Out Of Public Eyem Clinton Said Violent, Profane, Ruthless

By Doug Thompson www.capitolhillblue.com 4-8-99

Away from the public eye and the vaunted White House spin machine, President Bill Clinton is a vulgar, vengeful man who believes in "killing" people try to hurt him, those who know Clinton best say.

White House staffers, Clinton confidants and others describe Clinton as "incredibly profane" and "an angry man who wants to inflict as much pain as possible on his enemies."

Former White House senior staff member George Stephanopoulos in his book, All Too Human, writes about Clinton's mishandling of the Somalia crisis and shows the depth of the President's violent emotions:

"'We're not inflicting pain on these fuckers,' Clinton said, softly at first. 'When people kill us, they should be killed in greater numbers.' Then, with his face reddening, his voice rising, and his fist pounding his thigh, he leaned into Tony [Lake], as if it was his fault. 'I believe in killing people who try to hurt you. And I can't believe we're being pushed around by these two-bit pricks.'"

Those who have known Clinton since his days in Arkansas say the quote is "vintage Bill."

"Only an idiot would buy the public persona of Bill Clinton," says Walter Erricson, a retired reporter who covered Clinton in his early political days in Arkansas. "He is an incredibly profane individual. He is now and always has been an angry man who wants to inflict as much pain as possible on his enemies."

White House staff members say Clinton curses like a sailor, has temper tantrums that cause people to back away from him and uses the word "kill" often to describe what he wants to do with his enemies.

"Once, when the House was finishing up its impeachment investigation, the President slammed his fist down on the table and said 'I'd like to kill all of these sons of bitches and just be done with it!' There was a long, painful period of silence until he regained his composure. Then everybody went on like it was never said," says one former White House staffer.

Samuel Wilson, a former political worker in Clinton's second campaign for governor, remembers the candidate encountering a critic at a campaign appearance in a small town. After the critic told Clinton he was nothing but a "two-bit politician" and then walked away, Clinton turned to a campaign aide and said "write down the name of that motherfucker. When I'm back in office, he's a dead man."

"I remember his look. It was cold," Wilson said. "I don't want to think he wanted to kill him literally, but I'm sure some sort of revenge was inflicted later on."

In fact, it was fear of what Attorney General Bill Clinton could do to her business that kept nursing home operator Juanita Broaddrick from reporting Clinton's rape of her 21 years ago in a Little Rock hotel room.

"Her fears were justified," says retired reporter Erricson. "Everybody knew Bill Clinton was a man who got even, any way he could."

Helen Shannon, who worked in the Arkansas Statehouse during Clinton's second term as governor, said the governor would personally order state contracts canceled when he got angry with people.

"The word would come down from the governor's office that somebody was off limits and we would cancel their contracts and put them on a 'don't use' list. It happened a lot," she says.

Shannon, who was dating a member of Clinton's staff, says Clinton would order audits of contracts and tell the the Arkansas State Police to "turn up the heat" on somebody he didn't like.

"When Bill Clinton ran Arkansas, it was a police state," she says.

White House staff members tell similar stories. At one meeting, Clinton told staff members he wanted everyone in the Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr's office audited by the IRS.

"Several people in the meeting told the President he shouldn't do that," the staff member remember. "He slammed his fist down on the table and said: 'I can do any Goddamned thing I want. I'm President of the United States. I take care of my friends and I fuck with my enemies. That's the way it is. Anybody who doesn't like it can take a hike."

The White House did not return calls for comment.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/April1999/040899/privateclinton040899.htm

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), April 09, 1999

Answers

For some reason, I don't dobt any of it. Trouble is...his wife is just as bad according to the gossip rags in DC. (Using sources from the White House housekeeping staff, no doubt.) Nixon was very similar in his responses to people according to the books written about him.

(FYI...On El Rushbo's program today, he said that there had been only two presidents whose names contained all the letters of the alphabet necessary to spell the word 'criminal'. One was Nixon..the other? You guessed it.)

-- Lobo (atthelair@yahoo.com), April 09, 1999.

Some of those sources aren't just staff. I read one about the Secret Service agent refusing to carry all of her royal highnesses purchases because he had to keep at least one hand clear for gun use. Her response was, "well what the f**k good are you then?!"

Truly a charming woman. Hillary is such a bitch that even a scumbag like Wild Bill wont do her. It works out just fine actually. Herr William is such a scumbag that even a bitch like Hillary wont do him!

Have you actually looked at his "choice" in women? Less "choice", and more like "leftovers".

This started as a response, and turned into a vent. I really DO NOT like those "people".

-- Scott (duhelmet@aol.com), April 09, 1999.

And these are the people that are going to "lead" us out of possibly the worst man-made disaster in history.

That doesn't make one feel very confident, does it?

Jolly...............not.

-- Jollyprez (jolly@prez.com), April 09, 1999.

This seems like the right thread to post this. =================== Analysis: Russia Mobilizes, America Sleeps J.R. Nyquist and Christopher Ruddy April 8, 1999

LONDON AND WASHINGTON -- Bill Clinton's use of NATO forces to bomb Yugoslavia could trigger global war. Over the weekend, Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji hinted that the crisis in Kosovo could lead to a world war. At the same time, Russia -- a long-time ally of the Serbs -- has begun a large-scale mobilization of its military forces.

While NATO countries are engaging in military operations, not one Western country is mobilizing for a larger war, as is Russia.

THE NEW STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP OF RUSSIA AND CHINA

NATO's soporific reaction to Russia's mobilization should also be viewed, not in the context of the Yugoslavia bombing, but in the broader context of the new China-Russia relationship -- one that has dramatically altered the balance of power in the world.

In November 1998, Russia and China officially formed a "strategic partnership." According to the official Chinese news agency, this partnership is meant to challenge the "perceived global dominance of the U.S." In plain English, the primary enemy Russia and China plan to fight is the United States and its allies.

Together, Russia and China have the world's most powerful military, including over 30,000 nuclear weapons, armies of 6 million men with hundreds of battle-ready combat divisions, and thousands of tanks. Their new alliance should have rung warning bells throughout the world. Instead the Western media, Clinton and other Western leaders have ignored it, continuing to insist that Russia and China are our "friends."

WHILE CLINTON DIDDLES, RUSSIA AND CHINA PREPARE FOR WAR

In recent months, Russia and China have jointly demilitarized their 2,500-mile border. Three hundred Russian combat units were withdrawn from the Chinese frontier. A similar number of Chinese units were withdrawn.

China has also been rapidly building up its ballistic missile forces opposite Taiwan -- forces that could be used against the U.S. military in the Far East. An attack against Taiwan could come at any time. Carl Ford of the Heritage Foundation, testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on March 25, said that the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) has changed its military strategy from one of a slowly-developed assault and blockade against Taiwan, to "more intense, quick-hitting attacks using ballistic missiles."

For many years, Russian military theory has held that ballistic missile weapons can be used to accelerate attacks, allowing for rapid victories over powerful opponents. The Chinese missile buildup together with its shift in military strategy suggests that China's generals have fallen under the spell of Russian military theory.

At the same time, the Russian units moved off the Chinese border are now free to threaten Europe.

As the NATO bombing began, Russia talked of moving heavy bombers and tactical nuclear weapons into Belarus, the traditional invasion route from Russia to Europe.

Still, NATO is oblivious to the tremendous shift in the global balance of power caused by the new Russia-China military alliance.

NORTH KOREA JOINS THE RUSSIA-CHINA AXIS

There are strong indications that the Russia-China alliance also includes other sworn enemies of the West, including the North Korean military dictatorship. During the Korean War, tens of thousands of Chinese troops fought against the US in support of the North Korean dictatorship, and China continues to be North Korea's principal ally. It is virtually unthinkable that the North Koreans would launch a new war against South Korea or the West without Chinese approval and support.

In the past year, North Korea has become increasingly bellicose, repeatedly threatening to launch nuclear weapons against US cities if we interfere with their activities on the Korean peninsula. In just the last month, Korea has also deployed a new three-stage missile capable of hitting most US cities.

A major obstacle in any war launched by North Korea is America's ally, Japan. According to the nationally circulated Japanese newspaper Sankei, on March 23, North Korea used a naval diversion to cover the insertion "dozens" of special operations commandos into Japan. According to unidentified sources, these North Korean infiltrators are trained in the sabotage of trains, bridges, and communications.

Such a move by the North Koreans could mean that an attack by North Korea against the South is imminent.

AMERICAN FORCES SPREAD THIN AND VULNERABLE TO RUSSIAN OR CHINESE AGGRESSION

The bulk of front-line American combat troops are now dispersed abroad. As the Balkans conflict escalates even further with the likely introduction of NATO ground forces, the West is ill prepared to defend South Korea, Taiwan, or even America.

The NATO blitz against Yugoslavia is already sapping U.S. military strength needed in the Middle East to check Saddam Hussein. If war were to intensify in the Balkans, or if war broke out in Korea, with our current commitment in Iraq, America doesn't have the resources to cope.

The logic of this is apparent to our enemies, and could well be exploited to inflict a major defeat on American forces in one or two hot spots simultaneously.

Still, the main threat to America is Russia, which now has more nuclear weapons than every other nation on earth combined.

For the past three months NewsMax.com has been sounding the alarm about growing war preparations against the West by a new Russia/China axis. The very timing of the Russian-Chinese alliance -- when U.S. forces are at a low -- is extremely ominous.

But the establishment media has ignored this story. Now NATO's attack against Yugoslavia has provoked bitter condemnation from Russia and China and the military threat is apparent for all to see.

PREPARING THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE FOR WAR

As we reported in Newsmax.com four months ago, before it would be politically possible for the Russians to launch a war against the West, the Russian people would first have to be psychologically prepared for war. Clinton's war on Yugoslavia has provided precisely the stimulus needed to create massive war hysteria among the Russian people.

Just last Thursday, hundreds of furious Russian demonstrators marched through Moscow calling for Russia to go to war against NATO. One banner said: "It's time to bomb the military bases of the United States." That banner becomes much more ominous when you realize that the demonstration was either sponsored by the Russian government or at least had its tacit approval.

Equally ominous was the singling out of US military bases, the first strike target in any war against the West, essential for destroying America's retaliatory nuclear capability.

'CLINTON HAS SINGLE-HANDEDLY REVIVED THE COLD WAR'

The sentiment expressed by Russian war protesters isn't just the opinion of a few extremists. A recent opinion survey found that in the wake NATO bombing of their traditional allies, the Serbs, an incredible 64% of all Russians now believe that NATO intends to attack Russia.

Russian officials have also issued increasingly ominous pronouncements against America and the West. Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov spoke of "new tasks" for Russia's military. Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev likened the crisis to "a whirlpool which is drawing more countries into it." Former Russian Premier Gorbachev said, "Clinton has managed to single-handedly revive the Cold War."

RUSSIA PREPARES FOR WAR

Obsessed with the carnage in Kosovo, NATO appears to be oblivious to the fact Russia has been engaging in a massive military mobilization.

In the two weeks since NATO launched their offensive against Yugoslavia:

The Russian Defense Ministry began an enlarged draft, calling up 168,776 men from the ages of 18 to 27.

Recruited over 60,000 Russian "volunteers" to fight NATO troops in Serbia. On 6 April the first Russian volunteers arrived in the Serbian town of Novi Sad.

Threatened to move tactical nuclear weapons and heavy bombers forward into Belarus -- Russia's highway to NATO.

Dispatched key elements of their Northern fleet, including the aircraft cruiser, Admiral Kuznetsov, and the newly commissioned Peter the Great, the largest ballistic missile cruiser ever built. Vice Admiral Popov, commander of the Northern Fleet told Itar-Tass, the Northern Fleet is "ready to fulfill any order of the supreme command to defend the interests of Russia."

The Northern Fleet has more ballistic missile submarines than the entire U.S. Navy.

On 30 March, Russia sent a battle group of over twenty warships to sea from its Pacific Fleet. Included in the fleet were ground forces from Russia's Far Eastern Military District.

Russia dispatched ships from the Black Sea Fleet -- including a missile cruiser, two anti-submarine warfare frigates, and support ships. A Russian reconnaissance ship has already entered the Mediterranean.

Russian TV displayed pictures of ballistic missiles being loaded on cruisers in the Black Sea.

Russia announced the successful launch of a ballistic missile during exercises of its Northern fleet. Despite these clear war preparations, Russian news agencies continue to repeat the Big Lie that Russia has no plans to get involved in military action in Yugoslavian war.

If that's true, why all of the war preparations? How have the supposedly "economically desperate" Russians been able to mobilize so many naval ships and combat troops men so quickly?

RUSSIA'S PATTERN OF DECEPTION

Russia's growing preparation for war during the Kosovo crisis suggests a massive pattern of deception, which is being ignored by the clueless Western media and Clinton. This pattern of deception is just the most recent and blatant example of how Russia has been talking peace while preparing for war against the West. How else do you explain this behavior from a friend and ally of America:

Russia continues to maintain the world's largest arsenal of nuclear weapons -- over 30,000 -- the overwhelming majority targeted against the West.

During the past two years, Russia has engaged in several mock nuclear war exercises against the United States. These exercises have included the use of rockets as well as naval and airborne forces to wipe America from the map.

For the past 18 months, Russia has been moving its nuclear weapons onto naval ships. Naval ships are considered to be less vulnerable to retaliation in a nuclear war.

This past December, Russia's Strategic Rocket Forces deployed a regiment of state-of-the-art Topol-M missiles targeted against the West. These missiles are now rolling off Russian production lines and are more sophisticated than anything in America's arsenal.

In January, Russia put is nuclear forces--strategic rockets, naval and air--under a unified command -- essential for a coordinated first strike against the West.

Russia appears to be hoarding food, fuel, gold, and other commodities -- an essential preparation for a major war. Despite claims of poverty and famine, Russia is stockpiling millions of tons of food and urging its people to buy gold. It is interesting to note that the Kosovo crisis began just as the last shipments of billions of dollars of Western food aid reached Russia.

Russia has built the world's largest network of fallout shelters -- complete underground cities, some as large as Washington, DC. WAR PREPARATIONS IN RUSSIA HAVE BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS

In order to mobilize their people against the West, and prepare them for the destruction it will bring, Russian leaders know that they must create massive hatred of the West.

The first step occurred during the summer of 1998 when Russia defaulted on their foreign loans resulting in massive bank and business failures, bread lines throughout the country, and incredible suffering.

On the face of it, it made no sense for the Russian government to default, since just weeks before the default, the IMF had given Moscow some $5 billion in new foreign aid. (According to the Wall Street Journal, these funds mysteriously "disappeared into the offshore accounts of Russia's oligarchy.")

Why would any regime in its right mind subject their own people to such massive suffering when they had the resources to prevent it?

The likely answer: Russia's leaders knew that "evil Western capitalists" -- not themselves -- would be blamed. Indeed, as a result of the 1998 Russian economic meltdown, millions of Russians demanded that communism be restored and corrupt Jewish tycoons be sent packing. The Russian economic meltdown, quite possibly engineered by Moscow, was in effect a bloodless coup that did more than any other single event to revive hatred of capitalism, anti-Semitism, and again set Russia on the path of tyranny and confrontation with the West.

CREATING A NEW SOVIET EMPIRE

With Russia's economy in shambles, Russian leaders should have been preoccupied with domestic problems. Instead, the primary focus of Russia's energies and resources has been creating a new Soviet Empire.

Last November, China and Russia announced a new global alliance. Their intelligence services now share information. Their high commands have organized cooperative working groups.

The new Russian-Chinese Alliance represents the greatest shift in the balance of power since World War II, yet the Western press has virtually ignored it.

Chinese leaders speak more and more openly about war with the West. In January Chinese President Jiang Zemin told the People's Liberation Army to get ready for two things: First, nuclear world war; and second, to suppress uprisings inside China.

ANTI-AMERICAN HATRED IS REACHING NEW HEIGHTS

In Russia, the government doesn't have to worry about uprisings. Thanks to Bill Clinton's bombing campaign in Yugoslavia, the Russians have rallied to the Kremlin.

Consider what Clinton has done: For the first time in its history, NATO has attacked a sovereign state, in direct violation of the NATO Charter which forbids an offensive war against other countries.

The result of that attack, encouraged by the American leadership, may well be the collapse of the NATO alliance and the end of American leadership in Western Europe, particularly in Italy and Greece. At the very least, Clinton's use of NATO as an offensive tool of war, has shifted public opinion against the U.S. in Russia, Eastern Europe, and much of the Third World.

Understandably, since both Russia and Serbia are Slavic nations with strong historical, religious and cultural ties, there is real anger among the Russian populace against the NATO bombing. After all, how would Americans feel if Russia bombed London because of the strife in Northern Ireland? Or if Russia bombed Canada or Mexico? NATO's bombing of Yugoslavia proves to the average Russian that NATO is an offensive military organization whose ultimate aim is the destruction of Russia -- which is what they have been told by their leaders for generations.

CLINTON'S WAR AGAINST YUGOSLAVIA: A 'ROYAL GIFT' TO COMMUNISTS AND KREMLIN INSIDERS

The present Russian anger over the NATO bombing is, as Izvestia called it, a "royal gift" to the communists and Kremlin insiders -- some of whom have publicly advocated war with the West. There is growing pressure on even moderate Russian leaders to take "some action" against NATO to restore Russia's glory and pride.

Russia's Duma passed a resolution 366-4 that declares that NATO "aggression" is "a threat to Russia's national security" and called on the Russian government to begin war mobilization. Russia's foreign secretary Igor Ivanov said while Russia had no immediate military plans, it was "holding extreme measures in reserve."

As the Christian Science Monitor reports, Russian nationalists now repeat a mantra, "What is happening in Serbia today, will happen in Russia tomorrow."

Itar-Tass reports that leading Russia intellectuals have formed a new movement called "Against World War III" to combat growing war hysteria in Russia.

RUSSIAN LEADERS CONSIDER NUCLEAR WAR INEVITABLE

Colonel Stanislav Lunev, the highest-ranking GRU officer ever to defect from Russia, has stated that the Russian General Staff considers nuclear war with America to be inevitable.

Lunev writes, "I spent thirty years preparing for war against America. Not a war against China. Not a war against Europe. A war against America."

In an interesting footnote, almost immediately after the NATO bombing campaign began, Russia canceled its cooperation with America on the Y2K computer virus. This cooperation is vital as the year 2000 rapidly approaches, and by rejecting U.S. help suggests the Russians have other plans and have no intention of ever opening up its defense systems to outside technicians -- unlike the US under Clinton, which has allowed Russian and Chinese military agents to roam our top-secret defense labs virtually at will.

'WAG THE DOG' GLOBAL WAR?

As conservative commentator, Lwellen Rockwell, points out, Clinton's foreign policy can be summarized by a single word: Bombs!

Clinton's popularity dips and he bombs Iraq. Ken Starr issues a report recommending that Clinton be impeached, and he bombs Sudan and Afghanistan. The Senate prepares to vote on impeachment charges, and Clinton again bombs Iraq. Chinagate -- Clinton's cynical selling of US military secrets in exchange for campaign contributions -- threatens to break in the popular press, and Clinton bombs Yugoslavia.

As in the movie, "Wag the Dog," whenever Clinton gets in trouble, he bombs someone to distract attention from his own scandals and crimes. Clinton's foreign policy reads like a script for a Hollywood B film.

Personal and political scandals have enveloped Bill Clinton's presidency since his first days in office. Just months after becoming president, he launched a bloody attack on the Branch Davidians in Waco, which ended with the immolation of some 80 innocent men, women and children. He blatantly used the military to "wag the dog" on the eve of the Senate impeachment vote with a cynical bombing of Iraq.

Those who claim that with impeachment behind him, Clinton has no real reason to wag the dog by bombing Yugoslavia, are dead wrong. Supreme egotist that he is, Clinton is consumed with remaining popular and securing his place in history -- both of which are threatened by continuing public attention to previous and newly revealed scandals, like Chinagate. Some of those scandals could even have legally devastating consequences for Clinton and Hillary personally, after his presidency ends.

The Lewinsky scandal continues to percolate, and Monica has been on a high profile book tour. Now a new and very a serious rape allegation hangs over Clinton's head -- and there could be more such allegations forthcoming. New revelations come out almost daily about Clinton's treasonous aid to the Chinese war machine, in exchange for campaign contributions.

Despite Clinton's claims to the contrary, no vital U.S. interests are at stake in Kosovo, and no NATO member have been attacked by Serbia. In fact, by attacking Yugoslavia, Clinton has created precisely the outrages he claimed he was acting to prevent:

Mass murder of Albanian Serbs,

Shoring up the power of the tyrant Milosevic,

Destabilizing surrounding countries,

Expanding the war -- with the introduction of Russian "volunteers"-- beyond Yugoslavia,

Weakening NATO,

Killing of innocent men, women and children in Yugoslavia. Not to mention the flirtation with global war. By wagging the dog with a very hot war in Europe, Clinton has managed -- for now -- to bury growing accusations of treason against him. Clinton may go down in history as the first US President willing to risk -- or cause -- global war to ensure his own popularity.

HOW CLINTON IS PUSHING RUSSIA TOWARDS WAR

The Russian people view the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia as almost a direct attack on their nation. American refusals to allow Russia to broker a peaceful settlement have lead to further Russian war hysteria.

As the American-lead assault began, the Russian Prime Minister, Yevgeny Primakov, an old line KGB general, came to Belgrade and hours later had a peace deal. Waving a scrap of paper in his hand he flew to Munich to meet with German Chancellor Schroeder. Germany is NATO's most important continental member. Germany and NATO rejected the offer. Russia, the peacemaker, was rebuffed by the Americans, the aggressors. So hostility grew in Russia.

Clinton's bombing of Yugoslavia encourages the most violent, extreme and anti-American factions in Russia. Russia's ailing leader and erstwhile US-friend, Boris Yeltsin, faces his own impeachment vote on April 15th. He too desperately needs to wag the dog to distract attention from his own failures. His status weakened by NATO bombing, only after agreeing to oppose NATO and draft troops for Yugoslavia did Yeltsin partially recover his standing in the polls.

WILL RUSSIA ACTUALLY GO TO WAR WITH THE WEST?

Russian war preparations continue to accelerate.

When the Yugoslav crisis erupted, we were told that Russia's major fleets were going out to sea. A coincidence, the West was told. It has long been theorized that if Russia ever wanted to attack America, it would steer its ballistic missile submarines underneath its surface ships on their way to sea, making it difficult for U.S. sonar to detect the submarine deployment.

Once deployed, the submarines can sink to the bottom of the Atlantic and Pacific, where the can stay for months, quietly waiting for orders from the high command.

Convenience is joined by luck. Russia supposedly has no oil for its ships, one spokesman says. But miraculously, there's suddenly enough oil for its major fleets to engage in extensive maneuvers.

The Russians must have noted that their deployment causes no alarm from the West. After all, Russia is so weak it couldn't harm a fly -- so the thinking goes. Russian spokesmen continually insist they have no plans to engage NATO militarily, but every action suggests a progressive mobilization for war.

So the Russians will continue mobilizing and gaining the advantage as America and the West sleeps. In Russia, hundreds of thousands of troops are called up. It will only take three months for the full conventional weight of the old Soviet Army to be resurrected. It will have five times as many soldiers as the American army.

Russia "has no intention of interfering in the current conflict around Yugoslavia," a government spokesman told Interfax. Meanwhile, Russia's leaders continually talk of war. They hint, they threaten and they mobilize for it.

And good Republicans like Henry Kissinger, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeane Kirkpatrick and Senator McCain, are actually calling for American ground troops to be sent into Serbia. Those calling for a ground force in Yugoslavia -- estimated to be at least 200,000 soldiers -- are not considering the implications of such a move if a global war does break out. The NATO ground force would be vulnerable to a tactical nuclear strike and easily cut-off from supply lines. Moreover, the continental U.S. would have no significant force to defend itself from invasion by China or Russia.

Such considerations and precautions are not being considered because it is party time in the West. The Dow Jones rises past 10,000 as NATO bombs. The price of gold drops. People still plan their trips to Disney World instead of worrying about the nation's vulnerability to Russia's nuclear weapons.

There is no way to be certain if Russia will actually attack the United States, and there is one alternative plausible explanation of their actions: They may be getting ready for one big blackmail attempt, hopeful that Clinton will buckle under.

Instead of war, Russia could be preparing for global domination.

=============== This one article has made me push up my final y2k preparations. It use to be Sept 1. Now it is May 1. I believe y2k fears are forcing their 'use it or lose it' policy.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), April 09, 1999.

And all the sleep-walkers, lemmings and slave-children dutifully report to vote predictably every time the slave-masters call them to. Amazing! You're either a part of the problem or your're a part of the solution, Lovelies.

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), April 09, 1999.

Drat! I forgot a couple of quotations:

"And the party on the left, is now the party on the right, and their beards have not grown longer over night,.....we don't get fooled again." --The Who

(Paraphrased) "In the end they will come to us on their knees, saying, 'Whatever you want,...just feed us'" Dostoyevsky, The Grand Inquisitor

Don't Vote!

Shams and delusions are esteemed for soundest truths, while reality is fabulous....By closing the eyes and slumbering, and consenting to be deceived by shows, men establish and confirm their daily life of routine and habit everywhere, which still is built on purely illusory foundations. Henry David Thoreau 1817-1862

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), April 09, 1999.

And I suppose none of you Clinton haters have ever felt a smidgen of rage, or hate, toward anyone that you felt did you dirty. If that's the case, then I will immediately nominate you for sainthood.

Or perhaps you're are so perfect that no one has ever done you dirty. I am not a Clinton fan, but if you think he's the only president that's ever been "incredibly profane", or went into rages, or wanted revenge, think again. And don't tell me that he's the president, and he should be above this; well that's called being a humam being, warts and all.

I suppose you think Rush Limbaugh is a nice person for asking an audience if they'd heard that the White House had gotten a new dog, and then pulled out a picture of Chelsea Clinton, when she was 13 years old? His whole audience of ditto heads, (and dumb asses) applauded. If I'd been the Clinton's, I'd have uprooted a big tree and beaten that asshold to death with it.

A few years ago my husband and I were both sued in a false lawsuit over a property sale which lasted six years, cost us thousands of dollars and untold hours of anguish. The plaintiffs' entire case was based on greed and lies, but all we could do was defend ourselves. It was finally thrown out of court not once, but twice. The last time it stuck, and we were so angry and vengeful that my husband sued the jerk for filing a false lawsuit, and won! We only got about half our legal fees back, but that wasn't even the point. Believe me revenge has never felt better.

I think Clinton was, and is, dead wrong on many things, especially this Kosovo tragedy, but I thought the same about Bush, Reagan, Johnson, Nixon. Nixon was supposedly a professional when it came to swearing; Truman was too. So what? I come from a family that one side swears creatively and often. The other side wouldn't say shit if they were choking on it. Guess which side is kind, tolerant, funny, generous and intelligent? It sure isn't the those of the pure mouths, and small, holier-than-thou minds.

-- gilda jessie (jess@listbot.com), April 09, 1999.

Clinton is a clown,...and not one we'd have in the Magnificent and Colossal Yourdon Y2K Circus....

People need to "get" that if they keep participating in a corrupt system it will continue...there is no "voting in a better guy"...there is nobody who gets that far "up" in politics who has any shred of integrity left...can't happen, Lovelies...

If we don't play, us slaves,....they can't....Quit!

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), April 09, 1999.

Ah, Gilda Jessie! Were we both free and but 40 years younger. . .

You couldn't be more correct; about Limbaugh, about the cussin', about "Slick" or about the revenge.

"Revenge is the sweetest of the Dark Emotions."

- Saltheart Foamfollower; a Giant of Ancient Times and of some note.

-- Hardliner (searcher@internet.com), April 09, 1999.

I'm a Donna-dittohead on this one! And thanks for the great articles Andy and BB.

-- humptydumpty (no.6@thevillage.com), April 09, 1999.

the most frightening development is that both clinton and blair have popularity ratings of 60%!

"Lets all sign up, your country needs you" yes 60%

I find talking even about the possibility of Russian reaction and adverse consequences gets me the same 30 yard stare I got when I first tried to warn people about y2k (in 1993!)

-- dick of the dale (rdale@coynet.com), April 09, 1999.

Dear BB,

Where is that article from? Do you have a URL?

-- mabel (mabel_louise@yahoo.com), April 09, 1999.

Never mind...

I just noticed that the URL is provided in the "Hyperbole" thread, along with another reproduction of the article.

-- mabel (mabel_louise@yahoo.com), April 09, 1999.

But, Gilda, you might admit that the contrast between Clinton's external, publically cultivated feel-your-pain persona and these allegations is somewhat disconcerting.

-- Blue Himalayan (bh@k2.y), April 09, 1999.

I think perhaps I could post on this forum as many articles, quotes and exposes' about Richard Melon Scaife, Starr, The Rutherford Institute, the Arkansas state troopers, etal, and their dirty, underhanded, right wing, "get Clinton" diatribes as Andy posted. But I won't. I'm not saying Clinton is a paragon of virtue. I'm just saying he has powerful enemies, and he isn't any more power driven than past presidents were.

I had a friend a few years ago, who took a job as a private legal secretary, after working for the state government several years. After she'd worked a month or two, I asked what profound legal advice she could give me that might help in running my daily business at that time. She said, "The advice is the same as when I worked for the government, "Always cover your ass."

"It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress." Mark Twain, and.... "Everyone is a moon, and has a dark side which he never shows to anybody." Mark Twain

-- gilda jessie (jess@listbot.com), April 09, 1999.

"'We're not inflicting pain on these fuckers,' Clinton said, softly at first. 'When people kill us, they should be killed in greater numbers.' Then, with his face reddening, his voice rising, and his fist pounding his thigh, he leaned into Tony [Lake], as if it was his fault. 'I believe in killing people who try to hurt you. And I can't believe we're being pushed around by these two-bit pricks.'"

Uh...I must have missed something...you don't believe in killing people who try to hurt you?

-- a (a@a.a), April 09, 1999.

Couple the quote about killing those who hurt you with the fact that many of Clinton's enemies have "committed suicide" in very mysterious circumstances. It can't be proven, just a lot of innuendo but I wouldn't put it past the slime.

Oh yes Gilda, I have felt a smidge of hate toward people who did me wrong but never took it to the extreme that's indicated here. That smidge usually lasted about ten minutes, then I moved on to fix whatever mess they left behind. It takes way too much energy to "fuck my enemies", energy that could be more productively spent on positive aspects of my life.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), April 09, 1999.

Maria,

quite frankly the last time I used that sort of language, indeed the last time I engaged in that sort of mindless anger, was as a young GI, hanging out with other young GI's a long way from home. All of us have matured somewhat since then, billy jeff doesn't appear to have done the same.

Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), April 09, 1999.

Gilda,

Once again you inexorably proved what a moronic liberal piece-of-shit imbecile you are.

I marvel at how you Loyal-Subjects-of King-Clinton revert to trashing or comparing the failings of others to exonerate your king. What does citing examples of how Rush lampooned your king, equate with how Clinton acts as our nation's leader? Rush isn't president you twit!

Your ability to digest and understand the substance of the article obviously escapes your emotion-driven feeble mind. The article wasn't debating his use of foul language --it was about how his rage and vengeance against political enemies makes him a dangerous tyrant.

And save your comparrison of what Stephanopoulos wrote in his book, to what Nixon said about HIS political enemies. Nixon never said he wanted to "kill" them -even in jest. If that was known, believe you me, the media would have called for Nixon's execution, not impeachment in '74. But now we have a temper-tantrum-driven power-mad admitted- liar for leader that desires DEATH for his detractors. So much for living without fear of our government.

I also marvel at your excuse for your king's desire for vengeance to the point of death, by citing a personal example! What bullshit!! Hey idiot - there ARE dead people surrounding your king. Ever hear of Ron Brown, Vince Foster and a host of other associates that are now dead or missing under suspicious circumstances? It 'aint no "conspiracy" to "get" your king either. Your king creates his own scandals. Richard Mellon Scaife didn't FORCE Lewinski's lips to his crotch, the Rutherford Institute didn't FORCE him to lie under oath, and Starr didn't FORCE Clinton to sell national security secrets to China for campaign contributions. So save the bullshit, it don't work on the thinking - just the emoting morons like yourself.

But your king can do no wrong - even though you say you don't agree with him - he is no worse than any other person or president you say. You either have the hots for him, or you are a willingly blind-deaf and dumb idiot that would follow him right into the gas chambers.

Idiots like you are the reason this nation will end in massive suffering and loss. You will have only yourselves to blame.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), April 09, 1999.

"was as a young GI, hanging out with other young GI's a long way from home. All of us have matured somewhat since then, billy jeff doesn't appear to have done the same."

Arlin, the hypocrite never got to hang out a long way from home with AMERICANS - Russians and East Germans yes, GI's no. Unless you mean the Marines at the US Embassy in London that saw him protesting back when he was an In-Road "Scholar."

Dig a little deeper Gilda, Clinton doesn't have a dark side per se, he has a black hole, only outclassed by his beloveds...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), April 09, 1999.

Thanks Arlin, couldn't of phrased it better myself. Folks have a way of outing themselves so to speak.

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), April 09, 1999.

I couldn't let this one be passed up again. May I suggest all you disbelievers read "The Secret Life of Bill Clinton : The Unreported Stories" by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard.

It will curl your toe hairs, make your jaw drop to the ground and send you chuckin' to the toidy-bowl.

The only way us Americans are going to get the truth is by reading about it in obscure books. Cuz' it sure ain't gonna come from the tee vee, the Washington Post or from Peter Jennings lips. Dig it.

-- (orwelliator@biosys.net), April 09, 1999.

See previous discussion on Ambrose and the Clintonistas - no smoke without fire...

If you REALLY want your toes to curl search out a guy on the web by the name of Sherman H. skolnick from Chicago - appears regularly on the Jeff Rense show - definitely not for the feint of heart,

Several folks on this forum would have multiple apoplexies listening to him :)

-- Andrei-hung-lo (2000EOD@prodigy.net), April 09, 1999.

INVAR, You are a truly awful person. If I was standing next to you and heard you address a woman the way you addressed Gilda, I'd punch you in the mouth.

-- At least somewhat civil (atleast@civil.yes), April 09, 1999.

He really is showing himself for the shithead that he is. But don't worry about his soul, you see INVAR is a "good Christian" and God talks to him.

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), April 09, 1999.

Donna my dear

Not voting is akin to sticking your head in the sand and hoping that someone else fixes things. Vote Libertarian if you cannot stand the powers that be, but don't throw away your only recourse to changing things without violence.

If all of the people who I've ever heard bitching about too much government would just join us...

Come on in and take a look

Oh yeah, I am also of the opinion that if you don't vote, you are not entitled to complain about what results from those of us who do.

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), April 09, 1999.

Invar, I wish I could express my thoughts as well as you do. Thank You for telling the fantasy queen (gilda) what I would like to have said to her and that old fart deedud. Very enjoyable post!

-- Believe in Hard times (abcabc@14735.com), April 10, 1999.

OK here's a term even an illiterate moron like you can understand:

Bite me.

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), April 10, 1999.

Donna, just because my post was directly under yours, I don't want you to think I was addressing it to you, for I wasn't. I agree it probably does no good to vote, but I feel if we of the CC's don't vote we're saying we don't care.

Thanks, At least somewhat civil; I needed that; you are indeed a gentleman. You see Invar, that is the difference between intelligent, real men and hateful, petty types like you. Real men may disagree with everything I said, and many on this thread did, but they will never sink to the level you did. While Clinton is nothing to be proud of, you have certainly stolen his crown as King of Slime.

Uncle Deedah, thanks. Invar a Christian?? Most Christians I know would not identify with him. He's kind of like the guy's in the pointy white hats calling themselves Christians. We may be old farts, Uncle, but we are humane old farts.

Invar, according to P. J. O'Rourke's "Modern Manner's," you are the type person that gets sneaky revenge by going to your enemy's house when they are gone, and "shitting under their cushions."

-- gilda jessie (jess@listbot.com), April 10, 1999.

Gilda,

Invar brutally stated the truth. Insult his method and means and ignore the message. Liberals like you don't have the common sense God gave a brass monkey. Ignorance is bliss. Enjoy yours before TSHTF.

-- trafficjam (judgement@day.ahead), April 10, 1999.

Invar, trafficjam, I may be "ignorant," but I cannot imagine any circumstances, that would cause me to talk to you, as you have talked to me.

"Oh fan from me the witless chaff of such a writer!" Shakespeare from "The Noble Kinsmen."

-- gilda jessie (jess@listbot.com), April 10, 1999.

I care about individual human beings, not constructs called governments. It simply makes no sense to me to appoint someone I don't know, and can never know to make decisions about my life. I don't really complain that much about those constructs, Uncle. I know they continue on doing what they do,...I agree that complaining does as little as volunteering to be subsumed.

As an aside, from cybernetic systems studies it is held that complex systems are never reformed. Systems seek to remain in stasis, and in the evolution of systems, sometimes the stasis will not hold, systems come apart from the center, not from without. I will never reform any system by participation in it,...all participation does, from my experience on multiple levels, is coopt my time and energy. I have found it far more efficacious to devote my time to creating a healthy, and sane existence using self-rule as the base.

Not a popular worldview, I understand, but the only one that makes sense to me.

Some interesting reading here with links to other written material on systems:

Principia Cybernetica Web

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), April 10, 1999.

Oops,...while the above link is interesting, this one is a lot more enjoyable to read:

Holographic Model of the Universe, Mobius Strips, etc.,...

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), April 10, 1999.

And finally there's this from a site called "The New Civilization Game", by Bill Robertson

http://www.newciv.org/ncn/newcivgame.html New Civilization

(clipped exerpt) One who has all Power but little or no Knowledge will lose Power as he uses it.

One who has all Knowledge but no Power will gain and win Power as he uses it.

- o O o -

Power is an ability of using energy and force to Create and/or Destroy.

Used with little, false or no knowledge of the true nature of things and being ignorant of purposes and plans of organization inherent in all life, one without knowledge who uses power will surely create destruction and/or destroy creation. This is observable in the highest echelons of pIanetary government in the "Old Civilization".

(My italics here:)Balancing and far outweighing the small percentage (2% or 3%) of people who have the "power without knowledge" insanity, are the millions of people of Earth who have knowledge of life, the truth of what it takes to survive, the duty and loyalty of their family and friends, and the trust that others will exchange, work and play in a fair and honest, friendly fashion as they themselves. These millions, (some 97% of the population of Earth) are the source of all good things and survival components of the civilization. Then why is the "old civilization" in such poor condition? Because the Power that the insane 2 or 3 percent are using is continually being given to them by the 97 percent. It is given in the form of financial energy - (taxes), controlling force - (by obeying those who suppress or destroy freedom and initiative), and confidence - (by electing those who take the fun out of life's games to get and keep more power for themselves).

And this power is given and the insane actions not halted by the 97% because they:

1) Believed there was no alternative, and

2) Were not organized, so

3) Thus, did not recognize that they were the largest Power source on the Planet, and

4) They were the Source of ALL the suppressive power being used against them, and

5) They could take the Power away from the 2 or 3 percent at any time by just not giving it to them.

Note: It is an observable fact that also part of the power given to the 2 or 3 percent was used to carefully mis-educate the 97 percent into not having the knowledge of 1), 2), 3), 4) and 5) above. (For example, controlled media repeatedly being used to voice the "belief" that there is no alternative.)

THE NEW CIVILIZATION

IS

THE ALTERNATIVE

The New Civilization knows:

1) You have the power

2) You have the freedom.

3) You have the purposes.

4) You have the knowledge of how to play the game.

5) You have the right to your own sanity and will not agree to insane uses of power.

6) You have the right to leave any game you don't like, take your power, knowledge, and purposes with you and join another, start another, or just not play.

7) You WILL enjoy the New Civilization Game, if you decide to play.

8) That if you do decide to play, you - and ALL of us on this planet - will win.

(End of clip)

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), April 10, 1999.

Ah, Hardliner! Were we both free and but 40 years younger.....who knows??

Somehow I missed your post when reading the flames. Glad you agree with me about the important things in life; about Rush, cussin', "Slick" and revenge." Thanks!

-- gilda jessie (jess@listbot.com), April 10, 1999.

Donna, very good post, it seems incredible in this day and age that wars are still started by the decisions of an elite of the "elected" government. I wonder how many members of the Labour Party were consulted when Blair decided to support the bombing (none), how many voters were consulted (none) I do not recall waging war against a Russian protectorate (illegally) to be in the Labour Party's manifesto.

The peace of the world is now dependent on the health/survical (political and physical) of an aging old alchoholic (yeltsin)

Its like the old days when kings ruled

-- dick of the dale (rdale@coynet.com), April 12, 1999.

Yep, Sir Richard,...the more things change the more they stay the same, eh?

"And the party on the left, is now the party on the right,...and their beards have not grown longer over night." The Who, "We Don't Get Fooled Again"

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), April 12, 1999.