WAR: The Clinton Administration Attempted to Kill Bin Laden

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Mar, 23 2004 @ 11:41 AM
link   
During today's testimony before the special commission investigating the 9/11 terrorist attacks, former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright testified that the Clinton administration made al-Qaida leaer, Osama bin Laden, a top target and had tied to kill him. This is a stark contrast with the following administration, who seemed to care little about threats from al-Qaida.
 
VOA.com She said the United States owes it to the families of the victims to do everything it can to prevent future attacks, using all the tools at its disposal, including cooperative diplomacy with other countries. We see more and more stories on how this current Administration adopted a lax posture in relation to Islamic terrorist, in favor of finding ways to revive cold war philosophies and return to unfinished work in Iraq.




posted on Mar, 23 2004 @ 12:47 PM
link   
That's funny! They admit that they tried to kill Osama?? I thought it was a crime to kill someone. I know it happens during war but here, they are just admitting that once in a while, they commit crime by killing someone just because he might do something. Hey, if the governement can do it, why can't I? I'm sure my neighbour will do something bad someday so, I better kill him now?!?! I'm not saying that Osama shouldn't be killed or anything here. If it is true that if he is behind 9/11, he deserves to be punished for it. But, we can see that our governement have their own agendas and their own rules...What is a crime for a citizen, is not a crime for a government! That's weird...



posted on Mar, 23 2004 @ 12:49 PM
link   
The reason why they can do it is because the President can order the usage of military force against targets that represent a clear and present danger to the United States and her citizens.



posted on Mar, 23 2004 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Uh... it's been clear since the very-early 1990's that Osama was considered an enemy-of-the-state due to his terrorism activities. History. It's a good thing.



posted on Mar, 23 2004 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Read the seven rules for which deadly force can be authorized (and this is off of the top of my head).

ASSETS INVOLVING NATIONAL SECURITY

ASSETS NOT INVOLVING NATIONAL SECURITY BUT INHERENTLY DANGEROUS TO OTHERS

ESCAPES

PROTECTION OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY

ARRESTS AND APPREHENSIONS

SELF DEFENSE AND DEFENSE OF OTHERS

SERIOUS CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS


Mr. M



posted on Mar, 23 2004 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Thats a joke. The Clinton administration is making a half assed attempt to cover thier rears. They failed the american people gravely. Bill Clinton was way too concerned with being impeached and Monica Lewitski than to accept Bin Laden being handed to him on a silver platter by the Sudanese. What a crime, we were already at war. At that point, Al Queda tried to blow up World Trade Ceter once, blasted our embassies in Africa, took out an American base in Suadi Arabia, organized chaos and death in Somalia, took a chunck out of the USS Cole.. Humm - hell Al Queda had been at war for years. But Clinton cared not. "It's a police issue, not war" . What a steaming loaf of bull#e this testimony is. It's time for everyone to get over the friggen finger pointing anyway. Does it really matter one iotta today? No it does not. I mean, the US had intllegence six ways to Sunday that Pearl Harbor was impending too. But just admitted, hey we F''d up, it happened. Now lets get onto getting the bag guys who sucker punched us. The islamic fundamentaist must be laughing thier arses off as they watch the Americans scratch chins and point at each other. Thumbs down - lets get on with it


[Edited on 23-3-2004 by dreamrebel]



posted on Mar, 23 2004 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by dreamrebel
Now lets get onto getting the bag guys who sucker punched us. The islamic fundamentaist must be laughing thier arses off as they watch the Americans scratch chins and point at each other. Thumbs down - lets get on with it


[Edited on 23-3-2004 by dreamrebel]


I admit that we must fight terrorism...But not by going to war with entire countries...By doing this, we create new terrorists everyday in those countries by hatred of the americans... Can someone here explain to me why Al-Quaida wants to attack the US? Don't tell me because they're Evil!! Nobody is born evil in my mind. Evil people are made and created by people or society. What are they fighting? IMHO, they want to fight idealogies which permits the rich to control the poor. Rich countries go and invade the economy of poor countries and steal their resources and their land and their oil without thinking about the consequences of what will happen to people there... I might be wrong but, US must have made them mad for them to want to attack us as a revenge... By going to war with them, we just continue the cycle of hatred without taking care of the real problem...

An interesting read:

batr.org...





[Edited on 23-3-2004 by riouxda]



posted on Mar, 23 2004 @ 01:41 PM
link   
Yes I can clarify:

Al Queda wants:

1) US Military Bases out of Saudi Arabia (thats reasonable and dont think they are necessay. The US should comply)

2) Stop support of Israel

3) Stop the "polluting of Islamic societies with Western Culture" - Impossible to stop because thier own youth and people are the ones who crave, want, and import it!

One example: women living under islamic law find dont really like living under submission and being beaten by a stick like an animal. Freedom to speak and express theselves as indiviuals through dress and opinion seems a little more appealing. Thats just the tip of the iceburg.

[Edited on 23-3-2004 by dreamrebel]

[Edited on 23-3-2004 by dreamrebel]



posted on Mar, 23 2004 @ 03:04 PM
link   
we don't need those bases in SA now. We were there to contain Saddam.


It's been said the Clinton administration rejected 4 offers to take bin laden from Sudan, because 'we had no legal basis' (www.newsmax.com...)



posted on Mar, 23 2004 @ 04:34 PM
link   
And who's fault was it that Clinton had the wrong focus? It was ours, we allowed our congress to spend all that time and money because the guy got a blow job. If you did not demand your congressman do his job instead of trying to hang a president, you are at fault as well.

The current president started a war without our permission and he is getting a pass. See how screwed up this country is? No wonder the extremist hate us so much, we have our priorities WAY OUT OF WHACK...



posted on Mar, 23 2004 @ 04:48 PM
link   
This is a bunch of bologna! It was well known that in the 1990's he lived in an apartment in downtown Cartoon, Sudan. You probably could have looked up his address on Yahoo yellow pages. The Clinton administration did nothing during this time. This was discussed on several news channels last night. The Bush administration dropped the ball as well, but Clinton had the real chance to capture him. Sudan even contacted us to ask if we wanted him as a prisioner.

"Albright speaks with forked tounge"

[Edited on 23-3-2004 by dbates]



posted on Mar, 23 2004 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Rumsfeld: Killing Bin Laden Might Not Have Stopped Sept. 11 Attacks

"Killing bin Laden would not have removed al-Qaida's sanctuary in Afghanistan," Rumsfeld said. "Moreover, the sleeper cells that flew the aircraft into the World Trade towers and the Pentagon were already in the United States months before the attack."

Powell said that even if U.S. forces had invaded Afghanistan, killed bin Laden and neutralized al-Qaida, "I have no reason to believe that would have caused them to abort their plans."





top topics
 
0

log in

join