F.B.I. Agent Says Superior Altered Report, Foiling Inquiry (Chechnya Link Was Ignored)

WASHINGTON, May 24 A senior F.B.I. agent in Minneapolis has accused a supervisor at the agency's Washington headquarters of altering a report in a way that made it impossible for investigators to obtain crucial evidence in the case of Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 20th hijacker, before the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington, government officials said today.

Coleen Rowley, an agent and counsel in the F.B.I.'s Minneapolis field office, wrote in a 13-page letter received this week by the joint Congressional committee investigating the terrorist attacks that changes in the search warrant application made it all but impossible to convince the F.B.I.'s national security lawyers to pursue court authorization for the search. The identity of the supervisor at F.B.I. headquarters mentioned in Ms. Rowley's letter could not be determined.

Officials who have seen Ms. Rowley's letter say it accuses the supervisor of altering the application to play down the significance of information provided by French intelligence officials about Mr. Moussaoui's links to Islamic extremists.

Mr. Moussaoui, a French citizen of Moroccan descent, was arrested in Minnesota on Aug. 16 on immigration-related charges after an employee of a local flight school notified the F.B.I. that he was acting suspiciously while taking flight lessons. F.B.I. agents in Minneapolis repeatedly questioned Mr. Moussaoui in late August, and one F.B.I. agent accused him of being a terrorist. But the F.B.I. did not obtain a search warrant to examine his computer and other belongings until after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon (news - web sites).

Senator Bob Graham, a Florida Democrat, and Representative Porter Goss, a Florida Republican, the co-chairmen of the joint committee investigating the terrorist attacks, said today that they were planning to closely examine Ms. Rowley's accusations that officials at F.B.I. headquarters obstructed efforts to aggressively investigate the Moussaoui case.

Central to the dispute between Minneapolis and F.B.I. headquarters over the Moussaoui search warrant application was the quality of intelligence the bureau had received from the French intelligence service about Mr. Moussaoui.

According to Ms. Rowley's letter and other bureau officials, the Minneapolis field office believed that the French report on Mr. Moussaoui provided enough troubling information about his ties to Islamic extremism to go to court to obtain a search warrant under the federal law that allows the government to carry out searches and surveillance in espionage and terrorism cases. Under the statute, investigators do not have to show that a subject committed a crime, only that they have reason to believe the suspect is engaged in terrorist activity or espionage on behalf of a foreign power or a terrorist organization.

But headquarters officials did not believe the French report was sufficient to justify a search warrant. F.B.I. officials said today that the French report showed that Mr. Moussaoui was an Islamic extremist, but did not reveal any direct links to specific terrorist groups. The French report revealed that Mr. Moussaoui had a close friend who had fought and died with Islamic separatist fighters battling the Russians in Chechnya (news - web sites), but F.B.I. headquarters believed that connection was too indirect to link Mr. Moussaoui to terrorism.

Officials at the Central Intelligence Agency (news - web sites) have also played down the significance of the French information, saying that it did not provide conclusive proof of Mr. Moussaoui's terrorist ties.

In her letter, Ms. Rowley states that F.B.I. headquarters did not take the Minneapolis agents seriously when they made their search warrant request, and that headquarters officials were too dismissive of the quality of the French information. Out of frustration, officials in the Minneapolis field office called directly to the F.B.I.'s legal attaché in Paris in an effort to obtain more French information on Mr. Moussaoui. The agents in Minneapolis also went around F.B.I. headquarters and contacted counterterrorism experts at the C.I.A. to further build their case, an action that prompted a reprimand from F.B.I. headquarters.

In her letter, Ms. Rowley was especially critical of the F.B.I. director, Robert S. Mueller III, whom she wrote had made "misleading" public statements on how the F.B.I. handled the Moussaoui case both before and after Sept. 11, according to officials who have read her letter. She asserted that Mr. Mueller had been covering up for the bureau on the Moussaoui case since the attacks.

"Certain facts have been omitted, downplayed, glossed over, or mischaracterized," Ms. Rowley said, referring to Mr. Mueller's public statements since the hijackings, said officials who have copies of the letter.

The Rowley letter has sent shock waves through the F.B.I. and has seriously damaged Mr. Mueller's standing with the Congressional committee just as it is preparing for it first hearings.

Mr. Graham and Mr. Goss announced today that the joint panel would hold its first closed hearing on June 4, and that it planned public hearings in late June, and Mr. Mueller and the C.I.A.'s director, George J. Tenet, would be asked to testify in those open hearings.

Officials said that particularly damaging for the F.B.I. director was Ms. Rowley's assertion that either intentionally or unintentionally, Mr. Mueller has since Sept. 11 directed people at the bureau to muddy the waters in their public statements about the Moussaoui case.

In her letter, Ms. Rowley criticizes assertions by F.B.I. leaders that the bureau's failure to act on the Moussaoui case and other clues last summer did not make a difference in preventing the attacks. She said that if the same officials at F.B.I. headquarters who handled the search warrant request from the Minneapolis office had been aware of a July memo from an agent in the F.B.I.'s Phoenix office warning that terrorists connected with Osama bin Laden (news - web sites) might be trying to go to American flight schools, the Moussaoui case would have been handled differently.

Go ahead and spit it out, Ms. Rowley !!!!!!!

Robert Mueller III is a political hack and a liar.

If I remember correctly, the Wall Street Journal warned this country about Mueller during his nomination process.

If I remember correctly, the Wall Street Journal warned this country about Mueller during his nomination process.

Your memory is quite correct

This means the presumed front-runner is Mr. Mueller, who took personal charge of the BCCI probe. If he is nominated, a number of questions need to be asked. How did BCCI manage to gain entry into the U.S. banking system and acquire First American? Did the U.S. intelligence community grease the skids for BCCI at critical junctures? Was the Justice Department part of the solution to the BCCI mess, or part of the problem?

When Mr. Mueller took over the Criminal Division, critics in Congress and the media were already raising questions about Justice and BCCI. He stepped into this breach, telling the Washington Post in July 1991 that maybe indeed there was an "appearance of, one, foot-dragging; two, perhaps a coverup." He denied the coverup claims, specifically rejecting a Time magazine report that the U.S. government was seeking to obscure its role in the scandal partly because the CIA may have collaborated with the bank's operatives. Perhaps Justice should have been more enthusiastic and aggressive about the case, he told the Post, but "nobody has ever accused me of lacking aggression."

Still, the problems with Justice persisted. And the timing of some of Mr. Mueller's moves raised eyebrows. In September 1991, Justice indicted six BCCI figures and a reputed Colombian drug lord on racketeering charges. The indictment was unveiled just minutes after then-Congressman Charles Schumer issued a report sharply critical of Justice Department handling of the case. As Peter Truell and Larry Gurwin noted in their authoritative book, "False Profits: Inside BCCI," the indictment was merely "warmed-over information from an investigation that had ended nearly two years before."

Mr. Mueller also engaged in a running series of battles with the Manhattan District Attorney, Robert Morgenthau. According to news reports over the years, Justice prosecutors were instructed not to cooperate with Mr. Morgenthau's office, documents were withheld, and attempts were made to block other federal agencies from cooperating. In July 1992, both Mr. Mueller and Mr. Morgenthau simultaneously but separately indicted Mr. Clifford and his top aide Robert Altman in the BCCI scandal, with Mr. Morgenthau finally winning the right to try the men. Mr. Clifford was later dropped from the case due to infirmity and Mr. Altman was eventually acquitted. The curious and distracting fight over jurisdiction stands to be revisited.

Janet Reno named Mr. Mueller interim U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California in 1998; he was confirmed for the position in 1999. He was sent to reform an office marked by trouble, and his success or lack of it should be closely examined. His position as FBI front-runner, we read, was won by showing the ropes to new Attorney General John Ashcroft when he was home alone at Justice without a confirmed staff.

With Mr. Mueller's splendid paper credentials, we initially thought he must be a top-flight professional, whatever his misfortunes with BCCI. When we sought out some former Justice officials and others whose views we trust, we were surprised by negative returns, BCCI aside. While we hesitate to traffic in anonymous slams, let it be said that informed doubt exists about not only his independence, but his managerial competence.

On general principles, our view is that it would be a mistake to appoint as FBI head anyone who had any role in the failed BCCI probe. Too many important questions remain unanswered, and we clearly need another stand-up guy after the Clinton depredations at Justice. On the evidence we can see, Mr. Mueller would be a peculiar choice indeed.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.