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.

 

What if I told you that...

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 10 2004 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Clinton was the most effective US President when it came to fighting terror? What if I told you that he dismantled 20 al-Qaeda terror cells prior to 2001?

What would you say?




posted on Apr, 10 2004 @ 01:09 PM
link   
I would say you need to provide sources. Just saying something doesn't make it true



posted on Apr, 10 2004 @ 01:09 PM
link   
I'd probably agree with you. We never really had any "major" terror incidents with him. I think he actually did an okay job.



posted on Apr, 10 2004 @ 01:09 PM
link   
I'd say you're wrong.



posted on Apr, 10 2004 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Slayer
I'd say you're wrong.



Prove it, Slayer!



posted on Apr, 10 2004 @ 01:15 PM
link   
I would say:

No. Clinton was not the most effective at fighting terror.

You prove yours, ill prove mine.



[Edited on 10-4-2004 by Cascadego]



posted on Apr, 10 2004 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by kramtronix

Originally posted by Slayer
I'd say you're wrong.



Prove it, Slayer!


Oh, for the love of. You're obviously reading the thread, and read my statement to you along the same lines. You didn't, but you expect Slayer to?

I think Clinton really screwed our nation up. 20 cells, you say? so almost 120 people? Lemme guess, they were in Bagdad when Clinton bombed it to distract from the dress. It didn't prevent the 9-11 attacks.

Also, just because Billy was in office while counter terror tactics were being implimented, doesn't mean he had much to do with it. Bush has taken an active role in counter terrorism. Clinton took an active roll in evading the law. :bnghd:



posted on Apr, 10 2004 @ 01:28 PM
link   
I'd say that it sounds to me like kramtronix is playing a game with some peoples' way of thinking...intentionally, I'd say.

Hope I didn't blow your cover or punchline...


_____________________



posted on Apr, 10 2004 @ 01:39 PM
link   
I'd say your wrong also.



posted on Apr, 10 2004 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by kramtronix

Originally posted by Slayer
I'd say you're wrong.



Prove it, Slayer!


Very well. Between 1993 and 2000, four major terror attacks were made against the US. The first one was in 1993 in New York City at the World Trade Center. A car bomb in the underground parking lot exploded, killing six and injuring thousands. Osama bin Laden was believed to be the mastermind behind the attack. In response to the attacks, Bill Clinton said, "I would plead with the American people and the good people of New York to keep your courage up and go on about your lives. I would discourage the American people from overreacting to this," He also laid out his plan for cracking down on the terrorists behind the attacks, he said he would use "the full, full resources of the federal law enforcement agencies - all kinds of agencies, all kinds of access to information - at the service of those who are trying to figure out who did this and why." But Clinton didnt change his policy of fighting terrorism at all. "From the time President Clinton took office until May of 1995, a Presidential Decision Directive, PDD 39, sat in the National Security Council, in the In Box of one of the officials with no action taken. The significance of PDD 39 is that it was the document defining what the missions and roles were of combating terrorism," says Howard Johnson, formerly with the CIA and state dept. Clinton finally passed the PDD 39 after the Okalahoma City Bombing.
The second attack took place on June 25, 1996 in Saudi Arabia. Explosives were used in the U.S. military complex and Khobar Towers, killing nineteen Americans. Again, Clinton said he would get to the bottom of the attack: "The explosion appears to be the work of terrorists. The cowards who committed this murderous act must not go unpunished," Clinton said. "America takes care of its own." But once again, Clinton didnt take any action. The explosives used in the attack were believed to of come out of Lebanon, which at the time, was a country with trade restrictions with the US, but a year later, Clinton lifted the trade restrictions with the country.
Thirdly, on August 7, 1998, two US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania were attacked, killing 258 people, and injuring more than 5,000. Bin Laden and his terror network were once again blamed for the attacks. The only thing Clinton did in response to the attacks was launch cruise missiles at locations where there were believed to be Al-Qaeda training camps.
Finally, in the year 2000, on October 12, terrorists drove a boat packed with explosives into the side of the USS Cole, nearly sinking it, and killing 17 sailors. In response to the attack, Clinton ordered military personnel in that area to step up security.
In conclusion, we can see that Clintons failure to fight terrorism from the beginning of 1993 led to major attacks against the US. By ignoring and taking no action against terrorist cells around the world, terrorists were able to plan and carry out their attacks virtually unrestricted.

source



posted on Apr, 10 2004 @ 02:03 PM
link   
I guess now the podium is yours kramtronix...


I would like to now see how it is that he was the most effective.



posted on Apr, 10 2004 @ 07:43 PM
link   
According to the ATSNN article "White House Releases 9/11 Memo", it seems that Bin Laden launched the attacks against the World Trade Center in response to Clintons order to launch cruise missiles at Al-Qaeda training camps. Looks like when he acually took action to stop globabl terror, he just made things worse.

"The document, which was declassified and circulated on Saturday 11/04/04 stated that Bin Laden wanted to retaliate against Washington after Fmr President Clinton launched cruise missile strikes, this intelligence came from another country but was blacked out of the released memo. "

Source



posted on Apr, 11 2004 @ 04:08 AM
link   
I'm not a Clinton fan. some knucklehead told me to my face that Clinton was the most effective anti-terrorist president in US history. Not only did I laugh in his face, but I pretty much said what Slayer did.

I just wanted the Clintonites to get in here, but of course they didn't want any of that asinine opening statement!!!




top topics



 
0

log in

join