..................
Q: The issue of terrorism or some kind of a terroristic threat against U.S. assets, specifically the Pentagon, closing visitation for two days, I believe -- today and tomorrow. What can you tell us about... Is this a foreign threat?
A: Well I can tell you first of all, that we haven't totally closed visitation because you're all here, so we are continuing our operations in a fairly normal way.
Let me just say that we get a variety of information about the security of the building from time to time. Some of this is passed on to us by the FBI, some of it we collect on our own. We respond appropriately to that information in a way designed to protect the security of the building and the security of the people who work in the building.
As you know, the entire department -- starting with the military but also spreading through the civilian ranks -- has become much more attuned to force protection since the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia. This is true all across the Defense Department infrastructure, military and civilian.
What happened here was that we did receive some information through the FBI. Some of it was credible, some of it wasn't very credible. But when it was evaluated by the FBI and by the Defense Protective Service, which has to make the final determination here based on the information it gets, the DPS, Defense Protective Service, decided there should be a one notch increase in the security posture of the Pentagon, and that's what you've seen.
You may notice from time to time that when you come in the building it will say threat con normal. That's what it says almost every day. Today it's moved up one notch to threat con alpha. The definition of threat con alpha is a general threat of possible terrorist activity against installations, building locations, and/or personnel, the nature of which and the extent of which are unpredictable.
As I said, this is the first notch up. The most severe warning state or threat condition state is called threat con delta. You can see we've moved up from normal to alpha, and we have a long way to go. But that was a prudent step to protect the building and the people in it.
Q: What was the nature of the threat?
A: The nature of the threat was a possible terrorist action against the building. I don't want to go into specifics at this stage.
Q: Just the Pentagon or other military...
A: This was limited to the Pentagon.
Q: What's the practical effect of moving the security up one notch?
A: Well, the practical effect is there's a heightened security presence around the building. You see more people dressed in utility outfits, Ninja-type outfits. There are more vehicles stationed around the building. There are more people at the gates as you come in. There will be more Defense Protective Service agents working around the metro stop. There will be increased attention given to vehicles coming in and out of the building, in and out of the whole reservation area, the 500-odd acres here. Just basically greater vigilance and greater security presence.
Now actually, Bill asked about one response, which is that we have discontinued some of the Pentagon tours, the public tours, temporarily until the threat condition returns to normal. We anticipate that that will be for today and tomorrow.
Q: Is it normal to post what your threat con is? Would you do a delta...
A: Remarkably, it is normal. We post it every day in most of these areas, and that's really a way to alert the staff, the people who work here, that there is a change, in this case a slight change, in the security posture.
Q: Is there... Do you know yet from the FBI if this threat is foreign, from some organized terrorist group of some kind of a notification from a foreign...
A: I don't think I want to get into a great deal of detail about the threat at this stage. The FBI is still working very hard to verify the threat. As I said, some elements of this threat are credible and some elements of the threat are not credible, and that's frequently the case with most threats, that you're weighing the quality of information against what you learned from other sources, against your database, against experience, and deciding exactly what action to take. In this case the Defense Protective Service led by Chief Jester, made a one-notch rise in the threat condition.
Q: Is it in response to any incident or situation, any particular situation?
A: It's in response to information that came into the hands of the FBI.
Q: I mean the threat. Does the threat appear to be in response to...
A: No, not that we can tell. It does not seem to be in response to a particular action or incident associated with the Pentagon.
Q: Does the FBI, was the FBI able to indicate any sort of motivation or purpose on behalf of whoever was considering doing this action, whatever it is?
A: I think that, not with any great specificity.
Q: Does it affect Secretary Cohen's personal schedule at all or his travel at all?
A: It has not reflected in his personal schedule. His personal security is adjusted according to conditions, and if any adjustment is required, I'm sure it will be made.
Q: Under what sort of threat would it be necessary to evacuate the Pentagon?
A: Well, it would have to be a much more detailed, much more credible, and much more specific threat than we have today.
....................Press: Thank you.