Thread: Did my country really plan this????

Originally Posted by Throbert McGee

Getting back on the thread topic:

Clark retired from the military in 2000; this video was from 2007. In between 2000 and 2007, Clark sought the Democratic Party's nomination for the Presidency in 2004, but ultimately withdrew from the race and threw his endorsement behind John Kerry, and subsequently endorsed both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

In short, a significant part of Clark's chosen civilian career has been to work as a booster and loyalist of the Democratic Party, which in our two-party system tends to make him an automatic opponent of whatever the Republican Party is doing and a detractor of major GOP politicians, including any Republican President.

Moreover, far from being utterly unlike Michael Moore, Wesley Clark was (at least when this video was made in 2007) doing the same kind of work that Moore did for much of the Bush years -- namely, trying to get the "radical" left-wing base of the Democratic Party interested and motivated in driving the Republicans out of the White House.

I'm not saying that Clark is a bad person to have his political biases, that Republicans are any less biased and more objective, or that political bias makes a person biased in every single aspect of his life. I'm just pointing out that when this video was made, Clark definitely had at least two glaringly obvious sources of bias against the Bush administration -- namely his Democratic Party loyalism, and also his personal desire to make money selling books and giving interviews. Sensationalism sells!

Not only is there room for misinterpretation, but (arguably) Clark himself is the one doing the misinterpreting. For example, it seems very plausible to me that the "seven-country takeover/invasion/destruction" memo that he describes was NOT some sort of definitely settled, long-term plan, but only one out of multiple different "contingency scenarios" that had been dreamt up by officers doing PowerPoint presentations.

Remember the climactic scene of WarGames where "Joshua" the supercomputer runs through hundreds of potential thermonuclear-war models in a few minutes? That was fantasy, but the real-life basis is that military planners actually do looove modeling many different "strategic scenarios" and "contingency plans." That's the full-time job for some in the officer ranks.

So in short, Clark may indeed be telling the truth about seeing the memos (in that there actually were such memos), but he's also putting a "spin" on the interpretation and significance of the memos because he knows exactly what his interviewer (and the disproportionate number of "911 troofers" in the interviewer's target audience!) wanted to hear.

Interesting what you say.. I did suspect that Clark would have some sort of affiliation to the left - even if for no other reason than, well, after all, when a person has already been aligned with the largely-right american military, is aware of the level of severity of black-ops and internal cleanup operations that this force is capable of, and then wishes to break away from that force and say something they don't want said.. well, I would want friends on the other team, too. [People laugh at the concept that the CIA might have killed Bob Marley (to control societal incitement), just as an example.. but he died of toe cancer two years after donning a boot with a tack point-up in the sole, and an odd-smelling goo inside the toe of the boot. That toe cancer metzed and he died. It's not my goal to convince people things like this are true.. but I do hope some of us keep an open mind to what COULD be true.]

And everything you're saying makes sense.. but some things stick out as largely suspicious. Namely, in 2007 no one had mentioned plans to go to war with Libya (I didn't think we had such plans), there was no large struggle with Gaddafi (in fact, near that time they were shipping him in to "talk" to American schools and organizations; he was doubted for his past, but not vilified) ... Now we find we ARE in a conflict with Libya, or at least aligned to one (i've not followed so closely whether we've already sent troops there, but I would bet that if we haven't yet, we will).. and if any of this is accurate, we're not done! - there's more countries coming!.. Somalia and Sudan were surprises, but the Iran conflict seems to have been lining up to happen for years, if you follow the clues the media leaves you.

And so it's possible you're right, that this is only spin... but sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Throbert, do you think this will prove to be only spin? Or do you think we WILL be heading to these other countries, after Libya?

And to reiterate the point that Hanna made.. if this DID turn out to be true, wouldn't we be guiltier by association for dismissing it, if the US does go into these places next?

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Yes, I admit it was a bit extreme. I've only done it for the consistency reasons. I guess I just got sick and tired of some people blaming the US for just about anything without considering the alternatives. As soon as they hear anything negative about the US - voila! - they are caught like a fish on a hook and start crying some blanket statements. You know, it became so fashionable these days to be over-critical of the US that all the positive factors are forgotten. And usually those very people are very vocal, but unfortunately have not that much clue of what's going on...

I respect this. I should mention that the reason you hear me cry about this, is not because I'm caught on a certain idea, but because I DO love my country. There are plenty of things about capitalism and American freedom that I love dearly.. As a case-in-point, I've been allowed to say and think things about my country that would have had me, if I were a Chinese citizen, whisked away into whatever unknown dungeons their dissidents go to.. (1984-style: Weiwei, an artist, was just freed.. because he "confessed" to his crime of dissidence) .. And I'm very vocal because I'm disheartened by the general US opinion that we should ignore it all, there's nothing we can do, that we should focus on being workers and consumers of functionally-obsolescent electronic goods and trust the leaders to lead.. I'm not really frightened or appalled by the IDEA of corruption - it's part of human nature, in our current iteration - but that corruption can snowball out of control when no one's watching the store.. Sometmies it feels like the curtain has been pulled around our poltical Oz for so long that no one can say what he's been up to. I'm no revolutionist. I like this place. I would just like to encourage people to have a mind for cleaning it up a bit.. And when I have an opportunity to bounce things like this off of people like you all, I feel like I learn more about it, from every angle.. so hopefully one day I WILL know what can be done constructively.. I'm no good at "Oh well, what can you do?" =)

1) As far as I am concerned, Michael Moore is a trustworthy source, but I don't agree with his exaggerated larger-than-life style. I suppose it helps get the message across to some of his fans though. And "Canadian Bacon" was a very funny film and so was "Sicko".

2) Croc, yes I support private property on a smaller scale. But I do not support globalism, corporatism or the type of capitalism whereby somebody is making a lot of money through hardly no actual work, or exploit people. I know that you will argue about this regardless of what I answer though, so let's see what you make of this response.

Originally Posted by kidkboom

...To Seraphim - My apology should extend to you to, since I believe I was overly vitriolic on the same topic with you a couple days back.. Not my intention.. Your words ring true, and your intentions are good. Far be it from me, when I know what I'm doing, to want to interfere with that. My respects to you.

No harm done. Any landing you walk away from is a good one. Cheers

No, your country did not plan this. This was planned by the Global Elites! Google Aaron Russo and watch the interview with Alex Jones. In this he explains how his ex friend Nick Rockefeller told him that they had already planned the wars in the Middle east. Why do you think that Obama, who said he would end the wars, has now accelerated them and started another? Obama is not in control, and neither was Bush.

Originally Posted by Hanna

yes I support private property on a smaller scale. But I do not support globalism, corporatism or the type of capitalism whereby somebody is making a lot of money through hardly no actual work, or exploit people

What's exploiting people to you?

Originally Posted by Eric C.

What's exploiting people to you?

Eric, if you want, it's your turn. I just gave up and I washed my hands. It seems like running through the tunnel looking for exit when the tunnel is closed in a doughnut-like shape. The best I was able to get out of it was that Hanna supports capitalism with high taxes, lots of social programs, and a very significant involvement of the state into the business with some tariffs, protectionism, and other cool classical features of it. In addition, perhaps some occasional nationalization of an entire industry or two.