An honest question for Clark supporters (or others in the know)

[HFishbine]

I'm aware that Clark resigned from the Acxiom board of directors, but is he still doing business with Axciom? I ask because of this, from the 2003 Acxiom Corporation proxy:

During the past fiscal year we had an agreement with an affiliate of Stephens Group, Inc. ("Stephens"), whereby we retained the consulting services of a former Stephens employee who is also one of our board members, General Wesley K. Clark, in connection with our pursuit of contracts with various government agencies. Under the agreement, commissions were payable to the Stephens affiliate on revenue from government contracts attributable to Clark's efforts, which commissions were to be offset against an annual consulting fee of $300,000. As of March 1, 2003, General Wesley K. Clark resigned from Stephens and founded Wesley K. Clark & Associates, a business services and development firm. As of that date we replaced the agreement with the Stephens affiliate with an agreement with Wesley K. Clark & Associates for the consulting services of General Clark. Under the terms of the new agreement, Acxiom will pay Clark an annual retainer of $150,000 plus commissions for new business obtained through Clark's efforts, which commissions will be offset against the retainer.

http://public.thecorporatelibrary.net/Transactions/rel_ACXM_2003.html

[SeveneightyWhoa]

1. I thought this was an interesting response:

http://pub73.ezboard.com/fwesleyclark200463811frm12.showMessage?topicID=29.topic

[FubarFly]

11. Interesting defense of Capps II

It's okay that your rights may be violated, because your rights are already violated.

"The problem is the CAPPS II program created by the government, and not because it violates privacy. Again, the information is already out there and was never private to begin with. Nobody broke the law to obtain it. The concern is that the program is not foolproof, and innocent people will be scrutinized, which already occurs under the system in place. CAPPS II could only be an improvement over the current system if it is subjected to proper protocols of oversight and scrutiny to prevent abuse."


Sheesh.

Here is an alternative view:

As a brief overview, CAPPS-2 would require airlines to collect
peoples' full legal name, residence address, home phone number, and
date of birth (none of which is currently used by airlines today)
before they can even make a flight reservation. They would be
required to hand this information, and everything else in the PNR
(flight reservation), to the government, LONG BEFORE the flight takes
off. Then the government (or its "contractors") would do the same
kind of data matching that Torch Concepts did, hooking up your flight
reservations to credit databases and many other government and private
databases. The difference is that if YOUR data was one of those
"anomalous records" (that didn't fit one of the standard patterns of
your airline's customers), you would be singled out to be specially
searched, and/or kept off the airplane.

Torch Concepts' report blew the whistle on this secret program. The
report is at http://cryptome.org/jetblue-spy.pdf. On page 22,
Torch found two major groupings of JetBlue customers:

(1) Young Middle Income Home Owners with Short Length-of-Residence
(2) Older Upper Income Home Owners with Longer Length-of-Residence

Everybody else they categorized into "anomalous records". If you're
an oldster who moved to Florida recently -- or a renter -- or a lower
income person of any type -- you're anomalous. You're going to get
that special government search whenever you fly on JetBlue, if TSA
succeeds in imposing CAPPS 2.

http://lists.virus.org/cryptography-0309/msg00280.html

[BootinUp]

42. Another source if info

http://www.eff.org/privacy/cappsii/20030930_comments.php

[windansea]

2. TANK

it's Clarkspeak for poop

[Forkboy]

3. and just as mature

I swear,watching the Dean and Clark camps is like going back to grade school.

What's next,"I know you are but what am I?" :eyes:

[billbuckhead]

6. Actually Clark secretly works for Dr No, the Penguin&Fearless Leader

Not really, but the tone of this post makes Clark sound like something like that. And for good measure, I bet Clark never beat his dog either.

[Forkboy]

10. I wish I knew what you're talking about

[SahaleArm]

29. Bond, Batman, etc... n/t

[Forkboy]

31. Well that much I knew

it was the rest of the post I'm not grasping.

Must be my cold meds :shrug:

[windansea]

14. just a joke forkboy

which I will continue to use when I see lame "can I ask an honest question" stealth attacks on my boy..I much prefer an honest attack thread...such as "Clark bought and paid for by evil corpration" in which case the army of Clark supporters will respond and return fire...destroying the bullshit

and yes..the military imagery and language are just literary vehicles

the most peace loving men are those who have actually fought wars

peace

[BootinUp]

7. We get to watch

Clark wading into the shitstorm, fending off anti-clark smears right and left, like an M1 Abrahams, and launching precision guided counter-attacks. Its going to be interesting. :nuke:

BTW I have no intention of discussing the axciom subject, it has been covered ad nauseum. Please search for my previous posts on the subject.

[worldgonekrazy]

19. You don't want to discuss it because you know it is damning

It must get tiring trying to support a war profiteerer.

[oasis]

9. I dunno, even the guys in your tank are wearing tinfoilhats.

;-)

[BootinUp]

12. Thats Kevlar!

We need a new emoticon.

;)

[windansea]

18. kevlar emoticon

perfect!!

[xultar]

45. Fine $5.00 to Clark campaign n/t

[xultar]

46. Fine $5.00 to Clark campaign n/t

[rogerhall]

4. I'm not sure, but ...

I do want to let you in on an important little thing. If not for Axciom, Arkansas would be a really crappy place.

Wait, please, before you stone me. I too am fairly convinced that Axciom is akin to Big Brother. I don't work there, and every time I interview there (which is three times so far) I insisted on making about $30k more than I'm worth and also insisted on three days of telecommuting per week. (I just like to poke the bear with a stick - besides, if they hired my, I would be making scads of cash to learn thine enemy. :)

But the truth is Axciom is only one of two places for most technically oriented people to work in central AR. Many of my neighbors (and a few of my friends) feed their kids with Axciom dollars.

So where was Clark going to work when he moved back to Arkansas? WalMart? Tyson chicken plants? The trucking industry? That's pretty much all we have.

Nope. Axciom or Alltel (the only big tech houses here), or Stephens Investments (who have themselves been the targets of animal activists) were about his only choices that fit his stature and experience. He has worked for two of them so far ... but wasn't even there very long before he started his own consultancy.

As for any suggestion that Clark might somehow be nefarious because of such a connection, well, then you are accusing tens of thousands of Arkansans of the same!

[HFishbine]

8. A few minor points

Clark lobbieed the federal government on behalf of Acxiom to advance an unprecedented surveillance system that would establish a dossier on every American. This isn't just about where some Joe worked. It's about the degree of respect for the Constitution by a presidential candidate.

[BootinUp]

13. Oh Gosh!

And if you ignore the facts about Clark's policies and instead assume guilt by association with evildoers, then, then, maybe you can convince the tinfoilhat crowd there's a problem. :think:

[HFishbine]

15. Far from it

What, pray tell, am I ignoring? I'm endevoring to undertake a through examination of Clark's policy statements AND record. Far from ignoring anything, I'm taking a broad and deep look. What is being ignored though, is an answer to my question. (:think:)

[windansea]

20. BS

you got a pretty good response in reply number 1

http://pub73.ezboard.com/fwesleyclark200463811frm12.showMessage?topicID=29.topic

[FubarFly]

21. First off, that post doesn't answer his question.

It does quote Clark speaking out against the PA, which is good. It asserts that he also tried to balance privacy rights while working for Acxiom, but offers no other evidence as proof. Did I miss it?
I also find the defense of Capps-2 in there to be somewhat objectionable.

[HFishbine]

22. Pretty good response?

Sorry, a blog entry that offers the unsubstantiated opinon that Clark's involvement with Acxiom is a non-issue does not meet my standards. Glad that's enough for you though.

[windansea]

28. it IS a non issue

in terms of Clark vs Bush...they can't attack this...people want to feel safe boarding an aircraft...this info is READILY AVAILABLE now without CAPPS II...civil libertarians may bitch....but Rove cannot attack Clark here

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

[FubarFly]

32. Don't dismiss the vote of civil liberatarians.

You may need them on your side someday.

Much of the Democratic base is already paranoid about the PA. If Clark can be shown to speak out against the PA, but somehow support Capps-2..then yes, there is ample space for MAINSTREAM attack.

And no, I don't believe Clark did anything wrong at Acxiom, but I can't sell this to skeptical voters without proof.

[windansea]

34. I defend civil liberties

so does Clark...it's quite a tightrope to walk...Clark has the creds to defend our liberties while also being strong against terror...that's the beauty of his candidacy

your average american feels no pain from the PA or airline security procedures...other than waiting in some lines...like me..they just want the plane to land...

this is a non issue against Bush...it can be sold as a strength

[FubarFly]

36. I don't believe it is wise to underestimate or dismiss out of

hand what may or may not be an issue with voters.

The more facts I have at my disposal, the happier I will be about a potential Clark candidacy. I am not alone in this belief.

Like it or not, Clark has a credibility problem with many Democratic voters. If he wins the nomination, in my estimation, it will because Dean stumbled in a major way- I.E. somebody landed a punch that stuck. If this happens, it will take a considerable effort to reinvigorate the many crushed Dean supporters out there- many of whom are new voters.

All information about Wesley Clark would be useful at that stage. Some of which may be vital to convincing skeptical liberals that Clark really is sincere in his statements and is worth getting excited over. Hopefully future inquiries about Clark's background will be treated with more respect.

[BootinUp]

37. No disrespect was directed at you

But respect is a two way street. You may not know the history of these honest questions you stumbled into.

As I said before, if Clarks financial records, or business records while he was a private citizen are an issue, there is little point in continually bringing it up in a public forum like this. The question should be directed to Gen. Clark, by the interested party.

[FubarFly]

39. Fair enough.

I will e-mail his campaign and ask them for the information directly.

Respect is a two way street. I hope your respect for Howard Dean's privacy concerning his personal records are just as sincere.

[windansea]

38. understood

a good start in understanding...

Men who love peace are those who have fought wars...

[BootinUp]

25. Clark hasn't hid anything, you just don't want to look

I could probably take your grandma or grandpa or other close relative and do what you are trying to do here to them. The question really comes down to this, since you choose NOT to give Clark a fair listen and you close your mind to the possibility he just might be running for POTUS because he wants to do some good for our country, then why should I bother with a response. In every persons life there are business contacts and personal contacts that can be construed in a conspiratorial way. If thats what you want to spend your time doing... Have fun. For those interested in what Clark has to say on Civil Liberties and our constitution read on. I will also mention for these readers that Clark has promised to cut the pentagon budget. And he is the only candidate with the credentials to actually do it.


http://clark04.com/issues/patriotact/
On the Issues
Civil Liberties and the USA PATRIOT Act

Using appropriate tools responsibly, for effective law enforcement

I believe that law enforcement should have access to all necessary tools to deal with the problems of terrorism, which is why I'm calling for an immediate $40 billion investment in homeland security. But I don't believe that we can win a war on terror if we give up the essence of who we are as Americans. That's why I think that Congress should fully review the so-called USA PATRIOT Act - and repeal the provisions that go too far.

The USA PATRIOT Act was jammed through Congress in a matter of weeks, when the country was still in shock from the horrific attacks of September 11th. It wasn't carefully drafted and it wasn't fully debated. More troubling is that, in just two years, the Act has grown the tentacles that many feared. Last month, a Justice Department report admitted that the John Ashcroft has actually expanded the substantial reach of the Act, using it to snoop in secrecy for evidence of crimes that have nothing to do with terrorism.

Now Ashcroft is proposing the PROTECT Act. Among other curtailments, the proposed bill all but forbids prosecutors from agreeing to downward departures from the rigid federal sentencing guidelines, increasing the chance that individual punishments won't actually fit individual crimes. It also instructs prosecutors to report judges that order departures from sentencing guidelines - creating the very real possibility that judges will be put on a DOJ blacklist.

I am concerned that the USA PATRIOT Act goes too far in expanding the authority of government investigators, and that it does so without sufficient oversight. We need to make sure that we are taking responsible measures to meet the needs of the time. That's why I'll call on Congress to fully review each provision of the Act, study the ways in which each has been used in practice, and eliminate those provisions that unduly threaten our civil liberties.


http://clark04.com/press/release/039/
For Immediate Release
October 26, 2003

General Wes Clark calls for New American Patriotism on Anniversary of Patriot Act

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK'S STATEMENT ON THE SECOND ANNIVERSARY OF THE PATRIOT ACT
I BELIEVE IN A NEW AMERICAN PATRIOTISM

The Bill of Rights is one of the most precious gifts that we, as a nation, pass on to each new generation of Americans. Tomorrow is the second anniversary of the passage of the Patriot Act. To ensure that it doesn't diminish our children's legacy of inalienable rights, we need to review the Act and its enforcement.

We must give law enforcement every appropriate tool to fight terrorism, both at home and abroad. But the Patriot Act, which was designed and passed in haste, must be revised to better protect our civil liberties. I am outraged that John Ashcroft's Justice Department refuses to submit such a sensitive and important measure to legislative oversight.

I call on Congress to review the Patriot Act, to assess what works and what needs to be changed. We should immediately suspend the provisions that allow searches and seizure without subpoenas and warrants. Until we know more about any possible abuses of the Act, I would limit the Justice Department's use of its powers to the prevention and prosecution of terrorism.

I believe in a New American Patriotism -- one which recognizes that democracy demands discussion and dissent. There is nothing more American -- nothing more patriotic -- than speaking out, questioning authority, and holding your leaders accountable.

Concerned citizens throughout this country are raising their voices in protest against abuses of the Patriot Act. I applaud their efforts.

[HFishbine]

26. Great!

Another non-answer, but at least it's long.

[FubarFly]

27. The conspiracy should be debunked without resorting to

ridicule. Clark's policy statements are solid, but it would be nice to see his views REINFORCED by actual ancedotal evidence from Acxiom.

He worked to maintain privacy while lobbying for Acxiom? Cool. Is it too much to ask for to see some proof?

[FubarFly]

17. Who's assuming guilt?

It would be nice to know the Clark supporters have actual information ready for defense at their fingertips. If he is going to be our candidate, then we all must be prepared to defend him.

I would feel much better if on threads like these, I saw more facts, and less ridicule.

[BootinUp]

30. What facts do you expect to get?

Clark has presented his beliefs, plans, policies, resume, for your inspection. (see my post above). If Clark was employed by a company attempting to get Government contracts in the security field, then to tell you the truth, I feel a damn bit safer from future unwarrented violations of my privacy and civil rights.

If people like Clark do not get involved then we are worse off, not better. That's why this posters repeated smear tactic really torques me.

As far as any past or present financial connections to Acxiom, that can only be answered by General Clark, after all it is his personal business. No one here will have that information for you.

[FubarFly]

33. Clark's personal business sounds a lot like Dean's records.

I would love to see memos, e-mails, and documents that chronicled some of Clark's work at places like Acxiom. If his record there is so admirable, then he should proudly produce them. I don't really think that is too much for his supporters (current or potential) to ask.

[stickdog]

40. How about the Mena airport?

CAPPS II is indefensible, and Jackson Stephens is a sick Repuke.

[maxr4clark]

5. ask on www.forclark.com

I don't know; what I remember Clark saying about his business associations is that he terminated the vast majority of them later than March, more like August or even early October.

I'd like to hear more about Acxiom, though. I know that Clark pitched for Acxiom to Lockheed-Martin regarding CAPPS II, but I haven't been able to verify that Acxiom had any further dealings with CAPPS II than that. And I understand from the same article that "leaked" Clark's lobbying for Acxiom that Clark stressed the importance of individuals' rights to privacy in the process.

As far as I know, Clark's work for Acxiom isn't a skeleton in his closet except among conspiracy theorists.

[worldgonekrazy]

16. Sounds just like Cheney and Halliburton

On a "retainter" for "new business obtained through Clark's efforts." Hmm. What efforts might those be?

[rogerhall]

23. Okay. Here is the real truth.

BTW, if there is a newspaper anywhere that is critical of Dems, it is the Akansas Democrat Gazette. They *hate* the Clintons and anything that makes them think about the Clintons. :}

From: Arkansas Democrat Gazette, Oct 2, 2003

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/993773/posts

<snip>

The way Charles Morgan remembers it, Clark had lots of choices after leaving the military in May 2000, and returning to Arkansas didn’t seem to be on the radar screen.

Morgan, chief executive at Acxiom — a customer datamining powerhouse based in Little Rock and Conway — traveled to Brussels, Belgium, to be part of a roundtable discussion with top international executives in early 2000. He was surprised to discover that everyone was talking about Clark, the four-star general who was about to turn over his command of NATO.

"When I arrived in Brussels, everyone was saying, ‘We’re so sad Wes Clark is leaving.’" Morgan said in an interview Tuesday. "At that time, I’d forgotten he was from Arkansas. I was fascinated that Wes was so popular in Europe."

Morgan remembers thinking, "Does this guy walk on some sort of water or what?"

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

[FubarFly]

24. Thanks for posting.

That's a very informative article:

In March, Clark left Stephens to form his own consulting company, Wesley K. Clark & Associates. He kept the Acxiom contract, which was renegotiated for $150,000 a year plus expenses, until announcing his candidacy for president Sept. 17.


It suggests here that he is no longer being paid.

[windansea]

35. very good rh

thanks !!

[stickdog]

41. CAPPS II is indefensible. It HELPS terrorists while it tramples on our

privacy rights. Ask yourself, how does doing a credit/police/traffic/medical/address/IRS/employment check on every American flight passenger protect against foreign terrorism? And as far as domestic terrorism goes, ask yourself when was the last time a US citizen hijacked a domestic flight?

CAPPS II is nothing more than Total Information Awareness for all airplane passengers.

Any terrorist cell would simply run a series of test flights to find out in advance which of them would be waved right past security under which flight conditions. Having gamed the system in this manner, they'd now be far more likely to successfully smuggle contraband onto an airplane than they are under the current system.

It doesn't take a Rhodes Scholar to figure out that CAPPS II is an abomination that is completely indefensible by any measure. So what's General Clark's excuse for lobbying FOR it?

[BootinUp]

43. I guess you missed

The part of Clark's programs to immediately repeal sections of the Patriot act, and to push for a complete congressional review, and review by all Americans of the rest of it.

I guess you missed where people familiar with Clark's lobbying say he always was concerned with privacy and advocated for it.

Do you not want someone with Clarks beliefs up their to battle the RW on this kind of thing? In order to make a difference, you gotta get involved.

[Moderator]

44. rogerhall

Per DU copyright rules
please post only four
paragraphs from the
news source.


Thank you.

DU Moderator

[rogerhall]

47. Thank you - sorry!

If at first you don't succeed - read the directions! :}