Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
FBI, FAA Knew in 1998 of Plan to Attack by Air
Aired September 19, 2002 - 9:03 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: "Maximum flexibility." That's what President Bush wants from Congress if the U.S. attacks Iraq. And this morning, the president is expected to give lawmakers a draft resolution that would authorize using military force, if Mr. Bush decides that diplomacy has failed.
At the White House this morning, we're joined by correspondent Kelly Wallace to let us know how that might be received by members of Congress. Some think he's wanting far too specific authority here.
Good morning, Kelly.
KELLY WALLACE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Paula.
Well, definitely some lawmakers will have questions. Some Democrats, namely, wanting to really hammer away at that language. We understand the president, though, will make it clear he wants "maximum flexibility" to deal with Saddam Hussein. And we understand that the language is expected to mirror previous congressional resolutions authorizing the use of force. For example, in September of 2001, Congress authorized the president to use all necessary and appropriate force against those believed to be responsible for the September 11th terrorist attacks. And then you had a resolution back in 1998, this one dealing with Iraq, urging the president to take all necessary and appropriate actions to respond to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.
Now, when a senior official was asked if the administration's language would explicitly use the word force, well, we understand it will. This official seemed to indicate that saying -- quote -- Our preference is that we be very clear here about what we mean. And we've been saying that the president wants flexibility. He made it clear to congressional leaders yesterday. He told them it would be -- quote -- Totally unacceptable for Congress only to back the use of military force in conjunction with the United Nations.
Some Democrats would like to see U.N. support as opposed to the U.S. taking a "go it alone" approach. This president, though, wants the authority to use military force alone if he deems that necessary. White House officials also want Congress to act very, very soon. In fact, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was on Capitol Hill yesterday urging Congress to vote before the UN Security Council votes, saying this would send a message to skeptics at the United Nations.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Delaying a vote in Congress would send the wrong message, in my view. Just as we are asking the international community to take a stand, and as we are cautioning the Iraqi regime to respond and occur its options.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: And Secretary Rumsfeld will be back on Capitol Hill today and Secretary of State Colin Powell will be testifying as well. First though, he's meeting with the president to brief him on negotiations going on behind the scenes to get a tough, new UN Security Council resolution -- Paula.
ZAHN: Kelly, thanks so much.
It now appears that U.S. intelligence officials knew much but did little about terror clues received before 9/11. Congressional investigators disclosed yesterday that the government had several warnings about terrorist plots, even using planes as weapons. Relatives of those who died on 9/11 said U.S. Intelligence let them down.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The ossified intelligence bureaucracy must now be thoroughly restructured. If it isn't, the next attack may involve weapons of mass destruction and the death toll may be in the tens of thousands, or even hundreds of thousands.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: Florida Senator Bob Graham, chairman of the intelligence committee, and Congressman Porter Goss, head of the house intelligence panel, both join us from Capitol Hill this morning.
Welcome back.
REP. PORTER GOSS (R-FL), HEAD OF HOUSE INTELLIGENCE PANEL: Good morning.
ZAHN: Senator Graham, I want to start with you this morning. The report also says that the director of the CIA has refused to declassify precisely what the White House knew.
Are you getting the information you need?
SEN. BOB GRAHAM (D-FL), CHAIRMAN OF SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Most of it, but not all of it. In this particular instance, the information that had been declassified, which had been presented to the president, we can present the information, but we cannot present the fact that that information had been given to the president. I cannot conceive of a national security reason why it would be a threat to our nation to let the American people know what the president, as the commander-in-chief, knew before September the 11th.
ZAHN: Representative Goss, how much tension is there between your committees and the White House? GOSS: I don't think there's any unusual tension. I think that we started out trying to work on a cooperative basis. We've avoided confrontation, but there's a lot of areas that do need to be negotiated out.
There are different perspectives. Obviously, we want to protect sources and methods and not jeopardize any ongoing prosecution in court. And we want to make sure we don't want to give away any plans and intentions in the war on terror. But, by and large, I would say the negotiation process is going forward. It's not always smooth.
ZAHN: Do you think the administration is holding something back from you., Representative Goss?
GOSS: I think they have points of view that we don't agree with and we are trying to work them out and as the process goes along I think you will find more information comes to the public.
GRAHAM: I also want to be clear that the position of the administration relative to disclosing what the president knew is not peculiar to President Bush. They're taking the same position as to prior presidents.
ZAHN: Yes, I'm glad you brought that up because I think it's really important to note that it was a report that goes back to 1998. That the U.S. Intelligence Committee knew that terrorists were planning to fly a bomb-laden plane into the World Trade Center.
Senator, can you expand on that?
GRAHAM: Yes, in the report there are four or five pages of specific pieces of intelligence that relate to the use of a commercial airliner as a weapon of mass destruction, mainly being used to attack a building of great symbolic significance in the United States. So the fact that that was the method by which the terrorists on September the 11th attacked us should not have been a surprise.
ZAHN: Representative Goss, based on what has come out of your countless hours of investigation, was there anything this administration could have done to prevent the attacks on 9/11?
GOSS: Well, I haven't seen anything specific as to date, time and place and so forth. I suppose people in hindsight can always go back and say, If you had only connected these dots and done it more quickly, a different result might have happened on September 11th.
But I have not seen anything yet that a single part of the intelligence community failed to act on something as that dramatic. What we have is a bit here and a piece there and someplace over here, somebody else knew something. And as we go through the files and find this out, turns out if all of those people should talk to each other and they had figured out that something was afoot, they probably could have come up with some kind of an idea. But still, it would not have been specific to the date, time and place, unless somebody made a very lucky guess. ZAHN: But Senator Graham, in the "New York Times" today there is a suggestion that government did have enough to at least fear an imminent attack, even though maybe precise time of the attacks and the kind of attacks weren't telegraphed.
GRAHAM: There were ample pieces of intelligence, very credible intelligence, and building in intensity in the summer of 2001 that the United States of America had been targeted by Osama bin Laden for a very major attack. And that's why we were on a general state of alert over the summer of 2001.
What was missing was that all of these pieces of information, some of which were in the FBI, some in the CIA, others elsewhere, never were brought before a single set of analytical eyes to see if they fit together to form a picture that could have then led to further questions and actions that might have disrupted this plot before we were hit.
ZAHN: Representative Goss, in closing there is a note in this report, that has just become public that says one critically important theme that ran through this, that what was apparent was Osama bin Laden's -- quote -- Intent to launch terrorist attacks inside the United States.
How significant is this?
GOSS: Very significant. The problem we had, frankly, was getting an audience for that statement. It took a number of years, you may remember that same report says, that the director of central intelligence, that said that war had been declared on us and that we were at war with Osama bin Laden. And it just seems that it was a war that not enough people came to early enough.
ZAHN: Gentleman, we're going to have to leave it there this morning. Congressman Goss, Senator Graham, appreciate both of you joining us morning.
GRAHAM: Thank you.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired September 19, 2002 - 9:03 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: "Maximum flexibility." That's what President Bush wants from Congress if the U.S. attacks Iraq. And this morning, the president is expected to give lawmakers a draft resolution that would authorize using military force, if Mr. Bush decides that diplomacy has failed.
At the White House this morning, we're joined by correspondent Kelly Wallace to let us know how that might be received by members of Congress. Some think he's wanting far too specific authority here.
Good morning, Kelly.
KELLY WALLACE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Paula.
Well, definitely some lawmakers will have questions. Some Democrats, namely, wanting to really hammer away at that language. We understand the president, though, will make it clear he wants "maximum flexibility" to deal with Saddam Hussein. And we understand that the language is expected to mirror previous congressional resolutions authorizing the use of force. For example, in September of 2001, Congress authorized the president to use all necessary and appropriate force against those believed to be responsible for the September 11th terrorist attacks. And then you had a resolution back in 1998, this one dealing with Iraq, urging the president to take all necessary and appropriate actions to respond to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.
Now, when a senior official was asked if the administration's language would explicitly use the word force, well, we understand it will. This official seemed to indicate that saying -- quote -- Our preference is that we be very clear here about what we mean. And we've been saying that the president wants flexibility. He made it clear to congressional leaders yesterday. He told them it would be -- quote -- Totally unacceptable for Congress only to back the use of military force in conjunction with the United Nations.
Some Democrats would like to see U.N. support as opposed to the U.S. taking a "go it alone" approach. This president, though, wants the authority to use military force alone if he deems that necessary. White House officials also want Congress to act very, very soon. In fact, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was on Capitol Hill yesterday urging Congress to vote before the UN Security Council votes, saying this would send a message to skeptics at the United Nations.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Delaying a vote in Congress would send the wrong message, in my view. Just as we are asking the international community to take a stand, and as we are cautioning the Iraqi regime to respond and occur its options.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: And Secretary Rumsfeld will be back on Capitol Hill today and Secretary of State Colin Powell will be testifying as well. First though, he's meeting with the president to brief him on negotiations going on behind the scenes to get a tough, new UN Security Council resolution -- Paula.
ZAHN: Kelly, thanks so much.
It now appears that U.S. intelligence officials knew much but did little about terror clues received before 9/11. Congressional investigators disclosed yesterday that the government had several warnings about terrorist plots, even using planes as weapons. Relatives of those who died on 9/11 said U.S. Intelligence let them down.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The ossified intelligence bureaucracy must now be thoroughly restructured. If it isn't, the next attack may involve weapons of mass destruction and the death toll may be in the tens of thousands, or even hundreds of thousands.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: Florida Senator Bob Graham, chairman of the intelligence committee, and Congressman Porter Goss, head of the house intelligence panel, both join us from Capitol Hill this morning.
Welcome back.
REP. PORTER GOSS (R-FL), HEAD OF HOUSE INTELLIGENCE PANEL: Good morning.
ZAHN: Senator Graham, I want to start with you this morning. The report also says that the director of the CIA has refused to declassify precisely what the White House knew.
Are you getting the information you need?
SEN. BOB GRAHAM (D-FL), CHAIRMAN OF SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Most of it, but not all of it. In this particular instance, the information that had been declassified, which had been presented to the president, we can present the information, but we cannot present the fact that that information had been given to the president. I cannot conceive of a national security reason why it would be a threat to our nation to let the American people know what the president, as the commander-in-chief, knew before September the 11th.
ZAHN: Representative Goss, how much tension is there between your committees and the White House? GOSS: I don't think there's any unusual tension. I think that we started out trying to work on a cooperative basis. We've avoided confrontation, but there's a lot of areas that do need to be negotiated out.
There are different perspectives. Obviously, we want to protect sources and methods and not jeopardize any ongoing prosecution in court. And we want to make sure we don't want to give away any plans and intentions in the war on terror. But, by and large, I would say the negotiation process is going forward. It's not always smooth.
ZAHN: Do you think the administration is holding something back from you., Representative Goss?
GOSS: I think they have points of view that we don't agree with and we are trying to work them out and as the process goes along I think you will find more information comes to the public.
GRAHAM: I also want to be clear that the position of the administration relative to disclosing what the president knew is not peculiar to President Bush. They're taking the same position as to prior presidents.
ZAHN: Yes, I'm glad you brought that up because I think it's really important to note that it was a report that goes back to 1998. That the U.S. Intelligence Committee knew that terrorists were planning to fly a bomb-laden plane into the World Trade Center.
Senator, can you expand on that?
GRAHAM: Yes, in the report there are four or five pages of specific pieces of intelligence that relate to the use of a commercial airliner as a weapon of mass destruction, mainly being used to attack a building of great symbolic significance in the United States. So the fact that that was the method by which the terrorists on September the 11th attacked us should not have been a surprise.
ZAHN: Representative Goss, based on what has come out of your countless hours of investigation, was there anything this administration could have done to prevent the attacks on 9/11?
GOSS: Well, I haven't seen anything specific as to date, time and place and so forth. I suppose people in hindsight can always go back and say, If you had only connected these dots and done it more quickly, a different result might have happened on September 11th.
But I have not seen anything yet that a single part of the intelligence community failed to act on something as that dramatic. What we have is a bit here and a piece there and someplace over here, somebody else knew something. And as we go through the files and find this out, turns out if all of those people should talk to each other and they had figured out that something was afoot, they probably could have come up with some kind of an idea. But still, it would not have been specific to the date, time and place, unless somebody made a very lucky guess. ZAHN: But Senator Graham, in the "New York Times" today there is a suggestion that government did have enough to at least fear an imminent attack, even though maybe precise time of the attacks and the kind of attacks weren't telegraphed.
GRAHAM: There were ample pieces of intelligence, very credible intelligence, and building in intensity in the summer of 2001 that the United States of America had been targeted by Osama bin Laden for a very major attack. And that's why we were on a general state of alert over the summer of 2001.
What was missing was that all of these pieces of information, some of which were in the FBI, some in the CIA, others elsewhere, never were brought before a single set of analytical eyes to see if they fit together to form a picture that could have then led to further questions and actions that might have disrupted this plot before we were hit.
ZAHN: Representative Goss, in closing there is a note in this report, that has just become public that says one critically important theme that ran through this, that what was apparent was Osama bin Laden's -- quote -- Intent to launch terrorist attacks inside the United States.
How significant is this?
GOSS: Very significant. The problem we had, frankly, was getting an audience for that statement. It took a number of years, you may remember that same report says, that the director of central intelligence, that said that war had been declared on us and that we were at war with Osama bin Laden. And it just seems that it was a war that not enough people came to early enough.
ZAHN: Gentleman, we're going to have to leave it there this morning. Congressman Goss, Senator Graham, appreciate both of you joining us morning.
GRAHAM: Thank you.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
