Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: capt. apathy on March 23, 2004, 12:26:00 AM
-
from msnbc, interesting charicterisations from Clarke, on top US officials.
cut and paste from:
Following is a look at some of Clarke’s descriptions of the president and other top officials:
President Bush: “The critique of him as a dumb, lazy rich kid was somewhat off the mark,” Clarke says, but he looked for “the simple solution, the bumper-sticker description of the problem.”
Clinton- Clarke was “beyond mad” over President Clinton’s lack of discretion, which led to his impeachment, but he generally praises Clinton as a charismatic, sharp thinker who could not get the CIA, the Defense Department and the FBI to deal with terrorism issues.
He says Clinton’s approval of missile attacks against Iraq over the attempt to assassinate Bush’s father deterred Saddam from future terrorism against America.
Vice President Dick Cheney- is described as quiet and calm but radically conservative. He says that Cheney believes the United States could handle Iraq alone and that “everyone else is just more trouble than they are worth.”
Clarke also blames Cheney for failing to speak out about the threat of al-Qaida during senior White House meetings.
CIA Director George Tenet- “was as much concerned with the threat of al-Qaida as anyone in the government prior to Sept. 11” but was struggling with internal rebuilding at the CIA, Clarke says, quoting him as saying in June 2001: “It’s my sixth sense, but I feel it coming. This is going to be the big one.”
Clarke says Tenet and Clarke jointly scrapped a doomed plan to capture bin Laden in 1996 at the heavily guarded Tarnak farm in Afghanistan. Clarke complains regularly about failures by CIA to insert spies effectively into Afghanistan and Somalia.
National security adviser Condoleezza Rice- has “a closer relationship with the second President Bush than any of her predecessors had with the presidents they reported to,” Clarke says. She effectively demoted Clarke in October 2001, when he became head of cyber-security instead of counterterrorism.
Rumsfeld- Clarke accuses Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld of plotting to bomb Iraq one day after the Sept. 11 attacks, despite the lack of any evidence of Iraqi involvement. He says Rumsfeld noted that there were no good bombing targets in Afghanistan but plenty of targets in Iraq.
“At first I thought Rumsfeld was joking. But he was serious, and the president did not reject out of hand the idea of attacking Iraq,” Clarke writes.
Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz- is quoted as saying during an April 2001 meeting, “I just don’t understand why we are beginning by talking about this one man bin Laden” and telling Clarke, “You give bin Laden too much credit.”
Secretary of State Colin Powell- is praised for urging focus on al-Qaida, not Iraq, immediately after Sept. 11. Clarke credits him for recognizing the al-Qaida threat early in 2001.
Attorney General John Ashcroft- is criticized over his response to Sept. 11, especially over his handling of alleged “dirty bomber” Jose Padilla as an enemy combatant. “The attorney general, rather than bringing us together, managed to persuade much of the country that the needed reforms of the Patriot Act were actually the beginning of fascism.”
Clarke says an unidentified staffer asked him after meeting with Ashcroft early in 2001, “He can’t really be that slow, can he?” Clarke’s response: “He did lose a Senate re-election to a dead man.”
FBI Director Robert Mueller- who was hired days before Sept. 11, “cannot be blamed for the failure of the bureau to find al-Qaida or even to have a computer network prior to then.” But he complains that the FBI, under Mueller, has not managed to keep its top counterterrorism experts from retiring.
Former FBI Director Louis Freeh- is blamed for failing to coordinate largely independent FBI field offices or upgrade their computer networkshere (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4568982/)
-
Is that the same General Clarke that was called a liar by Lt. Gen. Marc Cisneros?
-
Sounds like this guy Clarke is the only competent guy in Washington. Good thing he wrote this book so the others can see the error of their ways.
:rolleyes:
-
So Clark is the next Ann Coulter?
-
Out of the loop much.:aok
Are they going to lynch this guy or what?
-
Here's an interesting article about your source:
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/984206/posts
"While commanding NATO troops in defense of Muslim Kosovo and against Serbian Christians, for example, the hot-headed Clark commanded a subordinate British General to attack Russian troops that had landed without NATO permission at the airport in Kosovo’s capital. (Clark speaks fluent Russian but chose not even to talk with the Russian troops before attacking them.)
The British General Sir Mike Jackson reportedly refused Clark’s risky orders, saying: “I’m not going to start the Third World War for you!”"
-
(http://www.scottwynn.com/events/event_6d.jpg)
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Here's an interesting article about your source:
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/984206/posts
"While commanding NATO troops in defense of Muslim Kosovo and against Serbian Christians, for example, the hot-headed Clark commanded a subordinate British General to attack Russian troops that had landed without NATO permission at the airport in Kosovo’s capital. (Clark speaks fluent Russian but chose not even to talk with the Russian troops before attacking them.)
The British General Sir Mike Jackson reportedly refused Clark’s risky orders, saying: “I’m not going to start the Third World War for you!”"
Wrong guy. He is not military.
h
-
Guess I'm just not keeping up with the latest mud slinging. Link yer sources dangit.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Guess I'm just not keeping up with the latest mud slinging. Link yer sources dangit.
He did in the original post.
One more time just for you:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4568982/
h
-
Originally posted by Horn
He did in the original post.
One more time just for you:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4568982/
h
Thanks, don't see that anywhere in his original post though.
Nevermind, I see it at the end.
-
Now that I've read the article I'll just quote a comment in it from Rice that sums it for me.
“He was the counterterrorism czar for the entire period in which the al-Qaida plot was hatched and led to the Sept. 11 attacks,” said Rice, who said that while Clarke did put forth general proposals to fight terrorism, most of them “had already been tried and rejected in the Clinton administration.”
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Here's an interesting article about your source:
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/984206/posts
"While commanding NATO troops in defense of Muslim Kosovo and against Serbian Christians, for example, the hot-headed Clark commanded a subordinate British General to attack Russian troops that had landed without NATO permission at the airport in Kosovo’s capital. (Clark speaks fluent Russian but chose not even to talk with the Russian troops before attacking them.)
The British General Sir Mike Jackson reportedly refused Clark’s risky orders, saying: “I’m not going to start the Third World War for you!”"
Thats clark not clarke akiron. 2 different people.
-
Some of Clark's claims seem pretty damning. In the 60 minutes interview he told of the increased voice traffic that was intercepted over the summer prior to 9-11. And the lack of response by Bush to this traffic.
Then he said a similar spike in voice traffic occured in 1999. Clinton immediately called a "battle stations" cabinet level meeting, and an Al Queda operative was caught with explosives in his trunk crossing the border into Washington State. The intended target was LAX.
ALSO...
Secretary of State Colin Powell- is praised for urging focus on al-Qaida, not Iraq, immediately after Sept. 11. Clarke credits him for recognizing the al-Qaida threat early in 2001.
When is this guy gonna run for President?
-
He won't, because of this kind of poltical mudslinging. He has stated that he would not put his family through it. Damn shame, too, he is a good man.
-
He was the only one with credibility until he went to Halabja to commiserate with the Kurds.
-
Hillarios. Everyone has thier pat reasons why the guy is a nut and they dont even know who they are talking about.
Can you spell indoctrinated?
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Hillarios. Everyone has thier pat reasons why the guy is a nut and they dont even know who they are talking about.
Can you spell indoctrinated?
Plenty of self-serving nuts on the left. Dunno 'bout indoctrinated but an innoculation might help.
-
I wouldnt call him left wing. He has been around since reagan.
-
Originally posted by Frogm4n
I wouldnt call him left wing. He has been around since reagan.
Figured he'd have to be left to work with Clinton for so long, but maybe I'm wrong. Anyhow affiliations can change pretty quick, just look at that other Clark. He didn't become a democrat until last year and already he ran for president as a democrat.
-
amazing (well, not really, I have come to expect it) how fast the "he's an idiot", "he's a liberal", "who are we talking about" coments come up.
When is this guy gonna run for President?
the only republican I can think of who I would consider voting for.
-
A Dick Clarke Top Seven
Questions for commissioners.
At the height of the presidential campaign season, Clarke has made irresponsible and untrue allegations that the Bush White House was indifferent to the threat posed by al Qaeda in the months leading up to the 9/11 attacks. Whether his charges are the result of a momentary lapse in judgment in an otherwise distinguished civil-service career, or the hallmark of personal ego and greed in trying to sell a book while settling scores with a Bush White House that demoted him, the 9/11 commissioners cannot be deterred in their task to find out the truth about what happened on his watch to America's counterterrorism efforts.
The 9/11 commissioners have a thankless job of asking tough questions that nobody wants to ask. There will be a broad set of questions asked Tuesday and Wednesday of the various witnesses who appear. But when Clarke goes under oath, there will be a need to get down to specifics because the devil of understanding how 9/11 became possible is in the details of what Clarke did or did not do.
If I were a 9/11 commissioner, there are seven very pointed areas of inquiry I would enter into with Clarke to understand exactly how the intelligence failures and policy missteps evolved:
1. Sudan's offer to hand over Osama bin Laden. Mr. Clarke, we know from news reports and the testimony of a former U.S. ambassador that a meeting took place at an Alexandria, Virginia, hotel in February 1996 between Sudan's minister of defense, El Fatih Erwa, Ambassador Timothy Carney, a career State Department officer, and a CIA official with oversight responsibility for African affairs. During that meeting, Erwa offered to have Osama bin Laden extradited to Saudi Arabia (an offer which President Clinton has admitted to and also said that the Saudi government declined when asked), and barring that, to have Sudan essentially baby-sit him with U.S. guidance (which we also turned down). Is it true that a second meeting took place a few weeks later in which Erwa and the CIA officer met alone? What can you tell us about that meeting? Did Erwa make an offer, however vague or oblique, to permit the United States to have access to bin Laden in a manner similar to the capture of Carlos the Jackal that Sudan orchestrated with France? If the CIA case officer received this offer, did he pass it up the chain of command and did you at the NSC see or review any notes of that meeting? If he did not, was this a result of the poor state of relations between CIA and the White House or just a bureaucratic snafu? How do you assess President Clinton's own view that the administration chose not to bring bin Laden to the United States because there were insufficient legal grounds for doing so? Why would he make such a claim if there were never any offer in the first place?
2. Sudan's counterterrorism offer. Mr. Clarke, in April 1997, a private U.S. citizen brought an unconditional offer from Sudan's president to cooperate on the intelligence data about various terrorist groups, including al Qaeda, to the vice chairman of this commission, the Honorable Lee Hamilton. On September 28, 1997, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright announced after a five-month interagency review that the U.S. was sending a high-level team of diplomats back to Sudan to pressure the Islamist government there to stop harboring terrorists, and to have a look at Sudan's intelligence files on those terrorists it had harbored in previous years, including several of the 9/11 hijackers and several of the planners for the 1998 U.S.-embassy bombings. That decision was overturned on October 1, 1997. What role did you play in the reversal of that decision? Were you ever approached by Susan E. Rice, the former director of African affairs at the National Security Council and assistant secretary of state for East Africa, to assist her in making a case to Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger in overturning the Albright decision? If so, what were her reasons, and why did you agree with her assessment, if you did? Please tell us whether any officials other than you, Mr. Berger, and Ms. Rice were involved in that decision.
3. Iraq and al Qaeda — the Sudan connection. Mr. Clarke, are you aware of a February 1998 correspondence from Sudan's intelligence chief to FBI Regional Director for East Africa David Williams in which again an offer to share terrorism data was made by Sudan without conditions? Are you aware that bin Laden's chief deputy in Sudan made a trip to Baghdad to visit with Iraqi intelligence officials at about the same time in February 1998? If not, why not? How do you reconcile your categorical statement in a recent 60 Minutes interview that there was no relationship between al Qaeda and Iraq — ever, I believe is how you put it — with the fact that bin Laden's chief deputy was visiting Baghdad at the same time you were receiving repeated offers to explore Sudan's intelligence files?
4. The U.S. embassy bombings. Mr. Clarke, once the U.S. embassies had been attacked in Kenya and Tanzania in August 1998, Sudan's intelligence chief again contacted the FBI in a handwritten note that has been published, and offered to turn over to U.S. custody two of the key suspects who had taken up residence in an apartment overlooking the U.S. embassy in Khartoum. Why did the United States not pursue their extradition immediately? Were you aware of the offer? If not, why not? If so, why did you not, in your role as counterterrorism coordinator, make sure the FBI was given all support necessary from the White House to gain their extradition?
5. Retaliation: bombing the al-Shifa plant in Khartoum. Mr. Clarke, you then recommended bombing Sudan's al-Shifa pharmaceutical plant as the best response to the embassy attacks. Can you recount the evidence that led you to believe al-Shifa was producing nerve agents, and the evidence you had of its ownership and financing by bin Laden? Can you again help us to rectify your categorical statement now that there was no relationship between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's regime, ever, when you previously argued that Iraq and Sudan were cooperating on the development of chemical and biological weapons at a pharmaceutical plant you claimed was owned and financed by bin Laden?
6. The United Arab Emirates offers help on capturing bin Laden. Mr. Clarke, press reports indicate that the government of the United Arab Emirates, for its own reasons, was interested in helping the United States get bin Laden out of Afghanistan during the summer of 2000. It is our understanding that you were involved in a similar effort already in late 1999 and that the effort failed for a number of different reasons before a second attempt was made to revive it. First, can you tell us precisely what is the nature of your relationship with the UAE ruling family? Are you aware of any threats that were made against the family by al Qaeda leaders during that period of time? Did you relay any U.S. intelligence on the nature of those threats to UAE officials at that time? Did any UAE official, including members of the ruling family responsible for defense and national-security affairs, make an assessment or an offer to find a way to get bin Laden out of Afghanistan? If so, did it involve the construction of an Afghan Development Fund for the Taliban regime in return for bin Laden's transfer to the UAE? Was onward extradition of bin Laden from the UAE to the United States ever discussed with you? Did you ever make the president aware that such a possibility to get bin Laden out of Afghanistan existed? Was it your view at that time that armed CIA predator drones, which would presumably identify and kill senior al Qaeda leaders in Afghanistan, were the most efficient tools available to the United States for dealing with the threat posed by al Qaeda?
7. Did al Qaeda get nuclear assistance from Pakistan? A Pakistani national, Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, has now admitted to selling nuclear hardware and other materials for the construction of nuclear devices to Iran, Libya, and North Korea. The White House in which you worked was warned about Pakistan's nuclear black-market enterprise in August of 2000, and again in September 2000. You clearly had suspicions about the North Korean relationship very early on. Other troubling aspects of Pakistan's nuclear program were brought to Mr. Berger's attention as early as February 1996. Can you tell us today whether al Qaeda was able to get its hands on sufficient nuclear materials to be able to build a radiological device? Do you believe al Qaeda possesses a functional nuclear device? Did the Clinton administration have sufficient evidence to confront Pakistan's military regime about the illicit nuclear activities of its scientists? Why did you not act on the intelligence you had to stop Dr. Khan's network earlier?
Factual answers to these questions, minus the political bluster and ad-hominem attacks aimed at scoring points with a potential future employer, would go a long way in restoring Richard Clarke's severely damaged credibility as an observer and participant in some of history's most important events. Our future generations deserve better than to watch catfights between grown adults charged with nothing less than providing for their safety and security.
Just tell us the truth, Mr. Clarke.
— Mansoor Ijaz is chairman of Crescent Investment Management in New York. He negotiated Sudan's offer of counterterrorism assistance on al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden to the Clinton administration in 1997 and coauthored the blueprint for the ceasefire in Kashmir in the summer of 2000.
From National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com/ijaz/ijaz200403230855.asp)
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
amazing (well, not really, I have come to expect it) how fast the "he's an idiot", "he's a liberal", "who are we talking about" coments come up.
the only republican I can think of who I would consider voting for.
Knew who I was talking about. Just wasn't the same guy you were talking about. BTW, both of these Clark(e)s seem to be very anti Bush and are being called liars.
-
what dune said
this book is an attempt to CYA before he is called to the hearing
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
[Colin Powell]
When is this guy gonna run for President?
Sadly, I dont think he will ever run. But if he did, very probably he would win landslide.
And its been strange how he has been kept behind the courtains for the past years of this administration because of his disaproval of some extreme policies.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
what dune said
this book is an attempt to CYA before he is called to the hearing
Dune didn't say anything, just cut and pasted from an op-ed piece.
lol, like the Bush admin is going to say, "Yeah, he was right"
h
-
Oh I definately must read this book.