Terry Thurber
June 6, 2005
I am troubled. The issue is the sperm stain on Monica Lewenski’s blue dress. DNA testing proved the stain was the sperm of Bill Clinton, and subsequent attempts by Bill Clinton to deny the stain, led to articles of impeachment.
Now, after a school boy’s gloat of mission accomplished, and the bloodstains of 100’s of thousands of Iraqi and American decedents we learn from “official” assessments that Iraq did not possess or plan a WMD program, therefore was not in violation of UN resolutions. In fact, Iraq has been in full compliance since the end of Bush War 1.
Just a month or so ago we learned that our president, George, was determined to fix (street cops call it planting evidence, con artist refer to it as salting) the intelligence to make the case for war, six months before the issue was presented to the UN. Hundreds of thousands of bloodstains from someone’s last heartbeat have paid for those lies.
I don’t know anything about the law. But where I live, if someone plans another’s death and subsequently kills that person, its called murder. People go to jail for murder. Acts ordered by state leaders that kill hundreds of thousands of people without just cause are usually petitioned to war crimes tribunals. In cases of war crimes, elected officials, agency leadership as well as troops on the ground and national media outlets that marketed the false pretext for war may also be subject to a war crimes complaint.
At least that’s the way it used to be.
But I am still confused on issue of the sperm stain. Bill was an okay president for the time. He was good with the checkbook and a lot of us little people were able to get our children into decent schools and build a modest equity.
Some will always wonder if Bill caved to the alpha primes, and set aside some obligations because he could not prevail, or because of intimidation or fear or some other stain in a closet was being used to leverage his position. One half of Bill Clinton was loved. The rest was hated. There were some things that happened on his watch could or should be looked at as impeachable crimes. Waco is one. The Balkans and Chinese embassy bombings are another. The sanctions and no-fly enforcement over Iraq – someone had to know back then Iraq was in compliance – we know it today – maybe that’s a “guilty but with an explanation” offense. Failure to decertify Florida’s state police for not enforcing US immigration and international parental rights policies in the Elean Gonzalez case is worth examining. The US’s continual veto of Security Council resolutions requiring Israel to comply with previous resolutions is another probable impeachment offense.
But Hillary had NY in her sites, and General Electric, the greatest killing machine manufacturer the world has ever known is headquartered in NY and, by the way, also owns NBC. I guess they own Hilary now, too.
But still, sperm stains do not equivocate with death throe bloodstains. One could reasonably assume that 100s of thousands of unjustified homicides would at least be as impeachable as ONE sperm stain. The only technical argument that these strange times could make might be based on the number of sperm cells in the sperm stain. For example, if the special prosecutors office actually counted the number of dried sperm in the sperm stain on Monicas’a black dress and determined that there were half a million dead sperm in the sperm stain and determined each dead sperm was a human life denied. If this argument could be made, and in a frenzy of rapturous delight and enlightenment, one accepts this argument, then I could understand why ONE sperm stain is more impeachable than a 100 thousand unjustified homicides.
But I cannot. It just seems bloodstains from 100x1000 (plus) murders would be at least as impeachable as one sperm stain. Maybe NBC will explain the weakness of this perception in a few days and life can get back to normal.
Peace
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/impeachstains.html
June 6, 2005
I am troubled. The issue is the sperm stain on Monica Lewenski’s blue dress. DNA testing proved the stain was the sperm of Bill Clinton, and subsequent attempts by Bill Clinton to deny the stain, led to articles of impeachment.
Now, after a school boy’s gloat of mission accomplished, and the bloodstains of 100’s of thousands of Iraqi and American decedents we learn from “official” assessments that Iraq did not possess or plan a WMD program, therefore was not in violation of UN resolutions. In fact, Iraq has been in full compliance since the end of Bush War 1.
Just a month or so ago we learned that our president, George, was determined to fix (street cops call it planting evidence, con artist refer to it as salting) the intelligence to make the case for war, six months before the issue was presented to the UN. Hundreds of thousands of bloodstains from someone’s last heartbeat have paid for those lies.
I don’t know anything about the law. But where I live, if someone plans another’s death and subsequently kills that person, its called murder. People go to jail for murder. Acts ordered by state leaders that kill hundreds of thousands of people without just cause are usually petitioned to war crimes tribunals. In cases of war crimes, elected officials, agency leadership as well as troops on the ground and national media outlets that marketed the false pretext for war may also be subject to a war crimes complaint.
At least that’s the way it used to be.
But I am still confused on issue of the sperm stain. Bill was an okay president for the time. He was good with the checkbook and a lot of us little people were able to get our children into decent schools and build a modest equity.
Some will always wonder if Bill caved to the alpha primes, and set aside some obligations because he could not prevail, or because of intimidation or fear or some other stain in a closet was being used to leverage his position. One half of Bill Clinton was loved. The rest was hated. There were some things that happened on his watch could or should be looked at as impeachable crimes. Waco is one. The Balkans and Chinese embassy bombings are another. The sanctions and no-fly enforcement over Iraq – someone had to know back then Iraq was in compliance – we know it today – maybe that’s a “guilty but with an explanation” offense. Failure to decertify Florida’s state police for not enforcing US immigration and international parental rights policies in the Elean Gonzalez case is worth examining. The US’s continual veto of Security Council resolutions requiring Israel to comply with previous resolutions is another probable impeachment offense.
But Hillary had NY in her sites, and General Electric, the greatest killing machine manufacturer the world has ever known is headquartered in NY and, by the way, also owns NBC. I guess they own Hilary now, too.
But still, sperm stains do not equivocate with death throe bloodstains. One could reasonably assume that 100s of thousands of unjustified homicides would at least be as impeachable as ONE sperm stain. The only technical argument that these strange times could make might be based on the number of sperm cells in the sperm stain. For example, if the special prosecutors office actually counted the number of dried sperm in the sperm stain on Monicas’a black dress and determined that there were half a million dead sperm in the sperm stain and determined each dead sperm was a human life denied. If this argument could be made, and in a frenzy of rapturous delight and enlightenment, one accepts this argument, then I could understand why ONE sperm stain is more impeachable than a 100 thousand unjustified homicides.
But I cannot. It just seems bloodstains from 100x1000 (plus) murders would be at least as impeachable as one sperm stain. Maybe NBC will explain the weakness of this perception in a few days and life can get back to normal.
Peace
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/impeachstains.html