CHAPTER ONE FALSE POSITIVES
At noon on September 13, a passing agent ducked his head into Dennis Lormelâs office. He said that someone had called from the Omaha FBI office. A company named First Data Corporation, with a huge processing facility out there, wanted to help in any way it could. A red-eyed Lormel looked up from his desk. âOh, thatâs big,â he said, breaking into a weary smile. âThat could be very, very big.â
The son of a New York City cop, Lormel had spent two decades working the financial angle of some of the bureauâs biggest cases, from corrupt congressmen in the Abscam scandal, to allegations of Billy Carter being bribed by Libyans, to the Bank of Credit and Commerce International, or BCCI, the mother of all international bank frauds.
First Data is one of the worldâs largest processors of credit card transactions, a company with $6.5 billion in revenues and a global reach. Lormel knew there would be scores of names to check, starting with the nineteen hijackers, and that each name would produce several hitsâfalse positivesâthat would then have to be checked against the place and time specifics of spending histories. There would be civil liberties issuesâlegally, each credit card search demanded a warrant. There might not be time for that; another attack might be on the way.
But Lormel also knew something most of the agents running sleepless around FBI headquarters two days after 9/11 didnât know: First Data was not only the worldâs leading credit card processorâan extraordinary ally at this moment. âInside that company,â he told the young agent, âis a gem.â
Western Union.
The old telegraph company was the engine of a technological revolution many generations removed from the present. Its heyday was in the 1850s, when it began stringing wire cables across the Northeast, then the first transcontinental cable in 1861. Five years later, those cables carried trading on the New York Stock Exchange to cities up and down the East Coast on âtickers.â It was hailed as a miracle.
The world moved on. But many of the twenty-two nations in the Arab world still have a foot planted in this past. Western Union, with nearly $2.7 billion in revenue, remains a destination for a wide slice of the Arab worldâs 300 million residents. In some less favored parts of the globe, the only way to wire funds is the old-fashioned way. You bring your money to the Western Union office. You hand it over. They count it. And soon, transmission is made to another of the companyâs offices, a hot flash of cold cash.
The so-called âwar on terrorâ is about unlikely twists, strange alliances, about things you least expect. The unexpected is, in fact, what catches a swiftly adaptable enemyânamely, a global village of Islamic terroristsâby surprise. Lormel is a financial crimes wizard, who talks like a longshoreman, knows how to play rough, and has a fine-tuned capacity to think like his preyâa perfect character for a moment that demands innovation. The previous night, heâd arrived home for dinner after wandering in a daydream through a frantic FBI headquarters for much of the day. He told his wife, Molly, âI figured a lot of stuff out⊠we need a massive integrated approach to thisâthe whole government working togetherâand we can wrap them up, all of them, the bastards. Thereâs a lot we can do now on the financial side that we could never do before. If, for once, we can just get everyone organized.â
Now, sitting in his office, Lormel told the young agent to go get him a number for First Data, and he chewed over an idea: âWe need to turn this company into a deadly weapon.â
On the seventh floor of CIA headquarters, at midnight on September 13, George Tenet, an exhausted forty-eight, slumped into his office. He hadnât slept more than a few hours since the attacks, and it was starting to show. Jami Miscik, Tenetâs deputy associate director of intelligence, stuck her head in the doorway.
âReady to crash?â
âMaybe soon,â he said. âBut not for long.â
Miscik, a slender brunette in her fifties, had affection for Tenet, whoâd made her his executive assistant back when he was the deputy director in 1996, and, as director, promoted her to the number two job in the Directorate of Intelligence, or DIâhome of CIAâs army of analysts. Theyâd been through a lot together. Nothing, though, like what was to come.
She loves George. They all seem to on the seventh floor at CIA, a rarity in a place where the walls are primed with secrecy and the distrust it breeds. Among recent DCIs (Directors of Central Intelligence) heâs an anomaly, with a kind of clumsy, shirt-untucked openness, and a behavioral tic whereby he has trouble criticizing anyone, even when they deserve it. Most of the trouble he gets into is because he aims to please, even when heâs screaming at you.
She eased in and sat on the arm of a cushioned chair across from his desk, a conditional posture, so she could slip out if he was too tired, or if a call came from somebody more important, anxious to talk. The upper reaches of government wereâat this momentâjammed with anxious somebodies.
Miscik, who joined the agency in 1983 as an economic analyst, now watched over thousands of analysts who read the human intelligence, or humint, collected by field agents, clandestine agents, and foreign sources of human intelligence, and the signals intelligence, or sigint, from the vast U.S. network of eavesdropping. Their goal is to make sense of it in so-called âoperational timeââwhich translates into when needed, or, in the current parlance, in time to save lives. On that, they had failed. Things had been missed. Miscik knew that. It didnât matter that her taskâor theirs, at the DIâwas a task that flirted with abstract limits: knowing everything you need to know, when you need to know it.
âWe need to figure out new ways that we can take this story apart and put it back together again,â she said. âSee what else might there be⊠what we may be missing.â
Tenet grabbed his pad. âAll right,â he said. âWhere do we start?â
âWith a few of the most creative people we can find to head up a unit of people whoâve never worked on terrorism,â she said. âSee what they see as they look at what weâre facing, see if they see anything different.â
âFresh eyes,â Tenet said, rubbing his own. âWe could use some of those.â They discussed names, until Miscik slipped out, saying sheâd have a list compiled by morning.
Tenet turned toward the window, and leaned back in his chair. Just above the line of trees that obscures the CIA campus, the lights of Washingtonâan altered city, reconstructing its worldviewâwere barely visible in the distance. An endless day was now ending. Not that it hadnât gone well. It had, better than he could have hoped. That morning, one of Tenetâs key deputiesâthe tough, theatrical Cofer Black, head of the agencyâs Counter-Terrorist Centerâhad given an astonishing performance in the White House Situation Room. After nine months of daily presidential briefings, Tenet knew Black would be the right man to stir George W. Bushâs blood. And he was. The President was getting his bearings. Now that it was clear who was behind the attacks, he was anxious to think clearly about the U.S. response. Pacing the floor in the Situation Room, under the quizzical gazes of National Security Council (NSC) principals and an anxious President, Black had laid out a plan that Tenet and other senior agency officials had swiftly constructed: a campaign led by CIA, supported by U.S. Special Forces, that would soon invade Afghanistan, employ local tribal leaders and hard-bitten fighters, and decapitate al Qaeda in its Afghan refuge. There would be a cost, Black saidâU.S. soldiers and CIA operatives would dieâbut the enemy would âhave flies walking across their eyeballs.â
The Presidentâin full action modeânodded, alert and hard-eyed. Later, heâd call this a âturning point in my thinking,â the framing of a plan to invade Afghanistan. In the afternoon, at another NSC meeting, Bush had given a preliminary nod as well to ideas Tenet had for granting the CIA added powers. Powers, as Tenet told him, âto take off the shacklesâ and really go after the enemy. To rise to this occasion, the agency would need more money, more trained bodies, more latitude. Theyâd need a global strategy. Bush agreed. Already, just two days after the attacks, he wanted moreâmore details, more ideas, more of everything.
All of which made George Tenet fairly sure he wouldnât be fired.
It was thoroughly logical to have wondered, of course. Presidents, all leaders, need someone to blame at moments like this. When a country is caught by surprise, the person designated with knowing enough to prevent surprisesâa vizier, an archduke, a particular general, an intelligence chiefâwill generally take the fall.
âOf course, you knew we all could be fired,â said John McLaughlin, Tenetâs deputy, looking back. âNo one had a whole lot of time to think about that. It was mostly, âGo, go, go. We know what to do. Letâs pull a plan together. If someone wants to fire us, fine! Weâll just give him a plan on our way out the door.â â
To understand what would occur over the coming four years, it is crucial to understand this mix of insecurity and gratitudeâthis survivorâs guilt, survivorâs surprise, survivorâs appreciationâand how it played out, especially in terms of George Tenet.
It is the key to a central relationship in the âwar on terrorââthe dance between the two Georges. They were a natural pair from the startâgregarious men, blunt, physical, cut-the-crap typesâbut from very different worlds. Tenet, the son of working-class Greek immigrants, a New Yorker, was a self-made man, a Democrat, whoâd come up through Congressâas a staff director on the Senate Intelligence Committee, then over to the NSC, then to CIAâs number two position in the mid-nineties, having impressed Clintonâand always felt he needed to prove himself, to earn his way. Bush, on almost all those points, hailed from a smug loyal opposition, having stamped advantages of birth with his own mark and risen to the nationâs highest perch, matching his father. When Tenet was kept on after the 2000 election, there were whispers of surprise from within the White House. The old man had a role, knowledgeable insiders said, telling his son that Tenet was a good man and that CIA should remain beyond politics, a point made by keeping Tenet aboard. In theory, fine, but letâs see how it works out, they said. See how he fits with Bush and Cheney. Tenet heard them, and each dayâat each official ceremony and early-morning briefingâhe sought to prove his worth. Every top official serves âat the pleasure of the President.â For Tenet, an outsider in the inner circle, the phrase was served, cold, at each dayâs breakfast.
And that was all before the tragic events. Had Bush fired the CIA director in the wake of 9/11, Tenet would have been cast into an abyss of almost unfathomable censure, the kind that crushes lives. The unseen attack matched with someone to blame. Judgment. Eternal vilification.
When Republican congressmen attacked Tenet in the days after 9/11, Bush swiftly came to his aid. âWe cannot be second-guessing our team,â the President told a group of angry congressmen aboard Air Force One on September 27, âand Iâm not going to. The nationâs at war. We need to encourage Congress to frankly leave the man alone. Tenetâs doing a good job. And if heâs not, blame me, not him.â
At that point, George Tenet would do anything his President asked. Anything. And George W. Bush knew it.
On Friday, September 14, when the President of the United States wanted a grant of special powers from Congress, his team arrived on Capitol Hill well prepared.
It so happened that administration lawyers had for months been incubating theories about how to expand presidential power. The ideas were originally seeded by the Vice President, a believer, since his harrowing days in the death throes of the Nixon administration, that executive power had been dangerously diminished.
In both the House and Senate, White House negotiators pressed for the broadest possible legislative language, including authorization to engage in wide-ranging activities on U.S. territory.
The language of the proposed resolution authorized the President âto use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.â A sweeping mandate. Minutes before the vote, the White House officials had pressed for even moreâafter âuse all necessary and appropriate force,â they wanted to insert âin the United States,â to, essentially, grant war powers to anything a president deigned to do within the United States. Senators shot that down. That would be without precedent. A resolution passed in the Senate by a vote of 98 to 0 and in the House by a vote of 420 to 1.
Two days later, on Sunday morning, September 16, Vice President Dick Cheney settled into a secure cabin overlooking Camp David, the presidential retreat in the Maryland mountains, to explain how the President would use this extraordinary grant. Cheney, with more executive branch experience than any vice president in modern times, knew this was his moment. The President had spoken briefly in televised addresses, and then on Friday afternoon from the rubble of the World Trade Center with a bullhorn. Now, it was Cheneyâs turn to speak about execution, how to get the job done, his mĂ©tier. The lights came up, and it was clear that Tim Russert of NBCâs Meet the Press would ask few questions today. Viewers wanted to hear the Vice President speak. In a moment, Cheney settled into his stentorian rhythm, the grumbling, got-this-covered, call-you-if-I-need-you thrump of crew-cut speech. In fighting al Qaeda, he said, the government needed to âwork through, sort of, the dark side.â Crises prompt candor. The country was in trauma. Cheney was, against his nature, opening the playbook on national television. âA lot of what needs to be done here will have to be done quietly, without any discussion, using sources and methods that are available to our intelligence agencies, if weâre going to be successful. Thatâs the world these folks operate in. And so itâs going to be vital for us to use any means at our disposal, basically, to achieve our objective.â
Experts on Osama bin Laden often advise, âListen to what he says. Itâs all there. He says what he means.â In this one case, that was also true of the Vice President. So much is in that one statement, so much more, in its way, than the bold, blood-quickening calls to bring âinfinite justiceâ to our enemies abroadâand, yes, maybe hiding among usâevildoers who would soon taste the fury of might sharpened by right. Not that those calls to arms werenât effective. They were; just maybe not suited for the challenge America now faced. The real action, Cheney said, would not happen with armies assembled and banners waving. It would happen in the shadows.
At a special cabinet meeting on Monday morning, September 17, the President handed out assignments. After a weekend of deliberation with his top officials at Camp David, it was time for action. The mission was to oust al Qaeda from its Afghanistan refuge and, if necessary, destroy the countryâs ruling Taliban regime. The response, in this case, would bridge old and new, engaging intelligence officers, air-power, and a light military footprint. âThe CIA is in first,â Bush told the seventeen top officials of the U.S. government gathered around the cabinet table that morning, each of whomâthe Secretaries of State, Treasury, Energy, Defense, Justiceâwould leave with a task list. The CIA teams would immediately begin by engaging with the Afghan tribesâsupporting, directing, bribingâand prepare the terrain for the arrival of U.S. Special Forces. Targeted bombings would most likely commence soon, it was hoped by early October. A limited number of U.S. troopsâa few thousandâwould then arrive, guided by a map largely drawn by CIA agents who had experience in the region and, now, the full faith of the President.
Washington, day by day, had already become the bustling capital of a twilight struggleâthe so-called âwar on terror,â a term that was settling unevenly into the global vernacular. Close facsimiles had been floated for a week or so after the attacks and before President Bush used it, just so, in his landmark speech of September 20, 2001, declaring before a joint session of Congress that âOur âwar on terrorâ begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach had been found, stopped and defeated.â
The termâs meaning drifted fitfully, being defined mostly by what it was notâa kind of definition by default. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer parried with reporters at a press conference on the key issue: use of the word âwar.â
âYou donât declare war against an individual, surely?â puzzled one.
âHow can you declare war against a nation when you donât know the nation involved?â the reporter asked.
âI donât know whether we should use the word âwar,â â French president Jacques Chirac said, standing next to George W. Bush at a press conference shortly after 9/11, when the two countries stood united. âBut what I can say is that now we are faced with a conflict of a completely new nature.â
Several immediate responses would, indeed, be of a ânew nature.â One, that the CIAâan intelligence agencyâwould be the central actor, a kind of loosely assembled army, with many tasks. Too many. Though the agency had failed in its prime missionâspecific advance warning of the 9/11 attacksâmore than any other arm of the U.S. government it was ready for the aftermath. While other parts of the government looked at what institutional capabilities they might now employ to protect and defend America, CIA was already several years into âthe plan,â a strategic analysis of how to fight al Qaeda that the agency had started in 1999âa full year after Tenet said to his staff that âweâd spare no expense in funds or bodiesâ in fighting this threat from transnational terrorist groups.
Strong words. But, as months slipped into years, not much to show for the bluster. While, surely, funds had been tight, and proposed budget increases had been turned down by both Clinton and Bush, only a modest share of overall CIA resources had been put toward the counterterrorism effort. There were too many weaknesses in too many areas at the agency, which had lost nearly a quarter of its budget in the 1990s as part of the âpeace dividend.â The clandestine service had been gutted. Humint assets in the Arab world were almost nonexistent. Tenetâs strategy to counter the growing terrorist threat had been to rebuild the entire...