The Stentorian
For the Preservation of Liberty and Individual Freedom
Home
Politics and Elections
Second Amendment
Antispam resources
Global Warming
Anti-Terrorism Omdurman.org (vs. militant "Islam")
A New Political Spectrum


What is George Soros getting for his money?

Barack Obama is on George Soros' political "payroll"


Hillary Clinton called for war in Iraq before George Bush did!

Hillary Clinton's involvement in the Million Mom March scandal of 2000



Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama: National Security Risks
Why is Hillary Clinton accepting campaign money from Jane Fonda, Michael Moore, and George Soros?

We previously described how Hillary Clinton accepted campaign contributions from the shadowy international financier and convicted inside trader George Soros, who is morally albeit not legally a domestic enemy of the United States. Soros is the individual who uses his enormous wealth (some allegedly acquired through collaboration with genuine Nazis during the Second World War, see below) to denounce the United States as a menace to world peace while saying that Israel causes anti-Semitism.

It now turns out that Hillary Clinton has also accepted campaign contributions from Jane Fonda, who once posed in a North Vietnamese gun emplacement.  Fonda's August 22, 1972 radio broadcast in North Viet Nam referred to  the US as an imperialist nation systematically destroying schools,  hospitals, pagodas, factories and houses, and accused Nixon of  committing war crimes while praising Ho Chi Minh. Every Vietnam veteran needs to be aware that Hanoi Jane Fonda is funding Hillary Clinton’s political career, and that Hillary Clinton is knowingly and willfully accepting Fonda’s support. Hillary Clinton has also taken money from filmmaker Michael Moore, who has praised the terrorists who are murdering our men and women in uniform while cutting the heads off helpless prisoners like Margaret Hassan “Minutemen.” In combination with Bill Clinton’s credibly-alleged acceptance of illegal campaign contributions from a hostile foreign power (China), Hillary Clinton must be regarded as a security risk to the United States.

http://www.newsmeat.com/billionaire_political_donations/ provides a convenient way of finding out who is taking money from whom, and it is quite instructive. http://www.newsmeat.com/billionaire_political_donations/George_Soros.php
shows that Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Ned Lamont (the opponent of “Jew Lieberman” as MoveOn.org calls him), Barbara Boxer, and numerous other prominent left-wing Democrats have recently accepted campaign funds from George Soros. The same goes for Joseph Biden, who recently praised Barack Obama as a credit to his race (mighty white of Biden for doing that, eh?).

http://www.newsmeat.com/celebrity_political_donations/Jane_Fonda.php
shows that Hillary Clinton, Barbara Boxer, and MoveOn.org (a tentacle of the Soros-Occupied Government) have also accepted money from Hanoi Jane Fonda,

Next we come to Jabba the Moore. Hillary Clinton, Sheldon Whitehouse, and Edward (Ned) Lamont are on record as accepting this individual’s money. For the record, this is what Moore said about the terrorists who have murdered more than two thousand of our soldiers in Iraq:

The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not “insurgents” or “terrorists” or “The Enemy.” They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow — and they will win.

More recently, Moore posted the following at his Web site:

Wednesday, November 29th, 2006
Cut and Run, the Only Brave Thing to Do …a letter from Michael Moore

…So I don’t want to hear another word about sending more troops (wake up, America, John McCain is bonkers), or “redeploying” them, or waiting four months to begin the “phase-out.” There is only one solution and it is this: Leave. Now. Start tonight. Get out of there as fast as we can. As much as people of good heart and conscience don’t want to believe this, as much as it kills us to accept defeat, there is nothing we can do to undo the damage we have done.

…This is what we demand:

1. Bring the troops home now. Not six months from now. NOW. Quit looking for a way to win. We can’t win. We’ve lost. Sometimes you lose. This is one of those times. Be brave and admit it.

We seem to recall that Lord Haw-Haw was hanged as a traitor for broadcasting this kind of thing during wartime. It is one matter to criticize the war or the manner in which it is being waged, and there is plenty to criticize. It is another to express a wish for the enemy’s victory as Michael Moore has done, praise terrorists as “Minutemen” as Michael Moore has done, and encourage the enemy as Michael Moore has done above. No matter what Hillary Clinton says about supporting our troops, her acceptance of Michael Moore’s money shows that this is really what she stands for. Meanwhile, we remind Jabba the Moore that Hillary Clinton was just as jingoistic as President Bush in agitating for this war, along with John Kerry and other prominent MoveOn.org Democrats.

Maybe Hillary Clinton, despite her efforts to reinvent herself as pro-military for political advantage, also thinks the terrorists are “Minutemen.” Now on to the character and ethics of her other political sugar daddy, George Soros:

On December 20, 1998, there appeared this exchange between Soros and Steve Kroft on “60 Minutes”:

Kroft: “You’re a Hungarian Jew …”

Soros: “Mm-hmm.”

Kroft: “… who escaped the Holocaust …”

Soros: “Mm-hmm.”

Kroft: “… by posing as a Christian.”

Soros: “Right.”

….Kroft: “My understanding is that you went … went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews.

Soros: “Yes, that’s right. Yes.”

Kroft: “I mean, that’s—that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years. Was it difficult?”

Soros: “Not, not at all. Not at all. Maybe as a child you don’t … you don’t see the connection. But it was—it created no—no problem at all.”

Kroft: “No feeling of guilt?”

Soros: “No.” … I could be on the other side or I could be the one from whom the thing is being taken away. But there was no sense that I shouldn’t be there, because that was—well, actually, in a funny way, it’s just like in the markets—that is I weren’t there—of course, I wasn’t doing it, but somebody else would—would—would be taking it away anyhow. And it was the—whether I was there or not, I was only a spectator, the property was being taken away. So the—I had no role in taking away that property. So I had no sense of guilt.

These are the ethics of a common thief: “If I hadn’t stolen it, someone else would have.” Soros’ argument that he did what he had to do to survive breaks down in light of the fact that, once the danger was over, he never made the slightest effort to return the property (or its equivalent in money) to the people from whom it was taken, or their families. If Soros really thinks the United States requires “de-Nazification,” his renunciation of his U.S. citizenship and his immediate departure for some other country–maybe Argentina–would be a good start.

Finally, let us not forget very credible allegations that Bill Clinton accepted illegal campaign contributions from a hostile foreign power, and allegedly gave that hostile foreign power technology with military applications in exchange. In most countries, this would be defined as treason. The U.S. Constitution, however, defines treason as either levying war against the United States or aiding its enemies during time of war.

WASHINGTON (AllPolitics, May 23) — Republicans are keeping up the pressure on President Bill Clinton to explain questions about possible links between 1996 Democratic campaign contributions and decisions to share U.S. satellite technology with the Chinese government.

…”How did it come about that highly sensitive technical information was given to the Chinese? Why did the president ignore the national security experts who counseled against this deal? What damage has been done to our national security?” Goss asked.

We know that Chinese officials chose to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars in the 1996 re-election of the Clinton administration. What we don’t know is what they expected to gain from that investment,” Goss said.

We don’t know what America-haters George Soros, Jane Fonda, and Michael Moore expect to gain from their investment in Hillary Clinton, and the voters had better make damned sure that we never find out.

Barack Obama is on George Soros' political "payroll"

Voters must ask what the shadowy international financier (and convicted inside trader) George Soros is getting for the $60,000 he and his family gave Barack Obama in 2004, and also for the money he gave Hillary Rodham Clinton. Remember, this is the individual who calls the United States a danger to world peace while blaming Israel for causing anti-Semitism, and who just called for the “de-Nazification” of the United States. When Soros spends money, he doubtlessly expects something in return, and we must ask what he expects Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, and Barbara Boxer to give him.

Unlike Kerry, Barack Obama Covets George Soros’ Support, By Robert B. Bluey, CNSNews.com Staff Writer, July 27, 2004 shows who, including Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Kerry, and Barbara Boxer, is taking campaign money from George Soros.

Obama, however, is different from most Democrats because of his willingness to embrace the controversial Soros. Shortly after Soros equated the abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Obama joined him for a New York fund-raiser June 7.

…Because of a special provision campaign finance laws, the Soroses were able to give a collective $60,000 to Obama during his primary challenge. Obama faced millionaire Blair Hull, which allowed donors to give more than typically allowed.

Obama is one of only a handful of candidates to get a personal contribution from George Soros. The others include Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), Bob Graham (D-Fla.), John Kerry (D-Mass.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), U.S. Rep. Tom Lantos, and former Vermont governor Howard Dean.

If George Soros is getting his money’s worth from these individuals, we have a serious problem. Given Soros’ open hatred of the United States as well as Israel, anyone like Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Kerry, and the other named individuals must be regarded as a security risk who might vote or legislate contrary to the best interests and sovereignty of our nation.

Speaking of genuine Nazis, George, how much Jewish property did you manage to appropriate during the war?

http://www.matriots.com/apn/224/soros2.htm

During the Nazi occupation, with German and Hungarian fascists rounding up some 300 000 Jews, young Soros posed as the Christian godson of an Hungarian official responsible for expropriating Jewish property. The 14-year old George sometimes accompanied his supposed godfather, helping to identify and expropriate the property of wealthy fellow Jews. So far from being a “Holocaust Survivor,” George Soros was instead a Nazi collaborator.

In a TV interview, 15.4.93, Soros made the startling admission: “I actually went with him, and we took decisions on these large estates. That was my identity. So it’s a strange, very strange, life.” To this day, Soros recalls those as “the happiest years of my life.”

This is the man–no, let us use Richard Sharpe’s line from Sharpe’s Enemy: “That’s not a man; take it away”–who is bankrolling Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Kerry, and the others, and they are taking his money the way a cheap gutter whore takes a john’s cash. Someone who would take George Soros’ money would sell the United States on the streets the way a pimp sells a prostitute, and such an individual is totally unfit to hold any position of public trust or responsibility in this country.

 Hillary Clinton called for war in Iraq before George Bush did!
The left wing of the Democratic Party proclaims, "Bush lied, men died" regarding our failure to locate Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. Per the Democratic Left, Bush "lies," but liberal Democrats only "make mistakes" or "are proven wrong by events" as shown here.

  • Hillary Rodham Clinton, Floor Speech of 10 October 2002 (from her own Senate Web site): "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001." http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html 
  • John Kerry, 23 February 1998: "Saddam Hussein has already used these weapons and has made it clear that he has the intent to continue to try, by virtue of his duplicity and secrecy, to continue to do so. That is a threat to the stability of the Middle East. It is a threat with respect to the potential of terrorist activities on a global basis. It is a threat even to regions near but not exactly in the Middle East."
  • Thomas Daschle, 1998: a 1998 use-of-force resolution would "send as clear a message as possible that we are going to force, one way or another, diplomatically or militarily, Iraq to comply with international law." "We have exhausted virtually our diplomatic effort to get the Iraqis to comply with their own agreements and with international law. Given that, what other option is there but to force them to do so?"
  • Albert Gore, 16 December 1998: "If you allow someone like Saddam Hussein to get nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, chemical weapons, biological weapons, how many people is he going to kill with such weapons? He's already demonstrated a willingness to use these weapons. He poison-gassed his own people. He used poison gas and other weapons of mass destruction against his neighbors. This man has no compunction about killing lots and lots of people."
  • Saddam Abused His Last Chance, [Bill] Clinton Says   By Linda D. Kozaryn  American Forces Press Service
    [As a publication of the United States Government, this is believed to be in the public domain]

    WASHINGTON -- A month ago, the United States called off its war planes to give Saddam Hussein one last chance to cooperate. When he failed to do so, the United States took action.
    President Clinton ordered air strikes Dec. 16 against Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors. Warships and combat aircraft began bombarding the defiant Gulf state at 5 p.m. EST -- 1 a.m. in Baghdad, the Iraqi capital.
    ..."Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons," Clinton said. The Iraqi dictator has used these weapons against his neighbors and his own people, he said, and "left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again."
    ...Butler's conclusions, Clinton said, proved to be "stark, sobering and profoundly disturbing." Instead of living up to its agreement, he said, "Iraq has abused its final chance."
    He said Iraq had placed new restrictions on the inspectors, further obstructed inspections and failed to turn over all requested documents. In one instance, the Iraqis removed all documents, furniture and equipment from a building prior to a U.N. inspection.
    Butler's report concluded Iraq has ensured U.N. inspectors could make no progress toward disarmament. Even if the inspectors could stay in Iraq, Clinton said, their work would be a sham.
    "Saddam's deception has defeated their effectiveness," he said. "Instead of the inspectors disarming Saddam, the Iraqi dictator has disarmed the inspectors."
    Clinton said he and his national security advisers agreed that Hussein presented a clear and present danger to the stability of the Persian Gulf and the safety of people everywhere. He said he deemed military action necessary to prove the international community, led by the United States, had not lost its will. Failure to act, Clinton said, would have "fatally undercut the fear of force that stops Saddam from acting to gain domination in the region."
  • "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 http://www.glennbeck.com/news/01302004.shtml

More WMD quotes from liberal Democrats!

Hillary Clinton's involvement in the Million Mom March scandal of 2000
We already know that elitists like Ted Kennedy and Rosie O'Donnell want one set of gun laws for themselves (they or their bodyguards can own guns and even, as in the case of one of Kennedy's bodyguards, carry them illegally) and another for the rest of us ("You are not allowed to own a gun"). As shown below, these people also seem to think there should be one set of tax laws for us commoners (giving the IRS inaccurate information = heap big trouble) and another for themselves (it's fine to file tax reports like those shown below, and also to lie to your donors and volunteers about your organization's real purpose and agenda).

The Million Mom March (created by Hillary Clinton's friend Donna Dees-Thomases) told its volunteers and financial donors it was raising money to "reduce handgun violence" or something to that effect, when it was actually spending the money to support Al Gore's Presidential campaign while providing photo-ops for Hillary Clinton's Senate campaign. The Million Mom March also told the IRS that it spent NO money on lobbying or influencing public opinion on legislation, when its stated mission was to demand so-called common sense gun laws!

This is what Hillary Clinton's friends in the Million Mom March told the Internal Revenue Service about their activities in 2000



http://archive.nandotimes.com/election2000/story/0,3977,500204245-500283510-501519874-0-nandotimes,00.html (Nando Times archive:  links are almost seven years old, and some may no longer work. This information was compiled in 2000.)

"Hillary Clinton faces mob scene at Million Mom March"     By SHANNON McCAFFREY, Associated Press  WASHINGTON (May 14, 2000 6:09 p.m. EDT  http://www.nandotimes.com) -
"A crush of media and excited onlookers forced Hillary Rodham Clinton to take a detour shortly after she joined the Million Mom March as it moved along the National Mall on Sunday."
"The Mother's Day march was intended to send lawmakers and the gun lobby a message that American families support stricter gun control laws."


http://www.zip.com.au/~cpa/garchve2/1002usa.html The Guardian, 31 May 2000
US women rally for gun control

by Tim Wheeler

On Mother's Day 750,000 women rallied in Washington to demand enactment of "sensible gun control" laws. The protesters, many of them mothers holding portraits of their slain children, cheered as speakers called for ousting lawmakers tied to the National Rifle Association (NRA) who block gun control legislation.
Donna Dees-Thomases, Million Mom March initiator, said "Our votes are our power and we will use that in force in the November elections."

...First Lady Hillary Clinton, a candidate for the US Senate from New York, said in a taped message: "We have had enough bloodshed, enough violence. When children are afraid to walk down their own blocks or walk to their own schools ... or even visit neighbours, it is time to say enough!"

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/121000-01.htm Published on Sunday, December 10, 2000 in the Sunday Times of London
                   Yoko Ono May Help Lead New US Gun Control Campaign      by Tom Rhodes
...However, the NRA is not the force it was. Following a series of shootings in schools, public opinion has started to turn against it. Earlier this year thousands of women in Washington DC took part in a "Million Mom March" against guns, led by Hillary Clinton and the mothers of several children shot dead at Dunblane. Electors were urged to vote against politicians who backed guns. [On 501(c)(3) tax-exempt money, by the way.]
Their efforts were evident in the results of the November 7 election. Eight out of 12 senators and congressmen deemed to be the staunchest advocates of the gun lobby were resoundingly defeated. Bush failed to win states such as Pennsylvania and Michigan where he had promoted gun ownership as a pillar of his campaign.
Congresswoman Nita Lowey (D-NY), Hillary Clinton (D-NY), and Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) use the 501(c)(3) tax-exempt Million Mom March as a photo-op to support their political campaigns, from http://www.house.gov/lowey/mmm.html. (Nita Lowey apparently took the page down when she realized that it was evidence that the Million Mom March abused tax exempt funds for electioneering, and also gave the Internal Revenue Service inaccurate information about its activities in 2000.)

Your tax dollars (noting that donations to the Million Mom March were deductible) at work!


E-mail
  Spammers: sending unsolicited bulk commercial E-mail to any address in this domain constitutes your acceptance of the terms of use.


visitors since 1 February 2007
Image credits and copyright