EZEKIEL

 

and YHWH’s

 

 Judgment

 

 

for the

 

Good News

 

PEOPLE

 

 

 

VOLUME XXXVI

 

The Ending

 

 

EZEKIEL and YHWH’s

 

 

Judgment for the

 

 

 Good News People

 

 

 

 

Volume XXXVI--The Ending

 

 

 

 

 

by

 

an unworthy servant

 

 

 

 

 

 

And you shall know the truth,

 

and the truth will make you free.

 

(John 8:32)

 

 

Common Law Copyright, 2003 & 2005 CE, an unworthy servant, Calder, Idaho.  The author claims his Right of exclusive ownership and control of this publication, the fruit of his labor, as a matter of Intellectual Property protected by the Laws of YHWH and as guaranteed by the US Constitution for the United States.  Permission is granted to quote provided appropriate credit is cited together with the Publisher’s web site name and postal mailing address––WWW.age-end.Com PO Box 473, Calder, ID 83808, USA. 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contents

 

 

 

Volume XXXVI--The Ending 

 

 

APPENDIX                                                                              PAGE

 

 

      -                  Cover Page                                                                                                         1

 

      -                  Title Page                                                                                                             2

 

      -                  Contents                                                                                                              3

 

      -                  Publisher’s Preface                                                                                           5

 

 

Part JJJJJ--Still Further Addendum 

 

      F                 Clinton, Gone?                                                                                                   6

 

      G                 Clinton Evil                                                                                                        13

 

      H                 Clinton Plans                                                                                                    25

 

      I                   Clinton and the Amalekites                                                                            34

 

      J                  Clinton and Survival                                                                                        46

 

      K                 More Views on Clinton                                                                                    56

 

      L                 The 666 Clintons                                                                                              60

 

      M                Clinton Comes Back                                                                                        75

 

      N                 Clinton and Custer                                                                                          81

 

      O                 Corrupt Leaders and Corrupt People                                                           89

 

 

Part KKKKK--The Terminus 

 

      -                  Epilogue                                                                                                            99

 

      -                  Bibliography                                                                                                   117

SHEERIT YISRAEL

PO Box 473

Calder, Idaho 83808, USA

 

 

Publisher’s Preface

 

Greetings!  The following presentation is volume thirty-six of a 36-volume production of some 6,000 pages on “Ezekiel and YHWH’s Judgment for the Good News People,” all of which is on the Internet at the www.age-end.com web site. 

 

This overall effort provides an interpretation of the Good News message in the New Testament, its linkage to the book of Ezekiel, and an application of both to the age-end prophecies relating to certain nations and peoples now out in the world.  In order for this single volume to be understood and comprehended, it is imperative that the study be read from its beginning--from page one of volume one. 

 

Anyone trying to read this volume or the study’s 6,000 pages at any mid-point will end up in a state of confusion without having read and digested the preceding material.  It is crucially important that this work be read in sequence from its beginning--otherwise, the reader will almost certainly end up missing the essence of the message! 

 

The effort was originally set on a Macintosh computer with Microsoft Word 6.0.1.  It was set in Helvetica, 12-point type (18 pt on chapter headings); single line spacings; and margins:  left 1.2”, right 0.8”, top 0.7”, bottom 0.8” and footer 0.6” (for page numbers). 

 

For further information on obtaining this study in 18 computer floppy disks (IBM-formatted, high density, 2HD, 1.44 MB, 3 1/2 inches); in a single CD-Rom; or in hard copies (when the Internet or a compatible computer is not available); please write the publisher at the above address and send a stamped, self-addressed, long (legal-size), return envelope. 

 

With a CD-Rom or computer floppy disks, the study is readable on Macintosh (systems 5.0 and later) or IBM/compatible (with Microsoft Word-Windows) personal computers.  May The Great CREATOR and SOVEREIGN OF THE UNIVERSE bless you as you study His word to learn His will and to obey Him.  Shalom (peace) to you and yours! 

 

an unworthy servant, Hanukkah 2003 CE

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix F--Clinton, Gone?

 

 

US Politics, Revisited 

 

This publication has presented what may seem to be an inordinate amount of data on oppression and wrong being committed by the “liberal” federal government against its own citizens.  Some readers may try to second guess this outline on the assumption that it has little or nothing to do with the subject of Ezekiel or the people of the Good News.  At least, much of Christendom sees no connection. 

 

The inclusion decision was made on the premise that the present US government is a Christian government; and in particular, a Christian, sun worship government, which is precisely what one finds in much of the so-called, Christian West (as first promulgated centuries ago by Greek sun worshippers). 

 

After all, the US Supreme Court ruled that the “United States of America” is a “Christian Nation” in 1892--the first and only nation ever founded as a Christian nation (“The 11th Hour Remnant Messenger,” newsletter, p. 6, undated).  This reality is relevant and especially so for people in the very elect classification.

 

While the American nation and its government will assuredly not last long into the future (because world enemies and events are now in process to terminate this nation and the status quo, per YHWH’s judgment--as outlined herein), it is prudent for believers to draw a parallel between the present US government (now organizing for the New World Order) and the world government which will ultimately succeed it. 

 

The New World Order government will be effectively a religious, sun worship government--similar to the present one in Washington, but far more dictatorial and oppressive.  It’s not too far fetched to see the parallels and understand the coming similarities.  The very elect need to be informed on such tactics and operations for their own benefit. 

 

Beyond the obvious in the above comments, it should likewise be noted that this whole theme plays a role in the question of the pride of life possessed by sun worshipping Christians (as described in preceding chapters).  The pride of life is a bad thing which the very elect particularly need to address and deal with in their focus upon carnality and the flesh. 

 

As believers deal with this pride of life feature in their lives and conduct, it is inevitable that they will become politically incorrect; at least, in terms of beliefs, opinions and thinking. 

 

There is just no way that a believing person of faith can stand by and approve of what has been occurring in the Western, Christian, sun worship culture since WWII with the government approved gods of racial amalgamation, feminism, homosexuality, etc. 

 

Assuredly, honest persons living by the Scriptures will quickly disapprove of what has been happening, although quietly/passively since the Word teaches them to be apolitical.  This is not to say that the very elect will, all of a sudden, become political and involved in politics, as they become politically incorrect in the secular state. 

 

 

The Opposition is to Sin  

 

Of course, the apolitical believers become politically incorrect by being opposed to the sin and wickedness present in the politically correct culture and society with the worship of state approved social gods (feminism, racial integration and amalgamation, homosexuality, etc) and not because they are active in politics. 

 

In other words, if a religious person takes a stand, in contrast to the blatant immorality, wickedness and sin prevailing and present in the politically correct culture and civilization, that person is immediately adjudged to be a politically incorrect enemy of the state.  Thus, people are being forced to believe in, worship and serve government approved, social gods (just as Parmenides, Hegel and others have espoused). 

 

To refuse this worship means becoming an enemy of the state.  Since the very elect will be judged, condemned and persecuted by the secular sun worship society, as being politically incorrect for their religious beliefs, it is clear then that they need to have a good understanding of government and what all is going on in terms of oppression toward politically incorrect people, like themselves. 

 

Based just upon the actions of the Tanakh prophets, it is manifest that people who are totally apolitical must righteously speak out and condemn the evil and wickedness present in the secular state and culture, even though it is being controlled and promoted by government.  The OT is full of such examples. 

 

Perhaps Dr Stan Monteith put it best when he said that the person who fails to oppose evil and wrong becomes an accomplice to it (per video, “Secrets of the Illuminati”).  This is a far reaching conclusion and one which each of us should keep in mind.  However, that factor alone has not been the only reason for the direction chartered herein. 

 

 

The Current American Perspective 

 

This backdrop on politics then suggests a further clarification over the many critical remarks herein against so-called liberal leaders (who are often Democrats) and liberal government actions, as opposed to the few comments condemning conservatives (supposedly Republicans). 

 

This writer is no fan of Democrats or Republicans alike, nor of Liberals or Conservatives, and has maintained a stance of being apolitical in continental US elections since 1968.  But in the need to speak out and condemn sin and wretchedness, it has been necessary to particularly focus upon the evils of the modern liberals and their humanist colleagues (who tend to be Democrats). 

 

It is true that Republican conservatives are bad and evil, as well as liberal Democrats.  But there is a difference in degrees.  The liberal Democrats lead the pack in depravity.  Perhaps the primary reason for this is the basic philosophy underlying liberal thinking, as opposed to conservative thinking.  As pointed out previously, liberals believe that there is inherent good in man, while conservatives are not quite so sure about it. 

 

This reality was illustrated in “The Washington Times” of Jan 24-30, 2000 (p. 12), which quoted Republican House Majority Whip Tom DeLay as issuing a call to arms that only conservatives can guide the nation from the cultural abyss to which it is headed.  Going on, DeLay said that the “presidency has been debased and the political dialogue has been poisoned.” 

 

Liberals tend to more quickly follow the Amalekite leadership into permissiveness and wretchedness, while conservatives are more likely to be more serious Christians (especially fundamentalist Christians) and truly religious Jews who are not quite so apt to jump into the moral degeneracy being advocated and pushed by the Amalek-Edomite bankers/masters. 

 

Since liberals themselves are fairly immoral and dishonest in philosophy, they have no problem with the Amalek-Edomite wretchedness being pushed upon the generic, American population.  In this sense, liberals lean more in the direction of immorality and depravity, as opposed to conservatives.  Both groups are evil.  It’s just that one is far more wicked than the other one. 

 

In the “Come Lord Jesus” video, Catholic priest John O’Connor makes the case that the Ashkenazi Jews are in total control of the US Democrat party.   While O’Connor made his reference in the vein of Ashkenazi Jews, the truth is that his words really focused upon degenerate, Ashkenazi, Amalekite Jews.  Truly, they own and control the Democrat party and even the Republican party to some extent.  

 

In previous comments, the need to watch and be alert was assessed to show that the person of faith can and indeed must have some perception about what all is going on around him, without jumping in to participate in the depravity and evil. 

 

In order to watch and be alert, the student of truth is obligated to have some perception about current politics, politicians and government operations--not because of any interest in those subjects, per se; but rather, because of the need to evaluate, measure and judge how those actions are occurring to impact upon a believer and his family and the fulfillment of prophecy (as discussed earlier). 

 

 

Getting Elected 

 

The modern American political process requires large sums of money--which comes from the plutocrat bankers and masters (mainly Amalekites, who are committed to the destruction of Israelite believers and who, secretly, behind the scenes, call the shots).  With these large gifts of money, the politicians can go out and influence voters (through media power); and if necessary, buy votes (as can be done with Blacks). 

 

Once in power in the democratic society, the elected politicians take control of the government--to use it for their own selfish purposes and to further advance their causes.  It is manifest that with the assumption of political power over the government (which possesses power), the elected politician typically will pay back those who elected him and put him into power. 

 

The pay back can come in many, many different forms.  If it does not come back in direct payments and benefits, it can come back to family members or to corporations controlled by the person putting up the money.  A good illustration of this occurred in 1992 in the presidential election involving George H. W. Bush of the Republicans, Bill Clinton of the Democrats and Ross Perot of the Reform party. 

 

Almost all observers on the sidelines agree that the presence of Perot and the Reform party hurt the Republicans most of all and probably insured the election of Clinton.  The same thing can be said for 1996. 

 

But 1992 was unique for still one more reason.  Perot entered the race and was doing real well in the polls.  All of a sudden, he withdrew, claiming that his family was under some kind of threat (presumably from George H. W. Bush and the Republicans).  Still later, Perot reentered the race; but bombed out, in comparison with how well he was doing before he flip-flopped. 

 

Now, the above is what is commonly known or believed about the 1992 election.  But there are some fascinating peculiarities associated with the 1992 election that are not commonly known.  For example, Larry Patterson, one of Slick Clinton’s Arkansas state police guards, has confirmed that Clinton held two or more secret meetings with Perot in 1992.  This is strange for two men opposing each other in an election. 

 

 

Doing Business 

 

Next, it is fascinating that much of Ross Perot’s business in his controlled computer corporation has been coming from the US government.  This “doing business” continued under Clinton (or in fact, it went up substantially under Clinton?). 

 

Perot was out millions of dollars from his own pocket to set up and establish the Reform party in 1992.  Is it possible that Clinton paid him back with huge government contracts to his computer corporation after the election?  This is one of the prime methods used to pay off big contributors or supporters in an election.  It comes back in government contracts to a corporation controlled by the contributor or his colleagues. 

 

This election phenomenon means assuredly that the politician must deliver whatever the plutocrats want who put up the money and effectively put him into power (since money buys votes).  Therefore, when the chips are down, the plutocrats ultimately have their way, not only in American elections; but more importantly, in using the government as their own, private, puppet agency after the election. 

 

It goes without saying that bloc voters, like the Blacks and Hispanics, must be provided for in some things--to include a lot of words of support (from the politicians) for their part in delivering the votes. Thus, the whole philosophy of politicians has become a support first of the plutocrats and their needs and second a support of bloc voters and special interest groups. 

 

Accordingly, as was known in former days, whenever the voting population in a democracy discover that they can vote themselves a largess of benefits from the government (via the politicians), they will do so.  Therefore, politicians in a democracy deliver and so use their governmental powers--to pay off their benefactors. 

 

The point of this is that it matters not one whit whether a Republican or a Democrat is in the White House.  The ruling plutocrats behind the scenes will continue to call the shots--regardless of the political profile of the leaders, Republican or Democrat.  Therefore, the election of George W. Bush changes little or nothing in terms of the coming New World Order.  It will come with Bush, Clinton or whomever. 

 

 

Thus, Have Things Changed? 

 

The above presentation on the political dilemma in the United States necessitates a more careful look at Bill “Slick” Clinton and his possible future. 

 

Now that Bill Clinton is no longer president (in early 2003), there is an assumption that all of the evil and depravity of the president in the Oval Office at the White House is now over.  Supposedly, America survived Bill Clinton and the nation can go about its business with a much more honorable George W. Bush.  But have things really changed? 

 

“The Week” of Jun 22, 2001 (p. 16), had a short news item on how Clinton has been conducting himself--now that he is “retired.”  According to “New York Daily News” reporter Mitchell Fink, Bill was attending game three of the NBA finals/play offs in New York.  Slick had brought his binoculars and was sitting in his skybox (while Hillary was politicking in Washington). 

 

The story that Fink told was that Slick never used his binoculars at all to watch any of the basketball play on the court.  But he did use them on two other occasions.  During one of the time outs, the scantily clad girls of the Sixers Dance Team were performing.  Bill raised his binoculars and took a careful look at the girls.  At one more time when the girls were strutting around, Bill again raised his binoculars to survey the court. 

 

On a summer 2001 speaking engagement in Scandinavia, an attractive, 19-year-old girl presented Slick with a tulip as a gesture of hospitality.  The Jul 2001 “Internet Vortex” (p. 6) had a news report that noted that Slick put his arms around the teenager and told her “You’re too beautiful to only get a hug” (suggesting that he’d like to do more). 

 

Now, the latest news following the former president around is that he broke up the lesbian marriage of Melissa Etheridge and Julie Cypher (Aug 3, 2001, “The Week,” p. 10).  Per the story, Bill Clinton broke the queer lovers apart when he moved in on Melissa’s turf and started courting Julie (by sending her flowers, e-mails and surely engaging in sex with her). 

 

For sure, Slick Clinton has not changed one iota since he left the White House.  Bill is a politician and a power hungry politician.  He is not finished on the global or US political scenes.  He is still a man to be concerned about--as mentioned in the Prologue. 

 

 

Does Truth Matter? 

 

By trying to be apolitical and yet be watching and focusing upon government evils (particularly against her own citizens), there has to be a recognition of the importance of truth.  As the Word says, let YHWH The ELOHIM be true, though every man be a liar (Rom 3:4).  Or as noted earlier, YHWH YESHUA is the personification of TRUTH. 

 

Suffice to say, there must be some concern, appreciation for and ascertaining of truth in the vein of politics.  Ultimately, there has to be a question of truth and whether or not a believer should be informed on truth.  Hence, how relevant is truth in today’s world? 

 

On this, popular radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh posed the question “does truth matter any more” in his program on December 12, 1996.  Limbaugh was agonizing over the American electorate who stupidly had supported Bill Clinton, irrespective of Clinton’s character and morals (or rather lack of them, since it is doubtful that Slick has any character or morals). 

 

While Limbaugh has had and does have several things wrong on his program (like his constant support for the super rich), he generally has had it right on Clinton.  Truly, Clinton is a deliberate, pathological liar; dishonest, immoral philander; cheat; sodomite; pot smoker; cocaine sniffer; draft dodger; and an outright crook of the worst kind (to certainly include murder), as pointed out in this work. 

 

This writer does not want to be the pot calling the kettle black, since i, too, have lied, cheated and abused a number of innocent young girls over forty years ago when i was a teenager and evil young man.  Too often, i was a philander after marriage and an immoral sinner who brought abuse, hurt and pain on my loved ones because of the presence of wicked pride and vanity in my evil heart (as noted in prior chapters). 

 

It worked out that i sinfully destroyed my family and hurt the wife of my youth and my son greatly.  And i am immensely sorry, humbled and ashamed for my great sins and wickedness.  As it has worked out over the years, i have paid a terrible price for my wretchedness.  The ELOHIM, blessed be His name, has seemingly punished me severely for my sins over most of the last 60 years or so. 

 

YHWH never let me get away with my wickedness (and i thank Him and praise Him for His mercy to me).  Sin exacts a terrible price, if and when The HIGHEST commences His corrective punishment (and i pray and hope that my punishment has been corrective and has come from Him). 

 

However, i was not president of anything, nor in any position of influence or power over anyone beyond my immediate family and myself.  Clinton was in a different position.  It isn’t only that his sexual immorality, dishonesty, lying, cheating and sinning hurt his wife and daughter.  They have.  His family has paid and will pay a terrible price for his wickedness. 

 

But more importantly, he is also a mature fifty year old man (and not a foolish young boy) and was/is the leader and role model for 280 million Americans, including something over 100 million children and young people.  His wretchedness was far reaching in terms of moral damage to the United States.  As i destroyed my family of three persons, Slick was destroying this nation of 280 million people. 

 

In a sense, my lying and womanizing was in the minor leagues compared to Clinton--who seems to have been in the major leagues on depravity for his entire, adult life.  This is no justification for my evil and wickedness.  But it does put his lying and womanizing wickedness in a far more reaching perspective for America. 


 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix G--Clinton Evil

 

 

Clinton--A Professional Liar and Cheat, Revisited 

 

Actually, in truth, Bill Clinton seems to act with foreknowledge and deliberate intent to deceive and mislead others in many, many areas of his life which make his evil and depravity even worse than if it was an isolated occurrence. 

 

He is the classic spin-master who manipulates the gullible, American, sun worshipping public for his own purposes.  He deliberately obstructed justice in the US courts and has used his power and influence to have other persons lie and obstruct justice for him. 

 

He lied as he spied upon his political enemies (as in file-gate).  He lied as he falsely accused staff people in order to have them fired (as in travel-gate).  He lied as he sold out the national interests of the United States to the Chinese and other foreign powers for donations to his political campaigns (with treason).  He lied about selling plots in Arlington Cemetery.  He lied about his sexual immorality and on and on. 

 

Clinton is so smooth and so committed to lying, he not only has lied to the gullible American public, but he has lied to members of Congress in official statements.  For example, in Slick’s State of the Union address to Congress and the nation in January 2000, he repeatedly lied. 

 

 

Mike Blair on Clinton 

 

The “Spotlight” paper of Mar 6, 2000 (p. b-8), had a story by Mike Blair on “Clinton Lies to Push Anti-Gun Agenda,” which focused upon the lies told by Bill in his 2000 state of the union speech to Congress about guns and crime.  This story outlined a number of precise lies and distortions emanating from the evil Clinton.  Without attempting to cover all of them, a few will be highlighted to prove the point. 

 

He claimed that the Brady Act had kept firearms out of the hands of 500,000 criminals, while ignoring the fact that half of the Brady Act gun purchase denials was because of administrative errors (plus the fact that the Clinton Administration prosecuted almost none of these alleged criminals for anything).  In other words, Slick’s words were all lies designed to fool his gullible listeners. 

 

Anyway, any criminals unable to buy guns legally in a gun store can obtain them in a thousand other ways.  In fact, Slick, himself, signed an exemption allowing Chinese assault rifles into the US, which reached gangs on the West coast.  So Slick has helped criminals get guns--rather than hindering them in any fashion.  

 

 

More Clinton Lies 

 

In going on to Congress, Clinton claimed that he was able to put 100,000 new cops on the streets and asked Congress for funds for 50,000 more. 

 

The truth is no one knows for sure if any new police were hired from the granted federal funds (evidently few, if any, American police were hired; but some foreign police were brought here with this federal money).  Some estimates were that there could have been 40,000 new ones (and this includes the foreign policemen brought in with federal funds).  But most agencies receiving the money used it for other purposes. 

 

In another matter, Slick lied and deceived the public regularly with his economic and monetary statistics.  This reality has been discussed in former chapters herein.  He consistently painted a rosy picture of good that simply was not out there in the real world.  When the truth of his lies eventually becomes manifest, there will be an utter crisis in America beyond description. 

 

On Nov 8, 1999, Clinton told the “Washington Post,” in a White House interview, that he had always been interested in and supportive of the US military.  He added that he wished that he would have been a part of it (Nov 15-21, 1999, “Washington Times,” p. 4).  In view of Clinton’s former hate and opposition to the military and his draft dodging and anti-war acts during the Vietnam war, his remarks were obvious lies. 

 

 

Clinton Lies in Order to Kill 

 

Some of Slick’s most fantastic and successful lies were carried out in 1999 when he repeatedly lied and deceived the American public about what all was happening in the Balkans (specifically Kosovo) to try to get America into a war there on almost any pretext. 

 

As discussed on the Rush Limbaugh program on July 1, 1999, Clinton used exaggerated and misleading statistics and alleged facts to build a case that the Serbs were murdering almost the entire Albanian population in the vein of genocide. 

 

For instance, Clinton told a veterans group that 100,000 male Albanians had been murdered and another 600,000 Albanians were stranded in Kosovo without food as they fled from the evil Serbs--rather than be captured and murdered and have to dig their own graves. 

 

Most or all of the reports told by Clinton and his Secretary of Defense Cohen were lies or exaggerations at best--exaggerated to the tune of over 900%, per an article by Ben Barber on “U.S. inflated casualties in Kosovo, E. Timor, officials say” in the Nov 15-21, 1999, “Washington Times” (p. 24). 

 

The “Spotlight” of Dec 6, 1999 (p. 6), said that only a total of 2,100 grave-sites had been found in Kosovo.  Since these graves included people dying from natural deaths and the multitudes murdered by Slick Clinton’s air assaults in the Balkans, it is apparent that the Serbs killed very, very few Kosovars (and these deaths seem to have largely occurred in the Serb military action against the terrorist Kosovars). 

 

The most accurate final count of dead Kosovar Muslims seems to be less than 200, based upon autopsies and examinations of the dead bodies by the FBI.  A Spanish investigation team only found 187 deaths which might have been due to the military actions of the Serbs in their war against the Kosovo Liberation Army (“The Birth of World Government,” p. 45). 

 

Regardless of the actual count of Muslim deaths, the case can be made that Clinton’s air attacks killed more Albanians than the Serbs. 

 

Even the ultra liberal “Washington Post” got into the act on Jan 17, 2000, in a story by Peter Finn, which acknowledged that the Western reported stories of Serb atrocities, rape camps, mutilations of the dead and living, etc were all “bunk” (Jan 31, 2000, “Spotlight,” p. 2). 

 

 

The Lies Were Needed 

 

But the lies were needed to justify Clinton’s bombing of the Serbs.  So they were told to the public, who believed them.  As Dr Stan Monteith mentioned in his video on the “Secrets of the Illuminati,” alleged atrocity stories have been used several times to get America into a war planned by the plutocrats.  Monteith said that it happened in WWI, in WWII, in Desert Storm (the Gulf War) and in Clinton’s war against the Serbs. 

 

When the controlled media starts telling the atrocity stories and bombarding the people daily with them, the public finally cries out for war and vengeance.  The same thing happened in prior wars and other conflicts as well.  As Monteith noted, a lie told often enough is finally believed.  And this is what has happened regularly with the atrocity stories. 

 

The Serbs were engaged in a civil war in Kosovo with the revolutionary Kosovo Liberation Army of 100,000 fighters, armed with the latest weapons (as described and profiled elsewhere herein). 

 

Per “Spotlight” (p. 2, Mar 27, 2000), it is true that the Serbs may have killed up to 10,000 of these armed fighters in open warfare between the two armies in a raging civil war (although less than 200 possible Muslims were killed by the Serbs, per the FBI and Spanish investigators, as noted above). 

 

But Clinton’s spin operation of lies and deceits reported an alleged 100,000 Serb murders.  This was all false.  Moreover, the story about the 600,000 stranded Albanians in Kosovo was totally a fabrication. 

 

 

Microsoft and Bill Gates 

 

Most of the first several months of 2000 were obsessed with Bill Gates and the Clinton Administration’s efforts to break up Microsoft.  It seems that the controlled media loves to promote stories of little importance for days, weeks and months on end.  They bombarded the public for months about O. J. Simpson.  In 1999, the situation with the Cuban boy Elian Gonzalez totally took over the US media. 

 

After months and months of Elian, all of a sudden Microsoft was placed in the spotlight by the controlled media.  Of course, the idea was to mesmerize and further zombiize the American population with frivolous remarks about little or nothing.  In the case of Microsoft and its breakup, it seems that no one in the media or in US leadership understood the essence of the problem (if there was one). 

 

“Newsweek” of June 19, 2000, typified the controlled media approach.  That issue had Bill Gates’ picture on the cover and several lead stories about Microsoft and the breakup.  One article, by Jared Sandberg, was on “Microsoft’s Six Fatal Errors” (p. 23).  The only thing about this story was that it talked on and on about a lot of things.  But it never addressed the problem. 

 

The story behind Microsoft seems fairly obvious.  First, there were apparently some grounds for the monopoly charges against Microsoft.  Actually, this is a common condition in many of the large, multi-national corporations of today.  And when one looks at the owners and rulers of these corporate giants from behind the scenes, the collusion and conspiracies of corruption and dishonesty are very manifest. 

 

Since the plutocrats own or at least control this maze of corporate powers, no politician will dare take a stand against them.  After all, the plutocrats elect and control the politicians in both parties.  Thus, there is no independent force to question their operations.  So, why did the classic liar, crook, cheat and manipulator Bill Clinton decide to destroy the Microsoft force? 

 

 

The Missing Reasons 

 

There seems to be two primary reasons on Microsoft which have escaped being discussed in present times (although some few people have skirted around one of the reasons).  Perhaps the most important reason of all is the one missed by almost everybody. 

 

Bill Gates and a handful of his close colleagues built the Microsoft empire and became extremely wealthy because of it.  Apparently, none of the founders of this giant were Amalekites (though Christian preacher Texe Marrs claims that Gates is a Jew).  Or at least, they didn’t seem to be the Amalekites who pull most of the strings in modern America. 

 

Obviously, the breakup of Microsoft would benefit the Amalekite run computer companies and put a serious hole in the goyim influence at Microsoft.  Who knows, the breakup might even be pulled off in such a way that conniving Amalekite masters and bankers could move in on the broken up pieces and exploit and plunder them for profit reasons (particularly, when crooked politicians will oversee the breakup). 

 

While Gates and many of his senior colleagues were probably not Amalekites, in Microsoft’s early days, this profile may have changed since Slick Clinton went after Microsoft.  In January 2000, Microsoft appointed a Jew named Steve Ballmer as its president.  Possibly this move was prompted by the troubles that Gates and company had with Clinton.  With Ballmer on board, Microsoft may be able to survive the Amalekite assault. 

 

 

The Second Reason 

 

There is a second reason which has whet the appetite of a few people.  Some persons understand that Bill Gates and his colleagues did not donate enough money to Bill Clinton or the Democrat National Committee.  Certainly, Slick Willy was unhappy with this situation from day one.  He had his sights set upon this empire. 

 

Though “Newsweek” focused upon six alleged errors, some persons perceptively note that the initial Clinton attack on Microsoft was a shake-down operation.  If Gates would have laid out some money in the right places early on in 1999, the whole Clinton assault would have been avoided.  Slick would have called off his attack dogs at the US Justice Department.  But Gates balked. 

 

Since Gates and company failed to put up some money in the right places, he was doomed.  All Clinton had to do was coordinate his thinking and wishes with his ruling plutocrat Amalekites.  Since they too didn’t like the Washington state enterprise, Slick got the green light to proceed. 

 

There is no question about it whatsoever.  This whole Justice Department undertaking was a Clinton operation from day one.  It went forward on his word.  Obviously, with Bush, things changed (Bush backed off and dropped the pursuit of Microsoft).  After all, Bush and his liberal Republican colleagues do like big businesses--like Microsoft. 

 

All Americans by now must understand that Bill Clinton is not interested in US laws, justice or what’s right.  His decision to attack Microsoft was not fueled by his integrity, honesty, character or truthfulness (since he has none of these qualities).  He had only one goal in his presidency.  It was to use the US government and US government forces and powers to further his own political plans for the future. 

 

 

Slick Gets Away With His Evil 

 

Furthermore, it is manifest that Clinton is so smooth about lying, cheating and deceiving that he largely gets away with it--with his family, with the media, with the Congress (which had a moral duty to remove him) and with the gullible, American public which continued to vote for him knowing full well that he is dishonest and an immoral crook. 

 

In the 1992 election campaign, Clinton repeatedly lied to the voting public with his constant denials about an affair with Gennifer Flowers (and many others).  Then on Jan 17, 1998, in a deposition in the Paula Jones case, he finally admitted the Flowers affair which conclusively established that he lied to the public in 1992. 

 

He followed up with more lies about Monica Lewinsky which he eventually admitted on August 17, 1998.  He lied to the public about the sale of Arlington Cemetery plots.  And when his lies were later exposed, he still got away with them. 

 

One big Clinton contributor (an Amalekite named Larry Lawrence) was even dug up and moved to another cemetery, when his illegal Arlington burial was exposed.  Slick also promised (and later was forced to cancel) former Surgeon General Koop an Arlington plot for help on the Clinton health care plan. 

 

 

Slick Lied to Bibi 

 

Clinton even lied to former Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin “Bibi” Netanyahu which is most interesting.  Netanyahu is writing his memoirs and will reportedly tell how Slick lied to him and used a classic bait and switch technique to get him to sign the Wye Peace Accord with PLO leader Yasser Arafat (Nov 1999 “Internet Vortex,” p. 15). 

 

According to Bibi, Clinton promised to free the apparent Amalekite Jonathan Pollard, who was caught stealing US secrets some years ago and giving them to Israel.  Pollard was convicted and went to jail in the 1980s.  Ever since then, Israeli officials have tried to persuade various American presidents to pardon Pollard and release him. 

 

Netanyahu and Clinton agreed that Pollard would be released and allowed to immigrate to Israel.  Clinton then double crossed Netanyahu at the last minute and said that he would not release Pollard.  Reportedly, Netanyahu turned pale.  But he was already committed to the peace accord and couldn’t back out. 

 

Since Netanyahu was a conservative and at some odds from Clinton’s liberal, internationalist ideology, Clinton conspired with the Amalekite bankers/masters and his army of liberal Amalekite aides to get rid of Netanyahu.  This paved the way for the election of Ehud Barak, a man who would be more in tune with the powerful Amalekite internationalists calling the shots in America. 

 

The role of Slick Clinton and his Amalekite aides has been commented upon in a former chapter herein on the ruling plutocrats.  There is no need to repeat what has already been said, in the context that Clinton rushed a team of evil people into Israel (all Amalekites or Amalekite janissary robots) to be sure that Netanyahu was defeated.   

 

While it was true that these media manipulators and crooks were able to con the Israeli people, it came with trouble for Barak.  A former chapter discussed how the Barak administration had been caught with their hands in the cookie jar for dishonest and crooked election practices.  Heavy fines have been imposed and some members of the Barak team may go to jail.  Truly, it is dangerous to get too close to Bill Clinton. 

 

 

The Hypocrite 

 

Slick gets away with his lies because the media and his political cronies act to cover them up, coupled with the fact that most of the immoral and depraved, American, sun worshipping people simply don’t care (but they will be judged accordingly by YHWH for not caring.  In other words, they should have cared when they voted for Slick and allowed him to remain in office). 

 

Clinton cannot ever be depended upon to tell the truth or be honest in virtually any situation.  At the Ron Brown funeral in 1997, a television cameraman caught Slick and some aides leaving the building from a side door.  As mentioned in a previous chapter, he was laughing and cutting up with his assistants. 

 

Upon spotting the photographer, he completely changed his demeanor to a sad, depressed appearance with tears coming from his eyes, though his aides were still laughing.  The camera picked upon this immediate change, accomplished by Slick in less than one step, while never losing his stride.  Later, that same day, Slick had a sodomite encounter with his girl friend Monica Lewinsky. 

 

Three months before he told a Washington grand jury that he and Monica did not have sex (as he defined it), Clinton issued an executive order which blatantly contradicted his own definition of sex (Nov 1999 “Internet Vortex,” p. 9). 

 

On May 27, 1998, Slick issued EO 13086 to amend the Manual for Courts Martial for the military services.  In this order, a definition of sex was included which plainly took in all forms of sodomy, plus natural sex.  The definition specifically covered so-called oral sex.  Lewinsky’s statement about the affair included some four of the eight precise situations covered in the EO. 

 

Yet, on Aug 17, 1998, Clinton appeared before the grand jury and said that his acts with Monica did not constitute sexual acts.  He called his sodomy with the girl an “inappropriate relationship.”  In the Paula Jones case, he categorically denied having sex with Monica. 

 

 

The Hypocrite and the Blacks 

 

From day one of his political career, Clinton has used and has manipulated the Black vote.  For him, it has paid off since most Negroes routinely support him and his depravity without question or concern.  As discussed in former chapters, he doled out a few benefits and payoffs to the many Africans who blindly followed him (but not much in comparison with what he bestowed upon the Amalekite Jews).   

 

This then becomes one more illustration of the gigantic hypocrisy associated with this man (just as was true with the segregationist Abraham Lincoln, who hypocritically supported Negroes in political actions, per a discussion heretofore).  Slick publicly cries, moans and groans about the poor Blacks and how they have been discriminated against, oppressed and hurt by the White majority. 

 

Yet, in private, Slick routinely laughs at them and refers to many of them as “Niggers.”  Former Arkansas State Trooper Larry Patterson has confirmed Clinton’s use of the “n” word on more than one occasion.  One of the classic illustrations of Clinton’s hypocrisy is over the Black leader Jesse Jackson. 

 

When the heat built upon Slick in 1998 and 1999 over Monica Lewinsky, the hypocrite Clinton brought Jackson into the White House to ostensibly “pray” with him.  This choice of Jackson to pray with him is interesting in view of the fact that in 1992, Slick called Jackson a “Nigger” --as he especially uses the “n” word to refer to Negroes he doesn’t like (Oct 1999 “Internet Vortex,” p. 20).

 

Slick’s brother Roger Clinton has also confirmed that Bill uses the “n” word in private to refer to Black people (in the “New Clinton Chronicles” video).  Dolly Kaye Browning of Dallas, Texas, another one of the many reported Clinton girl friends, also confirmed that Slick has used the “n” word to refer to Black people in her presence (Nov 1999 “Internet Vortex,” p. 7). 

 

 

Slick and Al Sharpton 

 

While Slick has had the Blacks in his back pocket for years, the point must be made here that in 2002-2003 some of that automatic Negro support came under trouble--primarily from “the reverend” Al Sharpton, a New York Black preacher/leader of some notoriety (as was told in the Apr 2003 “NewsMax.com,” p. 1-28, formerly the “Internet Vortex”). 

 

Somehow and someway, “the reverend” discovered that the Black support for the Democrats for over a half-century had netted them practically nothing.  Accordingly, Al decided to become a wild card to supposedly teach the Democrats “a lesson.” 

 

In the New York City Mayor’s election in 2002, Al bolted the party and refused to endorse or support the Democrat mayoral candidate Mark Green (who also just happened to be the Clintons’ man).  Bill “Slick Clinton tried to repair the damage and get Sharpton on board by promising nothing of substance.  Al refused to budge.  Green lost the mayor’s contest to the Republicans. 

 

Thereupon, Al wrote a book outlining his problems with the Democrats.  Sharpton was particularly critical of Bill Clinton.  Al said that Clinton’s “style ingratiated him with blacks and the media.  But in many ways his style betrayed black America because his substance and his policies really did not serve our needs.”  Al added that Black people were duped by Clinton. 

 

“The reverend” entered the 2004 presidential race--not particularly to win the White House (because Al understands that this was not possible), but to teach the Democrats that they automatically cannot count on the Black vote. 

 

Since Al did choose to speak out, he became an enemy of the Clintons.  At once, the Democrat National Committee (which is controlled by the Clintons) persuaded the Black woman Carol Mosely-Braun to also enter the presidential race in order to try to offset and oppose Sharpton.  Actually, this Clinton tactic may backfire and cause a split in the Black vote. 

 

In any case, it is clear that all of a sudden Bill Clinton does not have the total Black vote in his pocket--or at least, that portion of the vote which can be influenced by Al Sharpton. 

 

 

He is Totally Corrupt  

 

In any case, the evidence is most convincing that Slick does not have an ounce of honor or integrity in his entire character.  He appears to be totally corrupt and sorry.  Of most significance, he is an absolute hypocrite of the worst kind.  

 

As unbelievable as it is, Clinton issued a presidential proclamation that the week of Oct 17-23, 1999, would be known as “National Character Counts Week” (Nov 1999 “Internet Vortex,” p. 2). 

 

Slick’s statement started by saying “The character of our citizens has enriched every aspect of our national life and has set an example of civic responsibility for people around the world.”  Yes, Clinton proclaimed those words.  And this has to be one of the most incredible things he has done or could do.  The man with no character talked about character. 

 

 

But Slick is Smart 

 

As commented upon elsewhere in this study, it would be easy to get entrapped into believing that Slick Clinton is a stupid, Arkansas hick--only interested in snorting cocaine and sodomizing young girls.  But that’s not the true Bill Clinton (despite the appearance).  Slick is really a man of some intelligence, cunning and conniving (of evil). 

 

The “Spotlight” newspaper (p. 19) of Feb 28, 2000, had a reader’s letter which perceptively noted that the letter writer had finally figured out why “our beloved president” bites his lip so often.  The solution--he bites his lip to keep from laughing on camera in the faces of the American people

 

Assuredly, the Christian Israelite Americans are extremely ignorant, uninformed, mesmerized and gullible.  It takes no particular skill to fool and deceive the American electorate (as has been proven many times over in US elections).  Perhaps this “Spotlight” reader has it right. 

 

While most of us thought that Slick was biting his lip because he was lying, the truth may be that he does it to keep from laughing at the gullible, goyim public.  There is no question but that Clinton and his Amalekite aides and colleagues laughed behind the backs of the American voting public. 

 

 

Chuck Youngbrandt, Revisited 

 

In his Apr 20, 2000, “Staff and Sword” newsletter, the previously discussed Christian spokesman Chuck Youngbrandt offered his assessment of Bill Clinton in several comments. 

 

He noted that his mind understood on Nov 5, 1992, that Clinton is “considered a suitable vessel by Lucifer, one he preferred over Bush and Perot.  This man is weak in moral character and easily swayed by what is expedient in any situation.  Clinton will be more than a disaster for this nation, he will lead America to destruction.”  Youngbrandt claimed that this word came from his Gee-Zeus. 

 

In a focus upon Clinton on Jan 4, 1994, Youngbrandt said that he tried to pray for Clinton, but was unable to do so.  In any case, an idea popped into Youngbrandt’s head (that he thought was another message from The MOST HIGH), which told him that many pray for Clinton in a way that they become accomplices with him in his sin and rebellion. 

 

Finally, in an April 2000 assessment, Youngbrandt indicated that “The anti-Christ spirit that directed Hitler is the same one driving-leading Clinton and it will just move from one vessel to the next, the names change but the spirit behind the actions of those men will not change.” 

 

 

The Most Evil People of All 

 

The writer of this study at hand has repeatedly made reference to the great evil and wretchedness of Bill Clinton.  While diabolical Amalekites (like Franklin Roosevelt, Adolf Schicklgruber, Adam Weishaupt and Karl Marx) have been some of the most vile and corrupt men in history, Slick Clinton must be put into the same class (or rather, at the top of the list).  He, too, is profoundly evil and rates right up there with the others. 

 

Of course, this writer has repeatedly expressed this reality about Slick, who is so incredibly depraved and wicked.  But in fairness, it must be observed that many other people share an almost similar view that this writer has expressed. 

 

Per an article by Mike Blair on “Bill Clinton’s Theme Song: Hail to the Creep,” appearing in the December 6, 1999, “Spotlight” (p. 7), the “New York Post” newspaper conducted an Internet generated survey of its readers to determine the 25 most evil persons in the ending millennium (the last 1,000 years).  Some 19,184 people responded. 

 

As might be expected, Adolf Hitler (correctly Schicklgruber) was number one.  Guess who number two was?  Yes, Bill “Slick” Clinton was number two in the poll (not far behind Adolf).  Josef Stalin was three; Cambodian killer of millions Pol Pot was four; and Nazi doctor Joseph Mengele was five.  Now, another surprise is in order.  Hillary Rodham Clinton came in number six. 

 

The rest of the runner ups, in sequence, were:  Saddam Hussein, Adolf Eichmann, Charles Manson, Idi Amin, Genghis Khan, Jeffrey Dahmer, Benito Mussolini, Ayatollah Khomeini, Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, Ivan the Terrible, Fidel Castro, Jim Jones, Vlad the Impaler, Tim McVeigh, Slobodan Milosevic, the Marquis de Sade, Mommar Khadafy and Jack the Ripper. 

 

Hillary had the honors of being the only woman on the list of the 25 most evil people in the last 1,000 years.  Please understand that this was a New York poll in a very liberal state.  And Hillary was elected a senator from New York (reportedly, with the help of Bill Clinton and Democrat generated vote fraud).   

 

Interestingly, the “New York Post” provided a list of candidates for the 25 most evil people of all.  All of the vote getters were on this list but Bill and Hillary Clinton.  Thus, all of the votes cast for Bill and Hillary came from write-in voters.  This makes the whole exercise most astounding.  If they would have been on the list, they would have received even more votes--perhaps enough to allow Slick to be in first place. 

 

 

Tom and Daisy Buchanan 

 

Back in the roaring 20s, and in the quieter 30s, one of the great American authors was a man named F. Scott Fitzgerald (1896-1940).  Perhaps Fitzgerald’s most notable work was a book on “The Great Gatsby.”  It was so well known and acclaimed that Hollywood made at least two film versions of the book (first with Alan Ladd and later with Robert Redford) and a more recent TV miniseries. 

 

“The Great Gatsby” had a couple of characters named Tom and Daisy Buchanan who lived out on Long Island in New York.  There was some wealth in the family.  So apparently, Tom never worked, but liked to pass his time playing polo. 

 

The one word which describes this pair of characters is “evil.”  They were incredibly wicked, deceitful, abusive, inconsiderate, immoral, adulterous and on and on. 

 

The writer of this study at hand often thinks of the characters Tom and Daisy Buchanan in the context of the two Clintons.  They are so much alike.  If there is one paramount difference between the two pairs, it is only that Fitzgerald’s Tom and Daisy are too petty and low keyed in their depravity.  After all, Tom was not into politics as Bill is.  Clearly, the Clintons are substantially more depraved and pathetic. 

 

 

Achav and Jezebel 

 

But there is another interesting observation about the two Clintons.  A former chapter outlined the enormous parallel between Bill and Hillary Clinton and the incredibly corrupt and evil Achav and Jezebel in the ancient House of Yisrael (I Kg 21:25).  In terms of evil and depravity, it is hard to match Achav and his Edomite wife Jezebel (although the Clintons correctly are a match). 

 

Many people reading the Scriptures lose sight of the fact that the books of Kings are prophetic books.  People and events described in them in the historic vein can be ante-types of later people and events which will be even more profound than the Scriptural accounts. 

 

Certainly, the Clintons’ duplication of Achav and Jezebel is totally prophetic.  Much of the life of Achav and Jezebel has been and is being fulfilled in the modern pair of Bill and Hillary Clinton.  Of the two couples, it is questionable which pair is the more evil and wretched. 

 

In any case, one must ask if the terrible deaths of Achav and Jezebel (in the form of YHWH’s curse and judgment) will be repeated in some manner with the Clintons?  Were those historic deaths prophetic of what will ultimately happen to the diabolical Clintons? 


 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix H--Clinton Plans

 

 

The Coming Clinton Dictatorship 

 

But there is still more on the liar and crook Slick Clinton.  Even now, there is every evidential reason to believe that he is making plans and preparations presently to either regain power in America or achieve power in the UN (which will grant him a renewed source of power over the US).  This will really be a shock to gullible Americans who have stood by him repeatedly. 

 

The ignorant American voters have thought that they would have a shot at being rid of Slick when they installed a Clinton presidential successor.  But this option looks out of the question from the Scriptural perspective.  Not only is Slick the type of person who would plan and scheme on how he can gain power as a dictator, but the world situation will also contribute to it (as the confused 2000 elections demonstrated). 

 

Back in 2000, former Clinton friend, Larry Nichols, told the “Spotlight” in an interview that Clinton “has no intention of leaving the oval office when his term is over” (Jun 26, 2000, “Spotlight,” p. 6).  Another former Clinton ally, Dick Morris, has expressed similar sentiments that Bill and Hillary would do anything to stay in the White House. 

 

These “Spotlight” remarks came from a story on “Will Slick Bill & Hill Leave the White House?” (p. 6), by Mike Blair, which concluded that indeed the Clintons were planning on staying in power past January 2001.  Blair quoted several scenarios which were outlined by Nichols, as allowing for this eventuality.  Nichols said that one option was a martial law takeover by Clinton (in a situation that would not truly warrant marital law). 

 

Nichols charged that Hillary Clinton’s run for the US Senate in New York (which she won) was nothing but a cleverly designed ruse--because her real target was and is the presidency.  He added that the Federal Election Commission had Hillary listed as a presidential candidate (despite Al Gore’s run).  By running for the Senate, Hillary would keep her name in the headlines to eclipse Gore. 

 

 

A Double Cross on Gore? 

 

Larry Nichols furthermore suggested that a scandal could have erupted to force Gore out at the last moment (which would have allowed Hillary to take over the Democratic nomination). 

 

On this option, it is interesting that in June 2000, the Justice Department (under Clinton’s supervision) did announce that there were some problems with Gore’s actions of raising money in 1996 (like from the Buddhist monks and nuns, discussed earlier). 

 

Furthermore, the controlled media began to talk about Gore’s sleazy campaign practices in 1996 (clearly, this motion was fueled by Amalekite Jew bankers/masters who controlled Bill Clinton).  There was even talk coming from various Democrats that an independent prosecutor might be needed to investigate Gore.

 

It was always possible that something could have knocked Gore out and Hillary could have stepped in to become the presidential nominee (but things never fell into place for her in 2000--perhaps because the Amalekite Jew bankers/masters were in no mood for a Hillary Clinton presidency in 2001.  After all, they may have wanted Bush to win, so he could be blamed for a crisis which they would set up and implement. 

 

Actually, unbeknown to a lot of people, the tension and confrontation between Clinton and Gore built-up, particularly in 2000, during Gore’s run for the presidency. Actually, Al went to great efforts to try to distance himself from Slick Clinton and the Clinton administration.  This separation manifested itself regularly in that Gore purposely seemed to go out of his way to not even be seen in the presence of Clinton. 

 

Many people speculated that Gore was trying to break all ties with Bill Clinton--because of fears that too much association or contact with Clinton would act detrimentally in Gore’s campaign.   The view of many was that Clinton’s sexual depravity in the White House would upset a lot of potential Gore voters. 

 

So Gore tried to separate his campaign totally from Clinton.  This allowed Gore and his Amalekite running mate Lieberman to talk about family values and morality (though they both are basically immoral and evil men). 

 

 

The 2001 Revelations 

 

A CBS news report on the night of Feb 6, 2001, offered quite a bit of insight on an actual confrontation and increasing hostility between Gore and Clinton, starting during the presidential campaign and accelerating after the November elections. 

 

While neither Gore nor Clinton would officially comment upon this conflict, the news was obviously leaked by someone (the best guess here is that Clinton purposely leaked the news to try to further damage and/or destroy his friend Gore for political purposes in 2001 and in later years as well). 

 

The essence of this story is that indeed, there was conflict between the Gore campaign organization and Clinton, during the presidential campaign.  After the election and after it became apparent that Gore had lost, this conflict increased and reached a state where there is now reportedly some open hostility between Gore and Clinton, on a personal basis.  Gore and Clinton are virtually not even on speaking terms. 

 

After the election, the report is that Gore blamed Clinton for his loss, while Clinton blamed Gore and Gore’s failure to link himself to the “achievements” of Bill Clinton and the Clinton administration for eight years. 

 

Though there was no mention of the possibility that Clinton had purposely set his so-called friend Gore up to lose the election (after winning the popular vote), as was offered in a discussion in a prior chapter, this course of events must not be ruled out.  If there is merit in this option, is it possible that Gore knew and understood how his buddy Clinton had double crossed him? 

 

For sure, the Clinton-Gore feud is serious and has spilled over into the lives of their wives.  The Aug 2001 “Internet Vortex” (p. 7) had a report from “Vanity Fair” magazine that called the feud between the women “a catfight.”  Hillary Clinton has called Tipper Gore an “unintellectual, nice lady who doesn’t have a brain in her head.”  Tipper thinks that Hillary is “an ambitious, rather uncoordinated, grasping, difficult woman.” 

 

 

Gore is Now Out 

 

Though Gore should be the theoretical head of the Democrat party (in the aftermath of the 2000 elections), this is certainly not true in 2000, 2001, 2002, or in early 2003 (as will be covered below).

 

As these words are being written, it seems that indeed Slick has been laying the groundwork to eliminate his friend Gore totally from the national political arena. This means that slowly Gore is being removed from the limelight and is being replaced with Hillary (who has her sights set upon the years 2004, 2008 and/or 2012, as being the Democrat candidate for president). 

 

While Gore had been a stupid sucker, supporting Slick during the Clinton presidency (like so many others, Clinton took advantage of him for benefits and then ended up double crossing him at the first opportunity), Slick was no true friend of Gore (although he “allegedly” supported Gore in the 2000 presidential campaign).  Hence, he was more than ready to double cross his supposed friend Gore when the time came for it. 

 

As allowed above and in a prior chapter, it well could be that Slick purposely engineered the 2000 election crisis so that Gore would lose in a close election.  This motion may have been prompted, in part, by promises to Hillary that he would support her in the future and with agreements with ruling Amalekite Jew bankers/masters to cause a 2000 election crisis to bring on a new constitution and the New World Order. 

 

Historically, in US politics, the presidential candidate of a party became the titular head of the party (and irrespective of whether he won or lost the presidential election).  In this context, Gore should have been and remained the visible and principle leader of the Democrat party throughout 2000 and later until 2004 (and the choice of a new Democrat leader in the form of the then presidential candidate). 

 

However, Sick has been in the background, working to undercut his alleged ally. 

 

 

Clinton is Still in Charge--Not Gore! 

 

The Dec 13, 2000, “New York Times” set the pace for the future--when it suggested that Bill Clinton alone would continue to lead the Democrat party, which clearly was a blow to the leadership mantle that supposedly should be with Al Gore (Jan 2001, “Internet Vortex,” p. 28).  This prediction soon came true! 

 

In late December 2000, it came time for the Democrats to choose a new Democrat National Chairman.  This choice has traditionally been done by the titular head of the party (the last presidential candidate).  However, in 2000, Gore was shut out and Clinton made the decision alone--proving that he is still the prevailing boss of the Democrat party (and not Gore). 

 

Though Gore tried his level best to be completely linked to the evil Amalekite bankers/masters, it really always was Clinton in the shadows who was the man most connected to the plutocratic Amalekites (the likely reasons for this tie will be covered in the succeeding appendices).  For sure, Clinton is still the Amalekites’ man. 

 

It has to be significant that when president elect Bush made his primary selections of potential cabinet people in December 2000 and early January 2001, he chose Blacks, Hispanics, Asians and majority Whites.  Manifestly, he did no favors for the ruling Amalekites, as presidential nominees usually have done.  For sure, both Clinton and his Amalekite handlers will be working full time to plan their take over of the US. 

 

 

The Revealing Clinton 

 

After leaving office in January 2001, Slick Clinton was at Andrews Air Force Base, where a group of admirers were assembled to greet him.  One sign in the crowd read-- “Don’t Go.”  He responded “I’m still here, we’re not going anywhere.”  He then added-- “Now that I have left the White House, perhaps I shall be in the driver’s seat as never before” (May-Jun 2001 “Prophecy Flash,” p. 67). 

 

A later news report from Jul 2001 said that Slick spoke to the United Federation of Teachers (the school teachers’ union).  Per the Jul 2001 “Internet Vortex” (p. 8), Bill told them “Maybe someday I’ll run for something again” (which indicated that he will not stay on the sidelines forever). 

 

 

A Constitutional Convention? 

 

Since Hillary did not get on the presidential ballot in November 2000 and since 2004 or 2008 are so far away, the Clintons have always had other options on the table.  Bill has already went on record that he favors an amendment to the constitution to allow a president to serve more than two terms, as is now the restriction (Jun 13, 2003, “The Week,” p. 19).  Clearly, Slick would support this idea in a constitutional convention. 

 

Certainly, if the Amalekite Jews pull the plug on George W. Bush and the US economy and financial markets, prevailing conditions can very easily pave the way for a constitutional convention (as discussed earlier). 

 

Only 34 states need to make a call for a constitutional convention and one will be assembled.  Already, 32 states have made such a call.  So only two more are needed.  An economic collapse could easily produce the call. 

 

Once a convention is assembled, it could do all kinds of things--to even amend the present constitution or produce a brand new one.  A new one has been on the drawing boards for years.  Moreover, most of the US states have already called for a convention over the flag burning issue and other questions which could never muster Congressional support for an amendment. 

 

The best guess is that Bill Clinton and his Amalekite handlers jointly agreed that the year 2000 was not quite ready for marital law.  Accordingly, the decision reached was to produce further dissatisfaction with the present constitution that would generate discontent over the electoral college.  If economic troubles surface, a constitutional convention will soon surface. 

 

 

The Clintons Are Here to Stay--For Awhile

 

Once a convention writes a new constitution or amends the old one, the way can be paved for Bill Clinton to return to the presidency.  Also, the case must be allowed that a liberal convention could even choose Hillary Clinton as president.  This would be a very plausible option if Bill Clinton should get to be UN Secretary General (which he is also working on). 

 

Hillary would be a very likely candidate for US president--although there has to be some questions about whether the Amalekite Jew bankers/masters would support her or not.  While she seems to have Amalekite Jewish roots (to be profiled in later comments), she has upset a lot of the Amalekites by being friendly to Mrs Arafat and the Arabs. 

 

As a matter of fact, the Apr 2003 “NewsMax.com” (p. 55), formerly the “Internet Vortex,” had an article on “Hillary Tainted by bin Laden Cash” which may prove to be very damaging to Hillary’s assumed Amalekite support.  This article said that the Clinton household was blessed (or cursed) with $750,000 in donations from three Arab terror nations--including $267,000 from the Bin Laden family. 

 

In addition to this $750,000 picked up by Bill in speaking fees, the Clinton library will be enriched by a $1 to $20 million donation from Saudi Arabia.  Former Clinton advisor Dick Morris suggests that the moneys collected for the Clinton library will be used to fund Hillary’s presidential campaign. 

 

Thus, many Amalekites do not like Hillary and it is hard to fathom that they would allow her to be president.  But anything is possible.  And who knows what kind of an agreement or deal that can be brokered by Bill, Hillary and the Amalekite bankers/masters in a smoke-filled back room. 

 

For sure, once Bill, Hillary, Colin Powell or whomever is in power (when the Amalekite plutocrats decide on the New World Order), a dictatorship with martial law will be declared. 

 

Frankly, my guess has long been that Bill Clinton will return to power with a new constitution or with a step-up to the UN (or with the election of Hillary).  In either case, he will impose the New World Order on the American people, as fast as possible. 

 

Certainly, in American politics, the Clintons are not about to willingly fade away from the circles of power.  They like being bosses and every indication is that they intend on regaining power for an indefinite period.  Even now, there is talk that Slick is thinking about running for Mayor of New York City (Jan 2001 “Internet Vortex,” p. 5).  Assuredly, he has his eyes set on the UN and world power, to be shortly addressed. 

 

Thus, for Bill, Hillary, Powell or whomever to become the first American dictator, there will surely be a need for some acceptance of the dictatorship in some quarters.  Manifestly, there would have to be some willingness by the public which will make the dictatorship legitimate.  

 

 

Current Events Which Will Help the Clintons 

 

As things are currently building up (in 2003), any number of events can start occurring soon to supposedly allow someone to declare a “national emergency” (economic collapse, Moslem terrorist attack, etc).  Surely, the earlier noted voting mess in 2000 is alone sufficient cause for Slick to come back.  Importantly, he has tried to present an appearance of being above all of the political conflict over the November election.  

 

The 2000 conflict between Gore and Bush completely polarized the American public into two opposing camps (of about one-half of the people in each group).  Hostility and hatred have been surfacing between the two factions.  With such animosity, Clinton has looked like a peace-maker, as he maneuvers events to regain power.  Certainly, the 50% of Americans in support of Gore would support this Clinton maneuver. 

 

Thus, it looks like Slick will ultimately make a comeback in the US or at the UN.  But surely, the Amalekite bankers/masters must be concerned about Slick and especially since their man Lieberman has temporarily lost out (although they likely engineered the whole 2000 election debacle in order to get a new US Constitution and/or speed up the imposition of the New World Order). 

 

The world situation is building up to such a momentum that a catastrophic escaton event seems waiting off stage for a grand entrance (as described by Dr Rod Lewis and elaborated upon in preceding comments herein).  It’s likely that the Amalekite fat cats must be suspicious that they could loose control of a crook like Clinton or be unable to maneuver the American public when he does regain power and impose martial law. 

 

Some students of the conspiracy have suggested that there is a powerful force at work presently (clearly, under the supervision of the Amalek-Edomite bankers/masters) to deliberately undercut the United States government and its leaders and to destabilize it, as a prelude to the imposition of the New World Order (assuredly, the 2000 election mess seems to fuel such a possibility).  This well could be why Bush won. 

 

 

The Issue Is Trust 

 

Manifestly, Slick has become the object of jokes both in the US and internationally and has virtually destroyed the office of the US presidency.  He has grossly hurt the image of the United States (just as GWB has followed suit with his war against Iraq). 

 

A 1998 Pew Research Center poll showed that only one in three American persons actually trusted their government and that the lowest percentage of voters in history turn out for elections (Oct 1998 “McAlvany Intelligence Advisor,” p. 26).  So, if the Amalekite fat cats have been trying to demoralize the American public, they are succeeding. 

 

These advocates believe that as the public gets fed up with their democracy and the corruption in high offices, they will assuredly be quite happy to accept the New World Order to theoretically bring in some sense of stability and perhaps even honor to corrupt human institutions of government.  While this option must be considered, there are still other alternatives to account for current events. 

 

The only problem is that when Slick comes on TV to say that he has regained power and is imposing a dictatorship, will the collective American people believe him?  And the answer is in doubt--because he is such a gross liar and cheat and everybody knows it.  So, when this day arrives, how much support can Slick muster?  Who will believe him? 

 

 

The Amalekites Know 

 

Slick is such a total liar, cheat and double crosser.  Can he be wholly depended upon as the first American dictator to continue to take orders from the Amalekite Jew power structure (if he regains power)? 

 

The Amalekite Jew bankers are not exactly stupid.  They know that Slick is such a liar and cheat that a question will inevitable surface making them wonder if he can be completely trusted once he declares himself to be the first American dictator.  Certainly, they know what he did to former Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu over Jonathan Pollard, previously discussed.  This surely must put fear in their hearts. 

 

The Amalek-Edomite Jews have been stung three times previously by presidents who double crossed them.  In the American Civil War, they elected Lincoln and promoted the Civil War, only to have Lincoln turn against them and their money lending practices.  They chose to then assassinate him in 1865. 

 

Later, after electing Kennedy, JFK turned against them in 1963.  So they acted to murder him.  After electing Richard Nixon, he double crossed them as well (certainly, the Amalekite Jew segment of the international bankers).  So they decided to get rid of him.  They used their media powers to completely destroy the evil Nixon.  Therefore, when the time came for impeachment and removal, Tricky Dick never had a chance. 

 

Too, there is the remaining question of Clinton’s public approval ratings (even in light of his soaring polls in 1998 and later).  The interesting thing about Slick is that he doesn’t have the real acceptance and popularity which the conniving Amalek-Edomite FDR enjoyed. 

 

Many people supposedly like Bill, but they all know that he is a liar and a cheat with no character or morality.  Assuredly, this condition must concern the ruling plutocrats planning a take-over of the US, if they decide on putting Bill back in power. 

 

 

The Amalekite Double Cross 

 

There is a third issue which is most profound.  The fall of modern Ephraim-Yisrael will parallel the previous falls of the House of Yehudah (first to the Babylonians and next to the Romans). 

 

In both of those terminations, the evil Amalekites played major roles.  Clearly, the Amalek-Edomites largely took over the Jewish government in the Roman War (precipitating a civil war) and probably attempted a similar task in the Babylonian war; although details of such seem lacking. 

 

In any case, the die is cast if Slick does regain US power from a new constitution, from a Hillary presidency, or from an elevation to the UN.  At some point in time, the Amalek-Edomite Jew masters (under the supervision and leadership of Amalekite Jew bankers) will logically attempt a removal of Clinton and his replacement by a reliable, (more) genetic Amalek-Edomite Jew (to cause another US civil war?). 

 

The records from the Scriptures and from history demand this option.  It will assuredly happen.  The issue is not whether, but only of how and when.  Whether this US civil war comes from Clinton acts or the Amalekites is unclear. 

 

But whomever sits in the White House in the coming dictatorship (Bill, Hillary, Colin Powell or whomever), the Amalekite Jew bankers/masters will be ready to double cross him or her to place a more genetic Amalekite Jew in power. 

 

 

The Rockefeller Concern 

 

While there is evidence of an eventual Amalekite Jew assault upon Slick, the next concern has been over the role of the Amalekite Christian Rockefellers who have been declining and are on the way out, in their long war with the Amalekite Jew Rothschilds. 

 

The Rockefellers have likely understood that they will be totally crushed and destroyed by the eventual Amalekite Jew victors when they make their move to take over the US and Christian West. 

 

With this future staring them in the face, the fading Rockefellers and their Eastern Establishment allies would appear to have been a part of the faction critical of Slick in the last three years.  Surely, the Rockefellers were happy to see him gone and the rise to power of their man George W. Bush. 

 

With this backdrop, it is interesting that some of the powers that be began to question Bill at least six years ago.  Mark Helprin, in an editorial in the Oct 10, 1997, “Wall Street Journal,” called Clinton “the most corrupt, fraudulent and dishonest president we have ever known.”  Other portions of the media, especially some Rockefeller friendly newspapers, also began to criticize Bill. 

 

But one must remember that the Rockefeller power over the media is extremely limited.  Almost all media power is held by plutocrat Amalekite Jews in today’s America.  Certainly, the Amalek-Edomite Jews control the television industry and leading newspapers and magazines (apparently, to include the “Washington Post” and “Newsweek”). 

 

The likely Rockefeller dissatisfaction with Clinton led some analysts to suggest that the fat cats were in the process of trying to duplicate the change in government that happened with the demise of Spiro Agnew and Richard Nixon in the 1970s and the elevation of Gerald Ford and Nelson Rockefeller.  Such an eventuality could have paved the way again for another un-elected president and/or vice president. 

 

This background then takes one to the Monica Lewinsky and the Bill Clinton sodomite scandal that erupted in the media on January 20, 1998.  Maybe, this was the very thing which the Rockefeller bankers were looking for to get rid of Slick!  Bill’s efforts to have her obstruct justice and commit perjury in the Paula Jones case were most serious (discussed formerly). 

 

Otherwise, the evil Clinton offered a host of other good reasons for his removal--like selling the White House, Arlington Cemetery and indeed the United States for campaign contributions (principally, from the Chinese Communists). 


 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix I--Clinton and the Amalekites

 

 

The Amalek-Edomite Dilemma! 

 

Not only would the Rockefellers have more than enough causes to see Slick go (as noted in the previous appendix), but the Christian right and any semblance left of morality in America wished to see him gone as well. 

 

But there also was the question of which way the Amalekite Jew bankers/masters would lean.  With the Amalekite Jewish control of the media and entertainment industries, they are the most powerful faction of Amalekites in modern America. 

 

Thus, the early 1998 question was whether Slick had double crossed the Amalek-Edomite Jews in some way; or rather, could they just trust him (if and when a crisis stage develops to allow implementation of the New World Order). 

 

Clearly, Clinton is untrustworthy and who knows what he might do as a US dictator.  Could the Amalekite Jew power structure keep US dictator Clinton loyal and supportive of their goals--all the while that he is busy sniffing cocaine, chasing young girls and telling lies?  Of course, everyone understands that he is a liar, par excellence.

 

Also, as pointed out before, Slick’s brother Roger Clinton has verified Bill’s long standing pursuit of both women and cocaine (per the “New Clinton Chronicles” video).  Roger has said that “My brother has a nose like a vacuum cleaner.”  “Spotlight” of Feb 21, 2000 (p. 2), notes that Bill’s nose gets bigger and redder, but experts are divided if it is caused by decades of cocaine use or something else. 

 

Even Monica Lewinsky has allowed for both cocaine and women in the Linda Tripp tapes (Jun 1999 “Idaho Observer,” p. 16).  The Starr investigation has likewise revealed both.

 

Pictures of him plainly suggest that he is a druggy.  Sometimes, his eyes are glassy or glossy and his face (especially his nose) shows puffiness and signs of cocaine use.  Even during his confession speech on Aug 17, 1998, one of the TV camera angles of his nose suggested something wrong with the nostrils being extra large and protruding (as a friend of mine once pointed out). 

 

Could the Amalekite Jew bankers/masters always count on a man like him? 

 

 

Plutocrat Concern 

 

As a minimum, the Amalekite Jew internationalists in the US would have to be concerned over whether the American public would be docile and willing to accept a Clinton dictatorship (if they choose to return him to power with a new constitution or however). 

 

Everyone knows that Slick is a pathological liar and an immoral, dishonest and totally corrupt bum who cannot be trusted.  If he came on TV and tried to present a case for martial law (because of an alleged emergency), who would believe him? 

 

Surely, the Amalekite Jew rulers would prefer to have someone more credible and reliable in a crunch as the American dictator.  Someone more loved and respected (than Clinton) by the gullible public would and could better put over the need for martial law.  A person like Franklin Roosevelt would have been first choice and he almost reached that pinnacle, before death cut him down in 1945. 

 

 

Slick Has Served the Amalek-Edomites 

 

It’s not that the Amalek-Edomite Jew super rich haven’t been served by Slick.  They have and especially as he was surrounded by Amalek-Edomite Jew cabinet members, lawyers and aides in the presidency.  The “Jubilee” paper of Jan/Feb 1998 (p. 7) quoted columnist Morton Kondracke (of Jan 18, 1998) as saying that Clinton was regarded as one of the most pro-Israeli presidents in history. 

 

In his video on “Come Lord Jesus,” Catholic Priest John O’Connor, previously quoted, noted from an Israeli newspaper that all of Clinton’s appointments to the Federal Reserve Bank and the Supreme Court have been of Jews (actually Amalekites).  Clinton even said that his next Supreme Court appointment would also be a Jew (clearly, George W. Bush has not and will not equal that position). 

 

Slick placed Amalekite Jews in charge of much or all of US intelligence and police capabilities.  Amalekite Jews ran the FBI and CIA.  In fact, again, per the Israeli paper cited by O’Connor, Jews were (and probably still are) in all key management positions within the CIA.  To top all of this off, this same source said that five or six out of the seven key advisors to Clinton were Jews. 

 

 

Slick Learned 

 

Some years ago, Clinton’s political mentor, Arkansas Senator William Fullbright said that the Jewish lobby controlled 70 of the 100 votes in the US Senate.  There was an outcry of horror at Fullbright’s alleged anti-Semitism.  Quite naturally, Fullbright was defeated the next time he ran for reelection.  Slick evidently learned from this history (to be sure that he gives the Amalekite Jews everything possible). 

 

Knowing where his bread is buttered and understanding the enormous power of the ruling Amalekite Jews over the entire American society today, Clinton chose to surround himself with these Amalek-Edomite Jews and turn almost the entire United States government and establishment over to them for plunder and exploitation (if they would just use their powers to keep him in the presidency). 

 

Though Slick had a reputation of being the first Black president of the US, he was far more subservient and obedient to the ruling Amalekite Jews.  As noted, his first two Supreme Court appointments were of apparent Amalekites.  African Americans could not crow over any such achievements on their behalf (other than Betty Curry, Clinton’s personal secretary, who ranked awful low, as compared to Supreme Court justices). 

 

Slick’s entire foreign policy agenda was in the hands of high ranking Amalek-Edomite Jews who ostensibly were pro-Israeli (although they also were so deceitful that they could and did double cross the state of Israel at the drop of a hat and particularly in the context that they were very liberal, while the Israeli government had been in the hands of conservatives for most of Clinton’s early presidency). 

 

While the Amalek-Edomite Jews will pretend to be Slick’s friends and supporters (if he should return to power), it would not take much in the way of provocation for them to turn on him and do him in.  Please remember that Stalin was pro-Amalekite for ages.  But in the end, it was reportedly an Amalek-Edomite doctor who murdered him to end his career. 

 

 

General Shabtai Ziv 

 

In April 2000, Israeli General Shabtai Ziv retired from government service.  Ziv was a former military judge who served as general counsel for the Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security services.  The “Spotlight” paper (p. 1, 3) of May 29, 2000, had an article by Martin Mann on “Israeli Admits Assassination is National Policy” which covered Ziv’s farewell address. 

 

Ziv said “As a jurist, I had to distinguish between hostile elements within the territory of the state of Israel and those who act outside the state and cannot be arrested or brought to trial.  As for the latter (enemies abroad), it is perfectly legitimate to strike at anyone who is a danger to the state’s security... I will authorize a liquidation of someone like that anywhere, provided I get a clear and specific order from the political level.” 

 

In terms of assassinations, Mann noted the situation with the spiritual leader of the Ultra Orthodox Shas group in Israel--Ovadia Yosef (mentioned in a former chapter).  Besides angering the Ashkenazim, he is under criminal investigation for publicly urging the murder of an Israeli official who has been participating in the current Mideast peace talks which involve giving land back to the Arabs. 

 

 

Tom Hoskins 

 

In this environment, Lt. Col. Tom Hoskins, a US Marine counterterrorist expert, said “Trouble is, the real promoters of these controversial Mideast settlement talks are Clinton and his top people.  If Zionist fanatics want to kill their own leaders for going along with Clinton, who can tell when they will turn their attention--and hit squads--toward Washington?” 

 

Hoskins has made a good point.  If certain Israeli terrorists had gotten fed up with Clinton’s constant meddling in Israeli affairs, would they target him for liquidation?  This is not far fetched at all.  True, Clinton gave Amalekite Jews most of the United States to plunder, exploit, abuse and steal from.  But whatever he did, it was never enough. 

 

Too, Slick is such a classic double-crosser.  He can’t be trusted for anything (as Binyamin Netanyahu discovered, as discussed earlier).  If Slick needs a scapegoat in the future (if he gets back into power in the US or UN), he could offer up the Jews (just as Adolf Schicklgruber did in the early 1930s).  If and when this happens, will the Israelis assassinate him?  This option will be explored in later remarks. 

 

These remarks from Israel also bring up the situation with George W. Bush.  For sure, his position is awful precarious.  If he upsets the ruling Amalekite Jew power structure, the Mossad could do him in at the drop of a pin.  And when the Amalekite Jew bankers/masters are ready for the New World Order, they may do just that--by assassinating Bush, Clinton or whomsoever they choose to eliminate. 

 

None of this is far fetched at all--because it is now public knowledge that the Israelis employed hit squads to liquidate a number of Arab dissidents in Palestine in 2000, 2001 and subsequently (Mar 5, 2001, “Spotlight,” p. 12). 

 

 

More on Clinton’s Maneuvers 

 

As just noted, and as also pointed out in previous comments, Clinton has already double crossed former Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.  Moreover, there was in motion Clinton’s push of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak into corruption.  Now, there is another related story to this Clinton maneuvering in the Middle East. 

 

A follow-up report on the practice of Slick Clinton to meddle in Israeli politics appeared in the Feb 25, 2000, “Jerusalem Post” (p. 3) in a report by David Zev Harris on “Likud MK tells Clinton to stop interfering.”  The essence here is that Likud Knesset member Uzi Landau called upon Clinton to stop interfering in the coming referendum on Israeli peace with Syria. 

 

In revelations of Clinton’s involvement in the Israeli-Syrian peace process, Landau wrote him a letter and said that if the information was correct, that “this would constitute an unprecedented and intolerable act of gross interference in Israel’s internal affairs.”  Of course, the US Embassy spokesman, Larry Schwartz (a likely Amalekite), denied everything. 

 

In any case, Lt. Col. Hoskins’ remarks, cited above, on the possibility of the Israelis assassinating Slick (now, or in the future, if he regains US power) and/or George W. Bush or whomever else in US power is not far fetched at all and even in the vein that Bill meddled too much in their internal affairs.  Something could easily set them off. 

 

However, this writer believes that the probabilities are great that Slick will regain power and survive for a time.  As will be covered in later comments, his life could be in danger if he does not fully march to the Amalekite Jew tune being piped or if he tries to double cross them.  Surely, he has enough brains to understand that he must be very careful in his dealings with the Amalekite Jews and the modern state of Israel. 

 

 

A Later Development 

 

While one must wonder why and how it is that Slick was able to completely dominate the Middle East peace negotiations, a news report in the Nov 20, 2000, “Spotlight” (p. 1, 6) by James Harrer on “UN Peacekeeping Forces--Next Stop:  Israel” may reveal the answer. 

 

The gist of the story was that Saudi Arabia and certain other oil rich Arab countries had offered a one billion dollar bribe to Slick (as briefly cited earlier), if he would promote an Arab acceptable peace in Palestine--to include the presence of a UN force to oversee it between the Palestinians and the Israelis. 

 

Per Harrer, Sandy Berger, Slick’s Amalekite aide, was the middle man negotiating the deal.  Maybe, this was one of the reasons that Slick worked so hard on this motion in 2000 (plus, it would benefit his legacy and help him in resuming power in the future). 

 

Reportedly, one aspect of the bribe plan called for some 350 UN observers and an international reaction force of 2,000 to 5,000 troops to be interspersed between the warring factions.  Yasser Arafat had been talking about this course of action in November 2000.  Even the US proposed at one time that the UN Security Council assume sovereignty over the Temple Mount. 

 

The fact that Slick’s Amalekite Jew aides and helpers were involved in this motion spells out that Ehud Barak may have been also involved, as noted earlier. 

 

Or alternatively, it could suggest that Slick and his Amalekite Jew buddies were in the process of taking this $one billion for themselves and then double-crossing Barak and the state of Israel.  It is very plausible that Slick and his Amalekite Jew aides would double cross the Israelis!  

 

 

The Essence Here 

 

The point is that Bill Clinton undertook peace in the Middle East as one of his primary goals.  Apparently, he even sided more with the Arabs than with Israel on occasion and this upset some of the Israelis.  There is no question about it whatsoever.  Slick had his eyes set upon a Nobel peace prize and the restoration of his image by promoting peace in the Middle East. 

 

Obviously, if he could give all parties involved enough US dollars, he would achieve something.  And if he was successful, it could pave the way for him to have a major role in international politics at the UN (which is one of his ambitions, as noted earlier and as will be assessed in a following appendix). 

 

As a follow-up on this story, Slick did not get his peace treaty.  Nevertheless, his efforts for a Nobel peace prize did not end.  In January 2001, Slick dispatched an aide to Norway to contact a member of the Norwegian parliament, asking for his help in getting the Noble peace prize for Clinton (Jan-Feb 2001 “Prophecy Flash,” p. 36). 

 

Two Norwegian public relations officials were offered money (in the range of six figures) for their help in getting the Nobel prize for Slick.  The Nobel committee has long held that such tactics were unethical (Jan-Feb 2001 “Prophecy Flash,” p. 36). 

 

 

Amalekite Possibilities 

 

During the Clinton presidency, some said Gore would get kicked out first--to be replaced possibly with Alan Greenspan (Chairman of the Federal Reserve), Secretary of State Madeleine Albright or Robert Rubin (former Secretary of the Treasurer).  Once Rubin, Albright or Greenspan was in as VP, Slick would then either be forced out or be removed. 

 

Another alternative was to have Slick pressured out with Gore temporarily succeeding him and naming Rubin, Greenspan or some other trustworthy Amalekite soul as VP.  Later Gore could be removed, leaving the fat cats’ real choice in charge. 

 

A 1998 “Proclaim Liberty Hot Sheet” quoted a January 30, 1998, report of the Jewish “Forward” that if Clinton goes, Gore would pick Gloria Steinem as his VP choice.  The reaction was that she is the grande dame of California politics and would hence be the ideal choice for US vice president.  Another option for Gore would have been Diane Feinstein, who also would be eagerly received by the Amalekites. 

 

 

The Amalekite Future? 

 

Any of these scenarios had merit--at least, from the perspective of planning (and even now, in the context of Clinton regaining power and choosing a new vice-president).  The fact that Clinton survived the Senate trial for his removal is no reason to suppose that the Amalekite Jews won’t ever move against him (if he regains power).  At some point in time, they will.  The only questions are when and how--not whether. 

 

Certainly, the Amalek-Edomite Jew power structure and media in the US would like to see an Amalekite Jew agent of the Rothschilds in the presidency anyway possible and especially since it is doubtful that an obvious Amalek-Edomite Jew could ever be elected as president by the voters at the polls.  Possibly, Joseph Lieberman is now in the running seat for this option (in view of his 2000 success in the polls). 

 

Not only would some White Christians have reservations about voting for a Jewish Amalekite, but more importantly, Louis Farrakhan and the Black Muslims could incite and ignite the whole African American population to get out and vote against one.  Gore’s choice of Connecticut Senator Lieberman, as his running mate, was interesting to watch in terms of the Blacks. 

 

It could have been a disaster for Gore.  But Lieberman was quickly dispatched to meet privately with Farrakhan and pacify the Blacks that Lieberman was really no threat.  Apparently, Lieberman’s words somewhat pacified Farrakhan (because Louis did not attack the Gore-Lieberman team, as he could have done so). 

 

After the meeting, Lieberman publicly declared that he was now in favor of affirmative action.  So this helped.  However, this willingness of Lieberman to change and his meeting with Farrakhan did not give the Democrats the full Black turn-out that they wanted.  Some Negroes were upset over Lieberman and did revolt. 

 

Despite the Amalekite Jewish power over Clinton, it is certain that they would like to have one of their own more trustworthy, racial cousins in the US president’s office. 

 

One must recall what happened to the Jewish Israelite authorities in control of Jerusalem--just before the Roman conquest in 70 CE, as Amalek-Edomites cunningly murdered them to take almost full and complete control of Jerusalem (described in prior comments). 

 

 

The Question Why? 

 

From the very beginning of the Lewinsky flap, there always was some concern (and there still is, even after the Senate’s acquittal on Feb 12, 1999) over whether the Amalekite masters-bankers would join into the fray to try to remove Slick or would they support and protect him against the developing threats.   

 

It must be relevant that Monica (a probable Amalek-Edomite) and certainly her first lawyer, William Ginsburg (another probable Amalekite), both always seemed to be more interested in protecting Slick than any thing else.  Since Monica herself called Clinton the creep and smuck-o, it was evident that she really didn’t like the man. 

 

Yet, she and Ginsburg went the extra mile to protect Clinton.  It is true that with her later lawyers, Monica eventually caved in and decided to cooperate (to a point).  But it has to be significant that she initially did seem to do her best to protect Slick (and did so, even to the end, when she testified at the Senate trial). 

 

Why then did Monica, Ginsburg and her later lawyers work so hard to insulate and protect Bill?  Was it possible that Ginsburg, Lewinsky and the others were running scared about all of the mysterious deaths associated with Clinton over the years (discussed in a previous chapter)?  This seems doubtful.  But Monica reportedly expressed some concern over this possibility. 

 

As discussed previously herein, there is some possibility that Monica was a Mossad agent on a Mossad mission to compromise and control the evil Clinton (making him susceptible to Mossad blackmailing).  The student of truth cannot even rule William Ginsburg out.  He, too, well could be a Mossad agent since many Jews worldwide are Mossad assets. 

 

Otherwise, in a late January 1998 Israeli news report, Ginsburg said that both he and Monica were Jews who appreciated what all Clinton had done for the Jews.  Could this statement be important in view of Clinton’s 1998 planned assault on Iraq?  Did the ruling Amalek-Edomite bankers/masters choose to try to keep Slick in power for at least the time being? 

 

If there is a conscious decision to dump Clinton or Powell later (if either gain power), it is likely that the “Washington Post” will play a key role.  So their actions must be watched carefully.  The “Washington Post” and their “Newsweek” subsidiary are both under alleged Rothschild control and will probably lead any real, deliberate, Amalekite attack upon Slick, Bush, Rice, Powell or whomever. 

 

 

Amalekite Media Power Stayed With Slick 

 

All the way through the Lewinsky affair, the “Washington Post” and the liberal Amalekite Jew controlled media stayed with Clinton.  They protected him to the point of being absurd. 

 

They were the sources of favorable polls and news coverage reports and events which helped Clinton immeasurably.  As late as February 11, 1999, Rush Limbaugh noted on his program that the “Washington Post” had continuously fed “media intelligence” to the Clinton White House--all through the fracas. 

 

The late July 1998 turn by Monica Lewinsky to begin cooperating with the special prosecutor similarly proved to be irrelevant in terms of the future of Slick.  Clearly, her cooperation simply was a matter of her own self interests to avoid prosecution?  She never turned on him, despite her obvious dislike for the man.  Her father, Barnard, also continued to support him, even after being threatened, as noted previously. 

 

As late as August 19, 1998, just after Slick went on national television to make his limited confession, an Iranian newspaper blamed the whole Monica affair on a Zionist conspiracy.  Surely, one must doubt this projection in view of how the Amalekite Jews treated the matter in the US.  Manifestly, the Amalekite Jews never got on the bandwagon to do Slick in. 

 

They stayed on his side to the time of the Senate’s acquittal.  On this, it must be important to note that one of the top, leading, Republican Senators, Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania (an evident Amalekite), spoke out for Clinton and announced his plans to acquit Clinton (even before the Senate vote). 

 

Specter gained fame as the counsel for the Warren Commission, investigating the JFK murder, discussed formerly.  He invented the famous, magic bullet theory that a Carcano bullet from Oswald gyrated in the air in several different directions to hit Kennedy twice and Connally three times, before mysteriously falling on a Parkland hospital stretcher in its almost original, pristine condition. 

 

Although the US House did vote out a bill of impeachment against Slick on December 19, 1998, the handwriting on the wall made it clear that a Senate removal would be out of the question, unless the Amalekite Jew plutocrats and their controlled media powers went to work on Slick. 

 

 

Some More Clinton Lies and Hypocrisy 

 

While the US controlled media was essentially on the side of Bill Clinton from day one of the Monica-Bill sodomy revelations, there was some evidence of a few Republican newspapers questioning Bill’s actions.  Perhaps the primary paper in this category was the “Washington Times,” which Slick labeled as being a “vast right-wing media conspiracy” against him (May 13, 2002, U.S. News & World Report,” p. 8). 

 

This claim by Slick Clinton was much like the one emanating from Bill’s wife Hillary when she was on the NBC TV “Today Program” on January 27, 1998, to claim that there was a vast right wing conspiracy responsible for the revelations of the Clinton-Lewinsky sodomite scandal (as noted above and as discussed in a prior chapter). 

 

Of course, Achav Bill and his Jezebel wife both knew that these charges of right wing conspiracies were totally false, but the lying hypocrite pair went on to make them.  Not only were the Clintons devious, but the Amalekite Jew bankers/masters who own and/or control the bulk of the US media were well aware that the words coming from the Clintons were all lies.  The Amalekite Jew bankers/masters are not exactly stupid. 

 

The liberal, leftist, controlled media, quite naturally, spun the Clinton lies and deception throughout the whole the Clinton sodomite scandal (after all, the controlled media is controlled by the Amalekite Jew bankers/masters and Clinton was their man). 

 

The controlled media (excepting for the minority “Washington Times” and maybe a few other papers loyal to the leftist Rockefeller empire, as discussed earlier in this appendix) blindly supported Bill all the way through the crisis.  Therefore, it was clear that Bill would survive (because of the enormous power that the controlled media has over the gullible, Christian goyim in America). 

 

 

Amalekite Controlled Hollywood 

 

One of the most important Hollywood contributions to liberalism occurred during the Clinton administration as a weekly television drama called “The West Wing.”  It started off with two apparent goals--one, to promote liberal policies and two, to glorify Bill “Slick” Clinton.  The March 8, 2002, “The Week” (p. 10) called it the “Left Wing.”  And it consistently has been a left wing, Amalekite production of evil. 

 

The weekly show has been built around the West Wing of the US White House. “The West Wing” laid out the Clinton White House with a string of actors, playing the different people associated with Slick in his first term.  The ultra leftist Martin Sheen (a Hispanic) plays Josiah Bartlet, the Democrat US president (who was originally supposed to be a copy of Slick Clinton). 

 

The program regularly features speeches and diatribes about the loves of the leftists--like gun control and high taxes.  The business community is held in low esteem. 

 

“The Week” quoted journalist Jonah Goldberg (from “National Review Online”) that when conservative ideas are presented on the show, they are things to be ridiculed, mocked, or simply ground into the dirt by the great heroes of the leftist, liberal, US White House (led by the leftist Josiah Bartlet/Martin Sheen).  Goldberg’s conclusion was that the West Wing was a “one-hour commercial for the Democratic Party.” 

 

Of course, the Amalekite Jew controlled entertainment industry in Hollywood and New York were Clinton people from day one.  So it was no wonder that they would create and promote a program designed to elevate and lift up the greatness of the Clinton presidency and the leftist programs Slick promoted.   

 

 

John Podhoretz 

 

The liberals loved Slick from day one.  They stayed with him through thick and thin--even to the point of being ridiculous and appearing stupid, as illustrated in an article on “The Liberal Imagination” by John Podhoretz in the March 27, 2000, “Weekly Standard” (p. 23-27). 

 

Podhoretz’s work was focused upon the above cited popular weekly television drama, “The West Wing,” which was supposedly a reference to the Clinton White House during its early years. 

 

As John Podhoretz sees it, “The West Wing” is the ultimate Hollywood fantasy (an escapist fantasy) and incorporates the epitome of the liberal imagination--actually, to the point of being ridiculous and perhaps even stupid. 

 

He notes that the president, himself, in the weekly drama is nothing like the real Clinton and that “The West Wing” is nothing but political pornography for liberals--made up of equal parts unrequited longing for and rage at Hollywood’s not so obscure object of desire--Bill Clinton.  

 

As the review indicates, the show simply is not realistic.  There is no Monica Lewinsky, no Kathleen Willey, no four-way phone-sex calls with Dick Morris, no bouts of (the Clintons’) foul temper and no jokes about dating the mummified corpse of a 14 year-old Inca girl (as Bill once suggested--he wished he could have dated the long dead girl, based upon her mummified remains). 

 

In the film, personnel in the White House are not even allowed to curse.  The president is one of the boys who makes chili for the staff and plays poker with them.  He is, per Podhoretz, immensely thoughtful, infinitely wise, deeply caring, thoroughly monogamous and unambiguously principled Nobel-Prize winning economist.  He is the epitome of what the liberals have wanted for Bill Clinton. 

 

The write-up notes one extraordinary case of the liberal mentality, in citing one instance of where one of the staff people gets involved with a high priced call girl.  Rather than be indignant about the incident and the irresponsibility of the staff person (who was supposed to be George Stephanopoulos), the press secretary (supposedly Dee Dee Myers) is upset over the intrusion into George’s personal life. 

 

John Podhoretz correctly points out that Clinton has seduced and abandoned and then seduced and abandoned again (always with another promise of another seduction) the Hollywood elite (who have stayed with him in loyalty, as much as Monica Lewinsky). 

 

Like Monica, the Hollywood liberals have nothing to show for their loyalty (all the while that Clinton was pocketing millions in campaign contributions from them).  Yes, Slick continuously milked millions of dollars in donations from the leftist Hollywood people and they got little in return (other than more in the way of the destruction of the United States, which probably pleased most of them). 

 

 

More From the West Wing 

 

In early 2002, the West Wing moved into a new stage in promoting the Democrat position on liberalism as creating an election in which the loving leftist Bartlet is involved in an election battle with the Republican Governor of Florida.  The Republican is illustrated as being dumb and deceptive and supported by money donations from special interests groups. 

 

The attempt to strike an image of the great loving liberal Bill Clinton in opposition to a so-called conservative Republican named Bush cannot be missed.  And in the presentation, the Bush character receives no favors from the program.  The West Wing paints a bad picture for Republicans and the Bush people. 

 

The bottom line of this TV program is that it is a total fabrication of what all Clinton is not (as John Podhoretz concluded in his comments in the Mar 27, 2000, “Weekly Standard”).  It seems to be the liberals’ attempt to erase Clinton from their minds with a fictional character that is totally removed from the real world of Bill Clinton. 

 

 

And Now, the Latest 

 

If anything could be added to the “West Wing” to enhance the power of the Clintonians over America, it would have to be a news item in the May 13, 2002, “U.S. News & World Report” (p. 11) indicating that Slick has been in contact with NBC executives. 

 

The story said that Slick and NBC are in the discussion stage on a plan that would allow Slick to have his own weekly talk show for a reported $50 million the first year.  This possibility would definitely be something that the evil Slick Clinton would find beneficial in order to keep his face and name before the credulous American public. 

 

Talk show personality Maury Povich said on CNN that Clinton should not do it because he would “fail miserably” (ibid, p. 11). 

 

The May 10, 2002 “The Week” (p. 17) quoted Jonah Goldberg (previously cited herein) from “National Review Online.”  Goldberg said that when Clinton speaks in an unscripted setting, he reveals himself as smarmy, superficial, and deceitful.  Per Goldberg, “putting Clinton on TV will prove that we Clinton-haters were right.” 

 

 

Some Likely Answers 

 

Any of the serious charges against Clinton or something new (which regularly surfaces with Slick) could have been sufficient to motivate the Amalekite Jew plutocrats to decide to get rid of him.  No one else had that power. 

 

Since the ruling Amalekite Jews had some obvious reasons why they should have joined into the fray and helped to remove Slick, they did not pursue that option.  The question must be asked--why? 

 

Perhaps there were several causes at work which motivated the Amalekite Jews to decide to wait to the future for their take over attempts of the United States (thus, allowing the presidency of George W. Bush and the possible resurfacing of Bill in the presidency, in the future). 

 

First, the 1998 election results (supporting Slick) must have persuaded them to temporarily abandon or delay such hopes.  This mid-term election showed remarkable support for Slick among the American people.  This same support was in evidence in most all of the polls for the 13 months of Slick’s trial. 

 

Effectively, the American people said that they loved the scoundrel Slick because he was one of them.  Surely, the 1998 elections and subsequent polls made the Amalekite Jews choose to stay on Slick’s side and largely defuse any serious trouble he could have faced over the Lewinsky sodomy. 

 

To a lesser extent, it was clear that the Amalekite Jew bankers/masters understood that Slick had been on their team from day one.  So while there is a risk with him in a future dictatorship, the Amalekite Jews chose to wait on his possible removal until later times.  Be assured that when the Amalekites are ready, they will strike and get rid of him. 

 

Of course, he will not be the first American leader who has worked for and faithfully served the international bankers (particularly the Amalek-Edomite Rothschilds) to be later destroyed by them.  As noted above, Abe Lincoln, John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon have all been down that road before for various and sundry reasons--usually, for double crosses, as discussed previously. 

 

Otherwise, other presidents who never served the bankers in the first place were eventually destroyed by them as well--like James Garfield and William Howard Taft.  Being enemies of the Amalek-Edomite bankers, one can perhaps understand why Garfield and Taft were hated so much.  But it’s hard to appreciate that they will ever turn against a faithful servant like Clinton. 


 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix J--Clinton and Survival

 

 

Slick’s Power Over His Enemies 

 

Former chapters have discussed the practice of the Slick Clinton White House to obtain and use over 900 FBI files of Clinton’s opponents.  This list of files obviously included many prominent members of Congress.  These files became enormously important to future events, as will shortly be illustrated. 

 

But there was another force at work to allow Slick to have a decided advantage over his enemies.  This one was brought out by Margaret Newsham, who was a guest on the Art Bell Coast to Coast AM radio talk show program on March 2, 2000 (as was discussed in a former chapter). 

 

Margaret formerly worked for Ford Aerospace and Lockheed which did contract work for the National Security Agency on a spying effort (which is now known as Project Echelon, discussed earlier).  The project is now focused upon the interception of all communications in America and around the world (telephone lines, cell phones, faxes, computer e-mail, the Internet, etc). 

 

Anyway, Ms Newsham expressed her view that the Clinton White House has been using the NSA and NRO (and to presumably include the FBI, CIA, IRS and all other federal agencies) to particularly focus their attention upon Clinton’s enemies.  Margaret’s suggestion was made in the context of 1998 and his war with the Republicans for survival. 

 

 

Of Course, Clinton Would! 

 

But it is manifest that a person like Slick Clinton would use all federal agencies for his own purposes.  Clinton is personally so depraved, evil and diabolical that he would think nothing about using the enormous spy agencies of the US government to spy upon and entrap his political opponents. 

 

Of course, this practice has been going on in a smaller scale for many years, going back to the Amalekite Franklin Roosevelt. 

 

Regardless, in late 1998, when it became obvious that the Republicans would try to impeach Slick over his sodomite debasement of the apparent Amalekite girl Monica Lewinsky, Slick turned to his FBI files and his control over the US government spy agencies and capabilities to produce data on his Republican opponents. 

 

Very quickly, the White House started leaking information to friendly liberal reporters on the alleged improprieties and misconduct of various members of the US House of Representatives--like Dick Armey, Bob Livingston, Dan Burton, Bob Barr, Helen Chenowith and Henry Hyde (as discussed earlier).  Some of these people went down the tubes, while others survived. 

 

So it became quite obvious to persons in Congress and in the Senate that Bill Clinton had files on all of them and was busy compiling even more detailed information which could forever destroy them, if it became public knowledge.  Of course, many people in the House and Senate backed off and refused to vote against Slick, for fear that they would be destroyed in the process. 

 

 

Slick Survived 

 

The House did temporarily delay its impeachment proceedings one day (with Slick’s attack on Iraq), but then went on with the effort on December 18, 1998.  On December 19th, the House followed up and did its duty by voting out a bill of impeachment on Slick. 

 

With the House’s vote for impeachment, the issue then went before the US Senate where Slick was acquitted (with even Jay Rockefeller voting for Slick, perhaps when it was apparent that Bill had won the fight and Rockefeller’s vote meant nothing). 

 

What this seems to suggest is that Slick Clinton used the powers of the presidency to blackmail, intimidate, threaten and coerce members of Congress to do his bidding.  With his alliance with the Amalekite controlled media, there was no way that Congress would do its duty and remove the diabolical Slick Clinton. 

 

Even though there was some remaining clamor against Slick from time to time, as these lines were first being written in the late 20th century, the ball game isn’t over until the final out.  True, he survived.  Importantly, Slick has had public opinion on his side to temporarily delay and defuse the little opposition which he has faced (and as he makes his move to return to power and declare martial law). 

 

The only thing that will do him in is if the Amalekite bankers/masters eventually turn on him.  If they turn against him, they will turn the controlled, liberal media against him to utterly destroy him in the eyes of the gullible public.  Surely, this has to be the most dangerous threats that any politician faces. 

 

The writer of this study would lean in the direction that Slick will survive all the way until the Russian and Islamic conquerors do the US in.  Perhaps a few days before their ultimate invasion and conquest, the Amalekites will attempt and succeed in a take over of the US government (and do Clinton in, if he is in power then), as they did in Jerusalem in 70 CE. 

 

 

Slick and His Start a War Card 

 

Clinton used the Iraqi war card three times in 1998 to try to stave off his troubles over Monica.  Obviously, some of his pro-Israeli Amalek-Edomite handlers were pushing him hard for a US attack on Saddam Hussein and Iraq in early 1998 because of apparent fear that Saddam possessed chemical and biological agents to upset the previously discussed balance of power. 

 

Slick knew that Christian Americans love war and that his popularity would go up in the polls with an attack on Iraq (the later GWB had the same understanding).  Such a Clinton assault against the hated Saddam (whose name appropriately means “one who confronts,” per J. R. Nyquist in “Origins of the 4th World War,” p. 160) would focus the American people’s minds away from Slick’s sex scandal. 

 

But this option was temporarily defused with the actions of the UN Secretary General to get a new agreement with Saddam on inspections (which subsequently broke down in late 1998 through a “slick” maneuver of Slick Clinton, as will shortly be shown). 

 

Thus, it appears that while Clinton’s desire for war and an attack upon Iraq in early 1998 backfired, the conflict with Saddam was far from over.  Just as the US House Judiciary Committee was getting ready to open hearings on the impeachment of the president on November 19, 1998, Slick once again used Iraq as a whipping boy to enhance his public image. 

 

About a week before the hearings, Slick started in on Saddam and Iraq with new complaints and charges.  To counter Iraq’s alleged evil, he commenced a new buildup of thousands of soldiers and aircraft in the Persian Gulf with a view that they would be ready to strike Iraq--just about the time Congress opened the impeachment hearings. 

 

Again, the UN Secretary General came to the rescue and announced a new agreement with Saddam that temporarily defused the hostile situation. 

 

 

The Foxy Slick 

 

But Slick kept an ace up his sleeve on the Iraq problem.  He used this one on December 16, 1998, a day before the House was preparing to vote out the bill of impeachment.  Slick pulled out the stops to try to head off the House vote with a new Saddam pretext.  In desperation, he turned to the military option against Iraq, just before the vote. 

 

News reports discussed on the Rush Limbaugh program on December 16 and 17 of 1998 noted that Richard Butler, an Australian in charge of the UN inspection team in Iraq, had reportedly been in contact with Sandy Berger, an evident Amalek-Edomite and close Clinton aide, on December 13th.  

 

The report said the Clinton White House encouraged (or forced--who knows?) Butler to begin a new series of inspections in some strange Iraqi areas (like in Saddam’s palace, where he lived, and at the political headquarters of Saddam’s political party) which Saddam would assuredly oppose and not permit.  So the team followed upon the Clinton request and tried to inspect those areas.  As anticipated, Saddam said no! 

 

Butler fired back a message to the UN on or about December 14th that he could not inspect those areas.  Clinton sat on the whole affair until the 16th, the day before the impeachment vote. 

 

He then launched a massive US air attack on Iraq in an obvious effort to stop the impeachment vote (which must have pleased some of his Amalek-Edomite handlers who had been pushing him for an Iraqi strike).  The interesting thing about this US attack is that it was carried out with almost worldwide opposition and particularly from Russia, China, France and various Muslim states. 

 

 

Yisrael Stands Alone 

 

Only Britain joined in with the attack and essentially only Canada, New Zealand, Australia and the state of Israel truly supported it.  The die was cast in 1998 that the US, Israel and White British Commonwealth were being postured against the rest of the world. 

 

So, in 1999 and 2000, Clinton and his Amalekite aides continued to heap condemnation and criticism upon Saddam (after concluding the US war in the Balkans).  Thereafter, the US assault and embargo on the Iraqi people intensified. 

 

Finally, even high ranking UN officials began criticizing the US for the sanctions against Iraq which had caused the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi people (Nov 15, 1999, “Spotlight,” p. 4, in a story by James Harrer on “UN Heads Reject Iraq Sanctions”).  This posturing at the UN was further evidence that very soon, the US and her Anglo-Saxon-Celtic allies will stand with Israel against the world. 

 

All along, Iraq was on America’s drawing board.  For years, there were some feelings that “Clinton could be envisioning himself and his place in history to do what Bush failed to do--complete the task of pushing Iraq farther back into the Stone Age and getting rid of Saddam” (Jan 24, 2000, “Spotlight,” p. 3).  Since Slick wasn’t able to destroy Iraq, George W. Bush decided that he would take Iraq on as a whipping boy. 

 

In January 2001, Bush began making threats against Saddam.  On Feb 16, 2001, Bush launched another US bombing assault on Iraq.  Then, on Mar 20, 2003, Bush began a more terrifying war and invasion of Iraq.  Attacking Iraq (or Afghanistan or some other state) helps young George’s image--because both GWB’s father and Clinton used wars to support their purposes. 

 

Even if GWB does subdue Iraq (for the time being), US wars of aggression against other nations are not over (like North Korea, Iran or Syria).  The US wars of aggression, by Bush or whomever (like a later Clinton if he can make a comeback), are always on the horizon to whet the appetite of the US president. 

 

At some point in time, it is almost a certainty that the US will commence further military aggression against some other nation on some pretext.  When this happens, there can be a response.  The American people should have brains enough to realize that by continuously attacking foreign nations, a day of reckoning will assuredly come.  The chickens will surely come home to roost at some point in time. 

 

 

Muslim Retaliation 

 

Therefore, every time the US attacks the Moslems worldwide (like in Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, etc) to further a political agenda and the wishes of the behind the scenes, ruling, Amalekite plutocrats, America is being forced into a day of judgment from the Muslims.  Someday, they will retaliate (perhaps this explains the Muslim terrorist attacks in Washington and New York on Sep 11, 2001)! 

 

The same is true with the Russians, vis-à-vis Slick’s attacks on Yugoslavia, as commenced in late March 1999.  Americans need to pull their heads out of the sand and understand that judgment day is coming just like it did for John F. Kennedy and his attempts to murder Castro. 

 

One of the ways which the Russians or other US enemies can retaliate is to launch an internal biological counterattack on selected US cities, described elsewhere herein.  This is a very plausible option.  If so, Big Brother will quickly declare martial law. 

 

For certain, this writer leans in the direction that something will happen (perhaps another Middle East confrontation, continuing problems in the Balkans, natural disaster, terrorism, an economic and monetary crisis or something else) to allow the president (Bush, Powell, Rice, some other Republican, or maybe even Slick if he regains power) to declare an emergency and martial law, as discussed above. 

 

Nevertheless, this eventuality would only be a prelude to the final collapse and end of the US government and people from a conquering external force (because of international debts and the historic support of the state of Israel).  In either case, disaster waits in the wings.  Of course, the real reason for judgment on America will be because of the sins of the American people--as illustrated by their choice of leaders. 

 

 

Clinton on War 

 

While it is true that Bill Clinton was a draft dodger and anti-war activist during the Vietnam War, one should not be naive and stupid enough to suppose that his reaction in those days was because he was a pacifist, ascetic or anti-war person, in reality, who loved people and human life. 

 

No!  Slick Clinton is no pacifist or conscientious objector.  And he certainly is not anti-war.  He initiated action to thrust the United States into more foreign wars, conflicts, separate attacks and murdering campaigns on independent nations and peoples (outside of a formal declaration of war) in his eight years in office, more so than other American president in history. 

 

Anyway the die is cast, Slick is a man of war and not a man of peace (although he tried to project a peace image in the Middle East by trying to push the Arabs and Israelis into a peace settlement there).  Under his rule, the FBI unilaterally murdered more American people than at any other time in American history. 

 

In his own personal life and history as a politician, more of his friends, enemies, associates and colleagues have died mysteriously (suggesting that they were murdered) than with any other known, major, American politician.  No!  Bill Clinton is not a pacifist.  Murdering, killing and death do not upset him at all.  He is perfectly at home in those situations. 

 

While Bill Clinton was totally uninterested in serving in the US armed forces, he has not been a anti-war activist in terms of Israel.  The Aug 19, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. 2) had a news item which quoted Clinton as saying that if the Iraqi or Iranian armies were at the Jordan River, Clinton would grab a gun and fight them and die.  Of course, per the report, Slick would never do that for America. 

 

 

Clinton’s Profanity and Hate 

 

The Sep 2000 “Internet Vortex” (p. 7) had an article on Clinton as seen by insiders who worked with him at the White House.  For example, the article quoted Clinton staffers, confidants and others who know him as being an incredibly profane and angry man who wants to inflict as much pain as possible on his enemies. 

 

During the Somalia crisis, George Stephanopoulos quoted Clinton as saying “We’re not inflicting pain on these f-ck-rs” and “when people kill us, they should be killed in greater numbers.”  Leaning on aide Tony Lake, Clinton added: “I believe in killing people who try to hurt you.” 

 

Clinton staffers also say that he cusses like a sailor, has temper tantrums and uses the word “kill” often to describe what he wants to do to his enemies.  At the end of the House impeachment investigations, Clinton told colleagues that he would like to kill all of these sons of b-tch-s and be done with it. 

 

Former Clinton political worker Samuel Wilson said that in the 1996 campaign, Bill encountered a critic who called him nothing but a two-bit politician and walked away.  Clinton told an aide to “Write down the name of that mother f-ck-r.  When I’m back in office, he’s a dead man.”  Wilson said he recalled Clinton’s look-- “it was cold!” 

 

This same source (ibid, p. 26) had some data on people near Clinton the past several years (discussed earlier).  Some 31 of them died in strange deaths--suicides, airplane or automobile accidents, murders, died while in federal custody or simply died from unexplained causes.  This 31 compares with the 30 Northern Mafia killings in its peak period of 1968-1978 and 156 Dixie Mafia killings (while Bill was in Arkansas). 

 

 

He Believes in Killing 

 

These observations should make everyone realize that Clinton is not an anti-war, anti-killing or pacifist president.  He believes in killing!  So his stance on the Vietnam war has to be traceable to some other reason than pacifism (as many voters have been incorrectly led to believe). 

 

Yet, Slick was a Vietnam draft dodger.  Why?  Was it because he was a personal coward or was there still something else to motivate him to choose this path of action in a day when it logically would hurt his chances in politics?  As it turned out, his draft dodging didn’t hurt him politically. 

 

But thirty years ago, who could have seen or anticipated his ability to lie, deceive and fool the state of Arkansas and later the American public sufficiently to be elected and reelected to the highest possible offices in Arkansas and the US. 

 

Assuredly, blaming cowardliness on Clinton won’t work either.  Actually, the only plausible explanation lies in his political ideology and the nature of the Vietnam war.  Bill Clinton is a classic internationalist.  But he is more.  He is a Socialist.  So, in essence, he is an international Socialist.  This makes him very close in ideology to a Communist. 

 

 

Bill’s Record and History 

 

With this backdrop, is it possible that Clinton is secretly a Communist at heart?  Well, this writer doesn’t know the answer to that question.  Maybe he is and maybe he is not. 

 

According to Arkansas State Trooper Larry Patterson, Clinton has been known to refer to at least one Arkansas State Policeman as  a “g--d d-mn-d  pig.”  So it is possible that indeed Slick is a Communist, or perhaps just a leftist anarchist of the most gross kind. 

 

As a minimum, he is an international Socialist.  His political record and history conclusively prove that reality, beyond a shadow of a doubt.  And this fact of his political persuasion has meant that he has been willing to walk the extra mile to be a friend, colleague and benefactor of the Communist Chinese and whatever semblance of Communism remaining in the old, broken-up USSR. 

 

In this context, he has went out of his way to be good to Communist China--in transferring the very latest American nuclear, missile and computer technology to China in exchange for evidently nothing, beyond millions of dollars in campaign funds.  Would he commit treason for some campaign money?  Yes, he would.  But still, one must wonder about Bill and the massive support that he has given China in all cases. 

 

On September 9, 2000, Rusty Humphreys, on “Saturday Night America,” discussed a news report about recent evidence surfacing which showed that Bill Clinton and the Democrats also took large sums of money from the Russians.  In view of US support for massive US contributions and loans and IMF loans to Russia in the 1990s, one must wonder if these payments had something to do with payments to Bill. 

 

Previous chapters discussed the situation involving the Amalekites in the pipeline of Western money into the former Soviet Union.  This money comes ostensibly for aid and help to the people.  But the Amalekites at all levels from Washington to New York to Moscow have been stealing $billions of this money.  The Russian people are being left with massive debts to pay. 

 

Exactly who in Russia made the campaign contributions to Clinton and the Democrats in 1992 and/or 1996 is not clear presently (although the enormous ties which the Gore family had with the Amalekite Armand Hammer and the Soviets must whet the appetite, as will be described below). 

 

But the Russian bribes and payoffs could have been either from the Russian Amalekites themselves or the Khazars, who may have prevailed upon the Russian government to make the payments.  In any case, the Amalekite cousins in the West also helped to arrange the loans so that Amalekites in both East and West could steal plenty. 

 

 

Slick’s Ally Gore Had Russian Connections 

 

The famous Amalekite capitalist Armand Hammer (now deceased) was head of the huge Occidental Petroleum Company and all of its various subsidiaries.  For years, Armand was a close confidante and associate of Stalin and other Communist leaders.  Since the breakup of the old USSR, information has come out of Moscow indicating that Armand was a paid agent for Soviet intelligence. 

 

In the days when Al Gore Sr was a member of the US Senate, Hammer lined up with Gore (as discussed in a prior chapter). 

 

The pair became close friends and Gore supported Hammer’s needs in the US Senate.  What all Gore got from Hammer (who was working for the Soviets) is unclear.  However, upon being defeated in an election, Gore was made chairman of the board of one of Hammer’s companies at a salary of $500,000 annually (as noted earlier). 

 

Gore and the Gore family became important stockholders in Occidental Petroleum.  So contact and linkage between the Clinton-Gore team went back many years to Hammer and the Russians--just after WWII. 

 

With the ties already established, it would have been easy for the Clinton-Gore people to continue them in the 1990s (yet, Gore regularly condemned George W. Bush in 2000 for his involvement in the oil industry). 

 

 

The Blackmail Possibility 

 

Beyond the campaign contribution probability, there is another option on why Slick treats the Russians and Chinese so well.  This course was laid out in a couple of articles in the Nov 2000 “Internet Vortex.”  A page one story in this source reported on the recent revelations of former Russian President Boris Yeltsin that the Russians knew about the Clinton-Monica Lewinsky affair as early as late 1996. 

 

Apparently, the Russians had a large amount of critical information on Clinton which could have been used to blackmail Slick, as suggested in the second “Internet Vortex” article (p. 28-29).  The essence of this second story focused upon the question of how much bad information that Russia and indeed other countries may have had on Bill Clinton. 

 

Vortex noted the strange reality of Clinton’s silence about various Russian evils and support for China.  Because of these events, the article raised the question of whether Slick was being blackmailed by the Kremlin or not. 

 

Some time ago, a Russian ship (with all kinds of antennas and communications and monitoring equipment aboard) was in the Puget Sound area off Washington state.  One of the US Ohio class submarines put to sea from the Bremerton area.  The Russian trawler followed it.  A Canadian Naval helicopter, with a Canadian officer and a US Naval officer on board, moved close to observe the Russian ship. 

 

The Russians fired a laser beam at the chopper which blinded the two observing officers (as briefly mentioned in a former chapter).  If the pilot had been watching, he would have also been blinded and the chopper would have crashed. 

 

Immediately, Naval authorities issued an order to detain the Russian ship and determine what it was doing in US waters.  In Washington, Clinton learned of the problem and countermanded the detention order.  The ship was allowed to go to sea without US interference.  The Clinton Administration said nothing publicly about the incident. 

 

Truly, Bill Clinton’s whole focus has been upon helping and assisting the Chinese and the Russians.  About the only Communists that he has not been chums with is Fidel Castro and the Cubans (who are still on the list of US enemies).  But this attitude soon changed as Clinton tried to cozy up to Cuba over Elian Gonzalez. 

 

 

Bill Visited the Communists 

 

Certainly, it is interesting and perhaps extremely relevant that during the Vietnam conflict and while Bill Clinton was “studying” at Oxford in England, Clinton took a month long trip behind the Iron Curtain to visit Russia and one other Warsaw pact country.  Why did he go? 

 

Well, Clinton doesn’t speak Russian and he had no background in Russian history, geography or the people.  So a month long trip to the Eastern Communists back in those days was a most questionable event and particularly so since he had no authority for the trip from the US State Department. 

 

There are also questions on why the USSR allowed him in.  Normally, Westerners could not readily go to the Soviet Union and travel in that country without special clearance and authorization.  Did the authorities in the Kremlin know things about Bill Clinton which were not known and understood by American authorities then or the later American people? 

 

Beyond Clinton’s contacts with the Soviets in the old cold war days, it has to be significant that in November 2000 (during the US elections), Slick made a state visit to Communist Vietnam. 

 

Slick spend several days in Hanoi and Ho Chi Min city (to pay homage to Ho Chi Min, who defeated the US in the Vietnam war).  While Clinton tried to claim that he was promoting trade, the question must remain about his love for the Communists. 

 

On April 5, 2001 (while the Chinese Communist government was holding 24 American prisoners on Hainan Island for spying), former President Slick Clinton traveled to Hong Kong to show his solidarity and appreciation for the Chinese people.  Reportedly, Slick picked up $200,000 for the trip.  So it was successful from his point of view. 

 

 

CIA Assets? 

 

Over the years, the “Spotlight” newspaper has run some stories suggesting that in the Vietnam war days, both Bill and Hillary Clinton were CIA assets.  In this context, Bill was supposedly on a secret CIA spying mission when he visited the USSR.  But if so, would the Soviets be so stupid to allow him in or did they permit him to come in because he had a reputation as a US draft dodger? 

 

Perhaps the better option on this theme is that both Bill and Hillary Clinton will be or rather will pretend to be whatever is beneficial at a given moment in time to further their own ambitions and desires.  In that vein, they could pretend to be Communists, Capitalists or secret CIA agents if they stood to gain something personally in the deal.  Like genetic Amalekites, neither of them have any morals or scruples on anything. 

 

So rather than serving the Communists or the CIA, the better option is that Bill and Hillary have been doing things to benefit and serve their own interests.  Probably, the CIA, US and Communists have all been losers in dealing with the Clintons.  For sure, both Bill and Hillary would gladly double cross whomever and whatever is necessary to further their own selfish goals of power and rule. 

 

Both the CIA and Communists may have thought they were benefiting someway from the actions of Bill Clinton.  One or both parties may have been suspicious that he was a double agent.  However, even that definition leaves something to be desired.  The truth is clear enough that Slick really was never interested in serving anyone or anything--but himself. 

 

 

The Bottom Line 

 

The essence of these comments is that there are major questions about the political ideology and thinking of President Bill “Slick” Clinton.  For sure, he is not an American nationalist or populist. 

 

The last things on his mind are the future of the US or the American people.  Logically, the most important thing dominating his thoughts is himself.  He is a very selfish and ambitious man. 


 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix K--More Views on Clinton

 

 

David P. Schipper’s Summary on Bill 

 

The Oct 20, 2000, “Staff & Sword”  (p. 11) quoted author David P. Schipper’s assessment of Bill Clinton.  He says-- “This is the man of whom it is rightly stated, out of overwhelming evidence, was involved in a conspiracy to obstruct justice, lie, suborn perjury, tamper with witnesses, bribe, threaten, falsify documents, and abuse the power of the Presidency to deny Paula Jones her constitutional right to her day in court. 

 

“A man who committed a known brutal assault (rape) of a woman, who sexually assaulted a married woman in the Oval Office (Kathleen Willey), who has a history of sexual harassment of women in general, a man who openly violated the Federal Privacy Act, a man who gave false testimony to a Federal Investigative Committee of the Congress, a man who lied under oath in a civil deposition and lied under oath in a criminal grand jury,

 

“who lied to the American people, who lied to his cabinet, who lied to his top aides and who lied under oath to the Congress of the United States, a man who added obstruction of an inquiry and an investigation before the Legislative Branch to his obstructions of justice before the Judicial Branch of our constitutional system of government. 

 

“A man who is sworn to uphold the Office of President as the chief law enforcement officer in the U.S. did anything necessary to stay in office, even if it meant destroying the legal un(der) pinnings of our political system (and this Great Republic)... 

 

“Can you imagine dealing with such a person in any important matter?  You would never know his secret mental reservations or the unspoken redefinition of words.  Even if you thought you had solved the enigma, it wouldn’t matter--he would just change the meaning to suit his purposes.” 

 

 

Internet Vortex’s Summary on Bill 

 

These words were first written in the late summer of 2000.  The Arkansas lawyer-discipline committee had just filed suit in court to disbar lawyer Bill Clinton from practicing law in the state of Arkansas.  This committee had almost a 100% track record of successes in seeking disbarment of lawyers for bad conduct. 

 

So the future didn’t look good for Slick at that time (but Slick ultimately beat this rap, just like he did with all of the others). 

 

This background prompted the Aug 2000 “Internet Vortex” (p. 2) to produce an article on Clinton which reported on all of his “firsts” over the years.  For example, he was the first elected president in history to be impeached (Andrew Johnson, in the 1860s, was not an elected president). 

 

Bill was the first president to be found guilty of a criminal act while in office (for leaking the private correspondence of Kathleen Willey, in violation of the Privacy Act).  He was the first one to be accused of forcible rape and the first to approve the sale and transfer of sophisticated weapons technology to a hostile power (while receiving campaign contributions from them). 

 

He was the first president to be accused by a host of witnesses of using cocaine and the first to be accused of sexual assault while on White House property.  He was the first to order a paramilitary assault on a television camera crew to keep them from broadcasting live video coverage (the crew was kicked and forced at gunpoint to the ground to keep them from broadcasting). 

 

Clinton was the first president to be sued in a sexual harassment lawsuit and the first to be held in contempt of court (for lying under oath).  He was the first to be named in a federal criminal referral as a possible witness to and beneficiary of fraudulent financial activity (in Whitewater). 

 

And he was the first to hold telephone consultations with members of the US Congress about the deployment of troops into battle while he simultaneously was getting an oral sex, sodomy job from Monica Lewinsky. 

 

He was also the first president to launch an unprovoked missile attack of war upon two sovereign, independent nations which he didn’t like (Afghanistan and Sudan). 

 

Finally, He was the first president to have a whole string of witnesses, colleagues and acquaintances (who knew him and knew of his activities) die under mysterious circumstances (as outlined herein in a former chapter). 

 

 

“Spotlight” on Bill 

 

The Dec 18, 2000, “Spotlight” (p. 2) offered these remarks on Clinton’s legacy:  “President Clinton keeps grasping for a ‘legacy’ in the twilight of his administration.  But he already has a legacy:  the only president ever impeached strictly on grounds of personal malfeasance, most number of cabinet officials under criminal investigation and the most number of convictions and guilty pleas. 

 

“Forty-seven individuals and businesses connected to the Clintons have been convicted of crimes, including drug trafficking, extortion, kickbacks, money laundering and perjury. 

 

“Sixty-one individuals have faced indictments and misdemeanor charges.  Fourteen people are currently serving prison sentences as a result of their convictions.  And 122 witnesses have pled the 5th amendment, fled the country or refused to be interviewed by investigators.” 

 

 

Lee Bellinger’s Assessment 

 

The Jun 2001 “American Sentinel” (p. 1) offered editor Lee Bellinger’s assessment on Bill Clinton on a comment upon the change in the White House in 2001.  Bellinger said that Bush’s low-key, common-sense approach to governing is a refreshing departure from the nauseating antics of the corrupt, sociopath who occupied the White House for eight long years. 

 

 

“Prophecy Flash” and Slick 

 

The May-Jun 2000 “Prophecy Flash” (p. 85) had a reader’s letter from Las Vegas, NV which addressed Bill Clinton by saying that “This president is the most evil-inclined president we have ever had.  Can you imagine the number and magnitude of deals that cross his desk every day, that if one would have a dishonest inclination, one could do enormous harm. 

 

“Yet our bubble-headed citizens say that character doesn’t matter.  From an investment analyst point of view, management of a company is more important than numbers.  Numbers can change, but a dishonest or inept management can kill a company (case in point:  When Xerox became led by a bunch of lawyers instead of entrepreneurs). 

 

“If bad or dishonest management can kill a company, imagine the same effect on the biggest ‘company’ of all:  the United States of America?...” 

 

 

Joe Klein’s View 

 

Even political journalist Joe Klein, a leftist/liberal on his own right and really a very pro-Clinton person, described Bill Clinton’s personal behavior at times as “outrageous and pathetic” (Mar 15, 2002, “The Week,” p. 23). 

 

 

Judicial Watch 

 

A May 2002 letter from Larry Klayman of Judicial Watch (p. 3) said:  “The fact that Bill Clinton has never been charged with any crime is an outrage. 

 

“Bill Clinton has left the White House--but he is still in charge of the Democratic Party.  His Attorney General, Janet Reno, is running for Governor of Florida.  Four other Clinton Administration cabinet secretaries are running for governor of their states.  And clearly, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is preparing to run for President...possibly with her disgraced husband as her vice presidential running mate!” 

 

As a follow-up on the success of the Clinton team in the 2002 elections, it appears that most or all five of them cited by Judicial Watch were defeated.  This writer was unable to learn of the status of all of them, but those that could be verified were defeated.  Importantly, Janet “Butch” Reno was wiped out in the Florida primary. 


 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix L--The 666 Clintons

 

 

The Clinton WWIII Option 

 

Previous comments in this presentation have outlined the very obvious Clinton planning and maneuvering to stay in power--ideally, as the US president.  Clinton has subtly mentioned a number of times to a number of different people that he wished he could run a third time.  He has repeatedly said that his agenda for the US is incomplete and that he will need more time to see it to its fruition. 

 

Despite his wishes to be the dictator of first the US and later the UN, the cards were stacked against him in late 2000--evidently, when the ruling Amalekites decided that Bush should take over (so that Bush, the Republicans, the Rockefellers and the Christian right can be blamed for the coming economic collapse.  This can then bring on a new constitution and the New World Order--under Clinton or whomever). 

 

Not only did Clinton have his eyes set upon being America’s first dictator and president for life, but he has even had more extraordinary ambitions for dictatorship, as will be assessed shortly in later comments herein at the UN.  In any case, Big Brother (Clinton or whomever) will lie the US into a WWIII. 

 

As outlined in a former chapter, Clinton has been plotting and planning WWIII ever since the summer of 1998, per Ralph Forbes, a Clinton friend since 1974 (Aug-Sep 1999 “Prophecy Flash,” p. 42).  As described earlier, Slick has evidently had this thinking in mind in his numerous attacks against various foreign nations around the world (perhaps the same thing can be said for GWB). 

 

These Clinton launched US military assaults against people around the world (like the Iraqis, the Serbs, etc) are interesting for another reason.  A document in the Dead Sea Scrolls, possibly commenting upon Numbers 14:40-45, concluded that one should not start a war unless The ELOHIM is with him (“The Dead Sea Scrolls, A New Translation,” p. 404). 

 

 

The Coming Disaster 

 

Slick and the American people should have followed this advice!  At some point in time, one of these Big Brother initiated aggressions (by Clinton, Colin Powell, Condi Rice, George W. Bush or whomever) against foreign powers will spell an absolute disaster for the United States. 

 

The Jul-Aug 2000 “Prophecy Flash” (p. 33) quoted writer Richard Mayberry who said:  “All eyes are focused upon Clinton’s latest sex scandals and the stock market.  When will Slick Willy leave office?  When will the stock bubble burst?  Far more important is the question:  when will we be hit by a surprise attack from a secret coalition of the enemies Clinton has created?” 

 

Previous chapters and comments have assessed one of the catalysts bringing on this collapse and destruction of especially the United States.  It is the flooding of US dollar bills worldwide as give-aways on behalf of the plutocrats and to purchase foreign consumer goods (since Americans produce little or nothing to support their present levels of consumption).  This writer has held this belief for years. 

 

While it is true that America’s decades old conflict with China and Russia, the US aggression in the Balkans and the Middle East, the outright support of Israel, meddling in the internal affairs of foreign states, support of foreign dictators and on and on will all contribute to this coming war and destruction, this writer has held onto the money issue as perhaps being the single, most important one. 

 

 

Other Options 

 

While a WWIII would be Big Brother’s most plausible scenario for the declaration of martial law and the establishment of the president as a US dictator (Clinton, Bush, Rice, Powell or whomever), there are a host of other possibilities also on the immediate horizon.  Many of these have been assessed in prior chapters (i.e. a financial meltdown, economic problems, terrorist attacks, etc). 

 

Even now, Big Brother has plans in place for a dictatorial take-over for all kinds of reasons (as discussed in previous chapters).  The government early on moved full force in preparation for a dictatorship in 2000 over Y2K, if nothing else would have happened to precipitate the event (Y2K did largely fizzle out; thus, opening the door for something else later by Yechezkel’s 31st or 32d year). 

 

In the future, Americans need to be alert because if anything happens to allow Big Brother to declare martial law, he will do so for any number of reasons.  In terms of Clinton (if he regains power), he will declare marital law for his own self perpetuation purposes. 

 

With acquittal in the Senate, Slick was ruthless after his impeachment and will be even more ambitious if he can successfully get back into power.  His enemies had better watch out and particularly during the days following his return (if he does return, either in the US or at the UN). 

 

In issue 21 of the “AIPL Communiqué,” Dr Rod Lewis had an article on “Mumbo Jumbo” (p. 10), which quoted MI 6 of the British Intelligence Service.  Some years ago, they profiled Clinton as a dangerous personality, who if cornered, would likely take down the whole country, rather than face his personal demise alone. 

 

Assuredly, Clinton is far more dangerous than the Amalekites Adolf Schicklgruber and Franklin Roosevelt (and their evil and deceptions, discussed earlier).  Clinton has no plans to leave the halls of power.  He is making plans and preparations right now for resuming power over the American people, via the US or the UN.  He will pull out all the stops to insure his continued exercise of that power in the future.   

 

 

Is Clinton 666? 

 

If and when Clinton launches his massive, brutal attack upon politically incorrect persons (from the US or the UN), outlined above and earlier, some thinking people will perhaps sit up and take notice of some interesting facts about this man.  The basis for the next several comments is some research done by William F. Dankenbring for two articles in the Jan-Feb 1999 “Prophecy Flash” (p. 3-21). 

 

Dankenbring tried to obtain some definite information on Clinton’s genealogy for his Clinton articles.  But for some strange reason, Slick’s genealogy records are much like his medical and draft records.  All of them are sealed and hid from public scrutiny. 

 

However, Dankenbring did find some data that is most fascinating--particularly, in view of some previous comments herein raising the question that Clinton must have some Amalekite blood in his mongrel genes, since he is so totally depraved.  Dankenbring’s work, quoting various authorities, seems to confirm this suspicion. 

 

While Clinton’s line “may” connect in some way to some blue-bloods and people like William Henry Harrison and Benjamin Harrison, the most significant thing about Slick appears to be that he is a relative of the Rothschild banking family--just as Hillary Rodham has links to the Rothschild’s banking empire in Germany. 

 

Hillary has suggested that she has Jewish ancestors in her forays into New York state, seeking support for her Senate campaign (Oct 1999 “Internet Vortex.” p. 20).  Hillary’s Jewish links are true, per Christian leader Texe Marrs, who says that Hillary’s Rodham name was originally Rosenberg, before a name change.  Also, Bill Clinton is known to call her a dirty Jew when he gets mad, as will be shortly discussed. 

 

So while Hillary tries to make a Jewish connection to Bill (when she likewise calls him a dirty Jew, as will be described in comments to follow), the probability is great that she (like Slick) also does indeed have Amalekite genes since she is so incredibly wicked. 

 

An interesting feature of Dankenbring’s work was his illustration of the names of William Jefferson Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton in Hebrew numerics.  Both names add to 666 in Hebrew (Jul-Aug 2000 “Prophecy Flash,” p. 57-58). 

 

This 666 linkage for Bill Clinton has to be very intriguing--especially, in view of his Voodoo and black magic ties (as outlined in a prior chapter).  “Prophecy Flash” (in both its Jan-Feb 1999 and Jul-Aug 2000 issues) proceeded with a question asking if Clinton will indeed be the predicted Beast man or the “Antichrist?”  The conclusion was that time will tell! 

 

 

The Clinton-Rothschild Ties 

 

The Clinton articles in the “Prophecy Flash” suggest that Clinton, along with Mayer Amschel Rothschild, were both descended from an earlier 13th century “Rabbi Meir” (also spelled Meyer or Mayer) of Rothenberg, Germany. 

 

If this connection has merit, it could go a long way in explaining why the Amalekite Jew bankers-masters chose to leave him in the White House after the Lewinsky scandal exploded, as described previously. 

 

It may also disclose the wisdom of Hillary Clinton when she gets mad and starts cussing Bill out for some of his depraved escapades.  Just as he commonly calls her dirty Jew names (as noted above), she responds in the same fashion with him (as also noted above). 

 

Hillary’s favorite epithets for Bill are that he is a “Jew b-st-rd” and/or a “Jew mother f-ck-r” (Aug 2000 “Internet Vortex,” p. 1).  Maybe, Hillary knows things about Bill not commonly known by the public. 

 

In the same, just cited, Jul-Aug 2000 “Prophecy Flash” (p. 52), editor William Dankenbring quotes J. R. Church, who had information from a descendant of the Rothschilds that Bill Clinton was a Rothschild relative and did attend some of the family functions as a boy (while wearing a Jewish skullcap). 

 

Certainly, Clinton has worshipped with Jews in synagogues on more than one occasion.  He has demonstrated his pro-Amalekite stance for many years and could very well be part Jewish (interestingly, the same thing seems true for rock n’ roll king Elvis Presley, whose maternal great-great grandmother, Nancy Burdine Tackett, was Jewish, April 19, 2002, “Forward,” p. 12). 

 

 

The Royal Boy Chosen 

 

Church claims that at the Rothschild get-togethers, the “rabbis” present would kiss Bill Clinton’s hand and call him the “Segulah Yeled Eklatosh” (which reportedly means “the royal-boy-chosen”). 

 

According to the Rothschild family, old Mayer Amschel Rothschild had a heavenly visitor in 1773 (which was just about the time that Mayer was working with Adam Weishaupt on organizing the Illuminati) who informed him that the NT YESHUA was not The MESSIAH and that his own family would produce The MESSIAH in the last half of the 20th century. 

 

Apparently, some of the Rothschild insiders have looked upon the modern Bill “Slick” Clinton, as this anticipated “Segulah Yeled Eklatosh.”  Maybe, this is the reason that they seem to have sided with him for his eight years in the presidency.  Too, this could be part of the reason why the Amalekites allowed George W. Bush to win the 2000 elections--so that Bush can be blamed for the coming collapse (instead of Clinton). 

 

Maybe, in their due time, the Amalekite bankers/masters intend on bringing Bill Clinton back into power (as the royal boy chosen)--either in America or at the UN.  For sure, Slick still has a future and his role in history is not over in 2003.  Manifestly, Bill Clinton absolutely shows evidence of Amalekite ancestry, based simply on his deeds of evil.  Yes, Slick Clinton must be an Amalekite (and the same thing applies to Hillary). 

 

 

More on the Edomite Tie 

 

While it would be easy to laugh at this whole report, a prudent man should back off and be careful.  It is not as far fetched as it seems on the surface.  There are some more peculiarities about Bill which do indeed suggest that he has Amalekite Jewish ancestry. 

 

Slick seems to be very passionate about liberal, left wing, red causes--as is genetically true with the typical Amalekite.   Like the Amalekites, Bill has consistently supported Edomites and Edomite causes around the world.  Specifically, he has joined in to place hate on one of the most important enemies of the Amalekites of all--namely, Saddam Hussein of Iraq. 

 

Next, Clinton sided with Edomite gangsters to bring Yugoslavia and President Milosevic down.  As outlined elsewhere herein, Edomites around the world hated and opposed the Serbs.  The Irishman G. Gordon Liddy illustrates the extremely irrational hatred that Edomites have had for the Serbs in the Balkans’ war.  Clearly, Slick pursued and pushed this conflict to appeal to the Edomites. 

 

There is still one more illustration of Clinton’s Edomite propensities.  Three times he went to Britain/Ireland to “allegedly” try to bring peace to the Catholic-Protestant confrontation in Northern Ireland (the last time was on Dec 11, 2000).  While many gullible Americans have supposed that Bill was impartial in this conflict, the truth is that he was not. 

 

Clinton used the power and influence of his office to regularly and routinely support the Irish (Edomite) revolutionaries and not the WASPs in Northern Ireland or in Britain.  For a man who was supposed to be a White, Anglo-Saxon Protestant (of the Southern Baptist Church), this was most unusual.  Why should he have regularly and routinely sided with the very people who were doing their level best to destroy his own kind? 

 

The Protestants in Northern Ireland do not like Clinton because they believe that he is their enemy and that he used the powers of the US presidency to support the Irish Revolutionary Army (the IRA). 

 

There is only one plausible answer here.  Bill Clinton is a genetic Amalekite cousin of the Irish Catholic Edomites trying to destroy the WASPs in Northern Ireland.  He has been as committed to the IRA and the destruction of the White Protestant Union people in Northern Ireland--as much as any other Edomite in power and influence in the US. 

 

 

Clinton-Nero Similarities 

 

The above cited Dankenbring articles go on to suggest that this just mentioned “Rabbi Meir family” descended from the sexual pervert Nero, discussed in prior comments herein.  Nero was not only a 666, but he surely was one of the most evil men in recorded history.  According to Talmudic tradition, Nero was a proselyte to Judaism at one time (Git. 56a, quoted in the Jul-Aug 2000 “Prophecy Flash,” p. 53). 

 

A reader’s letter from a man named Thompson in Texas, in the November 8-14, 1999, “Washington Times” (p. 39), pointed out some more aspects of the strange correlation between Clinton and Nero--viz: 

 

Both made history because of women.  Nero caused his own mother to be murdered to please his mistress.  In order to marry the mistress, he divorced his first wife and had her put to death.  He kicked his second wife so badly that she died of injuries.  He wanted to marry a third woman, but she refused.  So he had her put to death.  He married a fourth woman after murdering her husband. 

 

The decadent people of Rome knew and understood the facts about Nero.  Yet, they loved the scoundrel--just as the same situation prevails with Clinton.  The decadent people of America know and understand his wickedness.  But they love him for it. 

 

When two-thirds of Rome was burning in flames (evidently, from fires that Nero had set), he watched and recited poetry.  When he was accused of the fires, he turned the blame around and allegedly placed it upon the Christians and began a state persecution of them.  He neglected the military.  So they turned against him and he had to flee Rome. 

 

What the letter did not mention was the serious charges of Nero’s sexual perversion (he was reportedly a homosexual or correctly a bisexual and even Clinton is a known sodomite).  Clinton has had much in common with Nero.  Both have been wicked beyond description and both have had some brains (as illustrated earlier for Nero in how he handled Simon Magus). 

 

In any case, it might be that Nero’s horrible and terrible persecution and oppression of the early Christian followers of Simon Magus may have been a type or demonstration of what Clinton will now do with the politically incorrect people in America (if he regains power in the US or at the UN). 

 

While the Dankenbring articles in question never focused on Nero’s genealogy, one must pause and wonder if he too could have been a secret Amalekite?  This is very plausible. 

 

 

Another Clinton Possibility 

 

To set the stage on what all has been happening with Bill Clinton, as discussed above and in former chapters, it would be well to note a few more strange things about his background, as brought out in some editorial comments to a reader’s letter in the Jun-Jul 1998 “Prophecy Flash” (p. 94). 

 

This issue of the “Prophecy Flash” magazine had some articles on the actions of angels or messengers to leave their estate and come to earth to copulate with the daughters of Adam, resulting in the production of “nephilim” or demon seed, as editor William Dankenbring characterized it. 

 

This angelic history was put into the perspective of possible similar, end time miscegenation, involving angels and human women in the context of UFO abductions and reported sexual encounters.  The question was asked if Satan would make one final stab at reproducing seed in his own spiritual likeness and image. 

 

Editor Dankenbring noted that it is interesting in this light that one current world leader was apparently born out of wedlock, took the name of a later step father, and there appears to be some confusion or disagreement as to who his real father might have been; although his mother was a well known party girl who enjoyed a good time and probably had many lovers. 

 

Evidently, Dankenbring was writing in a light mood.  But his words certainly were very well chosen and most appropriate--at least, in application to the then President of the US--Slick Willy Clinton.  Certainly, among world leaders today, Slick stands out as being the most evil and Satanic of all. 

 

Though it is logical to discount Dankenbring’s hypothesis on the demon seed theory, the point he makes is very pungent and pregnant with enormous possibilities in the context of the evil and depraved Clinton.  Thus, he may not directly be the seed of a fallen angel.  But his background is such that one mus