Look what else Clark has been up to

[Eloriel]

He's on the Board of the National Endowment for Democracy.

For those of you not already familiar with NED, sounds cool, doesn't it? Cool it's not. In fact, it's quite "hot," in a manner of speaking:

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/TrojanHorse_RS.html

Now, one could say that Clark is either a willing dupe or he supports their mission. If he's a Rhodes Scholar, and a military man (a GENERAL), you damn well know he knows all about them.

And he serves with a nice conglomeration of luminaries and lesser-known neocons, including Frank Carlucci:

http://www.ned.org/about/who.html

Clark's bio (with that wonderful Jackson Stephens experience right up top): http://www.ned.org/about/board_bios/clark.html

I found it quite interesting that the google search for "National Endowment for Democracy" brought the Clark bio right up to the top (2nd item, actually), even though Clark wasn't one of the keywords used. http://www.google.com/search?q=National%20Endowment%20for%20Democracy%20board

Eloriel

[Eloriel]

1. Here's how they tried to "help" in Venezuela

overthrowing the duly elected Hugo Chavez:

http://www.mediatransparency.org/recipients/ned.htm

Eloriel

[KittyWampus]

Eloriel Your Lack Of Discrimination & Attempt To Create A Boogieman Is Sad

The National Endowment For Democracy & Clark

Edited on Sun Oct-05-03 10:04 AM by cryingshame

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)

It also has several arch Neoconservative/PNAC'ers such as Carlucci, Vin Weber, Frist, Fukuyama

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)


The reason I am starting this thread is because a fellow DU'er started a thread with a HIGHLY INFLAMMATORY
AND MISLEADING TITLE: Trojan Horse: Wesley Clark's National Endowment for Democracy.

The original poster makes it seem that the NED is somehow directed soley by Clark and there is something
IMPLICITLY sinister about his being in the NED.

Said poster totally neglected to point out that another DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BOB GRAHAM
was on the board or that the board was bipartisan. He also inferred that because the Board contains SOME
Neocons that Clark is one also. He also linked to a Translated Venezuelan website that had an article from
Red Voltaire (French)... which stated/implied Clark personally ADMINISTERED the Venezuelan coup (the NeoCons in the NED
allegedly directed funds to Chavez's opposition).

This thread is my attempt to bring fairness into the discussion, as opposed to blantant propaganda.
Thanks to the following posters for doing the research to get a FAIR AND BALANCED view of the NED:
JudiLyn, Dover, Zuni, Maha, bhunt70, Andym, LoneStarLiberal.

The original thread has over 325 posts and I can no longer respond to it due to my dial up.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=460511



....................................................................................................................................................................................................................
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.


....................................................................................................................................................................................
Unfortunately, the NED is alleged to have given funding to people who were part of the effort to overthrow the
semi-dictatorial but legally elected President of Venezuela- Hugo Chavez.

"While the endowment's expressed goal is to promote democracy around the world, the State Department's
human rights bureau is examining whether one or more recipients of the money may have actively plotted
against Mr. Chávez. The bureau has put a $1 million grant to the endowment on hold pending that review,
an official said." (NYTIMES)


Here is some more info on the NED and it's role in the Coup(the IRI being REPUBLICAN ENTITY):

(snip) In the Name of Democracy

However, the IRI evidently began opposing Chavez even before his 1998 election. Prior to that year's
congressional and presidential elections, the IRI worked with Venezuelan organizations critical of Chavez to
run newspaper ads, TV, and radio spots that several observers characterize as anti-Chavez.

The IRI has also flown groups of Chavez opponents to Washington to meet with U.S. officials. In March
2002, a month before Chavez's brief ouster, one such group of politicians, union leaders, and activists
traveled to DC to meet with U.S. officials, including members of Congress and State Department staff. The
trip came at the time that several military officers were calling for Chavez' resignation and talk of a possible
coup was widespread.

Trip participants said the U.S. officials expressed support only for a constitutional departure for Chavez. The
Assembly of Educators' Carvajal, who participated in the IRI trip, said that bringing varied government
opponents together in Washington accelerated the unification of the opposition. "The democratic opposition
began to become cohesive," he said. "We began to become a team." Shortly after returning from that trip,
Carvajal said, opposition organizations "precipitated" a plan of action against Chavez.
(Mike Ceaser, Americas Program, December 9, 2002)
(snip/)


...............................................................................................................................................................................
Here are some more Pros and Cons Re: NED:


THE NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR DEMOCRACY OF US

The post-Watergate enquiries into the activities of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of the US exposed
details of its covert political activities in other countries in order to promote US foreign policy objectives.
Amongst such activities were the secret funding of individuals, political parties and non-governmental
organisations (NGOs) favourable to US interests and funneling of money to counter the activities of those
considered anti-US.

After taking over as the President in January, 1977, Mr.Jimmy Carter banned such activities and imposed
strict limits on the CIA's covert operations in foreign countries. During the election campaign of 1980,
Mr.Ronald Reagan used effectively against Mr.Carter the argument that the post-Vietnam and
post-Watergate decline of the US under Mr.Carter was due to the emasculation of its military and
intelligence apparatus.

After his election in November, 1980, and before his taking-over as the President in January, 1981,
Mr.Reagan appointed a transition group headed by the late William Casey, an attorney and one of his
campaign managers, who was to later take over as the CIA Director, to recommend measures for
strengthening the USA's intelligence capability abroad.

One of its recommendations was to revive covert political activities. Since there might have been opposition
from the Congress and public opinion to this task being re-entrusted to the CIA, it suggested that this be
given to an NGO with no ostensible links with the CIA.

The matter was further examined in 1981-82 by the American Political Foundation's Democracy Programme
Study and Research Group and, finally, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) was born under a
Congressional enactment of 1983 as a "non-profit, non-governmental, bipartisan, grant-making
organisation to help strengthen democratic institutions around the world."

Though it is projected as an NGO, it is actually a quasi-governmental organisation because till 1994 it was
run exclusively from funds voted by the Congress (average of about US $ 16 million per annum in the 1980s
and now about US $ 30 million) as part of the budget of the US Information Agency (USIA). Since 1994, it
has been accepting contributions from the private sector too to supplement the congressional
appropriations.

Thirty per cent of the budgetary allocations constitute the discretionary fund of the NED to be distributed
directly by it to overseas organisations and the balance is distributed through what are called four "core
organisations"---the International Republican Institute (IRI), the National Democratic Institute for
International Affairs (NDI), the Centre for International Private Enterprise (CIPE) and the Free Trade Union
Institute (FTUI).

In 1994, the NED set up two other organisations called the International Forum for Democratic Studies
(IFDS) and the Democracy Resource Centre (DRC), both largely funded by the private sector.

Since its inception, the NED and its affiliates have been mired in controversy in the US itself as well as
abroad. Amongst its strongest supporters in the US is the Heritage Foundation of Washington DC, a
conservative think tank, which played an active role in influencing the policies of the Reagan and Bush
Administrations.

It brought out two papers on the justification for the NED, when questions were raised in the US on the
continued need for it after the collapse of the communist regimes of East Europe. In the first paper of July
8,1993, (Executive Memorandum No. 360) it described the NED as "an important weapon in the war of
ideas" and said:" The NED has played a vital role in providing aid to democratic movements in the former
Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, China, Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Nicaragua, Vietnam and elsewhere..... Communist
dictatorships still control China, Cuba, North Korea and Vietnam. Moreover, ex-communists masquerading as
nationalists continue to dominate several of the Soviet successor states. The NED can play an important
role in assisting those countries in making the turbulent transition to democracy..... Local political activists
often prefer receiving assistance from a non-governmental source, as aid from a US government agency
may undermine their credibility in the eyes of their countrymen."..>>>MORE

http://www.saag.org/papers2/paper115.html
.....................................................................................................................................................................................


Even the conservative Cato Institute considered the NED a "loose cannon" ten years ago

"The National Endowment for Democracy is a foreign policy loose cannon. Promoting democracy is a nebulous
objective that can be manipulated to justify any whim of the special-interest groups--the Republican and
Democratic parties, organized labor, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce--that control most of NED's
funds. As those groups execute their own foreign policies, they often work against American interests and
meddle needlessly in the affairs of other countries, undermining the democratic movements NED was designed
to assist. Moreover, the end of the Cold War has nullified any usefulness that such an organization might ever
have had. There is no longer a rival superpower mounting an effective ideological challenge, and democracy is
progressing remarkably well on its own.

NED, which also has a history of corruption and financial mismanagement, is superfluous at best and often
destructive. Through the endowment, the American taxpayer has paid for special-interest groups to harass the
duly elected governments of friendly countries, interfere in foreign elections, and foster the corruption of
democratic movements."

http://www.cato.org/pubs/fpbriefs/fpb-027es.html
http://www.cato.org/pubs/fpbriefs/fpb-027.html

It appears to built in a way to allow democratic, republican parties, organized labor and the chamber of
commerce to do their own foreign policy:


"That convoluted organizational structure seems to be based on the premise that government money, if filtered
through enough layers of bureaucracy, becomes "private" funding, an illogical and dangerously misleading
assumption. In effect, the NED structure allows private organizations (in this case organizations with very
distinct and disparate interests) to pursue their own foreign policy agendas with out regard to official policy."

SO what is Clark doing on the board of directors:
My sepculation:
He was placed their along with Holbrook (and Albright who chaired the NED's NDI National Democratic
Institute) by Clinton as "Democrats" to help promote the NED's effort to bring down Milosevic in Serbia.

My evidence:
Here is an excerpt of an NED officer quoted on a seeming pro-Milosevic website (not sure):
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/ned-1.htm

"1) Independent media NED programs have helped ensure the survival of a number of independent media and
helped break the stranglehold of government-dominated media in Serbia by strengthening influential sources of
objective information. NED assistance has enabled newspapers, radio and TV stations to purchase
desperately-needed supplies and equipment, including newsprint and broadcast transmitters..."



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

Here is a reposting of some info by DU'er Andym... who obviously is interested in getting information rather than spreading
propaganda:


As to Venezueala, my reading of the Soborenia article is that they were trying to shed light on the NED by
naming two of the board's
most prominent members: Clark and Carlucci. Both are well known in South America. They were saying that
the board oversees (administers) the NED, not that they administered the Venezuelan affair. Given the
structure of the NED, which allows each party, labor and commerce to make their own foreign policy (see
above) this is entirely reasonable.

Now, many DU'ers would not work for the NED, even less would they serve on its board of directors... For a
general interested in foreign relations, it may be more understandable. Still, it would be good to get Clark's
response to what he thought of NEDs involvement in Venezuela.

.....................................................................................................................................................................................

Clark May ver well propose closing NED activities and replacing it with a DEPARTMENT OF PEACE 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

.....................................................................................................................................................................................................


Here's a repost that seems pretty evenhanded:
LoneStarLiberal (504 posts)
Fri Oct-03-03 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
176. In Defense of the NED

Edited on Fri Oct-03-03 04:07 PM by LoneStarLiberal

Interesting stuff. For those who are rigidly opposed to Wes Clark and any institution that allows
Republicans on their Board of Directors or to even come in the front door, I've included the alternative to my
rhetoric in ().

I do think it does the NED a disservice though to only discuss some of their errors in judgement in their
grant awards (or, if you believe they are all evil, "...to only discuss their most evil awards...") without giving
them credit for the many fine, neoliberal and liberal programs that their grants have supported over the
years including programs in support of civic culture in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia, such as:

*economic, social, and political enfranchisement of women;
*financial support through direct grants of domestic elections monitoring and verification organizations.

They are not PNAC or even PNAC-lite. They are a well-intentioned organization (evil empire) that has made
mistakes (cynical choices) and should be judged by the balance of their actions and awards (should be
judged only by the worst choices and the fact that there are Republicans and ex-military people on their
Board of Directors).

I'm not going to lurk here and tell you the NED is all peaches and cream and this stuff is all tinfoil hat
rhetoric, because it's not. Yes, the NED has made mistakes (purposeful decisions). Certainly some of their
grants were politically awarded (awarded on purpose) to nefarious groups; should that slander the many
grants that they have made that have done demonstrably positive things around the world? I don't believe
it should.

Additionally, I don't see anything here that points to how this is "Clark's NED" (a point made by another
poster) or that every single grant and consulting decision the NED has made got the personal vetting of
Wes Clark (or that Wes Clark decided to help his Republican friends in the White House by knocking off
Venezuela's little empersario). The conjecture that Clark's involvement in the NED is what drives all of its
poor (nefarious) decisions requires a leap of faith that can only come from those who have already made up
their minds to not support Clark and thus scandalize ever organization that he is associated with, including
the NED.

[KittyWampus]

69. Here Is Some UNBIASED Info Regarding NED & Venezuela

My dial up wouldn't load whole page to show actual dialouges... I DID see some posts towards the end
that mentioned the AFL-CIO.

Ugh, it seems the NED has and does some good things but is also being used to do some nefarious
stuff. It has managed to fly under the radar to a large extent, probably because it is quasi-governmental.

The solution would be to dissolve it and create a DEPARTMENT that has Congresssional oversight, IMO.

Here's some info from Boloboffin's weblog. He has some really great commentary at the end.
....................................................................................................................................................................

The raging debate is over the NED's role in the Venezuelan crisis early in the Bush Administration. ...

The NED does its own grants, but it also favors four different organizations as grantees....

American Center for International Labor Solidarity (ACILS– commonly called the Solidarity Center)
Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE)
International Republican Institute (IRI)
National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI)

NED gives grants to these groups, for programs that promote:

pluralism and free and fair elections (IRI and NDI)
free markets and economic reforms (CIPE)
independent trade unions (ACILS)

Each of these four grantees receives an equal portion of NED's grant budget– and each program is
carefully developed with NED program staff and approved by NED’s board of directors, just like any other
grantee.

Who are NED's grantees?

The IRI and the NDI are essentially arms of the the Republican Party and Democratic Party respectively.
ACILS has the same relationship with the AFL-CIO. These three organizations were part of the quadrupling,
of NED grant Venezuelan organizations in 2001, the year of the coup.......

Of particular concern is $154,377 given by the endowment to the American Center for International Labor
Solidarity, the international arm of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., to assist the main Venezuelan labor union in advancing
labor rights.

The Venezuelan union, the Confederation of Venezuelan Workers, led the work stoppages that galvanized
the opposition to Mr. Chavez. The union's leader, Carlos Ortega, worked closely with Pedro Carmona
Estanga, the businessman who briefly took over from Mr. Chavez, in challenging the government.

The endowment also provided significant resources to the foreign policy wings of the Republican and
Democratic parties for work in Venezuela, which sponsored trips to Washington by Chavez's critics.

The National Democratic Institute for International Affairs was given a $210,500 grant to promote the
accountability of local government. The International Republican Institute, which has an office in Venezuela,
received a grant of $339,998 for political party building. On April 12, the day of the takeover, the group
hailed
Mr. Chavez's ouster. "The Venezuelan people rose up to defend democracy in their country," the institute's
president, George A. Folsom, said in a statement. Venezuelans were provoked into action as a result of
systematic repression by the government of Hugo Chavez."

[KittyWampus]

72. More UNBIASED Commentary On NED & Venezuela

What a nice sticky wicket of a situation this is. But I'm thinking that Clark's position on the NED board isn't
the automatic black eye that some people at DU are claiming it to be. The board is directly involved in the
grant process, but these sub-granters are then responsible for distributing it to the final recipients. Since
the labor unions and the major political parties are three of the four main grantees (the fourth grantee is
the foreign policy arm of the US Chamber of Commerce), I'd imagine the board to be a check and balance on
these four main groups, with political appointees from each party in evidence on the board. The closest
analogy I'd risk
is the post-WW2 administration of Germany under the auspices of France, Britain, the United States and
Soviet Russia, which was no model of harmonious relationship.

What we have here is a pile of money coming out of the government. Four groups with differing objectives
(some having closer connections with each other than others) get the lion's share of the money and the
board determines how that money is divided up.

The AFL-CIO appears to have its behind covered. Although its money went to the CTV, a labor union with
close ties to the parties Chavez displaced and a major part of the failed coup, the money appears to have
been spent the way it was intended to be spent.

For some observers, the most troubling grant was that to the IRI , because of its apparently false claims
about the institution's work and its director's strong support for Chavez' ouster. The grant amount for the
IRI, which has an office in Caracas, more than sextupled from $50,000 in 2000 to $339,998
in 2001.

In an April 12 facsimile sent to news media, IRI President George A. Folsom rejoiced over Chavez' removal l
from power. "The Venezuelan people rose up to defend democracy in their country," he wrote.
"Venezuelans were provoked into action as a result of systematic repression by the government of Hugo
Chavez."

Fanning the concerns about how the IRI may have utilized its NED funds are doubts regarding the accuracy
of its reporting on activities in Venezuela. According to the organization's website, it has several times
collaborated with a Venezuelan partner organization called the Youth Participation Foundation (FPJ).
Indeed, working with the FPJ was the primary purpose of the IRI's $50,000 year 2000 grant. But dozens of
Venezuelan
politicians, activists, and nongovernmental organization (NGO) representatives interviewed for this
story--including several who have worked with the IRI--had never heard of the FPJ.

According to the IRI's Caracas office, the FPJ ceased to exist "several years ago." According to the IRI
website, prior to the 1998 elections the FPJ arranged a pair of youth forums featuring major presidential
candidates. But neither the candidates nor the television station supposedly involved had any record or
memory of such events.

So the GOP was responsible for almost half of NED's funding increase to Venezuelan organizations in 2001.

Since Clark had last served in the Clinton administration, and stepped into the board on January 2001 after
voting for Gore in November 2000, my hunch is that he was on the Democratic side of the agenda even then
We'd have to know exactly what role he played in the funding of the Venezuelan grants, what he and other
board members were told the money was for, and whether this resembled the actual way the money was
used.

And so it's far too early to imagine him with his hands around Hugo Chavez's neck.

[KittyWampus]

75. Howard Dean Backed By The AFL-CIO Which Was Involved In Venezuela Coup

Will Dean be doing their dirty work if he gets elected?

[Hep]

82. When?

Did the AFL-CIO endorse Dean?

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

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

[CWebster]

Address it for once and don't nod off

it matters to all of us.

I am surprised that you don't have everyone who isn't a fellow Clark pep rallier on ignore.

For once, wake up!

[xultar]

110. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ n/t

[xultar]

112. From a Deanie saying that another issue had been discussed

Dean bash redux. (You guys are running out of material).

How many times are you going to post this thread?

[seventhson]

9. wow. how novel and ingenius

insults without rebuttal or facts or links or even an excuse for the underlying facts.

Just...

insults and obfuscations.

THIS story has been peripherally floating around in other threads and it NEEDS one of its own.

So does the Jackson Stephens connection.

and the Axciom connection

and the possible ties to DYNCORP via CSC (Computer Solutions Corporation) which I am exploring which puts him right in the belly of the Plan Columbia private war beast.

[bowens43]

13. I'm here every day, several times a day, I haven't seen it.

I want all the information I can get on all of the viable candidates. I appreciate the post. People need to know exactly who it is they are supporting. If you've seen it, skip over it or offer a constructive response.

[bicentennial_baby]

34. Links

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=460511

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=474693


There were more, but there's two of the bigger ones.

[CWebster]

53. First week of October

no wonder I missed it, was out of town that week. Interesting all the screeching denials even back then. damn, it has been a long past couple of months and its only going to get shriller.

[seventhson]

3. Clark has his bloody fingers in the Venezuela Coup according to

sources I just posted on another link.

As a Director Clark had to know that funds were allocated to the people who planned and implemented the coup attempt against ANOTHER democratically elected populist: Chavez.

As head of the Southern Command Clark also ran the nasty and disgusting US war in Columbia where our money backed the pramilitary thuigs and assassins.

Cllak reeks.

Thanks for posting this El.

I PRAY that some of Clark's supporters try to defend this.

I know HOW they will try to spin it: he didn't know, he's not responsible, it is not PROVEN that he knew (even though he was on the board which gave the opposition parties the funds to unseat Chavez)

They will say it has been debunked, but all the debunking they can do is say that it has been debunked with NO evidence.

Anyone who can back this republican is beyond me.

[TLM]

6. Notice how it gets real quiet when you mention Clark and south america

They know he is dirty, but they ignore it like an abused child ignores the abuse because they want that parent's protection and love.

Clark is the same way... he really appeals to the folks who have this need for the daddy protector image. THey don't care if he is a right wing war hawk with ties to the same evil fucks who are pulling Bush's strings.

[cally]

21. Thanks so much for the psychological profile

You are so wrong. I choose not to profile folks who bash folks who support other candidates. I would just ask you to look long term. Dean may win the nomination, but posts like yours just alienate those of us who will work and fund his election. Have fun feeling superior, but you are only hurting your candidate if he wins the nomination. I would never work as a volunteer with someone who said what you just did in a general election. I will support Dean if he wins, but not work with folks who hate me and do not understand my views.

[BootinUp]

58. An Alternative explanation

The conspiracy UFO stories that are being peddled here have no legs! Has there been bad policy in the past with regard to South/Central America? YES

Does that mean that anybody connected to it by 6 degrees of separation is SATAN? NOOOOOOOOOOO!

[seventhson]

94. He was the Head of the Southern Command, fer chrissakes

No Separation whatever with the military cintractors running the paramilitaries in Columbie THEN. Probably Venezuela too.

Jeesh. Know your facts!

[BootinUp]

104. Definitely Proof

that he is evil reincarnated. Please tell me once again...woops...I mean tell me for the first time what is it that this spawn of the devil did exactly. I mean this was what back in the early 90's? So there must be some good well researched stories about how Clark committed atrocious acts against humanity.

[Pastiche423]

4. So?

He's on the board of, affliated w/, worked for, voted for, gave speeches for...

NED
SOA
Stephens Corp
Acxiom
Repug fundraiser
Nixon
Reagan - twice
MIC

But, he's a democrat now!



:wtf:

I am so friggen sick of repug apologist in this Democratic board!

:mad:

[wndycty]

7. Who would you be referring to?

Moi?

[Pastiche423]

18. Did I mention your name in my post?

I stand by my post.

[wndycty]

20. You did not mention anyone's name. . .

. . .I am just curious who you are talking about.

[Pastiche423]

24. I am talking about anyone that supports...

NED
SOA
Stephens Corp
Acxiom
Repug fundraiser
Nixon
Reagan - twice
MIC

Is that clear to you?

Edited to add:

De-regulation
Sending our s/w to India
Amending our Consitution

[wndycty]

30. SO you are talking about Clark. . .

. . .would that extend to those of us who are his supporters?

[Pastiche423]

37. Anyone:

Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary.

pron (1711): any person at all

[wndycty]

40. So I support Clark. . .

. . .how do you feel about me. . .come on right out and say it. Come on. Get it on the record.

[wndycty]

49. Step up to the plate. . .

Get it on the record. How do you feel about me and other Clark supporters on the DU. Step up. Come strong or don't come at all? What say you?

[Pastiche423]

51. Asked and answered

[wndycty]

54. hmmmmm

eom

[seventhson]

14. He was the COMMANDER of the Southern Command --- which means

he was in charge of those enchanting paramilitaries we trained at School of the Americas doing wet work in Plan Columbia etc. protecting the OIL there too for the BFEE.

I know, I know --- but can we avoid the meme about CLINTON being president then? I know this.

Clinton was a horrific hypocrite on Columbia and the Drug wars as well as on the civil war there. Beastly.

[_NorCal_D_]

23. Clark

also supervised secret Government mind control programs! Be afraid, be very afraid! B-)

[returnable]

27. Don't forget the Haitian man tits!!

:tinfoilhat:

[roughsatori]

43. I see you and Norcal do not refute the facts but resort to implied insults

But that is good because you both kicked the post and will help keep it at the to--that is if the other Clarkries have not yet gotten it deleted as is another favored tactic so as to avoid facts.

Hey--you can always mimic the right-wing meme and call us "Clark haters," another favorite response that avoids refutation of facts.

[_NorCal_D_]

46. Facts?

I choose not to dabble in conspiracy theories, whether they involve Clark, Dean, or any other candidate for that matter.

[returnable]

50. What facts was I supposed to refute?

Are you saying Clark wasn't responsible for Haitian man tits?

[_NorCal_D_]

44. Of course!

I almost forgot that Clark supervised a secret government project that utilized genetic engineering to turn unsuspecting Haitians into the perfect super-soldiers!

:tinfoilhat::hi::tinfoilhat:

[seventhson]

55. Yeah, don't forget the Haitian man tits. Thanks

The pesticide sprayed on Haitian men at Guantanamo when Clark was in charge of the Southern Command (which included authority for the Haitian Island and its refugees/political situation)has been alleged to have caused them to grow tits, as so rightly pointed out. Men under his command worked at Guantanamo during the haitian Refugee crisis. But, oif course, the US government denied that Haitians man tits were caused by any chemicals we sprayed on them and that they were perfectly safe.

Go figure. Maybe Clark wanted to try and grow mantits on David Koresh and hs followers too, but bombs and tanks were easier to send over and the results m,ore desirable and less tempting :toast: :evilgrin: :hippie: :silly: :freak: :+ :+ B-) B-)

[OKNancy]

60. I debunked this, but you don't pay attention

Clark was not in charge of the command for Haiti when this was supposed to happen. The ATLANTIC command was in charge, not the Southern command

[returnable]

62. Keep yer damn facts out of my conspiracy!

:hi:

[seventhson]

101. I don't think so

But if you have links, I'll read 'em.

Clark had men under his command at Guantanamo when the Haitians were there, I believe, and was responsible for Haiti as head of the Southern Command.

You show me a link that is credible and addresses this and I will see if it is somehow evidence to debunk this issue.

I assure you the men who were exposed to chemicals and grew man tits may not believe you, however.

[OKNancy]

108. Good grief

It was in the very own thread that you started.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=367739#373262

Here is my post.

Gracious - it didn't take too long to find


that Clark never had any responsibility for Haitian refugees.

First, the article in Counterpunch says during the 1980s and 90s......
During the 1980s he was either in Washington DC or at the National Training Center in Irwin California. He was also briefly at Fort Collins Colo.

In 91-92 he was at Fort Hood Tx. In 92-94 back to D.C.

The ONLY time he could be remotely involved in the refugee matter was was in 1994-96 when he was head of the Southern Command
which was in PANAMA. The Southern Command was moved to Miami in 1997 after Clark was gone.

HOWEVER----- the southern command was not involved in Haitian refugees during Clark's tenure.

During the Haitian crisis from 1991 to 94 the Haitian refugees were handled by the Atlantic Command, not the Southern Command http://www.jfcom.mil/about/History/abthist5.htm

THe US handed over responsibility to the UN in 1995, a migrant camp was opened at Guantanamo in 1995-----but again under the command of the Atlantic command.

The responsibility for the Carribean was not transfered to the Southern Command until 1997 -----after Clark was already gone.

[tabasco]

89. Another misstatement or lie about Clark.

Your ignorance of the military is quite striking. SouthCom does not command or control foreign military forces. SouthCom is a US Major Command comprised of US forces located primarily in Central and South America.
Regular military forces from friendly nations come to train at SOA in the same infantry tactics we train our own military. They are regular army forces from friendly nations in South America. SouthCom does not have any control over these allied militaries.
Why would you make such an uninformed and erroneous statement? I'm sure it wouldn't be to smear Clark, would it?

[OKNancy]

25. Clark resigned all his board positions

FWI

[Eloriel]

65. Then someone ought to tell NED to take him off

their list, dontcha think?

Eloriel

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

5. Will Dean call for an end of the NED, or American imperialism in general?

Nope. It's hard to bash Clark for something that the Democratic party supports in general. If Dean was taking the lead on this, it might mean something. But Dean sure as hell isn't, so what's the point?

Now if you were a Kucinich supporter, you'd have a leg to stand on.

[Hep]

8. Huh?

It's like saying that since Dean won't commit to banning the KKK, it's OK if David Duke was a member.

[sangh0]

11. More straw men

Nothing was said about Dean making a "commitment". Is it really so hard for Dean to say something about ending the NED?

[TLM]

10. LOL!!!!! So since Dean is not campaigning on ending the NED...

the fact clark not only activly supports them but was a fucking co-director of the NED... is OK.


Talk about moral relativism. That's like saying that because Kerry and Clark and Edwards and Lieberman and Gephardt supported the war in Iraq, then it is OK that Bush gave 87 billion to Halliburton to steal the oil from Iraq.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

32. Moral Relativism

This is the point - Clark has been active in foregin policy and international government, while Dean has not. There is NOTHING that Clark has done that Dean wouldn't have done, or supported, if Dean had actually DONE ANYTHING In the field of the military, foreign policy, or international relations.

So when Dean supporters bash Clark for his "scary" associations in NED and the like, it's rather hollow, since there is NO indication that Dean would be against something like NED, in fact, by all accounts it seems Dean would be 100% for it.

As I said, Kucinich supporters can say it, since Kucinich has been a LEADER against things like NED and the SoA. Dean has just been SILENT.

Dean, the rich doctor from all-white Vermont, has rarely gotten his hands dirty. That's hardly a ringing endorsement for him.

[CWebster]

12. Do you have documentation of Dean's dirty dealings

in organizations such as these? He may not be progressive enough for some on this board but he isn't swimming in this cesspool.

[seventhson]

17. The problem is that the board directed funds to Chavez's opposition

and increased funding something like 300% for the Chavez opposition.

Dean has and had no role in that and cannot until he becomes president.

We would be CRAZY to elect someone who already had his bloody fingers in these evil deeds corrupting democracies abroad under a fake BANNER of supporting "democracy"

Bad as the contras or cuban terrorists.

THESE are the people we should be locking up for being terrorists.

HOW deep was Clark in it? We need to know, But he was IN it for sure.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

36. Name ONE US president that hasn't been involved?

Seriously, name ONE. I think there are some Dean supporters that simply have NO CLUE what the Democratic party is sometimes.

"We would be CRAZY to elect someone who already had his bloody fingers in these evil deeds corrupting democracies abroad under a fake BANNER of supporting "democracy""

You think Dean is going to be different than Carter or Clinton in that regard?

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

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

[Democrats unite]

16. Once again another thread...

Much to do about nothing.

[Hep]

28. Nothing?

I'm not going to comment as to how I feel about the allegations until I know more, but I'm not about to blindly claim that this is NOTHING. How do you dismiss it so readily?

[Eloriel]

31. Right.

Keep your denial on the ultra-simple level.

NED? CIA? Venezuelan coups. What, me worry?

Eloriel

[jmaier]

19. Other bloody neocons at NED

Here are some other dastardly neocon NED directors:

Sen. Bob Graham (Deanies are mushing over about as potential VP)
Former Rep Lee Hamilton
Ambassador Richard Holbrooke (think Dayton Accords)
Sen Evan Bayh
Ester Dyson
Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY)

to name a few.

[maddezmom]

22. here's the link to all of them

http://www.ned.org/about/who.html

[seventhson]

33. great minds think alike

HI spons

[maddezmom]

45. hey back at ya

:toast:

[seventhson]

29. If you're gonna name names HERE: Carlucci, Bill Frist, American Enterprise

Institute Directors.

Here's a goddamn list of these people.

THIS is the PRIME example why we do NOT NEED CLARK and we DO NEED DEAN

DEMS AND NEOCONS Working together to destabilize democracies abroad!

Just like the PNAC and the DLC!!! F*cking traitors to democracy, if they had their hands in it.

HERE is the list and who they "belong" to (and I imagine we can get nmore info on all these folks but just Carlucci's name (Carlyle/CIA mursder of Lumumba) is enough to spook me):

Officers and Directors
Officers

The Honorable Vin Weber More...
(Chairman)
Clark & Weinstock

Mr. Thomas R. Donahue, More...
(Vice-Chair)
Senior Fellow
Work in America Institute

Mrs. Julie Finley, More...
(Treasurer)
Founder, Board Member
United States Committee on NATO

Mr. Matthew F. McHugh, More...
(Secretary)
Counselor to the President
The World Bank

Carl Gershman, More...
President

Directors

Ambassador Morton Abramowitz, More...
Senior Fellow
Century Foundation

The Honorable Evan Bayh, More...
United States Senate

The Honorable Frank Carlucci, More...
The Carlyle Group

General Wesley K. Clark, More...
Stephens Group, Inc.

The Honorable Christopher Cox, More...
United States House of Representatives

Ms. Ester Dyson, More...
Chairman
Edventure Holdings

Ms. Jean Bethke Elshtain, More...
University of Chicago The Honorable William H. Frist, More...
United States Senate

Dr. Francis Fukuyama, More...
Johns Hopkins University,
Paul H. Nitze School for Advanced International Studies

Ms. Suzanne Garment, More...
Dow, Lohnes & Albertson

Mr. Ralph J. Gerson, More...
President & CEO
Guardian International Corp.

The Honorable Bob Graham, More...
United States Senate

The Honorable Lee H. Hamilton, More...
Director
The Woodrow Wilson Center

Ambassador Richard C. Holbrooke, More...
Counselor
Perseus

Mr. Emmanuel A. Kampouris, More...
President and CEO, Retired
American Standard, Inc.

The Honorable Jon Kyl, More...
United States Senate

Mr. Leon Lynch, More...
Vice President
United Steelworkers of America

The Honorable Gregory W. Meeks, More...
United States House of Representatives

Mr. Michael Novak, More...
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research

Ambassador Terence A. Todman, More...
International Consultant

Ambassador Howard Wolpe, More...
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars

[Eloriel]

41. Re Bob Graham

THIS Deanie never has mushed over about him for anything. In fact, I'd often counter to remarks about what a "good guy" he is with the fact that I thought he was too cozy with the Intel people and I never really trusted him. I was relieved to see him drop out. I regret that I never took my hunches and dim memories of once-concrete reasons for my objections to him to the next step to google on the guy, but I did voice them on occasion.

That said, it begins to dawn on me that there aren't all that many pols who have completely clean hands. Sooner or later, Dean may have to settle for someone like a Graham. I don't like it, but reality is hard reconcile with at times.

Eloriel

[_NorCal_D_]

52. As a man

who voted against the IWR and the 87 billion, Graham has my full trust and support. B-)

[seventhson]

61. Yeah, maybe, but wasn't he meeting with ISI and friends of Osama on 911?

I think he was. I always thought that was suspicious.

No mushies for that guy here.

And Bayh is a Bilderberger whore (another PNAC type)

[Eloriel]

68. You DO know why he voted against it, don't you?

Because it wasn't "tough enough," is what he said at the time.

Eloriel

[DUreader]

109. Many seem to forget that, if they ever knew. n/t

[RetroLounge]

77. and how many of them are running for president?

Sen. Bob Graham (Deanies are mushing over about as potential VP)

No, this Gov. Dean Supporter is not. Nice generalization.

and as far as I am concerned, Clark should NOT be the VP either, at least not for a Dem.

[BootinUp]

26. Edited: The NED is a broad based organization

This was where he made a recent speech, there are liberals, conservatives and probably a few extremists. What are you trying to make of it?

For one thing Clark does not take the Bush approach to problem solving and gaining consensus (MY way or the HI Way). Clark will open the debate up to a cross section of experts and actually build a consensus. But he has described his vision.



A New American Patriotism: A New Call to Service

General Wesley K. Clark
New York, NY
October 14, 2003

http://clark04.com/speeches/005/

snip
....
The terrorists who brought down the World Trade Center and hit the Pentagon thought they could rock the foundation of our economy, and strike a blow to the symbol of our strength.

They didn't understand that the foundation isn't concrete and steel - it's people like you.

They didn't understand that the measure of America's strength does not rest in our military arsenal.

They didn't understand that the real measure of America's strength is our people.

They didn't understand that freedom and democracy - and our commitment to each other - makes us stronger.

We know that our strength rests in our families and communities.

We know that our strength lies in our commitment to freedom and equality.

We know that our strength lies in a vibrant national debate - an open, honest discussion of the issues, where everyone has right to disagree.

And above all, we know that our diversity is our greatest strength.
.........
snip

[roughsatori]

35. Just read all the responses and not a single factual rebuttal

I am surprised not to have read any "yawns" yet. I have seen a "deleted post" or two though. A few weeks ago a few of them even defended the School of the Americas. Sorry, it is a terrorist training school (even under its new name)and DU apologists for Repuke ideology will not change my mind.

[Pastiche423]

42. The FACT is

they cannot rebut FACTS.

[returnable]

48. What is there to rebut?

Why is it that some folks expect Clark supporters to "rebut" every bit of information posted about him?

Clark served on the Board of NED. And? You seem to assume this a deal-breaker for some of us.

It's not.

That may not make you happy, but so what?

[ajacobson]

98. Why bother

What FACT would get you to change your position? None. You have an ideologically hardened position and neither one fact or a million facts would change your mind, so why bother?

[returnable]

38. As a Clark supporter...

...I'm not gonna try and defend Clark's participation in NED. I don't need to.

Am I happy about it? Not really.

But it's simply not an issue that defines his candidacy for me.

It's like Dean supporters who can forgive his awarding fat state contracts to Vermont Yankee and Hyrdo-Quebec.

Every candidate has associations that might give his or her supporters pause.

[mikehiggins]

39. Golly. What did he do there?

Many years ago I served on a committee working for Richard Nixon (yep, that Richard Nixon) on the topic of reforming Selective Service.

Even worse, in high school, I helped organize the Goldwater sponsored Young Americans for Freedom in Westchester County. I also took part in the Christian Anti-Communist Crusade and knew many folks in the <<<gasp>>> John Birch Society !!!!!!!

I'm a life member in the NRA.

Clearly I am suspect.

Since the Democratic party is not a religious organization, however, and there is no Canon or Creed that requires me to honor revealed truth and dogma, I can now call myself a Democrat, belong to the local County Committee, and work for Democratic candidates. Its a free country(at least so far).

If Joe Blow walks in off the street and signs up as a Democrat, he's a democrat. If he doesn't meet your standards for what a Democrat is, too bad for you. He has met all the requirements necessary.

Clark's membership on Boards of Directors is pretty much pro-forma for upper management types. I'm not in their number but I've served on the board of some pretty nifty groups myself. I'm on the board of the Friends of the Boardwalk, a citizen action group in Coney Island. I'm on the board of the Grand Street Boys Association, an old line civic action group in Manhattan. I'm on the board of the Harry S Truman Foundation in NYC.

Unlike corporate boards I don't get paid for being on those boards, but like corporate boards I am not privy to all activities of the groups involved. I go to meetings, talk over what is being planned, give advice if its asked, and move on. Mostly I help raise money. It is quite easy to do.

NED sounds real good. The list of establishment types on the board sounds pretty respectable. Same with PNAC and other groups. I'm sure many board members of all those groups are just names on a letterhead, and occasional meetings with dinner and a check, and little more. It is networking and making connections with the movers and shakers of the US establishment. Everyone does it.

Was it real hard to find out this information about Clark? Was it hidden away in some secret file only accessible to those who have the secret handshake and the Lost Word of Shamballa? Did you have to ferret it out in secretive midnight raids, like in Mission Impossible? Or is it a matter of public information?

And is it something the GOP is likely to use against Clark in a general election?

Hmmmmm....

I don't think so.

So we're back at the first argument. Clark is not sufficiently pure by the standards of faction a to deserve to carry the sacred Democratic banner. In fact, it would be better if we lost the election rather than run a candidate that wasn't sterling and true according to the standards of faction a.

Well, we've seen that before, haven't we?

[OKNancy]

57. We know Clark to be a fine and decent man

Clark has never done anything in his whole career to be ashamed of. He has always been the liberal general, sometimes to a detriment to his career. People who defame him do it because they fear that he will overtake their candidate (if Carol Mosley Braun was on the NED board there would be nary a peep), or they believe in every kooky conspiracy that comes down the pike. Some believe that Clark makes Haitian men grow titties and/or play hockey with John Kerry is cause for an investigation.

The screamers and haters aren't changing anyone's mind; in fact they just steel our resolve. It's a shame too, because I know for a fact that Howard Dean would never, ever condone the smears seen here.
He would point out differences in tax policy, differences in his approach to Iraq, differences in his healthcare plan. He would concentrate of the real, not the unreal ranting of those that see boogiemen and Hillary Clinton behind every curtain.

[Pastiche423]

63. It is not fear

that he will overtake a candidate. It is fear for our country.

[OKNancy]

67. Boo

I fear George Bush.

[Eloriel]

59. Oh, you're so right

If the GOP can't make hay of it, it makes it all just fine.

I don't think I've seen anything quite that cynical (your whole argument, highlighted best by that GOP comment) on DU for a while now.

And surely you're not suggesting PNAC is just Boy Scouts Board for Movers and Shakers, are you?

Eloriel

[mikehiggins]

78. Cynical El?

Disgusted is more like it. Most of my life I have had to deal with people who are more concerned with someone's moral and ethical purity than with his or her ability to get a job done. Thus we can't compromise or negotiate because, in this comic book view of reality, doing so besmirches our claims to the one true faith.

That is garbage. Clark isn't perfect? So what?

Can he win and send Dubya back to the ranch? That is what matters.

Chemotheraphy can be very unpleasant, but not as unpleasant as dying of cancer. There is a cancer on the presidency and if Clark is hard medicine, even if he makes our hair fall out, we'll still have time to argue over it. If this nation goes the way Bush wants to lead it, time will soon run out.

Cynical or not, to me the only issues are those that will affect the general election. NAP and the rest won't.

[Justice]

90. Thank you

Well Said

[democratreformed]

71. Rebuttal, if that's what you call it, does not work

To me, this is an issue that I have to simply agree to disagree with some people on. I tried the rebuttal tactic in a prior discussion of this topic and it didn't work. I left the conversation promising to think more about it. I did and I still do. The simple fact is that I disagree with some others on some of the core issues associated with this thread. I won't elaborate on my opinions and positions b/c it serves no purpose. My opinions are mine and sometimes its just best to keep them to myself.

So far, though, I haven't found anything in the topics of this post that cause me enough alarm to abandon my candidate and it's very highly doubtful that I ever will.

The bottom line is this. If these things bother you, don't support Wesley Clark. If they don't, then go ahead. And, for some topics, that is the only possible answer.

[seventhson]

47. Wonderful NED democratic efforts in Venezuela analyzed HERE

Thanks General Clark! YOU inspire CONFIDENCE in DEMOCRACY (not)!

http://www.williambowles.info/guests/ned-venezuela.html


an excellent breakdown of where the moneys went.

and this excerpt:

Observations:

1) It appears that the NED’s increased financial “assistance” was to some degree synchronized with the events aimed at ousting Chavez. Both the CTV and Fedecamaras (along with Venezuela’s privately-owned media: particularly, El Universal, El Nacional, Globovision, RCTV, TeleVen, Venevision, Tal Cual and others) were heavily involved both in the April 2002 coup against Chavez (which also led to the dictatorial abolishment of the National Assembly and the reform laws) and the 2-3 month business-backed “stoppage” (which plunged Venezuela into serious economic problems). The CTV and their “associates” were provided with $515,676US during the time that Chavez has been in power, versus $72,250US before Chavez came into power (approximately a 700% increase in funding!).

2) The major so-called “Venezuelan” organizations that the NED claims to have backed (at least publicly), were essentially Washington-based organizations (IRI, CICP,ACILS and the NDI) who were directly sponsored through facades: Fundacion Pensamiento y Accion, Fedecamaras, CTV and (apparently) Escuela de Vecinos de Venezuela. There are several other business/political Venezuelan organizations linked to the NDI as well, all of which appear to be anti-Chavez, and not mentioned in this document. A search of the NED grant details will lead you to them. The percentage of funds dealt to these organizations by the NED during the time of Chavez (compared to pre-Chavez times) is 65% ($2,083,973) of the total monies granted to them over an approximate 10 year period. The total amount of funds received by these four organizations (Washington-based, but in Venezuela) over the 10-year period is almost 70% of all the moneys granted to all organizations in Venezuela by the NED for the same time period.

[CWebster]

56. Obviously, an organization welcoming Bush's views

on democracy.

http://www.ned.org/events/anniversary/oct1603-Bush.html

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

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

[returnable]

66. I always suspected...

...that Paul Wellstone was a warmongering neocon hellbent on overthrowing Venezuela.

Thanks for bringing that to light :hi:

[Bread and Circus]

70. The energy that these folks have is undaunting....

and exhausting.....

They will go to any extreme to rehash the same thing over
and over and over no matter how much it is debunked.

Then....when everything's quiet, they start it up again
as if it hadn't been rehashed.

It's the same crew of yahoos too...

[Renew Deal]

73. It looks like Clark is back on the hit list.

I guess they are freaked out by all of the people Clark seems to be pulling in. It seems to be cyclical though. Clark was public enemy 1 for a while, then Dean, now Clark again. When is it Bush*s turn.

[wndycty]

76. Was he ever off?

:kick:

[returnable]

81. Wow....

...the Clark critics in this thread got awfully quiet after you mentioned Mondale and Wellstone.

Go figure. :kick:

[RichM]

74. This is completely consistent with everything Clark has his fingers in.

He loves the School of the Americas; gave the graduation speech praising all the young terrorists "educated" there in '96.

He loves & admires Colin Powell -- & said so again within the last few weeks.

He spoke in last Monday's debate about "BEATING DOWN THE INSURGENCY" in Iraq. Does that phrase set off warning bells for anyone?

He still thinks Vietnam was a great & noble use of American military force.

He's against corporate re-regulation.

The guy is a standard-issue militarist reactionary, with a few dollops of "liberal" talking points blopped over the surface (but this, of course, is more than enough to hoodwink a large number of terrified victory-starved Democrats).

[democratreformed]

79. This thread reminds me of why

I had to stop visiting "WhatReallyHappened" and othe conspiracy sights. If you listen to all of it, then there is absolutely no hope whatsoever because NO ONE is good. Everyone is EVIL. There is not in between. Dems, Repubs, whatever - they are all out to get us.

Enough of that stuff and you just start losing faith in living. Or resolve yourself to living back in some out-of-the-way place where you don't have to be in touch with the rest of society. Anything good you can think of has some bad somewhere. There is just no hope.

[Mattforclark]

80. Please tell me precisely

What Clark has done that is so bad, so that I may be able to learn whether or not it is true and address any concerns anyone may have.

Please avoid conspiratorial statements, guilt by association, ad-hominem attacks or any other logical fallacies like 'And he serves with a nice conglomeration of luminaries and lesser-known neocons, including Frank Carlucci:' and tell me what precisely Clark has done.

Because rational and open discourse is essential to progress.

[Mattforclark]

83. My god

did this thread just go from about 7 posts to 87 in about 5 minutes or is there something wrong with me?

[democratreformed]

99. Of course it did

If it had said "Look what else Clark has been up to" and then been something good, it would be more like it would go from 0 posts to 5 posts in 87 minutes. Isn't that funny?

[mmonk]

84. Concerning foreign policy

I think Clark will be fine. You can keep the threads if you want. They get posted over and over at different times. There are also plenty of Dean stories concerning his foreign policy positions on the middle east that many would find negative here (alot from common dreams). I would post them especially concerning his positions and AIPAC but I would probably be deleted. My point is to ask what do you think Clark's positions are on foreign policy since you are trying to develop a theme?

[DemCam]

85. There you go again, Eloriel...

Didn't read anything but the subject line...don't have to.

[NNN0LHI]

86. Just what I need. Someone who voted for Nader telling me whats wrong...

...with the Democratic candidates. Sheesh.

Don

[el_gato]

87. thanks Eloriel, good job

Some people just don't want to grasp the enormity of the problem

kudos to whocounts and richM as well

by the way i just can't trust people who have a screen name that implys support for a specific candidate, it just tells me they are partisans with no interest in the truth

[Pastiche423]

88. Some people just want to deny the problem

[returnable]

91. What "problem" are we supposedly denying?

Some of us just don't think it's a big deal.

I noticed you had nothing to say about Wellstone being associated with NED.

Can you deny Wellstone had a seat on NED?

Are you saying that Wellstone was a warmongering neocon hellbent on overthrowing Venezuela?

You haven't refuted any of cryingshame's post at the top of this thread, either. Why is that?

[Pastiche423]

93. cryingshame

has not posed a single question to me.

Could that be why?

[returnable]

95. Oh, please...

So you have to have an engraved invitation to respond to posts now?

By the way, I did pose a question to you. In fact, I posed two:

Can you deny that Wellstone had a seat on NED?

Do you think Paul Wellstone was a warmongering neocon hellbent on the overthrow of Venezuela?

I anxiously await your answers.

[el_gato]

105. given the fact that wellstone is dead, we can't ask him about it but

certainly clark could speak about his involvement
with SOA, NED etc.

Since your such a good buddy of his why don't you go get some answers

[mmonk]

96. nah

[KittyWampus]

97. Howard Dean Backed By Unions Responsible For Venezuelan Coup Attempt

Dean has been endorsed by the AFL-CIO and thus will be beholden to their agenda... which is overthrowing Chavez in Venezueal.

The AFL-CIO already sent money to groups trying to foment a coup in Venezuela.

Perhaps this is why Dean won't cut Pentagon Funding... he is in the pocket of the Neo0Cons.

After all, Dean won't even stand up against anti Union "Right to Work" laws.

Dean gets the support from the Unions but neither the Union Bigwigs nor Dean actually care about the actual workers they are supposed to represent.

Their real mission is to overthrow Hugo Chavez and all Governments and elected representatives who are not part of the Neo con agenda.

Why else is Dean happy with the excorbitant Pentagon funding?

[KittyWampus]

100. I May Have To Start A Thread About This: Dean Works For Venezuelan Coup

I'm sure the poster who started this thread (eloriel) would be pleased.

[returnable]

102. Don't forget to personally invite folks to respond...

:hi:

[mmonk]

92. sometimes

the problem could be that those who want to keep talking about these connections are trying to draw a conclusion of sorts (not really clear) of how this applies to his positions as presidential candidate. So explain it in detail so there is no confusion and back it up using Clark's positions or just keep entertaining yourselves with these postings and we'll ignore them so they can disappear.

[ajacobson]

103. Unlike others,

whose output is 99% posts ripping other candidates and 1% posts supporting their own. Very useful.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

106. This Thread Ain't Nothing But Bovine Excrement

NT

[chaska]

107. Yammering yammerers.

Who ever said that these attack threads only strengthen our resolve was right on the money. These things say more about the person who starts them than anything else. Bullies, that's what we're dealing with here.

I don't condemn all Deanies but there are a few that the rest of you need to put the smackdown to. There is a meme that some are trying to foment that says that Clarkies bash Dean as much as Deanies bash Clark. IT'S NOT TRUE. I have been carefully observing the situation for several weeks and it's simply not the case. For example, Monday night I turned on the computer at 10:00 and there were 6 anti-Clark threads going. There were no anti-Dean threads.

The central issue of this thread is all-or-nothing thinking. The person who started this thread is operating on that basis. I see this a lot at DU. The plain simple fact is that there is no perfect candidate. When you find one, vote for him. I'm voting for Clark. I don't agree with everything he's said or done, but he is the best man for the job.

[BootinUp]

111. No he is

Evil!

Head of the Southern Command
Member of the NED

He is Evil for serving his country because the country is evil so we all are evil we must cleanse ourselves.....we must....


And now for Something Completely Different

[Moderator]

113. I am locking this thread.

It is inflammatory.

[retyred]

114. Been there, done that, "Don't Care"

Nothing you have to offer means anything except to you and the other Deannie Babies that are afraid Clark will steal deans thunder, rehashing old news makes for dull reading.....But Thanx anyway!



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