Rummy MIA til 10:39

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-07-2004
Rummy MIA til 10:39
3
Fri, 08-13-2004 - 6:48pm
Published on Friday, August 13, 2004 by the Los Angeles Times

Rumsfeld and Bush Failed Us on Sept. 11

by Gail Sheehy



Donald Rumsfeld, one of the chief opponents of investing real power over purse and personnel in a new national intelligence chief, told the 9/11 commission that an intelligence czar would do the nation "a great disservice." It is fair to ask what kind of service Rumsfeld provided on the day the nation was under catastrophic attack.

"Two planes hitting the twin towers did not rise to the level of Rumsfeld's leaving his office and going to the War Room? How can that be?" asked Mindy Kleinberg, one of the widows known as the Jersey Girls, whose efforts helped create and guide the 9/11 commission. The fact that the final report failed to offer an explanation is one of the infuriating holes in an otherwise praiseworthy accounting.

Rumsfeld was missing in action that morning — "out of the loop" by his own admission. The lead military officer that day, Brig. Gen. Montague Winfield, told the commission that the Pentagon's command center had been essentially leaderless: "For 30 minutes we couldn't find" Rumsfeld.

For more than two hours after the Federal Aviation Administration became aware that the first plane had been violently overtaken by Middle Eastern men, the man whose job it was to order air cover over Washington did not show up in the Pentagon's command center. It took him almost two hours to "gain situational awareness," he told the commission. He didn't speak to the vice president until 10:39 a.m., according to the report. Since that was more than 30 minutes after the last hijacked plane crashed, it would seem to be an admission of dereliction of duty.

Rumsfeld's testimony before the commission last March was bizarre. Asked point-blank by Commissioner Jamie Gorelick what he had done to protect the nation — or even the Pentagon — during the "summer of threat" preceding the attacks, Rumsfeld replied simply that "it was a law enforcement issue." That obfuscation — was the FBI expected to be out on the Beltway with shoulder-launched missiles? — has been accepted at face value by the commission and media.

Rumsfeld is in charge of NORAD, which has the specific mission of protecting the United States and Canada by responding to any form of air attack. The official chain of command in the event of a hijacking calls for the president to empower the secretary of Defense to send up a military escort and, if necessary, give shoot-down orders.

Yet President Bush told the panel he spoke to Rumsfeld for the first time that morning shortly after 10 a.m. — 23 minutes after the Pentagon was hit and moments before the last plane went down. It was, says the report, "a brief call in which the subject of shoot-down authority was not discussed."

As a result, NORAD's commanders were left in the dark about what their mission was. When fighters were told to scramble from Langley, Va., they were sent not to cover Washington but on a fool's mission to tail and identify American Airlines Flight 11, which was already boiling the first Trade Center tower to the ground.

Why wasn't Rumsfeld able to see on TV what millions of civilians already knew? After the Pentagon was attacked, why did he run outside to play medic instead of moving to the command center and taking charge? The 9/11 report records the fatal confusion in which command center personnel were left: Three minutes after the FAA command center told FAA headquarters in an update that Flight 93 was 29 minutes out of Washington, D.C., the command center said, "Uh, do we want to, uh, think about scrambling aircraft?"

FAA headquarters: "Oh, God, I don't know."

Command center: "Uh, that's a decision somebody's going to have to make probably in the next 10 minutes."

But nobody did. Three minutes later, Flight 93 was wrestled to the ground by heroic civilians.

How is it that civilians in a hijacked plane were able to communicate with their loved ones, grasp a totally new kind of enemy and weaponry and act to defend the nation's Capitol, yet the president had "communication problems" on Air Force One and the nation's defense chief didn't know what was going on until the horror was all over?

The failures of 9/11 were not inherent in the system; they were human failures. Yet, so far, no one has been fired, which leaves the 9/11 families — and all of us — in a conundrum.

The inaction of both the president and the Defense chief under the ultimate test offer little reassurance to a nervous nation under the shadow of new terror warnings. Before we attempt to revamp the entire security system, shouldn't our government look first at why the people in charge failed to communicate or coordinate a response to the catastrophe?





iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Fri, 08-13-2004 - 8:52pm
Yet another biased view from an ultra left-wing paper looking to place blame where the 9/11 commission could not.

Sorry.....that holds no water.

Again, as I have stated time and time again, Bush perhaps could have done a little more, but Clinton (more his administration) is the one that failed the nation so terribly leading to 9/11.

Oh, and I love how Jamie Gorelick asked Rumsfeld the question about what he did to protect the Pentagon, etc......lets see what Gorelick did...oh wait, we cant because she was sitting on the commission when she should have been testifying before it.


Appointing John Deutch to head the CIA, and then listening to Deutch who recommended cutting the Human Intelligence capabilities of the CIA by over 60% to rely on electronic intelligence.

Adopting the Torricelli principle which basically disallowed the CIA from dealing with "unsavory" people as informants.

Cutting funding to the CIA and the military community.

I could go on, but you see the point.

If Bush is guilty, then Clinton is even moreso, using the logic of those that blame Bush.

Look at the math....Bush in office about 229 days when 9/11 happened....Clinton in office 2920 days while al Qaeda grew during his term. Where is the logic in the argument of the article in the LA Times. To me it is left wing propoganda. The bottom line is Congress and the intelligence community are the ones that failed us.

I read this same load of stupidity when the media tried to blame Robert Mueller, even though he had been the head of the FBI for just over a week.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-30-2004
Fri, 08-13-2004 - 9:10pm
That's absurd to blame Clinton for Muslim terrorism. It is even absurd to blame Bush, even though 9/11 happened on his watch.

You want to place blame? Here's what you blame.

Islamic terrorism actually started over one thousand years ago. Muslims have been using violence against others for many centuries. There have been many, many wars and many millions killed in the name of Islam.

Islamic terrorists groups, in one shape or form, have been around for centuries. They attack whoever gets involved with them.

The U.S. is involved because we have backed Israel for years, and have backed moderate non-fundamentalist Muslim regimes (some better than others), more than say the South Americans have.

That's why America is a target for the Islamic terrorists. Israel is also a target, as is India, as are moderate Muslim regimes. All those places are involved in one way or another, with Muslims.

The South Americans are not involved with Muslims and have few Muslims there, and don't let them immigrate there. Because the South Americans are not involved with Muslims, they are not a target.

If you get involved with Muslims, you get their Jihad, their Holy War against you the infidels.

That goes back to the early days of Islam, many centuries ago.

The more involvement with Muslims, the more there is conflict with them. Read your history, it is obvious.


Edited 8/13/2004 9:12 pm ET ET by bridgettao

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Fri, 08-13-2004 - 10:34pm
That is where the blame lies, but if someone in the US government is accountable, then just due to the days on watch, and what was done under their administration, Clinton wins hands down.

His administration did more to set back the CIA than any other administration, period.