Freeh Notes Clinton's Failure on al-Qaida

NewsMax.com ^ | 4/12/04 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

[kattracks]

In a commentary today in the Wall Street Journal, FBI Director Louis Freeh refers - indirectly, of course - to Bill Clinton's failure to deal with terrorism.

He writes:

Al Qaeda was at war with the U.S. even before Sept. 11, 2001. In August 1998, it attacked our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. In December 1999, one of al Qaeda's soldiers, Ahmed Ressam, entered the U.S. to bomb Los Angeles airport. In October 2000, al Qaeda attacked the USS Cole in the port of Aden.

The question before the 9/11 Commission is why our political leadership declared war back on al Qaeda only after Sept. 11, 2001. Osama bin Laden had been indicted years before for blowing up American soldiers and embassies and was known as a clear and present danger to the U.S. So what would have happened had the U.S. declared war on al Qaeda before Sept. 11? Endless and ultimately useless speculation about "various threads and pieces of information," which are certainly "relevant and significant," at least in retrospect, will not take us very far in answering this central question.

On Jan. 26, 2001, at 8:45 a.m., I had my first meeting with President Bush and Vice President Cheney. They had been in office four days. We discussed terrorism, and in particular al Qaeda, the African embassy bombings, the Cole attack and the June 1996 Khobar bombing in Saudi Arabia. When I advised the president that Hezbollah and Iran were responsible for Khobar, he directed me to follow-up with Condoleezza Rice. I did so at 2:30 p.m. that day and she told me to pursue our investigation with the attorney general and to bring whatever charges possible. Within weeks, a new prosecutor was put in charge of the case and on June 21 an indictment was returned against 13 Hezbollah men who had been directed to bomb Khobar by senior officials of the Iranian government. I know that the families of the 19 murdered airmen were deeply grateful to President Bush and Ms. Rice for their prompt response and focus on terrorism.

I believe that any president and Congress faced with the reality of Sept. 11 would have acted swiftly and overwhelmingly as did President Bush and the 107th Congress. They are to be commended. However, those who came before President Bush can only be faulted if they had had the political means and the will of the nation to declare a war back then, but failed to do so. The fact that terrorism and the war being waged by al Qaeda was not even an issue in the 2000 presidential campaign strongly suggests that the political will to declare and fight this war didn't exist before Sept. 11. ...

Freeh is scheduled to testify Tuesday before the 9/11 commission. Should be interesting.

[smiley]

Interesting, indeed....let's see if the DNC blast Freeh as they did Condi.

[nutmeg]

bump

[gov_bean_ counter]

Louie, Louie, Louie, Louie-e-e-e
Louie, Louie, Louie, Lou-i-i-i
Louie, Louie, Louie, Louie-e-e-e
Louie, Louie you're gonna ...

[nutmeg]

ping!

Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent ‘miscellaneous’ ping list.

[MEGoody]

Condi was right - America was not in a 'war' frame of mind. Can you imagine the outcry if Bush had taken military steps (e.g. boots on the ground) against Al Queda prior to 9/11?

In Clinton's defense (even though I can't stomach the man), he was in the same position.

[Sacajaweau]

VERY interesting....Just 4 days in office!! Imagine that!!

[Wild Irish Rogue]

And Brokaw and Couric and Brian Williams and Chris Matthews and Tim Russert and Dan Rather and Peter Jennings-will all treat this story with the same megaphone that they treated Richard Clarke. Yeah right.
A former Director of the FBI vs a disgruntled computer specialist with a book to sell and an agenda to promote. Such a difficult decision for the partisan media.

[TomGuy]

Notice how every 3 or 4 months some 'issue' arises that revisits the Clinton years and the Clinton gang come out of the woodwork in droves to try to rewrite and spin.

When is Bill going to learn....

Bill, you're legacy is set in stone. You can't change it. All the spin and rewriting history isn't going to work. Two words, Bill, are indelibly cemented: Monica and Impeachment. Bill, that's the legacy you created. Live with it.

[Bob Eimiller]

Not bad for a former Clinton hack... Freeh was made FBI Director so the clintons could access as many FBI files as they could carry at a time.

The 8 clinton years of neglect and incompetency in the FBI and the CIA are responsible for our gross vulnerability.

Hell... only a third of the clinton White House Staff had or could qualify for security clearances. That should illustrate how important our National Security was to the clintons.

9/11 happened as a direct consequence the election of bill clinton... elected by those who voted for him...or Ross Perot

[cc2k]

MEGoody wrote:

---

In Clinton's defense (even though I can't stomach the man), he was in the same position.

---

Mostly, he chose to stay in that same position. If he had used the bully pulpit of the Presidency to acknowledge the east african Embassy bombings or the Cole as an act of war against the USA, he could have acted more strongly with a military response. Instead, he chose to send in the FBI investigators and treat those as criminal acts.

Most likely, Gore would have done the same in response to 9/11/2001 if he were the president.

[Datom]

The dims and Clinton will be very very sorry they went down this path. They are now going to have to attempt to blame a Clinton appointee. Don't ya just love it!!!

[Cboldt]

See also http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1116070/posts

Freeh: Gorelick Ignored Terror Warnings

[Howlin]

When did this because the accepted norm, to publish an Op-Ed before you testify?

There's more spinning going on in D.C. than in a F5 tornado.

[scory]

I just wish all the efforts to place blame on presidents past and present would stop.

[Safetgiver]

I have always wondered what good it would have done, ultimately, to arrest the 19 hijackers. Can you imagine 1. the DNC ridiculing Ashcroft for even thinking any man would crash a plane into a skyscraper. 2. the media portraying the President as a right wing nut for the same reasons. 3. the courts dismissing all charges against the scum because there is no proof the nice middle eastern men wre doing anything but learning to fly. Ultimately we may have prevented the 3000 deaths on 9-11, but caused it on some other day. In that case, it would have been Bush's fault because the unknown attack was caused by the arrests from 9-10. Lose/lose no mater what did happen/ what might have happened.

[Wolfstar]

...that the political will to declare and fight this war didn't exist before Sept. 11.

If one judges by the Left/Dems constant anti-war, pro-UN drumbeat, and by the polls (which I don't trust) showing the presidential race very tight, I'm not sure the political will exists now!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

You describe it well!

[gundog]

Now, Louie...have you forgotten that no attack ever fed a hungry child?