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.

[kabar]

Although it may seem like inside baseball, I would ask Clarke about the fact that Iraq has been on the State Department's list of state sponsors of terrorism for over a decade spanning both the Clinton and Bush administrations. Did Clarke's office approve of that designation? Does Clarke agree with the Bush Doctrine, i.e., we will pursue the terrorists wherever they may be around the globe and the states that harbor them?

Iraq is not a diversion but an integral part of the WOT. Prior to invading Iraq, the US had been bombing Iraq almost daily for over 10 years to enforce the no-fly zones costing us billions of dollars a year and risking the lives of our pilots. Saddam had unaccounted for stocks of WMD (per the UN), billions of dollars of funds skimmed from the corrupt Food for Peace Program, and relationships with terrorist organizations. Given the events of 9/11, the US could no longer just contain Saddam and hope that he wouldn't give support to terrorists, including WMD. He had to removed. Moreover, it would have been a diversion and waste of resources to keep this no-fly regime in place at the same time we were waging the WOT.

There are also other salutary effects from a geopolitical standpoint that will change the dynamic in the Middle East and encourage the spread of democracy. Far from creating more terrorists, I believe it will, in the long run, dry up their breeding grounds. Our presence in Iraq also gives us some leverage in our relations with other state sponsors of terrorism such as Iran and Syria. Clarke needs to explain, in detail, his strategic vision on how to deal with terrorism, aside from arming predators and launching cruise missiles against low value targets.

[ReleaseTheHounds]

And Clarke just passes over the 1993 WTC bombing as if it didn't happen... That could have been worse even than 9-11 if they had succeeded as planned. Bill Clinton never went to the scene of that catastrophe... and never spoke about it. I wonder if that was on Clarke's counsel. They are all just disgusting.

[Adrastus]

Please forward to me all the names of those who believe this****. I would like to see them about some beach front property in Phoenix, Arizona. This character has stretch his credibility about as thin as a gnats' a** stretched over a rain barrell.If you don't like this story, wait 'til next week and see if you like that variation.

[ironman]

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

[ReleaseTheHounds]

I sense this could be like 2002 when the media and Demos were hounding the President to "make your case" for going to war with Iraq... He went to the UN, he went to Congress, and he went to the American people and made his case... And the lousy Dems were screwed.

[onyx]

Thanks for the ping, reminded me to watch this. Someone should start a live thread for this in due course.



Ditto Howlin, thanks for the ping/reminder.
Good idea BSF. A live thread is her specialty.

I don't know that I can stomach watching it,
after hearing Matthews BRAG to Imus how he's going
to treat the interview: plans to get the REAL inside info
from Clarke regarding Cheney, Wolfowitz, Condi Rice, Rummy
and the like BECAUSE Matthews says, "Clarke is like a
mafia guy who KNOWS the inside," and is willing to spill
the proverbial beans --- willing to tell where all the bodies are buried.
Matthews thinks Clarke is such a valuable source of truth.

[ReleaseTheHounds]

Does the "A" stand for "Clymer"?

[cyncooper]

No kidding. I went and read the whole thing. Check this whine out:

Bush and Cheney have agreed to meet with all 10 members in private, but no date has been set. They will appear together, allowing them to reinforce each other’s recollections, a privilege Clarke noted Wednesday that he had not had.

“I guess when you’re president you get special treatment,” he told Matthews.

Geeze, just who would be his Dick Cheney? He's casting himself as equal to the president.

LOL

[tirednvirginia]

I am sure "Chrissy" was in heaven and didn't interupt him one time.

[Steve_Seattle]

What was Ben Veniste doing on Hardball? This is supposed to be a non-partisan commission, and the commissioners shouldn't be running to the press to spin things their way. Apart from a brief quote or two, the commission should only deal with the media as a collective, not as individual commissioners. Ben Veniste should keep his fat Democratic spinmeister ass off of the television.

[Dolphy]

Are you familiar with Richard Miniter's book, Losing bin Laden? (Published before Clarke was a household name.) From page 76:

The President made capturing "the world's most dangerous man (Yousef)" the personal responsibility of Richard Clarke. To the outside world, appointing a little known National Security Council staffer to lead a global manhunt for a terrorist mastermind seemed unusual.

He goes on to say that Clinton made the appointment because he didn't want to draw attention to the manhunt for fear if he failed he would be blamed. On the following page he says:

In fact, he (Clarke) was perfectly cast for the part. Clarke was so colorless that even his office seemed to project more personality...A career federal bureaucrat...Clarke could be mistaken for a middle aged, mid-level employee at the Department of Energy

Dick Clarke is out of his element. And you are right. It was a hit to the ego Clinton wrongly implanted in this man when the Bush administration saw him for what he was.

[kabar]

Exactly and the 1993 WTC bombing not only killed 6 people, it injured over 1000. Moreover, Clinton and Clarke tout the attacks they thwarted missing the bigger picture that we were at war and stayed on the defensive.

[ironman]

Great analysis.

Here is another Clarke contradiction over whether Iraq is a "diversion." Just when did al-Qaeda become a global problem???

On MTP: "Because during those two years when forces were diverted to Iraq... al-Qaeda has metamorphosized into a hydra-headed organization with cells that are operating autonomously, like the cells that operated in Madrid recently."

vs.

Clarke in his book recalling a 2001 conversation with Condi:
`Most people think of it as Usama bin Laden's group, but it's much more than that. It's a network of affiliated terrorist organizations with cells in over 50 countries, including the U.S.' Rice looked skeptical."

[BigSkyFreeper]

Hey there! Did you survive listening to Al Franken? :)

I know off topic, but an inquiring mind wants to know. LOL :)

[onyx]

Does the "A" stand for "Clymer"?



LOL!
Ya think?

[cyncooper]

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

[onyx]

Hey there! Did you survive listening to Al Franken? :)
I know off topic, but an inquiring mind wants to know. LOL :)




Ah, you-hoo, anybody home?
I took you to task for listening.
"I" did not.

[Howlin]

I finally went to the library and GOT that book, after you kept quoting it! :-)

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

I'm halfway through it.

It's ALL about Clarke; let's see: he gave Miniter HIS side of the story, he gave the 9-11 Commission HIS side of the story, and now he's giving yet another story.

This guy is a meglomaniac!

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

Yep........he's crossed over into the honest-to-goodness looney zone.

[BigSkyFreeper]

Ah, you-hoo, anybody home?
I took you to task for listening.
"I" did not.

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