^CZ^QLC,V>1

n^lf
-IKean

* H Hamilton
Date: S<L.k^'<£
VICE CHAIR
\d-^jr IQ_ y
Aard Bet Veniste
TO: TEAM
otOeland £o^<
sd F. Fielding FROM: Dianna Campagna
JieS.Gorelick

le Gorton
The attached correspondence from . _ . —-
i Lehman

othyj. Eoemer is being forwarded to you for information and consideration. A copy has rf
also been sent to Team(s) ^^.s for their information. If you /^-' / CL I— '
ss R. Thompson
have any questions, please call me on 331 -4082. Thank you.
- -
pD.Zelilaow
^JTIVE DIRECTOR

TEL (202) 331-4060

FAX (202) 296-5545
www.9-1 Icommissioagov
9/11 Personal Privacy

q_
England

Telephone
Fax

e-mail

Book www.business-minds.com

Governor Thomas H Kean

Chairman
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States
301 7th Street SW
Room 5125
Washington DC 20407
USA March 23,2004

Dear Governor Kean,

As I am certain you know, the work of your Commission is of great interest to this
country, which lost 69 people in the attacks. It also of course interests the entire
world, and not only the 90 nations which suffered a direct loss of life. Everyone on
Earth has been affected in some way by the events of 911.

I can tell you that the reports in the British media on the Commission have inspired
great confidence in its independence and integrity, and in your own.

I am writing as an ordinary British citizen. I was not directly affected by 911, other
than being born a New Yorker and feeling numbed and devastated by the attack on
the city, and anxious for family and friends. I wanted to make a specific suggestion
for this phase of your inquiry and then to mention a few specific topics which have
raised concerns among many British people.

Your inquiry now seems to be focused on the priorities of the Bush administration in
the months leading up to September 11, and whether these gave sufficient attention
to the threat from Al-Qaeda. Of course this is a highly contentious issue, particularly
in an election year, and the evidence you receive from American witnesses could be
colored by partisanship. I wonder therefore whether the Commission has considered
seeking evidence from the British government on this very point? Given the close
relationship between our countries, not only at a political level but at a working level
throughout the diplomatic, defense, intelligence and security communities, British
government sources could say a great deal about the degree of focus of the
administration on Al-Qaeda or Iraq or other issues, without any element of
partisanship.

Of course you have no power to compel the production of evidence or witnesses

from an overseas government. But given the intense interest of the British people in
your inquiry I do not think that our government would refuse your request. Perhaps
you have had evidence from them already, but if so there has been no account of this
in the British media or Parliament.

Broadly speaking, the British people are surprised that so many questions
surrounding 911 are unanswered so long after the event. I would like to mention ten
which crop up regularly in our media and in ordinary conversations. It would give
people here great relief if your Commission could clear these up:

1) What responses were made by the Bush administration to the numerous

warnings it received of an impending attack by Al-Qaeda, including specific
references to hijacking, and including two from British intelligence?

2) What was the content of the memorandum of 6 August 2001 delivered to

President Bush at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, and what was his response?

3) If the administration was unaware of any threat from hijacking and aerial
attack, why did Attorney General Ashcroft refuse to travel in commercial
flights in the summer of 2001, and why was the President given extra
protection against air attack, including the morning of September 11?

4) Was the FBI ordered to back off investigating Saudi links to Al Qaeda in the
summer of 2001, and what were the reasons for the resignation of FBI Deputy
Director John O'Neill? (Mr O'Neill took up a post as head of security in the
World Trade Centre, where he was killed on September 11).

5) Who were the speculators who suddenly started selling short stock in United
and American airlines, just before September 11?

6) Why did the President continue his visit to a school after he was given the
news of the first attack on the World Trade Center? Why (on his own
subsequent account) did he assume that the Center had been hit by a small
private plane rather than an airliner?

7) Were America's fighter defences reduced in the summer of 2001? Even

allowing for the reduction, fighters should have been available to intercept all
of the hijacked planes in time, under standing orders and well-rehearsed
procedures of the American air force. Why was there so much delay in getting
 any fighters into the air? Were any orders or procedures changed during the
months leading up to September 11?

8) Why were members of Osama Bin Laden's family allowed to leave the United
States in a private plane days after September 11 without being questioned?

9) September 11 was an evil act but also a highly sophisticated one. It required
years of planning and the acquisition of specialized flying skills. It is unlikely
that any terrorist organization, even one as well financed and connected as Al
Qaeda, could mount such an operation on its own, from a base in one of the
most backward countries in the world. Was Al-Qaeda assisted by an
organized state other than Afghanistan?

10) Has anyone in any agency of government been disciplined in any way for
any failure on September 11?

Yours sincerely,

Richard Heller