Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Clinton/Gore had SEVERAL chances to whack or capture Osama"...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
oc2002 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 01:12 PM
Original message
"Clinton/Gore had SEVERAL chances to whack or capture Osama"...
I am sick of hearing this almost daily on Hanity and Rush, is there a link that clearly points out how dishonest this statement is?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
keithyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
1. But we still have "whacked" or captured Osama.
I bet he's been dead for at least a year. Died a natural death from kidney disease.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tjwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. Sorry Rush, but Clinton never had two major buildings in NYC...
...destroyed on his watch. Try again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billybob537 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
3. Bush had three chances to whack the terrorist
in Kurdish northern Iraq. He failed, what a surprise! Now this terrorist is our biggest problem in Iraq ... Al Zaquari ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hong Kong Cavalier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
4. Clarke's "Against All Enemies" mentions this...
And he said that Clinton tried to kill bin Laden multiple times, but the Pentagon, stocked to the gills with republican officers left over from Reagan and Bush 1, resisted EVERY DAMN TIME.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
5. A few points about this lie
First of all I love how the right suddenly would have been in full support of Clinton deploying the military whenever and whereever he wanted. It wasn't like that, Lott"I can suppor the troops without supporting the President", and so on. They raised hell when he even dare set foot on a military base, Helms "he better gring his bodyguards" about a visit to Ft.Bragg NC.

Now they claim that they would have been fully behind dropping 20-30 of our best fighters into the Sudan (since there was NO chance the whole thing was a set-up) where they could have been taken hostage or surrounded.

Second, Ijaz is a credible as Chalabi. HE wasn't an agent of the US and had no authority to establish any deals, the fact that he was using this deal to further his oil persuits in the Sudan blew his credibility out of the water.


Third, Clarke points out in his book that the military brass always hit the brakes at the last minute in all of the "close calls".


It is completely rubbish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sal316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. and now Ijaz is a Fox "Terrorism Expert"
...nuff said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #9
17. That is the only place you will see him mentioned
Everyone else (except the NEwsmax, Wash.Times, etc.) knows that he is not a credible source.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wickerman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
6. And this explains the utter failure of Bush* to do so with
every man and women of the US armed forces, every police force in every nation looking for Osama, AND 230$ Billion at his disposal? Oh, that's right, Georgie took his eye off the ball and went after the bad man his daddy and his Sec of Def created. Way to stay on message Rush and Sean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ganja Ninja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
7. Tell them to google "Wag the Dog."
They were freaking out when Clinton went into Kosovo and no American troops were killed in that war.
You can't prove anything to these people that they won't conveniently forget five minutes later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hunter_1253 Donating Member (121 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
8. I may be wrong...
but the so-called chances Clinton had came from intelligence (oxymoron) given by one Mr. Ahmad Chalibi, who as everyone already knows, is the best source of information about locations of troops, terrorists, and WMD's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThoughtCriminal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. No, the source was Ijaz
Mansoor Ijaz, a former "lobbyist for Pakistan" who is now a regular Clinton hit-man on conservative FOX News and the National Review.

This guy is not even remotely credible. Most bush-bots have no clue where the story came from.

http://xpat.org/archives/000157.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lanparty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 01:43 PM
Response to Original message
11. "Al Gore claimed he invented the internet"

These liars just keep them going. The news media should be all over this shit setting things straight.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
12. Psst. Come here. I got something to tell you
You won't hear Hanity and Rush saying this shit if you don't listen to them assholes. I am tired of seeing subject lines by posters here at DU repeating their insane rantings. You have about a half an hour to change it. Why don't you?

Don

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
13. What? They can't read?
Of course they can't! Silly me. They need to read Richard Clarke's book 'Against All Enemies'. He talks about the Clinton order to KILL bin Laden.

EVERYTHING is CLINTON'S fault. What a bunch of sad, pathetic losers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
14. 911 Commission findings:

from: http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/hearing8/staff_statement_5.pdf
"Usama Bin Ladin, 1996
The U.S. government was also interested in another individual with disturbing ties toterrorists, a Saudi named Usama Bin Ladin. Bin Ladin was then based in Sudan. Underthe influence of the radical Islamist Hassan al Turabi, Sudan had become a safe haven for violent Islamist extremists. By 1995, the U.S. government had connected Bin Ladin toterrorists as an important terrorist financier.
Since 1979 the Secretary of State has had the authority to name State Sponsors of Terrorism, subjecting such countries to significant economic sanctions. Sudan was so designated in 1993. In February 1996, for security reasons, U.S. diplomats left Khartoum.
International pressure further increased as the regime failed to hand over three individuals involved in a 1995 attempt to assassinate Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak. The United Nations Security Council imposed sanctions on the regime.
Diplomacy had an effect. In exchanges beginning in February 1996, Sudanese officials began approaching U.S. officials, asking what they could do to ease the pressure. During the winter and spring of 1996, Sudan’s defense minister visited Washington and had a series of meetings with representatives of the U.S. government. To test Sudan’s willingness to cooperate on terrorism the United States presented eight demands to their Sudanese contact. The one that concerned Bin Ladin was a request for intelligence information about Bin Ladin’s contacts in Sudan.
These contacts with Sudan, which went on for years, have become a source of controversy. Former Sudanese officials claim that Sudan offered to expel Bin Ladin to the United States. Clinton sdministration officials deny ever receiving such an offer. We have not found any reliable evidence to support the Sudanese claim.
Sudan did offer to expel Bin Ladin to Saudi Arabia and asked the Saudis to pardon him.
U.S. officials became aware of these secret discussions, certainly by March 1996. The evidence suggests that the Saudi government wanted Bin Ladin expelled from Sudan, but would not agree to pardon him. The Saudis did not want Bin Ladin back in their country at all.
U.S. officials also wanted Bin Ladin expelled from Sudan. They knew the Sudanese were considering it. The U.S. government did not ask Sudan to render him into U.S. custody.
According to Samuel Berger, who was then the deputy national security adviser, the interagency Counterterrorism and Security Group (CSG) chaired by Richard Clarke had a hypothetical discussion about bringing Bin Ladin to the United States. In that discussion a Justice Department representative reportedly said there was no basis for bringing him to the United States since there was no way to hold him here, absent an indictment. Berger adds that in 1996 he was not aware of any intelligence that said Bin Ladin was responsible for any act against an American citizen. No rendition plan targeting Bin Ladin, who was still perceived as a terrorist financier, was requested by or presented to senior policymakers during 1996. Yet both Berger and Clarke also said the lack of an indictment made no difference.
Instead they said the idea was not worth pursuing because there was no chance that Sudan would ever turn Bin Ladin over to a hostile country. If Sudan had been serious, Clarke said, the United States would have worked something out.
However, the U.S. government did approach other countries hostile to Sudan and Bin Ladin about whether they would take Bin Ladin. One was apparently interested. No handover took place.
Under pressure to leave, Bin Ladin worked with the Sudanese government to procure safe passage and possibly funding for his departure. In May 1996, Bin Ladin and his associates leased an Ariana Airlines jet and traveled to Afghanistan, stopping to refuel in the United Arab Emirates. Approximately two days after his departure, the Sudanese informed the U.S. government that Bin Ladin had left. It is unclear whether any U.S. officials considered whether or how to intercept Bin Ladin."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
F.Gordon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 02:01 PM
Response to Original message
15. I have a link, but why do you need it?
You could make a career out of disputing the bullshit that comes from these RW assholes. But, if you should get through the Reverend Limbaugh screeners I'm sure Rush would love to have you on air....

These contacts with Sudan, which went on for years, have become a source of controversy. Former Sudanese officials claim that Sudan offered to expel Bin Ladin to the United States. Clinton administration officials deny ever receiving such an offer. We
have not found any reliable evidence to support the Sudanese claim.

http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/hearing8/staff_statement_5.pdf

On 15 October 1999, citing the failure of the Taliban authorities to respond to this demand, the Council applied broad sanctions under the enforcement provisions of the UN Charter. In resolution 1267 (1999), it noted that Usama bin Laden had been indicted by the United States for the August 1998 embassy bombings and demanded that the Taliban faction - never recognized as Afghanistan's legitimate government - turn him over to the appropriate authorities to be brought to justice. The sanctions, imposed on 14 November following non-compliance, included the freezing by States of all funds and other financial resources owned or controlled by the Taliban.

http://www.un.org/News/dh/latest/afghan/un-afghan-history.shtml


1999 was the first time the Clinton government pursued an "acquisition" of Bin Laden, because prior to the 1998 bombings it wasn't clear who the hell he was.....or how he was involved in terrorism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oc2002 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. thanks for the info.

I was just tired of hearing this repeated over and over, with no proof.

Thanks, now I can dispute it when I see it again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
the Kelly Gang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 03:44 PM
Response to Original message
18. just accept it..if Bill could have then it's Hillary's fault !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrSlayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-04 04:04 PM
Response to Original message
19. Here's what Snopes has to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC