The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/m/mcguire.wayne/1996/mcguire.0696


From wmcguire@cybercom.net Wed Jun  5 11:59:55 PDT 1996
Article: 51396 of alt.activism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.newt-gingrich,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.activism,alt.politics.usa.newt-gingrich,alt.society.conservatism,alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.reform,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater
Subject: Re: Public to right-wing - YOU'RE WASTING YOUR TIME!!!
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 1996 17:31:56 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services (617) 396-0491
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <31b5c1e3.4903860@news.cybercom.net>
References: <4p3r43$cv0@sjx-ixn5.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial2-10.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.misc:384502 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:315969 alt.politics.usa.republican:209573 alt.activism:51396 alt.politics.usa.newt-gingrich:59411 alt.society.conservatism:42130 alt.politics.correct:105937 alt.politics.reform:72752 alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:23997

WellWell@ix.netcom.com (WellWell) wrote:

>From The New York Times, June 5, 1996:	  
>
>The standings of President Clinton and Sen. Bob Dole remain
>relatively unchanged from two months ago, despite events that
>could have roiled the presidential race, including the convictions of
>Clinton's former business partners and Dole's resignation from the
>Senate, the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll shows. 

I'm surprised that anyone who is familiar with the history of
presidential campaigns is paying much attention to polls at this stage
in the race. They are meaningless. They can change overnight, and
often do. All this arguing and gloating about current polling data is
silly.

Also, many Democrats are making a big mistake in viciously attacking
everyone who is concerned about the Whitewater scandal.
Many of those who are concerned about Whitewater are not especially
Republicans or conservatives. They are simply American citizens who
feel that there are serious dangers in the flagrant abuse of power by
any government or politician, regardless of party affiliation.

Some Democrats are making an immense political mistake in tying their
fortunes to one person, Bill Clinton, and by savaging anyone who dares
raise questions about his behavior and that of his closest political
and business associates.

They are not being smart. Bill Clinton and Whitewater may well take
them and the Democratic Party down with them. The unthinking hotheads
on the Democratic side have certainly offered this political
opportunity on a silver platter.

Why, for instance, shouldn't any reasonable Democrat be as curious and
concerned about the peculiar circumstances of Vince Foster's death as
any Republican? Why the knee-jerk reaction to dismiss Fostergate
without a full investigation?

The hysteria of those who are trying to block a full investigation
into all aspects of Whitewater is destroying their credidibility.

--
Wayne McGuire
wmcguire@cybercom.net
http://www.cybercom.net/~wmcguire/


From wmcguire@cybercom.net Wed Jun  5 12:15:26 PDT 1996
Article: 384502 of talk.politics.misc
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.newt-gingrich,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.activism,alt.politics.usa.newt-gingrich,alt.society.conservatism,alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.reform,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater
Subject: Re: Public to right-wing - YOU'RE WASTING YOUR TIME!!!
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 1996 17:31:56 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services (617) 396-0491
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <31b5c1e3.4903860@news.cybercom.net>
References: <4p3r43$cv0@sjx-ixn5.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial2-10.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.misc:384502 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:315969 alt.politics.usa.republican:209573 alt.activism:51396 alt.politics.usa.newt-gingrich:59411 alt.society.conservatism:42130 alt.politics.correct:105937 alt.politics.reform:72752 alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:23997

WellWell@ix.netcom.com (WellWell) wrote:

>From The New York Times, June 5, 1996:	  
>
>The standings of President Clinton and Sen. Bob Dole remain
>relatively unchanged from two months ago, despite events that
>could have roiled the presidential race, including the convictions of
>Clinton's former business partners and Dole's resignation from the
>Senate, the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll shows. 

I'm surprised that anyone who is familiar with the history of
presidential campaigns is paying much attention to polls at this stage
in the race. They are meaningless. They can change overnight, and
often do. All this arguing and gloating about current polling data is
silly.

Also, many Democrats are making a big mistake in viciously attacking
everyone who is concerned about the Whitewater scandal.
Many of those who are concerned about Whitewater are not especially
Republicans or conservatives. They are simply American citizens who
feel that there are serious dangers in the flagrant abuse of power by
any government or politician, regardless of party affiliation.

Some Democrats are making an immense political mistake in tying their
fortunes to one person, Bill Clinton, and by savaging anyone who dares
raise questions about his behavior and that of his closest political
and business associates.

They are not being smart. Bill Clinton and Whitewater may well take
them and the Democratic Party down with them. The unthinking hotheads
on the Democratic side have certainly offered this political
opportunity on a silver platter.

Why, for instance, shouldn't any reasonable Democrat be as curious and
concerned about the peculiar circumstances of Vince Foster's death as
any Republican? Why the knee-jerk reaction to dismiss Fostergate
without a full investigation?

The hysteria of those who are trying to block a full investigation
into all aspects of Whitewater is destroying their credidibility.

--
Wayne McGuire
wmcguire@cybercom.net
http://www.cybercom.net/~wmcguire/


From wmcguire@cybercom.net Wed Jun  5 16:06:17 PDT 1996
Article: 105937 of alt.politics.correct
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.newt-gingrich,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.activism,alt.politics.usa.newt-gingrich,alt.society.conservatism,alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.reform,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater
Subject: Re: Public to right-wing - YOU'RE WASTING YOUR TIME!!!
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 1996 17:31:56 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services (617) 396-0491
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <31b5c1e3.4903860@news.cybercom.net>
References: <4p3r43$cv0@sjx-ixn5.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial2-10.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.misc:384502 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:315969 alt.politics.usa.republican:209573 alt.activism:51396 alt.politics.usa.newt-gingrich:59411 alt.society.conservatism:42130 alt.politics.correct:105937 alt.politics.reform:72752 alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:23997

WellWell@ix.netcom.com (WellWell) wrote:

>From The New York Times, June 5, 1996:	  
>
>The standings of President Clinton and Sen. Bob Dole remain
>relatively unchanged from two months ago, despite events that
>could have roiled the presidential race, including the convictions of
>Clinton's former business partners and Dole's resignation from the
>Senate, the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll shows. 

I'm surprised that anyone who is familiar with the history of
presidential campaigns is paying much attention to polls at this stage
in the race. They are meaningless. They can change overnight, and
often do. All this arguing and gloating about current polling data is
silly.

Also, many Democrats are making a big mistake in viciously attacking
everyone who is concerned about the Whitewater scandal.
Many of those who are concerned about Whitewater are not especially
Republicans or conservatives. They are simply American citizens who
feel that there are serious dangers in the flagrant abuse of power by
any government or politician, regardless of party affiliation.

Some Democrats are making an immense political mistake in tying their
fortunes to one person, Bill Clinton, and by savaging anyone who dares
raise questions about his behavior and that of his closest political
and business associates.

They are not being smart. Bill Clinton and Whitewater may well take
them and the Democratic Party down with them. The unthinking hotheads
on the Democratic side have certainly offered this political
opportunity on a silver platter.

Why, for instance, shouldn't any reasonable Democrat be as curious and
concerned about the peculiar circumstances of Vince Foster's death as
any Republican? Why the knee-jerk reaction to dismiss Fostergate
without a full investigation?

The hysteria of those who are trying to block a full investigation
into all aspects of Whitewater is destroying their credidibility.

--
Wayne McGuire
wmcguire@cybercom.net
http://www.cybercom.net/~wmcguire/


From wmcguire@cybercom.net Wed Jun  5 16:09:30 PDT 1996
Article: 241808 of alt.politics.clinton
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.politics.clinton,alt.journalism
Subject: The Big Media as Whitewater Co-Conspirators
Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 15:39:46 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services (617) 396-0491
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <31b1b52c.4565718@news.cybercom.net>
References: <31AEC6E4.63CE@globaldialog.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial1-5.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:23889 alt.politics.clinton:241808 alt.journalism:41623

Does anyone know why the persons mentioned below expressed "vitriolic
opposition" towards Morris's book, and especially regarding the Mena factor?

"John Q. Public"  wrote:

>From: denmorpar@aol.com
>Date: Thu, 30 May 1996 17:35:13 -0400
>Posted-Date: Thu, 30 May 1996 17:35:13 -0400
>Reply-To: denmorpar@aol.com (DenMorPar)
>To: "John Q. Public" 
>
>Subject: Re: Hewitt and Wallace: PARTNERS IN POWER
>X-Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
>References: <31AAF4F6.526B@globaldialog.com>
>In-Reply-To: <31AAF4F6.526B@globaldialog.com>
>
>...It is  my understanding that Roger Morris' book aroused,
>predictably enough, serious internal controversy at 60 Minutes, including
>vitriolic opposition from producers Lowell Bergman and Howard Rosenberg,
>as well as Don Hewitt.  Hewitt was reportedly called at one point by Bob
>Woodward who, like Bergman and others, has his own historical reasons for
>being dismissive of a story like Mena, as well as a personal animus toward
>Roger Morris ever since Morris wrote the introduction to the Watergate
>expose' "Silent Coup" and testified in that book as to Woodward's previous
>connections with the intelligence community.  There are old and new
>politics at work here, but it seems to be quite savage and all out of
>proportion to the issue of serious consideration for an utterly serious
>book, which has been compared to de Toqueville in its breadth and depth. 
>Morris has been told for several weeks now that 60 Minutes is NOT doing a
>story, since they chose to focus on one small incident in the book (L.D.
>Brown's testimony about Clinton's knowledge of Mena, a few pages out of
>500 ) and could not or would not work to independently investigate and
>corroborate Brown's historic testimony.  If they are doing anything on
>Morris' book, or any of the many subjects it covers far beyond Mena, it is
>not with Roger's knowledge or cooperation.  Sally Denton

--
Wayne McGuire
wmcguire@cybercom.net
http://www.cybercom.net/~wmcguire/


From wmcguire@cybercom.net Thu Jun  6 19:46:10 PDT 1996
Article: 56174 of alt.conspiracy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news2.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.media,alt.president.clinton,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.conspiracy,alt.journalism,alt.news-media,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.org.cia
Subject: Re: The Big Media as Whitewater Co-Conspirators
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 1996 15:52:59 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services (617) 396-0491
Lines: 80
Message-ID: <31b6f930.716981@news.cybercom.net>
References: <4p07qk$7de@life.ai.mit.edu>  <31b5cde2.7975001@news.cybercom.net> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial1-19.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.media:8450 alt.president.clinton:75655 alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:24099 alt.conspiracy:56174 alt.journalism:41979 alt.news-media:24569 alt.politics.clinton:242827 alt.politics.org.cia:11321

lar-jen@interaccess.com (Larry-Jennie) wrote:

>In article <31b5cde2.7975001@news.cybercom.net> wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire) writes:

>>Does anyone have more information about how The Washington Post
>>cancelled this story by Denton and Morris?
>
>>Has The Washington Post offered any official explanation for its
>>behavior?
>
>Nein.  Government media organs answer to no one except their masters. -- Larry
>
>Here's what Denton and Morris had to say:
>
>THE CRIMES OF MENA
>Article by Sally Denton and Roger Morris
>Penthouse
>July, 1995

Thanks! What a remarkable story!

Check this out:

>     This was, after all, the thoroughly documented story of an 
>enormous crime -- of billions of dollars in gunrunning and drug 
>smuggling done with the apparent collusion and cover-up of the 
>U.S. government. It raised ominous questions not only about Bill 
>Clinton, but about presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush as 
>well -- not simply a single set of scoundrels, but a far larger 
>culture of official lawlessness. And behind the sorry episode at 
>*The Washington Post* was something nearly as sinister -- the 
>tragic inability or refusal of a major media institution to confront 
>that malignant dark side of American life and governance, even 
>when presented with unprecedented evidence.

Increasingly it is impossible to escape the conclusion, based on the
facts, that Whitewater taken as a whole represents one of the greatest
criminal conspiracies in American history. The mass media are full and
willing co-conspirators, as are the Congressional and Republican
agencies formally charged with investigating Whitewater. Pretty much
the entire American establishment is engaged in a frantic coverup of
Whitewater, which is a scandal that extends far beyond the domain of
Bill and Hillary Clinton's financial irregularities in Arkansas.

About the only place you are likely to discover the truth about this
affair is on the Internet. Obviously the big media intend to hang
tough and continue to censor all the key information.

The big question is this: why did the big media energetically defy the
federal government on the Pentagon Papers, CIA scandals and Watergate,
but show more fanaticism about covering up Whitewater than even the
Clinton administration? What big media interest would be severely
damaged by a full and fair investigation?

How will it ever be possible again to view the media as independent
and courageous seekers after truth after observing the crudity with
they have tried to crush any honest investigation into Whitewater?

Here's what the American people have a right to know and need to know
if American constitutional government is going to survive: who came up
with bright idea of dealing drugs as a supposed instrument of national
security? These geniuses need to be brought to justice. They screwed
up in the worst possible way. Let the chips fall where they may: it
doesn't matter if the ringleaders were Republicans or Democrats.

Ross Perot and Pat Buchanan, regardless of how much we all may
disagree with them on many issues, are dead on target on their chief
issue: the American establishment has become utterly rotten and
corrupt. Probably some establishment insiders are well aware of the
problem and are deeply concerned about it, but are afraid of speaking
out for fear of being destroyed.

But if one or two insiders begin to talk, from their strong moral
convictions and sense of duty, the floodgates will be opened. It is
going to be difficult for the big media to keep a lid on this scandal.

--
Wayne McGuire
wmcguire@cybercom.net
http://www.cybercom.net/~wmcguire/


From wmcguire@cybercom.net Fri Jun  7 19:24:36 PDT 1996
Article: 242827 of alt.politics.clinton
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news2.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.media,alt.president.clinton,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.conspiracy,alt.journalism,alt.news-media,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.org.cia
Subject: Re: The Big Media as Whitewater Co-Conspirators
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 1996 15:52:59 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services (617) 396-0491
Lines: 80
Message-ID: <31b6f930.716981@news.cybercom.net>
References: <4p07qk$7de@life.ai.mit.edu>  <31b5cde2.7975001@news.cybercom.net> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial1-19.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.media:8450 alt.president.clinton:75655 alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:24099 alt.conspiracy:56174 alt.journalism:41979 alt.news-media:24569 alt.politics.clinton:242827 alt.politics.org.cia:11321

lar-jen@interaccess.com (Larry-Jennie) wrote:

>In article <31b5cde2.7975001@news.cybercom.net> wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire) writes:

>>Does anyone have more information about how The Washington Post
>>cancelled this story by Denton and Morris?
>
>>Has The Washington Post offered any official explanation for its
>>behavior?
>
>Nein.  Government media organs answer to no one except their masters. -- Larry
>
>Here's what Denton and Morris had to say:
>
>THE CRIMES OF MENA
>Article by Sally Denton and Roger Morris
>Penthouse
>July, 1995

Thanks! What a remarkable story!

Check this out:

>     This was, after all, the thoroughly documented story of an 
>enormous crime -- of billions of dollars in gunrunning and drug 
>smuggling done with the apparent collusion and cover-up of the 
>U.S. government. It raised ominous questions not only about Bill 
>Clinton, but about presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush as 
>well -- not simply a single set of scoundrels, but a far larger 
>culture of official lawlessness. And behind the sorry episode at 
>*The Washington Post* was something nearly as sinister -- the 
>tragic inability or refusal of a major media institution to confront 
>that malignant dark side of American life and governance, even 
>when presented with unprecedented evidence.

Increasingly it is impossible to escape the conclusion, based on the
facts, that Whitewater taken as a whole represents one of the greatest
criminal conspiracies in American history. The mass media are full and
willing co-conspirators, as are the Congressional and Republican
agencies formally charged with investigating Whitewater. Pretty much
the entire American establishment is engaged in a frantic coverup of
Whitewater, which is a scandal that extends far beyond the domain of
Bill and Hillary Clinton's financial irregularities in Arkansas.

About the only place you are likely to discover the truth about this
affair is on the Internet. Obviously the big media intend to hang
tough and continue to censor all the key information.

The big question is this: why did the big media energetically defy the
federal government on the Pentagon Papers, CIA scandals and Watergate,
but show more fanaticism about covering up Whitewater than even the
Clinton administration? What big media interest would be severely
damaged by a full and fair investigation?

How will it ever be possible again to view the media as independent
and courageous seekers after truth after observing the crudity with
they have tried to crush any honest investigation into Whitewater?

Here's what the American people have a right to know and need to know
if American constitutional government is going to survive: who came up
with bright idea of dealing drugs as a supposed instrument of national
security? These geniuses need to be brought to justice. They screwed
up in the worst possible way. Let the chips fall where they may: it
doesn't matter if the ringleaders were Republicans or Democrats.

Ross Perot and Pat Buchanan, regardless of how much we all may
disagree with them on many issues, are dead on target on their chief
issue: the American establishment has become utterly rotten and
corrupt. Probably some establishment insiders are well aware of the
problem and are deeply concerned about it, but are afraid of speaking
out for fear of being destroyed.

But if one or two insiders begin to talk, from their strong moral
convictions and sense of duty, the floodgates will be opened. It is
going to be difficult for the big media to keep a lid on this scandal.

--
Wayne McGuire
wmcguire@cybercom.net
http://www.cybercom.net/~wmcguire/


From wmcguire@cybercom.net Sat Jun  8 07:52:50 PDT 1996
Article: 56601 of alt.conspiracy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news2.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.media,alt.president.clinton,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.conspiracy,alt.journalism,alt.news-media,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.org.cia
Subject: Re: The Big Media as Whitewater Co-Conspirators
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 1996 22:36:41 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services (617) 396-0491
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <31b75942.25315407@news.cybercom.net>
References: <4p07qk$7de@life.ai.mit.edu>  <31b5cde2.7975001@news.cybercom.net>  <31b6f930.716981@news.cybercom.net> <4p7e9u$md0@anarchy.io.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial1-6.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.media:8474 alt.president.clinton:76047 alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:24215 alt.conspiracy:56601 alt.journalism:42171 alt.news-media:24640 alt.politics.clinton:243417 alt.politics.org.cia:11341

Brett,

Very nice message--one of the best I have read in this newsgroup for
its clear-sighted analysis.

brettw@io.com (quantum) wrote:

>We definitely agree here, but I certainly wouldn't title the conspiracy
>"Whitewater".  That lays too much of this at Clinton's feet (not that I'm
>a Clinton fan).  This thing started with the October Suprise -- establishing
>contacts and connections for an arms network, then moved into Iran/Contra.
>The Contras were already running coke to suport themselves.  The CIA, not
>new to drug running themselves, realized that as long as they were shipping
>arms down, why not ship cocaine up and fund the whole ball of wax.

When you put all the information together, this is where the so-called
"Whitewater" affair seems to begin: with the October Surprise. And if
you remember that period, you will recall that the big media also went
out of their way then to squash any meaningful investigation into the
October Surprise, which also heavily involved Israel. (According to
some reports, the October Surprise scam was primarily dreamed up by
right-wing Israeli forces that were anxious to see Jimmy Carter
removed from power because of his Mideast policies, which threatened
their vision of Greater Israel).

Much provocative and important information about the October Surprise
that was revealed in books by Gary Sick and others was ignored or
unfairly ridiculed in the big media.

>They only cut Bill in because they were running this thing in his backyard
>and needed him to run interference with the local and state police, and
>because he had the power (and motivation) to put in place a money
>laundering operation.  Granted, in Bill they found a willing
>co-conspirator, but calling this whole complex affair (which is much, much
>more complex than most realize) "The Whitewater Affair" is like calling
>the "JFK Conspiracy" the "Clay Shaw Affair".  It misses the point and
>points the finger at a peripheral character.  Ableit one who should go to
>jail.  Everybody who follows this has their own ax to grind in this, but
>we need to stand above partisanship and be willing to condemn all who
>violated the law.

I agree. Clinton is a peripheral player, and "Whitewater" is an
American problem, not a Democratic or Republican problem. I feel no
vindictive or partisan urge to see him punished, imprisoned or
impeached, but I do think the full truth needs to come out about the
activities in which he was involved.

Unless the mess is fully cleaned up, the nation is going to suffer
many consequences down the road. One consequence we are already seeing
is a widespread distrust, contempt and hatred of the federal
government stirring in the land, among the militia movement and other
groups. That is an unhealthy development. But look who is responsible
for creating all the distrust and alienation.

The cancer needs to be excised, if we are to prevent a slide into
anarchy, revolution or civil war. What is appalling is that some of
the "Whitewater" co-conspirators seem willing to further undermine
American democratic principles in order to perpetuate the coverup of
their crimes. The cancer is still growing.

--
Wayne McGuire
wmcguire@cybercom.net
http://www.cybercom.net/~wmcguire/


From wmcguire@cybercom.net Sat Jun  8 20:09:28 PDT 1996
Article: 243417 of alt.politics.clinton
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news2.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.media,alt.president.clinton,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.conspiracy,alt.journalism,alt.news-media,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.org.cia
Subject: Re: The Big Media as Whitewater Co-Conspirators
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 1996 22:36:41 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services (617) 396-0491
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <31b75942.25315407@news.cybercom.net>
References: <4p07qk$7de@life.ai.mit.edu>  <31b5cde2.7975001@news.cybercom.net>  <31b6f930.716981@news.cybercom.net> <4p7e9u$md0@anarchy.io.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial1-6.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.media:8474 alt.president.clinton:76047 alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:24215 alt.conspiracy:56601 alt.journalism:42171 alt.news-media:24640 alt.politics.clinton:243417 alt.politics.org.cia:11341

Brett,

Very nice message--one of the best I have read in this newsgroup for
its clear-sighted analysis.

brettw@io.com (quantum) wrote:

>We definitely agree here, but I certainly wouldn't title the conspiracy
>"Whitewater".  That lays too much of this at Clinton's feet (not that I'm
>a Clinton fan).  This thing started with the October Suprise -- establishing
>contacts and connections for an arms network, then moved into Iran/Contra.
>The Contras were already running coke to suport themselves.  The CIA, not
>new to drug running themselves, realized that as long as they were shipping
>arms down, why not ship cocaine up and fund the whole ball of wax.

When you put all the information together, this is where the so-called
"Whitewater" affair seems to begin: with the October Surprise. And if
you remember that period, you will recall that the big media also went
out of their way then to squash any meaningful investigation into the
October Surprise, which also heavily involved Israel. (According to
some reports, the October Surprise scam was primarily dreamed up by
right-wing Israeli forces that were anxious to see Jimmy Carter
removed from power because of his Mideast policies, which threatened
their vision of Greater Israel).

Much provocative and important information about the October Surprise
that was revealed in books by Gary Sick and others was ignored or
unfairly ridiculed in the big media.

>They only cut Bill in because they were running this thing in his backyard
>and needed him to run interference with the local and state police, and
>because he had the power (and motivation) to put in place a money
>laundering operation.  Granted, in Bill they found a willing
>co-conspirator, but calling this whole complex affair (which is much, much
>more complex than most realize) "The Whitewater Affair" is like calling
>the "JFK Conspiracy" the "Clay Shaw Affair".  It misses the point and
>points the finger at a peripheral character.  Ableit one who should go to
>jail.  Everybody who follows this has their own ax to grind in this, but
>we need to stand above partisanship and be willing to condemn all who
>violated the law.

I agree. Clinton is a peripheral player, and "Whitewater" is an
American problem, not a Democratic or Republican problem. I feel no
vindictive or partisan urge to see him punished, imprisoned or
impeached, but I do think the full truth needs to come out about the
activities in which he was involved.

Unless the mess is fully cleaned up, the nation is going to suffer
many consequences down the road. One consequence we are already seeing
is a widespread distrust, contempt and hatred of the federal
government stirring in the land, among the militia movement and other
groups. That is an unhealthy development. But look who is responsible
for creating all the distrust and alienation.

The cancer needs to be excised, if we are to prevent a slide into
anarchy, revolution or civil war. What is appalling is that some of
the "Whitewater" co-conspirators seem willing to further undermine
American democratic principles in order to perpetuate the coverup of
their crimes. The cancer is still growing.

--
Wayne McGuire
wmcguire@cybercom.net
http://www.cybercom.net/~wmcguire/


From wmcguire@cybercom.net Mon Jun 17 17:47:28 PDT 1996
Article: 25219 of alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.books.reviews,alt.journalism,alt.news-media,alt.politics.reform,dc.politics
Subject: Re: Blood Sport vs Partners in Power publicity?
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 17:53:16 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services (617) 396-0491
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <31c59908.1910888@news.cybercom.net>
References:  
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial2-14.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:25219 alt.books.reviews:17223 alt.journalism:43601 alt.news-media:25285 alt.politics.reform:76126

stephenh@netcom.com (stephenh) wrote:

>stephenh (stephenh@netcom.com) wrote:
>
>: I have seen almost no publicity about Morris' Partners in Power
>: book on the Clintons so far.  This is in contrast to reams
>: of publicity for Blood Sport.  There must be some reason.
>: What accounts for the discrepancy?
>
>Update:
>
>I've heard about a review in the 6-16 Chicago Tribune (unfavorable);
>I have not seen any review in the 6-16 NY Times.

The Chicago Tribune review was a classic example of how to do a
hatchet job on a book. The author airily dismissed the factual
accuracy of Morris's account of Mena, but failed to provide a single
convincing example in which Morris got his facts wrong.

If the author were forced to defend his views on the Internet in an
interactive and participatory forum, he would sink like a stone. An
officious and oracular tone will not substitute for facts and reason
on the Internet. You can only can get away with that sort of nonsense
in the traditional media.

The big media seem to be intent on ignoring or discrediting Morris's
book, which proves once again that they are deeply afraid of the true
facts about Whitewater being revealed. They are in all-out coverup
mode.

What precisely are they afraid of? That's still the big question.

If any of the revelations about Clinton in Morris's book had been made
about any other president in recent years, they would have been
splashed all over the front pages of every major newspaper in the land
and been the lead story in all the broadcast media. The big media, as
co-conspirators in the Whitewater coverup, have apparently taken it
upon themselves essentially to censor Morris's book. Clinton's ties to
the CIA, Mena and cocaine are a forbidden topic in democratic America,
(as are all the questions about Vince Foster's death).

--
Wayne McGuire
wmcguire@cybercom.net
http://www.cybercom.net/~wmcguire/


From wmcguire@cybercom.net Mon Jun 17 23:54:35 PDT 1996
Article: 392744 of talk.politics.misc
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!news.sdsmt.edu!news.mid.net!mr.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.president.clinton,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.clinton,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater
Subject: Re: @ CLINTON uses FBI to investigate political enemies
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 21:03:45 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services (617) 396-0491
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <31c5c749.13754203@news.cybercom.net>
References: <4pccaa$ieo@news.tamu.edu> <31b9a347.6709930@buck.intelli-net.com>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial1-26.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.misc:392744 alt.president.clinton:77855 alt.politics.usa.republican:218027 alt.politics.democrats.d:88196 alt.politics.clinton:247104 alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:25241

dlo@francium.dr.att.com (Dave Olson) wrote:

>In article , Zack C Sessions  writes:
>} ... The documents obtained from
>} the FBI were obtained perfectly legally and within the FBI's policy.
>
>FBI Director Freeh said they were "egregious violations of privacy" and "without
>justification".

Do you see the utter absurdities in which so many Democrats and
liberals have been trapped in defending Clinton? That is why they are
dropping like flies--they are tired of the humiliations and
embarrassments.

Here we have one Clinton apologist making assertions about the FBI
that are directly and violently contradicted by the head of the FBI
himself. The Clinton thing is over. It was a clever operation (and
apparently a Casey Republican operation) while it lasted.

--
Wayne McGuire
wmcguire@cybercom.net
http://www.cybercom.net/~wmcguire/


From wmcguire@cybercom.net Tue Jun 18 00:06:46 PDT 1996
Article: 25241 of alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!news.sdsmt.edu!news.mid.net!mr.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.president.clinton,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.clinton,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater
Subject: Re: @ CLINTON uses FBI to investigate political enemies
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 21:03:45 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services (617) 396-0491
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <31c5c749.13754203@news.cybercom.net>
References: <4pccaa$ieo@news.tamu.edu> <31b9a347.6709930@buck.intelli-net.com>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial1-26.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.misc:392744 alt.president.clinton:77855 alt.politics.usa.republican:218027 alt.politics.democrats.d:88196 alt.politics.clinton:247104 alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:25241

dlo@francium.dr.att.com (Dave Olson) wrote:

>In article , Zack C Sessions  writes:
>} ... The documents obtained from
>} the FBI were obtained perfectly legally and within the FBI's policy.
>
>FBI Director Freeh said they were "egregious violations of privacy" and "without
>justification".

Do you see the utter absurdities in which so many Democrats and
liberals have been trapped in defending Clinton? That is why they are
dropping like flies--they are tired of the humiliations and
embarrassments.

Here we have one Clinton apologist making assertions about the FBI
that are directly and violently contradicted by the head of the FBI
himself. The Clinton thing is over. It was a clever operation (and
apparently a Casey Republican operation) while it lasted.

--
Wayne McGuire
wmcguire@cybercom.net
http://www.cybercom.net/~wmcguire/


From wmcguire@cybercom.net Tue Jun 18 14:45:45 PDT 1996
Article: 247104 of alt.politics.clinton
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!news.sdsmt.edu!news.mid.net!mr.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.president.clinton,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.clinton,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater
Subject: Re: @ CLINTON uses FBI to investigate political enemies
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 21:03:45 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services (617) 396-0491
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <31c5c749.13754203@news.cybercom.net>
References: <4pccaa$ieo@news.tamu.edu> <31b9a347.6709930@buck.intelli-net.com>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial1-26.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.misc:392744 alt.president.clinton:77855 alt.politics.usa.republican:218027 alt.politics.democrats.d:88196 alt.politics.clinton:247104 alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:25241

dlo@francium.dr.att.com (Dave Olson) wrote:

>In article , Zack C Sessions  writes:
>} ... The documents obtained from
>} the FBI were obtained perfectly legally and within the FBI's policy.
>
>FBI Director Freeh said they were "egregious violations of privacy" and "without
>justification".

Do you see the utter absurdities in which so many Democrats and
liberals have been trapped in defending Clinton? That is why they are
dropping like flies--they are tired of the humiliations and
embarrassments.

Here we have one Clinton apologist making assertions about the FBI
that are directly and violently contradicted by the head of the FBI
himself. The Clinton thing is over. It was a clever operation (and
apparently a Casey Republican operation) while it lasted.

--
Wayne McGuire
wmcguire@cybercom.net
http://www.cybercom.net/~wmcguire/


From wmcguire@cybercom.net Wed Jun 19 12:21:42 PDT 1996
Article: 60079 of alt.conspiracy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!psgrain!qiclab.scn.rain.com!orcalink.com!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.politics.clinton,alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: ALBEDO Re: Roger Olsen REALLY needs glasses.
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 21:51:44 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services (617) 396-0491
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <31c72497.8184618@news.cybercom.net>
References: <4panbp$1ve@inx3.inx.net> <4po81l$6ib@sjx-ixn2.ix.netcom.com> <4ps3f9$561@pulm1.accessone.com> <4psd28$gi@dfw-ixnews3.ix.netcom.com> <4q1j2j$abp@pulm1.accessone.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial1-2.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:25335 alt.politics.clinton:247494 alt.conspiracy:60079

SwopaTwo@aol.com (Swopa) wrote:

>But the gun doesn't LOOK "dark blue" in the photo, does it?
>It looks black, with hints of gray.

Why is a person of your obvious intelligence spending so much energy
trying to spin Whitewater away from the truth? The presently known
totality of facts about Whitewater indicates strongly that we have a
major and real scandal here of many dimensions, and that the lid is
going to be blown off the coverup effort.

A person as smart as yourself must surely realize that you have
positioned yourself on the wrong side of the controversy. So why do
you continue to set yourself up for a big fall?

The behavior of the horde of mindless partisans on this issue I can
understand: they aren't bright enough to see what's coming. But you
can see the locomotive bearing down on the tracks, right?

--
Wayne McGuire
wmcguire@cybercom.net
http://www.cybercom.net/~wmcguire/


From wmcguire@cybercom.net Wed Jun 19 14:24:07 PDT 1996
Article: 247494 of alt.politics.clinton
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!psgrain!qiclab.scn.rain.com!orcalink.com!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.politics.clinton,alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: ALBEDO Re: Roger Olsen REALLY needs glasses.
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 21:51:44 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services (617) 396-0491
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <31c72497.8184618@news.cybercom.net>
References: <4panbp$1ve@inx3.inx.net> <4po81l$6ib@sjx-ixn2.ix.netcom.com> <4ps3f9$561@pulm1.accessone.com> <4psd28$gi@dfw-ixnews3.ix.netcom.com> <4q1j2j$abp@pulm1.accessone.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial1-2.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:25335 alt.politics.clinton:247494 alt.conspiracy:60079

SwopaTwo@aol.com (Swopa) wrote:

>But the gun doesn't LOOK "dark blue" in the photo, does it?
>It looks black, with hints of gray.

Why is a person of your obvious intelligence spending so much energy
trying to spin Whitewater away from the truth? The presently known
totality of facts about Whitewater indicates strongly that we have a
major and real scandal here of many dimensions, and that the lid is
going to be blown off the coverup effort.

A person as smart as yourself must surely realize that you have
positioned yourself on the wrong side of the controversy. So why do
you continue to set yourself up for a big fall?

The behavior of the horde of mindless partisans on this issue I can
understand: they aren't bright enough to see what's coming. But you
can see the locomotive bearing down on the tracks, right?

--
Wayne McGuire
wmcguire@cybercom.net
http://www.cybercom.net/~wmcguire/


From wmcguire@cybercom.net Wed Jun 19 14:25:10 PDT 1996
Article: 25335 of alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!psgrain!qiclab.scn.rain.com!orcalink.com!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.politics.clinton,alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: ALBEDO Re: Roger Olsen REALLY needs glasses.
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 21:51:44 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services (617) 396-0491
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <31c72497.8184618@news.cybercom.net>
References: <4panbp$1ve@inx3.inx.net> <4po81l$6ib@sjx-ixn2.ix.netcom.com> <4ps3f9$561@pulm1.accessone.com> <4psd28$gi@dfw-ixnews3.ix.netcom.com> <4q1j2j$abp@pulm1.accessone.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial1-2.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:25335 alt.politics.clinton:247494 alt.conspiracy:60079

SwopaTwo@aol.com (Swopa) wrote:

>But the gun doesn't LOOK "dark blue" in the photo, does it?
>It looks black, with hints of gray.

Why is a person of your obvious intelligence spending so much energy
trying to spin Whitewater away from the truth? The presently known
totality of facts about Whitewater indicates strongly that we have a
major and real scandal here of many dimensions, and that the lid is
going to be blown off the coverup effort.

A person as smart as yourself must surely realize that you have
positioned yourself on the wrong side of the controversy. So why do
you continue to set yourself up for a big fall?

The behavior of the horde of mindless partisans on this issue I can
understand: they aren't bright enough to see what's coming. But you
can see the locomotive bearing down on the tracks, right?

--
Wayne McGuire
wmcguire@cybercom.net
http://www.cybercom.net/~wmcguire/


From wmcguire@cybercom.net Sat Jun 29 10:14:15 PDT 1996
Article: 62655 of alt.conspiracy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!kryten.awinc.com!laslo.netnet.net!en.com!uunet!inXS.uu.net!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: wmcguire@cybercom.net (Wayne McGuire)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.conspiracy
Subject: The Self-Destruction of Orlin Grabbe
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 16:15:48 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services (617) 396-0491
Lines: 88
Message-ID: <31d3fd8d.325662814@news.cybercom.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mfd-dial4-20.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:26219 alt.conspiracy:62655

We've just witnessed one of the most spectacular acts of
self-immolation on the Internet I've ever seen. Orlin Grabbe has
apparently devoted many months to ruining his credibility and
reputation utterly. He will never again be treated with anything but
contempt. He might just as well have poured gasoline all over himself
and lit a match.

So what's going on?

A number of possibilities:

1. Grabbe is a brilliant prankster and gifted fantasist who has been
amusing himself for many months by spinning tall tales and smoking out
all the conspiracy crazies on the net.

Based on private email I've exchanged with the man, I strongly doubt
this explanation. The intonations of his previous messages do not
leave me with this impression.

2. Grabbe is a vicious sociopath or a pathological liar or paranoid
schizophrenic or mad hatter or all four wrapped into one.

This seems a bit more likely than the first explanation: who, for
instance, but a vicious sociopath would be laughing about his role in
helping to destroy the career and life of Jim Norman? Funny stuff, for
a sociopath.

3. Grabbe finally realized that he has been duped by his intelligence
sources. He feels like a fool for having been taken in, and is trying
to hide his humiliation and embarrassment by pretending to be a
brilliant prankster who has duped and humiliated his victims. He's
attempting to transfer his embarrassment to others.

4. Grabbe is a disinformation specialist working for the bad guys who
has mixed up bizarre untruths with truths, in order to discredit the
truth.

Note that Grabbe has left disinformation and lies in his apology: I
asked Roger Morris and Sally Denton if they had relied on Grabbe for
their information about Bill Clinton and the CIA, and they said no.

5. Grabbe has had the ever-living shit scared out of him by the bad
guys--they managed to get to him. They have allowed him to hold on to
a fig leaf of dignity by passing himself off as a clever prankster,
while achieving their main goal of inflicting severe damage on the
credibility of everything Grabbe has ever said. They are
metaphorically holding a gun to his head and demanding that he clean
up the mess he has made for them.

In support of this theory, notice the hysterical and involuted sarcasm
in his apology, which differs greatly from his usual razor-sharp
irony. He appears to be under enormous stress in that post, and
perhaps under duress as well.

With regard to the timing of Grabbe's dramatic change of heart, I note
that it occurs after controversy about a possible Mossad role in
Whitewater reached a fever pitch, based on Grabbe's claims about a
sensitive videotape.

In any case, the man has now been ruined, either by his own innate
weirdness or by the pressure of others. He will probably never dare to
show his face on the Internet again.

If any one has any insights about Grabbe based on private
communications with him, let me know. The tone of his apology differs
markedly from the tone of earlier private messages I've received from
him.

A personal note: I've always been highly skeptical about the Fifth
Column story, and have repeatedly pressed Grabbe and Norman to offer
even the least shred of proof for their assertions. They always came
up empty-handed. My take on the situation was that the two of them
possibly had conventional intelligence sources for their information
(not renegade hackers roaming the country with a secret Cray), and
were using the Fifth Column story as a cover or device to disseminate
some true information. Now everything about these two gentlemen is in
doubt.

Any way you look at it, something strange has just transpired.

This entire exercise in its final outcome has been pure poison from
the standpoint of attempting to work through to the truth about
Whitewater. It's obvious who has benefited from it.

--
Wayne McGuire
wmcguire@cybercom.net
http://www.cybercom.net/~wmcguire/



Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.