The Worms Squirm

ABC will broadcast a 9/11 mini-series that seems to be somewhat close to the truth.

It traces the terrorist threat from the first World Trade Center bombing to the September 11th attacks.

So the democrats are crying foul. They claim that the actions (or inactions) of the Clintoin administration are incorrect. It is my understanding that the mini series does not go into the Somali fiasco better known as Blackhawk Down. Nor does it delve into the legal fiction concocted by Jamie Gorelick that prohibited the sharing of information between intelligence agencies such as the CIA and FBI.

There are eerie similarities between the Clinton and Bush 43 administrations. Both World Trade Center attacks took place early in the first terms. However, their responses were vastly different.

Clinton chose to treat the threat as a law enforcement issue and time after time the administration seemed sabotage attempts to either kill or apprehend bin Laden.

The Bush Administration responded the threat as a direct attack on the United States and prosecuted a war against the purveyors of terrorism.

I think success or failure can be measured in terms of results.

1) Catching bin Laden - neither side succeeded.

2) Neutralizing al Qaeda - Clinton suffered additional atatcks at the Khobar Towers, Uss Cole, and possible connections between Saddam's secet service at the Oklahoma City bombing. Bush neutralized the Taliban and destroyed Saddam's terrorist infrastructure. It is ludricous to argue these actions did not severely degrade al Qaeda and related organizations.

3) Changing the Middle east map - Clinton pushed land-for-peace in Israel. This failed formula resulted in another war in southern Lebanon, and lest we forget Israel is still prosecuting actions against Hamas and Fatah in Gaza. Land for peace is a failed policy. Bush is attempting to create a democratic regime in place of Saddam's Iraq. The jury is still out on this process, but if we use history as a measure, it should be notednthat we maintained an occupation government in both Germany and Japan for over seven years after the end of World War II. If Bush is succssful, it will dramatically change the map.

4) Nuclear proliferation - Clinton basically appeased the madmen in Pyongyang and Tehran. The result is the spectre of nuclear weapons threatening the western United States and the Pacific Rim. Bush has tried diplomacy, however, it does not appear either regime is serious. Whether or not a limited military option is possible or practical, we are quickly running out of time.

Now I'm not a Clinton fan. I think he was one of the worst Presidents in the country's history, ranking down there with Carter and Taft.

I did vote for Bush twice, but I did not feel I had a choice in either 2000 or 2004. Gore and Kerry come off as wackos. Bush policies and responses drive me crazy. For example, instead of permitting North Korea to launch their missile test, we should have destroyed their launch facilities. The jury is out on what will happen in Iran, but knocking out their nuclear production facilities should remain an active option. If we don't do it , then Israel will.

So it seems the Clintonistas have reason to squirm. Their record is on trial and they came up wanting. No wonder they are unhappy.