Inflammatory Political Rhetoric About Terrorism

When Bush Spoke To Students, Democrats Investigated, Held Hearings

(By Byron York, Washington Examiner, September 2009)

The controversy over President Obama's speech to the nation's schoolchildren will likely be over shortly after Obama speaks today at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Virginia. But when President George H.W. Bush delivered a similar speech on October 1, 1991, from Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington DC, the controversy was just beginning. Democrats, then the majority party in Congress, not only denounced Bush's speech -- they also ordered the General Accounting Office to investigate its production and later summoned top Bush administration officials to Capitol Hill for an extensive hearing on the issue.  Unlike the Obama speech, in 1991 most of the controversy came after, not before, the president's school appearance.

The day after Bush spoke, the Washington Post published a front-page story suggesting the speech was carefully staged for the president's political benefit. "The White House turned a Northwest Washington junior high classroom into a television studio and its students into props," the Post reported.  With the Post article in hand, Democrats pounced. "The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students," said Richard Gephardt, then the House Majority Leader. "And the president should be doing more about education than saying, 'Lights, camera, action.'"

Democrats did not stop with words. Rep. William Ford, then chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, ordered the General Accounting Office to investigate the cost and legality of Bush's appearance. On October 17, 1991, Ford summoned then-Education Secretary Lamar Alexander and other top Bush administration officials to testify at a hearing devoted to the speech. "The hearing this morning is to really examine the expenditure of $26,750 of the Department of Education funds to produce and televise an appearance by President Bush at Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington, DC," Ford began. "As the chairman of the committee charged with the authorization and implementation of education programs, I am very much interested in the justification, rationale for giving the White House scarce education funds to produce a media event."

Unfortunately for Ford, the General Accounting Office concluded that the Bush administration had not acted improperly. "The speech itself and the use of the department's funds to support it, including the cost of the production contract, appear to be legal," the GAO wrote in a letter to Chairman Ford. "The speech also does not appear to have violated the restrictions on the use of appropriations for publicity and propaganda."

That didn't stop Democratic allies from taking their own shots at Bush. The National Education Association denounced the speech, saying it "cannot endorse a president who spends $26,000 of taxpayers' money on a staged media event at Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington, D.C. -- while cutting school lunch funds for our neediest youngsters."

Lost in all the denouncing and investigating was the fact that Bush's speech itself, like Obama's today, was entirely unremarkable. "Block out the kids who think it's not cool to be smart," the president told students. "If someone goofs off today, are they cool? Are they still cool years from now, when they're stuck in a dead end job. Don't let peer pressure stand between you and your dreams.

 

When WWIII (3) Started - 1979

(From a forwarded email that my dad sent me)

This is not very long, but very informative.  You have to read the catalogue of events in this brief piece.  Then, ask yourself how anyone can take the position that all we have to do is bring our troops home from Iraq, reset  the snooze alarm, go back to sleep, and no one will ever bother us again.  In case you missed it, World War III began in November 1979....  US Navy Captain Ouimette is the Executive Officer at Naval Air Station, Pensacola , Florida. Here is a copy of the speech he gave last month. It is an accurate account of why we are in so much trouble today and why this action is so necessary.

AMERICA NEEDS TO WAKE UP!  That's what we think we heard on the 11th of September 2001 (When more than 3,000 Americans were killed) and maybe it was, but I think it should have been 'Get Out of Bed!’  In fact, the alarm clock has been buzzing since 1979 and we have continued to hit the snooze button and roll over for a few more minutes of peaceful sleep since then.  It was a cool fall day in November 1979 in a country going through a religious and political upheaval when a group of Iranian students attacked and seized the American Embassy in Tehran.  This seizure was an outright attack on American soil; it was an attack that held the world's most powerful country hostage and paralyzed a Presidency.  The attack on this sovereign U. S. Embassy set the stage for events to follow for the next 25 years.

America was still reeling from the aftermath of the Vietnam experience and had a serious threat from the Soviet Union when then President Carter had to do something.  He chose to conduct a clandestine raid in the desert. The ill-fated mission ended in ruin, but stood as a symbol of America's inability to deal with terrorism.  America's military had been decimated and down sized since the end of the Vietnam War.  A poorly trained, poorly equipped and poorly organized military was called on to execute a complex mission that was doomed from the start.

Shortly after the Tehran experience, Americans began to be kidnapped and killed throughout the Middle East.  America could do little to protect her citizens living and working abroad.  The attacks against US soil continued.  In April of 1983 a large vehicle packed with high explosives was driven into the US Embassy compound in Beirut.  When it explodes, it kills 63 people.  The alarm went off again and America hit the Snooze Button once more.  Then just six short months later in 1983 a large truck heavily laden down with over 2500 pounds of TNT smashed through the main gate of the US Marine Corps headquarters in Beirut and 241 US servicemen are killed.  America mourns her dead and hit the Snooze Button once more.Two months later in December 1983, another truck loaded with explosives is driven into the US Embassy in Kuwait, and America continues her slumber.  The following year, in September 1984, another van was driven into the gate of the US Embassy in Beirut and America slept. 

Soon the terrorism spreads to Europe.  In April 1985 a bomb explodes in a restaurant frequented by US soldiers in Madrid.   Then in August 1985 a Volkswagen loaded with explosives is driven into the main gate of the US Air Force Base at Rheine-Main, 22 are killed and the snooze alarm is buzzing louder and louder as US interests are continually attacked.  Fifty-nine days later in 1985 a cruise ship, the Achille Lauro is hijacked and we watched as an American in a wheelchair is singled out of the passenger list and executed.  The terrorists then shift their tactics to bombing civilian airliners when they bomb TWA Flight 840 in April of 1986 that killed 4 and the most tragic bombing, Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988, killing 259.  The wake up alarm is getting louder and louder.

The terrorists decide to bring the fight to America. In January 1993, two CIA agents are shot and killed as they enter CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.  The following month, February 1993, a group of terrorists are arrested after a rented van packed with explosives is driven into the underground parking garage of the World Trade Center in New York City.  Six people are killed and over 1000 are injured.  Still this is a crime and not an act of war?  The Snooze alarm is depressed again.  Then in November 1995 a car bomb explodes at a US military complex in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia killing seven service men and women.  A few months later in June of1996, another truck bomb explodes only 35 yards from the US military compound in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia.  It destroys the Khobar Towers, a US Air Force barracks, killing 19 and injuring over 500. 

The terrorists are getting braver and smarter as they see that America does not respond decisively.  They move to coordinate their attacks in a simultaneous attack on two US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.  These attacks were planned with precision.  They kill 224. America responds with cruise missile attacks and goes back to sleep.  The USS Cole was docked in the port of Aden, Yemen for refueling on 12 October 2000 , when a small craft pulled alongside the ship and exploded killing 17 US Navy Sailors.  Attacking a US War Ship is an act of war, but we sent the FBI to investigate the crime and went back to sleep. 

And of course you know the events of 11 September 2001.  Most Americans think this was the first attack against US soil or in America.  How wrong they are.  America has been under a constant attack since 1979 and we chose to hit the snooze alarm and roll over and go back to sleep.  In the news lately we have seen lots of finger pointing from every high official in government over what they knew and what they didn't know.  But if you've read the papers and paid a little attention I think you can see exactly what they knew.  You don't have to be in the FBI or CIA or on the National Security Council to see the pattern that has been developing since 1979.

I think we have been in a war for the past 25 years and it will continue until we as a people decide enough is enough.  America needs to 'Get out of Bed' and act decisively now.  America has been changed forever.  We have to be ready to pay the price and make the sacrifice to ensure our way of life continues.  We cannot afford to keep hitting the snooze button again and again and roll over and go back to sleep.  After the attack on Pearl Harbor, Admiral Yamamoto said '... it seems all we have done is awakened a sleeping giant.'  This is the message we need to disseminate to terrorists around the world.  This is not a political thing to be hashed over in an election year, this is an AMERICAN thing.  This is about our Freedom and the Freedom of our children in years to come.

 

Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat

(Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book, 2010)

Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life.  Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components.  The religious component is a beard for all of the other components.  Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges.  When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well.

Here's how it works:

As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the case in the following countries:

        United States -- Muslim 0.6%

        Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
        Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
        China -- Muslim 1.8%
        Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
        Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in the following countries:

        Denmark -- Muslim 2%

        Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
        United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
        Spain -- Muslim 4%
        Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in the following countries:

        France -- Muslim 8%

        Philippines -- 5%
        Sweden -- Muslim 5%
        Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
        The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
        Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris, we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam, with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections in the following countries:

        Guyana -- Muslim 10%

        India -- Muslim 13.4%
        Israel -- Muslim 16%
        Kenya -- Muslim 10%
        Russia -- Muslim 15%

After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and  Jewish synagogues, such as in the following country:

        Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in these countries:

        Bosnia -- Muslim 40%

        Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
        Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%
 

 From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as these countries:

        Albania -- Muslim 70%

        Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
        Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
        Sudan -- Muslim 70%

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some state-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced  and in some ways is on-going in the following countries:

        Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%

        Egypt -- Muslim 90%
        Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
        Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
        Iran -- Muslim 98%
        Iraq -- Muslim 97%
        Jordan -- Muslim 92%
        Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
        Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
        Palestine -- Muslim 99%
        Syria -- Muslim 90%
        Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
        Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
        United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace. Here there's supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in the following countries:

        Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%

        Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
        Somalia -- Muslim 100%
        Yemen -- Muslim 100%

Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims for a variety of reasons. 

“Before I was nine, I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world, and all of us against the infidel.” -- Leon Uris, The Haj

It is important to understand that in some countries with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts, or schools, or non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend madrasses. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable by death. Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.

Today's 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world's population. But their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world's  population by the end of this century.

Can a good Muslim be a good American?  

This question was forwarded to a friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for 20 years. The following is his reply:

Theologically, no . . . because his allegiance is to Allah, the moon God  of Arabia.

Religiously, no . . . because no other religion is accepted by his Allah except Islam (Quran, 2:256)(Koran).

Scripturally, no . . . because his allegiance is to the five pillars of Islam and the Quran.

Geographically, no . . . because his allegiance is to Mecca, to which he turns in prayer five times a day.

Socially, no . . . because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews.

Politically, no . . . because he must submit to the mullahs (spiritual leaders), who teach the annihilation of Israel and the destruction of America, the great Satan.

Domestically, no . . . because he is instructed to marry four women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34).

Intellectually, no . . . because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles, and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.

Philosophically, no . . . because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic.

Spiritually,  no . . . because when we declare “one nation under God,” the Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in The Quran's 99 excellent names.

They obviously cannot be both “good” Muslims and good Americans.

Can a Muslim be a good soldier???   Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan opened fire at Ft. Hood and killed 13. He is a devout Muslim!

Call it what you wish, it's still the truth. You had better believe it. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country and our future. The religious war is bigger than we know or understand.

Footnote: The Muslims have said they will destroy us from within.

·       Obama appoints two devout Muslims to Homeland Security posts.

·       Obama and Janet Napolitano appoint Arif Alikhan, a devout Muslim, as Assistant Secretary for Policy Development.

·       DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano swore in Kareem Shora, a devout Muslim who was born in Damascus, Syria, as ADC National Executive Director as a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC).

NOTE: Has anyone ever heard a new government official being identified as a devout Catholic, a devout Jew or a devout Protestant?  Just wondering.

 

William Jefferson Clinton on 'FOX News Sunday'

(Fox News, September 24, 2006)

The following is a partial transcript of the Sept. 24, 2006, "FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace":

CHRIS WALLACE: This week [President William Jefferson Clinton] hosted his second annual Global Initiative forum in New York. More than $7 billion was pledged to tackle some of the worst problems in developing countries, such as poverty, disease and climate change.  As part of the conference, Mr. Clinton agreed to his first one-on-one interview ever on "FOX News Sunday." The ground rules were simple: 15 minutes for our sit-down, split evenly between the Global Initiative and anything else we wanted to ask. But as you'll see now in the full, unedited interview, that's not how it turned out.

WALLACE: Mr. President, welcome to "FOX News Sunday."

BILL CLINTON: Thanks.

WALLACE: In a recent issue of the New Yorker you say, quote, "I'm 60 years old and I damn near died, and I'm worried about how many lives I can save before I do die."  Is that what drives you in your effort to help in these developing countries?

CLINTON: Yes, I really — but I don't mean — that sounds sort of morbid when you say it like that. I mean, I actually ...

WALLACE: That's how you said it.

CLINTON: Yes, but the way I said it, the tone in which I said it was actually almost whimsical and humorous. That is, this is what I love to do. It is what I think I should do.  That is, I have had a wonderful life. I got to be president. I got to live the life of my dreams. I dodged a bullet with that heart problem. And I really think I should — I think I owe it to my fellow countrymen and people throughout the world to spend time saving lives, solving problems, helping people see the future.  But as it happens, I love it. I mean, I feel it's a great gift. So, it's a rewarding way to spend my life.

WALLACE: Someone asked you — and I don't want to, again, be too morbid, but this is what you said. He asked you if you could wind up doing more good as a former president than as a president, and you said, "Only if I live a long time."

CLINTON: Yes, that's true.

WALLACE: How do you rate, compare the powers of being in office as president and what you can do out of office as a former president?

CLINTON: Well, when you are president, you can operate on a much broader scope. So, for example, you can simultaneously be trying to stop a genocide in Kosovo and, you know, make peace in the Middle East, pass a budget that gives millions of kids a chance to have afterschool programs and has a huge increase in college aid at home. In other words, you've got a lot of different moving parts, and you can move them all at once.  But you're also more at the mercy of events. That is, President Bush did not run for president to deal with 9/11, but once it happened it wasn't as if he had an option.  Once I looked at the economic- I'll give you a much more mundane example. Once I looked at the economic data, the data after I won the election, I realized that I would have to work much harder to reduce the deficit, and therefore I would have less money in my first year to invest in things I wanted to invest in.

WALLACE: So what is it that you can do as a former president?

CLINTON: So what you can do as a former president is — you don't have the wide range of power, so you have to concentrate on fewer things. But you are less at the mercy of unfolding events.  So if I say, look, we're going to work on the economic empowerment of poor people, on fighting AIDS and other diseases, on trying to bridge the religious and political differences between people, and on trying to, you know, avoid the worst calamities of climate change and help to revitalize the economy in the process, I can actually do that.  I mean, because tomorrow when I get up, if there's a bad headline in the paper, it's President Bush's responsibility, not mine. That's the joy of being a former president. And it is true that if you live long enough and you really have great discipline in the way you do this, like this CGI, you might be able to affect as many lives, or more, for the good as you did as president.

WALLACE: When we announced that you were going to be on "Fox News Sunday," I got a lot of e-mail from viewers. And I've got to say, I was surprised. Most of them wanted me to ask you this question: Why didn't you do more to put bin Laden and Al Qaeda out of business when you were president?  There's a new book out, I suspect you've already read, called "The Looming Tower." And it talks about how the fact that when you pulled troops out of Somalia in 1993, bin Laden said, "I have seen the frailty and the weakness and the cowardice of U.S. troops." Then there was the bombing of the embassies in Africa and the attack on the Cole.

CLINTON: OK, let's just go through that.

WALLACE: Let me — let me — may I just finish the question, sir?  And after the attack, the book says that bin Laden separated his leaders, spread them around, because he expected an attack, and there was no response.  I understand that hindsight is always 20/20. ...

CLINTON: No, let's talk about it.

WALLACE: ... but the question is, why didn't you do more, connect the dots and put them out of business?

CLINTON: OK, let's talk about it. Now, I will answer all those things on the merits, but first I want to talk about the context in which this arises.  I'm being asked this on the FOX network. ABC just had a right- wing conservative run in their little "Pathway to 9/11," falsely claiming it was based on the 9/11 Commission report, with three things asserted against me directly contradicted by the 9/11 Commission report.  And I think it's very interesting that all the conservative Republicans, who now say I didn't do enough, claimed that I was too obsessed with bin Laden. All of President Bush's neo-cons thought I was too obsessed with bin Laden. They had no meetings on bin Laden for nine months after I left office. All the right-wingers who now say I didn't do enough said I did too much- same people.  They were all trying to get me to withdraw from Somalia in 1993 the next day after we were involved in "Black Hawk down," and I refused to do it and stayed six months and had an orderly transfer to the United Nations.  OK, now let's look at all the criticisms: Black Hawk down, Somalia. There is not a living soul in the world who thought that Usama bin Laden had anything to do with Black Hawk down or was paying any attention to it or even knew Al Qaeda was a growing concern in October of '93.

WALLACE: I understand, and I ...

CLINTON: No, wait. No, wait. Don't tell me this — you asked me why didn't I do more to bin Laden. There was not a living soul. All the people who now criticize me wanted to leave the next day.  You brought this up, so you'll get an answer, but you can't ...

WALLACE: I'm perfectly happy to.   CLINTON: All right, secondly ...   WALLACE: Bin Laden says ...   CLINTON: Bin Laden may have said ...   WALLACE: ... bin Laden says that it showed the weakness of the United States.

CLINTON: But it would've shown the weakness if we'd left right away, but he wasn't involved in that. That's just a bunch of bull. That was about Mohammed Adid, a Muslim warlord, murdering 22 Pakistani Muslim troops. We were all there on a humanitarian mission. We had no mission, none, to establish a certain kind of Somali government or to keep anybody out.  He was not a religious fanatic...

WALLACE: But, Mr. President ...   CLINTON: ... there was no Al Qaeda ...   WALLACE: ... with respect, if I may, instead of going through '93 and ...   CLINTON: No, no. You asked it. You brought it up. You brought it up.   WALLACE: May I ask a general question and then you can answer?   CLINTON: Yes.   WALLACE: The 9/11 Commission, which you've talk about — and this is what they did say, not what ABC pretended they said ...   CLINTON: Yes, what did they say?

WALLACE: ... they said about you and President Bush, and I quote, "The U.S. government took the threat seriously, but not in the sense of mustering anything like the kind of effort that would be gathered to confront an enemy of the first, second or even third rank."

CLINTON: First of all, that's not true with us and bin Laden.

WALLACE: Well, I'm telling you that's what the 9/11 Commission says.

CLINTON: All right. Let's look at what Richard Clarke said. Do you think Richard Clarke has a vigorous attitude about bin Laden?

WALLACE: Yes, I do.  CLINTON: You do, don't you?

WALLACE: I think he has a variety of opinions and loyalties, but yes, he has a vigorous ...

CLINTON: He has a variety of opinion and loyalties now, but let's look at the facts: He worked for Ronald Reagan; he was loyal to him. He worked for George H. W. Bush; he was loyal to him. He worked for me, and he was loyal to me. He worked for President Bush; he was loyal to him.  They downgraded him and the terrorist operation.  Now, look what he said, read his book and read his factual assertions — not opinions — assertions. He said we took vigorous action after the African embassies. We probably nearly got bin Laden.

WALLACE: But ...   CLINTON: No, wait a minute.   (CROSSTALK)   WALLACE: ... cruise missiles.

CLINTON: No, no. I authorized the CIA to get groups together to try to kill him.  The CIA, which was run by George Tenet, that President Bush gave the Medal of Freedom to, he said, "He did a good job setting up all these counterterrorism things."  The country never had a comprehensive anti-terror operation until I came there.  Now, if you want to criticize me for one thing, you can criticize me for this: After the Cole, I had battle plans drawn to go into Afghanistan, overthrow the Taliban, and launch a full-scale attack search for bin Laden.  But we needed basing rights in Uzbekistan, which we got after 9/11.  The CIA and the FBI refused to certify that bin Laden was responsible while I was there. They refused to certify. So that meant I would've had to send a few hundred Special Forces in helicopters and refuel at night.  Even the 9/11 Commission didn't do that. Now, the 9/11 Commission was a political document, too. All I'm asking is, anybody who wants to say I didn't do enough, you read Richard Clarke's book.

WALLACE: Do you think you did enough, sir?  CLINTON: No, because I didn't get him.

WALLACE: Right.

CLINTON: But at least I tried. That's the difference in me and some, including all the right-wingers who are attacking me now. They ridiculed me for trying. They had eight months to try. They did not try. I tried.  So I tried and failed. When I failed, I left a comprehensive anti-terror strategy and the best guy in the country, Dick Clarke, who got demoted.  So you did Fox's bidding on this show. You did your nice little conservative hit job on me. What I want to know is ...

WALLACE: Well, wait a minute, sir.  CLINTON: No, wait. No, no ...

WALLACE: I want to ask a question. You don't think that's a legitimate question?

CLINTON: It was a perfectly legitimate question, but I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked this question of.  I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked, "Why didn't you do anything about the Cole?"  I want to know how many you asked, "Why did you fire Dick Clarke?"  I want to know how many people you asked ...

WALLACE: We asked — we asked ...   CLINTON: I don't ...   WALLACE: Do you ever watch "FOX News Sunday," sir?   CLINTON: I don't believe you asked them that.   WALLACE: We ask plenty of questions of ...   CLINTON: You didn't ask that, did you? Tell the truth, Chris.   WALLACE: About the USS Cole?   CLINTON: Tell the truth, Chris.

WALLACE: With Iraq and Afghanistan, there's plenty of stuff to ask.

CLINTON: Did you ever ask that?  You set this meeting up because you were going to get a lot of criticism from your viewers because Rupert Murdoch's supporting my work on climate change.  And you came here under false pretenses and said that you'd spend half the time talking about — you said you'd spend half the time talking about what we did out there to raise $7-billion-plus in three days from 215 different commitments. And you don't care.

WALLACE: But, President Clinton, if you look at the questions here, you'll see half the questions are about that. I didn't think this was going to set you off on such a tear.

CLINTON: You launched it — it set me off on a tear because you didn't formulate it in an honest way and because you people ask me questions you don't ask the other side.

WALLACE: That's not true. Sir, that is not true.

CLINTON: And Richard Clarke made it clear in his testimony...

WALLACE: Would you like to talk about the Clinton Global Initiative?

CLINTON: No, I want to finish this now.  WALLACE: All right. Well, after you.

CLINTON: All I'm saying is, you falsely accused me of giving aid and comfort to bin Laden because of what happened in Somalia. No one knew Al Qaeda existed then. And ...

WALLACE: But did they know in 1996 when he declared war on the U.S.? Did they know in 1998 ...

CLINTON: Absolutely, they did.  WALLACE: ... when he bombed the two embassies?

CLINTON: And who talked about ...  WALLACE: Did they know in 2000 when he hit the Cole?

CLINTON: What did I do? What did I do? I worked hard to try to kill him. I authorized a finding for the CIA to kill him. We contracted with people to kill him. I got closer to killing him than anybody has gotten since. And if I were still president, we'd have more than 20,000 troops there trying to kill him.  Now, I've never criticized President Bush, and I don't think this is useful. But you know we do have a government that thinks Afghanistan is only one-seventh as important as Iraq.  And you ask me about terror and Al Qaeda with that sort of dismissive thing? When all you have to do is read Richard Clarke's book to look at what we did in a comprehensive, systematic way to try to protect the country against terror.  And you've got that little smirk on your face and you think you're so clever. But I had responsibility for trying to protect this country. I tried and I failed to get bin Laden. I regret it. But I did try. And I did everything I thought I responsibly could.  The entire military was against sending Special Forces in to Afghanistan and refueling by helicopter. And no one thought we could do it otherwise, because we could not get the CIA and the FBI to certify that Al Qaeda was responsible while I was president.  And so, I left office. And yet, I get asked about this all the time. They had three times as much time to deal with it, and nobody ever asks them about it. I think that's strange.

WALLACE: Can I ask you about the Clinton Global Initiative?  CLINTON: You can.

WALLACE: I always intended to, sir.

CLINTON: No, you intended, though, to move your bones by doing this first, which is perfectly fine. But I don't mind people asking me — I actually talked to the 9/11 Commission for four hours, Chris, and I told them the mistakes I thought I made. And I urged them to make those mistakes public, because I thought none of us had been perfect.  But instead of anybody talking about those things, I always get these clever little political yields (ph), where they ask me one-sided questions. And the other guys notice that. And it always comes from one source. And so ...

WALLACE: And ...   CLINTON: And so ...   WALLACE: I just want to ask you about the Clinton Global Initiative, but what's the source? I mean, you seem upset, and I ...   CLINTON: I am upset because ...   WALLACE: And all I can say is, I'm asking you this in good faith because it's on people's minds, sir. And I wasn't ...

CLINTON: Well, there's a reason it's on people's minds. That's the point I'm trying to make. There's a reason it's on people's minds: Because there's been a serious disinformation campaign to create that impression.  This country only has one person who's worked on this terror. From the terrorist incidents under Reagan to the terrorist incidents from 9/11, only one: Richard Clarke.  And all I can say to anybody is, you want to know what we did wrong or right, or anybody else did? Read his book.  The people on my political right who say I didn't do enough spent the whole time I was president saying, "Why is he so obsessed with bin Laden? That was "wag the dog" when he tried to kill him."  My Republican secretary of defense — and I think I'm the only president since World War II to have a secretary of defense of the opposite party — Richard Clarke and all the intelligence people said that I ordered a vigorous attempt to get bin Laden and came closer, apparently, than anybody has since.

WALLACE: All right.

CLINTON: And you guys try to create the opposite impression, when all you have to do is read Richard Clarke's findings and you know it's not true. It's just not true.  And all this business about Somalia — the same people who criticized me about Somalia were demanding I leave the next day. The same exact crowd.

WALLACE: One of the ...   CLINTON: And so, if you're going to do this, for God's sake, follow the same standards for everybody ...   WALLACE: I think we do, sir.   CLINTON: ... and be flat- and fair.

WALLACE: I think we do. ... One of the main parts of the Global Initiative this year is religion and reconciliation. President Bush says that the fight against Islamic extremism is the central conflict of this century. And his answer is promoting democracy and reform.  Do you think he has that right?

CLINTON: Sure. To advance — to advocate democracy and reform in the Muslim world? Absolutely.  I think the question is, what's the best way to do it? I think also the question is, how do you educate people about democracy?  Democracy is about way more than majority rule. Democracy is about minority rights, individual rights, restraints on power. And there's more than one way to advance democracy.  But do I think, on balance, that in the end, after several bouts with instability — look how long it took us to build a mature democracy. Do I think, on balance, it would be better if we had more freedom and democracy? Sure I do. And do I think specifically the president has a right to do it? Sure I do.  But I don't think that's all we can do in the Muslim world. I think they have to see us as trying to get a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. I think they have to see us as willing to talk to people who see the world differently than we do.

WALLACE: Last year at this conference, you got $2.5 billion in commitments, pledges. How'd you do this year?

CLINTON: Well, this year we had — we had $7.3 billion, as of this morning. 

WALLACE: Excuse me?

CLINTON: $7.3 billion, as of this morning. But $3 billion of that is — now, this is over multi years. These are up to 10-year commitments.  But $3 billion of that came from Richard Branson's commitment to give all of his transportation profits for a decade to clean energy investments. But still, that's — the rest is over $4 billion.  And we will have another 100 commitments come in, maybe more, and we'll probably raise another, I would say, at least another billion dollars, probably, before it's over. We've got a lot of commitments still in process.

WALLACE: When you look at the $3 billion from Branson, plus the billions that Bill Gates is giving in his own program, and now Warren Buffet, what do you make of this new age of philanthropy?

CLINTON: I think that, for one thing, really rich people have always given money away. I mean, you know, they've endowed libraries and things like that.  The unique thing about this age is, first of all, you have a lot of people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet who are interested in issues at home and around the world that grow out of the nature of the 21st century and its inequalities — the income inequalities, the health-care inequalities, the education inequalities.  And you get a guy like Gates, who built Microsoft, who actually believes that he can help overcome a lot of the health disparities in the world. And that's the first thing.  The second thing that ought to be credited is that there are a lot of people with average incomes who are joining them because of the Internet. Like in the tsunami, for example, we had $1.2 billion given by Americans; 30 percent of our households gave money, over half of them over the Internet.  And then the third thing is you've got all these- in poor countries, you've got all these nongovernmental groups that you can- that a guy like Gates can partner with, along with the governments.  So all these things together mean that people with real money want to give it away in ways that help people that before would've been seen only as the object of government grants or loans.

WALLACE: Let's talk some politics. In that same New Yorker article, you say that you are tired of Karl Rove's B.S., although I'm cleaning up what you said.

CLINTON: But I do like the — but I also say I'm not tired of Karl Rove. I don't blame Karl Rove. If you've got a deal that works, you just keep on doing it.

WALLACE: So what is the B.S.?

CLINTON: Well, every even-numbered year, right before an election, they come up with some security issue.  In 2002, our party supported them in undertaking weapons inspections in Iraq and was 100 percent for what happened in Afghanistan, and they didn't have any way to make us look like we didn't care about terror.  And so, they decided they would be for the homeland security bill that they had opposed. And they put a poison pill in it that we wouldn't pass, like taking the job rights away from 170,000 people, and then say that we were weak on terror if we weren't for it. They just ran that out.  This year, I think they wanted to make the questions of prisoner treatment and intercepted communications the same sort of issues, until John Warner and John McCain and Lindsey Graham got in there. And, as it turned out, there were some Republicans that believed in the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions and had some of their own ideas about how best to fight terror.

The Democrats- as long as the American people believe that we take this seriously and we have our own approaches- and we may have differences over Iraq- I think we'll do fine in this election.  But even if they agree with us about the Iraq war, we could be hurt by Karl Rove's new foray if we just don't make it clear that we, too, care about the security of the country. But we want to implement the 9/11 Commission recommendations, which they haven't for four years. We want to intensify our efforts in Afghanistan against bin Laden. We want to make America more energy-independent.  And then they can all, if they differ on Iraq, they can say whatever they want on Iraq.  But Rove is good. And I honor him. I mean, I will say that. I've always been amused about how good he is, in a way.  But on the other hand, this is perfectly predictable: We're going to win a lot of seats if the American people aren't afraid. If they're afraid and we get divided again, then we may only win a few seats.

WALLACE: And the White House, the Republicans want to make the American people afraid?

CLINTON: Of course they do. Of course they do. They want us to be — they want another homeland security deal. And they want to make it about — not about Iraq but about some other security issue, where, if we disagree with them, we are, by definition, imperiling the security of the country.  And it's a big load of hooey. We've got nine Iraq war veterans running for the House seats. We've got President Reagan's secretary of the navy as the Democratic candidate for the Senate in Virginia. A three-star admiral, who was on my National Security Council staff, who also fought terror, by the way, is running for the seat of Kurt Weldon in Pennsylvania.  We've got a huge military presence here in this campaign. And we just can't let them have some rhetorical device that puts us in a box we don't belong in.  That's their job. Their job is to beat us. I like that about Rove. But our job is not to let them get away with it. And if they don't, then we'll do fine.

WALLACE: Mr. President, thank you for one of the more unusual interviews.

CLINTON: Thanks.