US Intelligence in 1995 Said Attack on U.S. Possible

Reuters ^ | April 16, 2004 | Tabassum Zakaria

[tomball]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. intelligence report in 1995 raised the possibility of a foreign terrorist attack inside the United States and a 1997 update named Osama bin Laden, U.S. intelligence officials said on Friday in trying to offset a highly critical report from the Sept. 11 commission.

[steveegg]

I'm shocked, SHOCKED that the Clintoon Administration would bury this.

[Dog]

If anyone on this site ever claims again that this White House never fights back will only have to look back to this past week......Ashcroft dropped a NUKE on the commission with the Gorelick memo....... and now this report.....someone is on the offensive.

[dead]

A U.S. intelligence report in 1995 raised the possibility of a foreign terrorist attack inside the United States

A couple of years after the first WTC attack.

Gee, that's some impressive sleuthing. I wonder what that study cost.

[Dog]

Check this out.

[Dog]

fyi..

[thoughtomator]

No mention of the elephant in the room - the Gorelick memo. How interesting.

[TomGuy]

A National Intelligence Estimate in 1995 said "there probably would be a foreign terrorist attack on the U.S. homeland and it highlighted civil aviation as a particular vulnerability," an intelligence official said.

What was the actual date of this report? Murrah/OKC wasn't exactly 2 white guys acting along; although much of the evidence has been buried.

[TomGuy]

Posted in another thread:

Even Clinton staffers know the truth

But according to former Clinton staffers, it's doubtful Gorelick will budge. "She's on that commission for a reason, and it isn't because of her brilliant legal mind," says a former DNC and Clinton White House staffer. "She's there to make sure Bush and his team look as bad as possible and to protect the Clintons and Reno."

38 posted on 04/16/2004 12:44:59 PM CDT by george wythe

[george wythe]

Even Clinton staffers know the truth

But according to former Clinton staffers, it's doubtful Gorelick will budge. "She's on that commission for a reason, and it isn't because of her brilliant legal mind," says a former DNC and Clinton White House staffer. "She's there to make sure Bush and his team look as bad as possible and to protect the Clintons and Reno."

[TomGuy]

Also quoted from the article in post #9:


It isn't just Gorelick who is now in hot water. Based on their remarks on Wednesday and Thursday, both Kean and fellow commissioner, former Sen. Slade Gorton are taking heat from 9/11 families for telling critics during TV interviews to stay "out of our business."

[Dog]

The wheels have come off the Bush bashing bandwagon......:-)

[NYC GOP Chick]

It's Bush's fault!

[Fitzcarraldo]

The wheels have come off the Bush bashing bandwagon......:-)

Have they tried to bash Bush Senior yet?

[kcvl]

I think Reuters must have read it here FIRST! lol!

[Nita Nupress]

What was the actual date of this report? Murrah/OKC wasn't exactly 2 white guys acting along; although much of the evidence has been buried.

I want that answer too. What IS it with these people not putting dates on their correspondence?

Someone want to take a guess on what Henry Hyde is referring to in this April, 1995 House Judiciary Committee meeting?  Out of the blue, he asked Louie Freeh if anyone had "overruled his request to surveill certain terroristic targets."  This House Judiciary Committee meeting is one month after the now-declassified Gorelick "Build-a-Wall" memo and 13 days before the OKC bombing.

I'm wondering if Freeh or someone else in the FBI had submitted a FISA request for surveillance on foreigners -- foreigners who were planning a bombing in the Heartland. If this is what Henry Hyde is referring to below, that would be one reason Gorelick wrote her "Build-a-Wall" memo to Freeh and others.

Have we determined the exact motivation for Gorelick writing her March 4, 1995 memo yet?  I haven't read that entire memo yet.

 

APRIL 6, 1995, THURSDAY
CAPITOL HILL HEARING WITH DEFENSE DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL

HEARING OF THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
SUBJECT: INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM
CHAIRED BY: REPRESENTATIVE HENRY HYDE (R-IL)
PANEL II; 10:55 AM
PANEL II

WITNESSES:
ADM. WILLIAM STUDEMAN, ACTING DIR., CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
JAMIE S. GORELICK, DEP. ATTY. GEN., U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
LOUIS J. FREEH, DIRECTOR, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
AMB. PHILIP WILCOX, COORDINATOR, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
2141 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING

REP. HYDE: The second panel will come forward. We are pleased to have with us today four members of the Clinton administration who will educate this committee on the threats of terrorism from their specific perspectives, and to address various provisions of the administration's proposal which was introduced by Congressman Schumer, H.R. 896. In the order of their testimony, let me introduce, on my right, acting director, William O. Studeman, admiral and acting director of the Central Intelligence Agency; next to Admiral Studeman is Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick, United States Department of Justice; and next to Ms. Gorelick is the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Louis J. Freeh; and next to Mr. Freeh is Ambassador Philip Wilcox, coordinator of the Counterterrorism Section, United States Department of State. We are most grateful to have such a distinguished panel here, and we welcome you, and ask Admiral Studeman to commence. And we will go through the panel, and then if you will be patient we will try to formulate some questions. Thank you.

(snip)

REP. HYDE: Good. Director Freeh, has the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review overruled your request to surveill certain terroristic targets?

MR. FREEH: No, sir.

REP. HYDE: That has not happened?

MR. FREEH: Unless you can be more specific I don't know that I could answer that. But no, as far as I know, it's not.

REP. HYDE: All right, I don't think it's appropriate to be more specific, but that was something that I had heard that concerned me. If you say it didn't happen --

MR. FREEH: No, we have recently -- the Attorney General and the Deputy and myself discussed some -- not changes, but clarifying our mutual interpretation of the Attorney General's guidelines with respect to investigating terrorism cases to ensure that we are not missing anything. But other than that, I don't really have any complaints about it.

(snip)

[TomGuy]

Do you have a link to that document?

I'd be curious to read Gorelick's testimony, now that she is center stage in the controversy.

[Nita Nupress]

I don't really know who to bump who is still interested in OKC and is also following this Gorelick stuff. Maybe one of you knows.

[kcvl]

REP. HYDE: Good. Director Freeh, has the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review overruled your request to surveill certain terroristic targets?

MR. FREEH: No, sir.

REP. HYDE: That has not happened?

MR. FREEH: Unless you can be more specific I don't know that I could answer that. But no, as far as I know, it's not.

******

Excuse me, but that is a lie! Be more specific? He knows EXACTLY what Hyde was asking about. These people make me SICK!

[Nita Nupress]

No link, but I can dump the whole thing here if you want. It printed out to be 22 pages long.

Or I could freepmail it to you.

[Kozak]

I was always hoping they were playing " Rope a Dope". Hope they got some more to dish out. "Clit"on"s admin was the most corrupt and incompetent in US History.