It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bill Clinton: I Got Closer To Killing bin Laden

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by nextguyinline

Originally posted by Shar
If Clinton was actually trying to warn the Afghanistan government of the comming missles, he would have done it through the normal diplomatic channels. Instead he sent someone to warn the Afghanistan army knowing full well that there were Bin Ladan sympathisers among them that would warn him of the coming attack.


What is a normal diplomatic channel? Telephone?
Why does sending a body(which is a personal gesture of great respect) instead of making a phone call, implicate the ex-president in warning his targets?

Regardless of that topic, the ex-president was ambushed, and anyone would be angry if it occured to them.


They're called embassadors, thats why they're there.
That body which you say was a personal gesture let Bin Ladan go.

The ex-president ambushed by one reporter are you joking. Rumsfeld gets ambushed everytime he gets in front of a mic.



Now I think everyone should read the whole 9-11 commission report before continue their responses and at least show yourself informed as to what your talking about...


I think everyone should know that back in 1992 after Clinton invaded Somalia Bin Ladan Declared War on the United States. Did you know that?
Probably not. Given the fact that Clinton did not tell the American people.
Clinton should have came on the air right then and there and told the American people war had been declared.

To make matters worse Bin Ladan in an interview with ABC in 1998 once again declared war on the United States openly for the whole world to hear. Once again it got ignored by Clinton. He never came out and even acknowledged what Bin Ladan just declared.

Now I dont care what you say or how much you think Clinton was the greatest. Any President in the United States who dosn't take a DECLARATION OF WAR serious has got a major problem. We were at war!!!







[edit on 26-9-2006 by Shar]




posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 09:06 PM
link   
"1992 after Clinton invaded Saudi Arabia"

Um...... the US did a invasion of Saudi arabia. I don't quite remember hearing about this, if we did wouldn't the kings and queens running the country be over thrown. Though, you can cite a wikapeida or other 'normal' sorce and you can convince and inform me and everyone else about the invasion.


Anyway, though in some ways Clinton did get the closest . In the end mabey tracea (some disease) has or will kill bin laden.

So in the end, people might not need to be killed by anything, but natural causes, and it will not cause much of a difference had they been killed by a actual person. Asides from a moral boost, not much else.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 09:09 PM
link   
The invasion is in the 9-11 commission report. Once again i believe people should read this.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 09:16 PM
link   
you see i believe that Clinton decided to put more focus into domestic policy and situations inside the coiuntry rathe than foreign policy and everything happening outside, that's why he didn't go to Afghanistan, and didn't go into Iraq. Afghanistan is a total disaster, not in military figures, but it has been like 5 years and afghanistan isn't a stable country.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 09:33 PM
link   


I think everyone should know that back in 1992 after Clinton invaded Saudi Arabia Bin Ladan Declared War on the United States. Did you know that?


Err, no.
GG reading comprehension...

In 1991, George Bush senior sent US troops to Saudi Arabia to push Iraqi forces out of Kuwait. The Gulf War - you may have heard of it.

Anyway, Bin Laden, a then relatively unknown fanatic, declared a Jihad against the US and the Saudi government because 1) he was upset about "infidels" being based in the home country of Mecca and 2) he had tried to convince the Saudi Government to send his Afghan war jihadis into Kuwait to kick the Iraqis out instead.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 09:35 PM
link   
xmotex dont bother, you can tell this guy has the blindfold on. The 9/11 commission report says it exactly how you said it, yet he says it means something else. Really stretching for anti clinton material arent we? I dont like clinton, but come on, lets not make stuff up.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 09:37 PM
link   
it is Ambassador. An individual cannot declare war (unless they are a head of state) so pray tell why should anyone have paid attention to Bin Laden at the very beginning? Were they wrong? Perhaps given the subsequent history but as usual hindsight is 20/20.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 09:47 PM
link   
I meant to say Somalia. Not Saudi Arabia. After the invasion in Somalia in 1992 is when Bin Ladan first declared war on the United States. Then again more publicly in the ABC interview in 1998 Bin Ladan once again DECLARED WAR ON THE UNITED STATES.

He might not be the head of a country, however Bin Ladans al qaeda group ran the russian army out of Afghanistan back in 1988. Clearly this was not a man to ignore a Declaration of War from.

[edit on 26-9-2006 by Shar]



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 10:00 PM
link   
And Clinton tried to blow him up around the same time.
What's your point?

I am hardly a Clinton fan, but on this issue he's right.

In the last years of his administration he made a serious effort to get Bin Laden.
Far more seriously than Bush did until 9-11.

Before that time, the aministration's security policy was mainly concerned with Saddam, and with China. They did not consider Al Quaeda a significant threat.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 10:15 PM
link   
he got close, real close like directly on top of it , or it was on top of him , or maybie it was she was on top of him ,


Anyway he got close to alot of things REALLY close


Omega



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 10:17 PM
link   
Didnt the UN send us into somalia as a security force for the distribution of aid?



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Clinton may have pursued Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda but he pursued it as a law enforcement issue and not as a military one. Big difference there, one is more limited to specific individuals directly involved in the attacks the other target the whole organization all over the world, and before they strike.

To meaningfully pursue Bin Laden militarily would've required the cooperation of Congress... they were more concerned about what he was doing with his genitals.

Also, as Clinton said, the FBI and CIA refused to certify that Bin Laden was responsible for the 2000 Cole attack. The FBI STILL refuses to include the Cole bombing OR the 9/11 attacks as their reasons for aprehending him.

If Bush and Clinton are to blame, might as well throw in the CIA and FBI as well.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shar
So give me your sources. Deny Ignorance is what seems to be said around here.


Here's one of the sources that I had found

www.physics911.net...

It states it in here it also gives the reasons WHY the administration wanted a pretext to attack Afghanistan , among other things



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by nanna_of_6

Originally posted by Shar
So give me your sources. Deny Ignorance is what seems to be said around here.


Here's one of the sources that I had found

www.physics911.net...

It states it in here it also gives the reasons WHY the administration wanted a pretext to attack Afghanistan , among other things


Parts of it are even confirmed by Fox News. A damning piece of evidence....



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfTom
Hello all you libs out there, If you really want to know about Bill Heres a quote from Rush's show;




First I must say,ProfTom, you really picked a loulou of a person to quote
of all the people in the world that you could of found to quote, it had to be the Rush show


Isn't the Rush show, " Rush Limbough "(something like that ) ? If so than maybe you or others have forgotten that your ever-loving Rush is/was a druggie, he broke laws pretaining to illegal use of pain killers or something like that. Everyone knows that Rush is a Neocon hisself and his past actions speak volumes, so with that said,need I say more.




posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by nanna_of_6

Originally posted by Shar
So give me your sources. Deny Ignorance is what seems to be said around here.


Here's one of the sources that I had found

www.physics911.net...

It states it in here it also gives the reasons WHY the administration wanted a pretext to attack Afghanistan , among other things



The following document was published in June of 2002. If genuine


If Genuine..... You know like I said above War was Declared on our Country.

for a president who supposedly has such a great speaking voice cannot come out and tell the American people whats going on. Theres a MAJOR problem there.



posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shar

Originally posted by nanna_of_6

Originally posted by Shar
So give me your sources. Deny Ignorance is what seems to be said around here.


Here's one of the sources that I had found

www.physics911.net...

It states it in here it also gives the reasons WHY the administration wanted a pretext to attack Afghanistan , among other things



The following document was published in June of 2002. If genuine


If Genuine..... You know like I said above War was Declared on our Country.

for a president who supposedly has such a great speaking voice cannot come out and tell the American people whats going on. Theres a MAJOR problem there.






Shar,

President Clinton could, still can "run rings" around both GW Bush and the Bush Sr., Clinton is 100% better president than either of those two have been or would ever be.

Here's BinLaden's 1997 interview, I think this is the one you were refering to.

www.public-action.com...




* Bin Laden on striking military targets, 1997 CNN interview *

Reporter: "Mr. bin Laden, you've declared a jihad against the United States. Can you tell us why? And is the jihad directed against the US government or the United States' troops in Arabia? What about US civilians in Arabia or the people of the United States?"

Osama bin Laden: " . . . we have focused our declaration on striking at the soldiers in the country of The Two Holy Places [Mecca and Medina] ... "

Speaking of the bombings of US troops in Riyadh and Al-Khobar (Dhahran), bin Laden patiently explained their purpose was to get US occupation troops out of Arabia. He had high praise for those who did the job.

Fair enough. In America, we also give high praise to our soldiers when they perform heroically.

Elsewhere in the interview, Arnett asks bin Laden if the jihad will stop when US troops leave Arabia. Bin Laden replies he wants US troops out of *all* Muslim lands.

* Bin Laden on striking civilian targets, 1997 CNN interview.*

In response to a question from Arnett, bin Laden says: "As for what you asked whether jihad is directed against US soldiers, the civilians in the land of the Two Holy Places (Mecca and Medina) or against civilians in America, we have focused our declaration on striking at the soldiers in the country of the Two Holy Places.

"The country of the Two Holy Places has in our religion a peculiarity of its own over the other Muslim countries. In our religion, it is not permissible for any non-Muslim to stay in our country. Therefore, even though American civilians are not targeted in our plan, they must leave ..."

That's clear. Bin Laden is not targeting American civilians. He just wants them to leave his country.




Shar,
even "firebat" stated below that parts of what I showed for my "source" that you asked for was even on the "fox News"








firebat

Contributor: 0

posted on 26-9-2006 at 05:13 PM - single REPLYQUOTE

quote: Originally posted by nanna_of_6

quote: Originally posted by Shar
So give me your sources. Deny Ignorance is what seems to be said around here.


Here's one of the sources that I had found

www.physics911.net...

It states it in here it also gives the reasons WHY the administration wanted a pretext to attack Afghanistan , among other things


Parts of it are even confirmed by Fox News. A damning piece of evidence....





Here's something else that others may find interesting.

www.oilempire.us...

www.voltairenet.org...

www.americanprogress.org...

www.dissidentvoice.org...






Amazing how taking a couple nights and staying up searching for information can help, instead of just making statements that can't be backed up with sources
, I've spent many a nights searching,.............. why , because I don't trust Bush or his Administration any farther than I can throw them and that might be a whole 2 to 3 inches.

[edit on 27-9-2006 by nanna_of_6]



posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 01:58 AM
link   
No, I said what I meant The Interview with ABC 1998. Bin Ladan Declared War on the United States its in the 9-11 commission report.



posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 05:43 AM
link   
OH BROTHER.

I see that Clinton still can't control his temper. He's well known for losing control of it. If he had jabbed me with his finger like that I would have snapped it off. Now ya'll can see why we bombed an asprin warehouse while he was in office .. he'd get pissed off (or Monica would get him all excited) and he'd let his temper fly.

HEY BILL - 'Close' to killing someone does't count. You still didn't get him. Bush let him get away at Tora Bora .. but you let him get away too. Don't even try to say that you didn't mess up 'as badly'. You both screwed up.



posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 07:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shar
The invasion is in the 9-11 commission report. Once again i believe people should read this.


I actually think YOU should read it and try to comprehend what you are reading. What you suggest is in the report is a fabrication. You have quoted it multiple times and each and every time has been a fradulent interpretation of what is in the report itself.




Any President in the United States who dosn't take a DECLARATION OF WAR serious has got a major problem. We were at war!!!


Where is this Declaration of War you speak of? There has been no Declaration of War. We are NOT at war. Let me guess, you read that in the 911 Commission Report too? It just keeps getting better and better!!!



[edit on 27-9-2006 by The Iconoclast]

[edit on 27-9-2006 by The Iconoclast]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join