You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: WoT
Richard Clarke admits authorizing departure of bin Laden flight
2004-05-27
by Alexander Bolton, The Hill
EFL. Hat tip: Brothers Judd.
Richard Clarke, who served as President Bush’s chief of counterterrorism, has claimed sole responsibility for approving flights of Saudi Arabian citizens, including members of Osama bin Laden’s family, from the United States immediately after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. In an interview with The Hill yesterday, Clarke said, “I take responsibility for it. I don’t think it was a mistake, and I’d do it again.”
Not that the moonbats who think President Bush is a Saudi dupe who was paid to let them out (*cough* Michael Moore *cough*) will change their tune.
Clarke’s claim of responsibility is likely to put an end to a brewing political controversy on Capitol Hill over who approved the controversial flights of members of the Saudi elite at a time when the administration was preparing to detain dozens of Muslim-Americans and people with Muslim backgrounds as material witnesses to the attacks. . . .
When has the truth ever mattered to a good political controversy?
This new account of the events seemed to contradict Clarke’s sworn testimony before the Sept. 11 commission at the end of March about who approved the flights. “The request came to me, and I refused to approve it,” Clarke testified. “I suggested that it be routed to the FBI and that the FBI look at the names of the individuals who were going to be on the passenger manifest and that they approve it or not. I spoke with the — at the time — No. 2 person in the FBI, Dale Watson, and asked him to deal with this issue. The FBI then approved 
 the flight.”
It's only a bit of perjury. Everybody does that, don't they?
“That’s a little different than saying, ‘I claim sole responsibility for it now,’” [commission member and former Rep. Tim] Roemer [(D-Ind.)] said yesterday. . . .
More like lying under oath
Clarke said yesterday that the furor over the flights of Saudi citizens is much ado about nothing.
Finally! he says something we can all agree with.
“This is a tempest in a teapot,” he said, adding that, since the attacks, the FBI has never said that any of the passengers aboard the flight shouldn’t have been allowed to leave or were wanted for further investigation. He said that many members of the bin Laden family had been subjects of FBI surveillance for years before the attacks and were well-known to law-enforcement officials. “It’s very funny that people on the Hill are now trying to second-guess the FBI investigation.”
Pot --> Kettle --> Black.
Posted by:Mike

#12  Alaska Paul --- Michael Moore was one of those who spread this around. There's a summary of the rumors here. It's still pretty confusing, though. Richard Clarke is mentioned toward the end.
Posted by: Angie Schultz   2004-05-27 2:09:49 PM  

#11  I suspect the only reason Clark didn't immediately approve the exit visas was to up the bidding. That's what Signor Ferrari would have done.
Posted by: Mr. Davis   2004-05-27 12:19:04 PM  

#10  I sent the link, too, just for fun. At least some producer will have to trip over them as they read all their invitations for pr0n and vmagra. :)
Posted by: eLarson   2004-05-27 12:04:55 PM  

#9  I cannot find the source, but I remember reading after 9-11 that FBI agents wanted to question members of the Bin Laden family in Boston, but they were spirited out of the country and the FBI agents were furious. That is my recollection of the article.
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2004-05-27 11:59:29 AM  

#8  thanks elarson, I did my email to them...we'll see an entire one-hour show about Clarke's lies, I'm sure....


****crickets chirping****
Posted by: Frank G   2004-05-27 11:55:07 AM  

#7  â€œI take responsibility for it..."

“The request came to me, and I refused to approve it.”

It's very simple, guys: he voted against it before he voted for it.

Seriously, it sounds as if he didn't want to approve it before he'd heard from the FBI. Once the FBI was satisfied, he approved it. Nothing inherently contradictory there, just weaseling before the Commission. (Of course, the FBI says they had nuttin' to do with it.)

What's more striking to me is that I've heard people (like Moore) say that the Bin Ladens were taken out of the country before flights were allowed to resume again on the 14th (13th?) This says the flight didn't take place until the 20th. That's forever, on the timescale we're talking here. The article has Clarke going on and on about how he was calling the shots in those first few hours. The flight was more than a week later.
Posted by: Angie Schultz   2004-05-27 11:47:23 AM  

#6  I believe this runs exactly counter to a statement made in M. Moore's most recent "documentary." I think this should be passed around to the Academy voters, too.

Speaking of Hardball, you can email the show.

Posted by: eLarson   2004-05-27 11:45:14 AM  

#5  This should be above-the-fold, front page news after all the lies and deceit this asswipe spewed during his week and a half of fame.

Richard Clarke is an worthless piece of shit and so is the partisan media if they don't give this story it's due.
Posted by: Chris W.   2004-05-27 11:41:41 AM  

#4  Try finding this on the front page of any major newspaper. Hold your breath waiting for Brokaw/Jennings/Rather to mention it.
Posted by: Infidel Bob   2004-05-27 11:13:56 AM  

#3  Ed, do you think they'll even be able to figure it out?
Posted by: The Doctor   2004-05-27 9:47:58 AM  

#2  Uh, he just admitted he committed perjury before the 911 Commission. I wonder if commission members will demand prosecution?
Posted by: ed   2004-05-27 9:47:06 AM  

#1  Scum-sucking Lying WEASEL. Think the press and Hardball will note this F**king Liar's lies? Not if it helps W in November. What liberal media?
Posted by: Frank G   2004-05-27 9:39:06 AM  

00:00