Sunday, April 11, 2004

The Bush administration has released the August 6th PDB
This was admirably quick compared to the standard procedure of resisting for weeks or months
The Redaction seems to have been done very well under, among other things, time preassure.
I have no sense that I learned anything about sources and methods that would be damaging to operatives or would anger friendly intelligence services. I also have no sense that information relevant to the political debate was supressed using "sources and methods" as an excuse.

The memo shows that, although she will clearly not be prosecuted for perjury, Condolezza Rice certainly pushed the envelope. Already her testimony revealed that she considers [no threat information] to mean [they didn't tell the president the time, place and method of the attack] (I'm using [] for paraphrases). To make it more clear, she claims the President responded reasonably given the fact that the PDB didn't say that al Qaeda operatives were going to use planes as missiles against Washington and New York on September 11 2001.

I notice that the PDB does mention Washington and New York as possible sites for attacks and mentions no other cities. That is getting close to even Rice's definition of "threat information". Maybe she will argue that the Pentagon is not in DC but in Northern Virginia so the threat information was incorrect.

The "historical document" is full of assertions about the present. I offer an edited down version to spin it against Rice.


"Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US
...Bin Ladin implied in US television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef.
…Bin Ladin told followers he wanted to retaliate in Washington,
…Bin Ladin was planning to exploit the operative's access to the US to mount a terrorist strike.

Al-Qa'ida members -- including some who are US citizens -- have resided in or traveled to the US for years, …

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.

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. "

That sure looks like threat information to me. Much is inaccurate such as "federal buildings in New York" and "with explosives" but it clearly describes preparations in the present for attacks in the future.

Rice claims that it is reasonable for the President to require information on time place and method in order to do anything, such as warn America of the al Qaeda risk on August 7th as opposed to telling journalists about the threat from, you guessed it, Saddam Hussein. I see now "planning", "World Trade Center", "New York", "Washington", "hijackings". What furthre information could a President seriously hope to get from the CIA ?

No comments:

Post a Comment