These statements need fact checking, of course. Whether Republican, Democrat, or Independent, I believe Americans need to be critical and attentive to the state of national security and its policies.

As such, here's a semi-brief article on the subject:

----

Condi Gets A Reality Check

By David J. Sirota and Christy Harvey and Judd Legum, Center for American Progress

Article

----

The next article I'd like to bring up concerns the recently declassified Presidential Daily Bulletin of August 6th, 2001, entitled "Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in U S".

First, though, here's the full text of that memo--

--{"Verbatim text of the declassified presidential daily intelligence briefing from Aug. 6, 2001. Portions marked "x" were blacked out before release.

Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in U S

Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate Bin Ladin since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the U.S. Bin Ladin implied in U.S. television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and "bring the fighting to America."

After U.S. missile strikes on his base in Afghanistan in 1998, Bin Ladin told followers he wanted to retaliate in Washington, according to xxxxxxx service.

An Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) operative told an xxxxxx service at the same time that Bin Ladin was planning to exploit the operative's access to the U.S. to mount a terrorist strike.

The millennium plotting in Canada in1999 may have been part of Bin Ladin's first serious attempt to implement a terrorist strike in the U.S. Convicted plotter Ahmed Ressam has told the FBI that he conceived the idea to attack Los Angeles International Airport himself, but that Bin Ladin lieutenant Abu Zubaydah encouraged him and helped facilitate the operation. Ressam also said that in 1998 Abu Zubaydah was planning his own U.S. attack.

Ressam says Bin Ladin was aware of the Los Angeles operation.

Although Bin Ladin has not succeeded, his attacks against the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 demonstrate that he prepares operations years in advance and is not deterred by setbacks. Bin Ladin associates surveilled our Embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam as early as 1993, and some members of the Nairobi cell planning the bombings were arrested and deported in 1997.

Al-Qa'ida members -- including some who are U.S. citizens -- have resided in or traveled to the U.S. for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks. Two al-Qa'ida members found guilty in the conspiracy to bomb our Embassies in East Africa were U.S. citizens, and a senior EIJ member lived in California in the mid-1990s.

A clandestine source said in 1998 that a Bin Ladin cell in New York was recruiting Muslim-American youth for attacks.

We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a xxxxxx service in 1998 saying that Bin Ladin wanted to hijack a U.S. aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Shaykh" 'Umar 'Abd al-Rahman and other U.S.-held extremists.

Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.

The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full field investigations throughout the U.S. that it considers Bin Ladin-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our Embassy in UAE in May saying that a group of Bin Ladin supporters was in the U.S. planning attacks with explosives."}---

And here's the article deconstructing that memo: Article

----

My commentary on the PDB memo:

The primary thrust of Republican criticism is that this memo almost exclusively deals with pre-2000 intelligence surrounding Al-Qaeda activities, both in the US and in US targets abroad. Since 90% of the document concerns "old intelligence", they question the relevance of the document.

As a scientist and someone with a degree in history, however, it seems clear to me why CIA Intelligence Director George Tenet took this tact: he was offering evidence to point to escalating conflict coming from Al-Qaeda. Further, he was using these examples to illustrate what Al-Qaeda's and specifically Bin Laden's tactics are--and why increased action and security are needed.

For example, Tenet talks about the "Bin Ladin...television interviews in 1997 and 1998" to underscore the fact that "his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and 'bring the fighting to America.'"

In other words: Bin Laden actively wants to commit terrorism against America and has directly stated so on several occasions.

The 1999 plot to blow up LAX by an Al-Qaeda operative is cited because this illustrates "Bin Ladin's first serious attempt to implement a terrorist strike in the U.S.". This plot sets a precedent for actively seeking to commit terrorism inside the US--not just talking about it in interviews.

By talking about "attacks against the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998", Tenet demonstrates that "[Osama Bin Laden] prepares operations years in advance and is not deterred by setbacks." Clearly one wants to know the Modus Operandi of a potential major terrorist threat, and Tenet seems to reveal that by discussing these attacks.

Just as with any discussion of the evidence, however, Tenet addresses the point of his argument at the tail-end--which is the 10% that was (at the time) extremely relevant.

For instance, "Al-Qa'ida members -- including some who are U.S. citizens -- have resided in or traveled to the U.S. for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks." Further, FBI information had found a few of these suspected members carrying out "activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York."

While this report doesn't include the idea of using "planes as missles" (Condi Rice in 9/11 testimony)--which is another point that Republicans criticize--the Bush Administration does acknowledge knowing about such tactics pre-9/11.

To prove that point, ABC News reported: "Bush Administration officials acknowledged that U.S. intelligence officials informed President Bush weeks before the Sept. 11 attacks that bin Laden's terrorist network might try to hijack American planes." [source: ABC News, 5/16/02]

Further, to combine information from both of the reports, we know that over 70 FBI investigations were going on in 2002 that were related to Al-Qaeda. We also know that some of the more ambitious programs to net Al-Qaeda sleeper cells in the US were cut by the Bush administration pre-9/11. In fact, if you really read over the Condi Rice article, you'll see that counter-terrorism funds were denied or even cut before and after 9/11.

----

What the hell is the point of me arguing all of this? My point is that the Bush administration did not emphasize counter-terrorist policy with nearly as much aggression as they should have--and as they could have, using Clinton's aggressive policies and former Counter-Terrorism Czar Richard Clarke as an aid from the Clinton era.

Did Bush and his staff know about the attacks? I can't say one way or the other. Could the attacks have been prevented? I can't say one way or the other.

I can say, however, that a much more aggressive policy against terrorism should have been taken in lieu of all the speculation and insistence of the counter-terrorism and intelligence communities.

previous - next