Was Clinton a murderer?

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Let me know when the Clinton total approaches 15,000 (Coalition Troops + Iraqi Civilians).

Any apologists want to ring in and answer the question?

IT was addressed to you Mr. Dittohead

Does your own soup taste icky, Dahunan?



So, you do not believe in fair and honest investigations?

I fully believe in the threads I post.. UNLIKE YOU who are only trolling and hoping to make a difference??

And that's what is frightening. You DO believe that crap. Oh well, gotta have something to do in your basement until mom calls you up.

Ha ha ha.. you are so pathetic sometimes.. you tried the basement and mom sh!t on me... I must have gotten under your skin... That = making a difference

 

[b0mbrman]

Here, let me try

why should anyone trust Clinton and Snopes... I have read far too much to be as blind as you

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: alchemize
Points proven

Looks like someone didn't like the way the discussion went and cut and run...

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: alchemize
Points proven

Really? What point did you prove? You cannot contribute to others' threads, so you posted a troll to inspire the same thread-crapping by others? Do you always endorse two wrongs making a right, or only when you're trying to avoid accountability for your own actions?

 

[imported_Aelius]

From the snoops article:

Former White House intern Mary Caitrin Mahoney, 25, manager of a Georgetown Starbucks, was killed along with two co-workers (Emory Allen Evans, 25 and Aaron David Goodrich, 18) on 6 July 1997 during a robbery of the shop. In March 1999 Carl Derek Havord Cooper (29) of Washington was arrested and charged with these murders.

Yes, it is unusual that three employees were killed in the course of a robbery during which nothing was taken. According to Cooper's 26 April 2000 guilty plea (he received life with no hope of parole), he went to the Starbucks to rob the place, figuring the receipts from the July 4 weekend would make for a fat take. He came in after closing, waved a .38, and ordered all three Starbucks employees into the back room. Once there, Mahoney made a run for it after Cooper fired a warning shot into the ceiling. She was ordered back to the room, but then went for the gun. Cooper shot her, then afterwards shot the other two employees. He left empty-handed, afraid the shots had attracted police attention. As regrettable as these three deaths were, this was nothing but a case of a robbery gone wrong.

And, right away, we have come to the first big lie of the "Clinton Body Count" list: Any unexplained death can automatically be attributed to President Clinton by inventing a connection between him and the victim. Mary Mahoney did once work as an intern at the White House, but so have hundreds of other people who are all still alive. There is no credible reason why, of all the interns who have served in the Clinton White House, Ms. Mahoney alone would be the target of a Clinton-directed killing. (Contrary to public perception, very few interns work in the West Wing of the White House or have any contact with the President. The closest most interns get to the chief executive is a brief handshake or a group photo.)

The putative reason offered for Mahoney's slaying ? that she was about to testify about sexual harrassment in the White House ? was a lie. This absurd justification apparently sprang from a hint dropped by Mike Isikoff of Newsweek just before the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke that a "former White House staffer" with the initial "M" was about to talk about her affair with Clinton. We all know now, of course, that the "staffer" referred to was Monica Lewinsky, not Mary Mahoney. The conspiracy buffs maintained that White House hit men rushed out, willy-nilly, and gunned down the first female ex-intern whose name began with "M" they could find.

Actually she was shot 3 times in the back of the head, the others were shot once in the back of the head, was tied up, nobody heard the shots even though residence live right next to the place, and the doors to the shop were locked afterwards.

The rest of it is true.

It's funny how you can spin information if you don't include vital aspects of it. I wouldn't be surprised if these guys, from the site, were part of the NSA or CIA although that's probably a stretch. Perhaps not since disinformation regarding classified facts is very important in counter espionage.

EDIT: Forgot to add that Mary Mahoney was also the "mother hen" for the then working and ex interns at the White House. Interns would go see her with their problems because she was the only one offering genuine support.

However, assuming this is 100% true (cannot confirm since all accounts of this are anonymously provided by supposed ex interns), this would mean she probably knew the most about the goings on in the White House in relation to the interns. It would make sense to put a bullet in her if you wanted to send a clear message.

However that's speculation since we have no clear evidence of this and I'm more concerned about issues where possible foul play is likely and it's ruled as suicide.

That's always a red flag. However I'm not as concerned about what Clinton did or didn't do. Simply because you cannot prove that unless you can first prove that many of these deaths are in fact assassinations. That's not easy.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: b0mbrman
Ha ha

I love this thread

Too bad people here have their blinders on or they might be suitably amused

There you go. Now all you need to do is find a Snopes entry or similar source that refutes the Fourth Reich article and you will have contributed something to the thread. That's the point you seem to keep missing.


(Still waiting for you to make any contribution to this thread.)

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: alchemize
Points proven

Looks like someone didn't like the way the discussion went and cut and run...

Yeah, I'm sure thepoint of this thread was to prove that Clinton murdered people :roll:

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: alchemize
Points proven

Really? What point did you prove? You cannot contribute to others' threads, so you posted a troll to inspire the same thread-crapping by others? Do you always endorse two wrongs making a right, or only when you're trying to avoid accountability for your own actions?

Points proven?

1) That tinfoil trolls don't like it when tinfoil articles are posted that go against their "side" (by the #2 tinfoil poster on the board coming in within 7 minutes to jump all over it)
2) That you can't follow your own advice, and came in to threadcrap instead of refuting the article.
3) I'm pretty sure PT Barnum would have somehting to say.
4) That the left are just as hypocritical about jumping all over this kind of crap as the right is.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: alchemize
Points proven

Really? What point did you prove? You cannot contribute to others' threads, so you posted a troll to inspire the same thread-crapping by others? Do you always endorse two wrongs making a right, or only when you're trying to avoid accountability for your own actions?

Points proven?

1) That tinfoil trolls don't like it when tinfoil articles are posted that go against their "side" (by the #2 tinfoil poster on the board coming in within 7 minutes to jump all over it)
2) That you can't follow your own advice, and came in to threadcrap instead of refuting the article.
3) I'm pretty sure PT Barnum would have somehting to say.
4) That the left are just as hypocritical about jumping all over this kind of crap as the right is.

If you're still going to post why don't you be a man and remove the "lock" title?

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: alchemize
Points proven

Looks like someone didn't like the way the discussion went and cut and run...

Do you want me to open it back up for discussion? I will if you really want to. I just think the "clinton murdered" topic is very distasteful, but the best example out there we have to compare to the tinfoil activities of the left. I have a bit more respect for our presidents, left or right.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
If you're still going to post why don't you be a man and remove the "lock" title?

Heh heh, just have a moment of catharsis there?

 

[Vic]

Ask any insurance actuary. Once you get a large enough sample of people over a long enough period of time, people are going to start dying off. It's simple statistics. And over a long enough timeline, everyone dies. There's nothing mysterious about it.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: alchemize
If you think the article is wrong, misguided, whatever, back it up with facts and figures and evidence supporting you point of view. As a group, you and the other bleating Clinties spend your entire existence attacking the right instead of supporting the left. For God's sake, put up or shut up. Use those stones you're throwing to build your case, for sheer novelty value if nothing else.

You're an idiot. First of all I'm not a 'bleating Clintie' - You are just another blind fool that labels everyone against you as one of those 'crazy liberals'...and again you spew the same 'right' and 'left' rhetoric that only a brainwashed fool follows. I suggest you take your brainwashed 'crazy' conservative buddies and brainwashed 'crazy' liberal idiots and think for yourselves for once.

The problem is that you assume that any topic is a valid discussion and not 'idiotic'. If I put up a thread saying that Bush killed, skinned, and boiled 40,000 American babies in a cauldron and then ate it as soup and linked it to a Geocities website, then that would be as idiotic as your moronic thread. You fail to understand this as you are apparently a brainwashed fool.

 

[imported_Aelius]

Originally posted by: Vic
Ask any insurance actuary. Once you get a large enough sample of people over a long enough period of time, some of them are going to die. It's simple statistics. And over a long enough timeline, everyone dies. There's nothing mysterious about it.

That's kind of the point. If you are going to off people you better spread it out otherwise it will look like assassination regardless of how you try to change the facts in each case.

It's quite simple. That's why it's hard to prove and easy to discount. The deck is stacked against suggestions of assassinations, perhaps rightly so, but again this is a non issue. What is the issue is looking at each case on its own merit as opposed the whole thing all at once. It's too much and the more there is the more likely it is you will find something you won't like, such as a genuine accident, which helps to disprove the whole idea of assassination.

All you gota do is look at them one at a time. One instance does not a case make against assassination but it does "for" assassination.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: alchemize
Points proven

Really? What point did you prove? You cannot contribute to others' threads, so you posted a troll to inspire the same thread-crapping by others? Do you always endorse two wrongs making a right, or only when you're trying to avoid accountability for your own actions?

Points proven?

1) That tinfoil trolls don't like it when tinfoil articles are posted that go against their "side" ...

Duh. This surprises you why, exactly? The appropriate response for either side is to either contribute or ignore it.

On a side note, I am pleased to see you acknowledge your role as a tinfoil troll for the right.

2) That you can't follow your own advice, and came in to threadcrap instead of refuting the article.

Sorry, that one doesn't hold water. My first post was to support the person posting the Snopes link and to point it out to you as an example of contributing to a thread. Everything I posted after that followed your changing the topic to "Lock" and admitting this was a troll thread. Nice try, but I'm not stupid enough to fall into that blatant trap.

3) I'm pretty sure PT Barnum would have somehting to say.

So?

4) That the left are just as hypocritical about jumping all over this kind of crap as the right is.

I don't think you proved that at all. Why don't you count the number of people posting craps/trolls in the other thread versus this one ... before you admitted you were trolling. In any case, two wrongs don't make a right, or at least they don't for some of us.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
If they were they sure were a lot more discreet than the current administrion. Oh wait, that isn't murder, that's called collateral damage.

starving people out is sublte?

 

[alchemize]

"Then STFU and move on to the next thread. That's the point. If you cannot or will not discuss the topic, go away. "

 

[SirStev0]

righties putting on the tinfoil...

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: alchemize
If you think the article is wrong, misguided, whatever, back it up with facts and figures and evidence supporting you point of view. As a group, you and the other bleating Clinties spend your entire existence attacking the right instead of supporting the left. For God's sake, put up or shut up. Use those stones you're throwing to build your case, for sheer novelty value if nothing else.

You're an idiot. First of all I'm not a 'bleating Clintie' - You are just another blind fool that labels everyone against you as one of those 'crazy liberals'...and again you spew the same 'right' and 'left' rhetoric that only a brainwashed fool follows. I suggest you take your brainwashed 'crazy' conservative buddies and brainwashed 'crazy' liberal idiots and think for yourselves for once.

The problem is that you assume that any topic is a valid discussion and not 'idiotic'. If I put up a thread saying that Bush killed, skinned, and boiled 40,000 American babies in a cauldron and then ate it as soup and linked it to a Geocities website, then that would be as idiotic as your moronic thread. You fail to understand this as you are apparently a brainwashed fool.

Psst. Ignore him. This was an intentional troll thread alc started because of my comments in this thread. It seems I touched a nerve by pointing to his thread-crapping. Sometimes the truth hurts. His comment above was stolen from my comment, word for word, except he replaced "bleating Bushies" with "bleating Clinties" and he swapped "left" and "right".

It wasn't about you at all. He is just trying -- and failing -- to attack me. That's what they do to compensate for their limp inability to support their own positions.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: alchemize
If you think the article is wrong, misguided, whatever, back it up with facts and figures and evidence supporting you point of view. As a group, you and the other bleating Clinties spend your entire existence attacking the right instead of supporting the left. For God's sake, put up or shut up. Use those stones you're throwing to build your case, for sheer novelty value if nothing else.

You're an idiot. First of all I'm not a 'bleating Clintie' - You are just another blind fool that labels everyone against you as one of those 'crazy liberals'...and again you spew the same 'right' and 'left' rhetoric that only a brainwashed fool follows. I suggest you take your brainwashed 'crazy' conservative buddies and brainwashed 'crazy' liberal idiots and think for yourselves for once.

The problem is that you assume that any topic is a valid discussion and not 'idiotic'. If I put up a thread saying that Bush killed, skinned, and boiled 40,000 American babies in a cauldron and then ate it as soup and linked it to a Geocities website, then that would be as idiotic as your moronic thread. You fail to understand this as you are apparently a brainwashed fool.

Psst. Ignore him. This was an intentional troll thread alc started because of my comments in this thread. It seems I touched a nerve by pointing to his thread-crapping. Sometimes the truth hurts. His comment above was stolen from my comment, word for word, except he replaced "bleating Bushies" with "bleating Clinties" and he swapped "left" and "right".

Then STFU and move on to the next thread. That's the point. If you cannot or will not discuss the topic, go away.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: alchemize
Then STFU and move on to the next thread. That's the point. If you cannot or will not discuss the topic, go away.

Still reading impaired I see. Once you admitted this was an intentional troll thread, that became the point. Cheers,

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: alchemize
Then STFU and move on to the next thread. That's the point. If you cannot or will not discuss the topic, go away.

Still reading impaired I see. Once you admitted this was an intentional troll thread, that became the point. Cheers,

Feel free to quote me where I said I was trolling. Proving points is trolling now? Why do you keep diverting?

Attack and divert, attack and divert; it's a full day of Hard Work for you. Hard Work.

 

[Strk]

I've always thought this theory was one of the more interesting ones.

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: alchemize
This looks to become yet another thread where the Clinton apologists use every trick in the book except actually addressing the points raised

Yawn...........When you have a life of public service and become President, no doubt your going to have developed relationships with a lot of people who die along the way. Pieces of filth like you need to stop posting garbage like this. If Clinton is a murderer, guess what, Bush is a murderer as well. He is at over 1000, because no doubt that eveidence he used as an excuse to go to war was probably doctored up by his own people with his full knowledge. So by sending all those troops to fight a war based on a flat out lie, that he knew was a lie, makes him a murderer. So how's that for a spin on it. Clown

 

[zzzz]

alchemize- A frequent poster at ATOT tried to attract attention to the murders by posting a thread on 11/06/2004. That was the last thread he made.