| 1. A search of all your public statements and writings reveals that you apparently
mentioned Osama bin Laden only once and never mentioned Al Qaeda at all as a threat to the
United States before 9/11. Why? 2. Both Bob Woodward's book "Bush at War" and
Richard Clarke's "Against All Enemies" show that shortly after 9/11 there was
considerable focus by the Bush cabinet on Iraq's possibly being the perpetrator of the
attacks. Why was Iraq considered a suspect when there was no evidence that it was involved
in any act of anti-American terrorism for a decade — other than a failed attempt to
assassinate former President George H. W. Bush in 1993 — while there was overwhelming
evidence that it was the Al Qaeda network that attacked the World Trade Center in 1993,
tried to blow up Los Angeles International Airport in 1999, blew up American embassies in
Africa in 1998 and attacked the destroyer Cole in Yemen in 2000? After all, the cabinet
did not discuss the possibility that the attacks were the work of Iran, Libya or Syria,
all countries that have a history of terrorism directed at Americans.
3. Mr. Clarke, the former White House counterterrorism director, has said that of the
100 or so meetings held by cabinet-level officials before 9/11 only one was about
terrorism. Is this true? If so, was this emblematic of the Bush administration's posture
on terrorism?
4. The Bush administration's position, and your own, has been that it would not have
been possible to conceive that planes might be used as missiles against the United States.
Yet during the 1996 Olympics countermeasures were taken for just that eventuality. How do
you reconcile this discrepancy?
5. According to the interrogations of detainees held as suspected Al Qaeda operatives,
the lack of response to the attack on the destroyer Cole made the group feel that it could
act with impunity. Early in your administration Al Qaeda was identified as the principal
suspect in that attack. In addition, Osama bin Laden released videotapes in January and
June of 2001 more or less taking credit for his role in it. Why was there no response of
any kind from your administration to the Cole attack, an act of war against the United
States that killed 17 sailors and nearly sank one of the most advanced destroyers in the
American fleet?
6. On Aug. 6, 2001, President Bush was briefed that members of Al Qaeda might plan to
hijack a plane in order to secure the release of Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, a spiritual
leader of Al Qaeda jailed in the United States. Given what you now know of the importance
of Sheik Rahman to Al Qaeda — as well as the fact that two of his sons played key
roles in the group — how would you now characterize this piece of intelligence?
7. Why did you have no plan in place on 9/11 to immediately attack Al Qaeda and its
Taliban allies? The United States government had repeatedly put the Taliban on notice that
they would be held responsible for any attacks by Al Qaeda. By delaying the military
response for a month, the Taliban and Al Qaeda had time to disperse, regroup and fight
another day.
8. When you came into office some two dozen members of Al Qaeda, including several
senior commanders of the group, had already been indicted. What plans did you have to
bring these men to justice?
9. Why has there been no public apology or resignation by any Bush administration
official over the most catastrophic intelligence and national security failure of the past
five decades?
Peter Bergen, a fellow of the New America Foundation and an adjunct professor at
Johns Hopkins University, is the author of "Holy War Inc.: Inside the Secret World of
Osama bin Laden."
OP-ED
CONTRIBUTOR 6 Questions for Dr. Rice
By SCOTT ARMSTRONG
|
| 1. In his statement on March 24 to the independent commission investigating the 9/11
attacks, George Tenet, the director of central intelligence, said, "In August 1996,
bin Laden, in collaboration with radical Muslim clerics associated with his group, issued
a religious edict or fatwa in which he proclaimed a `declaration of war,' authorizing
attacks against Western military targets on the Arabian Peninsula." Two years ago,
the joint Congressional committee looking into pre-9/11 intelligence made reference to the
participation of Saudi clerics — salifi — in the preparation of additional
fatwas issued by Osama bin Laden in 1998 in which he "declared war" against
Americans. What's more, the director of the National Security Agency reportedly told a
closed session of that committee that on Sept. 10, 2001, his agency intercepted messages
by the 9/11 hijackers. The messages, which went untranslated until Sept. 12, were
reportedly not to Osama bin Laden but to Saudi clerics.
Who, then, planned and executed the 9/11 attack beyond Osama bin Laden and his
lieutenants? What have the intelligence agencies of the United States and other countries
suggested were the reasons, motivations and objectives of these other groups? What has the
United States government learned about the participation before and after 9/11 by these
Saudi clerics? What has been done to halt their support of Mr. bin Laden and bring them to
justice? What has been done to compel the Saudi government to take action against these
forces?
2. Looking back on 9/11, were your priorities appropriate for the threat based on what
you knew? Did you take the necessary precautions given your perception of the threat at
the time? Press reports indicate that before 9/11, you believed that the use of ballistic
missiles against United States was our most pressing national security vulnerability. What
precautions were taken to ensure that Al Qaeda militants in Kashmir did not provoke a
ballistic missile exchange between India and Pakistan?
3. Why was Iraq viewed by the president — and others — as a likely, if not
the most likely, perpetrator of 9/11?
4. What was the accumulated evidence on Sept. 11 that Iraq was a direct and imminent
threat to the United States? How much reliance did our government put on human sources,
Iraqi defectors and former Iraqi officials for this intelligence? In retrospect, do you
consider these sources to have been credible?
5. The stated purpose of invading Afghanistan was to remove the Taliban and deprive Al
Qaeda of its primary sanctuary. There appears to be no evidence that Iraq, before 9/11,
was a sanctuary for Osama bin Laden and his followers. Yet Pakistan, Saudi Arabia,
Uzbekistan, Yemen and several North African countries have served as havens for them and
other anti-American terrorist groups. What steps did we take before or after 9/11 to
deprive terrorists of these havens? Why do we not have more troops in Afghanistan today to
thwart the continued and escalating attacks from the Taliban and Al Qaeda?
6. J. Cofer Black, the State Department's coordinator for counterterrorism, told
Congress last week: "Iraq is currently serving as a focal point for foreign jihadist
fighters, who are united in a common goal with former regime elements, criminals and more
established foreign terrorist organization members to conduct attacks against coalition
and Iraqi civilian targets. These jihadists view Iraq as a new training ground to build
their extremist credentials and hone the skills of the terrorist."
Has the United States invasion of Iraq played into the hands of anti-American Islamic
extremists and made Iraq a breeding ground for terrorism? Leading up to the invasion, what
was your plan to avoid an escalation of terrorism from within Iraq?
Scott Armstrong, founder of the National Security Archive, is director of the
Information Trust.
|
|
|
