1 posted on
11/28/2001 3:47:03 PM PST by
OPS4
To: OPS4
clinton was probably getting a cut of the drug traffic profits; I have no idea about Blair.
2 posted on
11/28/2001 3:51:24 PM PST by
cfrels
To: OPS4
Besides (both) Clintons always having hated Christians, that was when Clinton supported any / all muslims, including the eary Taliban gov., regardless of the degree of terrorism involved, in a desperate hope that he could then be seen as a peacemaker who'd given everything to get a nobel prize.
3 posted on
11/28/2001 3:55:39 PM PST by
Steven W.
To: OPS4
Drugs finance the efforts of New World Order, through the components such as the CFR, etc. The Non-Government Organizations (UN / NATO) and the secretly controlled national resources (American / British politics) act as the vehicles toward that end.
If you look closely, you'll discover that the "Patriot Act" was developed far ahead of 9-11. The laws which Bush used in his declaration of an emergency were pre-written for 9-11. Imagine Congress writing an advance bill, which so blatantly undermines the Constitution. That should tell the world quite a story.
In 1999, the CIA tied bin Laden's brothers to a terrorist bank-corporate system on the Turkish side of Cyprus, yet his American family was rushed to London, with a new Swiss citizenship.
4 posted on
11/28/2001 3:58:40 PM PST by
fliberman
To: OPS4
Drug rakeoffs; hatred of Christians; the warm feeling a bully gets when he bombs civilians or bites their lips while raping them; need for a risk-free wag-the-dog war somewhere to distract attention from impeachment. There were plenty of reasons. Unfortunately none of them were legal, moral, or in the best interests of our country and the world.
The entire operation was straight out of the Hitler-Stalin playbook.
5 posted on
11/28/2001 4:12:22 PM PST by
Cicero
To: OPS4
the white house was one big party with him being the guest of honor. he did not have the patience to deal with complex issues and get his administration to act as a team. since the united states is the world's superpower, and since the liberal position for foreign policy is one of 'spread democracy' (over protect national interest), clinton new that politically he had to do something. at the time few of us understood the balkins, politically or historically. because of that, and because he knew the press would not call him on the carpet, he selected the option that caused him the least personal pain (being away from the white house party) and was the most political expedient.
7 posted on
11/28/2001 4:48:54 PM PST by
mlocher
To: OPS4
So why did Bill Clinton and Tony Blair Bomb Yugoslav Catholics and Christians in their defense? Ex 42 was just looking for a quick war right before the NATO anniversary celebration in DC. He thought he would be hailed as the great leader of NATO.
The Serbs just didn't give up as easily at he thought they would. The leftest press had a lot to do with it also, making it seem that ethnic-cleansing was going on in Kosovo. In reality, most of the fleeing took place in response to our bombing.
What I could never figure was Albright's hatred of the Serbs. Any ideas on that?
To: OPS4
9 posted on
11/28/2001 4:55:05 PM PST by
F-117A
To: OPS4
Don't you know the abu bent ***** bill clinton, and abu osama bent ***** laden are soul mates?
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson