"It's total hubris. It's arrogance by the people doing this," said a
second senior U.S. counter-terrorism official. "This is a 24-hour
thing, and you can get these kinds of warrants immediately. I think
they are just being lazy."


>From the Los Angeles Times


Officials Fault Case Bush Cited
Internal breakdowns, not shortcomings in spy laws, were at play before
Sept. 11, they say.
By Josh Meyer
Times Staff Writer

December 21, 2005

WASHINGTON — In confirming the existence of a top-secret domestic
spying program, President Bush offered one case as proof that
authorities desperately needed the eavesdropping ability in order to
plug a hole in the counter-terrorism firewall that had allowed the
Sept. 11 plot to go undetected.

In his radio address Saturday, Bush said two of the hijackers who
helped fly a jet into the Pentagon — Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid
Almihdhar — had communicated with suspected Al Qaeda members overseas
while they were living in the U.S.

"But we didn't know they were here until it was too late," Bush said.
"The authorization I gave the National Security Agency after Sept. 11
helped address that problem in a way that is fully consistent with my
constitutional responsibilities and authorities."

But some current and former high-ranking U.S. counter-terrorism
officials say that the still-classified details of the case undermine
the president's rationale for the recently disclosed domestic spying

Indeed, a 2002 inquiry into the case by the House and Senate
intelligence committees blamed interagency communication breakdowns —
not shortcomings of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act or any
other intelligence-gathering guidelines.

The incident Bush referred to involved at least six communications
between the hijackers in San Diego and suspected terrorists overseas.

The current and former counter-terrorism officials, who requested
anonymity, said there were repeated phone communications between a
safe house in Yemen and the San Diego apartment rented by Alhazmi and
Almihdhar. The Yemen site already had been linked directly to the Al
Qaeda bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa in 1998 and to the 2000
bombing of the U.S. destroyer Cole in Yemen, several current and
former U.S. counter-terrorism officials familiar with the case said.

Those links made the safe house one of the "hottest" targets being
monitored by the NSA before the Sept. 11 attacks, and had been so for
several years, the officials said.

Authorities also had traced the phone number at the safe house to
Almihdhar's father-in-law, and believed then that two of his other
sons-in-law already had killed themselves in suicide terrorist
attacks. Such information, the officials said, should have set off
alarm bells at the highest levels of the U.S. government.

Under authority granted in federal law, the NSA already was listening
in on that number in Yemen and could have tracked calls made into the
U.S. by getting a warrant under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Then the NSA could have — and should have — alerted the FBI, which
then could have used the information to locate the future hijackers in
San Diego and monitored their phone calls, e-mail and other
activities, the current and former officials said.

Instead, the NSA didn't disclose the existence of the calls until
after Sept. 11, according to these officials and U.S. documents
produced in two independent inquiries.

"The NSA was well aware of how hot the number was … and how it was a
logistical hub for Al Qaeda, and it was also calling the number in
America half a dozen times after the Cole and before Sept 11," said
one senior U.S. counter-terrorism official familiar with the case.

The joint congressional inquiry found that the NSA and the FBI
independently had learned of the "suspected terrorist facility in the
Middle East" by 1998, and that the NSA had disseminated several
reports of communications to and from the undisclosed location.

"However, NSA and the FBI did not fully coordinate their efforts, and,
as a result, the opportunity to determine Almihdhar's presence in the
United States was lost," the 2002 report said.

Like other current and former officials, the senior counter-terrorism
official would only speak on condition of anonymity, citing the
classified nature of the intercepts and the controversy that has
engulfed the secret program since its disclosure last week.

NSA officials declined to comment Tuesday; a spokeswoman for Lt. Gen.
Michael V. Hayden — the former NSA chief who now is the No. 2 official
in the newly created Office of the Director of National Intelligence —
said she could not discuss the issue.

This week, Hayden said that the program to eavesdrop without obtaining
FISA warrants was necessary to respond to fast-moving terrorist
threats, and that getting a FISA warrant was inefficient and slow.

But NSA and Bush administration officials were urged repeatedly by
members of the joint inquiry and by the Sept. 11 commission to
recommend FISA reforms that they felt were needed, said Eleanor Hill,
staff director of the joint inquiry and former inspector general for
the Pentagon.

She also said congressional committees held hearings on whether FISA
needed an overhaul to better track international terrorism communications.

"The question was always asked of these witnesses: 'What do you need?'
… There was plenty of time to raise this issue," Hill said Tuesday.
"You don't just take it upon yourself to circumvent FISA. That
attitude ignores the absolutely critical need for oversight."

Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales said this week that the administration
had discussed possible reforms to FISA with members of Congress. "We
were advised that … that was not something we could likely get," he said.

The joint inquiry and the Sept. 11 commission that came after it
referred indirectly to the calls from Yemen to San Diego. But neither
report disclosed what the NSA gleaned from the calls, or why they were
never disclosed to the FBI. The current and former counter-terrorism
officials also said they did not know or could not comment.

"I don't know if they got half the conversation or none of it or hung
up or whatever," the senior counter-terrorism official said. "All I
can tell you is we didn't get anything from it — we being the people
at the FBI who could have done something about it. So were they
sitting on it? I don't know."

The officials from U.S. intelligence, law enforcement and
counter-terrorism agencies said they agreed to discuss the case — and
Bush's reference to it — because they did not believe it supported the
administration's position that the FISA court should be circumvented
in certain high-profile and urgent terrorism cases.

"It's total hubris. It's arrogance by the people doing this," said a
second senior U.S. counter-terrorism official. "This is a 24-hour
thing, and you can get these kinds of warrants immediately. I think
they are just being lazy."

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back!

Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
Brooks Isoldi, editor


  Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

Reply via email to