Skip to comments.
Berger rejected four plans to kill or capture bin Laden
THE WASHINGTON TIMES ^
| July 24, 2004
| James G. Lakely
Posted on 07/23/2004 11:12:30 PM PDT by neverdem
President Clinton's national security adviser, Samuel R. Berger, rejected four plans to kill or capture Osama bin Laden, worrying once that if the plans failed and al Qaeda launched a counterattack, "we're blamed."
According to the September 11 commission's 567-page report, released Thursday, Mr. Berger was told in June 1999 that U.S. intelligence agents were confident about bin Laden's presence in a terrorist training camp called Tarnak Farms in Afghanistan.
Mr. Berger's "hand-written notes on the meeting paper," the report says, showed that Mr. Berger was worried about injuring or killing civilians located near the camp.
Additionally, "If [bin Laden] responds" to the attack, "we're blamed," Mr. Berger wrote.
The report also says that Richard Clarke, Mr. Berger's expert on counterterrorism, presented that plan to get bin Laden because he was worried about the al Qaeda leader's "ambitions to acquire weapons of mass destruction."
These revelations come as Mr. Berger is under investigation by the Justice Department for smuggling several copies of classified documents that dealt with the Clinton administration's anti-terror policies out of the National Archives.
Commission Co-chairman Lee Hamilton said Thursday, however, that the missing documents Mr. Berger has acknowledged taking doesn't affect "the integrity" of the final report.
According to the report, the first plan of action against bin Laden presented to Mr. Berger was a briefing by CIA Director George J. Tenet on May 1, 1998. Mr. Berger took no action, the report says, because he was "focused most" on legal questions.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: alqaeda; jamesglakely; missedopportunity; osamabinladen; samuelrberger; sandyberger; soxgate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-44 next last
To: leadpenny
If the documents are missing, how does the Honorable Lee Hamilton know which documents are missing? My guess is that the National Archives updates their inventories on a timely basis. They also noticed Berger behaving suspiciously.
I've read or heard that Berger took an original document, not just copies.
The hour is late. Try googling Berger+national+archives tomorrow.
21
posted on
07/24/2004 1:33:52 AM PDT
by
neverdem
(Xin loi min oi)
To: Jeff Chandler
I sure wouldn't want to be the guy who prosecutes Burglar. The media will destroy him. I nominate Ken Starr or David Shippers. Hell, they have both been skewered already, might be time for some revenge!
22
posted on
07/24/2004 1:47:08 AM PDT
by
Michael.SF.
(The Democrats can claim: People, too stupid to vote correctly, cost them the 2000 election.)
To: neverdem
I was poorly trying to make the point that Hamilton's statement was unfortunate.
Whether it will or not, this Berger affair should turn out to be bigger than Watergate. We have only seen the tip of the iceberg. That Bill Clinton made a statement within 24 hours of the story breaking speaks volumes. The outcome is going to depend on the Justice Department and how vigorous the House committee doing the investigation is.
To: beckett
Perhaps you, or someone, has a transcript?
To: neverdem
25
posted on
07/24/2004 2:29:53 AM PDT
by
lainde
(Heads up...We're coming and we've got tongue blades!!)
To: Yaelle
Or is there something else that he successfully prevented from getting into the report?There is apparently an "original" missing, but I can't believe they don't have copies of everyting. But who knows.
All I know is that if Berger doesn't end up behind bars for a long time for what he did (repeatedly), then I know this country is finished and Republicans have no balls.
26
posted on
07/24/2004 2:37:08 AM PDT
by
beyond the sea
(There's always one to turn and walk away ........ and one who just wants to stay)
To: neverdem
"President Clinton's national security adviser, Samuel R. Berger, rejected four plans to kill or capture Osama bin Laden..."
This seems to contradict what Lt. Col. Robert "Buzz" Patterson, USAF (Ret.), "Carrier of the 'nuclear football'", says in "Dereliction of Duty", pp. 129-130. In his book Col. Patterson says that at one point "the intelligence community" was tracking OBL. He says they found his location, contacted Berger (who came), tried again and again to get Clinton, but couldn't get him for over an hour.
When Berger finally got Clinton, Clinton was indecisive wanting to discuss, study the issue, and talk to his Secretary of State. They had about a two hour window to get OBL, and Clinton "studied the issue" until it was too late.
I have wondered if Berger took the papers that would prove these types of "dereliction of duty" by Clinton.
27
posted on
07/24/2004 2:43:14 AM PDT
by
Humal
To: jwpjr
we are going to have to use every bit of persuasive power we can muster up to get people to vote and to urge them to vote for the Bush-Cheney ticket and for Republicans at every level.You're so right about "every bit of persuasive power". Along those lines, I wrote this thread yesterday......... check it out.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1177327/posts
No Big Deal if G.W. Bush Loses the Election to Kerry
28
posted on
07/24/2004 2:43:36 AM PDT
by
beyond the sea
(There's always one to turn and walk away ........ and one who just wants to stay)
To: nopardons
We all must work on everyone we know and even those we don't know,to get them to either vote for President Bush,or stay home if they're Dems,ping to post # 28.
29
posted on
07/24/2004 2:45:36 AM PDT
by
beyond the sea
(There's always one to turn and walk away ........ and one who just wants to stay)
To: neverdem; Grampa Dave; PhilDragoo; potlatch; devolve; Registered; MeekOneGOP; Smartass; ...
"Berger rejected four plans to kill or capture bin Laden"
_________________________
Our Boy Berger ping.
30
posted on
07/24/2004 2:50:31 AM PDT
by
Happy2BMe
(Ronald Reagan to Islamic Terrorism: YOU CAN RUN - BUT YOU CAN'T HIDE!)
To: neverdem
31
posted on
07/24/2004 3:30:15 AM PDT
by
BunnySlippers
(Must get moose and squirrel ... B. Badanov)
To: nopardons
Clinton is no longer the president,Reno isn't running the DoJ,and the wheels of hustice grind awfully slowly,so we MUST make sure that President Bush gets re-elected.That way,Sloppy,sloppy,SLOPPY Sandy WILL get tried and punished. I agree. If Berger is charged before the election, the media and Democrats will scream to high heaven that it is a political attack and paint Bush as "mean spirited".
After Bush is reelected, the matter can run its course without worry of political fallout.
32
posted on
07/24/2004 4:05:50 AM PDT
by
varon
(Allegiance to the constitution, always. Allegiance to a political party, never.)
To: Yaelle
"Or is there something else that he successfully prevented from getting into the report?"
Must be -- otherwise it makes no sense.
Carolyn
33
posted on
07/24/2004 4:18:25 AM PDT
by
CDHart
(I'm not crazy. I've just been in a bad mood for 40 years. [Steel Magnolias])
To: neverdem
Mr. Berger was worried about injuring or killing civilians located near the camp. Ater all, why should Afghanis die when Americans can die instead?
Berger is a traitor!
34
posted on
07/24/2004 4:57:56 AM PDT
by
nonliberal
(With Specter as Judiciary Chair, how do the Bushbots propose we get a conservative onto the Court?)
To: nopardons
Get Bush out to get this boiling stuff off the burner and save the Clinton legacy.
35
posted on
07/24/2004 5:24:59 AM PDT
by
alrea
To: neverdem
This story is white-hot. That means we'll see a lot of stories about Martha Stewart, Bush not talking to the NAACP, and Abu Graibe in the coming weeks.
36
posted on
07/24/2004 5:46:35 AM PDT
by
H.Akston
To: neverdem
Berger rejected what Toon told him to reject.
37
posted on
07/24/2004 5:47:39 AM PDT
by
mewzilla
To: leadpenny
If the documents are missing, how does the Honorable Lee Hamilton know which documents are missing?I think that is that a trick question and I'm not falling for it? LOL!
To: AndyJackson
I get up early in the morning but not early enough to get ahead of you. :)
To: greasepaint
I'll see if I can find a transcript of his remarks on Charlie Rose, which is where I definitely saw him make the "three months planning" claim.
40
posted on
07/24/2004 8:29:16 AM PDT
by
beckett
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-44 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson