Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Need help debunking "Clinton was handed bin Laden" myth... any takers?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
 
kiahzero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-17-03 10:11 PM
Original message
Need help debunking "Clinton was handed bin Laden" myth... any takers?
One of the guys in one of my classes today said that the Sudanese government was prepared to give us bin Laden, but Clinton didn't take the opportunity. I've heard this and it's refutation before; can anyone help me refresh my memory?

Thanks a bundle!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-17-03 10:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. Snoopes probably has it in detail.
That is usaully my first stop on such things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kiahzero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-17-03 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Just checked
Nothing specifically about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bossy Monkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-17-03 10:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. No Sudan, but there's this:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kiahzero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-17-03 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Yeah... that's the one I just found
I also did a DU search (yay donor benefits), but came up empty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-17-03 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. we assume, of course, you tried Google?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rooboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-17-03 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
6. Washington Post article from 2001...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A61251-2001Oct2

Probably clarifies the situation a little.

But here's the thing that gets me: the right wing keeps bitching about how Clinton did nothing, yet they voted for a president who RAN FOR ELECTION on the platform of "I'm not going to do anything"!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kiahzero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-17-03 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Thanks
That helps a lot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcane1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-17-03 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. and remember, Bush was prez for 9 MONTHS before 9/11
and I have yet to hear ANY right-winger tell me ONE THING Bush did about terrorism during that time
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-18-03 12:14 AM
Response to Original message
9. Tell them to buy Joe's book which has details on why its a lie
:-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-18-03 12:15 AM
Response to Original message
10. Bring up these articles, too
http://www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/binlad.htm

"Unless the Clinton administration can come up with some hard evidence that bin Laden is in fact calling the shots of a vast new anti-American terrorist network, all the present allegations and faceless intelligence-source leaks claiming facts too secret and explosive to be revealed should be taken with a grain of salt.

Bin Laden may be a dangerous anti-American zealot with a mouth as big as his bankroll. But the evidence so far does not support him being a cerebral Islamic Dr. No moving an army of terrorist troops on a vast world chessboard to checkmate the United States."
SALON | Aug. 27, 1998

Or this:

http://www.salon.com/news/1998/09/23news.html

"Clinton needed to look "presidential" for a day. He may even have needed a vacation from his family vacation. In any event, he acted with caprice and brutality and with a complete disregard for international law, and perhaps counted on the indifference of the press and public to a negligible society like that of Sudan, and killed wogs to save his own lousy Hyde (to say nothing of our new moral tutor, the ridiculous sermonizer Lieberman). No bipartisan contrition is likely to be offered to the starving Sudanese: unmentioned on the "prayer-breakfast" circuit."

These were the attitudes that Clinton faced. People forget that though he had a high approval rating, the media and the Republicans (repititious, I know) claimed every action he took was wagging the dog. Now they want to pretend he did nothing except stand in their ways. Without the Republican attempts to destroy Clinton at any cost, Bin Laden would be less than a footnote.

For a list of things Clinton did to fight terrorism: http://www.makethemaccountable.com/myth/ClintonAndTerrorism.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC