The Bill's Coming Due - Clinton's Legacy - He Didn't Do Enough to Stop Terrorists

Wall Street Journal ^ | 10/4/01 | Rush Limbaugh

[wcdukenfield]

Since the Sept. 11 massacre, there have been numerous press reports about Bill Clinton's attendance at funerals, visits to the rescue site, and his other activities as a former president. What the media have largely overlooked is the extent to which Mr. Clinton can be held culpable for not doing enough when he was commander in chief to combat the terrorists who wound up attacking the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

If we're serious about avoiding past mistakes and improving national security, we can't duck some serious questions about Mr. Clinton's presidency.

Osama bin Laden already had the blood of Americans on his hands before Sept. 11. He was reportedly behind the World Trade Center bombing that killed six; the killing of 19 soldiers at the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia; the bombings of the embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, which killed 226 people, including 12 Americans; and the attack on the USS Cole at Aden, Yemen, killing 17 seamen.

Mr. Clinton and his former national security adviser, Sandy Berger, said after Sept. 11 that they had come within an hour of killing bin Laden when they launched cruise missiles against his camps in 1998. (Mr. Clinton also ordered the destruction of a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan.) Many saw this attack as a diversion from domestic embarrassments, because it took place only three days after his grand jury testimony in the Paula Jones case.

On Sept. 24, National Review Online published a report by Byron York that added considerable weight to this last charge.Mr. York spoke recently to retired Gen. Anthony Zinni, who had been U.S. commander in the region. Although he supported the cruise missile attack, the general revealed it was a "million-to-one-shot." "There was a possibility [bin Laden] could have been there. . . . My intelligence people did not put a lot of faith in that."

His recollection is a far cry from the version of Messrs. Clinton and Berger. Which is accurate?

On Sept. 13, the Associated Press disclosed that "in the waning days of the Clinton presidency, senior officials received specific intelligence about the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden and weighed a military plan to strike the suspected terrorist mastermind's location. The administration opted against an attack." The possible attack was discussed at a meeting last December, which was prompted by "eyes-only intelligence" about bin Laden's location.

A military strike option was presented at the meeting. There was debate about whether the intelligence was reliable. In the end, the president decided against it.

The day after AP's story, Hillary Clinton gave a different explanation of events to CNN. She said that in the last days of her husband's administration, he planned to kill bin Laden, but that his location couldn't be pinpointed: "It was human assets, that is, people on the ground, who provided the information. My memory is that those assets proved unreliable and were not able to form the basis of the plan that we were considering launching."

Exactly what "eyes-on intelligence" was provided to Mr. Clinton in December? And just how reliable did the information have to be to merit a military strike? When Mr. Clinton ordered an attack on bin Laden's camps in August 1998, Gen. Zinni said that it was a "million-to-one shot."

A partial answer can be found in a Sept. 27 report by Jane's Intelligence Digest, whose sources "suggested that previous plans to capture or kill [bin Laden], which were supported by Moscow, had been shelved by the previous U.S. administration on the grounds that they might end in humiliating failure and loss of U.S. service personnel."

As a Jane's source put it: "Before the latest catastrophe there was a distinct lack of political will to resolve the bin Laden problem and this had a negative impact on wider intelligence operations."Jane's claimed that the fundamental failure to deal with al Qaeda was due "to a political reluctance to take decisive action during the Clinton era, mainly because of a fear that it might derail the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. This was "combined with a general complacency in Washington towards warnings that the U.S. itself (as opposed to U.S. facilities and personnel abroad) might be targeted."

President Bush is now leading a world-wide war against terrorism, focused presently on bin Laden, al Qaeda, and their Taliban sponsors. It has been widely noted that the U.S. is handicapped in this war by a lack of good "Humint"--human intelligence--about the terrorists. Here again the Clinton administration is culpable.

In 1995 CIA Director John Deutsch imposed complex guidelines that made it more difficult to recruit informants who had committed human-rights violations. Therefore, while the Justice Department has been able to use former mobsters to get mobsters (e.g. Sammy "the Bull" Gravano, who killed 19, was the government's key witness against John Gotti), the CIA has been discouraged from recruiting former terrorists to get terrorists. This has made infiltrating groups like al Qaeda virtually impossible.

We have no choice but to address the policies and decisions, made at the very highest level of our government, which helped bring us to this point. To do otherwise is to be irresponsible and unprepared in the face of a ruthless enemy, whose objective is to kill many more Americans.

Mr. Limbaugh is a nationally syndicated radio talk show host.

[nevergore]

Has everyone forgotten how Bill and Hillary rewarded terrorists by releasing the Puerto Rican Terrorists from Federal Prison....

Why isn't the press now going after Hillary for her soft approach.....How about her kissing up to Hamas???

NeverGore

[Cicero]

We should be thankful for the Wall Street Journal, which is the ONLY media source with national distribution that ever publishes any genuine criticism of clinton. The New York Post also has a good record, but it is read mainly by New Yorkers and by people who visit internet sites like FreeRepublic.

Although there's nothing new in this story, it will probably be the first time a lot of people have seen it.

[A Vast RightWing Conspirator]

This is great. The great Rushboe knows 'Humint'. As soon as he gets comfortable with 'Hazmat' he can begin calling himself an expert (in humint and hazmat) and start touring the cable talk shows.

[11th Earl of Mar]

Now that is from the Rush Limbaugh I started listening to years ago. [I don't know who that imposter is who lately has been taking his place behind the EIB microphone... You know the guy. The one who talks about golf, cigars and repeats himself for 45 minutes without giving us any information we don't already know.]

[Galtoid]

I love Hillary's quote to CNN. Why should we trust her damn memory? If the New York Republicans can't defeat her in five years, I will be furious. All they need to do is show footage of her kissing Sula, and follow it up with the rollingeyes spectacle during GWB's speech to both houses. Couple her behavior with 4000+ dead New Yorkers, and she just might find herself having to move her big ass out of that mansion we helped buy in D.C.

[ChemistCat]

To be scrupulously fair, responding to the terrorist threat wasn't high on the Republican agenda pre-9/11. We were smug and complacent, and willing, apparently, to let our leaders pass over the first WTC bombing, the Cole, our embassies in Africa, et cetera et cetera. Isn't it obvious now that things were building up? But if you look back at the campaigning, neither Gore nor W spent a lot of time talking about this, now Bush's number one issue.

[chatham]

Bill and Hillary are a couple of pathological psychopaths who never should have been put in office. Remember,Bill's first love is his penis and its needs,and secondly he is a coward and a draftdodger.. Beyond that he allowed the sale or theft of Missle technology to enemies of the U.S.A. After that, is his LEGACY of weakening the U.S.A. and through his FECKLESS terms in office, presented the U.S.A. as a Nation of self serving Bullies. He is a disgusting example of a man.. We are reaping the Whirlwind of his actions.. Don't ever forget the people who supported him are still in office in the DemocRAT party.. Gephardt,Bonior, Conyers,Daschle, and the everpresent Jesse Jackson..

[hauerf]

I, on the other hand, think he made good points in this piece.

[Quicksilver]

Bill Clinton had eight years to do something--but was totally ineffective. Al Gore, while VP, was in charge of improving security for the airlines--but did nothing, or at most, not enough. Congress was asleep at the switch, too, perhaps because of Bubba's un-presidential behavior.

[Yankee]

"There comes a time in the affairs of men when one must grab the bull by the tail and face the situation." --William Claude Dukenfield

It seems to me, that the estimable Mr. Limbaugh has done just that.

[marsis]

Remember,Bill's first love is his penis and its needs.

Seems to be the first love of a great many people here also, not to mention the media and Congress. While you were all so enamored of his member, he was bombing Laden's training camps in Afghanistan and Sudan with the blessing of most conservative Congressmen, your only thoughts "he's doing this to take the heat off the Monica affair". Who commisioned the Hart-Rudman report? Where were you? Oh yeah, focused on Clinton's penis. Who gave a speach about terrorism before the UN on international terrorism? Who created Hussein and Bin Laden? Who gave them billions of dollars in weapons? What family has direct ties with the Bin Laden family? Who ignored the Hart-Rudman report focussing on a missile defense shield ie, welfare for the insanely wealthy. There is plenty of blame top go around from Reagan through The current resident of the Whitehouse. Is Clinton my idea of a great President, nope, far from it, but at least I can see where much of the blame lies, with Washington and with all of us.

and secondly he is a coward and a draftdodger

we still talking about Clinton here?

Flame away, who cares. To those with objective reasoning, sorry, I respect your input and knowledge on these subjects, you people are the reason I visit this site daily. To the ditto heads, this was for you.

[okiedust]

Yeah, its spot on. Old Bill was going to take care of things just as soon as he got the intern out from under his desk and finished his golf game. Clinton's trying to rewrite history before it even unfolds. Too bad, he's going to have to play this one where it lays. History doesn't give mulligans. (bet Rush would like that metaphor! LOL)

regards

[rogers21774]

While I'm certainly no fan of the Clintons I don't think it's fair or right to point the finger of blame at them for terrorism.

Could Clinton have done more as President to fight terrorism? Probably. Is Clinton a low life scumbag? Definately. Is he responsible for terrorism? No!

There are a lot of people in America who've dropped the ball on fighting terrorists over the past several decades, including Congress, former Presidents, the CIA... the list goes on. Are any of them responsible for what happend on 9/11? Absolutely not.

It may be fun and satifying to blame Clinton for all of our problems, but let's not forget who the enemy is.

[The Electrician]

Who ignored the Hart-Rudman report focussing on a missile defense shield ie, welfare for the insanely wealthy.

No doubt the first time that a rogue state or military commander lobs a missile in our direction, your response will be "oops, never mind". Most everything that appears crystal clear in hindsight was much less clear as the events were unfolding in real time.

[mc5cents]

Now that is from the Rush Limbaugh I started listening to years ago. [I don't know who that imposter is who lately has been taking his place behind the EIB microphone... You know the guy. The one who talks about golf, cigars and repeats himself for 45 minutes without giving us any information we don't already know.]

Yea and the guy calling himself Rush these days dosn't even sound much like the real Rush either. Sounds more like Thurston Howell III from Gilligan's Island. Deep voice affectation.

[Republic]

I am glad that Rush was moved enough , by the astoundingly obvious avoidance of the mainstream media, to write this editorial. So glad. Rush knows and so do many of us, that it is past time to take a hard and HONEST look at that games and stupidity and cowardice of the clinton administration's dealings with terrorists who regularly crumpled American citizens.

Too bad Rush did not MENTION how the clinton administration did NOT BACK the nuclear inspectors who were brave enough to go to Iraq (as part of the end of the war agreement) and FINALLY simply allowed the inspections to STOP (we took our orders from Saddam at the time, with the UN acting like wet noodles, and our own President, billy the boinker, hiding somewhere-avoiding taking a demanding stance that Saddam allow continued inspections. Saddam COWARED Clinton.

Of course the terrorists saw and see Americans as weak, the clintons and their phil donohue agenda tore our spirit up and spit it out. Folks like the clintons will NEVER understand that:

FREEDOM DOES NOT COME FREELY.

Clinton did not start terrorism, of course, but he ENABLED IT just like his sick wife enabled him-year after year.

[marsis]

Most everything that appears crystal clear in hindsight was much less clear as the events were unfolding in real time.

Yes my point exactly. We can play blame games from now to eternity, most of the blame lies in Washington and goes by no particular party affiliation. My point on the missile defense: you may be right, but many have been saying for years we are exposed because of our porous borders. A missile launch site is expensive and very easy to find and is very vulnerable. Once a missile is launched, retaliation would be immediate and devastating. Far easier to ship a nuke to any port and detonate. Chemical and biological weapons also would come from within. I long for the good old days when the USSR was our enemy, we all knew the consequences and no one wanted to die. That has changed for the worse don't you think?

[Mia T]

Bill Clinton Talks on Terrorism

By Jennifer Loven
Associated Press Writer
Tuesday, Oct. 9, 2001; 10:51 p.m. EDT

WASHINGTON -- Former President Clinton on Tuesday cited at least 15 terrorist attacks thwarted during his administration and said the keys to preventing others are supporting President Bush's current efforts and doing "more to reduce the pool of potential terrorists."

"Though neither I nor anyone can tell you there will not be another terrorist attack on U.S. soil, it will be all right," Clinton told a packed Kennedy Center concert hall. "They still can't win unless we give them permission. We are not about to give them permission."...

© Copyright 2001 The Associated Press

COMPLETE ARTICLE

compulsive clinton CYA-ing CONTINUES

Because the frequency and intensity of compulsive CYA maneuvers by clinton and his/her gang are increasing in direct proportion to the increasing frequency and intensity of editorial comment fingering clinton for 9-11, I suspect compulsive clinton CYA-ing will soon reach critical mass.

At that historic, civilization-sparing moment, Sandy Berger (along with his smarmy revisionism) will implode by virtue of one-too-many pressure-deflating "uhs"...taking the two inept, corrupt, cowardly, self-serving Boss-Dweeb dullards down with him.

As Martha Stewart might say, this is a good thing...surprisingly, for the atavistic clintons as well as for advanced civilization.

• clinton CYA-ing clearly does precious little to cover the collective clinton posterior -- (or anterior, for that matter -- if we contemplate the profound private clinton -- er -- defects).
• clearly, clinton CYA-ing is compromising Bush's brilliant anti-terror campaign. (Perhaps compromising Bush is precisely what clinton has in mind, eh?...You might recall that clinton has a history of trashing other presidents in an effort to hoist his own sorry, putrified heft to marginally acceptable level.)

Ironically, this latest clintonoid tactic has only served to congeal the already-established clinton legacy of egomania, depravity and failure. You might say that the clintons have served up their legacy poached, cold and coated with assss...pic.

 

[backhoe]

Index-