By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

  1. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum...
    You are currently logged out and viewing our forum as a guest which only allows limited access to our discussions, photos and other forum features. If you are a 12ozProphet Member please login to get the full experience.

    If you are not a 12ozProphet Member, please take a moment to register to gain full access to our website and all of its features. As a 12ozProphet Member you will be able to post comments, start discussions, communicate privately with other members and access members-only content. Registration is fast, simple and free, so join today and be a part of the largest and longest running Graffiti, Art, Style & Culture forum online.

    Please note, if you are a 12ozProphet Member and are locked out of your account, you can recover your account using the 'lost password' link in the login form. If you no longer have access to the email you registered with, please email us at [email protected] and we'll help you recover your account. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum (and don't forget to follow @12ozprophet in Instagram)!

Former Terrorism Advisor (Republican) Holds U.S. Government Accountable

Discussion in 'Channel Zero' started by [email protected]#$%, Mar 24, 2004.

  1. !@#$%

    [email protected]#$% Moderator Crew

    Joined: Oct 1, 2002 Messages: 18,517 Likes Received: 623
    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


    1. "Dissent from within on Iraq war," Philadelphia Inquirer, 3/24/04
    http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/fr.../8260216.htm?1c (Registration required)

    2. "Bush Aides Blast Ex-Terror Chief," CBS News, 3/22/04

    3. "The book on Richard Clarke," Washington Post, 3/23/04
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2004Mar22.html (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
    http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/23/politics.../23CLAR.html?hp (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
    http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/23/politics/23CWOR.html (Registration required)

    13. "60 Minutes" interview; see 4, above.

    14. "Memoir Criticizes Bush 9/11 Response," Washington Post, 3/22/04
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2004Mar21.html (Registration required)

    15. "60 Minutes" interview; see 4, above.

    Already, the White House spin machine is in overdrive. Since they can't rebut Clarke's facts -- which independent witnesses have confirmed (7) -- 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.
  2. SteveAustin

    SteveAustin Veteran Member

    Joined: Mar 12, 2002 Messages: 7,042 Likes Received: 2
    Brilliant government we have.

    Let's ignore a man's opinions because he served under the previous administration.

    And as a reward for being right...let's put the spin machine on him and discredit him.

    If they'd spend half the time and money on legitimate shit...we'd be so far ahead of everyone else.

  3. --zeSto--

    --zeSto-- Veteran Member

    Joined: Jul 12, 2000 Messages: 6,979 Likes Received: 2
    the Daily Show's take on this last night was brilliant!

    'bang-your-head' relevent.

    MANIK DEK Member

    Joined: Aug 14, 2003 Messages: 351 Likes Received: 0
  5. gfreshsushi

    gfreshsushi Senior Member

    Joined: Sep 21, 2003 Messages: 2,244 Likes Received: 1
    i read the newsweek article on this guy, he's looking to hand bush his own ass on a platter.
  6. Poop Man Bob

    Poop Man Bob Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined: Nov 16, 2000 Messages: 10,259 Likes Received: 18
    McClellan on Clarke from yesterday's press gaggle:

    And you can watch Clarke testifying live on the Hill right now.Click here. Note that Real Player is required.
  7. SteveAustin

    SteveAustin Veteran Member

    Joined: Mar 12, 2002 Messages: 7,042 Likes Received: 2

    the politics of politics.

    I'm almost tempted to run for office.
  8. seeking

    seeking Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined: May 25, 2000 Messages: 32,277 Likes Received: 235
    can me and Gliko be the chief advisors on all matters dealing with dragons, sti's and internet dating?
    if so, you've got my support.
  9. J.HollaBack

    J.HollaBack Junior Member

    Joined: Mar 23, 2004 Messages: 147 Likes Received: 0
    is that so? wow, a terrorist attack is going to happen sometime, somewhere in the (near) future... imagine that!

    this guy is the next mrs. cleo...

    p.s people- i predict another terrorist plot against the united states is going to happen in the future as well, i dont know when, or by who, or how they intend to do it, but im sure it's going to happen. Now that I gave you the heads up, please go prevent it someone...

    (I am not trying to be overly funny here, I just feel that it's a joke to blaim the Bush administration for "not preventing" the terrorist attacks because they might have been given a heads up before hand. And that broad statement that I quoted struck a nerve in me, pardon my sarcasm, but I just find that statement aggrivating in reguards to placing blaim on President Bush or his administration for the terrorist attacks).
  10. seeking

    seeking Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined: May 25, 2000 Messages: 32,277 Likes Received: 235
    not to risk swerving this thread off track, but tease, you stupid motherfucker, YOU DO NOT LISTEN!!!
    this is the exact shit i just made a huge fucking thread about two days ago. you have no fucking clue what so ever as to what (or who) is being discussed, but you just cant handle there being a thread that your dumb ass isnt a part of. so you pop your head in, make some stupid ass joke that is neither funny, nor witty, nor wanted.
    i honestly can not fathom why we have not condemned you for good.
  11. J.HollaBack

    J.HollaBack Junior Member

    Joined: Mar 23, 2004 Messages: 147 Likes Received: 0
    no seeking, i am being serious.

    my point was that the point that she mentioned (that i quoted)... was very broad. Anyone could predict that the US was going to get attacked by terrorists in the future and in fact it was very likely to happen. But that doesn't mean you can prevent the attacks just because you were warned about them. That's all i was getting at.

    I'm not trying to be funny or throw this thread off, I have no intention to.

    My apologies seriously...

    ps- I do know who is being discussed here, and the severity of the ordeal. The former TERRORISM ADVISOR is saying that he believes that the Bush administration had the proper knowledge about these terrorist warnings for 9/11 prior to them happening and did nothing about them, I get that. And man, like i said, I realised I was being an idiot in those other threads with the stupid comments I was making, but I am being serious when I tell you that I'm interested in learning about this stuff, and I'm not making jokes or anything to be funny or throw the thread off, I'm simply giving my two cents on the matter (which is the point of a message board). You guys use sarcasm a lot, I was merely doing the same thing. Once again, I apoligize if you thought I was being childish or not acting properly, I didnt mean to be out of line by any means. (you can delete this part of my post after I know you read it, if you want.)
  12. !@#$%

    [email protected]#$% Moderator Crew

    Joined: Oct 1, 2002 Messages: 18,517 Likes Received: 623

    the warning was PRE-9/11...
    we'd had problems at waco, a unabomber, a few floors in wtc, and oklahoma.
    domestic terrorism.

    what this guy is getting at is that back then, NO ONE in power was PAYING ATTENTION to the HUGE mounting threat...we might as well have had our heads in the sand...

    back in 2000, people were not thinking that we were going to be a terrorist target
    much less that thousands were about to die..
    or that we were about to enter a fucking WAR WITHOUT END!

    how crazy it is
    people, like yourself tease, have adjusted SO QUICKLY to the threat of terrorism
    that you now think it was PLAINLY OBVIOUS that we were about to be attacked.

    the guy also specifically stated: IN THE WEEKS AND MONTHS AHEAD
    NOT some random time in the future, as your ms.cleo abilities tell you.

    and another thing:

    if you think the government we live under could KNOW attacks were coming and NOT do enough to PREVENT them, you are letting the government off way too easy.
    part of a government's job is to PROTECT IT'S PEOPLE
  13. J.HollaBack

    J.HollaBack Junior Member

    Joined: Mar 23, 2004 Messages: 147 Likes Received: 0
    You are absolutely correct. We weren't doing much about this huge mounting terrorist threat that seemed more than obvious to be building up and about to explode, without a doubt, you are exactly right.

    All I was trying to get at was, even with the warnings, and prior knowledge that terrorists seemed to be plotting a major attack on us, I feel that it was hard to know: how they were going to execute their plan, where it was going to unfold, what time it was going to go down during the day, and all of the other aspects of a possible attack... making it very hard for ANYONE to prevent it from occuring. That's all.

    and just so you know, I'm not trying to let the Government off easy by any means. They are suppost to protect the people of their country like you said, but that's why terrorism is so tricky, because anyone at anytime could execute a terrorist plot by any number of ways... (it's hard to prevent).
  14. !@#$%

    [email protected]#$% Moderator Crew

    Joined: Oct 1, 2002 Messages: 18,517 Likes Received: 623
    i hear you...but i personally think they could have, should have done a lot more
    (as i think that now, we are having the wrong reaction)

    the FBI knew that terrorists were in the country.
    why weren't they originally detained at customs?
    shouldn't there have been more effective checks in place?
    Atta, the ringleader, entered florida with another guy, who WAS detained and DEPORTED by a customs agent..

    authorities now believe that this guy was the elusive 20th hijacker (NOT mousaaoui)
    authorities credit the customs agent for being extremely vigilant:
    he gave the routine questions they ask everyone entering
    where are you from?
    why are you here? for how long?
    the guy answered a few questions, then his story fell apart
    they kicked him out of the country.
    phone records show atta was calling his buddies trying to figure out what went wrong that day.....

    the WTC had already been used as a target.

    if the attack was imminent, couldn't some type of plan have been formulated to deal with such a situation?
    at least a contingency plan?

    was it necessary that 2 planes crash into WTC, with one into the pentagon?

    shouldn't the government have discussed what to do if planes were hijacked and used as weapons?? (there is evidence the government had heard of those threats)
    why were 3 out of 4 crashed into targets?

    why were cockpit doors so flimsy? making the pilots and controls vulnerable?
    why did we wait so long?

    people who lost fathers, husbands, providers, sisters, mothers, children in those attacks are demanding answers.
    they deserve an explanation
    and someone needs to get fired
    so people in power know
    they can't ignore shit like this
    ever again.
  15. villain

    villain Veteran Member

    Joined: Jul 12, 2002 Messages: 5,190 Likes Received: 2
    Hmm.... Rumsfeld and them were talking about Clarke yesterday during the 9-11 investigations.... They were painting him a sort of disgruntled former employee from what I gathered....
    As far as government prior knowledge goes, I was reading the papers every day around the time of 9-11 and I specifically remember a few different articles about an FBI agent who tried to warn officials of suspected terrorists, with ties to terrorist organizations attending a flight training school in Florida. There was a conspiracy to silence this man. I haven't heard about him since. Unfortunately I have forgot his name.... But this search on google:

    Has turned up the name of an agent named Delmart Edward "Mike" Vreeland. I'm not sure if this is the same FBI agent I'm thinking of but there seems to be quite an intriguing assortment of information haloing around him.... So I'm going to look further into it on this message board... they seem to know something about this.