• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Transcript of Aug 6, 2001 PDB

MonstaThrilla

Golden Member
Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate bin Laden since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the US. Bin Laden implied in U.S. television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and "bring the fighting to America."

After U.S. missile strikes on his base in Afghanistan in 1998, bin Laden told followers he wanted to retaliate in Washington, according to a -- -- service.

An Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) operative told - - service at the same time that bin Laden was planning to exploit the operative's access to the U.S. to mount a terrorist strike.

The millennium plotting in Canada in 1999 may have been part of bin Laden's first serious attempt to implement a terrorist strike in the U.S.

Convicted plotter Ahmed Ressam has told the FBI that he conceived the idea to attack Los Angeles International Airport himself, but that in ---, Laden lieutenant Abu Zubaydah encouraged him and helped facilitate the operation. Ressam also said that in 1998 Abu Zubaydah was planning his own U.S. attack.

Ressam says bin Laden was aware of the Los Angeles operation. Although Bin Laden has not succeeded, his attacks against the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 demonstrate that he prepares operations years in advance and is not deterred by setbacks. Bin Laden associates surveyed our embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam as early as 1993, and some members of the Nairobi cell planning the bombings were arrested and deported in 1997.

Al Qaeda members -- including some who are U.S. citizens -- have resided in or traveled to the U.S. for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks.

Two al-Qaeda members found guilty in the conspiracy to bomb our embassies in East Africa were U.S. citizens, and a senior EIJ member lived in California in the mid-1990s.

A clandestine source said in 1998 that a bin Laden cell in New York was recruiting Muslim-American youth for attacks.

We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a ---- service in 1998 saying that Bin Laden wanted to hijack a U.S. aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Sheikh" Omar Abdel Rahman and other U.S.-held extremists.

Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.

The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full-field investigations throughout the U.S. that it considers bin Laden-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group or bin Laden supporters was in the U.S. planning attacks with explosives.
 
And Rice just sloughed it off..."Oh, the FBI is working on it".

A major terrorist threat to our country and she doesn't want to follow up on it?!?!
rolleye.gif
 
Originally posted by: conjur
And Rice just sloughed it off..."Oh, the FBI is working on it".

A major terrorist threat to our country and she doesn't want to follow up on it?!?!
rolleye.gif


GWB was on vacation!
 
Well, that's all pretty non-specific information. Of course, it was information just like this-or worse-that formed the basis for the invasion of Iraq.

Anyway, I don't think that PDB is very helpful. If the horizontal hold is out on your crystal ball, what good is it?

The systemic problems within the national security infrastructure were much, much worse than anything Rice/Bush did or didn't do about this PDB.

EDIT: Oh, and thanks for that MT. 🙂

-Robert
 
Originally posted by: chess9
Well, that's all pretty non-specific information. Of course, it was information just like this-or worse-that formed the basis for the invasion of Iraq.

-Robert

Well this is an important point which we as a country need to contemplate:

Was the intelligence on terrorism in 2001 pre 9/11 of the same quality as the intelligence on Iraq and WMDs post 9/11?

My take is that the intelligence on domestic terrorism (2001) previous to 9/11 was collected on-the-level, with no preconceived motivations--and it seems it was also unwelcomed by the white house.

For what reason(s) I don't know? But Rice did not seem to be moved to action on this--maybe Clarke was perceived as an outsider or a pain in the backside, or a jerk, or crazy??/ Only Rice knows this answer.

We see a different case after 9/11--where evidence (moreso than intelligence) on Iraqi involvement is actively sought for by the president himself. At this point its a goal-directed excercise.

2 different methodologies entirely.
 
nobody is perfect. humans aren't perfect. we've been striving for perfection for 1000's of years. Anyone who thinks that the US government LET 9/11 happen is a fool. Hindsight is 20/20
 
Oh I agree, I think from day 1 when Bush hit the oval office, the only thing on his tiny little brain was getting back at the guy who put a hit out his daddy. The hell with American safety. Fortunately there is other people down the ladder with lesser axe to grind who were looking out for us, and unfortunately they couldn't stop what was planned.
 
"The PDB article did not warn of the 9/11 attacks," the White House said in a statement released Saturday night. "Although the PDB referred to the possibility of hijackings, it did not discuss the possible use of planes as weapons."

cnn

I think it did warn of the 9/11 attacks in my opinion. Obviously they didn't have a date and the exact plan, but all the other elements are there.

From the memo:
"Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York."

I know in hindsight that people can more easily point fingers, but it is obvious that the administration didn't take it seriously. Whether or not it would have made much difference isn't really the case anymore. It is whether or not they could/should have done more.
 
I am going to "shake the trees here"

How many threats against the united states Does A President
read in an average term?

I mean we only know about the ones we have been told about
or the ones that are reality and no longer just threats.

How can we single out 1 terrorist event?
 
The anti-Bush crowd seemed to be convinced that this memo was going to be a smoking gun that Bush was aware of the 9/11 attacks beforehand After reading this memo, I think this is going to massively backfire on those anti-Bush people. This memo is about as insightful as my regular bowel movements.

There is no logical way to conclude that anybody was aware of an attack on 9/11 and against the World Trader Centers and using airplanes as suicide missles.
 
Originally posted by: Babbles
The anti-Bush crowd seemed to be convinced that this memo was going to be a smoking gun that Bush was aware of the 9/11 attacks beforehand After reading this memo, I think this is going to massively backfire on those anti-Bush people. This memo is about as insightful as my regular bowel movements.

There is no logical way to conclude that anybody was aware of an attack on 9/11 and against the World Trader Centers and using airplanes as suicide missles.

You obviously have no idea what the "anti-Bush" crowd thinks. All rational people know that there was no way to know of the exact method and time of the attack.

The problem people have with the Bush administration is their arrogance, lack of responsibility, inability to admit error, and strange fixation with Iraq in regards to the War on Terror...
 
Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.

The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full-field investigations throughout the U.S. that it considers bin Laden-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group or bin Laden supporters was in the U.S. planning attacks with explosives.

When Rice gave her testimony she said the PDB contain no new information and it was historical. That info right there is clearly new and is damn sure not historical.
 
This memo is insignificant. There is no specific intellgence in the memo. If this is the best the democrats can do in the ongoing campaign to smear the Bush administration, they're in big trouble. What's the best that can happen for the democrats in this blame game? A draw. If one wants to play the blame game, you can spread the blame across several past administrations, Republican and Democrat.
What was the purpose of this 9/11 panel? To assign blame or fix the problem? If it's to assign blame, this country is in deep trouble.
 
Originally posted by: FrodoB
This memo is insignificant. There is no specific intellgence in the memo. If this is the best the democrats can do in the ongoing campaign to smear the Bush administration, they're in big trouble. What's the best that can happen for the democrats in this blame game? A draw. If one wants to play the blame game, you can spread the blame across several past administrations, Republican and Democrat.
What was the purpose of this 9/11 panel? To assign blame or fix the problem? If it's to assign blame, this country is in deep trouble.

:beer:

After being out of commision for a day - I wake this morning to find that the memo had been released. And oh boy, it's exactly how Rice described it. - go figure. She mentioned in her testimony about the FBI working on the 70 or so investigation so classy is really stretching with his little whining about it not being historical. Oh well - it's become quite clear that the left has once again opened the door right into their nose with this memo.

CkG
 
The Meat of the Matter - Let's get to the Point - and Stop Posturing
(Washington Post - Sunday Morning)

When you get to the heart of the matter here's what the facts are -
Bush was told repeatedly - he chose to go on vacation.
Rice was told as well, but she had turned her own job function into that of a clerk, screening memos out that Bush didn't want to hear,
while selecting those which she and Bush had decided to persue which fell within their "Compassionate Conservative Agenda'.
She effectivly had severed communication in both directions at her level so nothing bad passed up and nothing relevant passed down.
This is the form of 'Corporate Management' that has caused buisness models to fail for years, Bush brought it to Washington.

This isn't about Bush and his ego, or him loosing the popularity contest that might make him the 'Repiblican Hero of the 21st Century' -
this is about an incompetent Administration that never warmed to any information outside of their narrow minded, right wing focused agenda.
Nobody there has the courage or the moral strength to admit that they blew it - it's all become 'Fix the Blame' and not the problem by spining
and continuing deflection of responsibility and deceitful representation to the public by selective interpetation of the facts.

I mean what more of a warning did they expect ? A flight number with aisle & row number and a destination of WTC ?

<CLIP>
President Bush was warned a month before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that the FBI had information that terrorists might be preparing for a hijacking in the United States and might be targeting a building in Lower Manhattan.President Bush was warned a month before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that the FBI had information that terrorists might be preparing for a hijacking in the United States and might be targeting a building in Lower Manhattan.

The information was included in a written Aug. 6, 2001, briefing to Bush that was declassified Saturday night by the White House in response to a request from the independent commission probing the Sept. 11 attacks.

The short article, titled "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US," also included information that the FBI had "70 full field investigations" underway in the United States that were believed related to Osama bin Laden, and that a caller to the U.S. Embassy in the United Arab Emirates in May 2001 said a group of bin Laden supporters was in the United States planning attacks with explosives.

The document, citing a foreign intelligence service whose identity was redacted, said bin Laden told followers he wanted to "retaliate in Washington" for the United States' 1998 missile attack on his facilities in Afghanistan.

In a conference call Saturday with reporters, administration officials who insisted on anonymity said there was no evidence that either the call to the U.S. Embassy in the UAE or the surveillance of federal buildings in New York by Yemenis was related to the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The officials said the photographing of the federal buildings was later judged to be "tourist activity," but they did not say whether that judgment was made before or after the attacks.

The White House originally resisted releasing the article, part of the President's Daily Brief, or PDB, citing the sensitivity of intelligence information. It characterized the document as a historical summary with little current information on which the president could have acted.

In her testimony to the 9/11 commission on Thursday, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said, "this was a historical memo. . . . It was not based on new threat information."

While the two-page document included information dating to 1997, it also contained information that the government suspected al Qaeda was actively preparing for an attack in the United States. While it gave no information about specific targets or dates, the briefing warned that U.S. intelligence believed bin Laden had serious plans to hit the United States.

The PDB said U.S. intelligence could not confirm "some of the more sensational threat reporting," such as information from a foreign intelligence service in 1998 saying bin Laden "wanted to hijack a US aircraft" to gain the release of U.S.-held Muslim extremists. The identity of the foreign service was redacted.

"Nevertheless," it said, "FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York."

The brief continued: "The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full field investigations throughout the US that it considers Bin Ladin-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our Embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group of Bin Ladin supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives."

The CIA author of the document wanted to make clear to the president that, despite the many threats being centered abroad, agency analysts believed there was a real and continuing danger that bin Laden was determined to attack the United States.

As one former administration official who has read the PDB said last week: "The agency doesn't write a headline like that if it doesn't want to get attention." In this case, the former official said, "the CIA did not believe Bush policymakers were taking the threat to the U.S. seriously."


<You want Pg. 2 ? - Register and it's yours, for FREE>
 
The police use "historical data" all the time to catch criminals. Of course, they call it "clues". 😉
 
Once again, Clarke claimed that the Bush administration did not give priority or prudent attention to terrorism and Al Qaeda--despite numerous intelligence spikes throughout 2001, prior to 9/11.

Rice did not directly rebutt Clarke's claim, instead she claimed the administration was not culpable or blameworthy due to faulty intelligence sharing and structurally flawed institutional problems. Further, she claimed no "silver bullet" could have prevented 9/11, so Bush admin is in the clear of any negligence, and should not be open to any criticism.

No silver bullet is a euphamistic way of saying no single piece of intelligence gave them the EXACT date and time and place and names of the perps--but this is totally disengenuous. The job of the National Security Advisor is to take all those disparate pieces of information and pull them together to get a picture of the pattern of that intelligence.

Did the Bush administration *really* understand and deal with terrorism prior to 9/11? Clearly the answer is no.

Clarke's testimony under oath stands unchallenged.

The August 6th PDB memo supports his claims 100%

Personally, I think the problem is not so much that the Bush admin was unattentive or negligent, or even inept before 9/11, but more that after the fact--they went into a campaign of smear and coverup--which points further to their corruption.

After 9/11 the Bush administration has been more than a total disaster. It is one thing to be a failure at true leadership, it is something else to actively take a whiz on democracy.
 
Originally posted by: fjord
Once again, Clarke claimed that the Bush administration did not give priority or prudent attention to terrorism and Al Qaeda--despite numerous intelligence spikes throughout 2001, prior to 9/11.

Rice did not directly rebutt Clarke's claim, instead she claimed the administration was not culpable or blameworthy due to faulty intelligence sharing and structurally flawed institutional problems. Further, she claimed no "silver bullet" could have prevented 9/11, so Bush admin is in the clear of any negligence, and should not be open to any criticism.

No silver bullet is a euphamistic way of saying no single piece of intelligence gave them the EXACT date and time and place and names of the perps--but this is totally disengenuous. The job of the National Security Advisor is to take all those disparate pieces of information and pull them together to get a picture of the pattern of that intelligence.

Did the Bush administration *really* understand and deal with terrorism prior to 9/11? Clearly the answer is no.

Clarke's testimony under oath stands unchallenged.

The August 6th PDB memo supports his claims 100%

Personally, I think the problem is not so much that the Bush admin was unattentive or negligent, or even inept before 9/11, but more that after the fact--they went into a campaign of smear and coverup--which points further to their corruption.

After 9/11 the Bush administration has been more than a total disaster. It is one thing to be a failure at true leadership, it is something else to actively take a whiz on democracy.

:beer:, right to the point. of course, for republicans everything bad is clinton's fault.

30 years from now when you open a high school history book, bush will be portrayed as one of the worst presidents.
 
Story


Bush: Nothing Warned of 9/11 Attacks


In his first comments since Saturday's release of the presidential daily brief, Bush said the document contained "nothing about an attack on America."


Bush said if there had been any specific intelligence pointing to threats of attacks on New York and Washington, "I would have moved mountains" to prevent it.


Bush was told more than a month before the Sept. 11 attacks that al-Qaida had reached America's shores, had a support system in place for its operatives and that the FBI (news - web sites) had detected suspicious activity that might involve a hijacking plot. Since 1998, the FBI had observed "patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks," according to the memo prepared for Bush and declassified Saturday.


White House aides and outside experts said they could not recall a sitting president ever publicly releasing the highly sensitive document, known as a PDB, for presidential daily briefing.


The Aug. 6, 2001 PDB referred to evidence of buildings in New York possibly being cased by terrorists.





Nothing at all...





SHUX
 
My own thoughts. Incidentally, my flame burns on the left. OK, I don't fault the administration with failing to stop the attack. I DO FAULT THEM FOR FAILING TO MAKE THIS A PRIORITY MATTER with the intelligence services after the PDB. I mean, that's the politician's way, right or left, see a warning message and send out the word "You guys be on top of this." I don't expect the President to mix in the details. But I do expect that when he gets a PDB like the one he got, he sends out a "Hey, I'm interested in this." message. So far, I've seen no indication that that was done. I mean, after all, the PDB said,

"Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.

The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full field investigations throughout the US that it considers Bin Ladin-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our Embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group of Bin Ladin supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives."

Seventy investigations going on. Sounds like it was under control to me. I don't expect the Pres to get out and examine the clues. I do expect a message that says, "This is important." Just show me the message.
 
Witling -

I don't think that you'll find that raise of the sense of urgency, Rice through the way she ran her office effectively cut off that line of communication.
It was severed moving up or down through the NSA, not relevant to Bush, not relevant to her.
 
Can someone explain to me why the page numbers at the bottom of the pages are redacted? We are seeing the whole thing, right?
 
Back
Top