Posted on 04/09/2004 6:12:14 AM PDT by chance33_98
Clinton Defends Counterterror Policies in Meeting With Sept. 11 Panel
WASHINGTON (AP) - Former President Clinton defended his counterterrorism policies in a private meeting with the Sept. 11 commission and said intelligence wasn't strong enough to justify a retaliation against al-Qaida for the 2000 bombing of a Navy ship. Clinton met for nearly four hours with the 10-member bipartisan panel in a closed-door session shortly after the conclusion of national security adviser Condoleezza Rice's public testimony, broadcast live on national television.
Commissioners described Clinton's testimony as frank and informative.
Bob Kerrey, a former Democratic senator from Nebraska and now a member of the commission, said Friday on ABC's "Good Morning America" he believes Clinton should have been more aggressive in going after al-Qaida following the ship attack.
"I think he did have enough proof to take action," Kerrey said. "That's a difference of opinion."
A person familiar with the session said Clinton told the commission he did not order retaliatory military strikes after the bombing of the USS Cole in October 2000 because he could not get "a clear, firm judgment of responsibility" from U.S. intelligence before he left office the following January.
It wasn't until after the Bush administration took power that U.S. intelligence concluded al-Qaida had sponsored the attack on the ship in the harbor at Aden, Yemen. Some commissioners have been critical of the decision not to launch a retaliatory military strike.
The person, who would speak only on condition of anonymity because Clinton's testimony delved into classified materials, also said the former president explained the rationale for many of the terror-fighting policies that his administration instituted and the message his administration left behind to the incoming Bush administration.
Clinton "did not indicate anything fundamentally that he would have done differently" given what U.S. intelligence knew about Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaida threat, the person said.
Commission chairman Thomas Kean said Clinton told the commission he has wrestled with the issue of whether his administration could have done more.
"He said he's going back in his mind over and over again about whether there was something more he could've done," Kean told PBS' "NewsHour with Jim Lehrer."
The panel said it didn't plan to release details of the meeting, saying much of it involved classified information.
Commissioners said that Clinton addressed big-picture policy issues.
"He was adamant about trying to work in a bipartisan way to fix the problems," said Democratic commissioner Timothy Roemer, a former U.S. representative from Indiana. "He was quite honest and frank."
John Lehman, a former Navy secretary under President Reagan, agreed.
"He did very well," Lehman told CNN. "He gave us a lot of very helpful insights into things that happened, policy approaches."
A spokesman for Clinton, Jim Kennedy, said the former president was pleased to talk to the commission "and believed it was a very constructive meeting."
Clinton and former Vice President Al Gore consented in February to separate private interviews; Gore is scheduled to meet the panel soon.
President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney also will meet privately with the full panel in a joint session in coming weeks. They initially restricted the interview to one hour with two panel members, but under mounting public pressure agreed last week to a joint session without time constraints.
|
Attempting to save the taxpayers money by voting no after you voted yes: $87 billion |
|
|
|
Believing you can present yourself as an alpha male by wearing a Flower Power zipper pull on your vest: Priceless! |
|
Or mail checks to: Or you can use: |
|
|
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- |
|
Never stopped them before! I guess what was said doesn't fit the agenda for public release [doesn't bash Bush!]
Surprise, surprise.
Where are the defenders of blacks? In comparison with Anita Hill and Betty Curie, the media in this case is really showing it's bias. I wonder if the black community sees this or are they too ignorant? I'm talking about the decent black folk. There has to be a conservative black group out there that is outraged? No?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
