WHY DID BILL CLINTON IGNORE TERRORISM?

C-SPAN, The New York Times, Judicial Watch, Rush Limbaugh, Richard Miniter, Carl Limbacher, L. King | 8.19.05 | Mia T

[PigRigger]

"WHY DID BILL CLINTON IGNORE TERRORISM?"

Don't think his administration ignored it....believe they were frozen with indecision/fear on how to deal with it....

Basically, the Clinton Administration did not like making hard decisions....they just wanted to baby-sit the country...IMHO

[OldEagle]

That is really great.
We probably agree that bc never did anything that didn't help him. Was he paid to ignore Bin Laden or was he leaving it as a GWB issue so HRC could get elected? Or was it something else altogether?

[malia]

"Bill Clinton claimed to be obsessed with UBL.--"

Below is what Bill Cohen says about that.......

Senate Coverage -- (September'06)
Thomas ^ | 9/5/06

Posted on 09/05/2006 9:49:31 AM PDT by Mo1

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1695809/posts?page=385#385

I had to turn off Levin or I would have broken my TV and computer..

BUT, I have a SCOOP...I turned off Levin and turned on the Bill O'Reilly radio talk show.

His guest was William Cohen, Clinton's Sec. of Def....and they were discussing the war on terror, blah blah.

Bill asked him about the various times the Clinton had the opportunity to catch or kill OBL...and Cohen said this, "well, you have to understand that at the time that OBL was blowing up embassies, WE WERE TOO DISTRACTED BY SADDAM HUSSEIN..and what he was doing in Iraq, with possible WMD'S"!!!


IOW..like Bill said, SADDAM WAS a part of the war on TERROR even in 1990s ..Cohen said in 1998, they were focusing totally on Saddam and the weapons inspectors...

There is NO WAY a dem can say that the war in Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 in that way...because if the USA hadn't been so concerned about SADDAM, there would have been more attention paid to OBL...and he MIGHT have been caught.



385 posted on 09/08/2006 9:46:11 AM PDT by Txsleuth

[malia]

typo in #243 meant to say Mia

[Mia T]

interesting.
turning the clintonistas' spin on its 'clueless' head bump.

[Mia T]

IMO it was the intersection of cowardice, the polls and the Nobel Peace Prize.

[Mia T]

fyi

[Mia T]

the primary reason... Hillary is defeated

'hillary is defeated in the primary' would be my preference. ;)

[OldEagle]

Thank you for your reply. You are probably correct.

[Gail Wynand]

Prior to 9/11 any idiot presumably could have gone to a large public place, a subway, a mall, a convention center, and with some sort of homemade device, killed a few thousand people. Indeed, an idiot, Mr. McVay appears to have done close to that in Oklahoma in 1998 (although there are inadequately investigated indications a middle eastern involvment may have existed). One of the things that makes 9/11 significant is the manner in which the assault was undertaken and the damage done to the non-human targets. The symbolism of America's engineering and financial greatness turned to wreakage in minutes by the perverse science fiction like simultaneous takeover of multiple passenger aircraft, was an assault not only on Americans but also on the American psyche.

It is reported that airline company employees were uncomfortable with middle easterners, paying cash for one way tickets and carrying no baggage on the morning of 9/11. In a normal world, in a Norman Rockwell or Samuel Clemons America that would have been enough to prevent the full catastrophe. Even Barney Fife would have held the suspicious characters for questioning long enough to defeat the plot. But by 2001 America was already living in a world created by the likes of Jamie Gorelick and Hillary Clinton. Quintissential 1960's leftists that the reformed David Horowitz for one has been warning us about for years.

Through their persistent strategy of a "thousand cuts" including by institutionalized "political correctness" backed by lawsuit awards for "discrimination" the 60's leftists had paralized the American spirit more successfully than the most lethal snake toxins. From the Pilot School owner who called the FBI, from the investigators who tried to warn the FBI and Justice Departments, down to the last minute of the last day, as helpless airline employees sensing something was wrong (not to mention the actor who reported strange passenger behavior days before during their dry run)were compelled to stand by and do nothing because of a thousand Gorelick walls these same leftists, in a confused and delusional faith, combined with disdain for humanity, not unlike that of the terrorists themselves, had finally constructed a free passageway for wide scale pathological antisocial acts to go unrestrained resulting in a scale of massive disaster most Americans could never envision being possible.

We should not forget where these policies began. They began when the United Nations was formed and the implicit principal that US policy should be influenced by "world opinion". They began when the US courts decided that police power must be restrained by ambiguous and senseless judicial conceptions of reasonableness. They began when courts refused to deal with criminals who could find procedural errors in police or prosecutorial methods. They began when organized lawlessness and mayhem in American cities were not responded to by public authority and were excused by American intellectuals. They began when student lawlessness was similiarly unopposed and allowed to redefine the requirements of scholarship. They exploded when the left gained the critical mass to enable political defeat in Vietnam and stage a political coup (driving from power a president elected by a massive majority) over trivialities magnified by political power vested in a congressional opposition. (Ms. Clinton of course was an eager and direct participant in the charade).

In a direct line from the Boland Amendment and the Church committee, clear products of the ugly smear of an historically great presidency by those who were envious of his achievements, the Gorelick wall and the thousand impositions on the normal life of Americans, distorting judgment and restraining rational self preservation driven actions, the morning of 9/11 (including the disarming of airline pilots which had been accomplished counter to the accepted practice of post WWII flyers who entered the profession out of combat) presented no obstacles to the sick minded terrorists, until the passengers on flight 93 learned enough to grasp what horror was unfolding around them.

The point is simply that on September 11, 2001, the 1960's leftist politicians, intellectuals, professors, lawyers, judges, and newspeople had succeeded in remaking America into their vision of utopia, sufficient at least to render America defenseless, not because the terrorists were smart, but because the leftists made it easy for them through institutionalized nitpicking over perverse abstractions and demented notions of equality including a deliberately skewed and seriously flawed immigration policies.

The Clintons, poster children of the Left, acceded to power in 1992 through the complicity of a corrupt media and through the historical anomoly of Ross Perot's candidacy. The were never elected by majority of Americans. History will ultimately conclude that in the critical post cold war period (New World Order) this fluke of political fortune cast Americas future into the hands of an incompetent, self absorbed, mentally disturbed, perversely wicked, corrupt (I learned how to trade cattle futures by reading the wall street journal)couple. It is entirely appropriate that these two disdain Marriage. For their partnership is surely not a marriage in any normal sense. Their sadistic bond inexorably linked in their psyches with their views of governance (Gorelick Wall) and their instinctive willingness to employ flagrant vindictiveness to suppress or punish their "enemies", threatens again to distort normal political processes by interferring with a 40 MM dollar production set to be broadcast by one of their long time allies. Clearly, truth is a massive embarrassment to the Clintons and their ongoing ambitions.

One hopes only, that after all we have been through, and with this additional specticle of committed leftists threatening with every lever of power they can command or bluff, to chill free political expression (the lefts sacred McCarthysm) that a majority of Americans will wake up from the stupor of Clinton toxic venoms and recapture the essentially American virtues of self defense, self preservation, and disdain for those who preach inaction in the face of evil, or consensus when every American breath can feel and smell the need for Victory.

President Bushes only significant error in fighting the war against the forces that killed Americans and toppled our national symbols on 9/11 has been his timerity in following his instincts and his tolerance for delays and mitigation of efforts and goals in deference to his political opponents and half hearted allies. Just as the jihadists knew there was more to be done than merely kill Americans, ie they knew they had to target symbols of our greatness to damage America, so too America, must bring down symbols of the power of the jihadists with massive and spectacular defeats of the sources of their power. By way of example I am quite in favor of every mosque and congregation of every wahabist or similiar leaning Imam being obliterated in a simultaneous attack during services throughout any area, territory or country that has evoked militant hostility to the U.S. or its citizens, unless such Imams have specifically and publically condemed terrorist violence. Alternatively, I think the time has come to consider a simultaneous tactical nuclear strike on every suspected Iraninan nuclear site along with a similar attack on their parliment when in session.

The world may well feign hatred if the US takes these kinds of actions. On the other hand Europe will be relieved and the price of oil will tumble. If my suggested methods are too crude, then I invite our government to polish and refine any plan that results in a devastating blow to the jihadists. Nothing wrong with bringing democracy to Iraq and the broader middle east for example, however, it is a mistake to leave the end in doubt, even for a minute.

The American people will never, by a majority, elect a Clinton who opposed Bush, if Bush will bring us Victory. If he cant bring Victory, anyone eventually will be able to be his successor.

[Mia T]

Must-read. Brilliantly incisive.

Two points:

1-Wiping out the enemy isn't optional... and the longer we wait, the greater the risk of defeat, the greater the 'collateral damage.'

2-This is a long war. I think Americans understand it won't be finished by 2008. Bush need not win before the next presidential election. But he does need to fight to win. Limited war makes no sense in asymmetric warfare. Limited war makes no sense when one of the actors is not constrained by MAD.

[Fiddlstix]

Thanks for the Ping

[Mia T]

thanx. :)

Ping again to post 250

[FlyVet]

Unfortunately, Mia, the 'Merican Pipples, traditionally slow to anger, will not Get This, in sufficient numbers, until we take some very severe Hard Hits, that I fear will make 9/11 look like a backyard slap fight. Then,
"Worship the god of Politial Correctness" will turn into "Why Aren't You Pounding Their Guts Out, and Why Have You Waited This Long?!?"

[Wolverine]

bump

[M Kehoe]

Good evening. Such a wonderful night in my little piece of paradise.

Methinks clinton stood up hard, and firm regarding terrorism when Monica Lewinsky was in the room (or under his desk).

5.56mm

[4woodenboats]

bookmark for later reading

[E.G.C.]

BTTT

[Casio]

Much as dislike democrats (in reality: socialists), I can't particularly blame Clinton for THIS issue. Until 9/11/2001, despite any warnings, despite any dangers, it was difficult to put up a proper "pre-defense". Furthermore, even if bin Laden was captured, killed, otherwise properly treated, I seriously doubt that the current "muslim revival" process would have stopped. The problem, in my opinon, is much greater than any single person's activity. My favorite line regarding this:"if Hitler was run over by a car at age 6 (or a horse, or died of an infectious disease), WW II may have been slightly different, but only slightly."

Same with the muslims. We are witnessing something much bigger than a single person. It is a muslim "revival", sort of, similar to what happened with Christianity in the middle ages. More and more muslims believe that Allah gave them world, and they have the right to take what is "theirs", based on their religion. Bin Laden merely accelerated this process, but if he died at age 6, someone else would be there now, fulfilling a similar role, since he didn't invent the problem. It is not like the muslims (arabs) were America-loving people with all the good intentions until bin Laden appeared on the scene.

We have to take some much firmer steps, than simply capture bin Laden, to counter-act this muslim "revival". Although even I symbolize the muslim problem with bin Laden (:-), see picture below I made a while back.



Gabor

[Ready4Freddy]

Hell, why did Reagan ignore terrorism?

WHY DID BILL CLINTON IGNORE TERRORISM?