You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: WoT
Records Show Tenet Briefed Rice on Al Qaeda Threat
2006-10-03
From the NYT just before an election, so put your special reading glasses on.
JIDDA, Saudi Arabia, Oct. 2 — A review of White House records has determined that George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, did brief Condoleezza Rice and other top officials on July 10, 2001, about the looming threat from Al Qaeda, a State Department spokesman said Monday.

The account by Sean McCormack came hours after Ms. Rice, the secretary of state, told reporters aboard her airplane that she did not recall the specific meeting on July 10, 2001, noting that she had met repeatedly with Mr. Tenet that summer about terrorist threats. Ms. Rice, the national security adviser at the time, said it was “incomprehensible” she ignored dire terrorist threats two months before the Sept. 11 attacks.

Mr. McCormack also said records show that the Sept. 11 commission was informed about the meeting, a fact that former intelligence officials and members of the commission confirmed on Monday.

When details of the meeting emerged last week in a new book by Bob Woodward of The Washington Post, Bush administration officials questioned Mr. WoodwardÂ’s reporting. Now, after several days, both current and former Bush administration officials have confirmed parts of Mr. WoodwardÂ’s account.

Officials now agree that on July 10, 2001, Mr. Tenet and his counterterrorism deputy, J. Cofer Black, were so alarmed about an impending Al Qaeda attack that they demanded an emergency meeting at the White House with Ms. Rice and her National Security Council staff.

According to two former intelligence officials, Mr. Tenet told those assembled at the White House about the growing body of intelligence the Central Intelligence Agency had collected pointing to an impending Al Qaeda attack. But both current and former officials took issue with Mr. WoodwardÂ’s account that Mr. Tenet and his aides left the meeting in frustration, feeling as if Ms. Rice had ignored them.

Mr. Tenet told members of the Sept. 11 commission about the July 10 meeting when they interviewed him in early 2004, but committee members said the former C.I.A. director never indicated he had left the White House with the impression that he had been ignored. “Tenet never told us that he was brushed off,” said Richard Ben-Veniste, a Democratic member of the commission. “We certainly would have followed that up.”
Ben-Veniste is one of the more honorable Democrats around. If he's backing Condi up, this is no story at all despite the NYT spin.
Mr. McCormack said the records showed that, far from ignoring Mr. TenetÂ’s warnings, Ms. Rice acted on the intelligence and requested that Mr. Tenet make the same presentation to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and Atttorney General John Ashcroft.

But Mr. Ashcroft said by telephone on Monday evening that he never received a briefing that summer from Mr. Tenet. “Frankly, I’m disappointed that I didn’t get that kind of briefing,” he said. “I’m surprised he didn’t think it was important enough to come by and tell me.”
Once again, kids: no one, no one, covered himself/herself with glory in the pursuit of al-Qaeda, not in the Clinton administration, not in the Bush administration, from the early 1990s all the way to 9 am on 9/11. It's important to learn how and why we screwed up, just as we had to learn from Pearl Harbor, but the issue isn't where and how much blame to assign. It is, much more simply, what are we doing now to wreck al-Qaeda?
Posted by:Steve White

#16  Fred for Director of National Intelligence, and Joe Mendiola for Director of MisUnderInformation.
Posted by: Steve White   2006-10-03 17:45  

#15  Oops, I missed seeing your last paragraph. Shit! My apologies - I was far too harsh. Kick me, plz. :-(

As for who should be in what position, I'm open. Certainly not Dickie, lol.
Posted by: .com   2006-10-03 16:52  

#14  Interesting, DN. However, I do not think you or DG made any sort of case that would stand up to factual scrutiny, although it is perfectly acceptable for political hit pieces.

I guess we differ on:

a) actively fucking up vs passively not being able to read tea leaves

b) solid and specific intel vs vague bullshit intel

I jus' loves perfect 20/20 hindsight.

I won't go thru all of the stuff about Pearl Harbor - and think it is a poor choice to equate with 9/11 - where there was some serious active fucking up (documented in actual orders) but unknown quality intel delivered to those who needed it in time - wildly differing claims and whole schools of pro/con advocacy revolve around the intel and who got it and when.

Which did Kimmel and Short have?

Which did Rice and Bush have?

I'm rather disappointed by your response. Need blood? Okay, let's see the proof - not Woodward or Dickie Clark, please, something actually credible and specific to those you want crucified. BTW, who do you want crucified?

I've said my piece. I just don't believe in this sort of shit. :-|
Posted by: .com   2006-10-03 16:49  

#13  CIA analysts need not apply either. Too many leaks. Purge time
Posted by: Frank G   2006-10-03 16:32  

#12  Dot,

Your points on tossing folks overboard are interesting, but there is another side to the matter.

As you'll recall after the Pearl Harbor attack, Admiral Kimmel and General Short were both relieved of command. FDR went far down the Navy's seniority list to pick Nimitz as CINCPAC. Many have explained the reasoning thusly: It wasn't Kimmel or Short's fault that it happened, but FDR didn't want commanders who obviously did not have special insight into the current situation and therefore they had to go.

I have similar misgivings in today's environment. It wasn't Tenet's fault or Louis Freeh's or Condi Rice's, but have we gotten the people with special insight into the right positions? (John Kerry need not apply.)
Posted by: Dreadnought   2006-10-03 16:04  

#11  Lol, DepotGuy - did you leave a trail of breadcrumbs?

That post reminds me of liberalhawk, lol.

"Reasonable people are not advocating for George TenetsÂ’ or Dr. RicesÂ’ head on a pike. But..."

Look, no one, 911 Political Asscover & Blame Commission included, saw precisely what occurred coming. Nothing actionable was discovered by Tenet's bunch, much less handed to Rice and fumbled.

You obviously do want some heads on pikes or someone to commit sepuku. But you've stated that such would be unreasonable, lol. I agree - it's pointlessly unreasonable, unproductive, and unseemly to need somebody to be sacrificed on the altar of political bullshit when no one, and I mean no one, knew what the fuck was going to happen.

The Psychic Friends Network was offline.

So, other than wanting some blood spilled to satisfy the mob, is there anything else?
Posted by: .com   2006-10-03 13:33  

#10  "It really is goofy to single out someone in the cabinet and rail against them. They serve at the pleasure of the President."

.com,
Your point is well taken. Too often people search for alternate realities and pin exclusive blame on others to mitigate their ignorance. This enables them to overlook cumbersome complexities and provides them with simple explanations. However, the conclusions of 9/11 commission illustrates the folly of those unwilling to assign individual responsibility only to choose the path of least resistance in collective blame. For many, when the commission concluded that the 9/11 tragedy resulted from a “Failure of imagination at all levels”, it exposed the unthinkable truth that even the survival of a nation now must first pass through the political prism. Reasonable people are not advocating for George Tenets’ or Dr. Rices’ head on a pike. But it is impossible to ignore that one was the Presidents’ National Security Advisor and the other was the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency when the worst Terrorist attack hit the United States mainland. It’s difficult to offer an analogy of failure from leaders even with limited roles of action and accepted partial responsibility. In some cultures, a failure of that magnitude, the honourable course of action would have been self disembowelment with a Tantô blade. But of course we all know that one received the nation's highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom Award and the others position was elevated to Secretary of State.
Posted by: DepotGuy   2006-10-03 12:31  

#9  OT : Regarding the pink issue, I think Mr. White is still in denial, and it's harmful for him in the long run to pretend not to notice, and pretend it's salmon, in order not to upset him.
Posted by: anonymous5089   2006-10-03 11:36  

#8  whoops! meant "pink salmon"
Posted by: BA   2006-10-03 11:34  

#7  I'm with the mods' comments in pink salmon about it being high time to quit the blame game and let's get to the "After Action Report" and learn HOW to squish AQ and other Islamofascists like the cockroaches they are. Hey, I'm all (personally) for piling on President Clinton anytime we can, but we've ALL got to remember that even us die-hard Rantburgers couldn't have gone to war w/ AQ without 9/11. To pretend you could've taken them out with the military at that time is ludicrous, honestly. Now, let's get on with it, and GIT ER DONE!
Posted by: BA   2006-10-03 11:33  

#6  They couldn't get Bush in the 04 'lection, so they came after Cheney. They got Scooter, but couldn't take out Rove. This week they're working both Rummy and Rice, with approximately the same odds for success...zippy.
Posted by: Seafarious   2006-10-03 09:43  

#5  this is all rewarmed up spit. It all gets down to the same thing: no specifics, no actionable intel
Posted by: Captain America   2006-10-03 09:12  

#4  Mmm, letÂ’s seeÂ… the former Director had many meetings with the National Security Advisor and he could not convey a sense of urgency of the looming threat of Al QaedaÂ….. Wish I was in those briefings, or maybe the NYT was there and failed to report itÂ…
Posted by: Joe of the Jungle   2006-10-03 08:44  

#3  we're waiting null. LOL!
Posted by: RD   2006-10-03 03:55  

#2  Spot on, tw.

Null, you sound just like Snease. Who sounds like Listen to Dogs. Who sounds like Man Bites Dog - only on proper meds.

[mini-rantus]
It really is goofy to single out someone in the cabinet and rail against them. They serve at the pleasure of the President. Full stop. If anyone really thinks they're doing it all wrong, playing the maverick and off the deep end, then they're both unhappy with how Bush is deploying and using his chess pieces and completely ignorant of the Executive Branch of the US government. Blame it on Bush. Then, intrepid ankle-biters of the world, please explain how it is that you are so much more brilliant, can see so much more clearly, and possess such a stash of mahvelous intel. I'm sure Bush & Co will beg you to bring your dazzling intellect to bear upon the major issues. Besides, I need the laughs.
[/mini-rantus]
Posted by: .com   2006-10-03 03:00  

#1  It's Secretary Rice's job to talk nicely to everyone unless told otherwise, right up to the moment when war is declared -- or the bombs start falling, whichever comes first/
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-10-03 01:03  

00:00