Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Steamed Rice

I just love this photo of Condi, it really sums her up well...
NEW YORK (CNN) -- U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has taken on former President Clinton, rejecting his statement that President Bush failed to carry out adequate anti-terror efforts before the September 11, 2001, attacks.
"What we did in the eight months [between Bush's inauguration and 9/11] was at least as aggressive as what the Clinton administration did in the preceding years," Rice told the New York Post in comments published Tuesday.
"The notion that somehow for eight months the Bush administration sat there and didn't do that is just flatly false."
Rice's remarks followed Clinton's TV interview on "Fox News Sunday" in which the ex-president defended his efforts to track down and kill al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. Clinton lashed out against "the right-wingers who are attacking me now," saying the same people had accused him of being "obsessed" with bin Laden.
Now these statements are contradicted by a memo released by "THE RAW STORY"...
Who is lying??? I think it has been established that Clinton doesn't lie about matters of national importance, but Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld and Condi have a long, dirty track record of lying, especially when it comes to national affairs.

6 comments:

  1. Anonymous1:10 PM

    Good Grief! hope her face doesn't freeze like that!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I believe it has been established that Bill Clinton will lie about anything he thinks he can get away with. Take the Monica incident, Bill the narsistic fuck that he is thought he could get away with that one.

    Two more lies the man told (1) While growing up in Arkansas Churches were being burnt...a lie (2) He took a toke but did not inhale, come on we all know that any RDDB Red Diaper Doper Bay who takes a toke will inhale, the man done the same thing as I done when I took my first toke.

    So what makes you think the man will tell the truth on matters regarding national importance when he will sit right in front of a camera and lie to the American people about an issue that he should have said was none of your business. Again the man is a narsistic fuck.

    8 fucking years and what did the man do,throw a few bombs at Iraq and bomb the shit out of the Serbs for 86 days.

    Lets not forget the Nazi act He pulled in Waco when they killed 80 some Americans for what? weapon charges and child molesting here in this country we slap the sexual predators on the hand, not Bill they go in full force and kill women and children who had nothing to do with it. Lets not forget the little cuban boy who they pulled out of a home at gunpoint and sent back to Fidel....Dont you all wish you were as smart and Ms. Rice gotta make you fucking jealous correct?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes, we should apologize to you Rocky because 8 years of peace and prosperity weren't good enough for you. I am sure you are quite pleased now that we are engaged in two separate wars and breathing down the neck of a third and our economy is in the toilet. It has to be much more gratifying to see the Pretzeldent wrap himself in the flag than to actually do something of significant importance. Go troll elsewhere.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Can I get some broccoli beef and some orange chicken with that steamed rice?

    ReplyDelete
  5. n June 25, 1996, a powerful truck bomb exploded outside the Khobar Towers barracks in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, tearing the front from the building, blasting a crater 35 feet deep, and killing 19 American soldiers. Hundreds more were injured. When news reached Washington, President Bill Clinton vowed to bring the killers to justice. "The cowards who committed this murderous act must not go unpunished," he said angrily. "Let me say again: We will pursue this. America takes care of our own. Those who did it must not go unpunished." The next day, leaving the White House to attend an economic summit in France, Clinton had more tough words for the attackers. "Let me be very clear: We will not resist" — the president corrected himself — "we will not rest in our efforts to find who is responsible for this outrage, to pursue them and to punish them."

    So Clinton talked tough. But he did not act tough. Indeed, a review of his years in office shows that each time the president was confronted with a major terrorist attack — the February 26, 1993, bombing of the World Trade Center, the Khobar Towers attack, the August 7, 1998, bombing of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and the October 12, 2000, attack on the USS Cole — Clinton was preoccupied with his own political fortunes to an extent that precluded his giving serious and sustained attention to fighting terrorism.

    And lets not forget Bosnaia, rember that on where Clinton painted our planes the color of NATO and bomb the be-jesus out of the Serbs for 86 days, how quick we forget when it comes to a Demon-cat.

    Lets take a look at unemployment today 4.7 the tsame it was when Clinton left office, another fact more people especially miniorities own their homes today than they did during the Clinto years and these are not some card board shacks that were just thrown up, the DJA is almost ready to break the all time high and if I remember correctly it was at 10,700 when Clinton was in office, and within the next few days or the next couple of weeks it will eclispe that number. so do not come in here and piss down my back and tell me it is raining. The only thing Clinton ever done was tell lies and chase women and done nothing wwhen it came to terriost.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The First WTC Attack
    Clinton had been in office just 38 days when terrorists bombed the World Trade Center, killing six people and injuring more than 1,000. Although it was later learned that the bombing was the work of terrorists who hoped to topple one of the towers into the other and kill as many as 250,000 people, at first it was not clear that the explosion was the result of terrorism. The new president's reaction seemed almost disengaged. He warned Americans against "overreacting" and, in an interview on MTV, described the bombing as the work of someone who "did something really stupid."

    From the start, Clinton approached the investigation as a law-enforcement issue. In doing so, he effectively cut out some of the government's most important intelligence agencies. For example, the evidence gathered by FBI agents and prosecutors came under the protection of laws mandating grand-jury secrecy — which meant that the law-enforcement side of the investigation could not tell the intelligence side of the investigation what was going on. "Nobody outside the prosecutorial team and maybe the FBI had access," says James Woolsey, who was CIA director at the time. "It was all under grand-jury secrecy."

    Another problem with Clinton's decision to assign the investigation exclusively to law enforcement was that law enforcement in the new administration was in turmoil. When the bomb went off, Clinton did not have a confirmed attorney general; Janet Reno, who was nominated after the Zoë Baird fiasco, was awaiting Senate approval. The Justice Department, meanwhile, was headed by a Bush holdover who had no real power in the new administration. The bombing barely came up at Reno's Senate hearings, and when she was finally sworn in on March 12, neither she nor Clinton mentioned the case. (Instead, Clinton praised Reno for "sharing with us the life-shaping stories of your family and career that formed your deep sense of fairness and your unwavering drive to help others to do better.") In addition, at the time the bombing investigation began, the FBI was headed by William Sessions, who would soon leave after a messy forcing-out by Clinton. A new director, Louis Freeh, was not confirmed by the Senate until August 6.

    Amid all the turmoil at the top, the investigation missed some tantalizing clues pointing toward a far-reaching conspiracy. In April 1995, for example, terrorism expert Steven Emerson told the House International Relations Committee that there was information that "strongly suggests . . . a Sudanese role in the World Trade Center bombing. There are also leads pointing to the involvement of Osama bin Laden, the ex-Afghan Saudi mujahideen supporter now taking refuge in Sudan." Two years later, Emerson told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee the same thing. In recent years, according to an exhaustive New York Times report, "American intelligence officials have come to believe that [ringleader Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman] and the World Trade Center bombers had ties to al-Qaeda."

    But the Clinton administration stuck with its theory that the bombing was the work of a loose network of terrorists working apart from any government sponsorship. Intelligence officials who might have thought otherwise were left out in the cold

    ReplyDelete