RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
read more of todays top articles

Shenon writes: "Clarke's theory addresses a central, enduring mystery about the 9/11 attacks - why the CIA failed for so long to tell the White House and senior officials at the FBI that the agency was aware that two Al Qaeda terrorists had arrived in the United States in January 2000, just days after attending a terrorist summit meeting in Malaysia that the CIA had secretly monitored."

Richard A. Clarke, a former advisor to the president for security, attends a news conference for the film 'S.O.S. - State of Security' at the International Film Festival Berlinale in Berlin, Germany, 02/19/10. (Markus Schreiber/AP)
Richard A. Clarke, a former advisor to the president for security, attends a news conference for the film 'S.O.S. - State of Security' at the International Film Festival Berlinale in Berlin, Germany, 02/19/10. (Markus Schreiber/AP)

go to original article

Former Counter-Terrorism Czar alleges CIA cover-up of effort to recruit 9/11 hijackers in the months leading up to 9/11. -- JPS//RSN your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+63 # Don Richardson 2011-08-11 12:35
Richard Clarke is one of the few reliable insiders. He knows that 9/11 was an inside job, for which the evidence is overwhelming. The official story, of course, protects the guilty and 10 years later the public is not considered adult enough to deal with the real facts. We're waiting for some deathbed confessions.
-24 # Pickwicky 2011-08-11 15:07
Don--Clarke may be a reliable insider, but even he says about his
scenario, "[its] the only conceivable reason that I’ve been able to come up with.” That remark can only be defined as 'speculation.' Further, I strongly disagree that 9/11 was "an inside job."
+39 # redjelly39 2011-08-11 16:05
I thought it odd that when not even a single wallet or purse or anything else could be found in the rubble of the twin towres, Muhammad Atta's passport was found laying neatly on top of it all. And can someone please explain to me what caused building #7 to also collapse ?
Even the 1st responders clearly heard loud explosions in the basement of both towers before they collapsed. Many even remarked how similar it was to a the modern methods we currently use to take down buildings. And - why did the Bulgarian government tell their staff at the WTC not to go to work that day ?
Hitler did the same thing by staging an attack and blaming it on the Polish so he could validate his invasion of Poland.
+10 # usedtobesupermom 2011-08-11 21:24
Building # 7 was purposely "pulled down" (a demolition term), because it housed all the "white collar" criminal cases (RICO) including the ongoing cases involving Wall Street. see: Hal Sisson 911 For Who's Benefit (video)
-11 # Texan 4 Peace 2011-08-12 11:42
when not even a single wallet or purse or anything else could be found in the rubble of the twin towres, Muhammad Atta's passport was found laying neatly on top of it all... why did the Bulgarian government tell their staff at the WTC not to go to work that day ?

You're repeating the same baseless rumors one can find on numerous conspiracy sites. After any disaster, lots of crazy stories circulate. Repeating them doesn't make them any more true. There are some very real questions about 9-11, but such reckless gossip-mongerin g with no actual evidence to back it up does not help matters. It just makes it easier to marginalize those pressing for an actual investigation.
-15 # Activista 2011-08-12 12:24
Agree with Texan - it is baseless rumors one can find on numerous conspiracy sites.
There is NO inside job - people get educated!
+18 # majorpayne 2011-08-12 18:04
If you want to find educated people who believe there was a conspiracy, visit the website of and see the opinions of more than 1,500 registered professional engineers and architects who recognize the tell-tale signs of intentional demolition, and compare the collapses of the twin towers and WCT-7 with the collapses of other high-rises that suffered hours and hours of intense fire. Uh-oh, there aren't any!
-18 # Interested Observer 2011-08-12 07:01
I too am fed fed up with truthers whose "work" completely fails the Occam's Razor test but often has unsavory echoes of the Protocols of Zion. Without any evidence it is speculation as you note. And at worst his speculations propose a cover up of mistakes and omissions not a neocon/Zionist/ corporate (etc ad nauseam) conspiracy. When will we admit that al Qaeda got in a really solid sucker punch and it took almost everything they had and two years of work to do it. Much ado about next to nothing at this point. (And now the truthers can vote me deep into the red.)
+8 # rf 2011-08-12 04:54
He is not saying it was an inside job. He is saying it was a bungled job. Did you read the article? Seems the most reasonable theory I've heard so far.
+12 # Rita Walpole Ague 2011-08-12 08:40
We did have a deathbed warning sorta, when Pres. Ike, departing office and on his presidency's deathbed, issued the now famous caveat re. military-indust rial complex. Insiders for years have known that included on the top of his list of concerns re. power takeover was the C.I.A.

Then, there's the verbal wish made be corporate villainaire neo-cons in the late 90's, not long before 9/11, for another Pearl Harbour.

Given all the viable suspicions re. 9/11, a serious, real McCoy investigation is in order. Given the finding of explosive residue and the expert's take on how the towers fell in a way indicative of explosives igniting vs. a plane hit on each tower, it's hardly unreasonable to seek truly impartial investigative assistance with this from international sources.

Richardson is one of many who need to gather up their courage and, with protection ordered from a strong pres. (sorry, not OhBombAh) it's time and then some for them all to come out with truth now, rather than waiting for their deathbed confessions and warnings.
+4 # George D 2011-08-12 09:53
I knew Clark's statements would bring out the conspiracy theories again. But he isn't saying there was a conspiracy. He's saying the CIA was doing CYA. Just as a comment above said;

"Never attribute to malice that which is equally explicable by stupidity.

You had an inept executive team that was focused on its Axis of Evil narrative, and was not interested in anything that distracted from it. No conspiracies need be fabricated to explain the result."

The rats all scrambled for cover right after 9/11. People forgot his words, almost as quickly as he said them, in those first couple weeks after the fact, when GWB said "we're gonna find the people responsible. You won't see headlines about this on a daily basis; Now and then you'll see the results in the news" (or words to that affect). Then they figured out how to make this an opportunity to be a "wartime president" and invade Iraq. The rest is sad history.

A cascading series of blunders by inept, selfish and greedy, people in our government. It's as simple as that.
Clark may be right but that doesn't mean 9/11 was in inside job. Not intentionally.
+3 # bobbygoode 2011-08-11 12:43
re: wareagle... not true, right wing spin to blame Democrats - Gorelick in particular, since she was on the commission - for intelligence failures. Read here:
+53 # GeorgeNJ 2011-08-11 13:03
What does make sense is that Bush and the White House knew the 9/11 attacks were coming weeks ahead of time (certainly 8/6/2001 CIA Daily President Report, probably others) and did nothing because he wanted the "New Pearl Harbor" Dick Cheney wrote about for PNAC to come to pass. That is what the "conservatives" wanted to happen, and they cheered when it did.
+12 # SHADAAH 2011-08-11 13:12
The anticipatory nausea I experiecned before reading the article, "An Explosive New 9/11 Charge", was absolutely right on time and justified!
The CIA continues to reveal itself to be a FRACTURED FAIRY TALE each and every time!
They make me LAFF! Even though it is a crying pitiful situation.
How could the CIA want to recruit AL QAEDA to spy on AL QAEDA, when there would be no AL QAEDA if they had not of invented the cryptic, heathen, atheist barbarians in the first place!
+16 # Lookingpast 2011-08-11 14:37
Quoting SHADAAH:
. . . AL QAEDA if they [the CIA] had not of invented the cryptic, heathen, atheist barbarians in the first place!

While I agree with the gist of your comment, AL QAEDA are certainly not heathen or atheists (and barbarian-ness is in the eye of the beholder). I don't believe we can ever defeat AL AQEDA unless we understand who they are and what they believe in--and WHY!
+4 # redjelly39 2011-08-11 16:06
Thats easy and it starts and ends with Isreal
+11 # wfalco 2011-08-11 18:25
Quoting Lookingpast:
Quoting SHADAAH:
. . . AL QAEDA if they [the CIA] had not of invented the cryptic, heathen, atheist barbarians in the first place!

I don't believe we can ever defeat AL AQEDA unless we understand who they are and what they believe in--and WHY!

Of course. How can a country defeat a belief system ? It is the same thing as invading Alabama to rid a portion of our country of Fundamentalist bible thumpers..or bombing Kansas into the stone age because it is apparent much of the populace has strong doubts about the relevence of science. Extremist views are not the issue in the world of American foreign policy. We are an empire therefore we will behave as one. Empire thrives on war and the manufacture of the means of mass destruction.It' s as American as apple pie. As implied in the PNAC document-a catastrophic event can change people's minds about the necessity for war. This idea alone is enough to think the possiblity of "inside job" is certainly not far fetched. How could one be a rational/logica l person and think ohterwise?
+1 # rf 2011-08-12 04:56
They are just stupid super religious all of the stupid super religious jews and christians. C. Hitchens has got it right there!
+5 # frank scott 2011-08-11 13:33
even if this is true and fantasists claim it makes their theories about "inside jobs" plausible, it simply proves what most reasonable people have always known: the un-intelligence community failed, miserably, for reasons having nothing to do with plotting to help terrorists unless those terrorists were in the employ of the u.s. government.

+22 # Glen 2011-08-11 13:43
A trickle here, a gusher there. More is coming to be known about this event and folks are on the edge of speaking out no matter the consequences. There is so much research being done on the attacks that it is no longer possible to ignore it and that information is emboldening folks with inside information.

Tony Chopkoski, in the comments above ours, makes jest on the subject because he is not yet privy to the forums that actually have presented evidence, not to mention dvds, and papers available to download. Tony probably makes fun of paleontologist conferences as well.
-6 # Texan 4 Peace 2011-08-12 11:45
I'm generally suspicious of the govt's "official stories", but I have studied those DVDs and papers "available to download" and found no convincing argument for the "inside job" theory. Just because the "truthers" have put out a bunch of media to bolster their claims doesn't mean they have good evidence. Birthers and creationists publish papers and DVDs too.
+34 # fredboy 2011-08-11 13:45
Bush's numbers rose from the 20s to the 90s after the attacks. Just hoping the right wing doesn't turn the anniversary into a celebration of the greatest national security failure in US history.
+14 # kalpal 2011-08-11 13:58
Within 30 seconds of being formed all Bureaucracies become far more important than their missions. In government any mission is very much scondary to what's in it for the bureaucracy.

At one point the CIA admitted that its agents commit on average 100,000 felonies each year. I am sure many of those felonies seek to protect the agency from any blowback or being outed for screwups.
+16 # tcatt57 2011-08-11 14:24
Bobbygoode on the right track, Clark's cofession is trying to take the heat off the mass murderers in the White house. George Bush sr. is a Nazi, George W just used Hitler's past as a playbook. Fascist Nazi's run Corporations like any mafia would. We have to return to that day and chase down every cockroach involved. Those 30 Navy Seals must be end of the murders to cover this crime.
+4 # rockieball 2011-08-11 14:51
In her book Area 51 Annie Jacobsen talks about how the CIA knew where bin Ladin was and how they want to use a predator drone aircraft to take him out. But less than a month after he became CIA director and after the State Department gave the go ahead. George Tenat said no that he thought it was a mistake because the compound where he was know to have high-profile Middle Eastern royal family members visit there.
+7 # tuandon 2011-08-11 14:55
These are the people who say FDR knew in advance about Pearl Harbor. Yet they refuse to admit that the Previous President knew about the up-coming al-Qaida attack, yet did nothing.
+19 # stonecutter 2011-08-11 15:11
“...Mr. Clarke went on to speculate – which he admits is based on nothing other than his imagination – that the CIA might have been trying to recruit these two future hijackers as agents. This, like much of what Mr. Clarke said in his interview, is utterly without foundation.”

This public statement from Tenet and Black is illuminating in its parsing of every word. These people are masters of the verbal feint, the parse, the plausible denial, and so forth. It's their stock-in-trade. Tenet's not saying all of Clarke's allegations are false, but only "much" are "without foundation", meaning there's no public evidence to prove them, not that they're untrue. Clarke is too important a player, too knowledgeable of the prior inner workings of the CIA, for Tenet to accuse him of lying head-on, as he most certainly would of a lesser figure.

He says Clarke bases his allegations on "imagination", as if he dreamed this up while reposing in a hammock one summer day. Clarke is indeed "speculating" based on the fact this information was singularly withheld at the time, and this seems the only plausible reason for it to have been withheld. That's more than fanciful "imagination".

Richard Clarke came off back then and since as the ONLY senior official that was candid with the American People about the events of 9/11. Where's Tenet been hiding?
+5 # jon 2011-08-11 16:01
Now here is something we will probably never hear about on MSM, certainly never on FOX news
+1 # Activista 2011-08-11 17:10
Clark is believable - even IF the fact that Tenet CIA had order to NOT to share information IS CRIMINAL.
Did Mossad know? CIA and Mossad share information - THERE was NOT inside job - BUT agencies knew and let it go - 911 was perfect for NEOCON agenda.
+5 # Alice W 2011-08-11 18:24
I trust Richard Clarke.
+7 # tomo 2011-08-11 19:21
Tenet is himself utterly discredited. His "slam dunk" over "Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq"--however much he's tried to explain it away--means he absolutely missed any honorable rendezvous with history. There he sits, forever immortalized, behind Colin Powell at the U.N., backing up the pretext on which a country of 25 million fellow humans was smashed to smithereens. I've heard him excuse himself; I've never heard him say he is sorry. The man has placed himself beyond the pale of respectable society. That he should offer himself as a credible denier of Clarke is absurd.

What we do know is that we had been monitoring Al Qaeda communications for a goodly while before 9/11. We also know NORAD proved inexplicably "incompetent" on 9/11. Further, Clarke himself recounts his desperate attempts to catch the attention of our national defense apparatus in the days leading up to 9/11, and recounts the near absolute incapacity of the apparatus to focus. Or so it seemed. A point Clarke has not yet reached is the possibility, plausible to me, that the defense apparatus was in fact very focused, and was awaiting what it regarded as a golden opportunity. (Do not expect any help from Barack Obama on clarifying these things; the man is, like George Tenet, totally committed to covering the backside of the CIA.)
+3 # Activista 2011-08-11 23:41
again tomo - great analysis - CIA was/is politicized - re sharing information was not allowed - and ONLY information suited to Neocon (Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute, Elliot Abrams) goals was filtered UP. And Cheney orchestrated.
CIA agents that did question idiocy - Niger and Iraq on the sale of 500 tons of uranium oxide, also known as “yellowcake.” - were "silenced".
- WMD in Iraq were made up by Cheney.
CIA is out of loop when "needed".
It is a bit out of context - but shows power of Neocons in US government:
This is how the WARS are "Made in USA".
-12 # XLIB 2011-08-11 21:30
I found myself wondering why, other than perhaps his defeatist leftist agenda, would Richard Clarke go off about "theories" that he admittedly had no real basis for . . . then it hit me right at the end - "Clarke, now a security consultant and bestselling author, has hinted in his writings in the past that there may have been a CIA cover-up . . ."

Gee, could the "bestselling author" thing have anything to do with it?
+5 # Activista 2011-08-11 23:55
read the second page -
" Nawaf Al-Hazmi and Khalid Al-Mihdhar lived with a well paid FBI INFORMANT, Abdussattar Shaikh, in San Diego, in early Fall, 2000"
Google bit and think - WHO is lying here ... NOT Clarke
+6 # futhark 2011-08-11 21:32
I confess to having been duped by the Cheney/Bush "orthodox" 19-Islamic-terr orists-with-box -cutters theory of 9/11 for about 2 years...then I discovered the demolition of Building 7. I don't see how anyone can look at that building coming down and not see that it was deliberately destroyed in a controlled demolition process, which means that charges had to have been installed weeks in advance.

Examination of video of the twin towers collapsing also shows evidence of controlled demolition.

The Kean Commission was charged with finding evidence supporting the Islamic terrorist theory, not with finding out what really happened. It was totally under the control of the Cheney/Bush administration through its executive administrator, White House stooge Philip Zelikow. Its findings should in no way be taken as conclusive or even authoritative.

The anti-Islamic hysteria mounted by the government and its propaganda organs can only be compared with the synthesized minutes of hate against Emmanuel Goldstein in Orwell's "Nineteen Eighty-Four".
0 # Activista 2011-08-11 23:44
our liberal media NYT:
The New York Times publishes an op-ed piece written by National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, titled, “Why We Know Iraq is Lying,” in which she writes that “Iraq has filed a false declaration to the United Nations that amounts to a 12,200-page lie,” citing among other things its failure “to account for or explain Iraq’s efforts to get uranium from abroad.” She says that Iraq has reneged on its commitment to disarm itself of its alleged arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. Instead of full cooperation and transparency, Iraq has “a high-level political commitment to maintain and conceal its weapons,” she claims. Iraq is maintaining “institutions whose sole purpose is to thwart the work of the inspectors,” she adds, asserting that the country is not allowing inspectors “immediate, unimpeded, unrestricted access” to the “facilities and people” involved in its alleged weapons program. [NEW YORK TIMES, 1/23/2003]
+7 # Patricia Chang 2011-08-12 01:43
We will never know the complete truth about 9/11 in our lifetimes. Perhaps, it will never come out in any lifetime. However, I firmly believe there was some type of cover-up, a great deal of incompetence and self-serving agendas, and lies will continue to be told. It is the same with the assassination of JFK. The Jackie tapes reveal she felt LBJ was involved. I have always believed that. Definitely, there were lies told and a cover-up. But, as usual, anyone not buying the official line is called a conspiracy theorist, etc. It is just like a whistleblower is always called a disgruntled employee. I go with the old saw that where there is smoke, there is fire.
+4 # 4yourinformation 2011-08-12 08:10
Still nothing really new here. What about WTC #7? It just fell down? They recovered IDs from the hi-jackers from the fallen towers??? Many, many questions to be answered.
+2 # Activista 2011-08-13 06:02
"They recovered IDs from the hi-jackers from the fallen towers?"
Please reference this IDs - who/where/when - and think.
Biggest fraud of 911 is NEOCONs starting Iraq war.
+3 # wipster 2011-08-12 09:15
" Many, many questions to be answered." You are correct sir. The important thing is to keep asking them and keep asking them and keep asking them... the lies will eventually become evident.
+3 # qasee 2011-08-12 10:12
Oh come now Mr. Clarke, the CIA being secretive, dishonest, not talking about there operations??? Nawwww, they wouldn't do that.
+2 # fredboy 2011-08-12 10:25
Might be good to honor the victims of the most massive human slaughter event in our nation in our lifetime with its first, and I believe essential, thorough criminal investigation.
+4 # belljp 2011-08-12 15:57
Shenon did a great job :there is a rebuttal out there from the 3 nutcakes ; They were under oath . SO WAS THE FAA , but they all lied along with the ten Commissioners .look at the 12th public meeting of the 911 Commission ,last session ,FAA.It is the worst case ,or the best case of PERJURY ever recorded in the annals of Criminal Law
+1 # belljp 2011-08-12 15:59
patricia Chang go to brass check and see the latest on johnson and Kennedy . take care and good luck ,,
+4 # annualoath 2011-08-13 11:33
false flags, 911, pearl harbor

for those of you who cannot get you mind around the actual 911 conspiracy, you never will. your conditioning is thorough. you'll go to your death believing and having faith in those few who own all the wealth and own the government thinking they have your welfare in mind. i'm not sorry, but glad to inform you that they don't. 911's have happened here and other places around the globe before. it's always the same scenario. the wealthy class, for their narrow, selfish, and fiendish reasons, find it necessary and to their financial advantage that some of the sheep must be sacrificed. yes, you are sheep people. and the wealthy class call you at their whim, and they have many ways of getting you to follow and step in lockstep. patriotism and religion are probably two of their most faithful and reliable tactics to get you to obey. and it never fails. every generation you obey and walk blindly to the beat of their drum.

so, pickwicky, texan, activista, interested observer and whoever else is out there walking around in the dark, it's not a question of "getting educated. clearly it's a question of "getting liberated". liberate that gray matter between your ears. get those chains off your brain. think outside the box you've been taught to think in. you're missin' it yo!

+2 # drush 2011-08-13 15:55
we seem to be a country that gropes for a confusing incident. so we can be collectively duped. We live a duped life so why not. Duped by banks. duped by every Corporation we deal with. It is time to wake up, thanks Mr. Clark.
+1 # CenTexDem 2011-08-14 20:41
Had Bill Clinton read about terrorist plans to fly into office buildings in his PDB he would have had the FBI and CIA top brass kicking the rank and file's ass to find out more about - George W. took a 6 week spoiled rich kid's vacation in Texas.
0 # jfriccio38 2011-08-15 12:39
Don Richardson is so right.It was an inside job, coverup. It was also reported that some of these guys were taking flying lessons and not wanting to know how to take off or land.Gee i wonder why.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.