Hardball Tonight: Clarke - 9/11 Might Have Been Prevented

MSNBC ^ | Updated: 3:35 p.m. ET March 31, 2004 | Alex Johnson

[ironman]

NEW YORK - Richard Clarke, President Bush’s former chief counterterrorism adviser, said Wednesday that it was possible that he and his team could have prevented the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks if the Bush administration had paid more attention ahead of time to Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida terror network.

Clarke’s comments, in an hourlong interview on MSNBC’s “Hardball,” were a departure from the testimony he gave last week before the independent commission investigating the attacks, when he answered no to the question of whether there was “the remotest chance that it would have prevented 9/11” even if everything he had called for had been implemented.

But Clarke told MSNBC’s Chris Matthews that he hoped he and his team would have been able to take action to quash the attacks, which killed about 3,000 people in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania, had the CIA and the FBI sufficiently coordinated the bits and pieces of information they had about the 19 Saudis who hijacked four planes and crashed them in the worst attack on U.S. soil.

Acknowledging that he was indulging in “20/20 hindsight,” Clarke said it was likely that he could have made a difference had he known that some of the hijackers were in the country ahead of time and had drawn suspicion. The full interview is scheduled to air today at 7 p.m. ET on MSNBC-TV.

[Howlin]

Sort of like "If they're not listening to me, they can't be doing anything?"

There's a word to describe this kind of person -- I just can't think of it!

[BigSkyFreeper]

This guy is a meglomaniac!

You got him pegged alright.

[onyx]

Yeah. Anyway, lets just say I was amused in a weird sort of way. :) You didn't miss much.




One time, OK.
NO MORE.

[oceanview]

he also said he was aware of the "planes as weapons" idea for the 1996 Olympics, and put a plan in place for "air cover" near Atlanta. So why didn't he bother looking for hijacker pilots in training in 97,98,99,00, since he knew that planes could be used as weapons in 1996? who did he think would be flying those planes, American pilots?

you know, I didn't think it was possible to find the person singly most responsible for 9/11, but I think we have now - ITS CLARKE!

[rocklobster11]

Most of the commissioners have been on the talk shows, but Ben Veniste is the first one I've seen who was talking about what conclusions they would reach. The others make a point that they are not going to speculate of jump to conclusions until they release their report.

[Howlin]

One entry found for megalomania. Main Entry: meg·a·lo·ma·nia
Pronunciation: "me-g&-lO-'mA-nE-&, -ny&
Function: noun
Etymology: New Latin
1 : a mania for great or grandiose performance
2 : a delusional mental disorder that is marked by infantile feelings of personal omnipotence and grandeur
- meg·a·lo·ma·ni·ac /-'mA-nE-"ak/ adjective or noun

[Lauratealeaf]

This is kind of off-topic but have you heard the tape of the serial killer who called 911 to report his victim's death in Kansas years ago? The guys voice sort of sounds like Richard Clarke.

[kabar]

Speaking of Iraq, I notice Clarke basically flat out ignores our venture into Afghanistan and purveys the idea that we went straight to Baghdad.

Exactly. Clarke tried to insinuate that Bush wanted to go immediately into Iraq when he "dragged" him aside on 9/12 and demanded that Clarke see if there was an Iraqi connection. The inference we are supposed to draw is that Iraq was the most important objective of Bush and the neocons. Unfortunately, the inference doesn't comport with the facts, namely we went to Afghanistan and then a year later to Iraq. More hyperbole from Clarke the drama queen.

[Dolphy]

Now I wish I had my own copy so I could use a yellow highlight pen on it!

I know what you mean, you should see my copy :~)

[cyncooper]

From today's White House briefing:

excerpt regarding Clarke and also the 9/11 commission:

Q Okay, the second question, on Richard Clarke. A lot has been made about Dr. Rice's testimony, whether she would testify. But not a lot has been made about the perjury charges that Bill Frist made on Friday, on the Senate floor. He said, basically, that Mr. Clarke had two different stories under oath. Isn't that perjury, and shouldn't he be prosecuted for that?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, those are decisions that others make, obviously. I think that this is a decision that was made by Senate leaders. They made a request of us, and our role is to look at those issues and see what could be declassified.

Q The question is about the declassification --

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, that was a decision --

Q -- if they should --

MR. McCLELLAN: Can I finish? That was a decision by congressional leaders.

Q But if he did have two different, contradictory statements under oath, shouldn't he be prosecuted for perjury?

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm not going to get into speculating about that. We've made our views very well-known. I think most Americans view Dick Clarke and his contradictions as yesterday's story. This is about the war on terrorism and the important role that the 9/11 Commission plays in helping us move forward in the war on terrorism. We have taken significant steps since September 11th to make sure we are doing everything we can to prevent another attack from happening. And the work of the 9/11 Commission is very important, particularly if they can help provide us additional recommendations, beyond what we've already done, that would help prevent another attack from happening.

Q Can I stay on that subject -- we need to stay on that subject, briefly. Could you explain to us why the White House requested that the President and Vice President jointly answer questions, as opposed to separately?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, one, we've said from the very beginning that it's important for the 9/11 Commission to have all the information they need to do their job. And we've worked very closely and cooperatively with the 9/11 Commission to make sure they have all that information. We have provided, as the Chairman and Vice Chairman have pointed out, unprecedented access to information from the administration to the 9/11 Commission, including our most sensitive national security documents. And that's the spirit in which we have worked.

Now, keep in mind that the 9/11 Commission already has more than 2.3 million pages of documents, there have been more than a hundred briefings, and that includes at the head-of-agency level, there have been more than 800 interviews and meetings with administration officials, some 900 audio cassette tapes of meetings and other materials that have been provided to them, and more than 60 compact discs of radar, flight and other information. So they already have a lot of information. And we want to work in a way that helps make sure that they have the information they need.

The commission very much welcomed the decision of the President and the Vice President to sit down together and meet with the entire commission and answer whatever questions they want to raise with the President and Vice President. This is a good way to make sure that they're getting the information that they need to do their job.

Q Why the specific insistence that they be together? I mean, they could --

MR. McCLELLAN: This is a good way to help them get the information they need and do so in a timely manner. Remember, they've already got a lot of the information, they've already conducted a lot of the interviews. And what they're trying to --

Q But they were separate interviews, right?

MR. McCLELLAN: What they're trying to do is get the information they need to complete their work and provide a full report to the American people. And we are helping every step of the way. And this is a way that will help them move forward in those efforts.

Q But why is the joint session better than separate sessions, which is what they --

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, one, it will help make sure they get that information in a timely manner. They can talk to both of them and help better understand how to piece together all the information that they've already received.

~snip~

I included the part about Bush and Cheney appearing together because Clarke chose to whine about it on Hardball. Love the phrasing about "Dick Clarke and his contradictions". Sounds like a band!

[ironman]

Here is my post #77 again.

What really gets me steamed is Mathews is bent out of shape about W asking Clarke to look into possible Iraq connections right after Sept 11, as if we immediately knew with 100% certainty everybody who was involved. No need to investigate. Crime solved. In fact there are quite a lot of ties between Iraq and al-Qaeda, and some between Iraq and 9-11.

Case Closed OSAMA BIN LADEN and Saddam Hussein had an operational relationship from the early 1990s to 2003 that involved training in explosives and weapons of mass destruction, logistical support for terrorist attacks, al Qaeda training camps and safe haven in Iraq, and Iraqi financial support for al Qaeda--perhaps even for Mohamed Atta--according to a top secret U.S. government memorandum obtained by THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1022083/posts

[cyncooper]

Eek!

I have not heard it, though I have heard about it.

[cyncooper]

You bet, ironman. Thanks for emphasizing it.

Facts matter.

[malia]

bttt

[Howlin]

From Larry King Live last night:

SHAYS: No, I won't read a letter. I just -- I want to say, I have no ill will against Richard Clarke, but I am troubled that I feel he's rewriting history. He came before my committee, we had 20 hearings before September 11, 2001. And he came in in a closed-door meeting, we asked him what our strategy was to combat terrorism and he said it would be silly to have a strategy. We know who the bad guys are and we go after them. And we were so stunned by it. We wrote him a letter a few days later saying, what do you mean it's silly. And asking him to explain what our strategy was. What I would have liked to have asked him was, during the eight years he was there, what was the strategy -- first off, what was the assessment of the terrorist threat that all three commissions said that we needed to develop. What was our strategy. And I don't think there was one. The commission's asked for it. And the administrations of both parties should have produced it.

And I loved this part:

SCHIEFFER: Well, I'll tell you, Larry, I think that all of us were slow to recognize this threat of terrorism. When Bill Clinton first began firing those cruise missiles into the Sudan, and into Afghanistan, he was immediately challenged. People wondered, is he doing this to distract and to try to divert attention from Monica Lewinsky. Every one of his actions at that point, rightly or wrongly, were being questioned. I think that had Monica Lewinsky had not come along, I think all of us might have come to understand the threat of terrorism a lot quicker than we did. I think we were all slow to recognize this.


Again:

SCHIEFFER: Well, I think there were questions about President Clinton's credibility. As I was just saying a while ago. I think the whole Monica Lewinsky thing brought into question the president's judgment. He was questioned about everything he did. And I think perhaps because of that, perhaps some of the things that the Clinton people did pass on to the Bush people were not taken -- I don't want to say were not taken seriously, but perhaps they were questioned in the beginning.

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0403/30/lkl.00.html

[steveegg]

Case Closed OSAMA BIN LADEN and Saddam Hussein had an operational relationship from the early 1990s to 2003 that involved training in explosives and weapons of mass destruction, logistical support for terrorist attacks, al Qaeda training camps and safe haven in Iraq, and Iraqi financial support for al Qaeda--perhaps even for Mohamed Atta--according to a top secret U.S. government memorandum obtained by THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

This bears repeating again and again and again and again.

[Howlin]

No need to investigate.

Why, didn't you hear Richard Clarke say, "I told him, 'Mr. President, Saddam Hussein did not do this, AQ did."

Etched in stone.

/ sarcasm OFF

[reformedliberal]

You are looking for:

Borderline Personality Disorder/Narcissist. There were a ton of them in the former administration.

[cyncooper]

Thanks for the Shays comment and this:

SCHIEFFER: Well, I think there were questions about President Clinton's credibility. As I was just saying a while ago. I think the whole Monica Lewinsky thing brought into question the president's judgment. He was questioned about everything he did. And I think perhaps because of that, perhaps some of the things that the Clinton people did pass on to the Bush people were not taken -- I don't want to say were not taken seriously, but perhaps they were questioned in the beginning.

A lesson in why character matters. If a president doesn't want his judgement questioned and wants to be able to lead he'd best not behave like a depraved pervert. And that is just referring to Monica and the rest of the bimbos. How convenient for the Schieffers of the world to pretend there weren't scads of other activities and events that evidenced that Clinton had no business in office with the responsibilities it has.

[sanjacjake]

The word..is....ASSININE, EGOCENTRIC, LYING SNAKE ! Jake