I thought the entire article didn't need to take up space, so annotation...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by kg_veteran
Mavdog, here's another article to help you out...
|
kg, why doesn't the article address the question of somalia and bin laden? clinton made the point that no one believed of ANY connection of mogadishu and bin laden, in fact al queda wasn't even labeled or identified when somalia happended. rather than focus on the point made by clinton in regard to the interjection of "The Looming Tower" the author makes the claim that the book has "historically factual statements" when in fact it doesn't. it is fair to say that the author lied to the reader with that very point.
here's clinton's quote in question:
Quote:
|
I think it’s very interesting that all the conservative Republicans who now say that I didn’t do enough, claimed that I was obsessed with Bin Laden. All of President Bush’s neocons claimed that I was too obsessed with finding Bin Laden when they didn’t have a single meeting about Bin Laden for the nine months after I left office. All the right wingers who now say that I didn’t do enough said that I did too much
|
the one name that comes to mind which supports clinton's assertion (and inexplicably missed by this author) is our own phil gramm, who would not support the bill on tighter controls on international money transfers thru the us banking system that the clinton administration proposed, saying it was "totalitarian". guess what, the almost identical bill was approved post 9/11 and is seen as an effective tool.
were there some (such as the author pointed out) who weren't overly critical? absolutely. it may come as a surprise to some in the current administration but there have been times of cooperation between the two sides of the aisle
is it fair to say that clinton exxagerated when he said that "all" the republicans? absolutely.
imho to criticize clinton for his aggressive position with wallace by saying that bush wouldn't do the same is 1) conjecture, 2) not relevant to the discussion of if clinton was honest in his assertions, and 3) impossible to determine as bush has been protected against such a thing happening. heck, his people have removed anyone opposed to bush's policies from any event at which he attends!