This is one of the articles on the 9/11 summary
for which the media website requires payment. For the New York Times website, you must both register as a member (which is free), and then pay a small fee by credit card on line in order to be able to view or download the full
article. Once registered, you can view an abstract of the article for no
cost. First, go to:
If you haven't previously signed up as a user,
fill in the required information. Once complete, you will see the abstract
and have the option to view and download the full article with payment. We
provide a copy of the article below for free.
May 16, 2002,
BUSH WAS WARNED BIN LADEN WANTED TO HIJACK PLANES
By DAVID E. SANGER (NYT) 858 words
WASHINGTON, May 15 -- The White House said tonight
that President Bush had been warned by American intelligence agencies in
early August that Osama bin Laden was seeking to hijack aircraft but that
the warnings did not contemplate the possibility that the hijackers would
turn the planes into guided missiles for a terrorist attack.
''It is widely known that we had information that bin Laden wanted to
attack the United States or United States interests abroad,'' Ari
Fleischer, the president's press secretary, said this evening. ''The
president was also provided information about bin Laden wanting to engage
in hijacking in the traditional pre-9/11 sense, not for the use of
suicide bombing, not for the use of an airplane as a missile.''
Nonetheless the revelation by the White House, made in response to a
report about the intelligence warning this evening on CBS News, is bound
to fuel Congressional demands for a deeper investigation into why
American intelligence agencies and the Federal Bureau of Investigation
had failed to put together individual pieces of evidence that, in
retrospect, now seem to suggest what was coming.
In the past few days, government officials have acknowledged for the
first time that an F.B.I. agent in Phoenix had urged the F.B.I.
headquarters to investigate Middle Eastern men enrolled in American
flight schools. That memorandum also cited Mr. bin Laden by name and
suggested that his followers could use the schools to train for terror
operations, officials who have seen the memorandum said.
Administration officials reached this evening said the warning given
to Mr. Bush did not come from the F.B.I. or from the information
developed by the Phoenix agent. Instead, it was provided as part of the
C.I.A. briefing he is given each morning, suggesting that it was probably
based on evidence gathered abroad.
The C.I.A. had been listening intently over the July 4 holiday last
year, after what one investigator called ''a lot of static in the system
suggesting something was coming.'' But then the evidence disappeared as
quickly as it had arisen, and by August, officials have said, little was
heard from Al Qaeda.
The warning of the hijacking was given to the president at his ranch
in Crawford, Tex., where he was on vacation.
Taken together, the news of the C.I.A. warning and the information
developed separately by the F.B.I. explains Mr. Bush's anger after Sept.
11 that intelligence gathered on American soil and abroad was not being
centrally analyzed and that the agencies were not working well together.
Several times he has told audiences that he is working on solving that
problem, and these days he is briefed jointly by the F.B.I and the
C.I.A., ensuring that each hears information from the other agency.
It was not clear this evening why the White House waited eight months
after the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington to reveal what Mr.
Bush had been told.
But Mr. Fleischer noted that in the daily flow of intelligence
information the president receives, the warning of what appeared to be
the threat of a conventional hijacking was not as serious as it appears
in retrospect. ''We were a peacetime society, and the F.B.I. had a
different mission,'' he said.
Mr. Fleischer said the information given to the president in Texas had
prompted the administration to put law enforcement agencies on alert. But
there was no public announcement.
Nonetheless, a senior administration official said tonight that there
was speculation within the government that heightened security -- if it
truly existed in August and September -- might have prompted the
hijackers to use box cutters and plastic knives to avoid detection.
The C.I.A. warning might also explain why Mr. Bush's aides were so
certain that Mr. bin Laden was behind the attacks almost as soon as they
happened. ''We never had any real doubt,'' one senior official involved
in the crucial decisions at the White House on Sept. 11 said several
Until recently, Mr. Bush has deflected demands for a lengthy and
detailed investigation into the intelligence failures surrounding the
Sept. 11 attacks. White House officials were concerned that the
investigation would feed into demands by Senator Richard C. Shelby, the
Alabama Republican who is the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence
Committee, for the replacement of George J. Tenet as director of central
But the news that the hijacking warning was in the president's brief,
which Mr. Tenet sees and approves, and that it was linked to Mr. bin
Laden is almost certain to widen the scope of the investigation.
Already, several lawmakers who have read the Phoenix memorandum
written by the F.B.I. agent have described it as the most significant
document to emerge in Congressional inquiries into whether the government
might have been warned about possible hijackings.
Now those investigators are almost certain to demand the details of
the president's August briefing by the C.I.A. and may ask to hear about
how that evidence was developed.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of
which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance
understanding of criminal justice, political, human rights, economic,
democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe
this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
the included information for research and educational purposes. For
more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes
of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.