Posted on 06/22/2004 10:08:21 AM PDT by tjwmason
The interview in which the former President looses his temper can be viewed via this web-site. It is due to start at 10:35p.m. British Summer Time (9:35p.m. G.M.T.). http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/default.stm
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bbc.co.uk ...
The thing that struck me the most is the blatant lies about Ken Starr "interjecting himself" into the Paula Jones case.
Clinton just completely ignores the fact that the ONLY reason Ken Starr got involved was because Bill Clinton got Monica Lewinsky to try to get Linda Tripp to falsify an affadavit for the Jones case -- and she wouldn't commit perjury!
From the link lainie gave
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/programmes/panorama/transcripts/clintoninterview.txt
DIMBLEBY: It’s reported that you went privately to
Chequers to see Tony Blair before the invasion. Is that
true and presumably if it is true you didn’t urge him
to support President Bush?
CLINTON: Well I have sa.. I don’t.. you’re asking me
a question and I’m not sure exactly when I was at
Chequers, vis a vis the Iraq date. I’ve been there several
times since I left office. Tony Blair and I are friends. Mrs
Blair and Hillary and all, we’re all friends and I stayed in
touch with him and I urged him to try to work with the,
with the incoming Bush administration because I think the
partnership for the British and the Americans is important
it should transcend party politics and personal differences.
DIMBLEBY: But did you share your doubts about the
wisdom of invading…
CLINTON: Well I…
DIMBLEBY: …without a UN backing.
CLINTON: But here’s the problem Tony Blair faced.
Blair had a problem unique in Europe and that’s why I
went to the Labour Party Conference in Blackpool and
defended him …he had a problem unique in Europe.
Britain, the UK, had been the bridge between the US in
Europe but when America moved to the right after the
2000 election there was nobody to be the bridge between
the US and Europe but the UK. Blair also believed as I
did that we had to open Iraq to inspections, which all the
rest of Europe agreed to after 9/11. They agreed with that.
And that if Saddam Hussein blocked the inspections and
didn’t finish, we should be prepared to attack. I agreed
with that.
So in other words I basically had the same position that
Prime Minister Blair did. That is, not where the Bush
administration was which is we want to attack anyway,
whether there’s weapons or not there and not where the
Europeans were, which is even if there are weapons there
or even if he won’t let the inspections proceed, he’s too
weak to do any harm. We’re helping America and the
world in Afghanistan, let’s don’t fight regardless.
So here was Blair stuck in the middle, same place I was.
And the ground that he wanted to stake out was
represented in the last gasp UN Resolution, if you
remember, that failed, it said let’s give him six more
weeks, or however much time it was, and it collapsed.
So Prime Minister Blair was left in an unenviable
position. He either had to go with the American position,
which he didn’t entirely agree with or go with the
European position, which he didn’t entirely agree with.
And in the end I believed he thought that there was still
some risk that Saddam had the weapons, that if he stayed
involved, he could have an impact on the post-Saddam
Iraq. But if he stayed involved, he could keep America
and Europe, closer together than they otherwise would
have been, and so he made the decision he did. I can’t
quarrel with that; he was in a very difficult position.
DIMBLEBY: But had it been you there, in the White
House or Al Gore there in the White House, this
wouldn’t have arisen, there wouldn’t have been an
invasion of Iraq on these terms.
CLINTON: No. But we might have had to invade
anyway. It would just depend on what happened – with
the wea, weapons inspection. But keep in mind, I had no
problem with that. I never liked Saddam Hussein, we
bombed him several times but I just didn’t think he was as
big a threat as Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, and I was
more concerned with diverting and dividing our resources
until we had finished that job.
DIMBLEBY: But you back in the ‘60s over Vietnam
endorsed what your mentor at the time, Senator
Fulbright, said about American power. That ‘Nations
get in to trouble when they’re arrogant in use of power
and pursue a foreign policy rooted in missionary zeal’.
Did you wonder, do you wonder whether that’s what’s
happened with the use of American power in Iraq?
*L* .. yep, he is a nut case
Want to set him off .. Just mention Ken Star's name ... LOL
Or call him Slick Willie!
I notice the answer was not "I would NEVER undermine my country at time of war".
Nope.
He basically said yes, that is what he did.
And the media laps it up--and some "conservatives", too. Why just tonight Pat Robertson told Campbell Brown that Bill is pathological and this book is an attempt to draw us in to his pathology. But then he ends with an idiotic grin and "but he's a nice guy".
I've tried, I'm getting a "real player" error.....:(
Does your real player usually work?
If so, look for an upgrade.........it should work!
http://switchboard.real.com/player/email.html?PV=6.0.12&&title=arab.pulse.a.blk.cnn.cnn&link=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2Fvideo%2Fpromotional%2F2004%2F06%2F21%2Farab.pulse.cnn.300k.smil
That should get you to this page:
http://mailafriend.guide.real.com/index.html?link=http%3a%2f%2fwww.cnn.com%2fvideo%2fpromotional%2f2004%2f06%2f21%2farab.pulse.cnn.300k.smil
and you should be able to click on it there!
Clinton can my a nice guy .. he can also very friendly too .. like you've been best friends forever
He's problem is .. he can't be trusted like a REAL friend .. because he'd put a knife in your back to save his sorry a$$
I'm sure Web Hubbell knows what I'm talking about
You mean Clinton can ACT like a nice guy. I do not think he is nice at all.
I just saw it. I will say this:
yes, he's a sicko. you can really see what Juanita Broaderick must have seen. he's a liar, he's delusional.
however, from a purely political point of view - he's not afraid to confront his opponents directly. regardless of whether we agree with what he has to say, what we think, he's not afraid to take on his enemies. our side, from a purely political point of view, could learn something from that.
And in the end I believed he thought that there was still some risk that Saddam had the weapons, that if he stayed involved, he could have an impact on the post-Saddam Iraq. But if he stayed involved, he could keep America and Europe, closer together than they otherwise would have been, and so he made the decision he did. I can’t quarrel with that; he was in a very difficult position.
Thank God---I really mean that---Tony Blair made his stand out of noble conviction and principle. Principles he has held fast to and eloquently defended.
Thanks! I'll try again as soon as Michael Reagan is done on H&C.
Oh for corn's sake!
EXACTLY!
Did you see this?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1158213/posts
Yeah, and I really believe that he had to sleep on the sofa. NOT. He makes it sound like the White House has only 1 bedroom! LOL! He is a truly Narcisstic!
I don't know about you, ocean, but I like my "political points" truth; there was hardly a word of truth in that interview.
All that crap about "the titanic fight against the Republicans about the direction of the country" is complete and utter fabricated BS.
Flame me if you must, but I stand by that.
Did you see Rumsfeld's last press conference? For the first time since the Abu Ghraib scandal broke (what is it, 5 weeks now?), he finally went toe to toe with the media - directly challenging their assertion that everything is defined as "torture". And he was effective.
That's whats missing on out side - we know the media is hurting Bush, yet I don't see the fight in him.
I can't remember where I read it a few years back
But it was an article on how Tony Blair tried to get Clinton to stand up and do something about Saddam and Tony Blair could never get anywhere with Clinton, except for sending a few missiles over to Iraq
Blair's domestic policies I don't agree with .. But he knew how bad Saddam was and how important it was to get rid of Saddam .. and I will always give him credit for that
I said that, please don't misquote me. I said he was a liar and delusional. I know that.
My only point is regarding his ability, even when lying, to confront his enemies directly.
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.