|
|
|
A Special Message from Christopher Ruddy, Editor, NewsMax.com Re: FBI Agent Gary Aldrich Reveals Truth About Bill and Hillary Clintons' Role in Sept. 11 Attacks Dear Fellow American: Since 9-11 there has been an almost total news blackout on the role Bill and Hillary Clinton played in making America vulnerable to a major terrorist attack. Nothing surprising about that. Despite the most scandalous and corrupt administration in history, the liberal big media still will not say a bad word about Bill and Hillary Clinton. Even after years of the Clintons' negligence that helped cause thousands of American deaths on 9-11! Even after Bill Clinton's own top aides have admitted that his skirt chasing may have allowed Osama bin Laden to slip through our fingers. Even though it is widely acknowledged that Bill and Hillary's politically correct policies severely curtailed the ability of the CIA and FBI to catch terrorists like bin Laden. But NewsMax Media, my company that publishes NewsMax.com and NewsMax.com magazine, is not afraid to tell the truth. My name is Christopher Ruddy. The Washington Post has called me the No. 1 press enemy of the Clinton White House. I have exposed the Clintons' cover-ups from the strange death of Vince Foster to the demise of Ron Brown. NewsMax is committed to telling the truth no matter how much the liberals hate to hear it. That's why NewsMax is bringing to light the full story of former FBI agent Gary Aldrich in a powerful new tape, available now: https://www.newsmaxstore.com/nm_mag/aldrich.cfm?refid=11 <a href="https://www.newsmaxstore.com/nm_mag/aldrich.cfmrefid=11">AOL users click here</a> Agent Aldrich isn't afraid to tell you the real story of what happened in the Clinton White House that led directly to 9-11. In a new audiotape just released by NewsMax - "Off the Record with Gary Aldrich" - the one-time top FBI agent assigned to the White House reveals things never before revealed, the sordid and shocking truth about the Clintons. Few know the truth like Gary Aldrich. Aldrich is a 26-year veteran of the Bureau. After his best-selling book "Unlimited Access" revealed how Bill and Hillary had scandalized the White House, he became the most famous G-man since J. Edgar Hoover. After Aldrich broke the FBI's "code of silence" - because he cared more about his country than he did about his pension - he became a pariah for the top-level bureaucrats in Washington and a reviled figure by the left-wing press. Now, in a stunning one-hour audiotape, Aldrich once again breaks the "code of silence" and reveals new, incredible details of what went wrong during the Clinton-Gore years - and why 9-11 became inevitable and future 9-11s may still await us. That's why you need to get this new tape, and you can even get it FREE: https://www.newsmaxstore.com/nm_mag/aldrich.cfm?refid=11 <a href="https://www.newsmaxstore.com/nm_mag/aldrich.cfmrefid=11">AOL users click here</a> In "Off the Record with Gary Aldrich" you will find out: How the Clintons orchestrated a wholesale breakdown of America's national security apparatus - not just the FBI but also the CIA, National Security Council, Department of Justice, Customs and every other federal law enforcement agency. Why Aldrich believes the Clintons had sinister motives in undermining the nation's security. How the Clintons' blatant disregard of national security procedures - everything he saw, from gay sex in the White House to acceptance of drug users - made the U.S. government weak and vulnerable. How Hillary and Bill, as well as Al Gore, were absolutely "paranoid" about their political opponents - something Aldrich had never witnessed in previous administrations, which were more worried about foreign enemies! Why Aldrich believes Hillary was the mastermind of the "slow train wreck" over eight years to purposefully weaken America's national security. How diversity policies and politically correct "silliness" became the main objectives of the White House and FBI. New information from Customs insiders who warn that the U.S. borders are so porous that terrorists and drug dealers still can cross with ease. The full truth about former FBI Director Louis Freeh and how he was a knowing and willing accomplice to the Clintons' reign of terror. (Freeh, Aldrich says, even sought to "punish" agents who warned about the Clintons' sellout of national security.) Aldrich's opinion of John Ashcroft and new FBI Director Robert Mueller. This will surprise you! The threat posed by Janet Reno, and her real activities as a state's attorney in Florida and later as Attorney General. Why Aldrich believes both the CIA and FBI may need to be completely dismantled and rebuilt if we are to make America safe again. An inside view into how top management at agencies like the FBI and CIA are "incompetent lunkheads and deadheads," yet still call all the shots - making America unsafe. Why the FBI's mission needs to be downsized, taken out of the business of enforcing state and local laws - and re-chartered with its original mission of protecting the American people. Aldrich's disbelief that, to this day, not a single person in the federal bureaucracy has been held responsible for the catastrophic intelligence failures of Sept. 11 (and his shock that some in the media suggest it is irresponsible for Americans to demand accountability.) Bill Clinton's foolish efforts to bring terrorism and terrorists into federal courthouses. Why Aldrich believes America remains vulnerable today to future attacks. Why Aldrich believes the anthrax attacks were not domestic attacks, as the FBI claims, but came from a foreign enemy. New threats Aldrich warns of, including sleeper terrorists, Iraq and even Castro's Cuba. ..and much, much more. You can hear with your own ears Gary Aldrich's account - unedited and uncensored. Find out about our special FREE offer for the tape: https://www.newsmaxstore.com/nm_mag/aldrich.cfm?refid=11 <a href="https://www.newsmaxstore.com/nm_mag/aldrich.cfmrefid=11">AOL users click here</a> This has much more information than has been previously reported. NewsMax has a special offer. You can even get this special tape with Gary Aldrich absolutely FREE. Yes, you can get the Aldrich tape for FREE by subscribing to NewsMax magazine. There's one publication in America breaking news - NewsMax magazine. Each month you'll read my hard-hitting investigative reports, with special commentaries from Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly, Carl Limbacher Jr., David Limbaugh, Michael Reagan, Col. Stanislav Lunev, Michael Savage, Barry Farber and many others. Nationally syndicated radio host Michael Reagan, President Reagan's son, says: "NewsMax.com has become my favorite news Web site. I guarantee that you'll love their magazine. The liberal media moguls hate NewsMax. Not only does it expose 'liberal' shenanigans without mercy, it's dedicated to making America once again a 'shining city upon a hill.'" Let's face it: NewsMax is the only news outlet in the country with the guts to reveal Gary Aldrich's story. In the wake of 9-11 America needs NewsMax - and needs to know the full truth. You need to hear Gary Aldrich's account of what went on in the Clinton White House - and what he thinks needs to be done now to avoid future 9-11s. Get this special tape today - you'll never hear this on CNN! Click Here Now: https://www.newsmaxstore.com/nm_mag/aldrich.cfm?refid=11 <a href="https://www.newsmaxstore.com/nm_mag/aldrich.cfmrefid=11">AOL users click here</a> Thank you. Yours for America, Christopher Ruddy Editor, NewsMax.com Click Here Now: https://www.newsmaxstore.com/nm_mag/aldrich.cfm?refid=11 <a href="https://www.newsmaxstore.com/nm_mag/aldrich.cfmrefid=11">AOL users click here</a> ****************************TO ADVERTISE********************************** For information on advertising at NewsMax.com please contact Julie Greenberg at jgreenberg@newsmax.com. ****************************TO SUBSCRIBE********************************** If you would like a subscription to NewsMax.com News Alerts, please visit http://NewsMax.com/email.shtml <a href="http://NewsMax.com/email.shtml">AOL users click here</a> Sign up for free e-mail alerts today! **************************************************************************
32 responses total.
Wow. That's some pretty harsh comedy. If this guy had even the slightest appearance of credibility he might actually be worth paying attention to.
NewsMax is, ah, not considered a reliable news source by the internet community. </understatement>
This response has been erased.
What abouWhat about the Onion? I get most of my knews from there.
ROFLOL (though I only read the first few paragraphs, it was so silly).
I started skipping after I read the part where "Clinton's skirt-chasing" cost thousands of lives, or however that went. Clinton's skirt-chasing was far more likely to create life (and that does mean what you think) than destroy it. Of course, it could also explain his stance on abortion...
Maybe I should order this tape (under an assumed name) and then see about ordering all the junk mail which comes with it returned as "RETURN TO SENDER - OBSCENE". That's bound to cost them a bundle. Newsmax.com seems to be a really popular site for readers of Lucianne Goldberg's not-so-free speech forum. Not surprising.
I take it this guy wasn't around during the Nixon days. Nixon was definitely much more paranoid about his domestic opponents than he was of foreigners.
yeah...he was partying with that monster MAO but was *worried* about a silly little punk like LENNON. <laffs>
Well, I find this silly, too, but I'm surprised that it had to raise even a hint of defensiveness. Again, I hear the sound of squirming or head-shaking whenever the 'liberals' are supposedly attacked in a post here.. including cut-and-paste ones. I was of the opinion that the Twin Towers attack was something that happened to slip through the notice of the CIA and the FBI-- I can believe that we have many such threats daily, and this one was a threat that happened to slip through. What I generally find more plausible is to believe that many political trends, policies, etc. generally occur over a number of administrations, although a particular President may have instigated initial policy or Congress of that particular administration passed certain legislation. Rarely is something 100% the blame of an individual President, which honestly, in my eyes, makes political bickering seem hollow and unsubstantiated, if not merely ritualistic. In my observation, those who are loudest on the subject of politics are often very subjective and dogmatic. I struggle to get an objective story-- so many are quick to tell me Democrats, Republicans, bleeding-heart liberals, unfeeling conservatives, etc., etc. are to blame. I also suppose I'm one of the few fairly moderate and Independent folks willing to speak out. But it gets so old sometimes.
Actually, if you look at the "statistics", "moderates" make up the largest part of the voting population. This is why so many political trends and policies continue across administrations. Er, that, and also that giant mega-corporations have so much to say about our trends and policies today. Generally speaking, both candidates work hard to look "appealing" to the central moderates, even at the cost of disaffecting members of their respective "camps". The moderates elected Reagan to the white house twice, and 4 years after that, elected Clinton to the white house twice. Seemingly, those moderates weren't particularly bothered by Ollie North's escapades, nor do they seem to have been particularly disturbed by Clinton's wandering penis. Today, those same moderates don't seem particularly disturbed by the Federalist society, which has quietly replaced the ABA as the people who screen our federal judges. You can read more about the federalist society vs. the ABA here: http://www.cnn.com/2001/LAW/04/columns/fl.dean.aba.screen.04.03/
Wait, would these things be solved if the moderates just made up their minds? Can we then re-transfer the blame transferred to the moderates back to the extremists who disgust the moderates with their childish infighting?
I hope that's sarcasm. ;) I don't know how it's like where you are, but the political parties can't even get people to hardly come out to caucus meetings. Times have changed, apparently. Back when Eisenhower was pres, the parties were moderate, if I have reliable sources. A friend of mine describes himself as an unreconstructed liberal. He votes Independent these days, although he was a registered Republican in the past. He's not real fond of the way Republican ideology has gone down South, and seems to be convinced that many good ol' boy legislators are thinking to keep those 'damn n***ers' in their place. From what I have heard of the South from a number of other sources, I suppose that might not be far off the mark. The Democrats, as I remember, have been through some interesting twists and turns. I suppose it began when the hippies to the yippies started protesting.. which ones were they who crashed the 1969 DNC Convention? Recently, I remember that the party has largely embraced fiscal conservatism, although Presidential nominees (before the last election) Bill Bradley and Al Gore were seeking to return the party to its ideological roots. I remember that some past Democrat presidential nominees (the names escape me now) sought to form a third party but were rebuffed. What alternatives do we have? Ralph Nader tried hard for a long time to raise the Green Party to high enough status that it would receive federal funding, but he failed. There was the Reform party, but well, H. Ross Perot appeared to look less than committed, and Pat Buchanan seemed to take it over. Jesse Ventura seems to be doing fairly well as governor of Minnesota, but he doesn't seem to be running for President just yet. Colin Powell would be a *wonderful* candidate for the next presidency, but he has said he would not seek the office. Maybe he sees things behind the scenes a LOT better than we do.
he prolly doesn't want to put his wife thru that morass. he's a good feller.
i'd kinda like to see him be prez tho.
he would win by a landslide.
If Marcus is right, oh shit yeah. He doesn't need to look appealing to the political moderates, because more or less, he is one. I figure he may be compared quite comfortably to Eisenhower if he does run and win.
I don't think the Republicans would nominate him, though. He doesn't have a pedigree the way Bush did, and he's too moderate on some of the Republicans' litmus test issues.
he should run libertarian.
Around here, "Libertarian" is virtually synonymous with "Lunatic Fringe."
resp:18 That's quite sad, and would seem to indicate the Republicans honestly have moved to the right, despite protests to the contrary.
The Republicans have a well organized "christian" conservative movement within their ranks, which at the very least has become a dominant voice in determining who of their party represents them. I'm surprised you haven't noticed. It's true they have had to tone their rhetoric down in order to avoid scaring away the moderates and business wing of their party. Nevertheless, it shines through -- the president's faith based initiative is one such example - though that may also have been a clever ploy to appeal to black voters. The president's public opposition to fetal tissue and stem cell research is another example. The federalist society is a less visible but perhaps more insidious example. The Democrats, so far as I can see, have no such equivalent liberal influence in their organization. There may be many individual members who are quite in opposition to conservative Republican goals, but this is by no means uniform. In congress, it seems to be more common for some Democrats to vote with the Republicans than visa-versa.
The Republicans are not what they used to be. Nixon's 1972 platform was anti-war, pro-reproductive rights and pro-affirmative action.
Didn't Nixon also create the EPA?
resp:22 I've noticed, which is apparently why the ideology has moved down South-- more of the party's strongmen hail from there nowadays (Jesse Helms, Newt Gingrinch, etc.) Interesting idea that the faith-based initiative might be aimed at black voters-- I have been told that that particular ethnicity (I no longer think it's accurate to say 'race') tie their communities strongly to their churches, or in other words, black churches are reported to take a much more active role in the communities they serve. I generally agree that Democrats may vote with the Republicans-- there was indeed a trend for them to vote fiscally conservative. This is especially so, I'd say, in the state of Washington. Democrats here, as best I can tell, are very moderate. resp:23 No, they are not, which is why I suspect my friend does not identify himself as Republican anymore.
Re #25: Washington is kind of interesting. From what I've seen the Republicans there are extremely far to the right, to the point where they have trouble appointing candidates anyone can vote for with a straight face. Didn't they have a governor candidate a few years ago that ran on a rabidly anti-homosexual platform?
huh? No, dude, that is not my experience. Locke's competition was someone even a Republican friend of mine thought was a flake (or does that prove your point? hard to say). Haven't heard of a Republican governor candidate who openly spoke out against homosexuals.. can you provide a name?
Haven't a lot of them?
Re #27: I can't remember any names, I'm afraid. I just remember a friend of mine talking about how the Republicans had nominated some right-wing talk show host who proclaimed that earthquakes were the result of God expressing disapproval of elections. Apparently this guy got something like 30% of the vote and considered it a huge moral victory.
i always get really freaked out when guilliani dresses in drag to get the gay vote. got no prob with drag, just when he does it .. what a creep.
Men should not dress as honky chicks. Fuckin' queers.
transparent!
Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.
|
|
|
- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss