Need some debunking: Clinton let bin Laden slip through his fingers

[Cruzan]

If the worst criticism of President Bush is that he lied to us about Iraq, then we just got a whopping reminder of Bill Clinton's extraordinary talents for deception.

In a letter to ABC's chief Bob Iger, Clinton's attorney, Bruce Lindsey, alleges that the network's program, The Path to 9/11 is "factually and incontrovertibly" inaccurate in suggesting that the Clinton administration let Usama bin Laden slip through its fingers. Clinton's defenders, from their high horses, arrogantly have demand that the program be edited to their satisfaction, or be pulled entirely.

Bristling at evidence that Clinton and his administration were wavering and indecisive, the letter asserted that the president aggressively tried to "take a shot at Bin Laden." It cites the 9/11 Commission Report for supposedly giving credit to Clinton for approving "every request made of him by the CIA and the U.S. military involving using force against Bin Laden and Al Qaeda.

This is close enough to the truth to make the "I-didn't-inhale" and "I-didn't-have-sex-with-that-woman" Clinton think he can get away with it. But it is far enough away from the truth to be classified as, if not a bold lie, an artless equivocation.

As usual, Clinton figures that the rest of us are too stupid or lazy to look it up for ourselves. And having read the complete report when it came out more than two years ago, I think it is an inescapable fact that a vacillating, equivocating administration had more than one opportunity to take out terrorist mastermind bin Laden, but blew it.

A good place to look is the report's "Chapter 4: Responses to Al Qaeda's initial assaults," Section 4.5, "Searching for Fresh Options." There you have details of how bin Laden was ready to be plucked, but someone in the administration either ignored or nixed it. Or put it on an endless "you-decide, not-me" merry-go-round.

More at link:

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,213040,00.html

-----------------------------
EDIT: COPYRIGHT. PLEASE POST ONLY 4 OR 5
PARAGRAPHS FROM THE COPYRIGHTED NEWS SOURCE
PER DU RULES.

[Beelzebud]

1. Wait. The meme is "offered on a silver platter".

EVERY right-wing freak that tries to pass this bullshit off, ALWAYS says the EXACT same thing: "Bill Clinton was offered Bin Laden ON A SILVER PLATTER."

They don't even bother to change the words from the original talking point.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

2. Nice try. Welcome to DU, enjoy your stay. Ah, Faux, still catapulting

the propaganda.

:hi: MKJ

[MADem]

3. DEBUNKING??? Look at your SOURCE!!!!!! FauxSnooze!!!

The joint needs FUMIGATING when you put that much crap up....

[A-Schwarzenegger]

4. Dude, something is happening,but you don't know what it is.

Debunk a FauxNews splooge?

[many a good man]

5. Aritcle debunks itself

It only mentions two opportunities to get OBL: in February and May. They would have created a huge intl incident had they killed UAE officials Feb. Tenet judged the evidence insufficient to order an attack in May. I'm only surprised the author didn't dredge the other discredited BS about Sudan offering him up.

IMO bushcheney's dismantling of the units hunting OBL did far greater damage, despite all the red lights and "hair on fire." And what about Tora Bora??? Fox isn't worth responding to. The only people paying them any attention are hopeless Kool Ade drinkers.

[City Lights]

6. Fox, like ABC, is dead to me.

They don't just drink the Kool-Aid, they make it.

[treestar]

7. Even if OBL had been killed, the attack still would have occurred.

If OBL is so important to Al Qaeda that they would have dissolved and there would have been no attack, then Bush should have caught Al Qaeda by now.

Clinton did not have a crystal ball. But Bush knows what Al Qaeda is capable of and has most of the world on his side. Yet no Osama.