Clark still sits on boards

[realFedUp]

Thanks to Tinoire for this research:

He resigned as managing director of merchant banking for the Stephens Group Inc. in March 2003 after a 3 year stint there before going on to CNN when he was already examining running for President.

Gen. Wesley Clark Resigns From Stephens
ArkansasBusiness.com | February 28, 2003
http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=377

He resigned from Acxiom AFTER the scandal broke about Acxiom selling the information about Jet Blue's passengers to HomeLand Security.

He still serves on the boards of directors of

Sirva Inc. of Westmont, Ill. (the day he launched his campaign, he missed their board meeting)
privately held Time Domain Inc. of Huntsville, Ala.
Messer-Griesheim
Entrust Inc., an Addison, Texas, (Internet-security company),
Time Domain Corp. (a Huntsville, Ala., advanced wireless-technology company)
WaveCrest Laboratories (closely linked with US Military & Industrial Complex) (think he's the Chairman there)

International Crisis Group (ICG) Board of Trustees Brussels, Belgium

Also is Senior Advisor for the Center for Strategic International Studies (pro bono)
http://csis.org/scholars/alpha.htm#c http://www.csis.org/

Those are the ones that are talked about. Untalked about are these:

National Endowment for Democracy (currently implicated in the Venezuelan Coup Scandal for having financed the oppostition to Hugo Chavez) which Ronald Reagan started in the early 1980s to promote American values abroad. Also on the board Frank Carlucci, Carlyle fame, Morton Abramowitz, Vin Weber, Evan Bayh http://www.ned.org/about/who.html

Markle Foundation Task Force on National Security in the Information Age http://www.markletaskforce.org/bios.html (Scary group with intimate ties to the Saban Center (Daniel Pipes)

trustee of the International Crisis Group http://www.intl-crisis-group.org/home/index.cfm

Anyway this article from the Wall Street Journal covers a few of those boards:

Pentagon Ties Boost Clark's Business
Retired General Helps Firms Navigate Homeland Security and Defense-Procurement Maze By Jacob M. Schlesinger and Sara Schaefer in Washington and Greg Hitt in Little Rock,Ark.

Wall Street Journal, 9/18/03

IN ANNOUNCING his presidential campaign, Wesley K. Clark promoted himself as the candidate best qualified to prosecute the war on terror. As a businessman, he has applied his military expertise to help a handful of high-tech companies try to profit from the fight. Since retiring from a 34-year Army career in 2000, Gen. Clark has become : chairman of a suburban Washington technology-corridor start-up, managing director at an investment firm, a director at four other firms around the country and an advisory-board member for two others. For most, he was hired to help boost the companies' military business.

http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=377

[TLM]

1. And the silence is thunderous...

[private_ryan]

12. well many of us are not

Marxists, we believe that he has the right to make a living as long as he does so by legal means.

[SahaleArm]

32. We were out on break:) n/t

[Mattforclark]

59. Do you think before you post?

Just curious.

[Mattforclark]

62. My message was deleted

because I was angry that someone would trash a democrat without bothering to take basic steps to make sure their claims are true. I was angry and said something that was apparently deemed insulting, and I apologize for that. However, I think it is important that people know that the 'research' is false, so I am reposting the information part.


Allegedly Wesley Clark from CSIS: click on the CSIS link




"William Clark, Jr.

Senior Adviser

Phone: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

Expertise: Political, economic, and security affairs in Asia



William Clark, assistant secretary of state for East Asia and Pacific affairs (1992-1993), joined CSIS in August 1993 and was Japan Chair until 1995. Clark, now president of the Japan Society, continues his affiliation with CSIS as senior adviser on Asia with a focus on India. He has held many senior diplomatic positions, including ambassador to India (1989-1992), principal deputy assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs (1986-1989), deputy chief of mission and chargé d'affaires in Cairo (1985-1986), and deputy chief of mission in Tokyo (1981-1985). His government service has been recognized by the President's Distinguished Service Award (1985), the Department of State Distinguished Honor Award (1989), and the Department of State Charles E. Cobb Award as the leading promoter of U.S. business interests abroad (1992). Clark is a graduate of San Jose State University and the National War College. He holds a honorary Doctor of Letters from San Jose, 1992. He speaks Japanese"

[Tinoire]

71. You got angry a little too soon. See message 65

What is it with this? You don't think I just made that name up out of the blue do you? Before I "trash a democrat", I will always bother "to take basic steps to make sure (my) claims are true".

In the future, check it out a little and ask yourself why someone would say that if it weren't so. Oftentimes you'll find out that if they said it, it is so :) So I dunno Mattforclark, maybe you should at least try the search button on that site if you don't trust google.

So no, we are not talking about William Clark, we are talking about Wesley Clark who for some odd reason is no longer on that page even though he is on that board still.

The more time goes by, the more I realize that many Clark supporters don't really know much about the General. Bizarre. CSIS was a pretty big thing- they did a lot of important work with Markle and the Brookings Institute. Maybe you just didn't hear about this because this was during the Stephens Institute period that we don't talk about much these days :shrug: One of the really fun papers Markle did was about putting Homeland Security in charge of but whoops, let me not ruin this for you, here's part of their press release:

Markle Foundation Task Force Says FBI Should Not Be Lead Agency For Domestic Information to Prevent Terrorism


Press Release
October 7, 2002

Report Calls for National Network of Information Sharing According to Guidelines

Washington, DC, October 7, 2002 – A new report released today by the Markle Foundation Task Force on National Security in the Information Age recommends that a new Department of Homeland Security (DHS) rather than the FBI should take the lead in shaping domestic information and intelligence priorities to inform policymakers.

The report calls for a networked information technology system that effectively shares information among local, state, regional and federal agencies and the private sector, and sets forth a blueprint for how such a system can be established under a set of Presidential guidelines.

<snip>
http://www.markle.org/news/_news_pressrelease_100702.stm


=====
March 6, 2002
New Task Force Aims to Protect Nation with Better Information and Technology

The Markle Foundation in alliance with CSIS and The Brookings Institution launches information and technology working group to improve national security

New York, NY and Washington, DC, March 6, 2002 – An independent, multi-sector task force to determine how information and technology can enhance national security was announced today by the Markle Foundation in alliance with the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and the Brookings Institution.

http://www.markle.org/news/_news_pressrelease_030602.stm

Of course, this isn't anything they like to make to much noise about because even in the words of one Clark supporter:

Wes is a member of the CSIS, but I can't imagine he approves of this kind of thing.

http://theclarksphere.com/archives/000148.html


Happy hunting :)

[Name removed]

85. Deleted message

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

[Tinoire]

100. Aw... Don't forget to see message 65 ok?

:) Maybe you can have CSIS and even the Clark blogs update their pages :shrug:

I understand this hurts. It must have really hurt when Kucinich let the entire world know that Clark had worked on the plans for the Occupation of Iraq with the CSIS during one of the debates.

Yes I am a sad, sad person. I am extremely sad to see how far to the right certain people are trying to take the Democratic Party and with what brazenness they expect us to just forget certain things, forgive the baggage, close our eyes and vote.

[Name removed]

102. Deleted message

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

[Tinoire]

105. Yeah... Now if you spent a little less time typing that word

and a little more time putting it into action, such as doing your own research to intelligently debate... that would be what Martha Stewart calls "a good thing" :)

Think. You can do it! Just try a little every night and before you know it, it will come to you naturally :) There's hope yet.

[Mattforclark]

107. It's hard to have a rational debate

with a person who apparently can not count.

[drfemoe]

106. What else is he hiding?

Great mission .. to tell the truth about this character.

Also, Joe Conason and I would like to know why the media blackout at Clark's testimony? This is highly irregular.

Joe suggests Bush is protecting Clark from something.

...
"In what respect could our national security be jeopardized by Clark's testimony? Actually, U.S. security and prestige would more likely be enhanced by worldwide coverage of a former American general testifying about his country's defense of the oppressed Balkan Muslims.
...
A spokesman for the State Department refused to answer any of Hundley's specific questions about the strange decision to black out Clark. In the absence of any convincing explanation, this appears to be a matter not only of harmful judicial meddling and unwarranted censorship, but a gross abuse of diplomatic authority for domestic political advantage as well. " ...

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2003/12/04/clark/index.html

[Julien Sorel]

113. I think you need to read that article again.

It doesn't say Bush is 'protecting Clark' from anything; rather, it says Bush is protecting himself from Clark getting positive exposure.



Also, Joe Conason and I would like to know why the media blackout at Clark's testimony? This is highly irregular.

Joe suggests Bush is protecting Clark from something.

I challenge you to find a quotation anywhere in this piece that indicates Conason thinks Bush is 'protecting' Clark from anything, or else retract your ludicrous and self-humiliating post.

[TorchTheWitch]

122. huh?

Joe suggests Bush is protecting Clark from something.

Why in the world would Bush want to protect Clark who is running (and quite well I might add) to unseat him and throw his skanky ass out of the White House?

The media black out is obvious... BushCo doesn't want the world to see a Democratic candidate who is running to throw him out of the White House doing something not only highly commendable but something Bush could never have done if his drunken AWOL ass depended on it.

Aside from that, the article doesn't suggest in the least that Bush is trying to protect Clark. I just can't imagine where you might have come up with that idea.

[retyred]

72. Sorry...I was busy examining that resume

I'm even more impressed, not only with this list, but the ability for some here to re-submit old news.


george bush…pResident?

retyred in fla
“good night paul, wherever you are”
So I read this book

[drfemoe]

110. It will be old news

just as soon as Clark drops out of the race.

[retyred]

117. LOL

Psssst! Don't hold your breath!

[madfloridian]

2. Tinoire's research should be respected by all here.

She and I don't agree on a candidate, but her research skills are impeccable.

[SahaleArm]

33. Questionable - Like linking to shadow world conspiricy sites as fact n/t

[Tinoire]

73. Here's another site I'd forgetten. You can link this one too

:)

The Atlantic Council of the United States

Surprise, surprise... both William and Wesley K. again! What a small world! And Frank Carlucci, ex CSIS but present Carlye there too!

Wow. What a list... I wonder why there are so many neo-cons working with the Atlantic Council.

HONORARY DIRECTORS

James A. Baker III
Frank C. Carlucci III
Warren Christopher
Harlan Cleveland
Russell E. Dougherty
Gerald R. Ford
Alexander M. Haig, Jr.
Christian A. Herter, Jr.
Robert S. McNamara
Paul H. Nitze
Bernard W. Rogers
Edward L. Rowny
George M. Seignious II
Raymond P. Shafer
George P. Shultz
William H. Webster
John C. Whitehead

[SahaleArm]

75. Yeah, Warren Christopher is some Neo-Con? n/t

[SahaleArm]

76. And make sure never to attend any of these neo-con universities...

Atlantic Council Academic Associates:

http://www.acus.org/AcademicAssociates/

I'm glad to know UC-Berkeley is really a front for neo-consevitives:)

[Mattforclark]

52. LOL!

Why don't you click on the link to CSIS and find out just how impecabble her research skills are. LMAO.

[Tinoire]

65. Hope you enjoyed your laugh. He who laughs last, laughs best

Since you were incapable of searching the site yourself, I thought I'd help you out:) Not too difficult though since his name is still all over the damn place. Why if you search diligently enough, you'll even find mention of it on the Clark sites because this is something that impresses certain "swing" voters.

Who leads CSIS?

CSIS receives guidance and direction from several groups that oversee its operations

Board of Trustees

The Board of trustees is composed of distinguished U.S. business, public policy, and academic leaders.

Chairman

Sam Nunn, partner, King and Spalding; Former U.S. Senator*

Vice Chairman

David M. Abshire
Cofounder, CSIS; President, The Center for the Study of the Presidency

Chairman, Executive Committee

Anne Armstrong*
Former U.S. Ambassador to Great Britain

Members

Lester M. Alberthal, Jr.
George L. Argyros
Betty Beene
Reginald K. Brack, Jr.
William E. Brock
Harold Brown
Zbigniew Brzezinski
J. Michael Cook*
Douglas N. Daft
Robert A. Day
Richard Fairbanks (ex officio)
Henrietta Holsman Fore
Michael P. Galvin*
Joseph T. Gorman
John J. Hamre*
Carla A. Hills
Ray L. Hunt
James A. Kelly (ex officio)
Henry A. Kissinger
Donald B. Marron
Felix G. Rohatyn
Charles A. Sanders
James R. Schlesinger
William A. Schreyer*
Brent Scowcroft
Murray Weidenbaum
Dolores D. Wharton
Frederick Whittemore
R. James Woolsey
Amos A. Jordan, Emeritus
Leonard H. Marks, Emeritus
Robert S. Strauss, Emeritus

*member of the Executive Committee

Advisory Board

The Advisory Board is composed of both public and private sector policymakers, including 11 members of Congress. The Board is cochaired by Zbigniew Brzezinski and Carla Hills.

Corporate Officers

John J. Hamre, President and CEO
Robin Niblett, Senior Vice President for Strategic Planning
Erik R. Peterson, Senior Vice President and Director of Studies Program Greg Broaddus, Vice President for Operations, Treasurer
Jay Farrar, Vice President External Affairs
Judy L. Harbaugh, Vice President for Development



Counselors

CSIS Counselors are world-class strategists who have formerly held top-level government posts. They bring to the Center an extensive reserve of expertise and experience.

William E. Brock
Harold Brown
Zbigniew Brzezinski
William S. Cohen
Richard Fairbanks
Henry A. Kissinger
Sam Nunn
James R. Schlesinger
Brent Scowcroft



Senior Advisers

Senior advisers and associates are an integral part of the CSIS family. They provide substantive counsel and input on the full range of Center projects.

Distinguished Senior Scholars

Fred C. Iklé (in residence)
John Kornblum
Bernard Lewis

Distinguished Senior Advisers

Wesley Clark

Anthony Zinni

Senior Advisers

J. Carter Beese
Arnaud de Borchgrave
Charles Bowman
M. Stanton H. Burnett
Richard R. Burt
William Clark, Jr.
Diana Lady Dougan
Luis E. Giusti
Ernest Graves
Amos A. Jordan
Max M. Kampelman
Robert H. Kupperman
David McCurdy
Thomas F. (Mack) McLarty (special counselor)
The Duke of Westminster
======================

July 10, 2002

GLOBAL WAR AGAINST TERRORISM
CSIS-Baker Institute Report Highlights Geopolitical Opportunities, Dangers

The Geopolitical Implications of the War Against Terrorism

WASHINGTON, DC, July 10, 2002 - The U.S. war against terrorism should include an integrated set of long-range geopolitical objectives that advance global peace and stability, according to a new task force report by CSIS and Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy.

The report, The Geopolitical Implications of the War Against Terrorism (available at www.csis.org), explores how Sept. 11 changed the geopolitical calculus in regions across the world. Developed by a 13-member task force of former government officials and policy experts, the report offers the following recommendations:

<snip>

Russia. More leadership and resources should be directed by the United States to broadening the Nunn-Lugar initiative to secure nuclear materials and expertise in Russia. Regarding Chechnya, Washington should become more actively engaged with Moscow to achieve peace in the Caucuses.

Iraq. We recommend that the United States follow a 'ramp up' strategy, employing escalating phases of suasion and coercion, to effect a change in regime in Iraq. That implies beginning with multinational efforts to bring about political change. Beyond that, it implies moving, under appropriate circumstances, from indirect support of alternative political players to covert operations to military operations that undercut the Iraqi Baathist regime.

<snip>

The task force was established in January 2002 by CSIS and the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy of Rice University. Under the honorary chairmanship of James A. Baker III, the panel consisted of former National Security Adviser Samuel Berger, former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, former NATO Supreme Commander Wesley Clark], former CIA Director Robert Gates, former Chairman of the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Europe and the Middle East Lee Hamilton, former Deputy Secretary of Defense and CSIS President and CEO John Hamre, former Undersecretary of Defense Fred Iklé, former Senator and Chairman of the CSIS Board of Trustees Sam Nunn, former U.S. ambassador and CSIS South Asia Program Director Teresita Schaffer, and former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft. The Task Force was organized by CSIS Counselor Richard Fairbanks and Rice University's Baker Institute Director Edward Djerejian.


CSIS is an independent, nonpartisan public policy organization. /i]


=====================
GEN. WESLEY CLARK JOINS CSIS
Former Supreme Allied Commander Named Distinguished Adviser

WASHINGTON, July 10, 2000 — Retired U.S. Army Gen. Wesley K. Clark, who commanded the first major combat operation in NATO history, was named today a distinguished senior adviser at CSIS.

Clark, Supreme Allied Commander Europe from July 10, 1997, until May 3, 2000, will work with the Center across the full range of its programs, concentrating particularly on international security. Clark was in overall command of NATO’s military forces in Europe and led approximately 75,000 troops from 37 NATO and other nations participating in ongoing operations in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo. In 1999, Clark commanded the alliance’s military response to the Kosovo crisis –Operation Allied Force.



http://www.csis.org/press/pr00_42.html

[SahaleArm]

74. Good Advice - "Multinational efforts to bring about political change"

He was not the sole constructor of the document. Kind of like a professor adding his name to a research paper, adds distinction. Why not highlight the names of Democratic Ex-Senator Sam Nunn and Clinton National Security Advisor Samuel Berger?

[Spazito]

80. The dates cited are all well before Wesley Clark declared...

so there unless there are some that are dated after his declaration to run I am not sure that these are relevant to the original question regarding what boards he currently sits on.

[Name removed]

94. Deleted message

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

[Tinoire]

115. Ah.. and here's the link for that the "Who Leads the CSIS" page

since none of the moaners were able to search for "Who Leads the CSIS" on the CSIS's web-site. Must have been asking too much.

http://www.csis.org/html/csislead.html

On edit: Under Distinguished Senior Advisors lest distractors try to pull that "William Clark" BS again.

We'll add this one too, just as a sugar coating

http://csis.org/about/index.htm#4

[Tinoire]

66. Thanks for your vote of confidence. This election is too important

and I do try to be accurate though sometimes in a rush and with so many things changing so quickly, people would be wise to double-check... I'm only human and since I don't do this for a living anymore, I only have access to open-source materials.

Hopefully we'll be behind the same Democratic candidate soon! :)

[Myra]

69. madfloridian, I think we'll each decide who to respect.

I'll refrain from giving a public critique of any board member,
or instructing people who to respect.

But I will say that our perceptions seems to differ
on at least one key point, dramatically.

[seventhson]

3. I think you missed Dyncorp

or the company that bought it out. Some generic name like Computer systems Corp.

These are the top thuggish military cvontractors that do privcate armies and such in Columbia, Kosovo, etc.

But his ties are deep and hidden. But they are there I am damn sure we can find them if we stay on this long enough.

I WANT a Military/Spook Lobbyist for Prez!!!!


NOT!!!!

Wesley, you got some 'splainin; to do.

[SahaleArm]

23. Can you link the SEC or an official page to the board members?

Please no shadow world links to DynCorp or CSC. There was a claimed link to CSC until it was determined to be a Mr. Wesley Clark not General Wesley Clark.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

97. CSC (Computer Sciences Corporation) is a consultancy-most business is

commercial.


They bought Dyncorp last year to extend their business the public sector.

I think you guys are seeing conspiracies where there aren't any...

[barbaraann]

4. Dr. Phil says:

The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.

I don't like it.

[maddezmom]

5. question not related to morals ...

honest question...does anyone know if it is illegal? or is a gray issue?

[realFedUp]

6. A couple of the boards are gray areas

and probably he will need to answer why he's
still on the boards.
I feel there is a lot to Wesley Clark we just
don't know beyond the uniform. He looks like
a moral guy but he has questions to answer.

[drfemoe]

7. kick

:kick:

[maddezmom]

11. thanks for the reply n/t

[ozone_man]

63. I would agree.

The Acxiom and NED organizations alone raise a red flag to me, not to mention the others that I am not as familiar with.

He needs to do a full disclosure of his involvements on these boards.

[Dookus]

10. Why would it be illegal?

Believe it or not, he's still a private citizen, and is free to do what he wants.

Whether he can sit on those boards once he's elected is a different issue. But for now, I can't imagine what law this could possibly break.

[maddezmom]

15. just a question to see if I could get any clarity

for the record, I'm supporting Wes Clark. :)

[Dookus]

34. well you'll get as much clarity on this issue

as the main issue here: What's WRONG with serving on boards? What has he done wrong on these boards? Nobody will answer that - they'll just say he's "on the board" and we're supposed to presume that he's doing something wrong by serving in that capacity.

It's an empty smear, but it's the best they can do.

[maddezmom]

82. it's empty to you, me and other supporters of Clark

but to others it's a "red flag" or worse. Just trying to see the other sides perspective.

[Tinoire]

140. No, it's not illegal. It's simply very troubling

and the fact that these are the same organizations that we denounced her for years and whose actions we protested against is what's really disturbing. Take the NED for instance and their involvement in the coup against Hugo Chavez- I can't support that. Nor can I support what they did against Haiti and the insurrections in Latin America. Clark praised Reagan for having established such a great organization- I can't forget that. Here's an interview with a friend of mine, fellow retired vet, and fellow Veteran for Peace. The things some of us have seen do not reassure us about these organizations. Many of us protested these things and re Clark, some of us personally, right here at DU, protested Clark specifically. Veterans for Peace took busses to Chicago and Washington for that purpose. Hope that explains it a little.

Meria with Stan Goff - Hideous Dream - U.S. Foreign Policy (http://subscribe.streamguys.com/meriaheller_od/021302.wma)
Stan Goff author of "Hideous Dream" depicting his experience in Haiti is my guest .As a man with over 24 years experience in our armed forces, his views and revelations MUST be heard by every Ameri-CAN. Stan took the oath "to protect the U.S. Constitution" yet said that at no time in his 24 yrs did he do that. He discloses the racism in our armed forces, as the bottom line in most of our conflicts. "The flag follows the money, the armies follow the flag." He discloses lots of information about the CIA being used more for covert ops than intelligence for YEARS, thus the WTC disaster. He also talks of the D.O.D. and the NSA as the groups responsible for intelligence. Stan says the U.S. is still interfering in Haiti, the "laboratory nexus of CIA and local thugs". Learn about the National Endowment For Democracy, a front group that interferes in the outcomes of other elections in other countries for U.S. corporate interests. Hear what he thinks about "the idiotic foreign policies of Bush", U.S. Imperialism; the Fascism already happening in America and WHY; War is about money, money is about domination"; hegemony in the U.S., a small group of rich controlling the work force; our economy downturn (is it deliberate?); his views on the war on "terrorism" as a pretext to restructure the global architecture; how we couldn't possibly have been ready to war in Afghanistan within 30 days, it had to be preplanned; How Sept 11 was used as a means to accelerate the foreign and national policies of militarianism; the stolen election; the complicity in the cover up of Sept 11; why aren't we going after the Saudis?; why the political complacency in America and what we can do individually to change things; Ashcroft as an unrepentent racist; destroying services to the public sector to impose militarisation of domestic policies;how our response to 9/11 reeked of incompetence and so much more. Stan knows the game inside out. He's been involved in Somalia, Vietnam, Grenada, Haiti, Columbia, Guatemala and finally realized that what he thought the missions were, had nothing to do with the true missions.
http://www.meria.net/subscribers/interviews/stan_goff_hideous_dream.html

[Myra]

8. Just out of genuine curiosity, why didn't Tinoire post this?

eom

[madfloridian]

9. She has posted this and more before.

She does not post often, but it is well done.

[Myra]

26. Ok...not exactly an answer, but then I'm just curious. Not a major point.

Thanks.

[realFedUp]

137. Tinoire posted this within one of my original threads

I thought it was worth pulling out for one of its own
and by the number of posts, I guess it was.

[KittyWampus]

27. Well Done? This Was Reported In The Media Already

When you run for President ALL your financial records are made public.

By the way, where are the emails that tinoire recieved from each of these boards which state that Clark is still a member?

[CivilRightsNow]

124. I have posted this info many times...

But nobody cares to spend the time really looking at the information. Maybe that is why Tinore doesnt post it every day. When you post it over and over again and cant even get a valid arguement, you tend to get a bit discouraged that people wish to remain so blind.

[reprehensor]

13. Who needs a revolving door?

When you ARE the door? I don't think Clark for Prez is a good idea. I've heard that Kucinich wants to scale back the Pentagon massively, which is a good idea. Now, if Dean could just graft parts of Kucinich's brain onto his own, he would really be ideal.

FDR led America through WWII, never having served in the military. America has plenty of Generals. Does America really need one in the White House?

Maybe as VP. Actually, that would rule.

[sandnsea]

18. Kerry already has

He's fought to decrease the toys in the military budgets consistently, all the way back to the 80s.

But we couldn't possibly vote for the guy who has already done everything we're asking for. Oh hell no, that just makes too damn much sense.

[KittyWampus]

30. Clark Proposed Cutting Pentagon Budget By 25%

You do realise that don't you?

He said during a Town Hall meeting- Republicans like weapons systems and Democrats like people...

By the way, did you know that Clark is the furthest Left on the Political Compass and closest to Dennis Kucinich?

And who do you think could actually GET the Pentagon budget cut...
Clark or Kucinich... although the first question is who do you think can actually get elected.

[sandnsea]

43. He could really get it done

I have to say, that's my strongest reason to support Clark. If a General says the Pentagon budget can be cut, who can legitimately argue with him? He even has more credibility on it than Kerry. It might be worth it to get him in office just to prove to the United States that we don't have to spend all this money on defense.

[SahaleArm]

14. How do you know he hasn't resigned? Wesley Clark Resigns From Entrust...

The Bellaciao links are from September 19th, 2003.

Wesley Clark Resigns From Entrust (Released on 10/9/2003):
http://www.entrust.com/news/files/5557.htm

How many private firms will make press-releases for this?

BTW Nice Website :): http://bellaciao.org/en/about.php

[Spazito]

22. That was exactly what I was thinking...

these lists do not state they are from after Clark's announcement. I am still listed on some organizations long after I had resigned. I would like to see a list that is current, dated after September 18th.

[mikehiggins]

144. You are missing the point, I suspect.

This thread is not about whether he is STILL on those boards, it is about the fact that he EVER served on those boards. To many people just the fact that he did makes him ever suspect in their eyes, and disqualify him from running against THEIR candidate, who is pure and true and wonderful.

At this stage of the game, it is pointless to respond. The machines are in motion, the footsoldiers are taking to the streets, the money is coming in, the tv ads are being played and the election nears.

As the voting approaches I expect many more gems of reasearch to appear, leading to lengthy threads like this. In the end, someone will win and we can get on about the business of taking this nation back from the Bushbonic plague that is ravaging it.

Eleoril (or whatever her name is) says that the "Anybody but Dean" threads drives her to spend her time in more productive activities than posting on DU. Everyone should heed her advice. Instead of getting involved in these endless disputes, go out and do what you can to help your candidate get elected. Leave these threads to those pure and good and wonderful folks who have nothing else to do with their time.

[KaraokeKarlton]

16. my, my, my

and that's about all I'm gonna say about this one.

[knight_of_the_star]

17. Here's an answer

Maybe he was hired by them because it best fit his area of expertise, being someone who KNOWS how the Pentagon works, thus he would be a valuable asset to any company involved. Also, it not only doesn't say ANYWHERE that he was a lobbyist. If you are ex-military I don't think you can lobby for a defense contracter, and Clark is a man, based on his LONG military history, of being someone who would respect the law and follow it, not break it to pieces. You seem to be fond of guilt by association. How about this one, my uncle-in-law works for Arnie, does THAT make me the enemy? Clark's past behavior has mostly been 34 years in the armed forces serving this country. What makes you think that he isn't going to serving us? It's not like the info that was dug up was secret anyway, unlike some things about other candidates I could mention.

[HFishbine]

21. Are you saying Clark was not a lobbyist?

???

[SahaleArm]

24. Lobbyists are registered entities. He was on the board. n/t

[HFishbine]

35. Oooops

Go here. Search "Clark"

http://www.fecinfo.com/cgi-win/lb_directory.exe?DoFn=

Yep. He was a registered lobbyist.

[SahaleArm]

39. I would assume that anyone who is an represents a private business...

when talking with government officials must be registered with the FEC.

[HFishbine]

41. You would ASSume incorrectly

If you're simply on Capitol Hill on behalf of your own cause, you don't have to worry about registering, and you're completely free to talk to any representative or senator who wants to talk to you. Registration is necessary only when you accept payment from clients for whom you have lobbied.

http://www.dummies.com/WileyCDA/DummiesArticle/id-1443,subcat-POLITICS.html

on edit: it's not very intellectually honest to keep editing your posts so that the errors and misstatements I'm bringing to your attention vanish.

[SahaleArm]

44. Huh? "anyone who is an represents a private business"

I'm sure he was salaried as a board member.

[HFishbine]

46. Yes, I saw that

and if you edit it for a third time, you might even correct the spelling.

[SahaleArm]

47. Done :) n/t

[Name removed]

99. Deleted message

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

[KittyWampus]

31. Are You Saying Being A Board Member Is The Same As Lobbyist?

???

[HFishbine]

36. No, of course not.

I'm saying that in addition to being a board member, he was also a registered lobbyist. Not surprising really, it would have been illegal for him to lobby on behalf of Acxiom and not register.

http://www.fecinfo.com/cgi-win/lb_directory.exe?DoFn=

[Renew Deal]

38. I am happy to hear

Clark has the experience in Washington many doubtedhe had. This is more proof that he knows how to be effective in public office.

[HFishbine]

42. Pssst

Don't tell John Edwards, okay? He thinks the problem with Washington is lobbyists.

[SahaleArm]

45. Unless it's a trial lawyer lobbyist:) n/t

[HFishbine]

49. Ahhh

So now we are not liking lobbyists? Take it up with Clark and Edwards, dear.

[SahaleArm]

50. See the smiley face :)

I don't have a problem with it, someone above may?

[HFishbine]

53. I think

you must have deleted your smiley face in one of your multiple edits.

[Renew Deal]

48. I agree

but you have to deal with the system while you improve it. His job was not to improve the system. If he is elected it is. But I am now reassured that he knows how to manipulate the system when there was some doubt. Clark really does have the crucial Washington experience many had wondered about.

[knight_of_the_star]

60. Interesting

No response on the fact that it is out in the open. I mean, it's not like he was working for Halliburton or Bechtel or anything like that. That and it says on his website that WaveCrest Laboratories is an alternative energy firm. Perhaps that should have been noticed during the research, aye?

[bearfartinthewoods]

68. isn't that always 'why' lobbyists get hired?

for their "knowledge"?

[Cheswick2.0]

19. It is not illegal, however..............

For many people it is immoral. I am not in that camp. But I do note that one of the things I hate about the bush administration is their ties to and promotion of their own war profits corporations.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

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

[knight_of_the_star]

57. Very good question

Considering how good Tinoire is at doing that, I wonder what she could dig up on Bush for the nominee to use in '04.

[Donna Zen]

20. Do we know when those sites were last updated?

Have you contacted the campaign? iirc, he resigned from all boards. Although the NED thing may not fall under the same catagory.

[SahaleArm]

28. NED is a bitpartisan government-funded entity - Ask Bob Graham...

Bob Graham: http://www.ned.org/about/board_bios/graham.html

[Tom Rinaldo]

40. We've been through this one before.

Paul Wellstone was on that Board also. There is way too much gulit by association by association by association thrown around as if that proved anything. If you want to play that game I would be far more concerned about the potential ethical conflicts of the the ex Govourner and current Senators who are running for President based on the millions of dollars of special interest money each has raised to fund prior campaigns.

[CivilRightsNow]

127. And it still is not explained...

Did Paul Wellstone get appointed with the same group of wolves?

Just cause an organization did shit in the past that was good doesnt mean without vigilance it stays good.

You do not get appointed to a board of directors as shady as the ones currently sitting on the board at NED without being dirty. Look at what the friggin dems on NED's boards are doing! Hello! October Sunrise Hamilton? Graham.. Heritage and NED are so intertwined now they are basically the same tank.. So, yer loving Heritage and it's right wing neoconservative nature too? Come on!

Heritage bailed NED out when the intelligent ones were trying to dismantle it during Clinton's presidency.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAid/em461.cfm

Heritage:(You will have to excuse me.. this is just one page out of many on Heritage and the Think Tank links and Corporate ties.. and general crappiness that I have been compiling.. the links arent active cause Im not formatting it all, I have it in .asp and just pasted it. I will be posting the ridiculous amount of information on all of this once I finish organizing it. This is just a snippet of the head of the think tank beast as it now exists.)

The Wall Street Journal says, "No policy shop has more clout than the conservative Heritage Foundation."


"Keep up the wonderful work of truth which emanates from Heritage." – John Ashcroft


"Some of the finest conservatives in America today do their work in The Heritage Foundation. For those of you new to all this, The Heritage Foundation is America's leading conservative think tank." - Rush Limbaugh, November 10, 2000.


The Democratic Policy Committee Annual Report says, "It is hard to overstate the impact The Heritage Foundation has had on the direction of U.S. policy since the late 1970’s."

(1)The Heritage Foundation is one of the newer think tanks, founded in 1973 by Colorado beer baron Joseph Coors and New Right activist Paul Weyrich. Coors provided the entire first year budget for the foundation with a donation of $250,000. Rightwing ideologue Richard Scaife became a major funder of the foundation after its initial year. (2,6,9,43,44) The Heritage Foundation’s influence grew rapidly, coming into the public limelight with the election of Ronald Reagan to the presidency. It is best known for its production of tomes that compile recommendations for reducing or abolishing government policies, regulations, and agencies. Heritage sends its “recommendations” out to 7,000 congressional and administrative officials, staff journalists, and major donors. Heritage president Feulner served on the Reagan transition executive committee and fourteen other Heritage staff and board had transition team appointments. Many called Heritage the “shadow government” of the Reagan administration. The late CIA director William Casey was among the initial supporters of the foundation.

Paul Weyrich


(2)Paul Weyrich served as President of Heritage Foundation until 1974 when he founded the Committee for the Survival of a Free Congress (which he heads today as the Free Congress Foundation). Heritage Foundation guided the Reagan administration during its period of transition and Joe Coors served in the President's "Kitchen Cabinet." During its first year, the Reagan administration adopted fully two-thirds of the recommendations of Heritage's Mandate for Leadership: Policy Management in a Conservative Administration.

(5)According to Political Research Associates (PRA) , a think tank based in Cambridge, Mass. that tracks right-wing politics, Paul Weyrich is a "key strategist for the secular and religious right." One of Weyrich's positions is that the U.S. government should formally declare a war on drugs, so that suspected drug offenders could be treated as "prisoners of war," with no right to habeas corpus or trial, and could be held indefinitely, "until the war is over." One of Weyrich's advisors on eastern Europe, according to PRA, is a fellow named Laslo Pasztor, who "...served a prison term for his role as a functionary in a Hungarian pro-Nazi party, the Arrow Cross."

What is Paul doing now?

(6)Pissing off the Jews with articles like: "Indeed He Is Risen!"

"Our God could not bear to see mankind suffering, even if it was from the consequences of his own actions, so He sent His only Son to become man so that man could become like God. To accomplish that, Christ was crucified by the Jews who had wanted a temporal ruler to rescue them from the oppressive Roman authorities. Instead God sent them a spiritual leader to rescue them from their sins and despite the fact that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, performed incredible miracles, even raised people from the dead, He was not what the Jews had expected so they considered Him a threat. Thus He was put to death."


And writing articles like (4) this gem regarding the Court of Appeals nominees filibuster, Excerpt: "I believe Republicans, who have been totally united on the judges issue, have now set up a framework for the liberal filibuster to be seen as an important matter. At minimum, it has set up this issue for 2004. At maximum, it may have even created demand for the "nuclear option" where Senators will simply insist that what the liberals are doing is unconstitutional and will proceed to confirm these nominees.", Paul has been busy at the neocon think tank that he spawned, FCF.

FCF is comitted to these nominees as you can tell from numerous articles and commentary at http://www.freecongress.org/media/lawandemocracy.asp

Free Congress Foundation
http://www.freecongress.org/

About FCF (10)
The Free Congress Research and Education Foundation describes itself in its 1995 annual report as a "non-partisan, non-profit, tax-exempt research and education institution dedicated to conservative governance, traditional values and institutional reform."


Led by Paul Weyrich, who also co-founded the Heritage Foundation, Free Congress received $5.0 million in grants over the 1992-1994 period to assist it in its efforts "to return to our nation's origins in limited government and personal liberty, despite the overweening power of the leviathan state."


One of Free Congress' major (and now independent) programs is National Empowerment Television, a nation-wide, interactive, 24-hour television network described in 1992 by political commentator David Gergen as "the creation of a new politics in America" for its ability to mobilize and interact with core constituencies on issues ranging from immigration to tax policy to welfare reform. The organization claims that NET now carries "its message of cultural conservatism and anti-Establishment politics into more than 11 million homes.


Weekly offerings include Borderline, a forum for discussion of conservative views on immigration policy; the Cato Forum, which provides the Cato Institute with an on-going opportunity to promote its beliefs concerning the illegitimacy of taxes and government regulation; Legal Notebook, providing discussion and perspectives by legal analysts on crime in america; Straight Talk, produced in conjunction with the right-wing Family Research Council; and On Target With the National Rifle Association.


Special series and programs currently under development include Science Under Siege, co-produced with the Competitive Enterprise Institute (dedicated to the dissemination of what it calls "free market scholarship" in support of such issues as utility deregulation and the repeal of mandated fuel economy standards), and Ways and means, a monthly hour-long show to inform core constituencies about important public policy debates and what viewers can do to take action.
Free Congress president Paul Weyrich said that, in his 25 years of conservative political activism, NET is the most exciting thing he has done, stressing the communication benefits that accrue from conservative-controlled media. "In any kind of battle," Weyrich stated, "communication is number one. So at last we have a tool that is extraordinary in its ability to interest people, to get them motivated."" (more)


An example from the Free Congress Foundation website:
(3)The press release dated Nov 18th, 2003 : The Ten Commandments in the Public Square
"Jill S. Farrell, Director of Communications for the Free Congress Foundation, gave the following speech in at the National Press Club yesterday defending the Ten Commandments' place in the public square. Jill
said:
“The Restore the Commandments Project may be the last opportunity to demonstrate to the Congress and the Administration and even the Judiciary that we are serious about America being a nation based on the Judeo/Christian understanding of morality.
“We make no apologies for supporting the basis for our nation. For those who would say that our Judeo/Christian tradition is on a par with other religions we ask that the record be examined...." (more)

Where does FCF get it's funding?

The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation
The Sarah Scaife Foundation *
The Carthage Foundation *
The Allegheny Foundation *
The Castlerock Foundation -Created by the Adolph Coors Foundation
The John M. Olin Foundation
Korean Ties - (14)According to a document uncovered by members of South Korea's National Assembly in autumn 1988, Korean intelligence gave $2.2 million to the Heritage Foundation on the sly during the early 1980s (The Nation, 1/23/89). Heritage officials continue to "categorically deny" the accusation. But Heritage's latest annual report does acknowledge a $400,000 grant from the Korean conglomerate Samsung. Another donor, the Korea Foundation--which serves as a direct conduit of money from the South Korean government--has given Heritage almost $1 million in the past three years (Wall Street Journal, 8/10/95). However, U.S. media outlets rarely allude to Heritage's financial links with Korea--even when such ties are directly relevant.

*all Scaife organizations

But I digress, who is the Heritage Fundation right now? We know it's roots in Scaife and Weyrich.. but what praytell, has it become?

Heritage VP, Stuart Butler: "Heritage now works very closely with the congressional leadership…. Heritage has been involved in crafting almost every piece of major legislation to move through Congress." Another Heritage VP, Kim Holmes said, "without exaggeration, I think we've in effect become Congress's unofficial research arm…. We truly have become an extension of the congressional staff, but on our own terms and according to our own agenda."

What have you done for us lately? (7)

HF suggested that Bush open up a “Office of Marriage Initiatives” to promote marriage, but instead Bush folded HF’s “pro-marriage” proposals into his welfare reform package, setting aside $300 million dollars for states and local communities to “promote marriage.”(The Positive Effects of Marriage: A Book of Charts) (Marriage and Family portion of Heritage's Website)

In 2002 HF will almost double its physical size, expanding into a 63,000 square foot building next door, making HF’s headquarters 128,000 square feet. HF is three blocks from the Capitol building. HF’s new office space will include: intern and fellow apartments, a 200-seat auditorium, a private fitness center, and two floors dedicated to expanding their research department.

Published “Priorities for the President,” written for President Bush. HF also wrote “A Budget for America,” a companion volume written for the Bush administration. (Mandate for Leadership: 2002)

Internet activities: in 2001, HF reported 4.8 million visitors to their homepage, and 14.4 million visitors to their conservative internet portal, Townhall.com.

(9)Heritage has long synthesized ideas from a variety of right-wing groups and packaged them as a "conservative" agenda for policymakers to implement. Heritage's influence in the Bush administration has been both broad and deep. The group helped the Bush administration fill jobs throughout the government, passing on 1,200 to 1,300 names and resumes to the Bush administration. For his part, Bush had reportedly asked the Heritage Foundation to review all the executive orders put in place by President Clinton during his two terms in office and recommend which should be repealed.

Though other right-wing think tanks have adopted the Heritage model and joined its fight, Heritage has not lost influence as it has gained company. In 2001, Heritage held over 2,000 events in-house and with its current renovation will create a state-of-the-art, media-ready, 200-seat auditorium in hopes of doubling its capacity and impact. Heritage continues to expand. For example, it is building 33 two-person apartment units for interns, "the young people who make up our 'farm team' - the future conservative leaders of America." Philip Truluck, Executive VP and COO at Heritage, says "It's amazing how much of an impact you can have on a young person's thinking in two or three months."

On the policy front, Heritage produced "Agenda 2003," which it calls "the playbook in Washington for helping lawmakers rack up victories on behalf of all Americans." Agenda 2003 address more than two dozen issues from the budget, healthcare, education and energy to homeland security, missile defense, terrorism, the Middle East and Asia. The book also provides lists of experts in each policy area. "Each policy area begins with an ACTION section, in which Heritage boils down its proposal to one sentence. Then, the issue is explained in brief. Action taken on the issue in 2002 is described, followed by a prediction of what to expect this year."

Other noteworthy accomplishments: (8)

In 1980 HF published a 3000-page, 20-volume set of policy recommendations, Mandate for Leadership, which was presented to Attorney General Ed Meese a week after Reagan's election. Meese was quoted as saying that "the Reagan Administration will rely heavily on the Heritage Foundation.” These recommendations included: rollback of minority programs, dramatic increase in military spending, and cutting taxes. In 1985 HF claimed that the Reagan administration’s policy reflected 60 to 65 percent of HF’s policy measures. (11)(In 1980, Heritage presented the new Reagan Administration with Mandate for Leadership. The policy recommendations helped the skipper-of-state turn the nation in a conservative direction. Edwards records that 1270 of the 2000 suggestions (about 60 percent) were acted upon.


In 1984, HF published Mandate for Leadership II, which recommended privatization of social security and denial of special educational funding for the handicapped.



Also:

(13)Heritage crafted a new propaganda campaign "to prepare public opinion for Medicare reform" built on the lessons they had learned from their 1995 activities. As described in the 1997 Heritage document "Mandate for Leadership IV–Turning Ideas into Actions," the key goals of the new campaign were to: Convince Americans that Medicare provides inferior medicine and poor financial security;

Convince Americans that Medicare cannot be sustained for long;

Focus on "health care security";

Attract provider constituencies to support reform; and Build bipartisan support first, then reinforce it with a commission.


The North Korea Connection -(14)Unlike most other think tanks, Heritage not only suggests ideas but actively pushes them in Congress. And in some cases, its legislative efforts would benefit the goals of major donors. Heritage scholars, for example, have drafted specific language for legislation that would help South Korea by encouraging the U.S. to include Seoul more directly in U.S. dealings with North Korea. Meantime, one of Heritage's largest donors, the Korea Foundation, is an affiliate of the South Korean government, according to Yoo Lee, a spokesman for South Korea's embassy here. Heritage President Edwin Feulner says he isn't aware that the Korea Foundation is an arm of their government. Feulner, the Journal reported, "has taken an active role in promoting South Korean issues in Congress through actions such as testifying before committees to promote the think tank's pro-South Korea positions. Meanwhile, one in six of Heritage's 24 known major donors last year--gifts of $100,000 or more--were Taiwanese or South Korean concerns."


(8)(9)Heritage Alumni Currently working in the Bush Administration

Elaine Chao, Depart of Labor Secretary, formerly a Heritage Distinguished Fellow (12)Elaine Chao was CEO of United Way of America and worked for the Peace Corps. But in between her nonprofit pursuits, she found time to sit on five corporate boards, including Dole Food, Clorox and health care companies C.R. Bard and HCA. She is married to Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)


Kay Coles James, Director of the Office of Personnel Management, formerly Heritage’s Citizenship Project director

Angela Antonelli, Chief Financial Officer of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, formerly Heritage’s director for Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies

Mark Wilson, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor, formerly HF’s Reseach Fellow

Alvin Felzenberg, Rumsfield’s “team” at the Department of Defense, formerly HF’s Visiting Fellow

Stephen Yates, Deputy Assistant to the Vice President for National Security Affairs

Nina Shokraii Rees, Special Assistant to the Vice President for Domestic Policy

Kris Ardizzone, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Policy Development

Sarah Youssef, Associate Director of Domestic Policy, White House

[Tinoire]

129. Saving this. Thank you!

and very nice to see you in this thread. Welcome again to DU :toast:

[CivilRightsNow]

139. No Problem...

Sometimes I get frustrated and go MIA for a bit while I weave deeper into the rabbithole of all this..


Thank you for trying to actually be heard and not being as easily frustrated as I am. It's like, damn.. if I could just get these people to click on a couple links and explore on their own with open minds, what they would see would blow them outta their chair. I think the problem is that people have to read multiple links, the information is not all in some easily worded cliff notes article for lazy americans and it is so difficult to organize it as such and show all the threads of the web.

I've also been helped a great deal by your links. Ive recognized that here, on DU, I have to make sure to organize all of it and do everyone's logic for them before posting, people just dont wish to do alot of thinking or researching on their own when it doesnt fit into their preconcieved notions. So I hold my full hand on Clark for just a little longer.

What I often find funniest about all of it is that at one point in time, I was Wesley Clark's biggest fan. Im not a deanie.. I have no ulterior motive other then trying to stop this country from making an even bigger mistake then Bush. I dont even have a candidate yet! Heck, I havent even had the time to properly research the other candidates because what this one is into scares the bejesus out of me and everytime I think Ive got it all, I find some other facet. I havent even been able to completely delve into all of his other associations.

Sigh..

Keep fighting the good fight. I notice that our voices are growing.

[Tinoire]

142. Not to worry- A lot of people read these threads

without posting in the thread. You'd be surprised how many PMs and posts some of us get from people who say "Thanks, I've been lurking for months/years and really appreciate your stuff". Most people just don't want to post in these ugly brouhahas but they will read, click on the links and book-mark the posts.

Courage! I'm going to be searching for other stuff and saving it because what you have here is really helpful! I'll PM you a few threads you might appreciate.

Peace :) We'll get there. There can be a better world, never mind the nay-sayers and those who would discourage the truth thinking it might gain them a few votes. I'm shooting for an informed Democracy where the best man wins and people know who/what they're voting for and weight that vote against their conscience.

Peace :hi:

[SahaleArm]

29. Last updated September 19th - None of this crap is up to date n/t

[Renew Deal]

37. What proof do you have that he sits on those boards still? What's illegal?

I don't see any proof that he is still on those boards. Besides that, why isn't he in prison if he is doing something illegal? This looks more like desperate regergetated FUD than substance. Big bad Wes Clark had a job. Sorry if he actually made a success out of himself after living off peanuts for 34 years.

[Code_Name_D]

64. Well, let us just see, shall we.

Job #1: Sirva Inc. of Westmont, Ill
Job #2: International Crisis Group (ICG) Board of Trustees Brussels, Belgium
Job #3: Senior Advisor for the Center for Strategic International Studies (pro bono)
Job #4: National Endowment for Democracy
Job #5: trustee of the International Crisis Group

Now, assuming, oh, let's make him a slave to his work, an 80 hour week. Excluding his campaigning of course. This would give him a total of 3,840 total man hours on a normal work year, excluding vacations. Dividing that by five jobs, gives is an annual of 758 man hours per job, per year. Divide that by twelve months, giving us an average of 64 hours per month for each job, and then again divide by 4 weeks, and then again by 6 working days, and we have a job where he only has to show up, on average, a whole whopping 2.7 hours a day. Oh, what a hard job that must be.

Tell me, exactly how much work do you think you could do in a day if you only had 2.7 hour hours? Not a great deal I would warrant. That is because these are not jobs, but little more than granted positions bested upon him status alone. He doesn’t do any real work, but has absolutely no problem raking in 25 million dollars annual in compensation for jobs he doesn’t do any work for. Ahem, excuse me, for jobs he only dose three hours of work a day at.

Lets throw into the pile those two other jobs, and a full time job of campaigning, and his work as a lobbyist. And oh, what about that book he wrote. And you know he spend even less time with each "job." So what dose Clark do for a living? He is a greedy fat who lives off of his privilege and power.. And you want to make that President? I am not so sure Bush wouldn't be a better choice.

[Tom Rinaldo]

67. Where do you get your figure?

You say that Clark is "raking in 25 million dollars annual in compensation for jobs". Where did you get that figure? He just relesed all of his financial records, and Clark has a net worth of something like 2 or 3 million. I think you screwed it up somewhere.

[Jerseycoa]

120. "25 million dollars annual in compensation"

Source: New York Times, November 10, 2003

And although General Clark, the latest entrant in the Democratic presidential field, left the military with precious little in the bank to show for years of public service, he has managed to find his way to wealth. In just three years, he has patched together a career heavy with speaking engagements and seats on corporate boards, and has even taken a stab at investment banking. All of which has put him in the enviable position of having $2 million in checking accounts and an annual income that topped $1.6 million last year.

<snip>

While his speaking income was not a separate item in the documents provided, a Clark spokesman said it accounted for the bulk of the $434,000 business income in his 2001 tax filing and the bulk of the $984,000 business income on his 2002 taxes.

In 2000, the year he left the military, General Clark had an income of $474,000, of which $184,000 came from wages, $249,000 from business earnings and the rest from investments. In 2001, he reported income of $762,000, of which $213,000 was wages, $84,000 was pension, $434,000 was business and the rest was from investments.

By 2002, General Clark's income had risen to $1.667 million. Of that, $568,000 came from wages, $86,000 was pension and $984,000 was business income, with investment gains making up the rest. Since he left the military, most of General Clark's wages have come from Stephens.

His investment portfolio is worth about $575,000. He also has $1 million in a checking account and short-term certificates of deposit, and another $1 million in a checking account in the name of Wesley K. Clark and Associates, which he set up in 2002.

[Ksec]

130. Jeebus I just read this thread.

And alot of you sound exactly like freepers(no offense meant)

So he sits on boards, big deal, its not a crime.

Would you turn down free money?

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

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

[Dookus]

54. but... but....

I heard the research done here was "impeccable". (giggle)

[Mattforclark]

58. I love how people can say

that research is 'impeccable' without checking on that research themselves. Human nature, what can I say? My opinion of it goes down every day.

[Tinoire]

79. Message 65- just for you and others who don't care to research

the person you want to convince people is the best thing since sliced bread. One must wonder how so many arrived at that conclusion seeing how little they knew about him.

Or was the "draft" movement blinded by all those pretty medals?

[SahaleArm]

83. Are you convinced that Sam Nunn, Samuel Berger, and Warren Christopher...

are neo-cons? If it's guilt by association then was Bill Clinton a neo-con as well?

[Tinoire]

114. Neo-cons can come in all shapes and sizes. A (- D) is not a vaccine

To think the Democratic Party is immune to that is to seriously delude oneself. We are not that good! We are better but just because there's a D after someone's name is no guarantee. Were you paying attention when Clinton was in power or were you like most of us? Half asleep because our guy was in office? This is great news for the 2 party system. This is exactly how it was designed to work- we shift every few years and always blame the "other" party for all the problems, never looking at ourselves in the mirror and admitting what we do. So back and forth, back and forth, each side blaming the other and nothing ever changing. Until the day we, the Democratic Party voters pay attention to what our reps do in our name and treat them accordingly we will never make progress. Neither will the Republicans. We'll just piss at each other every few years as nobody even notices the neo-con cancer eating away at both parties.

Sandy Berger. Yeah, I'll never forget him. That was the guy Bill Clinton sent on a tour with Madeline Albright to see how much support he could raise for the war against Iraq which was planned to happen under Clinton's watch. For additional details check out Vets for Peace.

Let's see...

US loses PR battle over Iraq war 20 February 1998

((Madeleine Albright, Samuel Berger and William Cohen, known as the ABC of President Clinton's foreign policy team))

WASHINGTON, February 19: The United States lost a major public relations battle on Wednesday even before it fired the first shot in the impending war against Iraq.

Assigned by President Clinton to sell the idea of a military offensive against Iraq to a skeptical American public, three of his cabinet members ran into a hostile and vocal minority protesting US foreign policy at a townhall meeting in Columbus, Ohio, the heart of the United States and the birthplace of American humorist James Thurber.

<snip>

``One, two, three, four. We don't want your racist war'', a crowd of about 60 people began to chant a few minutes into a widely advertised media event that was being telecast around the world by CNN. The demonstration at the event, held on the campus of the Ohio State University (OSU), immediately recalled the protests overVietnam War nearly 30 years ago. OSU is known more for its middle-of-the-road politics than Leftism.

<snip>
Instead, what followed was a spectacular defrocking of American foreign policy by a few vigilant radicals. Led by incisive if opinionated questioning by the hecklers, other audience members interrogated the three top administration officials about the lack of international support for bombing, the scale of civilian casualties, the feasibility of reducing Iraq's weapons stocks, and the likelihood of having to attack the country again and again to achieve US aims.

Almost every answer was greeted with boos and jeers. The radical questioners seemed to reserve their vitriol for Albright, the formidable Secretary of State used to staring down some of the most powerful men in the world. One bespectacled youth confronted her with a list of what he called American double standards: Threatening to bomb Iraqwhile allying with regimes like Indonesia, Turkey and Saudi Arabia, also known for their excesses of their own people.

``I am really surprised that people feel that it is necessary to defend the rights of Saddam Hussein, when we ought to be making sure that he does not use weapons of mass destruction,'' Albright snapped. ((Gee, did I hear that one again??))


http://www.financialexpress.com/ie/daily/19980220/05150014.html



====

Iraq rally at OSU backfires
Boos greet pleas to support attack
By Randy Ludlow, Post Ohio Bureau


COLUMBUS - In a raucous town meeting Wednesday, President Clinton's national security team found that not all of the heartland is behind bombing Baghdad.

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Defense Secretary William Cohen and National Security Adviser Sandy Berger were dispatched to St. John Arena at Ohio State University to seek public support as the United States nears air attacks on Iraq.

But an audience of 5,000 loudly called - and cat-called - for both war and peace in a media event gone awry for the Clinton administration.

The security team - when they were allowed to speak - insisted that the United States will not be deterred from raining destruction on Iraq if leader Saddam Hussein, an ''armed and dangerous bully,'' insists on hiding and stockpiling chemical and biological weapons that threaten its neighbors.

<snip>

Small but vocal groups of anti-war protesters unfurled banners and periodically were wrestled away from their seats by campus police as they continually interrupted the show with chants: ''1, 2, 3, 4, we don't want no racist war.'' ((Damn those Liberals!))

<snip>
http://www.cincypost.com/news/1998/iraq021998.html

[SahaleArm]

150. So? Clinton was a hawk but he wasn't stupid

He's also not the type to get involved unless immenent threat is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Your ability to highlight portions of articles passes for nothing more than sophistry.

[Tinoire]

160. So then Mr Clinton, since he's not stupid - Where are the WMDs?

Ms Albright? I ask you once again- was half a million dead Iraqi's worth it?

If Clinton isn’t the type to get involved unless immenent threat is proven beyond a reasonable doubt then why did we starve and sanction Iraq for 8 years straight over the objections of the rest of the UN whom the US&UK bullied into going along? You realize the flaw in your argument don’t you? If we’re asking Bush “Where are the WMDs?” why aren’t we asking Clinton that? Half a million dead Iraqi children thanks to Clinton/Blair sanctions, an entire country littered with depleted uranium, mass birth deformities, a populace that was terrorized for 8 years by incessant and daily bombings and no WMDs? WOW! :wow: “immenent threat is proven beyond a reasonable doubt?” This using the reasoning of people who think war is a humanitarian intervention right?

Published on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 in the lndependent/UK
The Dishonesty of This So-Called Dossier
by Robert Fisk

Tony Blair's "dossier" on Iraq is a shocking document. Reading it can only fill a decent human being with shame and outrage. Its pages are final proof – if the contents are true – that a massive crime against humanity has been committed in Iraq. For if the details of Saddam's building of weapons of mass destruction are correct – and I will come to the "ifs" and "buts" and "coulds" later – it means that our massive, obstructive, brutal policy of UN sanctions has totally failed. In other words, half a million Iraqi children were killed by us – for nothing.

Let's go back to 12 May 1996. Madeleine Albright, the US Secretary of State, had told us that sanctions worked and prevented Saddam from rebuilding weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Our Tory government agreed, and Tony Blair faithfully toed the line. But on 12 May, Mrs Albright appeared on CBS television. Leslie Stahl, the interviewer, asked: "We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that's more than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?" To the world's astonishment, Mrs Albright replied: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price, we think the price is worth it."

Now we know – if Mr Blair is telling us the truth – that the price was not worth it. The price was paid in the lives of hundreds of thousands of children. But it wasn't worth a dime. The Blair "dossier" tells us that, despite sanctions, Saddam was able to go on building weapons of mass destruction. All that nonsense about dual-use technology, the ban on children's pencils – because lead could have a military use – and our refusal to allow Iraq to import equipment to restore the water-treatment plants that we bombed in the Gulf War, was a sham.

<snip>

So there it is. If these pages of trickery are based on "probably" and "if", we have no business going to war. If they are all true, we murdered half a million Iraqi children. How's that for a war crime?

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0925-03.htm

=================

Silly me for forgetting how pure we are and how our feces smell like roses. It’s all the fault of those evil Republicans and gee, if we could only get rid of them, all would be fine and dandy in this world because Lord knows, Democrats are pure and good and would never war monger or even encourage it. No Democrats are part of the Military Industrial Complex that Leftists have fought for decades. Nope, we are all good- we just call our wars “humanitarian interventions” safe in the knowledge that Americans don’t have an effin’ clue and that we can manipulate the media and manipulate people’s perceptions by subtle little things like calling a war that went all the way for effin Belgrade, a war against Kosovo as if it were contained to one tiny little rural area where no real damage was done. You’ll have to forgive this Leftist if I don’t agree that the Bomber-in-Chief should now be promoted to Commander-in-Chief simply because he finally registered as a Democrat in September and is reluctantly resigning from a few boards when they attract too much attention.



Belgrade

Belgrade

Belgrade

Europe: Belgrade under fire - in pictures


The police HQ was also a target


But not all missiles hit military targets. A residential street was blown up


Under rubble: Belgrade civilians count the cost

In pictures: Clinton's violent welcome

Thousands of left-wing protesters chanting anti-American slogans have clashed with police and set dozens of shops ablaze at the start of a state visit by President Clinton to Athens.

Violence greets Clinton visit: Thousands of left-wing protesters chanting anti-American slogans have clashed with police and set dozens of shops ablaze at the start of a delayed state visit by US President Bill Clinton to Athens.


Protesters carry anti-American and anti-Nato signs.


In the background a riot policeman throws a gas canister, as another tries to stop a photographer capturing the anti-American demonstrations.

From the BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/529061.stm


US targets attacked in Greece


Daily anti-Clinton demonstrations are expected in Athens

The president's trip is opposed by many Greeks, angry at the US Government's leading role in Nato's bombing campaign against Yugoslavia earlier this year.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/509036.stm

On 30 March, Mr Solana, Gen Clark and Gen Naumann jointly informed Nato ambassadors that the old phased war plan with its political safeguards was being thrown away. In return for a promise that Nato would only hit "strictly military targets", the lukewarm allies were pursuaded to back them.
Gen Clark then hit the Milosevic party HQ, the presidential palace and the TV stations - all targets taken from the Phase Three list that several allies had refused to vote for.
The Supreme Commander then proceeded with his escalation, occasionally phoning the key political leaders to get particularly sensitive targets okayed.
"I didn't always defer to those who wanted targets withheld," Gen Clark now reveals.
<snip>
Those who had tried to brake the escalation either ducked questions about their attitude to what had happened or tried to claim they had stopped Gen Clark escalating further.

President Jacques Chirac of France for example boasted that it was thanks to him that any bridges had been left standing across the River Danube.
What about those like Germany and Italy who were suggesting a bombing pause?
London and Washinton thought this would be disastrous, so they made clear they would not even allow the idea to be formally tabled.
<snip>
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/425468.stm
==========================

[SahaleArm]

163. Blaming Clinton for UN sanctions? Uh ok.

The only dishonesty is mad-libbing an argument through barely coherent bold text. You can blame Clinton for listening to Cohen and trying to avoid ground troops. Quicker deployment of ground troops would have caused less damage than air strikes, that's what Clark requested at first but was overruled. But are you surprised we took out Milosevic's communications station (aka "the TV station")?

[Tinoire]

172. No the dishonesty is trying to pass off these obscenities

No the dishonesty is trying to pass off these obscenities as being in line with progressive values. The DLC has never done anything but retard any advancement of progressive values. They can peddle fairy-tales and obfuscate all day long but that will never drown out the truth.

You not even addressing my points. I showed you pictures of down-town modern civilian-inhabited Belgrade bombed to smithereens and you came back with some weak distraction about a communications station. I think the pictures are pretty clear about what happened in Belgrade- far away from Kososvo. I'm not worried if you don't get the point, plenty of other people will.

This has nothing to do with Clinton vs Bush, Democrats vs Republicans, or Progressives vs Conservatives. It has to do with morality and principles.

Not every Democrat shut their eyes simply because it happened under Clinton's watch as the same is true for Republicans under Bush. Clinton bullied the UN in the same manner Bush did. It's most disingenious to pretend that Clinton was just going along with the UN when it was Clinton and Blair (surprise, surprise, the two Anglo Imperialist countries again) who pushed and bullied. Russia, China, and France, permanent members of the Security Council, had been demanding a relaxation of the sanctions since 1994 but the US and The UK refused. Blair Bush, Blair Clinton, dead Iraqis.

What is great though after all these conversations with people celebrating Saddam's capture, pretending Yugoslavia was a Humanitarian mission, pretending that Clinton just went along with the UN and that Clark was just following orders is that, even as a non-Dean supporter, I am beginning to value Gore's endorsement of Dean. After researching Ed Feighan and his ties to Clinton and to the same DLC that's pushing Clark and trying to destroy our vocabulary (war = peace), I am able to forgive Al Gore for prematurely endorsing Dean because this is a fight for the soul of our party. I want the side that at least admits the concept that war is not peace to win.

===
<snip>

Despite the fact that fellow UN Security Council members Russia, France and China are convinced that Iraq has disarmed, the US continues to insist on one inspection after another, without any commitment regarding lifting of sanctions. In 1998, UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter revealed that the US had successfully inserted intelligence agents in the UN inspection teams. The Iraqis refused the final UNSCOM inspection in reply, and this refusal was used to justify another round of US bombing in Operation Desert Fox. Compounding the hypocrisy of Washington's stance is the well-publicized fact that US corporations, including Exxon-Mobil and Chevron, are profiting from the strangulation of Iraq by purchasing Iraqi oil from third parties involved in the "humanitarian" Oil For Food program.
As early as the first half of the Clinton administration, US was resorting to proxy war in its campaign against Iraq. In 1994, Ahmad Chalabi of the Iraqi National Congress (INC) launched an insurrection from a base in Iraqi Kurdistan with US backing, intent on overthrowing the Ba'athist government before it could resume exporting oil. The insurrection was a dismal failure, but that didn't stop Chalabi from co-signing, with Caspar Weinberger, Frank Carlucci, and Donald Rumsfeld, an open letter to President Clinton in 1998, urging a second try. Toward the end of his term, President Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act, allocating $97 million for training and military equipment for Iraqi opposition groups. Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, and many other signers of the letter now hold positions in the Bush II administration, where they are counseling an all-out war under the handy pretext of the "War on Terrorism. "

<snip>
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Iraq/SlowMotionHolocaust_Iraq.html

===

By Barry Grey
28 September 1999
Clinton administration blocks easing of sanctions against Iraq

After two weeks of intensive negotiations within the United Nations Security Council, the United States has blocked efforts by France, Russia and China to lift sanctions against Iraq. Washington has thereby ensured the continuation of a policy which must rank as one of the great crimes against humanity of the twentieth century.

Only last month the UN children's agency, UNICEF, released a study showing that nine years of economic embargo, compounded by the devastation from two air wars, have produced a “humanitarian emergency.” UNICEF reported that mortality rates among infants and children under five in the central and southern parts of the country which are controlled by Baghdad, where 85 percent of Iraqis live, have more than doubled since 1989. The study further concluded that 20 percent of Iraqi children under five suffer from stunted growth caused by malnutrition.

UNICEF estimated that 500,000 child deaths are attributable to the sanctions. ((This is where Madeleine Albright's infamous comment comes in))

A number of other reports and eyewitness accounts have documented the existence of a social catastrophe in Iraq, resulting from the relentless economic, political and military assault by the most powerful nation in the world. In recent years Bill Clinton and his counterparts in Europe have employed the term “genocide” with near abandon to demonize leaders and regimes targeted for attack. But if anything in the past decade approaches the level of genocide, it is the systematic destruction of an entire nation carried out by the United States against Iraq.

To cite some of the indices of this tragedy:

Iraq claims that from August 6, 1990, when UN sanctions were first imposed in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, to late August of this year, 1,187,486 Iraqis died from sanctions-related causes. The United Nations estimates that 1 million have died, mostly children.

Iraq's economy has been shattered by sanctions and US-led bombings. Industry, irrigation, sanitation, the supply of clean water, healthcare and education have virtually collapsed. Baghdad claims the country's Gross Domestic Product is presently one-third of its pre-1991 level.

Studies have shown a drastic increase in the rate of birth defects and cancer as a result of environmental poisoning from depleted uranium weapons.

Jutta Burghardt, the head of the UN's World Food Program in Iraq, told a delegation of US congressional staffers earlier this month that Iraqi families spend approximately 70 percent of their total income for food. Burghardt said that by world and UN standards, that figure indicates “imminent famine.”

Denis Halliday, the former United Nations Humanitarian Coordinator for Iraq, who resigned in protest over the continuation of sanctions, claims the embargo is responsible for the death of 6,000 Iraqis every month.

His successor, Hans von Sponek, on September 19 called for an immediate and unconditional lifting of most sanctions, so as to permit a larger inflow of food, medicine and most other Iraqi imports. In a tacit, but pointed, attack on the US, he deplored the use of the Iraqi people as a “human shield” in the drive to topple the regime of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

On September 24, following the collapse of negotiations within the Security Council over Iraqi sanctions, French Foreign Minister Hubert Védrine issued an even more blunt attack on Washington, saying, “The United States is insensitive to the human catastrophe under way in Iraq.”

<snip>

No doubt the threat to US hegemony over the Persian Gulf and the region's petroleum reserves is a major factor in Washington's intransigent position.

<snip>

http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/sep1999/iraq-s28.shtml

[Mattforclark]

89. Post 85 (giggle) n/t

adsg

[Tinoire]

78. Message 65- just for you (giggle) n/t

:)

[Mattforclark]

87. Post 85 (giggle) n/t

asdf

[Tinoire]

116. You're twittering like a field-mouse. Something wrong with you? n/t

[Mattforclark]

56. By the way

Not that I see much problem in being involved with NED. The CEO of the Guardian is right next to Clark. I am sure he is doing evil things with Clark. Right.

But did you ever consider the possibility that maybe he did resign from some of these and the websites have just not been updated yet? Is that possible? At all possible? Faintly possible?

[Tinoire]

88. I dunno, Fabiani's still saying that there's no conflict of interest

as long as he's not receiving payments but you'll have to do your own research on that.

But here, I'll throw you a bone... Clark's no longer with Entrust and WaveCrest. It's amazing how fastidious Clark supporters are with timelines- as if to say that if he's no longer on these boards all is copacetic... Kind of like returning the payments for the speeches he gave after he entered the race... After the hue and cry, he returned the money and all was supposed to be forgotten.

Acxiom Corp., Entrust Inc. and the privately held WaveCrest Laboratories -- announced that Clark had resigned from their boards
10/09/2003 4:06:06 (Source: Yahoo Business)

xxx

Clark should have resigned from the corporate boards before his candidacy. He also should have realized taking money for speeches while seeking votes was not the brightest idea. What would have been non-stories became stories.

October 10, 2003
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=16933

[Field Of Dreams]

61. Shhhh!

"William Clark" is the alias for the diabolical duo of Bill Clinton and Wesley Clark. Clark is EVIL and a stalking horse for the Clintons and a DLC plant you know!

[Spazito]

55. Boards of Directors Listings are notorious at being behind...

often they do not publish a new list until they have an Annual General Meeting which, depending on the timing of a director's resignation, could leave that person's name on the list long after they are no longer affiliated with the organization.

[retyred]

70. So who's your candidate of choice?

Just asking!

[Jerseycoa]

77. Hahaha

:7


:dem:

[tameszu]

81. OK, just on the matter of CSIS

As an academic (a political scientist in training), I can say that CSIS is a non-partisan and centrist (along the lines of Brookings, but possibly more "hard edged" because it has more actual practitioners) academic research institute on security issues. I find it rather laughable that people would cite it as though it were some scary conspiratorial shadow institution. It's not. It's mainstream among International Relations and International Security Studies scholars.

[SahaleArm]

84. It's a shadow world of top Democrats and Republicans...

They're all boogeymen in a Vast Neo-Con Conspiricy, bring on Scully and Mulder.

[Julien Sorel]

92. According to some people here, CSIS is an influence peddling

company, just like Carlyle group, and Clark worked as a lobbyist there reporting directly to Henry Kissinger, who is the Chairman of CSIS, and as a result, Clark is a lobbyist for Kissinger. There is one individual, who has posted in this thread, in fact, who made that claim every day for several weeks straight, including a link to the CSIS website, and many people took that person at his word without ever checking out the link to find that that individual was full of the brown and smelly. I suppose that, too, would be considered 'impeccable research.'

[Jerseycoa]

86. Please edit

to remove Entrust, from which he resigned 10/8/2003.


:dem:

[Myra]

90. Thanks Jerseycoa. Who will *correct* this "impeccable" research???

The impeccable researcher or the impeccable poster?

[Mattforclark]

95. Impeccably incompetent is about it n/t

Yes, I am angered when people through around baseless accusations. Whatever, ban me from DU if you want.

[Jerseycoa]

91. Wavecrest, terribly sinister

The retired general has been devoting much of his time to running a company making a new kind of electric motor that does not require gears or a transmission, but uses computer algorithms to maximize torque and efficiency. The company, WaveCrest Laboratories of Dulles, Va., hopes to put these motors into hybrid gas-electric cars or even hydrogen-powered fuel-cell cars one day. But for now, WaveCrest is focused on bikes.

:dem:

[SahaleArm]

93. A plot for an oil-free world - Burn him at the stake! n/t

[Myra]

96. Impeccable irony SahaleArm!

:evilgrin:

[Jerseycoa]

98. They're good for wheelchairs, too (eom)

:dem:

[bhunt70]

136. WHEELCHAIRS OF DEATH!

sorry for the yelling but nefarious WHEELCHAIRS OF DEATH should always get respect.

[Mattforclark]

101. Oil free! Free oil!

He wants to steal everyone's oil! He'll be elected president and next thing you know we'll be invading the Soviet - errr Russia. He did almost start World War III, now dontcha know. :crazy:

[Jerseycoa]

131. Just a reminder

Waco :wow:

[Donna Zen]

112. Wow...that is cool! Go WaveCrest--hydrogen engins

Don't worry because the main instigators of this thread have participated on various threads which list the same information. If they don't know what most of these companies do, then this thread will not inform them. I'm waiting for a conformation, but in the mean while I will say that on two separate occasions Clark has stated that he had to resign from all boards because of the election. He pointed out that he was in this race because he was asked to be, had given up all outside income, while congress people kept their salaries and barely made it to Washington.

I guess when you're a foreign policy expert, you get asked to sit on boards. That he could have made more money sitting on weapons boards, like the beloved Shelton, is a choice he has said decided against.

"Is he still associated with NED" is a question because it is an appointment that he accepted from Clinton. Anyway, it runs for three years and will be over on Jan. 1, 04. Holbrook and Soros also sit on NED, or did at one time. Mondale was one of NED's founders. There have been huge threads on NED, and again, the people that chose to post this over ripe tripe participated in those discussions. NED has a Democratic branch, a Republican branch, an organized labor branch and a business branch. Clark did not participate in any other the four, but rather sat on the board which over saw the foundations money.

As we also know, Acxion's spokes person at the time was clear that General Clark had nothing to do with Jet Blue's contract. And it was Jet Blue who sold the data. The object of the new data base was to increase the perimeters, all of which had to part of the public record, in order to decrease the false positives that were throwing people off of airplanes because of mistaken identities.

If you read the longer articles exploring Clark's finances, you will know that most of the money he earned 1.6 million (highest earning year) came from speeches. He gets 30-60,000 a pop, at least until he began speaking for free on behalf of the citizens of this country. You know, your right to free speech so that you could write cut and paste smear jobs on message boards.

[democracy eh]

119. Wavecrest is flipping cool

the implications of these engines is unbelievable. they are in the wheel hub so no need for an 'engine' under a hood per say. they may very well revolutionize transportation. either less weight or more room for cargo and passengers, or smaller vehicles.

I really want one of the bikes.

I can't speak of Clark's other positions, but he is really passionate about and into Wavecrest.

sure they have potential military applications, but what the heck doesn't.

[arewethereyet]

103. if he gets elected he'll need to address that

but not necessary before. Setting off the boards would do nothing to keep him honest if her were dishonest and if he's honest then who cares ?

[Mattforclark]

104. Rationality

is an uncommon commodity. You possess the ability to think, and I commend you for it! Congratulations!

[arewethereyet]

111. why, thank you

it took my sainted Mom and Dad quite a lot of pounding to get a little common sense beaten into my thick skull and I thank then for it daily. Credit where the credit is really due, thanks for honoring my folks Matt.

[DemCam]

108. Enough already

[Mattforclark]

109. Please N/T

[DemCam]

121. gawdamighty.......still at it?

Bogus absurdus non-issueus

[dobak]

118. Call CSIS and ask if Clark is still a board member.

CSIS
1800 K St., NW
Washington, DC 20006
ph: 202.887.0200
fax: [phone]

[CivilRightsNow]

123. Wes Clark.. the wolf in sheep's clothing

Wesley Clark is a scary fellow. Yet nobody cares to speak about it.

I think his quote about letting other countries have the software jobs is pretty telling since he sits on the board at SIRVA, a company that specializes in not only outsourcing but H1 and L1 Visa misuse.

Ned scares me the most.. and those that lie down with dogs get up with fleas. They dont appoint you to this board, with this many shady members unless you fit their mold.


Links about NED:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/CIA/Reagan_CIA.html
http://www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAid/em461.cfm
http://www.saag.org/papers2/paper115.html
http://www.jpf.go.jp/j/region_j/cgp_j/intel/abe/original/report_04.html

http://www.publiceye.org/research/Group_Watch/Entries-71.htm
http://www.ecotalk.org/VotingMachineCompanies.htm

Here is some of a breakdown of Ned's members:

Wes Clark
"Former general, possible Democratic presidential candidate, and Segway rider Wesley Clark on why the military usually gets the money it needs while foreign aid, for example, usually loses out: "In the Defense Department, we've got the machinery. When we want something done we just make sure the B-2 Bomber is built in 49 states."

http://www.kabissa.org/lists/newsletter-submissions-l/0612.html

He joined Ned in 2001

Some more on Wesley and NED
http://la.indymedia.org/news/2003/10/88388.php

Clark praised Reagan for improving the military:

“We were really helped when President Ronald Reagan came in. I remember non-commissioned officers who were going to retire and they re-enlisted because they believed in President Reagan.” Clark continued: “That’s the kind of President Ronald Reagan was. He helped our country win the Cold War. He put it behind us in a way no one ever believed would be possible. He was truly a great American leader. And those of us in the Armed Forces loved him, respected him, and tremendously admired him for his great leadership.” (Ibid.)

Clark on President George H.W. Bush:

“President George Bush had the courage and the vision... and we will always be grateful to President George Bush for that tremendous leadership and statesmanship.” (Ibid.)

These are the people he is in bed with at NED:

Francis Fukuyama
This guy scares me. Ill only focus on a few links because there is so much info out there on how scary this guy is you should have no reason finding it on your own if you are interested.

Condi Rice buddy
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/lm/stories/s640487.htm

Member of the President's council on Bioethics
http://www.bioethics.gov/about/fukuyama.html

This is PNAC stuff. It's straight up weird. Scroll down for the article so you dont have to sign up for the NYT
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0204/msg00031.html


Vin Weber
http://www.mediatransparency.org/people/vin_weber.htm

He is linked to the CAE (Center for -- (Other board member, Micheal Novak is also linked to CAE
http://www.mediatransparency.org/recipients/cae.htm

http://www.citypages.com/databank/23/1119/article10388.asp

He is even part of PNAC
http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

Vin also had links to ChoicePoint, the people who helped steal the election and are now contracted for Ashcroft's Total Information Awareness Project:
http://www.gregpalast.com/printerfriendly.cfm?artid=203

Thomas Donahue
President of Federated
http://www.federatedinvestors.com/company/history.asp
http://opengov.media.mit.edu/EX/0000/100/124/472/

Federated talks to the SEC alot:
Federated on the Sarbanes -Oxley Act
http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/s73302/skeen1.htm
On the Investment company act of 1940 amendment
http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/s72101/neuman1.htm

Federated Is linked to the Galliot Center (Oh, his dad owns Federated, by the way):
In its role as advisor to the JEC, the Center produces "Quarterly International Economics Reports" that are distributed to members of Congress and published by the JEC. Several of the reports have been supported by international news stories and opinion-editorials, authored by Meltzer and/or Lerrick, in London's Financial Times and The Wall Street Journal. Another measure of the Center's impact is the implementation of its research as policy. President George W. Bush has highlighted the Center's grant-based aid proposal as a cornerstone of the Administration's international development strategy.
http://wpweb2k.gsia.cmu.edu/gsia/media/10-23-02NS.asp

William H Frist - Senate Republican Majority Leader
http://opengov.media.mit.edu/DBD/CACHE/0000/000/300/045/

He also wrote this book
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?isbn=0742522458

He is the health industry's man in the govt.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A14010-2003Nov7¬Found=true

Frist also froze the probe into prewar iraq data


Suzanne Garmet
--formerly of AEI fame
http://www.aei.org/scholars/view.,dateType.,year.,month.,recNo.0,filter.social/scholar_byname.asp

***Micheal Novak and Richard Perle are scholars at AEI.. so is Lynne Cheney.. and Gingrich (this will make sense in the next link)

Defending Gingrich
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/congress/january97/scandal_1-8.html

She is also in bed with Vin Webber in The Council for Excellence in Govt.. Lee Hamilton makes an appearance there too. Look at the Coucil's Corporate partners
http://www.excelgov.org/displayContent.asp?NewsItemID=1315&Keyword=prnwChanging

Last but not least, she is married to Nixon's former special counsel after Watergate broke.
Leonard Garmet wrote:
http://www.bookreporter.com/reviews/0465026141.asp
Some speculate he may just be Deepthroat.

Lee H. Hamilton
http://www.9-11commission.gov/about/bio_hamilton.htm
-- He is also on the 9/11 comission.. guess he is Kissinger's stand in

Also on the homeland security advisory council
http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Homeland_Security_Advisory_Council

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1994_cr/h940721-terror-is.htm

The Role of the Congress in US Foreign Policy - http://www.csis.org/html/sp98hamilton.html

Last Words: October Sunrise

Ralph J. Gerson
Sits on the Henry Ford Board of Trustees
http://www.hfmgv.org/about/mission.asp

He LOVES Globalization (check out his article on page 30 of the following link)
http://www.wdi.bus.umich.edu/publications/gp_pdf/gp_issue2_fall2002.pdf

Bio - http://www.consespain-usa.org/intro/biografias/ing/14.html

Matthew McHugh
From 1975 to 1992, McHugh represented the 27th and 28th Congressional Districts of New York. While in Congress, McHugh served on a number of committees and sub-committees, including the Appropriations Committee and the Arms Control and Foreign Policy Committee, which he chaired in the early 1980s.

Then, he became counselor to the president of the World Bank... WTF?

A speech: http://inside.binghamton.edu/September-October/16sept99/mchugh.html

NED also helped steal the election in 2000 through its baby thinktank IFES
"The passage of landmark electoral reform legislation in the United States in 2002 opens the door for IFES to apply its extensive international experience in efforts to improve elections at home. IFES has already taken steps in this direction. We joined the Center for Democracy to conduct assessment and observation missions in Miami-Dade County for the November 2002 general elections, and we delivered long-term recommendations for improving elections in the county. We conducted a similar mission to the City of St. Louis prior to the November 2002 election. We are eager to continue contributing our expertise to make the U.S. electoral system a model of which we can be proud." page 8 http://www.ifes.org//biennial_low_PRINT.pdf

"After being focused almost entirely overseas from the time of our founding, IFES is now rendering a real service in the United States. Following the passage of the Help America Vote Act of 2002, we are eager to help jurisdictions across America with the challenges of adopting new technologies, meeting federal standards, and educating voters and poll workers.
Another new focus for IFES is the Arab world, a region of tremendous human potential that will benefit greatly from releasing the power of its citizenry through more open political systems. IFES has a track record as a trusted advisor in this region." page 12


More: http://www.ifes.org/new_initiatives/US_elections.htm

Paul DeGregorio -
http://www.dailyillini.com/dec00/dec05/news/campus02.shtml
He helps recount the FL votes for Bush.

Guess who else Paul DeGregorio is? Vice President of IFES
Then, guess who gets nominated to to the Election Assistance Commission buy Baby Bush?
http://www.ifes.org/pressroom/Press%20Releases/06_12_03_DeGregorio_EAC.pdf

Wesley Clark also praised Bush and Blair on the Iraq war.
"As for the political leaders themselves, President Bush and Tony Blair should be proud of their resolve in the face of so much doubt. And especially Mr Blair, who skillfully managed tough internal politics, an incredibly powerful and sometimes almost irrationally resolute ally, and concerns within Europe. Their opponents, those who questioned the necessity or wisdom of the operation, are temporarily silent, but probably unconvinced. And more tough questions remain to be answered. "

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0917-14.htm

[Tom Rinaldo]

126. I know that

you know someone, who knows someone, who knows someone, who is REALLY EVIL.

[Donna Zen]

128. Done...done...done...

One million times, and a thousand cut and pastes later, the pieces are out of context and pure swill from the belly of the racid beast.

Let's take this which is the flaming off point to a string of people who have at one time been associated with NED:

These are the people he is in bed with at NED

Now what the writer fails to tell you is that there are also members of the Congressional Black Caucus at NED. Or that the purpose of the organization is to spread democracy and democratic ideals. Are there assholes appointed to NED? Yes, because one half of the people there are republicans and big business. But there are also union leaders and Democrats. They also, when you look at some of the past projects, actually do some good things. Promoting women in politics in third world countries is suddenly the kiss of death. Not in the book of the sensible.

Ask yourself how twisted does one have to be to be consumed by such hatred?

Now I can tell you one thing for sure, with any sensible person looking at a presidential NED appointment might think that the person receiving that honor was in someway deserving of respect. But not here!

The rest of this over lengthy and constantly posted cut and paste bile is equally as unworthy of note.

I'm going to bed now, but if anyone has the debunking filed fill free to post. But here's a warning: they won't read it, they don't give a shit, and they will post the entire pile of dung someday real soon. Just you wait.

[CivilRightsNow]

134. I have spent hundreds of hours on research on this..

and am the writer.. so you can take your opinion that you havent spent hundreds of hours on and stick it whereever you would like.

Reagan started NED... it is no more part of friggin democracy as democrats know it then the CBN.

You people druge up the same 20 good things and say.. woohoo in 20 years here are the marginally good things they have done. Yes, they have some good members, yes they have done some good things.. BUT LOOK AT THEIR BOARD, look at what they are doing NOW.. Tell me what is for show and what is what governs this institution.. Maybe you'll be able to figure that out.

"The rest of this over lengthy and constantly posted cut and paste bile is equally as unworthy of note.

I'm going to bed now, but if anyone has the debunking filed fill free to post. But here's a warning: they won't read it, they don't give a shit, and they will post the entire pile of dung someday real soon. Just you wait."

It's posted because NONE of you can debunk it. None of you even take the time to read it. Just because you make a post saying its been debunked dont make it true. This is what it is debunked with, Ill paste it for you. Try to pay some close attention to the Democrats that they list. Yeah, Im proud of "Election 2000" Graham and "October Surprise" Hamilton . Im so proud they are democrats that my fellow party members think are assets in a "debunking" post:

Actually the NED has SEVERAL Democrats on its board some of whom were or are presently in Congress,
including: Sen. Bob Graham(Fla), Rep. Gregory Meeks (N.Y.), Howard Wolpe(Michigan), Lee Hamilton(Indiana),
Matthew McHugh (NY), Evan Bayh (Indiana). Clark was a Clinton appointee.

There are also Labor Representatives: Thomas Donahue (AFL-CIO) and Leon Lynch (United Steel of A)

The reason there are both White and Black hats is because the NED is BI-PARTISAN non profit organization
funded by Congress (after 1994 it accepts contributions from private sector).

The NED's mission is to "help strengthen Democratric Instititutions around the world". Like all government
organizations it has been used towards both good and BAD ends... as the Left and Right BOTH get to direct
where funds go. The funds are dispursed through the following four organizations (two are Democratic/Labor & two are
Republican).

"The NED funnels its money overseas either through direct grants to foreign organizations or through
four NED core institutes: the American Center for International Labor Solidarity (ACILS), the Center for
International Private Enterprise (CIPE), the International Republican Institute (IRI), and the National
Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI)." (snip)

Some of the Good Stuff done by fellows who got grants from the NED (which has gotten good words from
Amnesty International):

Chaihark Hahm, (November 2001 - August 2002)
Constitutionalism and Democracy in South Korea
Dr. Hahm's project focuses on constitutional review and democracy in South Korea. He examines the role of
the Korean Constitutional Court in building democracy in South Korea, using a comparative framework that
considers the influence of political culture and cultural traditions

Charlie James Hughes, (May 2002 - August 2002)
A Practitioner's Handbook on Civic Education Initiatives
Charlie Hughes is the director and "driving force" behind the Forum for Democratic Initiatives (FORDI) in
Sierra Leone. His project focuses on civic education initiatives in the United States which can be applied in
Sierra Leone

Ramin Jahanbegloo, (October 2001 - August 2002 )
Intellectuals and Democracy in Iran
Dr. Jahanbegloo's project focuses on the role of Iranian intellectuals in promoting Iranian democracy,
including the attitudes of youth and young professionals in Iran today

Yuriy Krynytskyy, (April - August 2002)
Political Technologies and the Promotion of Democracy in Ukraine
Mr. Krynytskyy is a young activist from Kharkiv, Ukraine, who serves as press secretary and head of a
district division of the "Rukh" party (People's Movement of Ukraine).

Ndubisi Obiorah, (June - August 2002)
Corruption and Democracy in Africa: A Comparative Perspective
Mr. Obiorah is a Nigerian human rights lawyer who has worked for HURILAWS, the Human Rights Law
Service in Lagos


Adotei Akwei, Ghana
Governance, Repression, and Human Rights in Africa
Visiting Fellow, July - December 2003
Mr. Akwei is Senior Advocacy Director for Africa at Amnesty International USA, serving as his organization's
chief spokesperson, strategist, and liaison with the U.S. government, media, and the general public on
African human rights issues and U.S. foreign policy toward Africa

Ladan Boroumand, Iran
Promoting Democracy and Human Rights in Iran
Visiting Fellow, October 2002 - September 2003
Dr. Ladan Boroumand is director of the Abdorrahman Boroumand Foundation for the Promotion of Human
Rights and Democracy in Iran. She earned her doctorate in history from the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en
Sciences Sociales in Paris, where she published La guerre des principes (1999), a book exploring the
tensions during the French Revolution between the rights of man and the sovereignty of the nation. Her
project examines the prospects for democracy in Iran from a historical perspective.

Clark May ver well propose closing NED activities and replacing it with a DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AID (similar to Kecinich's Dept. of Peace, but as an International dept/not so much domestic) to replace it:
Clark Wants More Foreign Aid, New Department to Handle It
Book Faults Bush for Pursuing Notion of American 'Empire'

By Bradley Graham
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, September 29, 2003; Page A05

A new book by Wesley K. Clark, the retired Army general running for president, calls for a major expansion
in U.S. foreign assistance programs and establishment of a Department of International Assistance to
manage the initiative.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14400-2003Sep28.html

[robbedvoter]

153. Geez! try spending half of this on W - might do some good!

What's your beef and have you heard from Vince Foster lately?

[CivilRightsNow]

157. Try reading some of it and it might do some good...

Umm, GWBush scares me much less the Wesley Clark. I think Ill stay right where Im at.

The 80s called and they want their slogan and inane humor back...;)

[Tinoire]

133. Great. Thanks again!

That's what we need more of here. More research and less hand-wringing and obfuscation. Your thread reminds me of the old DU.

[CivilRightsNow]

135. Thanks...

But it doesnt matter. None of them will ever read it until it's made into a movie on the hallmark, lifetime or showtime channel.

Dont clutter up our pretty little heads with links and information! Clark is good.. repeat after me.. he just likes to make money! Who doesnt like to make money? Money good! Democracy spread with propaganda and CIA operations, good! Questioning, bad!

[Ksec]

146. I looked at your links

sorry but theyre crap. Theyre just a bunch of innuendo and half truths. No solid evidence when you use suspect information from less than credible websites

[CivilRightsNow]

152. Sooo...if you looked at em..

Which ones were crap? The ones from the think tanks? The ones from the gov? The ones from various educational facilities? Common dreams? Which ones? As they come from everywhere. What is credible to you? I mean, hell.. if none of those are.. then maybe you should tell me what spirit I should be channeling or something.

:rolleyes:

[realFedUp]

138. wow, that's some research also...

thanks for posting.

[tameszu]

155. Uh, Francis Fukyama was low-level State Dep't official

who wrote a fluffy book called _The End of History and the Last Man_ which loosely read Hegel so as to suggest that the United States and capitalist liberal democracy are the pinnacle/end state of civilization. But it's not much more than pseudo-academic musing that made some neocons happy. Now because the guy's vaguely famous gets to pontificate about current affairs at think tanks and in Time Magazine. Not really much more scary than a more successful than average RW prof or, I dunno, a RW editor like David Brooks. Ooh, is being associated with the New York Times now cause for illuminati status? Sheesh.

[CivilRightsNow]

159. Uhhhh....

Now he is the President's advisor on Science and bio ethics and he gives regular speeches a the IMF, sits on the board at PNAC and NED... just to name a few things this guy does and.. he's just some silly author? It isnt just think tanks and time magazine.

Someone has to help spin the media. The New America Foundation, which he also sits on the board at... provided more contributions to the opinion pages of the Los Angeles Times and New York Times then any other research organisation in 2002 (More then even Weyrich over at Heritage).

I dunno what this year's stats will be, but Im sure they wont disappoint.

[CivilRightsNow]

161. The Cato institute calls NED a "Loose Cannon"

This is a rather long critique of NED by the Cato institute with a heck of alot of information in it... Keeping with the copyright guidelines, I will simply post this:

"NED's 10-year history has proven the skeptics right, however. On a number of occasions the lack of coordination between NED and the federal government has resulted in NED programs that undermine official U.S. foreign policy. Examples of NED failures are ubiquitous, but NED's defenders are hard-pressed to cite definitive successes.

At its most innocuous, NED is a slush fund for politicians.(3) Journalist David Corn has described it as "a porkbarrel for a small circle of Republican and Democratic party activists, conservative trade unionists and free marketeers who use the endowment money to run their own mini-State Departments."(4) The distribution of money to opposing interest groups helps NED deflect charges of partisanship in the distribution of pork, but the fact remains that the taxpayer is picking up the tab for politicking.

Moreover, although the four core grantees appear to represent diverse constituencies, Corn and other liberal critics accuse NED of leaning too far to the right, because the Republican party, business (represented by the Chamber of Commerce group), and organized labor all generally adopt a conservative stance when it comes to foreign policy. That leaves only the National Democratic Institute to represent more liberal views.

At the same time, conservative critics bring up the issue of proportion among the four main recipients: the AFL CIO receives approximately 40 percent of available funding, while each of the other groups receives around 10 percent. That imbalance has prompted speculation that NED is in the hands of the neo-Trotskyite Social Democrats/USA, whose membership includes both NED president Carl Gershman and a number of AFL-CIO officials involved with the endowment.(5) Such political rancor is inevitable when an organization is authorized to pursue partisan agendas abroad at taxpayers' expense."
http://www.cato.org/pubs/fpbriefs/fpb-027.html

It talks about their irresponsibility and mismanagement as well as counter productive efforts that have undermined the US foreign policy.

[SahaleArm]

164. Credibility? Cato is an isolationist libertarian "think tank" n/t

[CivilRightsNow]

170. Heh... Can you give me the credibilty stats on clark04.com?

Since we cant verify any of it with a voting record.. or a life record.

These are opinions. To sit there and have you people say that NED isnt bad cause it is made up of all kinds of people, yadda yadda yadda.. and then pounce straight on the next think tank is definately laughable. Isnt it made up of a whole lot of different people too? Come on now.. Pick yer stories and stick with em.

Im not saying Cato is great. I am saying that you know you've got a problem when the think tanks and republicans start eating their own.

[CivilRightsNow]

162. Republican Senator Ron Paul on NED

Federal House of Representatives, October 7, 2003

Mme. Speaker: I rise to express my grave concerns over H.Con.Res. 274. The misnamed National Endowment for Democracy (NED) is nothing more than a costly program that takes US taxpayer funds to promote favored politicians and political parties abroad. Mr. Speaker, what the NED does in foreign countries, through its recipient organizations the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and the International Republican Institute (IRI), would be rightly illegal in the United States. The NED injects "soft money" into the domestic elections of foreign countries in favor of one party or the other. Imagine what a couple of hundred thousand dollars will do to assist a politician or political party in a relatively poor country abroad. It is particularly Orwellian to call US manipulation of foreign elections "promoting democracy." How would Americans feel if the Chinese arrived with millions of dollars to support certain candidates deemed friendly to China? Would this be viewed as a democratic development?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul134.html

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:h.con.res.274:

[wyldwolf]

125. So?

I agree with this post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=915558&mesg_id=915926&page=

[Ksec]

132. Jeez I just posted in the wrong place and

And alot of you sound exactly like freepers(no offense meant)

So he sits on boards, big deal, its not a crime.

Would you turn down free money?

[Myra]

141. Well, who can argue with "research" presented like this?

"and am the writer.. so you can take your opinion that you havent spent hundreds of hours on and stick it whereever you would like."

Bravo bravo.

And then sourcing the Washington Post, which is down there with
the NY Times.

Bravo bravo.

[Name removed]

143. Deleted message

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

[Tom Rinaldo]

145. Well you never explained

why all your great links still left you making a wildly false claim about Clark earning 25 million dollars a year when the facts are public record. And why your links did not include those that showed that Clark had resigned from some boards after the September cut off you chose to use (interesting, because Clark was not a cnadidate before September). Also how is it that you got General Wesley Clark confused with another Wesley Clark in some of your research, or why you failed to note that Wavecrest was developing alternative energy engines that, while being offered to the military for small scooter replacements, hardly fits most people's image of the military Industrial complex as you characterized it.

Actually there is a lot of good raw material in your research, and I credit you for your ability to provide positive examples of work that NED has supported,as an example, but in addition to including some faulty and misleading information in your posts, you fail to directly link Clark to the bad things rather than the good things, and you only mentioned the more liberal members of NED's board after others on this thread pointed out that your presentation was slanted through ommissions.

[mikehiggins]

147. I refer you to post 144

There is no point to letting these individuals set the agenda on this topic. There are nine candidates in the race. One will get the nomination. Sixty days from now we will be well on our way to finding out who that will be.

Until then, there is little value to arguing these points. They will accomplish nothing and I am sorry that the authors have spent so much time researching what is essentially a waste of bandwidth.

When I was a boy in the conservative movement we used to have people who were very hard workers because they were true beleivers. Those of us who were working on the ground appreciated them because they could always be counted on to show up for leafletting, and making phone calls and stuffing envelopes and so forth (these were the days long before computers made modern campaigning possible). Often they would serve as the "memory" of the various campaigns because they always had a quote or a clipping or some piece of research that supported their point of view. We humored them, as I said, but we didn't pay too much attention to them. Basically we treated them like one of Ross Perot's crazy uncles up in the attic. Why? Because nobody cared about all their research; not the campaigns, not the workers and most especially, not the voters.

This stuff is the political equivalent of porn. It can only be used to do harm and, in the long run, it makes your own hands sticky.

What is the essential difference between all of this stuff and the ad being complained about by the Dean campaign? The intent is the same, isn't it?

[CivilRightsNow]

151. Umm..

How exactly did you get me confused and lumped together with 3 different people? I said nothing about wavecrest. I said nothing about Clark making 25 million dollars. My concern about Clark centers around NED. Ill get into the corporations later. I also never got Wesley Clark confused with anyone else... though obviously you got me confused with not one but several different posters although are names are not even remotely similar.



Also,
There are way more questionable comments made in this thread. I have no idea why my comment was deleted.

In it,I also mentioned my links were broad and sweeping. They come from all over the place. Left wing, right wing.. etc. I covered some of the "liberals" that sit on the board in my post. So dont pretend that I didnt. But if you look at the research, you will find they are not liberals after all. You dont even read my whole posts... if you did you would have found that I was simply helping the clark mongers to regurgitate their "debunking" which I consider pure garbage.

So, pray tell what faulty logic and misleading information have *I* presented? Not the entity that you seem to wish to lump us all into. None. There are 41 links in my NED information. There are only a *handful* of links that are not to the think tanks own pages.. to a govt site or to an educational facility. Included in the questionable links are places like Common dreams which are considered valid here all the time. Where the heck am I supposed to link to?

Someone tell me what is acceptable and what isnt, cause this is total crap.

[Tom Rinaldo]

154. You are right

I apologize. It was late, I was tired and frustrated. Much of what I said did not pertain to your posts.

[CivilRightsNow]

156. Thank you.

:)

[Tom Rinaldo]

165. I am a little lost about the point you are making

I understand that NED has been all over the map, it has supported questionable things, some very questionable things, and some extremely questionable to evil things, along with some sort of OK things, some reasonably good things, and a few overall positive things. I am willing to believe that NED is a loose cannon. I personally think the State Departnment is often a loose cannon, not to mention the Defence Department.

I think the U.S. Government has and will continue to be a somewhat loose canon regardless of who wins the next election. It is a huge huge enterprise with millions of people pursuing various agendas.

No one who is not regularly rubbing shoulders with enough major players and wheelers and dealers stands any chance of winning the American Presidency. That is simply a fact. For many years I stayed out of Presidential politics for that reason, staying active on the grass roots level instead. This year I have changed course and believe the stakes are too high to not do what I can to make sure Bush doesn't remain in the White House.

When I take a quick look at NED, I see Board positions as prestige appointments that give people access to the halls and bathrooms of power. Much like the Bohemian Club in the SF Bay Area where I personally have demonstrated against their meetings. But the Bohemian Club has the added negative of being for men only. If someone like Paul Wellstone can particate in NED, and Bob Graham, simple membership is not enough to turn me against a candidate for President. For Congress maybe it would be a veto, because we do not need to assemble such a huge national coalition to win a Congressioal seat as we do to win the Presidency.

I have not seen anything that I find convincing about Clark's involvement at NED that marks him as a relative bad guy. Chains of Associations do not do it for me. One can find comparable chains like that for every past occupant of the White House and for other candidates running now as well.

[CivilRightsNow]

169. In context, my friend

I understand that NED has been all over the map, it has supported questionable things, some very questionable things, and some extremely questionable to evil things, along with some sort of OK things, some reasonably good things, and a few overall positive things. I am willing to believe that NED is a loose cannon. I personally think the State Departnment is often a loose cannon, not to mention the Defence Department.

Okay, I guess the biggest point Im trying to make here is that organizations are living breathing entities.. they are made up of humans, just like you and me. If we look at these organizations and what they do, who they are.. we can get some sort of sense of what they are doing NOW. What concerns me is that yes, over the years things have been slowing spinning out of control and in the last few years a good deal of the things NED is involved in are very right wing.. this indicates even more of a power shift and an organization that seems to think it can run foreign policy plays better then our elected officials. This also concerns me because of what NED does with its propaganda network during election times like these.. as well as the part that IFES had to play in Bush winning FL in 2000. I worry about what they have up their sleeves now.

I think the U.S. Government has and will continue to be a somewhat loose canon regardless of who wins the next election. It is a huge huge enterprise with millions of people pursuing various agendas.

See, I think that if you look at the relatively small number of people controlling a very large portion of things, which is something that even the average american is starting to feel, you will see that the inner sanctum is shrinking. As it shrinks, it is gaining more power.. it is accomplishing amazing things with is monopoly that it was unable to do before. I mean, look at what the BFEE has done. Would you ever have thought that it could be done in this country? I think Clark is a part of the same beast. I feel that this election is absolutely pivotal for the american people. We can continue down this path towards control and america's incorporation and an inbred govt, or, we can begin to recognize the factors at play here. The agendas are aligning.

Although I agree that the govt may continue to be "somewhat" of a loose cannon while fixing the mistakes made by this administration.. I feel that by putting someone in power that has ties to places like NED as well as major corporations and was campaigning for Bush 2 years ago, even lauding praises on him 8 months ago... we are insuring that america becomes a cannon, and I fear that it will not only be pointed abroad, but at us, here at home..

No one who is not regularly rubbing shoulders with enough major players and wheelers and dealers stands any chance of winning the American Presidency. That is simply a fact. For many years I stayed out of Presidential politics for that reason, staying active on the grass roots level instead. This year I have changed course and believe the stakes are too high to not do what I can to make sure Bush doesn't remain in the White House.

But see, I believe that the wheelers and dealers shouldnt be making the decisions.. I believe that the people of this country from every walk of life should be getting represented. So I reject your simple fact. I believe in my fellow americans and that if they are actually given information that they can elect the right person for the job.. not just the ones with the biggest campaign contributers and media hogs.

When I take a quick look at NED, I see Board positions as prestige appointments that give people access to the halls and bathrooms of power. Much like the Bohemian Club in the SF Bay Area where I personally have demonstrated against their meetings. But the Bohemian Club has the added negative of being for men only. If someone like Paul Wellstone can particate in NED, and Bob Graham, simple membership is not enough to turn me against a candidate for President. For Congress maybe it would be a veto, because we do not need to assemble such a huge national coalition to win a Congressioal seat as we do to win the Presidency.

Well, I see board positions as a prestige appointments that people are given when they align to the purpose of an organization. I dont believe that people are just magically appointed that do not fit into those molds. --I also protest every year regarding the Bohemian Club, I wonder if we have met-- You cite Paul Wellstone.. and yes, he was an amazing man.. I wish that he was the majority at NED, not the minority. But my focus is NED's current administration. Not it's past. I find it very telling concerning the powerstructure currently in place at NED that Clark was appointed along with:

Frank Carlucci, Julia Finley, Vin Webber, Francis Fukyama and Richard Holbrooke. ( http://www.kabissa.org/lists/newsletter-submissions-l/0612.html )

I realize I havent added information on all these characters to my list of NED links, I will be posting a complete list soon.

Now, you can say that guilt by association is unfair.. you can say that you dont care that the vast majority of the organization is bad.. but, I do care. As an American, I care about the fact that these think tank organizations have been subversively running our government for 20 years now.. but nothing like what we have going on now. -- Also, brother, you referenced Bob Graham? That man does not do justice to the Democratic title. Id suggest you do a little research on Mr. Graham.

I have not seen anything that I find convincing about Clark's involvement at NED that marks him as a relative bad guy. Chains of Associations do not do it for me. One can find comparable chains like that for every past occupant of the White House and for other candidates running now as well.

And that is your perogative. I go with the feelings I have developed from his interviews at beliefnet to "friend of israel" statements.. to NED's involvement in Haiti (Clark was there too), to Sirva and quotes on letting technology jobs go overseas.. to so much more. And I try my damnedest to develop the clearest picture of the man that I can. The fact is, we dont have any real information on Clark other then what has been released since his campaign... we dont know how he would have voted on key issues when push came to shove. We dont know how much military bravado he would have employed.. we dont know a hell of alot. And of course everything coming out of his mouth and his campaign is going to be sunshine and roses.

But I feel like the man is carrying around some pretty dark clouds. I've said it before... Im bad at organizing information. That is something that I have to figure out. But, the storm is a brewing... and I cannot be silent.

[Tom Rinaldo]

171. It is harder to defend an imperfect individual over an abstraction

So I have to ask you, who are you backing for President this time around? I don't have time for a long post right now, but I wanted to acknowledge and thank you for a writing thoughtful reply. I will say this though about rubbing shoulders with the wheelers and dealers, I stand by my comments. I am not saying that all shoulders are created equal (well maybe they were created equal, but they don't stay that way). Indeed some associations are more compromising than others. But I accept that anyone who gets close enough to reach for the Presidential ring has had some hands pushing him along that I for one would rather not be touched by.

Is is not always the candidates fault. He or she is not completely free to chose who choses to back them for their own reasons. But Bush will turn to the Republican Party in the Fall for their machinery and our candidate will do the same with the Democratic Party. National Parties are big machines, and not all their parts are desirable or subject to easy inspection and replacement. And to get the serious attention of those machines in the first place requires money or connections.

I don't know if you support Dean, and it is wonderful that he has cranked up an effective grass roots fundraising machine, but Dean would not be where he is today had he not held elective office as a Governor, and to do that, and win reelections, he had to wheel and deal with Enron, IBM, Yankee Nuclear, and the like.

We have a diferent take on Clark. I think he is who he says he is, someone who pursued a career of Service in the military. I think he is a pragmatic idealist who learned what he needed to, to advance his career. Without those skills he would make a lousey President, so I don't begrudge him for them. I think by staying task oriented in service to his nation in a non partisan military context Clark actually preserved some shreds of political innoncens that mainstream politicians have had to compromise doing that money solicitation grind every two to four years. I do have a radical political background, was very active in the Abalone Alliance in CA, blah blah. I've worked a lot in mental health also. I have generally been an excellent judge of character. I've met Clark. I think he is sincere.

[CivilRightsNow]

173. Well.. I believe that there *is* real good and evil

I dont expect people to be absolutely perfect. But as I watch the world get worse and worse, I do expect some goodness. Doesnt mean the knees of your pants cant be dirty... but Im just not down with those covered in mud.

I have not picked a candidate yet. I originally was very happy to hear about Clark. He was my initial choice, but I began to research the candidate.. and I have been stuck on Clark since, Ill be posting a website soon with the information, if I dont decide to just go ahead and join the popular trend here of writing books. ;) I dont generally veer towards Dean.. he just doesnt strike me as the kind of guy with the fortitude to carry the party, much less the country, if anyone.. I really like Kucinich's points, but I will need to do some more research into what he accomplished in OH.. and who donates to his campaign.. what bills he has been involved in.. etc. I will vote almost any candidate that gets the nomination (based on my current basic research on the 9).. However, if Clark gets the nomination.. which I really think he will, by hook or by crook, I will write in Mickey Mouse or possibly vote green. I will not vote Clark.

I, too have been very active.. however, I support Not in Our Name and Code Pink mainly nowadays, I also am very active in the anti globalization movements, but feel what is going on here at home must take my attention right now.I have also met Clark and being a woman, my intuition screamed bad juju.. his eyes were very ruthless in my opinion.

I always read the 50 year old conspiracy theorists and roll my eyes, but I can only make my opinion based upon my own research, gut instinct and experiences... that is all any of us can do. This isnt the world I want to live in.. I dont want to feel that a democratic candidate is truly a product of the propaganda machine that NED has been perfecting globally and has been recently enacting locally. Their fingerprints are all over the election scandal and the media spin on "liberation" of iraq. I, in all good conscience, cannot support a candidate that sits on it's board.

Even if he is only a name sake. Even if he has NOTHING to do with any of it.. he still runs in those circles strongly enough that the people who sit on that board would think he was a good fit. This isnt a democratically elected panel... you get in from the inside. NED also has some very interesting connections to what happened in Haiti under Clark's watch-- I know what he says in his book, but the recollections just dont gell for me.. Im still trying to formulate the whole reason why with as much information as I can find.

Clark's theme song for me is Pink Floyd's "Welcome to the Machine".. it plays over and over in my mind's eye as I find out more and more about him and the people that, yes, I feel he is involved with.

Welcome my son
Welcome to the machine
Where have you been?
It's alright we know where you've been
You've been in the pipeline
Filling in time
Provided with toys and scouting for boys
You bought a guitar to punish your ma
And you didn't like school
And you know you're nobody's fool
So welcome to the machine
Welcome to the machine

Welcome my son
Welcome to the machine
What did you dream?
It's alright we told you what to dream
You dreamed of a big star
He played a mean gituar
And he always ate in the steak bar
And he loved to drive in his Jaguar
So welcome to the Machine

[Tom Rinaldo]

176. Clinton gave Clark that post

Because Clark was one of the only Military men around that Clinton could relate to. Clark embodied the type of new thinking in the military that Clinton was seeking as he tried to fashion a new Post Cold War foreign policy. Clinton never was popular with the Pentagon during his Presidency. Come to think of it neither was Clark, with the exception of maybe one or two strong backers. Clark wasn't even the military's choice to become NATO Commander. Yes I think there is evil in the world but I don't think Clark is it. You have a theory, and you are going about trying to assemble facts that will prove it. A Clinton appointment to NED does not establish that someone is on the dark side. You are starting out assuming the worst, and I just don't see it in this case, but I respect your dedication to your causes.

[CivilRightsNow]

177. No he didnt- That is misinformation

I dont know where you got that information but the board is elected among the current directors at NED. Clinton did not give him that position.

It works like any corporation.

Tsk. Tsk.

[Tom Rinaldo]

178. I don't remember where I read about Clinton's role

And I can only assume you are correct about the exact proceedure. Maybe I am 100% mistaken, could well be, I am never afraid to admit when I am wrong. But my fuzzy recollection is that each Party has a role in placing people on the Board, maybe it is a matter of nominating people, but I really was under the impression that Clinton had an involvement in promoting Clark.

[Zero Division]

148. Original Post Deleted by Author

I wish some people would actually try and respectfully answer some of the rebuttals that people like Tom Rinaldo have give.

[Myra]

149. Ilk kick

eom

[nolabels]

158. A fine thread in deed

:kick:

[1songbird]

166. Most of this I knew and no one

should be surprised. If your expertise is in military operations then who says that you should not profit within your area of expertise. He was a career military man and I would think that anyone would be crazy if they did not put their experience to use to make a profit for themselves. The key point is that he is not in office yet. He is still an ordinary citizen just as we all are. I personally want him in office specifically because of his military expertise. For those that say we must turn this war over to the UN, I say get a grip. They are struggling in Afghanistan now and I don't think they will take on the task of Iraq. It's morally wrong to expect them to as well. We created this mess and we must fix it.

The foundations themselves may have ties with individuals that we don't like but what is Gen. Clark's specific role in the National Endowment for Democracy and other groups? We don't know this. Move along nothing to see here.

[maddezmom]

167. Is the problem Clark is moderately wealthy or where he got his wealth?

Sometimes while reading these types of threads, I feel people believe he is evil not only for how he obrtained his wealth but because he has "money".

[CivilRightsNow]

168. Neither..

The problem as most of us see it isnt money. He could have 90 billion or .90 as a result. The problems are who he alligns himself with. What companies he represents. Some feel that is a big indicator of what kind of person he is.

[DemCam]

174. Still beating the dead horse?

Poor ol' thing.

When you haven't got a case...use every scurrilous lie or scurrilous source that can be googled.

Sometimes its hard...when we've become so cynical and distrustful...to recognize the real thing, the man who has our best interests at heart...the man who risks it all.

It will come to you...just hope it isn't too late.

[DemCam]

175. Still beating the dead horse?

Poor ol' thing.

When you haven't got a case...use every scurrilous lie or scurrilous source that can be googled.

Sometimes its hard...when we've become so cynical and distrustful...to recognize the real thing, the man who has our best interests at heart...the man who risks it all.

It will come to you...just hope it isn't too late.

[TexasSissy]

179. I don't see anything wrong with any of those business connections.

It's not like he was on the board of Enron or anything, and sold his stock before the bust. Or on the board of Halliburton and profiting from the non-bidding reconstruction contracts, while he supports bidding? Even if true, all these companies seem to be reputable, legitimate companies or organizations.

As far as one or two of the companies' making $$ directly or indirectly from the Iraq War, who in America wasn't hoping, if we were stuck with Bush's plan, that the war would help our economy, as wars often do? Did you throw away the increased $$$ in your 401(k) for the past six months, since it may have come indirectly from the war?