PDA

View Full Version : On 9/11 Rumsfeld wanted to bomb Iraq




Sayhey
Mar 20, 2004, 01:20 AM
There is another confirmation of the fact that this administration wanted to respond to the 9/11 attacks with attacks against Iraq and not Afghanistan.Former White House terrorism advisor Richard Clarke tells Correspondent Lesley Stahl that on Sept. 11, 2001, and the day after - when it was clear al Qaeda had carried out the terrorist attacks - the Bush administration was considering bombing Iraq in retaliation.

Clarke's exclusive interview will be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, March 21 at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

Clarke was surprised that the attention of administration officials was turning toward Iraq when he expected the focus to be on al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.

"They were talking about Iraq on 9/11. They were talking about it on 9/12," says Clarke.

The top counter-terrorism advisor, Clarke was briefing the highest government officials, including President Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks.

"Rumsfeld was saying we needed to bomb Iraq....We all said, 'but no, no. Al Qaeda is in Afghanistan," recounts Clarke, "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 [the September 11 attacks].'"

Clarke goes on to explain what he believes was the reason for the focus on Iraq.

"I think they wanted to believe that there was a connection [between Iraq and al Qaeda], but the CIA was sitting there, the FBI was sitting there, I was sitting there, saying, 'We've looked at this issue for years. For years we've looked and there's just no connection,'" says Clarke.

Clarke, who advised four presidents, reveals more about the current administration's reaction to terrorism in his new book, "Against All Enemies."


CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/19/60minutes/main607356.shtml)



zimv20
Mar 20, 2004, 01:32 AM
this is the week that the former clinton officials testify before the 9/11 commission. clarke, albright, cohen, berger... i'm not sure who else. should be interesting.

Neserk
Mar 20, 2004, 02:06 AM
Actually they've wanted to bomb Iraq for a while. Something tells me that historians will look on this dark period of US History with an eye that suggests that the reason Bush was placed into office was so he could start a war with Saddam... he didn't even have a legitimate reason (ie no connection between 9/11 and Iraq) yet managed to create the illusion of reason.

Thanatoast
Mar 20, 2004, 04:15 AM
ouch. how many more times do the american people need to be told "wake up!"

3rdpath
Mar 22, 2004, 01:33 AM
after seeing richard clarke on 60 minutes tonite, i'm just wondering how much more it will take for the majority of people to realize this administration has serious credibility problems.

seriously, how can you not believe a guy who was hired by reagan, then served bush the 1st, clinton and bush the 2nd until he resigned...basically out of disgust for our current foreign terrorism policy?

an approximate transcript of the show is here (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/19/60minutes/main607356.shtml)

i think stahl did a good job on the story and i enjoyed her catching hadley in a lie.

wwworry
Mar 22, 2004, 08:50 AM
Clarke then tells Stahl of being pressured by Mr. Bush.

"The president dragged me into a room with a couple of other people, shut the door, and said, 'I want you to find whether Iraq did this.' Now he never said, 'Make it up.' But the entire conversation left me in absolutely no doubt that George Bush wanted me to come back with a report that said Iraq did this.

"I said, 'Mr. President. We've done this before. We have been looking at this. We looked at it with an open mind. There's no connection.'

"He came back at me and said, "Iraq! Saddam! Find out if there's a connection.' And in a very intimidating way. I mean that we should come back with that answer. We wrote a report."

Clarke continued, "It was a serious look. We got together all the FBI experts, all the CIA experts. We wrote the report. We sent the report out to CIA and found FBI and said, 'Will you sign this report?' They all cleared the report. And we sent it up to the president and it got bounced by the National Security Advisor or Deputy. It got bounced and sent back saying, 'Wrong answer. ... Do it again.'

"I have no idea, to this day, if the president saw it, because after we did it again, it came to the same conclusion. And frankly, I don't think the people around the president show him memos like that. I don't think he sees memos that he doesn't-- wouldn't like the answer."

IJ Reilly
Mar 22, 2004, 11:37 AM
Not surprisingly, the White House response is denial, obfuscation, and character assassination.

Sayhey
Mar 22, 2004, 11:40 AM
I find this statement to be amazing.

The administration maintains that it cannot find any evidence that the conversation about an Iraq-9/11 tie-in ever took place.

That could be used as a textbook example of a "non-denial denial."

I wonder how Paul O'Neil is feeling about now. I guess he isn't the only "crazy and bitter" ex-employee of this White House to tell this same story. Perhaps the commission report on 9/11 might be interesting reading after all?