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

22 answers

Slick Willy was too busy using Interns as Humidors .Then he got Sandy Burglar to steal the classified documents proving he was asleep. He had no time to stop terrorists. He let Bin Laden go to keep his poll numbers up. He and Jimmy Carter the two worse presidents in my time.

2007-03-10 10:21:12 · answer #1 · answered by carolinatinpan 5 · 1 1

I'm a republican and I love a good Clinton bashing as much as the next guy. But the means used to bring down the world trade center in 2001 I think was beyond the wildest imagination of any leader in history. Im sure that security was vastly beefed up. But to think that we needed to prevent against terrorist hijacking planes and flying them into buildings wouldve been thought of as a little far fetched. In which cas we wouldve blamed clinton for hidering our liberties at airports. Its all part of the political blame game

2007-03-10 18:15:25 · answer #2 · answered by Unions are Lazy 1 · 3 0

the Republican congress would have cried about 10 times louder than the dems have over Iraq... and would have cut off any funding to anything Clinton did... and this is almost UNDENIABLE...

look at how they reacted to the actions he did take:

they complained when he attacked Osama with missiles... if you remember, do you actually think they wouldn't have minded more though?

IMAGINE HOW LOUD THEY WOULD HAVE CRIED IF HE ACTUALLY SEND TROOPS IN (which would have had to have been done to stop anything)... they simply wouldn't have let him have enough funding to get anything meaningful done... and everyone knew it, especially Clinton, so why bother?

although... granted... after 9-11... it would have pretty much ended the Republican party if they would have cried that much about it before... as Clinton would have clearly tried to do more and that Republicans clearly forcibly stopped his actions...

great opportunity missed by Clinton there...

2007-03-10 18:18:43 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Since the bums that bombed the WTC in 1993 were captured during Clinton's administration:
In October 1995, the militant Islamist and blind cleric Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, was sentenced to life imprisonment for masterminding the bombing. In 1998, Ramzi Yousef was convicted of "seditious conspiracy" to bomb the towers. In all, ten militant Islamist conspirators were convicted for their part in the bombing, each receiving prison sentences of a maximum of 240 years. In October 1995, the militant Islamist and blind cleric Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, was sentenced to life imprisonment for masterminding the bombing. In 1998, Ramzi Yousef was convicted of "seditious conspiracy" to bomb the towers. In all, ten militant Islamist conspirators were convicted for their part in the bombing, each receiving prison sentences of a maximum of 240 years.

So what didn't he do? You guys are grasping at straws now, you know that, don't you?

2007-03-10 18:16:21 · answer #4 · answered by iwasnotanazipolka 7 · 2 0

clinton DID do something after the WTC was bombed in 1993.


A BETTER question would be WHY did george w bush stand by and do NOTHING to even TRY to stop the terrorist attacks on 911?

2007-03-10 18:16:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

I wonder what the world would be like if Bush and Condi had reviewed all the signals of a massive air-attack against U.S. cities along the east coast in fall 2001, that Al-Qaeda operatives had been hinting at and training for.

Oh wait....the Iraq invasion plans and "My Pet Goat" took precedent over that boring ol' document.

Sorry!

2007-03-10 18:10:10 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 7 1

He did, but I hate how rethugs ALWAYS leave out Ronnie "Bonzo" Reagan from this flawed equation, what would the world be like if he hadn't fled beirut in 1983? How many rethugs understand this is what emboldened Osama Bin Laden as he has oft stated himself

and while we're at it let's not forget the current administrations ignoring the PDB "Al Queda determined to attck United States" how freaking stupid was that

2007-03-10 18:10:04 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 5 2

Your question assumes that he knew for certain who did it, that whoever did it was part of an organization based where? and that definitive action could have be taken. And he could have pulled a real ***** like G W Bush and done everything wrong. Trustworthy intelligence was unavailable then too.

2007-03-10 18:13:52 · answer #8 · answered by pilot 5 · 0 1

I believe he did. The FBI found the people behind that bombing. They were arrested, tried, and convicted, and are still in prison.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_bombing

Clinton did many things that one could criticize, but kindly don't say he didn't do anything when in this case he obviously did. By lying about a fact so easily found, it casts anything you say into the shadow of doubt.

2007-03-10 18:17:19 · answer #9 · answered by KCBA 5 · 3 1

Ah hell...if you're going to throw a rock of this magnitude, then you're going to have to go back a long ways 'before' Clinton to do it!

2007-03-10 18:40:39 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers