Randall Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 (edited) It's about time other democrats did the same. Before 911 not thing was done to get bin laden and now they blame others for their own incompetence. All right Bill. "A Combative Clinton Defends Record on Fighting Terrorism Former President Faults Neocons for Inaction on Bin Laden By Michael Grunwald Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, September 24, 2006; A09 Former president Bill Clinton angrily defended his administration's counterterrorism record during a Fox News interview to be aired today, while accusing "President Bush's neocons" and other Republicans of ignoring Osama bin Laden until the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Clinton had planned to discuss his climate change initiative during his appearance on "Fox News Sunday," but he turned combative after host Chris Wallace asked why he hadn't "put bin Laden and al-Qaeda out of business." Clinton shot back that "all the conservative Republicans" who now criticize him for inattention to bin Laden used to criticize him for over-attention to bin Laden. Clinton said he authorized the CIA to kill bin Laden, and even "contracted with people to kill him." He also said he had a plan to attack Afghanistan, overthrow the Taliban and hunt for bin Laden after the attack on the USS Cole, but the CIA and FBI refused to certify that bin Laden was responsible, and Uzbekistan refused to allow the United States to set up a base. By contrast, Clinton said the Bush administration's neoconservatives "had no meetings on bin Laden for nine months," believing he had been "too obsessed with bin Laden." "At least I tried," Clinton said. "That's the difference [between] me and some, including all of the right-wingers who are attacking me now. They ridiculed me for trying. They had eight months to try. They did not try. I tried. So I tried and failed. When I failed, I left a comprehensive anti-terror strategy and the best guy in the country, [Richard] Clarke, who got demoted." Clinton seemed particularly irked by Wallace's reference to his decision in 1993 to pull troops out of Somalia, a move bin Laden later described as a sign of American weakness. Clinton argued that even though many Republicans demanded a withdrawal from Somalia the day after the downing of a Black Hawk helicopter, he kept a U.S. presence there for another six months to ensure an orderly transition to United Nations forces. That's when the interview got testy, as a Fox transcript reflects: Clinton : There is not a living soul in the world who thought Osama bin Laden had anything to do with Black Hawk down or was paying any attention to it, or even knew al-Qaeda was a going concern in October '93. Wallace : I understand. Clinton : No, no, wait. Don't tell me that -- you asked why didn't I do more to bin Laden, there was not a living soul, all the people who now criticize me wanted to leave the next day. You brought this up, so you get an answer. But you -- secondly, Wallace : -- Bin Laden says, but it showed the weakness of the United States. Clinton : Bin Laden may have said it -- but it would have shown the weakness if we left right away. But he wasn't involved in that, that's just a bunch of bull. That was about Mohamed Aideed, a Muslim warlord, murdering 22 Pakistani Muslim troops. We were all there on a humanitarian mission; we had no mission, none, to establish a certain kind of Somali government or keep anybody out. He was not a religious fanatic -- Wallace : Mr. President -- Clinton : -- there was no al-Qaeda -- Wallace : With respect, if I may, instead of going through '93 and -- Clinton : No, no -- you asked it. You brought it up. Wallace, a 30-year broadcast veteran who worked at NBC and ABC before Fox, is not usually considered part of the network's conservative commentariat, but Clinton accused him of doing "Fox's bidding" by preparing a "conservative hit job." He attacked Wallace for failing to ask Bush administration officials why Clarke was demoted from his counterterrorism job: "Tell the truth, Chris. Tell the truth, Chris. Did you ever ask that?" He also complained that Wallace had lured him to the interview "under false pretences," but when Wallace offered to discuss his climate change project, he replied: "No, I want to finish this now." And so he did, attacking President Bush for focusing on Iraq instead of Afghanistan, urging Americans to read Clarke's book and accusing Republicans of "a serious disinformation campaign" to blame the Clinton administration for losing bin Laden. "I got closer to killing him than anybody's gotten since," Clinton said. "And if I were still president, we'd have more than 20,000 troops there trying to kill him. . . . You got that little smirk on your face and you think you're so clever, but I had responsibility for trying to protect this country. I tried and I failed to get bin Laden. I regret it, but I did try and I did everything I thought I responsibly could." Edited September 24, 2006 by Randall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spain Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 Clinton has been proven time and time again to be a liar. I dont believe anything he says and you would have to be an idiot to do so. I did see a show on the History Channel outlining how he screwed the pooch on Bin Laden a couple of times. But Clinton was so busy not trying to offend people that he allowed Bin Laden to get away several times. He was a disaster as President in terms of our national security and now he again is refusing to accept responsibility for his failures. Typical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big F'n Dave Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 Dubya has been proven time and time again to be a liar. I dont believe anything he says and you would have to be an idiot to do so. Someday we'll see a show on the History Channel outlining how he screwed the pooch on Bin Laden while wasting billions of dollars in Iraq. He is a disaster as President in terms of our national security and now he again is refusing to accept responsibility for his failures. Typical. Werd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 Clinton ... is refusing to accept responsibility for his failures. Typical. unfortunately it's to the point that a president even admitting that there was a failure is a breath of fresh air Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Neutron Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 On a related note - anybody see the clip Leno showed the other night when the new gal on the Today Show interviewed Bill? She wiped her hand on her leg after shaking his hand. It was pretty funny - one of those subconscious, "yuck" moments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 I tried and I failed to get bin Laden. I regret it, but I did try and I did everything I thought I responsibly could."[/b] he again is refusing to accept responsibility for his failures. Typical. Reading comprehension is apparently not all that important in Tennessee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 Reading comprehension is apparently not all that important in Tennessee. Werd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polksalet Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 Typical demoncrat traitorous idiots. Dont you people have some kids to murder or poles to smoke? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polksalet Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 More democrats are apparently firing back Sept. 11 inscriptions spark outrage By Beth Lucas, Tribune September 23, 2006 Inscriptions etched into Arizona’s Sept. 11 monument — meant to inspire and capture the horror of the terrorist attacks — sparked the beginnings of a political blog battle this week. The monument was unveiled at Phoenix’s Wesley Bolin Memorial Plaza near the state Capitol on the fifth anniversary of the attacks. A timeline and record of key events and quotes are etched onto a giant angled ring reflected by sunlight in what designers said was intended to capture how Arizona and the nation responded to the attacks, and to remember the strong emotions. But this week, blog visitors have said they’re shocked at some of the inscriptions, which they describe as political statements against the Bush administration and its war on terror. One inscription states, “You don’t win battles of terrorism with more battles.” Another: “Congress questions why CIA and FBI didn’t prevent attacks.” And another reads, “Erroneous US air strike kills 46 Uruzgan civilians,” referring to a wedding reportedly hit by mistake in Afghanistan. “It’s a worldview that is critical of America, and in many cases cheapens 9/11,” said Greg Patterson, a lobbyist and consultant who operates the EspressoPundit blog, where he and his readers have been critical of the memorial. “It is bent on attacking the Bush administration’s take on the war, at the expense of the memory of 9/11.” Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, said he was stunned to learn of the inscriptions. “To politicize it to me is absolutely outrageous, instead of a memorial to remember those who have sacrificed their lives,” he said. Tempe resident Donna Bird, whose husband Gary was killed in the attack, was among the 30-member Arizona 9/11 Memorial Commission created by former Gov. Jane Hull in 2002. She said all the inscriptions were found factual by an Arizona State University history professor. She added that she wouldn’t have helped design the memorial, which names her husband, if it were political. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 Typical demoncrat traitorous idiots. Dont you people have some kids to murder or poles to smoke? Dude - you were planning to run for office as a Democrat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 Someone should start firing back at the bullsh*t artists running the country into the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted September 25, 2006 Author Share Posted September 25, 2006 Clinton inherited Al Qaeda from George Bush Sr but never blamed the senior Bush for it. CNN's coverage of this. In the interview, which was taped on Friday, Clinton also lashed out at Fox's Chris Wallace, accusing him of promising to discuss Clinton's initiative on climate change, then straying from the issue by asking why the former president didn't do more to "put bin Laden and al Qaeda out of business." "So you did Fox's bidding on this show. You did your nice little conservative hit job on me," he said to Wallace, occasionally tapping on Wallace's notes for emphasis. "I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked this question of? (Watch Clinton blast the "neo-cons" -- 1:51) "And you've got that little smirk on your face and you think you're so clever. But I had responsibility for trying to protect this country. I tried and I failed to get bin Laden. I regret it," Clinton said. Wallace said that the question was drawn from viewer e-mails. Clinton asserted he had done more to try to kill bin Laden than "all the right-wingers who are attacking me now." In fact, Clinton said, conservatives routinely criticized him for "obsessing" over bin Laden while he was in office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 Clinton has been proven time and time again to be a liar. I dont believe anything he says and you would have to be an idiot to do so. That's hilariously ironic for someone defending Bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted September 25, 2006 Author Share Posted September 25, 2006 Right wingers are truly amazing. Bush does absolutely nothing to prevent 911, engages in a war Barney Fife would do a better job of, then blame everyone but the man responsible and fails at every thing he has ever done but you support the idiot. If Bush would kiss Saddam and say he's a great man you'd fall for that BS too. Truly amazing people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 billy boy lying once again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 Someone let me know if it gets onto Youtube. I can't find it right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 USA, terrorism free since 2001! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puddy Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 USA, terrorism free since 2001! Thanks to the United Kingdom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 For anyone that's been paying attention at all, this is all old news. Just because Bush crawled ontop of the pile of debris of 9-11 to use it for political advantage doesn't mean he's ever kept this country safe or ever made it safer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 USA, terrorism free since 2001! I attribute that to Jenna Jameson since she went all lesbo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spain Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 Someone should start firing back at the bullsh*t artists running the country into the ground. Bill Clinton is no longer in office thankfully! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spain Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 That's hilariously ironic for someone defending Bush. Speaking of reading comprehension problems! I didnt defend Bush, but merely pointed out that Clinton is a known serial liar. And yet you liberals hang on his every word like white house interns and large nosed arkansas sl*ts used to hang from his nut sack. Clinton cant be trusted because of his propensity to lie. When he said to the American people, "I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinksi" and then had his wife go on national television and blame it all on a "vast right wing conspiracy", I believed him. When he went under oath and lied more about his sexual peccadillo's, I believed him. When he lied about his 12 year affair with Jennifer Flowers and the trist with Paula Jones, I believed him. But when all of these things turned out to be just a pack lies, I decided I wouldnt believe a word that man said ever again, and I dont. You simply have to take what he says with a grain of salt, especially when he is trying to cover his ass like in the article above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted September 25, 2006 Author Share Posted September 25, 2006 Speaking of reading comprehension problems! I didnt defend Bush, but merely pointed out that Clinton is a known serial liar. And yet you liberals hang on his every word like white house interns and large nosed arkansas sl*ts used to hang from his nut sack. I don't hang on his every word. I liked the fact that he spoke the truth about bin laden and the fact that Bush was warned and did nothing to pretect us before 911. He was warned 50 times(according to the 911 commission) but remained on fricking vacation. He did the same thing during Katrina. In both cases he did nothing. Since he has made us all less safe with his war. Calling Clinton a liar while defending Bush, the biggest liar in hsitory, is a bit much. Clinton lied when he got in trouble. I didn't like that, but Bush lies every minute of every day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spain Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 Calling Clinton a liar while defending Bush, the biggest liar in hsitory, is a bit much. Clinton lied when he got in trouble. I didn't like that, but Bush lies every minute of every day. This statement just shows how stupidly partisan you are lulu. You want people to take you seriously but how can we with this drivel. "Bush lies every minute of every day" and "Clinton only lied when he got in trouble". Come on Lulu. You are like skins only dumber... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polksalet Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 I don't hang on his every word. I liked the fact that he spoke the truth about bin laden and the fact that Bush was warned and did nothing to pretect us before 911. He was warned 50 times(according to the 911 commission) but remained on fricking vacation. He did the same thing during Katrina. In both cases he did nothing. Since he has made us all less safe with his war. Calling Clinton a liar while defending Bush, the biggest liar in hsitory, is a bit much. Clinton lied when he got in trouble. I didn't like that, but Bush lies every minute of every day. The point is that since Clinton is a known liar, how can you believe anything he says? I think that is a valid point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts