Whores come in all types of packaging, but most recognize them as “ladies” of the night. Not so fast.

Oftentimes, this blog strips bare those who violate trusted positions in U.S. (and Israel too) leadership, whether still on duty or retired. Makes no difference. And it is not as if this is an easy task being that there are too many miscreants, deeply embedded in the pockets of those who wish America & Israel ill. Regardless, whatever their main impetus, let their psychiatrists, or significant others, delve into their dark recesses. This American-Israeli has too many pressing issues to hunt down. Alas, one does have to catch some nappy time…playtime too…delicious, precious babies await attention.

NEVERTHELESS, a laundry list of former Presidents, Congressional reps and government advisers are joined at the hip with their Saudi paymasters; in exchange for lucrative speaking gigs, as well as post retirement libraries too.

But especially since 9/11/01 (and even years before…see evidence at an op-ed posited here – www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/5798#.UKikrYfFXcw), it has become more than self evident; coinage from the Islamic world is nothing less than dealing with the anti-western devil. Literally.

Though infuriating, and surely violating more than one U.S. law (international laws too), the fact of the matter is, a former high official in national security, Richard Clarke, is one such duly ensnared.

Really? Indeed.

This is the same Richard Clarke…en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_A._Clarke…who understands the “ins and outs” of one of the Muslim Brotherhood Mafia’s tentacled groups – Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) – like a pimp knows his whores. That intimate. As such, Clarke knows full well, Al Qaeda is part and parcel of the Muslim Brotherhood Mafia.

So, if this blogger knows the Brotherhood score – http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/08/09/shoring-up-a-decade-of-my-research-regarding-the-muslim-mafia-aka-the-muslim-brotherhood-embedded-video-links/– so should the targeted focus of this commentary. 

For further edification, and as an indictment, the following is embedded in his above linked wiki file:

‘Early WARNINGS ABOUT AL-Qaeda THreat’

“Clarke’s role as a counter-terrorism advisor in the months and years prior to 9/11 would lead to the central role he played in deconstructing what went wrong in the years that followed. Clarke and his communications with the Bush administration regarding bin Laden and associated terrorist plots targeting the United States were mentioned frequently in Condoleezza Rice’s public interview by the 9/11 investigatory commission on April 8, 2004. Of particular significance was a memo^[8] from January 25, 2001, that Clarke had authored and sent to Rice. Along with making an urgent request for a meeting of the National Security Council’s Principals Committee to discuss the growing al-Qaeda threat in the greater Middle East, the memo also suggests strategies for combating al-Qaeda that might be adopted by the new Bush administration.^[9]

In his memoir, “Against All Enemies”, Clarke wrote that when he first briefed Rice on Al-Qaeda, in a January 2001 meeting, “her facial expression gave me the impression she had never heard the term before.” He also stated that Rice made a decision that the position of National Coordinator for Counterterrorism should be downgraded. By demoting the office, the Administration sent a signal through the national security bureaucracy about the salience they assigned to terrorism. No longer would Clarke’s memos go to the President; instead they had to pass though a chain of command of National Security Advisor Rice and her deputy Stephen Hadley, who bounced every one of them back.

Within a week of the inauguration, I wrote to Rice and Hadley asking ‘urgently’ for a Principals, or Cabinet-level, meeting to review the imminent Al-Qaeda threat. Rice told me that the Principals Committee, which had been the first venue for terrorism policy discussions in the Clinton administration, would not address the issue until it had been ‘framed’ by the Deputies.^[10]

At the first Deputies Committee meeting on Terrorism held in April 2001, Clarke strongly suggested that the U.S. put pressure on both the Taliban and Al-Qaeda by arming theNorthern Alliance and other groups in Afghanistan. Simultaneously, that they target bin Laden and his leadership by reinitiating flights of the MQ-1 Predators. To which Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz responded, “Well, I just don’t understand why we are beginning by talking about this one man bin Laden.” Clarke replied that he was talking about bin Laden and his network because it posed “an immediate and serious threat to the United States.” According to Clarke, Wolfowitz turned to him and said, “You give bin Laden too much credit. He could not do all these things like the 1993 attack on New York, not without a state sponsor. Just because FBI and CIA have failed to find the linkages does not mean they don’t exist.”^[10]

Clarke wrote in Against All Enemies that in the summer of 2001, the intelligence community was convinced of an imminent attack by al Qaeda, but could not get the attention of the highest levels of the Bush administration, most famously writing that Director of the Central Intelligence Agency George Tenet was running around with his “hair on fire”.^[10]

At a July 5, 2001, White House gathering of the FAA, the Coast Guard, the FBI, Secret Service and INS, Clarke stated that “something really spectacular is going to happen here, and it’s going to happen soon.” Donald Kerrick, a three-star general who was a deputy National Security Advisor in the late Clinton administration and stayed on into the Bush administration, wrote Hadley a classified two-page memo stating that the NSA needed to “pay attention to Al-Qaida and counterterrorism” and that the U.S. would be “struck again.”

9/11 Commission

On March 24, 2004, Clarke testified at the public 9/11 Commission hearings.^[11] At the outset of his testimony Clarke offered an apology to the families of 9/11 victims and an acknowledgment that the government had failed: “I also welcome the hearings because it is finally a forum where I can apologize to the loved ones of the victims of 9/11…To the loved ones of the victims of 9/11, to them who are here in this room, to those who are watching on television, your government failed you. Those entrusted with protecting you failed you. And I failed you. We tried hard, but that doesn’t matter because we failed. And for that failure, I would ask, once all the facts are out, for your understanding and for your forgiveness.”^[11]

Many of the events Clarke recounted during the hearings were also published in his memoir. Among his highly critical statements regarding the Bush administration, Clarke charged that before and during the 9/11 crisis, many in the Administration were distracted from efforts against Osama bin Laden‘s Al-Qaeda organization by a pre-occupation with Iraq andSaddam Hussein. Clarke had written that on September 12, 2001, President Bush pulled him and a couple of aides aside and “testily” asked him to try to find evidence that Saddam was connected to the terrorist attacks. In response he wrote a report stating there was no evidence of Iraqi involvement and got it signed by all relevant agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the CIA. The paper was quickly returned by a deputy with a note saying “Please update and resubmit.”^[12] After initially denying that such a meeting between the President and Clarke took place, the White House later reversed its denial when others present backed Clarke’s version of the events.^[13][14]

Prior to the 9/11 Commission, portions of Clarke’s August 6 Daily Briefing Memo, entitled “Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US” to President Bush were subsequently redacted by The White House for national security reasons. Despite the title of the memo, in response to aggressive questioning from Richard Ben-Veniste – a Democratic member of the 9/11 Commission – Rice stated that the document “did not warn of attacks inside the United States.”^[15] Clarke then asked on several occasions for early principals meetings on these issues, and was frustrated that no early meeting was scheduled. No principals committee meetings on Al-Qaida were held until September 4, 2001.^[16]

In a late November truthout interview, former Clinton advisor Sidney Blumenthal said, “Clarke urgently tried to draw the attention of the Bush administration to the threat of Al-Qaeda.. the Bush administration is trying to withhold documents from the 9/11 bipartisan commission. I believe one of the things that they do not want to be known is what happened on August 6, 2001. It was on that day that George W. Bush received his last, and one of the few, briefings on terrorism. I believe he told (Clarke) that he didn’t want to be briefed on this again, even though Clarke was panicked about the alarms he was hearing regarding potential attacks. Bush was blithe, indifferent, ultimately irresponsible… The public has a right to know what happened on August 6, what Bush did, what Condi Rice did, what all the rest of them did, and what Richard Clarke’s memos and statements were.”^[17]

Former Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick, the only member of the 9/11 Commission to read the President’s Daily Brief, revealed in the hearings that the documents “would set your hair on fire” and that the intelligence warnings of al-Qaida attacks “plateaued at a spike level for months” before 9/11.^[18]

And one shouldn’t give a rat’s behind about the mud slinging between Bush bashers and his defenders, as to whose doorstep 9/11/01 lands at. This blogger will leave said reckoning squarely in the highly capable hands of her readership. You all decide.

So the question before us is still: how is it possible a HIGH level counter- terror operative, upon his post-Washington assignment (by both parties!), finds himself “in bed” with MPAC; the same umbrella terror organization he rang alarm bells over? Once again, leave it to Walid Shoebat to get to the down and dirty.

‘Report : MPAC OPENLY PARTNERING WITH GROUP THAT HAS FORMER COUNTER-TERRORISM CZAR ON ADVISORY COUNCIL’

“Regular readers might remember the name Haris Tarin. He is the Executive Director for the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) in Washington, D.C. He is one of Huma Abedin’s defenders. Tarin was featured in an article at OnIslam that focuses on MPAC’s work with a group known as the National Security Network (NSN).

Via OnIslam:

A Muslim activist is winning the admiration of Americans for his efforts to tackle issues that stoke tension between Muslims and non-Muslims and energize younger generations to balance between their faith and the western life.

“What I like about working with Haris and MPAC is that they understand both the needs of their community and the way Washington works,” Heather Hurlburt, director of the nonprofit National Security Network, told The Washington Post.

Hulburt’s group cooperated with Haris Tarin, director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) in Washington to hold a series of hearings on extremism in the US.

Aside from the infamous Samuel “Sandy” Berger and Gen. Wesley Clark listed as members of the NSN Advisory Council, the name another individual who was very involved in dealing with the threats of al-Qaeda in both the Clinton and Bush administrations, appears as a member of this Council.

His name is Richard Clarke, former National Coordinator for Security in the Clinton administration.

Shockingly, Clarke said the following in 2003:

The common link here is the extremist Muslim Brotherhood – all of these organizations are descendants of the membership and ideology of the Muslim Brothers.

In 2004 testimony, Richard Clarke apologized to the American people for allowing the 9/11 attacks to happen, saying that their government “failed them”.

Considering the fact that Clarke understands the Muslim Brotherhood hierarchy as well as the extremely close connections that MPAC has with that group, why would he be serving on an Advisory Council that seeks to partner with the likes of MPAC?”

http://shoebat.com/2012/11/14/report-mpac-openly-partnering-with-group-that-has-former-counter-terrorism-czar-on-advisory-council/

By the bye….the MPAC hasn’t changed its Islamist stripes…they still truck with jihadi terror!!

Does consorting with terrorists (without even the cover of six degrees of separation…as an “adviser” who will “partner” with MPAC…huh and duh?)…in the hip pocket…supping with the devil…take on broader/renewed/alarming context?

Rhetorical question.