Posted on 04/13/2004 9:14:01 PM PDT by hope
Wednesday, Apr. 14, 2004 12:13 AM EDT
Bob Kerrey: Clinton's 9/11 Testimony 'Much Different' From Prior Account
After reviewing a transcript of remarks by former President Bill Clinton describing how he handled the al Qaeda threat in the late 1990s, former Sen. Bob Kerrey said Monday that the ex-president's testimony to the 9/11 Commission was "much different."
Calling the transcript "extremely helpful," Kerrey, a member of the 9/11 Commission, told WDAY Fargo, North Dakota radio host Scott Hennen that Clinton's comments were "much different than what we heard last week" during a behind closed doors interview.
Kerry said that the Commission would "fully vet" the discrepancies between Clinton's 2002 account to a New York business group and what he told the Commission.
Among the differences: Clinton insisted that tape recorded remarks showing him admitting that he turned down an offer for Osama bin Laden's arrest were "a misquote."
Sen. Kerrey did not specify the other discrepancies, but the transcript, based on NewsMax.com's exclusive audiotape of the ex-president's remarks, included a detailed account by Clinton of his efforts to capture or kill bin Laden.
Ex-President Clinton's Remarks on Osama bin Laden - as delivered to the Long Island Association's Annual Luncheon, Crest Hollow Country Club, Woodbury, NY
Feb. 15, 2002
Question from LIA President Matthew Crosson:
CROSSON: In hindsight, would you have handled the issue of terrorism, and al-Qaeda specifically, in a different way during your administration?
CLINTON: Well, it's interesting now, you know, that I would be asked that question because, at the time, a lot of people thought I was too obsessed with Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda.
And when I bombed his training camp and tried to kill him and his high command in 1998 after the African embassy bombings, some people criticized me for doing it. We just barely missed him by a couple of hours.
I think whoever told us he was going to be there told somebody who told him that our missiles might be there. I think we were ratted out.
We also bombed a chemical facility in Sudan where we were criticized, even in this country, for overreaching. But in the trial in New York City of the al-Qaeda people who bombed the African embassy, they testified in the trial that the Sudanese facility was, in fact, a part of their attempt to stockpile chemical weapons.
So we tried to be quite aggressive with them. We got - uh - well, Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan.
And we'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again.
They released him. At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America.
So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have. But they thought it was a hot potato and they didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan.
We then put a lot of sanctions on the Afghan government and - but they inter-married, Mullah Omar and bin Laden. So that essentially the Taliban didn't care what we did to them.
Now, if you look back - in the hindsight of history, everybody's got 20/20 vision - the real issue is should we have attacked the al-Qaeda network in 1999 or in 2000 in Afghanistan.
Here's the problem. Before September 11 we would have had no support for it - no allied support and no basing rights. So we actually trained to do this. I actually trained people to do this. We trained people.
But in order to do it, we would have had to take them in on attack helicopters 900 miles from the nearest boat - maybe illegally violating the airspace of people if they wouldn't give us approval. And we would have had to do a refueling stop.
And we would have had to make the decision in advance that's the reverse of what President Bush made - and I agreed with what he did. They basically decided - this may be frustrating to you now that we don't have bin Laden. But the president had to decide after Sept. 11, which am I going to do first? Just go after bin Laden or get rid of the Taliban?
He decided to get rid of the Taliban. I personally agree with that decision, even though it may or may not have delayed the capture of bin Laden. Why?
Because, first of all the Taliban was the most reactionary government on earth and there was an inherent value in getting rid of them.
Secondly, they supported terrorism and we'd send a good signal to governments that if you support terrorism and they attack us in America, we will hold you responsible.
Thirdly, it enabled our soldiers and Marines and others to operate more safely in-country as they look for bin Laden and the other senior leadership, because if we'd have had to have gone in there to just sort of clean out one area, try to establish a base camp and operate.
So for all those reasons the military recommended against it. There was a high probability that it wouldn't succeed.
Now I had one other option. I could have bombed or sent more missiles in. As far as we knew he never went back to his training camp. So the only place bin Laden ever went that we knew was occasionally he went to Khandahar where he always spent the night in a compound that had 200 women and children.
So I could have, on any given night, ordered an attack that I knew would kill 200 women and children that had less than a 50 percent chance of getting him.
Now, after he murdered 3,100 of our people and others who came to our country seeking their livelihood you may say, "Well, Mr. President, you should have killed those 200 women and children."
But at the time we didn't think he had the capacity to do that. And no one thought that I should do that. Although I take full responsibility for it. You need to know that those are the two options I had. And there was less than a 50/50 chance that the intelligence was right that on this particular night he was in Afghanistan.
Now, we did do a lot of things. We tried to get the Pakistanis to go get him. They could have done it and they wouldn't. They changed governments at the time from Mr. Sharif to President Musharraf. And we tried to get others to do it. We had a standing contract between the CIA and some groups in Afghanistan authorizing them and paying them if they should be successful in arresting and/or killing him.
So I tried hard to - I always thought this guy was a big problem. And apparently the options I had were the options that the President and Vice President Cheney and Secretary Powell and all the people that were involved in the Gulf War thought that they had, too, during the first eight months that they were there - until Sept. 11 changed everything.
But I did the best I could with it and I do not believe, based on what options were available to me, that I could have done much more than I did. Obviously, I wish I'd been successful. I tried a lot of different ways to get bin Laden 'cause I always thought he was a very dangerous man. He's smart, he's bold and committed.
But I think it's very important that the Bush administration do what they're doing to keep the soldiers over there to keep chasing him. But I know - like I said - I know it might be frustrating to you. But it's still better for bin Laden to worry every day more about whether he's going to see the sun come up in the morning than whether he's going to drop a bomb, another bomb somewhere in the U.S. or in Europe or on some other innocent civilians. (END OF TRANSCRIPT)
Editor's note:
Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
9/11 Commission
Clinton Scandals
Ah yes--ever the "vicitim." The reason people criticized Clinton was because he was trying to discract from Monica, perjury, lies, and crimes.
Earth to Senator Kerry:
That means he lied.
This man is such a joke. Clinton is an obvious lightweight when it comes to such high stakes matters. No sense of vision comes through in his words. He has no sense of dignity. He is only a self-absorbed and pitiful excuse for a man: unworthy to be called former President of the United States.
I guess I need a program to figure out which numbskull is which.
No, a lot of people thought he was too obsessed with Monica.
That's what came across in this interview and always comes across when I hear/read Bill Clinton's words. He has no class. No offense to trailer park people (my brother has just become one) but he comes across as that stereotypical caliber of a person--not someone who should have ever been anywhere near the Oval Office.
Comments: 202-456-1111 Switchboard: 202-456-1414 FAX: 202-456-2461 E-Mail President George W. Bush: president@whitehouse.gov Vice President Richard Cheney: vice.president@whitehouse.gov
Now, after he murdered 3,100 of our people and others who came to our country seeking their livelihood you may say, "Well, Mr. President, you should have killed those 200 women and children." Now I had one other option. I could have bombed or sent more missiles in. As far as we knew he never went back to his training camp. So the only place bin Laden ever went that we knew was occasionally he went to Khandahar where he always spent the night in a compound that had 200 women and children. So I could have, on any given night, ordered an attack that I knew would kill 200 women and children that had less than a 50 percent chance of getting him.
Well we already knew that he had war criminal tendencies. Talk about a faulty reasoning paradigm.
They changed governments at the time from Mr. Sharif to President Musharraf.
Still the master of euphemisms too. It is called a coup d'etat - not a "change of governments". Gee: he makes it sound like they simply had an election.
But it's still better for bin Laden to worry every day more about whether he's going to see the sun come up in the morning than whether he's going to drop a bomb, another bomb somewhere in the U.S. or in Europe or on some other innocent civilians.
Another BOMB!? Is he claiming something which appears to diverge from the official version?
The planes were not reported to have had bombs on them. Does he know something that we do not know?
He can not even keep up with official account.
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.