Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Clinton's phony war on Terrorism
Accuracy in Media ^ | October 1, 2001 | Cliff Kincaid - Reed Irvine

Posted on 10/01/2001 8:41:34 AM PDT by majordivit


By Reed Irvine and Cliff Kincaid
October 1, 2001


In an editorial on the September 11 attack, the Washington Post said, "The scattered details that have emerged about the plot put this failure in stark relief: More than fifty people were likely involved, Justice Department officials have said, and the plot required extensive communications and planning to pull off. The group’s size, not to mention the complexity of its endeavor, should have offered many opportunities for infiltration. Yet the conspirators proceeded unmolested. What is striking is how safe they apparently felt, how unthreatened by law enforcement. Some of the terrorists were here for long periods.

They left and entered the country unimpeded. Some were reportedly on the so-called ‘watch list,’ a list of people who are not permitted to enter the country. Yet this apparently caused them no problems."

For a possible answer as to how this may have happened, we have turned to a book originally published abroad, Dollars for Terror, by Swiss television journalist Richard Labeviere. His thesis is that the international Islamic networks linked to Osama Bin Laden have been nurtured by elements of the U.S. intelligence community, especially during the Clinton years. This is a shocking view, but it puts other developments in perspective, such as Clinton support for Muslims in Bosnia and Kosovo. The Islamic radicals may have been tolerated because it was believed that they were training to hit targets in other countries, not the U.S.

Clinton and his top aides did not anticipate that this radical Islamic network would turn against the United States. A Los Angeles Times article headlined, "Some See U.S. as Terrorists’ Next Big Target," quoted Labeviere as saying, "For America, the bill is now coming due." That was dated January 13, 2000. Perhaps the bill has now come due.

Bin Laden was initially supported by the CIA when he was battling the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan during the 1980s. But Labeviere’s book insists that this support continued. He argues that the Clinton administration viewed the Bin Laden network and the radical Taliban regime in Afghanistan as a bulwark against Russian, Iranian and even Chinese influence in Asia.

In his prologue to the American edition of the book, published last year, he says that between 1994 and 1997, "Bill Clinton was happy to allow Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to support the Taliban, seeing them as a useful counterbalance to Iran’s influence…" In August 1998, the situation seemed to change when Bin Laden was blamed for the destruction of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Bin Laden was placed on the FBI’s Most Wanted List and was reported to be in Afghanistan. But Labeviere says the State Department did not exert any real pressure on the Taliban to apprehend him.

It has subsequently been reported that the Clinton Administration had specific intelligence information about bin Laden’s whereabouts but opted against attacking or apprehending him. It also turns out that one of bin Laden’s alleged patrons had a lawyer connected to the Clinton administration. We will have more on this in our next commentary.

TOPICS: News/Current Events
It also turns out that one of bin Laden’s alleged patrons had a lawyer connected to the Clinton administration.>

None other than Vernon Jordan...

To listen to Cliff Kincaid on the radio discuss Clinton's Bin Laden gate, click this link to the audio archive of a radio program Kincaid hosted on 9.28...

I Want to Hear Cliff Kincaid Now!!

Catastrophic Intelligence Failure - Clinton's Bin Laden Gate by Reed Irvine and Cliff Kincaid:

Discussion Thread on freerepublic

Accuracy in Media Home Page

1 posted on 10/01/2001 8:41:34 AM PDT by majordivit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: majordivit
Could it really be Vernon Jordan ? Oh, please !!!!! Black Tuesday. . . brought to you by Wiliam Jefferson Clinton.
3 posted on 10/01/2001 8:49:01 AM PDT by weepnomore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: majordivit
I've seen a couple of stories posted here about how Bill Clinton, when he was walking around New York City "sharing everyone's pain," would walk up to random strangers and start babbling about how he tried so hard to get Osama bin Laden, but just missed him by ten minutes or something like that.

What a pathetic SOB. He really was just a pile of sh!t between the Bushes, wasn't he?

4 posted on 10/01/2001 8:49:15 AM PDT by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: youbetterlistenup
A lot of "I told you so's" after that turd (Clinton) is gone does not make me feel much better that he was ever in the oval office, but I suppose it's better than never never getting to rub the liberals' noses in it at all!
5 posted on 10/01/2001 8:50:48 AM PDT by jcable13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: weepnomore
That's what Cliff Kincaid said..check out the radio broadcast audio link..Cliff mentions Jordan...
6 posted on 10/01/2001 8:54:00 AM PDT by majordivit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Clinton's policy was to conspire with the Islamic terrorist network in places like Bosnia and Kosovo. That was Clinton's attempt to curry favor with radical Islam. That's a fact. It also appears that the Clinton policy was to use Bin Laden as a bulwark against Iran, China and about blowback and backfiring..we end up with 6,000 murdered Americans.
7 posted on 10/01/2001 8:57:13 AM PDT by majordivit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: majordivit
I have made a few responses to articles in which I have asserted that it was Clinton's military escapades in Sudan, Afghanistan, and Yugoslavia that motivated 9-11. This article is disturbing in that what I attributed to Clinton was misfeasance but here it is suggested and probably true that it was actually malfeasance. We are chasing evil-doers but we should never forget that we have just retired the earthly incarnation of evil itself, although NY seems not to mind so much in that it chose half of satan's team to represent it in the senate.
8 posted on 10/01/2001 9:02:46 AM PDT by RWG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Check out this Reed Irvine and Cliff Kincaid AIM report published last week entitled "Catastrophic Intelligence Failure"

AIM report #18

9 posted on 10/01/2001 9:14:51 AM PDT by majordivit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: jcable13
To some people it appears to be piling on..but this goes way beyond any usual scandal..I should think that the American people have a right to hold to account the govt people who had prior knowledge that the terrorist groups planned to hijack aircraft and crash them into buildings ..(Project Bojinka)but who failed to protect us....and the American people have the right to hold to account the officials (Clinton) who for years protected and nurtured the radical Islamic terrorists themselves...
10 posted on 10/01/2001 9:20:42 AM PDT by majordivit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: majordivit
11 posted on 10/01/2001 12:07:51 PM PDT by Free the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: majordivit
President wants Senate to hurry with new anti-terrorism laws July 30, 1996 Web posted at: 8:40 p.m. EDT WASHINGTON (CNN)

President Clinton urged Congress Tuesday to act swiftly in developing anti-terrorism legislation before its August recess.

"We need to keep this country together right now. We need to focus on this terrorism issue," Clinton said during a White House news conference.

But while the president pushed for quick legislation, Republican lawmakers hardened their stance against some of the proposed anti-terrorism measures.

Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Mississippi, doubted that the Senate would rush to action before they recess this weekend. The Senate needs to study all the options, he said, and trying to get it done in the next three days would be tough.

One key GOP senator was more critical, calling a proposed study of chemical markers in explosives "a phony issue."

Taggants value disputed Clinton said he knew there was Republican opposition to his proposal on explosive taggants, but it should not be allowed to block the provisions on which both parties agree.

"What I urge them to do is to be explicit about their disagreement, but don't let it overcome the areas of agreement," he said.

The president emphasized coming to terms on specific areas of disagreement would help move the legislation along. The president stressed it's important to get the legislation out before the weekend's recess, especially following the bombing of Centennial Olympic Park and the crash of TWA Flight 800.

"The most important thing right now is that they get the best, strongest bill they can out -- that they give us as much help as they can," he said.

Hatch blasts 'phony' issues Republican leaders earlier met with White House Chief of Staff Leon Panetta for about an hour in response to the president's call for "the very best ideas" for fighting terrorism.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, emerged from the meeting and said, "These are very controversial provisions that the White House wants. Some they're not going to get."

Hatch called Clinton's proposed study of taggants -- chemical markers in explosives that could help track terrorists -- "a phony issue."

"If they want to, they can study the thing" already, Hatch asserted. He also said he had some problems with the president's proposals to expand wiretapping.

Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-South Dakota, said it is a mistake if Congress leaves town without addressing anti-terrorism legislation. Daschle is expected to hold a special meeting on the matter Wednesday with Congressional leaders.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.
12 posted on 10/19/2001 7:06:01 AM PDT by marsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marsis; *clintonscandals
13 posted on 11/06/2001 2:42:54 PM PST by backhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson