60 Minutes Details Clinton Passing on Opportunity to Kill Bin Laden in 1999
As NewsBusters noted while the media celebrated Bill Clinton's involvement in an Obama campaign ad spiking the bin Laden's dead football, the former President should never have appeared in such a video given his administration having passed on numerous opportunities to kill or capture the al Qaeda leader before 9/11.
On Sunday, CBS's 60 Minutes detailed such an occurrence in late summer 1999 (video follows with transcript and commentary):
Lara Logan, CBS: That mission actually began five years before 9/11. That's when the CIA set up what became Hank Crumpton's special unit tasked with finding Osama bin Laden.
Hank Crumpton, Former Deputy Director of the CIA'S Counter-Terrorism Center: From '98, '99 all the way up to 2001, the warnings were there, the in--
Lara Logan: So through the Clinton administration, to the Bush administration?
Hank Crumpton: Yes, yes. We had extensive human networks in Afghanistan, Afghan sources that had been reporting on al Qaeda, on the presence of bin Laden.
But Crumpton says the Clinton White House didn't trust the CIA's Afghan sources alone and they wanted U.S. eyes on the target.
Hank Crumpton: So we were driven to look at various technical options. And we looked at a range of things. Long-range optics, they were too heavy, too cumbersome to get over the mountains. We looked at balloons. The prevailing winds would take those balloons to China. That would be a bad thing. We scrapped that. And then we stumbled across the UAVs, particularly the Predator. And sure enough, wasn't long before we had the Predator in theater over Afghanistan, the Predator unarmed at the time. And our human sources took us to a village-- far-- not far from Kandahar.
Lara Logan: And what did you see there?
Hank Crumpton: We saw a security detail, a convoy and we saw bin Laden exit the vehicle.
Lara Logan: Clearly?
Hank Crumpton: Clearly. And we had-- the optics were spot on. It was beaming back to us, CIA headquarters. We immediately alerted the White House. And the Clinton administration's response was, "Well, it will take several hours for the TLAMs, the cruise missiles launched from submarines, to reach that objective. So you need to tell us where bin Laden will be five or six hours from now." The frustration was enormous.
Lara Logan: So at that moment you wanted to kill him?
Hank Crumpton: Yes.
Lara Logan: But you couldn't get permission?
Hank Crumpton: Correct.
He couldn't get permission to do anything, including allowing the CIA's Afghan agents on the ground to attack bin Laden's compound. That missed opportunity in the late summer of 1999, led Crumpton and his CIA team to figure out how to arm the Predator drone with hellfire missiles.
Lara Logan: So the Predator drone strikes that take place in the tribal areas of Pakistan today are a direct result of what happened when you had Osama bin Laden in your sights in Afghanistan and no way to kill him yourselves?
Hank Crumpton: It was a response to the lack of response on the part of the administration or DOD. So the handful of CIA officers that we had, in great frustration, we began the discussion of, "Okay. We find him again we will have to engage ourselves. And we'll have to do it right then, right there."
Maybe all the media members that praised Clinton's appearance in this Obama campaign ad should issue a retraction in the coming days.
Don't hold your breath.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
I would say what I really think of Billy Jeff as POTUS and CIC
Submitted by Dave. on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 1:20am.
But in these insane PC times, I would get banned from NB in a heartbeat.
But that's okay, because God will ultimately put this spineless POS p*ssy of a coward (who is quite literally swimming in the blood of those that died on 9/11) in his place for an eternity.
Glad I won't be him come Judgment Day.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Waiting for that 60 Minutes interview of US commanders
Submitted by lrgon on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 11:10am.
giving us the play by play of Bin Laden and entourage trapped in Tora Bora.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tora_Bora
Oh,
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 11:36am.
We thought you were waiting for the weather to warm up before the spring migration.
Whatever. Loon.
Big deal................a
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 1:21am.
Big deal................a little bit late to the party??? Hell, I was readin' (Obamaspeak) about bin Laden in the early 1990's, and they had allready tried to blow up the WTC. Der Schlickmeister is just another chicken-sh%t queebie-assed tillley who didn't want to deal with anything that might have been too 'heavy'......................and now the pathelogical liar is tryin' to act like he had sumpin' to do about it????
:-D
Submitted by Dave. on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 1:27am.
:-D
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Yeah, Dave.............sick
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 1:37am.
Yeah, Dave.............sick minds think alike - and if we're 'sick'??? I'll take it!!! Our 'sickness' could cure a LOT of ills!!!!!
Really, killa? Who is "they"...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 6:39am.
in your "they had already tried to blow up the WTC" [in 1993]?
bin Laden? al Qaeda?
If that's the case, I wish you had gone to the FBI with your blockbuster info in the early 90's since Ramzi Yousef, the central figure involved in the bombing, wasn't captured until 1995 and his links to al Qaeda and OBL at and before that time were tenuous at best. As a matter of fact, the connection of OBL and al Qaeda to the first WTC attack remain unclear to this day.
Jer
WTC '93
Submitted by HudsonRiverGirl on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 6:52am.
Obama wants to free the blind sheik convicted in the WTC '93 bombing.
A compliant media and a silent Mayor Blooming-idiot have ignored this publicized intention.
After all what could be more important to NYers than salt in their soup or too much transfat in their diet.
HRG...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 7:20am.
According to a tweet of a rumor published in an Arabic newspaper.
Never happened. The organizations employing the detained Americans paid their "bail" and they have all been flown home.
But I realize it's very tempting to regard as factual mere speculation which presumes the worst about a despised president.
Jer
Besides, Jer, ...
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 9:11am.
... what's more fun? A dead Osama or a live Monica?!?
Want to read what a real live Navy SEAL thinks of the current Fluking CINC?
http://sm1.netatlantic.com/track?t=v&eas=1&mid=477775&msgid=418835&did=4...
Careful, Newsbubba, I got raked over the coals here recently
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 9:22am.
for merely suggesting many Republicans had claimed Clinton's attempted missile strike against OBL was a "wag the dog" diversion.
Are you hinting that you thought likewise?
Jer
Bubba always had impeccable timing for bombings, intern.
Submitted by frank14 on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 10:25am.
Remember his bombing of Iraq the very week he was being impeached in the House? Sure you do!
Tenuous at best, intern?
Submitted by frank14 on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 10:38am.
Your defense of the Clintons knows no bounds or shame. Unfortunately for you, '93 WTC bomber Ramzi Yousef's ties to abu sayyaf and their connection to al qaeda are well known. Have you heard of Google and the search function? You just come on this blog to throw up dust and obfuscate for your dear hero Bubba. But inquiring minds just gots to know: Are you paid staff at the B.J. Clinton Presidential Library and Massage Parlor?
That's right, junior...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 10:41am.
Now I have to sign off for awhile. So gather all of your talking points from your favorite propaganda sites, and put them in good order so you won't embarrass yourself any more than what will naturally attend the espousal of nonsense. And I'll be back later.
Jer
Translation ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 12:07pm.
I smell another ass kicking coming my way cuz of my penchant for defending the indefensible - damn that Slick Willie C. anyway.
Gonna take foot bail for the nonce, but I shall return. (h/t Dugout Doug MacArthur - circa early 1942)
Jer
Don't forget Bush.
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 2:26pm.
Bush. Bush. Bush. Bush. No mention of any president of the last 30 years can take place without comparing the actions/feelings/words/actions/poopy size/speeches/budgets/wars/haircut of the 43rd president. Bush. Bush. Bush. Bush. Bush.
I know it was 'the blind
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 11:40am.
I know it was 'the blind Shiek', Jer...............I guess I shouldn't have juxtaposed (great word!!) the sentence about bin Laden and the first WTC bombing attempt. But I could categorize 'they' as the radical Islamists who were, and still are, hell-bent on doing as much damage to this country as possible.........................and obviously, whether it was the blind Shiek OR Osama Obama bin laden, der Schlickmeister wasn't particularly interested in doing much about it - and he proved that by NOT doing much about it!!
Bush Wasn't Responsible For Starting Drone Strike Program?
Submitted by manofaiki on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 1:29am.
Haven't I been hearing for years about how the drone strike program was developed/ok'd by the evil Bush Administration?
You mean this actually was developed by the CIA on it's own in direct response to the Clinton Administration's refusal to act against Bin Laden?
Oh. Ok.
Rumor has it, ...
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 9:16am.
.... that some Predator "driver" was siting in Las Vegas, or elsewhere, when he spotted a high value target, and said something like, "I wish the hell I could take his ass out right now with a missile."
His NCO tech, said, "Why don't we suggest that they put missiles on the Predator, and we COULD kill him?"
HELLO!
Oh, mano. More on that evil Bush . . er. . Clinton . . er Gore
Submitted by Gary Hall on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 12:25pm.
One more of those evil things dreamed up by the Bush administration was extraordinary rendition.
Oh - excuse me - it wasn't the evil Bush?
So, how did this all come about? Turn to the MSM's favorite man of many faces, former National Security Advisor, Richard Clarke; "Against All Enemies," 143-4.- my bold:
Snatches, or more properly "extraordinary renditions," were operations to apprehend terrorists abroad, usually without the knowledge of and almost always without public acknowledgement of the host government. . . The first time I proposed a snatch, in 1993, the White House Counsel, Lloyd Cutler, demanded a meeting with the President to explain how it violated international law. Clinton had seemed to be siding with Cutler until Al Gore belatedly joined the meeting, having just flown overnight from South Africa. Clinton recapped the arguments on both sides for Gore: Lloyd says this. Dick says that. Gore laughed and said, "That's a no-brainer. Of course it's a violation of international law, that's why it's a covert action. The guy is a terrorist. Go grab his ass."
If only they would have grabbed Bin Laden, or came to the aid of Afghanistan to prevent the Taliban from seizing control, in 1996.
Shortly thereafter, Bill Clinton ordered the CIA to establish the US program of extraordinary rendition (PDD#39); the idea being that we could ship them off to you know who in Egypt, etc., so that they could be tortured to get information out of them.
Obama refused to put an end to the extraordinary rendition program, as well, as well, we're going to need it again, if and when they close Gitmo.
(;~/ gary
Not Again...
Submitted by Ogundipe S.O. on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 1:29am.
We have a proverb here that says, if you have two bad plans against someone, you'll hit yourself with at least one.
Mr. Clinton thought it would do him good to attack Mitt without contemplating a return consequences.
Just like all recent Obama camp attacks against Romney.
So Lara has since returned to TV following the aggravated rape she suffered in the hands of "peaceful" Muslims in Cairo?
Did she did an abortion? Just curious.
Hope
Submitted by grammajane on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 1:49am.
Rush takes this article and runs with it on his show
A part of the MSM actually
Submitted by HelloDare on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 2:48am.
A part of the MSM actually doing its job. Amazing. How long do we have to wait before it happens again?
Nothing new here.
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 5:39am.
Clinton's policy vis a vis Al Qaeda and bin Laden has been meticulously documented by the 9/11 Commission and elsewhere--including a thorough delineation of the potential opportunities for capturing or killing bin Laden--and the reasons for taking or not taking action in particular instances [success not a certainty, emboldening OBL in case of failure, killing of innocents and/or endangering sheiks friendly to US, etc.] have been subjected to exhaustive examinations.
A few conclusions are in order: It's probably safe to assume in retrospect Clinton wishes on at least a couple of occasions that he and others responsible for calling the shots had erred on the side of aggressive action instead of caution. It is also obvious that his administration--especially during the second term--was very cognizant of and near-obsessively focused upon Al Qaeda and bin Laden, and there were numerous security steps taken which reflected that heightened concern. This was in stark contrast to the pre-9/11 posture of the succeeding administration which regrettably can be summed up by the phrase: "asleep at the wheel".
Jer
"success not a certainty"
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 9:27am.
When was the last time that a military (or any other action) was a certainty, Jer? Try looking that up for us.
Maybe North African invasion, Normandy, Italy, Inchon, Iwo Jima, Coral Sea, Midway? Shall I go on?
"Certain" is a word like "perfect," and "absolute." Never gonna happen (with never being another one of those things that is never correct.)
Lincoln had a General during the Civil War that wasn't too keen on engaging the enemy because success wasn't certain. He got his ass fired.
I am absolutely convinced, and perfectly certain, that success is never, ever a certainty!
"Nothing new here" the mantra of the libtard
Submitted by frank14 on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 9:42am.
Unfortunately for you reality says otherwise, you kneepad wearing intern.
I see that your familiarity with the events leading up to
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 9:53am.
and including those of 9/11 extends no further than the right-wing talking points and distortions of history your tiny intellect is able to absorb. Enjoy the eternal bliss of your staggering ignorance.
Jer
Really intern? Wave that 9-11 Commission report around!
Submitted by frank14 on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 10:03am.
9/11 Commission Covered Up Gorelick Warning
A 1995 memo from a top terrorism prosecutor warning that a directive by Clinton administration Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick "could cost lives" is being concealed by the 9/11 Commission.
Compounding the cover-up, Gorelick herself was a prominent member of the Commission and refused to recuse herself from parts of the 9/11 investigation that covered the now notorious "wall" she erected that prevented intelligence and law enforcement agencies from cooperating in the war on terror.
In June 1995, U.S. Attorney for New York's Southern District Mary Jo White warned the Justice Department that Gorelick's prohibition against intelligence sharing would hamper U.S. counterterrorism efforts.
"It is hard to be totally comfortable with instructions to the FBI prohibiting contact with the United States Attorney's Offices when such prohibitions are not legally required," White wrote on June 13, 1995, in a memo reported Friday by the New York Post's Deborah Orin.
"The most effective way to combat terrorism is with as few labels and walls as possible so that wherever permissible, the right and left hands are communicating," advised White, who was then in the midst of prosecuting the 1993 World Trade Center bombers.
According to Orin, however, "White was so upset that she bitterly protested with another memo - a scathing one" - blasting Gorelick's wall of separation.
While the former Clinton official and her fellow 9/11 commissioners have so far declined to make the second memo public, the Post reports that White used it to warn that Gorelick's wall "hindered law enforcement and could cost lives."
The 9/11 Commission omitted any mention of White's scathing second warning to Gorelick from its final report.
"Nor does the report include the transcript of its staff interview with White," the Post said.
The revelation that the 9/11 Commission covered up White's full account comes on the heels of news that Gorelick's wall may have prevented the FBI from learning that lead 9/11 hijackers Mohamed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi had entered the U.S. and had been identified by military intelligence as terrorist threats a year before the attacks.
And yet you Clinton apologists have the nerve to come on this blog and cite the 9-11 Commission as a defense for your hero's dereliction of duty when in reality he was too busy servicing interns and starlets to be bothered with terrorists. I would say shame on you... but we know Democrats aren't capable of feeling shame. I wouldn't bring up eternity either if I were you.
You wouldn't?
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 10:24am.
"I wouldn't bring up eternity either if I were you."
Well, you're not me, and I'm not you, thank God. And I didn't bring up "eternity". I brought up "eternal bliss" as in "perpetual; ceaseless; endless: eternal quarreling; eternal chatter."
Why don't you crack open a dictionary some time, genius.
Jer
The intern has no reply at all for the fraud 9-11 Commission
Submitted by frank14 on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 10:30am.
You really are a genius citing the 9-11 Commission in your defense of the indefensible Intern Slayer. You must have banged you head under the Oral Office desk once too many times while doing your duty to your Master. And there you are, bringing up God again. Not a good subject for you Clinton lovers.
Jer, history if fickle
Submitted by Agnostic on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 10:06am.
OBL in hiding but could potentially have been captured or killed (by questionable deals and alliances) but was let go by Clinton and he manages to pool the resources for 9/11 and Clinton is the goat.
OBL in hiding but could potentially have been captured or killed (by questionable deals and alliances) but was deemed as unimportant by GWB and OBL does little to nothing and Bush is either incompetent or prudent depending upon whose opinion you are receiving.
OBL in hiding and is killed by the allowance of Obama (questionable legality of the operation) and he is either a gloat or hero - the same people have the opposite opinion as they did under Bush.
Agnostic...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 10:26am.
Well said.
Gotta run.
Later,
Jer
You mean "gotta run away and cry after that whipping".
Submitted by frank14 on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 10:36am.
Better get some help, intern. Custer did better at Little Big Horn.
loud sigh
Submitted by Free Stinker on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 10:00am.
"asleap at the wheel"?
What's next? "Bush was an idiot" followed by "Bush was an evil genius" ?
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Yes. Meticulously documented.
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 10:59am.
With what meticulous documents were left over after Sandy Berger walked off with a bunch of those meticulous documents?
Anybody know...
Submitted by Annie Ashe Fields on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 7:05am.
...if Obama joined in the chorus of people EVISCERATING President Bush for "letting it (9/11) happen on his watch"? Or blaming Bush for it in any way? I would *love* to know that.
Clinton also downplayed the
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 7:07am.
Clinton also downplayed the intention of the '93 attack, which was to bring down the building. Had that occurred, the death toll would have been everyone in the building, 10 times more than the toll on 9/11.
Instead, he said of the attack, that "somebody did something very stupid." (oh, is that all?) and we should not "overreact."
After all, they failed.
And since the Right blames Clinton for what
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 7:31am.
occurred eight months into GWB's presidency, I'm sure they would have been willing to blame Bush '41 for those (30,000 deaths) only one month into Clinton's term. Agreed?
Jer
I suppose we should be thankful
Submitted by Boudin on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 7:39am.
Clinton didnt over-react,,,,, jeez
So the issue of "who was to
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 8:13am.
So the issue of "who was to blame" is relevant to Clinton's response?
If Bush '41 build a wall between the FBI and CIA
Submitted by frank14 on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 10:43am.
and ignored reports on Ramzi Yousef's terrorist activities and passed on clear chances to take him out, then that would be fair, intern. But that only occurred in your bizzarro world of Clinton interns, not reality. How sad to be you.
motherbelt...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 8:54am.
If that was the extent of his reaction--and maybe it was, I don't know--I would agree that the remark was inappropriately flip and dismissive.
Jer
I'll say it again
Submitted by DontFeedTheTrolls on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 7:33am.
Shouldn't Clinton be referred to as the impeached former President?
Is that a serious question?
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 7:40am.
You mean officially?...as in "Ladies and Gentleman, it is my pleasure to introduce the forced to resign in disgrace former President Richard M. Nixon"?
I think not.
Jer
The only think more predictable then Clinton
Submitted by Boudin on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 7:55am.
Being a perverted creep, is Jer defending every insult directed at the lying former disbarred President.
Except, Boudin, I have never defended his reckless
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 8:47am.
and immoral personal conduct. In fact, I've explicitly condemned it on numerous occasions.
But, then, you've always been a bit slippery when it comes to factual matters.
Jer
Pot calling kettle black
Submitted by frank14 on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 10:51am.
You really have no shame, intern. You cite the corrupt 9-11 Commission to defend your hero and accuse others of being slippery with the facts? LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well, Nixon is dead
Submitted by misterbee241 on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 9:17am.
so wont be introduced to anybody at any time.
Clinton, however is still impeached.
And yes, if there were not a double standard in this country, every time Clinton is mentioned in the baggy pants clown media, it would be as "Impeached" President Clinton.
Liberal logic. It never ceases to amaze me.
You're quite right, misterbee...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 9:34am.
Please amend my earlier hypothetical introduction to read: "Ladies and Gentlemen, it is my pleasure to introduce Julie Nixon Eisenhower, the daughter of the forced to resign in disgrace former President Richard M. Nixon."
Fixed it.
Jer
Imagine the MSM freakout . . .
Submitted by Free Stinker on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 9:37am.
"Introducing, the daughter of disgraced ex-President Clinton, Chelsea "I call the Secret Service my 'trained pigs' Clinton!"
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Officially? Did DontFeedTheTrolls say officially?
Submitted by needle on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 9:30am.
I think he meant informally.
You provide an overblown example to make you point; however, I could say with only slight exaggeration that the media practically spit every time they mention Nixon’s name.
Here is the point you seem to want to deflect: The [DNC] media continues to accord the Clintons honor and high regard in direct reflection of Democrats in general – it’s silly to pretend there is a difference. If they treat Nixon with disrespect, they most certainly should treat the Clintons no better. Why? Because their criminal and disgraceful actions where much greater and more numerous than Nixon’s, but of course they were also covered up much better, with the considerable help of the DNC media, natch.
- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.
I don't believe he specified the context, needle...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 9:44am.
thus the ? in my post.
But, there are far bigger fish to fry. If it makes y'all happy to routinely attach the word "impeached" to Clinton's name, well, I like for folks to be happy.
Jer
Jer, when you look at why
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 11:48am.
Jer, when you look at why Nixon resigned, and all of the facts and information leading up to the hue and cry from the media that basically forced him to give the 'V' sign as he flew away on the helicopter.....................and compare it to what goes on these days in politics and the White House - especially starting with the Clinton administration, and then being on steroids these days with the Obama REGIME - it was junior high school prank time.
Except that Nixon left office
Submitted by Utherpend on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 1:05pm.
Except that Nixon left office "before" they started impeachment proceedings, where as Clinton was still at the desk signing pardons for money.
Clinton used absolutely proven methods for his decisions...
Submitted by c5then on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 8:30am.
He took action if there was a poltical positive and the outcome was asured.
If there was no political plus and/or the outcome was questionable, he did nothing.
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
So, ONCE AGAIN
Submitted by misterbee241 on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 9:14am.
the blood of innocent Americans is on the hands of the democrats.
Come on, people, when are you going to WISE UP????
FBI agents White and Vincent are heroes too
Submitted by lrgon on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 11:40am.
FBI agents Robert Wright and John Vincent told ABC NEWS the FBI stopped them from pursuing a criminal investigation of terror suspects.
http://911review.org/Reports/FBI_wright.html