Anti_Illuminati Guest ! Re: Cheney, The OODA Loop, SAIC, Ptech Cyber-PsyOps Warfare & 9/11 « Reply #12 on: May 05, 2009, 07:16:59 PM » Source If you really want to do some homework, I challenge you to read about Lt. Col. John Boyd (USAF) (deceased). There is a biography, and several web sites devoted to him, his ideas, and his work. In addition to being a top- flight pilot, founder of the Air Force combat pilot training system that the Navy adopted and morphed into its TopGun school, and much, much more, he is most famous for his OODA Loop Theory [OODA is an acronym that stands for a rapid, repeated cycle of Orient, Observe, Decide, Act.] Go and read about the OODA Loop, and come to understand how he applied it to high-speed aerial combat, and then how he applied it to ground combat (his work was embraced by the US Marine Corps), and then how he briefed the Secretary of Defense on his theory just before Desert Storm, and how that theory was successfully applied to the initial knock-out punch thrown at Saddam in Kuwait. And when you come to a higher understanding about the OODA Loop, and how it uses information gleaned from the opponent and the environment and thrust into the decision-making loop rapidly so that you may stay one step ahead of your opponent, then I want you to remember that Dick Cheney was briefed on it. And then I want you to ponder, for a minute, the use of Total Information Awareness campaigns, data-mining, and various intelligence-gathering methods available to the US government; these are the sources for information that are pumped into the complex loop. And then I want you to remember that Cheney was briefed... And then I want you to consider how this OODA loop has likely been used for domestic political purposes....

And then I want you to consider, given the explosive theories suggested by Ruppert and Singh relative to the war games, and the use of very sophisticated software (PROMIS and PTECH), how the OODA loop may have played a role on 9/11. I went out this weekend and bought the biography of Boyd (Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed The Art of War, Robert Coram, Back Bay Books/ Little, Brown & Co., 2002, ISBN 0-316-79688-3). I'd read it previously and have dozens of articles in my PC related to it. The OODA loop appears to be a relatively simple cycle. However, given the multiple feedback loops, it is actually very complex. The best practitioner learns to simplify it and apply it instinctively and intuitively...literally, to fly by the seat of their pants... Here is the explanatory text that Boyd used under the OODA loop diagram: "Note how orientation shapes observation, shapes decision, shapes action and, in turn, is shaped by the feedback and other phenomena coming into our sensing or observing window. Also note how the entire "loop" (not just orientation) is an ongoing many- sided implicit cross-referencing process of projection, empathy, correlation, and rejection." In simpler English, if someone can get you to "see" certain things and understands how you will "forecast" forthcoming events based on what you "see", how you will feel emotionally about what you "see", how you will put two and two together to get five, and how you can be led to reject or disbelieve what you think you see, then you can be led by the nose to a certain action. This is what happens in a military airplane dogfight, in the misdirection of a football play, in the way the media is being used and was perhaps used that day, and likely in the way the radar injects were inserted into the day-to-day system during the war games. If you can be led to see something and believe it, then you will act in a way that can be quite effectively predicted based on your traditions, your heritage, your prior experience (which may also have been "cooked" (e.g., the numerous terror warnings), and the way you think (whether that is correct or not). Then all your opponent has to do is to introduce some "new information", and you will "decide" and act in a way that allows me to get behind you and take advantage of your misperception.

If you understand how Boyd thinks, all you need is one short opportunity for advantage; then repeat the process rapidly. Boyd’s nickname” was “40- second” Boyd. No one in his entire history could ever, in a simulated dogfight, avoid being "killed" by Boyd in under 40 seconds. In the Desert Storm event, the 6th largest army on the planet put their hands in the air and surrendered in 36 hours. Some units literally surrendered to drones. NORAD and the FAA were confused for 90 minutes. America threw its hands up in confusion when asked to think about what happened on 9/11. They can't see what happened because they too have been misled and confused on purpose. -- From Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War, Robert Coram, Back Bay Books, Little Brown & Co., Boston 2002, p. 335-6: “Understanding the OODA Loop is difficult. First, even though it is called a “loop”, it is not. A drawing of the Loop shows thirty arrows connecting the various ingredients, which means hundreds of possible “loops” can be derived….Even Boyd’s Acolytes do not always agree with what Boyd meant by the OODA Loop… The OODA Loop briefing contains 185 slides. “ The OODA loop is based on Boyd’s earlier thesis entitled “Destruction and Creation”, which links Godel’s Proof, Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, and the second law of thermodynamics. “…Boyd spent four years researching and writing and then distilling his [thesis] down to eleven pages; the result has the specific gravity approaching that of uranium. It is thick and heavy and ponderous, filled with caveats and qualifiers and arcane references that span theories never before connected. To read [it] is to fully appreciate the term “heavy sledding”. [Page 323] -- You can download the pdf of Boyd’s “Destruction & Creation” here: http:// www.goalsys.com/id17.htm --

An important part of the thesis is an elaboration on the idea that a relationship exists between the observer and what is being observed. This idea is not original, but the author presents a new explanation of how we perceive physical reality. Several people can look at the same process or same event and each might see it in an entirely different fashion. A crowd streaming into a college football stadium is seen in significantly different ways by a fraternity member, a TV cameraman, the beer distributor, the security officer, and the college president. Furthermore, each process of observation changes what is being observed. The people in the football stadium, knowing that they are being recorded by a TV camera, might wave or shout or begin a spontaneous demonstration. The same crowd, knowing that security officers are monitoring them, might become subdued, or perhaps confrontational. If we are aware of the changes that take place during a dynamic interaction, we can and must reassess and recalculate our own relationship with that which we are observing; the process not only shapes what is being observed, but feedback reshapes the observer's outlook. The TV cameraman searches out people who are not waving. Security officers become more vigilant because they know people in the crowd are disguising their behavior. A cycle begins, and it is repeated over and over again. -- The OODA loop is used to create “the fog of war”. -- “The act of observation is, of course, filtered. We usually see what we expect to see, not what is actually taking place. And what we do manage to observe is colored or tinted by our past experience. Once we actually observe something, our brain attempts to orient itself to the new information. Does it match our past experience, or our cultural background, or our genetic make- up? If not, is it powerful enough to significantly change our view of the world? One way or another, it becomes part of our new reality.” Source: http://isobe.typepad.com/sketchpad/ And our past experience, in a media-driven world, is colored by the images, stories, headlines, pronouncements and “leaks” given to us repetitively and programmatically. Suggestion is a powerful tool. Keep that in mind when you listen to a car salesman.

-- Lt. Col. Rich Liebert, who teaches tactics at the Army Command and Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., agreed that Boyd’s thinking was visible during Desert Storm. "The constant references to and the delay of the 'shock and awe' bombing campaign, is the kind of psychological warfare that Boyd recommended to paralyze the enemy," he said. [from http://www.post- gazette.com/nation/20030321boydnatp5.asp ] “Boyd proposed a way of achieving our national goal based on his OODA loop theory. He said that the US should penetrate the adversaries “moral- mental-physical” being, aiming to dissolve his moral fiber, disorient his operations, and overload his system. Once this has been achieved, the enemy would be psychologically paralyzed, and his will to resist would collapse. By operating inside the adversaries’ OODA loop, the US can generate mismatches between the events and efforts the enemy sees or imagines and those he must react to. The enemy will then be immersed in an amorphous, menacing, and unpredictable world, and he will be strategically defeated. Boyd explained that the US should maneuver the enemy into a position where he can neither divine our intentions nor focus his efforts to cope with the strategic design to splinter, isolate, envelop, and overwhelm him.” From http://www.ndu.edu/nwc/writing/AY04/5602/5602K.pdf “According to Col John Boyd's observation-orientation-decision-action (OODA) loop theory, this kind of offensive effort can "enmesh [the] adversary in a world of uncertainty, doubt, mistrust, confusion, disorder, fear, panic, chaos . . . and/or fold [him] back inside himself so that he cannot cope with events/efforts as they unfold." [from http://www.iwar.org.uk/iwar/resources/airchronicles/man1.htm ] -- “Boyd's view of combat manifests itself in his OODA Loop, a loop which shows the human decision making process. In warfare, both sides fight the conflict by working through this loop. Boyd's belief is that the opponent who works through the loop faster has gained a measure of moral agility. With this agility, he can then act to cause his opponent to react. His actions can confuse, and disorient his opponent's moral force, by consistently forcing an opponent to play catch-up. The destruction of an enemy's armed forces, if it

must be done at all, becomes secondary to the need to get into his loop and force him to over- and under-react. The employment of Boyd's system is the management of chaos. To spread chaos among the enemy and to stem the chaotic effects upon one's own. Boyd's warfare is a moral one. By moral, I mean the psychological ability for an enemy to apply intellectual effort to the complicated tasks of war. The first goal of an aggressor, and in Boyd's philosophy the advantage always lies with the aggressor, is to confuse and blind an opponent. In Boyd's OODA loop, the single largest component is that of observation. Cut that and the enemy is virtually defeated. The next component is orientation. For this component, I must first give a few words on the idea of shock. An enemy's military force is like the human body. The human body can sustain a good deal of trauma, however, multiple injuries multiply their effects. [shock] These multiple injuries greatly enhance the difficulties a human body faces when trying to deal with the damage. Warfare is much the same. Multiple strikes against a variety of targets, not only increases the number of actions within a certain amount of time which an enemy must take to save himself; it also increases the strain put on subsystems, like logistics, communications, command and control, co-ordination, and so on. The result is the spread of confusion and uncertainty [awe]. Add to this the increased affect of further strikes and chaos spreads, ultimately ending in an opponent's complete paralysis. This is the effect of striking an opponent's orientation. Confuse him, do the unexpected, rapidly shift around, and eventually destroy his moral functions. The third component of Boyd's OODA Loop is decision. By introducing traumatic shock to an opponent's orientation, his decisions become increasingly reactive and desperate. He'll either be forced to skip this component all together, by falling back on pre-planned operations, or strike blindly at any perceived menace. The last, and final, component is action. This component represents the physical elements' reaction to the previous three moral components. With the rest of the loop suffering moral shock, physical damage can be introduced with relative ease, if even needed at all.” [from http://www.neokaw.com/interests/boyd_tsu_clause.php] --

virtually unstoppable in causing panic and confusion and – Boyd’s phrase is best – “unraveling the competition”. This is true whether the Loop is applied in combat, in competitive business practices, in sports, or in personal relationships. The most amazing aspect of the OODA Loop is that the losing side rarely understands what happened.” This may also be what has happened in domestic politics since before 9/11. And it may be what happened to the NORAD/FAA chain of command on 9/11. -- The 9/11 People’s Commission presentations by Ruppert and Singh detail the war games run by Cheney on 9/11 and suggest the possible use of software like that of PROMIS and/or PTECH (described as of risk management and enterprise architecture, or “back door” surveillance and operational intervention capability software with an artificial intelligence core): -- FBI Agent Robert Wright said his investigation into the founders and financiers of Ptech and their financing shell, something called BMI, was also shut down. BMI stands for “Bait ul Mal,” which later turned out to be a front for Hamas and al Qaeda. Governor Kean did a $24 million land deal with a sub [SIC – Subsidiary] of BMI, three percent of which the commission went back to BMI. The Kean Commission does not mention Ptech at all. They were going to air the Ptech story nationwide and the lead story in the first year anniversary of 9/11… There were many other networks that had gotten wind of it and all the networks were going to run the Ptech story on the first year anniversary. However, the White House got wind of the investigation – [Indira Singh] has proof of that – and shut the story down in late August. Ptech was with Mitre [Corporation] in the basement of the FAA for two years prior to 9/11. Their specific job is to look at interoperability issues the FAA had with NORAD and the Air Force in the case of an emergency. If anyone was in a position to know that the FAA, that there was a window of opportunity or to insert software or to change anything it would have been Ptech along with Mitre. And that ties right back to Michael Ruppert’s information….The functionality that Michael [Ruppert] is claiming that Dick

Cheney utilized is the exact same functionality I was looking to utilize Ptech for in the bank. I was looking to set up a shadow surveillance system on everything going on, every transaction and the ability to backdoor, [to] look at information unobtrusively and to backdoor intelligent agents out there to do things that other people would not be aware of. Another company known to have PROMIS, aside from DynCorp, is Lockheed Martin, on whose board of directors sat Lynne Cheney, the Vice President’s wife. She was also in the PEOC, Presidential Emergency Operations Center, with her husband on the morning of 9/11. How did she get in? She didn’t hold a government office. But if you consider the two companies, Lockheed Martin and DynCorp control all the financial auditing of the Department of Defense, the Departments of Housing and Urban Development and about 10 other departments in the U.S. government and the fact that the Pentagon has lost, quote, unquote, $3.3 trillion of your money to the accounting system that they refuse to account for. The money just disappeared. That also is PROMIS software in action. DynCorp also operates the telephone systems for the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate. ” [ Source: http://justicefor911.org/September-Hearings.doc] This indeed may be an explanation for how all the puzzle pieces fit into the approach used to paralyze the minds of many filling roles within the normal day-to-day system at the FAA, NORAD and other agencies at all. This also makes the issue of conspiracy look much more functional because people don't have to be co-conspirators. If you understand how someone thinks and normally acts, you can then use that against them, or as a shield behind which you can hide, or through which you can dupe them into being compliant without knowing that they are compliant. It may also explain numerous other sideline anomalies that have never been explained. Perhaps these were the remnants of a set-up that was not used or required. -- Excerpts from Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed The Art of War,

Robert Coram, Back Bay Books/Little, Brown & Co., 2002, ISBN 0-316-79688-3. From the Epilogue (p. 447): “Vice President Cheney has his own ideas about Boyd’s place in military history. “We could use him again now. I wish he was around now. I’d love to turn him loose on our current defense establishment and see what we could come up with. We are still oriented toward the past. We need to think about the next one hundred years rather than the last one hundred years.” -- For a slide show on Misperception, Self-Perception and Information Warfare, go to http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/courseware/cse468/Lectures/ IWAR-2005-LB-Slides.pdf -- A number of articles by Franklin “Chuck” Spinney, one of Boyd’s Acolytes, can be found at the web site run by another of those Acolytes; here’s one http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/comments/c549.htm -- To help readers revisit the military exercises question, here are the timelines: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp? timeline=complete_911_timeline&before;_9/11=militaryExercises Logged Anti_Illuminati Guest ! Re: Cheney, The OODA Loop, SAIC, Ptech Cyber-PsyOps Warfare & 9/11 « Reply #13 on: May 05, 2009, 07:19:59 PM » Source

OODA, Rumsfeld, TIA, NSA “According to Colonel Boyd, “the O-O-D-A loop can be thought of as being the C&C; [command and control] loop.” Surely, Boyd is actually referring to all aspects of what we call C3I—command, control, communications, and intelligence (or what many people now call C4I—the fourth C standing for “computers”). Logically, then, (1) intelligence* provides observation (in accordance with command elements' requirements); (2) working together, intelligence and command elements provide orientation (i.e., they determine what to observe, which observed information is of greatest value, and how it is to be used in making decisions); (3) command elements make necessary decisions and direct the actions required to execute those decisions; and (4) field units and their discrete elements (aircraft, tanks, people, etc.) execute the directed actions (and contribute to observation through post-action reports, at which point the cycle begins again). All these elements are interconnected through the communications element of C3I (and computers of C4I).” “The difference between information and knowledge may seem very subtle at first, but in warfare it is truly critical. On the one hand, information is passive and always exists (at least in the abstract) whether anyone pays attention to it or not. Among other things, it can be collected, collated, analyzed, “fused,” packaged, disseminated, and even managed….. it can be stored, protected, and concealed or suppressed, sometimes even from one's own decision makers. It can also be jammed up in a system of data flow that will eventually deliver it to decision makers but perhaps not in time to be useful to them.” from http://aupress.au.af.mil/Books/b-2/mannch9.htm -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- “Gingrich had been out of the House for nearly 3 years, but he was an ally of Rumsfeld and a member of his Defense Policy Board, an influential advisory group. Gingrich was also one of a number of military theorists in the nineteen-eighties who tried to imagine a new American military suited to a world beyond the Cold War. Their intellectual patron was the late Air Force Colonel John Boyd, whose cardinal tenet was a concept that he called the “OODA loop”: success in war is a matter of observing, orienting, deciding, and then acting faster than the enemy. Boyd’s brainstorm generated others,

and for military thinkers the great quest was figuring out ways to “get inside the other guy’s loop.” From http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/030630fa_fact3 -- -- -- -- -- Courtesy of TalkingPointsMemo.com: -- -- -- -- -- -- The graphic above depicts at least part of a hand-written note provided to the Vice President by Senator Rockefeller. The last sentence: "As I reflected on the meeting today and the future we face, John Poindexter's TIA project sprang to mind, exacerbating my concern regarding the direction the Administration is moving with regard to security, technology and surveillance." Logged Anti_Illuminati Guest ! Re: Cheney, The OODA Loop, SAIC, Ptech Cyber-PsyOps Warfare & 9/11 « Reply #14 on: May 05, 2009, 07:24:54 PM » The OODA Loop & CyberSecurity on 9/11 Mar 25 2006, 03:08 PM Cybersecurity and the OODA Loop In addition to the use of the OODA loop in strategic management and operations with multiple war game scenarios, the OODA loop also has widely accepted application within computer programming circles, especially as it pertains to cybersecurity. The following will give you an introduction and may introduce some surprises.

I have not found reference to some of these events and issues in the common “literature” of 9/11, nor any major reference on the timelines, nor any major discussion of same in any detail within the 9/11 Commission Report. A quick review of several of the primary 9/11 web sites did not disclose any discussion of cybersecurity issues and events in or around 9/11. --- --- --- --- --- Selected excerpts from a book: Black Ice: The Invisible Threat of Cyber-Terrorism Chapter Seven : 9/11: The Cyber-terrorist Attack http://books.mcgraw-hill.com/downloads/products/ 0072227877/0072227877_ch07.pdf One of the first things that all U.S. military officers are taught is to accept the inevitability of the “fog of war,” a phrase that refers to the uncertainty and confusion that often arises in the heat of battle as a result of a commander lacking adequate information about the enemy and terrain, or receiving faulty intelligence. More importantly, however, is the emphasis that U.S. military officer training courses place on being able to operate effectively and decisively under such circumstances. And on September 11, 2001, that training would be put to the test in America’s own backyard. On the fifth floor Strategic Information and Operations Center at the FBI’s headquarters facility in Washington, D.C., Ron Dick, former director of the FBI’s National Infrastructure Protection Center and a 24-year veteran of the FBI, began the process of setting up a 24-hour Cyber-Crisis Action Team (C- CAT) that would be responsible for not only helping Brenton Greene’s physical recovery effort in New York but also monitoring the Internet infrastructure for signs of a follow-on cyber-attack that might target additional sectors of the economy. “There were a lot of unknowns,” recalled Dick. -- -- While Greene was rushing back to the NCS operations center to get a better understanding of what had happened in New York, civilian and military officials were boarding a militarized version of a Boeing 747, known as the E-4B National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC), at an airfield outside of

the nation’s capital. They were preparing to conduct a previously scheduled Defense Department exercise. There are four E-4Bs, code-named “Night Watch,” in the U.S. military arsenal. They exist to provide the president, vice president, and Joint Chiefs of Staff with an airborne command center that can be used to execute war plans and coordinate other emergency government operations in the event of a national emergency or destruction of ground command and control centers. As a result, they are often referred to unofficially as “the doomsday planes.” One E-4B remains on alert at all times. As the crew of the E-4B was preparing to begin the regularly scheduled training exercise, including the use and testing of the aircraft’s various advanced technology and communications equipment, the FAA was ordering all New York City area airports to cease flight operations. Minutes later, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey ordered all bridges and tunnels in the new York area closed. The fog of war was thick and officials were left wondering if other airplanes were about to come careening out of the haze like jet-powered artillery shells. President George W. Bush, who had been speaking to second graders at the Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Florida, was notified immediately of the unfolding crisis. At 9:30, Bush informed his audience and the nation that America had become a victim of “an apparent terrorist attack.” Ten minutes later, the FAA ordered a historic nationwide grounding of all air traffic. It was clear to many officials, however, that the crisis was far from over. And that fact was driven home at 9:43, when American Airlines Flight 77 plowed through the thick concrete walls of the Pentagon. There were thousands of airplanes still in the air and heading toward airports all over the country. And one of them, a 747 code-named “Night Watch,” had only just taken off and was immediately ordered to cease the military exercise it was conducting and prepare to become the actual national airborne operations center. America was under attack. -- -- -- As the president was being whisked off to a secure command and control facility at Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska, the White House began an evacuation of all nonessential personnel. Specific concerns had been relayed by the intelligence community about the potential targeting of the White House and the Capitol building. It was an apparent effort to decapitate the government and sow mass confusion.

Clarke, acting on direct orders from the president and vice president, then initiated the emergency continuity of the government plan, which called for all federal departments to relocate to alternate sites and for the Speaker of the House of Representatives to be moved to a secure location outside of Washington. Although the secretary of defense remained at the Pentagon, Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defense, was moved to an alternate military command and control center. Shortly thereafter, all ports and border crossings were ordered closed, and all available military fighter aircraft were launched. For Clarke, most of the morning was spent ensuring that all of the various orders relating to the emergency action plan were being carried out. Members of Clarke’s staff would remain in close contact with the FBI’s National Infrastructure Protection Center. Meanwhile, as the public watched the horrible human tragedy unfold live on television, Clarke, Dick, and their respective staffs were forced to deal with another possibility: that the morning’s attacks could be one phase of a multi-pronged assault that could include attacks against the digital infrastructure of the U.S. economy. If that was the case, then they were staring at the one scenario that had often kept them awake at night. Across town at the NIPC, Dick summoned his key advisors into an emergency meeting to analyze all available cyber-intelligence. Among those Dick relied on for expert advice were Bob Gerber, a career CIA officer who had been detailed to the NIPC to serve as the agency’s chief of analysis and warning; Navy rear admiral James Plehal, who served as Dick’s deputy and was a key link to the Defense Department establishment; and LesWiser, the FBI agent responsible for tracking down CIA spy Aldrich Ames. A major cyber-attack now would prove absolutely devastating to the rescue and recovery effort and would almost certainly amplify the sense of fear and uncertainty far away from the epicenter of the main attack in New York. Such an assault had to be stopped at all costs. But with the crash of hijacked American Airlines Flight 93 in Pennsylvania, the fog of war had settled firmly over official Washington. Despite the billions of dollars invested every year in advanced information technology designed to provide key government and military decision-makers with what is known in military parlance as “situation awareness,” the fog of September 11 proved too thick to see through. America’s national security community was thrown off-balance and had lost (in fact, may never have had) the initiative. What should have been an offensive war of maneuver had quickly turned into a reactive war fought from trenches and hardened bunkers.

September 11 was far from over when a small cadre of highly respected national security experts began warning of the potential for the physical attacks to be followed by cyber-attacks. Marv Langston, the former deputy CIO at the Defense Department, characterized the events during an interview with Computerworld magazine as an act of war and said the country needed to be on alert for what he described as an “electronic Pearl Harbor.” Likewise, retired Air Force Lt. General Al Edmonds, who at one time headed the Defense Information Systems Agency, said he feared a cyber-attack could be next and added that such an event would be “absolutely paralyzing.” Meanwhile, Atlanta-based Internet Security Systems, Inc. (ISS), which operates the IT industry’s Information Sharing and Analysis Center (ISAC), placed its operations center on what it called AlertCon 3 (the highest is AlertCon 4), “in order to focus IT security efforts on the potential for (and defense against) an Internet component to these attacks.” The IT-ISAC was one of several ISACs established in cooperation with the FBI and the NIPC to share information between the government and the private sector about cyber-threats. In a threat assessment issued to the private sector members of the ISAC, ISS stated, “This is a time to partner all security assets on what is most important to your enterprise. While physical security concerns are paramount, it is essential to keep some eyes on the networks focused on malicious activity. We can expect a significant increase in disaster-recovery activity—plans being activated, dusted off, etc. No doubt the [disaster recovery] industry will be sorely stressed at this point, and it would behoove staffs to consider security as a move to alternate sites is contemplated or enacted.” At FBI headquarters, the NIPC began what Dick characterized as “harvesting” physical threat information pertaining to critical infrastructures and pushing that data out to thousands of private-sector companies that owned and operated those facilities, such as power plants, telecommunications facilities, water companies, and financial institutions. Dick relied on the FBI’s InfraGard program and the various private-sector- run Information Sharing and Analysis Centers for much of that outreach effort. On September 11, ISACs had already been established in the Financial Services sector, the Electric Power sector, the Telecommunications sector, the Information Technology industry, and the computer software anti- virus industry. In addition, the NIPC would set in motion a daily threat

briefing schedule for the Water sector, the Oil and Gas sector, and the Aviation and Railroad sectors. Accurate and timely information was the only thing that could cut through the fog of war. And the government was doing everything it could to get that information flowing to the right people at the right time. -- -- -- -- -- -- Secretary of State Colin Powell was in Lima, Peru, attending a meeting of the Organization of American States when he received word of the attacks. He immediately cut his trip short and boarded a government aircraft for the seven-hour flight back to Washington. The former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff understood and appreciated the advantage the U.S. enjoyed over most nations when it came to the advanced electronics and communications capabilities. The former Army General had put his name on various Pentagon war-fighting manuals that outlined the Department’s commitment to what the military called “network-centric warfare” and “information superiority.” He had even written an article in Byte Magazine in 1992 titled “Personal Computer Technology May Determine the Outcome of Future Conflicts.” But what really made Powell’s experience on September 11 unique was his understanding and continued devotion to the military’s decision cycle, known as the OODA loop. OODA is an acronym for the cycle of Observation, Orientation, Decision, and Action. For Powell, it was absolutely critical that he be inside of his counterpart’s or enemy’s loop. But on September 11, Powell got a taste of what communications must have been like for his early nineteenth-century counterparts. “I never felt more useless in my life than on the morning of the 11th of September,” Powell told members of the National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee (NSTAC) during a meeting held at the State Department on March 13, 2002. For most of the seven-hour return flight, Powell was unable to communicate with other senior government leaders in Washington. “Phones[were] gone because of what happened here and what happened to the [communications] system here in Washington,” he said. “They couldn’t get a phone line through. I was able to get some radio communications—two radio spots on the way back—but for most of that seven-hour period, I could not tell what was going on here in my capital, and I’m the Secretary of State.” The implications of the communications failure on September 11 went beyond the seven-hour window during which Powell was unable to

communicate with Washington. For Powell, this meant that there was the chance he and his department could be severed from the world again in the future, removing the initiative from America’s diplomatic and foreign policy efforts around the world. “Power to me now, as Secretary of State, is to be inside of everybody else’s information loop or decision loop,” he told the group of telecommunications experts. “I had called the President of Pakistan last Friday [March 8] to talk some business and just as I was concluding I said ‘I’m sorry to hear about the deaths that occurred in Karachi today.’ And he said, ‘what deaths?’ I’m inside his information loop.” Powell was not alone in his distress. The National Airborne Operations Center that had converted literally on the fly from exercise status to real-world crisis management also had its share of trouble deciphering what was happening around the nation. Although the details are not known, a classified after- action report was produced that, according to one official who was on board the aircraft on September 11, does not paint a favorable picture of the government’s overall crisis management capabilities. According to one government official, the nation was “deaf, dumb, and blind” for much of that horrible day in September. Back in Arlington, Virginia, Brenton Greene and the NCS staff began preparing for 24-hour operations—a state they remain in as of this writing. As afternoon turned to evening, officials began to piece together the true nature of the digital devastation in and around New York City and the Pentagon. In short, the destruction amounted to “the most significant challenge that the National Communications System had ever seen,” recalled Greene. In addition to the immediate wireless circuit overload, the collapse of the towers sent a massive steel beam slicing through a bundle of critical fiber- optic communications cables buried eight feet below the streets of Manhattan. The hulk of steel destroyed more than four million high-speed access lines and ruptured water lines that filled underground switching vaults with more than ten million gallons of water. As many as 300,000 voice telephone lines and 139 fiber rings in surrounding buildings and 26 building- specific fiber rings also failed as a result of the physical devastation. The damage also knocked out 1.5 million circuits that served the financial district, threatening the country’s economic stability with each passing minute. The loss of connectivity to Wall Street was so severe that President Bush would soon establish three top priorities and communicate them personally to the NCS managers: rescue, recovery, and getting Wall Street back online.

The collapse of the towers had knocked out all primary power for much of lower Manhattan, and backup power, which was running on diesel fuel generators, began to fade quickly. Emergency responders and corporate disaster recovery specialists had failed to anticipate the physical impediments to getting fuel and spare parts onto Manhattan Island, which was now essentially surrounded by a blockade of bridge and tunnel police officers and military personnel at sea and in the air. Complicating matters was the fact that air transportation was no longer an option. Therefore, getting fuel delivered to keep the back-up power generators running was delayed due to the significant preplanning that was required to pass through security. In fact, security precautions and lack of planning denied Verizon officials timely access to their own facilities at the disaster site. Other telecommunications companies who had pledged support to the restoration effort had been completely denied entry into the disaster site and would only be able to get through using Verizon identification badges. Those delays had a direct impact on the time it took to restore services to the financial district. The electronic damage also extended to the transportation industry, cutting the electronic circuits that fed data to the tollbooths on the various bridges in the New York Area. When the first jetliner struck the north tower of the World Trade Center, it destroyed the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey headquarters facility, which housed 2,000 staffers and the central host servers for the E-ZPass electronic toll collection system. It would take a team of 15 engineers to recover the toll system, helping to ensure the flow of traffic, including emergency vehicles, into and out of Manhattan. When the towers collapsed, 75 Port Authority workers were among the more than 2,800 who perished. Despite these difficulties, Greene was amazed at the sense of community and patriotism that had taken hold throughout the various private companies that only a day earlier considered each other ruthless competitors. Lucent Technologies, Inc., in Murray Hill, New Jersey, one of Verizon’s main systems providers, rushed a 100,000-line switch to the scene to replace another massive switch that had been sent crashing through the window of the Verizon building at 140 West Street. The company also put all of its customer requirements on hold and made its entire inventory available to rescue services. “Companies that were competitors with each other were all bending over backwards to help each other,” recalled Greene. “There was a clear recognition of the urgent need to get our economic machine—Wall Street— back online.”

-- -- -- -- On the morning of September 18, the world woke up to the Nimda Internet worm, malicious code that can destroy data and has the ability to self- replicate and find its way through the Internet to other vulnerable computers. Nimda, which contained five different malicious payloads, infected all 32-bitWindows systems it encountered, including Windows 98, 2000, Millennium Edition, XP, and NT. It scanned systems for as many as 100 different vulnerabilities and automatically exploited them when found. Within 30 minutes of being discovered, Nimda had become a global problem. At the White House, Clarke was immediately alarmed. Nobody could tell him who was responsible for the worm, which meant anybody could be responsible, including a nation-state sponsor of terrorism or some other surrogate of Osama bin Laden. Almost immediately, experts were warning that Nimda was spreading faster and more aggressively than any other worm they had ever seen and could easily begin to have an impact on overall Internet performance. Although there was no way to know for sure, this could have been part of the series of follow-up attacks that the national security community had been expecting. “Nimda was a devastating attack,” recalled Clarke, who remained on a 24- hour rotation in the White House Situation Room. “We had been expecting another wave of attacks. We were all still worrying about conventional terrorism. We didn’t know if it would be more airplane attacks, truck bombs, chemical or biological or cyber attacks. And suddenly the cybersecurity team came to me and said there was a major worm going through the Internet and it was knocking off major companies.” Initially, the consensus among Clarke’s staff of experts was that Nimda could have been related in some way to the September 11 attacks.“ We still don’t know for sure,” he recalled during an interview in his office in December 2002. “But had Nimda happened on September 5, it would have been a big news story. A lot of companies, particularly in the financial world, shut down major pieces of their operations. It destroyed and corrupted databases. It was quite devastating, causing several billion dollars in damage.” --- For more about the book: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/007222787...glance&n;=283155 -- -- --

NIMDA is ADMIN spelled backwards. -- -- -- From another source: “As you may recall, Nimda appeared one week after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Using multiple exploit vectors, the worm rampaged through the Internet, causing massive network outages. Nimda also left a backdoor on infected systems that, in theory, could be exploited by its creators. The backdoor, of course, could also be exploited by a "chaser" program written by someone else. Enter the E911 virus. Back in March 2000, some 18 months prior to 9/11, AV experts began tracking a low-level virus that caused modems on infected computers to endlessly dial 911, wait for an answer, and then hang up. The evil genius of this program was that it exploited the unique functionality of the 911 emergency response system. In ordinary telephone calls, the caller controls the connection--once he hangs up, the switch drops the call. But in 911 systems, the switch works in reverse: Only the 911 console can drop the connection. That way, emergency services can trace the call even if the caller hangs up. If some malicious opportunist had reprogrammed the E911 virus to exploit Nimda's backdoor, and then released it as a chaser on Sept. 19, millions of infected computers would have DoS'd the nation's 911 systems. If you tried to call 911 during that time, you'd get a busy signal. Such an attack, Geer correctly surmises, would have caused a "grand mal seizure" on the nation's already fragile psyche and, worse yet, resulted in needless deaths of people waiting for emergency services.” From http://infosecuritymag.techtarget.com/ss/ 0,295796,sid6_iss446_art928,00.html --- --- Please see the following: http://www.dandurand.uqam.ca/download/pdf/... 004/gagnonb.pdf I am not allowed to “quote” from this pdf but I direct your attention to the last two paragraphs on the first page, and the first paragraph on the second page, as well as the recounting of the exercise known as Eligible Receiver on pages 3 and 4.

He sees a pattern. Can you? --- --- --- http://events.um.edu.mt/bileta2006/22%20Savirimuthu.doc “Webs of Deceit and the Art of War” -- A PowerPoint presentation: http://www.dfrws.org/2004/bios/day2/D2- Dussault-OODA.ppt#256,1 Forensics, Fighter Pilots and the OODA Loop The Role of Digital Forensics in Cyber Command & Control Heather Dussault, Ph..D., Asst.Professor of Electrical Engineering, SUNY Institute of Technology An accompaning pdf : http://www.dfrws.org/2004/bios/day2/Dussault- OODA.pdf --- --- --- Should the question occur to the reader as to what the OODA loop developed for mid-air and other combat has to do with cyber crime, it should be noted that Boyd developed his Energy-Maneuverability theory (applied to the design of the F-15) despite the fact that the military would not give him access to the computer time he needed. He got the job done anyway. Some time later, the Air Force was going to charge him with the theft of $1 million worth of computer time, but could never prove that he did it. This is recounted in the biography by Robert Coram. --- ---- ----- To industry outsiders like myself, it may appear as though the massive focus on cybersecurity ramped up significantly after 9/11, given the fact the 9/11 Commission did not discuss cybersecurity in any detail yet chose to make recommendations on improving it, and given the “demotion” of Richard Clarke from counter-terrorism tzar to cyber-security tzar. (He’d been talking about the possibility of a digital Pearl Harbor well in advance of 9/11).

But this paper ( http://www.cert.org/research/isw/isw2000/papers/13.pdf ) notes, in footnote #3, a 1999 presentation on the use of the OODA loop in cybersecurity: "3 Wood, Bradley and Schudel, Gregg “Modeling Behavior of the Cyber Terrorist”, pre-publication draft presented at various 1999 DARPA Workshops. This paper identifies an adversary cycle that leads to such a “packet of death”. This cycle consist of an Adversary Orient, Observe, Decide and Act (OODA) loop consisting of intelligence gathering, preparation, and development, live network discovery, test-practice-replan, attack and damage assessment processes. --- --- --- --- “Information warfare, in its essence, is about…the way humans think and, more important, the way humans make decisions.” (Stein, 1996) Effective information operations entail some of the most extreme warfighter demands ever encountered. This is especially true for information operations, where the prospects include the fastest, most numerous, most anonymous, and most rapidly reconstitutable attackers in military history. The information operations mission must beaccomplished in an environment (“cyberspace”) where “fog” is common and routine access can become pure “friction.” Moreover, the operations tempo is marked in milliseconds, and this makes information operations the warfighting effort most reflective of Col. John Boyd’s (1987) analysis in terms of adversaries’ OODA (Observe-Orient- Decide-Act) Loops. High performance information operations entail global situation awareness (SA), efficient threat identification, and effective attack assessment. To achieve these ends watch center staff must monitor, manage, and manipulate data streams and information artifacts large in number, high in complexity, and dynamic in the extreme. From a paper published on March 23, 2000 entitled “CYBER WARRIOR: INFORMATION SUPERIORITY THROUGH ADVANCED MULTI-SENSORY COMMAND AND CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES” found here: http://www.hec.afrl.af.mil/Publications/n-101.pdf . ----

“Decision-support systems for situational awareness are tightly coupled with data fusion systems. The basic decision system—observe-orient-decide-act (OODA)— is the classic decision-support mechanism used in military information operations. OODA provides a cognitive mapping of the lowest level of cyberinference to knowledge-based personnel actions. This cyberfusion process requires the utilization of techniques ranging from processing algorithms and statistical estimations, to heuristic methods such as template correlation, or expert systems to assess situations and threats in cyberspace. The ID systems observe functions include the technical and human collection of data, comprising ID sensors, network sniffers, and computer system log files. The orient function includes data mining concepts to discover or learn previous unknown characteristics in the recorded data and computer files. The orient function also encompasses the application of templates for intrusion detection and association in data fusion processes. In the decision function, cyberinformation is further refined into threat knowledge used in the determination of an appropriate action or countermeasures. Act functions include both automated and human responses. Simple responses to cyberattacks may be automated, however, more complex decisions will always require human intervention. [which is problematic if buildings have been evacuated]. The OODA decision-support process may be mapped into the three levels of abstractions. Data is the measurements and observations. Information is the data placed in context, indexed, and organized. Knowledge or intelligence is information explained and understood. These abstractions make up the ID data-fusion model, illustrated in Figure 3, introduced by Waltz [11] for physical targets.” From another paper from April 2000: http://www.silkroad.com/papers/pdf/ acm-p99-bass.pdf --- --- - --- -- ------- Text of the slide presentation for DARPA in 1999 can be found here: http://www.darpa.mil/darpatech99/Presentations/Scripts/ISO/ ISO_StrategicCyberDefense_Saydjari_Script.txt --- --- http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich/cyberwarfare.html ( a compendium of articles on cyberwarfare) Logged

Part IV: Ptech, the OODA Loop and SAIC "By 8:56 a.m., it was evident that Flight 77 [which hit the Pentagon] was lost. The Federal Aviation Administration, already in contact with the Pentagon about the hijackings out of Boston, notified the North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, of American 77 at 9:24, 28 minutes later." "'We Have Some Planes,' Hijacker Told Controller", New York Times, 16 October 2001 **** "I want to get though to the White House to reiterate that we need air cover." New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani to Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik at the World Trade Center just after the second attack on the World Trade Center Time Magazine, 7 January 2002 **** Indira Singh describes the software she sought, the search for which brought her to PTECH: “The job of this software was to think about all the information that represented what was going in the enterprise at any given time…. For example, it would, it would be a surveillance software that would look at trading patterns that indicated someone was up to no good and then do something about it, send a message somewhere, send a transaction information somewhere, perhaps shut their system down, perhaps shut another system down, perhaps start something up elsewhere… I asked all my colleagues who were industry gurus what would they recommend for this. My buddies recommended PTECH…. it has an artificial intelligence core…. “ “… the networks were going to run the Ptech story on the first year anniversary. However, the White House got wind of the investigation – I have proof of that – and shut the story down in late August.” http://911citizenswatch.org/September-Hearings.pdf

Bob Ruppert: p. 90 ff Indira Singh: p. 126 ff A transcript of a radio interview with Indira Singh Audio here Mr.John Pike, GlobalSecurity.org: When you look at all of the different military security agencies that [Ptech has] as customers, it's very difficult to imagine how they would not be encountering sensitive information, classified information. ***** “The company, once known as PTech (now GoAgile), has been contracted to provide sophisticated computer software to several government agencies, including the Army, the Air Force, Naval Air Command, Congress, the Department of Energy, the Department of Justice, Customs, the FAA, the IRS, NATO, the FBI, the Secret Service, and the White House. Shortly after 9/11, the company’s primary investor, Yassin al-Qadi (al-Kadi), was identified by the US government as a specially designated global terrorist. Officials describe al-Qadi as one of Osama bin Laden’s "chief money launderers," and allege he transferred as much as $3 billion to al-Qaeda during the 1990s. Al-Qadi is a wealthy Saudi with connections to banking, diamonds, chemicals, construction, transportation, and real estate. He once headed Muwafaq, an Islamic charity the US Treasury Department described as an “al Qaeda front that receives funding from wealthy Saudi businessmen.” Al-Qadi also maintained an unusually close relationship with notable US politicians. While attempting to defend Ptech, the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee of Massachusetts (ADCMA) revealed the fact that al-Qadi “was prominent in Washington circles and even showed President Jimmy Carter and Dick Cheney around during their visits to Saudi Arabia.” Al-Qadi told an Arab newspaper in October of 2001 that he “spoke to [Dick Cheney] at length” and they “even became friends.” Similarly, while speaking with Computer World Magazine, Ptech cofounder Oussama Ziade said that al-Qadi “talked very highly of his relationship with [former President] Jimmy Carter and [Vice President] Dick Cheney." Ptech, under al-Qadi’s ownership, supplied the US government with what is known as enterprise architecture. According to Glenn Watt of Backbone Security, "Enterprise architecture is really the design, the layout, the blueprint if you will for the computer networks and computer systems that

are going to go into an organization." In regard to Ptech, he said, “The software they put on your system could be collecting every key stroke that you type while you are on the computer. It could be establishing a connection to the outside terrorist organization through all of your security measures." John Zachman, who is considered the “father” of enterprise architecture, said, "You would know where the access points are, you'd know how to get in, you would know where the weaknesses are, you'd know how to destroy it." Former FBI counterterrorism analyst Matthew Levitt has said, “For someone like [al-Qadi] to be involved in a capacity in an organization, a company, that has access to classified information, that has access to government open or classified computer systems would be of grave concern.” http://www.onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_570.shtml Please read the entire article at the link above… as well as this one: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17730 See also (and read in their entirety) the Cooperative Research notes on Ptech which note: “Ptech will help build “the Military Information Architecture Framework, a software tool used by the Department of Defense to link data networks from various military computer systems and databases.” ******* Mike Ruppert: “Whoever plotted 9/11 definitely viewed the FAA as an enemy that morning. Overriding FAA systems would be the most effective way to ensure the attacks were successful. To do this, the FAA needed an evolution of PROMIS software installed on their systems and Ptech was just that; the White House & Secret Service had the same software on their systems - likely a superior modified version capable of "surveillance and intervention" functions…. Enterprise architecture software is designed with the express purpose of knowing everything that is going on throughout the entirety of the enterprise in real-time.” [Doesn’t that sound like having good situation awareness?] Ptech Inc. Confidential Business Plan: Page 37 of 46 11/7/2001:

“The FAA recognized the need for leveraging its IT investment, with a means of centralizing activities and introducing consistency and compatibility within the operating systems environment. A Ptech consulting team was organized to use activity modeling to identify key functions that could be examined for improvement in network management, network security, configuration management, fault management, performance management, application administration, network accounting management, and user help desk operations.” Ptech was with Mitre Corporation in the basement of the FAA for 2 years prior to 9/11 and their specific job was to look at interoperability issues the FAA had with NORAD and the Air Force, in case of an emergency. Mitre knew the FAA's technological enterprise inside and out, including any simulation-and-testing (war game) technology operated by the FAA. ************ According to Ruppert: “Ptech is Total Information Awareness . . .“Programs based on datamining are powerful analytical tools; finding meaningful patterns in an ocean of information is very useful. But when such a tool is driven by a high- caliber artificial intelligence core [P-tech], its power gets spooky. The datamining capability becomes a smart search tool of the AI [Artificial Intelligence] program, and the system begins to learn. . . . ’Neural Network’ programming is modeled on the computational techniques used by the human brain - an electrochemical computer that uses neurons instead of semiconductors; the firing or non-firing of neurons instead of ones and zeros. With neural networking, software has become much smarter than it had been . . . “. . . Ptech's Framework can exploit the patterns it detects and extrapolate future probabilities. Then it can integrate itself with the computers from which it's getting the information and intervene in their functioning. The result is a tool for surveillance and intervention. The program can identify suspect streams of cash in a banking network and allow a bank officer to freeze the suspect assets. Of course, a user could direct the same program to prevent detection. It can discover salient anomalies in a person's movements through a city and either flag those anomalies for further scrutiny, or erase them from the record. And it can find errant flights in an air traffic map and initiate an intercept response. Or not.”

Read about the DOJ and FBI investigations of Ptech here. Note also that Chertoff was minority counsel in the first Senate investigation related to the death of Vincent Foster and majority special counsel in the second such Senate investigation. See http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/ readart.cgi?ArtNum=81709 . Neither Indira Singh, nor Ptech, warrant a mention in the official 9/11 Commission report. ****************************** The OODA loop is used to create “the fog of war”. According to Col John Boyd's observation-orientation-decision-action (OODA) loop theory, this kind of offensive effort can "enmesh [the] adversary in a world of uncertainty, doubt, mistrust, confusion, disorder, fear, panic, chaos . . . and/or fold [him] back inside himself so that he cannot cope with events/ efforts as they unfold." If someone truly understands how to create menace and uncertainty and mistrust, then how to exploit and magnify the presence of these disconcerting elements, the Loop can be vicious, a terribly destructive force, virtually unstoppable in causing panic and confusion and – Boyd’s phrase is best – “unraveling the competition”. The most amazing aspect of the OODA Loop is that the losing side rarely understands what happened.” “Gingrich had been out of the House for nearly 3 years, but he was an ally of Rumsfeld and a member of his Defense Policy Board, an influential advisory group. Gingrich was also one of a number of military theorists in the nineteen-eighties who tried to imagine a new American military suited to a world beyond the Cold War. Their intellectual patron was the late Air Force Colonel John Boyd, whose cardinal tenet was a concept that he called the “OODA loop”. (From http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/arti.../ 030630fa_fact3) In addition to the use of the OODA loop in strategic management and operations with multiple war game scenarios, the OODA loop also has widely

accepted application within computer programming circles, especially as it pertains to cybersecurity. Some examples: Wood, Bradley and Schudel, Gregg, Modeling Behavior of the Cyber Terrorist, (pre-publication draft presented at various 1999 DARPA Workshops). This paper identifies an adversary cycle that leads to such a “packet of death”. This cycle consist of an Adversary Orient, Observe, Decide and Act (OODA) loop consisting of intelligence gathering, preparation, and development, live network discovery, test-practice-replan, attack and damage assessment processes. “Information warfare, in its essence, is about…the way humans think and, more important, the way humans make decisions.” (Stein, 1996) ”Effective information operations entail some of the most extreme warfighter demands ever encountered. This is especially true for information operations, where the prospects include the fastest, most numerous, most anonymous, and most rapidly reconstitutable attackers in military history. The information operations mission must be accomplished in an environment (“cyberspace”) where “fog” is common and routine access can become pure “friction.” Moreover, the operations tempo is marked in milliseconds, and this makes information operations the warfighting effort most reflective of Col. John Boyd’s (1987) analysis in terms of adversaries’ OODA (Observe-Orient- Decide-Act) Loops. High performance information operations entail global situation awareness (SA), efficient threat identification, and effective attack assessment. To achieve these ends watch center staff must monitor, manage, and manipulate data streams and information artifacts large in number, high in complexity, and dynamic in the extreme.” From a paper published on March 23, 2000 entitled “CYBER WARRIOR: INFORMATION SUPERIORITY THROUGH ADVANCED MULTI-SENSORY COMMAND AND CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES” found here: http:// www.hec.afrl.af.mil/Publications/n-101.pdf. SAIC SAIC has been involved in military simulation. SAIC was one of four contractors selected to provide support for Phase I of the U.S. Air Force Distributed Mission Training Operations and Integration program. See http://www.saic.com/news/sept99/news09-15-99.html.

“SAIC has unique experience in information security, Internet-based video networks, video search and indexing. SAIC’s government services expertise, specifically its reputation in supplying security solutions for the DOD, NSA and FBI, provides Onstream Media and its customers with top-notch engineers and the highest DOD-level security infrastructure.” In 1998-1999, SAIC was also involved in a study of functional system performance parameters and decomposition of air traffic control/air traffic management. See http://as.nasa.gov/aatt/rto/Br19.pdf (See especially page 15). According to SourceWatch: “Christopher Ryan Henry, SAIC's corporate vice president for strategic assessment and development, previously worked at the the Pentagon as deputy undersecretary of defense for policy, serving with Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith." In 2006, they were dropped from an Iraq war psy-ops project. According to Mark Lewellen-Biddle in his December 2003 article Voting Machines Gone Wild!, “… Diebold hired Scientific Applications International Corporation (SAIC) of San Diego, to assess the security of the company’s voting software.... Many SAIC officers are current or former government and military officials. Retired Army Gen. Wayne Downing, who until last summer served as chief counter-terrorism expert on the National Security Council, is a member of SAIC’s board. Also on the board is former CIA Director Bobby Ray Inman, who served as director of the National Security Agency, deputy director of the CIA and vice director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. During the first Bush administration and while on the board of SAIC, Inman was a member of the National Foreign Intelligence Board, an advisory group that reports to the president and to the director of Central Intelligence. Retired Adm. William Owens, a former vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who sits on Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s Defense Policy Board, served as SAIC’s president and CEO and until recently was its vice chairman. He now is chairman of the board of VoteHere, which seeks to provide cryptography and computer software security for the electronic election industry. Robert Gates, ex-CIA director, former SAIC board member and a veteran of the Iran-Contra scandal, also is on the board of VoteHere.”

Non-Linear Dynamics of War It was previously noted that war and the events of 9/11 were dynamic. There is an additional factor of such dynamism, that of non-linear dynamism. Dr. Linda Beckerman of SAIC wrote a paper in 1999 entitled 'The Non-Linear Dynamics of War". Interestingly, she references the OODA loop several times: The Boydian approach tracks extremely well with the nonlinear dynamics of war. He advocates that we "Operate inside adversary's observation- orientation-decision-action loops to enmesh adversary in a world of uncertainty, doubt, mistrust, confusion, disorder, fear, panic, chaos,..and/or fold adversary back inside himself so that he cannot cope with events/efforts as they unfold." He refers to the Strategic Game as "A game in which we must be able to diminish adversary's ability to communicate or interact with his environment while sustaining or improving ours". "Generate many non-cooperative centers of gravity, as well as disorient, disrupt, or overload those that adversary depends on, in order to magnify friction, shatter cohesion, produce paralysis, and bring about his collapse." … At the same time, we deny the adversary the same ability by disrupting his interactions to create non-cooperative centers.... It is interesting to view Boyd's legacy to us in light of the role that new technology plays in our ability to wage war. It has become very vogue in some circles to invoke Boyd's OODA Loop as justification for new, superior technology to win "the information war". The idea is that we can be almost omniscient with regards to situational awareness, and become capable of replan and redirection at ever increasing speeds. That article is hosted at a web site run by folks whose “methods closely follow the ideas of the late American strategist, Col John R. Boyd, USAF, particularly his concepts for dislocating competitors before engaging in decisive actions. We bring over 30 years of experience in this area, including several years working directly with Col. Boyd on applications of his strategy to business competition. Our services include training, consulting, and preparation of business plans and strategies. We also built and operate Defense and the National Interest which retains Col Boyd's original focus on military applications. This site specializes in the emerging "fourth generation" of warfare such as we experienced on September 11, 2001.”

« Reply #17 on: June 09, 2009, 07:33:10 PM » “Is this real-world or exercise?”: Cyber-PsyOps Warfare & 9/11 Part I (of 7): 9/11, Simulation and “Red Teaming” What was the time span between the awareness of the US military of the second hijacking (a clear indication of an aberrant event, confirmed in a short time by the first and second WTC impacts) and the impact on the Pentagon? It is tempting to see the totality of 9/11 as a single event, but in reality those events played out over hours -- yet were sometimes measured in minutes, or seconds (or even milliseconds) over multiple locations from Boston to Washington to Florida and beyond. 9/11 was a series of inter-connected events. Furthermore, we know that there were extensive warnings in advance by sources both inside and outside the US. Indeed, there was a palpable prodrome (a period of time during which early warning signs can be observed or experienced) that was acknowledged and noted at that time by many. (The 9/11 prodrome was so palpable that the US military community drilled for it for years in advance.) We also know -- despite the fact that we think that 9/11 came to a close as the dust settled and the President returned to Washington to address the nation -- that the events of 9/11 continued on beyond that day, as evidenced by the anthrax events, the clean-up, and the discussions about investigations that dragged on for years, as well as the wars, infringement of liberties, torture, governmental abuses and cover-ups in its wake. But even when thinking only about that “severe clear” September morning, it must be acknowledged that any encounter of a modern-day military nature must necessarily be a dynamic event … in other words, it can change nature, tempo and focus as it evolves through multiple bifurcations, Moebian twists and the forced false perceptions of mind war. The Battle of the Bulge, for example, can be seen as a single event, but it had a prodrome that extended for months, and Patton’s G-2 smelled out the

that it wasn’t their first time: the troop had been exposed to combat repeatedly through the National Training Center and an array of simulations. [See Into the Storm: A Study in Command, by Tom Clancy & Gen’l Fred Franks Jr. (Ret’d)]. The Clancy/Franks book also has an excellent description of a synchronization matrix and its use during Desert Storm. Synchronization is "the ability to focus resources and activities in time and space to produce maximum relative combat power at the decisive point." “This paper* proposes an automated technique (labeled the "Dynamic Synchronization Matrix") for synchronizing forces at the operational level. The Dynamic Synchronization Matrix is a simple adaptation of a commercial project management program, run on a personal computer, which improves upon existing capabilities because it combines the two distinct major improvements of PERT methodology and automation. This decision support tool improves upon the two-dimensional synchronization matrices that enable modern tactical planning, command and control by making connections between time, space, forces, functions, actions, and effects which the average human would have difficulty making and storing…. The net gains in employing the DSM include more disciplined planning, greater flexibility in subsequent planning and execution, multiple display options, greater speed, agility, and accuracy, enhanced situational awareness and information management, insights into one's own plans, and enemy strengths and vulnerabilities, and linkage and applicability to subordinate echelons and other levels of war.” From “The Dynamic Synchronization Matrix: An Automated Decision Support Tool for the Campaign Planning Staff”, Kevin S Donohue, Army Command and General Staff College, Ft. Leavenworth School of Advanced Military Studies. Descriptors: *AUTOMATION, *ARMY PLANNING, *DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, TIME INTERVALS, METHODOLOGY, WARFARE, COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS, MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, DECISION MAKING, DATA MANAGEMENT, MILITARY DOCTRINE, DISPLAY SYSTEMS, COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEMS, JOINT MILITARY ACTIVITIES, STRENGTH(GENERAL), ENEMY, MICROCOMPUTERS, ARMY, ARMY OPERATIONS, MILITARY COMMANDERS, COMBAT FORCES, PERT, AIR LAND BATTLES. Subject Categories : OPERATIONS RESEARCH, MILITARY OPERATIONS, STRATEGY AND TACTICS, ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT, MILITARY

FORCES AND ORGANIZATIONS, COMMAND, CONTROL AND COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS, HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING & MAN MACHINE SYSTEM Distribution Statement : APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE Published in 1994, it can also be found here: http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai? &verb;=getRecord&metadataPrefix;=html&identifier;=ADA289230 Red Team/Team B One of the key elements in military-caliber simulation gaming is the use of “Red Teaming”, an approach that is in close parallel to the use of “Team B” as developed during the Reagan administration under the tutelage of his DCI, George Herbert Walker Bush. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Team_B . “The “Red Team”: Forging a Well-Conceived Contingency Plan”, by Col. Timothy Malone and Major Reagan Schaupp (both USAF), describes the use of “red-teaming, synchronization matrices and simulation for improved mission planning and mission rehearsal. The use of “a group of subject- matter experts (SME), with various, appropriate … disciplinary backgrounds, that provides an independent peer review of products and processes, acts as a devil’s advocate, and knowledgeably role-plays the enemy and outside agencies, using an iterative, interactive process during operations planning.” ["an iterative, interactive process"--repeatable and repeated] “An effective Red Team can pinpoint key Blue decision points, identify planning shortfalls, show deviations from doctrine, reveal overlooked opportunities, and extrapolate unanticipated strategic implications.” “Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltke’s adage ‘no plan survives contact with the enemy’ is true. But through Red Teaming, a plan can be refined after each contact with a Red Team. This process is valuable because it brings a contingency plan, together with the reasoning and information behind it, under the scrutiny of a well-simulated enemy. Better still, the Red Team can imitate outside agencies, higher headquarters, and even “Murphy’s Law.” A plan that survives this kind of treatment should be healthy indeed. To modify Gen George S. Patton’s famous quotation, ‘A good plan, well rehearsed, is better than a perfect plan unrehearsed’.”

Interestingly, research which pre-dated the 1990-1998 TADMUS work was done for air traffic controllers; see Seamster, T.L., Cannon, R.R., Purcell, J.A., Pierce, R.M., Fisher, S.G., & Redding, R.E. 1991. Analysis of controller communication in en route air traffic control. Published in ERIC reports. By 1999, the TADMUS research was well enough regarded that it was adopted, via the Federal technology transfer program, to the law enforcement/prison industry. See http://www.oletc.org/oletctoday/ 0309_tdt.pdf.) Similarly, a great deal of research has been done in the field of situation awareness, most notably by Mica Endlsey et al at SA Technologies, and focused heavily on the aeronautical applications. Google any or all of those three for an in-depth look at the research and publications since the late 1980’s. See the SA Technology publications focused on air traffic control here: http://www.satechnologies.com/publications/list.php?topic=2. One example is the 1998 article entitled Shared situation awareness in the flight deck-ATC system. “Numerous studies have been performed to assess the validity of SAGAT [situation awareness global assessment technique] (e.g., Endsley, 1995). SAGAT has been shown to have a high degree of reliability (e.g., Endsley & Boldstad (1994), to possess sensitivity to condition manipulations (Endsley, 2000), and to be effective across a variety of domains, including air traffic control (Endsley, Sollenberger, Nakata, & Stein, 2000); infantry operations (Matthews, Pleban, Endsley, & Strater, 2000); commercial aviation(Endsley & Kiris, 1995; Kaber, Endsley, Wright, & Warren, 2002); and teleoperations (Kaber, Onal & Endsley, 2000; Kaber, Wright, & Hughes, 2002).” See also http://www2.hf.faa.gov/workbenchtools/default.aspx? rPage=Tooldetails&subCatId;=9&toolID;=240 Endsley defined situation awareness as "1) the perception of the elements in the environment within a volume of time and space [or a specific context];

2)the comprehension of their meaning; and 3)the projection of their status in the near future". Two years later, she defined it as "knowing what is going on around you". The term “situation awareness” was used in this 1996 article The Digital General: Reflections on Leadership in the Post-Information Age, by Paul T. Harig, Parameters, Autumn 1996, pp. 133-140, and attributed to Thomas J. Czerwinski, "Command and Control at the Crossroads," Marine Corps Gazette, October 1995, pp. 13-15. There was a clear understanding of the term situation awareness in military circles well in advance of 9/11. Indeed: “The [9/11] Commission then states that the Secretary of Defense did not join the NMCC’s [air threat] conference call until just before 10:30AM. The Secretary of Defense himself told the Commission he was just gaining situation awareness when he spoke with the Vice-President at 10:39AM. That transcript is on page 23, page 43.” Yet the FBI arrived at the FAA’s Boston Center, in Nashua, New Hampshire, “minutes after Flight 11 crashed into the World Trade Center,” (circa 8:50 AM) and seizes tape recordings of radio transmissions from the hijacked plane. (See the Cooperative Research timelines for 9/11.) “At 8:43 a.m., [Master Sergeant Maureen] Dooley's technicians [at NEADS], their headsets linked to Boston Center, heard of a second plane, United Flight 175, that also was not responding. It, too, was moving to New York.” [See Hart Seely, “Amid Crisis Simulation, 'We Were Suddenly No-Kidding Under Attack,’” Newhouse News Service, January 25, 2002. ] According to this story, NEADS knew by 8:43 that UA 175 was problematic.” According to Laura Brown, the Deputy in Public Affairs at FAA headquarters: “Within minutes after the first aircraft hit the World Trade Center, the FAA immediately established several phone bridges that included FAA field facilities, the FAA Command Center, FAA headquarters, DOD [meaning the NMCC in the Department of Defense], the Secret Service. . . . The US Air Force liaison to the FAA immediately joined the FAA headquarters phone bridge and established contact with NORAD. . . . The FAA shared real-time information on the phone bridges about the unfolding events, including information about loss of communication with aircraft, loss of transponder

said.” Although earlier voice morphing techniques required cutting and pasting, often producing robotic intonations, the new software “can far more accurately replicate the way one actually speaks.” This new technology, developed in the Los Alamos National Laboratory, can be used equally by Hollywood and by military and intelligence agencies. “For Hollywood, it is special effects. For covert operators in the U.S. military and intelligence agencies, it is a weapon of the future.” One agency interested in this weapon, Arkin reports, is “the Information Operations department of the National Defense University in Washington, the military's school for information warfare.” Referring to what the military calls PSYOPS, meaning psychological operations, Arkin explains that these operations “seek to exploit human vulnerabilities in enemy governments, militaries and populations.” But voice morphing, I would add, could equally well be used as a weapon to exploit human vulnerabilities in a government’s own population. The “human vulnerabilities” in the US population could include the public’s ignorance of such technologies plus its tendency to trust its political and military leaders and to reject “conspiracy theories.” Arkin, pointing out that video and photo manipulation had already “raised profound questions of authenticity for the journalistic world,” teaching it that “seeing isn’t necessarily believing,” points out that the addition of voice morphing means that “hearing isn’t either.” Or at least it shouldn’t be. Surely, given the existence of this technology plus the manifold problems in the 9/11 Commission’s story based on the NORAD tapes, our media should be questioning the authenticity of these tapes.” To search the Cooperative Research timelines for “Secret Service”, click here. To search the Cooperative Research timelines for “FAA”, click here. According to all official accounts, the exercises were called off by 9:16 – well before 9:25 when "Phantom Flight 11" comes on the scene. [See Michael Ruppert’s Crossing the Rubicon, p. 444 (quoting from Air War Over America, p. 59).] Why was a phantom blip showing up then? Did it, or are we just being told that it did? If all warfare is based on deception, who was (or is) deceiving whom?

Logged Anti_Illuminati Guest ! Re: Barnett-Air Force Research Lab-OODA Loop-SAIC, Pentagon VPN Red Team « Reply #19 on: June 09, 2009, 08:15:49 PM » Some of this is redundant, so I will be leaving out some things already present in abundance on this site (regarding Singh/Ptech in the bottom half of this). “Is this real-world or exercise?”: Cyber-PsyOps Warfare & 9/11 Part III: Wired? “PROMIS software (originally Prosecutor Management Intelligence System) appeared in the early 1980s. It was developed by a small Washington, DC, company, Inslaw Inc., and proved to be the perfect intelligence tool. Though designed for the Department of Justice to help prosecutors in case management, it hooked the attention of corrupt officials and Israeli intelligence. Subsequently stolen from Inslaw, the software was hacked and given a “trap door.” This trojan gave it the power to retrieve info for the US and Israel from the very foreign intelligence services and banks it had been sold to in some 40 countries. The software helped the US win the Cold War against the Soviets, but also helped the Russian mafia, Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden & Company and any number of spies and crooks. In 1985 Mossad spy and British media tycoon Robert Maxwell, opened the “trap door” secret to Chinese Military Intelligence (PLA-2), at the same time selling them a copy of PROMIS for $9 million, turning it against the US. Unfortunately, in the mid-90s PLA-2 hacked the databases of Los Alamos and Sandia laboratories to cop US nuclear secrets. The KGB also bought PROMIS from Maxwell, and also received the back door trojan to plant in a tender part of the FBI. Yes there is no honor among thieves. We also provided PROMIS to Russia and China to backdoor their

intelligence, figuring the 64 federal agencies they could expose did not outweigh the many other look-sees PROMIS provided the US. Actually, using the same PROMIS bought from Russia, Saddam and his regime shifted major money through the banking system. Some of these funds still feed Iraqi anti-coalition and resistance fighters. Unfortunately, when Maxwell tried to extort more money from the KGB to pay off his huge corporate debts, he ended up falling off the back of a yacht into the deep blue drink, stung by a hot shot needle, this with a little help from his friends. Nevertheless PROMIS was, as Michael Ruppert described in Crossing the Rubicon: “ . . . software that could think, understand every major language in the world, that provided peepholes into everyone else’s computer ‘dressing rooms,’ that could insert data into computers without people’s knowledge, that could fill in blanks beyond human reasoning, and also predict what people would do — before they did it? You would probably use it wouldn’t you? But PROMIS is not a virus. It has to be installed as a program on the computer systems that you want to penetrate. Being as uniquely powerful as it is, this is usually not a problem. Once its power and advantages are demonstrated, most corporations, banks, or nations are eager to be a part of the 'exclusive' club that has it. And, as is becoming increasingly confirmed by sources connected to this story, especially in the worldwide banking system, not having PROMIS -- by whatever name it is offered -- can exclude you from participating in the ever more complex world of money transfers and money laundering. As an example, look at any of the symbols on the back of your ATM card. Picture your bank refusing to accept the software that made it possible to transfer funds from LA to St. Louis or from St. Louis to Rome.” http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_1322.shtml “According to Federal court documents, PROMIS [software] was stolen from Inslaw by the Department of Justice directly after Etian's 1983 visit to Inslaw (a later congressional investigation preferred the word "misappropriated"). [Rafael Etian, chief of the Israeli defense force's anti-terrorism intelligence unit] And according to sworn affidavits, PROMIS was then given or sold at a profit to Israel and as many as 80 other countries by Dr. Earl W. Brian, a man with close personal and business ties to then-President Ronald Reagan and then-Presidential counsel Edwin Meese.

A House Judiciary Committee report … found evidence raising "serious concerns" that high officials at the Department of Justice executed a pre- meditated plan to destroy Inslaw and co-opt the rights to its PROMIS software. The committee's call for an independent counsel have fallen on deaf ears. One journalist, Danny Casolaro, died as he attempted to tell the story (see sidebar), and boxes of documents relating to the case have been destroyed, stolen, or conveniently "lost" by the Department of Justice. But so far, not a single person has been held accountable.” --snip -- “WIRED has spent two years searching for the answers to the questions Inslaw poses: Why would Justice steal PROMIS? Did it then cover up the theft? Did it let associates of government officials sell PROMIS to foreign governments, which then used the software to track political dissidents instead of legal cases? (Israel has reportedly used PROMIS to track troublesome Palestinians.) The implications continue: that Meese profited from the sales of the stolen property. That Brian, Meese's business associate, may have been involved in the October Surprise (the oft-debunked but persistent theory that the Reagan campaign conspired to insure that US hostages in Iran were held until after Reagan won the 1980 election, see sidebar). That some of the monies derived from the illegal sales of PROMIS furthered covert and illegal government programs in Nicaragua. That Oliver North used PROMIS as a population tracking instrument for his White House-based domestic emergency management program. Each new set of allegations leads to a new set of possibilities, which makes the story still more difficult to comprehend. But one truth is obvious: What the Inslaw case presents, in its broadest possible implications, is a painfully clear snapshot of how the Justice Department operated during the Reagan- Bush years. This is the case that won't go away, the case that shows how justice and public service gave way to profit and political expediency, how those within the administration's circle of privilege were allowed to violate private property and civil rights for their own profit. Sound like a conspiracy theorist's dream? Absolutely. But the fact is, it's true.”

-- “Among the many strong conclusions of the "House Judiciary Committee Report on the Inslaw Affair" was this rather startling and brief recommendation: "Investigate Mr. Casolaro's death." The House Committee Report contained some no-holds-barred language on the issue of stonewalling: "One of the principle reasons the committee could not reach any definitive conclusion about Inslaw's allegations of a high criminal conspiracy at Justice was the lack of cooperation from the Department," the report states. "Throughout the two Inslaw investigations, the Congress met with restrictions, delays and outright denials to requests for information and to unobstructed access to records and witnesses. "During this committee's investigation, Attorney General Thornburgh repeatedly reneged on agreements made with this committee to provide full and open access to information and witnesses ... the Department failed to provide all the documents subpoenaed, claiming that some of the documents ... had been misplaced or accidentally destroyed." [Sound familiar?] "There appears to be strong evidence," the report states, "as indicated by the findings in two Federal Court proceedings as well as by the committee investigation, that the Department of Justice 'acted willfully and fraudulently,' and 'took, converted and stole,' Inslaw's Enhanced PROMIS by 'trickery fraud and deceit.' " "While refusing to engage in good faith negotiations with Inslaw," the report continues, "Mr. Brewer and Mr. Videnieks, with the approval of high- level Justice Department officials, proceeded to take actions to misappropriate the Enhanced PROMIS software." Furthermore, the report states, "several individuals have stated under oath that the Enhanced PROMIS software was stolen and distributed internationally in order to provide financial gain to Dr. Brian and to further intelligence and foreign policy objectives for the United States." The INSLAW Octopus: Software piracy, conspiracy, cover-up, stonewalling, covert action: Just another decade at the Department of Justice By Richard L. Fricker , March/April 1993, Wired http://www.wired.com/ wired/archive/1.01/inslaw_pr.html

* * * * * * * * * According to Wkipiedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosecutor %27s_Management_Information_System ): In early 1999, Gordon Thomas, a British journalist and author, published an authorized history of the Israeli Mossad intelligence agency. The book, entitled Gideon's Spies: the Secret History of the Mossad, included extensive admissions about the theft and re-sale of PROMIS by the long-time former deputy director of the Mossad. He claimed that Israeli intelligence had collaborated with the U.S. Justice Department on the theft of PROMIS from Inslaw, that the FBI and CIA were among the agencies of the U.S. intelligence community that adapted PROMIS to track the intelligence information they produce, that U.S. intelligence also adapted PROMIS to track financial transactions in the banking sector, and that U.S. and Israeli intelligence created a Trojan horse version of PROMIS and sold in excess of $500 million worth of that version to foreign intelligence agencies to spy on them. In 2001, The Washington Times and Fox News each published reports about PROMIS which they attributed to federal law enforcement and/or intelligence officials familiar with the debriefing of former FBI Agent Robert Hanssen, whom the FBI had arrested for espionage for the Soviet Union and Russia in February 2001. Each of these news reports stated that Hanssen had stolen for the Soviet KGB copies of the PROMIS-derivative software used in the FBI and U.S. intelligence agencies to keep track of the intelligence information they produce and copies of the PROMIS-derivative software that U.S. intelligence installed in banks to track the financial transactions of terrorists and others. Both news reports also stated that Osama bin Laden later bought copies of these software systems on the Russian black market for $2 million and that al Qaeda used the software to penetrate U.S. intelligence database systems so that it could move its funds through the banking system and so that it could evade detection and monitoring by U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies. See also http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/INSLAW/inslaw_hr.summary “… Promis, after improvement with [artificial intelligence], had allegedly been mated with the software of Jackson Stephens' firm Systematics. In the late seventies and early eighties, Systematics handled some 60-70% of all electronic banking transactions in the U.S. The goal, according to the diagrams which laid out (subsequently verified) relationships between Stephens, Worthen Bank, the Lippo Group and the drug/intelligence bank

BCCI was to penetrate every banking system in the world. This "cabal" could then use Promis both to predict and to influence the movement of financial markets worldwide.” http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/pandora/052401_promis.html (note especially his explanation of “the Nagasaki syndrome”) * * * * * * * * As Michelle Malkin suggestively notes: “The odor of a cover-up is unmistakable. To this day, the Justice Department, FBI and other government agencies continue to insist that they have never possessed or used any pirated version of PROMIS. Career Justice officials who oversaw the theft of the Hamilton’s software program in the 1980’s remain in place today. And according to my sources, the 9-11 Commission created by President Bush had declined to investigate this spy software fiasco and its possible role in facilitating the terrorist attacks on America.” * * * * * * * * Wall Street, the CIA and 9/11 “One of the primary functions of the Central Intelligence Agency by virtue of its long and very close history of relationships with Wall Street -- I mean to the point where the current executive vice president of the New York Stock Exchange is a retired CIA general counsel -- has had a mandate to track, monitor, all financial markets worldwide, to look for anomalous trades, indicative of either economic warfare, or insider currency trading or speculation which might affect the US Treasury or, as in the case of the September 11 attacks, to look for trades which indicated foreknowledge of attacks like we saw. One of the vehicles that they use to do this is a software called Promis software, which was developed in the 1980s, actually 1979, by Bill Hamilton and a firm called INSLAW, in [the] Washington D.C. area. And Promis is very unique for two reasons: first of all, it had the ability to integrate a wide range of databases using different computer languages and to make them all into one readable format. And secondly, in the years since, Promis has been mated with artificial intelligence to even predict moves in markets and to detect trades that are anomalous, as a result of those projections. … the UAL put options were primarily held by Deutsche Bank-A.B. Brown. And its very important to note that the current Number Three at CIA, the Executive Director, a man by the name of A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard, was, until 1998, the chairman of A.B. Brown. The company went from being owned by

Banker’s Trust to being owned by Deutsche Bank. But this is a man effectively running CIA, who came from the bank that handled the trades. Historically speaking, we go back to 1947, we look at Clark Clifford, who wrote the National Security Act, in 1947. He was a Wall Street banker, and a lawyer from Wall Street. He was the chairman of First American Bancshares that brought BCCI onto US shores in the late 1980s. He was given the design for the CIA by John Foster and Allen Dulles, two brothers: John Foster becoming Secretary of State, Allen becoming director of Central Intelligence, who was fired by John Kennedy. They were partners in what is until this day the most powerful law firm on Wall Street: Sullivan Cromwell. Bill Casey, the legendary CIA director from the Reagan/Iran Contra years, had been chairman of the Securities and Exchange commission under Ronald Reagan. He, in fact, was a Wall Street lawyer and a stockbroker. I’ve already mentioned Dave Doherty, the Vice President of NYSE [New York Stock Exchange] who is the retired CIA general counsel. George Herbert Walker Bush is now a paid consultant to the Carlyle Group, the 11th largest defense contractor in the nation, very influential on Wall Street. “Buzzy” Krongard is there. John Deutsch, the former CIA director, who retired a couple of years ago, a few years ago, is now on the board of Citibanc or Citigroup. And his number three, Nora Slatkin, the Executive Director at CIA is also at Citigroup. And Maurice “Hank” Greenburg, who is the chairman of AIG insurance, which is the third largest investment pool of capital in the world, was up to be the CIA director in 1995 and Bill Clinton declined to nominate him. So there is an inextricable and unavoidable relationship between CIA and Wall Street.” The CIA’s Wall Street connections, Transcript of interview with Michael C. Ruppert on Guns and Butter: The Economy Watch, with Kellia Ramares and Bonnie Faulkner, aired on KPFA 94.1 FM, Berkeley, CA Friday, October 12, 2001 _____________________________________________________________ __________________ “Is this real-world or exercise?”: Cyber-PsyOps Warfare & 9/11 Part IV: Ptech, the OODA Loop and SAIC "By 8:56 a.m., it was evident that Flight 77 [which hit the Pentagon] was lost. The Federal Aviation Administration, already in contact with the Pentagon about the hijackings out of Boston, notified the North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, of American 77 at 9:24, 28 minutes later."

"'We Have Some Planes,' Hijacker Told Controller", New York Times, 16 October 2001 **** "I want to get though to the White House to reiterate that we need air cover." New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani to Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik at the World Trade Center just after the second attack on the World Trade Center Time Magazine, 7 January 2002 Excerpt by Mike Ruppert: "Enterprise architecture software is designed with the express purpose of knowing everything that is going on throughout the entirety of the enterprise in real-time.” [Doesn’t that sound like having good situation awareness?] Ptech Inc. Confidential Business Plan: Page 37 of 46 11/7/2001: “The FAA recognized the need for leveraging its IT investment, with a means of centralizing activities and introducing consistency and compatibility within the operating systems environment. A Ptech consulting team was organized to use activity modeling to identify key functions that could be examined for improvement in network management, network security, configuration management, fault management, performance management, application administration, network accounting management, and user help desk operations.” Read about the DOJ and FBI investigations of Ptech here. Note also that Chertoff was minority counsel in the first Senate investigation related to the death of Vincent Foster and majority special counsel in the second such Senate investigation. See http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/ readart.cgi?ArtNum=81709. Neither Indira Singh, nor Ptech, warrant a mention in the official 9/11 Commission report. ****************************** The OODA loop is used to create “the fog of war”.

According to Col John Boyd's observation-orientation-decision-action (OODA) loop theory, this kind of offensive effort can "enmesh [the] adversary in a world of uncertainty, doubt, mistrust, confusion, disorder, fear, panic, chaos . . . and/or fold [him] back inside himself so that he cannot cope with events/ efforts as they unfold." If someone truly understands how to create menace and uncertainty and mistrust, then how to exploit and magnify the presence of these disconcerting elements, the Loop can be vicious, a terribly destructive force, virtually unstoppable in causing panic and confusion and – Boyd’s phrase is best – “unraveling the competition”. The most amazing aspect of the OODA Loop is that the losing side rarely understands what happened.” [INSERT: Including an extended excerpt for the following link]: From: THE NEW WAR MACHINE How General Tommy Franks joined Donald Rumsfeld in the fight to transform the military. by PETER J. BOYER Issue of 2003-06-30 Posted 2003-06-23 "Gingrich had been out of the House for nearly three years, but he was an ally of Rumsfeld and a member of his Defense Policy Board, an influential advisory group. Gingrich was also one of a number of military theorists in the nineteen-eighties who tried to imagine a new American military suited to a world beyond the Cold War. Their intellectual patron was the late Air Force Colonel John Boyd, whose cardinal tenet was a concept that he called the “ooda loop”: success in war is a matter of observing, orienting, deciding, and then acting faster than the enemy. Boyd’s brainstorm generated others, and for military thinkers the great quest was figuring out ways to “get inside the other guy’s loop.” One result was the rediscovery of the art of maneuver warfare, an old fighting doctrine that became a new article of faith for military reformers. The idea of maneuver warfare is to defeat the enemy by disrupting his capacity to fight rather than by overcoming him in a head-on contest of firepower. A maneuver attack might feature a ferocious assault on the

enemy’s front as a means of distraction while flanking forces dash to the adversary’s rear, enveloping the opponent’s force and collapsing it. The German tank blitzkrieg against France in