On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 08:59:23 -0500, John H wrote:

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 08:30:43 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:59:43 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Clinton had several opportunities to assassinate or arrest the *******
prior to 9/11, but was worried about the Constitutionality of such an
act. In fact, he's on record (audiotape) as saying that he didn't know
under what legal grounds he could hold him when the Sudanese offered to
hand him over.

Why don't we just overlook the 75 cruise missiles?

http://partners.nytimes.com/library/...attack-us.html


From your reference:

"Clinton and his national security team linked both sites to Osama bin
Laden,
the exiled Saudi millionaire tied by U.S. intelligence to the twin
bombings on Aug. 7 in Kenya and Tanzania. The bombings killed 12 Americans
and nearly 300 Africans.

Bin Laden, who is in Afghanistan, apparently survived the attack, which
officials insisted was not aimed at him."

Yet nothing more was done...

And, strangely enough, I don't recall a lot of liberal whining about doing
nothing more...

Strangely, I remember considerable conservative whining about diverting
attention from a BJ.