Mueller ALREADY Reviewing Shortcomings of Hasan Investigation

Here’s an interesting detail. Robert Mueller is already launching a review into shortcomings of earlier investigations into Nidal Hasan.

FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III has ordered a review of what might have been done differently in the case.

Mind you, it’s not that I think the FBI shouldn’t review what they did to make sure they didn’t ignore any warning signs that Hasan might represent a danger to Americans. I think such a review is necessary.

It’s just that–a week ago–I wrote a post reporting Mueller’s continued refusal to review the Anthrax investigation. As a reminder, here’s the excuse he gave for not welcoming an outside investigation.

There is also ongoing criminal and civil litigation concerning the Amerithrax investigation and information derived therefrom, and an independent review of the FBI’s “detective work” at this time could adversely affect those proceedings.

So, two unexpected attacks, both raising questions about the FBI’s diligence. Both with multiple murders and further injuries. Both exposing vulnerabilities in our military infrastructure. Both with ongoing investigations (purportedly, in the case of the Anthrax case).

But Mueller’s only willing to review the FBI’s detective work in one case.

image_print
24 replies
  1. Leen says:

    Tonight on Hardball they reported that Dr. Hasan had tried to make contact with Al Queda and that intelligence officers had contacted officials and that this had just passed by.

    I thought these agencies were supposed to be talking to each other.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/

    Soon after the shootings there was word out that some of the people killed may have been killed by “friendly fire” (hate that term)

    By now they have to know whose bullets ended up in whom.

  2. MadDog says:

    If I had to guess, I’d think that Mueller more readily responds to Repug howler monkees residing in the Beltway trees than to normal folks like bloggers.

  3. watercarrier4diogenes says:

    Based on the knowledge that Dr. Hasan had two weapons that might at max each carry 20 rounds fully loaded and the fact that over 40 people were hit, some multiple times, MSNBC’ mil. adviser said on Rachel Maddow that it would be difficult to assume that none of the victims were hit by friendly fire.

    • PJEvans says:

      Since some of the people talking about this case are saying he only used one gun, I’d say that ‘friendly fire’ is a pretty good bet.

    • Hmmm says:

      I thought it was supposed to be very quick to reload the bigger gun he was using. Multishell cartridge kinda dealie.

  4. prostratedragon says:

    This morning someone on the radio was trying to sell that Hasan had got off about 100 rounds. From what?

      • Leen says:

        Which agencies job is it to connect the dots? I thought that all of these agencies were supposed to be talking?

        Will we ever find out whose bullets killed whom? The UN “friendly fire” issue

  5. Hmmm says:

    Welly well. I guess this pretty well pegs FBI as the IC agency who missed the earlier attempted AQ contacts, then.

    Also remember it’s not just Amerithrax this adds to, but also the FBI’s missed 9/11 stuff. Today FBI is not looking all that good. Score CIA.

    • bmaz says:

      This DKos piece of junk is based on a writer in Phoenix published in the Asia Times and claims 75 suicides this year and 10 this month?? The NYT puts the figure at 76 suicides for Ft. Hood since 2003 and 10 this year. Think I’ll trust the NYT on this one. Still fairly alarming rate though.

  6. Jim White says:

    This does not help my spidey sense about Amerithrax at all. Mueller doesn’t want to go back and look at it again because he knows where a real investigation will go.

    I still haven’t seen anything in the scientific press that allows a real evaluation of their science pinning the attack material solely on Ivins’ material. And I don’t think we will, because it can’t be done.

  7. lawordisorder says:

    I think a look into the suicide rate of normal psychiatrist numbers that might indicate where this is heading… my take the guy snapped..thats it until i see the raw meat from the federales as for the “blue on blue” the answer would be havent the foggiest, but if it happend you can’t really hold it against the guys trying to stop the shooting we all know what happens in the “fog of war”

    Deep breath people and a silent tought of compasion and sympathy with all involved and that include in my book also the honest hardworking muslims i know.

    People who whan to se how thats done my wanna visit this
    http://www.werenotafraid.com/

    Just my five cents worth

    • fatster says:

      Leen, either highlight a word or phrase in your comment where you’d like your link to be, click on the chain symbol immediately above (the one to the right of the quotes symbol) and paste your link in the little box that will appear. Or, go to http://tinyurl.com/ and paste your link in the little box there and click “Make tiny URL”, then bring the shortened version back here.

      (I’m quite clumsy with these things, so it took me a few tries before I got the chain symbol dealie to cooperate. I figure you will need far fewer attempts or “YMMV.”)

      PS I hope my attempts at explanation are clearer than mud.

  8. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Is the FBI also involved in the Ft. Hood investigation, or is that limited to the Army’s criminal investigation group? If it’s part of or leading the investigating team, would it be too much to ask that Mr. Mueller, when he can carve out time form reviewing a past investigation, get this one right the first time round?

    Just as a Holmesian reminder, theorizing about causes can be useful, but it’s useless without data, as is making final determinations about what happened and why.

    • bobschacht says:

      …theorizing about causes can be useful, but it’s useless without data, as is making final determinations about what happened and why.

      Data? What the heck do we need data for? We KNOW what is right! Don’t confuse us with data! When Moses came down from the mountain, did he look for data to test the Ten Commandments? Data is just a communist plot by American Liberals to confuse the electorate! DON’T CONFUSE US WITH FACTS!

      Oh yeah, /s

      Bob in AZ

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Holmes to Watson, from A Scandal in Bohemia:

        “It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data.”

  9. mulcher says:

    In response to someone’s question, the civil litigation pending is a suit by the widow of Robert Stevens for $50 million.

    On the question of connecting dots, I’ve emailed Anwar Aulaqi too. I emailed him to ask him about his relationship with Ali Al-Timimi, who shared a suite with the leading anthrax scientist and former deputy USAMRIID Commander, both Battelle consultants who had co-invented in March 2001 a process by which anthrax was concentrated using silica in the culture medium.

    Ali Al-Timimi’s defense counsel, a legal analyst for MSNBC and regular guest on Rachel Maddow’s show, explained that Ali is an “anthrax weapons suspect.”

    There has been a failure to “connect the dots” in Amerithrax.

    Ali’s defense counsel explains:

    “The conversation with [Bin Laden’s sheik] Al-Hawali on September 19, 2001 was central to the indictment and raised at trial. ***
    [911 imam] Anwar Al-Aulaqi goes directly to Dr. Al-Timimi’s state of mind and his role in the alleged conspiracy.”

    In a filing unsealed in Spring of 2008 (see PACER), Dr. Ali Al-Timimi’s lawyer, Professor Jonathan Turley, explained that his client “was considered an anthrax weapons suspect.” Al-Timimi was a computational biologist who came to have an office 15 feet from the leading anthrax scientist and the former deputy commander of USAMRIID. A motion filed in early August 2008 seeking to unseal additional information in federal district court was denied. The ongoing proceedings are highly classified.

    Dr. Al-Timimi’s counsel summarizes:

    “we know Dr. Al-Timimi:
    * was interviewed in 1994 by the FBI and Secret Service regarding his ties to the perpetrators of
    the first World Trade Center bombing;
    * was referenced in the August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing (”Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US”) as one of seventy individuals regarding whom the FBI is conducting full field investigations on a national basis;
    * was described to his brother by the FBI within days of the 9-11 attacks as an immediate suspect in the Al Qaeda conspiracy;
    * was contacted by the FBI only nine days after 9-11 and asked about the attacks and its perpetrators;
    * was considered an anthrax weapons suspect;
    [redacted]
    * was described during his trial by FBI agent John Wyman as having “extensive ties” with the “broader al-Qaeda network”;
    * was described in the indictment and superseding indictment as being associated with terrorists seeking harm to the United States;
    * was a participant in dozens of international overseas calls to individuals known to have been under suspicion of Al-Qaeda ties like Al-Hawali; and
    * was associated with the long investigation of the Virginia Jihad Group.
    ***
    The conversation with [Bin Laden’s sheik] Al-Hawali on September 19, 2001 was central to the indictment and raised at trial. ***
    [911 imam] Anwar Al-Aulaqi goes directly to Dr. Al-Timimi’s state of mind and his role in the alleged conspiracy. The 9-11 Report indicates that Special Agent Ammerman interviewed Al-Aulaqi just before or shortly after his October 2002 visit to Dr. Al-Timimi’s home to discuss the
    attacks and his efforts to reach out to the U.S. government.
    [IANA head] Bassem Khafagi was questioned about Dr. Al-Timimi before 9-11 in Jordan, purportedly at the behest of American intelligence. [redacted ] He was specifically asked about Dr. Al-Timimi’s connection to Bin Laden prior to Dr. Al-Timimi’s arrest. He was later interviewed by the FBI about Dr. Al-Timimi. Clearly, such early investigations go directly to the allegations of Dr. Al-Timimi’s connections to terrorists and Bin Laden [redacted]”
    The letter attached as an exhibit notes that in March 2002 Al-Timimi spoke with Al-Hawali about assisting Moussaoui in his defense. Al-Hawali was Bin Laden’s sheik who was the subject of OBL’s “Declaration of War.” Moussaoui was the operative sent by Bin Laden to be part of a “second wave” who had been inquiring about crop dusters. The filing and the letter exhibit each copy defense co-counsel, the daughter of the lead prosecutor in Amerithrax. That prosecutor pled the Fifth Amendment concerning all the leaks hyping a “POI” of the other Amerithrax squad, Dr. Steve Hatfill. His daughter withdrew as Al-Timimi’s pro bono counsel on February 27, 2009.

    ‘Dr. Ali Al-Timimi’s Support Committee’ in an email to supporters dated April 5, 2005 explained: “This is a summary of the court proceedings that took place yesterday April 4th 2005. We will send a summary everyday inshallah. *** “In his opening statement, Defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon Jr. said that Al-Timimi was born and raised in Washington DC. He has a degree in Biology and he is also a computer scientist, and a mathematician. He worked for Andrew Card, who’s now the White House chief of staff, at the Transportation Department in the early 1990s.”

  10. mulcher says:

    Ali Al-Timimi’s defense attorney once submitted a brief describing what the US knew and when.

    In United States v. Ali Al-Timimi, attorneys have wrangled about the government’s failure to produce law enforcement interviews of Al-Timimi after WTC 1993 and after 9/11 — as well as failure to produce NSA intercepts from 2002. Al-Timimi’s original attorney was the first to tell us in 2003 that the FBI raided Ali’s townhouse on February 26, 2003 because they feared he was part of a planned WMD attack. Al-Timimi’s townhouse was raided two weeks after the blind sheik’s son, Mohammed Abdel-Rahman — a member of Al Qaeda’s 3-member WMD committee — was captured in Quetta, Pakistan. Al-Timimi’s attorney, Edward McMahon, in the Moussaoui case, stipulated to a timeline of events in 2001 related to what the US knew about a planned attack.

    Over this same period the United States government was failing to disrupt the coming attacks, Al-Timimi was publicly lecturing on the signs of the coming day of judgment. In both July and August 2001, in Toronto and then London, Al-Timimi was lecturing on the end of times alongside the man known as the “911 imam.” “911 imam”, Awlaqi, was a fellow Falls Church iman who counseled key hijackers first in San Diego and then in Falls Church. Before that, in 1993 and twice in 1996, the man joining Al-Timimi at the podium was none other than Mohammed Abdel-Rahman, the blind sheik’s son. Mohammed Abdel-Rahman would serve on Al Qaeda’s WMD committee and recruit scientists. Al-Timimi was granted a high security clearance and allowed to work alongside top anthrax bioweaponeers at the same time law enforcement and intelligence memos were flying fast and furious about Al Qaeda’s interest in biological weapons and the attorneys have wrangled about the government’s failure to produce law enforcement interviews of Al-Timimi after WTC 1993 and after 9/11 — as well as failure to produce NSA intercepts from 2002.

    Although the timeline by Al-Timimi’s defense attorney begins on February 6, 2001, I have added some notes from the first week in February 2001 that set the stage. In February 2001, the CIA briefed the President in a Presidential Daily Brief (”PDB”) on “Bin Laden’s Interest in Biological and Radiological Weapons” in a still-classified briefing memorandum. Like the PDB on Bin Laden’s threat to use planes to free the blind sheik, the February 2001 PDB would illustrate the wisdom that most intelligence is open source. There was little about Ayman’ s plan to use anthrax against US targets in retaliation for rendering of EIJ leaders that was not available to anyone paying attention. The blind sheik’s attorney in Cairo had announced that Zawahiri likely would use weaponized anthrax to protest the detention of senior Egyptian militants. The previous military commander of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, then on trial, had made the same claim, along with yet another EIJ shura member. In September 1999, a London cleric even had a dialogue with Bin Laden, in open letters read at mosques in Pakistan and London, in which the cleric called for a holy biowar against the United States and Bin Laden responded.

    The timing of the specific PDB on Al Qaeda’s biological weapons in early February 2001, however, was due to anthrax threat letters sent in late January 2001 to the Immigration Minister in Canada and the Justice Minister. The letters were sent upon the announcement of bail hearing for a detained Egyptian Islamic Jihad leader who had managed Bin Laden’s farm in Sudan. Canada announced on January 18, 2001 that an Egyptian Islamic Jihad Shura member, Mahjoub, would have a January 30 bail hearing. Someone sent an anthrax threat letter to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Minister Caplan had signed the security certificate authorizing Mahjoub’s detention. After arriving in Canada in 1996, Mahjoub continued to be in contact with high level militants, including his former supervisor in Sudan, al-Duri, an Iraqi reputed to be Bin Laden’s chief procurer or weapons of mass destruction. Beginning on February 6, 2001, another former colleague of al-Duri in Sudan, Jamal Ahmad Al-Fadl, began his testimony in the Southern District of New York in United States v. Bin Laden about his own early efforts on Bin Laden’s behalf to obtain WMD. Then Assistant United States Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald was the prosecutor. (The United States has been required to produce 900 pages of transcripts of video conferences between FBI agents and al-Fadl.) Al Duri, while living in Tucson, Arizona, was acquainted with Wadi al Hage. Wadi al Hage was another witness cooperating with authorities in connection with the prosecution of Bin Laden in Spring 2001 relating to the bombing of the U.S. embassies in Africa.

    On February 6, 2001, a Senior Executive Intelligence Brief (”SEIB”) indicated a heightened threat of Sunni extremist terrorist attacks against United States facilities, personnel, and other interests. (A SEIB, once called the National Intelligence Daily, is a CIA-produced intelligence summary similar to the President’s Daily Brief; it must be returned to the CIA within 5 days.

    In March and April 2001, the Central Intelligence Agency disseminated a series of reports warning that Abu Zubaydah was planning an operation in the near future.

    On April 13, 2001, the FBI sent an all-office message summarizing the intelligence reporting to date on the Sunni extremist threat.

    On April 20, 2001, a Senior Executive Intelligence Brief indicated that that Osama Bin Laden was planning multiple operations.

    On May 3, 2001, a SEIB indicated Bin Laden’s “public profile may presage attack.”

    On May 23, 2001, a SEIB reported a possible hostage plot against Americans abroad to force the release of prisoners, including Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, who was serving a life sentence for this role in the 1993 plot to blow up landmarks in New York City. (The anthrax letters followed the pattern of letter bombs mailed in late 1996 to NYC and DC newspaper offices, along with people in symbolic positions associated with the detention with Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and the WTC bombers. That is, the modus operandi of the anthrax letters was not just the modus operandi of The Friends of Abdel-Rahman, it was their signature).

    On May 26, 2001, a SEIB indicated that Bin Laden’s plans were advancing.

    In June 2001, over the course of a week, Yazid Sufaat briefed Ayman Zawahiri and Hambali on his efforts at cultivating anthrax).

    On June 19, 2001, a CIA report passed along biographical information on several terrorists mentioned, in commenting on Khalid Mohammed, that he was recruiting people to travel to the United States to meet with colleagues already there so that they might conduct terrorist attacks on Bin Laden’s behalf. (An early December 1998 PDB to the same effect to President Clinton — declassified and included in the 911 Commission Report — reported that the aircraft and attacks were being planned by the brother of Sadat’s assassin, Mohammed Islambouli. Islambouli was in a cell with Khalid Mohammed (”KSM”), who by December had come to lead the cell planning anthrax attacks in the United States.)

    On June 21, 2001, after a press report from a journalist reporting from Bin Laden’s entourage, United States embassies raised the force protection condition for United States troops in six countries to the highest possible level, Delta. The embassy in Yemen was closed. (In February 1999, militants had threatened to attack with anthrax if Americans did not promptly leave the country; the militants were thought to be connected to Abu Hamza in London; Ayman Zawahiri was in contact with a cell in Yemen).

    The unclassified portion of “Daily UBL/Radical Fundamentalist Threat Update” for June 22, 2001 under “Newly Reported Threats and Incidents” (recently uploaded to intelwire.com) states:

    “State notified all embassies and the national security community of a terrorist threat warning on 6/22/01. ‘The State Department has been made aware of the following uncorroborated threat information indicating a possible near term strike against U.S. interests (NFI). Usama Bin Laden reportedly intends to strike against U.S. interests within the next two days according to the information held by an Arab in Kabul, Afghanistan on 6/21/01. The Arab in Kabul was sure that the strike, whose location he did not disclose, would generate an American response. The DOD European also put out a similar warning to all military commands.”

    On June 22, 2001, the CIA notified all its station chiefs around the world about intelligence suggesting a possible al Qaeda suicide attack on a United States target over the next the few days. The same day, the State Department notified all embassies of the terrorist threat and updated its worldwide public warning.

    On June 23, 2001, the title of a SEIB warned, “Bin Laden Attacks May be Imminent.”

    On June 25, 2001, a SEIB titled Bin Laden and Associated Making Near-Term Threats reported that multiple attacks were being planned by Bin Laden and his associates over the coming days, including a ’severe blow’ against United States and Israeli “interests,” during the next two weeks. (Senator Leahy is in charge of the subcommittee that oversees appropriations to Egypt and Israel).

    Also, on June 25, 2001, an Arabic television station reported Bin Laden’s pleasure with al Qaeda leaders who were saying that the next few weeks “will witness important surprises” and that the United States and Israeli interests will be targeted. At the end of June 2001, an Qaeda intelligence report warned that something “very, very, very, very” big was about to happen, and most of Bin Laden’s network was reportedly anticipating the attack.

    In late June 2001, a CIA terrorist threat advisory indicated a high probability of near-term “spectacular” terrorist attacks resulting in numerous casualties.

    On June 30, 2001, a SEIB titled “Bin Laden Planning High-Profile Attacks,” repeated that Bin Laden operatives expected near-term attacks to have dramatic consequences of catastrophic proportions. The SEIB contained an article titled “Bin Laden Threats Are Real.”

    The intelligence reporting at the end of June consistently described the upcoming attacks as occurring on a calamitous level, indicating that they would cause the world to be in turmoil and that they would consist possibly of multiple — but not necessarily simultaneous — attacks.

    Threat reports surged in June and July 2001.

    On July 2, 2001, a SEIB indicated that the planning for Usama Bin Laden’s attacks continue, despite delays.

    Also on July 2, 2001, the FBI issued a National Law Enforcement Telecommunications (”NLETS”) message concerning potential anti-United States attacks. The message summarized the information regarding the threats from Bin Laden and warned that there was an increased volume of threat reporting. The message indicated a potential for attacks against United Statets targets abroad from groups “aligned or sympathetic to Usama Bin Laden.” The message further stated, “The FBI has no information indicating a credible threat of terrorist attack in the United States.” The message asked recipient to “exercise extreme vigilance” and “report suspicious activities” to the FBI. (Later that summer, when a flying school instructor reported Zacarias Moussaoui and it was known he was associated with Bin Laden’s colleague Ibn Khattab, who intelligence showed was related to Bin Laden’s CBRN aspirations, FBI HQ denied the request that a FISA warrant be sought for his laptop.)

    On July 5, 2001, the CIA briefed the Attorney General on the al Qaeda threat, warning that a significant attack was imminent. In addition, the Attorney General was told by the CIA that preparations for multiple attacks were in late stages or already complete and that little warning could be expected. The briefing addressed only threats outside United States.

    On July 13, 2001, a SEIB indicated that Bin Laden’s plans had been delayed, maybe for as long as two months, but not abandoned.

    On July 19, 2001, one of the items mentioned by the Acting FBI Director in a conference call with his special agents in charge, was the need, in light of increased threat reporting, to have evidence response teams ready to move at a moment’s notice, in case of an attack. The Acting Director did not task FBI field offices to try to determine whether any plots were being considered within the United States or to take any action to disrupt any such plots.

    On July 25, 2001, a SEIB stated that one Bin Laden operation was delayed, but that others were ongoing.

    On August 1, 2001, the FBI issued an advisory that in light of the increased volume of threat reporting and the upcoming anniversary of the bombings of the U.S. embassies in East Africa (which occurred on August 7, 1998), increased attention should be paid to security planning. The advisory noted that while most of the reporting indicated that the potential for attacks were on U.S. interests abroad, the possibility of an attack in the United States could not be discounted.

    On August 3, 2001, the CIA issued an advisory concluding that the threat of impending al Qaeda attacks would likely continue indefinitely. The advisory suggested that al Qaeda was lying in wait and searching for gaps in security before moving forward with the planned attacks.

    An article in the August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing (”PDB”) titled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S” was the 36th PDB item in 2001 relating to Bin Laden or al Qaeda and the first devoted to the possibility of an attack in the United States. The PDB again mentioned the detention of the blind sheik Abdel-Rahman as motivating the attack.

    On August 7, 2001, a SEIB indicated that Osama Bin Laden was determined to strike in the United States.

    On August 23, 2001, Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet received a briefing on Zacarias Moussaoui, titled “islamic Extremist Learns to Fly.” (Both Zacarias Moussaoui and Mohammed Atta had made cropduster inquiries during the summer).

    On August 24, 2001, a foreign intelligence service reported that Abu Zubaydah was considering mounting terrorist attacks in the United States to Attack Targets in the United States.

    The Stipulation ended just before the most interesting pre-911 data point.

    A report titled “Risk Assessment of Anthrax Threat Letters” issued on September 10, 2001. It was a study of the mailed anthrax threat in January 2001. In contrast to a 1998 study by William Patrick that had been requested by Dr. Hatfill’s employer SAIC, the Canadian study found considerable exposure to those in the room resulted when such a letter was opened. Bacillus globigii spores (in dry powder form) had been donated by the US Department of Defense (Dugway Proving Ground, Utah). “The letter was prepared by putting BG spores in the center of a sheet of paper, folding it over into thirds, placing the folded sheet into the envelope and sealing using the adhesive present on the envelope. The envelope was then shaken to mimic the handling and tumbling that would occur during its passage through the postal system.” The aerosol, produced by opening the BG spore containing envelope, was not confined to the area of the desk but spread throughout the chamber. Values were almost as high at the opposite end of the chamber, shortly after opening the envelopes. 99% of the particles collected were in the 2.5 to 10 mm size range. The report explained: “In addition, the aerosol would quickly spread throughout the room so that other workers, depending on their exact locations and the directional air flow within the office, would likely inhale lethal doses. Envelopes with the open corners not specifically sealed could also pose a threat to individuals in the mail handling system.” The authors of the study emailed the study to the head of the CDC’s investigation of the anthrax mailings but he did not open or read the email. The lead CDC investigator explained: “It is certainly relevant data, but I don’t think it would have altered the decisions that we made.” In the week after 9/11, only an estimated 16 individuals in the United States knew of the report). Question: Was Ali-Al-Timimi one of the 16 who knew of the Canadian report on the danger of anthrax aerosols from mailed anthrax? Was the Canadian report faxed to the Alibek/Bailey/Timimi fax number or sent to his mail drop? (Alibek and Bailey, co-inventors of a method to concentrate anthrax using silica in the culture medium, were Battelle consultants and funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency).

    On October 5, 2001, bail was denied for Egyptian Islamic Jihad shura member Mahjoub. The anthrax mailer then rushed to mail the potent anthrax to the author of “Leahy Law” — that allows continued appropriations to security units in the event of “extraordinary circumstances.” The postmark was Tuesday, October 9, but Monday was a holiday, leaving the possibility the anthrax was mailed as early as October 6.

Comments are closed.