Soyuz rocket launches European Gaia space telescope from Guiana Space Centre in Kourou

Soyuz rocket launches European Gaia space telescope from Guiana Space Centre in Kourou

12/19/13 - 10:53 Source: Belga

© epa.

A Soyuz rocket carrying the European Gaia space telescope took off Thursday morning at the Guiana Space Centre in Kourou, according to a retransmission via Internet broadcast by Arianespace.


The launcher lifted off at 9:12 GMT (6:12 hours of Guyana, 10:12 Paris time).The Gaia satellite, which will measure with unprecedented accuracy the distance of a billion stars in our galaxy, must be separated from the upper stage of the rocket after 41 minutes and 59 seconds of flight. Before separation, the satellite will send a radio signal to the first station in Perth (Australia) of the European Space Agency (ESA). But mission controllers Operations Centre of ESA (ESOC) in Darmstadt (Germany) will live long minutes of suspense.

"After separation, Gaia must still perform an automated sequence criticism, which includes pressurizing its thrusters Attitude and the deployment of its visor skirt control, a very delicate stage, "said Dave Milligan, head of operations for Gaia. "For about 17 minutes, we risk losing radio contact," he has said in a statement ESA, adding that these minutes would be "very long and tense" in the control room.

Hopefully Gaia will be positioned approximately 1.5 million kilometers from Earth, in a privileged location, Lagrange point 2. Its mission is to last five years in total-or six-during which the satellite will locate a billion stars, each observed about 70 times. Over 99% of them have never had their distance measured accurately.

Reference article: Oufti-1, the first satellite 100% Belgian, ready for space


By: Editor [at http://www.7sur7.be/7s7/fr/1506/Sciences/article/detail/1746738/2013/11/25/Oufti-1-premier-satellite-100-belge-pret-pour-l-espace.dhtml]
25/11/13 - 5:13 p.m. Source: Belga

After six years of development , the nano- satellite Oufti -1 has been assembled and should be launched into space around the 1st January 2015. This is the first Belgian CubeSat satellite and was fully developed by students of the University of Liège.

It measures just 10 centimeters high , weighs between 1 and 1.3 kg , yet it contains a multitude of advanced technologies : solar panels, battery with technical regulation, telecommunication system ... CubeSat Oufti is now equipped to reach orbit somewhere around 600 kilometers from Earth.

The nano- satellite developed for 6 years by students of the University of Liège has been assembled. " If it reaches orbit , it will be the first satellite ( small or large) registered in Belgium , made in Belgium by a Belgian team and under Belgian management," enthuses Professor Jacques Verly , one ankle workers of the project.

Oufti (for Orbital Utility For Telecommunication Innovations) will be the first satellite relay to be equipped with D- STAR , a digital communications protocol for radio amateurs. Enthusiasts with necessary equipment can use for free , on request. But the CubeSat remains primarily a teaching and experimental tool , which forty students worked . Some of them have since found work in large aerospace companies.

Its life in space will not exceed one year , due to radiation from the sun that eventually in the long run by damaging its components. Its orbiting is expected around January 1, 2015 , prior to which he must undergo and pass a series of tests to check its resistance in space conditions.


Par: rédaction
25/11/13 - 17h13  Source: Belga

Après six années de mise au point, le nano-satellite Oufti-1 vient d'être assemblé et devrait être lancé dans l'espace aux alentours du 1er janvier 2015. Ce CubeSat est le premier satellite belge et a été entièrement élaboré par des étudiants de l'ULg.
Il mesure à peine 10 centimètres de haut, pèse entre 1 et 1,3 kilo et abrite pourtant une multitude de technologies de pointe: panneaux solaires, batterie avec régulation technique, système de télécommunication... Le CubeSat Oufti est désormais équipé pour atteindre l'orbite, quelque part à 600 kilomètres environ de la Terre.

Ce nano-satellite mis au point depuis 6 ans par des étudiants de l'Université de Liège vient d'être assemblé. "S'il atteint l'orbite, il s'agira du premier satellite (petit ou grand) immatriculé en Belgique, réalisé en Belgique par une équipe belge et sous management belge", se réjouit le professeur Jacques Verly, l'une des chevilles ouvrières du projet.

Oufti (pour Orbital Utility For Telecommunication Innovations) sera le premier satellite relais à être équipé de D-STAR, un protocole numérique de télécommunication pour radioamateurs. Les passionnés équipés du matériel nécessaire pourront l'utiliser gratuitement, sur demande. Mais le CubeSat reste d'abord un outil pédagogique et expérimental, sur lequel une quarantaine d'étudiants ont travaillé. Certains d'entre eux ont depuis trouvé du travail dans de grandes entreprises aérospatiales.

Sa durée de vie dans l'espace n'excédera pas un an, en raison des radiations du soleil qui finiront à la longue par abîmer ses composants. Sa mise sur orbite est prévue aux alentours du 1er janvier 2015, date avant laquelle il devra subir et réussir une série de tests pour vérifier sa résistance dans des conditions spatiales.


Fusée Soyouz lance télescope spatial européen Gaia du Centre spatial guyanais à Kourou

12/19/13 - 10:53 Source: Belga

© epa.


Une fusée Soyouz emportant le télescope spatial européen Gaia a décollé jeudi matin du Centre spatial guyanais à Kourou, selon une retransmission via internet diffusée par la société Arianespace.

Le lanceur a décollé à 9H12 GMT (06H12 heure de Guyane, 10H12 heure de Paris). Le satellite Gaia, qui mesurera avec une précision inégalée la distance d'un milliard d'étoiles de notre galaxie, doit se séparer de l'étage supérieur de la fusée après 41 minutes et 59 secondes de vol. Avant la séparation, le satellite enverra un premier signal radio à la station de Perth (Australie) de l'Agence spatiale européenne (ESA). Mais les contrôleurs de mission du Centre des opérations de l'ESA (Esoc) à Darmstadt (Allemagne) vivront encore de longues minutes de suspense.

"Après la séparation, Gaia doit encore effectuer une séquence automatisée critique, qui comprend la pressurisation de ses propulseurs de contrôle d'attitude et le déploiement de sa jupe pare-soleil, une étape très délicate", a expliqué Dave Milligan, responsable des opérations pour Gaia. "Pendant environ 17 minutes, nous risquons de perdre le contact radio", a-t-il précisé dans un communiqué de l'ESA, ajoutant que ces minutes seraient "très longues et tendues" dans la salle de contrôle.

Si tout va bien, Gaia sera positionné à environ 1,5 million de kilomètres de la Terre, sur un emplacement privilégié, le point de Lagrange 2. Sa mission doit durer cinq années au total -voire six- pendant lesquelles le satellite localisera un milliard d'étoiles, chacune étant observée environ 70 fois. Plus de 99% d'entre elles n'ont jamais eu leur distance mesurée avec précision.

The 9/11 Truth Movement - 911truth.org

See this link: The 9/11 Truth Movement - 911truth.org

Welcome to 911Truth.org, where you can explore the facts about 9/11, learn about the 9/11 Truth Movement and find answers to your questions about the 9/11 attacks.

Ever since the moment of the first impact at the World Trade Center, a struggle has raged between two broad, competing ideas of what really happened on September 11th, 2001.

The US administration delivered an almost immediate verdict, which can be described as follows: Dispatched by Osama Bin Ladin’s network and motivated by hatred and religious fanaticism, 19 suicide bombers hijacked four planes, crashed three of them into their targets, and caused the collapse of the Twin Towers as a consequence of the resulting damage and fires. The 19 men did not necessarily require any accomplices within the United States; and no one in the US government could have possibly anticipated or prevented the attacks.

Even as the administration exploited this Official Story (or “Official Conspiracy Theory”) as the pretext to launch new wars long in the making, independent researchers began to accumulate a vast body of evidence suggesting a different narrative for 9/11: that of the False Flag Operation.

The 9/11 events and the anomalies in the official story raised Unanswered Questions about:

the unprecedented failure of the US air defense system on the morning of the attacks;

the AWOL military chain of command during the actual attacks, including the inexplicable behavior of the presidential entourage;

the seeming impossibility of official claims with regard to Flight 77;

the evidence that Flight 93 was shot down;

contradictions and dubious evidence in the official claims about the alleged hijackers and masterminds, and doubts about their real identities;

signs that the alleged hijackers enjoyed high-level protection against discovery by honest investigators;

evidence that the alleged hijackers were financed by states allied with US intelligence;

suspicious and massive international financial trades suggesting foreknowledge of the attacks;

widespread signs of official foreknowledge and, in fact, advance preparation for the 9/11 attack scenario;

the long-running links between Islamist fundamentalist terror cells and US covert operations, dating back to CIAsupport for the anti-Soviet mujahedeen and Osama Bin Ladin himself;

the demolition-like collapse of the Twin Towers and of a third skyscraper, WTC 7;

and questions concerning who could have logically expected to derive benefit in the aftermath of a massive attack on the United States.

The suspicions received further confirmation a few weeks after September 11th, with the arrival of anthrax letters targeted only at opposition politicians and media figures, and timed to coincide with the introduction of the USA PATRIOT Act.

Already within those first weeks, loose networks of researchers and investigators formed via the Internet to generally become known as the “9/11 skeptics.” They presented substantial bodies of evidence to show that elements within the US government must have been involved in facilitating or orchestrating the attacks – in other words, that 9/11 was possibly a classic case of “false-flag” or synthetic terrorism, such as corrupt states have often perpetrated on their own citizens.

What motive would people in the US government or establishment have to commit crimes of this magnitude? The outrage caused by September 11th allowed the Bush administration to instantly implement policies its members have long supported, but which were otherwise infeasible. 9/11 was exploited to launch an open-ended, perpetual “war on terror,” actually a war against any and all enemies the US government may designate. The case of Iraq shows that the target countries of this war need have nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11.

The invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan were both planned and prepared in advance of September 11th, with the apparent motive of gaining geostrategic advantage and seizing vital resources. The architects of the Iraq invasion within the Bush administration had earlier been members of the Project for a New American Century. In the PNACmanifesto of September 2000 (“Rebuilding America’s Defenses”), they admitted that the American people would be unwilling to pay the stiff price for US global hegemony, full-spectrum military dominance, and the imposition of a new order in the Middle East – unwilling, that is, in the absence of a catalyzing event, an epochal lesson such as a “new Pearl Harbor.”

9/11 put the nation on a permanent war footing, allowed the extension of secrecy doctrines, and temporarily deified the President. The unprecedented public fear was stoked and exploited to allow a roll-back of domestic rights and liberties, as had long been advocated by key members of the Bush administration (and their allies in both major parties). 9/11 allowed the designation of “enemy combatants” in violation of international law; preventive detention and the open use of torture; the activation of long-standing “shadow government” plans; the passage of measures officially undermining constitutional government; and a wholesale re-definition of US geopolitics and American society itself.

Perhaps most important of all to potential conspirators, trillions of dollars in spending priorities were predictably shifted from “butter” to “guns” in the years after September 11th, unleashing a new wave of growth and profiteering in the war and security industries. 9/11 became a pretext for economic crisis management and transformation under the cover of war and counterterror.

From the beginning, those who doubted the official story saw the potential for achieving a different kind of global transformation. By exposing the great fraud to the public, the 9/11 dissidents hoped to reverse the policies adopted after September 11th; to end the wars; to reveal a long and sordid history of covert operations, black budgets and hidden economics; to wake up the American people to the reality of the globalist drive to corporate feudalism, which is destroying the natural environment and the lives of the planetary majority; and to motivate the people to act against this sea of troubles.

The first two years after September 11th saw the rise of the Families’ Movement, which kept the issue of the “unanswered questions” alive, and which forced the creation of the official 9/11 Commission. The Bush administration acted to delay, stonewall and starve all official investigations – with the complicity of the mainstream media, who ignored the festering questions or at best ridiculed those who asked them.

Many signs confirmed that there was indeed a 9/11 Cover-up: outrageous conflicts of interest within official investigating bodies, such as the appointment of Henry Kissinger and then Philip Zelikow to the 9/11 Commission;destruction of evidence; the silencing of whistleblowers; and the promotion of the very officials who were responsible for the supposed failures of September 11th. For many, the 9/11 cover-up itself became the smoking gun pointing to wrongdoing: the untenable excuses of massive serial incompetence; the endless coincidences; the insulting fairy tale that “no one could have imagined planes as weapons”; the omission and suppression of any evidence contradicting the official story.

Syria, Sarin gas and other lies

First of all, the Chemical Weapons Industry was birthed in the United States and when the U.S. Congress outlawed export of all Chemical Weapons from the United States and mandated the destruction of the Chemical Weapons stockpiled here in the United States, U.S. Military Intelligence and the CIA pillaged all they could and sent them to both Iran and Iraq to destroy as many people as they could in the Iran-Iraq war. The Chemical Weapons experts in the U.S. knew that the rockets we had stockpiled would backfire and destroy a user's own troops - this is exactly what happened to Iran. Another genocide that Ollie North was involved in.

Passing Gas in Syria and Endless Israeli “False Flag” Attacks | Veterans Today

Sunday, August 25th, 2013 | Posted by Jim Fetzer

Passing Gas in Syria and Endless Israeli “False Flag” Attacks

by Jim Fetzer

“I am comfortable that Assad deployed a nerve agent in East Damascus.”–Michael Shrimpton, Veterans Today

Michael Shrimpton

In my opinion, no serious analyst of affairs in the Middle East takes the claim that the Assad government has used chemical weapons in Syria as accurate and true–which means that at least one of my colleagues here at Veterans Today is not a serious analyst of Middle East affairs.  
The very idea that the government of Syria would launch a nerve agent attack as a UN inspection team is about to arrive to investigate previous gas attacks is politically absurd.
That is on a level with the bombing in Bulgaria that killed five Israeli tourists and was blamed on a Canadian to provide pseudo-justification for passing extreme “anti-terrorism” legislation by Canada’s neo-con government, which appears to be playing “catch up” in its efforts to compete with its own version of the PATRIOT Act.  These are obvious “false flag” attacks.
Both are examples of the kind of blatant propaganda brought to us by Israel in the past, including the attack on the King David Hotel in Palestine in 1946 by Irgun terrorists dressed as Arabs, the attack on the USS Liberty in 1967, and the bombing of its own Embassy in Argentina in 1992 and–when too few Jews were killed–of its own Jewish Community Center in 1994.
Israel’s involvement in the atrocities of 9/11 has been copiously documented–right down to the painting of the Twin Towers being hit by aircraft on the side of a truck from Urban Moving Systems, which was used to bring the “Dancing Israels” from Liberty State Park, where they had been filming the demolition of the World Trade Center and celebrating in Arab clothing. This is only the latest in a long line of fabricated events in the tradition of the Mossad’s motto, “Make War by Deception”.

YouTube - Veterans Today -

Any competent analyst could see it coming when Benjamin Netanyahu baited Barack Obama into “drawing a red line” representing an action by the Syrian government that would require a response by the United States. When he said that the use of chemical weapons would be a “game changer”, we all knew that Netanyahu would see that it was done.  How any serious person could be taken in by such blatant stunts is beyond me. I am shocked that someone at VT should fall into that category.

____________________________________

Experts Doubt Syrian Chemical Weapons Claims

Washington’s Blog
(August 24, 2013)- CBS News reports that the U.S. is finalizing plans for war against Syria – and positioning ships to launchcruise missiles against the Syrian government – based on the claim that the Syrian government used chemical weapons against its people.

The last time the U.S. blamed the Syrian government for a chemical weapons attack, that claim was was debunked.

But is the claim that the Syrian government used chemical weapons against its people true this time?

It’s not surprising that Syria’s close ally – Russia – is expressing doubt.  Agence France-Presse (AFP)notes:

Russia, which has previously said it has proof of chemical weapons use by the rebels, expressed deep scepticism about the opposition’s claims.
The foreign ministry said the timing of the allegations as UN inspectors began their work “makes us think that we are once again dealing with a premeditated provocation.”

But Russia isn’t the only doubter.

AFP reports:

“At the moment, I am not totally convinced because the people that are helping them are without any protective clothing and without any respirators,” said Paula Vanninen, director of Verifin, the Finnish Institute for Verification of the Chemical Weapons Convention.
“In a real case, they would also be contaminated and would also be having symptoms.”
John Hart, head of the Chemical and Biological Security Project at Stockholm International Peace Research Institute said he had not seen the telltale evidence in the eyes of the victims that would be compelling evidence of chemical weapons use.
“Of the videos that I’ve seen for the last few hours, none of them show pinpoint pupils… this would indicate exposure to organophosphorus nerve agents,” he said.
Gwyn Winfield, editor of CBRNe World magazine, which specialises in chemical weapons issues, said the evidence did not suggest that the chemicals used were of the weapons-grade that the Syrian army possesses in its stockpiles.
“We’re not seeing reports that doctors and nurses… are becoming fatalities, so that would suggest that the toxicity of it isn’t what we would consider military sarin. It may well be that it is a lower-grade,” Winfield told AFP.

YouTube - Veterans Today -

Haaretz reports:

Western experts on chemical warfare who have examined at least part of the footage are skeptical that weapons-grade chemical substances were used, although they all emphasize that serious conclusions cannot be reached without thorough on-site examination.
Dan Kaszeta, a former officer of the U.S. Army’s Chemical Corps and a leading private consultant, pointed out a number of details absent from the footage so far: “None of the people treating the casualties or photographing them are wearing any sort of chemical-warfare protective gear,” he says, “and despite that, none of them seem to be harmed.” This would seem to rule out most types of military-grade chemical weapons, including the vast majority of nerve gases, since these substances would not evaporate immediately, especially if they were used in sufficient quantities to kill hundreds of people, but rather leave a level of contamination on clothes and bodies which would harm anyone coming in unprotected contact with them in the hours after an attack. In addition, he says that “there are none of the other signs you would expect to see in the aftermath of a chemical attack, such as intermediate levels of casualties, severe visual problems, vomiting and loss of bowel control.”
Steve Johnson, a leading researcher on the effects of hazardous material exposure at England’s Cranfield University who has worked with Britain’s Ministry of Defense on chemical warfare issues, agrees that “from the details we have seen so far, a large number of casualties over a wide area would mean quite a pervasive dispersal. With that level of chemical agent, you would expect to see a lot of contamination on the casualties coming in, and it would affect those treating them who are not properly protected. We are not seeing that here.”
Additional questions also remain unanswered, especially regarding the timing of the attack, being that it occurred on the exact same day that a team of UN inspectors was in Damascus to investigate earlier claims of chemical weapons use. It is also unclear what tactical goal the Syrian army would have been trying to achieve, when over the last few weeks it has managed to push back the rebels who were encroaching on central areas of the capital. But if this was not a chemical weapons attack, what then caused the deaths of so many people without any external signs of trauma?
***
The Syrian rebels (and perhaps other players in the region) have a clear interest in presenting this as the largest chemical attack by the army loyal to Syrian President Bashar Assad to date, even if the cause was otherwise, especially while the UN inspectors are in the country. It is also in their interest to do so whilst U.S. President Barack Obama remains reluctant to commit any military support to the rebels, when only the crossing of a “red line” could convince him to change his policy.
The rebels and the doctors on the scene may indeed believe that chemical weapons were used, since they fear such an attack, but they may not have the necessary knowledge and means to make such a diagnosis. The European Union demanded Wednesday that the UN inspectors be granted access to the new sites of alleged chemical attacks, but since this is not within the team’s mandate, it is unlikely that the Syrian government will do so.

Stephen Johnson, an expert in weapons and chemical explosives at Cranfield Forensic Institute, said that the video footage looked suspect:

There are, within some of the videos, examples which seem a little hyper-real, and almost as if they’ve been set up. Which is not to say that they are fake but it does cause some concern. Some of the people with foaming, the foam seems to be too white, too pure, and not consistent with the sort of internal injury you might expect to see, which you’d expect to be bloodier or yellower.

YouTube - Veterans Today -

Chemical and biological weapons researcher Jean Pascal Zanders said  that the footage appears to show victims of asphyxiation, which is not consistent with the use of mustard gas or the nerve agents VX or sarin:

I’m deliberately not using the term chemical weapons here,” he said, adding that the use of “industrial toxicants” was a more likely explanation.

Michael Rivero asks:

1. Why would Syria’s Assad invite United Nations chemical weapons inspectors to Syria, then launch a chemical weapons attack against women and children on the very day they arrive, just miles from where they are staying?
2. If Assad were going to use chemical weapons, wouldn’t he use them against the hired mercenary army trying to oust him? What does he gain attacking women and children? Nothing! The gain is all on the side of the US Government desperate to get the war agenda going again.
As I type these words, US trained and equipped forces are already across the border into Syria, and US naval forces are sailing into position to launch a massive cruise missile attack into Syria that will surely kill more Syrians than were claimed to have died in the chemical attack.

Last time there was a chemical weapon attack in Syria, Bush administration office Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson said that he thought Israel might have given chemical weapons to the Syrian rebels to frame the government.
British MP George Galloway just floated the same theory in regards to the new chemical weapon attack.

YouTube - Veterans Today -

Of course, we don’t know who carried out the attack, or what weapon was used.
But given the well-documented fact that the U.S. has been planning regime change in Syria for 20 years straight – and planned to use false ploys for 50 years – it is worth being skeptical until all of the evidence is in.
Indeed, many are asking whether this is Iraq War 2.0.   For example, the Independent writes:

Pictures showing that the Syrian army used chemical weapons against rebel-held Eastern Ghouta just east of Damascus are … likely to be viewed sceptically because the claims so much resemble those made about Saddam Hussein’s possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) before the US and British invasion of Iraq in 2003.
***
Like the Iraqi opposition to Saddam, who provided most of the evidence of WMDs, the Syrian opposition has every incentive to show the Syrian government deploying chemical weapons in order to trigger foreign intervention.

But the obvious fact that for the Syrian government to use chemical weapons would be much against their own interests does not prove it did not happen. Governments and armies do stupid things. But it is difficult to imagine any compelling reason why they should do so since they have plenty of other means of killing people in Eastern Ghouta, such as heavy artillery or small arms, which they regularly use.

The evidence so far for the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian army is second-hand and comes from a biased source.

Jim Fetzer is a former Marine Corps officer, McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth and a journalist and editor for Veterans Today.

Related Posts:

• Prof. James H. Fetzer: Washington Overtly Supporting Al-Qaeda in Syria
• Armageddon Visible from the Rear View Mirror
• US Attack on Syria Would Violate International Law
• Obama postpones World War III Till Next Week
• Israel main beneficiary of US attack on Syria

Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=265560

The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT or any other VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors or partners. Legal Notice

Posted by Jim Fetzer on Aug 25 2013, With 3960 Reads, Filed under WarZone. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.          

Palestine Cry: Intelligence Fusion Centers | Public Intelligence

Reference, see: NSA has turned its surveillance apparatus on the US 

and together with this: black helicopters


Intelligence Fusion Centers | Public Intelligence

Intelligence Fusion Centers

October 9, 2009 in Government

• Part of domestic surveillance system that incorporates private contractors, federal government, military, and local law enforcement
• Originally organized by the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice
• Provide federal authorities with access to local databases and legally protected information concerning law-abiding citizens
• Often function with military liaisons and integrate with National Guard
• Often at undisclosed locations listing only post office boxes as physical addresses
• As of July 2009, approximately 72 fusion centers exist nationwide

Overview

“Fusion center” is a generic term for entities which are designed to integrate federal intelligence efforts with the state and local authorities.  As of July 2009, there are 72 fusion centers around the country and one in nearly every state.¹ These entities work under the auspices of local law enforcement, often integrating with the state’s police force, Department of Justice, or Office of Emergency Management.  The fusion center integrates law enforcement intelligence activities throughout the jurisdiction, providing federal authorities access to local information and databases, while simultaneously allowing federal agencies to disseminate intelligence materials to local authorities.   There are often federal representatives present in local fusion centers, either from civilian or military sources.  The Department of Homeland Security lists 36 active field representatives as of July 2009 and a number of fusion centers are integrated with their state’s National Guard through “liaison officers”.²

This combination of collection and dissemination creates a unique situation where larger federal agencies are able to simultaneously influence local law enforcement activities while gaining access to substantial amounts of private information on American citizens.  An article from Time magazine in early 2009 notes that:

“New Mexico’s All Source Intelligence Center, housed in an old National Guard building, has access to 240 state, regional and federal agencies and their databases, including agricultural and parks agencies, according to Peter Simonson, executive director of the state’s ACLU chapter. Establishing what kinds of information is being processed by fusion centers can be difficult, Simonson says, since they do not store the records, or even collect them, but simply mine them through digital gateways. Records are accessed, not retained as they would be in specific case or investigative files. Simonson says the New Mexico chapter of the ACLU has filed several open records requests seeking to find out what kind of information is being reviewed, but has been stymied by the lack of a “material product.”³

The article also lists current Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano as being instrumental in the formation of one of the first state fusion centers.  The American Civil Liberties Union has published several reports which are highly critical of fusion centers, equating their operations with the formation of a domestic spy force.  One of their reports states that:

If the federal government announced it was creating a new domestic intelligence agency made up of over 800,000 operatives dispersed throughout every American city and town, filing reports on even the most common everyday behaviors, Americans would revolt. Yet this is exactly what the Bush administration is trying to do with its little-noticed National Strategy for Information Sharing, which establishes state, local and regional “fusion centers” as a primary mechanism for the collection and dissemination of domestic intelligence.⁴

The report goes on to note that a 2008 Los Angeles Police Department order required officers to collect information on the seemingly mundane, everyday behaviors of American citizen. “LAPD Special Order #11, dated March 5, 2008, states that it is the policy of the LAPD to ‘gather, record, and analyze information of a criminal or non-criminal nature, that could indicate activity or intentions related to either foreign or domestic terrorism,’ and includes a list of 65 behaviors LAPD officers ‘shall’ report.”  Some of the suspicious behaviors include taking notes, drawing diagrams and using binoculars.

Other fusion centers are listed in the report as having massive amounts of data on ordinary law-abiding citizens.  The report states that:

“In addition to access to FBI and even CIA records, fusion centers often have subscriptions with private data brokers such as Accurint, ChoicePoint, Lexis-Nexus, and LocatePlus, a database containing cellphone numbers and unpublished telephone records. According to the article, fusion centers have access to millions of “suspicious activity reports” sent to the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, as well as hundreds of thousands of identity theft reports kept by the Federal Trade Commission.”

“Pennsylvania buys credit reports and uses face-recognition software to examine driver’s license photos, while analysts in Rhode Island have access to car-rental databases. In Maryland, authorities rely on a little-known data broker called Entersect, which claims it maintains 12 billion records about 98 percent of Americans …  Massachusetts … taps a private system called ClaimSearch that includes a “nationwide database that provides information on insurance claims, including vehicles, casualty claims and property claims.”⁵

There have also been a number of incidents involving fusion centers infiltrating protest groups.  One example of this is the Washington Joint Analytical Center’s infiltration of the Olympia Port Militarization Resistance, an antiwar group.  John J. Towery, a Fort Lewis civilian contractor who worked for the Army’s Fort Lewis Force Protection Unit, posed as an anarchist and was fed information on the group by the WJAC.⁶  A document released March 5, 2009 by Wikileaks.org demonstrates that Army Fusion Cells, which are organized by Force Protection Units, are part of a domestic police intelligence operation which is designed to work with local law enforcement to, among other things, “identify and prevent disruptive actions by private protestors”. ⁷

The National Intelligence Strategy of 2009 argues for increasing this policy information sharing and eliminating the barriers between classified military intelligence and civilian law enforcement.  In September 2009, Federal Computer Week reported that the Department of Defense will begin sharing some classified information with local law enforcement. ⁸

Locations and Contact Information

The following list is believed to be accurate at this time.  If you have any information regarding these or other fusion centers please let us know.

Alabama

Criminal Information Center
301 South Ripley Street
Montgomery, Alabama 36104

PO Box 1511 Montgomery, AL 36102-1511
334-353-1172

-Component of Alabama Bureau of Investigation

Alaska

Alaska State Troopers Statewide Law Enforcement Information Center
101 E. 6th Ave.
Anchorage, Alaska, 99501
(907) 276-4441

-Located at FBI Alaska HQ: Anchorage Division Office

Arizona

Arizona Counter Terrorism Information Center (ACTIC)
Arizona Department of Public Safety
Post Office Box 6638
Phoenix, AZ 85005
602-644-5805

-Engaged with power, water companies, chemical sector, transportation such as trucking and rail transport.  Contact point for local Infraguard chapter. Works with Arizona Division of Emergency Management (ADEM) which has developed relationship with the private sector, through the creation of the Arizona Emergency Response Commission (AZSERC), which has involved over 100 participants representing all 23 identified sectors, including over 70 companies.

California

State Terrorism Threat Assessment Center (STTAC)

California National Guard JFHQ
P.O. Box 269101
Sacramento, CA 95826-9101
sttac@doj.ca.gov

-This address is listed for military liaison officers working with STTAC.

Anti-Terrorism Information Center 
Attorney General’s Office California Department of Justice
Attn: Public Inquiry Unit
P.O. Box 944255 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550
(916) 322-3360 or (Toll-free in CA) (800) 952-5225

-Component of the California Department of Justice. Staffed with analysts from FBI, local and state law enforcement.

Northern CA Regional Terrorism Threat Assessment Center (RTTAC) 
P.O. Box 36102
San Francisco, CA 94102
(866) 367-8847

-TITAN website allows access by private sector, etc. to receive intelligence bulletins; security and safety information

Regional Terrorism Threat Assessment Centers (RTTAC)

Sacramento Regional Terrorism Threat Assessment Center
sacrttac@sacsheriff.com
(888) 884-8383
(916)808-8383

-Integrates with FBI JTTF and serves as contact point for Sacramento Infragard

San Francisco Regional Terrorism Threat Assessment Center 
415-436-8096
(866) 367-8847
mmarty@nca.hid

Joint Regional Intelligence Center (JRIC) (Los Angeles) 
12440 East Imperial Highway
Norwalk, CA 90650

San Diego Regional Terrorism Threat Assessment Center
(858) 495-5730

Los Angeles Regional Terrorism Threat Assessment Center
(562) 345-1100

Colorado

Colorado Information Analysis Center
9195 E. Mineral Ave
Centennial, CO 80112
720-852-6705

Website

Connecticut

Connecticut Intelligence Center (CTIC)
DEMHS
25 Sigourney Street, 6th Floor
Hartford,CT 06106-5042
(203) 777-6311

866-HLS-TIPS

Delaware

Delaware Information Analysis Center (DIAC)
Department of Safety and Homeland Security Office of the Secretary
303 Transportation Circle Dover , DE 19903
P.O. Box 818
Dover , DE 19903
(302) 744-2680
800-FORCE-1-2

-DIAC staffed with 4 full-time Delaware State Police Criminal Intelligence Analysts and 2 analysts provided through DE National Guard.

District of Columbia

Multiple Threat Alert Center (MTAC) 
Naval Criminal Investigative Service Headquarters
716 Sicard St, SE Ste 2000
Washington Navy Yard, DC 20388-5380
(202) 433-3858

-Component of Naval Criminal Investigative Service. Engages private entities that are involved with Navy critical infrastructure, such as contractors that would be managing research facilities, waste handling, power plants, etc. several thousand facilities under their purview, mostly notifications on what potential threats are, how to protect from such a threat; provides them with information that would be provided to military about threats, etc., as required by law.

Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force
935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20535
(703) 553-7991

-Component of the Federal Bureau of Investigation

Florida

Florida Fusion Center (formerly Counter Terrorism Intelligence Center)

Post Office Box 1489
Tallahassee, FL 32302
(850) 410-7060

-Component of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement)Does not have any sort of database/storage/data collection procedure independent of the Office of Statewide intelligence, which the center is a part of current data collection procedure/storage must involve a defined criminal predicate.

Georgia

Georgia Information Sharing and Analysis Center (GISAC)
P.O. Box 29649
Atlanta, Georgia 30359
(404) 486 6420

-Coordinating operations with the Atlanta FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force

Illinois

Statewide Terrorism & Intelligence Center
2100 S. Dirksen Parkway
Springfield, IL 62703
(217) 782-7938
1-877-ILL-STIC

Indiana

Indiana Intelligence Fusion Center
Indiana Government Center South
302 West Washington Street, Room E243
Indianapolis, IN 46204
866-400-IIFC

Iowa

Iowa Intelligence Fusion Center
Region 5 Fusion Center, located in Des Moines Police Dept
Wallace State Office Building
Des Moines, IA 50319
25 East First Street
Des Moines, Iowa 50309
(515) 242-6124

Kansas

Kansas Threat Integration Center 
2800 Topeka Boulevard
Room 13
Topeka, KS 66611
(785) 274-1822

-Component of Kansas State Bureau of Investigation

Kentucky

Kentucky Intelligence Fusion Center
Kentucky Office of Homeland Security
200 Mero Street
Frankfort, KY 40622
(502) 564-2081

Website

Louisiana

Louisiana State Analytical & Fusion Exchange (LA-SAFE)
(Part of LA state police)
7919 Independence Blvd.
Baton Rouge, LA 70806
(225)-925-1978,
(800)-434-8007

Maine

Maine Intelligence Analysis Center
Maine Information and Analysis Center
45 Commerce Dr. Suite 1
Augusta, Maine 04333
207-624-7287

Maryland

Maryland Coordination and Analysis Center
Ste 130, 7125 Ambassador Rd
Woodlawn, MD 21244, 443-436-8800.
443-436-7702
800-492-TIPS

-Component of MD state police and Antiterorrism Advisory Council of MD. Private sector working group at center; 15 reps from private sector groups to work on how to structure relationship between center and private entities; Finance and transportation sectors have been strong in getting and sharing info. Transportation partners include Amtrak, CSX, some airlines, metro, light rail. U.S. Army involved in force protection that stands watch; not involved in analysis of data

Massachusetts

Commonwealth Fusion Center
124 Acton Street, 2d Floor
Maynard, MA 01754
Phone: 978-451-3700
Fax: 978-451-3707
Tipline: 888-USA-5458
fusion@pol.state.ma.us

Website

New England State Police Information Network® (NESPIN) RISS Intelligence Center (Region includes: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont)
124 Grove Street, Suite 105
Franklin, MA 02038

RISS Number:
(508) 528-8200

Minnesota

Minnesota Joint Analytical Center
Minnesota Department of Public Safety Central Office, Town Square Building
444 Cedar Street
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101
(612) 341-7002

-Formerly under the direction of MN Division of Homeland Security Emergency Management, now under State Police.  Relationships with the private sector: critical infrastructure representative at fusion center; partnerships with utilities companies, security (corporate, hospitals, universities including University of Minnesota and University of Minnesota-Duluth, as well as some of the larger private colleges).

Montana

Montana All-Threat Intelligence Center (MATIC) 
Division of Criminal Investigation Department of Justice
2225 11th Avenue
P.O. Box 201417
Helena, MT 59620-1417
(406) 444-3874

-Component of the Montana Department of Justice, Division of Criminal Investigation

New Hampshire

NH Department of Safety Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Incident Management Center
110 Smokey Bear Blvd
Concord, NH 03301

33 Hazen Drive
Concord, NH 03305
Local (603) 271-2231
Toll free (800) 852-3792

-Director of Homeland Security and Emergency Management is the State’s primary contact with the federal Department of Homeland Security and counterparts in other states. Federal involvement in NH Department unknown.

New Jersey

Regional Operations and Intelligence Center (ROIC)
New Jersey State Police
P.O. Box 7068
West Trenton, NJ 08628
609-882-2000

-Under the New Jersey State Police.  Analysts include state police employees, traditional police analysts, folks from govt (ATF, FBI, coast guard) and analysts from NJ Office of Homeland Security and Preparedness

New Mexico

New Mexico Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management’s All Source Intelligence Center (ASIC)
13 Bataan Blvd.
Santa Fe, NM 87504
505-476-9600

New York

Upstate New York Regional Intelligence Center (UNYRIC) 
630 Columbia St
Latham, NY 12110
(866) 486-9743

-(Component of the NY State Police)

Rockland County Intelligence Center (RCIC) 
Post Office Box 295
New City, NY 10956
(877) 724-6835

-Component of the Rockland County Sheriff’s Office

New York City Police Department Intelligence Division (NYPD INTEL)
NYPD switchboard: 646-610-5000

North Carolina

North Carolina Regional Analysis Center
3320 Garner Road
Raleigh, NC 27601
(800) 334-3000

North Dakota

North Dakota Homeland Security Fusion Center
PO Box 5511
Bismarck, ND 58506
(866)-885-8295

-Component of the North Dakota Bureau of Investigations.

Ohio

Strategic Analysis and Information Center
1970 West Broad Street
Columbus, Ohio 43223
(614) 466-6178

Oregon

Terrorism Fusion Center (TITAN)
610 Hawthorne Avenue, SE
Suite 210
Salem, OR 97301
(800) 442-6248

-Component of the Oregon State Police and the Oregon Department of Justice.

Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania Criminal Intelligence Center (PaCIC) 
1800 Elmerton Avenue
Harrisburg, PA 17110
(717) 772-4140

-Component of the Pennsylvania State Police.

Middle Atlantic-Great Lakes Organized Crime Law Enforcement Network^® (MAGLOCLEN) RISS Intelligence Center
140 Terry Drive, Suite 100
Newtown, PA 18490
(215) 504-4910

-Region includes: Delaware, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia.

Rhode Island

Rhode Island State Fusion Center 
311 Danielson Pike
North Scituate, RI 02857
(401) 444-1026

-Within Rhode Island State Police

South Carolina

South Carolina Fusion Center 
PO Box 21398
Columbia, SC 29210
(803) 896-7008

-Component of the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division.

South Dakota

South Dakota Fusion Center
118 West Capitol Avenue
Pierre, SD 57501
605.773.3450

-Within South Dakota Department of Homeland Security.

Tennessee

Tennessee Regional Information Center
Tennessee Bureau of Investigations
901 R.S. Gass Boulevard
Nashville, Tennessee 37216
877.250.2333

Texas

Texas Intelligence Center
Texas Department of Public Safety Criminal Intelligence Service
Texas Intelligence Center
P.O. Box 4087
Austin, Texas 78773-0425
(512) 424-7981
Website

- All hazards system that can be accessed remotely, contains public health, emergency response and law enforcement portals. Servers located at Center; system links together local databases, such as records management system from local law enforcement agencies.

North Central Texas Fusion System

http://www.fusionsystem.us/

Utah

Utah Criminal Intelligence Center
Department of Public Safety, Division of Homeland Security
Post Office Box 140200
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-0200
(801) 579-4413

Virginia

Virgina Fusion Center
Post Office Box 27472
Richmond, VA 23261
(804) 674-2000

Vermont

Vermont Fusion Center
The Vermont Fusion Center Law Enforcement Support Center
Williston, Vermont 05495
802-872-6110

Washington

Washington Joint Analytical Center (WAJAC)
P.O. Box 42600
Olympia, WA 98504-2600
(360) 753-6540

-Works with private sector to report suspicious activity. Includes utilities and Microsoft. In negotiations to have Boeing provide an analyst for the center; working on issues and threat assessments relating to critical infrastructure and also act as a liaison reflecting the needs of business community with regards to homeland security issues.

West Virginia

West Virginia Joint Intelligence Fusion Center (WVJIFC)
1900 Kanawha Blvd., East
Bldg 1, Rm W-400
Charleston, WV 25305
Phone: (304) 558-4831
Toll Free: 1-866-WVWATCH
Fax: (304) 558-6592
wvfusion@wv.gov

Website

-Component of West Virginia Dept of Military Affairs and Public Safety

Wisconsin

Wisconsin Statewide Information Center
Post Office Box 7857
Madison, WI 53707-7857
608-266-1671

Source notes:

1. DHS – State and Local Fusion Centers [↩]
2. Ibid. [↩]
3. Time.com – Fusion Centers: Giving Cops Too Much Information? [↩]
4. ACLU – Fusion Center Update July 2008 [↩]
5. Ibid. [↩]
6. Antifascist calling . . .: U.S. Intelligence Budget: $75 billion, 200,000 Operatives [↩]
7. Spying on anti-war protesters: US Army Concept of Operations for Police Intelligence Operations, 4 Mar 2009 [↩]
8. fcw.com – DOD opens some classified information to non-federal officials [↩]