COMING APART: What clinton was REALLY saying... and why... when he bashed Bush in Canada

4.21.03 | Mia T

[Mia T]

direct link to the (very, very short) interactive, audio-enhanced flash movie

 

If you don't have the flash player 6 plug-in...

 

COMING APART.......by Mia T..........4-21-03

What he said in Canada last week:

What he was REALLY saying:

[hollywood]

Is all this hard work of yours gaining traction anywhere else but here at FR? (Judicial Watch doesn't count: Klayman hasn't won anything of importance yet.) Although it's very thorough, until there is buy-in elsewhere, it all comes across as conspiracy-theory stuff. I would think by now that at least Hannity, or O'Reilly, would have run with one of the scandals for a while, but it doesn't seem to have happened.

[Mia T]

Unlike hillary clinton, I was never really very interested in the "conspiracy-theory stuff." Mainly, I try to document and analyze the clintons and their crimes and ineptitudes and emptiness.

You may be confusing style with substance... ;)

[Mia T]

I won't tell... ;)

[Mia T]

BTW... don't minimize FR... It's a great venue for getting out the word.

[Mia T]

It just occurred to me that you may be referring to the Ron Brown death...

To borrow from Nixon, the manifest obviousness and the outrageousness a clinton coverup of the Brown death doesn't make us conspiracy nuts. If nothing else, the outcome of the Juanita Broaddrick rape allegation should drive that home...

[Mia T]

thx ;)

[Republic]

Just thinking about that bulbous, coke-nosed, sorry excuse for an ex-president speaking out against our foreign policy against terrorism while slumming in Canada can make my blood boil.

And as for the 'is' and its meaning thingie-oh vomit. Just hearing him going thru that torturous exercise again brings on such embarrassment for me, for our nation as a whole. This pig needs to get his nose out of the public trough and disappear into the netherworld of has beens (tho he really never was-past tense of 'is'-and I KNOW what it means!).

[Mia T]

Q ERTY6

ping!

The reason the clintons are undermining America NOW
is the same reason the clintons didn't fight terrorism THEN

The simple, immutable clinton calculus:
Do it if -- and only if -- it benefits the clintons.

 

Thou art arm'd that hath thy crook'd schemers straight.

Cudgel thy brains no more, the clinton plots are great.

Mia T, On Neutered and Neutering,

by Mia T and Edward Zehr (EZ)

A Fish Rots from the Head

Investor's Business Daily

 

 

Ijaz, an admitted Clinton supporter who helped negotiate these opportunities to nab bin Laden, said, "The silence of the Clinton administration in responding to these offers was deafening."

 

Ijaz says that three months before bin Laden's men blew up the USS Cole in Yemen, he "brought the White House another plausible offer to deal with bin Laden, by then known to be involved in the embassy bombings (in Tanzania and Kenya)... But senior Clinton officials sabotaged the offer."

 

Clinton's apparent boredom with vital information extended beyond Sudanese intelligence officers to his own intelligence officers. His first CIA director, James Woolsey, couldn't get a meeting with Clinton in the two years he served. Woolsey left the Clinton administration disgusted with its slovenly approach to national security. ...

 

To hear Clinton now say "We must do more to reduce the pool of potential terrorists" is thus beyond farce. He had numerous opportunities to reduce that pool, and he blew it.

 

The pool, in fact, grew larger on Clinton's watch, as he spent his final days giving pardons to drug dealers, Puerto Rican terrorists and Marc Rich, a fugitive who topped America's most-wanted list.

 

NEW AUDIO!

Hear the Bill Bennett epilogue

 

In this light, Clinton's order to the CIA that it not use "unsavory characters" to collect information pushes irony to its outer limits.

 

hillary clinton blames better half for terrorism
(SHE knew, "you know," nuttin')

Meet the Press, 12-09-01

 

Mia T, 12-09-01

 

 

Clinton's failure to grasp the opportunity to unravel increasingly organized extremists, coupled with Berger's assessments of their potential to directly threaten the U.S., represents one of the most serious foreign policy failures in American history

Clinton Let Bin Laden Slip Away and Metastasize

 

Bill Clinton may not be the worst president America has had, but surely he is the worst person to be president.*

-GEORGE WILL, Sleaze, the sequel

 

 

Had George Will written Sleaze, the sequel (the "sequel" is, of course, hillary) after 9-11-01, I suspect that he would have had to forgo the above conceit, as the doubt expressed in the setup phrase was, from that day forward, no longer operational.

Indeed, assessing the clinton presidency an abject failure is not inconsistent with commentary coming from the left, most recently the LA Times: "Clinton Let Bin Laden Slip Away and Metastasize."

When the clintons left office, I predicted that the country would eventually learn--sadly, the hard way--that this depraved, self-absorbed and inept pair had placed America (and the world) in mortal danger. But I was thinking years, not months.

It is very significant that hillary clinton didn't deny clinton culpability for the terrorism. (Meet the Press, 12-09-01), notwithstanding tired tactics (if you can't pass the buck, spread the blame) and chronic "KnowNothing Victim Clinton" self-exclusion.

If leftist pandering keeps the disenfranchized down in perpetuity, clinton pandering,("it's the economy, stupid"), kept the middle and upper classes wilfully ignorant for eight years.

And ironically, both results (leftist social policy and the clinton economy) are equally illusory, fraudulent. It is becoming increasingly clear that clinton covertly cooked the books even as he assiduously avoided essential actions that would have negatively impacted the economy--the ultimate source of his continued power--actions like, say, going after the terrorists.

It is critically important that hillary clinton fail in her grasp for power; read Peggy Noonan's little book, 'The Case Against Hillary Clinton' and Barbara Olson's two books; it is critical that the West de-clintonize, but that will be automatic once it is understood that the clintons risked civilization itself in order to gain and retain power.

It shouldn't take books, however, to see that a leader is a dangerous, self-absorbed sicko. People should be able to figure that out for themselves. The electorate must be taught to think, to reason. It must be able to spot spin, especially in this age of the electronic demagogue.

I am not hopeful. As Bertrand Russell noted, "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so. "

 

 

 

*George Will continues: There is reason to believe that he is a rapist ("You better get some ice on that," Juanita Broaddrick says he told her concerning her bit lip), and that he bombed a country to distract attention from legal difficulties arising from his glandular life, and that. ... Furthermore, the bargain that he and his wife call a marriage refutes the axiom that opposites attract. Rather, she, as much as he, perhaps even more so, incarnates Clintonism

 

 

[SerpentDove]

[Mia T]

Q ERTY3
THE INTERMINABLE clintons 
It's time to take out the trash...
A Senate en passant capture is THE MOVE... 

BUMP!

[jla]

BTTT

[jla]

Q ERTY6

Don't know if you've seen this or not.

[sultan88]

Q ERTY6

That is the coolest thing!!

[Mia T]

Q ERTY Series: The Inspiration

 

QWER•TY (kwûr'tee) adj.

Of, relating to, or designating the traditional configuration of typewriter or computer keyboard keys. [From the first six letters at the upper left.]

 

 

Q ERTY Series: The Inspiration

No Joke
Those who trashed the White House were vicious vandals, not merry pranksters.

 

BY TUNKU VARADARAJAN

Monday, January 29, 2001 12:01 a.m. EST

The Wall Street Journal

 

What is a "prank"? And when does a prank take on a darker hue and merit, instead, a less indulgent label--such as "delinquency," or "vandalism"?

 

These questions, whose answers are rooted in common sense, culture and civilization, were raised last week by revelations first detailed on the Internet by Matt Drudge, for whose insolent, frontiersman's approach to newsgathering we continue to be grateful. He's not always right, and he's not always elegant, but he bawls his tales from the rafters when others, more timorous and more conventional, would only mince their words, or whisper.

 

Although the mainstream press echoed the story only reluctantly, and sought to draw its sting by downgrading it to the status of rumor, the contents of the Drudge report seemed to be unquestionably consonant with the tone, the oh-so-jarring tone, struck, in their departure from the White House, by the Clinton cohorts--from the strutting self-congratulation of the ex-president at Andrews Air Force Base (like a weed, he'd taken root, and like a weed he called to be ripped from the soil beneath him), to the stripping bare of the former Air Force One by the ex-presidential locusts.

 

According to reports, outgoing Clinton-Gore staffers at the White House performed a range of "pranks," including the prizing out from many White House computer keyboards of the W (Dubya) key, the gluing shut of drawers on office desks, the infecting of computers with viruses, the recording of offensive reception messages on the answering machines, the slashing (yes, slashing) of telephone lines, the loading of pornographic images on printers and computers, offensive graffiti on corridors and bathroom walls, the turning upside down of desks, and, as a valedictory signature, the leaving of a trail of trash across the West Wing.

 

Mr. Drudge, the only one to quantify the damage publicly, has put the monetary estimate--in terms of its cost to the taxpayer--at $200,000. There is some speculation that this is a conservative estimate...

 

In the context of the White House, any harm or damage must be construed to include the infliction of a burden on the taxpayer--not to mention the interference, however temporary, with the business of government....the slashing of phone lines? The gluing shut of desk drawers? The gouging out from keyboards of the W key? The infection of computers with viruses? The redirection of official phone lines, on which the public and government rely? These, I fear, violate the prankster's rulebook. They caused damage; lines, desks, computers and keyboards needed repair and replacement. My money, and yours, was used for this repair.

 

Most shabby of all, however, was the perpetrators' intent. A true prank--a prank properly defined--is carried out in a jocular spirit. Pranks are escapades, monkeyshines. They're not acts of venom or spite, of resentment or ill-will. If the actor is malefic, he is not a prankster but a vandal. He is, in truth, a delinquent.

 

That's what I learned in grade school, and I commend that interpretation

to you.

 

Mr. Varadarajan is deputy editorial features editor of The Wall Street Journal. His column appears Mondays.

I would argue with Mr. Varadarajan's contention that mens rea must be considered and that the absence of malicious intent reduces the act to mere prank. Such an argument 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.

"I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let's start with typewriters."

- Frank Lloyd Wright

link to movie

Someone recently tested the monkeys-on-typewriters bit trying for the plays of Will Shakespeare, but all they got were the plays of bill clinton.

clinton hunt-and-peck

Q ERTY1

Q ERTY2

Q ERTY3

Q ERTY4

Q ERTY5

Q ERTY6

Q ERTY7

Q ERTY8

Q ERTY9

 

 

 

[jla]

I already knew the origin of Q ERTY, Mia.
But I never tire of seeing your truly original & impressive work.

[Republic]

"I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let's start with typewriters."
- Frank Lloyd Wright

Didn't know this fellow designed quotes, too! LOL. You didn't put this one in for my benefit, did ya? :^)

LOL-I know it follows the Q ERTY theme....but it is just sooooooooooooo rich!

[Mia T]

bump ;)

[Mia T]

thx. ;)