What did Bush and the Republicans warn us about terrorism before 9/11?
Oh yeah, they accused Clinton of "wagging the dog".
2007-10-12 01:28:01
·
answer #1
·
answered by ck4829 7
·
8⤊
1⤋
The Clinton administration attempted to warn the Bush administration about the threat of Al-Quaeda. The Bush administration was too obsessed with Iraq from the start to listen to them.
"I'm coming to this briefing to underscore how important I think this subject is. I believe that the Bush Administration will spend more time on terrorism generally, and on al-Qaeda specifically, than any other subject."
— Clinton National Security Adviser SANDY BERGER, to Condi Rice, January 2001
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/bush/elliott.htm
April 30, 2001: Wolfowitz in Deputy Secretary Meeting: Who Cares About [Bin Laden]? The Bush administration finally has its first Deputy Secretary-level meeting on terrorism. [Time, 8/4/2002] According to counterterrorism “tsar” Richard Clarke, he advocates that the Northern Alliance needs to be supported in the war against the Taliban, and the Predator drone flights need to resume over Afghanistan so bin Laden can be targeted. [Clarke, 2004, pp. 231] Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz says the focus on al-Qaeda is wrong. He states, “I just don’t understand why we are beginning by talking about this one man bin Laden,” and “Who cares about a little terrorist in Afghanistan?” Wolfowitz insists the focus should be Iraqi-sponsored terrorism instead. He claims the 1993 attack on the WTC must have been done with help from Iraq, and rejects the CIA’s assertion that there has been no Iraqi-sponsored terrorism against the US since 1993. (A spokesperson for Wolfowitz later calls Clarke’s account a “fabrication.”) [Clarke, 2004, pp. 30, 231; Newsweek, 3/22/2004] Wolfowitz repeats these sentiments immediately after 9/11 and tries to argue that the US should attack Iraq.
2007-10-12 01:49:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
0⤋
OMG bypass use your ethanol powered motorcar and burn some corn which calls for more desirable skill to make then it produces. (the position contained in the hell do you imagine that skill got here from) carry forth about international warming at the same time as in the course of the globe we've had the coldest temperatures on record because the 70s. I pray to god that guy would not ever run back. Makes me favor to bypass purchase yet another firearm purely in case they merchandise to me making use of electrolysis (it quite is arising skill from water) for polluting a gallon of water a week purely to extend my gasoline milage. Does Al Gore even study what he helps thats what i favor to understand. If he will change into president i visit flow abroad.
2016-10-09 02:10:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by obear 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hey, NEOCON you cannot stand that Al Gore won Nobel Prize so that you decided to put Al Gore down with your full of lies and hatred question. Aren't you tired of your lies? Talk about your Neocon buddy Bush how he perpetrated 9/11, how he lied to the whole world in order to invade Iraq and to steal their oil.
2007-10-12 01:30:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
As compared to our Naked Emperor, who dismissed attempts by the outgoing Clinton administration to warn them that terrorism was *the* most pressing foreign relations issue?
Here is an interesting article from Slate magazine:
http://www.slate.com/id/2071466
It's about 5 years old, and remains as prescient now as it was then, regarding "the party of fear vs. the party of goodwill." Very interesting.
2007-10-12 01:32:06
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
Apparently both Clinton and Gore were obsessed with stopping Osama Bin Ladin, even though there is nothing more than one scratchy audio recording of Clinton ever mentioning OBL.
2007-10-12 01:28:51
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
Yes. He did. In Fact, they prosecuted the bombers of Oklahoma and Atlanta. Both terrorists. They also bombed Iraq when they thought it was necessary. They also prosecuted the bombers of the US Cole... Any more questions, or are you going to just go on being brainwashed by your corpoate overlords in all the media?
2007-10-12 01:30:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
7⤊
1⤋
Hell, I don't know
The right was too busy slandering him
And the news was too busy paying attention to them.
Peace
Jim
.
2007-10-12 01:34:57
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
0⤋
Yes, and he said we should go after Iraq if they do not comply to the UN resolutions... which is what President Bush did.
Democrats always have short term memory loss (or simply when it serves their purposes)
2007-10-12 01:34:06
·
answer #9
·
answered by Dina W 6
·
1⤊
4⤋
Did you? Did Bush? Did I? Did Rush? Damn what a stupid question.
2007-10-12 01:47:03
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋