• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CIA Warnings About 9/11

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,342
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The story is now coming out at a faster tempo. Warning was given before 9/11 but the political class -- both parties -- chose to throw the professionals under the bus.


The Friday Cover
‘The Attacks Will Be Spectacular’

An exclusive look at how the Bush administration ignored this warning from the CIA months before 9/11, along with others that were far more detailed than previously revealed.
By Chris Whipple

“Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” The CIA’s famous Presidential Daily Brief, presented to George W. Bush on August 6, 2001, has always been Exhibit A in the case that his administration shrugged off warnings of an Al Qaeda attack. But months earlier, starting in the spring of 2001, the CIA repeatedly and urgently began to warn the White House that an attack was coming.
By May of 2001, says Cofer Black, then chief of the CIA’s counterterrorism center, “it was very evident that we were going to be struck, we were gonna be struck hard and lots of Americans were going to die.” “There were real plots being manifested,” Cofer’s former boss, George Tenet, told me in his first interview in eight years. “The world felt like it was on the edge of eruption. In this time period of June and July, the threat continues to rise. Terrorists were disappearing [as if in hiding, in preparation for an attack]. Camps were closing. Threat reportings on the rise.” The crisis came to a head on July 10. The critical meeting that took place that day was first reported by Bob Woodward in 2006. Tenet also wrote about it in general terms in his 2007 memoir At the Center of the Storm.



But neither he nor Black has spoken about it publicly in such detail until now—or been so emphatic about how specific and pressing their warnings really were. Over the past eight months, in more than a hundred hours of interviews, my partners Jules and Gedeon Naudet and I talked with Tenet and the 11 other living former CIA directors for The Spymasters, a documentary set to air this month on Showtime. . . .




 
This is just CIA warnings. There were MOSSAD, MI6, FSB, French, and German warnings as well. Why do you think MOSSAD was filming the event? Do yourself a favor and check why four simultaneous Joint Forces operations were ongoing during 9/11, and why air traffic controllers were confused. And who is in charge of Joint Forces operations?
 
This is just CIA warnings. There were MOSSAD, MI6, FSB, French, and German warnings as well. Why do you think MOSSAD was filming the event? Do yourself a favor and check why four simultaneous Joint Forces operations were ongoing during 9/11, and why air traffic controllers were confused. And who is in charge of Joint Forces operations?

Nonsense, front to back.
 
All I can tell you is, that according to Michael Morell, then Deputy Director of the CIA and the man who briefed president Bush daily on intelligence matters, was that the information that President Bush received from the CIA concerning a possible terrorist attack on US soil by bin laden and al qaida, was not actionable information. Prior to the September 11th attacks, the CIA never presented intelligence to the White House that was specific enough that it could have been used to prevent those attacks.

Much has been said about the intelligence presented to President Bush that warned of possible attacks by OBL prior to that famous August 6th PDB. People have cited that intel as proof that the president ignored warnings of attacks on the US, but leave out one important detail about that intelligence. Prior to the August 6th PDB, all of the intelligence that the CIA briefed the President on containing credible attack threats by al qaida, were attacks that targeted US interests overseas, not the US homeland. In fact, the only intelligence the CIA got wind of about a possible attack on the US homeland prior to that August 6th memo, came from one of our embassies in the middle east that received an anonymous phone call from someone who said that a group sympathetic to al qaida, was in the US and planning to use explosives to launch an attack on a major US city. The CIA investigated that report, but were never able to corroborate it.

Watch this clip from a Nora O'Donnell interview with Michael Morell. He provides details and context on both the August 6th PDB and it's origins, as well as the intelligence the president received prior to August 6th.

 
Last edited:
All I can tell you is, that according to Michael Morell, then Deputy Director of the CIA and the man who briefed president Bush daily on intelligence matters, was that the information that President Bush received from the CIA concerning a possible terrorist attack on US soil by bin laden and al qaida, was not actionable information. Prior to the September 11th attacks, the CIA never presented intelligence to the White House that was specific enough that it could have been used to prevent the 9/11 attacks.

Much has been said about the intelligence presented to President Bush that warned of possible attacks by OBL prior to that famous August 6th PDB. People have cited that intel as proof that the president ignored warnings of attacks on the US, but leave out one important detail about that intelligence. Prior to the August 6th PDB, all of the intelligence that the CIA briefed the President on containing credible attack threats by al qaida, were attacks that targeted US interests overseas, not the US homeland. In fact, the only intelligence the CIA got wind of about a possible attack on the US homeland prior to that August 6th memo, came from one of our embassies in the middle east that received an anonymous phone call from someone who said that a group sympathetic to al qaida, was in the US and planning to use explosives to launch an attack on a major US city. The CIA investigated that report, but were never able to corroborate it.

Watch this clip from a Nora O'Donnell interview with Michael Morell. He provides details and context on both the August 6th PDB and it's origins, as well as the intelligence the president received prior to August 6th.



Morell's account is incomplete, and now superseded by Black and Tenet.
 
Morell's account is incomplete, and now superseded by Black and Tenet.

The key things he said were that all the intel about OBL attacks that he and George Tenet provided to President Bush prior to the August 6th PDB, were attack plots overseas and not on the US homeland, and that the intelligence briefing from August 6th contained no actionable intelligence.

I read the piece from politico, looking for anything that contradicted what Morell has said, and I can't find it. Could you please paste the excerpts that you believe contradict what he said?
 
The key things he said were that all the intel about OBL attacks that he and George Tenet provided to President Bush prior to the August 6th PDB, were attack plots overseas and not on the US homeland, and that the intelligence briefing from August 6th contained no actionable intelligence.

I read the piece from politico, looking for anything that contradicted what Morell has said, and I can't find it. Could you please paste the excerpts that you believe contradict what he said?

The drama of failed warnings began when Tenet and Black pitched a plan, in the spring of 2001, called “the Blue Sky paper” to Bush’s new national security team. It called for a covert CIA and military campaign to end the Al Qaeda threat—“getting into the Afghan sanctuary, launching a paramilitary operation, creating a bridge with Uzbekistan.” “And the word back,” says Tenet, “‘was ‘we’re not quite ready to consider this. We don’t want the clock to start ticking.’” (Translation: they did not want a paper trail to show that they’d been warned.) Black, a charismatic ex-operative who had helped the French arrest the terrorist known as Carlos the Jackal, says the Bush team just didn’t get the new threat: “I think they were mentally stuck back eight years [before]. They were used to terrorists being Euro-lefties—they drink champagne by night, blow things up during the day, how bad can this be? And it was a very difficult sell to communicate the urgency to this.”
That morning of July 10, the head of the agency’s Al Qaeda unit, Richard Blee, burst into Black’s office. “And he says, ‘Chief, this is it. Roof's fallen in,’” recounts Black. “The information that we had compiled was absolutely compelling. It was multiple-sourced. And it was sort of the last straw.” Black and his deputy rushed to the director’s office to brief Tenet. All agreed an urgent meeting at the White House was needed. Tenet picked up the white phone to Bush’s National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice. “I said, ‘Condi, I have to come see you,’” Tenet remembers. “It was one of the rare times in my seven years as director where I said, ‘I have to come see you. We're comin' right now. We have to get there.’”
Tenet vividly recalls the White House meeting with Rice and her team. (George W. Bush was on a trip to Boston.) “Rich [Blee] started by saying, ‘There will be significant terrorist attacks against the United States in the coming weeks or months. The attacks will be spectacular. They may be multiple. Al Qaeda's intention is the destruction of the United States.’" [Condi said:] ‘What do you think we need to do?’ Black responded by slamming his fist on the table, and saying, ‘We need to go on a wartime footing now!’”
 
I knew that this was what you were going to post. I have a lot of respect for you Jack, because you are an honest and reasonable person who doesn't let ideology cloud the facts.

My disagreement is based more on what isn't said in the excerpt below, than what is said. What Morell said is not contradicted by anything in that excerpt, although everything it says certainly gives that impression. I'll go over it piece by piece and explain.

The drama of failed warnings began when Tenet and Black pitched a plan, in the spring of 2001, called “the Blue Sky paper” to Bush’s new national security team. It called for a covert CIA and military campaign to end the Al Qaeda threat—“getting into the Afghan sanctuary, launching a paramilitary operation, creating a bridge with Uzbekistan.”

I do not doubt this one bit, because the CIA had drawn up similar preemptive plans during the Clinton administration to take out bin laden.

“And the word back,” says Tenet, “‘was ‘we’re not quite ready to consider this. We don’t want the clock to start ticking.’” (Translation: they did not want a paper trail to show that they’d been warned.)

Again, I don't doubt that that was the Administrations response, but I do question the translation enclosed in the parenthesis. Follow me if you would...

They presented a plan to the administration to take offensive action. Such action must have been preceded by intelligence information about a pending strike on the US, in order to justify such an offensive. Wouldn't you agree?

The Administration rejected the plan and saying "we don't want the clock to start ticking". That doesn't strike me as a) an attempt by the administration to secure deniability about being warned of an attack on the US by OBL, because b) the intelligence information on any threats on the US by OBL, would have been included in one or more PDB's that the president had received.... In other words, a paper trail had to have already existed, otherwise their plan to take offensive action wouldn't have any legitimate basis. Warnings are issued first... That creates a paper trail... Then a plan of action is created. This is why the translation doesn't seem very plausible to me.

The first impression I got when I saw the "clock ticking" comment was that launching an offensive to kill OBL, would result in every al qaida operative and OBL sympathizer in the world, putting all their efforts into retaliatory strikes against the US homeland, no matter how big or small.

Black, a charismatic ex-operative who had helped the French arrest the terrorist known as Carlos the Jackal, says the Bush team just didn’t get the new threat: “I think they were mentally stuck back eight years [before]. They were used to terrorists being Euro-lefties—they drink champagne by night, blow things up during the day, how bad can this be? And it was a very difficult sell to communicate the urgency to this.”

I believe Black saw an urgency in the situation, but what I don't know is, the basis for it.

That morning of July 10, the head of the agency’s Al Qaeda unit, Richard Blee, burst into Black’s office. “And he says, ‘Chief, this is it. Roof's fallen in,’” recounts Black. “The information that we had compiled was absolutely compelling. It was multiple-sourced. And it was sort of the last straw.”

What information? I've read dozens of stories, seen interviews, and read all the investigative reports I could get my hands on, and I have never seen or heard any details about any intelligence information indicating an attack on the US was imminent, or even actionable.

This is what I was saying... We know about all these intelligence reports and the details behind them prior to 9/11, all of which to my knowledge never indicated that an attack on the US homeland was in the works... They claim now that they expressed such panic, so why haven't they ever told anyone the basis of that panic?


Black and his deputy rushed to the director’s office to brief Tenet. All agreed an urgent meeting at the White House was needed. Tenet picked up the white phone to Bush’s National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice. “I said, ‘Condi, I have to come see you,’” Tenet remembers. “It was one of the rare times in my seven years as director where I said, ‘I have to come see you. We're comin' right now. We have to get there.’”

OK, fine and dandy.

continued
 
Tenet vividly recalls the White House meeting with Rice and her team. (George W. Bush was on a trip to Boston.) “Rich [Blee] started by saying, ‘There will be significant terrorist attacks against the United States in the coming weeks or months. The attacks will be spectacular. They may be multiple. Al Qaeda's intention is the destruction of the United States.’"


Saying there will be attacks "against the United States" is not the same as saying there will be attacks "in the United States".


As Morell has stated, Tenet has stated in past interviews and according to the information I obtained over the years through interviews and investigative reports, The pre-9/11 intelligence about OBL attack plans, were all plots that targeted US interests overseas, such as embassies, military outposts, etc... Based on interviews I've seen with people in the intelligence field, they both consider them, and refer to them as "attacks against the US".


[Condi said:] ‘What do you think we need to do?’ Black responded by slamming his fist on the table, and saying, ‘We need to go on a wartime footing now!’”


His idea of "wartime footing" was to launch that preemptive strike against OBL, and nowhere do any of them say anything about measures that should be taken here at home.


Condi Rice's response in the next paragraph seems to confirm exactly what Morell said about the intelligence on OBL attacks prior to August 6th, being exclusively overseas plots:


“My recollection of the meeting is not very crisp because we were discussing the threat every day.” Having raised threat levels for U.S. personnel overseas, she adds: “I thought we were doing what needed to be done.”




Do you understand where I'm coming from now Jack?


Every story I have ever read, most of which came from far left blogs, have exactly the same language, omissions and lack of specifics, and I find it incredibly hard to believe that it's just a coincidence. Nowhere in that article did they ever cite any intelligence indicating that an attack on the US homeland by OBL was planned, much less imminent. My impression is that a few of them had a "gut feeling" something bad was going to happen, didn't have a clue what it would be, and couldn't find any intelligence that would back up those feelings.


What they are doing now is telling the world "We knew it... we knew it... we knew OBL was going to launch a spectacular attack... We told them and they didn't listen." I believe them when they say they knew an attack was coming and that they said so to the Administration, but the problem as I see it is, they are leaving out vital details and seem content on allowing people to believe their gut feeling and plan of action was supported by the intelligence, and that if they were listened to, 9/11 might have some how been prevented.
 
Saying there will be attacks "against the United States" is not the same as saying there will be attacks "in the United States".


As Morell has stated, Tenet has stated in past interviews and according to the information I obtained over the years through interviews and investigative reports, The pre-9/11 intelligence about OBL attack plans, were all plots that targeted US interests overseas, such as embassies, military outposts, etc... Based on interviews I've seen with people in the intelligence field, they both consider them, and refer to them as "attacks against the US".





His idea of "wartime footing" was to launch that preemptive strike against OBL, and nowhere do any of them say anything about measures that should be taken here at home.


Condi Rice's response in the next paragraph seems to confirm exactly what Morell said about the intelligence on OBL attacks prior to August 6th, being exclusively overseas plots:







Do you understand where I'm coming from now Jack?


Every story I have ever read, most of which came from far left blogs, have exactly the same language, omissions and lack of specifics, and I find it incredibly hard to believe that it's just a coincidence. Nowhere in that article did they ever cite any intelligence indicating that an attack on the US homeland by OBL was planned, much less imminent. My impression is that a few of them had a "gut feeling" something bad was going to happen, didn't have a clue what it would be, and couldn't find any intelligence that would back up those feelings.


What they are doing now is telling the world "We knew it... we knew it... we knew OBL was going to launch a spectacular attack... We told them and they didn't listen." I believe them when they say they knew an attack was coming and that they said so to the Administration, but the problem as I see it is, they are leaving out vital details and seem content on allowing people to believe their gut feeling and plan of action was supported by the intelligence, and that if they were listened to, 9/11 might have some how been prevented.

I agree with you about the nonsense in parentheses. It's a partisan cheap shot.
 
Man alive, DP has numerous threads about this specious bit of propaganda. Is it an effort to make the Cocaine Importing Agency look good in the eyes of a most gullible public? Maybe.

911 was an inside job, a false flag, and staged events. Though they may not like to talk about it, most folks understand that.
 
Back
Top Bottom