The Truth About Clinton and Bin Laden: Another Right-Wing Talking Point Exposed

By Stephanie H. Dray, published Aug 28, 2006
Published Content: 248  Total Views: 773,334  Favorited By: 17 CPs
Rating: 3.4 of 5
(Read a follow-up to this by Jeff Mussall:A Further Look at a Right Wing Talking Point)

It has become reflexive for Bush administration apologists to answer any criticism with an excoriation of Bill Clinton.

Some say that George W. Bush's actions are driven, in part, by his desire to step out from his father's shadow. But given the administration's tendency to cower behind Bill Clinton, there's obviously a larger and more recent shadow that the Bush Administration won't or can't escape.

Ask why President Bush is spying on Americans without warrants, and his spokespeople cry that President Clinton spied on Americans too. (They just leave off the part where the Clinton Administration complied with FISA court warrant requirements in order to do so.)

Ask why FEMA's response to hurricane Katrina was so poor, and Rush Limbaugh starts babbling about Monica and a blue dress.

It has not only become predictable, but comedic. Just watch Anne Coulter. She's like a demented yellow-parrot who can't stop squawking inappropriate lines or hilariously yanking out her own feathers on national television.

But one Clinton-bashing RNC talking point is not funny or comedic in the slightest. It's a lie meant to disguise the miserable job that Republicans have done at avenging 9/11, and it's being promoted with increasing desperation as we approach the mid-term elections.

The lie is that Bill Clinton had an easy opportunity to capture Osama Bin Ladin, but let him get away.

It's one thing to hear this on Fox News; America's Propaganda Network predictably allows this contention to go unrefuted by discoverable facts. It's quite another thing when the lie has become so pervasive that ABC feels entitled to air a "docu-drama" which supports that lie.

Takeaways
  • The Clinton Administration was actively seeking Osama Bin Ladin and ways to capture or kill him.
  • The 9/11 Commission debunked the suggestion that Clinton simply refused Osama on a silver platter.
  • When Clinton did bomb Osama Bin Ladin's encampments, Republicans claimed he was "Wagging the Dog."
Did You Know?
In the summer, just before September 11th, the CIA warned of imminent attacks but Deputy Secretary of Defense, Paul Wolfowitz did not find these threats to be credible.
Resources
  • The 9/11 Commission Report
Comments
Showing Comments 1 - 11 of 11
 
 
I've listened to the tape from Clinton and he does not say that he had an easy opportunity to capture him, nor that he had a clear shot. What he said was that he could have done so if he was willing to kill 200 innocent people with only a 50 percent best chance success rate, as given to him by the CIA. Given that Osama bin Ladin was then thought to be a financier of terrorism and not the criminal mastermind that we know him to be today, such a move would have been roundly condemned. In fact, it might still be today. Americans strive to limit collateral damage--we're not animals.

Posted on 09/08/2006 at 3:09:00 PM

 
Wingnuts are going to believe crap like this show because they want to. Nothing, not even the truth, will make them change their minds, or vote in their own self-interest. Their motto is: "We don't care if there is food on the table, just don't let them gays marry each other."

Posted on 09/05/2006 at 6:09:00 PM

 
I agree. Now ,what about responding to an attack from the left onPres.C linton -that of Robert Scheer on workfare ?

Posted on 08/31/2006 at 5:08:00 PM

 
Harry Truman's desk had a sign that read: "The Buck Stops Here." The sign on Bush's desk should read: "The Buck stops here....where Clinton said he did all that bad stuff you guys said was my fault and I totally got it on tape...honest....God, who I talk to all the time, will totally back me up."

Posted on 08/30/2006 at 5:08:00 PM

 
Evleness--Wait a minute--I may have jumped on you for no reason. Are you saying that this article is spinning the truth, or did you just do a poor job at making your point. Whatever the case, your post is sort of muddled. You should have left out teh uneccessary crap about Jimmy Carter and your Freeper-esque "just when I start warming up to you libs..." garbage.

Posted on 08/29/2006 at 7:08:00 PM

 
Evleness--You guys always say people are lying or "spinning", but never offer any facts to back it up. I guess that's because you have no facts to back up your ridiculous statements, so you proceed to denigrate Jimmy Carter--very original. Anyway, Stephanie, thanks for putting out the truth about the whole"Clinton had Bin Laden on a silver platter" lie. I'm no fan of Clinton, but there is no doubt he paid greater attention to Al Qaeda than the Bush administration, who paid virtually no attention to the threats. Goood job

Posted on 08/29/2006 at 7:08:00 PM

 
Thanks very much for setting the record straight on just far the right wing folk will go to discredit their opponents.

Posted on 08/29/2006 at 11:08:00 AM

 
The whole 'nobody knew they'd use planes as a missile' is a bold-faced lie. Not only was it discussed in prior plans and used in training 'missions', it was the plot of the Pilot episode (Called Pilot) for the Lone Gunman tv series spinoff of X-Files. It aired about 6 months before Sept. 11th. If Hollywood could easily think it up, so could a government strategist who's job is to think of these things and prevent them.

Posted on 08/29/2006 at 9:08:00 AM

 
Well, perhaps the movie will also show that on August 6th, over a month before the hijackings, Pres. Bush received a memo that specifically stated that Bin Laden had a desire to use hijacked planes in a terrorist attack with plans to launch an attack in the coming weeks. Hopefully there will also be the scene where after 9/11 Condi Rice said, "Nobody could have predicted they'd used hijacked planes as a missile."

Posted on 08/28/2006 at 10:08:00 PM

 
Thanks for writing this article; they do that kind of thing all the time, and that example is particularly annoying.

Posted on 08/28/2006 at 9:08:00 PM

 
You are so correct, it is right wing junk-talk, trying to protect the Republicans as the election approaches. But even if everything they say happened to be true, they would still lose an arguement on these grounds-Clinton may or may not have had the opportunity to get Bin Laden before 9/11, the question can't be answered definitively. But what we do know for sure is that Bush hasn't got him after 9/11!

Posted on 08/28/2006 at 8:08:00 PM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comments 1 - 11 of 11
 
Most Commented On