WHY BIN LADEN WANTS HOME DELIVERY OF THE NEW YORK TIMES

7.11.06 | Mia T

[Mia T]

WHY BIN LADEN WANTS HOME DELIVERY OF THE NEW YORK TIMES
by Mia T, 7.11.06

IN A 'PINCH': RETHINKING THE FIRST AMENDMENT
(Which came first, the 'journalist' or the traitor?)

by Mia T, 6.27.06

"What is government itself but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary."

James Madison

hen the founders granted 'The Press' special dispensation, they never considered the possibility that traitors in our midst would game the system. But that is precisely what is happening today. (Hate America? Support jihad? Become a 'journalist!')

This was bound to happen.

The premise behind the First Amendment as it applies to the press--that a vigilant watchdog is necessary, sufficient--indeed, possible--to protect against man's basest instincts--is tautologically flawed: The fox guarding the White House, if you will.

Walter Lippmann, the 20th-century American columnist, wrote, "A free press is not a privilege, but an organic necessity in a great society." True in theory. True even in Lippmann's quaint mid-20th-century America, perhaps. But patently false in this postmodern era of the bubbas and the Pinches.

When a free and great society is hijacked by a seditious bunch of dysfunctional, power-hungry malcontents and elitists, it will remain neither free nor great for long. When hijacked by them in the midst of asymmetric warfare, it will soon not remain at all.

If President George W. Bush is serious about winning the War on Terror, he will aggressively pursue the enemy in our midst.

Targeting and defeating the enemy in our midst is, by far, the more difficult task and will measure Bush's resolve and courage (and his independence from the MPRDC (mutual protection racket in DC)) more than any pretty speech, more even than 'staying the course.'

No government ought to be without censors; and where the press is free no one ever will.

Thomas Jefferson
Letter, September 9, 1792, to George Washington

It is hard to believe that a man is telling the truth when you know that you would lie if you were in his place.

H. L. Mencken

READ MORE

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2006

WAR AND TREASON AND THE NEW YORK TIMES
(Please see post 65)


The Devil & the Gray Lady


IN A 'PINCH': RETHINKING THE FIRST AMENDMENT
(Which came first, the 'journalist' or the traitor?)


PINCH SULZBERGER, PEARL HARBOR + TREASON
WHY WE MUST PROSECUTE THE NEW YORK TIMES


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?


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


'MAKE IT A RULE' -- PLACE YOUR ORDER FOR OSAMA WITH CLINTON and CO.
(HEAR HILLARY + BILL MAKE THEIR PITCH)


ON THE FICTIONALIZED MEMOIR (HEAR HILLARY IN SF)^{~PART TWO~}
THE (oops!) INADVERTENT ADMISSIONS OF HILLARY AND JANE IN SAN FRANCISCO


THE (oops!) INADVERTENT (TERRORISM) ADMISSIONS OF BILL + HILLARY CLINTON (HEAR HILLARY IN SF) ^{~PART ONE~}


IT TAKES A CLINTON TO RAZE A COUNTRY


BIN LADEN FINGERS CLINTON FOR TERROR SUCCESS (SEE FOOTAGE)
THE THREAT OF TERRORISM IS AS CLOSE AS A CLINTON IS TO THE OVAL OFFICE


CHENEY: CALL THEM REPREHENSIBLE
THE DEMOCRATS ARE GONNA GET US KILLED (kerry, clinton + sandy berger's pants) SERlES₅


sandy berger haberdashery feint
(the specs, not the pants or the socks)


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


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)


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


UNITED 93:THE CLINTON-9/11 NEXUS
"We have to do it now. We know what happens if we just sit here and do nothing...."


ALBRIGHT INDICTS CLINTON FOR TERRORISM FAILURE
(and doesn't even know it)


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



THE FAILED, DYSFUNCTIONAL CLINTON PRESIDENCY
(DECONSTRUCTING CLINTON'S HOFSTRA SPEECH) -- part1: clinton's "Brinkley" Lie


AFTERWORD: ON CLINTON SMALLNESS
(BRINKLEY MISSES THE POINT)

WHY HILLARY IN THE OVAL OFFICE IS A NATIONAL-SECURITY NO-NO^{PART ONE}

[Mia T]

ping

[Stallone]

You are hilarous.

A graphic for your viewing pleasure.

[Mia T]

ping

[A message]

Oh Mia, if wasn't so darn true it would be funny.

Your " Why Bin Laden wants home delivery of the New York Times" is a classic.

[no-s]

heheh...that's really good. shorten it up a bit and stick it in you-tube/google video etc...I have friends who read the NYT and they need an ironic whack to the brain to get the point....

[Mia T]

It's tragic. :(

[A message]

yes it truly is :-(

[nopardons]

bttt

[Mia T]

;)

[Mia T]

thanx :)

[nopardons]

Welcome, as always. I LOVE your stuff! :-)

[Cindy]

Thanks for the ping, MiaT.

[Mia T]

thanx, Cindy. :)

[A message]

This phrase underscores clinton's failure to understand that:

* a terrorist war requires only one consenting player

Something you wrote earlier( and is in your links) that bears repeating.

When our enemies call it a Jihad. It is a Jihad.

When our enemies say we are at war. We are at war.

War and Jihad only require one side to prosecute it. It is up to the other side whether they want to defend themselves. The liberals dont seem to understand this and the NYTimes is traitorous paper that seeks for our side not to defend ourselves.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

TOP SECRET DOCUMENTS

[Yehuda]

"There's the Times and then theres everything else..."

DIRKA DIRKA

LOL!

[Mia T]

Exactly. The clintons and The Left don't get it... or CHOOSE not to get it

Clearly, the impeached ex-president treated terrorism not as war but as a law enforcement problem, which, by definition is defensive, after-the-fact and fatally-too-late.

He appears not to understand that when terrorists declare war on you…and then proceed to kill you… you are, perforce, at war. At that point, you really have only one decision to make: Do you fight the terrorists… or do you surrender?

Critical to the understanding of the clintons' (and the left's) inability to protect America from terrorism is the analysis of clinton's final phrase, "though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America."

"I did not bring him [Osama bin Laden] here... though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America."

This phrase is clinton's explicit rejection of both bin Laden's repeated declarations/acts of war and the (Bush) doctrine of preemption to fight terror.

This phrase underscores clinton's failure to understand that:

• a terrorist war requires only one consenting player
  
• the War on Terror is global and irreducible, the Left's postmodern posture notwithstanding.
  
• defining bin Laden's acts of war as "crimes'' is a dangerous, anachronistic, postmodern conceit (It doesn't depend on what the meaning of the word "war" is) and amounts to surrender
  
• preemptive action, and even more so, preventative action, serve a necessary, critically protective, as well as offensive function in any war on terror.

The sorry endpoint of this massive, 8-year clinton blunder was, of course, 9/11 and the exponential growth of al Qaeda.

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

also see:
The Left's Fatally Flawed "Animal Farm" Mentality
(Why America Must NEVER AGAIN Elect a Democrat President)
by Mia T

.

[Mia T]

In the caldron of conflict and resolution that is government, it matters not much from which little parochial corner we pluck our leaders. What matters--what matters most--perhaps in the end what matters only--is character.

According to the author, "Do I desire security or glory?" is one of the "complicated" questions a president must ask.

The author fails to understand that a president who needs to ask himself that question is in the wrong job.--Mia T]

by Mia T, 7.07.06
ON PEGGY NOONAN ON HILLARY CLINTON SENDING MEN TO WAR
(IT RUNS IN THE FAMILY)

 

ALBRIGHT INDICTS CLINTON FOR TERRORISM FAILURE (and doesn't even know it)
by Mia T, 4.28.06

ALBRIGHT: 'Bin Laden and his Network Declared War on the United States and Struck First and We Have Suffered Deeply'



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

HEAR CLINTON! 'Can we kill 'em tomorrow?'
by Mia T, 4.24.06



READ MORE

[Mia T]

Hoisted by their own petard, so to speak. ;)

[E.G.C.]

Mia T. Bump.

[river rat]

Treason is the crime....
Death is the result...

Unfortunately, it's not the NYT dying....

Semper Fi

[mo]

IMHO, pursuing the enemy in our midst is precisely what FR does, what Ann Coulter is doing...

[Mia T]

bump

[Mia T]

bump.

[Mia T]

thanx :)

[Mia T]

ping

[Mia T]

thanx again :)

[bmwcyle]

Wrap it with a bomb and send the paperboy out in the F-16.

[PGalt]

We are fighting a war on many fronts. Our armed forces are doing an outstanding job against foreign enemies. Thanks for FOCUSING on our Most Wanted domestic enemies. Fortunately they can still be knocked out without firing a shot.

FR Press. Good people are connecting rapidly.

[M Kehoe]

Another great piece of work.

5.56mm

[Delta 21]

I would settle for a fist full of treason charges on all the "un-named sources in the Pentagon". The MSM will consume itself soon enough. Untill we start charging treason to the people who give out classified information, its only going to get worse.

Hang 'em!

[Mia T]

As for 'wrapping,' the Times (and all its 'news') isn't fit for fish.

[Wolverine]

bump

[bmwcyle]

Wrapped two hundred pound bombs, they will be reduced to ash.

[Mia T]

Treason is the crime....
Death is the result...

Unfortunately, it's not the NYT dying....
Semper Fi-river rat

PINCH SULZBERGER, PEARL HARBOR + TREASON
WHY WE MUST PROSECUTE THE NEW YORK TIMES
by Mia T, 06.26.06

READ MORE

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2006

[Mia T]

thanx :)

[Mia T]

READ MORE

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2006

[Mia T]

It may, in the end, take al Qaeda, ironically, to stop Sulzberger and the Times. In order to game the First Amendment, you need a First Amendment in the first place. In order to game the First Amendment, you need to be.

[Mia T]

We don't have the luxury of 'time(s).'
Notwithstanding, they are both traitors.
We've got to 'plug' both leaks.

[Mia T]

thanx :)

[Mia T]

thx

[Mia T]

We are fighting a war on many fronts.

America's Real Two-Front War

 

by Mia T, 4.17.04

merica's real two-front war: fundamentalist Islam on the right and a fundamentally seditious clintonoid neo-neoliberalism on the left, both anarchic, both messianically, lethally intolerant, both amorally perverse, both killing Americans, both placing America at grave risk, neither undeterred by MAD--which means--both quite insane.

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

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

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

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

America must not pull her punches (or her 'Pinches').

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

[Mia T]

fyi

[DoctorMichael]

Bitingly satirical and, as always, not without a hint of truth and reality.

[Mia T]

Bitingly satirical

thanx DoctorMichael.

The inexorable result of Pinch and company biting off their Armani to spite their Prada, so to speak.

[Mia T]

ping

[Mia T]

bump

[Screamname]

Excellent! My God, that Losing Bin laden one you made is fantastic. Freggin` Hillary, I don`t know what is a more annoying sound; That womans voice or hearing a 100 fingernails run across a blackboard. Hey another thing; When the rapist was Pres I swear, it seemed it was every single day this putz was in NYC for a fundraiser. It use to drive me nuts! Half of the streets in Manhattan closed down so this putz could schmooze with the liberal elite, it was impossible to drive anywhere! I think Steve Dunleavey of the NY Post once said in one year alone Clinton visited NYC 111 times!! That`s twice every week! And not ONCE did he ever visit the WTC bombing. NYC to him was just a place where he could line his pockets. And who had to pay for all these visits, for all this police overtime not to mention all he business that was disrupted? Clinton was just an effin` absolute self serving scumbag. "Oh Denise, give me money for my Clinton worship center and I will pardon your husband, the biggest tax cheat in US history!"

"Denise, can you blow this for me?"