Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CLARKE WITNESSED FIRST-HAND THE CLINTONS' UTTER FAILURE TO FIGHT TERRORISM
NRO ^ | September 11, 2003, 11:45 a.m. | Richard Miniter, Kathryn Jean Lopez

Posted on 03/23/2004 3:09:38 AM PST by Mia T

CLARKE WITNESSED FIRST-HAND THE CLINTONS' UTTER FAILURE TO FIGHT TERRORISM

"If Clarke's plan had been implemented,

[i.e., if clinton had responded to the bombing of the USS Cole,
a clear act of war, militarily instead of telephonically!]

al Qaeda's infrastructure would have been demolished and bin Laden might well have been killed.
Sept. 11, 2001 might have been just another sunny day"

[So the real question that requires answering is this:

Why did this legacy-obsessed president
miss a golden opportunity to secure his legacy for all time
by wiping out terrorism,
then in its incipient stage and stoppable?

Was it simple stupidity and lack of vision?

Or was it also that familiar demagogic mix:
cowardice, megalomania...
and the
Nobel Peace Prize?]

 


Lopez: What exactly was U.S. reaction to the attack on the USS Cole?

Miniter: In October 2000, al Qaeda bombed the USS Cole in Aden, Yemen. Seventeen sailors were killed in the blast. The USS Cole was almost sunk. In any ordinary administration, this would have been considered an act of war. After all, America entered the Spanish-American war and World War I when our ships were attacked.

Counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke had ordered his staff to review existing intelligence in relation to the bombing of the USS Cole. After that review, he and Michael Sheehan, the State Department's counterterrorism coordinator, were convinced it was the work of Osama bin Laden. The Pentagon had on-the-shelf, regularly updated and detailed strike plans for bin Laden's training camps and strongholds in Afghanistan.

At a meeting with Secretary of Defense William Cohen, Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Attorney General Janet Reno, and other staffers, Clarke was the only one in favor of retaliation against bin Laden. Reno thought retaliation might violate international law and was therefore against it. Tenet wanted to more definitive proof that bin Laden was behind the attack, although he personally thought he was. Albright was concerned about the reaction of world opinion to a retaliation against Muslims, and the impact it would have in the final days of the Clinton Middle East peace process. Cohen, according to Clarke, did not consider the Cole attack "sufficient provocation" for a military retaliation. Michael Sheehan was particularly surprised that the Pentagon did not want to act. He told Clarke: "What's it going to take to get them to hit al Qaeda in Afghanistan? Does al Qaeda have to attack the Pentagon?"

Instead of destroying bin Laden's terrorist infrastructure and capabilities, President Clinton phoned twice phoned the president of Yemen demanding better cooperation between the FBI and the Yemeni security services.

If Clarke's plan had been implemented, al Qaeda's infrastructure would have been demolished and bin Laden might well have been killed. Sept. 11, 2001 might have been just another sunny day.

Clinton's Loss?
How the previous administration fumbled on bin Laden.
A Q&A by Kathryn Jean Lopez
NRO
September 11, 2003, 11:45 a.m.




And as for Clarke's book,
a disgruntled ex-employee's abrupt 180,
suffice it to say
Simon & Schuster published it,
60 Minutes and CBS promoted it
and the parent company, Viacom,
and its friends on the political left,
from
the clintons to Kerry,
have in the past,
and will in the future,
"profit" from it.

Viacom

Bill Clinton is getting $12 million for his memoirs; Hillary is getting $8 million dollars for hers, for a total of $20 million. Not bad for a couple that for eight years swore under oath they couldn't remember anything.

--anonymous

YOO-HOO missus clinton
A '68 Mustang is not exculpatory

 

by Mia T, 1-29-03

link to movie

"I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let's start with typewriters."

- Frank Lloyd Wright

clinton
hunt-and-peck

Q ERTY1

Q ERTY2

Q ERTY3

Q ERTY4

Q ERTY5

Q ERTY6

Q ERTY7

Q ERTY8

Q ERTY9


Q ERTY Series:
The Inspiration

HALF A HOUSE, HALF A BRAIN: Why the clintons hit on Simon & Schuster

The 30 Seconds that Seemed Like 60 Minutes:
clinton Pats Own Back Preemptively for Bush's Certain Military Success

 


by Mia T

 

illary clinton's equal and inapposite reactions seem to be, at first blush, instances of the immutable First Law of The Betrayed and Humiliated Wife: Outdo the errant hubby's doxy...at all cost.

Thus, Vanity Fair's glamorous Marilyn-Monroe spread of Monica's digitally reduced spread was answered by Vogue's lushly Elizabethan, gauzy-focus, hindquarter-cropped-pleated-and-flounced, Queen-hillary-for-President cover.

And now we have hillary clinton doing a Martha Stewart, who herself, is purported to have been "done" by the aforementioned errant rogue (notwithstanding the plain fact that Martha is more well-known for her tarts than for being one).

Seems hillary clinton is now writing a book titled "An Invitation to the White House" in which she will follow the format of the Martha Stewart classic, "Entertaining", claim multifarious Martha-Stewart talents and wrap her indecorous and corrupt, backwoods, backroom style of White House "entertaining" in Martha-Stewart elegance and purity. (NB: Written years before Martha ImPloded.)

"The clinton White House has been noted for the...innovation of its events," said Carolyn Reidy, president of Simon & Schuster's (aptly named) Trade Division, the book's publisher.

hillary clinton's spokeswoman, Marsha Berry, added that the book will focus on how the clintons have "advanced the availability" of the White House by increasing the number and diversity of people; that it will "highlight the access that the clintons have given to more people, more types of entertainment..."

It should be emphasized that it was without even a trace of irony or the slightest smirk that both women related the above.

On closer inspection, hillary clinton's bizarre behavior is more than simple Ivana Trump-eting. It is vulgar, compulsive, shameless, smarmy, contemptuous, demagogic, megalomaniacal, in-your-face naked clintonism.

It is one thing for the frumpy, chipmunk-cheek, huge-hindquarter fishwife to insinuate her image -- albeit Elizabethan-shrouded and low-res-clouded -- onto the cover of Vogue; but it is quite another for the corrupt harpy to trumpet White House access even as new charges emerge of the clintons' rapes and other predations, of the clintons' corrupt quid-pro-quo arrangements with a menacing and motley assortment of drug dealers, gun runners and nuclear weapons makers.

For hillary clinton to vaunt White House access just as the clintons' China treason is becoming increasingly, patently manifest to all requires a certain level of contempt for the people and for the country that is uniquely clinton.

Thank heaven for small favors...

Or as the real Martha Stewart would say,
"That is a good thing."


NOTE THE CBS--SIMON & SCHUSTER CONNECTION

Viacom




3.20.04 ALERT!
CLINTON-WAS-AN-UTTER-FAILURE Containment Team Scheme team
is reactivated and in high gear...

Thou art arm'd that hath thy crook'd schemers straight.
Cudgel thy brains no more, the clinton plots are great.

 Mia T, On Neutered and Neutering,
by Mia T and Edward Zehr (EZ)

 "The instant that second plane hit, I said to the person with whom I was speaking, 'Bin Laden did this.' I knew immediately. I know what this network can do."

bill clinton

 



COMMENT: The above inculpatory remark by the impeached erstwhile ersatz prez is illustrative of
the synergy of profound psychological dysfunction and rube arrogance rooted in stupidity. That
remark is his legacy's death knell.


hillary talks: ON TERROR

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

Clinton's failure to grasp the opportunity to unravel increasingly organized extremists, coupled with Berger's assessments of their potential to directly threaten the U.S., represents one of the most serious foreign policy failures in American history.

Clinton Let Bin Laden Slip Away and Metastasize
MANSOOR IJAZ
December 5, 2001

A Fish Rots from the Head

Investor's Business Daily

 

Ijaz, an admitted Clinton supporter who helped negotiate these opportunities to nab bin Laden, said, "The silence of the Clinton administration in responding to these offers was deafening."

Ijaz says that three months before bin Laden's men blew up the USS Cole in Yemen, he "brought the White House another plausible offer to deal with bin Laden, by then known to be involved in the embassy bombings (in Tanzania and Kenya)... But senior Clinton officials sabotaged the offer."

Clinton's apparent boredom with vital information extended beyond Sudanese intelligence officers to his own intelligence officers. His first CIA director, James Woolsey, couldn't get a meeting with Clinton in the two years he served. Woolsey left the Clinton administration disgusted with its slovenly approach to national security. ...

To hear Clinton now say "We must do more to reduce the pool of potential terrorists" is thus beyond farce. He had numerous opportunities to reduce that pool, and he blew it.

The pool, in fact, grew larger on Clinton's watch, as he spent his final days giving pardons to drug dealers, Puerto Rican terrorists and Marc Rich, a fugitive who topped America's most-wanted list.

NEW AUDIO!
Hear the Bill Bennett epilogue

In this light, Clinton's order to the CIA that it not use "unsavory characters" to collect information pushes irony to its outer limits.


hillary talks: ON MILITARY TACTICS
The Easy Part

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

INTERVIEW Osama bin Laden

(may 1998)

 

In the first part of this interview which occurred in May 1998, a little over two months before the U.S. embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, Osama bin Laden answers questions posed to him by some of his followers at his mountaintop camp in southern Afghanistan. In the latter part of the interview, ABC reporter John Miller is asking the questions.

 

Describe the situation when your men took down the American forces in Somalia.

 

After our victory in Afghanistan and the defeat of the oppressors who had killed millions of Muslims, the legend about the invincibility of the superpowers vanished. Our boys no longer viewed America as a superpower. So, when they left Afghanistan, they went to Somalia and prepared themselves carefully for a long war. They had thought that the Americans were like the Russians, so they trained and prepared. They were stunned when they discovered how low was the morale of the American soldier. America had entered with 30,000 soldiers in addition to thousands of soldiers from different countries in the world. As I said, our boys were shocked by the low morale of the American soldier and they realized that the American soldier was just a paper tiger. He was unable to endure the strikes that were dealt to his army, so he fled, and America had to stop all its bragging and all that noise it was making in the press after the Gulf War in which it destroyed the infrastructure and the milk and dairy industry that was vital for the infants and the children and the civilians and blew up dams which were necessary for the crops people grew to feed their families. Proud of this destruction, America assumed the titles of world leader and master of the new world order. After a few blows, it forgot all about those titles and rushed out of Somalia in shame and disgrace, dragging the bodies of its soldiers. America stopped calling itself world leader and master of the new world order, and its politicians realized that those titles were too big for them and that they were unworthy of them. I was in Sudan when this happened. I was very happy to learn of that great defeat that America suffered, so was every Muslim....

 

The American people, by and large, do not know the name bin Laden, but they soon likely will. Do you have a message for the American people?

 

 

I say to them that they have put themselves at the mercy of a disloyal government, and this is most evident in Clinton's administration....

Lopez: In sum, how many times did Bill Clinton lose bin Laden?

Miniter: Here's a rundown. The Clinton administration:

1. Did not follow-up on the attempted bombing of Aden marines in Yemen.

2. Shut the CIA out of the 1993 WTC bombing investigation, hamstringing their effort to capture bin Laden.

3. Had Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, a key bin Laden lieutenant, slip through their fingers in Qatar.

4. Did not militarily react to the al Qaeda bombing in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

5. Did not accept the Sudanese offer to turn bin Laden.

6. Did not follow-up on another offer from Sudan through a private back channel.

7. Objected to Northern Alliance efforts to assassinate bin Laden in Afghanistan.

8. Decided against using special forces to take down bin Laden in Afghanistan.

9. Did not take an opportunity to take into custody two al Qaeda operatives involved in the East African embassy bombings. In another little scoop, I am able to show that Sudan arrested these two terrorists and offered them to the FBI. The Clinton administration declined to pick them up and they were later allowed to return to Pakistan.

10. Ordered an ineffectual, token missile strike against a Sudanese pharmaceutical factory.

11. Clumsily tipped off Pakistani officials sympathetic to bin Laden before a planned missile strike against bin Laden on August 20, 1998. Bin Laden left the camp with only minutes to spare.

12-14. Three times, Clinton hesitated or deferred in ordering missile strikes against bin Laden in 1999 and 2000.

15. When they finally launched and armed the Predator spy drone plane, which captured amazing live video images of bin Laden, the Clinton administration no longer had military assets in place to strike the archterrorist.

16. Did not order a retaliatory strike on bin Laden for the murderous attack on the USS Cole.





hillary talks:ON TERROR

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

 

ne•o-ne•o•lib•er•al•ism n.

neocommunist political movement, a tipsy-topsy, infantile perversion of the Marxist-Leninist model, global in scope, beginning in the post-cold-war, unipolar 1990s, led by the '60s neoliberal baby-boomer "intelligentsia," that seeks power without responsibility, i.e., that seeks to dilute American power by concentrating power in said '60s neoliberals while yielding America's sovereignty to the United Nations, i.e., while surrendering to the terrorists, as it continues the traditional '60s neoliberal feint, namely: (1) concern for social justice, (2) distain for bureaucracy, and (3) the championing of entrepreneurship for the great unwashed.

Mia T, 2.24.04

 

The Democratic Party's Problem Transcends Its Anti-War Contingent2

hyperlinked images of shame
copyright Mia T 2003
.

by Mia T, 4.6.03

 

If Act I was a thinly veiled allegory about naked clintonism, then Act II is a parable about the plan for world domination by the Establishment, aged hippies in pinstripes all, with their infantile, solipsistic world view amazingly untouched by time.

 

Mia T, June 9, 1999
THE ALIENS

 

l From is sounding the alarm. "Unless we convince Americans that Democrats are strong on national security," he warns his party, "Democrats will continue to lose elections."

Helloooo? That the Democrats have to be spoon-fed what should be axiomatic post-9/11 is, in and of itself, incontrovertible proof that From's advice is insufficient to solve their problem.

From's failure to fully lay out the nature of the Democrats' problem is not surprising: he is the guy who helped seal his party's fate. It was his Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) that institutionalized the proximate cause of the problem, clintonism, and legitimized its two eponymic provincial operators on the national stage. The "Third Way" and "triangulation" don't come from the same Latin root for no reason.

That "convince" is From's operative word underscores the Democrats' dilemma. Nine-eleven was transformative. It is no longer sufficient merely to convince. One must demonstrate, demonstrate convincingly, if you will… which means both in real time and historically.

When it comes to national security, Americans will no longer take any chances. Turning the turn of phrase back on itself, the era of the Placebo President is over. (Incidentally, the oft-quote out-of-context sentence fragment alluded to here transformed meaningless clinton triangulation into a meaningful if deceptive soundbite.)

Although From is loath to admit it -- the terror in his eyes belies his facile solution -- the Democratic party's problem transcends its anti-war contingent.

With a philosophy that relinquishes our national sovereignty -- and relinquishes it reflexively… and to the UN no less -- the Democratic party is, by definition, the party of national insecurity.

With policy ruled by pathologic self-interest -- witness the "Lieberman Paradigm," Kerry's "regime change" bon mot (gone bad), Edwards' and the clintons' brazen echoes thereof (or, alternatively, Pelosi's less strident wartime non-putdown putdown)… and, of course, the clincher -- eight years of the clintons' infantilism, grotesquerie and utter failure -- the Democratic party is, historically and in real time, the party of national insecurity.

The Democrats used to be able to wallpaper their national insecurity with dollars and demogoguery. But that was before 9/11.



addendum 12.13.03:
Pathologic self-interest: Richard Miniter's C-SPAN interview, contained in hillary talks:ON TERROR, (below), is absolutely devastating for the clintons. Miniter presents the clintons' monumental failure to protect America in sickening detail.

Note in particular Madeleine Albright's shocking reason given at the time of the USS Cole attack why the clinton administration should not respond militarily. It tell us everything we need to know about the clintons. It tell us why clinton redux is an absolutely suicidal notion.

Notwithstanding their cowardice, corruption, perfidy, and to borrow a phrase from Andrew Cuomo, their essential cluelessness, the clintons, according to Albright, made their decision not to go after the terrorists primarily for reasons of their own legacy and power. The clintons reasoned that inaction would MAXIMIZE THEIR CHANCES TO RECEIVE THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE. No matter that that inaction would also maximize the terrorists' power, maximize America's danger.

For more than a half decade, the Clinton administration was shoveling atomic secrets out the door as fast as it could, literally by the ton. Millions of previously classified ideas and documents relating to nuclear arms were released to all comers, including China's bomb makers.

William J. Broad
Spying Isn't the Only Way to Learn About Nukes,
The New York Times, May 30, 1999


Broad would have us believe we are watching "Being There" and not "The Manchurian Candidate." His argument is superficially appealing as most reasonable people would conclude that it requires the simplemindedness of a Chauncy Gardener (in "Being There") to reason that instructing China and a motley assortment of terrorist nations on how to beef up their atom bombs and how not to omit the "key steps" when building hydrogen bombs would somehow blunt and not stimulate their appetites for bigger and better bombs and a higher position in the power food chain.

But it is Broad's failure to fully connect the dots -- clinton's wholesale release of atomic secrets, decades of Chinese money sluicing into clinton's campaigns, clinton's pushing of the test ban treaty, clinton's concomitant sale of supercomputers, and clinton's noxious legacy -- that blows his argument to smithereens and reduces his piece to just another clinton apologia by The New York Times.

But even a Times apologia cannot save clinton from the gallows. Clinton can be both an absolute (albeit postmodern) moron and a traitor. The strict liability Gump-ism, "Treason is as treason does" applies.

The idea that an individual can be convicted of the crime of treason only if there is treasonous intent or *mens rea* runs contrary to the concept of strict liability crimes. That doctrine (Park v United States, (1974) 421 US 658,668) established the principle of 'strict liability' or 'liability without fault' in certain criminal cases, usually involving crimes which endanger the public welfare.

Calling his position on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty "an historic milestone," (if he must say so himself) clinton believed that if he could get China to sign it, he would go down in history as the savior of mankind. This was 11 August 1995.

(There would be an analogous treasonous miscalculation in the Mideast: clinton failed to shut down Muslim terrorism, then in its incipient stage and stoppable, because he reasoned that doing so would have wrecked his chances for the Nobel Peace Prize. Indeed, according to Richard Miniter, Madeleine Albright offered precisely the Nobel-Muslim factor as a primary reason for not treating the bombing of the USS Cole as an act of war.)

Mia T, 2.11.04
BUSH, THE CLINTONS + WMD PROLIFERATION:
The
REAL "Imminent Threat"

 

 

It is precisely the clintons' bin-Laden-emboldening inaction to the attack on the USS Cole and the clintons' bin-Laden-emboldening token, ineffectual, August 1998 missile strikes of aspirin factories and empty tents that eliminate "bin-Laden-emboldenment avoidance" as the rationale for the latter decision and support "wag the dog," instead.

Taken together, feckless clinton inaction and feckless clinton action serve only to reinforce the almost universally held notion: the clinton calculus was, is, and always will be, solely self-serving.

In the case of the non-response to the attack on the Cole, an unambiguous act of war, the clinton rationale, according to no less than Madeleine Albright, was a clinton Nobel Peace Prize by Arab appeasement. i.e., a clinton Nobel Peace Prize by bin-Laden-emboldenment.

And in the case of the curiously-timed, ineffectual (and, therefore, bin-Laden-emboldening) token missile strikes, the clinton rationale was Lewinsky-recantation distraction -- clearly not bin-Laden-emboldenment avoidance.

(This is not to say there wasn't a Nobel factor here, too. Obsolete intelligence, bolstered by the redundancy of a clinton tipoff, ensured that both bin Laden and the Mideast Muslim ego would escape unscathed.)

Mia T, "WAG THE DOG" revisited

 

 

 

WASHINGTON -- Two Norwegian public-relations executives and one member of the Norwegian Parliament say they were contacted by the White House to help campaign for President Clinton to receive this year's Nobel Peace Prize for his work in trying to negotiate peace in the Middle East.

Clinton Lobbies for Nobel Prize: What a Punk
White House Lobbied For Clinton Nobel Peace Prize Updated
Friday, October 13, 2000
By Rita Cosby

 

 

 

There's been speculation in the last few months that Clinton was pursuing a Mideast peace accord in an effort to win the prize and secure his legacy as president.

AIDES PUSH CLINTON FOR THE NOBEL

 

 

 

At the time, clinton observed: "I made more progress in the Middle East than I did between Socks and Buddy." Retrospectively, it is clear that clinton's characterization was not correct.

Mia T, Buddy Death Report Raises More Questions Than It Answers

 


(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

flash movie


THE CLINTONS--AMERICA'S BIGGEST BLUNDER
Hear Bush 41 Warn Us--October 19, 1992*

hear

*Thanx to Cloud William for text and audio

 

LEHRER: President Bush, your closing statement, sir.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Three weeks from now--two weeks from tomorrow, America goes to the polls and you're going to have to decide who you want to lead this country ...

On foreign affairs, some think it's irrelevant. I believe it's not. We're living in an interconnected world...And if a crisis comes up, ask who has the judgment and the experience and, yes, the character to make the right decision?

And, lastly, the other night on character Governor Clinton said it's not the character of the president but the character of the presidency. I couldn't disagree more. Horace Greeley said the only thing that endures is character. And I think it was Justice Black who talked about great nations, like great men, must keep their word.

And so the question is, who will safeguard this nation, who will safeguard our people and our children? I need your support, I ask for your support. And may God bless the United States of America.

(Applause)

 

play tape

 

 

THE INTERMINABLE clintons 

It's time to throw out the trash...

A Senate en passant capture is THE MOVE...

Q ERTY6 utter failureBUMP

Lib Author Regrets Voting (TWICE!) for clinton
"Sickened" by clinton's Failure to Protect America from Terrorism

MUST-READ BOOK FOR DEMOCRATS:
How clintons' Failures Unleashed Global Terror

(Who in his right mind would ever want the clintons back in the Oval Office?)

The Man Who Warned America
(Why a Rapist is Not a Fit President)

UDAY: "The end is near… this time I think the… Americans are serious, Bush is not like Clinton."



TOPICS: Anthrax Scare; Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; Israel; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Arkansas; US: Illinois; US: Massachusetts; US: New York; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 60minutes; 911; 911attacks; 911commission; 911investigation; abunidal; abuseofpower; abuseofwomen; agitpropmachine; alqaeda; alqaedairaq; alqaida; alqaidairaq; antisemitism; arkansas; arnold; arnoldschwarzenegger; autoimpeach; autoindict; bayh; betseywright; biggestloser; bigot; bigots; bill911; billclinton; billydale; bimboeruptions; blameamericafirst; bobdole; bookdeal; bot; broaddrick; caelectoralvotes; california; callmeirresponsible; cbs; cbsnews; cbsviacom; charlieyahlintrie; china; chinagate; chinaresources; chinesetakeout; clarke; clinton; clinton911; clintonarrogance; clintonbigot; clintonbigots; clintoncontempt; clintoncorruption; clintoncreep; clintondemagoguery; clintondysfunction; clintonfailure; clintonfelons; clintonineptitude; clintonintimidation; clintonism; clintonjunkets; clintonlegacy; clintonliars; clintonobstruction; clintonpredation; clintonpsychopathy; clintonracism; clintonrage; clintonrape; clintonrapes; clintonrevisionism; clintons; clintons911; clintonsedition; clintonsrrapists; clintonstupidity; clintontreason; clintonviolence; collui; confess; congenitalliar; corapist; costind; counterterrorismczar; coverup; coverupqueen; denial; effinkerry; ethnicslurs; evanbayh; eyeswideshut; failedcrook; falseaffidavits; faustianbargain; fkingjewbastard; flipflop; footinmouth; foreignleaders; gandhi; gandhijoke; gasstation; google; googleloser; googling; gulpingforair; halfabrain; halfahouse; harrywu; heilhitlery; heiress; helltopay; herheinous; hildebeast; hillary; hillary911; hillaryblog; hillarybot; hillaryclinton; hillaryconfesses; hillaryknew; hillaryliar; hillaryrape; hillaryraped2; hillaryrapedtoo; hillarysedition; hillaryspeaks; hillaryssedition; hillarystinear; hillarystreason; hillarytalks; hillarytalksorg; hillarytalksus; hillarytreason; hillaryveep; hillarywho; hoosegow4hillary; imaginaryleaders; indict; inoculation; intimidation; iowa; iraq; jamesriady; jewbastard; johnhuang; johnkerry; johnkerryveep; johnnychung; juanita; juanitabroaddrick; kathleenwilley; kerry; kerryveep; launderingmachine; lauriemylroie; letatcestmoi; lippo; lippobank; mediabias; memogate; memogate1; ministering; ministeringgirls; mistakenconceptzia; moctarriady; mohamedatta; moneylaundering; moseleybraun; nationalsecurity; nglapseng; noeyecontact; notratrulock; nword; obstructionofjustice; opportunist; paulfray; payoff; pla; predator; predators; quidproquo; rape; rapist; rapistclintons; rapists; recall; reddragonrising; revisionism; riady; richardclarke; safire; schwarzenegger; secretpolice; sedition; seebs; seebsnews; selfimpeach; selfindict; sheknewsheraped2; simonschuster; slushfund; standbyyourman; tammywynette; terror; terrorism; terrorismczar; tessellationsplanet; thanksgiving; thepredator; theterrorismstupid; thomaskean; tinear; travelgate; treason; turkey; turkeys; utterfailure; veepcreep; viacom; viacommie; victimizer; virtualhillary; wearethepresident; whitewater; wot; youknow; zeitgeist; zipper; zipperhoist; zipperhoist2; zipperhoisted
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

1 posted on 03/23/2004 3:09:43 AM PST by Mia T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Clarke, eyes wide shut...
2 posted on 03/23/2004 3:15:29 AM PST by binger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Sunday, March 21, 2004 1:45 p.m. EST

Kerry Connection 'Discredits' Terror Czar Clarke, Say Critics

Former Clinton administration terrorism czar Richard Clarke, who has been portrayed in dozens of media accounts as a nonpartisan critic of the Bush White House's terrorism policies, faces new questions about his credibility after a report surfaced on Sunday suggesting he has close ties to the presidential campaign of Sen. John Kerry.

"One of [Clarke's] very close friends and colleagues for years - a man whom he taught a class with at Harvard, Rand Beers - is one of the top foreign policy advisers to Sen. Kerry," reported ABC White House correspondent Terry Moran.

Moran told ABC's "This Week" that Clarke's close relationship with the Kerry aide "discredited" him in the eyes of critics, with the White House maintaining that "this is essentially a Democrat making these arguments" that Bush dropped the ball in the war on terrorism.

Of Clarke's much-ballyhooed new book, "Against All Enemies," where the security expert charges that President Bush has done "a terrible job" fighting the war on terrorism, Moran noted that "[Republicans] say that this book is an audition for a place in the next Democratic administration."

Beers and Clarke both resigned from the White House within a month of each other last year, shortly before the Iraq war started in March. When Beers made a public show of joining Kerry's campaign, it set off political smoke alarms in Washington.

"I can't think of a single example in the last 30 years of a person who has done something so extreme," Paul C. Light, a scholar with the Brookings Institution, told The New Yorker magazine's Jane Mayer.

"He's not just declaring that he's a Democrat," Light said. "He's declaring that he's a Kerry Democrat, and the way he wants to make a difference in the world is to get his former boss out of office."

While Beers began publicly criticizing the Iraq war almost immediately, Clarke held his fire for a few months. But by last November it was clear he and Beers were on the same page.

"Fighting Iraq had little to do with fighting the war on terrorism, until we made it [so]," Clarke proclaimed to interviewers.

He was even critical when reacting to the news of the capture of Saddam Hussein, telling ABC News, "I don't think it's going to have a near-term positive effect on security. ... In the short term, we may have actually a worse problem."

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

 


WHY JOHN KERRY IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA:
(a NEW virtual john kerry talks series)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

missus clinton's REAL virtual office update
http://hillarytalks.blogspot.com
http://virtualclintonlibrary.blogspot.com
http://demmemogate.blogspot.com
http://www.hillarytalks.us
http://www.hillarytalks.org
fiendsofhillary.blogspot.com
fiendsofhillary.us
fiendsofhillary.org
fraudsofhillary.com

by Mia T

Kerry: "Call me irresponsible."
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)
Kerry's Fatal(clinton)Error
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)
Kerry's flip-flop opportunism
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)
NEW! hillary talks: DEEP VEEP
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)
Kerry's imaginary(?) foreign (cheer)leaders
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)
Kerry's Vietnam Quagmire
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)


Kerry's(?) Veep Short List

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

copyright Mia T 2004

 



3 posted on 03/23/2004 3:30:59 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth; jla; Gail Wynand; Brian Allen; Lonesome in Massachussets; IVote2; Slyfox; ...
 Kerry's imaginary(?) foreign (cheer)leaders:
check out the Bush photo sequence
ping

Kerry's imaginary(?) foreign (cheer)leaders
WHY JOHN KERRY IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA:
(a NEW virtual john kerry talks series)


(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

 

t appears that we now have sort of a fusion issue.

With the terrorists falling all over themselves in a mad dash to publicly endorse their man, he's flip-flopping on wanting those phantom foreign endorsements, after all.


4 posted on 03/23/2004 3:39:51 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Mia T,

You're obviously a fan of Mae West, "Too much of a good thing is wonderful!" :)
5 posted on 03/23/2004 3:49:04 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (Uday and Qusay are ead-day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

^
6 posted on 03/23/2004 3:53:49 AM PST by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
"I generally avoid temptation unless I can't resist it."

BTW,
"His mother should have thrown him away and kept the stork." ;)

7 posted on 03/23/2004 4:03:25 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Clinton is getting $12 million for his memoirs; Hillary is getting $8 million dollars for hers, for a total of $20 million. Not bad for a couple that for eight years swore under oath they couldn't remember anything. --anonymous

LOL.

Thanks for this thread. I find it uplifting. It reminds me how very, very lucky we are that the Clintons are out of the White House.

8 posted on 03/23/2004 4:05:19 AM PST by syriacus (Kerry was dumb enough to believe Hubbard served in Vietnam. Is Kerry smart enough to be President?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Thanks for the Ping J
9 posted on 03/23/2004 4:07:53 AM PST by Fiddlstix (This Space Available for Rent or Lease by the Day, Week, or Month. Reasonable Rates. Inquire within.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
A lot of arrogant men have trouble working for a woman.

In the 60 min interview, Clark seemed bitter and full of hatred, named Condi a lot.

Turns out he worked for Condi, was demoted by Condi, never showed up to most of Condi's meetings....

Read between the lines...
10 posted on 03/23/2004 4:21:50 AM PST by tkathy (Our economy, our investments, and our jobs DEPEND on powerful national security.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
His mother should have thrown him away and kept the stork

Maybe she would have preferred to keep a doctor...

Clinton's Real Father Discovered in Hope, Arkansas

My name is Tom Wakefield. Most years I attend the Wakefield family reunion in Hope Arkansas, birthplace of Bill Clinton. Many of my relatives are lifelong residents of Hope. I have heard it more than once, in casual conversation at these reunions, that the biological father of Bill Clinton is a doctor in town.

"Everybody knows it" and "Bill Clinton looks just like him" are common statements made by my relatives. They speak of this in a way that it is just common knowledge around Hope. I do not know the name of the doctor, and I do not know if he is active or retired. (I doubt that he would still be active.)


11 posted on 03/23/2004 4:27:36 AM PST by syriacus (Kerry was dumb enough to believe Hubbard served in Vietnam. Is Kerry smart enough to be President?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
This has the appearance of an organized effort to make Iraq
a replay of what took place in 'Vietnam', and at home during 'Vietnam'. Not one of these lying crooked liberals ever says one negative utterance against the terrorist killers, blowing up and killing our own military.

All making sense why JFKerry's campaign is founded upon his status as 'war' hero. Even to the point now that he is planting his own movies, he had the presence of mind to film "reenacting" his gun battles while in Vietnam, in his campaign ads. A twisted mind!

The day the Iraqi war started began the chorus of "QUAGMIRE". The verses have since been the song about, illegal war, Bush war for oil, etc....

The real target seems to be the military, their families and fellow citizens, as an attempt to "reenact" JFKerry's Vietnam anti-war protest days.

These liars and crooks show there is nothing they will not attempt to pervert to regain power. "EVIL"!

12 posted on 03/23/2004 4:46:49 AM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tkathy
Don't discount clinton involvement in this.

As a potential presidential candidate in '08
(and a potential veep in '04, should Cheney develop any problems),
Condi Rice, given her race, gender, brains and cv,
poses a monumental problem for the Ds, in general,
and for the
congenitally zipper-hoisted missus clinton, in particular.

Condi Rice is for real what missus clinton can only pretend to be ....

hillary talks: DEEP VEEP

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

missus clinton's REAL virtual office update
http://hillarytalks.blogspot.com
http://virtualclintonlibrary.blogspot.com
http://demmemogate.blogspot.com
http://www.hillarytalks.us
http://www.hillarytalks.org
fiendsofhillary.blogspot.com
fiendsofhillary.us
fiendsofhillary.org
fraudsofhillary.com


by Mia T, 3.7.04

 

Uber Democrat Sen. Hillary Clinton is warning all-but-certain presidential nominee John Kerry to back off if he's thinking about replacing party chairman Terry McAuliffe before the election.

Asked about rumblings that the Kerry camp wanted to toss McAuliffe over the side, Clinton told the New York Times on Friday, "Terry has helped the Democratic Party move into the 21st century to compete against the incredible interlocking institutional powers of the other side."

"A lot of plans have been laid, a lot of infrastructure put in place, and I want to see us follow through," she insisted.

Hillary Warns Kerry: Hands off McAuliffe

issus clinton says she doesn't think she will be asked to be John Kerry's running mate.... and doesn't think she would accept, in any case. "Think" seems to be the operative word.... (or is it "doesn't think?")

Susan Estrich had it exactly right when she said missus clinton is unelectable. If hillary clinton wants to occupy the Oval Office, she must perforce either marry the president (been there, done that) or ascend to the throne; that is to say, missus clinton must zipper-hoist.... (We will leave means of ascension to your imagination and her devices. Suffice it to say, John Kerry would be wise to sharpen the ol' peripheral vision.)

For her entire adult (such as it is) life, zipper-hoisting has been missus clinton's principal means of upward mobility.

Zipper-hoisting has proved to be a sticky wicket for missus clinton, owing not to antithetical feminist ideology, as one would expect -- feminists willingly sacrificed feminism on the altar of clintonism -- but to zipper choice, her rather injudicious attachment early on to a certain zipper habitually on the downslide.

Look for missus clinton to switch zippers. And sooner rather than later. (Note: Kerry's zipper is the current default choice; missus clinton would have much preferred the General's.)

What zippers are to missus clinton, heiresses are to John Kerry. As comptroller of the Democrat coffers, missus clinton is the de facto Democrat "heiress," (Teresa Heinz without the ketchup, if you will).

Thus, what we have here is the perfect symbiosis, the perfect playing into proclivities, the lowest common denominator, the perfect pair....

copyright Mia T 2004


13 posted on 03/23/2004 4:48:03 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Why did this legacy-obsessed president miss a golden opportunity to secure his legacy for all time by wiping out terrorism, then in its incipient stage and stoppable?

Wipe it out? Incipient?

Terrorism isn't just Al Quaeda, and it didn't start on 9-11

Capturing or Killing Bin Laden won't stop it either.

This war is ongoing and there will be new figures emerging that we have to deal with.

No doubt clinton avoided it because it was too risky and ththere was no upside for him personally.

14 posted on 03/23/2004 6:19:15 AM PST by Wil H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
.

In a new Time of War...
In a new Century...
With an Enemy that is now...
Just around the corner and...
Up our streets...



.."IS it SAFE?" = HILLARY on Senate Armed Services Committee..

http://www.TheAlamoFILM.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=629






HILLARY & TERRORISM's plan to regain the White House

http://www.Freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1022571/posts

.


15 posted on 03/23/2004 6:48:47 AM PST by ALOHA RONNIE (Vet-Battle of IA DRANG-1965 http://www.LZXRAY.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Albright was concerned about the reaction of world opinion to a retaliation against Muslims, and the impact it would have in the final days of the Clinton Middle East peace process.

The “Peace Talks” were little more than a photo-opt for Bill Clinton as he held priminister Barak and Arafat at Camp David hostage. The sham didn’t work – all smoke and mirrors for more US $$s – Clinton the peace maker – NOT!

Does anyone recall what this actually cost the United States in tax dollars for Arafat-the-terrorist?

16 posted on 03/23/2004 7:03:26 AM PST by yoe (The worse it is – the better it is!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wil H
I agree with you about the risk factor (i.e., clinton cowardice and clinton putting self above all else)
 
But I wasn't talking about 9/11. I was talking about 1993 and throughout his tenure.
 
Contrary to clinton/leftist-media spin, this war waged against America by the terrorists did not begin on September 11, 2001. The terrorists--bin Laden--had declared war on America repeatedly, had killed Americans repeatedly, throughout the clinton years.
 
Remarkably, the same terrorists hit the same WTC building in 1993, and clinton, 15 minutes away from the devastation, didn't even bother to visit the site, preferring instead to add his old bromides on the economy to the pollution along the Jersey Turnpike.
 
(Ironically, the legacy clinton would desperately, futilely seek throughout his life was right under his nose on that day in 1993; but he was too self-absorbed--too stupid, some would say--to see it.)



WHY JOHN KERRY IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA
(a NEW virtual john kerry talks series)

Kerry's Fatal(clinton)Error
 
Mia T, 3.16.04
  


(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com
 

Kerry seldom speaks out on the campaign trail about the importance of fighting terrorism, and polls shows it's an issue on which Bush appears to have an advantage.

"We are determined to make this campaign about real issues facing Americans, like making health care affordable, improving education and getting our economy back on track," Kerry campaign manager Mary Beth Cahill said....

BRIAN BLOMQUIST
KERRY JOINS AIR WAR

NYPOST.COM

"I voted for a process by which war would be the last resort."

John Kerry

Kerry hits out at Bush over Iraq
Adam Blenford and agencies
Monday January 26, 2004

ohn Kerry says the war on terror is less about military might than about law enforcement.

This should not surprise us. Kerry's dangerously flawed thinking on terrorism is perfectly consistent with his dangerously soporific bombast: Both are anachronistic, early 20th-century artifacts.

Osama bin Laden has made it perfectly clear: The clintons' military fecklessness and cowardice emboldened the terrorists.

Even if we allow for his characteristic flatulence and opportunism, John Kerry's demagogically tortured parsing of President George W. Bush's war-as-the-last-resort pledge and the fact that Kerry's list of the "real issues facing Americans" does not include the one issue, namely terrorism, that renders all other issues moot -- (health care, education and money have very limited utility to the dead)-- reveal a fundamental--and fatal--misunderstanding of America's situation.

When terrorists declare war on you…and then proceed to kill you… you are, perforce, at war. At that point, you really have only one decision to make: Do you fight the terrorists… or do you surrender?

Contrary to clinton/leftist-media spin, this war waged against America by the terrorists did not begin on September 11, 2001. The terrorists--bin Laden--had declared war on America repeatedly, had killed Americans repeatedly, throughout the clinton years.

Remarkably, the same terrorists hit the same WTC building in 1993, and clinton, 15 minutes away from the devastation, didn't even bother to visit the site, preferring instead to add his old bromides on the economy to the pollution along the Jersey Turnpike. (Ironically, the legacy clinton would desperately, futilely seek throughout his life was right under his nose on that day in 1993; but he was too self-absorbed--too stupid, some would say--to see it.)

And as for the September 11 attacks, they were planned in May 1998, on the clintons' watch, in the Khalden Camp in southeastern Afghanistan.


The terrorists declared war on America on the clintons watch and the clintons surrendered...

hillary talks: ON TERROR
(reinstalling clintons in White House-1 advantage over suicide)

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

Democrats, from the clintons to Kerry, reflexively choose "surrender"...

hillary talks: ON MILITARY TACTICS
The Easy Part

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

ne•o-ne•o•lib•er•al•ism n.

neocommunist political movement, a tipsy-topsy, infantile perversion of the Marxist-Leninist model, global in scope, beginning in the post-cold-war, unipolar 1990s, led by the '60s neoliberal baby-boomer "intelligentsia," that seeks power without responsibility, i.e., that seeks to dilute American power by concentrating power in said '60s neoliberals while yielding America's sovereignty to the United Nations, i.e., while surrendering to the terrorists, as it continues the traditional '60s neoliberal feint, namely: (1) concern for social justice, (2) distain for bureaucracy, and (3) the championing of entrepreneurship for the great unwashed.

Mia T, 2.24.04



hillary talks: On Military Tactics
WHEN TO BOMB


(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

missus clinton's REAL virtual office update
http://hillarytalks.blogspot.com
http://virtualclintonlibrary.blogspot.com
http://demmemogate.blogspot.com
http://www.hillarytalks.us
http://www.hillarytalks.org
fiendsofhillary.blogspot.com
fiendsofhillary.us
fiendsofhillary.org
fraudsofhillary.com

President Bush chooses '"fight."

Andrew Cuomo didn't call the Democrats "clueless" for no reason.

Q ERTY9

BUSH: "I will not wait on events, while dangers gather."

 

video screen capure

multimedia

President's Remarks
video image view

This country has many challenges. We will not deny, we will not ignore, we will not pass along our problems to other Congresses, to other presidents, and other generations. (Applause.) We will confront them with focus and clarity and courage...

Sending Americans into battle is the most profound decision a President can make. The technologies of war have changed; the risks and suffering of war have not. For the brave Americans who bear the risk, no victory is free from sorrow. This nation fights reluctantly, because we know the cost and we dread the days of mourning that always come.

We seek peace. We strive for peace. And sometimes peace must be defended. A future lived at the mercy of terrible threats is no peace at all. If war is forced upon us, we will fight in a just cause and by just means -- sparing, in every way we can, the innocent. And if war is forced upon us, we will fight with the full force and might of the United States military -- and we will prevail. (Applause.)

State of the Union Address by President George W. Bush


17 posted on 03/23/2004 7:19:12 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: yoe
Photo-op was a side benefit, in my view. The talks were serious business for clinton. One doesn't have to look too closely at the photos to see his arm-twisting of the principals.

Clinton viewed a sham Mideast peace accord as his ticket to the Nobel Peace Prize. Madeleine Albright said as much at the cabinet meeting to determine the disposition of the USS Cole bombing, a clear act of war.

Albright offered the Nobel as the primary reason for not responding militarily. (Clarke was the only one at the meeting in favor of retaliation.)
18 posted on 03/23/2004 7:30:58 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Thanks for the timely post, Mia. I hope the Bushies are learning something about the krinton appointees through this affair. Why they didn't sack all these goons on the first day is a mystery to me. Cut them out like tumors and drench their offices in Lysol. There is no cure for krintonistas - only their removal and destruction.
19 posted on 03/23/2004 3:20:05 PM PST by WorkingClassFilth (DEFUND PBS & NPR - THE AMERICAN PRAVDA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Mia,

These Kerry pieces are very effective!

20 posted on 03/23/2004 7:41:27 PM PST by Wolverine (A Concerned Citizen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson