Skip to comments.Drudge Report: FORMER WHITE HOUSE TERROR ADVISER ...SAYS PRESIDENT ISNíT DOING GOOD JOB...
Posted on 03/20/2004 5:23:19 PM PST by ReleaseTheHounds
FORMER WHITE HOUSE TERROR ADVISER SET TO BREAK SILENCE ON '60 MINS'; SAYS PRESIDENT ISNT DOING VERY GOOD JOB FIGHTING TERRORISM
Fri Mar 19 2004 17:49:30 ET
**Updated** Sat Mar 20 2004 09:52:43 ET
President Bushs former top terrorism advisor says the president isnt doing the best job fighting terrorism. The former advisor, Richard Clarke, discusses this and other observations he made while he was a White House insider in an interview with Lesley Stahl to be broadcast on 60 MINUTES Sunday March 21 (7:00-8:00 PM, ET/PT) on the CBS Television Network.
Frankly, I find it outrageous that the president is running for re-election on the grounds that hes done such great things about terrorism, says Clarke in tomorrow nights interview. He ignored it. He ignored terrorism for months, when maybe we could have done something to stop 9/11. Maybe. Well never know, he tells Stahl.
Clarke tells Stahl that on September 11, 2001 and the day after - when it was clear Al Qaeda had carried out the terrorist attacks - the Bush administration was considering bombing Iraq in retaliation.
Clarke was surprised that the attention of administration officials was turning toward Iraq when he expected the focus to be on Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. "They were talking about Iraq on 9/11. They were talking about it on 9/12," says Clarke.
The top counter-terrorism advisor, Clarke was briefing the highest government officials, including President Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, in the aftermath of 9/11. "Rumsfeld was saying we needed to bomb Iraq....We all said, 'but no, no. Al Qaeda is in Afghanistan," recounts Clarke, "and Rumsfeld said, 'There aren't any good targets in Afghanistan and there are lots of good targets in Iraq.' I said, 'Well, there are lots of good targets in lots of places, but Iraq had nothing to do with [the 9/11 attacks],'" he tells Stahl.
Clarke goes on to explain what he believes was the reason for the focus on Iraq. "I think they wanted to believe that there was a connection [between Iraq and Al Qaeda] but the CIA was sitting there, the FBI was sitting there, I was sitting there, saying, 'We've looked at this issue for years. For years we've looked and there's just no connection,'" says Clarke.
Clarke, who advised four presidents, reveals more about the current administration's reaction to terrorism in his new book, "Against All Enemies."
And besides: John F'in' Kerry voted for war (the second time) and voted for the $87 billion supporting the war (the first time) and that's all we need to say. And he didn't really mean those votes that under-cut our intelligence efforts. Ask John McCain: Kerry is strong on defense. Who are you going to believe: W and those lying Republicans or John "Crazy" McCain?
Any idiot knows that terrorism is a regional and cultural problem, and a clandestine network problem, which defies the traditional understandings and rules of war between nation-states.
The arguments for war in Iraq were foolishly contorted to fit 20th century conventions.
I support Bush, but it's ironic that straightforwardness is such a strength for him in some ways but the lack of such is such a liability in others.
Some Clinton Sock Puppets are saying that the Bush Transition Team was warned about the WTC. But, from what I can remember the Bush Transition Team was forced to work from their cars because Bush was selected.
Oh, fercryingoutloud. They hadn't even had time to get all of the stains out of the carpets.
Read this - its long and quite complex - but you must realize that it was written in 1995 by an advisor to the Clinton administration. It ties Saddam to the first attempt to bring down the WTC towers in 1993.
What did Clinton do with this.....nothing. And, Cheney was wrong on this one.
Go to FR Search and enter this title (or a portion) and you will get this real eye-opener!
Saddam's ties to 9/11? ~ "THE WORLD TRADE CENTER BOMB: Who is Ramzi Yousef? And Why It Matters"1995
No wonder. He's a disgruntled former advisor. And he's got SFB.
You are an optimist. I believe that this will be one of their "big guns" in the campaign and they wil beat it to death.
If it works, Bush is culpable in his own demise. We should have, long ago, fried the Clinton administration of their total incompentence and refusal to fight the war against terror - bin Laden declared war in 1997 (close) and Clinton treated it as a lawinforcement problem.
This even after his won staf, (Laurie Nlyroie) linked Iraq to both WTC 1993 bombing and Oklahoma City.
Bush basically shut down thowe on his staff that wanted to fry Clinton after 9/11....and what has playing Mr. NicesGuy got him - a problem that may defeat him in November.