| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
09 Sep 2006 01:31:52 PM |
| Object: |
Clinton boldly warned America about bin Laden |
As a daily follower of current events, I know for an absolute fact that
Bill Clinton tried to put the word out about Osama bin Laden and his
organization, even to the public, because I remember at least three
times that it made the national news. I remember wondering about it,
because Clinton said that this bin Laden fellow was a more realistic
threat than even a nuclear attack. He said bin Laden was already the
biggest threat to attack America, and that he would have to be dealt
with at some point.
Again, I know the above to true with absolute certainty.
.
|
|
| User: "Angry Young Man!" |
|
| Title: Re: Clinton boldly warned America about bin Laden |
09 Sep 2006 03:36:46 PM |
|
|
<beachshark1@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1157826712.531332.224200@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
As a daily follower of current events, I know for an absolute fact that
Bill Clinton tried to put the word out about Osama bin Laden and his
organization, even to the public, because I remember at least three
times that it made the national news. I remember wondering about it,
because Clinton said that this bin Laden fellow was a more realistic
threat than even a nuclear attack. He said bin Laden was already the
biggest threat to attack America, and that he would have to be dealt
with at some point.
Again, I know the above to true with absolute certainty.
I first heard of bin Ladin in 1995 on network news. Yes, Clinton warned
America and Bush & Rice decided to ignore those warnings.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DKat" |
|
| Title: Re: Clinton boldly warned America about bin Laden |
09 Sep 2006 06:05:02 PM |
|
|
"Angry Young Man!" <tossEdwards@bush.net> wrote in message
news:yBFMg.17424$%j7.6270@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
<beachshark1@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1157826712.531332.224200@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
As a daily follower of current events, I know for an absolute fact that
Bill Clinton tried to put the word out about Osama bin Laden and his
organization, even to the public, because I remember at least three
times that it made the national news. I remember wondering about it,
because Clinton said that this bin Laden fellow was a more realistic
threat than even a nuclear attack. He said bin Laden was already the
biggest threat to attack America, and that he would have to be dealt
with at some point.
Again, I know the above to true with absolute certainty.
I first heard of bin Ladin in 1995 on network news. Yes, Clinton warned
America and Bush & Rice decided to ignore those warnings.
Yes, I remember Clinton trying to get the simplest anti-terror legislation
passed and his warning that terrorism was the biggest threat this nation had
to face. For the life of me, I could not understand why the republicans
refused to pass legislation that would have put markers in explosives or why
they refused to let him track bank records on suspected terrorist. I'm a
civil libertarian and am very cautious about the government tracking
individuals but neither one of these struck me as a danger to our civil
rights and I just didn't get the obstruction Clinton was getting. It seemed
very much to be partisan and nothing to do with any real issues in what
Clinton wanted passed.
.
|
|
|
| User: "the_blogologist" |
|
| Title: Re: Clinton boldly warned America about bin Laden |
10 Sep 2006 12:03:15 AM |
|
|
DKat <dkatspam@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Angry Young Man!" <tossEdwards@bush.net> wrote in message
news:yBFMg.17424$%j7.6270@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
<beachshark1@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1157826712.531332.224200@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
As a daily follower of current events, I know for an absolute fact that
Bill Clinton tried to put the word out about Osama bin Laden and his
organization, even to the public, because I remember at least three
times that it made the national news. I remember wondering about it,
because Clinton said that this bin Laden fellow was a more realistic
threat than even a nuclear attack. He said bin Laden was already the
biggest threat to attack America, and that he would have to be dealt
with at some point.
Again, I know the above to true with absolute certainty.
I first heard of bin Ladin in 1995 on network news. Yes, Clinton warned
America and Bush & Rice decided to ignore those warnings.
Yes, I remember Clinton trying to get the simplest anti-terror legislation
passed
What?? LOL
Gee, I seem to remember an assault weapon ban. Right after the oklahoma
city bombing he named a big list of things on nightline. One was using
the military to police civilians, a law that was broken at Waco, TX. He
also tried and failed to put all local police under federal authority.
When he couldn't get that he managed use federal money "for more cops"
which was actually used as an incenitive for local police to go after
"anti-government types". The biggest peice of "anti-terrorist
legilation" was the massive expansion of ECHELON in which voice
recognition super-computers were installed in every major phone hub in
the US. Each of these scan up to 100,000 phone calls simotaniously and
recording any matches for key words or key phrases for later review.
This makes Bush's wiretaps look like a drop in the ocean.
Clinton's "anti-terrorist" legislation was aimed at US citizens.
and his warning that terrorism was the biggest threat this nation had
to face.
And all gun owners are terrorists?
For the life of me, I could not understand why the republicans
refused to pass legislation that would have put markers in explosives or why
they refused to let him track bank records on suspected terrorist.
Because most of clinton's "anti-terrorist legislation" was aimed at US
citizens.
I'm a
civil libertarian and am very cautious about the government tracking
individuals but neither one of these struck me as a danger to our civil
rights and I just didn't get the obstruction Clinton was getting. It seemed
very much to be partisan and nothing to do with any real issues in what
Clinton wanted passed.
Translation: blah, blah [blither] blah, blah.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "the_blogologist" |
|
| Title: Re: Clinton boldly warned America about bin Laden |
09 Sep 2006 06:15:11 PM |
|
|
Angry Young Man! <tossEdwards@bush.net> wrote:
<beachshark1@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1157826712.531332.224200@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
As a daily follower of current events, I know for an absolute fact that
Bill Clinton tried to put the word out about Osama bin Laden and his
organization, even to the public, because I remember at least three
times that it made the national news. I remember wondering about it,
because Clinton said that this bin Laden fellow was a more realistic
threat than even a nuclear attack. He said bin Laden was already the
biggest threat to attack America, and that he would have to be dealt
with at some point.
Again, I know the above to true with absolute certainty.
I first heard of bin Ladin in 1995 on network news. Yes, Clinton warned
America and Bush & Rice decided to ignore those warnings.
And had Bush done anything you'd be accusing him of starting the war on
terror.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "the_blogologist" |
|
| Title: Re: Clinton boldly warned America about bin Laden |
09 Sep 2006 06:15:06 PM |
|
|
<beachshark1@yahoo.com> wrote:
As a daily follower of current events, I know for an absolute fact that
Bill Clinton tried to put the word out about Osama bin Laden and his
organization
Was this before or after all the W's were removed from Whitehouse
keyboards?
.
|
|
|
| User: "DKat" |
|
| Title: Re: Clinton boldly warned America about bin Laden |
09 Sep 2006 07:32:57 PM |
|
|
"the_blogologist" <nobody@nowheres.com> wrote in message
news:1hlenc4.34q7j5fp4g69N%nobody@nowheres.com...
<beachshark1@yahoo.com> wrote:
As a daily follower of current events, I know for an absolute fact that
Bill Clinton tried to put the word out about Osama bin Laden and his
organization
Was this before or after all the W's were removed from Whitehouse
keyboards?
Seems that this was a fabricated story. AND Fox actually was the good guy
in this story because they seemed to be the only one that actually covered
the fact that the story was fake.
Apparently, just like the White House, the media that reported on the vandal
scandal so aggressively in January doesn't want to "live in the past"
either -- and has largely ignored the GAO review that cleared the Clinton
team. Last Friday, the Kansas City Star ran a story on the vandal scandal
that wasn't, and the story moved on the Knight-Ridder and Associated Press
wires. Other than that, the country's newsrooms have remained nearly silent.
"The New York Times never gave the story much play, so they didn't really
have the same obligation to correct it," says Siewert. "But the Washington
Post -- they didn't even bother to have one of their own reporters do a
follow-up on [the GAO report]."
The Post did run the AP wire item on the GAO review in Friday's print
edition, and also ran a two-paragraph mention the same day in the
Internet-only "Political Insider" column written by Charles Babington. The
Post's failure to correct its vandalism coverage didn't escape the attention
of media critics, including its own Howard Kurtz. On Monday, Kurtz mentioned
the dearth of his paper's coverage in his online column.
But the Post wasn't alone. With the exception of Fox News, none of the media
outlets that hyped this nonstory have moved aggressively in the past week to
rectify their errors. The conservative cable news channel mentioned the
vandalism story in 13 separate programs or segments in the first week after
it broke. To its credit, Fox acknowledged on Friday -- the same day the GAO
report became public -- that there had been little evidence to support its
vandalism claims. Later "Fox News Sunday" host Tony Snow went even further,
apologizing to former Clinton staffers for his error. "OK, I'm sorry," Snow
said on the program. "The ex-president's pals have a legitimate beef."
In contrast, NBC News, which ran two reports about the vandalism scandal in
January, has not yet covered the latest developments. The Los Angeles Times,
which also ran two stories mentioning the scandal -- one just a 118-word
item about an offer by Clinton to investigate the charges -- has yet to run
anything about the new GAO conclusions. USA Today reported one story on Jan.
26 about White House vandalism, but has since not followed up.
The New York Daily News ran stories on Jan. 25 and 27 that repeated some of
the more damaging vandalism rumors -- including the tale of the "sobbing"
telecommunications worker. Tom DeFrank, the Daily News Washington bureau
chief who reported both stories, said he has made calls to his original
sources and that the GSA statement had "raised his eyebrows." But so far,
DeFrank has written nothing, though the Daily News ran the Knight-Ridder
wire story.
http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2001/05/23/vandals/print.html
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Angry Young Man!" |
|
| Title: Re: Clinton boldly warned America about bin Laden |
10 Sep 2006 12:04:59 AM |
|
|
"the_blogologist" <nobody@nowheres.com> wrote in message
news:1hlenc4.34q7j5fp4g69N%nobody@nowheres.com...
<beachshark1@yahoo.com> wrote:
As a daily follower of current events, I know for an absolute fact that
Bill Clinton tried to put the word out about Osama bin Laden and his
organization
Was this before or after all the W's were removed from Whitehouse
keyboards?
Urban legend but they should've removed all the B's.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
