When will Bill Clinton stand up and take responsibility for 9-11?

Question

I mean if he would of got Bin Laden when he could of, there would of been no 9-11..Nope, not Bill, too busy with cigar's

Bunnyboo, screw you.YOU learn the facts, child.CLINTON was president when laden was blowing up our embassies and the USS Cole, and had the chance to get him but passed on it.

Answer 1

Thank you. I have always felt the same way. Clinton admitted he had special forces just hours away from capturing bin Laden. 9/11 happened just a few months into Bush's presidency. The plot was being put together way before that.

Answer 2

There has been 3 terrorist attacks in this country. The Feb. 1983 bombing of the WTC. This was a month after Clinton came into office. Did he blame Pappy Bush? No he went after the people responsible. They are now sitting in prison. Then there was the April 1995 bombing of the Murrah federal building. McVeigh was a whit fundamentalist terrorist. He had read the "Turner Diaries" and sought to overthrow the government. He wanted Clinton to overreact and declare marshal law. Instead Clinton had him hunted down, tried and executed. Then there was 9/11. before it Bush had got 52 warnings from the FBI about terrorists hijacking airplanes in the US, the last one on Sept. 10th. Then there was the Aug 6th PDB that said Bin Laden Determined to Attack in the US. And where are the person responsible for 9/11. Didn't Bush say he would get Bin Laden "DEAD OR ALIVE". It seems Clinton is 2 for 2 and Bush is 0 for 1! There is one thing we must all remember......9/11 HAPPENED ON BUSH"S WATCH!!!

Answer 3

Actually, Clinton put more effort in the war on terror in his presidency than Bush did prior to 9/11. He was actively seeking Bin Laden, we later found out, up until the end of his presidency. In fact, if I remember correctly, he spent more on the effort as well, prior to 9/11 than the Bush administration did.

However, I hate Clinton. He ruined our social welfare programs by instating TANF and limiting how much our government could support those that litterally cannot afford to live. He also created that awful "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Clinton didn't do anything except sell himself to the mainstream, so I have to push myself to defend ANYTHING he did.

But, back to the topic at hand, Bush did something far worse. He ignored warnings from German Intelligence that we would be attacked with our own aircraft. The exact detail of that report is unknown to me, but this was months before 9/11. Also, the military did a shitty job on trying to pursue the planes that crashed into the twin towers. NORAD should have had F-15s up there forcing the two planes to land within ten minutes of communications going out. Nope. Never happened.

Did Bush plan 9/11? No. But the stupid frat boy didn't stop it.

EDIT: Harley, do you actually believe the propoganda you are spewing? All this nonsense about "standing together" is no different than when Hitler insisted that his country men come to fight for the fatherland. Do we all really want to support one leader who has so far spied on us, lied to us, and done nothing except rattle his saber to make us fear and submit to him? I didn't figure anybody actually believed the way to end terrorism was to homoginize.

Answer 4

You people will never understand it. Big money brainwashes most of you. They feed you exactly what you want to hear. There have never been two parties and there never will be. The super-rich control the politicians and all the major media outlets. They care about one thing selling you more junk you do not need. They do their demographics and put on a few different opinions left or right and sell, sell, sell. It's all about the money and always will be about the money. Why do you think they buried Nader in the last two elections. Face facts Nader would never have won but he would have made the two twin candidates answer questions they won't answer because then the money would stop flowing and without all the lobbies handing out checks most of these charlatans would be practicing corporate law. There is too much money to be made and law-makers make it easier for the rich too take most of it. The rich fund both parties, you really don't think they want something in return. Sleep well!

Answer 5

More condemning than his decision not to take Bin Laden when he was offered to him on a silver platter, is Clinton's handling of the Able Danger case. I don't know if you've heard of it, but Able Danger was a intellegence group in the military designed to track Al'Quiada. They were ready to capture Mohammad Atta, one of the 9-11 masterminds, and were going to turn the information over to the FBI for domestic arrest, but lawers appointed by Clinton within the DoD stopped them because Atta had a greencard. If Atta was captured 9-11 would have been stopped, and there was no reason not to let the FBI arrest him. Surely Slinton would have known about such a serious threat, if there was a group designed specifically to track it, and why was Atta allowed to go free and continue on his plot to kill 3000 American citizens? And you wonder why Sander Berger stole classified information that should have been given to the 9-11 comission. Any bets that what he stole was the information regarding the details of the Able Danger screw-up?

Answer 6

This is an attack on freedom, liberty and on all of America and all Americans. It's also an attack on all civilized nations throughout the world.For now Americans should be United. No matter who you voted for in 2001.Its time for America to show strength. Part of true strength is a thoughtful but forceful response to this terrorist action. The response should be defined and strong -- forceful enough to make any other potential terrorists, or those who would harbor them, think very strongly about the consequences of their actions. Two simple steps. First, get it right. Second, respond.
This goes back as far as 1987, anyone remember Oliver North?
Oliver North during the Iran-Contra deals during the Reagan administration. Oliver North on the stand.

'Did you not recently spend close to $60,000 for a home security system?'

Oliver replied, 'Yes I did sir.'

The senator continued, trying to get a laugh out of the audience, 'Isn't this just a little excessive?'

'No sir,' continued Oliver.

'No. And why not?'

'Because the life of my family and I were threatened.'

'Threatened? By who.'

'By a terrorist, sir.'

'Terrorist? What terrorist could possibly scare you that much?'

'His name is Osama bin Laden.'

At this point the senator tried to repeat the name, but couldn't pronounce it, which most people back then probably couldn't. A couple of people laughed at the attempt. Then the senator continued.

'Why are you so afraid of this man?'

'Because sir, he is the most evil person alive that I know of.'

'And what do you recommend we do about him?'

'If it were me I would recommend an assassin team be formed to eliminate him and his men from the face of the earth.'

The senator disagreed with this approach

Answer 7

There is an audio tape of Clinton saying he had Bin Laden and let him go because he didnt have "enough" on him. I dont know if this was before or after 911. Either way the administration was to lax dealing with a terrorist group they knew much more about then the American people did at the time.

Answer 8

Just one problem,it was the Bush Nazis that orchestrated the destruction of the Twin Towers in order to terrorize the American people in to voluntarily give up their rights and freedoms and allow him to conquer the planet for oil and profit and The New World Order so Clinton and Osama have nothing to do with it and you are looking like a typical con.Osama is living in the east wing of the White house and his dad owns Citi Bank which is worth about 10 % of the U.S. economy.Go figure.

Answer 9

who cares if they had their chance to catch him or not...no one here knew that 911 was gonna happen so quit blaming everyone except the terrorists who did it. God you people make me soo sick. this is whats wrong with America. We can't just be a united country...there is always dumbasses that have to try and gain publicity by saying our government plotted 911 or that,like in this case, Clinton is to blame for not catching him. I bet next someone will say bin laden's parents are to blame for having sex and conceiving him, huh? oh one more thing. bunny boo how the hell would you handle it? no one thought it was a bad idea to go to war in afghanistan at the time. so how, now, did he handle it so poorly. because we didn't catch 1 guy in a whole country? who cares. we have told the whole world that we will not just sit back and be attacked and that we will fight for our country. people like you should think about all the soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen that die for YOU everyday and then talk **** about how you don't like the way things are run. without us you wouldn't have freedom. oh and while i am at it i guess invading iraq was a terrible idea too huh. everyone has lost sight of the fact that we liberated that country and since then we haven't been nuked by them. who the hell would know that they didn't have nukes? but i bet damn sure everyone would hate bush anyways if we had sat back and iraq did have them. so who cares. until you people go over there and fight for yourself then SHUT UP. maybe next time the government "conspires" to do something like 911 they will make sure they off all the people in America like you.

Answer 10

How could someone who shows absolutely no personal responsibility possibly take responsibility for 911? Aside from the fact that he won't take responsibility on his own, liberals and the media have let him get by with it. It's easier to blame the next guy, and why not? He took credit for his predecessors economy!!!