John Whitehead's Commentary
Americans Have a Right to Know the Truth About Sept. 11
Within hours of the Sept. 11 attacks that claimed more than 3,000 lives, a stunned and bewildered public started clamoring for answers.
"How," many asked, "could 19 individuals have trained, plotted and carried out within our borders such an involved plan to terrorize our country without someone--somewhere--becoming suspicious?"
When intelligence information was made public suggesting that government officials could have been better prepared for the possibility of suicide bombers hijacking planes, the persistent requests for a probe into a possible government mishandling of security information turned into an unrelenting demand.
Almost immediately, however, the Bush Administration made known its opposition to such an investigation--especially if it took the form of an independent commission looking into classified government matters.
Every new revelation gave credence to concerns that, when confronted with critical pieces of information that could have prevented the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, federal agencies failed to act efficiently and appropriately.
For example, despite the White House's contention that no one envisioned planes being used as suicide bombs before Sept. 11, a 1999 report issued by Federal Research Division, a branch of the Library of Congress, stated that "[s]uicide bomber(s) belonging to al Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives into the Pentagon, the CIA, or the White House."
One year later, in January 2000, the CIA began tracking two individuals with connections to al Qaeda--one of whom had been linked to one of the bombers of the USS Cole. The CIA failed to share its information with the FBI or other agencies. Had they been warned, the INS might have prevented the individuals' entry into the U.S. As it was, the two men entered the country legally using their real names, obtained driver's licenses and enrolled in flight school. They reappeared on the nation's radar as two of the Sept. 11 hijackers.
In the summer of 2001, an FBI agent in Arizona alerted his superiors in Washington that several Middle Easterners training at a U.S. aviation school might be part of a terrorist plot masterminded by Osama bin Laden. He recommended that the FBI investigate other flight schools across the nation. Although the information was relayed to FBI terrorism experts in Washington and New York, it was not immediately shared with the CIA. It was later revealed that the Sept. 11 hijackers who piloted the stolen planes had been trained in American flight schools.
In July 2001, counter-terrorism officials warned the FAA, FBI and INS agencies that a major attack on the U.S. was coming soon.
One month later, President Bush was reportedly warned about possible terrorist attacks on the U.S., as well as the possibility that Osama bin Laden might be plotting to hijack planes.
That same month, Zacarias Moussaoui--now charged with being the 20th hijacker--was arrested after informing his flight instructor that he wanted to learn to fly a commercial plane, but not to take off or land.
And at some point before the Sept. 11 attacks, the National Security Agency intercepted and secretly recorded at least one conversation in Arabic in which the participants referenced something big happening on Sept. 11. However, according to news sources, the information was supposedly not translated until after the attacks because agency officials were too swamped and overwhelmed with data.
Thus, in light of what has been revealed in the torrid saga of government oversights and blunders relating to Sept. 11, the Bush Administration's ongoing resistance to an outside probe makes little sense.
It could be, as Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) suggested, that "[t]he bureaucracies don't want to be investigated." But if there's nothing to hide, what's the harm?
Insisting that Americans should be satisfied with a bipartisan committee appointed to investigate the matter, the Bush Administration has claimed that an independent commission would be "duplicative and would cause a further diversion of essential personnel from their duties fighting the war."
Yet, as more and more Americans have become dissatisfied with pat answers about the war on terrorism, they are demanding that their representatives carry out a thorough and objective investigation of the CIA, FBI, FAA, INS and others. And with elections only months away, their representatives are finally taking heed.
In a surprise vote that took place on July 25, members of the House of Representatives voted 218-189 to form an independent 10-member blue-ribbon commission appointed by Congress. Twenty-five Republicans--many from communities around New York City--broke ranks with the White House to lend their support to an outside investigation.
It's time for full disclosure--hard questions must be asked and honest answers given--by those in charge and in the know. The American people have a right to know what went wrong and what needs to change to prevent another Sept. 11 tragedy.
Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Grasping for the Wind. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org.
"How," many asked, "could 19 individuals have trained, plotted and carried out within our borders such an involved plan to terrorize our country without someone--somewhere--becoming suspicious?"
When intelligence information was made public suggesting that government officials could have been better prepared for the possibility of suicide bombers hijacking planes, the persistent requests for a probe into a possible government mishandling of security information turned into an unrelenting demand.
Almost immediately, however, the Bush Administration made known its opposition to such an investigation--especially if it took the form of an independent commission looking into classified government matters.
Every new revelation gave credence to concerns that, when confronted with critical pieces of information that could have prevented the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, federal agencies failed to act efficiently and appropriately.
For example, despite the White House's contention that no one envisioned planes being used as suicide bombs before Sept. 11, a 1999 report issued by Federal Research Division, a branch of the Library of Congress, stated that "[s]uicide bomber(s) belonging to al Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives into the Pentagon, the CIA, or the White House."
One year later, in January 2000, the CIA began tracking two individuals with connections to al Qaeda--one of whom had been linked to one of the bombers of the USS Cole. The CIA failed to share its information with the FBI or other agencies. Had they been warned, the INS might have prevented the individuals' entry into the U.S. As it was, the two men entered the country legally using their real names, obtained driver's licenses and enrolled in flight school. They reappeared on the nation's radar as two of the Sept. 11 hijackers.
In the summer of 2001, an FBI agent in Arizona alerted his superiors in Washington that several Middle Easterners training at a U.S. aviation school might be part of a terrorist plot masterminded by Osama bin Laden. He recommended that the FBI investigate other flight schools across the nation. Although the information was relayed to FBI terrorism experts in Washington and New York, it was not immediately shared with the CIA. It was later revealed that the Sept. 11 hijackers who piloted the stolen planes had been trained in American flight schools.
In July 2001, counter-terrorism officials warned the FAA, FBI and INS agencies that a major attack on the U.S. was coming soon.
One month later, President Bush was reportedly warned about possible terrorist attacks on the U.S., as well as the possibility that Osama bin Laden might be plotting to hijack planes.
That same month, Zacarias Moussaoui--now charged with being the 20th hijacker--was arrested after informing his flight instructor that he wanted to learn to fly a commercial plane, but not to take off or land.
And at some point before the Sept. 11 attacks, the National Security Agency intercepted and secretly recorded at least one conversation in Arabic in which the participants referenced something big happening on Sept. 11. However, according to news sources, the information was supposedly not translated until after the attacks because agency officials were too swamped and overwhelmed with data.
Thus, in light of what has been revealed in the torrid saga of government oversights and blunders relating to Sept. 11, the Bush Administration's ongoing resistance to an outside probe makes little sense.
It could be, as Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) suggested, that "[t]he bureaucracies don't want to be investigated." But if there's nothing to hide, what's the harm?
Insisting that Americans should be satisfied with a bipartisan committee appointed to investigate the matter, the Bush Administration has claimed that an independent commission would be "duplicative and would cause a further diversion of essential personnel from their duties fighting the war."
Yet, as more and more Americans have become dissatisfied with pat answers about the war on terrorism, they are demanding that their representatives carry out a thorough and objective investigation of the CIA, FBI, FAA, INS and others. And with elections only months away, their representatives are finally taking heed.
In a surprise vote that took place on July 25, members of the House of Representatives voted 218-189 to form an independent 10-member blue-ribbon commission appointed by Congress. Twenty-five Republicans--many from communities around New York City--broke ranks with the White House to lend their support to an outside investigation.
It's time for full disclosure--hard questions must be asked and honest answers given--by those in charge and in the know. The American people have a right to know what went wrong and what needs to change to prevent another Sept. 11 tragedy.
Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Grasping for the Wind. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org.
ABOUT JOHN W. WHITEHEAD
Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His most recent books are the best-selling Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the award-winning A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, and a debut dystopian fiction novel, The Erik Blair Diaries. Whitehead can be contacted at staff@rutherford.org. Nisha Whitehead is the Executive Director of The Rutherford Institute. Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.
Publication Guidelines / Reprint Permission
John W. Whitehead’s weekly commentaries are available for publication to newspapers and web publications at no charge. Please contact staff@rutherford.org to obtain reprint permission.
