Posted on 11/10/2001 8:18:25 AM PST by Dqban22
CLINTON: THE PROTRAIT OF DORIAN GRAY
It was pitiful the spectacle of former president Bill Clinton addressing his Alma Mater, Georgetown Jesuit University, where he graduated in 1968. Was he stoned or was he brutally battered by his wife the previous night? Or was his disfigured face, swollen read nose and blotted eyes, that reminded me of the Portray of Dorian Gray, the product of a life of vice, lie and deception?
The master communicator was rambling, incoherent and certainly divisive in his speech to an audience composed by Jesuit students who were raised to an emotional delirium by the words of the former president. While President Bush was uniting the nation and raising the spirit of the American people, Clinton was trying to divide the country with a peroration that could well have been written by Usama bin Laden’s speechwriters.
In his address Clinton accused the U.S. of a long history of terrorism against Blacks and the slaughter of the American Indians in order to rob their territories and mineral rights, terrorists actions for which, according to Clinton, we are still paying for. Behind those historical divagations, Clinton was in fact implying that those terrorist allegations were the roots cause for the terrorist attack of September 11 with the sequel of over 5,000 innocent victims being cowardly murdered. Clinton preferred to ignore that the U.S. is today one of the most fair and free nations in the world.
The fact is that such alleged horrors occurred more than a century ago and that hundreds of the victims that died on September 11 attack were from more than 80 countries around the world, including Muslims, and that none of the Americans who died had any responsibility for the alleged horrors, never have deterred Clinton from making scurrilous allegations against our country.
Or was Clinton just trying to deviate the public’s attention away from his own responsibility? President Clinton emasculated and demoralized the Intelligence Services, the Justice Department, and dangerously undermanned and under-funded our Arms Forces leaving the countrywide open for terrorist attacks. Clinton also aided and abetted the international terrorism by freeing the Puerto Rican terrorists responsible for the murder of policemen, bombings, and bank heists in the U.S.
Clinton, who complained about the mistreating of the American Indians, has responsibility for defrauding millions of dollars from the Indian Reservations Funds during his administration while they were under the care of Clinton’s Interior Department.
The main culprits for the terrorist attacks of September 11, were Usama bin Laden and the Islamic terrorist network that declared war upon the U.S., Christianity, the Jews, the Western civilization and all the other world religions, as was demonstrated by the destruction in Afghanistan of giant Buda statues, that were sculptured on a mountain, invaluable religious and artistic treasures of humankind lost for ever by the fanaticism and hatred of Islamic zealots.
One of the students of Georgetown University, said in the O’Reilly’s program that the main reason for Clinton invitation was that “he was most respected and admired” by the students of that prestigious Jesuit institution. In fact many students spent the night waiting queued for the precious privilege of hearing this president product of Jesuit education, and during and after the Clinton’s address the students erupted with such an enthusiastic expressions of approval that seemed more appropriate for hysterical pre-teen girls toward a rock star than for men formed and educated by the Jesuits.
To consider Clinton, who was the second president in the history of U.S. to be impeached, disbar for lying under oath, and who disgraced and dishonored the office of the Presidency, as “the most respected and admired” by students formed by the Jesuits, reveals the moral decay of today’s Jesuit education and is quite an indictment against an institution that once enjoyed the highest academic and morals standards.
Excellent point! The blame for his actions or acceptance of failure is not something the Clintons are familiar with. Blaming others is their modus operandi.
I thought this was most telling of his own words:
"If you live in a country where you're never required to take responsibility for yourself, where you never even have to ask whether there's something you should be doing to solve your own problems, then people are kept in kind of a permanent state of collective immaturity and it becomes quite easy for them to believe that someone else's success is the cause of their distress."
It's my belief as so often with both of the Clintons, they condemn themselves when they mean to condemn others.
Regards, Jen
It should be obvious to the most casual observer that Clinton is a textbook psychopath.
Whose agenda is served by people who wish to conceal the fact that Clinton is a psychopath?
Here's the full text. Read it and you'll see that your response has nothing to do with what Clinton actually said. And don't tell give me "Salon liberal media" crap because it's a literal transcription. Read it and think for yourself.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2001/11/10/speech/index.html
Nowhere did Clinton justify the actions of Sept 11. Everywhere did he say that this war must be prosectuted to our fullest ability.
Now let's talk about the "price" comment, since that's what the talking heads on TV seem to be fixated on. If you read the above link, you'll see very clearly that this comment was in reference to the Crusades, not slavery or the treatment of Indians or, indeed, anything America did. Not that this prevented the Washington Times from lying about it, or you from repeating that lie.
Clinton simply said this: Muslims in the middle east still resent the West because of the Crusades. A simple enough statement, and not a very controversial one. Further, he made in the context of using the Crusades as an example for why acts of terror never accomplish their intended purpose. But you, in your desire to slander Clinton, willfully closed your eyes to this argument.
Everyone has reasons to rip on Clinton, but we don't need to fabricate new ones out of whole cloth by attributing words to the man that he didn't say. Show at least a little bit of the honesty and character you claim to champion.
Would that statement imply that William Jefferson Clinton represents the best that a Jesuit education can produce?
If only.
Unfortunately EVERYTHING X42 says is SPIN, or maybe it ISN'T........or.. well... I guess whatever is, is, is necessary to decipher whether it is spin or isn't.
True, this is not a controversial statement. However, it reflects more on how history is taught than on actual history.
Islam spread by the sword, almost conquering Europe. The Crusades provided a unifying theme for a counter-attack that could not have hoped to succeed without some way to unify the otherwise mutually suspicious and/or warring nations of Europe.
In other words, the Crusades were a counter-attack against Islamic aggression. The original Islamic attack and the European response was spread over several hundred years. Only by selectively ignoring the origins can this episode be cast as western and/or Christian aggression against Islam.
But, then, America was never IN a Crusade, were we. Please explain the why's of Clinton's connection of the terror attacks on OUR NATION, as opposed to an attack on religion, as relates to the Crusades. But then, Libs are short on logic, long on equivocation, I don't expect much more than a 'you're Christian therefore you're guilty' response.
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.