May 8th, 2014
05:17 PM ET
5 months ago

Clinton's handling of Boko Haram questioned

Washington (CNN) - Hindsight is 20/20, they say, but some people may need backwards-looking glasses in debating whether the State Department under Hillary Clinton erred two years ago by not designating Boko Haram a terrorist group.

The question arose Thursday as part of the international focus on last month's abduction of more than 200 schoolgirls by the jihadist group in northeast Nigeria that threatens to sell them into slavery.

FULL STORY


Filed under: Hillary Clinton • State Department
soundoff (60 Responses)
  1. kevin

    Pantsuit was a horrible Secertary of State. Remember liberals, she was also on the board of anti-union Wal Mart, too

    May 8, 2014 07:55 pm at 7:55 pm |
  2. Ryan Farnham

    Seems like the republitards have no new ammo so they are digging up old crap and trying to use that, they are desperate because they know they are dinosaurs in a modern era, we can't catch up with the rest of the world and have nice things and be modern with them in charge and people are starting to realise it! Gone are the days of old.

    May 8, 2014 07:55 pm at 7:55 pm |
  3. SaraD

    I have to say that I am proud of CNN for making this news. I did not think CNN had it in them to post a truth about their choice for president.

    May 8, 2014 07:58 pm at 7:58 pm |
  4. Uncle Sam

    Sadly, yes a typical response we have come to expect

    May 8, 2014 08:08 pm at 8:08 pm |
  5. Gunderson

    Hmm, What's That You Say?,
    Those that don't do anything wrong don't do anything. But, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE!! This is just another assessment of the Obama Administration. Instead of doing things the president need to do Obama was out Campaigning 24-7. The screw up's are piling up. Welcome to the Club.

    May 8, 2014 08:32 pm at 8:32 pm |
  6. Rick McDaniel

    Perhaps the "mishandling" would be a far better word to describe it.

    May 8, 2014 08:32 pm at 8:32 pm |
  7. bart hooliman

    I guess they are not considered terrorists for only killing Christians.

    May 8, 2014 08:33 pm at 8:33 pm |
  8. 1776usa2016

    Boko Haram hadn't abducted any schoolgirls until WAY AFTER Clinton's term.

    In fact they weren't even much of a nuisance back then. They are now, but not back then.

    .

    May 8, 2014 08:36 pm at 8:36 pm |
  9. Kendall

    So

    So if they were identified as a terrorist group, then we should have started yet another "unfunded/off-the-books" war with them? Is that all the GOP want to do?
    ********************************************************
    Terrorist status would have enabled assets to be frozen among many other measures,it is possible that this situation may not have taken place. But then again..."What difference does it make at this point"

    May 8, 2014 08:39 pm at 8:39 pm |
  10. Edwin

    Clearly they are terrorist now, and I would bet they were terrorist-leaning then. But information may not have been available, and it is also possible that they had not actually done nasty things then. That is why we need to continually update databases.

    May 8, 2014 08:44 pm at 8:44 pm |
  11. Terry Gonzales

    Wierd. Former sec of state shown to be totally clueless and everyone on trying to defend her? What if h&r block said you'd get a refund, then you find out you really owe money?

    May 8, 2014 08:45 pm at 8:45 pm |
  12. ED1

    Just like her husband but worse.

    May 8, 2014 09:00 pm at 9:00 pm |
  13. The other guy

    The jigs up fellas. You've been pegged as the mouth piece for the Tea Party!

    May 8, 2014 09:00 pm at 9:00 pm |
  14. dajowi

    Well if it walks like a islamic terrorist and quacks like a islamic terrorist it must be labeled anything but. Clinton and Obama are making a grave mistake.

    May 8, 2014 09:01 pm at 9:01 pm |
  15. Freedom Storm

    What else do we need to know about Hitlary? She successfully fought to have Boko kept OFF the terrorist lists.

    May 8, 2014 09:12 pm at 9:12 pm |
  16. S. B. Stein

    No matter what had been done, it wouldn't have changed what happened recently. If these people are unwilling to consider any "Western education," then these people shouldn't be using any modern weapons. These people are hypocrites.

    May 8, 2014 09:25 pm at 9:25 pm |
  17. Winston Smith

    With the help of our illustrious press, we're going to be witness to one of the rottenest, most despicable campaigns in recent history. No one is going to be safe from the mud slinging of the republicans, attempting to gain control of the nation. Before it's over we'll all be sick of politicians. Get ready, it's coming.

    May 8, 2014 09:35 pm at 9:35 pm |
  18. Cindy

    That is not what President Jonathan wanted at the time. Part of the reason why he has been so ineffectual in combating BH is because he wanted more than anything a peaceful dialect and to build a bridge between Muslim and Christian faiths in somehow trying to unite Nigeria. He did not want the country divided and many northern leaders already felt they had an ax to grind with Jonathan because they felt he should not be entitled to be president because he was a southern Christian.

    Jonathan also further empathized with the young,, severely poor vulnerable men who were easy targets for recruitment with BH leaders. These young people knew nothing other than extreme poverty all their lives. Boko Haram gave them a home, a family of sorts that they never knew living in the brush country of northeastern Nigeria.

    Jonathan would have done anything to further avoid dividing the country. He caved often times when most felt he should not by releasing BH prisoners from jail or by paying families of lost BH leaders. He repeatedly tried peaceful dialect while BH grew in strength, support and power all the while feeling more emboldened with each and every successful attempt to disrupt the country and make it ungovernable.

    It had nothing to do with Hillary, it was Jonathan's decission as the president of a sovereign nation.

    May 8, 2014 09:59 pm at 9:59 pm |
  19. Cindy

    It had nothing to do with Hillary. It was Jonathan's decission to make as president of a sovereign nation.

    May 8, 2014 10:01 pm at 10:01 pm |
  20. Scott

    Hilary had MANY accomplishments as Secretary of State

    May 8, 2014 10:04 pm at 10:04 pm |
  21. Tom l

    I'm wondering if that was the look on her face when she sternly told the father of the fallen navy seal at his funeral days after the attack that we were going to arrest the man that made the video (on tax evasion)

    May 8, 2014 10:10 pm at 10:10 pm |
  22. TheHighForester

    Boko Haram does NOT have its roots in Al-Qaeda. It is an indigenous Nigerian movement which is the successor to the famous Sultan of Sokoto, Usuman dan Fodio, who led the "Fulani Jihad" more than two centuries ago. Usuman dan Fodio and his son, Mohammed Bello, were regarded as outstanding Islamic scholars whose influence stretches all across North and West Africa.

    The Netanyahu government in Israel, which tightly controls Republican Party foreign policy, finds it convenient to lump all fundamental Islamists with Al-Qaeda, because that is simple enough for idiots like Ted Cruz to understand, and because milking American fears of terrorist attack keeps the money flowing into the Israeli treasury. Unfortunately that also leads the US government to make some very basic mistakes in dealing with these diverse peoples.

    May 8, 2014 10:18 pm at 10:18 pm |
  23. ohioan

    The ethically impaired GOP can't run on the important issues facing the country, so this is what we get. I smell Karl Rove and the swift-boaters.

    May 8, 2014 10:22 pm at 10:22 pm |
  24. Wake Up People! Many Rivers to cross.....

    Lord have mercy. Now Hillary is responsible for THIS?? Oh yes indeed, they are terrified of her.😆

    May 8, 2014 10:54 pm at 10:54 pm |
  25. Ted Cruz's gloryhole

    Did any Republican utter the words "Boko Haram" before the kidnapping?

    May 8, 2014 10:55 pm at 10:55 pm |
1 2 3