Does Kirk Have Terrorist Ties? Absolutely! [Senate Race in Texas]

Downside Legacy, New York Post, Austin Review | Arthur Wildfire! March

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Candidate Kirk, seeking to be a senator representing the Great State of Texas, was accused of terrorist ties by Marc Levin [The Austin Review] [Link to article].

There was a firestorm of debate among conservatives about how true or valid those terrorist ties might be.

Always trying to think outside the box, I have conclusive proof that Kirk does, indeed, have strong terrorist ties. The funny thing is, this terrorist tie is so obvious, it's been right under reporters' noses for years. But liberals have clamped down on the way people think. That clamp down is so tight that anti-liberals are taught to overlook certain things, even to this day.

So please keep an open mind when you consider this. Kirk asked for political money from a man who actively sought to release bomb terrorists from jail. This is no joke. This man actually succeeded in releasing 11 bomb terrorists from jail, and Kirk goes to this terrorist liberator and asks for help getting campaign money. Kirk knew that this man is despised by the Lone Star State and asked him not to campaign there. [Just the money, please. And please stay away from Texas.] This man is widely known as a lover of terrorists and was officially condemned by the Senate. Ninety Five Senators decided to cut into their valuable time to officially condemn this terrorist liberator. And STILL, Mr. Kirk decides to approach this man for help.

The terrorist liberator is none other than former impeached president, Bill Clinton.* True, Bill Clinton asked the terrorists to make a promise to never kill people again. They STUBBORNLY REFUSED to make that promise for over a week. All 16 he offered clemency to have one primary purpose in life: kill American people. Finally, 11 of them agreed, tired of hearing his begging and pleading to make that useless promise.

This public condemnation did nothing to stop Candidate Kirk and other members of the DNC from asking a terrorist lover for campaign cash. Houston Chronicle,July 11, 2002 | CLAY ROBISON.

Link to Kirk's desire to get $$$ from terrorist lover but keep terrorist lover out of Texas.

Now for a hard look at the entire DNC. They almost unanymously supported the condemnation of impeached former president, Bill Clinton, with regard to the FALN pardons. Did they mean what they said? No. Many democrats continue to fawn over this terrorist lover for more cash. And there is no significant quote I know of regarding any democrat denouncing another democrat for pandering to that terrorist lover.

Their condemnation is nothing but political posturing. There is no substance to their words. Conclusion: The DNC does not take terrorism seriously. The FALN is repsonsible for 130 bombings. Bill Clinton offered clemency to 16 of its convicted, imprisoned members. And he is still a 'respected' source for campaign cash.

The taint of the money means nothing to them. They want to win, regardless of how. They don't care how bloody their money is, so long as it keeps them in positions of power. They only hope that you don't think too much about what they are actually doing.

* Background Info at Downside Legacy:

Link to a page crammed with Downside Legacy's Info on FALN Pardon

New York Post 9/15/99 Brian Blomquist Robert Hardt Jr. "....The Senate yesterday voted 95-2 to condemn President Clinton's clemency to 16 Puerto Rican militants - as the White House stonewalled questions on how the decision was made. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said the White House stonewalling was a key reason for voting to condemn Clinton's clemency grant. "I have repeatedly requested information on these cases. I have been given no such information and therefore have voted to support the resolution," Schumer said. Sen. Paul Coverdell (R-Ga.) charged that the White House, in a last-minute move, "pulled the plug" on a witness from the FBI who was set to testify to a Senate hearing on Clinton's controversial clemency decision. The stonewalling appears only to have fanned the flames against Clinton's clemency, which led to the freeing last week of 11 jailed members of the FALN, a Puerto Rican terrorist group responsible for 130 bombings and six deaths. In a letter to Attorney General Janet Reno, Coverdell wrote, "It is completely unacceptable for the administration to refuse to discuss the president's decision to offer clemency to 16 convicted terrorists."....." [Just a small nibble from a vast compilation of reports on the FALN pardons in web page]

Downside Legacy web page including numberous articles on FALN pardons.

[MeekOneGOP]

bttt

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Kirk Ping.

[ForGod'sSake]

Well, the headline is a bit of a come-on, no? Although you make good points, I suspect a few were turned off by the bait and switch tactic.

BUMP anyway ; )

FGS

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Thanks for the bump, and I mean what I say. Clinton is a terrorist liberator. It's no different than someone using trickery to break a terrorist out of jail. It was trickery in fact. He exploited America's trust and was condemned by 95 senators for doing it.

Anyone who takes campaign cash from Clinton is taking campaign cash from a terrorist supporting organisation.