posted on October 17, 2001 11:46:26 AM new
This was emailed to me through a news group I belong to. It does pose a couple of interesting questions.
After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and
injured 1,000, President Clinton promised that those responsible
would be
hunted down and punished.
After the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed five U.S.
military personnel, Clinton promised that those responsible would be
hunted
down and punished.
After the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19
and injured 200 U.S. military personnel, Clinton promised that those
would be hunted down and punished.
After the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224
and injured 5,000, Clinton promised that those responsible would be
hunted
down and punished.
After the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39
U.S. sailors, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted
down and punished.
Maybe if Clinton had kept his promise, an estimated 7,000 people would
be alive today.
An interesting question:
This question was raised on a Philly radio call-in show. Without
casting stones, it is a legitimate question.
There are two men, both extremely wealthy. One develops relatively
cheap software and gives hundreds of millions of dollars to charity.
The other sponsors terrorism.
That being the case, why is it that the US government has spent more
money chasing down Bill Gates over the past ten years than Osama
bin Laden?
It is a strange turn of events. Hillary gets $8 Million for her
forthcoming memoir. Bill gets about $12 Million for his memoir.
This from two people who have spent the past 8 years being
unable to recall anything about past events!
Incredible!!
Edited because I left off part of the message in the first attempt.
[ edited by lindajean on Oct 17, 2001 11:48 AM ]
posted on October 17, 2001 12:32:48 PM new
Just a thought lindajean, but seeing how difficult it is just to capture one guy (Bin Laden), perhaps it was a statement made that was easier said than done. If Clinton had of said, "we'd like to think we can catch who did this, but it's very difficult and we might not have the resources", the public wouldn't have bought it. Maybe ALL the President's knew that capturing terrorists would mean war......something to be avoided at all costs. That's the problem with politics. Do you tell the people the truth or what they want to hear?
posted on October 17, 2001 01:27:45 PM new
You forgot to mention that Bush Jr. promised that the persons responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon would be hunted down and punished.
Yet somehow they still manage to make threatening videotapes and get their message out to the world, give personal interviews to CNN (two days ago in Afghanistan), etc.
posted on October 17, 2001 01:33:00 PM new
kraftdinner,
We are at war. Doesn't matter what people in America call it, war has been declared on us. We can sit around and debate the terminolgy all day long. But we are at war.
posted on October 17, 2001 01:46:00 PM newMaybe if Clinton had kept his promise, an estimated 7,000 people would be alive today.
And maybe if Clinton were still President, they'd still be alive today. Maybe the new President was perceived as weak and because of that our country was seen as vulnerable and ripe to be attacked.
Not that any of it matters anymore. What's done is done. There's a galaxy full of maybe's and what if's. And none of them changes the reality. Using them as fodder for pot stirring on a chat board is pointless and benefits no one.
posted on October 17, 2001 01:56:15 PM new
"Not that any of it matters anymore. What's done is done. There's a galaxy full of maybe's and what if's. And none of them changes the reality. Using them as fodder for pot stirring on a chat board is pointless and benefits no one."
I agree. So how do you suppose we go about ending the threads blaming Americans for 9/11?
Jess
[ edited by deliteful on Oct 17, 2001 01:57 PM ]
