An Analysis of General Wesley Clark (Ret) and the Memo of Destruction.

by Dee McLachlan

This once Supreme Allied Commander Europe of NATO (1997 to 2000) revealed the ‘the plan’ to destroy 7 countries in 5 years. How and WHY was Clark ‘allowed’ to reveal this Neocon plot of destruction?

I was drawn in by Clark’s bold disclosure March 2, 2007 – that is so often referenced in the alternative media (and rightly so). This an extract:

GEN. WESLEY CLARK: So I came back to see him a few weeks later (2001), and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!”

AMY GOODMAN: I’m sorry. What did you say his name was?

GEN. WESLEY CLARK: I’m not going to give you his name.  (He goes on to blame the oil being there)

March 2007

My friend, Mary, commented in her post on Udo:

“It is unthinkable that any man of Clark’s credentials (Rhodes scholar, Pentagon bloke, candidate for White House) could have been acting that day as a whistleblower. No. He must have been assigned to reveal the Pentagon’s laundry list as a way of conditioning us to what would happen. Perhaps it was also a trial balloon to see if there would be any objection”

I agree somewhat. The Democracy Now interview was not a slip. He again – more confidently in October 2007 – stating “This country was taken over by a group of people with a policy coup”

October 2007

There are several options:

1. Clark, the opportunist, was shown a memo by a disbelieving and concerned Pentagon official who chose Clark as his best (and only) option for the leak. Clark, seeking the limelight for his new career some years later, exposes the plan (a) knowing the tide in the US was swinging against the Neocons, but (b) as you will see in 2013, he has has since pulled his head in.

2. Clark is a whistle-blower (on the Neocon faction). This ‘Snowden-esque reveal’ does not seem credible, as he is still doing swimmingly.

3. He was ‘fed’ the memo and ‘allowed’ to disclose the information?

Clark was very passionate in 2007 – so what happened later. Below is a WE ARE CHANGE video, where Clark is interviewed by Luke Rudkowski.

Clark in 2013

I am a great fan of WAC,  and Luke at the end says its mind blowing as he wonders why Clark does not want to say more. This is stunning, as he just does NOT want to be on camera, and appears embarrassed or scared.

Clark in 2007 and Clark in 2013 are very DIFFERENT people.

There are several points of discussion here:

a. He’s an accidental whistle-blower, been told to tow the line – and is now working off ‘his’ modified script. (Not really credible. He held this view publicly for some time)

b. He was in disbelief of the memo in the first place. The hypothetical turned into reality, so now he is scared to speak out and has divorced himself from his previous bold statements. This could be to limit any controversy around his present ‘consulting’ career and status etc.

c. As a (retired) soldier – he was and presently is just taking orders.

d. He was ‘picked’ to leak the information. And maybe he only realized later that he had been ‘used’  (and is regretful/embarrassed about it).

e. He was/is a mind control victim.

It doesn’t quite make sense. If Edward Snowden had leaked this ‘memo’, he would have received a very different reception. But Clark moved on to greener pastures as a international consult (in energy, security, defense and investment banking). Only 93 words on his website describe his business, but it is telling that he is a ‘consultant’ for Blackstone for example. Read here  and Rothchild here.  So he is kept in the corral, but not in the game.

Is there any of 2007-Clark left? He recently wrote a (yawn) piece for the New York Times (Oct 10) on China, and in reviewing Clark’s latest book DON’T WAIT FOR THE NEXT WAR, Walter Russell Mead (Oct. 12, 2014 Wall Street Journal) says Wesley Clark has a propensity to propose federal spending that would benefit industries with which he himself has been closely connected. But two of the comments below the review are telling:

Toni Mack (~13th)  ‘In short, Wes Clark is all for crony capitalism….. ‘

Cater Newton (~14th Oct)  ‘I so hope this man fades into the sunset of political influence; a spineless brown-noser…..’  (my emphasis)

So…

Why and how was Clark ‘allowed’ to reveal this Neocon plan?

1. Conditioning/trial:  Maybe the populace need to be conditioned or tested on regarding the destruction of these countries – which benefit the global cabal by (a) Removing powerful leaders that don’t comply with central bankers and global agendas etc (e.g. Gaddafi, al-Assad etc.), (b) Allow for the Corporatocray to benefit in resources control, and (c) Feed the ongoing ‘war on terror’ thus allowing the west to be tightened by security laws.

2. Distraction: Maybe the destruction of 7 countries was and is just a giant DISTRACTION – which means in 2007 we needed to know about it and be distracted. (From what though?)

3. Deflection / firewall: Maybe Clark blaming of Cheney and Wolfowitz et al. is a FIREWALL protecting and shielding the real culprits. (A blame deflection, like the 28  9/11 redacted pages pointing to Saudi Arabia)

But why did Clark take 6 years for his memo story to become known?

For retired Wesley, just visiting the Pentagon, and to miraculously be given this memo – doesn’t it indicate that a powerful group had to benefit from this revelation?

Maybe Clark’s reveal was designed to do all of the above (aimed at the 2007 alternative thinkers), while the mainstream media continually and BRILLIANTLY distract and condition the public.

If so – then what is the real target?

This plan to attack the Middle East has weakened America, while strengthening the military corporate sector.  The ‘war on terror’ is draining American liberties. So while all the attention is focused on the MIND BLOWING destruction of the Middle East (and now ISIS) as a distraction – the real destruction is actually happening else where.

The one thing standing in the way of the NWO / or global cabal control is not Syria, or Libya – it is the people of the United States of America. Thus…

Is the target of destruction America?

This has not escaped many commentators. Alex Jones and others have been onto this for years (one example at INFOWARS), and Michael Rivero’s All Wars are Banker Wars explains much too.

But back to Wesley. If, for example, he had got his hands on a memo that said “We are planning the destruction of OUR country” and he revealed that – well, he might have ended up like Michael Hastings (killed in a car incident).

PS: And it will have been leaked who to blame if the US collapses.  But I hope the people of America avoid that and reclaim their constitution – SOON.