"Bin Laden Determined To Strike In U.S."

[AnnieBW]

As part of a work-related class on critical thinking and analysis, we looked at the infamous PDB memo from August 6, 2001. You can find the full text at http://fpc.state.gov/fpc/31435.htm. It was the first time that I've actually looked at it. The first thing that struck me was how poorly it was written. The heart of the matter, that the FBI had 70 ongoing investigations into suspected Islamic terrorists, was at the END of the memo. Any person in journalism or reporting 101 can tell you that you put the most important information FIRST - the proverbial "inverted triangle". Never, at any time in the memo, did the writer say that there was a likelihood of attacks within the coming months, or that it was "likely" at all. It almost seemed like a background piece to cover someone's ass.

Now, I'm no expert on briefing the President, but I do know something about presenting information to upper management. You focus on the "so what". You give them short, informative bullets. You summarize your conclusion, and you give a recommended course of action. Even the title was wrong. It should read "Bin Laden likely to Strike In U.S." or "Terrorist Strike On America is Likely." If I was the writer's supervisor, I'd have kicked this puppy back for a re-write so fast that his or her head would be spinning.

Having read the briefing, I can certainly see why * didn't feel that it was necessary to take immediate action. Not that it forgives him for all of his other mistakes, but I can certainly understand it. Read it yourself, and try to think back to five years ago, before we knew what we know now, and make your own judgements. It's making me re-think my LIHOP position.

[LARED]

1. I appreciate the thoughtful analysis, but

I hope you are wearing flame proof undies.

Many people do not realize how much our thought processes changed on 9/11. For example it's not hard to imagine airliners being used as weapons now, but pre 9/11 the "rules" were to keep quiet in a hijacking and the plane will land some where with a list of demands.

[AnnieBW]

3. Oh, I'm getting flamed on other posts

So I'm used to it. However, the poor quality of the memo coming from a senior CIA person makes me wonder about other things - like was it vague for a reason, or just sloppiness? Hmmm... it's a whole other can o' worms.

[WoodrowFan]

13. it's corporate writing

it's corporate writing, so it won't jump out and say "we think he'll attack in 6 weeks." It'll be couched carefully. Look at the Prez Briefings online at places like the National Security Archive. For such a briefing this one was practically jumping up and down and waving red flags. But then you have to take the audience into account. They don't listen when the Pentagon bluntly says we don't have enough troops. Hitting these clowns on the head with a 2x4 isn't enough, you need a ceiling beam.

a relevant link:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB116/

check all the historic examples link at the bottom of the page.

[greyl]

6. Are you kidding? It wasn't "hard to imagine" then either.

It's true that, pre 9/11, the rules for passengers during a hijacking were "keep quiet and the plane will land somewhere with a list of demands", but, and it's a big ass but, the PDB wasn't prepared by civilians for presentation to other civilians.

Further on the "hard to imagine" point, I'm sure you must be aware of the episodes of The Simpson's and The Lone Gunmen in which hijacked planes were used as flying car bombs.
It's crazy, but it's not exactly a crazy idea.

[Bolo Boffin]

7. And as I recall

security for the G-8 summit that year was very concerned with planes being flown into the meeting place.

Plus the kamikazi flights from WW2: did American intelligence think that only Japanese soldiers could do such a thing?

It's definitely not an unthinkable idea.

[petgoat]

11. The French had foiled a plot to fly a hijacked plane into the Eiffel Tower

in 1994.

The "Atlanta Rules" closed the airspace above the Olympics in 1996.

Al Qaeda's "Project Bojinka" plot to fly hijacked airliners into the
WTC and the Pentagon were known in 1995.

[DoYouEverWonder]

2. Keep in mind that it appears

that a number of pages have probably been deleted.

The PDB that the WH released doesn't make much sense in it's current form. It looks like they kept the first page and the last page and threw out everything in between.

[Bolo Boffin]

5. I disagree.

Though I don't have the links handy, actual copies of the relevant pages of this PDB are out there. This section of the PDB (which covered several other topics) is two pages long, and the text is as it's reproduced in the link in the OP.

Instead of trying to change the hard facts to fit your theories, change your theories to fit the facts.

[DoYouEverWonder]

8. According to Condi the Aug 6 PDB was a 'historic document'

which included information about Bin Laden's methods of operation from a historical perspective dating back to 1997.

The first page goes into a fair bit of detail about certain key events up to 1998. Then the 2nd page, which is only 2 paragraphs, suddenly concludes the report. The NYT's had originally reported that the Aug 6 PDB was 11 pages long. Funny that if this was supposed to be a summary of bin Laden's 'history' that they didn't even mention the Cole bombing or anything else after 1998?

[Bolo Boffin]

9. The Aug 6 PDB covered more topics than Osama.

Do you honestly think Osama was the only intelligence concern of the day? The PDB was 11 pages long, but that doesn't mean the part about Osama was 11 pages long. It was two, and its focus on what bin Laden was "determined" to do shows that Condi was spinning her ass off about the PDB's "historic" characteristics.

[DoYouEverWonder]

10. Basic book report writing 101

The content is suppose to relate to the title.

The title of of the 08/06 is 'Bin Laden determined to strike in US'

Therefore the content of this report should be about Bin Laden. Out of 11 pages only the 1st page and the last two paragraph related to Bin Laden. WTF were the other 9 pages about, how to make falafel?

[Bolo Boffin]

14. That's not the title of the entire brief, only a two page section.

That's the only part of the 8/6/01 PDB to be released.

You and I have no idea what was covered in the other nine pages, but it probably had nothing to do with bin Laden. It shouldn't surprise you that the American government has security interests that have nothing to do with bin Laden.

Let me state this simply, to make sure we are communicating: the 8/6 PDB was eleven pages long and covered more topics than Osama. The two page section of the brief that dealt with Osama is the only part of that PDB that has been declassified. The other nine pages could have been a report on Chinese troop movements, or Kim Jong Il's efforts to enrich nuclear fuel - you and I don't know.

[Artdyst]

12. The 8/6 PDB had many purposes & leads to many questions

Was 8/6 the first time Bush had been given information about terrorism? Isn't it odd that this PDB was given to him "out of the blue"? Since the PDB (unclassified version) contains nothing concrete, what was the (legitimate) purpose of providing the President with musings about OBL?

I think it's fairly obvious that the purpose of the document was to:

* Provide Bush with guilty knowledge (the portion of the PDB that wasn't declassified probably has more in the way of "hints" that savvy analysts would identify as an effort to give the President guilty knowledge such that he couldn't plausibly deny having at least a good inclination that something BIG was gonna happen and that it might well involve explosives, airplanes, the WTC, Washington (Pentagon) and so on.

* Inoculate U.S. intelligence & FBI operatives against any potential charges that could arise as the result of the then up-coming attacks (since it was impossible to know for sure that there wouldn't be any potentially embarassing mishaps that could lead to a discovery that it was an inside job, the various intelligence agencies wanted protection from any public outrage that could conceiveably lead to charges as serious as treason).

Another good example of making sure the President was "on board" (had guilty knowledge) was showing him the closed circuit television (live) "hit" on the WTC1 just before he entered Booker Elementary School...which has to have been the luckiest place to be in America on 9/11 (obviously the SS knew that, which is why they didn't immediately remove the President. Dick Cheney was literally lifted off his feet (if reports are accurate) & hustled down to the "Operations"
room in the WH basement where he could "monitor" the "crisis" as it unfolded.

[greyl]

4. Your post is misleading beyond reasonable belief.

It's as if all of the bush apologetic criticisims you listed, were chosen based on their being the opposite of reality.

I'll list the 14 serious problems with your post now:

1. The heart of the matter, that the FBI had 70 ongoing investigations into suspected Islamic terrorists,

Bullshit. The heart of the matter is the title, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike U.S."

___________________________________________________________________
I'm not going to bother with the next 13, because I think your post must be sarcasm.

Don't forget the key!
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/top10/254

[DemInDistress]

15. back in April 04' when that PDB was made public on TV I saw

the full 2 pages on cable (maybe CNN,maybe MSNBC). Someone inadvertently showed to the camera both pages and
on page 2 3rd or 4th paragraph this was stated," weeks many many dead, very very big uproar,possibly using hijacked commercial jets as suicide weapons to be crashed into skyscrapers in New York City, Chicago and Washington DC."
I usually let my VCR run all day but this day I didn't (maybe that was a good thing). I had expected to see the PDB again since it was now made public. It was again shown but it was sanitized that damaging paragraph and the paragraph that followed was GONE.
I know what I read..I had 45 seconds to memorize what I seen and who would have thought "they would pull the last 2 paragraphs on Page 2.

Remember when BenViniste challenged Rice to release the PDB. It might have been the following afternoon when it went public but I know what I saw..
I recall it was george w who requested that report when rumors of arabs wanting to learn to fly commercial jets came to his attention in July 2001 (Phoenix Flight Memo's). What disturbs me is not just the Aug.6 PDB but how many additional PDB's prior to Sept.11 2001 did that scumbag get? We know through BenViniste that there was the Aug.6 2001 PDB but how many more warnings was given that we Never heard about.

When George Tenet testified he was asked if he met with bush during Aug. 2001. Tenet replied,"NO" bush was in crawford and I was in Maryland. Later that afternoon after testifying Tenet and Kean came to the camera and amended the testimony to include meeting with bush on Aug 18 (right after Moussouai was arrested) Aug 25 when Tenet spent the day at the ranch in Crawford (what did they discuss?) and on Aug 31, when the idiot came back to DC after his 6 weeks of vacation "WHAT DID THEY DISCUSS" keep in mind after reading from Paul Thompson's Timeline many many warnings came to DC (Tenet) (FBI) by individuals and others from foreign countries. George Tenet hair was on fire. H'm..

Certain people were warned not to fly in early Sept 2001 why wasn't that warning shared with all America because King George wanted to be a 'WAR PRESIDENT" I don't believe for a minute that du-fuss could plan such a complex act of murder. I feel it was Mossad working with expert retired CIA folks connected to Poppy Bush Cheney and Dumsfeld that pulled off 911.

One more thing on 911 I gave that scumbag bush the benefit of the doubt he claimed he didn't know who did it but as the weeks and months passed it became obvious that he and his DICK cheney were hiding from the truth by not allowing for an independent investigation of the 911 attacks and almost 5 years later "I NOW KNOW WHY"

911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB"

Thanks for allowing me this time to write DU !!!