Rice Falsely Claims Clinton Administration Did Not Leave A ‘Strategy To Fight Al Qaeda’
Rice Falsely Claims Clinton Administration Did Not Leave A ‘Strategy To Fight Al Qaeda’
In her interview with the New York Post, Condoleezza Rice claims that the Clinton Administration did not develop a strategy to fight al Qaeda:
The secretary of state also sharply disputed Clinton’s claim that he “left a comprehensive anti-terror strategy” for the incoming Bush team during the presidential transition in 2001.
“We were not left a comprehensive strategy to fight al Qaeda,” Rice responded during the hourlong session.
Here’s what the 9/11 Commission Report has to say about it:
As the Clinton administration drew to a close, Clarke and his staff developed a policy paper of their own [which] incorporated the CIA’s new ideas from the Blue Sky memo, and posed several near-term policy options. Clarke and his staff proposed a goal to “roll back” al Qaeda over a period of three to five years …[including] covert aid to the Northern Alliance, covert aid to Uzbekistan, and renewed Predator flights in March 2001. A sentence called for military action to destroy al Qaeda command-and control targets and infrastructure and Taliban military and command assets. The paper also expressed concern about the presence of al Qaeda operatives in the United States.” [p. 197]
Clarke, who also worked for the Bush administration, wrote Condoleezza Rice a memo as soon as the Bush administration took office, stating, “[W]e urgently need…a Principals level review of the al Qida network.” His request was denied.
UPDATE: Raw Story has the text of the Clarke memo.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
71 Responses to “Rice Falsely Claims Clinton Administration Did Not Leave A ‘Strategy To Fight Al Qaeda’”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
Seems that Condi is free to interpret “comprehensive” as she sees fit. Big surprise there.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:59 amCondi is a liar.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:59 amI swear that lying is a strategy with the neocons. They lie and that puts their opponents on the defense looking up facts. When presented with these facts they tell another lie which puts their opponents on the defense looking up facts. By the time the whole truth is out Dems have been smeared, people have forgotten what the subject was all about, and the election is over.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:00 pmFox news says Bush angry, will realease NIE now. Someone make Bush mad and leak NIE. Here come NIE, very angry now.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:01 pm“Sure, they left a little memo. But, but, but … it wasn’t comprehensive. They didn’t leave us Osama’s street address, the exact times when he’d be home, whether he preferred Coke or Pepsi, nothing helpful at all. How could we do anything with so little information?”
September 26th, 2006 at 12:02 pmcnn, on its front page [lower right] asks ‘which admin. did more: bush or clinton?’
September 26th, 2006 at 12:03 pmvote away…
The “over- the-top” reaction of Clinton to Wallace’s questions and your over-the-top praise of his angry bluster are the best evidence the Americna people could have hoped for.
Now the real Clinton has emerged: angry, bitter defensive, protesting “too much” his innocence, just like he said he never had a relationship with Lewinsky. He lied then as we all know too well. He’ s lying now, also.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:04 pmI haven’t seen that report.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:05 pmI wonder which “liberal” news organization will run with this story and show the lies that Condi has spewed from her blowhole? I wouldn’t recommend holding your breath.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:06 pmI have a feeling the neocon strategists may be regretting the comparison of Bush’s to Clinton’s pre-9/11 record. It’s simply bringing more research and facts into light.
Good luck with those presidential aspirations, Condi. Keep digging that hole.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:06 pmLies, lies, and more lies from everyone involved with this administration. The corporate controlled media eats up these lies and plasters all media outlets with the regurgitation of these lies. The democrats don’t combat these lies to the point where they are exposed as lies on a national scale, and the only people that recognize these lies are people that read blogs like this, and who already know they are lies to begin with. As much as I hate to admit it, we are very near November and the republicans are once again winning the war of words. What shall be done?
September 26th, 2006 at 12:08 pm#6….I just voted in that poll and guess what? George Bush gets 32%…which is the same 32% who are behind him no matter what he does. LOL!!
September 26th, 2006 at 12:09 pmThe era of Republican lies, deception, and contempt for the public.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:10 pmAll of you who are calling Condi a liar are unfair. You’re over looking the stupid factor.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:15 pmThe era of Republican lies, deceit, and contempt for the public.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:17 pmStay tuned… http://www.rawstory.com to post Clinton-era docs on al Qaida given to Bush;
September 26th, 2006 at 12:17 pmShow Rice claims about plan to be false… Developing…
#12–You beat me to it. They just won’t budge!
September 26th, 2006 at 12:18 pm#14….LOL!!
September 26th, 2006 at 12:18 pm12 - it’s on a butterfly ballot….
September 26th, 2006 at 12:19 pmEvery time I see Condi open her mouth, it is obvious that she is lying. I guess she must have some shame, because it shows. Too bad she doesn’t have enough to do the right thing for the country. Colin Powell, same thing; cowards all.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:19 pm[…] Update: More about the “comprehensive strategy to fight al Qaeda” that Condi doesn’t remember at ThinkProgress. Apparently the 9/11 Commission says she got it. As the Clinton administration drew to a close, Clarke and his staff developed a policy paper of their own [which] incorporated the CIA’s new ideas from the Blue Sky memo, and posed several near-term policy options. Clarke and his staff proposed a goal to “roll back†al Qaeda over a period of three to five years …[including] covert aid to the Northern Alliance, covert aid to Uzbekistan, and renewed Predator flights in March 2001. A sentence called for military action to destroy al Qaeda command-and control targets and infrastructure and Taliban military and command assets. The paper also expressed concern about the presence of al Qaeda operatives in the United States.†[p. 197] […]
September 26th, 2006 at 12:25 pmPlease tell the tv news networks to report this. And have them put up a nice graphic with the Commision report findings on one side and Rice’s comments on the other.
Then make sure the anchor says, “Now how much more comprehensive can you get than that?”
Can anybody make this happen?
September 26th, 2006 at 12:25 pmA summary of the strategy entitled “Strategy for Eliminating Jihadist Networks of al Qida” was attached to Clarke’s January 2001 memorandum.
A brief summary and links to the document are here.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:29 pmCondi: “We opened the box they left us but there was no silver bullet. I repeat: there was no silver bullet!”
September 26th, 2006 at 12:29 pmHey, Condi! Remember, when the next big storm hits the gulf coast, your favorite shoes will go on sale in NY!!!
September 26th, 2006 at 12:29 pmWhat makes anyone believe that if Clinton had left a plan that this administration would have used it?
They considered everything Clinton so toxic that if they had been told a long operation was in gear to capture OBL in six months, they’d have let the program go.
Such was their disdain for Clinton, Clinton MIGHT have left a plan, but in Bushco’s determination to obiliterate all things Clinton, they just didn’t bother to look at it.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:29 pmCondi: “Oh they left us plans…but there was no silver bullet!
September 26th, 2006 at 12:30 pm“When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love has always won. There have been tyrants and murderers and for a time they seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall - think of it, always.”
— Mahatma Gandhi
September 26th, 2006 at 12:31 pmMore fine work from the “Party of Responsibility.”
Heckuva job, Condi.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:31 pmRice couldn’t find her ass if you gave her a flashlight and an extra pair of hands. No one could have imagined planes flying into buildings. No one told us on what day the terrorists might strike. No one gave us a comprehensive plan. Did she get the Phd from a mill? God what an idiot, and a liar.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:31 pmNow the real Clinton has emerged: angry, bitter defensive, protesting “too much†his innocence, just like he said he never had a relationship with Lewinsky. He lied then as we all know too well. He’ s lying now, also.
Comment by G Harrison
He was only upholding a tradition started in the Reagan years. Gee, Harrison, don’t you know Reagan sold weapons to terrorists? And then lied about it? But blowjobs are more important, as we all know.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:31 pmThe “over- the-top†reaction of Clinton to Wallace’s questions and your over-the-top praise of his angry bluster are the best evidence the Americna people could have hoped for.
Now the real Clinton has emerged: angry, bitter defensive, protesting “too much†his innocence, just like he said he never had a relationship with Lewinsky. He lied then as we all know too well. He’ s lying now, also.
Comment by G Harrison
The “stupid” comment you left here along with your “ridiculous” assertions that Clinton is “lying” are the best evidence the Americna people could have hoped for. Your “brain” is the size of a “walnut”. And you and your sociopathic “party” are going “down” in the “polls” in “November”.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:32 pmyes a stategy Clinton never implemented……. and neither did Bush before 9/11…
I tried.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:42 pm“I don’t see the point in continuing to discuss our incompetence before 9/11. Don’t you have questions about my love life?” - Condi Rice.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:45 pmInteresting, the Northen Alliance leader was killed 2 days before 9-11, which probably required a meeting of the principles, which is essentially where Defibrulator Dick told everyone he’d get back with them on a terror plan some time after 9-10.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:46 pmRice is expendable, they made her testify under oath for the 9-11 commission. What she says is inconsequencial, she would be thrown under the bus in a hearbeat if it served Bush.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:47 pmIt’s Clinton’s fault cuz all his staffers removed the W keys from all the computers before W came in. That messed things all up.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:56 pmCondi please resign and do something that won’t harm anyone…like shoe shopping.
September 26th, 2006 at 1:00 pmIt was not a comprehensive policy because Clinton and Clarke’s plan did not include expanding Missile Defense and invading Iraq. Also it was not less than one page. How in the world to you expect busy people like Condi the read things that are more than one page and do not confirm her pre-existing statist priorities.
Besides if something is really serious and important the Bush Administration comes up with it themselves, that is how you know it is serious and important.
September 26th, 2006 at 1:02 pmRice said Clarke “left when he did not become deputy director of homeland security.”
what a freakin bald-faced liar:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/ context.jsp?item=a010301clarkedemoted
January 3, 2001: Clarke Demoted by Rice and Future 9/11 Commission Executive Director
National Security Adviser Rice decides this day to retain Richard Clarke, counterterrorism “tsar†for the Clinton administration, and his staff. However, she downgrades his official position as National Coordinator for Counterterrorism. While he is still known as the counterterrorism “tsar,†he has less power and now reports to deputy secretaries instead of attending Cabinet-level meetings. He no longer is able to send memos directly to the president, or easily interact with Cabinet-level officials. [Clarke, 2004, pp. 227-30; Guardian, 3/25/2004] In 2004, Rice will reveal that the person she tasks with considering changes to Clarke and his staff is Philip Zelikow, the future Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission. Zelikow recuses himself from those parts of the 9/11 Commission’s investigation directly relating to his role in this and other matters. However, 9/11 victims’ relatives are not satisfied. For instance, one relative says, “Zelikow has conflicts. I’m not sure that his recusal is sufficient. His fingerprints are all over that decision [to demote Clarke].†[United Press International, 4/10/2004]
Entity Tags: Richard A. Clarke, Philip Zelikow, Condoleezza Rice
September 26th, 2006 at 1:02 pmBla, bla bla. Can you people do anything but call everyone a liar or say they are stupid. Condi made it a lot further in life than you. You people sit here spouting lies every day. Condi for Prez!
September 26th, 2006 at 1:12 pmCONDI LIES!
September 26th, 2006 at 1:35 pmHappy+Guy = Imbecile
September 26th, 2006 at 1:36 pm“We were not left a comprehensive strategy to fight al Qaeda,â€
What the hell does that mean?
What busco wants you/me/us/everybody (including themselves) to believe is that President Bush, or his Administration, never developed a plan to deal with al Queda nor did President Clinton, nor any member of his Adminisrtation, pass such a plan on to any member of bushco. Let us analyze the statement to see what she actually does say:
“We” Since the quote is from Condom (She needs all the protection she can get) Rice she must be one part of the “we” but there is no way of knowing who she meant by the other party or parties. A lie by obfuscation.
“were not left” If they were not left were they right? In this connotation the left denotes abandoned by some unknown party or parties at some location other than that of the speaker. She does not say they were not given, presented, donated, or made aware of such a plan by a member or members of the Clinton administration, in particular Mr. Clarke. A lie by apostasy.
“a comprehensive strategy” Perhaps they were given a detailed tactical program or an encyclopedic politic. A rose by any other name is still a lie by equivocation.
“to fight” Should it have been “roll-back” or maybe “couch one’s lance,” “rise up in arms,” “ply one’s weapons,” “take up the cudgels,” or “come to close quarters with?” A lie by casuistry.
“al Qaeda” Finally something we can truly understand.
The statement, therefore, is nothing but the typical tergiversation of trivia resorted to by the bushco to adumbrate their inefficacy.
(Ok, I used the book for a couple of them!)
September 26th, 2006 at 1:49 pm“she would be thrown under the bus in a hearbeat if it served Bush.”
September 26th, 2006 at 1:58 pmShe would dive under the bus happily.
#41
Condi made it a lot further in life than you.
Comment by Happy+Guy
Uh, speak for yourself …
I don’t lie for a living and my love life is great. Unlike, Condi, I don’t have to worry about Katie Couric asking “why no one wants to date me” on national television. (Note to Katie Couric - the constant unabashed lying may be a big turnoff … just a thought … )
And I don’t say “my wife and I have decided …” when the woman I am referencing is actually somebody else’s wife.
She is not good at her job ( either she didn’t read or ignored key parts of the pre-invasion NIE ). She is a compulsive liar. She is delusional. And she may be an adulterer.
That is really great, pal.
September 26th, 2006 at 1:58 pmCondi meant Clinton left no Ferragamo accessories to fight Bin Laden with. It amazes me that a woman with NO CREDENTIALS (other than being inept and a liar) can get a national venue.
September 26th, 2006 at 2:01 pmFrom Richard Clark’s prepared 911 statement:
At the senior policy levels in the Clinton Administration, there was an acute understanding of the terrorist threat, particularly al Qida. That understanding resulted in a vigorous program to counter al Qida including lethal covert action, but it did not include a willingness to resume bombing of Afghanistan. Events in the Balkans, Iraq, the Peace Process, and domestic politics occurring at the same time as the anti-terrorism effort played a role.
The Bush Administration saw terrorism policy as important but not urgent, prior to 9-11. The difficulty in obtaining the first Cabinet level (Principals) policy meeting on terrorism and the limited Principals’ involvement sent unfortunate signals to the bureaucracy about the Administration’s attitude toward the al Qida threat.
September 26th, 2006 at 2:09 pmCondi was the perfect choice for Bush’s NSA. Her background was in Soviet issues. Cheney was pushing missile defence - a Soviet-era relic. The Bushies insist on viewing terrorism as being state-based, another Soviet-era view. And they say *we* have a pre-9/11 mindset. These guys are stuck back in the 80’s. When disco ruled!
Personally, I agree with Happy+Guy that we shouldn’t be calling these people stupid. And certainly not incompetent. That would absolve them of responsibility. The real issue is that they’re either amoral, or sociopaths, or both. IMHO, it comes down to one of two conclusions: either they knew what was likely to happen, and went ahead anyways, without caring about the fallout; or they weren’t sure how things would turn out, but went ahead anyways, without caring about the fallout.
I have come to believe the first conclusion, but either way THEY. DON’T. CARE. About the soldiers, about the country, about anything other than lining their pockets - with our money.
We can only dream of a time when W has been reduced to a comma.
September 26th, 2006 at 3:34 pmCondi was the perfect choice for Bush’s NSA. Her background was in Soviet issues. Cheney was pushing missile defence - a Soviet-era relic. The Bushies insist on viewing terrorism as being state-based, another Soviet-era view. And they say *we* have a pre-9/11 mindset. These guys are stuck back in the 80’s. When disco ruled!
Personally, I agree with Happy+Guy that we shouldn’t be calling these people stupid. And certainly not incompetent. That would absolve them of responsibility. The real issue is that they’re either amoral, or sociopaths, or both. IMHO, it comes down to one of two conclusions: either they knew what was likely to happen, and went ahead anyways, without caring about the fallout; or they weren’t sure how things would turn out, but went ahead anyways, without caring about the fallout.
I have come to believe the first conclusion, but either way THEY. DON’T. CARE. About the soldiers, about the country, about anything other than lining their pockets - with our money.
We can only dream of a time when W has been reduced to a comma.
September 26th, 2006 at 3:34 pmthe audacity for these folks to lie and knowing they will get caught. but like they say once you start lying you have to keep going with the lies to the protect the lie. and then you lie so much you believe your lies. the bad part is that you forget your lie to beging with and the rest of the lies unravel. ummmmm……..sociopaths?
September 26th, 2006 at 4:04 pmDo you really expect Ms.Rice to tell the truth ? Sen Boxer showed she was a liar in that public hearing early this year.when she asked Boxer not to impune her integrity & that it is better for she(Rice) to provide the answers to Boxer’s questions in closed sessions
September 26th, 2006 at 5:17 pmRemember her famous quote “that no one taught that Al-queda would use planes to fly into buildings”.She is a liar.
Rice seems to be technically correct in that the Clintonites left behind a “policy paper,” not a “comprehensive” anti-terrorism strategy. But, considering how completely the Bushies ignored the paper, you can only conclude that a “comprehensive” plan would have been ignored even more strenuously.
September 26th, 2006 at 5:45 pm[…] Rice Falsely Claims Clinton Administration Did Not Leave A ‘Strategy To Fight Al Qaeda’ […]
September 26th, 2006 at 5:59 pmCondi has repeated consistently that Clinton didn’t even tell them OBL was a threat, so this memo proves she’s a liar. period, end of story. She figured being in the Administration meant parties, abusing Marine guards to be your personal servants, flying on private planes instead of commercial, getting insider info to make an unholy profit, and a book deal. She never expected her and the Administration’s ignorence would get Americans killed and the US embroiled in a horrendous quagmire.
September 26th, 2006 at 6:08 pmThat headline should say Rice lied! She lied her ass off. It’s time to be as blunt as possible.
September 26th, 2006 at 6:08 pmMORE BILL LESS KILL
September 26th, 2006 at 6:31 pmCondi needs to get laid
September 26th, 2006 at 7:38 pm[…] It boggles my mind. In this time, with information so easily obtained on the internet, why would anybody knowingly say something provably false. It just makes them look like an idiot. Or even worse, a liar. […]
September 26th, 2006 at 8:30 pmThat is the most evil woman on this planet.
September 26th, 2006 at 9:29 pmLOL!!! Clinton knows he’s been caught again! Did you see how he was trying to intimidate Wallace; pointing in his face and invading his personal space? What the heck was THAT about??? Let the truth be know that Al Qaida trained on our soil, on HIS watch. Or was he not watching and ‘otherwise occupied’??? What a clueless, worthless president. >:¬/
September 26th, 2006 at 10:10 pmya condi and george, just some terrorist group. is that why ashcroft was so busy investigating new orleans porn. the neocons keep this shit up and the democracts will own both the house and senate.
September 26th, 2006 at 10:28 pmthe neocons keep this shit up and the democrats will own both the house and senate
September 26th, 2006 at 10:32 pmIsn’t it funny Clinton gave a plan to the Bush administration that he didn’t have the backbone to follow himself.
September 26th, 2006 at 10:45 pm“Covert aid to the Northern Alliance”
Remember the commission said he wouldn’t help the northern alliance when they had the chance to kill Bin Laden. Real leadership; he was more worried about his legacy than the safety of America. Read it and Weep.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ ac2/ wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A8734-2002Jan19
September 26th, 2006 at 10:52 pmThe Buck stops at the President’s desk. 9/11 occured on Bush’s watch.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:17 pmIf Clinton had not cut the intelligence budget so much he might have figured out who attacked the USS Cole in time to do something about it in a timely manor.
September 27th, 2006 at 12:20 amThe attack happened in October 2000 Two full months before Bush was sworn in. What was he doing during that time stealing furniture from the White house? Oh that’s right HE WAS, real moral character there buddy. Very telling.
Happy Guy & pxlmvr….
First, Happy Guy, it is obvious you have the mental capacity of a house fly. Your assertions are infantile and your allegiances are fascist.
Now, pxlmvr, the fact is, today it is Sept. 2006, the Clinton administration has been out of office 6 years, what you saw on Sunday on FOX news was a former President that is sick and tired of all you right wingers re-writing history to justify every constitutional law they break, every war they start, every innocent Iraqi citizen killed.
There are 20 thousand….Read that again you muncher of feces, 20 thousand Americans that have been injured, 3000 that have been killed, and tens of thousands of Iraqi citizens dead. Not inconvenienced by freedom, they are dead.
September 27th, 2006 at 2:15 pmNow listen up you sanctimonious ass, it’s already been proven by the 911 commish that Clinton did try to get OBL, he tried to go after the terrorists, but it is like he said everyone was screaming “wag the dog”. It’s absolutely unfathomable how this administration can lie, lie, lie about the war, what got us there, how we are doing, why we are there and can do no wrong. Nothing would be done differently even with the facts that they have today. And all you can muster is that Clinton got a bj and lied about it? So what you are telling me is, if you’re married and you got busted getting a bj from another man, woman, or sheep you’d fess up to it? You’re an idiot and a liar. And to compare whatever Clinton lied about and what Bush lies about everyday even remotely compares!? So in your world of “morality” lying about a bj and being responsible for the deaths of 20,000 people, US, coalition, iraqi civilians is the same thing? Is that what you’re saying, because if it is, you have been brainwashed by the greatest manipulators of all time or you’re just a fascist at heart and all of this lawlessness, blood, death and destruction is right up your alley.
[…] In ya face #1 In ya face #2 […]
September 27th, 2006 at 3:36 pmNow we need an NIE for removing this administration from office.
September 27th, 2006 at 4:41 pm[…] its dramatic employee growth.http://news.yahoo.com/s/prweb/20080411/bs_prweb/prweb846794_1Rice Falsely Claims Clinton Did Not Leave A "Strategy To Fight al-Qaeda"The 9/11 Commission Report proves it pg. 197: "As the Clinton administration drew to a close, […]
April 11th, 2008 at 6:37 am