The construction had been delayed for months due to bitter controversies about the design of the tower, the finances of the huge project and the form of the memorial to the almost 3,000 people who died when al-Qaeda attacked the World Trade Center towers and other targets on Sept. 11, 2001.

The Freedom Tower will dominate the site and is to stretch up 1,776 feet - a height chosen to match the date of U.S. independence from Britain.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, state Gov. George Pataki and developer Larry Silverstein welcomed construction workers and heavy equipment to the site of the $2.1-billion US project Thursday morning.

"It will reclaim New York's skyline and establish a new civic icon for our city and our nation," Silverstein Properties said on the company's website.

The site of the tower is owned by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. The public body has been in tough negotiations with Silverstein over the financial terms of the project, but the parties finally reached a deal on Tuesday.

As well as the Freedom Tower, the site will eventually include three new office towers and residences, as well as a memorial, museum and cultural centre devoted to those killed in the attacks.

Construction could take six years.

It's unclear when Fitzgerald sent the target letter to Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin. Sources close to the two-year-old leak investigation said when Rove's attorney received the letter Rove volunteered to appear before the grand jury for an unprecedented fifth time to explain why he did not previously disclose conversations he had with the media about covert CIA operative Valerie Plame and her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who criticized the Bush administration's use of pre-war Iraq intelligence.

A federal grand jury target letter is sent to a person in a criminal investigation who is likely to be indicted. In a prepared statement Wednesday, Luskin said Fitzgerald indicated that Rove is not a "target" of the investigation. A "target" of a grand jury investigation is a person who a prosecutor has substantial evidence to link to a crime.

Last week, Rove was stripped of some of his policy duties in a White House shakeup orchestrated by incoming Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten. The White House insisted that Rove was not demoted, but insiders said the executive branch is bracing for a possible indictment against Rove.

Luskin was accompanying Rove to US District Court in Washington, DC, Wednesday morning and unavailable for comment. Rove was told by Fitzgerald's staff that his testimony could last for as long as three hours.

In an interview last week, Luskin confirmed that Rove was a "subject" of Fitzgerald's probe. In a previous interview, Luskin asserted that Rove would not be indicted by Fitzgerald, but he was unwilling to make that same prediction again during an interview last week.

"Mr. Fitzgerald hasn't made any decision on the charges and I can't speculate what the outcome will be," Luskin said in an interview last week. "Mr. Rove has cooperated completely with the investigation."

Luskin said Rove has not been offered any plea deal by Fitzgerald and Rove has cooperated with the probe voluntarily. He said Rove's cooperation is not contingent upon any plea agreement.

People close to the case said that Fitzgerald has presented additional evidence to the grand jury in the past week that shows Rove lied to federal investigators and a grand jury eight out of the nine times he was asked about his knowledge of the leak since October 2003.

Should Wednesday's court appearance by Rove provide the grand jury with answers to lingering questions, Rove may not be charged with obstruction of justice, but will likely be indicted for perjury and lying to investigators, sources close to the case said.

For one, according to the sources close to the investigation, the likelihood that Rove will be charged with perjury centers on the fact that Rove has testified at least three times that he first discovered that Plame worked for the CIA after her name was printed in a July 2003 newspaper report by conservative columnist Robert Novak. Evidence has since surfaced that shows Rove spoke to Novak about Plame prior to Novak's published report in which Novak outed the undercover CIA officer.

Moreover, Rove did not disclose that he had also been a source for a story about Plame written by Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper, and Rove testified that he was not involved in a campaign to discredit or attack the credibility of Plame's husband, Ambassador Wilson, when at least two dozen witnesses have testified before the grand jury that Rove was in fact instrumental in the smear campaign on Wilson.

Rove's grand jury appearance Wednesday is crucial in determining whether he will face a charge of obstruction of justice for not turning over an explosive email that was written moments after his July 2003 conversation with Time's Cooper. Rove volunteered to testify before the grand jury Wednesday to explain why he did not disclose and locate the email for more than a year, sources close to the case said.

Luskin said that Rove simply forgot about his conversation with Cooper when he testified before the grand jury because Rove had been dealing with other pressing matters, such as Bush's reelection campaign.

Rove's story began to unravel when Fitzgerald discovered the existence of an email Rove sent to then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley after he spoke with Cooper on July 11, 2003, which Hadley and Rove did not disclose to the special prosecutor or hand over to his probe, sources close to the case said.

"I didn't take the bait," Rove wrote in the email to Hadley immediately following his conversation with Cooper. "Matt Cooper called to give me a heads-up that he's got a welfare reform story coming. When he finished his brief heads-up he immediately launched into Niger. Isn't this damaging? Hasn't the president been hurt? I didn't take the bait, but I said if I were him I wouldn't get Time far out in front on this."

In December, desperate to keep his client out of Fitzgerald's crosshairs, Luskin became a witness in the case when he made an explosive revelation to Fitzgerald.

Luskin revealed to Fitzgerald that Viveca Novak - a reporter working for Time magazine who wrote several stories about the Plame Wilson case - inadvertently tipped him off in early 2004 that her colleague at the magazine, Matt Cooper, would be forced to testify that Rove was his source who told him about Plame Wilson's CIA status.

Novak - who bears no relation to syndicated columnist Robert Novak, the journalist who first published Plame Wilson's name and CIA status in a July 14, 2003, column - met Luskin in Washington, DC, in the summer of 2004, and over drinks, the two discussed Fitzgerald's investigation into the Plame Wilson leak.

Luskin assured Novak that Rove learned Plame Wilson's name and CIA status after it was published in news accounts and that only then did he phone other journalists to draw their attention to it. But Novak told Luskin that everyone in the Time newsroom knew Rove was Cooper's source and that he would testify to that in an upcoming grand jury appearance, these sources said.

According to Luskin's account, after he met with Viveca Novak he contacted Rove and told him about his conversation with her. The two of them then began an exhaustive search through White House phone logs and emails for any evidence that proved that Rove had spoken with Cooper. Luskin said that during this search an email was found that Rove sent to Hadley immediately and it was subsequently turned over to Fitzgerald.

Still, Rove's account of his conversation with Cooper went nothing like he described in his email to Hadley, according to an email Cooper sent to his editor at Time magazine following his conversation with Rove in July 2003.

"It was, KR said, [former Ambassador Joseph] Wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized [Wilson's] trip," Cooper's July 11, 2003, email to his editor said.

As one of the founders of Farm Aid, I have watched with admiration and a good amount of satisfaction the growth of what many now call the "Good Food Movement" -- the growing interest in and demand for organic, humanely-raised and family farm-identified food that is transforming the way America grows its food and how our food gets to our tables.

While it might seem obvious to many, good food comes from farms with healthy soil and clean water. I've always believed that the most important people on the planet are the ones who plant the seeds and care for the soil where they grow. As the stewards of the land, family farmers are the foundation of this movement, as well as its guarantor.

No one can say they planted the original seed that gave rise to this movement, but many can claim they have helped nurture and cultivate its growth. Farm Aid's vision for America is to have many family farmers on the land -- a vision born out of our strong conviction that who grows our food and who cares for the land and water is of vital national importance; that farmers and their fields are the fabric that holds our country together.

Many have asked me, "What is the Good Food movement?" The Good Food movement isn't just about good and delicious food -- although this is certainly one of its greatest achievements. The Good Food movement is at the center of some of the most important issues and debates that will define American society for years to come: issues like stewardship of our soil and water, local and democratic control of decision making and land use, health and nutrition and a thriving and sustainable food and farm economy needed to feed and fuel America.

While good, healthy, fresh food from family farms is the most visible product of the movement that each of us can enjoy, the movement stands for much more. It represents the interests of all who care about the future of this land, its resources and its people. As members of this movement and as eaters, the food we choose to buy connects us directly to those who produced it and to the multiple reasons why it is in our own interests to see this movement flourish.

Natural resources

The future of safe and sound food production depends on taking care of the most basic resources needed to grow food: soil and water. Family farmers eat the food they grow in their fields and drink the water from their wells. They know that they have to take care of the soil and water in order to pass on the promise of the farm's bounty to the next generation. Sustainable family farms are the alternative to the large-scale industrial farms that erode our soil and pollute our waterways. Excessive chemicals, soil erosion, runoff from hog factories laced with hormones and antibiotics and the growing threats of widespread genetic contamination from genetically engineered crops threaten our capacity to grow the food we need to feed our country. By supporting family farms through the Good Food movement, we are all helping to ensure that our children and our children's children inherit a healthy and resilient environment.

Health and nutrition

Good food leads to good nutrition and good health. There's no comparison between fresh, organic food at the local farmers market and the mass-produced, additive-laden, highly processed stuff that corporations would have us think is real food. The rising epidemics of childhood obesity and diabetes are clearly linked to the highly processed food peddled to kids and served in school cafeterias. The Good Food movement is helping to turn this situation around, bringing farm-fresh food grown by local farmers into school lunch programs. A diet of fresh, wholesome food will improve health outcomes for kids and provide new direct markets for family farmers.

Strong local economies

Family farms are the engines for economic vitality, in both rural communities as well as urban areas that benefit from jobs created by vibrant local and regional food systems. When family farms thrive, so do main street businesses. The Good Food movement is creating new markets and opportunities that help farmers stay on their land and provides hope for new and young farmers to make farming their life. A growing number of those now participating in direct farm-to-consumer marketing are first generation farmers! The more we keep farming local, the stronger the community. Participating in local and regional food and farm markets helps keep food dollars circulating in the local economy -- rather than increasing the profits of distant corporations that suck the dollars and the life out of our communities.

Energy

Many Americans are becoming aware of the startling and troubling fact about our food system known as "food miles:" on average, each food item travels 1500 miles before arriving to our tables. It makes little sense to burn fossil fuels that pollute the environment to ship apples across the country and around the world when local growers can provide us with fresh apples, the purchase of which keeps dollars in the local economy. By strengthening local food production, the Good Food movement is reducing the distance food travels and the ecological footprint of American agriculture.

Keeping farmers on their land also enables them to use their know-how and ingenuity to help us achieve more energy independence. Farmers are key to our energy future -- growers and harvesters of renewable energy that will power our vehicles and heat our homes. Farm Aid is working to link The Good Food and Green Energy movements as two sides of the family farm-centered agriculture system we envision.

Animal Welfare

The Good Food movement increases the demand for humanely-raised beef, pork and poultry products by family farms. As opposed to the factory livestock farms, where thousands of animals are raised under one roof and never see the light of day their entire lives, family farm-raised animals are fed natural diets and allowed to live in healthy conditions with access to open pastures.

Democracy

I believe keeping family farmers on the land is inextricably linked to a strong and thriving democracy. Thomas Jefferson wrote, "cultivators of the earth are the most valuable citizens...they are tied to their country and wedded to its liberty and interests by the most lasting bonds." Family farmers are the backbone not only of a strong economy; they are also the defenders of local, democratic control of decision making.

In communities across farm country, large and powerful food corporations are working their political connections at the State House and on Capitol Hill to change local and state laws to take local control and decision-making away from communities, stripping local communities of their democratic right of self-determination. In many examples, corporations are working to change state laws so that communities cannot block the construction of hog factories.

We live in a time when all of us must take our responsibility to exercise our democratic rights seriously -- before it's too late. Family farmers are standing up for their rights -- and they're standing up for our rights too. The Good Food movement is about democracy at the grassroots level- building decentralized, sustainable and locally controlled farm and food economies.

Farm Fresh Food

And yes, the Good Food movement is about better food. Growing up in Texas, I learned at an early age the difference between a fresh tomato, a fresh farm egg and the stuff most other people eat and think is food. There is just no way to compare a family-raised ham to a ham from a factory farm, or fresh strawberries to berries shipped thousands of miles. To understand this, you have to taste it yourself. The next time you drive by your local farmers market, stop by and pick up some farm-fresh food. I guarantee you won't regret the flavor and freshness of food from the family farm.

Growing the Movement

If you enjoy good food and care about the issues behind this movement, I invite you to take action today to ensure the future of family farming and your right to choose food from family farms. The most direct and regular action you can take is to search out and buy as much of your food directly from farm families in your area. Our food choices today shape tomorrow's agriculture. Buying organic milk today strengthens tomorrow's outlook for organic dairy farmers. Think about one food item that you can buy from local farmers and commit to buying it. These small and simple actions are building the Good Food movement and changing American agriculture for the better.

The other opportunity we have to further this movement is the upcoming debate over the next Farm Bill. If you value good food from family farms, call your legislator and demand a Farm Bill that strengthens local and regional food economies.

If you care about local and democratic control, demand a Farm Bill that curbs the power of factory farms and the influence of lobbyists for large food corporations. If you care about health and nutrition for children, demand a Farm Bill that puts more fresh, wholesome food in our cities' schools. If you want your children and grandchildren to enjoy the benefits of a clean environment, demand a Farm Bill that increases protection of our natural resources by helping farmers transition to organic and more sustainable growing methods. The future of good food depends on you.

Other congressional aides already have testified about the March 29th confrontation. The Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call reported Tuesday that the officer involved, Paul McKenna, testified before the grand jury within the past week.

McKenna has said he asked the Georgia Democrat three times to stop. After she refused, the officer reportedly placed a hand on her and she hit him. McKinney at first said she was the victim of racial profiling but later apologized on the House floor April 6th for what she said was a "misunderstanding."

There are easily verifiable problems with air and noise pollution, exacerbated by the oversized craft. And, critics fear, there are secret plans to turn PDK into Hartsfield North.

A very savvy reporter at WSB-TV (Boortz bellows forth from WSB 750AM radio), Dale Cardwell, turned up a new and very scary problem. Many flights in and out of PDK are listed on records as "unknown." Pilots flying low, under what are called visual flight rules, avoid FAA detection, and show up as "unknown" -- no aircraft type, no registration number, no info at all. Our Homeland Security is very insecure when it comes to private planes.

So, as he always does, Boortz launched a fusillade at critics, this time at fellow Coxopoly employee Cardwell. Boortz said Cardwell's report was "another sensational scare piece."

I pulled records from PDK and found that on one day alone, about half the flights were "unknown." The last time I'd written about general aviation airports was in Miami -- where private planes formed the Drug Runners Squadron. I've sat on my sailboat in the Keys and watched smugglers toss "square grouper" from their planes as cops chased them.

So, of course, it stands to reason, as Cardwell surmised, that the small planes and willfully ignorant airport officials could be tools of terrorists. Boortz went ballistic, fuming on Feb. 27 that the Congressional Research Service had concluded in a report that trucks were more likely to be a platform for a terrorist attack than the "light GA (general aviation) aircraft." Probably true, but as I noted above, a lot of the planes landing at PDK aren't light aircraft. They're DC-9s and Gulfstream 5s. Since we don't know anything about all of the "unknowns" at PDK, presumably these very big and very heavy planes are landing and taking off with records.

Boortz knows that, of course.

And it gets worse. According to an April 21 Reuters report: "The Transportation Security Administration has warned aircraft owners and airport managers that Muslim extremists may be targeting private American jets and urged them to boost security."

The report further stated: "The TSA urged airplane owners and operators to boost security measures and secure unattended aircraft and verify identification of crew and passengers."

Did you get that -- verification of crew and passengers? But we don't know anything about, as I saw in the records, almost half of the flights at PDK. Osama bin Laden, the Antichrist and Hitler's ghost could be crewing a Gulfsteam 5 (one of the plane types whose presence at PDK angers neighbors), and no one would ever know.

So, if someday you see a mushroom cloud rising out over Dunwoody, or people in your neighborhood start dropping dead from the plague, be sure and call Boortz's radio show and tell him, "Thanks, Neal."

P.S.: The date that Boortz lambasted Cardwell -- Feb. 27 -- is significant. It was during that time that Boortz, according to records I obtained from the airport, was vigorously lobbying DeKalb CEO Vernon Jones to renew a contract for the "Pentagon Club." Boortz and a bunch of drinking flyboys commandeered the old control tower at PDK years ago, and use it to party hearty (and probably do a bit of flying after the cocktails).

The club paid a paltry $250 a month for years for the tower; Jones recently approved a new lease for $300 a month. As I reported, other groups offered several multiples of that for the taxpayer-owned facility. Jones is about the only prominent local black official to escape Boortz's frequent race-baiting venom.

The apparent quid pro quo is that Boortz keeps mum on Jones, and Jones allows the imbibing pilots to keep their taxpayer-subsidized playpen.

The latest contract with the Pentagon Club was pushed through the county in the last two weeks of February. Thus, Boortz's attack on Cardwell can be seen as a bit of public relations work on behalf of the county -- while Boortz's club was sealing its new deal.

Conflict of interest? That's putting it mildly.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon Club's president, Larry King (no, not THAT Larry King) not only confirmed Boortz's lobbying activities for the outfit, but said several DeKalb public officials are members of the club and also lobbied Jones to renew the lease.

Jones has told me that he doesn't recall Boortz lobbying on behalf of the club. Jones also has refused to reveal any public officials -- some perhaps in his own executive office -- who might have spoken to him as members of the club.