| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Steyn: Richard Clarke’s New Career as a Fiction Writer |
| 2004-03-28 |
| Severely snipped for brevity via:LGF In October 2000, Clarke and Special Forces Colonel Mike Sheehan leave the White House after a meeting to discuss al-Qa’eda’s attack on the USS Cole: "’What’s it gonna take, Dick?’ Sheehan demanded. ’Who the s*** do they think attacked the Cole, f****** Martians? The Pentagon brass won’t let Delta go get bin Laden. Does al-Qa’eda have to attack the Pentagon to get their attention?’" Apparently so. The attack, on the Cole, which killed 17 US sailors, was deemed by Clinton’s Defence Secretary Bill Cohen as "not sufficiently provocative" to warrant a response. You’ll have to do better than that, Osama! So he did. And now the same people who claim Bush had no right to be "pre-emptive" about Iraq insist he should have been about September 11. As for Clarke’s beef with Bush, that’s simple. For eight years, he had pottered away on the terrorism brief undisturbed. The new President took it away from him and adopted the strategy outlined by Condoleezza Rice in that Detroit radio interview, months before the self-regarding Mr Clarke claims he brought her up to speed on who bin Laden was: "We really need a stronger policy of holding the states accountable that support him," Dr Rice told WJR. "Terrorists who are just operating out there without basis and without state support are a lot less dangerous than ones that find safe haven, as bin Laden does sometimes in places like Afghanistan or Sudan." Just so. In the 1990s when al-Qa’eda blew up American targets abroad, the FBI would fly in and work it as a "crime scene" - like a liquor-store hold-up in Cleveland. It doesn’t address the problem. Sure, there are millions of disaffected young Muslim men, but, if they get the urge to blow up infidels, they need training and organisation. Somehow all those British Taliban knew that if you wanted a quick course in jihad studies Afghanistan was the place to go. Bush got it right: go to where the terrorists are, overthrow their sponsoring regimes, destroy their camps, kill their leaders. Instead, all the Islamists who went to Afghanistan in the 1990s graduated from Camp Osama and were dispersed throughout Europe, Asia, Australia and North America, where they lurk to this day. That’s the Clarke-Clinton legacy. And, if it were mine, I wouldn’t be going around boasting about it. |
| Posted by:badanov |
| #3 Here's the money quote: "And now the same people who claim Bush had no right to be "pre-emptive" about Iraq insist he should have been about September 11." |
| Posted by: eLarson 2004-03-28 8:07:34 PM |
| #2 ROFLMAO!!! Leave to one of the best, Steyn here, to rip the inane LLL Jackass "logic" a brand-new asshole. Obviously, the one they were born with has been obstructed for some time - they're full of shit. Sadly, it won't change the minds of idiotarians. Either your mind is open enough to get it - or not. Many don't. Get out and vote. Drag others out to vote. Everyone you know. Imagine people too blind, willfully or otherwise, to see Clark's duplicity running this country. Imagine the grief and damage they could cause in 4 years. Nothing less than our survival is at stake, in the end. Thx Bad! |
| Posted by: .com 2004-03-28 1:40:54 PM |
| #1 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted] |
| Posted by: Anonymous TROLL 2004-03-28 1:32:33 PM |