has PNAC morphed into FDD - look who's on the team

[welshTerrier2]

a woman named Tanya Gilly just appeared on C-Span's Washington Journal ... she was very evasive about who funded her organization which is named Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) ... her main pitch (i only caught the very end) seemed to be how wonderful democracy in Iraq will be ... she encouraged everyone to go to her organization's website to learn more ...

what i found was an organization that sounds like the education and propaganda arm of PNAC and a few of our very own Democrats joining in ... any group that "wraps itself in democracy" to hide the truth about using democracy as a smokescreen for American imperialism bears watching ...

Board of Directors
Steve Forbes, Jack Kemp, Jeane Kirkpatrick

Distinguished Advisors
Newt Gingrich, James Woolsey

Advisors (some names omitted)
Gary Bauer, Donna Brazile, Frank Gafney, JD Hayworth, Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, Frank Lautenberg, Zell Miller, Richard Perle, Charles Schumer

FDD's website is: http://www.defenddemocracy.org/

[Missy M]

1. Sorry to see Chuck Shumer's name as an advisor to this organization.

[welshTerrier2]

2. Schumer's motivation?

i would guess Schumer's interest is far more about his unrelenting support for Israel than it is to support the imperialistic "oil crowd" ... FDD even has articles on their website about supporting Israel's security fence ...

strange bedfellows, eh ??

[Missy M]

3. I have a hard time relating the war in Iraq to Israel's well being....

Shumer's unrelenting support should be to NY state, the US and our troops. I understand his ties to Israel but we are talking about a war started by lies and deceptions. He should be looking into that and make sure it never happens again.

[mzteris]

5. this group

is all about the government of Israel....... check it's sources/founders/contributors/causes list.......

[welshTerrier2]

6. FDD has a much broader agenda than just Iraq

i agree with all you wrote ... this FDD crowd has an agenda that encompasses a variety of issues ... it's not clear that Schumer joined them to support the war in Iraq ...

btw, right on FDD's homepage, they have an article about Cindy Sheehan ... to quote the article: "I also know that while the President met with you previously, he is not eager to see you again – not now that you are affiliated with Moveon.org and supported by David Duke and handled by slick public relations professionals."

How sleazy is that? After bush refused to meet with Sheehan, they blame her for affiliating with MoveON and then even toss in David Duke's name as if Sheehan should be held responsible for Duke's racist history ... and we certainly shouldn't approve of anyone hiring "slick public relations professionals" even though this is exactly what bush has done to counter the damage Sheehan's actions are doing to his poll numbers ...

the hypocrisy boggles the mind ...

[flpoljunkie]

7. Cliff May is one vicious son of a b*tch, of that there is no doubt.

[Missy M]

9. That's about as sleazy as it gets. Why would Shumer be associated

with this organization at all. As soon as I read some of the names I couldn't believe Shumer's was there. Donna Brazile is a disappointment but she has been for awhile now. Perhaps Shumer just puts his name on an organization and doesn't even realize what it is all about. I guess it is time to write him of my displeasure.

[acmejack]

14. As his constituent, I hope you ask him!

See if his staff will answer. Better yet, call 1877SOBUSOB (I swear) and get his office and inquire!

[Missy M]

16. As I stated in another post I thought it was time I wrote to Shumer...

and ask him why he was associated with this organization but maybe a phone call would be better.

[Roland99]

10. Permanent US military presence in Iraq is a deterrent to attacking Israel.

[Missy M]

11. But we were told we are there to form a democracy, after finding no

WMD's. Our troops are being killed as a deterrent to attacking Israel. We all know Iraq was in no position to do harm to Israel. We give Israel support with money and military might and I would think that is enough.

[Roland99]

12. Securing oil is a nice, big benefit, too.

But, the AIPAC/PNAC/FDD connections cannot be denied.

[leesa]

25. But they WANT the war. It doesn't matter to these people what lies or

deceptions are used to create it. The ends justify the means for all of them whether they be End Timers, Imperialists, Likudniks. Doesn't matter.
The easiest example is the Fundies, who are clearly supporting evil in order to attain their fantasy of the Rapture as "predicted" in Revelations and by the PNACer Tim LeHaye. They DON'T CARE that Bush and his players are criminals and do criminal acts.

[flpoljunkie]

4. Headed by neocon Cliff May, former Communications Director of the RNC

He is very aggressive and articulate when he appears of the cable news show--hogs the airs time--a loathesome personality, all in all.

[Bucky]

8. Recommend. These are people to keep an eyeball on.

Schumer, Brazile, and Lautenberg oughta have their heads examined for playing bipartisan windown dressing for this crowd. The rest come in two flavors at the FDD.

The vomitrocious: Forbes, Woolsey, Bauer, Gafney, Krauthammer, Gingrich, Hayworth, Miller, and Perle

The tolerable, but consistantly wrong: Kemp, Kirkpatrick, and Kristol

But the thing they all have in common is they're a bunch of has beens and second stringers. Kristol, Schumer, and Brazile are the only ones in that bunch who have any future prospects in national affairs--and I'm not all that sure about Brazile.

[MH1]

13. Brazile is no surprise. Lautenberg is.

I think I'll post this over in the NJ forum so NJ folks can write him and ask him

:wtf:

[Eloriel]

15. It's more than just "bipartisan," it offers camouflage and legitimacy

And it steams me to the max.

This is the kind of thing that happened with the CLI - Committee for the Liberation of Iraq - which was a PNAC spin-off back in the mid-1990s. I think Joe Lieberman was one of its prominent Dems. Anyway, this group were involved in getting passed the resolution (or whatever it was) that Clinton signed that said, yes, the official policy of the U.S. is that we want to see Saddam out of office.

Just look what power that kind of thing has later: they respond to us, when criticized about the war, that removing Saddam has been "official U.S. policy since the Clinton administration." Ouch. Caught in their trap. They set us up to serve as their excuse, and deflect criticism.

This is no different. I'm sure. And I hate seeing Democrats participate in anything whatsoever to do with PNAC. Damn fools.

[starroute]

22. Keep your eye on the Coalition for Democracy in Iran

That's the equivalent of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq -- founded in late 2002 by Michael Ledeen and Morris Amitay.

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/org/cdi.php

[MH1]

17. SourceWatch article on FDD - worth reading

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Foundation_for_the_Defense_of_Democracies

It's too long to post the whole thing.

But here's part:

With a few possible exceptions, the members of FDD are predominately conservative and neo-conservative and the articles written by FDD's members and the literature on their site promote a neo-conservative slant.

For example, FDD's page on Iraq (http://www.defenddemocracy.org/research_topics/research_topics_list.htm?topic=7511) provides a list of documents authored by FDD members or documents FDD believes are worth highlighting. All the documents (as of this writing with documents ranging in dates from 8/2002 to 6/2003) support the hawkish view of Iraq. No documents provide any critical perspectives of U.S. policies towards Iraq. Also, some of the documents listed cite "facts" that have been proven to be false, such as the linkage of Saddam Hussein with al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks, as well as with Saddam's highly active WMD programs (see Weapons of mass deception for related analysis).

Clifford D. May (discussed earlier) wrote a July 3, 2003 article (http://www.defenddemocracy.org/in_the_media/in_the_media_show.htm?doc_id=180868&attrib_id=7378) justifying military action in Africa, mainly due to the press about the problems in Liberia. The article is guilty of overall generalization, labeling, and statements of "facts" that not backed by references. For example, he accuses "liberal" think tanks that insisted "Africa's young nations were making progress, ... that it bordered on the racist to suggest otherwise. Any problems that could not be wished away were dismissed as 'the legacy of colonialism.' And, of course, the consequence of too little U.S. foreign aid." However, May fails to provide any references to back this up, including that all "liberal" organizations share the same view. Use of such rhetoric shows an idealogical bias.

May continues by blaming "the legacy of socialism" as the "obvious" reason for Africa's problems since, as May states, "The first generations of post-independence African leaders were advised by European and American intellectuals (many of them at those universities and think tanks) to forego capitalism in favor of 'the socialist path to development.'" First, May fails to cite references to back up this view along with dimissing factors like ancient tribal conflicts (which was made worse by the effects of colonialism), the legacy of Western support of dictators during the Cold War to fight off Soviet influence, and the interference by large multinational corporations seeking to profit from Africa's natural resources.

Clifford May then provides justifications for military intervention in Africa that mirror the justifications promoted by hawks for the war in Iraq, but with a slight twist: failed African nations "are apt to become terrorist havens." So, we have now moved from nations believed to be supporting terrorists as a justification for military action to nations that may become breeding grounds for terrorists. Any humanitarian concerns are listed last and hints of oil (Nigeria) exist in the reasons.

Another indicator of FDD's idealogical bias is provided on their related websites page (http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about_FDD/about_FDD_show.htm?doc_id=156812&attrib_id=7615). They provide links to numerous conservative think tanks like the American Enterprise Institute (which some FDD members are either current or former fellows of) and the Hudson Institute. There is a link to the so-called student group Oxford Democracy Forum which portrays the same hawkish perspective and includes the same rhetoric with respect to Iraq and terrorism as is coming out of the Bush administration and neo-con controlled media. On OxDems' FAQ page (http://www.oxdem.org/faq.html), it repeats false information about Iraq, such as its links to Al-Qaeda by citing Colin L. Powell's discredited United Nations speech.

The list of related media links provided by FDD is very interesting, with Fox News listed first, and mostly conservative publications (like fellow FDD member Bill Kristol's Weekly Standard) that follows. CNN and the Washington Post are listed, but these news organizations are moderate at best. The New Republic is the only exception, as most consider it a liberal-oriented publication.

It looks like the last major edit was in Jan 2004 (SourceWatch is a wiki). Some of the info may be dated but I think it is still useful.

[sans-culotte]

28. This is very disturbing

thanks for posting this

[sunwyn]

18. What a load of crap....

They think the US is still a democracy?LOL

[Stephanie]

19. Donna Brazile!

Why's she in bed with Kristol and Perle? What's Lautenberg doing there? Schumer!!!?

[The2ndWheel]

20. Morphed into? They have many think tanks and organizations

It's all the same.

In addition to PNAC, and AEI, and FDD:

http://www.peaceinchechnya.org/about_members.htm

http://www.fightingterror.org/members/index.cfm

http://www.usacc.org/contents.php?cid=2

I'm sure there are more. I remember when I first looked up http://www.defenddemocracy.org/biographies/biographies.htm , it was fun. How could learning about their giant infrastructure of propaganda not be fun?

[starroute]

21. Clifford May has also been savaging Joe Wilson

I think I posted something on this recently, but can't come up with it in Search.

The quick version is that Clifford May, president of the FDD, has been a primary attack dog against Joseph Wilson. He's the person who claimed that he knew of Valerie Plame's identity long before Novak revealed it and took it to be common knowledge around Washington. (See http://rightweb.irc-online.org/ind/may/may.php)

Also, he and Michael Ledeen had almost identical columns in National Review on July 11, 2004, claiming that Wilson was "thoroughly discredited" by the report of the Senate Intelligence Committee which had just come out.

If there's a war going on between the Neocons and the CIA, May and the FDD are one of the centers of it.

[Neshanic]

23. Laugh if you will, but Hayworth is the most dangerous.

In years to come, he will make George look positively sane.

[acmejack]

27. JD is a piece of work all right

Or at least a piece of something. I detest his smarmy ass everytime he opens his mouth in the House.

[Burried News]

24. New URL new logo same CONspirators.

[ArthurRuger]

26. On FUDD

I don't think I'd want my name on any list that included Bauer, Krauthammer, Kristol, Millet and Perle.

As for the names of those supposed "friendlies", I'd want to ask THEM do define FUDD for those of us who see their name linked to Neocons.