37 americans died from al Qaeda terrorism during Clinton's two terms...

[Brotherjohn]

That's what I just read in another post -- http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1305436 (don't have the source info).

Assuming that's true, how many Americans have Al Qaeda killed in Bush's first 3 years / 2 months... NOT even counting 9-11, not even counting Iraq? How many incidents have there been targeting Americans and our allies?

I'm guessing it's more than during Clinton's two terms, or at least close, what with the Bali, Riyadh, Madrid and Morocco bombings. Certainly it must be more on an annual basis. And then there's 9-11.

So he's good at protecting us from terrorism, huh?

[arcane1]

1. and IIRC, many of the perpetrators of those 1990's acts were CAUGHT

and PUNISHED

said it before, and again- 9/11 was the best thing to happen to Bush, and he NEEDS TERRORISTS in order to get any support from average Americans at all

[RobertSeattle]

2. I think the 37 is an important figure

The Bush Administration always like to use 9/11 has their new "prism/paradigm/whatever" to justify things AFTER 9/11. But Prism's work both ways. BEFORE 9/11, Al Qaeda had "only" killed 37 Americans so there was just no political will (from either party) to deal with them. Like Clarke said, to make critical changes, you need body bags - it's just the way things work unfortunately.

[FloridaPat]

3. On 60 minutes, they pointed out to Rice that more people

have died in the 18 months before 9-11 then in the 18 months since 9-11. So how can they say they're doing a good job on the war against terrorism. Rice replied: "you're looking at it the wrong way".

Sure.