💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › conspiracy › CN › cn07-51.txt captured on 2022-06-12 at 06:54:52.
⬅️ Previous capture (2020-10-31)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 7 Num. 51
======================================
("Quid coniuratio est?")
-----------------------------------------------------------------
NEWS ROUND-UP -- 03/24/96
=========================
This Editor-in-Chief job ("I couldn't find a real job, so I made
myself Editor-in-Chief!") has its own rhythms. Some days the news
is flying in and I'm swamped with work, other days things are
slow. For the moment, things are slow so I thought I'd do a "news
round-up", a summary of various items. I wish I could guarantee
this as a regular feature, but like I say, this job has its own
rhythms.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BOSNIA? WHAT'S THAT?
--------------------
There used to be a country called Yugoslavia, made up of
smaller countries called "Republics". Not sure why, maybe the
death of their BIG LEADER TITO, maybe the re-unification of
Germany and subsequent German expansionist impulses into Croatia
(one of the "Republics" of the former Yugoslavia), but now
Yugoslavia is split up and the various peoples, Republics, and
religions therein are having a bloody feud, like there used to be
with the Hatfields and the McCoys here in the U.S.
So about last November, Bill Clinton (maybe he was high on
cocaine at the time) suddenly has a BIG push that we must send
U.S. troops to the former Yugoslavia NOW! NOW! NOW! Hurry up! Do
it right away! Like a whirlwind suitor, Clinton dragged the
leaders of the various Yugoslav factions to Dayton, Ohio and "lit
a fire under their pants" that made them hurry up and sign the
damn agreement -- pronto. Clinton was in a big hurry all of a
sudden to put our troops on the ground over there. It was like
someone had "lit a fire" under *his* pants. He got the factions
to sign an agreement, mobilized the troops, and then basically
said "Congress can rubber stamp this or not, but I'm King Clinton
and I'll do as I please!"
In the first rush of events, before the press had been
coached into how to cover the story, it was being reported that
the 1-year limit on U.S. involvement in the region was "just for
public consumption" -- in other words, it was a lie! The press,
caught off-guard, actually let some truth slip out at first.
Estimates (apparently *not* for "public consumption") were for a
5-year U.S. involvement in the former Yugoslavia.
Now, in an article in the London Telegraph (03/22/96,
electronic version), we learn that, according to the Pentagon,
"Bosnia is likely to revert to the chaos and bloodshed of civil
war once the 55,000 soldiers of Ifor [mostly U.S. soldiers], the
NATO-led peace-keeping force, are withdrawn at the end of the
year."
The article points to the "Muslim-Croat Federation",
controllers now of part of Bosnia (one of the Republics), and
says that "diplomats in Sarajevo already admit that the
federation is a sham."
Two of the pistol-packing antagonists are entities known as
BOSNIAN CROATS and BOSNIAN SERBS. One wonders how it was that the
late BIG LEADER TITO managed to keep them peaceable in the past
-- maybe that's why they used to call him "Marshall" Tito.
Says the London Telegraph: "The Pentagon assessment
concludes, 'the prospects for the existence of a viable, unitary
Bosnia beyond the life of Ifor are dim.'"
And, according to the Telegraph, "This is tantamount to
saying that the Dayton accords, which committed all parties to
preserving the integrity of Bosnia as a multi-ethnic nation, are
meaningless."
-----------------------------------------------------------------
STRATEGIC DEFENSE INITIATIVE (SDI) -- THE SEQUEL
------------------------------------------------
Remember how, after the break-up of the Soviet Union, some
floated the concept of a "peace dividend"? The idea was that,
since the Soviet Union was gone, we didn't have to worry so much
about the Soviet threat of a missile attack. This meant that we
ourselves wouldn't need to spend so much of our tax dollars on
anti-missile defense systems meant to defend us against such an
attack. So, because we wouldn't be spending so much on these
anti-missile defenses, that would free up money that could be
spent, say, for improvements in our own infrastructure. Or, the
freed-up money could be used to decrease our national debt. Or it
could be used to cut taxes.
Remember how the "peace dividend" never materialized? The
freed-up money must have went somewhere! But we, the people,
never saw it! Maybe it went south, down sunny Mexico way, to help
bail them out so they wouldn't default on their debt to Wall
Street. Maybe it got stolen by corrupt politicians and now sits,
hidden, in secret offshore bank accounts.
Now, according to the London Telegraph (03/22/96, electronic
edition), Bob "I'm from Kansas" Dole wants to "require the
Pentagon to develop a multi-billion-dollar missile defence system
to counter the nuclear threat from rogue nations."
So gone (apparently) is the big bad ENEMY, Soviet communism,
and here is a new big bad ENEMY, "rogue nations." (We've also had
an internal big bad ENEMY, the "drug menace", since at least
1969.) The faces change, but the (expensive) danger from the big
bad ENEMY remains the same.
Says the Telegraph, "Mr. Dole and Newt Gingrich... yesterday
jointly endorsed a Bill that would commit the government to
building a system capable of defending all 50 American states
from a limited missile attack by the year 2003." But what are we
supposed to do between now and then? Should we go to Oz, just
like another Kansan, named Dorothy?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I WON'T TELL IF YOU WON'T
-------------------------
Back before the Republican landslide in the November 1994
elections, the then-Democratic Congress stonewalled attempts to
dig into, for example, the strange death of Vincent Foster, Jr.,
and the Mena dope and money-laundering corruption.
Then, when the Republicans gained control of the Congress
after the November 1994 elections, many of us were hoping that
"Now, with a Republican majority, we'll get an honest
investigation." In fact, that was probably part of why the
Republicans did so well in November of '94: many of us naive
folks thought an honest investigation would ensue.
But we found out, thanks to sources such as Strategic
Investment newsletter and Sherman Skolnick of the Citizens'
Committee to Clean Up the Courts that -- surprise, surprise --
the Republicans are also crooked. See, for example, CN 4.15 where
we learned that
Skolnick's sources had previously indicated to him that there
was a stalemate in efforts to bring this story out; that the
Democrats and Republicans, both being "dirty" in the Iran-
Contra/Mena imbroglio, had come to an impasse where an "I
won't tell if you won't tell" situation was in effect.
We now find that the big deal Washington Times seems to have
discovered this also -- but over a year later. In an article
posted to Internet bearing the heading "The smoking guns"
(Washington Times, March 18, 1996, by Paul Craig Roberts), the
Washington Times wonders, "if the Republicans also have something
to hide."
The Times informs us that (shock, gasp), "What Whitewater
seems to come home to is the laundering of drug money." True,
notes the tame, "conservative" newspaper, the Senate Democrats
have used the filibuster to block a continuation of the
Whitewater hearings. "Yet, there is nothing to stop Republicans
from going ahead with Whitewatergate hearings but their own
wimpishness. The Banking Committee, the Judiciary Committee
[Orrin Hatch], and a number of other committees and subcommittees
could easily claim oversight and investigatory jurisdiction. One
can't help but wonder why the Republicans don't just get down to
work."
So are you then thus saying, Washington Times, that the
Republicans maybe themselves have "dirty laundry"?
Here's a scoop for Washington Times: When Mr. Whipple tells
his customers, "Don't squeeze the Charmin," if you'll look and
notice very carefully -- *he* *himself* *is* *squeezing* *the*