Rating: 
Summary: This guy is dead on!
Review: 8 years of Clinton irresponsibility is what inevitably brought us 9/11. Clinton even had Bin Laden in his sights... live, real-time spy video in 2000, way before the elections. And Clinton did absolutely nothing.Watch the video: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4540958/
Rating:
Summary: Star System -- Schmar System
Review: Like the one star raters -- fakers, liars and dopes, I have not read this Book ! But I liked the author interview and so am buying it. Until amazon puts some kind of Proof of Purchase requirement on the ability to review a book, I'll give all the books I am buying five stars so as to average out at least one of the liars. Review to follow.
Rating: 
Summary: Bush really lost Bin Laden
Review: Clinton foiled at least a dozen known terrorist attacks;
rolled up Al Qaeda cells in 20 countries;
issued a pres. order tossassinate Bin Laden;
struck him at every opportunity Bush had 3 actual verified opportuntites to get Bin Laden in early 2001, but let him get away;
dismantled a 3-pronged force designed to get him;
blocked investigations into all Saudis (15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis);
ignored warnings from 10 different contries' intelligence agencies about 9/11;
knew the who, how, probable where and approximate when of the 9/11 attacks, but did nothing.
and since 9/11, has foiled no verified terrorist plots;
enabled terrorists to get their hands on 'dirty bomb' materials (in this case, nuclear waste) which was stored in Iraq);
and enabled Al Qaeda to spread to five MORE countries. So who should this book _reaaly have been about?
Rating: 
Summary: First WTC Bombing on 26 Feb 1993
Review: Unfortunately the author didn't do sufficient research on the volumes of evidence from the first WTC bombing on Feb 26 1993. Bin Laden was only a disaffected Saudi worker at the time and Al Queda was barely a thought. Hussein was Bin Laden's mentor and idol. Read some more history on the relationship between these two guys. The first WTC attack was planned, financed, and coordinated by Saddam and the Iraqi Intelligence Service. The criminal trial evidence of Ramzi Yousef (thanks to the FBI and CIA who couldn't cooperate until the Patriot Act) overwhelmingly supports this. After having been in office after his inauguration six weeks before, even Bill Clinton knew who was responsible for this attack. Clinton launched several Tomahawk cruise missile attacks on Baghdad in retaliation for this attack. Like most of Clinton's military exploits, this response was a halfhearted, token effort and totally ineffective. Neither Clinton or Gore would ever have the courage and determination to go in and do the job right. Unfortunately NO ONE in the news media has done the least bit of research on this first WTC attack. If the truck bomb had been parked 8 ft closer to the underground garage support column, BOTH towers of the WTC would have collapsed within 3-5 minutes, killing more than 30,000 (ten times the 9/11 deaths). The truck also had canisters of cyanide poison gas (same used in Waco) that could have killed 10-20,000 more people but fortunately for us the gas was incinerated in the blast. This attack involved a Weapon of Mass Destruction, launched at the American homeland by Saddam Hussein's Iraqi Intelligence Service on the second anniversary of the Gulf War surrender. There is no more compelling justification possible for the invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein than this attack 10 years ago. Saddam not a threat to the US? No WMD in Iraq? Where's Bin Laden? Those are all pretty vapid, mindless charges when one seriously examines this pivotal event that is all but ignored and forgotten by Americans. Hopefully the next person who writes about terrorism in the 1990s will do better research and thoroughly investigate the reams of evidence on this first WTC attack.
Rating:
Summary: Rather Disturbing
Review: Richard Miniter has written a very devastating book for the Clinton Administration. In it, he elucidates the plethora of failiures the Administration made with respect to fighting bin Laden's Al Qaeda terrorist network. This is not to say that the Clinton Administration did nothing. It actually acheived some very commendable successes in the secret war against Al Qaeda, the arrest of Ramzi Youssef (mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing) being a prime example. But in reading this book it becomes overwhelmingly evident that the Clinton Administration's policies against the terrorist network were not sufficiently vigorous. Do not read this book to convict Clinton - he was a good man who made some mistakes. Read it to understand the failiures he and his Administration made regarding the strugle against bin Laden, and learn from his mistakes. Regrettably, it is now demonstrably evident that the Bush Administration's approach in dealing with terrorist acts - treating them as acts of war, rather than conventional crimes, is the correct policy. We cannot negotiate with terrorists, nor can we deal with them solely with law enforcement and inditements. We must simply destroy Al Qaeda in its entirety.
Rating:
Summary: A response to buggyhair's comments
Review: If Bush II responded aggressively to Bin Laden by bombing Afghanistan before 9/11 a lot of people including all of the screaming left who love terrorists will rise in protest. Bush wouldn't of gotten the 80% support by the American people after 9/11 if he acted too early. Remember Pearl Harbor and how America got out of the isolationist spider hole after that.
Rating:
Summary: Good research and an important example of failure.
Review: Those who are politically biased won't believe any of the facts in this book but there is plenty of evidence out there, even on the Internet, for those who want to verify these facts for themselves. Those who prefer to blame Bush, who had been President for only 7 months and 2 weeks when 9/11 occurred had hardly had time to lay out a plan for handling the threat, will do so for political reasons; but there is evidence that 9/11 plotters were in this country in 2000 and had at least appeared on the radar of our intelligence services that year. It's well known that Clinton preferred to handle terrorist acts as domestic crimes; this weakened the transfer of information between intelligence agencies. Thank heaven, we've learned from his mistakes; and are making a real effort now to combat terrorism. Strong action in the mid-1990s after the 1993 WTC bombing could have saved many lives.
Rating:
Summary: The Truth = Something Bill Clinton Would Rather you not know
Review: A stunning account of the absolute lack of moral leadership and courage of a man who shamed the entire country while serving in the Office of the Presidency. Mr. Miniter goes into great detail and cites numerous parties, most from within the Clinton Administration, to feverishly drive home his point of how Bill Clinton's lack of any personal integrity to the Oath he swore to uphold, led to the deaths of thousands of Americans, here at home and around the globe. A must read for ALL Americans concerned about matters of national security and for ALL Americans with a desire to know the truth about what a man from Hope did to ruin the Oval Office.
Rating: 
Summary: This is a good read
Review: The author presents a well documented discription of the ineffectual fighting of terrorism by the White House of Bill Clinton. Some of the documentation is "cross checkable" in other books; such as 'Dereliction of Duty" by Robert Patterson, "Off with Their Heads" by Dick Morris, and "Holy War, Inc." While Bin Laden and his network are not totally the result of Bill Clinton and his Staff, probably the greater part is. One point that the author makes is that most of the terrorist are not 'good' muslim believers, but rather profligates; openly drinking alcohol, visiting strip clubs and prositutes, while using 'expendables' to do their dirty work. It is an interesting book.
Rating:
Summary: Only read if open minded
Review: I noticed all of the negative reviews of this book are short, resort to name calling, and attack the author and Republicans. I have read this book, but I doubt that many of those writing this kind of negative review have. This book is well documented and I haven't read any negative reviews that dispute the facts as presented. It's true the author has a point of view and a bias, but that doesn't make the premise of the book wrong. Darwin had a point of view too. Without some solid and substantive rebuttal of the facts as presented in this book, and I haven't been able to find any, it's hard to dispute that the Clinton administration blew it. Whether or not some other administration might have done better is an open issue, and we'll never know.
| 
