Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 05-20-2008, 01:58 AM   #1 (permalink)
Banned
 
01/20/09 All of Their Planning Is Due to Fear Us, Plan Now For Their Refusal to Leave

An interesting new article came out this week, it attempts to explain what acting attorney general James Comey was so concerned about physically stopping Alberto Gonzales and Andrew Card from getting the gravely ill AG John Ashcroft to sign off on an expiring secret surveillance program re-authorization, while in Ashcroft's intensive care hospital room in 2004.

Video of James Comey's congressional committee testimony:

Quote:
http://cryptogon.com/?p=2590

The Last Roundup: MAIN CORE
May 18th, 2008

In my case, there’s no way the programs I want to talk to Congress about should be public ever, unless maybe in 200 years they want to declassify them. You should never learn about it; no one at the Times should ever learn about these things.

The Last Roundup: MAIN CORE
May 18th, 2008

In my case, <h3>there’s no way the programs I want to talk to Congress about should be public ever, unless maybe in 200 years they want to declassify them. You should never learn about it; no one at the Times should ever learn about these things.</h3>

<a href="http://cryptogon.com/?p=956">—Russell Tice, Former NSA SIGINT Officer</a>

I’m going to provide a one paragraph summary, just to make sure that the implications of this are clear to everyone:

The U.S. Government has, almost certainly, established a database and tracking system for something like eight million Americans who have been designated as threats to national security. The system is called MAIN CORE and it is being run under the auspices of highly classified Continuity of Government (COG) operations. MAIN CORE uses a variety of intelligence sources as inputs, including your email, web activity, telephone and private financial information. In the event of a major national security crisis, it is alleged that Americans listed in the MAIN CORE database, “Could be subject to everything from heightened surveillance and tracking to direct questioning and possibly even detention.”">—Russell Tice, Former NSA SIGINT Officer</a>

I’m going to provide a one paragraph summary, just to make sure that the implications of this are clear to everyone:

The U.S. Government has, almost certainly, established a database and tracking system for something like eight million Americans who have been designated as threats to national security. The system is called MAIN CORE and it is being run under the auspices of highly classified Continuity of Government (COG) operations. MAIN CORE uses a variety of intelligence sources as inputs, including your email, web activity, telephone and private financial information. In the event of a major national security crisis, it is alleged that Americans listed in the MAIN CORE database, “Could be subject to everything from heightened surveillance and tracking to direct questioning and possibly even detention.”:


http://www.radaronline.com/from-the-...e_01-print.php
Politics
The Last Roundup
Is the government compiling a secret list of citizens to detain under martial law?
By Christopher Ketcham

....
What was the mysterious program that had so alarmed Comey? Political blogs buzzed for weeks with speculation. Though Comey testified that the program was subsequently readjusted to satisfy his concerns, one can't help wondering whether the unspecified alteration would satisfy constitutional experts, or even average citizens. Faced with push-back from his bosses at the White House, did he simply relent and accept a token concession? Two months after Comey's testimony to Congress, the New York Times reported a tantalizing detail: The program that prompted him "to threaten resignation involved computer searches through massive electronic databases." The larger mystery remained intact, however. "It is not known precisely why searching the databases, or data mining, raised such a furious legal debate," the article conceded.

Another clue came from a rather unexpected source: President Bush himself. Addressing the nation from the Oval Office in 2005 after the first disclosures of the NSA's warrantless electronic surveillance became public, Bush insisted that the spying program in question was reviewed h3>"every 45 days" as part of planning to assess threats to "the continuity of our government."</h3>

Few Americans—professional journalists included—know anything about so-called Continuity of Government (COG) programs, so it's no surprise that the president's passing reference received almost no attention. COG resides in a nebulous legal realm, encompassing national emergency plans that would trigger the takeover of the country by extra-constitutional forces—and effectively suspend the republic. In short, it's a road map for martial law.

While Comey, who left the Department of Justice in 2005, has steadfastly refused to comment further on the matter, a number of former government employees and intelligence sources with independent knowledge of domestic surveillance operations claim the program that caused the flap between Comey and the White House was related to a database of Americans who might be considered potential threats in the event of a national emergency. Sources familiar with the program say that the government's data gathering has been overzealous and probably conducted in violation of federal law and the protection from unreasonable search and seizure guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment.

According to a senior government official who served with high-level security clearances in five administrations, "There exists a database of Americans, who, often for the slightest and most trivial reason, are considered unfriendly, and who, in a time of panic, might be incarcerated. The database <a href="http://cryptogon.com/?p=956">can identify and locate perceived 'enemies of the state'</a> almost instantaneously." He and other sources tell Radar that the database is sometimes referred to by the code name Main Core. One knowledgeable source claims that 8 million Americans are now listed in Main Core as potentially suspect. In the event of a national emergency, these people could be subject to everything from heightened surveillance and tracking to direct questioning and possibly even detention....


.....Another well-informed source—a former military operative regularly briefed by members of the intelligence community—says this particular program has roots going back at least to the 1980s and was set up with help from the Defense Intelligence Agency. He has been told that the program utilizes software that makes predictive judgments of targets' behavior and tracks their circle of associations with "social network analysis" and artificial intelligence modeling tools.


"The more data you have on a particular target, the better [the software] can predict what the target will do, where the target will go, who it will turn to for help," he says. "Main Core is the table of contents for all the illegal information that the U.S. government has [compiled] on specific targets." An intelligence expert who has been briefed by high-level contacts in the Department of Homeland Security confirms that a database of this sort exists, but adds that "it is less a mega-database than a way to search numerous other agency databases at the same time."

[...]

"We're at the edge of a cliff," says Bruce Fein, a top justice official in the Reagan administration. "To a national emergency planner, everybody looks like a danger to stability"The following information seems to be fair game for collection without a warrant: the e-mail addresses you send to and receive from, and the subject lines of those messages; the phone numbers you dial, the numbers that dial in to your line, and the durations of the calls; the Internet sites you visit and the keywords in your Web searches; the destinations of the airline tickets you buy; the amounts and locations of your ATM withdrawals; and the goods and services you purchase on credit cards. All of this information is archived on government supercomputers and, according to sources, also fed into the Main Core database.

Main Core also allegedly draws on four smaller databases that, in turn, cull from federal, state, and local "intelligence" reports; print and broadcast media; financial records; "commercial databases"; and unidentified "private sector entities." Additional information comes from a database known as the Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment, which generates watch lists from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for use by airlines, law enforcement, and border posts. According to the Washington Post, the Terrorist Identities list has quadrupled in size between 2003 and 2007 to include about 435,000 names. The FBI's Terrorist Screening Center border crossing list, which listed 755,000 persons as of fall 2007, grows by 200,000 names a year. A former NSA officer tells Radar that the Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, using an electronic-funds transfer surveillance program, also contributes data to Main Core, as does a Pentagon program that was created in 2002 to monitor antiwar protesters and environmental activists such as Greenpeace......
Quote:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea.../20051217.html
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
December 17, 2005

President's Radio Address
The Roosevelt Room

....The activities I have authorized make it more likely that killers like these 9/11 hijackers will be identified and located in time. And the activities conducted under this authorization have helped detect and prevent possible terrorist attacks in the United States and abroad.

The activities I authorized are reviewed approximately every 45 days. Each review is based on a fresh intelligence assessment of <h3>terrorist threats to the continuity of our government</h3> and the threat of catastrophic damage to our homeland. ......
Quote:
http://www.iht.com/bin/printfriendly.php?id=9966775

FEMA looks at expanded use of trains in hurricane evacuations of sick and elderly

The Associated Press
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
NEW ORLEANS: The Federal Emergency Management Agency may expand the use of passenger trains to evacuate the sick and elderly in advance of hurricanes across the Gulf Coast, a FEMA official said.

Glenn Cannon, a FEMA assistant administrator, told a congressional subcommittee meeting in New Orleans on Monday that his agency is looking at passenger trains as a method of getting people out of harm's way.

After Hurricane Katrina hit in August 2005, Amtrak was hired to be on hand to evacuate people with special needs if another disaster hit. Cannon said FEMA is now devising disaster plans for other Gulf Coast cities based on the New Orleans model.

"We're changing our whole planning focus now from Louisiana-centric to Gulf Coast-centric," Cannon told the subcommittee.

But, he said, turning railways into evacuation routes won't be easy.

Rights of way for most railroads are privately owned by freight companies, and there is no congressional mandate to use railroads for evacuations. Also, the existing stock of passenger cars cannot accommodate evacuees unable to walk, he said.
Quote:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/indust...industry_x.htm
Homeland security generates multibillion dollar business
Updated 9/10/2006 11:56 PM

By Gary Stoller, USA TODAY

.... As the biggest customer in the field, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, a post-9/11 creation, has played a major role in shaping the industry.

The agency has spent $28 billion over the 22-month period ended in August on security-related goods and services while issuing more than 115,000 contracts.

This year's contracts include: a $385 million award to Halliburton subsidiary KBR to establish temporary detention and processing capabilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants, and a $308 million to $750 million contract with Unisys to continue building, securing and managing the information technology infrastructure for the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration, one of its agencies.....
Quote:
http://web.archive.org/web/200602070...rch/ci_3470080

02/03/2006 12:00:00 AM

Customs `camps' cause for concern
By Tom Hennessy, Columnist

Maybe a lifetime in the news business makes one paranoid. Or maybe it was just a matter of timing.

The story showed up in Tuesday's Press-Telegram, as I was reading "Night," Elie Wiesel's horrifying autobiography of a teenager in Buchenwald and Auschwitz.

Appearing on page A5, the story said the federal government had awarded a $385 million contract for the construction of "temporary detention facilities." These would be used, the story said, in the event of an "immigration emergency."

Jamie Zuieback, an official with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), explained such an emergency like this: "If, for example, there were some sort of upheaval in another country that would cause mass migration, that's the type of situation that the contract would address."

That sounds a tad fuzzy, but let's concede that the camps do have something to do with immigration, illegal or not. In fact, there already are thousands of beds in place at various U.S. locations for the purpose of housing illegal immigrants.

But for anyone familiar with history U.S. or European the construction of detention camps for whatever purpose should prompt a chilling scenario.

Same folks
The new detention camps will be built by Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR), a subsidiary of Halliburton. The latter, as you likely know, is the defense-related corporate giant with fists full of contracts involving the war in Iraq.

Halliburton was led by Vice President Dick Cheney from 1995 to 2000. Democrats in Congress have accused the administration of favoring the company via no-bid contracts. But KBR says the detention contract was competitive.

Tuesday's story also said the contract was awarded by the Army Corps of Engineers. However, Halliburton says it was awarded by the Department of Homeland Security in support of ICE.

The contract is for a year, but includes four one-year options. It is a renewal of an existing

ICE contract, notes Halliburton.

KBR, in fact, had the $9.7 million contract to build the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba. This facility, popularly dubbed "Gitmo," holds 660 prisoners classified by the government as "enemy combatants."

Anyone care?
This column is written with the distinct feeling that not many people will give a hoot about any or all of this. But as already noted, a news story about construction of government detention centers should give us all pause.

Considering what took place in Nazi Germany, as well as the shameful incarceration of Japanese-Americans in 1942, no detention camp should be built without the widest possible public scrutiny.

Bottom line: The contract cries out for greater attention. So far, the government's expressed reason for building them is insufficient and ill-defined. And even if the camps do relate to illegal immigration, their purpose could be changed overnight.

This is an instance in which we could be well served by our representatives in Congress. They need to look at this and give constituents a better picture of what is going on.

Let's not have it said, years from now, that no one ever questioned this.
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...050902719.html
Bush Changes Continuity Plan
Administration, Not DHS, Would Run Shadow Government

By Spencer S. Hsu
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 10, 2007; A12

President Bush issued a formal national security directive yesterday ordering agencies to prepare contingency plans for a surprise, "decapitating" attack on the federal government, and assigned responsibility for coordinating such plans to the White House.

The prospect of a nuclear bomb being detonated in Washington without warning, whether smuggled in by terrorists or a foreign government, has been cited by many security analysts as a rising concern since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

The order makes explicit that the focus of federal worst-case planning involves a covert nuclear attack against the nation's capital, in contrast with Cold War assumptions that a long-range strike would be preceded by a notice of minutes or hours as missiles were fueled and launched.

"As a result of the asymmetric threat environment, adequate warning of potential emergencies that could pose a significant risk to the homeland might not be available, and therefore all continuity planning shall be based on the assumption that no such warning will be received," states the 72-paragraph order. It is designated National Security Presidential Directive 51 and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 20.

The statement added, "Emphasis will be placed upon geographic dispersion of leadership, staff, and infrastructure in order to increase survivability and maintain uninterrupted Government Functions."

After the 2001 attacks, Bush assigned about 100 senior civilian managers to rotate secretly to locations outside of Washington for weeks or months at a time to ensure the nation's survival, a shadow government that evolved based on long-standing "continuity of operations plans."

Since then, other agencies including the Pentagon, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the CIA have taken steps to relocate facilities or key functions outside of Washington for their own reasons, citing factors such as economics or the importance of avoiding Beltway "group-think."

Norman J. Ornstein, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and an adviser to an independent Continuity of Government Commission, said the order "is a more explicit embrace of what has been since 9/11 an implicit but fairly clear set of assumptions."

He added, "My frustration is that those assumptions have not gripped the Congress in the same way."

Other former Bush administration officials said the directive formalizes a shift of authority away from the Department of Homeland Security to the White House.

Under an executive order dating to the Reagan administration, responsibility for coordinating, implementing and exercising such plans was originally charged to the Federal Emergency Management Agency and later DHS, the Congressional Research Service noted in a 2005 report on a pending DHS reorganization.

The new directive gives the job of coordinating policy to the president's assistant for homeland security and counterterrorism -- Frances Fragos Townsend, who will assume the title of national continuity coordinator -- in consultation with Bush's national security adviser, Stephen J. Hadley, with the support of the White House's Homeland Security Council staff. Townsend is to produce an implementation plan within 90 days. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff will continue to coordinate operations and activities, the directive said.
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...55877-2004Apr6

'Armageddon' Plan Was Put Into Action on 9/11, Clarke Says

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, April 7, 2004; Page A29


An "Armageddon" program designed to ensure that the federal government would continue to function in the aftermath of a nuclear war was put into place during the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

According to ABC's "Nightline," which plans to report its findings tonight, every federal agency shifted its control to an alternate headquarters outside Washington. President Bush's decision to fly to Nebraska that day instead of returning to the White House, which drew some criticism at the time, was part of that plan, former counterterrorism official Richard A. Clarke said on the program.

"Nightline" expands on a book by James Mann that detailed the birth of the program, named "Continuity of Government," during the Reagan administration. Under the plan, if the United States were facing a nuclear attack, three teams of 50 federal officials would be sent from Washington to locations across the country -- each with a Cabinet member who was prepared to become president.

That is what happened on Sept. 11. "Questions were raised by talking heads about the president's courage or lack of it because he didn't return directly to Washington," "Nightline" anchor Ted Koppel said yesterday. "This was absolutely the Armageddon plan put into effect."

Clarke told the program: "Every federal agency was ordered, on the morning of 9/11, to activate an alternative command post, an alternative headquarters outside of Washington, D.C., and to staff it as soon as possible." The former administration official also said he has participated in regular exercises over the past 20 years in which he has "gone off into caves in mountains in remote locations and spent days on end in miserable conditions, pretending that the rest of the world had blown up, and going through the questions, going through the drill. . . . Everyone there play acts that it's really happened. You can't go outside because of the radioactivity. You can't use the phones because they're not connected to anything."

Mann, whose book "Rise of the Vulcans" was excerpted last month by Atlantic Monthly, reported that Richard B. Cheney, then a Wyoming congressman, and Donald H. Rumsfeld, then a drug industry executive, were heavily involved in shaping the program during the 1980s. Both men, who were also former White House chiefs of staff, participated in the mock disaster exercises, which included convoys of lead-lined trucks carrying sophisticated communications gear to the secret locations.

During the Sept. 11 attacks, Vice President Cheney and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld found themselves carrying out a plan they had designed two decades earlier for a very different kind of threat during the Cold War.

ABC confirmed that Rumsfeld ordered his deputy, Paul D. Wolfowitz, to move to an undisclosed location outside Washington. Cheney was similarly dispatched, as was House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), who under the Constitution is second in line for the presidency. Several Cabinet members, including Agriculture Secretary Ann M. Veneman and Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton, were also removed, said Mann, a former Los Angeles Times reporter.

Koppel said that most members of Congress will be surprised to learn the plan's details, although selected leaders have been briefed. He said he felt "reassured" by the plan because "it seems to make common sense. You want the executive branch thinking about how to restore some kind of order in what would be absolute chaos."

The Washington Post reported in 2002 that as part of the plan, Bush has dispatched a shadow government of about 100 senior civilian managers to live and work secretly outside Washington. These officials have been rotating in and out of one of two fortified locations along the East Coast, according to three officials with firsthand knowledge....

<h3>Background:</h3>

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200403/mann

March 2004 Atlantic Monthly
During the Reagan era Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld were key players in a clandestine program designed to set aside the legal lines of succession and immediately install a new "President" in the event that a nuclear attack killed the country's leaders. The program helps explain the behavior of the Bush Administration on and after 9/11

by James Mann

<h3>The Armageddon Plan

At least once a year during the 1980s Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld vanished.</h3> Cheney was working diligently on Capitol Hill, as a congressman rising through the ranks of the Republican leadership. Rumsfeld, who had served as Gerald Ford's Secretary of Defense, was a hard-driving business executive in the Chicago area—where, as the head of G. D. Searle & Co., he dedicated time and energy to the success of such commercial products as Nutra-Sweet, Equal, and Metamucil. Yet for periods of three or four days at a time no one in Congress knew where Cheney was, nor could anyone at Searle locate Rumsfeld. Even their wives were in the dark; they were handed only a mysterious Washington phone number to use in case of emergency.

After leaving their day jobs Cheney and Rumsfeld usually made their way to Andrews Air Force Base, outside Washington. From there, in the middle of the night, each man—joined by a team of forty to sixty federal officials and one member of Ronald Reagan's Cabinet—slipped away to some remote location in the United States, such as a disused military base or an underground bunker. A convoy of lead-lined trucks carrying sophisticated communications equipment and other gear would head to each of the locations.

<h3>Rumsfeld and Cheney were principal actors in one of the most highly classified programs of the Reagan Administration. Under it U.S. officials furtively carried out detailed planning exercises for keeping the federal government running during and after a nuclear war with the Soviet Union. The program called for setting aside the legal rules for presidential succession in some circumstances, in favor of a secret procedure for putting in place a new "President" and his staff.</h3> The idea was to concentrate on speed, to preserve "continuity of government," and to avoid cumbersome procedures; the speaker of the House, the president pro tempore of the Senate, and the rest of Congress would play a greatly diminished role.

The inspiration for this program came from within the Administration itself, not from Cheney or Rumsfeld; except for a brief stint Rumsfeld served as Middle East envoy, neither of them ever held office in the Reagan Administration. Nevertheless, they were leading figures in the program.

A few details about the effort have come to light over the years, but nothing about the way it worked or the central roles played by Cheney and Rumsfeld. The program is of particular interest today because it helps to explain the thinking and behavior of the second Bush Administration in the hours, days, and months after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. Vice President Cheney urged President Bush to stay out of Washington for the rest of that day; Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld ordered his deputy Paul Wolfowitz to get out of town; Cheney himself began to move from Washington to a series of "undisclosed locations"; and other federal officials were later sent to work outside the capital, to ensure the continuity of government in case of further attacks. All these actions had their roots in the Reagan Administration's clandestine planning exercises.

The U.S. government considered the possibility of a nuclear war with the Soviet Union more seriously during the early Reagan years than at any other time since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. Reagan had spoken in his 1980 campaign about the need for civil-defense programs to help the United States survive a nuclear exchange, and once in office he not only moved to boost civil defense but also approved a new defense-policy document that included plans for waging a protracted nuclear war against the Soviet Union. The exercises in which Cheney and Rumsfeld participated were a hidden component of these more public efforts to prepare for nuclear war.

The premise of the secret exercises was that in case of a nuclear attack on Washington, the United States needed to act swiftly to avoid "decapitation"—that is, a break in civilian leadership. A core element of the Reagan Administration's strategy for fighting a nuclear war would be to decapitate the Soviet leadership by striking at top political and military officials and their communications lines; the Administration wanted to make sure that the Soviets couldn't do to America what U.S. nuclear strategists were planning to do to the Soviet Union.

Under the Truman and Eisenhower Administrations the U.S. government had built large underground installations at Mount Weather, in Virginia's Blue Ridge Mountains, and near Camp David, along the Pennsylvania-Maryland border, each of which could serve as a military command post for the President in time of war. Yet a crucial problem remained: what might happen if the President couldn't make it to one of those bunkers in time.

The Constitution makes the Vice President the successor if the President dies or is incapacitated, but it establishes no order of succession beyond that. Federal law, most recently the Presidential Succession Act of 1947, establishes further details. If the Vice President dies or cannot serve, then the speaker of the House of Representatives becomes President. After him in the line of succession come the president pro tempore of the Senate (typically the longest-serving member of the majority party) and then the members of the Cabinet, in the order in which their posts were created—starting with the Secretary of State and moving to the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, and so on. The Reagan Administration, however, worried that this procedure might not meet the split-second needs of an all-out war with the Soviet Union. What if a nuclear attack killed both the President and the Vice President, and maybe the speaker of the House, too? Who would run the country if it was too hard to track down the next living person in line under the Succession Act? What civilian leader could immediately give U.S. military commanders the orders to respond to an attack, and how would that leader communicate with the military? In a continuing nuclear exchange, who would have the authority to reach an agreement with the Soviet leadership to bring the war to an end?

The outline of the plan was simple. Once the United States was (or believed itself about to be) under nuclear attack, three teams would be sent from Washington to three different locations around the United States. Each team would be prepared to assume leadership of the country, and would include a Cabinet member who was prepared to become President. If the Soviet Union were somehow to locate one of the teams and hit it with a nuclear weapon, the second team or, if necessary, the third could take over.

This was not some abstract textbook plan; it was practiced in concrete and elaborate detail. Each team was named for a color—"red" or "blue," for example—and each had an experienced executive who could operate as a new White House chief of staff. The obvious candidates were people who had served at high levels in the executive branch, preferably with the national-security apparatus. Cheney and Rumsfeld had each served as White House chief of staff in the Ford Administration. Other team leaders over the years included James Woolsey, later the director of the CIA, and Kenneth Duberstein, who served for a time as Reagan's actual White House chief of staff.

As for the Cabinet members on each team, some had little experience in national security; at various times, for example, participants in the secret exercises included John Block, Reagan's first Secretary of Agriculture, and Malcolm Baldrige, the Secretary of Commerce. What counted was not experience in foreign policy but, rather, that the Cabinet member was available. It seems fair to conclude that some of these "Presidents" would have been mere figureheads for a more experienced chief of staff, such as Cheney or Rumsfeld. Still, the Cabinet members were the ones who would issue orders, or in whose name the orders would be issued.

One of the questions studied in these exercises was what concrete steps a team might take to establish its credibility. What might be done to demonstrate to the American public, to U.S. allies, and to the Soviet leadership that "President" John Block or "President" Malcolm Baldrige was now running the country, and that he should be treated as the legitimate leader of the United States? One option was to have the new "President" order an American submarine up from the depths to the surface of the ocean—since the power to surface a submarine would be a clear sign that he was now in full control of U.S. military forces. This standard—control of the military—is one of the tests the U.S. government uses in deciding whether to deal with a foreign leader after a coup d'état.

"One of the awkward questions we faced," one participant in the planning of the program explains, "was whether to reconstitute Congress after a nuclear attack. It was decided that no, it would be easier to operate without them." For one thing, it was felt that reconvening Congress, and replacing members who had been killed, would take too long. Moreover, if Congress did reconvene, it might elect a new speaker of the House, whose claim to the presidency might have greater legitimacy than that of a Secretary of Agriculture or Commerce who had been set up as President under Reagan's secret program. The election of a new House speaker would not only take time but also create the potential for confusion. The Reagan Administration's primary goal was to set up a chain of command that could respond to the urgent minute-by-minute demands of a nuclear war, when there might be no time to swear in a new President under the regular process of succession, and when a new President would not have the time to appoint a new staff. The Administration, however, chose to establish this process without going to Congress for the legislation that would have given it constitutional legitimacy.

Ronald Reagan established the continuity-of-government program with a secret executive order. According to Robert McFarlane, who served for a time as Reagan's National Security Adviser, the President himself made the final decision about who would head each of the three teams. Within Reagan's National Security Council the "action officer" for the secret program was Oliver North, later the central figure in the Iran-contra scandal. Vice President George H.W. Bush was given the authority to supervise some of these efforts, which were run by a new government agency with a bland name: the National Program Office. It had its own building in the Washington area, run by a two-star general, and a secret budget adding up to hundreds of millions of dollars a year. Much of this money was spent on advanced communications equipment that would enable the teams to have secure conversations with U.S. military commanders. In fact, the few details that have previously come to light about the secret program, primarily from a 1991 CNN investigative report, stemmed from allegations of waste and abuses in awarding contracts to private companies, and claims that this equipment malfunctioned.

The exercises were usually scheduled during a congressional recess, so that Cheney would miss as little work on Capitol Hill as possible. Although Cheney, Rumsfeld, and one other team leader took part in each exercise, the Cabinet members changed depending on who was available at a particular time. (Once, Attorney General Ed Meese participated in an exercise that departed from Andrews in the pre-dawn hours of June 18, 1986—the day after Chief Justice Warren Burger resigned. One official remembers looking at Meese and thinking, "First a Supreme Court resignation, and now America's in a nuclear war. You're having a bad day.")

In addition to the designated White House chief of staff and his President, each team included representatives from the Departments of State and Defense and the Central Intelligence Agency, and also from various domestic-policy agencies. The idea was to practice running the entire federal government with a skeletal crew during a nuclear war. At one point there was talk of bringing in the governors of Virginia and Maryland and the mayor of the District of Columbia, but the idea was discarded because they didn't have the necessary security clearance.

The exercises were designed to be stressful. Participants gathered in haste, moved and worked in the early-morning hours, lived in Army-base conditions, and dined on early, particularly unappetizing versions of the military's dry, mass-produced MREs (meals ready to eat). An entire exercise lasted close to two weeks, but each team took part for only three or four days. One team would leave Washington, run through its drills, and then—as if it were on the verge of being "nuked"—hand off to the next team.

The plans were carried out with elaborate deception, designed to prevent Soviet reconnaissance satellites from detecting where in the United States the teams were going. Thus the teams were sent out in the middle of the night, and changed locations from one exercise to the next. Decoy convoys were sometimes dispatched along with the genuine convoys carrying the communications gear. The underlying logic was that the Soviets could not possibly target all the makeshift locations around the United States where the Reagan teams might operate.

The capstone to all these efforts to stay mobile was a special airplane, the National Emergency Airborne Command Post, a modified Boeing 747 based at Andrews and specially outfitted with a conference room and advanced communications gear. In it a President could remain in the air and run the country during a nuclear showdown. In one exercise a team of officials stayed aloft in this plane for three days straight, cruising up and down the coasts and back and forth across the country, refueling in the air.

When George H.W. Bush was elected President, in 1988, members of the secret Reagan program rejoiced; having been closely involved with the effort from the start, Bush wouldn't need to be initiated into its intricacies and probably wouldn't re-evaluate it. In fact, despite dramatically improved relations with Moscow, Bush did continue the exercises, with some minor modifications. Cheney was appointed Secretary of Defense and dropped out as a team leader.

After the fall of the Berlin Wall and the Soviet collapse, the rationale for the exercises changed. A Soviet nuclear attack was obviously no longer plausible—but what if terrorists carrying nuclear weapons attacked the United States and killed the President and the Vice President? Finally, during the early Clinton years, it was decided that this scenario was farfetched and outdated, a mere legacy of the Cold War. It seemed that no enemy in the world was still capable of decapitating America's leadership, and the program was abandoned.

There things stood until September 11, 2001, when Cheney and Rumsfeld suddenly began to act out parts of a script they had rehearsed years before. Operating from the underground shelter beneath the White House, called the Presidential Emergency Operations Center, Cheney told Bush to delay a planned flight back from Florida to Washington. At the Pentagon, Rumsfeld instructed a reluctant Wolfowitz to get out of town to the safety of one of the underground bunkers, which had been built to survive nuclear attack. Cheney also ordered House Speaker Dennis Hastert, other congressional leaders, and several Cabinet members (including Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman and Interior Secretary Gale Norton) evacuated to one of these secure facilities away from the capital. Explaining these actions a few days later, Cheney vaguely told NBC's Tim Russert, "We did a lot of planning during the Cold War with respect to the possibility of a nuclear incident." He did not mention the Reagan Administration program or the secret drills in which he and Rumsfeld had regularly practiced running the country.

Their participation in the extra-constitutional continuity-of-government exercises, remarkable in its own right, also demonstrates a broad, underlying truth about these two men. For three decades, from the Ford Administration onward, even when they were out of the executive branch of government, they were never far away. They stayed in touch with defense, military, and intelligence officials, who regularly called upon them. They were, in a sense, a part of the permanent hidden national-security apparatus of the United States—inhabitants of a world in which Presidents come and go, but America keeps on fighting.

James Mann, former Washington correspondent for the Los Angeles Times, is senior writer-in-residence at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, in Washington, D.C. This article is adapted from his book Rise of the Vulcans: The History of Bush's War Cabinet to be published this month.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...0201410_2.html

BACK TO THE BUNKER

By William M. Arkin
Sunday, June 4, 2006; B01

On Monday, June 19, about 4,000 government workers representing more than 50 federal agencies from the State Department to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission will say goodbye to their families and set off for dozens of classified emergency facilities stretching from the Maryland and Virginia suburbs to the foothills of the Alleghenies. They will take to the bunkers in an "evacuation" that my sources describe as the largest "continuity of government" exercise ever conducted, a drill intended to prepare the U.S. government for an event even more catastrophic than the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

The exercise is the latest manifestation of an obsession with government survival that has been a hallmark of the Bush administration since 9/11, a focus of enormous and often absurd time, money and effort that has come to echo the worst follies of the Cold War. The vast secret operation has updated the duck-and-cover scenarios of the 1950s with state-of-the-art technology -- alerts and updates delivered by pager and PDA, wireless priority service, video teleconferencing, remote backups -- to ensure that "essential" government functions continue undisrupted should a terrorist's nuclear bomb go off in downtown Washington.

But for all the BlackBerry culture, the outcome is still old-fashioned black and white: We've spent hundreds of millions of dollars on alternate facilities, data warehouses and communications, yet no one can really foretell what would happen to the leadership and functioning of the federal government in a catastrophe.

After 9/11, The Washington Post reported that President Bush had set up a shadow government of about 100 senior civilian managers to live and work outside Washington on a rotating basis to ensure the continuity of national security. Since then, a program once focused on presidential succession and civilian control of U.S. nuclear weapons has been expanded to encompass the entire government. From the Department of Education to the Small Business Administration to the National Archives, every department and agency is now required to plan for continuity outside Washington.

Yet according to scores of documents I've obtained and interviews with half a dozen sources, there's no greater confidence today that essential services would be maintained in a disaster. And no one really knows how an evacuation would even be physically possible.

Moreover, since 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina, the definition of what constitutes an "essential" government function has been expanded so ridiculously beyond core national security functions -- do we really need patent and trademark processing in the middle of a nuclear holocaust? -- that the term has become meaningless. The intent of the government effort may be laudable, even necessary, but a hyper-centralized approach based on the Cold War model of evacuations and bunkering makes it practically worthless.

That the continuity program is so poorly conceived, and poorly run, should come as no surprise. That's because the same Federal Emergency Management Agency that failed New Orleans after Katrina, an agency that a Senate investigating committee has pronounced "in shambles and beyond repair," is in charge of this enormous effort to plan for the U.S. government's survival.

Continuity programs began in the early 1950s, when the threat of nuclear war moved the administration of President Harry S. Truman to begin planning for emergency government functions and civil defense. Evacuation bunkers were built, and an incredibly complex and secretive shadow government program was created.

At its height, the grand era of continuity boasted the fully operational Mount Weather, a civilian bunker built along the crest of Virginia's Blue Ridge, to which most agency heads would evacuate; the Greenbrier hotel complex and bunker in West Virginia, where Congress would shelter; and Raven Rock, or Site R, a national security bunker bored into granite along the Pennsylvania-Maryland border near Camp David, where the Joint Chiefs of Staff would command a protracted nuclear war. Special communications networks were built, and evacuation and succession procedures were practiced continually.

When the Soviet Union crumbled, the program became a Cold War curiosity: Then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney ordered Raven Rock into caretaker status in 1991. The Greenbrier bunker was shuttered and a 30-year-old special access program was declassified three years later.

Then came the terrorist attacks of the mid-1990s and the looming Y2K rollover, and suddenly continuity wasn't only for nuclear war anymore. On Oct. 21, 1998, President Bill Clinton signed Presidential Decision Directive 67, "Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Government Operations." No longer would only the very few elite leaders responsible for national security be covered. Instead, every single government department and agency was directed to see to it that they could resume critical functions within 12 hours of a warning, and keep their operations running at emergency facilities for up to 30 days. FEMA was put in charge of this broad new program.

On 9/11, the program was put to the test -- and failed. Not on the national security side: Vice President Cheney and others in the national security leadership were smoothly whisked away from the capital following procedures overseen by the Pentagon and the White House Military Office. But like the mass of Washingtonians, officials from other agencies found themselves virtually on their own, unsure of where to go or what to do, or whom to contact for the answers.

In the aftermath, the federal government was told to reinvigorate its continuity efforts. Bush approved lines of succession for civil agencies. Cabinet departments and agencies were assigned specific emergency responsibilities. FEMA issued new preparedness guidelines and oversaw training. A National Capital Region continuity working group established in 1999, comprising six White House groups, 15 departments and 61 agencies, met to coordinate......
Quote:
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/200...urrentPage=all
The Hidden Power
The legal mind behind the White House’s war on terror.
by Jane Mayer July 3, 2006


On December 18th, Colin Powell, the former Secretary of State, joined other prominent Washington figures at FedEx Field, the Redskins’ stadium, in a skybox belonging to the team’s owner. During the game, between the Redskins and the Dallas Cowboys, Powell spoke of a recent report in the Times which revealed that President Bush, in his pursuit of terrorists, had secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on American citizens without first obtaining a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, as required by federal law. This requirement, which was instituted by Congress in 1978, after the Watergate scandal, was designed to protect civil liberties and curb abuses of executive power, such as Nixon’s secret monitoring of political opponents and the F.B.I.’s eavesdropping on Martin Luther King, Jr. Nixon had claimed that as President he had the “inherent authority” to spy on people his Administration deemed enemies, such as the anti-Vietnam War activist Daniel Ellsberg. Both Nixon and the institution of the Presidency had paid a high price for this assumption. But, according to the Times, since 2002 the legal checks that Congress constructed to insure that no President would repeat Nixon’s actions had been secretly ignored.

According to someone who knows Powell, his comment about the article was terse. “It’s Addington,” he said. “He doesn’t care about the Constitution.” Powell was referring to David S. Addington, Vice-President Cheney’s chief of staff and his longtime principal legal adviser. Powell’s office says that he does not recall making the statement. But his former top aide, Lawrence Wilkerson, confirms that he and Powell shared this opinion of Addington....
It's obvious to me that their obsession with planning and security is more about their fear of us, American people who won't quietly accept what they've set up to do to us, THAN IT HAS EVER BEEN ABOUT DEFENDING AGAINST A FOREIGN OR TERRORIST THREAT OF ANY ORIGIN.

I don't expect that they intend to give up the executive branch, next January 20th. Isn't the most practical solution to deal with this possibility, very visible and ceaseless, grassroots planning to immediately respond to any attempt they might make to extend their "stay"? They've acted as if they are afraid of us. Isn't the best way to inflience them to hesitate and then fold, to menace them with public oppostion planning, from now to next January, on the biggest and most visible scale, we can muster?

Last edited by host; 05-20-2008 at 02:19 AM..
host is offline  
Old 05-20-2008, 07:00 AM   #2 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: bedford, tx
Host, the 'executive' branch isn't going to do anything but completely and honestly abide by the constitution and laws of the united states. They would NEVER abrogate or infringe upon the rights and liberties of american citizens and you and I are total whackjobs for even suggesting such a thing might happen. Ask most anybody here and they will tell you that the government is totally open and honest and are only here to protect our rights.
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."
dksuddeth is offline  
Old 05-20-2008, 07:24 AM   #3 (permalink)
Darth Papa
 
ratbastid's Avatar
 
Location: Yonder
I dunno, host, I've been watching pretty closely, and I don't see the behavior of an administration that's going to pull out martial law or cancel elections or anything like that. I see a lame-duck president in spin-down mode. We'd be hearing more and more drumbeats of war, I think.

To the contrary, Bush said yesterday that, with regard to Iran, while the military option is not off the table, but he'd prefer to resolve the matter through peaceful diplomatic means. Aside from being an example of disgusting Chaimberlainish appeasement, that's just not the talk of somebody working the public up into a lather to support a constitutional sidestep.
ratbastid is offline  
Old 05-20-2008, 08:14 AM   #4 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
I dont doubt the existence of the MAIN CORE program and other DoD, NSA, DHS programs that have been implemented or expanded by Bush to spy on (or maintain databases on) millions of Americans for no valid reason and contrary to Constitutional protections and the rule of law.

I have serious concerns that Bush will take military action against Iran...without the consent of Congress...before he leaves office. (Jerusalem Post article)

But he will leave office on Jan 20, 2009.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Last edited by dc_dux; 05-20-2008 at 09:03 AM.. Reason: added article
dc_dux is offline  
Old 05-20-2008, 08:28 AM   #5 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
It probably won't happen. Bush doesn't have the popularity left to maintain the "I'll save you" place in people's hearts. If it does happen, it'll be interesting to see millions of people storm the White House. I'll be there.
Willravel is offline  
Old 05-20-2008, 11:15 AM   #6 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by willravel
It probably won't happen. Bush doesn't have the popularity left to maintain the "I'll save you" place in people's hearts. If it does happen, it'll be interesting to see millions of people storm the White House. I'll be there.
They seem wayyyyy too politically partisan at DHS and in the pentagon, and exhibit a HYPER concern about the coming presidential transition....

<h2>....SOoooo, why the eff shouldn't we, as well?</h2>
Quote:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/...tion.security/
Homeland Security trains for presidential transition

* Story Highlights
* This presidential transition is a first for department, formed after 9/11
* Agencies get together for drills with mock hijackers and drug runners
* Homeland Security says it knows of no specific threat related to the transition
* Member of think tank skeptical: "It looks more like showmanship"

From Jeanne Meserve and Mike M. Ahlers
CNN

GLYNCO, Georgia (CNN) -- Federal agents sped after phantom drug runners and fired at mock hijackers in coastal Georgia this week as senior officials from various agencies watched and sometimes participated.

The Department of Homeland Security brought the top officials together to prepare for the transition that will follow this fall's presidential election.

The department says it knows of no threat related to the transition. In other countries, however, terrorists have struck shortly before or after government changes.

In an effort to ensure a smooth transition, the Department of Homeland Security brought more than 100 top career employees -- nonpolitical employees who are expected to stay in their jobs -- to build their knowledge about the department's 22 agencies.

The idea is to prepare them to manage other agencies on an interim basis, as one round of political appointees gives way to a new president's picks.

The senior officials watched as agents pursued a "drug runner" around a closed course at speeds of up to 90 mph, culminating in a fake but realistic shootout. VideoWatch simulated shootout, real explosion »

After briefings from agents, they shot simulated bullets at mock hijackers. They watched incidents involving deranged gunmen, suicide bombers and others intent on causing mayhem.

Department officials say the exercises are particularly important because this presidential transition is a first for the department, which was formed after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Yet the elaborate exercises, held at the sprawling Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Georgia, are not without skeptics.

"It's late in the game," said P.J. Crowley of the Center for American Progress, a Washington think tank. "I mean, developing a career civil service within the Department of Homeland Security should have been a priority five years ago when the department first stood up.

"I think it looks more like showmanship than real team building, but I'll wait and see."

Department officials say they hope the incoming president will designate a new secretary and other top officials before January 20, Inauguration Day, to ensure continuity.

Nancy Ward, a career employee who could temporarily head the Federal Emergency Management Agency during the transition, says the experience is valuable.

"I have really been able to see what [other DHS agencies] do on a day-to-day basis and understand how they do it," she said.
Quote:
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_s...ls-mullen.html
Admiral's Mullen's attitude

"Offering an unusual insight into how senior military leaders are anticipating the transition to a new president, Mullen said he is continually thinking about how military decisions taken today will play out under a new administration.

"There are very few either briefings or meetings that I'm in that I'm not thinking about 'How does what we're talking about right now transition to next spring?' " Mullen said. He said U.S. commanders in regions overseas, as well as chiefs of the different services, are having similar discussions.

The transition is unlikely to be smooth, predicted Mullen, who assumed his position seven months ago for a two-year term. He said he hopes to offer a stabilizing influence as a military leader who will bridge two administrations.

"We will be tested. . . . I'm preparing that this country will be tested, and I have a role in that regard, certainly providing advice to whoever the new president's going to be," he said. He said his current priority is to develop military strategies for the Middle East and the globe to "tee up" for a new president.

Specifically, Mullen said he hopes that the change in politically appointed leaders will unfold at a wartime pace, rather than at a "peacetime" one. "I think it's important for us to get as many principals in positions as rapidly as possible in a time of war," he said. " Tyson

---------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps Tyson is trying to stimulate discomfort with the idea of the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff talking about getting "as many principals in positions as rapidly as possible." If that is so, then she has succeeded with me. Mullen is talking about politically appointed civilians in that last sentence, civilians nominated by the president for confirmation by the senate of the United States.

What business is that of his?

We have come a long way in the development of civil-military relations in the US since the time in which George Marshall gave up his promised position as commander of the European Theater of war merely because FDR suggested that he could not cope with the Washington scene in Marshall's absence. A small sacrifice? He would have been Eisenhower in the "Crusade in Europe" with all that would have flowed from that.

You have to wonder how much Admiral Mullen's fretting is caused by the prospect of a Democratic Administration. Perhaps the new president should consider the suitability of present leadership in the Pentagon. pl

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...src=newsletter

<h3>Some "coincidences" to Chew on:</h3>

Quote:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...q=cipro&st=nyt
A NATION CHALLENGED: WHITE HOUSE MEMO; Home Front Is a Minefield For President

By ELISABETH BUMILLER AND DAVID E. SANGER
Published: October 25, 2001

....In his first 72 hours back, Mr. Bush discovered that the more complex and immediately dangerous front <h>is here in what the White House calls ''the homeland.''</h> As the president said in a speech today in suburban Baltimore, ''It's something that, obviously, we're not used to in America.''.....

<h3>After this was published, one year earlier, in 2000:</h3>
[PDF]
Why Another Defense Review
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
America must defend <h3>its homeland.</h3> During the Cold War, ...... catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a. new Pearl Harbor. Domestic politics and ...
http://www.newamericancentury.org/Re...asDefenses.pdf
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...201158_000.htm

White House Mail Machine Has Anthrax

By Sandra Sobieraj
Associated Press Writer
<h3>Tuesday, Oct. 23, 2001; 8:11 p.m. EDT</h3>

WASHINGTON –– President Bush said confidently Tuesday that "I don't have anthrax" after biohazard testing at the White House and the discovery of anthrax on a mail-opening machine at a screening facility six miles away.

All White House mail – more than 40,000 letters a week – is examined at military facilities across the Potomac River.

"Let me put it this way," Bush said. "I'm confident that when I come to work tomorrow, I'll be safe."

Asked if he was tested for the germ that has killed three people already this month, or if he was taking precautionary antibiotics, Bush replied simply: "I don't have anthrax."

<h3>At least some White House personnel were given Cipro six weeks ago</h3> White House officials won't discuss who might be receiving the anthrax-treating antibiotic now.

On the night of the Sept. 11 attacks, the White House Medical Office dispensed Cipro to staff accompanying Vice President Dick Cheney as he was secreted off to the safety of Camp David, and told them it was "a precaution," according to one person directly involved.

At that time, nobody could guess the dimensions of the terrorists' plot. .....
Quote:
http://www.sptimes.com/News/101501/W...ked_to_t.shtml
Compiled from Times wires

© St. Petersburg Times,
published October 15, 2001

Confirming a clear link between the terrorists targeting America and the South Florida company hit by anthrax cases, the FBI said Sunday that the Sun tabloid editor's wife rented a Delray Beach apartment to two of the hijackers.

The Sun is part of the American Media Inc. tabloid chain, and it employed photo editor Bob Stevens, who died this month from inhalation anthrax. Two other AMI employees were exposed, and five more are being retested to confirm positive blood test results.

Sun editor Michael Irish's wife, Gloria, rented unit 1504 at the Delray Racquet Club to Marwan Alshehhi and Saeed Alghamdi this summer, said FBI spokeswoman Judy Orihuela.

Alshehhi was aboard United Airlines Flight 175, the second jet to strike the World Trade Center. Alghamdi was on United Flight 93, which crashed 80 miles southeast of Pittsburgh when passengers apparently thwarted an attempt to target another building.

"There is now a link between the editor's wife and the terrorists," Orihuela said.

But just as quickly, she said the FBI wasn't drawing immediate conclusions.

"It's just a coincidence right now," Orihuela said. "I'm sure there will be some sort of follow-up."

"We are not searching the apartment at this time," Orihuela said from outside the tabloid's Boca Raton headquarters. "We are focusing on this building."

The Delray apartment is central to a massive federal investigation into the terrorist attacks. Investigators trying to piece the puzzle together created a diagram that includes photos of the 19 hijackers who seized control of four airplanes on Sept. 11.

At the center of the diagram, which was obtained by the Miami Herald: an image of a house with the address 755 Dotterel Road. Arrows connect nine of the hijackers to the icon.

Two terrorists, Alshehhi and Alghamdi, rented the apartment in Delray Beach just north of Boca Raton, the FBI said. The other seven, including suspected ringleader Mohamed Atta, are connected because they visited the apartment or otherwise had a direct tie to the inhabitants, a federal official familiar with the investigation told the Miami Herald.

Previously, only Saeed Alghamdi and another terrorist, Ahmed Alnami, both aboard United Flight 93, had been connected to the Delray Racquet Club apartment.

It is clear that the apartment was a meeting ground for terrorists, authorities say. Now they must determine whether unit 1504 was also a hatching ground for the anthrax attacks.

Gloria Irish, the wife of tabloid editor Michael Irish, was approached by reporters Sunday afternoon while walking her black Labrador retriever outside her Delray Beach home.

"I can't believe you people," said Irish, who works for Pelican Properties. "We are not making any comments."

Mike Irish, who, records show, is a licensed airplane pilot, several years ago was a member of the Civil Air Patrol based at a small-plane airport in Lantana, just north of Delray Beach, an official there told the Washington Post. One of the hijackers, Atta, reportedly rented a plane at that airport to practice flying for three days in August. Stevens, the Sun photo editor who died of anthrax Oct. 5, also lives in Lantana. But there is no indication whether Irish or Stevens ever crossed paths with Atta.

In other developments Sunday, a police officer and two lab technicians involved in the NBC anthrax investigation have tested positive for the bacteria, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani said. Nevada officials said four people who may have come into contact with a contaminated letter at a Microsoft office tested negative while results weren't known for two others.

The police officer had the bacteria in his nose, as did one lab technician. Another technician had a spore on her face. Both work for the city health department, which conducted the tests.

Exposure to the spores does not mean infection.

In Washington, meanwhile, Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson said he considered the anthrax cases in New York, Nevada and Florida to be instances of bioterrorism. "It certainly is an act of terrorism to send anthrax through the mail," he said on Fox News Sunday.

And Attorney General John Ashcroft said it was "premature at this time to decide whether there is a direct link" to Osama bin Laden's terrorist network, but "we should consider this potential."

The new New York cases brought to 12 the number of people around the nation who either have anthrax or have been exposed to it. That does not include a second NBC employee who is taking antibiotics after displaying possible symptoms of the disease.

Health investigators have tested more than 300 people at American Media and have found some people with "elevated levels" of antibodies, which the body produces to fight off disease, said Tim O'Connor, spokesman for the Palm Beach County Health Department.

Though O'Connor said investigators don't know for sure whether those antibodies were produced to fight off anthrax or other diseases, such as HIV or hepatitis, he acknowledged that "there's an inkling it's for anthrax."

Still, only the results of a second test will show that for sure. Those tests probably will occur Wednesday or Thursday, and results should be available by Saturday, O'Connor said.

O'Connor said if other workers show an elevated antibody level for anthrax, chances are they came in contact with the disease at American Media, and not anywhere else.

All employees are taking antibiotics, and none is considered likely to become ill or die, O'Connor said.

News of the exposures has caused jitters around the world, with a number of false or pending cases reported over the weekend. Among them:

* In Hawaii, hazardous-materials teams were called to Lihue Airport after passengers on a flight from Los Angeles discovered a white powder on their luggage after they arrived. Tests were being conducted on the powder.
* In Uniontown, Pa., a 49-year-old woman was given Cipro, an antibiotic for anthrax, and was tested for exposure after receiving an envelope containing a powdery substance. She was later released from a hospital.
* In England, several hundred people were evacuated from Canterbury Cathedral after a worker said he saw a man dropping a white powder in one of the chapels. Workers in wearing chemical protection suits cleared up the powder and took samples for analysis.

-- Information from the Miami Herald, Associated Press and Times staff writer Chris Tisch was used in this report.
Quote:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...pagewanted=all
A NATION CHALLENGED: THE DETAINED; Arrested Men's Shaved Bodies Drew Suspicion of the F.B.I.

By CHRISTOPHER DREW AND RALPH BLUMENTHAL
Published: October 26, 2001

When two Indian men

.....The F.B.I. also recently tested the Jersey City apartment for signs of anthrax, and its agents have looked into a tip that Mr. Azmath may have been seen in 1993, around the time of the van-bombing of the World Trade Center, in an apartment with a man who was later convicted in the assault. But officials said they doubted that Mr. Azmath had any connection to that attack.
Quote:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...pagewanted=all
A NATION CHALLENGED: BIOTERRORISM; Report Linking Anthrax and Hijackers Is Investigated

By WILLIAM J. BROAD AND DAVID JOHNSTON
Published: March 23, 2002

The two men identified themselves as pilots when they came to the emergency room of Holy Cross Hospital in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., last June. One had an ugly, dark lesion on his leg that he said he developed after bumping into a suitcase two months earlier. Dr. Christos Tsonas thought the injury was curious, but he cleaned it, prescribed an antibiotic for infection and sent the men away with hardly another thought.

But after Sept. 11, when federal investigators found the medicine among the possessions of one of the hijackers, Ahmed Alhaznawi, Dr. Tsonas reviewed the case and arrived at a new diagnosis. The lesion, he said in an interview this week, ''was consistent with cutaneous anthrax.''

Dr. Tsonas's assertion, first made to the F.B.I. in October but never disclosed, has added another layer of mystery to the investigation of last fall's deadly anthrax attacks, which has yet to focus on a specific suspect.

The possibility of a connection between the Sept. 11 attacks and the subsequent anthrax-laced letters has been explored by officials since the first anthrax cases emerged in October. But a recent memorandum, prepared by experts at the Johns Hopkins Center for Civilian Biodefense Strategies, and circulated among top government officials, has renewed a debate about the evidence.

The group, which interviewed Dr. Tsonas, concluded that the diagnosis of cutaneous anthrax, which causes skin lesions, was ''the most probable and coherent interpretation of the data available.'' The memorandum added, ''Such a conclusion of course raises the possibility that the hijackers were handling anthrax and were the perpetrators of the anthrax letter attacks.''

A senior intelligence official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that George J. Tenet, the director of central intelligence, had recently read the Hopkins memorandum and that the issue has been examined by both the C.I.A. and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

''No one is dismissing this,'' the official said. ''We received the memo and are working with the bureau to insure that it continues to be pursued.''

In their public comments, federal officials have said they are focusing largely on the possibility that the anthrax attacks were the work of a domestic perpetrator. They have hunted for suspects among scientists and others who work at laboratories that handle germs.

The disclosure about Mr. Alhaznawi, who died on United Airlines Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania, sheds light on another front in the investigation. Senior law enforcement officials said that in addition to interviewing Dr. Tsonas in October and again in November, they thoroughly explored any connection between the hijackers and anthrax. They said the F.B.I. scoured the cars, apartments and personal effects of the hijackers for evidence of the germ, but found none.

Dr. Tsonas's comments add to a tantalizing array of circumstantial evidence. Some of the hijackers, including Mr. Alhaznawi, lived and attended flight school near American Media Inc. in Boca Raton, Fla., where the first victim of the anthrax attacks worked. Some of the hijackers also rented apartments from a real estate agent who was the wife of an editor of The Sun, a publication of American Media.

In addition, in October, a pharmacist in Delray Beach, Fla., said he had told the F.B.I. that two of the hijackers, Mohamad Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi, came into the pharmacy looking for something to treat irritations on Mr. Atta's hands.

If the hijackers did have anthrax, they would probably have needed an accomplice to mail the tainted letters, bioterrorism experts knowledgeable about the case said. The four recovered anthrax letters were postmarked on Sept. 18 and Oct. 9 in Trenton. It is also possible, experts added, that if the hijackers had come into contact with anthrax, it was entirely separate from the supply used by the letter sender.

For his part, Dr. Tsonas said he believed that the hijackers probably did have anthrax.

''What were they doing looking at crop-dusters?'' he asked, echoing experts' fears that the hijackers may have wanted to spread lethal germs. ''There are too many coincidences.''

In recent interviews, Dr. Tsonas, an emergency room doctor, said Mr. Alhaznawi came into the hospital one evening in June 2001, along with a man who federal investigators believe was another hijacker, Ziad al-Jarrah, believed to have taken over the controls of United Flight 93.

They used their own names, he added, not aliases.

''They were well-dressed foreigners,'' he said. ''I assumed they were tourists.''

The men explained that Mr. Alhaznawi had developed the ulcer after hitting his leg on a suitcase two months earlier. Dr. Tsonas recalled that Mr. Alhaznawi appeared to be in good health, and that he denied having an illness like diabetes that might predispose him to such lesions. The wound, he recalled, was a little less than an inch wide and blackish, its edges raised and red.

Dr. Tsonas said he removed the dry scab over the wound, cleansed it and prescribed Keflex, an antibiotic that is widely used to combat bacterial infections but is not specifically recommended for anthrax.

The encounter lasted perhaps 10 minutes, Dr. Tsonas said.

He took no cultures and had no thoughts of anthrax, a disease at that time was extremely rare in the United States and was unfamiliar even to most doctors.

In October, amid news reports about the first anthrax victims, Dr. Tsonas, like other doctors, threw himself into learning more about the disease. An incentive was that his hospital is relatively near American Media, so victims there might come to Holy Cross for treatment.

Dr. Tsonas said he forgot entirely about the two men until federal agents in October showed him pictures of Mr. Alhaznawi and Mr. Jarrah, and he made positive identifications.

Then, agents gave Dr. Tsonas a copy of his own notes from the emergency room visit and he read them. ''I said, 'Oh, my God, my written description is consistent with cutaneous anthrax,' '' Dr. Tsonas recalled. ''I was surprised.''

He discussed the disease and its symptoms with the agents, explaining what else could possibly explain the leg wound. A spider bite was unlikely, he said. As for the hijacker's explanation -- a suitcase bump -- he also judged that unlikely.

''That's a little unusual for a healthy guy, but not impossible,'' he said.

After his meetings with F.B.I., Dr. Tsonas was contacted early this year by a senior federal medical expert, who asked him detailed questions about the tentative diagnosis.

Last month, experts at Johns Hopkins also called Dr. Tsonas, saying they, too, were studying the evidence. The Hopkins analysis was done by Dr. Thomas Inglesby and Dr. Tara O'Toole, director of the center in Baltimore and an assistant secretary for health and safety at the federal Energy Department from 1993 to 1997.

In an interview, Dr. O'Toole said that after consulting with additional medical experts on the Alhaznawi case, she was ''more persuaded than ever'' that the diagnosis of cutaneous anthrax was correct.

She said the Florida mystery, as well as the entire anthrax inquiry, might benefit from a wider vetting.

''This is a unique investigation that has many highly technical aspects,'' she said. ''There's legitimate concern that the F.B.I. may not have access to the kinds of expertise that could be essential in putting all these pieces together.''

John E. Collingwood, an F.B.I. spokesman, said the possibility of a connection between the hijackers and the anthrax attacks had been deeply explored.

''This was fully investigated and widely vetted among multiple agencies several months ago,'' Mr. Collingwood said. ''Exhaustive testing did not support that anthrax was present anywhere the hijackers had been. While we always welcome new information, nothing new has in fact developed.''
<h3>They seem much better at protecting themselves, against their fears of what we might do to interfere with their operations, than about solving this, or about protecting the health of the citizenry if it were to happen again..PRIORITIES !!</h3>
Quote:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n2019769.shtml
Anthrax Investigation A 'Cold Case?'
5 Years, 53,000 Leads, 5,000 Subpoenas Later, FBI Is Empty-Handed

Comments Comments3

WASHINGTON, Sept. 18, 2006

(CBS) Three years ago, FBI agents slogged through the woods to a fishing pond in suburban Maryland, where they hoped to find the hidden lab equipment used in the 2001 anthrax attacks. But, as CBS News correspondent Jim Stewart reports, they pumped the pond dry and even sifted through the mud at the bottom ... and found nothing

Five years, 53,000 leads, and 6,000 subpoenas after those attacks, they still have no arrests.

Things are so cold, law enforcement officials tell CBS News, that barring the discovery of new evidence, the anthrax investigation could be declared a "Cold Case" and put in the inactive files.

So who did it? Former Attorney General John Ashcroft once singled out Dr. Steven Hatfill, a bioweapons specialist, as a "person of interest." But there have been no charges.

Former FBI counter-terrorism executive and now CBS News consultant Mike Rolince says no case has frustrated the FBI more.

"We now know that someone, or ones, can conduct an attack like this and for least the first five years, get away with it," Rolince says.

The FBI says it remains committed to solving the crime. In a written statement, Joseph Persichini, Jr., acting assistant director of the FBI’s Washington field office said: "Today, the FBI’s commitment to solving this case is undiminished ... While no arrests have been made, the dedicated investigators who have worked tirelessly on this case, day-in and day-out, continue to go the extra mile in pursuit of every lead."

The bureau never had more than scant physical evidence, like the envelopes the anthrax was mailed in, and the terse letters inside - "Death to America" read one - and the spores themselves. But they were never able to trace the anthrax back to the attacker.

"It's true that a vast majority of the investigation early on was figuring out the science," Rolince says.

Nor did the administration ever entirely figure out what to do in case of another such attack. Despite a $5.6 billion effort to stockpile vaccines, just a small amount is available. Only the Pentagon has enough on hand for the troops.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff hints no one may ever be indicted.

"There are times that we may know a lot about a crime or an event that occurred, but we may not have the admissible evidence that we need to prove it in court," Chertoff says.

But the thinking among investigators is more stark: If we can't agree among ourselves who did it, they reason, how could we ever convince a jury?

Last edited by host; 05-20-2008 at 11:18 AM..
host is offline  
Old 05-20-2008, 11:30 AM   #7 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: bedford, tx
Quote:
Originally Posted by willravel
It probably won't happen. Bush doesn't have the popularity left to maintain the "I'll save you" place in people's hearts. If it does happen, it'll be interesting to see millions of people storm the White House. I'll be there.
interesting. and how do you think you'll fare against secret service and fbi agents....with guns?
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."
dksuddeth is offline  
Old 05-20-2008, 11:52 AM   #8 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dksuddeth
interesting. and how do you think you'll fare against secret service and fbi agents....with guns?
1) Do you think they have a million rounds readily available at the drop of a hat?
2) Do you think that the Secret Service would fire upon unarmed people requiring a lame duck to leave office?
Willravel is offline  
Old 05-20-2008, 12:09 PM   #9 (permalink)
Junkie
 
loquitur's Avatar
 
Location: NYC
Host, I suggest you start raising a militia right now, pronto, tout suite. This is clearly an emergency warranting drastic action.
loquitur is offline  
Old 05-20-2008, 12:13 PM   #10 (permalink)
spudly
 
ubertuber's Avatar
 
Location: Ellay
host:

I suggest that you take the replies as an indication that you have not yet made your case in a convincing manner. Perhaps more explanation about how your pasted excerpts relate to each other and prove your thesis would help.

Without some more explanation, this will have to be moved to paranoia.
__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam
ubertuber is offline  
Old 05-20-2008, 12:29 PM   #11 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
With Iraq, he lied but wasn't caught until after it was too late. The same with wiretapping.

If he tried to remain in power as a lame duck, he would be held responsible as it happened, which would be much more difficult to keep under control.
Willravel is offline  
Old 05-20-2008, 02:37 PM   #12 (permalink)
Junkie
 
loquitur's Avatar
 
Location: NYC
I'm not sure why anyone here thinks Bush even WANTS to stay past 1/20/09. He doesn't look to me like a guy who is enjoying what he does and wants to keep doing it. He looks more like a guy who is sure he'll enjoy his retirement.
loquitur is offline  
Old 05-21-2008, 12:00 AM   #13 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ubertuber
host:

I suggest that you take the replies as an indication that you have not yet made your case in a convincing manner. Perhaps more explanation about how your pasted excerpts relate to each other and prove your thesis would help.

Without some more explanation, this will have to be moved to paranoia.
By the executive branch's refusal to respond to attempts by those constitutionally responsible for oversight, they bring a thread attempting a discussion of their planning and possible motives, on a politics discussion forum, on themselves, since they refuse to disclose their presidential transition and "Continuity of Government" planning.....even to duly elected officials with the authority and security clearances to conduct inquiry on our behalf. I don't think the posts that you speak of should be a definitive barometer of the appropriateness of this thread, in this forum.

The title of the thread may play to sensationalism, but it is, given the supporting material presented in the OP, and in this and my previous post, grounded in the root concern and reasonable reaction. If the executive branch is doing all of this secret planning and drilling that they appear to be doing, related to "Continuity of Government" and secret "transition planning", related to the transfer of the office of the presidency to a newly elected president, eight months from yesterday, it seems fitting to wonder "out loud", if we should do some visible organizing/planning related to the Jan. 20, 2009 transition, ourselves.

I've provided reports of the Continuity of Gevernment drills, as far back as the '80's, that VP Cheney participated in. Given that they won't disclose what they are planning, but because there appears to be a flurry of it, going on for quite some time, complete with secret and semi-secret executive orders, and their track record for inaccurate and misleading statements on matters related to national security, over the last six years, why wouldn't we be suspicious of the motives and intent of the president and vice-president?

Here's how it works, here. The folks who don't want to react in ways I, myself, would expect all of my fellow Americans to react to the constant challenges by the executive branch, to constitutional authority.....the lawful attempts by our elected officials to find out, on our behalf, WTF the executive branch is doing, and why..... react instead by shooting the messenger, eye rolling, and by attempting, too often successfully, to make the argument and it's well sourced support, seem deficient, not on it's merits, but via "drive by" attempts to make the ideas advanced seem unimaginable. ridiculous, or both.

This is a political discussion forum. It is quite logical, given the breakdown in our federal government checks and balances and the accountability that the checks were envisioned and intended to foster....make visible to the people, that a well documented set of concerns would emerge for discussion in this venue.

Where else would they be discussed in the context of what is at stake....the people's right to know, amidst an ongoing threat to usurp congressional authority by the executive branch. Transfer this to a less respected venue, and those who attempt to end this as a legitimate political discussion and set of concerns, are encouraged to react the same way, whenever they object to discussion on the merits of the argument.

This exercise on a politics discussion forum is an expected and a normal extension of events taking place in Washington.

It can end up being a "town meeting", or a target of ridicule, more fitting of a discussion of say, a coverup by government of aliens landing in Roswell, NM in 1947, I've worked to make it legitimate, and some others post with the purpose of making it illegitimate as an appropriate political discussion.

I think some of us are responding to valid concerns, and I provide evidence that our valid concerns are shared with elected officials thwarted in their official attempts at congressional committee oversight:

Quote:
http://fray.slate.com/discuss/forums...d/1242177.aspx

<P align=left><h3>NOTE: <iEM>Whatever the case, you sure gotta wonder why all the planning? </EM></h3>
<P align=left><STRONG></STRONG>
<P align=left><STRONG>"Continuity of Government Planning has ... Already Superseded the Constitution as a Higher Authority"</STRONG>
<P><A href="http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">George Washington's Blog </A><BR>Saturday, May 10, 2008</P>


<P align=left>UC Berkeley Professor Emeritus Peter Dale Scott has <A href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&amp;aid=8864" target="_blank">warned</A>:</P>
<BLOCKQUOTE>

<P align=left>"If members of the Homeland Security Committee cannot enforce their right to read secret plans of the Executive Branch, then the systems of checks and balances established by the U.S. Constitution would seem to be failing.</P>
<P align=left>To put it another way, if the White House is successful in frustrating DeFazio, then Continuity of Government planning has arguably already superseded the Constitution as a higher authority."</P></BLOCKQUOTE>

<P>What's he talking about?<BR><BR>Well, in the summer 2007, Congressman Peter DeFazio, on the Homeland Security Committee (and so with proper security access to be briefed on COG issues), inquired about continuity of government plans, and was refused access. Indeed, DeFazio told Congress that <A href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdfjsS9Wqk8" target="_blank">the entire Homeland Security Committee of the U.S. Congress has been denied access to the plans</A> by the White House (video; or <A href="http://fas.org/sgp/congress/2007/cog.html" target="_blank">here is the transcript</A>). The Homeland Security Committee has full clearance to view all information about COG plans. DeFazio concluded: "<A href="http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/07/21/2678/" target="_blank">Maybe the people who think there’s a conspiracy out there are right</A>”.<BR><BR>Professor Scott's point that COG planning may have already superseded the Constitution can be summarized by making an analogy. Let's assume that the police are not supposed to seize and sell a suspect's house unless a court has held a full trial and found that person guilty of a certain offense. And let's say that the police seize and sell somebody's house, but that the suspect's relatives cannot find any record that there has been a trial, let alone a finding of guilt by the court.</P>
<P>(Article continues below)<BR><BR>



<BR><BR>Let's say they go to the City Council (which is the local counterpart of the U.S. Congress -- that is, part of the legislative branch), and the City Council asks the police if the suspect was found guilty by the court. If the police refuse to even answer the City Council's question, that shows that the rule of law has broken down. In other words, whether or not there was a trial and a guilty verdict, the failure of the police to answer the question shows that the police (part of the executive branch) are acting outside of the law by failing to respect the separation of powers between the police and the City Council.<BR><BR>As Steven Aftergood, of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy, notes:<BR></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE>"<A href="http://niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ask_this.view&amp;askthisid=00321" target="_blank">Of the 54 National Security Presidential Directives issued by the [George W.] Bush Administration to date, the titles of only about half have been publicly identified. There is descriptive material or actual text in the public domain for only about a third. In other words, there are dozens of undisclosed Presidential directives that define U.S. national security policy and task government agencies, but whose substance is unknown either to the public or, as a rule, to Congress</A>."</BLOCKQUOTE>Similarly, Senator Russ Feingold, a member of the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary committees, <A href="http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-feingold8-2008may08,0,2076668.story" target="_blank">wrote</A> yesterday in the Los Angeles Times:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE>"The memos on torture policy that have been released or leaked hint at a much bigger body of law about which we know virtually nothing. The Yoo memo was filled with references to other Justice Department memos that have yet to see the light of day, on subjects including the government's ability to detain U.S. citizens without congressional authorization and the government's ability to bypass the 4th Amendment in domestic military operations.<BR><BR>Another body of secret law involves the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). In 1978, Congress created the special FISA court to review the government's requests for wiretaps in intelligence investigations, which is -- and should be -- done behind closed doors. But with changes in technology and with this administration's efforts to expand its surveillance powers, the court today is doing more than just reviewing warrant applications. It is issuing important interpretations of FISA that have effectively made new law.<BR><BR>These interpretations deeply affect Americans' privacy rights, and yet Americans don't know about them because they are not allowed to see them. Very few members of Congress have been allowed to see them either. When the Senate recently approved some broad and controversial changes to FISA, almost none of the senators voting on the bill could know what the law currently is.<BR><BR>The code of secrecy also extends to yet another body of law: changes to executive orders. The administration takes the position that a president can "waive" or "modify" a published executive order without any public notice -- simply by not following it. It's every president's prerogative to change an executive order, but doing so without public notice works a secret change in the law. And, because the published order stays on the books, Congress and the public have no idea that it's no longer in effect. We don't know how many of these covert changes have been made by this administration or, for that matter, by past administrations.<BR><BR>***<BR>Keeping the law secret doesn't enhance national security, but it does give the government free rein to operate without oversight or accountability. Even the congressional intelligence committees, which are supposed to oversee the intelligence community, have been denied access to some of these legal opinions.<BR><BR>Congress should pass legislation to require the administration to alert Congress when the law created by Justice Department opinions ignores or even violates the laws passed by Congress, and to require public notice when it is waiving or modifying a published executive order. Congress and the public shouldn't have to wonder whether the executive branch is following the laws that are on the books or some other, secret law."<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>Like all important political issues of the day, the government will not agree to to the right thing unless the public demands it. The White House will not agree to follow the Constitution and the rule of law, or even to disclose whether or not the COG plans which were implemented on 9/11 are still in effect, unless the public demands it. Professor Scott <A href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&amp;aid=8864" target="_blank">stresses</A> the importance of citizen activism in this regard:<BR>

<BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<P align=left>"Will Congress insist on its right of review COG? The answer to this question will depend on discussion in the blogosphere, the degree of pressure exerted by the electorate on their representatives, and the questions asked the men and women who would be president."</P></BLOCKQUOTE>
I join Professor Scott's call for public input, and urge We Are Change - style citizen activism regarding COG. Specifically, I urge people to bring videocameras and to <A href="http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2008/05/wanted-dead-or-alive-reward.html" target="_blank">ask Congress people, White House officials and spokespeople, judges, and every other high-level official whether COG plans are currently in effect</A>, to film their responses, and to post the video on the Web. </p></p></p>


</div>
Quote:
http://www.nationaljournal.com/congr...3=h_20061023_3
Dems Threaten To Subpoena Department Transition Plans

<h3>Wed. Apr. 23, 2008

Democrats on the House Homeland Security Committee today threatened to subpoena the Homeland Security Department to get access to presidential transition planning documents.</h3> If they make good on the threat, it would be the first subpoena issued against the department since its creation in 2003. Democrats charge that the department has failed to give the committee enough information describing how the agency plans to handle the transition to a new president and administration after the November election. They are giving the department until May 23 to produce the documents. “We want that information or else we’re going to subpoena you,” Rep. Bill Pascrell, D-N.J., told the department’s acting deputy secretary, Paul Schneider, during a hearing. House Homeland Security Chairman Bennie Thompson added, “We think it’s reasonable for the committee’s jurisdiction to have access to those planning documents and whatever you have in place to address transition.” A law enacted last year mandates that the department provide a “transition and succession plan” by Dec. 1 to the incoming administration. It does not require that plan to be submitted to Congress.

According to Pascrell, committee Democrats are seeking contact information identifying the department officials responsible for transition planning; a list of program priorities for the next administration; a list of political appointees at the department; and itemized budgets for each agency within the department handling the transition. Aides added the committee wants a detailed plan for how each operational agency is planning for the transition. That includes agencies such as Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Transportation Security Administration. Schneider said the department had informed the committee that there is no budget information pertaining to the transition. Schneider’s testimony to the committee today included a list of department posts held by political appointees. The department previously gave the committee a seven-page PowerPoint document entitled “DHS Transition Planning,” but Schneider acknowledged more documents exist. Democrats said information the department has provided is inadequate. Aides said the list of presidential appointees does not provide names of each official. They said they want the department to explain whether any of the presidential appointees have been moved to career civil servant positions.

Schneider said the department is required by law to give Congress a full transition plan by October — a claim that could not be immediately verified. Regardless, he said he would “look to see if there is other documentation we can provide” to comply with the committee’s demands by May 23. He offered assurances the department will be ready for the transition. For example, the department has identified a career civil servant to be in charge of each major operational agency during the transition, he said. “We are taking a multi-pronged approach to our transition planning to ensure operational continuity of homeland security responsibilities during the presidential administration transition,” he said. “Our goal is to ensure the programs we are implementing are on track for the next administration.”

by Chris Strohm

Wed. Apr. 23, 2008
Quote:
http://hsc.house.gov/issues/index.as...=2008&issue=10
Concerns with DHS Domestic Spy Platform Remain for Homeland Security Committee Leaders

Monday, April 07, 2008

(WASHINGTON) – Today, Committee on Homeland Security Chairman Bennie G. Thompson (D-MS), Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment Chair Jane Harman (D-CA), and Subcommittee on Management, Investigations, and Oversight Chairman Chris P. Carney (D-PA) sent a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff detailing their concerns over the progress of the Department’s National Applications Office (NAO).

The letter details the Members’ dissatisfaction with the lack of not only a legal framework and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for the NAO but also adequate assurances from the Department that the privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties issues involved with turning spy satellites on the homeland have been comprehensively resolved. In September 2007, Chairman Thompson, Chair Harman, and Chairman Carney requested that the NAO be put on hold until their concerns had been addressed. Now, over seven months later – and despite a commitment from the Department that the overdue documents would be provided in due course – many of the same concerns have yet to be satisfactorily addressed. DHS nevertheless plans to operationalize the NAO in the very near future.

The NAO is a planned element within the Department of Homeland Security first publicized in August 2007. The office is described as the government’s gatekeeper for all requests to access spy satellite imagery for domestic purposes, including homeland security, law enforcement, intelligence, and geospatial. See link below for a PDF version of the letter


# # #

FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Please contact Dena Graziano or Adam Comis at (202) 225-9978
RELATED DOCUMENTS:

* <a href="http://hsc.house.gov/SiteDocuments/20080407134422-36588.PDF">Letter</a>
Quote:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2007/cog.html
[Congressional Record: August 2, 2007 (House)]
[Page H9548]


AMERICA NEEDS A PLAN TO PROVIDE FOR CONTINUITY OF GOVERNMENT

(Mr. DeFAZIO asked and was given permission to address the House for
1 minute.)
Mr. DeFAZIO. Most Americans would agree that it would be prudent to
have a plan to provide for the continuity of government and the rule of
law in case of a devastating terrorist attack or natural disaster, a
plan to provide for the cooperation, the coordination and continued
functioning of all three branches of the government.
The Bush administration tells us they have such a plan. They have
introduced a little sketchy public version that is clearly inadequate
and doesn't really tell us what they have in mind, but they said, don't
worry; there's a detailed classified version. But now they've denied
the entire Homeland Security Committee of the United States House of
Representatives access to their so-called detailed plan to provide for
continuity of government. They say, trust us. Trust us, the people who
brought us Katrina, to be competent in the face of a disaster? Trust
us, the people who brought us warrantless wiretapping and other
excesses eroding our civil liberties? Trust us?
Maybe the plan just really doesn't exist and that's why they won't
show it to us. I don't know. Or maybe there's something there that's
outrageous. The American people need their elected representatives to
review this plan for the continuity of government.
Quote:
http://hsc.house.gov/press/index.asp...&PublishDate=0
Thompson, DeFazio, Carney Call on White House to Provide Emergency Plans

Friday, July 27, 2007

July 27, 2007 – Today, Committee on Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie G. Thompson (D-MS), Subcommittee on Management, Investigations, and Oversight Chairman Christopher P. Carney (D-PA), and Homeland Security Committee member Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) sent a letter to Frances Townsend, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism regarding the rejection of a request by the Committee to allow Congressman DeFazio to view classified portions related to federal emergency continuity plans in the “Homeland Security Presidential Directive-20”.

The text of the letter is attached.

Congressman Thompson released the following statement along with the letter:

“Once again the Bush Administration has shown a lack of respect for this Congress, but more importantly, they have displayed a lack of respect for the Constitution by not recognizing the equality of the three branches of government. The denial of the Administration to provide this vital national security document raises serious concerns about how they plan to insure the continuity of government should a catastrophic incident take place.”

Congressman DeFazio added the following:

"I can't see any reason or justification to deny a member of Congress the right to review how the Administration intends to conduct the government of the United States after a catastrophic national emergency," DeFazio said. "I thought this was a routine request, but this makes you wonder."

Congressman Carney also added:

“This is a disturbing and inexplicable refusal by the Administration to cooperate with Congressional oversight activities. As Chairman of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Management, Investigations, and Oversight, I am troubled by the White House's attempt to block our inquiry into the government’s continuity of operations plan. I came to Congress to fight bureaucracy and increase transparency, and I will continue to demand nothing short of complete cooperation with the Homeland Security Committee’s oversight efforts."

RELATED DOCUMENTS:
* <a href="http://hsc.house.gov/SiteDocuments/20070727193755-38123.pdf">Letter in PDF form</a>

Last edited by host; 05-21-2008 at 12:54 AM..
host is offline  
Old 05-22-2008, 03:44 AM   #14 (permalink)
Banned
 
The biggest assault by our own elected officials, EVER...... on our right to keep unwarranted goverment intrusion out of our everyday lives, and no opinions or reaction posted, for a whole day?

Isn't there enough here to consider that the integrity of the next election is at stake, by the actions, lack of visibility, and resistance to congressional inquiry, routinely practiced by the Bush Cheney administration? Why is it not the logical reaction to what they are documented to be doing to us? Are we that complacent, resigned, and or indifferent?

The reason I believe that the current administration cannot smoothly transition, unless John McCain "wins" the november election, is because they cannot unwind what they have started....it's gotten too large for that, and their patrons, the corporations who run the state security apparatus for the regime, probably wouldn't like life under the oversight of an Obama administration...

Ya think????

The following documents that James B. Comey went directly from courageous acting US AG, blocking the efforts by Gonzales to force the gravely ill Ashcroft to approve a secret surveillance program renewal....to....general counsel of major US intelligence contractor, Lockheed Martin, and Comey has done quite well, in the 28 months he worked there, as of last December. DOJ salary to buying a $2.2 million home, in just two years.....

Ask yourself, do you think this administration has built all of this to routinely turn it all over to Obama and company, just 8 months from now, or is it just possible that they have created the domestic intelligence gathering organization to control the outcome of future elections?

If you look at the bottom quote box, you will see that they've even attempted to wipe out the evidence online, of their overzealous detention and deportation plan. Why did they scrub the web page describing the Operation ENDGAME, when the Massachusetts ACLU wrote an Op-ED about it, if it is a routine alien control program?

Why does the house DHS oversight committee, as I document in my last post, have to threaten to subpoena the presidential transition plan, drafted by DHS for next January 20th? Why won;t DHS share the plan with duly elected, authorized, bi-partisan contingent of congressmen with the security classifications to examine the planning documents?

All of the documentation that follows, relates to the documentation in the thread OP.

The administation does not trust you, they make that quite obvious. Why then, do you trust them to permit an orderly transition? Why take that risk, if you value the protections we thought we had, against overzealous or illegal government interference in our lives? Why not look into what I am showing you, ask questions, and do your own DD, but visibly, vocally, for the purpose of putting them on notice, as they have put all of us on notice, that the rules of the game have changed, irrespective of the laws of the land?
Quote:
http://www.washingtonian.com/article...rden/5844.html
Luxury Homes: December 2007

By Mary Clare Fleury

<img src="http://www.washingtonian.com/page_dbimages/5844/12.01.07.luxhomes.jpg">
Former top Justice official James Comey bought this McLean house for $2.2. million. Photographs by David Pipkin


....In Virginia: James B. Comey, a key figure in the scandal surrounding former attorney general Alberto Gonzales, and his wife, Patrice, bought a house on Kirby Road in McLean for $2.2 million. Comey, who was a top aide to Gonzales and predecessor John Ashcroft, testified this year about Gonzales’s hospital-room visit to persuade Ashcroft to certify the legality of the Bush administration’s warrantless-wiretapping program. Comey resigned from the administration in 2005 and became general counsel and senior vice president for Lockheed Martin.....
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...070601993.html
By R.J. Hillhouse
Sunday, July 8, 2007; Page B05

“Who Runs the CIA? Outsiders for Hire.”

...In April, Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell was poised to publicize a year-long examination of outsourcing by U.S. intelligence agencies. But the report was inexplicably delayed — and suddenly classified a national secret. What McConnell doesn’t want you to know is that the private spy industry has succeeded where no foreign government has: It has penetrated the CIA and is running the show.

Intelligence professionals tell me that more than 50 percent of the National Clandestine Service (NCS) — the heart, brains and soul of the CIA — <h3>has been outsourced to private firms such as Abraxas, Booz Allen Hamilton, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon.</h3>

These firms recruit spies, create non-official cover identities and control the movements of CIA case officers. They also provide case officers and watch officers at crisis centers and regional desk officers who control clandestine operations worldwide. As the Los Angeles Times first reported last October, more than half the workforce in two key CIA stations in the fight against terrorism -- Baghdad and Islamabad, Pakistan -- is made up of industrial contractors, or "green badgers," in CIA parlance.

Intelligence insiders say that entire branches of the NCS have been outsourced to private industry. These branches are still managed by U.S. government employees ("blue badgers") who are accountable to the agency's chain of command. But beneath them, insiders say, is a supervisory structure that's controlled entirely by contractors; in some cases, green badgers are managing green badgers from other corporations.....
Quote:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070730/hillhouse
Outsourcing Intelligence
By R.J. Hillhouse

July 24, 2007


....Over the past six years, a quiet revolution has occurred in the intelligence community toward wide-scale outsourcing to corporations and away from the long-established practice of keeping operations in US government hands, with only select outsourcing of certain jobs to independently contracted experts. Key functions of intelligence agencies are now run by private corporations. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) revealed in May that 70 percent of the intelligence budget goes to contractors.

For all practical purposes, effective control of the NSA is with private corporations, which run its support and management functions. As the Washington Post's Walter Pincus <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/06/AR2006050601088.html">reported</a> last year, more than 70 percent of the staff of the Pentagon's newest intelligence unit, CIFA (Counterintelligence Field Activity), is made up of corporate contractors. Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) lawyers revealed at a conference in May that contractors make up 51 percent of the staff in DIA offices. At the CIA, the situation is similar. Between 50 and 60 percent of the workforce of the CIA's most important directorate, the National Clandestine Service (NCS), responsible for the gathering of human intelligence, is composed of employees of for-profit corporations....
This was reported 17 months before James Comey confirmed to a senate committee that it was an accurate account:

Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/01/po...OsskSZSD8Q8xFg
January 1, 2006
Justice Deputy Resisted Parts of Spy Program
By ERIC LICHTBLAU and JAMES RISEN

WASHINGTON, Dec. 31 - A top Justice Department official objected in 2004 to aspects of the National Security Agency's domestic surveillance program and refused to sign on to its continued use amid concerns about its legality and oversight, according to officials with knowledge of the tense internal debate. The concerns appear to have played a part in the temporary suspension of the secret program.

The concerns prompted two of President Bush's most senior aides - Andrew H. Card Jr., his chief of staff, and Alberto R. Gonzales, then White House counsel and now attorney general - to make an emergency visit to a Washington hospital in March 2004 to discuss the program's future and try to win the needed approval from Attorney General John Ashcroft, who was hospitalized for gallbladder surgery, the officials said.

The unusual meeting was prompted because Mr. Ashcroft's top deputy, James B. Comey, who was acting as attorney general in his absence, had indicated he was unwilling to give his approval to certifying central aspects of the program, as required under the White House procedures set up to oversee it.

With Mr. Comey unwilling to sign off on the program, the White House went to Mr. Ashcroft - who had been in the intensive care unit at George Washington University Hospital with pancreatitis and was housed under unusually tight security - because "they needed him for certification," according to an official briefed on the episode. The official, like others who discussed the issue, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the classified nature of the program.

Mr. Comey declined to comment, and Mr. Gonzales could not be reached.

Accounts differed as to exactly what was said at the hospital meeting between Mr. Ashcroft and the White House advisers. But some officials said that Mr. Ashcroft, like his deputy, appeared reluctant to give Mr. Card and Mr. Gonzales his authorization to continue with aspects of the program in light of concerns among some senior government officials about whether the proper oversight was in place at the security agency and whether the president had the legal and constitutional authority to conduct such an operation.

It is unclear whether the White House ultimately persuaded Mr. Ashcroft to give his approval to the program after the meeting or moved ahead without it.....

.....What is known is that in early 2004, about the time of the hospital visit, the White House suspended parts of the program for several months and moved ahead with more stringent requirements on the security agency on how the program was used, in part to guard against abuses.

The concerns within the Justice Department appear to have led, at least in part, to the decision to suspend and revamp the program, officials said. The Justice Department then oversaw a secret audit of the surveillance program. ....
Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/24/po...=1&oref=slogin
Spy Agency Mined Vast Data Trove, Officials Report

By ERIC LICHTBLAU and JAMES RISEN
Published: December 24, 2005

The National Security Agency has traced and analyzed large volumes of telephone and Internet communications flowing into and out of the United States as part of the eavesdropping program that President Bush approved after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to hunt for evidence of terrorist activity, according to current and former government officials.The volume of information harvested from telecommunication data and voice networks, without court-approved warrants, <h3>is much larger than the White House has acknowledged, the officials said. It was collected by tapping directly into some of the American telecommunication system’s main arteries, they said.</h3>

As part of the program approved by President Bush for domestic surveillance without warrants, the N.S.A. has gained the cooperation of American telecommunications companies to obtain <h3>backdoor access to streams of domestic</h3> and international communications, the officials said.

What has not been publicly acknowledged is that N.S.A. technicians, besides actually eavesdropping on specific conversations, have combed through large volumes of phone and Internet traffic in search of patterns that might point to terrorism suspects. <h3>Some officials describe the program as a large data-mining operation.</h3>

This so-called ‘’pattern analysis'’ on calls within the United States would, in many circumstances, require a court warrant if the government wanted to trace who calls whom.

The use of similar data-mining operations by the Bush administration in other contexts <h3>has raised strong objections, most notably in connection with the Total Information Awareness system</h3>, developed by the Pentagon for tracking terror suspects, and the Department of Homeland Security’s Capps program for screening airline passengers. Both programs were ultimately scrapped after public outcries over possible threats to privacy and civil liberties.

But the Bush administration regards the N.S.A.’s ability to trace and analyze large volumes of data as critical to its expanded mission to detect terrorist plots before they can be carried out, officials familiar with the program say. Administration officials maintain that the system set up by Congress in 1978 under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act does not give them the speed and flexibility to respond fully to terrorist threats at home.

A former technology manager at a major telecommunications company said that since the Sept. 11 attacks, the leading companies in the industry have been storing information on calling patterns and giving it to the federal government to aid in tracking possible terrorists.

‘’All that data is mined with the cooperation of the government and shared with them, and since 9/11, there’s been much more active involvement in that area,'’ said the former manager, a telecommunications expert who did not want his name or that of his former company used because of concern about revealing trade secrets.

<h3>Such information often proves just as valuable to the government as eavesdropping on the calls themselves</h3>, the former manager said.

Several officials said that after President Bush’s order authorizing the N.S.A. program, senior government officials arranged with officials of some of the nation’s largest telecommunications companies to gain access to switches that act as gateways at the borders between the United States’ communications networks and international networks. The identities of the corporations involved could not be determined.

The switches are some of the main arteries for moving voice and some Internet traffic into and out of the United States, and, with the globalization of the telecommunications industry in recent years, many international-to-international calls are also routed through such American switches.

Historically, the American intelligence community has had close relationships with many communications and computer firms and related technical industries. <h3>But the N.S.A.’s backdoor access to major telecommunications switches on American soil with the cooperation of major corporations represents a significant expansion of the agency’s operational capability</h3>, according to current and former government officials.

Phil Karn, a computer engineer and technology expert at a major West Coast telecommunications company, said access to such switches would be significant. ‘’If the government is gaining access to the switches like this, what you’re really talking about is the capability of an enormous vacuum operation to sweep up data,'’ he said......
Quote:
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/02/24/...-in-name-only/

<h2 class="title"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2006/02/24/national-journal-total-information-awareness-stopped-in-name-only/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to 'National Journal: Total Information Awareness ‘Stopped In Name Only’'">National Journal: Total Information Awareness ‘Stopped In Name Only’</a><span class="storyexpander"><a class="storyexpander" id="exlink1-19090">&raquo;</a></span></h2>

<p><img src="/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/tia.jpg" class="imgright" alt="" />The National Journal has <a href="http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2006/0223nj1.htm">published a major exposé</a> on Total Information Awareness, the controversial data mining program that Congress voted to terminate in 2003. </p>
<p>Earlier this month, ThinkProgress <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2006/02/11/tia-lives/">noted</a> a Newsweek story reporting that “very quietly, the core of TIA survives with a new codename of Topsail.” The National Journal adds several new details to the picture.</p>
<p>The core components of TIA have been moved to the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Advanced_Research_and_Development_Activity">Advanced Research and Development Activity</a>, housed at NSA headquarters. <strong>According to the Journal, “The names of key projects were changed, apparently to conceal their identities, but their funding remained intact, often under the same contracts.”</strong> Emails written by subcontractors working to design these components show that the program continues under the codename “Basketball”:</p>

<blockquote><p>Congress’s decision to pull TIA’s funding in late 2003 “caused a significant amount of uncertainty for all of us about the future of our work,” Hicks executive Brian Sharkey wrote in an e-mail to subcontractors at the time. <strong>“Fortunately,” Sharkey continued, “a new sponsor has come forward that will enable us to continue much of our previous work.” Sources confirm that this new sponsor was ARDA. Along with the new sponsor came a new name. “We will be describing this new effort as ‘Basketball,’ ” Sharkey wrote</strong>, apparently giving no explanation of the name’s significance.</p></blockquote>

<p>Also notable is testimony given earlier this month by National Intelligence Director John Negroponte. As we <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2006/02/03/intel-stonewalling/">pointed out</a> at the time, Negroponte claimed ignorance about the status of TIA:</p>
<blockquote><p>WYDEN: Mr. Director, is it correct that when John Poindexter’s program, Operation Total Information Awareness, was closed, that several of Mr. Poindexter’s projects were moved to various intelligence agencies?</p>
<p>NEGROPONTE: I don’t know the answer to that question.</p></blockquote>
<p>Today’s report suggests that answer was misleading at best. Not only does it appear that Negroponte was aware of the ongoing activities, his office will soon control them.</p>
<blockquote><p><strong>ARDA now is undergoing some changes of its own. The outfit is being taken out of the NSA, placed under the control of Negroponte’s office, and given a new name.</strong> … Officials with the intelligence director’s office did not respond to multiple requests for comment on this story.</p></blockquote>

Quote:
http://www.aclum.org/issues/ice_doc_gallery.php

"Endgame" Documents: Before and After

On March 26, 2007, the Boston Globe ran our <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/03/26/inhumane_raid_was_just_one_of_many/">op-ed</a> about operation Endgame, the plan to remove all 12 million undocumented immigrants from the United States by 2012. We wrote the piece to point out that the March 2007 raid in New Bedford by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents was not just an isolated incident, but part of a detailed and ambitious plan that will likely require similar tactics on an even greater scale.

After that (and starting the very next day), something interesting happened. While <a href="http://aclumedia.blogspot.com/2007/04/lte-immigration-op-ed-new-aclu-low.html">publicly</a> taking issue with our assertion that Endgame uses tactics similar to the ethnic cleansing we saw in the Balkans during the 1990s -- lightning raids, mass arrests, packed detention centers, and mass deportations -- ICE has quietly removed documents about operation Endgame from its website, ice.gov.

Fortunately, we anticipated this and saved copies.

The operation Endgame strategic plan itself used to be available online <a href="http://www.ice.gov/doclib/pi/dro/endgame.pdf">here</a>.
Update....the "here" link, in the last sentence, in the quote box above, is indeed, dead now, but.....

Stupid government stooges were embarrassed into removing their corporatist detention planning document, but it's still archived here:
http://web.archive.org/web/200609261...ro/endgame.pdf

<h3>Isn't it just a bit fucking curious that the mainstream media simply stopped digging to find the justification for the determination of Gonzales and Andrew Card to roust Ashcroft from his ICU hospital bed, while James Comey and FBI director Mueller had decided to resign if Gonzales and Card succeeded iin their Bush directed errand? The press dropped their inquiry, after James Comey's sensational confirmation of the Jan. 1, 2006 NY Times reporting on the confrontation, ....it's been a year since Comey's senate testimony.</h3>

I am not a sheep.....I am not a sheep....I am not a......

Last edited by host; 05-22-2008 at 04:08 AM..
host is offline  
Old 05-22-2008, 05:12 AM   #15 (permalink)
let me be clear
 
ottopilot's Avatar
 
Location: Waddy Peytona

Last edited by ottopilot; 06-12-2008 at 06:55 PM..
ottopilot is offline  
Old 05-22-2008, 11:03 AM   #16 (permalink)
Banned
 
So which will it be.... marginalization of the most serious domestic threat to "our way of life", in the modern era, via taunts that are the device of those intent on avoiding any admission that there is a problem? The avoidance, considering the quality of sources supporting the argument here, that there is indeed, a grave problem, is all the more puzzling to me, because those going out of their way to avoid discussion while attempting to derail it, have to live here in the US, just like I do.....

Do you think any of the unlawful domestic intrusion that appears to be taking place, might impact the integrity of elections, when the US intelligence "TSAR", Negroponte, admitted he did not even know what became of the assts of "TIA", could be a clue on how to answer the question?
host is offline  
Old 05-22-2008, 11:11 AM   #17 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
We won't know until lame duck day arrives. Until then there's not a lot that can be done besides continuing to demand our representatives attempt to impeach Bush and continue to protest and share information.

If that day comes, then things will change.
Willravel is offline  
Old 05-22-2008, 11:29 AM   #18 (permalink)
Tilted Cat Head
 
Cynthetiq's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
their planning is to put fear in us....

this OP is to put fear in us for them refusing to leave...

either way someone is trying to manipulate someone else with fear.

to quote Joshua: A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.
Cynthetiq is offline  
Old 05-22-2008, 12:16 PM   #19 (permalink)
Confused Adult
 
Shauk's Avatar
 
Location: Spokane, WA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthetiq
The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?
and this is why I try to avoid political discussion.
Shauk is offline  
Old 05-22-2008, 06:06 PM   #20 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Byrnison's Avatar
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthetiq
to quote Joshua: A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shauk
and this is why I try to avoid political discussion.
Woah, a "Wargames" reference(!!!), and a statement that echoes my reason for lurking in politics but rarely if ever posting. Sorry, I couldn't let that somewhat obscure and memory-inducing quote go without comment. /threadjack
Byrnison is offline  
 

Tags
due, fear, leave, plan, planning, refusal, us


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:30 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360