FALSE FLAGS

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.