http://www.ornery.org/essays/2001-01-26-1.html

I have read many false facts, on this form! and i have heard many people blame Bush for 911, as well as many other things! But this is the first time, i have read anything about what clinton did, Many people forget he was the one who made the US look weak in the eye's of other country's

We dont read it because it doesnt fit their agenda of false info based on bias media reporting

Doesn't surprise me that the kool-aid drinking Bush haters here haven't responded....

well its a shame we have had so many crappy presidents through the last few decades. In my eyes the last four were pretty bad. People dont bash Clinton so much becuase the economy was doing pretty well and there wasnt any major issues throughout his 8 years in whitehouse. Thats not to say he was a good president but at least he didnt throw us in a war with no real plans. Bush gets such a bad rep becuase he comes across as caring more for big business and his wealthy friends then for the american people.

clinton is guilty!! i say every administration since kennedy should be put away for life as they are complicit in his assasination by association and non-action--clinton bombed the only sudanese pharmacutical manufacturer when they tried to turn in bin laden during his administration--41,reagan they are ALL GUILTY!!

Yeah... I think he also got the baby milk factory, an orphanage, and a home for little old ladies. Oy yeah, kittens...lots of cute little kittens too...

I wonder why folks would be concerned about clinton bombing Iraq and regarding bushs' bombing as a good thing. It was all unfortunate and unecessary in my opinion, but hey, I am just a voting taxpayer.

becuase some people dont have any logic.. Clinton did bombings he was bad Bush does them and he's saving the world. And people dont think their brainwashed. sheesh. Anyway you look at it bombing and killing people is wrong.

I dont think we have had a good president in the last 30 years you would think we would be a little better at picking them after so long.

i tend to lean towards the "we were never picking them" ideology--or at least for the last 30 years--its all theatre and war is business--

As a critique I would say that this thread lacks substance...a lot of accusations and opinions unsupported by any details worthy of consideration...have you all ever considered working for FOX? You dont need to know anything...just cite inflammatory rhetoric and sound convincing.

I agree after the last 2 elections i get the feeling our votes never counted in the first place. Makes you wonder how long that has been going on.

You might research election JFK won Daly used his power in Chicago and fraud has been alledged. So its been going on a LONG time!

Your right it probably has been happening for a long time, to bad the masses are asleep and let this sort of stuff happen.

Yeah right but Kennedy did a good job of keeping us out of a nuclear confrontation with Russia...Nixon was less stable and he would have allowed the war and you and I might not be here...thank god Kennedy was a smart man. Nixon proved to us later who he really was...oh yes..."Im not a crook"...but he was a crook.

there all freakin crooks. I dont think its possible for a honest politicion to make it very far in politics.

Well I think JFK tried and he was killed for it. He stood against mafia, Veitnam,and big oil like Rockefeller Standard Oil. He was killed for it.

Bobby Kennedy spoke out against the war...he was shot down. There are military assassin programs that create Sirhan Sirhans.

...but this is what happens when you want to help people.

I think Clinton walked a fine line. I am really surprised that he was not picked off by a right -winger because they really went after him...but he passed a lot of laws in their favor.
A lot of hatred thrown by whites at Clinton is because Clinton actually tried helping colored people. Black caucus liked Clinton. Bush does not even affiliate with the black caucus. Bush does not mend hatred well and is very divisive.

They're all following the course of human nature. Power creates monsters. Especially in politics. They take advantage of everything because they can. It's called narsasistic personality disorder.

I do not agree with that fact, Yes power can make people act different, but the point that was being made here was Clinton crimes againest the people of the US are being payed by Bush, He walked into a mess and did not even know it,Clinton made us weak, he left us open to attack, and the terriost took full advanage of that fact, Because Clinton was more worried about young girls than the country he was suppose to be running, The twin towers came down and alot of people lost their lives, If Clinton had been doing his job in the first place, they would have never seen a weak country being turned over to a man who did not have time to know all the facts or how weak we had became, So blame Bush all you want, but is Clinton who really is too blame 8 years of lies and look how many people had to die because of it.

Without wanting to sound one sided, which is an unfortunated side effect of being a moderator, I would like to point out two things.

Firstly, the attacking and name calling in this thread actualy began before an opposing view was even posted Doesn't surprise me that the kool-aid drinking Bush haters here haven't responded.... and that this article prooves that Governments do many things behind the backs of those who vote for them. It's fuel I would use against the argument, if I were arguing on the side of conspiracies.

Kismit, the point you made about the link is very correct, And i do not think anyone will even try to say the goverment does not hide some of what they do, But you must look at the big picture here. Did the goverment bring down the twin tower, does Bin Laden work for the CIA, did Bush's family support the nazi war machine, Is our goverment in the beginning forms of a NWO, are we to become a policed state, under total goverment rule, with no voice! These are just a small amount of the things i have read on this form, and the bombing in London is just getting stated good, the crazy post on that has yet to really take full swing, We can blame the goverments we can blame Bush, or Blair, or for that matter we can blame just about anyone we want, But we can not hide from the fact that we were attacked that Clinton, left us weak and that alot of people paid for that with their lives. and even now the attacks are still happen all over the world, and the answer some wish to give is that BIN LADEN, works for the CIA, please you can do better than that! How can one even say such a thing when people are still losing there life's to these mad men, This is a holy war, one they started,because we do not believe as they do, this is not a Bush, BLAIR we want power war, the UNITED STATES and THE UNITED KINGDOM do not need more power, they already have all they need, together they are the strongest force in the world! and a great deal of what i pointed out ^^^^ does not make since, It is a shame some of us just can not see the true facts, Maybe it is easier to blame someone less threating like the goverment then to accept the fact a mad man is just waiting to do great harm to us all.

Do you ever listen to yourself? Seriously...

Clinton made crimes that are being paid for by Bush?

9/11 happened because Clinton handed a weak country over to Bush?

9/11 happened because Clinton was too busy worrying about young girls?

Blame Bush all you want, but it's Clinton's eight years of lies?

Ok, let's play that game.

On Osama's bio, it says that he was trained in the 1980's, during Regan's war on terror. Most of what Osama knows, he was trained to do on Regan's watch. Osama wouldn't have known how to do 9/11, nor would he have his underworld/black market connections to do it without the training he recieved.

On that note, I propose that 9/11 was all the fault of Ronald Regan. Dig him up and re-bury him upside down for his shame!

Oh, wait... I can't talk about Regan that way, so that part's conveniently left out.

Bush sr. pissed off the entire middle east with the way he handled his Iraq campaign- they thought he was covering his ass about Saddam being put there by the US in the first place. Many middle easterners, including the majority of the Taliban became radically anti-US due to his continuation of Regan's seemingly well-intended actions fought on questionable tatics. Not to mention the belief that securing the oil wells was an alterior motive...

People conveniently forget about that part, so he can't take the blame for whatever part of the blame this gets him.

Shrub was president from Feburary to that day- should I be counting my fingers correctly, that's eight months. If Clinton was blowing off 9/11, fine. But Bush was president now, and if they knew anything about it, they would have kicked themselves in the ass trying to get better results from the new president. Eight months is more than enough time to look into and follow a possible attack, especially if they knew about it prior to those eight months and the CIA was taking it seriously enough to follow it since Clinton was president. Let me repeat that:

EIGHT. FREAKIN'. MONTHS!

If it was being followed and investigated on Clinton's watch(with Clinton throwing out memos to look at skirts instead), that adds onto the ineptude of the Bush investigation in 2001. If they were investigating possible attacks for eight years, despite Clinton, don't you think they would have tried to appeal this to Bush?

It happened on Bush's watch- EIGHT MONTHS into Bush's watch. If it had happened on March 1st, then we could blame Clinton, because Clinton had no longer been president for only what, a week? Couple weeks? Do you see the difference between a couple weeks and the majority of a year? Did it even occour to you that intelligence may be telling the truth when they said they didn't find out about a possible attack until a month before the attack?

Use your brain- I've seen you post on other topics, and I know that you're normally quite intelligent. But when it comes to Bush, this is the best you can do? 9/11 happened because Clinton got a hummer from an intern? You're either getting your information from Sean Hannity, or you're too politically biased to think clearly on any Bush-related issue.

Was Bush the one who let BIN LADEN, walk free-no That would be Clinton, and eight months is not enough time to fix eight years of BS, Maybe you should listen to yourself, How can anyone fix the mess Clinton had us in, when they had only really just got into office, Bush did not cut or military, Clinton did, Bush did not drop bombs on iraq, because he was in trouble for sleeping around, And then go on TV,and lie in the face of every american who watched him that night! But Clinton did, it is no wonder these people thought the US was a joke, we had a clown for a president, and now you all want to blame Bush, because he had to come in and clean up the mess. But what i find so hard to believe, is that a man can lie to you too all of us, and there are those who still think he did a good job, hello he cut everything, and look how we have paid for it.

FOOTNOTE,- What fool cuts it military power? oh yes that would have been Clinton.

well again it seems you are completewly wrong--in fact just 4 months prior to 9/11 bush signed executive order w199i --which ordered fbi agent john o'neil to cease his investigation into bin laden--look it up

How convienant dance around Clintons not taking Bin Laden when we had him. Years before!

so we should blame clinton for not having years of foresight but completely ignore bush's EXECUTIVR ORDERS "just prior" to 9/11

Clinton was handed Bin Laden's head on a platter long before Bush took Office and Clinton refused so who's to blame? Want to play blame game then start with Clinton

Did Clinton know that Osama would become or do what he has done?Do you think if Clinton had another chance he would have done it differently?

is your perception of reality so twisted as to not percieve the difference between ignoring something and signing an executive order in order to protect someone?

You could say the same thing for Bush...The pendulum swings both ways.

Wow, Deja Vu! I was pointing out that if we could blame Clinton, we could also blame Bush sr. and Regan, because wasn't Osama trained by the CIA during their terms? I also pointed out that I would like to know where Clinton getting a hummer comes into this... was that Osama's inspiration? I know- maybe Clinton got a hummer, and when Osama learned about it, he went insane with penis envy... the world trade center looked like two huge dicks, and had a lot of dickheads working there. So he decided to blow it up. But blowing it up with Clinton in office, we would have blamed Bush and Regan, so he decided to wait until 2001...

JESUS, it makes sense now! Thank you for clearing that up!

However, I must still insist that this is strike three for you, and strike two for the whole "9/11=Clinton" argument pro-conservative pundits on this site seem to love. Note to you- next time someone asks you a question, try to answer it... don't just rephrease what they were asking about in a ruder tone.



Panther, old buddy- strike three waiting to happen! And after you gave us strike one on the "who's really to blame for 9/11?" thread!

Can you prove any of what you're saying, or should I just mark the strike now?

You know I'm just razzing you- secretly I love you... your utter lack of logic, reason, compromise or evidence on Bush-related topics rivals only Isis, and you produce it in such a fanatic manner that we just can't help but check to see if you believe this crap yourself...

Do you like Sean Hannity or Bill O'Riley, by any chance?

No i do not think Clinton could do anything for trying to get l**d,that was all he really cared about,!

Clinton was playing the role given him - the Dems are supposed to play "good cop" to the Reps "bad cop". They are two of the same agenda, just different roles are given to each one to play, to make it look like there IS a choice or a difference.

I could never understand something about bush people. When you ask them why they love bush, they usually tell you that it's because clinton lied about having sex in the white house. BIG FRICKIN DEAL. bush lied about getting us into a war that has killed thousands of innocent people. i"ll take clintons indiscression any day over bushs bobbleheaded blunders. really people if you can't come up with anything more than a fling with monica then let it go. besides people have affairs all of the time (even republicans) and they can still maintain their business. the 911 incident was long in coming as many people have said. you do remember the whole iran-contra thing don't you? that was under the reign of reagan and daddy bush. it's all about money and power.

Forget about Clinton hes an adulterer and so are most married americans it seems to fit quite well. Anyway we should be talking about the ignarent redneck fool who is in office now He has killed numerous innocent people he is guilty of invasion, his docterine of preemptive attack is scary its napoleon all over again, his disasterous environmental plans, his condoning of slave labor and connections with both Saudi arabia and china are bewildering, his puppy dog face and with us or against us mentality are very unfortunate for america, you would think people would vote for someone with a degree of intelligence but it would seem that many of americas greatest minds are fleeing New babylon. On top of this America is just angry with the french because america is less intelligent. "Screw you frenchy with your big words and stuff". America proclaims " Genetic mutation must reach all things we can make it bigger fatter and abundant" of course they dont mention that the food has been combined with the genes of animals and fish then put through radiation treatments and dowsed in disinfectant. WE MUST FTGHT FOR ORGANIC FOOD STRAIGHT FROM THE GROUND AND FIGHT AGAINST THE GODLESS FAITHLESS ALTERATION OF OUR PLANETS FRAGILE GIFTS.

Isnt it amazing that when ever Clinton or any liberal is brought up along with their wrongdoings instead of defending him/her they redirect to someone else.!

There is no defense, wy even talk about it though when there is such a perfect target present and making monumentally stupid decisions as we write.

I will say this for the Bush people they defend Bush meaning there is crediable evidence to suggest accusations are wrong. Clinton supporters on other hand redirect and put up NO defense this suggest they cant defend him!

Why should clinton supporters put up a defense. He made a mistake with a mistress and our economy was stable. Now look what we have, extreme unemployment, our pentions being controlled by the government, censorship, civil rights violatoins and so on and so on. Now the previous bush supporters are jumping a sinking ship. They certainly aren't defending the smiley face bobblehead now are they?
UM needs to add a smiley bobblehead to the list. We could name it george.

If I voted for Bush, I too would be desperate to rehash the Clinton iniquities right about now.
If you're worried about Rove and Co., don't be. The Republican party has been subsumed and is now the American Fascist Party. They hold have the upper hand in all three branches of our so-called government. No matter what depravities Rove has perpetuated, this administration is untouchable.
...at least that's a reality I'm prepared for.

I just watched "Eyes Wide Shut" last night. The Illuminati masked ball is the perfect icon for the true inner circle of the Republican Party.
You know how your stereotypical comic book Satanists love to invert meanings? That's what the Bushies do. Here is the code:
God = Satan
Jesus = Mephistophales (or Beelzabub)
Church = Corporation
Values = Greed
Democracy = Plutocracy
Freedom = Do what you're told and shut up
Tradition = Submit to our depraved agenda
Responsibility = Every man for himself
Liberty = Your status commensurate with the amount of wealth and property you own, etc. etc. etc.

I don't say there are literal masked ball sex orgies at which you will find both Karl Rove and Hillary Clinton...
I say there are figurative masked ball sex orgies at which you will find both Karl Rove and Hillary Clinton!


OK, so go ahead and raise a fuss about Clintonian conspiracies, but I assure you it is not necessary!

There is no defense to be made a president getting head from his secretary has nothing to do with american or global politics, the bombing of iraq that he did was condoned and supported by real evidence and he only attacked what was part of the evidence, he did bomb the taliban after the attack in africa. But war was not condoned.

Bush was not all that bad to me until the weirdness of iraq, quite simply there is no reasonable way to condone this brutality and the way it has unfolded, no wmd, no ties to al qaeda,not even a masacre of his own people. O no! Saddams one of us! Even if he is a flunky. Who would think reagans man would turn out like this ?"To bad our plan to make iraq and iran destroy each other didnt work, I think its time to begin operation ZION, Soon Soon darth wolfowitz, you and Sith cheney will be high level rulers of Israel all thats left is getting president teary eyes to convence the world to attack iran and syria."

Is this coming from someone who's managed to turn even a passing mention of Bush on a non-Bush topic into a half-witted diatribe about how Bush is paying for everything Clinton supposedly did, maybe 1% of which doesn't inspire us asking what the hell you're talking about? Someone who goes on and on about credible evidence, but has yet to provide any?

People have produced quite a bit of credible evidence against you, and yet you insist on continually coming forward with telling us that we're the half-cocked ones that can't back ourselves up. Like Isis, you need to either sh** or get off the pot.

Evidence was at beginnng of thread and throughout but I guess you didnt read ..............................flushes toilet

Wow this is very stupid, one thing i would like to hear is someone actually giving justification for Bushes war if u backem ya gotta agree withem, i guess the only thing left for the lovers of bush is to critisize so as to divert attention from lord dumb ass. I guess everyone picks a side in the end either Democracy or Republic, as of now though i think their both pretty dense and out for ideals that i dont beleive in.

Diverting attention! No but actually that is what Clinton supporters have done. In the Bush threads actual defense of Bush has occurred not diversion which is all I have seen in Clinton's defense. It appears pot is calling the kettle black! Now no one will support anyone 100% just because one is a Bush supporter does not force them to blindly accpet every policy person puts in place, that would be misguided. The thread is about Clinton and his involvement yet diversion tactics have turned it around toward Bush!

please refresh my memory of how you "defended" bush's actions concerning his executive order w199I where he ordered special agent john o'neil to desist any further investigation into usama bin laden three months prior to 9/11--also explain his reason for flying over a hundred bin laden family and friends out of the country while all commercial air transportation was grounded immediately after the attacks--while your at it devulge bush's reasoning behind flying 8000 taliban generals and officers to pakistan two weeks into the invasion--answer these three inquiries for me and if your answer is logical and rational i will swicth sides today!!

diversion diversion diversion

of course what was i thinking

Getting late here but I have to address this silly comment. I have said and still say once Clinton was attacked with links (you always want links) of his crimes and involvement in 911 (making him part of your NWO plot if you choose to believe it) You choose NOT to defend Clinton instead more anti Bush garbage comes out. The persons not following the bizzare 911/Bush plot have made several points (throughout the mindless babble) in the dozens of post making this claim and defended their postion made made points to support their non bleief in this silly notion. Now when Clinton is attacked and evidence provided you FAIL to defend him or discredit point. Instead you attack Bush and divert! Why one can speculate but I would guess because you cant deny or disprove evidence that is base of this thread which you and others have taken OFF topic!

Yes, the topic is. "Clintons Worst Crimes"

they're two sides of the same coin--i wouldnt defend clinton any more than i would his partner in crime 43--trying to get intelligent people to defend clinton is harder than getting ignorant ones to stop defending bush--impossible! --close this useless thead!