Posted on 05/19/2004 9:26:19 AM PDT by kattracks
The Clinton administration repeatedly failed to recognize the growing terrorist threat against the United States, even after the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, and was regularly outsmarted by al-Qaida founder Osama bin Laden, a new book reveals.
David N. Bossie, author of "Intelligence Failure: How Clinton's National Security Policy Set the Stage for 9/11" (Thomas Nelson/WND), backs up his claims with copious evidence gleaned from extensive research and exclusive interviews.
Bossie, who has written several other books, served as chief investigator for the U.S. House of Representatives' Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, which unearthed facts about Bill Clinton's Chinese fund-raising scandal, and served on the staff of the Senate's Whitewater committee.
So, unlike other books on the subject, his tome documents Clinton's failures from a unique, insider perspective.
He says Clinton's regime was more concerned with economic and political security — staying in power — instead of national security.
And it showed. From the first attack on the World Trade Center, to the millennium bomber of 1999, to the bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen in 2000, Clinton's policies contributed to the devastation and loss of life on 9/11.
"... His degrading of America's intelligence and armed forces not only made the attacks of September 11 possible but also increased the likelihood of an attack," the book says.
From the first attack in New York City on, "Clinton made frequent mistakes in his handling of bin Laden."
Bossie’s book has won a major endorsement. Clinton’s own CIA director, R. James Woolsey, has praised it: "This book proves, once and for all, that the FBI and CIA's failures that led to 9/11 were caused directly by Bill Clinton himself."
Clarke, and Clinton, Got It Wrong
Another insider, former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, served Clinton and President Bush and claimed the Clinton administration did more to combat terrorism than the Bush White House. Bossie's research, however, portrays Bush's predecessor as inept on management and collection of intelligence about potential terrorist threats.
Clinton went beyond emasculating the military, which prevented it from deterring threats: He was an indecisive leader whose poor judgment and negligence contributed to the greatest attack on U.S. soil in history.
Bossie reveals that Clinton not only was aware of the terror threats posed by al-Qaida and others, but also that he worked to undermine the efforts of U.S. intelligence agencies to root out terrorist operatives and prevent attacks.
The book "systematically records how Clinton's poor judgment, negligence, indecisiveness, and slashing of U.S. intelligence services and the military left America a sitting duck for the terrorist attacks on 9-11," Bossie says.
During Clinton's two terms, terrorists associated with bin Laden:
- Killed six Americans in the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993.
- Killed 19 in an attack on the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, where U.S. military personnel were housed.
- Killed 11 Americans and more than 200 other people in the bombing of two U.S. embassies in east Africa in 1998.
- Killed 17 U.S. sailors and wounded 39 more in the bombing of the Cole as it was anchored in Yemen in 2000.
Warnings of 9/11-Style Attack ... in 1994
"While the media was quite willing to ask what warning George W. Bush or his administration received before the [9/11] attack, it is important to realize that plenty of warnings were given long before he ever took office," Bossie writes.
He cites a Pentagon report called "Terror 2000" that was "prophetic" in warning of that hijackers could use an airliner as a missile against the Pentagon. The report also predicted the World Trade Center would be a terrorist target.
Now for the kicker. The report, Bossie notes, was written in 1994, just two years into Clinton's eight-year stint in office.
"Clinton wants everyone to believe the terrorism problem, the 9/11 attacks, were Bush's fault for not doing in eight months what Clinton refused to do in eight years," Bossie says.
"They're wrong, and there are facts in the book to prove it."
Thankfully this book will be the lead story on "The Today Show" tomorrow, so there is no need to fear that the media will try to bury this information.
I blame him , too. A shame the sheeple don't see it. HE should be reviled and vilified for his inaction and preoccupation with his nether region.
Right, Today Show, Oprah, Larry King, MTP and Imus.
Can't wait for the author to be feted by Katie on the Today Show.
BUMP!
Don't forget Larry King and all the Sunday shows. *spit*
The Today Show will try to discredit this book and uphold Clinton, while bashing Bush Administration for not having ability to stop it. The SADDEST PART of this is that CLINTON ADMINISTRATION created a real BOTTLENECK in the offices when they refused to give Bush Administration the opportunity to move in on time...if you remember it was more than a month later than usual that Clintonites left their offices....AND WHILE HOLDING UP BUSH ADMIN THEY DID ABSOLUTELY NO WORK worthwhile.
The Today Show will try to discredit this book and uphold Clinton, while bashing Bush Administration for not having ability to stop it. The SADDEST PART of this is that CLINTON ADMINISTRATION created a real BOTTLENECK in the offices when they refused to give Bush Administration the opportunity to move in on time...if you remember it was more than a month later than usual that Clintonites left their offices....AND WHILE HOLDING UP BUSH ADMIN THEY DID ABSOLUTELY NO WORK worthwhile.
"Terror 2000". Anyone able to get their hands on this one?
Oh brother! This book'll never sell!! It'll be "off the charts," meaning it will literally be off the charts and off the shelves, if there's any way to keep it off, by hook, or by crook!!!
Suppose he'll get a half hour plug on 60 Minutes ?
When is "60 Minutes" going to devote an hour to it?
Better yet, is Ted Koppel going to devout an hour to the soldiers lost in Africa and Yemen?
Didn't think so.
Using standard FReeper logic, would it be fair to say the author is 'biased'? His politics are conservative, all his prior writing seems to attack dems and libs, he's a repub and conservative. It would also seem the author could fit the definition of an 'elite'.
Is it possible to be an 'elite' and 'biased' if you happen to be a conservative, or are the terms mutually exclusive?
Bill now has a documented legacy.
It's available on Amazon.com
Bossie's book has won a major endorsement. Clinton's own CIA director, R. James Woolsey, has praised it: "This book proves, once and for all, that the FBI and CIA's failures that led to 9/11 were caused directly by Bill Clinton himself."
Wrong publi$her. ;^)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.