New Paradigm Means New Rules

New Rules Means New Rulers Means Coup d'etat

It also makes it understandable why Dick and George testified together rather than separately during the 9/11 Commission hearings.  No doubt Dick had to be there to ensure that George didn't spill the beans as to who is really the Dictator-in-Chief. 

The "Unitary Executive" and his Goat
Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense 1989-1993

[Right Web Profile] Veteran journalist T.D. Allman recounted the episode: "Having turned Ford into their instrument, Rumsfeld and Cheney staged a palace coup. They pushed Ford to fire Defense Secretary James Schlesinger, tell Vice President Nelson Rockefeller to look for another job, and remove Henry Kissinger from his post as national security adviser. Rumsfeld was named secretary of defense, and Cheney became chief of staff to the president..."

Cheney's alliance with core neoconservatives, including the likes of I. Lewis Libby and Paul Wolfowitz, also began long ago. Both Wolfowitz and Libby worked under Cheney when he was defense secretary during the George H.W. Bush administration. The three oversaw the drafting of the notorious Defense Planning Guidance (DPG) in 1992, the first draft of which, although immediately rejected when it was leaked to the press, is often regarded as an early blueprint for what would be become the Bush Doctrine in the wake of 9/11.

War Behind Closed Doors - excerpts from DPG

[Defense Link: Cheney History] Just before he left office, Cheney released a paper dealing with defense strategy for the 1990s in which he elaborated his strategic views, underscoring the importance of strategic deterrence and defense, forward presence, and crisis response. He added "science and technology" and "infrastructure and overhead" to the traditional pillars of military capability-readiness, sustainability, modernization, and force structure.

The Armageddon Plan

Cheney's New Security Advisor linked to bogus information on Iraq

Working Group Take Over - Cheney's People Everywhere

Poker Face

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
May 8, 2001

Statement by the President
Domestic Preparedness Against Weapons of Mass Destruction

Protecting America's homeland and citizens from the threat of weapons of mass destruction is one of our Nation's important national security challenges. Today, more nations possess chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons than ever before. Still others seek to join them. Most troubling of all, the list of these countries includes some of the world's least-responsible states -- states for whom terror and blackmail are a way of life. Some non-state terrorist groups have also demonstrated an interest in acquiring weapons of mass destruction....

Therefore, I have asked Vice President Cheney to oversee the development of a coordinated national effort so that we may do the very best possible job of protecting our people from catastrophic harm. I have also asked Joe Allbaugh, the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, to create an Office of National Preparedness. This Office will be responsible for implementing the results of those parts of the national effort overseen by Vice President Cheney that deal with consequence management. Specifically it will coordinate all Federal programs dealing with weapons of mass destruction consequence management within the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Justice, and Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, and other federal agencies. The Office of National Preparedness will work closely with state and local governments to ensure their planning, training, and equipment needs are addressed. FEMA will also work closely with the Department of Justice, in its lead role for crisis management, to ensure that all facets of our response to the threat from weapons of mass destruction are coordinated and cohesive. I will periodically chair a meeting of the National Security Council to review these efforts.

Bush & Cheney Asked Daschle to limit Sept. 11 probes

Rand - 2001 Presidential Transition Report

"Governments are less in control of foreign policy than they were only a few years ago; global politics is increasingly being shaped by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs)  and by private-sector and financial entities that transcend tradition state borders.  For most countries, sovereignty is eroding--in some places, such as the European Union (EU), by design; elsewhere, as an unintended consequence of the digital age.  Resentment of globalization is on the rise and has produced increased anti-Americanism, since Washington is perceived as its architect." 

Lynn Cheney
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"In the late nineties, while he [Dick Cheney] was turning military bases into Halliburton suburbs, his wife Lynne, was earning stock options in addition to her salary as a board member at Lockheed Martin..."  Naomi Kline, Shock Doctrine, p293

Sec. of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld

But Whose side is Addington on?

A Defiant Stance In Jefferson Probe - Justice Dept. Talked of Big Resignations If White House Agreed to Return Papers

Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, David S. Addington, was among the leading White House critics of the FBI raid, telling officials at Justice and on Capitol Hill that he believed the search was questionable, several sources familiar with his views said.

Addington was managing a PAC, Cheney for President.  This PAC was renamed to 'Alliance for American Leadership'.  This PAC is primarily for ... drum roll please... DEMOCRATS!    Note the reference to Alliance on this page and look at the guy's bio. 

Chief of Staff (November 2005-present); Counsel to Vice President (January 2001-October 2005)

Special Assistant to Defense Secretary Cheney (1989-1992), General Counsel (1992-1993)

Deputy Assistant to President Ronald Reagan and Special Assistant to Reagan (1987)

*During the Clinton years, Addington did a stint in private practice at Baker, Donelson, Bearman & Caldwell, then served as general counsel to the American Trucking Associations.

"Those who have worked with him say he's not just devoted to Cheney, but to the primacy of presidential authority... After the Sept. 11 attacks, when Addington was counsel to the vice president, he had a chance to implement some of his views on executive power.." MORE

Addington Defends Jefferson

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Excerpt: Hidden Power, Jane Mayer, July 3, 2006]
According to someone who knows Powell, his comment about the article was terse. “It’s Addington,” he said. “He doesn’t care about the Constitution.” Powell was referring to David S. Addington, Vice-President Cheney’s chief of staff and his longtime principal legal adviser.

"New Paradigm"

[Excerpt: Hidden Power, Jane Mayer, July 3, 2006] "Most Americans, even those who follow politics closely, have probably never heard of Addington. But current and former Administration officials say that he has played a central role in shaping the Administration’s legal strategy for the war on terror. Known as the New Paradigm, this strategy rests on a reading of the Constitution that few legal scholars share—namely, that the President, as Commander-in-Chief, has the authority to disregard virtually all previously known legal boundaries, if national security demands it. Under this framework, statutes prohibiting torture, secret detention, and warrantless surveillance have been set aside. A former high-ranking Administration lawyer who worked extensively on national-security issues said that the Administration’s legal positions were, to a remarkable degree, “all Addington.” Another lawyer, Richard L. Shiffrin, who until 2003 was the Pentagon’s deputy general counsel for intelligence, said that Addington was “an unopposable force.”

Military Transformation, Art Cebrowski

Amalgam Virgo - Live Fire "Training Exercise" - only the date and name of the city is different than 9-11

9-11 War "Games"

"In addition, a December 9, 2001 Toronto Star article (pay-per-view; reprinted here), stated that "Operation Northern Vigilance is called off. Any simulated information, what's known as an 'inject,' is purged from the screens". This indicates that there were false radar blips inserted onto air traffic controllers' screens as part of the war game exercises."

Effects Based Operations Model  - The computer system for managing crisis

Institutionalizing EBO is a complex undertaking that requires the development of new doctrine, the education of the forces in the EBO concepts along with the development of a common lexicon of terms, the adaptation of the current command and control processes, and the development and use of tools that support effects based analysis.

Since 2000, the DoD components have conducted experiments and war games to develop and test approaches for making effects based operations work in the real world environments.

Excerpt from Mark H. Gaffney's article titled, "How Clinton Set The Stage For Bush" (quoting Dr. Helen Caldicott:

"To my horror I found that seventy-five military industrial corporations such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, TRW Aerojet, Hughes Space, Sparta Corp, and Vista Technologies had produced a Long Range Plan, written with the cooperation of the US Space Command, announcing a declaration of US space leadership and calling for the funding of defensive system and 'a seamlessly integrated force of theatre land, sea, air and space capabilities through a world-wide global defense information network.' The US Space Command would also 'hold at risk' a finite number of 'high-value' earth targets with near instantaneous force application­­­the ability to kill from space...I also discovered that the much-vaunted missile defense system was to be closely integrated with the weaponization of space, and that all of the hardware and software would be made by the same firms, at the combined cost of hundreds of billions of dollars to the US taxpayers."[1]

 

The plan envisaged "full spectrum dominance," that is, US military domination of land, sea, air and space. Although US planners sought to portray this next generation of technological wizardry as defensive, in actuality, the planned systems, if implemented, amounted to a major break with the 1972 ABM Treaty, and with long-standing US commitments to maintain the peaceful status of outer space. The cold logic of dominance meant that the project was offensive in nature.

The Pentagon would be a high value target.  And so would the World Trade Center.  WTC 7 would be an especially high value target because that's where government offices were.

Full Spectrum Treason

Lockheed cripples U.S. Coast Guard fleet - "Deep Water" program.

[Excerpt: Hidden Power, Jane Mayer, July 3, 2006]
"At the Pentagon, Addington took a particular interest in the covert actions of the Special Forces. A former colleague recalled that, after attending a demonstration by Special Forces officers, he mocked the C.I.A., which was constrained by oversight laws. “This is how real covert operations are done,” he said. (After September 11th, the Pentagon greatly expanded its covert intelligence operations; these programs have less congressional oversight than those of the C.I.A.)"'

In 1998, Adm Cebrowski assigned Barnett a project called, "Year 2000 International Security Dimension Project.  A follow on project was called "New Rulesets Project".  

"The NewRuleSets.Project began in the spring of 2000 as a multi-year, five workshop effort designed to explore how the spread  of globalization alters the basic "rules of the road" in the international security environment, with special reference to how these changes redefine the U.S. Military's historic role as "security enabler" of America's commercial network ties with the world.  The project was hosted by the Wall Street broker-dealer firm Cantor Fitzgerald, which participated in the design of the three workshops held atop World Trade Center 1 at the Windows on the World conference facility (May 2000, October 2000, June 2001).  That particular workshop series ended with the tragedy of 9/11, as did Cantor's participation in the research."

"New Rules Sets - New Paradigm"

Year 2000 National Security Dimension
Best Case, Nothing Happens.  Worst Case, Coup d'etat.

Barnett: 2002, Esquire Magazine

“We really haven’t been a nation at war since World War II,” Barnett says. “We always did it on the side, so to speak. We networked ourselves with the outside world so much that our definition of national security started moving beyond the war paradigm to something else—crises that threatened our connections with the outside world.” So in the late nineties, he began thinking larger. He teamed up with the bond firm Cantor Fitzgerald and asked a question: How would the U. S. military react to a hypothetical, interconnected catastrophe like, say, a terrorist attack on Wall Street? “People heard our brief,” Barnett says, “but everyone thought we were too apocalyptic, too out-there.”

No more. Within weeks of September 11, 2001, Barnett was called to the Pentagon and installed as the assistant for strategic futures in the Office of Force Transformation, Office of the Secretary of Defense. Since then, he has been relentlessly briefing high-ranking members of the intelligence community and brass from all branches of the military on the next world and how to manage it. “September 11 was crystallizing,” he says. “We all just went, This is what we were talking about—a peacetime, war-like event that’s so profound it forces us to rethink everything.”

Barnett - Military in the 21st Century

I’m going to talk about the 1990’s, Berlin Wall comes down, Desert Storm - a split emerges inside U.S. Military between those who see a future they can live with and those who see a future they cannot live with... 9-11 heals the rift.  It jerks the transformation gurus out of their long-term fantization about China and says you know what?  Make it good for now.   If you’re going to transform this force I’ve got a reason for you now.  We’ve got a networked opponent."

Four elements are put together.  I’ll confess, I’m an economic determinist.  I’ll say that technology is the main driver of history.  If globalization continues to advance - all these good things will happen.  You can attach numbers to most of these in terms of per capita income.   Get them below a certain level and they stop doing a lot of these bad things and they start moving in the direction of these positive things.  But I’ll argue we have to manage carefully four crucial flows within globalization IV.  Those four crucial flows meaning resources in regions where they are plentiful have to migrate to regions where they are in scarce supply...       The movement of people is a key flow.   [allowing our country to be invaded by foreign nationals] The money of energy is a key flow [oil money for the criminals who executed a coup d'etat on our government to provide on-going funding].  The movement of money - long term, foreign direct investments - not flows in and out of stock markets, not commercial bank loans but foreign direct investment - equity ownership [let Spanish firms like Cintra buy the interstates and the UAE and COMMUNIST CHINA can buy the ports].  Finally, the exporting of security which only the United States can do in any appreciable manner. [we "exported security" to Iraq for the oil money for the "new rulers"].

Network Centric Warfare:  Its Origins and Future

A Landmark Directive

Presidential Decision Directive-23 (or PDD-23, as it is commonly known) had its roots in the Land Remote Sensing Policy Act of 1992, which established the terms for civil and commercial remote sensing in the U.S. Government. The act designated the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) as the chief regulatory agency for the commercial remote-sensing industry and outlined the general terms and conditions required to obtain a license to operate a remote-sensing satellite in the United States. These included, for example, the submission of on-orbit technical characteristics of the proposed system for NOAA review. The act also stipulated that a licensee "operate the system in such a manner as to preserve the national security of the United States and to observe the international obligations of the United States." These conditions required the government to investigate the ambiguous nexus between technology development and national security and decide on the best course of action. Accordingly, Aerospace began conducting research and analysis to assist the investigation and decision-making process.

President Clinton in 1994, Presidential Decision Directive-23, U.S. Policy on Foreign Access to U.S. Remote Sensing Capabilities.

Gift of Echelon to Communist Chinese - April 1, 2001

Coastal Remote Sensing

FEMA Remote Sensing

Transportation Remote Sensing

Global Freight Tracking - Smart Highways

ITS Resources for Transportation Remote Sensing

Inmate Remote Sensing

Remote Sensing Animals

Citizen Remote Sensing

Remote Sensing Children

School puts a RFID chip on pupils

Command and Control --------> Surveillance

GAITHERSBURG, MD and COLORADO SPRINGS, CO, September 20th, 2000

Under the 15-year, Integrated Space Command and Control (ISC2) program, Lockheed Martin and its teammates will integrate approximately 40 systems into a common, interoperable C2 information technology infrastructure, giving commanders at the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and U.S. Space Command (USSPACECOM) new flexibility to handle growing mission responsibilities. ISC2 will be a "virtual command center," providing warfighters a common operational picture of the global battlefield derived from shared, realtime data, that is available anytime and to any location in the world for specified users.

One of the key program challenges will be to migrate existing defense systems to the new ISC2 architecture without any disruption to Air Force operations at Cheyenne Mountain, where most of the NORAD and USSPACECOM systems are located. Over its 15-year cycle, the ISC2 program will also provide operations and maintenance services.

The team also includes strong core technology partners and providers, such as Computer Sciences Corp., Logicon/INRI, and Autometric, Inc., and also neweconomy "B2B" - Business to Business electronic commerce - leaders, such as Microsoft Corp., Cisco Systems, Oracle Corp., AT&T, Neon and BEA Systems, who bring innovation and offer expertise in highly specialized technology areas vital to the success of ISC2.

And who is it that Lockheed is working for?

John Chambers, Cisco Systems: 

Military Transformation - Special Forces, Effects based Operations  
Admiral E.P. Giambastiani