HILLARY CLINTON SHOULD BE CAREFUL WHAT SHE WISHES FOR. . . / THE REAL PROXIMATE CAUSE OF 9/11

The New York Times, C-SPAN, Newsmax.com | 5.17.02 | Mia T

[Mia T]

05-16-02

HILLARY CLINTON SHOULD BE CAREFUL WHAT SHE WISHES FOR. . .

THE REAL PROXIMATE CAUSE OF 9/11

 

In a Senate speech, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York, called on Mr. Bush to "come before the American people at the earliest possible time to answer the questions so many New Yorkers and Americans are asking."

The New York Times, Democrats Say Bush Must Give Full Disclosure

Clinton Warned on Bin Laden Hijack-Kamikaze Plot

Newsmax | 05.16.02

Posted on 5/16/02 8:03 AM Pacific by callisto

If you don't recall seeing the blaring post-9-11 headline "Clinton Warned on Bin Laden Hijack-Kamikaze Plot," it's not because your memory is failing.

In fact, the big media mostly ignored the story - in marked contrast to today's wall-to-wall coverage of news that President Bush received a pre-9-11 CIA briefing on a possible bin Laden hijack plot.

And while the warning transmitted to Bush gave no inkling that bin Laden planned to transform U.S. airliners into flying bombs and slam them into American office buildings, in fact, Clinton administration intelligence officials were in the possession of detailed information on an al Qaeda conspiracy to hijack several U.S. airliners - including a plan to crash one of the planes into the Pentagon or CIA.

It was called "Operation Bojinka," a 1995 plot hatched by an al Qaeda cell in the Philippines with an eye towards blowing up 12 American airliners. Some would be booby trapped with bombs like Pan Am 103, others hijacked like the four U.S. jets commandeered on 9-11 and crashed into buildings.

Though the mainstream press never demonstrated much enthusiasm for the story, Accuracy in Media's Reed Irvine detailed what the Clinton administration knew - and when it knew it - for NewsMax.com last October.

Citing a Sept. 13 Agence France-Presse report, Irvine noted that Philippine Police Chief Superintendent Avelino Razon had uncovered the plot to "plant bombs in U.S. airliners and hijack others to crash them into buildings like the CIA headquarters."

"Razon said (the plot) was found on the computer of Ramzi Yousef, the organizer of the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center," Irvine reported. "He had fled to Pakistan, but his laptop was found in the apartment he shared with his accomplice, Abdul Hakim Murad. Razon said both were agents of Osama bin Laden."

A later Agence France-Press report noted:

"Among targets mentioned (in Yousef's computer files) was the World Trade Center in New York..... CIA offices in Virginia and the Sears Tower in Chicago."

Picking up where Irvine left off, the Washington Post quoted a Filipino investigator, who said that as he watched the attack on the World Trade Center on television he exclaimed in horror, "It's Bojinka. We told the Americans everything about Bojinka. Why didn't they pay attention?"

Chief Police Superintendent Avelino Razon told the Philippine Daily Inquirer that the Philippine intelligence report was passed on to the U.S. Embassy and the U.S. Joint Task Force on Terrorism.

"It was not given credibility. Otherwise, it could have prevented the destruction of the World Trade Center," he explained.

The Clinton FBI was in full possession of all the frightening facts on Bojinka, but did nothing. Instead, as Reed Irvine revealed, the bureau assured Congress that everything was under control.

"In testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee subcommittee on Terrorism in February 1998, 'Bojinka' - which means 'big bang' - was described by Dale L. Watson, chief of the International Terrorism Operations Section of the FBI, only as a plot to blow up 'numerous U.S. air carriers.'

"He said that the FBI had identified 'a significant and growing organizational presence' of foreign terrorists in the United States. He swore the bureau had them under control."

The Clinton FBI counterintelligence chief told the Senate that as a result of the bombings of the World Trade Center in 1993 and the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995 the FBI had developed an 'enhanced capability' to track terrorist activities.

Is it likely that U.S. intelligence possessed this much information on al Qaeda plans to slam planes into U.S. buildings - and didn't tell President Clinton?

Actually it is, if you believe the account of his former CIA Director James Woolsey, who said Clinton never bothered to meet with him during his stint as the nation's intelligence chief.

What about other administration officials, like Attorney General Janet Reno, who certainly should have known about Bojinka?

There Clinton may also have an alibi.

During all of 1998 - the same year FBI counterintelligence briefed Congress on the al Qaeda hijack plot - Clinton met with his Cabinet exactly twice: Once in January to lie to them about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky, and again in August to come clean about the affair.

Want to know more about why U.S intelligence missed the 9-11 clues during the Clinton years. Get your copy of NewsMax.com's "Off the Record" interview with FBI whistleblower Gary Aldrich.

May 17, 2002

Democrats Say Bush Must Give Full Disclosure

By ALISON MITCHELL

ASHINGTON, May 16 ó After months of unstinting support for President Bush's handling of the war on terror, leading Congressional Democrats changed course today and demanded full disclosure of what Mr. Bush was told last summer about the danger of terrorist hijackings. They also called for a broad public inquiry into what the government knew before Sept. 11.

The sharp questions about possible intelligence lapses and about the vigor of the administration's response to terrorist warnings came a day after the White House announced, eight months after the terror attacks, that President Bush had been alerted by the Central Intelligence Agency last summer to the danger of hijackings by terrorists affiliated with Osama bin Laden.

Even some Republicans questioned the government's response to information gathered last summer.

"I think it should have been acted upon, and it wasn't," said Senator Richard C. Shelby of Alabama, the ranking Republican on the Senate intelligence committee.

Mr. Shelby was particularly critical of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, saying officials there had been "asleep."

But Democrats were the fiercest. For the first time since Sept. 11, the bipartisan unity over how Mr. Bush has conducted the war on terror appeared to be dissolving in sharp questions, accusations and partisan finger-pointing.

Senator Tom Daschle of South Dakota, the majority leader, said he was "gravely concerned" and asked, "Why did it take eight months for us to receive this information?" Mr. Daschle added that the president should immediately hand the Congressional intelligence committees "the entire briefing that he was given" in August.

Democrats were also seeking an F.B.I. memorandum warning that many Middle Eastern men were training at American flight schools.

Representative Richard A. Gephardt, the House minority leader, said, "I think what we have to do now is to find out what the president, what the White House, knew about the events leading up to 9/11, when they knew it and, most importantly, what was done about it at that time."

Mr. Gephardt, of Missouri, said the long-planned investigation by the intelligence committees was no longer enough. "I don't think this can just be a closed-door secret intelligence investigation," he said. (The joint committee is planning to hold both public and closed hearings.)

In a Senate speech, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York, called on Mr. Bush to "come before the American people at the earliest possible time to answer the questions so many New Yorkers and Americans are asking."

Most of the Republicans who spoke publicly today rallied around Mr. Bush, arguing that the information he had received in August in a briefing paper several pages long was too generalized to act on. They said the Democrats were playing election-year politics.

Senator Christopher S. Bond, Republican of Missouri, accused the two Democratic leaders of an "effort to blow this up into a scandal."

"Their unspoken implication," Mr. Bond said, "is that the president knew these attacks were coming and did nothing. That is an insult to the U.S. intelligence community, to the president and the American people."

Senator Trent Lott, Republican of Mississippi, said in a Senate speech tonight that "there is nothing more despicable ó and `despicable' is a tame word ó in American politics than to insinuate the president of the United States knew that an attack on the United States was imminent and did nothing to stop it."

"For us to be talking like our enemy is George W. Bush and not Osama bin Laden, that's not right," Mr. Lott added.

But Democrats, who until now have been reluctant to speak out against Mr. Bush on foreign policy, said it was their duty to seek information.

"We have a right and responsibility to speak out," said Senator John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat who may run for president. "Preventing another Sept. 11 undoubtedly requires understanding our past vulnerabilities."

The questions over what the administration knew ignited a battle over whether to create a special commission to look into the events surrounding the Sept. 11 attacks.

Senators Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut, and John McCain, Republican of Arizona, have long argued for an independent commission. They said they would move quickly to try to create one in an attachment to other legislation, perhaps as early as next week. Mr. Daschle suggested he might support the idea.

Mr. Lieberman, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee in 2000, pointed to an array of warnings to intelligence agencies last summer that have recently been made public.

"If there had been one person receiving all that information, would it have been possible to prevent Sept. 11?" he asked. "That's the question an independent commission has to answer so we never have to ask it again."

Senator Robert G. Torricelli, Democrat of New Jersey, who has also pushed hard for a commission, noted that Vice President Dick Cheney repeatedly pressed Congress last fall to avoid an investigation while troops were in Afghanistan. In light of recent disclosures, Mr. Torricelli said, "that argument just became extremely disingenuous."

One dispute that simmered across the day was about just how much members of Congress knew last August about intelligence warnings.

After Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesman, pointed to an assertion by Representative Porter J. Goss of Florida, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, that the Congressional panels had been given similar information, Senate Democrats quickly contested the remark.

Senator Bob Graham, the Florida Democrat who is chairman of the Senate intelligence committee, said that the committees were given more general information than the president received last August and that it did not include references to hijackings.

Mr. Daschle, at Mr. Graham's side at a news conference, said, "There is no one in Congress who had that information."

Mr. Goss said all the information in the president's intelligence briefing had been given to his committee as well, but over time. The information, he said, included "no specificity as to time, place, date or method."

The senior Democrat on the intelligence committee, Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, who is also the No. 2 Democrat in the House leadership, joined Mr. Goss at his news conference and agreed that some of the information in the president's memorandum had been available to the lawmakers.

But, Ms. Pelosi added, the president's briefing paper had three pieces of specific information that day in August that the intelligence committees had learned over several months. That, she said, "raised it to a different level" and needed to be part of the Congressional investigation into Sept. 11.

Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Permissions | Privacy Policy

[Mia T]

September 11 changed a lot of things for me, I will say this, before September 11, I was definitely mildly myopic in terms of my political agenda. If you were Democrat you were probably right, and if you were a Republican you were probably wrong. Everything changed for me that day...

My entire worldview changed. If you would have told me September 9 that I would have been at the world series game filming George Bush throwing out the first pitch with my 6-year-old son crying, I never would have believed you, but I was. Because my whole worldview changed.

ROSIE O'DONNELL

The Real Danger of a Presidential Fake:

Post-9/11 Reconsideration of The Placebo President

by Mia T, 1.06.02

 

 

 In May, 1996, American diplomats were informed in a Sudanese government fax that Bin Laden was about to be expelled -- giving Washington another chance to seize him. The decision not to do so went to the very top of the White House, according to former administration sources.

They say that the clear focus of American policy was to discourage the state sponsorship of terrorism. So persuading Khartoum to expel Bin Laden was in itself counted as a clear victory. The administration was "delighted".

Bin Laden took off from Khartoum on May 18 in a chartered C-130 plane with 150 of his followers, including his wives. He was bound for Jalalabad in eastern Afghanistan. On the way the plane refuelled in the Gulf state of Qatar, which has friendly relations with Washington, but he was allowed to proceed unhindered.

Barely a month later, on June 25, a 5,000lb truck bomb ripped apart the front of Khobar Towers, a US military housing complex in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. The explosion killed 19 American servicemen. Bin Laden was immediately suspected...

US missed three chances to seize Bin Laden

Just look around this chamber. We have members from virtually every racial, ethnic, and religious background. And America is stronger for it. But as we have seen, these differences all too often spark hatred and division, even here at home. . . This is not the American way. We must draw the line. Without delay, we must pass the Hate Crimes Prevention Act and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. And we should reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act.

bill clinton, State of Union Speech, January 27, 2000

 

"I'm sorry, but the president is one of the crudest men I have ever encountered in government service," says one female agent. "He has no respect for women."

Among the comments clinton made in presence of Secret Service agents:

. Frequent speculation on the oral sex skills of women

the president saw or met in receiving lines;

. References to the size of a woman's breasts, legs or figure;

. Sexual jokes.

After the Monica Lewinsky story broke, however, clinton toned down his rhetoric and behavior in front of his Secret Service agents, but those who guarded the president say enough of them saw and heard things which could be damaging to clinton.

"It depends on who Ken Starr calls," says one ex-agent. "The people who are on the job today are not necessarily the ones who know the most."

Turnover In clinton's Secret Service Detail 'Highest That Anyone Can Remember'

 

In the months that follow, reporters drop the issue. Feminists say little or nothing. Rape crisis center workers acknowledge that Broaddrick's case, including her reluctance to come forward, is typical of victims of sexual assault. But they decline to speak against clinton. Some cite the federal funding they receive as a result of the Violence Against Women Act, which was signed into law by clinton.

Why does the press continue to ignore the Juanita Broaddrick story?

 

 

 

The Placebo President:

How a Rapist can be a Policy Feminist

 

placebo effect n.

A beneficial effect in a patient following a particular treatment

that arises from the patient's expectations concerning

the treatment rather than from the treatment itself.

 

Every woman adores a Fascist,

The boot in the face, the brute

Brute heart of a brute like you.

----Sylvia Plath

 

The placebo effect immediately came to mind

as I listened to Shelby Steele,

a research fellow at the Hoover Institution,

debunk the following pernicious spin intended to save clinton.

To wit:

A proven felon and utter reprobate can remain president;

clinton can be a failed human being but a good president.

 

The error in these statements arises, says Steele,

from the belief that

virtuousness is separate from personal responsibility

so that one's virtuousness as an individual is determined by

one's political positions on issues rather than on

whether or not in one's personal life there is a

consistency and a responsibility.

 

Steele's contention is that this compartmentalization,

rather than being the amazing advantage

the clintons would have us believe,

in fact, spills toxicity into, corrupts, the culture.

 

If mere identification with good policies is what makes one virtuous

then those policies become, what Steele calls, iconographic,

that is to say they just represent virtuousness.

They don't necessarily do virtuous things.

 

If clinton's semantic parsing strips meaning from our words,

clinton's iconographic policies strip meaning from our society,

systematically deconstructing our society as a democracy. . .

 

I would take Shelby Steele's thesis one step further.

I maintain that iconographic policy functions like a placebo,

producing a real, physiological and social effects.

 

The placebo effect is, after all, the brain's triumph over reality.

Expectation alone can produce powerful physiological results.

The placebo effect was, at one time, an evolutionary advantage:

act now, think later

 

bill clinton is the paradigmatic Placebo President.

Placebo is Latin for "I shall please."

And please he does

doling out sham treatments, iconographs, with abandon.

To please, to placate, to numb, to deflect.

Ultimately to showcase his imagined virtue.

Or to confute his genuine vice.

 

clinton will dispense sugar pills (or bombs)

at the drop of a high-heeled shoe...

or at the hint of high treason...

 

clinton's charlatanry mimics that of primitive medicine.

Through the 1940s, doctors had little effective medicine to offer

so they deliberately attempted to induce the placebo response.

 

The efficaciousness of today's medicines

does not diminish the power of the placebo.

A recent review of placebo-controlled studies

found that placebos and genuine treatments

are often equally effective.

If you expect to get better, you will.

 

Which brings me back to the original question:

Can clinton be a failed human being but a good president?

 

Clearly he cannot.

These two propositions are mutually exclusive.

clinton's fundamental failure is a complete lack of integrity.

He has violated his covenant with the American people.

 

Because clinton has destroyed his moral authority as a leader,

he can no longer function even as a quack;

the placebo effect is gone.

And so the Placebo President must now go, too.

 

 

[Mia T]

 

 

Bill Clinton may not be the worst president America has had, but surely he is the worst person to be president.*

---GEORGE WILL, Sleaze, the sequel

^{Q ERTY6}

Had George Will written Sleaze, the sequel (the "sequel" is, of course, hillary) after 9-11-01, I suspect that he would have had to forgo the above conceit, as the doubt expressed in the setup phrase was, from that day forward, no longer operational. 

the clintons were utter failures

_{rodham-clinton} REALITY-CHECK bump!

Clinton's failure to grasp the opportunity to unravel increasingly organized extremists, coupled with Berger's assessments of their potential to directly threaten the U.S., represents one of the most serious foreign policy failures in American history

Clinton Let Bin Laden Slip Away and Metastasize

 

 

Bill Clinton may not be the worst president America has had, but surely he is the worst person to be president.*

---GEORGE WILL, Sleaze, the sequel

 

Had George Will written Sleaze, the sequel (the "sequel" is, of course, hillary) after 9-11-01, I suspect that he would have had to forgo the above conceit, as the doubt expressed in the setup phrase was, from that day forward, no longer operational.

Indeed, assessing the clinton presidency an abject failure is not inconsistent with commentary coming from the left, most recently the LA Times: "Clinton Let Bin Laden Slip Away and Metastasize."

When the clintons left office, I predicted that the country would eventually learn--sadly, the hard way--that this depraved, self-absorbed and inept pair had placed America (and the world) in mortal danger. But I was thinking years, not months.

It is very significant that hillary clinton didn't deny clinton culpability for the terrorism. (Meet the Press, 12-09-01), notwithstanding tired tactics (if you can't pass the buck, spread the blame) and chronic "KnowNothing Victim Clinton" self-exclusion.

If leftist pandering keeps the disenfranchized down in perpetuity, clinton pandering,("it's the economy, stupid"), kept the middle and upper classes wilfully ignorant for eight years.

And ironically, both results (leftist social policy and the clinton economy) are equally illusory, fraudulent. It is becoming increasingly clear that clinton assiduously avoided essential actions that would have negatively impacted the economy--the ultimate source of his continued power--actions like, say, going after the terrorists.

It is critically important that hillary clinton fail in her grasp for power; read Peggy Noonan's little book, 'The Case Against Hillary Clinton' and Barbara Olson's two books; it is critical that the West de-clintonize, but that will be automatic once it is understood that the clintons risked civilization itself in order to gain and retain power.

It shouldn't take books, however, to see that a leader is a dangerous, self-absorbed sicko. People should be able to figure that out for themselves. The electorate must be taught to think, to reason. It must be able to spot spin, especially in this age of the electronic demagogue.

I am not hopeful. As Bertrand Russell noted, "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so. "

Mia T, hillary clinton blames hubby for terrorism

(SHE knew nuttin')

Meet the Press, 12-09-01

 

 

*George Will continues: There is reason to believe that he is a rapist ("You better get some ice on that," Juanita Broaddrick says he told her concerning her bit lip), and that he bombed a country to distract attention from legal difficulties arising from his glandular life, and that. ... Furthermore, the bargain that he and his wife call a marriage refutes the axiom that opposites attract. Rather, she, as much as he, perhaps even more so, incarnates Clintonism

Q ERTY3 co-rapist  bump!

[Freedom'sWorthIt]

All right, MiaT enters the fight! WE WILL WIN! Get 'em, MiaT. Summary of summaries in MiaT's on unmatched style!

[anniegetyourgun]

Thanks, Mia....we knew you'd come through.

What I find most interesting right now is that Bubba is thus far silent on the matter. Wonder why....

[firewalk]

Mia, Thank you for not letting this go.

As you can see, I'm not part of the "let's just move along " frame of mind. Big bump!

[Republic]

...it is critical that the West de-clintonize, but that will be automatic once it is understood that the clintons risked civilization itself in order to gain and retain power...

Oh yes, babe, absolutely. I sure hope this happens. Imho-the cancer that was and is the klintons gave the United States its first overt painful symtom on 9/11.

[ventana]

After months of unstinting support for President Bush's handling of the war on terror, leading Congressional Democrats changed course today

Leave it to the times to lead with a lie. V's wife.

[BeAlert]

BIG BUMP TO THE TOP!!!! Mia T, thank you to your service to the FreeRepublic and not letting these issues fall to the way-side.

[hobbes1]

Two more.... Calling Former President Clinton....

[Cuttnhorse]

I never tire of reading this stuff...my neck gets tired from me shaking my head in disbelief. Thanks again Mia

[Giddyupgo]

BTT

[FreeTheHostages]

What a great post. Clinton let OBL metasticize. That's a good way of putting it.

[stanz]

Hillary Clinton should burn in hell.

[4Him]

May 17, 2002

CLICK TO ENLARGE

[Musket]

The DemoCraps are toast. I just wish the elections were tomorrow. I don't want to see 6 more months of their crap.

[ChaseR]

Big bump for Mia T. Thank you Mia for another informative post. As usual, absolutely superb. BTTT

[backhoe]

I mass emailed this- and a few other "info-bombs"- to a pile of papers & opinonators... we'll see what develops today!

[Honorary Serb]

....Operation Bojinka...

The clintons, clintonites, and clintonoids didn't just let bin Laden "slip away", they were in league with him!!!

The key to the whole thing is the name for the terrorists' plot--"Operation Bojinka". "Bojinka" is Serbian, Croatian, and/or "Bosniak" (the Bosnian muslim form of the Serbian language) slang for “loud bang”! This name points to a Balkans connection, either bin Laden's thugs who served in Bosnia, Bosnian muslim terorists, or both. And clinton, Hillary, and their hangers-on and clones were DEFINITELY in league with the muslim terrorists--including al Qaeda--in the Balkans!!!!

Besides that, ALL of the Sept. 11th hijackers and conspirators that we know of were citizens of countries considered US "allies", but which support terrorism and islamic extremism and expansionism. It is not American "oppression of islam", but New World Order elitists' use of muslim thugs to do their dirty work that set up Sept 11th!!!!

Hillary Rodham Izetbegovic Khomeini has also proven time and again that she is an A#1 muslim shill!!!! She invited muslim extremists to the White House, she got campaign contributions from them, and she has always backed their evil causes, especially against Serbian Christians. After Sept. 11th, she has been posing as the "enemy of terrorism" and a "friend of Israel", etc.---BUT WE KNOW WHERE SHE REALLY STANDS, DON'T WE!!!!!

The bad part is that even under Bush, the US continues to back islamic aims in the Balkans, and to hammer away against Serbs and other Slavic Christians with that horrible muslim/NWO kangaroo "court" in the Hague. And Bush still invited the SAME muslim extremist groups as Hillary did to the White House, and spreads muslim lies about the "religion of peace".

It's time for the US to STOP backing muslim thugs, and stand up for Serbia and Israel!!!! The only "reward" we get for backing muslim thugs is more and more terrorism, even on our own soil!!!!

[johnny7]

Excellent research but alas, you'll never see a NewsMax article quoted on network news.

You know how it goes, Clinton was constantly being attacked by those right-wing talk-shows and news sites.

Besides Bush was president when it happened.

They need anything to slam Bush... anything!

[princess leah]

Not only will this thing be worse than Enron for the Dems, but I already heard many people calling in on the conservative radio stations and the outrage is HUGE! Republicans angry are a force to be reckoned with, but you add TREASON into the mix against a POPULAR President and you will see LANDSLIDE in November and Dems are OUT!