by Scott Creighton
Yesterday I wrote, regarding the media blackout of the tens of thousands of Bernie Sanders supporters who attended two rallies in three days in California:
“Can you imagine the coverage a Killary rally would receive if more than 100 Hillarybot assholes showed up to support her ascension to the throne? It would be non-stop. Chris Mathews would cream in his pants like he did back when Obama was running. Rachel Maddow would have a stroke. An orgasm and then a stroke.
Fox News wouldn’t cover it, but that is to be expected.” Scott Creighton, 6 hours before the Killary Clinton speech
Sometimes it’s like I’m a psychic, isn’t it? I think the only thing I got wrong was that Fox “News” did cover the Killary foreign policy speech, word for word, right alongside CNN and MSNBC.
Mathews was literally rubbing his crotch and drooling on his anchor desk while Killary was speaking and Rachel couldn’t be found. Rumor has it, she was in her office staring at her private collection of these.
Mathews says Hillary’s speech was a “masterpiece” though he admits her foreign policy is just a little right of Dick Cheney (and that she was probably targeting those valuable neocon PNAC voters with it). Yes, Chris did actually say she was going back to the good old days of Scoop Jackson “liberalism”. For those of you who don’t know, Scoop Jackson was one of the original neocons and he was a Democrat… like many of the PNAC leaders used to be actually. For Mathews, Hillary dragging the left back to the “hate the damn commies and let the bombs fly!!!” era is a great thing.
Maddow says Hillary “clobbered Trump with his own words” and praised Killary’s far-right slide as well. I don’t know whether or not she stroked out but I’m guessing there was some form of celebration that involved a blackout of some kind.
Truth be told, I watched Hillary Clinton’s speech and for all the constant, unending, breathless ranting about how good and “presidential” it was, it actually sucked. And for all the talk about how “scary” a Trump presidency would be, I can’t help but worry about the possibility of a lying, cheating, scamming Scoop Jackson Clinton presidency as well.
As far as the “performance” goes (and it was a performance, not a presidential address from the heart of a candidate. We don’t get those anymore) … she was stiff. Uncomfortable. Calculating. Disingenuous. Self-conscience. Dishonest. Over-coached. Over-directed. And over-acted.
There wasn’t a single moment of genuine authenticity to the whole thing. Not one. Not when she tried to read the laugh lines and screwed up the timing. Not when she tried to turn on the passion and looked more like a psycho demanding another pump of cheese on his 7-11 nachos (don’t ask, but you know who I’m talking about Dell). Not a single moment of that speech came across as genuine. Not one.
It was like watching a high school drama coach give some pimple-faced awkward teen a reading of how he wanted to see a presidential character played.
You know what it was? It was a talent-less hack doing a scene from the West Wing trying to be Martin Sheen. That’s exactly what Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy speech was, except, the Martin Sheen character was actually a liberal and a Democrat and not Dick Cheney in a cheap, flimsy disguise and Martin Sheen, unlike his son Charlie and Hillary Clinton, is a talented actor.
There certainly wasn’t any authenticity when Hillary Clinton was lying through her teeth about various foreign policy events (blunders) that happened under her watch and for someone who lies as much as Hillary Clinton, you would think she’d be better at it by now.
Truth be told, the Hillary Clinton foreign policy speech was a disaster in spite of how revisionist cheerleaders like Chris Mathews and Rachel Maddow are trying to make in on par with the likes of JFK, Lincoln and MLK Jr. speeches. It was a disaster for a number of reasons not the least of which being her lack of authenticity and her endless, pathological lying.
Someone in her camp made it very clear to candidate Clinton that she needed something positive to happen in the campaign right now because her poll numbers were slipping quickly to both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump and the recent developments in her illegal email server case have marginalized her as a candidate in a substantial way.
And that’s too say nothing of the fact that many Dems now understand just how rigged the primary has been for Hillary and she is even losing the credibility she tries to maintain regarding her “3 million more votes” than Bernie: she stole ’em (and here and here) rigged primary elections with her State Attorney friends (here and here) and disenfranchised millions of voters along the way (here and here and here) to achieve that paper tiger lead all those talking head pundits keep mentioning.
Hell, they are already talking about how they expect poll numbers are going to be off in the next primary and general election because Clinton and Trump have such low favorability numbers. You want to guess how that is supposed to make sense? It doesn’t. It’s just a pretext for the narrative when they finally count the votes and none of them match-up with exit polls or opinion polls. You get that in rigged elections sometimes.
However, recent poll numbers showed one positive result for Hillary and that was she was favored over Donald by a large margin in terms of the perception people have of their foreign policy abilities.
So, true to form for publicists, they cobbled together her little foreign policy speech, they brought in drama coaches by the bus-load to coach her up before the big day, and they wound up their little Stepford Candidate and marched her out front of a couple teleprompters with a little speaker in her ear so they could coach her some more and the event unfolded.
They stuck her out in front of a bunch of MIC Killary supporters in San Diego (about a hundred. I am psychic), the left-coast home of the military industrial complex, with a ridiculous number of American flags being used as props behind her, and made sure at least three major networks carried the pathetic display of desperation live.
Then they made sure Mathews, Maddow and the other sycophants to power told the American people didn’t really see what they thought they saw but instead they witnessed the best speech ever given by a human being since the Sermon on the Mount.
Too say that Hillary was lying throughout the entire speech would be tantamount to flogging a dead “ISIS” actor (I’m looking at you Britain). So I am not going to go line by line on her speech.
She did open it up with something that was, on the surface, at least a little presidential sounding. But when you take a moment to really let it sink in… well, Scoop Jackson’s neocon vision of America does come to mind. I’ll give Mathews that much.
“That’s what I want to speak about today – the challenges we face in protecting our country, and the choice at stake in this election.
It’s a choice between a fearful America that’s less secure and less engaged with the world, and a strong, confident America that leads to keep our country safe and our economy growing.” Scoop Jackson Clinton
The only challenges we face in protecting out country come from criminal enterprises operating destabilization campaigns abroad and here at home in order to further their globalist agenda. These are interests who have penned manifestos like the one called “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” in Sept. of 2000.
“Further, the process of transformation,
even if it brings revolutionary change,
is likely to be a long one,
absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event
â€“ like a new Pearl Harbor.”
— from “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”The authors of that work just happen to be the same neocon members of the Project for the New American Century who used to identify as “Scoop Jackson Democrats”
Truth be told, our troops in the field who bear the brunt of the hostilities being cultivated toward our nation by people across the world would not need to be in harm’s way if our leaders, first the neocons of the Bush administration and then by the neocons of the Obama administration, didn’t send them over there for reasons that had nothing to do with protecting our nation or “humanitarian interventions”
Our young men and women of the armed services were sent into harm’s way for another reason, one that Hillary Clinton so eloquently slipped into her Scoop Jackson message right along side the platitude that they are there to keep us “safe”:
“to keep our economy strong“
After we bombed Iraq back into the stone ages and decimated a culture and a civilization that is older than Christianity, our economy did what? It crashed. Why? Because some greedy bankers and hedge-fund capitalists got together with the neocons of the Bush administration and took advantage of some changes made by the neocon Clinton administration (ended regulations of derivatives and broke up Glass-Steagall) and they wrecked the economy so they could profit from the chaos. Then they got the Central Bank to hand over trillions of dollars in a seemingly endless quantitative easing scam which, along with the useless Iraq and Afghanistan occupations, jacked up the national debt to historic levels.
Did invading Iraq make our economy strong? How about Afghanistan? How about the billions we spent to destroy Libya and Syria? Is our economy stronger or weaker for those quagmires?
Someone is reaping the benefits though. That’s for sure. Maybe if Hillary releases the transcripts to her Goldman Sachs speeches we can figure out exactly who that is, but for right now, it damn sure isn’t us.
But even on a more general level, is that what we send out kids to war for? To keep our economy strong? Is that what we tell our kids when Daddy or Mommy is away? They are over there to make sure someone here gets some money?
Is that the message on the supertron over a football field when the planes are flying over and some washed up hack is lip syncing the national anthem? “Go Make America RICH!”
Is that what we tell our soldiers in the field?
That’s the lesson Smedley Butler came to understand. But it took him decades to figure it out. Or at least it took him decades to finally say something about it in public but when he did, he didn’t say it as if it were a virtuous creed like Killary did yesterday, he said it like it should be said: a confession and condemnation.
And don’t mistake what she said and my interpretation of it as some kind of “missing the point” fluke. She said it and she meant it. And if you don’t believe me, just check out what Hillary said herself back in 2011 about Iraq when troops were still dying and being maimed by IEDs every week.
Hillary Clinton, like the neocons and Scoop Jackson before her, see military adventurism as a “business opportunity”. It is a sickening fact of life and considering the fact that she and her handlers decided to keep that little quip in the opening segment of her foreign policy speech it seems to me she wanted to make damn sure the business interests of America knew right off the bat what to expect under her presidency. More violence. More deaths of foreign citizens. More suffering and deaths of US soldiers on behalf of our business interests and keeping our economy strong for a couple well connected billionaires (and the politicians who serve them)
I could go on and on for a couple hours detailing the lies Hillary Clinton spouted yesterday in her speech, but I have a life, as pathetic as it is, and as such, I have a few things to do today so I will limit myself to exposing just one. But it is a doosy.
“So it really matters that Donald Trump says things that go against our deepest-held values. It matters when he says he’ll order our military to murder the families of suspected terrorists. During the raid to kill bin Laden, when every second counted, our SEALs took the time to move the women and children in the compound to safety. Donald Trump may not get it, but that’s what honor looks like.” Scoop Jackson Clinton
Let’s break this down, line by line, shall we?
“So it really matters that Donald Trump says things that go against our deepest-held values“
Didn’t Clinton just say earlier that we send our troops out in the world, “we lead”, in order to make part of our economy better for a few of us? Is that in line with “our deepest held values”? just sayin…
Didn’t Hillary Clinton giggle and laugh during a live interview when asked about the extrajudicial murder of the leader of Libya who had done nothing to harm the United States of America? I think she did.
Didn’t that life-long friend and mentor of Hillary Clinton, M. Albright (who was praising Hillary’s speech all day yesterday) go on live television back in the 90s and say killing 500,000 Iraqi children with our sanctions was “worth it” to weaken Saddam’s regime while Bill Clinton was in office? I think she did.
Are these the “deepest held values” Hillary Clinton and her mentor’s are speaking of, or am I just a damn liberal throw-back to the post Scoop Jackson, pre-Hillary Clinton days?
“It matters when he says he’ll order our military to murder the families of suspected terrorists“
Really? Didn’t President Obama give the order to kill the son of a suspected al Qaeda propagandist in Yemen a couple years back? Didn’t they kill that kid with a drone strike? Wasn’t that kid an American citizen? I think he was and Obama did.
Didn’t the CIA and our troops get in trouble a couple years ago for torturing and raping family members of suspected insurgent leaders who were being held illegally in places like Abu Ghraib and other black sites across the globe? I think they did.
And didn’t Hillary Clinton herself promote and advocate for the humanitarian bombing campaign in Libya that killed thousands of women and children and more specifically, one of M. Gaddafi’s sons and 3 of his grandchildren? I think she did.
So what exactly is Hillary Clinton talking about here? It sounds to me like someone is already giving such orders to our troops in the field and if the suicide rate of our boys and girls coming back to the states in any indication, these aren’t easy orders to be followed because they are contradictory to their “deepest held values”. And though Donald Trump might talk about committing such atrocities when serving as commander in chief, the difference here is, Hillary Clinton is already bathed in the blood of the innocents and he isn’t… yet.
“… our SEALs took the time to move the women and children in the compound to safety”
Well first of all, that poor dumb slob who was killed in Pakistan in that illegal raid wasn’t Osama bin Laden. That’s why they didn’t bring him in alive, the most useful source of information on the structure and inner workings of al Qaeda. And that’s why they lied about him being dumped in the drink, about him going out in a blaze of gun fire and about his body being chopped up and tossed out of the window of a helicopter. Anything to make up a justification for not bringing him back alive and in one piece to be identified via DNA. Hell, they didn’t even take pictures of him and the one that got circulated to members of congress to prove he was dead, was a photoshop forgery.
That’s the first thing. They didn’t kill bin Laden. They needed a publicity stunt to regain some points for Obama. In all likelihood, bin Laden died in December of 2001.
The second thing is this:
- “in these versions, one of bin Laden’s wives, Amal Ahmed Abdul Fatah is said to have screamed at the SEALs in Arabic and motioned as if she were about to charge. The lead SEAL shot her in the leg, then grabbed both women and shoved them aside.”
- “A woman near him, later identified as Abrar’s wife Bushra, was, in this version, also shot and killed.
- “initial versions said three other men and a woman were killed as well: bin Laden’s adult son Khalid, bin Laden’s courier (Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti), al-Kuwaiti’s brother Abrar, and Abrar’s wife Bushra.
- “Bin Laden’s 12-year-old daughter Safia was allegedly struck in her foot or ankle by a piece of flying debris.
- “Seymour Hersh reports that, according to his sources, Bin Laden was found cowering and shot dead.
The Seals involved did not bravely take the time to gather up all the kiddies and women folk and move them to safety in the compound. They shot the shit out of them. Women and children were killed, wounded or injured. And that is too say nothing of the poor sap they found to play the role of bin Laden who according to Seymour Hersh, was wasted at point blank range because they needed a body to fit the bill, not some living guy who probably didn’t even know who bin Laden was.
Whether or not you wish to believe bin Laden died that day or some 10 prior to it, the fact remains, according to every single one of the stories, the official stories (there are several) or Seymour’s, the end result is the same: Hillary Clinton is lying ONCE AGAIN about what happened that day (and quite probably trying to take credit she doesn’t deserve for getting bin Laden)
Let your claims of “conspiracy theory” subside for a moment and look at the facts. Family members of bin Laden’s and those other “terrorists” in that compound were killed or wounded by our troops carrying out the specific orders of President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. There’s no two ways around that simple and obvious fact. And for her to get up there with her wooden, Stepford Candidate performance and call out Donald Trump for simply TALKING about doing what she and other heads of state have ACTUALLY DONE is beyond hypocritical… it’s pathological.
And there is just no other way of looking at it when you bother to take the time to fact check her speech.
“but that’s what honor looks like.”
Our soldiers do what they are commanded to do. They are as moral or as amoral as their leaders. And not all of them are expected to do such things. In fact, the vast majority of them are not. But it does happen and when it does we can’t be afraid to talk about it or to condemn it.
But ultimately the responsibility lies not with them, but with their commanding officers and the top of the chain of command that sets the parameters of their code of conduct.
When we have leaders who openly admit that the reason they send our sons and daughters to fight in far away lands is in order to improve the national economy for a select group of their patrons, we have a problem because that is an immoral foreign policy from the start and from their all sorts of bad things are going to trickle down to the men and women in the field expected to carry out the nuts and bolts of the program.
In this and in so many other ways, Hillary Clinton is not suited for the office of the presidency. She is dangerous and as much as she would like to terrify the people in this country on the left of the political divide about the dangers of a theoretical Trump presidency, her track record proves her madness and shear ruthlessness is a proven commodity and she will willingly sacrifice however many troops it takes to ensure that precious economic growth she is so obsessed with.
And listen, that’s not me saying that… it’s clearly her. That’s her “great speech” that the likes of Mathews and Maddow will be ranting about all weekend until Hillary steals the next primary contests and they can justify saying she’s “won” the nomination.
When you think about someone’s finger on the button, it’s not a pleasant thought seeing Trump’s little finger or Hillary’s twitching one on it. That’s for damn sure. Frankly, I’m sitting this one out. But I want you to think about something else as you muddle through your own personal decision making process:
Hillary Clinton is crazy. She hates opposition. She resents it. Like Rahm Emanuel, she is said to have a list of folks she hates.
We are entering a new dawn of repression here in the States. We have handed over control of the surveillance state to Big Business and thanks to Obama’s NDAA 2012, Big Brother now has the authority to go after dissidents in this country, to round them up and hold them without charges indefinitely until the end of hostilities (this, the “endless war” the “thousand year war”)
Do people really want Hillary Clinton, as spiteful and angry as she is now at the real left for abandoning her and forcing her to steal the nomination, with that kind of power sitting in the White House with her own kill or detain list?
Do we really want another Scoop Jackson neocon zealot babbling “I came, I saw, they disappeared” in the Oval Office?
This speech of hers was not a crowning achievement in her campaign. It’s a manifesto. A warning from a deeply disturbed individual who is in all likelihood, about to become one of the most powerful people on the planet at a time when the last two administrations have decimated our constitutional protections to the point where they simply don’t exist anymore.
Me? I found her speech just a tad disturbing and I found the rabid apologists trying to spin it equally unsettling. There is a madness here that seems to be trickling down and all we can do is watch and hope.
Filed under: Uncategorized |