Thought Provoking Question!!!

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 responsible 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.

This question was raised on a 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 Clinton
government spent more money chasing down
Bill Gates than Osama bin Laden?
Gotta wonder!!!!

Makes ya think, huh?

GRRRRRRR, people kill me

clinton had nothing to do with the m$ lawsuit

they are *clears throat*

STATE SPONSORED CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS

And who\'s pulling the strings of the state governments hmmm?

Originally posted by mm
GRRRRRRR, people kill me

clinton had nothing to do with the m$ lawsuit

they are *clears throat*

STATE SPONSORED CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS

The federal government was in on it too.
"Microsoft Corp. and the Justice Department disclosed significant changes Thursday to the proposed settlement in their landmark antitrust case, partly to stem criticism from many legal and technology experts that the software giant was getting off too easy."

yeah i don really get this thread... im sure if clinton could have gtthe peep responsible for the bombing he would have, but he couldnt...... so it aint rally his thought is it...

It was just an e-mail I got, thought maybe some of you would find it interesting!

if i remember correctly..clinton did send troops over in the area for something or another..it is very vague.

Originally posted by luckee
if i remember correctly..clinton did send troops over in the area for something or another..it is very vague.

Most of Clintons\' time in office is very vague. Except for that d*mn Monica case that was drawn out for way too long. Thank God his time is over.

Originally posted by luckee
if i remember correctly..clinton did send troops over in the area for something or another..it is very vague.

He didn\'t send troops, he sent cruise missiles, into a camp that Osama Bin Laden was allegedly at.

You can\'t really post a critical statement like this until we wait a while and see whether George W. Bush is able to follow through on his own promise "that those responsible would be hunted down and punished."

With all of his strong retoric which helped console our nation, you have to admit that he\'s gotten himself in WAAAYYY too far over his head. His words are now being used against him for leverage. Following his words, we should have to support Israiel.. even tho what they\'re doing is just as wrong as what the Palestinians are doing. Either way we go.. we\'re pissing tons of people off (including allies) who hold alegience to one faction or another.

The political repprecussions of his actions are piling up.. and tying his hands.. what was once a president is now a puppet being ping-ponged back and forth between nations trying to please everyone... and still please the people back home who are still grieving. It\'s going to take a long time to untangle this mess. The Russians were the new enemies spawned from WWII. The Muslim Extreemists are the new enemies spawned from the Cold War. Who will our next enemies be spawned from the War on Terror?

Clinton played it safe.. he was the "Peace maker" and the "Placater" and while it wasn\'t the best thing he could have done... it\'s not like Bush is doing anything better playing the "war monger".

Originally posted by mjps21983


He didn\'t send troops, he sent cruise missiles, into a camp that Osama Bin Laden was allegedly at.

ahh..there we go..I knew it was something like that.

If blaming Clinton for 9/11 makes you feel better, I am happy for you.

Originally posted by Coredweller
You can\'t really post a critical statement like this until we wait a while and see whether George W. Bush is able to follow through on his own promise "that those responsible would be hunted down and punished."

He\'s doing a good job keeping that promise so far (no, not sarcasm, it\'s the truth).

Originally posted by Tom G


He\'s doing a good job keeping that promise so far (no, not sarcasm, it\'s the truth).

IMO, I think some of the things he is doing is good, BUT, like someone else..he is trying to do so much and its going to come back and bite him in the ass hard.