Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

WH web site posts "Explainer" of memo

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
grasswire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 05:34 PM
Original message
WH web site posts "Explainer" of memo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
grasswire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
1. text
The August 6, 2001 Pdb
· the August 6, 2001 Pdb Item Entitled "bin Ladin Determined to Strike



in US" was prepared in response to questions asked by the President about the possibility of attacks by al-Qaida inside the United States. The PDB article did not warn of the 9-11 attacks. Although the PDB referred to the possibility of hijackings, it did not discuss the possible use of planes as weapons. The PDB was based largely on background information about past terrorist attacks conducted by al-Qaida and general threats from the late 1990s. The only recent information concerning possible current activities in the PDB related to two incidents. There is no information that either incident was related to the 9-11 attacks.

Q: Why was this PDB prepared?

DCI Tenet has already described the genesis of this PDB item in a letter to the 9-11 Commission dated March 26, 2004. This PDB item was prepared in response to questions President Bush asked his PDB briefer. The President had seen previous intelligence reports about possible al-Qa'ida threats to U.S. targets outside the United States. The President had asked whether any of the information pointed to a possible attack inside the United States. When this PDB item was presented to the President on August 6, 2001, his PDB briefer told him that it was prepared in response to the President's previous questions.

Q: What information does this PDB item contain?

The article advised the President of what was publicly well-known: that Bin Ladin had a desire to attack inside the United States. Bin Ladin had stated publicly in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would try to "bring the fighting to America." Most of the information in the article was an analysis of previous terrorist attacks by al-Qaida and a summary and discussion of general threat reporting from the late 1990s. The draft was prepared by CIA after consultation with an FBI analyst.

Q: Did the PDB item include any warning of the 9-11 attack?

No. The only recent information concerning possible current activities in the PDB related to two incidents. There is no information that either incident was related to the 9-11 attacks. The first incident involved suspected "recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York." This information was based on a report that two Yemeni men had been seen taking photographs of buildings at Federal Plaza in New York. The FBI later interviewed the men and determined that their conduct was consistent with tourist activity and the FBI's investigation identified no link to terrorism. The second incident involved a call made on May 15, 2001 by an unidentified individual to the U.S. Embassy in the UAE "saying that a group of Bin Ladin supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives." The caller did not say where or when the attacks might occur. o On May 17, 2001, the NSC's counterterrorism staff convened the Counterterrorism Security Group, whose members include State, DoD, JCS, DoJ, FBI, and CIA, and reviewed the information provided by the caller. o The information was also shared with Customs, INS, and FAA. o The PDB article advised the President that CIA and FBI were investigating the information. o We had no information, either before or after 9/11, that connects the caller's information with the 9/11 attacks.

Q: The PDB item stated that "al-Qa'ida members have resided in or traveled to the US for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks." Was this new information and what was being done about it?

The presence of individuals associated or affiliated with al-Qaida in the United States was not new information. This information had been well-known to the intelligence and law enforcement communities for a number of years. The FBI was actively investigating individuals associated or affiliated with al-Qaida in the United States -- a fact noted in the PDB article. As also noted in the PDB article, the FBI was conducting approximately 70 full-field Bin-Laden-related investigations.

Q: Why is the term "patterns of suspicious activity" used in the PDB and what does it refer to?

The CIA author of the PDB item judged, after consulting an FBI colleague, that there were suspicious patterns of activity that were worrisome, even though nothing pointed to a specific operation in a specific location. o In that vein, the author was concerned that one of the East African bombing defendants had told FBI officers earlier in 2001 that Bin Laden would retaliate if the defendants in the trial were convicted -- four were convicted in New York on May 29 -- with a major attack, something the FBI interpreted to mean possibly in the United States. o In addition, the CIA author understood that there had been possible recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York. Except for the information relating to the possible surveillance of federal buildings in New York, which was later determined by the FBI to be consistent with tourist-related activity, the PDB item contained no information from FBI investigations that indicated activities related to the preparation or planning for hijackings or other attacks within the United States. None of the information relating to the "patterns of suspicious activity" was later deemed to be related to the 9-11 attacks. From June through September, the FAA and FBI issued a number of warnings about the possibility of terrorist attacks. FAA warnings included specific warnings about the possibility of a hijacking to free imprisoned al-Qaida members inside the United States and the possibility of attacks in response to law enforcement actions against al-Qaida members.

Q: Why has information been redacted from the PDB?

The copy of the PDB that has been released is a copy of the PDB prepared for the President, except that three redactions have been made to protect the names of foreign governments that provided information to CIA.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FloridaPat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Then why don't they release it? OK, someone - when was the
last time the Bush people told the truth about anything??? Does anyone believe they've decided to tell the truth now???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
louis-t Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. WH still trying to control info
they're trying to pre-emptively answer all of the expected questions.
Damage control. By the way, if you think * really asked any questions about al-Queda......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AussieInCA Donating Member (510 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 05:57 PM
Response to Original message
4. freeper idiots posting the spinfaq like it's the pdb
one of them posts..."yep just like condi said"

keep drinking that cool aid freepers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MGKrebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
5. It is SO friggin damaging!
He ASKED the question .
They told him they were HERE.
They told him they wanted to HIJACK PLANES.
They told him they wanted to ATTACK WASHINGTON.

At what point does it become specific enough to do SOMETHING. ANYTHING.

Shrub couldn't be bothered. He was on vacation. And Condi has absolutely no Middle East expertise. They are incompetent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Katherine2 Donating Member (319 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #5
15. Why do they keep talking about
how we were only warned about hijackings, but not about using planes as missiles? Are hijackings OK, as long as they don't crash the plane? I don't get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 02:11 AM
Response to Reply #15
21. That's why Condi used the term "traditional hijackings" in her May 2002
press conference. Just another diversionary tactic. It was never followed up on at the press conference but it was not lost on the "9/11 widows".

I give the "Jersey Girls" a ton of credit for their tenacity in pushing for these commission hearings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occulus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 02:19 AM
Response to Reply #21
22. Maybe a 'traditional hijacking' was what she
expected to happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fridays Child Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
6. Conflicting stories about the redactions!
From the above webpage:

The copy of the PDB that has been released is a copy of the PDB prepared for the President, except that three redactions have been made to protect the names of foreign governments that provided information to CIA.

From CNN:

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.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/10/bush.briefing/index.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 04:26 AM
Response to Reply #6
24. so the PDB contains info that's not publicly available,
contrary tot what the WH explanation says.

"Q: What information does this PDB item contain?

The article advised the President of what was publicly well-known: that Bin Ladin had a desire to attack inside the United States. Bin Ladin had stated publicly in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would try to "bring the fighting to America." ...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MikeG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 06:57 PM
Response to Original message
7. Someone tell the White House we aren't as stupid as W
We don't need an explainer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mountainvue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 08:14 PM
Response to Original message
8. Does anyone know
how long the original memo was? A page and a half seems a little short to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. I'm probably wrong, but somehow 16 pages seem to be what
I have heard or read. And that does seem like a lot to me?!?!?!?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mountainvue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. I thought I had heard
16-19 pages myself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Guess I ain't going looney, LOL!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 01:35 AM
Response to Reply #9
18. I'd heard 11 pages.
This is apparently NOT all there is to it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhereIsMyFreedom Donating Member (605 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. As far as I understand
This is the full length of the memo. Apparently, after Bush took office they had to shorten the length of the daily presidential briefings because of his short attention span. And 1 1/2 pages is being generous. It's really only 1 page and a tiny bit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mountainvue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 01:14 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. It was actually 11 pages.
There is a link abou it on one of the other threads.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhereIsMyFreedom Donating Member (605 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 02:48 AM
Response to Reply #16
23. I think this is all based on a typo of 11 instead of 1
I'm pretty sure the commission said that it was only 1 1/2 pages during the interview with Condi.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Devils Advocate NZ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. 1 and a 1/2 pages of a 16 page briefing document...
That is how it seems to me. I have heard that the PDB is 16 or so pages long, but that there is only 1 and a 1/2 pages that actually deals with Al Qaeda.

The rest might deal with items such as North Korea, Russia, Iraq etc...

If you look at the "explainer" they have a question: "What information does this PDB item contain?". That suggests to me that they are NOT releasing the entire PDB but only the "item" that deals with Al Qaeda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mountainvue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 01:15 AM
Response to Reply #14
17. The fact of the matter is
we don't know what the rest of it is. What they have released is damaging enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
masshole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 08:29 PM
Response to Original message
11. 3 redactions
Q: Why has information been redacted from the PDB?

The copy of the PDB that has been released is a copy of the PDB prepared for the President, except that three redactions have been made to protect the names of foreign governments that provided information to CIA.

It took a couple of days to redact the names of three foreign countries who provided intelligence? Wow.

Shrub himself must have handled that chore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ravy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #11
20. Twas Bush and Condi that needed the explainer.(nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
minkyboodle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 01:37 AM
Response to Original message
19. LOL
Hannity is trying to memorize this by Monday..... its a struggle for him.
Scott
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 04:20 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC