Bush Supporters Back Hillary, The Dynasty continues Options

[grizz]

THE BUSH-CLINTON DYNASTY

By Pastor Chuck Baldwin

July 17, 2007

A news item appeared in the Financial Times last Friday that received little notice. However, the hidden story behind this report is much deeper and more complex. The FT report stated: "John Mack, Morgan Stanley's chief executive, is to invite senior staff to a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton on Monday [yesterday], in a pointed endorsement of the Democratic presidential hopeful from an important backer of President George W. Bush in 2004.

"Mrs. Clinton, a New York senator, is scheduled to appear at the fundraiser on the 41st floor of Morgan Stanley's headquarters in Times Square.

"The minimum donation for the event is $1000 per person but Mr. Mack urged those attending to give $4,600, the maximum for the 2008 presidential campaign.

"Mr. Mack surprised many on Wall Street in the spring when he said he and his wife, Christy, would support Mrs. Clinton's 2008 bid."

John Mack is not the first Bush supporter to jump on the Hillary bandwagon. Neither will he be the last.

That wealthy and influential supporters of G.W. Bush are now supporting Hillary Clinton only surprises those who have not been paying attention. For the rest of us, this is merely par for the course.

The Bushes and Clintons go way back. They have been fast friends for decades. Only a closely guarded media cover up has hidden this fact from the general public.

As you will recall, George H.W. Bush was President of the United States while William Jefferson Clinton was Governor of Arkansas. During this time, it was very common for the two families (along with G.W. Bush and Laura) to vacation together. This is well-known to those who are familiar with the two families.

Yet, the connection between the Bushes and Clintons is much deeper than simple friendship. They share a deep socio-political alliance as well.

Remember that it was President Bill Clinton who first proposed what came to be called the USA Patriot Act. Of course, he failed to convince a GOP Congress to approve the measure. However, G.W. Bush succeeded where Clinton failed. Remember, too, that it was President Bill Clinton who gave us NAFTA, something G.W. Bush has not only supported but expanded into the SPP and a burgeoning North American Community. Furthermore, both Bush and Clinton are major players in the push for amnesty for illegal aliens. And the list just goes on and on.

Face it folks: the Bushes and Clintons are political soul mates. Therefore, why should it be surprising that many Bush supporters are now working for the Hillary Clinton campaign?

To believe that the Bushes and Clintons are political and philosophical opponents is the height of absurdity. Both have the support and do the bidding of the international elite. Both families are imbedded in secret societies and globalist agendas. And mark my words, the Bushes will be working behind the scenes for a Hillary victory in 2008.

I will even be so bold as to say that the Bushes and Clintons are as close as America has gotten to a crime family dynasty. If you are brave at heart, do a little personal research into the connection between these two families and the CIA's infamous "extra curricular" C-130 flights to Central and South America originating in and out of Mena, Arkansas back in the '90's.

Barak Obama needs to pray he doesn't get too close to the Democratic nomination. And the American people need to pray for a "Great Awakening," because another four or eight years of the Bush-Clinton dynasty might turn this once-great constitutional republic into just another banana republic. NewsWithViews

[Sue]

Excellent find, Oceans Flow! (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/thumbsup.gif)

I've been trying to bang this point into the heads of my Democrat & Republican friends, but basically to no avail. I've posted this article about the Bush-Clinton nexus before:

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0502/S00155.htm


I think things are rigged big-time to make Hildabeast the new dictator.

If we could convince enough people of this evil alliance I think we could put a stop to their dictatorial takeover of America. But it's an uphill battle because a lot of people's heads are going to have to be pulled out of the clouds or the sand and they will have to understand that they were being played for fools. People don't like to admit they were conned.

[mo fiya]

Not only that, but I looked up campaign financing records for this campaign, and the contributions from businesses to Hillary are thousands more than to any other candidate.

Boeing for instance, gave Hillary something like $6,700 (I thought only 2,300 was allowed?), and gave no more than $1,000 to anyone else.

What does that tell you when the defense contractors are financing Hillary the most...

MORE WAR.

[LizzyTish]

She's Bush in a girl suit...and nobody seems to see that.

[Sue]

She's Bush in a girl suit...and nobody seems to see that.

Actually, I think it may be even worse than that.

As hard as it is to imagine, I think Hildabeast is going to be even worse than "W".

She has already said we may have to go into Iran and is going to make Bill "can't keep his pants zipped" Clinton the "roving ambassador to the world". "W" did a good job of futhering the elites/globalists agenda, but I think Hildafascist is going to ratchet it up to a whole new level. Be ready for more false flags. And the FEMA camps may become "open for business".

With Hildawitch as president, we will be on the fast track to:

WORLD GOVERNMENT (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/angry.gif)

[Sanders]

I think left-wing one-world-government zealots are more dangerous than right-wing-one-world-government zealots.

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/nonono.gif)

No need to worry though, we probably won't be having anymore elections anyway.

[Quest]

I think left-wing one-world-government zealots are more dangerous than right-wing-one-world-government zealots.

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/nonono.gif)

No need to worry though, we probably won't be having anymore elections anyway.

I agree.

[Sue]

I lost the source for this but I think it's good stuff on Hilla the Hun:

In a recent report, A Duty to Mislead: Politics and the Iraq War, on US National Public Radio, broadcaster Ted Koppel stated:

"Democrats are telling voters that if they are elected, all U.S. troops will be pulled out of Iraq. But as Sen. Hillary Clinton privately told a senior military adviser, she knows there will be some troops there for decades. It's an example of how in some cases, politics can force dishonesty."

"In a recent interview with the New York Times," Koppel continues, "Senator Clinton emphasized that there are remaining vital national security issues [clearly oil] in Iraq and that these would require a continuing deployment of American troops."

"She didn't, in that interview, give any sense of how long U.S. forces might remain in Iraq during a Clinton administration."

And to an old military friend of Koppel's Clinton revealed how, were she to be elected and then re-elected, "she would still expect U.S. forces to be in Iraq at the end of a second term."

"When, oh when," Koppel despairs, "is that deadly serious issue going to become the topic of an equally serious and candid discussion? When, in other words, will we get the brutal truth in place of vapid and misleading campaign applause lines?"

Well, the brutal truth is finally seeping out, proving that the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan was, all along, to capture and occupy areas of strategic and economic importance to the U.S. led multinational corporations: oil and gas.

Now we have a ruling class toff, Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles would you believe, the new UK Ambassador to Afghanistan, telling the ever servile Huw Edwards of BBC News 24 that the British will have to remain in Afghanistan for "a long time ... we should be thinking in terms of decades."

On being questioned why the British are building a huge new embassy in Kabul (as are the Americans in Baghdad) Sir Sherard admitted that "strategic interests" required it.

"Ministers realize we are here for the long haul."

All this fits in perfectly with the neocons' Blueprint for a New American Century which calls for geopolitical wars to seize and occupy areas of the world containing minerals and resources vital to the U.S. 'security (read corporate capitalist) interests.' It is also why U.S. generals have been telling their troops for some time now to get used to the idea of long, generational and endless wars.

And why our societies are being totalitarianized. No way out: this really is Armageddon.