Al-Quada vs Clinton and Bush White House

Sourdoughman · Mar 24, 2004

Clarke has been caught on a flip flop and will now be discredited.
Fox news is reporting of an audio clip they have of Clarke praising the Bush administration.
This further proves that Clarke is trying to sell a book and has an ax to grind
against the Bush administration, I can't wait to see him get drilled by the 9-11
hearings in 30 minutes.
Heres the Link
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,115085,00.html

I find it interesting that watching the 9-11 hearings today that Sandy Berger didn't think they would have the support to attack Afghanistan even though Al-Qaida declared war on us and attacked the USS Cole.

The Clinton Administration didn't have that much support to go to Bosnia but they could do that and it definitely wasn't in America's interest.
I don't have a problem helping get rid of ethnic cleansing or evil dictators but I think its interesting that they didn't act or wouldn't act in our own interest.
The president, no matter who, always gets our support and rally around the troops.

Clinton IMO, wanted to be buddy, buddy with the international community even our enemies, what a nice guy.
Thanks
Clinton!

ps I agree with Dallastigers post above

martin · Mar 24, 2004

Sourdoughman said:

I find it interesting that watching the 9-11 hearings today that Sandy Berger didn't think they would have the support to attack Afghanistan even though Al-Qaida declared war on us and attacked the USS Cole.
Click to expand...

me too. thats the problem with these "peace at all costs" liberals. they vote and their representatives are afraid to offend them. thats why i dislike the pacifists so much. what they are doing is dangerous. i would have been very happy if clinton had been crazy to fight after the cole bombing. terrorists should always know that an attack on us will result on an attack on them and 100 of them should die for every american that gets scratched. i would like it if we were so giddy to kill al queda that anyone who even slightly mentioned their allegiance to them would be scared of an american special ops bullet to the brain.

tirk · Mar 24, 2004

I don't get the gist of that interview. someone give me the cliffs notes so i get where they are headed. ambiguous as to the point it makes.

islstl · Mar 24, 2004

martin said:

our enemies must fear us.
Click to expand...

We don't need to post anything else on this thread. That sums it up.

Long live George W. Bush.

MLUTiger · Mar 24, 2004

Ex-Adviser: Terrorism Not Urgent for Bush

By HOPE YEN
Wednesday, March 24, 2004 9:04 PM CST

WASHINGTON - The Bush White House scaled back the struggle against al-Qaida after taking office in 2001 and spurned suggestions that it retaliate for the bombing of a U.S. warship because "it happened on the Clinton administration's watch," a former top terrorism adviser testified Wednesday.

The Clinton administration had "no higher priority" than combatting terrorists while the Bush administration made it "an important issue but not an urgent issue" in the months before Sept. 11, 2001, said Richard Clarke, who advised both presidents. He testified before the commission investigating the worst terrorist attacks in U.S. history. >>Read the article.
=============================

Did I miss this memo that the Clinton Admin. had "no higher priority" than terrorism?

Richard Clarke slowly creeps his way to "hack status".

dallastigers · Mar 27, 2004

A lot of this is old news, but parts of this article are more examples of parts of Clarke's book and parts of his testimony differing from his past statements.

Article link

Bush bashers have deployed former White House counterterrorist Richard A. Clarke as a weapon of mass denunciation. They are using an all-too-willing Clarke and his new book, Against All Enemies, to condemn the Bush administration for allegedly obsessing over Iraq rather than al Qaeda. Clarke made war critics swoon by chanting one of their cherished mantras.

"There is absolutely no evidence that Iraq was supporting al Qaeda ever," Clarke declared March 21 on CBS' 60 Minutes. Because Baathist Iraq and al Qaeda colluded less than, say, Iceland and the Cosa Nostra, the theory goes, President Bush squandered American time, treasure, and blood by hunting Saddam Hussein rather than Osama bin Laden.

This view totally overlooks extensive connections between Baghdad and bin Laden. Just ask Richard Clarke.

On Wednesday, he told the September 11 Commission about Abdul Rahman Yasin, the al Qaeda operative indicted who federal prosecutors indicted for mixing the chemicals in the bomb that rocked the World Trade Center, killed six, and injured 1,042 people on February 26, 1993.

"He was an Iraqi," Clarke observed. "Therefore, when the explosion took place, and he fled the United States, he went back to Iraq." While Clarke believes Baghdad did not orchestrate that attack, he concedes that Hussein embraced this assassin.

"The Iraqi government," Clarke continued, "didn't cooperate in turning him over and gave him sanctuary, as it did give sanctuary to other terrorists."

"Last week, Day One confirmed he [Yasin] is in Baghdad," ABC correspondent Sheila MacVicar reported June 27, 1994. "Just a few days ago, he was seen at [his father's] house by ABC News. Neighbors told us Yasin comes and goes freely."

Vice President Dick Cheney told National Public Radio last January 22: "We've discovered since [Iraq's liberation] documents indicating that a guy named Abdul Rahman Yasin, who was a part of the team that attacked the World Trade Center in '93, when he arrived back in Iraq was put on the payroll and provided a house, safe harbor and sanctuary."

WorldNetDaily.com excavated on Tuesday a January 23, 1999, Washington Post article in which Clarke defended the Clinton administration's August 20, 1998, cruise-missile strike on the El Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, Sudan. That mission avenged al Qaeda's demolition of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that August 7, which killed 224 individuals and injured more than 5,000. The Post quoted Clarke as "sure" that Iraqi experts there produced a powdered VX nerve gas component. According to the Post, Clarke "said that intelligence exists linking bin Laden to El Shifa's current and past operators, the Iraqi nerve gas experts and the National Islamic Front in Sudan."

Meanwhile, Palestinian terrorist Abu Abbas made news March 9 by dying of natural causes in U.S. military custody in Iraq. Green Berets captured him last April 14 in Baghdad, where he had lived under Hussein's protection since 2000. After masterminding the 1985 Achille Lauro cruise ship hijacking, in which U.S. retiree Leon Klinghoffer was murdered, Abbas slipped Italian custody. How? ''Abu Abbas was the holder of an Iraqi diplomatic passport,'' Italy's then-premiere Bettino Craxi announced then. So, Rome let him split for Yugoslavia, and beyond.

Speaking of diplomacy, the Philippine government booted the second secretary at Iraq's Manila embassy, Hisham al Hussein, on February 13, 2003, after discovering that the same mobile phone that reached his number on October 3, 2002, six days later rang another cell phone strapped to a bomb at the San Roque Elementary School in Zamboanga. While that device failed, another exploded one day earlier in Zamboanga, wounding 23 and killing three, including U.S. Special Forces Sergeant First Class Mark Wayne Jackson. That mobile phone also registered calls to Abu Madja and Hamsiraji Ali, leaders of Abu Sayyaf, al Qaeda's Philippine branch. It was launched in the late 1980s by the late Abdurajak Janjalani, with the help of Jamal Mohammad Khalifa, Osama bin Laden's brother-in-law.

As the Washington Times's Marc Lerner reported on March 3, 2003, Hamsiraji Ali, an Abu Sayyaf commander on the southern island of Basilan, bragged that his group received almost $20,000 annually from Iraqis close to Saddam Hussein.

"It's so we would have something to spend on chemicals for bomb-making and for the movement of our people," Sali explained.

Iraqi diplomat Muwafak al-Ani also was expelled from the Philippines, the Christian Science Monitor's Dan Murphy reported February 26, 2003. In 1991, an Iraqi embassy car took two terrorists near America's Thomas Jefferson Cultural Center in Manila. As they hid a bomb there, it exploded, killing one fanatic. Al-Ani's business card was found in the survivor's pocket, triggering al-Ani's ouster.

Washington Times Pentagon correspondents Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough reported March 19 on a 20-page, Arabic-language document from the Iraqi Intelligence Service. Stamped "top secret," it lists IIS "collaborators," among them, "the Saudi Osama bin Laden." It says he is a "Saudi businessman and is in charge of the Saudi opposition in Afghanistan...And he is in good relationship with our section in Syria." Signed "Jabar," the 1993 record seemed authentic to an American official who reviewed it.

"Since Operation Enduring Freedom, we have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al-Qa'ida members, including some that have been in Baghdad," CIA Director George Tenet concluded in an October 7, 2002 letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee. "Iraq's increasing support to extremist Palestinians, coupled with growing indications of a relationship with al-Qa'ida, suggest that Baghdad's links with terrorists will increase, even absent US military action."

Perhaps all of this made Richard Clarke state: "There is absolutely no evidence that Iraq was supporting al-Qaeda ever."

Critics of Operation Iraqi Freedom ignore these and many more ties among Saddam Hussein, al Qaeda, Palestinian zealots, and other Islamofascist mass murderers. Why? Acknowledging these contacts would concede a major casus belli behind Coalition efforts. The fact that Mohamed Atta did not charge his plane ticket to Hussein's Platinum Visa card does not render the Butcher of Baghdad a virgin among militant Muslims. In fact, Saddam Hussein loyally supported global terrorists, including al Qaeda. If Richard Clarke and others who oppose Bush's Iraq policy still do not see this, they are either blind to Nexis and similar news databases or paralyzed in a state of deep, pathological denial.
Click to expand...

dallastigers · Mar 27, 2004

Here is one article that is from a less main stream news organization.

Clarke Campaign Contributions link

Here is another good read.

TIME link

.....Nowhere do we see the President pointing fingers at or even sounding particularly "vigorous" toward Clarke and his deputies. Despite Clarke's contention that Bush wanted proof of Iraqi involvement at any cost, it's just as possible that Bush wanted Clark to find disculpatory evidence in order to discredit the idea peddled by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld that Baghdad had a hand in 9/11. In the aftermath of 9/11, Bush rejected Wolfowitz's attempts to make Iraq the first front in the war on terror. And if the President of the United States spoke "testily " 24 hours after the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history, well, can you blame him?........
Click to expand...

Log in or Sign up

Al-Quada vs Clinton and Bush White House

Sourdoughman TigerFan of LSU and the Tigerman

martin Banned Forever

tirk im the lyrical jessie james

islstl Playoff committee is a group of great football men Staff Member

MLUTiger Secular Humanist

dallastigers Founding Member

dallastigers Founding Member

Share This Page