Two Al Qaeda Messages Were Intercepted Sept. 10

WASHINGTON —  One day before Sept. 11, U.S. intelligence officials intercepted two messages from Al Qaeda operatives indicating that “tomorrow is zero day” and “the match begins tomorrow,” but the communications were not translated until after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Bush administration officials confirmed Wednesday.

The communications, apparently phone calls in Arabic between Al Qaeda operatives, were vacuumed up by the enormously powerful electronic listening posts operated by the National Security Agency, the ultra-secret intelligence-gathering apparatus that is supposed to be the nation’s ears around the globe.

But they were not translated until Sept. 12, officials said, prompting a new round of questions on Capitol Hill about whether the U.S. intelligence community missed another warning sign.

Meanwhile, reflecting the continued state of heightened alert since the terrorist attacks, the capital was rattled Wednesday by separate incidents that resulted in brief evacuations of the Federal Reserve and the White House.

One Bush administration official defended the NSA, saying the information could not possibly have prevented the deadly terrorist attacks.

“Obviously, it would have been nice to have it three or four days before” Sept. 11, said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. But, he added, “there was no specificity there. It was just a time frame. It didn’t tell you where.”

The official also said that in the weeks and months before Sept. 11, the U.S. intelligence community already had a wealth of information that Al Qaeda was planning something, which had led to a heightened state of alert worldwide. But, he said, all indications were that the attack would be overseas, and the vague threat probably would not have resulted in a dramatic increase in domestic security.

“If we had gotten it earlier,” the official said of the intercepts, “we would have locked down everything overseas--embassies and military installations--because that’s where the threats were coming from.”

James Bamford, an expert on the NSA and author of a current best-seller about the agency, said that if the intercepted communications were between top Al Qaeda leaders, “I could see where it would be a problem if it took several days to translate that. If it was a lower-level Al Qaeda person on the fifth rung or something, then that’s far more forgivable.”

The existence of the intercepts, which were first reported by CNN, came up during hearings Tuesday and Wednesday before the joint House and Senate intelligence committees investigating the events of Sept. 11, and whether the terrorist attacks could have been averted.

The NSA’s director, Air Force Lt. Gen. Michael V. Hayden, was questioned at length about the two intercepts during the closed-door hearings. He was also asked about whether communications problems among intelligence agencies, a shortage of language specialists and the NSA’s delays in translating and analyzing intercepted communications helped make the nation vulnerable to terrorist attacks.

“There was considerable concern that this wasn’t translated until two days later,” said a congressional aide, who said the joint intelligence committees learned of the intercepts at least a week ago. The aide, who asked not to be identified, said that the two Sept. 10 intercepts hinting at action the following day are believed to have originated in Afghanistan. It was not clear, the aide said, whose conversations were intercepted.

But several U.S. intelligence officials insisted that the language in the messages did not indicate an attack on U.S. targets.

“It could have been a plan to attack the Northern Alliance,” said one intelligence official. “It could have been a plan to go after something in Africa, Asia, China or nothing at all. So what would you have someone do about something as generic as that?”

The intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that “far more ominous” messages have been intercepted “on scores of occasions” both before and since Sept. 11 and “nothing has happened.”

“It doesn’t mean you ignore it,” he said. “But something like this is not actionable intelligence you can do something about.”

Interpreting cryptic, and often coded, communications from terrorist groups and sympathizers around the world presents a vast challenge to intelligence authorities. The NSA’s dozen or so major listening posts receive about 2 million pieces of communications each hour.

For much of 2001, in fact, the NSA and the CIA had been receiving a crescendo of intercepted “chatter” and threats indicating an imminent attack. U.S. officials closed embassies around the world last summer and fall, and tightened security at military bases and other facilities in the Persian Gulf and the Far East.

“This was an example that something was up,” the official said of the Sept. 10 calls. “But it doesn’t tell you where it was, what it was or how we could stop it.”

U.S. officials said last fall that Osama bin Laden had telephoned his wife and his mother in Damascus, Syria, on Sept. 10. He reportedly urged his wife to return to Afghanistan, and told his mother she would not hear from him for a long time.

Intelligence intercepts immediately after Sept. 11 showed that Bin Laden’s associates had taken responsibility for the attacks, officials said last fall. They also said communications after the attacks indicated a second and possibly third wave of attacks might be imminent.

The intelligence committee hearings lasted until late Wednesday afternoon as members peppered Hayden, as well as CIA Director George J. Tenet and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III., with questions. Rep. Ray LaHood (R-Ill), a member of the committee, said that the committee had decided to postpone two days of public hearings next week.

“We’re not ready,” LaHood said. “We want to make sure when we go public that the right people are there and we’re prepared so that we don’t look like we’re flying by the seat of our pants.”

A Senate aide, however, said the panel’s leaders would meet today to decide whether to postpone or cancel next week’s hearings.

Times staff writer Bob Drogin contributed to this report.