Interview: Richard Clarke ---- Guardian newspaper UK

[radfringe]

Interview: Richard Clarke
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1175790,00.html
Julian Borger in Washington talks to former White House insider Richard Clarke about US's vulnerability to al-Qaida before the September 11 attack.
Tuesday March 23, 2004

JB: Condoleezza Rice wrote today in response to your book - that the Bush administration did have a strategy for eliminating al-Qaida and that the administration worked on it in the spring and summer of 2001? Is that true?

RC: We developed that strategy in the last several months of the Clinton administration and it was basically an update on that strategy. We briefed Condi on that strategy. The point is that it was done before they came to office and she never held a meeting on it. It was done before she asked for it.

----snip---

RC: Yes there were many more, it was central. The buzz in national security staff administration wanted to go after Iraq.

JB: Do you think they came into office with that as a plan?

RC: If you look at the so-called Vulcans group talked about publicly in seminars in Washington. They clearly wanted to go after Iraq and they clearly wanted to do this reshaping of the middle east and they used the tragedy of 9/11 as an excuse to test their theories.

JB: Do you think President Bush was already on board when he came to office.

RC: I think he was. He got his international education from the Vulcans group the previous year. They were people like Richard Perle, Jim Woolsey, Paul Wolfowitz. They were all espousing this stuff. So he probably had been persuaded. He certainly wasn't hearing any contrary view during this education process.

[leftchick]

1. I think he should testify in the Iraq "intelligence" investigation

At least he talks about the influence of the OSP....

JB: Did the Pentagon and the office of special plans play an important role in the processing of intelligence?

RC: Certainly. The people in Rumsfeld's office and in Wolfowitz's operation cherry-picked intelligence to select the intelligence to support their views. They never did the due diligence on the intelligence that professional intelligence analysts are trained to do. would go through the intelligence reports including the ones that the CIA was throwing out. They stitched it together they would send it out, send it over to Cheney. All the stuff that a professional would have thrown out. As soon as 9/11 happened people like Rumsfeld saw it was opportunity. During that first week after September 11, the decision was made. It was confirmed by president We should do Afghanistan first. But the resources necessary to do a good job in Afghanistan were withheld. There was not enough to go in fast, to go in enough to secure the country. Troops were held back. There were 11,000 troops in Afghanistan. There were fewer in whole country than police in the borough of Manhattan

[radfringe]

2. selective amnesia?

Ex-Bush Aide, Finding Fault, Sets Off Debate
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/23/politics/23CLAR.html
By ELISABETH BUMILLER and JUDITH MILLER
Published: March 23, 2004


Scott McClellan, President
Bush's spokesman, says Mr.
Bush does not recall talking
with Richard A. Clarke about
Iraq on Sept. 12, 2001.

WASHINGTON, March 22 — As the White House opened an aggressive personal attack against its former counterterrorism chief, Richard A. Clarke, a furious debate broke out on Monday about the credibility of his assertion that President Bush pushed him the day after the Sept. 11 attacks to see if there was a link with Saddam Hussein.

The White House dismissed the accusations, described in a new book by Mr. Clarke, by casting him as a disgruntled, politically motivated job seeker and a "best buddy" of a top adviser to Senator John Kerry. But Mr. Clarke defended his account, and several allies rallied to his defense.

One ally, Mr. Clarke's former deputy, Roger Cressey, backed the thrust of one of the most incendiary accusations in the book, about a conversation that Mr. Clarke said he had with Mr. Bush in the White House Situation Room on the night of Sept. 12, 2001. Mr. Clarke said Mr. Bush pressed him three times to find evidence that Iraq was behind the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The accusation is explosive because no such link has ever been proved.

----snip---

Scott McClellan, the White House press secretary, responded at a White House briefing on Monday that Mr. Bush did not remember having the conversation, and that there were no records that placed the president in the Situation Room at the time.

Mr. Clarke countered in a telephone interview on Monday that he had four witnesses, including Mr. Cressey, who is a partner with Mr. Clarke in a consulting company that advises on cybersecurity issues. In an interview, Mr. Cressey said the national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, also witnessed the exchange. Administration officials said Ms. Rice had no recollection of it.

============

once again we see the "smear" tactics, pass the buck, blame anyone else, and "re-frame" the issue...

In the 60 minute interview, Clark said he expected to have the attack dogs go after him... just my humble opinion - he was wrong, these are not attack dogs, they're attack-lemmings

[leftchick]

3. Let me see, not remembering a meeting on Sept. 12....

That is about as believable as poppy not knowing where he was when JFK was shot.

[Disturbed]

4. uh....duh

Shrub & Condi now have sudden on set of memory loss. It's gonna be a contagious thang goin' 'round in the White House from now on. Raygun was the master of "Don't recall"

[izzie]

5. It seems to me all they were interested in was Star Wars.

I can recall thinking, my God they have dragged that old dead fish up for getting money to the big corp. Did they even talk about the ship in Yemen?