The Department of Homeland Security recently carried out
an extensive anti-terrorist exercise entitled TOPOFF 3 (April 4-8, 2005).
The "drill" was described by officials as "a multilayered
approach to improving North American security".
The stated objective of the TOPOFF 3 "Full Scale Exercise"
was to "prepare America" in the case of an actual bioterrorism
attack by Al Qaeda:
".. we deliberately built the scenario as a very complex
WMD bioterrorism attack in New Jersey, as well as a kind of a dual-header
in the state of Connecticut in terms of a vehicle-borne improvised explosive
device, and then a simultaneous chemical attack.
The system in TOPOFF 3 across the board was tested as never
before, and this was deliberate. We wanted to test the full range of our
incident management processes and protocols that spanned prevention, intelligence
and information-sharing, and then the more classic or traditional response
and recovery. But really for the first time in a national-level exercise,
we really got at a near simultaneous WMD attack which is, of course, very,
very stressful for the federal folks, as well as our state, local and international
partners. (DHS spokeperson at Press Conference, * april, 2005, complete
transcript at http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/m-news+article+storyid-9058.html
"The War on Terrorism"
These exercises must be understood in the broader context
of America's National Security doctrine, which presents Al Qaeda as the
main threat to the American homeland.
The "war on terrorism" is the central building
block of the administration's foreign policy and domestic security agendas.
In the words of DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff:
Homeland security is one piece of a broader strategy [which]
brings the battle to the enemy... But while one key to defense is offense,
it is not the entirety of our security picture. For we also need a “defense
in depth” as part of the strategic whole. That means even as we pursue
terrorists overseas, we work at home to prevent infiltration by terrorists
and their weapons; to protect our people and places if infiltration occurs;
and to respond and recover if an attack is carried out. This is embodied
in our strategy of building multiple barriers to terrorist attacks.(Transcript
of complete March 2005 speech of Secr. Michael Chertoff at http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/display?theme=42&content=4392
Illusive Outside enemy
Known and documented, Al Qaeda is a creation of the US intelligence
The purpose of the TOPOFF anti-terrorist exercises is not
to "defend America" against terrorists, but to build a consensus
within federal, State and municipal bodies, as well as within the business
community and civil society (hospitals, schools, etc.) that this illusive
outside enemy exists and that "the threat is real". We are not
dealing with a classical media disinformation campaign. While the TOPOFF
exercise has been casually mentioned in press reports, it is not the object
of a national debate.
With regard to TOPOFF, the consensus building process is
"internal", it does not pertain the public at large. it is largely
addressed to key decision-makers within these various governmental and nongovernmental
bodies. It includes more than 10,000 participants in important decision-making
positions (federal and State officials, law enforcement, fire departments,
hospitals, etc), who may be called to act in the case of an emergency situation.
These individuals in turn have a mandate to spread the word within their
respective organizations, --i.e. with their coworkers and colleagues, as
well as with the people working under their direct supervision.
In other words, this consensus building process reaches out
to tens of thousands of people in positions of authority. The antiterrorist
agenda and exercises thus become a "talking point" within numerous
governmental and nongovernmental organizations.
In turn, the holding of these antiterrorist exercises supports
the National Security doctrine of "preemptive war", --i.e. that
America has to legitimate right to self defense by intervening in foreign
lands and that America must defend itself against terrorists. It also sustains
the myth of WMD in the hands of terrorists, being used against America,
when in fact the US is the largest producer of WMD, with a defense budget
of more than 400 billion dollars a year.
The objective is to sustain the war and national security
agenda --and of course the possibility of martial law-- within the governmental,
nongovernmental and corporate business sectors.
Ultimately, the objective is develop across the land, an
unequivocal acceptance by key officials (and of their coworkers and subordinates),
from the federal to the local level, for an emergency situation, where civil
liberties and the rights of citizens would be suspended:
Officials will not give a specific figure, but they say the
exercise involved several thousand fake deaths and thousands more injuries.
This time, the sick and dying were only acting. But officials are aware
that someday there could well be a real attack. They say the more they learn
about how to coordinate prevention and response efforts, the better job
they will be able to do to minimize casualties if and when that happens.
From TOPOFF 2 to the "Full Scale Exercise":
The previous "anti-terrorist exercise" entitled
TOPOFF 2 was held two years ago in May 2003. It was described as "the
largest and most comprehensive terrorism response and homeland security
exercise ever conducted in the United States." It was carried out in
a military style exercise by federal, State and local level governments,
including Canadian participants. TOPOFF 2 established various "scenarios"
under a Red Code Alert.
In other words, it was conducted on the same assumptions
as a military exercise, in anticipation of an actual war situation, examining
various WMD terror attack scenarios and the institutional response of State
and local governments:
"It assessed how responders, leaders, and other authorities
would react to the simulated release of weapons of mass destruction (WMD)
in two U. S. cities, Seattle, WA and Chicago, IL. The exercise scenario
depicted a fictitious, foreign terrorist organization that detonated a simulated
radiological dispersal device (RDD or dirty bomb) in Seattle and released
the pneumonic plague in several Chicago metropolitan area locations. There
was also significant pre-exercise intelligence play, a cyber-attack, and
credible terrorism threats against other locations."
The April 2005 so-called Full Scale Exercise`` TOPOFF 3 goes
much further than the May 2003 TOPFF 2.
TOPOFF 3 involved a larger number of individual participants.
Moreover, in addition to Canada which had been involved in TOPOFF 2 , the
exercise also included the participation of Britain's Home Office. The UK
had labeled its exercise "Atlantic Blue", whereas Canada designated
its component of TOPOFF 3 as "Triple Play".
While there was mention of the Canadian exercise in the news,
the details of "Atlantic Blue" were not revealed, nor were they
reviewed in the British press. Britain's Home Office Minister Hazel Blears
admitted in March that "There will be no visible 'on the ground' activity
within the UK exercise". (quoted in the Sunday Express, 3 April 2005).
TOPOFF 3: Organizational Structure
More than 200 Federal, State, local, tribal, private sector,
and international agencies and organizations and volunteer groups were involved.
TOPOFF 3 was organized in terms of five separate "venues":
1. Interagency, 2. Connecticut, 3. New Jersey: 4. United Kingdom, 5. Canada:
The FSE offers agencies and jurisdictions a way to exercise
a coordinated national and international response to a large-scale, multipoint
terrorist attack. It allows participants to test plans and skills in a real-time,
realistic environment and gain the in-depth knowledge that only experience
The TOPOFF 3 scenario will depict a complex terrorist campaign
and drive the exercise play through the homeland security system, beginning
in Connecticut and New Jersey, and leading to national and international
Over the course of several days fire personnel will conduct
search and rescue, hospitals will treat the injured (played by role players),
subject-matter experts will analyze the effects of the attack on public
health, and top officials will deploy resources and make the difficult decisions
needed to save lives.
An internal Virtual News Network (VNN) and news website will
provide real-time reporting of the story like an actual TV network would.
The mock media will keep players up-to-date on unfolding events and enable
decision makers to face the challenge of dealing with the real world media.
Only participating agencies can view the VNN broadcast.
The New Jersey Domestic Security Preparedness Task Force
will dissect how every state department performed during exercise. And the
Homeland Security Department will analyze the performance of the more than
200 agencies that participated in TopOff 3 and issue an "after action"
report in the next four to six months.
"This is not over until we fully capture all of the
lessons learned," said Robert Stephan, director of the agency's Incident
Management Group. "This phase is perhaps the more significant phase,
showing us where we did well and where we need to make improvement."
Coordinated by Canada's Department of Public Safety and Emergency
Preparedness and the RCMP, eighteen Canadian federal departments, as well
as the provinces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, took part in the mock
"Officials circulate word the ocean-going ship Castlemaine,
en route to Halifax, carries a container holding chemicals for creating
a weapon of mass destruction - possibly like the deadly substance already
released in the United States and Britain. A meeting is hastily called to
devise a plan." ( http://www.canada.com/montreal/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=3295af24-3ceb-4aae-b6cc-12a76bd32e17
Scenario of a Code Red alert
The TOPOFF exercise prepares the Nation for an emergency
under a Code Red alert. More specifically, it sets the stage within the
various governmental bodies and organizations. The exercise moulds the behavior
of public officials
According to official statements, an "actual terrorist
attack" of the type envisaged under TOPOFF 3 would inevitably lead
to a Code Red Alert. The latter in turn, would create conditions for the
(temporary) suspension of the normal functions of civilian government. This
scenario had already been envisaged by former DHS Secretary Tom Ridge in
a CBS News Interview back in December 2003:
"If we simply go to red ... it basically shuts down
meaning that civilian government bodies would be closed down
and taken over by an Emergency Administration.
The scenario is also detailed at the Homeland department's
Ready.Gov website at http://www.ready.gov/
The Department of Homeland Security's "Ready.Gov
"Terrorists are working to obtain biological, chemical,
nuclear and radiological weapons, and the threat of an attack is very real.
Here at the Department of Homeland Security, throughout the federal government,
and at organizations across America we are working hard to strengthen our
Nation's security. Whenever possible, we want to stop terrorist attacks
before they happen. All Americans should begin a process of learning about
potential threats so we are better prepared to react during an attack. While
there is no way to predict what will happen, or what your personal circumstances
will be, there are simple things you can do now to prepare yourself and
your loved ones."
A Code Red alert, according to the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) , would create conditions for the ("temporary" we
are told) suspension of the normal functions of civilian government. According
to FEMA, code red would:
Increase or redirect personnel to address critical emergency
needs; Assign emergency response personnel and pre-position and mobilize
specially trained teams or resources; Monitor, redirect, or constrain transportation
systems; and Close public and government facilities not critical for continuity
of essential operations, especially public safety. (FEMA, http://www.fema.gov/pdf/areyouready/security.pdf
Several functions of civilian administration would be suspended,
others would be transferred to the jurisdiction of the military. More generally,
the procedure would disrupt government offices, businesses, schools, public
services, transportation, etc.
Known internally as "Continuity of Government"
or COG, the secret Shadow government would become functional in the case
of a code red alert, leading to the redeployment of key staff to secret
Code red alert would suspend civil liberties, including
public gatherings and/ or citizens' protests against the war or 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 the Department
of Justice Neighborhood Watch Program which have a new post 9/11 mandate
to "identify and report suspicious activity in neighborhoods"
across America. The DOJ Neighborhood Watch is involved in " Terrorism
Awareness Education" (www.USAonWatch.org ).
Under the Citizen Corps, which is a component of the USA
Freedom Corps, citizens across America are invited to participate in what
could potentially develop into a civilian militia:
"Americans are responding to the evil and horror of
the terrorist attacks of September 11 with a renewed commitment to doing
good … As part of that initiative, we created Citizen Corps to help
coordinate volunteer activities that will make our communities safer, stronger,
and better prepared to respond to any emergency situation.
… We are asking cities and counties across the country
to create Citizen Corps Councils of their own design, bringing together
first responders, volunteer organizations, law enforcement agencies, and
community-serving institutions, such as schools, hospitals, and houses of
worship. Some Citizen Corps Councils will feature local activities that
reflect new and existing national programs such as Neighborhood Watch, Community
Emergency Response Teams, Volunteers in Police Service, and the Medical
Reserve Corps. Some will include local programs that involve partnerships
with law enforcement agencies, hospitals, first responders, and schools.
What all Citizen Corps Councils will have in common is that our local leaders
will be working to expand opportunities for their community members to engage
in volunteer service that will support emergency preparation, prevention,
and response." (Citizen Corps, Guide for Local Officials, President
Bush's introductory remarks, http://www.citizencorps.gov/pdf/council.pdf
The Role of the Military
What would be the involvement of the Military in a code red
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 is central to the functioning of
While 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 at http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MOR309A.html
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
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 permits the military to be involved in civilian
affairs "regardless of whether there is an emergency". (See ACLU
"The new proposed exception to the Posse Comitatus Act
would further expand a controversial measure adopted by Congress in 1996
that permitted military involvement in "emergencies" involving
chemical and biological weapons crimes.
Under that new measure, which was proposed by the Defense
Department, the military would be authorized to deal with crimes involving
any chemical or biological weapons -- or any other weapon of mass destruction
-- regardless of whether there is an "emergency." In addition,
the new proposal would lift requirements that the military be reimbursed
for the cost of its intervention, thus likely increasing the number of requests
for military assistance.
"Under this new provision," Nojeim said, "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
The defense authorization bill would also require the Pentagon
to develop a plan to assign military personnel to assist Customs and the
Immigration and Naturalization Service to "respond to threats to national
security posed by entry into the U.S. of terrorists or drug traffickers."
"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 "war on terrorism".
Despite this 1999 "exception" to the Posse Comitatus
Act", which effectively invalidates it, both the Pentagon and Homeland
Security, have been actively lobbying Congress for the outright repeal of
the 1878 legislation:
"new rules are needed to clearly set forth the boundaries
for the use of federal military forces for homeland security. The Posse
Comitatus Act is inappropriate for modern times and needs to be replaced
by a completely new law ...
It is time to rescind the existing Posse Comitatus Act and
replace it with a new law. ... The Posse Comitatus Act is an artifact of
a different conflict-between freedom and slavery or between North and South,
if you prefer. Today's conflict is also in a sense between freedom and slavery,
but this time it is between civilization and terrorism. New problems often
need new solutions, and a new set of rules is needed for this issue.
President Bush and Congress should initiate action to enact
a new law that would set forth in clear terms a statement of the rules for
using military forces for homeland security and for enforcing the laws of
the United States.
The Posse Comitatus Act, is viewed by military
analysts as a "Legal Impediment to Transformation":
"[The Posse Comitatus Act constitutes] a formidable
obstacle to our nation's flexibility and adaptability at a time when we
face an unpredictable enemy with the proven capability of causing unforeseen
catastrophic events. The difficulty in correctly interpreting and applying
the Act causes widespread confusion at the tactical, operational, and strategic
levels of our military. Given that future events may call for the use of
the military to assist civil authorities, a review of the efficacy of the
PCA is in order. ( Donald J. Currier, The Posse Comitatus Act: A Harmless
Relic from the Post-Reconstruction Era or a Legal Impediment to Transformation?
Authors; Army War College Strategic Studies Institute, Carlisle Barracks,
Pa, September 2003)
The ongoing militarization of civilian justice and law enforcement
is a bi-partisan project. Senator Joseph Biden (a Democrat), former Chairman
of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has been waging, since
the mid-1990s, in consultation with his Republican counterparts, a battle
for the outright repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act.
The Patriot Legislation
In turn, the Bush administration PATRIOT Acts have set the
groundwork of the evolving Homeland Security State. In minute detail, they
go much further in setting the stage for the militarisation of civilian
The various provisions are very detailed and precise. The
USA PATRIOT ACT of 2001 entitled "Providing Appropriate Tools Required
to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001" as well as the "Domestic
Security Enhancement Act of 2003," ("PATRIOT Act II") create
the conditions for the militarization of justice and police functions:
The "PATRIOT Act" is a repressive "coordination"
of the entities of force and deception, the police, intelligence and the
military. It broadens, centralizes and combines the surveillance, arrest
and harassment capabilities of the police and intelligence apparatus. Homeland
defense is, in essence, a form of state terrorism directed against the American
people and democracy itself. It is the Pentagon Inc. declaring war on America.
The "domestic war on terrorism" hinges upon the
Pentagon's doctrine of homeland defense. Mountains of repressive legislation
are being enacted in the name of internal security. So called "homeland
security", originally set within the Pentagon's "operations other
than war", is actually a case in which the Pentagon has declared war
on America. Shaping up as the new battleground, this proliferating military
"doctrine" seeks to justify new roles and missions for the Pentagon
within America. Vast "legal" authority and funds to spy on the
dissenting public, reconfigured as terrorist threats, is being lavished
upon the defense, intelligence and law enforcement "community."
All this is taking place amidst an increasingly perfected
"fusion" of the police and military functions both within the
US and abroad, where the phenomena is referred to as "peacekeeping",
or the "policization of the military". Here in America, all distinction
between the military and police functions is about to be forever expunged
with the looming repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act.
In other words, the "New World Law and Order" based
on the repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act, requires a system of domestic
and global counterinsurgency led by the Pentagon.
(Frank Morales, Homeland Defense: The Pentagon Declares War
on America, http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MOR312A.html In 2003, Frank
Morales was granted A Project Censored Award of Sonoma University, Cal.
Even under a functioning civilian government, the PATRIOT
Acts have already instated several features of martial law. The extent to
which they may be applied is at the discretion of the military authorities.
The 2003 Patriot Act II goes much further in extending and
enlarging the "Big Brother functions" of control and surveillance
of people. It vastly expands the surveillance and counterinsurgency powers,
providing government access to personal bank accounts, information on home
computers, telephone wire tapping, credit card accounts, etc. (for further
details, see Ratical.org at http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/USAPA2.html#DSEAanalysis
The Role of Northern Command (Northcom)
Northern Command (Northcom) (based at Peterson Air Force
Base, Colorado) was set up in April 2002 specifically in the context of
"the pre-emptive war on terrorism".
The creation of Northcom is consistent with the de facto
repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act. In fact, the position of a "Homeland
Defense Command" leader "in the event of a terrorist attack on
U.S. soil", had already been envisaged in early 1999 by Clinton's Defense
Secretary William Cohen. ( http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Civil_Liberties/Posse_Comitatus_Law.html
Following the Bush Administration's decision to create Northcom,
the White House instructed Justice Department lawyers "to review the
Posse Comitatus law in light of new security requirements in the war on
terrorism." The 1878 Act was said to "greatly restrict the military's
ability to participate in domestic law enforcement". (National Journal,
Government Record, 22 July 2002)
The role of Northern Command defined in the Pentagon's "Joint
Doctrine for Homeland Security (JP-26)", constitutes a blueprint on
how to defend the Homeland.
Martial law could be triggered even in the case of a bogus
terror alert based on fabricated intelligence. Even in the case where it
is known and documented to senior military officials that the "outside
enemy" is fabricated, a martial law situation, characterized by detailed
command military/ security provisions, would become operational almost immediately.
Northcom has a mandate to "defend the homeland"
against this 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 militarisation
of civilian institutions.
Northcom's "Command Mission" encompasses a number
of "non-military functions" including "crisis management"
and "domestic civil support". Under Northcom jurisdiction, the
latter would imply a process of "military support to federal, state
and local authorities in the event of a terror attack". The latter
the preparation for, prevention of, deterrence of, preemption
of, defense against, and response to threats and aggression directed towards
U.S. territory, sovereignty, domestic population, and infrastructure; as
well as crisis management, consequence management, and other domestic civil
support." (See http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/dod/northcom.htm
Northcom is described as having "a Creeping Civilian
Mission". (David Isenberg, Asian Times, 5 December 2003). Since its
inception, it has been building capabilities in domestic intelligence and
law enforcement. It is in permanent liaison with the DHS and the Justice
Department. It has several hundred FBI and CIA officers stationed at its
headquarters in Colorado. (National Journal, 1 May 2004). It is in permanent
liaison, through an advanced communications system, with municipalities
and domestic civilian law enforcement agencies around the country. (Ibid).
It also has links to Canadian military and government authorities through
the so-called "binaitonal planning group". (See Is the Annexation
of Canada part of Bush's Military Agenda? November 2004 http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO411C.html
Meanwhile the CIA, which has a unit operating out of Northcom,
has extended its mandate to issues of "domestic intelligence".
In the case of a Code Red Alert, a national emergency would
be declared. Northern Command would deploy its forces on air, land and sea.
Several functions of civilian government would be transferred to Northcom
headquarters, which already has several structures, which enables it to
oversee and supervise civilian institutions.
In other words, Northcom's "command structure"
would be activated in the case of a code red terror alert. But Northcom
does not require, in accordance with the provisions of the 1999 Defense
Authorization Act (DAA), a terror alert, a terror attack or a war-like situation
to intervene in the country's civilian affairs.
The jurisdiction of the Northern Command now extends from
Mexico to Alaska. Under ("bi-national") agreements signed with
Canada and Mexico, Northern Command can intervene and deploy its forces
and military arsenal on land, air and sea in Canada (extending into its
Northern territories), throughout Mexico and in parts of the Caribbean.
(See http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/dod/northcom.htm )
Taken together, the existing legislation grants the military
extensive rights to intervene in an "emergency situation", without
the prior formal approval of the Commander in Chief.
America's Big Brother Data Banks
To prepare for new "law enforcement" missions for
the military within America, overseen by the Northern Command, the Center
for Law and Military Operations, based in Charlottesville, Virginia has
published a "useful" Handbook entitled "Domestic Operational
Law for Judge Advocates." According to Frank Morales, the Handbook:
"attempts to solidify, from a legal standpoint, Pentagon
penetration of America and it's 'operations other than war,' essentially
providing the U.S. corporate elite with lawful justification for its class
war against the American people, specifically those that resist the "new
world law and order" agenda." (Frank Morales, Homeland Defense
and the Militarisation of America, Global Outlook, No. 6, Winter 2004, http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MOR309A.html
According to Morales: "the 'war on terrorism' is the
cover for the war on dissent." which requires setting up comprehensive
procedures and data banks for the surveillance of individual citizens.
In this context, In the wake of September 11, the Bush Administration
established its proposed Big Brother data bank: "the Total Information
Awareness Program (TIAP).
TIAP was operated by the Information Awareness Office (IAO),
which had a mandate "to gather as much information as possible about
everyone, in a centralized location, for easy perusal by the United States
government." This would include medical records, credit card and banking
information, educational and employment data, records concerning travel
and the use of internet, email, telephone and fax.
Ironically, when it was first set up, it was headed by a
man with criminal record, former National Security Adviser ret. Admiral
Pointexter, who had been indicted on criminal charges for
his role in the Iran Contra scandal during the Reagan Administration, subsequently
resigned as TIAP Director and the program was "officially" discontinued.
While the IAO no longer exists in name, the initiative of
creating a giant data bank was by no means abandoned. Several US government
bodies including Homeland Security, the CIA and the FBI, respectively oversee
giant "Big Brother" data banks, which are fully operational. They
also collaborate in the controversial Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information
Exchange ( MATRIX). The latter is defined as "a crime-fighting database"
used by law enforcement agencies, the US Justice Department and Homeland
The National Intelligence Reform Act of 2004, sets the framework
for establishing a centralized "Information Sharing Network" which
will coordinate data from "all available sources". The proposed
network would bring together the data banks of various government agencies
under a single governmental umbrella. (Deseret Morning News, 29, 2004).
Needless to say, this integration of Big Brother data banks also includes
tax records, immigration data as well as confidential information on travelers.
Similar procedures have been implemented in Canada. The federal
government in Ottawa is collaborating with the US, leading to the eventual
merger of tax and immigration data banks between the two countries.
Meanwhile, the militarization of civilian institutions is
not only contemplated, it has become a talking point on network TV; it is
openly debated as a "solution" to "protecting American democracy"
which is said to be threatened by Islamic terrorists.
The implications of a code red alert are rarely the object
of serious debate.
The terror exercises under TOPOFF serve to condition public
officials and key decision makers. In turn through media disinformation,
citizens are being prepared and gradually conditioned for the unthinkable.
Email this article to a friend
To become a Member of Global Research
The Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) at www.globalresearch.ca
grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles in their
entirety, or any portions thereof, on community internet sites, as long
as the text & title are not modified. The source must be acknowledged
and an active URL hyperlink address of the original CRG article must be
indicated. The author's copyright note must be displayed. For publication
of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial
internet sites, contact: email@example.com
www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use
of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner.
We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions
of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of
political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted
material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission
from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole
responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the
Centre for Research on Globalization.
To express your opinion on this article, join the discussion
at Global Research's News and Discussion Forum
All information posted on this web site is
the opinion of the author and is provided for educational purposes only.
It is not to be construed as medical advice. Only a licensed medical doctor
can legally offer medical advice in the United States. Consult the healer
of your choice for medical care and advice.