Robert G. Kaiser
Analysis: 9/11 Commission Reports
Fri Jun 18, 2004 03:43
64.140.158.57

Analysis: 9/11 Commission Reports

Robert G. Kaiser
Washington Post Associate Editor
Thursday, June 17, 2004; 12:00 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47298-2004Jun16.html

On Wednesday, the 9/11 Commission released new reports outlining details of the al Qaeda terrorist network and the planning that resulted in the Sept. 11 attacks. The attacks were originally envisioned as an assault involving 10 jetliners on the east and west coasts, but the plan was scaled back and was nearly derailed on several occasions by setbacks and squabbling among senior al Qaeda officials, according to one report. A separate report concluded that the commission found "no credible evidence" that al Qaeda collaborated with Saddam Hussein's government in Iraq on the Sept. 11 strikes or any other attacks on the United States.

Washington Post Associate Editor Robert G. Kaiser was online Thursday, June 17 at Noon ET, to discuss the newly released details.

Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.

________________________________________________

Washington, D.C.: I suspect that many of the chatters today are going to assert that President Bush claimed a connection between 9/11 and Iraq as a basis for going to war. It might be a useful service if you could dredge the Post's archives to find some of the occasions when he made such statements.

Obviously, this is a trick question; he never made such statements, and he publicly disagreed with Cheney when Cheney made such a statement.

Certainly, Bush told Richard Clarke to investigate for an Iraqi connection shortly after 9/11, but presumably no one is suggesting that it was wrong even to investigate.

Robert G. Kaiser: Good day to all. This first question is typical of quite a few posted already. And the questioner is correct. Who exactly said what about Iraq, terrorism and Al Qaeda is often lost in the swirl of spin and accusation.

But we do know that a substantial majority of Americans continues to believe that Iraq was involved in 9/11. Polls show this every time they ask. President Bush has issued an explicit statement, now months ago, saying there was NO such connection. But then other administration officials, including the Vice President, repeatedly imply that there was, or might have been.

I'll come back to all this in responding to other questions.

_______________________

Denver, Colo.: The 9/11 report is hardly surprising. We were not ready for this attack and when you operate in an environment of business-as-usual, it is extremely difficult to act in the most appropriate fashion. Even after so many months, years after 9/11 we still have major cities who can't communicate with each other and few states who have really adequate plans to respond to any type of emergency.

Can't we also admit that this attack was a masterful plan-- sure it even faltered and almost didn't happen because of internal disputes among its planners, but it worked quite well. The point is to catch us off guard, so that we can't respond quickly enough, and they succeeded at doing that.

Despite all the knowledge we're learning about through these hearings, the next plan is probably already in works. However, it will focus on our greatest vulnerabilities at the moment. While were preparing to prevent the last terrorist attack, they've already figured out the next-- which will be completely different and equally surprising.

I'd appreciate your thoughts.

Robert G. Kaiser: Thanks for your good comment, with which I agree, with one caveat. I think it may, repeat MAY, be a mistake to assume that another 9/11 plot is already in the works. The first one took years. It also took incredible luck, on top of great skill and determination. And it was concocted against no serious opposition, we now know--we weren't on the lookout as we should have been, they had the element of surprise at every turn, etc.

The Commission's new reports suggest Al Qaeda is in rough shape--not defeated, but not strong, not as rich as it was, not certainly able to coordinate as it once did. Let's not automatically assume the worst.

_______________________

Fairfax, Va.: Is there any way to take the commission's declaration that Iraq and al Qaeda weren't linked in a light that is anything but disastrous for the Bush administration? What will their spin likely be?

Robert G. Kaiser: We're talking politics here, so you need to be more precise: disastrous with whom? Will it cost Bush the election? I don't think so. Will it contribute to the doubts some voters have about the administration's credibility? Sure. But I don't think it's a straw that could break a camel's back. Do you?

_______________________

McLean, Va.: Mr. Kaiser,
With the myriad of absolute failures attributed to the FBI, CIA, NSA, the Pentagon, FAA, INS, etc. which allowed the attacks of Sept. 11th has there been one person -- anyone -- that has been held accountable and suffered some consequence as a result? And if not why not?

Robert G. Kaiser: I can't think of an individual who has been "held accountable." President Bush's poor standing in the polls today suggests he MIGHT be the one, but not until November, obviously. And I am not predicting the election result today. Too much can happen between now and then to make any prediction now irrelevant.

Why has no one been held accountable? BEcause we have developed a bottom-covering culture in modern America where such accountability is in fact rare. The 9/11 Commission will, I expect, challenge this culture in its report next month.

_______________________

Tionesta, Pa.: Please don't consider me to be void of feelings! Yet from time to time, I wonder just why United States government is having to pay victims and families of the horrendous disaster of 9/11 when it clearly was not the government who did the dastardly deed, but rather al Qaeda. Was this the case in the Oklahoma bombing of the Murrah building?

Robert G. Kaiser: I do not consider you devoid of feelings. This is a very good question, and it touches on an important point that I think gets too little attention.

The previous question was about accountability. In fact, I'd bet that every senior official of the government, from the president down, realized on 9/11 or soon afterward that each of them might somehow be considered responsible for what happened. Think about it. For the first time since 1812, a foreign enemy pulled off a devastating attack on the American homeland, causing great loss of life as well as national humiliation. If you had been president that day, how would you have felt?

I have long believed that the feelings engendered in our leaders that day -- private feelings, about which they never spoke -- help explain events since. I believe, analytically, that Bush and Cheney were both drawn to the idea of a war with Iraq that day, not because they were certain that Iraq had anything to do with the attacks, but because they felt, as many Americans felt, that we had to do something dramatic to respond, if only to show the world that America would not take such an event lying down.

Of course the first response was to invade Afghanistan and go after Al Qaeda and the Taliban. But I've always suspected that the enthusiasm for hitting Iraq also came from this sense that it was obligatory to respond fiercely, and dramatically, to 9/11, and that knocking off Saddam's regime was seen, at least by some officials, as an appropriate reply. And many ordinary Americans obviously thought it was, too.

_______________________

Robert G. Kaiser: Sorry, I ended the previous answer too quickly. I would say finally that the reason the government in Washington jumped to offer generous government-financed compensation to the families of 9/11 victims is related to this same sense. The administration and the Congress, with reason, both felt guilty that this attack had happened on their watch. They expressed that guilt with the generous compensation program. Or so it seems to me.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: I know, I know; The Post's news and editorial page staffs are quite separate. But isn't today's "Iraq Sideshow" editorial inexcusable? Cheney and Bush, on the basis of next to no evidence, continue to blur the distinction between Saddam and al Qaeda, leading the underinformed to conclude that the invasion of Iraq was and is seamlessly connected to the "war on terror." When opponents of the administration point to this dishonesty, how does the Post respond? "The accusation is nearly as irresponsible as the Bush administration's rhetoric has been." What Newspeak definition of "responsibility" is in use here?

washingtonpost.com: An Iraq Sideshow, (Post, June 17)

Robert G. Kaiser: Many questions about this editorial, to which we have provided a link.

Once again, I note that the news department of The Post, where I work, is in no way connected to the editorial page staff, and vise versa. They are independent of us, we of them. Their opinions have no impact whatsoever on news coverage.

I cannot answer questions about editorials. Write a letter to the editor if you want to comment on one.

_______________________

Raleigh, N.C.: What is amazing and frightening is how little cash it took to run the operation for two years up until the event. They opened checking accounts and got money from overseas through ATMs.

"Following the money" and shutting it down seems like one approach to monitor and suppress al Qaeda. Do you know what the status of that is and how successful we've been in shutting down their finances?

Robert G. Kaiser: There is conflicting information about how effective we have been. A U.N. committee reported some months ago that Al Qaeda still had plenty of resources, but the new 9/11 Commission reports suggest they aren't so flush. We have closed down a large part of the financial network that existed before 9/11. But I'm personally concerned that we don't know what we don't know about their money.

_______________________

Accountable: Bill Maher lost his job following his post-9/11 comments. I think that's it, so far.

Robert G. Kaiser: good point.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Reading the Commission's report today, I am reminded of the wonderful job the people on the front lines did on 9/11, namely the landing of all the planes in American airspace without incident. This is truly an accomplishment, and I don't know that we as a nation have ever properly acknowledged it. Whatever failures occurred of the leadership that day, let's remember that there were remarkable people who kept their head that day and safely landed thousands of passengers. Thanks.

Robert G. Kaiser: thank you.

_______________________

Washington, DC: Is the 9/11 Commission going to damage Bush politically? What other surprises might await us in the months between now and the election?

Robert G. Kaiser: There is a lot to come later this summer and fall. The Senate Intellegence Committee's report on the intel failures before 9/11 is written. The CIA is in the process of "clearing" it for publication. This process is going slowly, and Senators are angry about it. The report will be damaging to the administration, I am told by good sources.

Then the 9/11 Commission will report. I don't know what it will say, but I don't think it will be patting the administration on the back.

The turnover of sovereignty, so-called, in Iraq will open a new situation there. Our colleagues in Iraq are pessimistic about what will happen later in the summer and in the fall. Might civil war begin? Might assassinations of key Iraqis continue? Alas, these and other horrific possibilities cannot be ruled out. But nor are they destined to happen. We'll just have to wait and see.

Events that haven't yet occurred will determine the result of this election. This is a cliche, but like so many cliches, it is rooted in truth, I think.

_______________________

Morristown, N.J.: I still don't understand why our Air Force did not intercept the planes that were being hijacked on Sept. 11th. We had hijackings going on for 30 years before and it was policy that all planes more than 15 minutes off their scheduled path were to have an Air Force jet on their wing tips. This happened with Payne Stewart's plane when he went off course.

Why do you think this is not being investigated and someone held accountable?

Robert G. Kaiser: Hey, this IS being investigated, by the 9/11 Commission, which devoted much of its hearing this morning to the question...

_______________________

Santa Barbara, Calif.: I continue to be amazed and not a little bit disturbed by the administration's insistence (the latest by Cheney a few days ago) that Saddam Hussein had ties to al Qaeda, when all evidence that's been uncovered indicate to the contrary. Which brings up two points: What does the administration know that it has not told the public or the 9/11 Commission, and if Cheney et al. don't have any hidden knowledge, why do they continue on insisting on the tie? They both seem like dangerous paths to tread.

Robert G. Kaiser: At this stage I think it is fair to assume that there is no hard evidence in the administration's possession that we don't know about. Yesterday, senior CIA and FBI officials at the 9/11 Commission hearing confirmed the report's conclusion that there was no evidence of an active connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda.

_______________________

Ashland, Mo.: Just a comment to say how much I enjoy your chats even if I don't always agree with you. Your balanced, informed approach is so different from so many of the chatters.

Robert G. Kaiser: I thank you for the nice words, and hope we aren't related.

_______________________

Moodus, Conn.: Given the finding of the 9/11 Commission that there was no operative link between Iraq and al Qaeda, and the fact that despite this the administration continues to try to insinuate an operative link -- it seems more important than ever that the Iraq Intelligence Investigation present at least a preliminary report prior to the election. How else is the electorate to make an informed decision on the credibility of the White House? What do you think the chances are?

Robert G. Kaiser: You are referring to the commission chaired by former Senator Robb and retired Appeals Court Judge Silberman, appointed by Bush but given a mandate to report next year. I don't think there's any chance its timetable will be advanced.

_______________________

Marblehead, Mass.: Why are we all so willing to give W such a pass? Quoting from Froomkin's excellent column today:
"In a letter to Congress on March 19, 2003 -- the day the war in Iraq began -- Bush said that the war was permitted under legislation authorizing force against those who 'planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."

Wake up.

washingtonpost.com: White House Briefing, (post.com, June 17)

Robert G. Kaiser: thanks for posting. Froomkin is doing a great job with his column.

_______________________

Falls Church, VA: I have watched a lot of the 9-11 commission questioning and in my opinion, Mr. Ben-Veniste keeps asking questions to undermine the current administration. Why is no one else complaining about his obvious partisan tone? The questions that he asks preclude that the Bush presidential administration is directly responsible for 9-11. He keeps asking about the PDB that clearly did not give any specific evidence of an attack in the US. His goal is clear, to attempt to embarrass and put doubt in the current administration. His tone would definitely be different if it were the Gore administration being questioned.

Robert G. Kaiser: This raises what I think is an interesting question. In our poisoned political atmosphere in Washington, it is impossible for a

• ATTN: 9/11 Truth workers and friends — Les Jamieson, Fri Jun 18 17:50
• Rookie in the 9-11 Hot Seat? — Tom Flocco, Fri Jun 18 15:05
• Something Wicked This Way Comes — Dave Mullenax, Fri Jun 18 19:06
• Arabs, Al Quida , & Mike Ruppert — Matthew Continetti, Fri Jun 18 10:19
• OP MOCKINGBIRD AGENT MIKE RUPPERT & OTHERS! — RESEARCHER, Fri Jun 18 15:23
• Ruppert and Holmgren — Preston Peet, Sat Jun 19 09:14
• Impressions on Ruppert — J. Corbin, Fri Jun 18 16:16
• comment — doesn't matter, Fri Jun 18 19:58