2 Students Heckle Bill Clinton at University-Call Him A "War Criminal"?

Today: March 06, 2006 at 7:46:29 PST

2 Students Heckle Clinton at University

ASSOCIATED PRESS

PLEASANTVILLE, N.Y. (AP) - Two Pace University students were questioned by Secret Service officers after they heckled former President Clinton during a speech at the school, a university spokesman said.

The hecklers shouted "war criminal" when Clinton answered a law student's question about the value of working for peace, Pace spokesman Christopher T. Cory said.

The outburst came at the end of a speech Sunday in which the former president was applauded by the crowd of about 1,800, Cory said.

The two students were asked to leave by local police, then were questioned by the Secret Service and released, Cory said. Their identities were not released.

During his speech, Clinton urged stricter security measures at the nation's ports.

"I still really can't believe we only check five percent of our containers at all the ports in America, when we've had now for four years a study saying that unless we do 10 to 20 percent, there's no deterrent effect at all," he said.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/news/2006/mar/06/030602738.html

Sure puts a nail in all those claims that our universities are all a bunch of bastions of liberalism, doesn't it?

that would have been hysterical. He would have made them look even dumber than they did on their own.

He's a master at expressing himself in non-threatening language. That really makes a freeper's blood pressure skyrocket.

I suggest they mosy down to the Army Recruiting Office and find out about war crimes up close and personal. But they'd have to have testicles to do that.

They yell at everyone.

and the audience was not screened or hand-picked. Can you imagine what it would be like if * went before a "real" audience? This shouldn't be news. This is how it used to be before the current regime.

But I guess they wouldn't have the guts to debate their notion.
Chickenhawks. :puke:

How could Clinton be a war criminal if:

A - he's not the president (and has not been for six years, contrary to what the Fox "News" and AM radio idiots tell us)

B - He's not the commander-in-chief or serving in the army, which would mean he would have to be in order to be constituted a "war criminal".

Dumbasses!!! :nuke:

accountable.

Hell, by that logic, A man who kills his wife is no longer an abuser. After all, he isn't even married anymore!

Bush has so far killed far, far more people under his command in six years than Clinton did in 8.

It's more than the deadly sanctions (and bombings) on Iraq. It would be swell if US politics were divided between Democratic good guys (and women) the Repubs (booo... hissssss), like some kind of ol' time play, but unfortunately, that ain't the way it works.

With this kind of thinking, I would not doubt that many DU'ers think there were no US troops in Vietnam before Nixon took office.

That is why we need to work really hard for an end to the Iraq war (meaning immediate withdrawal) and an end to US belligerence. It looks like too many dems want an end of the Iraq war so they can start one against Iran. &$&^%%^!! that!

In the war in Kosovo and Serbia, he called for the bombing of Serbian Orthodox churches on our Easter, our absolute holiest of days and a day when they'd be full. The really odd thing is that the Serbian Patriarch was an ally and constantly called for the killing to stop.

What really burns the Orthodox Christians about it is that he'd just refrained from any and all bombing in Iraq during Ramadan.

Remember the initial "Shock And Awe" campaign that started in 2002 that initially led to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? And how it started within a couple weeks of guess which holiday? That's right, Easter.

So to repeat (with emphasis): WHAT BUSH IS DOING IS NO DIFFERENT.

I would never argue with that. Bush and Gang have committed so many atrocities that it's hard to even keep track of them all, but I know some Orthodox Christians, committed Dems, who would consider yelling at Clinton as well. They wouldn't do it, but they'd think about it.

.... what with having to rationalize all their and Smirky's screw-ups.

So two kids is all they could afford to pay this time.

Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it.

I know people would like to think differently about what came before Bush, whose quest for expanding empire is not at all as subtle as his predecessor. However the killing of Iraqis, the war on the world's poor through unfair trade agreements, all this is not something we should be nostalgic for.

We need a new direction, and a whole new foreign policy.

No excuse for the sanctions.

While * is openly trying to start WW3, the Clinton administration has blood on its hands as well.

Sorrows of Empire.

but he certainly was not.

And despite what some previous posters assume, I can almost guarantee that these were NOT republicans. I was protesting the sanctions in the 1990s and I am certainly no Republican.

Peace!

agreed, sanctions killed more innocent people than just about anything. It's asinine to think that that would somehow punish the country's leaders.

I'm itchin' to Google! :)

expanding the market share of the Democratic Party.
You know the type.

But you could be right. Not everyone on the left has agreed with every one of Clinton's decisions...

Gosh, Free Speech was allowed.

Two protesters out of the whole student body? Not bad at all.

I am certainly not a Republican and I protested the Iraq sanctions under Clinton in the 90s. I am guessing that's what these folks were referring to :shrug:

He told our pilots to bomb churches on Orthodox Easter--when the churches would normally be full--but didn't bomb anywhere in Iraq during Ramadan. I know a lot of people still very angry about that--good Dems who don't respect Clinton anymore because of that.

I think it is really important to hold Dems to the same standards we would anyone else...sometimes the truth hurts but we have to start with the truth before we can make anything better.

Peace!

It's too easy to just dismiss any attacks as partisan rather than take a look to see if there's any truth in there.

May we all be blessed with peace in our lifetimes.

but these days I would be a little surprised to see Democrats go to such lengths to harass him when the environment for voiced political outrage is so target rich with real adversaries.

Your points are well taken, however.

They're spitting mad at Bush and Gang, but they're still quite sore at what Clinton did, too. It's not something they'd start yelling at him for, though. That doesn't sound like them.

Check out the message below Cindy Sheehan's picture. This must be discredit a Democrat Day.


?


Check out the Clinton war criminal reference at the bottom. Maybe the Secret Service needs to investigate this?

and that's the moment they call him a "war criminal." :eyes:

Let's see them cry like little babies at the thought.

If they were true to form they would be selling info to the highest bidder; locations of American forces, strengths, weaknesses, etc. Whatever they thought they could make a buck on. Not a pretty picture.

I know we're in the age of night is day and day is night, where the "Clean Air Act" really means polluted air, and "No Child Left Behind" really means no rich, white kid gets left behind, and "liberating" a country, really means invading and occupying a country, and "Fair and Balanced" really means right-wing propaganda, and the "Help America Vote Act really means the vote will be hacked ...

but if you're going to rag on Clinton, stick to Monica jokes because we all know who the real war criminal is:

They do tend to love Milosevic, after all.

who died under the Iraq sanctions that Clinton supported.

Peace.

Never a mention of the victims of the Milosevic or North Korea, and the like.

Workers World even came out in defense of the Tiananmen Square Massacre.

How do you know what these people's intentions are? It's easier to judge people when you compartmentalize them, but there are more than 2 ways of looking at things.

I say this as someone who protested Clinton's support of the Iraq sanctions, who had issues with the way he handled Kosovo. Do you want to tell me how much I love Milosevic? Because I will tell you that you're wrong. And I will tell you that I hold politicians to the same standards whether they are Democrat or Republican.

Write me off as a Ramsey-Clark-loving ANSWER freak if it makes it easier for you.

Peace.

A use of force that was not authorized by the Congress, nor the U.N. Security Council and which occured outside the geographical borders and authority of NATO.

If we don't adhere to the spirit of the law then it means nothing.

I just registered after doing a search on the internet for the protest.

I was one of the students who called out former president clinton rightly for what he is: a war criminal. I called him for his actions in Iraq, Sudan, Bosnia, Columbia and many other places around the world. Including his miserable INaction in Rwanda. Had I the chance before the police came over to me, I would have called him out on his trade agreement catastrophes and domestic policies also.

I am not a right-wing fanatic. I am a dedicated left-wing, anti-war, student activist. People who only call out republican presidents on their atrocities should be ashamed on themselves. Such people have no right to call themselves anti-war activists or progressives. The most fundamental cause of every war is Profit.

I have to strongly agree with Bridget Burke: "How many would heckle "Our President" if they were allowed within shouting distance?" My answer: I sure as hell would. But I also have no problem calling out former presidents on their war crimes also.

I will be doing a press release by tomorrow. I'll include a copy or a link to a copy on here also.

-Brian


Why did I call Clinton a War Criminal? Because he is and he came to my school. If bush had came to my school I would have enjoyed it just as much (and I am sure my SS interrogation would have been MUCH longer). BUT as it relates to Iraqis in particular, between the bombings and sanctions, Bill Clinton killed a million of them. George Bush might be working his way up to that level (he might very possibly it it), but he's not there yet.

On other issues I agree George Bush is much worse. But for the record I am part of the Campus Antiwar Network and various other student and progressive groups. This was not an "isolated" event.

Any one that wants to see the video: http://www.leftist.ws/media/clintonwarcriminal.swf

I will post the one that shows me shouting when I get it. We were on ABC and Fox news so far. And the front page of Yahoo.com

More information to follow!

-Brian

NEVER FORGET: Sanctions on Iraq, Bombings in Iraq, Sudan, Extermination in Rwanda, Bombings in Bosnia, NAFTA

I'm not really in your corner on this one, but if you'd like I'll start a new thread for fresh discussion on this issue and for you to handle the questions I'm sure will come your way.

Welcome to DU.

I would definitely like to debate this in a new thread. Its regrettable how people on this site rush to use derogatory names such as "FReeper". I HATE the free republic and I am a lot more left than most people on this site. Also the "send them" to iraq rhetoric smacks of right wing conservatism.

-Brian

http://www.leftist.ws/media/clintonwarcriminal.swf

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2497883

I placed it in GD: politics. You should go, check in and introduce yourself.

Thanks! :-)

I am the other student who did the action. My name is Lauren.

I find it shameful that so-called progressives are bashing two student activists for doing what they believed was right. I fully stand by my actions.

I'm a member of a radical group called SDS. Some of you may remember it from the 60's. It has re-started. Not that I have to prove my "leftness" to any of you but I am as far left as it gets. Not only will I protest George Bush or Bill Clinton but I will confront any injustice that I see, regardless if its against the status quo or not.

The issue I have with many politically minded people, such as yourselves, is that you believe that only one party is to blame and only one party is worth protesting. You conveniently forget that Democrats voted for the Iraq war and for the Patriot Act. You conveniently forget that it was a Democratic President who signed NAFTA and GATT into law. It's not just Republicans, its not just Democrats. They are merely symptoms of a larger issue: the SYSTEM.


Thank you though to those on this site who do support our action, it's appreciated.


-Lauren

:eyes:

And honestly, "so-called progressives"? I love having my progressive credentials called into question because I happen not to think that shouting slogans at the top of your lungs while being dragged away by security is the best way to effect change.

Just out of curiosity, did you two vote in 2004?

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

For having the brain, heart and balls to follow through with this.

Care for a joke?

Many of the self-described liberals on my campus fawn over Bill Clinton, who, in his eight year tenure, presided over more military interventions than almost any other president, drove the definitive stake through the heart of the New Deal (by way of Welfare Deform, er...Reform), and nourished the prison-industrial complex.

Many self-described conservatives are quite enamored with George W. Bush, who, in his five years, has demonstrated a profound lust for foreign adventurism, has greatly expanded the federal government (more than any chief executive since LBJ, I believe), and seems intent on wedding Church to State.

Now, if I didn't know any better, I'd say labels don't mean much of anything; I dare say these Medusa's Heads swear fealty to no one but the corporate teat.