www.globalresearch.ca 10 April 2005
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO504B.html

The Department of Homeland Security recently carried out an extensive anti-terrorist exercise entitled TOPOFF 3 (April 4-8, 2005). The "drill" was described by officials as "a multilayered approach to improving North American security".

The stated objective of the TOPOFF 3 "Full Scale Exercise" was to "prepare America" in the case of an actual bioterrorism attack by Al Qaeda:

".. we deliberately built the scenario as a very complex WMD bioterrorism attack in New Jersey, as well as a kind of a dual-header in the state of Connecticut in terms of a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device, and then a simultaneous chemical attack.

The system in TOPOFF 3 across the board was tested as never before, and this was deliberate. We wanted to test the full range of our incident management processes and protocols that spanned prevention, intelligence and information-sharing, and then the more classic or traditional response and recovery. But really for the first time in a national-level exercise, we really got at a near simultaneous WMD attack which is, of course, very, very stressful for the federal folks, as well as our state, local and international partners. (DHS spokeperson at Press Conference, * april, 2005, complete transcript at Patriot News: Transcript of Background Briefing with Senior DHS Officials on TOPOFF 3)

"The War on Terrorism"

These exercises must be understood in the broader context of America's National Security doctrine, which presents Al Qaeda as the main threat to the American homeland.

The "war on terrorism" is the central building block of the administration's foreign policy and domestic security agendas. In the words of DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff:

Homeland security is one piece of a broader strategy [which] brings the battle to the enemy... But while one key to defense is offense, it is not the entirety of our security picture. For we also need a “defense in depth” as part of the strategic whole. That means even as we pursue terrorists overseas, we work at home to prevent infiltration by terrorists and their weapons; to protect our people and places if infiltration occurs; and to respond and recover if an attack is carried out. This is embodied in our strategy of building multiple barriers to terrorist attacks. (Transcript of complete March 2005 speech of Secr. Michael Chertoff at
Dep. of Homeland Security: Remarks for Secretary Michael Chertoff empasis added)

Illusive Outside enemy

Known and documented, Al Qaeda is a creation of the US intelligence apparatus.

The purpose of the TOPOFF anti-terrorist exercises is not to "defend America" against terrorists, but to build a consensus within federal, State and municipal bodies, as well as within the business community and civil society (hospitals, schools, etc.) that this illusive outside enemy exists and that "the threat is real".

We are not dealing with a classical media disinformation campaign. While the TOPOFF exercise has been casually mentioned in press reports, it is not the object of a national debate.

With regard to TOPOFF, the consensus building process is "internal", it does not pertain the public at large. it is largely addressed to key decision-makers within these various governmental and nongovernmental bodies. It includes more than 10,000 participants in important decision-making positions (federal and State officials, law enforcement, fire departments, hospitals, etc), who may be called to act in the case of an emergency situation. These individuals in turn have a mandate to spread the word within their respective organizations, --i.e. with their coworkers and colleagues, as well as with the people working under their direct supervision.

In other words, this consensus building process reaches out to tens of thousands of people in positions of authority. The antiterrorist agenda and exercises thus become a "talking point" within numerous governmental and nongovernmental organizations.

In turn, the holding of these antiterrorist exercises supports the National Security doctrine of "preemptive war", --i.e. that America has to legitimate right to self defense by intervening in foreign lands and that America must defend itself against terrorists. It also sustains the myth of WMD in the hands of terrorists, being used against America, when in fact the US is the largest producer of WMD, with a defense budget of more than 400 billion dollars a year.

The objective is to sustain the war and national security agenda --and of course the possibility of martial law-- within the governmental, nongovernmental and corporate business sectors.

Ultimately, the objective is develop across the land, an unequivocal acceptance by key officials (and of their coworkers and subordinates), from the federal to the local level, for an emergency situation, where civil liberties and the rights of citizens would be suspended:

Officials will not give a specific figure, but they say the exercise involved several thousand fake deaths and thousands more injuries. This time, the sick and dying were only acting. But officials are aware that someday there could well be a real attack. They say the more they learn about how to coordinate prevention and response efforts, the better job they will be able to do to minimize casualties if and when that happens. (VOICE OF AMERICA: US Terrorism Exercise Tests Prevention and Response)

From TOPOFF 2 to the "Full Scale Exercise": TOPOFF 3

The previous "anti-terrorist exercise" entitled TOPOFF 2 was held two years ago in May 2003. It was described as "the largest and most comprehensive terrorism response and homeland security exercise ever conducted in the United States." It was carried out in a military style exercise by federal, State and local level governments, including Canadian participants. TOPOFF 2 established various "scenarios" under a Red Code Alert.

In other words, it was conducted on the same assumptions as a military exercise, in anticipation of an actual war situation, examining various WMD terror attack scenarios and the institutional response of State and local governments:

"It assessed how responders, leaders, and other authorities would react to the simulated release of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in two U. S. cities, Seattle, WA and Chicago, IL. The exercise scenario depicted a fictitious, foreign terrorist organization that detonated a simulated radiological dispersal device (RDD or dirty bomb) in Seattle and released the pneumonic plague in several Chicago metropolitan area locations. There was also significant pre-exercise intelligence play, a cyber-attack, and credible terrorism threats against other locations."

(For full text see, Department of Homeland Security, Summary Conclusions From National Exercise, Office of the Press Secretary, December 19, 2003, Dep. of Homeland Security: Summary Conclusions From National Exercise)

The April 2005 so-called Full Scale Exercise`` TOPOFF 3 goes much further than the May 2003 TOPFF 2.

TOPOFF 3 involved a larger number of individual participants. Moreover, in addition to Canada which had been involved in TOPOFF 2, the exercise also included the participation of Britain's Home Office. The UK had labeled its exercise "Atlantic Blue", whereas Canada designated its component of TOPOFF 3 as "Triple Play".

While there was mention of the Canadian exercise in the news, the details of "Atlantic Blue" were not revealed, nor were they reviewed in the British press. Britain's Home Office Minister Hazel Blears admitted in March that "There will be no visible 'on the ground' activity within the UK exercise". (quoted in the Sunday Express, 3 April 2005).

TOPOFF 3: Organizational Structure

More than 200 Federal, State, local, tribal, private sector, and international agencies and organizations and volunteer groups were involved.

TOPOFF 3 was organized in terms of five separate "venues": 1. Interagency, 2. Connecticut, 3. New Jersey: 4. United Kingdom, 5. Canada:

The FSE offers agencies and jurisdictions a way to exercise a coordinated national and international response to a large-scale, multipoint terrorist attack. It allows participants to test plans and skills in a real-time, realistic environment and gain the in-depth knowledge that only experience can provide."

The TOPOFF 3 scenario will depict a complex terrorist campaign and drive the exercise play through the homeland security system, beginning in Connecticut and New Jersey, and leading to national and international response.

Over the course of several days fire personnel will conduct search and rescue, hospitals will treat the injured (played by role players), subject-matter experts will analyze the effects of the attack on public health, and top officials will deploy resources and make the difficult decisions needed to save lives.

An internal Virtual News Network (VNN) and news website will provide real-time reporting of the story like an actual TV network would. The mock media will keep players up-to-date on unfolding events and enable decision makers to face the challenge of dealing with the real world media. Only participating agencies can view the VNN broadcast.

Dep. of Homeland Security: TOPOFF 3 Exercise

Scenario of a Code Red alert

The TOPOFF exercise prepares the Nation for an emergency under a Code Red alert. More specifically, it sets the stage within the various governmental bodies and organizations. The exercise moulds the behavior of public officials

According to official statements, an "actual terrorist attack" of the type envisaged under TOPOFF 3 would inevitably lead to a Code Red Alert. The latter in turn, would create conditions for the (temporary) suspension of the normal functions of civilian government. This scenario had already been envisaged by former DHS Secretary Tom Ridge in a CBS News Interview back in December 2003:

"If we simply go to red ... it basically shuts down the country,"

meaning that civilian government bodies would be closed down and taken over by an Emergency Administration.

The scenario is also detailed at the Homeland department's Ready.Gov website at http://www.ready.gov/

Emergency Scenario

A Code Red alert, according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) , would create conditions for the ("temporary" we are told) suspension of the normal functions of civilian government. According to FEMA, code red would:

Increase or redirect personnel to address critical emergency needs; Assign emergency response personnel and pre-position and mobilize specially trained teams or resources; Monitor, redirect, or constrain transportation systems; and Close public and government facilities not critical for continuity of essential operations, especially public safety.
(FEMA, Are You Ready?)

Several functions of civilian administration would be suspended, others would be transferred to the jurisdiction of the military. More generally, the procedure would disrupt government offices, businesses, schools, public services, transportation, etc.

"Continuity in Government" (COG)

A secret "Shadow government" under the classified "Continuity of Operations Plan" was installed on September 11, 2001.(See Washington Post: Shadow Government Is at Work in Secret).

Known internally as "Continuity of Government" or COG, the secret Shadow government would become functional in the case of a code red alert, leading to the redeployment of key staff to secret locations.

Code red alert would suspend civil liberties, including public gatherings and/ or citizens' protests against the war or against the Administration's decision to declare martial law.

The emergency authorities would also have the authority to exert tight censorship over the media and would no doubt paralyze the alternative news media on the internet.

In turn, code red alert would trigger the "civilian" Homeland Emergency response system, including the DHS' Ready.Gov instructions, the Big Brother Citizen Corps, not to mention the USAonWatch and the Department of Justice Neighborhood Watch Program which have a new post 9/11 mandate to "identify and report suspicious activity in neighborhoods" across America. The DOJ Neighborhood Watch is involved in "Terrorism Awareness Education" (www.USAonWatch.org).

Under the Citizen Corps, which is a component of the USA Freedom Corps, citizens across America are invited to participate in what could potentially develop into a civilian militia:

Americans are responding to the evil and horror of the terrorist attacks of September 11 with a renewed commitment to doing good … As part of that initiative, we created Citizen Corps to help coordinate volunteer activities that will make our communities safer, stronger, and better prepared to respond to any emergency situation.

… We are asking cities and counties across the country to create Citizen Corps Councils of their own design, bringing together first responders, volunteer organizations, law enforcement agencies, and community-serving institutions, such as schools, hospitals, and houses of worship. Some Citizen Corps Councils will feature local activities that reflect new and existing national programs such as Neighborhood Watch, Community Emergency Response Teams, Volunteers in Police Service, and the Medical Reserve Corps. Some will include local programs that involve partnerships with law enforcement agencies, hospitals, first responders, and schools. What all Citizen Corps Councils will have in common is that our local leaders will be working to expand opportunities for their community members to engage in volunteer service that will support emergency preparation, prevention, and response. (Citizen Corps, Guide for Local Officials, President Bush's introductory remarks,
Citizen Corps A Guide for Local Officials)

The Role of the Military

What would be the involvement of the Military in a code red emergency situation?

In theory, the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 adopted in the wake of the US civil war, prevents the military from intervening in civilian police and judicial functions. This law is central to the functioning of constitutional government.

While the Posse Comitatus Act is still on the books, in practice the legislation is no longer effective in preventing the militarization of civilian institutions.(See Frank Morales at "Homeland Defense" and the Militarisation of America).

Legislation inherited from the Clinton administration, not to mention the post 9/11 Patriot Acts I and II, "blurs the line between military and civilian roles". It allows the military to intervene in judicial and law enforcement activities even in the absence of an emergency situation.

In 1996, legislation was passed which allowed the military to intervene in the case of a national emergency (e.g.. a terrorist attack). In 1999, Clinton's Defense Authorization Act (DAA) extended those powers (under the 1996 legislation) by creating an "exception" to the Posse Comitatus Act, which permits the military to be involved in civilian affairs "regardless of whether there is an emergency". (See ACLU at ACLU: Congress Moves to Expand Military Involvement in Law Enforcement)

"The new proposed exception to the Posse Comitatus Act would further expand a controversial measure adopted by Congress in 1996 that permitted military involvement in "emergencies" involving chemical and biological weapons crimes.

Under that new measure, which was proposed by the Defense Department, the military would be authorized to deal with crimes involving any chemical or biological weapons -- or any other weapon of mass destruction -- regardless of whether there is an "emergency." In addition, the new proposal would lift requirements that the military be reimbursed for the cost of its intervention, thus likely increasing the number of requests for military assistance.

"Under this new provision," Nojeim said, "the mere threat of an act of terrorism would justify calling in military units. That represents a loophole large enough to drive a battalion of army tanks through."

The defense authorization bill would also require the Pentagon to develop a plan to assign military personnel to assist Customs and the Immigration and Naturalization Service to "respond to threats to national security posed by entry into the U.S. of terrorists or drug traffickers."

"the mere threat of an act of terrorism would justify calling in military units. That represents a loophole large enough to drive a battalion of army tanks through." (ibid)

In other words, the Clinton era legislation had already laid the legal and ideological foundations of the "war on terrorism".

Despite this 1999 "exception" to the Posse Comitatus Act", which effectively invalidates it, both the Pentagon and Homeland Security, have been actively lobbying Congress for the outright repeal of the 1878 legislation:

"new rules are needed to clearly set forth the boundaries for the use of federal military forces for homeland security. The Posse Comitatus Act is inappropriate for modern times and needs to be replaced by a completely new law ...

It is time to rescind the existing Posse Comitatus Act and replace it with a new law. ... The Posse Comitatus Act is an artifact of a different conflict-between freedom and slavery or between North and South, if you prefer. Today's conflict is also in a sense between freedom and slavery, but this time it is between civilization and terrorism. New problems often need new solutions, and a new set of rules is needed for this issue.

President Bush and Congress should initiate action to enact a new law that would set forth in clear terms a statement of the rules for using military forces for homeland security and for enforcing the laws of the United States.

(John R. Brinkerhoff, former associate director for national preparedness of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), The Posse Comitatus Act and Homeland Security)

The Posse Comitatus Act, is viewed by military analysts as a "Legal Impediment to Transformation":

"[The Posse Comitatus Act constitutes] a formidable obstacle to our nation's flexibility and adaptability at a time when we face an unpredictable enemy with the proven capability of causing unforeseen catastrophic events. The difficulty in correctly interpreting and applying the Act causes widespread confusion at the tactical, operational, and strategic levels of our military. Given that future events may call for the use of the military to assist civil authorities, a review of the efficacy of the PCA is in order. ( Donald J. Currier, The Posse Comitatus Act: A Harmless Relic from the Post-Reconstruction Era or a Legal Impediment to Transformation? Authors; Army War College Strategic Studies Institute, Carlisle Barracks, Pa, September 2003)

The ongoing militarization of civilian justice and law enforcement is a bi-partisan project. Senator Joseph Biden (a Democrat), former Chairman of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has been waging, since the mid-1990s, in consultation with his Republican counterparts, a battle for the outright repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act.