DEAD ZONE
July 23rd, 2004, 10:41 PM
Thsi is the same Berger that was goingto be Kerrys advisor? He better choose then a lot better than that.
The New York Sun reports thatThat plans to nab osama 5 yrs ago were nixed by berger:
http://daily.nysun.com/Repository/getmailfiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:ArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=NYS/2004/07/23&ID=Ar01000
On December 4, 1999, the National Security Council's counterterrorism coordinator, Richard Clarke, sent Mr. Berger a memo suggesting a strike in the last week of 1999 against Al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan. Reports the commission: "In the margin next to Clarke's suggestion to attack Al Qaeda facilities in the week before January 1, 2000, Berger wrote, 'no.' "
Then we have the New York's Daily News reports that "U.S. officials scrapped a 1999 plan to offer the Taliban a $250 million bribe to turn over Osama Bin Laden, fearing then-First Lady Hillary Clinton and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright would object to paying off the infamous women's rights abusers":
According to the final 9/11 commission report, Bill Clinton's administration had already made fruitless overtures to the Taliban, paying $10 million to $20 million annually in bribes.
"Two senior State Department officials suggested asking the Saudis to offer the Taliban $250 million for Bin Laden," the report said, citing a May 1999 memo. But White House terrorism czar Richard Clarke "opposed . . . a 'huge grant to a regime as heinous as the Taliban' and suggested that the idea might not seem attractive to either Secretary Albright or First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton--both critics of the Taliban's record on women's rights."
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/story/214880p-185025c.html
Why shoul the first ladies opinion way so much on this subject anyway??Even if it sems like a half baked idea.
The New York Sun reports thatThat plans to nab osama 5 yrs ago were nixed by berger:
http://daily.nysun.com/Repository/getmailfiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:ArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=NYS/2004/07/23&ID=Ar01000
On December 4, 1999, the National Security Council's counterterrorism coordinator, Richard Clarke, sent Mr. Berger a memo suggesting a strike in the last week of 1999 against Al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan. Reports the commission: "In the margin next to Clarke's suggestion to attack Al Qaeda facilities in the week before January 1, 2000, Berger wrote, 'no.' "
Then we have the New York's Daily News reports that "U.S. officials scrapped a 1999 plan to offer the Taliban a $250 million bribe to turn over Osama Bin Laden, fearing then-First Lady Hillary Clinton and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright would object to paying off the infamous women's rights abusers":
According to the final 9/11 commission report, Bill Clinton's administration had already made fruitless overtures to the Taliban, paying $10 million to $20 million annually in bribes.
"Two senior State Department officials suggested asking the Saudis to offer the Taliban $250 million for Bin Laden," the report said, citing a May 1999 memo. But White House terrorism czar Richard Clarke "opposed . . . a 'huge grant to a regime as heinous as the Taliban' and suggested that the idea might not seem attractive to either Secretary Albright or First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton--both critics of the Taliban's record on women's rights."
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/story/214880p-185025c.html
Why shoul the first ladies opinion way so much on this subject anyway??Even if it sems like a half baked idea.