Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA)

Flight 77 and the Pentagon

By M.K. Styllinski

“All of this is physically impossible, plain and simple. The wings of a 757 can’t hit a concrete building at more than 500 mph without leaving a mark. And they certainly won’t be vaporized by exploding jet fuel.”

Craig McKee, 9/11 Researcher at Truth and Shadows


Whilst Building 7 appears to represent the more opportunistic aspect of the 9/11 attacks, the Twin Towers acting as the psychological centre piece for maximum effect, the official story of Flight 77 and its alleged impact of the Pentagon goes even further into the realms of the bizarre. Unlike the WTC, very little evidence was available through which to sift. This is more than a little strange since at 9:37 a.m. September 11, 2001, a Boeing jet airliner Flight 77 apparently crashed into the reinforced section of the Pentagon, killing 189 people.

At 8:20 am on September 11, American Airlines Flight 77 left Dulles Airport in Washington DC, veering off course at 8:46 for several minutes. By the time the plane had returned to its original flight path at 8.50 am radio contact had been lost, the transponder switched off and by 8.56 am the plane had vanished from radar. [1] Curiously, by 9:09 am FAA chief Jane Garvey had notified the White House that there may have been another plane down. At 9:25 am air traffic controllers at Dulles Airport issued a warning to the White House that a plane was approaching them at considerable speed. According to the 9/11 Commission, NORAD was not told that Flight 77 had been hijacked at this time or at any time prior to impact. However, the FAA has claimed they officially warned NORAD at 9:24 am and informally warned them even earlier.

The same questions asked of Flights 11 and 175 can be levelled at the response to Flight 77: What on earth were the authorities doing for half an hour? Why had no jets been scrambled? [2]

American Airlines Flight 77

American Airlines Flight 77

Andrews Air Base in the District of Columbia houses the 121st Fighter Squadron of the 113th Fighter Wing equipped with F-16 fighters; Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 321, supported by a reserve squadron; the Air National Guard (DCANG) which provides: “…combat units in the highest possible state of readiness.” Yet Washington remained undefended. A stated delay in Air Traffic clearance simply doesn’t cut the mustard when the biggest emergency of modern times was underway. As one ex-Pentagon employee observes: ““ATC Radar images were (and are) available in the under structures of the Pentagon, and any commercial flight within 300 miles of DC that made an abrupt course change toward Washington, turned off their transponder, and refused to communicate with ATC, would have been intercepted at supersonic speeds within a max of 9 minutes by a Fighter out of Andrews. Period. Why these planes weren’t, baffles me. If we could get fighters off the ground in 2 minutes then, we could now.” [3]

At 9:25 Vice President Dick Cheney and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice were ensconced in a bunker below the Whitehouse. Cheney is said to have been warned of an aircraft approaching Washington and confirmed by radar evidence tracking the plane as it reached a distance of 30 miles to Washington. [4] Meanwhile, air traffic controllers at Washington Dulles saw an unidentified plane (due to its transponder being turned off) or as David Ray Griffin mentions: “…shortly after AA 77’s transponder signal was lost, the flight was also lost to primary radar. So there was no ‘blip’ until much later, when a high-speed primary target… …is seen moving toward Washington.” [5]

This is later confirmed as Flight 77 travelling at such high speed (500 mph) and with a distinctive manoeuvrability that the experienced Dulles Air traffic controllers thought it was a military fighter plane. One controller also expressed reservations about Flight 77 being a commercial flight: “Nobody knew that was American 77.… I thought it was a military flight. I thought that Langley [Air Force Base] had scrambled some fighters and maybe one of them got up there.… It was moving very fast, like a military aircraft might move at a low altitude.” [6]

Accordingly, the “commercial Jet airliner” Flight 77 was seen by radar making for the Pentagon, which it reached at 9:35 before making an extremely – if not impossible – 300 degree loop reportedly flying: “several miles south of the restricted airspace around the White House.” It performs rapid downward spiral: “dropping the last 7,000 feet in two and a half minutes,” accelerating to 530 mph before crashing into the West wing of the Pentagon at 9:37 am. [7]

Attack Path

Flight Path of American Airlines Flight 11. Such a maneuver is impossible for a expert pilot let alone an amateur one. It is also against the law of aviation physics. | “At 9 11, four planes for two hours were able to drive around, fly around even one hour in the direction going toward the west and then turn around and then comeback. The military air force was not able to interdict them. It’s [un]imaginable.” – Andreas Von Buelow, Former assistant German defense minister, director of the German Secret Service, minister for research and technology, and member of Parliament for 25 years.

Before getting into just a few of the countless oddities that make up the Pentagon attacks, let’s return to the overriding question and which has never been convincingly answered: how on earth did a Boeing 757 jet airliner penetrate the most heavily protected US military citadel on earth? When the aircraft breached White House airspace then why didn’t the automated missile system shoot it down?

There are claims by 9/11 debunkers who cling to the official conspiracy theory that there is no evidence that these defence systems exist, hence the problem. It would surely be against the most basic military-intelligence protocol to telegraph where these defence systems are located. According to Navy Combat Systems Specialist Dennis Cimino: “The sabotage of routine protective systems, controlled by strict hierarchies would never have been contemplated let alone attempted absent the involvement of the supreme US military command.” He states further that this would include:  “…President George Bush, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and the then-acting Head of Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General Richard B. Meyers.” [8]

The Pentagon is protected by State-of-the-Art antimissile batteries or Raytheon Basic Point Defence missile battery armaments embedded on several building rooftops. Cimino adds: “With anti-aircraft missile defences installed in rooftops in the Washington, D.C. area since the mid 1980’s” and likely versions of the “PAC-3 ‘Patriot’ Missile systems and Secret Service agents on the roof with shoulder fired STINGER Missiles, protecting the White House, the claims that the capability did not exist is an untenable assertion. [9]

Cimino further explains that the Sea Sparrow air defines missiles are used:

“… much in the same fashion that Moscow has a system that NATO code named ‘Yo Yo’ that maintains radar surveillance and provides protection to the Kremlin and other high value targets from military incursions. A ‘MODE 4A military I.F.F. response’ (identify friendly or foe – enemy aircraft) which requires special encryption and restricted to use by military aircraft with an additional ‘mission specific MODEX aka SEDSCAF number’ assigned for each plane’ if it is required to ‘meet PLAN OF THE DAY for the area.’”

Cimino tells us it is this number which “… enables an aircraft then to penetrate prohibited or military restricted airspace such as that which surrounds both the White House and the Pentagon, as well as a number of military installations around the globe.” Without this IFF any aircraft would be shot down.” [10]

The question remains: Who “unplugged” the defence systems? The night cleaner?

pentagon-path-markerThe Pentagon aftermath from overhead video footage

When 130 billion of US tax dollars were funnelled into the Pentagon’s Strategic Defence Initiative (Star Wars) during the Reagan years, US officials claimed the system could detect and intercept missiles fired from an unknown destination traveling at well over 10 times the speed of a commercial airliner, and to shoot them down in 15 minutes or less, before they reached their US targets. [11] What is more, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) tells us that: “a defensive system may need to hit a warhead smaller than an oil drum that is traveling above the atmosphere at speeds greater than 13,000 miles per hour.” The CBO report states that missile defines and intercept systems must take down an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) in a matter of minutes, or its curtains. [12]

Journalist and ex-US government employee Fred Burkes summarises the mystery:

“If these sophisticated military systems were designed to detect missiles fired from unknown locations at over 13,000 mph and shoot them down in mere minutes, why on 9/11 could they not detect any one of the four large airliners traveling at a mere 600 mph, especially when two of them were known to be lost for over 40 minutes before they crashed? … How is it possible that the Pentagon’s highly touted missile detections systems could not locate Flight 77 in the 42 minutes it was known to be lost before it crashed into the heart of the defense system of the U.S.?” [13]

Which is why a Pentagon spokesman’s response that they were: “… simply not aware that this aircraft was coming our way… ” is a load of hokum. How is it possible that with the highly sophisticated radar systems such as the PAVE PAWS which “does not miss anything occurring in North American airspace” yet couldn’t detect a huge Boeing 757 on a crash course to the Pentagon with ample amounts of time to do so? [14] If the plug had somehow been pulled on that system, then are we expected to believe that the Pentagon’s National Military Command Centre, NORAD and the FAA had all decided to have an extended coffee break where standard operating procedures suddenly didn’t apply?

pave-paws-1

PAVE PAWS radar system | Source: globalsecuirty.org

Griffin underscores this confusion when he states: “… if F-16s were airborne by 9:30, as alleged, they would have to travel slightly over 700 mph to reach Washington before Flight 77 does. The maximum speed of an F-16 is 1,500 mph. Even at traveling 1,300 mph, these planes could have reached Washington in six minutes – well before any claim of when Flight 77 crashed. […] Why is the emergency considered important enough to stop all takeoffs from Washington at this time, but not important enough to scramble even a single plane to defend Washington?” [15]

There was also ample time to evacuate all Pentagon personnel. Top officials were well aware of the WTC attacks with air traffic controllers having spotted an unidentified fast-flying aircraft heading towards the Pentagon and the White House at 9:25. By the time of the crash at 9.37am the Pentagon’s ‘War Room’ or Executive Support Centre (ESC) had been in session for at least half an hour watching WTC footage. [16] 30 minutes to a minimum of 12 minutes before the Pentagon was hit, almost everyone could have been evacuated or at least attempts could have been made by a so-called military machine priding itself on safety protocols. Apparently, those in the ESC didn’t even know that they had been hit and it is only when Donald Rumsfeld enters the War Room after thoroughly annoying everyone at the crash scene that anyone knew anything was amiss. If Donald knew all about it and half the Pentagon was smashed in you’d think the heart of the defensive nexus would have at least known the whereabouts of the Secretary of Defence.[17]

Firstly, notwithstanding the fact that Flight 77 was able to hit the Pentagon by executing an almost impossible downward spiral, it is incredible that so little damage was done. The pilot, Hani Hanjour, was not just an amateur but painfully inept. Peggy Chevrette, Arizona Flight School Manager stated in a New York Times piece: “I’m still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon … He could not fly at all … “I couldn’t believe he had a commercial license of any kind with the skills that he had”. [18]

pentagon1

Pentagon aftermath. We are meant to believe that a Boeing Jet Airliner hit the outer wall and vapourised – including wings, undercarriage and engines.  (Source: top: 9/11Review.org | Bottom: Alex Wong/Getty Images

The impact targeted the first floor of the Pentagon’s reinforced west wall, the only part of the Pentagon having recently undergone extensive renovation, causing heavy damage to the building’s three outer rings. Destruction ploughed a path through Army accounting offices on the outer E Ring, the Navy Command Centre on the D Ring, and the Defence Intelligence Agency’s comptroller’s office on the C Ring. It seems nonsensical that the terrorists would aim the plane at an 8ft façade in the process of being renovated and reinforced – and therefore with less people present – when they could have crashed into the roof, a far more expansive target with the possibility of killing far more military personnel. As it happens, most of those killed were civilians.

Now, here’s where it gets truly surreal, as Griffin explains:

“…since the aircraft penetrated only the first three rings of the Pentagon, only the nose of a Boeing 757 would have gone inside…The rest of the airplane would have remained outside. […] ‘While the plane’s nose is made of carbon and the wings, containing the fuel, can burn, the Boeing’s fuselage is aluminium and the jet engines are built out of steel. At the end of the fire, it would necessarily left a burnt-out wreck.” […]

… on a Boeing 757,…the jet engines, made of steel, are attached to the wings, so the wings would hit the facade with great force. And yet prior to the collapse…the photos reveal no visible damage to the facade on either side of the orifice, even where the engines would have hit the building…the fact that the photographs clearly show that the facade above the opening is completely intact and even unmarked creates a still more insuperable problem, given Boeing 757’s big tail.”[19]

Furthermore, for a Boeing 757 in excess of 63 tons (virtually empty) to over 100 tons (full) it makes little sense that only the first ring of the building was destroyed so that the second and third rings would only reveal a hole about seven feet in diameter. [20]

In the immediate aftermath of the explosion one would have expected a vast amount of material evidence to have come from a massive 63 ton Boeing 757 Jet airliner crashing into a federal building at a speed of over 530 mph. An aircraft of this size as well as the history of plane crashes show that a huge quantity of debris and smouldering destruction would be spread over a significantly wide area. With no clusters of fires except on the Pentagon itself, only a few pieces of the alleged plane remained, exhibiting no scorching from the alleged “fireball” and which were picked up by hand. What about the thousands of gallons of jet fuel that would have been spilled across the crash site? There was no clean-up of the ground in evidence at any time. If the Boeing 757’s fuselage is made from aluminium and engines made from steel, then no hydrocarbon fire is going to melt them let alone leave no trace as we are being asked to believe.

mystery_debris

The tiny remains of so-called plane debris. But is it from American Airlines?

pl1

This is the Pentagon lawn immediately outside the Pentagon and after the crash of Flight 77. Fancy a game of golf?

This also leaves the question of the upper floors which survived this elusive inferno. There was no evidence of the sort of intense heat required to completely vanish a jet airliner leaving virtually no debris behind on the Pentagon lawn. More than 35 minutes after the crash at 10.15 am the front section of the Pentagon which had been hit by Flight 77 collapsed exposing the interior. Computers, office furniture and even books and files could clearly be seen and were perfectly intact showing no signs of fire damage. [21]

pentagon-inside-hole

This is the approx, 20ft, ground floor hole that American Airlines Flight 77 is said to have vanished into. No damage from he wings either side, no damage on the front lawn.

What was perhaps the most glaring anomaly in the whole media-led illusion was the 18 foot diameter impact hole on the second floor which the jet airliner was meant to have squeezed itself into. If the building’s façade was about 18 feet in diameter and the diameter of the fuselage of Flight 77 around 12 feet; wingspan about 125 feet, with the tip of the tail is about 44 feet from the ground, it begs the question if it did miraculously suck itself into the length of the impact pathway then all those plane parts had to have been left behind. [22] But there was nothing of the kind. The condition of the Pentagon lawn was so pristine lawn that it could have hosted a golfing tournament. The official theory would like us to believe that the 6 ton titanium engines, the wings and the tail simply vaporised. They say this, because no sign of them can be found at the crash site. Not even the seat cushions. [23] Or, as Jamie McKintyre of CNN News observed: “[F]rom my close up inspection there’s no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon… …The only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you could pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, fuselage— nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon.” [24] 

So, perhaps the wings were vapourised whilst being sucked into the 18 ft. hole which was in fact a worm-hole?

What is more, there is no sign that there were even any people on board the plane unless they were travelling extremely light as no luggage of any kind was found; no suitcases, shoes, clothing, or anything resembling personal effects that would indicate passengers were aboard. Though there were many victims inside the Pentagon, no bodies or body parts were recovered from the crash site. Alleged passengers were identified from DNA samples yet we are told that most of the Boeing 757 simply vaporised or evaporated which somehow left all the bodies intact yet invisible.

pentagon-plane

A mock-up by a French 9/11 researcher to illustrate how ridiculous the idea is that a Boeing 747 jet-airliner fuselage can somehow vanish into a 20ft to lie comfortably within the interior of the Pentagon, leaving no essential parts behind. Yet, at the same time we are told to believe that Flight 77 powered its flimsy way through three of the five concentric rings of the Pentagon complex.

pentagon-fireball

The orange fireball which people believe is evidence of the net result of a Boeing 747 hitting the outer wall. Where is exactly is all the jet fuel? The wings? Fuselage? wheels? Chairs? Tail-fin? Engine?

The credulity needed to accept the kind of reality where a 125-foot-wide airplane created and then went inside a hole less than 20-feet wide, is beyond anything approaching logic and rationale. Yet, that is apparently what we are expected to believe – even within much of the 9/11 Truth Movement.

9/11 investigators have commented on why the videos surrounding the Pentagon approach were either not working or had been confiscated by the FBI allegedly for analysis. None of the confiscated surveillance and security video tapes from hotels and gas stations, traffic cameras, have been released. Although after much pressure from 9/11 Truth Movement and certain sections of the political and public arena the Department of Defence finally released two clips from Pentagon security cameras no doubt chosen due to the fact they show absolutely nothing.

The standard cry from those confronted with the hint of a possibility that something other than a jet aircraft hit the Pentagon is a hands-on-hips question of: “Well, what happened to the plane and all the people?” This question alone is deemed more than enough proof that to contemplate any other scenario is both silly and pointless. Along with what can be seen and verified at the crash site the US authorities have refused to give any evidence to prove that Flight 77 did hit the Pentagon. Despite the FBI and the CIA having a record of lying as long as your arm, they expect us to dutifully trust them in the face of the most obvious evidence that something is very, very wrong.

It is clear from the voluminous analysis now available on internet journals that various examples of obfuscation and blocking by US and government agency officials have continued to this day. On October 14, 2001, flight control transcripts for the 9/11 aeroplanes were finally released. Yet the data on Flight 77 ends almost 20 minutes before it crashes. Could it be, out of many floated explanations that government officials simply didn’t want the press and public to hear what actually took place during the final 20 minutes of Flight 77?


 “After five years of talking to many individuals in the intelligence community, in the military, foreign intelligence agencies, and a whole host of other people, people from the air traffic control community, the FAA, I came to the conclusion that after five years what we saw happen on that morning of September 11, 2001, was the result of a highly-compartmentalized covert operation to bring about a fascist coup in this country … These people need to be brought to justice, if not by our own Congress, then by an international tribunal in the Hague…”

Wayne Madsen, Former U.S. Navy Intelligence Officer, specialist in electronic surveillance and security. Formerly assigned to the National Security Agency and the State Department


At 9:37 am September 11, the Pentagon’s ‘War Room’ otherwise known as the Executive Support Centre (ESC) was in session. Torie Clarke, the Assistant Secretary of Defence for public affairs, describes the capabilities of the War room as having: “… instant access to satellite images and intelligence sources peering into every corner of the globe” and where: “… the building’s top leadership goes to coordinate military operations during national emergencies.” That being the case, it is doubly strange that no one realised the Pentagon had been hit, or if they did, nobody stirred. Some of the individuals present included Clarke, Stephen Cambone, Donald Rumsfeld’s closest aide, and Larry Di Rita, Rumsfeld’s personal chief of staff, all of whom decided it was either a bomb or “the heating and cooling systems.” Indeed, Clarke would claim that the first they heard it was a possible “plane” was from Rummie himself half an hour after the attack was heard and while the ESC team were still “glued to television screens showing two hijacked planes destroying the World Trade Center,” (no doubt with pop-corn in hands).

usualsuspects1

The Usual Suspects: Clueless authoritarians or did some have the inside scoop?

Rumsfeld decided to arrive at the ESC at 10.15 am after running about the crash scene; getting in the way of rescue teams and interfering with a crime scene.  It was also Rumsfeld who first made the executive decision in less than 30 minutes that the Pentagon had been struck by an aeroplane. [25] [26] Like so many of the Bush Administration officials, Torie Clarke followed the Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice school of dramatic denial in claiming the notion of a jet airliner attacking was “unfathomable,” when it has been proven beyond doubt that the opposite was the case. [27] As we have seen, the US government had long since created simulations and models to predict what would happen if terrorist flew planes into the White House, The Twin Towers and the Pentagon, including intelligence reports illustrating how “Al-Qaeda could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives … into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House.” [28]

first-response1Donald Rumsfeld “lending a hand” outside the Pentagon

Just one example in an ocean of foreknowledge includes the more peculiar case of Charles Burlingame who in 1990 participated in a department of Defence exercise called “Project MASCA” in which a commercial jet airliner is deployed as a weapon and crashed into the Pentagon. Charles Burlingame was found to be none other than the Captain who supposedly flew Flight 77 into the Pentagon. [29]

In creating distractions to reinforce the official story on 9/11 there are plenty of people on hand to deliver. Though most of the sources for making the link between AA Flight 77 and whatever struck the Pentagon came from military personnel, Ted Olson, Republicrat, U.S. Solicitor General and his wife Neo-Con author Barbara Olson became the designated pillars of truth linking Flight 77 with the Pentagon attack. There were other calls reportedly made by passengers and flight attendants, but Ted Olson was the only person to receive calls from his wife at around 9:25 and 9:30am.

According to a CNN report, Ted Olson maintained that his wife had: “called him twice on a cell phone from American Airlines Flight 77,” further stating that: “all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers. The only weapons she mentioned were knives and cardboard cutters.” [30] This helped to produce the outpourings of indignation and collective revenge surrounding the death of Olson’s wife who had been downed by foaming-at-the-mouth Muslim terrorists, the antithesis of American Christian values. The highbrow “bring ‘em on” philosophy of Bush which seeped into middle town America’s vengeance meant that the “War on Terror” took on new vigour.

barbara-ted-olsonBarbara and Ted Olson

Ted Olson was a faithful supporter of Bush and Neo-Conservatism which right then and there, allows some scepticism about his claims. David Ray Griffin reminds us that he: “… pleaded George W. Bush’s cause before the Supreme Court in the 2000 election dispute” and also: “… defended Vice President Cheney’s attempt to prevent the release of papers from his energy task force to the committee investigating the Enron scandal.” [31] While adoration of the Bush Doctrine isn’t enough to place him under suspicion of lying, the contradictions and constant changes and vagueness in his story certainly are.

The claim that his wife had called him twice from a cell phone via the Department of Justice collect was contradicted on a Hannity and Colmes, Fox News interview on September 14. Olson thought she must have used the aeroplane phone because for some reason her credit cards were inaccessible. This doesn’t work either because a credit card is still needed to activate a passenger-seat phone.  [32] No doubt realising he was digging a hole for himself, when giving an interview to American talk show host Larry King, he said that the call went dead because “the signals from cell phones coming from airplanes don’t work that well” which was a huge understatement considering that high-altitude cell phone calls from jet airliners were not possible until 2004.  [33] Olson’s statement is contradicted a second time by American Airlines who are on record saying that no Boeing 757s had phones at that time: “The passengers on flight 77 used their own personal cellular phones to make out calls during the terrorist attack.” [34]

Perhaps, Mrs. Olson used her cell phone after all? Taking into account the improbability of such a move given the state of technology, an FBI report at the 2006 trial of alleged hijacker Zacharias Moussaoui added to the weakening of Olson’s story still further by attributing one “unconnected call” to Barbara Olson lasting “o seconds”. According to the FBI report, there was no incoming call from Flight 77 to Ted Olson or anyone else from a cell phone or passenger phone. Why was this total refutation of Ted Olson’s famous “two calls from his wife” not reported?

The nail in the coffin of Ted Olson’s story is the sheer absurdity of the hijack scenario that Ted and Barbara Olson would like us to believe, yet remains a fundamental pillar of the official 9/11 narrative. According to Olson his wife had said that: ‘all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers.’ This is barely credible. 60+ people are hardly likely to be held against their will by 3-4 armed with knives and “box-cutters.” (Actually box-cutters were not allowed on any aircraft from 1994 onwards, so this is another fantasy).  Further, the hijackers had previously been described by the 9/11 Commission as: “… not physically imposing, … the majority of them were between 5’5” and 5’7” in height and slender in build’…” If Charles Burlingame had been aboard as claimed, as a weight-lifter and boxer it is distinctly unlikely he would have suddenly turned into a pussy-cat. His brother also dismissed this scenario who said: “I don’t know what happened in that cockpit, but I’m sure that they would have had to incapacitate him or kill him because he would have done anything to prevent the kind of tragedy that befell that airplane.”  [35]

Either Ted Olson was lying or he was a useful idiot. Probably both. The story which he has given to the media doesn’t hold up under any kind of scrutiny though it did provide suitable distraction. But this still leaves us with the burning question:

What was it that hit the Pentagon?

This perhaps:

drone-schmatic

See: Truth and Consequences: A Watershed Moment for Rebuilding a Movement by Scott Creighton | Though the tiny amount of debris that was found does not fit the wreckage profile of a jet airliner by any stretch of the imagination, it certainly conforms to the idea of a drone.

Or even a cruise missile such as this one?

cruisemissile1

During an October 2001 interview U.S. Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld made a revealing remark:

“They [find a lot] and any number of terrorist efforts have been dissuaded, deterred or stopped by good intelligence gathering and good preventative work. It is a truth that a terrorist can attack any time, any place, using any technique and it’s physically impossible to defend at every time and every place against every conceivable technique. Here we’re talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filled with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building [the Pentagon] and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center. The only way to deal with this problem is by taking the battle to the terrorists, wherever they are, and dealing with them.”  [36]

Did Rumsfeld “misspeak”? Was the reference to a missile hitting the Pentagon just an innocent slip of the tongue or did it reveal a deeper truth? If it was truly a jet airliner how could anyone confuse this with a missile unless it is a truth that slipped out unconsciously – a common trait of the psychopath.

Recall that the nose of the Boeing 757 is composed of carbon fibres and thus very fragile. It is physically impossible to suggest that the most fragile part of the aircraft could have piled through three rings of the Pentagon to create a seven-foot exit hole in the inside wall of the third ring. The head of a missile however, would be a much more logical conclusion. The fire produced at the Pentagon shows red flames which are consistent with the type of AGM Maverick, Tomahawk or Russian/Soviet Granit missile which would indicate a hotter and more instantaneous fire.  [37]

Short video clips from Pentagon security videos were leaked by an alleged whistleblower in 2002 from which the most pertinent five frames were analysed and pored over, (as it turned out, to little avail) showing something hitting the Pentagon but very likely not a Boeing 757. On May 16th 2006, the U.S. Department of Defence released two more short video clips apparently to placate those calling for the release of all security tapes. Officials declared that these clips show conclusively AA Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon. Once again, there is an explosion but it certainly doesn’t show anything resembling a Boeing 757. What the images do seem to resemble on the so-called crash site is a cruise missile or carrier drone.

pentagonhit1-5

The so-called “leaked” video of a “Boeing 747” hitting the Pentagon. The smoke and fireball however, looks suspiciously like some variety of tomahawk or stinger missile.

The manoeuvre seen in the security video clips is straight as an arrow and typifies the trajectory and behaviour of a missile, as researcher Peter Wakefield Sault explains:

“The reason it could not be an airplane is that airplanes swoop up and down, always pointing in the direction of flight, unlike cruise missiles which, because they are pilotless, can perform violent maneuvres known as ‘bump up/down’ wherein the attitude of the missile does not change while the missile changes its line of attack. A cruise missile is steered with one or more onboard devices known as ‘Control Moment Gyroscopes’ (CMGs). These control the direction that the missile points in, its attitude, and thereby its course. The wings, which swivel laterally in their entirety, can be used to cause a sudden rapid ascent or descent while the gyroscopes force the missile to maintain the same attitude. This is the maneuvre shown as ‘bump up/down’ … Cruise missiles are designed to hug the ground (or sea) at a height of 6 feet (2 metres) during their final approaches, employing radars and high-speed electronics to achieve this.”  [38]

The vapour trail which can be seen in the security camera video clips and stills has also been listed as singular proof of the Aircraft’s presence before slamming into the Pentagon, riding heavily on the power of suggestion, as with most of the 9/11 images. However, jet airliners do not produce vapour trails below 30,000 ft. which must therefore exclude any kind of aeroplane, though the US State Department very much wanted us to believe otherwise. A cruise missile is propelled by a rocket motor and could be seen if launched from a relatively short-distance from the Pentagon. Though speculative, the Army and Navy Club, less than two miles away is one location where a possible missile trajectory can be traced and which may have served as the missile launch zone. [39]

Wakefield-Sault also alerts us to considerable evidence concerning the presence of an aeroplane which passed low and nearby a press conference sometime between 09:31 and 09:38 on the morning of September 11th 2001. Then Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Porter Goss, had convened the conference over three miles North-East of the Pentagon.

According to taxi-driver Lloyde England a large airplane flew very low across State Route 27 taking out five lampposts as it approached the Pentagon, one of which hit Mr. England’s car. According to his testimony on the now defunct website of The Survivors’ Fund Project:

“As [Lloyde] approached the Navy Annex, he saw a plane flying dangerously low overhead. Simultaneously, the plane struck a light pole and the pole came crashing down onto the front of Lloyde’s taxi cab, destroying the windshield in front of his eyes. Glass was everywhere as he tried to stop the car. Another car stopped and the driver helped move the heavy pole off Lloyde’s car. As they were moving the pole, they heard a big boom and turned to see an explosion. The light pole fell on Lloyd and he struggled to get up from underneath, wondering what had happened.”  [40]

Given the trajectory of the flight-path it is highly probable that this is the same plane heard at the Porter Goss press conference and does mean that there was not some kind of aircraft approaching the Pentagon. However, the timings are wrong since “… the flight time from the highway to the Pentagon is about one second. Clearly then, if Mr England is correct about the sequence of events, the explosion could not have taken place at the same time that the airplane flew over the Pentagon.”  [41]

Furthermore, “…at least half of the “north side flyover” witnesses also claim to have seen the airplane they saw flying over hit the Pentagon, … which is contradicted by the physical evidence of the damage path both inside and outside the Pentagon, hence diminishing their credibility as witnesses to a great big zero.”

lloyd-england-taxiLloyde England’s Taxi which was used to justify the direction and trajectory of the alleged Flight 77. Unfortunately, for the official story, this too is riven with contradictions.

“National Security Alert” a short documentary film made by Citizen Investigation Team claims to have established that witnesses supported a banking north side approach to the Pentagon, with nothing on the South side, “this means the damage to the light-poles and taxi-cab had to have been staged.” The video extract continues: “As unanimously demonstrated by the witnesses, the plane was nowhere near the downed light poles, but it was furthest from light pole no.1 which is what cab-driver Lloyde England claims he lifted out of the windshield of his cab minutes after the attack.” In June of 2008 the CIT confronted England with the information, but before the interview began audio test recording picked up a “strange reaction.” Saying “… he knew that his cab and light pole were on the bridge.” Here is short transcript of what he had to say:

L: One guy who took..um..the pictures lives right over here on 17th street

CIT: He took pictures of your cab?

L: and, um…. he took pictures … He was up on the bridge. He took pictures of the pole, he took pictures of the car.

CIT: Oh, right.

L: And as far as I know he still has them.

When cameras started rolling England states the exact opposite and refused to admit he was anywhere near the bridge. Later on in the film he becomes more candid:

L: I’m not supposed to be involved in all this… This is their thing.

CIT: Meaning they are doing it for their own reasons?

Pentagon_taxi_hit_by_lightpole

Lloyd England by his car after the Pentagon attack and before the collapse.

L: That’s right. I’m not supposed to be in.

CIT: But they used you right?

L: I’m in it.

CIT: You’re in it?

L: Yeah, we came across … across the highway together.

CIT: You and their “event”?

L: That’s right.

CIT: Then they must have planned it?

L: It was planned. […] One thing about it you gotta understand something, when people do things and get away with it – you…eventually it’s going to come to me. And when it comes to me it’s going to be so big I can’t do nothin’ about it …. So, it has to be stopped in the beginning when it’s small, you see, to keep it from spreading.”  [42]

CIT claim that England was cautious not to “outright confess,” working hard to distance himself from the planners while admitting it was planned. They believe this is corroboration for other witness statements in the film testifying to a North side approach, the staging of the light-poles and cab event and thus the plane could not have hit the Pentagon.

One researcher Gerard Holmgren and his brilliant analysis found that many of the testimonies were seriously flawed or in Holmgren words: “What appeared at first reading to be 19 eyewitness accounts … actually turned out to be none.” Yet he was open-minded and aware that: “Eyewitnesses who are vague on fine details are generally more likely to be telling the truth than those who claim to have meticulously taken in everything. But there should be some indication that the object was a large passenger jet, and could not have been a much smaller jet, a military craft, a light plane, a helicopter or a cruise missile.” His meticulous findings concluded that such indications did not materialise.  [43]

The source of his initial research of eyewitness accounts focused on a website called http://www.urbanlegends.about.com, which included a rebuttal of the theory that Flight77 did not hit the Pentagon. The main evidence presented was the listing of 19 web-linked eyewitness accounts of the event which appeared to be compelling at first glance. On closer inspection Holmgren found they were all missing a “basic condition” in that: “the witnesses did not actually claim to see the Pentagon hit by the plane. What they claimed was to have seen a plane flying way too low, and then immediately afterwards to have seen smoke or an explosion coming from the direction of the Pentagon which was out of sight at the time of the collision.” This became a familiar theme which could not be in anyway termed “evidence” and thus had to be ruled out. This, in addition to logistical and photographic inconsistencies, non-existent witnesses, tampering with witness reports and possible examples of CoIntelpro, led Holmgren to conclude: “… that there is no eyewitness evidence to support the theory that F77 hit the Pentagon …”  [44]

pentagon

After the collapse of the outer ring. Of course, that’s where all the plane wreckage is buried…But didn’t they say the plane reached two inner rings of the Pentagon? Did they collapse? Nope. Any wreckage there? Nope.

An enormous contribution to 9/11 official theory derives from witness testimony disseminated by the MSM has come down to us as fact when it is more often a product of trauma-induced confusion sitting alongside careful disinformation. Most of these witnesses were either Pentagon employees, thus unreliable, or USA Today reporters such as Walters whose statements have been heavily referenced. However, as Canadian author and independent journalist Dave McGowan points out, knowing what we know about media complicity in PSYOPS, can we trust what these reporters have to say about the events, given the newspaper’s background and a distinct pattern of USA Today interest which has emerged?

McGowan explains: “USA Today and Navy Times are both part of the Gannett family of news outlets. … Gannett also publishes Air Force Times, Army Times, Marine Corp Times, Armed Forces Journal, Military Market, Military City, and Defence News. In other words, it’s just your typical independent, civilian media organization. Having established that, let’s now take a look at who our group of mystery witnesses are (or who they were at the time of the Pentagon attack):

  • Bob Dubill was the executive editor for USA Today.
  • Mary Ann Owens was a journalist for Gannett.
  • Richard Benedetto was a reporter for USA Today.
  • Christopher Munsey was a reporter for Navy Times.
  • Vin Narayanan was a reporter for USA Today.
  • Joel Sucherman was a multimedia editor for USA Today.
  • Mike Walters was a reporter for USA Today.
  • Steve Anderson was the director of communications for USA Today.
  • Fred Gaskins was the national editor for USA Today.
  • Mark Faram was a reporter for Navy Times. [45]

The odds of all those USA Today reporters being on sight and in such numbers and touting the same story counter to the evidence is a stretch. Or as McGowan reiterates: “So unless USA Today staff was holding its annual company picnic on the Pentagon lawn that morning, it seems to me that there is something seriously wrong with this story.” [46] This is the same newspaper which reported that Andrews Air Base: “… had no fighters assigned to it,” and in a later piece, that Andrews did have fighters present “but those planes were not on alert” both statements of which were wholly untrue. As evidence from multiple reports that immediately after the attack on the Pentagon, F-16s from Andrews were flying over Washington. [47]

It is also true to say that this doesn’t mean that USA Today was necessarily in on the official story conspiracy. As Holmgren mentions: “if a newspaper gives a one line quote from an anonymous witness and gives no details of when, where or how the quote was gathered, does not specify who wrote the story and gives no other details, then this is not an eyewitness account. It is hearsay.” And the vast majority of eyewitness accounts which support the official story are precisely that.

pentagonstrikewww.pentagonstrike.co.uk/

The total lack of evidence of anything remotely fitting the description of a jet airliner being found at the scene should be the defining characteristic of the Pentagon attacks. Yet, the 9/11 Truth Movement cries “disinformation!” at the merest hint of such a suggestion since it opens a veritable hornet’s nest of uncomfortable questions which apparently, cannot be answered. (i.e. Where did Flight 77 go? What happened to the passengers? – and other conundrums.)

Just because this raises more complicated questions and “reinforces conspiracy theory” doesn’t mean that we should shy away from appraising a crime scene and reaching conclusions based on what is. Digging for truth is a dirty job and doesn’t necessarily fit into neat boxes with nice little ticks. Sometimes all we have is a framework upon which we can build further answers. Yet, the framework is crucial. If that is wrong then we are led down avenues of exploration which must be wrong too. And so it is with Flight 77 and the Pentagon.

 


Notes

[1] ‘FAA Summary of Air Traffic Hijack Events September 11 2001 http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB165/faa7.pdf
[2] ‘ “We have planes. Stay quiet” – Then silence’ by Michael Ellison, The Guardian, 17 October 2001. | ‘Timeline in Terrorist Attacks of Sept. 11, 2001’ Staff and Wire Reports, Washington Post, September 12, 2001 | ‘9/11 commission staff statement No. 17,’ NBC News, http://www.msnbc.msn.com June 17, 2004.
[3] http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_timeline.html
[4] 9/11 National Commision on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States Public Hearing Friday, May 23, 2003. http://www.9-11commission.gov/ | ‘Clear the skies’ September 8, 2002 http://www.mnet.co.za
[5] p.232; Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the .Official Conspiracy Theory by David Ray Griffin,, Olive Branch Press, 2007 | ISBN-10: 156656686X
[6] ‘Get These Planes on the Ground’ Air Traffic Controllers Recall Sept. 11: ABC News October 24, 2001.| MSNBC Transcript: ‘American Remembers, Air Traffic Controllers Describe How Events Unfolded As They Saw Them on September 11th.’ MSNBC Dateline. September 11, 2002.
[7] ‘Probe reconstructs horror, calculated attacks on planes’ By Glen Johnson, The Boston Globe, November 23, 2001. | ‘Primary Target’ CBS News, February 11, 2009 | ‘Primary Target’ CBS News, February 11, 2009. | ‘Part I: Terror attacks brought drastic decision: Clear the skies’ By Alan Levin, Marilyn Adams and Blake Morrison, USA Today, August 12, 2002 | National Transportation and Safety Board, Office of Research and Engineering, Washington D.C. 20594, Febraury 19 2002. Flight Path Study American Airlines Flight 77. http://www.ntsb.gov/info/Flight_ Path_ Study_AA77.pdf
[8] ‘The Official Account of the Pentagon Attack is Fantasy’ March 3, 2012. http://www.veteranstoday.com By Dennis Cimino and Jim Fetzer,| Dennis Cimino, A.A., EE; 35-years EMI/EMC testing, field engineering; FDR testing and certifications specialist; Navy Combat Systems Specialist; 2,000 hours, Pilot in Command, Commercial Instrument Single and Multi-Engine Land Pilot, Eastern Airlines 727-200, Second Officer. Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer and founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ibid.
[11] ‘Ill-Starred ‘Star Wars’ Tests’ Los Angeles Times, December 20, 2004.
[12] ‘Alternatives for Boost-Phase Missile Defense’ CBO Report, July 1, 2004. http://www.cbo.gov/publication/15852
[13] ‘9/11, Pentagon, and Missile Defense: $130 Billion on Pentagon’s Missile Defense Fails to Stop Four Airliners on 9/11’ By Fred Burkes, http://www.wanttoknow.info.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Paul Thompson (9:03-9:08 AM), citing USA Today, September 12 and 13, 2002.
[16] U.S. Department of Defense Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs) Speech Testimony Prepared for Delivery to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States | http://www.defense.gov/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=105 | Testimony Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, Washington, DC, Tuesday, March 23, 2004.
[17] p.5; Rumsfeld: His Rise, Fall, and Catastrophic Legacy By Andrew Cockburn, Published by Scribner 2007. | ISBN-10: 1416535748.
[18] ‘A Trainee Noted for Incompetence’ By Jim Yardley, New York Times, May 4, 2002.
[19] 9/11:The Big Lie By Thierry Meyssan Published by Carnot Editions 2003. ISBN-10: 1592090265 | p.22.
[20] Aircraft Information Boeing 757/767: http://www.simviation.com/rinfo75767.htm
[21] op. cit. LeLong (p.118)
[22] ‘Evidence That a Frozen Fish Didn’t Impact the Pentagon on 9/11and Neither Did a Boeing 757’ by Joe Quinn, Sott.net, June 9, 2006.
[23] http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_16.htm
[24] ‘Live CNN Report of Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon’ | http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C02dE5VKeck
[25] op. cit. Griffin (2004; p.34)
[26] Ibid. | TV Transcipt: ‘The Pentagon Goes to War’ National Military Command Centre, CNN American Morning with Paula Zahn | ‘Keeping the Heart of the Pentagon Beating’ By Jim Garamone, American Airforces Press Service, July 9 2006.
[27]
(p.219 – 221) Lipstick on a Pig: Winning In the No-Spin Era by Someone Who Knows the Game By Torie Clarke, Published by Free Press, 2006.
[28] ‘1999 Report Warned of Suicide Hijack’ By John Soloman, AP Press, April 18 2002. (The report can be found in the Library of Congress, Federal Research Division, entitled: ’The Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism.’) George W. Bush denied he had ever seen such a report despite the fact it is was commonly known to intel personnel and available all over the internet. | p.175; Learning Rants, Raves, and Reflections: A Collection of Passionate and Professional Perspectives Elliott Masie (Editor) Paul L. Nenninger: “Simulation at the Secret Service – As Real as it Gets” Published by Pfeiffer, 2005 | ISBN-10: 0787973025.
[29] ‘Ex-Navy Pilot Flies Flight 77’ http://www.911lies.org/was_911_an_inside_job.html
[30] ‘Wife of Solicitor General Alerted Him of Hijacking from Plane,’ by Tim O’Brien, CNN, September 11, 2001. (http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/pentagon.olson).
[31] op. cit. Griffin; (2004; p.28)
[32] Hannity & Colmes, Fox News, September 14, 2001 | http://www.s3.amazonaws.com/911timeline/2001/foxnews091401.html.
[33] ‘America’s New War: Recovering from Tragedy,’ Larry King Live, CNN, September 14, 2001 http://www.edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/14/lkl.00.html | ‘Ted Olson’s Report of Phone Calls from Barbara Olson on 9/11: Three Official Denials’ by David Ray Griffin, Global Research, April 01, 2008.
[34] Ibid.
[35] ‘Ted Olson’s Report of Phone Calls from Barbara Olson on 9/11: Three Official Denials’ By David Ray Griffin, Global Research, April 01, 2008.
[36] U.S. Department of Defense, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs) News Transcript: Secretary Rumsfeld Interview with Parade Magazine, Interview with Lyric Wallwork Winik. October 12 2001. http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=3845
[37] 9/11 Deceptions by M.P.LeLong Published by XLibris 2011. (p.260)
[38] ‘September 11th 2001: A Cruise Missile at The Pentagon’ by Peter Wakefield Sault, http://www.odeion.org/ updated August 2012.
[39] Ibid.
[40] ‘Pentagon Attack Cab Driver Lloyde England’s Virtual Confession’ Citizen Investigation Team http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GHM5f9lVho | See the complete interviews with Lloyde here: thepentacon.com/eyeofthestorm.htm
[41]
Perdue Universities RCAC center produced this Pentagon FEA simulation. Originally produced in 2003, before the 9/11 Truth movement, this groundbreaking FEA based simulation was followed by the more famous WTC North simulation, presented on Youtube. This simulation pioneered mass data input for 3D modeling and input, and developed file formats that allow universities to create, trade, and build a library of huge digital models of 3D aircraft, ships and buildings. By V. Popescu, C. Hoffmann, S. Kilic, M. Sozen, S. Meador, “Producing High-Quality Visualizations of Large-Scale Simulations”, Proc. of IEEE Visualization, Oct., 2003.
[42] op. cit pentacon.com
[43]
‘Did F77 hit the Pentagon? Eyewitness accounts examined: Examines the apparent contradiction between photographic evidence and eyewitness evidence.’ by Gerard Holmgren. 5 ’03)
[44] http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/lofiversion/index.php?t4603.html
[45] ‘September 11, 2001 Revisited’ By Dave McGowan, The Center for an Informed America Newsletter #68E April 12, 2005. http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr68e.html
[46] Ibid.
[47] ‘Military now a presence on home front’ By Andrea Stone, USA Today,September 16, 2001.

Advertisements

Technocracy XI: Social (SMART) Grid and “Cognitive Infiltration”

“A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude.”

Aldous Huxley, Brave New World


thSocial networking websites like Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Yahoo! and others have offered new ways to chat, make friends, speed-date and keep in touch with family wherever you are. It has revolutionized information in ways which we are only just beginning to understand. The networks have become such a normal part of our daily lives in such a short time that it is only recently that serious questions about privacy and surveillance have filtered through to the MSM. But ethical questions are being left behind as the Information Age surges ahead. Indeed, if you don’t have a Facebook account then you have already consigned yourself to the hinterlands of suspicion and abnormality. According to some, this may even be a red-flag for suspected terrorist or paedophile. Such is the power of social networking websites on society and the ridiculous assumptions now circulating. [1] $billion companies like Twitter and Facebook have become the largest database on the global population, representing a free and easy resource for intelligence agencies to data-mine. With over 900 million active users it is not difficult to see how useful data catchment could be.

Growing awareness that social networks are being used by intelligence agencies to monitor citizens’ activities prompted cyber-consumer advocate Electronic Frontier foundation (EFF) to file requests in October 2009 to provide records about federal guidelines on the use of social networking sites for investigative or data-gathering purposes. Among other issues related to surveillance as discussed previously, they sued the CIA, the US Department of Defence, Department of Justice and three other government agencies for allegedly refusing to release information on their involvement in social networks. The cases are on-going.

There are so many dubious aspects to Facebook aside from its intelligence connections and origins it is hard to know where to start. We will pinpoint a few however.

The company makes no secret of is its drive to know everything about its members. It wants to extract and mine as much the data from them as is humanely possible and then make it available to all kinds of interested parties. The implications of their drive to happily make your social life – including information you might not ordinarily reveal – fully integrated into the net experience is of course, never discussed. Facebook has been busily creating “Shadow Profiles” in a bid to extract even more information. Using various functions on the software interface which encourages users to share personal data of other users and non-users of Facebook such as mobile phone synchronization, search queries, friend invitations, email-provider imports and instant messaging means that even if you don’t use Facebook you may have a profile nonetheless. [2]

Since Facebook is such a fan of being “social by default” then it shouldn’t be concerned when the tables are turned. Since Facebook revealed in 2012 that more than 83 million Facebook accounts (8.7% of total users) were fake accounts, ongoing controversies with privacy issues, class action lawsuits and litigation as well as the virtual ownership of members’ profiles, it is hardly surprising this was reflected in the stock value which dropped below $20 in the same year. [3]


th“You may remove your User Content from the Site at any time. If you choose to remove your User Content, the license granted above will automatically expire, however you acknowledge that the Company may retain archived copies of your User Content.”

– Facebook Terms of Service. (It has since been updated yet protests groups claim little has changed).


When independent software developer Pete Warden crawled all the data that Facebook’s privacy settings changes had made public, the company sued him. This occurred before the Open Graph API system which means they were planning to make the data publicly available anyway. As Vice President of Engineering at Border Stylo Dan Yoder comments: “Their real agenda is pretty clear: they don’t want their membership to know how much data is really available,” stating further: “It’s one thing to talk to developers about how great all this sharing is going to be; quite another to actually see what that means in the form of files anyone can download and load into MatLab.” [4]

In 2010, a Canadian security researcher Ron Bowes created a specific crawler script which he then used to take information from Facebook’s open access directory. He managed to download 2.8Gb of personal details including credit card numbers, account names, profile URLs and contact details; names of those users’ friends, (even with hidden profiles) and more intimate photos of over 100 million Facebook users. This cache of private information gold was then dumped on P2P file-sharing service BitTorrent, which was subsequently downloaded by scores of major corporations many hundreds of times. The point was not the relative ease by which such data was “stolen,” though this is an important issue, it was the fact that the data is already publicly available, provided Facebook members have not chosen to hide their profile from search results. [5]

As of 2012, there are now a raft of members, celebrities, underwriters and advertisers all taking a cut of Facebook profits. On the management board is co-founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg with the largest ownership percentage of an individual at 28% (he is worth $33.1Billion) with co-founders Eduardo Saverin, Dustin Moskovitz, Sean Parker taking between 6-4%.  Venture capital company Accel Partners, Russian internet firm Mail du Ru take 10% repsectively and former PayPal CEO and venture capitalist Peter Thiel 3%. Thiel sums up Facebook’s history of double-dealing and entrepreneurship very well.

mark-zuckerbergCEO Mark Zuckerberg

The first lump sum from his venture capital funding amounted to $500,000 – a tidy sum no doubt drawn from his £3bn hedge fund Clarium Capital Management and a venture capital fund called Founders Fund. Thiel is the Author of an anti-multicultural missive The Diversity Myth and on the board of VanguardPAC a radical internet-based Neo-Conservative pressure group that was apparently set up to attack MoveOn.org, a left-liberal pressure group website. VanguardPAC’s mission is to “reshape America and the globe” according to Neo-Conservative values – the type of values which are still carving up the Middle East. Thiel is certainly not the shy and retiring type and promotes a New World Technocracy laced with transhumanist and right-wing conservatism. The Guardian’s Tom Hodgkinson summarises Thiel’s curious mélange of fascist views: “… since the 17th century, certain enlightened thinkers have been taking the world away from the old-fashioned nature-bound life, and here he quotes Thomas Hobbes’ famous characterisation of life as ‘nasty, brutish and short’, and towards a new virtual world where we have conquered nature. Value now exists in imaginary things.” [6]

pthiel1

Peter Thiel: Technocratic Neo-Conservative

From where did Theil obtain his inspiration? Stanford’s University’s René Girard and his mimetic theory that states all cultures and ancient societies were built on the victimisation and an eventual sacrifice of the innocent, even though they believed they were guilty. Mythology was used to legitimise and rationalise the fact that society was founded on violence. If Girard believes that people are sheep and will follow the one strongest in the herd then according to Hodgkinson:

“The theory would also seem to be proved correct in the case of Thiel’s virtual worlds: the desired object is irrelevant; all you need to know is that human beings will tend to move in flocks. Hence financial bubbles. Hence the enormous popularity of Facebook. Girard is a regular at Thiel’s intellectual soirees. What you don’t hear about in Thiel’s philosophy, by the way, are old-fashioned real-world concepts such as art, beauty, love, pleasure and truth.” [7]

Perhaps this is something that may be said for much of the neo-feudalist collectives currently infiltrating our social systems?

Consider the other board member of Facebook, Jim Breyer a partner in the venture capital firm Accel Partners who put $12.7m into Facebook in April 2005:

“…. On the board of such US giants as Wal-Mart and Marvel Entertainment, he is also a former chairman of the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA). Now these are the people who are really making things happen in America, because they invest in the new young talent, the Zuckerbergs and the like. Facebook’s most recent round of funding was led by a company called Greylock Venture Capital, who put in the sum of $27.5m. One of Greylock’s senior partners is called Howard Cox, another former chairman of the NVCA, who is also on the board of In-Q-Tel. What’s In-Q-Tel? Well, believe it or not (and check out their website), this is the venture-capital wing of the CIA. After 9/11, the US intelligence community became so excited by the possibilities of new technology and the innovations being made in the private sector, that in 1999 they set up their own venture capital fund, In-Q-Tel, which “identifies and partners with companies developing cutting-edge technologies to help deliver these solutions to the Central Intelligence Agency and the broader US Intelligence Community (IC) to further their missions”. [8] [Emphasis mine]

With significant lobbying costs totalling over $41,000 in just one quarter of 2010 the focus of their expenditure was primarily intelligence agencies such as the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA). It was the only internet company to do so out of Google, Amazon, eBay, Microsoft, Yahoo and Apple. The DNI is an umbrella office founded in the wake of 9/11 synthesizing intelligence from 17 agencies (including the CIA) and advises the President on privacy and federal cyber-security policy.

Which begs the question: Is Facebook lobbying merely to keep their operations free from interference for their Intel handlers?

Meanwhile, Facebook, Blogs, newspapers, radio TV channels, and internet chat rooms are poured over and monitored by the Open Source Centre or “vengeful librarians” – even the constant “tweets” from the Twitter network reaching over 5 million per day. Information is gathered by an army of analysts to find the low-down on the emotional level of a certain city demographic or whether a country is ready to be invaded or …”Democratised.”

facebooklogin1


 “Facebook is not your friend, it is a surveillance engine.”

– Richard Stallman, software freedom activist


It is now common knowledge that The U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s command centre monitors blogs, forums newsgroups and message boards on a daily basis. Scores of popular websites, including Twitter, Facebook, WikiLeaks, Hulu, and many alternative and left-leaning news sites also come under the umbrella of US surveillance.

Among the many examples that the Obama Administration has provided and which go above and the beyond the Neo-Conservative crimes of the Bush-Cheney cabal is President Obama’s regulatory Czar and legal scholar Cass Sunstein. Just before his appointment as Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, this gentleman managed to add to the grand façade that is American democracy by writing a 30-page academic paper co-authored with Adrian Vermule entitled: “Conspiracy Theories.” In the paper he suggested the government should “infiltrate” social network websites, chat rooms and message boards. This “cognitive infiltration,” according to Sunstein, should be used to enforce a U.S. government ban on “conspiracy theorizing.” This ban would be imposed on such heresies as anti-anthropocentric global warming; the World Trade Centre attacks on 911 were an inside job; Al-Qaeda is a US government-created mercenary unit for hire and a range of other proven conspiracy facts, most of which feature on this blog. By “conspiracy theory” Sunstein defines it as “an effort to explain some event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role.”

Heaven forbid we should try to expose that …

And of course, Sunstein implies that that there are no conspiracies operating in government, banking and corporate activities and if you are one of the mentally deranged few that believe so, then medical help and a good psychologist is the only path open to you. It seems everyone is a potential extremist if you are aren’t giving the government a virtual back-rub. He further suggests: ““… a distinctive tactic for breaking up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories: cognitive infiltration of extremist groups, whereby government agents or their allies (acting either virtually or in real space, and either openly or anonymously) will undermine the crippled epistemology of believers by planting doubts about the theories and stylized facts that circulate within such groups, thereby introducing beneficial cognitive diversity.” [9]

Cass SunsteinCass Sunstein 2011, (AP Photo)

Sunstein’s objective is to raise: “… doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action,” which places a whole new angle on some of many trolls and trouble-makers who periodically appear on website forums to sow seeds of discontent in ways which follow distinct patterns of emotional programming indicative of paid disinformation agents. Indeed, PSYOPS targeting the web have been in operation for several years, possibly since the internet’s inception in some form or another.  Sunstein’s suggestions are merely an updating of the US Dept. Defence’s Information Operations Road Map of the future. [10]

To make sure such a future – and the mass mind – is firmly where it should be DARPA means to keep biometrics and the internet connected to the same port (which, one day soon, may be located at the back of our skulls). Pentagon scientists are helpfully creating a program to use biometrics as a platform for creating a “cognitive fingerprint” which would dispense with all those passwords building up in our little black books. Which means, according to their website: “… validating any potential new biometrics with empirical tests to ensure they would be effective in large scale deployments.” Named the Active Authorisation Program (AAP) it offers deep analysis of the user’s cognitive processes and thus their online behaviour in the hope of inventing new forms of biometrics so that your identity can be ascertained.

Parallel to this grateful assistance in making our lives so much more efficient and safe, online tech journal Security Ledger reported in April 2013 on one time hacker and DARPA’s cyber chief Peiter “Mudge” Zatko heading to Google Inc. Joining Google’s Motorola Mobility’s Advanced Technology & Projects (ATAP) group, it has a mission to deliver “breakthrough innovations to the company’s product line on seemingly impossible short time-frames.” While Microsoft continues to track users of the Windows phones which have a unique ID that interacts with Wi-Fi locations and GPS to know anyone’s longitude and latitude. Customer privacy isn’t a big issue for Microsoft and really any of the big internet companies. Google knows the password of every Android device (phone or tablet) which has ever logged on to a particular Wi-Fi network. (Android accounts for 79 per cent of phones shipped worldwide).

Business Insider’s article of August 14th, 2013 alerted us to the fact that if you are one of 400 million persons who chose Gmail then you can also expect no privacy at all. In a class action complaint of 2013 Google responded by claiming “a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties.” So, be warned, even though it is unlikely you’ll be able to avoid Google even if you wanted to.

It seems Google and DARPA are courting each other for good reason.

 


Notes

[1] Is not joining Facebook a sign you’re a psychopath? Some employers and psychologists say staying away from social media is ‘suspicious’ Daily Mail, 6 August 2012.
[2] ‘Facebook Is Building Shadow Profiles of Non-Users’ October 18 2011, http://www.slashdot.org
[3] “Facebook: About 83 million accounts are fake”. USA Today. August 3, 2012.
[4] ‘Top Ten Reasons You Should Quit Facebook’ by Dan Yoder http://www.gizmodo.com May 3 2010.
[5] ‘How 100 million Facebook users ended up in a list on BitTorrent’ Jemima Kiss, The Guardian, 29 July 2010.
[6] ‘With friends like these …’ by Tom Hodgkinson, The Guardian May 2010.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[9] ‘Conspiracy Theories’ by Cass R. Sunstein (Harvard Law School) and Adrian Vermeule (Harvard Law School) January 15, 2008, Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 08-03, U of Chicago, Public Law Working Paper No. 199 U of Chicago Law & Economics, Olin Working Paper No. 387. [ During my own experience in working for several alternative news websites there was no question that persistent problems from site “trolls” on the relevant forums fell into this category. Some exhibited high knowledge on certain specialist subjects and exhibited a standard formula for contouring ideas and concepts which included the very same “cognitive infiltration” tactics cited by Sunstein and often in a highly elaborate form. Once “outed” they were gone but often the damage was already done].
[10] As part of the “Information Dominance” strategy of the Pentagon, ‘The Information Operation Road Map’ was a paper commissioned in 2003 and declassified in 2006. It was personally approved by the then Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld. It included details of major PSYOPS disinformation campaigns to place false stories in newspapers and the internet as well as the kind of beginings of “cognitive infiltration” that Sunstein was so keen to see materialise.

Save

Technocracy V: The Technocrats Tap in (2)

“What is the society we wish to protect? Is it the society of complete surveillance for the commonwealth? Is this the wealth we seek to have in common – optimal security at the cost of maximal surveillance?”
 .
– Tom Stoppard, author, playwright
.

sbirs-geo-1-missile-warning-satellite

                                      Image credit: gizmag.com | infrakshun

In 2003, under the Bush Administration, the Total Information Awareness program was introduced in order to provide “large, distributed repositories” including “biometric signatures of humans” and “human network analysis and behavior modeling” provided by DARPA. It was a reiteration of what ECHELON and MAIN CORE had been doing for years. Congress defunded the program in the same year, prohibiting any such activities to target Americans.

The Total Information Awareness Office run by convicted Iran-Contra felon John Poindexter and featured a logo on its website resembling the popular occult mythology of the Illuminati. It was so blatant that some visitors thought it was a bad attempt at political satire. It wasn’t. It did however, beg the question as to why such a revealing caricature and its objectives was allowed the go ahead? Moreover, why was it derailed so quickly when other draconian legislation – including the highly controversial PATRIOT act – sailed through without any problems?

The reason for this was to provide a distraction so that yet another surveillance hub could be built away from the spotlight.

A 2012 article by online tech magazine Wired reports on Intel journalist James Bamford’s sources who claim that once again, NSA has been continuing its surveillance operations with a new spy data centre based in Utah: “… capable of breaking almost any encryption, reading any email and recording any phone call anywhere in the world, even if it’s not made over the Internet.” Where have we heard that before? This hub is just one of a number of networked sites based around a similar network 0f “ultra-sensitive satellites … with the unique ability to sniff electronic communications from a massive distance.” [1]Bamford’s sources say that the NSA is routinely violating the US constitution by dumping all of America’s communications data into the system for analysis. Perhaps most importantly, and which goes to the heart of the premise of this book is the opinion of another covert source to which Bamford made contact who claimed that: “… the NSA is on the verge of a massive coup, putting the U.S. inches away from ‘a turnkey totalitarian state.’” [2]

tia-greatseal

The Total Information Awareness logo as compared to the Great Seal found on the US dollar bill, a freemasonic emblem. A purposeful distraction?

Another heavy-weight whistleblower, William Binney, decided to grab the gauntlet and go against his superiors to warn of an Orwellian Superstate which is “ready” and “set up” so that one has to just “turn the key” and this would be an immediate reality. [3] A specialist in traffic analysis, Binney worked for the NSA for 37 years and knows its capabilities and technical now-how inside out. He joined Electronic Frontier Foundation’s case against the National Security Agency (Jewel v. NSA) filed in July 2, 2012, and their illegal domestic surveillance programs which, according to Binney, “are consistent, as a mathematical matter, with seizing both the routing information and the contents of all electronic communications” inside the U.S. He has stated that over 20 trillion files have been created since the September 11th attacks.[4]Amid significant civil liberty concerns, NSA head and commander of US Cyber Command department General Keith Alexander is still seeking to redesign the internet’s infrastructure so that the NSA may: “… know instantly when overseas hackers might be attacking public or private infrastructure and computer networks.” A trial of 17 US defence companies is already underway.

Tom Simonite from Technology Review tells us:

“Under the Defense Industrial Base (DIB) Cyber Pilot, Lockheed Martin and other companies set up their computer security systems to automatically alert the agency when the alarm is tripped. They automatically pass a summary of what was detected and the IP address associated with the event to the NSA over the Internet. ‘All you need to pass is the fact of a signature and IP address in real time, and we can take it from there,’ said Alexander.” [5]

Yet, there is more to MAIN CORE than high-level data collection and future detention. First, we need to keep in mind that targeting the thinking population is not just an Orwellian fantasy but an objective reality. The NSA and Homeland Security is collecting massive amounts of data on the US and European populations for another purpose which may well have something to do with “Synthetic Environments for Analysis and Simulation” or (SEAS). From their celebratory website we read: “What happens when you take gaming technology, inject it with the latest discoveries in management, economics, and psychology, and apply it to business, political, and social situations? The answer is Simulex’s Synthetic Environments for Analysis and Simulation (SEAS), the result of ten years of research conducted at Purdue University’s Krannert School of Management, in association with the United States Department of Defence and several Fortune 500 companies.” [6]

Looking at Simulex Inc. client base it is fairly easy to guess. As the bold heading that greets us on the client page attests, SEAS has a top heavy bias for the telecommunications industry. It assists the United States Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM) to “model the volatile regions of the world” while also providing their services to United States Department of Homeland Security in preparing “… for bio-terrorist attacks, and by Fortune 500 companies for strategic planning.”[7]Other clients include: United States Department of Defence, United States Department of Justice, United States Army Recruiting Command and Crane Naval Surface Warfare Centre. Their private sector clients are global pharmaceutical corporation Eli Lilly and our old weapons friend Lockheed Martin who got rid of whistleblower Margaret Newsham for blabbing to the press about unwarranted surveillance.

Is it coincidence Lockheed turns up here?

Other Fortune 500 companies are apparently clients but we are not given a list. However, it would be right up the social engineering alley of the Rockefeller Foundation and Monsanto Corp.

(Photo: Mönch / STN)

Which brings us to another 2005 whistleblower Russell D. Tice, a former intelligence analyst for the U.S. Air Force, Office of Naval Intelligence, Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) and NSA Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) officer. His statements in an interview to online journal Think Progress Security.org claimed that the surveillance discovered so far was “… only the tip of the iceberg,” and there was “… an angle that you haven’t heard about yet…” [8]In another interview with the online culture journal Reason just prior to a congressional hearing on the NSA wiretapping scandal (which went nowhere) Tice infers that the wire-tapping was not the main issue and that he needed: “… to tell Congress that no one knows yet, which is only tertiarily connected to what you know about now … In my case, there’s no way the programs I want to talk to Congress about should be public ever, unless maybe in 200 years they want to declassify them. You should never learn about it; no one at the Times should ever learn about these things.”[9]

So, surveillance was only scratching the surface. What then, are we to make of this military-corporate complex outsourcing in conjunction with MAIN CORE? What would you do if you wanted to predict how each of us may act in the future, most especially if your main objective was to control population in the face of a real or imagined threat against the Establishment power-base?

What is it that we “should never learn about?”

Could that be that each and every one of us who has expressed a level of awareness that thinks out of the box has an electronic kindle file packed full of interesting data? Moreover, this data is part of complex synergy of multi-layered simulations that uses a form of mass “pre-crime” software with a supercomputing power undreamt of.

>Blogger and commentator Kevin Flaherty from cryptogon.com makes it clear in the following analysis:

We must assume that They are using the full spectrum of surveillance information to try to PREDICT HOW EACH OF US IS LIKELY TO BEHAVE ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS. Where we go. Which routes we take. What we buy. Etc. All of these things can be broken down into a kind of moving average that wiggles around between an upper band and a lower band, kind of like a standard deviation from a mean. Stay within the bands, and the Magic 8 Ball probably won’t bother to flag your profile for closer analysis by some genius at the Terrorist Screening Center.

Obviously, most of us aren’t worth the attention of a human analyst, and They know it. Most of the sheep just go with the herd. They do what they’re told, shop at Wal-Mart, pay their taxes, go to church, the end. More educated sheep read Business Week or the New York Times, etc. Within a fairly wide range of activities, it’s no more complicated, for the vast majority of the people out there, than the way pool balls behave as they bounce around the table and each other.

This is a key point, so I’m going to emphasize it: These systems would excel at finding the artifacts, the outliers, the people who haven’t internalized the programming, but continue to act ‘normal.’ [10] [Emphasis mine]

Journalist and author Walter Bowart who wrote the seminal classic Operation Mind Control (1978) the NSA of the 1960s had computer systems decades in advance of public and governmental agencies of the time. And let’s not forget the capabilities of “Quantum Light Harvesting” which offers a revolutionary way to advance computational power to undreamt of levels and in a short space of time. That being so, what systems do we imagine the NSA playing with now in 2015?

Having explored the notions of depopulation or “managed genocide” and psychological operations in this series, Flaherty makes an interesting observation on the nature of this total surveillance and so called resource-grabbing. He draws our attention to a recent and on-going SEAS project in partnership with the US Department of Defence (DOD) called the Sentient World Simulation (SWS). According to the concept paper for the project, a parallel Planet Earth is being developed: “… with billions of individual ‘nodes’ to reflect every man, woman, and child this side of the dividing line between reality and AR… It will be a “synthetic mirror of the real world with automated continuous calibration with respect to current real-world information.” Apparently, the simulation: “… provides an environment for testing Psychological Operations (PSYOP),” so that military leaders can “develop and test multiple courses of action to anticipate and shape behaviors of adversaries, neutrals, and partners”.

SWS also:

“… replicates financial institutions, utilities, media outlets, and street corner shops. By applying theories of economics and human psychology, its developers believe they can predict how individuals and mobs will respond to various stressors.

SEAS can display regional results for public opinion polls, distribution of retail outlets in urban areas, and the level of unorganization of local economies, which may point to potential areas of civil unrest. Yank a country’s water supply. Stage a military coup. SWS will tell you what happens next.

“The idea is to generate alternative futures with outcomes based on interactions between multiple sides,” said Purdue University professor Alok Chaturvedi, co-author of the SWS concept paper. [11]

However, the Pentagon still isn’t content. Hundreds of additional spies are being sent overseas as part of a new espionage network that is set to rival the CIA in size according to the Washington Post. The report informs us that the a transformation of the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) is underway having been “dominated for the past decade by the demands of two wars” and which will now be a “spy service focused on emerging threats and more closely aligned with the CIA and elite military commando units.” With “collectors” numbering as many as 1,600 all over the world this is no small project. In fact, as we have explored, it seems to be part of an expansive operation to merge military and intelligence agencies into a more centralised system of espionage and domestic surveillance. As the Post mentions: “… the Pentagon’s plan to create what it calls the Defense Clandestine Service (DCS) reflects the military’s latest and largest foray into secret intelligence work. The DIA overhaul — combined with the growth of the CIA since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks — will create a spy network of unprecedented size.” [12]

illustrationPhoto from Simulex, Inc. advert

On top of all this, in 2012, former CIA intelligence analyst turned Whistleblower Edward J. Snowden leaked more than 50,00 classified documents to the Wikileaks organisation and journalist Glenn Greenwald revealing in black and white just how pervasive and all-encompassing the surveillance capabilities of America’s NSA and Britain’s GCHQ truly is. For some, the jury is still out on Snowden’s motives, primarily due to the fact that much of this information had been known for many years by independent journalists and alternative media who had been trying to get the attention of the mainstream media, but to no avail. So, it was a little fishy that Snowden was all over every possible media outlet in a very short space of time as though he had single-handedly dismantled the apparatus himself. Yet, he is the first CIA agent to do so. Is he a patsy, a conscious agent or a hero?

Whether the NSA is using him to test the demographic water of mass perception is unclear. For one thing, it allows the public to ease their way into deeper issues surrounding the whole arena of US policy from drone attacks to terrorism. The latter reason has been trotted out to justify all kinds of unconstitutional measures and many are waking up to this fact. After all, so-called “terrorists” are acutely aware that they are always monitored. What Snowden has done is to show how surveillance is targeting innocent people, not the terrorists. The NSA, in all probability, may be extremely peeved that their methods have been revealed. Whether this is a CIA-NSA turf war suggested by some commentators remains to be seen. As the CIA grapples with increasing revelations about its torture and rendition programs and the NSA continues to try and stem the flow of leaked cables on its surveillance capabilities, the leviathan of soft totalitarianism still lumbers forward.

NSACIA Emblem

© infrakshun

By 2013, while the magnitude of surveillance of all and everyone was being digested it is true to say that there may be much more to be drawn out of the NSA shadows. On November 28th,the BBC’s Hardtalk programme, Glenn Greenwald stated that there are still thousands of leaked cables to go through and make public. As it stands, the leaks have not made the slightest difference to its illegality as some commentators have been saying for quite some time. Far from being chastened, the NSA has romped ahead by creating a secret body of law which gives the agency carte blanche in accessing data on Americans justified by the war on terror and the threat of cyber-terrorism and underground nuclear proliferation.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) has eleven members whose job it was to approve illegal wire-tapping orders and which have  now been expanded to allow the NSA to do as it pleases while doffing its hat to feeble attempts to regulate intelligence surveillance. In a Guardian piece by Spencer Ackerman on August 16, 2013, it was reported that thousands of annual violations of its own restrictions continue to mount as reported by two US senators who sit on the US intelligence committee. As Rice, they stated that these were, also: “the tip of the iceberg.”

The bottom line is that everyone is presumed guilty rather than innocent simply due to the vast amount of data building on every citizen. The NSA can effectively trap you into suspected wrongdoing. As we have seen, the ubiquitous rise of entrapment operations may reflect something much deeper. Just because you have led a law-abiding life, it is no protection against mass spying programs seeping into every corner of our lives care of SMART technology. Indeed, the very definition of “law abiding” is changing; contoured towards government policy rather than what is ethically and morally sound. Whistleblower William Binney has warned for several years that the government is storing literally everything and creating a highly sophisticated, searchable database to be used for anything it wants. Snowden says much the same thing in an interview on June 12, 2013:

Because even if you’re not doing anything wrong you’re being watched and recorded. And the storage capability of these systems increases every year consistently by orders of magnitude … to where it’s getting to the point where you don’t have to have done anything wrong. You simply have to eventually fall under suspicion from somebody – even by a wrong call. And then they can use this system to go back in time and scrutinize every decision you’ve ever made, every friend you’ve ever discussed something with. And attack you on that basis to sort to derive suspicion from an innocent life and paint anyone in the context of a wrongdoer. [13]

On July 6, 2013, Eric Lichtblau writng for the New York Times commented on officials’ statements that: “… the court’s still-secret decisions go far beyond any single surveillance order.” Indeed, though European countries such as France and Spain have been found spying on their own citizens, even handing over data to the NSA it is the United States that has led the charge against the global population’s privacy. This in turn, has led the Surveillance State seeping into every avenue of American life. Even the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has routinely been snooping in order to extract largely unconstitutional taxation claims. It believes that it can continue to operate quite happily without using a warrant to read people’s emails and text messages. Just like the search engine Google Inc. (whom we will turn to presently) the Fourth Amendment and every person’s right to basic privacy is deemed irrelevant to the IRS and it’s highly dubious definitions of taxations laws. In summary, they have their ears and eyes tapped into every conceivable communication source while making up their own laws to maintain this illegal surveillance  well into the future. If you listened to the BBC you would think that it is Glenn Greenwald who should be on trial for daring to suggest that intelligence chiefs “routinely lie.”

But the shadow government and the NSA isn’t content – it needs more and more. Research into weaponisation, military capabilities and surveillance has now encompassed much of society. Corporations, multinational security firms and private contractors who act as “digital blackwaters” are all in the NSA bag. Outsourcing is key in terms of diluting accountability whilst encouraging innovation. In just a few examples from many, military-intel company Raytheon has “… secretly developed software capable of tracking people’s movements and predicting future behaviour by mining data from social networking websites.” The company admitted that it was a joint research & development project shared with the US government sincce 2010 in order “… to help build a national security system capable of analysing ‘trillions of entities’ from cyberspace.

WilliamBinney-EdwardSnowdenWhistleblowers William Binney (left) and Edward J. Snowden (right)

The security of biometric data is a bad joke since the sale of private data is open to lucrative profits. In 2013, Richard Kerbaj and Jon Ungoed-Thomas reported in the May 13th, edition of The Sunday Times that data of 27m mobile phone users had been: “… offered for sale to the Metropolitan police, private companies and other bodies, enabling them to track users’ movements.” The company involved in the potential sale is: “Ipsos Mori, one of Britain’s biggest research firms, … claimed in meetings that every movement by users can be tracked to within 100 metres.” According to the newspaper, the company: “shelved any deal after being contacted by The Sunday Times.” The report continued: “Documents to promote the data reveal that it includes ‘gender, age, postcode, websites visited, time of day text is sent [and] location of customer when call is made’. They state that people’s mobile phone use and location can be tracked in real time with records of movements, calls, texts, also available for the previous six months.” [14]

To carry out these  games in order to “protect us” the NSA has resorted to impersonating Google in order to obtain its information and swell its billions of files.  Named in the business as a “man in the middle attack” it involves a hacker technique of “… using a fake security certificate to pose as a legitimate Web service, bypass browser security settings, and then intercept data that an unsuspecting person is sending to that service.” Once passwords have been collected users can then log in to genuine banking websites thereby acting as intermediary or “middle man” and re-routing requests to their bank and returning the information to the customer while gathering highly personal data from both participants without either having the slightest clue what has happened. (It also applies to email servers). This time it is not a lone hacker but the NSA and GCHQ, where massive amounts of information is being channelled back to their central hubs. [15]

The idea that informational roadmap of cyberspace has been compromised by Intel PSYOPS and NSA surveillance has become more of a probability that a possibility. It is foolish to believe that anything we do online is secure or private. Not only is the NSA breaking most forms of encryption on the internet but is likely replacing intercepting downloads of open-source encryption software and silently replacing these with their own versions. The NSA is re-calibrating the internet towards its own perception of reality.

Illegality is justified with the favourite canard that it is all to protect us from terrorism. It was confirmed just how manufactured the threat truly is when online journal allgov.net reported in October 2013 that NSA Director Keith Alexander admitted before a congressional committee that he lied when he claimed the agency’s wire-tapping program had thwarted 54 terrorist “plots or events.”  In June of 2013, while the Obama administration was busy denouncing the whistleblowing of Edward Snowden and locking away Bradley Manning for 35 years, the NSA was lying through its teeth once again. Only 13 of the 54 cases were connected to the United States and just one or two suspected plots were: “… identified as a result of bulk phone record collection.” This was nothing new. The head was merely following the “terrorist-under-your-bed” justification for all manner of constitutional abuses practiced by the government and military-intelligence apparatus.

Lying is an inherent part of the deal. Apart from using data and surveillance as a means to implement propaganda, cyber-warfare and the harassment of those deemed “enemies,” mass surveillance is key to Obama’s assassination programs still carried out without oversight. In combination with the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) the NSA and CIA effectively make a private army outside any democratic accountability. Special operations units utilising drones and US soldiers are deployed all around the globe, from Somalia to Yemen, Afghanistan to Iraq. The coordination and logistical support is given by the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) who essentially decides who might be a suitable target and the means by which he or she will be murdered.

According to Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) the true purpose of the NCTC is the:

“massive, secretive data collection and mining of trillions of points of data about most people in the United States” …. In particular, the NCTC operates a gigantic data-mining operation, in which all sorts of information about innocent Americans is systematically monitored, stored, and analyzed. This includes “records from law enforcement investigations, health information, employment history, travel and student records” – “literally anything the government collects would be fair game”. In other words, the NCTC – now vested with the power to determine the proper “disposition” of terrorist suspects – is the same agency that is at the center of the ubiquitous, unaccountable surveillance state aimed at American citizens.

Worse still, as the ACLU’s legislative counsel Chris Calabrese documented back in July in a must-read analysis, Obama officials very recently abolished safeguards on how this information can be used. Whereas the agency, during the Bush years, was barred from storing non-terrorist-related information about innocent Americans for more than 180 days – a limit which “meant that NCTC was dissuaded from collecting large databases filled with information on innocent Americans” – it is now free to do so. Obama officials eliminated this constraint by authorizing the NCTC “to collect and ‘continually assess’ information on innocent Americans for up to five years”. [16]

As the NSA and Homeland Security can now, on a whim, label any American a potential terrorist, the most obvious question to ask is how long will it be before American citizens are assassinated on their own soil? (Assuming it hasn’t happened already).

drones

Obama’s Drones ready to assassinate from a distance without trial or jury. Based on the woeful intelligence of the last decade chances are you are likely to be an innocent civilian.

Perhaps no better example illustrates how the NSA should be the last people we trust is from the recent confirmation that the agency wishes to defend none other than Wall Street. Rather than wire-tapping genuine criminals infesting the world of cartel economics, this bastion of financial terrorism is deemed worthy of protection.

Salon, journalist Natasha Lennard details how the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper released a statement in early 2013 noting: “It is not a secret that the Intelligence Community collects information about economic and financial matters, and terrorist financing. We collect this information for many important reasons: for one, it could provide the United States and our allies early warning of international financial crises which could negatively impact the global economy. It also could provide insight into other countries’ economic policy or behavior which could affect global markets.” [17]

The NSA could no doubt collect vast amounts of information on the continuing “irregularities” and corporate crimes still devouring any chance of a healthy economy. As journalist Michael Degerald mentioned regarding the admission: “If any part of American society or business had shown itself to be corrupt to the core, and thus in need of surveillance, it’s Wall Street.” [18]

 


Notes

[1] ‘The NSA Is Building the Country’s Biggest Spy Center (Watch What You Say)’ By James Bamford, Wired, March 15, 2012.
[2] Ibid.
[3] RT report July 2012.
[4] ‘Sworn Declaration of Whistleblower William Binney on NSA Domestic Surveillance Capabilities’ July 16 2012. Public Intelligence.net, http://www.publicintelligence.net.
[5] ‘NSA Boss Wants More Control Over the ‘Net’by Tom Simonite, technologyreview.com, July 27, 2012.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] ‘NSA Whistleblower To Expose More Unlawful Activity: ‘People…Are Going To Be Shocked’’ By Faiz Shakir, Thnik Progress Security, wwwthinkprorgess.org May 12, 2006.
[9]‘Inside the Puzzle Palace’ – A Reason interview with NSA whistleblower Russell Tice, by Julian Sanchez, http://www.reason.org, January 13, 2006.
[10] ‘Synthetic Environments for Analysis and Simulation’ By Kevin Flaherty, http://www.cryptogon.com, June 30th, 2007.
[11] ‘Sentient world: war games on the grandest scale – Sim Strife’ By Mark Baard, The Register, 23rd June 2007.
[12] ‘DIA sending hundreds more spies overseas’ By Greg Millar, The Washington Post, December 2.
[13] See: ‘Full Interview with Edward Snowden’at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdPbvKeRgpk
[14] ‘Secrets of 27m mobile phones offered to police’ by Richard Kerbaj and Jon Ungoed-Thomas Sunday Times, 12 May 2013.
[15] ‘NSA Disguised itself as Google’ by Edward Moyer CNET.com, September 2013.
[16] “The President’s Private Army”: NSA-CIA Spying is Central to Carrying Out the Obama Administration’s Assassination Program. By Washington’s Blog / Global Research, September 29, 2013.
[17] ‘Statement by Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper on Allegations of Economic Espionage’
Sunday, September 08, 2013.
[18] ‘Why doesn’t NSA spy on Wall Street?’by Michael Degerald Salon.com Sep 11, 2013.

Technocracy IV: The Technocrats Tap in (1)

By M.K. Styllinski

“…As far as intelligence goes the NSA’s far, far superior to [the CIA]—far in advance in the ‘black arts.’…The CIA gets blamed for what NSA does. NSA is far more vicious and far more accomplished in their operations.”

Operation Mind Control (1978) By Walter Bowart, Interview conducted with a confirmed government assassin.


cctv1The average British person has the dubious honour of being part of a population that is the most intensely monitored on the planet. In just one week, a British individual will have over 3,254 pieces of personal information stored about him or her, which is then held for years on a variety of databases, or in some instances indefinitely. Where you shop, how frequently, what you buy, how often you use your credit card and where; you’re most common website searches and favourite sites as well as the details of your emails and keyword analysis therein. An average of 50 websites is visited and 32 emails sent per person in Britain every day. That’s a lot of data. And the internet service providers (ISPs) log everything which is then happily handed over to advertisers representing perhaps the most “benign” use of your private data. (Stay tuned).

The dividing line between the corporate sector and government has never been more blurred when it comes to sharing data about customer’s habits. Phone companies already retain enormous amounts of data about British people and presently give it to over 650 public bodies on request. A recent finding by the UK’s Telegraph newspaper revealed that plans to grant local authorities and other public bodies access to the email and internet records of millions has already gone ahead, despite the well-publicised loss of data by government departments, including an incident where HM Revenue and Customs mislaid computer disks containing the personal details of 25 million people. [1]

Microsoft continues to track users of the new Windows phones which has a unique ID that interacts with Wi-Fi locations and GPS to know anyone’s longitude and latitude. Customer privacy isn’t a big issue for Microsoft and any of the big internet companies. Mobile phones are now effectively little tracking devices courtesy of a network of phone masts which allow name, time, location and direction of travel to be catalogued via a unique identifying signal that is pulsed out at regular intervals, even when you are not using the phone. Police and public authorities can access this information at any time, ostensibly for investigating crimes. [2]

intellistreetsIt seems that one company “Illuminating Concepts” is quite open about the spread of surveillance and even seems to celebrate it. Closely associated with Homeland Security, the firm is already rolling out its SMART street lighting under brand name “intellistreets” in various cities throughout the USA. However, on the intellistreets website it reveals the lighting system has: “Homeland Security features … embedded in the system.” What does that mean exactly? Well, they have provided sensors for: “Mass notification, emergency evacuation routing, emergency call stations, CBRNE attack notification, visual analysis and digital signage. And further, team have helpfully created: “… systems processors [that] provide background music, public announcements, and digital messaging.” Although in an earlier report  the description included “voice stress analyzers,” this seems to have been scrubbed from their updated version, although you can be sure it remains in the package, all made possible via an ocean of wi-fi waves…And since they also act as surveillance cameras then there is no reason to fear …

intellistreets2

Intelligent Street Lighting in Las Vegas. They are fitted with a range of sensors designed to assist Homeland Security…(screen-shot from intellistreets demo)

Back in the United Kingdom, aside from intelligent transport and street lighting, there is still the matter of a central nexus of surveillance care of CCTV or closed-circuit television where well over 4.2 million cameras are crammed into this tiny island. Network Rail, London Underground, government and corporate buildings are all littered with the critters, recording an average of over 300+ appearances on camera for the ordinary Brit. The tapes can be kept however long it is deemed necessary. The fact that CCTV surveillance has proven by the police’s own crime statistics to have made virtually no reduction or prevention of crime, the SMART city future continues to attract the technocratic faithful, nonetheless.[3]And if you are thinking of high-tailing your way out of the UK in search of real privacy, automatic number plate recognition systems can always track your speeding car…

That is, if airborne drones don’t do it first.

Produced by yet another delighted arms manufacturer, BAE Systems, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) better known as “drones,” and controversially deployed in Afghanistan are now being used for the routine and covert monitoring of the UK and US public. In the United States police, universities, state transportation departments and federal agencies already have some form of drone device monitoring the public. Some of these are anything from small, remote-controlled model “aeroplanes” to large predator drones seen in the military. A consortium of government agencies and law enforcement authorities are falling over themselves to deploy the drones in an attempt to “greatly extend the government’s surveillance capacity and ‘revolutionise policing.’” According to a 2010 Guardian report: “The CAA is currently reluctant to license UAVs in normal airspace because of the risk of collisions with other aircraft.” Despite this, the government and their weapons manufacturers are confident that the widespread deployment of drones will take off… in just a few years. [4] 

The Federal Administration Authority (FAA) has estimated 10,000 drones could be flitting about our skies by 2020. With a September 2015 deadline from Congress to open the nation’s airspace to drone traffic, the investment alone will ensure such a deadline remains on course. [5] Indeed, early 2015 has already seen drones operating on behalf of amazon, pizza delivery, as waiters in Japan and even drones whizzing around at the Superbowl (until the FAA became jittery and banned them).

Overall surveillance is marching to the tempo of intel agencies and the creation of so-called “threat assessments.” CCTV photography is entered into a facial recognition database which can then be used to create a 3D model of your face which is distributed across a vast database surveillance network. The United States Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has been busy developing the AWARE-2 gigapixel camera which is capable of creating images with 50,000 megapixels. The machine will be used for military surveillance, which means if not being used against suspecting civilians or “insurgents” in foreign lands it will probably mean protesters and law abiding citizens like you and me. The AWARE camera is part of a whole industry rolling out new hardware to meet the demands of a global populace that is becoming more aware.

Governments have been spying on their own people since the end of the Second World War as a consequence of gathering enemy intelligence and code cracking. Codes and encryption technology led to coordinated signal intelligence (SIGINT) which obtained a fresh burst of state support from the pressure of the Cold War. The computer innovations that would follow led to the creation of the ECHELON global spying system, a vast network of digital spy stations carefully maintained by the US, England, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.

Originally named “Project P415” with the involvement of a broad network of international intelligence agencies on board, it has continued to grow in size and scope thanks to successive Prime Ministers and Presidents signing off billions of pounds and dollars without congressional approval. By the 1980s, the Anglo-American plan for an expansion of ECHELON was set in motion. It was to be fully operational by the 21st century and its ambitions included the monitoring, collection and analysis of the civilian population overseen by the United States’ National Security Agency (NSA) and Britain’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) at Cheltenham, England. This is the coordinating centre for Europe, Africa and Russia, West of the Ural Mountains, while the NSA is responsible for the rest of Russia and the Americas. The NSA’s monitoring of the South Pacific, and South East Asia is sourced from a base in Australia. The still secret UKUSA (UK-USA) monitoring agreement splits the work into several sections assigned to the relevant agency where the global population’s private lives are intercepted from mobiles, land line telephones, fax transmissions and emails and fed through NSA departments where personnel pore over keywords in the hope of isolating phantom suspects’ intent on blowing up the White House.[6]

A 1998 European Parliament sponsored research study entitled: ‘An Appraisal of Technologies of Political Control,’ gave credence to journalists’ insistence that a UK-US spy surveillance network was in operation. The Scientific and Technological Options Assessment (STOA) committee of the European Parliament compiled the report and gave cast iron evidence that not only did it exist but showed the NSA was routinely carrying out illegal and sophisticated surveillance experiments on Europeans with UK support.

In the 1980s, Margaret Newsham worked for arms manufacturer Lockheed Martin and had been stationed at the NSA’s Menwith Hill listening post in Yorkshire, England. This is the central clearing house for information that is vacuumed up and dissected by the NSA at fort Meade and other locations. Newsham became a whistleblower and testified to a Congressional committee after realising that the NSA was illegally spying on Americans and Europeans. Their report was never published but investigative journalist Duncan Campbell took an interest and verified her story in a 1988 report of his own, blowing the lid off ECHELON secrecy in the process.

gchq-nsaAmerica’s NSA Headquarters (top) and UK’s ECHELON surveillance system and GCHQ

Patrick S. Poole, a lecturer in government and economics at Bannockburn College in Franklin, Tennessee compiled a data base on the nature and history of ECHELON. In an extensive series from 1999 and 2000 he outlined some of the surveillance operation code names unveiled over the years mostly by determined investigative journalists which include the following sourced from the Menwith Hill data hub:

STEEPLEBUSH – Completed in 1984, this $160 million system expanded the satellite surveillance capability

RUNWAY –receives signals from the second-generation geosynchronous Vortex satellites, and gathers miscellaneous communications traffic from Europe, Asia and the former Soviet Union. The information is then forwarded to the Menwith Hill computer systems for processing.

PUSHER – An HFDF system that covers the HF frequency range between 3 MHz and 30 MHz (radio transmissions from CB radios, walkie-talkies, and other radio devices). Military, embassy, maritime and air flight communications are the main targets.

MOONPENNYthis system is targeted at the communication relay satellites belonging to other countries, as well as the Atlantic and Indian Ocean Intelsat satellites.

KNOBSTICKS I and II – The purpose of these antennae arrays are unknown, but they probably target military and diplomatic traffic throughout Europe.

GT-6 – A new system installed at the end of 1996, GT-6 is believed to be the receiver for the third generation of geosynchronous satellites termed Advanced Orion or Advanced Vortex. A new polar orbit satellite called Advanced Jumpseat may be monitored from here as well.

STEEPLEBUSH II – An expansion of the 1984 STEEPLEBUSH system, this computer system processes information collected from the RUNWAY receivers gathering traffic from the Vortex satellites.

SILKWORTH – Constructed by Lockheed Corporation, the main computer system for Menwith Hill processes most of the information received by the various reception systems.

Additional systems (TROUTMAN, ULTRAPURE, TOTALISER, SILVERWEED, RUCKUS, et. al.) complete the monumental SIGINT collection efforts at Menwith Hill. [7]

Unfortunately, while disputing the strength of such a system and the danger it poses for ordinary citizens Mr. Poole also buys into the propaganda of “us and them” terrorism and hails the “successes” that such a framework has yielded, citing a selection of terrorist atrocities that unbeknownst to him, had the sticky hand of state-sponsorship all over of them. Like many journalists and academics he has yet to grasp that the building of extremism is part of the Terror Industry in turn, connected to the “justifications” rallied by the mainstream press to support the World State-surveillance apparatus. In conjunction with long-time utilisation of PROMIS software – and now thanks to Edward Snowden’s whistleblowing on Internet surveillance programs such as PRISM, XKeyscore, Tempora, and the interception of US and European telephone metadata, remote viewing of any computer in real time is possible, as well as the creation of “back door snooping” in most public systems such as Microsoft.

Unsurprisingly, the Middle East, that bastion of US-NATO interference, has come under extensive surveillance activities at the turn of the millennium.  The online tech journalThe Register revealed in June 2014 that British intelligence had created a secret spy base responsible for tapping undersea cables at Seeb on the coast of Oman. This is only one of a three sites as part of the GCHQ network in Oman codenamed “TIMPANI”, “GUITAR” and “CLARINET”. Iraq and Yemen are the targets of this spying. According to leaked cables by Edward Snowden, it seems telecommunication companies are making a mint by allowing intel operatives to plug in to their networks and stay silent. (This symbiotic relationship reflects the dominance of Israeli spy networks within telecommunications in the United States).

…the intelligence agency annually pays selected companies tens of millions of pounds to run secret teams which install hidden connections which copy customers’ data and messages to the spooks’ processing centres. The GCHQ-contracted companies also install optical fibre taps or “probes” into equipment belonging to other companies without their knowledge or consent. Within GCHQ, each company has a special section called a “Sensitive Relationship Team” or SRT.

BT and Vodafone/C&W also operate extensive long distance optical fibre communications networks throughout the UK, installed and paid for by GCHQ, NSA, or by a third and little known UK intelligence support organization called the National Technical Assistance Centre (NTAC).

Snowden’s leaks reveal that every time GCHQ wanted to tap a new international optical fibre cable, engineers from “REMEDY” (BT) would usually be called in to plan where the taps or “probe” would physically be connected to incoming optical fibre cables, and to agree how much BT should be paid. The spooks’ secret UK access network feeds Internet data from more than 18 submarine cables coming into different parts of Britain either direct to GCHQ in Cheltenham or to its remote processing station at Bude in Cornwall. [8]

oman-1From The Register: “GCHQ’s submarine cable tapping centre for the TEMPORA project at Seeb in Oman, codename “CIRCUIT”.   It was built alongside a commercial satellite interception station, codename “SNICK”, according to documents revealed by Edward Snowden.”

As the tawdry tale of US-NATO led destabilisation policy continues in the Middle East, directly connected to the crisis in the Ukraine and Baltic states you can be sure more spy centres will be cropping up as surveillance sophistication grows.

The NSA’s warrantless surveillance or “wire-tapping” authorised by George W. Bush’s executive order expanded the monitoring of phone calls, emails, Internet history, text messaging, and any form of communication in or outside US jurisdiction. The search warrant became a thing of the past. Violations of the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the US Constitution continue to be ignored because what’s left of the Bill of rights and the Constitution itself has been so diluted that intelligence agencies and their law-makers take advantage of the myriad loopholes and executive order mandates. The Obama Administration has continued where Bush left off and extended the financing and capability of the surveillance methods. [9]

As a result of its illegal spying programs the NSA still hasn’t foiled a single terrorist plot, including all the copious amounts of suspicious activity prior to 9/11. Once we realise that the War on Terror is at root a hoax, designed to facilitate geo-strategic control, suppress domestic dissent and create leverage for political blackmail, we may see that surveillance becomes much more than a protective measure, as former workers and whistleblowers have cautioned. As Duncan Campbell observed: “The targeting of US political figures would not occur by accident, but was designed into the system from the start.” [10]

Since the recent furore of Rupert Murdoch’s News of the World scandal in which journalists were found to have listened in to calls and monitored computer files, one can imagine the capability available to the NSA and GCHQ in the context “deep black” intelligence operations. Satellite systems have become integral to this global project with a network of monitoring stations in Britain and Europe tapping into domestic communications circuits, and analysing every email, text, mobile phone call and just about any data signal that is readable – which is everything. Telecommunications companies in the UK such as BT and Vodafone have made this easier by collaborating with the spy agency and passing on details of their customers’ phone calls, email messages and Facebook entries. As reported in several June 2013 reports at various news outlets, fibre optic cables have been tapped by the NSA – with the blessing of the government.

Leaked documents from whistle-blower Edward Snowden has shown that illegal surveillance in the UK is pretty much a carbon-copy of what goes on in the United States, though with even more ubiquitous surveillance devices positioned in everyone’s direction. From overhead satellite systems extremely precise location can be secured along with a raft of data about a company or individual. International communications was said to be its original concern at the US satellite and communications base at Menwith Hill but US national security in the wake of the War on Terror has given “justification” for monitoring all and everything, ostensibly to sift for Al-Qaeda/ ISIL gold.

Keep in mind that this isn’t just a rough scan of large quantities data. According to former NSA analysts and whistle-blowers Judy Woodruff, William Binney, Russell and now Snowden, they have all confirmed that the NSA is scanning every email, recording every word of every phone call made within the United States – digitised and archived. This includes files on relevant persons deemed a domestic threat. If we take a look at the extraordinary advances in telecommunications and applications in the public domain then we must also consider the likelihood that the advances in the military-intelligence sector is decades ahead. In the context of ECHELON surveillance, Homeland Security, the SMART Grid, and the delights of technocratic automation of every conceivable suburban amenity, you can gain an understanding of what this may mean if you are one of those that don’t take to this kind of regimentation.

In the 2008 May/June issue of Radar Magazine an article written by investigative journalist Christopher Ketcham entitled: “The Last Roundup” reveals the high probability that the U.S. Government had established a database and tracking system called MAIN CORE used primarily for over eight million Americans who have been designated as threats to national security. Taking its cue from the from the global equivalent that is ECHELON, it uses the same sources of data such as internet activity, mobile, telephone, health records, marketing and financial information but extends that capability to a cross-network with undisclosed black programs. Need to check out a suspicious individual because he looked funny on a subway camera? The keywords in your Web searches; the destinations of the airline tickets you buy; the amounts and locations of your ATM withdrawals; and the goods and services you purchase on credit cards are all archived on government supercomputers and according to Ketcham and others’ sources, also fed into the MAIN CORE database.

It also has another more immediate purpose.

With the program’s inception going back to at least the 1980s and with help from the Defence Intelligence Agency, MAIN CORE is run under the highly classified and controversial Continuity of Government (COG) operations. The COG is the principle of establishing defined procedures that allow a government to continue its essential operations in case of nuclear war or other catastrophic event. President George W. Bush, tasked with eviscerating the constitution, included in his raft of executive legislation the National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51 and Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-20 which served to outline the federal government’s plan for maintaining continuity in the face of such a “catastrophic emergency.” The latter is defined 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 function.” Constitutional government is effectively bypassed granting Police State powers to the White House, the Federal Emergency Management Authority (FEMA) and Homeland Security (DHS).

gty_nsa_surveillance_kb_131029_16x9_992Source: abcnews.go.com

If you think that gives a government the licence to impose Martial Law based on virtually any scenario it chooses, then you’d be correct. Such a state of affairs would be lamentable for the public but a bundle of laughs for those in power, many whom would be gagging for such an opportunity. According to Ketcham’s article, it alleges that Americans listed in the MAIN CORE database, “Could be subject to everything from heightened surveillance and tracking to direct questioning and possibly even detention.” [11] A senior government official who had high level clearance gives a chilling observation:

“There exists a database of Americans, who, often for the slightest and most trivial reason, are considered unfriendly, and who, in a time of panic, might be incarcerated. The database can identify and locate perceived ‘enemies of the state’ almost instantaneously.” [12]

This didn’t extend to the assigned terrorists such as Osama Bin Laden it seems.

What about this hypothetical attack – Another 911? We saw how the US and the world changed radically after that event. This time, the scenario may not be Al-Qaeda/ISIL bogeyman but the American citizens themselves who would be targeted. Indeed, this is exactly what’s happening.

Ketcham describes how events might play out:

“With the population gripped by fear and anger, authorities undertake unprecedented actions in the name of public safety. Officials at the Department of Homeland Security begin actively scrutinizing people who—for a tremendously broad set of reasons—have been flagged in Main Core as potential domestic threats. Some of these individuals might receive a letter or a phone call, others a request to register with local authorities. Still others might hear a knock on the door and find police or armed soldiers outside. In some instances, the authorities might just ask a few questions. Other suspects might be arrested and escorted to federal holding facilities, where they could be detained without counsel until the state of emergency is no longer in effect.” [13]

If we factor in Pre-Crime software, it is obvious that this will play an integral part in the coming SMART revolution, as a former military operative explains: >

“… the program utilizes software that makes predictive judgments of targets’ behavior and tracks their circle of associations with ‘social network analysis’ and artificial intelligence modeling tools…. “The more data you have on a particular target, the better [the software] can predict what the target will do, where the target will go, who it will turn to for help,” he says. “Main Core is the table of contents for all the illegal information that the U.S. government has [compiled] on specific targets.” An intelligence expert who has been briefed by high-level contacts in the Department of Homeland Security confirms that a database of this sort exists, but adds that “it is less a mega-database than a way to search numerous other agency databases at the same time.” [14]

Homeland Security’s homage to Phillip K. Dick’s Minority Report is already up and running with their version of an airport based Pre-Crime. Using an algorithmic “prototype screening facility” designed “to detect cues indicative of mal-intent” based on ground-breaking factors of ethnicity, gender, breathing, and heart rate” we can expect great things from those fearless protectors. Combine that still further with the FBI’s nationwide new facial recognition service and we have reason to feel that we are not so much “protected” as invasively monitored. [15]

The Terrorist Watch List garners over 200,000 new unaware individuals every year from housewives to school boys, businessmen to political commentators and ordinary citizens. As of writing, the list is well over the 1 million mark and rising exponentially. A former NSA officer discloses: “… that the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, using an electronic-funds transfer surveillance program, also contributes data to MAIN CORE, as does a Pentagon program that was created in 2002 to monitor anti-war protestors and environmental activists such as Greenpeace.” [16] In the MAIN CORE data base even these definitions are too restrictive.

We can easily arrive at the logical conclusion that if we have voiced an opinion that is contrary to the prevailing “wisdom” of government authorities then you can be rest assured there is a pretty little file just for you.

If supermarkets have a marketing profile of your purchasing patterns then imagine what your own governments have?

In 2007, online revelations concerning the NSA’s IP intercept operations and there ubiquitous presence on the internet gave us a level of surveillance that surpassed most people’s wildest imaginations. AT&T telecommunications engineer Mark Klein who participated in building the secret NSA infrastructure blew the whistle on the real designs behind his boss’s wishes. The NSA and AT&T tried their best to prevent disclosure. After a class-action lawsuit against AT&T allowing secret government surveillance of Internet traffic, a refreshingly rare instance of democracy was at work when the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) released unredacted court documents related to the AT&T/NSA intercept case. This provided – in astonishing detail – the capability of surveillance software run by intelligence agencies on service providers’ networks. [17] A company called Narus developed a custom-built network surveillance system named “NarusInsight Intercept Suite” with the capable of real-time analysis of all the data passing through the most advanced and largest network nodes currently in existence.

According to the Narus website:

These capabilities include playback of streaming media (i.e. VoIP), rendering of web pages, examination of e-mail and the ability to analyze the payload/attachments of e-mail or file transfer protocols. Narus partner products offer the ability to quickly analyze information collected by the Directed Analysis or Lawful Intercept modules. When Narus partners’ powerful analytic tools are combined with the surgical targeting and real-time collection capabilities of Directed Analysis and Lawful Intercept modules, analysts or law enforcement agents are provided capabilities that have been unavailable thus far. 

This is what you might call the tip of a particularly large and hidden iceberg…

 


Notes

[1] How Big Brother watches your every move’ by Richard Gray, The Telegraph, August 2008.
[2] Ibid.
[3] ‘CCTV cameras: If they do not stop crime or catch criminals, what are they for?’ The Telegraph, 24 Aug 2009. | ‘CCTV boom has failed to slash crime, say police’ by Owen Bowcott, The Guardian, 6 May 2008.
[4] ‘CCTV in the sky: police plan to use military-style spy drones’ by Paul Lewis, The Guardian, 23 January 2010.
[5] ‘Drones Are Taking to the Skies in the U.S.’ Los Angeles Times February 18th, 2013.
[6]‘The National Security Agency and Global Electronic Surveillance’ by Duncan Campbell, New Statesman August 12, 1988.
[7] ‘ECHELON: America’s Global Surveillance Network’ by Patrick S. Poole 1999/2000.
[8] ‘Federal Judge Finds N.S.A. Wiretaps Were Illegal’. By Charlie Savage, James Risen, The New York Times, March 31, 2010.
[9] ‘GCHQ’s Middle East cable tap centre revealed’,The Register 3rd June, 2014.
[10] op. cit. Campbell.
[11] ‘The Last Roundup’ By Christopher Ketcham, Radar Magazine, April 29, 2008.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid.
[15] ‘Homeland Security Moves Forward with ‘Pre-Crime’ Detection’CNET, October 8th, 2011. | ‘FBI to Launch Nationwide Facial Recognition Service’ Nextgov. October 8th, 2011.
[16] Ibid.
[17] https://www.eff.org/nsa/faq/