Posted on 09/30/2001 8:10:34 AM PDT by liberallarry
If that is the truth, then Larry's press release doesn't make sense.
But if Larry is right, then Larry works for the bin Laden groups every time HE fills up his car.
"The sponsorship of the Rothschilds--- (EIR Investigation
Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), November 1, 1996)
Soros's relation to the Rothschild finance circle represents no ordinary or
casual banking connection. It goes a long way to explain the extraordinary
success of a mere private speculator, and Soros's uncanny ability to "gamble
right" so many times in such high-risk markets. Soros has access to the
"insider track" in some of the most important government and private
channels in the world."
""Among Soros's silent investors, these sources say, are the fugitive metals and oil trader Marc Rich, based in Zug, Switzerland; and Shaul Eisenberg, a decades-long member of Israeli Mossad intelligence, who functions as a major arms merchant throughout Asia and the Near East. Eisenberg was recently banned from doing business in Uzbekistan, where he had been accused by the government of massive fraud and corruption. A third Soros partner is Israel's "Dirty Rafi" Eytan, who served in London previously as Mossad liaison to British intelligence.
And then there's Carlucci and Bushes and Soros and ........... http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3857577920af.htm
"Scowcroft in an earlier period...the same period of the BCCI takeover of Financial General Bankshares, was an important shareholder in in the now defunct National Bank of Washington [NBW]. Another major shareholder was Saudi Arabian Wafic Said. Robert Abboud was a board member of Said's holding company and and a board member of NBW. Abboud ties to Bin Mafouz, [who ties to George Bush Jr. and BCCI, and Chicago, and David Edwards, and Arkansas, and Clinton, etc..and remember that George Bush Jr. connects to Harken. Harken connects to Alan Quasha, to his dad, who was a lawyer for Nugan Hand in the Philipines. Harken also connects to Jackson Stephens through David Edwards, to Talat Othman [to Carlucci through the NCEE] to Bakhsh, to Mike Ameen, to Kamal Adham and to George Soros, the man behind the marijauna laws in California and Arizona.] [BCCI also connects in many ways to Jeb Bush, in Miami, but that's another story.]
Where do I go to get the money I donated to JW (when they weren't a bunch of unfocused, publicity-seeking, PR-conscious, paranoid opportunists) BACK? Thank God it wasn't that much.
I don't mind being criticized for doing stupid things (like not doing a search). I deserve it.
I don't mind being told my facts are wrong, or my conclusions, illogical, intemperate, overstated, etc. That's why I post among people I know don't share my beliefs.
I you truly believe I have not offered anything of worth, that I'm an amateur among professionals, then your view is justified. I see no evidence of that.
Rather, I see intense partisanship, intolerance, self-righteousness, etc., etc. It's extraordinarily difficult to get past that, to the people who know more than I do, whose wit, clarity, and knowledge I value.
If the rest of you just want to talk to yourselves. Be my guest.
A trial two-week subscription is free; if you had wanted to access it, you could have. For nothing. You didn't actually want to see the real thing, though, did you? You'd be perfectly content to take Klayman's word for it. That's the impression I get, anyway. If it's a false one, my apologies.
Ramble, ramble, ramble. . . . Sorry! The point is, you cannot judge a person's family by what they do. My dad is a French teacher, and very active in the church. My mother is the parish nurse and an ordained minister with the church. My youngest sister's hubby lived in Tokyo until he came over here for college; his parents are Methodist missionaries there. They're all genuine Christians. The real article. Not "fakey" ones. They never condoned my wild departure! Never!! (I'm not wild about remembering it myself.)
And that's the truthhhhhhhhhhhh! ;-p
If it weren't for them bringing John Huang out of the closet about a week before the 1996 election, Clinton may have won in a landslide; as it is, he got just short of 50% of the vote. If JW had somehow been able to force him out about a week earlier, the election could conceivably have gone the other way. Although there's no way Dole would have a majority of the popular vote, a +4% to Dole and -4% to Clinton would have gotten Dole the electoral votes of Arizona (8 votes), Florida (25), Kentucky (8), Missouri (11), Nevada (4), New Mexico (5), Ohio (21), and Tennessee (11). Clinton won 379-159 in the EC. The 93 votes I just noted would have made it 286-252. A +5, -5 swing in Pennsylvania (23) would have put Dole over the top.
I believe, and the poll numbers leading up to the election mostly show, that Clinton lost about 5% in the final week or so of the campaign, mostly because the truth about the China connection was beginning to come out, and because Ross Perot was hammering on the topic mercilessly (and getting covered by the lib press, who thought it would attract Dole voters to Perot, when it was really attracting Clinton voters to Dole). Another week of pounding on the China connection could easily have moved another 5%.
During this time and about the next 2-3 years, JW did its best work. Starting at about the time of Elian Gonzalez, I believe Klayman & Co. made a conscious decision to attempt to inject themselves into anything that even remotely looked like a publicity opportunity. They also started wasting time (in retrospect) on a weekly talk show, an annual cruise (are you kidding me?), and in general institutionalizing themselves.
They started losing focus, and winning fewer victories. Most of the 60 victories you cite either occurred before this time or were the result of momentum built up previously.
To name just a few examples, I don't think they have done enough to nail Al Gore on his e-mails, Carol Browner on her erased hard drive the day she left offfice, and Hillary on Filegate. I don't think they ever will, because they are too busy chasing after relatively inconsequential matters they can't possibly influence.
It's a d*** shame.
They aren't in "effective" office anymore, though! I'm curious as to how much money it takes to cover up that huge derriere of hers?! ;-}
… For example, he's trying to pressure the IRS into looking at the tax exempt status of groups posing as Islam organizations but are really fronts for HAMAS. ….
Don’t reckon ol’ larr would want the IRS to look at all tax exempts, now do you. It would be nice to know what goes on behind closed does in all of them.
Judicial Watch Inc., a tax-exempt, not-for-profit, Washington, D.C.-based watchdog, frequently promotes itself as an organization committed to bringing lawsuits to expose government corruption. But its tax forms show that it spent only 5.8% of the $12.4 million it raised from donors and foundations in 1998 on litigation. ........
.....The Form 990 reveals that while Judicial Watch spent more than $9 million on its education/fund-raising mailings, it spent only $718,626 pursuing its lawsuits--almost $280,000 less than it paid American Target Advertising, run by conservative direct-mail guru Richard Viguerie, to design and run its direct-mail campaign. ......
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.