To: aculeus
Is this a way for Clinton to plant the idea that he actually did something to battle al-Qaeda--a lie wrapped in a truth, which will be allowed to fly because it supports rendition of terrorists?
To: Republican in CA
I wondered that too, as well as offer a red herring as to why Sandy Burglar stole those confidential files.
I find this story hard to believe. One of the main reasons we didn't have the Intel we needed on terrorism was that Slick Willie passed a law that our intelligence agents could no longer use 'low lifes,'who are the only ones who snitch to intel agents. They also passed a law saying that we couldn't violate anyone's civil rights. He promptly bogged the intelligence agencies down with reviewing all the contacts intelligence had for the previous 10 years to ensure no one's rights were violated. This effectively prevented them from doing any new intelligence gathering.
Slick Willie was hardly the type to be tough on terrorists and this sounds to me like more legacy-rewriting as well as a Hillary campaign point.
17 posted on
12/29/2005 5:18:59 PM PST by
Ghost of Philip Marlowe
(Liberals are blind. They are the dupes of Leftists who know exactly what they're doing.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson