Clinton is guilty of TREASON by selling defense secrets to Chinagreenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
Using the 'T' Word
) 1999 WorldNetDaily.com
Chinese spies have probably stolen the secrets of the neutron bomb, the miniaturized W-88 warhead and much more. Before that, there was a scandal involving the transfer of technology to Red China in exchange for campaign contributions. By penetrating the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government, China has acquired missile guidance technology and the ability to place multiple warheads on long range missiles. If this were not enough, Chinese controlled front companies now operate the ports of entry on both sides of the Panama Canal.
All these events have been reported in the mainstream press, discussed in books and investigated by Congress. In the course of these investigations we find a dead Commerce Secretary, a dead Assistant Secretary, an un-jailed Chinese agent immediately beneath them in the chain of command, eighteen critical witnesses fleeing the country, and another seventy-nine witnesses taking the Fifth Amendment.
In the wake of this ever-unfolding national security debacle, a United States senator was asked about treason in high places. The senator answered, "We don't want to use the 'T' word, yet." But as it happens, more than our military technology has been compromised. There are indications that we've seen only the tip of the iceberg. An emerging body of evidence suggests that U.S. intelligence, the Pentagon, as well as key U.S. banks may have been penetrated -- and manipulated -- by foreign intelligence agents.
According to a congressional witness, speaking on condition of anonymity, "There is something wrong with the government agencies responsible for national security; that is, the Pentagon, the State Department, the FBI and the CIA. There is something gravely wrong." Has our national security system broken down? "There is an internal breach," says the witness. "It is wide, it is pandemic and systemic -- and it comes from the top."
Of course, these comments are nothing new. Horrific penetrations have occurred, vital secrets have been compromised, and no one is punished -- no one is convicted and jailed. Are we talking about the failure of American counter-intelligence? Are we talking about the collapse of the justice system?
"Yes," says the congressional witness. "But it's more than a collapse. It's almost like a coup d'etat."
In a coup d'etat something or someone is overthrown and replaced. What, in this instance, has been overthrown and replaced? The witness answers: "Military journalists have been discussing a critical statement by Dick Morris, a former Clinton aide. In a TV interview Morris said that people might next be suggesting there are thirty Communists in the State Department."
Morris was referring to an assertion made long ago by Senator Joseph McCarthy. To Morris, this assertion is laughable; so Morris was attempting to mock the next logical conclusion, that we have a problem with Communists in the U.S. Government, that the Cold War is still on.
But let us ask, seriously: Is it possible that the Cold War never ended, that our victory was only temporary? Look at what is happening. Clinton has, by bombing Yugoslavia pushed the Russian people back into the arms of the Communists. He has restarted the Cold War in a manner most favorable to the Communist side.
Half a million Russian soldiers and sailors have been put into uniform since the bombing. Russian motorized rifle divisions are being filled up. Four Russian fleets are undergoing military exercises. Late last year the Russians introduced a new generation of road-mobile ICBMs. The current Prime Minister of Russia is, in terms of background and training, a KGB general. On top of that, consider the vast alliance between Russia, China and India. Is Communism really dead?
"No, Communism is not dead," says our congressional witness, "but nobody will discuss this in public. Nobody will touch it."
"I don't know the answer. But now people are being forced to cross the line, only because the situation is so grave. We're talking about nuclear weapons and nuclear war, and the committees are seeing more evidence every month."
Colonel Stanislav Lunev, the highest-ranking defector from the Russian General Staff, recently said, "The GRU [Russian military intelligence] is still preparing for war with the United States." Lunev also stated that U.S. counterintelligence is "woefully under-funded."
Has America's under-funding of counterintelligence led us to misread the situation? Is the Cold War continuing?
"Absolutely," says our witness. "It has been a massive deception. I have worked with the committees in Congress for nearly a decade. We didn't know where all this was leading. But some of us are beginning to put the pieces together."
How dangerous is the situation?
"Far more dangerous than nearly any American could believe," says the witness. "There have been 4-5 secret reports. A great deal has been uncovered, and all of it is very disturbing." Edward Timperlake and William C. Triplett II, authors of Year of the Rat: How Bill Clinton Compromised U.S. Security for Chinese Cash, tell us there is "an underground war going on in Washington. ..." That war is being fought between "patriots hidden away in the American national security apparatus" and the Clinton Administration.
We have fallen far indeed if our patriots must be "hidden away." Sadder still that the president of the United States is not on the patriotic side. More to the point: Article III, Section 3 of the United States Constitution says, "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."
Any honest observer can see that the Chinese Communists are enemies of the United States. China's military buildup is a critical indicator. China's penetration of America's military industry is also suggestive. And China's untoward grasping at the Panama Canal should have knocked U.S. officials out of their characteristic stupor. After all, these are not the moves of a friendly nation, but of an enemy. Furthermore, the Chinese government is Communist. As such it is dedicated to the destruction of capitalism, to the overthrow of the United States, and to the creation of a new socialist civilization -- built on the ashes of "American imperialism."
In this context, any American who aids or abets China is a traitor. But wait. We're not supposed to say this, yet.
J.R. Nyquist is a WorldNetDaily contributing editor and author of 'Origins of the Fourth World War.'
-- From worldnetdaily (email@example.com), May 06, 1999
...That's the sound of the average American SOUND ASLEEP because the Dow is over 10,000 and gas has dropped in price the last week.
Not until there's that bright flash in the sky will anyone realise just what's happened to us.
But I know...this is just another one of those Right Wing Conspiracy things to embarrass the president.
To all our peril.
-- INVAR (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 06, 1999.
What does this have to do with y2k?
You right-wing loonies just need a forum, don't you?
Since you posted, some basic facts for you: - Russia is not communist. I know. I've been there. Ain't a communist is sight, just rampant capitalism and lots of guns and crime (the NRA would LOVE Russia). - India and China are not in an "alliance". They hate each other's guts and point their armies at each other. Jeez, anyone with the most basic knowledge of world affairs knows that. - Russia is mobilizing 500k men, 4 fleets? Nope, more lies and paranoia.
Get a life. No, first get a basic education. Then get a life.
-- nospam (email@example.com), May 06, 1999.
well, J.R. Nyquist once again demonstrates that he undestands nothing about either military logistics or the relationship between Russia and India (he's managed to totally misinterpret border treaty negotiations as some sort of alliance -sheesh!). Add to that his lack of any realistic grasp of asian politics and, well, it's fun reading, but doesn't have great deal of relationship to the common reality.
I'd also point out that haranguing the forum about billy jeff's treason really isn't an effective means of communication - all you're succeeding in doing is driving off all of the moderates and newbies. Not educating them - just driving them away. you might think about that a bit.
-- Arlin H. Adams (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 06, 1999.
Arlin! I haven't polled YOU yet I don't think... which do you see:
a. Russia plans to launch on US on or before rollover (Nikoli)
b. Russia plans to launch on US around 2004 (Skousen)
c. Launch ? They just want cheeseburgers & SUV's (Clinton)
-- Blue Himalayan (email@example.com), May 06, 1999.
Uh, I thought that the loose security in Los Alamos has been going on since the Reagan Years. Don't blame it ALL on Billy Jeff.
Furthermore, the Chinese were merely being opportunitic--they weren't spying in the strict sense of the word. We let them in the door and lead them to the kitchen. Is it any wonder they found the cookies? Why should this be a big surprise? And why wouldn't it be surprising to find that the US has been spying on China as well?
In short, stupid things happened. The responsibility is, sadly, quite diffuse. And who knows? Maybe we will pay for this at one point down the road.
-- coprolith (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 06, 1999.
Hey guys, stop all this silly speculatin'... nospam said Russia is not communist, and he should know, because HE'S BEEN THERE!!!
That settles it for me...
-- Pollyslayer (email@example.com), May 06, 1999.
Yeah but Coporith,
Not only did they steal the cookies during Reagan, they were SOLD the special ovens required to bake the secret recipe cookies by manager Clinton for campaign dollars to be reelected manager by the Bakery Board. They were also sold the special mixers that enable these cookies to be mixed and whipped properly before baking. Before '96 the Chineese had no way to mix or bake them properly, only to fork-stir and fry them, so they were of little competition to the bakery.
Then the Chineese put a spy in the kitchen, who stole the recipes to ALL the cookies and even the cakes!!! When the FBI requested wiretaps to investigate the chef, the Maitre D' Reno denied them the wiretaps...THE ONLY DENIAL IN OVER 400 REQUESTS SINCE 1993!!! Then the Chineese chef was moved from the bakery to the Dough room, where the ingredients are mixed and kneaded!!!! Not only did this chef steal the recipes, he stole the instructions to make the secret spices, and all the cake and tart designs that keep the bakery in business, and protect it from the competition.
The chef then uploaded the secrets on the internet to his Pastry shop in China. Not long after, the bakers at the bakery found out that not only did the China Pastry shop have all their secret recipees and ingredients for their untouchable confections, but also the Syrian Doughnut shoppe, The Iranian Tart House, and the North Korean Rice Cookie factory.
For many yeast rising cycles, the Chineese chef remained....even though it was known to the foreman that he had given this information to the competition. The foreman complained to the supervisor who was told by the manager to ignore the Chineese chef. But when word of the treachery started being talked about by the Flourers, the Chef quit the Bakery.
As word of this traitorous act became known, the manager started a pie fight with a little-known bug exterminator named Milo who was busy doing what he felt was his business. But manager Clinton stated that what Milo was doing was INSECTICIDE and pest-cleansing. So he hit him with all his cream pies until he ran out, but Milo wouldn't heed. The pie fight was the most watched and debated spectacle in the Bakery, and many of the Mixers, Kneaders, Decorators and Sugarers didn't hear or care about the stolen recipees.
Time passed, and the manager was still throwing pies. But the Flourers were wondering why the chef wasn't arrested for stealing or even for questioning!!! The supervisors were told by the manager to be quiet and direct attention to the Great Pie Fight.
But over a time, China Pastry was baking cookies that could sink the Bakery. They even had the secrets that could bake or burn the Bakery's own cookies.
But no one cared. And as the bakery became more worried, and they wanted to know more about what happened, the supervisors' report was deliberately kept from the Owners. And soon the Chineese chef left for the pastry shop in China, so he couldn't even be questioned.
Now the owners had an idea that something wasn't right about all this, but because the bakery was turning such a huge profit...they didn't see the catastrophe happen until their own cookies were being used to destroy them.
The problem is these cookies can be fired from mainland China, and launch ten chips at ten different locations, each with the power to level an entire city.
-- INVAR (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 06, 1999.
INVAR -- Absolutely and terrifyingly hilarious.
"When the FBI requested wiretaps to investigate the chef, the Maitre D' Reno denied them the wiretaps...THE ONLY DENIAL IN OVER 400 REQUESTS SINCE 1993!!!"
This is the most outragous smoking gun of the entire Clinton administration history and that's saying something. BTW, it is being reported, though feebly, by mainstream as well as alternative media.
It is CLEAR evidence of treason at or near the very top of the Clinton White House. If Congress doesn't get real about this, it will demonstrate, even more horrifyingly than your post above, that, when push comes to shove, they are "in the bag".
-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), May 06, 1999.
I think that you should look-up the legal definition of treason. It is a legal term. It might be possible to bring such charges against the Repulican leadership in both the Senate and the House over actions and statements concerning Iraq and the Balkans. But such charges are so legally IFFY that it would just be harassment. In dealing with China, no such charges could be brought against Reagan, Bush or Clinton. Look up the definition!
-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), May 06, 1999.
Z..etc --- I hold no brief for the Republican leadership. But why do you say that?
-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), May 06, 1999.
Clinton will not live this down. He's sold us out. It's no longer in the hands of the INVARS (ahead of the curve as always, I.). It's in the mainstream. Clinton TOOK CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS IN EXCHANGE FOR NUCLEAR SECRETS. And you are quibbling about whether this is, strictly speaking, "treason?" Listen to yourself!
Impeachment is the least of this guy's worries now that the cat has three legs out of the bag. I wouldn't want to be in his shoes right now.
-- Dano (email@example.com), May 06, 1999.
World Net Daily? That explains it. Those guys are so full of s**t it is incredible. If Clinton wasn't so busy doing his job he could sue the piss out of them for false accusations, slander, defamation of character, and on and on. Show me some facts or get another life please.
-- @ (@@@.@), May 06, 1999.
Once again you prove just how absolutely CLUELESS you are!!!
-- Roger (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 06, 1999.
Doing his Job? ROTFLMAO, IS HIS JOB TO SLAUGHTER THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT CIVILLIANS AND LEVEL THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF A SOVEREIGN NATION? TO BRING US TO THE BRINK OF NUCLEAR HELL WHILE INSTITUTING A POLICE STATE DOMESTICALLY? A JOB HE GOT BY CUTTING THE THROAT OF OUR NUCLEAR DEFENSE SYSTEM? YOU FUCKING SOCIALIST MAKE ME SICK. I SWEAR TO GOD I WISH THEY'D STRING UP EVERYONE OF YOU COMMUNIST BASTARDS OR DEPORT YOU TO RUSSIA IF THAT'S THE LIFE YOU WANT TO BRING ON US ALL.
-- sickofgovtrolls (email@example.com), May 06, 1999.
I hate to use a dirty "word", but Rush Limbaugh has consistantly pointed out the last few days that if Clinton had done these things in the 50s or even 60s he would have long been impeached. Despite the fact that Clinton is a traitor and people like Limbaugh (10 million? listerners a day) and other well known commentators have pointed it out --- NOTHING HAPPENS! Someplace here is a mystery we don't understand. There should be thousands demanding his impeachment --- despite all the distractions.
And Rush may not be worried about Y2K, but he has specifically stated he is "very concerned" that we are vulnerable to attack by China and/or Russia.
What I'm saying in all this talk about Limbaugh is: Its no longer a secret - millions know --- and still NOTHING.
I admit I'll be shocked if its not a completely differtent world by 9 months from now.
-- Jon Johnson (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 06, 1999.
Ha ha!! It lasted 4 days whiners! This issue is bigger than Y2K. Bottom line>>
1-American public too apathetic to care.
2-The public that does are labeled/trashmouthed.
3-NWO is the government, not Washington.
4-TSwillHTF, but not by Y2K.
5-Socialism (for the corp.) here we come.
-- R. Wright (email@example.com), May 06, 1999.
You are more than clueless, you are suffering from some kind of paranoid hallucinations.
You need some serious sedatives, you have apparently gone off the deep end. Anyone who is actually afraid of Clinton has got severe problems!
-- @ (@@@.@), May 06, 1999.
Drudge just threw some more stinkbomb logs onto this dastardly story.
-- h (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 06, 1999.
BTW the definition of treason is in the original post, to whit:More to the point: Article III, Section 3 of the United States Constitution says, "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." /blockquote>
-- chuck, a Night Driver (email@example.com), May 07, 1999.
And to forward that aiding and giving comfort,,
.."China's Man in Washington: Bill Clinton A.M. Rosenthal April 30, 1999
Except for one-time personal use, no part of any New York Times material may be reproduced by any mechanical, photographic, electronic process, or in the form of phonographic recording, nor may it be stored in a retrieval system, transmitted or otherwise copied for public or private use without written permission of the New York Times Permissions Department.
Spies and Character
How come they can do it right here in America and how come our Government does not take action when the crimes are discovered?
The woman next to me at dinner was asking the question all Americans should ask about China's continuous and successful nuclear espionage against the U.S. - how come?
So far only one or two people have been named as suspected spies, who got hold of thousands of pages of secret American information on nuclear weapons - one of the great espionage coups of our time.
But it is almost comical - any belief that one or two men could find out exactly where the information was, what data to search for and in what priority, how to extract it from lab computers without getting caught, and the names and access codes of the companies in America that are fronts for the Chinese Government and Chinese Army.
Historians will be writing books about Beijing's counterparts to the Soviet spy rings in America, and the Cambridge treason crowd in Britain.
The Clinton Administration, which for years ignored early tips on the espionage, now stalls on releasing information gathered by a committee headed by Representative Christopher Cox of California. But I expect pretty soon the investigation teams of The Times and other papers will break the story of the spy rings plural and their contacts plural. Read the excellent article in the May issue of The American Spectator by Kenneth R. Timmerman, one of the experts read by other experts.
But still - how come these made-in-China spies? The answers are essential not only to understanding the espionage case but the character - the precise word - of President Clinton's problems about other critical realities, from Lewinsky to Kosovo.
For almost all its time in office the Administration has preached and practiced a policy toward the Chinese Government that he had denounced before he was elected the first time but soon adopted, widened and made more dangerous to American interests and ideals.
The policy is that the only way to get China to behave itself, and not do nasty things like engaging in nuclear espionage and torturing political and religious prisoners, is to build up U.S.-China trade. Like his American business mentors and our foreign allies, the President calls it the policy of engagement.
It is, it is - engagement with China's Communist Politburo, not with the Chinese people.
The Administration uses an old trick to fight American people and organizations who still want what he supported before assorted C.E.O.s and political donors got to him - the use of economic leverage to squeeze human rights concessions out of the Politburo. Mr. Clinton falsely accuses them of the fatal weakness of his own policy - playing only one note on his saxophone.
When the Chinese take the trade money and tell the world to get lost about human rights, or go in for nuclear espionage in America, the President has a choice. He can remain a prisoner of Beijing by insisting he is right. Or, he can break out of his cage by admitting error and returning to the mixture of realism and idealism he had promised Americans, to get the votes of those who cared.
But somehow I doubt he will ever do that. I think he really believes that evasion, falsehood, stonewalling, listening to the music of the cash register and not of the soul, stalling - about Monica or about espionage - are the instruments of government and the path of self- preservation. I suppose they are for him.
They worked to save him from impeachment. They were useful in helping Americans forget the promise he once spoke into my own little ears - not to send troops to Bosnia.
They are not quite working to save him from world realization that neither he nor the other NATO brains ever thought that Slobodan Milosevic would be so crass as to use NATO bombing as the right moment to drive out the Albanians, turning the war into a disaster for Albanians, NATO, Americans and Serbs who positioned themselves under the bombs.
He will not change his character, nor the fact that character of a President determines character of Presidential policy. He has not yet said that espionage by his Chinese captors is good for America. But he has a year and a half of Presidential time left to figure how to break the news.
Copyright ) 1999 by the New York Times Company Reprinted by Permission.."
That does say New York Times, not worldnetdaily doesn't it?
-- R. Wright (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 07, 1999.
how is clinton any different than any other white male status-quo figurehead with interests in industry?the democrats are on the inside what the republicans are on the outside.as a chomskyite it seems to me that if we the people don't rise abouve the partisan issues that the government offers us as distraction from our one party corporate state,we'll never know what it's like to live in a democracy
-- zoobie (email@example.com), May 07, 1999.
The ol'night driver is right. But more important is how the courts have interpreted this definition. Presently, they are still trying to figure out what is war and what are the rights of a representative. If you are old enough to remember, we went through this with "Lucky Lindy" and others.
-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), May 07, 1999.
Yes we have been through this before. What happened to Aubrey Ames when he got caught selling secrets to the Russians? Or the other American citizens caught betraying their country for money? Are we once again going to be shown that the President is above the law which applies to the rest of us? Now if the perjury and obstruction of justice precedents weren't enough to make the President a God, Espionage and Treason will certainly do it.
-- Nikoli Krushev (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 07, 1999.
I hate to pull the age rank on you, but I will. I am unfair. Do you remember Ezra Pound, Joy or Bob Best. All clear treason, but different decisions. What does it mean when leaders in Congress repeat [almost verbatum] what I hear from Iraq's radio over shortwave. In terms of common sense, this is confusing. But it has to be settled in the courts. What you say is opinion. It has no legal standing. That is all that is important. We are dealing with the difficult area which stands between free speech and actions deliterious to the country. For me, I stand on the side of free speech. Best wishes.
-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), May 07, 1999.
Z, the last time I was called to jury duty it was for the case of a black man who had been convicted 5 times on felony charges, and recieved a life sentence on his last conviction as a habitual offender. He was suing his defense attorney.
Some people just never learn. Some people think the world owes them everything. Some people are just born bad. Some people would rather lie to you than tell the tuth, even when they know they will be caught. Some people are just no damned good. Now you can memby pamby about legal this and legal that or the definition of is or what sex consist of all you want. This country boy knows a traitorous scumbag when he see's him, and all I got to say is Get A Rope.
-- Nikoli Krushev (email@example.com), May 08, 1999.
Moderation questions? read the FAQ