Posted on 09/23/2002 10:27:24 AM PDT by Havisham
Agent: FBI Never Got 9/11 Data
By Bill Gertz
The Washington Times | September 23, 2002
An FBI agent told Congress yesterday that days before September 11 he complained to FBI headquarters that "someone will die" because senior bureau officials refused to permit him to pursue one of the men who later took part in the Pentagon suicide attack.
The New York-based FBI agent told a joint House-Senate hearing on the intelligence failures of September 11 that he and other FBI agents were denied CIA intelligence information on Khalid Al-Mihdhar and Nawaf Al-Hazmi.
The two al Qaeda terrorists would end up aboard the aircraft that flew into the Pentagon in a suicide attack.
The CIA had identified the two terrorists from a meeting in Malaysia in January 2000 but never informed the FBI, officials testified yesterday.
The FBI agent said a bureaucratic "wall" prevented intelligence from being shared in a criminal investigation of the two terrorists.
"This resulted in a series of e-mails between myself and the FBI headquarters analyst working the matter," the agent said.
The agent sent an e-mail message to headquarters complaining about the information blockage on Aug. 29, 2001: "Whatever has happened to this, someday someone will die, and, wall or not, the public will not understand why we were not more effective in throwing every resource we had at certain problems. Let's hope the national security law unit will stand behind their decisions then, especially since the biggest threat to us now, [Osama bin Laden], is getting the most protection."
The FBI agent's testimony is among numerous intelligence failures related to the September 11 attacks now being probed by Congress.
Earlier, Eleanor Hill, the staff director of the congressional panel, testified that numerous intelligence signs were missed.
Neither the CIA nor FBI was able to "see the potential collective significance of the information, despite the increasing concerns throughout the summer of 2001 of an impending terrorist attack," Mrs. Hill said.
The testimony made clear that legal restrictions that prevented sharing intelligence information that could be used in legal prosecutions were a major impediment in pursuing terrorists.
Mrs. Hill stated in testimony yesterday that Al-Mihdhar and Al-Hazmi lived openly in San Diego after being linked to al Qaeda in Malaysia. The two used their names on an apartment lease, took flight lessons and obtained and renewed visas.
The two men were placed on the State Department's watch list on Aug. 23, 2001, and the FBI in New York was prevented from investigating the two men.
The FBI agent and a CIA officer testified at the congressional hearing from behind a glass enclosure to obscure their identities.
After learning that Al-Mihdhar was one of the September 11 attackers, the FBI agent said: "I was upset. I remember explaining this is the same Khalid Al-Mihdhar we had talked about for three months."
The FBI was faulted at the hearing for failing to pursue an FBI agent's warning in a memorandum from Phoenix that U.S. flight schools should be investigated for possible al Qaeda terrorists. It was also blamed for refusing to obtain a surveillance warrant for a computer used by Zacarias Moussaoui, who has been charged in the September 11 plot.
The CIA did fully share its intelligence about the January 2000 terrorist meeting in Malaysia with the FBI, which was investigating the bombing of the USS Cole in October 2000.
The Clinton administration imposed new restrictions that prohibited sharing intelligence information with criminal investigators, according to U.S. officials. The restrictions were lifted after September 11.
Mrs. Hill, the inquiry staff director, testified that the CIA and FBI had no information linking 16 of the 19 hijackers to terrorism or terrorist groups before the attacks.
Al Qaeda terrorist leaders may have selected the terrorists because they were not well known to authorities, she said.
In addition to Al-Mihdhar and Al-Hazmi, U.S. agencies had information about Al-Hazmi's brother, Salim Al-Hazmi.
According to Mrs. Hill, the CIA was unaware that the National Security Agency, which conducts electronic eavesdropping, had gathered information on Nawaf Al-Hazmi, linking him to al Qaeda.
The NSA failed to share the information with the CIA, she said.
According to testimony yesterday, the CIA learned in March 2000 that Nawaf Al-Hazmi came into the United States through Los Angeles International Airport on Jan. 15, 2000.
I have more or less come to the same conclusion, though I would word it differently. I invite comment.
I have said a number of times that our foreign policy since the eighties has been essentially designed by Riyadh. There are a number of reasons for this, not all of them bad ones.
Al Qaeda is our term of convenience for Saudi operatives at work all across Asia. Bin Ladin was a leading control agent for these operatives. The Saudis, in part through Bin Ladin, managed to establish rebel movements in every country in Central Asia, and inside Russia itself, and inside China. Kashmir, India proper, Indonesia, the Philippines, all had rebel movements fomented by the Saudis. Bin Ladin was not the commander per se of these movements, but he was a key personage in the training and motivating of these movements.
For a number of reasons, we found it useful to actively aid these movements, in some cases, or tolerate them in others. We and the Saudis were joined at the hip, and as they ignored our support of Israel, we ignored their support of some troublesome groups, such as the Philippinos.
This is also why we would monitor, but not interfere with Muslim radicals in the US.
And this is why we tolerated Bin Ladin for so long, after he began to target us. Our aim for a long time was to try to redirect his aim away from us, and back toward targets we and the Saudis could agree on.
So, my question is, if I am right, why did Bin Ladin begin to target us? Did he start to believe his own rhetoric? Did he get too big for his britches? Did he start to work for Saddam?
My personal answer is that the Wahabist movement is volatile enough that it is uncontrollable, and it was inevitable that it would target us, just as it will inevitably target the Saudi regime. The Saudi's own movement will eventually consume it, if the Saudi's don't dismantle it first.
September 11, and the new Bush presidency, and our new relations with Russia, have motivated us to reverse course and turn on Al Qaeda, and begin to roll up the operations. For the Saudis its a little more complicated. Some in the regime see the danger, and will acquiesce in this. Others are loyal Al Qaedists, and will try to topple the Saudi regime.
Both sides have the money to buy US lawyers and PR firms, and Congressmen, and so part of the battle will be fought out in the Pankisi Gorge, but the more important part will be fought out on CNN and US federal court, and on the floor of the Senate.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/755554/posts
Earlier, Eleanor Hill, the staff director of the congressional panel, testified that numerous intelligence signs were missed.
You also might want to review Ms. Hill's previous job performance.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/753887/posts
Grassley, a staunch critic of the IG's office under Hill's leadership, tells Insight: "My three-year oversight investigations of the Inspector General's Office has uncovered a number of serious problems, including high-level misconduct and the falsification of investigative and audit reports."
Interesting reading.
Bush had the responsibility from the moment he was sworn in. What Clinton did is one thing, well worth a thoughtful upchucking, but what Bush didn't do is another. If 'events' moved too slowly for Bush to do the job right, it was because Bush moved too slowly.
Sorry, but being 'in charge' means you're responsible for all the things nobody tells you.
The links I posted in #14 are just on the domestic front. In the BIN LADEN GATE article the links point to a policy that began overseas, mostly in the Balkans and slowly entered into the USA. In fact the 9/11 Atta cell came into the USA around the same time Clinton used NATO to support the aims of the Kosovo Liberation Army, which the State Dept. once branded a terrorist group with links to al-Qaida. Bosnia holds the same similarities (Bin Laden had a Bosnian passport at one time).
I am not suggesting there was any American collusion with al-Qiada that caused 9/11!! Let us be clear on that. I am suggesting maybe a blowback of some kind in which "agents" (for lack of a better term) being used to further Clinton foreign policy aims double crossed their benefactors (again for lack of a better term).
...Al Qaeda is our term of convenience for Saudi operatives at work all across Asia. Bin Ladin was a leading control agent for these operatives. The Saudis, in part through Bin Ladin, managed to establish rebel movements in every country in Central Asia, and inside Russia itself, and inside China. Kashmir, India proper, Indonesia, the Philippines, all had rebel movements fomented by the Saudis. Bin Ladin was not the commander per se of these movements, but he was a key personage in the training and motivating of these movements.
For a number of reasons, we found it useful to actively aid these movements, in some cases, or tolerate them in others. We and the Saudis were joined at the hip, and as they ignored our support of Israel, we ignored their support of some troublesome groups, such as the Philippinos.
This is also why we would monitor, but not interfere with Muslim radicals in the US....
a Btt doesn't seem adequate, marron.
NewsMax.com WiresMueller had been in charge of the FBI a total of 6 days when 9/11 happened, he barely had time to get the key to the executive washroom ...I guess you blame him as well.
Thursday, June 21, 2001WASHINGTON - Attorney General John Ashcroft on Wednesday ordered a comprehensive review of the FBI, including an evaluation from the private sector, as a first step in broadly reforming the bureau.
In his memo to Thompson, who oversees the FBI, Ashcroft told his deputy that he wanted the department's new Strategic Management Council, or SMC, to "undertake a comprehensive review of the bureau, and by Jan. 1, 2002, submit recommendations to me for reforms within the FBI."
Thompson is the highest-ranking department official on the SMC, which was formed in May by Ashcroft to initiate long-range planning in the department.
Each member of the SMC "should identify and recommend actions dedicated to improving and upgrading the performance of the FBI, assisting the incoming director with the many challenges to be faced, and reinforcing the FBI's effectiveness as the premier law enforcement organization in the world," Ashcroft said.
FBI Director Louis Freeh is leaving the bureau this month, two years short of his full 10-year term.
Ashcroft said he also wanted the SMC to "commission a management study of the FBI, by a private firm, to review policies and practices of the bureau including information technology, personnel, crisis management and performance appraisal" by Nov. 1.
In a move that might prove controversial within the bureau, Ashcroft said the SMC "should independently solicit input from other individuals and organizations, both internal and external, including Congress, who may have constructive ideas on reforming and improving the FBI."
Bush also had a plan to take out al Queda before 9/11...
Shortly before the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States, U.S. security officials prepared a presidential order to dismantle the al Qaeda network later blamed for the attacks, the White House said Friday. It was dated September tenth, and sat on National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice's desk awaiting Bush's review when the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were struck.
Bush shuts down terrorist financial support network in U.S. that Clinton knew existed and ignored
Why was this terrorist financial support network, that the Russians were begging the Clinton administration to shut down allowed to operate inside the USA until after 9/11?
Bush shuts down terrorist financial support network in U.S. that Clinton knew existed and ignored
Why was this terrorist financial support network, that the Russians were begging the Clinton administration to shut down allowed to operate inside the USA until after 9/11?
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.