"It may be true that the
law cannot make a man love me, but it can keep him
from lynching me, and I think that's pretty
important." (Martin Luther King)
ronically,
the logic of this pronouncement by Martin Luther King
would, in short order, be refuted by the reality of
his own lynching. King's hope was misplaced and his
reasoning was circular. The resultant rule of law
relied on by King presumed an adherence to the rule of
law in the first instance.
Adherence to the rule of law is not something
normally associated with the clintons. Moreover,
racial and ethnic disrespect, intimidation,
exploitation and hate have always been a fundamental
clinton tactic and the reflexive use the "N"-word and
other racial and ethnic slurs, an essential element in
the clinton lexicon.
When the "first black president" and his wife ran
Arkansas, the NAACP sued them for intimidating black
voters at the polls.
Conversely, the clintons' refinement of the DNC
drag and drop is, arguably, one of the more insidious
and repugnant applications of their special brand of
race-hate politics. Calculating a black man's worth to
be 5/3 of a vote is no less racist, and arguably more
so, than calculating his worth to be 3/5 of a white
man; the latter is demeaning, but the former is
dehumanizing.
But it is even worse.
Listen to Randall Robinson in this
video, read below about Rwanda.
Only one conclusion is possible: A clinton legacy
of lynching.
This month marks 10
years since the advent of the Rwandan genocide,
a cruel, violent and well-organized rampage that
resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands
of innocent men, women and children and the
total disruption of Rwandan society. Over the
past decade, scholars and advocates have rightly
reflected on the reasons that the international
community and nations in Africa must share the
responsibility for this tragedy. As I said
during my trip to Rwanda in 1998, "We did not
act quickly enough after the killing began. We
should not have allowed the refugee camps to
become safe haven for the killers. We did not
immediately call these crimes by their rightful
name: genocide."
The
Washington Post Tuesday, April 6, 2004; Page
A21
Note: clinton's use of
"we" is consistent with his "buck stops
there/everywhere but not here"
policy.
Bill Clinton felt their
pain. Retrospectively. In 1998, on his Grand
Apology Tour of Africa, a whirlwind tour of
whirlwind apologies for slavery, the Cold War, you
name it, he touched down in Kigali and apologized
for the Rwandan genocide. "When you look at those
children who greeted us," he said, biting his lip,
as is his wont, "how could anyone say they did not
want those children to have a chance to have their
own children?"
Alas, the President had
precisely identified the problem. In April 1994,
when the Hutu genocidaires looked at the children
who greeted them in the Tutsi villages, that's
exactly what they thought: they didn't want those
Tutsi children to have a chance to have their own
children. So the question is: when a bunch of
killers refuse to subscribe to multiculti
mumbo-jumbo, what do you do?
"All over the world there
were people like me sitting in offices," continued
Bill in his apology aria, "who did not fully
appreciate the depth and the speed with which you
were being engulfed by this unimaginable terror."
Au contraire, he
appreciated it all too fully. That's why, during
the bloodbath,
Clinton Administration officials were specifically
instructed not to use the word "genocide" lest it
provoke public pressure to do something.
Documents made public last week confirm that US
officials knew within the first few days that a
"final solution" to eliminate all Tutsis was
underway.
In the course of a hundred
days in 1994 the Hutu government of Rwanda and its
extremist allies very nearly succeeded in
exterminating the country's Tutsi minority. Using
firearms, machetes, and a variety of garden
implements, Hutu militiamen, soldiers, and ordinary
citizens murdered some 800,000 Tutsi and
politically moderate Hutu. It was the fastest, most
efficient killing spree of the twentieth century.
A few years later, in a
series in The New Yorker, Philip Gourevitch
recounted in horrific detail the story of the
genocide and the world's failure to stop it.
President Bill Clinton, a famously avid reader,
expressed shock. He sent copies of Gourevitch's
articles to his second-term national-security
adviser, Sandy Berger. The articles bore confused,
angry, searching queries in the margins. "Is what
he's saying true?" Clinton wrote with a thick black
felt-tip pen beside heavily underlined paragraphs.
"How did this happen?" he asked, adding, "I want to
get to the bottom of this." The President's
urgency and outrage were oddly timed. As the terror
in Rwanda had unfolded, Clinton had shown virtually
no interest in stopping the genocide, and his
Administration had stood by as the death toll rose
into the hundreds of thousands.....
In March of 1998, on a
visit to Rwanda, President Clinton issued what
would later be known as the "Clinton apology,"
which was actually a carefully hedged
acknowledgment. He spoke to the crowd assembled on
the tarmac at Kigali Airport: "We come here today
partly in recognition of the fact that we in the
United States and the world community did not do as
much as we could have and should have done to try
to limit what occurred" in Rwanda.
This implied that the
United States had done a good deal but not quite
enough. In reality the United States did much more
than fail to send troops. It led a successful
effort to remove most of the UN peacekeepers who
were already in Rwanda. It aggressively worked to
block the subsequent authorization of UN
reinforcements. It refused to use its technology to
jam radio broadcasts that were a crucial instrument
in the coordination and perpetuation of the
genocide. And even as, on average, 8,000
Rwandans were being butchered each day, U.S.
officials shunned the term "genocide," for fear of
being obliged to act. The United States in fact
did virtually nothing "to try to limit what
occurred." Indeed, staying out of Rwanda was an
explicit U.S. policy objective.
With the grace of one
grown practiced at public remorse, the President
gripped the lectern with both hands and looked
across the dais at the Rwandan officials and
survivors who surrounded him. Making eye contact
and shaking his head, he explained, "It may seem
strange to you here, especially the many of you who
lost members of your family, but all over the world
there were people like me sitting in offices, day
after day after day, who did not fully appreciate
[pause] the depth [pause] and the
speed [pause] with which you were being
engulfed by this unimaginable terror."
Clinton chose his words
with characteristic care. It was true that although
top U.S. officials could not help knowing the basic
facts--thousands of Rwandans were dying every
day--that were being reported in the morning
papers, many did not "fully appreciate" the
meaning. In the first three weeks of the genocide
the most influential American policymakers
portrayed (and, they insist, perceived) the deaths
not as atrocities or the components and symptoms of
genocide but as wartime "casualties"--the deaths of
combatants or those caught between them in a civil
war.
Yet this formulation
avoids the critical issue of whether Clinton and
his close advisers might reasonably have been
expected to "fully appreciate" the true dimensions
and nature of the massacres. During the first three
days of the killings U.S. diplomats in Rwanda
reported back to Washington that well-armed
extremists were intent on eliminating the Tutsi.
And the American press spoke of the door-to-door
hunting of unarmed civilians. By the end of the
second week informed nongovernmental groups had
already begun to call on the Administration to use
the term "genocide," causing diplomats and lawyers
at the State Department to begin debating the
word's applicability soon thereafter. In order not
to appreciate that genocide or something close to
it was under way, U.S. officials had to ignore
public reports and internal intelligence and
debate.
...[W]hatever
their convictions about "never again," many of them
did sit around, and they most certainly did allow
genocide to happen. In examining how and why the
United States failed Rwanda, we see that without
strong leadership the system will incline toward
risk-averse policy choices.
The
author's exclusive interviews with scores of the
participants in the decision-making, together with
her analysis of newly declassified documents, yield
a chilling narrative of self-serving caution and
flaccid will and countless missed opportunities to
mitigate a colossal crime
ADDENDUM
"When you look at the
way the House of Representatives has been run,
it has been run like a plantation, and you know
what I'm talkin' about. (hillary
clinton)
iss
hillary's 'plantation' metaphor, ostensibly about the Rs,
is really about Katrina and New Orleans and the Ds.
Like the parting of the Red Sea, Katrina let an
enslaved people go. Katrina opened the eyes of the
poor--mostly black--underclass, the Left's absolutely
essential--and until now, captive--constituency.
The clintons and the Left are terrified that these
poor people will finally see what has been before them
for 60 years: Not only a failed idea, but a party whose
power depends on perpetuating that failure.
The clintons and the Left are terrified that these
people will finally see the modern Democratic party for
what it is: a bunch of bitter, moribund, power-hungry
elistists whose very existence depends keeping them dirt
poor, disinformed and dependent....
This, in contrast to the Republican party whose power
depends on their education, success and
self-sufficiency.
Why do you suppose the clintons and Landrieu-through
Mayor ('chocolate New Orleans') Nagin--tried to get their
voters back, post haste (no trouble bussing 'em
straightaway and en masse when it's to the polls)--to a
still toxic morgue with no potable water, no emergency
support and with renewed risk of deluge?
Why do you suppose the diaspora looks to be permanent?
Pre-Katrina New Orleans was 67 percent black.
Post-Katrina is only 46.
Indeed, the people are seeing.
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2007
"It may be true
that the law cannot make a man love me, but it can
keep him from lynching me, and I think that's pretty
important."
Ironically, the
logic of this pronouncement by Martin Luther King would,
in short order, be refuted by the reality of his own
lynching. King's hope was misplaced and his reasoning was
circular. The resultant rule of law relied on by King
presumed an adherence to the rule of law in the first
instance.
Adherence to the
rule of law is
not something normally associated with the clintons.
Moreover, racial and ethnic disrespect, intimidation,
exploitation and hate have always been a fundamental
clinton tactic and the reflexive use the
"N"-word
and other
racial and ethnic slurs,
an essential element in the clinton lexicon. When the
"first black president" and his wife ran Arkansas,
the
NAACP sued them for intimidating black
voters at
the polls.
The following
movie in Flash
format for Without Sanctuary features a series of
photographs from James Allen's collection with a
voice narrative about the work by Mr. Allen. If you
have a regular speed 56K modem, be patient - the
movie will start playing in about eight minutes. If
you have a high-speed connection, the movie will
load for playback in about 20-30
seconds.
"It may
be true that the law cannot make a man love me, but it
can keep him from lynching me, and I think that's pretty
important."
Dr.
Martin Luther King, Jr
3
CIRCULAR
REASONING:The resultant rule of law relied on by King
presumed an adherence to the rule of law in the first
instance.
4
Two
years ago a riot occurred in Atlanta, Georgia, in which four
white policemen were killed and several wounded by a colored
man named Richardson, who was himself finally burned to
death. Through the press the public was informed that the
negro was a desperado. As a matter of fact, Richardson was a
merchant, well to do and law-abiding. The head and front of
his offending was that he dared to reprimand an ex-policeman
for living in open adultery with a colored woman. When it
was learned that this negro had been so impudent to a
white man...
What,
then, is the cause of lynching? At the last analysis, it
will be discovered that there are just two causes of
lynching. In the first place, it is due to race hatred, the
hatred of a stronger people toward a weaker who were once
held as slaves. In the second place, it is due to the
lawlessness so prevalent in the section where
nine-tenths of the lynchings occur.
evidence
of consciousness of guilt
at Ron Brown's funeral
[A]t the time
of his death Ron Brown was under investigation by an
independent counsel, and was likely to be indicted.
According to his business partner and confidant, Nolanda
Hill, Brown had told President Clinton days before he was
asked unexpectedly to travel to Croatia that he would
negotiate a plea agreement with the independent counsel,
which would entail telling what he knew about alleged
illegalities in the Clinton-Gore Administration. Clinton,
according to Brown, responded badly.
..............................
Judicial Watch, the
only entity that has, in its case, taken the sworn testimony
of John Huang, which sparked the campaign finance scandal,
had also asked the Court to depose Ron Brown, the former
Clinton Commerce Department Cabinet Secretary who
orchestrated the sale of seats on trade missions in exchange
for large campaign contributions to the Democratic Party and
Clinton-Gore campaigns, among other illegal acts. The Court
in the lawsuit which exposed the scandal has stated that had
Ron Brown lived, he would have been deposed by Judicial
Watch.
Ironically, Judicial Watch had inadvertently noticed
Brown for deposition the week that he was to travel to and
later die in Bosnia-Croatia, but the Reno/Clinton Justice
Department, which represents the Commerce Department in
Judicial Watch's case, asked for a delay... " In a twist of
fate, had Brown been ordered to be deposed that week, he
might still be alive..."
...............................
Following his death in
Croatia, the Clinton-Gore Pentagon precipitously announced
that the death was accidental, before a standard safety
investigation was undertaken. Importantly, a safety
investigation was never undertaken.
In addition, the Armed
Forces Institute of Pathology was asked to examine the body.
What the pathologists and photographers found was a hole in
Secretary Brown's head, the size and shape of a .45 caliber
bullet.
Interviews on BET
television with the chief military pathologist suggest that
he wanted to conduct an autopsy to see if the hole was the
result of a gunshot wound, but he was called off by The
White House, Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Clinton-Gore
Commerce and Transportation Departments.
6
Judicial
Watch petitions to continue Ron Brown investigation by
Independent Counsel
Move
has tacit backing of Congressional Black Caucus, NAACP,
and 75% of African-Americans
Brown was key
witness in Judicial Watch lawsuit which uncovered John
Huang and likely defendant in Independent Counsel probe
at time of his death in Croatia
PRESS CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR 2:00 P.M. ON THURSDAY,
FEBRUARY 12, ON D.C. FEDERAL COURTHOUSE STEPS
Today, Thursday,
February 12, 1998, Judicial Watch will file a petition
with the three judge panel to continue the independent
counsel investigation of Ron Brown, which had been
underway at the time his death on April 3, 1996, in
Croatia.
At the time of his death, Ron Brown was a material
witness, who had been noticed to testify, in Judicial
Watch's lawsuit against the Clinton-Gore Commerce
Department. It was this case which uncovered John Huang
and is credited for sparking the campaign finance
scandal.
In addition, at the time of his death Ron Brown was under
investigation by an independent counsel, and was likely
to be indicted. According to his business partner and
confidant, Nolanda Hill, Brown had told President Clinton
days before he was asked unexpectedly to travel to
Croatia that he would negotiate a plea agreement with the
independent counsel, which would entail telling what he
knew about alleged illegalities in the Clinton-Gore
Administration. Clinton, according to Brown, responded
badly.
Following his death in Croatia, the Clinton-Gore Pentagon
precipitously announced that the death was accidental,
before a standard safety investigation was undertaken.
Importantly, a safety investigation was never undertaken.
In addition, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology was
asked to examine the body. What the pathologists and
photographers found was a hole in Secretary Brown's head,
the size and shape of a .45 caliber bullet. Interviews on
BET television with the chief military pathologist
suggest that he wanted to conduct an autopsy to see if
the hole was the result of a gunshot wound, but he was
called off by The White House, Joint Chiefs of Staff, and
the Clinton-Gore Commerce and Transportation Departments.
However, a military photographer, sensing that something
was "not right," photographed X-rays of Ron Brown's skull
which hung on light boxes. These photographs show what
may be metal fragments in his brain, consistent with a
gunshot wound. Except for these photographs, other X-rays
taken in the lab are now mysteriously missing.
Pathologists in the lab wanted to conduct an autopsy, but
were prevented from doing so. Dr. Cyril Wecht, a renowned
physician and pathologist, and a Democrat, has said that
the failure to conduct an autopsy was a gross deviation
from accepted medical practice. It is also violative of
the policy of the Armed Forces Institute of
Pathology.
Strangely, neither the Brown family nor any of the
families of the victims of the plane crash were ever
notified of the circumstances of Secretary Brown's death,
until after officers in the Armed Forces Institute of
Pathology Institute recently blew the whistle on the
cover-up, despite groundless and coercive threats from
military brass that they would be prosecuted for doing
so.
In its petition, Judicial Watch, which represents the
military photographer and a pathologist of the Armed
Forces Institute of Pathology submits sworn affidavits
from U.S. military officers attesting to the
cover-up.
Judicial Watch has learned that the independent counsel
who had been investigating Secretary Brown at the time of
his death never closed the inquiry. Accordingly, Judicial
Watch will petition the three judge panel which oversees
the independent counsel to direct his focus to the death
of Ron Brown, and a government employee, Barbara Wise,
who was found dead in the Clinton-Gore Commerce
Department shortly after John Huang was deposed in
Judicial Watch's lawsuit. Wise reportedly worked in the
same section as Huang. Judicial Watch is taking this
action because Janet Reno has refused to investigate.
While Judicial Watch makes no accusations that Brown was
murdered, his death raises questions about why an autopsy
was not performed, particularly since he was a Cabinet
Secretary and a material witness and putative defendant
in legal proceedings at the time. The independent counsel
clearly has jurisdiction to investigate Brown's death,
since if his fate was not accidental, it could amount to
criminal obstruction of justice and witness tampering.
Clearly, Brown had deep knowledge of the inner workings
of the Clinton-Gore Administration and its allegedly
illegal campaign finance and other activities at the
Commerce Department, White House, Democratic National
Committee and elsewhere. He was also the target of the
independent counsel's probe.
AFTER THE FILING OF THE PETITION, A PRESS CONFERENCE WILL BE
HELD ON THE STEPS OF THE U.S. COURTHOUSE IN WASHINGTON,
D.C., AT 2:00 P.M. TOMORROW, FEBRUARY 12, 1998.
JUDICIAL
WATCH: DEATH OF RON BROWN CLINTON
COMMERCE SECRETARY WAS SLATED FOR DEPOSITION WEEK THAT HE
DIED PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW REVEALS EVIDENCE THAT WOUND
FOUND ON BROWN'S HEAD WAS
UNEXPLAINED Friend
Nolanda Hill Believes Death Needs to Be Investigated
Judicial Watch, the only entity that has, in its case,
taken the sworn testimony of John Huang, which sparked
the campaign finance scandal, had also asked the Court to
depose Ron Brown, the former Clinton Commerce Department
Cabinet Secretary who orchestrated the sale of seats on
trade missions in exchange for large campaign
contributions to the Democratic Party and Clinton-Gore
campaigns, among other illegal acts. The Court in the
lawsuit which exposed the scandal has stated that had Ron
Brown lived, he would have been deposed by Judicial
Watch.
Ironically, Judicial Watch had inadvertently noticed
Brown for deposition the week that he was to travel to
and later die in Bosnia-Croatia, but the Reno/Clinton
Justice Department, which represents the Commerce
Department in Judicial Watch's case, asked for a delay,
which was granted as a courtesy to a cabinet secretary.
Judicial Watch did not object to the postponement. " In a
twist of fate, had Brown been ordered to be deposed that
week, he might still be alive," stated Larry Klayman,
Chairman of Judicial Watch.
Nolanda Hill, the former business partner and close
friend of Brown, has told major news networks that she
believes that "Ron's" death needs to be investigated,
based on two facts. First,
Page 1 of 2 Pagesshe related that two weeks before Brown
died, he had a meeting with Clinton in the White House,
where he told the President of his intentions to cut a
plea agreement with the independent counsel that had been
investigating him and his son, Michael Brown, for bribery
and other offenses. The plea would have meant cooperating
to tell everything Brown knew about the scandals.
Clinton, accordingly to Hill's account of what Brown told
her, reacted with a terse, "that's nice," sitting in an
armchair, bare feet up on a stool and arms folded.
Second, after Brown's plane went down, she was called by
Togo West, the Secretary of the Army, Brown's friend, and
told "the military was looking for the bodies in the
water (i.e., Adriatic Sea)." The official explanation has
been that the plane hit a mountain. Hill believes that
the death should be investigated, given these
occurrences.
Yesterday, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review revealed that a
Lieutenant Colonel and forensic pathologist in the U.S.
Air Force has evidence that the wound found on Ron
Brown's head is the shape of a .45 caliber bullet. The
body of Ron Brown, contrary to normal Air Force
procedures, was never autopsied.
When Ron Brown died he was subject to an independent
counsel investigation, which was then closed. The case
was transferred to the Reno/Clinton Justice Department.
After reports on PBS's "Frontline" and the New Yorker
magazine that Ron and Michael Brown were part of a
bribery scheme of the former cabinet secretary, Reno then
struck a plea agreement with Michael Brown, allowing him
to plead only to a misdemeanor, with 3 years probation.
The only cooperation that Reno asked for, and received
from Michael Brown, according to the Associated Press,
was an agreement to testify against Nolanda Hill, who had
also been implicated in alleged illegality with Ron
Brown. Judicial Watch challenged this plea, and has
appealed the lower court's acquiescence to the D.C.
Circuit Court of Appeals.
"As a result of what would appear to be a sham plea
agreement with Michael Brown -- where he was not charged
with serving as a conduit of bribes to his father, but
let off the hook only with a promise to help effectively
silence Nolanda Hill (who has expressed her willingness
to reveal everything she knows about the Clinton
scandals), and this new evidence from a U.S. Air Force
Lieutenant Colonel and forensic pathologist, it is clear
that the independent counsel investigation of Ron and
Michael Brown should be reopened to investigate the
circumstances around Ron Brown's death. Had he lived, Ron
Brown would have likely provided key evidence about one
of the two biggest Clinton Administration scandals
(Filegate is the other), the campaign finance scandal,"
stated Larry Klayman, Chairman of Judicial Watch. "Reno
and the Clinton Justice Department are obviously not
interested in revealing this evidence, but instead with
suppressing it," concluded Klayman. This same conclusion
has been reached by many others, including The New York
Times editorial page, The Wall Street Journal editorial
page, Investor's Busniness Daily, Bob Woodward of The
Washington Post, and William Safire, among a growing
number of experts who now see an apparent cover-up at the
Reno/Clinton Justice Department.
Mr. Grafeld
told me, referring to Judicial Watch's allegations that
Commerce Department trade mission seats were sold in
exchange for campaign contributions, that "(Judicial
Watch Chairman and General Counsel) Klayman is right on
target" but that he believes that the trade mission
issues were "only the tip of the iceberg -- that the
really big money went towards Presidential access."
Mr. Grafeld
indicated to me that he believes that Ms. Moss was
asking for political contributions in exchange for seats
on Commerce Department trade missions, likely at the
direction of Hillary Rodham Clinton, but that documents
showing this illegal activity had "left the
building." In fact, there were effectively no
security procedures at the Commerce Department to ensure
that sensitive and secret documents and/or any documents
which might evidence criminal activity stayed in the
building. The purported letters referenced by Mr. Grafeld
and Nolanda Hill could easily have "left the building"
absent sufficient procedures to secure them.
President
Clinton [upon the discovery of the body of
Barbara Wise in the Commerce Department offices]
briefly interrupted his Thanksgiving holiday
weekend at Camp David Friday with a quick trip to the
White House to gather data...and then returned to the
mountaintop retreat...
The president, still suffering from a raspy voice, and
ordered by his doctor to rest his vocal chords,
carried a briefcase as he strolled to the waiting
helicopter to return to Camp David. He wore a leather
jacket and was followed by an aide carrying a huge
box ....
The complex of
symptoms associated with Helen
Thomas Syndrome,
(also known as 'habituated doyenne-iosis'), includes
the following:
... tunnel vision -field of vision is so
severely constricted that evidence of
Pulitzer-quality stories are invariably missed...
evidence like:
the
discovery of a dead body, the Ron-Brown-posthumous
Thanksgiving-Day corpse of Barbara Wise in the
Commerce Department offices followed immediately by
the clintons' sudden need to travel from Camp David to
DC and back.
an absurd reason ("to get a book of poetry")
given by the corrupt president under subpoena for the
clintons' sudden Turkey-Day travels.
the deposition of Sonya Stewart, which tells us
that "the trade mission issues were "only the tip of
the iceberg -- that the really big money went towards
Presidential access." Mr. Grafeld indicated to me that
he believes that Ms. Moss was asking for political
contributions in exchange for seats on Commerce
Department trade missions, likely at the direction of
Hillary Rodham Clinton, but that documents
showing this illegal activity had "left the
building."
"a huge box" (A really big book of poetry,
Helen?) hauled back to Camp David by said corrupt
president under subpoena.
"Hill's
charges lead to one conclusion -- reappoint the independent
counsel"
WASHINGTON -
The business partner of late Commerce Secretary Ron
Brown testified Monday to a scheme by First Lady Hillary
Clinton and top-level White House operatives to cover up
evidence linking Commerce Department trade missions to
political contributions. Today, the Chairman of the
Republican National Committee charged that Nolanda Hill's
sworn accusations "mandate that the independent counsel's
investigation of the Commerce Department's trade missions
be reactivated."
"Independent
counsel Daniel Pearson's investigation into allegations
that the Commerce Department sold seats on trade missions
for contributions to the Clinton-Gore campaign was
dropped after Ron Brown's death in April of 1996," noted
RNC Chairman Jim Nicholson.
"In light of
Nolanda Hill's testimony, it seems the allegations of
wrong-doing go much higher than the late Ron Brown.
Pearson must be re-appointed, and the independent
investigation allowed to continue."
Mrs. Hill, who
testified she was Brown's business partner and "close
personal confidant for over seven years," testified that
he showed her "an inch-thick set" of Commerce Department
documents linking trade missions and political
contributions. He was under orders from former White
House Chief of Staff Leon Panetta and current Deputy
Chief of Staff John Podesta, he told her, to withhold the
documents until after the 1996 Presidential elections.
Brown died weeks afterwards, she testified.
Hill testified that
Hillary Clinton and senior White House officials had
ordered Brown to ask business executives to give a
minimum of $50,000 to the Democrat National Committee and
the 1996 Clinton-Gore campaign to gain seats on the trade
missions. "I'm doing my chores for Hillary
Clinton," Brown told her.
"Nolanda Hill's
allegations of a cover-up orchestrated at the highest
levels of the White House are serious and troubling,"
Nicholson said, "as is the fact that she was indicted by
the Justice Department only two months after she first
made these allegations under oath." Hill made the
allegations in an affidavit January 17, and expressed
fears that she would face retaliation from the Clinton
Justice Department for doing so, Nicholson noted. She was
indicted on March 13.
At
least in the case of Ron Brown, why aren't
Americans aggressively pushing Congress and
the Justice Department to get at the truth?
James Dale Davidson has a theory:
"We're
in the point of a hillbilly song, and the
line was, 'We really don't want to know.' I
really don't want to know. People sometimes
shy away from unhappy truths."
WASHINGTON
(January 6, 1998 01:18 a.m. EST -- Jesse
Jackson said Monday the death of Commerce
Secretary Ron Brown should be investigated
"to relieve people of reasonable
doubt."
"There
is everything to be gained from pursuing
an investigation," Jackson said in an
interview with New York City talk radio
host Gary Byrd. "It may only prove that he
was not murdered. But that would relieve
people of reasonable doubt."
Air
Force Lt. Col. Steve Cogswell, a deputy
medical examiner at the Armed Forces
Institute of Pathology, said in November
that an unusual wound at the top of
Brown's head could have been a bullet
hole, and an autopsy should have been done
to find out.
Cogswell
did not participate in the examination of
Brown's body after it was returned from
Croatia. No autopsy was
conducted.
Government
investigators concluded that Brown died of
multiple injuries sustained in the crash
of the Air Force plane in which he was a
passenger. The plane slammed into a
mountain in Croatia in April 1996, killing
all 35 aboard.
Col.
William T. Gormley, the assistant armed
forces medical examiner who conducted the
external examination of Brown's corpse,
was quoted in an Air Force statement as
saying he had ruled out the possibility of
a gunshot wound.
"Due
to the initial appearance of Brown's
injuries we carefully considered the
possibility of a gunshot wound," Gormley
said. "However, scientific data, including
X-rays, ruled out that
possibility."
But
the government statements have done little
to quell the controversy, especially among
some influential blacks like NAACP
President Kweisi Mfume and Rep. Maxine
Waters, head of the Congressional Black
Caucus. Both have called for further
investigation of Brown's death.
Two
weeks ago, civil rights activist Dick
Gregory was arrested during a protest
outside the Armed Forces Institute of
Pathology in Washington to demand an
independent investigation into Brown's
death.
"I
think people have a right to know what
really happened," Jackson said.
Editorial
Reviews Book
Description
Jesse
Jackson is a modern day highway robber who
uses cries of racism to steal from
individuals, corporations, and government, to
give to himself, says veteran investigative
reporter Kenneth R. Timmerman.
Until
now, however, no one has been brave enough to
say it and diligent enough to prove it. But
Ken Timmerman has cracked Jackson's machine,
found Jackson cronies willing to break ranks,
and uncovered a sordid tale of greed,
ambition, and corruption from a
self-proclaimed minister who has no qualms
about poisoning American race relations for
personal gain.
Shakedown
reveals:
•Jackson's
massive defrauding of the federal
government - and how both Republican and
Democratic administrations have chosen to
ignore it.
•Jackson's
financial ties to Third World dictators -
including Mohammar Qaddafi of
Libya.
•Jackson's
shocking private life - and his even more
shocking public lies, including about his
relationship with Dr. Martin Luther
King
Other
details must remain embargoed until
publication, but one thing is for certain,
Shakedown finally bursts the carefully
constructed myths around Jesse Jackson and
subject him to the critical scrutiny he's
long deserved.
Kenneth
R. Timmerman, a reporter with more than two
decades of experience, has written for many
magazines and newspapers including Time,
Newsweek, The Wall Street Journal, Reader's
Digest, and The American Spectator, and has
appeared on Nightline, Sixty Minutes, and
many other television programs. He lives in
Kensington, Maryland, with his wife and five
children.
About
the Author
Kenneth
R. Timmerman, a reporter with more than two
decades of experience, has written for many
magazines and newspapers including Time,
Newsweek, The Wall Street Journal, Reader's
Digest, and The American Spectator, and has
appeared on Nightline, Sixty Minutes, and
many other television programs. He lives in
Kensington, Maryland, with his wife and five
children.
Parallax
View, Posthumous Treason
by
Mia T
On
15 January 1998, standard issue clinton hush
money passed flagrante delicto right
under the Fourth Estate's patrician nose, the
congenital skew of which apparently
restricting its line of sight to the obvious
payoff.
You may
recall that immediately after various
world-class forensic experts (some of them
devout Democrats who twice voted for clinton)
identified a probable bullet wound atop Ron
Brown's head, Reverend Jesse Jackson and his
Black Caucus cohorts were literally screaming
for an independent investigation of the Brown
death, demanding
an immediate exhumation and
autopsy.
Two
points to ponder:
•Under
federal law Brown's cabinet position
mandated an autopsy
•Brown
died in a plane crash far more -- shall we
say ambiguous -- than the crash
that took the life of JFK, Jr. whose
autopsy was both a given and
instantaneous.
Back to
that week in January...
It was
a rather busy week for clinton, what with his
own
sexual-predation/perjury/obstruction-of-justice
deposition on Saturday, Ken Starr combing
through his congenitally corrupt wife's
crimebook on Wednesday, Alexis Herman being
added to that burgeoning list of corrupt
cabinet clintonoids as of Thursday and Saddam
jerking him around every day.
It
is noteworthy that after 15 January 1998,
Jesse Jackson and the Black Caucus never
again mentioned the need for an autopsy or an
independent investigation of Ron Brown's
death.
"It may
be true that the law cannot make a man love me, but it
can keep him from lynching me, and I think that's pretty
important."
Dr.
Martin Luther King, Jr
CIRCULAR
REASONING:The resultant rule of law relied on by King
presumed an adherence to the rule of law in the first
instance.
Two
years ago a riot occurred in Atlanta, Georgia, in which four
white policemen were killed and several wounded by a colored
man named Richardson, who was himself finally burned to
death. Through the press the public was informed that the
negro was a desperado. As a matter of fact, Richardson was a
merchant, well to do and law-abiding. The head and front of
his offending was that he dared to reprimand an ex-policeman
for living in open adultery with a colored woman. When it
was learned that this negro had been so impudent to a
white man...
What,
then, is the cause of lynching? At the last analysis, it
will be discovered that there are just two causes of
lynching. In the first place, it is due to race hatred, the
hatred of a stronger people toward a weaker who were once
held as slaves. In the second place, it is due to the
lawlessness so prevalent in the section where
nine-tenths of the lynchings occur.
by Mia T,
November 2000 (sometime before
the-first-Tuesday-after-the-first-Monday)
"I view
Hillary Clinton as a great danger to Jews if she
is elected."
former
Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir
Jewish Press, July 2000
I... underestimated the
propensity of my people for narrow-mindedness and
self-destruction (the Jewish vote for Mrs. Clinton
was about 70%)....
Some anti-Semitism is
irrational, founded in ignorance, as in Hillary's
case....
But other forms of
anti-Semitism can be earned, giving folks
legitimate grievances against a people because they
do crazy things like EXTEND HILLARY CLINTON'S
POLITICAL LIFE!
This is not to cast the
entire blame on Jewish New Yorkers; they alone
couldn't have elected her. In my initial
optimism, I equally underestimated the urban
pseudo-intellectual's high-mindedness, as well
as the Everyman's yearning for celebrity in his
midst.
Julia
Gorin, Getting used to Hillary Jewish World Review
Nov. 27, 2000 / 29 Mar-Cheshvan, 5761
Let us hope that
the
rabbi's question
was merely rhetorical. . . Let us hope that Rabbi Potasnik,
and by extension, New York Jews, are not as credulous and
obsequious and passive as they appear. . .
The simple answer to
the rabbi's question is that the corrupt, self-serving,
anti-Semitic, power-hungry harpy cannot be trusted.
Weren't we to never
forget?
The Holocaust must
remain, for Jew and Gentile alike, a constant reminder that
mass credulity and obsequiousness and passivity are
necessary for the demagogue to prevail.
To remember that six
million Jews died in the Holocaust is to understand that
centuries of anti-Semitic attitudes made this horror
possible. We must ask ourselves what role our society played
through the centuries that in any way contributed to the
atmosphere that made such a genocide even
thinkable.
Which brings me to the
clintons and clintonism. . .
Senator Patrick
Moynihan proffered one of the more incisive operant
definitions of clintonism -- "defining deviancy
down."
Defining deviancy
down, indeed.
clintonism has made
personal and public perversions, personal and public
predations, not merely thinkable, not merely acceptable, but
de rigueur. Watch us spin.
This brilliant Alinsky-clinton observation
by beyond the sea is the perfect segue to an analysis of
Alinsky's influence on hillary clinton... which leads
inexorably to hillary rodham's closely guarded Wellesley
thesis. (Plan to do an extended piece on that
shortly.)
In the Wellesley thesis, hillary discussed "how to
change the American political culture." This discussion
occurred in the context of a tribute to the leftist
political organizer, her mentor, Saul Alinsky.
Does
missus clinton reveal her own thoughts on the
radicalization and even balkanization
of the American political process? We can't yet say with
certainty because the thesis has been sealed--closed to
public scrutiny--from the moment missus clinton
insinuated her radicalizing, balkanizing, liquidating
self onto the national political stage.
If I had to guess, I would say she adopted Saul
Alinsky's theories and practices without modification:
hillary clinton exhibits no creativity, no vision of her
own and tends to glom onto the latest fashion, whether
it's Alinsky's Stalinist methods... or New Age occultism,
recall her attraction to the teachings of
Marianne Williamson, who some described as a
"Jewish charismatic spiritualist"
Ken Scott Nateshvar, yogi to the stars
and the pièce de résistance, Jean
Houston, the Director of the Foundation for Mind
Research.
Houston was described by some as a "New Age" author
who "studied psychic experiences and mystical connections
to historical figures and other worlds." When the story
of the Houston connection became public Houston became
known as hillary clinton's "Eleanor Roosevelt
Conduit."
Although she baked no
cookies, didn't do illicit land
or cattle
deals and stood
by no man,
hillary clinton starred in the triple role of the
Cook, the Thief and his Wife. Her lover was played
at once vaporously and in workmanlike fashion by
the ghost of Eleanor Roosevelt, with Janet Reno,
between her stints rendering intermittent injustice
for the Husband, as the reliable stand-in. Sidney
Blumenthal was the stand-in for the Cook and Craig
Livingstone the stand-in for the Thief. The
last-minute addition of Christopher Hitchens as the
snitch was a stroke of absolute genius
notwithstanding its cerebral accident, its
predictable-if-perfect pitch (or its facile
alliteration).
There is a great emotional likeness there too.
Thank you for putting the photos side by side.
On
Alinsky
(http://www.vcn.bc.ca/citizens-handbook/rules.html)
For Alinsky, organizing is the process of
highlighting what is wrong and convincing people they
can actually do something about it. The two are
linked. If people feel they don't have the power to
change a bad situation, they stop thinking about
it.
According to Alinsky, the organizer --
especially a paid organizer from outside -- must first
overcome suspicion and establish credibility. Next the
organizer must begin the task of agitating: rubbing
resentments, fanning hostilities, and searching out
controversy. This is necessary to get people to
participate. An organizer has to attack apathy and
disturb the prevailing patterns of complacent
community life where people have simply come to accept
a bad situation. Alinsky would say, "The first step in
community organization is community
disorganization."--beyond
the sea
The mind
of the bigot is like the pupil of the eye; the
more light you pour upon it, the more it will
contract.
Oliver
Wendell Holmes
"She might
have called him a bastard. I wouldn't rule that
out. She's never claimed that she was pure on
profanity. But I've never heard her tell a joke
with an ethnic connotation. She's so fanatic
about it. She
can't tell an ethnic joke.
It's not in her."
Bill
Clinton, in a call to
the New York Daily News
17 July 2000
hen
bill clinton
offered up his "ethnic joke" non sequitur, unsolicited, to
the New York Daily News in an attempt to save his
ethnic-slurring
wife's
candidacy, he doubtless never imagined that it would be an
ethnic joke by the wife (and to the press and about Gandhi,
no less) that would expose clinton racism to anyone who
would listen.
If the purpose of the
call to the New York Daily News was single-minded -- to save
the wife from certain defeat -- (missus clinton's
"f---ing
Jew bastard"
ethnic slur was not going over well with the crucial Jewish
vote) -- the purpose of the non sequitur was twofold -- (1)
to recast the wife's vicious anti-Semitic slur as a
(relatively) common, (relatively) benign "ethnic joke" and
(2) to argue implicitly (if fallaciously) that if the
wife is viscerally unable to tell an ethnic joke, the wife
is viscerally unable to utter a vicious anti-Semitic slur.
Casuistry in the service of clinton
revisionism....
To those who say that
the only thing this Gandhi "joke" confirms is that the wife
is a poor comedian, that everybody ought to lighten up, I
say, "wrong," (although it does confirm that
the wife is no Jackie Mason, whose timing and judgment are
impeccable, who manages to use ethnic humor with a certain
benign benevolence and intelligence, Ed
Sullivan notwithstanding).
The wife's ethnic
"joke" in fact also confirms the following:
(1) The
wife does, indeed, tell ethnic
"jokes."
(2) The
premise (i.e., hillary doesn't do ethnic
jokes)
of the husband's 'argument' (i.e., hillary
doesn't do ethnic jokes--> she doesn't do
vicious ethnic slurs)
was, therefore, a lie, false.
demonstrates
that the couple's entire defense of the wife's
anti-Semitic
slur
was based on lies, that not only does the wife
tell ethnic jokes, she also reflexively and
repeatedly utters vicious anti-Semitic, racial
and other slurs.
(3) Forget
president. This is hardly the judgment,
intelligence or temperament required of a
senator.
Censorship
& Scandals
Jackie Mason's Finger
Gesture - On the October 18, 1964 installment of THE ED
SULLIVAN SHOW, as comedian Jackie Mason concluded his
comedy routine he noticed some off-stage finger gestures
from Ed Sullivan's indicating that his time was winding
down. According to Mason, he jokingly took the moment to
comment on the signs by saying "and here's a finger for
you, and one for you..." Ed Sullivan thought that the
glib finger joke reference was actually a case of Jackie
Mason giving him the "finger" on-the-air. Outraged, Ed
Sullivan barred Jackie Mason from any further appearances
on his program. The controversy over the "finger" damaged
Mason's career. He retaliated with a libel suit in the
New York Supreme Court and won. They had viewed his
performance and found "nothing offensive." However, the
influence that Sullivan possessed relegated Jackie Mason
to "show-business-limbo" forcing him to work in outlying
Catskill mountain resorts and related second-hand
entertainment establishment. Years later, Jackie Mason
resurfaced in a successful Broadway Tony Award winning
one-man show and in the short-lived sitcom CHICKEN
SOUP/ABC/1989.
ST.
LOUIS (AP) -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton
apologized for joking that Mahatma Gandhi used to
run a gas station in St. Louis, saying it was "a
lame attempt at humor."
The
New York Democrat made the remark at a fund-raiser
Saturday. During an event here for Senate candidate
Nancy Farmer, Clinton introduced a quote from
Gandhi by saying, "He ran a gas station down in St.
Louis."
After
laughter from many in the crowd of at least 200
subsided, the former first lady continued, "No,
Mahatma Gandhi was a great leader of the 20th
century." In a nod to Farmer's underdog status
against Republican Sen. Kit Bond, Clinton quoted
the Indian independence leader as saying: "First
they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they
fight you, then you win."
The
director of a U.S. center devoted to Gandhi's
teachings said the remarks amounted to stereotyping
and were insensitive.
After
being approached by The Associated Press to clarify
the remarks, Clinton suggested in a statement late
Monday that she never meant to fuel the stereotype
- often used as a comedic punch line - that certain
ethnic groups run America's gas
stations.
"I
have admired the work and life of Mahatma Gandhi
and have spoken publicly about that many times,"
Clinton said. "I truly regret if a lame attempt at
humor suggested otherwise."
Michelle
Naef, administrator of the M.K. Gandhi Institute
for Nonviolence, a Memphis, Tenn.-based
organization founded in 1991 by a Gandhi grandson,
credited Clinton and her husband, former President
Clinton, with long having "supported the Gandhi
message." But she said Saturday's remarks "could be
incredibly harmful."
"I
don't think she was, in any way, trying to demean
Mahatma Gandhi," Naef said. "To be generous to her,
I would say it was a poor attempt at humor. Perhaps
I'm overly sensitive, but I find it offensive when
people use stereotypes in that way."
"I
was there and [Hillary] never said it
[*f---ing
Jew bastard].
In 29 years, my wife has never, ever uttered an
ethnic or racial slur against anybody,
ever."
Bill
Clinton,
in a call to the New York Daily News
17 July 2000
"She's
so straight on this, she squeaks."
Bill
Clinton,
in a call to the New York Daily News
17 July 2000
"She
might have called him a bastard. I wouldn't rule
that out. She's never claimed that she was pure on
profanity. But I've never heard her tell a joke
with an ethnic connotation. She's so fanatic about
it. She can't tell an ethnic joke. It's not in
her."
Bill
Clinton,
in a call to the New York Daily News
17 July 2000
*"Hillary
hit him between the eyes. She was angrier than Paul
had ever seen her. 'You f---ing Jew bastard!' she
screamed."
author Jerry
Oppenheimer
quoting campaign aide Paul Fray
State of a Union
(New York: Harper-Collins, 2000) p. 153
It
is wrong to demonize and cartoonize one another and
ignore evidence and to make false charges and to
bear false witness. Sometimes I think our friends
on the other side have become the people of the
Nine Commandments. It is wrong to bear false
witness because we all see through [the]
glass darkly....
We
have a curious situation in American where the
religious right has tried to turn all who disagree
with them into two-dimensional cartoons. I read a
very moving article in one of our newspapers a few
days ago in which someone in the president's
hometown said all the Democrats cared about was
abortion, gay marriage, and being weak on
defense....
[T]hese
people really do believe they are in possession of
absolute truths. You won't hear about it during
this convention. They'll put up their other face.
But the truth is that when it all comes down to it,
a lot of the religious absolutists believe that all
other issues are irrelevant, that all who disagree
with them are somehow almost non human, certainly
not deserving of basic consideration. Therefore
it's nothing but right to concentrate wealth and
power in the hands of those who share their values
and to constantly assert that whatever position
they decide to take is right regardless of the
inconvenient evidence....
Our
number one threat abroad is fundamentalism,
absolutism. Terror is their tactic, but it is their
ideas, their hatred, their absolute certainty that
they are so right that they can kill people who
disagree with them -- that is our enemy.
linton
moral relativism
meets an insidious balkanizing
brand of clinton fundamentalism. The goal: to render the
corrupt, treacherous, utter-failure clintons at once
untouchable and empowered.
SERMON
ON THE MAKE
Note
that clinton made this
despicable argumentin a church. In a black church. So much for
the separation of church and state. So much for racial
equality and respect. Miss
hillary's plantation
prequel....
Calculating
a black man's worth to be 5/3 of a vote is no less
racist, and arguably more so, than calculating his
worth to be 3/5 of a white man; the latter is
demeaning, but the former is
dehumanizing.
As for
fundamentalism, note that no one is more doctrinaire than
the clintons. If the Religious Right eschews science for
faith, the clintons corrupt science*
for dogma,
treasure and power.
*
More
on that later....
AFTERWORD:
A note to the Religious Right
I am not arguing
that you change your deeply held convictions. To the
contrary.
Your
convictions--the evangelical ethos-- is precisely
my premise, my starting point. It is precisely why
I cannot envision how you would doing anything to help
elect hillary clinton, someone who is anathema to
all you believe.
But that is exactly
what you would be doing if, in the next presidential
election, you stay home or vote for a 'Perot.' You don't
have to physically pull the lever or mark the box or
touch the square next to the name 'hillary clinton' to
help elect her. To think otherwise is to play with your
mind.
It is tempting to
rationalize this issue... even to ignore it. It's a
difficult issue. It's a dilemma. But rationalizing the
issue won't make your actions morally right... and
ignoring the issue won't make it go away.
The clintons equate
the Religious Right with the islamo-fascist terrorists,
with the enemy. They are attempting to transfer onto the
Religious Right the hate and fear and disgust Americans
feel for the islamo-fascist terrorists. To disseminate
their vile invective, the clintons chose a church for the
venue and what the they believe to be a vulnerable,
easily demagogued population for the audience. (A
population they've exploited
forever.)
The purpose of this
article is to inform you of the clintons' contemptible
and dangerous scheme. To let you hear
clinton for
yourself.
It is critical that
you know fully what the clintons think of you and to what
extremes they are willing to go to harm you, to defeat
you, to crush you.
You must not ignore
or rationalize away this threat to your existence.
As a Jew, I tend to be
vigilant about such threats. I implore you to do
likewise. You must not make the same mistake my brethren
made almost seven decades ago.
"She
is angry. Not all the time. But most of
the time."
author
Gail Sheehy Hillary's
Choice
(New York: Random House, 1999) p. 11
"[Hillary
Clinton] is in a perpetual state of
suspended anger...."
former
Clinton adviser to
author Gail Sheehy Hillary's Choice
(New York: Random House, 1999) p. 139
"Hillary
hit him between the eyes. She was angrier
than Paul had ever seen her. 'You f**king
Jew bastard!' she screamed."
author
Jerry Oppenheimer quoting
campaign aide Paul Fray
State of a Union
(New York: Harper-Collins, 2000) p.
153
[W]hen
White House Counsel... Abner Mikva finally
bowed to the law and delivered subpoenaed
documents, she and her White House scandal
team lashed at him with such a vicious
streak of humiliating profanity that he
resigned.
Barbara
Olson Hell
to Pay (Washington, D.C.: Regnery, 1999) p.
5
"Anyone
that stood up... was smashed down and
belittled,very personally. [N]ot
only would she sort of humiliate you in
front of your colleagues or whoever
happened to be around, Hillary tended to
kind of campaign against people behind
their back, and that was certainly my
experience."
former
Clinton press secretary Dee Dee Myers PBS
Frontline, 16 Jan 2001 The
Clinton
Years
Longtime
Hillary aide Carolyn Huber, who saved Mrs.
Clinton's buns in 1996 with a convenient
cover story about how her mysterious Rose
Law Firm billing records magically
appeared in the White House book room,
described the former first lady's fits of
rage to Sheehy as nearly lethal. "The
person on the receiving end never gets
over it," Huber remembered, reportedly
shivering as she spoke those
words.
Hillary's
Scheme (New
York: Crown Forum, 2003) p. 88 Hillary's
Choice (New
York: Random House, 1999) p. 11
The
rages continued even after Mrs. Clinton
took up residence in the White House,
where she blew up at a Secret Service
agent for declining to carry her bags.
When the agent explained that he needed to
keep his hands free in order to protect
her, she replied, "If you want to remain
on this detail, get your f**king ass over
here and grab those bags."
Joyce
Milton First
Partner (New York: William Morrow, 1999) p.
259
a senator to Henry
Hyde
It
is natural for man to indulge in the illusions of
hope.
We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth,
and listen to the song of that siren
till she transforms us into beasts.
Is this the part of wise men,
engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty?
Are we disposed to be the number of those
who, having eyes, see not,
and having ears, hear not,
the things which so nearly concern their temporal
salvation?
For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost,
I am willing to know the whole truth;
to know the worst, and to provide for it. Patrick Henry
In a dark
time, the eye begins to see.
Theodore Roethke
But even as
Clinton fails to grasp the scandal's metabolism
he understands all too well its most significant
byproduct.
You can see it in his eyes.
Once
reflecting a Machiavellian confidence,
they now dart back and forth reflexively,
searching futilely for approval,
attempting desperately to dispel his own certain
knowledge
that his moral authority is gone. . .
forever. Mia T
If
a white person was walking down the sidewalk, a
black person had to get off the sidewalk so the
white person could walk by. There were laws
which prohibited Blacks to look at white people
in the eye, and a black person could be sent to
jail for "assault (reckless eyeballing)."
...
Blacks who dared to challenge the rules were
lynched by the thousands. Men and women were
lynched. Lynchings
were public events and white men, women and
children went to watch Blacks being tortured and
burned or hanged... Whites literally got away
with murder for killing "uppity" Blacks.
"When
'Queen Hillary' walks down the hall, you're not
supposed to look at her. You're actually
supposed to go into an office if there is one
nearby. She doesn't want staff 'seeing' her. And
I know she sure as hell doesn't want to meet you
or any other staffer!" "You have to be kidding
me!" John replied. "No, we got the word at a
staff meeting. It's true. Look around. Do you
see anyone else in the hall?" John looked around
and sure enough people were starting to emerge,
like prarie dogs peeking out of their burrows
after a hawk had flown past.
"It may be true that
the law cannot make a man love me, but it can keep him from
lynching me, and I think that's pretty important."
Ironically, the logic
of this pronouncement by Martin Luther King would, in short
order, be refuted by the reality of his own lynching. King's
hope was misplaced and his reasoning was circular. The
resultant rule of law relied on by King presumed an
adherence to the rule of law in the first
instance.
Adherence to the rule
of law is not
something normally associated with the clintons. Moreover,
racial and ethnic disrespect, intimidation, exploitation and
hate have always been a fundamental clinton tactic and the
reflexive use the
"N"-word and
other
racial and ethnic slurs,
an essential element in the clinton lexicon. When the "first
black president" and his wife ran Arkansas, the
NAACP sued them for intimidating black
voters at the
polls.
But it is the
clintons' refinement of the DNC drag
and drop that
is, arguably, the most insidious and repugnant application
of their special brand of race-hate politics.
Drag
and drop is a
vote fraud technique by which unwitting, unwilling and/or
illegal voters -- typically inner-city blacks and other
minorities -- are literally dragged into the voting booth
and told where to mark the "x" -- often multiple times per
election. Drag
and drop does
not merely undermine and corrupt our system of government.
Drag
and drop is
not merely illegal and exploitive.
Calculating a black
man's worth to be 5/3 of a vote is no less racist, and
arguably more so, than calculating his worth to be 3/5 of a
white man; the latter is demeaning, but the former is
dehumanizing.
The Ron Brown death
and the
clinton legacy of lynching
represent the pernicious endpoint, but the history of
clinton race-hate politics is replete with a reflexive
'disposal' of 'uppity' blacks from to Marian Wright Edelman
to Lani Guanier to Jocelyn Elders to Carl
McCall...
To former Atlanta
Mayor Maynard Jackson. The clintons' anointment of their
man, Terry McAuliffe,
to the
chairmanship of the Democratic National Committee didn't
merely force Maynard Jackson to the back of the bus. It
pushed him off.
In order to better
understand the easy entry of Moseley Braun into democrat
field, clinton-clinton precedent (president!) and the
field's increasingly circus-like quality notwithstanding,
one must consider the precipitating acts of Al Sharpton and
Donna Brazile.
The Al Sharpton
candidacy, by definition, disturbed both the clinton
calculus and literati sensibilities, inspiring an immediate
if ineffectual Tawana-Brawley deathblow attempt by leftist
media. Sharpton's response was swift and sure. He warned
that the next time the media asked him about Tawana Brawley,
he would invoke the clinton scandals and the media's
apparent lack of interest in same when questioning hillary
clinton. (Surely the
clintons' rapes and other
predations
would trump this quaint little hoax...)
Sharpton's Harlem
office effectively burned to the ground the next day--an
accident they say--but he was not deterred. The
media, however, apparently were; they quickly buried Tawana
Brawley beside Juanita Broaddrick, somewhere in that dark
recess of expediency called access
journalism.
If the clintons wanted
Sharpton out because of the sheer embarrassment of him
before his salvo, they now would be satisfied with no less
than Sharpton's head. Donna Brazile was to neutralize
(decolorize?) Sharpton by creating black favorite son
candidates in every state of the union. It seems that
Brazile ultimately thought the better of it, warning that
dem dissing was demonstrably dumb, that Sharpton could, a la
Jesse Jackson, lure crucial black voters back into the
democrat fold.
So how then to siphon
off the black votes that will go to Sharpton? Enter clinton
lackey, Carol Moseley Braun, nothing more than a cynical
extension of clinton drag
and drop and
legacy
of lynching.
bill
clinton Learn
From Rwanda
The Washington Post
Tuesday, April 6, 2004; Page A21
Note:
clinton's use of "we" is consistent with his
"buck stops there/everywhere but not
here" policy.
Bill Clinton felt their pain.
Retrospectively. In 1998, on his Grand Apology Tour
of Africa, a whirlwind tour of whirlwind apologies
for slavery, the Cold War, you name it, he touched
down in Kigali and apologized for the Rwandan
genocide. "When you look at those children who
greeted us," he said, biting his lip, as is his
wont, "how could anyone say they did not want those
children to have a chance to have their own
children?"
Alas, the President had
precisely identified the problem. In April 1994,
when the Hutu genocidaires looked at the children
who greeted them in the Tutsi villages, that's
exactly what they thought: they didn't want those
Tutsi children to have a chance to have their own
children. So the question is: when a bunch of
killers refuse to subscribe to multiculti
mumbo-jumbo, what do you do?
"All over the world there
were people like me sitting in offices," continued
Bill in his apology aria, "who did not fully
appreciate the depth and the speed with which you
were being engulfed by this unimaginable terror."
Au contraire, he appreciated
it all too fully. That's why, during the
bloodbath,
Clinton
Administration officials were specifically
instructed not to use the word "genocide"
lest it provoke public pressure to do
something.
Documents made public last week
confirm that US officials knew within the first few
days that a "final solution" to eliminate all
Tutsis was underway.
n the course of a hundred days in 1994 the Hutu
government of Rwanda and its extremist allies very
nearly succeeded in exterminating the country's
Tutsi minority. Using firearms, machetes, and a
variety of garden implements, Hutu militiamen,
soldiers, and ordinary citizens murdered some
800,000 Tutsi and politically moderate Hutu. It was
the fastest, most efficient killing spree of the
twentieth century.
A few years later, in a series in The New
Yorker, Philip Gourevitch recounted in horrific
detail the
story of the genocide
and the world's failure to stop it. President Bill
Clinton, a famously avid reader, expressed shock.
He sent copies of Gourevitch's articles to his
second-term national-security adviser, Sandy
Berger. The articles bore confused, angry,
searching queries in the margins. "Is what he's
saying true?" Clinton wrote with a thick black
felt-tip pen beside heavily underlined paragraphs.
"How did this happen?" he asked, adding, "I want to
get to the bottom of this." The President's
urgency and outrage were oddly timed. As the terror
in Rwanda had unfolded, Clinton had shown virtually
no interest in stopping the genocide, and his
Administration had stood by as the death toll rose
into the hundreds of thousands.....
In March of 1998, on a visit
to Rwanda, President Clinton issued what would
later be known as the "Clinton apology," which was
actually a carefully hedged acknowledgment. He
spoke to the crowd assembled on the tarmac at
Kigali Airport: "We come here today partly in
recognition of the fact that we in the United
States and the world community did not do as much
as we could have and should have done to try to
limit what occurred" in Rwanda.
This implied that the United States had done a good
deal but not quite enough. In reality the United
States did much more than fail to send troops. It
led a successful effort to remove most of the UN
peacekeepers who were already in Rwanda. It
aggressively worked to block the subsequent
authorization of UN reinforcements. It refused to
use its technology to jam radio broadcasts that
were a crucial instrument in the coordination and
perpetuation of the genocide. And even as, on
average, 8,000 Rwandans were being butchered each
day, U.S. officials shunned the term "genocide,"
for fear of being obliged to act. The United
States in fact did virtually nothing "to try to
limit what occurred." Indeed, staying out of Rwanda
was an explicit U.S. policy objective.
With the grace of one grown practiced at public
remorse, the President gripped the lectern with
both hands and looked across the dais at the
Rwandan officials and survivors who surrounded him.
Making eye contact and shaking his head, he
explained, "It may seem strange to you here,
especially the many of you who lost members of your
family, but all over the world there were people
like me sitting in offices, day after day after
day, who did not fully appreciate
[pause] the depth [pause] and the
speed [pause] with which you were being
engulfed by this unimaginable terror."
Clinton chose his words with characteristic care.
It was true that although top U.S. officials could
not help knowing the basic facts--thousands of
Rwandans were dying every day--that were being
reported in the morning papers, many did not "fully
appreciate" the meaning. In the first three weeks
of the genocide the most influential American
policymakers portrayed (and, they insist,
perceived) the deaths not as atrocities or the
components and symptoms of genocide but as wartime
"casualties"--the deaths of combatants or those
caught between them in a civil war.
Yet this formulation avoids the critical issue of
whether Clinton and his close advisers might
reasonably have been expected to "fully appreciate"
the true dimensions and nature of the massacres.
During the first three days of the killings U.S.
diplomats in Rwanda reported back to Washington
that well-armed extremists were intent on
eliminating the Tutsi. And the American press spoke
of the door-to-door hunting of unarmed civilians.
By the end of the second week informed
nongovernmental groups had already begun to call on
the Administration to use the term "genocide,"
causing diplomats and lawyers at the State
Department to begin debating the word's
applicability soon thereafter. In order not to
appreciate that genocide or something close to it
was under way, U.S. officials had to ignore public
reports and internal intelligence and debate.
...whatever their convictions
about "never again," many of them did sit around,
and they most certainly did allow genocide to
happen. In examining how and why the United States
failed Rwanda, we see that without strong
leadership the system will incline toward
risk-averse policy choices.
Samantha
Power Bystanders
to Genocide Why
the United States Let the Rwandan Tragedy
Happen The
author's exclusive interviews with scores of the
participants in the decision-making, together with
her analysis of newly declassified documents, yield
a chilling narrative of self-serving caution and
flaccid will and countless missed opportunities to
mitigate a colossal crime The Atlantic
Online
"When you
look at the way the House of Representatives has
been run, it has been run like a plantation, and
you know what I'm talkin' about. [Note the
gratuitous
gerundial g-dropping.]
... We have a culture of corruption. We have
cronyism. We have incompetence. I predict to you
that this administration will go down in history
as one of the worst that has ever governed our
country."
(Miss hillary also apologized to a group of
Hurricane Katrina evacuees in the audience "on
behalf of a government that left you
behind.)
hillary
clinton
Martin Luther King Day
Monday, January 16, 2006
Canaan Baptist Church of Christ
Harlem, New York City
"It's
time for us to come together. It's time for
us to rebuild a New Orleans, the one that
should be, a chocolate New Orleans. And I
don't care what people are saying uptown or
wherever they are. This city will be
chocolate at the end of the day.... You can't
have New Orleans no other way."
New
Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin
Monday, January 16, 2006
ixing
metaphors.
If Katrina's
inescapable allusion is the parting of the Red Sea, (and it
is):
Pharaoh
will say of the children of Israel, They are entangled in
the land, the wilderness hath shut them in.... And it was
told the king of Egypt that the people were fled: and the
heart of Pharaoh and of his servants was changed towards
the people, and they said, What is this we have done,
that we have let Israel go from serving us? ...And the
children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon
the dry ground: and the waters were a wall unto them on
their right hand, and on their left. And the Egyptians
pursued, and went in after them into the midst of the
sea, all Pharaoh's horses, his chariots, and his
horsemen.... And the waters returned, and covered the
chariots, and the horsemen, even all the host of Pharaoh
that went in after them into the sea; there remained not
so much as one of them. (Exodus 14)
... the
Democratic Party's inescapable allusion is the
plantation.
Miss hillary's
'plantation' metaphor, ostensibly about Bush and the
Republicans, is really about the clintons and Katrina and
New Orleans and the Democratic Party. (The Left generally,
and the clintons, in particular, are notoriously
projectional.)
Katrina has opened the
eyes of the poor -- mostly black -- underclass, the Left's
absolutely essential -- and until now, captive --
constituency.
The clintons and the
Left are terrified that these poor people will finally see
what has been before them for 60 years: Not only a failed
idea, but a party whose power depends on perpetuating that
failure.
The clintons and the
Left are terrified that these people will finally see the
modern Democratic party for what it is: a bunch of bitter,
self-serving, moribund, power-hungry, dangerous elistists
whose very existence depends keeping them
dirt
poor, disinformed and dependent.... This, in contrast to a
Republican party whose power depends on their education,
self-sufficiency and success.
Why do you suppose
the clintons and Landrieu -- through Mayor
('chocolate...
You can't have New Orleans no other
way')
Nagin -- tried to get their
voters
back, post
haste (no
trouble bussing 'em straightaway and en masse when it's
to the polls)
-- to a still
toxic morgue with no potable water, no emergency support
and with renewed risk of deluge?
Finally, why the
shameless "culture of corruption" harangue? Its tactical
purpose was diversionary. Miss hillary had no politically
helpful answer to the question, ("Why did you vote for the
war?"), having previously staked
out Iraqi territory apparently populated by no
one.
But "culture of
corruption" also served a broader, strategic function: the
inflation of the clinton legacy. Downward revision
("defining
deviancy down")
is the classic clinton m.o., (see Jefferson
double-helix hoax),
(although clinton, exposed, will often argue the obverse:
the double negative offers the illusion of higher ground.)
Posthumous
misappropriation, for obvious reasons the clintons'
preferred method of legacy inflation, was unavailable. Not a
problem. Miss hillary will take whatever she can
get.
Yesterday,
Daniel Patrick Moynihan died. Today, the clintons are
arrogating his soul. Hardly surprising. In 1999, the
clintons were not at all shy about seizing his
still-warm senate seat.
One
has merely to recall theJefferson
double-helix hoaxto understand that posthumous misappropriation is,
for the obvious reason, the clintons' preferred method
of legacy inflation….
Standard-Issue
clintonism
If
misappropriation of Jefferson's alleles hinged on a
broken line of descent, misappropriation of Moynihan's
endorsement depends on a broken line of dissent. Like
Sally Hemmings' progeny, Moynihan's later acquiescence
is of dubious lineage
"She
is angry. Not all the time. But most of the
time."
author
Gail Sheehy Hillary's
Choice
(New York: Random House, 1999) p. 11
"[Hillary
Clinton] is in a perpetual state of
suspended anger...."
former
Clinton adviser to
author Gail Sheehy Hillary's Choice
(New York: Random House, 1999) p. 139
"Hillary
hit him between the eyes. She was angrier
than Paul had ever seen her. 'You f**king Jew
bastard!' she screamed."
author
Jerry Oppenheimer quoting
campaign aide Paul Fray
State of a Union
(New York: Harper-Collins, 2000) p. 153
[W]hen
White House Counsel... Abner Mikva finally
bowed to the law and delivered subpoenaed
documents, she and her White House scandal
team lashed at him with such a vicious streak
of humiliating profanity that he
resigned.
Barbara
Olson Hell
to Pay (Washington, D.C.: Regnery, 1999) p.
5
"Anyone
that stood up... was smashed down and
belittled,very personally. [N]ot only
would she sort of humiliate you in front of
your colleagues or whoever happened to be
around, Hillary tended to kind of campaign
against people behind their back, and that
was certainly my experience."
former
Clinton press secretary Dee Dee Myers PBS
Frontline, 16 Jan 2001 The
Clinton
Years
Longtime
Hillary aide Carolyn Huber, who saved Mrs.
Clinton's buns in 1996 with a convenient
cover story about how her mysterious Rose Law
Firm billing records magically appeared in
the White House book room, described the
former first lady's fits of rage to Sheehy as
nearly lethal. "The person on the receiving
end never gets over it," Huber remembered,
reportedly shivering as she spoke those
words.
Hillary's
Scheme (New
York: Crown Forum, 2003) p. 88 Hillary's
Choice (New
York: Random House, 1999) p. 11
The
rages continued even after Mrs. Clinton took
up residence in the White House, where she
blew up at a Secret Service agent for
declining to carry her bags. When the agent
explained that he needed to keep his hands
free in order to protect her, she replied,
"If you want to remain on this detail, get
your f**king ass over here and grab those
bags."
Joyce
Milton First
Partner (New York: William Morrow, 1999) p.
259
Ironically, the logic
of this pronouncement by Martin Luther King would, in short
order, be refuted by the reality of his own lynching. King's
hope was misplaced and his reasoning was circular. The
resultant rule of law relied on by King presumed an
adherence to the rule of law in the first
instance.
Adherence to the rule
of law is not
something normally associated with the clintons. Moreover,
racial and ethnic disrespect, intimidation, exploitation and
hate have always been a fundamental clinton tactic and the
reflexive use the
"N"-word and
other
racial and ethnic slurs,
an essential element in the clinton lexicon. When the "first
black president" and his wife ran Arkansas, the
NAACP sued them for intimidating black
voters at the
polls.
Transcript
of Fox News' Cavuto on Business show with
Meredith Whitney and Herman Cain, January 21,
2006
NEIL
CAVUTO (host): All right, we're back to go
"On the Spot." Meredith, my friend, what have
you got?
WHITNEY:
It will take more than a village to get
Hillary Clinton elected in '08 after her
comments on the plantation. She's
doomed.
CAVUTO:
So the charge that Republicans ran Congress
like a plantation, you think, hurts
her?
WHITNEY:
Yeah. Offended just about
everyone.
CAVUTO:
Maybe she's galvanizing, do you think she
could be galvanizing her base?
WHITNEY:
Well, she galvanized blacks, she galvanized
me, a lady, and she, I mean, it's -- it's
going to be tough sledding for
her.
CAVUTO:
All right. Herman Cain?
CAIN:
Martin Luther King Jr. day, birthday
celebration, is supposed to be about unity.
She took a play right out of the Democratic
playbook, which was when you want to pander
to the African Americans, you race-bait. And
I happen to think that in 2006 as well as
2008, she's going to discover, along with a
lot of other Democrats, that a lot of us have
already left the Democratic plantation. And
you know what I mean.
Why do
you suppose the clintons and Landrieu --
through Mayor
('chocolate...
You can't have New Orleans no other
way')
Nagin -- tried to get their
voters
back,
post haste (no
trouble bussing 'em straightaway and en masse
when it's to the polls)
--
to a still toxic morgue with no potable
water, no emergency support and with renewed
risk of deluge?
Calculating
a black man's worth to be 5/3 of a vote is no
less racist, and arguably more so, than
calculating his worth to be 3/5 of a white
man; the latter is demeaning, but the former
is dehumanizing.
omething
had
been bothering me ever since I first heard
miss
hillary's voucher rant.
The whiff of racism was undeniable, but it
seemed to exceed the actual words.
Miss-hillary-of-the-plantation
delivered her rant in the form and cadence of an
ethnic joke. (And we all know that
hillary clinton has had considerable practice
doing ethnic
jokes....
And slurs.)
What's
going on here is somewhat clear to me.
First of
all I have a liberal aunt/uncle pair who have
been in education as well as other liberal
causes their entire lives. I can vividly recall
being in their house about 3 years ago or so,
and they made this exact argument to me
i.e. we can't have vouchers because they might
be used to send someone to a KKK school or
whatever. So this "argument" has clearly been
floating around in education circles for a
reasonably long period of time and is probably
routinely pulled out and dusted off when need
be. Missus clinton probably heard this argument
and decided to use it making it sound like she
had thought it up.
What is
more curious to me is her delivery. It is told
in the exact same format as you might
tell an ethnic joke. If you go back an listen,
some of the internal cadences resemble an ethnic
joke. She's making a policy argument but the
rhythm, the cadences, the sonata form is as if
she were saying "Catholic, Jew, White
Supremacist and Jihadist walk into a bar".
Usally
these jokes are told with 3 examples, the first
two for the setup, and the last one for the
punchline. In her case she has 2 setup and 2
punchline. Which has its own disconcerting
effect as we're not used to 2
punchlines!
[NOTE:
Two punchlines because missus clinton has two
target demographic groups--blacks and white
women.-- Mia T]
But again,
this is yet another demonstration of her
political tone deafness--this is not the cadence
of political speech-- this is the cadence of
someone telling a bad ethnic joke and one in
which the audience just wishes they were
somewhere else.
One gets
the feeling that she tells a lot of these jokes,
tells them poorly, but woe be unto Those Who
Will Not Laugh.
You vill
hear ze joke and you vill like it,
jah?
posted
on 02/26/2006 11:48:27 PM EST by 2 Kool 2 Be
4-Gotten
illary
clinton's voucher
rant1
is really not about vouchers at all.
Blatant hypocrisies,
silly non sequiturs and dangerous
lies
make it easy to
miss the underlying machinations.
So put aside for a
moment Chelsea's private-school education at Sidwell Friends
and Stanford... put aside standard
issue clinton race-hate politics.
Put them aside, for now.
"It
may be true that the law cannot make a man love
me, but it can keep him from lynching me, and I
think that's pretty
important."
Ironically,
the logic of this pronouncement by Martin Luther
King would, in short order, be refuted by the
reality of his own lynching. King's hope was
misplaced and his reasoning was circular. The
resultant rule of law relied on by King presumed an
adherence to the rule of law in the first
instance.
Adherence
to the rule of law is not something normally
associated with the clintons. Moreover, racial and
ethnic disrespect, intimidation, exploitation and
hate have always been a fundamental clinton tactic
and the reflexive use the
"N"-word
and other
racial and ethnic
slurs,
an essential element in the clinton lexicon. When
the "first black president" and his wife ran
Arkansas, the
NAACP sued them for intimidating black
voters
at the polls.
Missus clinton was
speaking to the South Bronx Overall Economic Development
Corporation, (SoBRO),
an organization that has taken on the formidable challenge
of rebuilding a community whose name alone 'evokes images of
burned out buildings, crime, poverty, and drugs.'
(NB:
Thirty-nine percent of the South Bronx is Black and 60% is
Hispanic. Thirty-nine percent live below the poverty
level.)
Capitalist
sensibilities and faith-based initiatives drive SoBRO.
This is precisely the kind of group that would be
sympathetic to vouchers. (And to
Republicans!)
The twofer construct, transposed to
circumvent the 22nd Amendment, is now
poised to retake power. A
self-replicating, Constitution-specific
pathogen, the clinton nano-presidency,
post-9/11, is a danger that we cannot --
we must not -- abide.
elete
hillary:
a simple purpose, but hardly simple to achieve.
And yet it is critical that we do.
These are
not ordinary times. America is waging the global
War on Terror; the uncharted territory of
asymmetric netherworlds is the battlefield; the
enemy is brutal, subhuman; the threat of
global
conflagration
is real.
Defeating
the enemy isn't sufficient. For America to
prevail, she must also defeat a retrograde,
misogynous mindset. To successfully prosecute
the War on Terror, it is essential that the
collective patriarchal islamic culture perceives
America as politically and militarily strong.
Condi
Rice excepted,
this requirement presents an insurmountable
hurdle for any female presidential candidate,
and especially missus clinton, historically
antimilitary--(an image, incidentally, that
is only enhanced today by her clumsy, termagant
parody of Thatcher), forever
the pitiful victim,
and, according to Dick Morris, "the biggest dove
in the clinton administration."
Hillary
Clinton's revisionist tome notwithstanding,
'living history' begets a certain symmetry. It
is in that light that I make this not-so-modest
proposal on this day, exactly 64 years after the
attack on Pearl Harbor.
The
context of our concern today--regardless of
political affiliation--is Iraq and The War on
Terror, but the larger fear is that our
democracy may not survive.
We have
the requisite machines, power and know-how to
defeat the enemy in Iraq and elsewhere, but do
we have the will?
In
particular, do we have the will to identify and
defeat the enemy in our midst?
Answerable
to no one, heir apparent in her own mind,
self-serving in the extreme, Hillary Clinton
incarnates this insidious new threat to our
survival.
What we
decide to do about Missus Clinton will tell us
much about what awaits us in these perilous new
times.
We
are both humbled and inspired by the
encouragement we've received over the
years concerning our efforts to expose
the clintons. Until now, we have
absorbed all costs, but it is becoming
increasingly prohibitive for us to
continue to do so. We would, therefore,
be very grateful if our readers would
donate whatever they can to help defray
some of our bandwidth, software
management and other necessary
expenses.
ronically,
the logic of this pronouncement by Martin Luther King
would, in short order, be refuted by the reality of
his own lynching. King's hope was misplaced and his
reasoning was circular. The resultant rule of law
relied on by King presumed an adherence to the rule of
law in the first instance.
iss
hillary's 'plantation' metaphor, ostensibly about the Rs,
is really about Katrina and New Orleans and the Ds.
On
15 January 1998, standard issue clinton hush
money passed flagrante delicto right
under the Fourth Estate's patrician nose, the
congenital skew of which apparently
restricting its line of sight to the obvious
payoff.
with its theology
of contempt? 
n the course of a hundred days in 1994 the Hutu
government of Rwanda and its extremist allies very
nearly succeeded in exterminating the country's
Tutsi minority. Using firearms, machetes, and a
variety of garden implements, Hutu militiamen,
soldiers, and ordinary citizens murdered some
800,000 Tutsi and politically moderate Hutu. It was
the fastest, most efficient killing spree of the
twentieth century.
Hillary
Clinton's revisionist tome notwithstanding,
'living history' begets a certain symmetry. It
is in that light that I make this not-so-modest
proposal on this day, exactly 64 years after the
attack on Pearl Harbor.