Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Parallel Universe of Jamie Gorelick: Why the Left is Dangerous for U.S. (NEW Virtual Gorelick)
NPR, MSNBC | 6.19.04 | Mia T

Posted on 06/20/2004 9:22:21 AM PDT by Mia T

The Parallel Universe of Jamie Gorelick

WHY JOHN KERRY IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA
WHY THE LEFT IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA

 


by Mia T, 6.19.04

 

 

 
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)
thanx to Fixit for the audio

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

It is quite clear that the agencies of government who should have been protecting us in these circumstances had not even barely contemplated this sort of event and therefore were not prepared to execute against any kind of plan and so you had massive miscommunication and failure to execute on what they needed to do.

This is a persistent question that we have had.

There seems to have been an enormous disconnect between the intelligence community and what it thought the threats were and the individuals who had to plan against given threats.

So you see the FAA utterly unprepared for--uh--not taking any steps to prevent hijacking of this sort, and you hear NORAD--that is, our military--who are supposed to protect the domestic air space, saying they were focused completely outward and had almost no capacity to protect us internally.

JAMIE GORELICK
All Things Considered,
Thursday , June 17, 2004
NPR

I would just say, though, Pete, and you've been at the Pentagon, too. You know this.

The military is pretty good as a--an intelligence consumer. And my question today for General Myers and others was, why didn't you pull into yourselves and into your own planning process a government-wide assessment of what the threats were?

And you know, John [Lehman] is right. They didn't get intelligence which said, "Focus inside." And so they were focused completely on the perimeter. And that has an enormous impact in what you're seeing in this report....

I mean, you can't fault the FAA here at all. I mean, the FAA did not have the right intelligence either.

I mean, it was not exercising against this. It had protocols as we just discussed that were not remotely appropriate to the kind of hijacking that we had, to an airplane used as a missile.

This is not the FAA's problem. This is the way in which intelligence, which was someplace in the intelligence community, did not find its way to policy makers and certainly to implementers like the FAA and like the Pentagon.

JAMIE GORELICK
'Hardball with Chris Matthews'
June 17. 2004

PETE WILLIAMS, HOST
MSNBC

o my eyes deceive me?

Is that Jamie Gorelick I see, flitting from show to show, fingering intelligence/law-enforcement communications failure as the efficient cause of 9/11*?

"The Gorelick Wall" Jamie Gorelick, without whose pre-engineered structural wonder said communications would not have failed in the first instance?

Is the woman delusional?

Or is the former clinton+clinton "deputy" attorney general "under" Janet Reno simply as shamelessly corrupt as her masters?

And why are there no follow-ups by the media to expose as shameless self-indictment this smarmy self-serving scramble to get it out first (before someone rightly points the finger her way)?


Theatre of the Absurd

Gorelick's surreal presence on the 911 commission investigating Gorelick's Justice Department, a maneuver that effectively removes from the universe of witnesses a central witness, Gorelick, even as it uniquely positions a central player, Gorelick, to directly shape the commission's conclusions.

Reverse Gorelick
Mia T, 4.15.04
QUINN IN THE MORNING (ESSAY DISCUSSED)
(
MP3, REAL, WINDOWS MEDIA, WINAMP)

With Gorelick's graceless intersection of prima facie and prima ballerina, the 9/11 Commission's final act commences.  Aided and abetted, of course, by a compliant media and the D.C. mutual protection racket writ large.

 

 


*even as she undermines President Bush by inserting a stray word here and there to distort the significance of the Commission's findings of multiple Iraq-terrorist linkages, and ignores the pre-emptive as opposed to retaliatory logic of the Iraq casus belli.


 

 COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004


 

CLINTON TREASON + THE GORELICK WALL

by Mia T, 5.5.04

This story merits its own book, but what deserves immediate comment is the willingness of the Clintons to risk everything to keep the cash pipeline open. Schwartz kept it open and full. Before he was through, Schwartz and Loral would donate roughly $2 million to the Clinton cause. Whether Schwartz gave additional money or favors off the books is a question that deserves asking.

A second question that deserves asking is just how much damage Schwartz, Berger and the Clintons did to America's national security.

A third question worth asking is whether Ron Brown's very real threats to expose these machinations led to his death.

Some dare call it treason:
Jack Cashill reveals how Clinton sold America's security to China
WorldNetDaily.com| Wednesday, May 5, 2004 | Jack Cashill


Reverse Gorelick

by Mia T, 4.15.04
QUINN IN THE MORNING (ESSAY DISCUSSED)
(
MP3, REAL, WINDOWS MEDIA, WINAMP)

e 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 of the Wall-as-cover-for-clinton-corruption thesis:

  • Gorelick's failure to disclose the fact that she authored the memo that was the efficient cause of 911

  • Gorelick's surreal presence on the 911 commission investigating Gorelick's Justice Department, a maneuver that effectively removes from the universe of witnesses a central witness, Gorelick, even as it uniquely positions a central player, Gorelick, to directly shape the commission's conclusions. (Is there any question which two people are responsible for Gorelick's insertion on the commission?)

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.

Filegate and the clinton Putsch,
committed in tandem,
the product of a careful criminal calculus,
at once empowered clinton
and disemboweled his opponents.
clinton was now free to betray with abandon
not only our trust,
but the Constitution as well.

The Common Man
Mia T
February, 1998


Allegations of international clinton crimes swirling around the White House in 1995 and beyond support The-Wall-as-cover-for-international-clinton-crimes thesis.

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.


(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com
missus clinton's REAL virtual office update
http://hillarytalks.blogspot.com
http://virtualhillary.blogspot.com
http://virtualclintonlibrary.blogspot.com
http://www.hillarytalks.us
http://www.hillarytalks.org
fiendsofhillary.blogspot.com
fiendsofhillary.us
fiendsofhillary.org
fraudsofhillary.com

 

WSJ.com OpinionJournal

 

 

 

 

 

REVIEW & OUTLOOK

Gorelick Agonistes
Her refusal to resign taints the 9/11 Commission.

Saturday, April 24, 2004 12:01 a.m.
Opinion Journal
from The Wall Street Journal Editorial Page


Jamie Gorelick has now issued her defense for staying on the September 11 Commission, and the usual media and Democratic suspects are rallying behind her. So let's put the issue as simply as possible: If Clinton-era Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick were not already a Commission member, does anybody doubt that she would be called to testify before it?

The Commission is interviewing nearly every major law enforcement and defense figure in two Administrations, and surely a Deputy AG was one of them. More than that, Ms. Gorelick was the author of a memo that has now become central to the debate over what went wrong before 9/11 in the way the U.S. dealt with terror threats.

Yet Ms. Gorelick now claims she can judge everyone else as a Commissioner....

No serious person on either side of the aisle doubts that the "wall" of separation between intelligence agents and criminal investigators... in her memo was a problem. Everyone also now agrees that poor intelligence sharing was one of the key reasons U.S. authorities failed to detect the September 11 plot....

Far from being unnecessary, Ms. Gorelick's testimony goes to the heart of the U.S. government's 1990s' failure to get its antiterror act together....

What is clear is that for some reason the nature and height of "the wall" underwent a qualitative change in the 1990s, as any investigator or prosecutor who dealt with it now says.

Whereas previous interpretations of the FISA statute had limited the ability of prosecutors to produce certain intelligence in court, the new rules effectively prohibited people from communicating at all....

[W]e won't have a clear picture until she and some of the other major players--including members of the FISA court--testify.

The 9/11 Commissioners are only undermining their own credibility in rallying to Ms. Gorelick's defense. Her conflict of interest can't be solved merely by recusing herself from discreet portions of the probe, since as a Commissioner she will still serve as judge and jury on everyone else in government. She should have recused herself entirely from even questioning John Ashcroft. We also take no comfort in Republican Orrin Hatch's endorsement, since one of Ms. Gorelick's former law partners represented him in the BCCI case and he whisked her through Senate confirmation in 1994.

The 9/11 Commission was supposed to be a fair-minded, non-partisan probe that would help our democratic government learn from its mistakes. Ms. Gorelick's failure to resign and testify herself in the face of a clear conflict of interest is reason enough for the American public to distrust its ultimate judgments.

Copyright © 2004 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.


Newly released Justice Department memos show that September 11 panel commissioner Jamie S. Gorelick was more intimately involved than previously thought with hampering communications between U.S. intelligence and law-enforcement agencies fighting terrorism.

As the No. 2 person in the Clinton Justice Department, Ms. Gorelick rejected advice from the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, who warned against placing more limits on communications between law-enforcement officials and prosecutors pursuing counterterrorism cases, according to several internal documents written in summer 1995.

"It is hard to be totally comfortable with instructions to the FBI prohibiting contact with the United States Attorney's Offices when such prohibitions are not legally required," U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White wrote Ms. Gorelick six years before the 2001 terrorist attacks in New York and at the Pentagon.

"Our experience has been that the FBI labels of an investigation as intelligence or law enforcement can be quite arbitrary, depending upon the personnel involved and that the most effective way to combat terrorism is with as few labels and walls as possible so that wherever permissible, the right and left hands are communicating," she wrote.

The documents -- released yesterday by the Justice Department at the request of two Senate Republicans -- drew renewed calls for Ms. Gorelick to testify publicly before the September 11 commission about the so-called "wall" between law enforcement and intelligence agencies that many have blamed for allowing the 2001 terrorist attacks to occur.

Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, said yesterday that Ms. Gorelick's policies regarding the wall contributed to "blinding America to this terrible threat."

Also, he said, the newly released memos raised apparent conflicts with statements Ms. Gorelick has made recently defending herself and her role in the Clinton Justice Department.

"These documents show what we've said all along: Commissioner Gorelick has special knowledge of the facts and circumstances leading up to the erection and buttressing of 'that wall' that, before the enactment of the Patriot Act, was the primary obstacle to the sharing of communications between law enforcement and intelligence agencies," Mr. Cornyn said.

In a June 19, 1995, memo, Ms. White recommended a series of changes to a Gorelick policy that went beyond legal requirements in separating law- enforcement and intelligence agencies.

Memos show Gorelick involvement in 'wall'
Charles Hurt and Stephen Dinan
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published April 29, 2004

The Mary Jo White Memo:
Documentation of clintons' and Gorelick's willful, seditious malfeasance

by Mia T, 4.30.04

 

ary Jo White's memo is documentation of the clintons' and Gorelick's willful, seditious malfeasance.

White's 1995 memo effectively put the clinton-Gorelick cabal on contemporaneous notice that Gorelick's Wall was placing America at grave risk from terrorism.

The memo explicitly warned that the protective wall the clintons and Gorelick were busy erecting (doubtless to blind domestic law enforcement to the clintons' illegal foreign schemes) would (also) blind domestic law enforcement to terrorist plots foreign and domestic.

From this it follows that Gorelick's Wall was not the clintons' and Gorelick's simple (albeit monumental) blunder.

Rather, Gorelick's Wall was no less than the clintons' and Gorelick's malfeasance--willful, self-serving and seditious--with the metastasis of al Qaeda and 9/11 the sorry endpoint.

NOTE: Bin Laden declared war on America throughout the clintons' watch. Had the clintons understood that this was war, not crime, that a terrorist war requires only one consenting player, Gorelick's Wall would be just another clintoncorruption footnote.

"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."

MORE

bill clinton
Sunday, Aug. 11, 2002
Clinton Reveals on Secret Audio:
I Nixed Bin Laden Extradition Offer

It is critical to understand that this same terrorism-is-crime-not-war flawed, dangerous thinking animates John Kerry, and the left, generally.

A post-9/11 America must never again put these dangerous pre-9/11 dinosaurs in any positions of leadership. To do so would be to place at grave risk no less than our very existence.


(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

Bored Certified
NEW virtual john kerry can bore + snowboard at the same time series


(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

copyright Mia T 2004


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; Israel; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Arkansas; US: Illinois; US: Massachusetts; US: New York; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 60minutes; 911; 911attacks; 911commission; 911investigation; abuseofpower; agitpropmachine; alqaeda; alqaedairaq; alqaida; alqaidairaq; alsadr; anachronism; animalfarm; arkansas; bill911; billclinton; blameamericafirst; bookdeal; bot; callmeirresponsible; cbs; cbsnews; cbsviacom; chappaquiddick; clarke; clinton; clinton911; clintonarrogance; clintonbigot; clintonbigots; clintoncontempt; clintoncorruption; clintoncowardice; clintondemagoguery; clintondysfunction; clintonfailure; clintonfelons; clintonineptitude; clintonintimidation; clintonism; clintonjunkets; clintonlegacy; clintonliars; clintonobstruction; clintonpredation; clintonpsychopathy; clintonracism; clintonrage; clintonrape; clintonrapes; clintonrevisionism; clintons; clintons911; clintonsedition; clintonsrrapists; clintonstupidity; clintontreason; clintonviolence; commissionedportrait; confess; congenitalliar; corapist; counterterrorismczar; coverup; coverupqueen; dangerous; denial; error; flipflop; genocide; georgesoros; georgetsuris; giuliani4veep; gorelick; gorelickswall; gorelickwall; hillary; hillary911; hillaryblog; hillarybot; hillaryclinton; hillaryconfesses; hillaryknew; hillaryliar; hillaryrape; hillaryraped2; hillaryrapedtoo; hillarysedition; hillaryspeaks; hillaryssedition; hillarystinear; hillarystreason; hillarytalks; hillarytalksorg; hillarytalksus; hillarytreason; hillaryveep; hillarywho; hoosegow4hillary; imaginaryleaders; indict; iraq; jamiegorelick; johnkerry; johnkerryveep; kennedy; kerredy; kerredyconstruct; kerry; kerryconfesses; kerryisnobodyschoice; kerryveep; kerrywarcrimes; launderingmachine; lauriemylroie; letatcestmoi; losingbinladen; maryjowhite; maryjowhitememo; mccain; mediabias; moneylaundering; nationalsecurity; payoff; portrait; postmodernploy; postmodernprez; predator; predators; quidproquo; rape; rapist; rapistclintons; rapists; recall; reddragonrising; revisionism; richardclarke; rwanda; sedition; selfaggrandizement; sheknewsheraped2; simonschuster; slushfund; snowboard; snowboarding; snowbored; sorosstandbyyourman; sudanoffer; tedkennedy; terrorism; terrorismczar; terroristannihilator; terroristsympathizer; thefinger; thegorelickwall; theterrorismstupid; tinear; tolerance4terrorism; treason; utterfailure; viacom; viacommie; victimizer; vietnam; vietnamwall; virtualhillary; wearethepresident; wot; youknow; zeitgeist; zipper; zipperhoist; zipperhoist2; zipperhoisted

1 posted on 06/20/2004 9:22:29 AM PDT by Mia T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

A Vote for Kerry is a Vote for the Terrorists

by Mia T, 6.08.04

For the better part of 18 months, John Kerry has bitterly denounced the Bush administration's conduct of international relations, above all in Iraq.  Over and over he has pronounced his unsparing indictment: "George Bush has pursued the most arrogant, inept, reckless, and ideological foreign policy in the modern history of this country."
 
That is remarkably hostile language for a presidential challenger.  No major party candidate for the White House in modern times has so thoroughly abandoned the principle that politics stops at the water's edge.
 
On the other hand, voters clearly benefit when candidates articulate their differences, and make plain what is at stake on Election Day.  After 18 months of honing his anti-Bush message, Kerry should be able to outline his alternative foreign policy with crystal clarity.  He should have no trouble laying out a comprehensive vision for Iraq and the Middle East and explaining why it is superior to Bush's.
 
So why doesn't he do so?
 
...No matter how the question is put, Kerry's answers on Iraq always boil down to a single recipe: Shrink the US role in Iraq and defer to the United Nations instead.  That's it.  That is the sum and substance of his thinking about Iraq.  He doesn't relate it to the war on terrorism, to the future of liberty in the Middle East, to America's national interests.  He repeatedly declares Bush a failure for not kowtowing to the UN and vows that in a Kerry administration, the UN will be given the commanding role it deserves.
 
Kerry has been talking this way for months.  In his speech on Iraq at the Brookings Institution last fall, for example, he mentioned the UN no fewer than 25 times.  ("We need a new Security Council resolution to give the United Nations real authority in the rebuilding of Iraq. . . . This shift of authority from the United States to the United Nations is indispensable.") By contrast, he mentioned terrorism just seven times.  He mentioned freedom, democracy, and the Middle East not at all....

 
When Bush speaks about Iraq, by contrast, it is clear that he has thought the subject through and related it to his larger goals in the world... 

"The defeat of violence and terror in Iraq is vital to the defeat of violence and terror elsewhere, and vital, therefore, to the safety of the American people.  Now is the time, and Iraq is the place, in which the enemies of the civilized world are testing the will of the civilized world.  We must not waver. . . .
 
 

The cause of liberty and the defeat of terror vs. the cause of a more powerful UN: In this first presidential election of the post-9/11 world, that is what the choice comes down to.

Kerry's U.N. fetish
Jeff Jacoby

April 23, 2004
townhall.com

The Left's Fatally Flawed "Animal Farm" Mentality
(Why America Must NEVER AGAIN Elect a Democrat President)


WHY JOHN KERRY IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA

by Mia T, 6.04.04

 

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

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."

George Soros

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.

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.

"All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

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

Kennedy-Pelosi-Gore-clinton (either--"one for the price of two," I say) -Sulzberger-Soros-Moore construct

its porcine manifestation.

GEORGE TSURIS

Soros' little speech reveals everything we need to know about the Left, to wit:

  • its naivete about the War on Terror,
  • its preference for demagoguery over rational argument, and ideology and reacquisition of power over national security,
  • its mindset, which is inextricably bound to its failed, tortuous, reckless schemes, relics of a different time, a different war and a different enemy.

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
The Pentagon's New Map
NB: Dr. Barnett is a lifelong DEMOCRAT

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.

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.

Christopher Hitchens
Washington Journal, 6.01.04
C-SPAN


COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004

 



America's Real Two-Front War
 
 

by Mia T, 4.17.04

 

 

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)


johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com



merica's real two-front war: fundamentalist Islam on the right and a fundamentally seditious clintonoid neo-neoliberalism on the left, both anarchic, both messianically, lethally intolerant, both amorally perverse, both killing Americans, both placing America at grave risk, both quite insane.

If we are to prevail, the rules of engagement--on both fronts--must change.

Marquis of Queensberry niceties, multicultural hypersensitivity, unipolar-power guilt, hegemony aversion (which is self-sabotage in the extreme--we must capture what we conquer--oil is the terrorist's lifeblood)... and, most important, the mutual-protection racket in Washington--pre-9/11 anachronisms all--are luxuries we can no longer afford.

Notwithstanding, the underlying premise of our hyperfastidious polity, (that we must remain in the system to save the system) is fallacious at best and tantamount to Lady Liberty lifting herself up by her own bootstraps.

To borrow from the Bard, let's start metaphorically, or better yet, economically and politically, by killing all the seditious solicitors, which include the clintons and their left-wing agitprop-and-money-laundering machine: the Viacom-Simon & Schuster-60-Minutes vertical operation, the horizontal (as in "soporific") Cronkite-ite news readers, the (hardly upright) Ben-Veniste goons and Gorelick sleepers, and, of course, the clueless, cacophonic, disproportionately loud, left-coast Barbra-Streisand contingent.

America must not pull her punches.

To prevail, America must defeat--thoroughly destroy--her enemies. On both fronts.


MORE
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004

 

 

ne•o-ne•o•lib•er•al•ism n.

neocommunist political movement, a tipsy-topsy, infantile perversion of the Marxist-Leninist model, global in scope, beginning in the post-cold-war, unipolar 1990s, led by the '60s neoliberal baby-boomer "intelligentsia," that seeks power without responsibility, i.e., that seeks to dilute American power by concentrating power in said '60s neoliberals while yielding America's sovereignty to the United Nations, i.e., while surrendering to the terrorists, as it continues the traditional '60s neoliberal feint, namely: (1) concern for social justice, (2) distain for bureaucracy, and (3) the championing of entrepreneurship for the great unwashed.

Mia T, 2.24.04
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004

 

The Democratic Party's Problem Transcends Its Anti-War Contingent2

hyperlinked images of shame
copyright Mia T 2003
.

by Mia T, 4.6.03

 

If Act I was a thinly veiled allegory about naked clintonism, then Act II is a parable about the plan for world domination by the Establishment, aged hippies in pinstripes all, with their infantile, solipsistic world view amazingly untouched by time.

 

Mia T, June 9, 1999
THE ALIENS

 

l From is sounding the alarm. "Unless we convince Americans that Democrats are strong on national security," he warns his party, "Democrats will continue to lose elections."

Helloooo? That the Democrats have to be spoon-fed what should be axiomatic post-9/11 is, in and of itself, incontrovertible proof that From's advice is insufficient to solve their problem.

From's failure to fully lay out the nature of the Democrats' problem is not surprising: he is the guy who helped seal his party's fate. It was his Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) that institutionalized the proximate cause of the problem, clintonism, and legitimized its two eponymic provincial operators on the national stage. The "Third Way" and "triangulation" don't come from the same Latin root for no reason.

That "convince" is From's operative word underscores the Democrats' dilemma. Nine-eleven was transformative. It is no longer sufficient merely to convince. One must demonstrate, demonstrate convincingly, if you will… which means both in real time and historically.

When it comes to national security, Americans will no longer take any chances. Turning the turn of phrase back on itself, the era of the Placebo President is over. (Incidentally, the oft-quote out-of-context sentence fragment alluded to here transformed meaningless clinton triangulation into a meaningful if deceptive soundbite.)

Although From is loath to admit it -- the terror in his eyes belies his facile solution -- the Democratic party's problem transcends its anti-war contingent.

With a philosophy that relinquishes our national sovereignty -- and relinquishes it reflexively… and to the UN no less -- the Democratic party is, by definition, the party of national insecurity.

With policy ruled by pathologic self-interest -- witness the "Lieberman Paradigm," Kerry's "regime change" bon mot (gone bad), Edwards' and the clintons' brazen echoes thereof (or, alternatively, Pelosi's less strident wartime non-putdown putdown)… and, of course, the clincher -- eight years of the clintons' infantilism, grotesquerie and utter failure -- the Democratic party is, historically and in real time, the party of national insecurity.

The Democrats used to be able to wallpaper their national insecurity with dollars and demogoguery. But that was before 9/11.



addendum 12.13.03:
Pathologic self-interest: Richard Miniter's C-SPAN interview, contained in hillary talks:ON TERROR, (below), is absolutely devastating for the clintons. Miniter presents the clintons' monumental failure to protect America in sickening detail.

Note in particular Madeleine Albright's shocking reason given at the time of the USS Cole attack why the clinton administration should not respond militarily. It tell us everything we need to know about the clintons. It tell us why clinton redux is an absolutely suicidal notion.

Notwithstanding their cowardice, corruption, perfidy, and to borrow a phrase from Andrew Cuomo, their essential cluelessness, the clintons, according to Albright, made their decision not to go after the terrorists primarily for reasons of their own legacy and power. The clintons reasoned that inaction would MAXIMIZE THEIR CHANCES TO RECEIVE THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE. No matter that that inaction would also maximize the terrorists' power, maximize America's danger.

For more than a half decade, the Clinton administration was shoveling atomic secrets out the door as fast as it could, literally by the ton. Millions of previously classified ideas and documents relating to nuclear arms were released to all comers, including China's bomb makers.

William J. Broad
Spying Isn't the Only Way to Learn About Nukes,
The New York Times, May 30, 1999


Broad would have us believe we are watching "Being There" and not "The Manchurian Candidate." His argument is superficially appealing as most reasonable people would conclude that it requires the simplemindedness of a Chauncy Gardener (in "Being There") to reason that instructing China and a motley assortment of terrorist nations on how to beef up their atom bombs and how not to omit the "key steps" when building hydrogen bombs would somehow blunt and not stimulate their appetites for bigger and better bombs and a higher position in the power food chain.

But it is Broad's failure to fully connect the dots -- clinton's wholesale release of atomic secrets, decades of Chinese money sluicing into clinton's campaigns, clinton's pushing of the test ban treaty, clinton's concomitant sale of supercomputers, and clinton's noxious legacy -- that blows his argument to smithereens and reduces his piece to just another clinton apologia by The New York Times.

But even a Times apologia cannot save clinton from the gallows. Clinton can be both an absolute (albeit postmodern) moron and a traitor. The strict liability Gump-ism, "Treason is as treason does" applies.

The idea that an individual can be convicted of the crime of treason only if there is treasonous intent or *mens rea* 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.

Calling his position on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty "an historic milestone," (if he must say so himself) clinton believed that if he could get China to sign it, he would go down in history as the savior of mankind. This was 11 August 1995.

(There would be an analogous treasonous miscalculation in the Mideast: clinton failed to shut down Muslim terrorism, then in its incipient stage and stoppable, because he reasoned that doing so would have wrecked his chances for the Nobel Peace Prize. Indeed, according to Richard Miniter, Madeleine Albright offered precisely the Nobel-Muslim factor as a primary reason for not treating the bombing of the USS Cole as an act of war.)

Mia T, 2.11.04
BUSH, THE CLINTONS + WMD PROLIFERATION:
The
REAL "Imminent Threat"

 

 

It is precisely 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.

Taken together, 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.

In the case of the non-response to the attack on the Cole, an unambiguous act of war, the clinton rationale, according to no less than Madeleine Albright, 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.)

Mia T, "WAG THE DOG" revisited

 

 
 

WASHINGTON -- Two Norwegian public-relations executives and one member of the Norwegian Parliament say they were contacted by the White House to help campaign for President Clinton to receive this year's Nobel Peace Prize for his work in trying to negotiate peace in the Middle East.

Clinton Lobbies for Nobel Prize: What a Punk
White House Lobbied For Clinton Nobel Peace Prize Updated
Friday, October 13, 2000
By Rita Cosby

 

 

 

There's been speculation in the last few months that Clinton was pursuing a Mideast peace accord in an effort to win the prize and secure his legacy as president.

AIDES PUSH CLINTON FOR THE NOBEL

 

 

 
At the time, clinton observed: "I made more progress in the Middle East than I did between Socks and Buddy." Retrospectively, it is clear that clinton's characterization was not correct.

Mia T, Buddy Death Report Raises More Questions Than It Answers

 

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004


 

May 11, 3:18 PM EDT

Video Shows Beheading of American in Iraq


BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- A video posted Tuesday on an al-Qaida-linked Web site showed the beheading an American civilian in Iraq in what was said to be revenge for abuse of Iraqi prisoners.

The video showed five men wearing headscarves and black ski masks, standing over a bound man in an orange jumpsuit - similar to a prisoner's uniform. The man identified himself as Nick Berg, a U.S. civilian whose body was found Saturday near a highway overpass in Baghdad.

"My name is Nick Berg, my father's name is Michael, my mother's name is Suzanne," the man said on the video. "I have a brother and sister, David and Sarah. I live in ... Philadelphia."

After reading a statement, the men were seen pulling the man to his side and putting a large knife to his neck. A scream sounded as the men cut his head off, shouting "Allahu akbar!" - "God is great!" They then held the head up to the camera.

The slaying recalled the kidnapping and videotaped beheading of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in 2002 in Pakistan. Four Islamic militants have been convicted of kidnapping Pearl, but seven other suspects - including those who allegedly slit his throat - remain at large.

NOTE: GRAPHIC CONTENT Video posted of beheading of American in Iraq

 

Copyright 2004 Associated Press. All rights reserved.

"Free Republic is one of those groups obsessed with the Clinton era."

Word's out: Protest at Hillary's tonight
U.S. News & World Report (Washington Whispers) |
March 11, 2003 | Paul Bedard

 

 

 

I'll bet that Mr. Bedard is a member of "one of those groups" so "obsessed" with voting in -- and having access to -- the clintons that they--ooops-- failed to notice the obvious danger of the lovely couple.

hillary talks: ON TERROR
(reinstalling the clintons in White House has 1 advantage over suicide)

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)
 
Thanx for 9/11, Paul...

Mia T
"ONE OF THOSE GROUPS OBSESSED WITH THE CLINTONS"

"Loose Cannon" Kerry's AWOL/PURPLE-HEART FRAUD

A Vote for Kerry is a Vote for the Terrorists

sanitizing evil
Kerry Cabal Censors Nick Berg Decapitation


pro-islamofascist-terrorist radical chic

The Cycle of Violence:
NOW WITH HYPERLINKED INSTRUCTION MANUAL


JOHN KERRY'S RECKLESS TET-OFFENSIVE-GAMBIT REPLAY:
the left's jihad against America is killing our troops, aiding + abetting the terrorists and imperiling all Americans


DON'T BELIEVE YOUR LYING EARS (The Perjurer Returns)
(Clinton: Claims I Turned Down Bin Laden are 'Bull')

UNFIT: taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
#4 - Kerry champions tolerance for terrorists


UNFIT: taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
#3-sang-froid and the "nuclear" button

UNFIT: taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
#2-understanding the job description

UNFIT: taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
#1-making the tough choices in a post-9/11 world

nepotism + tokenism = a nancy pelosi
(or a hillary clinton)

Kerry's Belated Condemnation Focuses on Process
Kerry Lacks Moral Authority to Condemn Content

"CRY BUSH" + Iraqi-Prisoner "Abuse"
What are the Dems up to?


The Mary Jo White Memo:
Documentation of clintons' and Gorelick's willful, seditious malfeasance


What is the REAL Reason for Gorelick's Wall?


Q ERTY6 utter failureBUMP
Lib Author Regrets Voting (TWICE!) for clinton
"Sickened" by clinton's Failure to Protect America from Terrorism

MUST-READ BOOK FOR DEMOCRATS:
How clintons' Failures Unleashed Global Terror

(Who in his right mind would ever want the clintons back in the Oval Office?)

The Man Who Warned America
(Why a Rapist is Not a Fit President)

UDAY: "The end is near… this time I think the… Americans are serious, Bush is not like Clinton."

more

 

2 posted on 06/20/2004 9:25:32 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fixit

thanks for the Gorelick audio! ping :)


3 posted on 06/20/2004 9:26:17 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jla

ping


4 posted on 06/20/2004 9:26:41 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
CORRECTION

Forgot to include the link:
fingering intelligence/law-enforcement communications failure

5 posted on 06/20/2004 9:29:39 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth; jla; Gail Wynand; Brian Allen; Wolverine; Lonesome in Massachussets; IVote2; ...

ping


6 posted on 06/20/2004 9:30:34 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

BTTT


7 posted on 06/20/2004 9:34:12 AM PDT by spodefly (This post meets the minimum daily requirements for cynicism and irony.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

Thanks for the ping
bttt


8 posted on 06/20/2004 11:53:32 AM PDT by firewalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

<< Jamie Gorelick, without whose pre-engineered structural wonder said communications would not have failed in the first instance?


Is the woman delusional?


Or is the former clinton+clinton "deputy" attorney general "under" Janet Reno simply as shamelessly corrupt as her masters? >>

Yes on both counts -- and, you have to ask?

And, more to the heart of the matter, who are the masters?

Peking's putrid pack of psychopathologically-hesperophobic predators, perhaps?

For G-d knows that, Gorelick included, none who publicly slime and slither in the tow of that obscene pair of lying, looting, thieving, mass-murdering, co-serial rapist Hot-Springs' gangster bastards has the brains of a sotong -- and none is either what he appears to be -- or more than a distraction.

And also knows that neither of the Hot Springs' traitor/felons has either the intelligence and the attention span to have been other than the cod-pieces that but fronted our nation's awful recent eight-year gap between presidents.

So.

Who are the masters?

[Blessings, M! -- B]


9 posted on 06/20/2004 12:35:03 PM PDT by Brian Allen (Did you hear that my beloved FRiend died, today? -- President Ronald Wilson Reagan 1911 - 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

bump


10 posted on 06/20/2004 1:32:43 PM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

How do you do your graphics? Or is that a secret?


11 posted on 06/20/2004 2:08:19 PM PDT by The Raven (<<----Click Screen name to see why I vote the way I do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mia T


Mia T

I agree with your message. That said, your delivery is a shotgun blast. I don't disagree with your images and such, but as a slight suggestion, you'll find that folks will respond to your threads that have one topic. I don't figure I'm alone when I see a thread from you and expect the same CG picts of an old hillary frowning.

Tighten it up, you'll get a better response.

-Mal


12 posted on 06/20/2004 2:23:49 PM PDT by Malsua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

Sometimes I feel like I'm parked diagonally in a parallel universe.


13 posted on 06/20/2004 2:28:12 PM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

The amount of work you do is amazing! I hope your message gets through... there's a lot to digest here. I tend to agree with the earlier poster who said to focus on one topic. Good luck and thank you for all your work!!


14 posted on 06/20/2004 2:39:18 PM PDT by TenthAmendmentChampion (Freepmail me if you'd like to read one of my Christian historical romance novels!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Malsua

thx for the constructive criticism. Hard to believe, I know, but what you see is in fact the edited down version. ;)

Shotgun-blast delivery, like beauty, is in the eyes of the beholder. I see the delivery as stream-of-consciousness.


15 posted on 06/20/2004 5:46:06 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

bttt


16 posted on 06/20/2004 5:50:03 PM PDT by bmwcyle (<a href="http://www.johnkerry.com/" target="_blank">miserable failure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jla

bump


17 posted on 06/21/2004 2:21:53 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

CORRECTION:

The footnote should read:

*even as she undermines President Bush by inserting a stray word here and there to distort the significance of the Commission's findings of multiple Iraq-terrorist linkages and by ignoring the pre-emptive as opposed to retaliatory logic of the Iraq casus belli.


18 posted on 06/21/2004 3:44:32 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

Great job as usual. I love it. Gorelick was swimming in the
Clinton Reno septic tank and tossing life preservers to
the criminal fundraisers. That was her job. She saved that
Clinton duo and her boss Janet Reno. They were incompetent. She used her legal expertise to scatter the
evidence and protect their incompetence and disorder.


19 posted on 06/21/2004 3:55:03 AM PDT by oldironsides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

^


20 posted on 06/21/2004 3:59:08 AM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: beyond the sea; jla; All
CORRECTIONS/ADDITIONS

The Parallel Universe of Jamie Gorelick
WHY JOHN KERRY IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA
WHY THE LEFT IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA

 


by Mia T, 6.19.04

 

 

 
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)
thanx to Fixit for the audio

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

It is quite clear that the agencies of government who should have been protecting us in these circumstances had not even barely contemplated this sort of event and therefore were not prepared to execute against any kind of plan and so you had massive miscommunication and failure to execute on what they needed to do.

This is a persistent question that we have had.

There seems to have been an enormous disconnect between the intelligence community and what it thought the threats were and the individuals who had to plan against given threats.

So you see the FAA utterly unprepared for--uh--not taking any steps to prevent hijacking of this sort, and you hear NORAD--that is, our military--who are supposed to protect the domestic air space, saying they were focused completely outward and had almost no capacity to protect us internally.

JAMIE GORELICK
All Things Considered,
Thursday , June 17, 2004
NPR

I would just say, though, Pete, and you've been at the Pentagon, too. You know this.

The military is pretty good as a--an intelligence consumer. And my question today for General Myers and others was, why didn't you pull into yourselves and into your own planning process a government-wide assessment of what the threats were?

And you know, John [Lehman] is right. They didn't get intelligence which said, "Focus inside." And so they were focused completely on the perimeter. And that has an enormous impact in what you're seeing in this report....

I mean, you can't fault the FAA here at all. I mean, the FAA did not have the right intelligence either.

I mean, it was not exercising against this. It had protocols as we just discussed that were not remotely appropriate to the kind of hijacking that we had, to an airplane used as a missile.

This is not the FAA's problem. This is the way in which intelligence, which was someplace in the intelligence community, did not find its way to policy makers and certainly to implementers like the FAA and like the Pentagon.

JAMIE GORELICK
'Hardball with Chris Matthews'
June 17. 2004

PETE WILLIAMS, HOST
MSNBC

o my eyes deceive me?

Is that Jamie Gorelick before me, flitting from show to show, fingering intelligence/law-enforcement communications failure as the efficient cause of 9/11*?

"The Gorelick Wall" Jamie Gorelick?

The Jamie Gorelick without whose pre-engineered structural wonder said communications would not have failed in the first place?

Is Jamie Gorelick delusional?

Or is the former clinton+clinton "deputy" attorney general "under" Janet Reno simply as shamelessly corrupt as her masters?

And why are there no follow-ups by the media to expose this smarmy self-serving scramble to get it out first (before someone rightly points the finger her way) as what it really is--shameless self-indictment?


Theatre of the Absurd

Gorelick's surreal presence on the 911 commission investigating Gorelick's Justice Department, a maneuver that effectively removes from the universe of witnesses a central witness, Gorelick, even as it uniquely positions a central player, Gorelick, to directly shape the commission's conclusions.

Reverse Gorelick
Mia T, 4.15.04
QUINN IN THE MORNING (ESSAY DISCUSSED)
(
MP3, REAL, WINDOWS MEDIA, WINAMP)

With Gorelick's graceless intersection of prima facie and prima ballerina, the 9/11 Commission's final act commences...

aided and abetted, of course, by a compliant media and the D.C. mutual protection racket writ large.

 

 


*even as she undermines President Bush by inserting a stray word here and there to distort the significance of the Commission's findings of multiple Iraq-terrorist linkages and by ignoring the pre-emptive as opposed to retaliatory logic of the Iraq casus belli.


 

 COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004


 

CLINTON TREASON + THE GORELICK WALL

by Mia T, 5.5.04

This story merits its own book, but what deserves immediate comment is the willingness of the Clintons to risk everything to keep the cash pipeline open. Schwartz kept it open and full. Before he was through, Schwartz and Loral would donate roughly $2 million to the Clinton cause. Whether Schwartz gave additional money or favors off the books is a question that deserves asking.

A second question that deserves asking is just how much damage Schwartz, Berger and the Clintons did to America's national security.

A third question worth asking is whether Ron Brown's very real threats to expose these machinations led to his death.

Some dare call it treason:
Jack Cashill reveals how Clinton sold America's security to China
WorldNetDaily.com| Wednesday, May 5, 2004 | Jack Cashill


Reverse Gorelick

by Mia T, 4.15.04
QUINN IN THE MORNING (ESSAY DISCUSSED)
(
MP3, REAL, WINDOWS MEDIA, WINAMP)

e 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 of the Wall-as-cover-for-clinton-corruption thesis:

  • Gorelick's failure to disclose the fact that she authored the memo that was the efficient cause of 911
  • Gorelick's surreal presence on the 911 commission investigating Gorelick's Justice Department, a maneuver that effectively removes from the universe of witnesses a central witness, Gorelick, even as it uniquely positions a central player, Gorelick, to directly shape the commission's conclusions. (Is there any question which two people are responsible for Gorelick's insertion on the commission?)

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.

Filegate and the clinton Putsch,
committed in tandem,
the product of a careful criminal calculus,
at once empowered clinton
and disemboweled his opponents.
clinton was now free to betray with abandon
not only our trust,
but the Constitution as well.

The Common Man
Mia T
February, 1998


Allegations of international clinton crimes swirling around the White House in 1995 and beyond support The-Wall-as-cover-for-international-clinton-crimes thesis.

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.


(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com
missus clinton's REAL virtual office update
http://hillarytalks.blogspot.com
http://virtualhillary.blogspot.com
http://virtualclintonlibrary.blogspot.com
http://www.hillarytalks.us
http://www.hillarytalks.org
fiendsofhillary.blogspot.com
fiendsofhillary.us
fiendsofhillary.org
fraudsofhillary.com

 

WSJ.com OpinionJournal

 

 

 

 

 

REVIEW & OUTLOOK

Gorelick Agonistes
Her refusal to resign taints the 9/11 Commission.

Saturday, April 24, 2004 12:01 a.m.
Opinion Journal
from The Wall Street Journal Editorial Page


Jamie Gorelick has now issued her defense for staying on the September 11 Commission, and the usual media and Democratic suspects are rallying behind her. So let's put the issue as simply as possible: If Clinton-era Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick were not already a Commission member, does anybody doubt that she would be called to testify before it?

The Commission is interviewing nearly every major law enforcement and defense figure in two Administrations, and surely a Deputy AG was one of them. More than that, Ms. Gorelick was the author of a memo that has now become central to the debate over what went wrong before 9/11 in the way the U.S. dealt with terror threats.

Yet Ms. Gorelick now claims she can judge everyone else as a Commissioner....

No serious person on either side of the aisle doubts that the "wall" of separation between intelligence agents and criminal investigators... in her memo was a problem. Everyone also now agrees that poor intelligence sharing was one of the key reasons U.S. authorities failed to detect the September 11 plot....

Far from being unnecessary, Ms. Gorelick's testimony goes to the heart of the U.S. government's 1990s' failure to get its antiterror act together....

What is clear is that for some reason the nature and height of "the wall" underwent a qualitative change in the 1990s, as any investigator or prosecutor who dealt with it now says.

Whereas previous interpretations of the FISA statute had limited the ability of prosecutors to produce certain intelligence in court, the new rules effectively prohibited people from communicating at all....

[W]e won't have a clear picture until she and some of the other major players--including members of the FISA court--testify.

The 9/11 Commissioners are only undermining their own credibility in rallying to Ms. Gorelick's defense. Her conflict of interest can't be solved merely by recusing herself from discreet portions of the probe, since as a Commissioner she will still serve as judge and jury on everyone else in government. She should have recused herself entirely from even questioning John Ashcroft. We also take no comfort in Republican Orrin Hatch's endorsement, since one of Ms. Gorelick's former law partners represented him in the BCCI case and he whisked her through Senate confirmation in 1994.

The 9/11 Commission was supposed to be a fair-minded, non-partisan probe that would help our democratic government learn from its mistakes. Ms. Gorelick's failure to resign and testify herself in the face of a clear conflict of interest is reason enough for the American public to distrust its ultimate judgments.

Copyright © 2004 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.


Newly released Justice Department memos show that September 11 panel commissioner Jamie S. Gorelick was more intimately involved than previously thought with hampering communications between U.S. intelligence and law-enforcement agencies fighting terrorism.

As the No. 2 person in the Clinton Justice Department, Ms. Gorelick rejected advice from the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, who warned against placing more limits on communications between law-enforcement officials and prosecutors pursuing counterterrorism cases, according to several internal documents written in summer 1995.

"It is hard to be totally comfortable with instructions to the FBI prohibiting contact with the United States Attorney's Offices when such prohibitions are not legally required," U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White wrote Ms. Gorelick six years before the 2001 terrorist attacks in New York and at the Pentagon.

"Our experience has been that the FBI labels of an investigation as intelligence or law enforcement can be quite arbitrary, depending upon the personnel involved and that the most effective way to combat terrorism is with as few labels and walls as possible so that wherever permissible, the right and left hands are communicating," she wrote.

The documents -- released yesterday by the Justice Department at the request of two Senate Republicans -- drew renewed calls for Ms. Gorelick to testify publicly before the September 11 commission about the so-called "wall" between law enforcement and intelligence agencies that many have blamed for allowing the 2001 terrorist attacks to occur.

Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, said yesterday that Ms. Gorelick's policies regarding the wall contributed to "blinding America to this terrible threat."

Also, he said, the newly released memos raised apparent conflicts with statements Ms. Gorelick has made recently defending herself and her role in the Clinton Justice Department.

"These documents show what we've said all along: Commissioner Gorelick has special knowledge of the facts and circumstances leading up to the erection and buttressing of 'that wall' that, before the enactment of the Patriot Act, was the primary obstacle to the sharing of communications between law enforcement and intelligence agencies," Mr. Cornyn said.

In a June 19, 1995, memo, Ms. White recommended a series of changes to a Gorelick policy that went beyond legal requirements in separating law- enforcement and intelligence agencies.

Memos show Gorelick involvement in 'wall'
Charles Hurt and Stephen Dinan
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published April 29, 2004

The Mary Jo White Memo:
Documentation of clintons' and Gorelick's willful, seditious malfeasance

by Mia T, 4.30.04
 

ary Jo White's memo is documentation of the clintons' and Gorelick's willful, seditious malfeasance.

White's 1995 memo effectively put the clinton-Gorelick cabal on contemporaneous notice that Gorelick's Wall was placing America at grave risk from terrorism.

The memo explicitly warned that the protective wall the clintons and Gorelick were busy erecting (doubtless to blind domestic law enforcement to the clintons' illegal foreign schemes) would (also) blind domestic law enforcement to terrorist plots foreign and domestic.

From this it follows that Gorelick's Wall was not the clintons' and Gorelick's simple (albeit monumental) blunder.

Rather, Gorelick's Wall was no less than the clintons' and Gorelick's malfeasance--willful, self-serving and seditious--with the metastasis of al Qaeda and 9/11 the sorry endpoint.

NOTE: Bin Laden declared war on America throughout the clintons' watch. Had the clintons understood that this was war, not crime, that a terrorist war requires only one consenting player, Gorelick's Wall would be just another clintoncorruption footnote.

"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."

MORE

bill clinton
Sunday, Aug. 11, 2002
Clinton Reveals on Secret Audio:
I Nixed Bin Laden Extradition Offer

It is critical to understand that this same terrorism-is-crime-not-war flawed, dangerous thinking animates John Kerry, and the left, generally.

A post-9/11 America must never again put these dangerous pre-9/11 dinosaurs in any positions of leadership. To do so would be to place at grave risk no less than our very existence.


(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

Bored Certified
NEW virtual john kerry can bore + snowboard at the same time series


(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

copyright Mia T 2004
21 posted on 06/21/2004 4:00:19 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oldironsides

...and the metastasis of al Qaeda and 9/11 were simply the cost of doing business, clinton-style.

Gorelick belongs in the slammer, (at a minimum)... just like her bosses.

thx :)


22 posted on 06/21/2004 4:16:45 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

You're welcome!

It was truly surreal listening to that interview when it was first broadcast. I was sitting in the parking lot of the Sikorsky helicopter assembly plant, having just turned on my radio to kill a few minutes before going inside for my appointment.

At first I didn't know it was Gorelick speaking, I just knew it was a member of the 9/11 commission, though I thought it was a mere staff member at first given the detached mode of speech.

At some point I was talking back to my radio, blaming Gorelick for the deficiencies the speaker was pointing out.

Imagine my shock at my sudden realization of Gorelick's complete & total detachment from reality, when the interviewer gave Gorelick's name at the end of the interview.

It being NPR, of course no mention was made of Gorelick's own involvement in the creation of the very (governmental) detachment she was now complaining about.

Gorelick: Detached both in mind & intelligence gathering.


23 posted on 06/21/2004 5:01:10 AM PDT by Fixit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

BTTT...Gorelick needs to testify about her role in disempowering our intelligence agencies...MUD


24 posted on 06/21/2004 6:08:21 AM PDT by Mudboy Slim (RE-IMPEACH Osama bil Clinton!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Fixit

This is how these people operate. Thx again.

bump


25 posted on 06/21/2004 6:12:48 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Mudboy Slim

bump!


26 posted on 06/21/2004 6:13:35 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: The Raven

I use various imaging, modeling, lip-syncing and animation software. Good hardware helps.


27 posted on 06/21/2004 6:19:22 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

"Lib'rals!!"
(To be sung to the Rolling Stones' "Some Girls")

Lib'rals steal yer money...Lib'rals steal yer souls!!
Lib'rals just crave Power...o'er lives that ain't their own!!
Lib'rals love their "Programs"...Lib'rals love to TAX!!
Lib'rals, we give most our bread to...We won't ever git it back!!

Lib'rals they LOATHE Liberty...DemRATS, They Love POWER!!
Lib'rals hide behind children...each time they beg fer MORE!!

So give'em all YER money...Do Just What Yer Told!!
Left takes more'n half of what I own...
But it's Right who's doin' the Chores!!
BigGuv'ment takes yer money...Leftists Corrupt Yer Souls!!
Lib'rals tax the shirt off yer back...and tell ya "You a selfish louse!!"

Lib'rals, they love JessieJay...Sharpton, they're UncleToms!!
American Left wants everything in the World...They're all TAKE and Never GIVE!!
Medyuh Whore'd...They're ALL Sissies...I can't stand 'em on TeeVee no mo'!!
Sometimes I venture over to CNN fer just a look...but I end up barfin' in the stall!!

White RATS, they're pretty funny...They think that 'Life's Soooo Sad!!'
Black Libs...they just wanna blame the damned Right!!
Self-reliance, they can't Stand!!
Chi-Com Spies are so subtle...They got Slick on his knees!!
But the Right knows 'bout what Left's cookin'...They're all Enemies of the FREE!!
Give Libs all YER money...Give Libs all YER Gold!!
Bought me a house outside the City...I'll educate MY kids in my Home!!
Yeah...gonna VOTE Dem Leftists home...

LeftWing spreads manure...Lib'rals Are Corrupt!!
Lib'rals warp their children...look at Chelsea, she's such a DUNCE!!
Give Slick half YER money...we'll put Slick behind bars...
Re-Impeach Left's Boy, I say...WE'll CONVICT the Left's Biggest Star...then Laugh!!
Make Slick his cellmate's "honey"...make'im a Prison 'HO!!
Let's CONVICT Left's Evil, FReepers...first step's to VOTE Conservative...Let's Roll!!

Mudboy Slim (9/23/2002)


28 posted on 06/21/2004 7:12:09 AM PDT by Mudboy Slim (RE-IMPEACH Osama bil Clinton!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Mudboy Slim

bump thx


29 posted on 06/21/2004 7:50:10 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

De nada, mi hermana...MUD


30 posted on 06/21/2004 8:26:42 AM PDT by Mudboy Slim (RE-IMPEACH Osama bil Clinton!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: jla

bump


31 posted on 06/21/2004 11:10:45 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: jla; All

bump


32 posted on 06/21/2004 2:26:30 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

^


33 posted on 06/21/2004 3:52:45 PM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: jla

^


34 posted on 06/21/2004 6:32:24 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

^


35 posted on 06/21/2004 7:23:25 PM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

^


36 posted on 06/22/2004 5:55:18 AM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

bump


37 posted on 06/22/2004 12:00:13 PM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: jla

bump


38 posted on 06/22/2004 7:48:32 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


39 posted on 06/23/2004 6:24:23 AM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: jla

bump


40 posted on 06/23/2004 11:47:08 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

bump


41 posted on 06/23/2004 1:19:29 PM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]


42 posted on 06/27/2004 8:06:04 PM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


43 posted on 06/29/2004 7:14:57 PM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]


44 posted on 06/30/2004 4:29:10 AM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

bump


45 posted on 06/30/2004 3:57:25 PM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

bump!


46 posted on 07/23/2004 10:15:32 AM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson