1
   

Panel says Bush saw repeated warnings

 
 
Reply Tue 13 Apr, 2004 11:40 pm
Panel says Bush saw repeated warnings
Tenet: 'System was blinking red'
By Dana Priest - Washington Post
Updated: 11:35 p.m. ET April 13, 2004

By the time a CIA briefer gave President Bush the Aug. 6, 2001, President's Daily Brief headlined "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US," the president had seen a stream of alarming reports on al Qaeda's intentions. So had Vice President Cheney and Bush's top national security team, according to newly declassified information released yesterday by the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

In April and May 2001, for example, the intelligence community headlined some of those reports, "Bin Laden planning multiple operations," "Bin Laden network's plans advancing" and "Bin Laden threats are real."

The intelligence included reports of a hostage plot against Americans. It noted that operatives might choose to hijack an aircraft or storm a U.S. embassy. Without knowing when, where or how the terrorists would strike, the CIA "consistently described the upcoming attacks as occurring on a catastrophic level, indicating that they would cause the world to be in turmoil," according to one of two staff reports released by the panel yesterday.

"Reports similar to these were made available to President Bush in the morning meetings with [Director of Central Intelligence George J.] Tenet," the commission staff said.

The information offers the most detailed account to date of the warnings the intelligence community gave top Bush administration officials, and provides the context in which a CIA briefer put together a memo on Osama bin Laden's activities in the Aug. 6 PDB for Bush.

The government moved on several fronts to counter the threats. The CIA launched "disruption operations" in 20 countries. Tenet met or phoned 20 foreign intelligence officials. Units of the 5th Fleet were redeployed. Embassies went on alert. Cheney called Crown Prince Adbullah of Saudi Arabia to ask for help. National security adviser Condoleezza Rice asked the CIA to brief Attorney General John D. Ashcroft about an "imminent" terrorist attack whose location was unknown.

"The system was blinking red," Tenet told the commission in private testimony, the panel's report noted.

In this context, Bush "had occasionally asked his briefers whether any of the threats pointed to the United States," the report said. Or as one U.S. senior official more intimately involved in the summer reporting paraphrased the president's question to the CIA: "This guy going to strike here?"

A partial answer was contained in the very first sentence of the Aug. 6 President's Daily Brief: "Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate Bin Ladin since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the US."

The document ended with two paragraphs of circumstantial evidence that al Qaeda operatives might already be in the United States preparing "for hijackings or other types of attacks," and that the FBI and the CIA were investigating a call to the U.S. Embassy in the United Arab Emirates in May "saying that a group of Bin Ladin supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives."

The commission also released new details showing how the CIA and FBI failures to track the movements of two hijackers, Khalid al Mihdhar and Nawaf al Hazmi, and share information foiled what now appears to have been the best chance to disrupt the terrorist attacks on New York and the Pentagon.

The CIA knew Mihdhar had attended a meeting in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, in January 2000 where, officials later learned, he had helped plan the October 2000 bombing of the USS Cole off the coast of Aden, Yemen. After the meeting, Mihdhar and others went to Bangkok, but the CIA station in Malaysia did not inform the CIA station in Bangkok in a timely manner.

Only two months later, in March, did the CIA learn that Mihdhar had left Bangkok with a visa to the United States.

In January 2001, two surveillance photographs from the Kuala Lumpur meeting were shown to an informant who was helping both the CIA and the FBI. He helped them understand that Mihdhar was at the meeting with a man identified as "Khallad" -- who by then was known to have planned the Cole bombing. But "we found no effort by the CIA to renew the long-abandoned search for Mihdhar or his traveling companions," the staff report noted.

Also, contrary to the previous testimony of Tenet, the CIA did not tell the FBI about this discovery until late August 2001, according to the report.

Mihdhar had left the United States in June 2000 but had plans to return.

"It is possible that if, in January 2001, agencies had resumed their search for him" or had placed him on a terrorist watch list, "they might have found him" before he applied for a new visa in June 2001, the report said. "Or they might have been alerted to him when he returned to the United States the following month. We cannot know."

'In her free time'

In mid-May 2001, during the height of threat reporting, a CIA official went back through the Mihdhar files and discovered that he had a U.S. visa and that Hazmi had come to Los Angeles on January 15, 2000. The official concluded "something bad was definitely up," the staff report said, but he did not alert his FBI counterparts. "He was focused on Malaysia."

But the report said he did ask an FBI analyst detailed to the CIA to review the Kuala Lumpur material again -- "in her free time." She began on July 24, 2001, and learned from the Immigration and Naturalization Service that the two might be in the country. She drafted a cable asking that Mihdhar and Hazmi be put on a terrorist watch list. The FBI analyst, meanwhile, "took responsibility for the search effort inside the United States."

The analyst thought Mihdhar was in New York and informed the FBI's New York field office. But she labeled her first e-mail to the office "routine," which gave the FBI 30 days to respond.

"No one apparently felt they needed to inform higher levels of management in either the FBI or CIA about the case," the commission staff said.

The search was assigned to an FBI agent who had never before handled a counterterrorism lead.

"Many witnesses have suggested that even if Mihdhar had been found, there was nothing the agents could have done except follow him onto the planes," the report said. "We believe this is incorrect.

"Both Hazmi and Mihdhar could have been held for immigration violations, or as material witnesses in the Cole bombing case," the commission report said. Interrogations "also may have yielded evidence of connections to other participants in the 9/11 plot. In any case, the opportunity did not arise."
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,343 • Replies: 21
No top replies

 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 04:14 am
Duh
http://bushspeaks.com/img/he-knew.jpg
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 08:16 am
Yes 'Bush saw repeated warnings'. So did 'Clinton'. Intelligence agencies were intercepting warnings and threats and hate speech every day, sometimes dozens in a day.

Both administrations had the same problem. How many times can you put the nation on high alert and then have nothing happen before 'crying wolf' becomes counterproductive? And how do you isolate the one threat in the one place at the one time that it will be carried out?

God, I wish the American public was savvy enough to be angry with the bad guys--the al Qaida, the other terrorist groups, those who effect their will with blood, mayhem, and murder--and would stop trying to make our American president and his administration the villain. That would be so much healthier for the country and would be so much more productive in finding solutions for the problems we have and will face.
0 Replies
 
Deecups36
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 08:38 am
I wonder if Bush was drunk or stoned the day he receieved the August 6th PDB? There have been rumors for years that Bush is an addict and who really knows what goes on behind the 10 foot steel walls of the ranch?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 09:30 am
Deecups, does it make you feel good to be so consumed by hate for this president? I was no Clinton fan, but I didn't understand the irrational hate that some extreme right wing conservatives felt for him. And I don't understand the pure hatred, lack of respect, and irrational contempt some extreme leftwing liberals have for GWB. I just can't relate to it.

I suppose you haven't read all the threads re that PDB or what the honest press (and the 9/11 comission plus the people who put it together and Richard Clarke) have said about it--that it did not contain anything specific that could have been acted on, especially in the limited time available to act.
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 10:15 am
I hardly ever even considered American politics before the shrub arrived. But I despise that piece of worthless lying mass murdering scum with every fibre of my being. He's the most dangerous, incompetent half wit ever to hold office not only in the US but in possibly any democracy anywhere.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 10:18 am
Normally I ignore you Wilso. But you make my point here. Thanks.
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 10:21 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Normally I ignore you Wilso. But you make my point here. Thanks.


Anytime!
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 10:36 am
Just a couple of the shrubs mutterings.


"It's clearly a budget. It's got a lot of numbers in it." - Reuters, May 5, 2000.

"I know the human being and fish can co-exist peacefully" - Saginaw, Mich., Sept. 29, 2000.


"I understand small business growth. I was one"- New York Daily News, Feb. 19, 2000.


"Nigeria is an important continent " - Oct., 2000.


Now how could I have been so blind and not seen his obvious genius. Maybe I'll have to rethink my opinion. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
coluber2001
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 07:23 pm
Don't hold back, Wilso. Tell us how you feel. In ten years we'll all laugh about Bush. I'd laugh now, but he's not funny yet, just embarassing.
0 Replies
 
roverroad
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 07:27 pm
coluber2001 wrote:
Don't hold back, Wilso. Tell us how you feel. In ten years we'll all laugh about Bush. I'd laugh now, but he's not funny yet, just embarassing.


I think Ashcroft gave a copout testimony. He pretty much denied everything and blamed Clinton. How does a guy like that reach high political positions? God must like liars.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 07:29 pm
roverroad wrote:
coluber2001 wrote:
Don't hold back, Wilso. Tell us how you feel. In ten years we'll all laugh about Bush. I'd laugh now, but he's not funny yet, just embarassing.


I think Ashcroft gave a copout testimony. He pretty much denied everything and blamed Clinton. How does a guy like that reach high political positions? God must like liars.


Seems to me he was simply telling the truth. You can say it's lies because you disagree with it, but that doesn't make it so.
0 Replies
 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 07:35 pm
Hello
Hi there, Mr. Pres. I just want to tell you that there are al Q. cells in the USA. Uh...ya know, the guys that bombed several embassies, the USS Cole and uh, ah the World Trade Center. These guys seem to think that they are at war with the USA. Yeah, I know that you are busy clearing brush on your pig farm but maybe if you can spare a few minutes to call the FBI to check up on these fellas. I mean, maybe they should be arrested because aren't they criminals that killed people, some Americans, too?

If you're to busy, could you ask Condi to look into it. She needs to be told what to do you know. She doesn't act on her own. OK thanks. See ya.
0 Replies
 
roverroad
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 07:36 pm
Ashcroft is the most despicable man on the planet second only to Bush. He named Clinton and didn't take any esponsibility himself. The man is a low life and will be exposed for what he really is. A liar, a dictator at heart who abuses power. I'd spit in his face if I ever met him. I've never hated anybody more.
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 07:36 pm
roverroad wrote:
How does a guy like that reach high political positions? God must like liars.


That's the worst thing about political jokes-they get elected.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 07:42 pm
roverroad wrote:
Ashcroft is the most despicable man on the planet second only to Bush. He named Clinton and didn't take any esponsibility himself. The man is a low life and will be exposed for what he really is. A liar, a dictator at heart who abuses power. I'd spit in his face if I ever met him. I've never hated anybody more.


A liar?
A dictator at heart?
Abuses power?

How do you figure? Do you have anything concrete that can explain to me why you think these things?
0 Replies
 
roverroad
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 07:42 pm
Wilso wrote:
roverroad wrote:
How does a guy like that reach high political positions? God must like liars.


That's the worst thing about political jokes-they get elected.


Exactly. But I don't think anybody elected Ashcroft. He was just sort of a political mistake.
0 Replies
 
roverroad
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 07:55 pm
McGentrix wrote:


A liar?
A dictator at heart?
Abuses power?

How do you figure? Do you have anything concrete that can explain to me why you think these things?


The man's tactics alone say it all. He said it him self. He believes in arresting everybody and sorting out the details later. He makes names of suspects public before they are even convicted and makes no apologies when they are found innocent. He ruins lives, destroys freedoms and puts his personal beliefs before the constitution. And Bush thinks he's the best man for the job. What does that say about Bush?
0 Replies
 
Tarantulas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 08:30 pm
roverroad wrote:
Ashcroft is the most despicable man on the planet second only to Bush.

It looks like you missed the latest liberal lodge meeting. The Democrats have named Donald Rumsfeld the most despicable man on the planet. He is always salivating over taking over someone else's country.

Better watch out and not make up new enemies or they will kick you out of the club for wrongspeak. Laughing
0 Replies
 
roverroad
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2004 08:42 pm
Rumsfeld would be the third most despicable man. But all things considered, they're all equally as bad.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Panel says Bush saw repeated warnings
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/05/2024 at 01:32:36