Powell: Clinton Failed to Act on Clarke's 9/11 Warning

[rtwngAvngr]

http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/3/23/132951.shtml


Under fire on Tuesday from 9/11 Commission Democrat Timothy Roemer for failing to act on a Dec. 20, 2000, briefing from Clinton administration terrorism czar Richard Clarke, Secretary of State Colin Powell turned the tables - demanding to know why the Clinton White House failed to act on its own intelligence.

Powell acknowledged that Clarke had warned him that al-Qaida operatives had already entered the U.S., but reminded Roemer, "At the time [Clarke] gave me the briefing, I was not the secretary of state - this administration was not in office."

"If they were aware that al-Qaida representatives were already in the country running around, and knew that, and knew that these nineteen [9/11 hijackers] ... were running around inside the country, the obligation, frankly, was on them," Powell said.

"[It's] not, 'Why didn't we do something beginning a month later?'" he contended.

Instead, Powell said, the more pertinent question is, "Why hadn't they done something while they were preparing [Clarke's] Power Point presentation?"

Former Rep. Roemer said he would put that question to Mr. Clarke when he testifies on Wednesday.

 

[kcmcdonald]

Powell,
The thinking and waring man's man. This guy could lead me into battle anyday, and then confince me it was the right thing to do over some tea.
God I wish he wasn't a foriegn national, I'ld vote for him if he ever ran for Pres.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by kcmcdonald
Powell,
The thinking and waring man's man. This guy could lead me into battle anyday, and then confince me it was the right thing to do over some tea.
God I wish he wasn't a foriegn national, I'ld vote for him if he ever ran for Pres.

Me too. This guy's the real deal. Did you see the one on one he did with Hannity the other day. No spinning. Honest answers. So very different from anyone even remotely a Democrat.

 

[wade]

Originally posted by kcmcdonald
Powell,
The thinking and waring man's man. This guy could lead me into battle anyday, and then confince me it was the right thing to do over some tea.
God I wish he wasn't a foriegn national, I'ld vote for him if he ever ran for Pres.

But just where does a "general" in the US military come up with 10's of millions of $ I wonder?

Wade.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by wade
But just where does a "general" in the US military come up with 10's of millions of $ I wonder?

Wade.

I'll end this conspiracy before it starts:

WASHINGTON - Colin Powell has parlayed his fame as the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff into a lucrative speaking career since he left government, earning millions of dollars addressing corporate clients and universities, records show.

The former Army general has amassed millions more in stock market holdings and options, according to financial disclosure forms submitted by President-elect Bush's nominee to be secretary of state. In the filings, Powell reported at least $24.5 million in assets and probably holds much more, since he was required only to disclose amounts within broad parameters.

Powell, who rose to popularity during the 1991 Persian Gulf War, last year earned more than $6.7 million in speaking fees, charging from $42,500 to $127,500 for appearances before audiences that included American Express, Miller Brewing Co., Sun Microsystems, Credit Suisse Financial Services, Pillsbury Co., Twentieth Century Fox, the University of Texas and Rochester Institute of Technology.

According to Powell's financial disclosure forms, filed Jan. 12 with the Office of Government Ethics, Powell gave 109 speeches last year, with the vast majority bringing in a $59,500 fee.

The forms also show that Powell has substantial stock holdings, including $1 million to $5 million in shares of General Dynamics, the largest domestic builder of naval vessels and tanks.

The company has annual sales of $10 billion, with 60 percent of its revenue from military sales to the Pentagon and foreign governments.

Powell also holds fully vested options to buy 120,000 shares of America Online Inc. stock at $14.37 a share and another 120,000 at $14.24.

http://www.amarillonet.com/stories/011801/usn_millions.shtml

 

[wade]

Exactly my point. Thank you...

Wade.

 

[jimnyc]

And your point is?

 

[badfish]

You know making money isn't a bad thing, right?

 

[modman]

Here is what we know. Both Clinton and Bush received regular reports from counter terrorism experts. Clinton went after bin laden. Bush didn't. Bin Laden was looking over his shoulder with clinton in office. With Bush brusing off the reports, looking the other way and worrying about missile defense al queda was free to conspire and attack. Undoubtably this is what the 9/11 commission will find.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by modman
Clinton went after bin laden. Bush didn't. Bin Laden was looking over his shoulder with clinton in office.

Care to explain why Clinton turned down an offer to have him handed over then? So much for that argument.

 

[lilcountriegal]

Clinton went after bin laden. Bush didn't

This is the second time I've read this sentence in your posts. I'm actually a little puzzled how you come to this conclusion? When, exactly, did Clinton go after Bin Laden?

and... as far as Bush not going after Bin Laden... last I heard we had troops deployed to Afghanistan looking for Bin Laden.

Crawl out of your bunker and update yourself with up-to-date news, dude. Its safe. Honest. The cold war is over.

 

[wade]

Originally posted by badfish
You know making money isn't a bad thing, right?

As long as it is rightfully earned, not gifted for past favors. How do we have any integrity in the military procurements programs when they are just timing the payoffs for after the crooks retire?

Wade.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by wade
As long as it is rightfully earned, not gifted for past favors. How do we have any integrity in the military procurements programs when they are just timing the payoffs for after the crooks retire?

Wade.

Can you cite specific examples of these past favors and payoffs?

 

[wade]

And that is the game itself. Make sure there is no paper trail, and no one can have "proof". So now an industrialist can say, subtly and personally "make sure the XXX system gets funded and you'll have a fat consulting position and/or a seat on the board with my company when you retire".

In this case, as is all to often so, the appearance of impropriety is impropriety. It is simply not right that these people can and are so easily paid off with disproportional contracts, management positions and board seats, speaking engagement fees, etc...

The military pension (which is quite substantial at the level of General) should be enough, our military leaders should not be allowed to take large payoffs from such sources for at least 10 years after they retire. It corrupts the whole process and creates a clear conflict of intrest.

Wade.

 

[jimnyc]

Wade, are you just assuming all of this as a conspiracy of some sort, or do you have anything specific in which you care to elaborate on?

 

[wade]

Just making a point for future reference.

Wade.

 

[SPIKESMYGOD]

Jimnyc-

Please, are you heartless? Between the "No blood for oil" conspiracy gang & the "Bush helped bin Laden plan & finance 9/11" wackos, it is obvious that the Dean Blog people have lost their forum and have nowhere else to go.

Even though we are heartless, baby-eating Republicans, I believe that we should show these poor downtrodden souls a little compassion. I mean, could we rest at night wondering if they were sleeping in the bitter cold on some bench of an abandoned Dukakis or Mondale site? Rummaging around for food in some filthy Nader site's garbage cans? Getting mugged or raped on some unseemly "Oliver Stone Is Fidel Castro's Punk-Ass Bitch" site.

They are, for the most part, fellow human beings, thus deserving of some dignity, shelter, & mental health care.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Hannitized
For some reason I'm confused, but this is from what I get out of it.
You say there is no "proof", yet you can come to these harsh conclusions. Is this the new trend? I see alot of your kind (Bush haters) spouting out for "proof" on everything Bush and his Admisnstration says or does, yet yall can say anything and no proof is needed. Amazing!

Thank you! They don't have proof, they have their 'conspiracy theories'.