In essence, the article concerns the crumbling network of steam tunnels beneath the Capitol buiilding. The Capitol Police do not venture into this dark labyrinth, due to exposed asbestos and unstable concrete walls. Even police dogs may not venture down there.
A special police unit has received training to enter the tunnels if the need should arise. D.C.-area firefighters say they will go in if circumstances require.
These concerns arose after employees of the Capitol Power Plant sent four members of Congress a letter describing the obvious potential dangers from terrorism. The following section of the letter struck me as particularly noteworthy:
"This should be a real concern to the Congress and Senate as all buildings on the complex can be entered through the steam tunnels," they wrote. "Realize that it is on a regular basis [that] we see people in the tunnels that we don’t know why they are down there."(Emphasis added.) Who are these spelunkers? More than likely, they belong to the city's homeless population. Still, if they can get down there, how difficult would it be for someone of bad intentions to join their numbers?
The folks at GNM cite another indicator of a possible Capitol strike. While I consider their argument a bit of a reach, the points they raise deserve some consideration.
On April 3, the Capitol Building was evacuated after a power outage. GNM sees a parallel to a similar power outage in the South Tower of the World Trade Center the weekend before the great tragedy. The latter link goes to an interview with one Scott Forbes, who worked in the WTC complex, and whose words have been seized upon by the dreaded "controlled demolition" aficionados.
As readers know, I do not accept that theory of 9/11. (No doubt the bomb brigadiers will now fill the comments section with their usual predictable prattlings. Must you?) And yet, in a theoretical sense, I can see how a power outage might serve as a cover for the planting of explosives, although such an operation would surely take much more time than the Scott Forbes description allows. Electrical blackouts do happen; some of us have even experienced them first-hand. But, as the linked story makes clear, the recent difficulties at the Capitol appear to have increased the presence of police and firemen, and their presence cannot have made work easier for any of the nefarious covert operators presumed, in GNM's scenario, to have been scuttling around the complex. Besides, the lights merely flickered (except in the visitors gallery); the entire building did not go dark.
On the other hand -- an imaginative person might posit a scenario derived from the first Mission Impossible film, in which fake firemen use an "emergency" to gain access to off-limits areas. This idea seems rather fanciful.
Still...the notion of a Capitol Hill blast is chilling, especially when one considers the controversy over the new film V For Vendetta. I've not yet seen the film adpatation, although I possess the Alan Moore piece that inspired it. Right-wingers have made this movie the centerpiece of one of their usual hate campaigns, while many on the left have -- perhaps unwisely -- embraced V's actions without caveat. (Moore himself has expressed mixed feelings about his protagonist.) If a bomb destroyed much of the Capitol building, many would automatically blame the act on a left-wing radical (or group of radicals) inspired by Guy Fawkes and his updated cinematic counterpart.
Such an event would give the conservative propagandists an unimaginable coup. If life imitates art, the radio rightists will surely scream, once more, about their imaginary conspiracy of Hollywood "libruls." That meme always succeeds in riling the rubes.
Not only that. For years, the Rovian hordes have attempted to link progressives with terrorism -- even though the only destructive incidents of domestic origin during the past three-and-a-half decades have all originated with the militia maniacs and their reactionary comrades. (A few lefties did commit violent acts during the Vietnam era, but the worst of those outrages was insignificant compared to, say, the Oklahoma City blast.) An explosion in the Capitol would insure the election of a Republican congress -- which would, in turn, insure that impeachment remains a dream.
A number of people have noted the similarities between the tragedy of 9/11 and the finale of another Alan Moore graphic novel, Watchmen. Pray, if you are the sort to pray, that this history does not repeat itself. "Remember, remember/The Fifth of November" -- and while you're at it, consult your rhyming dictionary to see what goes with April, May, June or July...
Joseph,
ReplyDeleteI am nervous about the imposition of martial law and the removal of political opponents to the Halliburton detention camps that were supposed to be setup only for "immigration upheavals".
The closer Bush gets to being impeached, the closer this country gets to living under martial law because the ruling party will never just allow themselves to be voted out of office or to removed from office legally.
this is a scary situation. These neocons having had so much power for the past 6 years are jumping at the bit to ditch the constitution and run this country like they have always wanted to do: those with the gold rule.
If 9/11 was an inside job, then 9/11 was just a warmup for the most secretive rampup to an updated version of the 3rd Reich. These folks responsible for 9/11, responsible for implementation of martial law don't care if millions of folks get wasted in the process as long as they hold onto power.
I hope I am completely wrong. Please let me be wrong.
anon from SF
Interesting scenario ... makes ya wanna go hmmm. The only thing I very much disagree with is... an explosion would not necessarily put Repubs back in all the slots. After all, USA never had terror strikes at home under the Demos. ALL OUR TERROR STRIKES have happened under Repubs... Why go there again?????? The biggest failure ever happened on the Repub's watch.
ReplyDelete"After all, USA never had terror strikes at home under the Demos."
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure I can agree with this reasoning. 9/11 strengthened Bush immensely. A second strike would, at least temporarily, greatly increase both his poll numbers and what he is pleased to call political capital.
More than that. A second strike could lead to an open season on liberals and liberalism if cooked intelligence indicates that the new "Guy Fawkes" (i.e., the Fall Guy, the Oswald, the Martinus van der Lubbe) can be associated in any way with a prominent progressive.
I don't see how the Republicans can hold onto power without a second strike. And I don't see how this proposed "new Reichstag fire" scenario could possibly fail -- unless the operatives carrying out the actual dirty work do something sloppy.
Under Clinton we had the '93 WTC bombing and the OK City bombing. Bush must be greatly tempted to reprise 9/11 even if he wasn't complicit in it. The ONLY thing that will stop him is widespread suspicion that he was complicit in the original 9/11 attacks which would make people skeptical about 9/11 II.
ReplyDeleteYour complacent assertion that the Scott Forbes power outage did not allow time for the planting of explosives is not justified, Joseph. Dr. Van Romero, an explosives expert from New Mexico Tech, said it would take only a few charges in a few key places. Dr. Thomas Eagar's "zipper/pancake" theory of the WTC collapses, the conventional dogma for three years, asserts that the building was a house of cards--that a few broken truss "clips" would be enough to cause a floor to "unzip"; falling, it would knock down the others. Dr. Steven Jones estimates that forty men taking ten trips each could have planted the necessary explosives. IMHO, by using the roofs of elevator cars as movable staging, a few men could have planted radio-controlled charges on many of the core columns from the elevator shafts. The idea that demolition was prohibitively complex is not justified. After all, the official story is that limited asymmetrical structural damage and fires on a few floors did the deed. If so, bombs on a few floors could have done it.
By the way, Joseph, have you investigated the reports that in the OK City bombing unexploded bombs were found in the building that were bigger than McVeigh's truck bomb? These reports were carried on local TV at the time. Former OK state legislator Charles Key discusses this in an 8 minute video taken in DC last summer.
ReplyDeletewww.truthemergency.us/pages/VideoAudio.html
Charles Key will be appearing at a national 9/11 conference in Chicago 6-2 to 6-4.
I've been thinking for some time that the Capitol building might soon be a target but because of something else going on. I just think that the Moussaoui (sp?) trial will be related. He was supposed to fly into the Capitol, he wants to go down "honorably". If Al Queda is dismissive of him I think it's a ruse.
ReplyDeleteMiss P.
The lack of another attack does perpetuate the belief that the current administration is "protecting" us from terrorists. However, if another attack were to "happen", the Bushies would need sufficient rationale to blame others for the attack's occuring. The revelation of the warrantless spying program may provide enough wiggle room for that to happen. "See, if the terrorists hadn't been let in on what we were doing, this attack might have been stopped. Blame the liberals!"
ReplyDeleteIt's really not such a stretch.
Seem to remember a book written in the 50's (Hofsteder(?)) documenting his thesis that violence in America has overwhelmingly, historically been by the right factions against the left. Of course, the right has been busily trying to disqualify him as a researcher, but his arguments seemed pretty solid to me.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I don't think the Rep.s are worried about the '06 election....remember they have all those consenting machines. My guess as to what they are going for is total military control by Cheney/Bush, hence no need for another election.