T3 B7 Hurley Monograph Fdr- All Emails- Memos- Notes- Outlines and Withdrawal Notices (3) in Folder 107

8/14/2019 T3 B7 Hurley Monograph Fdr- All Emails- Memos- Notes- Outlines and Withdrawal Notices (3) in Folder 107

1/67

Page 1 of 1

Mike HurleyFrom: Barbara GreweSent: Monday, May 10, 2004 3:05 PMTo: Front Office; Mike Hurley; Warren Bass; John Raidt; Susan GinsburgSubject: Ongoing saga of July 5 meeting.

To date we have confirmed that Cofer Black attended the meeting. He wouldappear to have been the most senior attendee. We are working on the remainingpossible names. The one item that Clarke claims came out of the meeting ameeting of the federal building security committee may have happened.There was a meeting of the committee on July 9. We will be receiving from theFBI tomorrow documents regarding the July 9 bldg sec. meeting, including thesign in sheet. Do not yet have confirmation that this meeting was explicitly aresult of the July 5 Clarke meeting. It may have been a regularly scheduledmeeting.Barbara

5/10/2004


2/67

Page 1 of 1

Mike HurleyFrom: Mike HurleySent: Saturday,May 08, 2004 3:09 PMTo: Team 3Cc: Philip ZelikowSubject: Status Report on FR Chapter III

Team 3:I just spoke with Philip in C-Ville.He confirmed that he has received Sections 3.1- 3.5 and the additionalpiece that Warren drafted on Friday.Philip asked me to tell you that he is very happy with the high quality ofyour work which, he said, lifts his spirits. Heasked me to pass along hisappreciation.Well done to all of you and thanks for your hard work.Mike

5/8/2004


3/67

Page 1 of 1

Mike HurleyFrom: Mike HurleySent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 4:35 PMTo: Dan MarcusCc: Mike HurleySubject: Mike Hurley's Sections

Dan:Please take the following text and paste it (or some Marcusian version of it) into an email from you toPhilip, so that he'll know what's going on with my sections. When you send your note forward, please ccStephanie and me on it.Thanks, Mike

Philip:Mike Hurley is working on the draft of section 9.2: Initial war planning andthe invasion of Afghanistan. He'll have it to Stephanie by Mondayandshe'll cue it up for your review.His other section is 5.4: Change and continuity. As that concernsprimarily the transition between the Clinton and Bush administrations, I'lltake lead editing responsibility for it. I'll also ensure that Chris is involvedin the editing process.Dan

5/2/2004


4/67

Page 1 of 1

Mike HurleyFrom: Dan MarcusSent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 4:24 PMTo: Stephanie KaplanCc: Chris Kojm; Steve Dunne; Mike HurleySubject: chapter 5.4

Draft of this chapter - on the transition -- should go to Chris, Steve and me, but not to Philip, pending my review.I'll talk to Philip and Ernest about this.

5/2/2004


5/67

Page 1 of 2

Mike HurleyFrom: Mike HurleySent: Friday, April 30, 2004 10:05 AMTo: Stephanie KaplanCc: Chris Kojm; Dan Marcus; Mike HurleySubject: BE: Guidelines on deadlines

Stephanie:I have two sections: 9.2 and 5.4.I've focused on 9.2 this week. I had hoped to have it done by close of business today,but the trip to Tampa cost me a day. I'll work on it on Saturday and Sunday and have itsent to you by Sunday afternoon.5.4 is on the transition"Change and continuity". I'll pivot to that on Monday, and willhave a decent draft by Friday (May 7). Given that it covers the transition,myunderstanding is that Chris or Dan will have the lead on editing it.Mike

Original MessageFrom: Stephanie KaplanSent: Friday, April 30, 2004 9:43 AMTo: Chris Kojm; staffSubject: RE:Guidelines on deadlines

Colleagues:When you are ready to submit a chapter section, please send it to me via unclassified email or, if you areat K S treet, via classified email. If you are not located at K Street and have a classified draft to submit,please consult with Tony as soon as possible to m ake arrangements for transfer to the K Street classifieddrive.As Chris mentioned in an earlier em ail, we w ill begin the editing process this weekend, and so we lookforward to receiving you r first drafts. If, for whatever reason, you cannot submit a draft today, send me aquick email just letting me know the status of your section so that I can keep track of where wecollectively stand.Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Thanks and have a good weekend.StephanieSTEPHANIE L. KAPLAN9-11 COMMISSION7(202)331-1125F (202) 296-5545www.9-11commission.gov

Original MessageFrom: Chris Kojm

4/30/2004


6/67

Page 2 o f2

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2004 11:51 AMTo: staffSubject: Guidelines on deadlinesImportance: HighFinal Report.To those drafting portions of the Final Report:

The two week-target date set by the Front Office for chapter submissions is Friday, April30th. The m ore material the Front Office receives early, the m ore we can wo rk with you inshaping that material, and the less painful the process will be later in the month. In all casessend material to Stephanie Kaplan; she will take care of further distribution.

We understand that not eve ryone will be complete with drafts by that date, but if you canpush hard this wee k to get the first draft done, please do so. We will start the editing processthis weekend. The deadline for a first draft final report submission to Com missioners is Monday,May 31st.Monographs.To Team Leaders:

We want to clarify priorities on written products. For Team 8, the top priority is staffstatements, which will fold directly into the final report. For all other teams the top priority is thefinal report. The next priority is the monographs. Monographs can take forms that suit the wo rkof your Team; they are of no set length or fo rma t, but we believe it is important for every team tocomplete a monograph. The purpose of the monograph is to mem orialize each Team's body ofwork, and provide the investigative and intellectual underpinning for your contribution to the finalreport.The outside deadline for monographs is July 1st. What this means is that all work shouldbe complete by that date, subject to final edits by the Front Office and copy editing. Teams willhave the month of June to complete monographs wh ile the Front Office is engaged w ith theCom missioners turning the draft report into the final report by July 1st. Any monographs

completed before July 1st would be welcome.The target date for issuing the Final Report, not later than July 26th, is also the target datefor issuing monographs.

4/30/2004


7/67

WITHDRAWAL NOTICERG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial Comm issionsSERIES: Team 3, 9/11 Commission

NND PROJECT NUMB ER: 52100 FOIA CASE NUM BER: 31107WITHDRAWAL DATE: 11/18/2008

BOX: 00003 FOLDER: 0002 TAB: 1 DOC ID: 31205825COPIES: 1 PAGES: 1

_ACCESS RESTRICTEDThe item identified below has been withdrawn from this file:

FOLDER TITLE: Hurley's Monograph FileDOCUMENT DATE: 04/27/2004 DOCUM ENT TYPE: E-Mail Printout/(Profs Notes)FROM: MarcusTO: Team 3SUBJECT: E-Folder for Our .. Sections

This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s):9/11 Classified Information

WITHDRAWAL NOTICE


8/67

4/26 PZ guidance:Feel free to copy as much of Number 5 as needed (leaving the four rendition examplesfor another area)Put the Sudan expulsion issue in Yoel's 2.1With 3.3, use a page for pre Aug 1998 policy towards Afghanistan, Pakistan and AQ.Take the Afghan story to Feb 2001; Take the Pak story to Dec 31,1999.In 5.2 present the new Pak policy (i.e. high level diplomatic efforts) and carry through toFeb 2001In 5.5 discuss Afghan policy and Pak approach, Feb 2001 through Sept. 2001


9/67

Page 1 of 1

Mike HurleyFrom: Mike HurleySent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 7:56 AMTo: Dan LeopoldCc: Team 3Subject: Readership of Team 3 Monograph

Dan,It's still unclear what shape Team 3's monograph will take, but assuming there is time to produce one after all thework on the Final Report, then:Classification is likely to be Top Secret/Codeword.Given that, its readership will be restricted to a limited number of people in the compartment at CIA, State, NSC,Office of Secretary of Defense, Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Senior officials in thecombatant commands (such as CENTCOM and SOCOM), DoJ, Treasury Department, Senior levels of the FBI,and congressional leadership. Most of the people in the compartment are at CIA, the number of people in thecompartment at other agencies is limited.If we can get our work through pre-publication review, then the readership would be broader, and would includeinterested officials in the major foreign policy and national security departments and agencies, the think-tankcommunity, former government officials, reporters writing on national security, academics, and the families of thevictims of 9/11.Mike

4/22/2004


10/67

To: Barbara GreweFrom: Team 5 (JKR)Re: inserts for chapters 6 and 4: The entry of the hijackers.Date: April 22, 2004

The summ er of threat: border lookouts placed on Hazmi and Mihdhar.Primary records of lookouts placed on Hazmi and M ihdhar show that borderlookouts were not received by INS and Customs until after Mihdhar had returnedJuly 4, 2001. (It appears that the INS acted qu ickly to upload the inform ationonce the information was received.) On August 23, 2001, the CIA sent a classified electronic message to the StateDepartment, FB I, INS and other government agencies, recommending thatMihdhar and al Hazmi be added to TIPOFF and the Treasury E nforcementCommunications System (TECS) which contained a database accessible to theINS and Customs. On August 24, the State Department's T IPOFF office created a dual record foreach terrorist, a classified side with intelligence reporting, and an unclassified

record with their name, passport number, andplace and date of birth. Theunclassified information was entered into the Consular Lookout SupportSystem (CLASS) for use by consular officers running checks on visaapplications. The TIPOFF office also transmitted the information to INS. August 24, 2001. Both al Hazmi and Mihdhar are entered into TECS aslookouts, automatically scanned at ports of entry. The lookouts are identical,and warn of "possible travel to the U.S." and instruct inspectors to refer theterrorists to secondary inspection, where both investigations and intelligencedivisions at headquarters were to be notified. In addition, passport numbersand travel itinerary were to be recorded in secondary results. August 31, 2001. Mihdhar is listed in TECS as "armed and dangerous", andinspectors are instructed to transport him to secondary inspection. September 4,2001. The State Department revoked Mihdhar's visa undersection 212(A)(3)(B) of the Imm igration and Nationality Act for hisparticipation in terrorist activities. September 5,2001. The INS entered Mihdhar's notice of revokation into theINS lookout system, NAILS. September 5,2001. Mihdhar is listed in TECS as a potential witness in anFBI investigation, and now inspectors are told not to detain him.


11/67

WITHDRAWAL NOTICERG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial CommissionsSERIES: Team 3,9/11 Commission

NND PROJECT NUM BER: 52100 FOIA CASE NUM BER: 31107WITHDRAWAL DATE: 11/18/2008

BOX: 00003 FOLDER: 0002 TAB: 2 DOC ID: 31205826COPIES: 1 PAGES: 11

ACCESS RESTRICTEDj_|The item identified below has been w ithdrawn from this file:

FOLDER TITLE: Hurley's Monograph FileDOCUMENT DATE: 02/06/2001 DOCU MENT TYPE: TelegramFROM: SECSTATETO:SUBJECT: Options for Dealing with the Afghan Terrorism Problem

This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s):9/11 Classified Information

WITHDRAWAL NOTICE


12/67

Page 1 of 1

Mike HurleyFrom: Dan MarcusSent: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 4:19 PMTo: staffSubject: Classification issues in drafting report chapters

Attached is a memorandum from Philip and me setting forth guidelines and procedures to be followed in draftingchapters of the report (which drafts we hope to see from you soon!) to assure that we keep on the right side of theline on treatment of classified or possibly classified material pending executive branch review and clearance ofthe report as unclassified. The rules are pretty much the same as the ones set forth in my March 22 e-mail restaff statements. Our successful experience in navigating the classification shoals (or rapids?) with staffstatements underlines the importance of following the attached guidelines for the report chapters. So please readthe attached memorandum carefully.

4/22/2004


13/67

April 21,2004MEMORANDUM

To: StaffFrom: Philip Zelikow and Dan MarcusRe: Classification Issues in Drafts of Report Sections

While we plan for the Commission's final report to be a public, unclassified document,the reportor at least most portions of itwill have to undergo a pre-publication reviewby the executive branch to assure that result. In addition, many if not most of you will beusing informationalbeit information we believe should be declassified or regarded asunclassifiedthat is derived from classified documents or interviews. It is thereforeimportant to adhere to the following guidelines and procedures, similar to those we havefollowed in preparing draft staff statements, in working on drafts of chapters of thereport:

1. Drafts of chapters that rely on any information derived from classified sourcesmust be handled as classified documents based on the highest classification ofsource documents or interviews. In particular:

a) such chapters must be drafted and edited only on classified computers;b) draft chapters derived from material up to the Secret level may be worked

on in any Commission office; draft chapters derived from TS/SCI materialmust be worked on at the K Street office or another SCIF;

c) such draft chapters must be transmitted by secure meanse.g., classifiedfax or lock bag;d) such draft chapters must be stored and transported securely.

2. Drafts of chapters that rely on any information derived from classified sources(documents or interviews) should be marked on each page as "Subject toClassification Review."

3. Draft chapters should include endnotes thatset forth both the proposed citation forthe actual public report, along with the classification (if any) of the source andadditional information (such as Bates numbers) that would facilitate the retrievalof the source. Stephanie Kaplan will circulate citation guidelines for both thefinal report and monographs later today.


14/67

4. Such draft chapters should be treated as classified until you are notified by thefront office that the pre-publication review process for that chapter has beencompleted.

We recognize that it may be clear from the outset that some draft chapters contain nomaterial derived from currently classified sources (e.g., the chapters on the immediateresponse in New York or chapters based solely on material in staff statements that havealready been cleared by the executive branch). Such draft chapters may be treated asunclassified from the outset with the consent of the front office.If you have any questions, please talk to Chris, Steve, Stephanie, Graham, or one of us.


15/67

Page 1 of 1

Mike HurleyFrom: Philip ZelikowSent: Wednesday, April 21,2004 1 0:30 AMTo: Mike HurleySubject: RE: FR Section 9.2 Initial War Planning and the Invasion of Afghanistan

Come visit

Original MessageFrom: Mike HurleySent: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 10:23 AMTo: Philip Zelikow; Chris KojmCc: Stephanie Kaplan; Mike Hurley; Dan Marcus; Steve DunneSubject: FRSection 9.2 Initial War Planning and the Invasion of Afghanistan

Philip and Chris:I'm drafting this section. I think it should be fairly straightforward. But I'd like tospend a couple of minutes with both of you to get your thoughts.Mike

4/21/2004


16/67

Page 1 of2

Mike HurleyFrom: Mike HurleySent: Friday, April 16, 2004 4:25 PMTo: Daniel BymanCc: Alexis Albion; Warren Bass; Mike HurleySubject: A Few Bullets

Dan,Per your request. This is a start, I'll send more as I think of them. I suggest youspeak to John Roth about changes at Treasury that relate to the emerging shape of awar on terror (FR, Section 9.3):

TTIC-established in spring 2003 to consolidate threat reporting and ensure that all relevant info from cia, fbiand other collectors resides in one place and is easily accessible. Unclear, at this point whether individualagencies will cough up their most sensitive info. Tenet is banking that this answers the mail for a newcapability.

CIA's management of the war on terrorism is conducted in its daily 5:00 meetings, which bring togetherreps of all elements within CIA, the 1C, State, DoD, Treasury, etc. to coordinate their efforts. Tenet toutsthis as a highly effective management mechanism.

The al Qaeda Senior Leadership Group: This is a highly sensitive group of deputies, sometimes includingprincipals, that manages the USG's hunt for bin Laden, Zawahiri, and other a Q high value targets.Chairman Myers runs it.

Task Force 121 now has a new name. But it is the special operations forces group, now under CombatantCommander for CENTCOM, that hunts down UBL and his henchment in the field.

Rumsfeld/Tenet lash-ups: Both Tenet and Rumsfeld say they meet frequently and converse constantly.As DoD and CIA have the leading roles, this close bilateral relationship ensures, they say, that there is nodaylight between them on important issues. The question is whether this will be institutionalized, orwhether it's personality dependent, i.e., it works because Tenet and Rumsfeld get along.

NSC Office of Combating Terrorism: Stood up in fall of 2001. Has coordinated an overall CT strategy.How much power and authority does it have. In less than three years it has had three different DeputyNational Security Advisers for Combating Terrorism: Wayne Downing, John Gordon, now FranTownsend. Can it really prevail over Rumsfeld and DoD? Tenet and CIA? Powell and State?

NSC also stood up in summer of 2003 a new directorate for Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran. It's now headed byBob Blackwill who has the title of Deputy National Security Council. What is its role vis-a-vis Townsend'sshop? Just a coordinator? Or does it have real authority?

4/16/2004


17/67

Page 2 of2

FBI: Mueller says that it is moving in the right direction: emphasis now not just on developing criminalcases, but on collecting domestic intelligence. Problem is that his requires a huge cultural change.Mueller does not want congress, or our commission, to force change on the bureau, so he is doing his bestto address concerns and demonstrate he is our in front of the wave. Bureau needs to establish a wholenew career track for analysts. These people w on 't be cops; but they need to know they can rise in theBureau. Lots of skepticism about whethe r the Bureau is really capable of making such a dramatic changefrom how it has done business in the past.

FBI Director briefs President Bush every day. In press interviews, Andy Card makes clear that theDirector's access to the president is unprecedented. These daily briefings began on September 14, 2001.According to Card, this channel alone is a huge step forward toward enhancing the country's security. Thebackground is that the FBI for years had stayed away from the White House as a result of the dysfunctionalClinton-Freeh relationship, and concerns that the White House would m isuse the FBI in some way (seeTravelGate).

4/16/2004


18/67

Page 1 of 1

Mike HurleyFrom: Mike HurleySent: Friday, April 16, 2004 7:22 AMTo: '[email protected]'Cc: Team 3Subject: Bonnie

Bonnie,While the FO has the responsibility for Chapter XV, Section 15.3 "Homeland defense," Ithink you can be very helpful to them on that section, given the research you've done,knowledge you've acquired on steps the military has taken to protect the homeland.You're certainly our expert on this important topic.Mike

4/16/2004


19/67


20/67

MikeHurleyFrom: Daniel BymanSent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 11:18 AMTo: Team 3Subject: help...

I would like to ask all of you for help on section 9.3 -- "The emergingshape of the war on terror." Because I am the person who as looked atthis the least, I am naturally the one tasked to draft it.I would like to have each of you provide me with about four paragraphson how your "instrument" has fought the war on terror since September20, 2001. Can I ask:1. Scott -- how is diplomacy helping out?2. Len -- how is criminal justice working?3. Bonnie: what is the military/OSD up to?4. Alexis: whassup at the Agency?5. Warren: What is the White House plan/strategy now?Suggestions on MFRs, testimony, and documents are also welcome.If possible, I'd like this soon (say COB Wednesday), so I can go back toyou for more (okay, not the best incentive).Dan


21/67

Mike HurleyFrom: Daniel BymanSent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 11:35 AMTo: Kevin ScrieidCc: Mike Hurley; Daniel BymanSubject: Help

Kevin,I'd like to ask you or a member of your team for help on my section ofthe final report. In a rather dubious move, I've been asked to draft onsections on Bringing Foreign Policy Back In.I'd appreciate your thoughts on how multilateral institutions abroadmight be used (or should not be) with regard to intelligence. Are therebetter ways to cooperate with allies? Can we set up new structures?Does this approach work at all for intelligence?Please let me know if you or another teammate can do this and, if so,how you'd like to structure it. I'd particularly appreciate writtensubmissions that I can directly incorporate, but I'll take what I canget. I'd also appreciate thoughts on MFRs/documents/testimony thatmight be relevant.Best,Dan


22/67

Mike HurleyFrom: Daniel BymanSent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 11:26 AMTo: Christine Healey; Mike Jacobson; Caroline BarnesCc: Daniel Byman; Mike HurleySubject: Request for help

Chris, Mike and Caroline,I've naturally been asked to be a lead drafter on several sections ofthe report for which I've done no research. Can you (or someone fromyour team ... or someone else (I'm not sure who)) help out on two partsof the report related to the FBI and justice issues? In particular, I'dappreciate your thoughts on:1. Chapter 9, section 3. How has the FBI changed its activitiesoverseas (and its cooperation overseas with others) to fight the war onterrorism since September 20, 2001? What has it done? What problemshave emerged? What remains to be done?2. Chapter 12, section 3. How has DOJ/the FBI tried to work withmultilateral institutions? Is there more that can be done? Is this abad idea?I'd also appreciate your thoughts on relevant documents, MFRs, andtestimony. Ideally, I'd like some written thoughts that I canincorporate directly, but I'll take what you have time to give.Thanks .. and please redirect me if there are better people.Best,Dan


23/67

Page 1 of 1

Mike HurleyFrom: Daniel BymanSent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 11:14 AMTo: Scott AllanCc: Dan Byman; Len Hawley; Tom Dowling; Mike HurleySubject: Re: chapter 12

You've anticipated me ... would tommorrow (Friday) afternoon work? If not, how "bout 9:00 am onTuesday?DanScott Allan wrote:

Gentlemen:

I saw that Dan Byman is listed as the "lead drafter" for Chapter 12 of the F/O's final report. Sincewe all will have information and insights to add to his section we should try to schedule abrainstorming session next week. Anytime Tues, Thurs, Friday works for me , as does Wedafternoon. I can help with 12.2 (Central Asia and Arabia) and I'm sure Len would have a goodamount to say about reinventing multilateral institutions (covered in 12.3).-SNA

4/15/2004


24/67

Mike HurleyFrom: Daniel BymanSent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 11:12 AMTo: Tom DowlingCc: Daniel Byman; Mike HurleySubject: Byman request for help

Tom,In a rather dubious move, I've been ask to take the lead on draftingChapter 12 of the final report: "Bringing Foreign Policy Back In." Iwould appreciate your help with several sections of this chapter. Inparticular, I'd like your thoughts on "America in the Muslim World" andon "Reinventing Multilateral Institutions."Can you give me your thoughts on these subjects? In particular, I'dlike your ideas on 1. what the problems are; 2. how they contributed to9-11 or to problems in counterterrorism in general; 3. what is beingdone, if anything; and 4. recommendations for improvement.I would also appreciate yoru suggestions on any MFRs, testimony, ordocuments to look at.Of course, this is due in a hurry. Can you get some thoughts to me inthe next few days?Thanks in advance -- and I'm open to any ideas that aren't above.Dan


25/67

Page 1 of 1

Mike HurleyFrom: Mike HurleySent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 11:10 AMTo: '[email protected]'Cc: Mike HurleySubject: Final Report Assignment

Hi Bonnie:You've been assigned lead drafting responsibility for Section 3.4 "Military Options".The overall title of Chapter III is "Responses to al Qaeda's Initial Assaults". Section 3.4is one of 5 sections that come under that chapter.You'll need to submit your draft section to the FO on or before April 30. PZ advised thateach section should be more or less 5,000 words, which is equivalent to 10 pagessingle-spaced, using Times Roman, 12 point typeface.As a lead drafter you should call on any materials (MFRs, documents, notes), held byany staff member or team on the commission.PZ wants very strong footnoting done for each section.The sections must be concise, there can be no wasted sentences or even words.Mike

4/15/2004


26/67


27/67


28/67

COMMISSION SENSITIVE

CHAPTER LEA D DRAFTER |1. The Foundation of an Islamic Army1 . 1 The fatwa of February 1 9981.2 Islamist extremism and its appeal in the Islamic world1 .3 The rise of Bin Ladin and al Qaeda1.4 Al Qaeda and the Muslim world1 .5 Attacking the United StatesII. Counterterrorism Evolves2.1 From the old terrorism to the new: The case of WTC I2.2 Adaptation - or non-adaptation - in the aw enforcement community2.3 ...the intelligence community2.4 ... the Departments and the Congress2.5 ...the White HouseIII. Responses to al Qaeda's Initial Assaults3.1 Before the bombings in Kenya and Tanzania3.2 Crisis3.3 Post-crisis diplomacy3.4 Military options3.5 Clandestine and covert actionIV. Al Qaeda Aims at the American Homeland4.1 Terrorist entrepreneurs4.2 Plans, targets, and requirements4.3 Choosing the attackers: recruitment, vetting, and training4.4 Seeing aircraft as weapons?4.5 A money trail?V. From Threat to Threat5.1 The Millennium crisis5.2 Post-crisis reflection: an agenda for 20005.3 The attack on the U.S.S. Cole5.4 Change and continuity5.5 A new strategy?VI. The Attack Looms6.1 Arriving, Waiting in California6.2 California and Florida6.3 Final strategies and tactics6.4 Assembling the teams6.5 The 'summer of threat'6.6 Late leads? Al Mihdhar and MoussaouiVII. The Four Flights7.1 The hijacking of AA 1 1 and UA 1757.2 FAA and NORAD7.3 Losing AA 777.4 Improvising a homeland defense7.5 The battle for UA 93VIII. Heroism and Horror8.1 Emergency plans8.2 Agencies and firms implement the plans8.3 The World Trade Center8.4 Fateful choices in emergency response

\MayMay

MacEachinDowling

MacEachin

TobinFOFOFOFO

AlbionBassAllan

JenkinsAlbion

SnellDeDeMayRoth

LindenAlbion

GrandrimoHurleyBass

SnellJacobsonKimKimGrewe

Grewe

JohnstoneFarmerFarmerFarmerRaidt

CaspersenCaspersenCaspersenCaspersen



29/67


CHAPTER LEAD DRAFTER |IX. Wartime9.1 Crisis management and domestic responses9.2 Initial war planning and the invasion of Afghanistan9.3 The emerging shape of a war on terrorX. Problems of Foresight - andHindsight10.1 The world of policymakers: appreciations and judgments10.2 The blinding effects of hindsight1 0.3 Finding fair verdictsXI. National Leadership and National Strategy11.1 A new world and a new kind of conflict1 1 .2 Measuring success1 1 .3 Coordinating a national strategy1 1 .4 The role of the Congress1 1 .5 From national strategy to coalition strategyXII. Bringing Foreign Policy Back In12.1 America and the Muslim world12.2 Central Asia and Arabia12.3 Reinventing multilateral institutionsXIII. Intelligence for a Different World13.1 America's intelligence community: A legacy of the Cold War13.2 Bridging the foreign-dom estic divide13.3 Assessment and warning13.4 Reforming the Executive and the CongressXIV. Protecting Security and Preserving Liberty14.1 Balancing empowerment and restraint14.2 Harnessing and regulating the power of the information age14.3 Terrorist financeXV. National Defense1 5.1 Transforming institutions for attacking terrorists1 5.2 Border security (move to Chap. 1 4?)15.3 Homeland defenseXVI. Living in a World of Risk16.1 Assessing vulnerabilities and judging risks1 6.2 Aviation and transportation security16.3 Who is protecting us? Public and private partnerships16.4 Mitigating and managing the consequences of catastrophic attack1 6.5 Learning to live in a world of risk

HydeHurleyByman

FOFOFO

FOFOFOFOFO

BymanBymanByman

LedermanHealeyFenner

Lederman

RundletFORoth

HawleyGinsburgFO

FODillingham

FarmerTeam 8

FO



30/67

\o v V


31/67

Thought Experiment:1) What are the most important institutional criticisms the commission is findingacross the board? Weaknesses in the pre-9/11 posture of the United States.2) Zelikow's 1998 article, and the Hart-Rudman article3) To what extent were these weaknesses identified and recognized before 9/11?4) To what extent were the weaknesses placed on the agenda for national actionbefore 9/11?5) What is the purpose of national policy coordination? What is the White Houseuniquely supposed to do? Help define the national agenda for action, draw theentire government together in pursuit of that agenda.6) How do we define the debate, using our independent analysis?7) What are the big problems? Criminal investigation vs. intelligence collection;lack of capac ity for direct action in Afghanis tan; lack of will to use direct actionin Afghan istan; diplomatic strategy to deal with Pak istan


32/67

McLaughlin on Sum mer of Threat:But it was a reflection of the degree of frustration he was feeling at the time. Given thefact that policy was proceeding so slowly w hile the threat warnings w ere at their height,McLaughlin's feeling at this time was, "what more did you need to know?" (He addedthat he understands that before 9-11 one could not expect the same consensus as was seenafter 9-11).

"We were going nuts at this point," McL aughlin explained, and yet it was at exactly thistime when C IA was asked whether the warnings it was receiving were, perhaps,disinformation. These questions came m ostly from the Pentagon, McLaughlin observed,but they were "from all over." In response, a study was put together by CIA whichreported that the warnings were indeed for real. McLaughlin explained that hiscomm ents on this matter were not meant to be critical, but "imagine the extra energy thatwent into that."


33/67 \

J

Qj

>0 3

I>N

-u

V

O

a


34/67

14

- 5. ? 3

ri

O

\

L

VX

5 1

3


35/67

a^

3 2 O


36/67

9 "

o~

^

c

T&-?

,$

C

0 P

C

N

\ L

r

s?y


37/67

r?

Documents

T3 B7 Hurley Monograph Fdr- All Emails- Memos- Notes- Outlines and Withdrawal Notices (3) in Folder 107