The October surprise … five months late

The October surprise … five months late

: There are two scandals in today’s NY Times story on just-declassified portions of the 9/11 Commission report that detail the many specific warnings about al Qaeda the FAA received:

The first is the dangerous incompetence of the FAA and of airport security in the months leading up to September 11th.

The second is that this was not released before the election. That feels, sounds, tastes, and smells like election fraud.

During the commission hearings and when its report was released, based on what we were told, I was one of those who said the blame for not stopping the attacks could not fall on one administration, neither Clinton nor Bush. But now we are told this:

The report discloses that the Federal Aviation Administration, despite being focused on risks of hijackings overseas, warned airports in the spring of 2001 that if “the intent of the hijacker is not to exchange hostages for prisoners, but to commit suicide in a spectacular explosion, a domestic hijacking would probably be preferable.”

The report takes the F.A.A. to task for failing to pursue domestic security measures that could conceivably have altered the events of Sept. 11, 2001, like toughening airport screening procedures for weapons or expanding the use of on-flight air marshals. The report, completed last August, said officials appeared more concerned with reducing airline congestion, lessening delays, and easing airlines’ financial woes than deterring a terrorist attack.

The Bush administration has blocked the public release of the full, classified version of the report for more than five months, officials said, much to the frustration of former commission members who say it provides a critical understanding of the failures of the civil aviation system. The administration provided both the classified report and a declassified, 120-page version to the National Archives two weeks ago and, even with heavy redactions in some areas, the declassified version provides the firmest evidence to date about the warnings that aviation officials received concerning the threat of an attack on airliners and the failure to take steps to deter it.

Among other things, the report says that leaders of the F.A.A. received 52 intelligence reports from their security branch that mentioned Mr. bin Laden or Al Qaeda from April to Sept. 10, 2001. That represented half of all the intelligence summaries in that time.

Five of the intelligence reports specifically mentioned Al Qaeda’s training or capability to conduct hijackings, the report said. Two mentioned suicide operations, although not connected to aviation, the report said….

The F.A.A. did not see a need to increase the air marshal ranks because hijackings were seen as an overseas threat, and one aviation official told the commission said that airlines did not want to give up revenues by providing free seats to marshals.

The F.A.A. also made no concerted effort to expand their list of terror suspects, which included a dozen names on Sept. 11, the report said. The former head of the F.A.A.’s civil aviation security branch said he was not aware of the government’s main watch list, called Tipoff, which included the names of two hijackers who were living in the San Diego area, the report said.

Nor was there evidence that a senior F.A.A. working group on security had ever met in 2001 to discuss “the high threat period that summer,” the report said.

Now we must know who decided to classify this material and keep it from the nation before the election. Who and why?

33 responses to “The October surprise … five months late”

  1. Doug Avatar

    Does this surprise you? I recall hemming and hawing over the release schedule from the White House from the get go. The current administration, for good reason or not, sure have a thing with secrecy. I think we’ll have a better perspective a few years down the line… or will we?
    Have you ever heard of Executive Order 13233? It obliterates the Nixon era Presidential Records Act, meaning that future generations won’t have as much access to Bush’s records. Go read it on the white house website… well, it’s difficult to find on their website. You have to google for it.
    http://www.archives.gov/presidential_libraries/presidential_records/executive_order_13233.txt
    If you’re concerned with classified material, this should bother you as well.

  2. Ian Nowland Avatar
    Ian Nowland

    While I don’t like information like that being classified, I can see why the Bush administration kept it from being released during the election. The MSM was and will do anything they can to smear Bush, even make up allegations or pin entirely unrelated things to him (what the heck did he have to do with the flu vaccine shortage?). September 11th caught us with our pants down, and an atomic wedgie pulled up over our eyes so we couldn’t see anything, but I don’t blame the Bush administration any more than I blame the Clinton administration for all the successful bombings that happened. I’m not quite sure who I place the blame on, but I feel that Clinton and Pre-9/11 Bush were no less diligent in the American security issue than most other people with responsibilities.

  3. Tom Grey - Liberty Dad Avatar

    Reasonable post, Jeff — but don’t you think deliberately avoiding NAMING any of the FAA decision makers sort of, you know, smacks of Leftist bias? Since most top gov’t agency leaders got there after 8 years of Clinton.
    The failures are BOTH Clinton’s AND Bush. And it’s surprising Bush didn’t do more, immediately after 9/11, to demonize all the Clinton/Bush I/ Reagan top bureaucrats and boot more of them (Tenet & Clarke, especially).
    I think there was a report from the 90’s on how easy it still was to hijack planes, and the airlines didn’t want to raise prices to pay for better security.

  4. Hubris Avatar

    …and one aviation official told the commission said that airlines did not want to give up revenues by providing free seats to marshals.
    That’s pretty f—ed up.

  5. jeremy in NYC Avatar
    jeremy in NYC

    Hmmm. To save everyone else the time and keep your comments clear, I hereby simultaneously condemn Jeff for being a left-wing moonbat for trying to say mean things about the Bush administration and a right-wing wingnut for havbing supported the war even though the Bush administration does stuff like this.
    Hey, since I got that out of the way, can we have a discussion about the topic?

  6. Jimminy Avatar

    Jeeze, settle down. Lets consider a little ex-post facto example: Richard Reed, the shoe bomber. Less than 3 months after Sept. 11th he got a bomb on board an Air France flight, in spite of all the warnings, air marshalls, and super-duper-elevated post 9/11 screening and security scrutiny.
    He was only foiled by the poor design of his bomb.
    There were endless warnings of innumerable potential terrorist catastrophes prior to 9/11. So what? The bad guys took advantage of loopholes in the system and the old ‘culture’ of hijacking, which was for passengers to submit to the hijackers. If one or two loopholes had been closed then they would have found others – Richard Reed proved that.

  7. mumon Avatar

    I can’t believe I’m agreeing with Jeff Jarvis.
    Well, thanks for this one.
    I had to put that on my blog…
    Oh, and Jeff? The other “Gannon” angle is Plame-gate- how did an guy with a possibly shady past, who didn’t survive the scrutiny of bloggers, get daily access to the White House AND possibly claissified material?
    That’s Special Prosecutor stuff…

  8. Seppo Avatar

    Let the useless recriminations begin.
    Of course there were people who perceived a threat, with varying degrees of specificity, before Sept 11 2001. Just as today there are threats of terrible catastrophes that MAY come to pass, but are not inevitable.
    America has always been a free and open society much adverse to regimented security measures. Absent very specific and irrefutable evidence of an imminent threat, the country will not sacrifice its liberty and, for want of a better term, convenience.
    Only a successful attack on the scale of Sept 11 would cause a reappraisal of the default position of openness, and reluctant acceptance of the tighter security environment.
    No FAA official, had they chosen to sound the alarm, would have successfully convinced the many constituencies in a free country and economy to implement measures likely to have prevented the specific attacks that occurred on that day.
    It is silly partisan foolishness to blame either the Bush or Clinton administrations for that salient fact of American society’s prevailing values, and the risks inherent in them.

  9. jsh26 Avatar

    You gonna balance all your eason jordan “coverage” with equal time on the Jeff Gannon catastrophe?

  10. Stanley Avatar

    This is all there is? Without context it’s hard to judge, but I suspect this was a case of the commission’s legions of staff going through reams of documents and finding little chestnuts that, in hindsight, could be interpreted as some sort of foreknowledge. And what would the FAA have done if they had picked up on the possibility?–ban box cutters? It’s not clear that there is anything that the FAA in isolation could have done to have prevented 9-11.
    I think Ms. Rice summed it up when she testified before the commission that it just took something like the 9-11 attack to make _everybody_ aware of the dangers and to motivate everybody. Just take, for example, the possiblity of the FAA ordering cockpit doors to be bolted shut (and it’s unclear this would have prevented 9-11, because without knowing the highjacking was a suicide mission, the pilot staff may have unbolted the door in response to threats to kill the flight staff). But if they had tried to order doors bolted, you’d have the pilot’s union, the airlines, congressmen, aerospace contractors, et al., coming at you with all kinds of opinions, and the FAA would basically have to shut down everything else it was doing and spend all its political capital (and endangering careers of FAA officials perceived as unilateral and uncooperative) on this one thing. Like Condi said, it took the attack to change everybody’s priorities.

  11. Angelos Avatar

    Must have been Clinton’s fault.

  12. Mike Avatar

    Jeff, is that what you think this release is, election fraud? Come on, what does this report of the FAA have to do with the election of the President? Especially if, as you’ve said many times before, that 9/11 was the fault of the terrorists and not one particular administration be it Clinton or GW Bush. How do you reconcile those beliefs with the belief that not declassifying this is some sort of election fraud? It would seem to me that you are implying that Bush is somehow responsible for the ignored warnings by the FAA.
    Truth is, nothing could have prepared us for this, let alone stopped it given the freedom we value in our society.

  13. Matt Stoller Avatar

    Now we must know who decided to classify this material and keep it from the nation before the election. Who and why?
    How would one find out?
    What could one do with this information?
    How do we departisanize 9/11?

  14. aba Avatar

    Just as it is probably true that whatever half-measures that may have been enacted in light of the warnings would likely not have stymied the plot (but you never know), it is even less likely that the bill currently being debated regarding stricter driver license standards would do anything to foil any future attack. It is laughable to think that the resources behind a largescale terrorist plot would not be adequate to circumvent such an obstacle. Ultimately short-term terrorism prevention does not lie primarily in immigration or avaiation policy, but in identifying and relentless pursuing terrorists, you know, like that bin Laden guy that’s been waging war on the US since the 90s (preferably without all the torture).

  15. Charlie (Colorado) Avatar
    Charlie (Colorado)

    Oh, Jeff, this is palpable nonsense. First of all, threats that someone, sometime, might try a suicide attack using a plane aren’t exactly what you’d call “actionable intelligence” — can you imagine any administration putting the necessary restrictions in place to have prevented a 9/11 attack pre-9/11? Hell, people are still grumbling about them post-9/11.
    Second, if is there anything in this that we haven’t heard, if perhaps not in quite so much detail, before? Sure, people knew al Qaeda wanted to attack the WTC again … but we’d known that since 1993. Sure, there were various rumors about attacks with airplanes … we’d known that for years too. But anyone who seriously thinks this was information that could have been acted upon pre-9/11 is a fool.
    As far as “election fraud”, sadly, thousands of unaccounted-for votes in Seattle may be election fraud, but it isn’t getting anything like enough attention. Not having publicized these threats enough is not election fraud.
    Are you sure you’re not in favor of the Angry Party?

  16. Matt Welch Avatar

    Expanding Executive-Branch secrecy and power has been a front-burner project of this administration since before Sept. 11; the attacks accelerated and expanded that process. Rumsfeld and Cheney especially have been trying to roll back post-Watergate reforms for 30 years, especially your treasured Freedom of Information Act (which John Ashcroft instructed all federal agencies to drag their feet on). More here. Delaying public release of possibly sensitive Sept. 11-related information has been the default setting of this administration from the get-go; if it were up to Bush there would have been no Aug. 6, 2001 PDB memo, and no 9/11 Commission in the first place.

  17. Anon Avatar

    Jeff,
    The one nugget you seem to miss is that declassifying information is a PAINFUL process. There are lots of people involved that want to release as much information as possible, but they understand that even small slip ups can dry up the very intelligence that would stop another 9/11. It would be irrational for ANY administration to rush and release a document that could cause them to lose the intelligence they need prevent the next type of 9/11 attack because they tipped thier hand about a souce.

  18. pete the elder Avatar

    Charlie-even after 9/11 almost all of our airline pilots are unable to arm themselves even though we still do not have nearly enough air marshals to go on most flights. That reform probably would have prevented 9/11 and we still do not have it.

  19. Tom Avatar

    Why is this a surprise to anyone? Any info that might have lost votes was neatly tucked away.
    Why did the president only agree to meet with the 9/11 commission if he did NOT have to be under oath, NOT be recorded and MUST be with Cheney? Isn’t that essentially saying “there will be some lying going on here” ?
    Folks, it’s all right there in front of us.

  20. Matt Welch Avatar

    It would be irrational for ANY administration to rush and release a document that could cause them to lose the intelligence they need prevent the next type of 9/11 attack because they tipped thier hand about a souce.
    Is there anything to suggest that releasing this FAA information burned a source, prevented future intelligence, and maybe even hurt our ability to prevent another 9/11? Or do you just trust the government to act in secret (and then suddenly relent) whenever it wants to?

  21. Anon Avatar

    “Or do you just trust the government to act in secret (and then suddenly relent) whenever it wants to?”
    The government has to act in secret. If it published intelligence sources and methods, the sources and methods become useless. Publishing a classified report that has been appropriately reviewed isn’t relenting- that’s protecting sources and methods. Would you rather they start at page one and try to release a page a day (if they could even work that fast)? What about all the extra overhead of trying to get people together and agree that releasing information is harmless? There isn’t a magic button in any word processing program that decides “this is still sensitive” and “oh, this is ok now, you can release it.” I’d rather have the most information possible made public and wait a few months than have ninety percent of the sentences redacted (probably every sentence that actually had any relevant information) and see something in a few weeks. This really points to the political nature of the 9/11 commission. If we really wanted it to be a useful exercise, people would learn the lessons of it (democarcy and freedom require constant vigilance, balancing openness and security) and not point fingers.

  22. SirPercy Avatar

    OK so now the bloggers who helped implode Gannon should go to work to find out WHO at the FAA specificially made the policy decisions detailed in these PURPOSEFULLY delayed reports. WHO in the FAA helped to allow us to be VULNERABLE to the attack which has allowed the Bu$h agenda to proceed “full speed ahead?”
    And Jeff is a propagandist: September 11 did NOT catch us with our “pants down.” It caught Bu$h ON VACATION! – nearly the entire month before the planned attack. And, even though it’s been shown multiple times this administration turned a blind eye to signs of imminent attack(s), Jeff wants to pretend 9/11 caught us by surprise?
    And by the way Jeff, Clinton managed to thwart quite a number of attacks, something you can’t say about Bush… at least not until the whole world started watching with eagle eyes…

  23. Robert Avatar

    About Richard Reed, ” He was only foiled by the poor design of his bomb.” is not true. He was foiled becuse of his stupidity in not going to the lavatory, placing the shoe against the outside wall, and lighting the fuse where nobody could see him.
    The next large scale attack on a jetliner will probably be a small aircraft that is used to ram the jet while it is landing. Most likely a rented Learjet or similar type that is highjacked, or one purchased through laundered money. It’s much more agile than a 747 / L1011 , and should not be tough for even an average pilot.

  24. J.R. Avatar

    Hey Percy, Michael Moore called, he wants his talking points back.

  25. Charlie (Colorado) Avatar
    Charlie (Colorado)

    Pete, I’m all for arming the pilots — hell, arm everyone on the plane, although the truth is that current experience suggests that an attempt at hijacking would be just about as fatal to the hijacker armed and unarmed. But the number I heard in the last week was 40000 armed pilots, which is a pretty significant percentage. The real fatal factor on 9/11, though, was the impression that the best thing to do in a hijacking was remain passive: the hijackers were armed with weapons hardly more dangerous than butterknives.
    Matt, I used to do this stuff, and particularly worked on how to “sanitize” and “downgrade” things automatically. (Ans: you can’t.) What you’re neglecting is that the stuff you’re seeing today is the result of being sanitized, and so would have all the “sources and methods” (please God) removed.
    The fact that you don’t see anything secret, classified, or sensitive in these materials now is (at least potentially) a function of the material having been declassified, and therefore having all that stuff removed. You can’t logically infer it wasn’t there beforehand.

  26. owl Avatar

    Ten years of radical Islamic buildup, a slow election startup, slow conformations, leftover department heads (Clarke!!!), and it’s GW’s fault. Thank God he signed his #180 with that famous 9/11 Commission back out, making their TV circuit, AGAIN. Bet it’s time for those Jersey Girls, AGAIN. They should co-ordinate their appearances. “Election fraud” or just a plain ole time lynchin? Yeah, this group, subject, etc put me into full rant, AGAIN.

  27. Chabuka Avatar

    As a former private airport screener..we were told nothing, not by F.A.A. or the airlines…and any little ideas we might have had, such as more security and background checks for those who had “tarmack” clearence…such as cargo handlers, catering services or mechanics were NOT appeciated, (there is still no security screening or background checks on those individuals) TSA lies..surprise you? We were the bottom of the pile, we took the blame. We lost our jobs, our self respect, our homes in some cases..stressed into illness, depression and divorces…and as we knew all along, while the F.A.A. was pointing and yelling at us…they were the ones who were (along with a raft of other government entities (National Security Director, my a**!) and big business (the airlines)) criminally negligent, to say the least…the airlines received a big “bailout” and the FAA was promoted to the next level of imcompetence…what a country!

  28. Kat Avatar

    SirPercy–Clinton did not thhwart attacks, he condoned them.
    * The first World Trade Center bombing on February 26, 1993, Clinton did nothing
    * 10 months later in Mogadishu, Som….alia… an attack on American military forces who were in country to bring food to starving Som….alis, eighteen American soldiers were killed and the body of one was dragged through the streets in a gesture designed to formally humiliate the world

  29. anna banana Avatar
    anna banana

    The ex-boyfriend just called – he’s frothing at the mouth – the Al Franken show is highlighting this document released today: Memorandum for Condoleezza Rice From Richard A. Clarke dated January 25, 2001.
    Should this have been released to the public prior to the election? My own preference would have been for both of these documents to have been released when testimony was being given before the commission.
    However, I’m reluctant to take my ex-boyfriend’s approach and call my senator and berate him for approving Condi’s appointment to Secretary of State.

  30. J.C. Avatar

    I don’t think we need to question who is responsible for holding up the 911 reports, from being released before the 2004 Election. I don’t even think any of us questions why they did it. But we can’t expect them to be held accountable, though. They will either find someone else to blame, or better yet, will just refuse to discuss it. It amazes me that the Bush administration can jump from one scandal to another, and yet never be expected to be held accountable for any of them. These are some really friggin messed up times we are living in. They are down right un friggin believable.

  31. J.C. Avatar

    As angry as I am about the contents of the report, and the fact that this information was deliberately witheld from the American people, for five months, do you know what makes me even angrier,..wondering what lies in the blackened areas of the report. It seems to me, that the information that lies within these blacked out areas, must be even more incriminating then the rest of the report, and I find that really frightening? I can’t help but wonder, what else the Bush Administration is trying to hide from the American people? What else happened exactly, regarding 911, that they still are’nt telling us?

  32. Fatty Moon Avatar

    Congrats! Your post has been added to the outrage.
    Pax,
    Profit Fatty

  33. GSMAN Avatar

    I feel exactly the same as J.C. about this whole mess, from the evidence of the disasters being whisked away in a moments notice [not allowing thorough investigation], to not a single screw-up being questioned.
    Not being under oath when testifying has to mean something…..The media being seemingly totally unaware of anything so far that has come to pass.
    I fear for whats ahead!