Monthly Archives: May 2009

Peter Power Reveals More Details of 7/7 Terrorist Bombing Drills

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Monday, April 6, 2009

Peter Power Reveals More Details of 7/7 Terrorist Bombing Drills  060409Power

Peter Power, the former Scotland Yard official Anti-Terrorist Branch official, who oversaw drills of the very events of the London bombings on the morning of 7/7 as they were happening, has revealed more details behind the events for the first time in three and a half years.

A statement, apparently from Mr Power, has appeared in the comments section of a recent blog posting regarding comments Power made on the BBC last week.

As we highlighted, the “crisis management expert” revealed that some companies used the shut down of the city of London on Wednesday, during the G20 protests, as a dress rehearsal for an influenza pandemic.

In response to an explanation of who Peter Power is, which was added by the Uncensored Magazine blog, Mr Power himself posted a lengthy statement in which he reveals that the company he was working with on 7/7 was London based information giant Reed Elsevier.

The company is most notable for its ownership of the Lexis/Nexis legal database, as well as many other information sources. As Elsevier, it runs a vast number of science journals, including some of the biggest and most reputable ones. Reed is also known as a host of large exhibitions. The company part owns the ExCel Centre in London’s Docklands area, where the G20 summit was held this past weekend.

Here is Peter Power’s statement in full:

There has been much nonsense written about why my company ran an exercise on 7 July 2005 that had very close parallels to the real thing that day. Since then I have made several attempts to add my own comments to numerous sites that seem to get increasingly excited about their own conspiracy theories and in the process exclude any rational debate. It seems those who occupy the world of finding conspiracy theories to replace just about any coincidence, do not want to have any dialogue with those offering a different view, but I have not yet given up hope. I am therefore hoping, perhaps naively, that someone might like to read an honest and factual account about a particular exercise my company ran in London three years ago.

Unfortunately, the BBC had postponed in 2008 a programme in their ‘conspiracy files’ series that would have done this. Our client three years ago agreed to be named in the BBC programme since the attitude of the producer and his team was very balanced (several conspiracy theorists were also invited to take part). We even allowed our complete exercise material to be made available to the BBC. Regrettably broadcasting in 2008 might have jeopardised an ongoing court case, so they had little choice about postponing it to 2009.

Early in 2005 Reed Elsevier, an organisation specialising in information and publishing that employs 1,000 people in and around London, asked us to help them prepare an effective crisis management plan and rehearse it before sign-off. Several draft scenarios were drawn up and the crisis team themselves set the exercise date and time: 9.00am on 7 July.

The test was planned as a table-top walk through for about six people (the CM team) in a lecture room with all injects simulated. Everything was on MS PowerPoint. The location of their Central London office near to Chancery Lane was chosen as one test site. With many staff travelling to work via the London underground system, the chosen exercise simulated incendiary devices on three trains, very similar to a real IRA attack in 1992, as well as other events.

As there had been eighteen terrorist bomb attacks on tube trains prior to 2005, choosing the London Underground was logical rather than just prescient. With this in mind it was hardly surprising that Deutsche Bank had run a similar exercise a few days before and, prior to that, a multi-agency (and much publicised) exercise code-named Osiris II had simulated a terrorist attack at Bank tube station. Moreover, I had also taken part in a BBC Panorama programme in 2004 as a panellist alongside Michael Portillo MP et al, in an unscripted debate (we had no idea at all what the scenario was to be?) on how London might once again, deal with terrorist attacks, only this time it was fictional (created entirely by the BBC).

In short, some of the research for our exercise had already been done. The scenario developed for our client even started by using fictitious news items from the Panorama programme then, as with any walk through exercise, events unfolded solely on a screen as dictated by the facilitator without any external injects or actions beyond the exercise room. Also factored into the scenario was to be an above ground fictitious bomb exploding not far from the head office of the protected Jewish Chronicle magazine where for exercise purposes, our imagined terrorists would have been aware that commuters would now be walking to work (past a building already considered a target) as some tube stations would have been closed.

Of just eight nearby tube stations that fell within possible exercise scope, three were chosen that, by coincidence, were involved in the awful drama that actually took place on 7 July 2005. A level of scenario validation that on this occasion, we could have done without.

An exercise that turns into the real thing is not that unusual. For example, in January 2003, thirty people were injured when a tube train derailed and hit a wall at speed. At the same time, the City of London Police were running an exercise for their central casualty bureau where the team quickly abandoned their plans and swung into action to cope with the real thing.

For a surprising number of people such coincidents cannot be accepted as such. There just has to be a conspiracy behind them, despite the obvious point that painstaking research will always identify probable above possible scenarios. By the way, the only reason I was asked to speak on TV news that day, when there was still much confusion about the real tragedies, was to encourage more organisations to thoroughly plan their own exercises knowing the threat of terrorism is and remains, very real. One tragic consequence being Islam, a great Abrahamic, monotheistic faith (along with Judaism and Christianity), has undeservedly become vilified by some people.

Peter Power
Visor Consultants

To re-cap the situation, on the afternoon of July 7th, 2005, Power told a BBC radio interviewer that his company was running an exercise for an unnamed group that revolved around three bombs going off at precisely the same tube stations and precisely the same time as those that were hit that morning.

The transcript is as follows.

PETER POWER: At half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now.

HOST: 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 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 that 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.

The odds of such a coincidence are absolutely staggering, which led some to charge that Power’s drill was set up ahead of time, or used by people with insider foreknowledge of 7/7.

Just as happened on 9/11, when exercises involving hijacked aircraft overlapped with the real attacks, some charge that the drill was a cover for the real attack in case any of its perpetrators were caught.

Power alluded to the nature of the simulations in the days after 7/7, in an effort to downplay the significance of the mock-versus-real events.

Less than one week after the bombings, as Power and his company Visor consultants received correspondence and questions, mostly stemming from our articles on the drills, a short statement was issued, concluding with the following comments:

“Beyond this no further comment will be made and based on the extraordinary number of messages from ill informed people, no replies will henceforth be given to anyone unable to demonstrate a bona fide reason for asking (e.g. accredited journalist / academic).”

Power’s culpability is seemingly minimal – after all why would he announce the drill on national radio hours after the attack? – but his reaction to questions regarding the drills highlighted that he was not comfortable discussing the subject further.

Indeed, in December 2007, when Power was approached politiely by members of the We Are Change group, who explained who they were and what they were doing, he refused to answer any of their questions on camera, saying he would not tolerate the approach.

Watch the video:

Massive Checkpoint Operation in Tennessee Violated Posse Comitatus, Fourth Amendment

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
April 6, 2009

 

On April 3, Infowars reported on the decision of the Tennessee Governor’s office to call off an illegal seat belt checkpoint operation that was scheduled to be conducted by the Whiteville police with DHS and military participation on April 4.

Earlier today on the Alex Jones Show, Tennessee Representative Johhny Shaw admitted he was unaware of the planned operation. He also said Governor Phil Bredesen did not know the DHS and military planned to collaborate with local police in Shaw’s district in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.

http://www.infowars.com/wp-content/plugins/audio-player/player.swf

Alex talks with Tennessee Representative Johhny Shaw

Shaw’s admission state government was unaware of the scheduled checkpoint is more evidence the feds are contacting local police agencies directly without going through the state or informing them of operations that are in violation of the law.

 

 

 

It appears this is not the case in regard to another illegal operation. Last month, DHS, federal and state agencies, the Air Force, and local law enforcement worked together to violate the law in Tennessee.

On March 31, 2009, the Marion County News reported on a truck checkpoint set-up by the Tennessee Highway Patrol, Homeland Security, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, the Tennessee Department of Health, the Tennessee Emergency Management Agency, the Tennessee Department of Transportation, the Tennessee Department of Revenue, the Marion County Sheriff’s Department, the Monteagle Police Department, the Tennessee National Guard, the Arnold Air Force Base Police, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms, the Department of Commerce and Insurance and the FBI.

“Tennessee Highway Patrol troopers led explosive and drug sniffing dogs around the bases of trucks while National Guardsmen circled overseas containers with explosive and radiation detecting hand held devices in a scene reminiscent of ‘24’. Dozens of law enforcement vehicles, lights flashing, lined the brake inspection station, as trucks, both private and commercial, queued in the far right lane of 24 for what seemed like miles,” reports a Marion County News reporter.

According to a Tennessee Department of Safety press release, the object if the Homeland Security type checkpoints is to stop, evaluate and inspect as many commercial vehicles as possible, focusing in commercial vehicles, rental trucks and cargo tanks. Furthermore, these checkpoints will be held randomly throughout the year.

“The object (of the checkpoint) is to look at as many trucks as possible. I want to find something,” Sergeant John Harmon told law enforcement officials during the pre-checkpoint briefing. “I want to prevent something from happening.”

Harmon didn’t discover anything one might find in an episode of 24. However, over a span of ten hours, cops issued dozens of tickets on 285 eastbound for everything from safety defects to DUI.

Posse Comitatus was violated during the massive operation held on March 24 due to the fact the Arnold Air Force Base Police participated.

As noted above, DHS and the military intend to participate in additional sweeps — not simply in violation of Posse Comitatus but also the Fourth Amendment — randomly throughout the year. Tennessee residents need to contact local and state officials and demand the Constitution and Posse Comitatus be respected.

Glenn Beck’s Lame Attempt to “Debunk” FEMA Camps

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
April 7, 2009

Disinfo operative Glenn Beck’s shabby and comical attempt to “debunk” FEMA camps was theater of the absurd at its most revealing. Recall Beck a few weeks ago trying to bait us with a promise to investigate the camps. He came off as alarmed over the prospect of internment camps and this set the hook. Stay tuned, folks, he teased, we’ll get to the bottom of this.

 

 

 

Glenn Beck, the seasoned operative, never intended a serious exposé. He planned to make those of us who know FEMA camps exist look like fools and churls. In order to do this he enlisted the retread James Meigs, editor-in-chief of the washed-up Hearst publication, Popular Mechanics. Back in 2005, Meigs spearheaded an effort to debunk the 9/11 truth movement with a Popular Mechanic cover story. Meigs and his crew of supposed debunkers approached the science of 9/11 very selectively and were more interested in ad hominem attacks leveled against researchers. Meigs concluded his diatribe by stating that “those who peddle fantasies that this country encouraged, permitted or actually carried out the attacks are libeling the truth — and disgracing the memories of the thousands who died that day.”

Meigs turned his “fact checking” (through omission) into a book — Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can’t Stand Up to the Facts. It was published by Hearst, the media corporation famous for its association with the expression “yellow journalism.” Hearst told the illustrationist Frederic Remington during the Spanish-American War: “You furnish the pictures and I’ll furnish the war.” Nothing much as changed since 1895.

In the video here, Beck says Meigs heads up the “independent group” he assigned the task of debunking the conspiracy nuts who believe in the existence of FEMA camps. As evidence the nutters are way out in left field, Meigs dissects a widely discredited video of a Beech Grove, Indiana, Amtrak facility filmed by the Indianapolis attorney Linda Thompson.

 

 

 

You may recall Thompson’s earlier video about the government siege and subsequent incineration of the Branch Davidians in Waco, Texas. She made a series of absurd claims about the siege, for instance insisting the BATF and FBI used flame throwers mounted on tanks against the Davidians. It didn’t take long for Soldier of Fortune Magazine to discredit Thompson’s accusations. She mysteriously vanished into the ether after people began asking if she might be a government operative.

Meigs and Beck say nothing about this. “This footage, which appears in multiple videos on YouTube, is from a ‘documentary’ filmed 15 years ago,” explains Beck’s Fox News web page. “Yet today, it’s been viewed nearly 1.5 million times online. The woman who made the video, Linda Thompson, was one of the pioneers of the militia movement in the United States — except she was so extreme, she embarrassed even her fellow militants. Far from a death camp, Beech Grove is the primary maintenance facility for Amtrak’s long-distance trains, overhauling and repairing approximately 700 passenger cars a year. Company officials, who’ve heard these theories for years, welcomed our film crew, and the superintendent of the facility showed us anything we wanted to see.”

Beck does not bother to mention the fact serious FEMA camp researchers discarded the video years ago. Meigs and Beck are more interested in linking the video to Thompson and the “militia movement” (created as a scary bogeyman by the corporate media in the 1990s) and connecting that up with the ugly specter of the Timothy McVeigh — the same McVeigh photographed at Camp Grafton, North Dakota (the base specializes in demolitions training) in 1993, a mere 18 months before the Oklahoma City bombing. The FBI insisted he was not in the military at the time.

In the second installment of this “definitive debunking,” Beck and his sidekick Meigs show us a satellite photo of a real concentration camp the conspiracy theorists supposedly claim is a FEMA camp. As Alex Jones called it when the photo was used as a teaser at the close of the first installment the previous evening, the camp is located in North Korea (because only communists operate concentration camps, never mind the forcible relocation and internment of approximately 110,000 Japanese nationals and Japanese Americans by Roosevelt during World War 2, a criminal act lavishly defended by the neocon darling Michelle Malkin, a regular on Fox News).

After “debunking” Camp Grayling, Michigan, where there is a mock camp complete with barbed wire and watch towers for National Guard training, Beck and Meigs begin talking about how the conspiracy theorists are out of touch with reality and refuse to accept the obvious truth there are no camps and our loving government would never do such a thing, not like the evil communists in North Korea (or the evil mullahs in Iran, although our intrepid investigators do not mention the latter).

As expected, Beck’s long awaited “debunking” does not bother to cover more substantial territory and instead relies on old discredited video footage and photos that look good on television.

Beck and his protégé completely ignore solid and irrefutable evidence that does not look good on television and might prompt bored viewers to switch over to the Comedy Channel or actually turn off the idiot tube and read a book.

No mention of the contract awarded in January of 2006 to Kellogg, Brown and Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton, to build “temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE (Immigration Customs Enforcement) Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) Program facilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs,” (emphasis added) according to Fox News.

 

 

 

 

It was said Rex-84, short for Readiness Exercise 1984, was also about rounding up and detaining illegal immigrants. “The Rex 84 Program was originally established on the reasoning that if a ‘mass exodus’ of illegal aliens crossed the Mexican/US border, they would be quickly rounded up and detained in detention centers by FEMA,” notes Allen L Roland.

In fact, Rex-84 Alpha Explan (as it was also known) was cooked up by FEMA and 34 other federal civil departments and agencies (with a few NATO nations to boot) for the express purpose of detaining large numbers of American citizens. “The exercise anticipated civil disturbances, major demonstrations and strikes that would affect continuity of government and/or resource mobilization. To fight subversive activities, there was authorization for the military to implement government ordered movements of civilian populations at state and regional levels, the arrest of certain unidentified segments of the population, and the imposition of martial law,” Diana Reynolds writes (The Rise of the National Security State: FEMA and the NSC).

No mention of master military contingency plan Operation Garden Plot developed in response to the civil disorders of the 1960s and still operational under the control of the U.S. Northern Command. Garden plot was last activated (as Noble Eagle) to provide military assistance to civil authorities following September 11, 2001. The Pentagon also activated it to restore order during the 1992 Los Angeles Riots. Operation Garden Plot is “the program to control the population.”

Rex 84, Operation Garden Plot and its sister program Operation Cable Splicer were not enough for the control freaks in government, so in May, 2007, George Bush signed executive new orders NSDP51 (also known as PDD 51) and HSDP20 to replace Rex 84. Bush’s orders established that the executive would take over all state and local governments during a national state of emergency.

More recently the National Emergency Centers Act or HR 645 was introduced in Congress. It mandates the establishment of “national emergency centers” to be located on military installations for the purpose of to providing “temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster,” according to the bill (see Paul Joseph Watson: New Legislation Authorizes FEMA Camps In U.S.). “Ominously, the bill also states that the camps can be used to ‘meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security,’ an open ended mandate which many fear could mean the forced detention of American citizens in the event of widespread rioting after a national emergency or total economic collapse,” writes Watson.

None of this was mentioned by Beck or Meigs.

Or did they mention the long list of executive orders establishing draconian mechanisms for martial law and detention and work camps, all in violation of Article 4 Section 4 of the United States Constitution (see Establishing martial law in the United States).

Finally, Beck and Meigs don’t want you to know about and would certainly never cover the U.S. Army’s “Civilian Inmate Labor Program” under Army Regulation 210–35.

Maybe in the future Glenn Beck will commission another investigation into the existence of not only FEMA camps but the plans formulated by government to impose martial law in the United States.

I’m not going to hold my breath in the meantime.

Virginia Fusion Center Releases “Homegrown Terrorism” Document

InfowarsApril 8, 2009

featured stories   Virginia Fusion Center Releases Homegrown Terrorism Document
Terrorism

 

 

 

Spanning 39,598 square miles, Virginia has a population of almost 7.5 million residents. Roughly half of these residents are concentrated in the northern Virginia, central Virginia, and Hampton Roads regions. All three of these regions feature ethnically diverse populations with cultural ties to the Middle East, the horn of Africa, Southeast Asia, and other areas heavily impacted by terrorist activities.

Virginia’s network of colleges and universities also represent a potential avenue of entry for terrorist operatives and a possible forum for recruitment of sympathizers.

In addition to reviewing information directly reported to the VFC, surveys were sent to all Virginia local law enforcement agencies to determine the extent of terrorism activities throughout the state. Information of interest included not only event-specific data, but also suspicious traffic stops or activities consistent with pre-operational attack planning. Assessments of the overall threat posed by specific terror and extremist groups or movements were completed utilizing the Project SLEIPNIR: Revised Long Matrix for Criminal Extremism utilized by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

OVERVIEW OF TERRORIST AND EXTREMIST DATA IN VIRGINIA

INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM THREAT

Al-Qa’ida

Al-Shabaab

HAMAS

Hizballah

Jama’at al-Tabligh

Jama’at ul Fuqra

Lashkar-e Tayyiba

Muslim Brotherhood

DOMESTIC TERRORISM THREAT

Anarchist Extremists

Black Separatist Extremists

Homegrown Islamic Extremism

Lone Wolf Extremists

Militia Extremists

Special Interest Extremism

White Nationalist Extremism

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of the 2009 Terrorism Threat Assessment is to convey potential terrorism threats affecting the Commonwealth of Virginia. Terrorism, for the purpose of this report, is defined as politically motivated violence or threat of violence designed to coerce action or to prevent others from taking intended actions. While there is no intelligence that indicates terrorists are currently planning attacks in Virginia, the presence of extremists, evidence of trends linked to terrorism, and the abundance of potential targets, suggests that the potential for Virginia to be targeted remains significant.

As with previous years, the threat from terrorist and extremist groups can be categorized as international or domestic threats. Each of these groups holds particular values and political goals and thus represents a different type of threat to Virginia and the U.S. The international terrorism threat to Virginia and the nation as a whole stems from several radical Islamic militant groups. The domestic terrorist threat is comprised of a wide variety of groups, to include special interest groups, anarchists, race-based groups, including black separatists and white supremacists, militias and sovereign citizens, and homegrown extremists.

In Virginia, identified activities have been limited primarily to non-violent acts and crimes committed to raise funds to finance group activities. Some activities also relate to criminal endeavors generally used by extremists to further operational planning. The Virginia Fusion Center monitors international, national, and regional trends relating to terrorism and criminal extremism for indicators of emerging activity in the Commonwealth. Terrorism trends of greatest concern in 2009 include terrorism tradecraft, recruitment, and radicalization, terrorist use of technology, and terrorism financing.

As terrorists adapt and evolve to offset existing counterterrorism measures, they have successfully exploited available technology and modified their tactics to ensure successful operations. While several of the trends noted are applicable to all terrorist and extremist groups, increasing linkages are noted to specific critical infrastructure and key resources. As such, this product highlights, where possible, connections noted between groups, their behaviors, and potentially targeted infrastructure.

Based on the information gathered, the Commonwealth of Virginia could be potentially targeted for terrorist attack due to its location and proximity to Washington, D.C., its concentration of critical infrastructure, and the amount of extremist activity documented in Virginia. In order to detect and deter terrorist attacks, it is essential that information regarding suspected terrorists and suspicious activity in Virginia be closely monitored and reported in a timely manner. Additionally, it remains important to determine the extent of existing trends and to collect, analyze, and disseminate this information to law enforcement partners in Virginia.

OVERVIEW

The 2009 Terrorism Threat Assessment, in keeping with the Virginia Fusion Center (VFC) mission of integrating threat information from public and private sector agencies to prevent terrorist attacks, is designed to afford law enforcement, homeland security, and policy making officials terrorism threat intelligence of relevance to Virginia. Included in this assessment is an overview of identified groups, individuals, or activities; known or suspected trends; and critical infrastructure or key resources with significant U.S. or Virginia reporting within the past five years. While there is no intelligence that indicates terrorists are planning attacks in Virginia, the abundance of potential targets provides terrorists with many possibilities and opportunities throughout the Commonwealth. Information contained in this Threat Assessment is current as of February 2009 and will be

reviewed and updated on an annual basis.

In addressing the terrorism threat to Virginia, it is important to define terrorism and the scope of activities included. Terrorism can be defined as politically motivated violence or threat of violence designed to coerce others into actions they would not otherwise undertake or to refrain from actions they desired to take. Terrorism is generally directed against civilian targets and is intended to produce effects beyond immediate physical damage, to produce long-term psychological repercussions, especially fear, on a particular target audience. For the purposes of this Threat Assessment, terrorism is divided into two categories: international and domestic terrorism. International terrorism involves threats emanating primarily from the international jihad movement, foreign terrorist organizations, and state sponsors of terrorism. Domestic terrorism includes threats from special interest groups, white supremacists, black separatists, and anti-government groups. Terrorism trends included in this assessment are activities, such as recruitment, financing, training, and planning, conducted in furtherance of terrorism.

Terrorism remains a threat to Virginia, not only because of its proximity to the nation’s capitol, but also due to the volume of significant infrastructure. Such infrastructure includes military installations such as the Pentagon; two nuclear power plants; and a major East Coast seaport. Virginia is also home to a wide range of transportation sector targets of interest, including interstate highways with high-traffic bridges and tunnels; railways and subways; and aviation and port facilities. While other infrastructure sectors, such as water, energy, and information technology could be targeted, it is also possible that terrorist attention could be directed toward law enforcement at the local, state, and federal levels.

Spanning 39,598 square miles, Virginia has a population of almost 7.5 million residents. Roughly half of these residents are concentrated in the northern Virginia, central Virginia, and Hampton Roads regions. All three of these regions feature ethnically diverse populations with cultural ties to the Middle East, the horn of Africa, Southeast Asia, and other areas heavily impacted by terrorist activities. While the vast majority of these individuals are law-abiding, this ethnic diversity also affords terrorist operatives the opportunity to assimilate easily into society, without arousing suspicion. Virginia’s network of colleges and universities also represent a potential avenue of entry for terrorist operatives and a possible forum for recruitment of sympathizers. Additionally, Virginia’s correctional system remains an attractive venue for recruitment and radicalization relating to terror organizations and hate groups.

The VFC has compiled information from local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies, as well as open sources to create this Threat Assessment. In addition to reviewing information directly reported to the VFC, surveys were sent to all Virginia local law enforcement agencies to determine the extent of terrorism activities throughout the state. Information of interest included not only event-specific data, but also suspicious traffic stops or activities consistent with pre-operational attack planning. Assessments of the overall threat posed by specific terror and extremist groups or movements were completed utilizing the Project Sleipnir: Revised Long Matrix for Criminal Extremism utilized by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Although the primary objective of this report is to share valuable terrorism intelligence with public safety agencies in Virginia, a secondary goal is to highlight the types of data needed from local, state, and federal partners of the VFC. While every effort was made to ensure accurate, thorough reporting of the terrorist threat, it is expected that not every incident of possible terrorist activity will be reported or forwarded to the VFC.

Obama Admin Seeks to Legalize And Expand Government Spying

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Wednesday, April 8, 2009

Advocacy group Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has warned that the Obama administration is seeking to expand the government’s authority to carry out wiretapping under the auspices of national security.

The EFF points to the dismissal of its own litigation against the National Security Agency for the warrantless wiretapping, warning that arguments made in defense of wiretapping by Obama’s Department of Justice are worse than Bush’s.

EFF writer Tim Jones explains the arguments that were made by the DOJ in the Jewel v. NSA case:

First, they argued, exactly as the Bush Administration did on countless occasions, that the state secrets privilege requires the court to dismiss the issue out of hand. They argue that simply allowing the case to continue “would cause exceptionally grave harm to national security.” As in the past, this is a blatant ploy to dismiss the litigation without allowing the courts to consider the evidence.[…]

it’s the Department Of Justice’s second argument that is the most pernicious. The DOJ claims that the U.S. Government is completely immune from litigation for illegal spying — that the Government can never be sued for surveillance that violates federal privacy statutes. […]

The Obama Administration goes two steps further than Bush did, and claims that the US PATRIOT Act also renders the U.S. immune from suit under the two remaining key federal surveillance laws: the Wiretap Act and the Stored Communications Act. Essentially, the Obama Administration has claimed that the government cannot be held accountable for illegal surveillance under any federal statutes.

The Obama Administration’s full motion to dismiss can be read here (PDF).

In short, not only is the Obama administration actively defending and protecting Bush officials over illegal wiretapping, they are arguing in favor of expanding the practice and already seeking to protect themselves and any other administration past or present from legal challenge.

Watch a Keith Olbermann report on this story:

When dovetailed with recent announcements by Obama’s Director of National Intelligence Admiral Dennis Blair, that the NSA is seeking to expand it’s power, a clear and disturbing picture emerges.

Blair’s intention to encompass all electronic communications within the NSA’s scope is a direct continuation of the policy under the Bush administration. Last year the former US National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell announced plans for cyberspace spying that would make the current debate on warrantless wiretaps look like a “walk in the park”.

The plan would mean giving the government the authority to examine the content of any e-mail, file transfer or Web search.

This is exactly the kind of thing we warned our readers of before Obama was elected. Instead of repealing the freedom stripping tools put into place by the Bush administration, Obama is continuing to use them and is even seeking to enhance them.

Military Whistleblower Claims She Witnessed Flight 93 Shootdown Order

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, April 8, 2009

A woman who claims she was stationed at Fort Meade on September 11, 2001, has given an explosive interview about how she personally heard military commanders make the decision to shoot down United Airlines Flight 93 on 9/11.

A person using the pseudonym Elizabeth Nelson told The Project Camelot website that she personally heard officials agree on the order to shoot down Flight 93. The decision was apparently made because the plane was flying in a no-fly zone near to Camp David and heading toward Site R, a military facility in known as the “backup Pentagon”.

Nelson stresses that at no time was there any talk of “hijackers,” and the plane was shot down purely because communication had been lost and standard operating procedure mandated that the plane be intercepted and destroyed.

Because the woman refuses to provide her real name, the authenticity of her story is very much up for debate, but in a 40 minute MP3 recording ( click here to listen) of the interview, she relates what she witnessed in as sincere and genuine a way as one could expect. This individual has seemingly little to gain from making up such a story, unless it’s part of a deliberate disinformation campaign.

Nelson says that she was stationed at at Fort Meade under the Kimbrough Ambulatory Care Center Hospital and was training as a radiologic technologist having finished basic training three weeks prior. On 9/11, her rank was Private First Class.

Nelson relates how 9/11 started as a routine day before a higher ranked soldier suddenly emerged from another room and exclaimed, “Holy shit! I just saw a plane crash into one of the Twin Towers.”

Nelson and her colleagues then gathered around the TV in the hospital lobby before they saw the second plane hit the tower. Despite the fact that the first plane strike was not broadcast on live television, Nelson was adamant that the soldier was referring to the first plane when he first spoke. Nelson says that when she first saw the live TV pictures, only one tower was on fire, so the soldier could not have been referring to a replay of the second hit. In the interview, Nelson speculates that the first hit could have been broadcast on an internal military channel. President Bush once famously claimed that he had seen the first plane hit and thought that it was a case of pilot error, despite there being no live TV footage of the first plane strike.

While the majority of the personnel on the base scrambled to protect the facility as part of standard operating procedure, Nelson and a colleague were offered up by their First Sergeant to act as assistants to the Commander of the Base.

“All the other departments of soldiers – the nursing department, the clerical, administrational department – everybody sent their base soldiers there and I didn’t see them anymore. So basically the hospital was not fully active at that point. Everything was on hold,” said Nelson, adding, “And so I remember the room that they took us into. And they told us that we were in charge of, you know, getting coffees, any kind of snacks from the cafeteria – not cafeteria, like from the snack machines or from the place where you can get little snacks – in charge of making photocopies because she and I had the access codes for the rooms, to get in there.”

Nelson and her colleague were sat at the far end of the room and told to face the wall as the meeting of top officials on the base commenced.

“And there was probably six or seven men around this very large table, just like you would see in a big office somewhere. And they had this funny phone. It was like a conference-call phone. And I remember them sitting there and they were talking through this phone. And it seemed to me that they were talking to one or two other places,” said Nelson, adding that she suspected the men were in contact with the West Point military base an hour north of New York City.

The men were trying to ascertain what was going on and quickly expressed concern about Camp David and “Site R” and stating words to the effect of, “Protocol is that this is a no-fly zone. We have to take this plane down. Yes, it’s a passenger plane. It needs to be taken down. It’s a no-fly zone.”

According to Wikipedia, Site R, otherwise known as The Raven Rock Mountain Complex (RRMC) or the Underground Pentagon, is a United States government facility on Raven Rock, a mountain in the U.S. state of Pennsylvania. The facility houses the ANMCC (Alternate National Military Command Center), JSSC (Joint Staff Support Center), OSD/DHS (Office of the Secretary of Defense/Department of Homeland Security), and the 114th Signal Battalion. RRMC also houses the emergency operations centers for the Army, Navy and Air Force.

“I didn’t hear a thing about hijackers,” states Nelson, “We just heard that this plane was flying in a no-fly zone and they couldn’t make contact with the plane, or something like this. There was no communication. Protocol says it has to be taken out. And so I was in this room when the decision was mutually made by the people talking on the phone in the room that I was in, to shoot this plane down.”

“It didn’t feel like anybody knew that there was anything with terrorists,” added Nelson, saying that the officers mentioned the attack on the twin towers but only in the context that they didn’t know where Flight 93 was heading. She got the impression that they were genuinely unaware of the wider 9/11 plot, as would be expected in a compartmentalized structure, and that they were simply following military protocol.

Nelson recalls how she later felt revulsion after she saw news reports about how Flight 93 had supposedly been taken down by brave passengers.

“I remember the distinct feeling inside of me of when I saw on the news that there was this story that there were terrorists on this plane, and that the people overtook the pilot and crashed the plane, – I mean, overtook the terrorists and crashed the plane themselves. And how this was leaking out as these people being heroes,” she states.

“And I remember the extreme moral frustration inside of me, of feeling: But that’s not true! That’s not true at all! We shot this down. And a huge conflict inside of me, of knowing that the world is made to believe this story that’s not true.”

Nelson subsequently felt frustrated when anyone talked about the manufactured myth of the Flight 93 heroes.

“I also remember the confronting feeling when I would be around … because there were civilians that worked in the hospital as well. And then when they would talk about the heroes and these things, the conflict that I had inside of myself was wanting to bust out and say: That’s not true!,” she states.

“They didn’t crash the plane. If they would have crashed it, there would have been a skeleton of the plane. There was no… Nothing. It was blown up.”

Nelson speculated that the errant aircraft could have been originally heading for New York City (Building 7?) before the passengers retook control of the aircraft and started aimlessly flying it elsewhere.

“The only thing I can think is if the third plane was also intended for somewhere in the city [New York City] as well, and that the people actually did take over the hijackers and divert the plane so that the plane ended up flying aimlessly someplace else. And of course the people don’t know how to talk over the radio or any of these things. And that’s maybe something that happened,” she states.

The biggest argument against Nelson’s claims is the hard to accept notion that she and another Private were allowed to sit within earshot of top military commanders making monumental decisions about national security. If the commanders had needed people to make photocopies of documents and bring snacks and drinks as Nelson describes, then why not just have them on call in a different room? One would expect that a military complex have sophisticated communication connections that would have easily facilitated such a scenario.

Then again, if all the other active duty personnel were busy defending the base it could be argued that in the midst of the chaos, Nelson and her colleague were called upon.

Whether or not Nelson’s story is true, the fact that Flight 93 was shot down is one of the most glaring holes in the official 9/11 story.

Footage of the crash site showed barely any debris whatsoever. Compare this to any other plane crash in history and the contrast is astounding.

The debris field of Flight 93 was eight miles wide – investigators found a second debris field three miles away from the main crash site at Indian Lake, and a third debris field in New Baltimore, eight miles away. This is entirely consistent with the plane having been shot down.

Several eyewitnesses described hearing explosions before Flight 93 crashed and others said they heard missiles.

The Flight93Crash website has a compilation of eyewitness reports all attesting to the fact that the plane was shot down.

Donald Rumsfeld himself said that Flight 93 was “shot down” in an apparent slip of the tongue on December 24, 2004.

Obama Lies About Bow to King Abdullah

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
April 8, 2009

 

Obama’s White House insists the Anointed One did not bow and scrape before the decrepit King of Saudi Arabia, Abdullah, even though the disgusting instance of mandatory deference was captured on video. “It wasn’t a bow. He grasped his hand with two hands, and he’s taller than King Abdullah,” insisted an Obama aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Positive proof Obama bowed to King Abdullah. Our forefathers would have been aghast at such fawning deference.

The Washington Times got it right even if the rest of the fawning corporate media did not. Obama preformed a “shocking display of fealty to a foreign potentate” and said it violated centuries of American tradition of not deferring to royalty.

In Saudi Arabia the media understands Obama did indeed bow in the presence of King Abdullah and appreciates the deference. “Obama wished to demonstrate his respect and appreciation of the personality of King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz, who has made one of the most important calls in the modern era, namely the call for inter-faith and inter-cultural dialogue to defuse the hatred, conflict and wars,” wrote the columnist, Muhammah Diyab.

Obama also groveled before the two British royal creatures and even allowed the former Nazi youth member Prince Philip to sarcastically ask if Obama could tell the difference between various European leaders.

« Older Entries Recent Entries »