What does Wes Clark do for a living? Does he have a job?

[cestpaspossible]

Is he independently wealthy? Does he not need income? I find it hard to believe that he's subsisting entirely on his military retirement.


I've asked this question in several threads of Clark supporters and for some reason, it has not been answered, and a lot of hostility has been directed at me for asking. I don't understand why. Surely if someone is being touted as a potential President of the United States four years from now, what he does now for a living is a relevant question.

[KittyWampus]

1. He Gets By On His Good Looks

:eyes:

if you really cared, why not use google.

[cestpaspossible]

5. Google hasn't been much help

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22wes%20clark%22%20job&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=lang_en%7Clang_fr&safe=off&c2coff=1&q=%22wes+clark%22+living&btnG=Search&lr=lang_en%7Clang_fr
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=lang_en%7Clang_fr&safe=off&c2coff=1&q=%22wes+clark%22+employed&btnG=Search&lr=lang_en%7Clang_fr

maybe you could tell me which of these links contains the mystery info?

I thought maybe the http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/Wes_Clark">Demopedia entry would have it, but, no, nothing there.

Really why is this some big mystery? Does no one really know, or is there something embarassing about the answer?

[KittyWampus]

9. Higl-level US Group To Monitor UN Work

found this with no effort

High-level US group to monitor UN work

2 hours, 36 minutes ago Politics - AFP



WASHINGTON (AFP) - Two influential former congressional leaders were named to lead a new Washington group to study the UN's effectiveness and reform efforts.



Newt Gingrich, the Republican former speaker of the House of Representatives, and George Mitchell, former Democrat Senate leader, will lead the task force on UN reform created by the US Institute of Peace, a government organization dedicated to studying international conflict.


The task force will also include a number of business executives, retired diplomats and former military leaders, including General Wesley Clark (news - web sites), the former NATO (news - web sites) commander who ran for the Democratic Party nomination for president in 2004.


The task force is mandated to monitor "the extent to which the United Nations (news - web sites) is fullfilling the goals of its Charter and offer recommendations for US action" to the US Congress, according to a USIP statement.


The task force will address five areas of UN work: its role in conflict resolution and building stable societies; its ability to deal with genocide and human rights violations; its role in preventing terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction; the UN's internal integrity, transparency and accountability; and its role in poverty reduction and economic development.


The task force will work together with a group of well-known US think tanks, including the Brookings Institution, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Hoover Institution.


They plan to present their report to Congress in June.

[cestpaspossible]

18. Look below for some honest answers to the question

I'd already read that article. It is not an answer to my question, you can't even tell from it whether it is a paid position.

[KittyWampus]

34. Work's Only Worthwhile If You Get Paid? Funny You Say HONEST

[cestpaspossible]

36. That's not anything I said or implied

I asked how he earned his living, not how he spent his time, so clearly, whether he's paid for a task is relevant to my question. To falsely imply that therefore I think what you put in the title of your comment -- I just don't get it. Why the hostility? I asked the question, and now I have the answer. So now you have something against me?

[Jai4WKC08]

107. It's not a paid position

Altho I would imagine there's some sort of stipend or other reimbursement for expenses. Not something that would pay the bills or line the pockets. More of a civic duty sort of thing.

[leyton]

139. The original poster asked a valid, honest question.

And you are less than subtle.

[BootinUp]

140. huh

totally mystified at what you are complaining about, she gave a simple factual answer.

[Jai4WKC08]

148. I don't understand either

I was answering the question. Or do you assume by my sig that I have an ulterior motive?

[QC]

2. Breast development research in Haiti, they say. n/t

[BootinUp]

24. that's in his spare time, mind control is his primary area of expertise

lol.

[LittleClarkie]

28. www.hotmilitarystud.com

GASP!

[RadiDem]

33. LOL !

[Clark2008]

87. You ain't kiddin'!

This was in my e-mail this morning.
So much nicer than the "news!"

[PatrioticOhioLiberal]

90. Whoa!

Need more coffee...need a cold shower...erm...never mind!

[More Than A Feeling]

41. LOL

Well done finding that photo!

[ClarkUSA]

48. LOL!

Shhhh!! We're keeping that a secret until the Iowa caucuses, remember?

[stackhouse]

WES CLARK 2008

WES CLARK

IS INVOLVED IN TWO INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CONSULTING FIRMS!!!

[vpigrad]

3. Living on our money

He's retired and being paid for having been in the military.

[Donna Zen]

14. When offered the directorship of a bank

when he was 31, a job worth millions, Clark turned it down to stay in the service where his average pay over the years was $50,000. Yes, he does get a retirement--and as a teacher, someday I will too. You gotta problem with people getting a retirement?

[July]

82. Why put it that way?

That makes him sound like a leech. Didn't he earn a pension? Wouldn't you call it HIS money?

[PatrioticOhioLiberal]

91. Yeah, it's a darn shame

that these people that spend their lifetimes in defense of our right to make money, retire and draw a pension (if we didn't work for Enron of course) have the audacity to accept the pittance that "we" pay them (both while serving as well as after they retire) isn't it?

:spank:

[Jai4WKC08]

100. What a crock

Military retirement is earned. It's not OUR money but our debt, based on contractual obligation.

If you hire a plumber and agree to pay him in monthly installments over some agreed upon period of tim, the money is HIS once the work is completed. He has in essence agreed to loan it to you until you can pay it all.

[American Tragedy]

105. Yeah, those free-loading war veterans and career soldiers.

:eyes:

[Freddie Stubbs]

112. He earned it

[ClarkUSA]

4. Let's see...he does this:

General Wesley Clark, Former NATO Commander of US Allied Forces,
Addresses North Carolina Emergency Preparedness Communications

Critical North Carolina Homeland Security Communications Needs
Addressed by National, State and Local Public Safety Officials

Nextel Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ:NXTL) today hosted a conference at
the Marriott Charlotte Center City in Charlotte, devoted to improving
interoperable communications and emergency preparedness. The
conference highlighted the vital role of communication in overall
public safety and homeland security in North Carolina. The event
focused on the day-to-day and emergency communications needs facing
police, fire, emergency management and other public safety and health
officials. More than 100 North Carolina homeland security, public
safety, education and public health officials attended.

The conference addressed interoperability - the idea that public
safety officials must have the ability to easily manage and directly
connect with one another through reliable and secure communications
regardless of agency, jurisdiction or department. Speakers included
General Wesley Clark, Partner, James Lee Witt Associates and Former
NATO Commander of US Allied Forces; Bill Pessemier, executive
communications systems advisor, International Association of Fire
Chiefs and former incident commander, Columbine, CO Fire Department;
Charles Werner, deputy fire chief, Charlottesville, VA and Joel
Garner, Nextel senior director, public sector, south region.

Today, General Clark underscored the immediate need to address these
issues, "It's imperative to continue and expand the dialogue about
interoperable communications among public safety officials. It's at
the very core of emergency preparedness."

Local participants included Terry Sult, chief, Gastonia Police
Department, Sheriff Jim Pendergraph, Mecklenburg County and Sergeant
Hervey from the Mecklenburg Police Department. All contributed
first-hand examples about public safety concerns and issues.

Nextel is hosting a series of emergency preparedness communications
conferences around the country designed to educate government and
public safety officials.

About Nextel Communications

Nextel Communications, Inc., a FORTUNE 200 company based in Reston,
Va., is a leading provider of fully integrated wireless communications
services and has built the largest guaranteed all-digital wireless
network in the country covering thousands of communities across the
United States. Today 95 percent of FORTUNE 500(R) companies are Nextel
customers. Nextel and Nextel Partners, Inc. currently serve 297 of the
top 300 U.S. markets where approximately 261 million people live or
work.

Contacts
Nextel Communications, Inc., Reston
Media: Norma Tharp, 678-405-8604
or
Investors: Paul Blalock, 703-433-4300

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/in
dex.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20050209005698&newsLang=en

[cestpaspossible]

6. So, he's working the lecture circuit?

is that what your saying?

[Sparkly]

8. Speaking, advising, consulting, campaigning

He's been on the board of directors for quite a few companies involved in a range of things from security to a themepark called MythFaire; today it was announced he'll be on a DC taskforce looking at the UN; he speaks at conferences like the one posted above; he's a commentator on several tv networks; and he campaigned for state as well as our national Democratic candidates. No, he isn't paid for everything he does.

[cestpaspossible]

12. Thank you

I gotta tell you, this has been really frustrating for me. You are the first person whose comment seemed like an actual attempt to answer the question and not just blow me off.

Thank you for treating me with some respect.

[ClarkUSA]

17. I am offering you a sample of what he is doing this month

In two days, he'll be in Dallas, Texas at a Democratic Party function and will give remarks.

Last month, he travelled to Dubai to discuss Middle East issues at a strategic conference.

[cestpaspossible]

19. Sparkly, Donna Zen, and ultraist did an excellent job of answering

for which I heartily thank them.

[ClarkUSA]

29. Meow.

[Donna Zen]

37. Wasn't he just in PA

Speaking on "leadership" at a college near Erie. It one of those high profile lectures and probably endowed. I remember looking over the list of past speakers and being very impressed.

[Adelante]

96. Later this month - Feb. 22

Edinboro University's Frank G. Pogue Honors Scholarship Luncheon.

[ClarkUSA]

15. And this:

High-level US group to monitor UN work

http://us-politics.news.designerz.com/high-level-us-group-to-monitor-un-work.html?d20050210

[Schema Thing]

7. I believe he had acquired about 4 mil before his run for presidency

Thru a handful of business interest, and to a great extent, speaking engagements.


I'm sure he's doing just as well now. People with his life experience, skills, and brilliance don't hurt for work.

[cestpaspossible]

10. The amount he earned doesn't answer the question of how

he earned it. $4 million bucks sounds like a lot of money for speaking engagements -- just who is paying him this kind of money?

[Donna Zen]

16. Actually his speaking engagements

earn him about $30,000 each.

I know that after the Caymen Island hurricane, Clark and Rodney Slater (Clinton's Sec. of Trans.) made a presentation for rebuilding and road construction. They won the contract.

[Tom Rinaldo]

47. He's also written two significant issue related books (not just memoirs)

that have been well received and earned him additional income. That is one reason why he is sought after as a consultant. Clark actually knows his stuff.

[ultraist]

11. Clark is very wealthy, he was the CEO of a private corp and sits on boards

I don't know which private corps he is on the payroll of but he made buckoo bucks in the private sector. He also had a best seller book that was written for a bi partisan org.

He is not just living off of his military retirement.

http://www.nbc6.net/politics/2488225/detail.html
snips
"After graduating from the National War College, as well as the Ranger and Airborne schools, Clark became a White House Fellow, a post he held from 1975 - 1976. In that post, Clark served as a Special Assistant to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. He later became a professor of social science in the United States Military Academy.

Clark retired from the Army in 2000.

Now in the private sector, Clark is chairman and CEO of Wesley K. Clark & Associates, a strategic advisory and consulting firm. He also serves on the boards of several private corporations and nonprofit organizations, and comments regularly on politics, diplomacy and public affairs.

Clark became known to many cable television viewers as a commentator on CNN during the major combat phase of the Iraq war.

He is also the author of the best-selling book, "Waging Modern War: Bosnia, Kosovo, and the Future of Combat," and the chairman of the board for the nonprofit group, "Leadership for America," a nonpartisan educational organization dedicated to fostering a national dialogue about America's future.

[cestpaspossible]

13. Thank you as well.

It can be awfully frustrating sometimes trying to have a simple dialogue in this place with the hair-trigger so many have on their emotions....

[Donna Zen]

30. The pleasure is all mine:

Oh_and Clark is working on something for TV. A mini-series? No one knows.

and he was sent to Ukrainian during the election mess.

It helps that he speaks four languages.

I hope his life is going well. He passed up the big bucks all of his life, and gave up every job he had when we drafted him to run. While the congressional candidates had a salary coming in, Clark basically had nada. He said the other day that he is still reconstructing his life because of that run. He said that he and Gert know what they are facing, getting older, and that they are trying to secure their future. They still have a mortgage.

So...good for him! He has three masters degrees including the one from Oxford, he chose a path in life that not many of us would: he chose to be poor or pretty nearly. Drove a Volvo with 300,000 miles on while in his forties. Now he drives a '92 Miada.

Plato's silver star: service.

BTW, he says we must now focus on protecting the Constitution. He said that if we do that we will be alright.

[More Than A Feeling]

46. I did not know that

The more I learn about Wesley Clark, the more I like. I could easily see myself supporting him in the 2008 primaries.

[BootinUp]

26. "very wealthy"

compared to Kerry and Edwards, Clark is a upper middle class.

[Crunchy Frog]

40. I'm not sure, but I believe that he was the least wealthy

of all the presidential candidates last year, with the probable exception of Kucinich.

But of course, if he tries to make a living, it's generally considered to be just about criminal of him.

[Clark2008]

88. Yeah, it was between him and Kucinich

Both were upper middle class.

[July]

84. WAS a CEO or IS a CEO?

The information you provide refers to a company he leads that hasn't been around too long. I would be surprised if that has already made him "very wealthy." He was earning a general's pay up till fairly recently.

[Jai4WKC08]

110. Clark was (and is) not VERY wealthy

"Wealthy" is relative of course, but he's not at all in a league with Kerry, Edwards or Dubya.

I recall that at the beginning of his campaign, the opensecrets.org folks put his net worth at around $1.5 million. He released all his tax returns and his AGI was something on the order of $86,000 for 2000 (the year he retired from the Army), then several hundred thousand for 2001 and 2002, and maybe a million for 2003. That's all from memory, so I might be off a little, but you can find it pretty easily at that website. Or used to could.

Most of his pre-campaign income was from the lecture circuit, CNN appearances, and book sales. Some, esp in-kind payments of euqities, from work for Stevens Group and a handful of high-tech companies (the infamous Axiom, but also a couple of environmental-friendly companies), and his consulting work from his own company, Wesley K Clark and Associates.

Clark dropped all employment and board positions during his campaign except for Clark & Assoc. But last summer he has entered into a partnership with James Witt (Clinton's FEMA director) and Rod Slater (Clinton's Sec of Transportation), both of Arkansas. They do consulting in the area of security and disaster relief, contracting in that all around the world. He's been working in the Caribbean after the hurricanes there, and I suspect the Nextel conference reported above was under contract to Witt LLC.

Clark still does the lecture circuit, but only as a sideline. The income isn't all that big a deal, but it gives him a chance to speak out, usually to receptive audiences of people who are not political junkies. Often college students. Just the folks he wants to reach.

Most of the other stuff he does, like the new USIP commission on UN reform, the Democratic dinner in Dallas this week, and an up-coming conference of national security round-table discussions for the Democratic congressional caucus, are not-for-profit endeavors.

[melnjones]

124. It's amazing

that the amount of money he can earn in a year is SO much more than the amount he earned for so many years as a general. It's so contrary to how many Americans live, but man do I admire him for it.

[Jai4WKC08]

131. Well, he's not just ANY general

Even among the 4-stars, there aren't many who have hobnobbed with some of the people Clark knows personally: heads of state all thru Europe and Latin America, much of Asia and Africa too. People pay good money to get the advice of guys like Clark, with the contacts he has.

But more than who he knows, I think it's a matter of what he knows. Yeah, the defense and diplomacy stuff. But Clark is a Rhodes scholar, afterall. With his masters in PPE, and having taught both economics and philosophy. He reads. And in my unbiased opinion ;) is one of the great minds of our time.

So what blows me away is not what he's making now, but that he could have been doing as well by the time he was 30, had he gotten out of the military after Vietnam, and God only knows how much at this point in his life. Another Soros easily. But he CHOSE a life of public service, living in house trailers and cheap apartments or military quarters (not much better), and driving used cars he had to take personal leave time to get running again.

How many people with his options would have done the same? Yeah, it's starting to pay off financially. But let's face it, there were no guarantees. Military life is hazardous and he could have easily have left Gert and Wes Jr with only that 15K death gratuity they're trying to increase in Congress right now. To tell the truth, Gert is the one who took the real risk of being left destitute, not to mention also living in those trailers and apartments, so I'm doubly glad to see her finally get some benefit.

[no name no slogan]

20. IIRC he was a lobbyist/consultant

for some military contractors, as well. This is pretty common among retired high-ranking military officers. There's a virtual revolving door between the armed forces and defense contractors nowdays.

[ClarkUSA]

22. He worked for a company that invented an electric-motor powered bicycle

http://www.greenspeed.us/wesley_clark.htm

This is one reason the founder of Earth Day endorsed him for President.

[ClarkUSA]

21. He earns his living here helping people.

James Lee Witt Associates is a leader in public safety and emergency management.

http://www.wittassociates.com

[cestpaspossible]

23. Oh, come on, there's nothing wrong with being a consultant but

it's a long way from the Albert Schweitzer career path.

[ClarkUSA]

27. Ask the tsunami victims whether he is "helping people"

Your sarcasm is unwarranted. My sentence was simple and true.

Wes Clark could be working with Bushies to sell arms like Hugh Shelton and William Cohen and others but he's doing this.

If you're going to attack people who answer your question, then it's no wonder people are hostile towards you.

[cestpaspossible]

32. Whatever.

Others answered the question, you provided spin. I hope Clark will decide to leave the private sector and embark on the path of public service by running for Governor of Arkansas. I'd contribute.

[ClarkUSA]

42. I answered your question and provided links and spoke the truth

Perhaps some people find it hard to admit good things about candidates they don't like. Did you even bother to read anything provided in the links?

General Clark was in public service in the executive branch for over 35 years of his life. He's contributed more to public service than anyone here - and he's saved a generation of people from mass graves and slaughter. Running NATO (and earning less than $50K a year the whole time) is equivalent to running a fully-functional state. He fought a war at the same time without losing one American life and he saved 1.5 million Albanians from genocidal ethnic cleansing at the hands of Serbs and their Hitler-admiring leader Slobidan Milosevic.

Sure sounds like something Albert Schweitzer would approve of.

:smoke:

[cestpaspossible]

49. Save the snark

I don't have any ax to grind with you, so why don't we call it a hatchet and bury it? I'm thankful for the responses I got here and grateful that I won't have to further annoy any Clark supporters by asking.

[ClarkUSA]

60. Save the sneer

and I wouldn't have to defend myself against your accusations and sarcasm.

Oh, and here's some more info that isn't widely-known: General Clark travelled to the Ukraine with the U.S. delegation to monitor the Ukraine elections.

[cestpaspossible]

62. Are you accepting or rejecting my offer to bury the hatchet?

I don't want to jump to the wrong conclusion.

[Donna Zen]

44. Wes said that Gert should run for governor

public service? like 34 years worth?

SACEUR is considered a head of state position. Wanna talk to Blair--you pick up the phone.

I'm not being smarmy, but no one says that any other candidate needs to have been a general or even a foreign policy expert before running for the presidency. Personally, I think having worked in the White House for 3 years is impressive. (J-5 is policy and the liaison to the WH)

Many people found Clark's outside of politics position, he's biggest draw. They don't like politicians. For the most part, I don't either. And in a candidate, I love the absence of baggage and IOUs to big donors.

[Tom Rinaldo]

52. Some doubt the sincerity of such comments

because the push from some quarters that Clark, at age 60, should run for Governor in two years at age 62, fails to acknowledge that if Clark becomes Gov of Arkansas that rules out any run by him for President in 2008, since Clark would barely have been elected prior to having to start up his Presidential campaign. That means Clark would be 68 come 2012 if he ran then, assuming we lose in 2008, or 72 in 2016 if Democrats win in 2008 before the position would be open for him to again seek it.

Look if you are someone who sincerely believes that no one should run for President without having held a lower elective office, fine, don't support General Clark. But obviously Clark embarked on a path of public service a very long time ago and he continues to perform public service today.

[cestpaspossible]

57. Wasn't Reagan older than that?

I don't remember exactly but I think so.

Yes, I do believe that the Presidency should not be the first elective office someone holds. And I do also think it would be a good thing for the Democratic party, Arkansas, and the country, if Clark knocked out Huckabee. And after that? There certainly is precedent for moving up to the WH from there.

[Tom Rinaldo]

70. Reagan was one year older

But Reagan was building off of almost stealing the Republican Presidential nomination away from Ford in 1976. So Reagan had a lot of momentum inside his party to secure the nomination four years later, and even so Reagan's age may well have factored more against him in the General Election had Carter not been perceived as week in 1980 for his inability to resolve the Iranian student hostage crisis.

But usually life can be viewed as a series of modified Bell curves. There are exceptions to the rules at both ends but most of the action happens closer to the center. Reagan was the exception, and special circumstances favored him.

While I disagree with your position about the necessary sequence of elected offices, I can accept that you hold it. We have differing sets of priorities over what is most important. I believe that if Wesley Clark does not run for President in 2009 the odds become quite slim that he would ever realistically have another serious chance. And if he does not run for President, I would rather he stay involved in shaping issues at the national and international level than become Governor of Arkansas, no offense meant to Arkansas, I just belief that a broader role better suits Clark's talent and calling.

[Jai4WKC08]

123. Reagan wasn't older when...

When he ran for office. He turned 72 mid-way thru his first term in office. And while I'll grant you that Clark is in much better shape physically than Reagan at the same age, there's no telling how he (or any of us) will fare health-wise in the next 8-12 years. Like Clinton, Clark's father died of a heart attack at a relatively young age. Heart disease does tend to run in families.

Also, Clark would not be running against Repub Huckabee. Huckabee has to step down do to term limits. Clark would be running in the primary against a good (or so I'm told) Democrat who has already declared his intention to run (altho not formally, iirc).

Besides, he's done the governor thing. It's not where he can do us the most good.

Like Tom said, if you think he needs to have won an election, then don't vote for him. I can understand the concern of whether he would be able to beat whomever the Repubs nominate, but I also think it makes a helluva lot more sense to wait and judge based on how he puts together his campaign in '07/08. If it's not up to par, that should be painfully obvious, considering the competition is likely to be fierce.

But I would remind you that Clark wouldn't be the first president in American history to have held no previous elected office. And for many of those who have, it's only been for a very short time or from a relatively small constituency.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cestpaspossible]

38. Consulting is not an altruistic endeavor.

Neither is it something to be ashamed of, which is why I don't understand the hostility shown by you and others towards me, just for asking what he does.

[ClarkUSA]

43. Oh, such an innocent!

:eyes:

[Clark2008]

136. Well, I do think he did his "Albert Schweitzer" days

by spending 30 + years in the service of his country for pennies, don't you?

[Jane Austin]

25. He gets healthy speaking and lecture fees.

n/t

[Sparkle]

31. Maybe he's a well kept man.

:-)

[ProgressiveConn]

39. He put 37 years into the military.

He was making 135k when he retired. No doubt he gets a nice pension too. Doesn't sound like he's starving.

[ClarkUSA]

69. Read #30

He's not swimming in $$$ like some other candidates.

[FrenchieCat]

45. I far as I know, Wes Clark is keeping busy.....how bout you?

Clark is a lecturer and security consultant:
Faith, Security to Dominate Democrats' Retreat
Byline: Erin P. Billings
Excerpt:
The conference highlights include panel discussions on national security, values and faith, winning in conservative "red" states and combating GOP plans to reform Social Security. Virginia Gov. Mark Warner (D), retired Gen. Wesley Clark, Democratic strategist Mark Gersh and PBS journalist Bill Moyers are among the featured guests.
http://tinyurl.com/6wmj6
----------
Capital Hotel
111 W. Markham
Little Rock, AR
Tues, Nov 16, 2004
430-730 pm

In September 2004 Wesley Clark and Rodney Slater joined
James Lee Witt Associates (JLWA) as Vice Chairmen and Senior
Advisors a welcome reception was held in Washington, D.C. last
month. They will serve James Lee Witt Associates in addition to
maintaining their current positions at Wesley K. Clark &
Associates and Patton Boggs, respectively. General Clark will focus
advising JLWA on their domestic and international security practice
and Secretary Slater will advise JLWA on issues regarding
transportation and critical infrastructure work.
http://www.wittassociates.com/

-----------------
Serves on the boards of various organizations:
About Crisis Group
The International Crisis Group is an independent, non-profit, multinational organisation, with over 100 staff members on five continents, working through field-based analysis and high-level advocacy to prevent and resolve deadly conflict.

Crisis Group’s approach is grounded in field research. Teams of political analysts are located within or close by countries at risk of outbreak, escalation or recurrence of violent conflict. Based on information and assessments from the field, Crisis Group produces regular analytical reports containing practical recommendations targeted at key international decision-takers. Crisis Group also publishes CrisisWatch, a 12-page monthly bulletin, providing a succinct regular update on the state of play in all the most significant situations of conflict or potential conflict around the world.
http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm

---------------
Appears and consults for various productions for television
"The Presidents" and it's an 8-part series. The episode that covers Eisenhower (1945-1977) http://www.historychannel.com/global/listings/upcominge...
--------------
Friday January 07, 2005 8:32am
Little Rock, AR (AP) - Former presidential candidate Wesley Clark is involved in various television projects to go with his private security and technology consulting business.

The retired four-star general continues to make appearances on political talk shows, just as he did in the summer and fall for the Kerry-Edwards ticket.

Clark has worked as a consultant on several military documentaries and recently has been asked by a group of veterans in Little Rock to serve as narrator for a project they want to produce.
http://www.katv.com/news/stories/0105/198898.html
------------------
Theme park would give visitors taste of medieval times
BY JOYCE BLAY
Staff Writer
Former executives of Disney and Universal Studios, companies that own several theme parks, including one each in Orlando, Fla., conceived the idea for the five-village theme park, according to retail consultant Barry Lefkowitz. Lefkowitz said the Simon Group of New York would develop the park, which had been presented as a possible future application to the Jackson Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC).

Lefkowitz said that recently Township Committeeman Michael Kafton, who is a member of the EDAC, Gen. Wesley Clark (retired), who ran for the Democratic nomination for president in 2004 and is a member of the board of MythFaire, Michael Hamilton, CEO of MythFaire, Jackson Business Administrator Andrew Salerno, and Lois Yates, Lefkowitz’s business partner, took a helicopter ride in the skies above Jackson.

The postings stated that MythFaire was proposed as a 400-acre, family-oriented theme park comprised of five historic and mythic lands. A cast of 600 actors and hundreds of attractions and activities would provide guests with interactive and passive participation in adventures that would take place during the Middle Ages.

“MythFaire would draw its visitors from Philadelphia, New York City, Maryland and New Jersey for a projected audience in excess of 30 million, said Hamilton.
http://examiner.gmnews.com/news/2005/0105/Front_Page/022.html
-----------------
Runs his Political PAC
http://www.wespac2004.com
-----------------
Is a Best selling author, who is writing another book:


----------------

DO YOU WANT HIM TO DELIVER YOUR MAIL TOO?

[cestpaspossible]

51. What does C'ellequipue mean? Which you called me in another thread.

I'm just learning French, I'm far from fluent, and I couldn't figure it out with any of my dictionaries, even the slang ones. Aidez-moi, svp.

[FrenchieCat]

55. Well since you're concerned that everyone should have a job....

I suggest you hire a French tutor, and pay them a living wage.!:think:

GOTCHA!

[cestpaspossible]

59. Why can't you be nice? I asked you a polite question.

I start another class next week, if it gives you some perverse pleasure in not helping me out, I'll ask the prof.

[cestpaspossible]

71. OK I figured it out, "elle qui pue"

C'est bon que les mods ne parlent pas français. Mais je suis un homme.

[FrenchieCat]

77. Sorry about that one....

It was just one of those things....

[cestpaspossible]

78. Heat of the moment.

I have a temper, too. No hard feelings here. Actually it was fun figuring it out.

[FrenchieCat]

58. Actually, your name is not grammatically correct....

Cestpaspossible should be ce n'est pas possible.

[cestpaspossible]

61. Yeah, I know, but that's the way I hear people say it quite often.

Actually, a African francophone song was in my head when I picked out the name and the singer sings it that way... I hear the 'ne' dropped a lot in spoken French.

[FrenchieCat]

67. Your name is fine....

It's your approach that needs refinement. But BWT, I consider myself nice too...but sometimes my patient wears thin.

Ask JohnONeillsmemory.

[Crunchy Frog]

50. I think the hostility you've encountered

may have something to do with the way you generally go about asking the question. It tends to have the tone of someone interested in entrappment, or in using the question to prove some sort of negative point about Clark.

If that isn't the intent behind your question, then I apologize about the hostility. You may want to work a little bit on how you go about phrasing questions. The general tone and way that you say something can make all the difference between getting a helpful and informative answer, and getting a flamewar.

People are sensitive about the way that Clark is brought up, mostly due to the continuous nonstop attacks on his character. That sort of thing tends to raise people's defenses somewhat.

[FrenchieCat]

53. can'estpaspossible

has been involved in a few of those flamebusters....:nuke:

on ----------->the other side

[cestpaspossible]

54. Chicken or the egg?

Whichever came first, the question has been answered, so it's a moot point. I gotta say though, this is politics, anyone who gets riled up when asked what the person they support does for a living needs a thicker skin.

[Crunchy Frog]

68. Well, as far as thicker skins go,

I could say the exact same thing about supporters of other political figures as well.

In any event, I wasn't taking offense, just trying to offer some helpful advice on how you might better phrase these questions so as to get answers rather than flamewars. It may be that flamewars are what you want though, in which case, I expect you will disregard the advice.:)

[cestpaspossible]

74. It depends

I'll admit to a sometimes moth-like fatal attraction to the flame, but, it's not really what I want to do.

[Jai4WKC08]

133. But Clark is not a politician...

Just joking, sort of. I realize he's chosen to enter the political fray and thus subject himself to all sorts of scrutiny. Many of us wish for a day when politicians are judged by their policies and behavior, instead of one ugly smear after another. But that's not the way the game is played, is it? It's a shame.

Nevertheless, when you say:

...this is politics, anyone who gets riled up when asked what the person they support does for a living needs a thicker skin.

I think you don't understand, or are ignoring, that most of us who consider ourselves Clarkies believe him to be a man of great character who's devoted almost his entire life to helping people, often at great risk to himself, his family and his reputation. We get denigrated for "hero worship," but he is a hero (altho we don't worship him) and more than just another politician.

So some of us assume the worst and get a little defensive. It's not like he (and we) haven't been attacked often enough on DU to justify the assumption.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

56. He lobbied DARPA for Acxiom data-miners. Ex-FEMA security advisor.

Clark has been doing what the Military Industrial Complex does. Make money on security and surveillance industries.

In 12/2001 he was named lobbyist for Acxiom, one of the largest data-mining companies. Clark met with John Poindexter twice to provide millions of American's info to DARPA's Total Information Awareness project.

Acxiom gave up 2,000,000 Jet Blue customer records to a contractor who combined them with social security numbers for DARPA's efforts to have a record of everyone who may or may not get on a plane someday.
(They sure got my records then!)
http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20031013&s=jones
http://www.nccprivacy.org/handv/030922villain.htm

Acxiom lost the info on 20,000,000 Americans to a sub-contractor who took it home on 30 CDs and distributed it to other criminals before he was busted, one of the biggest breaches of ID security ever.

While Clark was a registered defense industry lobbyist, he was a commentator on CNN on defense matters, a clear conflict of interest.
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=2000
(Yes, this is a nasty conservative site with a disclaimer at the bottom but the facts are correct.)

Clark joined ex-FEMA head John Lee Witt's firm doing revolving-door security consulting for places like the Cayman Islands.
http://www.wittassociates.com/3942.xml

Clark is doing a lot of recruiting for the US military but is having trouble articulating what Democrats stand for in this recent San Diego-area radio interview.
http://www.scpr.org/programs/talkcity/index.shtml#

Here is a profile from The Center for Public Integrity, an investigative journalism website which looks at politicians:
http://www.public-i.org/bop2004/candidate.aspx?cid=12

>snip<

"After more than three decades of military service, the General transitioned to civilian life, accepting a consulting position with Arkansas-based Stephens Inc., one of the largest investment banking companies off Wall Street. A year later, the retired general pondered running for governor of Arkansas. A few months after that, the first "Draft Clark" movement emerged, in which supporters tried to persuade Clark to challenge Arkansas Republican Senator Tim Hutchinson in the 2002 midterm elections.

Neither opportunity provided the allure necessary for Clark to relinquish his position as a military analyst at CNN or the lucrative lobbying and consultant contracts he procured as a business executive. That is, not until the presidential election provided him with the platform to challenge the unilateral foreign policy of the Bush administration.

Two weeks after declaring his intention to run for president, Clark was still registered to represent a high tech contractor, Acxiom Corporation, giving him the rare distinction of seeking the White House while registered as a lobbyist. Shortly after Clark announced his candidacy, a company spokesman said the general no longer lobbied for Acxiom, but, according to the Senate Office of Public Records, Clark had not filed any termination papers.

Clark has been lobbying for the firm since January 2, 2002; Acxiom has paid more than $830,000 for Clark to advance its agenda and meet with government officials. Clark also serves on the company's board of directors.

According to federal disclosure records, Clark lobbied directly on "information transfers, airline security and homeland security issues," for Acxiom, which sought funding to do controversial informational background checks on passengers for airlines. Privacy advocates have criticized the program, called the Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening System II, because of concerns that the data collected would be an overly invasive violation of individuals' rights to privacy. The public outcry has been so strong that there is a bi-partisan effort to create more oversight for the program to protect privacy interests if CAPPS II is implemented.

Clark lobbied the Department of Justice, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the Department of Transportation for the company. Clark also reported, on his lobbyist disclosure forms, that he promoted Acxiom to the Senate and the executive office of the president. According an Arkansas Democrat-Gazette report, he even met personally with Vice President Richard Cheney.

He also made a pitch for the kind of tracking that the company's wares can perform while acting as a commentator on CNN. On January 6, 2002, four days after filing as a lobbyist for Acxiom, Clark told an interviewer, in response to worries that private planes could be used for terrorist attacks, "We've been worried about general aviation security for some time. The aircraft need to be secured, the airfields need to be secured, and obviously we're going to also have to go through and do a better job of screening who could fly aircraft, who the private pilots are, who owns these aircraft. So it's going to be another major effort."

Naturally, he did not reveal to CNN's viewers that the company he lobbied for had a substantial stake in this issue."

----------------------------------------------

These are just facts, not judgements. And this is not a complete description of his endeavors. I haven't read his book 'Winning Modern War' and I'd like to learn everything I can about this interesting man.

[FrenchieCat]

64. Hey John.....

whatcha have there?

I really, really don't get the Recruiting for the US military bit. That's a real stretch in what he said. Why stretch the truth Johnoneills? What the point for you? He talked about young people doing public service....not military service. I am disappointed in you....cause what you posted is an unwarranted attack....no other way to look at it.

Clark and Acxiom; Or: Why Privacy Is A Myth

It's always nice when someone shares your opinion. Timothy Noah of Slate addresses the "JetBlue scandal," where JetBlue provided a government contractor with the names, addresses and itineraries of former passengers. The contractor, Torch Concepts, paired this with financial and social security data it had purchased. Like this blogger, Noah points out that the government already has this information so nobody's privacy was actually violated.****

Defending Wesley Clark from the stones and arrows flying in from all directions could prove to be a full-time job. Fortunately most of the arrows are blunted and the stones fall well short of their mark.

One of today's projectiles concerns Clark's work lobbying on behalf of an Arkansas corporation called Acxiom, which maintains a database of legally obtained information that it provides to telemarketers or research groups. Acxiom won a contract from the Pentagon to assist in building a passenger database called CAPPS II that airlines would use to screen for potential terrorists. According to an Acxiom executive and government officials who attended the meetings, Clark was vigilant about insisting that privacy rights be balanced with security needs.

CAPPS II was to be a database of information such as housing stats, telephone numbers, and car ownership. The government can already access most of this information through DMV records (see the Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994), state property tax records and phone bills for toll free government numbers, which document the number of every caller, listed or unlisted.

Many people are surprised when they learn about the wealth of publicly available information: extensive property records; birth, marriage, and death certificates; court records. Ever hear of The Smoking Gun? They post legally obtained court records concerning the famous and infamous on-line.

Thanks to the Social Security Administration, the federal government possesses the social security number of every citizen who has one, along with his or her name, birthdate, and latest known address. Based on annual tax filings, the government knows where people work, how much money they make, how many dependents they claim and the social security numbers of those dependents. They know even more about those who itemize, such as where their children attend daycare or whether the person likes to gamble.

In truth, privacy is a myth when it comes to personal information.

The problem isn't the information, available for anyone to find; rather, it's how the government uses it. CAPPS II, now on hold, would cross-reference its database of information with an established terrorist profile and color-code flyers as green (safe), yellow (question), or red (detain). This would eliminate the random security checks of seventy-five year old men with walkers or harried mothers struggling to control two small children.

The CAPPS II program bears some similarity to work done by ClearForest, an Israeli company that specializes in data-mining. The US government has purchased a program from ClearForest that will scan 200 pages per minute, analyzing text and performing 'structural extraction.' According to ClearForest developers, this is an "extraction of entities from the document based on their visual characteristics and relative position in the document layout," which it then translates into XML. The program uses a learning algorithm to hunt for relationships between the various documents. For example, in Israel, the program noted an increase in the number of calls made from homes of suspected Palestinian militants days prior to an attack. Now the program scans phone records for such increases to predict attacks and pinpoint possible attackers.

Everyone wants to be safe. Nobody wants to board a plane only to discover that the person next to them is a hijacker, but nobody wants to be evaluated as a potential terrorist either, which is what programs like CAPPS II do. Under such a program, everyone is evaluated as a possible terrorist and only exonerated if their information fails to match a pre-established terrorist profile. But coincidence can be a kicker sometimes. What if you drive the same kind of car terrorists drive and live in a house similar to one terrorists prefer? The CAPPS II system would flag you as a potential terrorist and cause you to be detained.

On the other hand, the program currently in place is too simplistic and flags people on the basis of name similarity and their presence on a TSA 'no-fly' list. The ACLU has filed suit against the TSA for including anti-war activists and others opposed to Bush administration policies on a second 'no-fly' list that tags such individuals for further investigation before allowing them to fly. The TSA initially denied creating such a list, but now admits its existence although it refuses to disclose any information about the list and acknowledges that nobody actually monitors the list for accuracy.

Following 9/11, Congress voted away citizens' rights and passed the PATRIOT Act, which was ostensibly for fighting terrorism but in reality has often been applied to non-terrorist crimes, like drug trafficking, insider trading, and blackmail. Terrorism prevention was a ruse to convince lawmakers to broaden the government's powers to invade the privacy of its citizens at will with little oversight.

Some may argue that any tool that helps catch any kind of criminal is worthwhile, but it should be acknowledged that not everyone investigated, arrested, charged or even convicted of a crime is guilty. Thanks to advances in DNA technology, many innocent people have been released from our prisons. But what about those cases that do not involve DNA? It is statistically unlikely that false convictions are only made in cases involving DNA.

Clark, as he did while lobbying on behalf of Acxiom, stresses the need to balance citizens' reasonable expectations of privacy against the needs of the government to derail terrorism. He has called for a halt on any effort to expand the Patriot Act and believes the act itself it requires a complete review.

We have to be very careful of the PATRIOT Act. It was passed at a time of enormous perception of threat in this country. It was passed without full legislative analysis and review. Its been in place, a number of people have been arrested, a number of people have been deported. I think the PATRIOT Act needs a good, open air, public review, in the sunshine, before we retain it or modify it, or add to it.

...one of the risks you have in this operation is that youre giving up some of the essentials of what it is in America to have justice, liberty and the rule of law. I think youve got to be very, very careful when you abridge those rights to prosecute the war on terrorists.

The problem with efforts like the PATRIOT Act, the TSA lists and the new "Victory Act" bill, which among other things allows prosecutors to obtain records through administrative subpoenas, is that they insulate themselves with secrecy provisions that thwart oversight. Administrative subpoenas would completely remove judicial oversight, allowing prosecutors to subpoena anyone's records for any reason they chose. Without judicial oversight, there would be no way to determine whether administrative subpoena power was being misapplied and no way for someone to find out whether his or her records had been requested.

This is a "dangerous piece of legislation," as presidential candidate Howard Dean said in response to Bush's urged support for the measure. Any program, no matter how well-intentioned, is not acceptable if it allows the government to conduct its actions in secrecy. The power of invisibility invites temptations of the worst kind.

Clark's involvement with Acxiom is a non-issue, like many other non-issues the media seems to be pursuing. The problem isn't Acxiom, which is merely another company taking advantage of capitalism and angling for a lucrative contract. The problem is the CAPPS II program created by the government, and not because it violates privacy. Again, the information is already out there and was never private to begin with. Nobody broke the law to obtain it. The concern is that the program is not foolproof, and innocent people will be scrutinized, which already occurs under the system in place. CAPPS II could only be an improvement over the current system if it is subjected to proper protocols of oversight and scrutiny to prevent abuse.

-----------------------------
Clark helped craft a report for the Markle Foundation
titled "Protecting America's Freedom in the Information Age"...

One of the report's recommendations is that information owned by private companies that is relevant to the fight against terrorism should be left in the companies' hands and not consolidated into government databases.
http://www.cio.com/archive/011504/candidates.html

[JohnOneillsMemory]

143. My god, FC. Look what you posted- Clark lying! I just posted his jobs.

And you accuse ME of attacking him for just listing his employers?
(I was out all day so I apologize for this belated response.)

Did you see that cio.com website you sourced is for "Information Technology executives"?? They are the one's making money off of data-mining and trying to keep the public from getting nervous about all the ways they are tracked. Their articles on security start in 2000 with 'What's All the Fuss?' and progress through gradual stages of recognizing news reports about Acxiom, DARPA, Matrix, etc. to admitting just what all the fuss is. Yeah, right. Industry rag 'journalism.' Tips for making a buck and not admitting more to clients and employees than you have to. Classic.


FC, you clipped this industry propaganda hype right here:
>snip<

"Clark helped craft a report for the Markle Foundation
titled "Protecting America's Freedom in the Information Age"...
One of the report's recommendations is that information owned by private companies that is relevant to the fight against terrorism should be left in the companies' hands and not consolidated into government databases."
>snip<

THEN WHY WAS CLARK SHOPPING ACXIOM'S DATABASE TO JOHN POINDEXTER'S TOTAL INFORMATION AWARENESS PROJECT AT DARPA??
Was this "consolidating into government databases"??
Damn straight it was!

This is called....LYING. LYING. Let me repeat that...LYING.

This is transparent PR. Like the Gropenfuhrer going to a menorah-lighting ceremony to cover up the fact that he once said he admired Hitler. Ahnuld really did this. That's called 'bullshit politics.'

FC, your Slate article doesn't even come close to saying what you WISH it said.

Timothy Noah at Slate saying "Clark's involvement in Acxiom is a non-issue" leads you to exonerate him for making a buck off of the most egregious violations of privacy EVER since Hoover's COINTELPRO in the hands of fascist psychopaths like this administration?!?

The very same Slate article says THINGS ARE SO DAMN BAD THAT CLARK IS PART OF A HUGE PROBLEM:GREEDY CAPITALISTS FEEDING UNREGULATED SECRETIVE POTENTIAL CRIMINALS-NOT A 'NON-PROBLEM.'

>snip<

"The problem with efforts like the PATRIOT Act, the TSA lists and the new "Victory Act" bill, which among other things allows prosecutors to obtain records through administrative subpoenas, is that they insulate themselves with secrecy provisions that thwart oversight. Administrative subpoenas would completely remove judicial oversight, allowing prosecutors to subpoena anyone's records for any reason they chose. Without judicial oversight, there would be no way to determine whether administrative subpoena power was being misapplied and no way for someone to find out whether his or her records had been requested.

This is a "dangerous piece of legislation," as presidential candidate Howard Dean said in response to Bush's urged support for the measure. Any program, no matter how well-intentioned, is not acceptable if it allows the government to conduct its actions in secrecy. The power of invisibility invites temptations of the worst kind."



Did you even listen to the interview with the Washington Post investigative reporter, Robert O'Harrow Jr. who wrote 'No Place to Hide'??

I repeat: Even the author of the Patriot Act is alarmed at the state of data-mining combined with DARPA software. THE AUTHOR OF THE FRIKKIN' PATRIOT ACT!! Does this register with you? Or is Slate making you feel good about Big Brother?

Besides 'Winning Modern Wars,' you better read this book. Counter-terrorism expert Richard Clarke considers it a must-read.

I listened to all 42 minutes of that Clark radio interview. All 42 minutes...

Clark is recruiting HEAVILY and REPEATEDLY in that San Diego radio interview. He gets downright emotional about how wonderful it would be for every American youth to sign up IN THE MILITARY. He says "oh sure, it's a little rough in Iraq now but that won't always be..." HA!

AND when asked about the Democratic message and values, he draws a total blank and says 'well, we'll see what's down the road...' or words to that effect.

Do I have to make a transcript of it so you don't accuse me of stretching his words and "what's in it for you, John?"

What the heck would be in it for me you ask?
How about not having a police-state that targets me for dissent?
How about not having a totally bloodthirsty militarized culture?
How about not having candidates who are totally in bed with the Military Industrial Complex?
How about having a civilian executive branch?
How about not having a 'Dem' candidate who helped author the intelligence document given to Representatives to urge them to 'stay the course' in Iraq for 5 years at the cost of $245,000,000? (Yes, I DO trust Dennis Kucinich for saying this document existed during the 2004 primary debates. If you don't trust Kucinich on this, so be it.)

FC, I realize you really want to have a trustworthy "kick-ass" candidate. While it is easy for both of us to see things that confirm our attitudes, this appears to be a big blind spot for you.

He sure likes to make a buck off of yours and my personal records and advise corporations on how to make money around the world.

Yes, Clark has criticized the neocons and said many great things.
He could be totally sincere about wanting to reign in the neocons.
He could just be getting money the way everybody else does, no different at all. Is this what you want in a president?

I compare his words against his actions.
Do you?

[FrenchieCat]

73. I also don't understand what is so sinister about a company

that includes Clinton's former FEMA Director....or the Transportaion Secretary under Clinton?

I'm sure you will let us know. Cause when it's you.....there's got to be a conspiracy in it somewhere. Righto?

Yep....these guys are hiding something. You can tell by the look in their eyes. The democratic counterbalance and shadow equivalent to Bush's Homeland Security Dept. We need them, cause I don't believe that Bush and his friends know jackshit. I'm glad our guys are around, to be honest with you. But according to you, just the mention of their names....makes them "shadowy"...ooooooooh :scared:

[JohnOneillsMemory]

106. That you see info as 'an attack' should set off your own alarms. Consider:

(I'm posting this for both of you, FrenchieCat and PatrioticOhioLiberal.)

Recall that when Barbara Boxer put Condi's own words in front of her Condi characterized it as "an attack."

I put Clark's own actions up with documentation and words from an independent watch-dog organization. And you took it as "an attack."

Oh, and presenting information with cut-and-paste is an evil tactic, like those pesky liberal intellectuals who think they're better than us, right PatrioticOhioLiberal?

I looked at what FrenchieCat put up to back up her support for Clark and I've saved it to examine even more closely than I already have. I respect this DU-er for offering information to assess for myself and I do the same out respect for others. I would hope that anyone who wants to do their own critical thinking would look for themselves. There are lives at stake. And possibly the last chance for the idea of democracy ever being given life.

Both the James Lee Witt group and the Crisis-fixing info site seem to be efforts to advise corporations and their paid-for politicians on how to better manage their exploitation of nations destabilized by either bad weather or 'insurgents.'

Look at the notes on Haiti at that Crisis-fix website. It skirts the fact that the US sent 16,000 new M16 rifles to the thugs who killed and tortured their way to a coup against democratically-elected Aristide. The US withdrew its corporate mercenary security detail and kidnapped Aristide and his American-citizen wife to Africa. This is called "US pressure." Ok, maybe if you want to resolve a crisis, you don't point fingers. Or maybe you white-wash it. Hmmm.

Under Reagan/Bush in the 1980s, FEMA included 'domestic unrest' as one of the 'disasters' to be managed by The Powers That Be. If you know anything about the WTO and the IMF, you know that 'Confessions of an Economic Hit-Man' tell-all by John Perkins spells just who Wesley Clark has always worked for and continues to.
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/09/1526251&mode=thread&tid=25
(Interview with John Perkins: Confessions of an Economic Hit Man)

If you think that an 'R' or a 'D' after a name changes this, you are naive.

AMY GOODMAN WAS PULLED OUT OF LINE AND ASKED AT AIRPORT SECURITY IN HEATHROW (LONDON) IF SHE WOULD SUBMIT TO BEING DOSED WITH "LOW-LEVEL RADIATION"! SHE SAID "NO WAY". THIS IS THE SECURITY STATE IN YOUR BODY. CONSENT WILL SOON BE ELIMINATED.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/10/1545230
(Democracy Now - Robert O'Harrow Jr. interview)

Please listen to Robert O'Harrow Jr.'s interview with Amy Goodman on today's Democracy Now radio program. He wrote the book 'No Place to Hide' detailing the PROMINENT ROLE of Acxiom and other data-mining private industries who are providing the records on ALL Americans to DARPA and DOD and der Fatherland Security Agency.

O'Harrow even quotes the author of the Patriot Act as being alarmed by this technology! THE AUTHOR OF THE PATRIOT ACT!

The cover of security is creating an unregulated police-state where 'they' know everything about you, your friends, what you say and read, the websites you look at, where you drive, where you shop, what you buy, EVERYTHING.

Are you really offering up 'The Illusion of Privacy' as a dismissal of this grave threat to public dissent because there is a 'Democrat' involved?

We are all on the same side here. I will keep looking at what is offered in support of Clark and I will keep presenting more for you to consider.

I'd like their to be "kick-ass candidates" and 'good guys' to counter the 'bad guys' in the seats of power. But lobbying for the police-state is incredibly dangerous to MY SAFETY as a dissenter.

Washington Post investigative reporter Robert O'Harrow Jr.'s says as much, too, with heavy documentation. Read the book, listen to his interview.

[Jai4WKC08]

132. I checked your link

And there's no reference to Clark or any company he worked for. Not a single one.

Guilt by association, I suppose? But you can't even identify the association.

Let's face it, that knocks out anyone who's ever worked at a sufficiently high level in any capacity for the government, or for any company that contracts for the government. Not a very large pool of people. Probably no one who could ever stand a change of winning.

Sorry, John, but I gotta laugh at the absurdity of someone who has no faith in anyone connected to the US government even caring who might run or be elected president. Why do you waste your time here?

[JohnOneillsMemory]

146. Did you miss my post #56? Look again. And #145, too.

I've learned alot about the US government since 9/11.

I share what I've learned in hopes of getting back the Bill of Rights, US Constitution, New Deal, Great Society, Geneva Conventions, UN Charter.

Namely, any hope of a better future than the one the NeoDems and NeoCons are busy destroying.

Why would you even ask that? Oh well, I don't flinch from stating the obvious along with things some don't want to hear or believe.

[Jai4WKC08]

150. Yep, read 'em

And just re-read the first. Still no connection between your link and Wes Clark. Nada.

Ref your latter post, Clark had nothing to do with the Axiom indident--not a big enough deal to call a "scandal." But whatever. He was never highly placed in the company, was long gone by the time it all went down, and was never guilty of any wrong-doing.

Nor do I see a conflict of interest in his being a lobbyist and a CNN commentator. He was hired to comment on the reports coming from embedded reporters, explain and provide background on military tactics and capabilities. Where's the conflict?

But I guess for some people, any connection to the government, especially the defense sector, is evil. That guilt by association thing--you're either with us or against us... sound familiar? No one will ever be "pure" enough for you, will they? Certainly no one with enough strength or experience to accomplish anything but left-wing whining.

As for your desire to share what you've learned since 9/11, you must not know much American history before that date. You seem to think there was no imperialism or economic exploitation before... what? The '60s? Great Society days. Why do YOU think Kennedy put troops in Vietnam and Johnson escalated after the Gulf of Tonkin? Were they "neo-Dems" too? How about the Monroe Doctrine? Or Jefferson and the Barbary Coast? How old can "neo-" be and still mean "new"?

Know what I think? I think you're like a religious convert or a reformed smoker. You've just woken up to see the light and want to make sure everyone else does too. But you have no perspective of the bigger picture.

Actually, it's men like Wes Clark who are busting their collective ass to get us back to our ideals. But make no mistake, we didn't abandon them overnight--never really did live up to them--and it'll be a long hard fight to undo even that which has happened in the last four years.

So go back and play with your friends in the loony left. The people who will never be more than a fringe, incapable of changing anything, but damn sure good at giving the right wing something to terrify the masses with.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

151. One of my main themes is the century of imperialism that the US military

has been used for. And you contradict yourself by saying "what about imperialism before Clark" and then trying to portray me a fringe wacko for saying that is exactly what the US military is for.

Do you see the irony in your own efforts to have it both ways to portray me as an irrational zealot? Nice try.

Here. This is something I like to share for perspective on the role of the US military in preventing democracy and protecting corporations just like General Smedley Butler said in his famous 1937 essay 'War is a Racket.'

You do remember that, right? General Butler realized his career had been as a hit-man for the United Fruit Company in the Caribbean region and he was pissed! He also single-handedly prevented the DuPont coup attempted by the largest corporations against FDR in 1932 back when Prescott Bush was financing the rise of Hitler and applauding Mussolini.

Can you see Wesley Clark writing 'War is a Racket'?? No, he wrote 'Winning Modern Wars.'

Read:

The Balkans are all about economics for the US and EU. Pipelines and other transportation corridors. The US destabilizes countries and stages coups, death squads, starvation, etc. to get what it wants ECONOMICALLY.
OR it 'stabilizes' to get what it wants with dictators like Saddam. The CIA helped create the Taliban to stabilize Afghanistan for a potential pipeline for Caspian Sea-area gas and oil.



http://www.hermes-press.com/impintro1.htm
(The New US-British Oil Imperialism, 100 Year War for Oil)

>snip<

The huge oil and gas reserves in the Caspian Sea must either be moved west to European markets or south to Asian markets. The western route is to move oil from Chechnya, across the Black Sea and through the Bosporus to the Mediterranean, but the narrow Bosporus channel is already clogged with oil tankers from the Black Sea oil fields. An alternate route would be to move the tankers from the Black Sea, bypassing the Bosporus, up the Danube River and then through a very short pipeline across Kosovo to the Mediterranean at Tirana, Albania. However, that process was stopped by the Chinese who have supplied and armed the Albanians, as a client state, since 1949.

The other difficulty with the western route is that Western Europe is a tough market, characterized by high prices for oil products, an aging population, and increasing competition from natural gas. Furthermore, the region is fiercely competitive, now being serviced by oil from the Middle East, the North Sea, Scandinavia, and Russia. Western Europe is not a very attractive market, because substantial infrastructure would have to be developed to bring that oil from the Caspian to an already overly-competitive European market.

The only other ways to get Caspian Sea oil and gas to Asian markets is through China, which is too long a route, or through Iran, which is politically and economically inimical to U.S.-Standard Oil objectives.

As soon as the Soviets discovered the vast Caspian Sea oil fields in the late 1970's, they attempted to take control of Afghanistan to build a massive north-south pipeline system to allow the Soviets to send their oil directly through Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean seaport. The result was the decades long Soviet-Afghan war. The Standard Oil-influenced U.S. government saw the danger of a Russian north-south pipeline and the CIA trained and funded armed terrorist groups, including Osama bin Laden, who defeated the Soviets in the late 1980's.

The Russians then tried to control the flow of oil and gas through its monopoly on pipelines. The Southern Asian Republics of the former Soviet Union--Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan--saw through this Russian monopolistic ploy and began to consult with Western companies.

The Standard Oil-influenced U.S. government now plans to thrust further along the 40th parallel from the Balkans through these Southern Asian Republics of the former Soviet Union. The U.S. military has already set up a permanent operations base in Uzbekistan. The so-called anti-terrorist strategy is clearly designed to simultaneously consolidate control over Middle Eastern and South Asian oil, and contain and neutralize the former Soviet Union. With that strategy, Afghanistan is exactly where they need to be.




Read former CIA station chief of Angola, John Stockwell in a 1987 speech. There is a video that loads along with the transcript.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4068.ht...
(Americas Third World War How 6 million People Were killed in CIA secret wars against third world countries)

http://members.aol.com/bblum6/American_holocaust.htm
(Killing Hope US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II)

http://www.swans.com/library/art6/zig055.html
(A CENTURY OF U.S. MILITARY INTERVENTIONS, From Wounded Knee to Yugoslavia, -this stops in 1999 and misses Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Haiti again, and more.)

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/GAG501A.html
(New Pentagon Vision Transforms War Agenda)

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-overclass.html
(The Origins of the Overclass)

http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/rise_of_amer...
(The Rise of Fascism in America)

http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street /
(Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler)

[Jai4WKC08]

153. None of that has anything to do with Clark

Nada. Nothing at all.

Just like your link up-stream. Nothing to do with Clark.

You mention the Balkans, which was Clark's milieu for a time, and then go off on a tangent on staged coups, death squads, and starvation. None of which the US or NATO did in the Balkans. We stopped genocide. We were the good guys. Period.

Now, I know you don't accept that. Everything the US does is evil and imperialistic. And that's what puts you in the nut-fringe.

But the rest of it? Totally unrelated to Clark.

And do NOT put quotes around "what about imperialism before Clark" and try to attribute it to me I NEVER said that. YOU said you wanted to go back to the days of the Great Society. I mentioned a couple of the people who brought us the concept of the Great Society. I did not contradict myself, and you haven't, no doubt can't, show where I have. Appears your vision is so narrow, you can't understand anything that doesn't match your preconceptions.

Well, whatever. But if you're gonna post links to articles to attack Clark, they'd better damn well have something to do with Clark. And yours don't. Instead they paint a portrait of a Great American Satan, loony in itself, and you expect us to accept that anyone who was ever connected in any way to that establishment is tarred with the same brush. Except, I guess, for the ones you happen to like better. Maybe you don't like any. I don't know.

Either way, it's bullshit.

But what I think instead is maybe you're counting on the fact that most people will never bother to follow your links or read what's at the other end.

Just like you have obviously never read "Winning Modern Wars." Because it most assuredly is all about exposing modern American imperialism. The real kind. The sort that kills people and undermines American security. Not the fantasies of someone's hash pipe.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

155. Ah, hero-worship is easier than reading. Reading is hard work.

You wrote "we were the good guys. Period."

Well, with a detailed contextual analysis like that how could I be so foolish as to provide a detailed 100 year history of US military interventions and the economic reasons?

Maybe you would tell me what 'points of light' the US government has offered the world in the last 100 years. With links, please.

Thanks for setting me straight by attacking the messenger with insults about being a hash-smoking fringe nutjob. Democraticunderground will certainly benefit from your input!

1) Suggesting I wanted to back in time to the legal apartheid of the 1960s is just irrational. Slavery, lyncing, eugenics, apartheid, human experimenting, all these are the legacy of Africans in America. I'd like to see eradication of the institutionalized poverty that puts this country 27th on a University of Pennsylvania assessment of quality of life in nations.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-07/uop-ur2071703.php

That would take at least a little of the clotted blood off of the cover of your American history text-book. Harder to remove the complete genocide of Native Americans and the financing and arming of Hitler since WWII killed, what, 50,000,000 people?

Yeah, some 'points of light' are certainly in order to dispel the nutty 'Great Satan' America-haters, right?

2) I documented the history and context of Acxiom's data-mining for DARPA and pointed you at an award-winning Washington Post investigative reporter's new book on the topic which is alarming even the author of the horrible Patriot Act. Acxiom is at the center of this topic and it has quite a bit to do with Wesley Clark, the guy who lobbied Acxiom personally to John Poindexter and Dick Cheney.

3) Page 444 in 'Winning Modern Wars' has Clark whining about how public opinion on civilian casualties hampered NATO bombing " thereby accomplishing what Milosevic couldn't."

He goes on to say that small 'actions' can be carried out in secret but larger prolonged 'actions' will need public support.

4) Pages 456-457 in 'Winning Modern Wars' has Clark positing in so many words that 'the value of a nation is its credibility as a reliable force to be reckoned with.' He writes that nations first use diplomacy to get what they want and "when they can't get traction" with other nations, they resort to war. While pretending to warn against other nations, this is an indictment of the US government that corroborates the history I gave you and YOU characterized as 'the Great Satan.'

He spends most of this book detailing how hard it was to negotiate in the Balkans without the reliable back up of a big stick and having to accomodate public opinion. These are the same complaints the neocons and every war-waging government has.

Clark is a professional warrior who writes about how to do it better. Admittedly, he gives great lip-service to the humane democratic principles we'd like to believe are behind The Just Wars.

See? That's how you put forward an opinion and then atleast TRY to back it up. I don't claim to be infallible and I look at other people's offerings critically because this isn't just for fun for me, lives are at stake.

You want to see my posts backed up? Give DU money so you can use the search feature. If you'd like to see one from yesterday, go here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1587996

See you around the threads. When I'm not too busy "smoking hash," that is...

[Jai4WKC08]

162. You make the typical mistake of every fanatic

In assuming that because I think your theories are crack-pot, I am less well informed (too lazy to read), or that my judgement is clouded by some other motivation (like "hero-worship"). Clark is a hero, but I do not worship him. I do recognize and admire his courage and dedication to democratic ideals. Too bad you have closed your mind to the reality of what he has accomplished.

You can point to all the economic factors that have governed the behavior of nations, and the evil deeds of individuals all thru history. It doesn't justify the assumption that every action a nation takes is motivated solely by greed. There are just wars. It's a simple as that. Kosovo was one. WWII was another. People who think WWII was not "just" are definitely on the fringe of American politics. If more people knew what was was happening in Kosovo when NATO intervened, the same would be said about that war as well.

I will admit you didn't say you want to back to '60s--I was not as precise in my wording as I should have been.

But you did write: "I share what I've learned in hopes of getting back the Bill of Rights, US Constitution, New Deal, Great Society, Geneva Conventions, UN Charter. It's hardly "irrational" to assume you think that was a better time. Afterall, unlike the Constitution or Bill of Rights, the Great Society is not a document or principal you can point to in isolation of all the rest that was going on at the time. You can't get it back without the baggage that comes along with it.

None of which is relevant to this thread.

The subject of THIS thread is Clark's employment. His current employment to be exact. Lobbying for Axiom is PAST employment, very short-lived past employment, and certainly not in any capacity to have influence over whatever Axiom may have done that broke the law.

Which returns me to my original point. The one you keep side-stepping. NOT ONE of the links you posted show that Clark had anything to do with Axiom's release of data to the feds. Or even worked under contract to them at the same time the alleged misdeed took place. He was trying to sell a new technological capability that seemed to have the potential to enhance national security. Might as well indict Madame Currie for the bombing of Hiroshima.

Besides, lobbying itself is not a crime. Perhaps you think it should be. But you cannot realistically point to a single potential national leader who has not been on one side or the other of the act.

As for Clark's book "Winning Modern Wars" (now available in paperback at your local bookstore--shameless plug :) ), you are correct. Clark is "a professional warrior who writes about how to do it better." Guess what. That's not a crime either. Perhaps you think it should be too. If that doesn't make you "fringe" I don't know what does. Thank God.

Ironic as hell that you would say you don't do this for fun, that there are lives at stake. Because it's more than just "lip-service" Clark gives to "humane democratic principles." He has SAVED LIVES. The lives of real people. I don't suppose you've read Samantha Power's book, "A Problem from Hell." Maybe you think she indulges in "hero-worship" too? The Pulitzer award committee didn't.

I'm not sure what your point is with the particular passages you posted from Clark's book. They don't disprove my assertion that his bottom line was to condemn the imperialism of the current administration. I suppose he doesn't go far enough for you, but that was not his intent. Not that he would, since he obviously doesn not see the world thru the same lens.

But there's not a damn thing wrong with anything you quote. It's not "whining" to observe that Milosevic' goals were aided by political restrictions on the NATO military operation. That's just a fact. It's also a fact that major military actions do require public support. That nations resort to war when diplomacy fails, to the extent to which they're capable. And that diplomatic negotiations are more successful when backed up by a realistic threat of force. Welcome to the real world. Ain't pretty, is it? But it's the way things are. That bad men (neo-cons, for example) encounter the same realities in prosecuting their objectives, does not make Clark (Clinton/Albright/etc) bad too. It's the objectives that differ.

And yes, I'm still waiting for you to back some assertion against Clark with facts. Yeah, I can use the search function. Like I would waste my time. Well, maybe if I had some reason to believe your other posts would be more concrete than anything here. I see no reason to think so.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

163. Oh, I forgot that Clark also writes that NATO leaders said their govt's

were on the line and wanted Clark to save their asses over Kosovo. Yup. Direct from Clark's own pen.

I'm going to ignore that you keep calling me names and fixating on whether Clark personally handed Acxiom data over to places it shouldn't be.

This is a disinfo tactic called: 'Raising the standard of evidence.'
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Raising_standard_of_evidence
>snip<

Raising standard of evidence is a propaganda technique sometimes used in refuting a convincing and appropriate argument. It consists of defining an unreasonable standard of evidence that must be met before the argument of one's opponent can be accepted."

>snip<

Atleast you started to address militarism and even admitted that you believe in a just war. Now you are actually having a dialogue instead of throwing mud.

You're right, many people believe that WWII and Kosovo are examples of the 'just war.' I've given you info that shows how much more comlicated these wars are.

Fine, keep ignoring complexity. After all, if a general tells you he is a hero, it must be true.

NATO in Kosovo was one of the first American military actions that used perception management science on the internet.

To better understand how complicated and muddled the information you and I have to argue about, read this lengthy essay called 'Shaping Perceptions During the Latest Balkans' Imbroglio':

http://www.psywarrior.com/shapingperceptionsbalkans.html
Shaping Perceptions During the Latest Balkans’ Imbroglio
Steven Collins
Submitted for Publication Consideration to European Security
May 30, 2000

(Reprinted with the author's permission)

"The truth is not simply what you think it is; it is the circumstances in which it is said, to whom, why, and how it is said." -- Vaclav Havel

Despite prevailing, at least temporarily, in the conflict with Yugoslavia, NATO members, especially the US, must quickly appraise the conduct of the conflict and determine the applicable "lessons learned" -- particularly those pertaining to shaping attitudes and behaviors, or as it is often called, ‘perception management.’ Not only is it likely Kosovo will remain an area of concern for years to come; but, much like the wrinkle in a carpet that once pushed down in one area only reappears elsewhere, crises in the Balkans are likely to continue to bedevil the architects of American foreign policy. Effective perception management offers policy makers a more deft and less destructive tool than bombings, or economic sanctions, as well as a more effective means to shape long term attitudes and behaviors.

>snip<

Use of Cyberspace – Leveling the Field

While military coalitions led by the US can militarily overwhelm adversaries with technology and precision guided munitions, the use of cyberspace can help level the playing field. The potential use of Internet chat groups, websites, and email, has long been touted as a tool for future propagandists. The Kosovo perception management struggle attested that the future is now. The use of cyberspace was vital to the Serb and ethnic Albanian endeavors to present their view of events in Kosovo.

Both Serbs and ethnic Albanians used Internet websites as information banks. Reporters, as well as interested members of the public around the world, visited these sites to quickly and easily gain background material. With the use of cyberspace as a propaganda medium, it was important to discredit or degrade the credibility of the opposition’s website. The Serbs attempted this on October 19, 1998, when the self-proclaimed "Black Hand" group hacked into the ethnic Albanian site at <www.kosova.com> and posted this message: "Welcome to the Web page of the biggest liars and killers!"

When NATO became the primary Serbian opponent, the Serbs were helpless in trying to combat the Western coalition militarily. Therefore, the Serbs formed ad hoc groups like ‘Captain Dragan’s Serbian Cybercorps’ to participate in chat groups, send out email, and try to win the information war on the Internet. This effort included over a 1000 volunteers scattered throughout six sites in Belgrade. The Serbs hoped to splinter popular support for NATO actions among the world’s "cyber-citizens." Ultimately, though, these actions did not significantly decrease Western public support for NATO’s actions.

Dissident Serbs also used cyberspace to send information that would have otherwise never reached the outside world. Media-savvy Serbian Orthodox Priest, Father Sava Janjic, sent out voluminous email to those registered at his website. Other Serbs reported anonymously for various independent news websites.

As part of the wider rubric of Information Warfare, both NATO and Yugoslavia used cyberspace in areas other than perception management. Soon after the bombing began, NATO accused the Serbs of spamming the NATO email system and inserting viruses. Conversely, it was reported that US Central Intelligence Agency computer hackers tried to strip the finances of Milosevic by electronically draining his accounts in banks around the world.

>snip<

much more...

[Jai4WKC08]

164. What a crock

My "standard of evidence" is the most basic of all.

You are accusing Clark of wrong-doing, or lack of character or some such nonsense. But you provide no evidence, not even circumstantial, that he committed any misdeed whatsoever. Nor that he was in any position of responsibility for which he could be held accountable for the actions of others. Merely SOME evidence that a crime may have been committed by a company that he happened to work for at some earlier date.

In case you hadn't noticed, Wesley Clark is a real person. He is innoscent until proven guilty. Granted this is not a court of law, but without ANY evidence whatsoever that he did anything wrong, all you've posted is a vicious smear.

I return to my original premise. You apparently never intend for anyone to actually follow the link. You figure the inuendo suffices.

And I sure wish you'd quit whining about my alleged mud slinging. And then have the audacity to say, "I'm going to ignore that you keep calling me names..." while making that very accusation repeatedly in every reply, Ya know, you've been pretty handy with the personal insults as well. I don't read, can't handle complexity, am subject to "hero-worship" or am somehow enamoured by his uniform. Yada yada yada.

But I figure being on the receiving end of your insults puts me in good company.

There is one "tactic" to which you are resorting, however, and that is ignoring every point or counterpoint that you cannot or will not answer. For example: I have said Clark is a hero. I point out that he did save lives. I referenced Pulitzer prize winner Samantha Power. I could also reference a couple million Albanians, many of whom have testified that they are alive today because of Clark. What do you come back with? That I think he's a hero because he's a general and he said so. What crap. Clark has never called himself a hero. But his actions speak louder than any words.

Fwiw, he's as much a hero for taking crap from people like you, and your (perhaps unintentional) allies on the right, to try to set this country and MY party (not sure about yours) back on track.

One final thing. Clark is absolutely correct that a number of NATO-member governments were on the line and that he "saved their asses" (your words, not his). Throw in saving the alliance itself. I would submit the latter may well save a helluva lot more lives in the future. I suppose you'll now say that I'm taking his word for it. LOL. You must have no clue about European domestic politics.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

161. Here's some more hearty reading if you are interested.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/index.html

[JohnOneillsMemory]

169. oops. Here is NATO killing innocent people in the GLADIO terrorism spree.

(You may point out 'this is mostly before WesClark.' Yup. But it shows the common tactics of NATO using terrorism to coerce populations into accepting a security-state or a police-state. It happens all the time and this is Clark's post-NATO business even if he is sincere about trying to 'do it right.'-JOM)

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0210-22.htm



Published on Thursday, February 10, 2005 by CommonDreams.org

The Pentagon's 'NATO Option'

by Lila Rajiva

Washington is shocked by Seymour Hersh’s scoop about the Pentagon’s “Salvador Option,” an ambitious plan to deploy secret special forces in friendly and unfriendly countries to spy, target terrorists and their sympathizers, and conduct “hits,” all without Congressional oversight. Its model is the American counter-insurgency program in Salvador in the 1980s which funded nationalist death squads to hunt down insurgents. What’s new today is that the program would be run by the Pentagon, not the CIA, and it would be much broader in scope. According to Hersh, the Pentagon's gremlins are already at work in Iran prepping targets for possible US or Israeli strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities.

But Washington’s shock is misplaced. There’s nothing new about the “Salvador Option.” At the end of last month, Frank Cass in London released a new book by Dr. Daniele Ganser of the Center for Security Studies at the Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich called, “NATO’s Secret Armies. Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe,” which offers plenty of evidence that there was also a “Salvador Option” in post-war Europe. It turns out that during the Cold War, European governments and secret services conspired with a NATO-backed operation to engineer attacks in their own countries in order to manipulate the population to reject socialism and communism.

It was called “the strategy of tension” and it was carried out by members of secret stay-behind armies organized by NATO and funded by the CIA in Italy, Portugal, Germany, Spain, and other European countries. The strategy apparently involved supplying right-wing terrorists with explosives to carry out terrorist acts which were then blamed on left-wing groups to keep them out of power.

Only three countries, Italy, Belgium, and Switzerland, have had a parliamentary investigation into NATO’s role and a public report. The US and UK, the two nations most centrally involved, are refusing to disclose details, so crucial pieces of the story are missing. Still, Ganser’s book offers some disturbing insights into a hidden aspect of the Cold War.

(snip)

As one of Gladio’s operatives said, “You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security.”

(snip)

[JohnOneillsMemory]

142. Hell, links didn't update this morning. Read Clark right here.

http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=1219&l=1

"Set Kosovo Free"
Wesley Clark in the Wall Street Journal
1 February 2005
The Wall Street Journal

In his visionary inaugural address, President George W. Bush talked about the challenges of promoting freedom abroad.

>snip<

[JohnOneillsMemory]

145. "threatening to unravel U.S. and EU investments in stabilizing...Balkans."

Wesley Clark writing for the Wall Street Journal about Kosovo 2005:
"Further clashes, like the ones last spring, in which 20 people died and another 800 were wounded, could result in an emergency partition of Kosovo's territory, creating a precedent threatening to unravel U.S. and EU investments in stabilizing multiethnic states throughout the Balkans."

KEY WORD: INVESTMENTS

The Balkans are all about economics for the US and EU. Pipelines and other transportation corridors. The US destabilizes countries and stages coups, death squads, starvation, etc. to get what it wants ECONOMICALLY.
OR it 'stabilizes' to get what it wants with dictators like Saddam. The CIA helped create the Taliban to stabilize Afghanistan for a potential pipeline for Caspian Sea-area gas and oil.



http://www.hermes-press.com/impintro1.htm
(The New US-British Oil Imperialism, 100 Year War for Oil)

>snip<

The huge oil and gas reserves in the Caspian Sea must either be moved west to European markets or south to Asian markets. The western route is to move oil from Chechnya, across the Black Sea and through the Bosporus to the Mediterranean, but the narrow Bosporus channel is already clogged with oil tankers from the Black Sea oil fields. An alternate route would be to move the tankers from the Black Sea, bypassing the Bosporus, up the Danube River and then through a very short pipeline across Kosovo to the Mediterranean at Tirana, Albania. However, that process was stopped by the Chinese who have supplied and armed the Albanians, as a client state, since 1949.

The other difficulty with the western route is that Western Europe is a tough market, characterized by high prices for oil products, an aging population, and increasing competition from natural gas. Furthermore, the region is fiercely competitive, now being serviced by oil from the Middle East, the North Sea, Scandinavia, and Russia. Western Europe is not a very attractive market, because substantial infrastructure would have to be developed to bring that oil from the Caspian to an already overly-competitive European market.

The only other ways to get Caspian Sea oil and gas to Asian markets is through China, which is too long a route, or through Iran, which is politically and economically inimical to U.S.-Standard Oil objectives.

As soon as the Soviets discovered the vast Caspian Sea oil fields in the late 1970's, they attempted to take control of Afghanistan to build a massive north-south pipeline system to allow the Soviets to send their oil directly through Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean seaport. The result was the decades long Soviet-Afghan war. The Standard Oil-influenced U.S. government saw the danger of a Russian north-south pipeline and the CIA trained and funded armed terrorist groups, including Osama bin Laden, who defeated the Soviets in the late 1980's.

The Russians then tried to control the flow of oil and gas through its monopoly on pipelines. The Southern Asian Republics of the former Soviet Union--Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan--saw through this Russian monopolistic ploy and began to consult with Western companies.

The Standard Oil-influenced U.S. government now plans to thrust further along the 40th parallel from the Balkans through these Southern Asian Republics of the former Soviet Union. The U.S. military has already set up a permanent operations base in Uzbekistan. The so-called anti-terrorist strategy is clearly designed to simultaneously consolidate control over Middle Eastern and South Asian oil, and contain and neutralize the former Soviet Union. With that strategy, Afghanistan is exactly where they need to be.

[calimary]

173. Good grief, my head's exploding!

Gonna take awhile to digest all this. Thanks, though. ALWAYS useful.

[ZootSuitGringo]

154. This was posted on another site, and they said then

That some people who didn't know any better or were enemies of Wes Clark would look at the first sentence, cut it off from the rest of the article and attempt to make it seem like Wes Clark is in agreement with George Bush.

I said that only the right wing does this to Democrats, and there is no primary going on right now, so I would doubt that anyone would bother to do this. Maybe if he runs, they might, like they did with everything else he says and writes. You know, cut it and paste it.

Congratulations, you have done what I gave most progressive credit as something that they would'nt do.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

157. Now you're doing it. It leads to my post #145. And many others. OIL!!! n/t

[PatrioticOhioLiberal]

170. You know John

I have to ask...is there anyone you trust?

Are you looking for perfection in an imperfect world? If so you will spend your life in dissappointment and despair.

I'm an old woman, I've seen much in my life. I've suffered and found joy, laughed and cried...and learned that sometimes the ideals I hold and would like to hold others too are unreachable by anyone including myself.

I've learned to be an idealistic pragmatist. It's the only way to survive and remain reasonably sane.

I wish you a good and ulcer free life lol. But I don't think you're likely to find it at this point in time.

[PatrioticOhioLiberal]

94. Ah...finally

I just knew there couldn't be a Clark thread without John popping in to cut and paste. LOL

Guess I can relax and start breathing again...all is right with the world.

Would be nice to see less repitition though...after the first 100 or 200 times of seeing the same thing folks tend to just slide right on past.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

158. How timely. Yet another data-mining security disaster on 2/12/05 WP:

(Now maybe Wesley Clark has had HIS OWN info stolen from the data-mining industry that he makes money lobbying for. Poetic justice...-JOM)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A17506-2005Feb11?language=printer

>snip<

"Some of the nation's most influential former military and intelligence officials have been informed in recent days that they are at risk of identity theft after a break-in at a major government contractor netted computers containing the Social Security numbers and other personal information about tens of thousands of past and present company employees.

The contractor, employee-owned Science Applications International Corp. of San Diego, handles sensitive government contracts, including many in information security. It has a reputation for hiring Washington's most powerful figures when they leave the government, and its payroll has been studded with former secretaries of defense, CIA directors and White House counterterrorism advisers."

[Jai4WKC08]

166. MADE money for -- past tense

You just can't stop with the lies and smears, can you?

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

63. REpost or,...répétition...

should this help,...this time? Pardon moi, ne parlais pas francais avec piratez,... too often.. :/

L'information de contact est sur leur site Web. De façon générale, WesPAC soutient sa mission pour fournir des moyens pour Clark aux titres d'adresse par des médias ou aux événements démocratiques de soutien à travers le pays, comme les détails je vous ai fourni la semaine dernière, concernant ses efforts de collecte de fonds dans le Texas. De mon arrangement il est également sur plusieurs conseils sur des questions d'"groupe de réflexion", aussi bien que la Science et la technologie. You'er présumant la plupart des personnes doit faire une vie avec un travail 9-5. Mais si vous obteniez des qualifications uniques et des qualifications et les cerveaux, comme Clark , vous travaillez en dehors de la boîte d'un travail 9-5. Dans le passé, j'ai lu les articles que le palce il sur plusieurs embarque dans diverses compagnies, telles que les sports et le club de chasse. Par exemple, il était directeur pour la technologie wavecrest http://www.greenspeed.us/wesley_clark_electric.htm. non sûrs combien il est encore impliqué, mais ceux-ci ne sont pas nécessairement les travaux à temps plein. De nos jours son expérience et qualifications invite autre consultation ou sociétés technologie-conduites pour contracter sa "expertise" sur la sécurité, la défense, et les secteurs scientifiques et la technologie, tels que des télécommunications. Elle est peu claire actuellement si tous ses aspects sur les nouvelles de câble (www.u-wes-a.com) offre aux haut-parleurs spéciaux des honoraires, car la plupart des experts chargent de nos jours ; mais certainement du est le DERNIER endroit que vous trouverez l'information spécifique que vous recherchez. Estacade à claire-voie, je ne suis pas même sûr ou soin quel Gephardt, Edwards, et Sharpton font, à moins que vous connaissiez ces détails... de du. Jusqu'à ce point, allait comment le doyen obtenant son funds... c'est vraiment un nonissue, imo, à moins qu'il y ait le motif secret.....? Une chose pour sure... il est le seul spokeman croyable sur des titres national pour le parti démocratique. L'issue s'est fermée. Contact Juste WesPAC.

[cestpaspossible]

65. Merci beaucoup

Je ne suis pas en accord qu'il est 'le seul' porte-parole croyable, mais peu importe.

[CWebster]

85. So, are you Helen of Troy? nt

[FrenchieCat]

66. Voila!

"Expertise" sur la sécurité, la défense, et les secteurs scientifiques et la technologie, tels que des télécommunications.

Exactement son metier. Mais malheureusement, Wes Clark et vraiment tros intelligent pour la plus part des Democrate a DU. Je trouve ca
triste.

[Quixote1818]

72. Here is an article

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58300-2004Jan28.html

I am sure he does much of the same kind of stuff plus some consulting for news programs like CNN.

[ginnyinWI]

75. I thought he worked for CNN

as a military advisor.

[Donna Zen]

76. Had to quit

because we asked him to run for president. By law, he couldn't have a job. CNN is sooooo far to the right at this point, they'll stick with Bill Cohen and Grange.

OT: I thought CNN was revamping their approach to the news with the arrival of this new guy. Ha! Worse than ever news (WTEN) That truly wacko Nancy Grace is now getting her own program.

[AP]

79. He's on a bunch of corporate boards, I suspect, and Goldman Sachs gave

him a no-risk loan to buy shares in a German corp that ended up being sold for about 1 million dollars.

He also lobbies (or has lobbied) the government on behalf of a couple corps.

[ZootSuitGringo]

81. Yup, I read that article

Clark campaign officials say the money is a mark of his talents and the well-deserved fruit of 34 years' service in relatively low-paying military posts. Some of his opponents in the campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination have criticized him for following a well-trod path to private enrichment through powerful connections to government officials in Washington.

Even with two bank accounts holding $500,000 to $1 million each on Dec. 15, according to financial disclosures made by Clark's campaign, his declared assets of $2.6 million to $6 million are less than those held by rivals Sens. John Edwards (N.C.) and John F. Kerry (Mass.). Edwards and Kerry, respectively, have declared assets of $8.7 million to $36.5 million and $198.7 million to $839 million, according to the Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit watchdog group. Former Vermont governor Howard Dean has declared assets of $2.1 million to $5 million.

Also, unlike many other retiring senior military officers, Clark did not immediately go to work for a large defense contractor; instead, he preferred smaller firms specializing in technology. In addition, he earned more than $1 million by giving speeches and appearing as a military commentator on CNN. In 2002, his military retirement pay was $85,909.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58300-2004Jan28.html

[saracat]

80. I answered it for you. He is an economist and has his own consulting firm

in Little Rock.I think it is called Clark and Assoc.

[Adelante]

93. Wesley K. Clark & Associates, saracat nt

[CWebster]

83. This is pure flamebait

Don't you think it is a little early in your posting career to be sowing such discord?

The fact that you shill for Kerry does not reflect well on your champion because you are leaving him wide open...he is the wealthiest Senator, after all--thanks to millionaire wives.

[melnjones]

125. Why is it flamebait?

Seemed to me to be an honest question, and there's not a whole lot of flaming going on here...
As a Clark supporter, I am happy when other people are seeking to learn more info about him.

[ClarkUSA]

135. CWebster is not the only one who has expressed misgivings

Also, this subject was brought up in other threads by the same poster and answered.

[katinmn]

86. Retired military officers get paid very well

with much better benefits than any of us will ever see.

A general gets well over a six figure pension.

One of my uncles who is a retired Lt. Colonel in the AF was getting over 70k a year about 20 years ago. (My aunt spilled the beans once, never to be repeated again.) They also could draw on Social Security benefits. What they call double-dipping.

[Adelante]

92. $85,909 is his military pension

Not all that much more for a 4-star general over a lt. col 20 years ago. Surprising.

It's more money than I will ever see, but I didn't take four bullets for my country, spend 37 years in national service, or win a war without losing a single American life.

[katinmn]

97. yes-- it is surprising!!

BTW, I like Wes Clark very much. You don't have to defend his service to me.

[Adelante]

99. No problem

Just clarifying :hi:

[Jai4WKC08]

128. Your aunt was selling you wolf-cookies

I'm a retired Lt Col and my retirement was just barely over $50K last year.

'Course, I'm not old enough to collect social security yet. But since I had to pay into SS my entire career, it hardly constitutes "double-dipping." It's not a government pension, you know.

And generals do not make 6-figure retirements. You might think so, looking at the pay charts. But Congress, in separate legislation, capped the amount that senior officers make. The charts reflect what they would make if the cap were ever lifted.

[PatrioticOhioLiberal]

89. And you have received answers

on numerous threads where you've asked.

Did you choose to ignore them so you could continue your broken record mantra?

LOL

[cestpaspossible]

113. In this thread, no others

if you want to point one out, I'll cheerfully admit my mistake.

[ClarkUSA]

130. People answered you in this thread before you started this one

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1581530&mesg_id=1581530

:smoke:

[Adelante]

95. Consider yourself answered in this thread, 'kay?

Where on earth would you get the idea he is "subsisting entirely on his military retirement"? He has said hundreds of times that he is in "private industry." His post-military career has been covered thoroughly in the press. People have answered you and others on DU multiple, multi-multiple times. Nobody is trying to fool anybody here, except maybe you, cestpaspossible.

[cestpaspossible]

114. See posts 12, 13, 19

I considered the question answered at that point.

If you want to point out another thread where I actually received a sincere answer, I'll cheerfully admit my mistake.

[Vinnie From Indy]

98. This Post Smells To High Heaven!

In the time it took this poster to type his long "set 'em up" post, he could have EASILY Googled Gen. Clark's name and had reams of information about his activities. That is especially true in light of his own claim that he has asked this question repeatedly on other threads. This post is pretty transparent in it's attempt to distract and smear. Is this the best you got?

[July]

101. Now let's ask him to look into the Bush, Cheney, et al. fortunes.

Just to be fair and balanced.

[ArkDem]

102. He is making tons of money as a Homeland Security advisor.

[Tom Rinaldo]

104. Good, we can use some good advice on homeland security

With Bush's foreign policy creating enemies all around the world we are going to need it, and I certainly don't trust the advice coming out of Bush's people.

[PeaceProgProsp]

108. It's sad that people are getting rich off of anxieties about terror.

[Donna Zen]

116. Talking about Bernie Kerik and Rudy?

Yes_ it would be.

Or if you are saying that preying on notions of senseless fear would be "sad," then I could agree.

If however you are saying that security is unnecessary, I would have to caution against a belief that somehow the world has suddenly lurched into a Utopian dream.

The work that Slater and Clark did for the Cayman Islands was in relation to the hurricane rebuilding and focused on the building types and road grids that would prevent or mitigate damage from future storms. Not everyone is an expert on everything, and often those who are are consulted.

Bill Moyers did more than one program on the vulnerability of America's chemical plants and cargo ports. These are vulnerabilities that are unnecessary and invite problems. That the current regime choses to leave those areas open might give one the notion that future attacks are always welcomed by those who benefit most for exploiting public anxieties.

Personally, I think it is stupid to ignore a weakness that is easily preventable. I would trust Clark and Slater to give timely advice to calm people and make them less open to the greedy machinations of those who would use and abuse them.

[ultraist]

119. How can he be a Homeland Security advisor when he lobbied them

as a paid lobbyist for Axciom Corporation? That seems a bit odd. Are you sure he is an advisor?

[Jai4WKC08]

137. "when he lobbied..." whom?

You mean the US Dept of Homeland Security?

I don't know that Witt LLC (the partnership thru which Clark is providing security advice for pay) has any contracts with the US govt. Maybe they do, but I've never heard of any. I know they're under contract to the govt of the Caymans. I believe he probably did some consulting, don't know in what capacity, when he was in the Middle East in Dec. And I think he was representing Witt LLC at the Nextel conference yesterday, which was for North Carolina law enforcement and emergency response types. I don't doubt there are other contracts let or negotiated; I just haven't heard.

BUT, even if he were advising the DHS of the US govt, what on earth would having been a lobbyist have to do with it? He was only one for a very short time, and that had to have been well over a year ago, closer to two. And even that only his formal registration--he actually quit working for them quite earlier. In any case, they don't tatoo a big "L" on your forehead just because you register as a lobbyist for a time. You can go on to other jobs, even for the government. Certainly in this case, there's no possible conflict of interest.

[Donna Zen]

103. Clark at work:

WaveCrest: developer of hydrogen engines

Note: a job Clark gave up because we asked him run.

Setting and some of the participants participants: Allen Andersson-MIT math; Boris Maslov-Moscow Institute, PH. D. electronics engineering; Joe Perry-Duquesne U, physicist; Wes Clark. lab at WaveCrest.

Subject: electromagnetic cores, battery chemistries, algorithms, power-to-energy ratios, and electric drivelines

The first meeting of the minds between Clark and WaveCrest was informal but intense. “I remember that day very clearly,” said Perry. “Our company was very small, we had this dream, and Wes said, ‘I’d like to just come out and the engineers and have you guys explain what you’re doing.’ So people sat around on the floor and we had pizza and a couple of beers and did equations on the whiteboard. And Wes was at home. He immediately connected with the science and the engineers.”

Allen Andersson, the principal investor and cofounder of WaveCrest, was astonished at the mathematical prowess and quick grasp of the new technology that Clark exhibited during that first meeting. “When it came to explaining what our company was doing, he understood it a lot better than I did,” Andersson said. “He thought that I was just being modest; but no, he understood it and I didn’t . I felt embarrassed because he went to West Point and learned how to march while I went to MIT and learned mathematics. He’s a guy that does all the practical things, he knows how to move vehicles from one place to another and make sure they have good drivers and fuel and the right number of rest stops; but he’s also right there on the theoretical science end of it.”

...Perry remarked that Clark had a down-to-earth relationship with everyone at the company. “He would walk around building and talk to the janitor and people running the switchboard; everybody was equally important to him. He has that genuine connection that only a few people could make.” ...According to Perry and other officers of the company, Clark had the ability to rally everyone and make morale soar. “Wes was really, in many respects, an inspirational leader,” said Perry.

...”Towards the end he was becoming really distracted,” said Joe Perry. “It was one thing to read in the papers about the rumors of him entering the race, but it was another thing to sit in the next office to him see what was going on. You could just see that it was tearing him up; he just thought that what we were doing was bad for the country.” To his coworkers, Clark’s ambition was not about politics but about problem solving. In their day-to-day talks with him about the war on terrorism and the bush administration’s environmental policies, they witnessed a genuine concern that was personal. “You read that he’s just another politician,” said Perry. “He’s kind of everything but.”

(excerpts from: Wes Clark, A. Felix, 177-88)

Note: it is snowing here, and had decided to take the time type this for the Wes-jobs thread. Since this text is not available on line, there is no link.

“We need a vision of how we’re going to move humanity ahead, and then we need to harness science to do it.” ~Wesley Clark

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

109. recent clark in the news on various topics

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200502/s1300350.htm

http://www.nwanews.com/story.php?paper=adg§ion=News&storyid=107483

http://www.news14charlotte.com/content/local_news/?AC=&ArID=86297&SecID=2


hot off the press,...

[JohnOneillsMemory]

156. OMG. Look at your stories. Clark plus Newt Gingrich, CFR, Hoover Inst.?!!!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200502/s1300350.htm
"The task force is mandated to monitor "the extent to which the United Nations is fulfilling the goals of its charter and offer recommendations for US action" to the US Congress, according to a USIP statement."
>snip<
"The task force will work together with a group of well-known US think tanks, including the Brookings Institution, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Hoover Institution."
>snip<

(These are hardcore conservative neocon-supporting hawk thinktanks who have been discrediting and subverting the UN for years.)
Very nice!

http://www.nwanews.com/story.php?paper=adg§ion=News&storyid=107483
"Arkansas would have an earlier — and likely more noticeable — voice in selecting presidential party nominees under a bill that the Arkansas Senate approved Wednesday. It would move the state’s presidential primaries, now held in May, to the first Tuesday in February."
>snip<

(Here comes a Wesley Clark candidacy in 2008, a good reason to analyze his track record and alliances NOW.)

http://www.news14charlotte.com/content/local_news/?AC=&ArID=86297&SecID=2
Clark urged the crowd of about 100 to discuss interoperable communications among public safety officials. He said it is the core of emergency preparedness.

"You need flexible communications that are adaptable to the situation,” he said. Littleton, Colo., was the site of the Columbine High School tragedy in 1999, when two students went on a shooting rampage and killed 15 people.

Those in attendance agreed that they could all work on improving their systems.
>snip<

(Clark campaigning in the south using Columbine High School Massacre as a touchstone for fear-based governance in the guise of Homeland Security, the most successful sales tactic of the police-state government we live under. Go rent the Michael Moore video 'Bowling for Columbine' and see where this is going.)

[Sparkly]

159. Brookings Institution is not a "hardcore conservative

neo-con supporting hawk thinktank."

And he wasn't in Littleton, he was in North Carolina while Littleton's former fire chief was also there at the same conference.

Communications were also an issue on 9/11, and mayors like Martin O'Malley are screaming as loudly as they can that we need more local emergency preparedness. There is nothing wrong with any of this.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

160. Brookings is parroting the Heritage Foundation now. Bad news links here:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Brookings_Institution

>snip<

About the Brookings Institution

The Brookings Institution, whose predecessor was founded in 1918 by Robert Brookings, was probably the first public policy institute in the USA. Currently a right-wing, neoliberal (http://www.SourceWatch.org/wiki.phtml?title=Neoliberal), anti-regulation organisation, it has politcally veered between the centre and right during its lifetime.

Initially centrist, the Institution took its first step rightwards during the depression, in response to the New Deal. In the 1960s, it was linked to the conservative wing of the Democratic Party, backing Keysian economics. From the mid-70s it cemented a close relationship with the Republican party. Since the 1990s it has taken steps further towards the right in parallel with the increasing influence of right-wing think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation.

>snip<

Cooperation & Affiliation

* American Enterprise Institute, US (AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies; joint conferences, publications, research)
* Wharton Business School, US (Brookings-Wharton Papers on Economic Activity; joint research, conferences, publications)


Related Articles

* Brookings Institution Project on Homeland Security


References

* Sam Husseini, Brookings - The Establishment's Think Tank (http://www.fair.org/extra/9811/brookings.html), Extra!, FAIR, November/December 1998

[Donna Zen]

165. Ha ha ha ha ha ha......

I'm sorry, this is just too funny, but I'll let you in on the joke: When I read this article my first impulse was a sense of relief. I know what Wes Clark thinks about the UN. When asked, he said that there were organizational problems in the UN; nevertheless, we created the UN so if there are problems--fix them--and pay our bills.

Then I wondered who had requested Clark. Not the White House that is for sure. So was it Mitchell of Annan--Clark is very friendly with man he always refers to as Kofi. As for Mitchell--well, I'm from Maine and I have attended many a Dem event with Mitchell. He may be making some money today, but he's not a neocon by any stretch.

Anyway, I got to thinking about the article and then it hit me: Wow, Newt is listed in that article. So I wrote on the Clark blog that some Clark-hater would bring that up as a sure sign that Clark Oh My God was a neocon PNACer. Posters pooh poohed my fear with contradictions of how could anyone assume that considering that Mitchell was on list. I dunno said I.

And here it is! Amazing...simply amazing.

I know you are just "reaching" and are much smarter than this. But damn, in a strange way, you gave me a good laugh. I am very glad that Clark, a believer in the importance of international diplomacy, will halt the march of Newt. Clark is smarter than Newt, has his number and knows just what rocks Newt lives under.

I do agree with you that while all the Dems go to the Brookings looking for policy, they are a mixed bag at best. That Ken Pollack is certainly no prize, no matter how friendly he is with Josh Marshall.

As for the rest: The Arkansas Dems did bring up the Clark campaign, but the original bill was introduced by a republican. And Clark was representing his company about communications equipment for first responders, he did not organize or invite anyone to this conference. People have jobs. Even retired disabled vets who were generals supplement their incomes.

Maybe the problem is we seldom see anyone as gifted as Clark in the public arena; they usually keep a low profile or spend their lives making millions. I can't say as I blame them considering the ruthlessness of the media and the ridicule that often comes from extreme sources.

In some ways I'm glad that Clark made the choice to be involved, we need people like him on our side. And yet, it truly saddens me that it means his name is dragged into every piss hole that people feel obliged to dig.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

168. Thanks for actually having something to share. I'm getting lots of flames.

I don't pretend to have all the answers or to be in command of every topic. But I do offer info and links to be evaluated critically, not dismissively.

There's something about the topic of Wesley Clark that brings out sharp teeth in his supporters as if detracters didn't want the same things his supporters want and therefore must be menacingly psychopathic. Being scorned as a hash-smoking jibberish-speaking fanatic doesn't sit well with me. What a surprise, hunh?

Perhaps the biggest divide is between those who believe in 'just' wars and those who don't. I don't. Not since Hitler was defeated. And since the same guy, Averell Harriman, financed Hitler's rise and then administered the Marshall Plan to rebuild the Europe Hitler destroyed, that 'just' war is darker than most Americans would like to believe.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Brown_Brothers_and_Company

Minimizing the significance of the police-state disturbs me.
Minimizing the significance of US military history disturbs me.
Minimizing the significance of rationalizing war disturbs me.
Minimizing the significance of Repubs running as Dems disturbs me.
Minimizing the significance of perpetual oil wars disturbs me.
Minimizing the significance of recruiting new fodder disturbs me.
Minimizing the significance of the Military Industrial Complex disturbs me.

Wesley Clark's military career and security and surveillance lobbying touches all these topics and is worth a close examination to see just where he fits in with all this.

If he is "a good guy. period." the way some say, fine. I'd like that.
If he is a complex in-the-middle but "on our side" guy. So be it.
If he is a well-intentioned but used-as-a-Colin Powell-prop, too bad.
If he is a professional warrior who enables a kinder-gentler hegemony over the world, fuck that shit.

This is worth putting on the table and doesn't deserve flaming and insults.

I ended a 20-year career because of the oil war that needed 9/11 and the economic draft of poor Americans and police-state surveillance of Americans everywhere all the time.

Bands I used to work for were glorifying the war with propaganda musical productions ala Toby Keith to much applause and I had to stop supporting them when Abu Graib became public and Fallujah was annihilated.

Now I struggle to make ends meet so as not to support the war or submit to body cavity searches just to commute to work. This has had some drastic consequences on my personal and family life. Interesting times.

So these issues are very personal for me and I don't take them lightly. You might think I'm "stretching" in my criticisms and you may be right. But I damn sure want to know the truth and won't be deterred by flamers who think the US military is like the Red Cross only with bombs.

If you have something to offer by way of enlightenment, I welcome any rational input and sincerely thank you in advance for doing so whenever you care to.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

144. Wow. Listen to the string section swelling under the campaign brochure

affirmation propaganda above.

This is how you manufacture a candidate from scratch by portraying him as a combination of Thomas Edison and Jesus Christ in a Hallmark card.

What an embarassing and extremely gooey bit of PR for the 'Genius Generalissimo' worthy of competing with Reagan's 'Morning in America' advertisements. Someone earned their pay writing this piece.

Allow me to give you the highlights of this handcrafted tribute:

Listen!
(((Flutes and violins enter gently yet hopefully...)))

>snip<



"Our company was very small, we had this dream

people sat around on the floor and we had pizza and a couple of beers

And Wes was at home. He immediately connected

the mathematical prowess and quick grasp of the new technology that Clark exhibited

he understood it a lot better than I did

he understood it and I didn’t

He’s a guy that does all the practical things

(((bluegrass guitar with banjo accompaniment)))

but he’s also right there on the theoretical science

Clark had a down-to-earth relationship with everyone

everybody was equally important to him. He has that genuine connection that only a few people could make

(((enter brass, french horns and trumpets ala John Williams)))

Clark had the ability to rally everyone and make morale soar. “Wes was really, in many respects, an inspirational leader

but it was another thing to sit in the next office to him

You could just see that it was tearing him up; he just thought that what we were doing was bad for the country.

Clark’s ambition was not about politics but about problem solving

they witnessed a genuine concern that was personal.

(((orchestra swells underneath)))

“You read that he’s just another politician,” said Perry. “He’s kind of everything but.”

(((strings out leaving marching snare drum...)))

[Donna Zen]

147. Direct quotes

And great! Wes Clark loves music, although his son says that you really don't want to hear Wes-rap...and he does.

As for the strings, for his birthday a violinist from the Little Rock symphony recently gave Clark a birthday gift of violin lessons because Wes has always wanted to play his father's violin.

If these direct quotes stood alone in this unauthorized bio, then this poster would have accepted the gooey label, but instead, the phrase "he lifts people up" repeats itself over and over by those who know the man instead of just posting any ol'net based garbage to support a steady spew of anti-Clark cacophony they can grub up.

And yes, Clark's giftedness leans toward math and science; his first major was in physics. He switched to foreign policy after a summer in Moscow, when as part of a Russian language class, he was working from original documents. At twenty, he found the subject fascinating.

"When you think you are open-minded; you've just closed you mind." ~Wes Clark

[dogman]

152. That's the beauty of the man.

People write honest feelings that inspire the American people. I guess that's "too cool for school", but luckily there are more people who see this in the positive and are happy to work for him. That is something I don't think some people will ever understand-LEADERSHIP.

[Jai4WKC08]

171. Here's a novel idea

They could just be telling the truth, describing the man as they know him and events as they actually occurred.

Because I have met Clark, a number of times, and know personally people who worked with him in the military, and they all corroborate what the folks at Wavecrest are saying, I think I'll give 'em the benefit of the doubt. Said doubt being nil, since I have found Clark to be every bit as smart as I imagine Thomas Edison to have been, and quite possibly as morally anchored as the Nazarene (since I don't happen to put much stock in the legends).

I don't suppose that in your assumption that the Wavecrest execs, men you presumably have never met, are all liars, you have considered that it is a small business in pursuit of ecologically friendly technology? Not generally the type to participate in "manufacturing a candidate from scratch." Oh, it's possible. But it's a long shot.

[Silverhair]

111. I am sure he commands really big bucks on the lecture circuit.

If he has not been smart enough to be able to have taken care of himself financially, then he isn't smart enough to be President.

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

115. Texan,...

Clark's fundraising hosted by a former Edwards contributer for Dallas Dems tomorrow. I hope you can hear him speak. His campaign accounting books btw, has always been kept fiscally sound by his staff, inlike others who dipped into the red.

[Silverhair]

121. Thanks for telling me. Too late though. Tickets sold out. NT

[Bridget Burke]

117. He starts annoying threads on liberal boards for $20/hour!

Actually, he probably doesn't.

He's an intelligent man with a fine education & an outstanding CV.

[ultraist]

118. Clark is not "upper middle class" , he's very wealthy

Nor does he just make money "helping people."

One of his endeavors was being a paid consultant, lobbyist and a member of the Board of Directors at Acxiom corporation, a data info co that has billions of records on individuals in the US and abroad. Clark lobbied for the company to get the contract from the Homeland Security dept for screening people.

Jobs such as this, a best selling book, and 30k per lecture from Nextel, does not reflect middle class earnings or one who is a public servant. These are private sector jobs and very well paid at that.

But, so what if Clark is no longer a public servant, didn't he serve in the military for a very long time? Just because he's made a LOT of money in the private sector, doesn't mean he is a bad person.

Why the spin that he is "middle class" "works for the people" ? Is there something there to be ashamed of?

Is Nextel a red company? What's the deal? Why hide the facts?

[FrenchieCat]

120. Clark earned his millions in the last few years....

I think, in essense, he was part of the middle class for a very long time. Edwards has been a millionaire for very many more years....yet, he's supposed to be the one that "feels the pain". OK...Whatever. I guess when you are the son of a mill worker in North Carolina, that gives one the corner market on empathy, and gives one up on the son of a widowed bank teller in Arkansas.

I don't believe anyone is hiding anything....as you can clearly see, the information is avalaible for all interested parties.

[PeaceProgProsp]

126. Edwards made his money actually, literally helping people.

And he was helping regular people who work for a living who suffered great losses.

Not that there's anything wrong with how Clark is making money now, but I think this fact makes a difference in how these two men are perceived.

[FrenchieCat]

138. Did Edwards ever take pro-bono cases?

What was Edwards' take from the large corporations in the amounts won by his claimants? You, know....what percentage of those people's awards ended up in his pocket...20%, 30%, 35%?

[AP]

141. He took less from them then they would have paid in taxes if their awards

were earned income -- and Edwards paid earned income tax rates on what he took.

So, if he got 30%, he took hom about 20% leaving his clien with 70% which is more than what the government leaves you if you worked your whole life and got that money as salary.

As for pro-bono work, what do you suggest he do? He shouldn't have worked a complicated med mal case which requires a big investment in trial prep, paying experts, etc, which would, if he won, influence the way hospitals do business thus making other people's lives better who weren't even his clients, so he could do what? A free house closing?

I just find Edwards absolutely beyond reproach in terms of what he did as a lawyer. He handled big cases which were expensive try, he got paid a fair rate for what he did, and his clients got more, and his cases made a big difference in the lives of all citizens of NC.

[Donna Zen]

122. I think the spin

was really more of a comparison. Of the people who ran for 2004, Clark was way down on the payscale.

The last published records show assets of about 4M.

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

127. News Alert: Clark on FOXNews - w/John Gibson

Fwd:
News Alert: Clark on FOXNews - w/John Gibson

-------------
HI EVERYONE--

JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT GENERAL CLARK WILL BE ON FOX NEWS BIG
STORY WITH JOHN GIBSON THIS EVENING. HE WILL BE DISCUSSING NATO'S ROLE IN TRAINING IRAQI TROOPS.

THANKS,

SUZANNE from WesPAC

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

129. 5pm EST

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

134. http://www.u-wes-a.com/mediaclips-post.html

http://www.u-wes-a.com/mediaclips-post.html

[BlueInRed]

149. I'm sure he has military retirement plus $ from speaking engagements

I imagine being that high up in the military gives him a decent retirement. Speaking is pretty lucrative as well.

It seems like you're trying to imply something by the question, although I'm not sure exactly what.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

167. .

[Eurobabe]

172. He & Gert are spending their grandchildren's inheritance

God, what an inane question!