Reprinted from Jan 23, 2009
In the made for television movie about the events leading to 9/11 that played over a year ago on ABC, much of the drama had to do with failure to stop Osama bin Laden before the 9/11 attacks. You can see the frustration of the military people with the terrorist mastermind in their sights, as they wait for permission from Washington to pull the trigger. You can see the uncertainty as a sweaty Clinton bureaucrat hesitates, finally letting the opportunity go by. As the television drama demonstrates, Osama lived and so thousands died on American soil. It happened almost exactly that way.
Almost.
Except it was not Clinton’s people who backed down from attacking bin Laden. It was the Bush administration. ABC had turned research for the drama over to a conservative ideologue who made the conscious decision to turn history on its head. Bill Clinton was shown as weak and clueless. President Bush was shown as unflinchingly heroic.
With the harsh memory of that administration not even beginning to fade into merciful obscurity, the distortions of loyalists begin. Viral emails, occasional television commentary, radio and print, carry a repetition of the familiar tale. President Clinton was weak, indecisive, letting bin Laden go, and leaving President Bush to face the consequence of near criminal negligence.
In fact, President Clinton was mocked during his term by Republicans who thought his focus on terrorism was obsessive.
In an article published almost exactly two months before the 9/11 attacks, David Keane, head of the Conservative Union, pointed to specific anti-terrorism activities by the Clinton administration. He regarded everything from financial tracking to cut off funds to terrorists, to efforts within the United States to find and stop terrorism before it happens as unjustified infringements. He praised Republican statements opposing anti-terrorist actions, and urged Republicans to make these useless activities a major campaign issue in 2002 and beyond. President Clinton more than tripled funding for fighting terrorism. He multiplied the number of intelligence agents assigned to stopping terrorism by similar proportions, to 357 percent of what had been.
He and his people begged the new Bush administration to continue and expand those efforts. Their pleas were laughed away, with tragic results. Anti-terrorist budgets were slashed, agents reassigned to anti-porn projects, CIA warnings derided.
I don’t blame President Bush for disregarding the warnings, and discontinuing efforts by the Clinton administration against terrorism. He did not know, did not suspect what would happen. The Bush administration regarded Clinton as a little crazed on the topic of terrorism.
I do object to the continuing efforts of some sweaty palmed conservatives for whom the truth is just not good enough.