| Sunday, October 01, 2006 |
| The talented Ms. Condi |
Did Condi Rice get an explicit warning -- and ignore it -- two months before 9/11? From today's Washington Post:
Two Months Before 9/11, an Urgent Warning to Rice Sunday, October 1, 2006; Page A17
On July 10, 2001, two months before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, then-CIA Director George J. Tenet met with his counterterrorism chief, J. Cofer Black, at CIA headquarters to review the latest on Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda terrorist organization. Black laid out the case, consisting of communications intercepts and other top-secret intelligence showing the increasing likelihood that al-Qaeda would soon attack the United States. It was a mass of fragments and dots that nonetheless made a compelling case, so compelling to Tenet that he decided he and Black should go to the White House immediately.
Tenet called Condoleezza Rice, then national security adviser, from the car and said he needed to see her right away. There was no practical way she could refuse such a request from the CIA director.
For months, Tenet had been pressing Rice to set a clear counterterrorism policy, including specific presidential orders called "findings" that would give the CIA stronger authority to conduct covert action against bin Laden. Perhaps a dramatic appearance -- Black called it an "out of cycle" session, beyond Tenet's regular weekly meeting with Rice -- would get her attention.
Tenet had been losing sleep over the recent intelligence he'd seen. There was no conclusive, smoking-gun intelligence, but there was such a huge volume of data that an intelligence officer's instinct strongly suggested that something was coming. He and Black hoped to convey the depth of their anxiety and get Rice to kick-start the government into immediate action.
He did not know when, where or how, but Tenet felt there was too much noise in the intelligence systems. Two weeks earlier, he had told Richard A. Clarke, the National Security Council's counterterrorism director: "It's my sixth sense, but I feel it coming. This is going to be the big one."
But Tenet had been having difficulty getting traction on an immediate bin Laden action plan, in part because Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld had questioned all the National Security Agency intercepts and other intelligence. Could all this be a grand deception? Rumsfeld had asked. Perhaps it was a plan to measure U.S. reactions and defenses.
Tenet had the NSA review all the intercepts, and the agency concluded they were of genuine al-Qaeda communications. On June 30, a top-secret senior executive intelligence brief contained an article headlined "Bin Laden Threats Are Real." Was this urgent meeting reported to the 9/11 commission? Signs point to "no..."
Tenet and Black felt they were not getting through to Rice. She was polite, but they felt the brush-off. President Bush had said he didn't want to swat at flies.
As they all knew, a coherent plan for covert action against bin Laden was in the pipeline, but it would take some time. In recent closed-door meetings the entire National Security Council apparatus had been considering action against bin Laden, including using a new secret weapon: the Predator unmanned aerial vehicle, or drone, that could fire Hellfire missiles to kill him or his lieutenants. It looked like a possible solution, but there was a raging debate between the CIA and the Pentagon about who would pay for it and who would have authority to shoot.
Besides, Rice seemed focused on other administration priorities, especially the ballistic missile defense system that Bush had campaigned on. She was in a different place.
Tenet left the meeting feeling frustrated. Though Rice had given them a fair hearing, no immediate action meant great risk. Black felt the decision to just keep planning was a sustained policy failure. Rice and the Bush team had been in hibernation too long. "Adults should not have a system like this," he said later.
The July 10 meeting between Tenet, Black and Rice went unmentioned in the various reports of investigations into the Sept. 11 attacks, but it stood out in the minds of Tenet and Black as the starkest warning they had given the White House on bin Laden and al-Qaeda. Though the investigators had access to all the paperwork on the meeting, Black felt there were things the commissions wanted to know about and things they didn't want to know about.
Philip D. Zelikow, the aggressive executive director of the Sept. 11 commission and a University of Virginia professor who had co-authored a book with Rice on Germany, knew something about the July 10 meeting, but it was not clear to him what immediate action really would have meant. In 2005 Rice hired Zelikow as a top aide at the State Department.
Afterward, Tenet looked back on the meeting with Rice as a tremendous lost opportunity to prevent or disrupt the Sept. 11 attacks. Rice could have gotten through to Bush on the threat, but she just didn't get it in time, Tenet thought. He felt that he had done his job and had been very direct about the threat, but that Rice had not moved quickly. He felt she was not organized and did not push people, as he tried to do at the CIA.
Black later said, "The only thing we didn't do was pull the trigger to the gun we were holding to her head." The article is a clip from Bob Woodward's new book, which had already been scooped by "60 Minutes" and the New York Times.
As for the merit of the book (which I haven't read yet, but plan to,) it could be Tenet (and others) trying to clean up his reputation with help from Woodward, and at Rice's expense. I expect there's a lot of that going on in Woodward's book. Or it could be Woodward's attempt to clean up his reputation after two soliicitous tomes about the Bush team. Either way, Woodward's revelations aren't good news for the Bushies, who will now have to fight their security fight on territory they're not familiar with -- defenseive territory.
As for the other 9/11 commission members -- the ones Condi Rice didn't give federal jobs to -- they seem to be taking the unreported meeting with something beyond Zellikow's befuddlement. Some apparently are pissed:
A counsel for the 9/11 Commission, Peter Rundlet, wrote late Saturday that the Woodward revelation filled him with a "mixture of shock, anger, and sadness" and suggested that a "coverup" had occurred. Not a cover-up! Not from the Bush administration!!! Do tell... And how's Mr. Zelikow doing in his new job at State? His name resurfaces in a New York Times Sunday story about the attempt by Zelikow and another Bush advisor to bring the administration's detainee policy in line with Geneva. here's the link.
Other revelations from the Woodward book?
Dubya never tells Tony Blair anything... including how f**d up things are going in Iraq. According to the Times of London and other pubs, Rummy emerges as the book's chief villain.
Andy Card tried to get Rumsfeld booted (Laura did too), but Rummy was in place, according to Woodward, "in part to prove Bush's father wrong" ... Bush Sr. apparently can't stand Rumsfeld (who was with him on the short list to become Gerald Ford's vice president in 1972...)
The Bush White House isn't nearly as disciplined as ... well ... Woodward (and others) mythologized it to be. In this book, Woodward points to the infighting.
Also in the book: U.S. forces in Iraq aren't just being attacked every day, they're being attacked every 15 minutes ... and the administration is trying to keep that information from the American people.
Tags: Bush, Iraq, Politics, Bush, War, News, 9-11, Bob Woodward |
posted by JReid @ 12:19 AM   |
|
|
|
|