----- Original Message ----- 
From: "JDG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 8:01 PM
Subject: High-Level Meetings Re: Bush wanted more specifics



> So Clarke couldn't call a meeting of the principals to consider his
>ideas, as he desperately wanted. But the deputies met seven times between
>April and September 10 on the issue of terrorism. As Clarke himself
admits,
>when the principals took up the proposed anti-al-Qaeda strategy on
>September 4, they quickly approved the plan. This was partly because the
>issues had already been worked thoroughly by the deputies - exactly the
>process that so outrages Clarke.

There is no arguement that there was little difference between policy
meetings on what to do on a worldwide strategy level between the Clinton
White House and the Bush White House.  I have no problem with that.  The
real difference was in how they handled times of high security alert.

Reno gave a passionate description of the regular meetings of the
principals trying to ferret out enough information to stop the millenium
plot.  The top people pushed hard to get the information needed to stop the
plot.  In contrast, we have the interum head of the FBI at the time saying

<quote>

A second report said Pickard had briefed Ashcroft on terrorist threats in
late June and July 2001.


ASHCROFT 'DID NOT WANT TO HEAR'


"After two such briefings, the attorney general told him he did not want to
hear this information anymore," the report quoted Pickard as saying.

<end quote>

Now Ashcroft and his aids deny this.  But, either the FBI director is
committing perjury, or Ashcroft gave him the impression that he was not
interested in the details on terrorism. Now, I'll allow a situation where
Ashcroft said something that he intended as a weaker denial of interest
than this, and that Pickard gave a bit of an overread, but I have a very
hard time accepting the idea that Ashcroft believed that the US was at high
risk and was intent on stopping an expected terrorism attack.

This is the contrast that is critical.  Its not the willingness to invade
Afghanistan to get AQ.  It is the interest in expending effort to defend
the US.

Dan M.


_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to