Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Clinton Plan That Wasn't
8-7-02 | Republican_strategist

Posted on 08/07/2002 2:27:26 AM PDT by Republican_Strategist

Over the weekend a story in Time Magazine made splashes when it hurled accusations that the Clinton Administration had developed some sort of plan that it handed over to the Bush administration that would have been the blueprint for attacking Al Qaeda. Quickly, it story has spread like wildfire and the liberal media has already been trumpeting it while denouncing Bush for not acting on it.

This came to a surprise to many people considering that following 9-11, as note by popular conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, Bill Clinton didn’t talk about any such plan in the wake of the attack and surely would have staged a press conference highlighting any such plan. There was also no mention of it by other Clinton officials like Sandy Berger.

What we know is that the story was not the result of some pile of papers called the "Clinton Plan to get Al Qaeda." It was the result of Clinton officials feeding Time Magazine in hopes of covering up facts that the Clinton administration had been absolutely reckless and careless in dealing with the terrorist threat that Osama Bin Laden posed.

Conservative radio personality, Sean Hannity, on his nightly show on Fox News has pointed to the failure of the Clinton Administration to take up what can only be described as a golden opportunity that Sudan offered. A former Clinton supporter and fundraiser, Mansoor Ijaz, has made it clear in a series of editorials in major newspapers that the offer was presented and rejected by Clinton. Hannity went on to suggest was the reason that democrats leaked the story was to deflect from that.

I don't want to sound too self-serving or anything, but I have somewhat of a different theory so to speak about how exactly this came into play. On Friday, I had sent a link to my web site to Democrats.com by posting it on their online forum. It was removed, as was I within a short period of time. Now you must be wondering: what was the site and what does it have to do with any of this?

Well, Democrats.com is operated by former members of the Clinton Administration and it supposedly the largest community of online democrats. I posted a link to my web site on their and my web site is "Clinton’s Bin Laden-gate - Mother of all Scandals." I developed it to highlight what I thought Clinton’s worst we had ever seen and I built my case against Clinton.

On my site I build my case centering on Clinton allowing Bin Laden to attack us 6 separate times without adequately responding or going after Bin Laden. More to the point, Clinton turned up at least three offers by foreign governments to have Bin Laden handed over just to be brief about it. Fred Barnes pointed out that after Bin Laden was exiled from Sudan, he flew in a plane to Afghanistan and Clinton could have easily taken him out then.

Also key, is an Associated Press story that brought forth some very interesting facts. Bill Clinton, in December 2000 was presented an operation by the Pentagon after the whereabouts of Bin Laden had been determined. Bill Clinton refused to green light the operation. And furthermore, Sandy Berger said that wasn’t the first time! He made it perfectly clear that was one of many occasions where they had located Bin Laden, but Clinton didn’t take action.

It my belief that the former members of the Clinton Administration were fearful of the web site and they took it upon themselves to formulate a strategy to combat startling facts about how Clinton failed America and was culpable for 9/11 and they did that by feeding some scraps to Time and the information was printed almost word for word.

They were able to turn Clarke and his power point presentation that lasted, 15 minutes or so, that included a few suggestions about what to do, into some sort of comprehensive plan that was Bill Clinton developed and in lieu of the fact that he turned down an operation at the end of his tenure, it seems even more ludicrous. If Clinton toadies were not busy having orgasms, perhaps they would understand a Bush official said this so called plan never existed.

I also found it interesting that the Time story portrayed it as a valiant effort by the Clinton administration to help the incoming Bush Team. After all, Bill Clinton refused to allow the transition to take place and forced Bush to take up donations and set up an office in Virginia. Additionally the Clinton Administration in the spirit of friendship left the White House in chaos. Staffers cut phone lines, damaged keyboards, trashed the White House, and committed other types of vandalism.

Bill Clinton in fact seemed more interested in aiding the democrats with their frivolous accusations that constituted pure demagoguery through executive orders like one that made a dramatic change in the arsenic standard. It was no time before hypocrites like Daschle were accusing Bush of putting arsenic in our water for keeping the same standard we had for 8 years under Clinton while distracting Bush from focusing on his transition.

The other half of Clinton's final moments in office were spent doing public services by awarding pardons that bypassed the Justice Department all together to people like Marc Rich, who was a fugitive hiding out in Switzerland.

Now, more to the point, the Time piece painted a picture that the Bush Administration sat on the so called plan for 8 months and it was too late. The reality is that Bush officials went to work and they finally did what Clinton should have done and developed a comprehensive plan. They were not going to simply roll back Al Qaeda over 3 to 5 years, they were going to eliminate Al Qaeda. And Bush approved of the plan his team came up with shortly before 9/11.

Its funny to see the Time piece noted Bush was getting briefings all during his stay at is ranch for a month while democrats liked saying it was a vacation and imply Bush did nothing. What's humorous is the Aug. 6th briefing was mistakenly called a warning when in fact it wasn't. So Bush is reviewing intelligence given to Clinton in 1998 and that was taking fire while now we know it was being given to the President as part of his ongoing effort to formulate a plan and take the fight to Al Qaeda.

And the suggestions Clarke made that are supposed to be some fantasy plan Clinton handed to Bush included measures Clinton failed to implement, but the liberal media doesn’t point it out. Such as aiding the Northern Alliance.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif. had for years during the Clinton Administration made efforts to get information on Clinton’s foreign policy in Afghanistan. He said Clinton had directed supoort and funding to the Taliban through Pakistan and Saudi Arabia as such information is on my web site. More to the point, he urged Clinton to back the Northern allaince in 1999 after the Taliban had overextended themselves and were very vulnerable.

Clinton instead has a ceasefire put in place. Then Saudi Arabia and Pakistan sent them money and military equipment. As a result the Taliban was able to regain its strength. The Associated Press back in June reported that in 1999 a senior member of the Taliban had approached the Clinton Administration about removing the Taliban because of its support for Al Qaeda and would have handed over Bin Laden.

In the end it was all about revisiting history and covering up damning facts about Clinton ineptitude and lack of action engaging Al Qaeda. Dick Morris said that terrorism was last on Clinton’s list and Clinton himself said that his biggest mistake was his refusal to take Sudan's offer as quoted by the Sunday Times of London. Not only is he culpable for 9/11, he sat idly as Bin Laden carried out 6 terrorist attacks on America claiming 290 people and injuring well over 6,300. That's Clinton's legacy.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; News/Current Events; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: binladengate; clinton

1 posted on 08/07/2002 2:27:26 AM PDT by Republican_Strategist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Republican_Strategist
Clinton's Bin Laden-gate
2 posted on 08/07/2002 2:39:42 AM PDT by Republican_Strategist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republican_Strategist

(from rushlimbaugh.com)

3 posted on 08/07/2002 2:55:17 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Recent Programs from C-SPAN (click to watch)
Tuesday, August 06, 2002
Washington Journal Entire Program
Washington, DC
Morning Newspaper Articles, Open Phones & Hotline; Massimo Calabresi, TIME Magazine, Washington Correspondent

4 posted on 08/07/2002 3:01:06 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Republican_Strategist
This is the best reason in the world one can give to boycott "The Mainstream Media".They feed Americans only one side of a story.The "Mainstream Media" has an agenda for America and it is total Socialism.For years they have gotten away with this agenda and never been called on it. I for one use to believe most anything they showed or printed,that is until I retired and had the time to do my own research.With the coming of the internet this may open some eyes if people have the desire for the real truth. But I am affraid a lot of those that have been brainwashed possibly cant read or write and do not have access to a computer.Another problem is you have a very large segment of the population that have already been programed and we need some method to deprogram them and show them both sides so they are allowed to find the real truth. Our educational system has been taken over by these people also.I am affraid our educational system also shows only one side and does not any longer push people into searching for truth they only program them.The morals and visions of America can no longer even compare with what our forefathers had in mind and it is getting worse everday.People with a strong sense of these morals and values have been branded extreme right wing and I am affraid some conservatives have been brainwashed into believing this if in fact they are real conservatives.
America needs to regroup in a hurry we are no longer the moral compass for the rest of the world now that our dirty linen is being exposed and those in power showing they live by a double standard.Even our own countryman are losing faith.
5 posted on 08/07/2002 3:12:42 AM PDT by gunnedah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gunnedah
Take a look at CBS & NBC Hyped How Clinton Gave Bush Anti al-Qaeda Plan (Pure Propaganda!)
6 posted on 08/07/2002 3:16:52 AM PDT by Republican_Strategist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Republican_Strategist
I am not sure if Clinton's failure to rub salt into Bush's wounds or the failure of former Clintonoids to antagonize the only administration that's available to give them new jobs is proof that Clinton had nothing in the way of plans.

Considering how grumpy people have been about airport security and other precautions, after experiencing Sept 11th, it would have been a very tough row to hoe for Clinton to have introduced such precautions or start a war in Afghanistan in the absence of a WTC type attack.

7 posted on 08/07/2002 3:27:32 AM PDT by DonQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gunnedah
Well spoken. Boycott propaganda - DONE. Look at their ratings. Don't despair. The enemy from within is being engaged. We are all doing what we can. Reinforcements are arriving daily.
8 posted on 08/07/2002 3:37:41 AM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DonQ
With all do respect, what in the world do you think people were expecting in the wake of the U.S.S. Cole? People wanted the hammer to come down and Bubba didn’t lift a finger. BTW, Al Gore failed to implement increased airline security measures in the wake of the crash of TWA flight 800. Gore wrote an airline lobbyist promising his findings wouldn’t cost the airlines a dime and then Clinton/Gore were up to their neck in cash.

Why airline security failed- Gore commission study material still classified

How Gore aborted air safety

Go tell it to the Clinton toadies. I’m sick of the demoCRAP!
9 posted on 08/07/2002 3:38:48 AM PDT by Republican_Strategist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PGalt
I’ll stick to Fox News, Conservative Radio, and web sites like Newsmax or WND.

I'm fed up with:

The Clinton News Network(CNN)

Nothing But Clinton(NBC)

All Bill Clinton(ABC)

Clinton Broadcasting Service(CBS)
10 posted on 08/07/2002 3:43:45 AM PDT by Republican_Strategist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Republican_Strategist
Just revisit any of Clinton's speeches - especially the State of the Union speeches

He's words not deeds. Propaganda.

11 posted on 08/07/2002 3:48:46 AM PDT by The Raven
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Raven
Clinton Joins the Blame-America-First Crowd

Bill Clinton says that terror has existed in America for hundreds of years and the U.S. is "paying a price today" for its past sins.

This is what the millionaire speech maker said Wednesday at Georgetown University, according to today's Washington Times:

"Here in the United States, we were founded as a nation that practiced slavery, and slaves quite frequently were killed even though they were innocent.

"This country once looked the other way when a significant number of native Americans were dispossessed and killed to get their land or their mineral rights or because they were thought of as less than fully human.

"And we are still paying a price today."

This is from the man who is causing a black heritage site in Little Rock, Ark., to be demolished so his presidential "library" can be built.

The impeached ex-president blames today's Muslim terrorism on Christians of long ago.

"In the first Crusade, when the Christian soldiers took Jerusalem, they first burned a synagogue with 300 Jews in it and proceeded to kill every woman and child who was a Muslim on the Temple Mount. I can tell you that story is still being told today in the Middle East, and we are still paying for it."

Fox News Channel tonight showed a clip of him sounding like a stereotypical Guilty White Liberal: "Those of us who come from various European lineages are not blameless."

Clinton's bizarre solution to terrorism: Make freeloading countries even more dependent on U.S. taxpayers. Despite the dismal failure of America's government schools to educate our own children, and despite the fact that Mideast nations send America-hating terrorist "students" to the U.S. for training, he thinks Americans should pay to educate students from foreign countries!

"We ought to pay for these children to go to school - a lot cheaper than going to war," he claimed.

Will Clinton's blame-America-for-terrorism comments spark even 1 percent of the criticism heaped on Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson for their remarks? Of course not; most media are not even reporting Slick Willie's not-so-bon mots.
12 posted on 08/07/2002 3:53:33 AM PDT by Republican_Strategist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: The Raven
Bingo!!!

Nailed it - right on its head.

Couple that with the sorry state of American public education and you can see the longer-term future for the United States ... a whole lot of non-critical thinking a'goin on!!!

13 posted on 08/07/2002 3:54:44 AM PDT by jamaksin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: The Raven
It was within the last two weeks that I remember reading a story on Drudge that I forgot to save it, Clinton was talking about Aids and saying $500 million wasn’t enough and Bush should have tagged on another zero. Liberals always fancy themselves on spending more money. The point is that Clinton said that fighting Aids was as important as fighting terrorism! Where was the liberal media!
14 posted on 08/07/2002 3:57:05 AM PDT by Republican_Strategist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Republican_Strategist
Good article.
15 posted on 08/07/2002 3:59:52 AM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republican_Strategist
I have never hated another human being as much as I hate bill clinton
Cept maybe hillary clinton
16 posted on 08/07/2002 4:03:02 AM PDT by DeaconRed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republican_Strategist
Notice in the Time Magazine photo...Clinton has the lens caps on the binoc's !!

PS...Anybody know what this is?

17 posted on 08/07/2002 4:11:51 AM PDT by The Raven
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Voter#537
"I have never hated another human being as much as I hate bill clinton Cept maybe hillary clinton"

Yeah, me too. I hate the fact that I hate another human, but I can't not hate the Clintons, as well as their propaganda services that are supposed to be non-partisan and anyone else who blindly supports them. Fortunately, FR is like a big support group.

"Hi. My name is "GBA" and I hate Clinton."

18 posted on 08/07/2002 4:32:03 AM PDT by GBA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: PGalt
I am beginning to wonder about Iraq now. Just read a article in WND.COM on how Congress was covering up numerous violations for their colleagues and how both Democrat & Republican had signed on to it. Go to that site and read if you wish.With so much fraud and deception going on in corporate America and if this story is true it is also going on within Congress.That being the case no wonder the war drums are beating,Congress needs to take themselves out of the picture and there is no better distraction than a war.Folks we apparently have major corruption in all of government!There must be a way to clean up politics,we are being sold out from within (BUY) our own elected officials,no wonder they are affraid of the polygraph.But I am told they could even handle that by picking their own polygraph operator.We no longer have leaders and people interested in America and her future all of these people are looking out for self.With a war going on and the floodgates open to aliens we have major problems.
19 posted on 08/07/2002 4:44:27 AM PDT by gunnedah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Republican_Strategist
As usual the liberal press has misread the issue of the Bush administration failing to follow plans put together by the Clinton administration. The problem was they were followed too closely. Any good contingency plan relies on a trigger event. A good example was the Fulda gap in the 70’s and 80’s. If and when the Ruskies decided to shoot the gap they would have tripped the trigger resulting in us nuking them until they glowed and then shooting them in the dark.

The triggers for the Clinton contingencies were never tripped. John Huang, Kathleen Willey, Whitewater, Mark Rich, etc. never reached critical mass so the B1’s and Tomahawks were never launched.

Hell, if Bubba’s poll numbers had ever dipped below 50% Liechtenstein could have become the world’s largest divot.

20 posted on 08/07/2002 4:54:56 AM PDT by Feckless
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republican_Strategist
I also found it interesting that the Time story portrayed it as a valiant effort by the Clinton administration to help the incoming Bush Team. After all, Bill Clinton refused to allow the transition to take place and forced Bush to take up donations and set up an office in Virginia. Additionally the Clinton Administration in the spirit of friendship left the White House in chaos. Staffers cut phone lines, damaged keyboards, trashed the White House, and committed other types of vandalism.

Excellent point that I haven't seen mentioned with respect to Time's propaganda piece. Bottom line - Bill Clinton and Al Gore were and are the two most serious domestic threats to the security of Americans.

21 posted on 08/07/2002 5:36:50 AM PDT by Quilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The Raven
That was Clinton's first visit to the 38th Parallel where he claimed that no president had ever been this close to the action.

Just a photo-op gone bad that was quickly covered up by the media.

Remember when the photographer got a picture of Hitlery coming back from the bathroom with about 3 feet of toilet paper stuck to the bottom of one shoe and dragging behind? She sued the photographer for "metal anguish".

22 posted on 08/07/2002 5:59:16 AM PDT by Redleg Duke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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