HILLARY CLINTON REPRISES FATAL CLINTON ERROR
by Mia T, 11.17.06
-
-
"Hope is not a strategy."--missus clinton
enying the power of the psychological in the War on Terror can easily prove fatal.
The most potent weapon in the terrorist's arsenal is the psychological--the selective use of real information, disinformation, manipulation of the press, propaganda, and other psychological (Psy-Ops) warfare methods.
Missus clinton's "hortatory" notwithstanding, these are also the clintons' and the Left's weapons of choice in their domestic wars.
In asymmetric warfare, the belligerents are, by definition, of unequal power: The terrorists lack the military might. The clintons and the American Left lack the ideas. Psychological warfare is the most easily attainable equalizer.
Missus clinton's rejection of the essential strategic value of the psychological--of hope (and despair)--in the War on Terror reprises a fatal clinton error.
Saddam Hussein won the stand-off with the United States in early 1998 over chemical/biological weapons and inspections of his palaces, in part because he was able to manipulate public opinion in the United States and elsewhere and split the former allied Persian Gulf coalition. Indeed, had the clintons understood this dynamic, even Saddam's Oil-for-Food kickback scheme would have been more difficult to pull off. Had the clintons understood this dynamic, the Iraq War, arguably, would have been averted.
Similarly, Osama bin Laden won in Somalia because the clintons chose to deny this dynamic. Had the clintons chosen otherwise, i.e., had they chosen America's interests instead of their own, (protecting their poll numbers and winning the Nobel Peace Prize), 911 would be today nothing more than the universal emergency phone number and al Qaeda would be no more than a loose collection of virtual sapper squads put together for the purpose of committing one act and then disbanding and dispersing, which was the precise scenario in 1993 when they bombed the World Trade Center and the clintons did nothing.
-
'KILL BILL'
THE CLINTON-FOLEY NEXUS: A THEORY
by Mia T, 10.05.06
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....
BIN LADEN FINGERS CLINTON FOR TERROR SUCCESS (SEE FOOTAGE)
THE THREAT OF TERRORISM IS AS CLOSE AS A CLINTON IS TO THE OVAL OFFICE
... While America appears not to be ready for a female president under any circumstances, the post-9/11 realities pose special problems for a female presidential candidate. Add to these the problems unique to missus clinton. The reviews make the mistake of focusing on the problems of the generic female presidential candidate running during ordinary times.These are not ordinary times. America is waging the global War on Terror; the uncharted territory of asymmetric netherworlds is the battlefield; the enemy is brutal, subhuman; the threat of global conflagration is real.
Defeating the enemy isn't sufficient. For America to prevail, she must also defeat a retrograde, misogynous mindset. To successfully prosecute the War on Terror, it is essential that the collective patriarchal islamic culture perceives America as politically and militarily strong. Condi Rice excepted, this requirement presents an insurmountable hurdle for any female presidential candidate, and especially missus clinton, historically antimilitary--(an image, incidentally, that is only enhanced today by her clumsy, termagant parody of Thatcher), forever the pitiful victim, and, according to Dick Morris, "the biggest dove in the clinton administration."
It is ironic that had the clintons not failed utterly to fight terrorism... not failed to take bin Laden from Sudan... not failed repeatedly to decapitate a nascent, still stoppable al Qaeda... the generic female president as a construct would still be viable... missus clinton's obstacles would be limited largely to standard-issue clintonisms: corruption, abuse, malpractice, malfeasance, megalomania, rape and treason... and, in spite of Juanita Broaddrick, or perhaps because of her, Rod Lurie would be reduced to perversely hawking the "First Gentleman" instead of the "Commander-in-Chief."
Mia T, 10.02.05
HILLARY'S COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF PROBLEM
(see descriptor morphs)December 7, 1941+64
AN OPEN LETTER TO TIM ROBBINS, DAVID GEFFEN, CHRIS MATTHEWS, MAUREEN DOWD + JEANINE PIRRO
RE: a not-so-modest proposal concerning hillary clinton
Dear Concerned Americans,
Hillary Clinton's revisionist tome notwithstanding, 'living history' begets a certain symmetry. It is in that light that I make this not-so-modest proposal on this day, exactly 64 years after the attack on Pearl Harbor. The context of our concern today--regardless of political affiliation--is Iraq and The War on Terror, but the larger fear is that our democracy may not survive.
We have the requisite machines, power and know-how to defeat the enemy in Iraq and elsewhere, but do we have the will?
In particular, do we have the will to identify and defeat the enemy in our midst?
Answerable to no one, heir apparent in her own mind, self-serving in the extreme, Hillary Clinton incarnates this insidious new threat to our survival.
What we decide to do about Missus Clinton will tell us much about what awaits us in these perilous new times.
COMPLETE LETTER
December 7, 1941+64
Mia T
AN OPEN LETTER TO TIM ROBBINS, DAVID GEFFEN, CHRIS MATTHEWS, MAUREEN DOWD + JEANINE PIRRO
RE: a not-so-modest proposal concerning hillary clinton
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2005- COPYRIGHT MIA T 2006
