National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC), founded in August 2004, is an independent and nonpartisan alliance of whistleblowers who have come forward to address our nation's security weaknesses; to inform authorities of security vulnerabilities in our intelligence agencies, at nuclear power plants and weapon facilities, in airports, and at our nation's borders and ports; to uncover government waste, fraud, abuse, and in some cases criminal conduct. more....
...TG: And what can you do about issues like these over the next however long it is before you make a decision about 2008?
WC: It's a matter of both formulating and speaking and acting. I laid out a strategy in the book I published in 2003, "Winning Modern Wars," in the sixth chapter. It's still the right strategy for America. It's even more current now than it was then about how we have to conduct ourselves abroad and what we have to do at home to meet the competition from overseas. And then I think we've got to encourage Americans to get moving.
TG: "Get moving" in what sense?
WC: On education, healthcare reform, dealing with the reality of poverty, heading off crises before they erupt into war, promoting better business practices at home and a better business environment at home.
TG: It seems like that would have, if not the dual purpose, at least the dual effect, of shaping the debate and broadening your own portfolio a bit.
WC: Well, I have a broad background. People in uniform have had incredibly varied careers, and they've done a lot of things. Because so many Americans don't haven't gone through the military themselves, they may be not aware of that.
In the military I was responsible for 44,000 schoolchildren in Europe. I had a number of hospitals [to oversee], I had to deal with problems of diplomacy, I had to deal with base-closure problems and job problems in the civilian economy, I had a big budget to manage -- in addition to being a sort of traditional general. And in the military, we got all the education that you could possibly want. I had a degree in philosophy, politics, economics. I taught political philosophy and economics. I was an assistant in the White House Office of Management and Budget. I saw how budget decisions are made. I saw how the president goes through the annual budget, and I worked the process with Congress.
I'm not sure how good the chances are of Clark winning the nomination for the '08 race. It's NOT just the Corporate Press who blacks him out. Too many of our elected officials are much too comfortable with business as usual in DC and he would definitely rock their cozy little boat... That said I will work my ass off for him if he decides to run.
And finally, please go to VotersUnite.org and/or BlackBoxvoting.org to find the election integrity groups working in your area and get involved. (At BBV, scroll down to the State Forums.) There are a lot of brilliant people working on this but it's going to take a mass movement to change things.
Eric, is there any way to create jobs by promoting alternative energy sources? Wind, solar, hydrogen, geothermal, etc? We could change the direction of this country if the right people were leading. We so need to rid ourselves of these old elite fat cats who look no futher than what they can put in their own bank accounts.
REPP supports the advancement of renewable energy technology through policy research. REPP seeks to define growth strategies for renewables that respond to competitive energy markets and environmental needs. Since its inception in 1995, REPP has investigated the relationship among policy, markets and public demand in accelerating the deployment of renewable energy, which include biomass, hydropower, geothermal, photovoltaic, solar thermal, wind and renewable hydrogen. The organization offers a platform from which experts in the field can examine issues of medium-to long-term importance to policy makers, green energy entrepreneurs, and environmental advocates...
Thank you for jumping in the race Eric! I wish I could help more but my once a month donation is all I can swing right now. It's so ridiculous and sad that the right man for the job has nothing to do with who is most qualified, and everything to do with who has the most money...
Interesting you say that about Richardson. I know 2 people who live in NM and they feel that way too...
I wonder if any of the people who support him live there.
Mostly I just wanted to post something because I voted Clark and feel it's important for Clarkies to post to show our numbers are true and the poll is not being "freeped" or whatever it is we're accused of when Clark wins.
I also like Edwards. Some think he's "phony" but I think he's true. Especially love his wife!
how the people who took their boats down there maintained their composure. I would have been screaming and would likely have been arrested or shot.
Then the fucking NERVE of Brown and Chertoff on C-Span today, and the rest of jr's thugs to be patting each other on the back for a job well done!!! This just can't go on. As another Clarkie said last night, this must be jr's Waterloo!!!
Sending this to Anderson Cooper, Geraldo, Shepherd - who else on the cable news shows was finally outraged enough that they were speaking truth? (sorry, no cable here)
'...The United States diplomacy in the United Nations will be further strengthened if the Congress can adopt a resolution expressing US determination to act if the United Nations will not. The use of force must remain a US option under active consideration. The resolution need not at this point authorize the use of force, but simply agree on the intent to authorize the use of force, if other measures fail. The more focused the resolution on Iraq and the problem of weapons of mass destruction, the greater its utility in the United Nations. The more nearly unanimous the resolution, the greater its impact in the diplomatic efforts underway.
- The President and his national security team must deploy imagination, leverage, and patience in crafting UN engagement. In the near term, time is on our side, and we should endeavor to use the UN if at all possible. This may require a period of time for inspections or even the development of a more intrusive inspection program, if necessary backed by force. This is foremost an effort to gain world-wide legitimacy for US concerns and possible later action, but it may also impede Saddam's weapons programs and further constrain his freedom of action. Yes, there is a risk that inspections would fail to provide the evidence of his weapons programs, but the difficulties of dealing with this outcome are more than offset by opportunity to gain allies and support in the campaign against Saddam.
If efforts to resolve the problem by using the United Nations fail, either initially or ultimately, the US should form the broadest possible coalition, including its NATO allies and the North Atlantic Council if possible, to bring force to bear.
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."
Once initiated, any military operation should aim for the most rapid accomplishment of its operational aims and prompt turnover to follow-on organizations and agencies.
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...'
When asked about his praise for Bush and his credentials as a Democrat, Clark said this at his first candidate debate on September 25, 2003:
'We elected a president we thought was a compassionate conservative. Instead we got neither conservatism or compassion. We got a man who recklessly cut taxes. We got a man who recklessly took us into war with Iraq.
I was never partisan in the military. I served under Democratic presidents, I served under Republican presidents. But as I looked at this country and looked which way we were headed, I knew that I needed to speak out. And when I needed to speak out, there was only party to come to.
I am pro-choice, I am pro-affirmative action, I'm pro-environment, pro-health. I believe the United States should engage with allies. We should be a good player in the international community. And we should use force only as a last resort. That's why I'm proud to be a Democrat.'