Skip to comments.
Iraq Attack Scrubbed for Clinton Golf Game
Newsmax ^
Posted on 03/16/2003 11:17:52 AM PST by Patriot1998
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
To: Patriot1998
ARE YOU F------ KIDDING ME? He should be hauled up in front of a military tribunal!!
C'mon Republican leadership: The very next time BC makes a speech criticizing our foreign policy, etc., someone with some nads needs to call him on this and not just ROLLOVER and continue to take it.
2
posted on
03/16/2003 11:22:46 AM PST
by
whadizit
(A)
To: Patriot1998
I will buy this book ASAP. I will read it with a critical eye. Here is the scary part... if only HALF of what this man says is true... WOW!
3
posted on
03/16/2003 11:24:09 AM PST
by
OperationFreedom
(Is a RECOVERING demoncrap that supports a liberal still a demoncrap? You decide......)
To: Patriot1998
"This time, the president was engaged in conversations with several people and was less approachable,Here is a transcript of the conversations:
Clinton: Mmmmmm....oh, yeah baby....oooooooh....shazaam!, that's good......
To: Patriot1998
"Tell him I'll get back with him later." Hey, it takes concentration and avoidance of distractions to cheat (at golf).
5
posted on
03/16/2003 11:27:27 AM PST
by
TADSLOS
(Sua Sponte)
To: Patriot1998
So this man is claiming a Kurdish massacre occured because Clinton was watching a golf tournament and wouldn't do his job? That is a very serious charge. If true, he should have to account for this.
I won't hold my breath. I have learned about the never-never land of liberal journalism by now.
But I would love to see O'Reilly get ahold of this one. Whatever you think of him, he is a bulldog on the issues he chooses to be.
To: whadizit
ARE YOU F------ KIDDING ME? He should be hauled up in front of a military tribunal!! Yeah that was my first thought. Good holy Christ, is there no end to Clinton's treason? What's even worse than this revelation is that nothing, not one damn thing will happen to this dirty bastard. Excuse the swearing, I tend to do that every time I see the name Clinton.
7
posted on
03/16/2003 11:31:59 AM PST
by
TheSpottedOwl
(Can we paint all the Daisy Cutters and MOAB's kelly green for St. Patrick's Day????)
To: Patriot1998
I find this disturbing, of course. But I am having trouble believing that this guy is actually telling the story. That is wrong too. He better have some very important information in that book, because he is damaging a system.
To: Patriot1998
Don't forget that he was on the phone discussing the troop deployment to Bosnia, he was getting a
BJ from Monica, who was under the desk at the time.
Or that he got an illicit thrill by deliberately boning down with her on the Presidential Seal on the floor of the Oval Office...
9
posted on
03/16/2003 11:49:27 AM PST
by
gaijin
To: BillCompton
Damaging a system of what? In other words the system of playing around, pretending he is King Tut and letting his nation down. Heil Hitler, let nothing interfere with the fuehrer' pleasure!
10
posted on
03/16/2003 11:49:53 AM PST
by
meenie
To: Patriot1998
Also on that day (back when Larry Klayman had a shred of credibility):
First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton and the FBI were among defendants named in a $90 million invasion-of-privacy lawsuit stemming from the mishandling of sensitive FBI background files at the White House.
Attorney Larry Klayman, who filed the class-action suit on behalf of former White House employees says, "Their actions were intentional. People were damaged. Apologies aren't enough."
Klayman is general counsel for the watchdog group Judicial Watch, and denies the suit was politically motivated. He maintains no other group is behind the suit.
Five plaintiffs who were members of previous administrations were identified, but the suit contends more than 700 former White House employees are entitled to damages. The suit says the violations of privacy damaged the reputations of the former employees.
The suit names four individuals and two institutions as defendants. In addition to Mrs. Clinton, the group is suing former White House Counsel Bernard Nussbaum, former Head of the White House Security Office Craig Livingstone and Anthony Marceca, who worked in that office. The FBI and the Executive Office of the President are also listed as defendants.
To: meenie
Damaging a system of what?
The aid that carries the football is very much like a Secret Service agent. He has to stay close. But a president is likely not to let them stay close if they are not trusted. This guy violated that trust. I am not saying there are no circumstances where this is warranted, but this better be a good one, otherwise he is doing more harm than good.
To: Patriot1998
I find this hard to believe, but I stand squarely behind former Chinese premier Xiang Zemin on this one topic:
"The United States lost whatever moral high ground it mat have once occupied when it refused to throw Bill Clinton out of office."
To: meenie
This needs to be brought up on Fox now! The American people deserve to know how fortunate we are that G.W.Bush is our President in these dangerous times.
14
posted on
03/16/2003 12:10:48 PM PST
by
vger
To: BillCompton
The Colonel did not violate any trust or oath! However Clinton violated his oath of office!
15
posted on
03/16/2003 12:13:21 PM PST
by
RdhseRat
To: whadizit
Just forwarded your post to the O'Reilly Factor. Thanks for the great post.
16
posted on
03/16/2003 12:16:45 PM PST
by
vger
To: Patriot1998
The Sept. 13, 1996 airstrike was planned as the U.S.'s response to an August 31 tank attack launched by Saddam Hussein on the northern Kurdish city of Irbil, a blatant violation of the 1991 Gulf War surrender accords that had an estimated 300,000 Kurdish refugees fleeing for their lives. At the same time Saddam's Republican Guard had executed an estimated one hundred Iraqi dissidents and arrested fifteen hundred more - extinguishing whatever opposition the Iraqi dictator might have faced from within.
Two days before he attended the President's Cup golf tournament, Clinton had warned the world that "action is imminent" and that "the determination of the United States in dealing with the problem of Iraq should not be underestimated," reports the national security whistleblower.
Anyone with Nexis/Lexis capability should be able to verify if this is accurate.
17
posted on
03/16/2003 12:24:28 PM PST
by
Tall_Texan
(Where liberals lead, misery follows.)
To: Alberta's Child
"The United States lost whatever moral high ground it mat have once occupied when it refused to throw Bill Clinton out of office."
Yeah I have always felt that about the American dumbed down brain washed public
18
posted on
03/16/2003 12:52:54 PM PST
by
uncbob
( building tomorrow)
To: RdhseRat
The Colonel did not violate any trust or oath!
Please explain this. We just let this guy hang around the president without having to be politically loyal and there is not prohibition in place for him to keep quiet about what he hears?
To: BillCompton
The Colonel had sworn an oath to protect a political party or a politician. The Colonel swore an oath to protect the country. By writing this book he is still protecting the country; he is not covering up for a politican!
20
posted on
03/16/2003 1:24:15 PM PST
by
RdhseRat
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson