Skip to comments.An Explosive New 9/11 Charge
Posted on 08/12/2011 5:09:05 AM PDT by lbryce
In a new documentary, former national-security aide Richard Clarke suggests the CIA tried to recruit 9/11 hijackersthen covered it up. Philip Shenon on George Tenets denial.
With the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks only a month away, former CIA Director George Tenet and two former top aides are fighting back hard against allegations that they engaged in a massive cover-up in 2000 and 2001 to hide intelligence from the White House and the FBI that might have prevented the attacks.
The source of the explosive, unproved allegations is a man who once considered Tenet a close friend: former White House counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, who makes the charges against Tenet and the CIA in an interview for a radio documentary timed to the 10th anniversary next month. Portions of the Clarke interview were made available to The Daily Beast by the producers of the documentary.
In the interview for the documentary, Clarke offers an incendiary theory that, if true, would rewrite the history of the 9/11 attacks, suggesting that the CIA intentionally withheld information from the White House and FBI in 2000 and 2001 that two Saudi-born terrorists were on U.S. soilterrorists who went on to become suicide hijackers on 9/11.
Richard A. Clarke in 2010., Markus Schreiber / AP Photo
Clarke speculatesand readily admits he cannot provethat the CIA withheld the information because the agency had been trying to recruit the terrorists, while they were living in Southern California under their own names, to work as CIA agents inside Al Qaeda. After the recruitment effort went sour, senior CIA officers continued to withhold the information from the White House for fear they would be accused of malfeasance and misfeasance, Clarke suggests.
(Excerpt) Read more at thedailybeast.com ...
Richard Clarke....his picture should be under the fake words loser-burger.
So okay, we can write books based on speculation now?
First, I hope it’s considered fiction. Second, even if true....so the CIA tried to recruit people who could speak both Arabic and English? It’s not unheard of. This is the Clarke nothing-body trying to be somebody again.
I speculate that Clark abuses his wife and tortures small dogs.
What a loser.
What a misleading opening sentence!
Does anyone recall the Gorelick memo?
It was Jamie Gorelick, who wrote the policy which stovepiped information from intelligence agencies and LEOs and prevented cross-checking and information sharing between agencies. (Probably to keep a bunch of the Clinton's deals under wraps).
Later she sat on the 9/11 commission (!), likely to find ways to quash or discredit any information which would have held the Clintons and others culpable in the attacks.
I see this as just another poke at the Bush WH, when the policies were put in place by the former occupants.
Clark is a egotistical weasel ... he’s managed to milk 9/11 for nearly the last ten years. He appears on ABC frequently in some sort of security consultant role. Early on he bashed the Bush administration concerning 9/11 ... mostly because Condoliza Rice was in the process of lessening his advisory role to the WH ... a position he held during the Clinton era.
So the Clinton administration tried to recruit these guys?
OK, Clarke is a loon, but it may be interesting to see how his fellow loons on the left handle this paradigm shift. What are they going to chant if it can be shown that Bush *didn't* know and it *wasn't* Bush's fault?!
All sarcasm aside, Clarke is a loon.
A Summary of Richard Clarke:
“Clarke speculatesand readily admits he cannot prove...”
Time for someone to cue up the “Aw, not this shit again” photo.
Ha, I can suggest anything, I can offer up theories all day long. Doesn't mean I'm not full of ... (just ask my wife!). This guy is selling something, puffing himself up. He's got an agenda. Throwing out unfounded, unsupported allegations is cheap. All he and his cohorts are doing is making the CIA defend themselves from ridiculous, but hard to completely disprove claims. Hard to prove a negative unless you open up the books on all the CIAs activities at the time and say "see, nothing in there about these jerk offs!" Even then, many will claim the CIA destroyed the records...
Hey, Clarke, you stop cheating on your wife yet? Sure, you claim you never have but... How's it feel with the shoe on the other foot so-to-speak?
Former national-security aide Richard Clarke...
Wasn’t he found in a closet with Bill Clinton’s panties on his head?
Duh! They were taking flying lessons!...
not landing lessons!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This needs to be shouted from the rooftops!
The MSM and the Dems count on short attention spans and shorter memories. Otherwise, their BS won't fly.
Of course, if you say this needs "investigation", then you are automatically branded a "Truther" which effectively ends all debate.
yeah, like revisiting 9-11 troofer theory is really going to be the deciding factor in this election.
Me: "Wow... this Able Danger stuff looks damning. This should be investigated to see who knew what in our government in regards to 9/11."
Them: "Oh you're just one of those Alex Jones Tr00fers who think the FBI blew up the Pentagon! You and that Ron Paul libertardian! Tin foil too tight?"
Me: "Well... No. But..."
Them: "'But' nothing... I bet you don't even believe we put a man on Mars!!!"
It's happened more than once. Even here on FR. And yes, it has the feeling of a well run psy-ops campaign to keep any real data from being seriously considered.
And he believes he is the only one who knew everything that was going on.
I think an objective analysis of the situation would show he was a single point of failure, one broken link in this chain of defense. IMO, he and anyone who hired or supervised him bears a great deal of the blame. Certainly criminal incompetence.
Richard Clarke is a self-serving opportunist and proven liar.
End of story.
The OFF program and the smuggling of Iraqi oil was used to manipulate the world price of oil.
Control the price of oil, and you can control the world economy.
In 1999 the price of oil was driven so low the oil producing countries around the world were running out of money thus triggering a recession.
The recession Bush inherited from Clinton was an orchestrated recession.
The 9/11 terrorist attack was an attack against the US economy.
The exact same thing happened with the first WTC bombing in 1993.
That was an attack against the economy and it was preceded by an orchestrated recession.
The terrorist attack that was planned for NYC’s subway system, stopped in 2009, would have been an attack against the economy and that too was preceded by an orchestrated recession.
Once is a coincidence. Twice is suspect. Three times is planned.
Did you understand how Able Danger worked and why the Clinton’s had to get rid of it?
If anyone had the brains to read up on the planning of 9/11 long before it took place this crap would be ignored.
I agree with your assessment of Clark. There are countless others who deserve the same assessment. Objective analysis has been lacking for decades, thus all of us are caught up in this matrix to never witness any analysis objectively analyzed. There is a reason for the matrix of lies the public is constantly fed. Confusion is only one objective on a battlefield, by each opposing commander. Another objective is to win. Competing forces with competing ideas. Both commanders want suppression, with the thoughts implemented each commander believes. One commander normally wins, or a stalemate is declared, where once more the forces come out for renewed battle, once both sides have healed. Makes one know, battles never really end, and also lends credence to the thought, in the world of today there will be no winners except for the few. America's Founders gave to the world something the tyrants disdain. For in the tyrants world where the tyrants rule, there are far fewer winners. I thank those who came before us, I pray we can keep what the Founders gave us for the battle is always before each of us. At least, in this country, the people will decide.
I thought Barry O was CIA too.
if God doesn’t decide first.
Right. And what documents did Sandy Berger have in his pants? I think it is safe to say he was protecting the Clintonistas and not President Bush or the CIA.
It would not surprise me if the CIA was working to infiltrate jihadists after the first attempt to bring down the towers with a truck bomb. In fact, I would be disappointed if all our agencies were not trying to infiltrate the jihadist cells in the US and abroad given they pulled off the first terrorist attack on the twin towers.
I find it far more “explosive” that 4 of the future hijackers were on expired visas when stopped for speeding tickets - all in cities with “sanctuary” policies on checking immigration status...so were released with mere citations. If Arizona’s SB1070 were in effect nationwide, Mohammed Atta himself would have been in Federal custody on Sept 11, 2001.
It’s Obama’s fault!
When he's not on the 'Net...
They have convinced themselves the radical left is somehow different in this country than in other countries, and there is a line the radical left in this country will not cross.
They honestly believe the same people that advocated the extermination of 25 million American citizens that couldn't be “reeducated”, wouldn't kill a few thousand.
Even people that will admit the radical left would ally themselves with muslin terrorist, will not admit the Clinton's are part of the radical left.
Ron Paul / Charlie Sheen ping.
"Never let a crisis go to waste" or words to the effect. "You are either with us, or against us." Even if that means taking a trip over the falls in the same whiskey barrel as everyone else...
One of these docs was a letter from UBL to Mullaha Omar.
It was listed as doc # AFGP-2002-600321 in the CTC at West Point, Harmony database.
In the doc UBL made a passing statement to the effect “the news is 90% of the preparation for the battle”.
If you have a small scale attack such as a single suicide bomber, you can carry out the attack based on what is in the news.
For a large scale attack such as 9/11 you can't, you have to orchestrate the news for it.
There is only one group of people in this country that can orchestrate the news over an extended time period, and that is the left.
Since news stories are being orchestrated prior to the attacks, there is a pattern to the attacks.
That's why they had to get rid of Able Danger.
Able Danger picked up patterns.
Once you have the pattern, then you can put a face and name to who it is creating the pattern.
Yep. That is my understanding of it as well. “Problem, reaction, solution” takes care of the rest.