(archived from June 18, 2014)
by Scott Creighton
Last night, Hillary Clinton and her PR specialists held an infomercial in the guise of a town hall style Q&A session on CNN in which she answered scripted questions from “average citizens” about the issues of the day. The interview came not 24 hours after news of the capture of the “Benghazi suspect” hit the headlines and only about a week after her book, Hard Choices, hit the shelves.
During last night’s infomercial, when asked by a school teacher (of course) about stricter gun control laws, here is what Hillary said (video):
“I’m well aware that this is a hot political subject. And again, I will speak out no matter what role I find myself in But I believe that we need a more thoughtful conversation. We cannot let a minority of people – and it’s, that’s what it is, it is a minority of people – hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people,”
“We’re going to have to do a better job protecting the vast majority of our citizens, including our children, from that very, very, very small group that is unfortunately prone to violence and now with automatic weapons can wreak so much more violence than they ever could have before,” Hillary Clinton
Disturbing on so many levels, it’s hard to figure out where to begin with Killary’s statement.
1. The messenger
First of all, let’s not forget, this is the same woman that not only pushed for the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2002 and 2003, but she did so using fabricated evidence, the same fabricated evidence that the administration was pushing, long past the point where that so-called “evidence” had been debunked. She only recently admitted (days before her book came out) that she got that one wrong after a decade of defending the vote.
She’s also the same crazy woman who giggled while boasting on national television about the extra-judicial murder of Muammar Gadhafi, gleefully taking pride in her own role in the brutal murder. Her efforts to destabilize and then destroy what had been the jewel nation on the African continent was never brought up. Libya’s horrific state of decay since our “liberation” was not addressed last night nor were the thousands of men, women and children slain by Hillary’s “humanitarian intervention” that was based on as many lies as she told about the need to invade Iraq.
Also not addressed was the fact that the Syrian destabilization campaign began under her watch with one of her State Department employees, Robert Ford, who went there as Ambassador to Syria in late Dec. 2010 and he immediately started meeting with opposition members and throwing cash around to start up the Syrian uprising, better known as the terrorist destabilization campaign.
It’s hard too say how many people died as a result of Killary’s war-mongering efforts. Likely, many dems would have opposed the Iraq War resolution had such a prominent member of their elites not endorsed it and even campaigned for it behind closed doors. Syria would not be where it is right now and Libya would still be a peaceful, beautiful state.
To listen to someone like this preach about protecting the “majority” of American citizens (majority of Syrians want Assad, VAST majority of Libyans wanted Gadhafi) from the crazed violence of a few, is sickening. You are literally listening to a mass murderer who has gleefully committed countless crimes against humanity moralize about allowing people to hold a viewpoint that “terrorizes” citizens. She’s spent her career terrorizing people with guns and weapons no Adam Lanza could ever think about controlling. And she did it to benefit a tiny minority of wealthy elites in spite of the opposition of the majority of Americans.
The hypocrisy is stunning.
2. The message.
There will be thousands of blog posts written about this aspect of her statement today, of that I am certain, so I won’t focus too much on it except to say… wow.
Since when does someone get applause in this country when they start saying things like (paraphrase) “we can’t allow people to hold certain viewpoints”?
Who doesn’t “allow” them? Who decides which viewpoints are allowed and which are not?The same person who lied repeatedly to justify Shock and Awe in Iraq? The same person who committed crimes against humanity in several nations across the globe? That’s f*cking dangerous, people.
This is remarkably scary because not only is she conflating the “viewpoint” with the “terrorism”, but she’s also aligning those who hold that viewpoint with the ones committing the acts themselves as if thinking in a certain way terrorizes the country (i.e. thought itself or expressing it, is an act of terrorism)
That’s too say nothing of the fact that the “terrorist thinking” is simply support of a constitutional protection guaranteed us in the Bill of Rights.
So what she’s done is basically suggest that the 1st and 2nd amendments to the constitution (freedom of expression of your ideas and the right of all citizens to own a firearm) must be tossed out and those who oppose that action, are terrorists destroying our nation.
And this mess is considered “campaigning” for Killary? Wow. Just… wow.
No comments:
Post a Comment