Criminal Mastermind: Donald Rumsfeld (Rules on Hijack changed)

[BikeWriter]

There is a set of procedures for responding to hijackings. In particular, these procedures were changed on June 1, 2001 while Rumsfeld was in power as our Secretary of Defense, in a document called: "CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF INSTRUCTION, J-3 CJCSI 3610.01A"
(www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/cjcsd/cjcsi/3610_01a.pdf)

"AIRCRAFT PIRACY (HIJACKING) AND DESTRUCTION OF DERELICT AIRBORNE OBJECTS"
These are the standing orders to the military as to how to respond to hijackings over United States territory. The June 1 '01 document deliberately changed the existing policies. Previous directives were issued in 1997, 1986 and before.

http://anderson.ath.cx:8000/911/pen09.html

[DoYouEverWonder]

1. Then on 9-11 Rummie and Wolfowitz

sat in Rummie's office at the Pentagon while the attack was under way. When they were told a 2nd plan had hit the WTC, Rummie & Wolfie decided to just continue on with their meeting, since according to Wolfie, 'there was nothing we could do about it anyway'.

[BikeWriter]

2. I was with NORAD in the 1960s. I'd wondered since 9/11...

how they'd been kept from completing their mission.

[DoYouEverWonder]

3. Here's the transcript that is still posted on the DOD website

Q: This is a feature magazine and people want to know a little about you so let me just lead you through a few questions there.

One is, where were you on September 11th? Were you at the Pentagon when --

Wolfowitz: I was in my office. We'd just had a breakfast with some congressmen in which one of the subjects had been missile defense. And we commented to them that based on what Rumsfeld and I had both seen and worked on the Ballistic Missile Threat Commission, that we were probably in for some nasty surprises over the next ten years.

Q: Oh, my gosh.

Wolfowitz: I can't remember, then there was the sort of question of what kind of nasty surprises? I don't remember exactly which ones we came up with. The point was more just that it's in the nature of surprise that you can't predict what it's going to be.

Q: Do you remember then the impact of the plane into the Pentagon? Or had you first heard stories about New York? What was --

Wolfowitz: We were having a meeting in my office. Someone said a plane had hit the World Trade Center. Then we turned on the television and we started seeing the shots of the second plane hitting, and this is the way I remember it. It's a little fuzzy.

Q: Right.

Wolfowitz: There didn't seem to be much to do about it immediately and we went on with whatever the meeting was. Then the whole building shook. I have to confess my first reaction was an earthquake. I didn't put the two things together in my mind. Rumsfeld did instantly.

Q: Did he really?

Wolfowitz: Yeah. He went charging out and down to the site where the plane had hit, which is what I would have done if I'd had my wits about me, which may or may not have been a smart thing to do. But it was, instead the next thing we heard was that there'd been a bomb and the building had to be evacuated. Everyone started streaming out of the building in a quite orderly way. Congregated on the parade ground basically right in front of the Pentagon which would have been about the worst place to have a crowd of a couple of thousand people in that moment if we'd again had our wits about us. But we were out of the building anyway.

http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2003/tr20030509-depsecdef0223.html


There didn't seem to be much to do about it immediately and we went on with whatever the meeting was. WTF? Human beings don't react to such horror in this way.

[BikeWriter]

4. The change in engagement orders has been discussed...

on Randi Rhode's Show. I don't know why I never heard of it before. I'd like to know what Congress thought about it.

http://forums.therandirhodesshow.com/index.php?showtopic=59178

[BikeWriter]

5. The topic has been under discussion here before:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=46392&mesg_id=46571

[DoYouEverWonder]

6. So Rummie deliberately changed the policy

on June 1, 2001 and he knew he was the only one with the power to launch a response to an attack. Then he sat in his office that morning with Paul Wolfowitz, Rep Cox and others and did nothing while he watched the attack unfold. The attack on the WTC was perfect. Beyond their wildest dreams. But then things started to go wrong.

All of the planes were supposed to depart by 8:00 AM but they didn't. The attack was supposed to have been over by 9:00 AM. Unfortunately, one plane Flight 93 screwed everything up. Flight 93 got stuck for 45 minutes and that forced Bush and his men to go into a stall. They had to diddle around until at least one more plane hit. So Rummie, Cheney, Myers and Bush sat around and did nothing for 30 - 45 minutes. THEY FAILED TO LEAD ON PURPOSE.

[BikeWriter]

7. That is the only explanation I see for changing...

the 1997 procedures, yes.

[BikeWriter]

8. Kick!

[Duer 157099]

9. I was looking into this the other day, and came to this roadblock:

I could not find, specifically, where in the 1997 document it said that the Sec of Def *did not* have to authorize such an intercept. In other words, how are we certain that this really changed in June 2001? I know where in the June 2001 doc it specifies this, but it doesn't say that this wasn't how it always was. Know what I mean?

Can someone show me the exact wording of the prior (1997) protocol that differs in this regard from that issued in June 2001?

[Make7]

10. Here is how they differ:

From CJCSI 3610.01, issued July 31, 1997:

4. Policy

a. Aircraft Piracy (Hijacking) of Civil and Military Aircraft. The Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), pursuant to the title 49, USC, section 44903(e), has exclusive responsibility to direct law enforcement activity and may request DOD assistance in responding to an actual or suspected air piracy (hijacking) under the authority contained in Enclosure A. Reference a establishes the role of the NMCC to serve as the focal point for coordinating DOD assistance to the FAA. In the event of a hijacking, the NMCC will be notified by the most expeditious means by the FAA. The NMCC will monitor the situation and forward all requests or proposals for DOD military assistance for aircraft piracy (hijacking) to the Secretary of Defense for approval. DOD assistance to the FAA will be provided in accordance with reference b. Additional guidance is provided in Enclosure B.

http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/cjcsd/cjcsi/3610_01.pdf

From CJCSI 3610.01A, issued June 1, 2001:

4. Policy

  a. Aircraft Piracy (Hijacking) of Civil and Military Aircraft. Pursuant to references a and b, the Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), has exclusive responsibility to direct law enforcement activity related to actual or attempted aircraft piracy (hijacking) in the "special aircraft jurisdiction" of the United States. When requested by the Administrator, Department of Defense will provide assistance to these law enforcement efforts. Pursuant to reference c, the NMCC is the focal point within Department of Defense for providing assistance. In the event of a hijacking, the NMCC will be notified by the most expeditious means by the FAA. The NMCC will, with the exception of immediate responses as authorized by reference d, forward requests for DOD assistance to the Secretary of Defense for approval. DOD assistance to the FAA will be provided in accordance with reference d. Additional guidance is provided in Enclosure A.

http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/cjcsd/cjcsi/3610_01a.pdf

- Make7

[BikeWriter]

11. Rumsfeld crippled my old unit, NORAD! He should answer for it.