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

Skip to comments.

Why The Religious Right Must Mobilize Against hillary: CLINTON CONFLATES CHRISTIANS AND TERRORISTS
C-SPAN | 03.16.06 | Mia T

Posted on 03/16/2006 7:35:04 AM PST by Mia T

WHY THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT MUST MOBILIZE AGAINST HILLARY:
CLINTON CONFLATES EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS AND ISLAMO-FASCIST TERRORISTS


by Mia T, 03.16.06


It is wrong to demonize and cartoonize one another and ignore evidence and to make false charges and to bear false witness. Sometimes I think our friends on the other side have become the people of the Nine Commandments. It is wrong to bear false witness because we all see through [the] glass darkly....

We have a curious situation in American where the religious right has tried to turn all who disagree with them into two-dimensional cartoons. I read a very moving article in one of our newspapers a few days ago in which someone in the president's hometown said all the Democrats cared about was abortion, gay marriage, and being weak on defense....

[T]hese people really do believe they are in possession of absolute truths. You won't hear about it during this convention. They'll put up their other face. But the truth is that when it all comes down to it, a lot of the religious absolutists believe that all other issues are irrelevant, that all who disagree with them are somehow almost non human, certainly not deserving of basic consideration. Therefore it's nothing but right to concentrate wealth and power in the hands of those who share their values and to constantly assert that whatever position they decide to take is right regardless of the inconvenient evidence....

Our number one threat abroad is fundamentalism, absolutism. Terror is their tactic, but it is their ideas, their hatred, their absolute certainty that they are so right that they can kill people who disagree with them -- that is our enemy.

'All of Us See Through the Glass Darkly'
bill clinton
sermon at Riverside Church
before the start of the Republican convention, 2004



 









linton moral relativism meets an insidious balkanizing brand of clinton fundamentalism. The goal: to render the corrupt, treacherous, utter-failure clintons at once untouchable and empowered.

SERMON ON THE MAKE

Note that clinton made this despicable argument in a church. In a black church. So much for the separation of church and state. So much for racial equality and respect. Miss hillary's plantation: THE PREQUEL....

Calculating a black man's worth to be 5/3 of a vote is no less racist, and arguably more so, than calculating his worth to be 3/5 of a white man; the latter is demeaning, but the former is dehumanizing.

Mia T, 07.23.05
THE FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT?
clinton legacy of lynching update

As for fundamentalism, note that no one is more doctrinaire than the clintons. If the Religious Right eschews science for faith, the clintons corrupt science for dogma, treasure and power.


 

THROUGH A GLASS DARKLY:
HOW DECADES OF CLINTON DOUBLE-DEALING COMPROMISED OUR NATIONAL SECURITY


by Mia T, March 8, 2006

 

 

PREFACE: Why 'THROUGH A GLASS DARKLY'



It is wrong to demonize and cartoonize one another and ignore evidence and to make false charges and to bear false witness. Sometimes I think our friends on the other side have become the people of the Nine Commandments. It is wrong to bear false witness because we all see through [the] glass darkly.

'All of Us See Through the Glass Darkly'
bill clinton
sermon at Riverside Church
before the start of the Republican convention, 2004

 


'Through a glass darkly' is bill clinton's favorite biblical metaphor and his fixers' spin-of-last-resort.

When properly misconstrued, the phrase at once captures and effectuates the clinton con perfectly, placing clinton conveniently beyond the reach of criticism, impeachment (figuratively speaking), and, most important, punishment.

It is wrong to bear false witness because we all see through [the] glass darkly.--bill clinton

Notice the tenuous, self-serving logic here. Notice how clinton slyly implies that because we all see through a glass darkly, we are unable to see the truth (about him)--ever, all charges past, present and future (against him) are necessarily indeterminable and, therefore, false, and it is wrong, therefore, to bring any charge (against him), ever.*

So, for example, while all the evidence and all the contemporaneous accounts of all the witnesses support the charge that bill clinton raped Juanita Broaddrick and that hillary clinton aided and abetted that rape, we must throw out all the evidence and all the witnesses and keep two rapists in the Oval Office.

Excellent.

 

*

 





 

"One thing was certain, that the WHITE kitten had had nothing to do with it:--it was the black kitten's fault entirely."

Lewis Caroll
THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS'
page 1, line 1

 

 

'THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS' may be the better descriptor: Notice that as he makes his argument, clinton hurls multiple charges against his "friends on the other side" with no trouble at all.



How cheerfully he seems to grin,
How neatly spreads his claws,
And welcomes little fishes in
With gently smiling jaws!
~Alice's Adventures in Wonderland~

 

 

 






ld habits die hard.

Bill and hillary and their fixers in the press and DC are up to their old tricks.1 The clintons trade our national security for their power and treasure2 while old media and the DC establishment--pre-9/11, 20th-century relics all--do nothing.3 But this time the betrayal is happening in real time, right before our very eyes.

Aided and abetted by the usual useful-idiot suspects in the press, allowed to operate with impunity by a Congress cowered by Filegate and other clinton abuses of power4 past, present and future,5 the husband is pushing the Dubai ports deal as seven-figure kickbacks from the crown prince sluice into clinton-family coffers6 and vulturine clinton cronies7 circle the kill.8 All this while the bagman wife assumes phony poses, both familiar 9 (hillary 'KNOWNOTHING VICTIM' clinton), and newly configured10, 11 (hawkish scold).

There are none so blind as those who will not see... except, perhaps, those who do and prop the clintons up anyway12.




1

 

WHY HILLARY IN THE OVAL OFFICE IS A NATIONAL-SECURITY NO-NOPART ONE
EXPENSIVE CHINA: the clinton legacy

by Mia T et al, 10.17.03, 03.01.06

It is no secret that Hillary's past takes us through a pile of hard, cold cash from the Chinese army, Chinese army agents roaming the White House and photos with a wide variety of scoundrels.

For example, the one prominent name missing from Hillary's recent "tell-all" book is Riady. Mrs. Clinton failed to mention the Riady family at all. One would get the impression that the Riadys were not present in the Clinton White House. Hillary Clinton certainly overlooked listing the table settings and menus for White House dinners with the Riadys.

The Riadys knew the Clintons from their Arkansas years, when Moctar bought out a local bank. Moctar and his son James were close to Bill and Hillary through 1992 and into the White House. Moctar even owned the firm selected by Hillary Clinton to replace the White House travel office.

Riady and Hillary

Moctar and James Riady played a key role in bringing the Clintons to power in Washington. The Indonesian billionaire and his Lippo banking company managed to contribute large sums of money to the Clintons' campaigns even though it was against the law. Moctar's gardener contributed $450,000 directly to Bill Clinton in a single check. James Riady, Moctar's son, eventually pleaded guilty to campaign violations.

The connections between the Riadys and the Clintons have a much more sinister theme than simple foreign money inside U.S. elections. Testimony before the U.S. Senate revealed Moctar Riady's involvement in Chinese espionage. The Lippo Group is in fact a joint venture of China Resources, a trading and holding company "wholly owned" by the Chinese communist government and used as a front for Chinese espionage operations.

Mrs. Clinton not only knew the Riadys but took their money as well. To prove my point I need only to cite photographic evidence. Her picture with Moctar Riady is certainly damning evidence of a relationship that spanned several bank accounts and two decades. It is often said that a picture tells a thousand words. However, Hillary's pictures not only tell stories left out of her book but they also netted $10,000 each for the DNC in illegal donations.

Hillary's Most-Wanted

Mrs. Clinton has left us with a wide selection of photo evidence. Mrs. Clinton has had her photo taken with drug dealer Jorge Cabrera. Jorge donated a load of drug money to the DNC in order to get close to the first lady. Jorge is currently serving federal time for smuggling 3,000 pounds of cocaine into the United States.

Ironically, Jorge and Hillary were photographed in front of the White House Christmas tree.

Mrs. Clinton also has a virtual personal photo gallery of modern crime. It is almost as if she wanted to collect snapshots of herself and major crime figures.

For example, the co-presidents were photographed together with Macao criminal boss Ng Lapseng. Ng makes most of his money through the female-empowering career of prostitution.

Ng owns the Fortuna Hotel in Macao. You can stay overnight at the Fortuna for a reasonable price. In addition, you can also purchase the services of a Fortuna hostess for an additional nightly or hourly fee.

Ng frequently visited the Clintons with his close friend Charlie "Yah-Lin" Trie. It was through Charlie Trie that Ng also donated thousands of dollars to the Clintons.

Ng's Fortuna Hotel showed up again later in official State Department charges against the satellite division of Hughes. The Fortuna turned out to be a front for a Chinese army company that leased a Hughes satellite.

Hillary Clinton's close relationship with the Chinese army is all too well documented. The first lady was clearly involved with Chinese agent Johnny Chung and the penetration of Col. Lui of Chinese army unit COSTIND, the Chinese Commission of Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense.

According to the GAO, COSTIND "oversees development of China's weapon systems and is responsible for identifying and acquiring telecommunications technology applicable for military use."

Johnny Chung also had several photo sessions with both Clintons. Many of the photos appear in Mr. Chung's beer advertisements. Chung passed Chinese army money to the DNC through Mrs. Clinton. In return, a very young and attractive female PLA colonel and COSTIND computer information warfare specialist was allowed inside the White House to meet Bill Clinton.

Hillary's Albatross
Charles R. Smith
Friday, Sept. 5, 2003

ALL

Double, trouble TOIL for HUBBELL;

Fire burn and cauldron bubble.

 

THIRD WITCH (a stealth Conservative)

Scale of BONIOR, tooth of WOLF,

HILLARY'S memory, maw and gulf

A ravin'd salt-sea shark,

Ears of the MARTINS digg'd i' the dark,

Gall of BILL, and McCURRY'S slips

"Noes" of LANNY, and HUBBELL'S lips,

Finger of ICKES ditch-deliver'd by a drab,

Make the gruel thick and slab:

Add thereto a Chinese squadron,

For the ingredients of our cauldron.

 

ALL

Double, trouble TOIL for HUBBELL;

Fire burn and cauldron bubble.

 

SECOND WITCH:

Cool it with cash and blood,

Then the charm is firm and good.

 

Enter Lady MacClinton

 

Mia T, MacClinton
Act IV, Scene I

 

I believe that this espionage case -- the Chinese -- is the worst in the history of this country. They got just about everything that we have and you'll see it in the out years in their development of their weapons.

HEAR Sen. Richard Shelby

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

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.

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


HIROSHIMA'S NUCLEAR LESSON
bill clinton is no Harry Truman






I believe that this espionage case -- the Chinese -- is the worst in the history of this country. They got just about everything that we have and you'll see it in the out years in their development of their weapons.

HEAR Sen. Richard Shelby


China space shot has military implications


China launches first manned space flight
Reuters ^ | 10-14-03

Wed 15 October, 2003 02:07 BST

BEIJING (Reuters) - China has launched its first manned space flight from the Gobi desert, Xinhua news agency says, in its bid to become the third country to put a man in orbit after the former Soviet Union and the United States.

The Shenzhou V, or "Divine Ship V", was expected to orbit the Earth 14 times before returning after about 21 hours.

Xinhua said the craft carried astronaut Yang Liwei, 38. The launch on Wednesday, 42 years after the Soviet Union put the first man into space, marked a milestone for China's secretive space programme, which analysts say has its sights set on a manned mission to the moon.







2

THE CLINTON NATIONAL SECURITY SCANDAL AND COVERUP

Senator James Inhofe
Senate Floor Statement
June 23, 1999

Mr. President, I want you to listen again. I am going to pick up on the incredible but true story of the Clinton Administration's betrayal of national security and the scandalous coverup that continues as we speak. In doing so, I fully realize that the majority of Americans will not believe me. They have continued to believe our President even after he has demonstrated over and over that he has no regard for the truth. Though you would never realize it by listening to the national media or the Clinton spin doctors, the recently released Cox Report has revealed a wealth of information on how the Clinton Administration has undermined national security to simultaneously pursue its misguided foreign policies and self-serving domestic political agendas. On the one hand, there is the mind-boggling story of how the Clinton Administration deliberately changed almost 50 years of bipartisan security policies--relaxing export restrictions, signing waivers to allow technology transfers, ignoring China's violation of arms control agreements and its theft of our nuclear secrets, opening up even more nuclear and high technology floodgates to China and others--thus harming U.S. national security.

On the other hand, there is the continuing coverup--the effort to hide from Congress and the American people the true damage that has been done to national security and the Clinton administration's central role in allowing so much of it to happen on their watch.

Over three months ago--on March 15--I spoke on this floor about China's theft of the W-88 nuclear warhead. I spoke about how serious this was to our national security--how it was a story with life and death implications for millions of Americans.

I told how President Clinton was directly responsible for downplaying the significance of and covering up this story. While the information on the W-88 design--the crown jewel of our nuclear arsenal--was stolen in the late 1980's, the theft was first discovered in 1995 by this administration. I told how it was this administration and this president who deliberately covered up this vital information from Congress and the American people and, at the same time, lulled our people into a false sense of security by repeating the lie that there were no nuclear missiles targeted at America's children.

At that time, I spoke of six proven incontrovertible facts...and let me repeat them now:

1. President Clinton hosted over 100 campaign fundraisers in the White House, many with Chinese connections.

2. President Clinton used John Huang, Charlie Trie, Johnny Chung, James Riady, and others with strong Chinese ties to raise campaign money.

3. President Clinton signed waivers to allow his top campaign fundraiser's aerospace company to transfer U.S. missile guidance technology to China.

4. President Clinton covered up the theft of our most valuable nuclear weapons technology.

5. President Clinton lied to the American people over 130 times about our nation's security while he knew Chinese missiles were aimed at American children.

6. President Clinton single-handedly stopped the deployment of a national missile defense system, exposing every American life to a missile attack, leaving America with no defense whatsoever against an intercontinental ballistic missile.

On March 15, I began my speech by asking the American people to listen as I told them "a story of espionage, conspiracy, deception and cover-up--a story with life and death implications for millions of Americans--a story about national security and a President and an administration that deliberately chose to put national security at risk, while telling the people everything was fine."

In the three months since I made these statements, none of this has been refuted.

Now, I come before you to tell some of the rest of the story that we have learned since March 15. And it is a truly astounding story. We thought the W-88 story was bad--and it is. But with the release of the Cox Report last month, the American people have been presented with documented evidence that the harm that President Clinton has done to U.S. national security is enormously worse than we thought.

On March 15, I said that, as damaging as the W-88 breach was, I believed we had not yet scratched the surface of the national security scandal exposed by this one revelation. I must say that I was right--even beyond my own worst fears.

Let's not be distracted by the self-serving Clinton spin: that everybody does it; that it all happened during previous administrations; that this is only about security at the nuclear weapons labs; that there is equal blame to go around on all sides; that President Clinton acted quickly and properly when he found out; and that the problem is now being fixed.

I am here today to tell you that all of this is wrong. The Clinton spin is nothing more than a dishonest smokescreen designed to divert attention from the real issues. It is also, I believe, an attempt to dissuade people from actually reading the Cox Report and discovering for themselves that the Clinton spin is a snare, a delusion and a lie.

This is why I want to take some time to walk through some of the more important revelations in the Cox Report and to remind my colleagues that we have an obligation to tell the American people the truth--the truth that the media is inexplicably ignoring and that the President seems to hope the people will never find out on their own.

First, let us begin with a simple fact: Sixteen of the 17 most significant major technology breaches revealed in the Cox Report were first discovered after 1994. With the lone exception of the breach of the initial design information of the W-70 warhead (the so-called neutron bomb)--which was first discovered during the Carter administration--everything else was first discovered during the Clinton administration. Let me repeat--sixteen of the 17 most significant major technology breaches revealed in the Cox Report were first discovered during the Clinton administration. Those who tell you otherwise are willfully lying to you.

Second, of the remaining 16 technology breaches, one definitely occurred during the Reagan administration--the W-88 Trident D-5. Seven occurred sometime before 1995, though it is unclear exactly when. And eight occurred--without question--during the Clinton administration.

Let's take a closer look at these. The seven that occurred before 1995 included breaches of information on all of the currently deployed nuclear warheads in the U.S. intercontinental ballistic missile arsenal: the W-56 Minuteman II; the W-62 Minuteman III; the W-76 Trident C-4; the W-78 Minuteman Mark 12A; and the W-87 Peacekeeper. In addition, there was the breach of classified information on reentry vehicles, the heat shield that protects warheads as they reenter the earth's atmosphere when delivered by long range ballistic missiles.

Let me repeat that all of these technology breaches were first discovered in 1995. They were discovered when a Chinese "walk-in" agent actually approached the CIA at a location outside of China and handed them a secret Chinese government document containing state-of the art classified information about the W-88 and the other U.S. nuclear warheads. We still don't know why he did this, but he did.

The Cox Report also tells us that the Energy Department and FBI investigations of this matter have focused exclusively on the loss of the W-88, which we know happened around 1988. There have been no investigations undertaken about the loss of the other warheads, the timing of whose loss cannot be as clearly pinned down.

Next, we move to the other eight major technology breaches revealed in the Cox Report. All of these were not only first discovered during the Clinton administration, they also happened on Clinton's watch:

1. The transfer of the so-called Legacy Codes containing data on 50 years of U.S. nuclear weapons development including over 1,000 nuclear tests;

2. The sale and diversion to military purposes of hundreds of high performance computers enabling China to enhance its development of nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, and advanced military aviation equipment;

3. The theft of nuclear warhead simulation technology enhancing China's ability to perfect miniature nuclear warheads without actual testing;

4. The theft of advanced electromagnetic weapons technology useful in the development of anti-satellite and anti-missile systems; 5. The transfer of missile nose cone technology enabling China to substantially improve the reliability of its intercontinental ballistic missiles;

6. The transfer of missile guidance technology (by President Clinton to China) enabling China to substantially improve the accuracy of its ballistic missiles--these same missiles that are targeting US cities;

7. The theft of space-based radar technology giving China the ability to detect our previously undetectable submerged submarines; and

8. The theft of some other "classified thermonuclear weapons information" which "the Clinton administration" (not the Cox committee) "has determined...cannot be made public."

We used to think China was decades behind us in terms of building a modern advanced nuclear arsenal. Now we learn that, later this year, China is planning to test its new JL-2 long range ICBM, a submarine launched ballistic missile with MIRV capability--meaning multiple independently targeted warheads on each missile --almost a replica of our Trident ICBM. This missile will have a range of over 13,000 kilometers and could reach anywhere in the United States from protected Chinese waters.

In addition, we know that China has been helping North Korea, among others, with weapons and technology. North Korea is also expected to test its long range Taepo Dong II missile later this year.

I remind my colleagues we have no defense against either of these potential threats, because of the policy decisions of the Clinton administration. Some one very smart back in 1983 determined that we would need a national missile defense system in place by Fiscal Year 98. We were on track to meet the deadline until 1993 when President Clinton, through his veto power, stopped this missile defense system.

But as the Cox Report points out, nuclear espionage by China is only one part of the problem. China's efforts to acquire U.S. military related technology is pervasive. Operating through a maze of government and quasi-government entities and front companies, China has established a technology gathering network of immense proportions.

They are willing and able to trade, bribe, buy, or steal to get U.S. advanced technology--all for the purpose of enhancing their long-term military potential. Their success is often determined largely by our willingness to make it easier for them to get what they want.

The Cox Report has shed light on the fact that the Clinton administration has actually helped China in its technology acquisition efforts or made it easier for them to commit thefts and espionage. You know the truth is always difficult and controversy is difficult. It is easier to take polls and tell people what they want to hear. But I have to make a decision--who do I love more, this President or America. That is easy. The following are just some of the things that the Clinton administration has done. And I want to applaud Cong. Weldon for helping to bring many of these things to light.

1. In 1993, the Clinton Administration removed the color-coded security badges that had been used for years at Energy weapons labs claiming they were "discriminatory"-- as if that makes any sense whatsoever. Now just a few weeks ago, in the wake of all these revelations, the Energy Department has reinstated the color-coded badges to tell us it is fixing the problem. But I don't hear current Energy Secretary Bill Richardson talking about who created this particular problem.

2. In 1993, the Clinton Administration put a hold on doing FBI background checks for lab workers and visitors, an action which helped to dramatically increase the number of people going to the labs who would previously have not been allowed to have access.

3. In 1995, the Clinton Administration took the extraordinary action of overturning its own agency's decision to revoke the security clearance of an employee found guilty of breaching classified information. When this happened, it sent a message to employees throughout the Department, that this administration was not serious about countering breaches of classified information.

4. The Clinton Administration deliberately, and many would say recklessly, declassified massive amounts of nuclear-related information in what the Clinton administration touted as a new spirit of openness.

5. In the W-88 investigation, the Clinton Administration turned down four requests for wiretaps on a suspect who was identified in 1996 and allowed to stay in his sensitive job until news reports surfaced in 1999.

6. In 1995, someone at the Department of Energy gave a classified design diagram of the W-87 nuclear warhead to U.S. News & World Report magazine which printed it in its July 31 issue that year. Rep. Curt Weldon is still trying to get answers about how this leak was investigated and what was determined. He has good reason to believe the investigation was quashed because it was going to lead straight to President Clinton's Energy Secretary.

7. Career whistleblowers at the Department of Energy, who tried to warn of serious security breaches--people like Ed McCallum, the former security and safeguards chief --were thwarted for years by Clinton political appointees who refused to let them brief Congress and others about what they knew. Trulock was demoted, but will now get to keep his job. McCallum appears on his way to being scapegoated and perhaps fired for trying to tell the truth.

8. Rejecting advice from his Secretaries of State and Defense, President Clinton approved switching the licensing authority for satellites and other high technology from the State Department to the Commerce Department, making it easier for China to acquire U.S. missile technology.

9. President Clinton granted waivers making it easier for U.S. companies to transfer missile and satellite technology to China during the launching of U.S. satellites on Chinese rockets.

10. In 1994, President Clinton ended COCOM, the Coordinating Committee on Multinational Export Control, the multi-nation agreement among U.S. friends and allies that they would not sell certain high technology items to countries like China. When this happened, it opened the commercial floodgates. Ever since, there has been a wild scramble of competition to sell more and more advanced technology to China. As a result, proliferation has never been worse than it has been in the last six years.

11. In a series of decisions throughout his presidency--and many surrounding the 1996 election--Clinton has consistently relaxed export and trade restrictions on various forms of high technology of interest to China.

12. At the same time, President Clinton has ignored or downplayed numerous China's arms control violations by not imposing sanctions required by law. So while we're selling more and more high tech to China, China is sending prohibited military technology to countries like Pakistan, Iran, North Korea, Syria, Libya and Egypt. And what does the Clinton administration do? Nothing.

What are the motives for all this? Why did the Clinton administration act the way it did, in almost total disregard for any traditional concern for U.S. national security?

The Cox Report did not answer these questions because it was only concerned with the facts of the security breaches themselves, not what was behind it.

But FBI Director Louis Freeh did assign one man to look into this. His name was Charles LaBella, who became head of the Justice Department's China Task Force. He and his investigators spent months looking into the connections, trying to connect the dots with campaign contributions, foreign influences and administration actions. What he found is laid out in a 100-page memo he prepared for Janet Reno. We know this memo argues in favor of the appointment of an independent counsel to carry on the investigation.

But the memo itself has remained secret, even though it has been subpoenaed by Congress. Janet Reno, who rejected its recommendation for an independent counsel, has refused to release the memo to the Congress or to the public. It is time for that memo to be released.

FBI Director Freeh has testified that the public knows only about one percent of what the FBI knows about the Chinagate scandal. It is time for the truth to come out. It is time for the public to get some sense of the other 99% which is contained in the LaBella memo.

Mr. President, over the last six years, President Clinton and his administration have shown a pervasive disregard for national security. In both actions and inactions, this President has broken ranks with the bipartisan consensus about national security that helped us win the Cold War.

His policies and attitudes--towards export controls, nuclear weapons, militarily important high technology, and dealing with our adversaries in the world--have been strikingly different from those of all of his predecessors in the modern era.

His administration has acted as if the end of the Cold War gave them carte blanche license to open the commercial and technology floodgates to countries like China....simply because it was good for business, or good for getting campaign contributions, or good for other domestic political reasons.

The traditional concern about national security--about protecting our nuclear secrets, about maintaining our military and technological superiority, about sanctioning those in the world who engaged in flagrant and hostile espionage and proliferation--all that went out the window, replaced by other priorities this President somehow thought were more important.

President Clinton claims he has "redefined" national security. In fact--as the Cox Report conclusively documents--he has "harmed" national security. This is the message that every American must understand.

My hope is that we never again have a president who is so disrespectful of, and inattentive to, traditional national security concerns. Yesterday at the joint hearing of the Armed Services, Energy and Intelligence committees, I asked whether or not it would be possible to put in place some safeguards so that no future president could ever again so successfully undo the country's national security defenses as this one has. We are working on an answer.

Some of us will continue to speak out--seeing it as our highest duty of public service. As I said on March 15--and repeat again here today-- I only hope America is listening. We have a nation to save.

THE CLINTON NATIONAL SECURITY SCANDAL AND COVERUP
Senator James Inhofe
Senate Floor Speech
June 23, 1999

thanx to Sic Luceat Lux for locating text of Inhofe speech


9

DUBAI-ITIES:
HILLARY 'KNOWNOTHING VICTIM' CLINTON STRIKES AGAIN

by Mia T, March 6, 2006

 

 


(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)
audio montage, Lincoln-pose scoop:
rushlimbaugh.com

'REFUSAL TO LEVEL WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE'
... IS HILLARY 'KNOWNOTHING VICTIM' CLINTON'S MIDDLE NAME
by Mia T, February 16, 2006

 


6


DUBAI DUETS
The American Spectator ^ | 3/6/06 | Washington Prowler

Late Friday, Department of Justice lawyers in the Office of Legal Counsel were attempting to determine if former President Bill Clinton had registered as an "Agent of a Foreign Principal."


Federal statute requires that anyone -- even a former President -- doing political or public affairs work on behalf of a foreign country, agency or official must register with the Department, and essentially update his status every six months. It was not clear the Clinton had done so.

If his status is less clear, here is what we do know: If Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton did not know about her husband's standing with the United Arab Emirates and with Dubai World Ports, members of her Senate staff most assuredly did.

"There were enough people in the Clintons' orbit who were potentially going to be part of the deal," says an employee of a firm that does work for both Clintons. "We were pursuing work on the ports deal, and we cleared our participation with Clinton's office. We didn't want there to be a conflict."

In fact, at least two senior outside advisers to Senator Clinton were attempting to get business out of the Port Deal, and President Clinton was the go-between. Associates with the Glover Park Group, which houses just about the entire shadow staff for Hillary's run-up to a Democratic presidential bid, were attempting to get a slice of the DPW deal before the deal was made public about three weeks ago. According to current and former President Clinton staff, Hillary Clinton's Senate office was aware that Glover Park was in the running to do work on the DPW deal.

"She was also very much aware of President Clinton's financial arrangements with the UAE," says a former Bill Clinton staffer. "We're talking about more than a million dollars, some of paid out soon out after they left the White House. That income helped the Clintons buy the properties that allow them to live both in New York and Washington, D.C.. This was not an insignificant financial arrangement."

8

What is not clear is whether or not the junior Senator from New York was aware that Clinton was acting as an agent of a foreign principal, which Clinton clearly was. According to sources with knowledge of the deal, President Clinton was advising members of the DPW buyout team in the UAE, London and Washington before the deal hit the headlines. He encouraged them to hire a number of people working in consulting firms based in Washington with whom he had both personal and financial ties: The Cohen Group, the Albright Group, and the Glover Park Group. Other sources claim that longtime Clinton confidante and golf partner Vernon Jordan's name was also suggested as potential helpful fixer in the capital.

Much of this activity and consultation took place before the DPW deal hit the front pages of newspapers in mid-February, and about ten days before the DPW deal was to close in Great Britain.


READ MORE


The Clintons Pass In The Night

The Hill, 03.08.06
Dick Morris

Written in conjunction with Eileen McGann

 

Bill and Hillary Clinton are the first couple to appear simultaneously and independently on the national political stage. They are using their special circumstances as a convenient shield for one another, fulfilling, at once, Hillary's dream of no accountability and Bill's of being able to take both sides of an issue.

Did Hillary know that Bill was pardoning the FALN terrorists to help her win Puerto Rican votes in New York? Oh, she was opposed to the pardon.

Did Hillary find out that Bill was granting pardons to felons and drug dealers who had hired her brothers for six-figure fees to lobby her husband for pardons right under her nose? No way. In fact she was "saddened" at her brothers' involvement.

And we all know that Hillary was "gasping for breath" when she first learned the truth about Monica Lewinsky.

And the former first lady was "bewildered" that members of the White House staff would treat her demands that they fire the travel-office staff as an order.

Bill has been out there criticizing the war while Hillary plays to the center by voting for it.

And now, this heavy-footed pas de deux straddles the issue of whether a Dubai company should run six American ports.

Are we truly to believe Hillary's insistence last week that she knew nothing about Bill's counseling of his friend and benefactor the crown prince of Dubai, Sheik Mohammed bin Rashid al Maktoum, on the ports deal? Do Bill and Hillary Clinton ever speak to each other, or do they just attend funerals, fundraisers and Billy Graham crusades together for photo-ops?

Bill is, after all, a regular in Dubai. The crown prince &emdash; that is, the government &emdash; contributed to his presidential library and pays him $300,000 per speech. Recently, Yucaipa, an American company that has Bill Clinton as a "senior adviser" and pays him a percentage of its profits, formed a partnership with the Dubai Investment Group to form DIGL Inc., a company dedicated to managing the sheik's personal investments.

No doubt Bill Clinton was brought in to cement this lucrative deal from which he &emdash; and therefore Hillary &emdash; will likely make millions. Neither Bill nor Hillary will disclose how much he is paid, but her Senate financial disclosure says that he will make "more than" $1,000. They also won't say how much Dubai royalty gave to the Clinton library.

So when Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) broke the story that the administration had approved the Dubai ports deal and Bill Clinton started to defend it in public, are we to believe that Hillary did not know that the sheik had called him to ask his advice, and are we to believe that Bill's defense of the deal was unrelated to his myriad financial ties to Dubai?

Hillary stands to gain millions in income from her husband's Dubai connection. She knows he flies there very, very frequently. And she must realize that Bill is close to the Dubai royal family.

So why did she dump on the port deal? Likely to cover herself. If she were anything less than front and center against the Dubai port deal, she would vulnerable to criticism over Bill's involvement with the Dubai royal family. So she held marathon press conferences denouncing the deal and professed not to realize her husband was defending the deal at the sheik's request.

What's really going on here is that Bill Clinton is trying to please his Arab patrons and business partners at the same time that Hillary Clinton is trying to capitalize on American stereotypes about Arab terrorists.

More important, she's desperately trying to distract attention from the Dubai dollars that flow into her family checking account from Bill's political and business dealings with the Dubai crown prince. What better way than to attack them?

We should insist that:

  • Bill Clinton register as an agent of a foreign principal.

  • The Clintons say how much he makes from Dubai.

  • The Clinton library tell us how much Dubai royalty gave to the library.

  • And Bill disclose, in the future, whenever he is speaking as an ex-president or as a paid public-relations flack.

Morris, a former political adviser to Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and President Bill Clinton, is the author of Condi vs. Hillary: The Next Great Presidential Race.


5

DICK MORRIS:
CLINTON IS A PAID AGENT OF THE CROWN PRINCE OF DUBAI

by Mia T, 03.03.06

 



READ MORE

AFTERWORD

Don't
take
hillary's
opposition
to the
ports
deal
on
face
value.

We all
know
who the
bagman is
in
this
--uh--
relationship.


Sen. Hillary... has emerged as a leading voice in opposition to the deal, saying, "Our port security is too important to place in the hands of foreign governments."... This is more than a security problem, she says - it's "a larger problem" of ceding "some of our fiscal sovereignty."

... Hubby Bill, on the other hand, supports Dubai. Big time.

He not only supports it, he's even been advising the company on the sly on how to get around the opposition of senators like - well, Hillary.

Better still, he reportedly tried to get Dubai Ports World to hire his former mouthpiece, Joe Lockhart, as its new spokesman in Washington.

... Actually, Bill's been a big fan of Dubai for some time now.

It goes back to when that government - which actually owns Dubai Ports World - kicked in very big bucks indeed to his presidential library.

Since 2002, it's been paying him for speeches there - at $300,000 a pop.

Talk about having your cake and eating it, too: Despite his support for the company, the former prez says his wife and other critics have a legitimate beef.

This neat little arrangement keeps the Clintons covered on all sides of the issue. And it helps tuck a little boodle in the family piggy bank, too.

But then, that's the way the Clintons operate. One hand washes the other, and all that matters is advancing the Clinton self-interest.

Fiscally.

And politically.

The legendary Tammany Hall figure George Washington Plunkitt used to put it like this: "I seen my opportunities, and I took 'em."

Bill 'n Hill, too.

EXCERPT
'CLINTON VS. CLINTON' INC.
Editorial
March 4, 2006
New York Post


10

Having failed to snare the Nobel Peace Prize by ignoring terrorism, clinton has apparently decided to intensify his America-bashing on foreign soil, the method employed by Jimmy Carter to great (if somewhat belated) effect. (The Nobel committee, sufficiently mollified only after 24 years of the peanut president's America-bashing, awarded Carter his 1978 Peace Prize finally in 2002.)

Meanwhile, back in the Senate, the missus, the other half of the clinton construct, maintains her hawkish pose (though not without bird problems of another sort).

Yet another example of the clinton conflation ploy, (see SCHEMA PINOCCHIO: how the clintons are handling the hillary dud factor), this variant allows "clinton, the construct" to hold two mutually exclusive positions simultaneously, thereby enabling the missus to avoid in '08 the trap that repeatedly ensnared the ever 'nuanced' Kerry in '04.

Do you now understand how stupid the clintons think you are?

A CALL TO IMPEACH CLINTON IN ABSENTIA
Mia T, 11.17.05

REINVENTING HILLARY... AGAIN
(clinton machine dumps Geena Davis for Margaret Thatcher)
how the clintons are handling the hillary dud factor2
Mia T, 11.23.05




11

 

It isn't that they can't see the solution. It is that they can't see the problem.

G. K. Chesterton

 

... While America appears not to be ready for a female president under any circumstances, the post-9/11 realities pose special problems for a female presidential candidate. Add to these the problems unique to missus clinton. The reviews make the mistake of focusing on the problems of the generic female presidential candidate running during ordinary times.

These are not ordinary times. America is waging the global War on Terror; the uncharted territory of asymmetric netherworlds is the battlefield; the enemy is brutal, subhuman; the threat of global conflagration is real.

Defeating the enemy isn't sufficient. For America to prevail, she must also defeat a retrograde, misogynous mindset. To successfully prosecute the War on Terror, it is essential that the collective patriarchal islamic culture perceives America as politically and militarily strong. Condi Rice excepted, this requirement presents an insurmountable hurdle for any female presidential candidate, and especially missus clinton, historically antimilitary--(an image, incidentally, that is only enhanced today by her clumsy, termagant parody of Thatcher), forever the pitiful victim, and, according to Dick Morris, "the biggest dove in the clinton administration."

It is ironic that had the clintons not failed utterly to fight terrorism... not failed to take bin Laden from Sudan... not failed repeatedly to decapitate a nascent, still stoppable al Qaeda... the generic female president as a construct would still be viable... missus clinton's obstacles would be limited largely to standard-issue clintonisms: corruption, abuse, malpractice, malfeasance, megalomania, rape and treason... and, in spite of Juanita Broaddrick, or perhaps because of her, Rod Lurie would be reduced to perversely hawking the "First Gentleman" instead of the "Commander-in-Chief."

Mia T, 10.02.05
HILLARY'S COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF PROBLEM
(see descriptor morphs)


3

December 7, 1941+64

AN OPEN LETTER TO TIM ROBBINS, DAVID GEFFEN, CHRIS MATTHEWS, MAUREEN DOWD + JEANINE PIRRO

RE: a not-so-modest proposal concerning hillary clinton



Dear Concerned Americans,

Hillary Clinton's revisionist tome notwithstanding, 'living history' begets a certain symmetry. It is in that light that I make this not-so-modest proposal on this day, exactly 64 years after the attack on Pearl Harbor.

The context of our concern today--regardless of political affiliation--is Iraq and The War on Terror, but the larger fear is that our democracy may not survive.

We have the requisite machines, power and know-how to defeat the enemy in Iraq and elsewhere, but do we have the will?

In particular, do we have the will to identify and defeat the enemy in our midst?

Answerable to no one, heir apparent in her own mind, self-serving in the extreme, Hillary Clinton incarnates this insidious new threat to our survival.

What we decide to do about Missus Clinton will tell us much about what awaits us in these perilous new times.

COMPLETE LETTER

December 7, 1941+64
Mia T
AN OPEN LETTER TO TIM ROBBINS, DAVID GEFFEN, CHRIS MATTHEWS, MAUREEN DOWD + JEANINE PIRRO
RE: a not-so-modest proposal concerning hillary clinton


COPYRIGHT MIA T 2005


WHY THE CLINTONS FAILED "TO CAPTURE OR KILL THE TALLEST MAN IN AFGHANISTAN"
(DID THEY REALLY WANT TO TAKE HIM OUT ANYWAY?)
by Mia t, 2.15.06

<



"You cannot explain to me why we have not captured or killed the tallest man in Afghanistan."

hear hillary clinton

"You know... the job which we should have done 1... which should have been our primary focus, to find [you know] bin Laden and eliminate al Qaeda."

hear hillary clinton
Saturday, Jan. 28, 2006
Chitchat with Jane Pauley
San Francisco, CA

"Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in '91 and he went to the Sudan.

We'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him [bin Laden].

At the time, '96, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America.3

So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have; but they thought it was a hot potato. They didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan."

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


 



hen the damning tape surfaced, focus was naturally on bill clinton's (oops!) admission.

No one paid much attention to what may turn out to be even more incriminating: clinton's curious explanation of the missile strike at Kandahur that took out a phalanxlike formation of... empty tents... and allowed bin Laden (and the Mideast Muslim ego) to escape unscathed.

Ever notice how a crook volunteers way too much information when he's trying to explain away his crimes? This is especially true when the crook thinks you're an idiot and he's a genius.

"When I bombed his training camp and tried to kill him and his high command in 1998 after the African -Embassy bombings, some people criticized me for doing it. We just barely missed him by a couple of hours. I think whoever told us he was going to be there told somebody who told him that our missiles might be there. I think we were ratted out."

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

I agree. We were ratted out. bill clinton could not afford to capture or kill bin Laden. This information courtesy of none other than Madeleine Albright.

clinton's reaction--or should I say non-reaction-- to the USS Cole bombing in 2000--an unambiguous act of war--validates Albright's assertion.

clinton's refusal to take bin Laden in 1996--validates Albright's assertion.

That clinton summarily ignored and urged all of us to ignore the first attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor, the 1993 WTC bombing--ignore the first major Islamofascist terrorist attack on the continental United States!!--validates Albright's assertion.

The fact that "our national mourner," bill "I feel your pain" clinton, never even visited the site--he was only 15 minutes away mere days after the 1993 WTC bombing--validates Albright's assertion like nothing else.






'MAKE IT A RULE' -- PLACE YOUR ORDER FOR OSAMA WITH CLINTON and CO.
(HEAR HILLARY + BILL MAKE THEIR PITCH)
by Mia t, 2.13.06



 

I M P E A C H M E N T
h e a r --c l i n t o n --l o s e --i t



by Mia T, 11.11.05

This legacy confab is in and of itself proof certain of clinton's deeply flawed character, and a demonstration in real time of the way in which the clinton years were about a legacy that was incidentally a presidency.

Madeleine Albright captured the essence of this dysfunctional presidency best when she explained why clinton couldn't go after bin Laden.

According to Richard Miniter, the Albright revelation occurred at the cabinet meeting that would decide the disposition of the USS Cole bombing by al Qaeda [that is to say, that would decide to do what it had always done when a "bimbo" was not spilling the beans on the clintons: Nothing]. Only Clarke wanted to retaliate militarily for this unambiguous act of war.

Albright explained that a [sham] Mideast accord would yield [if not peace for the principals, surely] a Nobel Peace Prize for clinton. Kill or capture bin Laden and clinton could kiss the 'accord' and the Peace Prize good-bye.

If clinton liberalism, smallness, cowardice, corruption, perfidy--and, to borrow a phrase from Andrew Cuomo, clinton cluelessness--played a part, it was, in the end, the Nobel Peace Prize that produced the puerile pertinacity that enabled the clintons to shrug off terrorism's global danger.

READ MORE

"PAPER TIGER"

Feckless clinton inaction and feckless clinton action serve only to reinforce the almost universally held notion: the clinton calculus was, is, and always will be, solely self-serving.

It is the clintons' bin-Laden-emboldening inaction to the attack on the USS Cole and the clintons' bin-Laden-emboldening token, ineffectual, August 1998 missile strikes of aspirin factories and empty tents that eliminate "bin-Laden-emboldenment avoidance" as the rationale for the latter decision and support "wag the dog," instead.

In the case of the non-response to the attack on the Cole, an unambiguous act of war, the clinton rationale was a clinton Nobel Peace Prize by Arab appeasement. i.e., a clinton Nobel Peace Prize by bin-Laden-emboldenment.

And in the case of the curiously-timed, ineffectual (and, therefore, bin-Laden-emboldening) token missile strikes, the clinton rationale was Lewinsky-recantation distraction -- clearly not bin-Laden-emboldenment avoidance. (This is not to say there wasn't a Nobel factor here, too. Obsolete intelligence, bolstered by the redundancy of a clinton tipoff, ensured that both bin Laden and the Mideast Muslim ego would escape unscathed.)

"I remember exactly what happened. Bruce Lindsey said to me on the phone, 'My God, a second plane has hit the tower.' And I said, 'Bin Laden did this.' that's the first thing I said. He said, 'How can you be sure?' I said 'Because only bin Laden and the Iranians could set up the network to do this and they [the Iranians] wouldn't do it because they have a country in targets. Bin Laden did it.'

I thought that my virtual obsession 2 with him was well placed and I was full of regret that I didn't get him."

bill clinton
Sunday, Sept 3, 2002
Larry King Live


 

INTERVIEW Osama bin Laden
(may 1998)

In the first part of this interview which occurred in May 1998, a little over two months before the U.S. embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, Osama bin Laden answers questions posed to him by some of his followers at his mountaintop camp in southern Afghanistan. In the latter part of the interview, ABC reporter John Miller is asking the questions.

 

Describe the situation when your men took down the American forces in Somalia.

 

After our victory in Afghanistan and the defeat of the oppressors who had killed millions of Muslims, the legend about the invincibility of the superpowers vanished. Our boys no longer viewed America as a superpower. So, when they left Afghanistan, they went to Somalia and prepared themselves carefully for a long war. They had thought that the Americans were like the Russians, so they trained and prepared. They were stunned when they discovered how low was the morale of the American soldier. America had entered with 30,000 soldiers in addition to thousands of soldiers from different countries in the world. As I said, our boys were shocked by the low morale of the American soldier and they realized that the American soldier was just a paper tiger. He was unable to endure the strikes that were dealt to his army, so he fled, and America had to stop all its bragging and all that noise it was making in the press after the Gulf War in which it destroyed the infrastructure and the milk and dairy industry that was vital for the infants and the children and the civilians and blew up dams which were necessary for the crops people grew to feed their families. Proud of this destruction, America assumed the titles of world leader and master of the new world order. After a few blows, it forgot all about those titles and rushed out of Somalia in shame and disgrace, dragging the bodies of its soldiers. America stopped calling itself world leader and master of the new world order, and its politicians realized that those titles were too big for them and that they were unworthy of them. I was in Sudan when this happened. I was very happy to learn of that great defeat that America suffered, so was every Muslim....

 

The American people, by and large, do not know the name bin Laden, but they soon likely will. Do you have a message for the American people?

I say to them that they have put themselves at the mercy of a disloyal government, and this is most evident in Clinton's administration....
 
BIN LADEN FINGERS CLINTON FOR TERROR SUCCESS (SEE FOOTAGE)
THE THREAT OF TERRORISM IS AS CLOSE AS A CLINTON IS TO THE OVAL OFFICE

 

Lopez: In sum, how many times did Bill Clinton lose bin Laden?

Miniter: Here's a rundown. The Clinton administration:

1. Did not follow-up on the attempted bombing of Aden marines in Yemen.

2. Shut the CIA out of the 1993 WTC bombing investigation, hamstringing their effort to capture bin Laden.

3. Had Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, a key bin Laden lieutenant, slip through their fingers in Qatar.

4. Did not militarily react to the al Qaeda bombing in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

5. Did not accept the Sudanese offer to turn bin Laden.

6. Did not follow-up on another offer from Sudan through a private back channel.

7. Objected to Northern Alliance efforts to assassinate bin Laden in Afghanistan.

8. Decided against using special forces to take down bin Laden in Afghanistan.

9. Did not take an opportunity to take into custody two al Qaeda operatives involved in the East African embassy bombings. In another little scoop, I am able to show that Sudan arrested these two terrorists and offered them to the FBI. The Clinton administration declined to pick them up and they were later allowed to return to Pakistan.

10. Ordered an ineffectual, token missile strike against a Sudanese pharmaceutical factory.

11. Clumsily tipped off Pakistani officials sympathetic to bin Laden before a planned missile strike against bin Laden on August 20, 1998. Bin Laden left the camp with only minutes to spare.

12-14. Three times, Clinton hesitated or deferred in ordering missile strikes against bin Laden in 1999 and 2000.

15. When they finally launched and armed the Predator spy drone plane, which captured amazing live video images of bin Laden, the Clinton administration no longer had military assets in place to strike the archterrorist.

16. Did not order a retaliatory strike on bin Laden for the murderous attack on the USS Cole.


 




WHY DID BILL CLINTON IGNORE TERRORISM?
Was it simply the constraints of his liberal mindset, or was it something even more threatening to our national security?

by Mia T, 8.18.05


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




MORE


3. Earth to clinton: Bin Laden was in the process of waging war, not 'committing crimes.'


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: abortion; balkanizing; bill; china; christians; clinton; corruption; elections; evangelical; gwot; hillary; hillary2006; hillary2008; hitlery; islam; islamofascists; misshillary; mrsbillclinton; muslims; plantation; prayer; prochoice; prolife; putin; racebaiting; racism; religiousright; riversidechurch; russia; sermon; terrorism; terrorists; waronterror; wot; yeltsin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-94 last
To: jla

And btw, no one is 'my' candidate. I would support an Allen as enthusiastically as I would a Giuliani.

I refuse to help elect a clinton. We no longer have the luxury of time or circumstance to endure another one. (Indeed, it is unclear whether we will survive the first.)


51 posted on 03/16/2006 7:34:25 PM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Sic Luceat Lux; jla

I don't think jla would vote for me. ;)


52 posted on 03/16/2006 7:41:30 PM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: PGalt
bump!







53 posted on 03/16/2006 7:44:43 PM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

Thanks for the ping!


54 posted on 03/16/2006 9:59:07 PM PST by de Buillion (Greater love hath no man than this, that which Shepard Smith hath for himself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Sic Luceat Lux

Indeed. Thanks for the ping!


55 posted on 03/16/2006 10:32:08 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
You prove my point, jla. ;)... If the GOP candidate is not to your liking, you will effectively place a de facto vote for the clintons...

You know, we had a boy named Bobby we ran with in our younger days. He went to all these fancy schools, always scored well on tests and such. So he thought he knew it all. He certainly would never take advice from his lessers.

One day we were all standing on the river bank. It was a hot July day, really hot, 100 in the shade. Bobby was intent on getting cooled off, at having his way.
He ran up to the river's edge and we yelled at him, "Bobby, you don't want to jump in there, it's shallow water".
Bobby, being the sophisticated one, paid us no mind. He took a running start and dove head first right into the clear, cool, blue water.

Couple hours later, we all got up from the curb when we seen Bobby coming out of the hospital, his head adorned with a swath of stiches that patched up the crack in his skull after he hit the rock in the river bed.

Ol' Bobby, true unto himself, seen us and exclaimed, "Ha ha! I get outta school for 2 weeks and I'm gettin' ice cream too!"
We boys, who were truly concerned about Bobby, just shook are stupid heads in disbelief.
Little Jimmy O'Malley spoke up, "Hey, why should we care about Bobby? He's treated us all like we're inferior to him and he can tell us what to do?"
Just then, Joshua Mahon put his hand on Jimmy's shoulder and said, "More the reason for us to be friendly with Bobby, showing him that we hold no grudge for him being wrong and his condescending attitude towards us."


Sláinte

56 posted on 03/16/2006 10:56:30 PM PST by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: jla

I don't see the analogy. I am not disputing what you are saying. I am merely noting that you agree with me. (The condescension is in your head, not mine.)

Nice try avoiding the question. Could you explain why your conscience would be bothered helping to elect Giuliani but would not be helping to elect hillary clinton? I really don't get it.

Happy St. Patrick's Day.


57 posted on 03/16/2006 11:20:11 PM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: de Buillion

you're welcome :)


58 posted on 03/16/2006 11:24:11 PM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
(The condescension is in your head, not mine.)

You may wish to consider the fact that folks who read your missive might, as I did, take it as an insult. You're telling people who to vote for as if they need to be led around by a school marm lecturing a class of children.
Now, you of course won't agree, but I'm telling you, Miss NY'er, that is how Mr and Mrs. Southern Baptist will interpret it.
And I'd agree with them.
Perhaps you try seeing things thru a real-life prism instead of some algebraic equation.

Nice try avoiding the question.

Let me tell you once and for all - I avoid no questions. Christians won't support a person who advocates policies in polar opposition to their beliefs, and those beliefs are what have been instilled in them from the Holy Bible and/or Torah.
If you can't comprehend this then you really don't know the mindset of of the Christian Right, not one iota.

They are not going to vote for your people. Do you understand this? They are not. They will not. How much clearer can I make it?

As much as I hate to say it, you, and the Clintons, do not figure in the minds of Christians as much as obeying God does.
I know that may seem silly to you, but it'd true! Believe me, it really is! These folks have the nerve to think God is wiser than you all!

59 posted on 03/16/2006 11:47:20 PM PST by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: jla

 

You may wish to consider the fact that folks who read your missive might, as I did, take it as an insult. You're telling people who to vote for as if they need to be led around by a school marm lecturing a class of children.

Now, you of course won't agree, but I'm telling you, Miss NY'er, that is how Mr and Mrs. Southern Baptist will interpret it.

And I'd agree with them.

Perhaps you try seeing things thru a real-life prism instead of some algebraic equation....

Christians won't support a person who advocates policies in polar opposition to their beliefs, and those beliefs are what have been instilled in them from the Holy Bible and/or Torah.--jla


I understand your position perfectly, jla. And I respect it. I am not arguing that the Religious Right change this deeply held position. To the contrary.

Your position--the evangelical ethos-- is PRECISELY my premise, my starting point. Your position--stated above--is PRECISELY why I cannot understand how you would help to elect HILLARY, someone who is anathema to all you profess to believe.

And that is exactly what you'd be doing if you sit out the presidential election or vote for a 'Perot.'

Just because you are not physically pulling the lever or marking the box or touching the square next to the name 'hillary clinton' doesn't mean you are not helping to elect her. You are playing with your mind if you think otherwise.

Why do you refuse to address this point? I know it's difficult, a dilemma, but ignoring it won't make it go away.

Were you aware that clinton had equated the Religious Right with the islamo-fascist terrorists, with the enemy? That he was attempting to transfer onto the Religious Right the hate and fear and disgust one feels for the islamo-fascist terrorists? In a church, no less? And to what the clintons believe to be a vulnerable, easily demagogued population?
(A population they've exploited for their entire contemptible 'career.')
*

That was the purpose of this thread. To inform you of this. To let you hear clinton for yourself.

Don't you want to know fully what the clintons think of you and to what extremes they are willing to go to harm you, to defeat you, to crush you? Or do you think that by ignoring this, it, too, will go away.

As a Jew, I am sensitive about ignoring such threats to my existence. I am hoping, therefore, that you pay it some heed and not make the same mistake my brethren made almost seven decades ago.

 





*Why do you suppose the clintons and Landrieu -- through Mayor ('chocolate... You can't have New Orleans no other way') Nagin -- tried to get their voters back, post haste (no trouble bussing 'em straightaway and en masse when it's to the polls) -- to a still toxic morgue with no potable water, no emergency support and with renewed risk of deluge?

Mia T, 01.18.06
GONE WITH THE WIND
(miss hillary's 'plantation' blunder)




Calculating a black man's worth to be 5/3 of a vote is no less racist, and arguably more so, than calculating his worth to be 3/5 of a white man; the latter is demeaning, but the former is dehumanizing.

Mia T, 07.23.05
THE FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT?
clinton legacy of lynching update


Full transcript. Video excerpt: RealPlayer or Windows Media. Plus MP3


60 posted on 03/17/2006 4:20:57 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Brian Allen

ping


61 posted on 03/17/2006 4:51:34 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: hummingbird

ping


62 posted on 03/17/2006 5:57:40 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: freema

fyi


63 posted on 03/17/2006 5:58:06 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: freema
jla raises a critically important issue....

I wonder what the wonderful 'church hats,' would make of this clinton racebaiting and hate....

64 posted on 03/17/2006 6:15:26 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: UWSrepublican

fyi


65 posted on 03/17/2006 8:31:54 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Sic Luceat Lux

survival in the balance fyi


66 posted on 03/17/2006 8:51:28 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

Exactly, very much so. / Bttt


67 posted on 03/17/2006 5:40:23 PM PST by Sic Luceat Lux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Sic Luceat Lux

thx :) bump


68 posted on 03/17/2006 6:31:46 PM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

bttt


69 posted on 03/18/2006 10:03:14 AM PST by Sic Luceat Lux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Sic Luceat Lux

thanx:)


70 posted on 03/18/2006 10:30:16 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: freema

ping here


71 posted on 03/18/2006 10:35:41 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Grendel9

bttt


72 posted on 03/18/2006 3:38:53 PM PST by Sic Luceat Lux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

bttt


73 posted on 03/18/2006 7:26:10 PM PST by Sic Luceat Lux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

bttt


74 posted on 03/18/2006 7:26:10 PM PST by Sic Luceat Lux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Mia T; freema; All

Bttt again for the night owls to ponder.


75 posted on 03/18/2006 9:20:37 PM PST by Sic Luceat Lux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Sic Luceat Lux

thx :)


76 posted on 03/19/2006 5:41:21 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Sic Luceat Lux

thx again :)


77 posted on 03/19/2006 5:43:24 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Sic Luceat Lux

and again :)


78 posted on 03/19/2006 5:44:28 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: All

AFTERWORD: A note to the Religious Right
WHY THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT MUST MOBILIZE AGAINST HILLARY:
CLINTON CONFLATES EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS AND ISLAMO-FASCIST TERRORISTS
by Mia T, 03.16.06

I am not arguing that you change your deeply held convictions. To the contrary.

Your convictions--the evangelical ethos-- is precisely my premise, my starting point. It is precisely why I cannot envision how you would doing anything to help elect hillary clinton, someone who is anathema to all you believe.

But that is exactly what you would be doing if, in the next presidential election, you stay home or vote for a 'Perot.' You don't have to physically pull the lever or mark the box or touch the square next to the name 'hillary clinton' to help elect her. To think otherwise is to play with your mind.

It is tempting to rationalize this issue... even to ignore it. It's a difficult issue. It's a dilemma. But rationalizing the issue won't make your actions morally right... and ignoring the issue won't make it go away.

The clintons equate the Religious Right with the islamo-fascist terrorists, with the enemy. They are attempting to transfer onto the Religious Right the hate and fear and disgust Americans feel for the islamo-fascist terrorists. To disseminate their vile invective, the clintons chose a church for the venue and what the they believe to be a vulnerable, easily demagogued population for the audience. (A population they've exploited forever.)

The purpose of this article is to inform you of the clintons' contemptible and dangerous scheme. To let you hear clinton for yourself.

It is critical that you know fully what the clintons think of you and to what extremes they are willing to go to harm you, to defeat you, to crush you.

You must not ignore or rationalize away this threat to your existence. As a Jew, I tend to be vigilant about such threats. I implore you to do likewise. You must not make the same mistake my brethren made almost seven decades ago.

 

READ MORE

79 posted on 03/20/2006 6:45:37 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Knitting A Conundrum; x5452; redgolum; NYer; dukeman; Salvation; alpha-8-25-02; .30Carbine; ...

This is a fascinating (although short) thread. I would be interested in your thoughts.


80 posted on 03/21/2006 2:39:36 PM PST by freema (Proud Marine FRiend, Mom, Aunt, Sister, Friend, Wife, Daughter, Niece)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Knitting A Conundrum; x5452; redgolum; NYer; dukeman; Salvation; alpha-8-25-02; .30Carbine; ...

This is a fascinating (although short) thread. I would be interested in your thoughts

re: Bill's sermon


81 posted on 03/21/2006 2:41:56 PM PST by freema (Proud Marine FRiend, Mom, Aunt, Sister, Friend, Wife, Daughter, Niece)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: freema

welcome back and thx. :)


82 posted on 03/21/2006 3:55:35 PM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: maica

ping


83 posted on 03/25/2006 5:21:51 PM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: All
HILLARY DOES JESUS
"FURTHER EVIDENCE WHY SHE IS ONE OF THE MOST DESPICABLE POLITICIANS OUT THERE RIGHT NOW"

by Mia T, 3.26.06



From a Christian theologian:



his is just further evidence of what, in my opinion, is why Hillary Clinton is one of the most despicable politicians that is out there right now in the sense that she's absolutely chameleonlike.

When she is pandering to the Left, she wants nothing to do with religion. She sounds like the ACLU. When she's voting against [the banning of] partial-birth abortion, I don't see her invoking the name of Jesus there because I'm sure she can't picture Jesus doing something like that. And she also knows it doesn't play with her far-left base.

And now she wants to pander to the center, so she starts invoking the name of Jesus.

And as a Christian, I'm offended by her use of Jesus for what I see as her very, very--uh--very self-interested political partisan ambition. I think this is simply a craven attempt to use the name of Jesus for political purposes....

To demonize either side of the immigration issue by invoking the name of Jesus is precisely the point..

This is an issue of prudential judgment that reasonable people can disagree about. They're weighing competing values--humanitarian values vs. values of national sovereignty in the age of terrorism. Neither side of this debate has the moral corner or the moral high ground.

Both sides have good points to make and to demonize the other side by invoking the name of Jesus [is despicable].

Larry Chapp, Ph.D.
Professor of Theology
The O'Reilly Factor


READ MORE

84 posted on 03/30/2006 6:17:13 AM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: trubluolyguy; Gail Wynand; jla; AliVeritas; All
The clinton scheme to marginalize and crush Evangelicals that I warned about beginning in 2004 is being implemented by the clinton-Soros machine today, in real time, right before our eyes. (See relevant essays, below.)

My point remains the same: The Religious Right has its survival (and very possibly America's) in its control.

The choice is stark: Stay home and place a de facto vote for the clinton-Soros-democrat machine, i.e., the people who want to crush you (and the party who will cripple Bush and lose the war)...

or support Bush and the war effort, and vote for an admittedly imperfect GOP.

Let down the curtain: the farce is done. (Rabelais)
[Zucker ad, analysis]


Comedy director David Zucker goes to GOP? You can't be serious!
[Nu, so what took you so long?]


BEYOND NORTH KOREA
CLINTON DELUSIONS, DECEPTIONS + THE BOMB

(THE DEMOCRATS ARE GONNA GET US KILLED)


ALERT! SECURITY MOMS
THE LEFT IS GONNA GET US KILLED
PART 6
(HEAR GEORGE SOROS, BILL CLINTON)



SEE RAHM DANCE
THE CLINTON-FOLEY NEXUS: A THEORY
part 2


'KILL BILL'
THE CLINTON-FOLEY NEXUS: A THEORY
part 1



How To Get Rich Quick In Shady Land Deals Like Harry Reid and hillary clinton


JIM TOWEY DEBUNKS KUO BOOK
BOOK ANOTHER CLINTON-SIMON SCHUSTER MACHINE EFFORT TO MARGINALIZE EVANGELICALS, SUPPRESS TURNOUT


ALERT! CLINTON-SIMON & SCHUSTER MACHINE TARGETS RELIGIOUS RIGHT: ANOTHER INSIDIOUS EFFORT TO DENY THE FRANCHISE TO EVANGELICALS


WHY THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT MUST MOBILIZE AGAINST HILLARY: CLINTON CONFLATES EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS AND ISLAMO-FASCIST TERRORISTS


AFTERWORD: A Note to the Religious Right


What's black and white and read all over and is more self-destructive than pre-9/11 thinking?
Pre-clinton thinking, that's what.... Putting doctrinal purity ahead of making sure a defective and dangerous clinton never again controls this country is pre-clinton thinking. We no longer have the luxury of time or circumstance to massage our sensibilities, to indulge our indignations.We will not survive another clinton. (We may yet not survive the first one.)


VIRTUAL KILL
THE CHRIS WALLACE-BILL CLINTON INTERVIEW DECONSTRUCTED



'BIN LADEN ALIVE TODAY BECAUSE CLINTON, BERGER + CLARKE REFUSED TO KILL HIM'
CLINTON 'MISLED AMERICAN PEOPLE' IN CHRIS WALLACE INTERVIEW
:HEAR Osama-Division CIA Chief


MISSING CLINTON AUDIO! 'Can we kill 'em tomorrow?'
(+Albright-Fulbright-Nobel TERRORISM revelations)


THE DRAMATIC INCREASE IN HILLARY CLINTON'S DISCLOSED ASSETS: An Alternative Theory


WHEN CATTLE FUTURES ARE THE FUTURE:
HILLARY CLINTON'S COW TRADES AS PROGNOSTIC




SOMALIA + RWANDA UNDERSCORE WHY WE MUST DEFEAT THE CLINTONS NOW (ATTENTION NEW YORKERS)


THE DECLINE OF HILLARY CLINTON: THE DYNAMICS (SHE HAS ONLY ONE WAY TO GO. AND IT ISN'T UP.)


THE POLITICS OF DUMPING HILLARY (see post 53)


'HILLARY'S BIGGEST PROBLEM... SHE'S OLD NEWS'


CARVILLE AGITPROP + THE CLINTON JACKBOOT: 'THE POWER OF HILLARY': THE TITLE


CARVILLE'S 'Clinton is electable! Clear the way!' BATTLE CRY SPELLS TROUBLE FOR HILLARY


I'LL SEE ANN COULTER'S 'BILL CLINTON RAPE CHARGE' AND RAISE HER 'ONE HILLARY CLINTON'


SUSAN ESTRICH ON "DREDGING UP" THE RAPE OF JUANITA BROADDRICK + "ALL THAT OLD CLINTON STUFF"




THE INCONVENIENT TRUTH ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON
(FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU. FOOL ME TWICE, SHAME ON ME.)


ON PEGGY NOONAN ON HILLARY CLINTON SENDING MEN TO WAR
(IT RUNS IN THE FAMILY)



HILLARY GOES NUCLEAR
PROLIFERATION IN THE AGE OF CLINTON



QUID PRO COAL2:
CLINTON CORRUPTION + THE SEQUESTRATION OF GASEOUS FOSSILS
(HILLARY DOES COAL AT THE NATIONAL PRESS CLUB)



TIRE INFLATION, GAS STATIONS + THE NEED TO SEQUESTER HILLARY


Nina Burleigh: Do the Right Thing, Hillary








COPYRIGHT MIA T 2006


85 posted on 10/20/2006 6:27:32 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
The choice is stark: Republicans must cease with their blatant sanctimonious attitude towards the Christian Right and nominate a Presidential candidate acceptable to them or place a de facto vote for the clinton-Soros-democrat machine, i.e., the people who want to crush you (and the party who will cripple Bush and lose the war)...

or support the war effort, and vote for an admittedly imperfect GOP that is still acceptable to the Christian Right. In doing so, the ideals of Jefferson and Reagan will again take precedence and flourish.

Editing happily provided by jla.

86 posted on 10/22/2006 2:32:32 PM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

Comment #87 Removed by Moderator

To: jla

I disagree with the premise of your edit, jla.

In the end, voting is something we do, not something that is done to us. And it is an individual act, not groupthink.

Each of us has it in us the power to overcome the demagoguery and marginalization (and worse) from the Left, and any sanctimony--imagined or real--from the Right, to make sure the commander in chief has the means to continue to prosecute the war and protect the nation.





88 posted on 10/22/2006 10:47:31 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
In the end, voting is something we do, not something that is done to us.

I don't understand this statement, please clarify.

And it is an individual act, not groupthink.

Of course it is, (an individual act). But many, (millions actually), of individuals share the same basic premise in regards to what constitutes a political candidate that they would support and vote for.

Each of us has it in us the power to overcome the demagoguery and marginalization (and worse) from the Left,

I put the key word of your remark in bold font. For the last few years your clarion call, Mia, has been 'we must set aside our individual preferences, ethical/moral standards, and beliefs and vote (R) no matter even if the candidate's conviction are the polar opposite...all for the common good, (am I the only one who sees the contradiction here?), of beating the (D)'.

and any sanctimony--imagined or real--from the Right, to make sure the commander in chief has the means to continue to prosecute the war and protect the nation.

It is not imagined, and you know that to be so, Mia.


If I had a time machine, do you know what I'd do? I'd send you back to early 19 c. Virginia, Monticello to be exact. On your garment I'd pin this note:

Mr. Jefferson,

The young lady to whom this message is attached is very bright, very imaginative, and loves America. She just has a problem with placing her priorities in the proper hierarchical order. Take her under your noble wing, explain to her what you meant in the Declaration of Independence and how your solemn and inspiring words should be applied by the thoughtful American. Take heed though, for she will contest many of your posits in the fields of science as well as critiquing your scheme to convert our nation to the decimal system, and she may suggest architectural amendments that should be made to your home, (and you will probably agree with her, at times). Oh, and be sure to show her the improvement you made on the plow moldboard...then put her to work. Getting in touch with the soil would be of unfathomable benefit to the girl. To be sure, you will find her engaging, charming and winsome. She is just in need of a (founding) father figure to not so much set her on the right path, but keep her from wondering off the road and stepping into a ditch.

Thank you, and best regards,

jla

89 posted on 10/23/2006 7:32:00 AM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: jla

A lovely letter to TJ. Thank you, jla. :)


90 posted on 10/23/2006 8:42:40 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: jla

Voting is an individual act, but we no longer have the luxury of time or circumstance to indulge our individual sensibilities.

As for the sanctimony, I cannot say whether it's real. I don't know what is in their hearts.

But I do know this: I'd take the party of sanctimony any day over the party of extermination.

What's black and white and read all over and is more self-destructive than pre-9/11 thinking?

(Pre-clinton thinking, that's what....

Putting doctrinal purity ahead of making sure a defective and dangerous clinton never again controls this country is pre-clinton thinking.

We no longer have the luxury of time or circumstance to massage our sensibilities, to indulge our indignations.

We will not survive another clinton. (We may yet not survive the first one.))



JIM TOWEY DEBUNKS KUO BOOK
BOOK ANOTHER CLINTON-SIMON SCHUSTER MACHINE EFFORT TO MARGINALIZE EVANGELICALS, SUPPRESS TURNOUT


ALERT! CLINTON-SIMON & SCHUSTER MACHINE TARGETS RELIGIOUS RIGHT: ANOTHER INSIDIOUS EFFORT TO DENY THE FRANCHISE TO EVANGELICALS


WHY THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT MUST MOBILIZE AGAINST HILLARY: CLINTON CONFLATES EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS AND ISLAMO-FASCIST TERRORISTS


AFTERWORD: A Note to the Religious Right



91 posted on 10/23/2006 8:44:20 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
A lovely letter to TJ. Thank you, jla. :)

Happy knowing you took it in the spirit* intended. (As I knew you would).

* Mine and that of 1776.

92 posted on 10/23/2006 5:54:57 PM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

Goodnight and Golightly, Mia T

93 posted on 10/23/2006 8:11:49 PM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: jla

great animation. Captures the Amish way of life/aesthetic.


94 posted on 10/25/2006 7:29:05 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-94 last

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