April 7, 2004

CAN'T WE JUST MOVE ON?:

Panel to reconsider Clarke statements (James G. Lakely, 4/07/04, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

The September 11 commission will look at the discrepancy between the testimony of Richard A. Clarke that the Clinton administration considered the threat of al Qaeda "urgent" and its final national-security report to Congress, which gave the terror organization scant mention. [...]

The Clinton administration's final document was 45,000 words long and titled "A National Security Strategy for a Global Age," but it hardly mentioned bin Laden and his terrorist network.

Mr. Clinton wrote in the preface, "We are blessed to be citizens of a country enjoying record prosperity with no deep divisions at home, no overriding external threats abroad, and history's most powerful military ready to defend our interests around the world."

Mr. Clarke has testified to the commission — and has written in his best-selling book — that as the top terrorism analyst for Mr. Bush and Mr. Clinton, he repeatedly warned that al Qaeda posed a significant and dangerous threat to the United States and urged strong military action.

The Clinton document consistently characterized terrorist attacks against Americans and U.S. interests as "crimes" and outlined how it was using diplomatic and economic pressure to bring the "perpetrators to justice."

The use of military force "should be selective and limited, reflecting the importance of the interests at stake," the document said.

Although the Clinton administration pledged in the report to retaliate militarily for the al Qaeda attack on the USS Cole in October 2000, no operation was carried out.

The only two military operations in which the Clinton administration committed a significant troop presence on the ground were in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo, which were undertaken to "support our humanitarian and other interests," the document says.


Mr. Clarke served his country well for thirty years; if in the heat of a presidential campaign and at the behest of his friend, and Kerry staffer, Rand Beers he happened to commit perjury in front of this dog and pony show, that's no reason to send him to prison. Let's just forget he ever spoke.

Posted by Orrin Judd at April 7, 2004 1:41 PM
Comments

Forgive and forget, just like the Dems did with Elliot Abrams and other conservative public servants, right? :)

Posted by: kevin whited at April 7, 2004 1:45 PM

OJ

That's mighty big of you.

Posted by: h-man at April 7, 2004 1:50 PM

or ... he could go to prison for a little while

sic 'em , Ashcroft !

Posted by: JonofAtlanta at April 7, 2004 2:30 PM

I'm with Kevin, H, and Jon. When laws are not enforced, they are meaningless, and letting such behavior go unpunished only encourages its repetition in the future.

Posted by: jd watson at April 7, 2004 2:48 PM

Why not? Worked for Martha Stewart.

Posted by: Jeff Guinn at April 7, 2004 3:10 PM

Recall him and grill him......

Then see what he says.

Posted by: RoboDruid at April 7, 2004 3:48 PM

Show him exactly as much mercy and understanding as the Dems did us when They were in power.

i.e. None Whatsoever.

Posted by: Ken at April 7, 2004 6:37 PM

Clinton got away with it; why not Clarke.

I swear, before his book and as an analyst for ABC I instinctively felt he was a sleazy little b....... Now I know he is.

Posted by: genecis at April 7, 2004 9:34 PM

It would be a huge mistake not to prosecute Mr. Clarke for perjury. The prosecution should wait, however, until after November.

Posted by: "Edward" at April 7, 2004 10:15 PM

Whoops, Kevin beat me to it! Abrams came immediately to mind when I read oj's gratuitously-lenient statement.

Posted by: Kirk Parker at April 8, 2004 2:16 AM

Give him a fair trial and then hang him.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at April 8, 2004 11:05 PM
« I'M DECISIVE, YOU'RE ARBITRARY: | Main | THE TWAIN SHAN'T MEET: »