Replies

The Clinton anti-terror policy was predicated on the assumption that America had more to fear from home-grown, "right-wing" terrorists than from foreign terrorists. Some researchers have charged that, during the Clinton administration, terrorist attacks by Middle Eastern groups were covered up and falsely characterized as accidental (eg. the downing of TWA Flight 800), while the Oklahoma City bombing was used as a showcase to justify the Clinton policy of targeting "rightwing" terrorism almost exclusively.

As a former lefty who sat around with other lefties dreaming of the day we could place "one of our own" in the White House, I have always seen the Clinton presidency as the culmination of a conspiracy to bring that dream to fruition. We wanted to SOCIALIZE the economic system and DISMANTLE the "military-industrial complex", as we called it then, and I don't believe HILLARY ever lost that dream.

The ACTIONS of the Clinton presidency can be seen much more clearly if viewed through that prism.

For me, Jayna Davis' contribution to the history not only gives us a middle eastern connection to OKC, but more importantly an IRAQI one. Laurie Mylroie's work provides us a specific IRAQI connection to the '93 WTC bombing.

I do not find it far-fetched that Bill and Hillary Clinton would have allied themselves in a clandestine manner with the one person in the world who had not only the motive to assist in this endeavor but who also could benefit greatly from the weakening of America's military might.

The Clinton administration's actions while in office vis-a-vis Iraq, all seemed to benefit SADDAM. OKC saved the Clinton presidency, am I too far out there to see a quid-pro-quo between OKC and subsequent actions on Iraq which greatly benefited Saddam?