Replies

Found this:

Here is another reference that is a lot less cryptic, and might easily prompt many follow-up questions about documents, after-action reports, and Sandy Berger. From the footnotes on p. 482:

46. NSC email, Clarke to Kerrick,“Timeline,”Aug. 19, 1998; Samuel Berger interview (Jan. 14, 2004). We did not find documentation on the after-action review mentioned by Berger. On Vice Chairman Joseph Ralston’s mission in Pakistan, see William Cohen interview (Feb. 5, 2004). For speculation on tipping off the Taliban, see, e.g., Richard Clarke interview (Dec. 18, 2003).

And to what does footnote (46) refer? On p. 117, Chapter 4, we find this:

Later on August 20, Navy vessels in the Arabian Sea fired their cruise missiles. Though most of them hit their intended targets, neither Bin Ladin nor any other terrorist leader was killed. Berger told us that an after-action review by Director Tenet concluded that the strikes had killed 20–30 people in the camps but probably missed Bin Ladin by a few hours. Since the missiles headed for Afghanistan had had to cross Pakistan, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs was sent to meet with Pakistan’s army chief of staff to assure him the missiles were not coming from India. Officials in Washington speculated that one or another Pakistani official might have sent a warning to the Taliban or Bin Ladin. (46)

How about that? How many times have we heard Clinton say that he missed Bin Ladin by just a few hours? Yet the after-action report is missing, so the Commission relied on Sandy Berger's testimony.

Just One Minute

"We did not find documentation on the after-action review mentioned by Berger."

great find!!! RED ALERT! So the 9/11 O-mission was NOT provided with the "after-action review" on the 8/20/98 cruise missile bombings of Bin Laden's camp and the Sudan pharmaceutical factory???? That is HUGE! UNBELIEVABLE! That should have been one of the most fundamental documents for any review of pre-911 counter-terrorism efforts, and the doc(s) went MISSING! Think there might have been various remarks in that review about both things that were not done well and things that needed to be done in the future? This surely must be among the items which were BURGLAR-ized by Sandy Burglar in the National Archives. We were told he was only taking 'copies' of the Millenium Plot docs. We were told that they got all the docs they 'needed' but obviously that's a lie.