Rice, the CIA, and the July 2001 meeting — redux

Let’s briefly recap. According to Bob Woodward’s new book, “State of Denial,” then-National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice had what appeared to be a pretty important meeting on July 10, 2001. Rice sat down with then-CIA Director George J. Tenet and his counterterrorism chief, J. Cofer Black, and according to the CIA officials, Tenet and Black warned Rice that al Qaeda was planning an attack on American interests, possibly in the United States itself, and that immediate action was needed. Rice, according to reports, blew the concerns off. Bush, Rice reportedly said, would not swat at flies.

Rice initially questioned whether the meeting had even happened, but this week, we learned that the meeting definitely occurred. Now, we’ve learned a bit more. (thanks to my friend Sarabeth for the heads-up)

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice did receive a CIA briefing about terror threats about two months before the Sept. 11 attacks, but the information was not new, her chief spokesman said.

In doing so, Sean McCormack confirmed a meeting — on July 10, 2001 — that his boss had said repeatedly she could not specifically recall. She had said earlier that there were virtually daily meetings at the time. […]

“We can confirm that a meeting took place on or around July 10, 2001,” McCormack said. “The information presented in this meeting was not new, rather it was a good summary from the threat reporting from the previous several weeks,” he added.

“Not new.” This is a bit like the defense when the president was presented with a PDB from nearly panic-stricken intelligence officials, shortly before 9/11, about how determined Osama bin Laden was to attack inside the United States. It apparently wasn’t “new” enough to warrant the president’s attention.

But in Rice’s case, the terrorist threat warnings certainly seemed to be new.

From Woodward:

On July 10, 2001, two months before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, then-CIA Director George J. Tenet met with his counterterrorism chief, J. Cofer Black, at CIA headquarters to review the latest on Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda terrorist organization. Black laid out the case, consisting of communications intercepts and other top-secret intelligence showing the increasing likelihood that al-Qaeda would soon attack the United States. It was a mass of fragments and dots that nonetheless made a compelling case, so compelling to Tenet that he decided he and Black should go to the White House immediately.

Tenet called Condoleezza Rice, then national security adviser, from the car and said he needed to see her right away…. He and Black hoped to convey the depth of their anxiety and get Rice to kick-start the government into immediate action. […]

Tenet hoped his abrupt request for an immediate meeting would shake Rice. He and Black, a veteran covert operator, had two main points when they met with her. First, al-Qaeda was going to attack American interests, possibly in the United States itself. Black emphasized that this amounted to a strategic warning, meaning the problem was so serious that it required an overall plan and strategy. Second, this was a major foreign policy problem that needed to be addressed immediately. They needed to take action that moment — covert, military, whatever — to thwart bin Laden.

Black recalls, “The only thing we didn’t do was pull the trigger to the gun we were holding to her head.” Now the defense for Rice’s spectacularly poor judgment is that the hair-raising threat wasn’t “new” enough?

I still believe the best way to settle this is to see exactly what Tenet and Black showed Rice. It’s been five years; the briefing materials can be declassified and the public can see what Rice chose to ignore.

If Rice is right, the intelligence materials were routine and historical. If Woodward’s book is right, the materials pointed almost directly to 9/11.

If Rice is right, someone lied to Woodward. If the book is right, Rice should resign.

Not just what Rice ignored, but Ashcroft as well. Especially in light of post-meeting facts which show Rice and the administration was only really concerned with and focused on missile defense, and Ashcroft was cutting the budget for anti-terror related activities.

  • “Tenet called Condoleezza Rice, then national security adviser, from the car and said he needed to see her right away…. He and Black hoped to convey the depth of their anxiety and get Rice to kick-start the government into immediate action. […]” – Bob Woodward, “State of Denial”

    See the arrogance of these Clintonista leftovers, calling Ms. Bushite herself and demanding a meeting. No wonder she blew them off. Do they expect the Bushites to actually follow Clintonistas practice and mobilize the Government to protect America when there’s brush to be cleared in Crawford?

    What a silly idea!

  • Bush, Rice reportedly said, would not swat at flies.

    But… according to, y’know, that movie, “not swat at flies” was Bush’s way of taking action, not avoiding it. Oh, and that decision was a direct result of the August 6th PDB. And the movie was based on the 9/11 Commission report, so you know it’s true.

  • Perhaps everyone should be thanking Cyrus and Diznee for priming the pump (so to speak.) If they hadn’t tried to wave the “red” flag with their horseshit Path to 9/11 propaganda piece then there would have been no smary attempted whacking of Clinton by Chris Wallace and no ferocious defense of his anti terrorism efforts and Woodward’s book would have been dismissed by the Cons as Librul agitprop.

    This is what the CIA would call blowback.

    Thanks Cyrus! You’re doing a hell of a job!

  • DAn, and Condiliar would not have so vocally drawn attention to her actions but for the Fox Smackdown.

  • I admit up front I am naive, but isn’ Sean McCormack essentially saying that, far from Tenet’s and Black’s 7.10 visit being the occassion when intel finally offered information that OBL and the al Qaedettes were on their way to strike, Condi knew about all this for several weeks MORE – i.e. mid-June or so – from her “threat reporting from the previous several weeks”.

    Soooo…mid-June threat reports (that came through avenues other than Tenet & Black I assume, since those two apparently were not yet doing the hair-on-fire dance) say OBL is going to strike, Condi does nothing. 7.10 Tenet and Black rush to the White House and report (or repeat if you are McCormack) that OBL is going to attack, and Condi does nothing. The August 6 PDB says OBL determined to attack, and Condi does nothing.

    Two questions: (1) HaveI got my timeline straight? (2) where was Condi’s reporting coming from in June that bypassed the director of Central Intelligence, since he saw no reason to be alarmed about what McCormack says was essentially the same information that freaked out Tenet so much in July that he demanded Condi meet him?

    Like I say, I am naive about many things, so don’t feel guilty about letting me know there’s a simple answer to this, too.

  • Someone needs to brief Denny Hastert on this defense.

    “I did not find out about the [Insert scandal relative material] on [Insert Date].”

    Of course the truth is that s/he knew about it before that date but in GOPworld the above statementis factual and therefore true.

    Let’s try it:

    Reporter: Rep Hastert did you learn about Rep. Foley’s problems 6 months ago if a briefing from Rep. Reynolds?

    Hastert: No. (technically true because according to the fired staffer and reluctant DEM party hero he knew about it 3 years ago!)

    Oh and by the way Dr. Rice needs to hit showers. I’m sure Hannity will claim the Sean McCormick is a DEM operative out to attack Rice while she is on a diplomatic mission the the Middle East. blah blah…. Too friggin bad. Bush, Ricew, Ashcroft, Tenet, and Cheney knew, not just 2 months prior but possibly teh day they took office as Clinton’s administration offcials claimed.

  • Bubba, Ashcroft didn’t completely ignore these warnings about al Quaeda. He was conscientious enough to quit flying commercial airliners before Sept. 11th. So all this work by our inelligence agencies may have saved one life – Ashcroft’s.

  • One thing is clear, the intelligence community was trying to get the attention of Bush, Rice et al. Each attempt resulted in little to no action or response. So each next attempt became a little more “urgent.” But was still basically ignored. Which culminated in the August PDB specifically stating bin Laden is going to attack the US. Yet even that was ignored. An historical document, yes, but a history of all the bells and whistles going off the previous 3-5 months, all in one place, sent with the hopes og getting them to do something asap.

  • Anyone ever hear of LIHOP?
    Let It Happen On Purpose.
    Conspiracy spreaders had this one years ago, but it was just too horrible to rationally consider.
    Remember, the PNAC supporters needed a “Pearl Harbor” type of event to push their agenda.
    The Foley affair symbolizes that the Repubs care only about power, not protection of even innocent kids.
    Repubs willingness to shed a river of blood in Iraq shows that they have little regard for anyone else’s life or limb.
    Sorry for the ramble, I’m just trying to connect the dots.

  • This was about a week before the Genoa G8 summit – the one where they famously had special security plans to watch for attacks by airplanes tha Condi later said no one could have imagined… It was the Bushies first big international meeting since taking power and I’m sure they were very distracted and the last thing Condi needed was some Clintonistas elbowing their way to the front and demanding attention.

    The big issues that the Bushies were concerned with at the time was the negative reaction in Europe to Bush’s rejection of the Kyoto Agreement and the plans to scrap the ABM treaty. After the summit Bush would meet with the Pope and discuss stem cell research. They had just revealed how radical their agenda would be to the dismay of the rest of the world and they were busy defending it. In the sense that it would distract from their agenda, they didn’t have time nor interest for warmed-over terrorist warnings.

  • Condi should resign?? No way!

    I would give her a medal of freedom for implementing her boss’ “Not-swatting-at-flies” plan. Also for converting the NSAF plan into OIL (Operation Iraqi Liberation), which definitely isn’t creating MORE FLIES.

  • I don’t understand why the fact that it wasn’t new information is exculpatory (sp?) It seems to me that the more they heard about a probable attack, the more likely it was to be credible. If, in my business, we heard about a product problem once, we’d look into it and possibly conclude it was a one time problem. However, if we continued to hear about similar problems, we would become more concerned, not less so.
    Cathy

    Also, I understand why the Foley story is getting all the intention – but to my mind this story is much more important and I bet the Bushies actually are happy that Foley grabbed the spotlight.

  • Considering Rice is/was a Sovientologiest she didn’t/doesn’t know didly about terroristm, this would like seem nothing more than a “good summary.” She has and is in totally over her head, but we can say that for more than a few administration officials can’t we?

  • One more thing – as I recall from the 9/11 commission hearings a Condi statement that had me ranting was her comment made more that once regarding the terrorist threat was along the lines of “I was not tasked with that”. As if she just sits at her desk waiting for someone to tell her what to do or as if she’s a fast food employee waiting for a customer with a glazed look in her eye. In her position, she is not supposed to be “tasked”, she is supposd to be directive. Again, in my experience you cannot get away with that attitude as a high level executive in any successful business. (or maybe you can, if your the CEO)

  • “Condi Rice—you’ve just acknowledged that the threat report you received on 7-10-01 was “old news.” What are you going to do next?”

    “I’m going to Diz-nee world! WHEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!”

  • If the book is right, Rice should resign.

    Only in the reality-based community. In the current administration, if the book is right, then Ohioan has it: she will recieve the congressional medal of freedom.

  • Sorry for the ramble, I’m just trying to connect the dots.

    No apology necessary. The more that comes out about what the Bush crew knew and when they knew it, the more alarming the whole story becomes. Bush, Rumsfeld, Rice, Ashcroft and Cheney were all repeatedly warned the 9-11 attacks were coming, yet decided to “ignore” the evidence.

    If you knew about premeditated murder but did nothing to stop it, wouldn’t that make you complicit? I’m not a member of the tinfoil hat set by any means, but it’s looking like the Bush administration enabled the 9-11 attacks.

    Resignation? Hell, let’s label them “enemy combatants” and convene the tribunals.

  • Also, I understand why the Foley story is getting all the attention – but to my mind this story is much more important and I bet the Bushies actually are happy that Foley grabbed the spotlight.
    —Comment by Cathy

    I have had the same thought myself. To me this revelation is so much worse than some republican pharasee caught in his own folly. Of course the page story does point to the lack of oversight which we all have been concerned about for a long time, but the Condi story is terrible. She should resign.

  • Condi should have taken the NFL job when it came along. Ah well, there’s yet another example of poor decision-making by our nation’s currrent Secretary of State. -Kevo

  • Condi is right. The information was old news. Sandy Berger, Richard Clarke and other Clinton administration offiicials had impressed on her the reason to respond to these al Quaeda threats. The flies she refused to swat flew into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and crashed into a field in Pennsylvania, killing all on board and many on the ground. This wasn’t a failure of imagination, it was a failure to give a sh*t.

  • “We can confirm that a meeting took place on or around July 10, 2001,” McCormack said. “The information presented in this meeting was not new, rather it was a good summary from the threat reporting from the previous several weeks,” he added.

    Woodward quotes some other meeting participant, Tenet or Black, as saying it was “connecting the dots”. What McCormack and Rice had heard before then were the dots. This would have been the meeting where action was called for.

    But that’s pre-11/9/2000 thinking, isn’t it 😉

  • I love how Condi tries to have her cake and eat it too. First she doesn’t remember the meeting; then the meeting did occur but there was nothing new in it.

    But yet, she felt the information was important enough to tell Rumsfeld and Asscroft.

    And if it was old news, WHAT DID SHE DO WITH IT WHEN SHE FIRST FOUND OUT??

  • Sounds like one from Donald Rumskin’s* Greatest Hits:

    You see there’s news. And then there’s known news and unknown news and new news and old news. If it’s new news then no one could have known it. It it’s old news how can any one know it’s news?

    I can’t wait ’til these pathetic sluts are run out of town.

    *Unless that was Cheney. All Neo-Con war whores sound alike to me.

  • uhhhhh…. all of this information “wasn’t news”, and yet out of the other side of her forked tongue, Condi also says “no one could have imagined that they would crash planes into buildings?”

    Their lies are getting weaker.

  • Comments are closed.