Smoking Gun #523 - Change to "Stand Down" order June 2001

[Duer 157099]

OK, I don't know that it's really number 523.

But, please check this page out:

http://911review.com/means/standdown.html

This site seems to be very reasoned and rational in its examination of 9/11.

Prior to June 2001, the military protocol for errant aircraft over the U.S. was to default to intercept mode -- meaning, in the absence of any order, deviant aircraft were to be immediately intercepted.

In June of 2001, this standing order was changed such that thenceforth, ONLY an order by the Secretary of Defense (Rumsfeld) could activate an air intercept. In other words, if Rumsfeld doesn't explicitly give the order to intercept, it doesn't happen.

And, Rumsfeld is on record as saying that when the Pentagon was hit, he had no idea what had happened -- suggesting that he was "somehow" out of the loop altogether.

Just chew on this piece for awhile, and share it with your friends and family who think you're a CT nutcase. If nothing else shows that 9/11 was nicely set-up, this should at least suggest it.

[savemefromdumbya]

1. Odd that happened in June 2001

[LARED]

2. Can you point out in the document where

this change took place. This is a rather old "smoking gun" that has never actually shown to be of any substance as far as I can tell.

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

[Duer 157099]

3. Did you try here?

http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/analysis/norad/docs/intercept_proc.pdf

edit: oh, now I see you mean where in the document... ok, hold on a bit..

There's a discussion here that might be helpful:

http://911review.com/articles/russell/standdown.html

But perhaps you are asking for a quote from the original (1997) version?

http://permanent.access.gpo.gov/websites/dodandmilitaryejournals/www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/d302515_021897/d302515p.pdf

and

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:fNUYkTQFLKsJ:www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/cjcsd/cjcsi/3610_01.pdf+3610.01&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2

edit again: Is the salient question whether the original (pre-June2001) document did not contain the spec that the Sec of Def authorize?

[Shoestring]

4. This requirement was not new

Actually, the predecessor to this Instruction, CJCSI 3610.01, issued on July 31, 1997, had the same requirement for Defense Secretary approval in response to a hijacking. It says:

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.

The document is online here:
http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/cjcsd/cjcsi/3610_01.pdf

I still find this interesting. Has Rumsfeld ever been asked whether he was contacted on the morning of 9/11 by the NMCC, in line with the CJCSI? I don't think so.

[Mnemosyne]

5. Rumsfeld was too busy stuffing his pockets

with the missing 2.3 trillion dollars missing from the Pentagon that he had announced at a press conference the day before to pay attention to happenings on 9/11.

Evil bastard.