Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Clinton's Failure to Confront Iraq
Middle East Intelligence Bulletin, The Wall Street Journal, KPFK Los Angeles | 9.17.01 | Allan J. Favish

Posted on 09/17/2001 6:34:48 AM PDT by Mia T

Clinton's Failure to Confront Iraq
Allan J. Favish
Iraqi Complicity in the World Trade Center Bombing and
Beyond by Laurie Mylroie, which was published in June of this year and discusses the 1993 bombing of the WTC.
She explains how Bill Clinton intentionally failed to confront Iraq over its complicity in the bombing and other attacks.
She supported Clinton in 1992 having been an advisor on Iraq policy to the 1992 Clinton presidential campaign, as you can see at
Her September 13, 2001 article in the Wall Street Journal on the recent attack is at
In a live interview on Los Angeles radio station KPFK, broadcast around noon today, PST, she stated that Clinton lied about more than sex; he lied about national security.
I wish somebody would ask her about whether she thinks the Clinton administration covered up Iraqi involvement in the murder of those aboard TWA 800 and ordered the military not to pursue the attackers.


Bush: "I'm not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt."

Churchill vs. Chamberlain Redux


Washington and the liberal media may be getting the message: George Bush is for real and he's no Mr. Nice Guy when it comes to war.

Even Newsweek's Howard Fineman, a liberal Bush-basher, has had to do a double take this week.

Writing in his column of an Oval office meeting with four U.S. Senators -- including Hillary Rodham -- Fineman described Bush "relaxed and in control."

Fineman, drawing a comparison with Winston Churchill's defiance during World War II, quoted the president as telling the Senators: "When I take action," he said, "I'm not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt. It's going to be decisive."

No doubt, Hillary must have shuddered when she heard that, a clear hit on her husband's eight years of appeasement with terrorists and their backers.

Carl Limbacher and Staff

[ASIDE: Have you noticed that as of the morning of 9-11-01, hillary clinton's "best memory" informs her--and she is quick to inform us -- that she was not "co-president" after all?]

"It's a legitimate end-use," says a Clinton administration official, who asked not to be identified. "Weather forecasting in the United States uses very intensive computing."

'Precedent Shattering': Administration OKs Supercomputer Sale to China, Published: 12/02/99, Author: David Ruppe


The Manchurian Candidate?
Or Being There?
by Mia T
The Republicans' latest talking point is that the breach of national security enabled by clinton-gore must be simple incompetence, that the concept that anyone in government would commit treason is too outrageous even to contemplate.
If the Republicans believe what they are saying, then they are morons.
If they don't believe what they are saying, then they are traitors.
Outrageousness is an essential element of clinton-gore corruption. The clinton (and gore) crimes -- perjury, obstruction of justice, abuse of power, rape, murder -- and now treason -- are so outrageous that they allow clinton hacks to reasonably brand all clinton accusers clinton-hating neo-Nazi crazies.
Yet privately few clintonites would deny that bill clinton facilitated China espionage. Their only question: "Why?"
Some call clinton a quisling, a Manchurian Candidate, bought off in Little Rock by Riady and company decades ago (and much too cheaply, according to his Chinese benefactors), trading our national security for his political power. This argument is persuasive but incomplete; clinton, a certifiable megalomaniac, is driven ultimately by his solipsistic, messianic world view and by that which ultimately quashes all else -- his toxic legacy.
William J. Broad suggests (Spying Isn't the Only Way to Learn About Nukes, The New York Times, May 30, 1999) that clinton had another reason to empower China and disembowel America. Broad argues that clinton sought to disseminate our atomic secrets proactively in order to implement his counterintuitive, postmodern, quite inane epistemological theory, namely, that, contrary to currently held dogma, knowledge is not power after all -- that, indeed, quite the contrary is the case.
Broad writes in part:
Since 1993, officials say, the Energy Department's "openness initiative"
has released at least 178 categories of atom secrets. By contrast, the
1980s saw two such actions. The unveilings have included no details of
specific weapons, like the W-88, a compact design Chinese spies are
suspected of having stolen from the weapons lab at Los Alamos, N.M. But
they include a slew of general secrets.
Its overview of the disclosures, "Restricted Data Declassification
Decisions," dated January 1999 and more than 140 pages long, lists such
things as how atom bombs can be boosted in power, key steps in making
hydrogen bombs, the minimum amount (8.8 pounds) of plutonium or uranium
fuel needed for an atom bomb and the maximum time it takes an exploding
atomic bomb to ignite an H-bomb's hydrogen fuel (100 millionths of a
No grade-B physicist from any university could figure this stuff. It
took decades of experience gained at a cost of more than $400 billion.
The release of the secrets started as a high-stakes bet that openness
would lessen, not increase, the world's vulnerability to nuclear arms
and war. John Holum, who heads arms control at the State Department,
told Congress last year that the test ban "essentially eliminates" the
possibility of a renewed international race to develop new kinds of
nuclear arms.
And the devaluing of nuclear secrets, highlighted by the rush of atomic
declassifications, was seen as a prerequisite to the ban's achievement.
The symbolism alone was potent, officials say. Openness let them
advertise a dramatic new state of affairs where hidden actions were to
be kept to a minimum, replacing decades of secrecy and paranoia.
"The United States must stand as leader," O'Leary told a packed news
conference in December 1993 upon starting the process. "We are
declassifying the largest amount of information in the history of the
Critics, however, say the former secrets are extremely valuable to
foreign powers intent on making nuclear headway. Gaffney, the former
Reagan official, disparaged the giveaway as "dangling goodies in front
of people to get them to sign up into our arms-control agenda."
Thomas B. Cochran, a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense
Council in Washington, a private group that has criticized the openness,
said the declassifications had swept away so many secrets that the
combination had laid bare the central mysteries.
"In terms of the phenomenology of nuclear weapons," Cochran said, "the
cat is out of the bag."
Even before the China scandal broke, experts outside the administration
faulted the openness as promoting the bomb's spread. Last year, a
bipartisan commission of nine military specialists led by former Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said the "extensive declassification" of
secrets had inadvertently aided the global spread of deadly weapons.
["inadvertently" ???!!!!]  
The ultimate brake on nuclear advances was to be the Comprehensive Test
Ban Treaty, which clinton began to push for as soon as he took office in
1993, hailing it as the hardest-fought, longest-sought prize in the
history of arms control.
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...(or, alternatively, to fail to understand that the underlying premise of MAD (mutually assured destruction) is the absense of madness.)
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 desensitizing clinton apologia by The New York Times.
But even if clinton is a thoroughgoing (albeit postmodern) fool, China-gate is still treason. 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.
According to James Risen and Jeff Gerth of The New York Times, "the legacy codes and the warhead data that goes with them" [-- apparently stolen from the Los Alamos weapons lab by scientist, Wen Ho Lee aided and abetted by bill clinton , hillary clinton , the late Ron Brown, Sandy Berger, Hazel O'Leary, Janet Reno, Eric Holder and others in the clinton administration (not to mention congressional clinton accomplices Glenn, Daschle, Bumpers, Harkin, Boxer, Feinstein, Lantos, Levin. Lautenberg, Torricelli et al.) --] "could be particularly valuable for a country, like China, that has signed onto the nuclear test ban treaty and relies solely on computer simulations to upgrade and maintain its nuclear arsenal [especially when combined with the supercomputers that clinton sold to China to help them finish the job]. The legacy codes are now used to maintain the American nuclear arsenal through computer simulation.
Most of Lee's transfers occurred in 1994 and 1995, just before China signed the test ban treaty in 1996, according to American officials."
Few who have observed clinton would argue against the proposition that this legacy-obsessed megalomaniac would trade our legacy codes for a rehabilitated legacy in a Monica minute and to hell with "the children."

TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; News/Current Events

1 posted on 09/17/2001 6:34:48 AM PDT by Mia T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Yes indeed. Not only failure to confront - but toleration and even friendship - with terrorists throughout the world - has led to this. He/she must be arrested for treason.
2 posted on 09/17/2001 6:36:57 AM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt
Are we going to arrest all the politicians who failed to confront Saddam Hussein? Perhaps Clinton can share a cell with Bush's father.
3 posted on 09/17/2001 6:56:20 AM PDT by ignatz_q
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Right on, and colorful as ever, Mia! (But I think we should open a gallery for your posts and make people pay to see them!) Do you think Clinton will EVER pay for his crimes against America?
4 posted on 09/17/2001 6:57:19 AM PDT by looscannon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Maybe we shouldn't hold Clinton responsible for the mess we are in now.
He was only doing what Hillary and Madeline were telling him to do.
5 posted on 09/17/2001 7:09:45 AM PDT by Slyfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Why stop with Clinton I'm sure some imaginative souls can trace the blame all the way back Abrahamn Lincoln. Let see how many silly-ass theories have we had this weekend. Handcuff on the CIA, Lifting export restrictions, Not going after Saddam, Truman's recognition of Israel, and of course we had Robertson and Falwell suggest it was our sinful ways and Roe v. Wade that was the real culprit.

It is the terrorists who are at fault not Bush, not Clinton, not Reagan, not Eisenhower, not Kissinger, not Nixon or Truman. The terrorist and those who support and encourage them are the culpable ones and this mindless attempt to blame others does little to advance the rational discourse we need now.

6 posted on 09/17/2001 7:43:47 AM PDT by Nightstalker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Nice work again, Mia! I love the last morph image.
7 posted on 09/17/2001 9:26:34 AM PDT by Irma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
These terrorist cells seem to have arrived in the U.S. as early as 1993. Does anyone else think a re-investigation of the Oklahoma City bombing might be in order? There is new blood at Justice as well as at the FBI.
8 posted on 09/17/2001 9:36:49 AM PDT by Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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
Topics · Post Article

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