Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RJC2006 who wrote (3361)	8/28/1998 8:45:00 AM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

To get things started this morning, here is my favorite irony/hypocrisy. The boy and his butt boys and girls cry and cry about his privacy being invaded. And then there's the 1000 FBI files. This is not a dead issue: More Women Testify/Tripp Testifies to Seeing Data from FBI Files Being Entered Into Computers/She Also Attended a Hard Money Fund Raiser in the White House Jim Bohannon Morning News Show 5:00 a.m., CDT Christine Dolan Christine Dolan, former news director for CNN says Kenneth Starr has more women testifying before the grand jury about sex in the White House. These are not the only problems Clinton has. She went as the guest of a campaign donor to a hard money fundraiser in the White House. $50,000 was the price of the ticket. To top it off she knows that Linda Tripp testified before the Grand Jury that she witnessed data being entered into computers from the 900+ FBI files. She also said that these computers are now at a site away from the White House. She says it won't be long before Democrats quietly go to the White House and ask this man to resign. Bohannon asked if she thought Clinton should resign and she said yes.

To: RJC2006 who wrote (3361)	8/28/1998 9:00:00 AM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13994

He may be personally flawed but he's doing a great job. Ask Scott Ritter about that. It isn't about sex, it's about criminal incompetence and the safety of our country. Scott Ritter's Decision NY Times 8-28-98 A.M. ROSENTHAL In seven years as a key U.N. inspector searching out Saddam Hussein's concealed capabilities to make weapons of mass destruction, Scott Ritter had to call on all the physical courage in him. Then on Wednesday he summoned up all his moral and intellectual courage, and resigned. In his letter of resignation and in conversation, he gave the world his reasons, with candor we have almost forgotten. He said the U.S. Administration, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and the U.N. Security Council were seriously weakening the inspection machinery, the only thing that stood between Saddam Hussein and revival of Iraq's nuclear, biological and chemical weapon programs. Scott Ritter -- William S. only to official records -- has performed what he considered inescapable duties: refusal to participate in the damage to inspection, letting the world know arms control in Iraq was an "illusion, more dangerous than no arms control at all." Straight out, he said that the U.S. had blocked additional personnel and equipment needed to carry out critical spot inspections, that the Secretary General had made himself simply a sounding board for Saddam's grievances, that the U.S. and U.N. once again had exacted no penalty from Saddam for ordering U.N. inspections ended. Iraq, said Mr. Ritter, is now stronger than when the U.S. and U.N. allowed Saddam to walk away from the gulf war and took on the job of controlling Iraqi power. From Washington and the U.N., denials and knifings of Mr. Ritter came as soon as it was known that he had taken on the U.N. bureaucracy and the American Government he once served as a Marine intelligence officer. If Americans leave it at that -- he says, they deny -- Mr. Ritter's bravery may not bring results. So it is important for Americans to know the denials and knifing do not come from everybody in Washington or the U.N., not from the insistently honorable. Some of President Clinton's top aides, by acting as if they had believed him not only about Monica Lewinsky but about far more important reversals, have lowered confidence in themselves, almost to invisibility. I have in mind the apologists of his reversal on human rights, on the relative ranking in American foreign policy of democracy and foreign trade, the bailing out of corrupt foreign despotisms, his furious fight against monitoring religious persecution abroad, that kind of thing. Now Mr. Clinton's people tell us to believe that his war against terrorism can consist of missiles against terrorist gangs in Afghanistan and the Sudan -- while Iraq, a major terrorist state, is getting immunity for closing down U.N. inspections. Secretary of State Albright says that's a matter between the U.N. and Iraq. With such judgments, and with a President who has to think politically, whether about Monica or Saddam, Americans should search for other minds to trust. I trust the people at the U.N. and in Washington who tell me that Mr. Ritter was telling the truth. Bolstering them is the evidence of American journalists, who even before the Ritter resignation were documenting U.S. diplomacy against surprise inspections that might upset Saddam and our allies who want his business back. But why would the U.S. damage inspection of Iraq? Mr. Ritter, and I, do not believe that the President & Co. have fallen in love with Saddam. But from what clues the Administration grants the public, the idea seems to be that Iraq can be so weakened in pocketbook that Iraqis will get real mad and somebody will kill him. Mr. Ritter points out that the U.N. already grants Iraq more oil to sell than Iraq can pump. He says that soon the U.N. will allow Iraq the funds to build more pumps. Sounds crazy, is crazy. Resignations, anyone? All Mr. Ritter really wants, I come to understand, is for America to be what he thought it was -- not bloodthirsty against Iraq but staunch, determined to prevent Saddam from killing us and other enemies, in mass. I hope someday his twin 5-year-old girls read this job assessment of their father: Brave in service against state terrorism, even braver in resigning to speak truths, and admirable in the faith that his countrymen will recognize awaiting dangers, if told by those who know. If all that is the mark of an innocent, send in more.