Proof that Clinton did a better job on terror than Bush

[Seeker30]

Clinton was in office for 8 years, it has not even been 4 years for Bush. There was no 'war on terror' under Clinton, yet look at these facts on al-Qaida terror.

Under 8 years of Clinton there were 13 successful al-Qaida terror attacks throughout the world, and another 12 that was prevented.

Under less than 4 years of Bush there have been 18 al-Qaida attacks with 16 of them happening after 9/11. THERE HAVE BEEN ONLY 4 PREVENTED ATTACKS UNDER BUSH.

A chart of this can be found at
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5961838/
halfway down the page.

Bush has been completely ineffective at stopping al-Qaida and yet has spent billions and the full military. Someone explain why people think this is his strong point.

[havocmom]

1. Good question, Seeker30

That would make a mighty fine LTTE. You ever think of sending it off to your local papers? We gotta get this info out to those who don't read the DU (yet!)

[Seeker30]

5. Good idea but...

I think its stuff like this that Kerry needs to attack Bush on. All the Kerry commercials I've seen so far seems to focus on the economy but every poll shows people are concerned with terrorism more so than anything else.

[lapfog_1]

2. Because he SAYS so

and so does the entire corporate media.

We have truly entered Orwellian times. Lies, repeated often
enough, are truth. And the sheeple believe them. Unfortunately,
educating the public is ofter very difficult... there is a *lot*
of wool to cut through.

[Catherine Vincent]

3. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

Clinton did a better job of everything compared to Chimpy!

[mr_du04]

4. Thats what I keep telling

the few repukes I work with but, they yammer on how it was Clinton's failures that led up to 9-11 they just can't see beyond what Sean Savage Limbaugh says. SOme people can't be saved I suppose.