<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is Bill Clinton a Convicted Felon?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/08/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/08/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/</link>
	<description>Drinking the love from her Holy Grail</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 14:00:07 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Bob</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/08/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1318</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 13:44:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1318</guid>
		<description>Despite what the judge said, and what the papers said, Clinton was found guilty of criminal contempt. A civil contempt is refusing to do something like pay child support, sign a deed, tell the other party where a asset is, etc. One is punished until one conforms there actions. It is coercive not punitive.
What Bill did was an insult to the court like telling the judge he is an ass or worse committing perjury (which is what he did). It  was punishment for improper conduct unbefitting a party or a lawyer. That is criminal cintempt. No one contested it because if it were criminal contempt Paula Jones would not/ could not have received the "fine". Bill did not contest the ruling because he did not want to be found to be a criminal. Nevertheless, he has been found to have committe a felony but was not convicted of
a felony because he was not indicted/charged as it were.
Bill's legacy is not only the redefinition of the word "is" it is also the redefinition of the word "criminal contempt".</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Despite what the judge said, and what the papers said, Clinton was found guilty of criminal contempt. A civil contempt is refusing to do something like pay child support, sign a deed, tell the other party where a asset is, etc. One is punished until one conforms there actions. It is coercive not punitive.<br />
What Bill did was an insult to the court like telling the judge he is an ass or worse committing perjury (which is what he did). It  was punishment for improper conduct unbefitting a party or a lawyer. That is criminal cintempt. No one contested it because if it were criminal contempt Paula Jones would not/ could not have received the &#8220;fine&#8221;. Bill did not contest the ruling because he did not want to be found to be a criminal. Nevertheless, he has been found to have committe a felony but was not convicted of<br />
a felony because he was not indicted/charged as it were.<br />
Bill&#8217;s legacy is not only the redefinition of the word &#8220;is&#8221; it is also the redefinition of the word &#8220;criminal contempt&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Midimagic</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/08/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1314</link>
		<dc:creator>Midimagic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 01:16:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1314</guid>
		<description>Clinton committed felonies. The only reason he was not convicted is that Democrats put "party unity" above justice. The head of the Democrat Party said that no Democrat senator who voted to convict Clinton would get any re-election money.

Womanizing is not a felony. Lying in court is. Clinton turned a civil court matter into a felony charge by lying.

And don't forget that Clinton also used the FBI to spy on his political; enemies. The recent articles on spying on Democrat candidates in both Bush administrations are strangely silent on Clinton's similar activities. Don't tell me the press is not biased.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Clinton committed felonies. The only reason he was not convicted is that Democrats put &#8220;party unity&#8221; above justice. The head of the Democrat Party said that no Democrat senator who voted to convict Clinton would get any re-election money.</p>
<p>Womanizing is not a felony. Lying in court is. Clinton turned a civil court matter into a felony charge by lying.</p>
<p>And don&#8217;t forget that Clinton also used the FBI to spy on his political; enemies. The recent articles on spying on Democrat candidates in both Bush administrations are strangely silent on Clinton&#8217;s similar activities. Don&#8217;t tell me the press is not biased.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: commentor</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/08/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1316</link>
		<dc:creator>commentor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:43:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1316</guid>
		<description>George W Bush did not lie about Iraq, and did not "hide behind religion" to justify the wise action of retaliating againt Saddam and taking the largest terrorist force in the world out of the equation...... and more than 500 WMD were found after the invasion.

No Bush "aided Hitler". It was ruotine for businesses to deal with Germany prior to WW2. It was nothing unusual.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>George W Bush did not lie about Iraq, and did not &#8220;hide behind religion&#8221; to justify the wise action of retaliating againt Saddam and taking the largest terrorist force in the world out of the equation&#8230;&#8230; and more than 500 WMD were found after the invasion.</p>
<p>No Bush &#8220;aided Hitler&#8221;. It was ruotine for businesses to deal with Germany prior to WW2. It was nothing unusual.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jerry H</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/08/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1317</link>
		<dc:creator>Jerry H</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 22:08:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1317</guid>
		<description>I haven't read all the posts in this thread because, frankly, too many of them get offtopic and get engaged in flamethrowing. However, to your original point "Is Bill Clinton a Convicted Felon?" I believe you to be disingenuous at best and certainly deceiving: you ask the question and then demand proof for the negative: "If I am wrong, I will loudly retract my statement calling him a convicted felon, and never use that as a talking point again." If he is not a convicted felon there of course would be no evidence to prove that point, indeed, it is your obligation as the accuser to show proof that he IS a convicted felon, court documents, legal statements, etc; for surely if he was convicted of a felony such a record would certainly  exist. I demand either the proof or the loud retraction, without either I will consider you dishonest and possibly a fraud.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I haven&#8217;t read all the posts in this thread because, frankly, too many of them get offtopic and get engaged in flamethrowing. However, to your original point &#8220;Is Bill Clinton a Convicted Felon?&#8221; I believe you to be disingenuous at best and certainly deceiving: you ask the question and then demand proof for the negative: &#8220;If I am wrong, I will loudly retract my statement calling him a convicted felon, and never use that as a talking point again.&#8221; If he is not a convicted felon there of course would be no evidence to prove that point, indeed, it is your obligation as the accuser to show proof that he IS a convicted felon, court documents, legal statements, etc; for surely if he was convicted of a felony such a record would certainly  exist. I demand either the proof or the loud retraction, without either I will consider you dishonest and possibly a fraud.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: phyllis</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/08/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1315</link>
		<dc:creator>phyllis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 15:44:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1315</guid>
		<description>I agree with #14.  You put it on the line.  Bill Clinton was in trouble, because he raised his right hand and lied under oath.  Old george and dick did not have the balls to raise their right hands.  They refused, but they did go before congress, sitting together, but were to cowardly to swear under oath.  Just like they did not have the balls to serve in the military, but call ones that did cowards.  I have realized that the people that support this war and the lies that bush told to get us there, are the ones in this country not serving, never have.  It just came out in nixon's papers about dick applying for a job with him, and the DUIs that were listed in his application. Plus being drunk out there when he shot that old friend.  If I shoot someone and liquor is involved, I would be arrested ande found quilty of a felony.  I also agree with #28 comments. I think Nixon and Clinton have been great world diplomats and that is what we need here.  Lord knows bush is hated throughout the world.To hide behind religion is the worst thing this ad. is doing.  LORDY  To think that he told the world that God told him to bomb Iraq.  People need to look at the records of the whole bush family.  FDR had to pass a law to stop themy from aiding Hitler.  Its called "DO not help the Enemy.  I look at all runing for Pres., on both sides and I could live with any of them.  But who can clean up this mess.  I can't see republicians voting for G. from up in NY as he has committed adultry, how many times.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with #14.  You put it on the line.  Bill Clinton was in trouble, because he raised his right hand and lied under oath.  Old george and dick did not have the balls to raise their right hands.  They refused, but they did go before congress, sitting together, but were to cowardly to swear under oath.  Just like they did not have the balls to serve in the military, but call ones that did cowards.  I have realized that the people that support this war and the lies that bush told to get us there, are the ones in this country not serving, never have.  It just came out in nixon&#8217;s papers about dick applying for a job with him, and the DUIs that were listed in his application. Plus being drunk out there when he shot that old friend.  If I shoot someone and liquor is involved, I would be arrested ande found quilty of a felony.  I also agree with #28 comments. I think Nixon and Clinton have been great world diplomats and that is what we need here.  Lord knows bush is hated throughout the world.To hide behind religion is the worst thing this ad. is doing.  LORDY  To think that he told the world that God told him to bomb Iraq.  People need to look at the records of the whole bush family.  FDR had to pass a law to stop themy from aiding Hitler.  Its called &#8220;DO not help the Enemy.  I look at all runing for Pres., on both sides and I could live with any of them.  But who can clean up this mess.  I can&#8217;t see republicians voting for G. from up in NY as he has committed adultry, how many times.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: greg</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/08/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1287</link>
		<dc:creator>greg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Sep 2007 00:01:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1287</guid>
		<description>Okay, I'll try this one more time. And again, I'll tell you where I am coming from. I am a legal beagle. I graduated from law school and was admitted to the bar in 1980. I have been a Republican and am now a Democrat. I voted for Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan twice, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton twice. If Al Gore chooses to run in 2008 I'll vote for him again. I'm a tree hugging environmentalist and an ordained minister with standing in two major Protestant denominations. And I used to live in San Francisco and in Berkeley.

The information I have is that (1) Bill Clinton was acquitted by the U.S. Senate on the impeachment articles, (2) on July 29, 1999 he was ordered to pay $90,686 for civil contempt of court in the Paula Jones case with the judge referring the matter to the Arkansas State Bar for possible disciplinary proceedings, and (3) on January 19, 2001, in response to those possible proceedings he agreed to a five-year suspension of his law license in Arkansas and pay a $25,000 fine. As a specific condition of his agreeing to the suspension and fine, no criminal charges were to be filed or pursued against him. Civil contempt of court is not a felony -- in fact it is not even a crime. Thus, he is not a convicted felon and has never even been charged with a felony so the whole issue about whether he is getting special treatment by being allowed to vote is a non-issue.

Here are some of the sources I looked at. Eric, you will increase your own credibility if you recognize that while the NY Times may have its faults, rejecting it out of hand in all circumstances is really kind of silly.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E7D9103EF93BA35757C0A9679C8B63&#38;n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FPeople%2FJ%2FJones%2C%20Paula%20Corbin

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/19/clinton.lewinsky/

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0760626.html

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E7D9103EF93BA35757C0A9679C8B63&#38;n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FPeople%2FJ%2FJones%2C%20Paula%20Corbin

There's no question that Bill Clinton has his moral shortcomings. All of us do. But he is most definitely NOT a convicted felon.

I also agree with those who say it's time to move on from the fanatical obsession some people have with Clinton. Too many people on the other side of the fence suffer from the same obsession with Richard Nixon. Part of the problem for both Clinton and Nixon is that, while both had their moral shortcomings, they were both quite effective politicians and that frustrated their opponents to no end. And, just as Richard Nixon sought and largely succeeded in redemption to become not a politician but a statesman, I suspect Clinton will do the same. I can't say the same for our current president, however.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, I&#8217;ll try this one more time. And again, I&#8217;ll tell you where I am coming from. I am a legal beagle. I graduated from law school and was admitted to the bar in 1980. I have been a Republican and am now a Democrat. I voted for Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan twice, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton twice. If Al Gore chooses to run in 2008 I&#8217;ll vote for him again. I&#8217;m a tree hugging environmentalist and an ordained minister with standing in two major Protestant denominations. And I used to live in San Francisco and in Berkeley.</p>
<p>The information I have is that (1) Bill Clinton was acquitted by the U.S. Senate on the impeachment articles, (2) on July 29, 1999 he was ordered to pay $90,686 for civil contempt of court in the Paula Jones case with the judge referring the matter to the Arkansas State Bar for possible disciplinary proceedings, and (3) on January 19, 2001, in response to those possible proceedings he agreed to a five-year suspension of his law license in Arkansas and pay a $25,000 fine. As a specific condition of his agreeing to the suspension and fine, no criminal charges were to be filed or pursued against him. Civil contempt of court is not a felony &#8212; in fact it is not even a crime. Thus, he is not a convicted felon and has never even been charged with a felony so the whole issue about whether he is getting special treatment by being allowed to vote is a non-issue.</p>
<p>Here are some of the sources I looked at. Eric, you will increase your own credibility if you recognize that while the NY Times may have its faults, rejecting it out of hand in all circumstances is really kind of silly.</p>
<p><a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E7D9103EF93BA35757C0A9679C8B63&amp;n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FPeople%2FJ%2FJones%2C%20Paula%20Corbin" rel="nofollow">http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E7D9103EF93BA35757C0A9679C8B63&amp;n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FPeople%2FJ%2FJones%2C%20Paula%20Corbin</a></p>
<p><a href="http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/19/clinton.lewinsky/" rel="nofollow">http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/19/clinton.lewinsky/</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0760626.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0760626.html</a></p>
<p><a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E7D9103EF93BA35757C0A9679C8B63&amp;n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FPeople%2FJ%2FJones%2C%20Paula%20Corbin" rel="nofollow">http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E7D9103EF93BA35757C0A9679C8B63&amp;n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FPeople%2FJ%2FJones%2C%20Paula%20Corbin</a></p>
<p>There&#8217;s no question that Bill Clinton has his moral shortcomings. All of us do. But he is most definitely NOT a convicted felon.</p>
<p>I also agree with those who say it&#8217;s time to move on from the fanatical obsession some people have with Clinton. Too many people on the other side of the fence suffer from the same obsession with Richard Nixon. Part of the problem for both Clinton and Nixon is that, while both had their moral shortcomings, they were both quite effective politicians and that frustrated their opponents to no end. And, just as Richard Nixon sought and largely succeeded in redemption to become not a politician but a statesman, I suspect Clinton will do the same. I can&#8217;t say the same for our current president, however.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jersey McJones</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/08/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1288</link>
		<dc:creator>Jersey McJones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2007 20:23:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1288</guid>
		<description>Gunny,

"..Somalia did not start coming apart until Clinton started taking sides."

Now, I don't know much about you, or what you know about modern history (I was a history major who worked for many years in international trade, albeit at the grunt level) but just so you know Somalia was a stinking hell hole long before GHWB, let alone Clinton.  I actually give GHWB some credit for trying to intervene, but his efforts were certainly no more or less intensive than Clinton's.  "Blackhawk Down" could well have happened under Bush I or Clinton.  Read about it.

As for the Branch Davidians, we can parse the "facts" however you like.  It's easy to do that with dead people and ashed buildings.  In my opinion, these were sick, twisted religious fanatics who got what they deserved - and probably wanted.  I just feel bad for the children.  For that I first blame the Davidians themselves, and then the government for not realizing what sort of sick, twisted people these were.  It was mishandled, obviously, but whether it should have been dealt with in the first place should not be in question.  Koresh was a dangerous domestic terrorist.

JMJ</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gunny,</p>
<p>&#8220;..Somalia did not start coming apart until Clinton started taking sides.&#8221;</p>
<p>Now, I don&#8217;t know much about you, or what you know about modern history (I was a history major who worked for many years in international trade, albeit at the grunt level) but just so you know Somalia was a stinking hell hole long before GHWB, let alone Clinton.  I actually give GHWB some credit for trying to intervene, but his efforts were certainly no more or less intensive than Clinton&#8217;s.  &#8220;Blackhawk Down&#8221; could well have happened under Bush I or Clinton.  Read about it.</p>
<p>As for the Branch Davidians, we can parse the &#8220;facts&#8221; however you like.  It&#8217;s easy to do that with dead people and ashed buildings.  In my opinion, these were sick, twisted religious fanatics who got what they deserved - and probably wanted.  I just feel bad for the children.  For that I first blame the Davidians themselves, and then the government for not realizing what sort of sick, twisted people these were.  It was mishandled, obviously, but whether it should have been dealt with in the first place should not be in question.  Koresh was a dangerous domestic terrorist.</p>
<p>JMJ</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GunnyG</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/08/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1299</link>
		<dc:creator>GunnyG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2007 18:54:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1299</guid>
		<description>Jersey,

Actually, if you knew WTF you were takling about, you'd know that Somalia did not start coming apart until Clinton started taking sides. This can be researched as the Marines were there under Bush 41 with no problems. You see, I had friends there in country handing out food and water. Once Klintoon started going after Addid, he pissed off the natives. Then Aspin denied armor support to keep it low-keyed. Then 18 Army Rangers paid with their lives.

Next, the Branch Davidians have never been proved to be such. In fact, Koresh was wanted on MINOR weapons charges. The FBI and the ATF attacked the building right off, the report absolutely admits that.

FACT:  Within a minute of the raid starting, a Davidian, Wayne Martin, called 911 pleading for them to stop shooting. The resident asked for a ceasefire, and audiotapes clearly caught him saying "Here they come again!" and "That's them shooting, that's not us!"

The local sheriff then attempted to contact the ATF force, but initially could not get through as the ATF communications officer had turned his radio off. Eventually the sheriff got through and negotiated a ceasefire.[3]

FACT: Between 1993 and 1999, FBI spokesmen denied (even under oath) the use of any sort of pyrotechnic devices during the assault; non-pyrotechnic Flite-Rite CS gas grenades had been found in the rubble immediately following the fire. In 1999, FBI spokesmen were forced to admit that they had used the grenades, however they claimed that these devices, which dispense CS gas through an internal burning process. (I've thrown CS grenades in exercises and they have started grass fires)
The FBI claims the gernades were not fired into the building itself. According to FBI claims, the fires started approximately three hours after the grenades had been fired.[9] When the FBI's documents were turned over to Congress for an investigation in 1994, the page listing the use of the pyrotechnic devices was missing. Gee, go figure.

Of course the Feds said that the Davidians started the blaze but the whole thing could have been avoided had the feds waited to nab Koresh in Waco.

The bottom line is that NO ONE was punished for Ruby Ridge or Waco. And WHO can forget Reno's Gestapo in action.

http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/images1/gonzalez_elian_sm.jpg</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jersey,</p>
<p>Actually, if you knew WTF you were takling about, you&#8217;d know that Somalia did not start coming apart until Clinton started taking sides. This can be researched as the Marines were there under Bush 41 with no problems. You see, I had friends there in country handing out food and water. Once Klintoon started going after Addid, he pissed off the natives. Then Aspin denied armor support to keep it low-keyed. Then 18 Army Rangers paid with their lives.</p>
<p>Next, the Branch Davidians have never been proved to be such. In fact, Koresh was wanted on MINOR weapons charges. The FBI and the ATF attacked the building right off, the report absolutely admits that.</p>
<p>FACT:  Within a minute of the raid starting, a Davidian, Wayne Martin, called 911 pleading for them to stop shooting. The resident asked for a ceasefire, and audiotapes clearly caught him saying &#8220;Here they come again!&#8221; and &#8220;That&#8217;s them shooting, that&#8217;s not us!&#8221;</p>
<p>The local sheriff then attempted to contact the ATF force, but initially could not get through as the ATF communications officer had turned his radio off. Eventually the sheriff got through and negotiated a ceasefire.[3]</p>
<p>FACT: Between 1993 and 1999, FBI spokesmen denied (even under oath) the use of any sort of pyrotechnic devices during the assault; non-pyrotechnic Flite-Rite CS gas grenades had been found in the rubble immediately following the fire. In 1999, FBI spokesmen were forced to admit that they had used the grenades, however they claimed that these devices, which dispense CS gas through an internal burning process. (I&#8217;ve thrown CS grenades in exercises and they have started grass fires)<br />
The FBI claims the gernades were not fired into the building itself. According to FBI claims, the fires started approximately three hours after the grenades had been fired.[9] When the FBI&#8217;s documents were turned over to Congress for an investigation in 1994, the page listing the use of the pyrotechnic devices was missing. Gee, go figure.</p>
<p>Of course the Feds said that the Davidians started the blaze but the whole thing could have been avoided had the feds waited to nab Koresh in Waco.</p>
<p>The bottom line is that NO ONE was punished for Ruby Ridge or Waco. And WHO can forget Reno&#8217;s Gestapo in action.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/images1/gonzalez_elian_sm.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/images1/gonzalez_elian_sm.jpg</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GunnyG</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/08/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1300</link>
		<dc:creator>GunnyG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2007 18:34:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1300</guid>
		<description>Jan,

I was talking about training and deployments, terrorism training is a ONE DAY class ONCE a year. It's done in the Base Theater on a powerpoint. Not exactly a high dollar training session.

First of all, I did EVERY major deployment from Okinawa from 1996-2001. Second, I did 90% of the minor deployments on island or local trips. We usually had to crossdeck our gear with LITTLE TIME for maintenance. We were chronically short of spare parts. I know, I did the classified SORTS report and was the Unit historian for that period. Next, we were NEVER above 80% manning and I had a total of FIVE key billets from 1996-1999 including a stint as a Platoon Commander as a SSgt (which is usually a LT's billet) for six months. My day started at 0500 and ended about 1930. So please, don't tell me I'm wrong, I FLIPPING LIVED IT! I originally enlisted in August 1979 so I got to enjoy that enormous asshole Carter as well.

Also, I NEVER make a statement without backing it up. I draw your attention to the State Dept's OWN terrorist website. Please note the amount of attacks against Americans from 1993-2000. Bubba was criminally negligent as was Sandy "Sticky Socks" Berger. Americans were being killed by A-Q and Bubba and his co-president Hillary IGNORED IT!

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/5902.htm</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jan,</p>
<p>I was talking about training and deployments, terrorism training is a ONE DAY class ONCE a year. It&#8217;s done in the Base Theater on a powerpoint. Not exactly a high dollar training session.</p>
<p>First of all, I did EVERY major deployment from Okinawa from 1996-2001. Second, I did 90% of the minor deployments on island or local trips. We usually had to crossdeck our gear with LITTLE TIME for maintenance. We were chronically short of spare parts. I know, I did the classified SORTS report and was the Unit historian for that period. Next, we were NEVER above 80% manning and I had a total of FIVE key billets from 1996-1999 including a stint as a Platoon Commander as a SSgt (which is usually a LT&#8217;s billet) for six months. My day started at 0500 and ended about 1930. So please, don&#8217;t tell me I&#8217;m wrong, I FLIPPING LIVED IT! I originally enlisted in August 1979 so I got to enjoy that enormous asshole Carter as well.</p>
<p>Also, I NEVER make a statement without backing it up. I draw your attention to the State Dept&#8217;s OWN terrorist website. Please note the amount of attacks against Americans from 1993-2000. Bubba was criminally negligent as was Sandy &#8220;Sticky Socks&#8221; Berger. Americans were being killed by A-Q and Bubba and his co-president Hillary IGNORED IT!</p>
<p><a href="http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/5902.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/5902.htm</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jan</title>
		<link>http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2007/08/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1290</link>
		<dc:creator>Jan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2007 11:00:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com/2007/08/30/is-bill-clinton-a-convicted-felon/#comment-1290</guid>
		<description>GunnyG, you are full of bull.
I served under Clinton as well. We had training for terrorism that was stopped when Bush came into office. For that very reason, I left the military in Feb 2001 and refused to serve under Bush.
Clinton had one attack on the WTC just after he came into office ( six deaths) and we weren't attacked on US soil again. We got rid of an evil dictator, with the support of the international community, and we didn't have over 3000 deaths to do it.
I don't think Clinton was the best C-i-C, having served under GHW Bush as well (terrific C-i-C!) but I definitely think Bush is the Worst C-i-C ever.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>GunnyG, you are full of bull.<br />
I served under Clinton as well. We had training for terrorism that was stopped when Bush came into office. For that very reason, I left the military in Feb 2001 and refused to serve under Bush.<br />
Clinton had one attack on the WTC just after he came into office ( six deaths) and we weren&#8217;t attacked on US soil again. We got rid of an evil dictator, with the support of the international community, and we didn&#8217;t have over 3000 deaths to do it.<br />
I don&#8217;t think Clinton was the best C-i-C, having served under GHW Bush as well (terrific C-i-C!) but I definitely think Bush is the Worst C-i-C ever.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
