Jul 13 2007
BILL CLINTON: FIRST NEOCON PRESIDENT
Cyrano’s Journal Online, Thomas Paine’s Corner, The Greanville Journal, CJO Avenger, and VoxPop are initiating a weekly email which will include links to both the most recent offerings and to timeless classics available on our very diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to subscribe, type “CJO subscription” in the subject line and send your email to
By Peter Chamberlin
7/13/07
Bill Clinton seems to get blamed by this Neocon administration for many things, but most of all for “losing bin Laden.” The ugly truth is that, in this case, they are probably right. Clinton’s team probably had good information on Osama’s whereabouts most of the time, since they were playing on the same team for most of Clinton’s two terms. It is becoming clear from the accumulating evidence that Bill Clinton resurrected Ronald Reagan’s Afghan strategy of using Islamist guerillas as his own covert foreign policy in Europe and other intransigent hot spots that seemed to be immune to normal diplomacy. Clinton’s foolish toying with Islamist killers is probably the spark that ignited the international jihad against America.
Those of us who are diehard “Bush haters,” like to blame Bush senior for creating Al Qaida, when he abandoned Afghanistan. The problem is, even though Bush did abandon the Afghans, it fell to the next misled president to breathe life into Al Qaida. According to Gen. Hameed Gul (former head of Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence-ISI- during the war against the Soviets), when Vice President George H. W. Bush became president in 1989, he threatened to “clip ISI’s wings.” (Gul now serves as an adviser to Pakistan’s extremist religious political parties. He may also be the source of the Al Qaida rumors that it was the Israeli Mossad, not bin Laden, that carried-out the 9/11 attacks, as well as the idea of creating an Islamic Caliphate, beginning with Afghanistan and the Central Asian Republics.) After the withdrawal of the Soviets on February 15, 1989, Bush began to make good on that threat. According to author George Crile, in Charlie’s War, on September 30, 1991, the end of the fiscal year, the flow officially stopped (except for $200 million [matched by the Saudis] hidden within the defense authorizations bill for 1992). After the US abandoned Afghanistan, to attack Saddam Hussein, the ISI was left alone to manage the Afghan tribal bloodbath and civil war. Soon after the liberation of Kabul, their man, Hezb-i-Islami leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (long the main recipient of CIA weaponry) started the civil war, by firing rockets at Kabul. (The ISI later created the Taliban regime and installed them in power in 1996.)
In 1993, the stage had been set for Clinton to take over, after Bush had walked off the field. His common history with the radical Islamists began shortly after he took office, when he acceded to the demands of the Muslim governments, who were wanting to send aid to their brethren in Yugoslavia. Clinton began a covert operation with Saudi Arabia, Iran and Pakistan, to send money and arms to Bosnia-Herzegovina. According to a lengthy Congressional report by the Republican Party Committee, published in 1997 (while the Republicans were pre-occupied with learning about the president’s sexual habits), the Clinton administration “helped turn Bosnia into a militant Islamic base,” by recruiting and arming thousands of Mujahideen through the “Militant Islamic Network.” The report then went on to claim administration “…complicity in the delivery of weapons from Iran to the Muslim government in Sarajevo.., involvement with the Islamic network’s arms pipeline… (and using Muslim “charity” groups who were) connected with such fixtures of the Islamic terror network as Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman (the convicted mastermind behind the 1993 World Trade Center bombing) and Osama Bin Laden…” [Washington Post, 9/22/96]
The result was an illegal Iran-Contra style operation which utilized Iranian militants and elements of Al Qaida in Albania some of which were under direct command of Al Qaida “number two” Ayman al-Zawahiri), to smuggle weapons and mujahedeen though Croatia into Bosnia. This secret program was later duplicated with the Kosovo Liberation Army, and again in nearby Macedonia, as well as in Chechnya. According to author and researcher Yossef Bodansky (director Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare), Clinton also used these Al Qaida offshoots against Egypt, after President Mubarak opposed Clinton’s use of force against Iraq in February 1998. Some of these Islamists, again led by Zawahiri, had tried to assassinate Mubarak in 1995. (Zawahiri had earlier gained notoriety as one of the conspirators, and spokesman, for the assassins of Anwar Sadat.) In Bosnia, the Islamists staged attacks upon fellow Muslims in order to elicit international sympathy and thus intervention. The outcomes of these actions effectively converted NATO into the Islamists’ air force, the Western press into their propaganda organs, and American troops into their proxy forces.
The Saudis provided most of the money for the covert program in Yugoslavia (just as they had matched all US funds to the original mujahedeen), the Iranians supplied the arms, and the Pakistan Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) brought the “Afghan-Arab” veterans to the fight. The ISI is widely known as a surrogate of the CIA, which had created them, as well as SAVAK, the Shah of Iran’s secret police. During the Afghan jihad, the CIA used the ISI to create the drug/arms pipeline that supplied the war effort and promoted the smuggling of heroin into Afghanistan, in order to turn the Soviet troops into heroin addicts. (Echoes of Iran-contra CIA drug-running charges.) After the fall of the Soviet puppet Najibullah in 1992, the veteran Arabs took their skills back to their homelands, where they began to spread the militant disease, sharing the technical skills that we had taught them, creating local cells of “the base.”
The ISI sent thousands of the remaining jihadis to Kashmir, to wage a new covert war against India, after the alarming series of nuclear tests which both countries had just conducted. ISI seeded thousands of their own paramilitary forces in with the mujahedeen, to lead the fight in the disputed territory. How can we possibly tell the Taliban and Al Qaida from the Pakistani undercover ISI agents? For that matter, is there even a difference? Who is to say if “Al Qaida” is not really just another Pakistani covert operation? Bin Laden himself never used the term before 1999. In 1998 he created the “International Islamic Front for Jihad against the Jews and Crusaders.” According to former agents of the French secret service, “al Qaida” (”the base” in Arabic) was the name for a database of an early version of the Internet that had been created by Saudi Arabia, for families of the Afghan mujahedeen to use to communicate with their honored “freedom fighters.” Did Al Qaida originate as a generic name for the entire Islamic mujahedeen support network?
The ISI did not create “the base” (the mujahedeen network) by themselves; it was created by the Saudis under the supervision of the CIA master planners. Were the Pakistanis working with Al Qaida on 9/11? If not, then how were the terrorists able to coordinate their attacks with American war games? Who helped them to pre-wire and precisely time the secondary explosives in the buildings? Was the ISI still in the employ of the CIA in 2001? How could the ISI or Al Qaida have managed to “stand down” the protective fighter bubble, that should have prevented the later attacks, if there was no one on the inside to hobble those defenses?
There are far too many discrepancies in the “official versions” of these events, and in the war on terrorism as well, to allow the cover-ups to continue. President Bush has based the Iraq war and the war on terrorism on a series of cover-ups—a cover-up of the truth about the “Iraq threat” following an even bigger cover-up of the cycle of endless retribution with the Islamists over our shared secret history. Bush has followed the deadly path blazed by Clinton, seeking to revive his lost wars and to force his version of diplomacy upon a targeted Muslim population. Unlike Clinton, Bush is trying to fight multiple wars using the Sunni terrorist network (Al Qaida the base), to create multiple civil wars and to ignite a regional religious civil war. Bush is a lost man, multiplying his failures in hopes of ending up with something that resembles victory in the end product.
Bush has breathed new life into the American/Saudi/Pakistani Islamist network as the foundation for his covert war against Iran. He is using Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan as bases of operation, from which to train and launch trained Sunni terrorists into Iran. What are the ramifications of bringing the ISI into the Iraqi and Afghan conflicts? Could the ISI be to blame for the sudden avalanche of “irrefutable proof” being offered of Iranian weapons in Sunni hands in Iraq and Afghanistan? That “proof” was the basis for yesterday’s Senate vote to accuse Iran of waging war against American forces. The events on the ground in Afghanistan and in Pakistan speak volumes about Pakistani veracity as our partner in the war on terror. Thanks to them, the Taliban may be on the verge of victory in both of those countries. Afghanistan and the tribal provinces of Western Pakistan could probably be cleansed of most Taliban by repeating the carpet-bombing campaign of 2001, but both countries would choose Islamist governments in democratic elections. A hostile Islamist government in Islamabad would have nuclear missiles with which to carry-out their retribution.
The next president has the awful task of unwinding this tangled mess. If he has any chance at all of accomplishing this task, it will not be by continuing the failed policies of Clinton and Bush. They took Reagan’s violent, though successful policy of working with Islamic extremists and tried to co-opt and use the Islamists for very un-Islamic tasks. Bush has exacerbated the repercussions of these manipulations by turning a struggle to bring a few thousand Al Qaida terrorists (whoever they really were) to justice into a “clash of civilizations” against all of Islam. This has proven to be a powerful Islamic recruiting device.
The next president will have to deal with empowered Islamists without being so quick to resort to bombs. He will have to try to reason with extremist Islamist governments. The next president will have to act reasonably, as well. This means that we cannot elect another extremist president ourselves, unless his extremism is in defense of the Constitution and the people it defends, which includes defending the “inalienable human rights” of all people. He must be a man who will defend America against those who call themselves “Americans,” while doing so many bad things to so many people.
A SPECIAL MESSAGE TO OUR READERS.
For over two years now, Thomas Paine’s Corner has been a powerful and unwavering voice for a courageous and badly needed agenda for change. We have consistently delivered hard-hitting and insightful commentary, polemics, and analysis in our persistent efforts to persuade, educate, and inspire, and serve as a discriminating but generous platform for voices from many points of view with one thing in common: their spiritual honesty and quality of thinking.
•
Aside from the caliber of its content, Thomas Paine’s Corner’s strength is that there are no advertisers or corporations to exercise de facto censorship or orchestrate our agenda. We aim to keep it that way and we need your help!
•
As a semi-autonomous section of the multi-faceted, thoroughly comprehensive, and highly prestigious Cyrano’s Journal Online, we share Cyrano’s passion for winning the battle of communications against systemic lies, an act which is essential to attaining social and environmental justice. To help us achieve that goal, Cyrano’s Journal, besides its regular editorial pages, intends to begin producing editorial videos to expose the lack of proper context, ahistoricalism, excessive over-emphasis on inane events, and outright lies the corporate media, and in particular television, present to you and your family as a steady diet of pernicious intellectual junk food. This will be an expensive under-taking and there will be no grants forthcoming from the likes of the American Enterprise Institute, the Coors or Heritage Foundation. You can be sure of that!
•
As Greek mythology has it, the powerful are frequently defeated by their own hubris, and that’s precisely what we are witnessing today. Our rotten-to-the-core, usurping plutocracy has become so overtly and arrogantly corrupt that our patience has now reached its generous limit, and the membrane of America’s collective consciousness is about to burst. This will result in a significant restructuring of our socioeconomic and political environments, we hope (and must make sure) for the better. Considering what is at stake in the world today, Cyrano’s Journal and Thomas Paine’s Corner want to accelerate the arrival of that new day, and its promise of a new, truly well organized, kind, and honest civilization.
•
Assisting us in our cause is as simple as clicking on the PayPal button below and exercising the power of your wallet. No matter how large or how small, we thank you in advance for your donation! If you are serious about our struggle for a new society, please don’t put it off. Let us hear from you today.
•Jason Miller
Associate Editor, Cyrano’s Journal Online, and Editorial Director, Thomas Paine’s Corner.
Patrice Greanville, Editor in Chief, Cyrano’s Journal Online
Could be..and I am not saying it is…They didn’t prefer to actually catch Bin Laden…Perhaps he’s far more useful to them being at large…for the whole fear factor they can play out over the tv, newspapers, radio, magazines, and such.
Such a statement is a way beyond the kettle calling the pot black! There is nothing in Clinton’s presidency that when compared to the lie, deny, reblame tactics of this currant White House seige that could even be construde as Neo-Con. This is my first read of this site and I highly suspect from this article and odor that true neo-cons are behind the spin. Here is the new twist, if you supported Bush at any time you are for sure suspect. but if you continued to support Bush in 04, you are still part of the problem and believe me America has woken from the cloud of fear brought on by the Bush Adminstration and its involvment in 9/11. All those that supported this criminal group prior to 9/11, without question will be investigated. All financial gains will be disclosed. Political interfernce cases will end with severe jail sentences for any politicians involved. So all you Neo-cons beware! Your best bet is too start confessing now!!!!!! lol
Bill Clinton was certainly not the first neocon president — there was Bush I before him.
Bush I’s illegal Iraq war was definitely the act of a neocon terrorist.
If we’re looking for the first “neo-con” president using the underlying philosophy of neo-cons as criteria, then we must go back to at least Woodrow Wilson. Of course “neo-conservativism” was not the term that was in vogue back then, but the philosophy is the same–hierarchical collectivism. The terms they used then were internationalism, Anglo-Americanism, Pan-Atlanticism, etc. Some of the terms are still used. Today the main term for it all is globalization, a guiding principle of the neo-cons.
Wilson believed in intervention. He believed in lying as a means to success. He lied the USA into WWI. He lied the USA into the criminal Federal Reserve System.
FDR was the next prominent proto-neo-con, if I might coin a phrase. He lied the US into WWII after making sure to rob the people of their gold. Many collectivistic programs were initiated which still plague us today–including Social Security, a tyrannical scam.
Instead of obsessing over the frontmen like Bush, Clinton, etc., we must examine the overtly manifested underlying philosophy as well as trace the network of controllers that own them. Clinton, a Rhodes scholar, definitely believed it was necessary to lie to the people. He still does. He lied the US into Kosovo. He reigned over genocidal sanctions against Iraq. So far Bush II has killed off over 600,000. Bush has a way to go to catch up with Clinton when it comes to murdering Iraqis. Clinton dumped tons of DU all over Kosovo and the surrounding region; he bombed Afghanistan before Bush. How soon deluded “progressives” forget. I do not understand why anyone would still love Clinton. Perhaps it is because people who quite rightly detest Bush but who love Clinton are neo-cons themselves without even knowing it. “Neo-Con” is just another term for hierarchical collectivism.
Right-on Dave. FDR sat there knowing planes were going to slaughter our sleeping
military men! When are people going to realize,all wars/events are planned and orchestrated for “their” purposes,means to an end. SAME AGENDA CONTINUES TODAY…
LBJ thoroughly for JFK`s assassination,probably an enabler,along w/ Bush Sr. who
was behind the Reagan attempt.Hidden masters ‘direct’ all these puppets` sinister deeds and all our leaders today,don`t doubt it. Now we are witnessing the results of their ongoing,cumulative,actions.The materialization of their ultimate goal…..
GLOBAL DOMINATION and de-population (by any means).
Light overcomes their darkness-keep shining it upon them,
exposing their deception,evil actions and intentions.
Dear Peter, forget the Bin Laden fairy tale that has been sold to the sheeple. Forget the neocons, it was Israe, have you not heard of the dancing Israeli’s in NY on 911.
Read the following excerpt from prophecies.org
Israel, “You are Naked!”
My Blessed Child, I am your Father, Yahweh, yea Jehovah, Most High God! You know Me, My Little One, and you know My voice! You hear Me when I speak and now you hear well My words to the Nation of Israel!
Rise up, My Little One, and proclaim My words to this errant nation; for save you, Israel, as a nation repent of your idolatries, save you repent of your whoredoms, save you repent of your high-mindedness and arrogance before the whole world, I shall divide you asunder! I, Myself, shall carve you up and I, Myself, shall send devouring armies upon you and I shall smash your pride! I shall smash your haughtiness! I shall smash your rebellion against Me! For, in your pride you say, ‘Look at us! Who can touch us? We are mighty Israel, set up by God, Himself, and above all reproach!’
Yet, you are naked and you see it not! Blind and you know it not! Deaf and totally unaware of your deafness! Few, and I say again “few” of you know Me and few of you love Me; for you love and serve the god of this world! Therefore, I shall shackle you to the god of this world and many, many of you shall fall down and worship him, as you have forsaken your First Love!
In your arrogance you dance, the harlot of the world, creating and selling terror, deceiving the people of the world with your false storefront! You, Oh, Israel, are the greatest terrorist, in the world, starting terror, exporting terror and manufacturing terror, in order to bring the whole world to the brink of collapse! And, soon, very soon, you shall know terror; for I shall bring it upon you! I shall put it at your feet! For, you have terrorized the whole world on your campaign of hidden terror! And, you say, ‘Who will see? Who will know?’ I see and I know and I shall repay unto your bosom seven-fold the terror that you have put upon the whole world!
I disagree with the article’s assertion that Clinton was the first neo-con president. I agree that the neocon roots can be traced to Wilson. However, I believe that Reagan was actually the first neocon president.
Most people have forgotten that Reagan was elected on a pure libertarian platform, with the promise to eliminate the dept of education. Reagan singlehandedly destroyed the libertarian movement, which was emerging as a powerful force at the time. Reagan’s rhetoric and his actions were as far apart as they could possibly be, a hallmark of the neocons.
Reagan was a card carrying member of the communist party in his youth. This is also a hallmark of the neocons.
Reagan tried to kick off the war on terror but was forced to abort when the Iran-Contra scandal broke, wherein the Reagan administration was exposed for trading arms with the Ayatollah Khomeini (to satisfy the October Surprise agreement), running arms to the contras, and running drugs (crack cocaine was the popular item then) to the US, all of which were strictly for profit. They managed to keep the lid on this. Who could ever forget Reagan’s passionate speeches that “America is standing tall against terrorism” that were shown to be the most hypocritical lies imaginable.
Someone asked Reagan why he didn’t do any of the things he promised he would do once he was elected, and Reagan responded “because it hurt too much to get shot.” No doubt there is truth to that. John Hinckleys’ father was the president of a Texas oil company. Gee, what a coincidence. Who else do we know who was the president of a Texas oil company? It’s obvious who was behind the shooting.
That’s all I have to say, but I think Republicans/conservatives need to come to grips with the fact that Reagan was not the person they think he was.
This piece is a ‘classic’. Excellent work. I don’t believe that Bill Clinton went into office as a ‘true’ , ‘ core’ neo con. In fact, as Brer Rabbit stated above, Reagan either. But that the core neo cons who have worked their Machiavellian magic on Washington for years, slowly introduced their candidates to the “true government’, their government. Not a government for the people. That is what I see of these candidates. They start out with these beautiful idealistic views…get elected…get eaten up by the power, greed, and glutteny. They emerge as these perfect neo con soldiers. As I’ve stated before in my articles…Same Players. Different Scandal. They fail in comparison to the pieces of Thomas Paine’s Corner, but I must say, you guys have ignited a fire…Impeach this Carlyle/Halliburton Administration. We need a through ‘purge’ of the Beltway and Media, as well. They have thwarted our progress long enough
Good comments all around…of course the organization of the Islamic “Freedom Fighters” actually happened on Carters watch, to sucker the Soviets into attacking Afghanistan (See:Brzensky…sp?) As far as Clinton–anyone who understands the Mena situation knows that Clinton has been an ‘insider’ all along (See: Barry Seal).
Hopefully, all here understand that the Democrat v Republican thing is a Punch and Judy show.
There hasn’t been a legitimate ‘President’ since the coup d’etat in 1963.
This is not government, this is predation.
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossibe make violent revolution inevitable”
–John F. Kennedy
All one has to do is to go back top the convention videos when Bill first ran, then look at the second candidacy convention. If this didn’t tell you something then you missed the blatant choreography. Then if you weren’t watching during his tenure, you missed a lot more.
Don’t be fooled by Hillary either.
The simple fact that Wilson gave us the federal reserve would make one think he was first neo-con but the conspiracy goes back to the constitution. When the declaration of independence was signed the the PTB (read Rothschilds) had to have a method of control so that their goals could be met. The constitution was that contract.
This editorial was written to leap-frog a connection between the Clintons and the neo-cons, and specifically Bill after Bush Sr.’s tenure., to lighten the load off the dear President on his way out the door. It was a big leap, and it missed.
I used to believe you could put spin on anything and frame it however you want it, I don’t think that’s the case. I saw a lot of people who saw right through all of the construed comparisons and retrospective criticisms.
The world is a nasty place, and yes bin Laden WAS working for us at one point, and no we didn’t “catch” him because he hadn’t blown up downtown Manhattan yet. After he did, Bush let him get away…
This is where people fail to understand the principles of our nation. America is the kind of place that other countries fear because it has a very powerfully liberal voice. Because of this, and because of our actions in the past, we are going to be seen as enemies from certain sectors of people.
Our duty is NOT to attack them first because we fear for our safety. The only responsible thing to do is bilateral diplomacy and then, if that fails, and if we are attacked despite our homeland defense, to retaliate.
Bush failed to retaliate, and instead is using the entire situation as an excuse for us to be where? In Iraq! Gosh…
Normally I’d gripe about all the people who just don’t get it, but like I said, I think more and more people are finally coming around to see what’s really happening. Good for you and good for America.
A good overview of the ongoing use of the poor Islamic pawns, by all sides in these plots to steal the last remaining assets of the people by the Kleptocracy.Make no mistake,all of these plooters on all sides are just thieves in nice suits.
The world is their oyster,or so their gangster parents have told them since they were little spoiled Tyrants in Training.They see only their own desires and never see what their greed has done to ower world and the poor people who have to work to support them.All the labels,Neo Con, etc are just the latest add copy to repackage greed and the hunger for control.They are all the same,and always have been.As the rest of the world’s population has become jaded and numb to all the greed and violence,the last remaining large group that can be motivated by moral conviction is the Islamic poor.They have a beautiful simple faith that only the poor can have,and this faith makes them vulnerable to manipulation by any group who can push the right buttons and strap a bomb on them.If they had been allowed the use of the profits of their own resources and allowed to develop without the control of madmen,the culture that brought us the first great understanding of geometry,sciences etc.Would have turned their region into a enlightened center of learning,culture and tolerence.Instead they have been harnessed to the pull the wagon of greed and privilageto the sociopaths that always seem to rise to the top like scum on a pond.Populations are always starved and frightened into being cannon fodder,on their own they only seek to provide a better life for their children and given some leisure time,often produce the arts that make our world so beautiful.It seems that when a family becomes powerful to a certain level,they should be sent to some “Lord of the Flies” Island prison where they can play their games of conquest with all the other little spoiled would be tyrants and they cancancel eachother out and leave the rest of us to play with our grandchildren and teach them the beauty of helping our less fortunate,passing on our creative talents,and the art of living in harmony with the rest of an increasingly small planet.
Sorry for all the typos ! Just comming of an 80 hour work week ,hope that some of what is swimming in my head is able to be understood.Power should make someone humble,if they have any understanding, of what a great gift and opportunity it is, to make all lives better.Not a chance to feed the ego and make everyone else suffer for your lack of spiritual development,and pre adolecent sadism.
Saint Francis was the son of a powerful merchant who returned from the Crusades,and finally got the message,that any success we may have is only to be used to help those around us who are in need.Any other use of power leads to our own destruction and the misery of the rest of the world.
Clinton is not new to crime. Or the NWO agenda. He is part of the same bloodline families that have been scamming us for centuries.
He is their cousin.
They definitely like to keep it all in the family.
They are the ones that need to be investigated. Oh ya, I forgot, they already have been investigated, by thousands of people over MANY decades. The problem is we won’t read it or support it as “evidence” of crimes. We say that we should not blame the sons for the fathers crimes. Well what if the sons and daughters ARE committing the crimes of the fathers? Are we talking about multi generational crime? Hmmmm, has anyone ever heard of the mafia? Well this is just like the mafia. Only “royal”.
They own everything. They control everything. Could it not be possible to blame the right people for a change? Like maybe the people who organized, paid, controlled our entire existence? Could we do that for a change?
there are 3 types of people
the puppet masters
their puppets (Bush, Clinton, Arabs, Jews, etc)
us the sheeple ( so divided as to ever get anything done)
For robin499:
Thanks for the valuable insight. So true!
I have often wondered about Sandy Berger and the Archive escapade. What would have been valuable enough for him to risk his status, his financial position, and perhaps even his freedom? He took documents from the Archives and was caught. He returned the documents but it appears he did not return them all. What would these be? Could they be documentation of Clinton Administrations contacts with Atta?
Is it necessary to determine when the FIRST neo-con president took office?
From the looks of it, you can go all the way back to the founding fathers. So, please, let’s not write sensationalized journalism. It doesn’t help anything.
All it does is compound the current problem.
The people running the show control most of politicians are involved or controlled by the power structure (very few honest and unbribed Senators and House members based upon approval for invasion of Iraq without due diligence).
The news and media are obviously controlled by the power structure, as they do not report in a fair and unbiased manner. The fact that they went along with the official 9-11 story and suppressed counter-stories shows that the corporate power structure, and more specifically the power behind that, is controlled by forces not necessarily in alignment with most Americans and loving people.
Please. Let’s not create stories that serve no purpose. Slamming one president only creates party system bickering. Both parties are guilty. Let’s face it. WE need THREE NEW parties, who represent us - the vast voting public - not special interests like Big Oil, Tobacco, Auto, Music Industry, etc., etc., etc.
Don’t have any problem with the Iran Contra deal. Sold them obsolete weapons when they could have bought better from the soviets. Irans F-14A was no match for our F-14D’s. The F-14 A’s were stripped down models, not even HUD. All Bill could have done was say the word in one instance and Osama would have been dead within 60 seconds. Still he argued Osama was no threat, all the while setting up terrorist training bases. Bill’s foreign policy has been a disaster everywhere. What was he thinking when he gave China two nueclear reactors. Still they didn’t have a missile that could accuratly hit Tiawan. So he gives them the guideance systems. Now they can hit any of our cities with precision. This has gone from China to North Korea and to Iran. The president who should have been the movie star he portrayed. Still the media barely mentioned his misdeads. Giving his address to the nation saying not a single missile was aimed at the USA. Truth was there were still hundreds if not thousands. Those that were not only required a simple program change. Bill had the privilige of going into office just after the market started to recover and lasted until his last year when the recession began. During this time he told us he was paying down the national debt. After it is discovered he “cooked the books” the story is we are almost one trillion dollars farther in debt. All the while he was spending fica payments as they came in plus other government and retirement programs. The actual debt reduction plan didn’t kick in until Bill was long gone. Weapons of choice for Bill’s enemies were the IRS and the ATF and he used them with frequency.
President Extraordinary
Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! fswkrnyojv
Justin Raimondo (a gay leftist/indy writer)
describes Bill Clinton’s warmongering M.O.
From Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-con
Neoconservatism is a political movement that emerged as a rejection of liberalism and the New Left counter-culture of the 1960s. It coalesced in the 1970s and was influential in the Reagan administration, George H. W. Bush administration, and the George W. Bush administration. It represented a realignment in American politics and the defection of “an important and highly articulate group of liberals to the other side.”[1] Because the neoconservatives knew liberalism from the inside, they were effective at criticizing the failures of liberalism, and one of their accomplishments was “to make criticism from the right acceptable in the intellectual, artistic, and journalistic circles where conservatives had long been regarded with suspicion.”[1]
The term neoconservative was first used derisively by democratic socialist Michael Harrington to make clear that a group, many of whom called themselves liberal, was actually a group of newly conservative ex-liberals. The name eventually stuck, both because it was reasonably accurate, and because neoconservatives came to accept that they were, in fact, conservative.[2] The idea that liberalism “no longer knew what it was talking about” became one of the central themes of neoconservatism,[3] and by the 1980s, being considered a conservative was far from an insult.[2]
The etymology of this type of conservatism is based on the work and thought of Irving Kristol, cofounder of Encounter and its editor from 1953 to 1958,[4] Norman Podhoretz,[5] and others who described themselves as “neoconservatives” during the Cold War.
Prominent neoconservatives are associated with periodicals such as Commentary and The Weekly Standard, and with foreign policy initiatives of think tanks such as the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA).
Neoconservative journalists, policy analysts, and politicians, are often dubbed “neocons” by supporters and critics alike; however, in general, the movement’s critics use the term more often than their supporters.[6][7]
Contents [hide]
1 History and origins
1.1 Great Depression and World War II
1.2 Drift away from New Left and Great Society
1.3 Far Left-wing past of some neoconservatives
1.4 1980s
1.5 1990s
2 Definition and views
2.1 Three pillars of Neoconservatism
2.1.1 Economics
2.1.2 Domestic affairs
2.1.3 Foreign policy
2.2 Usage and general views
2.3 Overview
2.4 Distinctions from other conservatives
2.5 Criticism of the term “neoconservative”
2.6 Pejorative use
3 Criticism
3.1 Jacobinism, Bolshevism
3.2 Conflict with Libertarian conservatives
3.3 Friction with paleoconservatism
4 Related publications and institutions
4.1 Institutions
4.2 Publications
5 Criticism in popular culture
5.1 Music
5.2 Parodies
5.3 Jokes
6 See also
7 External links
8 Notes
9 References
10 Further reading
10.1 History of Neoconservatism
10.2 Who is Neoconservative
10.3 Explanations of neoconservative ideas
10.4 Critiques of Neoconservative ideas
10.5 Conservative Criticism of NeoConservatism
10.6 Neoconservatism, Leo Strauss, and Trotskyism
10.7 Neoconservatism and Jews
11 Documentaries