Skip to comments.HIROSHIMA'S NUCLEAR LESSON: bill clinton is no Harry Truman
Posted on 08/06/2005 9:11:38 PM PDT by Mia T
HIROSHIMA'S NUCLEAR LESSON
bill clinton is no Harry Truman
[T]he threat nuclear weapons pose today is probably greater than ever before. That's not because they're more plentiful--thanks to the 2002 Moscow Treaty (negotiated by John Bolton), U.S. and Russian arsenals are being cut to levels not seen in 40 years. It's because nuclear know-how and technology have fallen into the hands of men such as A.Q. Khan and Kim Jong Il, and they, in turn, are but one degree of separation away from the jihadists who may someday detonate a bomb in Times or Trafalgar Square.
Reflecting on this history, there's a tendency to wax melancholic about the dangers of letting the proverbial genie out of his bottle, and to suggest we stuff him back in. Thus the reflexive opposition by Democrats and some Republicans to developing new nuclear weapons such as the "bunker buster" and to the resumption of nuclear testing. The Senate has even zeroed out of the President's budget funding for a high-powered laser that would help gauge the reliability of the U.S. arsenal without testing. We also frequently hear calls for the U.S. to lead by example by further reducing its arsenal, and for the Bush Administration to "strengthen" the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty by agreeing to the useless Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.
Yet the notion that the nuclear genie can be willed out of existence through the efforts of right-thinking people is as absurd as it is wrongheaded. Just as guns and knives will be with us forever, so too will the bomb. We need bunker busters because North Korea and Iran are using underground facilities to build weapons that threaten us, and we must be able credibly to threaten in return. We need to have nuclear tests because the reliability of our principal warhead, the W-76, has been seriously called into question, and China must not be enticed to compete with us as a nuclear power. In neither case does the U.S. set a "bad example." Rather, it demonstrates the same capacity for moral self-confidence that carried America through World War II and must now carry us through the war on terror.
Looking back after 60 years, who cannot be grateful that it was Truman who had the bomb, and not Hitler or Tojo or Stalin? And looking forward, who can seriously doubt the need for might always to remain in the hands of right? That is the enduring lesson of Hiroshima, and it is one we ignore at our peril.
Hiroshima: Nuclear weapons, then and now
Outrageousness is an essential element of clinton corruption. The rank obscenity of the clintons' crimes -- rape -- murder (did you REALLY look into the death of Ron Brown?) -- and now treason -- allows clinton hacks to reasonably brand all clinton accusers clinton-hating neo-Nazi crazies (ignoring the plain fact that some of us are Northeast Jews of leftist origin).
Yet privately few clintonites would deny that bill clinton facilitated China espionage. Their only question is why.
Some call clinton a quisling, a Manchurian Candidate, bought off in Little Rock by Riady and company decades ago (and much too cheaply, according to his Chinese benefactors), trading our national security for his political power. This argument is persuasive but incomplete; clinton, a certifiable megalomaniac, is driven ultimately by his solipsistic, messianic world view and by that which ultimately quashes all else -- his toxic legacy.
William J. Broad suggests (Spying Isn't the Only Way to Learn About Nukes, The New York Times, May 30, 1999) that clinton had another reason to empower China and disembowel America. Broad argues that clinton sought to disseminate our atomic secrets proactively in order to implement his postmodern, quite inane epistemological theory, namely, that, contrary to currently held dogma, knowledge is not power after all -- that, indeed, precisely the opposite is the case.
Broad writes in part:
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 pushing 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. (Similar motivation (and danger) in clinton's arm-twisting, phony rapprochement in the Mideast.)
According to James Risen and Jeff Gerth of The New York Times, "the legacy codes and the warhead data that goes with them" -- apparently stolen from the Los Alamos weapons lab by scientist, Wen Ho Lee aided and abetted by bill clinton, hillary clinton, the late Ron Brown, Sandy Berger, Hazel O'Leary, Janet Reno, Eric Holder and others in the clinton administration [not to mention congressional clinton accomplices Glenn, Daschle, Bumpers, Harkin, Boxer, Feinstein, Lantos, Levin. Lautenberg, Torricelli et al.] -- "could [especially when combined with the supercomputers that clinton sold to China to help them finish the job] be particularly valuable for a country, like China, that has signed onto the nuclear test ban treaty and relies solely on computer simulations to upgrade and maintain its nuclear arsenal. The legacy codes are now used to maintain the American nuclear arsenal through computer simulation.
Most of Lee's transfers occurred in 1994 and 1995, just before China signed the test ban treaty in 1996, according to American officials."
Few who have observed clinton would argue against the proposition that this legacy-obsessed megalomaniac would trade our legacy codes for his rehabilitated legacy in a Monica minute and to hell with "the children."
WHY MISSUS CLINTON IS DANGEROUS
FOR THE CHILDREN,
FOR THE WORLD
madhillary.com (coming soon)
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2005
"What, me worry?"
THE THREAT OF TERRORISM AS CLOSE AS
A CLINTON TO OVAL OFFICE
how the clintons are handling
the hillary dud factor
I'm not sure I understand the respect Truman gets here. He practically bent over for Uncle Joe.
"bought off in Little Rock by Riady "
Clinton designated some park in Utah as off limits to coal mining. As a result, his buddy Riady in Indonesia made a fortune.
I am reminded here of Zaire,
where the ink was dry on the contract
even as the blood continued to flow in the streets.
It was the largest mineral rights contract in history,
The signatories were
a fledgling company from Hope, Arkansas,
American Mineral Fields (AMF)
and the Kabila rebels.
AMF is headed up by
Hope native Mike McMurrough
and Jean Raymond Boulle
the ex-chief diamond buyer for DeBeers.
McMurrough, a land surveyor,
first met Boulle when they were both
exploring for diamonds in Arkansas.
Both were later principals of
Diamond Fields Resources.
Boulle and McMurrough in1988 formed
the Arkansas Diamond Development Co.
to develop diamond operations on state-owned lands.
In 1972, the diamond-rich area of southwest Arkansas
was purchased by the state and was designated
Crater of Diamonds State Park
to prevent private mining.
In 1986, then-Gov. Clinton began a
to allow commercial operations
in the state park.
In 1989, Clinton,
despite strong opposition from environmentalists,
gave Boulle's mining company the okay to begin exploration.
(Sorta like the quid pro coal Utah land grab in reverse.)
While the American press
has totally ignored the AMF-Arkansas connection,
the foreign press hasn't.
The Italian paper Corriere della Sera
described AMF's link
with Clinton's home state of Arkansas,
with Clinton's home town of Hope,
as a "wicked coincidence."
And it is a coincidence that encompasses Stephens Inc.
the powerful Little Rock-based investment house
that has consistently backed Clinton
in his campaigns for governor and his 1992 presidential run.
The Wall Street Journal reported on possible U.S.
assistance to the rebels
using neighboring Burundi as a conduit for arms
ultimately destined for Uvira,
just across Burundi's border in Zaire,
the cradle of Kabila's revolt.
So the quid is covert U.S. assistance for the Kabila rebels;
the quo is the richest mineral rights contract for FOB's.
But there is more.
Clinton repeatedly refused to freeze
the Mobutu multi-billion dollar booty,
plundered over three decades
from the impoverished Zairean people.
Was Clinton's inaction part of the self-enriching deal?
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2005
thanks for the ping
so many scandals; so little time