Al Qaeda had only been born in 1988 and had not established the kind
of offensive capability it demonstrated on 9/11. Had they gotten their
act together faster, 9/11 might have happened in the waning days of
the Clinton Administration rather than at the outset of the Bush
Administration.

After 9/11, everyone in the federal government assumed that Al Qaeda
had more attack plots in process and that we would be attacked again
in short order. We know that at least one additional major attack was
foiled in the wake of 9/11. I assume that the government is
withholding more than they are sharing in that regard.

Keep in mind also that there were many other attacks against US
interests during the Clinton years, just not in the US. The USS Cole.
The Saudi barracks bombing. The African embassy bombings. There's a
complete list floating around if you search for it.

Clinton groped around in the dark with regard to the real threat, but
so did everyone else. He doesn't get credit in my book, but I also
don't think he deserves the blame that some on the Right have tried to
saddle him with. He would have killed Bin Laden in a heartbeat if he
knew what was coming.

On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 11:00 PM, Judah wrote:
> I seem to recall only one attack on U.S. soil during the Clinton
> Administration, in 1993, curiously enough also on the World Trade Center. So
> he also went 7 years as President without an attack. Does that give Clinton
> the same credit?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to 
date
Get the Free Trial
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;203748912;27390454;j

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:270302
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5

Reply via email to