White House releases bin Laden memo

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
White House releases bin Laden memo
78
Sat, 04-10-2004 - 7:46pm

Presidential briefing was at center of Rice's testimony.


http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/10/bush.briefing/index.html


The White House declassified and released Saturday the daily intelligence briefing delivered to President Bush a month before the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.


Portions of the intelligence report dealing with Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network and dated August 6, 2001, have been redacted for national security reasons, the White House said.


The memo, titled "Bin Laden determined to attack inside the United States," had been described by the White House as a largely historical document with scant information about domestic al Qaeda threats.


The memo includes intelligence on al Qaeda threats as recent as three months before the attacks.


More.......... http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/10/bush.briefing/index.html


Transcript: Bin Laden determined to strike in US

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/10/august6.memo/index.html


The following is a transcript of the August 6, 2001, presidential daily briefing entitled Bin Laden determined to strike in US. Parts of the original document were not made public by the White House for security reasons.


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.


PDF file of transcript. You can see the areas deleted. It appears very sketchy, as if pages are missing, JIMO.


http://www.cnn.com/2004/images/04/10/whitehouse.pdf

cl-Libraone~

 


Photobucket&nbs

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-05-2004
Wed, 04-14-2004 - 11:27am
Actually I am open minded. You and I do have our minds made up about this war though. My view is that your opinion of the war is colored the fact that your son is in the military and that you deeply hate and distrust George Bush.

While I didn't hate Bill Clinton, I would have been very distrustful of him if either one of my son's lives were in his hands, so I can relate to that feeling. I would never want to trust my loved ones to someone like him, mainly because I never viewed him as sincere.

Regardless of the relentless attacks from the left I feel like George Bush is sincere and is a good man. I don't think he's given most of the people who hate him a reason to hate him, other than the fact that he has an R behind his name. He even acts like a Democrat with all his social spending - so it must be the R, mainly, imo.

He is right about this war. Our country's safety is at stake and, even though I disagree with him on many issues I will be proudly voting for him based mainly on this strong unwavering determination to defend this country.

And Iraq with pay for most of it's own reconstruction with oil revenues. This was discussed last night in the press conference.

Thanks for your kind words at the end of your post. I did pray for him yesterday and will continue to do so.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-05-2004
Wed, 04-14-2004 - 11:42am
I'm with you on taking out Saudi Arabia! Let's go get them! Do you think that we need 12 years of trying diplomacy first, though? I personally think 12 years is too long, but how about you? I mean, isn't that how long we tried dipolmatic remedies in Iraq before we did anything?

After our action in Iraq, many nations that have supported terrorism are seeing that we really mean business and are cooperating with us. We are going for "Peace through Strength" because it is the ONLY thing that works. Did you know that Libya was very discomforted with our action in Iraq that they started cooperating in a big way? This directly stemmed from our actually doing what we threatened to do in Iraq.

You and I disagree completely about Bush and this war.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 04-14-2004 - 11:47am
>> And if you'll remember, the terrorists attacked the USS Cole in the fall of 2000. America was outraged. Clinton was already leaving office, the Republicans wouldn't have had any reason to claim a "Wag the Dog" then.

Perhaps, but I still think that the Congress would have given Clinton a very difficult time, especially in light of the fact that Al Gore was running for President.

We will never know as Clinton never did seek approval.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Wed, 04-14-2004 - 2:34pm
Question - Why do you believe that anyone who disagrees with Bush 'hates' him?

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-05-2004
Wed, 04-14-2004 - 4:13pm
Why would you assume to know what I think? I have never said that *anyone* who disagrees with Bush hates him, nor would I. And I think that would be a silly thing to say. It is pretty clear that he *is* hated by many, though. Do you disagree?
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Wed, 04-14-2004 - 6:05pm

Yes, I do disagree.


iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 04-15-2004 - 12:08pm
That does nothing to dispell the fact that the offer was made.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 04-15-2004 - 12:11pm
After hearing more of what has come out during the commission hearings, it seems as though the government was doing everyting it could to hinder its own ability to do proper investigations.

We had the FBI not knowing what was going on within its own department, as Freeh stated he had no idea how the information about 70 field investigations made it into the Aug 6 PDB. Isnt that his job?

We have the Asst AG releasing a memo that is saying that they want to be sure that the domestic intelilgence services do not get any of the overseas intelligence. Seems a bit odd to me, but I know there are some legal guidelines for this.

We have the former counter-terrorism expert for the CIA testify that numerous times they had requested more money as they were constantly running over budget mid way through the year.

The entire thing seems to be a huge mess, and it is going to take a while to fix it, so it seems

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Thu, 04-15-2004 - 2:43pm

Hopefully, identifying the problems will help put us on the road towards solving them...but, honestly, I'm not holding my breath.


iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 04-15-2004 - 3:10pm
>> Somehow, we need to get beyond all the politicization of the issue, figure out what went wrong and keep it from ever happening again

I agree.

Some interesting things that I have seen as a result of the commission, picking through the finger pointing:

1) The Gorelick memo shows the difficulties that exist between the agencies when it comes to sharing intelligence information. This needs to be addressed, and perhaps changed.

2) Freeh's testimony about the problems with immigration and the INS not properly processing the people with fingerprints and photo identification so they can properly be accounted for is another point that needs to be addressed and corrected.

3) Black's testimony that he had requested several times for more resources and a larger budget to do the job properly as they were constantly running over budget mid way through the year needs to be addressed

4) Tenets testimony that there are not enough assets to gather intelligence in the arena we are now dealing with in a post cold war world needs to be addressed and corrected.

5) Freeh's testimony that he had no idea how the information about 70 ongoing field investigations getting into the PDB needs to be addressed. If the head of the FBI does not know what is getting placed into the PDB this cannot be a good thing

6) Clarke saying since the early 90's that al Qaeda was a growing and severe threat, but seemingly ignored by both Clinton and Bush needs to be addressed. Did he not have the proper evidence to back his position up, or was he not talking to the right people????? I bet this is something we never will know.

7) Knowing what we do now about the terrorists, why are we not actively looking to secure both our borders and our ports? This needs to be addressed and corrected if we truly are to be a safer nation.

These are just some of the hot points, and they all are showing the lack of communication in the intelligence sector, and the different obstacles that they need to overcome to work more efficiently. This is just my opinion on this so far. What do you think of the points that I have raised to date.

Pages