Posted on 10/05/2006 3:00:14 AM PDT by Mia T
'KILL BILL'
If not the Democrats then who? Who benefits from the odd timing? And who has the means, the motive, the opportunity--and the m.o.-- 1, 2 to pull off this dirty trick?
WHO BENEFITS?
The clintons had been hemorrhaging ever since the first week in September when the husband, by attempting to quash the ABC movie, "The Path to 9/11," managed to accomplish in mere days what his opponents failed for years to effectuate, namely, to focus the electorate simultaneously on the clinton jackboot 3, 4 and on the clinton failure to confront terrorism. 5
If the story had legs, continued clinton stupidity and arrogance made them sprint. And as if dispatching the tired clinton scold, the tired clinton spinners and the tired clinton playbook weren't enough to keep story on page one of The New York Times above the fold, clinton brought his tired clinton shtick to FoxNews Sunday.
'KILL BILL'
What the country finally learned--fittingly on the fifth anniversary of 9/11--was that clinton didn't simply fail to kill bin Laden.
Clinton refused to kill or even capture bin Laden.
Clinton refused to kill or even capture bin Laden even as he pretended to go after bin Laden.
Clinton refused to kill or even capture bin Laden even as he pretended to go after bin Laden because killing or even capturing bin Laden would have denied clinton the Nobel Peace Prize and he couldn't let us know he valued the prize more than keeping this country safe. 6, 7
VIRTUAL KILL
With everyone beginning to understand the dynamics of the clinton failure to fight terrorism, 8 prospects appeared even bleaker for the quondam shoo-in and for her husband's legacy, to which said prospects are inextricably bound.
As long as the voters believe the clintons willfully failed to kill or even capture bin Laden--and worse, that they did so for reasons of self-aggrandizement--there can be no scenario in which they recapture the White House.
Hence, bill clinton's 'virtual kill' on Fox Sunday morning.
Although "kill him" must have polled really, really well, the interview didn't help the clintons; the story remained on page one... and the hemorrhaging continued...
That is, until the Foley scandal hit the fan....
VIRTUAL KILL
The Other Nixon
As long as the voters believe the clintons willfully failed to kill or even capture bin Laden--and worse, that they did so for reasons of self-aggrandizement--there can be no scenario in which they recapture the White House.
Hence, bill clinton's 'virtual kill' on Fox Sunday morning.
"Kill him" must have polled really, really well....
"Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in '91 and he went to the Sudan.
We'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him [bin Laden].
At the time, '96, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America.
So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have; but they thought it was a hot potato. They didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan."
bill clinton
"I remember exactly what happened. Bruce Lindsey said to me on the phone, 'My God, a second plane has hit the tower.' And I said, 'Bin Laden did this.' that's the first thing I said. He said, 'How can you be sure?' I said 'Because only bin Laden and the Iranians could set up the network to do this and they [the Iranians] wouldn't do it because they have a country in targets. Bin Laden did it.'
I thought that my virtual obsession 2 with him was well placed and I was full of regret that I didn't get him."
bill clinton
hillary clinton
"In this interdependent world, we should still have a preference for peace over war....
But sometimes we would have these debates where people would say, if I didn't take some military action this very day, people would look down their nose at America and think we were weak. And I always thought of Senator Fulbright.... 6
So anytime somebody said in my presence, 'Hey, if you don't do this, people will think you're weak,' I always asked the same question for eight years, 'Can we kill 'em tomorrow?'
I don't think we can bring 'em back tomorrow, but can we kill 'em tomorrow? If we can kill them tomorrow, then we're not weak.... 1
I learned that as a 20-year-old kid watching Bill Fulbright. Listening."
bill clinton
The president seems to be able, the former president seems to be able to deny facts with impunity. Bin Laden is alive today because Mr. Clinton, Mr. Sandy Berger, and Mr. Richard Clarke refused to kill him. That's the bottom line. And every time he says what he said to Chris Wallace on Fox, he defames the CIA especially, and the men and women who risk their lives to give his administration repeated chances to kill bin Laden."
... [T]he fact of the matter is that the Bush Administration had one chance that they botched, and the Clinton Administration had eight to ten chances that they refused to try. At least at Tora Bora our forces were on the ground. We didn't push the point. But it's just, it's an incredible kind of situation for the American people over the weekend to hear their former president mislead them."
Michael Scheuer
... 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
CBS Terror Expert, Iraq War Critic and former CIA head for hunting Bin Laden on Monday CBS Early Show....
Harry Smith: "Elizabeth Palmer live in Pakistan this morning, thank you. I'm going to go back now to Michael Scheuer once again. Let's talk about what President Clinton had to say on Fox yesterday. He basically laid blame at the feet of the CIA and the FBI for not being able to certify or verify that Osama bin Laden was responsible for a number of different attacks. Does that ring true to you?"
Michael Scheuer: "No, sir, I don't think so. The president seems to be able, the former president seems to be able to deny facts with impunity. Bin Laden is alive today because Mr. Clinton, Mr. Sandy Berger, and Mr. Richard Clarke refused to kill him. That's the bottom line. And every time he says what he said to Chris Wallace on Fox, he defames the CIA especially, and the men and women who risk their lives to give his administration repeated chances to kill bin Laden."
Harry Smith: "All right, is the Bush administration any less responsible for not finishing the job in Tora Bora?"
Michael Scheuer: "Oh, I think there's plenty of blame to go around, sir, but the fact of the matter is that the Bush Administration had one chance that they botched, and the Clinton Administration had eight to ten chances that they refused to try. At least at Tora Bora our forces were on the ground. We didn't push the point. But it's just, it's an incredible kind of situation for the American people over the weekend to hear their former president mislead them."
"I have heard from other CIA people that there was as many as a dozen incidents, missions, etc. where the will was not there to green-light the operation. And everybody was in place, whether it was a missile attack, a bomb run, an ambush of bin Laden by tribals on the ground, or that they had pinpointed him at Tarnak Farm or his hunting lodge.
There were numerous opportunities. We only focused on one. We used it as sort of an amalgamation of the numerous different opportunities because you can't show a dozen attempts in a movie; and I don't think a lot of people would have been happy if we did that either...."
CYRUS NOWRASTEH 'The Path to 9/11'
9/11 Commission: Clinton Refused to Let CIA Kill Bin Laden
Announcing some of its preliminary findings on Wednesday, the 9/11 Commission has confirmed that President Clinton ordered the CIA to take Osama bin Laden alive or not at all - a directive that made the task of neutralizing the terrorist kingpin infinitely more difficult.
In a statement read at the beginning of Wednesday's session, 9/11 staffer Michael Hurley revealed:
"CIA senior managers, operators and lawyers uniformly said that they read the relevant authorities signed by President Clinton as instructing them to try to capture bin Laden.
"They believed that the only acceptable context for killing bin Laden was a credible capture operation. 'We always talked about how much easier it would have been to try to kill him,'" a former chief of the bin Laden station told the Commission.
"Working level CIA officers were frustrated by what they saw as the policy restraints of having to instruct their assets to mount a capture operation," the Commission statement said.
Commission staffer Hurley detailed one attempt to recruit indigenous Afghan forces in a bin Laden capture operation, explaining, "When Northern Alliance leader Massoud was briefed on the carefully worded instructions for him, the briefer recalled that Massoud laughed and said, 'You Americans are crazy. You guys never change.'"
... Last week NBC News quoted former CIA official Gary Schroen as saying that White House orders to spare bin Laden's life cut the chances of getting him in half, from 50 to 25 percent.
Schroen's revelation - now confirmed by the 9/11 Commission - was ignored by the mainstream press beyond its initial coverage by NBC.
NewsMax.com
THE CLINTON-FOLEY NEXUS: A THEORY
he timing of the Foley revelations is a bit odd. If the intended beneficiary of the political dirty trick was the Democrats, surely the perpetrators would have sprung it closer to Election Day. A month is an eternity in politics (irrespective of the fact that it is the pundit class' favorite hedge).
TEMPUS ACTUM
THE CHRIS WALLACE-BILL CLINTON INTERVIEW DECONSTRUCTED
by Mia T, 9.27.06
virtual kill of bin Laden seems apt. One should never expect more of bill clinton. And there is a certain symmetry, a perfect parry for clinton's 'virtual obsession.' 9
Hypocrisy abounds in this Age of clinton, a Postmodern Oz rife with constitutional deconstruction and semantic subversion, a virtual surreality polymarked by presidential alleles peccantly misplaced or, in the case of Jefferson, posthumously misappropriated.
Mia T
Now that everyone is beginning to understand the willfulness of clinton failure to fight terrorism, the willfulness of clinton failure to kill bin Laden, 10 prospects seem even bleaker for the quondam shoo-in and for her husband's legacy, to which said prospects are inextricably bound.
Sunday, Aug. 11, 2002
Clinton Reveals on Secret Audio:
I Nixed Bin Laden Extradition Offer
Sunday, Sept 3, 2002
Larry King Live
Saturday, Jan. 28, 2006
Chitchat with Jane Pauley
San Francisco, CA
Fulbright Prize address
April 12, 2006
CBS Terror Expert, Iraq War Critic
former CIA head for hunting Bin Laden
Monday CBS Early Show
HILLARY'S COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF PROBLEM
(see descriptor morphs)
CLINTON WILLFULLY FAILED TO NAIL BIN LADEN
AS MANY AS A DOZEN TIMES: CIA
'THE PATH TO 9/11' WRITER, PRODUCER
THE SEAN HANNITY SHOW, SEPT. 8, 2006
CLINTON FAILURE TO ORDER 'PURE KILL' CUT CHANCES OF GETTING BIN LADEN IN HALF 8
(WHICH TIPPING HIM OFF QUICKLY REDUCED TO ZERO) 9
'WHY THE CLINTONS FAILED "TO CAPTURE OR KILL THE TALLEST MAN IN AFGHANISTAN"
(DID THEY REALLY WANT TO TAKE HIM OUT ANYWAY?)
Part Two:
Wednesday, Mar. 24, 2004 10:26 AM EST
"You cannot explain to me why we have not captured or killed the tallest man in Afghanistan."
"You know... the job which we should have done 1... which should have been our primary focus, to find [you know] bin Laden and eliminate al Qaeda."
hear hillary clinton
"Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in '91 and he went to the Sudan.
We'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him [bin Laden].
At the time, '96, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America.3
So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have; but they thought it was a hot potato. They didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan."
hear bill clinton
No one paid much attention to what may turn out to be even more incriminating: clinton's curious explanation of the missile strike at Kandahur that took out a phalanxlike formation of... empty tents... and allowed bin Laden (and the Mideast Muslim ego) to escape unscathed.
Ever notice how a crook volunteers way too much information when he's trying to explain away his crimes? This is especially true when the crook thinks you're an idiot and he's a genius. "When I bombed his training camp and tried to kill him and his high command in 1998 after the African -Embassy bombings, some people criticized me for doing it. We just barely missed him by a couple of hours. I think whoever told us he was going to be there told somebody who told him that our missiles might be there. I think we were ratted out.7"
bill clinton
clinton's reaction--or should I say non-reaction-- to the USS Cole bombing in 2000--an unambiguous act of war--validates Albright's assertion.
clinton's refusal to take bin Laden in 1996--validates Albright's assertion.
That clinton summarily ignored and urged all of us to ignore the first attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor, the 1993 WTC bombing--ignore the first major Islamofascist terrorist attack on the continental United States!!--validates Albright's assertion.
The fact that "our national mourner," bill "I feel your pain" clinton, never even visited the site--he was only 15 minutes away mere days after the 1993 WTC bombing--validates Albright's assertion like nothing else.
This legacy confab is in and of itself proof certain of clinton's deeply flawed character, and a demonstration in real time of the way in which the clinton years were about a legacy that was incidentally a presidency.
Madeleine Albright captured the essence of this dysfunctional presidency best when she explained why clinton couldn't go after bin Laden.
According to Richard Miniter, the Albright revelation occurred at the cabinet meeting that would decide the disposition of the USS Cole bombing by al Qaeda [that is to say, that would decide to do what it had always done when a "bimbo" was not spilling the beans on the clintons: Nothing]. Only Clarke wanted to retaliate militarily for this unambiguous act of war.
Albright explained that a [sham] Mideast accord would yield [if not peace for the principals, surely] a Nobel Peace Prize for clinton. Kill or capture bin Laden and clinton could kiss the 'accord' and the Peace Prize good-bye.
If clinton liberalism, smallness, cowardice, corruption, perfidy--and, to borrow a phrase from Andrew Cuomo, clinton cluelessness--played a part, it was, in the end, the Nobel Peace Prize that produced the puerile pertinacity that enabled the clintons to shrug off terrorism's global danger.
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.
It is 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.
In the case of the non-response to the attack on the Cole, an unambiguous act of war, the clinton rationale 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.)
"I remember exactly what happened. Bruce Lindsey said to me on the phone, 'My God, a second plane has hit the tower.' And I said, 'Bin Laden did this.' that's the first thing I said. He said, 'How can you be sure?' I said 'Because only bin Laden and the Iranians could set up the network to do this and they [the Iranians] wouldn't do it because they have a country in targets. Bin Laden did it.'
I thought that my virtual obsession 2 with him was well placed and I was full of regret that I didn't get him."
bill clinton
INTERVIEW Osama bin Laden
Describe the situation when your men took down the American forces in Somalia.
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?
"In this interdependent world, we should still have a preference for peace over war....
But sometimes we would have these debates where people would say, if I didn't take some military action this very day, people would look down their nose at America and think we were weak. And I always thought of Senator Fulbright.... 6
So anytime somebody said in my presence, 'Hey, if you don't do this, people will think you're weak,' I always asked the same question for eight years, 'Can we kill 'em tomorrow?'
I don't think we can bring 'em back tomorrow, but can we kill 'em tomorrow? If we can kill them tomorrow, then we're not weak.... 1
I learned that as a 20-year-old kid watching Bill Fulbright. Listening."
bill clinton
"Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in '91 and he went to the Sudan.
We'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him [bin Laden].
At the time, '96, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America.
So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have; but they thought it was a hot potato. They didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan."
bill clinton
"I remember exactly what happened. Bruce Lindsey said to me on the phone, 'My God, a second plane has hit the tower.' And I said, 'Bin Laden did this.' that's the first thing I said. He said, 'How can you be sure?' I said 'Because only bin Laden and the Iranians could set up the network to do this and they [the Iranians] wouldn't do it because they have a country in targets. Bin Laden did it.'
I thought that my virtual obsession 2 with him was well placed and I was full of regret that I didn't get him."
bill clinton
hillary clinton
bill clinton
Bill Schneider
Clinton Lobbies for Nobel Prize: What a Punk
AIDES PUSH CLINTON FOR THE NOBEL
Mia T
This legacy confab is in and of itself proof certain of clinton's deeply flawed character, and a demonstration in real time of the way in which the clinton years were about a legacy that was incidentally a presidency.
Madeleine Albright captured the essence of this dysfunctional presidency best when she explained why clinton couldn't go after bin Laden.
According to Richard Miniter, the Albright revelation occurred at the cabinet meeting that would decide the disposition of the USS Cole bombing by al Qaeda [that is to say, that would decide to do what it had always done when a "bimbo" was not spilling the beans on the clintons: Nothing]. Only Clarke wanted to retaliate militarily for this unambiguous act of war.
Albright explained that a [sham] Mideast accord would yield [if not peace for the principals, surely] a Nobel Peace Prize for clinton. Kill or capture bin Laden and clinton could kiss the 'accord' and the Peace Prize good-bye.
If clinton liberalism, smallness, cowardice, corruption, perfidy--and, to borrow a phrase from Andrew Cuomo, clinton cluelessness--played a part, it was, in the end, the Nobel Peace Prize that produced the puerile pertinacity that enabled the clintons to shrug off terrorism's global danger.
(DID THEY REALLY WANT TO TAKE HIM OUT ANYWAY?)
(Part One)
by Mia t, 2.15.06
Saturday, Jan. 28, 2006
Chitchat with Jane Pauley
San Francisco, CA
Sunday, Aug. 11, 2002
Clinton Reveals on Secret Audio:
I Nixed Bin Laden Extradition Offer
hen the damning tape surfaced, focus was naturally on bill clinton's (oops!) admission.
I agree. We were ratted out. bill clinton could not afford to capture or kill bin Laden. This information courtesy of none other than Madeleine Albright.
Sunday, Aug. 11, 2002
Clinton Reveals on Secret Audio:
I Nixed Bin Laden Extradition Offer
7. The ABC miniseries, 'The Path to 9/11,' reports that Albright, herself, did the ratting, which makes sense: Madeleine Albright was obviously the clintons' Nobel Peace Prize point man and facilitator.
'MAKE IT A RULE' -- PLACE YOUR ORDER FOR OSAMA WITH CLINTON and CO.
(HEAR HILLARY + BILL MAKE THEIR PITCH)
by Mia t, 2.13.06
ALBRIGHT INDICTS CLINTON FOR TERRORISM FAILURE
(and doesn't even know it)
by Mia T, 4.28.06
ALBRIGHT1: 'Bin Laden and his Network Declared War2 on the United States and Struck First and We Have Suffered Deeply'
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2006
h e a r --c l i n t o n --l o s e --i t
by Mia T, 11.11.05
Sunday, Sept 3, 2002
Larry King Live
BIN LADEN FINGERS CLINTON FOR TERROR SUCCESS (SEE FOOTAGE)
(may 1998)
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....
THE THREAT OF TERRORISM IS AS CLOSE AS A CLINTON IS TO THE OVAL OFFICE
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2006
THE (oops!) INADVERTENT ADMISSIONS OF BILL + HILLARY CLINTON part one
UNITED 93:THE CLINTON-9/11 NEXUS
"We have to do it now. We know what happens if we just sit here and do nothing...."
CLINTON: 'Can we kill 'em tomorrow?'
(+ Albright-Fulbright-Nobel TERRORISM revelations)
WHY DID BILL CLINTON IGNORE TERRORISM?
Was it simply the constraints of his liberal mindset, or was it something even more threatening to our national security?
'The Path to 9/11' Annotated:
CLIPS, SYNOPSIS, THE CLINTON-9/11 NEXUS, THE CLINTON JACKBOOT
'The Path to 9/11': CLINTON FAILURE TO ORDER 'PURE KILL' CUT CHANCES OF GETTING BIN LADEN IN HALF
HEAR 'THE PATH TO 9/11' SCREENWRITER:
CLINTON WILLFULLY FAILED TO NAIL BIN LADEN AS MANY AS A DOZEN TIMES: CIA
HILLARY'S FECKLESS 'DEFENSE' OF BILL WILL DAMAGE BOTH CLINTONS
THE CHRIS WALLACE INTERVIEW BLOWBACK
'BIN LADEN ALIVE TODAY BECAUSE CLINTON, BERGER + CLARKE REFUSED TO KILL HIM'
CLINTON 'MISLED AMERICAN PEOPLE' IN CHRIS WALLACE INTERVIEW
:HEAR Osama-Division CIA Chief
THE DRAMATIC INCREASE IN HILLARY CLINTON'S DISCLOSED ASSETS: An Alternative Theory
WHEN CATTLE FUTURES ARE THE FUTURE:
HILLARY CLINTON'S COW TRADES AS PROGNOSTIC
SOMALIA + RWANDA UNDERSCORE WHY WE MUST DEFEAT THE CLINTONS NOW (ATTENTION NEW YORKERS)
IT TAKES A CLINTON TO RAZE A COUNTRY
BIN LADEN FINGERS CLINTON FOR TERROR SUCCESS (SEE FOOTAGE)
THE THREAT OF TERRORISM IS AS CLOSE AS A CLINTON IS TO THE OVAL OFFICE
UNITED 93:THE CLINTON-9/11 NEXUS
"We have to do it now. We know what happens if we just sit here and do nothing...."
MISSING CLINTON AUDIO! 'Can we kill 'em tomorrow?'
(+Albright-Fulbright-Nobel TERRORISM revelations)
WHY THE CLINTONS FAILED "TO CAPTURE OR KILL THE TALLEST MAN IN AFGHANISTAN"
(DID THEY REALLY WANT TO TAKE HIM OUT ANYWAY?)
ALBRIGHT INDICTS CLINTON FOR TERRORISM FAILURE (and doesn't even know it)
'MAKE IT A RULE' -- PLACE YOUR ORDER FOR OSAMA WITH CLINTON and CO.
(HEAR HILLARY + BILL MAKE THEIR PITCH)
THE (oops!) INADVERTENT (TERRORISM) ADMISSIONS OF BILL + HILLARY CLINTON (HEAR HILLARY IN SF)
HILLARY GOES NUCLEAR
PROLIFERATION IN THE AGE OF CLINTON
THE FAILED, DYSFUNCTIONAL CLINTON PRESIDENCY
(DECONSTRUCTING CLINTON'S HOFSTRA SPEECH) -- part1: clinton's "Brinkley" Lie
AFTERWORD: ON CLINTON SMALLNESS
(BRINKLEY MISSES THE POINT)
PRESIDENTIAL FAILURE, 9/11 + KATRINA
Carpe Mañana: The (bill + hillary) clinton Terrorism Policy
('Can we kill 'em tomorrow?')
CHENEY: CALL THEM REPREHENSIBLE
THE DEMOCRATS ARE GONNA GET US KILLED (kerry, clinton + sandy berger's pants) SERlES5
sandy berger haberdashery feint
(the specs, not the pants or the socks)
CLINTON TREASON + THE GORELICK WALL
Reverse Gorelick
THE LEFT'S RECKLESS TET-OFFENSIVE-GAMBIT REPLAY:
the left's jihad against America is killing our troops, aiding + abetting the terrorists and imperiling all Americans
CLINTON RAPES, REVISIONISM, USEFUL IDIOTS AND ENTROPY (an update)
pro-islamofascist-terrorist radical chic
WHY THE LEFT IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA
The Left's Fatally Flawed "Animal Farm" Mentality
(Why America Must NEVER AGAIN Elect a Democrat President)
WAR AND TREASON AND THE NEW YORK TIMES
(Please see post 65)
IN A 'PINCH': RETHINKING THE FIRST AMENDMENT
(Which came first, the 'journalist' or the traitor?)
PINCH SULZBERGER, PEARL HARBOR + TREASON
WHY WE MUST PROSECUTE THE NEW YORK TIMES
'MISBEGOTTEN' TIMES
(NARROWNESS, MR. SULZBERGER, NOT WIDTH)
WHY BIN LADEN WANTS HOME DELIVERY OF THE NEW YORK TIMES
MORE
THE ADDRESS
Fulbright Prize address
April 12, 2006
Sunday, Aug. 11, 2002
Clinton Reveals on Secret Audio:
I Nixed Bin Laden Extradition Offer
Sunday, Sept 3, 2002
Larry King Live
Saturday, Jan. 28, 2006
Chitchat with Jane Pauley
San Francisco, CA
Fulbright Prize address
April 12, 2006
CNN
reporting on the Fulbright Prize
April 14, 2006
White House Lobbied For Clinton Nobel Peace Prize Updated
Friday, October 13, 2000
By Rita Cosby
Buddy Death Report Raises More Questions Than It Answers
h e a r --c l i n t o n --l o s e --i t
by Mia T, 11.11.05
thanx :)
thanx
ping
Interesting and provocative piece - ABC does "path to 9/11" and then ABC breaks the Foley emails.
Question: Do we yet know what was in Sandy Burglar's pants? I mean really know?
Thank you, Mia T, for continuing to stand for the real truth.
Your focus on the phrase "kill him" which was used repeatedly by clintoon, reminds me that he is a student of the infamous mass manipulator Tony Robbins. Mr. Robbins teaches NLP (Neuro Linguistic Programming), a technique that uses words to create impressions.
For example, in the Chris Wallace interview, clintoon repeatedly said, "I have never criticized the Bush administration in their handling of the was on terror." He then went on to criticize; do exactly what he said he never did.
The effect of this technique on the unsuspecting mind is that (1) clintoon never criticized Bush, so any criticism of him is unjustified, and (2) his criticism if factual.
I wonder how many nights Tony Robbins spent in the Lincoln bedroom while coaching der slick miester.
The purple mafia will be after you. bttt
Thanx :)
It was probably the first thing of substance....
Is there anyone still in doubt about what Jamie Gorelick was doing on that commision... and who put her there?? |
We would have it backwards and miss the point entirely if we were to attribute The Gorelick Wall and the attendant metastasis of al Qaeda during the clintons' watch, (which, incidentally, was then in its incipient stage and stoppable), to the '60s liberal mindset. Rampant '60s liberalism was not the underlying rationale for The Gorelick Wall. Rather, The Gorelick Wall was the underlying rationale for--The Gorelick Wall was (insofar as '60s liberalism was the Wall's apparent impetus) a cynical cover for --the willful, methodical malpractice and malfeasance that was the product of the virulent clinton strain of rampant '60s liberalism. While it is true that The Gorelick Wall was the convenient device of a cowardly self-serving president, The Wall's aiding and abetting of al Qaeda was largely incidental, (the pervasiveness of the clintons' Nobel-Peace-Prize calculus notwithstanding). The Wall was engineered primarily to protect a corrupt self-serving president. The metastasis of al Qaeda and 9/11 were simply the cost of doing business, clinton-style. Further confirmation that the Wall was cover for clinton corruption:
Conversely, that it never occurred to anyone on the commission that Gorelick's flagrant conflict of interest renders her presence on the commission beyond farce calls into question the commission's judgment if not its integrity. Washington's mutual protection racket writ large, I suspect.... The Gorelick Wall is consistent with, and an international extension of, two essential acts committed in tandem, Filegate, the simultaneous empowering of the clintons and disemboweling of clinton adversaries, and the clinton Putsch, the firing and replacement of every U.S. attorney extant. ... Once the clintons' own U.S. attorneys were in place, once the opposition was disemboweled by the knowledge that their raw FBI files had been in the possession of the clintons, once domestic law enforcement was effectively blinded to foreign data by Gorelick's Wall, the clintons were free to methodically and seditiously and with impunity auction off America's security, sovereignty and economy to the highest foreign bidder.
Reverse Gorelick COPYRIGHT MIA T 2005
|
Hammer home this simple message: To vote for a D, or to vote third party or sit it out... is to put your kids' lives and your country at grave risk....
We must not get distracted. We must not get discouraged. AND WE MUST NOT PLAY INTO THE CLINTONS' HAND.
thx, Faith.
It should not go unnoticed that the clintons' rewrite of history places our country... and our children... in even greater peril. At least they are consistent.
<< The timing of the Foley revelations is a bit odd. >>
It's not odd to those of us who've kept an eye and a listening watch on the Moscow/Peking/Cli'ton/Rich/Soros/Socialist International nexus.
The timing of the long held-in-reserve feckless faggot Foley filth bears that awful Medusa-like Mob's hallmark but especially that of its immediate financier. These liberal-activist kids were Gorgon Soros staged stooges and his Servers' almost certainly saved and stored the stooges' chat-room and email records for likely daily release between now and election day.
The gang that gave Gerry Studds a mild censure for taking a 17-year-old page to Portugal and actually buggering the poor little bastard, greeted Studds his return to the House with three standing ovations, let Barney Fwank off completely when that perverted piece of it's "room mate" took Barney, according to Barney, "for a sucker" and ran a call-sodomite racket out of Barney's DC office and house -- and actually worships the world's most prominent ever serial sodomist -- would make the already run out of town on a rail, (by Republicans) Foley's turning out to have after all been but another closeted "Democrat," a reason to give it control of the Congress.
Fat hope, George.
(Great stuff, Mia. Thank you)
One thing to remember, though. In the privacy of the voting booth, with the lives of our children in the balance, even a few of the most radicalized crazies won't be able to pull that wobbly lever on the left.
We must keep hammering away: The Left is gonna get us killed.
The Bush Doctine is built on two pillars, one -- that the United States must maintain its absolute military superiority in every part of the world, and second -- that the United States has the right for preemptive action. Now, both these propositions, taken on their own, are quite valid propositions, but if you put them together, they establish two kinds of sovereignty in the world, the sovereignty of the United States, which is inviolate, not subject to any international constraints, and the rest of the world, which is subject to the Bush Doctrine. To me, it is reminiscent to [sic] George Orwell's "Animal Farm," that "All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
Yesterday, at the "progressive," i.e., ultra-extremist left-wing liberal, "Take Back America" confab, Mr. Soros confirmed the obvious: 9/11 was dispositive for the Dems; that is, 9/11 accelerated what eight years of the clintons had set into motion, namely, the demise of a Democratic party that is increasingly irrelevant, unflinchingly corrupt, unwaveringly self-serving, chronically moribund and above all, lethally, seditiously dangerous. Apparently missing the irony, George Soros chastised America with these words even as he was trying his $25,000,000, 527-end-run damnedest to render himself "more equal than others" in order to foist his radical, paranoic, deadly dementia on an entire nation. "Animal Farm" is George Orwell's satirical allegory of the Russian Revolution; but it could just as easily be the story of the Democratic Party of today, with the its porcine manifestation. SOROS TSURIS Soros' little speech reveals everything we need to know about the Left, to wit: Soros is correct when he states that each of the two pillars of the Bush Doctine--the United States maintenance of absolute military superiority and the United States right of preemptive action--are "valid propositions" [in a post-9/11 world]. But when he proceeds from there to argue that the validity of each of these two [essential] pillars is somehow nullified by the resultant unequalled power that these two pillars, when taken together, vest in the United States, rational thought and national-security primacy give way to dogmatic Leftist neo-neoliberal ideology. What is, in fact, "inviolate" here is the neo-neoliberal doctrine of U.S. sovereignty, which states simply that there must be none, that we must yield our sovereignty to the United Nations. Because this Leftist tenet is inviolate, and because it is the antithesis of the concept of U.S. sovereignty enunciated by the Bush Doctrine and the concept of U.S. sovereignty required by the War on Terror, rabid Leftists like Soros conclude that we must trash the latter two inconvenient concepts--even if critical to the survival of our country. It is precisely here where Soros and the Left fail utterly to understand the War on Terror. They cannot see beyond their own ideology and lust for power. They have become a danger to this country no less lethal than the terrorists they aid and abet. I think this administration has the right strategic vision and has taken many of the steps needed to get that long-term strategy rolling. Where I give them the failing grade is in explaining that vision to the American public and the world. Key example: this White House enshrines preemptive war in the latest National Security Strategy and that scares the hell out of a lot of Americans, not to mention our allies. Why? This administration fails to distinguish sufficiently under what conditions that strategy makes reasonable sense. My point is this: when you are explicit about the world being divided into globalization's Core and Gap, you can distinguish between the different security rule sets at work in each. Nothing has changed about strategic deterrence or the concept of mutual-assured destruction (or MAD) within the Core, so fears about preemptive wars triggering World War III are misplaced. When this administration talks about preemption, they're talking strictly about the Gap - not the Core. The strategic stability that defines the Core is not altered one whit by this new strategy, because preemption is all about striking first against actors or states you believe - quite reasonably - are undeterrable in the normal sense. Thomas P.M. Barnett I'm a single-issue voter, as I guess must have become apparent. I'm not a Republican. I'm not a conservative. I'm not a very great admirer of the president in many ways, but I think that my condition is... that this is an administration that wakes up every morning wondering how to make life hard for the forces of Jihad and how to make as hard as possible an unapologetic defense of civilization against this kind of barbarism... and though the Bush administration has been rife with disappointment on this and incompetent, I nonetheless feel that they have some sense of that spirit. Christopher Hitchens
(Why America Must NEVER AGAIN Elect a Democrat President)
by Mia T, 6.04.04
eorge Soros could not have more clearly enunciated the lethal danger that he and John Kerry and the clintons and the rest of his leftist cabal pose for America.
"All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
The Pentagon's New Map
NB: Dr. Barnett is a lifelong DEMOCRAT
I don't get that... I don't get that feeling from anyone who even sought the Democratic nomination.
I would [therefore] have to vote for the reelection of President Bush.
Washington Journal, 6.01.04
C-SPAN
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2006
December 7, 1941+64
AN OPEN LETTER TO TIM ROBBINS, DAVID GEFFEN, CHRIS MATTHEWS, MAUREEN DOWD + JEANINE PIRRORE: 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
Simultaneous Soros! (pronounced 'tsuris')
Virtual synchronicity.
In real time.
;)
Your right on again Mia T. Great info.... did you run across this:
http://www.progressivestrategies.net/introduction/partners.asp
A strong clinton connection.... Thanx :)
;)
This is a rebuilt Clinton War Room action. The DEMS can't go to the bathroom with Bill and Hill telling them when and how.
... and, therefore--to stick with your metaphor-- no one wants to flush them down the toilet more than the Ds. It would be naive to think there aren't multiple coups in the works.
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.