Richard Clarke's a real American hero!

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Jul 24, 2002
4,878
5
0
48
www.soundclick.com
#1
Bush Briefed on Al Qaeda Threat Before Taking Office
By Tabassum Zakaria

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The CIA told President Bush and his senior officials before they took office that Osama bin Laden was one of the gravest threats to the United States, according to the national commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks.

"President-elect Bush asked whether killing bin Laden would end the problem," and was told by top CIA officials that it would have an impact but not stop the threat, said a report prepared for hearings Wednesday.

CIA Director George Tenet and former counterterrorism coordinator Richard Clarke were to testify at the hearing.

Clarke, a senior counterterrorism adviser to Bush and the three previous administrations, created a stir this week by accusing the Bush administration of failing to recognize the urgency of the threat posed by bin Laden's al Qaeda network.

During the summer of 2001 the volume of intelligence about threats grew alarming. "By late July, there were indications of multiple, possibly catastrophic, terrorist attacks being planned against American interests overseas," the national commission's staff report said.

The CIA's Counterterrorist Center identified 30 possible overseas targets and launched operations to disrupt any attacks.

During this period, some CIA officials expressed frustration at the pace of policymaking, the report said. Tenet's deputy, John McLaughlin, "told us he felt a great tension -- especially in June and July 2001 -- between the new administration's need to understand these issues and his sense that this was a matter of great urgency," the report said.

Two veteran CIA counterterrorism officers who were deeply involved in bin Laden issues "were so worried about an impending disaster that one of them told us that they considered resigning and going public with their concerns," the report by the commission's staff said. The report did not identify them.


SENSE OF URGENCY

Tenet had told commission investigators that officials at the White House had grasped the sense of urgency he was communicating to them, the report said.

Clarke, who served both Bush and his predecessor, President Bill Clinton, has accused Bush of paying insufficient attention to the al Qaeda threat before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and afterward focusing on Iraq at the expense of efforts to crush the network.

Bush Tuesday rejected those accusations.

"The facts are these: George Tenet briefed me on a regular basis about the terrorist threats to the United States of America and had my administration had any information that terrorists were going to attack New York City on September 11, we would have acted," Bush told reporters Tuesday.

CIA officials say they were unclear whether presidential authorizations for covert operations in Afghanistan called for killing bin Laden during Clinton's tenure, the commission staff report said.

Clinton's National Security Council staff told the commission the former president made it clear he wanted bin Laden dead, the report said.

"But if the policy-makers believed their intent was clear, every CIA official interviewed on this topic by the commission, from DCI (Director of Central Intelligence) Tenet to the official who actually briefed the agents in the field, told us they heard a different message," the report said.

CIA officials believed that Clinton had authorized them to capture bin Laden, but the only acceptable context for killing him was during an operation to catch him, the report said.
__________________________________________________________

As you all propbably know, Clarke turned his back on the "darkside" last week and told America the truth about Curious George's mishandling pre-911 warnings.
I have nothing but respect for a man who isn't affraid to speak the truth against the biggest mafia of them all....

*Wondering why no one in here's talking about this "major" developement*
 
Mar 12, 2004
156
0
0
#3
miggidy said:
As you all propbably know, Clarke turned his back on the "darkside" last week and told America the truth about Curious George's mishandling pre-911 warnings.
I have nothing but respect for a man who isn't affraid to speak the truth against the biggest mafia of them all....

*Wondering why no one in here's talking about this "major" developement*
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/3/24/153453.shtml
Wednesday, March 24, 2004 3:31 p.m. EST
9/11 Commissioner Lehman Rips Clarke Over Book Deal

9/11 Commission member former Navy Secretary John Lehman ripped ex-terrorism czar Richard Clarke Wednesday afternoon for cashing in on this week's public hearings into America's worst disaster by using the forum to peddle his book.

"When you and I first served together [in the Reagan administration] I had been a fan of yours," Lehman began when his turn to question Clarke came. "When you agreed to spend this much time with us, as you say, 15 hours, I was very hopeful."

Of Clarke's private testimony before the Commission, Lehman said, "I thought you let the chips fall where they may. ... Certainly the greater weight of [your criticism of the U.S. war on terrorism] fell during the Clinton years."

The 'Selling' of Clarke's Commission Appearance

Then the former Navy secretary unloaded on Clarke with both barrels.

"But now we have the book," Lehman noted. "I've published books before and I must must say that I am green with envy at the promotion department of your publisher."

Continued Lehman: "I never got [Commission member] Jim Thompson to stand before 50 photographers reading your book. And I certainly never got '60 Minutes' to coordinate the showing of its interview with you with 15 network news broadcasts, the selling of the movie rights and your appearance here today."

Clarke has 'Credibility Problem'

Lehman said that when he started to read press accounts of Clarke's book, "I said to myself, this can't be the same Dick Clarke that testified before us, because all of the promotional material and all of the spin in the networks was that this is a roundly devastating attack - this book - on President Bush.

"That's not what I heard in the [private Commission] interviews.

"And I hope you're going to tell me, as you apologize to all the families for all of us who were involved in national security, that this tremendous difference - and not just in nuance but in the stories you choose to tell - is really the result of your editors and your promoters rather than your studied judgment."

Lehman then blasted:

[Your book] is so different from the whole thrust of your testimony to us. And similarly, when you add to it, the inconsistencies between what your promoters are putting out and what you yourself said as late as [last] August 5, you've got a real credibility problem."

Lehman concluded:

"Because of my real, genuine, longtime admiration for you, I hope you'll resolve that credibility problem because I'd hate to see you become totally shoved to one side during the presidential campaign as an active partisan selling a book."
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#4
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT! NEWSMAX ALERT!
 

EDJ

Sicc OG
May 3, 2002
11,608
234
63
www.myspace.com
#8
I WATCHED THE 60 MINUTE INTERVIEW. ALL I WAS THINKIN' WHEN HE WAS STRESSIN' WHAT HE WAS STRESSIN' WAS ALL MY "gATHERIN' OF MINDS" HOMIES TALKIN' BOUT THIS SHIT AND HOW ALL THESE PRO-EXTRA PATRIOTIC MUTHA-FUKAS WERE SO BLINDED.
 
Jul 24, 2002
4,878
5
0
48
www.soundclick.com
#9
I think Bush just lost the up coming elections....

At first he looked like a clear cut winner, but now it seems like he's done irreversible damage to himself. Capturing Osama won't save his ass.
The cat cut his own throat.... :dead:
It just goes to show that what goes around comes around....
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#10
miggidy said:
I think Bush just lost the up coming elections....

At first he looked like a clear cut winner, but now it seems like he's done irreversible damage to himself. Capturing Osama won't save his ass.
The cat cut his own throat.... :dead:
It just goes to show that what goes around comes around....
I don't think it really matters if he gets reelected or not. The damage is done. Plus, I don’t trust Kerry one bit, especially since he was a Skull & Bones member. It’s like a big fucking cycle.
 

phil

Sicc OG
Apr 25, 2002
7,311
27
0
116
#12
bush didnt lose anything. the only people who dont take clarke as a complete joke are the extreme lefties who are willing to believe that his motivations are anything less than monetary/polititcal.
 
May 16, 2002
454
2
0
40
#13
FucksNews is getting really desperate now :

"You've got a real credibility problem," John Lehman, former Navy secretary under President Reagan, told Clarke, calling the witness "an active partisan selling a book."
Well, let's see what Lehman REALLY SAID :

LEHMAN: And I hope you're going to tell me, as you apologized to the families for all of us who were involved in national security, that this tremendous difference -- and not just in nuance, but in the stories you choose to tell -- is really the result of your editors and your promoters, rather than your studied judgment, because it is so different from the whole thrust of your testimony to us.

And similarly, when you add to it the inconsistency between what your promoters are putting out and what you yourself said as late as August '05, you've got a real credibility problem.

And because of my real genuine long-term admiration for you, I hope you'll resolve that credibility problem, because I'd hate to see you become totally shoved to one side during a presidential campaign as an active partisan selling a book.

CLARKE: Thank you, John.

And this is the no-spin zone????????
 
Apr 25, 2002
3,461
542
0
49
#14
phil said:
bush didnt lose anything. the only people who dont take clarke as a complete joke are the extreme lefties who are willing to believe that his motivations are anything less than monetary/polititcal.
IM FAR FROM A LEFTY AND I BELIEVE CLARK IS CREDIBLE ENOUGH.
 

phil

Sicc OG
Apr 25, 2002
7,311
27
0
116
#15
im not saying he's lying but to act like he gives a shit is a farce. if he did he would have dropped this info he had years ago. why wait until your book comes out which happens to be critical of an administration who is in the process of an election of which you are a contributor to his opponents party and cause???? hmmmmm...... his credibility is shit.


if any of you actually believe this guy is doing this out of concern for america youre fucking idiots especially with nerve to call people sheep.
 
Jul 24, 2002
4,878
5
0
48
www.soundclick.com
#16
Dr. Phil,

Why so much focus on character assissination instead of looking into his claims?

The fact that people are attacking his character instead of zooming in on his claims speaks a thousand words. Sort of like shooting themselves in the foot and they are further incriminating themselves.

The Bush administration is acting like a guilty person who goes on the deffense when being caught....

What goes around comes around,
muthafuckas dig their own graves....
 
Mar 12, 2004
156
0
0
#17
miggidy said:
Hatch,

Do you personally believe Clarke's doing this to boost his book sales?
from what i have heard on Legitimate News Sources. he said the complete OPPOSITE of what he is saying right now and in his book last year both in a white house press release and Under Oath in classified hearings.

and another reason his book was supposed to come out in April but it got moved up to coincide with his 9-11 commision testimony.
 

phil

Sicc OG
Apr 25, 2002
7,311
27
0
116
#19
like i said miggidy, if you think this guy is concerned with victims of 9/11, america, etc... youre a fucking idiot.

im not saying the guy is lying at all. but you people act like he's some hero when all he is, is an opportunist using the victims of 9/11 to sell his book.

WHY DID HE WAIT TO RELEASE THIS INFO????

WHY????
 

shep

Sicc OG
Oct 2, 2002
3,233
2
0
#20
and the right doesn't do the same? Need I remind you the Bush campaign ads that show shit from 9/11 just to stir up emotions. Maybe if Bush was somehow victorious in doing anything ABOUT it, it would be one thing, but he didn't..... He's just using it.

it's funny... whenever truth comes out, even from your own side, you claim that you can't trust the source. this isn't a michael moore or an al franken... this is one of your guys.