portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary united states

government selection 2004

General Wesley Clark is dropping out

General Wesley Clark is abandoning his presidential bid after coming in third place In Tennesse and Virginia.
I think what destroyed Clark mostly was skipping Iowa. Also the media was rather unfair to him and Governor Howard Dean, two outsiders who seemed to really spark the Democratic Party for this election. Now they're both out, although Dean says he's not dropping out. Nevertheless, the nomination will go to Kerry, and we'll probably have a Kerry/Edwards ticket. And Kucinich and Sharpton, the two most progressive candidates, were never really in it. However, I think these people were able to do a lot of damage without getting the nomination. I'm not sure if I'd support Kerry, but he is running on a more liberal platform than any president we've had in a long time. So although the anti-war progressives and outsiders didn't make it, let's be grateful that they got into this race and got the message across. Oh, and don't forget that Ralph Nader is still considering jumping in. For info or even to e-mail comments and advice to Nader, go to www.naderexplore04.org. And hopefully later this year we can not only kick Bush's ass out, but bring the progressive change that we really need.
war criminal down! 10.Feb.2004 23:59


That leaves Bush and Kerry - two more war criminals.

heavens. This news will make Michael Moore and Madonna so sad.

interesting 11.Feb.2004 00:01

theorizing conspiracies

I had figured that Clark was just the DLC's pick to siphon votes from Dean. Perhaps they feel that their mission is accomplished. I guess the real test is to see who Clark endorses. Too bad it's a little late for those endorsing Clark to have actually made a difference. But I guess then that was always the plan...

Hey Gringo.. 11.Feb.2004 12:02


Hey Gringo, have you read Clark's book pertaining to his time in Kosovo? What part makes him more of a war criminal than say......William Cohen, or Bill Clinton, or Hugh Shelton, or General Solana? Being a NATO operation, there were many more people involved higher up than him. And, I don't suppose that you're a military guy either. My point to you is, do you have his side??

And while I agree with you that W is a war criminal, how the hell do you consider John Kerry one???? This one stumps me. Was it his actions in Vietnam? There's alot more of them out there if that is your criteria. Or was it his voting for the resolution? Not good grounds either. Frankly, being from Mass, I think Kerry is a terd, but I'd take him over W.

I just wonder why you think it is ok for you to spout your opinion over that of another? Who do you think you are, Lars Larson?

hey 'D' 11.Feb.2004 13:46

try getting a Boner from this

Disaster of Convenience - John Heinz' Widow Marries John Kerry
by Sherman Skolnick

President Ronald Reagan . . . was implicated in the Iran-Contra situation. . . . funds secretly given to the Iranians were skimmed off to finance the counter-revolutionaries in Nicaragua, to evade the Boland Amendment, prohibiting the U.S. from financing the Contras as they were called.

At the time Daddy Bush, as Vice President, denied he knew anything about this. He said he was "out of the loop" and thus not told what was going on. Later facts brought out by the Independent Counsel showed otherwise. In later years, some Congressmen an d other insiders admitted that they thought about impeaching President Reagan but thought it would be a bad thing for the nation. Working on a report on the Iran-Contra mess was a commission headed by Senator John Tower (R. Texas). For short, it was cal led the Tower Commission. In 1991, when he was unfairly defamed in being rejected by the Daddy Bush Administration for Secretary of Defense, Tower began grumbling he was going to bring out some dirty secrets of the elder Bush then President. Convenient ly, Tower perished with his daughter in an apparent sabotaged plane crash in April, 1991. About the same time, Senator John Heinz (R., Penn.), heir to the Heinz Ketchup fortune was himself snuffed out when his airplane was hit fro! m below by a helicopter. Although some believed it was foul play, others contended the helicopter pilot, examining whether the Heinz plane could not lower the landing wheels, slammed into the plane. Others raised the sinister version that the whirlybir d pilot wanted somehow to commit "suicide". Heinz' widow married Senator John Kerry (D., Mass.), long connected to the American CIA. Senator Kerry in investigating the dope traffic through his subcommittee, conveniently covered up the role of the espion age agency money laundry, Bank of Credit and Commerce International, BCCI, that also financed the campaigns of a group of senators including Kerry.


Please note. Senator Kerry is no sweet angel. He is an expert reputed blackmailer and cover up artist. He is married to the widow of the late U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania, John Heinz, heir to the ketchup and canned beans fortune. Heinz died in a sabotaged plane crash in 1991, just as he was planning to expose U.S. government complicity in several domestic and foreign political assassinations.

As to the infamous BCCI, Sen Kerry himself had a conflict of interest in that he headed a group of U.S. Senators who accepted campaign funds from the worldwide spy-money laundry-murder machine BCCI. Kerry's subcommittee refused to delve into the highly pertinent Chicago branch office of BCCI and their Chicago twin, a branch of Italy's largest bank, owned in part by the Vatican, Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro, BNL. [Suppressed BNL records as to the secret private partnership of the Elder Bush and Saddam Hussein were the subject of my exclusive story, in Spotlight, August 19, 1991, referred to earlier.]

John Kerry's Multimillionaire Wild Wife
repost - Guardian  http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1141394,00.html
Stormy and eccentric, multi-millionaire Teresa Heinz Kerry is not obvious First Lady material. But with her stepdaughters she is helping her husband scoop the Democratic presidential candidacy. Suzanne Goldenberg reports


Michael Moore, now who are you for? 11.Feb.2004 15:50

I really wanna know

PS: Think quick, Mike... and don't bother saying Bush, Kerry, Dean, Edwards, or Sharpton, because I couldn't even buy your last epiphany, fan of yours though I am...

And thus ends the tale of General Oxymoron, the Anti-War General...

Nader can't win 11.Feb.2004 16:07

Nader for dog catcher in '04

While an entry into the Presidential campaign might force Dems to move more to the Left, it would only be in speech. After the election, it will be the same old shit.

Even if Kerry wins, the House and Senate are Republican strongholds and most of them are way smarter than GW.

Hey 'Boner' 11.Feb.2004 16:30


Well thank you for that information. As I said, Kerry is a total terd. I'm from Massachusetts, I know! But, NOTHING you provided makes him a war criminal, as Gringo stated and I countered. So, do you have anything to say to that, my original point?

Or how about any other points I made?

Yo, D - Kerry admitted to being a war criminal right after his war crimes 11.Feb.2004 19:10


Kerry served in Vietnam, right? Tell me; did he kill any civilians? because a majority of combat soldiers did kill civilians, and that is a war crime. Bill Clinton is also a war criminal, yes, as are all the other assholes you named.

I already have Clark's side. He admitted to firing missiles into a civilian populated area. Have you seen the pictures from after the NATO bombings? That is a war crime as per the Geneva Convention.

Check out this Kerry interview:

(Audiotape, April 18, 1971):

MR. CROSBY NOYES (Washington Evening Star): Mr. Kerry, you said at one time or
another that you think our policies in Vietnam are tantamount to genocide
and that the responsibility lies at all chains of command over there. Do
you consider that you personally as a Naval officer committed atrocities in
Vietnam or crimes punishable by law in this country?

KERRY: There are all kinds of atrocities, and I would have to say that,
yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other
soldiers have committed in that I took part in shootings in free fire
zones. I conducted harassment and interdiction fire. I used 50 calibre
machine guns, which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only
weapon against people. I took part in search and destroy missions, in the
burning of villages. All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare, all of
this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions and all of this is ordered as a
matter of written established policy by the government of the United States
from the top down. And I believe that the men who designed these, the men
who designed the free fire zone, the men who ordered us, the men who signed
off the air raid strike areas, I think these men, by the letter of the law,
the same letter of the law that tried Lieutenant Calley, are war criminals.

(End audiotape)


You wanna punish him, Gringo? 12.Feb.2004 03:11


Your opinion reminds me of italian authorities, which, these days, are trying to arrest every single person related to the Brigate Rosse in the 70's because "the state does not forget".

Kerry was brave enough to admit what he 'd done, to reveal these things, to accuse his superiors of them and to play a major role in the anti-war movement. And one can also say that he was following orders...

What exactly do you think? That because he's done all the things HE admitted to, even if he's stated everything was wrong, even if he was so important to the anti-war movement he couldn't have one's vote?
What kind of revengeful thinking is that?

We can say thousands of things about Kerry's views and voting record and I may agree with you, but this view seems to me pretty strange..

Kerry wants to punish millions, winston 12.Feb.2004 08:58


You think that war criminals shouldn't be punished? You think it's OK to commit war crimes? You should be able to just commit lethal atrocities and there should never be any consequences? Do you even consider yourself a moral person at all?

Kerry was for both the Afghanistan and the Iraq war. If he has power, he will be little different than Bush, who also wants thousands to die so he can keep his cronies rich. If millions are made miserable, homeless or poor, so be it as far as the warmongers are concerned. How fucking sweet of him.

Your BS excuse of "merely following orders" is a pathetic non-excuse. Kerry CHOSE to volunteer for Vietnam TWIVE, and he CHOSE to follow orders. By treating him like a child or a retarded person with no self-determination, you are letting him off the hook for HIS OWN ACTIONS. What kind of irresponsible thinking is that? Your excuse is precisely the excuse employed by most Nazis when facing their war crimes trials; "I was merely following orders." Following orders is the problem, winston. There are FAR more crimes committed in the name of obedience than disobedience. As a matter of fact, it was soldiers revolting against the military hierarchy that ended the Vietnam war;

Kerry is running fir President, in other words; the top official who enforces LAW in our country. Don't you think that th etop executive officer should also follow and respect LAW? The Constitution defines treaties as "the highest law of the land" and they trump all other laws in the US. The Geneva Accords are a treaty, and hence they are laws that Americans MUST follow. Do you believe that Kerry is above the law, winston?

It's too bad that the Geneva Accords aren't enforced by Americans at all. If they were enforced, every American president would be under trial, every US general and admiral that saw action, and every service person who was engaged in any military actions. In other words, if we followed our own law, we would wage only DEFENSIVE wars. Since the US government is policing the world to the economic benefit our US corporations, notice that the US always tries to ignore the Geneva Accords and ignore international courts. They don't want to respect the law. So don't pretend that they are lawful people.

Winston, your amorality about this issue could use some information. Look up Albert Speer. He was a Nazi who took full responsibility for his actions. He claimed to be ignorant of concentration camps, but only because he remained willfully ignorant - he didn't WANT to know. Although he was a dispicable Nazi, he surprisingly took full responsibility for his actions, as well as his inactions - he admits he could have done the right thing but CHOSE to remain ignorant and passive. He is a good example to war criminals in that he took full responsibility, something that Kerry or Clark or Clinton will probably never do.