Beefheart said:
Perhaps if Clinton had been paying more attention to intel than interns 9/11 wouldn't have happened.
Clinton told the Bush White House that Bin Laden and Al Quada was America's #1 threat They warned them to not take it lightly.....But of course...They wouldn't listen to him and his staff. The Bush people by reflexive action didn't take the Clinton people seriously. They thought they knew it all...and lived to regret it. (If that bunch ever regrets anything).
Richard Clarke was saying the same things...but of course...all they could see was Saddam Hussein. Talk about being blinded.
I know the Bush administration never..never..takes responsibilty for anything. That is their credo.
I see the Bush apologists at this site....fall into line with that same credo.[/QUOTE]
From:
http://www.lyingliar.com/lies/clintonosama.htm
The fact is (summed up by Rich Lowry) that: "Sudan offered to give bin Laden to Saudi Arabia, which would have meant his demise. But the U.S. didn't push the Saudis to accept, so bin Laden went to Afghanistan instead, giving him the safe sanctuary that would be crucial to his 9/11 plot."
And ABC News even reported that Janet Reno too turned down the 911 mastermind (my emphasis):
"Federal agents seeking bin Laden had developed a plan to have a plane fly in and attack a compound in Kandahar, Afghanistan, where the terror leader was believed to have been holed up back in 1998 — three years before the devastating attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. But when the plan went up the chain of command for approval, it was killed by then-Attorney General Janet Reno. 'They came to the decision that this plan was probably too dangerous, that the loss of life on the ground would have been significant,' (former FBI agent Jack) Cloonan said. 'There was concern that people around the bin Laden compound would be killed.'"
Much like the O'Reilly-Levittown claim, this argument is so easily proven false by just opening your eyes on the topic that it is ridiculous.
And you can't honestly address the Sudan controversy without dealing with the fact that and with the fact that Clinton has been taped after his presidency saying, "I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him." Franken, of course, doesn't deal with either.
Couldn't legally obtain bin Laden?...WTF?
Clinton himself is on record confirming this offer from the Sudanese existed. The administration even asked the FBI to consider whether bin Laden could be brought to the U.S. (the FBI said no, because he hadn't been indicted and ----well, why am I telling you this? Just listen to Clinton himself-- At a February 2002 business luncheon in New York, Clinton said this:
"Mr. Bin Laden used to live in Sudan ... And weÂ’d been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start meeting with them again. They released him. At the time, '96, he had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America."
...... that there was just no possible way that Clinton could have ever actually obtained bin Laden. Course, that would only prove the legitimacy of the conservative argument that we shouldn't deal with international terrorists through the legal system. They aren't criminals; they're enemy combatants. From the beginning of the war on terror, conservatives had been asking why mess with a grand jury when you could use a military tribunal? Clinton not taking custody of bin Laden from the Sudanese because of a perceived lack of legal evidence to hold him is the ultimate case in point argument for conservatives on this issue. Another downfall of indicting terrorists in a grand jury is that the information revealed there is sealed. You can't use it to "connect the dots."
Information used in the first WTC bombing trial helped Al-Qaeda hide it's tracks (or "dots") when planning 9/11. This exposes the folly of the law the Democratic Congress passed banning the FBI and CIA from sharing information, because the FBI couldn't tell the CIA what they knew about bin Laden. The Clinton administration's grand jury procedure made it impossible for agencies to share information from things like the plot to blow up those airliners over the Pacific in the mid-90s. Al's friend Rush Limbaugh "Never forget this, folks: the Clinton administration - and in some cases Clinton personally - chose to let bin Laden roam free." It's sad but true. It's been reported that Clinton has confided that this failure "was the greatest mistake of my presidency"
----
You state: "Clinton told the White House that OBL was America's 1st threat. He warned them not to take it lightly. "
If he had only paid attention to his own words.
