From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Subject: Re: Kremlin_Gate: Bill Clinton in Moscow during Viet Nam.
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 18:53:02 GMT

Keywords: 

In article <1992Oct11.165139.16999@techbook.com> gummitch@techbook.com (Jeff Frane) writes:
]john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore) writes:
]It's always frightening to me to realize that guys like John Moore --
]who are so hot on "un-American activities", haven't the faintest notion
]of what the Constitution guarantees us that makes it worth protecting.

(1) I never said anything about "un-American activities"
(2) Let's see about my knowledge of the constitution...
]>In article <138338@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> ed@wente.llnl.gov (Ed Suranyi) writes:
]>]In article <1992Oct7.022045.19106@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com writes:
]>]>To conspire with an enemy country during war is an act of a traitor.
]>]>Bill Clinton may or may not have done this - he was more likely a
]>]>"willing dupe" - but for him to protest the war IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY,
]>]>and to travel to the capital of the main enemy, is, to say the
]>]>least, very suspect. As a veteran of that period, I find it
]>]>reprehensible and offensive.
]>]
]>]Do you think that anyone who was a tourist in Moscow in that period
]>]is automatically ineligible to be president?  Because I don't believe
]
]>I think any anti-war protest organizer who went to Moscow during that 
]>period has the burden of proof on him to show that he did not cooperate
]>with the Russians. If he is unwilling to try (and Clinton refuses to
]>discuss the issue), then yes, he would be unfit to be president. For one
]>thing, he could never get a high security clearance without explaining
]>it adequately. Do we want someone as president who wouldn't even qualify
]>for a secret or above security clearance? I know that I sure don't!
]
]If you would read the Constitution you might understand that one of the
]principal protections offered our citizens is that the *burden of proof*
]is on the accuser -- Bush or you.  Clinton refuses to discuss it because

If you had the slightest understanding of the Constitution, you would realize
that the constitution restricts the powers of governments. Is says NOTHING
about how we, as citizens, form our opinions.  Or do you believe that
there is an article that says "in political discussion, those making
allegations must prove them; no obligation resides on the acused to
justify himself - even if the allegations, if true, disqualify him for
a sensitive and critical position?"

]to do so would be to dignify it as a reasonable charge.  As others have
]pointed out, tens of thousands of tourists visited Eastern Europe and
]the Soviet Union during this period.  You might find it hard to believe,
]but there are other things to do in places like Moscow besides act like
]a comic book spy.

Funny, but I never said otherwise.

]You might also take into consideration that we, as Americans, are given
]the right to protest the behavior of the government, and that we don't
]lose that right simply because we have left American soil --
]particularly when we travel to the soil of a loyal ally.  I mean,
Yes, that's true. But that has nothing to do with the propriety of it.

]really, protests in England!  We also don't lose that right simply
]because our government has chosen to fight a war (and undeclared war,
]besides) -- in fact our *need* to make our disagreement heard is even
]greater during time of war.
]
]You might be one of those who is willing to let his brain shut down and
]become an automaton at the behest of Richard Nixon, LBJ or George Bush.
]Many of us are not.

Thank's for the vote of confidence. It completely amazes me how
vitriolic the attacks are on those of us who question Clinton. Is it now
unamerican to ask that our presidents behave loyally (not unquestioningly)
towards their countrys? I know that everyone on the net agrees that it is
okay for us to state the most anti-american views; why are we ridiculted
so much when we ask about the patriotism and veracity of a candidate
for the highest office in the land.

I think you guys imagine red-baiters under every bed.
]
]
]>]there's any evidence that he actually "conspired" with the enemy, or
]>]that he protested the war while he was there.  
]
]>Agreed. THere's no evidence that he didn't, also.
]>]
]
]There's also no evidence that he didn't poop on your lawn last night.
]Maybe you could accuse him of that too!

I haven't accused him of conspiring with the enemy, have I?
]
]>]We all know about Dornan's long tirade on this subject.  What did he say?
]>]He went through a long chain of evidence to show that Clinton was in
]>]Moscow in the period in question.  Nobody disputes that!  Then he went
]>]on to say that Clinton participated in treasonous activites while there.
]>]When a reporter asked him what evidence he had for that, he said,
]>]essentially, that it was entirely speculation.
]>]
]>Well, I don't particularly like Dornan's style, but he did NOT say that
]>Clinton participated in treasonous activities, he said it was likely
]>that Clinton met the KGB there. Now, it was impossible to travel there
]>at that time without meeting the KGB, since all Intourist people reported
]>to the KGB, so he is technically correct. I doubt that Clinton conspired
]>with the KGB there.... as I said before, he was probably just one of the
]>thousands of americans unwittingly used by them. Their term was "useful
]>fool."
]
]
]You ought to look for a time machine.  I'm sure Roy Cohn would have
]loved you.  Heh.

And you ought to listen to yourself, and see how you are reacting to what
you imagine I am thinking, rather than what I am actually writing.


I find it ironic that I have to defend myself against attacks by literally
dozens here on the net simply for asking about Clinton's activities, for
mentioning that he lied about them, and for expressing my opinion that
his anti-war activities in a foreign country were bad. Why do such things
bring up so many vitriolic, personal attacks? What's with you guys, anyway?

-- 
John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
- - "May you have the wealth of a Republican, and the sexual prowess - -
- -  of a Democrat." - Johnny Carson's joke writers