The Bombing of Kosovo - Michael Moore (related to Clark)

This is relevant considering Moore is endorsing General Wesley Clark:

http://www.commondreams.org/kosovo/views/mmoore.htm

"Dear friends,

As we file our taxes today (procrastinators, all of us), and we sign our names on the bottom line of our 1040 tax forms, perhaps we should ask ourselves if what we are doing is signing a death warrant for people we don't even know. Because each night, for the past three weeks, millions of dollars of bombs and missiles -- that you and I paid for -- are being used to kill people in the former Yugoslavia. That makes you and I culpable in their execution.

Did you personally know any of the people who were killed in the village of Pristina (capitol of Kosovo) last week? Had they ever done anything to harm you? How about the children who were blown to bits in the building in Prizren? Had they ever threatened you in any way to cause you to have to kill them in self-defense? Perhaps you had met the people who were incinerated by us on the train to Belgrade, Yugoslavia. Can you tell me why you would want to take their lives?

I'm sorry to personalize it in this way, but this slaughter is being conducted in your name and mine, and I'll tell you, this is blood I don't want on my hands. We will all have to answer for this some day, and I would like to be able to say that I did not sit by silently while this was being done, and that I did whatever I could to stop it as soon as possible."

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

He goes on to raise hell about the bombing in Kosovo and even tears into President Clinton. Now, if he comdemns the mission and the men commanding it, how does Moore do an about face and support Clark unless he now thinks bombing was ok?

Moore just wants to see the debate,
with the tall handsome smart General standing next to the short dumb AWOL chimp


he thinks that Clark will not be able to lose given that contrast

If you read moore's message he explains why Clark. Moore says (paraphrasing) "Let's not deal on the past, let's work on the future"

We can go to the past and bring up several things on the candidates. But what is wrong RIGHT NOW in the country points to the current Administration.

Clark's campaign did not kill 500 Americans. Clinton's decesion was not based on greed for him or his administration.

FOCUS ON THE FUTURE!

accountable for Iraq?

with world support and input. Bush didn't. They don't
even begin to compare. Hold him accountable? For what?
Doing the bidding of the world and saving 1.5 million
Albanians from extinction?

BRAVO!! GO GENERAL!

RV, whose nephew was there with the Danes and the UN
as an American attached to the effort in Kosovo, Bosnia
and Macedonia. He ADORES the general and has first
hand knowledge of what happened in Yugoslavia. Lots of
ghastly pictures too. Clark has nothing to answer for.

Thought is useful in these questions; far preferable to jerking knees....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

Clark was the Supreme Allied Commander, not the President! Understand?

I should Damn well Hope SO! ANd lets not Forget General Clark is loved in Kosovo, that has to say something.

You seem to be the only one here with that opinion, go sell it to someone who wants to by it.

The "Repository" organization is a mere Serb nationalist site, and worthless save for propaganda; you might as well consult Sons of Confederate Veterans for commentary on the Civil War.

The opinion of Amnesty International is trumped handily, in matters of the applicability of the Geneva Accords, by the International Court for Yugoslavia at The Hague. This body has investigated charges made against NATO, and found no items worthy of indictment and trial. That is the fact of the law on the subject: competent judges feel NATO did not violate it.

as liberal Democrats, who are we to judge Clark's electability to the general population?

Gee, Clark didn't get 500 AMERICANS killed yet. Just some foreigners. Screw'em.

If Moore was supposedly so profoundy opposed to unilateral indiscriminate bombing in Kosovo should he now be supporting the Supreme Commander of the bombing mission? Or are generals just supposed to do what they are told?

that Clark is the best candidate the Democrats have to beat him.

Maybe he can look down the road a bit and see a fuedal fascist America in which all the people spend their lives free of all those silly Constitutional protections.

Maybe he's an adult, able to make distinctions and judgments as to what is important for the future.

Moore?..nope...he's a publicity hungry huckster...which is of course his right

I see Clark helping Moore than Moore helps Clark.

How dare someone who endorsed NADER in 2000 come now and say he supports Clark because he's more ELECTABLE? What a buffoon! It's all about Michael Moore, no more no less.

...he's able to set aside some differences in favor of the Big Picture:

Beating Bush.

Moore has not done an about face on Kosovo - in his endorsement of Clark, he even noted he was against the Kosovo conflict.

So what?

:shrug:

He was just doing his job. To carry out the orders of the Government. When the U.S. bombs someone, the (blame?) is on members of the military no more than it is on any voting citizen, in my opinion.

The gentleman has thought on the matter, and changed his mind since this was written. Perhaps he considers it a much lesser evil than another term in office for the criminals of the '00 Coup.

What do you think, Sir?

What useful purpose do you think will be served by gnawing over these old bones once more? The people of the country do not consider the Kossovo war to be anything but a decent use of military force to rescue a clearly endangered population targeted by a murderous butcher who is now on trial at The Hague for his crimes. It can readily pointed out that it was handled in amuch more competent manner than the attack on Iraq, by the common measures of casualties incurred by U.S. forces (the only casualties the people care a rap about), and the relatively stable condition of the place once hostilities ceased.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

I think it's very relevant. I am looking for a reasonable explanation.

Painting glorious vistas of the future, spreading wide and prosperous as the eye can dream is the business of political campaigns. Only wretched curs who can get no better meal gnaw old bones, and even they dream of banquets to come as they do. A focus on the past is the most wholely un-American thing conceivable; we are the place of new beginnings and fresh identities and slates wiped clean in the territories....



"What was your name in the States?
Was it Wilson or Johnson or Bates?
Did you rifle the till?
Have you fled all your bills?
Tell me, what was your name in the States?"


"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

But it's not reality nor is it what has been happening on the campaign trail.

on ambition and oportunism? shakey ground by my eye. too shakey to build a furture that will be anything but a slightly different shade of the past.

Was built on ambition and opportunism. You speak of these as though they were bad things....

this has been bothering me. I mean, a HUGE argument in Bowling for Columbine focuses on the Kosovo War at the time of the shootings. He was VERY critical of Clinton for ordering these bombings...but why not Clark?

I just would like a reasonable explanation from a Clark supporter or someone who knows what Moore is up to.

a HUGE part of Bowling for Columbine focuses on the Kosovo War at the time of the shootings.

Only about a 6 second (or less) blurb.

a HUGE part of his argument.

I remember him talking about it during his interview with Marylin Manson.

And Lockheed Martin. And also the 6 second blurb you mention. And also during the "What a beautiful world" section.

sorry if I didn't specify his argument is what I was talking about.

except for the "he was ordered to" one. Thanks!

Illustrating his opposition to doing what "he was ordered to"

not disobeying orders isn't quite what I'm talking about.

I meant that Retired General Clark is very proud of what happened and what was accomplished during that war.

And I give Kudos to Kerry for it.

When in the position of carrying out orders of the United States, it is hard to accomplish the mission without trying to believe in what you are doing. As a General, his job was to complete the mission. To complete the mission, he needs to convey enthusiasm to his troops that it is the right thing to do. To convey that enthusiasm he had to find the good in what he is doing, and I would say that the net effect was to leave him with an overall positive outlook on the Kosovo operation.

What I am getting at, is that being in the military forces one to find the bright side of what they are asked to do. It is up to members of the military (as voters) and the public to make sure that the President and Congress are asking the military to do the right things. The job of the Government is to direct foreign policy. The job of the military is to carry out the policy when asked. Those in the military who promote war for the purpose of job security are not the majority, probably do not include Wes Clark, and quite likely are contractors and not uniformed.

member of NATO.

It required the unanimous consent of nineteen seperate governments before the bombs could be let fall. That consent was gotten, and Gen. Clark's diplomatic skills were a major factor in its acquisition.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

the Naderites that have come over have been welcome. If
he was pledging for any dem, he would be taking ont he
baggage of dem decisions. Kosovo was Clinton's baby. If
he votes dem, does this mean he's got to explain why
because of that? People change. They grow. They get
pragmatic. Especially now, when the country and world are
in such peril. Michael Moore is supporting Clark because
he's made a pragmatic decision.

Those of you seeking some sort of 'explanation' have done
the same thing too. Its amusing that some people have to
justify their pragmatism and some don't. If LUCIFER was
running against Bush, I would vote for him. I wouldn't ask
him to explain original sin. Bush has that concept covered.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Nutshell for me.

Dear General Clark,

Wow, what a great decision! I was very delighted to hear from my United Nations class teacher that Wesley Clark is running for President.

I am Behar Xharra from Kosovo, currently living in the USA. I spend my senior year of High School in Rabun County, Georgia, and now I am attending Earlham College in Richmond, Indiana.

I have experienced the war of 1999, and I have lived in a refugee camp in Albania. I had many hard times and I suffered a lot during that period. The only thing that kept us alive during that time was when Wesley Clark, President Clinton, Madeline Albright, Jamie Shea, and Havier Solana gave us hope and courage with their wonderful speeches. Your name, General Clark, has a huge meaning in Kosovo. You are a real Hero to us, and we, Kosovars, will love you forever. You mean a lot to us. I just want to thank you for all the work, help, courage, and freedom you gave us. You will always be special and a big part of our lives - God bless you.

Last month, when I heard that you decided to run for President, I was very happy. I was feeling the same way I felt the day I came back from the refugee camp to the liberated Kosovo. I think that there is nobody else more perfect for this position than you are. I wish you the best from my heart, and I will pray for you.

I know that it is impossible for us, Kosovars, to pay you back all the help you gave to us, but we will support you until the end. We will always be on your side. One more time, I wish you the best and thanks for everything you did for us. I hope the Americans will learn what you can do for America and the world.

Best wishes and victory after all!!!

With respect,

Behar Xharra

--------from the clarkblog

I could likely find the same letters coming from Iraq. Was it worth it there too?

ignoring a multilateral intervention backed by the world
and NATO and tons of coalition troops including the Soviets
while trying to tie it to the criminal pre-emptive crime
committed by Bush?

Any answer promises some low amusement....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

sometimes you have to cut off an arm to save the body.

that is the sort of argument that * is going to use against us in regards to Seddam Hussein and Iraq.

You will find it a damned thankless task, and your only companions in it people without the least concern for electoral success, and creatures who think Butcher Slobo was an innocent lamb who got a raw deal....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

When Saddam gassed his own people it was in the 80's and he was an ally of the Republican administration at the time. Rumsfeld was sent to Iraq personally to let Saddam know that it wasn't a problem. That argument is bogus.

And the consequences of action vs. inaction, and given the limits set on Clark, since he was not Commander in Chief and did not get to set overall policy, I think Clark did a great job, and overall served humanity in Kosovo. I don't know if Moore has come to that conclusion or not. I do know we both strongly back Clark, as does George McGovern, another hero of mine who is not chained to the past.

I think it is one of the most honorable things this country has done in my lifetime.

I think that the Moore piece is one of those times he's full of crap.

The thread was getting mired in debates on the righteousness of Kosovo, and Clark's role in that. Rather, it was about Moore's about face in supporting someone involved in what Moore freaked out about at the time. I've never been a big Moore fan. I read his latest book, and it had really good info. Lots of which, though, we DUers have been discussing for years. He's a bit too egocentric for me. I would be curious to see HIS answer to how he can reconcile this issue. I don't fault Clark for any of this.. Moore's endorsement is overshadowing Clark a bit.

It is merely an attempt to rally the faltering forces of "lefter than thou" against the concept of supporting a candidate based on electability....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

Those who compare the Iraq war with the Kosovo are biased or illogical.
In Kosovo the "opposition" was in a pro-active mode of killing and destruction. The Serb army was on the move and wiping out everything in their path. In Iraq that was not the case.

is that Kosovo was an action waged to protect civilians under persistent and strategic attack, through violence,relocation and rape, by the Serbian/Yugoslav military forces.

We stood up to stop active atrocities, on the European continent.

Iraq was a war waged in the name of American strategic interests, under the cover of liberation from a dictator.

Saddam may have been a dictator, but he was THEIR dictator. He was theirs to remove. Not ours.

Sorry, but to me, there's a huge difference between the two.

.. but rather Moore's passionate opposition to that war, and his embracing Clark right now. I didn't feel well informed enough to grasp good or evil in the Kosovo thing. I felt at the time, saddened that we were bombing, but grateful that we were stopping the ethnic cleansing in the region. The point of the post was why Moore was so violently opposed to something that Clark talks of so proudly now, and how he reconciles it with his endorsement of Clark. That's it.

Okay. To help me frame things being discussed. If Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, or Condileeza Rice switched parties, and were running against George W. Bush or Jeb Bush. Would you vote for them? Would you let bygones, etc., about their past in order to defeat a Republican candidate, a Bush candidate to be precise? Food for thought.. as I think most of us will have to suspend our ideaology to support the eventual Democratic nominee. This is not a Clark bashing post... I am in no way comparing him to them. I'm just wondering about our thought processes.

Your thoughts??

Gen. Clark never was a Repuiblican, but rather an Independent who on some past occcassions voted for a Republican.

Of the people you name, only Powell could claim not to have been a Republican operative his whole career, and he has clearly lent his allegiance for many years to that Party as a matter of self-evident fact, from the political stances he has taken.

Your question seems predicated on the idea that there is something not Democratic about a military career, or about serving the country in war. that is the general line of the Republican Party, and one with which very few rank and file members of the Democratic Party agree....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

the altitude of bombers from 30,000 feet to 15,000 feet. He fought hard for that because he wanted to do what he could to protect civilians as much as possible. Even though it put our pilots at greater risk. He also fought to threaten the use of ground troops thinking the threat would shorten the conflict.

He bucked the system every step of the way, and did an amazing job.

-TheBgrKng

Either he has changed his mind, or has really, really good reasons for endorsing Clark. My guess is the latter.

It doesn't bother me, because I still respect him even though his candidate is not my first pick.

in Bosnia/Kosovo is political (beyond control of SAC)

Clinton didn't want casualties so he directed that bombing runs be done from high altitude only

As I understand it Clark wanted a ground operation. I believe this would have been the better choice. It would have been quick and messy, some American lives would have been lost. But if Nato had concentrated on hammering the Serb military in the field there would have been much less "collateral damage" to the Serb civilians and the ethnic cleansing would have been cut short.
The decision to go "air only" was a chickenshit political call.
DISCLAIMER: I am not a Clark supporter.

Pretty simple.

haven't you heard?

Is what we are all engaged in here. What else should anyone expect to find?

Surely youi do not expect political figures in a political year involved in a political campaign to be engaged in anything but politics? That they are so engaged is hardly to be deplored....

The question was about why Moore supposedly endorses Clark even though questions about his involvement in Bosnia seem to be strangely missing now.

Here's THE link for the history of the conflict, as presented by NATO:
http://www.nato.int/kosovo/history.htm

As you can see from the above link, the ethnic cleansing went on for a long, long time before the UN and NATO authorized military intervention. Here are some facts and figures in the link by NATO:

"Facts and figures

Between March 1998 and March 1999, before NATO governments decided upon military action, over 2000 people were killed as a result of the Serb government's policies in Kosovo.

During the summer of 1998, a quarter of a million Kosovar Albanians were forced from their homes as their houses, villages and crops were destroyed.

In January 1999, evidence was discovered, by a United Nations humanitarian team, of the massacre of over 40 people in the village of Racak.

By the beginning of April 1999, the United Nations High Commission for Refugees estimated that the campaign of ethnic cleansing had resulted in 226,000 refugees in Albania, 125,000 in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (1), and 33,000 in Montenegro.

Assistance given by NATO forces to alleviate the refugee situation included providing equipment and building camps to house 50,000 refugees in Albania; assistance in expanding camps in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (1); providing medical support and undertaking emergency surgery on the victims of shootings by Serb forces; transporting refugees to safety; and providing transport for humanitarian aid and supplies.

By the end of May 1999, OVER 230,000 refugees had arrived in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (1), over 430,000 in Albania and some 64,000 in Montenegro. Approximately 21,500 had reached Bosnia and over 61,000 had been evacuated to other countries. Within Kosovo itself, an estimated 580,000 people had been rendered homeless.

IT IS ESTIMATED THAT BY THE END OF MAY, 1.5 MILLION PEOPLE, i.e. 90% OF THE POPULATIN OF KOSOVO, HAD BEEN EXPELLED FROM THEIR HOMES. SOME 225,000 KOSOVAR MEN WERE BELIEVED TO BE MISSING. AT LEAST 5000 KOSOVARS HAD BEEN EXECUTED.

NATO forces have flown in many thousands of tons of food and equipment into the area. By the end of May 1999, over 4666 tons of food and water, 4325 tons of other goods, 2624 tons of tents and nearly 1600 tons of medical supplies had been transported to the area. "

-and--

"Paying tribute to General Clark and to the forces which had contributed to Operation Allied Force, and to the cohesion and determination of all the Allies, the Secretary General stated that NATO was ready to undertake its new mission to bring the people back to their homes and to build a lasting and just peace in Kosovo. "

The real history of the liberation of Iraq, by G. W. Bush?
n/t,
very reliable source, don't go any further...
Dirk

This was posted on the Clark blog from a Kosovar. Tell HIM that he doesn't deserve that freedom.


Dear General Clark,

Wow, what a great decision! I was very delighted to hear from my United Nations class teacher that Wesley Clark is running for President.

I am Behar Xharra from Kosovo, currently living in the USA. I spend my senior year of High School in Rabun County, Georgia, and now I am attending Earlham College in Richmond, Indiana.

I have experienced the war of 1999, and I have lived in a refugee camp in Albania. I had many hard times and I suffered a lot during that period. The only thing that kept us alive during that time was when Wesley Clark, President Clinton, Madeline Albright, Jamie Shea, and Havier Solana gave us hope and courage with their wonderful speeches. Your name, General Clark, has a huge meaning in Kosovo. You are a real Hero to us, and we, Kosovars, will love you forever. You mean a lot to us. I just want to thank you for all the work, help, courage, and freedom you gave us. You will always be special and a big part of our lives - God bless you.

Last month, when I heard that you decided to run for President, I was very happy. I was feeling the same way I felt the day I came back from the refugee camp to the liberated Kosovo. I think that there is nobody else more perfect for this position than you are. I wish you the best from my heart, and I will pray for you.

I know that it is impossible for us, Kosovars, to pay you back all the help you gave to us, but we will support you until the end. We will always be on your side. One more time, I wish you the best and thanks for everything you did for us. I hope the Americans will learn what you can do for America and the world.

Best wishes and victory after all!!!

With respect,

Behar Xharra

by this grateful fellow's friends aren't nearly so thrilled.

HOAX UPON HOAX

Repo continues with regard to Ruder & Finn Global Public Affairs:

"The PR firm was piling hoax upon hoax. The famous story of Serb concentration camps was built on a photo of a gaunt man surrounded by others, staring at the viewer from behind barbed wire; surely an image to chill one to the bones. It took years before a German journalist Thomas Deichman, in an article titled 'The picture that fooled the world', described how the famous photo was staged by its takers, British journalists, who were photographing the inhabitants from inside barbed wire which was protecting agricultural products and machinery from theft in a refugee and transit camp; the men stood outside of it; and at no time was there a barbed-wire fence surrounding the camp. But by that time the image had done its deed, terminally slamming the Serbs as genocidal mass murderers.

"There are countless other stories, all deliberately maligning the Serbs to further the ends of military intervention. These stories and photos of 'genocide' and 'ethnic cleansing' (a la Hitler) in a civil war, in which Serbs are guilty as sin and others are their innocent victims, are repeated ad nauseam by western reporters without the slightest evidence, and have provided the ground for the public's (hopefully only temporary) acceptance of the illegal and brutal war against the sovereign nation of Yugoslavia. They continue after NATO's bombing began, unabated, with new absurdities such as the suggestion that the Serbs are really bombing themselves! Perhaps in the war crimes court there will soon be a place for journalists and PR firms who with their inflammatory reporting and fraudulent actions cause wars to begin." <7>

WHAT HAPPENS TO HONEST JOURNALISTS
IN THE NEW WORLD OF THE ELITE MEDIA

Visconti continues by recounting what happens to those journalists courageous enough to stand up against the elite media line:

"Journalists wanting to get to the bottom of news reports are few and far between. One such journalist is Bernard Volker of the French TV channel TF1. After the massacre of 5 February 1994, at the Sarajevo marketplace Markale, which preceded a UN ultimatum to the Serbs and threats of intervention by the West, this TV reporter (i.e., Volker) was made privy to "confidential" UN information. Two days before the expiration of the ultimatum, on February 11th, Volker stated on television that he had learned from reliable sources that the cause of the massacre was a mortar fired from Muslim lines (see our previous report to which this is a follow-up). He specified that the news had been the subject of a report sent to Lord Owen and the presidency of the CSCE, and circulated to the foreign ministers of the European Union. A day later, the United Nations and the French government, both in confusion, published denials (of Volker's assertions) ... and a day after the official ... (denials), Volker was forced to make a retraction, after the intervention of the Conseil Superieur de l'Audiovisuel ... (Volker) insisted on the quality of the source of his information and the veracity of the news item. In any case, this same information (i.e., that the massacre in the marketplace in Sarajevo resulted from the Muslims and not the Serbs) was broadcast by Misha Glenny (author of the most important book to date about the war in former Yugoslavia, " The Fall of Yugoslavia", Penguin, 1993), on the BBC World Service. According to him (i.e., Misha), the shell was fired from territory within the Muslim lines.

"Jacques Merlino, deputy editor-in-chief of France's Antenne 2 network, after writing about Timisoara and the Gulf War, pointed to the same oversimplifications and exaggerations in the conflict in former Yugoslavia. With great objectivity he brought to light the deliveries of arms to the Croats and Muslims from Austria, Germany, Switzerland, and the Vatican, and publicly stated some truths about the rapes and the bread queue massacre in Vasa Miskin street in Sarajevo (ascribed "confidentially" to the Muslims themselves, a claim also made by the British newspaper, The Independent). The new director, Jean Pierre El Kabasch, without any explanation removed him (i.e., Merlino) from his position as special correspondent. At the same time, unidentified humanitarian organizations (i.e., NGOs receiving money from elite sources) demonstrated in front of Antenne 2, shouting: "Merlino, the people are after your hide!"

"The Zurich weekly, Die Weltwoche, received the same treatment, the same attacks and threats, after publishing on January 20th an abridged version of the article by Peter Brock which appeared in the American periodical Foreign Policy in December 1993. The author, among other things, pointed out the superficiality of journalists (like) ... two Pulitzer Prize winners, Roy Gutman and John Burns, for irresponsible reporting and sensationalism, specifically about "death camps" and "systematic rape" in Bosnia. In June, those same pictures and articles were carried by Time Magazine (20 June 1994) in that week of great uncertainty. Roy Gutman, as indeed many others, was known for writing his articles about Bosnia from Zagreb.

"Martin Lettmayer, a reporter for Stem TV, covered the war in former Yugoslavia for various international networks and was moved by the imprecisions and gaps in media stories to begin his own investigations. On 10 March 1994, Die Weltwoche published a testimony under the caption, "We simply believed, without questioning," which revealed, among other things, how some of the author's prominent colleagues, such as the celebrated Alexandra Stiglmayer, used information on such gruesome themes as the "war rapes," gathered from sources which could not be verified or were non-existent. Once again there was a loud outcry from the Swiss press. In conclusion, here is a case all its own. Vladimir Cerkov arrived in Belgrade in August 1993 to make a documentary about the situation in Yugoslavia, and he showed in a dispassionate and objective manner the historical and human reasons which motivated all three sides. The film was aired by the TV station of the canton of Ticino and set off a heated debate on the objectivity of its contents; nevertheless, the Swiss television network broadcast it at the scheduled time.

"A debate was organized with Sergio Romano, who had advised Cerkov to approach RAI with his film. RAI 3 tuned it down. Giovanni Minoli accepted it for RAI 2, but nothing ever came of it. Afterwards, the documentary was sent to Arte TV Nova, a TV network with head offices in Bonn and Paris. Here, too, the film was rejected after it had been viewed by a committee which included among its members Bernard-Henri Levy, author of some of the most brutal propaganda documentaries about the war in Bosnia. It would be natural to ask ourselves: Is there still any genuine freedom of the press left? Who will protect the public from media manipulation?"
source: http://www.endtimesnetwork.com/oldnews/vol8no6.html

At least it will not be Wesley Clark,
Hello from Germany,
Dirk

...well, you get the idea.

there's a picture floating around of Clark being congenial and swapping hats with an indicted war criminal...

stop any kind of critical thinking or research until Bush is replaced with a "democrat", who's as different from Bush as Leonid Iljitsch Breschnew was different from - hmm - Leonid Iljitsch Breschnew.
What about a picture of Clark with some liberated children. This is still a weak point in his campaign, but I'm sure, this gap will be filled pretty soon.
And if you're not with us, you're with butcher... genocide...terrorist...
Thank God, I don't have to vote in the USA,
Dirk