Specifically, the ones who were saying that it was full of lies? Did any of you actually watch it? Because I did, and I didn't see anything glaringly wrong with it.
It is true that Clinton treated terrorism and al Qaeda as a law enforcement problem, and he was overly concerned with the legality of taking bin Laden out. And Madeline Albright DID warn the Pakis that we were launching cruise missiles over their territory, which probably tipped him off.
2006-09-13 12:14:48 · 17 answers · asked by BrianthePigEatingInfidel 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
True. That's why Slick Willy was making a fuss over it. Gratefully, the network didn't cave in.
2006-09-13 12:17:39 · answer #1 · answered by williegod 6 · 1⤊ 4⤋
I don't think even Clinton's folks said it was full of lies. Only that certain parts misrepresented the facts - specifically a few actions and conversations that happened. I was of the impression that Albright never did warn the paki's.
If it was treated as a law enforcement problem, then why did Clinton issue an executive order to assassinate Bin Laden? That is clearly NOT a law enforcement problem. Neither is lobbing missiles from an offshore ship into another country to kill terrorists. Using the CIA and the NSA to hunt down Al Qaeda and employing the Northern alliance is NOT a law enforcement problem. The CIA and NSA don't enforce laws, they carry out intelligence ops.
There were errors by both Clinton and Bush administrations on this. Heck, even going back to Bush I and Reagan.
You need to pull your head out of your behind.
You know what, at the end of the day, 9/11 happened on Bush's watch. And he was warned by Condi and Clark early in 2001. So if somebody really needs to shoulder the burden of the blame, its the Bush administration.
2006-09-13 19:21:11 · answer #2 · answered by dapixelator 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
For anyone interested in 9/11 check out this site: http://www.wanttoknow.info/9-11timeline60pg
Its a time line of events surrounding 9/11 from the 70's to the present and each entry has references from the main stream media to back it up. No theories, just facts. Excellent reading.
2006-09-13 19:37:09 · answer #3 · answered by Jagatkarta 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I suppose you'd of rather had us not warn the Paki's so they could've picked them up on radar and launched a nuke into India.. There's a VERY good reason why they were warned. It's not Clintons fault the Paki's f'd up our chance to get Osama. Didn't see the film, don't think it's that big a deal though..
2006-09-13 19:30:37 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
I watched the football game, as did the majority of America... I've already read the 9-11 report, so I am familiar with the actual factual basis for the move, I need no added "drama"...
I heard that what they actually aired was changed from the original? they edited out the highly controversial parts, so I wouldn't be so surprised if it was actually more factual after that...
2006-09-13 19:33:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
I saw that program and if its true,then there are many in the government ( past and present ),with blood on their stupid hands.And i use the word 'stupid' because of their totally beligerent attitude to political correctness which has cost my ( english ) country,many,many servicemens lives.They had TWO chances at least,to wipe that smile off Bin Laden's face once and for all,but of course they missed it,because of elections and being seen as PC towards arab states.This 'war on terror' can NEVER end now,despite Bush and Blair's bullshit.Makes me mad that they sit in their protected ivory towers,whilst their dumbness to reality is destroying families in the UK and USA
2006-09-13 19:28:31 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Right, so it makes the liberals look bad. Looking bad equals lies to them. The truth doesn't enter into the equation.
2006-09-13 19:47:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
That short movie wasn't based in facts(according to all news reports). So I don't think anyone(dem or rep) should believe anything from that movie.
What does regular television know anything about what's been happening inside the administration? Seriously people.
2006-09-13 19:30:45 · answer #8 · answered by deep_crawl 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
My family did and we liked it so much that we taped it. Clinton was a jerk and always will be a jerk. He costed the taxpayers so much money because of the way he treated the White house.
2006-09-13 19:25:41 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
i watched it...why were the dems panties in a bunch over it...and earlier in the day the history channel had their version of 9/11...and many things were left out of path to 9/11...
2006-09-13 19:22:01 · answer #10 · answered by bushfan88 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋