I'm almost certain that there is evidence of former rail infrastructure on Fort Hill but it has been ages since I've been there so take that with a barrel of salt. I recall so many rights-of-way on so many military bases that I very well could be wrong.
And to add some very unfortunate and tragic depth to the idea of training for assaults against "domestic terrorists" one has to remember that we're now most likely training to deal with the post 1980s iteration of a terrorist.
From the 1960s through the early 1990s the majority of the "terrorism" we had to deal with was the sort that took hostages/hijack aircraft and then had a list of demands that were to be met in exchange for the lives of the hostages. These demands were normally accompanied by some sort of anti-Israeli and anti-American statement due to the friction caused by the creation of Israel, the mass displacement of the Palestinian people caused by this event and America's supporting role in the creation and continuation of a free Jewish State. Pan Am Flight 103 and the Marine Barracks bombing in Beirut are two of the more obvious exceptions to this.
What we're dealing with now is a man or woman motivated by politics or warped versions of religions to get into a positon to kill many of the enemy and then to do so. While I am certain that the military is training for assaults on "domestic terrorists" in situations such as commuter trains, it is likely that the intensity and amount of this training is not as great as would be counter-insurgency (COIN) or urban warfare training. Most terrorism, sadly, is going to be reported a few minutes after something explodes. This type of warrior is most likely not going to give us a chance to stop them once they have acquired materials and accessed thier target.
I'm not saying for certain that the Army wouldn't buy some units to train (can't avoid that pun...) on because I don't know that for a fact. Just a hunch.
Be well. Do good work.
Semperfidelis
