NY Times: Tape Shows General Clark Linking Iraq and Al Qaeda

[RUexperienced]

www.nytimes.com/2004/01/12/politics/campaigns/CLAR.html

MANCHESTER, N.H., Jan. 11 — Less than a year before he entered the race for the Democratic nomination for president, Gen. Wesley K. Clark said that he believed there was a connection between the Iraqi government and Al Qaeda.

The statement by General Clark in October 2002 as he endorsed a New Hampshire candidate for Congress is a sign of how the general's position on Iraq seems to have changed over time, though he insists his position has been consistent.

"Certainly there's a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda," he said in 2002. "It doesn't surprise me at all that they would be talking to Al Qaeda, that there would be some Al Qaeda there or that Saddam Hussein might even be, you know, discussing gee, I wonder since I don't have any scuds and since the Americans are coming at me, I wonder if I could take advantage of Al Qaeda? How would I do it? Is it worth the risk? What could they do for me?"

At numerous campaign events in the past three months and in a book published last year, General Clark has asserted that there was no evidence linking Iraq and Al Qaeda. He has also accused the Bush administration of executing "a world-class bait-and-switch," by using the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, as an excuse to invade Iraq.

At a town hall meeting here on Jan. 4, for example, General Clark said, "There was no imminent threat from Iraq, nor was Iraq connected with Al Qaeda."

--------------------

**** Clark was starting to get my vote. But his own words are going to doom his chances. First his speech to a Republipuke convention praising *, now this!

Ughh!!!

[Robb]

1. Yeah, I'll bet

...he was "starting to get your vote." :eyes:

[trumad]

2. I think at one time we all thought that was a possibility...

Until we started reading that it wasn't....

[salin]

9. not me.

Never bought it. Indeed in Bush's first major speech after 9-11 he used very particular language about being able go after countries harboring terrorists ... can't remember the words - but it was broader than Afghanistan. I turned to someone else in the room and said... oh my God... he is going to use this to go after Iraq. It was such a nonsequitor - so soon after the towers fell - and after the blame was already being pinned on Al Qaeda. It felt like a set up - and I was skeptical from day one. Especially given all we quickly learned about OBL's and his #2 man's MO - including working to subvert and attack secular Muslim countries (including Egypt (mr #2) and Saudi Arabia).

Even if the thought passed - I think that many folks were immediately skeptical (as in the... "well maybe... but then again... think I need proof...")

[0007]

3. This won't help!

....just when the wool was starting to cover my eyes.

[fjc]

4. That link is dead.

That's interesting in and of itself. It strikes me that this kind of statement would have come to the surface a whole lot sooner given that his criticism of Bush on the war has been as strident, if not more so, than that of Dean's. Got another source for this? Inquiring minds want to know.

[9119495]

13. Clark is not being scrutinized like Dean because

the media needs a fight. What else would they talk about? I support Dean and the shit that has been thrown around about him in the past week is ridiculous. But what about Clark? Few words about him from the media--but you know there must be something out there. What did he say while an analyst for CNN? The fact that he has only received positive coverage lately convinces me that the media wants a Dean/Clark race. We should not be surprised by this given the recent trends in the media.

Now, that said, I like Clark a great deal. He is my second choice and I'll work for him if he gets the nod. But lets be honest in saying that Dean's comments on the Iowa caucuses are no more a story than Clark's past support of Republicans.

[Gman]

5. This is no big deal

He sounds like he's speculating out loud about what Hussein might do rather than making a definitive statement.

Nothing to see here.

Here's a good link.


http://query.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.html?tntget=2004/01/12/politics/campaigns/12CLAR.html&tntemail1

[realdem]

6. It is a huge deal

There is much self righteousness about the Clark campaign. Bashing others for changing positions or speaking without be sure. It shows Clark is a political animal and has much to answer for. They have only just begun to expose him.

[bowens43]

16. He is a political animal of the worst kind

an inexperienced political animal. No wonder he keeps refusing to debate.

[OpenMindedDem]

8. Using the word "Certainly" doesn't sound like he's speculating

"Certainly there's a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda," he said in 2002.

Flip.....

Flop....

[bowens43]

14. Nothing to see here.??

Where have I heard this before?

[ConcernedCanuk]

7. Updated LINK

.
.
. . HERE

and a better "balance" if you read the whole article

From the article:

"In an interview, General Clark said his more recent remarks were not inconsistent with what he said in 2002. In those remarks, he said, he was trying to explain that based on his knowledge of how the intelligence community works, low-level contacts almost certainly existed between Iraq and Al Qaeda, But, he said, that does not mean that Iraq had anything to do with the Sept. 11 attacks.

The 2002 comments, he said, were based in part on a letter to Senator Bob Graham, Democrat of Florida and chairman of the Intelligence Committee, from George J. Tenet, director of central intelligence, which said that the C.I.A. had credible reporting that Al Qaeda leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire weapons of mass destruction. The content of the letter was reported in a front-page article in The New York Times on Oct. 9, 2002, the day that General Clark made the comments at the New Hampshire endorsement.

"I never thought there would be any evidence linking Sept. 11 and Saddam Hussein," General Clark said. "Everything I had learned about Saddam Hussein told me that he would be the last person Al Qaeda would trust or that he would trust them."

"All I was saying is that it would be naïve to say that there weren't any contacts," he said. "But that's a far cry from saying there was any connection between the events of 9/11 and Saddam Hussein."

/snip/

I have a tendency to give Clark the benefit of the doubt.

After all, he was being fed the same bullsh_t that more than half the country is still swallowing !

[JNelson6563]

10. For "balance"?

All I saw in what you quoted was dancing.

"Certainly there's a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda," he said in 2002. "It doesn't surprise me at all that they would be talking to Al Qaeda, that there would be some Al Qaeda there or that Saddam Hussein might even be, you know, discussing gee, I wonder since I don't have any scuds and since the Americans are coming at me, I wonder if I could take advantage of Al Qaeda? How would I do it? Is it worth the risk? What could they do for me?"

At numerous campaign events in the past three months and in a book published last year, General Clark has asserted that there was no evidence linking Iraq and Al Qaeda. He has also accused the Bush administration of executing "a world-class bait-and-switch," by using the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, as an excuse to invade Iraq.

At a town hall meeting here on Jan. 4, for example, General Clark said, "There was no imminent threat from Iraq, nor was Iraq connected with Al Qaeda."

Seems to me that every insider in the intelligence community know that Saddam and Al Qaeda weren't in league with one another. Osama hated Saddam for not being a fundy. He had a secular Iraq and Osama thinks all Muslim countries should be theocracies. It was known long ago there was no connection by many of us here.

But then back then Clark seemed to be harboring hope he'd be called in to help out Team Bush. We know how that went.

Julie

[realdem]

11. SO was Dean, but he figured it out

[realdem]

12. Clark has to explain himself...AGAIN!

[joeybee12]

15. In Clark's book he says admin members came up to him on 9-11 and

told him they had to find a connection between Saddam and al-qaeda. He uses that anecdote to suggest the war in Iraq was a bait and switch, and I think he's right on that.

However, accepting that in the book, how do you square that with this comment he made in New Hampshire?

[madrchsod]

17. another candidate that isn`t perfect

my,my what is the world coming to?

[xray s]

18. Who was the NH congressional candidate he was endorsing?

Was he endorsing R's for congress in 2002?

[tabasco]

19. Nope, he was stumping for the Democratic candidate.

I remember quite well.

[xray s]

20. Whew! Thanks for clearing that up for me.

[Moderator]

21. Locking.....not LBN

This news is from Jan. 11th.

DU Moderator