Former Terror CZAR Clark Accuses CIA: 911 hijacking Recruitment!

1. 67

   bgamallposted 12 years ago

   The truth finally wins with the security aide, and former counter terrorism CZAR, Richard Clarke, hardly a tin foil guy, accusing George Tenet of recruiting 911 hijackers! The CIA knew about these guys in the country the whole time!! That means they knew what they were going to do! That means the US government facilitated 911 through these people!
   
   http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 … harge.html
   
   Don't ever vote for another Republican in your lifetime.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Moderndayslaveposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      "LA LA LA LA LA LA LA  I can't hear you"   The majority of the country seems to need to be hit in the head with a brick.

      replyreport
   2. 61

      American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Clarke's positions inside the government have included:
      •    United States National Security Council, 1992–2003
      o    Special Advisor 2001-2003
      o    National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Counter-terrorism, 1998–2001
      o    Chair of the Counter-terrorism Security Group, 1992–2003
      Within a week of the inauguration, I wrote to Rice and Hadley asking 'urgently' for a Principals, or Cabinet-level, meeting to review the imminent Al-Qaeda threat. This was January. He was pressed about what the target was and he had no answers. I can sit here and say it’s going to rain. I can say it every day and guess what? Sooner or later I will be right. Well that’s all Clarke did. He kept saying Al-Qaeda was going to strike. Well Al-Qaeda proved they could as they have in Beirut, The USS Cole and much more. So saying they would attack every day, eventually you would be right. But he never had intelligence to tell him if an attack was coming or where it would happen.
      His actions and accusations are just a self defense mechanism. For he was one that was in a position to know, but did not know.  So he is on the attack trying to put the blame elsewhere. Fact is Al-Qaeda was planning this for a long time. The terrorists that were in Florida taking flight school came to the US during the Clinton administration. The primaries for the next election were several years away. So what does the Clinton and Bush have in common, Clarke. There were several terrorist attacks including the first attack on the twin towers that occurred when Clinton was President. Why did Clarke not see them coming? Simple, he had no Intel to warn him of an attack. Same thing when Bush was President. Clarke had no clue then, and no clue now.

      replyreport
   3. 73

      Quilligrapherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Hi Gary.  Thanks for posting a link to The Daily Beast article.  The piece is very interesting. However, your statement above, "That means they knew what they were going to do! That means the US government facilitated 911 through these people!", is grossly untrue.
      
      Amidst all the unsupported, conspiracy innuendo, there are only three statements in the article about the CIA and the two hijackers. "Clarke speculates-and readily admits he cannot prove-that the CIA withheld the information because the agency had been trying to recruit the terrorists, while they were living in Southern California under their own names, to work as CIA agents inside Al Qaeda."  I read nothing here to support the CIA had advance knowledge of the 9/11 targets.
         
      The article goes on to say "The 9/11 Commission investigated widespread rumors in the intelligence community that the CIA tried to recruit the two terrorists-Clarke was not the first to suggest it-but the investigation revealed no evidence to support the rumors." I read nothing here either to support your claim that the US government facilitated 911 through these people!
      
      Finally, Clarke himself admits he fabricated his recruitment theory. "Clarke said his seemingly unlikely, even wild scenario - a bungled CIA terrorist-recruitment effort and a subsequent cover-up - was 'the only conceivable reason that I've been able to come up with' to explain why he and others at the White House were told nothing about the two terrorists until the day of the attacks."
      
      If, as you stated, your motivation is to urge your readers "Don't ever vote for another Republican in your lifetime" then this article fails to deliver for you even when you misstate and misrepresent it contents.
      The article was still an interesting read and provides some food for thought.  Thanks again for posting it.

      replyreport
2. 0

   Emile Rposted 12 years ago

   Ok. I read the article. I've had suspicions about the whole thing for some time; but if it's a CIA cover up and the White House wasn't informed how do you make the jump to never vote Republican? Because Bush made a bad appointment? Is he the first president to do that?
   
   I can think of valid reasons not to vote Republican. This doesn't count as one of them.

   replyreport
   1. 67

      bgamallposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The White House was in on it. Just because the Czar wasn't is irrelevant. Watch this about Bush's answer to his involvement:
      
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeoeGb47olU

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I didn't see that as a question of his involvement. The question was whether he thought Dean's statement could be labeled political hate speech. I got the impression he was unsure of whether it would be wise to agree.
         
         Man, you should watch the Zeitgeist video on events leading up to, and during, 9/11 if you want to pin it on Bush. That's pretty damning, if any could be proven.

         replyreport
         1. 67

            bgamallposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            He was crying like OJ. Instead of the normal response of saying that he wasn't involved, or that Dean's question was out of line, he cried. That is guilt. Don't you see anything unusual about that tape? If that was OJ, you would have said, guilty, guilty, guilty.
            
            Check out this one by the way. Here is how skyscrapers are supposed to look when burned but not demolished:
            
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBkIprte4SE
            
            And yet we are supposed to believe that three towers, including WTC7, were collapsed at the rate of gravity, by burning. And that when no other skyscrapers ever fell like that in the history of skyscrapers? Please.
            
            This is detonation: WTC7 is clearly detonated:
            
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=972ETepp … ature=fvwp

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Oh, don't get me wrong; I honestly believe if we had the truth we'd see government involvement. I detest George Bush and Cheney for that and a few other things.
               
               However, I go a little further than you. You say Republicans. I say they are all ready, willing and able to manipulate events and lie to us on any scale. Don't fool yourself into thinking one or the other party is the lesser evil.

               replyreport
               1. 67

                  bgamallposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  That is true. Except that the Republican ALSO want to repeal Dodd-Frank, and cause another housing bubble. So, they attack citizens, spend on wars for their oil benefit, and then they want another housing bubble.
                  
                  Now, the Dems were equally responsible for the first housing bubble, but they want to stop the second one.

                  replyreport
            2. 61

               American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Here is another view of the building. As you can see, there was a partial structural collapse. So once more you show inaccurate information to push your aganda.
               
               http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OkCPMJMZvY&NR=1
               
               
               Now comes your schooling. You have no clue about anything, let alone what happened at WTC. Nothing better than a first hand account, and I was there. I was an FDNY member for 15 years, I had the rank of LT. Building 7 was not a detonation, clearly. That building was fully involved for 7+ hours, there was no way the steel was not going to give out. Let me explain it to you. When Steel beams get hot, they begin to twist like a pretzal. the beams are connected to the outer walls. As they begin to twist, they pull the walls into the building. That is why building collapse upon or into  themselves.
               
               And before you start with the "pull it" crap, know this.It is a universal term in the fire servcie used by officers prior to evacuations. When they want the personal out of a building, the order comes out"pull it" At that time all trucks on scene will blast their air horns as a warning to evacuate the building. It has been done this way forever because in the old days, we did not have communicatioin radios for personal on the interior of a structure. Today, only line officers like myself had radio communication. So the air horns still blow on the order of "Pull It".
               
               I wish I could turn back time and bring every truther on site. They would then know the truth and thid garbage people like you would stop being spread. I lost 343 Brothers that day, I personally knew 43 of them, including 3 from my house. I will not allow them to be disrespected.

               replyreport
               1. 67

                  bgamallposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Sorry, we have NYFD folks on tape saying there were explosions. And I don't mean by the planes. 
                  
                  There was a gag order on the NYPD or NYFD because of those explosions. I don't care if you had the rank of general. You are without evidence and you are the tin foil. You are wasting your time.

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Wrong again, the gag order came because statements were taken out of context. That is why we have a no talk to the media rule in the fire service. I personaly know a firman who was asked if an explosian could do that. He showed up in a documentary useing only a part of his explanation to make it look like he thought there was an explosion. But of course you have no clue about that. Many times I have been asked questions from the Locla papers when on the scene over the years and I always ignored them. After a rescue of 3 men trapped in a water tower, the reporter came up to me and asked questionsw because I was the one that climbed the water towere and facilitated the rescue of the 3 trapped men. I did not answer any of her questions, but the Next day in Newsday there was a quote from me saying we were not quick enough to rescue them I had to testify in court wahen the families sued the FDNY and tell them I did not say that. So I know first hand how media lies So it is you that is wasting your time
                     
                     It is you that has no evidence. You and many just spew fake facts. but I know you cannot help yourself as that is all you do. I guess I do not have a trach because of it either. I guess I do not have 9 medals of honor 3 medals of valor. I guess I do not have a Masters in fire science. Wow you are so smart.
                     
                     By the way, there are no generals in the FDNY I know you do not know about those kinds of things

                     replyreport
                  2. 80

                     Aficionadaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Good grief.
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     This thread is ridiculous.  I haven't read 100% of it, but I have read enough of it and enough of the linked article to know that I believe your thread title is intentionally misleading.  Could it be that there's an agenda in operation here?

                     replyreport
3. 60

   Moderndayslaveposted 12 years ago

   "I know nothing" http://www.911review.org/Sept11Wiki/Bush,Marvin.shtml

   replyreport
4. 75

   Hugh Williamsonposted 12 years ago

   I was aware that people would destroy themselves for radical Islam, but now you're telling us that they will also commit suicide for the Republican party?
   
   Now that's dedication.

   replyreport