Reuters, June 12, 2001: "Terrorist Attack on U.S. Soil Predicted"

[paulthompson]

I came across a hard copy of this Reuters article the other day by pure luck. This article seems to have been completely forgotten in the wake of 9/11, I can't find any references to it on the web anywhere. I hope the mods don't mind, but I'm going to post it in full since it's so obscure. They see a major attack on US interests every year, including at home, so why didn't they take more preventative measures??


Terrorist Attack on U.S. Soil Predicted

FBI Officials Said a Strike by an Anti-American Group Could Be Chemical, Biological or Nuclear

by Letitia Stein
Reuters
July 12, 2001


WASHINGTON -- The FBI predicts terrorists will launch a major attack on American interests abroad every year for the next five years and thinks an attack using a weapon of mass destruction is likely at home, a department official said Wednesday.

"I'm not a gloom-and-doom type person," Assistant Director Dale Watson of the FBI Counterterrorism Division said at a conference of the National Governors Association. "But I will tell you this ... headed for an incident inside the United States."

The conference was organized as part of efforts to help states prepare and coordinate with federal agencies for the possibility of terrorist attacks.

Attorney General John Ashcroft, also speaking at the conference, said one focus for defensive planning was the upcoming 2002 Winter Olympic Games in Salt Lake City.

"We are doing everything we can to make sure people from all over the world can come to the Games and bring their families and enjoy the excitement of world-class athletic competition while feeling safe and secure," Ashcroft said.

A bomb at the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta killed one woman and injured more than 120 people.

U.S. officials have stepped up planning for possible domestic attacks since the bombings of the Oklahoma City federal building in 1995 and the World Trade Center in 1993.

In the past year, 257 threats tracked by the FBI involved a weapon of mass destruction, meaning a chemical, biological or nuclear weapon. That was seven times the number in 1996.

The No. 1 threat was from exiled Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden, accused by the United States of masterminding the 1998 bombing of two U.S. embassies in eastern Africa and other attacks on U.S. interests.

[greyl]

1. June 2001 was a busy month

June 2001: The CIA is warned by German intelligence that terrorists are planning to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack "American and Israeli symbols that stick out."

June 1-2, 2001: NORAD (the North American Aerospace Defense Command) conducts a planning exercise involving the hypothetical scenario of a cruise missile from a barge off the East Coast. Bin Laden is pictured on the cover of the proposal for the exercise.

June 3, 2001: Bush's national security leadership meets - one of only two times they meet before 9-11 to discuss terrorism.

June 23, 2001: Reuters reports that "Followers of exiled Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden are planning a major attack on U.S. and Israeli intrests in the next two weeks." This was based on the impression of a reporter interviewing bin Laden two days earlier. The reporter is quoted as saying; "There is a major state of mobilization among the Osama bin Laden forces. It seems that there is a race of who will strike first. Will it be the United States or Osama bin Laden?"

June 28, 2001: In a written briefing, CIA Director George Tenet warns national security adviser Condoleezza Rice that "it is highly likely that a significant al-Qaeda attack is in the near future, within several weeks."

Late June 2001: Richard Clarke, White House National Coordinator for Counterterrorism, gives a direct warning to the FAA to implement increased security measures in light of an impending attack. The FAA does not act.
http://www.newwartimes.com/warnings.html

[paulthompson]

2. So...

No one else finds it interesting? I find it strange how the things I find interesting about 9/11 many other people do not, while the things that most fascinate others, like a plane hitting the Pentagon or not, hold little interest to me.

[kerry_s]

3. 9/11 and 10/12

Al-qaeda is clearly full of numerologists;) :

12.10.2000 USS Cole bombing
11.09.2001 WTC Attack
12.10.2002 Bali car bombing,

[MrSammo1]

15. Al-qaeda is clearly full of numerologists

and neocons!

[greyl]

5. Yeah, why is that? :) nt

[greyl]

16. To answer my question,

I think it's probably because "our government" seems easier to get a handle on than "foreign terrorists".

The hopefulness of taking our government to task can be seen in the emotion of some ct posts.

A solution to global cultural and fundamentalist religious conflicts seems impossible relative to the quest to hold our own government responsible.

[Klimmer]

7. I find all approaches interesting. Keep up the good work!

The evidence comes from all sides. We have the means, motive, and the ability arguement (thanks to Michael Ruppert et al). The historical record as reported in MSM and a brilliant worked-out time-line (thank you Paul), and real science that is very powerful in debunking and invalidating the official 9-11 Commission Report CT (thanks to many, especially the new group S9/11T).

All together, that is a very powerful picture that can not be ignored by any thinking human being and clearly demonstrates LIHOP, MIHOP, or both together. Although I prefer MIHOP. LIHOP is just a convenient cover.

[medienanalyse]

8. Yawn. Paul, please read this:

March 5, 1999

"One may conclude that, in the absence of a strong external shock to the United States—a latter-day “Pearl Harbor” of sorts—surmounting the barriers to transformation will likely prove a long, arduous process. Providing support and oversight for this endeavor is a challenge worthy of this new committee."
http://www.csbaonline.org/4Publications/Archive/T.19990305.Emerging_Threats,_/T.19990305.Emerging_Threats,_.htm (conclusion)

Why should we be astonished when Krepinovitch and Wolfowitz are urgently arhuing für a new Pearl Harbor, when they prepare it and then: when every whistle is blown the government tries to ignore the evidence untill Pearl Harbor II finally occurs?

Krepinovitch got a new publicity by his last study concerning Iraq abot one month ago. There are more words like his available.

But for sure, Paul, you may still walk on the red herring of Saudi terrorists.

[paulthompson]

14. I had not seen that either

Remarkably similar to the PNAC "new Pearl Harbor" quote. But who exactly is Krepinovitch?

[AZCat]

9. Interesting - yes; surprising - no.

I remember this (and other "chatter") from the summer of 2001. When the attacks actually happened they should not have surprised anyone who was paying attention, no matter what our then-NSA has claimed.

[Make7]

11. I think an attack was essentially inevitable.

Given the foreign policy of the U.S. Government, someone striking back was bound to happen eventually. Predicting who it would be is just a matter of picking whoever was being touted as the favorite villain at any given moment. In 2001, it happened to be bin Laden.

I believe many, if not most, of the people that studied the issue of terrorism - or related issues - before 9/11/01 had reached the conclusion that an attack would happen. Here is an example that is within easy reach (my bookshelf):

"Blowback is shorthand for saying that a nation reaps what it sows, even if it does not fully know or understand what it has sown. Given its wealth and power, the United States will be a prime recipient in the foreseeable future of all the more expectable forms of blowback, particularly terrorist attacks against Americans in and out of the armed forces anywhere on earth, including within the United States."

Johnson, Chalmers, Blowback, ©2000, page 223

[Kevin Fenton]

4. Interview with Dale Watson here

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/sleeper/interviews/watson.html

Question: "The FBI knew. Various commissions knew, predicted that there would be an attack here in the United States."
Watson: "That's correct."

It's well worth reading.

Any idea what his connection to Dave Frasca was?

[Kevin Fenton]

6. Clarke says

I suppose you've seen this before, but nevermind:
"Here is what Richard A. Clark, former counter-terrorism advisor for both the Clinton and Bush Administrations, testified to in prepared remarks before the Sept. 11 Commission on March 24, 2004: “In retrospect, we know that there was information available to some in the FBI and CIA that al Qida operatives had entered the United States. That information was not shared with the senior FBI counter-terrorism official (Dale Watson) or with me, despite the heightened state of concern in the Counter-terrorism Security Group.”"
http://www.newmediajournal.us/guest/borse/the_gorelick_memo_and_what_we_knew.htm

I had a quick look to see if Watson has commented on Able Danger, but it doesn't seem he has.

[file83]

10. Paul, have you seen this video of a very specific prediction:

http://www.prisonplanet.tv/articles/august2004/082604alexwarned.htm

Amazing stuff. He had documented reasons why he made the prediction. Check it out.

[Tim Howells]

12. Yes, that is impressive IMO

Jones' blustery style and the weird commercials can be offputting,
but you have to give him credit. I'm glad to see people like
Paul Craig Roberts and Ray McGovern and Sibel Edmonds now appearing
on his show. Sometimes I get the impression that Alex Jones is
amazed himself that all the things he has been warning about are
actually coming true. It's like, "Wow, I thought I was just
a nut, but I was really right I guess!"

Tim Howells

[paulthompson]

13. I had not seen that

He keeps talking about some articles. Do you know which articles he's referring to? I imagine they were similar to this Reuters one.