Bill Clinton to Israel: Iran No Threat

phoenix80

Banned
Bill Clinton to Israel: Iran No Threat

NewsMax ^ | November 17, 2005 | Carl Limbacher

Ex-president Bill Clinton urged Israelis over the weekend not to overreact to comments by newly elected Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad recommending that Israel be "wiped off the map."

Speaking at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on Saturday, Clinton acknowledged that the remark was "outrageous," but he cautioned that the Iranian leader was "not elected because of his hatred for Israel or the West."

"He was elected because of the economic distress of ordinary Iranians, and which he promised to relieve by giving them financial assistance," Clinton explained, according to the Jerusalem Post.

He warned Israel not to act unilaterally when reacting to terrorist threats, saying that "true peace and security can only come through principled compromise."

Clinton urged Israelis to "organize their politics" so "their search for peace can continue" regardless of domestic policies.

On Oct. 27, President Ahmadinejad told a "World Without Zionism" conference that Israel is a "disgraceful blot" on the Middle East that should be "wiped off the map."

http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/14/225144.shtml

--------------------------------

Next he'll say al Qaeda isn't a threat to the US. That we should "make friends" with bin Laden.
What planet is he on?!
How could this genius become the US president!
 
He probably became president because some people interpret this message differently then you do. The way I interpret this is that he is being diplomatic in this powder keg, we call the middle east.
What would be your suggestion on this affair? Throw a nuke on them?
 
It sounds like Mr. Clinton has as much trouble controlling his mouth as he has had controlling the rest of his body parts. He's not a diplomat he represents nobody but himself. Why would Israel or anyone else care what he says these days? Besides he's not exactly famous for telling the truth or making a lot of sense out of a situation. Remember these statements?

"It depends on what the meaning of the words 'is' is." –Bill Clinton, during his 1998 grand jury testimony on the Monica Lewinsky affair

"It depends on how you define alone…" –Bill Clinton, in his grand jury testimony

"There were a lot of times when we were alone, but I never really thought we were." –Bill Clinton, in his grand jury testimony

"What's a man got to do to get in the top fifty?" –Bill Clinton, reacting to a survey of journalists that ranked the Monica Lewinsky scandal as the 53rd most significant story of the century

"I don't know whether it's the finest public housing in America or the crown jewel of the American penal system." –Bill Clinton, on the White House

"When I was in England, I experimented with marijuana a time or two, and I didn't like it. I didn't inhale and never tried it again." –Bill Clinton

"Politics gives guys so much power that they tend to behave badly around women. And I hope I never get into that." –Bill Clinton, to a woman friend while he was a Rhodes scholar at Oxford

"It was a real sort of Southern deal. I had AstroTurf in the back. You don't want to know why, but I did." –Bill Clinton, reminiscing about a pickup truck he once owned

"You know, if I were a single man, I might ask that mummy out. That's a good-looking mummy" —Bill Clinton, looking at "Juanita," a newly discovered Incan mummy on display at the National Geographic museum

"Being president is like running a cemetery: you've got a lot of people under you and nobody's listening." –Bill Clinton

"Look, half the time when I see the evening news, I wouldn't be for me, either." –Bill Clinton, in 1995, on a pre-campaign swing through Montana and Colorado
 
I'm suspicious about this article. The only source that I could find is NewsMax which has an extremely well known right wing/anti Bill Clinton political agenda. Its the rightwing version of Moveon.org, sorry I'm not buying it, something like that would be in the mainstream media and you could be sure the right such as FOX would pounce on it. Newsmax, Drudge, Moveon, Mediamatters etc are all extremely bias and their crediability is zero with me.

DTOP

All politicians lie, including the good ones. The difference is what they lie about. Yes Lewinsky and the drug thing was stupid and quite obvious. I refer to it as 'lawyering' which means take a very simple concept such as sex with a women and try and dissect it so much that it sounds like something else. Except its so obvious, that it fools nobody. No doubt, its a chilish tactic that tries to take everyone for a fool. I understand why Clinton lied I dont fault him for it (just try admitting an affair in front of 4 Billion people) he should have just lied better. Clintons fibs while childish were generally harmless (at least to the nation, although I doubt Hillary minded too much either). I mean seriously how much sleep did you lose when you discovered Clinton had an affair? It wasnt their first time thats happened (Kennedy, Eisenhower, FDR).

On the other hand compare that to a president sent his C.R.E.E.P friends to spy on political opponents and then had the audicity to say "I'm Not a Crook!". Or another who traded anti-tank missiles to Iran in direct violation of congress and claimed "he didn't remember". Or worse the current situation in a sitting US President knowing full well that there was no evidence to link Saddam to Niger Yellowcake went ahead and presented this as fact during the State of the Union in order to trick the American people into believing their lives were in danger.

It makes what Clinton did rather small in comparison.
 
That stuff that those presidents did, you can say is bad (for the most part).

The stuff Clinton says and the attitude he represents (with Iran), well that stuff could very well lead to the destruction of Western civilization, in the least a large scale war later. So it ends up being more dangerous and more destructive in the long run.

Thats how I see it at least. So I'll take guys like those over a Clinton type anyday.
 
mmarsh said:
I'm suspicious about this article. The only source that I could find is NewsMax which has an extremely well known right wing/anti Bill Clinton political agenda. Its the rightwing version of Moveon.org, sorry I'm not buying it, something like that would be in the mainstream media and you could be sure the right such as FOX would pounce on it. Newsmax, Drudge, Moveon, Mediamatters etc are all extremely bias and their crediability is zero with me.

DTOP

All politicians lie, including the good ones. The difference is what they lie about. Yes Lewinsky and the drug thing was stupid and quite obvious. I refer to it as 'lawyering' which means take a very simple concept such as sex with a women and try and dissect it so much that it sounds like something else. Except its so obvious, that it fools nobody. No doubt, its a chilish tactic that tries to take everyone for a fool. I understand why Clinton lied I dont fault him for it (just try admitting an affair in front of 4 Billion people) he should have just lied better. Clintons fibs while childish were generally harmless (at least to the nation, although I doubt Hillary minded too much either). I mean seriously how much sleep did you lose when you discovered Clinton had an affair? It wasnt their first time thats happened (Kennedy, Eisenhower, FDR).

On the other hand compare that to a president sent his C.R.E.E.P friends to spy on political opponents and then had the audicity to say "I'm Not a Crook!". Or another who traded anti-tank missiles to Iran in direct violation of congress and claimed "he didn't remember". Or worse the current situation in a sitting US President knowing full well that there was no evidence to link Saddam to Niger Yellowcake went ahead and presented this as fact during the State of the Union in order to trick the American people into believing their lives were in danger.

It makes what Clinton did rather small in comparison.
Gee and I thought my post was about the stupid things Clinton said. If you want to start another thread about which president has done the worst things the go ahead. No guarantee that it won't get locked though ;)
 
site1612.jpg


I thought this is proper to be posted here!
 
Clinton... god, well, we ellected an Arkansas governor because he was good at playing a saxaphone and we're surprised he's in over his head in foreign affairs?

At least he knew when not to meddle too much domestically and, let's face it, he'll never be as much of a life-long embarassment as Carter has been.
 
Whispering Death said:
Clinton... god, well, we ellected an Arkansas governor because he was good at playing a saxaphone and we're surprised he's in over his head in foreign affairs?

At least he knew when not to meddle too much domestically and, let's face it, he'll never be as much of a life-long embarassment as Carter has been.

I still cant find it in my heart to forgive Carter for the gifts of a massive truck plant at Kamaz (produces the truck beds that the SSB-21 nuke was mounted on) and the IBM mainframe to the Chinese univerity in Peking (placed on the same floor that HQ'd the military division that controled the ICBMs and was strictly offlimits to any and all students and university staff).

and in an effort to be more or less on topic..

Clinton is a bad bad man.
 
mmarsh said:
Or worse the current situation in a sitting US President knowing full well that there was no evidence to link Saddam to Niger Yellowcake went ahead and presented this as fact during the State of the Union in order to trick the American people into believing their lives were in danger.

Just a liiiiittle thing: President Bush never presented a "Saddam-Niger Wellowcake" during the State of the Union. Niger was mentioned on documents that the White House deliberately chose to ignore. Bush relied on sources that didn't mention Niger. Just to dot your i's.
 
Italian Guy said:
mmarsh said:
Or worse the current situation in a sitting US President knowing full well that there was no evidence to link Saddam to Niger Yellowcake went ahead and presented this as fact during the State of the Union in order to trick the American people into believing their lives were in danger.

Just a liiiiittle thing: President Bush never presented a "Saddam-Niger Wellowcake" during the State of the Union. Niger was mentioned on documents that the White House deliberately chose to ignore. Bush relied on sources that didn't mention Niger. Just to dot your i's.

the Niger government has also directly stated that Saddam's people did try to arrange "trade" to include that very same radioactive material.
 
IG

Dont want to get too far off subject, but you are mistaken.

Here is a transcript of the 2003 State of the Union, Part 8. Quote:

"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium (yellowcake) from Africa".

Right there, he lied. Bush knew that was a false claim because Wilson told him so a few months before.

Whole speach is here.

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/28/sotu.transcript.8/index.html
 
mmarsh said:
DTOP

All politicians lie, including the good ones. The difference is what they lie about. Yes Lewinsky and the drug thing was stupid and quite obvious. I refer to it as 'lawyering' which means take a very simple concept such as sex with a women and try and dissect it so much that it sounds like something else.

Don't overlook the fact that he was under oath when he lied and was impeached for his trouble. I call that a little more than a fib.
 
mmarsh said:
IG
Dont want to get too far off subject, but you are mistaken.
Here is a transcript of the 2003 State of the Union, Part 8. Quote:
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium (yellowcake) from Africa".
Right there, he lied. Bush knew that was a false claim because Wilson told him so a few months before.

So you were wrong when you said Bush "presented a link between Saddam and Niger". He said Baghdad had been trying to acquire uranium from various African countries, on his Speech on the State of the Union Jan 28, 2003. "Sought to acquire", not "bought", or "was buying". There were documents fabricated in France and French services fervently believed that Saddam had been trying to buy uranium from Niger. But Bush never used information contained in those documents. I prompt you to read the independent and bipartisan reports of Lord Butler in UK and the Intelligence Commission Senate Report in Washington DC. (posted this somewhere else too).
I think I can discuss it for 30 more days.
 
IG

You are mixing up two different cases. There was another uranium case concerning false docs (and they were forged in the ME) in Nigeria (I believe) but that was a totally seperate (much earlier) case. I am talking about the Wilson Report that was presented at the end of 2002.

Isnt that nitpicking just alittle?

Bush said
Saddam + sought/tried to buy/tried to acquire (all the same to me) + uranium + from Africa (unless there info thats still classfied, he was talking about Niger).

PM if you want to discuss further, I dont want to annoy the Mods...

Missileer

Thats true, and like I said it wasn't the worlds smartest thing to do. But this all goes back to sex, had it been National Security I would supported a conviction. Again, ask yourself if you really thought you could lie your way out of admitting an affair in front for 4 Billion People (and thus spare yourself and family enormous embarrasement) would you? I would have. So I dont fault him for it.

I do fault him from getting himself into this situation in the first place, but poor judgement is not a crime.
 
mmarsh said:
I do fault him from getting himself into this situation in the first place, but poor judgement is not a crime.

I think the crime was to lie under oath to a Federal Judge.
And no, I wouldn't lie to a Grand Jury under any circumstances.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/impeachvote121198.htm#full1

On August 17, 1998, William Jefferson Clinton swore to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth before a Federal grand jury of the United States. Contrary to that oath, William Jefferson Clinton willfully provided perjurious, false and misleading testimony to the grand jury concerning one or more of the following: (1) the nature and details of his relationship with a subordinate Government employee; (2) prior perjurious, false and misleading testi mony he gave in a Federal civil rights action brought against him; (3) prior false and misleading statements he allowed his attorney to make to a Federal judge in that civil rights action; and (4) his corrupt efforts to influence the testimony of witnesses and to impede the discovery of evidence in that civil rights action.

In doing this, William Jefferson Clinton has undermined the integrity of his office, has brought disrepute on the Presidency, has betrayed his trust as President, and has acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore, William Jefferson Clinton, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.
 
Missileer, if they set the hounds on Bush they'll probably catch him on a lie or two also. But twisting info about a :cen: from an intern and a complete war with tens of thousands dead....... It isn't exactly the same ball park, is it?

Mod edit: I'm getting really tired of editing your language. Use better judgement.
 
Back
Top