Can we trust Richard Clarke?

[noise]

Philip Shenon's recent book has restarted the Rice vs. Clarke debate. Soon Clarke will release a new book about the Bush administration's failures which will likely keep the partisan debate going through the November elections. I can't argue with Clarke's take on Rice. IMO her conduct is indicative of something along the lines of dereliction of duty or criminal negligence (at best).

There is some circumstantial evidence that suggests Clarke isn't being honest:

1) Clarke was a counterterrorism bigshot during the Clinton years so it seems likely he would have been in the loop during the January 5-8, 2000 al Qaeda summit. This was a big deal considering the concern of al Qaeda attacks in the lead up to 2000. Clarke would have been in position to know why CIA failed to alert the FBI when CIA discovered al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar has US visas. For example, was he told at the time that they were GID operatives?

2) Clarke attended the July 10, 2001 briefing in which Tenet warned Rice of an impending attack possibly in the US. Some have suggested a turf war explains CIA's failure to share intel with the FBI. Since they weren't CIA, Clarke, Rice and Hadley cannot resort to such an excuse (which IMO is idiotic in the first place). One is left to wonder why Clarke didn't bombard the FBI with emails. Couldn't he have carbon copied Pickard, Watson, Middleton and Frasca? After all, the FBI was the agency tasked with preventing terrorist attacks in the US.

Counterterrorism “tsar” Richard Clarke is told in private by Dale Watson, the head of the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division, “We got the passenger manifests from the airlines. We recognize some names, Dick. They’re al-Qaeda.” Clarke replies, “How the f_ck did they get on board then?” He is told, “Hey, don’t shoot the messenger, friend. CIA forgot to tell us about them.”

Link

Forgot? Rice and Clarke were supposed to make sure intel was shared. Clarke can't have it both ways. If he was as concerned as his emails to Rice indicate, he should have made sure CIA didn't 'forget' to share a damn thing.

[seemslikeadream]

1. Schoomaker didn't tell Clark

15. Able Danger is a Pandora's Box that will blow up in the RW's face.
Re-open the 9/11 investigation? BRING IT ON! Here's why:

So the responsibility for stopping DIA program Able Danger, which had Identified Atta and 3 other hijackers and linked them to 56 other al-Queda terrorists overseas, has been laid at the feet of Bill Clinton--except he and Richard Clarke were never told about it at all.

That's right. Bill Clinton was never told about Able Danger and the ID of Atta because Richard Clarke was never told about AD. How do I know? He never wrote about it in his book, nor did he testify about it's existence before the 9-11 Commission!

You see Richard Clarke was known for being obsessed with Osama Bin Laden and HE was the guy the neo-con moles did not want to find out about Atta and the gang. Schoomaker and the neo-cons knew telling the FBI would inform Clarke and then Mr. Laser Beam himself, President of the United State William Jefferson Clinton, would have gotten involved--and the Pearl Harbor-type attack would never take place (the neo-cons talked about the need for a Pearl Harbor-type attack before the PNAC Plan would be accepted by the American people--so when one presented itself, they let it happen).

General Pete Schoomaker, who were later heavily rewarded by the neo-cons in the Bush Administration, blocked the upward motion of the DIA information by having Shaffer and Philpott meet with Pentagon lawyers opinions--lawyers who were rubberstamping ridiculous legal opinions to carry out the neo-con plan. These certain people were neo-cons in the Clinton Administration, covertly carrying out the PNAC plan to let a Pearl Harbor-type attack occur so Iraq and 6 other countries could be invaded.



http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/8/24/124834/678

[noise]

2. Berger, Freeh and Tenet were in the loop

On January 6, 2000, the CIA office in Malaysia begins passing details from the Malaysian government’s surveillance of the al-Qaeda summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, to the CIA Counterterrorist Center (CTC) (see January 5-8, 2000 and January 6-9, 2000). Cofer Black, head of the CTC, orders that he be continually informed about the meeting. CIA Director Tenet is frequently informed as well. They are given continual updates until the meeting ends on January 8. National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, FBI Director Louis Freeh, and other top officials are briefed, but apparently President Clinton is not.

Link

Able Danger was not the only means of tracking al Qaeda operatives. It doesn't make sense for Clarke and Clinton to have been out of the loop.

[rschop]

6. RE:Berger, Freeh and Tenet were in the loop

It is clear that Freeh was in the loop. Then how does anyone explain the fact that Freeh told FBI Agent Ali Soufan in November 2000, that the CIA had no information on any meeting in Kuala Lumpur or on Khallad Bin Attash, questions Soufan had asked Freeh to give to CIA Director George Tenet, when Freeh him self clearly had been told of this meeting in January 2000 and of the fact that Khalid, Nawaf and Salem were attending this very important al Qaeda planning meeting?

Looks like Freeh clearly committed criminal obstruction of his own FBI criminal investigation of the Cole bombing!

CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN THIS?

[Diane_nyc]

3. Thanks for posting this. nt

[LakeSamish706]

4. Thanks for posting this. nt

[SDuderstadt]

7. Thanks for posting your thanks for the article you thanked the poster for n/t

[SidDithers]

5. Clarke was running around with his hair on fire...

during the first 10 months of the Bush presidency, but couldn't get anyone to pay attention.

Against All Enemies was an excellent book.

Sid