Richard WarnickRichard Clarke: al-Qaeda May Try to Help McCain
Former National Security Council chief counter-terrorism adviser Richard Clarke discusses the fact that al-Qaeda may try to influence the U.S. presidential election again, saying that “at the very least” we should “expect another Halloween video from the scary man in the cave.”
Remember that an Osama bin Laden video hit U.S. TV screens just three days before Election Day in 2004. At the time, the CIA secretly assessed that the video was intended to help President Bush defeat Senator John Kerry.
At the worst, Clarke says, al-Qaeda could mount an attack inside the United States. The two most recent major terrorist incidents are cause for concern.
First, al-Qaeda mounted a large and sophisticated assault on the American embassy in Yemen. Many analysts are surprised that the attack failed and that the local guard force fought back courageously and well. Al-Qaeda’s plan seemed to be to penetrate the embassy wall, gather up Americans, and then kill them in a series of terrorist suicides with explosive belts.
Second, al-Qaeda attacked the Marriott hotel in Islamabad with a large truck bomb. This attack seems to have been aimed at the Pakistani president, prime minister, and cabinet who were supposed to be dining there at the time but were not because of a last-minute decision to change the venue to a more secure location. Two U.S. military personnel who were dining there died in the attack.
Those who see the two attacks as the opening round of a pre-election campaign note that they were the first two major al Qaeda-related attacks on American facilities in a very long time, the first serious al Qaeda attack on an American embassy in a decade.
In the wake of these attacks, America’s military and intelligence agencies intercepted a series of messages from Al Qaeda’s leadership to intermediate members of the organization asking local cells to be prepared for imminent instructions. Counter-terrorism officials say they are expecting an “October surprise.”
Why would Osama bin Laden care who our next President is? Because Bush’s war on terror has been a propaganda, recruiting, and training bonanza for Al Qaeda.
In fact, Senator McCain said at the time that bin Laden’s 2004 pre-election video was “very helpful to President Bush.” Another attack on the U.S. “would be a big advantage” for McCain, according to McCain’s chief strategist, Charlie Black.
The only difference between McCain’s and Bush’s approach to the war on terror is that McCain promises more of it and harder. In contrast to McCain, Barack Obama has already become popular in Europe and the Middle East, and offers some hope of restoring America’s reputation.
“Al-Qaeda would not like it if there were a popular American president again,” says Clarke.
UPDATE: Fear mongering is going to be McCain’s last-ditch argument anyway. From Arianna Huffington:
The McCain campaign is all set to roll out its message for the last 30 days of the campaign: “We may not be good for your bank account, your mortgage, your health care, or your job security — but none of that will matter if you are dead. John McCain: If You Want to Live.”
October 6th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Tricks!
The Republicans are gonna trick us all again!
Karl Rove! Swiftboat! Southern strategy! October suprise!
Lions and Tigers and Bears, OH MY!!!
Sounds like ready made excuses for an Obama loss….
Y’all really sabotage yourselves, doncha?
October 6th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
jd — Do you agree with Charlie Black? Will a terrorist attack on the U.S. between now and Election Day be an advantage for McCain?
October 6th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Yes. I do think it will be an advantage for McCain.
BUT - had there been 12 or 20 terrorist attacks on US soil since 9/11 - another wouldn’t be an advantage.
So - the Republicans are in a dilemma. An attack means a sure win. But keeping us safe shows that the .gov has been doing its job.
As much of a disaster that Dems have claimed this administration has been, they’ve been pretty successful at deterring additional attacks on US soil. Bombs are easy to make. A couple in a few middle America shopping malls, churches and office buildings would be pretty devastating.
Folks like Cliffy like to pretend that 9/11 was faked (or something). But if the .gov really wanted us to start suspending liberties, wouldn’t the above be easier?
Another major attack might bring in McCain, but he’d be forced to really bring the hammer down onto Al Qeada. And this wouldn’t be the gentle hammer of a President who’s used up all his political capital. It’d be the hammer of a President with a mandate to kill all those people - peaceniks be damned.
You really think Osama wants that?
October 6th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
I don’t think a tape from Obama before the election will sway the electorate at all this time around. It wouldn’t surprise me if such a tape surfaced, but let’s be real - folks in the US are more concerned about their 401(k) accounts than a terrorist attack. Indeed, I don’t believe an actual attack would sway the electorate given the economic crisis.
Obama has all but won the election, and McCain’s looking ever more desperate with each passing day makes him look ever less presidential. He’s finished.
October 6th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
jd– You’re right, it would be very easy to stage a terrorist attack somewhere in America. Could it be that U.S. policy is in line with al-Qaeda’s goals, and there has been no need to attack as long as Bush was in still in office?
October 6th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
An interesting take on it, Richard.
Maybe.
Maybe they know that if they ramp it up - we will too and that will be the end of them?
Maybe they know that as long as they don’t attack us here - people will forget the terror of NYC. That they, in that unique American way, will put it in the past. Paper over it. And all we’ll remember is the present, and the names of the dead kids who lost their lives in a place most can’t find on a globe…
And that the peaceniks will trade on this forgetfullness and agitate for the troops to return home. And that will leave AQ to rebuild in peace, out from under the constant thread of raids and airstrikes - free to up the pressure on local governments - free to pursue the goal of the Salafist state.
Yup. Maybe?
October 6th, 2008 at 4:54 pm
jd:
You are kidding, right?
It’s already happening, thanks to the ill-fated decision to invade Iraq.
October 6th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
jd– After Bush pledged to get bin Laden, dead or alive 7 years ago he sure didn’t “ramp it up,” did he? It’s like he forgot about al-Qaeda and got obsessed with Iraq like a kid with a new toy. I wonder if we’ll ever know the full story.
We know nothing more about bin Laden than we did in April 2002 when Donald Rumsfeld famously said, “He’s alive or dead. He’s in Afghanistan or somewhere else.”
October 7th, 2008 at 8:50 am
Dictator in waiting Barack Hussein Osama has gotten his henchmen in Kenya to arrest and detain one of his top critics. Jerome Corsi Author of the book the Obama Nation was about to deliver a news conference that could be damaging to the Obama campaign. Obama has proven that he has zero tolerance for any kind of criticism and instead of answering questions or refuting the substance of the criticism he is attacking the messenger. This should put fear in the hearts of all free thinking people. Even Democrats and especially liberals should be outraged by the tactics that Obama is using such as threatening Television stations and reporters with federal investigations. Obama has proven he is not fit for leadership and is a threat to the freedoms of every American.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=77268
October 7th, 2008 at 9:58 am
What’s already happening, Jim?
October 7th, 2008 at 10:17 am
jd:
Reread your own “maybe” comment - the answer to your question lies within.
Come on, dude, I know you can do it. After all, you did study under Prof. Chisum.
October 7th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
By goodness, Jim! You’ve figured it out, finally.
I’m glad that you’ve finally come around.
October 7th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Ummm. I would have said that you finally came around. But, whatever.