You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
B Clinton: I Could'a Been A Contender...
2005-08-16
Ex-president Bill Clinton now says he would have taken out Osama bin Laden before the 9/11 attacks – if only the FBI and CIA had been able to prove the al-Qaida mastermind was behind the attack on the U.S.S. Cole.
"I desperately wish that I had been president when the FBI and CIA finally confirmed, officially, that bin Laden was responsible for the attack on the U.S.S. Cole," Clinton tells New York magazine this week. "Then we could have launched an attack on Afghanistan early."
"I don’t know if it would have prevented 9/11," he added. "But it certainly would have complicated it.”
Despite his failure to launch such an attack, Clinton said he saw the danger posed by bin Laden much more clearly than did President Bush.
"I always thought that bin Laden was a bigger threat than the Bush administration did," he told New York magazine.
"An' I *knew* that that tramp Angelina Jolie was going to break up Brad Pitt and Jennifer Anniston."
Posted by:Anonymoose

#18  The Clintons and DemoLefties were acknowledging the merits and expansions of the Reagan-Repub economy whilst giving credit to themselves and SSSSSSHHHHHHHHHH, Leftism-Socialism includ Communism - Clinty and the Dems were NOT going to let something such as TRUTH or CONTROVERSY, NO MATTER HOW MINUTAE, BESPOIL THEIR NATIONAL POTEMKINISM!? UNFORTUNATELY FOR US DEMOLEFTIES, CLINTON AS A COMMIE WAS AS DEDICATED TO THE DESTRUCTION OR FAILURE OF THE US LEFT AS HE AND HILLARY WERE TO THAT OF THE GOP-RIGHT. Where the Failed/Angry Left is concerned, the WOT > as much an INTRA-SOCIALIST WAR AS OTHER LABELS.i.e. what -ISM and Nation/Region will dominate the future SOCIALIST OWG AND SOCIALIST WORLD ORDER, AND IT T'AINT AMERIKA OR THE USSA THAT THEY WANT. The Left > America's only choices is to be a weak Global SSR, or to be militarily destroyed!
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2005-08-16 23:34  

#17  I think he got his taste for hefty trailer trash when he was a teenage lardass going door to door selling band candy to bored housewives.

One thing is for sure about Bill. After he reads the story about that town in Austria, he'll tell everyone he knows.
Posted by: F*cking Penguin   2005-08-16 16:30  

#16  Look for Hillary to distance herself from "Bill's administration" in the next coming months. She doesn't want to get caught up in those messy intelligence failures or policy flubs.
Posted by: Cyber Sarge   2005-08-16 16:08  

#15  Yeah, I remember that stunning speech Clinton gave about how it was time to stop deactivating army divisions and fleet units because of the growing threat of Islamic extremism. When was that?
Posted by: Matt   2005-08-16 15:53  

#14  "I always thought that bin Laden was a bigger threat than the Bush administration did,"

But, I never thought that the Bush administration would be a bigger threat than bin Laden.
Posted by: Poison Reverse   2005-08-16 15:43  

#13  Captain, you forgot national health care, "reinventing government", and Kyoto -- although Hillary and Al managed those efforts.

Yes, Darrell, but his Veep did invent the internet! I personally thank God for that act so I can come here daily (/sarcasm off/).
Posted by: BA   2005-08-16 15:11  

#12  Ex-president Bill Clinton now says he would have taken out Osama bin Laden before the 9/11 attacks – if only the FBI and CIA had been able to prove the al-Qaida mastermind was behind the attack on the U.S.S. Cole.

Now wait a minute. How in the phuque would the FBI and CIA prove anything if they weren't allowed to share information with each other???? Jamie Gorelick, anyone?

Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2005-08-16 14:52  

#11  Barbara, here's another difference between Clinton and Bush:

My brother was a 30-year Army colonial who was training up the Saudi national guard. In 1995, he was killed due to a terrorist car bombing during lunch in Ryhaid. Within hours, President Clinton jumped on the "opportunity" to meet the caskets when they arrived in Maryland, with TV cameras and the press on hand. We and the other grieving families requested that they not make a public display out of this, eventually they accepted our request.

President Bush meets privately with the families and respects the families right to privacy.

The difference is stark: President Bush respects the families. President Clinton respects the cameras and polls.

Posted by: Captain America   2005-08-16 14:11  

#10  Cigar, anyone?
Posted by: Raj   2005-08-16 14:11  

#9  Captain, you forgot national health care, "reinventing government", and Kyoto -- although Hillary and Al managed those efforts.
Posted by: Darrell   2005-08-16 14:07  

#8  Captain America - don't forget abusing the help, too. :-(
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2005-08-16 13:59  

#7  Bill Clinton is an narcissistic jack ass, period.

During Clinton's watch was: Somalia, WTC-I, 1995 terrorist car bombing, 1996 bombing in SA, USS Cole, etc. Declined Sudanese offer of OBL in 1996. Ignored Al Qaeda declaration of war 1996.

What was he doing at the time? Cutting military HUMINT to the bone, cutting FBI/CIA, trying to cash in on peace dividend, etc. Promoting gays in military, etc.
Posted by: Captain America   2005-08-16 13:57  

#6  But let's be honest, pre 9/11 I think to large degree most Americans had their collective heads in there asses.

Good observations, Cheaderhead. And nothing spells out the difference between a leader (Bush) and a poll watcher (Clinton) more than this issue. Bush knew he didn't have perfect info on Iraq, but proceeded and has taken his hits in public opinion. Clinton wanted someone else to do all the dirty work for him.
Posted by: Dreadnought   2005-08-16 13:26  

#5  At least Janet Reno got that terrorist Elian Gonzalez kicked out
Posted by: Frank G   2005-08-16 12:48  

#4  Woulda, shoulda, coulda. Could the Clinton Adminstration have done more to combat terrorism? Of course they could. But let's be honest, pre 9/11 I think to large degree most Americans had their collective heads in there asses. Even now most of the mooonbats still have them there. We are in a world war. Call it WW3 or 4 or whatever (IMO WW1 was the period of the French and Indian War through the American Revolution) but it has been a mostly low intensity conflict. Our enemies are attempting to bleed us from a thousand cuts while we attempt to smash them with sledgehammers. Sometimes the sledgehammers are the right tool. But sometimes the law enforcement approach works too. We need to use the right tools to do the job and the first tool we need is the resolve to do the job in the first place. Just my $.02
Posted by: Cheaderhead   2005-08-16 12:22  

#3  BC missing a good opportunity to keep quiet.

As always.
Posted by: Seafarious   2005-08-16 12:18  

#2  U.S. official sees similarties between USS COLE and 1998 Embassies bombings

QUOTE:"A senior U.S. counterintelligence official says that investigators working on the USS Cole bombing case see similarities between the deadly blast and the explosions at two U.S. embassies in East Africa in 1998.

....

The United States has indicted former Saudi millionaire Osama bin Laden for the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and he is on the FBI's list of the 10 most wanted suspected criminals."

Now why didn't BC act?
Posted by: Sully   2005-08-16 12:11  

#1  Has he no shame?

Oh, wait. I remember now. he never had any before, where did I think he was gonna grow some?
Posted by: Bobby   2005-08-16 12:06  

00:00