Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Clinton, bin Laden, Wag The Dog and Fox News
self | 9/24/2006 | Technomage

Posted on 09/24/2006 9:03:18 AM PDT by technomage

After reading parts of the FoxNews Sunday transcript of the interview between Wallace and Clinton, something stuck out to me.

Clinton keeps claiming that 'right wing conservatives' were constantly complaining that he was too obsessed with bin Laden. I have mentioned previous that I have no memories of that happening. What I do remember is conservatives in general complaining about his obsession with Monica.

But, getting back to that claim that conservatives were complaining that Clinton was too obsessed with bin Laden.

After watching the rant, oops, interview, Clinton slipped up. He showed his cards by uttering three little words: wag the dog.

It was like a light bulb going off in my head.

Now it made sense. Clinton is once again 'mixing' historical events to conform to what he wants the world to remember.

Conservatives did use the wag the dog reference numerous times, not in reference to bin Laden, but in reference to Clinton's massive bombardment of Serbia, which had absolutely nothing to do with bin Laden.

Clinton, in the interview basically says, and I paraphrase:

conservatives were complaining that I was obsessed with bin Laden, you know the wag the dog references.

THAT is the statement that shows that either Clinton is having memory problems and mixing up events, or is lying.

All the wag the dog references in the 90's had nothing to do with bin Laden, but had everything to do with Serbia and Milosevic, as far as my meager memory serves. I may be wrong, and I may be unaware of statements to the contrary but as far as I can remember, all those references were regarding Milosevic and Serbia.

Claiming that 'right wing conservatives' were complaining that Clinton was obsessed with bin Laden is an outright lie. But to try and prove it by using the wag the dog reference was a stupid move on his part and illuminated his lack of facts to back it up. And in my view, invalidated the rest of the rant, er interview.


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: httptinyurlcomqdxmq; lie; lies; orwellian; republicannonsense
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-169 next last
To: SoldierDad; Skip Ripley

At first glace I was thinking, no way could someone with Borderline Personality Disorder get so high into leadership positions! But the truth is, everything she is was "gotten" for her from the cabal. She doesn't have an original idea in her head, nor could she ever win a fair election (with an opponent). And we may never yet have seen BPD combined with megalomania before. It may be a unique combination.

But the two of them combined are like glue, I agree. They need each other to keep on their crooked paths to power.


101 posted on 09/24/2006 10:47:56 AM PDT by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

What I remember is that looooooooooonnnnngggggg walk of Hill and Billery with Buddy, er, sorry, Chelsea in between them to the Marine helicopter leaving for Martha's Vineyard after he was on tv saying that he'd "misled" the American people and even his wife. ("Lied" isn't part of his vocabulary when it applies to him, apparently.) Then all of a sudden, he's back at the White House bombing, I think, the aspirin factory. I remember thinking, dang!! He'll do anything to get away from Hillary at this point. At any rate, I think he's pooped in his hat with this Chris Wallace interview. He distorted facts once again as an excuse to make himself look better. He's only perpetuated his lack of backbone in the whole matter and brought it once again into the public eye. It's all over the news today and FOX is supposed to running the entire interview again tonight.


102 posted on 09/24/2006 10:50:22 AM PDT by fishergirl (Choose your vices carefully, then be loyal to them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle

Can't argue anything you said.


103 posted on 09/24/2006 10:51:21 AM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud Father of an American Soldier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: TexKat
Cohen served as a Republican U.S. senator from Maine before Clinton appointed him to the defense post

Cohen - a Trilateralist - was a rat/socialist zipped up in a faux-republican suit. He was despised by the rank and file here in Maine -

104 posted on 09/24/2006 10:52:24 AM PDT by maine-iac7 ("...but you can't fool all of the people all of the time." Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: technomage
http://www.citizensoldier.org/clintonbombed.html

AN ANALYSIS

Why Clinton Bombed the Serbs - A National Disgrace Few American Even Know Nor Care About

by Stella L. Jatras

1. To appease the Islamic world for our daily bombing of Iraq. President Clinton wanted to prove to the Muslim world that we really cared and that we were willing to destroy a Christian people to prove it.

2. The Saudis wanted the first Islamic country in the belly of Europe, and Clinton wanted cheap oil and Saudi money. The Saudis had signed a letter of intent to buy $6 billion worth of Boeing aircraft. The day after we bombed the Serbs in 1995 based on the self-inflicted Markale market place massacre by Bosnian Muslim forces, the Saudis signed on the dotted line. A coincidence? I don't think so. This is what Yossef Bodansky, author of "Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America," had to say in his 1995 book, "Offensive in the Balkans:"

- "Phase Three started with the self-inflicted major terrorist provocation. On Friday 5, 1994, a major explosion rocked the Markale -- Sarajevo's main market place -- causing heavy casualties. What was immediately described as the ubiquitous "Serb mortar shell" was actually a special charge designed and built with help from HizbAllah experts and then most likely dropped from a nearby rooftop onto the crowd of shoppers. Video cameras at the ready recorded this expertly-staged spectacle of gore, while dozens of corpses of Bosnian Muslim troops killed in action (exchanged the day before in a 'body swap' with the Serbs) were paraded in front of cameras to raise the casualty count.

- "This callous self-killing was designed to shock the West especially sentimental and gullible Washington, in order to raise the level of Western sympathy to the Bosnian Muslims and further demonize the Serbs so that Western governments would be more supportive of Sarajevo's forthcoming aggressive moves, and perhaps even finally intervene military."

There were other reports from European newspapers such as The [London] Sunday Times," with headlines that read, "Serbs 'not guilty' of massacre, Experts warned US that mortar was Bosnian" (1 Oct. 1995), and "US Framed Serbs for Market Bombing," from the Stoneyhill Center, a British think tank (Oct 1995). No such headlines appeared in US national newspapers.

3. Clinton needed a new mission for NATO. The Soviet Union had collapsed and if you recall, the NATO Treaty was a collective security agreement between member nations that if one NATO nation were attacked by the Soviet Union (CCCP), other NATO members would go to its defense. In violation of International law, the NATO Treaty, the UN Charter and without the approval of Congress, Clinton and his administration, along with Serb-hating Madeline Albright, Wesley Clark, Richard Holbrooke and the rest of the Clinton gang, bombed tiny Yugoslavia that did not attack us or any NATO nation, was never a threat to us, nor did it have weapons of mass destruction.

One graphic example of Madeleine Albright's animosity towards the Serbs was the time she was entering the United Nations building as US ambassador and a Serb called out and asked why she was doing these terrible things to the Serbs. She answered, "Because they deserve it!" A more humorous account regarding Ms. Albright is the story of how the war in the Balkans really began. During a meeting of Madeleine Albright with the all-male NATO ministers, she asked the question, "Well gentleman, do we make love or do we make war?" Of course, the answer was unanimously for war.

4. Clinton couldn't let this pip-squeak of a nation defy The New World Order.

5. Our wag-the-dog president had to have a diversion from his affair in the Oval Office with a woman young enough to be his daughter.

6. Clinton also needed a war to prove he was a wartime president in the mold of FDR in order to put to rest his draft-dodging days and his contempt for the US military. The propaganda against the Serbian people has not been equalled since Hitler's Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, said, "If you tell a big enough lie and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it." In civil wars all sides do terrible things, but in this war all blame fell on the Serbs. President Clinton was (and continues to be) the biggest con artist this nation has ever seen and it is unfortunate that the American people believed every word uttered by him regarding the events in the Balkans even though over 75% of the American people believed him to be a liar. The fate of the Serbs from Bosnia to Kosovo was sealed.

It is a sad reflection on all Americans what William Jefferson Clinton did to the Serbian people in our name. Sadder still is the realization that if he were able to run for president again he might very well be elected.

105 posted on 09/24/2006 10:53:05 AM PDT by paltz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maica
As I remember, Clinton supporters have asserted that a "potential" wag-the-dog claim could have been made. They said if Clinton responds miliarily, it will be said he's just trying to cover up Monica, or impeachment, or whichever it was at the time. Memory and dates are clouded.

None-the-less, his obsession for OBL is blatant BS, based on his actions, imho, and apparently in the opinion of several others that served in or near his administration at the time.

106 posted on 09/24/2006 11:00:51 AM PDT by chiller (every time we call MSM "mainstream" we confirm their status. "Drive-by" is working nicely.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: technomage

I wondered the same thing regarding his comments about conservatives and Bin Laden. I think you are right, he is mixing historical eents to shape his legacy. But why didn't Wallace call him on it?


107 posted on 09/24/2006 11:02:23 AM PDT by FLCowboy, (Ironically, Gore notes that he has run for president twice and says: "I know what it takes to win.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timeout
Yes, the Senate's "acquittal" of Clinton was on Feb. 12, 1999, before the bombing of Serbia began. There were threats to bomb Serbia in 1998 but I don't think any were actually carried out.

From The World Almanac 1999, page 65 (Chronology, October 1998, International):

...The United States, Oct. 8, informed Milosevic that his "cosmetic gestures" would not prevent NATO air strikes...On Oct. 26, just one day before threatened NATO air strikes were to begin, Serbian soldiers and police began a significant pullback from their positions in Kosovo...

108 posted on 09/24/2006 11:03:15 AM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Rocko
I do daily and hourly. I've prayed that God will reveal the truth about the Clintons, and that they will not be able to lie, cheat, and steal, and get away with it. I have prayed political failure over them. I have prayed that God will lift the veil of deceit from the eyes of the American people, see the truth about the Clintons, and repudiate them totally and completely. I think it's working, and God is answering in the affirmative. I think even He is sick of seeing the Clintons on TV every chance they can get.
109 posted on 09/24/2006 11:05:39 AM PDT by Yankereb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: khenrich
But why didn't Wallace call him on it?,

In all fairness to Chris, he had to be the "polite journalist" and respect the office. Clinton took advantage of the situation. And it would have turned into a shouting match. When you are an interviewer trying to keep your subject at bay, keep your thougghts at bay, and you have an unglued subject, keeping your own temper at bay is hard enough as it is. Digging into political history is the last thing on your mind. The guy didn't have google or a FR database in front of him. Afterall I think we all have been in tense debates with insane liberals and walked away thinking (oh $%$E%#! I forgot to say this and that!!!)

110 posted on 09/24/2006 11:09:59 AM PDT by paltz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: TexKat

Thank you for the sources. It is always better to have the facts. You must be one of the best researchers out there. I can't tell you how many times I am looking for information or links and I find exactly what I need in one of your posts. Thanks for all the great info.


111 posted on 09/24/2006 11:13:28 AM PDT by ga medic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: technomage
The thought of having to watch the Clintons for four more years makes me ill.

I haven't run across anyone more self-absorbed than the both of them are.

CC&E

112 posted on 09/24/2006 11:16:42 AM PDT by Calm_Cool_and_Elected (So many comments, so little time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: technomage

when caught red handed......
BLAME VAST RIGHT WING REPUBLICANS....


113 posted on 09/24/2006 11:17:24 AM PDT by JFC (President George W Bush, the comforter in chief.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: technomage
God I love to see Willy apoplectic…kudos to Chris Wallace!!! I think Willy was referring to this little known Congressional investigation.

January 16, 1997
Extended Bosnia Mission Endangers U.S. Troops
Clinton-Approved Iranian Arms Transfers Help Turn Bosnia into Militant Islamic Base

http://www.senate.gov/~rpc/releases/1997/iran.htm
114 posted on 09/24/2006 11:17:30 AM PDT by dgallo51 (DEMAND IMMEDIATE, OPEN INVESTIGATIONS OF U.S. COMPLICITY IN RWANDAN GENOCIDE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maine-iac7
Fyi great letter, I'd edit it down to two lines(3 at the most) if you want a chance to see it on tv or for it to be read at all. Newsrooms are fastmoving places and they look at emails like this:

"Graphics needs 3 pro clinton emails and 3 anti clinton emails in 2 mintues PRONTO!"

115 posted on 09/24/2006 11:20:35 AM PDT by paltz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: ga medic

You are welcome ga medic. Facts are our and our childrens friends! :)


116 posted on 09/24/2006 11:21:05 AM PDT by TexKat (Just because you did not see it or read it, that does not mean it did or did not happen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: dgallo51

And we all know Wallace is NOT A CONSERVATIVE!


117 posted on 09/24/2006 11:21:12 AM PDT by JFC (President George W Bush, the comforter in chief.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: JFC
Never meant to imply that Chris was a 'Conservative'…whatever he is…I'd love to see Willy pull a Fred Sanford…no, make that a Jim McDougall…no…make that a Slobodan Milosevic!!! Wallace…you magnificent bastard…you go Chris…YOU GO!
118 posted on 09/24/2006 11:25:32 AM PDT by dgallo51 (DEMAND IMMEDIATE, OPEN INVESTIGATIONS OF U.S. COMPLICITY IN RWANDAN GENOCIDE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Ditter

Wasn't the wag the dog moment the firing of a missle into a pharmaceutical factory? My memory may be failing.


119 posted on 09/24/2006 11:27:12 AM PDT by Texas Songwriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: WKUHilltopper
Pffft...and why should anyone believe or pay attention to Clinton's antics? This is a man who got on national attention and emphatically denied having sexual relations with Monica Screwwhenski. The guy knows how to act and "put on the dog". Are we now to believe he's a wounded saintly type of guy? Pffft!!!!!

I guess because he is the de facto leader of the demon rats.

120 posted on 09/24/2006 11:28:38 AM PDT by Texas Songwriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-169 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson