Lando 
Posted on 08/17/2005 12:32:44 PM PDT by Lando Lincoln
What remains of the former Clinton administration's facade regarding its malfeasance in dealing with the terrorist threat posed by bin-Laden is crumbling faster than one can parse a Bill Clinton denial.
Recent revelations by Curt Weldon [R, Pennsylvania] that military intelligence had identified parts of a New York based terror cell led by 911 mastermind Mohammed Atta - but were blocked from disclosing the information to the FBI by WH lawyers and Justice Dept. second in command Jamie Gorelick's "wall" - were preceded by allegations [substantiated in a June 16, 2004 article for PipeLineNews The Clinton Administration And The Extradition Of bin-Laden - The True Story by former registered agent for Sudan and key player in the affair, Janet McElligott] that the Clinton team refused on three separate occasions the Sudanese government's offer to extradite bin-Laden to the United States.
Now a July 18, 1996 declassified State Department document shows that the Clinton administration was warned that allowing bin-Laden to "set up shop" in Afghanistan would have grave consequences:
“His prolonged stay in Afghanistan - where hundreds of “Arab mujahadin" receive terrorist training and key extremist leaders often congregate – could prove more dangerous to US interest in the long run than his three year liaison with Khartoum. - Declassified State Dept. Report Terrorism/Usamma Bin Laden
Of note is the apparent quickening of revelations regarding the defects in Clinton’s almost non-existent policy on Islamic terror [former Clinton officials are steadfastly refusing to comment on the new developments, not a good sign for “the man from Hope’s" tattered legacy] with principles in Abel/Danger now coming forward we must conclude that this story is now just starting to assume critical mass.
Lando
Guilty, your honor. What a schmuck Clinton is.
Clinton and his Crime Syndicate will claim to have recieved "millions of bits of data on the terror problem but we couldn't act on all of them." /sarc
Been waiting since February 1993 for the Clintons - and the MSM - to get their comeuppance on this.
Since 1993? Why, sumtin speshal happen bak den? sarcasm/off....
bookmark.
This story is getting more and more interesting all the time. Hannity is going to do an interview with one of the principals.
Blam (thank Lando).
Still, millions of idiots would gladly vote for him again.
Why did the New York Times rat out their friend? Are they on the cusp of being linked at the hip with Mr.Clinton and friends and so they are in the process of throwing him to the wolves and create the facade of respectable journalism? These pricks have been sitting on much that they have not told us in my humble opinion.
WOW!! Good to see that Hillary's got her hands on the Puppetmaster's strings to keep her innocence
[Siberian-mud sarcasm/off]
Click the picture...
The 'Pentagon did it' defence. BAD Building!
If the buck stops at Bush because some guards at Abu Graib stuck panties on prisoner's heads, then the same logic applies to Clinton when DoD lawyers under his administration refuse to listen to information showing a clear national security risk.
What are we concerned with here? Protecting OUR politicians or protecting this nation?
We're all concerned about protecting the nation. What are you concerned about?
Might I point out this 911 Commission was nothing but a facade which we saw the Democrats once again use it to try to place the blame squarely on President Bush's shoulders. Give us all a break and grow up.
Loosen the aluminum foil. The only a$$ the 9/11/01 Commission remotely covered was Clinton's. The report was complimentary to neither administration.
"What are we concerned with here? Protecting OUR politicians or protecting this nation?"
Clarification is needed to make this statement other than a non sequitur
Guess who was General Counsel at the DOD from May '93 to April '94? Hint, her name begins with a "G" and she was a 9-11 Commission member: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1465296/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.