Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Report: Hijackers should have drawn FBI scrutiny in San Diego
Bakersfield Californian ^ | 6/9/05 | Seth Hettena - AP

Posted on 06/09/2005 4:56:40 PM PDT by NormsRevenge

SAN DIEGO (AP) - Two Sept. 11 hijackers "should have drawn some scrutiny from the FBI," when they lived openly in San Diego in 2000, the Justice Department's inspector general concluded in a report that chronicles the bureau's failures to connect the dots leading up to the attacks.

The head of the San Diego FBI office took issue Thursday with the inspector general's report, saying it "greatly exaggerates" the possibility that local agents could have prevented the attacks.

The 368-page review found that the FBI missed opportunities to learn about the al-Qaida operatives when they lived in the San Diego area in 2000. The two Saudis rented a room in home of a longtime FBI terrorism informant and they also befriended a fellow Saudi who had drawn FBI scrutiny in the past.

But the San Diego FBI did not learn of the presence of the two men, Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, until they boarded American Airlines Flight 77 on Sept. 11, 2001, and crashed it into the Pentagon, killing 190 people on the ground and on the plane.

At the time, the report states, agents in San Diego, like their FBI counterparts in bureaus around the country, were not focused on al-Qaida. The San Diego bureau's No. 1 priority was drugs and terrorism ranked fourth.

"In sum, we believe that Hazmi and Mihdhar's presence in San Diego should have draw scrutiny from the FBI," the report stated. "If San Diego's focus on counterterrorism and al-Qaida had occurred earlier ... there would have been a greater possibility, though no guarantee, that Hazmi's and Mihdhar's presence in San Diego may have come to the attention of the FBI before Sept. 11."

The inspector general's report is the first critical internal review of the San Diego FBI's performance to be made public. It was filed Wednesday in federal court in Virginia as part of the government's terrorism case against Zacarias Moussaoui.

Dan Dzwilewski, who took over in 2003 as special agent in charge of the San Diego FBI, disputed the report's conclusion that local agents should have learned about the two hijackers. Under guidelines in place at the time, the San Diego FBI lacked the grounds to open an investigation. Doing so would have broken the law, Dzwilewski said.

The San Diego office did not have a role in what the report identified as the most critical breakdown in the handling of intelligence information on Hazmi and Mihdhar: The FBI's failure to learn in time that the CIA identified the men as al-Qaida operatives, that Hazmi had entered the United States and Mihdhar had a U.S. visa.

"How could have found these people when we didn't know we were looking for them?" said Bill Gore, a retired FBI agent who ran the San Diego office on Sept. 11, 2001 and is now an assistant San Diego County sheriff. "The first place we would have looked is the phone book .... I sumbit to you we would have found them."

Hazmi spent most of 2000 in San Diego, while Mihdhar remained in the area for less than six months. The two men took flight lessons, bought a used Toyota, obtained driver's licenses and Hazmi was listed in the local phone book. But the report notes they did nothing that would draw attention.

Both men boarded in the home of Abdussattar Shaikh. The report did not name Shaikh, but noted that the "asset" who rented rooms to the hijackers had since 1994 provided information to the FBI. The asset identified the two men to his FBI handler only by their first names, and the report criticizes the handler as "not particularly thorough or aggressive" in following up.

After the Sept. 11 attacks, the FBI investigated whether the asset was involved in the attack. A polygraph was inconclusive, but the San Diego FBI concluded he had not been part of the plot. According to the report, the asset was paid $100,000 in 2003 and is no longer an FBI source. Shaikh could not be reached for comment, but he told The San Diego Union-Tribune that he did not receive the money.

The two men also befriended Omar al-Bayoumi, a Saudi who had established himself in the area. The FBI briefly investigated him in 1998 when the manager of his apartment complex reported that al-Bayoumi had received a suspicious package, had strange wires in his bathroom and hosted frequent weekend gatherings of Middle Eastern men. The FBI closed its inquiry the following year, a decision the report found appropriate.

---

On the Net:

http://notablecases.vaed.uscourts.gov/1:01-cr-00455/docs/70656/MultiDoc.html


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; US: California; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 911; 911hijackers; drawn; fbi; fbiscrutiny; hijackers; khalidalmihdhar; nawafalhazmi; sandiego; scrutiny
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 06/09/2005 4:56:41 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Lemme get this straight. It took the FBI almost 4 years to figure this out.


2 posted on 06/09/2005 4:57:39 PM PDT by FreedomPoster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

What's the big deal.
Kerry was notified of security short comings at Logan airport (pretty much spelled out the 9/11 scenario) by people that worked security at the airport.
He's much more responsible for what happened than any FBI agent who failed to connect dots. Kerry was handled the whole issue on a silver platter 5 months before it happend and did nothing.
And let's not talk about Tiny Tom Delay's wife.


3 posted on 06/09/2005 5:01:04 PM PDT by ProudVet77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Oh hell, so many gov't agencies screwed the pooch on these guys there's plenty of blame to go around.


4 posted on 06/09/2005 5:04:48 PM PDT by theDentist (The Dems have put all their eggs in one basket-case: Howard "Belltower" Dean.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Under guidelines in place at the time, the San Diego FBI lacked the grounds to open an investigation. Doing so would have broken the law, Dzwilewski said.

---

When did breaking laws ever stop the FBI or feds in the past?

Gorelick and Clinton, FReeh and Reno. Waco, Ruby Ridge, OKC,,

We been had from within and now the FBI is the stooge and/or fall-guy, again, per the IG.

With the enemies already well established within and the terrorists allowed to 'train' in our country, makes ya wonder or it should, as to what really happened and where did the buck really stop. jmo

5 posted on 06/09/2005 5:09:54 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ...... The War on Terrorism is the ultimate 'faith-based' initiative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
When did breaking laws ever stop the FBI or feds in the past?

In the 70's. WaPo + Felt. Oh...that was a Republican President...nevermind.

6 posted on 06/09/2005 5:15:31 PM PDT by Just A Nobody (I - L O V E - my attitude problem!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

When did breaking laws ever stop the FBI or feds in the past?

Gorelick and Clinton, FReeh and Reno. Waco, Ruby Ridge, OKC,,

We been had from within and now the FBI is the stooge and/or fall-guy, again, per the IG.

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

You said it all!!!


7 posted on 06/09/2005 5:33:00 PM PDT by 26lemoncharlie ('Cuntas haereses tu sola interemisti in universo mundo!')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ProudVet77
And let's not talk about Tiny Tom Delay's wife.

Sure you don't mean Daschle?
8 posted on 06/09/2005 5:49:25 PM PDT by Terpfen (New Democrat Party motto: les enfant terribles)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 26lemoncharlie

I forgot a couple..

The AFRican embassies, the WTC, not once but twice.

Much as on Decemer 7, 1941, the targets were sitting ducks, and the attacks unimpeded, as those sworn to protect were in a disconnect and did not see war was already declared.


9 posted on 06/09/2005 5:52:03 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ...... The War on Terrorism is the ultimate 'faith-based' initiative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Terpfen

Ooops, I started a long weekend this afternoon, a rare sunny hot and humid one here. So I've been hydrating my body with liquids ;) You are exactly right.


10 posted on 06/09/2005 5:58:33 PM PDT by ProudVet77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster
let me vent a little with a little vanity.
I live in Woodstock, GA. In the last two weeks, a "group", I guess part of them is a family has moved in up the street. They have no less than 5 cars, three having "tag applied for". They are all late model Mercedes.
Hanging in the garage is a large U.S. flag and two of the cars have small U.S. flags on them.
3 of the "group" are young, well built Muslim males that wear traditional garb with shaved heads.
After 9/11 and now Lodi, CA I'm trying not to be paranoid but with the flags it's almost like they are trying too hard..
Do I have a reason to be concerned?
11 posted on 06/09/2005 6:57:22 PM PDT by WoodstockCat (W2 !!! Four more Years!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WoodstockCat
Yes, you have reason to be concerned. Watch for other people coming in and out or for deliveries.

You can't just call the FBI with what you have. You have to have something suspicious in their behavior in order to report them, otherwise you will be ignored.

12 posted on 06/09/2005 7:01:31 PM PDT by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Thanks Bill Clinton!


13 posted on 06/09/2005 7:23:31 PM PDT by adam_az (It's the border, stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WoodstockCat; Miss Marple

I would 2nd Miss Marple, and further, if they don't have tags in 45 days or so, report them. Keep really good descriptions of all the vehicles.


14 posted on 06/09/2005 7:35:18 PM PDT by FreedomPoster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: WoodstockCat

What are you waiting for?


15 posted on 06/09/2005 10:21:01 PM PDT by Treader (Hillary's dark smile is reminiscent of Stalin's inhuman grin...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: WoodstockCat; Treader

What are you waiting for- deep personal regret or anonymous humility?


16 posted on 06/09/2005 10:27:52 PM PDT by Treader (Hillary's dark smile is reminiscent of Stalin's inhuman grin...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster

They're still working on the Lindberg Baby case.


17 posted on 06/10/2005 1:32:42 AM PDT by Jimbaugh (They will not get away with this. Developing . . . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Jamie (the Dunce) Gorelick is the very person who promulgated the Justice Department decision that clearly forbade the CIA to share intelligence information with the FBI, and vice versa.

That was the exact reason those two Saudis weren't picked up by the FBI. The CIA followed them into the country, and had to drop off because their jurisdiction ended, and, by law and Gorelick's memo, legally could not tell the FBI.
This is history, but it's still just as aggravating as it was whan it first came out.

The agencies had never had the ability to communicate with each other without restrictions. Both agencies, recognizing the growing danger, requested leeway. The Gorelick memo was their answer.

Jamie Gorelick, who sat on the 9/11 Commission, was asked about the damage her memo had done, ie, allow 9/11 to occur. Without blinking, Gorelick stated that her memo actually granted the FBI and the CIA permission to communicate, and that both agencies had misunderstood it.

WHAT OUTRAGEOUS BULLSH-T!!!!

And she got away with it.

And now Gorelick came out the other day (saw it in here, I think), that "several Commission members are dissastisfied" with the way the FBI has implemented (or not) the directives of the Commission. She strongly hinted
that she was considering taking action to break up the FBI altogether, and replace it with something else.

Now this dork IG raises a dead issue, for which Gorelick herself bears a great deal of responsibility, and uses it as further current criticism of the FBI.

DoJ has never liked the FBI, because it couldn't make JE Hoover be subservient. He was extremely reluctant to allow the Bureau to be used politically. (Example: Nixon actually asked Hoover to conduct the "plumbers'" mission with FBI agents. Hoover refused, advised him not to form such a group. Also, Hoover lobbied strongly against the internment of Japanese nationals after Pearl Harbor. He lost that argument, and the FBI was used to enforce the internment order.) Hoover angered many folks over time at DoJ.

After Hoover died, in 1972, the FBI was no longer able to defend itself that way. Pat Gray F'd up Big Time...he had no understanding of the absolute necessity to keep politics out of Bureau investigations (Watergate was a tough situation, however.) And the Directors since that time have been okay, with Freeh and current Director, Robert Mueller, being the best, IMHO.

But "watch the skies", folks. Something devastating may be coming the FBI's way, and it's all politics.


18 posted on 06/10/2005 3:45:14 AM PDT by Randy Papadoo (Not going so good? Just kick somebody's a$$. You'll feel a lot better!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Randi Papadoo
Gorelick is attached to Hillary at the hip. I just know it.

I'll betcha Gorelick destroyed tons and tons of stuff on the Clintons. Are you telling me that none of the security people around Bubba knew about all his flings?? What about Brown and Foster. Think about Hillary and Nixon. Think about our Archives Burglar. The anti-Bush 9-11 committee (run by Gorelick). Now think about Gorelick's memo with all those thoughts in mind. It's called operatives in the White House!! Felt was nothing!!

19 posted on 06/10/2005 7:27:44 AM PDT by Sacajaweau (God Bless Our Troops!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: WoodstockCat

Yes, do watch them. Also, I might not go through some guy at the FBI, but rather would contact -- oh, I don't know -- someone who cares: Daniel Pipes, Frank Gaffney. At least they might have an idea of which FBI guys would act on info. I would watch those guys like a hawk. Might even take notes on things going on there.


20 posted on 06/10/2005 10:48:06 AM PDT by bboop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson