Posted on 01/11/2003 11:07:57 AM PST by GeneD
You're wrong. Very wrong.
For some reason this article caused me to flip into super-sarcastic mode. I'm just amazed that people can be so very wrong over and over again in the face of staggering evidence to the contrary. I can't even imagine how their brain cells must be wired together.
H.L. Mencken said that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people. People who still believe in North Korea (Democrats, South Koreans, etc) have my grudging respect in that they have dodged the bullet of natural selection this long.
And let's not forget that Riady [agent of red China via Indonesia] provided the Democratic Party with illegal campaign donations, either. Or that over a hundred people fled the country, never to be heard from again.
Further, let's all remember that Janet Reno refused to investigate any of it. Our enemies donated illegal cash and walked away with out nuclear secrets, and no one did a damn thing.
She had the guts to protect the KLA, a brand of Marxist Islamic fanatics involved in the heroin trade and sex slavery.
She had the guts to support the spread of Islam in Eastern Europe.
We've got quite a list of dots collected here. I'm pretty sure anybody who connected them would get a foil-hat award, so I won't go there. I'll just remind you all that the current administration did NOT appoint Richardson or even request his help--the NKoreans did that, thus re-establishing their happy connection to the Clintonista regime.
I'm sure that President Bush gave the OK for the "talks" and gave Richardson strict orders to offer nothing. Politically speaking, how could he not?
But I do not understand why anyone would assume that the Bush administration knows every word exchanged unless they think Bush had a mole in Richardson's group or had the rooms bugged. What if Richardson was actually the go between for the x42 and 44-wannabe administration(s). Crazy? A couple questions to consider:
1. Do you think the NKs can do anything red China doesn't want them to?
2. If not, isn't it likely (at least possible) that China is behind the stirring of this pot--or at least accepting of it?
3. Did not China support al Qaeda via the Taliban prior to and for a short while after 9/11? [Not to mention their connections to Cuba and numerous anti-American operations in South America]
4. Are we certain they've stopped?
5. Are you aware that X42 met with Jiang Zemin on May 9, 2001? [(From http://www.public-action.com/911/psyopnews/DOCS/news/slickwillie.htm) Of course, all this had nothing to do with Clinton's 9th May, 2001 meeting with Chinese President Jiang Zemin. Clinton went to Wan Chai's Harbor Plaza Hotel, where Jiang was staying at around 10.30am and left an hour and a quarter later. Clinton's spokesman PJ Crowley later declined to comment to UPI on what areas the meeting might have covered. ]
6. Would an administration which sold our national security secrets for money and also destabilized the Balkans for the benefit of Islamic extreme radicals hesitate to do harm to our country via Korea and/or China and/or... to promote their own political futures?
I'm leaving the real foil-hat question unasked--you know, the one that includes radical Islamism. I sure wish I knew what the sworn non-negotiator Richardson communicated to Han that caused him to call Richardson a "tough negotiator". Remember Al Gore made his decision not to run right after personal meetings in China.
That pretty much describes 98% of the people who post on DU. I'm glad you have clarified the nature of your posts because I was going to suggest that go back over to DU.:-D
Everything I said has been written about by Bill Gertz, btw. There isn't much foil involved in anything I've stated.
Then, whenever they were caught at something destructive of America, they would say, "Ooops, bureaucratic SNAFU." They were quite willing IMO to be branded inept and incompetent because the truth would have been much worse for them.
Gertz is the best, and I wasn't trying to imply you were foil oriented. I figured I'd get that label ;^).
Phew!
Since reading this thread, actually, I've bumped into a couple of your other (non-sarcastic) posts on other threads, and I quickly realized that the threads on this post were in heavy sarcasm mode. But that article was a serious provocation, I agree!
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.