THE 9/11
COMMISSION
REPORT
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:25 PM Page i
List of Illustrations and Tables ix
Member List xi
Staff List xiiixiv
Preface xv
1. "WE HAVE SOME PLANES" 1
1.1
Inside the Four Flights 1
1.2
Improvising a Homeland Defense 14
1.3
National Crisis Management 35
2. THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW TERRORISM 47
2.1
A Declaration of War 47
2.2
Bin Ladin's Appeal in the Islamic World 48
2.3
The Rise of Bin Ladin and al Qaeda (19881992) 55
2.4
Building an Organization, Declaring
War on the United States (19921996) 59
2.5
Al Qaeda's Renewal in Afghanistan (19961998) 63
3. COUNTERTERRORISM EVOLVES 71
3.1
From the Old Terrorism to the New:
The First World Trade Center Bombing 71
3.2
Adaptation--and Nonadaptation--
. . .
in the Law Enforcement Community 73
3.3
. . . and in the Federal Aviation Administration 82
3.4
. . . and in the Intelligence Community 86
CONTENTS
v
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:25 PM Page v
3.5
. . . and in the State Department and the Defense Department 93
3.6
. . . and in the White House 98
3.7
. . . and in the Congress 102
4. RESPONSES TO AL QAEDA'S INITIAL ASSAULTS 108
4.1
Before the Bombings in Kenya and Tanzania 108
4.2
Crisis: August 1998 115
4.3
Diplomacy 121
4.4
Covert Action 126
4.5
Searching for Fresh Options 134
5. AL QAEDA AIMS AT THE AMERICAN HOMELAND 145
5.1
Terrorist Entrepreneurs 145
5.2
The "Planes Operation" 153
5.3
The Hamburg Contingent 160
5.4
A Money Trail? 169
6. FROM THREAT TO THREAT 174
6.1
The Millennium Crisis 174
6.2
Post-Crisis Reflection: Agenda for 2000 182
6.3
The Attack on the USS Cole
190
6.4
Change and Continuity 198
6.5
The New Administration's Approach 203
7. THE ATTACK LOOMS 215
7.1
First Arrivals in California 215
7.2
The 9/11 Pilots in the United States 223
7.3
Assembling the Teams 231
7.4
Final Strategies and Tactics 241
8. "THE SYSTEM WAS BLINKING RED" 254
8.1
The Summer of Threat 254
8.2
Late Leads--Mihdhar, Moussaoui, and KSM 266
9. HEROISM AND HORROR 278
9.1
Preparedness as of September 11 278
9.2
September 11, 2001 285
9.3
Emergency Response at the Pentagon 311
9.4
Analysis 315
vi
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:25 PM Page vi
10. WARTIME 325
10.1
Immediate Responses at Home 326
10.2
Planning for War 330
10.3
"Phase Two" and the Question of Iraq 334
11. FORESIGHT--AND HINDSIGHT 339
11.1
Imagination 339
11.2
Policy 348
11.3
Capabilities 350
11.4
Management 353
12. WHAT TO DO? A GLOBAL STRATEGY 361
12.1
Reflecting on a Generational Challenge 361
12.2
Attack Terrorists and Their Organizations 365
12.3
Prevent the Continued Growth of Islamist Terrorism 374
12.4
Protect against and Prepare for Terrorist Attacks 383
13. HOW TO DO IT? A DIFFERENT WAY OF
ORGANIZING THE GOVERNMENT 399
13.1
Unity of Effort across the Foreign-Domestic Divide 400
13.2
Unity of Effort in the Intelligence Community 407
13.3
Unity of Effort in Sharing Information 416
13.4
Unity of Effort in the Congress 419
13.5
Organizing America's Defenses in the United States 423
Appendix A: Common Abbreviations
429
Appendix B:Table of Names
431
Appendix C: Commission Hearings
439
Notes
449
vii
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:25 PM Page vii
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:25 PM Page viii
p. 15
FAA Air Traffic Control Centers
p. 15
Reporting structure, Northeast Air Defense Sector
p. 3233
Flight paths and timelines
p. 49
Usama Bin Ladin
p. 64
Map of Afghanistan
p. 148
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
p. 238239
The 9/11 hijackers
p. 279
The World Trade Center Complex as of 9/11
p. 284
The World Trade Center radio repeater system
p. 288
The World Trade Center North Tower stairwell with deviations
p. 312
The Twin Towers following the impact of American Airlines
Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175
p. 313
The Pentagon after being struck by American Airlines Flight 77
p. 313
American Airlines Flight 93 crash site, Shanksville, Pennsylvania
p. 413
Unity of effort in managing intelligence
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
AND TABLES
ix
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:25 PM Page ix
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:25 PM Page x
Thomas H. Kean
chair
Richard Ben-Veniste
Fred F. Fielding
Jamie S. Gorelick
Slade Gorton
Lee H. Hamilton
vice chair
Bob Kerrey
John F. Lehman
Timothy J. Roemer
James R.Thompson
COMMISSION
MEMBERS
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:25 PM Page xi
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:25 PM Page xii
Joanne M. Accolla
Staff Assistant
Alexis Albion
Professional Staff Member
Scott H. Allan, Jr.
Counsel
John A. Azzarello
Counsel
Caroline Barnes
Professional Staff Member
Warren Bass
Professional Staff Member
Ann M. Bennett
Information Control Officer
Mark S. Bittinger
Professional Staff Member
Madeleine Blot
Counsel
Antwion M. Blount
Systems Engineer
Sam Brinkley
Professional Staff Member
Geoffrey Scott Brown
Research Assistant
Daniel Byman
Professional Staff Member
Dianna Campagna
Manager of Operations
Samuel M.W. Caspersen
Counsel
Melissa A. Coffey
Staff Assistant
Lance Cole
Consultant
Marquittia L. Coleman
Staff Assistant
Marco A. Cordero
Professional Staff Member
Rajesh De
Counsel
George W. Delgrosso
Investigator
Gerald L. Dillingham
Professional Staff Member
Thomas E. Dowling
Professional Staff Member
Steven M. Dunne
Deputy General Counsel
Thomas R. Eldridge
Counsel
Alice Falk
Editor
John J. Farmer, Jr.
Senior Counsel & Team Leader
Alvin S. Felzenberg
Deputy for Communications
COMMISSION
STAFF
xiii
Philip Zelikow, Executive Director
Christopher A. Kojm, Deputy Executive Director
Daniel Marcus, General Counsel
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:25 PM Page xiii
Lorry M. Fenner
Professional Staff Member
Susan Ginsburg
Senior Counsel & Team Leader
T. Graham Giusti
Security Officer
Nicole Marie Grandrimo
Professional Staff Member
Douglas N. Greenburg
Counsel
Barbara A. Grewe
Senior Counsel, Special Projects
Elinore Flynn Hartz
Family Liaison
Leonard R. Hawley
Professional Staff Member
L. Christine Healey
Senior Counsel & Team Leader
Karen Heitkotter
Executive Secretary
Walter T. Hempel II
Professional Staff Member
C. Michael Hurley
Senior Counsel & Team Leader
Dana J. Hyde
Counsel
John W. Ivicic
Security Officer
Michael N. Jacobson
Counsel
Hunter W. Jamerson
Intern
Bonnie D. Jenkins
Counsel
Reginald F. Johnson
Staff Assistant
R.William Johnstone
Professional Staff Member
Stephanie L. Kaplan
Special Assistant & Managing Editor
Miles L. Kara, Sr.
Professional Staff Member
Janice L. Kephart
Counsel
Hyon Kim
Counsel
Katarzyna Kozaczuk
Financial Assistant
Gordon Nathaniel Lederman
Counsel
Daniel J. Leopold
Staff Assistant
Sarah Webb Linden
Professional Staff Member
Douglas J. MacEachin
Professional Staff Member & Team Leader
Ernest R. May
Senior Adviser
Joseph McBride
Intern
James Miller
Professional Staff Member
Kelly Moore
Professional Staff Member
Charles M. Pereira
Professional Staff Member
John Raidt
Professional Staff Member
John Roth
Senior Counsel & Team Leader
Peter Rundlet
Counsel
Lloyd D. Salvetti
Professional Staff Member
Kevin J. Scheid
Professional Staff Member & Team Leader
Kevin Shaeffer
Professional Staff Member
Tracy J. Shycoff
Deputy for Administration & Finance
Dietrich L. Snell
Senior Counsel & Team Leader
Jonathan DeWees Stull
Communications Assistant
Lisa Marie Sullivan
Staff Assistant
Quinn John Tamm, Jr.
Professional Staff Member
Catharine S.Taylor
Staff Assistant
Yoel Tobin
Counsel
Emily Landis Walker
Professional Staff Member & Family Liaison
Garth Wermter
Senior IT Consultant
Serena B.Wille
Counsel
Peter Yerkes
Public Affairs Assistant
xiv
COMMISSION STAFF
xiv
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:26 PM Page xiv
We p re se nt th e narrat ive of this report and the recommendations
that flow from it to the President of the United States, the United States
Congress, and the American people for their consideration. Ten
Commissioners--five Republicans and five Democrats chosen by elected
leaders from our nation's capital at a time of great partisan division--have
come together to present this report without dissent.
We have come together with a unity of purpose because our nation
demands it. September 11, 2001, was a day of unprecedented shock and suf-
fering in the history of the United States.The nation was unprepared. How
did this happen, and how can we avoid such tragedy again?
To answer these questions, the Congress and the President created the
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (Public
Law 107-306, November 27, 2002).
Our mandate was sweeping.The law directed us to investigate "facts and
circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001," includ-
ing those relating to intelligence agencies, law enforcement agencies, diplo-
macy, immigration issues and border control, the flow of assets to terrorist
organizations, commercial aviation, the role of congressional oversight and
resource allocation, and other areas determined relevant by the Commission.
In pursuing our mandate, we have reviewed more than 2.5 million pages
of documents and interviewed more than 1,200 individuals in ten countries.
This included nearly every senior official from the current and previous
administrations who had responsibility for topics covered in our mandate.
We have sought to be independent, impartial, thorough, and nonpartisan.
From the outset, we have been committed to share as much of our investi-
gation as we can with the American people.To that end, we held 19 days of
hearings and took public testimony from 160 witnesses.
PREFACE
xv
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:26 PM Page xv
Our aim has not been to assign individual blame. Our aim has been to
provide the fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11 and to
identify lessons learned.
We learned about an enemy who is sophisticated, patient, disciplined,
and lethal.The enemy rallies broad support in the Arab and Muslim world
by demanding redress of political grievances, but its hostility toward us and
our values is limitless. Its purpose is to rid the world of religious and polit-
ical pluralism, the plebiscite, and equal rights for women. It makes no dis-
tinction between military and civilian targets. Collateral damage is not in its
lexicon.
We learned that the institutions charged with protecting our borders,
civil aviation, and national security did not understand how grave this threat
could be, and did not adjust their policies, plans, and practices to deter or
defeat it.We learned of fault lines within our government--between foreign
and domestic intelligence, and between and within agencies.We learned of
the pervasive problems of managing and sharing information across a large
and unwieldy government that had been built in a different era to confront
different dangers.
At the outset of our work, we said we were looking backward in order
to look forward. We hope that the terrible losses chronicled in this report
can create something positive--an America that is safer, stronger, and wiser.
That September day, we came together as a nation. The test before us is to
sustain that unity of purpose and meet the challenges now confronting us.
We need to design a balanced strategy for the long haul, to attack terror-
ists and prevent their ranks from swelling while at the same time protecting
our country against future attacks.We have been forced to think about the
way our government is organized. The massive departments and agencies
that prevailed in the great struggles of the twentieth century must work
together in new ways, so that all the instruments of national power can be
combined. Congress needs dramatic change as well to strengthen oversight
and focus accountability.
As we complete our final report, we want to begin by thanking our fel-
low Commissioners, whose dedication to this task has been profound. We
have reasoned together over every page, and the report has benefited from
this remarkable dialogue. We want to express our considerable respect for
the intellect and judgment of our colleagues, as well as our great affection
for them.
We want to thank the Commission staff.The dedicated professional staff,
headed by Philip Zelikow, has contributed innumerable hours to the com-
pletion of this report, setting aside other important endeavors to take on this
xvi
PREFACE
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:26 PM Page xvi
all-consuming assignment. They have conducted the exacting investigative
work upon which the Commission has built.They have given good advice,
and faithfully carried out our guidance.They have been superb.
We thank the Congress and the President. Executive branch agencies
have searched records and produced a multitude of documents for us. We
thank officials, past and present, who were generous with their time and
provided us with insight. The PENTTBOM team at the FBI, the
Director's Review Group at the CIA, and Inspectors General at the
Department of Justice and the CIA provided great assistance. We owe a
huge debt to their investigative labors, painstaking attention to detail, and
readiness to share what they have learned. We have built on the work of
several previous Commissions, and we thank the Congressional Joint
Inquiry, whose fine work helped us get started.We thank the City of New
York for assistance with documents and witnesses, and the Government
Printing Office and W.W. Norton & Company for helping to get this
report to the broad public.
We conclude this list of thanks by coming full circle:We thank the fam-
ilies of 9/11, whose persistence and dedication helped create the
Commission.They have been with us each step of the way, as partners and
witnesses.They know better than any of us the importance of the work we
have undertaken.
We want to note what we have done, and not done.We have endeavored
to provide the most complete account we can of the events of September
11, what happened and why.This final report is only a summary of what we
have done, citing only a fraction of the sources we have consulted. But in
an event of this scale, touching so many issues and organizations, we are
conscious of our limits.We have not interviewed every knowledgeable per-
son or found every relevant piece of paper. New information inevitably will
come to light. We present this report as a foundation for a better under-
standing of a landmark in the history of our nation.
We have listened to scores of overwhelming personal tragedies and
astounding acts of heroism and bravery. We have examined the staggering
impact of the events of 9/11 on the American people and their amazing
resilience and courage as they fought back.We have admired their determi-
nation to do their best to prevent another tragedy while preparing to
respond if it becomes necessary. We emerge from this investigation with
enormous sympathy for the victims and their loved ones, and with
enhanced respect for the American people. We recognize the formidable
challenges that lie ahead.
We also approach the task of recommendations with humility. We have
PREFACE
xvii
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:26 PM Page xvii
made a limited number of them. We decided consciously to focus on rec-
ommendations we believe to be most important, whose implementation
can make the greatest difference. We came into this process with strong
opinions about what would work. All of us have had to pause, reflect, and
sometimes change our minds as we studied these problems and considered
the views of others.We hope our report will encourage our fellow citizens
to study, reflect--and act.
xviii
PREFACE
Thomas H. Kean
chair
Lee H. Hamilton
vice chair
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:26 PM Page xviii
THE 9/11
COMMISSION
REPORT
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:26 PM Page xix
Final FM.1pp 7/17/04 5:26 PM Page xx
1
"WE HAVE
SOME PLANES"
1
Tue sday, S e p te m b e r 11, 2 0 01, dawned temperate and nearly cloudless in
the eastern United States. Millions of men and women readied themselves for
work. Some made their way to the Twin Towers, the signature structures of the
World Trade Center complex in New York City. Others went to Arlington,Vir-
ginia, to the Pentagon. Across the Potomac River, the United States Congress
was back in session. At the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, people began to
line up for a White House tour. In Sarasota, Florida, President George W. Bush
went for an early morning run.
For those heading to an airport, weather conditions could not have been
better for a safe and pleasant journey.Among the travelers were Mohamed Atta
and Abdul Aziz al Omari, who arrived at the airport in Portland, Maine.
1.1 INSIDE THE FOUR FLIGHTS
Boarding the Flights
Boston:American 11 and United 175.
Atta and Omari boarded a 6:00
A
.
M
.
flight from Portland to Boston's Logan International Airport.
1
When he checked in for his flight to Boston, Atta was selected by a com-
puterized prescreening system known as CAPPS (Computer Assisted Passen-
ger Prescreening System), created to identify passengers who should be
subject to special security measures. Under security rules in place at the time,
the only consequence of Atta's selection by CAPPS was that his checked bags
were held off the plane until it was confirmed that he had boarded the air-
craft. This did not hinder Atta's plans.
2
Atta and Omari arrived in Boston at 6:45. Seven minutes later, Atta appar-
ently took a call from Marwan al Shehhi, a longtime colleague who was at
another terminal at Logan Airport.They spoke for three minutes.
3
It would be
their final conversation.
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 1
Between 6:45 and 7:40,Atta and Omari, along with Satam al Suqami,Wail
al Shehri, and Waleed al Shehri, checked in and boarded American Airlines
Flight 11, bound for Los Angeles.The flight was scheduled to depart at 7:45.
4
In another Logan terminal, Shehhi, joined by Fayez Banihammad, Mohand
al Shehri, Ahmed al Ghamdi, and Hamza al Ghamdi, checked in for United
Airlines Flight 175, also bound for Los Angeles.A couple of Shehhi's colleagues
were obviously unused to travel; according to the United ticket agent, they had
trouble understanding the standard security questions, and she had to go over
them slowly until they gave the routine, reassuring answers.
5
Their flight was
scheduled to depart at 8:00.
The security checkpoints through which passengers, including Atta and his
colleagues, gained access to the American 11 gate were operated by Globe
Security under a contract with American Airlines. In a different terminal, the
single checkpoint through which passengers for United 175 passed was con-
trolled by United Airlines, which had contracted with Huntleigh USA to per-
form the screening.
6
In passing through these checkpoints, each of the hijackers would have been
screened by a walk-through metal detector calibrated to detect items with at
least the metal content of a .22-caliber handgun. Anyone who might have set
off that detector would have been screened with a hand wand--a procedure
requiring the screener to identify the metal item or items that caused the alarm.
In addition, an X-ray machine would have screened the hijackers' carry-on
belongings.The screening was in place to identify and confiscate weapons and
other items prohibited from being carried onto a commercial flight.
7
None of
the checkpoint supervisors recalled the hijackers or reported anything suspi-
cious regarding their screening.
8
While Atta had been selected by CAPPS in Portland, three members of his
hijacking team--Suqami,Wail al Shehri, and Waleed al Shehri--were selected
in Boston.Their selection affected only the handling of their checked bags, not
their screening at the checkpoint. All five men cleared the checkpoint and
made their way to the gate for American 11. Atta, Omari, and Suqami took
their seats in business class (seats 8D, 8G, and 10B, respectively). The Shehri
brothers had adjacent seats in row 2 (Wail in 2A, Waleed in 2B), in the first-
class cabin. They boarded American 11 between 7:31 and 7:40. The aircraft
pushed back from the gate at 7:40.
9
Shehhi and his team, none of whom had been selected by CAPPS, boarded
United 175 between 7:23 and 7:28 (Banihammad in 2A, Shehri in 2B, Shehhi
in 6C, Hamza al Ghamdi in 9C, and Ahmed al Ghamdi in 9D).Their aircraft
pushed back from the gate just before 8:00.
10
Washington Dulles: American 77.
Hundreds of miles southwest of Boston,
at Dulles International Airport in the Virginia suburbs of Washington, D.C.,
five more men were preparing to take their early morning flight.At 7:15, a pair
2
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 2
of them, Khalid al Mihdhar and Majed Moqed, checked in at the American
Airlines ticket counter for Flight 77, bound for Los Angeles.Within the next
20 minutes, they would be followed by Hani Hanjour and two brothers, Nawaf
al Hazmi and Salem al Hazmi.
11
Hani Hanjour, Khalid al Mihdhar, and Majed Moqed were flagged by
CAPPS.The Hazmi brothers were also selected for extra scrutiny by the air-
line's customer service representative at the check-in counter. He did so
because one of the brothers did not have photo identification nor could he
understand English, and because the agent found both of the passengers to
be suspicious.The only consequence of their selection was that their checked
bags were held off the plane until it was confirmed that they had boarded
the aircraft.
12
All five hijackers passed through the Main Terminal's west security screen-
ing checkpoint; United Airlines, which was the responsible air carrier, had
contracted out the work to Argenbright Security.
13
The checkpoint featured
closed-circuit television that recorded all passengers, including the hijackers,
as they were screened. At 7:18, Mihdhar and Moqed entered the security
checkpoint.
Mihdhar and Moqed placed their carry-on bags on the belt of the X-ray
machine and proceeded through the first metal detector. Both set off the alarm,
and they were directed to a second metal detector. Mihdhar did not trigger the
alarm and was permitted through the checkpoint. After Moqed set it off, a
screener wanded him. He passed this inspection.
14
About 20 minutes later, at 7:35, another passenger for Flight 77, Hani Han-
jour, placed two carry-on bags on the X-ray belt in the Main Terminal's west
checkpoint, and proceeded, without alarm, through the metal detector. A short
time later, Nawaf and Salem al Hazmi entered the same checkpoint. Salem al
Hazmi cleared the metal detector and was permitted through; Nawaf al Hazmi
set off the alarms for both the first and second metal detectors and was then
hand-wanded before being passed. In addition, his over-the-shoulder carry-on
bag was swiped by an explosive trace detector and then passed. The video
footage indicates that he was carrying an unidentified item in his back pocket,
clipped to its rim.
15
When the local civil aviation security office of the Federal Aviation Admin-
istration (FAA) later investigated these security screening operations, the
screeners recalled nothing out of the ordinary.They could not recall that any
of the passengers they screened were CAPPS selectees. We asked a screening
expert to review the videotape of the hand-wanding, and he found the qual-
ity of the screener's work to have been "marginal at best." The screener should
have "resolved" what set off the alarm; and in the case of both Moqed and
Hazmi, it was clear that he did not.
16
At 7:50, Majed Moqed and Khalid al Mihdhar boarded the flight and were
seated in 12A and 12B in coach. Hani Hanjour, assigned to seat 1B (first class),
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
3
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 3
soon followed.The Hazmi brothers, sitting in 5E and 5F, joined Hanjour in the
first-class cabin.
17
Newark: United 93.
Between 7:03 and 7:39, Saeed al Ghamdi, Ahmed al
Nami, Ahmad al Haznawi, and Ziad Jarrah checked in at the United Airlines
ticket counter for Flight 93, going to Los Angeles.Two checked bags; two did
not. Haznawi was selected by CAPPS. His checked bag was screened for explo-
sives and then loaded on the plane.
18
The four men passed through the security checkpoint, owned by United
Airlines and operated under contract by Argenbright Security. Like the check-
points in Boston, it lacked closed-circuit television surveillance so there is no
documentary evidence to indicate when the hijackers passed through the
checkpoint, what alarms may have been triggered, or what security procedures
were administered.The FAA interviewed the screeners later; none recalled any-
thing unusual or suspicious.
19
The four men boarded the plane between 7:39 and 7:48. All four had seats
in the first-class cabin; their plane had no business-class section. Jarrah was in
seat 1B, closest to the cockpit; Nami was in 3C, Ghamdi in 3D, and Haznawi
in 6B.
20
The 19 men were aboard four transcontinental flights.
21
They were plan-
ning to hijack these planes and turn them into large guided missiles, loaded
with up to 11,400 gallons of jet fuel. By 8:00
A
.
M
. on the morning of Tuesday,
September 11, 2001, they had defeated all the security layers that America's civil
aviation security system then had in place to prevent a hijacking.
The Hijacking of American 11
American Airlines Flight 11 provided nonstop service from Boston to Los
Angeles. On September 11, Captain John Ogonowski and First Officer
Thomas McGuinness piloted the Boeing 767. It carried its full capacity of nine
flight attendants. Eighty-one passengers boarded the flight with them (includ-
ing the five terrorists).
22
The plane took off at 7:59. Just before 8:14, it had climbed to 26,000 feet,
not quite its initial assigned cruising altitude of 29,000 feet.All communications
and flight profile data were normal. About this time the "Fasten Seatbelt" sign
would usually have been turned off and the flight attendants would have begun
preparing for cabin service.
23
At that same time, American 11 had its last routine communication with
the ground when it acknowledged navigational instructions from the FAA's
air traffic control (ATC) center in Boston. Sixteen seconds after that transmis-
sion,ATC instructed the aircraft's pilots to climb to 35,000 feet.That message
and all subsequent attempts to contact the flight were not acknowledged.
From this and other evidence, we believe the hijacking began at 8:14 or
shortly thereafter.
24
4
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 4
Reports from two flight attendants in the coach cabin, Betty Ong and
Madeline "Amy" Sweeney, tell us most of what we know about how the
hijacking happened. As it began, some of the hijackers--most likely Wail al
Shehri and Waleed al Shehri, who were seated in row 2 in first class--stabbed
the two unarmed flight attendants who would have been preparing for cabin
service.
25
We do not know exactly how the hijackers gained access to the cockpit;
FAA rules required that the doors remain closed and locked during flight. Ong
speculated that they had "jammed their way" in. Perhaps the terrorists stabbed
the flight attendants to get a cockpit key, to force one of them to open the cock-
pit door, or to lure the captain or first officer out of the cockpit. Or the flight
attendants may just have been in their way.
26
At the same time or shortly thereafter, Atta--the only terrorist on board
trained to fly a jet--would have moved to the cockpit from his business-class
seat, possibly accompanied by Omari.As this was happening, passenger Daniel
Lewin, who was seated in the row just behind Atta and Omari, was stabbed by
one of the hijackers--probably Satam al Suqami, who was seated directly
behind Lewin. Lewin had served four years as an officer in the Israeli military.
He may have made an attempt to stop the hijackers in front of him, not real-
izing that another was sitting behind him.
27
The hijackers quickly gained control and sprayed Mace, pepper spray, or
some other irritant in the first-class cabin, in order to force the passengers and
flight attendants toward the rear of the plane.They claimed they had a bomb.
28
About five minutes after the hijacking began, Betty Ong contacted the
American Airlines Southeastern Reservations Office in Cary, North Carolina,
via an AT&T airphone to report an emergency aboard the flight.This was the
first of several occasions on 9/11 when flight attendants took action outside
the scope of their training, which emphasized that in a hijacking, they were to
communicate with the cockpit crew.The emergency call lasted approximately
25 minutes, as Ong calmly and professionally relayed information about events
taking place aboard the airplane to authorities on the ground.
29
At 8:19, Ong reported:"The cockpit is not answering, somebody's stabbed
in business class--and I think there's Mace--that we can't breathe--I don't
know, I think we're getting hijacked." She then told of the stabbings of the two
flight attendants.
30
At 8:21, one of the American employees receiving Ong's call in North Car-
olina, Nydia Gonzalez, alerted the American Airlines operations center in Fort
Worth,Texas, reaching Craig Marquis, the manager on duty. Marquis soon real-
ized this was an emergency and instructed the airline's dispatcher responsible
for the flight to contact the cockpit. At 8:23, the dispatcher tried unsuccessfully
to contact the aircraft. Six minutes later, the air traffic control specialist in Amer-
ican's operations center contacted the FAA's Boston Air Traffic Control Center
about the flight. The center was already aware of the problem.
31
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
5
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 5
Boston Center knew of a problem on the flight in part because just before
8:25 the hijackers had attempted to communicate with the passengers. The
microphone was keyed, and immediately one of the hijackers said, "Nobody
move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger
yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet."Air traffic controllers heard the trans-
mission; Ong did not.The hijackers probably did not know how to operate the
cockpit radio communication system correctly, and thus inadvertently broad-
cast their message over the air traffic control channel instead of the cabin
public-address channel. Also at 8:25, and again at 8:29, Amy Sweeney got
through to the American Flight Services Office in Boston but was cut off after
she reported someone was hurt aboard the flight.Three minutes later, Sweeney
was reconnected to the office and began relaying updates to the manager,
Michael Woodward.
32
At 8:26, Ong reported that the plane was "flying erratically."A minute later,
Flight 11 turned south. American also began getting identifications of the
hijackers, as Ong and then Sweeney passed on some of the seat numbers of
those who had gained unauthorized access to the cockpit.
33
Sweeney calmly reported on her line that the plane had been hijacked; a
man in first class had his throat slashed; two flight attendants had been
stabbed--one was seriously hurt and was on oxygen while the other's wounds
seemed minor; a doctor had been requested; the flight attendants were unable
to contact the cockpit; and there was a bomb in the cockpit. Sweeney told
Woodward that she and Ong were trying to relay as much information as they
could to people on the ground.
34
At 8:38, Ong told Gonzalez that the plane was flying erratically again.
Around this time Sweeney told Woodward that the hijackers were Middle East-
erners, naming three of their seat numbers. One spoke very little English and
one spoke excellent English.The hijackers had gained entry to the cockpit, and
she did not know how.The aircraft was in a rapid descent.
35
At 8:41, Sweeney told Woodward that passengers in coach were under the
impression that there was a routine medical emergency in first class. Other
flight attendants were busy at duties such as getting medical supplies while Ong
and Sweeney were reporting the events.
36
At 8:41, in American's operations center, a colleague told Marquis that the
air traffic controllers declared Flight 11 a hijacking and "think he's [American
11] headed toward Kennedy [airport in New York City].They're moving every-
body out of the way.They seem to have him on a primary radar.They seem to
think that he is descending."
37
At 8:44, Gonzalez reported losing phone contact with Ong. About this
same time Sweeney reported to Woodward,"Something is wrong.We are in a
rapid descent . . . we are all over the place."Woodward asked Sweeney to look
out the window to see if she could determine where they were. Sweeney
responded:"We are flying low. We are flying very, very low. We are flying way
6
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 6
too low." Seconds later she said,"Oh my God we are way too low." The phone
call ended.
38
At 8:46:40, American 11 crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade
Center in New York City.
39
All on board, along with an unknown number of
people in the tower, were killed instantly.
The Hijacking of United 175
United Airlines Flight 175 was scheduled to depart for Los Angeles at 8:00. Cap-
tain Victor Saracini and First Officer Michael Horrocks piloted the Boeing 767,
which had seven flight attendants. Fifty-six passengers boarded the flight.
40
United 175 pushed back from its gate at 7:58 and departed Logan Airport
at 8:14. By 8:33, it had reached its assigned cruising altitude of 31,000 feet.The
flight attendants would have begun their cabin service.
41
The flight had taken off just as American 11 was being hijacked, and at 8:42
the United 175 flight crew completed their report on a "suspicious transmis-
sion" overheard from another plane (which turned out to have been Flight 11)
just after takeoff. This was United 175's last communication with the ground.
42
The hijackers attacked sometime between 8:42 and 8:46.They used knives
(as reported by two passengers and a flight attendant), Mace (reported by one
passenger), and the threat of a bomb (reported by the same passenger). They
stabbed members of the flight crew (reported by a flight attendant and one pas-
senger). Both pilots had been killed (reported by one flight attendant).The eye-
witness accounts came from calls made from the rear of the plane, from
passengers originally seated further forward in the cabin, a sign that passengers
and perhaps crew had been moved to the back of the aircraft. Given similari-
ties to American 11 in hijacker seating and in eyewitness reports of tactics and
weapons, as well as the contact between the presumed team leaders, Atta and
Shehhi, we believe the tactics were similar on both flights.
43
The first operational evidence that something was abnormal on United
175 came at 8:47, when the aircraft changed beacon codes twice within a
minute. At 8:51, the flight deviated from its assigned altitude, and a minute
later New York air traffic controllers began repeatedly and unsuccessfully try-
ing to contact it.
44
At 8:52, in Easton, Connecticut, a man named Lee Hanson received a
phone call from his son Peter, a passenger on United 175. His son told him:
"I think they've taken over the cockpit--An attendant has been stabbed--
and someone else up front may have been killed. The plane is making
strange moves. Call United Airlines--Tell them it's Flight 175, Boston to LA."
Lee Hanson then called the Easton Police Department and relayed what he
had heard.
45
Also at 8:52, a male flight attendant called a United office in San Francisco,
reaching Marc Policastro.The flight attendant reported that the flight had been
hijacked, both pilots had been killed, a flight attendant had been stabbed, and
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
7
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 7
the hijackers were probably flying the plane.The call lasted about two minutes,
after which Policastro and a colleague tried unsuccessfully to contact the
flight.
46
At 8:58, the flight took a heading toward New York City.
47
At 8:59, Flight 175 passenger Brian David Sweeney tried to call his wife,
Julie. He left a message on their home answering machine that the plane had
been hijacked. He then called his mother, Louise Sweeney, told her the flight
had been hijacked, and added that the passengers were thinking about storm-
ing the cockpit to take control of the plane away from the hijackers.
48
At 9:00, Lee Hanson received a second call from his son Peter:
It's getting bad, Dad--A stewardess was stabbed--They seem to have
knives and Mace--They said they have a bomb--It's getting very bad
on the plane--Passengers are throwing up and getting sick--The
plane is making jerky movements--I don't think the pilot is flying the
plane--I think we are going down--I think they intend to go to
Chicago or someplace and fly into a building--Don't worry, Dad--
If it happens, it'll be very fast--My God, my God.
49
The call ended abruptly. Lee Hanson had heard a woman scream just before
it cut off. He turned on a television, and in her home so did Louise Sweeney.
Both then saw the second aircraft hit the World Trade Center.
50
At 9:03:11, United Airlines Flight 175 struck the South Tower of the World
Trade Center.
51
All on board, along with an unknown number of people in
the tower, were killed instantly.
The Hijacking of American 77
American Airlines Flight 77 was scheduled to depart from Washington Dulles
for Los Angeles at 8:10. The aircraft was a Boeing 757 piloted by Captain
Charles F. Burlingame and First Officer David Charlebois. There were four
flight attendants. On September 11, the flight carried 58 passengers.
52
American 77 pushed back from its gate at 8:09 and took off at 8:20. At 8:46,
the flight reached its assigned cruising altitude of 35,000 feet. Cabin service
would have begun. At 8:51, American 77 transmitted its last routine radio com-
munication.The hijacking began between 8:51 and 8:54. As on American 11
and United 175, the hijackers used knives (reported by one passenger) and
moved all the passengers (and possibly crew) to the rear of the aircraft (reported
by one flight attendant and one passenger). Unlike the earlier flights, the Flight
77 hijackers were reported by a passenger to have box cutters. Finally, a pas-
senger reported that an announcement had been made by the "pilot" that the
plane had been hijacked. Neither of the firsthand accounts mentioned any stab-
bings or the threat or use of either a bomb or Mace,though both witnesses began
the flight in the first-class cabin.
53
8
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 8
At 8:54, the aircraft deviated from its assigned course, turning south. Two
minutes later the transponder was turned off and even primary radar contact
with the aircraft was lost.The Indianapolis Air Traffic Control Center repeat-
edly tried and failed to contact the aircraft. American Airlines dispatchers also
tried, without success.
54
At 9:00, American Airlines Executive Vice President Gerard Arpey learned
that communications had been lost with American 77.This was now the sec-
ond American aircraft in trouble. He ordered all American Airlines flights in
the Northeast that had not taken off to remain on the ground. Shortly before
9:10, suspecting that American 77 had been hijacked, American headquarters
concluded that the second aircraft to hit the World Trade Center might have
been Flight 77. After learning that United Airlines was missing a plane,Amer-
ican Airlines headquarters extended the ground stop nationwide.
55
At 9:12, Renee May called her mother, Nancy May, in Las Vegas. She said
her flight was being hijacked by six individuals who had moved them to the
rear of the plane. She asked her mother to alert American Airlines. Nancy May
and her husband promptly did so.
56
At some point between 9:16 and 9:26, Barbara Olson called her husband,
Ted Olson, the solicitor general of the United States. She reported that the
flight had been hijacked, and the hijackers had knives and box cutters. She fur-
ther indicated that the hijackers were not aware of her phone call, and that they
had put all the passengers in the back of the plane. About a minute into the
conversation, the call was cut off. Solicitor General Olson tried unsuccessfully
to reach Attorney General John Ashcroft.
57
Shortly after the first call, Barbara Olson reached her husband again. She
reported that the pilot had announced that the flight had been hijacked, and
she asked her husband what she should tell the captain to do.Ted Olson asked
for her location and she replied that the aircraft was then flying over houses.
Another passenger told her they were traveling northeast.The Solicitor Gen-
eral then informed his wife of the two previous hijackings and crashes. She did
not display signs of panic and did not indicate any awareness of an impending
crash. At that point, the second call was cut off.
58
At 9:29, the autopilot on American 77 was disengaged; the aircraft was at
7,000 feet and approximately 38 miles west of the Pentagon.
59
At 9:32, con-
trollers at the Dulles Terminal Radar Approach Control "observed a primary
radar target tracking eastbound at a high rate of speed." This was later deter-
mined to have been Flight 77.
At 9:34,Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport advised the Secret Ser-
vice of an unknown aircraft heading in the direction of the White House.Amer-
ican 77 was then 5 miles west-southwest of the Pentagon and began a
330-degree turn. At the end of the turn, it was descending through 2,200 feet,
pointed toward the Pentagon and downtown Washington.The hijacker pilot then
advanced the throttles to maximum power and dove toward the Pentagon.
60
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
9
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 9
At 9:37:46, American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, travel-
ing at approximately 530 miles per hour.
61
All on board, as well as many civil-
ian and military personnel in the building, were killed.
The Battle for United 93
At 8:42, United Airlines Flight 93 took off from Newark (New Jersey) Liberty
International Airport bound for San Francisco.The aircraft was piloted by Cap-
tain Jason Dahl and First Officer Leroy Homer, and there were five flight atten-
dants. Thirty-seven passengers, including the hijackers, boarded the plane.
Scheduled to depart the gate at 8:00, the Boeing 757's takeoff was delayed
because of the airport's typically heavy morning traffic.
62
The hijackers had planned to take flights scheduled to depart at 7:45 (Amer-
ican 11), 8:00 (United 175 and United 93), and 8:10 (American 77). Three of
the flights had actually taken off within 10 to 15 minutes of their planned
departure times. United 93 would ordinarily have taken off about 15 minutes
after pulling away from the gate.When it left the ground at 8:42, the flight was
running more than 25 minutes late.
63
As United 93 left Newark, the flight's crew members were unaware of the
hijacking of American 11.Around 9:00, the FAA,American, and United were
facing the staggering realization of apparent multiple hijackings. At 9:03, they
would see another aircraft strike the World Trade Center. Crisis managers at
the FAA and the airlines did not yet act to warn other aircraft.
64
At the same
time, Boston Center realized that a message transmitted just before 8:25 by the
hijacker pilot of American 11 included the phrase,"We have some planes."
65
No one at the FAA or the airlines that day had ever dealt with multiple
hijackings. Such a plot had not been carried out anywhere in the world in more
than 30 years, and never in the United States.As news of the hijackings filtered
through the FAA and the airlines, it does not seem to have occurred to their
leadership that they needed to alert other aircraft in the air that they too might
be at risk.
66
United 175 was hijacked between 8:42 and 8:46, and awareness of that
hijacking began to spread after 8:51. American 77 was hijacked between 8:51
and 8:54. By 9:00, FAA and airline officials began to comprehend that attack-
ers were going after multiple aircraft. American Airlines' nationwide ground
stop between 9:05 and 9:10 was followed by a United Airlines ground stop.
FAA controllers at Boston Center, which had tracked the first two hijackings,
requested at 9:07 that Herndon Command Center "get messages to airborne
aircraft to increase security for the cockpit."There is no evidence that Hern-
don took such action. Boston Center immediately began speculating about
other aircraft that might be in danger, leading them to worry about a transcon-
tinental flight--Delta 1989--that in fact was not hijacked. At 9:19, the FAA's
New England regional office called Herndon and asked that Cleveland Cen-
ter advise Delta 1989 to use extra cockpit security.
67
10
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 10
Several FAA air traffic control officials told us it was the air carriers' respon-
sibility to notify their planes of security problems. One senior FAA air traffic
control manager said that it was simply not the FAA's place to order the air-
lines what to tell their pilots.
68
We believe such statements do not reflect an
adequate appreciation of the FAA's responsibility for the safety and security of
civil aviation.
The airlines bore responsibility, too.They were facing an escalating number
of conflicting and, for the most part, erroneous reports about other flights, as
well as a continuing lack of vital information from the FAA about the hijacked
flights.We found no evidence, however, that American Airlines sent any cock-
pit warnings to its aircraft on 9/11. United's first decisive action to notify its
airborne aircraft to take defensive action did not come until 9:19, when a
United flight dispatcher, Ed Ballinger, took the initiative to begin transmitting
warnings to his 16 transcontinental flights: "Beware any cockpit intrusion--
Two a/c [aircraft] hit World Trade Center." One of the flights that received
the warning was United 93. Because Ballinger was still responsible for his
other flights as well as Flight 175, his warning message was not transmitted to
Flight 93 until 9:23.
69
By all accounts, the first 46 minutes of Flight 93's cross-country trip pro-
ceeded routinely. Radio communications from the plane were normal. Head-
ing, speed, and altitude ran according to plan. At 9:24, Ballinger's warning to
United 93 was received in the cockpit.Within two minutes, at 9:26, the pilot,
Jason Dahl, responded with a note of puzzlement: "Ed, confirm latest mssg
plz--Jason."
70
The hijackers attacked at 9:28. While traveling 35,000 feet above eastern
Ohio, United 93 suddenly dropped 700 feet. Eleven seconds into the descent,
the FAA's air traffic control center in Cleveland received the first of two radio
transmissions from the aircraft. During the first broadcast, the captain or first
officer could be heard declaring "Mayday" amid the sounds of a physical strug-
gle in the cockpit. The second radio transmission, 35 seconds later, indicated
that the fight was continuing.The captain or first officer could be heard shout-
ing:"Hey get out of here--get out of here--get out of here."
71
On the morning of 9/11, there were only 37 passengers on United 93--33
in addition to the 4 hijackers.This was below the norm for Tuesday mornings
during the summer of 2001. But there is no evidence that the hijackers manip-
ulated passenger levels or purchased additional seats to facilitate their operation.
72
The terrorists who hijacked three other commercial flights on 9/11 oper-
ated in five-man teams.They initiated their cockpit takeover within 30 min-
utes of takeoff. On Flight 93, however, the takeover took place 46 minutes after
takeoff and there were only four hijackers. The operative likely intended to
round out the team for this flight, Mohamed al Kahtani, had been refused entry
by a suspicious immigration inspector at Florida's Orlando International Air-
port in August.
73
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
11
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 11
Because several passengers on United 93 described three hijackers on the
plane, not four, some have wondered whether one of the hijackers had been
able to use the cockpit jump seat from the outset of the flight. FAA rules allow
use of this seat by documented and approved individuals, usually air carrier or
FAA personnel.We have found no evidence indicating that one of the hijack-
ers, or anyone else, sat there on this flight. All the hijackers had assigned seats
in first class, and they seem to have used them.We believe it is more likely that
Jarrah, the crucial pilot-trained member of their team, remained seated and
inconspicuous until after the cockpit was seized; and once inside, he would not
have been visible to the passengers.
74
At 9:32, a hijacker, probably Jarrah, made or attempted to make the follow-
ing announcement to the passengers of Flight 93:"Ladies and Gentlemen: Here
the captain, please sit down keep remaining sitting.We have a bomb on board.
So, sit." The flight data recorder (also recovered) indicates that Jarrah then
instructed the plane's autopilot to turn the aircraft around and head east.
75
The cockpit voice recorder data indicate that a woman, most likely a flight
attendant, was being held captive in the cockpit. She struggled with one of the
hijackers who killed or otherwise silenced her.
76
Shortly thereafter, the passengers and flight crew began a series of calls from
GTE airphones and cellular phones. These calls between family, friends, and
colleagues took place until the end of the flight and provided those on the
ground with firsthand accounts. They enabled the passengers to gain critical
information, including the news that two aircraft had slammed into the World
Trade Center.
77
At 9:39, the FAA's Cleveland Air Route Traffic Control Center overheard
a second announcement indicating that there was a bomb on board, that the
plane was returning to the airport, and that they should remain seated.
78
While
it apparently was not heard by the passengers, this announcement, like those on
Flight 11 and Flight 77, was intended to deceive them. Jarrah, like Atta earlier,
may have inadvertently broadcast the message because he did not know how
to operate the radio and the intercom. To our knowledge none of them had
ever flown an actual airliner before.
At least two callers from the flight reported that the hijackers knew that pas-
sengers were making calls but did not seem to care. It is quite possible Jarrah
knew of the success of the assault on the World Trade Center. He could have
learned of this from messages being sent by United Airlines to the cockpits of
its transcontinental flights, including Flight 93, warning of cockpit intrusion
and telling of the New York attacks. But even without them, he would cer-
tainly have understood that the attacks on the World Trade Center would
already have unfolded, given Flight 93's tardy departure from Newark. If Jar-
rah did know that the passengers were making calls, it might not have occurred
to him that they were certain to learn what had happened in New York, thereby
defeating his attempts at deception.
79
12
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 12
At least ten passengers and two crew members shared vital information with
family, friends, colleagues, or others on the ground. All understood the plane
had been hijacked. They said the hijackers wielded knives and claimed to have
a bomb.The hijackers were wearing red bandanas, and they forced the passen-
gers to the back of the aircraft.
80
Callers reported that a passenger had been stabbed and that two people were
lying on the floor of the cabin, injured or dead--possibly the captain and first
officer. One caller reported that a flight attendant had been killed.
81
One of the callers from United 93 also reported that he thought the hijack-
ers might possess a gun. But none of the other callers reported the presence of
a firearm. One recipient of a call from the aircraft recounted specifically ask-
ing her caller whether the hijackers had guns.The passenger replied that he did
not see one. No evidence of firearms or of their identifiable remains was found
at the aircraft's crash site, and the cockpit voice recorder gives no indication of
a gun being fired or mentioned at any time.We believe that if the hijackers had
possessed a gun, they would have used it in the flight's last minutes as the pas-
sengers fought back.
82
Passengers on three flights reported the hijackers' claim of having a bomb.
The FBI told us they found no trace of explosives at the crash sites. One of
the passengers who mentioned a bomb expressed his belief that it was not real.
Lacking any evidence that the hijackers attempted to smuggle such illegal
items past the security screening checkpoints, we believe the bombs were
probably fake.
83
During at least five of the passengers' phone calls, information was shared
about the attacks that had occurred earlier that morning at the World Trade
Center. Five calls described the intent of passengers and surviving crew mem-
bers to revolt against the hijackers. According to one call, they voted on
whether to rush the terrorists in an attempt to retake the plane. They decided,
and acted.
84
At 9:57, the passenger assault began. Several passengers had terminated
phone calls with loved ones in order to join the revolt. One of the callers
ended her message as follows:"Everyone's running up to first class. I've got to
go. Bye."
85
The cockpit voice recorder captured the sounds of the passenger assault
muffled by the intervening cockpit door. Some family members who listened
to the recording report that they can hear the voice of a loved one among the
din. We cannot identify whose voices can be heard. But the assault was sus-
tained.
86
In response, Jarrah immediately began to roll the airplane to the left and
right, attempting to knock the passengers off balance. At 9:58:57, Jarrah told
another hijacker in the cockpit to block the door. Jarrah continued to roll the
airplane sharply left and right, but the assault continued. At 9:59:52, Jarrah
changed tactics and pitched the nose of the airplane up and down to disrupt
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
13
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 13
the assault.The recorder captured the sounds of loud thumps, crashes, shouts,
and breaking glasses and plates. At 10:00:03, Jarrah stabilized the airplane.
87
Five seconds later, Jarrah asked,"Is that it? Shall we finish it off?" A hijacker
responded,"No. Not yet.When they all come, we finish it off." The sounds of
fighting continued outside the cockpit. Again, Jarrah pitched the nose of the
aircraft up and down.At 10:00:26, a passenger in the background said,"In the
cockpit. If we don't we'll die!" Sixteen seconds later, a passenger yelled,"Roll
it!" Jarrah stopped the violent maneuvers at about 10:01:00 and said,"Allah is
the greatest! Allah is the greatest!" He then asked another hijacker in the cock-
pit,"Is that it? I mean, shall we put it down?" to which the other replied,"Yes,
put it in it, and pull it down."
88
The passengers continued their assault and at 10:02:23, a hijacker said,"Pull
it down! Pull it down!"The hijackers remained at the controls but must have
judged that the passengers were only seconds from overcoming them.The air-
plane headed down; the control wheel was turned hard to the right.The air-
plane rolled onto its back, and one of the hijackers began shouting "Allah is
the greatest. Allah is the greatest."With the sounds of the passenger counter-
attack continuing, the aircraft plowed into an empty field in Shanksville, Penn-
sylvania, at 580 miles per hour, about 20 minutes' flying time from
Washington, D.C.
89
Jarrah's objective was to crash his airliner into symbols of the American
Republic, the Capitol or the White House. He was defeated by the alerted,
unarmed passengers of United 93.
1.2 IMPROVISING A HOMELAND DEFENSE
The FAA and NORAD
On 9/11, the defense of U.S. airspace depended on close interaction between
two federal agencies: the FAA and the North American Aerospace Defense
Command (NORAD).The most recent hijacking that involved U.S. air traf-
fic controllers, FAA management, and military coordination had occurred in
1993.
90
In order to understand how the two agencies interacted eight years
later, we will review their missions, command and control structures, and work-
ing relationship on the morning of 9/11.
FAA Mission and Structure.
As of September 11, 2001, the FAA was man-
dated by law to regulate the safety and security of civil aviation. From an air
traffic controller's perspective, that meant maintaining a safe distance between
airborne aircraft.
91
Many controllers work at the FAA's 22 Air Route Traffic Control Centers.
They are grouped under regional offices and coordinate closely with the
national Air Traffic Control System Command Center, located in Herndon,
14
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 14
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
15
BOSTON
NEW
YORK
NEW
YORK
CLEVELAND
INDIANAPOLIS
Boston
Center
Otis
Air Force
Base
Langley
Air Force Base
Northeast Air
Defense Sector
(NEADS)
NORAD
Headquarters
Continental Aerospace
Command Region (CONR)
Cleveland
Center
Indianapolis Center
New York
Center
FAA Air Traffic Control Centers
Reporting structure, Northeast Air Defense Sector
Graphics courtesy of ESRI
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 15
Virginia, which oversees daily traffic flow within the entire airspace system.
FAA headquarters is ultimately responsible for the management of the
National Airspace System.The Operations Center located at FAA headquarters
receives notifications of incidents, including accidents and hijackings.
92
FAA Control Centers often receive information and make operational deci-
sions independently of one another. On 9/11, the four hijacked aircraft were
monitored mainly by the centers in Boston, New York, Cleveland, and Indi-
anapolis. Each center thus had part of the knowledge of what was going on
across the system.What Boston knew was not necessarily known by centers in
New York, Cleveland, or Indianapolis, or for that matter by the Command
Center in Herndon or by FAA headquarters in Washington.
Controllers track airliners such as the four aircraft hijacked on 9/11 primar-
ily by watching the data from a signal emitted by each aircraft's transponder
equipment.Those four planes, like all aircraft traveling above 10,000 feet, were
required to emit a unique transponder signal while in flight.
93
On 9/11, the terrorists turned off the transponders on three of the four
hijacked aircraft.With its transponder off, it is possible, though more difficult,
to track an aircraft by its primary radar returns. But unlike transponder data,
primary radar returns do not show the aircraft's identity and altitude. Con-
trollers at centers rely so heavily on transponder signals that they usually do not
display primary radar returns on their radar scopes. But they can change the
configuration of their scopes so they can see primary radar returns.They did this
on 9/11 when the transponder signals for three of the aircraft disappeared.
94
Before 9/11, it was not unheard of for a commercial aircraft to deviate
slightly from its course, or for an FAA controller to lose radio contact with a
pilot for a short period of time. A controller could also briefly lose a commer-
cial aircraft's transponder signal, although this happened much less frequently.
However, the simultaneous loss of radio and transponder signal would be a rare
and alarming occurrence, and would normally indicate a catastrophic system
failure or an aircraft crash. In all of these instances, the job of the controller was
to reach out to the aircraft, the parent company of the aircraft, and other planes
in the vicinity in an attempt to reestablish communications and set the aircraft
back on course.Alarm bells would not start ringing until these efforts--which
could take five minutes or more--were tried and had failed.
95
NORAD Mission and Structure.
NORAD is a binational command estab-
lished in 1958 between the United States and Canada. Its mission was, and is,
to defend the airspace of North America and protect the continent.That mis-
sion does not distinguish between internal and external threats; but because
NORAD was created to counter the Soviet threat, it came to define its job as
defending against external attacks.
96
The threat of Soviet bombers diminished significantly as the Cold War
ended, and the number of NORAD alert sites was reduced from its Cold War
high of 26. Some within the Pentagon argued in the 1990s that the alert sites
16
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 16
should be eliminated entirely. In an effort to preserve their mission, members
of the air defense community advocated the importance of air sovereignty
against emerging "asymmetric threats" to the United States: drug smuggling,
"non-state and state-sponsored terrorists," and the proliferation of weapons of
mass destruction and ballistic missile technology.
97
NORAD perceived the dominant threat to be from cruise missiles. Other
threats were identified during the late 1990s, including terrorists' use of aircraft
as weapons. Exercises were conducted to counter this threat, but they were not
based on actual intelligence. In most instances, the main concern was the use
of such aircraft to deliver weapons of mass destruction.
Prior to 9/11, it was understood that an order to shoot down a commer-
cial aircraft would have to be issued by the National Command Authority (a
phrase used to describe the president and secretary of defense). Exercise plan-
ners also assumed that the aircraft would originate from outside the United
States, allowing time to identify the target and scramble interceptors.The threat
of terrorists hijacking commercial airliners within the United States--and using
them as guided missiles--was not recognized by NORAD before 9/11.
98
Notwithstanding the identification of these emerging threats, by 9/11 there
were only seven alert sites left in the United States, each with two fighter air-
craft on alert.This led some NORAD commanders to worry that NORAD
was not postured adequately to protect the United States.
99
In the United States, NORAD is divided into three sectors. On 9/11, all
the hijacked aircraft were in NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector (also
known as NEADS), which is based in Rome, New York. That morning
NEADS could call on two alert sites, each with one pair of ready fighters: Otis
Air National Guard Base in Cape Cod, Massachusetts, and Langley Air Force
Base in Hampton,Virginia.
100
Other facilities, not on "alert," would need time
to arm the fighters and organize crews.
NEADS reported to the Continental U.S. NORAD Region (CONR)
headquarters, in Panama City, Florida, which in turn reported to NORAD
headquarters, in Colorado Springs, Colorado.
Interagency Collaboration.
The FAA and NORAD had developed proto-
cols for working together in the event of a hijacking.As they existed on 9/11,
the protocols for the FAA to obtain military assistance from NORAD
required multiple levels of notification and approval at the highest levels of gov-
ernment.
101
FAA guidance to controllers on hijack procedures assumed that the aircraft
pilot would notify the controller via radio or by "squawking" a transponder code
of "7500"--the universal code for a hijack in progress. Controllers would notify
their supervisors, who in turn would inform management all the way up to FAA
headquarters in Washington.Headquarters had a hijack coordinator,who was the
director of the FAA Office of Civil Aviation Security or his or her designate.
102
If a hijack was confirmed, procedures called for the hijack coordinator on
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
17
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 17
duty to contact the Pentagon's National Military Command Center (NMCC)
and to ask for a military escort aircraft to follow the flight, report anything
unusual, and aid search and rescue in the event of an emergency.The NMCC
would then seek approval from the Office of the Secretary of Defense to pro-
vide military assistance. If approval was given, the orders would be transmitted
down NORAD's chain of command.
103
The NMCC would keep the FAA hijack coordinator up to date and help
the FAA centers coordinate directly with the military. NORAD would receive
tracking information for the hijacked aircraft either from joint use radar or from
the relevant FAA air traffic control facility. Every attempt would be made to
have the hijacked aircraft squawk 7500 to help NORAD track it.
104
The protocols did not contemplate an intercept.They assumed the fighter
escort would be discreet,"vectored to a position five miles directly behind the
hijacked aircraft," where it could perform its mission to monitor the aircraft's
flight path.
105
In sum, the protocols in place on 9/11 for the FAA and NORAD to
respond to a hijacking presumed that
· the hijacked aircraft would be readily identifiable and would not
attempt to disappear;
· there would be time to address the problem through the appropriate
FAA and NORAD chains of command; and
· the hijacking would take the traditional form: that is, it would not
be a suicide hijacking designed to convert the aircraft into a guided
missile.
On the morning of 9/11, the existing protocol was unsuited in every respect
for what was about to happen.
American Airlines Flight 11
FAA Awareness.
Although the Boston Center air traffic controller realized at
an early stage that there was something wrong with American 11, he did not
immediately interpret the plane's failure to respond as a sign that it had been
hijacked. At 8:14, when the flight failed to heed his instruction to climb to
35,000 feet, the controller repeatedly tried to raise the flight. He reached out
to the pilot on the emergency frequency. Though there was no response, he
kept trying to contact the aircraft.
106
At 8:21,American 11 turned off its transponder, immediately degrading the
information available about the aircraft.The controller told his supervisor that
he thought something was seriously wrong with the plane, although neither
suspected a hijacking.The supervisor instructed the controller to follow stan-
dard procedures for handling a "no radio" aircraft.
107
18
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 18
The controller checked to see if American Airlines could establish commu-
nication with American 11. He became even more concerned as its route
changed, moving into another sector's airspace. Controllers immediately began
to move aircraft out of its path, and asked other aircraft in the vicinity to look
for American 11.
108
At 8:24:38, the following transmission came from American 11:
American 11:
We have some planes. Just stay quiet, and you'll be okay.
We are returning to the airport.
The controller only heard something unintelligible; he did not hear the spe-
cific words "we have some planes." The next transmission came seconds later:
American 11:
Nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make
any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet.
109
The controller told us that he then knew it was a hijacking. He alerted his
supervisor, who assigned another controller to assist him. He redoubled his
efforts to ascertain the flight's altitude. Because the controller didn't understand
the initial transmission, the manager of Boston Center instructed his quality
assurance specialist to "pull the tape" of the radio transmission, listen to it
closely, and report back.
110
Between 8:25 and 8:32, in accordance with the FAA protocol, Boston Cen-
ter managers started notifying their chain of command that American 11 had
been hijacked.At 8:28, Boston Center called the Command Center in Herndon
to advise that it believed American 11 had been hijacked and was heading toward
New York Center's airspace.
By this time, American 11 had taken a dramatic turn to the south. At 8:32,
the Command Center passed word of a possible hijacking to the Operations
Center at FAA headquarters.The duty officer replied that security personnel
at headquarters had just begun discussing the apparent hijack on a conference
call with the New England regional office. FAA headquarters began to follow
the hijack protocol but did not contact the NMCC to request a fighter
escort.
111
The Herndon Command Center immediately established a teleconfer-
ence between Boston, New York, and Cleveland Centers so that Boston
Center could help the others understand what was happening.
112
At 8:34, the Boston Center controller received a third transmission from
American 11:
American 11:
Nobody move please.We are going back to the airport.
Don't try to make any stupid moves.
113
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
19
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 19
In the succeeding minutes, controllers were attempting to ascertain the alti-
tude of the southbound flight.
114
Military Notification and Response.
Boston Center did not follow the
protocol in seeking military assistance through the prescribed chain of com-
mand. In addition to notifications within the FAA, Boston Center took the ini-
tiative, at 8:34, to contact the military through the FAA's Cape Cod facility.
The center also tried to contact a former alert site in Atlantic City, unaware it
had been phased out. At 8:37:52, Boston Center reached NEADS. This was
the first notification received by the military--at any level--that American 11
had been hijacked:
115
FAA:
Hi. Boston Center TMU [Traffic Management Unit], we have a
problem here.We have a hijacked aircraft headed towards New York,
and we need you guys to, we need someone to scramble some F-16s
or something up there, help us out.
NEADS:
Is this real-world or exercise?
FAA:
No, this is not an exercise, not a test.
116
NEADS ordered to battle stations the two F-15 alert aircraft at Otis Air
Force Base in Falmouth, Massachusetts, 153 miles away from New York City.
The air defense of America began with this call.
117
At NEADS, the report of the hijacking was relayed immediately to Battle
Commander Colonel Robert Marr. After ordering the Otis fighters to battle
stations, Colonel Marr phoned Major General Larry Arnold, commanding
general of the First Air Force and NORAD's Continental Region. Marr sought
authorization to scramble the Otis fighters. General Arnold later recalled
instructing Marr to "go ahead and scramble them, and we'll get authorities
later." General Arnold then called NORAD headquarters to report.
118
F-15 fighters were scrambled at 8:46 from Otis Air Force Base. But NEADS
did not know where to send the alert fighter aircraft, and the officer directing
the fighters pressed for more information:"I don't know where I'm scrambling
these guys to. I need a direction, a destination." Because the hijackers had
turned off the plane's transponder, NEADS personnel spent the next minutes
searching their radar scopes for the primary radar return. American 11 struck
the North Tower at 8:46. Shortly after 8:50, while NEADS personnel were still
trying to locate the flight, word reached them that a plane had hit the World
Trade Center.
119
Radar data show the Otis fighters were airborne at 8:53. Lacking a target,
they were vectored toward military-controlled airspace off the Long Island
coast.To avoid New York area air traffic and uncertain about what to do, the
fighters were brought down to military airspace to "hold as needed." From 9:09
to 9:13, the Otis fighters stayed in this holding pattern.
120
20
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 20
In summary, NEADS received notice of the hijacking nine minutes before
it struck the North Tower. That nine minutes' notice before impact was the
most the military would receive of any of the four hijackings.
121
United Airlines Flight 175
FAA Awareness.
One of the last transmissions from United Airlines Flight
175 is, in retrospect, chilling. By 8:40, controllers at the FAA's New York Cen-
ter were seeking information on American 11. At approximately 8:42, shortly
after entering New York Center's airspace, the pilot of United 175 broke in
with the following transmission:
UAL 175:
New York UAL 175 heavy.
FAA:
UAL 175 go ahead.
UAL 175:
Yeah.We figured we'd wait to go to your center.Ah, we heard
a suspicious transmission on our departure out of Boston, ah, with
someone, ah, it sounded like someone keyed the mikes and said ah
everyone ah stay in your seats.
FAA:
Oh, okay. I'll pass that along over here.
122
Minutes later, United 175 turned southwest without clearance from air traf-
fic control. At 8:47, seconds after the impact of American 11, United 175's
transponder code changed, and then changed again. These changes were not
noticed for several minutes, however, because the same New York Center con-
troller was assigned to both American 11 and United 175.The controller knew
American 11 was hijacked; he was focused on searching for it after the aircraft
disappeared at 8:46.
123
At 8:48, while the controller was still trying to locate American 11, a New
York Center manager provided the following report on a Command Center
teleconference about American 11:
Manager, New York Center:
Okay. This is New York Center. We're
watching the airplane. I also had conversation with American Air-
lines, and they've told us that they believe that one of their stew-
ardesses was stabbed and that there are people in the cockpit that
have control of the aircraft, and that's all the information they have
right now.
124
The New York Center controller and manager were unaware that American
11 had already crashed.
At 8:51, the controller noticed the transponder change from United 175 and
tried to contact the aircraft.There was no response. Beginning at 8:52, the con-
troller made repeated attempts to reach the crew of United 175. Still no
response.The controller checked his radio equipment and contacted another
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
21
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 21
controller at 8:53, saying that "we may have a hijack" and that he could not
find the aircraft.
125
Another commercial aircraft in the vicinity then radioed in with "reports
over the radio of a commuter plane hitting the World Trade Center."The con-
troller spent the next several minutes handing off the other flights on his scope
to other controllers and moving aircraft out of the way of the unidentified air-
craft (believed to be United 175) as it moved southwest and then turned
northeast toward New York City.
126
At about 8:55, the controller in charge notified a New York Center man-
ager that she believed United 175 had also been hijacked.The manager tried
to notify the regional managers and was told that they were discussing a
hijacked aircraft (presumably American 11) and refused to be disturbed.At 8:58,
the New York Center controller searching for United 175 told another New
York controller "we might have a hijack over here, two of them."
127
Between 9:01 and 9:02, a manager from New York Center told the Com-
mand Center in Herndon:
Manager, New York Center:
We have several situations going on here. It's
escalating big, big time.We need to get the military involved with us. . . .
We're, we're involved with something else, we have other aircraft that
may have a similar situation going on here.
128
The "other aircraft" referred to by New York Center was United 175. Evi-
dence indicates that this conversation was the only notice received by either
FAA headquarters or the Herndon Command Center prior to the second crash
that there had been a second hijacking.
While the Command Center was told about this "other aircraft" at 9:01,
New York Center contacted New York terminal approach control and asked
for help in locating United 175.
Terminal:
I got somebody who keeps coasting but it looks like he's going
into one of the small airports down there.
Center:
Hold on a second. I'm trying to bring him up here and get
you--There he is right there. Hold on.
Terminal:
Got him just out of 9,500--9,000 now.
Center:
Do you know who he is?
Terminal:
We're just, we just we don't know who he is.We're just pick-
ing him up now.
Center (at 9:02):
Alright. Heads up man, it looks like another one com-
ing in.
129
The controllers observed the plane in a rapid descent; the radar data termi-
nated over Lower Manhattan. At 9:03, United 175 crashed into the South
Tower.
130
22
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 22
Meanwhile, a manager from Boston Center reported that they had deci-
phered what they had heard in one of the first hijacker transmissions from
American 11:
Boston Center:
Hey . . . you still there?
New England Region:
Yes, I am.
Boston Center:
. . . as far as the tape, Bobby seemed to think the guy
said that "we have planes." Now, I don't know if it was because it was
the accent, or if there's more than one, but I'm gonna, I'm gonna
reconfirm that for you, and I'll get back to you real quick. Okay?
New England Region:
Appreciate it.
Unidentified Female Voice:
They have what?
Boston Center:
Planes, as in plural.
Boston Center:
It sounds like, we're talking to New York, that there's
another one aimed at the World Trade Center.
New England Region:
There's another aircraft?
Boston Center:
A second one just hit the Trade Center.
New England Region:
Okay.Yeah, we gotta get--we gotta alert the
military real quick on this.
131
Boston Center immediately advised the New England Region that it was
going to stop all departures at airports under its control. At 9:05, Boston Cen-
ter confirmed for both the FAA Command Center and the New England
Region that the hijackers aboard American 11 said "we have planes." At the
same time, New York Center declared "ATC zero"--meaning that aircraft were
not permitted to depart from, arrive at, or travel through New York Center's
airspace until further notice.
132
Within minutes of the second impact, Boston Center instructed its con-
trollers to inform all aircraft in its airspace of the events in New York and to
advise aircraft to heighten cockpit security. Boston Center asked the Herndon
Command Center to issue a similar cockpit security alert nationwide.We have
found no evidence to suggest that the Command Center acted on this request
or issued any type of cockpit security alert.
133
Military Notification and Response.
The first indication that the
NORAD air defenders had of the second hijacked aircraft, United 175, came
in a phone call from New York Center to NEADS at 9:03.The notice came at
about the time the plane was hitting the South Tower.
134
By 9:08, the mission crew commander at NEADS learned of the second
explosion at the World Trade Center and decided against holding the fighters
in military airspace away from Manhattan:
Mission Crew Commander, NEADS:
This is what I foresee that we
probably need to do.We need to talk to FAA.We need to tell 'em if
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
23
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 23
this stuff is gonna keep on going, we need to take those fighters, put
'em over Manhattan.That's best thing, that's the best play right now.
So coordinate with the FAA.Tell 'em if there's more out there, which
we don't know, let's get 'em over Manhattan.At least we got some kind
of play.
135
The FAA cleared the airspace. Radar data show that at 9:13, when the Otis
fighters were about 115 miles away from the city, the fighters exited their hold-
ing pattern and set a course direct for Manhattan. They arrived at 9:25 and
established a combat air patrol (CAP) over the city.
136
Because the Otis fighters had expended a great deal of fuel in flying first to
military airspace and then to New York, the battle commanders were con-
cerned about refueling. NEADS considered scrambling alert fighters from Lan-
gley Air Force Base in Virginia to New York, to provide backup.The Langley
fighters were placed on battle stations at 9:09.
137
NORAD had no indication
that any other plane had been hijacked.
American Airlines Flight 77
FAA Awareness.
American 77 began deviating from its flight plan at 8:54,
with a slight turn toward the south.Two minutes later, it disappeared completely
from radar at Indianapolis Center, which was controlling the flight.
138
The controller tracking American 77 told us he noticed the aircraft turn-
ing to the southwest, and then saw the data disappear. The controller looked
for primary radar returns. He searched along the plane's projected flight path
and the airspace to the southwest where it had started to turn. No primary tar-
gets appeared. He tried the radios, first calling the aircraft directly, then the air-
line.Again there was nothing.At this point, the Indianapolis controller had no
knowledge of the situation in New York. He did not know that other aircraft
had been hijacked. He believed American 77 had experienced serious electri-
cal or mechanical failure, or both, and was gone.
139
Shortly after 9:00, Indianapolis Center started notifying other agencies that
American 77 was missing and had possibly crashed.At 9:08, Indianapolis Cen-
ter asked Air Force Search and Rescue at Langley Air Force Base to look for a
downed aircraft.The center also contacted the West Virginia State Police and
asked whether any reports of a downed aircraft had been received. At 9:09, it
reported the loss of contact to the FAA regional center, which passed this infor-
mation to FAA headquarters at 9:24.
140
By 9:20, Indianapolis Center learned that there were other hijacked aircraft,
and began to doubt its initial assumption that American 77 had crashed.A dis-
cussion of this concern between the manager at Indianapolis and the Com-
mand Center in Herndon prompted it to notify some FAA field facilities that
American 77 was lost. By 9:21, the Command Center, some FAA field facili-
ties, and American Airlines had started to search for American 77.They feared
24
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 24
it had been hijacked. At 9:25, the Command Center advised FAA headquar-
ters of the situation.
141
The failure to find a primary radar return for American 77 led us to inves-
tigate this issue further. Radar reconstructions performed after 9/11 reveal that
FAA radar equipment tracked the flight from the moment its transponder was
turned off at 8:56. But for 8 minutes and 13 seconds, between 8:56 and 9:05,
this primary radar information on American 77 was not displayed to controllers
at Indianapolis Center.
142
The reasons are technical, arising from the way the
software processed radar information, as well as from poor primary radar cov-
erage where American 77 was flying.
According to the radar reconstruction,American 77 reemerged as a primary
target on Indianapolis Center radar scopes at 9:05, east of its last known posi-
tion.The target remained in Indianapolis Center's airspace for another six min-
utes, then crossed into the western portion of Washington Center's airspace at
9:10.As Indianapolis Center continued searching for the aircraft, two managers
and the controller responsible for American 77 looked to the west and south-
west along the flight's projected path, not east--where the aircraft was now
heading. Managers did not instruct other controllers at Indianapolis Center to
turn on their primary radar coverage to join in the search for American 77.
143
In sum, Indianapolis Center never saw Flight 77 turn around. By the time
it reappeared in primary radar coverage, controllers had either stopped look-
ing for the aircraft because they thought it had crashed or were looking toward
the west. Although the Command Center learned Flight 77 was missing, nei-
ther it nor FAA headquarters issued an all points bulletin to surrounding cen-
ters to search for primary radar targets. American 77 traveled undetected for
36 minutes on a course heading due east for Washington, D.C.
144
By 9:25, FAA's Herndon Command Center and FAA headquarters knew
two aircraft had crashed into the World Trade Center.They knew American 77
was lost. At least some FAA officials in Boston Center and the New England
Region knew that a hijacker on board American 11 had said "we have some
planes." Concerns over the safety of other aircraft began to mount.A manager at
the Herndon Command Center asked FAA headquarters if they wanted to order
a "nationwide ground stop." While this was being discussed by executives at FAA
headquarters, the Command Center ordered one at 9:25.
145
The Command Center kept looking for American 77. At 9:21, it advised the
Dulles terminal control facility, and Dulles urged its controllers to look for pri-
mary targets. At 9:32, they found one. Several of the Dulles controllers
"observed a primary radar target tracking eastbound at a high rate of speed" and
notified Reagan National Airport. FAA personnel at both Reagan National and
Dulles airports notified the Secret Service. The aircraft's identity or type was
unknown.
146
Reagan National controllers then vectored an unarmed National Guard C-
130H cargo aircraft, which had just taken off en route to Minnesota, to iden-
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
25
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 25
tify and follow the suspicious aircraft.The C-130H pilot spotted it, identified
it as a Boeing 757, attempted to follow its path, and at 9:38, seconds after
impact, reported to the control tower:"looks like that aircraft crashed into the
Pentagon sir."
147
Military Notification and Response.
NORAD heard nothing about the
search for American 77. Instead, the NEADS air defenders heard renewed
reports about a plane that no longer existed: American 11.
At 9:21, NEADS received a report from the FAA:
FAA:
Military, Boston Center. I just had a report that American 11 is still
in the air, and it's on its way towards--heading towards Washington.
NEADS:
Okay. American 11 is still in the air?
FAA:
Yes.
NEADS:
On its way towards Washington?
FAA:
That was another--it was evidently another aircraft that hit the
tower.That's the latest report we have.
NEADS:
Okay.
FAA:
I'm going to try to confirm an ID for you, but I would assume
he's somewhere over, uh, either New Jersey or somewhere further
south.
NEADS:
Okay. So American 11 isn't the hijack at all then, right?
FAA:
No, he is a hijack.
NEADS:
He--American 11 is a hijack?
FAA:
Yes.
NEADS:
And he's heading into Washington?
FAA:
Yes.This could be a third aircraft.
148
The mention of a "third aircraft" was not a reference to American 77. There
was confusion at that moment in the FAA. Two planes had struck the World
Trade Center, and Boston Center had heard from FAA headquarters in Wash-
ington that American 11 was still airborne.We have been unable to identify the
source of this mistaken FAA information.
The NEADS technician who took this call from the FAA immediately
passed the word to the mission crew commander, who reported to the
NEADS battle commander:
Mission Crew Commander, NEADS:
Okay, uh, American Airlines is
still airborne. Eleven, the first guy, he's heading towards Washington.
Okay? I think we need to scramble Langley right now.And I'm gonna
take the fighters from Otis, try to chase this guy down if I can find
him.
149
26
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 26
After consulting with NEADS command, the crew commander issued the
order at 9:23:"Okay . . . scramble Langley. Head them towards the Washington
area. . . . [I]f they're there then we'll run on them. . . . These guys are smart."
That order was processed and transmitted to Langley Air Force Base at 9:24.
Radar data show the Langley fighters airborne at 9:30. NEADS decided to
keep the Otis fighters over New York.The heading of the Langley fighters was
adjusted to send them to the Baltimore area. The mission crew commander
explained to us that the purpose was to position the Langley fighters between
the reported southbound American 11 and the nation's capital.
150
At the suggestion of the Boston Center's military liaison, NEADS contacted
the FAA's Washington Center to ask about American 11. In the course of the
conversation, a Washington Center manager informed NEADS:"We're look-
ing--we also lost American 77." The time was 9:34.
151
This was the first notice
to the military that American 77 was missing, and it had come by chance. If
NEADS had not placed that call, the NEADS air defenders would have
received no information whatsoever that the flight was even missing, although
the FAA had been searching for it. No one at FAA headquarters ever asked for
military assistance with American 77.
At 9:36, the FAA's Boston Center called NEADS and relayed the discovery
about an unidentified aircraft closing in on Washington:"Latest report.Aircraft
VFR [visual flight rules] six miles southeast of the White House. . . . Six, south-
west. Six, southwest of the White House, deviating away." This startling news
prompted the mission crew commander at NEADS to take immediate control
of the airspace to clear a flight path for the Langley fighters:"Okay, we're going
to turn it . . . crank it up. . . . Run them to the White House." He then discov-
ered, to his surprise, that the Langley fighters were not headed north toward
the Baltimore area as instructed, but east over the ocean."I don't care how many
windows you break," he said."Damn it. . . . Okay. Push them back."
152
The Langley fighters were heading east, not north, for three reasons. First,
unlike a normal scramble order, this order did not include a distance to the tar-
get or the target's location. Second, a "generic" flight plan--prepared to get the
aircraft airborne and out of local airspace quickly--incorrectly led the Lang-
ley fighters to believe they were ordered to fly due east (090) for 60 miles.Third,
the lead pilot and local FAA controller incorrectly assumed the flight plan
instruction to go "090 for 60" superseded the original scramble order.
153
After the 9:36 call to NEADS about the unidentified aircraft a few miles
from the White House, the Langley fighters were ordered to Washington, D.C.
Controllers at NEADS located an unknown primary radar track, but "it kind
of faded" over Washington.The time was 9:38.The Pentagon had been struck
by American 77 at 9:37:46.The Langley fighters were about 150 miles away.
154
Right after the Pentagon was hit, NEADS learned of another possible
hijacked aircraft. It was an aircraft that in fact had not been hijacked at all.After
the second World Trade Center crash, Boston Center managers recognized that
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
27
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 27
both aircraft were transcontinental 767 jetliners that had departed Logan Air-
port. Remembering the "we have some planes" remark, Boston Center
guessed that Delta 1989 might also be hijacked. Boston Center called NEADS
at 9:41 and identified Delta 1989, a 767 jet that had left Logan Airport for Las
Vegas, as a possible hijack. NEADS warned the FAA's Cleveland Center to
watch Delta 1989. The Command Center and FAA headquarters watched it
too. During the course of the morning, there were multiple erroneous reports
of hijacked aircraft. The report of American 11 heading south was the first;
Delta 1989 was the second.
155
NEADS never lost track of Delta 1989, and even ordered fighter aircraft
from Ohio and Michigan to intercept it. The flight never turned off its
transponder. NEADS soon learned that the aircraft was not hijacked, and
tracked Delta 1989 as it reversed course over Toledo, headed east, and landed
in Cleveland.
156
But another aircraft was heading toward Washington, an air-
craft about which NORAD had heard nothing: United 93.
United Airlines Flight 93
FAA Awareness.
At 9:27, after having been in the air for 45 minutes, United
93 acknowledged a transmission from the Cleveland Center controller.This was
the last normal contact the FAA had with the flight.
157
Less than a minute later, the Cleveland controller and the pilots of aircraft
in the vicinity heard "a radio transmission of unintelligible sounds of possible
screaming or a struggle from an unknown origin."
158
The controller responded, seconds later: "Somebody call Cleveland?"This
was followed by a second radio transmission, with sounds of screaming. The
Cleveland Center controllers began to try to identify the possible source of the
transmissions, and noticed that United 93 had descended some 700 feet.The
controller attempted again to raise United 93 several times, with no response.
At 9:30, the controller began to poll the other flights on his frequency to deter-
mine if they had heard the screaming; several said they had.
159
At 9:32, a third radio transmission came over the frequency:"Keep remain-
ing sitting.We have a bomb on board."The controller understood, but chose
to respond: "Calling Cleveland Center, you're unreadable. Say again, slowly."
He notified his supervisor, who passed the notice up the chain of command.
By 9:34, word of the hijacking had reached FAA headquarters.
160
FAA headquarters had by this time established an open line of communi-
cation with the Command Center at Herndon and instructed it to poll all its
centers about suspect aircraft.The Command Center executed the request and,
a minute later, Cleveland Center reported that "United 93 may have a bomb
on board."At 9:34, the Command Center relayed the information concerning
United 93 to FAA headquarters.At approximately 9:36, Cleveland advised the
Command Center that it was still tracking United 93 and specifically inquired
whether someone had requested the military to launch fighter aircraft to inter-
cept the aircraft. Cleveland even told the Command Center it was prepared to
28
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 28
contact a nearby military base to make the request.The Command Center told
Cleveland that FAA personnel well above them in the chain of command had
to make the decision to seek military assistance and were working on the issue.
161
Between 9:34 and 9:38, the Cleveland controller observed United 93 climb-
ing to 40,700 feet and immediately moved several aircraft out its way.The con-
troller continued to try to contact United 93, and asked whether the pilot could
confirm that he had been hijacked.
162
There was no response.
Then, at 9:39, a fourth radio transmission was heard from United 93:
Ziad Jarrah:
Uh, this is the captain.Would like you all to remain seated.
There is a bomb on board and are going back to the airport, and to
have our demands [unintelligible]. Please remain quiet.
The controller responded: "United 93, understand you have a bomb on
board. Go ahead." The flight did not respond.
163
From 9:34 to 10:08, a Command Center facility manager provided frequent
updates to Acting Deputy Administrator Monte Belger and other executives at
FAA headquarters as United 93 headed toward Washington, D.C. At 9:41,
Cleveland Center lost United 93's transponder signal. The controller located
it on primary radar, matched its position with visual sightings from other air-
craft, and tracked the flight as it turned east, then south.
164
At 9:42, the Command Center learned from news reports that a plane had
struck the Pentagon.The Command Center's national operations manager, Ben
Sliney, ordered all FAA facilities to instruct all aircraft to land at the nearest
airport.This was an unprecedented order.The air traffic control system han-
dled it with great skill, as about 4,500 commercial and general aviation aircraft
soon landed without incident.
165
At 9:46 the Command Center updated FAA headquarters that United 93
was now "twenty-nine minutes out of Washington, D.C."
At 9:49, 13 minutes after Cleveland Center had asked about getting mili-
tary help, the Command Center suggested that someone at headquarters should
decide whether to request military assistance:
FAA Headquarters:
They're pulling Jeff away to go talk about United
93.
Command Center:
Uh, do we want to think, uh, about scrambling
aircraft?
FAA Headquarters:
Oh, God, I don't know.
Command Center:
Uh, that's a decision somebody's gonna have to
make probably in the next ten minutes.
FAA Headquarters:
Uh, ya know everybody just left the room.
166
At 9:53, FAA headquarters informed the Command Center that the deputy
director for air traffic services was talking to Monte Belger about scrambling
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
29
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 29
aircraft. Then the Command Center informed headquarters that controllers
had lost track of United 93 over the Pittsburgh area.Within seconds, the Com-
mand Center received a visual report from another aircraft, and informed head-
quarters that the aircraft was 20 miles northwest of Johnstown. United 93 was
spotted by another aircraft, and, at 10:01, the Command Center advised FAA
headquarters that one of the aircraft had seen United 93 "waving his wings."
The aircraft had witnessed the hijackers' efforts to defeat the passengers' coun-
terattack.
167
United 93 crashed in Pennsylvania at 10:03:11, 125 miles from Washington,
D.C. The precise crash time has been the subject of some dispute.The 10:03:11
impact time is supported by previous National Transportation Safety Board
analysis and by evidence from the Commission staff 's analysis of radar, the flight
data recorder, the cockpit voice recorder, infrared satellite data, and air traffic
control transmissions.
168
Five minutes later, the Command Center forwarded this update to head-
quarters:
Command Center:
O.K. Uh, there is now on that United 93.
FAA Headquarters:
Yes.
Command Center:
There is a report of black smoke in the last position
I gave you, fifteen miles south of Johnstown.
FAA Headquarters:
From the airplane or from the ground?
Command Center:
Uh, they're speculating it's from the aircraft.
FAA Headquarters:
Okay.
Command Center:
Uh, who, it hit the ground.That's what they're spec-
ulating, that's speculation only.
169
The aircraft that spotted the "black smoke" was the same unarmed Air
National Guard cargo plane that had seen American 77 crash into the Penta-
gon 27 minutes earlier. It had resumed its flight to Minnesota and saw the
smoke from the crash of United 93, less than two minutes after the plane went
down. At 10:17, the Command Center advised headquarters of its conclusion
that United 93 had indeed crashed.
170
Despite the discussions about military assistance, no one from FAA head-
quarters requested military assistance regarding United 93. Nor did any man-
ager at FAA headquarters pass any of the information it had about United 93
to the military.
Military Notification and Response.
NEADS first received a call about
United 93 from the military liaison at Cleveland Center at 10:07. Unaware that
the aircraft had already crashed, Cleveland passed to NEADS the aircraft's last
known latitude and longitude. NEADS was never able to locate United 93 on
radar because it was already in the ground.
171
30
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 30
At the same time, the NEADS mission crew commander was dealing with
the arrival of the Langley fighters over Washington, D.C., sorting out what their
orders were with respect to potential targets. Shortly after 10:10, and having
no knowledge either that United 93 had been heading toward Washington or
that it had crashed, he explicitly instructed the Langley fighters: "negative--
negative clearance to shoot" aircraft over the nation's capital.
172
The news of a reported bomb on board United 93 spread quickly at
NEADS.The air defenders searched for United 93's primary radar return and
tried to locate other fighters to scramble. NEADS called Washington Center
to report:
NEADS:
I also want to give you a heads-up,Washington.
FAA (DC):
Go ahead.
NEADS:
United nine three, have you got information on that yet?
FAA:
Yeah, he's down.
NEADS:
He's down?
FAA:
Yes.
NEADS:
When did he land? 'Cause we have got confirmation--
FAA:
He did not land.
NEADS:
Oh, he's down? Down?
FAA:
Yes. Somewhere up northeast of Camp David.
NEADS:
Northeast of Camp David.
FAA:
That's the last report.They don't know exactly where.
173
The time of notification of the crash of United 93 was 10:15.
174
The
NEADS air defenders never located the flight or followed it on their radar
scopes.The flight had already crashed by the time they learned it was hijacked.
Clarifying the Record
The defense of U.S. airspace on 9/11 was not conducted in accord with pre-
existing training and protocols. It was improvised by civilians who had never
handled a hijacked aircraft that attempted to disappear, and by a military unpre-
pared for the transformation of commercial aircraft into weapons of mass
destruction. As it turned out, the NEADS air defenders had nine minutes'
notice on the first hijacked plane, no advance notice on the second, no advance
notice on the third, and no advance notice on the fourth.
We do not believe that the true picture of that morning reflects discredit on
the operational personnel at NEADS or FAA facilities. NEADS commanders
and officers actively sought out information, and made the best judgments they
could on the basis of what they knew. Individual FAA controllers, facility man-
agers, and Command Center managers thought outside the box in recommend-
ing a nationwide alert, in ground-stopping local traffic, and, ultimately, in
deciding to land all aircraft and executing that unprecedented order flawlessly.
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
31
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 31
32
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
American Airlines Flight 11
(AA 11)
Boston to Los Angeles
United Airlines Flight 175
(UA 175)
Boston to Los Angeles
7:59
Takeoff
8:14
Last routine radio
communication; likely takeover
8:19
Flight attendant notifies AA of
hijacking
8:21
Transponder is turned off
8:23
AA attempts to contact the
cockpit
8:25
Boston Center aware of
hijacking
8:38
Boston Center notifies NEADS
of hijacking
8:46
NEADS scrambles Otis fighter
jets in search of AA 11
8:46:40
AA 11 crashes into 1 WTC
(North Tower)
8:53
Otis fighter jets airborne
9:16
AA headquarters aware that
Flight 11 has crashed into
WTC
9:21 Boston
Center
advises NEADS
that AA 11 is airborne heading
for Washington
9:24
NEADS scrambles Langley
fighter jets in search of
AA 11
8:14
Takeoff
8:42
Last radio communication
8:42-8:46 Likely takeover
8:47
Transponder code changes
8:52
Flight attendant notifies UA of
hijacking
8:54
UA attempts to contact the
cockpit
8:55
New York Center suspects
hijacking
9:03:11
Flight 175 crashes into 2 WTC
(South Tower)
9:15
New York Center advises
NEADS that UA 175 was the
second aircraft crashed into
WTC
9:20
UA headquarters aware that
Flight 175 had crashed into
WTC
Boston
Boston
New York City
New York City
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 32
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
33
American Airlines Flight 77
(AA 77)
Washington, D.C., to Los Angeles
United Airlines Flight 93
(UA 93)
Newark to San Francisco
8:20
Takeoff
8:51
Last routine radio
communication
8:51-8:54 Likely takeover
8:54
Flight 77 makes unauthorized
turn to south
8:56
Transponder is turned off
9:05
AA headquarters aware that
Flight 77 is hijacked
9:25
Herndon Command Center
orders nationwide ground stop
9:32
Dulles tower observes radar of
fast-moving aircraft (later
identified as AA 77)
9:34
FAA advises NEADS that
AA 77 is missing
9:37:46
AA 77 crashes into the
Pentagon
10:30
AA headquarters confirms
Flight 77 crash into Pentagon
8:42
Takeoff
9:24
Flight 93 receives warning
from UA about possible
cockpit intrusion
9:27
Last routine radio
communication
9:28 Likely
takeover
9:34
Herndon Command Center
advises FAA headquarters that
UA 93 is hijacked
9:36
Flight attendant notifies UA of
hijacking; UA attempts to
contact the cockpit
9:41
Transponder is turned off
9:57
Passenger revolt begins
10:03:11 Flight 93 crashes in field in
Shanksville, PA
10:07
Cleveland Center advises
NEADS of UA 93 hijacking
10:15 UA
headquarters
aware
that
Flight 93 has crashed in PA;
Washington Center advises
NEADS that Flight 93 has
crashed in PA
Dulles
Newark
Shanksville, PA
Pentagon
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 33
More than the actual events, inaccurate government accounts of those events
made it appear that the military was notified in time to respond to two of the
hijackings, raising questions about the adequacy of the response.Those accounts
had the effect of deflecting questions about the military's capacity to obtain
timely and accurate information from its own sources. In addition, they over-
stated the FAA's ability to provide the military with timely and useful informa-
tion that morning.
In public testimony before this Commission in May 2003, NORAD offi-
cials stated that at 9:16, NEADS received hijack notification of United 93 from
the FAA.
175
This statement was incorrect.There was no hijack to report at 9:16.
United 93 was proceeding normally at that time.
In this same public testimony, NORAD officials stated that at 9:24,
NEADS received notification of the hijacking of American 77.
176
This state-
ment was also incorrect.The notice NEADS received at 9:24 was that Amer-
ican 11 had not hit the World Trade Center and was heading for Washington,
D.C.
177
In their testimony and in other public accounts, NORAD officials also
stated that the Langley fighters were scrambled to respond to the notifications
about American 77,
178
United 93, or both.These statements were incorrect as
well.The fighters were scrambled because of the report that American 11 was
heading south, as is clear not just from taped conversations at NEADS but also
from taped conversations at FAA centers; contemporaneous logs compiled at
NEADS, Continental Region headquarters, and NORAD; and other records.
Yet this response to a phantom aircraft was not recounted in a single public
timeline or statement issued by the FAA or Department of Defense.The inac-
curate accounts created the impression that the Langley scramble was a logical
response to an actual hijacked aircraft.
In fact, not only was the scramble prompted by the mistaken information
about American 11, but NEADS never received notice that American 77 was
hijacked. It was notified at 9:34 that American 77 was lost.Then, minutes later,
NEADS was told that an unknown plane was 6 miles southwest of the White
House. Only then did the already scrambled airplanes start moving directly
toward Washington, D.C.
Thus the military did not have 14 minutes to respond to American 77, as
testimony to the Commission in May 2003 suggested. It had at most one or
two minutes to react to the unidentified plane approaching Washington, and
the fighters were in the wrong place to be able to help.They had been respond-
ing to a report about an aircraft that did not exist.
Nor did the military have 47 minutes to respond to United 93, as would be
implied by the account that it received notice of the flight's hijacking at 9:16.
By the time the military learned about the flight, it had crashed.
We now turn to the role of national leadership in the events that morning.
34
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 34
1.3 NATIONAL CRISIS MANAGEMENT
When American 11 struck the World Trade Center at 8:46, no one in the White
House or traveling with the President knew that it had been hijacked.While
that information circulated within the FAA, we found no evidence that the
hijacking was reported to any other agency in Washington before 8:46.
179
Most federal agencies learned about the crash in New York from CNN.
180
Within the FAA, the administrator, Jane Garvey, and her acting deputy, Monte
Belger, had not been told of a confirmed hijacking before they learned from
television that a plane had crashed.
181
Others in the agency were aware of it,
as we explained earlier in this chapter.
Inside the National Military Command Center, the deputy director of oper-
ations and his assistant began notifying senior Pentagon officials of the inci-
dent. At about 9:00, the senior NMCC operations officer reached out to the
FAA operations center for information. Although the NMCC was advised of
the hijacking of American 11, the scrambling of jets was not discussed.
182
In Sarasota, Florida, the presidential motorcade was arriving at the Emma
E. Booker Elementary School, where President Bush was to read to a class and
talk about education.White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card told us he was
standing with the President outside the classroom when Senior Advisor to the
President Karl Rove first informed them that a small, twin-engine plane had
crashed into the World Trade Center.The President's reaction was that the inci-
dent must have been caused by pilot error.
183
At 8:55, before entering the classroom, the President spoke to National
Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, who was at the White House. She recalled
first telling the President it was a twin-engine aircraft--and then a commer-
cial aircraft--that had struck the World Trade Center, adding "that's all we know
right now, Mr. President."
184
At the White House,Vice President Dick Cheney had just sat down for a
meeting when his assistant told him to turn on his television because a plane
had struck the North Tower of the World Trade Center. The Vice President was
wondering "how the hell could a plane hit the World Trade Center" when he
saw the second aircraft strike the South Tower.
185
Elsewhere in the White House, a series of 9:00 meetings was about to begin.
In the absence of information that the crash was anything other than an acci-
dent, the White House staff monitored the news as they went ahead with their
regular schedules.
186
The Agencies Confer
When they learned a second plane had struck the World Trade Center, nearly
everyone in the White House told us, they immediately knew it was not an
accident. The Secret Service initiated a number of security enhancements
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
35
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 35
around the White House complex. The officials who issued these orders did
not know that there were additional hijacked aircraft, or that one such aircraft
was en route to Washington. These measures were precautionary steps taken
because of the strikes in New York.
187
The FAA and White House Teleconferences.
The FAA, the White House,
and the Defense Department each initiated a multiagency teleconference
before 9:30. Because none of these teleconferences--at least before 10:00--
included the right officials from both the FAA and Defense Department, none
succeeded in meaningfully coordinating the military and FAA response to the
hijackings.
At about 9:20, security personnel at FAA headquarters set up a hijacking
teleconference with several agencies, including the Defense Department.The
NMCC officer who participated told us that the call was monitored only peri-
odically because the information was sporadic,it was of little value,and there were
other important tasks. The FAA manager of the teleconference also remem-
bered that the military participated only briefly before the Pentagon was hit.
Both individuals agreed that the teleconference played no role in coordinating
a response to the attacks of 9/11.Acting Deputy Administrator Belger was frus-
trated to learn later in the morning that the military had not been on the call.
188
At the White House, the video teleconference was conducted from the Sit-
uation Room by Richard Clarke, a special assistant to the president long
involved in counterterrorism. Logs indicate that it began at 9:25 and included
the CIA; the FBI; the departments of State, Justice, and Defense; the FAA; and
the White House shelter. The FAA and CIA joined at 9:40. The first topic
addressed in the White House video teleconference--at about 9:40--was the
physical security of the President, the White House, and federal agencies.
Immediately thereafter it was reported that a plane had hit the Pentagon.We
found no evidence that video teleconference participants had any prior infor-
mation that American 77 had been hijacked and was heading directly toward
Washington. Indeed, it is not clear to us that the video teleconference was fully
under way before 9:37, when the Pentagon was struck.
189
Garvey, Belger, and other senior officials from FAA headquarters partici-
pated in this video teleconference at various times.We do not know who from
Defense participated, but we know that in the first hour none of the person-
nel involved in managing the crisis did.And none of the information conveyed
in the White House video teleconference, at least in the first hour, was being
passed to the NMCC.As one witness recalled,"[It] was almost like there were
parallel decisionmaking processes going on; one was a voice conference
orchestrated by the NMCC . . . and then there was the [White House video
teleconference]. . . . [I]n my mind they were competing venues for command
and control and decisionmaking."
190
At 10:03, the conference received reports of more missing aircraft, "2 pos-
36
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 36
sibly 3 aloft," and learned of a combat air patrol over Washington. There was
discussion of the need for rules of engagement. Clarke reported that they were
asking the President for authority to shoot down aircraft. Confirmation of that
authority came at 10:25, but the commands were already being conveyed in
more direct contacts with the Pentagon.
191
The Pentagon Teleconferences.
Inside the National Military Command
Center, the deputy director for operations immediately thought the second
strike was a terrorist attack.The job of the NMCC in such an emergency is to
gather the relevant parties and establish the chain of command between the
National Command Authority--the president and the secretary of defense--
and those who need to carry out their orders.
192
On the morning of September 11, Secretary Rumsfeld was having break-
fast at the Pentagon with a group of members of Congress. He then returned
to his office for his daily intelligence briefing.The Secretary was informed of
the second strike in New York during the briefing; he resumed the briefing
while awaiting more information. After the Pentagon was struck, Secretary
Rumsfeld went to the parking lot to assist with rescue efforts.
193
Inside the NMCC, the deputy director for operations called for an all-
purpose "significant event" conference. It began at 9:29, with a brief recap: two
aircraft had struck the World Trade Center, there was a confirmed hijacking of
American 11, and Otis fighters had been scrambled.The FAA was asked to pro-
vide an update, but the line was silent because the FAA had not been added to
the call.A minute later, the deputy director stated that it had just been confirmed
that American 11 was still airborne and heading toward D.C. He directed the
transition to an air threat conference call. NORAD confirmed that American
11 was airborne and heading toward Washington, relaying the erroneous FAA
information already mentioned.The call then ended, at about 9:34.
194
It resumed at 9:37 as an air threat conference call,
*
which lasted more than
eight hours.The President,Vice President, Secretary of Defense,Vice Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen
Hadley all participated in this teleconference at various times, as did military
personnel from the White House underground shelter and the President's mil-
itary aide on Air Force One.
195
Operators worked feverishly to include the FAA, but they had equipment
problems and difficulty finding secure phone numbers. NORAD asked three
times before 10:03 to confirm the presence of the FAA in the teleconference.
The FAA representative who finally joined the call at 10:17 had no familiar-
ity with or responsibility for hijackings, no access to decisionmakers, and none
of the information available to senior FAA officials.
196
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
37
* All times given for this conference call are estimates, which we and the Department of Defense believe to
be accurate within a ± 3 minute margin of error.
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 37
We found no evidence that, at this critical time, NORAD's top command-
ers, in Florida or Cheyenne Mountain, coordinated with their counterparts at
FAA headquarters to improve awareness and organize a common response.
Lower-level officials improvised--for example, the FAA's Boston Center
bypassed the chain of command and directly contacted NEADS after the first
hijacking. But the highest-level Defense Department officials relied on the
NMCC's air threat conference, in which the FAA did not participate for the
first 48 minutes.
197
At 9:39, the NMCC's deputy director for operations, a military officer,
opened the call from the Pentagon, which had just been hit. He began:"An air
attack against North America may be in progress. NORAD, what's the situa-
tion?" NORAD said it had conflicting reports. Its latest information was "of a
possible hijacked aircraft taking off out of JFK en route to Washington D.C."
The NMCC reported a crash into the mall side of the Pentagon and requested
that the Secretary of Defense be added to the conference.
198
At 9:44, NORAD briefed the conference on the possible hijacking of Delta
1989.Two minutes later, staff reported that they were still trying to locate Sec-
retary Rumsfeld and Vice Chairman Myers. The Vice Chairman joined the
conference shortly before 10:00; the Secretary, shortly before 10:30.The Chair-
man was out of the country.
199
At 9:48, a representative from the White House shelter asked if there were
any indications of another hijacked aircraft.The deputy director for operations
mentioned the Delta flight and concluded that "that would be the fourth pos-
sible hijack." At 9:49, the commander of NORAD directed all air sovereignty
aircraft to battle stations, fully armed.
200
At 9:59, an Air Force lieutenant colonel working in the White House Mil-
itary Office joined the conference and stated he had just talked to Deputy
National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley.The White House requested (1) the
implementation of continuity of government measures, (2) fighter escorts for
Air Force One, and (3) a fighter combat air patrol over Washington, D.C.
201
By 10:03, when United 93 crashed in Pennsylvania, there had been no
mention of its hijacking and the FAA had not yet been added to the tele-
conference.
202
The President and the Vice President
The President was seated in a classroom when, at 9:05,Andrew Card whispered
to him: "A second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack." The
President told us his instinct was to project calm, not to have the country see
an excited reaction at a moment of crisis. The press was standing behind the
children; he saw their phones and pagers start to ring. The President felt he
should project strength and calm until he could better understand what was
happening.
203
The President remained in the classroom for another five to seven minutes,
38
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 38
while the children continued reading. He then returned to a holding room
shortly before 9:15, where he was briefed by staff and saw television coverage.
He next spoke to Vice President Cheney, Dr. Rice, New York Governor George
Pataki, and FBI Director Robert Mueller. He decided to make a brief state-
ment from the school before leaving for the airport.The Secret Service told us
they were anxious to move the President to a safer location, but did not think
it imperative for him to run out the door.
204
Between 9:15 and 9:30, the staff was busy arranging a return to Washington,
while the President consulted his senior advisers about his remarks. No one in
the traveling party had any information during this time that other aircraft were
hijacked or missing. Staff was in contact with the White House Situation Room,
but as far as we could determine, no one with the President was in contact with
the Pentagon.The focus was on the President's statement to the nation.The only
decision made during this time was to return to Washington.
205
The President's motorcade departed at 9:35, and arrived at the airport
between 9:42 and 9:45. During the ride the President learned about the attack
on the Pentagon. He boarded the aircraft, asked the Secret Service about the
safety of his family, and called the Vice President. According to notes of the
call, at about 9:45 the President told the Vice President:"Sounds like we have
a minor war going on here, I heard about the Pentagon.We're at war . . . some-
body's going to pay."
206
About this time, Card, the lead Secret Service agent, the President's military
aide, and the pilot were conferring on a possible destination for Air Force One.
The Secret Service agent felt strongly that the situation in Washington was too
unstable for the President to return there, and Card agreed. The President
strongly wanted to return to Washington and only grudgingly agreed to go
elsewhere.The issue was still undecided when the President conferred with the
Vice President at about the time Air Force One was taking off. The Vice Pres-
ident recalled urging the President not to return to Washington.Air Force One
departed at about 9:54 without any fixed destination.The objective was to get
up in the air--as fast and as high as possible--and then decide where to go.
207
At 9:33, the tower supervisor at Reagan National Airport picked up a
hotline to the Secret Service and told the Service's operations center that
"an aircraft [is] coming at you and not talking with us." This was the first
specific report to the Secret Service of a direct threat to the White House.
No move was made to evacuate the Vice President at this time. As the offi-
cer who took the call explained, "[I was] about to push the alert button
when the tower advised that the aircraft was turning south and approach-
ing Reagan National Airport."
208
American 77 began turning south, away from the White House, at 9:34. It
continued heading south for roughly a minute, before turning west and begin-
ning to circle back.This news prompted the Secret Service to order the imme-
diate evacuation of the Vice President just before 9:36. Agents propelled him
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
39
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 39
out of his chair and told him he had to get to the bunker.The Vice President
entered the underground tunnel leading to the shelter at 9:37.
209
Once inside,Vice President Cheney and the agents paused in an area of the
tunnel that had a secure phone, a bench, and television. The Vice President
asked to speak to the President, but it took time for the call to be connected.
He learned in the tunnel that the Pentagon had been hit, and he saw televi-
sion coverage of smoke coming from the building.
210
The Secret Service logged Mrs. Cheney's arrival at the White House at 9:52,
and she joined her husband in the tunnel. According to contemporaneous
notes, at 9:55 the Vice President was still on the phone with the President advis-
ing that three planes were missing and one had hit the Pentagon. We believe
this is the same call in which the Vice President urged the President not to
return to Washington. After the call ended, Mrs. Cheney and the Vice Presi-
dent moved from the tunnel to the shelter conference room.
211
United 93 and the Shootdown Order
On the morning of 9/11, the President and Vice President stayed in contact
not by an open line of communication but through a series of calls.The Pres-
ident told us he was frustrated with the poor communications that morning.
He could not reach key officials, including Secretary Rumsfeld, for a period of
time.The line to the White House shelter conference room--and the Vice Pres-
ident--kept cutting off.
212
The Vice President remembered placing a call to the President just after
entering the shelter conference room. There is conflicting evidence about
when the Vice President arrived in the shelter conference room.We have con-
cluded, from the available evidence, that the Vice President arrived in the room
shortly before 10:00, perhaps at 9:58.The Vice President recalled being told, just
after his arrival, that the Air Force was trying to establish a combat air patrol
over Washington.
213
The Vice President stated that he called the President to discuss the rules of
engagement for the CAP. He recalled feeling that it did no good to establish
the CAP unless the pilots had instructions on whether they were authorized
to shoot if the plane would not divert. He said the President signed off on that
concept. The President said he remembered such a conversation, and that it
reminded him of when he had been an interceptor pilot.The President empha-
sized to us that he had authorized the shootdown of hijacked aircraft.
214
The Vice President's military aide told us he believed the Vice President
spoke to the President just after entering the conference room, but he did not
hear what they said. Rice, who entered the room shortly after the Vice Presi-
dent and sat next to him, remembered hearing him inform the President,"Sir,
the CAPs are up. Sir, they're going to want to know what to do." Then she
recalled hearing him say, "Yes sir." She believed this conversation occurred a
few minutes, perhaps five, after they entered the conference room.
215
We believe this call would have taken place sometime before 10:10 to 10:15.
40
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 40
Among the sources that reflect other important events of that morning, there
is no documentary evidence for this call, but the relevant sources are incom-
plete. Others nearby who were taking notes, such as the Vice President's chief
of staff, Scooter Libby, who sat next to him, and Mrs. Cheney, did not note a
call between the President and Vice President immediately after the Vice Pres-
ident entered the conference room.
216
At 10:02, the communicators in the shelter began receiving reports from
the Secret Service of an inbound aircraft--presumably hijacked--heading
toward Washington.That aircraft was United 93.The Secret Service was get-
ting this information directly from the FAA.The FAA may have been track-
ing the progress of United 93 on a display that showed its projected path to
Washington, not its actual radar return.Thus, the Secret Service was relying on
projections and was not aware the plane was already down in Pennsylvania.
217
At some time between 10:10 and 10:15, a military aide told the Vice Pres-
ident and others that the aircraft was 80 miles out. Vice President Cheney was
asked for authority to engage the aircraft.
218
His reaction was described by
Scooter Libby as quick and decisive, "in about the time it takes a batter to
decide to swing." The Vice President authorized fighter aircraft to engage the
inbound plane. He told us he based this authorization on his earlier conversa-
tion with the President.The military aide returned a few minutes later, proba-
bly between 10:12 and 10:18, and said the aircraft was 60 miles out. He again
asked for authorization to engage.The Vice President again said yes.
219
At the conference room table was White House Deputy Chief of Staff
Joshua Bolten. Bolten watched the exchanges and, after what he called "a quiet
moment," suggested that the Vice President get in touch with the President and
confirm the engage order. Bolten told us he wanted to make sure the Presi-
dent was told that the Vice President had executed the order. He said he had
not heard any prior discussion on the subject with the President.
220
The Vice President was logged calling the President at 10:18 for a two-
minute conversation that obtained the confirmation. On Air Force One, the
President's press secretary was taking notes; Ari Fleischer recorded that at
10:20, the President told him that he had authorized a shootdown of aircraft
if necessary.
221
Minutes went by and word arrived of an aircraft down in Pennsylvania.
Those in the shelter wondered if the aircraft had been shot down pursuant to
this authorization.
222
At approximately 10:30, the shelter started receiving reports of another
hijacked plane, this time only 5 to 10 miles out. Believing they had only a
minute or two, the Vice President again communicated the authorization to
"engage or "take out" the aircraft. At 10:33, Hadley told the air threat confer-
ence call: "I need to get word to Dick Myers that our reports are there's an
inbound aircraft flying low 5 miles out.The Vice President's guidance was we
need to take them out."
223
Once again, there was no immediate information about the fate of the
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
41
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 41
inbound aircraft. In the apt description of one witness,"It drops below the radar
screen and it's just continually hovering in your imagination; you don't know
where it is or what happens to it." Eventually, the shelter received word that
the alleged hijacker 5 miles away had been a medevac helicopter.
224
Transmission of the Authorization from the White House
to the Pilots
The NMCC learned of United 93's hijacking at about 10:03.At this time the
FAA had no contact with the military at the level of national command.The
NMCC learned about United 93 from the White House. It, in turn, was
informed by the Secret Service's contacts with the FAA.
225
NORAD had no information either. At 10:07, its representative on the air
threat conference call stated that NORAD had "no indication of a hijack head-
ing to DC at this time."
226
Repeatedly between 10:14 and 10:19, a lieutenant colonel at the White
House relayed to the NMCC that the Vice President had confirmed fighters
were cleared to engage inbound aircraft if they could verify that the aircraft
was hijacked.
227
The commander of NORAD, General Ralph Eberhart, was en route to the
NORAD operations center in Cheyenne Mountain, Colorado, when the
shootdown order was communicated on the air threat conference call. He told
us that by the time he arrived, the order had already been passed down
NORAD's chain of command.
228
It is not clear how the shootdown order was communicated within
NORAD. But we know that at 10:31, General Larry Arnold instructed his staff
to broadcast the following over a NORAD instant messaging system: "10:31
Vice president has cleared to us to intercept tracks of interest and shoot them
down if they do not respond per [General Arnold]."
229
In upstate New York, NEADS personnel first learned of the shootdown
order from this message:
Floor Leadership:
You need to read this. . . .The Region Commander
has declared that we can shoot down aircraft that do not respond to
our direction. Copy that?
Controllers:
Copy that, sir.
Floor Leadership:
So if you're trying to divert somebody and he won't
divert--
Controllers:
DO [Director of Operations] is saying no.
Floor Leadership:
No? It came over the chat. . . .You got a conflict on
that direction?
Controllers:
Right now no, but--
Floor Leadership:
Okay? Okay, you read that from the Vice President,
right? Vice President has cleared. Vice President has cleared us to
42
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 42
intercept traffic and shoot them down if they do not respond per
[General Arnold].
230
In interviews with us, NEADS personnel expressed considerable confusion
over the nature and effect of the order.
The NEADS commander told us he did not pass along the order because
he was unaware of its ramifications. Both the mission commander and the sen-
ior weapons director indicated they did not pass the order to the fighters cir-
cling Washington and New York because they were unsure how the pilots
would, or should, proceed with this guidance. In short, while leaders in
Washington believed that the fighters above them had been instructed to "take
out" hostile aircraft, the only orders actually conveyed to the pilots were to "ID
type and tail."
231
In most cases, the chain of command authorizing the use of force runs from
the president to the secretary of defense and from the secretary to the combat-
ant commander.The President apparently spoke to Secretary Rumsfeld for the
first time that morning shortly after 10:00. No one can recall the content of this
conversation, but it was a brief call in which the subject of shootdown author-
ity was not discussed.
232
At 10:39, the Vice President updated the Secretary on the air threat
conference:
Vice President:
There's been at least three instances here where we've
had reports of aircraft approaching Washington--a couple were con-
firmed hijack. And, pursuant to the President's instructions I gave
authorization for them to be taken out. Hello?
SecDef:
Yes, I understand.Who did you give that direction to?
Vice President:
It was passed from here through the [operations] cen-
ter at the White House, from the [shelter].
SecDef:
OK, let me ask the question here. Has that directive been trans-
mitted to the aircraft?
Vice President:
Yes, it has.
SecDef:
So we've got a couple of aircraft up there that have those
instructions at this present time?
Vice President:
That is correct. And it's my understanding they've
already taken a couple of aircraft out.
SecDef:
We can't confirm that.We're told that one aircraft is down but
we do not have a pilot report that did it.
233
As this exchange shows, Secretary Rumsfeld was not in the NMCC when
the shootdown order was first conveyed. He went from the parking lot to his
office (where he spoke to the President), then to the Executive Support Cen-
ter, where he participated in the White House video teleconference. He moved
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
43
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 43
to the NMCC shortly before 10:30, in order to join Vice Chairman Myers.
Secretary Rumsfeld told us he was just gaining situational awareness when he
spoke with the Vice President at 10:39. His primary concern was ensuring that
the pilots had a clear understanding of their rules of engagement.
234
The Vice President was mistaken in his belief that shootdown authorization
had been passed to the pilots flying at NORAD's direction. By 10:45 there was,
however, another set of fighters circling Washington that had entirely different
rules of engagement.These fighters, part of the 113th Wing of the District of
Columbia Air National Guard, launched out of Andrews Air Force Base in
Maryland in response to information passed to them by the Secret Service.The
first of the Andrews fighters was airborne at 10:38.
235
General David Wherley--the commander of the 113th Wing--reached out
to the Secret Service after hearing secondhand reports that it wanted fighters
airborne. A Secret Service agent had a phone in each ear, one connected to
Wherley and the other to a fellow agent at the White House, relaying instruc-
tions that the White House agent said he was getting from the Vice President.
The guidance for Wherley was to send up the aircraft, with orders to protect
the White House and take out any aircraft that threatened the Capitol. Gen-
eral Wherley translated this in military terms to flying "weapons free"--that is,
the decision to shoot rests in the cockpit, or in this case in the cockpit of the
lead pilot. He passed these instructions to the pilots that launched at 10:42 and
afterward.
236
Thus, while the fighter pilots under NORAD direction who had scram-
bled out of Langley never received any type of engagement order, the Andrews
pilots were operating weapons free--a permissive rule of engagement. The
President and the Vice President indicated to us they had not been aware that
fighters had been scrambled out of Andrews, at the request of the Secret Ser-
vice and outside the military chain of command.
237
There is no evidence that
NORAD headquarters or military officials in the NMCC knew--during the
morning of September 11--that the Andrews planes were airborne and oper-
ating under different rules of engagement.
What If ?
NORAD officials have maintained consistently that had the passengers not
caused United 93 to crash, the military would have prevented it from reach-
ing Washington, D.C.That conclusion is based on a version of events that we
now know is incorrect.The Langley fighters were not scrambled in response
to United 93; NORAD did not have 47 minutes to intercept the flight;
NORAD did not even know the plane was hijacked until after it had crashed.
It is appropriate, therefore, to reconsider whether United 93 would have been
intercepted.
Had it not crashed in Pennsylvania at 10:03, we estimate that United 93
44
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 44
could not have reached Washington any earlier than 10:13, and probably would
have arrived before 10:23.There was only one set of fighters circling Washing-
ton during that time frame--the Langley F-16s.They were armed and under
NORAD's control.After NEADS learned of the hijacking at 10:07, NORAD
would have had from 6 to 16 minutes to locate the flight, receive authoriza-
tion to shoot it down, and communicate the order to the pilots, who (in the
same span) would have had to authenticate the order, intercept the flight, and
execute the order.
238
At that point in time, the Langley pilots did not know the threat they were
facing, did not know where United 93 was located, and did not have shoot-
down authorization.
First, the Langley pilots were never briefed about the reason they were
scrambled.As the lead pilot explained,"I reverted to the Russian threat. . . . I'm
thinking cruise missile threat from the sea.You know you look down and see
the Pentagon burning and I thought the bastards snuck one by us. . . . [Y]ou
couldn't see any airplanes, and no one told us anything."The pilots knew their
mission was to divert aircraft, but did not know that the threat came from
hijacked airliners.
239
Second, NEADS did not have accurate information on the location of
United 93. Presumably FAA would have provided such information, but we
do not know how long that would have taken, nor how long it would have
taken NEADS to locate the target.
Third, NEADS needed orders to pass to the pilots.At 10:10, the pilots over
Washington were emphatically told,"negative clearance to shoot." Shootdown
authority was first communicated to NEADS at 10:31. It is possible that
NORAD commanders would have ordered a shootdown in the absence of the
authorization communicated by the Vice President, but given the gravity of the
decision to shoot down a commercial airliner, and NORAD's caution that a
mistake not be made, we view this possibility as unlikely.
240
NORAD officials have maintained that they would have intercepted and
shot down United 93.We are not so sure.We are sure that the nation owes a
debt to the passengers of United 93.Their actions saved the lives of countless
others, and may have saved either the Capitol or the White House from
destruction.
The details of what happened on the morning of September 11 are com-
plex, but they play out a simple theme. NORAD and the FAA were unpre-
pared for the type of attacks launched against the United States on September
11, 2001.They struggled, under difficult circumstances, to improvise a home-
land defense against an unprecedented challenge they had never before
encountered and had never trained to meet.
At 10:02 that morning, an assistant to the mission crew commander at
NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector in Rome, New York, was working
"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"
45
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 45
with his colleagues on the floor of the command center. In a brief moment of
reflection, he was recorded remarking that "This is a new type of war."
241
He was, and is, right. But the conflict did not begin on 9/11. It had been
publicly declared years earlier, most notably in a declaration faxed early in 1998
to an Arabic-language newspaper in London. Few Americans had noticed it.
The fax had been sent from thousands of miles away by the followers of a Saudi
exile gathered in one of the most remote and impoverished countries on earth.
46
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 46
2
THE FOUNDATION OF
THE NEW TERRORISM
47
2.1 A DECLARATION OF WAR
In February 1998, the 40-year-old Saudi exile Usama Bin Ladin and a fugitive
Egyptian physician,Ayman al Zawahiri, arranged from their Afghan headquar-
ters for an Arabic newspaper in London to publish what they termed a fatwa
issued in the name of a "World Islamic Front." A fatwa is normally an inter-
pretation of Islamic law by a respected Islamic authority, but neither Bin Ladin,
Zawahiri, nor the three others who signed this statement were scholars of
Islamic law. Claiming that America had declared war against God and his mes-
senger, they called for the murder of any American, anywhere on earth, as the
"individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it
is possible to do it."
1
Three months later, when interviewed in Afghanistan by ABC-TV, Bin
Ladin enlarged on these themes.
2
He claimed it was more important for Mus-
lims to kill Americans than to kill other infidels."It is far better for anyone to
kill a single American soldier than to squander his efforts on other activities,"
he said.Asked whether he approved of terrorism and of attacks on civilians, he
replied: "We believe that the worst thieves in the world today and the worst
terrorists are the Americans. Nothing could stop you except perhaps retalia-
tion in kind. We do not have to differentiate between military or civilian. As
far as we are concerned, they are all targets."
Note: Islamic names often do not follow the Western practice of the consistent use of surnames. Given the variety of names we
mention, we chose to refer to individuals by the last word in the names by which they are known: Nawaf al Hazmi as Hazmi,
for instance, omitting the article "al" that would be part of their name in their own societies.We generally make an exception for
the more familiar English usage of "Bin" as part of a last name, as in Bin Ladin. Further, there is no universally accepted way
to transliterate Arabic words and names into English.We have relied on a mix of common sense, the sound of the name in Ara-
bic, and common usage in source materials, the press, or government documents.When we quote from a source document, we use
its transliteration, e.g.,"al Qida" instead of al Qaeda.
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 47
Though novel for its open endorsement of indiscriminate killing, Bin
Ladin's 1998 declaration was only the latest in the long series of his public and
private calls since 1992 that singled out the United States for attack.
In August 1996, Bin Ladin had issued his own self-styled fatwa calling on
Muslims to drive American soldiers out of Saudi Arabia.The long, disjointed
document condemned the Saudi monarchy for allowing the presence of an
army of infidels in a land with the sites most sacred to Islam, and celebrated
recent suicide bombings of American military facilities in the Kingdom. It
praised the 1983 suicide bombing in Beirut that killed 241 U.S. Marines, the
1992 bombing in Aden, and especially the 1993 firefight in Somalia after which
the United States "left the area carrying disappointment, humiliation, defeat
and your dead with you."
3
Bin Ladin said in his ABC interview that he and his followers had been
preparing in Somalia for another long struggle, like that against the Soviets in
Afghanistan, but "the United States rushed out of Somalia in shame and dis-
grace." Citing the Soviet army's withdrawal from Afghanistan as proof that a
ragged army of dedicated Muslims could overcome a superpower, he told the
interviewer: "We are certain that we shall--with the grace of Allah--prevail
over the Americans." He went on to warn that "If the present injustice contin-
ues . . . , it will inevitably move the battle to American soil."
4
Plans to attack the United States were developed with unwavering single-
mindedness throughout the 1990s. Bin Ladin saw himself as called "to follow
in the footsteps of the Messenger and to communicate his message to all
nations,"
5
and to serve as the rallying point and organizer of a new kind of war
to destroy America and bring the world to Islam.
2.2 BIN LADIN'S APPEAL IN THE ISLAMIC WORLD
It is the story of eccentric and violent ideas sprouting in the fertile ground
of political and social turmoil. It is the story of an organization poised to seize
its historical moment. How did Bin Ladin--with his call for the indiscrimi-
nate killing of Americans--win thousands of followers and some degree of
approval from millions more?
The history, culture, and body of beliefs from which Bin Ladin has shaped
and spread his message are largely unknown to many Americans. Seizing on
symbols of Islam's past greatness, he promises to restore pride to people who
consider themselves the victims of successive foreign masters. He uses cultural
and religious allusions to the holy Qur'an and some of its interpreters. He
appeals to people disoriented by cyclonic change as they confront modernity
and globalization. His rhetoric selectively draws from multiple sources--Islam,
history, and the region's political and economic malaise. He also stresses griev-
ances against the United States widely shared in the Muslim world. He
48
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 48
inveighed against the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, the home of
Islam's holiest sites. He spoke of the suffering of the Iraqi people as a result of
sanctions imposed after the Gulf War, and he protested U.S. support of Israel.
Islam
Islam (a word that literally means "surrender to the will of God") arose in Ara-
bia with what Muslims believe are a series of revelations to the Prophet
Mohammed from the one and only God, the God of Abraham and of Jesus.
These revelations, conveyed by the angel Gabriel, are recorded in the Qur'an.
Muslims believe that these revelations, given to the greatest and last of a chain
of prophets stretching from Abraham through Jesus, complete God's message
to humanity. The Hadith, which recount Mohammed's sayings and deeds as
recorded by his contemporaries, are another fundamental source. A third key
element is the Sharia, the code of law derived from the Qur'an and the Hadith.
Islam is divided into two main branches, Sunni and Shia. Soon after the
THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW TERRORISM
49
Usama Bin Ladin at a news conference in Afghanistan in 1998
©Reuters 2004
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 49
Prophet's death, the question of choosing a new leader, or caliph, for the Mus-
lim community, or Ummah, arose. Initially, his successors could be drawn from
the Prophet's contemporaries, but with time, this was no longer possible.Those
who became the Shia held that any leader of the Ummah must be a direct
descendant of the Prophet; those who became the Sunni argued that lineal
descent was not required if the candidate met other standards of faith and
knowledge.After bloody struggles, the Sunni became (and remain) the major-
ity sect. (The Shia are dominant in Iran.) The Caliphate--the institutionalized
leadership of the Ummah--thus was a Sunni institution that continued until
1924, first under Arab and eventually under Ottoman Turkish control.
Many Muslims look back at the century after the revelations to the Prophet
Mohammed as a golden age. Its memory is strongest among the Arabs.What
happened then--the spread of Islam from the Arabian Peninsula throughout
the Middle East, North Africa, and even into Europe within less than a cen-
tury--seemed, and seems, miraculous.
6
Nostalgia for Islam's past glory remains
a powerful force.
Islam is both a faith and a code of conduct for all aspects of life. For many
Muslims, a good government would be one guided by the moral principles of
their faith.This does not necessarily translate into a desire for clerical rule and
the abolition of a secular state. It does mean that some Muslims tend to be
uncomfortable with distinctions between religion and state, though Muslim
rulers throughout history have readily separated the two.
To extremists, however, such divisions, as well as the existence of parliaments
and legislation, only prove these rulers to be false Muslims usurping God's
authority over all aspects of life. Periodically, the Islamic world has seen surges
of what, for want of a better term, is often labeled "fundamentalism."
7
Denouncing waywardness among the faithful, some clerics have appealed for
a return to observance of the literal teachings of the Qur'an and Hadith. One
scholar from the fourteenth century from whom Bin Ladin selectively quotes,
Ibn Taimiyyah, condemned both corrupt rulers and the clerics who failed to
criticize them. He urged Muslims to read the Qur'an and the Hadith for them-
selves, not to depend solely on learned interpreters like himself but to hold one
another to account for the quality of their observance.
8
The extreme Islamist version of history blames the decline from Islam's
golden age on the rulers and people who turned away from the true path of
their religion, thereby leaving Islam vulnerable to encroaching foreign powers
eager to steal their land, wealth, and even their souls.
Bin Ladin's Worldview
Despite his claims to universal leadership, Bin Ladin offers an extreme view of
Islamic history designed to appeal mainly to Arabs and Sunnis. He draws on
fundamentalists who blame the eventual destruction of the Caliphate on lead-
ers who abandoned the pure path of religious devotion.
9
He repeatedly calls
on his followers to embrace martyrdom since "the walls of oppression and
50
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 50
humiliation cannot be demolished except in a rain of bullets."
10
For those
yearning for a lost sense of order in an older, more tranquil world, he offers his
"Caliphate" as an imagined alternative to today's uncertainty. For others, he
offers simplistic conspiracies to explain their world.
Bin Ladin also relies heavily on the Egyptian writer Sayyid Qutb. A mem-
ber of the Muslim Brotherhood
11
executed in 1966 on charges of attempting
to overthrow the government, Qutb mixed Islamic scholarship with a very
superficial acquaintance with Western history and thought. Sent by the Egypt-
ian government to study in the United States in the late 1940s, Qutb returned
with an enormous loathing of Western society and history. He dismissed West-
ern achievements as entirely material, arguing that Western society possesses
"nothing that will satisfy its own conscience and justify its existence."
12
Three basic themes emerge from Qutb's writings. First, he claimed that the
world was beset with barbarism, licentiousness, and unbelief (a condition he
called jahiliyya, the religious term for the period of ignorance prior to the rev-
elations given to the Prophet Mohammed). Qutb argued that humans can
choose only between Islam and jahiliyya. Second, he warned that more peo-
ple, including Muslims, were attracted to jahiliyya and its material comforts
than to his view of Islam; jahiliyya could therefore triumph over Islam.Third,
no middle ground exists in what Qutb conceived as a struggle between God
and Satan. All Muslims--as he defined them--therefore must take up arms in
this fight.Any Muslim who rejects his ideas is just one more nonbeliever wor-
thy of destruction.
13
Bin Ladin shares Qutb's stark view, permitting him and his followers to
rationalize even unprovoked mass murder as righteous defense of an embattled
faith. Many Americans have wondered,"Why do `they' hate us?" Some also ask,
"What can we do to stop these attacks?"
Bin Ladin and al Qaeda have given answers to both these questions.To the
first, they say that America had attacked Islam; America is responsible for all
conflicts involving Muslims. Thus Americans are blamed when Israelis fight
with Palestinians, when Russians fight with Chechens, when Indians fight with
Kashmiri Muslims, and when the Philippine government fights ethnic Mus-
lims in its southern islands.America is also held responsible for the governments
of Muslim countries, derided by al Qaeda as "your agents." Bin Ladin has stated
flatly,"Our fight against these governments is not separate from our fight against
you."
14
These charges found a ready audience among millions of Arabs and
Muslims angry at the United States because of issues ranging from Iraq to Pales-
tine to America's support for their countries' repressive rulers.
Bin Ladin's grievance with the United States may have started in reaction
to specific U.S. policies but it quickly became far deeper.To the second ques-
tion, what America could do, al Qaeda's answer was that America should aban-
don the Middle East, convert to Islam, and end the immorality and godlessness
of its society and culture:"It is saddening to tell you that you are the worst civ-
ilization witnessed by the history of mankind." If the United States did not
THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW TERRORISM
51
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 51
comply, it would be at war with the Islamic nation, a nation that al Qaeda's
leaders said "desires death more than you desire life."
15
History and Political Context
Few fundamentalist movements in the Islamic world gained lasting political
power. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, fundamentalists helped artic-
ulate anticolonial grievances but played little role in the overwhelmingly sec-
ular struggles for independence after World War I.Western-educated lawyers,
soldiers, and officials led most independence movements, and clerical influence
and traditional culture were seen as obstacles to national progress.
After gaining independence from Western powers following World War II,
the Arab Middle East followed an arc from initial pride and optimism to today's
mix of indifference, cynicism, and despair. In several countries, a dynastic state
already existed or was quickly established under a paramount tribal family.
Monarchies in countries such as Saudi Arabia, Morocco, and Jordan still sur-
vive today.Those in Egypt, Libya, Iraq, and Yemen were eventually overthrown
by secular nationalist revolutionaries.
The secular regimes promised a glowing future, often tied to sweeping ide-
ologies (such as those promoted by Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser's
Arab Socialism or the Ba'ath Party of Syria and Iraq) that called for a single,
secular Arab state. However, what emerged were almost invariably autocratic
regimes that were usually unwilling to tolerate any opposition--even in coun-
tries, such as Egypt, that had a parliamentary tradition. Over time, their poli-
cies--repression, rewards, emigration, and the displacement of popular anger
onto scapegoats (generally foreign)--were shaped by the desire to cling to
power.
The bankruptcy of secular, autocratic nationalism was evident across the
Muslim world by the late 1970s.At the same time, these regimes had closed off
nearly all paths for peaceful opposition, forcing their critics to choose silence,
exile, or violent opposition. Iran's 1979 revolution swept a Shia theocracy into
power. Its success encouraged Sunni fundamentalists elsewhere.
In the 1980s, awash in sudden oil wealth, Saudi Arabia competed with Shia
Iran to promote its Sunni fundamentalist interpretation of Islam,Wahhabism.
The Saudi government, always conscious of its duties as the custodian of Islam's
holiest places, joined with wealthy Arabs from the Kingdom and other states
bordering the Persian Gulf in donating money to build mosques and religious
schools that could preach and teach their interpretation of Islamic doctrine.
In this competition for legitimacy, secular regimes had no alternative to
offer. Instead, in a number of cases their rulers sought to buy off local Islamist
movements by ceding control of many social and educational issues. Embold-
ened rather than satisfied, the Islamists continued to push for power--a trend
especially clear in Egypt. Confronted with a violent Islamist movement that
killed President Anwar Sadat in 1981, the Egyptian government combined
52
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 52
harsh repression of Islamic militants with harassment of moderate Islamic schol-
ars and authors, driving many into exile. In Pakistan, a military regime sought
to justify its seizure of power by a pious public stance and an embrace of
unprecedented Islamist influence on education and society.
These experiments in political Islam faltered during the 1990s: the Iranian
revolution lost momentum, prestige, and public support, and Pakistan's rulers
found that most of its population had little enthusiasm for fundamentalist Islam.
Islamist revival movements gained followers across the Muslim world, but failed
to secure political power except in Iran and Sudan. In Algeria, where in 1991
Islamists seemed almost certain to win power through the ballot box, the mili-
tary preempted their victory, triggering a brutal civil war that continues today.
Opponents of today's rulers have few, if any, ways to participate in the existing
political system. They are thus a ready audience for calls to Muslims to purify
their society, reject unwelcome modernization, and adhere strictly to the Sharia.
Social and Economic Malaise
In the 1970s and early 1980s, an unprecedented flood of wealth led the then
largely unmodernized oil states to attempt to shortcut decades of development.
They funded huge infrastructure projects, vastly expanded education, and cre-
ated subsidized social welfare programs. These programs established a wide-
spread feeling of entitlement without a corresponding sense of social
obligations. By the late 1980s, diminishing oil revenues, the economic drain
from many unprofitable development projects, and population growth made
these entitlement programs unsustainable.The resulting cutbacks created enor-
mous resentment among recipients who had come to see government largesse
as their right.This resentment was further stoked by public understanding of
how much oil income had gone straight into the pockets of the rulers, their
friends, and their helpers.
Unlike the oil states (or Afghanistan, where real economic development has
barely begun), the other Arab nations and Pakistan once had seemed headed
toward balanced modernization. The established commercial, financial, and
industrial sectors in these states, supported by an entrepreneurial spirit and
widespread understanding of free enterprise, augured well. But unprofitable
heavy industry, state monopolies, and opaque bureaucracies slowly stifled
growth. More importantly, these state-centered regimes placed their highest
priority on preserving the elite's grip on national wealth. Unwilling to foster
dynamic economies that could create jobs attractive to educated young men,
the countries became economically stagnant and reliant on the safety valve of
worker emigration either to the Arab oil states or to the West. Furthermore,
the repression and isolation of women in many Muslim countries have not only
seriously limited individual opportunity but also crippled overall economic
productivity.
16
By the 1990s, high birthrates and declining rates of infant mortality had
THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW TERRORISM
53
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 53
produced a common problem throughout the Muslim world: a large, steadily
increasing population of young men without any reasonable expectation of
suitable or steady employment--a sure prescription for social turbulence. Many
of these young men, such as the enormous number trained only in religious
schools, lacked the skills needed by their societies. Far more acquired valuable
skills but lived in stagnant economies that could not generate satisfying jobs.
Millions, pursuing secular as well as religious studies, were products of edu-
cational systems that generally devoted little if any attention to the rest of the
world's thought, history, and culture.The secular education reflected a strong
cultural preference for technical fields over the humanities and social sciences.
Many of these young men, even if able to study abroad, lacked the perspective
and skills needed to understand a different culture.
Frustrated in their search for a decent living, unable to benefit from an edu-
cation often obtained at the cost of great family sacrifice, and blocked from
starting families of their own, some of these young men were easy targets for
radicalization.
Bin Ladin's Historical Opportunity
Most Muslims prefer a peaceful and inclusive vision of their faith, not the
violent sectarianism of Bin Ladin.Among Arabs, Bin Ladin's followers are com-
monly nicknamed takfiri, or "those who define other Muslims as unbelievers,"
because of their readiness to demonize and murder those with whom they dis-
agree. Beyond the theology lies the simple human fact that most Muslims, like
most other human beings, are repelled by mass murder and barbarism what-
ever their justification.
"All Americans must recognize that the face of terror is not the true face of
Islam," President Bush observed. "Islam is a faith that brings comfort to a bil-
lion people around the world. It's a faith that has made brothers and sisters of
every race. It's a faith based upon love, not hate."
17
Yet as political, social, and
economic problems created flammable societies, Bin Ladin used Islam's most
extreme, fundamentalist traditions as his match.All these elements--including
religion--combined in an explosive compound.
Other extremists had, and have, followings of their own. But in appealing
to societies full of discontent, Bin Ladin remained credible as other leaders and
symbols faded. He could stand as a symbol of resistance--above all, resistance
to the West and to America. He could present himself and his allies as victori-
ous warriors in the one great successful experience for Islamic militancy in the
1980s: the Afghan jihad against the Soviet occupation.
By 1998, Bin Ladin had a distinctive appeal, as he focused on attacking
America. He argued that other extremists, who aimed at local rulers or Israel,
did not go far enough.They had not taken on what he called "the head of the
snake."
18
54
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 54
Finally, Bin Ladin had another advantage: a substantial, worldwide organi-
zation. By the time he issued his February 1998 declaration of war, Bin Ladin
had nurtured that organization for nearly ten years. He could attract, train, and
use recruits for ever more ambitious attacks, rallying new adherents with each
demonstration that his was the movement of the future.
2.3 THE RISE OF BIN LADIN AND AL QAEDA (19881992)
A decade of conflict in Afghanistan, from 1979 to 1989, gave Islamist extrem-
ists a rallying point and training field.A Communist government in Afghanistan
gained power in 1978 but was unable to establish enduring control.At the end
of 1979, the Soviet government sent in military units to ensure that the coun-
try would remain securely under Moscow's influence. The response was an
Afghan national resistance movement that defeated Soviet forces.
19
Young Muslims from around the world flocked to Afghanistan to join as vol-
unteers in what was seen as a "holy war"--jihad--against an invader.The largest
numbers came from the Middle East. Some were Saudis, and among them was
Usama Bin Ladin.
Twenty-three when he arrived in Afghanistan in 1980, Bin Ladin was the
seventeenth of 57 children of a Saudi construction magnate. Six feet five and
thin, Bin Ladin appeared to be ungainly but was in fact quite athletic, skilled
as a horseman, runner, climber, and soccer player. He had attended Abdul Aziz
University in Saudi Arabia. By some accounts, he had been interested there in
religious studies, inspired by tape recordings of fiery sermons by Abdullah
Azzam, a Palestinian and a disciple of Qutb. Bin Ladin was conspicuous among
the volunteers not because he showed evidence of religious learning but
because he had access to some of his family's huge fortune. Though he took
part in at least one actual battle, he became known chiefly as a person who gen-
erously helped fund the anti-Soviet jihad.
20
Bin Ladin understood better than most of the volunteers the extent to
which the continuation and eventual success of the jihad in Afghanistan
depended on an increasingly complex, almost worldwide organization. This
organization included a financial support network that came to be known as
the "Golden Chain," put together mainly by financiers in Saudi Arabia and the
Persian Gulf states. Donations flowed through charities or other nongovern-
mental organizations (NGOs). Bin Ladin and the "Afghan Arabs" drew largely
on funds raised by this network, whose agents roamed world markets to buy
arms and supplies for the mujahideen, or "holy warriors."
21
Mosques, schools, and boardinghouses served as recruiting stations in many
parts of the world, including the United States. Some were set up by Islamic
extremists or their financial backers. Bin Ladin had an important part in this
THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW TERRORISM
55
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 55
activity. He and the cleric Azzam had joined in creating a "Bureau of Services"
(Mektab al Khidmat, or MAK), which channeled recruits into Afghanistan.
22
The international environment for Bin Ladin's efforts was ideal. Saudi Ara-
bia and the United States supplied billions of dollars worth of secret assistance
to rebel groups in Afghanistan fighting the Soviet occupation. This assistance
was funneled through Pakistan:the Pakistani military intelligence service (Inter-
Services Intelligence Directorate, or ISID), helped train the rebels and dis-
tribute the arms. But Bin Ladin and his comrades had their own sources of
support and training, and they received little or no assistance from the
United States.
23
April 1988 brought victory for the Afghan jihad. Moscow declared it would
pull its military forces out of Afghanistan within the next nine months.As the
Soviets began their withdrawal, the jihad's leaders debated what to do next.
Bin Ladin and Azzam agreed that the organization successfully created for
Afghanistan should not be allowed to dissolve.They established what they called
a base or foundation (al Qaeda) as a potential general headquarters for future
jihad.
24
Though Azzam had been considered number one in the MAK, by
August 1988 Bin Ladin was clearly the leader (emir) of al Qaeda.This organi-
zation's structure included as its operating arms an intelligence component, a
military committee, a financial committee, a political committee, and a com-
mittee in charge of media affairs and propaganda. It also had an Advisory Coun-
cil (Shura) made up of Bin Ladin's inner circle.
25
Bin Ladin's assumption of the helm of al Qaeda was evidence of his grow-
ing self-confidence and ambition. He soon made clear his desire for unchal-
lenged control and for preparing the mujahideen to fight anywhere in the
world. Azzam, by contrast, favored continuing to fight in Afghanistan until it
had a true Islamist government. And, as a Palestinian, he saw Israel as the top
priority for the next stage.
26
Whether the dispute was about power, personal differences, or strategy, it
ended on November 24, 1989, when a remotely controlled car bomb killed
Azzam and both of his sons. The killers were assumed to be rival Egyptians.
The outcome left Bin Ladin indisputably in charge of what remained of the
MAK and al Qaeda.
27
Through writers like Qutb, and the presence of Egyptian Islamist teachers
in the Saudi educational system, Islamists already had a strong intellectual influ-
ence on Bin Ladin and his al Qaeda colleagues. By the late 1980s, the Egypt-
ian Islamist movement--badly battered in the government crackdown
following President Sadat's assassination--was centered in two major organiza-
tions: the Islamic Group and the Egyptian Islamic Jihad. A spiritual guide for
both, but especially the Islamic Group, was the so-called Blind Sheikh, Omar
Abdel Rahman. His preaching had inspired the assassination of Sadat. After
being in and out of Egyptian prisons during the 1980s, Abdel Rahman found
56
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 56
refuge in the United States. From his headquarters in Jersey City, he distrib-
uted messages calling for the murder of unbelievers.
28
The most important Egyptian in Bin Ladin's circle was a surgeon, Ayman al
Zawahiri, who led a strong faction of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad. Many of his fol-
lowers became important members in the new organization, and his own close
ties with Bin Ladin led many to think of him as the deputy head of al Qaeda. He
would in fact become Bin Ladin's deputy some years later,when they merged their
organizations.
29
Bin Ladin Moves to Sudan
By the fall of 1989, Bin Ladin had sufficient stature among Islamic extremists
that a Sudanese political leader, Hassan al Turabi, urged him to transplant his
whole organization to Sudan. Turabi headed the National Islamic Front in a
coalition that had recently seized power in Khartoum.
30
Bin Ladin agreed to
help Turabi in an ongoing war against African Christian separatists in southern
Sudan and also to do some road building.Turabi in return would let Bin Ladin
use Sudan as a base for worldwide business operations and for preparations for
jihad.
31
While agents of Bin Ladin began to buy property in Sudan in 1990,
32
Bin Ladin himself moved from Afghanistan back to Saudi Arabia.
In August 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait. Bin Ladin, whose efforts in
Afghanistan had earned him celebrity and respect, proposed to the Saudi
monarchy that he summon mujahideen for a jihad to retake Kuwait. He was
rebuffed, and the Saudis joined the U.S.-led coalition. After the Saudis agreed
to allow U.S. armed forces to be based in the Kingdom, Bin Ladin and a num-
ber of Islamic clerics began to publicly denounce the arrangement.The Saudi
government exiled the clerics and undertook to silence Bin Ladin by, among
other things, taking away his passport.With help from a dissident member of
the royal family, he managed to get out of the country under the pretext of
attending an Islamic gathering in Pakistan in April 1991.
33
By 1994, the Saudi
government would freeze his financial assets and revoke his citizenship.
34
He no
longer had a country he could call his own.
Bin Ladin moved to Sudan in 1991 and set up a large and complex set of
intertwined business and terrorist enterprises. In time, the former would
encompass numerous companies and a global network of bank accounts and
nongovernmental institutions. Fulfilling his bargain with Turabi, Bin Ladin used
his construction company to build a new highway from Khartoum to Port
Sudan on the Red Sea coast. Meanwhile, al Qaeda finance officers and top oper-
atives used their positions in Bin Ladin's businesses to acquire weapons, explo-
sives, and technical equipment for terrorist purposes. One founding member,
Abu Hajer al Iraqi, used his position as head of a Bin Ladin investment com-
pany to carry out procurement trips from western Europe to the Far East.Two
others,Wadi al Hage and Mubarak Douri, who had become acquainted in Tuc-
THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW TERRORISM
57
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 57
son,Arizona, in the late 1980s, went as far afield as China, Malaysia, the Philip-
pines, and the former Soviet states of Ukraine and Belarus.
35
Bin Ladin's impressive array of offices covertly provided financial and other
support for terrorist activities. The network included a major business enter-
prise in Cyprus; a "services" branch in Zagreb; an office of the Benevolence
International Foundation in Sarajevo, which supported the Bosnian Muslims
in their conflict with Serbia and Croatia; and an NGO in Baku, Azerbaijan,
that was employed as well by Egyptian Islamic Jihad both as a source and con-
duit for finances and as a support center for the Muslim rebels in Chechnya.
He also made use of the already-established Third World Relief Agency
(TWRA) headquartered in Vienna, whose branch office locations included
Zagreb and Budapest. (Bin Ladin later set up an NGO in Nairobi as a cover
for operatives there.)
36
Bin Ladin now had a vision of himself as head of an international jihad con-
federation. In Sudan, he established an "Islamic Army Shura" that was to serve
as the coordinating body for the consortium of terrorist groups with which he
was forging alliances. It was composed of his own al Qaeda Shura together with
leaders or representatives of terrorist organizations that were still independent.
In building this Islamic army, he enlisted groups from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jor-
dan, Lebanon, Iraq, Oman, Algeria, Libya, Tunisia, Morocco, Somalia, and
Eritrea.Al Qaeda also established cooperative but less formal relationships with
other extremist groups from these same countries; from the African states of
Chad, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, and Uganda; and from the Southeast Asian states
of Burma, Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia. Bin Ladin maintained connec-
tions in the Bosnian conflict as well.
37
The groundwork for a true global ter-
rorist network was being laid.
Bin Ladin also provided equipment and training assistance to the Moro
Islamic Liberation Front in the Philippines and also to a newly forming Philip-
pine group that called itself the Abu Sayyaf Brigade, after one of the major
Afghan jihadist commanders.
38
Al Qaeda helped Jemaah Islamiya (JI), a nas-
cent organization headed by Indonesian Islamists with cells scattered across
Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, and the Philippines. It also aided a Pakistani
group engaged in insurrectionist attacks in Kashmir. In mid-1991, Bin Ladin
dispatched a band of supporters to the northern Afghanistan border to assist
the Tajikistan Islamists in the ethnic conflicts that had been boiling there even
before the Central Asian departments of the Soviet Union became indepen-
dent states.
39
This pattern of expansion through building alliances extended to the
United States. A Muslim organization called al Khifa had numerous branch
offices, the largest of which was in the Farouq mosque in Brooklyn. In the mid-
1980s, it had been set up as one of the first outposts of Azzam and Bin Ladin's
MAK.
40
Other cities with branches of al Khifa included Atlanta, Boston,
Chicago, Pittsburgh, and Tucson.
41
Al Khifa recruited American Muslims to
58
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 58
fight in Afghanistan; some of them would participate in terrorist actions in the
United States in the early 1990s and in al Qaeda operations elsewhere, includ-
ing the 1998 attacks on U.S. embassies in East Africa.
2.4 BUILDING AN ORGANIZATION, DECLARING WAR
ON THE UNITED STATES (19921996)
Bin Ladin began delivering diatribes against the United States before he left
Saudi Arabia. He continued to do so after he arrived in Sudan. In early 1992,
the al Qaeda leadership issued a fatwa calling for jihad against the Western
"occupation" of Islamic lands. Specifically singling out U.S. forces for attack,
the language resembled that which would appear in Bin Ladin's public fatwa
in August 1996. In ensuing weeks, Bin Ladin delivered an often-repeated lec-
ture on the need to cut off "the head of the snake."
42
By this time, Bin Ladin was well-known and a senior figure among Islamist
extremists, especially those in Egypt, the Arabian Peninsula, and the
Afghanistan-Pakistan border region. Still, he was just one among many diverse
terrorist barons. Some of Bin Ladin's close comrades were more peers than sub-
ordinates. For example, Usama Asmurai, also known as Wali Khan, worked with
Bin Ladin in the early 1980s and helped him in the Philippines and in Tajik-
istan. The Egyptian spiritual guide based in New Jersey, the Blind Sheikh,
whom Bin Ladin admired, was also in the network.Among sympathetic peers
in Afghanistan were a few of the warlords still fighting for power and Abu
Zubaydah, who helped operate a popular terrorist training camp near the bor-
der with Pakistan.There were also rootless but experienced operatives, such as
Ramzi Yousef and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who--though not necessarily
formal members of someone else's organization--were traveling around the
world and joining in projects that were supported by or linked to Bin Ladin,
the Blind Sheikh, or their associates.
43
In now analyzing the terrorist programs carried out by members of this net-
work, it would be misleading to apply the label "al Qaeda operations" too often
in these early years.Yet it would also be misleading to ignore the significance
of these connections.And in this network, Bin Ladin's agenda stood out.While
his allied Islamist groups were focused on local battles, such as those in Egypt,
Algeria, Bosnia, or Chechnya, Bin Ladin concentrated on attacking the "far
enemy"--the United States.
Attacks Known and Suspected
After U.S. troops deployed to Somalia in late 1992, al Qaeda leaders formu-
lated a fatwa demanding their eviction. In December, bombs exploded at two
hotels in Aden where U.S. troops routinely stopped en route to Somalia, killing
two, but no Americans. The perpetrators are reported to have belonged to a
THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW TERRORISM
59
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 59
group from southern Yemen headed by a Yemeni member of Bin Ladin's Islamic
Army Shura; some in the group had trained at an al Qaeda camp in Sudan.
44
Al Qaeda leaders set up a Nairobi cell and used it to send weapons and train-
ers to the Somali warlords battling U.S. forces, an operation directly supervised
by al Qaeda's military leader.
45
Scores of trainers flowed to Somalia over the
ensuing months, including most of the senior members and weapons training
experts of al Qaeda's military committee.These trainers were later heard boast-
ing that their assistance led to the October 1993 shootdown of two U.S. Black
Hawk helicopters by members of a Somali militia group and to the subsequent
withdrawal of U.S. forces in early 1994.
46
In November 1995, a car bomb exploded outside a Saudi-U.S. joint facil-
ity in Riyadh for training the Saudi National Guard. Five Americans and two
officials from India were killed.The Saudi government arrested four perpetra-
tors, who admitted being inspired by Bin Ladin.They were promptly executed.
Though nothing proves that Bin Ladin ordered this attack, U.S. intelligence sub-
sequently learned that al Qaeda leaders had decided a year earlier to attack a
U.S. target in Saudi Arabia, and had shipped explosives to the peninsula for this
purpose. Some of Bin Ladin's associates later took credit.
47
In June 1996, an enormous truck bomb detonated in the Khobar Towers
residential complex in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, that housed U.S.Air Force per-
sonnel. Nineteen Americans were killed, and 372 were wounded.The opera-
tion was carried out principally, perhaps exclusively, by Saudi Hezbollah, an
organization that had received support from the government of Iran.While the
evidence of Iranian involvement is strong, there are also signs that al Qaeda
played some role, as yet unknown.
48
In this period, other prominent attacks in which Bin Ladin's involvement is
at best cloudy are the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, a plot that
same year to destroy landmarks in New York, and the 1995 Manila air plot to
blow up a dozen U.S. airliners over the Pacific. Details on these plots appear in
chapter 3.
Another scheme revealed that Bin Ladin sought the capability to kill on a
mass scale. His business aides received word that a Sudanese military officer who
had been a member of the previous government cabinet was offering to sell
weapons-grade uranium.After a number of contacts were made through inter-
mediaries, the officer set the price at $1.5 million, which did not deter Bin
Ladin.Al Qaeda representatives asked to inspect the uranium and were shown
a cylinder about 3 feet long, and one thought he could pronounce it genuine.
Al Qaeda apparently purchased the cylinder, then discovered it to be bogus.
49
But while the effort failed, it shows what Bin Ladin and his associates hoped
to do. One of the al Qaeda representatives explained his mission: "it's easy to
kill more people with uranium."
50
Bin Ladin seemed willing to include in the confederation terrorists from
60
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 60
almost every corner of the Muslim world. His vision mirrored that of Sudan's
Islamist leader,Turabi, who convened a series of meetings under the label Pop-
ular Arab and Islamic Conference around the time of Bin Ladin's arrival in that
country. Delegations of violent Islamist extremists came from all the groups
represented in Bin Ladin's Islamic Army Shura. Representatives also came from
organizations such as the Palestine Liberation Organization, Hamas, and
Hezbollah.
51
Turabi sought to persuade Shiites and Sunnis to put aside their divisions and
join against the common enemy. In late 1991 or 1992, discussions in Sudan
between al Qaeda and Iranian operatives led to an informal agreement to coop-
erate in providing support--even if only training--for actions carried out pri-
marily against Israel and the United States. Not long afterward, senior al Qaeda
operatives and trainers traveled to Iran to receive training in explosives. In the
fall of 1993, another such delegation went to the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon for
further training in explosives as well as in intelligence and security. Bin Ladin
reportedly showed particular interest in learning how to use truck bombs such
as the one that had killed 241 U.S. Marines in Lebanon in 1983.The relation-
ship between al Qaeda and Iran demonstrated that Sunni-Shia divisions did not
necessarily pose an insurmountable barrier to cooperation in terrorist opera-
tions.As will be described in chapter 7, al Qaeda contacts with Iran continued
in ensuing years.
52
Bin Ladin was also willing to explore possibilities for cooperation with Iraq,
even though Iraq's dictator, Saddam Hussein, had never had an Islamist
agenda--save for his opportunistic pose as a defender of the faithful against
"Crusaders" during the Gulf War of 1991. Moreover, Bin Ladin had in fact
been sponsoring anti-Saddam Islamists in Iraqi Kurdistan, and sought to attract
them into his Islamic army.
53
To protect his own ties with Iraq,Turabi reportedly brokered an agreement
that Bin Ladin would stop supporting activities against Saddam. Bin Ladin
apparently honored this pledge, at least for a time, although he continued to
aid a group of Islamist extremists operating in part of Iraq (Kurdistan) outside
of Baghdad's control. In the late 1990s, these extremist groups suffered major
defeats by Kurdish forces. In 2001, with Bin Ladin's help they re-formed into
an organization called Ansar al Islam.There are indications that by then the Iraqi
regime tolerated and may even have helped Ansar al Islam against the common
Kurdish enemy.
54
With the Sudanese regime acting as intermediary, Bin Ladin himself met
with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Khartoum in late 1994 or early 1995.
Bin Ladin is said to have asked for space to establish training camps, as well as
assistance in procuring weapons, but there is no evidence that Iraq responded
to this request.
55
As described below, the ensuing years saw additional efforts to
establish connections.
THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW TERRORISM
61
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 61
Sudan Becomes a Doubtful Haven
Not until 1998 did al Qaeda undertake a major terrorist operation of its own,
in large part because Bin Ladin lost his base in Sudan. Ever since the Islamist
regime came to power in Khartoum, the United States and other Western gov-
ernments had pressed it to stop providing a haven for terrorist organizations.
Other governments in the region, such as those of Egypt, Syria, Jordan, and
even Libya, which were targets of some of these groups, added their own pres-
sure. At the same time, the Sudanese regime began to change.Though Turabi
had been its inspirational leader, General Omar al Bashir, president since 1989,
had never been entirely under his thumb.Thus as outside pressures mounted,
Bashir's supporters began to displace those of Turabi.
The attempted assassination in Ethiopia of Egyptian President Hosni
Mubarak in June 1995 appears to have been a tipping point. The would-be
killers, who came from the Egyptian Islamic Group, had been sheltered in
Sudan and helped by Bin Ladin.
56
When the Sudanese refused to hand over
three individuals identified as involved in the assassination plot, the UN Secu-
rity Council passed a resolution criticizing their inaction and eventually sanc-
tioned Khartoum in April 1996.
57
A clear signal to Bin Ladin that his days in Sudan were numbered came when
the government advised him that it intended to yield to Libya's demands to stop
giving sanctuary to its enemies. Bin Ladin had to tell the Libyans who had been
part of his Islamic army that he could no longer protect them and that they had
to leave the country. Outraged, several Libyan members of al Qaeda and the
Islamic Army Shura renounced all connections with him.
58
Bin Ladin also began to have serious money problems. International pres-
sure on Sudan, together with strains in the world economy, hurt Sudan's cur-
rency. Some of Bin Ladin's companies ran short of funds. As Sudanese
authorities became less obliging, normal costs of doing business increased. Saudi
pressures on the Bin Ladin family also probably took some toll. In any case, Bin
Ladin found it necessary both to cut back his spending and to control his out-
lays more closely.He appointed a new financial manager,whom his followers saw
as miserly.
59
Money problems proved costly to Bin Ladin in other ways. Jamal Ahmed al
Fadl, a Sudanese-born Arab, had spent time in the United States and had been
recruited for the Afghan war through the Farouq mosque in Brooklyn. He had
joined al Qaeda and taken the oath of fealty to Bin Ladin, serving as one of his
business agents. Then Bin Ladin discovered that Fadl had skimmed about
$110,000, and he asked for restitution. Fadl resented receiving a salary of only
$500 a month while some of the Egyptians in al Qaeda were given $1,200 a
month. He defected and became a star informant for the United States. Also
testifying about al Qaeda in a U.S. court was L'Houssaine Kherchtou, who told
of breaking with Bin Ladin because of Bin Ladin's professed inability to pro-
vide him with money when his wife needed a caesarian section.
60
In February 1996, Sudanese officials began approaching officials from the
62
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 62
United States and other governments, asking what actions of theirs might ease
foreign pressure. In secret meetings with Saudi officials, Sudan offered to expel
Bin Ladin to Saudi Arabia and asked the Saudis to pardon him. U.S. officials
became aware of these secret discussions, certainly by March. Saudi officials
apparently wanted Bin Ladin expelled from Sudan.They had already revoked
his citizenship, however, and would not tolerate his presence in their country.
And Bin Ladin may have no longer felt safe in Sudan, where he had already
escaped at least one assassination attempt that he believed to have been the
work of the Egyptian or Saudi regimes, or both. In any case, on May 19, 1996,
Bin Ladin left Sudan--significantly weakened, despite his ambitions and orga-
nizational skills. He returned to Afghanistan.
61
2.5 AL QAEDA'S RENEWAL IN AFGHANISTAN
(19961998)
Bin Ladin flew on a leased aircraft from Khartoum to Jalalabad, with a refuel-
ing stopover in the United Arab Emirates.
62
He was accompanied by family
members and bodyguards, as well as by al Qaeda members who had been close
associates since his organization's 1988 founding in Afghanistan. Dozens of
additional militants arrived on later flights.
63
Though Bin Ladin's destination was Afghanistan, Pakistan was the nation
that held the key to his ability to use Afghanistan as a base from which to revive
his ambitious enterprise for war against the United States.
For the first quarter century of its existence as a nation, Pakistan's identity
had derived from Islam, but its politics had been decidedly secular.The army
was--and remains--the country's strongest and most respected institution, and
the army had been and continues to be preoccupied with its rivalry with India,
especially over the disputed territory of Kashmir.
From the 1970s onward, religion had become an increasingly powerful force
in Pakistani politics. After a coup in 1977, military leaders turned to Islamist
groups for support, and fundamentalists became more prominent. South Asia
had an indigenous form of Islamic fundamentalism, which had developed in
the nineteenth century at a school in the Indian village of Deoband.
64
The
influence of the Wahhabi school of Islam had also grown, nurtured by Saudi-
funded institutions. Moreover, the fighting in Afghanistan made Pakistan home
to an enormous--and generally unwelcome--population of Afghan refugees;
and since the badly strained Pakistani education system could not accommo-
date the refugees, the government increasingly let privately funded religious
schools serve as a cost-free alternative. Over time, these schools produced large
numbers of half-educated young men with no marketable skills but with deeply
held Islamic views.
65
Pakistan's rulers found these multitudes of ardent young Afghans a source
THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW TERRORISM
63
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 63
of potential trouble at home but potentially useful abroad.Those who joined
the Taliban movement, espousing a ruthless version of Islamic law, perhaps
could bring order in chaotic Afghanistan and make it a cooperative ally.They
thus might give Pakistan greater security on one of the several borders where
Pakistani military officers hoped for what they called "strategic depth."
66
It is unlikely that Bin Ladin could have returned to Afghanistan had Pak-
istan disapproved. The Pakistani military intelligence service probably had
advance knowledge of his coming, and its officers may have facilitated his travel.
During his entire time in Sudan, he had maintained guesthouses and training
camps in Pakistan and Afghanistan.These were part of a larger network used
by diverse organizations for recruiting and training fighters for Islamic insur-
gencies in such places as Tajikistan, Kashmir, and Chechnya. Pakistani intelli-
gence officers reportedly introduced Bin Ladin to Taliban leaders in Kandahar,
their main base of power, to aid his reassertion of control over camps near
64
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 64
Khowst, out of an apparent hope that he would now expand the camps and
make them available for training Kashmiri militants.
67
Yet Bin Ladin was in his weakest position since his early days in the war
against the Soviet Union.The Sudanese government had canceled the registra-
tion of the main business enterprises he had set up there and then put some of
them up for public sale. According to a senior al Qaeda detainee, the govern-
ment of Sudan seized everything Bin Ladin had possessed there.
68
He also lost the head of his military committee,Abu Ubaidah al Banshiri, one
of the most capable and popular leaders of al Qaeda.While most of the group's
key figures had accompanied Bin Ladin to Afghanistan, Banshiri had remained
in Kenya to oversee the training and weapons shipments of the cell set up some
four years earlier. He died in a ferryboat accident on Lake Victoria just a few
days after Bin Ladin arrived in Jalalabad, leaving Bin Ladin with a need to
replace him not only in the Shura but also as supervisor of the cells and
prospective operations in East Africa.
69
He had to make other adjustments as
well, for some al Qaeda members viewed Bin Ladin's return to Afghanistan as
occasion to go off in their own directions. Some maintained collaborative rela-
tionships with al Qaeda, but many disengaged entirely.
70
For a time, it may not have been clear to Bin Ladin that the Taliban would
be his best bet as an ally.When he arrived in Afghanistan, they controlled much
of the country, but key centers, including Kabul, were still held by rival war-
lords. Bin Ladin went initially to Jalalabad, probably because it was in an area
controlled by a provincial council of Islamic leaders who were not major con-
tenders for national power. He found lodgings with Younis Khalis, the head of
one of the main mujahideen factions. Bin Ladin apparently kept his options
open, maintaining contacts with Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who, though an
Islamic extremist, was also one of the Taliban's most militant opponents. But
after September 1996, when first Jalalabad and then Kabul fell to the Taliban,
Bin Ladin cemented his ties with them.
71
That process did not always go smoothly. Bin Ladin, no longer constrained
by the Sudanese, clearly thought that he had new freedom to publish his appeals
for jihad. At about the time when the Taliban were making their final drive
toward Jalalabad and Kabul, Bin Ladin issued his August 1996 fatwa, saying that
"We . . . have been prevented from addressing the Muslims," but expressing
relief that "by the grace of Allah, a safe base here is now available in the high
Hindu Kush mountains in Khurasan." But the Taliban, like the Sudanese, would
eventually hear warnings, including from the Saudi monarchy.
72
Though Bin Ladin had promised Taliban leaders that he would be circum-
spect, he broke this promise almost immediately, giving an inflammatory inter-
view to CNN in March 1997. The Taliban leader Mullah Omar promptly
"invited" Bin Ladin to move to Kandahar, ostensibly in the interests of Bin
Ladin's own security but more likely to situate him where he might be easier
to control.
73
THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW TERRORISM
65
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 65
There is also evidence that around this time Bin Ladin sent out a number
of feelers to the Iraqi regime, offering some cooperation. None are reported
to have received a significant response.According to one report, Saddam Hus-
sein's efforts at this time to rebuild relations with the Saudis and other Middle
Eastern regimes led him to stay clear of Bin Ladin.
74
In mid-1998, the situation reversed; it was Iraq that reportedly took the ini-
tiative. In March 1998, after Bin Ladin's public fatwa against the United States,
two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelli-
gence. In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with
the Taliban and then with Bin Ladin. Sources reported that one, or perhaps
both, of these meetings was apparently arranged through Bin Ladin's Egypt-
ian deputy, Zawahiri, who had ties of his own to the Iraqis. In 1998, Iraq was
under intensifying U.S. pressure, which culminated in a series of large air
attacks in December.
75
Similar meetings between Iraqi officials and Bin Ladin or his aides may have
occurred in 1999 during a period of some reported strains with the Taliban.
According to the reporting, Iraqi officials offered Bin Ladin a safe haven in Iraq.
Bin Ladin declined, apparently judging that his circumstances in Afghanistan
remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative. The reports describe
friendly contacts and indicate some common themes in both sides' hatred of
the United States. But to date we have seen no evidence that these or the ear-
lier contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship. Nor
have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in devel-
oping or carrying out any attacks against the United States.
76
Bin Ladin eventually enjoyed a strong financial position in Afghanistan,
thanks to Saudi and other financiers associated with the Golden Chain.
Through his relationship with Mullah Omar--and the monetary and other
benefits that it brought the Taliban--Bin Ladin was able to circumvent restric-
tions; Mullah Omar would stand by him even when other Taliban leaders raised
objections. Bin Ladin appeared to have in Afghanistan a freedom of move-
ment that he had lacked in Sudan.Al Qaeda members could travel freely within
the country, enter and exit it without visas or any immigration procedures, pur-
chase and import vehicles and weapons, and enjoy the use of official Afghan
Ministry of Defense license plates.Al Qaeda also used the Afghan state-owned
Ariana Airlines to courier money into the country.
77
The Taliban seemed to open the doors to all who wanted to come to
Afghanistan to train in the camps.The alliance with the Taliban provided al Qaeda
a sanctuary in which to train and indoctrinate fighters and terrorists, import
weapons, forge ties with other jihad groups and leaders, and plot and staff ter-
rorist schemes.While Bin Ladin maintained his own al Qaeda guesthouses and
camps for vetting and training recruits, he also provided support to and bene-
66
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 66
fited from the broad infrastructure of such facilities in Afghanistan made avail-
able to the global network of Islamist movements. U.S. intelligence estimates
put the total number of fighters who underwent instruction in Bin Ladinsup-
ported camps in Afghanistan from 1996 through 9/11 at 10,000 to 20,000.
78
In addition to training fighters and special operators, this larger network of
guesthouses and camps provided a mechanism by which al Qaeda could screen
and vet candidates for induction into its own organization.Thousands flowed
through the camps, but no more than a few hundred seem to have become
al Qaeda members. From the time of its founding, al Qaeda had employed
training and indoctrination to identify "worthy" candidates.
79
Al Qaeda continued meanwhile to collaborate closely with the many Mid-
dle Eastern groups--in Egypt, Algeria, Yemen, Lebanon, Morocco, Tunisia,
Somalia, and elsewhere--with which it had been linked when Bin Ladin was
in Sudan. It also reinforced its London base and its other offices around Europe,
the Balkans, and the Caucasus. Bin Ladin bolstered his links to extremists in
South and Southeast Asia, including the Malaysian-Indonesian JI and several
Pakistani groups engaged in the Kashmir conflict.
80
The February 1998 fatwa thus seems to have been a kind of public launch
of a renewed and stronger al Qaeda, after a year and a half of work. Having
rebuilt his fund-raising network, Bin Ladin had again become the rich man of
the jihad movement. He had maintained or restored many of his links with ter-
rorists elsewhere in the world. And he had strengthened the internal ties in his
own organization.
The inner core of al Qaeda continued to be a hierarchical top-down group
with defined positions, tasks, and salaries. Most but not all in this core swore
fealty (or bayat) to Bin Ladin. Other operatives were committed to Bin Ladin
or to his goals and would take assignments for him, but they did not swear
bayat and maintained, or tried to maintain, some autonomy. A looser circle of
adherents might give money to al Qaeda or train in its camps but remained
essentially independent. Nevertheless, they constituted a potential resource for
al Qaeda.
81
Now effectively merged with Zawahiri's Egyptian Islamic Jihad,
82
al Qaeda
promised to become the general headquarters for international terrorism, with-
out the need for the Islamic Army Shura. Bin Ladin was prepared to pick up
where he had left off in Sudan. He was ready to strike at "the head of the snake."
Al Qaeda's role in organizing terrorist operations had also changed. Before
the move to Afghanistan, it had concentrated on providing funds, training, and
weapons for actions carried out by members of allied groups.The attacks on
the U.S. embassies in East Africa in the summer of 1998 would take a differ-
ent form--planned, directed, and executed by al Qaeda, under the direct super-
vision of Bin Ladin and his chief aides.
THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW TERRORISM
67
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 67
The Embassy Bombings
As early as December 1993, a team of al Qaeda operatives had begun casing
targets in Nairobi for future attacks. It was led by Ali Mohamed, a former
Egyptian army officer who had moved to the United States in the mid-1980s,
enlisted in the U.S.Army, and became an instructor at Fort Bragg. He had pro-
vided guidance and training to extremists at the Farouq mosque in Brooklyn,
including some who were subsequently convicted in the February 1993 attack
on the World Trade Center. The casing team also included a computer expert
whose write-ups were reviewed by al Qaeda leaders.
83
The team set up a makeshift laboratory for developing their surveillance
photographs in an apartment in Nairobi where the various al Qaeda opera-
tives and leaders based in or traveling to the Kenya cell sometimes met. Ban-
shiri, al Qaeda's military committee chief, continued to be the operational
commander of the cell; but because he was constantly on the move, Bin Ladin
had dispatched another operative, Khaled al Fawwaz, to serve as the on-site
manager. The technical surveillance and communications equipment
employed for these casing missions included state-of-the-art video cameras
obtained from China and from dealers in Germany. The casing team also
reconnoitered targets in Djibouti.
84
As early as January 1994, Bin Ladin received the surveillance reports, com-
plete with diagrams prepared by the team's computer specialist. He, his top mil-
itary committee members--Banshiri and his deputy, Abu Hafs al Masri (also
known as Mohammed Atef)--and a number of other al Qaeda leaders
reviewed the reports. Agreeing that the U.S. embassy in Nairobi was an easy
target because a car bomb could be parked close by, they began to form a plan.
Al Qaeda had begun developing the tactical expertise for such attacks months
earlier, when some of its operatives--top military committee members and sev-
eral operatives who were involved with the Kenya cell among them--were sent
to Hezbollah training camps in Lebanon.
85
The cell in Kenya experienced a series of disruptions that may in part
account for the relatively long delay before the attack was actually carried out.
The difficulties Bin Ladin began to encounter in Sudan in 1995, his move to
Afghanistan in 1996, and the months spent establishing ties with the Taliban
may also have played a role, as did Banshiri's accidental drowning.
In August 1997, the Kenya cell panicked. The London Daily Telegraph
reported that Madani al Tayyib, formerly head of al Qaeda's finance committee,
had turned himself over to the Saudi government.The article said (incorrectly)
that the Saudis were sharing Tayyib's information with the U.S. and British
authorities.
86
At almost the same time, cell members learned that U.S. and
Kenyan agents had searched the Kenya residence of Wadi al Hage, who had
become the new on-site manager in Nairobi, and that Hage's telephone was
being tapped. Hage was a U.S. citizen who had worked with Bin Ladin in Afgha-
68
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 68
nistan in the 1980s, and in 1992 he went to Sudan to become one of al Qaeda's
major financial operatives.When Hage returned to the United States to appear
before a grand jury investigating Bin Ladin, the job of cell manager was taken
over by Harun Fazul, a Kenyan citizen who had been in Bin Ladin's advance
team to Sudan back in 1990. Harun faxed a report on the "security situation"
to several sites, warning that "the crew members in East Africa is [sic] in grave
danger" in part because "America knows . . . that the followers of [Bin Ladin]
. . . carried out the operations to hit Americans in Somalia." The report pro-
vided instructions for avoiding further exposure.
87
On February 23, 1998, Bin Ladin issued his public fatwa.The language had
been in negotiation for some time, as part of the merger under way between
Bin Ladin's organization and Zawahiri's Egyptian Islamic Jihad. Less than a
month after the publication of the fatwa, the teams that were to carry out the
embassy attacks were being pulled together in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam.The
timing and content of their instructions indicate that the decision to launch
the attacks had been made by the time the fatwa was issued.
88
The next four months were spent setting up the teams in Nairobi and Dar
es Salaam. Members of the cells rented residences, and purchased bomb-mak-
ing materials and transport vehicles. At least one additional explosives expert
was brought in to assist in putting the weapons together. In Nairobi, a hotel
room was rented to put up some of the operatives. The suicide trucks were
purchased shortly before the attack date.
89
While this was taking place, Bin Ladin continued to push his public mes-
sage. On May 7, the deputy head of al Qaeda's military committee,
Mohammed Atef, faxed to Bin Ladin's London office a new fatwa issued by a
group of sheikhs located in Afghanistan. A week later, it appeared in Al Quds
al Arabi, the same Arabic-language newspaper in London that had first published
Bin Ladin's February fatwa, and it conveyed the same message--the duty of
Muslims to carry out holy war against the enemies of Islam and to expel the
Americans from the Gulf region.Two weeks after that, Bin Ladin gave a video-
taped interview to ABC News with the same slogans, adding that "we do not
differentiate between those dressed in military uniforms and civilians; they are
all targets in this fatwa."
90
By August 1, members of the cells not directly involved in the attacks had
mostly departed from East Africa. The remaining operatives prepared and
assembled the bombs, and acquired the delivery vehicles. On August 4, they
made one last casing run at the embassy in Nairobi. By the evening of August 6,
all but the delivery teams and one or two persons assigned to remove the evi-
dence trail had left East Africa. Back in Afghanistan, Bin Ladin and the al Qaeda
leadership had left Kandahar for the countryside, expecting U.S. retaliation.
Declarations taking credit for the attacks had already been faxed to the joint
al QaedaEgyptian Islamic Jihad office in Baku, with instructions to stand by
THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW TERRORISM
69
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 69
for orders to "instantly" transmit them to Al Quds al Arabi. One proclaimed "the
formation of the Islamic Army for the Liberation of the Holy Places," and two
others--one for each embassy--announced that the attack had been carried
out by a "company" of a "battalion" of this "Islamic Army."
91
On the morning of August 7, the bomb-laden trucks drove into the
embassies roughly five minutes apart--about 10:35
A
.
M
. in Nairobi and 10:39
A
.
M
. in Dar es Salaam. Shortly afterward, a phone call was placed from Baku
to London.The previously prepared messages were then faxed to London.
92
The attack on the U.S. embassy in Nairobi destroyed the embassy and killed
12 Americans and 201 others, almost all Kenyans. About 5,000 people were
injured.The attack on the U.S. embassy in Dar es Salaam killed 11 more peo-
ple, none of them Americans. Interviewed later about the deaths of the Africans,
Bin Ladin answered that "when it becomes apparent that it would be impos-
sible to repel these Americans without assaulting them, even if this involved
the killing of Muslims, this is permissible under Islam."Asked if he had indeed
masterminded these bombings, Bin Ladin said that the World Islamic Front for
jihad against "Jews and Crusaders" had issued a "crystal clear" fatwa. If the insti-
gation for jihad against the Jews and the Americans to liberate the holy places
"is considered a crime," he said,"let history be a witness that I am a criminal."
93
70
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 70
3
COUNTERTERRORISM
EVOLVES
71
I n c hap te r 2 , we described the growth of a new kind of terrorism, and a
new terrorist organization--especially from 1988 to 1998, when Usama Bin
Ladin declared war and organized the bombing of two U.S. embassies. In this
chapter, we trace the parallel evolution of government efforts to counter ter-
rorism by Islamic extremists against the United States.
We mention many personalities in this report. As in any study of the U.S.
government, some of the most important characters are institutions. We will
introduce various agencies, and how they adapted to a new kind of terrorism.
3.1 FROM THE OLD TERRORISM TO THE NEW:
THE FIRST WORLD TRADE CENTER BOMBING
At 18 minutes after noon on February 26, 1993, a huge bomb went off beneath
the two towers of the World Trade Center.This was not a suicide attack.The
terrorists parked a truck bomb with a timing device on Level B-2 of the under-
ground garage, then departed.The ensuing explosion opened a hole seven sto-
ries up. Six people died. More than a thousand were injured. An FBI agent at
the scene described the relatively low number of fatalities as a miracle.
1
President Bill Clinton ordered his National Security Council to coordinate
the response. Government agencies swung into action to find the culprits.The
Counterterrorist Center located at the CIA combed its files and queried
sources around the world. The National Security Agency (NSA), the huge
Defense Department signals collection agency, ramped up its communications
intercept network and searched its databases for clues.
2
The New York Field
Office of the FBI took control of the local investigation and, in the end, set a
pattern for future management of terrorist incidents.
Four features of this episode have significance for the story of 9/11.
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 71
First, the bombing signaled a new terrorist challenge, one whose rage and
malice had no limit. Ramzi Yousef, the Sunni extremist who planted the bomb,
said later that he had hoped to kill 250,000 people.
3
Second, the FBI and the Justice Department did excellent work investigat-
ing the bombing.Within days, the FBI identified a truck remnant as part of a
Ryder rental van reported stolen in Jersey City the day before the bombing.
4
Mohammed Salameh, who had rented the truck and reported it stolen, kept
calling the rental office to get back his $400 deposit.The FBI arrested him there
on March 4, 1993. In short order, the Bureau had several plotters in custody,
including Nidal Ayyad, an engineer who had acquired chemicals for the bomb,
and Mahmoud Abouhalima, who had helped mix the chemicals.
5
The FBI identified another conspirator, Ahmad Ajaj, who had been arrested
by immigration authorities at John F. Kennedy International Airport in Sep-
tember 1992 and charged with document fraud. His traveling companion was
Ramzi Yousef, who had also entered with fraudulent documents but claimed
political asylum and was admitted. It quickly became clear that Yousef had been
a central player in the attack. He had fled to Pakistan immediately after the
bombing and would remain at large for nearly two years.
6
The arrests of Salameh, Abouhalima, and Ayyad led the FBI to the Farouq
mosque in Brooklyn, where a central figure was Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman,
an extremist Sunni Muslim cleric who had moved to the United States from
Egypt in 1990. In speeches and writings, the sightless Rahman, often called the
"Blind Sheikh," preached the message of Sayyid Qutb's Milestones, characteriz-
ing the United States as the oppressor of Muslims worldwide and asserting that
it was their religious duty to fight against God's enemies. An FBI informant
learned of a plan to bomb major New York landmarks, including the Holland
and Lincoln tunnels. Disrupting this "landmarks plot," the FBI in June 1993
arrested Rahman and various confederates.
7
As a result of the investigations and arrests, the U.S.Attorney for the South-
ern District of New York prosecuted and convicted multiple individuals,
including Ajaj, Salameh, Ayyad, Abouhalima, the Blind Sheikh, and Ramzi
Yousef, for crimes related to the World Trade Center bombing and other plots.
An unfortunate consequence of this superb investigative and prosecutorial
effort was that it created an impression that the law enforcement system was
well-equipped to cope with terrorism. Neither President Clinton, his princi-
pal advisers, the Congress, nor the news media felt prompted, until later, to press
the question of whether the procedures that put the Blind Sheikh and Ramzi
Yousef behind bars would really protect Americans against the new virus of
which these individuals were just the first symptoms.
8
Third, the successful use of the legal system to address the first World Trade
Center bombing had the side effect of obscuring the need to examine the char-
acter and extent of the new threat facing the United States.The trials did not
bring the Bin Ladin network to the attention of the public and policymakers.
72
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 72
The FBI assembled, and the U.S. Attorney's office put forward, some evi-
dence showing that the men in the dock were not the only plotters. Materials
taken from Ajaj indicated that the plot or plots were hatched at or near the
Khaldan camp, a terrorist training camp on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.
Ajaj had left Texas in April 1992 to go there to learn how to construct bombs.
He had met Ramzi Yousef in Pakistan, where they discussed bombing targets
in the United States and assembled a "terrorist kit" that included bomb-mak-
ing manuals, operations guidance, videotapes advocating terrorist action
against the United States, and false identification documents.
9
Yousef was captured in Pakistan following the discovery by police in the
Philippines in January 1995 of the Manila air plot, which envisioned placing
bombs on board a dozen trans-Pacific airliners and setting them off simultane-
ously. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed--Yousef 's uncle, then located in Qatar--was
a fellow plotter of Yousef 's in the Manila air plot and had also wired him some
money prior to the Trade Center bombing. The U.S. Attorney obtained an
indictment against KSM in January 1996, but an official in the government of
Qatar probably warned him about it. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed evaded cap-
ture (and stayed at large to play a central part in the 9/11 attacks).
10
The law enforcement process is concerned with proving the guilt of per-
sons apprehended and charged. Investigators and prosecutors could not pres-
ent all the evidence of possible involvement of individuals other than those
charged, although they continued to pursue such investigations, planning or
hoping for later prosecutions.The process was meant, by its nature, to mark for
the public the events as finished--case solved, justice done. It was not designed
to ask if the events might be harbingers of worse to come. Nor did it allow for
aggregating and analyzing facts to see if they could provide clues to terrorist
tactics more generally--methods of entry and finance, and mode of operation
inside the United States.
Fourth, although the bombing heightened awareness of a new terrorist dan-
ger, successful prosecutions contributed to widespread underestimation of the
threat.The government's attorneys stressed the seriousness of the crimes, and
put forward evidence of Yousef 's technical ingenuity.Yet the public image that
persisted was not of clever Yousef but of stupid Salameh going back again and
again to reclaim his $400 truck rental deposit.
3.2 ADAPTATION--AND NONADAPTATION--IN THE
LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY
Legal processes were the primary method for responding to these early mani-
festations of a new type of terrorism. Our overview of U.S. capabilities for deal-
ing with it thus begins with the nation's vast complex of law enforcement
agencies.
COUNTERTERRORISM EVOLVES
73
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 73
The Justice Department and the FBI
At the federal level, much law enforcement activity is concentrated in the
Department of Justice. For countering terrorism, the dominant agency under
Justice is the Federal Bureau of Investigation.The FBI does not have a general
grant of authority but instead works under specific statutory authorizations.
Most of its work is done in local offices called field offices. There are 56 of
them, each covering a specified geographic area, and each quite separate from
all others. Prior to 9/11, the special agent in charge was in general free to set
his or her office's priorities and assign personnel accordingly.
11
The office's priorities were driven by two primary concerns. First, perform-
ance in the Bureau was generally measured against statistics such as numbers
of arrests, indictments, prosecutions, and convictions. Counterterrorism and
counterintelligence work, often involving lengthy intelligence investigations
that might never have positive or quantifiable results, was not career-enhanc-
ing. Most agents who reached management ranks had little counterterrorism
experience. Second, priorities were driven at the local level by the field offices,
whose concerns centered on traditional crimes such as white-collar offenses
and those pertaining to drugs and gangs. Individual field offices made choices
to serve local priorities, not national priorities.
12
The Bureau also operates under an "office of origin" system.To avoid dupli-
cation and possible conflicts, the FBI designates a single office to be in charge
of an entire investigation. Because the New York Field Office indicted Bin
Ladin prior to the East Africa bombings, it became the office of origin for all
Bin Ladin cases, including the East Africa bombings and later the attack on the
USS Cole. Most of the FBI's institutional knowledge on Bin Ladin and al Qaeda
resided there.This office worked closely with the U.S.Attorney for the South-
ern District of New York to identify, arrest, prosecute, and convict many of the
perpetrators of the attacks and plots. Field offices other than the specified office
of origin were often reluctant to spend much energy on matters over which
they had no control and for which they received no credit.
13
The FBI's domestic intelligence gathering dates from the 1930s.With World
War II looming, President Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered FBI Director J. Edgar
Hoover to investigate foreign and foreign-inspired subversion--Communist,
Nazi, and Japanese. Hoover added investigation of possible espionage, sabotage,
or subversion to the duties of field offices. After the war, foreign intelligence
duties were assigned to the newly established Central Intelligence Agency.
Hoover jealously guarded the FBI's domestic portfolio against all rivals.
Hoover felt he was accountable only to the president, and the FBI's domestic
intelligence activities kept growing. In the 1960s, the FBI was receiving signif-
icant assistance within the United States from the CIA and from Army Intel-
ligence.The legal basis for some of this assistance was dubious.
Decades of encouragement to perform as a domestic intelligence agency
abruptly ended in the 1970s.Two years after Hoover's death in 1972, congres-
74
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 74
sional and news media investigations of the Watergate scandals of the Nixon
administration expanded into general investigations of foreign and domestic
intelligence by the Church and Pike committees.
14
They disclosed domestic
intelligence efforts, which included a covert action program that operated from
1956 to 1971 against domestic organizations and, eventually, domestic dissi-
dents.The FBI had spied on a wide range of political figures, especially indi-
viduals whom Hoover wanted to discredit (notably the Reverend Martin
Luther King, Jr.), and had authorized unlawful wiretaps and surveillance.The
shock registered in public opinion polls, where the percentage of Americans
declaring a "highly favorable" view of the FBI dropped from 84 percent to 37
percent.The FBI's Domestic Intelligence Division was dissolved.
15
In 1976, Attorney General Edward Levi adopted domestic security guide-
lines to regulate intelligence collection in the United States and to deflect calls
for even stronger regulation. In 1983,Attorney General William French Smith
revised the Levi guidelines to encourage closer investigation of potential ter-
rorism. He also loosened the rules governing authorization for investigations
and their duration. Still, his guidelines, like Levi's, took account of the reality
that suspicion of "terrorism," like suspicion of "subversion," could lead to mak-
ing individuals targets for investigation more because of their beliefs than
because of their acts. Smith's guidelines also took account of the reality that
potential terrorists were often members of extremist religious organizations and
that investigation of terrorism could cross the line separating state and
church.
16
In 1986, Congress authorized the FBI to investigate terrorist attacks against
Americans that occur outside the United States. Three years later, it added
authority for the FBI to make arrests abroad without consent from the host
country. Meanwhile, a task force headed by Vice President George H.W. Bush
had endorsed a concept already urged by Director of Central Intelligence
William Casey--a Counterterrorist Center, where the FBI, the CIA, and other
organizations could work together on international terrorism.While it was dis-
tinctly a CIA entity, the FBI detailed officials to work at the Center and
obtained leads that helped in the capture of persons wanted for trial in the
United States.
The strengths that the FBI brought to counterterrorism were nowhere more
brilliantly on display than in the case of Pan American Flight 103, bound from
London to New York, which blew up over Lockerbie, Scotland, in December
1988, killing 270 people. Initial evidence pointed to the government of Syria
and, later, Iran.The Counterterrorist Center reserved judgment on the perpe-
trators of the attack. Meanwhile, FBI technicians, working with U.K. security
services, gathered and analyzed the widely scattered fragments of the airliner.
In 1991, with the help of the Counterterrorist Center, they identified one small
fragment as part of a timing device--to the technicians, as distinctive as DNA.
It was a Libyan device.Together with other evidence, the FBI put together a
COUNTERTERRORISM EVOLVES
75
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 75
case pointing conclusively to the Libyan government. Eventually Libya
acknowledged its responsibility.
17
Pan Am 103 became a cautionary tale
against rushing to judgment in attributing responsibility for a terrorist act. It
also showed again how--given a case to solve--the FBI remained capable of
extraordinary investigative success.
FBI Organization and Priorities
In 1993, President Clinton chose Louis Freeh as the Director of the Bureau.
Freeh, who would remain Director until June 2001, believed that the FBI's
work should be done primarily by the field offices.To emphasize this view he
cut headquarters staff and decentralized operations.The special agents in charge
gained power, influence, and independence.
18
Freeh recognized terrorism as a major threat. He increased the number of
legal attaché offices abroad, focusing in particular on the Middle East. He also
urged agents not to wait for terrorist acts to occur before taking action. In his
first budget request to Congress after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing,
he stated that "merely solving this type of crime is not enough; it is equally
important that the FBI thwart terrorism before such acts can be perpetrated."
Within headquarters, he created a Counterterrorism Division that would com-
plement the Counterterrorist Center at the CIA and arranged for exchanges
of senior FBI and CIA counterterrorism officials. He pressed for more coop-
eration between legal attachés and CIA stations abroad.
19
Freeh's efforts did not, however, translate into a significant shift of resources
to counterterrorism. FBI, Justice, and Office of Management and Budget offi-
cials said that FBI leadership seemed unwilling to shift resources to terrorism
from other areas such as violent crime and drug enforcement; other FBI offi-
cials blamed Congress and the OMB for a lack of political will and failure to
understand the FBI's counterterrorism resource needs. In addition, Freeh did
not impose his views on the field offices. With a few notable exceptions, the
field offices did not apply significant resources to terrorism and often repro-
grammed funds for other priorities.
20
In 1998, the FBI issued a five-year strategic plan led by its deputy director,
Robert "Bear" Bryant. For the first time, the FBI designated national and eco-
nomic security, including counterterrorism, as its top priority. Dale Watson, who
would later become the head of the new Counterterrorism Division, said that
after the East Africa bombings,"the light came on" that cultural change had to
occur within the FBI.The plan mandated a stronger intelligence collection effort.
It called for a nationwide automated system to facilitate information collection,
analysis,and dissemination.It envisioned the creation of a professional intelligence
cadre of experienced and trained agents and analysts.If successfully implemented,
this would have been a major step toward addressing terrorism systematically,
rather than as individual unrelated cases. But the plan did not succeed.
21
First, the plan did not obtain the necessary human resources. Despite des-
76
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 76
ignating "national and economic security" as its top priority in 1998, the
FBI did not shift human resources accordingly.Although the FBI's counter-
terrorism budget tripled during the mid-1990s, FBI counterterrorism
spending remained fairly constant between fiscal years 1998 and 2001. In
2000, there were still twice as many agents devoted to drug enforcement as
to counterterrorism.
22
Second, the new division intended to strengthen the FBI's strategic analy-
sis capability faltered. It received insufficient resources and faced resistance from
senior managers in the FBI's operational divisions.The new division was sup-
posed to identify trends in terrorist activity, determine what the FBI did not
know, and ultimately drive collection efforts. However, the FBI had little appre-
ciation for the role of analysis.Analysts continued to be used primarily in a tac-
tical fashion--providing support for existing cases. Compounding the problem
was the FBI's tradition of hiring analysts from within instead of recruiting indi-
viduals with the relevant educational background and expertise.
23
Moreover, analysts had difficulty getting access to the FBI and intelligence
community information they were expected to analyze.The poor state of the
FBI's information systems meant that such access depended in large part on an
analyst's personal relationships with individuals in the operational units or
squads where the information resided. For all of these reasons, prior to 9/11
relatively few strategic analytic reports about counterterrorism had been com-
pleted. Indeed, the FBI had never completed an assessment of the overall ter-
rorist threat to the U.S. homeland.
24
Third, the FBI did not have an effective intelligence collection effort. Col-
lection of intelligence from human sources was limited, and agents were inad-
equately trained. Only three days of a 16-week agents' course were devoted to
counterintelligence and counterterrorism, and most subsequent training was
received on the job.The FBI did not have an adequate mechanism for validat-
ing source reporting, nor did it have a system for adequately tracking and shar-
ing source reporting, either internally or externally.The FBI did not dedicate
sufficient resources to the surveillance and translation needs of counter-
terrorism agents. It lacked sufficient translators proficient in Arabic and other
key languages, resulting in a significant backlog of untranslated intercepts.
25
Finally, the FBI's information systems were woefully inadequate. The FBI
lacked the ability to know what it knew: there was no effective mechanism for
capturing or sharing its institutional knowledge. FBI agents did create records of
interviews and other investigative efforts, but there were no reports officers to
condense the information into meaningful intelligence that could be retrieved
and disseminated.
26
In 1999, the FBI created separate Counterterrorism and Counterintelli-
gence divisions. Dale Watson, the first head of the new Counterterrorism Divi-
sion, recognized the urgent need to increase the FBI's counterterrorism
capability. His plan, called MAXCAP 05, was unveiled in 2000: it set the goal
COUNTERTERRORISM EVOLVES
77
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 77
of bringing the Bureau to its "maximum feasible capacity" in counterterror-
ism by 2005. Field executives told Watson that they did not have the analysts,
linguists, or technically trained experts to carry out the strategy. In a report pro-
vided to Director Robert Mueller in September 2001, one year after Watson
presented his plan to field executives, almost every FBI field office was assessed
to be operating below "maximum capacity."The report stated that "the goal to
`prevent terrorism' requires a dramatic shift in emphasis from a reactive capa-
bility to highly functioning intelligence capability which provides not only
leads and operational support, but clear strategic analysis and direction."
27
Legal Constraints on the FBI and "the Wall"
The FBI had different tools for law enforcement and intelligence.
28
For crim-
inal matters, it could apply for and use traditional criminal warrants. For intel-
ligence matters involving international terrorism, however, the rules were
different. For many years the attorney general could authorize surveillance of
foreign powers and agents of foreign powers without any court review, but in
1978 Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
29
This law reg-
ulated intelligence collection directed at foreign powers and agents of foreign
powers in the United States. In addition to requiring court review of proposed
surveillance (and later, physical searches), the 1978 act was interpreted by the
courts to require that a search be approved only if its "primary purpose" was
to obtain foreign intelligence information. In other words, the authorities of
the FISA law could not be used to circumvent traditional criminal warrant
requirements.The Justice Department interpreted these rulings as saying that
criminal prosecutors could be briefed on FISA information but could not
direct or control its collection.
30
Throughout the 1980s and early 1990s, Justice prosecutors had informal
arrangements for obtaining information gathered in the FISA process, the
understanding being that they would not improperly exploit that process for
their criminal cases. Whether the FBI shared with prosecutors information
pertinent to possible criminal investigations was left solely to the judgment of
the FBI.
31
But the prosecution of Aldrich Ames for espionage in 1994 revived con-
cerns about the prosecutors' role in intelligence investigations.The Department
of Justice's Office of Intelligence Policy and Review (OIPR) is responsible for
reviewing and presenting all FISA applications to the FISA Court. It worried
that because of the numerous prior consultations between FBI agents and pros-
ecutors, the judge might rule that the FISA warrants had been misused. If that
had happened,Ames might have escaped conviction. Richard Scruggs, the act-
ing head of OIPR, complained to Attorney General Janet Reno about the lack
of information-sharing controls. On his own, he began imposing information-
sharing procedures for FISA material. The Office of Intelligence Policy and
Review became the gatekeeper for the flow of FISA information to criminal
prosecutors.
32
78
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 78
In July 1995, Attorney General Reno issued formal procedures aimed at
managing information sharing between Justice Department prosecutors and
the FBI.They were developed in a working group led by the Justice Depart-
ment's Executive Office of National Security, overseen by Deputy Attorney
General Jamie Gorelick.
33
These procedures--while requiring the sharing of
intelligence information with prosecutors--regulated the manner in which
such information could be shared from the intelligence side of the house to
the criminal side.
These procedures were almost immediately misunderstood and misapplied.
As a result, there was far less information sharing and coordination between
the FBI and the Criminal Division in practice than was allowed under the
department's procedures. Over time the procedures came to be referred to as
"the wall." The term "the wall" is misleading, however, because several factors
led to a series of barriers to information sharing that developed.
34
The Office of Intelligence Policy and Review became the sole gatekeeper
for passing information to the Criminal Division. Though Attorney General
Reno's procedures did not include such a provision, the Office assumed the
role anyway, arguing that its position reflected the concerns of Judge Royce
Lamberth, then chief judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.The
Office threatened that if it could not regulate the flow of information to crim-
inal prosecutors, it would no longer present the FBI's warrant requests to the
FISA Court.The information flow withered.
35
The 1995 procedures dealt only with sharing between agents and criminal
prosecutors, not between two kinds of FBI agents, those working on intelli-
gence matters and those working on criminal matters. But pressure from the
Office of Intelligence Policy Review, FBI leadership, and the FISA Court built
barriers between agents--even agents serving on the same squads. FBI Deputy
Director Bryant reinforced the Office's caution by informing agents that too
much information sharing could be a career stopper.Agents in the field began
to believe--incorrectly--that no FISA information could be shared with
agents working on criminal investigations.
36
This perception evolved into the still more exaggerated belief that the FBI
could not share any intelligence information with criminal investigators, even
if no FISA procedures had been used. Thus, relevant information from the
National Security Agency and the CIA often failed to make its way to crimi-
nal investigators. Separate reviews in 1999, 2000, and 2001 concluded inde-
pendently that information sharing was not occurring, and that the intent of
the 1995 procedures was ignored routinely.
37
We will describe some of the
unfortunate consequences of these accumulated institutional beliefs and prac-
tices in chapter 8.
There were other legal limitations. Both prosecutors and FBI agents argued
that they were barred by court rules from sharing grand jury information, even
though the prohibition applied only to that small fraction that had been pre-
sented to a grand jury, and even that prohibition had exceptions. But as inter-
COUNTERTERRORISM EVOLVES
79
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 79
preted by FBI field offices, this prohibition could conceivably apply to much
of the information unearthed in an investigation.There were also restrictions,
arising from executive order, on the commingling of domestic information
with foreign intelligence. Finally the NSA began putting caveats on its Bin
Ladinrelated reports that required prior approval before sharing their contents
with criminal investigators and prosecutors. These developments further
blocked the arteries of information sharing.
38
Other Law Enforcement Agencies
The Justice Department is much more than the FBI. It also has a U.S. Marshals
Service, almost 4,000 strong on 9/11 and especially expert in tracking fugi-
tives, with much local police knowledge.The department's Drug Enforcement
Administration had, as of 2001, more than 4,500 agents.
39
There were a num-
ber of occasions when DEA agents were able to introduce sources to the FBI
or CIA for counterterrorism use.
The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), with its 9,000 Border
Patrol agents, 4,500 inspectors, and 2,000 immigration special agents, had per-
haps the greatest potential to develop an expanded role in counterterrorism.
However, the INS was focused on the formidable challenges posed by illegal
entry over the southwest border, criminal aliens, and a growing backlog in the
applications for naturalizing immigrants.The White House, the Justice Depart-
ment, and above all the Congress reinforced these concerns. In addition, when
Doris Meissner became INS Commissioner in 1993, she found an agency seri-
ously hampered by outdated technology and insufficient human resources. Bor-
der Patrol agents were still using manual typewriters; inspectors at ports of entry
were using a paper watchlist; the asylum and other benefits systems did not
effectively deter fraudulent applicants.
40
Commissioner Meissner responded in 1993 to the World Trade Center
bombing by providing seed money to the State Department's Consular Affairs
Bureau to automate its terrorist watchlist, used by consular officers and border
inspectors. The INS assigned an individual in a new "lookout" unit to work
with the State Department in watchlisting suspected terrorists and with the
intelligence community and the FBI in determining how to deal with them
when they appeared at ports of entry. By 1998, 97 suspected terrorists had been
denied admission at U.S. ports of entry because of the watchlist.
41
How to conduct deportation cases against aliens who were suspected ter-
rorists caused significant debate.The INS had immigration law expertise and
authority to bring the cases, but the FBI possessed the classified information
sometimes needed as evidence, and information-sharing conflicts resulted.
New laws in 1996 authorized the use of classified evidence in removal hear-
ings, but the INS removed only a handful of the aliens with links to terrorist
activity (none identified as associated with al Qaeda) using classified evidence.
42
Midlevel INS employees proposed comprehensive counterterrorism pro-
80
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 80
posals to management in 1986, 1995, and 1997. No action was taken on them.
In 1997, a National Security Unit was set up to handle alerts, track potential
terrorist cases for possible immigration enforcement action, and work with the
rest of the Justice Department. It focused on the FBI's priorities of Hezbollah
and Hamas, and began to examine how immigration laws could be brought to
bear on terrorism. For instance, it sought unsuccessfully to require that CIA
security checks be completed before naturalization applications were
approved.
43
Policy questions, such as whether resident alien status should be
revoked upon the person's conviction of a terrorist crime, were not addressed.
Congress, with the support of the Clinton administration, doubled the num-
ber of Border Patrol agents required along the border with Mexico to one
agent every quarter mile by 1999. It rejected efforts to bring additional
resources to bear in the north.The border with Canada had one agent for every
13.25 miles. Despite examples of terrorists entering from Canada, awareness of
terrorist activity in Canada and its more lenient immigration laws, and an
inspector general's report recommending that the Border Patrol develop a
northern border strategy, the only positive step was that the number of Border
Patrol agents was not cut any further.
44
Inspectors at the ports of entry were not asked to focus on terrorists. Inspec-
tors told us they were not even aware that when they checked the names of
incoming passengers against the automated watchlist, they were checking in
part for terrorists. In general, border inspectors also did not have the informa-
tion they needed to make fact-based determinations of admissibility.The INS
initiated but failed to bring to completion two efforts that would have pro-
vided inspectors with information relevant to counterterrorism--a proposed
system to track foreign student visa compliance and a program to establish a way
of tracking travelers' entry to and exit from the United States.
45
In 1996, a new law enabled the INS to enter into agreements with state and
local law enforcement agencies through which the INS provided training and
the local agencies exercised immigration enforcement authority. Terrorist
watchlists were not available to them. Mayors in cities with large immigrant
populations sometimes imposed limits on city employee cooperation with fed-
eral immigration agents. A large population lives outside the legal framework.
Fraudulent documents could be easily obtained. Congress kept the number of
INS agents static in the face of the overwhelming problem.
46
The chief vehicle for INS and for state and local participation in law
enforcement was the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF), first tried out in New
York City in 1980 in response to a spate of incidents involving domestic ter-
rorist organizations.This task force was managed by the New York Field Office
of the FBI, and its existence provided an opportunity to exchange information
and, as happened after the first World Trade Center bombing, to enlist local offi-
cers, as well as other agency representatives, as partners in the FBI investiga-
tion.The FBI expanded the number of JTTFs throughout the 1990s, and by
COUNTERTERRORISM EVOLVES
81
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 81
9/11 there were 34.While useful, the JTTFs had limitations.They set priori-
ties in accordance with regional and field office concerns, and most were not
fully staffed. Many state and local entities believed they had little to gain from
having a full-time representative on a JTTF.
47
Other federal law enforcement resources, also not seriously enlisted for
counterterrorism, were to be found in the Treasury Department.
Treasury housed the Secret Service, the Customs Service, and the Bureau
of Alcohol,Tobacco, and Firearms. Given the Secret Service's mission to pro-
tect the president and other high officials, its agents did become involved with
those of the FBI whenever terrorist assassination plots were rumored.
The Customs Service deployed agents at all points of entry into the
United States. Its agents worked alongside INS agents, and the two groups
sometimes cooperated. In the winter of 19992000, as will be detailed in
chapter 6, questioning by an especially alert Customs inspector led to the
arrest of an al Qaeda terrorist whose apparent mission was to bomb Los
Angeles International Airport.
The Bureau of Alcohol,Tobacco, and Firearms was used on occasion by the
FBI as a resource.The ATF's laboratories and analysis were critical to the inves-
tigation of the February 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and the April
1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.
48
Before 9/11, with the exception of one portion of the FBI, very little of the
sprawling U.S. law enforcement community was engaged in countering ter-
rorism. Moreover, law enforcement could be effective only after specific indi-
viduals were identified, a plot had formed, or an attack had already occurred.
Responsible individuals had to be located, apprehended, and transported back
to a U.S. court for prosecution. As FBI agents emphasized to us, the FBI and
the Justice Department do not have cruise missiles.They declare war by indict-
ing someone.They took on the lead role in addressing terrorism because they
were asked to do so.
49
3.3 . . . AND IN THE FEDERAL AVIATION
ADMINISTRATION
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) within the Department of Trans-
portation had been vested by Congress with the sometimes conflicting man-
date of regulating the safety and security of U.S. civil aviation while also
promoting the civil aviation industry.The FAA had a security mission to pro-
tect the users of commercial air transportation against terrorism and other
criminal acts. In the years before 9/11, the FAA perceived sabotage as a greater
threat to aviation than hijacking. First, no domestic hijacking had occurred in
a decade. Second, the commercial aviation system was perceived as more vul-
nerable to explosives than to weapons such as firearms. Finally, explosives were
82
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 82
perceived as deadlier than hijacking and therefore of greater consequence. In
1996, a presidential commission on aviation safety and security chaired by Vice
President Al Gore reinforced the prevailing concern about sabotage and explo-
sives on aircraft.The Gore Commission also flagged, as a new danger, the pos-
sibility of attack by surface-to-air missiles. Its 1997 final report did not discuss
the possibility of suicide hijackings.
50
The FAA set and enforced aviation security rules, which airlines and air-
ports were required to implement.The rules were supposed to produce a "lay-
ered" system of defense.This meant that the failure of any one layer of security
would not be fatal, because additional layers would provide backup security.
But each layer relevant to hijackings--intelligence, passenger prescreening,
checkpoint screening, and onboard security--was seriously flawed prior to
9/11.Taken together, they did not stop any of the 9/11 hijackers from getting
on board four different aircraft at three different airports.
51
The FAA's policy was to use intelligence to identify both specific plots and
general threats to civil aviation security, so that the agency could develop and
deploy appropriate countermeasures. The FAA's 40-person intelligence unit
was supposed to receive a broad range of intelligence data from the FBI, CIA,
and other agencies so that it could make assessments about the threat to avia-
tion. But the large volume of data contained little pertaining to the presence
and activities of terrorists in the United States. For example, information on
the FBI's effort in 1998 to assess the potential use of flight training by terror-
ists and the Phoenix electronic communication of 2001 warning of radical
Middle Easterners attending flight school were not passed to FAA headquar-
ters. Several top FAA intelligence officials called the domestic threat picture a
serious blind spot.
52
Moreover, the FAA's intelligence unit did not receive much attention from
the agency's leadership. Neither Administrator Jane Garvey nor her deputy rou-
tinely reviewed daily intelligence, and what they did see was screened for them.
She was unaware of a great amount of hijacking threat information from her
own intelligence unit, which, in turn, was not deeply involved in the agency's
policymaking process. Historically, decisive security action took place only after
a disaster had occurred or a specific plot had been discovered.
53
The next aviation security layer was passenger prescreening. The FAA
directed air carriers not to fly individuals known to pose a "direct" threat to
civil aviation. But as of 9/11, the FAA's "no-fly" list contained the names of
just 12 terrorist suspects (including 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh
Mohammed), even though government watchlists contained the names of
many thousands of known and suspected terrorists.This astonishing mismatch
existed despite the Gore Commission's having called on the FBI and CIA four
years earlier to provide terrorist watchlists to improve prescreening.The long-
time chief of the FAA's civil aviation security division testified that he was not
even aware of the State Department's TIPOFF list of known and suspected ter-
COUNTERTERRORISM EVOLVES
83
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 83
rorists (some 60,000 before 9/11) until he heard it mentioned during the
Commission's January 26, 2004, public hearing.The FAA had access to some
TIPOFF data, but apparently found it too difficult to use.
54
The second part of prescreening called on the air carriers to implement an
FAA-approved computerized algorithm (known as CAPPS, for Computer
Assisted Passenger Prescreening System) designed to identify passengers whose
profile suggested they might pose more than a minimal risk to aircraft.
Although the algorithm included hijacker profile data, at that time only pas-
sengers checking bags were eligible to be selected by CAPPS for additional
scrutiny. Selection entailed only having one's checked baggage screened for
explosives or held off the airplane until one had boarded. Primarily because of
concern regarding potential discrimination and the impact on passenger
throughput, "selectees" were no longer required to undergo extraordinary
screening of their carry-on baggage as had been the case before the system was
computerized in 1997.
55
This policy change also reflected the perception that
nonsuicide sabotage was the primary threat to civil aviation.
Checkpoint screening was considered the most important and obvious layer
of security. Walk-through metal detectors and X-ray machines operated by
trained screeners were employed to stop prohibited items. Numerous govern-
ment reports indicated that checkpoints performed poorly, often failing to
detect even obvious FAA test items. Many deadly and dangerous items did not
set off metal detectors, or were hard to distinguish in an X-ray machine from
innocent everyday items.
56
While FAA rules did not expressly prohibit knives with blades under 4
inches long, the airlines' checkpoint operations guide (which was developed in
cooperation with the FAA), explicitly permitted them.The FAA's basis for this
policy was (1) the agency did not consider such items to be menacing, (2) most
local laws did not prohibit individuals from carrying such knives, and (3) such
knives would have been difficult to detect unless the sensitivity of metal detec-
tors had been greatly increased. A proposal to ban knives altogether in 1993
had been rejected because small cutting implements were difficult to detect and
the number of innocent "alarms" would have increased significantly, exacer-
bating congestion problems at checkpoints.
57
Several years prior to 9/11, an FAA requirement for screeners to conduct
"continuous" and "random" hand searches of carry-on luggage at checkpoints
had been replaced by explosive trace detection or had simply become ignored
by the air carriers. Therefore, secondary screening of individuals and their
carry-on bags to identify weapons (other than bombs) was nonexistent, except
for passengers who triggered the metal detectors. Even when small knives were
detected by secondary screening, they were usually returned to the traveler.
Reportedly, the 9/11 hijackers were instructed to use items that would be
undetectable by airport checkpoints.
58
In the pre-9/11 security system, the air carriers played a major role. As the
84
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 84
Inspector General of the Department of Transportation told us, there were great
pressures from the air carriers to control security costs and to "limit the impact
of security requirements on aviation operations, so that the industry could con-
centrate on its primary mission of moving passengers and aircraft. . . . [T]hose
counterpressures in turn manifested themselves as significant weaknesses in
security."A longtime FAA security official described the air carriers' approach
to security regulation as "decry, deny and delay" and told us that while "the air
carriers had seen the enlightened hand of self-interest with respect to safety,
they hadn't seen it in the security arena."
59
The final layer, security on board commercial aircraft, was not designed to
counter suicide hijackings.The FAA-approved "Common Strategy" had been
elaborated over decades of experience with scores of hijackings, beginning in
the 1960s. It taught flight crews that the best way to deal with hijackers was to
accommodate their demands, get the plane to land safely, and then let law
enforcement or the military handle the situation. According to the FAA, the
record had shown that the longer a hijacking persisted, the more likely it was
to end peacefully. The strategy operated on the fundamental assumption that
hijackers issue negotiable demands (most often for asylum or the release of pris-
oners) and that, as one FAA official put it,"suicide wasn't in the game plan" of
hijackers. FAA training material provided no guidance for flight crews should
violence occur.
60
This prevailing Common Strategy of cooperation and nonconfrontation
meant that even a hardened cockpit door would have made little difference in
a hijacking.As the chairman of the Security Committee of the Air Line Pilots
Association observed when proposals were made in early 2001 to install rein-
forced cockpit doors in commercial aircraft,"Even if you make a vault out of
the door, if they have a noose around my flight attendant's neck, I'm going to
open the door." Prior to 9/11, FAA regulations mandated that cockpit doors
permit ready access into and out of the cockpit in the event of an emergency.
Even so, rules implemented in the 1960s required air crews to keep the cock-
pit door closed and locked in flight.This requirement was not always observed
or vigorously enforced.
61
As for law enforcement, there were only 33 armed and trained federal air
marshals as of 9/11.They were not deployed on U.S. domestic flights, except
when in transit to provide security on international departures. This policy
reflected the FAA's view that domestic hijacking was in check--a view held
confidently as no terrorist had hijacked a U.S. commercial aircraft anywhere in
the world since 1986.
62
In the absence of any recent aviation security incident and without "spe-
cific and credible" evidence of a plot directed at civil aviation, the FAA's lead-
ership focused elsewhere, including on operational concerns and the
ever-present issue of safety. FAA Administrator Garvey recalled that "every day
in 2001 was like the day before Thanksgiving." Heeding calls for improved air
COUNTERTERRORISM EVOLVES
85
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 85
service, Congress concentrated its efforts on a "passenger bill of rights," to
improve capacity, efficiency, and customer satisfaction in the aviation system.
There was no focus on terrorism.
63
3.4 . . . AND IN THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY
The National Security Act of 1947 created the position of Director of Central
Intelligence (DCI). Independent from the departments of Defense, State, Justice,
and other policy departments,the DCI heads the U.S.intelligence community and
provides intelligence to federal entities.
The sole element of the intelligence community independent from a cab-
inet agency is the CIA.As an independent agency, it collects, analyzes, and dis-
seminates intelligence from all sources.The CIA's number one customer is the
president of the United States, who also has the authority to direct it to con-
duct covert operations.
64
Although covert actions represent a very small frac-
tion of the Agency's entire budget, these operations have at times been
controversial and over time have dominated the public's perception of the CIA.
The DCI is confirmed by the Senate but is not technically a member of the
president's cabinet.The director's power under federal law over the loose, con-
federated "intelligence community" is limited.
65
He or she states the commu-
nity's priorities and coordinates development of intelligence agency budget
requests for submission to Congress.
This responsibility gives many the false impression that the DCI has line
authority over the heads of these agencies and has the power to shift resources
within these budgets as the need arises. Neither is true. In fact, the DCI's real
authority has been directly proportional to his personal closeness to the presi-
dent, which has waxed and waned over the years, and to others in government,
especially the secretary of defense.
Intelligence agencies under the Department of Defense account for
approximately 80 percent of all U.S. spending for intelligence, including some
that supports a national customer base and some that supports specific Defense
Department or military service needs.
66
As they are housed in the Defense
Department, these agencies are keenly attentive to the military's strategic and
tactical requirements.
One of the intelligence agencies in Defense with a national customer base
is the National Security Agency, which intercepts and analyzes foreign com-
munications and breaks codes.The NSA also creates codes and ciphers to pro-
tect government information. Another is the recently renamed National
Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), which provides and analyzes imagery
and produces a wide array of products, including maps, navigation tools, and
surveillance intelligence. A third such agency in Defense is the National
Reconnaissance Office. It develops, procures, launches, and maintains in orbit
86
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 86
information-gathering satellites that serve other government agencies.
The Defense Intelligence Agency supports the secretary of defense, Joint
Chiefs of Staff, and military field commanders. It does some collection through
human sources as well as some technical intelligence collection. The Army,
Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps have their own intelligence components
that collect information, help them decide what weapons to acquire, and serve
the tactical intelligence needs of their respective services.
In addition to those from the Department of Defense, other elements in the
intelligence community include the national security parts of the FBI; the
Bureau of Intelligence and Research in the State Department; the intelligence
component of the Treasury Department; the Energy Department's Office of
Intelligence and Counterintelligence, the former of which, through leverag-
ing the expertise of the national laboratory system, has special competence in
nuclear weapons; the Office of Intelligence of the Coast Guard; and, today, the
Directorate of Intelligence Analysis and Infrastructure Protection in the
Department of Homeland Security.
The National Security Agency
The National Security Agency's intercepts of terrorist communications often
set off alarms elsewhere in the government. Often, too, its intercepts are con-
clusive elements in the analyst's jigsaw puzzle. NSA engineers build technical
systems to break ciphers and to make sense of today's complex signals environ-
ment. Its analysts listen to conversations between foreigners not meant for
them.They also perform "traffic analysis"--studying technical communications
systems and codes as well as foreign organizational structures, including those
of terrorist organizations.
Cold War adversaries used very hierarchical, familiar, and predictable mili-
tary command and control methods.With globalization and the telecommu-
nications revolution, and with loosely affiliated but networked adversaries using
commercial devices and encryption, the technical impediments to signals col-
lection grew at a geometric rate. At the same time, the end of the Cold War
and the resultant cuts in national security funding forced intelligence agencies
to cut systems and seek economies of scale. Modern adversaries are skilled users
of communications technologies.The NSA's challenges, and its opportunities,
increased exponentially in "volume, variety, and velocity."
67
The law requires the NSA to not deliberately collect data on U.S. citizens
or on persons in the United States without a warrant based on foreign intelli-
gence requirements. Also, the NSA was supposed to let the FBI know of any
indication of crime, espionage, or "terrorist enterprise" so that the FBI could
obtain the appropriate warrant. Later in this story, we will learn that while the
NSA had the technical capability to report on communications with suspected
terrorist facilities in the Middle East, the NSA did not seek FISA Court war-
rants to collect communications between individuals in the United States and
COUNTERTERRORISM EVOLVES
87
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 87
foreign countries, because it believed that this was an FBI role. It also did not
want to be viewed as targeting persons in the United States and possibly vio-
lating laws that governed NSA's collection of foreign intelligence.
68
An almost obsessive protection of sources and methods by the NSA, and its
focus on foreign intelligence, and its avoidance of anything domestic would, as
will be seen, be important elements in the story of 9/11.
Technology as an Intelligence Asset and Liability
The application of newly developed scientific technology to the mission of U.S.
war fighters and national security decisionmakers is one of the great success sto-
ries of the twentieth century. It did not happen by accident. Recent wars have
been waged and won decisively by brave men and women using advanced tech-
nology that was developed, authorized, and paid for by conscientious and dili-
gent executive and legislative branch leaders many years earlier.
The challenge of technology, however, is a daunting one. It is expensive,
sometimes fails, and often can create problems as well as solve them. Some of
the advanced technologies that gave us insight into the closed-off territories
of the Soviet Union during the Cold War are of limited use in identifying and
tracking individual terrorists.
Terrorists, in turn, have benefited from this same rapid development of com-
munication technologies.They simply could buy off the shelf and harvest the
products of a $3 trillion a year telecommunications industry.They could acquire
without great expense communication devices that were varied, global,
instantaneous, complex, and encrypted.
The emergence of the World Wide Web has given terrorists a much easier
means of acquiring information and exercising command and control over
their operations.The operational leader of the 9/11 conspiracy, Mohamed Atta,
went online from Hamburg, Germany, to research U.S. flight schools.Targets
of intelligence collection have become more sophisticated.These changes have
made surveillance and threat warning more difficult.
Despite the problems that technology creates,Americans' love affair with it
leads them to also regard it as the solution. But technology produces its best
results when an organization has the doctrine, structure, and incentives to
exploit it. For example, even the best information technology will not improve
information sharing so long as the intelligence agencies' personnel and secu-
rity systems reward protecting information rather than disseminating it.
The CIA
The CIA is a descendant of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), which Pres-
ident Roosevelt created early in World War II after having first thought the FBI
might take that role.The father of the OSS was William J."Wild Bill" Dono-
van, a Wall Street lawyer. He recruited into the OSS others like himself--well
traveled, well connected, well-to-do professional men and women.
69
88
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Final1-4.4pp 7/17/04 9:12 AM Page 88
An innovation of Donovan's, whose legacy remains part of U.S. intelligence
today, was the establishment of a Research and Analysis Branch. There large
numbers of scholars from U.S. universities pored over accounts from spies, com-
munications intercepted by the armed forces, transcripts of radio broadcasts,
and publications of all types, and prepared reports on economic, political, and
social conditions in foreign theaters of operation.
At the end of World War II, to Donovan's disappointment, President Harry
Truman dissolved the Office of Strategic Services. Four months later, the Pres-
ident directed that "all Federal foreign intelligence activities be planned, devel-
oped and coordinated so as to assure the most effective accomplishment of the
intelligence mission related to the national security," under a National Intelli-
gence Authority consisting of the secretaries of State,War, and the Navy, and a
personal representative of the president.This body was to be assisted by a Cen-
tral Intelligence Group, made up of persons detailed from the departments of
each of the members and headed by a Director of Central Intelligence.
70
Subsequently, President Truman agreed to the National Security Act of
1947, which, among other things, established the Central Intelligence Agency,
under the Director of Central Intelligence. Lobbying by the FBI, combined
with fears of creating a U.S. Gestapo,
71
led to the FBI's being assigned respon-
sibility for internal security functions and counterespionage. The CIA was
specifically accorded "no police, subpoena, or law enforcement powers or
internal security functions."
72
This structure built in tensions between the CIA
and the Defense Department's intelligence agencies, and between the CIA and
the FBI.
Clandestine and Cove