Posted on 10/01/2006 2:02:11 AM PDT by angkor
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.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
This is because Clinton's ass recently got roasted and he doesn't like it. So his friends in the media thought they'd concoct this story to put the blame on Condi.
If so, then why didn't Tenet do something himself? Why discuss it with politicians?
I'm waiting to hear the howls of protest from them. Waiting... Still waiting...
"Bob Woodward School Of Fictional Reporting"
LOL You pegged it!
Sounds like the Joe Wilson drama, there does seem to be a habit of not writing reports by some of these revisionists. Then again Sandy the Burglar did take some reports the 9/11 Commission neglected to describe as well.
You've apparently seen more about the book than I have. If I'm going to a meeting like this, and I want to influence the action, I'm going to say, "And here's what I recommend:..." At the minimum, I'm going to be prepared to answer the question, "And what are your recommendations?" What were the CIA Directors recommendations to "kick start the government" to deal with this threat that the Director feared?
Let me fix that:
"The CIA had already done its due diligence." /sarc
President Bush's problem when first elected as president, was not the invasion of Iraq, it was all the hold overs he kept from the Clinton White House.
I hope in the future regardless of which party is elected
this will be a great lesson.
"The CIA had already done its due diligence." /sarc
I've re-read your original post. My forehead is now flatter. I shouldn't have skipped the coffee.
"What were the CIA Directors recommendations to "kick start the government" to deal with this threat that the Director feared?"
It's all a little vague isn't it?
In his Fictional Reporting (tm), Woodward can usually capture details such as "a drop of sweat licked at his eyebrow", or "While sitting at the Cabinet meeting, Powell was thinking 'What sort of mahogony is this table made from?', while Rumsfeld was privately musing on the virtues of aluminum siding for his new getaway home in Easton, Maryland.'"
Yet from this crucial meeting, we aren't told what the threat signals actually were, how they were presented to Rice, what action steps were suggested, or what the milestones for further notification might be.
I suppose becuase the meeting was "classified", and you know what that means in DC.
"I shouldn't have skipped the coffee."
I'm on the last third of a triple sized cup.
Sunday morning, FReeping hard.
Rush said it on his show on Friday.
(I'll paraphrase it)
Woodward's audience among the Washington D.C. liberal elites has been mad at him over statements he made, and statements he with-held in the Plamegate affair.
His current tome is an attempt to get back in their good graces. It simply exposes him as the hack that many of us always knew him to be.
This is an inadvertant admission that even after eight Clinton years there was no "clear counterterrorism policy" left over. Plus, Woodward and the rest of the left would've had a hissy-fit if Bush had given the "CIA stronger authority to conduct covert action against bin Laden."
[Tenet] and Black hoped to convey the depth of their anxiety and get Rice to kick-start the government into immediate action.
WHAT? Tenet and Black were already a part of the government, and at high levels too. They could have directed their own agencies to do more, a lot more if they really had this gut feel. To blame it on Rice is a cheap shot.
They needed to take action that moment -- covert, military, whatever -- to thwart bin Laden.
Again, Woodward and his pals on the left would've had a hissy-fit if Bush took covert or military action that killed bin Laden without a new provoking incident.
"after eight Clinton years there was no "clear counterterrorism policy" left over."
Sure there was. It just didn't exist in the Oval Office.
Throughout the 90's, America's counterrorism policy was run by Janet Reno and her overseer Jamie Gorelick at DoJ.
Jihadi terrorism was a law enforcement matter, which is why all of those missed opportunties were rejected on "legal grounds".
"They could have directed their own agencies to do more, a lot more if they really had this gut feel. To blame it on Rice is a cheap shot."
Even though he's a nit of a nutball, I'd like to know what Michael Scheuer says about those last months before 9/11, and after these June "premonitions".
What was the direct impact on his "kill bin Laden" team? Any new orders? Any additional resources? Etc etc.
There's no need to call this fiction. Even if every word of it is true (and it probably is), it does Bush no harm. Tenet came talking about feelings, noise, instincts, voodoo. No recommendations, no solid evidence, no specifics. What could Rice do with that? What could anyone do?
But Tenet thought the government could launch into immediate, effective action based on his "sixth sense" and information like "Bin Laden Threats Are Real" (this is why we keep the CIA!). Sounds like Black and Tenet expected Condi Rice to do some voodoo of her own.
I have no idea how Tenet got so far if he thinks that anyone could have prevented 9/11 based on a) the information that bin Laden was planning attacks against America and maybe within it, and b) the marvelous insight that this is a major problem we should do something about, pronto.
What a huge load of butt-covering by CIA. Designed to help the Democrats, of course. Apparently there was a meeting, but it is worth noting that Tenet had the chance to meet Bush every day. The notion that he needed to meet Rice to get the Gummint moving is a lie.
Bush made a huge mistake in keeping George Tenet. This book is yet another reason why.
BTW, Condi came out and gave a full throated denial that anything like this went on at that meeting.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.