.......but Clinton slyly left the "hard work" for his successor, and now, none of the Clinton Kool Aid drinkers want to remember how incompetent and negligent he was in confronting this massive evil and major threat to our country.
By Aug. of 1998, he was just too busy trying to salvage what he still thinks of as his "legacy," which explains his acquiescence to the "regime change" political urgency at that time.
The information was out there, largely by the excellent investigative work done by Jayna Davis. The CIA and FBI should have vigorously followed up, found the Iraqi connection and dealt with the "3rd man" and other "connect-the-dot" issues.
Who knows? Had the proper work been done at that time, there might never have been a 9/11.
"My own personal view on the cover-up is that Clinton didn't want to deal with global terrorism, or with the growing necessity for dealing with Saddam Hussein."
Yes...and the reason for this is because Clinton came into office with one major priority: Mid-East Peace between Israel and Palestine. That is why even after the first WTC attack in 1993, it wasn't Arabs he went after...but Christians at Waco.
"By 1998, the issue had become so urgent..."
Yep...finally, after the 2 embassy bombings Clinton had to do something. And while he tepidly declared his war on terrorism...it only lasted two weeks, so he could get the peace-talks back on track. Clinton never dealt seriously with these threats because he was afraid such acts would alienate the very Arab support he was seeking in the Israel/Pali conflict.
Your far too kind. Remember, not only did he kick the global terror can down the road, the SOB tried to turn the deaths of 160-odd people to his political advantage by blaming the political right.
Stained dresses, etc we can forget. But we should never forget this.
You're almost right. Clinton for sure did not want to provoke a public outcry for war with Iraq or an investigation by the new Republican Congress into how his Administration allowed ME terrorists into the country. But the larger reason he covered this up was that it was so incredibly useful for him to pin the whole thing on Tim McVeigh and Terry Nichols. They were apprehended so fast, and had ties to the militia movement and other right-wing groups that were manna from heaven for an embattled president. It was easy for the ultra-political White House to see that they had just been handed a huge gift, but it would all be messed up if it could be traced back to Iraq. The public would have seen the connection between the first World Trade Center bombing and Oklahoma City, and blamed Clinton for not doing enough after the WTC bombing to root out foreign terrorists. He would have been toast in 1996. So they stopped the FBI from investigating any ME connection. The coverup of the Oklahoma City bombing saved Clinton's presidency.
"Is this what the author calls a success in Kosovo, a model for Iraq? Deutsche Welle wrote on Nov. 15: "In Kosovo, human trafficking paid for much of the fighting. For the first time this year ... the world wide profits from human trafficking will exceed those of the drug trade." The Washington Times' own Jerry Seper reported as early as 1999, "Some members of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), which has financed its war efforts through the sale of heroin, were trained in terrorist camps run by international fugitive Osama bin Laden."
In November 2001, a Wall Street Journal Europe article said that in the past 10 years, al Qaeda's most senior leaders visited the Balkans. Osama bin Laden himself did three times between 1994 and 1996. While the Clinton administration underwrote the Bosnian Muslim government of Alija Izetbegovic, his embassy in Vienna gave bin Laden a passport in 1992.
Why did we go to war against the Serbian people? As Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media wrote on Feb. 19, "Clinton went to war on behalf of the Muslims, in Bosnia and then Kosovo. He wanted to appease the powerful Arab/Muslim bloc of nations and the Europeans who wanted to call the shots on U.S. foreign policy."
.......but Clinton slyly left the "hard work" for his successor, and now, none of the Clinton Kool Aid drinkers want to remember how incompetent and negligent he was in confronting this massive evil and major threat to our country.
----
Yes, it is true. But there was nothing 'sly' about Billy. He was a deliberate avoider of anything that might put pressure on HIS POLITICAL POSITION regardless of how bad it was for the country. Tragically, this mentality is becoming a mainstay attitude in Washington TODAY with personal politics far more important than doing the RIGHT THINGS for America, the job these bozos were sent there to do. Equally tragic is the mind-dead status of a big percentage of America that pays no attention to what Washington is DOING TO THEM.
"Who knows? Had the proper work been done at that time, there might never have been a 9/11."
Good point. I believe that Clinton's action on this would have prevented 9/11. We also know that Clinton was offered bin Laden 3 times by the Sudan and turned down the offers. Action on either or both most likely would mean that the original twin towers would still be standing on lower Manhattan.
The missing twin towers of the WTC are the Klintoon's legacy. And that is a legacy that Hillary also owns.
That...and there was an immediate political benefit to casting "right-wing wackos" as the perpetrators of the Murrah Building attack.
Clinton and the Democrats had just lost Congress to the Republican revolution, remember. In April, 1995, President Clinton had become an irrelevancy. Blaming the attack on right-wing militias made him relevant again.
Without having to go to all the trouble of getting serious about Middle Eastern terrorism, of course...
Exactly!!!!