Posted on 06/04/2002 6:51:28 AM PDT by Carl/NewsMax
Former Vice President Dan Quayle said Monday night that the lack of a firm policy to deal with terrorism during the Clinton administration was more responsible for leaving America vulnerable to the 9-11 attacks than any FBI or CIA intelligence failures.
"I don't believe 9-11 happened because of an intelligence breach," Quayle told Fox News Channel's "Hannity & Colmes."
"I think it was really a policy breach. It was the inaction of the previous administration, by and large, that al Qaeda -- and bin Laden in particular -- thought that they could hit the United States, and there would be a retaliation maybe of a cruise missile but nothing more than that," he explained.
The comments make the former vice president, who served under President Bush's father from 1989 to 1993, the highest ranking former U.S. official to suggest that the Clinton administration should get the lion's share of the blame for not preventing the 9-11 attacks.
Quayle also insisted that President Bush would have struck back more forcefully against al Osama bin Laden after earlier terrorist attacks on U.S. interests, taking action that could have averted 9-11.
"I can assure you if a USS Cole or an American embassy that had been hit under President Bush's watch, there would have been a different response," he said. "And I really think that bin Laden.... thought that he could hit us (on 9-11) and that the response would not be that much."
The former vice president also suggested that political correctness played a key role in allowing the 9-11 hijackers to elude U.S. anti-terror watchdogs, even after valuable intelligence on al Qaeda suspects was forwarded to Washington from the FBI's Phoenix and Minneapolis offices.
"This was, clearly, a situation where the FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C. (said), 'Oh, well, we can't do that. We might be getting into racial profiling,'" Quayle said. "'We might be doing something else, getting into wiretapping when we really don't have probable cause.'"
Appearing on the same show, former FBI assistant deputy director Daniel Coulson blamed a Clinton executive order for the failure of U.S. intelligence agents to infiltrate al Qaeda terror cells.
"The first thing you have to remember is that (Clinton) issued an executive order that said.... you can't use an individual who has terrorist connections in order to develop information about terrorist organizations, which is a huge bungle."
Coulson said the Clinton executive order, "defies reason, it defies logic, and it's not consistent with the law."
"Every day in a criminal case, we use unsavory characters," he explained. "We use people that are murderers to find other murderers. And that puts a great burden on the CIA, and it impedes their abilities to do their job."
MM
You are right. I stand corrected.
If I was Karl Rove, I would have Dubya address the nation (so the major media would be FORCED to cover it and "discuss" it) and announce that he was signing a new Executive Order to REVERSE this Clinton EO.
I would have Bush discuss the specifics of Clinton's EO, (without bashing) and explain that he feels it's in the nations interest to rescind it.
IMHO, that would end the lib media speculation about WHO was to blame for 9/11.
Still looking for the citation on this. Let's make sure we have our facts straight. See my post # 38. Let's get the document.
"Jeffrey H. Smith was general counsel of the CIA from 1995 to 1996, during which time he was instrumental in drafting new regulations governing the conduct of U.S. intelligence activities. ...
You're responsible for the regulation, as I understand it, that restricts the Central Intelligence Agency from recruiting or paying people who are guilty of murder or human rights violations?
That is not an accurate representation of the regulations.
Are you responsible for the regulation?
In 1995, when I became general counsel of the CIA, there were a series of investigations about CIA activity, largely in Central and South America. There were a series of allegations in public that were being investigated by the Congress... the agency was under huge pressure from the Congress and from the press about, how could you deal with these horrible people? ... So we put those guidelines in place. Essentially, they require that if the CIA wishes to recruit a source of human intelligence information, that is to say, a human being, outside the United States--excuse me--with a bad record, that is to say, someone who's committed murders, someone who's a drug dealer, someone who's a terrorist... ...Congress has directed George Tenet, the Director of Central Intelligence, to look at and rescind these regulations that require headquarters approval to recruit someone with serious human rights problems. "
Clinton made the State Dept. "the lead agency for managing and coordinating counterterrorism policy and operations abroad"!
state.gov
"the President has designated the Department of State, in keeping with its overall responsibility for the conduct of U.S. foreign policy, as the lead agency for managing and coordinating counterterrorism policy and operations abroad, whereas the Department of Justice has been designated the lead agency for domestic terrorism. These responsibilities were reaffirmed recently in Presidential Decision Directive 39, signed by President Clinton on June 21, 1995. "
It sure caught my attention! I was wondering...EX-VP??? This was the first FR article I clicked on this morning! Talk about Marketing!
"The first thing you have to remember is that (Clinton) issued an executive order that said.... you can't use an individual who has terrorist connections in order to develop information about terrorist organizations, which is a huge bungle."
Well, these guys lose more credibility every day. I sure do not see a Clinton "exective order" (his words), and the best anyone can come up with are some vague CIA "agency guidelines" or "regulations" which of course are classified.
The more these clowns open their mouths, the more I think that we need to completely eliminate the FBI and CIA and start from scratch all over. And I'm a leaning libertarian. The FBI seems to be adding about as much value to the fight against terrorism as my grandma. I think that "The FIBBIES" are little more than a leftover Hoover "image machine", a huge paper tiger dedicated to promoting this thought among the populace that everything is under control when in fact it's like the wizard of oz -- whole lotta smoke, not much action. (/rant)
Well, if I was making excuses I'd point out that "executive order" wasn't capitalized so it could refer to any order by the Executive Branch- but I'm probably even more frustrated by 'mis-speaks' than you are so heck with him.
Here's a more informative link on those guidelines (June 6, 2000): Wash post
Basically recruitments had to be pre-approved by headquarters- if you've ever worked in a company where things had to first be approved by 'headquarters' you know what that means.
The irony I see in these guidlines is that they were a response to criticism of the 'free hand' Reagan gave the CIA in Latin America.
Considering the great harm an asset in Al-Queda would have saved us from, IMHO Reagan was right once again.
The more I think about the eight years (eight years ! ) of Clintbilly rule the angrier I get. Kissing Islam's ass in Serbia for years, wagging the dog over Monica, kissing Arafat's wife, etc etc. What a goofball. The adults are back in town, too bad the media is stuck in adolescence.
If the R's had been running the show from '92 to '00, we would be in a HELL of a better position to root out this problem, maybe even would have nipped it in the bud.
That doesn't make it right. And every president does not sign a farm bill expanding socialist farm subsidies by 80%, now do they?
But then, go right ahead and spin your little socialist fairy tale. Facts mean nothing to you. Just whatever little factoid you can spin to attack the President. Pfui.
Conservatism 101:
Drastically reduced socialist program = Good 
Drastically expanded socialist program = Bad 
Any questions?
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.