Congressman Casts Doubt on Clarke's Credibility

CNSNEWS.com ^ | 3/24/04 | Susan Jones

[kattracks]

(CNSNews.com) - In a letter to the 9/11 commission on Wednesday, a Republican congressman noted that before the Sept. 11 terror attacks, a House panel held twenty hearings and two formal briefings on terrorism -- and Richard Clarke "was of little help in our oversight."

"When he briefed the subcommittee, his answers were both evasive and derisive," wrote Rep. Chris Shays (R-Conn.) in a March 24, 2004 letter to the national commission investigating the terrorist attacks.

Shays said the commission might find the information about Clarke relevant, given the fact that Clarke was testifying on Wednesday. Clarke made headlines this week after blasting the Bush administration in various media appearances and interviews.

Clarke, in a newly released book, accused the Bush administration of ignoring his warnings about al Qaeda before the September 11 attacks; and he also accused the administration of bungling the war on terrorism by invading Iraq, instead of concentrating exclusively on nabbing Osama bin Laden.

"Clark was part of the problem before Sept. 11 because he took too narrow a view of the terrorism threat," Shays wrote to the commission on Wednesday.

He also noted that "no truly national strategy to combat terrorism was ever produced during Mr. Clarke's tenure."

In fact, said Shays, his subcommittee was "so concerned about Mr. Clarke's narrow view of the terrorist threat" that the subcommittee wrote to National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, to express its concerns about Clarke.

Shays is chairman of the House Government Reform Committee's National Security Subcommittee.

E-mail a news tip to David Thibault.

[marvlus]

Shays always seemed like a straight shooter to me, although I view him as more of more to the left of moderate conservative.

[GailA]

btt

[MamaLucci]

This entire fiasco is to deflect attention from the obvious failures of Clarke and the Clinton administration to protect America from terrorism. Period.

[JohnGalt]

Ahh, much better. And the use of Shays is brilliant. He is a liberal Republican from CT and a media darling.

[dalebert]

This entire fiasco is to save the Dems even if they have to damage the country but thats nothing new.

[MamaLucci]

Shays is a weak excuse of a man, my comment really has nothing to do with him....or you, for that matter. Buzz off.

[Sprite518]

I love it. Now we see the truth about Clark. He is nothing but a political hack for Kerry.

[blue-duncan]

Well said! There is not much difference between Shays and the liberal Democrats in our Godforsaken State. But, there must be official transcripts of the hearings Shays refers to that would lend credibility to his characterization of Clarke.

[ravingnutter]

E-mail a news tip to David Thibault.

Here's your tip, David...watch Fox News more often. LOL!

Clarke in '02: Bush Admin Began Counterterror Plan in Jan. '01 (Clarke Caught!Fox Exclusive!)

[GOP_1900AD]

Clarke needs to be nailed hard. There must be some dirt on him. Let's see it. Time to go way negative.

[the right side jedi]

I'm watching Clarke in front of the 9/11 panel right now, and from what I can tell the panel Ds and Rs aren't really buying a lot of what he has said. One said he had a credibility problem.

[LiteKeeper]

INTREP - CLARKE - WHAM BAM SLAM!

[tessalu]

I would not believe Clark after reading his resignation letter. Either way you want to look at it, he is a liar, one way or the other.

[GailA]

btt

[optimistically_conservative]

Clarke pisses me off.

Since '79, long before Clarke became Mr. Terror Czar, actual terrorism experts were warning of the new brand of international terrorism coming out of the Palestinian groups and the Mujahideen fighters in the Balkans/'stans/Chechnya.

No one was taking the growth in terrorism seriously throughout the 80s or 90s. Everyone was focused on states and rouges. The loss of dozens or hundreds of lives were considered crime statistics. Clarke was part of that tradition. He was huge on attacking the "causes" of terrorism while limiting retaliation to law enforcement small strikes.

Could 9/11 have been prevented? Sure, if we had gotten lucky (again). Could 9/12 or 9/13 or 9/14? That's what counter-terrorism is about. Preventing the next attack every day. You can do it solely defensively through intelligence, information and law enforcement OR you can go in and take away land routes, training areas, financial markets, kill their leaders and generally create havoc in their backyard.

Terrorists are planning everyday to attack. All they need are the resources and the opportunity.

Taking Afghanistan and Iraq away has created havoc in the jihadists backyard and helped us to deny them opportunities and interdict those resources.

[NYCVirago]

Shays always seemed like a straight shooter to me, although I view him as more of more to the left of moderate conservative.

Shays and Peter King both voted against impeachment, but I have to give them both credit for stepping up over the last few weeks to defend Bush.

[rwfromkansas]

wow

[Milligan]

The plot thickens.

[Alas Babylon!]

Interesting. What's more, it's more than you can say about several Republican senators, specifically Hagel and McCain.