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

Skip to comments.

Clinton’s Kosovo Whopper
Family Security Matters ^ | 28 September 06 | Cliff Kincaid

Posted on 09/28/2006 8:26:10 AM PDT by LSUfan

Clinton’s Kosovo Whopper

By Cliff Kincaid

September 28, 2006

Of all the whoppers told by former President Clinton in his Chris Wallace interview, perhaps the most outrageous was his claim that he was involved in “trying to stop a genocide in Kosovo…” In fact, Clinton’s bombing of the former Yugoslavia killed more people than died in this “genocide.” And his policy benefited Osama bin Laden and the global Jihad.

In the year before the bombing, some 2,000 people had been killed in a civil war in Kosovo. A conservative estimate is that 6,000 were killed by U.S. and NATO bombs.

It’s strange as well that Clinton complained to Wallace about the “neocons” attacking him when many of the same neocons in 1999 supported Clinton’s war on Yugoslavia. The war was never approved by the U.N. or the U.S. Congress, and in fact violated the War Powers Act. The main beneficiary of the intervention was a Muslim terrorist group, the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), with links to bin Laden, who had declared war on America in 1996, bombed our embassies in Africa in 1998, and would later, of course, orchestrate 9/11.

When former CIA official Michael Scheuer says that the Clinton Administration “had eight to ten chances” to kill bin Laden and “they refused to try,” he is making a statement that goes far beyond acknowledging Clinton Administration incompetence or a lack of will. The fact is that Clinton had a pro-Muslim foreign policy that actually benefited bin Laden and facilitated 9/11. Most Republicans don’t mention this because too many of them were duped into backing Clinton’s misguided policy in Kosovo. President Bush, then a candidate, even backed U.S. military intervention there through NATO.

Scheuer’s CIA also has a lot to answer for. It is noteworthy that the CIA issued a January 2000 report that essentially whitewashed the nature of the KLA and claimed it was pro-American. The only public release of this dubious report came through Rep. Elliot Engel, in a posting on the website of the National Albanian American Council, which supports an Albanian Muslim takeover of Kosovo.

That report was prepared under CIA Director George Tenet, who on February 2, 1999, gave testimony referring to the Serb “massacre at Raçak,” which provided the pretext for NATO intervention against Serbia but which turned out to be a hoax. Tenet was, of course, kept on by President Bush. Not only were Tenet’s fingerprints all over the failed and deceptive policy in Kosovo, he told Bush that finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was a slam dunk.

Interestingly, Al-Jazeera celebrated the fifth anniversary of 9/11 by airing several al-Qaeda videos, one of which showed two of the 9/11 hijackers saying their actions were designed to avenge the suffering of Muslims in Bosnia and Chechnya. Nothing demonstrates the bankruptcy of the Clinton policy more than that. Not only did Clinton order the CIA to help the KLA in Kosovo, he approved Iranian arms shipments to the Bosnian Muslims, in order to help them establish a Muslim state in Bosnia. Still, that wasn’t good enough for the Jihadists. Nothing appeases them.

The Clinton policy of supporting the same extremist Muslim forces in Europe that subsequently attacked us on 9/11 is far more controversial than the policy of regime change in Iraq, which was officially a policy of Clinton, Bush and the Congress. Kosovo was never a threat to the U.S., and Serbia didn’t even pretend to have weapons of mass destruction.

At least in Iraq, despite some questionable intelligence, the cause is just. The U.S. removed a dictator and is fighting for democracy and against the terrorists. The neocons got it right here. Such a policy may in the short term provoke a strong anti-American reaction, as Al-Jazeera rallies the foreign fighters to Iraq to kill Americans, but it is vastly preferable to the Clinton policy of helping Muslim radicals come to power in places like Bosnia or Kosovo. What’s more, as the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) acknowledges, in a statement that has been curiously played down by most of the media, a victory in Iraq would deflate the forces of global Jihad.

Our media like to talk about Iraq, because they think the issue will damage Bush, but Kosovo gets no mention, except when Clinton himself or former officials of his administration bring it up and claim it as a foreign policy success. There is no coverage of the anti-Christian Jihad underway there. But seven years after the illegal Kosovo intervention, the September 15 Washington Post reports on a new World Bank study on fragile or failing states that “can breed terrorism.” One of them is listed as Kosovo, which is not a state—not yet. Actually, in the report itself, Kosovo is identified as a “territory,” not a province of Serbia, but the point remains valid. Kosovo is identified as being “outside the control of a recognized and reputable government,” offering “fertile soil on which terrorism could thrive.” Terrorism is thriving there, of course, because it was Clinton’s official policy to support the terrorist KLA and remove Kosovo from Serbian control.

The result was captured by the summer 1999 U.N. Association newsletter, The Interdependent, which showed Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine Albright on the cover with her thumb in the air. The headline was: “Kosovo: The U.N. Takes Charge.”

Seven years later, the U.N. is still in charge.

The growing danger in Kosovo is compounded by the fact that the problem gets almost no attention in our media, which reported the false charges of genocide that provided the pretext for the military intervention in the first place but still refuse to correct the record and hold Clinton, Albright and then-NATO Commander, General Wesley Clark, responsible for what they have done.

The media blackout is what enables Albright, in a lecture on religion and international affairs at Georgetown University on September 18, to declare, “Of all that we accomplished during my time in office, I’m proudest of what we did in Kosovo because we stopped the killing, and people are back in Kosovo living a free life.”

A free life when Christian Serbs are fleeing and their homes and churches in Kosovo are being destroyed? Albright’s outrageous comments provide the answer in stark terms to the question: Whose side was the Clinton Administration on in the clash of civilizations between Islam and the West? All of the “missed opportunities” to kill bin Laden, and the interventions on behalf of Muslims in Bosnia and Kosovo, didn’t give us anything but more anti-American attacks, more terrorism, and finally, 9/11.

Compounding the failure of the Clinton policy in Kosovo, the George Soros-funded International Crisis Group recently released a report saying that the international community “must avoid creating a weak state” and that the territory must have its own army. Left unsaid is that it would be an army dominated by former members of the KLA. That would be the ultimate reward for terrorism. The terrorists would become the official army of Kosovo.

Buried in the report, on page 8, you will find an interesting piece of information. It states that “A tiny but growing minority is turning to Wahhabi Islam,” the dangerous brand of Sunni Islam underwritten by Saudi Arabia, which is also financing the building of many mosques in Kosovo. But this should come as no surprise. That element was always there, nurtured by the Clinton policy. Now it gathers force again, just as it did before 9/11.

Serbian President Boris Tadic was in the U.S. recently, on the eve of the anniversary of 9/11, but failed to make any public comments about the status of Kosovo in the context of the global war against radical Islam. That was a glaring oversight. He failed to educate the American people about the stakes involved in the proposed dismemberment of the Serbian Republic. His article in the Washington Post, “Justice for Serbia,” was similarly flawed in this respect, focusing on the admittedly important issue of Serbian sovereignty but ignoring the religious dimensions of this conflict.

It won’t be enough to oppose independence for Kosovo. The terrorism problem will remain regardless of whether it is a province, territory or a state. But a U.S. position against independence will at least reflect belated recognition that the Clinton policy of encouraging terrorism in Kosovo has finally come to an end. The Bush Administration must side with Serbia in this important chapter in the clash of civilizations.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: alqaeda; alqaida; antichristian; balkans; binladen; bosnia; clinton; clintonblunder; clintonlegacy; foxnews; genocide; georgetenet; gwot; hatecrimes; kla; kosovo; obl; pc; politicalcorrectness; politicallycorrect; proterrorist; religion; religiousintolerance; terror; terrorism; un; unfailures; unitednations; usoutofunnow; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-31 next last

1 posted on 09/28/2006 8:26:11 AM PDT by LSUfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LSUfan

Having served time in Kosovo, I would be quite cautious as to how you link albanians with al-qaeda. Both sides were guilty of crimes of equal proportion, but I do say that the Serbs committed the utmost crimes while wearing and unforms and representing an army of a sovergn nation. Lining up children, raping women and killing the men is how cowards fight. When I served in the Balkans, we rarely ran into extremist types who hated the US. Most of the muslims in europe are different than that of middle easterners, and most of the albanians wanted to serve and fight in iraq. If you do your research, there are albanians fighting along side the US forces. Becareful at where you get your facts from.


2 posted on 09/28/2006 8:31:28 AM PDT by Btrp113Cav
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LSUfan

MMM... Whopper...

3 posted on 09/28/2006 8:33:05 AM PDT by Bosco (Remember how you felt on September 11?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LSUfan
The Clinton policy of supporting the same extremist Muslim forces in Europe that subsequently attacked us on 9/11 is far more controversial than the policy of regime change in Iraq, which was officially a policy of Clinton, Bush and the Congress. Kosovo was never a threat to the U.S., and Serbia didn’t even pretend to have weapons of mass destruction.

Bump!

4 posted on 09/28/2006 8:33:46 AM PDT by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LSUfan
The main beneficiary of the intervention was a Muslim terrorist group, the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), with links to bin Laden, who had declared war on America in 1996, bombed our embassies in Africa in 1998, and would later, of course, orchestrate 9/11.

OBL also benefited from Clinton breaking the UN arms embargo on Bosnia shipping the muslims almost a billion in small arms from Iran.

5 posted on 09/28/2006 8:33:52 AM PDT by Andy from Beaverton (I'm so anti-pc, I use a Mac)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Btrp113Cav

Excellent post.


6 posted on 09/28/2006 8:34:22 AM PDT by NYC Republican (GOP is the worst political party, except for all the others...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LSUfan

Don't I remember something about a Chinese Embassy during this period?


7 posted on 09/28/2006 8:37:18 AM PDT by TexasCajun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun
Yeah! Definitely bush's fault.

Anybody wonder is this is the Christmas when Xlintoon promised that US troops will be "outta Kosovo"?

After all Slick never said which Christmas, which Century or which Millenia!!

8 posted on 09/28/2006 8:43:48 AM PDT by Young Werther
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther

Let's not forget the absurd American invasion of Haiti, where of course there was NO threat to the US. Clinton did it because the black caucus demanded that he take action. Fortuantely not too many soldiers were killed, as I recall. But Clinton put them into harm's way without a peep of complaint from the Dems or the left. Just imagine if GWB made a similar move today. He'd be impeached.


9 posted on 09/28/2006 8:47:38 AM PDT by TNCMAXQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Btrp113Cav

Well, if you read Ken Timmerman's "Countdown to Crisis" he paints a picture of a very bad situation. Several times Iranian "diplomats" were caught conducting recon of NATO positions and Iranian transport aircraft were flying in to the area on a regular basis and they weren't carrying baby formula. The Serbs were evil and awful, but to say that because heavily armed US troops did not run into Jihadist terrorists in the area means that there was no outside influence from AQ and Iran or that the KLA were good guys, is naive.


10 posted on 09/28/2006 8:48:35 AM PDT by LSUfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LSUfan

All one needs to look at, to understand Clinton's level of concern with anything in the world apart from himself, is how he handled himself while the coup was going on in Moscow.

Clinton had just given his deposition to Ken Starr ("What is 'is'?") and ran off to hide in New England. He refused to resign, but also refused to show his face for TWO WEEKS.

In the meantime, tanks were firing SHELLS INTO THE DUMA in Moscow. Boris Yeltsin was standing on cars screaming to a confused public. All hell was breaking loose in Russia, the OTHER superpower with tons of nuclear warheads, and Clinton could not be found.

That one case shows, quite clearly, how much of a total failure, and how incredibly selfish, Clinton was.

There is no question that Clinton never gave a hoot about the US and never cared about anything other than his own petty self. He continues, to this day, to have his priorities oriented in the same manner.

While there are many, many, many selfish and stupid Clinton actions one can look at to try to see how little he cared about anyone but Bill Clinton, the Russian coup is the clearest example of his total selfishness, incompetence, and misunderstanding of the world we all live in.


11 posted on 09/28/2006 8:52:59 AM PDT by progressoverpeace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LSUfan

if you want to know about the genocide in the Balkans, just ask "Doctors Without Borders", hardly friends of conservatives, about the genocide they went to fight and treat the victims of yet couldn't find any patients.

On another note, I am looking forward to October 7th...check your game schedule to figure out why...pay backs are he!!


12 posted on 09/28/2006 9:04:58 AM PDT by representativerepublic (...from my cold, dead hands...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LSUfan
"Not only did Clinton order the CIA to help the KLA in Kosovo, he approved Iranian arms shipments to the Bosnian Muslims, in order to help them establish a Muslim state in Bosnia."

Clinton is helping them finnish the job they didn't get to finnish in WW2 when Hitler gave Arafats uncle Hussani the green light to create an all Muslim Nazi ss division in Kosovo and slaughter all the serbs and Jews. LSUfan

Having served time in Kosovo, I would be quite cautious as to how you link albanians with al-qaeda. Both sides were guilty of crimes of equal proportion, but I do say that the Serbs committed the utmost crimes while wearing and unforms and representing an army of a sovergn nation. Lining up children, raping women and killing the men is how cowards fight."

So did I and all those alligations turned out to be false, except a few isolated occasions. The main agressor has always been the Muslim Albanians, who- like Muslims attempting to "cleanse" infidels everywhere- are good at portraying themselves as the victim while doing it. Al- Qaeda certainly had and still has a presence in the region, even if it was only to provide support and supplies.

13 posted on 09/28/2006 9:07:54 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

LoL! You sure do, Clinton bombed it. Maybe he though Osama was there....


14 posted on 09/28/2006 9:10:16 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: representativerepublic

Tough to win down there, friend. Leak continues to impress me.


15 posted on 09/28/2006 9:11:16 AM PDT by LSUfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: LSUfan

I am proud to say I did NOT support klintoon's "wag the dog" in Kosovo.

LLS


16 posted on 09/28/2006 9:12:40 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (Preserve America... kill terrorists... destroy dims!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun
Plus he almost started a war with Russia.
Clinton did nothing but blunders in his entire time in the WH.
Don't forget what he did to Haiti as well.
17 posted on 09/28/2006 9:12:51 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TNCMAXQ
The left loved Clinton's wars.

As Janean Garafelo later admitted, "it wasn't hip to protest Clinton". Political correctness. Us and them politics. Putting the Party before the nation.
18 posted on 09/28/2006 9:22:17 AM PDT by weegee (Remember "Remember the Maine"? Well in the current war "Remember the Baby Milk Factory")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
<> Not true. He did sign the Republican legislation that was being passed in the Congress - against all of his constituents' loud protests - and, even better, he got his constituents to rally behind much of that Republican legislation when they are trying to defend Clinton!! There's nothing better than listening to a Dem crow about "Clinton's" welfare reform (as if it were a democratic initiative!!) in order to offer the only possible defense of the worst president to ever sit in the oval office (outside of Carter). Of course, dems have never had any problems with cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy, but anything that pushes them further in those directions is a good thing, and an entertaining one, as well.
19 posted on 09/28/2006 9:23:37 AM PDT by progressoverpeace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: weegee

Clinton was hell bent on going into that big superpower of Haiti but he was so reticent about doing anything about Saddam. Even though we know his administration said repeatedly saddam was a threat, had WMD, etc. Clinton *wishes* he had taken out Saddam. Though of course even if the aftermath were 10 times as bad as it is now, he would be hailed by every Democrat and media elite for his actions.


20 posted on 09/28/2006 9:36:01 AM PDT by TNCMAXQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-31 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