Condoleeza Rice Warned Willie Brown Not To Fly On 911 is one of the more dramatic headlines that you'll read in a 9/11 article, but of course that doesn't necessarily mean it's accurate. That article sources it's claim to this David Irving comment:
Others do the same, however our searches have turned up no recording to prove this, no transcript, no explanation of how or why they said it, no evidence to support the claim at all. And it doesn't make a great deal of sense. Why call Brown anyway? He was due to fly on 9/11, but at 8 am from San Francisco: he was in no danger. If the call was from someone with knowledge of the attacks, then they plainly didn't know very much.
And if it were true that Rice called him to issue such a warning, then you might imagine he would pay attention, because it would be such an unprecedented event. Yet Brown completely ignored the call, decided to fly anyway, and told the press about it the following day.
This suggests to us that the call to Brown was nothing out of the ordinary, which, in fact, is exactly what he said:
Okay, maybe we can still grab onto that last part, or maybe ask why anyone should warn Brown at all. Could that indicate some kind of foreknowledge? Well, there is an alternative explanation.
So there was an earlier warning, nothing specific to an attack within the US, but people like Schultz were aware of it so there's no particular reason to be surprised that Brown was, too. Especially because, as we said, he was in no danger. Whoever warned him clearly didn't know what was going to happen, therefore it's difficult to see any significance to this event at all.
Update: September 2006 saw Brown commenting on his “warning”. The biggest change here is that he’s saying he called the airport, not the other way around: