Pentagon devising scenarios for martial law in US
 

[url=http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/aug2005/mart-a09.shtml:5f15b]Link to article...[/url:5f15b]

[quote:5f15b]
Pentagon devising scenarios for martial law in US

By Patrick Martin
9 August 2005


According to a report published Monday by the Washington Post, the Pentagon has developed its first ever war plans for operations within the continental United States, in which terrorist attacks would be used as the justification for imposing martial law on cities, regions or the entire country.

The front-page article cites sources working at the headquarters of the military’s Northern Command (Northcom), located in Colorado Springs, Colorado. The plans themselves are classified, but “officers who drafted the plans” gave details to Post reporter Bradley Graham, who was recently given a tour of Northcom headquarters at Peterson Air Force Base. The article thus appears to be a deliberate leak conducted for the purpose of accustoming the American population to the prospect of military rule.

According to Graham, “the new plans provide for what several senior officers acknowledged is the likelihood that the military will have to take charge in some situations, especially when dealing with mass-casualty attacks that could quickly overwhelm civilian resources.”

The Post account declares, “The war plans represent a historic shift for the Pentagon, which has been reluctant to become involved in domestic operations and is legally constrained from engaging in law enforcement.”

A total of 15 potential crisis scenarios are outlined, ranging from “low-end,” which Graham describes as “relatively modest crowd-control missions,” to “high-end,” after as many as three simultaneous catastrophic mass-casualty events, such as a nuclear, biological or chemical weapons attack.

In each case, the military would deploy a quick-reaction force of as many as 3,000 troops per attack—i.e., 9,000 total in the worst-case scenario. More troops could be made available as needed.

The Post quotes a statement by Admiral Timothy J. Keating, head of Northcom: “In my estimation, [in the event of] a biological, a chemical or nuclear attack in any of the 50 states, the Department of Defense is best positioned—of the various eight federal agencies that would be involved—to take the lead.”

The newspaper describes an unresolved debate among the military planners on how to integrate the new domestic mission with ongoing US deployments in Iraq, Afghanistan and other foreign conflicts. One major document of over 1,000 pages, designated CONPLAN 2002, provides a general overview of air, sea and land operations in both a post-attack situation and for “prevention and deterrence actions aimed at intercepting threats before they reach the United States.” A second document, CONPLAN 0500, details the 15 scenarios and the actions associated with them.

The Post reports: “CONPLAN 2002 has passed a review by the Pentagon’s Joint Staff and is due to go soon to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and top aides for further study and approval, the officers said. CONPLAN 0500 is still undergoing final drafting” at Northcom headquarters.

While Northcom was established only in October 2002, its headquarters staff of 640 is already larger than that of the Southern Command, which overseas US military operations throughout Latin America and the Caribbean.

About 1,400 National Guard troops have been formed into a dozen regional response units, while smaller quick-reaction forces have been set up in each of the 50 states. Northcom also has the power to mobilize four active-duty Army battalions, as well as Navy and Coast Guard ships and air defense fighter jets.

The Pentagon is acutely conscious of the potential political backlash as its role in future security operations becomes known. Graham writes: “Military exercises code-named Vital Archer, which involve troops in lead roles, are shrouded in secrecy. By contrast, other homeland exercises featuring troops in supporting roles are widely publicized.”

Military lawyers have studied the legal implications of such deployments, which risk coming into conflict with a longstanding congressional prohibition on the use of the military for domestic policing, known as posse comitatus. Involving the National Guard, which is exempt from posse comitatus, could be one solution, Admiral Keating told the Post. “He cited a potential situation in which Guard units might begin rounding up people while regular forces could not,” Graham wrote.

Graham adds: “when it comes to ground forces possibly taking a lead role in homeland operations, senior Northcom officers remain reluctant to discuss specifics. Keating said such situations, if they arise, probably would be temporary, with lead responsibility passing back to civilian authorities.”

A remarkable phrase: “probably would be temporary.” In other words, the military takeover might not be temporary, and could become permanent!

In his article, Graham describes the Northern Command’s “Combined Intelligence and Fusion Center, which joins military analysts with law enforcement and counterintelligence specialists from such civilian agencies as the FBI, the CIA and the Secret Service.” The article continues: “A senior supervisor at the facility said the staff there does no intelligence collection, only analysis. He also said the military operates under long-standing rules intended to protect civilian liberties. The rules, for instance, block military access to intelligence information on political dissent or purely criminal activity.”

Again, despite the soothing reassurances about respecting civil liberties, another phrase leaps out: “intelligence information on political dissent.” What right do US intelligence agencies have to collect information on political dissent? Political dissent is not only perfectly legal, but essential to the functioning of a democracy.

The reality is that the military brass is intensely interested in monitoring political dissent because its domestic operations will be directed not against a relative handful of Islamic fundamentalist terrorists—who have not carried out a single operation inside the United States since September 11, 2001—but against the democratic rights of the American people.

The plans of Northcom have their origins not in the terrible events of 9/11, but in longstanding concerns in corporate America about the political stability of the United States. This is a society increasingly polarized between the fabulously wealthy elite at the top, and the vast majority of working people who face an increasingly difficult struggle to survive. The nightmare of the American ruling class is the emergence of a mass movement from below that challenges its political and economic domination.

As long ago as 1984—when Osama bin Laden was still working hand-in-hand with the CIA in the anti-Soviet guerrilla war in Afghanistan—the Reagan administration was drawing up similar contingency plans for military rule. A Marine Corps officer detailed to the National Security Council drafted plans for Operation Rex ’84, a headquarters exercise that simulated rounding up 300,000 Central American immigrants and likely political opponents of a US invasion of Nicaragua or El Salvador and jailing them at mothballed military bases. This officer later became well known to the public: Lt. Colonel Oliver North, the organizer of the illegal network to arm the “contra” terrorists in Nicaragua and a principal figure in the Iran-Contra scandal.

As for the claims that these military plans are driven by genuine concern over the threat of terrorist attacks, these are belied by the actual conduct of the American ruling elite since 9/11. The Bush administration has done everything possible to suppress any investigation into the circumstances of the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon—most likely because its own negligence, possibly deliberate, would be exposed.

While the Pentagon claims that its plans are a response to the danger of nuclear, biological or chemical attacks, no serious practical measures have been taken to forestall such attacks or minimize their impact. The Bush administration and Congress have refused even to restrict the movement of rail tank cars loaded with toxic chemicals through the US capital, though even an accidental leak, let alone a terrorist attack, would cause mass casualties.

In relation to bioterrorism, the Defense Science Board determined in a 2000 study that the federal government had only 1 of the 57 drugs, vaccines and diagnostic tools required to deal with such an attack. According to a report in the Washington Post August 7, in the five years since the Pentagon report, only one additional resource has been developed, bringing the total to 2 out of 57. Drug companies have simply refused to conduct the research required to find antidotes to anthrax and other potential toxins, and the Bush administration has done nothing to compel them.

As for the danger of nuclear or “dirty-bomb” attacks, the Bush administration and the congressional Republican leadership recently rammed through a measure loosening restrictions on exports of radioactive substances, at the behest of a Canadian-based manufacturer of medical supplies which conducted a well-financed lobbying campaign.

Evidently, the administration and the corporate elite which it represents do not take seriously their own warnings about the imminent threat of terrorist attacks using nuclear, chemical or biological weapons—at least not when it comes to security measures that would impact corporate profits.

The anti-terrorism scare has a propaganda purpose: to manipulate the American people and induce the public to accept drastic inroads against democratic rights. As the Pentagon planning suggests, the American working class faces the danger of some form of military-police dictatorship in the United States.

See Also:
[url=http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/aug2005/patr-a01.shtml:5f15b]US Congress votes to make Patriot Act permanent[/url:5f15b]
[1 August 2005]

[/quote:5f15b]

ROFL

The land of the free.

if there is a massive terrorist attack and martial law would maintain order and help to get everything back to normal, then go for it.

The terrorists would just wait until it's over and then attack. I can't see how martial law would help anything, it's just prolonging the inevitable.

You can't stop someone who is willing to die for their cause.

it will never happen unless there is a massive terrorist attack.

NEVER


NEVER

NEVER

The enemy within.

better safe than sorry

[quote="Simo Häyhä":8c2a0]better safe than sorry[/quote:8c2a0]

How's that if the martial law comes after a large mass casualty attack?

[quote="Sgt>Stackem":ab7af]it will never happen unless there is a massive terrorist attack.

NEVER


NEVER

NEVER[/quote:ab7af]

You're not expecting another massive terrorist attack? I wouldn't be suprised if there was one on U.S soil within the next 5 years....

martian law > martial law

I really don't konw what i would do in that situation.

I would be extremly suprised if there was not another major terrorist attack inside the US before 2008.

ANAAARCHY

Fuck that all the people that would support it are the gun toteing conservatives and i'm just a peace loving liberal. I would be shot on sight.

That is probably very true. Paint yourself black and start a riot....Then hide and watch the stupid followers get shot.

http://www.northcom.mil/index.cfm?fusea ... 34AFE33114

[quote:67e6b]Exercise to focus on nuclear terror scenario
Posted Jun 29, 2005 at 1:00:PM MDT



FORT MONROE, Va. -- Here’s the scenario…A seafaring vessel transporting a 10-kiloton nuclear warhead makes its way into a port off the coast of Charleston, S.C. Terrorists aboard the ship attempt to smuggle the warhead off the ship to detonate it. Is this really a possibility?

Joint Task Force Civil Support (JTF-CS) here is planning its next exercise on the premise that this crisis is indeed plausible.

Sudden Response 05 will take place this August on Fort Monroe and will be carried out as an internal command post exercise. The exercise is intended to train the JTF-CS staff to plan and execute Consequence Management operations in support of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV’s response to a nuclear detonation.

Some of this year’s objectives for SR05 are to refine nuclear incident Concept of Operations, produce a CM Operation Order, refine command post set-up procedures and maintain situational awareness of multiple CM incidents.

The Sudden Response exercise has been held at Quantico, Va., in the past, but has been moved to Fort Monroe to maximize command post training time. The senior leadership felt that it was more important to accomplish training instead of losing up to a day and a half in travel time, said Paul Deflueri, J7 Lead Exercise Planner. “This will allow us to still meet our training objectives,” he said.

Some external participants may work with JTF-CS during the exercise.

“We’re trying to get representatives from FEMA Region IV as well as representatives from South Carolina Emergency Management Division and active duty soldiers from the (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and Explosive) Consequence Management Response Force to play the role of task force units,” Defluri said.

“Each time we do one of these internal exercises, we try to make it more robust and try to add in fidelity,” Defluri said. “That’s what we’re trying to do for SR05: create a good scenario and be able to replicate the effects as best we can. That way we can give the command a really good CM exercise.”[/quote:67e6b]

[quote:f1ccf]Four Star Army General Fired For Alleged Sexual Misconduct; Some Say He May Have Been Ousted For Attempting To Thwart The Bush Administration Plans To Strike Iran
General Kevin P. Byrnes was relieved of his duties Tuesday, only the third four star officer to be fired in more than 15 years. Observers speculated there are much deeper reasons behind the firing of the high-ranking officer said to be against the administration's escalating war policies.
August 10, 2005

By Greg Szymanski



Sabers are rattling deep within the highest-levels of the U.S. military as for the first time in more than a decade a four star officer was relieved of his duties, Army officials announced Tuesday.



Gen. Kevin P. Byrnes was relieved for personal conduct reasons as the Pentagon Inspector General’s Office has been investigating possible sexual misconduct by Byres for several months.



“The investigation is complete but it is yet to be determined if the general will be only demoted or charged criminally,” said a Pentagon spokesman about relieving Byrnes of his duties as commander of the prestigious Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC).



To understand the magnitude of the firing and its unusual nature, Byrnes, 55, was only months away from full retirement and though high-ranking officers are commonly relieved of their duties rarely – if ever – is such a drastic measure taken against a four star general.



Although the military and Pentagon officials, including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, are remaining silent about the details, speculation among some military observers is that the firing of Gen. Byrnes goes much deeper than only personal sexual misconduct.



Sources close to the military who remain anonymous said Byrnes was part of U.S. military faction discontented with the Bush administration war policies in Iraq and the potential for a nuclear disaster in Iran.



In an effort to stop the Bush administration in its tracks, sources say Byrnes was about to lead a coup against the hawks in the military and executive branch determined to lead America into a global conflict, leading to devastating ramifications for the country, as well as financial and social chaos.

Rumors inside the military say that a growing faction of discontented high-ranking officers are attempting internally to try and stop the Bush administration’s imminent plans for war with Iran in an effort to avert global war.

Although the exact number of high-ranking military involved is undetermined, sources have disclosed it appears to be evenly split between pro Bush and anti Bush factions.

Even though speculation abounds about that an attempted coup relating to the Byrnes firing, no one would question the strange rumblings of war against Iran and warnings of terrorist threats on the homeland that are beginning to circulate from administration officials and media talking heads almost on a daily basis.

Further, ominous reports are even coming from the Washington Post this week that the Pentagon has developed its first ever war plans for operations within the United States, plans justifying and making necessary preparations for martial law in case of a homeland terrorist attack.

As reported in the front-page article, sources working at the headquarters of the military’s Northern Command (Northcom), located in Colorado Springs, Colorado gave details to Post reporter Bradley Graham, who was recently given a tour of Northcom headquarters at Peterson Air Force Base.

Observers say the article appears to be a deliberate military leak conducted for the purpose of getting America accustom to hearing the possibility of military rule and martial law.

According to the Post, “the new plans provide for what several senior officers acknowledged is the likelihood that the military will have to take charge in some situations, especially when dealing with mass-casualty attacks that could quickly overwhelm civilian resources.

“The war plans represent a historic shift for the Pentagon, which has been reluctant to become involved in domestic operations and is legally constrained from engaging in law enforcement.”

Concerning Byrnes, he is one of only 11 four-star generals in the Army previously in charge of all Army training programs and the development of combat guidelines for soldiers. His position at TRADOC gave him command of 33 training schools on 16 Army installations, one of the most prestigious and sought after positions in the entire Army.

Only twice since 1990 has a four star officer been relieved of his duties, once happening to a high-level Navy officer in 1995 and the other a high ranking Air Force officer in 1990.[/quote:f1ccf]
http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/ar ... /31291.htm

This is just getting fucking frightening now.

rolleyes:

explaaain the rolling eyesssss

Bush is Islamic.

[quote:1275e]Rumors inside the military say that a growing faction of discontented high-ranking officers are attempting internally to try and stop the Bush administration’s imminent plans for war with Iran in an effort to avert global war.[/quote:1275e] that explains it pretty clearly.

Lets put it together:

General Byrnes was based out of Fort Monroe.

Charleston, SC Nuke terror drill was reported on a news release out of Fort Monroe dated June 29, 2005.

http://www.northcom.mil/index.cfm?fusea ... 34AFE33114

The Fort Monroe, VA terror drill was announced via the post newspaper "Casemate" on August 5, 2005.

http://tradoc.monroe.army.mil/casemate/ ... ercise.htm

General Byrnes fired August 9, 2005 for "sexual misconduct".

Nuke Terror drills to go ahead August 17, 2005 and August 22 - 26, 2005.

http://source.gnn.tv/blogs/8036/Nuclear ... to_Go_Live

And:

[quote:b0142]Nuclear Training Drill May Have Provided Another Reason For Firing Of Four Star General
Suspicions mount as to real reason why Army General Kevin Byrnes was fired for sexual misconduct only months prior to retirement. Sources close to the Pentagon say Rumsfeld has wanted to get rid of Byrnes for more than three years.
August 15, 2005

By Greg Szymanski



Controversy around a simulated nuclear terrorist attack, called Exercise Sudden Response to be held Aug. 15- 19 at Ft. Monroe, may have provided another reason for the recent firing of General Kevin P. Byrnes, the head of a prestigious Army unit coincidentally taking part in the same nuclear training exercise.



In a highly unusual occurrence, Gen. Byrnes, 55, was relieved of is duties as commander of the prestigious Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) at Fort Monroe, several months short of retirement for what Army brass claims to be sexual misconduct and what insiders say involves an affair with an enlisted female.



Dismissed earlier in the week, Gen. Byrnes has been unavailable for comment.



Under Army regulations, the affair is an actionable offense if found to be an adulterous relationship, but the oddity in the charges against Gen. Byrnes is that he was legally separated from his wife when the alleged sexual misconduct occurred.


Further, it is highly uncommon for a four star officer like Gen. Byrnes to be treated so harshly, especially when he was only several months from full eligibility for Army retirement.



Besides the retirement issue, what makes the Gen. Byrnes firing even more suspicious is that only two other four star officers in the entire military have been fired for misconduct, one being high-ranking Naval officer in 1995 and the other a four star Air Force officer in 1990.



But political observers point to several other more serious reasons why Gen. Byrnes was pushed aside, including to an ongoing feud with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who has wanted to oust Byrnes for more than three years for bucking the neo=con party line.



Military insiders claim Rumsfeld, who has been trying to weed out officers who don’t toe the party since taking over at the Pentagon, finally let the hammer drop on Gen. Byrnes after backing off several times on the advice of several generals who mediated what looks a short-lived compromise.



Rumsfeld has remained silent on the issue, only saying it wouldn’t be proper to comment on an ongoing military investigation. However, two reliable sources from two different political camps, one conservative and one liberal, claim Gen. Byrnes was stopped in his tracks by Rumsfeld after intelligence reports surfaced that Gen. Byrnes was behind a contingent of at least 40 other high-ranking officers who are trying to thwart the administration’s to engage in a nuclear conflict with Iran.



To back up these claims, recently credible sources inside the Pentagon told the American Conservative Magazine, subsequently verified by Lyndon LaRouche and his political research staff that Vice President Dick Cheney has already instructed Strategic Command (STRATCOM) to prepare for a nuclear attack against Iran in the event of another 9/11-like attack occurs on American soil.



[b\“I think under their time-frame we are weeks away from an attack on our homeland and also an impending nuclear catastrophe,”[/b] said Lyndon LaRouche, an outspoken Bush critic and former third party presidential candidate in a telephone conversation from his Vermont political headquarters called Larouche PAC.



Besides the feud with Rumsfeld and Gen. Byrnes’ involvement in a military faction to overthrow the neo-con war agenda, the upcoming nuclear training exercise set for next week at Ft. Monroe also has political observers nervous.



Reports have surfaced that Gen. Byrnes was also fired due to certain irregularities involved in the nuclear training session, which is set to simulate a large nuclear bomb being brought on board a ship into a large U.S. city.



Bush critics also site the danger of these “simulated attacks” since the same type of training sessions occurred just prior to both 9/11 and 7/7, wit simulated jetliner and subway attack training exercises providing an eerie backdrop for the actual attacks that followed.



Regarding the nuclear exercise, Capt. Kevin McNamara, media relations officer, said the training session will be conducted officially by the Joint Task Force Civil Support (JTF-CS) with a press conference being held for credentialed media at Building 261, 363 Fenwick Road. Fort Monroe,VA at 10a.m.



“The exercise will focus on the Department of Defense’s ability to support civil and federal authorities in providing a coordinated response to a nuclear explosion in a major U.S. city. The exercise will be a computer-based field training exercise with very limited troop movements. All unit-level troop movements and response activities will be simulated,” said Capt. McNamara.



When asked about the Gen. Byrnes firing, Capt. McNamara said he wasn’t in a position to comment, deferring all questions to TRADOC media relations, who has failed to offer further details besides it has not been determined whether Gen. Byrnes will be determined or whether criminal charges will be filed.

And to further add fuel growing speculation that a homeland nuclear attack and impending global war are near, ominous reports are coming from the Washington Post, obviously fed the story by the military this week, that the Pentagon has developed its first ever war plans for operations within the United States, plans justifying and making necessary preparations for martial law in case of a homeland terrorist attack.

As reported in the front-page article, sources working at the headquarters of the military’s Northern Command (Northcom), located in Colorado Springs, Colorado gave details to Post reporter Bradley Graham, who was recently given a tour of Northcom headquarters at Peterson Air Force Base.

Observers say the article appears to be a deliberate military leak conducted for the purpose of getting America accustom to hearing the possibility of military rule and martial law.

According to the Post, “the new plans provide for what several senior officers acknowledged is the likelihood that the military will have to take charge in some situations, especially when dealing with mass-casualty attacks that could quickly overwhelm civilian resources.

“The war plans represent a historic shift for the Pentagon, which has been reluctant to become involved in domestic operations and is legally constrained from engaging in law enforcement.”

For more informative articles, go to http://www.arcticbeacon.com.[/quote:b0142]

http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/ar ... /31538.htm

I wouldn't be surprised if they nuked some US cities and blamed it on Iran. Bush and his cohorts will do it before the year's end.

What kind of idiotic comment is that?

I tend to agree.

I wouldn't put it past them. I'm not exactly a conspiracy nut, but i still reckon the 9/11 Pentagon attack is a bit iffy. eek:

that's ridiculous. I can't even begin to argue against that, it would be a waste of my time.

people who think our goverment planned 9/11 are retarded, and should have their throats slit. Just some gay hippy conspiracy setup after their blood for oil campaign failed. All those ACLU people who complain about searching bags, and tapping phones should arrested.

Did i say "OMG TEH GEROGE BUSH BLEW UP TEH PeNTERGON???"

No. All i'm saying is that i don't believe we've got the whole story on that one as yet. That's it.

newt = retarded troll.