
Bush and 9/11: What We Need to Know
The investigative panel is getting ready to grill the President. Here's what they should ask
By
JOE KLEIN

Saturday, Mar. 13, 2004
George W. Bush's most memorable day as President was Sept. 14, 2001,
when he stood in the rubble of the World Trade Center, holding a
bullhorn in one hand, his other arm slung over the shoulder of a
veteran fire fighter from central casting. Bush was pitch perfect
that daythe common-man President, engaged and resolute. This is the
image the Bush campaign is probably saving for the last, emotional
moments of the election next fall. It is the memory the Republicans
want you to carry into the voting booth. It is why the Republican Convention will
be held in New York City this year. And it may also be why the White
House has been so reluctant to cooperate with the independent
commission investigating the events of Sept. 11, 2001.
The commission, which will finish its work in midsummer, on the eve
of the conventions, will soon question the President about his
response to the terrorist threat in the months before 9/11. I asked a
dozen people last weeksome intimate with the commission's thinking,
some members of the intelligence community, some members of Congress
who have investigated 9/11what they would ask the President if they
could. Their questions fell into three broad categories.
Why didn't you respond to the al-Qaeda attack on the U.S.S. Cole? The
attack occurred on Oct. 12, 2000; 17 American sailors were killed.
The Clinton Administration wanted to declare war on al-Qaeda. An
aggressive military response was prepared, including special-forces
attacks on al-Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan. But Clinton
decided that it was inappropriate to take such dramatic action during
the transition to the Bush presidency. As first reported in this
magazine in 2002, Clinton National Security Adviser Sandy Berger and
counterterrorism deputy Richard Clarke presented their plan to
Condoleezza Rice and her staff in the first week of January 2001.
Berger believed al-Qaeda was the greatest threat facing the U.S. as
Clinton left office. Rice thought China was. What were President
Bush's priorities? Was he aware of the Berger briefing? Did he
consider an aggressive response to the bombing of the Cole or to the
al-Qaeda millennium plot directed at Los Angeles International
Airportwhich was foiled on Dec. 14, 1999? Did he have any al-Qaeda
strategy at all? Rice, who has not yet testified under oath, decided
to review counterterrorism policy; the review wasn't completed until
Sept. 4. A related question along the same lines: Why didn't you
deploy the armed Predator drones in Afghanistan? The technology,
which might have provided the clearest shot at Osama bin Laden before
9/11, was available early in 2001. But the CIA and the Pentagon
squabbled about which agency would be in charge of pulling the
trigger. The dispute wasn't resolved until after 9/11. Were you aware
of this dispute, Mr. President? Why weren't you able to resolve it?
Indeed, the second category of questions revolves around the
President's interest in and awareness of the al-Qaeda threat. As late
as Sept. 10, after the assassination of Northern Alliance leader
Ahmed Shah Massoud, Bush was asking in his national-security briefing
about the possibility of negotiating with the Taliban for the head of
bin Laden. "If he had studied the problem at all," an intelligence
expert told me, "he would have known that was preposterous." As early
as Aug. 6, Bush had been told that al-Qaeda was planning to strike
the U.S., perhaps using airplanes. What was his response to that? How
closely was he following the intelligence reports about al-Qaeda
activity, which had taken an extremely urgent tone by late spring?
Another intelligence expert proposed this question: "Did he ever ask
about the quality of the relationship between the CIA and the FBI?"
Obviously, the President couldn't be responsible for knowing that the
FBI was tracking suspicious flight training in Arizona or that the
CIA had an informant close to two of the hijackers, but was he aware
of the friction between the two agencies? Was he aware that John
Ashcroft had opposed increasing counterterrorism funding for the FBI?
Finally, there are the questions about the President's actions
immediately after 9/11. Specifically, why did he allow planeloads of
Saudi nationals, including members of the bin Laden family, out of
the U.S. in the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks? Who
asked him to give the Saudis special treatment? Was he aware that the
Saudi Arabian government and members of the royal family gave money
to charities that funded al-Qaeda?
It is easy to cast blame in hindsight. Even if Bush had been obsessed
with the terrorist threat, 9/11 might not have been prevented. But
the President's apparent lack of rigorhis incuriosity about an
enemy that had attacked American targets overseas and had attempted
an attack at homeraises a basic question about the nature and
competence of this Administration. And that is not a question the
Republicans want you to take to the polls in November.
Email the Columnist | More Columns By Joe Klein
Joe Klein is a senior writer for TIME Magazine based in New York and Washington, D.C. He wrote the critically-acclaimed novel "Primary Colors." [more]
BACK TO TOP
|