27 Apr 2012

In New Video, President Who Let bin Laden Walk Praises President Who Ordered Him Dead

By |April 27th, 2012|The Blog|0 Comments|

The Obama campaign has decided to make the death of Osama bin Laden a campaign issue, and they have enlisted President Bill Clinton to spike the football this time:

This latest ad contradicts President Obama’s own pledge after he took out bin Laden. “You know, we don’t trot out this stuff as trophies,” Obama told CBS soon after the terrorist mastermind had been taken out. He added: “Americans and people around the world are glad that he’s gone. But we don’t need to spike the football.”

How strange it is to have President Clinton give praise to Obama for making the call to go get bin Laden, even going so far as to call the decision “the harder and more honorable path,” considering when president, Clinton chose to let bin Laden walk:

Clinton’s comments and his actions relating to American efforts to capture bin Laden have taken on renewed interest because of claims made in a new ABC movie, the “Path to 9/11,” that suggests Clinton dropped the ball during his presidency. Clinton has also angrily denied claims the Monica Lewinsky scandal drew his attention away from dealing with national security matters like capturing bin Laden.

During a February 2002 speech, Clinton explained that he turned down an offer from Sudan for bin Laden’s extradition to the U.S., saying, “At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him.”

But that wasn’t exactly true. By 1996, the 9/11 mastermind had already been named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing by prosecutors in New York.

9/11 Commissioner former Sen. Bob Kerrey said that Clinton told the Commission during his private interview that reports of his comments to the LIA were based on “a misquote.”

During his interview with the 9/11 Commission, Clinton was accompanied by longtime aide and former White House counsel Bruce Lindsey, along with former national security advisor Sandy Berger, who insisted in sworn testimony before Congress in Sept. 2002 that there was never any offer from Sudanese officials to turn over bin Laden to the U.S.

But other evidence suggests the Clinton administration did not take advantage of offers to get bin Laden — and that the Monica Lewinsky scandal was exploding during this time period.

At least two offers from the government of Sudan to arrest Osama bin Laden and turn him over to the U.S. were rebuffed by the Clinton administration in February and March of 1996, a period of time when the former president’s attention was distracted by his intensifying relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

One of the offers took place during a secret meeting in Washington, the same day Clinton was meeting with Lewinsky in the White House just miles away.

On Feb. 6, 1996, then-U.S. Ambassador to the Sudan Tim Carney met with Sudanese Foreign Minister Ali Osman Mohammed Taha at Taha’s home in the capital city of Khartoum. The meeting took place just a half mile from bin Laden’s residence at the time, according to Richard Miniter’s book “Losing bin Laden.”

During the meeting, Carney reminded the Sudanese official that Washington was increasingly nervous about the presence of bin Laden in Sudan, reports Miniter.

Foreign Minister Taha countered by saying that Sudan was very concerned about its poor relationship with the U.S.

Then came the bombshell offer:

“If you want bin Laden, we will give you bin Laden,” Foreign Minister Taha told Ambassador Carney.

Still, with the extraordinarily fortuitous offer on the table, back in Washington President Clinton had other things on his mind.

A timeline of events chronicled in the Starr Report shows that during the period of late January through March 1996, Mr. Clinton’s relationship with Monica Lewinsky was then at its most intense.

Again, strange that they would tap Clinton to heap praise on an action he refused to take in 1996.

2 Jul 2010

Recruit for the Klan? It’s OK If You’re Trying to Get Elected…And a Democrat

By |July 2nd, 2010|The Blog|0 Comments|

i like to think that people can change. I know that I have done things in the past that I would not consider doing today. But I don’t justify what evil I have done. I admit it and simply say, “I am not that person anymore.”

What former President Bill Clinton did today was the opposite. I’ll let him explain why Robert Byrd’s days as a recruiter for the Klan is understandable:


“He once had a fleeting association with the Ku Klux Klan, what does that mean? I’ll tell you what it means. He was a country boy from the hills and hollows from West Virginia. He was trying to get elected,” former President Bill Clinton said of Sen. Robert Byrd.

“And maybe he did something he shouldn’t have done come and he spent the rest of his life making it up. And that’s what a good person does. There are no perfect people. There are certainly no perfect politicians,” he added.

It was far more than that, Mr. Clinton.

He wasn’t in the Klan solely because he was trying to get elected.

Here are a few choice quotes from Sen. Byrd:

  • “I will never submit to fight beneath that banner with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.”– Former Klansman and current US Senator Robert Byrd, a man who is referred to by many Democrats as the “conscience of the Senate”, in a letter written in 1944, after he quit the KKK.
  • “I am a former kleagle of the Ku Klux Klan in Raleigh County and the adjoining counties of the state …. The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia …. It is necessary that the order be promoted immediately and in every state of the Union. Will you please inform me as to the possibilities of rebuilding the Klan in the Realm of W. Va …. I hope that you will find it convenient to answer my letter in regards to future possibilities.” — Former Klansman and current US Senator Robert Byrd, a man who is referred to by many Democrats as the “conscience of the Senate”, in a letter written in 1946, after he quit the KKK.

President Clinton might want to rewrite history and paint Byrd as a good ole boy just trying to win an election, but the fact remains that Byrd was full of hate for the black man. Is it possible he changed? Absolutely.

But you do not minimize not only the membership in a terrorist organization, but the recruitment of terrorists. And that’s what the Klan is.

Byrd may have regretted his behavior until his last breath, but that is no justification for painting over his sins.