Im not a big docu-drama fan so I didnt see "Path to 9/11" when it first aired on ABC and I wouldnt normally watch Sean Hannity's new show on Sunday nights...but I think I might this week.
Seems the Clintonistas are up in arms again that Fox is going to be airing the footage that Bubba et al forced ABC to censor out of the original movie and are once again trying to suppress free speech.
"This movie was a completely false piece of right-wing propaganda when it was on ABC, and it will be exactly the same on Fox if they make the unfortunate choice to air it, though it should be right at home," said Jay Carson, a Clinton spokesman.
Well if weve learned anything from Clinton and the FOB's is that once they start bemoaning the VRWC....is that the accusations being leveled are usually true -- see: Flowers, Jones, Lewinsky, illegal bombing of Kosovo.
Now I would like to be clear on this. I do not blame any Americans for the acts of murderous islamofascist cowards, however much I may disagree with their politics. The blame lies squarely on obl and the terrorists.
but....
Here is what we do know......
February 26, 1993 alqaeda funded Islamist terrorists attacked the World Trade Center. Clinton called the cops, who with the exception of releasing Abdul Rahman Yasin, did an outstanding job solving the "crime" aspect of the attack -- but did next to nothing to address the declaration of war against us. (Clinton responded by ordering the murder of American citizens in Waco, TX the following week)
On October 3, 1993 The Battle of Mogadishu commenced and resulted in eighteen dead American soldiers and three days later a Clinton ordered retreat.
The attack on the Khobar Towers Saudi Arabia in '96 killing nineteen American service men went unanswered.
Beginning in 1996 the Sudanese government offered Clinton a treasure trove of information on bin laden. He refused. As Tim Carney the ambassador to the Sudan stated:
"The fact is, they were opening the doors, and we werent taking them up on it. The U.S. failed to reciprocate Sudan's willingness to engage us on some serious questions of terrorism. We can speculate that this failure had serious implications at least for what happened at the U.S. Embassies in 1998. In any case, the U.S. lost access to a mine of material on bin Laden and his organization. --- It was worse than a crime. It was a fuckup."
In 1998 three US embassies in Africa were bombed by Islamist terrorists resulting in the death of 257 persons. Clinton responded by writing a strongly worded Executive Order 13099 (dont do biz with bad guys) and authorizing the bombing of an aspirin factory.
Up until 1998, the Kosovo Liberation Army were classified as a terrorist organization as Robert Gelbard envoy to the Balkans under Clinton described them:
"without any questions, a terrorist group"
Yet in 1998 the bin laden backed KLA were removed from the State Department's terrorism list, and the following year received training (in violation of aforementioned Executive Order 13099) from US agents leading up to the illegal, unconstitutional, and lacking Congressional approval bombing campaign of Kosovo.
What we know of Clintons foreign policy of appeasement and non-action is damning enough. When liberals defend Bubba, they do so without looking at the big picture. When Clinton lied, they cry it was just sex. Well yes it was just a blowjob in one instance, and in and of itself I have no problem with that -- The Aurora have always been pro-fellatio (our taste in women just happens to be more discerning) but it was so much more. The shady land deals, the shady commodity deals, and the shady abuse of gov't agencies (primarily the IRS) to investigate and persecute foes etc etcetera.
At the very least -- the resulting damage control prevented Clinton from being an effective leader in a time of war and the very worst his administration aggressively pursued a course of action resulting in the murder of innocent Christians (see: KLA and Waco, TX) and his non action (see: all other attacks) only acted to embolden our enemies.
I know I know Clinton was charming, our first black sax playing President. A "master politician" ...thats just frickin great, but even the most devout apologist can not defend his track record with a straight face -- as it is undeniable that his foreign policy was, to paraphrase the Ambassador to the Sudan Tim Carney.... "a fuckup".
What concerns and troubles me is what we dont know -- and for that Clinton has Sandy Berger to thank and its a shame that the mainstream media does not give the Berger story a fraction of the coverage that they devote to Scooter. We must push for the truth to be told and for Berger to uphold the conditions of his plea bargain and answer these question under polygraph examination.
This has nothing (ok very little) to do with gop v dem as it does with right versus wrong -- especially when the lives and safety of Americans are at stake. You can not have it both ways by destroying classified information and then try to censor people when they try to document and report on said events. The dog ate my homework aint gonna cut it.
I have a hunch, and its just a hunch that it wasnt love letters to Lewinsky that were destroyed...and it's high time we found out exactly how complicit and incompetent the previous administration were regarding attacks against our country.
28 comments:
A well-written post Donkey. Obviously fuck-ups are not unique to the Bush administration, although they have elevated them almost to an art form.
A few points. Clinton did more than bomb what may or may not have been an aspirin factory; he also launched cruise missiles at Osama bin Ladin's camps in Afghanistan, if memory serves.He tried to kill him.
As to the KLA being a terrorist group: no doubt. America has never been against terrorist groups; we have supported them in Cuba, and Afghanististan. Neither has America ever been anti-dictator. Saddam was our friend before he was our enemy.So was Osama, for that matter. One reason Bush was so sure that he had WMDs was because his father sold them to him.
gary, lets get it straight. clinton didn't send missiles into afghanistan to get osama, he sent them into pakistan AFTER his secretary of state madeline HALFbright warned Pakistan that they were coming. So clinton bombed an empty camp. Also, according to the 9/11 commission (whatever thats worth) we never sold any wmd or any other weapons to osama, and in fact the only aid we gave anyone at that time was directed to the people of afghanistan who were caught in the middle of the whole mess.
We also never sold wmd to saddam. to say we don't have a problem with dictators is also wrong. in the case of saddam, we supported him diplomatically because he was fighting the khomeni regime at the time so he was considered the lesser of two evils in a region that was and STILL IS vital to our national interests.
here endeth the lesson.
Read "Spider's Web: The Secret History of How the White House Illegally Armed Iraq" by Alan Friedman and then tell me we didn't arm Saddam.
Your wrote: "it's high time we found out exactly how complicit and incompetent the previous administration were regarding attacks against our country." Fair enough, but I would extend that to the Bush administration as well.Clinton didn't do enough--Bush did nothing before Sept 11 (except screw up)and has totally screwed up the war against Al Qaeda since Sept 11 (but we kicked Saddam's butt right?)
Yes we have dealt with evil men in the past and will continue to do so in the future.
The point that I was trying to make and seems to have been lost with my timeline is that never before has the turnaround been so quick from friend? to foe. Under Clinton we were actively supporting friends of alqaeda at the same time alqaeda were actively waging war on us. That we know for fact, what we dont know is the extent of Clintons complicity with our enemies.
Bush has made mistakes thats for sure, but I expect my President to err on the side of America as opposed to appeasing our adversaries. For that I am thankful for President George W Bush.
First of all, i don't really really read a lot of fiction. Freidman is, much like yourself, an admitted conspiracy guy, and he also conveniently only finds these conspiracies in republican administrations. Also, Bush was in office for only a few months before sept. 11. and thanks to the wall of separation created by jamie gorelick, the little bit of information we did have was almost impossible to confirm because the cia group (able danger) wasn't allowed to tell the FBI what they suspected.
gary all you do is try to either defend the dems, or deflect the blame to Bush. Why aren't you, as a conspiracy guy, up in arms about the whole sandy berger thing? If this isn't a conspiracy then there never has been one. ever!
donkey wrote: what we dont know is the extent of Clintons complicity with our enemies.
careful--you're starting to sound like the "bush is a nazi" crowd. those wild insinuations detract from your argument, which makes a lot of important points.
but i only know of one political family that has profited from business relationships with our enemies while we were fighting them. anyone know who i'm thinking of?
Well Donksy the only difference is I have the truth on my side. Bush isnt a nazi but we know for a fact that Clinton gave aid and training to the bin laden backed KLA while at the same time they were waging war on us...my question is how far the rabbit hole goes.
....to answer your question. Id have to say all old money political families...Kennedy's, Gore's, Bush's etc as well as the nouveau power....Clintons, Heinz-Kerry's, Cheney's, Pelosi's.
Donsky don't get caught up in the bullshit.
What was contained in those documents that was so damning that the former national security advisor would risk jail time to cover it up?
Was he only protecting himself? was he also protecting the clintons? and why did the Bush justice department go so easy on him? was he also protecting one or both of the Bush administrations?
These are questions that we'll probably never have answered! what's up with bob woodward? he's not curious about this? Gee i wonder why?
EIGHT F-ING YEARS...and they DID NOTHING!!!!!!!!
.....except polish brass in the Oval Office.
Wow thanks for that productive commentary,Jane.
Donsky do you really think you will get anywhere with this? You know they are beyond partisan apologists, its a lost cause. You wont get the objectivity in discussion you want here no matter how many times you try.
Instead of looking at the truth on both sides, back to Clinton but also back to Bush senior, let's just talk about Clinton some more. blah blah Clinton was a wimp after the Cole, blah blah well Bush didnt get Bin Laden either and so on and so on. Fact is nobody seems to be getting him despite billions and thousands dead and THAT emboldens the enemy because it shows we cant focus and we can't do what needs to be done.
For all your talk about getting jobs done, your man did shit for America with control of ALL branches. Somebody might let Jane in on that fact too.
You want the emboldened enemy issue to be about the liberals you hate, to substantiate your divisive mindset- but not about the people who sat and read goat tales while his military couldn't even SEE the hijacked planes on the NORAD system to do anything about them.
I know you hate CNN but at least it was a way for our commanders to find out what was going on during the "competent" management. But at least Bush didnt wonder what tie to wear, one small comfort.
Dont you think that it emboldens the enemy to see tapes of Bin laden laughing at how easy it was to strike America? What about the fact that civilians had to intervene in Pennsylvania?
Do you think the enemy is emboldened by the fact that a couple of half assed pilots could penetrate the damn Pentagon? THAT doesn't embolden anyone in your eyes? But instead of being pissed as hell about that and demanding answers you fixate on Clinton. Why?
I find it odd that when we talk about going to war and you admit misgivings but say "we are in the here and now" and "we have to deal with what is here" but yet you guys can't seem to stop using the "Clinton sucked too!!" defense of your asswipe in chief.
You only seem to want answers and accountability when it suits your pathological bias.
Is that your argument? To come in here insult people, ignore the points made, suggest we dont have the right to make them because they are "partisan" and then change the subject?
I know that Clinton was just another "celebrity" to you, but he was our President and he was a pussy and possibly in cahoots with the enemy (to what extent we dont know)...it is not old news as demonstrated by the fact that he wont shut up about it. If Bubba is going to make claims that he tried harder than anyone else to catch obl -- Im gonna call his bullshit. When Sandy Berger commits a felony and possibly treason and then cries about a docu-drama -- Im gonna call bullshit. If youre going to come in here with your "blah blah blah" rebuttals -- Im gonna call bullshit.
Youre not even disagreeing with us...all you do is tell us that we have no right to our opinions because they are "partisan". Grow up Lily. If you have nothing to add, then keep it to yourself. We will not be censored by the likes of some two-bit hippie.
I didn't ever say you dont have the right to your opinions. But this is the first time I have seen you ever acknowledge that they are "opinions".
I realize I did change the subject (somewhat) with the embolden issue but I also think that ALL of these guys have a long history of supporting terrorists and human rights abusers when it suits their purposes and then calling them "boogey men" when it doesn't. Of course we know that obl was used and thrown away, and part of that is the real reason he went from kissing ass pre-Kuwait and his sudden "revelation" that we are evil infidels.
Now there were times when OBL was offered to the US, and I do think Clinton can be implicated there.
But my point is to say that they have ALL created the situation we have. I dont see you ever holding Bush accountable for that- perhaps you did over a year ago but I personally haven;t seen it.
But you said you were kicking up your partisan crap a notch so nobody can be critical of it.
Wouldnt want to censor.
Its odd that you spend hours at hippie blogs insulting people several times a day and would even be stupid enough to make these hypocritical remarks about "insulting" people.
While its sweet to see gentlemen cry foul when it comes to defending the womenfolk,get off your high horse donkey.
There is a difference between "conspiracy theory" and "conspiracy fact." The book I referred to "Spider's Web" is a very well-documented accounted of the covert effort by the US and Britain to arm Saddam. Insinuations of treason by Bill Clinton, based on documents you haven't seen is "conspiracy theory." I am not here to defend Sandy Berger, or Bill Clinton for that matter.Yes we supported the KLA, which had links to Al Qaeda. The United States government has never been above supporting terrorists, or ruthless dictators.
Al Qaeda, it has been reported, gets most of its financing from the drug trade. Pakistan and Turkey are involved in that trade. I would be suprised if the US intelligence community was not involved as well. Certainly, historically their involvement in drug running is well-documented.
Look into Sibel Edmonds if you want to get an idea where the real traitors are. They're not liberals.
By opinion I of course mean facts as nothing in my post can be disbuted, and that is why you didnt try.
We are partisans and we have an agendga. The mainstream media will cover Scooter and Rove, we will cover Berger and Clinton.
I admit that I have been guilty of spending too much time on liberal blogs, however the main difference is I back my insults up with facts...but that being said my slumming days are nearing an end as the stupidity no longer amuses me.
I wasnt defending any womenfolk, for any that come around here are more than capable of doing that themselves...I was defending the honor of The Aurora against your baseless slanderous accusations.
Lily i know you're jealous of Jane, but try to make it a little less obvious.
If you take a look at her blog you'll see that not only is she a very accomplished writer, she can also stay on point and NOT get overly emotional to the point that we have to read her comments 3 times to figure out what she's trying to say. so the fact that she only puts a blurb in here to show support is just fine with us.
Besides, you know we still love you, we just wish you would show up without your boyfriend gary sometimes so we could hit on you without feeling awkward.
I checked out Jane's site and we debated global warming. I attempted to correct an obvious error on her part. She was reduced to quivering incoherence and ended up banning me.
Gary that's why i like you, because....because.... because... well i guess i don't like you. but you're still welcome here.
I also checked out her site and I'm sorry, a writer for what?
And slumming, Donkey? I see.
Jane--if you read this--you said in a comment below that I was welcome at your site. I thought you had banned me. When I try to comment I get this message: You are not allowed to post comments
Stop being such a chick...and Lily dont get all sensitive on me.
Gary I guess we're off the guest list for the second annual Aurora get-together on St Patrick's Day.
Slummites can email me for the downtown location. Guaranteed bow tie bitch-free.
And donkey I'm not sensitive, just surprised.
Well donkey's doing something cool for st. pats day and he invited the fly but not me..... i'm kind of pissed about it too. if i had feelings they would be hurt, but i don't so we're all good.
Lily you are welcome at any and all Aurora functions. Now that youve mentioned youre back in country you no longer have any excuses.
Rhino the reason you werent invited is two-fold:
1) Youre a spic
2) Ok its just one-fold
oh, well then that explains it.
Rhino if you aren't invited, how is it an Aurora event?
Come be where you are wanted.
It appears that "spic" is Donkey's slur of the week. Nice.
As Cheney would say...because I am The Aurora and youre not.
Im sorry to hear that you are so close minded that you would think that spic is a slur and that your intolerance prevents you from joining me in celebration of Rhino's hispanic heritage.
The sooner the day comes that liberals can forsake their politics of hate the better off we all will be.
I was only invited because I make Donk look sober when in attendance. My alcoholism is very accomodating that way!
Yo, I liked the point about Waco...so true. They had to stop those nut jobs who were in the middle of nowhere influencing nothing. The terrorists can wait!
Post a Comment