In Overheard Calls, Terrorists Spoke of Major Attack, Officials Say

New York Times ^ | 11/02/01 | JAMES RISEN and DAVID JOHNSTON

[kattracks]

ASHINGTON, Nov. 1 — Government officials intercepted telephone conversations in recent days in which members of Osama bin Laden's terrorist network, Al Qaeda, spoke urgently of an imminent attack against American targets even larger than the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, senior government officials say.

Intelligence reports based on the intercepted communications frightened the officials who read them and played a decisive role in the Bush administration's decision to issue its latest warning Monday of an imminent terrorist attack, the senior officials said.

Al Qaeda intercepts were interpreted as extraordinarily clear signals of potential danger in part because of the urgent and serious tone of the conversations. Officials said the terrorist operatives were overheard talking about an operation that would be even bigger than the Sept. 11 hijackings. Officials said they intercepted several of these conversations between Al Qaeda members in several countries.

Counterterrorism analysts at the C.I.A. and F.B.I. who reviewed the intercepts judged their credibility to be high also because they determined that the participants believed no one was eavesdropping on their discussions, the officials added.

The reports, supported by other intelligence, were rushed to President Bush and his national security aides on Monday morning. Senior national security officials were quickly persuaded that the potential threat was grave. But the debate at the White House over whether to issue an alert lasted several hours. Some counterterrorism officials expressed strong disagreement with issuing another nonspecific alert like the warning issued on Oct. 10.

When the administration issued the public warning of another attack on Monday, senior members of Congress criticized the decision, saying it raised fears among Americans without providing any specific information that would allow the nation to prepare. But the administration said the intercepts were so worrying that they had little choice.

Officials who have seen the intelligence reports said they raised greater concerns than did the intelligence that prompted the Oct. 10 warning. The latest intercepts indicated that Al Qaeda operatives were talking about a big event and discussed a specific time frame for action, prompting the government to warn of a terrorist attack within the week.

The intercepted communications did not provide specific clues about where the attacks might come, and the intelligence did not indicate whether the terrorists were planning actions inside the United States or against American interests overseas. The reports also did not even suggest the nature of the plot or the methods, officials said.

Tom Ridge, director of homeland security; George Tenet, director of central intelligence; Robert S. Mueller III, the F.B.I. director; and Attorney General John Ashcroft were each advised of the threat soon after the intelligence was collected. The information, along with sanitized but still secret summaries, was described in secret briefings for a few top lawmakers, officials said.

Throughout Monday, the government's still evolving threat-assessment network worked to reach a consensus on whether to issue a new alert — knowing that the Oct. 10 warning was criticized by lawmakers and state and local authorities for spreading fear without offering any information about where or how terrorists might strike.

As a result, some senior officials at the Federal Bureau of Investigation were reluctant to recommend issuing a second warning on Monday. But Mr. Ashcroft and other senior administration officials were persuaded that the threat was too significant to be ignored. In the end, the White House said it was Mr. Bush who made the decision to issue the threat warning, the officials said.

Officials also said they hoped the warning would persuade state and local authorities to increase their vigilance. They added that they had believed an attack was imminent when they issued the Oct. 10th warning, but that it was delayed or prevented, possibly as a result of the arrests and detentions of suspected Al Qaeda operatives in the United States and overseas.

Frustration by state and local officials about the vague nature of the warnings on both Oct. 10 and Monday may help explain the F.B.I.'s decision to issue a more specific warning that terrorists were planning rush- hour attacks against four California bridges, possibly as early as Friday. Senior officials added, however, that they found the intelligence behind that threat less credible than the intelligence leading to the national warning issued on Monday.

Gov. Gray Davis of California, who announced the threat warning this afternoon, said law enforcement officials believed that the Golden Gate Bridge or Bay Bridge, both in San Francisco, the Vincent Thomas Bridge at the Port of Los Angeles or the Coronado Bridge in San Diego were all potential targets.

While the intelligence that prompted Monday's warning was general, officials have scrambled to respond to potential vulnerabilities. Aviation authorities have barred flights over nuclear power plants and have created a no-fly zone in the vicinity of buildings thought to be potential targets, like the Sears Tower in Chicago.

[mercy]

GET THESE MUTHER EFFING RAG HEADS OUTA MY COUNTRY. I DON'T CARE HOW GREAT PRESIDENT BUSH IS. IF HE LETS THESE ISLAMIST BASTARDS RUN AROUND THIS COUNTRY KILLING MORE AMERICANS MUCH LONGER I WILL ACTIVELY WORK FOR THE ELECTION OF ANY DEMOCRAT WHO RUNS AGAINST HIM. ANY DEMOCRAT. I WILL MAKE IT MY PERSONAL CAUSE IN LIFE TO SEND HIM HOME TO DADDY!!!!

[Ironword]

Question 1: Who / where are these various people who are communicating who supposedly know of the imminent attack(s)?

Question 2: Why don't we grab them in the night, and ask them politely (or otherwise) what is planned?

[mombonn]

Stay safe, FReeper FRiends.

[jbstrick]

I believe these calls were intercepted in foreign lands. I believe the calls originated in Afghanistan to Argentina and Columbia

[hinckley buzzard]

With proper attention to human intelligence resources over the last decade, we would have these weasels infiltrated and not have to rely on intercepts of signal communication.

Let's hope the lesson is learned, once and for all.

[jbstrick]

You are absolutely correct HUMINT is better than SIGINT

[habs4ever]

It was reported that the calls originated in Toronto, went to Afghanistan, and emails were sent from a public library computer, and code words were used that got intercepted by the NSC and passed on to the RCMP and later the FBI.This came from a Toronto newspaper today.

[patriciaruth]

Ah, the joys of living in a target rich environment.

Meanwhile, how do you all vote on whether we should
A. Send some bunker busters into the caves and probably kill bin Laden without much American loss of life, but never know for sure,
or
B. Send the Special Forces into the handful of caves we are down to into hand to hand battles against bin Laden's most loyal defenders and into tunnels that are most likely bobby trapped. We would have to trade an uncertain number of good American lives to bring back the head of bin Laden. However, it would prove he was gone, and would give a shot in the arm and a definitive victory to our side.

What is the Muslim reaction to a dead bin Laden? Make them more upset and make him a martyr? Or take some of the wind out of their sails?

[Ironword]

I believe the calls originated in Afghanistan to Argentina and Columbia

Well, should we not get nominal approval / assistance from the governments of Argentina and Columbia to lay hands on the communicators?

[anniegetyourgun]

Wait a minute - this recent alert was said by the administration to be based on "human intelligence" - not electronic surveillance. Am I the only one who heard that?

[jbstrick]

Definitely Target rich. I live 3 miles from a refinery that produces an enorbous amount of JP4 and gasoline.

[patriciaruth]

ANY DEMOCRAT

Hillary?

[RaceBannon]

Bring him back dead. No other way.

[Ironword]

It was reported that the calls originated in Toronto, went to Afghanistan, and emails were sent from a public library computer, and code words were used that got intercepted by the NSC and passed on to the RCMP and later the FBI.

Interesting. Now, if the calls / e-mails can be traced to individuals, should we not lay hands on them in Canada?

[Aria]

I vote for A. We'll eventually find out if we got him by his absence and won't have paid a huge price for his demise. I think he is less able to be a hero to his followers if his fate is unknown. His head on a platter would be a cause celebe for the barbarians who believe in him.

[sinkspur]

I WILL ACTIVELY WORK FOR THE ELECTION OF ANY DEMOCRAT WHO RUNS AGAINST HIM. ANY DEMOCRAT. I WILL MAKE IT MY PERSONAL CAUSE IN LIFE TO SEND HIM HOME TO DADDY!!!!

Formerly a rational FR poster, you've gone off the deep end since 9/11. You've turned into nothing but an emotional nerve ending.

Emotions are worthless in a war.

[patriciaruth]

So, we have one vote for a head count.

[patriciaruth]

And one vote for in absentia.