Constitution and laws of the United
States and the authority of the President and the Secretary of Defense,
including delegations of that authority through this Directive or other means.
The primary responsibility for protecting life
and property and maintaining law and order in the civilian community is vested
in the State and local governments. Supplementary responsibility is vested by
statute in specific Agencies of the Federal Government other than the Department of Defense. The President has
additional powers and responsibilities under the Constitution of the United
States to ensure that law and order are maintained.
The mission at NORTHCOM is to anticipate
events in the homeland and to be prepared to respond, to either prevent the
attacks or defeat them if they occur and then to mitigate the consequences of
those attacks should they occur. In addition, NORTHCOM has a secondary mission
to provide defense support to civil authorities. It's an old mission that the
Army used to lump together under the Garden Plot scenario, in that there was
always a brigade that was prepared to respond to civil disturbances.
The secretary of the Army is the Executive
Agent for DOD in matters pertaining to civil disturbances. The U. S. Army
Director of Military Support (DOMS) is the action agent and the DOD point of
contact in all such matters.
The Secretary of the Army as the DOD Executive
Agent, will, in the event of a civil disturbance within CONUS, exercise through
the Chief of Staff, U.S. Army, the direction of those forces committed to him
by the military services. In the event of civil disturbances in U. S.
territories and possessions and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico outside CONUS,
the DOD Executive Agent exercises the direction of those forces assigned or
committed to the commanders of unified or specified commands.
The Coast Guard,
as well as the other Services, is required to maintain support plans. GARDEN
PLOT is the name applicable to such service plans. Standard Operating
Procedures (SOPs) of operational commanders should reflect guidance herein.
Military assistance to civil authorities is a peacetime matter, not to be
confused with military support of civil defense (MSCD), which is a wartime
function.
DOD task force operations to quell civil
disturbances off military property can be initiated only by Presidential order.
Cases of such initiation in the past occurred during the urban political and
racial unrest in the Vietnam era when federal troops were deployed on a number
of occasions. GARDEN PLOT operations may include terrorist incidents, though
the FBI, not the Army, will then be the lead agent. In the event of civil
unrest upon the high seas and waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United
States, where in the Coast Guard has standing statutory responsibility, Coast
Guard units will in all likelihood be legitimately involved in law enforcement
operations well before any Presidential invocation of civil disturbance plans.
The Coast Guard character for law enforcement
and cooperation with civil authorities is much broader than that of DOD
services. DOD services are subject to law enforcement restrictions that are not
applicable to the Coast Guard. For policy reasons (i.e., to ensure unity of
command and control), there may be instances when these restrictions are
imposed upon Coast Guard personnel under a DOD task force commander's
operational control.
Cooperation with other services in GARDEN PLOT
operations is paramount and requires particular understanding of task force
constitution and chains of command. Civil disturbance planning cannot be
deliberate in that force mix and locales are obviously indeterminate. Guidance
herein will provide a basis for Coast Guard participation and related area and
district supplemental instructions or other directives. Actual Coast Guard
participation will in all likelihood be the logical extension of traditional
law enforcement functions.
The right of the United States to use federal
forces to protect federal property and functions is an accepted principle of
government. However, this use of federal forces is warranted only when the need
for protection of Federal property or functions clearly exists and State or
local authorities cannot or will not give adequate protection. Prior to the
designation of a civil disturbance objective area and employment of federal
forces by Presidential order, the Army may reinforce other federal forces
defending federal property.
Elements of the U. S. Army Intelligence and
Security Command (USAINSCOM) maintain liaison with federal, state, and
municipal investigative and police agencies and on order of Department of the
Army, collect and report civil disturbance information in response to requests
from DA, the Personal Liaison Officer for the Chief of Staff, Army (PLOCSA),
task force commanders, CONUS Army commanders, and other specified commands.
Military intelligence units have a very
limited role during domestic support operations other than civil disturbance
operations. U.S. Dep't of Defense, Reg. 5240.1-R, Procedures Governing the
Activities of DOD Intelligence Components that Affect United States Persons
(Dec. 1982)[hereinafter DOD 5240.1-R], does not apply to DOD intelligence
components when they perform authorized law enforcement activities, including
civil disturbance activities. In such cases, DOD intelligence components may
collect, report, process, and store information on the activities of persons
and organizations not affiliated with the Department in accordance with U.S.
Dep't of Defense, Dir. 5200.27, Acquisition of Information Concerning Persons
and Organizations Not Affiliated with the Department of Defense (7 Jan. 1980)
and U.S. Dep't of Defense Civil Disturbance Plan (GARDEN PLOT) (15 Feb. 1991).
The Insurrection Act permitted the President
to call the militia into Federal service to suppress insurrections and to
enforce the law, including when State authorities were unable or unwilling to
secure the Constitutional rights of their citizens. Rarely in U.S. history has
this authority been employed. In fact, the National Guard has been federalized
under the provisions of the Insurrection Act only ten (10) times since World
War II.
U.S. Presidents invoked the Insurrection Act
when a Governor requested such a decree or when State authorities were clearly
unable or unwilling to secure the Constitutional rights of their citizens. When
this authority is employed it takes control of a state’s National Guard from
the Governor and places command and control within the Federal government. This
requires the federalized National Guard forces to perform missions assigned by
the federal government, where and when specified, which may not be consistent
with a Governor’s direction that these forces conduct lifesaving, law
enforcement or other critical emergency functions in support of the State
emergency management agencies and incident commanders.
Controversy over civil rights and the
unpopular war in Vietnam during the 1960s and 1970s resulted in one of the most
turbulent periods in American histry. During this same time, major riots
occurred in Los Angeles in 1965; Detroit in 1967; Chicago in 1968 during the Democratic
National Convention; Santa Barbara, California, in 1970; East Los Angeles,
California, in 1970 and 1971; and Attica, New York, in 1971, during a major
prison riot. Violent rioting once again erupted across the country on April
29,1992, when four police officers were acquitted after being accused of
beating a black suspect (Rodney King). Also in recent years, issues such as
abortion, gay rights, immigration, and gun control have generated great public
debate and resulted in many mass assemblies and demonstrations.
The Active Army has often led federalized
forces of the various state ARNGs during periods of domestic disturbance, such
as the several Garden Plot operations to restore order in major urban areas in
the 1960s.
The ability of the Reserve Components to
conduct operations to control civil disturbances was increased during fiscal
year 1970; 375,000 National Guardsmen and 14,000 Army Reservists had been
trained in riot control as the year closed. The Army National Guard conducted,
at the expense of regular training, sixteen hours of refresher civil
disturbance training. Some states also carried out civil disturbance command
post exercises in conjunction with local and state civil authorities.
The Army Reserve had three infantry brigades
which were part of the federal military contingency force for the control of
civil disturbances. These units also conducted sixteen hours of refresher civil
disturbance training at the expense of primary training.
This additional responsibility of the Reserve
Components called for their immediate availability in times of natural
disasters, civil disturbances, and other emergencies. The Army National Guard
bore the brunt of these requirements because of its responsibility to the
respective state governments. From July 1, 1969, to June 30, 1970, individual
National Guard units were called in by state governors on ninety-two different
occasions in thirty-one states and the District of Columbia. These included
civil disturbances at Chicago, Illinois; Madison, Wisconsin; Charleston, South
Carolina; Berkeley, California; and Columbus and Kent, Ohio.
In response to the US invasion of Cambodia,
student unrest broke out. Under Operation "Garden Plot," from 30
April through 04 May 1970 9th Air Force airlift units transported civil
disturbance control forces from Ft Bragg to various locations throughout the
eastern US. Such deployments were commonplace during the unrest of the late
1960s and early 1970s.
The 943d Rescue Group participated in
Operation Garden Plot in support of Republican and Democratic conventions in
1972.
The anti-war and civil right protests picked
up momentum in 1968. On 20 May 1972, the 10th Transportation Battalion assumed
a secondary mission and provided 650 for a civil disturbance task force. The task
force conducted garden Plot exercise on 6 and 7 September 1972 and 1st US Army
commended the Soldiers for their professionalism. It conducted another Garden
Plot Exercise from 18 to 20 January 1973. In February 1973, the US and North
Vietnamese sign the Peace Accords in Paris and the US agreed to withdraw ground
units from Vietnam. With troops out of the war, the need for a civil
disturbance task force diminished. They conducted another Garden Plot Exercise
on 28 June and 19 December 1973.
"I remember
getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were
not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had
such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And
they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building
collapse." –Larry Silverstein
Larry A. Silverstein,
who has won nearly $4.6 billion in insurance payments to cover his losses and
help him rebuild at the World Trade Center site, is seeking $12.3 billion in
damages from airlines and airport security companies for the 9/11 attack"
The Fire Department commander says he never spoke to Larry ..."That he can
remember".
Worker #1: Oh, we’re
getting ready to pull building six.
Luis Mendes: We have
to be very careful how we demolish building six. We were worried about the
building six coming down and demolishing the slurry wall, so we wanted that
particular building to fall within a certain area.
Worker #1: We’ve got
the cables attached in four different locations... <”going up”? hard to
hear>... Now they’re pulling [gestures to vehicles] pulling the building to
the north. It’s not every day you try to pull down a eight storey building with
cables”
The use of explosives
to demolish World Trade Centres 4, 5 and 6 was rejected for fear workers would
risk their lives entering buildings to set the charges. Conventionally,
"pull a building" can mean to pre-burn holes in steel beams near the
top floor and affix long cables to heavy machinery, which then backs up and causes
the structure to lean off its center of gravity and eventually collapse. But
this is only possible with buildings about 6-7 stories or smaller. This
activity was performed to bring down WTC 6 (Customs) after 9/11 because of the
danger in demolishing conventionally."
The person that
called Silverstein was 32-year veteran Chief of Operations Daniel Nigro
[ed.note: Chief Nigro has later stated, that he was not the person who called
Silverstein; his decision to evacuate was made without consulting the owner].
After Chief of Department Peter Ganci died in the collapse of WTC1, Nigro took
over FDNY operations at the World Trade Center. He supports Silverstein’s claim
that the decision to “pull” was made by him, not Silverstein, and he adds
insight into what “pull” and “it” referred to:
The biggest decision
we had to make was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the
severely damaged [WTC 7] building. A number of fire officers and companies
assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the
building's integrity was in serious doubt.
FDNY Chief of
Operations Daniel Nigro
Fire Engineering
Magazine, Volume 10 (October), 2002
On July 22, 2004, the
"National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States" ,
also known as the "9/11 Commission," published its final Report, the
"9/11 Commission Report". The Report became a best-seller and was
hailed in the corporate media as the definitive report on the attacks. However,
the Report is more accurately characterized as the definitive narrative of the
official myth of 9/11. As David Ray Griffin points out in his scholarly book,
The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, the Report
systematically excludes almost every fact that doesn't support the official
story. 1
Omissions and
Distortions
Most of what we
document on this website has been omitted from the Commission Report,
particularly the contents of the analysis section. Indeed, the omissions are so
numerous they could fill a book, and do -- David Griffin's 339-page Omissions
and Distortions. Here we list only some of the more egregious omissions,
falsehoods, and contradictions in the Report. In the following we use 'Report'
to refer to the entire Report including the Notes section.
Omissions
The Report fails to
acknowledge that no steel-framed high-rise building has ever collapsed due to
fires.
The Report fails to
mention the total collapse of 47-story steel-framed skyscraper Building 7 at
5:20 on the day of the attack.
The Report contains
no mention of the interview in which the owner of Building 7 states that he and
the Fire Department decided to "pull" Building 7 -- an apparent
admission of a conspiracy to destroy the building and its contents.
The Report fails to
mention the rapid removal and recycling of the structural steel from the
collapsed World Trade Center buildings, even to make excuses for it.
The Report makes no
mention of a statement by then-Mayor Rudolph Giuliani to Peter Jennings
indicating he had foreknowledge of the collapses: "We were operating out
of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was gonna collapse, and
it did collapse before we could get out of the building."
The Report contains
no mentions of eyewitness accounts of explosions preceding the collapse of South
Towers.
The Report fails to
mention that George W. Bush's brother, Marvin Bush, and his cousin, Wirt Walker
III, were principals in the company that had the contract to provide security
for the World Trade Center, Stratesec, nor does it mention the company.
A company named
Stratesec had an ongoing contractor to handle security at the World Trade
Center "up to the day the buildings fell down" according to CEO Barry
McDaniel. The company, formerly named Securacom, acquired an $8.3 million World
Trade Center contract in October 1996, according to SEC filings. The company
also provided security for Dulles International Airport and United Airlines
between 1995 and 2001. Two of the commandeered flights on September 11th were
United Airlines', and one took off from Dulles. 1
Marvin P. Bush,
brother of George W. Bush, was a principal in the company between 1993 and
2000. A private Kuwaiti-American investment firm with ties to the Bush family
was one of the company's backers.
In the company's own
words, Stratesec has "an open-ended contract with the General Services
Administration (GSA) and a Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) with the agency
that allows the government to purchase materials and services from the Company
without having to go through a full competition." It promotes its services
to clients such as the armed services and Department of Justice for projects
that "often require state-of-the-art security solutions for classified or
high-risk government sites."
The role of Stratesec
in providing security to the targets of the September 11th attacks has
apparently not been investigated. Asked if FBI or other agents had questioned
anyone at Stratesec about the company's security work in connection with the
9/11 attack, CEO Barry McDaniel said no.
The Report makes no
mention of the fact that a new lessor took control of the World Trade Center
complex just six weeks before the attack, obtained an insurance policy covering
terrorist attacks, and successfully sued the insurance companies to obtain
twice the multi-billion-dollar value of the policy.
The Report repeats the list of 19
suspects identified by the FBI within days of the attack, while failing to
mention that six of them reported themselves alive after the attack.
The Report fails to mention any of the
reports of behavior by the alleged hijackers before the attack that belie the
official story that they were devout Muslims on a suicide mission for Allah.
The Report fails to mention that the
published passenger lists contained no Arab names -- a fact publicized by
skeptics of the official story.
The Report fails to ask why the plane
that crashed into the Pentagon was not stopped by anti-aircraft missile
batteries that presumably ring the building.
The Report fails to mention that no
credible footage of the Pentagon attack has been made public, despite public
knowledge that the FBI seized footage of the attack from nearby businesses.
The Report does not ask why the Secret
Service did not obtain air cover for the President's motorcade from the
Sarasota school to the airport, nor for Air Force One, which took off at about
9:54, until about 11:10.
The Report avoids mentioning several
reports that government officials and business leaders received warnings and
avoided targets of the attacks, including:
A warning by the FBI advising Attorney
General John Ashcroft to avoid flying on commercial airlines.
The report that Pentagon officials
suddenly canceled travel plans the evening before the attack.
A warning to San Francisco Mayor
Willie Brown to avoid flying.
The grounding of Salman Rushdie by
Scotland Yard.
The Report avoids mentioning a warning
received by employees of Odigo hours before the attack.
The Report does not mention that
letters with weaponized anthrax were sent to the two most powerful senators
attempting to slow the passage of the 9/11/01 attack-predicated USA PATRIOT
Act.
The Report states that the Commission
was "chartered to prepare a full and complete account of the circumstances
surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, including preparedness
for and the immediate response to the attacks," but fails to mention that
it makes no attempt to meet its charter.
Falsehoods
The Report's Notes state: "the
interior core of the [Twin Towers] was a hollow steel shaft, in which the
elevators and stairwells were grouped." In fact, the core structures were
composed of bundles of steel columns numbering 47 and having outside
dimensions, in most cases, of 36 by 16 inches and 54 by 22 inches.
The Report states that the "South
Tower collapsed in ten seconds," when it actually took about 15 seconds.
While one might expect that the Commission would overstate rather than
understate the collapse time, the fact that the Commission did not even
consider a collapse time within one second of the vacuum free-fall time of 9.2
seconds a problem for the official explanation is evidence that the Commission
would endorse that explanation no matter what the facts.
Regarding the failure to promptly move
George W. Bush from the known location of the Sarasota classroom, the Report
states that "No one in the traveling party had any information during this
time that other aircraft were hijacked or missing." Yet, according to
evidence assembled by David Griffin, the Secret Service has open lines to the
FAA, whose top operations people in the northeast corridor thought that as many
as 11 planes had been hijacked.
The Report states: "The threat of
terrorists hijacking commercial airliners within the United States -- and using
them as guided missiles -- was not recognized by NORAD before 9/11." (The
Report repeats the assertion three times.) Yet media reports, such as the USA
Today article entitled "NORAD had drills of jets as weapons" describe
pre-9/11 NORAD drills involving hijacked jetliners crashing into the World
Trade Center and the Pentagon. 3
The Report states: "The protocols
did not contemplate an intercept. They assumed the fighter escort would be
discreet, 'vectored to a position five miles directly behind the hijacked
aircraft,' where it could perform its mission to monitor the aircraft's flight
path." Yet the order referenced by the footnote for this statement (Order
7610.4J: Special Military Operations), states:
7-2-1. FACILITY NOTIFICATION
The FAA hijack coordinator will advise
the appropriate center/control tower of the identification of the military unit
and location tasked to provide the hijack escort. The center/control tower
shall coordinate with the designated NORAD SOCC/ROCC/military unit advising of
the hijack aircraft's location, direction of flight, altitude, type aircraft
and recommended flight plan to intercept the hijack aircraft. The
center/control tower shall file the coordinated flight plan. 4
To address the charge that Saudi
nationals were flown out of the country before the post-9/11 flight ban was
lifted, the Report states: "we found no evidence that any flights of Saudi
nationals, domestic or international, took place before the reopening of
national airspace on the morning of September 13, 2001." In fact national
airspace was only open to commercial airliners on a case-by-case basis on
September 13, 2001. It was not until September 15th that the skies were opened
to general aviation (privately owned aircraft). 5 Yet the Lear Jet that flew Saudi nationals
from Tampa, FL to Lexington, KY on September 13th was a private plane. 6
Contradictions
The Report notes that Hani Hanjour's
pilot application was rejected, and that he was a "terrible pilot,"
on the one hand, but asserts that he was "operation's most experienced
pilot," and piloted Flight 77 through a 330-degree spiral dive maneuver,
on the other.
The Report explains that the suicide
terrorists chose not to target a nuclear power plant because they "thought
a nuclear target would be difficult because the airspace around it was
restricted, making reconnaissance flights impossible and increasing the
likelihood that any plane would be shot down before impact." (p 245) It
fails to apply the same logic to their targeting of the Pentagon, which, being
the heart of the US military, is presumably even better defended than a nuclear
power plant.
The Report addresses the question of
why George W. Bush remained in the publicly known location of the Sarasota
school until 9:35 AM -- a half hour after the second Tower strike -- by
relating that Bush "told us his instinct was to project calm, not to have
the country see an excited reaction at a moment of crisis," (p38) and that
the Secret service "told us they were anxious to move the President to a
safer location, but did not think it imperative for him to run out the
door." (p39) The Report implicitly accepts these explanations as
satisfactory, thereby implying that for Bush to have taken any less than a half
hour to leave the school would have required him to display an excited reaction
and to "run out the door."
This list only touches on some of the
more obvious omissions from the Report. Even Griffin's book -- the most
thorough critique of the Report to date -- is far from exhaustive. In 2005,
Griffin wrote The 9/11 Commission Report: A 571-Page Lie, which provides 115
points on which the Report lies, either explicitly or implicitly.
The 9-11 Research Mirror of the
Commission Report
The 9/11 Commission Report is
published in its entirety on the 9/11 Commission website. However, the site
appears to be designed to make it difficult to analyze the Report. In
particular, there is apparently no easy way to search the text of the Report
for keywords -- a requirement to quickly discover what is missing -- because of
the following design features.
