Saturday, June 30, 2007

"Pilots For 911 Truth Presents.. Volume 1" -- New DVD!

- Presents... Volume 1 - Jam packed DVD of the finest has to offer thus far. Excellent to copy and hand out to the "stubborn".

Compilation Of Presentations made by members. Featuring Flight Data Recorder presentation by Calum Douglas in London, a chat with current Captain of jetBlue Airways and Former USAF Accident Investigation Board President LtCol Jeff Latas, interview with Air Force Fighter Pilot LtCol Guy Razer including (lack of) NORAD response on September 11, 2001, and a discussion with Captain Dan Govatos -- FAA Designated Examiner/Airline Check Airman who attempts to duplicate the attacks on the World Trade Center with his pilots at his airline in an airline simulator. Also includes interview with Co-Founder Rob Balsamo regarding Flight Data Recorder Raw file decode. We are currently in the process of attempting to raise funds for a future conference. A donation of 14.95 includes shipping within the USA.
(scroll to bottom to get your high quality copy)

Toledo, Ohio,Tuesday July 10th ** Dr. Bob Bowman ** speaking at UT

Hello everyone,
UT ANTI-WAR is sponsoring a night with Dr. Bob Bowman Lt. Col. USAF ret. 
Tuesday July 10th in room #2592 of the Student Union at the University of Toledo.
Starting at 5:30 p.m.
Dr. Bowman is currently on a country-wide speaking tour.
From Dr. Bowman's Website:
Dr. Bowman challenges us to "Take Back America" for the people. He explains why we need a government that:
(1) Follows the Constitution
(2) Honors the Truth, and
(3) Serves the People.
Think what a difference that would make! No more imperial presidency. No more undeclared wars of aggression. No more spying on the American people. No more jailing of dissidents. No more corporations importing and exploiting millions of illegal immigrants to drive down wages. No more exporting of jobs. No more NAFTA. No more North American Union. No more government lies, false-flag attacks, and cover-ups. No more corporate welfare. No more health plans written by insurance companies and pharmaceutical manufacturers. No more energy policies written by Exxon and Enron. No more trillions in debt. Most importantly, no more using our sons and daughters to kill Arabs for the oil companies. Let's "Take Back America !!"
Please visit for more info on Dr. Bowman
Don't miss this opportunity to see the man called "The Best Public Speaker in the Country" ( Los Angeles Times )
Hope to see everyone there!!

Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when.


Hello everyone!

What could be more patriotic than expressing your freedom of speech?? On Wed. 4th of July local activists are meeting downtown at 5:00 pm by the entrance to COSI to do some street action: hold signs/banners and pass out literature and dvds. We will be out from 5:00 to 8:30 or 9:00. Everyone is welcome to come down and join us- there will be members of UT ANTI-WAR, Toledo 9-11 Truth, and others. You can do whatever kind of activism you want - if you have an issue that you want to spread the word about we would love to have you expressing your freedoms with us!! The more the merrier. Hope to see you all there.


Fwd: Coming to a town near you.

Israeli 911 terrorism

A FOX news report about the Israeli 911 terrorism ties. Israelis caught but later shipped to Israel as "art students".

TruthBurn Art Project

Burning Man has given conditional approval to the TruthBurn Art Project. The head of the Art Project Dept. for Burning Man stated today that the project was very ambitious and interesting. We need to address some questions that Burning Man has regarding our use of fire and flame effects. The TruthBurn art sculpture will be engulfed in 6' high propane flames at night to commemorate the loss of life at 9/11 and loss of life in its aftermath all over the globe. Thermite or thermate cutter charges will bring the structure down in a "controlled demolition" towards the end of the week long Burning Man festival. Spokespersons from the truth movement will be on hand to answer questions from the press and festival participants. The partly destroyed letters from the sculpture that spell the word "Truth" will then be available for art galleries, public protests and nationwide calls for a new independent investigation into the events around 9/11. Architects Richard Gage and Scott Page and civil engineer, Charles Pegelow are advising and participating in the development process for TruthBurn.
We still need to raise funds to support this worthy endeavor. Thanks to Carol Brouillet, tax deductible donations can be made to TruthBurn through the Northern California 9/11 Truth Alliance, PO Box 60511, Palo Alto, CA 94306.Please state that your donation is for TruthBurn.
For more on the project please visit:
For Burning Man:

A good NZ 9/11 Truther Story

Hey Alfons,

Friday in NZ was an interesting day for this 911 Truther. We were headed to Auckland to see Axle Rose and his new Guns n Roses (which GNR sucked) and Skid Row (Skid Row ROCKED) when I pulled over to fill up with petro and a lady pulled in that was following us.

She liked my "911 was an inside job" bumper sticker and was asking where she can get one and for how much, so I fixed her up with a couple and some fact cards and a DVD, she was stoked to get it for free and we exchanged names and numbers. She was a Maori woman, a NZ native.

We picked up a Maori chick hitchhiking along the way and I gave her some cards and a DVD and she too was aware that the US government is perhaps the biggest sponsor of terrorism.

So we were off to Auckland and planning on meeting up with another Truther from Auckland (a pacific islander) that I sent some stickers and DVD's and fact cards to from the first package and was going to deliver a few more.

He had sent me a text message saying there was a room reserved for me at the Copthorne Hotel in the name of Tony Fitzgerald

The really cool part is that he had a connection in the hotel industry and he fixed us up with a room across the street from the arena at NO CHARGE and included free breakfast for 2. He done that because I am a 911 truther and had mailed him a truth package.

We got to meet up with him and have a beer and talk about politics, the NWO, JFK, the media, and the like. As I said he's from the Pacific Islands and knows more about the US Constitution than most americans.

I thought I would share that story with you, I figure your friend Seven would probably get a kick out of hearing that also.

Take Care, I'll be in touch.

Soldiers Speak Out!!

Soldiers Speak Out is ready for the world to see!!
Order more today and save on shipping!
We are happy to announce

Soldiers Speak Out
Soldiers Speak Out is a powerful, first-hand testament to the reality of the military experience told entirely in the words of American veterans who have been to war and are now opposing it. We hear how they came to join the military, about their experiences in training and in war, and what led to the turning point when they decided they could no longer, in good conscience, participate in the war or keep silent. This half-hour documentary sheds light on the growing and courageous anti-war and anti-occupation movement within the military and their families, and serves as a counter-recruitment and organizing tool for activists, schools and organizations. It provides a sober view of the war in Iraq and an important counterpoint to the 'stay-the-course' rhetoric of the Bush administration. "This DVD needs to be seen by every high school student in the country. It's short enough to show in a class. It effectively counters the disinformation recruiters routinely tell young people about enlisting." --Donnely/Colt Progressive Resources Catalog

"...This is truly the film I have been waiting for--a film I want to be able to hand to everyone sporting a magnetic car ribbon proclaiming "Support Our Troops." Covered are the military's access to the personal records of every child enrolled in public school which are used for aggressive recruitment purposes and brainwashing. The lie of this war as fighting for democracy and freedom is exposed by each soldier interviewed.... The horrors of depleted uranium munitions used in the war and the resultant birth defects among children fathered by returning GIs is revealed. But what is most important about this film is the recounting by our soldiers of the brainwashing techniques used by the military to train them into becoming soulless killing machines." --The Idaho Observer, July 2006
"It's wonderful! It's definitely one of the films we'd like to highlight at screening events. Its 28-minute length and focus on military recruitment make it perfect for teachers to use in high school and college classrooms. I particularly loved the extended interviews with Stan Goff and other veterans."
--Glenn Kissack, Educators to Stop the War, Forest Hill, NY
Buy Now!
Support The Truth

For more information about our other products please visit our website

Friday, June 29, 2007

An Interview with Presidential Candidate Congressman Ron Paul

Muckraker Report: Last February, I published an article at the Muckraker Report called “9/11 Widows Keep on Asking the Tough Questions,” in which I interviewed four out of five of the “Jersey girls,” the 9/11 widows who spearheaded the drive to form the 9/11 Commission. In that article, Lorie van Auken calls the 9/11 Commission Report a “pathetic excuse of a report,” in which “seventy percent of our questions went unanswered.” Widow Monica Gabrielle had this to say: “Addressing all these unanswered questions out there is about more than simply trying to quell conspiracy theories. It’s about making sure Americans are safe by revealing the unfettered truth about the failures. Because you can’t make recommendations on distortions, omissions, and half-truths, which is basically what the 9/11 Commission did.” As president, would you be in favor of reopening investigation into the 9/11 attacks?

Congressman Ron Paul: If the 9/11 families aren’t satisfied with the results of the 9/11 Commission, than neither am I. I’m in favor of an independant investigation, provided costs are kept in check.

"Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici"

"Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici" = Latin, "I by the power of Truth, while living, have conquered the Universe".

Thursday, June 28, 2007

Dr. Robert Bowman's Patriot Tour Stops in Toledo, Ohio

Dr. Robert Bowman's Patriot Tour Stops in Toledo, Ohio July 10, 2007 5:30 to 7:30 PM at the University of Toledo Student Union room # 2592
Sponsored by "UT ANTI-WAR", Toledo 9/11 Truth, and Veterans for 9/11 Truth.
Learn More

Kurt Sonnenfeld: FEMA 9/11 Whistleblower?

- What exactly was he able to document at the WTC site?
I was the only person, with camera in hand, with total and absolute access to any area of Ground Zero and the WTC. Any other cameras that were within that area would have been confiscated and the the person carrying them arrested.
- But what exactly are in these images of yours that could contradict the official US government version of events on 9/11?
What I saw at certain moments and in certain very frightening, I don't know who to put it in words, what I saw leads me to the terrible conclusion that there was foreknowledge of what was going to happen. The precautions that were taken to save certain things that the authorities there considered irreplaceable or invaluable. For example, certain things were missing that could only have been removed with a truck, yet after the first plane hit one of the towers, everything in manhattan collapsed and no one could have gotten near the towers to do that.
- What things were removed?
Several offices of the US intelligence agencies were located in the WTC, including the second most important CIA building in the country. From some of these locations certain documentation that was irreplaceable was removed. I don't want to give too many details because our future, our lives, depend on this. The information of which I speak is already distributed in several places."

Wednesday, June 27, 2007

ABCNews Deletes my reply -- again...

ABCNews deletes my reply AGAIN! How blatant can they be? Wow.

Front page news coming up in the near future for Pilots For 9/11 Truth.

new screen shot of my third reply to them..

What they dont want others to see.. my first reply...

QUOTE Mr Forbes,

Please quote a theory from our website at

I havent had a chance to read through the replies. But please check our homepage for corrections/comments to this article as we did not write it.

However, we did write this press release...

The Flight Data Recorder information does not support the govt story. When asked, the FBI and NTSB refuse to comment. Recordings can be found at our site. This should raise a serious eyebrow for any journalist who has respect for his work.

AA77 was never positively identified through Radar, parts or eyewitnesses (not sure how an eyewitness can positively ID a flight number) as the plane which struck the pentagon.

The parts found on location were never matched with maintenance logs, please read article(1) from Accident Investigator LtCol George Nelson USAF (Ret) (bottom of page).

Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not offer theory. We do not place blame at this point in time (unlike the govt who had their man 2 days after 9/11 yet the FBI doesnt seem to have him listed as wanted for the crime perpetrated on 9/11(2) due to the fact they feel there is "No Hard Evidedence linking Bin Laden to 9/11")(3). Any responsible journalist doing their job properly will see this clearly.

Surely any investigative reporter would want to offer responsible journalism instead of typical ad homs, and ridicule as an excuse to not do his/her job..Why is mainstream media not doing their job?

1. (bottom of page)



Pilots For Truth wrote:
ABCNews forums with Richard Forbes (never heard of him actually) replying to the latest article.. when i replied.. they deleted it... but you can see it at below link.. .also scroll down to see the reaction to the censorship and how we will proceed if it happens again...

Interesting Link

Below is a link to a documented article which contends that the U.S. has been responsible for an estimated 20 to 30 million deaths in the world since WWII. I thought that you might find it useful as background information.

James A. Lucas

D.C. Madam reveals name of Cheney in interview

The Free Press <> wrote:
The Free Press offers this breaking news story via the Progressive Revolution Radio program:

Editor's note: The D.C. madam spoke about the reason she is facing RICO
charges, insisting that her case is a "political case." About her records, she
said "...once these records are released en masse to a multitude of responsible
investigators and journalists be they independents or mainstream, the truth
will be gotten to. And in those records there are probably 20, 50, 100, possibly
more, Randall Tobiases, Dick Morrises, Harlan Ullmans, and yes, the name of
Dick Cheney has been touted on more than one occasion in those records. And,
can you imagine the -- it will be Watergate times how many people!" The D.C.
Madam says her client list includes 10,000 people over "thirteen or so years." is a streaming media project of,
Bob Fitrakis, Editor.

In peace...

The Free Press

Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!

Tuesday, June 26, 2007

Arrest warrant for Bush and Cheney!

Watch Video:
Arrest warrant for Bush and Cheney!
Submitted by tosca2 on Tue, 06/26/2007 - 9:56pm. Bush Junta
On June 16th during operation "Shock and Awe on the Oregon Coast",,
members of SQUADRON13-DEPLOYED recorded this arrest warrant for Bush
and Cheney at City Hall in Newport Oregon:

As former members of the armed services of the United States of
America, we swore to support and defend the Constitution of the
United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Upon
discharge from service we did not renounce that oath, which remains
our sacred duty.
It has long been apparent to us that our Constitution is under attack
and has been deliberately and relentlessly undermined by domestic
enemies - indeed, by our highest government officials who took and
have violated that same oath.
Many Constitutional crimes have been committed by the Bush
administration, including warrantless electronic surveillance of
American citizens in violation of the 4th Amendment, failure to
provide due process rights in violation of the 5th and 6th
Amendments, infliction of cruel and unusual punishments in violation
of the 8th Amendment, usurpation of powers granted exclusively to
Congress in violation of Article I, Section 1, and violation of
Article VI, Paragraph 2, which states that all international treaties
to which the United States is a signatory are "the Supreme law of the
The wars prosecuted by the Bush administration in our name with our
national resources are violations of all treaties defining the
international laws of war since 1928, including the United Nations
and Nuremberg charters, which uniformly prohibit wars of aggression.
As violations of these international covenants and pledges, they also
constitute high crimes against the United States Constitution.
Furthermore, the illegal occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan and
other war crimes including torture and use of internationally
prohibited weapons such as depleted uranium, violate the Geneva
Conventions of 1949, thereby further violating the Supreme Law of our
Our oath therefore compels us to issue a citizens' warrant for the
immediate arrest of George W. Bush and Richard Cheney, President and
Vice-President of the United States.
We call upon President Bush and Vice-President Cheney to surrender
themselves to federal law enforcement authorities or to any private
group of Americans that is prepared to make these citizens arrests.
The right of citizens arrest is deeply grounded in English common law
and is constitutionally protected under the 9th Amendment, derived
from the natural right of self-defense and defense of others. A
citizens arrest is valid when arresting citizens have a reasonable
belief that the suspect has committed a felony.
We believe that felonies of great magnitude have been committed, and
the evidentiary bases of these are conclusively established in the
public record.
We charge these officials with conspiracy to commit genocide against
the citizens of another sovereign state, with conspiracy to commit
mass murder of American citizens by waging a fraudulently justified
war, and other high crimes described on our website,
Our charges include war crimes and crimes against humanity for which
we will seek extradition for trial in the international criminal
court at the Hague, Netherlands, following trial in the United States
for treason and other high crimes against our constitutional
Source: and

Squadron13 Aviation Museum
& Flights of Thought on War and Politics -

founder- Veterans Against Torture

member: Vietnam Veterans Against the War, Veterans For Peace

"In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies,
but the silence of our friends" - Martin Luther King, Jr.


Vancouver Conference: Drs Deagle and Jones debate Micro Nukes in the WTC

--- In, "Ed Ward, MD" <edward19@...> wrote:

Vancouver Conference: Drs Deagle and Jones debate Micro Nukes in the
(Isotope ratios data this week - hopefully)

Related Articles - Chronological:

Bombs in the WTC Buildings Proves Nothing to Racist-Fascist Bigots

Micro-Nukes at the WTC

Update: Micro-Nukes at the WTC

Update: Proves Micro Nukes in the WTC

Prof. Jones Denies, Ignores, Misrepresents Proven Tritium Levels 55
Times Background Levels

Steven Jones Replies To Dr. Ed Ward

Prof Jones Gladly Assists Testing Unaffected WTC Items

Major Wallace Cole Hogan Jr.

---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Major Wallace Cole Hogan Jr.
From: "Thomas Potter"
Date: Tue, June 26, 2007 12:15 pm

Major Wallace Cole Hogan Jr. was reported by the media
to have perished on 9/11/01 at the Pentagon. His death
is not listed in the Social Security Death Index.
However, his father's death is reported in the SSDI.

WALLACE C HOGAN b.08 Jul 1927 d.18 Dec 2002
SS# 254-34-5612 Issued:Georgia

And even though it has been over 6 1/2 years since his
reported death, there is still a phone listing in his
name as well as property listed in his name. Pretty
good for a dead guy. It also appears that his wife,
Major Perrach Phermsangngam, never took his last name
when they were married. Maybe it's because the name
Phermsangngam just rolls off the tongue so easily!

Hogan, Wallace
[undisclosed] Collard St (3206)
Alexandria, VA 22306

Mailing Address: 3206 COLLARD ST ALEXANDRIA VA 22306
Book 11224

Maj. Wallace Cole Hogan Jr

It was in Panama that he met his wife-to-be, Pat, an
Air Force doctor. When Hogan fell ill, Pat was
assigned to treat him (prostrate), his father said.
The two were together in Panama for a year. More than
three years ago, they were transferred to Washington,
Hogan to the Pentagon and his wife to Andrews Air
Force Base. They would have celebrated their second
anniversary in October.


Maj. Pat Phermsangngam Hogan, that Hogan's husband of
two years, Cole, was missing. Cole Hogan was a major
in the Army Special Forces and was assigned to the
American College of Physicians
Governor's Newsletter, Winter 2001
Lt. Col. Arnyce Pock, MD, FACP
Governor, U.S. Air Force Chapter
Welcome to Our Newest SAFP Members!
Maj Perrach Phermsangngam - Alexandria, VA

Matuszak, Theresa
3206 Collard St
Alexandria, VA 22306-1420
(703) 768-1846

‘911 and the British Broadcasting Conspiracy’

`911 and the British Broadcasting Conspiracy'

A new British documentary has been released focusing on the BBC's
selective and distorted coverage of the events of 9/11.
`911 and the British Broadcasting Conspiracy' features ex-MI5 officer
David Shayler and was produced by Adrian Connock, who was also
responsible for the `Mind the Gap' documentary that exposed the false
flag terrorist attacks of 7/7/05.
Special attention has been paid to the BBC's `Conspiracy Files'
programme which aired on BBC 2, February 18th 2007 and omitted hardcore
evidence proving 9/11 was an inside job.

David Ray Griffin and Rob Balsamo Tonight on Revolution Radio]

Follow up -

David Ray and Rob Balsamo will be on Revolution Radio with Mike Swenson tonight discussing this latest development. 10-12pm eastern.

Breaking News! - Did AA 77 Have Onboard Phones? - David Ray Griffin and Rob Balsamo]

Full Story at

SHORTVIDEO==Paul Slams Bush's 'Demented Philosophy Of Conquest'

Ron Paul is OurPlan Paul Slams Bush's 'Demented Philosophy Of
Conquest' - Vid

Watch this and see why he is such a threat to so many.

Beware the needle; check to
see why...
"If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what
medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as
the souls who live under tyranny." - Thomas Jefferson

Democrats plan to cut Cheney out of executive funding bill

Democrats plan to cut Cheney out of executive funding bill
Josh CatonePublished: Saturday June 23, 2007
reddit_title='Democrats plan to cut Cheney out of executive funding bill'
Print This Email This

Following Vice President Dick Cheney's assertion that his office is not a part of the executive branch of the US government, Democratic Caucus Chairman Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) plans to introduce an amendment to the the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill to cut funding for Cheney's office.
The amendment to the bill that sets the funding for the executive branch will be considered next week in the House of Representatives.
"The Vice President has a choice to make. If he believes his legal case, his office has no business being funded as part of the executive branch," said Emanuel in a statement released to RAW STORY. "However, if he demands executive branch funding he cannot ignore executive branch rules. At the very least, the Vice President should be consistent. This amendment will ensure that the Vice President's funding is consistent with his legal arguments."
At a press briefing yesterday, White House Deputy Press Secretary Dana Perino said that Cheney's assertion that he operates outside of the executive branch of government was "an interesting constitutional question that people can debate" and a "non-issue."
On Thursday, Emanuel suggested that if Cheney feels his office is not part of the executive branch "he should return the salary the American taxpayers have been paying him since January 2001, and move out of the home for which they are footing the bill."
Emanuel also released the following graphic satirizing the situation:

Monday, June 25, 2007

LaRouche's Remarks Interweaved with the WAPO

LaRouche's Remarks Interweaved with the WAPO: The History of BAE and the Continuing Legacy of 9-11. June 24, 2007 (LPAC) Lyndon LaRouche Reports: Yesterday's Sunday edition of the WASHINGTON POST leads its front page with a remarkable echo of my own opening statements of the past Thursday International LPAC webcast. That Post feature, which is presented as the first, Sunday, section of a four-part series is splashed on the cover page under the rubric of A Different Understanding with the President. The POST describes that Sunday feature as "the first of a four-part series investigating the vice presidency, the most influential man ever to hold that office. The POST continues: The articles examine Cheney's largely hidden and little-understood role in crafting policies for the war on terror, the economy and the environment."
Dick Cheney looks out hishelicopter, as he returns toto the White House from an undisclosed location Sept. 12, 2001.
The content of the first section of that series, appearing in the Sunday edition is clearly a reflection of my own treatment of the same subject- matter in the opening portion of my international webcast of this past Thursday.
To understand what the POST is doing in its own report, it is necessary to intersperse certain of my opening remarks in that Thursday's international webcast, with the POST's own account of the same 2001 developments preceding and leading through the terrifying events of September 11, 2001.
First, one must read carefully my explicit, early January 2001 warning of an expected event like that which was to be experienced on September 11 of that year. (See: "Reichstag Fire" warning, Jan. 3, 2001 webcast) Second, one should compare my description of the developments around Cheney during the evening of September 11, 2001 with my own reading of the meaning of those developments, as I reported my own reading during the hours immediately following those attacks, and referenced the echoes of Hermann Goering's terrorist firing of the Reichstag, which give Adolf Hitler dictatorial powers during the early hours and days of the Reichstag burning.
(See: LaRouche Interview by Dr. Jack Stockwell During the Sept 11th Events or Listen to the audio: Lyndon Larouche Live Audio Interview)
The editors of this Briefing lead must interweave those remarks by me, and now by the POST's features, in the relevant orders. As I said, and as the POST's account suggests, there is a crucial link between the history of BAE and the continuing legacy of 9-11, a legacy which now burns brighter than at any time since the immediate weeks and months following the 9-11 events themselves.
The interweaving of these facts now follows.
In his opening remarks during the June 21 International Webcast, Lyn made the following statement, which includes his explicit warning in January 2001 of an event like that experienced on September 11, 2001:
"The world has been living under a system, which is the 9/11 system, which already existed, as I warned at the beginning of 2001, before President George W. Bush was inaugurated for the first time in January of 2001. Where I said: "The world system has reached the point, that an onrushing collapse of the system is now in process. We can not determine exactly when or how this will occur, but we know the following two things:
Number 1, we know that this President and this Presidency cannot deal with this crisis. Therefore, we must expect that the entire world will be subjected to the kind of thing we experienced in February of 1933, when Hermann Goering, the man behind the throne, the sort of the Dick Cheney of the Hitler administration, orchestrated the burning of the Reichstag as a terrorist event.
And this terrorist event was used on that night, or the following day, to install Hitler with dictatorial powers, which Hitler never lost, until the day he died!"
And I said then, the danger is that something like this will occur, under present trends in the United States, and it did occur: And it was called 9/11.
Now, without going into the details of what we know and what we don't know about how 9/11 was orchestrated, we know that the only means by which this kind of thing is orchestrated, is found in one location: In a financial complex which is centered in the identity of the BAE. Now, that's the mystery of 9/11. How it was, the mechanics, that's irrelevant. We'll find out. And everybody in and around government who understands these matters, knows that! And that's where the heat is here."
Later in the Thursday June 21 web-cast, during the Questions and Answers, Lyndon LaRouche directly addressed the efforts on the part of Cheney during the evening of September 11, 2001 to use the events of that day as the pretext for ramming through legislation or orders which would establish a dictatorship in the United States.
LAROUCHE: "I think that the relevant scoundrels in the British Isles will probably do something horrible to Dick Cheney, not because they don't like what he was trying to do, but because he failed to do it. The very question is a very significant question. Here you have exposure of the fact that the long-standing ambassador from Saudi Arabia to the United States, was a key figure in taking graft to the tune of about $2 billion, among other things, principally while an ambassador. And that he was also a British agent, functioning under the mask of being something else. So, the question is why and how was the secret kept? There was no real secret about this! You see, this has been known.
"Let me be very blunt without saying too much. This is the question, as I indicated today, which has been on my mind, and the mind of a great many other people, since before 9/11. As I said earlier today, this was the question in my mind when I made a public statement, a broadcast statement from here in the United States, prior to the actual inauguration of George W. Bush in 2001, that the economic situation, the pattern of the economic situation is such, that we must expect within the reasonably near future, that someone will try to do to the United States, what Hermann Goering did to make Hitler a dictator in Germany. And I saw that happen on September 11, 2001. I saw it. That is not only my thought. That has been the thought of many people.
"How was it done to us? It was known, for example, that most of the dead bodies that showed up, as of evidentiary significance, in the wake of 9/11, were of Saudi or related provenance. Somebody set that operation up! Now, al-Qaeda? Does that help us? No, it doesn't. Al-Qaeda was an asset. Again, he's [Osama bin Laden] a Saudi. He was an asset of George H.W. Bush and the British, in the operations in organizing the Afghanistan war of the 1980s. Osama bin-Laden is a key figure, who was recruited by these guys, out of the Saudis, to lead that operation. Al-Qaeda is a product of that operation! It's an operation which was British-American sponsored, and Saudi-sponsored. The dead bodies which were draped upon the doorsteps, as evidence in the wake of the bombing of 9/11, were largely of this provenance. And the question has been in the mind of everyone, since that time, knowing how this thing works. Wow! What's the evidence? Well, you've got ten prisoners dead. It's hard to get 'em to talk after they're dead!
"So that's what the issues is here. The issue is that, therefore, don't you think that there has not been a big effort to put a lid on a story as big as this has been, inside the U.S. press? Do you think that this story was not available, and it's significance was not apparent--at least to some degree--to every leading press in the United States---television, print? Why didn't they report it? It happened! And did this not involve money? Does not everyone know, that to run an operation like 9/11 was run, it takes many billions of dollars. It takes complicity of a government, or one or two governments?
That this is a coup, an attempted coup d'etat, in the same way that Hermann Goering set fire to the Reichstag in order to make Hitler a dictator? Wasn't there an effort on the evening of September 11th, in the evening discussions, to ram through legislation, or ram through orders, which would establish a dictatorship in the United States, that didn't quite succeed, almost succeeded but not quite? And, have we not been run and dominated by this ever since then, by the apparatus which was put into effect on the pretext of 9/11? Don't you think that everybody who is cognizant in the United States at every position of power, has not had these thoughts, repeatedly, persistently, over these intervening years? Do you not think that everybody who saw the evidence as it's come out now, who is in an appropriate position of power to understand how these things are done, has not had these thoughts? Do you not think that they were terrified, to death practically, of being involved in exposing this?"
Now compare LaRouche's remarks as quoted above with the first part of the Washington Post's four-part series on Dick Cheney published yesterday.
The Washington Post authors Barton Gellman and Jo Becker document in detail the coup d'etat attempted by Cheney and a coterie of co-conspirators even as the World Trade Center towers in New York City were collapsing. Particularly revealing is the description of Cheney's emotional state of mind on 9/11 as the south tower collapsed in stark contrast to others in the Presidential Emergency Operations Center that morning. One witness said: "There was a groan in the room that I won't forget, ever. It seemed like one groan from everyone,"--among them Rice; her deputy, Stephen Hadley, economic adviser Lawrence B. Lindsey, counselor Matalin; Cheney's chief of staff, Libby; and the vice president's wife. Cheney, on the other hand, made no sound. The witness, reading from a notebook of observations written that day, reported: "I remember turning my head and looking at the vice president, and his expression never changed."
The authors report, "Cheney closed his eyes against the image for one long, slow blink. Three people who were present, not all of them admirers, said they saw no sign then or later of the profound psychologial transformation that has often been imputed to Cheney. What they saw, they said, was extraordinary self-containment and a rapid shift of focus to the machinery of power. While others assessed casualties and the work of `first responders,' Cheney began planning for a conflict that would call upon lawyers as often as soldiers and spies.... With a small coterie of allies, Cheney supplied the rationale and political muscle to drive far-reaching legal changes through the White House, the Justice Department and the Pentagon."
Down in the bunker on 9/11, Cheney and Addington plotted to expand presidential powers. Before the day ended, Addington "joined forces with Timothy E. Flanigan, the deputy White House counsel, linked by secure video from the Situation Room. Flanigan patched in John C. Yoo at the Justice Department's fourth-floor command center. White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales joined later."
On Sept. 25, Yoo completed the memo justifying warrantless surveillance. They kept it secret from officials who were likely to object, specifically John B. Bellinger III, the ranking national security lawyer in the White House.
On Oct. 25, 2001, the chairmen and ranking minority members of the House and Senate intelligence committees were summoned to the White House for their first briefing on the warrantless surveillance program. Instead of meeting with Bush, they met with Cheney in the vice president's office. According to former Senator Bob Graham, Bush had told him that Cheney "has the portfolio for intelligence activites."
On Nov. 6, Yoo then wrote an opinion that said Bush does not need approval from Congress or the federal courts to try detainees before military commissions. When the Justice Secretary John Aschcroft went to the White House to object, again, the meeting was not with Bush, but with Cheney. Bush signed the order on Nov. 13.
Next Cheney pushed for detainees not to be covered by the Geneva Conventions as prisoners of war. When Bellinger sent a private legal warning to Rice opposing this, it was leaked to Cheney. Powell asked for a meeting with Bush, but within hours of making the request, a memo signed by Gonzales, but written by Addington was sent to Bush preempting Powell's opposition.
Thus, Cheney, whose code-name the Washington Post identifies as "Angler," and his legal co-conspirators, acting in the tradition of Carl Schmitt, the Nazi's "Crown Jurist," who was the author of the March 1933 legislation which enabled Hitler's dictatorship, used 9/11 as the Nazi's used the Reichstag fire to make an attempted coup d'etat against the U.S. Constitution.
As LaRouche stated during the Questions and Answers section of the webcast: "Now, what this means is, that Cheney is in deep kimchee!
First of all, because one of Cheney's functions was to be a control agent, to control the United States for London, under his wife's direction! His wife is practically a British imperial agent. He too. So now, his role has been depreciated greatly. He has failed to put the lid on the story. The story is now out. Cheney is in deep kimchee, and those who don't want to impeach Cheney are also in deep kimchee too."

Supreme Court hands Bush, GOP leaders, developers victories

News Updates from Citizens for Legitimate Government
25 Jun 2007
Supreme Court Limits Students' Speech Rights 25 Jun 2007 The Supreme Court tightened limits on student speech Monday, ruling against a high school student and his 14-foot-long ''Bong Hits 4 Jesus'' banner. Schools may prohibit student expression that can be interpreted as advocating drug use, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court in a 5-4 ruling.

Supreme Court bars taxpayers from suing over White House faith-based program 25 Jun 2007 The Supreme Court ruled Monday that ordinary taxpayers cannot challenge a White House initiative that helps religious charities get a share of federal money. The 5-4 decision blocks a lawsuit by a group of atheists and agnostics against eight Bush administration officials including the head of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives.

Supreme Court ends ban on corporate-funded campaign ads 25 Jun 2007 The Supreme Court gave President [sic] Bush and Republican leaders two important victories today by clearing the way for corporate-funded broadcast ads before next year's 'election' and by shielding the White House's "faith-based initiative" from challenge in the courts. Both came in 5-4 rulings led by new Chief inJustice John G. Roberts Jr.

Supreme Court Rules Against Environmentalists 25 Jun 2007 The Supreme Court sided with developers and the Bush administration Monday in a dispute with environmentalists over protecting endangered species. The court ruled 5-4 for home builders and the Environmental Protection Agency in a case that involved the intersection of two environmental laws, the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act.

Please forward this update to anyone you think might be interested. Those who'd like to be added to the Newsletter list can sign up: Please write to: for inquiries.

CLG Newsletter editor: Lori Price, Manager. Copyright © 2007, Citizens For Legitimate Government ® All rights reserved. CLG Founder and Chair is Michael Rectenwald, Ph.D.

LIKE WE' ve Been Saying - Bush's Mafia Whacks the Republic

Above The Law - Above The People
BushCo Mafia N COMPANY do NOT forget that STAND ALONE MAFIA that
Jolly Ollie talks about during IRAN / Bush Mafia / Contra



Bush claims oversight exemption too The SECRET GOVERNMENT

The White House says the president's own order on classified data
does not apply to his office or the vice president's.

By Josh Meyer, LA Times Staff Writer
June 23, 2007

Overseeing the overseers?
click to enlarge
WASHINGTON — The White House said Friday that, like Vice President
Dick Cheney's office, President Bush's office is not allowing an
independent federal watchdog to oversee its handling of classified
national security information.

An executive order that Bush issued in March 2003 — amending an
existing order — requires all government agencies that are part of
the executive branch to submit to oversight. Although it doesn't
specifically say so, Bush's order was not meant to apply to the vice
president's office or the president's office, a White House spokesman

The issue flared Thursday when Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles)
criticized Cheney for refusing to file annual reports with the
federal National Archives and Records Administration, for refusing to
spell out how his office handles classified documents, and for
refusing to submit to an inspection by the archives' Information
Security Oversight Office.


The archives administration has been pressing the vice president's
office to cooperate with oversight for the last several years,
contending that by not doing so, Cheney and his staff have created a
potential national security risk.

Bush amended the oversight directive in response to the Sept. 11
terrorist attacks to help ensure that national secrets would not be
mishandled, made public or improperly declassified.


The order aimed to create a uniform system for classifying,
declassifying and otherwise safeguarding national security
information. It gave the archives' oversight unit responsibility for
evaluating the effectiveness of each agency's classification
programs. It applied to the executive branch of government, mostly
agencies led by Bush administration appointees — not to legislative
offices such as Congress or to judicial offices such as the courts.

"Our democratic principles require that the American people be
informed of the activities of their government," the executive order

But from the start, Bush considered his office and Cheney's exempt
from the reporting requirements, White House spokesman Tony Fratto
said in an interview Friday.

Cheney's office filed the reports in 2001 and 2002 but stopped in

As a result, the National Archives has been unable to review how much
information the president's and vice president's offices are
classifying and declassifying. And the security oversight office
cannot inspect the president and vice president's executive offices
to determine whether safeguards are in place to protect the
classified information they handle and to properly declassify
information when required.

Those two offices have access to the most highly classified
information, including intelligence on terrorists and unfriendly
foreign countries.

Waxman and J. William Leonard, director of the Information Security
Oversight Office, have argued that the order clearly applies to all
executive branch agencies, including the offices of the vice
president and the president.

The White House disagrees, Fratto said.

"We don't dispute that the ISOO has a different opinion. But let's be
very clear: This executive order was issued by the president, and he
knows what his intentions were," Fratto said. "He is in compliance
with his executive order."

Fratto conceded that the lengthy directive, technically an amendment
to an existing executive order, did not specifically exempt the
president's or vice president's offices. Instead, it refers
to "agencies" as being subject to the requirements, which Fratto said
did not include the two executive offices. "It does take a little bit
of inference," Fratto said.

Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists'
government secrecy project, disputed the White House explanation of
the executive order.

He noted that the order defines "agency" as any executive agency,
military department and "any other entity within the executive branch
that comes into the possession of classified information" — which, he
said, includes Bush's and Cheney's offices.

Cheney's office drew criticism Thursday for claiming that it was
exempt from the reporting requirements because the vice president's
office is not fully within the executive branch. It cited his
legislative role as president of the Senate when needed to break a

At a Friday news conference, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said
constitutional scholars could debate that assertion.

But, she said, Cheney's office is exempt from the requirements
because the president intended him to be.

FYI: Bush Directive for a "Catastrophic Emergency" in America: Building a Justification for Waging War on Iran?

"Another [9/11 type terrorist] attack could create both a justification and an opportunity that is lacking today to retaliate against some known targets"
(Statement by Pentagon official, leaked to the Washington Post, 23 April 2006)
The US media consensus is that "the United States faces its greatest threat of a terrorist assault since the September 11 attacks" (USA Today, 12 February 2006) The American Homeland is threatened by " Islamic terrorists", allegedly supported by Tehran and Damascus.
America is under attack" by an illusive "outside enemy".
Concepts are turned upside down. War becomes Peace. "Offense" becomes a legitimate means of "self-defense". In the words of President Bush:
"Against this kind of enemy, there is only one effective response: We must go on the offense, stay on the offense, and take the fight to them." (President George W. Bush, CENTCOM Coalition Conference, May 1, 2007)
The intent is to seek a pretext to wage a preemptive war.
A "terrorist attack on America" could be used to justify, in the eyes of an increasingly credulous public opinion, on "humanitarian grounds", the launching of a major theater war directed against Iran and Syria.
Allegedly supported by Iran, the terrorists are said to possess nuclear capabilities. They are supposedly planning to explode "radiological dispersion devices" (RDD) or "dirty bombs" in densely populated urban areas in the US. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell had already forewarned in 2003 that, "It would be easy for terrorists to cook up radioactive ‘dirty’ bombs to explode inside the U.S. … How likely it is, I can't say..." (10 February 2003).
The sheer absurdity that Al Qaeda might have advanced capabilities to wage a nuclear attack on America is, nonetheless, pervasive in US media reports. Moreover, numerous drills and exercises, simulating a terrorist attack using nuclear devices, have been conducted in recent years, creating the illusion that "the threat is real":
"What we do know is that our enemies want to inflict massive casualties and that terrorists have the expertise to invent a wide range of attacks, including those involving the use of chemical, biological, radiological and even nuclear weapons. ... [E]xploding a small nuclear weapon in a major city could do incalculable harm to hundreds of thousands of people, as well as to businesses and the economy,...(US Congress, House Financial Services Committee, June 21, 2007).
Consistently since 911, the Bush administration has reminded Americans of the danger of a "Second 9/11":
"The near-term attacks ... will either rival or exceed the 9/11 attacks... And it's pretty clear that the nation's capital and New York city would be on any list..." (Former DHS Secretary Tom Ridge, December 2003)
"You ask, 'Is it serious?' Yes, you bet your life. People don't do that unless it's a serious situation." (Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, December 2003)
"... Credible reporting indicates that Al Qaeda is moving forward with its plans to carry out a large-scale attack in the United States in an effort to disrupt our democratic process... (Former DHS Secretary Tom Ridge, 8 July 2004)
"The enemy that struck on 9/11 is weakened and fractured yet it is still lethal and planning to hit us again." (Vice President Dick Cheney, 7 January 2006)
"We are still a nation at risk. Part of our strategy, of course, is to stay on the offense against terrorists who would do us harm. In other words, it is important to defeat them overseas so we never have to face them here. Nevertheless, we recognize that we've got to be fully prepared here at the homeland." (President George W. Bush February 8, 2006)
"Our main enemy is al Qaeda and its affiliates. Their allies choose their victims indiscriminately. They murder the innocent to advance a focused and clear ideology. They seek to establish a radical Islamic caliphate, so they can impose a brutal new order on unwilling people, much as Nazis and communists sought to do in the last century. This enemy will accept no compromise with the civilized world.... (President George W. Bush, CENTCOM Coalition Conference, May 1, 2007)
We're fighting a war on terror because the enemy attacked us first, and hit us hard. ... Al Qaeda's leadership has said they have the right to "kill four million Americans,... For nearly six years now, the United States has been able to defeat their attempts to attack us here at home. Nobody can guarantee that we won't be hit again. ... (Vice President Dick Cheney, United States Military Academy Commencement, West Point, New York, May 26, 2007)
In the immediate wake of the invasion of Iraq (April 2003), various national security procedures were put in place which focused on the eventuality of a "Second 911". These initiatives in the area of Homeland Security outlined the precise circumstances under which martial law could be declared in the case of a second major terrorist attack on America.
Under martial law, the military would take over several functions of civilian government including justice and law enforcement.
A terrorist attack on American soil of the size and nature of September 11, would lead ---according to former CENTCOM Commander, General Tommy Franks-- to the downfall of democracy in America. In an interview in December 2003, which was barely mentioned in the US media, General Franks outlined a scenario, which would result in the suspension of the Constitution and the installation of military rule in America:
"[A] terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event [will occur] somewhere in the Western world - it may be in the United States of America - that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event." (General Tommy Franks Interview, Cigar Aficionado, December 2003)
Franks was obliquely alluding to a "Second 9/11" terrorist attack, which could be used to galvanize US public opinion in support of a military government and police state.
The "terrorist massive casualty-producing event" was presented by General Franks as a crucial political turning point. The resulting crisis and social turmoil resulting from the civilian casualties, are intended to facilitate a major shift in US political, social and institutional structures, leading to the suspension of constitutional government.
It is important to understand that General Franks was not giving a personal opinion on the role of a "massive casuality producing event" in National Security doctirne. His statement very much reflects the dominant viewpoint both in the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security both on the concept of massive casualty producing event as well as how events might unfold in the case of a "Catastrophic Emergency".
The statement comes from a man who has been actively involved in military and intelligence planning at the highest levels. In other words, the "militarisation of our country" is an ongoing operational assumption. It is part of the broader "Washington consensus". It identifies the Bush administration's "roadmap" of war and Homeland defense.
The "Global War on Terrorism" which constitutes the cornerstone of Bush’s National Security doctrine, provides the required justification for repealing the Rule of Law, ultimately with a view to "preserving civil liberties."US Northern Command
The Administration's "Catastrophic Emergency" procedures are intimately related to military planning at the level of the Pentagon. In this regard, the formation of US Northern Command (NORTHCOM) in April 2002 (based at Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado) constitutes an important landmark in the evolving relationship between the Military and Homeland Security.
US Northern Command was created as a new command structure with the explicit mandate to defend the Homeland against foreign terrorists.
This mandate is defined in the Pentagon's "Joint Doctrine for Homeland Security (JP-26)". Even in the case where the "outside enemy" is fabricated (and this is known at the highest levels of the military-intelligence apparatus), a military coup d'Etat characterized by detailed command military/ security provisions, would become operational almost immediately.
NORTHCOM's "Command Mission" encompasses a number of "non-military functions" including "crisis management" and "domestic civil support". Under Northcom jurisdiction, the latter imply a process of "military support to federal, state and local authorities in the event of a terror attack."
NORTHCOM has a mandate to "defend the homeland" against an illusive "outside enemy" (Al Qaeda), which is said to be threatening the security of America. According to Frank Morales, "the scenario of a military take-over of America is unfolding." And Northern Command is the core military entity in this takeover and militarization of civilian institutions.
Dick Cheney's "Contingency Plan"
Following the creation of NORTHCOM in 2002, "Defense of the Homeland" functions -including domestic counter-terrorism and national emergency procedures-- have become increasingly integrated into the broader process of military planning by the Pentagon .
This integration should be understood as part of the Pentagon's preemptive war doctrine, where a presumed or planned attack on the Homeland by "Islamic terrorists" becomes a justification for waging an "offensive" (defined as defensive) war in the Middle East.
The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were used to wage war on Afghanistan, using the pretext (without a shred of evidence) that the Afghan Taliban government was a "State sponsor" of the 9/11 attacks.
In August 2005, Vice President Dick Cheney is reported to have instructed USSTRATCOM, based at the Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska, to draw up a "Contingency Plan", "to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States". (Philip Giraldi, Attack on Iran: Pre-emptive Nuclear War, The American Conservative, 2 August 2005)
Dick Cheney's "Contingency Plan" was predicated on the preemptive war doctrine. Implied in the "Contingency Plan" was the presumption that Iran would be behind the attacks.
The Vice president's instructions were given to USSTRATCOM, which is in charge of the central planning and coordination of major overseas theater wars, rather than to NORTHCOM, whose mandate consists in defending the North American Homeland against terrorist attacks. .
Cheney's "Contingency Plan" under USSTRATCOM jurisdiction, would draw on the possibility of a "Second 9/11" attack to prepare for a major military operation directed against Iran, while pressure would also be exerted in the corridors of the United Nations on Tehran, in relation to its (non-existent) nuclear weapons program.
What is diabolical in this 2005 decision by the US Vice President is that the justification to wage war on Iran rests on Iran's alleged involvement in a hypothetical terrorist attack on America, which has not yet occurred.
The plan to attack Iran is based on the principle of self defense. It "includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons." (Philip Giraldi, Attack on Iran: Pre-emptive Nuclear War, The American Conservative, 2 August 2005)
"Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing—that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack—but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections. (Ibid)
The Pentagon's "Second 9/11"
In early 2006, (former) Secretary Don Rumsfeld approved a far-reaching military campaign plan to fight terrorism around the World, with a view to retaliating in the case of a second major terrorist attack on America. This Pentagon plan was, in essence, an extension of the Second 911 "Contingency Plan" agenda announced by Dick Cheney in 2005.
The Pentagon's anti-terrorist plan was outlined in three secret documents, of which excerpts were leaked to the Washington Post.
These three documents consist of an overall "campaign plan" plus two "subordinate plans". The second "subordinate plan" explicitly focuses on the possibility of "Second 9/11" and how a second major attack on American soil might provide "an opportunity" to extend the US led war in the Middle East into new frontiers:
"[It] sets out how the military can both disrupt and respond to another major terrorist strike on the United States. It includes lengthy annexes that offer a menu of options for the military to retaliate quickly against specific terrorist groups, individuals or state sponsors depending on who is believed to be behind an attack. Another attack could create both a justification and an opportunity that is lacking today to retaliate against some known targets, according to current and former defense officials familiar with the plan. (Washington Post, 23 April 2006, emphasis added)
The presumption of this military document, is that a Second 911 attack "which is lacking today" would usefully create both a "justification and an opportunity" to wage war on "some known targets [Iran and Syria]".
National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive, NSPD-51/ HSPD 20
In May 2007, a major presidential National Security Directive is issued, (National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive NSPD 51/HSPD 20),
NSPD 51 / HSPD 20 is a combined National Security Directive emanating from the White House and Homeland Security. It is tailor-made to fit the premises of both the Pentagon's 2006 "Anti-terrorist Plan" as well Vice President Cheney's 2005 "Contingency Plan".
The directive establishes procedures for "Continuity of Government" (COG) in the case of a "Catastrophic Emergency". The latter is defined in NSPD 51/HSPD 20 (henceforth referred to as NSPD 51), as "any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions."
"Continuity of Government," or "COG," is defined in NSPD 51 as "a coordinated effort within the Federal Government's executive branch to ensure that National Essential Functions continue to be performed during a Catastrophic Emergency."
NSPD 51 has barely been reported by the mainstream media. There was no press briefing by the White House or by DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff, which would be the normal practice, given the significance and implications of NSPD 51. The text of NSPD /51 HSPD 20, announced by the White House is not even mentioned on the DHS's website.
This Combined Directive NSPD /51 HSPD 20 grants unprecedented powers to the Presidency and the Department of Homeland Security, overriding the foundations of Constitutional government. NSPD 51 allows the sitting president to declare a “national emergency” without Congressional approval The adoption of NSPD 51 would lead to the de facto closing down of the Legislature and the militarization of justice and law enforcement:
The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government. In order to advise and assist the President in that function, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counter terrorism (APHS/CT) is hereby designated as the National Continuity Coordinator. The National Continuity Coordinator, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (APNSA), without exercising directive authority, shall coordinate the development and implementation of continuity policy for executive departments and agencies. The Continuity Policy Coordination Committee (CPCC), chaired by a Senior Director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the National Continuity Coordinator, shall be the main day-to-day forum for such policy coordination. (National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive NSPD 51/HSPD 20, emphasis added)
NSPD 51 grants extraordinary Police State powers to the White House and Homeland Security (DHS), in the event of a "Catastrophic Emergency". The Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counter terrorism (APHS/CT), who is slated to play a key role in the eventuality of Martial law, is a key White House adviser, Frances Fragos Townsend. Foreign Policy Implications of NSPD 51: The Role of the Vice PresidentWhile NSPD 51 has the appearances of a domestic national security decision, it is, nonetheless, an integral part of US foreign policy. It belongs to a longstanding military national security agenda. Were NSPD 51 to be invoked, Vice President Dick Cheney, who constitutes the real power behind the Executive, would essentially assume de facto dictatorial powers, circumventing both the US Congress and the Judiciary, while continuing to use President George W. Bush as a proxy figurehead. NSPD 51, while bypassing the Constitution, nonetheless, envisages very precise procedures which guarantee the powers of Vice President Dick Cheney in relation to "Continuity of Goverment" functions under Martial Law:"This directive shall be implemented in a manner that is consistent with, and facilitates effective implementation of, provisions of the Constitution concerning succession to the Presidency or the exercise of its powers, and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 U.S.C. 19), with consultation of the Vice President and, as appropriate, others involved. Heads of executive departments and agencies shall ensure that appropriate support is available to the Vice President and others involved as necessary to be prepared at all times to implement those provisions." (NSPD 51, op cit.)In the case of a "Catastrophic Emergency", NSPD 51 could potentially be used to justify the implementation of retaliatory military action against Iran in accordance with Dick Cheney's 2005 "Contingency Plan". If the "Catastrophic Emergency" were to be triggered by a terrorist attack, NSPD-51 could be invoked as "the justification and ... opportunity ... to retaliate against some known targets" as outlined by the Pentagon in its 2006 anti-terrorist plan.
The broader question is whether the occurrence of this "Catastrophic Emergency " is actually being planned by the Pentagon, with a view to justifying an attack on Iran.
The Role of the US Military in the Case of a "Catastrophic Emergency"
NSPD 51 would instate martial law under the authority of the White House and the DHS. It would suspend constitutional government under the provisions of Continuity in Government (COG).
The provisions of NSPD 51 are consistent with an existing body of legislation and regulations pertaining to alleged terrorist attacks on the Homeland and the declaration of martial law.
Since 2003, following the invasion of Iraq, Homeland Security (DHS) has contemplated time and again the possibility of a so-called code red alert "scenario" --using a potential or possible Al Qaeda terrorist attack on America soil as a pretext for implementing martial law. (For further details, see Michel Chossudovsky, America's "War on Terrorism", Global Research, 2005)
Since 2003, the DHS has conducted several "anti-terrorist exercises" under the TOPOFF (top officials) program. The latter consisted in organizing anti-terror preparedness in a military style exercise with the participation of federal, State and local level governments. Various attack "scenarios" by foreign terrorists using weapons of mass destruction had been envisaged.
Code Red Alert was initially established under the provisions of Homeland Security Presidential Directive-3 (March 2002). Under the existing legislation, a code red alert would trigger conditions for the "temporary" suspension of the normal functions of civilian government. Several functions of civilian administration would be closed down, others could be transferred to the jurisdiction of the military. More generally, the procedure would disrupt government offices, businesses, schools, public services, transportation, etc.
According to (former) Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge (22 Dec. 2003):
"If we go to [code] Red ... it basically shuts down the country."
In which case, a national emergency is declared, Northern Command deploys its forces on air, land and sea. Several functions of civilian government are transferred to NORTHCOM headquarters, which already has the structures which enable it to oversee and supervise civilian institutions.
Code red alert would suspend civil liberties, including public gathering and/ or citizens' protests against the Administration's decision to declare martial law.
The emergency authorities would also have the authority to exert tight censorship over the media and would no doubt paralyze the alternative news media on the internet.
In turn, code red alert would trigger the "civilian" Homeland Emergency response system, including the DHS' Ready.Gov instructions, the Big Brother Citizen Corps, not to mention the USAonWatch and Neighborhood Watch Program which have a mandate to "identify and report suspicious activity in neighborhoods" across America.
The Militarization of Civilian Institutions
NSPD 51 is, in principle, a civilian directive emanating from the Presidency and the DHS.
What would be the involvement of the Military in a martial law situation, following the activation of NSPD 51?
In theory, the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 adopted in the wake of the US civil war, prevents the military from intervening in civilian police and judicial functions. This law has been central to the functioning of constitutional government.
Although the Posse Comitatus Act is still on the books, in practice the legislation is no longer effective in preventing the militarization of civilian institutions. (See Frank Morales, Global Research, September 2003)
Legislation inherited from the Clinton administration, not to mention the post 9/11 Patriot Acts I and II, "blurs the line between military and civilian roles", it allows the military to intervene in judicial and law enforcement activities even in the absence of an emergency situation.
In 1996, legislation was passed which allowed the military to intervene in the case of a national emergency (e.g.. a terrorist attack). In 1999, Clinton's Defense Authorization Act (DAA) extended those powers (under the 1996 legislation) by creating an "exception" to the Posse Comitatus Act, which would allow the military to be involved in civilian affairs "regardless of whether there is an emergency". (See ACLU)
Under this 1999 provision, "the mere threat of an act of terrorism would justify calling in military units. That represents a loophole large enough to drive a battalion of army tanks through." (Ibid)
In other words, the Clinton era legislation had already laid the legal and ideological foundations of the "global war on terrorism".
While NSPD 51 is a significant and timely landmark, it is broadly consistent with the pre-existing legislation, with one important exception. NSPD 51 confirms that "Continuity in Government" (COG), while suspending the Constitution, would be carried out under the control of the Presidency.
This distinction is important, in view of mounting opposition within the Armed Forces to the possible use of a "false flag" terrorist attack as a justification for the launching of a broader Middle East war, in which nuclear weapons could be used against Iran.
NSPD 51 largely confirms the "legitimacy" of preexisting procedures and legislation, while also stipulating a central and critical role for the presidency in the case of a "Catastrophic Emergency". In fact, NSPD 51 thwarts the possibility of discretionary actions taken unilaterally by the Military in the case of a national emergency. Broadly speaking, NSPD 51 reinforces the control exerted by the White House, its civilian apparatus as well as its corporate lobby groups.
While COG would result in the militarization of civilian institutions, this process would be under the control of civilian policy-makers, acting on behalf of their corporate sponsors. This civilian policy apparatus, made up of senior NeoCon advisers, with links to the Washington think tanks, Wall Street and the oil giants, is slated to play a key role in the case of martial law.
Whereas the militarization of justice and law enforcement would proceed, the Military would, nonetheless, remain subordinate to a "civilian dictatorship".
War Games and the Militarization of National Emergency Preparedness
Another relevant dimension of the militarization of civilian institutions pertains to interagency collaboration between the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Pentagon in the conduct of military style "catastrophic emergency response" exercises .
This "interagency collaboration" was endorsed in 2006 by the US Congress. FEMA (under the jurisdiction of the Department Homeland Security) was given exceptional powers. A significant budget was also provided to finance an ongoing partnership between FEMA and the US Military.
Northern Command was responsible for establishing links with civilian agencies involved in emergency preparedness (operating under the Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA)).
What has unfolded is an integrated military/civilian outlook on emergency preparedness. A number of civilian agencies now actively participate in the conduct of Pentagon war games. In 2006, FEMA's "catastrophic disaster response" exercise was integrated into the conduct of US Northern Command's "Operation Vigilant Shield 07":
"[In a] joint exercise activity, FEMA and USNORTHCOM exercised catastrophic disaster response during Vigilant Shield 07, an exercise focusing on a nuclear weapons accident and a terrorist event. (David Paulison, Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management, Agency (FEMA), statement to the Committee on House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management, US Congress, 19 May 2007)
Vigilant Shield 07 was a far-reaching "New Cold War" type war games exercise, directed against directed against (Irmingham) Iran and its Cold war era enemies: Ruebek (Russia), Churya (China), and Nemazee (North Korea). (for further details, see Michel Chossudovsky, Theater Iran Near Term, Global Research, February 21, 2007)
In April-May 2007, FEMA together with a number of civilian agencies including the FBI, local and State and private organizations participated in the Pentagon's Ardent Sentry-Northern Edge 07 war games (AS-NE 07), under the helm of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. U.S.
Part of the AS NE 07 war games were directed against Russia. They were held in the vicinity of the Bearing Straits on the immediate borders with Russia's Fareast, These associated exercises in Alaska entitled Alaska Shield also included the participation of Canadian forces. (For further details, see Fact Sheet)
Continued Emergency Preparedness
In the months prior as well as following the release of NSPD-51 by the White House on 9 May 2007, emergency exercises have been held, with the support of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in several US cities. How to respond in the case of a "Catastrophic Event". Brainstorming sessions involving officials from local, state and federal agencies have met to examine what to do in the case of "Catastrophic Event" or terrorist attack.
On June 2nd, the US was "dominated by screaming headlines and sensationalist broadcast coverage of an alleged plot in New York to blow up John F. Kennedy International Airport" (See Bill van Auken, June 7, 2007). In the meantime, the US public has become increasingly skeptical of repeated fake terror alerts:
There is every reason to believe that the succession of “terror” cases, each one weaker than the last and virtually all of them driven by “informants” who seem to play more the role of agents provocateur, are aimed at achieving precisely this effect. They serve as a means of intimidating public opinion with fear, justifying attacks on democratic rights and diverting attention from the ongoing debacle in Iraq.
The problem faced by the government is that the public is growing increasingly skeptical about these cases, with a sizeable portion of the population having concluded that they are trumped up for political purposes. (Ibid)
New Military Appointments; The Firing of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Several key military appointments were made in recent months. Of significance, Admiral. William J. Fallon, was appointed Commander of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) in March by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates.
Meanwhile, another major military appointment was implemented, which has a direct bearing on war preparations in relation to Iran. Admiral Timothy J. Keating Commander of US NORTHCOM was appointed on March 26, to head US Pacific Command, which includes both the 5th and the 7th fleets. The 7th Fleet Pacific Command is the largest U.S. combatant command. Keating, who takes over from Admiral Fallon is also an unbending supporter of the "war on terrorism". Pacific Command would be playing a key role in the context of a military operation directed against Iran.(
Of significance, Admiral Keating was also involved in the 2003 attack on Iraq as commander of US Naval Forces Central Command and the Fifth Fleet.
Admiral Fallon is fully compliant with the Bush administration's war plans in relation to Iran. He replaces Gen. John P. Abizaid, who was pushed into retirement, following apparent disagreements with Rumsfeld's successor, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates. While Abizaid recognized both the failures and the weaknesses of the US military in Iraq, Admiral Fallon is closely aligned with Vice President Dick Cheney. He is also firmly committed to the "Global War on Terrorism" (GWOT). CENTCOM would coordinate an attack on Iran from the Middle East war theater.
Moreover, the appointment of an Admiral is indicative of a shift in emphasis of CENTCOM's functions in the war theater. The "near term" emphasis is Iran rather than Iraq, requiring the coordination of naval and air force operations in the Persian Gulf.
The instatement of NSPD 51 in May 2007 was followed barely a few weeks later by the announcement of the "non-renewal of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) General Peter Pace, who in recent months, has indicated his disagreement with the Administration regarding Iran.
General Pace stated (February 2007) that he saw no firm evidence of Tehran supplying weapons to Shiite militias inside Iraq, which was being heralded by the Bush administration as a justification for waging war on Iran:
"[M]aybe that's why he's the outgoing chairman. Maybe that's why they're not renewing him. Because ...He has seen no evidence that Iran is fomenting unrest in Iraq that's causing Americans lives... " (Fox News' Alan Colmes, ox News, June, 13, 2007),
General Peter Pace ends his term as Chairman of the JCS in September 2007. Defense Secretary Gates has already announced that Admiral Michael Mullen, U.S. Chief of Naval Operations, has been nominated to replace General Peter Pace as Chairman of the Joint chiefs of Staff.
Admiral Mullen's discourse is in marked contrast to that of General Peter Pace. Mullen, who was in charge of coordinating naval war games off the Iranian coastline, has expressed an unbending commitment to "waging" and "winning asymmetric wars", while also "protecting the United States":
"we must ensure we have the Battle Force, the people, and the combat readiness we need to win our nation's wars...
Our Navy is fighting the Global War on Terror while at the same time providing a Strategic Reserve worldwide for the President and our Unified and Combatant Commanders.... Simply reacting to change is no longer an acceptable course of action if our Navy is to successfully wage asymmetric warfare and simultaneously deter regional and transnational threats (Statement, Senate Armed Services Committee, 7 May 2007)
Admiral Mullen's stance is in line with that of the Bush Administration's key Neo-conservative ideologues. With regard to Iran, echoing almost verbatim the stance of the White House, Admiral Mullen considers that it is "unacceptable that Iran is providing U.S. enemies in Iraq and Afghanistan with capabilities that are hurting and killing U.S. troops." (Inside the Pentagon, June 21, 2007). But on the issue of Iran, the Democrats are on board. There is a bipartisan consensus, expressed by Senator Jo Lieberman:
"I want to make clear I'm not talking about a massive ground invasion of Iran,... [but a] strike over the border into Iran, where we have good evidence that they have a base at which they are training these people coming back into Iraq to kill our soldiers" (AP, June 11, 2007)
US Nuclear Weapons in the Middle East War Theater
The use of conventional and nuclear weapons are now part of the same integrated command structure.
The Bush administration has confirmed that it contemplates the possible use tactical bunker buster nuclear bombs to "take out" Iran's non-existent nuclear weapons' facilities. An operational plan to wage aerial attacks on Iran has been in "a state of readiness" since June 2005. Essential military hardware to wage this operation has been deployed. (For further details see Michel Chossudovsky, Nuclear War against Iran, Jan 2006 ).
Vice President Dick Cheney' "Contingency Plan" "includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons." (Philip Giraldi, Attack on Iran: Pre-emptive Nuclear War , The American Conservative, 2 August 2005). USSTRATCOM would have the responsibility for overseeing and coordinating this military deployment as well as launching the military operation. (For details, Michel Chossudovsky, Nuclear War against Iran, Jan 2006 ).
The Bush administration has the full support of its NATO allies and Israel.
US made B61 tactical nuclear weapons have also been deployed in five European non-nuclear states, members of NATO, including Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy, Germany and Turkey. The B61 tactical nuclear warheads under the jurisdiction of these five non-nuclear states, plus Britain are pointed at Iran.
While Iran, which possesses a bona fide nuclear energy program, is the object of potential military retaliation, these five European non-nuclear countries (not to mention Israel), are not considered by the "international community" as a threat to global security, in a clear expression of double standards.
General Peter Pace is known to be opposed to the use of nuclear weapons against Iran:
"The Bush regime’s plan to attack Iran with nuclear weapons puts General Pace’s departure in a different light. How can President Bush succeed with an order to attack with nuclear weapons when America’s highest ranking military officer says that such an order is “illegal and immoral” and that everyone in the military has an “absolute responsibility” to disobey it?" (Paul Craig Roberts, Global Research, June 2007)
It would be difficult to wage war on Iran without the firm endorsement of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. According to Paul Craig Roberts, "[General] Pace had to go so that malleable toadies [Admiral Mullen] can be installed in his place [as Chairman of the JCS]"
Pace’s departure removes a known obstacle to a nuclear attack on Iran, thus advancing that possible course of action. A plan to attack Iran with nuclear weapons might also explain the otherwise inexplicable “National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive” (NSPD-51 and HSPD-20) that Bush issued on May 9. ...
The use of nuclear weapons arouses the ultimate fear. A US nuclear attack would send Russian and Chinese ICBMs into high alert. False flag operations could be staged in the US. The propagandistic US media would hype such developments to the hilt, portraying danger everywhere. Fear of the [Bush] regime’s new detention centers would silence most voices of protest as the regime declares its “national emergency.” (Ibid)
Concluding Remarks
9/11 and the threat of a second major attack on America are ostensibly part of the building block of the US National Security doctrine. While, the threat of an impending 9/11 type attack by "Islamic terrorists" is a fabrication, extensive media propaganda, supported by covert intelligence operations, has ensured that the "Global War on Terrorism" or GWOT is widely accepted both by the supporters and opponents of the Bush administration.
Visibly based on an outright lie, GWOT has nonetheless gained in legitimacy among America's European partners and allies, which have adopted their own ("copy and paste") anti-terrorist emergency procedures.
Despite mountains of evidence, the 9/11 attacks continue to be upheld by the US and its NATO allies as a bona fide act of war by a foreign power. Since 911, the GWOT is supported by the governments of more than 90 countries. (President George W. Bush, CENTCOM Coalition Conference, May 1, 2007)
Ironically, the Global War on Terrorism is also endorsed by several prominent and authoritative "progressive" intellectuals, who condemn US foreign policy and the Middle East war, while upholding the legitimacy of America's campaign against "Islamic terrorism."
An important segment of the US antiwar movement has a similar stance. While calling for the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, it denies the existence of a national resistance movement to the US led occupation: "We are against the US led war in Iraq, but we support the war on terrorism." Not surprisingly, Bush's "Catastrophic Emergency" Directive (NSPD 51) does not seem to have raised much concern within the US Antiwar movement.
Since 9/11, numerous lead stories and Op Eds outlining the nature of the "Global War on Terrorism" have been fed profusely into the news chain. A worldwide Al Qaeda legend has emerged.
Repeated ad nauseam on a daily basis, the GWOT has also become part of a shaky bipartisan political consensus. Despite the blatant contradictions and the political lies, in particular in relation to 9/11 and the possibility of a second terrorist attack, the GWOT is nonetheless accepted by an increasingly skeptical US public opinion.
Behind this diabolical "catastrophic emergency" scenario, which ultimately hinges on the powers of media disinformation and deceit, is a profit driven war.
The spiraling multibillion dollar "defense" budget, which according to independent estimates has reached the trillion dollar mark, is barely acknowledged, nor is the privatization of war itself.
The US military industrial complex which produces the numerous "humanitarian weapons" including the mini-nukes and bunker buster bombs used to go after the terrorists, would be the direct beneficiary of a war on Iran, together Wall Street and the Anglo-American oil giants, which vie to appropriate and privatize the region's extensive oil and gas reserves.
This war is not led by the military but by the civilian corporate interests which lie behind the Bush administration. The military takes orders from civilians acting on behalf of those dominant economic interests.
The Wall Street financial establishment, the military-industrial complex, led by Lockheed Martin, the big five weapons and aerospace defense contractors, the Texas oil giants and energy conglomerates, the construction and engineering and public utility companies not to mention the biotechnology conglomerates, are indelibly behind this militarization of America.
In turn, the Worldwide demonization of Islam is part of this profit driven war. Three quarters of the World's oil reserves lie in Muslim lands. (World Oil 2004, see also Michel Chossudovsky, The Demonization of Muslims and the Battle for Oil, Global Research, January 2007 ).
Vilification of the enemies of America, portrayed as fanatic Islamic terrorists, is part of the Battle for Oil. If the oil were in countries occupied predominantly by Buddhists or Hindus, one would expect that Bush's entire National Security agenda, including the recent "Catastrophic Emergency" Directive NSP 51 would be directed against Buddhists and Hindus.
How to reverse the tide?
The threat of a Second Al Qaeda "Attack on America" is being used profusely by the Bush administration to galvanize public opinion in support of a global military agenda.
Known and documented, the "Islamic terror network" is a creation of the US intelligence apparatus. The "war on terrorism" is bogus. The 911 narrative as conveyed by the 911 Commission report is fabricated.
The Bush administration is involved in acts of cover-up and complicity at the highest levels of government.
Revealing the lies behind 911 would serve to undermine the legitimacy of the "global war on terrorism" which constitutes the main justification for waging war in the Middle East.
Without 911, the war criminals in high office do not have a leg to stand on. Their entire National Security construct collapses like a deck of cards.
Global Research Articles by Michel Chossudovsky

John Perkins/Secrets of the American Empire/YouTube

(WAR) "Weekly Alfons Report"

Listen to Our New Streaming Radio Show Featuring 9/11 Conspiracy Expositions (WAR) "Weekly Alfons Report" for the week of 06/24/2007 4hrs.