DM B4 Joint Inquiry Fdr- Memos- Letters- Emails Re JI Report and Access to It- Materials- Witnesses 332

8/14/2019 DM B4 Joint Inquiry Fdr- Memos- Letters- Emails Re JI Report and Access to It- Materials- Witnesses 332

1/21

Congresso f t l je{ H n t t e f ct, 3B.C.

Top Secret/Codeword Material Attached

July 7,2003

Mr. Philip D. ZelikowExecutiveDirectorNationalCom mission on Terrorist Attacks Upo n the United States

Dear Philip:

Enclosed,for the use of theCommission,is a copy of the Joint Inqu iry Final Reportappendix entitled,"Evolution of the Terrorist Threatand U.S. Response, 1983-2001." As you

know , the Central Intelligence Agen cy (CIA) expressed concerns regardingfurther disseminationof the original versionand we have been working withC IA officials since last Decembertoproduce this revised version that C IA agrees adequately protects sensitive intelligence sourcesand methods. In addition, several references to NSC-level actions and dissemination ofintelligencehave been redactedat the requestof the C IA andNSC . Please note that, even withthese revisions, this version rem ains hig hly classifiedand access shouldbe limited toCommissionmembersan d Commissionstaff with appropriate clearancesand a need for accessin connection with the work of theCommission.

Also enclosedis a copy of the final versionof the Errata Sheet, dated July7, 2002.Please ensure thatit accompaniesthe copy of the original report,and the several redacted

versions ofthat report, thatwe provided to you earlier.

Sincerely,

Staff

Top Secret/Codeword M aterial AttachedUnclassified Upon Removal From Attachments


2/21

Congressof tfjeWini t t t i States

Top Secret Co deword M aterial Attached

July 7, 2003

M r. Philip D. ZelikowExecutive DirectorNational Com missionon Terrorist Attacks Uponthe United States

Dear Philip:

Enclosed, as requested on behalf of the C omm ission, are copies of the final 20 Joint

Inquiry Staff Interview Reports that we have reviewed for release to the Com mission. A list ofthe relevant subject namesan d interview datesis attached. Please not e thata numberof thesereports are classified at very high levels and should be protected accordingly.

These 20 Interview Reports involve National Security Agency (NSA) personnelan d werereviewed at ouroffices today byNSA representatives to determine whether they have beenclassified at the proper levels. They also reviewed the Interview Re ports of NSA personne l thatwere providedto theCommission previously.While those representatives recommendednochange in classification level for any of the Inte rview Re ports they rev iewed, they did ask thataccess to a num ber of them be limited at the C omm ission. A list of those Interview reports isalso enclosedfor your information.

These reports are being provided o nly for theofficial use of the Com mission inconnection w ith its review. As discussed, we have redactedfrom these reports informationpertainingto the internal deliberativeprocesses of the Committees.

Sincerely,

Staff

Top Secret Codewo rd Material AttachedUnclassified Upon Removal From Attachments


3/21


4/21


5/21

only to the commissioners themselves an d tightly restricted within th e staff tothe few individuals with the requisite security clearances and a specific needto know. This is, of course, in addition to the rules and procedures thataccompany thehandling of highly classified national security information.

Moreover, while the classified character of the Report should provide for theconfidentiality of any information pertaining to Mr. Zacarias Moussaoui, if aportion marked or unclassified version of the Report is prepared, we willrefrain from public disclosure of portions regarding Mr. Moussaoui prior tohis trial as needed to insure continued compliance with relevant court ordersan d Local Rule 57 of the Eastern District of Virginia.

Since the Commission "agrees to abide by the same access and disclosureprovisions that were agreed to between DOJ/FBI and the Committee," wehope this memorandum now lifts any remaining objections to Commissionexamination of the Joint Inquiry information it is required to review beforedoing so much of its work.

Looking beyond this particular issue, the Commission is determined toprevent the unauthorized disclosure of any sensitive information it receives inthe course of its work. The Chair and Vice-Chair of the Commission remainprepared to consider various other special restrictions on the handling ofspecific information or particular reports, as these concerns arise. We standready to work together with you to find the right approach on a case-by-casebasis.

Cc: KennethWainsteinEleanor Hill


6/21


7/21

,jitui .. ocin iiciiis. vvrauusc uu u icqucsi, ji niquiiy rage /. ui

I t h i n k t h a t i s w o r t h p u r s u i n g ! w h i l e w e a t t h e s a me t i m e t e l l C i o n g o l it h a t h i s " a g r e e m e n t " w i t h t h e J I w i l l n o t w o r k to ge t u s the a c c e s s t o C I Ad o c u m e n t s t h a t w e n e e d f a s t e n o u g h i a n d t h a t w e t h e r e f o r e w a n t t o r e v i s i t a n dr e v e r s e t h e d e c i s i o n n o t t o p e r m i t u s t o a c c e s s t h e d o c u m e n t s a t t h e C I A -W h i l e t h e CIA i n d e x i s n o t t e r r i f i c as a g u i d e t o t h e d o c u m e n t s ! D o u g M t h i n k si t i s a d e q u a t e a s a b a s i s fo r p u l l i n g up d o c u m e n t s t o r e v i e w a t t h e CIA r e a d i n gr o o m ! an d we w o u l d n o t h a v e t o a sk t h e CIA t o p u l l u p e v e r y t h i n g an d t ry t or e c r e a t e t h e w h o l e s e t o f d o c u m e n t s t h a t w e n t t o t h e J I - A n d onc e t h e J Ir e d a c t e d i n d e x w a s a v a i l a b l e ! w e c o u l d d o u b l e - c h e ck t o see i f t h e r e i s a n y t h i n gm o r e w e w a n t - I f C i o n g o l i s a y s n o i I w o u l d f a v o r g o i n g p u b l i c w i t h a s t a t e m e n tt h a t w e a r e b e i n m g s e r i o u s l y d e l a y e d a n d i m p a i r e d i n c a r r y i n g o u t an i m p o r t a n tp a r t o f o u r s t a t u t o r y m a n d a t e t o r e v i e w t h e J I r e c o r d b y t h e u n r e a s o n a b l ep o s i t i o n s o f t h e J I a n d t h e E x e c B r a n c h .

C o m m e n t s w e l c o m e -

Delete | Reply | Reply to All | Forward | Redirect | Blacklist | Message Source | Resume | Save as Back to Sent Items| Print

, _ llhis message toi^ ioy t 's uui>/

http://kinesis.swishmail.com/webmail/imp/message.php?index=126 5/31/03


8/21

iviau .. iiND^yv. jvc,. vvnuusc uuu icqucsi, ji mqauy rage i 01

11.60MB / 476.84MB (2.43%)

Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 10:05:34 -0400From: Philip Zel ikow4P'

To : "" 4|

G C: "" #,"" ^Reply-to: "


9/21

0 5 / 2 2 / 0 3 TH U 18:17 F A X 0 0 2

(Officeof ti|e Attorney(ieneralBafrI]ingtnn,B. (Q .2

M ay 22, 2003

H onorable PorterGossChairmanPermanent Se lec tCommittee on Intel l igenceUni t edStates House of Representa t ivesWashington, DC 20515

Dear M r. Chairman:

I am wri t ing in my c apaci ty as the E xe c ut ive Branch 's designated point of contac t w i th theNat ional Commissionon Terror is tAttacksU p o n th e U ni ted S ta te s("the C o m m i ss i o n " )at thesuggest ion of your s ta ff d i rec tor, Pa t r ick M urray. You are aware , of course , tha t the Exe cut iveBranchturned over c opies of a substant ia l numbe r of docum ents to the Joi ntInquiry last yea r as part of theJoint Inqu i ry ' s r ev iew , T he Jo i n t Inqu i ry re t a ins these cop ie s . Sec t ion6 0 4 ( b ) ( l )of the sta tute c re a t ingthe Comm iss ion requ i re s the Com mi ss ion tor ev iew thesematerialsprior to pursu ing addi t ional"appropriate"areasof i nqu i ry. T h i sL e t t e ris 10 advise that th e E x e c u t i v eB r a n c hhas no objec t ionsto

th e Joint Inquirymaking those copiesav a i l ab l eto the C o m m i s s i o ncons i s t en t w i thany handl ingorsecuri tyr e q u i r e m e n t sdue toc l ass i f i ca t i o n .Pleasele t me k n o w i f you need any fur ther informat ion.

S i n c e r e l y,

Ad a m G.Ciongo l iCounse lor to theAt torneyGenera l

c c : Na t i o n a l C o m m i ss i onon T er rori s t At t acks U ponT he U n i t e d S ta te sH o n o r a b l eT homas H . Kean ,Chai rHonorab le LeeH , H a m i l t o n , Vi c eC h a i rP h i l i pD . Z e l i k o w, E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r


10/21

omas H. KeanA I R

e H. HamiltonC E C H A I R

chard Ben-Veniste

ax Cleland

ederick F. Fielding

mie S. Gorelick

de Gorton

hn F. Lehman

mothy J. Ro emer

mes R . Thompson

i l i p D. ZelikowX E C U T I V ED I R E C T O R

DETERMINATION

Having reviewed the inform ation compiled by, and thefindings, conclusions,and recommend ations of, the Joint Inquiry of the C ongress relating to theIntelligence C ommunity,the National C ommissionon Terrorist A ttacks U ponthe U nited States herebydetermines that:

(a) The Joint I nquiry did not investigate the following areas of inquiryrelating to the Intelligence C ommunity:

The organization and operational methodsof A l Qa'ida; The character of Al Qa'ida's relationships with foreign

governments, especially Iraqand Iran; The wider terrorist threat againstthe U nited States beyondAl

Qa'ida, whether from organizations directly affiliated with A lQa'ida or from other organizations, suchas Hizbollah;

The immediate responseof the U nited Statesto the attacks; Lessons learnedand the counterterrorism policies, programs,

an d procedures instituted by the Intelligence C omm unityafterthe attacks of September 11,2001;

The role of state and local law enforcement agenciesin thecollection, analysis, and use of intelligence inside the U nitedStates; and

C ongressional oversightof the IntelligenceCommunity'scounterterrorism policies and programs.

(b) The Joint I nquiry investigatedthe followingareas of inqu iry relatingto the Intelligence C omm unity, some of them ex tensively, but did notcomplete its investigation into:

The reconstructionof the September 11, 2001 plot, includingthe higher-level directionof the conspiracy and the activitiesof the Hamburg cell;

The activities of the conspirators and their support network

inside the U nited States; The global financing networkof Al Qa'ida, including the

financing of the September 11, 2001 plot; C ontroversies overthe policy guidance providedby the

ExecutiveBranch for the Intell igence C omm unity 'sinternationalcounterterrorismefforts, includingth e contextand details of the debates over covert actionan d alternativeoptions;

301 71'1 Street SW, Room 5125

Washington, DC 20407

T 202.331.4060 F 202.296.5545

w w w. 9 - l l c o m m i s s i o n . g o v


11/21


12/21

z.u, /.uuj Jfagc i ui

April 26, 2003

MEMORANDUM

To: Commissioners

From:Philip Zelikow

Subj :Access to Information Compiledby the Joint Inquiry

As several of you know , concerns have arisen again over the Com mission'saccess to the informationcompiledby the Joint Inquiry. The A P story in today's newspapers states, for instance, that: "Onemember's attempt to review confidential transcripts exposed arift yesterday within the independentcommission examiningthe Sept. 11, 2001 attacks."

At the Commission's last meeting you received afull report on the status ofthese access issues,includinga copy of the relevant memorandumto Eleanor Hill. Since that meetingthe issues havelargelybeen resolvedin a numberof ways. Tom and Leehave been kept awareof the progressof

these discussion s. Withou t waiting for the next meeting or its accompanying briefing m aterials, thismemo reviewsth e current status ofal l the current Joint Inquiry accessissues, not just those that havebeen publicized.

The Com mission has the du ty to review the "inform ation compiled by" the Joint Inquiry. Thisinformation is in several form s:

1. Written Agency Subm issions

At the ou tset of theJI's wo rk, written qu estions were posed to all the agencies in the intelligencecommunity.Agencies responded in writing, several of them appendingcopies of hundreds ofdocuments. The responses contain thousands of pages of classified material. The Commission has

asked for and received copiesof all this material, wh ichis availablefor review at our offices. Thisincludes the follow -up questions to theOffice of the Secretary o f Defense and the written questionsposed to the NSC and answered in writing by Stephen Hadley.

2. Docum ents from Executive Branch Ag encies

The JI requested and received copies of thou sands of docum entsfrom various intelligence agencies.They have both hard copies and digital copies of these do cum ents. The Executive Branch has noobjectionto Co mm ission review of any of these documents. The JI, however, prefers that we notreview their copiesof these documents,but insteadgo back to the originating agenciesfo r them. TheJI's position is that: (a) their digital and hard copies o f these docum ents are stored in databases andboxesthat m ix those documents together with congressionally privileged material- namely th einteractions between and among mem bers andstaff; and (b) the JI lacks thestaff and resources tomanually run ou t orretrieve all of these documentsfrom this mix andprovide themto us.

We have accededto the JI's request that,if possible,we will attemptto obtain th e documentsfrom th eoriginatingagencies, who hav e lists of wh at they provided to the Joint Inquiry. B ut w e have reservedthe right to request docum entsfrom the JI if we canno t readily get themfrom the originatingagencies. Fu rther, we h ave asked the JI to prov ide us with an au thoritative list or index of theexecutive branch docum ents in their possession . At this time the JI maintains thatthey are not surethat they can generate sucha list, bu t Eleanor Hillis workingon the problem.W e believe we musthave su ch a list, in part as a check against whatever lists we receivefrom the Executive Branch

. . ./view.php?thismailbox=rNBOX&index-235&id=2&actionID=113&mime=589ec7bd2bd9aab64/27/03


13/21

J~agc z. ui j

agencies. The Exec utive Branch shares this concern,as they fear their lists may be imprecise orincomplete, and they do not want to be accused of misleading the Commission about what documentsare in thepossession of the JI.

Meanwhile,the FBI tells us that they have an other set of copies of w hatthey provided to the JointInquiryand are prepared to make that available to us when we be gin working during the next fewdays in thereading room they havese t aside for us.

The CIA did not keep an a dditiona l set of copies of w hat they provided to Joint Inquiry and prefersno t to go through the reque st and retrieval process for this all over again. Adam Ciongoli has beenurging the JI to provide us w ith these CIA doc umen ts. In the meantime, however, he has instructedCIA to furnish us with the completelist of wh at they provided to the Joint Inquiry, understanding thatif necessary we will be obliged to requestfurther copies of documents that have already beenprovided to the JI.

The CIA gave copies to the JI of'finished intelligence 1 reports. The CIA also made available largequantitiesof raw intelligence information, including operational cablesfrom the field. This materialwas setaside for JI review at CIA headquarters;it remains therefor us, andCommission staff havebegun reviewing this material.

W e expect to meet withNSA representatives next weekin order to work throughthe status of theirow n material. Dan M arcus and I have also met with the designated points of contact for the W hiteHouse, State, Defense, Justice,and Ho meland Security, with more meetings (Transportation,Treasury, etc.) scheduledfor next week.So f ar all ofthese discussions have been positiveand wewillbe reportingon them to you next week.

3. Interview Reports

All witness interviews conductedby JI staff were preserved in interview reports. These aresummaries,not transcripts. Thereare more than30 0 such reports.W e have requestedour own copiesof all these reports , to be kep t at the C omm ission'soffices. The JI has agreed, subject to their requestthat EleanorHill and her deputy first be allowed to review all these reports and redact from them anymaterial thatfalls under the congressional privilege (interactions among staffand members of the JI).W e have agreed to this condition.

Pursuantto this agreement,the JI hasalready reviewedand furnishedcopies to us of 91 oftheirinterview reports, including m any of the m ost sensitive reports.These are now available for review atour offices. We hope soon to receive copies of the remaining 200+reports.

Among those 200+ reports are14 interview reports that the Executive Branch hasalso asked toreview,to determine if any con tain preside ntially privileged m aterial that was disclosed w ithoutauthorizationto the JI staff. Ciongoli has provided that list to Eleanor Hill, who hasacceded to hisrequestas she is going through her own screening of all these reports. Thesereports are JI summariesof informationthey received an d are thus a JI work produc t. We believe the Executive Branch requestshouldnot be allowe d to delay Com mission access to these reports beyond the delay w e have already

accepted as a courtesy to the JI for its congression al review. W efurtherbelieve the Commission has aduty to receive all info rma tion contained in these reports and w e will insist on that if the ExecutiveBranch asserts any claim that w ould deny access. No such claim has been asserted, however.

4. Hea ring transcripts

There were twenty hearings o f theJoint Inquiry. Nine were held in publicsession. Though thesetranscriptsare notpublicly a vailable,we have copiesof all ofthem at the Commission an d they areavailablefor review.

../view.php?thismailbox=INBOX&index=235&id=2&actionID=113&mime=589ec7bd2bd9aab4/27/03


14/21

, z.uuj rage j ui

There were also eleven closed hearings,as follows:

1. June 11 - CounterterrorismPolicy, White HouseOverview: Richard Clarke (This hearing waslegallycharacterized as abriefing,and Clark e was not placed under oath.)

2. June 18 - Intellige nce Ag encies Overview : Tenet (CIA), Mueller (FBI), Hayden(NSA) (All ofthese witnesse s alsotestified in pub lic sessionas well.)

3. June 19 - Intelligence Agencies Overview, Continued

4. July 16 - Technical Intelligence Collection (NSA and CIA)

5. July 18 - Intelligence Collection (NSA - Hayden, and CIA, FBI,andNIMA)

6. July 23 - Terrorist Financing (Treasuryan d FBI)

7. July 25 - Analysisan d Langua ge Issues (CIA,DIA, NSA)

8. September12 - Clandestine Intelligence Collectionand Operations

9. September26 - Foreign and Dome stic Intelligence Issues, includingMoussaouian d Phoenix EC(FBI and CIA)

10. October9 - CompartmentedSubject (FBIan d CIA)

11. October 10 - Comp artmentedSubject, Continued: Tenet (CIA) and Mueller (FBI)

The C ommissionhas requested accessto all ofthese transcripts.The JI hasagreed,on condition thatwe review these transcriptsat the Ford Bu ilding since congressional rules prohibit their providing

. ./view.php?thismailbox=rNBOX&mdex=235&id=2&actionID-113&minie=589ec7bd2bd9aab4/27/03


15/21

^.u, /.uuj rage t ui

copies of closed hearing transcripts to any ou tside entity except under very narrowly circumscribedconditions.All of these hearing transcripts willbe availableat the Ford Buildingto all commissionersand to thosestaffers who have the req uisite clearances. W e are allowed to take verbatimnotes fromthese hearings, using whatever techn ologythe security officers can permit, an d bring those notesback to theCommissionfo r reference underthe usual proceduresfo r handling classified information.

The Ex ecutive Branch requ ested that, as a courtesy, we grant them the opportunity to review three ofthese transcripts (for numb ers2, 3, and 8above) so that White Housean d Justice Department lawyers

can find out what was said, so they can ju dg e whether to claim that presidentially privileged materialwas disclosed with out authorization. White House an d Justice lawyers did not attend those hearingsand have no more of a right to transcripts of them than we do. Th erefore the Executive Branch has notranscript of their own and the ir lawyers wished to d etermine what w as said.

Our position has been that, as a courtesy, we are willing to let them look at thosetranscripts to seewhat they contain in order to make their jud gm ent. We have also told them that we question the pointof the exercise, since we think any claim of privilege on this material would be utterlymeritless.Nevertheless, if they want a we ek or so in order to get the information that may allow them to cometo this same conclusion, and thereby avoid a legal confrontation, they can have it. We will nottolerate a delay that materially hinders o ur investigation, but w e have plenty ofother material we candigest at the mom ent, includingthe eight other closed hearing transcripts.

The staffer Justice sent over to the Ford B uilding in order to read the hearings was delayed in hiswork, as he discoveredhe needed to be read into certain additionalSC I compartments an d there was aconsequent process of request for clearances, approval, and briefings before he could return to hiswork this past week.

W e have told Adam Ciongolithat we ho pe the matter can be resolved b y the time the Comm issionmeets this coming week. O therwise the Com mission m ay decide it has waited long enough, andchoose to force the issue, thereby triggering a possible legal confrontation between the Commissionand the President.

On Friday, April 25, TimRoenier sought to read hearing transcripts 2, 3, and 8. Before he arrived atthe Ford Building, I told him o f our current position, a position I had confirmed beforehand with Toman d Lee, and had also discussed withmy deputy and our counsel.

Tim strongly disagreed with any unders tanding that might delay his access to any of these transcripts,however tem porary. He stressed that any claim of privilege w ould have no m erit, if the Presidenteventually choseto actually make sucha claim. On this point everyone involvedwas in agreement,and Tom and Lee had conveyed this basic agreement to Tim. How ever he thought any delay inaccesswas indefensiblean d that the Comm ission shouldbe prepared to have a legal confrontation withthePresidentthat day. This was not our view. Tim then appealed to the court of public opinion, callingand explaining his disagreem ent to thefamily groups and to thepress. Hence the newsstories.

5. The JI Report

The sum mation of wh at the JI learnedfrom all sources is contained in theJI's Report. That Reporthas been availablefo r review by all commissionersand appropriately cleared stafffo r nearly a month.The JI hasinsisted thatwe review this Reportat the Ford Building untila declassified versionis sentto the printers- a time thatis still at least several weeks away.

The full Report includes som e specially designated m aterialan d notes may not be taken from it. Aredacted butstill highly classified copyof the Report is also availablefor our review. Notes may betaken from it and those notesmay be brough t backto the Commission fo r storage underth eproceduresfo r handlingclassified information.

../view.php?thismailbox=INBOX&index=235&id=2&actionID=113&mime=589ec7bd2bd9aab4/27/03


16/21

ivid.il .. iryov^v. vvniicii jxcqucsis lu iinci /agencies rage i ui i

7.55MB / 476.84MB (1.58%)

Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 07:54:18 -0400From: [email protected]^P

To: dmarcus@9-11 commission.gov^, sdunne@9-11 commission.gov^f

G C: dhyde@9-11 commission. gov&Subject: Written Requests to Intel Agencies

D a n i S t e v e n b a s e d o n y o u r c o m m e n t y e s t e r d a y a b o u t a w r i t t e n a g r e e m e n t w i t h t h e1C a g e n c i e s ! s o m e h i s t o r y t h a t y o u m a y o r ma y n o t h a v e g o t t e n f r o m R i c k a n dE l e a n o r

B r i t S n i d e r t h o u g h t h e h a d h a m m e r e d o u t a n or a l a g r e e m e n t w i t h t h e 1C t h a tt h r e e d i s t r i b u t i o n r e s t r i c t i o n s w o u l d b e w a i v e d : O R C O N i 3 d - a g e n c y r u l e ! a n df o r e i g n g o v e r n m e n t i n f o r m a t i o n W h e n t h e J IS h i t t h e g r o u n d w i t h t h e a g e n c i e sw e f o u n d t h a t t o n o t b e e i t h e r c l e a r o r e v e n u n d e r s t o o d . T w o a g e n c i e s ! D I A a n dN I M A n a l l o w e d us un t e t h e r e d e l e c t r o n i c a c c e s s t o a l l t h e i r f i l e s - T h a t c a m e t oa sc r e e c h i n g h a l t w h e n w o rd t r i c k l e d b a c k t o S t a n N o s k o w i t z - I t t o o k s e v e r a lw e e k s t o g e t e v e r y o n e e d u c a t e d t ha t t h e w a i v e r s we r e r e a l e v e n t h e n n o t h i n gw a s c o m m i t t e d t o w r i t i n g . T h a t c au s e d s o m e g r i e f a n d t u r m o i l w h e n b i g D o D O G Cw o k e u p t o t h e f a c t s o f w h a t w e h a d b e e n a n d w e r e d o i n g a n d e n t e r e d t h ep r o c e s s - I t t oo k a w h i l e t o e d u c a t e t h e m t h a t t h e w a i v e r s d i d i i n f a c t ! e x i s t -

G i v e n t h e a b o v e i i t i s i m p o r t a n t t h a t y o u d o o b t a i n a w r i t t e n a g r e e m e n t wi t ht h e I n t e l A g e n c i e s - H o w e v e r ! i f t h e a b o v e w a i v e r s a r e n o t i n pl a c e i t w i l lc a u s e u n n e c e s s a r y (and u n w a r r a n t e d ) de l a y s i n o b t a i n i n g d o c u m e n t s - T h e 1C i sq u i t e c a p a b l e o f e x t e n d i n g s uc h d i s c u s si o n s o n a d n a u s e u m -

C a s e i n p o i n t ! s e p a r a t e b u t r e l a t e d - N S A d e c i d e d t h a t i t ha d t o h a v e a s t o r ag ea g r e e m e n t i n p l a c e b e f o r e J I S c o u l d b e a l l o w e d t o m a i n t a i n N S A d o c u m e n t s a t t h eF o r d b u i l d i n g . R i c k w o r ke d h a r d a t t i l t i n g t h i s w i n d m i l l ! b u t n e v e r s u c c e e d e di n g a i n i n g f i n a l approval e v e n t h o u g h H a y d e n p e r s o n a l l y t h o u g h t i t h a d b e e ng i v e n - S h o u l d t h i s g a m b i t s u r fa c e a g a i n ! a n d I a m s u re i t w i l l i t h e N S A i s su ei s n o t a b o u t s e c u r i t y ! a l t h o u g h t h e y w i l l cl o a k i t i n t h a t m a n n e r - R a t h e r ! i ti s a b o u t a r c h i v i n g . N S A w a n t s t o c o n t r o l t h a t -

W e e v e n t u a l l y d i s c o v e r e d t h r e e wa y s t o g e t a r o u n d t h e r e s t r i c t i o n . F i r s t ! i fw e t r u l y n e e d e d a d o c u m e n t w e w o u l d s i m p l y c a l l u p D I A a n d g i v e t he m t h e d a t e -t i m e - g r o u p a n d t h e m e s s a g e c i t e a n d h a v e t h e m p u l l i t fr o m t h e i r s y s t e m - I f w eh a d e s t a b l i s h e d t he e x i s t e n c e o f a b o dy o f i n f o r m a t i o n t h r o u g h f o r m a l d a t ac a l l s w e w o u l d f a r m o u t a w r i t t e n " s u p p l e m e n t a l " d a t a c a l l a t t h e t e a m l e v e l -F o r e x a m p l e ! D I A h a d s t a t e d i n a f o r m a l p r o d u c t t h a t i t ha d i d e n t i f i e d o v e r M Om e s s a g e s c o n c e r n i n g t h e t h r e a t b u i l d - u p i n J u n e E D D 1 - U e s i m p l y a s k e d t h e m fo rt h o s e m e s s a g e s . A s i t t u r n e d out! a l l o f t h e m w e r e S I G I N T- F i n a l l y ! t h r u t h e( 3 F R m e c h a n i s m ! w e w o u l d h a v e t h e C o m m i t t e e C h a i r s f o r m a l l y t a s k f o r d o c u m e n t s -F o r e x a m p l e i G e n e r a l H a y d e n m e n t i o n i n t e s t i m o n y t h a t N S A h a d i d e n t i f i e d 3 3 o rs o m e s s a g e s i m p o r t a n t t o t h e t h r e a t b u i l d u p i n J u n e E D D 1 - H e s a i d h e w o u l dp r o v i d e t h e m ! a n d N S A h a d t o r e s p o n d -

I t e l l y o u a l l o f t h i s t o d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t ! d e s p i t e N S A ' s s t o n e w a l l i n g o f t h es t o r a g e a g r e e m e n t ! J I S w a s a b l e t o o b t a i n f o r i t s a r c h i v e s s o m e k e y N S Am e s s a g e s

G o o d l u c k . I s p e c u l a t e ! b a s e d o n J I S e x p e r i e n c e ! t h a t T e n e t a n d H a y d e n w i l ls w e a r up a n d d o w n t h a t t h e i r a g e n c i e s a r e c o o p e r a t i n g . Yo u c a n g o t o t h e Vi c eP r e s i d e n t ! b u t s pe n d t h a t s i l v e r b u l l e t w i s e l y - i i f a t a l l -

M i l e s

. . ./message.php?actionID=l 48&mailbox=INBOX&bodypart=$bodypart&index=316&uniq=l 05195/2/03


17/21

StaffStatement # 10, at page6, recounts again the story ofal-Mihdharand al-Hazmi,includingthe photo identificationof Khalladby a Joint FBI/CIA sourcein January2001.The statementconcludes that CIA testimon y before the Congressional Joint Inquiry w as in error regarding FBIknowledgeof the identification,citingthe Com mission's reviewof extensive documents,etc., as abasis forthat conclusion. Unfortunately,the Com mission's s taff statement failsto note thattheCongressionalJointInquiry, in itsReportat pp.149-150,previouslyreached that sameconclusion, ba sedon its ownreviewof theextensive factual record compiledby the Joint Inquiryand now being revisitedby theCommission.Byfailingto also notethe Committees' previous,nearlyidentical conclusion, the staff statem ent could suggest that the Joint Inquiry erroneouslyrelied on the cited testimo ny and that the Com mission ha s reached a new an d differentconclusion,whichis not thecase. In fact,the Commission Staffis essentiallyechoingthe JointInquiry'sprevious conclusion,as clearly stated in the Joint Inquiry Report. If this issue isultimately includedin theCommission Report,Iwould hope thatthe Inquiry'sconclusionis alsonoted.

While Irecognize andempathize withthe difficultiesthe Commission facesIngatheringandmasteringthe extensivefactualrecord regarding9/11, it is important,as you use thefactsdeveloped in the Cong ressional Joint Inquiry record,to accurately portraythe Inquiry'swork.Tothe extent thatI ca n be helpfulto thestaffin quicklynavigatingthe Inquiry'streatmentofvariousissues, please do nothesitate to callme.

EleanorHillKing& Spalding(202-626-2955)(FormerStaffDirector, Con gression al Joint Inquiryon theSeptember 11th Attacks)


18/21

JV

Access the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the UnitedStates must gain from entities that the Joint Inquiry was either refused

or limited.

Dear Commissioners and Staff,

After recently re-reading the Joint Inquiry's Report, it has come to my attentionthat there are many ar eas that this Commission must gain access.

In light of recent eventsnamely the issuance of your first subpoena to the FAA, Iwould hope that if you have not already gained access to the below mentioned list,you will immediately and liberally issue subpoenas to gain such access. The issuanceof a subpoena provides the legal mechanism to compel compliance w ith yourrequests. It permits your investigation to m ove along swiftly, constructively and

thoroughly, devoid of any roadblocks. And, perhaps m ost impor tantly, the use of asubpoena establishes a level of credibility that this Commission must reach in orderfor your final report to be definitive, complete, and above reproach.

The Joint Inquiry listed these below m entioned areas, individuals, and entities asareas that were in need of further investigation. Thus, it would seem that these areaswould b e well within your mandate since your investigation of them will n otduplicate any work already done by the Joint Inquiry.

During your consideration of issuing subpoenas for the below m entioned areas, Iwould hope that you would recall the words issued by the White House in their

October 15, 2003, memorandum, 'Cooperation with National Commission onTerrorist Attacks Upon the United States,'words that were steadfast and strongabout the ability of this Commission to gain access to all information in order tocomplete a definitive fin al report. The Administration stated, "It is imperative thatwe see these strong efforts through to completion of the Comm ission's work."

The areas that callfor further investigationby this Commission include:

Areas Where Access Was Denied

The President's Daily BrieffPDBV.The White determined and theDCI and CIA agreedthat the Joint Inquiry could haveno access to the contentsof the PDB . Ultimately, thisbar extended to the point where CIA personnel was not allowed to be interviewedregarding the simple process by which the PDB is prepared. Although the Inquiry wasinadvertently given accessto fragments of some PD B items earlyon, this decision limitedthe Inquiry's ability to determine systematically what Presidents Clinton and Bush,andtheir senior advisors were being told by the Intelligence Com mu nity agencies, and whenit was told to them , regardingthe natureof the threat to the United States from Usama


19/21


20/21


21/21

Interview policies:The Intelligence Comm unity agencies insisted that agency irepresentatives be present to monitor all interviews of their personnel present or former. T ^ ^Some of the agenciespre-briefed personnel who were to be interviewed by the JointInquiry, explainingto them whatthe agency positionwas on certain mattersand urgingthe employeesnot to range too broadly in their responses.In one instance, after lengthydiscussions withDOJ and FBIpersonnel,a former FB I agent was interviewed withoutmo nitors present at his request. On occasion, agency legal representatives instructedindividuals not torespond to questions.

Areas Where Access Was Delayed

Interview of the Deputy N ational Security Advisor: The Joint Inquiry requested theopportunity to conductan interview of the National Security Advisorto the President inMay 2002 in order to better understandthe developmentof counterterrorism policy in theBush Administrationbefore September 11, 2001 . The NSC resisted this and suggested

that the Deputy Nation al Security Adv isor be the sub ject instead and that writtenquestions be provided instead of con ducting an interview. The Joint Inquiry providedwritten questions in July but did notreceive responses un til Novem ber 2002.

Documents

DM B4 Joint Inquiry Fdr- Memos- Letters- Emails Re JI Report and Access to It- Materials- Witnesses 332