NDN believes that the Secretary of State must answer these four critical questions about the July 10th meeting. If she does not provide honest and adequate answers to these four questions, the American people will be forced to conclude that she and others lied about what they knew to cover up their inadequate response to the Al Qaeda threat.

******

Question 1:  Why do you continue to deny that an “emergency meeting” took place on July 10th 2001 between yourself, CIA Director George Tenet and Director of the C.I.A. Counterterrorist Center Coffer Black? 

During an October 1st press briefing Secretary Rice was asked about the July 10th meeting between her, George Tenet and Coffer Black.  Her answers first cast doubt on the meeting itself: 

“…we'll have to go back to the records to see if there was a meeting on July 10th…I don't know that this meeting took place, but what I really don't know [sic], what I'm quite certain of, is that it was not a meeting in which I was told that there was an impending attack and I refused to respond.”[1]  

She then attempted to downplay the importance of the meeting:

“I don't remember a so-called emergency meeting.”[2] 

George Tenet’s sworn testimony before the 9/11 Commission – as reported by Washington Post journalists who were read sections of the transcript - confirms that the meeting happened, and that its urgency was high and its warnings stark:

“Tenet recalled a briefing he was given on July 10 th by Black and his staff, according to the transcript. He said the information was so important that he quickly called for a car and telephoned Rice to arrange for a White House meeting to share what he had just learned, according to the transcript and Ben-Veniste.”[3] 

In Bob Woodward’s State of Denial, Coffer Black explains the thinking behind calling for this unusual meeting:

“Perhaps a dramatic appearance -- Black called it an "out of cycle" session, beyond Tenet's regular weekly meeting with Rice -- would get her attention.”[4]

Question 2:  How can you continue to claim not to have been warned of a possible attack in the United States in light of what we now know about the July 10th meeting?

Secretary Rice says that she was given no warning from George Tenet about potential attacks on the United States:

“…all of the information was about potential attacks abroad. There was supposed to be -- the countries that were assumed to be targets -- Saudi Arabia, Yemen, I think there was one about Israel, maybe Jordan. Nothing about the United States…Now, there was nothing that related to an attack in the United States.”[5]

This claim was contradicted as far back as 2002, when Time Magazine first reported the July 10th meeting:

“In mid-July [2002], Tenet sat down for a special meeting with Rice and aides.  “George briefed Condi that there was going to be a major attack,” says an official...Tenet couldn't rule out a domestic attack...”[6]

An official at the July 10 briefing confirms that US targets were discussed:

“In the briefing, Tenet warned in very strong terms that intelligence from a variety of sources indicated that bin Laden's terrorist network was planning an attack on a U.S. target in the near future, said one of the officials.”[7]

And in State of Denial Bob Woodward writes that pointing out the threat to the US was a primary reason for the meeting:

“[Tenet] and Black, a veteran covert operator, had two main points when they met with [Rice]. First, al-Qaeda was going to attack American interests, possibly in the United States itself.”[8] 

Woodward also shared Coffer Black’s terse summary of the meeting:

“The only thing we didn't do was pull the trigger to the gun we were holding to her head.”[9]

Just over a month later, Rice saw a Presidential Daily Briefing that included this dire warning:

“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.”[10]

The title to that August 6, 2001 PDB, which was only revealed by Rice in response to questions from 9/11 Commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste, was equally stark:

BEN-VENISTE: Isn't it a fact, Dr. Rice, that the August 6 PDB warned against possible attacks in this country? And I ask you whether you recall the title of that PDB? 

RICE: I believe the title was, "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States.”[11]

Question 3: Given the evidence presented in the July 10th the meeting, why were no drastic and immediate new actions taken to protect the American people?

Testifying in front of the 9/11 Commission on April 8th 2004, then National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice said:

“I will tell you if we had known that an attack was coming against the United States that an attack was coming against New York and Washington, we would have moved heaven and earth to stop it.”[12]

Rice said essentially the same thing in early October:

“What I am quite certain of, however, is that I would remember if I was told, as this account apparently says, that there was about to be an attack in the United States; and the idea that I would somehow have ignored that I find incomprehensible…”[13]

Yet the meeting of July 10th provided evidence of a possible attack on the United States. The participants in the meeting were also clear that specific action should to be taken in response. Then Coffer Black is referenced in State of Denial:

“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.”[14]

A report in the Sacramento Bee on October 3rd also quotes officials involved in the preparation of the material shown at the meeting:

“The briefing was intended to ‘connect the dots’ contained in other intelligence reports and paint a very clear picture of the threat posed by bin Laden,” said the official, who described the tone of the report as ‘scary…… One official who helped to prepare the briefing, which included a PowerPoint presentation, described it as a “10 on a scale of 1 to 10”[15]

Yet there is no evidence that any new and drastic action was taken in response to these warnings. This continues the pattern of inaction detailed by Richard Clarke. Speaking on Meet the Press on March 28th 2004, Mr. Clarke detailed how no new action was taken to bring the warnings of July 10th:

 “…in May… Dr. Rice called me and said, "The president wants a strategy."  And I said, “Well, you know the strategy was what I sent you on January 25 [a reference to an anti-Al-Qaeda plan submitted by Clarke], and it's been stuck in these low-level committees.”  And she said, “Fine.  I'll deal with that.” Well, she didn't deal with it until September.”[16]

Question 4: How is it possible that the 9/11 Commission’s Report failed to mention the warnings of the July 10th meeting, given George Tenet’s testimony on the subject, witnessed by the Commission’s Executive Director Philip Zelikow, who now serves as one of your closest advisors?

With the exception of Commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste, who was present when Tenet’s gave his statement to the 9/11 Commission, none of the 9/11 Commissioners were made aware that Tenet had mentioned the July 10th meeting in his testimony.  Commissioner Jamie S. Gorelick said:

““We didn't know about the meeting itself,” she said. “I can assure you it would have been in our report if we had known to ask about it.””[17]

In fact, the chairmen of the commission only found out through media reports stemming from Bob Woodward’s reporting:

“As recently as [the afternoon of October 2, 2006] both commission chairman Thomas H. Kean and vice chairman Lee Hamilton said they believed the panel had not been told about the July 10 meeting.”[18]

It is difficult to understand how a meeting of this importance was left out of the 9/11 Commission Report, especially considering that the commission’s Executive Director heard the testimony:

“Tenet gave testimony about the July 2001 meeting with Rice at his Langley headquarters office on Jan. 28, 2004, occasionally referring to charts and slides. Philip Zelikow, who at the time was the commission's executive director and now works for Rice, was present along with other commission staff members, according to Ben-Veniste and to a portion of the transcript, which was read to The Washington Post by an official with access to it.”[19]

Dr. Philip Zelikow was Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission.  He is now Counselor to the U.S. Department of State   where he advises Secretary of State Rice on a wide range of issues and is considered one of her ‘closest aides.’[20]

NOTES