Did Wesley Clark work for Dyncorp???

[seventhson]

Follow this:

On LBN there is a story about SAIC and Kay (the "weapons inspector" who worked for SAIC before his job in Iraq)

I googled SAIC and Wesley Clark to see if there were any contacts/networks and sure enough I found that Wesley Clark sat on an advisory board with SAIC members for a defense (Space) industry association.

But , get this, the company this Mr. Wesley Clark is listed as representing is Computers Sciences Corporation - an innocuous enough name, but - as it turns out -- THAT is the parent company of the notorious and nefarious DYNCORP which is now not only running nasty coporate military operations on the sly (more or less)arounf the world for the BFEE BUT ALSO they are now getting inot the voting machine business.


DID WESLEY CLARK WORK FOR DYNCORPS PARENT COMPANY.

I did a lot of searching and found only a few hints. It looks like this association was BURIED or hidden. But it clearly appears to be if you look HERE (Scroll down for advisory counsel members or do a woprd search fopr Clark - he is listed right there with the SAIC members and others in the war business as a representative of Computer Sciences Corporation which is Dyncorp's parent compnay/owner):

http://www.ndia.org/committees/space/index.cfm

Scroll down to find THIS (excerpt):

Board of Directors
CHAIR
Mr. Gayle C. White, Computer Sciences Corporation

VICE CHAIR
Ed Swallow, Northrop Grumman




Assistant to the Chair
M Gen George Douglas, USAF (Ret), Douglas & Associates

EASTERN REGIONAL VICE CHAIR
Dr. Supriya Ganguli, SAIC


CENTRAL REGIONAL CHAIR
Grover Hall


WESTERN REGIONAL VICE CHAIR
Christopher Harlambakis, The Boeing Company

Members at Large

Mr. James R. Beale, SAIC
Ms. Ramona Boone, Northrop Grumman
...
Mr. Wesley Clark, Computer Sciences Corp.
Mr. George Douglas, Douglas Associates/UTC
Vice Adm David Frost
Dr. Supriya B. Ganguli Ph.D, SAIC
Mr. Dennis Granato, Northrop Grumman
Mr. Grover W. Hall, Martin Marietta Astronautics


Original SAIC/KAY discussion at LBN:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=149885

[Trajan]

1. I once worked in Palmdale CA ....

In the Space Shuttle OMDP program in the old Rockwell Space side of the Airport .....

Twas a great job .....

Anyways: .... I worked with a number of engineers who contracted out of CSC ..... some rather brilliant systems and analysis people ....

Am I to presume that EVERY employee of CSC is a rabid PNAC-lovin NEOCON ? .....

Furthermore: .... I had been a Boeing employee up until 26 days ago ...... and since I note you included the name of Mr. Harlambakis from Boeing, am I too presumed to automatically agree with every aspect of any awful, worst-case philosophy held by the any member of the entire Boeing organization ? .....

I know you dislike Clark ..... you have made that very clear this last month .... but the assertion that Clark is a nefarious and all knowing partner in such organizations by sitting in a minor board seat is fallacious and unfounded ...

[seventhson]

3. No, But I assume their lobbyists and reps are PNAC

employees are one thing .

Guys like Clark are another. As a representative of the Corporation (and admittedly the defense industry hires plenty of smart and probably very decent people who need jobs) --- he would have been promoting the DYNCORP agenda which is a PNAC agenda.

[birdman]

25. You worked for Boeing !!!!!??????

Skulls!! Bones!!!!

Dead Kennedys !!!!!

Karl Rove !!!!!

PNAC!!!!!

They're everywhere ! Give up!!!
Resistance is futile.

[kiahzero]

2. I love these threads

*gasp* Wesley Clark, a former general, worked for a Defense Contractor!?!

It's absurd, I tell you, absurd!

[stickdog]

4. "It's not a revolving door because ...

they long ago knocked down the adjoining wall."

[Code_Name_D]

28. Can you say - conflict of intrest? Good, I knew you could. n/t

And now he will be pres. Following in the foot steps of Cheeny.

Buy the way, I count Clark being on three corpreate boards so far. I bet you he is on sevral more.

[Cleve Steamer]

5. CSC is a huge IT/consulting corporation

From csc.com:

CSC has helped its clients around the world manage and profit from every major wave of change in information technology (IT) for more than 40 years. While many people talk about successful partnerships, CSC believes it is best achieved through developing a thorough understanding of the real world needs and problems a business is facing. With this unique understanding, CSC goes beyond simple fixes to truly innovative, effective solutions.

With approximately 92,000 employees, CSC offers companies the best total solutions they need to grow and prosper. These include consulting, systems integration and outsourcing. Headquartered in El Segundo, Calif., CSC reported revenue of $12.1 billion for the 12 months ended July 4, 2003.

Oooh, SCARY! :eyes:

[democracyindanger]

6. THE SKY IS FALLING! THE SKY IS FALLING!

Googling 'Wesley Clark computers' brings up

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/LINC

There's a Wesley Clark from MIT that invented one of the first minicomputers. Hmm. Maybe, just maybe, a company named Computer Sciences Corporation would hire a COMPUTER SCIENTIST?

Or maybe you're right, and not only is Wesley Clark the retired general working for the evil Dyncorp, but he also was a pioneer in computer sciences! You broke the case! Now you can blame him for Windows, too!

[Cleve Steamer]

7. Perhaps Wesley Clark is leading a DOUBLE LIFE!!

What else are you hiding from us, Mr. Clark!?!?

:tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat::tinfoilhat::tinfoilhat::tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat:

(Good find, BTW :))

[stickdog]

11. Yes. Mild mannered Wesley Clark-Kent is really

SuPNACman!

[seventhson]

8. So - Very good People!!! WHICH Wesley Clark is it at CSC/Dyncorp?

If I am wrong I will be happy to be proven so.

But just because there are two Wesley Clarks in the world does NOT make the one sitting on this board with the SAIC members the MIT dude.

IT COULD BE.

But let us find out.

I qualified this as a question at the outset so DON'T flame me.

It is a damn good legitimate question for good political researchers (better than me, I suppose - or with more time) to get to the bottom of.

[WillyBrandt]

34. So you have enough time

To post smear after smear over and over, but not do a little legwork to see if the facts are right once you're called on it?

[Julien Sorel]

9. ROFL

Clark is about to get Gored!!!

http://burks.brighton.ac.uk/burks/foldoc/89/126.htm

One of the designers of the Laboratory Instrument Computer at MIT who subsequently had a quiet hand in many seminal computing events, such as the development of the Internet, the first really good description of the metastability problem in computer logic.

Oh-My-God! I thought it was Al Gore who claimed to invent the internet? Two presidential candidates in a row can't have done it. This is going to be an embarrassment to the party, that is, if jackass conspiracy theorists leave any room for embarrassment.

[JI7]

10. too funny

heheh

[NNN0LHI]

12. Isn't this about the hunderedth time we have been down this road?

Same shit, different day.

Don

[seventhson]

14. No - The fact that a Wesley Clark is tied up with Dyncorp is scary

If it is NOT the same as the candidate then MAYBE it is not a new issue.

But to say we've been down this road before is horse dookey.


The MIT Clark is a principal at Clark, Rockoff and Associates of NY.

There is nothing I can find so far to say he is the same Wesley Clark who is sitting on as board with Kay's corporate comrades.

I STILL believe it is most likely the Candidate Clark as this other guy is primarily a researcher not a corporate scab lobbyist.

This MAT get buried but folks need to know about it either wat as these corporate entities are getting into the voting machine business and the elections may again be rigged by the military.

This issue concerns me. If Candidate Clark is in bed with the guys rigging the votes then ALL of us need to be worried (unless we like such people running our country. I DON'T)

[NNN0LHI]

17. Here are 3 more examples in the past weeks of you with your Dyncorp stuff

There are other examples too. So yes we have been down this road before, even though in your first post on LBN you stated that you had just found this info on Google, as though it was all a great new shock to you. So exactly what are you trying to prove here?

Don

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=398410#401926

seventhson (1000+ posts) Thu Sep-25-03 05:29 AM
Response to Original message

117. Unless we Know More about Clark and Stephens Group, MPRI, Dyncorp, etc

Edited on Thu Sep-25-03 05:31 AM by seventhson
All of whom he did business with in Columbia, Latin America (that part truly frightens me as Columbia is a shitty bloody mess) and/or Kosovo during or after his military service - we can never REALLY know WHY Clark is running.

I think the big military corporations and generals in MPRI have backed him as the Bush "alternative" for a few years now. He is kinda like a beauty queen candidate who hires a consultant to fix him up for the judges and he has made all the right whore moves from Stephens to CNN, playing to the crowds at DU, and NOW the primary runoffs.

Will he win the crown?

Or will we the people see him for what he truly is?

WE'd better keep doing our homework on this guy, team.

His military industrial ties and the fact that he JUST claims to be a Democrat this month for the first time is just plain too damn spooky for ME to take him at his word.

I think he is a creep. As in CREEP.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=390902

seventhson (1000+ posts) Tue Sep-23-03 03:23 PM
Response to Original message

24. I am not sure I could vote for him now. This is what scares me.

Edited on Tue Sep-23-03 03:29 PM by seventhson
As head of the Southern Command, Clark had rersponsibility for civilian and military contractors like Dyncorp and MPRI. These are essentially mercenary corporate forces.

In 1996-7 he and Richard Holbrooke (chief negotator) cut the contracts with MPRI for these civilian mercenary operations.

I assume that posting a link and an excerpt from a left wing source is still okay at DU as long as my rhetoric is not inflammatory.

(For more info google MPRI and Plan Columbia et al)


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=392291

seventhson (1000+ posts) Tue Sep-23-03 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #1

7. I don't trust Clark. I am glad that Moore is NOT endorsing him


I think that he would likely be told to say whatever he needs to to get elected now that they know Bush is unlikely to win.

If he has such trusted friends in the administration and the pentagon and he is deeply in bed with military contractors like the MPRC in Columbia and Dyncorp etc -- whom he dealt with in Columbia as Commander of the Southern Command in 1996-7 -- then can any of us really trust him???

I can't.

But I am trying to keep a semi-open mind. It is very hard to though when my intuition and research is screaming NO NO NO NO NO.


And here is your post expressing surprise at your great new find just a couple of hours ago on LBN:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=149885#149945

UH OH!!! Clark sat on board with SAIC dude and worked for DYNCORP...


it seems.


Here's the link.

Go down for the regional advisors to find the SAIC guys and Wesley Clark working together.

A Mr. Wesley Clark in 2001-2 represented Computer Sciences Corporation which OWNS DYNCORP and theyt are ALL getting into the voter machine business.

I discovered this while googling Clark and SAIC to see if there were connections. There ARE!!!


http://www.ndia.org/committees/space/index.cfm

[Rowdyboy]

18. ROTFLMAO!

I've been waiting for this for days! Thanks for saving me the energy of having to do the legwork myself. I mean, over and over and over discovering the same article for the first time? Reminds me of Groundhog Day!

Thank NNNOHLI. You made my evening. Think I'll go to bed now....Peace

[wyldwolf]

24. So, seventhson not only reposts the same dubious info over and over..

...but he lies about doing it.

[salin]

46. At what point

does this type of posting/thread starting technique become an issue?

The playing dumb... Look what I just found... help me dig...

Then a plausable explanation comes up (a different Clark - with a background that fits)... ignore... reframed to be PROVE IT.. or I will keep restating this claim...

I am not supporting Clark -but may someday in the future. I simply don't know enough - and want to watch his campaign develop. I will carry some skepticism (as I would with anyone with no political office record - which is easier to scrutinize). But this method of "discussion" is so blatantly biased and dishonest, and seems to intentionally try to create a story to be repeated again and again with the hopes that it becomes an accepted fact.

I normally wouldn't comment as such. But the series of threads and faux "surprise" at what was just "stumbled upon" makes the technique worthy of comment.

[Donna Zen]

47. Thanks for making sense

That said, they won't stop doing this; it is very effective and effortless. Many people never see the debunking, they just skim through the threads titles. What sticks in the unknowing poster's head is the "big lie." Of course the bonus comes if that same poster leaves the keyboard and repeats the "big lie" when Clark's name comes up in the real world.

The point of this is to raise Clark's negatives. These countless unsubstantiated charges having nothing to do with information or even concern for our democracy. I mean why does Rush continue to push the meme "Hillary killed Vince Foster?" Because as every propagandist knows, it works. Big Brother loves you and a word from the ministry of truth is time tested.

Thanks for taking the time to read what's going on here, and thanks for making sense.

[SidDithers]

29. If it's not the same Clark, how can it MAYBE not be an issue?

I would think that if it's a different person, it would DEFINATELY not be an issue.

Also, I suspect that if the CSC Wesley Clark were the candidate Wesley Clark, he would be listed as Gen. Wesley Clark as opposed to Mr. Wesley Clark. General is a title he earned.

Sid

[Dookus]

13. Well... if you'll notice in your own post...

that there's a Vice Admiral listed. Here's the complete list:

Mr. James R. Beale, SAIC
Ms. Ramona Boone, Northrop Grumman
Brig Gen J. Steve Boone, Northrop Grumman TASC
Mr. Wesley Clark, Computer Sciences Corp.
Mr. George Douglas, Douglas Associates/UTC
Vice Adm David Frost
Dr. Supriya B. Ganguli Ph.D, SAIC
Mr. Dennis Granato, Northrop Grumman
Mr. Grover W. Hall, Martin Marietta Astronautics
Mr. Donald G. Hard
Mr. Christopher N. Harlambakis, The Boeing Company
Mr. Phillip K. Heacock, Harris Corporation
Mr. Larry Hungerford, Lockheed Martin
Mr. Owen E. Jensen, Lockheed Martin Corporation
Mr. Wayne Kauffman, Spectrum Astro
Lt Gen Jay Kelley, Lockheed Martin
Ms. Carolyn Kwieraga, Northrop Grumman TASC
Mr. David A. Messner, General Dynamics
Mr. Thomas Parkingson, Boeing
Mr. Elliott Pulham
Mr. John Reynolds, TRW
Mr. Richard A. Riegel, DIRECTOR NDIA
Mr. John H. Rixse Emergent East
Mr. Robert A. Rosenberg, SAIC
Mr. Thomas Scanlan Jr., Lockheed Martin Astronautics
Mr. Edward Swallow, Emergent East
BGen Earl S. Van Inwegen, TRW
Mr. Gayle C. White, CHAIR, Computer Sciences Corporation



I count four people whose military titles are used. The Wesley Clark referred to is listed as "Mr. Wesley Clark", not "General Wesley Clark".

Why would they use military titles for all the others, but not Clark? Perhaps because it's NOT THE SAME WESLEY CLARK!!!!?

[dobak]

15. nice job

Some people are so thrilled to discover damning evidence that they don't take the time to dig deeper, only to have the "damning evidence" damn them.

[Rowdyboy]

16. Its reached the point of becoming ridiculous

For God's sake, if you don't like Clark, vote for someone else. Who cares? But, before you put out information as fact, CHECK YOUR SOURCES. This decision is too important to make based on faulty information.

[Tinoire]

30. Wrong thread n/t

[seventhson]

19. There is still nothing to prove this is NOT Candidate Clark, so back off..

I posed this as a question in the beginning.

Notice in Clark's lobbyist filings that he STOPS using General Clark after his first filing as his "title"

Odd that when you search the CSC site there is NO mention of Wesley Clark ANYWHERE that I could find. It looks like the info was PURGED.

It is UNLIKELY that a computer geek researcher would be in the same league with Generals and corporate heads.

There are several indicators that this is the SAME as CNDIDATE CLARK.

Unfortunately those who do NOT want to look into this further or who want to discourage others from doing so will CLAIM that this issue has been resolved

It has NOT. NOT YET.

I believe that if Gneral Clark WAS involved in this at all he probably needed to erase all traces of it before running for President. The net looks pretty wiped claen on this.

BUT NO mention of the MIT Wesley Clark appears in ANY CSC pages I have viewed so far.

It is an enigma wrapped in a conundrum.


I hope some folks with better skills than mine can either prtove me wrong or prove me right because this SHOULD be cleared up.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

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

[NNN0LHI]

23. You are starting to sound like Bush seventhson

Bush logic said Iraq must prove it didn't have any WMD's, and if they didn't they prove that it meant he had them. Your logic is that we must prove this is not the guy you think he is, and if we don't prove who he is then it must be him then. Get some rest seventhson.

Don

[salin]

40. The question is

what would it take for you to believe that it is "cleared up"?

The alternative explanation (the MIT Clark) is much more plausable then the scenario that started this thread.

I have a suspicion that regardless of the strong refutations that might come up, that this little charge will be brought up again and again and through sheer repitition be asserted as fact.

I am very uncomfortable by this game.

[Dookus]

44. it has been

cleared up to my satisfaction. I doubt any amount of information will clear it up to YOUR satisfaction, though.

[Renew Deal]

45. The Karl Rove school of politics.

You are obviously a graduate. "Prove that he did. Prove that he didn't."

Seventhson, I am not sure if you are really a democrat. You behave so much like a republican. You should find out if they would accept you.

[birdman]

21. Clark and Paul Begala had adjoining parking spaces at CNN !!!!!!

and as we all know Begala is an agent of Karl Rove
on special assignment to say nasty things about Bush on TV
and so if he was parking so close to Clark then we know
the General must have had a hand in whacking Wellstone
with a souped-up popsicle stick and he must have helped
the BFEE kill all the Kennedys and Martin Luther King and
Jimi Hendrix and Bob Marley.

And you just know he has the strawberries.

[IndianaGreen]

26. And we also know about Clark and the wanted war criminal Mladic

Regardless of the source, some stories are too solid to be ignored, such as Clark's own words in the video of his speech at the GOP Little Rock fundraiser, and the picture below in which Clark exchanged hats with wanted Serbian war criminal Mladic.

Let's not become like the Freepers who only believe what they see on Faux News.



On August 27, 1994, representing the Joint Chiefs of Staff during a fact-finding mission to Bosnia, Clark "ignored State Department warnings not to meet with Serb officials suspected of ordering deaths of civilians in a campaign known as ethnic cleansing" and paid a courtesy call on Serbian army commander Ratko Mladic. Mladic was already the subject of multiple U.S. war-crimes charges: "artillery attacks on civilians in Sarajevo" and the "razing of Muslim towns and villages," along with random acts of "mass murder." According to a contemporaneous Washington Post report: "On Friday and again on Saturday, State Department officials said, they instructed not to go, but he went anyway." The meeting "occurred as the Clinton administration is trying to isolate the Serbs in advance of possible military action against them."

But wait, there's more--there's a "visual," as they say in the 30-second attack-ad business.

"What State Department officials said they found especially disturbing was a photograph of Clark and Mladic wearing each other's caps. The picture appeared in several European newspapers, U.S. officials said. Clark accepted as gifts Mladic's hat, a bottle of brandy, and a pistol inscribed in Cyrillic, U.S. officials said. 'It's like cavorting with Hermann Goering,' one U.S. official complained."

Herewith, then, Wesley Clark, Democratic candidate for president of the United States, cavorting with "Hermann Goering"--the suspected war criminal Ratko Mladic, who to this day is a fugitive wanted by the U.N. war crimes tribunal and presumed to be hiding somewhere in Serbia.

http://www.theweeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/134skcnf.asp

[birdman]

27. I'm not even a Clark supporter

I'm for Dean.

There are legitimate questions about Clark. But this
guilt by the flimsiest of associations is ridiculous.
Pols and retired military big-shots very often sit
on corporate boards. It's easy money and it says next
to nothing about the individual involved. In the mindset
of some on this board everybody who ever had lunch
with a Republican is part of some right-wing conspiracy.


:tinfoilhat::tinfoilhat::tinfoilhat:

[WillyBrandt]

32. You're reposting weekly standard articles

You have utterly no credibility.

[SWPAdem]

37. Ah, yes the Weekly Standard

Definitely a source that I would trust. You know what, people? When you started throwing out bullshit allegations and guilt by association innuendo, you lost the respect of everyone that likes Clark. Do you really think that we would believe ANYTHING coming from the semi-pro astroturf team of Clark bashers? I'd be really fricking doubtful if you said the sky was blue.........

[kiahzero]

42. Funny this picture keeps showing up

Since it was taken before the war crimes.

[Cocoa]

22. I don't buy into the whole "evil company" thing

My concern about Clark and Acxiom isn't that Acxiom is evil and that anyone who works for Acxiom is evil, it's that his choosing to use his influence to help them can be seen to show something about his values, and it possibly calls into question his position on civil liberties.

What you've shown there is more information on other ways he has chosen to use his influence, as the member of a trade association for defense contractors.

[ozone_man]

36. Yes, this is my main problem with Clark (values).

Contracting for $300,000 plus stock ownership in a Homeland Security comapny (Acxiom) is against my value system. There is much more than this, tip of the ice berg IMO, including his NED role (National Endowment for Democracy). How much more, it could take a while to uncover.

I don't see this as unusual for a Republican military man, but for someone trying to sell himself as a Democrat running for President, I have a major problem with that.

[OKNancy]

39. But Cocoa

part of his job at Axiom was to monitor civil liberties, and how the contract they were bidding for would impact on civil liberties.

[Cocoa]

41. I'd like more info on that

That's what I've been looking for. That would be consistent with his professed views on civil liberties.

Do you have a link that shows that that was his role?

[OKNancy]

43. This is all I could find this quickly

http://msnbc.com/news/972597.asp?0cv=CB10

Government and industry officials who have attended meetings with Clark described him as thoughtful and persuasive. Jones, the Acxiom official, said Clark repeatedly stressed the need to “properly balance legitimate privacy interests and the need for security.” Jones said that was a core theme of Acxiom’s effort to win government contracts.

-----------------
I suppose some people are totally opposed to any pre-screening of passengers, but a lot of people got really scared right after 9-11. I know my sister was. She went on that Newark to California flight all the time. I have no problem with some data collection as long as it isn't too intrusive. I do NOT like the credit check business and as far as I know Acxiom was not involved in that.

[retyred]

31. Since the article lists

Assistant to the Chair
M Gen George Douglas, USAF (Ret), Douglas & Associates

then lists:

Mr. Wesley Clark, Computer Sciences Corp. w/o the Gen. (Ret) designation, could it possibly be another Wesley Clark?

Not that it matters but I am curious as to whether it is the General, if so it appears to be guilt by association, if not it appears to be looking under the bed for dust bunnies, (IMHO).

Nice find though!


CLARK FOR PRESIDENT
"I'm going to give them the TRUTH and they'll THINK it's hell."
So I Built This Web Site

[WillyBrandt]

33. A different Wesley Clark? A similar smear job?

Noted above, but again:

http://www.veranda.com.ph/hermant/History.htm

"In 1962, Wesley Clark and Charles Molnar of the MIT Lincoln Laboratory developed a a small multipurpose laboratory instrumentation computer (LINC)."

MIT Lincoln Labs does a ton of Computer Science work for the Defense Department.

Wouldn't this Wesley Clark mentioned above be an especially good candidate for a do-nothing board on a defense contractor? Especially when he is listed for "Computer Sciences Corp."

Moreover, look at the listing you have at top:

"Mr. Wesley Clark, Computer Sciences Corp.
..
Vice Adm David Frost"

Why would they call Wesley Clark "Mr." but a Vice-Admiral "Vice Adm."

Until you prove that this is Gen Wesley K. Clark, I have one question for you: Will you Retract this claim, or will you Repeat this claim?

(I think I know the answer.)

[retyred]

35. Too much time on your hands?

How To Make An Aluminum Hat
Practical Mind Control Protection for Paranoids
http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html

Welcome to the AFDB Website

This site is dedicated to spreading the word about the Aluminum* Foil Deflector Beanie and how it can help the average human. Here you will find a description of AFDBs, how to make and use them, and general information about related subjects. I hope that you find the AFDB Homepage to be an important source of AFDB know-how and advocacy.

What Is An AFDB?

An Aluminum Foil Deflector Beanie (AFDB) is a type of headwear that can shield your brain from most electromagnetic psychotronic mind control carriers. AFDBs are inexpensive (even free if you don't mind scrounging for thrown-out aluminium foil) and can be constructed by anyone with at least the dexterity of a chimp (maybe bonobo). This cheap and unobtrusive form of mind control protection offers real security to the masses. Not only do they protect against incoming signals, but they also block most forms of brain scanning and mind reading, keeping the secrets in your head truly secret. AFDBs are safe and operate automatically. All you do is make it and wear it and you're good to go! Plus, AFDBs are stylish and comfortable.

What are you waiting for? Make one today!

**************************

PS: BEWARE OF COMMERCIAL AFDBS: Since you should trust no one, always construct your AFDB yourself to avoid the risk of subversion and mental enslavement. Sometimes, AFDBs will be sold on places like eBay. Do not purchase these pre-made AFDBs, even if the seller seems trustworthy. They may contain backdoors, pinholes, integrated psychotronic circuitry or other methods that actually promote mind control. And please remember: Just because you're paranoid doesn' mean they arent out to get you!




CLARK FOR PRESIDENT
"I'm going to give them the TRUTH and they'll THINK it's hell."
So I Built This Web Site

[Jackhammer Jesus]

38. Hilarious!

Thanks for the laugh, seventhson.