Why do the Republicans still accuse Clinton of bombing an aspirin factory in Sudan when it was full of Anthrax

Question

The photos clearly showed rooms full of Bio-Fermenters. (not needed for acetylsalicylic acid)

Has anthrax production been taken off the Republican's terrorist activity list. After all WMD's in Iraq has been removed from the list of reasons for action.

Answer 1

Republicans want to spread the myth Clinton did nothing to stop terrorism while the truth is very different and doesn't make them look good at all. That's what the lies are for, to bury their own faults and cloud the reputation of a fairly good President.

Starting in 1995, Clinton took actions against terrorism that were unprecedented in American history. He poured billions and billions of dollars into counterterrorism activities across the entire spectrum of the intelligence community. He poured billions more into the protection of critical infrastructure. He ordered massive federal stockpiling of antidotes and vaccines to prepare for a possible bioterror attack. He order a reorganization of the intelligence community itself, ramming through reforms and new procedures to address the demonstrable threat. Within the National Security Council, “threat meetings” were held three times a week to assess looming conspiracies. His National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger, prepared a voluminous dossier on al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, actively tracking them across the planet. Clinton raised the issue of terrorism in virtually every important speech he gave in the last three years of his tenure. In 1996, Clinton delivered a major address to the United Nations on the matter of international terrorism, calling it “The enemy of our generation.”

Behind the scenes, he leaned vigorously on the leaders of nations within the terrorist sphere. In particular, he pushed Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to assist him in dealing with the threat from neighboring Afghanistan and its favorite guest, Osama bin Laden. Before Sharif could be compelled to act, he was thrown out of office by his own army. His replacement, Pervez Musharraf, pointedly refused to do anything to assist Clinton in dealing with these threats. Despite these and other diplomatic setbacks, terrorist cell after terrorist cell were destroyed across the world, and bomb plots against American embassies were thwarted. Because of security concerns, these victories were never revealed to the American people until very recently.

In Congress, Clinton was thwarted by the reactionary conservative majority in virtually every attempt he made to pass legislation that would attack al Qaeda and terrorism. His 1996 omnibus terror bill, which included many of the anti-terror measures we now take for granted after September 11, was withered almost to the point of uselessness by attacks from the right; Jesse Helms and Trent Lott were openly dismissive of the threats Clinton spoke of.

Clinton wanted to attack the financial underpinnings of the al-Qaeda network by banning American companies and individuals from dealing with foreign banks and financial institutions that al Qaeda was using for its money-laundering operations. Texas Senator Phil Gramm, chairman of the Banking Committee, killed Clinton’s bill on this matter and called it “totalitarian.” In fact, he was compelled to kill the bill because his most devoted patrons, the Enron Corporation and its criminal executives in Houston, were using those same terrorist financial networks to launder their own dirty money and rip off the Enron stockholders.

Just before departing office, Clinton managed to make a deal with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development to have some twenty nations close tax havens used by al Qaeda. His term ended before the deal was sealed, and the incoming Bush administration acted immediately to destroy the agreement. According to Time magazine, in an article entitled “Banking on Secrecy” published in October of 2001, Bush economic advisors Larry Lindsey and R. Glenn Hubbard were urged by think tanks like the Center for Freedom and Prosperity to opt out of the coalition Clinton had formed. The conservative Heritage Foundation lobbied Bush’s Treasury Secretary, Paul O’Neill, to do the same. In the end, the lobbyists got what they wanted, and the Bush administration pulled America out of the plan. The Time article stated, “Without the world’s financial superpower, the biggest effort in years to rid the world’s financial system of dirty money was short-circuited.”

Clarke knows the secret stories of Bill Clinton's great victories (shutting down anti-U.S. terrorism sponsored by Iran and Iraq) and his great frustrations (failing to kill Osama Bin Laden despite many attempts). When President Bush took office, Clarke was ready to present him with a master plan to roll back and destroy al Qaeda, yet the president did not grant a briefing for months. His aides had little interest in Osama Bin Laden, preferring to talk about Saddam Hussein at every turn. Clarke knows why we failed to shut down terrorist financing within our borders prior to 2001.

After ignoring existing plans to attack al Qaeda when he first took office, George Bush made disastrous decisions when he finally did pay attention. Thanks to the determined, even conspiratorial views of Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, and Bush, we went after the wrong enemy.

Mr. Clarke outlines a series of continuing errors in our efforts to combat terrorism.

1. Ronald Reagan did not retaliate for the killing of 278 Marines in Lebanon, and his people traded arms for hostages in Iran-Contra.

2. George H.W. Bush did not retaliate for the Libyan murder of 259 passengers on Pan Am 103, had no official counter-terrorism effort, left Saddam Hussein in power after the Gulf War, and built up huge forces in Saudi Arabia that are still there.

3. Bill Clinton failed to get the CIA, the Pentagon and FBI to take terrorist threats seriously.

4. George W. Bush ignored al Qaeda despite warnings before 9/11, launched an attack on Iraq that strengthened the fundamentalist Islamic terrorist movement, and has not pursued al Qaeda with much vigor or talent. Instead, Mr. Bush takes credit for launching a war on terror that is actually counter-productive.

Answer 2

It was not full of Anthrax. It was a pharmaceutical lab. The US Government paid the owner of the factory damages because all of the supposed evidence of any claims linking the factory to chemical weapons production were proven false. Clinton just wanted to do something to divert attention away from his problems at home.

Answer 3

Where are these photos? And how do you know they are of what Clinton bombed? Why did Clinton bomb them at the exact time (to the SECOND) that he was testifying to congress on his sexual escapades in the oval office? Why with Sudan even want to make anthrax? Was this a direct threat to the US? Which UN resolution give Clinton the right to bomb a sovereign country? How much diplomacy did Clinton use before he bombed them? How many warnings?

If it looks like crap, smells like crap and feels like crap..it is most likely crap.

Answer 4

full of anthrax haha thats a good joke, where did you dredge that one up from, sudan producing anthrax thats the best joke I have heard all day. Where were all the dead sudanese from anthrax then if this was the case?

Answer 5

Odd. I hadn't heard any Republicans saying that; only a few nut-cases who are so far to the left that even the Democrats are too tame for them.

Answer 6

if this is true then fine he bobed an anthrax factory. but was that smart exploding anthrax into the air like that?

Answer 7

Lies are just a tool of the trade for cons.

Answer 8

Really. They seem to turn the facts into something they believe is fodder for their machine, but forgot the machine needs FUEL to run, and they're OUT OF FUEL!!

Answer 9

Proof? Didn't think so. Spin, baby, spin!

Answer 10

What ever the problem, the repugs will always blame someone else