How Many Authors Are Out There Blaming Clinton for 9/11?

I saw Gerald Posner this morning on the Today Show and tonight on O'really. He wrote "Why America Slept" and Katie Couric asked him if he blamed Clinton for 911. He said Clinton just happened to be on the watch during that time and that it could have happened to any president in the seat then. But to O'really the urchin said he was "furious" that Clinton let 911 happen.

I'm watching MSNBC and Richard Miniter is outright blaming Clinton for failing to capture bin Laden. Miniter says bin Laden had a fixed address from 1991 to 1996 and that Clinton let him get away.

Then on CBS I saw yet another author whose name escapes me blaming Clinton too.

It seems Bushco regrouped and has come back swinging with their media cronies in tow. Is this concerted effort to distract the result of Rove's brainstorming sessions during vacation? We can only hope somebody notices that nobody's asking why Bush didn't do a damned thing to stop bin Laden from orchestrating 911.

When is the incredulity going to end?

wrote a book sometime ago about Clinton's 'secret war' on Osama.

I guess his bank account needed refilling, and a controversial book will do it.

Even if it contradicts a past book of his.

Miniter wrote another book in favor of Clinton? I'll have to check it out. Hope the Right Leaning Media picks up on this.

Want To Sell A Failed Book? Rewrite It And Blame Clinton!

Welcome Conason, Eschaton and Buzzflash Readers

Surprise! Looks like the right is ready to fire a huge salvo against...Bill Clinton. According to Drudge*, a book by one Richard Miniter is going to try to prove how Clinton's failures and twiddling Monica let bin Laden rise to power yada yada yada.

This book is titled "Losing Bin Laden - How Bill Clinton's Failures Unleashed Global Terrorism". It's 256 pages. It's being released in September. It's a pretty sensationalistic (and almost libelous) title.

And it looks like a re-marketed release of a failed first attempt.

In addition to "Losing," Amazon also lists another book on the same topic by Miniter. This one was supposed to have been published by Simon and Schuster last January. It was also 256 pages. And it was titled, "The Duel: Clinton and Bin Laden's Secret War."

Doesn't really appeal to your inner wingnut, does it? Anyway, it appears "Duel" never got off the launchpad for reasons I can't find over a holiday weekend.

So you've got to wonder if the new angle on "Losing Bin Laden" was Miniter's original vision - or if he's retooled it for the Coulter Kids. Then you see the nutbag books pooted out to the public by his new publisher, and it becomes crystal clear. Caveat emptor and all that.

For some reason I can't get Amazon right now...but I've seen it listed.

http://hoffmania.blogspot.com/

On edit: It is listed here... http://www.sinacity.com/store/1_10_Free+Press_5_1_index.html

And on Amazon's Chinese site

http://www.amazon.co.jp/exec/obidos/ASIN/0743242912/qid%3D1060807815/sr%3D1-6/ref%3Dsr%5F1%5F2%5F6/249-1379015-9117150

to take your calls regarding his new book.... :puke:

Up until now they have stayed away from blaming Clinton, because they know it opens the door for a full airing of all the things Bush failed to do to stop 9/11. Now the gloves are off. Hopefully Clinton will go on the circuit and strongly defend his record and finally go after Bush.

Time to pile on.

...if you can't find anybody to blame; then

Blame Bill Clinton.

Richard Miniter - former Wall Street Journal propagandist - is also a National Review "lackey" and is also a fellow of the Center for New Europe - a conservative think tank.

Hardly un-biased credentials, y'know?

Excuse me, I thought George W Bush was occupying the White Houses that day.

How does it get to be Clinton's watch?

This is one of three things:

* The biggest Freudian slip in history
* The updated version of "Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?"
* Or an admission by the right that Bush isn't really president.

One way to fight fire, is with fire.

Our side has the mainstream books lately, but we lack the sophomoric personal attack books that the right is so good at putting out by the thousands.

Time for a rich Democrat to start funding attack books like the rich right wingers do.

It is way too early in the War on Terror to be able to make any historical judgments, about either Clinton or Bush.

My 2 cents is that, at the end of the day, both will be judged equally harshly for different reasons. Clinton will be contrasted with FDR; FDR understood the twin threats of Germany and Japan and worked relentlessly against Republican isolationists to prepare the country for war (for example, the draft was extended by only one vote in the late summer of 1941). Clinton, distracted by the consequences of his own shortcomings, wholly failed to prepare the country.

Bush will be compared with Truman. With the Marshall plan, Truman rebuilt Greece, Italy and Germany, saving Europe. Bush, with far more power and resources, is failing in Iraq.

Bush appointed a total ditz to a national security position that she was not capable of handling. The Chimpadministration lost focus on Osama and then 9/11 happened. For those who see it differently and somehow want to let Bush of of the hook I would ask, "Who was asleep at the helm when 9/11 happened?"

Osama didn't fly those planes. The Bushites should have stopped the ones that did. Condi only envisioned "traditional hijackings" although there was plenty of intelligence indicating planes have been and could be, used to fly into buildings.

She connected all of the fucking dots. They only thing that I am willing to concede that the administration didn't have was an EXACT date. But they had everything else.

They fucked up, they let us down.

And the worst part?

They don't care.

spend some time reading the 9/11 forum here at DU and learn about MIHOP/LIHOP. Then I would like to see a post from you about who is to blame....

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

The fact of the matter is the Republican dominated congress was distracted in going AFTER Clinton. The VRWC directed time, money, and manpower at Clinton instead of the nation's enemies.
But you find Annthrax (the C-word) Coulter talking about that inconvenient fact.

that Clinton tried to pass anti-terrorism legislation as early as 1997, but it was laughed off by people like Orrin Hatch as a "non-issue".

presidential office. And Harry S didn't need a majority decision in the supreme court to prove his point at the ballot box in '48, either.
Bush is a microbe sitting in a pool of pus. He once tried to charm another Truman, asking her out on a date when he knew she was married and not interested in a slime ball like him. He got the reply he deserved, when told the lady "didn't date outside her species". I think that says it all....

If you want to delude your little GOP brain that bin Laden was the sole human being on earth who wished destruction to America then this GOP talking point MIGHT hold some water. But it's simply not true.
And there was NO fixed address for OBL. EVER. AND, there was no legal grounds to go after him- Clinton and Reno spent quite a bit of time trying to justify action on him but they never could.

We need an indepth book on Reagan's and both Bush's complicity for the radical islamic terrorism that led to 9/11 - but one written on a 9th grade level so the sheeple in this country will understand it.

We can start with Reagan's training of bin Laden. We can include Ali Mohammed, an Egyptian born Islamic fundamentalist who had come to live in the United States in 1985. He had been in the United States earlier that decade, having graduated as a captain from a Special Forces Officers School at Fort Bragg in 1981 in a program for visiting military officials from foreign countries. He joined the U.S. military in 1986 and received a security clearance for level "secret."

He gave El Sayyid Nosair documents, some of which were classified Secret, containing the locations of U.S. military Special Operations Forces exercises and units in the Middle East, military training schedules, U.S. intelligence estimates of Soviet forces in Afghanistan, a topographical map of Fort Bragg, U.S. Central Command data and intelligence estimates of Soviet force projection in Afghanistan. Appended throughout the documents were Arabic markings and notations believed to be that of Ali Mohammed. Some documents were marked "Top Secret for Training otherwise unclassified". Other documents were marked "sensitive."

An FBI prepared inventory contains the entire listing of materials seized from Nosair's residence. Beyond the U.S. military documents, the raid on Nosair's residence produced a veritable treasure trove of terrorist documents, publications and materials. Included were actual plans for destroying skyscrapers in New York.

El Sayyid Nosair was a planner of the first WTC attack - using info given to him by a Reagan trained terrorist with top security clearance in our military!

But, being the thread sinker that I am, I'm sure this is the last post on this thread.

that's right folks. Ronnie dealt with terrorists, and on both sides of the Atlantic.
but you won't find anyone talking about that. especially GOP shills.

Go to the Regnery Press website and count them.

Like Bill (Moonie) Gertz, Posner and Miniter.

someone about this today.

Why is Clinton being so silent on this subject? This bothers me. It bothers me for him and for all of us who believed in him through thick and thin. I think he needs to speak out on this. Start using the media the same way bush and cronies do. He needs to tell us all what he did and why he did or did not do something. It's getting hard to defend him now on the subject. I wanna know the truth from him.

Let the Bush toadies blame him for 9/11. After a while he'll come out with the proof that he did all that he could do to prevent what happened on Bush's watch that didn't happen on his (Clinton's).