Wes Clark cut to the Plamegate chase two years ago

Was looking for a particular quote from Wes Clark yesterday and came across the transcript of a speech he gave in October 2003 to the Second Annual Conference of Military Reporters (of all things!)

Not having known much about the Valerie Plame case two years ago when this speech was originally delivered his comments on the case didn't make much impact on me. In retrospect it's interesting how clear he was in his reading of what had gone on and how outspoken he was about it. (the bolding is mine).



more at http://securingamerica.com/speeches/2003-10-03

Why not, we'll need Gore to save the f'ing enviroinment, which will probably choke us all by 2030 (anticipated date when the atmosphere just can't take it anymore) and Iraq and the world will be such a mess, we'll need Clark's expert understanding and skills.

Thanks for this. Reocmmended.

approach, Pres a month, VP a month. IMHO, these two have the best experience, best minds, and most concern for country out there; in all the parties.

Not to belittle what Gore tried to accomplish. I doubt there was anything he could have brought back from Kyoto that the Repubs and far too many timid Dems on the Hill would have bought off on.

I also think the Clinton communications team could have done a better job on selling Kyoto to the American people, but they were probably too busy salvaging his post-impeachment image. Made it pretty damn hard for anyone in the Clinton administration to accomplish anything substantial by that point.

But Clark's vision for the environment and its impact on global security and economic stability is at least as good as Gore's--probably better, given his background--and he stands a far better chance of getting some movement both from the Repubs and with our allies.

Now, hopefully, we'll have a Democratic Congress in '06 and it'll make life a lot easier for whoever wins the White House in '08. But even then, the corporate business community is NOT gonna roll over on real environmental change, and they have the money to put a lot of pressure on even Democratic congress-critters. PLEASE give me a president who's not in their collective pocket.

Please give me Clark 08! :patriot:

Did anybody even listen to this man who keeps understanding exactly what's up?

Pretty much sums up this admin. Wes Clark hits it right every time.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

Clark saw through this like glass.

While almost every other Democrat was trying to find ways to parse their responses (so they didn't make anyone 'mad'), Clark's out telling the truth.... probably didn't win him many friends among the 'inside the Beltway' power brokers, but it won many of us over.

I'm wondering how many other potential 08 Dems have the guts to actually tell America the truth?

Oh, nevermind.... I already know the answer to THAT question.

Dayum, what are we waiting for?

was this one. I remembered this, but had forgotten the Plame references:



Thanks all of you for the comments. Glad you found the retro perspective as interesting as I did. Like I said, amazing what turns up while you're digging around looking for other stuff.

This is the first time I've seen it! I've been wondering what Gen. Clark thought about the Plame case, and I've never seen a speech where he commented on it. He knew what was up when it first broke. And no other politician, Democrat or Republican, commented on it in depth as he did in this speech.

No contest! Clark wins by a landslide!

$$$ talks, and Hillary will be the top dog in the D party, by far ...

That being said, IMO, a Clark/Hillary ticket would ROCK ... Just absolutely kick butt, IMO ...

I didn't know about this, and it was great reading it.

Calling them out! Yes!

Somewhere on this board is a thread questioning the ability of the Democrats to field a nominee that kick butt. I didn't even respond. If this community doesn't understand that we have a fearless leader right now, what can one say?

The beauty of General Clark's speaking out is that he doesn't have to play the "tuff guy." He's already proven that he's got the right stuff. Instead he can advance all of those so-called "mommy issues" like: education, the environment, health-care and the economy, because who in their right mind would take on his national security credentials. IOW, we run on our strengths not get mired in posturing against our perceived weaknesses.

Besides, once a voter understands that General Clark nailed blunder that would become the Iraq War, they will listen to his domestic judgment. For me, he still has the best ideas about where our future lies. He has a vision.

This morning on CNN, Gen. Odem (a republican hawk) said that to solve Iraq, we must be willing to understand that the entire concept of going to war there was a mistaken concept. Now where have I heard that before? Clark to Matthews: the entire concept is flawed.

So, in response to the quote that initiated this thread: when will Biden & friends start quoting from this speech (without attribution) on the Sunday Gasbag shows?

...in what he knew and has never been afraid to say it.

I remember when he said at one of his campaign stops that GWB could have done more to stop 9-11. There was a collective gasp among his supporters. Did he go too far? And then later, Richard Clarke came out with his book saying exactly the same thing.

The qualities this country needs in the next president, especially after what we have been through, is someone who is scary smart, fearless and owes no political favors. Clark has all three, unlike any of the other 2008 hopefuls. This country deserves more than politics as usual, imho.

He is usually so far ahead of the curve and ignored by the media. I am amazed when I listen to Air America and the hosts are fascinated by the revelation of a subject that I have heard Wes speak or write about long before their discovery.

'Democracy Now!'

He is interested in truth, not propaganda.

You think Amy is a propagandaist?

Let me talk to the dog....the man is out to lunch.

eta: So what do you think of Moyers? Another propagandaist? I am just aghast...someone on DU thinks Amy is not a journalist???? I guess the corporate media has corrupted the 'minds' of americans.

Amy puts personal opinions ahead of facts. A journalist can have a perspective but should not prejudge the facts. She has a penchant for declaring war crimes that are later judged otherwise.

As much as Rush or Sean or any of the RW hacks. Her motives may be better, and she usually demostrates a higher standard of journalistic integrity (which is not difficult). But she's no friend to the Democratic party, our leaders, or any of us in it.

The enemy of my enemy is not always my friend. To be quite honest, sometimes I wonder whether Goodman is even an enemy of the RW. She helps their cause by destructing our own all too often.

Clark...

This is the first time I have heard a 'progressive' attack Goodman...

So what if she is anti-Democrat and anti-pug....maybe she supports INDIVIDUALS...I'm not much of a Party Hag either. Just because the Dems say 'jump,' I certainly don't ask, 'how high.'

So what do you think of Seymour Hersch as a journalist? Do you only like journalists that are Dem hags? Just what journalists do you appreciate?

Are you by chance in the military...or have you been in the military? I ask only to get a frame of reference. No need to answer if feel it's intrusive.

She is so admired amongst journalists and has the creme de la creme on her show....Moyers, Hersch, etc. love her....You'll have to provide concrete evidence against her reporting. I know no one is perfect....but your use of the word....'propaganda' just doesn't sit right with me.....I think there is something more behind it.

A journalist should report the facts. She could even call for action, but her declarations of guilt and passing judgment based on her limited facts is not journalism, that is propaganda. She does a lot of good reporting but infuses her opinions without saying that she is departing from reporting. Her "reporting" on Kosovo is an example. To call a bomb that misses its target a war crime is opinion. She is entitled to her pacifism but that is not international law, that is her belief. Just as the RW expresses their beliefs as fact, it is propaganda in my book.

If only, If only, more people would have listened to Wes Clark a true Leader, during the short time he ran for President. We would be on the road to cleaning up the mess Bushco has created! Until the BUSH WAR is on the road to being ended, our economy will continue to tank, and our sons and daughters will continue to be killed. General Clark knew this long before we invaded Iraq...he was watching the Administration, planning the invasion with the CIA, which involved Valerie Plame.
Wes Clark is a gift to our Country.

aiye,.. you hear that Mr Rove and Mr Cheney? With the dignity of traitors, you hide under the American flag atop the White House Cabal.

It's no wonder Rove considered Wes Clark, the patriot, as his number one enemy;... and why Rove and Cheney under partisanship with neocons befriended traitors, and ultimately, ...the terrorists themselves.

and I will bookmark this to include into my collection of Clark's prescient view....of things that came to pass.

Maybe he's just too ahead of the curve for his own good?

But I often get frustrated that Democrats seem to lag so far behind it.

This is probably my favorite quote from many excellent ones by Clark in this piece:

"This Administration is trying to do something that ought to be politically impossible to do in a democracy, and that is to govern against the will of the majority. That requires twisted facts, silence, secrecy, and very poor lighting. That's why you need night-vision goggles to see what's going on over there.

They also retaliate harshly against anyone who expresses dissent, questions their facts, or challenges their logic. Dissent is the mortal enemy of ideology. Dissenters are demonized - whether you're a long-time ally or a loyal citizen. Cabinet Members have said that criticizing the President's policies is aiding the enemy."

This is all still going on of course, but Clark made these comments two years ago "to the Second Annual Conference of Military Reporters (of all things!") as you astutely pointed out. Clark doesn't just preach to the converted, he calls on all Patriots to defend America: from this Bush Regime.

"This Administration is trying to do something that ought to be politically impossible to do in a democracy, and that is to govern against the will of the majority. That requires twisted facts, silence, secrecy, and very poor lighting. That's why you need night-vision goggles to see what's going on over there.

I think I'll go change my sig line for that one. :7

K&R'ed.

... of definitive, aggressive action by Bush and Cheney to bring to justice those who outed Valerie P. was, and will always be, the single most important clue to the fact that Bush and Cheney should be charged with treason before this case is closed.


Peace.

"The bottom line: George Bush hasn't done his job. Al Qaeda is at large. Our world is more divided. Our reputation has been compromised. Our homeland is unnecessarily at-risk. We can - and we must - do better." -- Wesley Clark--Concord, NH


Just amazing when ya think about it.

From his statement to the House Armed Services Committee:

But the problem of Iraq is only an element of the broader security challenges facing our country. We have an unfinished, world-wide war against Al Qaeda, a war that has to be won in conjunction with friends and allies, and that ultimately be won by persuasion as much as by force, when we turn off the Al Qaeda recruiting machine. Some three thousand deaths on September 11th testify to the real danger from Al Qaeda, and as all acknowledge, Al Qaeda has not yet been defeated. Thus far, substantial evidence has not been made available to link Saddam's regime to the Al Qaeda network. And while such linkages may emerge, winning the war against Al Qaeda may well require different actions than ending the weapons programs in Iraq.

(snip)

Force should not be used until the personnel and organizations to be involved in post-conflict Iraq are identified and readied to assume their responsibilities. This includes requirements for humanitarian assistance, police and judicial capabilities, emergency medical and reconstruction assistance, and preparations for a transitional governing body and eventual elections, perhaps including a new constitution. Ideally, international and multinational organizations will participate in the readying of such post-conflict operations, including the UN, NATO, and other regional and Islamic organizations.

Force should be used as the last resort; after all diplomatic means have been exhausted, unless information indicates that further delay would present an immediate risk to the assembled forces and organizations. This action should not be categorized as "preemptive."

(snip)

If we proceed as outlined above, we may be able to minimize the disruption to the ongoing campaign against Al Qaeda, reduce the impact on friendly governments in the region, and even contribute to the resolution of other regional issues such as the Arab-Israeli conflict, Iranian efforts to develop nuclear capabilities, and Saudi funding for terrorism. But there are no guarantees. The war is unpredictable and could be difficult and costly. And what is at risk in the aftermath is an open-ended American ground commitment in Iraq and an even deeper sense of humiliation in the Arab world, which could intensify our problems in the region and elsewhere.

http://armedservices.house.gov/openingstatementsandpressreleases/107thcongress/02-09-26clark.html

Great find! Thank you posting. This thread is making me sad... We had such a chance to take our country back and it's hard for me to grasp what we got instead... Pure greed.

It's so up to us to inform people about this man. Corporate media and establishment politicians are NOT going to let anyone know there is such a leader right here in our midst. We can do this and I hope as more and more bloggers start seeing what we've got here, everyone will join us in spreading the word.

I admit I am a bit scared as we've seen in the past what has happened to leaders not "approved" by Corporate Power once they've started gaining traction. General Wes Clark: May he always be surrounded by protective white light.

I've always been dismayed that people voted for Bush because they thought he'd be fun to "have a beer with"...**yikes**

Anyway, Wes Clark is so far ahead of us mere mortals in his percetion of our world that I wonder if he needs a dumbdown assistant to homogenize his message for the masses.

I love Clark!!

I remember seeing a homemade video of him with a bunch of young NCOs (if I remember right... might have been officers) in NH and they "coined" him--a military tradition. He didn't have his, so naturally he bought 'em all a beer. And he drank one with 'em. Sam Adams. Looked to me like they were having a blast.

Most people, when they see Clark on TV, usually just see him speaking with passion and intensity about some subject he cares deeply about, or discussing an issue or problem with that complex intellect of his. They also tend to view him with their own preconceptions of the general officer sterotype.

What seldom translates well thru the TV screen is that Clark really is a "regular" guy with an excellent sense of humor and a great deal of personal warmth.

And he has a great wife, who without a doubt helps keep his feet firmly on the ground. Assholes don't usually marry that well or keep it together for so long.

Bush might be fun to have a beer with as many drunks can be, but if you were going out of town for the weekend, would you trust him to feed your dog?

This is my favorite part!


Number three: We need a change in leadership. As I travel back and forth across the country, I see a new patriotism in America - a new kind of patriotism. It's built on love of country. It's strengthened by the recognition that the country is in danger and that it needs our service now - service in the armed forces or service in our communities; volunteer service or paid service; full-time service or part-time service.

This new American Patriotism is not just about guarding our borders. It's about guarding what makes us distinctive as Americans - our personal liberties, our right to debate and dissent. It recognizes that we Americans owe our strength to certain values and principles.

We have done well in the world because of who we are: We are not a country that manipulates facts, ignores debate, and stifles dissent. We are not a country that retaliates against people who criticize the government. We are not a country that disdains our friends and allies. We are not a country that sheds blood before every other option has been exhausted. Every one of these principles was violated by this Administration in the war in Iraq - with costs to our identity and security that are catastrophic and rising.

This is why I'm running for President -- to return America to the core ideals of our democracy: personal liberty; service to country; respect for others; the right to criticize and correct the government. These ideals have made us great. They can make us greater. They can make us safer and more prosperous. We can have a new kind of patriotism in America. We can have a new kind of America. Thank you.

That, ladies and germs, just about sez it all!

imbillorightsmanandiapprovethismessage
:patriot:

I say, send'em to the gallos or walk the plank!

I want to live in Clark's America!

:hi: billorightsman

aside and marginalize him now too ... no shame, no shame at all!

Kicked, Nominated, Recommended, Bookmarked and e-mailed to all my DU buddies ... ya, ok, I really appreciate the OP and the poster.

Clark was SOOOOOOOOOOOO FAR AHEAD OF THE CURVE that he just may have traveled around our Sun (let alone DimWrathfulSon) and will re-orbit just in time for our country in 2008.

If he's scary smart and we know it, clap those hands!!!
:applause:

Thank you, General Clark.
:patriot:

:patriot:

Cause Wes Clark certainly is scary smart and THEY certainly know it......that's why the pundits won't even give us a straight scoop and include him as a contender when they do all of their tea leaves strategizing....and trying to make us the bigger fools!

Unfortunately, it's either the folks who voted for the IRW or the Folks who have not Foreign policy/National Security experience that get all of the attention. Now why would that be? Think about it!

In an article now long misplaced, the writer spoke about Clark's place among the brass. In meetings, Clark would make a comment but few could understand his take on the issue being discussed. Eventually, after long hours the others would "catch up" and reach the conclusion that Clark had set forth many hours ago. Over the years, Clark learned to sit quietly waiting for everyone else to digest the relevant facts. The writer said it was as if the others were working on an Apple II while Clark was using a Pentium chip.

He is always ahead of the curve.

After the Jordanian bombing, pundits and politicians threw up their collective hands with great solemn know it all pontificating about the negative effect this would have on the attitude toward the insurgency. It wasn't until Clark said: they're not trying to win a polularity contest, they just want to force the Jordanian government to crack down and create tension among their citizens. That will cause unrest. Bingo!

Please keep him talking! One of our greatest losses when he left the campaign trail was that his voice was gone. I now settle for snippets, but I wish that we could ask him questions at least once a week...at least.

The Late Col. David Hackworth said...."For the record, I never served with Clark. But after spending three hours interviewing the man for Maxim's November issue, I'm impressed. He is insightful, he has his act together, he understands what makes national security tick – and he thinks on his feet somewhere around Mach 3. No big surprise, since he graduated first in his class from West Point, which puts him in the supersmart set with Robert E. Lee, Douglas MacArthur and Maxwell Taylor.

Clark was so brilliant, he was whisked off to Oxford as a Rhodes scholar and didn't get his boots into the Vietnam mud until well after his 1966 West Point class came close to achieving the academy record for the most Purple Hearts in any one war."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34738

and what did Gene Lyons say?

"Clark's intellectual brilliance may be more apparent than Clinton's, because Clark doesn't do the "aw-shucks Southern country boy" act the way Clinton can do it. So you're struck immediately with how intelligent he is. At the same time, he listens to people and pays attention to what they're saying, and responds like a human being.

I want to be careful how I say this, but he has an almost feline presence -- and by that I don't mean "catty," as in bitchy. I mean like a big cat. I once encountered a mountain lion in the Point Reyes National Seashore in California, on a rainy day in winter, when I was all by myself. We stood stock still staring at each other for a few seconds. And there was this moment of "Gee, that's a cougar, this is really cool." And then an instant later, came the feeling of "My God, that's a lion!" There's nothing between me and him, no fence. Clark has a little bit of that kind of presence. You sense a tremendous personal authority about him held in and contained by self-discipline. Not somebody to fuck with, is another way of putting it.

I do think his concerns are honest. I think his criticisms of Bush are exactly what he believes. One reason that I think that is I have had an opportunity to talk to him in a sort of a semi-private way.

Going all the way back to the summer of 2002, I got a sense of how strong his feelings about Iraq were. Long before it was clear that the administration was really going to sell a war on Iraq, when it was just a kind of a Republican talking point, early in the summer of 2002, Wesley Clark was very strongly opposed to it. He thought it was definitely the wrong move. He conveyed that we'd be opening a Pandora's box that we might never get closed again. And he expressed that feeling to me, in a sort of quasi-public way.
snip
It was a Fourth of July party and a lot of journalists were there, and there were people listening to a small group of us talk. There wasn't an audience, there were just several people around. There was no criticism I could make that he didn't sort of see me and raise me in poker terms. Probably because he knew a lot more about it than I did. And his experience is vast, and his concerns were deep.

He was right, too. How long ago was it that you were hearing all this sweeping rhetoric from the Project for a New American Century"
http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/03/10/int03221.html

Or Sy Hersh: "Wes asked me why I hadn't written the story (about Operation Anaconda). He said I should have...he was right."

Or the late Paul Wellstone! "“But as General Wes Clark, former Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Europe has recently noted, a premature go-it-alone invasion of Iraq "would super-charge recruiting for Al Qaida." http://www.wellstoneaction.org/news/news_detail.aspx?it...

And emotional and shit. :spank:

You know I don't do mushy!

:cry:

of why I am still a strong backer of General Wesley Clark as a Democratic candidate for POTUS. He's a man of integrity and great intelligence.

"This Administration is trying to do something that ought to be politically impossible to do in a democracy, and that is to govern against the will of the majority. That requires twisted facts, silence, secrecy, and very poor lighting. That's why you need night-vision goggles to see what's going on over there.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

General Wes, :yourock:

My views on Iraq were very clear. You've heard them expressed on this show many times, Judy. And you yourself know very well how I felt about Iraq.

That's the reason I was attacked all through the war by guys like Dick Cheney for being an armchair general, because they knew I was against what they were doing. And they were right. And now we see why everybody should have been against it.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0402/12/ip.00.html

That is great, and one I missed. Thanks

;-)

I've seen Judy-Judy a few times on Meet The Press. I keep wondering how this plastic woman who may have once possessed an independent spirit, ended up being held hostage by demons of "The Canned Political Phrase." Sad.

But reading this interview simply makes my blood boil all over again. I've yet to see Judy-Judy ever treat anyone with less respect than she showed Wesley Clark. It was truly disgusting.

Any pity I've been feeling for her on Sunday mornings, I take it all back.

shame on that traitor and betrayer of democracy.

Judy was with the Washington Post. Her mentor, Katherine Graham, also knew how to plant the knife.

Thanks, I never saw/read this interview,.. me'thinks I was outfitting me ship at the time.

But this excerpt is another classic Clark smackdown from this interview 'against' Roves pit bull, Woof-Woof. It reveals Clarks' dedication and vision towards the interest of the Democratic Party, as well as the strength of his character when he made this comment the day after his withdrawal from the race and the day prior to his endorsement for John Kerry.

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

that I'm adding this to my collection! Thanks ya!

I mean the ones who think people in uniform are somehow LESS capable of loving, fighting and leading a country? The man was the best choice for Pres in 04, and the best in 08. And he knows where all those Puke skeletons are hidden.

Sigh.

:kick:

:kick: