- Jim Hoffman has discovered a document which I believe
may be very important to the 911 skeptic movement. This document superseded
earlier DOD procedures for dealing with hijacked aircraft, and it requires
that Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld is personally responsible for issuing
intercept orders. Commanders in the field are stripped of all authority
to act. This amazing order came from S.A. Fry (Vice Admiral, US Navy and
Director, Joint Staff) so it appears to me that responsibility for the
US armed forces "Failure to Respond" rests directly with Fry
for issuing this instruction, as well as with Donald Rumsfeld for failing
to execute his responsibility to issue orders in a timely fashion.
- Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction CJCSI
3610.01A (dated 1 June 2001) was issued for the purpose of providing "guidance
to the Deputy Director for Operations (DDO), National Military Command
Center (NMCC), and operational commanders in the event of an aircraft piracy
(hijacking) or request for destruction of derelict airborne objects."
This new instruction superseded CJCSI 3610.01 of 31 July 1997.
- This CJCSI states that "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
- Reference D refers to Department of Defense Directive
3025.15 (Feb. 18, 1997) which allows for commanders in the field to provide
assistance to save lives in an emergency situation -- BUT any requests
involving "potentially lethal support" (including "combat
and tactical vehicles, vessels or aircraft; or ammunition") must still
be approved by the Secretary of Defense. So again, the ability to respond
to a hijacking in any meaningful fashion, is stripped from the commanders
in the field.
- While none of this relieves the Bush Administration from
ultimate responsibility from 911, nevertheless there is the possibility
that this discovery could somewhat diffuse the power of our movement's
message about the "Stand Down", since it is now clear that it
was implemented through a routine administrative memo.
- If this comes up as an issue at the Washington 911 cover-up
commission, it would be interesting if Fry could testify as to the reasoning
behind making it bureaucratically impossible for the DOD to respond to
hijackings in a timely fashion.
- The relevant documents are on the Web at:
- Best regards,
- Jerry Russell