Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Sins of September 11

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 12:00 PM
Original message
The Sins of September 11
I am beginning to despise reading. I have lost count of the number of times I have read some passage in a politically-oriented book, and then been uncontrollably motivated to hurl said book against a wall or across the room in fury. My library looks like someone took a weed-whacker to it; all the dust-jackets have taken a fearsome beating.

The book currently on my desk has begun to retain a damaged appearance. Sidney Blumenthal’s “The Clinton Wars” is a meticulously researched and foot-noted tour de force through the last ten years of the brainless savagery of American politics. The retelling of the contrived scandals clarioned by a media establishment which abandoned any pretense of journalistic integrity, pushed by a cabal of House members and right-wing activists whose worshipped altar was the desire for raw power, and the sad and sorry tale of the impeachment itself, is a difficult but necessary review of a truly pathetic time in our history. Blumenthal manages to bring his readers back to that tar pit, and keep them enthralled, with an excellent and deft literary touch.

Since I have read most of the other books on the scandal-gasm and impeachment, there was not much through the middle of this book that brought me up short, though Blumenthal does present interviews and perspectives of players on both sides of that aisle which are not present in the other histories (It was amusing to read Congressional impeachment warrior James Rogan speak of being “On the wrong side of history” regarding the trial in the Senate). No, the book began to take its obligatory pounding when I reached page 656, and the second part of the chapter entitled “The Twenty-First Century.”

The astounding level of blunt ignorance within the American populace about the events surrounding the attacks of September 11 cannot be easily quantified. In a nation with thousands of newspapers, thousands of radio stations, and a ceaseless data stream from CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, Fox, NBC, ABC, CBS and PBS, some 70% of the population believed as late as a month ago that Saddam Hussein was centrally involved in and personally responsible for the attacks which destroyed the Towers and struck the Pentagon. Beyond that, what most people know about the single most important event in American history does not go much beyond “evildoers” who “hate our freedom.”

That is, simply, incredible. It is also not an accident. This ignorance has a great deal to do with the stunning mediocrity of the television news media, that empty well where most Americans go to become informed. This ignorance also, and far more importantly, has a great deal to do with the Clinton-era actions of a large number of conservatives, many of whom are in positions of power today, many of whom are now making careers out of September 11.

The two great myths that have settled across the nation, beyond the Hussein-9/11 connection, are that Clinton did not do enough during his tenure to stop the spread of radical terrorist organizations like al Qaeda, and that the attacks themselves could not have been anticipated or stopped. Blumenthal’s insider perspective on these matters bursts the myths entirely, and reveals a level of complicity regarding the attacks within the journalistic realm and the conservative political ranks that is infuriating and disturbing.

Starting in 1995, Clinton took actions against terrorism that were unprecedented in American history. He poured billions and billions of dollars into counterterrorism activities across the entire spectrum of the intelligence community. He pouted billions more into the protection of critical infrastructure. He ordered massive federal stockpiling of antidotes and vaccines to prepare for a possible bioterror attack. He order a reorganization of the intelligence community itself, ramming through reforms and new procedures to address the demonstrable threat. Within the National Security Council, “threat meetings” were held three times a week to assess looming conspiracies. His National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger, prepared a voluminous dossier on al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, actively tracking them across the planet. Clinton raised the issue of terrorism in virtually every important speech he gave in the last three years of his tenure. In 1996, Clinton delivered a major address to the United Nations on the matter of international terrorism, calling it “The enemy of our generation.”

Behind the scenes, he leaned vigorously on the leaders of nations within the terrorist sphere. In particular, he pushed Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to assist him in dealing with the threat from neighboring Afghanistan and its favorite guest, Osama bin Laden. Before Sharif could be compelled to act, he was thrown out of office by his own army. His replacement, Pervez Musharraf, pointedly refused to do anything to assist Clinton in dealing with these threats. Despite these and other diplomatic setbacks, terrorist cell after terrorist cell were destroyed across the world, and bomb plots against American embassies were thwarted. Because of security concerns, these victories were never revealed to the American people until very recently.

In America, few people heard anything about this. Clinton’s dire public warnings about the threat posed by terrorism, and the massive non-secret actions taken to thwart it, went completely unreported by the media, which was far more concerned with stained dresses and baseless Drudge Report rumors. When the administration did act militarily against bin Laden and his terrorist network, the actions were dismissed by partisans within the media and Congress as scandalous “wag the dog” tactics. The TV networks actually broadcast clips of the movie “Wag The Dog” to accentuate the idea that everything the administration was doing was contrived fakery.

The bombing of the Sundanese factory at al-Shifa, in particular, drew wide condemnation from these quarters, despite the fact that the CIA found and certified VX nerve agent precursor in the ground outside the factory, despite the fact that the factory was owned by Osama bin Laden’s Military Industrial Corporation, and despite the fact that the manager of the factory lived in bin Laden’s villa in Khartoum. The book “Age of Sacred Terror” quantifies the al-Shifa issue thusly: “The dismissal of the al-Shifa attack as a scandalous blunder had serious consequences, including the failure of the public to comprehend the nature of the al Qaeda threat.”

In Congress, Clinton was thwarted by the reactionary conservative majority in virtually every attempt he made to pass legislation that would attack al Qaeda and terrorism. His 1996 omnibus terror bill, which included many of the anti-terror measures we now take for granted after September 11, was withered almost to the point of uselessness by attacks from the right; Jesse Helms and Trent Lott were openly dismissive of the threats Clinton spoke of.

Clinton wanted to attack the financial underpinnings of the al-Qaeda network by banning American companies and individuals from dealing with foreign banks and financial institutions that al Qaeda was using for its money-laundering operations. Texas Senator Phil Gramm, chairman of the Banking Committee, killed Clinton’s bill on this matter and called it “totalitarian.” In fact, he was compelled to kill the bill because his most devoted patrons, the Enron Corporation and its criminal executives in Houston, were using those same terrorist financial networks to launder their own dirty money and rip off the Enron stockholders.

Just before departing office, Clinton managed to make a deal with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development to have some twenty nations close tax havens used by al Qaeda. His term ended before the deal was sealed, and the incoming Bush administration acted immediately to destroy the agreement. According to Time magazine, in an article entitled “Banking on Secrecy” published in October of 2001, Bush economic advisors Larry Lindsey and R. Glenn Hubbard were urged by think tanks like the Center for Freedom and Prosperity to opt out of the coalition Clinton had formed. The conservative Heritage Foundation lobbied Bush’s Treasury Secretary, Paul O’Neill, to do the same. In the end, the lobbyists got what they wanted, and the Bush administration pulled America out of the plan. The Time article stated, “Without the world’s financial superpower, the biggest effort in years to rid the world’s financial system of dirty money was short-circuted.”

This laundry list of partisan catastrophes goes on and on. Far from being inept on the matter of terrorism, Clinton was profoundly activist in his attempts to address terrorism. Mush of his work was foiled by right-wing Congressional conservatives who, simply, refused to accept the fact that he was President. These men, paid to work for the public trust, spent eight years working diligently to paralyze any and all Clinton policies, including anti-terror initiatives that, if enacted, would have gone a long way towards thwarting the September 11 attacks. Beyond them lay the worthless television media, which ignored and spun the terrorist issue as it pursued salacious leaks from Ken Starr’s office, leaving the American people drowning in a swamp of ignorance on a matter of deadly global importance.

Over and above the theoretical questions regarding whether or not Clinton’s anti-terror policies, if passed, would have stopped September 11 lies the very real fact that attacks very much like 9/11 were, in fact, stopped dead by the Clinton administration. The most glaring example of this came on December 31, 1999, when the world gathered to celebrate the passing of the millennium. On that night, al Qaeda was gathering as well.

The terrorist network planned to simultaneously attack the national airports in Washington DC and Los Angeles, the Amman Raddison Hotel in Jordan, a constellation of holy sites in Israel, and the USS The Sullivans at dock in Yemen. Each and every single one of these plots, which ranged from one side of the planet to the other, was foiled by the efforts of the Clinton administration. Speaking for the first time about these millennium plots, in a speech delivered to the Coast Guard Academy on May 17, 2000, Clinton said, “I want to tell you a story that, unfortunately, will not be the last example you will have to face.”

Indeed.

Clinton proved that Osama bin Laden and his terror network can be foiled, can be thwarted, can be stopped. The multifaceted and complex nature of the international millennium plots rivals the plans laid before September 11, and involved counter-terrorism actions within several countries and across the entire American intelligence and military community. All resources were brought to bear, and the terrorists went down to defeat. The proof is in the pudding here. September 11, like the millennium plots, could have been avoided.

Couple this with other facts about the Bush administration we now have in hand. The administration was warned about a massive terror plot in the months before September by the security services of several countries, including Israel, Egypt, Germany and Russia. CIA Director George Tenet delivered a specific briefing on the matter to the administration on August 8, 2001. The massive compendium of data on Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda compiled by Sandy Berger, and delivered to Condoleezza Rice upon his departure, went completely and admittedly unread until the attacks took place. The attacks themselves managed, for over an hour, to pierce the most formidable air defense system in the history of the Earth without a single fighter aircraft taking wing until the catastrophe was concluded.

It is not fashionable these days to pine for the return of William Jefferson Clinton. Given the facts above, and the realities we face about the administration of George W. Bush, and the realities we endure regarding the aftermath of September 11, the United States of America would be, and was, well served by its previous leader. That we do not know this, that September 11 happened at all, that it was such a wretched shock to the American people, that we were so woefully unprepared, can be laid at the feet of a failed news media establishment, and at the feet of a pack of power-mad conservative extremists who now have a great deal to atone for.

Had Clinton been heeded, the measures he espoused would have been put in place, and a number of powerful bulwarks would have been thrown into the paths of those commercial airplanes. Had the news media been something other than a purveyor of masturbation fantasies from the far-right, the American people would have know the threats we faced, and would have compelled their Congressmen to act. Had Congress itself been something other than an institution ruled by narrow men whose only desire was to break a sitting President by any means necessary, we would very probably still have a New York skyline dominated by two soaring towers.

Had the Bush administration not continued this pattern of gross partisan ineptitude and heeded the blitz of domestic and international warnings, instead of trooping off to Texas for a month-long vacation, had Bush’s National Security Advisor done one hour’s worth of her homework, we probably would not be in the grotesque global mess that currently envelops us. Never forget that many of the activists who pushed throughout the 1990s for the annihilation of all things Clinton are now foursquare in charge of the country today.

These are the sins of September 11. Thank you, Sidney. I’m sorry I broke your book.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 12:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. So, I'm buying this book you wrote
and sending it to my borther for his birthday. He called on mine and told me a 'Clinton joke'. I am tired of it and don't care if he never speaks to me again. I am printing pages of info till my printer dies and shipping the whole lot to him. Tired of it I tell you!

Thanks for your voice, Will. And take it easy on your walls, lest someone try to pad them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LearnedHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Thanks, Will. This is a MARVELOUS essay!
And for god's sake, please submit it to USA Today, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The LA Times, The Wall Street Journal (as if!), CNN.com, The Atlantic, Harper's, The American Prospect, The Nation, The Washington Monthly, The London Times -- and to ANYONE ELSE who might print it for wide distribution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Snow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. Excellent review, Will - thanks.....
Edited on Sun Oct-12-03 12:21 PM by Snow
being a practitioner of public health, I hope Blumenthal mentions, at least, that a perfectly viable health plan that went down primarily because the republicans in congress were determined to block it. It didn't go far enough in my opinion, but it would have done much to prevent the health care delivery mess we are in now.

Second, while I think television bears a huge blame for their irresponsible pandering and sycophancy and cowardice, the California election just past emphasizes the power of AM talk radio to influence opinion. I think we on this board are not as aware as we should be of the strength of that particular medium and the depth of response to it. Those guys are not simply panderers, thay are active, deliberate, hateful demagogues, worse and more dangerous, in my opinion, than even Fox network talking heads. That Clear Channel owns such a large proportion of that broadcast capability is frightening, and leaves me feeling helpless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leesa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #2
17. And the media has convinced the ignorant masses that it passed!!
I can't believe how many times I have heard that the health care industry is in a shambles because of Hillary! I always say, "But it didn't pass." They ignore me of course and continue to blather. They complain of unaffordable insurance rates, but can't seem to connect that the corporatists (mostly Republicans) are simply shafting them.
The media is responsible for most of this disconnect and its players should be tried for treason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
never cry wolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
4. Thanks again Will,
maybe you need a stunt double book. Maybe coulte's or o'reilly's. But, don't buy it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toucano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #4
15. That is so funny!
"stunt double book" :D

Yes, Will. Thanks for your post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
5. the people I work with in Texas
STILL think Saddam was involved in the events of 9/11. When I question them about said idiocy, I find that it isn't just FOX news telling them this stuff. THEY WANT TO BELIEVE IT. It fits so easily into their infantile notion that WE GOOD, THEY BAD. It's a big part of why these people vote repug - because republicans usually do have that black and white message so easily understood by people too busy or too damn lazy to research further. Simply put, Karl Rove tells a great portion of the American public WHAT THEY WANT TO HEAR. It's beyond sad but it's how the Bush misadministration gets away with all of their garbage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #5
18. Scapegoating a class of people is what happens.
Hitler used the German people's suspicions of Jews by blaming them for the poor economy and unemployment problems of the German Weimar Republic. It worked because they wanted to blame an underclass and the Jews were a handy scapegoat.

We are doing the same with Arabs or anyone who is Middle Eastern looking, even Hindus and Pakistanis. I think you have noticed that our racist government hasn't pursued Afghanis as diligently as it has Arabs I believe because Afghanis look a lot more Aryan than Arabs although all are racially considered Caucasians.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. YOU GOT IT CLETE
what I find so disheartening is that Americans - LOTS OF THEM - fall for such an obviously racist propaganda ploy. I feel sick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
6. Franken debunks this myth as well...
But sometimes it seems as though no one is listening. :-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mari333 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Franken called it Operation Ignore
and Bush officials ignored it.
LIHOP or MIHOP or just plain f*cking stupidity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maggrwaggr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 12:57 PM
Response to Original message
8. thanks, Will. Keep it up
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VelmaD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 12:59 PM
Response to Original message
9. This is why it's important...
Edited on Sun Oct-12-03 01:18 PM by VelmaD
to buy hardback books. They hold up so much better when you just have to give in to that urge to throw them across the room.

Thank goodness I'm able to overcome the urge I get to throw my computer sometimes when I read your stuff. :-)


P.S. If this is going up on truthout.org than it's "terrorist cell after terrorist cell was destroyed" instead of "were destroyed" I think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
10. Most importantly, you point out that Incompetency could have caused 9/11!
Edited on Sun Oct-12-03 01:03 PM by KoKo01
And, ordinary people might begin to accept this. Since folks have awakened to the fact that Bush's Invasion and Occupation are turning into a disaster due to "incompetency in planning," and ignoring of intelligence evidence and failure to heed any voices outside their own "bubble," it's not a far step to suddenly realize that 9/11 happened because they failed to listen to the intelligence experts who tried to warn them because at that point anyone who was associated with the Clinton's were oun the "outs" and were exciled from their hearing.

This is also why the Wilson leaks are important. If they didn't listen to Wilson then following the line of reasoning backwards they didn't listen to the warnings of 9/11 and that again shows total incompetency.

Tinfoilhat theories won't be listened to, like LIHOP but LIHTI might get traction. LIHTI meaning "Let it happen through Incompetency."

(This is good Will.....glad you put it together like this) :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mot78 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #10
27. LIHOP is nuts
Edited on Sun Oct-12-03 07:07 PM by mot78
But Bush* had evidence of some kind of terror attack, although not 9/11. The FBI and CIA also botched our intelligence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
11. The Age of Sacred Terror is on my reading list...added after reading...
Edited on Sun Oct-12-03 01:06 PM by AP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Darranar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
12. Al Franken has a nice summary of this...
Edited on Sun Oct-12-03 01:05 PM by Darranar
in Lies and the Lyign Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
realFedUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
13. Good one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
14. A couple of typos...
He pouted billions more into the protection of critical infrastructure. (poured?)

And the word "mush" instead of "much" about 8 paragraphs from bottom..
===================================================================

But very excellent info. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. Yeah, Will.
If you are putting this up for publication, proof read it first. I noted a few typos as well, like "pouted" should be "poured".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #14
23. Got 'em
Thanks!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uhhuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Great essay!
Also, 2nd paragraph from bottom, should have known instead of know, otherwise, very well done!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
16. The Republican congress
Is to blame for all the bad things which have happened. From 1994 to the present day, the Republican controlled congress has failed the American People. And still they get re-elected. What do you call citizens who continue to vote those bastards back into office? Sh##&*#?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcane1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. I call them traitors
:grr:

reading excellent articles like this make me long for the gallows...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemExpat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
22. Keep churning these excellent articles out, Will!
So necessary, they are.....

DemEx
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msmcghee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
24. Good, heartfelt review of Sidney's book.
I just got "Big Lies" in the mail today. I find that I have accumulated some pretty good hardcover first editions - some signed by the author.

Will you be doing any Seattle area appearances in the future - where one could get a book and a sig?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frank frankly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 06:49 PM
Response to Original message
26. magnificent
really

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oilwellian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 07:55 PM
Response to Original message
28. Excellent as always Will
It's always bothered me when I hear wingnuts say Clinton did nothing to address terrorism. Thank you for proving otherwise.

I also noted another typo in the 7th paragraph. You wrote: He order a reorganization of the intelligence community itself,

s/b "ordered"

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulthompson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
29. Too easy on Clinton
Will,

I think you're being far too easy on Clinton. True, he was much better than Bush on terrorism, but only in a relative sense. Greg Palast expressed it well when he likened counterterrorism under Clinton as one eye closed, whereas under Bush it was (and still is?) both eyes closed.

You fail to mention a whole range of failures that happened under Clinton's watch, and give his administration credit for things they don't deserve. As just one example, where's the mention of Clinton letting bin Laden go to Afghanistan in 1996? They even turned down a chance to catch his plane with all his top leadership on board in international airspace, and instead even gave permission for that plane to refuel in Qatar. The attempted bombing of the USS Sullivans only failed because the terrorist's boat filled with explosives was too heavy and literally sank within sight of its target. US intelligence didn't even know there was a failed attack on that ship until after the nearly identical USS Cole attack. The Ahmed Ressam bombing of the LA airport was only stopped because of the alertness of one border guard. Presumably that guard would have stopped the sweaty and nervous terrorist regardless of who was president at the time.

Furthermore, Clinton's retaliatory bombing of Sudan and Afghanistan was a complete fiasco, and I don't see how you can defend it. It's widely agreed now that the Sudan factory WAS producing medicine. The Afghanistan bombing was similarly a joke, killing more Pakistani gvmt advisors than actual terrorists, and is widely credited with inflating the bin Laden's status in the Muslim world.

Let's not give Clinton credit for things he doesn't deserve, and let's criticize him for what he did wrong. At best I'd say at least he was trying, though he only really woke up to the problem around 1998. I think a better tack to take is not that Clinton was exemplary in counterterrorism, but look at how much worse Bush was. Literally within days of coming into office, he undid many of the good things Clinton had done. Put a stop to FBI investigations touching on the bin Laden family and rich Saudis. Cancelled the subs near Afghanistan that gave the US a chance to kill bin Laden if it had the intelligence. Cancelled plans for a retaliatory strike in response to the USS Cole bombing. Failed to restart Predator drone surveillance of bin Laden. Lauched a new wave of secret negotiations with the Taliban, meanwhile turning a blind eye to their support of terrorism. There's much more. Those are the kinds of things that need to be hammered into the public mind to defeat the "Bush better against terrorism than Clinton" meme.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grasswire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. another typo
"politically-oriented" should not have a hyphen. Here's the rule:

To determine whether an -ly word is an adverb or an adjective, omit the second part of the compound. If the phrase no longer makes sense, then the -ly word is an adverb (and needs no hyphen); if it still makes sense, the -ly word is an adjective (and needs a hyphen).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msmcghee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. The meme that needs to be defeated . .
. . is the,

"Republicans, like Bush*, are inherently better at combatting our enemies and maintaining our security than any Democrat".

Most of the Clinton events you recall are subject to different interpretations - all more generous than yours - but not really worth arguing about with someone who has it in for Clinton.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 08:42 PM
Response to Original message
30. I'm not so sure about al Shifa
as far as I know, the jury is still out on that, and anyway, most criticism of it came from the Left. I didn't even know there were criticisms by conservatives -- at that time, I was only exposed to leftists -- though I'm not surprised they would criticize Clinton for anything and everything.

Has it proven to be a chemical weapons plant, and not just a pharmaceutical factory? And did it prove to do anything to stop any terrorist attacks? They managed to pull off the Cole, and Sept. 11, despite the strike.

In short, are you sure you want to hold up that action as a model of the right way to have responded to the East Africa attacks?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 08:53 PM
Response to Original message
33. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Beetwasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 09:15 PM
Response to Original message
34. You're forgiven
for being a Pedro apologist! ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ewagner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 09:46 PM
Response to Original message
35. Just some observations
First, I hope your essay is widely distributed and very widely read. It is an excellent synopsis of the book and will serve as a "reader's digest version" to those who cannot or will not take the time to read the whole book. The essay is eloquent and forceful. Again, I congratulate you on an excellent work.

I noticed in some of the other responses that there was some comentary about the role of the CIA and FBI in September 11. While praising the Clinton Administration in thwarting terrorist attacks, it implies that the CIA was most certainly "on top of its game" during those years. The next logical question to be asked then is, What happened between January 22, 2001 and September 11, 2001? How could these same, seemingly competetent, agencies become so grossly incompetetent in just over eight months? The implications is that the agencies didn't get stupid, the administration did. While many of us believe that this is the absolute truth, there is no single, simple smoking gun to back it up. Hence, we're consigned to the ignominy of conspiracy theorists.

Great work.

Again, I hope it is widely read.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 11:57 PM
Response to Original message
36. I always enjoy
reading your work and even visit Truthout quite a bit to see what's new.

I constantly find myself wanting to throw something these days.

Great piece.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 05:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC