MI5 warned that bin Laden was planning attacks on morning of 9/11


MI5 warned the government that Osama bin Laden was planning an attack in the weeks leading up to September 11, including the morning itself, a new history of the Security Service discloses.

By Duncan Gardham, Security Correspondent
Published: 4:49PM BST 05 Oct 2009

Newly published memos disclose an escalating concern about the terrorist leader right up until the moment he launched his attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York and the Pentagon in Washington killing nearly 3,000 people.

But the files also reveal that MI5 discounted the threat from Islamic extremism just six years before the attacks and did not believe that America was vulnerable.

The author of the book, Defence of the Realm, has been given access to all of MI5’s files dating back to its foundation in October 1909 in the first authorised history of an intelligence service anywhere in the world.

In a memo from July 6 2001, MI5 said the increase in the number of reports were “sufficient to conclude that UBL [Osama bin Laden] and those that share his agenda are currently well advanced in operational planning for a number of major attacks on western interests.”

Professor Christopher Andrew, the Cambridge University historian who wrote the book, added: “Similar Security Service warnings to Whitehall of imminent attack continued at intervals over the next two months, up to and including the morning of 11 September. The intelligence received during the simmer of 2001, however, did not point either to a major attack in the United States or to an operation based on hijacked aircraft.”

But MI5 had huge gaps in its knowledge about al-Qaeda and later on the morning of September 11, Sir Stephen Lander, then director general of MI5, told Tony Blair, the Prime Minister, that bin Laden was not head of a “coherent unified terrorist structure” according to a briefing note.

In an interview with the Daily Telegraph, Sir Stephen said MI5 had been “slow to get going” on the threat because they were pre-occupied with the IRA and that afterwards they had a “major set to, sitting around a board room table working out how to move on.”

MI5 had opened a permanent file on bin Laden in September 1995, but they believed he was a terrorist financier rather than a leader, adding the source of his wealth was a “mystery.”

In December 1995, a memo to the heads of police Special Branches, said: “Suggestions in the press of a world-wide Islamic extremist network poised to launch terrorist attacks against the West are greatly exaggerated…The contact between Islamic extremists in various countries appears to be largely opportunistic at present and seems unlikely to result in the emergence of a potent trans-national force.”

When Dame Stella Rimington visited the US in March 1996, a few weeks before her retirement as head of MI5, she had never heard the name al-Qaeda, the book reveals.

Nevertheless MI5 scored an intelligence triumph shortly afterwards when they became the first western intelligence agency to gain a recording of bin Laden’s voice.

But a memo from 1999 admitted: “The allied intelligence community does not have a clear view of UBL’s terrorist planning process. Even the most reliably sourced intelligence on this question usually consists of a snapshot of a proposed plan being discussed. Most of the reporting does not make clear how advanced the plan is. It is rare that intelligence has named those who are to take part in a planned attack.”

Later in the summer of 1999, MI5 reported: “Intelligence suggests that while UBL is seeking to launch an attack inside the US, he is aware that the US will provide a tough operating environment for his organisation.”

Unknown to MI5, Britain had already been targeted by al-Qaeda. It was only after September 11 that officers discovered that a Pakistani microbiologist called Rauf Ahmad, also known as Abdur Rauf, who traveled to a conference in Britain in September 2000 to try and buy pathogens from fellow delegates, was a high-ranking member of al-Qaeda.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Looking for twelve important dates...one each month...

I would like to use my CI-ing on the 11th of every month to inform the public about SPECIFIC events or information about the lead-up to, or the events and activities after 9/11/2001.

I think that this would be a good way to have a bit more focus for our activisms on each month.

I have a few ideas and here are a few examples: [I really do not memorize many dates in history...never have...so I apologize ahead of time...]

July 10...the comprehensive briefing to Bush by the CIA about the possibility of such attacks...
August 6th...The PDB about...Bin Laden to Attack Within The United States...
September 10th...Rumsfeld admits that the Pentagon cannot fin over two TRILLION in defense funding...
October...the anthrax attacks...The Patriot Act...
November?...the invasion of Afghanistan...
??? Bojinka exposed...


It would be great if anyone in the 9/11 Truth Community has any ideas about similar important dates falling in the twelve months. It would be good to have back-up facts for several months-if not all-to allow for lots of flexibility for activists to put out what they want.

I'm also quite interested in dates that announce 9/11 events that have happened around the world...

Thanks ahead of time for anyone's help in creating this highlights calendar...

This sort of a yearly calendar will help us keep refreshing and informing the citizenry because there still are millions of people that we have yet to reach.

love, peace and progress...

Robin Hordon
Kingston, WA


I'm beginning to wonder if we're ever going to catch Tim Osman.

reliablity of Andrew

Although I always use Wikipedia with caution, it's worth noting the following about Professor Andrew, whose MI5 study is now getting lots of attention:

"In February 2003, Andrew accepted the post of official historian for the Security Service MI5, being chartered to write an official history of the service due for their centennial in 2009. This appointment - which entailed Andrew's enrollment into the Security Service - drew criticism from some historians and commentators. In general, these criticisms drew heavily on the suggestion that he was too close to MI5 to be impartial, and that indeed his link with the Service (formalised with his privileged access to the defectors Gordievsky and Mitrokhin) made him a "court historian" instead of a clear-eyed and critical historian.[5] Persistent—if unfounded—rumours that Andrew was "MI5's main recruiter in Cambridge" have done little to quieten critics.[6]"

Even if the claim that he was a recruiter for MI5 is a nasty lie, the allegation that his assignment "entailed Andrew's enrollment into the Security Service" is very worrying. Until I've done more research on this I'm going to take all of Andrew's revelations with a grain of salt.

A ruse on a ruse

Isn't that the way it goes. Officials in our own govt know exactly who committed the 9/11 atrocities.
I'm sick of hearing the smokescreen stories about Osama and the 19 smokescreen terrorists. Anyone paying attention could see after the fact these "terrorists" were wanton for attention to themselves...very covert.
A real investigation with subpoena power from trustworthy people with expertise in their fields is the only way to get at the whats, whos and wheres Please Support NYCCAN http://nyccan.org/

Osama bin Laden was planning

Osama bin Laden was planning "attacks on the U.S." Really now?

OBL: "working for the US right up until 9/11 - Sibel Edmonds.
OBL: not wanted by FBI for 9/11.
OBL: not indicted by DOJ for 9/11.
OBL: first communiqué post 9/11 denies any involvement.
OBL "confession" videotape - clearly faked/doctored/mistranslated.
OBL visited by CIA, Dubai, June 2001 - not arrested despite being on most wanted list re. US Embassy bombings
OBL stayed at a hospital at Pak/US military/intel facility in Rawalpindi on 9/10/2001 - again not arrested (!).
OBL "escaped" US military in Afghanistan up to 4 times in 2001/2002 after "being surrounded".
OBL's subsequent broadcasts: all probable fakes.
CIA: no link between OBL's finances and 9/11 funding.
OBL's relatives allowed to exit US without been questioned by FBI.
Bush: I am "not particularly concerned" about OBL".
OBL: $25,000,000 reward out for 8 years, dead or alive. No takers.

A clearly nonsensical set of reactions and acts re. the "prime suspect" in the crime of the millennium.

(No subject)