Is Clark a Set-Up to clear the way for Kerry? Are we Being DUPED by Clark?

[seventhson]

I have to tell you I was REALLY REALLY PEEVED when I read this article this morning from FAIR posted at the Editorials forum.

I TRUST F.A.I.R. and now feel like we have all here at DU been the victims of a spurious congame by the DUers on this board and by Clark himself.,

Here is a man with admittedly NO domestc policy experience. A man who (presumably) oversaw the use of depleted Uranium in Kosovo and the war he headed for Nato and who has been protrayed as an antiwar "hero" by folks here at DU for months and months.

But FAIR turns that story into a lie. The Clark antiwar stuff is fake:

http://www.fair.org/press-releases/clark-antiwar.html

And we (many of us, myself included, fell fot it.) Who benefit's? I think Kerry will to the detriment of Dean.

Admittedly I did not like Clark at first but warmed up to him as more and more DUers said he was against this Iraq war and that he would be an antiwar general and Commander in Chief. Now it looks like that was ALL a lie.

You have to have PLENTY of connections to become supreme commander of Nato.

So now there is a poll at Democrats.com showing that CLARK COMES OUT OF THE GATE AHEAD OF DEAN. Dean moves to second in their fanatasy poll.

The way I see it the primaries now become name r4ecognition events and "activist" events. Activists will vote their respective candidates. Name recognition voiters will vote for whom they think is the most famous. And a few will actually vote for whom they know most rtepresents them.

Clark is unlikely to draw many votes in the primaries, the way I see it. At least not at first. The fact that he is now touted as the "antiwar" candidate (vs, say Lieberman or Kerry) will draw away supporters from Dean and NOT so much., Kerry -- who are name recognition loyalists who THINK (erroneously) that Kerry stood up to Bush on Iraq.

DU has been a prime target for disinformation. I KNOW we have a LOT of influence on the internet political community.

Even I was taken in by the Clark lies and saID i'DS LIKE TO SEE HIM AS vp.

I take that back.

MY PREFERRED CHOICE now IS DEAN EDWARDS (If Gore never gets back in).

The ONLY reason I ever tho8ugh Clark was okay at all was because I figured so many DUers could not be wrong on this "antiwar" stuff

Guerss what? They were lying it seems. And Kerry may well be the beneficiary. I smell something but don't know exactly where somebody plopped it at. But I think it was here at DU.


I still like Kucinich's policies the best. But I do not believe he has the right stuff to beat Bush with Americans.

[tjdee]

1. Oh for pete's sake.

I can see now that Clark will be the beneficiary of the Clinton mythology as well.

Maybe, Clark has a deadly cologne which makes everyone do *his* bidding?

Clark is not in to benefit John Kerry. He is in to beat Bush.

If the DNC/whoever urged him to get in (like thousands of other regular people), it is for this end. Since he's polling ahead at Democrats.com (a crap poll, no doubt), gee, maybe OTHER PEOPLE AGREE.

EVERYTHING IS NOT ABOUT HOWARD DEAN.

Do you have any proof AT ALL that this is what's going on?

Just the FAIR article? I thik it's clear that Clark was against the principle and politics of the war. FAIR is parsing words and the article is getting on my nerves with the amount of times it's been posted on this board in one day.

[seaglass]

12. No, but everything, this included is about John Kerry.

Don't be fooled by the concern about how this impacts Dean, it's just a cover for the real issue.

[tjdee]

36. The real issue=BEATING BUSH.

This is all so much speculation my head is spinning.

Kerry was FOR the war. Clark lends credibility to an anti-war position, and hurts Kerry irreparably in the foreign experience/veteran area.

Gee, maybe it's possible--MAYBE--that the DNC wants a winner and thinks Clark is one? What is the problem with that? Why do people have to cloak and dagger their way to the primaries?

[Egnever]

2. how the hell?

Does clark help kerry? If anything I think clark's entry kicks kerry out of the race.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. I Eschew All Conspiracy Theories

regardless of the direction from which they come...

[seventhson]

30. so.... WHAT? Did JFK commit suicide? Was Wellstone not Wellstoned?

And what about Allende in Chile and the bombing of Letelier's car in Washington DC.

History is FULL of proven conspiracies.

Even 9-11 was SOMEBODY's conspiracy.

I practice criminal law. Conspiracies are EVERYWHERE in the courts. Enron. Arthur Anderson. BCCI. Iran-Contra.

The Bushes have been involved in many conspiracies.

What about the voter purge in Florida.

To suggest that the bad guys (fascists) here in America would not use every means necessary to keep from going to prison and to keep their global economic and political power is true naivete or just pure denial and ignorance (or an outright lie) imho.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

50. Do you win cases with evidence as flimsy as you post here?

[seventhson]

51. I win cases by exposing the truth

Right now my theory about Clark and Kerry is just speculation -- but it appears we are the victim of a disinformation campaign by Clark's backers about his being "antiwar".


I watched JFK tonight.

These bastards will try any type of blackop to keep themselves and their toadies in power.

Clark may be a part of that plan.

I want the democrats to win. But I want them to win with a true representative of the people and NOT a pawn for the BFEE - whether or not they call themsleves a Dem.

I want a TRUE dem.

I really want Gore.

But Dean I will support. Kucinich and even Edwards too.

But Clark is too weird so far to trust AT ALL.

[seventhson]

28. We'll see. But mark my words...

If it helps Kerry then the BFEE was behind it

[morningglory]

3. The turning worm in the media makes me suspicious.

Last night and today, the crawls are all pointing out anti cabal stuff, all the talk shows like Tweety are saying anti cabal stuff. Now the whole press/media are jumping on Clark like he is good. I am afraid that if he is good, why are the whore media giving him so much license.

[DogKing]

6. Right On MG

I don't give a crap how antiwar he is over Iraq. The fact remains that he perpetuated the whole Kosovo Konflict and that makes him "prowar" IMHO. This media lovefest over a guy like him seriously hurts my head.

[liberalnurse]

18. Can you say.....

Slovalone Melocovich? You may say it but I don't think I can spell it....

[StopTheMorans]

27. you can't spell it:)

Slobodan Milosevic

[RichV]

5. Somebody

needs a tinfoil hat.

[Julien Sorel]

9. This kid believes Kerry had a plan to assassinate

Gore and become president in his place. Just so you know what you're dealing with. Tin foil wouldn't be strong enough; I think we're in the lead sheeting territory with this one. But there will be enough people posting on this thread to keep it alive.

[seventhson]

24. I never said that, buster...

My belief is that kerry is the BFEE/Skull and Bones candidate.

Skull has for almost two hundred years placed their members in key spots in the government, intelligence, wall street, the military and the Supreme Court. Many are long term moles.

Skull does not care whether Kerry or Bush gets elected because either one will fulfill their corporate fascist dreams of maintaining global dominance for their families. Kerry will do that for them.

But, like with LBJ and JFK, the principal who they want elected does NOT have to be IN on the plot.

I do not believe that LBJ KNEW who the killers were or was in on the JFK plot. The only thing that mattered to the skullboyz in THAT scenario is that LBJ would promote the war and the cuba embargo and the oil companies and that he would go with their flow in "fighting" communism" (i.e. the protection of the mines and minerals around the world for corporate raiders and wall street from nationalizing and control by the people whose country they belonged to).

This was ther deal with Hitler too: the Bushes et al played both sides in the war and profitted from it as long as the assets of a country were not owned by the people who they really belonged to.

Point is...

I never said it was Kerry's plot to get the VP slot and then have the BFEE off Gore to get their boy in place.

I said it was the BFEE plot. Kerry is as expendable to them as anybody.

But if Clark's entry into the race kills Dean's campaign and benefits Kerry then my beliefs will be vindicated.

We'll see. Clark will end up VP with Kerry maybe and THEN we have another possibly BFEE presidency in sheeps clothing.

[MarianJack]

7. NONSENSE!

You don't spend that money and expose yourself to the kkkarl venom for a reason like that. :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :silly:

[seventhson]

26. No Nonsense

You do if you are Karl's stealth candidate.

Look. I know practically NOTHING about Clark.

But the fact that FAIR has "outed" him as a faker antiwar candidate maKES ME BELIEVE THAT all the hype IS BLACKOPS tupe propoganda.

Kerry was losing traction.

Dean was gaining momentum and was all about the people's business all over the media. He was refining his message and making it clearer.

IF General Clark is an honest man, he would NOT have let this antiwar bullshit get slung by his meisters out there and right here.

Maybe he is just an arrogant bean counting opportunist.

Maybe he works for Rove.

I am still assessing.

But the scenario I porpose is not beyond the realm of possibility or reason.

After all -- this administration is one which uses assassination and the destruction of democracies and civilians to keep its bloody claws in power.

I happen to believe Wellstone was murdered by this bunch. Why would they not stoop to recruiting a CNN hack analyst for safekeeping in the event Dean surges ahead.

YOU have NO WAY of knowing if I am correct. Frankly, neither do I. I believe it must be vetted here at DU though.

The media and many DUer's have taken to Clark like flies to shit.

It is just weird. And it smells bad. Especially the pacifist lie.

If Clark did NOT say the things attributed to him then let's argue the FACTS about it.

Until then I trust FAIR's report and that proves Clark has either misled us or has lied through his teeth as has the media.

There is only one reason that would be IMHO. It helps the BFEE.

Franklin D.Roosevelt said NOTHING IN POLICS IS AN ACCIDENT!!!

Clark may not be either.

[Clark Can WIN]

8. Axe grinding lies- The general in september

http://pweb.jps.net/~gangale/opsa/ir/generals2.htm

I question your sincerity.

[seventhson]

32. I LOVE THIS: General Clark added ..."why not go after Iran?"

General Clark added that if we were so concerned with going after nation-states with ties to terrorism, why not go after Iran?

From the link above responded to here.

[CWebster]

10. nah

It is to knock Kerry out of the running. It already has. Notice the split is Dean-Clark with barely a mention of Kerry. Because the real appeal is in buying the sales pitch that military credentials equals strength. that was Kerry's launching pad. This is the mindset of those who follow polls rather than forging ahead to pitch an alternative vision.

[HawkerHurricane]

13. Aha!

KERRY was just running to give CLARKE a leg up! I get it now!
:tinfoilhat:

[CWebster]

17. No

that was not Kerry's intention--he just lost the strategy. Clarks candidacy is very studied---the promotion covers all bases superficially to bypass the liabilities in other candidate's past records

[Code_Name_D]

45. A Dean Clark split? What are you smoking?

Clark was just caught in a lie. Maybe I am a fool, but I sinsearly do not beleive a liying Clark represents a threat to Dean.

[hayu_lol]

11. Ah, Seventhson...up to your old tricks again?

Did you ever discover who fired the ray gun that knocked down Wellstone's plane?

[seventhson]

33. yeah - all evidence points to...

the BFEE. Whether Karl pulled the trigger or not remians to be determined, But since no one gives a sh*t then we probably will never know exactly WHP zapped 'em.

[WesWing2004]

35. this is the wanker conspiracist kicked off smirking chimp

a long time ago.

we didn't listen to your CT there and we don't listen to it here either.

you guys need to stop smoking whatever is making you so crazy.

[WoodrowFan]

37. deleted by author

Sorry, decided in afterthought it was too much of a flame.

[hayu_lol]

46. A Wanker Indeed...You got it Wes...

Was banned from Dems.com for roughly the same reasons.

[bicentennial_baby]

14. Oh wait

You're the guy that thinks Will Pitt is some kind of undercover operative who's duping everyone at DU....I remember you now.... :boring:

[StaggerLee]

15. He's not?

;)

[Emperor_Norton_II]

19. Only when the Reptoids remember to sign the checks

:evilgrin:

[Kahuna]

20. You...

devil, you. }(

[WoodrowFan]

39. when did he say that?

I'd love to read that thread!! (I ran several searches without success)

[Eloriel]

16. The FAIR Advisory matches my own muddy memory

of Clark's "performance" re the war. I've not been all that comfortable with him because when the war started, he was all pro-war -- from my recollection -- in his appearances as commentator on the news shows. That's not leadership in my book, and I found it pretty disappointing as it occurred. (Well, that's not the only reason I'm not all that comfortble with him, but it's one.)

Thanks for the link.

Eloriel

[Kahuna]

21. Your "recollection?" Maybe you can do what FAIR failed

to do and post links or entire articles so that we can make up our own minds.

[Gman]

22. As long as it's not Dean, all of the above is OK by me

even if it's unintended consequences.

[returnable]

23. Yeah, and...

...the other alleged "anti-war" candidate, Howard Dean, actually supported a 60-day timeline for absolute disarmament and would've endorsed a UN-led war.

So what's your point?

[Andy_Stephenson]

25. Ummm...I am antiwar...However...if the UN

had been on board and thought Saddam a big enough threat, I would have supported it. That was and is not the case. BTW I support Dennis K for president.

[seventhson]

38. I think the circumstances are very different between Kerry, Clark and Dean

Dean was on the outside with ONLY media reports on the WMD.

A UN supported demilitarization would maybe have worked --- especially if the weapons inspections were permitted to continue and SOME WMD's were found.

The METHOD of doing this in an international way would have been hugely different.

I did NOT hear Clark saying let the inspections continue.

I hear him criticizing the WAY the war is fought and supporting (as even Bushies guys did reluctantly at that point) getting the UN support first before the war.

Dean, unliek Kerry and Clark, did NOT have access to classified information abotu Saddam.

And while arguably Kerry and Clark may have been misled by analsysts for Rummy (although this is a stretch in my opinion as they had analsyst too and KNEW the Bushies were liars), Dean had NO way of knowing that what the experts said was not true as he had no inside info.

We ALL here knew that Saddam was a dangerous lunatic that needed to be removed from power. But many of us feel the same way about Bush. Does that mean we support a war over it?

My feelings about Dean are mixed. But I trust him MORE than Clark by a mile and the antiwar candidate satuff with Clark seems to me to be an outright LIE

What exactly did Dean support? A UN coalition? Okay with me, I suppose.

[returnable]

49. Guess we'll have to agree...

...to disagree.

Cuz your argument strikes me as a double standard:

"What exactly did Dean support? A UN coalition? Okay with me, I suppose."

That's exactly the position Clark took. And he DID urge for more inspections.

And what makes you believe Clark had access to recent classified info about Saddam? He's been retired from the military for 4 years. He can't just wander into the Pentagon and look at any old folder he wants.

[blm]

29. Dean's antiwar stance is less clear than Clark's, seventhson.

Care to check out ALL Dean has said? He wasn't antiwar, he was for a DIFFERENT VERSION of the Itaq resolution that STILL authorized use of force.

[robbedvoter]

31. Course you believe FAIR, fellow Naderites attacking Gore in 2000

and still helping W. On a locked thread, someone put this interesting info (thanks OK Nancy - glad I saved it):
---------------
> Since the outbreak of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Clark has been on CNN, bemoaning the Pentagon and Gen. Tommy Franks's
> strategy in the opening days of taking down Saddam. And while several other senior retired military men have made
> critical comments about the ongoing fighting -- Ret. Gen. Barry McCaffrey, another former Clinton-era official, has
> been quick to criticize during his stints on MSNBC -- Clark has by far been the most vocal.
> "It just looks really bad that he's knocking the troops and the way we're executing this war," says the DNC staffer.
> "He's taking hits everywhere, on TV, in the newspapers, on talk radio. People are furious at him. We can't fundraise
> off performances like this. The only presidential candidate that would probably want to be seen with him is Howard
> Dean."
> Prior to Clark's "tanking" on CNN, the DNC had Clark pegged for political stardom. He'd visited New Hampshire, and
> had hinted that he was interested in perhaps running for president as a Democrat. Now, the DNC isn't sure what they
> can do with the man who directed Bill Clinton's military machinations in Kosovo.
> http://www.spectator.org/article.asp?art_id=2003_3_27_22_49_18
> edit: this is dated March 28, 2003
>

[Donna Zen]

34. You who live without trust

What you are forgetting is that the draft campaign was not a DLC-Clinton-MIC-PNAC-AEI inspired anything. Posts that regularly regurgitate this pap, along with the accompanying already, debunked link, do nothing to strenghen their community by denigrating an honorable American, and a great deal to wound the ideals of the posters here who asked this man to run. No! this is not politics as usual. This open war-character assasination perpetrated by those who dare not know the truth; it is beyond ugly. People who chortle the word liberal and have never lived a day of that open-minded journey.

The greatest difference between Wesley and ABBW is that he did not chose to run; no matter how long and often, you wallow in the republican infested waters of some conspiracy theory to prove your deepest desire of inflicting damage to this man. Because we...I...me... asked him to run...sent money...you you...you...have put the guilt on me. But how could I ever have guessed at the level of ignorance to be encountered outside of some RNC hell.

[hayu_lol]

47. Your post is very nicely put DONNA.

Always the same old regurgitated garbage in these attacks. Thanks for your well-reasoned reply.

[janx]

40. I don't know that I'd go as far as the article does...

but I did hear on NPR today that Clark is being pushed by "some Democrats who feel that Dean is unelectable."

That reeks of DLC.

I like Clark so far, but I am wondering about this.

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

41. clark is a realist

not pro war or anti war. he is against preemptive action (agression) and isn't afraid to say it.

[disgruntella]

42. is that all it takes for you? one URL

and you are convinced Clark is EVIL? Never mind overwhelming evidence to the contrary - you find one URL and it makes the decision for you.

I bet the sky is a pretty color in your world.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

43. YAY! One more thing to be paranoid about!

[Zolok]

44. Yes, General Clark is John Kerry's faithful meat puppet

I have this on the highest authority from the squirrels that disport themselves in my yard.
THOSE TREACHEROUS LITTLE VERMIN....but clued in politically if'n you know what I mean...
With Wesley Clark in the race tis' but a mere matter of marching to CRUSH Howard Dean, ride over the bones of Kucinich et al and then John Kerry's path to power is clear!
NYAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!
NO ONE WILL STOP US
This Republic will follow us to-the-STARS if we pull this off!!!
MASSACHUSETTS UBER ALLES!!!
TOMORROW BELONGS TO US!!!
***
Seriously though, I think General Clark senses the same power vacuum I do.
How he exploits it is another matter.
***
BTW Am I the only person who thinks Seventhson is in fact a deep cover internet operative for the Kerry campaign?
He climbs onto the DU GD every day with outlandish shrill accusations against the Junior Senator from Massachusetts all designed by inference to make JK's opponents and their supporters look like humorless nattering nabobs.
I have my suspicions...perhaps the squirrels can shed some light on the matter.
:)

[hayu_lol]

48. Zolok...LOL!

Loved every word of your thesis. Meanwhile, we have to deal with this disrupter who tried to do this to every board he gets on. He usually gets caught and disappears for a while hoping that so many of us will also go away.
Deep cover I assume, means hiding in the sewers.

[seventhson]

52. I don't disappear. I stay and fight for what I believe is the truth...

or at least I try to expose the truth.

Fact is most of us know almost nothing about Clark.

He comes from almost nowhere (actually from the Pentagon)via CNN to try to knock Dean out of the box.

And yet Dozens of us on this board have embraced this general and military man because he is a GENERAL who thinks Bush is an idiot.

Hell -- almost everyone in the military today thinks Bush is an idiot.

I am just very suspect of Clark and am pissed that I was taken in by all the Clarkheads here who look at him uncritically and who repeated the untrue "antiwar" mantra.

THAT appears to be blackop typre lying. Clark is NOT antiwar.

I have posted criticisms of ALL the candidates pretty much and candidly. So critiquing Clark is fair, i believe.

But there is something about the fawning here over Clark that makes me believe something more sinister is afoot with him just like with Kerry or Lieberman. They are not to be trusted IMHO.

Clark MIGHT bring me around a bit depending on what I find out about him, but this intro was misleading and damnable in its fakery.

If THAT is Clark's methodology -- then I think he is not to be trusted.

As for getting kicked off other boards more than a year ago this had to do with my critique of the board moderators and a few traitorous Dem operatives who I think sold out to the Rethugs.

I have pretty consistently followed the rules here and believe that the owners of this site are damn decent and legit. They have an agenda, I believe, but it is not a Kerry agenda or a Bush agenda.

It is a people's agenda.

Smirking Chimp had some conflicts and were suspect to ME -- and, even though I was NOT banned there -- I came here because I believed that it was more progressive and less reactionary.

Democrat.com has narrow minded moderators who took me out for criticizing Begala over his anti-McKinney remarks and for discussing the lobbying/PR conflicts involving Rove, McKinnon and Begala at PSI that show that certain "dems" actually make money from Rove.

PSI = Public Strategies Inc. and they advise Rove. Begala used to work for them and they are very DLC and PNAC-like in their methods. They play both ends against the middle. While the rep Rove they also have Ann Richards on their staff. It's weird and seems corrupt to me. And I used to work with them too (we shared a client, actually - I did not work FOR them but had to cooperate with them for a mutual entity which is where I discovered their methods of owning both dems and rethugs and repping BOTH sides) Google McKinnon and Rove and Begala for more on PSI and learn how these guys work.

But you can smear me here all you want. The moderators and owners know I try pretty hard to play by the rules and , in fact, I will not hit alert for calling me a disruptor even though I could because I think arguing the facts is much better than smearing someone here.

On both sides.

Clark SOUNDS pretty decent

[Zolok]

54. C'mon Seventhson...come clean

how much is Kerry paying you to conduct black propaganda on his behalf?
Cause' believe me you are worth twice as much!!
:)
I too think the sudden surge towards Clark is suspicious, no doubt several posters in this very thread are paid agitprop agents of the other dem presidential campaigns.
Frankly I think almost everyone in this thread is an agent or spy for someone somewhere.
I myself am getting a regular monthly retainer from "Lyndon Johnson in 2004" (proposed slogan "LBJ in 04' Once More with Feeling")...
So we're all getting paid and that is good.
:)

[shance]

53. We all want a good candidate. And I think Seventhson has valid points

I like Clark too. And I also think that right now its important to "shop" our candidates while we have the opportunity.

I think we have to look at all information presented to then make a qualified decision coupled with the bottom line of our own gut instinct. As President Clinton said the other day, Dems fall in love with a candidate. Thats fine, but don't become too blinded without weighing the pros and cons of each nominee.

The issues Seventh addressed should concern Dems in my opinion. It doesnt mean you have to throw the baby out with the bath water and say forget about Clark, it just means to put it in your "file" of information.

With regards to Dean, he has been working hard to establish his base, building relationships with individuals across America, and overall has been very dedicated in confronting issues and being the front runner in almost everything. I watched the news tonight as Kerry was here in California campaigning with Davis, and I was grateful to see it. I was also aware of the fact that Governor Dean was out here in California last week, stumping for our Governor before any of the other candidates were, once again being the first to address a situation where DEMS needed to be. Again, thats the sign of a true leader in my opinion.

Actions......follow the actions. And cut them slack now and then. But I would consider situations, quite frankly, like this one, where perhaps Wesley Clark may indeed be too comfortable with those individuals like Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld who have led us to war and lied almost all the way doing it.