Mind Vomit by the ikss ~ a journal
Header
Wednesday, Mar. 24, 2004re Sept. 11 and Richard Clarke
Navigation
the archives
The last few dribbles...
- -
Wednesday, Jul. 06, 2005
good-bye diaryland -
Thursday, Jan. 13, 2005
Social Security -
Thursday, Jan. 13, 2005
save the arctic refuge -
Tuesday, Jan. 11, 2005
it's surreal -
Tuesday, Jan. 11, 2005
the latest entry
Contact the ikss
~ the ikss guestbook ~
email the ikss
notes to the ikss
New here? Start here
The Usual Suspects (Cast)
the ikss Mission Statement: Please Read
the ikss bio
the ikss profile, including favorite diaryland links
somebody out there loves me
�Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead�
-Lucille Ball
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
--Theodore Roosevelt, 1918
REGISTER TO VOTE
"The time is always right to do what is right"
- Martin Luther King, Jr.
"The "seven social sins": Knowledge without character,
Science without humanity,
Wealth without work,
Commerce without morality,
Politics without principles,
Pleasure without conscience,
Worship without self-sacrifice."
--Gandhi
"We have not inherited the world from our forfathers -
We have borrowed it from our children."
--Kashmiri, proverb
With President Bush's former top counterterrorism expert Richard Clarke issuing well-documented criticisms of the White House's failure to defend America, the Administration has resorted to outright lies and distortions about its record. The president himself once again tried to deflect criticism, saying "had my administration had any information that terrorists were going to attack New York City on September the 11" (1) - a statement designed to deflect attention from the specific warnings that he personally received outlining an imminent Al Qaeda attack (2) that could involve hijacked planes (3) being used as missiles (4).
Here are four other explicit lies that the Administration has told over the last few days:
LIE: National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice claimed that Clarke "chose not to" (5) voice his concerns about the Administration's counterterrorism policy. But Clarke sent an urgent memo to Rice in January 2001 asking for a Cabinet-level meeting about an imminent Al Qaeda attack (6). The White House itself admits top Bush officials rejected Clarke's request, saying they "did not need to have a formal meeting to discuss the threat." (7)
LIE: White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan yesterday denied Clarke's charge that the president ordered the Pentagon to begin drafting plans to invade Iraq immediately after 9/11. (8) But according to the Washington Post, "six days after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush signed a 2-and-a-half-page document" that "directed the Pentagon to begin planning military options for an invasion of Iraq." (9) This was corroborated by a September 2002 CBS News report which reported that, immediately after 9/11, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told "aides to come up with plans for striking Iraq." (10)
LIE: Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley denied Clarke's charge that there was an imminent domestic threat against America from Al Qaeda, saying, "All the chatter [before 9/11] was of an attack, a potential Al Qaeda attack overseas." (11) But, according to the bipartisan Congressional report on 9/11, "In May 2001, the intelligence community obtained a report that Bin Laden supporters were planning to infiltrate the United States" to "carry out a terrorist operation using high explosives." The report "was included in an intelligence report for senior government officials in August [2001]." (12)
LIE: Bush National Security spokesman Jim Wilkinson claimed that "it was this president who expedited the deployment of the armed Predator" (the unmanned plane) (13). But, according to Newsweek, it was the Bush Administration who "elected not to relaunch the Predator" and who did not deploy the new armed version of it despite "the military having successfully tested an armed Predator throughout the first half of 2001." (14)
Sources:
1. President Discusses Economy and Terrorism After Cabinet Meeting, 03/23/2004,
2. "August Memo Focused On Attacks in U.S.", Washington Post, 05/18/2002,
3. "Report Warned Of Suicide Hijackings", CBS News, 05/18/2002,
4. "Italy Tells of Threat at Genoa Summit", Los Angeles Times, 09/27/2001,
5. American Morning Transcript, 03/22/2004,
6. "Clarke's Take On Terror", CBS News, 03/21/2004,
7. "White House Rebuttal to Clarke Interview", Washington Post, 02/23/2004,
8. Press Briefing by Scott McClellan, 03/23/2004,
9. "U.S. Decision On Iraq Has Puzzling Past", Washington Post, 01/12/2003,
10. "Plans For Iraq Attack Began On 9/11", CBS News, 09/04/2002,
11. "Clarke's Take On Terror", CBS News, 03/21/2004,
12. Joint Inquiry of Intelligence Community Activities Before and After The Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001, 12/2002,
13. Fox News, 3/22/04
14. Freedom of Information Center, 05/27/2002,
Visit Misleader.org for more about Bush Administration distortion.
~~~
Dear MoveOn member,
As you may have heard, Richard Clarke, a former counter-terrorism advisor to Bush, and a registered Republican who has worked in every administration since Reagan, has exposed Bush's mishandling of 9/11 and the war on Iraq.1 In his book "Against All Enemies," Clarke does an amazing job of presenting the facts and connecting the dots. Instead of refuting Clarke's claims, the Bush Administration has launched a campaign of character assassination, hoping that the story will just go away.2
We're committed to stopping that from happening by making sure that the American public hears Clarke's extraordinary comments. If we can raise $300,000 in the next few days, we can run a hard-hitting ad nationally that highlights his message. You can see a rough story board of the ad and donate to get it on the air here.
When the World Trade Center was hit on the morning of 9/11, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice dubbed Richard Clarke, the administration's top counter-terrorism official, "crisis manager."3 As the White House, which was thought to be the next target, was evacuated, Clarke heroically stayed on, coordinating the government's response from the Situation Room in the West Wing.4
Clarke is viewed by colleagues as a hawk, a "true believer" who doesn't play partisan politics.5 So the shocking facts he revealed about the Bush administration's approach to terrorism before 9/11 and its response after must be taken seriously. On Sunday, Clarke told reporters that the President and Defense Secretary downgraded counter-terrorism and ignored repeated warnings about an al Qaeda attack prior to 9/11. And, perhaps even more explosive, Clarke revealed that President Bush and senior administration officials wanted to bomb Iraq after 9/11 even though they knew that it had no connection to al Qaeda, and that al Qaeda was responsible for the attacks.6
Already, the White House spin machine is in overdrive. Since they can't rebut Clarke's facts -- which independent witnesses have confirmed7 -- they're trying to paint him as an angry partisan, even though he's a Republican. But Clarke's words remain a searing indictment of the Bush Administration's campaign against terrorism. Together, if we act today, we can beat back the spin by widely airing a TV ad which gets these uniquely credible comments directly to TV viewers.
You can view a story board of the ad and help us get it on the air now here.
In his own words, here are some of Clarke's revelations:
� Clarke repeatedly warned the Bush Administration about attacks from al Qaeda, starting in the first days of Bush's term. "But on January 24th, 2001, I wrote a memo to Condoleezza Rice asking for, urgently -- underlined urgently -- a Cabinet-level meeting to deal with the impending al Qaeda attack. And that urgent memo-- wasn't acted on."8 According to another Bush administration security official, Clarke "was the guy pushing hardest, saying again and again that something big was going to happen, including possibly here in the U.S." The official added that Clarke was likely sidelined because he had served in the previous (Clinton) administration.9
� In face-to-face meetings, CIA Director George Tenet warned President Bush repeatedly in the months before 9/11 that an attack was coming. According to Clarke, Tenet told the President that "A major al-Qaeda attack is going to happen against the United States somewhere in the world in the weeks and months ahead."10
� On September 12, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld pushed to bomb Iraq even though they knew that al Qaeda was in Afghanistan. "Rumsfeld was saying that we needed to bomb Iraq," Clarke said. "And we all said ... no, no. Al-Qaeda is in Afghanistan. We need to bomb Afghanistan. And Rumsfeld said there aren't any good targets in Afghanistan. And there are lots of good targets in Iraq. I said, 'Well, there are lots of good targets in lots of places, but Iraq had nothing to do with it.'"11
� Also on September 12, 2001, President Bush personally pushed Clarke to find evidence that Iraq was behind the attacks. From the New York Times: "'I want you, as soon as you can, to go back over everything, everything,' Mr. Clarke writes that Mr. Bush told him. 'See if Saddam did this. See if he's linked in any way.' When Mr. Clarke protested that the culprit was Al Qaeda, not Iraq, Mr. Bush testily ordered him, he writes, to 'look into Iraq, Saddam,' and then left the room."12
� The Bush Administration knew from the beginning that there was no connection between Iraq and 9/11, but created the misperception in order to push their policy goals. "[Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush] did know better. They did know better. They did know better. We told them, the CIA told them, the FBI told them. They did know better. And the tragedy here is that Americans went to their death in Iraq thinking that they were avenging September 11th, when Iraq had nothing to do with September 11th. I think for a commander-in-chief and a vice president to allow that to happen is unconscionable."13
� The war on Iraq has increased the danger of terrorism. In his book, he writes that shifting from al Qaeda to Iraq "launched an unnecessary and costly war in Iraq that strengthened the fundamentalist, radical Islamic terrorist movement worldwide."14
It's been well reported that President Bush intends to run on his record as a wartime President. Clarke's revelations show how deeply flawed that record is. But if we don't act fast, the public may not have a chance to evaluate the facts for themselves -- the story could go away quickly. With an ad, we can take Clarke's comments directly to the public. Can you help? Check out the script and donate whatever you can to get this story out there here. (By the way, if we're unable to use your contribution for the ad you specify, either because of oversubscription or for another unforeseen reason, it is our policy to use your contribution for other advertising, public relations, and advocacy activities.)
Richard Clarke had an intimate view -- perhaps the best view -- of how the Bush Administration responded to terrorism. So we should all listen carefully when he says:
"Frankly, I find it outrageous that the president is running for re-election on the grounds that he's done such great things about terrorism. He ignored it. He ignored terrorism for months, when maybe we could have done something to stop 9/11. Maybe. We'll never know. . . I think the way he has responded to al-Qaeda, both before 9/11 by doing nothing, and by what he's done after 9/11 has made us less safe, absolutely. I think he's done a terrible job on the war against terrorism."15
Together, we can make sure every American knows what President Bush's true record on terrorism really is.
Sincerely,
--Adam, Carrie, Eli, James, Joan, Laura, Wes, and Zack
The MoveOn PAC Team
March 24th, 2004
P.S. Salon has recently published a new interview with Clarke. You can read it here
P.P.S. As the Administration strikes back, our friends at the Center for American Progress have put together an excellent rebuttal to their claims. Here's an example:
CLAIM #1: "Richard Clarke had plenty of opportunities to tell us in the administration that he thought the war on terrorism was moving in the wrong direction and he chose not to." -- National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, 3/22/04
FACT: Clarke sent a memo to Rice principals on 1/24/01 marked "urgent" asking for a Cabinet-level meeting to deal with an impending Al Qaeda attack. The White House acknowledges this, but says "principals did not need to have a formal meeting to discuss the threat." No meeting occurred until one week before 9/11. -- White House Press Release, 3/21/04
For the whole document, go here
Footnotes:
1. "Dissent from within on Iraq war," Philadelphia Inquirer, 3/24/04 (Registration required)
2. "Bush Aides Blast Ex-Terror Chief," CBS News, 3/22/04
3. "Washington Post, 3/23/04 The book on Richard Clarke," (Registration required)
4. "Clarke's Take On Terror," CBS, 3/21/04
5. See 3, above.
6. "60 Minutes" interview; see 4, above.
7. "Ex-Bush Aide Sets Off Debate as 9/11 Hearing Opens," New York Times, 3/23/04 (Registration required)
8. "60 Minutes" interview; see 4, above.
9. See 7, above.
10. "60 Minutes" interview; see 4, above.
11. "Sept. 11: Before And After," CBS News, 3/20/04
12. "Excerpts from 'Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror' by Richard A. Clarke," posted on NYTimes.com, 3/23/04 (Registration required)
13. "60 Minutes" interview; see 4, above.
14. "Memoir Criticizes Bush 9/11 Response," Washington Post, 3/22/04 (Registration required)
15. "60 Minutes" interview; see 4, above.
PAID FOR BY MoveOn PAC
This message is not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee P.O. Box 9218, Berkeley, CA 94709
last / next
~~~~~~~~~~~peace, love and smooches~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Don't know why you'd wanna, but on the off-chance you may feel tempted to steal any of my words and claim them as your own, please be advised:
All material
Copyright 2002-2005, Howl-at-the-Moon Words
***DISCLAIMER: These are my thoughts and my thoughts alone. If you know me in my "real life" off the net and have come across this page purely by accident, please keep in mind that you were not invited here and I would suggest you leave this page now. However, should you choose not to do so, please be warned that reading my thoughts here is not an invitation to discuss them off-line. You may discover things you do not know about me and may not like very much. Such is life. Again, this is MY space and I will use it as I see fit. If you are offended by anything here, well that's pretty much your own fault at this point.
I say all of this with love, of course, but there it is.
