DOCSLIB.ORG

Current and Projected National Security Threats to the United States

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Current and Projected National Security Threats to the United States S. HRG. 105±587 CURRENT AND PROJECTED NATIONAL SECURITY THREATS TO THE UNITED STATES HEARING BEFORE THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION ON CURRENT AND PROJECTED NATIONAL SECURITY THREATS TO THE UNITED STATES WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1998 Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Intelligence ( U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 51±954 WASHINGTON : 1998 SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama, Chairman J. ROBERT KERREY, Nebraska, Vice Chairman JOHN H. CHAFEE, Rhode Island JOHN GLENN, Ohio RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana RICHARD H. BRYAN, Nevada MIKE DEWINE, Ohio BOB GRAHAM, Florida JON KYL, Arizona JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma MAX BAUCUS, Montana ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah CHARLES S. ROBB, Virginia PAT ROBERTS, Kansas FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado CARL LEVIN, Michigan DAN COATS, Indiana TRENT LOTT, Mississippi, Ex Officio THOMAS A. DASCHLE, South Dakota, Ex Officio TAYLOR W. LAWRENCE, Staff Director CHRISTOPHER C. STRAUB, Minority Staff Director KATHLEEN P. MCGHEE, Chief Clerk (II) C O N T E N T S Page Hearing held in Washington DC: Wednesday, January 28, 1998 ......................................................................... 1 Statement of: Allard, Hon. Wayne, a U.S. Senator from the State of Colorado ................. 11 Baucus, Hon. Max, a U.S. Senator from the State of Montana .................... 10 Bryant, Robert, Deputy Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation ............. 26 DeWine, Hon. Mike, a U.S. Senator from the State of Ohio ......................... 88 Freeh, Hon. Louis J., Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation ................. 27 Glenn, Hon. John, a U.S. Senator from the State of Ohio ............................ 80 Hughes, Patrick M., Lieutenant General, USA, Director, Defense Intel- ligence Agency ............................................................................................... 70 Inhofe, Hon. James M., a U.S. Senator from the State of Oklahoma .......... 8 Kerrey, Hon. J. Robert, a U.S. Senator from the State of Nebraska ........... 5 Lugar, Hon. Richard G., a U.S. Senator from the State of Indiana ............. 9 Oakley, Hon. Phyllis E., Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research, Department of State ............................................................ 45 Robb, Hon. Charles S., a U.S. Senator from the Commonwealth of Vir- ginia ............................................................................................................... 96 Roberts, Hon. Pat, a U.S. Senator from the State of Kansas ....................... 91 Shelby Hon. Richard C., a U.S. Senator from the State of Alabama ........... 1 Tenet, Hon. George J., Director of Central Intelligence ................................ 12 Testimony of: Bryant, Robert, Deputy Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation ............. 86 Hughes, Patrick M., Lieutenant General, USA, Director, Defense Intel- ligence Agency ............................................................................................... 70 Oakley, Hon. Phyllis E., Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research, Department of State ............................................................ 43 Tenet, Hon. George J., Director of Central Intelligence ................................ 19 Supplemental materials, letters, articles, etc.: Questions for the record, dated March 12, 1998, submitted to the Hon. George J. Tenet, Director of Central Intelligence ...................................... 105 Questions for the record, dated March 12, 1998, submitted to the Hon. Louis J. Freeh, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation ....................... 111 Questions for the record, dated March 12, 1998, submitted to Lt. General Patrick M. Hughes, USA, Director, Defense Intelligence Agency ............. 113 Questions for the record, dated March 12, 1998, submitted to the Hon. Phyllis E. Oakley, Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research, Department of State .................................................................... 118 Letter of transmittal, dated June 9, 1998, responses to questions for the record from the U.S. Department of Justice ........................................ 154 Letter of transmittal, dated June 12, 1998, responses to questions for the record from Defense Intelligence Agency ............................................. 167 Letter of transmittal, dated June 15, 1998, responses to questions for the record from U.S. Department of State .................................................. 122 Letter of transmittal, dated July 24, 1998, responses to questions for the record from Central Intelligence Agency .............................................. 133 (III) CURRENT AND PROJECTED NATIONAL SECURITY THREATS TO THE UNITED STATES WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1998 U.S. SENATE, SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, Washington, DC. The Select Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:37 o'clock a.m., in Room SH±216, Hart Senate Office Building, the Honorable Richard Shelby Chairman of the Committee, presiding. Present: Senators Shelby, Lugar, DeWine, Inhofe, Roberts, Al- lard, Kerrey of Nebraska, Glenn, Baucus and Robb. Also Present: Taylor Lawrence, Staff Director; Chris Straub, Mi- nority Staff Director; Dan Gallington, General Counsel; Don Mitch- ell, Professional Staff; and Kathleen McGhee, Chief Clerk. Chairman SHELBY. The Committee will come to order. Last year marked the 50th anniversary of the enactment of the National Security Act, the legislation that created the Central In- telligence Agency and established the national defense and intel- ligence structure for the Cold War era. This year, we approach an equally significant anniversaryÐNo- vember 1999 will mark the tenth anniversary of the fall of the Ber- lin Wall, the beginning of the end of the Cold War, and the begin- ning of the post-Cold War era. Today, it is fitting that the Committee meet publicly, at the be- ginning of a new session of Congress, to hear the Intelligence Com- munity's views regarding the nature and extent of the changing na- tional security threats to the U.S. The identification and analysis of these threats are crucial to de- fining and conducting our nation's foreign policy. Our intelligence on these threats provides the basis for our defense strategy and planning, informs our budget and procurement choices, and sup- ports our military forces when they go into action. To be useful, intelligence must be timely and, of course, accurate. Equally important, the Intelligence Community must ``call it as it sees it''Ðreporting the facts to policymakers without bias, even if the intelligence findings do not support a particular policy or de- cision. Every day, U.S. policymakers and military forces rely on Intel- ligence Community reporting. By its very nature, most of this infor- mation must be classified to protect the sources and methods from which it is derived. Today we meet in open session so that, at a time of waning inter- est in international affairs, the American people may learn about the very real threats that we face in the post-Cold War era. (1) 2 We look forward to hearing from Director Tenet and other wit- nesses on the broad range of threats to U.S. national security. Many of the issues we will discuss bear directly on critical policy choices facing the administration and the Congress today and in the near future, and raise a number of complex questions. For ex- ample: Once again, Iraq is refusing to allow UN inspectors full access to its weapons programs. How strong is Saddam Hussein within his own country that he can defy the international community? Is he, in fact, better off than he was before he instigated the cur- rent crisis over weapons inspections? What is the status of the Iraqi weapons programs? How quickly could these programs be ex- panded or revived if sanctions were removed? Is it true, as has been suggested in the press, that Iraq tested biological and/or chemical weapons on human beings? Will Saddam Hussein ever comply with the UN resolutions? And on the other side of the Shatt al Arab, we have Iran. Many of us saw Iranian President Khatami's recent television interview. What do his remarks then and subsequentlyÐand the response of his hardline opponentsÐmean for US-Iranian relations? Most critically, has the Intelligence Community seen any reduc- tion in Iranian support for international terrorism, or slackening in Iran's pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, since the election? How soon will Iran deploy new ballistic missiles capable of threatening Israel and other U.S. allies? Iran of course is only one of more than a dozen or so countries which possess or are developing ballistic missile systems, and one of over two dozen nations that are developing weapons of mass de- struction. I am extremely concerned of the potential that such weapons will be used, or that someone somewhere will plausibly threaten to use such weapons, against the United States, our troops, our allies or our interests in the not too distant future. After all, it has already happenedÐthe single greatest loss of life by American forces in the Persian Gulf War came when an Iraqi SCUD crashed into a barracks in Saudi Arabia. How does the Intelligence Community assess the global ballistic missile threat to the United StatesÐthe greatest single threat to our national security? The Committee is looking forward to reviewing in the very near future the updated National Intelligence Estimate on this
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Counterterrorism CHAPTER 13 the Options
    Counterterrorism CHAPTER 13 The Options OPENING VIEWPOINT: THE DEATH OF OSAMA BIN LADEN Al-Qa’ida founder Osama bin Laden was killed during a individual. Based on other surveillance and circumstantial intel- raid by United States naval special forces on May 2, 2011, in ligence information, officials surmised that Osama bin Laden Abbottabad, Pakistan. The successful attack by a unit popularly resided at the compound with his couriers and their families. known as SEAL Team Six ended an intensive manhunt for the Options for assaulting thedistribute compound included a surgi- most wanted terrorist leader in the world. cal strike by special forces, deploying strategic bombers to The successful hunt for Osama bin Laden originated from obliterate the compound, or a joint operation with Pakistani fragments of information gleaned during interrogations of pris- security forces. Theor latter two options were rejected because oners over several years beginning in 2002. Believing that bin of the possibility of killing innocent civilians and distrust of Laden retained couriers to communicate with other operatives, Pakistani security agencies. Approximately two dozen SEAL interrogators focused their attention on questioning high-value commandos practiced intensely for the assault, and were targets about the existence and identities of these couriers. temporarily detailed to the CIA for the mission. A nighttime This focus was adopted with an assumption that bin Laden and helicopter-borne attack was commenced on May 2, 2011. other Al-Qa’ida leaders would rarely communicate using cellpost, The courier al-Kuwaiti and several others were killed during phone technology as a precaution against being intercepted by the assault, and women and children found in the compound Western intelligence agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Patterns of Global Terrorism 1999
    U.S. Department of State, April 2000 Introduction The US Government continues its commitment to use all tools necessary—including international diplomacy, law enforcement, intelligence collection and sharing, and military force—to counter current terrorist threats and hold terrorists accountable for past actions. Terrorists seek refuge in “swamps” where government control is weak or governments are sympathetic. We seek to drain these swamps. Through international and domestic legislation and strengthened law enforcement, the United States seeks to limit the room in which terrorists can move, plan, raise funds, and operate. Our goal is to eliminate terrorist safehavens, dry up their sources of revenue, break up their cells, disrupt their movements, and criminalize their behavior. We work closely with other countries to increase international political will to limit all aspects of terrorists’ efforts. US counterterrorist policies are tailored to combat what we believe to be the shifting trends in terrorism. One trend is the shift from well-organized, localized groups supported by state sponsors to loosely organized, international networks of terrorists. Such a network supported the failed attempt to smuggle explosives material and detonating devices into Seattle in December. With the decrease of state funding, these loosely networked individuals and groups have turned increasingly to other sources of funding, including private sponsorship, narcotrafficking, crime, and illegal trade. This shift parallels a change from primarily politically motivated terrorism to terrorism that is more religiously or ideologically motivated. Another trend is the shift eastward of the locus of terrorism from the Middle East to South Asia, specifically Afghanistan. As most Middle Eastern governments have strengthened their counterterrorist response, terrorists and their organizations have sought safehaven in areas where they can operate with impunity.
    [Show full text]
  • Global War on Terrorism and Prosecution of Terror Suspects: Select Cases and Implications for International Law, Politics, and Security
    GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM AND PROSECUTION OF TERROR SUSPECTS: SELECT CASES AND IMPLICATIONS FOR INTERNATIONAL LAW, POLITICS, AND SECURITY Srini Sitaraman Introduction The global war on terrorism has opened up new frontiers of transnational legal challenge for international criminal law and counterterrorism strategies. How do we convict terrorists who transcend multiple national boundaries for committing and plotting mass atrocities; what are the hurdles in extraditing terrorism suspects; what are the consequences of holding detainees in black sites or secret prisons; what interrogation techniques are legal and appropriate when questioning terror suspects? This article seeks to examine some of these questions by focusing on the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT), particularly in the context of counterterrorism strategies that the United States have pursued towards Afghanistan-Pakistan (Af-Pak) since the September 2001 terror attacks on New York and Washington D.C. The focus of this article is on the methods employed to confront terror suspects and terror facilitators and not on the politics of cooperation between the United States and Pakistan on the Global War on Terrorism or on the larger military operation being conducted in Afghanistan and in the border regions of Pakistan. This article is not positioned to offer definitive answers or comprehensive analyses of all pertinent issues associated with counterterrorism strategies and its effectiveness, which would be beyond the scope of this effort. The objective is to raise questions about the policies that the United States have adopted in conducting the war on terrorism and study its implications for international law and security. It is to examine whether the overzealousness in the execution of this war on terror has generated some unintended consequences for international law and complicated the global judicial architecture in ways that are not conducive to the democratic propagation of human rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Shooting at CIA HQ Remains a Mystery
    Click here for Full Issue of EIR Volume 20, Number 9, February 26, 1993 had successfully penetrated an intelligence operation involv­ ing Israeli, Chinese, and Russian age"ts. According to pub­ lished accounts, Darling may have been involved in supply­ ing arms to CIA-backed Afghan Mujiahideen rebels during the 1980s. If the shootings were actually aimed at Darling (he was Shooting at CIA HQ shot three times, whereas all the other victims were only shot once), the question then emerges: Was the "hit" carried remains a mystery out by one of the three intelligence agencies cited above? An assassination in broad daylight, outside the main gate of by Jeffrey Steinberg CIA headquarters, is quite a provo¢ative act, and could trigger the kind of bloody intelligence warfare that often characterized the tensest moments of the Cold War. Even though the FBI and Fairfax County, Virginia police have identified a Pakistani national, Mir Aimal Kansi, as the A lot of blue smoke and mirrors man who shot five people outside the main gate of the CIA Predictably, the American media have had a field day at Langley on Jan. 25, many crucial questions about the speculating about the suspected killer Mir Aimal Kansi. terrorist incident remain unanswered, and many experienced Among the most bizarre features of hiS profile is his employ­ observers believe that the mystery will never be solved. Dur­ ment by a courier service owned by the son of former CIA ing the Monday morning rush hour on Jan. 25, a man armed official Victor Marchetti. A former executive assistant to the with a rifle walked down a row of cars stopped at a traffic deputy to CIA director Richard Helms, Marchetti quit the light on Route 123 just outside the main headquarters of the agency in 1969 and wrote one of the earliest exposes of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 9-11 and Terrorist Travel- Full
    AND TERRORIST TRAVEL Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States 9/11 AND TERRORIST TRAVEL Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States By Thomas R. Eldridge Susan Ginsburg Walter T. Hempel II Janice L. Kephart Kelly Moore and Joanne M. Accolla, Staff Assistant Alice Falk, Editor Note from the Executive Director The Commission staff organized its work around specialized studies, or monographs, prepared by each of the teams. We used some of the evolving draft material for these studies in preparing the seventeen staff statements delivered in conjunction with the Commission’s 2004 public hearings. We used more of this material in preparing draft sections of the Commission’s final report. Some of the specialized staff work, while not appropriate for inclusion in the report, nonetheless offered substantial information or analysis that was not well represented in the Commission’s report. In a few cases this supplemental work could be prepared to a publishable standard, either in an unclassified or classified form, before the Commission expired. This study is on immigration, border security and terrorist travel issues. It was prepared principally by Thomas Eldridge, Susan Ginsburg, Walter T. Hempel II, Janice Kephart, and Kelly Moore, with assistance from Joanne Accolla, and editing assistance from Alice Falk. As in all staff studies, they often relied on work done by their colleagues. This is a study by Commission staff. While the Commissioners have been briefed on the work and have had the opportunity to review earlier drafts of some of this work, they have not approved this text and it does not necessarily reflect their views.
    [Show full text]
  • Terrorism and Counterterrorism SEPTEMBER 17, 2015 – DECEMBER 2, 2015
    Terrorism and Counterterrorism SEPTEMBER 17, 2015 – DECEMBER 2, 2015 DEFINITION OF TERMS HANDOUT We've taken these definitions from the following: 9/11 Commission Report, Wikipedia, Encyclopedia Britannica, Merriam-Webster, Marie-Helen Maras (Counterterrorism), Psychwiki, Mitchell Silber (The Al-Qaeda Factor), Andrew Kydd and Barbara Walter (Strategies of Terrorism), Federation of American Scientists, CIA Guide to the Analysis of Insurgency, Bruce Hoffman (Inside Terrorism), Janes Insurgency & Terrorism Centre, U.S. Department of Defense, Council on Foreign Relations, PBS, Harry Henderson (Global Terrorism), Harry Henderson (Terrorism), Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Encyclopedia of the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A Political, Social, and Military History, ed. Spencer C. Tucker, Priscilla Roberts, Hussain Haqqani (Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military), Contemporary World Issues: U.S. National Security: A Reference Handbook, Second Edition, "Homeland Security: Legal and Policy Issues," Cornell Law School's Legal Information Institute, USLegal, The 9/11 Encyclopedia: Second Edition, the Denver Post, Harvey W. Kushner (Encyclopedia of Terrorism), Federal Judicial Center, Counterterrorism Data Mining, Gus Martin (Understanding Terrorism: Challenges, Perspectives, and Issues), and West Point's Combating Terrorism Center. At times we modified them based on course content, and in others we used text, at times exact, from these sources. Should you wish to know the particular sourcing of any term, please contact Marc Meyer at [email protected]. ​ ​ Section Key Term Definition Index 1,2 9/11 Attacks On September 11, 2011, nineteen terrorists, directed by Al-Qaeda, high jacked four commercial passenger jets, killing almost 3,000 people and injuring thousands more. Two of the airliners crashed into the World Trade Center in New York City, causing both buildings to collapse, while a third plane crashed into the Pentagon outside of Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Patterns of Global Terrorism, 1993
    Terrorism Resources PATTERNS OF GLOBAL TERRORISM, 1993 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE Office of the Secretary Office of the Coordinator for CounterterrorismDepartment of State Publication 10136 APRIL 1994 CONTENTS ● Introduction ● The Year in Review ● African Overview ● Asian Overview ● European Overview ● Latin American Overview ● Middle Eastern Overview ● State-Sponsored Terrorism Overview ● International Community Action Against Terrorism ● Appendixes U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 1994 APRIL: PATTERNS OF GLOBAL TERRORISM, 1993 Department of State Publication 10136 Office of the Secretary Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism CONTENTS ● Introduction ● Legislative Requirements ● Definitions ● Note Introduction Global issues are a central focus of the Clinton administration, and international terrorism is one of the deadliest and most persistent. Terrorism made the headlines throughout 1993: ● The World Trade Center bombing in February. ● The foiled Iraqi plat to assassinate former President Bush in Kuwait in April. ● Numerous coordinated attacks by the Kurdistan Workers Party throughout Western Europe on two separate dates in June and November. It is clear that terrorism is an issue that will remain with us for quite some time. The focus of the US counterterrorism policy for more than a decade has been simple and direct: ● Make no concessions. ● Apply the rule of law and improve the capabilities of friendly governments to counter the threat they face. ● Apply pressure on state sponsors. The key to a successful, long-term counterterrorism policy is international cooperation on these three basic elements. The United States enforced this policy in many ways during the past year: ● When it became clear that the Government of Iraq was responsible for the foiled plot to kill former President Bush, the United States used military force to demonstrate to Saddam Husayn that such behavior would not be tolerated.
    [Show full text]
  • Kasi V. Angelone 300 F.3D 487 (4Th Cir
    Capital Defense Journal Volume 15 | Issue 1 Article 18 Fall 9-1-2002 Kasi v. Angelone 300 F.3d 487 (4th Cir. 2002) Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlucdj Part of the International Law Commons, and the Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons Recommended Citation Kasi v. Angelone 300 F.3d 487 (4th Cir. 2002), 15 Cap. DEF J. 203 (2002). Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlucdj/vol15/iss1/18 This Casenote, U.S. Fourth Circuit is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Capital Defense Journal by an authorized editor of Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Kasi v. Angelone 300 F.3d 487 (4th Cir. 2002) L Facts On Monday, January 25, 1993, a lone gunman emerged from his car and opened fire with an AK-47 assault rifle on a line of automobiles waiting to enter the Central Intelligence Agency ("CIA"). Two CIA employees, Frank Darling ("Darling") and Lansing Bennett ("Bennett") were killed, three other CIA employees, Nicholas Starr, Calvin Morgan, and Stephen Williams were wounded. All five victims were waiting to enter the CIA headquarters in Fairfax, Virginia, in separate automobiles. The gunman, identified as MirAimalKasi ("Kasi"), also known as Mir Aimal Kansi, fled the scene.' Kasi, a native of Pakistan, was working as a driver for a local courier service and lived in Reston, Virginia with a friend, Zahed Mir ("MNW).
    [Show full text]
  • Pakistan-US Relations
    Order Code IB94041 CRS Issue Brief for Congress Received through the CRS Web Pakistan-U.S. Relations Updated December 31, 2001 Barbara Leitch LePoer Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Congressional Research Service The Library of Congress CONTENTS SUMMARY MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS Context of the Relationship Historical Background U.S. 1990 Aid Cut-off Pakistan-India Rivalry The China Factor Pakistan Political Setting Background Pakistan-U.S. Relations and Bilateral Issues Security Nuclear Weapons and Missile Proliferation U.S. Nonproliferation Efforts Congressional Action Pakistan-U.S. Military Cooperation Democratization and Human Rights Democratization Efforts Human Rights Problems Economic Issues Economic Reforms and Market Opening Trade and Trade Issues Narcotics Terrorism CHRONOLOGY IB94041 12-31-01 Pakistan-U.S. Relations SUMMARY The major areas of U.S. concern in Paki- ity to waive, for two years, sanctions imposed stan include: nuclear nonproliferation; counter- on Pakistan following its 1999 military coup. terrorism; regional stability; democratization and human rights; and economic reform and Both Congress and the Administration development. An ongoing Pakistan-India consider a stable, democratic, economically nuclear arms race, fueled by rivalry over Kash- thriving Pakistan as key to U.S. interests in mir, continues to be the focus of U.S. South, Central, and West Asia. Although nonproliferation efforts in South Asia and a ruled by military regimes for half of its exis- major issue in U.S. relations with both coun- tence, from 1988-99, Pakistan had democratic tries. This attention intensified following governments as a result of national elections in nuclear tests by both India and Pakistan in 1988, 1990, 1993, and 1997.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Choices: Four Legal Models for Counterterrorism in Pakistan
    ARTICLE Strategic Choices: Four Legal Models for Counterterrorism in Pakistan James J. Saulino* I. Introduction In 2004, the 9/11 Commission made clear the need for a comprehensive and sustained U.S. counterterrorism strategy in Pakistan. “It is hard to overstate the importance of Pakistan in the struggle against Islamist terrorism,” the Commissioners wrote, urging U.S. policymakers to “make the difficult long-term commitment to the future of Pakistan.”1 They went on to note both the particular challenge posed by Pakistan and the need for cooperation with the Pakistani government.2 Accordingly, the Commission recommended the development of “a realistic strategy to keep possible terrorists insecure and on the run, using all elements of national power.”3 This kind of all-fronts counterterrorism policy in Pakistan had begun to take shape even before the 9/11 Commission issued its recommendations. Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed were apprehended in 2002 and 2003 as part of a joint effort between Pakistan and U.S. intelligence agencies, and the Pakistani military began an offensive in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas in 2004.4 In subsequent years, * J.D. candidate, Harvard Law School, 2011; M.P.P. candidate, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, 2011; A.B., Princeton University, 2003. The author would like to thank Professor Eric Rosenbach for his guidance and assistance with this project. 1 NATIONAL COMMISSION ON TERRORIST ATTACKS UPON THE UNITED STATES, FINAL REPORT 369 (2004) [hereinafter 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT]. 2 Id. at 368. 3 Id. at 367. 4 Tim McGirk, Anatomy of a Raid, TIME, Apr.
    [Show full text]
  • Present: All the Justices MIR AIMAL KASI OPINION by JUSTICE A
    Present: All the Justices MIR AIMAL KASI OPINION BY JUSTICE A. CHRISTIAN COMPTON v. Record Nos. 980797 November 6, 1998 980798 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF FAIRFAX COUNTY J. Howe Brown, Judge On Monday, January 25, 1993, near 8:00 a.m., a number of automobiles were stopped in two north-bound, left-turn lanes on Route 123 in Fairfax County at the main entrance to the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The vehicle operators had stopped for a red traffic light and were waiting to turn into the entrance. At the same time, a lone gunman emerged from another vehicle, which he had stopped behind the automobiles. The gunman, armed with an AK-47 assault rifle, proceeded to move among the automobiles firing the weapon into them. Within a few seconds, Frank Darling and Lansing Bennett were killed and Nicholas Starr, Calvin Morgan, and Stephen Williams were wounded by the gunshots. All the victims were CIA employees and were operators of separate automobiles. The gunman, later identified as defendant Mir Aimal Kasi, also known as Mir Aimal Kansi, fled the scene. At this time, defendant, a native of Pakistan, was residing in an apartment in Reston with a friend, Zahed Mir. Defendant was employed as a driver for a local courier service and was familiar with the area surrounding the CIA entrance. The day after the shootings, defendant returned to Pakistan. Two days later, Mir reported to the police that defendant was a "missing person." On February 8, 1993, the police searched Mir's apartment and discovered the weapon used in the shootings as well as other property of defendant.
    [Show full text]
  • Ghost Wars: the Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, F
    Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and bin Laden, f... http://www.carnegiecouncil.org/resources/transcripts/4421.html/:pf_print... Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001 Steve Coll , Joanne J. Myers March 1, 2004 Introduction Remarks Questions and Answers Introduction JOANNE MYERS: Good morning. I’m Joanne Myers, Director of Merrill House Programs, and on behalf of the Carnegie Council I’d like to thank you for joining us as we welcome Steve Coll to speak about Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and bin Laden, Ghost Wars: The from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001. Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and In the wake of what is currently perceived as the CIA’s historic failure on September 11, bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to much of the postmortem on the attack has focused on the failures of communication and September 10, 2001 information-sharing among the CIA, the FBI, and the National Security Agency, and their inability to connect the so-called dots. While it now appears that there certainly was a paucity of dot-connecting prior to 9/11, this begs the more important question as to whether there were realistically enough dots to connect. The literature on this and related topics flows on in an unabated fashion. However, with the publication of Ghost Wars, at last we have a comprehensive and penetrating account of the inside story of the U.S. involvement in Afghanistan as to what actually happened, or more precisely, what did not happen.
    [Show full text]