4,417 dead soldiers in peacetime
http://www.nysun.com/article/48926
Clinton view of al Qaueda and Saddam links
http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/003/527uwabl.asp
http://www.geocites.com/truthsawyonline/clintons.html
Able danger blocked communication between agencies
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9755.htm
Washington Times link to al Q and saddam b4 Bush
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040624-112921-3401r.htm
Add to my list pass them on I am afraid without research history will repeat itself ie: Hillbill coming on like a freight train.
Thoughts?
2007-05-12 14:19:06 · 8 answers · asked by Mele Kai 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I've been collecting such info like this from all the different posters and from the books I've read on the Clintons and they have to be the most dishonorable administration that was ever allowed in office!! The thought that another one could get back in is beyond a nightmare!!
2007-05-12 14:34:48 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Wow, you people are so desperate to prop Bush up that you have to site a Weekly Standard article arguing AlQueda ties to Saddam Hussein. But you can't make that case without showing Clinton was very much targeting AlQueda and the Sudanese pharmaceutical factory that he bombed in 98 and missed ObL by 30 minutes wasn't really wag the dog like the entire GOP accused back then. So there goes your theory that 9-11 is Clinton's fault. During the summer of 2001 when GW Bush is president, there were mountains of intelligence showing an imminent attack on this country. CIA agents talked of "hair on fire" and Ms. Rice received a briefing in August 2001 entitled "Al Queda determined to strike within the US." Problem was, no one in the administration did anything about it. August vacation and all that...
2007-05-12 15:52:17 · answer #2 · answered by Kathleen K 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First of all, Bill Clinton hasn't been in office in 7 years? Stop living in the past. RIght now and what we can do for our future should be what is important. last time I checked time travel wasn't yet possible, we can't go back and change anything anyway. That is truly a waste of a question.
Also, how about quoting or providing lin ks to credible papers or sights, wverything you posted was pretty much tabloid right wing loon crap. None of them are real sources. So based on the infromation provided I say no. Besides what purpose would it serve if we could? Bush is President now and has done for more damage to the future and standing of this country that Clinton did, although I do agree that Clinton should have done more, however he had a republican congress that blocked anything he tried to do, but no one wants to see the truth
2007-05-12 14:35:23 · answer #3 · answered by Myles D 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I'm for it!
I feel his actions in dismantling the Intelligence communities of America are directly responsible for 9-11.
If we can sue a gun manufacturer because his product was used in a crime, we can sure as hell an ex president for creating a disaster with his policies.
2007-05-12 14:44:59 · answer #4 · answered by The Forgotten 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your post just proves how much Hillary scares the crap outta the GOP. Still looking for any straw to grasp at. Bill was impeached already, get over it and worry about cleaning up your own party before your point your finger at another party.
2007-05-12 14:27:34 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
If I remember right, Clinton was impeached. What they didn't do was actual punishment other than censure ???? Anyway, been there, done that. Let's look to the present and future instead of dwelling on the past.
2007-05-12 14:23:00 · answer #6 · answered by whisper2roar 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Good Info I agree totaly we must stop Hill and Bill 2.
2007-05-12 14:23:27 · answer #7 · answered by martin d 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
How can we impeach someone who is not in office? That makes no sense at all.
2007-05-12 14:25:28 · answer #8 · answered by msi_cord 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋