Posted on 08/04/2002 11:33:00 PM PDT by veritas3
New York – A bold plan for the U.S. to attack al Qaeda was delayed by a Bush administration "policy review process" and was approved just a week before September 11, a TIME special report reveals. The plan, developed in the last days of the Clinton administration, was passed along to the Bush administration in January 2001 by Clinton National Security Adviser Sandy Berger and Richard Clarke, a career bureaucrat who had served in the first Bush administration and risen during the Clinton years to become the White House’s point man on terrorism. In the words of a senior Bush administration official, the proposals amounted to "everything we’ve done since 9/11."
TIME’s special report offers the fullest account of how ambitious the plan was, and how the Bush administration delayed the plan.
On Dec. 20, 2000, Clarke presented a strategy paper to Berger and the other national security "principals." But Berger and the principals decided to shelve the plan and let the next administration take it up. With less than a month left in office, they did not think it appropriate to launch a major initiative against Osama bin Laden. "We would be handing [the Bush Administration] a war when they took office on Jan. 20," says a former senior Clinton aide. "That wasn’t going to happen." "If we hadn’t had a transition," says a senior Clinton Administration official, "probably in late October or early November 2000, we would have had [the plan to go on the offensive] as a presidential directive." Now it was up to Rice’s team to consider what Clarke had put together.
(Excerpt) Read more at drudgereport.com ...
October?? How did they know that there was going to be a transition in October?
This thing is really fishy, What did Al Gore know and when did he know it? What they are saying is that Klintoon would have attacked Afghanistan if Gore had won? On what grounds?
The only thing Clinton was ready to do in Dec. 2000 was to give Usama a Presidential Pardon (if the price was right).
How about this story instead...
"Clinton team delayed critical plan on attacking Bin-Laden during the last 3 weeks he was in office because the higher priority plan of "how many presidential mementos they would steal", had to be decided on."
........which begs the question, what had these inept clowns been doing for the previous eight years?
Don't see Slime Magazine questioning that, do ya?
I always said that he would go completely mad when he lost the trappings of power. I just wish he would go away and do it quietly. The man has done more damage to this country than all of our enemies combined.
So, let's get this straight. The article reams President Bush for delaying an attack on bin Laden, when it's Clinton/Berger and Clarke who "shelved" it. Note the sarcastic mention reserved for Condeleeza Rice. Look for more of this, because she's perceived as Hillary's prime future threat to the White House.
....MSNBC gave the full quote, but I couldn't type that fast.
"KENNEBUNKPORT, Maine (Reuters) - The Bush White House denied a report on Sunday that the Clinton administration gave it an aggressive plan to take on al Qaeda that languished for eight months because of the change in presidents.
Time Magazine reported on Sunday that a plan to strike at al Qaeda was developed in the final days of the Clinton administration and presented to President Bush's new national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, in January 2001.
Irritated by the report, which appeared to suggest the Bush administration may not have done all it could to prevent the attacks on New York and Washington that killed about 3,000 people and that the government blames on the al Qaeda network, the White House issued a carefully-worded denial.
"The Clinton administration did not present an aggressive new plan to topple al Qaeda during the transition," White House spokesman Sean McCormack told Reuters in Kennebunkport, Maine, where Bush spent the weekend at his parents' summer home. According to Time, the proposals were developed by Richard Clarke, a career bureaucrat who had served in the first Bush administration and became the point man on terrorism in the Clinton White House.
The draft initiative became the victim of the transition between the presidencies of Bill Clinton and Bush, the magazine said, as the Bush White House instituted its own "policy review process" on the terrorist threat and the proposals outlined by Clarke were not reviewed by top officials until late April.
Time said Clarke's proposals called for the breakup of al Qaeda cells and arrest of their personnel, a systematic attack on the financial support for its terrorist activities and for aid to nations where al Qaeda was operating to fight terrorism. Clarke also wanted an increase in covert action in Afghanistan to eliminate the al Qaeda sanctuary provided by the Taliban.
ELIMINATE AL QAEDA, NOT ROLL IT BACK
The White House acknowledged that it reviewed the matter but insisted it did not receive any actual plan and said the strategy its top officials ultimately approved on Sept. 4 -- one week before Sept. 11 -- took a more aggressive stance in seeking to eliminate, rather than contain, al Qaeda.
"We were briefed (during the transition) on the al Qaeda threat and what the Clinton administration was doing about it," McCormack said, saying Clarke later gave Rice more ideas on taking on al Qaeda, prompting her to ask for a policy review.
"The review resulted in a comprehensive strategy approved by the principals committee on Sept. 4 to eliminate al Qaeda and deprive it of its sanctuaries," McCormack said, referring to a committee that includes the U.S. secretaries of state and defense as well as the director of the CIA. "There was no plan that was handed over," said a White House official who asked not to be named. "The nature of the ideas that were sketched out were for a roll back of al Qaeda over a three- to five-year period.
"We're talking about apples and oranges here," the official added. "Our strategy became focused on eliminating al Qaeda, not trying to 'roll it back,"' the official added. Time magazine also reported that while concern was mounting by last summer that a major terrorist attack against U.S. interests was imminent, no decision was made to send a Predator drone -- the best possible source of intelligence on the terror camps run by Osama bin Laden -- to fly over Afghanistan.
"The Predator sat idle from October 2000 until after September 11," Time reported. "The Predator was not flown because we were in the final stages of developing new capabilities for it," a U.S. official told Reuters. The official declined to describe the new capabilities, which could have included arming the drone."
© Copyright Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved. The information contained In this news report may not be published, broadcast or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of Reuters Ltd."
08/04/2002 19:17 RTR
What a tough decision.
NOT!!!!
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.