The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : The LA Tower Plot

Text Size

Yesterday, I noted Marc Thiessen's op-ed in which he asserted that the interrogation of KSM helped thwart an attack on the Library Tower in Los Angeles. Thiessen was citing a freshly declassified May 2005 memo (PDF), which states (referencing a CIA "effectiveness memo") that, "the interrogation of KSM -- once enhanced techniques were employed--led to the discovery of a KSM plot, the 'Second Wave,' 'to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into a building in Los Angeles.'" Yesterday, CNSNews reported that the CIA was standing by this claim.

But in Slate, Timothy Noah explains that the timeline doesn't add up:

In a White House press briefing, Bush's counterterrorism chief, Frances Fragos Townsend, told reporters that the cell leader was arrested in February 2002, and "at that point, the other members of the cell" (later arrested) "believed that the West Coast plot has been canceled, was not going forward" [italics mine]. A subsequent fact sheet released by the Bush White House states, "In 2002, we broke up [italics mine] a plot by KSM to hijack an airplane and fly it into the tallest building on the West Coast." These two statements make clear that however far the plot to attack the Library Tower ever got—an unnamed senior FBI official would later tell the Los Angeles Times that Bush's characterization of it as a "disrupted plot" was "ludicrous"—that plot was foiled in 2002. But Sheikh Mohammed wasn't captured until March 2003.

This does raise legitimate questions about the validity of the claim that waterboarding KSM thwarted the LA attack. What still doesn't make sense to me is why the CIA, in a top secret memo, would make a claim to the administration that could so easily be shot down. Remember, this isn't a politician going on TV, but one group of government officials informing another group in a document that they didn't believe was going to be made public. There may be more to this story -- perhaps there were multiple plots, which wouldn't be unheard of -- but until I hear a credible explanation for this discrepancy, I'm going to have to be skeptical about this particular claim.

UPDATE: More here.

View all comments (12) | Leave a comment

Tim| 4.22.09 @ 10:39AM

CIA officers would never orchestrate a campaign to embarass President Bush. Simply unthinkful!

Nope| 4.22.09 @ 12:56PM

I continue to be impressed by Philip Klein's legitimately honest reporting of this issue.

Note to the other writers of 'The American Spectator': It's okay to admit that the Republican party/Conservatives were wrong in the past about some things. They were. And so were/are Liberals and Democrats.

The nice thing about criticizing/being skeptical your own side, as well as the other side, is that it GETS PEOPLE TO TRUST YOU. I'm a total crazy liberal, I'm guessing that I wouldn't agree with most of his views. But the next time I read an article by him, even if I don't agree with it, he'll have built up that reservoir of trust in me. I'll listen more to what he has to say. I'll be willing to question my own beliefs, even. That's how critical writing works. It's a little different from simply issuing a press release for your own side each day, as, oh, let's say, Mr. Vadum and Mr. McCain do.

The next time Mr. Philips writes something criticizing, say, Obama's handling of the economy, I'll actually pause, and pay real attention to his ideas and what he's saying. That's the incredible power of honest reporting. If I trust a writer about one issue, then -- by gosh! -- I might actually trust him on another.

Eyas| 4.22.09 @ 1:13PM

You speak as if the truth matters.

Obama lied; people WOULD HAVE died. (if we had not used the interrogation techniques)

That's the new "truth". Spread it far & wide.

I'm getting a little tired of people who are unwilling to fight propaganda with propaganda -- or, at least, couter-propaganda. Or, we can go ahead & allow the Leftists to continue uncontested control of public sentiment with their propaganda. Perception is NOT reality; but when it controls and brain-washes the vast majority of the populace -- their perceptions influence and control future reality.

"But we're better than that," you say?
"We shouldn't stoop to their level," you opine?

The graveyard of history WOULD be littered with peoples who said the same -- except that there IS no "history" of those peoples -- they, and their very memories have been wiped from humanity's past.

Gabe| 4.22.09 @ 1:42PM

I've got to second what Nope said above. TAS's blog is really subpar compared to The Corner, Contentions, and Weekly Standard.

One reason is that TAS is mainly written by talentless hacks like The Other McCain, who in his quest for millions of hits has adopted the witless strategy of saying the most ludicrous and intellectually and morally degenerate things.

Unfortunately, with guys like him on board, it's hard to take honest fellows like Klein seriously. But this willingness to write what's true, rather than what will garner prime position on Memeorandum, makes it a little easier.

kmichaels| 4.22.09 @ 1:53PM

Here is the part however that both you left out and that the LA Times article glossed over and attempted to water down the threat.

From the LA Times article: "Federal counter-terrorism officials on Friday disclosed for the first time that during his interrogations, Mohammed said he hadn’t completely abandoned the prospect of a second wave of attacks, but had turned the idea over to a trusted aide named Hambali, the chief of operations for an Al Qaeda affiliate group in South Asia, Jemaah Islamiyah.

Hambali, also known as Riduan Isamuddin, in turn is believed to have chosen several men to launch the attacks, including a pilot, and had set aside some money to pay for them, according to one senior counter-terrorism official.

Those men were soon captured, however, and the plot never progressed past the planning stages, according to several counter-terrorism officials."

Hambali was not captured until August 11th 2003.

So, here is the correct timeline and it is totally consistent with the CIA memo of 2005.

2002:
word gets out about KSM attempting to have a 2nd wave attack on the West Coast and KSMs direct involvement and his first choice teams involvement is broken up.

2002:
KSM (as he confesses to in 2003) hands over leadership of 2nd wave attack to Hambali, also known as Riduan Isamuddin

2002 KSM sets up money supply to his Far East operatives, including Hambali, and Hambali (with this money) completes the 2002 bali hotel bombings killing 202 people.

2003 March 1 KSM is captured.
Shortly after his capture KSM (after having been waterboarded, etc) confessed to having turned over his leadership of the 2nd wave attack to Hambali.

2003 Spring (before Hambali is captured but after KSM was captured) according to LA Times article (which you supposedly read) ...

"In the spring of 2003, Los Angeles police officials were summoned to a briefing with the FBI-led Joint Terrorism Task Force and told that the 73-story Library Tower might have been the target of a terrorist plot similar to that of the Sept. 11 suicide hijackings."

2003 August 11 (with information supplied by KSM) Hambali is captured five months after KSM was captured.

I see no inconsistency in this timeline. It seems that neither you nor LA Times were very diligent in putting two and two together.

Smitty| 4.22.09 @ 2:13PM

Liberals only laud articles as 'truth' when they agree with them. Liberal agenda--not independent thought. No integrity and always predictable.

MT| 4.22.09 @ 2:16PM

Gabe, if you don't like TAS, why are you here? Get your whiny butt off our blog. Thank you.

MT| 4.22.09 @ 2:20PM

Eyas and kmichaels, thank you for your posts. A little truth helps rid this thread of liberal troll stench.

kmichaels| 4.22.09 @ 2:35PM

MT, it took me all of 15 minutes to research the stories and put the correct timeline together. I understand how LA Times works. They often have the correct facts but take great pride in how they word their stories in order to give out a false impression and allow their readers to draw the appropriate wrong conclusions. I am surprised however at how easily Philip Klein got suckered into his false conclusion.

MT| 4.22.09 @ 2:42PM

I agree. I think Klein is gullible. I'm tired of the Right bending over backwards to accommodate Demos' lies. Especially dangerous when it comes to national security. Thanks, again.

kmichaels| 4.22.09 @ 2:52PM

MT, you are welcome. One other point to go along with how LA Times works. Notice that KSM gave leadership role to Hambali in 2002 on the West Coast attack and was not captured until August of 2003 yet LA Times words this as him being captured quickly thereafter. I really see how they refer to 16 months afterwards being a quick capture and not enough time to lay out the west coast attack more completely.