-
February 3rd, 2008, 07:41 PM
#91
Inactive Member
Oh and Gus....
Check out the other "ditto heads' for Obama here !
http://www.draftobama.org/celebrities
Someplace somewhere HRH Hillary is ripping out her hair extensions !!!! [img]graemlins/wilted.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/cry_smile.gif[/img]
And now live from Clinton Campaign Headquarters
Hillary: YOU WICKED LITTLE BRAT !!! Just let one more State go to Obama and I'll see that you wind up like Vince Foster !!!! [img]confused.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/grrr.gif[/img]
-
February 9th, 2008, 06:16 PM
#92
Inactive Member
The Latest Dispatch From the F?hrer Bunker (Hillary Headquarters)... [img]mad.gif[/img]
February 9, 2008 -- WASHINGTON - Hillary Rodham Clinton threatened yesterday to pull out of an upcoming debate hosted by MSNBC after one of its correspondents said on air that daughter Chelsea was being "pimped out" by the campaign to win votes.
"I, at this point, can't envi sion a scenario where we could continue to engage in debates on that network, given the comments that were made," said Clinton's spokesman, Howard Wolfson, calling the comment "beneath contempt."
Correspondent David Shuster made the remark Thursday night as he and others were discussing on air how Chelsea Clinton, 27, is taking an increasingly active role in the campaign.
"Doesn't it seem as if Chelsea is sort of being pimped out in some weird sort of way?" Shuster said.
Shuster was suspended. He offered an on-air apology last night.
"I used a phrase that was inappropriate," Shuster said, adding that "all Americans should be proud of Chelsea Clinton" and pay credit to the way Hillary and Bill Clinton raised her.
Shuster told The Associated Press he had tried to reach Chelsea Clinton to apologize.
MSNBC executives said yesterday that they had also apologized to Clinton aides and had attempted to reach other campaign officials to apologize.
SR: Amazing Isn't it....The Bush Girls, The Reagan Kids, and other Presidential progeny have taken all sorts of hits from the media but ignore it and move on....
Yet say one bad word about Hillary or her stage prop daughter Chelsea and you'd better get on your knees and beg forgiveness from Her Highness...
Even Evita Peron was more forgiving....So much for HRH concept of the 1st Amendment [img]confused.gif[/img]
Oh lest I forget....
The Foulmouthed & Lying Clintons
by
Reinhold Aman, Ph.D.
Millions of Americans still admire Bill and Hillary Clinton, whose habitual lies, gutter language, anti-Semitic outbursts, and anti-black slurs have been documented by reliable writers but which have been -- and still are -- routinely suppressed by the so-called liberal media. This article serves to counter and expose that shameless misleading of the public about the true character of America's two supreme actors and how they talk in private.
Lest you think I am a Republican, conservative, or member of the imaginary "vast right-wing conspiracy": I am an apolitical anti-politician. Because I despise blatantly lying politicians with all my heart, I am presenting this uncensored record of some of the filthy language and lies by the amoral Clintons -- the ex-President and the aspiring first female President.
Hillary to Larry Patterson, an Arkansas state trooper and Clinton bodyguard from 1986 to 1993, who was bringing a judge's wife to the Little Rock airport: "What the f**k do you think you're doing? I know who that ***** is."
Patterson stated that Bill and Hillary Clinton would frequently argue with each other using the worst expletives known to mankind, sometimes in the presence of their daughter Chelsea. Some of the anti-Semitic slurs with which she commonly laced her tirades against Bill were "Jew motherf***er," "Jew Boy" and "Jew B******d." [NewsMax, 15 and 17 July 2000]
Patterson said he heard Hillary "utter anti-Jewish epithets between 10 and 20 times over the course of his six years at the Arkansas governor's mansion." [NewsMax, 17 July 2000
Vanity Fair writer Gail Sheehy, who has enjoyed special access to Mrs. Clinton over the years, interviewed Mary Lee Fray for her book Hillary's Choice. Sheehy told Newsday that even though Mary Lee's account included Mrs. Clinton's vile slur, her husband made no mention of it in a separate interview. Sheehy does not say that Mr. Fray denied the story -- only that the subject did not come up. Apparently the author herself decided to avoid the topic, thereby ruling out any chance that a second source for Hillary's anti-Semitic shocker would compel publication. [NewsMax, 18 July 2000]
Sheehy said that she had heard the story of the alleged anti-Semitic comment several years ago from Fray's wife. But Sheehy said she left it out of her book because it was "off the wall. It was totally without credibility." [NewsMax, 18 July 2000]
NBC-TV's Andrea Mitchell admitted that Fray recounted the incident, complete with Hillary's anti-Semitic slur, during an interview for the network's "Dateline NBC" program in 1999. But NBC News editors decided to kill the report on the sensational allegation because the story lacked corroboration, Mitchell said. [NewsMax, 18 July 2000]
MORE AT ....
http://sonic.net/maledicta/clintons.html
-
February 9th, 2008, 06:55 PM
#93
Inactive Member
February 4th, 2008
Paul Watson
U.S. troops are being trained to conduct round-ups, confiscate guns and shoot American citizens, including their own friends and family members, as part of a long-standing program to prepare for the declaration of martial law, according to a soldier who recently returned from Iraq.
We received an e mail from "Scott", a member of a pipe-fitters-union that runs an apprenticeship program called Helmets To Hard Hats, which according to its website, "Is a national program that connects National Guard, Reserve and transitioning active-duty military members with quality career training and employment opportunities within the construction industry."
http://info.helmetstohardhats.org/content/faq/
Frequently Asked Questions - Helmets to Hardhats
Scott writes that his company hired a soldier who had recently returned from Iraq, who told him that U.S. troops were being quizzed on whether or not they would be prepared to shoot their own friends and family members during a national state of emergency in America.
"I have become very close to this young man and have gained his respect and trust," writes Scott. "I want you to know that he informed me about one particular training exercise his superiors made them perform. It was concerning the rounding up of American citizens that disobey any type of martial law or in other words any type of infringement on our freedoms."
"He was asked if he could shoot his friends or family members if ordered to do so. At the time he said he could," writes Scott.
Scott says that the soldier later "had time to clear his head" and realize the truth, recanting his vow to kill his own countrymen if ordered to do so.
The issue of whether U.S. troops would be prepared to round-up, disarm and if necessary shoot Americans who disobeyed orders during a state of martial law is a question that military chiefs have been attempting to answer for at least 15 years.
Its known origins can be traced back to an October 1994 Marine questionnaire out of the Twentynine Palms Marine Base in California. Recruits were asked 46 questions, including whether they would kill U.S. citizens who refused to surrender their firearms.
http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:hR_RMGbGfKsJ [img]tongue.gif[/img] olitical-resources.com/misc/police-state.htm%2Bquestionnaire%2Bmarines%2Basked%2Bconf iscated%2Bguns%2Bshoot%2Bamericans%2Bmartial%2Blaw &hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=15&gl=uk
Police State Activities In America
Documentary film maker Alex Jones brought to light similar training programs that were taking place across the country in the late 90's which revolved around U.S. Marines being trained to arrest American citizens and take them to internment camps.
During one such program in Oakland California, dubbed "Operation Urban Warrior," Marines refused to answer if they would target American citizens for gun confiscation if ordered to do so. Watch video here:
YouTube - POLICE STATE 2000 - "Operation Urban Warrior" Pt. 3/3
YouTube - POLICE STATE 2000 - "Operation Urban Warrior" Pt. 3/3
During hurricane Katrina, National Guard units were ordered to confiscate guns belonging to New Orleans residents. Watch video here:
YouTube - NRA: The Untold Story of Gun Confiscation After Katrina
YouTube - NRA: The Untold Story of Gun Confiscation After Katrina
As we first exposed in May 2006, Clergy Response Teams are being trained by the federal government and FEMA to "quell dissent" and pacify citizens to obey the government in the event of a declaration of martial law.
Pastors and other religious representatives are being taught to become secret police enforcers who teach their congregations to "obey the government" in preparation for the implementation of martial law, property and firearm seizures, mass vaccination programs and forced relocation.
Many scoffed at our original story, which was based on the testimony of a whistleblower who was asked to participate in the program. Claims that the story was a conspiracy theory soon evaporated when a mainstream KSLA news report confirmed the existence of the program. Watch video here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbhPisgfeCw
YouTube - Pastors Prep for Martial Law
The experiences of U.S. troops in the worst areas of Iraq, where soldiers are ordered to go door to door and arrest all men of military age as well as confiscate their weapons, is a mere portend of what is being planned for America if these training programs ever come to fruition
-
February 17th, 2008, 08:55 PM
#94
Inactive Member
-
February 23rd, 2008, 05:15 PM
#95
Inactive Member
Willie Nelson Backs Calls To Impeach President Bush
He doesn't trust Dubya...
by Scott Colothan on 20/02/2008
Outspoken country singer Willie Nelson has called on America to impeach George Bush for crimes he believes the President has committed.
In the animated interview with radio DJ Alex Jones, Nelson impelled the nation to ?throw the bastards out? and alleged that the Bush administration would do all within their grasp to stay in power.
He blasted: ?If you break the law you have to pay for it one way or another and if these guys haven't broke the law nobody has."
"The deck's been stacked and we need to figure out a way to get a new fresh deck in there in the deal and I don't know how else to do it except throw the bastards out."
Importantly, he also snubbed the Democrats as a suitably replacement for Bush?s Republican party, saying: "We went through a couple of elections now and we didn't do anything, we thought we did but come to find out that the voting machines are crooked, everything's stacked against us, the politicians that we vote for won't stay and fight and they won't count the votes."
As Send2Press reports, Nelson also claims that the Bush administration will do all they can to remain in power at the end of his term, adding: "It could be anything and anything will work because they have everyone scared to death.
?I just think there are people out there who will do anything to stay in power, anything to keep what they have, they've already proven they'll do anything to keep it."
http://www.gigwise.com/news/40920/wi...president-bush
-
February 25th, 2008, 09:39 AM
#96
HB Forum Owner
-
March 1st, 2008, 05:23 PM
#97
Inactive Member
The dark Bush legacy on secrecy
By Nat Hentoff
There is no question that President Bush believed that he was doing the necessary and right thing in making secret decisions and setting secret policies as commander in chief against the jihadists. But how will the next president know what has been done in our name, and whether the resulting practices were, as Mr. Bush kept telling us, within the law? Accordingly, Steven Aftergood (whose online Secrecy News I have often cited in this column) ? director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists ? has presented a quintessential challenge to the leading presidential candidates in an article for the Nieman Watchdog, a project of the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University.
"By now no one expects the Bush Administration to make itself accountable for its controversial and possibly illegal practices." But the next president will have the authority to declassify and disclose any and all records that reflect the activities of executive branch agencies. ... It goes without saying that genuine national security secrets such as confidential sources and legally authorized intelligence methods should be protected from disclosure," he writes. But with regard to other secret actions and policies, Mr. Aftergood continues, "the new Administration could demonstrate a clean break with its predecessor, and lay the foundation for a more transparent and accountable Presidency."
Mr. Aftergood asks the candidates fighting for the Oval Office: "Will you disclose the full scope of Bush Administration domestic surveillance activities affecting American citizens, including all surveillance actions that were undertaken outside of the framework of law, as well as the legal opinions that were generated to justify them?" But on Feb. 12, Sen. John McCain voted for Mr. Bush's warrantless eavesdropping. Sen. Hillary Clinton said she would have opposed it. Sen. Barack Obama was against it.
I would include the legal opinions of not only former attorneys general John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales, but most certainly those of their successor, Michael Mukasey, the more strategically opaque true believer in executive power in these jihadist times. Mr. Aftergood also asks candidates Mr. McCain, Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama to look into the CIA's "extraordinary renditions," pointing out that, "the U.S. Government has seized suspected terrorists and transported them without any semblance of judicial process to foreign countries where they have been tortured." And he also asks, what legal justification and authority did the president use in allowing these "renditions," according to the classified orders by which he gave the CIA special powers?
These kidnappings and subsequent tortures have done much to discredit the United States in countries from which the suspects were taken ? and they have interfered with our intelligence gathering from officials there who are now accused of complicity with American disregard of the laws of those sovereign nations. Also adding to the assaults on our reputation in countries that are not our enemies are such previously classified presidential supports for "coercive interrogations," including waterboarding. Mr. Aftergood asks the frontrunners for the next presidency to find out:
"On what authority did interrogators engage in what has long been considered a prosecutable action (waterboarding)? What other coercive interrogation techniques have been adopted? ... If there is to be accountability for the interrogation of prisoners in U.S. custody, the first step must be a forthright disclosure of what the Bush Administration has done."
The next president can do that. Mr. Aftergood quotes Mr. McCain: "Excessive administration secrecy... feeds conspiracy theories and reduces the public's confidence in government." And he cites Mr. Obama: "I'll turn the page on a growing empire of classified information. We'll protect sources and methods, but we won't use sources and methods to hide the truth." Mr. Aftergood also quotes Mrs. Clinton: "We need a return to transparency and a system of checks and balances, to a president who respects Congress' role of oversight and accountability."
But I haven't heard any of the frontrunners stress this need for a clean break with the Bush administration's use of a "unitary executive" doctrine to cloak these and other extrajudicial ? and indeed extralegal ? practices in deep secrecy. Will they publicly agree to Mr. Aftergood's challenge to "declassify and disclose" these and other Bush administration policies that ? unless exposed to sunlight ? could continue to be embedded in executive agencies in the new administration?
In 1772, John Adams warned: "Trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty!" That not only includes the Bush government's pervasive surveillance of us, but also America's trust around the world to actually live by the values we are fighting, along with other nations, to protect against the terrorists.
The press and the nation's voters should ask these candidates whether they will start clean in the Oval Office.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Bookmarks