English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Along with Slick Willie? Every freely admits and knows that Bill allowed Bin Laden to come to power, attack us in 93, 96, 98 and how many other times? He did nothing so can we not say that he is liable for the deaths after his term in office? Kind of like his buddy Marc Rich who is now back in trouble with the law after Slick Willie pardoned him. I think its about time the Clintons are held and convicted for all their crimes against humanity, dont you?

2006-08-15 22:34:06 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

8 answers

I know for a fact that Bill Clinton was the one behind that 9/11 attack.

It was planned on his watch.

He and the Ds put a wall between the FBI and CIA preventing the information needed to pass from one to the other.

He and the Ds gutted the US human intelligence operations during the 90s.

The training of pilots happened on his watch.

He turned down OBL's capture several times during his administration.

He did practically nothing to Al Qaeda during his watch.

He was either incompetent or in bed with OBL as well as Monica.

2006-08-16 05:09:37 · answer #1 · answered by SPLATT 7 · 0 1

the..count.. of *** Bin Laden get away...why the hell did we leave Afghanistan before the job was done? Why?

U.S. Leaving Afghanistan is new to me lol. Obviously you don't know what you’re talking about it. If we took out Osama when we had the chance I am sure most of our problems would have been alleviated.

Our current situation is the way it is because instead of addressing the problem under the Clinton years we decided to (1) ignore it (2) pay it off (3) took on a react to reaction policy...verses one that would be pro active.

You can bash Bush all you want but the truth is he has been elected and re-elected. And without him where would we be at the moment? Fighting the War on Terror on our own soil. Has there been another major attack on U.S. soil? The answer to that is simply No. Will there be in the future? Who knows for sure but in the mean time this President has chosen to remain pro active in stopping the Jihadist.

Why don't you stop being some arm chair critic and join the rest of that are of us that have chosen to be pro active. I have fought in 3 countries so far and know the jihadist's up close and personal. (apologize for ranting) Oops but to answer your question no Hillary and Bill shouldn't be prosecuted for being complacent. They should be exiled to say N. Korea, Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan to reap the fruit of their labor :)

2006-08-16 06:46:23 · answer #2 · answered by Madness_75 2 · 1 0

Well if that's the case, you better hang George and his pals as accessories after the fact for letting Bin Laden get away...why the hell did we leave Afghanistan before the job was done? Why? Because the Saudis own the Bush family, and called in a marker...so Dubya and the Dick sent our soldiers into Iraq as mercenaries...to die for someone else's agenda...you see any real difference there? Crimes against humanity? Gee...the present administration condones racial profiling, rampant violations of the Geneva Convention and pretty much every other human rights statute known...in addition to spying on its own citizens...and that's for starters...
I can't apologize, and won't, for the mistakes of any administration...whether this one or the Clinton...but at least Bill did apologize for some stuff (not necessarily everything)...history will judge them both on their own merits (or lack thereof)...

addenda...this isn't as far as I know a forum for personal attacks...it should be for an exchange of ideas...I disagree with many I see here, but I respect and defend everyone's rights to have and express them...

2006-08-16 05:46:48 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

Bin Laden came to power..Where the heck are you from???

2006-08-16 11:17:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

then how come we never convicted ronald reagan for all the crap he pulled?

2006-08-16 05:58:33 · answer #5 · answered by gallow 5 · 1 1

why not... at least she wont be able to run for president. sounds good to me.

2006-08-16 05:39:34 · answer #6 · answered by afbb12 2 · 1 1

exactly...u r right...they shud be hanged for thier deeds...this is simply intolarable

2006-08-16 05:40:16 · answer #7 · answered by msknowall 2 · 1 2

ummmmmmmmmm...................................... your dumb!

2006-08-16 05:59:59 · answer #8 · answered by cc 1 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers