You Bush could have blamed Clinton for Sept 11

[LA RAM FAN]

Still wonder why Clinton wouldn't give the go-ahead to kill him when the CIA had him the FIRST time, after the FIRST WTC bombing.

Clinton gave the CIA the go ahead to kill Bin laden twice, the CIA however failed

thats not true at all.He never let them go after Bin Laden.

 

[Mustang]

He's a former President not a lame duck for crying out loud. Good grief. What now? All former Presidents are lame ducks?

I'm sure you didn't mean that statement.

And after his Presidency now as a private citizen he could speak more freely about many issues.

The Guardian is a very left wing newspaper. It's the Daily Mail and the Telegraph that are conservative.

And if you had actually read the article that I linked to in the Guardian you would have realized it was based on the ABC interview.

Did YOU even read the article you posted? It was dated Dec 1, 2008 WHEN Bush was STILL president but only for another 7 weeks.

For cripes sakes, are you really going to quibble about a couple of weeks? He's out the door for crying out loud. Whenever a new President is elected in November basically the one in office isn't a lame duck, but just a show piece.

Exit stage right. Come on. He was admitting his mistakes. You should be applauding this.

And BTW, I thought the one person who completely captured what it was like in the White House in the last days was that hysterical video that President Clinton made where he's washing the Presidential limousine and riding his bike and giving Hillary her lunch in the limo.

He nailed it with that. Too funny.

First of all, Bush was STILL president.

Secondly, and more importantly in my view, is the fact that Bush didn't admit to any mistake that he made. He said he regretted that the intelligence was wrong. That's not a mea culpa.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Several times Clinton was offered his head on a plate,and he refused.

Finally someone who understands what REALLY happend.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Since he was only in office 8 months when it happened. And the USS Cole was on his (clintons) watch and he had Bin Laden in his sights a few times and did nothing. But , did Bush blame Clinton for this no. HE took the high road and did what had to be done. Unlike the Blamer in chief we have in office now!

"Did Bush blame Clinton for this"? Yes he did....as did Righties in general.

you damn right the CITIZENS blamed Clinton..and rightfully so
now show us where Bush blamed Clinton? old rocks is already off trying to dig up on his claim..

Clinton and Bush are BOTH equally to blame.They both knew it would happen and allowed it to happen.

 

[Clementine]

Rush and Rudy indirectly blame 9/11 on Bill Clinton - YouTube

But, this thread is talking about how Bush did not blame anyone but the terrorists. The 9/11 attack was years in planning and yet no intel, or at least none that was acted on.

Obama is still blaming others, which is unprofessional. Can I assume the reason you posted this was to make Rudy and Rush look bad for blaming Clinton for his inaction regarding Osama bin Laden? If you think that makes them look bad, then it would be safe to assume you think Obama looks bad now for doing the same.

 

[tinydancer]

If only Bush had received a warning prior to 9/11 that Bin Laden was determined to attack the US. Like in a memo or something.

Look, I'm not blaming Bush for 9/11. The fault for that lies squarely on the terrorist jackasses who did it. I don't even think Bush could have done much to stop the attacks. That said, I think it's clear the Bush administration considered Bin Laden a non-threat and instead was focused on finding a reason to attack Iraq. And the idea that 9/11 can be blamed on Clinton is silly. Even if Clinton had a chance to kill Bin Laden and didn't not, which is debatable, it's still not his fault that Bin Laden did something months after Clinton left office.

My take on it is quite simply whether it was intelligence approaching President Clinton or President Bush or President <fill in the blank> with the proposal that an attack might be imminent no one could have predicted what would really happen.

And that attack by the enemy would be "a batch of guys getting on planes with box cutters, hijacking the planes and flying them into the WTC and the Pentagon" I know any rational human being, including a President is thinking "I want what they're smoking/drinking" OR
thinking "note to self: restrict all access to Art Bell and Coast to Coast to all CIA".

Before 9/11 happened no one ever could have dreamed up this case scenario.

So although both Presidents missed the boat on this, I'm sorry. I'm forgiving because it was the most unlikely scenario on the planet.

 

[elvis]

I blame Yoko.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

you damn right the CITIZENS blamed Clinton..and rightfully so
now show us where Bush blamed Clinton? old rocks is already off trying to dig up on his claim..

poor angry steffie... it must so suck to be you.

you would know about what it's like to suck I imagine..you have to follow people around the board to repeat the same stupid shit all the time..

but it blows your skirt up, so carry on

 

[Clementine]

Since he was only in office 8 months when it happened. And the USS Cole was on his (clintons) watch and he had Bin Laden in his sights a few times and did nothing. But , did Bush blame Clinton for this no. HE took the high road and did what had to be done. Unlike the Blamer in chief we have in office now!

Like hell. Clinton gave clear warning to Bush concerning Bin Laden. And people in Bush's administration made a joke about "Clinton's obsession with Bin Laden". A very correct obsession.

It took 8 or 9 years to plan 9/11, the entire length of Clinton's presidency. If he had an obsession with bin Laden, it didn't show in any of his actions, including turning down the chance to have bin Laden handed to him on a silver platter. We knew bin Laden was involved with previous terrorist attacks. If Clinton had passed along good intelligence info, that would be different, but why didn't Clinton act if he had all this knowledge before leaving office? I don't recall any jokes being made about Clinton's obsession and it didn't appear he had concerns considering he did nothing about it.

Funny how the left will blame Bush, not only for current troubles, but for things that were happening before he took office. That's playing the bushdidit game a little far.

 

[elvis]

He should of blamed Clinton..since he was the one who let him go when he had a chance to get him..

But Bush acted like a President and leader, not like another we have seen.

He did? By doing what? By attacking the wrong country? By ignoring the warnings before the attacks? By sitting there for a photo op while the country was under attack?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

If only Bush had received a warning prior to 9/11 that Bin Laden was determined to attack the US. Like in a memo or something.

Look, I'm not blaming Bush for 9/11. The fault for that lies squarely on the terrorist jackasses who did it. I don't even think Bush could have done much to stop the attacks. That said, I think it's clear the Bush administration considered Bin Laden a non-threat and instead was focused on finding a reason to attack Iraq. And the idea that 9/11 can be blamed on Clinton is silly. Even if Clinton had a chance to kill Bin Laden and didn't not, which is debatable, it's still not his fault that Bin Laden did something months after Clinton left office.

so he had all these warnings from all these different countries that were going to be terrorist attacks and did nothing to stop them,ignoring every warning and you dont blame Bush? gotcha. and you are wrong,like Ed said earlier,Clinton had PLENTY of chances to take him out and had hid head handed to him on a platter and did NOTHING..Neither Clinton or Bush had any interest in stopping terrorism.Bin Laden was just a patsy in the 9/11 operation.

 

[Clementine]

Still wonder why Clinton wouldn't give the go-ahead to kill him when the CIA had him the FIRST time, after the FIRST WTC bombing.

I guess Clinton didn't become obsessed with getting bin Laden till after Bush took office. Only when Bush was the man to blame did any Democrat have their knickers in a twist, but when they had their chance to capture him and prevent future attacks, they weren't interested. For heaven's sake, bin Laden was in custody and offered up to Clinton, who was more interested in the woman hiding under his desk than stopping a terrorist.

 

[Clementine]

Still wonder why Clinton wouldn't give the go-ahead to kill him when the CIA had him the FIRST time, after the FIRST WTC bombing.

Clinton gave the CIA the go ahead to kill Bin laden twice, the CIA however failed

Was this before or after bin Laden was actually in custody and offered to Clinton and would have made an easy target?

 

[bripat9643]

Since he was only in office 8 months when it happened. And the USS Cole was on his (clintons) watch and he had Bin Laden in his sights a few times and did nothing. But , did Bush blame Clinton for this no. HE took the high road and did what had to be done. Unlike the Blamer in chief we have in office now!

Like hell. Clinton gave clear warning to Bush concerning Bin Laden. And people in Bush's administration made a joke about "Clinton's obsession with Bin Laden". A very correct obsession.

Horseshit. His "clear warning" amounted to saying "something bad might happen sometime."

 

[LA RAM FAN]

If only Bush had received a warning prior to 9/11 that Bin Laden was determined to attack the US. Like in a memo or something.

Look, I'm not blaming Bush for 9/11. The fault for that lies squarely on the terrorist jackasses who did it. I don't even think Bush could have done much to stop the attacks. That said, I think it's clear the Bush administration considered Bin Laden a non-threat and instead was focused on finding a reason to attack Iraq. And the idea that 9/11 can be blamed on Clinton is silly. Even if Clinton had a chance to kill Bin Laden and didn't not, which is debatable, it's still not his fault that Bin Laden did something months after Clinton left office.

My take on it is quite simply whether it was intelligence approaching President Clinton or President Bush or President <fill in the blank> with the proposal that an attack might be imminent no one could have predicted what would really happen.

And that attack by the enemy would be "a batch of guys getting on planes with box cutters, hijacking the planes and flying them into the WTC and the Pentagon" I know any rational human being, including a President is thinking "I want what they're smoking/drinking" OR
thinking "note to self: restrict all access to Art Bell and Coast to Coast to all CIA".

Before 9/11 happened no one ever could have dreamed up this case scenario.

So although both Presidents missed the boat on this, I'm sorry. I'm forgiving because it was the most unlikely scenario on the planet.

your right about one thing,for someone to accept the idea of a bunch of guys getting on planes overpowering trained pros overpowering them with box cutters,highjacking the planes and flying them into the WTC and the pentagon,to believe that story any rational person would see that person has got to be on drugs. especially since some of the alleged highjackers turned up alive later and none of them were even listed on the passengers list.

 

[Clementine]

Clinton sets the record straight (1 of 2) - YouTube

Just a bump on this video for the Bush apologists.....

Well, if Slick Willy says it, it must be the truth. Is that all you've got?

 

[bripat9643]

Since he was only in office 8 months when it happened. And the USS Cole was on his (clintons) watch and he had Bin Laden in his sights a few times and did nothing. But , did Bush blame Clinton for this no. HE took the high road and did what had to be done. Unlike the Blamer in chief we have in office now!

I remember it differently.

That's why it's time to put down the crack pipe.

Several times during depositions during the investigations, I heard "91 days" over and over again. Besides the failure to read and react to the PDB indicating the attack was coming was not something that lent itself to shifting blame downward.

A PDB that says "some attack by someone may happen sometime" is virtually worthless.

 

[Stephanie]

He should of blamed Clinton..since he was the one who let him go when he had a chance to get him..

But Bush acted like a President and leader, not like another we have seen.

He did? By doing what? By attacking the wrong country? By ignoring the warnings before the attacks? By sitting there for a photo op while the country was under attack?

By not blaming anyone but the terrorist..but your rant was ok

 

[elvis]

He should of blamed Clinton..since he was the one who let him go when he had a chance to get him..

But Bush acted like a President and leader, not like another we have seen.

He did? By doing what? By attacking the wrong country? By ignoring the warnings before the attacks? By sitting there for a photo op while the country was under attack?

By not blaming anyone but the terrorist..but your rant was ok

ok. but has Obama blamed Bush for the attacks?

 

[Peach]

Since he was only in office 8 months when it happened. And the USS Cole was on his (clintons) watch and he had Bin Laden in his sights a few times and did nothing. But , did Bush blame Clinton for this no. HE took the high road and did what had to be done. Unlike the Blamer in chief we have in office now!

Like hell. Clinton gave clear warning to Bush concerning Bin Laden. And people in Bush's administration made a joke about "Clinton's obsession with Bin Laden". A very correct obsession.

Horseshit. His "clear warning" amounted to saying "something bad might happen sometime."

Looks like Bush II ignored ALL warnings:

Bush Administration's First Memo on al-Qaeda Declassified