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

Skip to comments.

Clinton 'Missed Chance To Get Bin Laden' (new)
The Telegraph (UK) ^ | 9-2-2003 | David Rennie

Posted on 09/01/2003 5:41:39 PM PDT by blam

Clinton 'missed chance to get rid of bin Laden'

By David Rennie in Washington
(Filed: 02/09/2003)

Bill Clinton refused to order a strike on Osama bin Laden after the bombing of the American destroyer Cole even though the al-Qa'eda leader's whereabouts were known, according to a book to be published this week.

Bill Clinton: shied away from an attack for reasons of diplomacy

In early leaks from Losing bin Laden, Richard Miniter, an investigative journalist, claims that Mr Clinton allowed the September 11 attacks to happen by squandering more than a dozen opportunities to capture or kill bin Laden. In two cases the terrorist leader's exact location was known, the book says.

Though Clinton supporters would doubtless reject the implication of responsibility for September 11, senior members of the Clinton White House did confirm, in interviews for the book, that they shied away from an attack immediately after the Cole bombing for reasons of diplomacy and military caution.

Robert Novak, a conservative columnist given early access to the book, reported yesterday that on Oct 12, 2000, the day the warship was bombed off Aden, killing 17 sailors, Mr Clinton's counter-terrorism chief, Richard Clarke, urged an immediate strike on al-Qa'eda camps and Taliban buildings in Kabul and Kandahar.

Such a strike would destroy terrorist infrastructure and with luck might kill bin Laden, Mr Clarke told senior colleagues. But he was overruled - first by the CIA and FBI, which wanted more investigation of the attack, and then by the Clinton cabinet.

Janet Reno, then the attorney general, said an attack would break international law. Madeleine Albright, the secretary of state, is quoted as saying that "bombing Muslims wouldn't be helpful at this time".

Most controversially, the book quotes William Cohen, then the defence secretary, as saying the Cole attack "was not sufficiently provocative" and retaliation might cause trouble in Pakistan.

Mr Cohen was quoted by Robert Novak in yesterday's Washington Post as saying he did not recall the cabinet meeting in question, but "certainly regarded the Cole as a major provocation".


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 911; afghanistan; alqaeda; alqaida; binladen; bookreview; chance; cia; clinton; clintonlegacy; cohen; dnastainonhumanity; doj; fbi; janetreno; losingbinladen; louisfreeh; madeleinealbright; missed; moreclintonevil; osama; pakistan; richardclarke; richardminiter; sept11; talibastards; tenet; usnavy; usscole; williamrodhamcohen; worthlessahole; yemen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last

1 posted on 09/01/2003 5:41:40 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: blam
I won't say it.....I just will not say it.....
2 posted on 09/01/2003 5:48:43 PM PDT by Paul Atreides (Bringing you quality, non-unnecessarily-excerpted threads since 2002)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
....White House intern Monica Lewinsky tried to tell President Bill Clinton that the CIA had called to tell him that they had Bin Laden in their grasp. The message was not heard by the President because Miss Lewinskys mouth was full at the time......
3 posted on 09/01/2003 5:49:49 PM PDT by JediForce (DON'T MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE AS "TORA BORA"...USE LOW YEILD NUKES NOW !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
Janet Reno, then the attorney general, said an attack would break international law. Madeleine Albright, the secretary of state, is quoted as saying that "bombing Muslims wouldn't be helpful at this time".

Yeah Reno but you had no trouble killing 82 people in WACO....you b!tch!

4 posted on 09/01/2003 5:52:21 PM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dog
Tanks for WACO.

Full rights of American legal system for Bin Laden.


Any questions???

5 posted on 09/01/2003 5:55:36 PM PDT by At _War_With_Liberals (If Hillary ever takes the oath of office, she will be the last President the US will ever have. -RR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dog
Normally, I feel bad for a person with Parkinson's Disease. In Janet's case, it is mighty difficult to do so.
6 posted on 09/01/2003 5:58:15 PM PDT by Paul Atreides (Bringing you quality, non-unnecessarily-excerpted threads since 2002)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dog
Janet Reno, then the attorney general, said an attack would break international law. Madeleine Albright, the secretary of state, is quoted as saying that "bombing Muslims wouldn't be helpful at this time".

Doesn't international law support the killing of white non-Muslims on foregin soil with extra bonus points for those killed on US soil?

7 posted on 09/01/2003 5:59:33 PM PDT by Dolphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: blam
There can never be too many reasons why the clintons must never be back in the White House. This is no exception.
8 posted on 09/01/2003 6:01:53 PM PDT by Mixer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog
Don't forget about the "aspirin factory", too.
9 posted on 09/01/2003 6:03:29 PM PDT by D. Brian Carter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mixer
"There can never be too many reasons why the clintons must never be back in the White House. This is no exception."

No exception, not ever!

10 posted on 09/01/2003 6:22:21 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
Oh, she might be able to shake it.
11 posted on 09/01/2003 6:23:25 PM PDT by John Beresford Tipton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: blam
There was a time when an attack on a ship was considered an act of war. The Spanish American War began with an attack on the Maine. WWI began with an attack on the Lusitania. WWII began with the bombing of the ships in Pearl Harbor.

But in 2000, we got weasel words like "bombing Muslims wouldn't be helpful at this time" and "[the Cole attack] was not sufficiently provocative". Then again, I guess we couldn't expect much more from an administration that was made up of weasels.

12 posted on 09/01/2003 6:28:58 PM PDT by Dave Olson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
To be fair, Clinton's schedule was very hectic at that time selling pardons.
13 posted on 09/01/2003 6:51:35 PM PDT by aynrandfreak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
I remember, after out victory in Afghanistan arguing with liberals online.

They claimed that Gore would have done all the same things as president in relation to dealing with the terrorists.

The Clinton record proved otherwise. How many 9/11s would there have been before Gore could be impeached and removed from office?
14 posted on 09/01/2003 7:01:16 PM PDT by swilhelm73
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Most controversially, the book quotes William Cohen, then the defence secretary, as saying the Cole attack "was not sufficiently provocative" and retaliation might cause trouble in Pakistan.

Mr Cohen was quoted by Robert Novak in yesterday's Washington Post as saying he did not recall the cabinet meeting in question, but "certainly regarded the Cole as a major provocation".

Back-pedal as hard and fast as you can Cohen. You won't out-run the swelling tide of evidence that your corrupt boss, his WINO (wife in name only), and his incompetent administration was directly and fully responsible for Sept. 11. May they all rot in their own filth.

Prairie

15 posted on 09/01/2003 7:13:47 PM PDT by prairiebreeze (please pardon my dust... I'm working on tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Madeleine Albright, the secretary of state, is quoted as saying that "bombing Muslims wouldn't be helpful at this time".

I can just HEAR her saying this. It certainly sounds just like the arrogant maid.

16 posted on 09/01/2003 7:17:25 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
All I can say is Thank you Clinton you spinless serpent.
17 posted on 09/01/2003 7:26:36 PM PDT by armymarinemom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prairiebreeze
"Back-pedal as hard and fast as you can Cohen. "

Wasn't it also Cohen who vetoed heavy equipment going to Somalia and consequently was responsible for some of the casualties in 'Black Hawk Down?"

18 posted on 09/01/2003 8:16:44 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: blam
Hey...Give the guy some credit. The way he wiped out those terrorist kids in Waco are a testament to...Sarcasm Alert.
19 posted on 09/01/2003 8:20:35 PM PDT by Young Werther
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Wasn't it also Cohen who vetoed heavy equipment going to Somalia and consequently was responsible for some of the casualties in 'Black Hawk Down?"


No, Les Aspin,, who did every $hi--y thing he could to the military as a congressman,Hope his death was agonizingly slow. He deserves a lower ring of Dante's nightmare .
20 posted on 09/01/2003 8:26:36 PM PDT by gatorbait
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 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