My Bush-loving friend sent this email to me:
I’ve looked for references to it on Snopes and can’t find anything.
My first reaction is that Bush did NOT cover it - any of these things listed…Bin Laden’s still at large. I need a little help, though, with a blow-by-blow rebuttal.
I think you pretty much said it. Osama’s at large, so he didn’t cover it in that sense. Of the people involved who were in fact hunted down and/or caught, I think it was all done by either Clinton or foreign law enforcement. So while the email might have a point about Clinton not doing enough about terror, it ignores two key issues.
Clinton isn’t running.
Bush didn’t fix the problems either.
I love this. If the best the Bush automata can do is to blindly mutter about Clinton, the election is in the bag.
Well, given there isn’t yet a clear Dem nominee, really hard to mutter about Ker, er, Dea, er, Edwa, er, Clar, er, Sharp…
Well, we can start here:
Clinton spotted Osama bin Laden three times in 2000 and his people felt they had a good chance of catching him once the winter winds died down in 2001 enough to allow the use of Predator reconaissance drones.
The Bush people instead pulled the Predators off-station in Afghanistan, so that they could fahr rawkits, yee-haw! They didn’t fly again until after September 11.
And of course Bush’s national security boys met 100 times or more before September 11. Twice they devoted the meetings to terrorism.
And there was that little tidbit about President Bush being warned about possible al Qaeda hijackings of American planes. Somehow I fancied Bush a Tom Clancy fan. Books on tape, at least.
But hey, I didn’t see it either sitting on my couch.
Well, for one, those directly involved in the WTC bombing were tried and found guilty while Clinton was still in office. Clinton didn’t track it all the way back to ObL, but then neither has Bush. In what sense did Bush “cover” that Clinton promise?
This probably isn’t on Snopes because it’s pure political propaganda, not an Urban Legend or glurge-type thing.
Interesting to note that it’s apparently a much more jingoistic update of this 2003 article.
http://www.freedomwriter.com/issue25/am12.htm
It sounds to me like someone got hold of this article, added the election-year exhortations, and sent it out on the Internet.
My guess would be that it’s in the sense of “All them Islamic fundamentalists are in it together.”
[url=http://www.snopes.com/rumors/clinton.htm]And you would be wrong, my dear Goose
[/quote]
(although the one quoted at Snopes doesn’t have any Bush references in it, it’s pretty clearly the same one). In fact, I’d say that this is, in a sense, glurge, of a pro-Bush type.
(Snopes covers many politically related chain-letters from both sides of the aisle. The fact you didn’t know that tells me you haven’t really gone over their archives lately. Even if that’s not so, I heartily recommend you do so anyway, just for educational purposes!)
Oops, let’s try that again. The ONE time I don’t preview…
(Oh, and I failed to see the first time that Snopes does acknowledge the existence of the OP’s version at the bottom of the page. Double oops.)
Dear Cmdr. McWhorter:
It is important that you remember: when folding the tin foil, it is crucial that the folds must, repeat, must be made in alignment with magnetic North. Otherwise, the hat’s utility as a defense against telepathic attack will be compromised!
Your friend,
E.
ssshhhhh!!!
<whisper>
Let Bush run against Clinton while we run against BUSH!!!
</whisper>
Uh, I didn’t hear anything
Gee, Leaper, thanx for the lecture.
Tons.
Now, why don’t you Copy the OP on that?
Hm?
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 4:08 AM
Subject: Bush Covered It
You know, it is easy to forget the ‘promises’ that Bill and Hillary made
while in office. It strikes home when it is listed like this:
After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured
1000; President Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down
and punished.
BUSH COVERED IT! ----WHILE HIS FAMILY AND MOST OF HIS POLITICAL AND BUSINESS ASSOCIATES CONTINUE LONG TERM LUCRATIVE TIES WITH THE BIN LADEN FAMILY (doesnt osama get a piece of everything the family gets as an heir?)
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.
BUSH COVERED IT! ----WHILE HIS FAMILY AND MOST OF HIS POLITICAL AND BUSINESS ASSOCIATES CONTINUE LONG TERM LUCRATIVE TIES WITH THE BIN LADEN FAMILY (doesnt osama get a piece of everything the family gets as an heir?)
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.
BUSH COVERED IT! —WHILE HIS FAMILY AND MOST OF HIS POLITICAL AND BUSINESS ASSOCIATES CONTINUE LONG TERM LUCRATIVE TIES WITH THE BIN LADEN FAMILY (doesnt osama get a piece of everything the family gets as an heir?)
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.
BUSH COVERED IT! ----WHILE HIS FAMILY AND MOST OF HIS POLITICAL AND BUSINESS ASSOCIATES CONTINUE LONG TERM LUCRATIVE TIES WITH THE BIN LADEN FAMILY (doesnt osama get a piece of everything the family gets as an heir?)
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.
BUSH COVERED IT! ----WHILE HIS FAMILY AND MOST OF HIS POLITICAL AND BUSINESS ASSOCIATES CONTINUE LONG TERM LUCRATIVE TIES WITH THE BIN LADEN FAMILY (doesnt osama get a piece of everything the family gets as an heir?)
Maybe if Clinton had kept his promise, an estimated 3,000 people in New York
and Washington, D.C. that are now dead would be alive today.
BUSH TOLD THOSE FIREMAN – THEY WOULD HEAR US TOO! —WHILE HIS FAMILY AND MOST OF HIS POLITICAL AND BUSINESS ASSOCIATES CONTINUE LONG TERM LUCRATIVE TIES WITH THE BIN LADEN FAMILY (doesnt osama get a piece of everything the family gets as an heir?)
AND ALSO ARRANGED TO ALLOW THE BIN LADEN FAMILY AND OTHER SAUDI OFFICIALS TO FLY DURING A NATIONWIDE AIR RESTRICTION AND ALLOWED THEM TO LEAVE THE COUNTRY UNCHALLENGED AND UNQUESTIONED.
And, now that Bush is taking action to bring these people to justice, we
have Democrats charging him with being a war monger…
OSAMA IS STILL ON THE LOOSE< SADDAM WAS NOT INVOLVED IN ANY OF THE ABOVE SITUATIONS, AND THE PLANS TO INVADE BOTH AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ WERE IN MOTION LONG BEFORE 9-11. oh, and—
WHILE HIS FAMILY AND MOST OF HIS POLITICAL AND BUSINESS ASSOCIATES CONTINUE LONG TERM LUCRATIVE TIES WITH THE BIN LADEN FAMILY (doesnt osama get a piece of everything the family gets as an heir?)
AN INTERESTING QUESTION: This question was raised on a Philly 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 billions of dollars to charity. The other sponsors terrorism. That
being the case, why was it that the Clinton administration spent more money
chasing down Bill Gates over the past eight years than Osama bin Laden?
THINK ABOUT IT!
THINK ABOUT THIS—WHILE HIS FAMILY AND MOST OF HIS POLITICAL AND BUSINESS ASSOCIATES CONTINUE LONG TERM LUCRATIVE TIES WITH THE BIN LADEN FAMILY (doesnt osama get a piece of everything the family gets as an heir?)
It is a strange turn of events. Hillary gets $8 Million for her forthcoming
memoir. Bill gets about $12 Million for his memoir yet to be written. This
from two people who have spent the past 8 years being unable to recall
anything about past events while under oath!
Sincerely, Cmdr Hamilton McWhorter USN(ret)
P. S. Please forward this to as many people as you can! We don’t want this
woman to even THINK of running for President.
Come now, Quint Essence. Do we really need this from both sides of the aisle?
I’m sorry if you feel like I was lecturing or persecuting you, but I don’t see any effort of the kind in my reply.
And, yes, I did miss that in the OP. Oops #3, I guess.
'Kay. 
People jump on me about the “Google Queen” thing, so I guess I’m a little touchy on the subject of “looking stuff up”. :rolleyes:
Ignoring the facts and just considering the political reality, it seems to me the email quoted in the email nails it.
Clinton merely [sub]dealt with[/sub] terrorism while Bush loudly “COVERS” terrorism with frenetic, decisive and probably counter productive activity.
Couple things.
First, the assertion that bin Laden would benefit because of his status as an heir to his family fortune is factually incorrect. He’s been disowned by the bin Laden family. In any event, he’s scheduled to predecease the rest of his family, events permitting.
Second, “Cmdr Hamilton McWhorter, USN(ret)” probably refers to Hamilton McWhorter III, the flying ace. From World War II. He’ll be 91 this April. And whilst he’s still said to be in good health, I rather suspect that someone else appended his name to this piece, as often happens in email glurge, to add authority in an attempt to disguise the lack of authenticity. So luci can feel free to to apologize to him for the slur or offer up evidence that he did in fact update this piece.
He got a lot of money himself before the disowning, and it doesn’t take all that much to hide out in a cave, does it? It’s also a large family, something like 60 kids by multiple wives, and it is not that likely that every one of them has cut him off from all contact.
Well, that’s as good as done, isn’t it? **Manny ** says so, based on the word of one lieutenant colonel. Only been, what, 2+ years now?
Got a cite for who did or did not write this glurge, or are you just asking **elucidator ** to apologize for doing no more speculating than you are?
Stick to the facts, please. Your guesses are *not * better than anyone else’s.
Which has literally absolutely nothing to do with anything whatsoever in the universe. I was simply responding to the statement “doesnt osama get a piece of everything the family gets as an heir?” The available evidence is that that statement is factually incorrect.
Is someone paying you to to respond to things I didn’t say? To ignore such important words as “scheduled” and “events permitting?” If so, who?
First things first. I’m not “just asking Eludicator to apologize” I’m asking him "to apologize… “or offer up evidence that he did in fact update this piece.” Once again you have intentionally and maliciously selectively taken only a piece of what I have written in order to make it seem that I have said something which I have not. You are entirely without character and a liar.
As to which one of the two possibilities which I left open and which you lied about is more likely, I have no idea in this instance. But Cmdr. McWhorter’s name has apparently been misattributed as the author of stupid email forwards before.