The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Clinton admits to being a failure!

jackoroe

jackoroe

JUB 10k Club
JUB Supporter
Joined
Jan 11, 2005
Posts
11,385
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Former President Clinton, in an apparent mental breakdown, admitted to failing to catch Bin Laden. He says that at least he tried. Of course he forgets to admit that he had Bin Laden in his sights on at least a couple of occasions and failed to pull the trigger. That's not trying and failing. That's failing to try. There is a difference.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UwJabtvSUQ
 
I think if we could choose between Clinton and Bush as President - for right now

Not many of use would choose Bush
 
As I recall the battle of Tora Bora took place after 9/11. What earthly excuse could there be for not getting Bin Laden after 9/11 when the Army said they had him cornered?
 
Investor's Business Daily, September 7,2006

As Clinton guru Dick Morris relates, this first missed chance to capture or kill bin Laden came in February 1998, when "Clinton's aides scuttled a CIA plot that had been eight months in the planning to kidnap Osama." The plan would have used Afghan tribesman to capture the al-Qaida leader for a later trial in the U.S.
Believe it or don't, Clinton's aides worried that bin Laden might be killed in the process, making it look like a political assassination.
According to the 9-11 commission report, they were worried of "recriminations" in the event "that bin Laden, despite our best intentions and efforts, did not survive."
The second chance came on Aug. 20, 1998, in the famous "wag the dog" attack at the height of le affaire Lewinsky, when cruise missiles were actually fired at a bin Laden encampment in Afghanistan. The problem was that Clinton ordered that the Pakistanis be told of the attack, lest they think it was an attack from India.
The news was leaked, and bin Laden dodged our bullets.
The final missed chance came in May 1999 when the CIA reported bin Laden would be in Kandahar, Afghanistan. As the 9-11 commission report said: "If this intelligence was not 'actionable,' working-level officials said at the time and today, it was hard for them to imagine how any intelligence could meet that standard."

So we see that BJ Clinton was more concerned with the public perception if we killed Bin Laden than in protecting the American public. He knew where Bin Laden would be in Afganistan and failed to act. BJ Clinton was the Commander in Chief and the only elected official with an obligation to protect the citizenry pursuant to his oath of office. It is ridiculous to blame a Republican or a Democratic Congress for BJ's failure.
 
The cruise missle attack was not leaked. The Pakastanis were not told until the missles were flying. One of the other incidents was called off by CIA's Tenent.

People should not count on Disney for their history.
 
chance1 said:
I think if we could choose between Clinton and Bush as President - for right now

Not many of use would choose Bush
Click to expand...


All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is vote for one of the Clintons - history certainly wastes is lessons on all of us.
 
MattieMich said:
I have to say that this is the best quote source I've ever seen a conservative use here on JUB. It's from an editorial/opinion piece at investors.com. Not only that, it's quoted here as a real source but it's actually a synopsis FROM the editorial OF the ABC movie Path to 9/11. Brilliant! It's the FOX news way of getting a story.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, nothing real interesting on this subject in Wikipedia. Seriously, try refuting the claims of Dick Morris, who was BJ 's right hand man (no pun intended) at the time rather than question the source. ..|
 
General_Alfie said:
Here's the transcript from the interview, as posted. I don't know if it's athe final version. It was on Atrios and USA Today





Now THAT'S how one responds to scurrilous lies. I wish more Democrats could express themelves as clearly.

How about that Christine Wallace, trying to smear Richard Clarke, huh, trying to defame him by saying, "He [Clarke] has a variety of opinions and loyalties?" Funny, I never heard a Fox whore complain about their right wingnut "experts," experts like Ann Coulter. I don't recall Wallace saying of Ann Coulter has "a variety of opinions," all of which seem to involve bombing, poisoning or hanging people she doesn't agree with. "Fair and balanced," no doubting that!
Click to expand...


Very nice find, Alfie except for one thing. Clinton lies. It is a fact the he lies under oath. He was found to have commited perjury and disbarred. He is a known liar and has absolutely no credibility. It was never about sex as he would have us believe. It was about perjury.
 
jackoroe said:
Very nice find, Alfie except for one thing. Clinton lies. It is a fact the he lies under oath. He was found to have commited perjury and disbarred. He is a known liar and has absolutely no credibility. It was never about sex as he would have us believe. It was about perjury.
Click to expand...
Even for you Jack, this is a very weak and off-topic defense of your orginal assertion ..... you anticlintonite you! ;)
 
no need to feel down clinton. just stick a poster of Bush on ur bedroom ceiling. It will surely make u feel better !! :lol:
 
jackoroe said:
Investor's Business Daily, September 7,2006

As Clinton guru Dick Morris relates, this first missed chance to capture or kill bin Laden came in February 1998, when "Clinton's aides scuttled a CIA plot that had been eight months in the planning to kidnap Osama." The plan would have used Afghan tribesman to capture the al-Qaida leader for a later trial in the U.S.
Believe it or don't, Clinton's aides worried that bin Laden might be killed in the process, making it look like a political assassination.
According to the 9-11 commission report, they were worried of "recriminations" in the event "that bin Laden, despite our best intentions and efforts, did not survive."
The second chance came on Aug. 20, 1998, in the famous "wag the dog" attack at the height of le affaire Lewinsky, when cruise missiles were actually fired at a bin Laden encampment in Afghanistan. The problem was that Clinton ordered that the Pakistanis be told of the attack, lest they think it was an attack from India.
The news was leaked, and bin Laden dodged our bullets.
The final missed chance came in May 1999 when the CIA reported bin Laden would be in Kandahar, Afghanistan. As the 9-11 commission report said: "If this intelligence was not 'actionable,' working-level officials said at the time and today, it was hard for them to imagine how any intelligence could meet that standard."
Click to expand...

This is a bullshit cut and paste from Dick Morris (the darling of the right wing) and a freeper post -- the Free Republic forum is notorious for right wing Clinton-hating nonsense. Revealing that you don't have a reasonable source to substantiate your claims. No wonder you didn't attribute or link to it.

So we see that BJ Clinton was more concerned with the public perception if we killed Bin Laden than in protecting the American public.
Click to expand...
Where, exactly, to you see that? It's not backed up by any reasonable reporting or analysis. In fact it's not even supported by what you've cut & pasted here. What your "source" says is:

According to the 9-11 commission report, they were worried of "recriminations" in the event "that bin Laden, despite our best intentions and efforts, did not survive."
Click to expand...
In typical Dick Morris dishonest style (or is that from the freeper post -- it's hard to tell which is which), cherry-picking words and phrases out of context from the 9/11 commission report leaves a false impression of the conclusion of the 9/11 commission. What the 9/11 commission report actually concluded:

On May 29, "Jeff" informed "Mike" that he had just met with Tenet, Pavitt, and the chief of the Directorate's Near Eastern Division. The decision was made not to go ahead with the operation. "Mike" cabled the field that he had been directed to "stand down on the operation for the time being." He had been told, he wrote, that cabinet-level officials thought the risk of civilian casualties-"collateral damage"-was too high. They were concerned about the tribals' safety, and had worried that "the purpose and nature of the operation would be subject to unavoidable misinterpretation and misrepresentation-and probably recriminations-in the event that Bin Ladin, despite our best intentions and efforts, did not survive."29

Clarke told us that the CSG saw the plan as flawed. He was said to have described it to a colleague on the NSC staff as "half-assed" and predicted that the principals would not approve it. "Jeff " thought the decision had been made at the cabinet level. Pavitt thought that it was Berger's doing, though perhaps on Tenet's advice. Tenet told us that given the recommendation of his chief operations officers, he alone had decided to "turn off" the operation. He had simply informed Berger, who had not pushed back. Berger's recollection was similar. He said the plan was never presented to the White House for a decision.
Click to expand...

It's just as easy to shoot down the representations of the other two "missed chances."
 
It is ASTOUNDING that still to this day, wingnuts try to blame Chimpy's failures on Bill Clinton.

If Chimpy were caught fucking a goat on the White House lawn, wingnuts, (like Jack) would blame Bill Clinton.....(whining) "He left the goat there!!!!!!"

Chimpy has had SIX years and control of ALL branches of government to made the world a better place. He has failed MISERABLY in everything he touches, from the war on "terra," to Katrina to Iraq.

Don't you wingnuts DARE to lay this at Clinton's feet. YOU OWN THIS ONE.
 
Clinton will probably accomplish more in the 8 years he was in office than those who criticize him from the reich ever will for their entire lives. That's the only reason 6 years on, after the Bush administration has majorly fucked up the country and the world, they are still going after them. They're simply jealous... to pathetic levels.

And if anyone had to deal with the sheer hatred and vitriol of far-right partisans that Clinton did, they would probably have been locked away in an asylum a long time ago and never been let out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top