Ramsey Clark: A Profile in Treason

[Chopper Dave]

Dave- you really know how to defend the most charming individuals...I look forward to your theses on Che Guevara, Ho Chi Minh, Deng Xioping and Fidel Castro..

In June 1990, a LaRouche front organization, the Schiller Institute, flew Ramsay Clark to a cult-organized conference in Copenhagen. His speech there claimed the US government had moved against LaRouche because he was "a danger to the system," and decried that he was a victim of "vilification." The speech was printed in full by the LaRouchie New Federalist propaganda rag.

Clark also represented PLO leaders in a suit brought by the family of Leon Klinghoffer, the elderly vacationer who was shot and thrown overboard from the hijacked Achille Lauro cruise-ship by renegade Palestinian terrorists in 1986.

Another Clark client was Karl Linnas, an ex-Nazi concentration camp guard in Estonia (where he had overseen the murder of some 12,000 resistence fighters and Jews), who was being deported from the US to the USSR to face war crimes charges. Clark again lost the case, but again went to bat for his client in the public arena, questioning the need to prosecute Nazis "forty years after some god-awful crime they're alleged to have committed."

The Devil's Pact

In August 1990, two months after his return from the LaRouche conference in Copenhagen, with US troops mobilizing to Saudi Arabia, Clark accepted an invitation to lead the National Coalition to Stop US Intervention in the Middle East. This invitation had been extended by members of an orthodox Stalinist sect, the Workers World Party (WWP). Clark had finally found a new home. The Clark-WWP alliance has lasted to this day.

With glasnost, WWP supported the Kremlin hard-liners who resisted Gorbachev's reforms and disarmament moves. Insisting that China remained a "workers state," WWP supported Deng Xiaoping in the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, again attacking the protesting students and workers as "counter-revolutionaries." In 1991, WWP supported the KGB coup against Gorbachev.

I mostly was defending against your unwarranted attack towards Carter.

Personally, I hate Clark. He defended the assailants in the Klinghoffer case. But you're trying to paint the democrats as evil and incompetant, and the republicans as great Americans. All in all, you've got both on both sides.

Of course, being a conservative, it must be hard for you to see things more than just in black and white.

[nelms]

I think 15 years down the road we might be saying that about our current president. Regardless, Carter's still a brilliant man, and just because things didn't work out when he was in office doesn't mean that he doesn't know more about foreign and domestic policy than anyone on this board. Hell, I'd venture that he still probably knows more about the two than anyone in Washington right now.

You're too young to actually live through the economic mess of the Carter years. Double digit inflation, double digit employment, double digit inflation rates. It was a really horrible time to live through. You literally could not buy a house because of the rates. The economic misery index was invented because of Carter.

Despite 9/11 and Katrina, the economy is humming along. Is it perfect? No, but it is very resilient and seems to be growing at a pretty good clip.

I don't even want to get into the weak-kneed forgein policy of the Carter years. He may be a smart man, but he was a horrible leader.

[redman]

I mostly was defending against your unwarranted attack towards Carter.

Carter is a nice, honorable man who had no business being President. He was a horrible leader from the executive branch. Habitat for Humanity is about his speed.

As for his foreign policy notions, it remains rooted in the idea that American foreign interests are inherently flawed/evil and that the real power should lie with the UN in all things international. I'll let that idiocy speak for itself and sink in.

[Winslowalrob]

You're too young to actually live through the economic mess of the Carter years. Double digit inflation, double digit employment, double digit inflation rates. It was a really horrible time to live through. You literally could not buy a house because of the rates. The economic misery index was invented because of Carter.

Despite 9/11 and Katrina, the economy is humming along. Is it perfect? No, but it is very resilient and seems to be growing at a pretty good clip.

I don't even want to get into the weak-kneed forgein policy of the Carter years. He may be a smart man, but he was a horrible leader.

Carter was actually left with an economic mess that no one saw coming when Nixon took the US off the Gold Standard. There were more mitigating factors when it came to the international economy as well (oil prices that he had nothing to do with). "The economic misery index was invented because of Carter." How did he invent it? Could you give examples of policies he carried out? What about factors that were outside of his control? Carter was not perfect, but damn man that stuff was not his fault. Its the equivalent of blaming Bush for post-2000 recession.

[Chopper Dave]

You're too young to actually live through the economic mess of the Carter years. Double digit inflation, double digit employment, double digit inflation rates. It was a really horrible time to live through. You literally could not buy a house because of the rates. The economic misery index was invented because of Carter.

Despite 9/11 and Katrina, the economy is humming along. Is it perfect? No, but it is very resilient and seems to be growing at a pretty good clip.

I don't even want to get into the weak-kneed forgein policy of the Carter years. He may be a smart man, but he was a horrible leader.

I'm sure. I'm not defending his presidency. But don't trash him as an American. That's uncalled for.

[nelms]

Carter was actually left with an economic mess that no one saw coming when Nixon took the US off the Gold Standard. There were more mitigating factors when it came to the international economy as well (oil prices that he had nothing to do with). "The economic misery index was invented because of Carter." How did he invent it? Could you give examples of policies he carried out? What about factors that were outside of his control? Carter was not perfect, but damn man that stuff was not his fault. Its the equivalent of blaming Bush for post-2000 recession.

Wow. Someone actually defending Carter's economic policies. I don't think Carter himself would defend it. :laugh:

Of course there are things that are out of a president's control. Do you think Bush can control the price of a barrel of oil or can control what hurricanes hit what cities in the U.S. It's not what was out of Carter's hands that was the problem. It was what he could control but didn't.

This country was coming out of a recession from the Ford administration during the 1976 presidential election. It's amazing that even after Watergate, Ford barely lost to Carter, mainly because of the economic recession. Carter's two biggest problems were 1) He didn't take the problem of inflation seriously at the outset of his administration 2) His own party in Congress could not work with him in coming up with a viable economic stimulus passage

With respect to #1, his biggest problem was his poor relationship with the Federal Reserve chairman, which impacted his ability to get inflation under control. #2 was an indication of his weakness as a leader on the domestic front. His own party didn't respect him. He also created a stupid economic group that was represented by several members of his administration, including a few cabinet level positions. The group got caught up in political infighting and basically spun it's wheels for most of his adminstration. It was Carter's brilliant idea of ruling by committee.

To answer your question about the "misery index", Carter used that term to describe Ford's economy, which adds the inflation rate and the unemployment rate. The ironic thing is that when Carter was voted out of office, the misery index was the highest it ever was in the history of the U.S. (22%).

[Winslowalrob]

Wow. Someone actually defending Carter's economic policies. I don't think Carter himself would defend it. :laugh:

Of course there are things that are out of a president's control. Do you think Bush can control the price of a barrel of oil or can control what hurricanes hit what cities in the U.S. It's not what was out of Carter's hands that was the problem. It was what he could control but didn't.

This country was coming out of a recession from the Ford administration during the 1976 presidential election. It's amazing that even after Watergate, Ford barely lost to Carter, mainly because of the economic recession. Carter's two biggest problems were 1) He didn't take the problem of inflation seriously at the outset of his administration 2) His own party in Congress could not work with him in coming up with a viable economic stimulus passage

With respect to #1, his biggest problem was his poor relationship with the Federal Reserve chairman, which impacted his ability to get inflation under control. #2 was an indication of his weakness as a leader on the domestic front. His own party didn't respect him. He also created a stupid economic group that was represented by several members of his administration, including a few cabinet level positions. The group got caught up in political infighting and basically spun it's wheels for most of his adminstration. It was Carter's brilliant idea of ruling by committee.

To answer your question about the "misery index", Carter used that term to describe Ford's economy, which adds the inflation rate and the unemployment rate. The ironic thing is that when Carter was voted out of office, the misery index was the highest it ever was in the history of the U.S. (22%).

Wow, that actually made sense. However, the reasoning is slightly flawed because Federal Reserve chairmen, while appointed by presidents, are not beholden to them. Unless the chairman at the time felt like letting inflation go nuts just to spite Carter (A possiblity), his personal liking of the man should have nothing to do with the matter. And as you yourself admit, the recession came in prior to Carter:

http://www.bls.gov/opub/cwc/cm20030124ar05p1.htm

Compensation in the 1970s

by Albert E. Schwenk

Bureau of Labor Statistics

This article was originally printed in the Fall 2001 issue of Compensation and Working Conditions.

Originally Posted: January 30, 2003

Partly reflecting an oil embargo in 1973 and disruptions to the oil supply in 1979, the economy in the 1970s experienced periods of inflation, recession, and high unemployment. The economic conditions led to price controls and new and enhanced programs to combat poverty and unemployment. The decade also saw the United States' continued presence in Vietnam, a conflict that brought substantial political and social unrest to the country. The decade was also marked by a growing importance of women in the workforce, as well as an aging of the workforce. During this period, there were important legislative and legal changes affecting compensation and workplace issues.

Inflation, recession, and high unemployment

For many, the 1970s was a decade of pessimism. It opened with a recession in 1970 and the painful ending of the Vietnam War. Memories of the Great Depression made policy makers unwilling to use restrictive monetary and fiscal policy to contain inflation, because it was felt that the associated increase in unemployment would be unacceptable.1 Instead, wage and price controls were introduced in August 1971.2 An oil embargo, in 1973, brought on by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), led to rapid inflation and a recession; and there was another round of disruptions to the oil supply in 1979.

Both the civilian unemployment rate and the rate of change in consumer prices deteriorated in the second half of the decade. Between 1970-74, the average annual unemployment rate was 5.4 percent, while the average annual change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) was 6.6 percent. From 1974-79, the figures edged up to 7.9 percent for unemployment and 8.1 percent for the CPI.

This decade was also marked by a number of large, highly publicized labor disputes. For example, in 1970, almost 210,000 postal employees walked off their jobs—the first mass work stoppage in the history of the U.S. Postal Service. In the same year, four railroad unions conducted a 1-day nationwide railroad strike. In 1971, two longshore strikes closed all major ports on the East, Gulf, and West Coasts; West Coast longshore workers resumed their strike after an emergency dispute injunction temporarily halted the walkout. In 1975, 80,000 employees of Pennsylvania conducted the first legal strike by State workers. In 1977-78, miners conducted one of the longest strikes in the coal industry. The decade ended with a 10-day nationwide strike by 219,400 over-the-road and local truckers in April 1979."

The article has some other stuff too, i just took a bunch of the first paragraphs to illustrate that the 1970s would have sucked regardless of presidency. And a president not being able to work with his party? That MAY have been a result of the economic hard times and congressmen looking to appease their districts and states by butting heads with the commander in chief.

Thanks for laughing at me though!

[nelms]

Wow, that actually made sense. However, the reasoning is slightly flawed because Federal Reserve chairmen, while appointed by presidents, are not beholden to them. Unless the chairman at the time felt like letting inflation go nuts just to spite Carter (A possiblity), his personal liking of the man should have nothing to do with the matter. And as you yourself admit, the recession came in prior to Carter:

Two things: 1) Carter appointed 2 FRB chairmen during his administration. While they are independent, a president must be able to have an effective working relationship with them. The last one he appointed, Paul Voelker, was able to work with the Reagan administration to get inflation under control 2) The Ford recession was ending during the 1976 presidential campaign, BEFORE Carter took the oath of office. Carter managed to eff it up at levels never seen before in 4 short years.

[Winslowalrob]

Reagan did not get inflation under control, it just happened to occur under his administration. And could you give examples of how the recession was ending and what Carter did specifically to "eff it up"?

[nelms]

Reagan did not get inflation under control, it just happened to occur under his administration. And could you give examples of how the recession was ending and what Carter did specifically to "eff it up"?

So Reagan didn't get inflation under control, huh? It just happened to "occur" under his administration, huh? So, I guess Bush isn't responsible for the war in Iraq. It just happened to "occur" under his administration. :doh:

Didn't I just cover what Carter did to eff it up? :doh: It's called lack of leadership. Is that a concept that is too difficult to understand for you? Presidents are supposed to provide leadership, both domestically and abroad. He did not do this. He could not work with a Democratic Congress to pass any type of effective tax legislation, job growth legislation, energy legislation. He could not even get members of his own adminstration, appointed by him that worked for him, to agree on an effective economic stimulus package. He failed at all levels.

Now, here's a little indication of Carter's domestic and foreign failures: he lost in one of the biggest presidential landslides ever. You're too young to have lived at that time, but believe me, it was the worst economic situation in my lifetime.

[Winslowalrob]

So Reagan didn't get inflation under control, huh? It just happened to "occur" under his administration, huh? So, I guess Bush isn't responsible for the war in Iraq. It just happened to "occur" under his administration. :doh:

Didn't I just cover what Carter did to eff it up? :doh: It's called lack of leadership. Is that a concept that is too difficult to understand for you? Presidents are supposed to provide leadership, both domestically and abroad. He did not do this. He could not work with a Democratic Congress to pass any type of effective tax legislation, job growth legislation, energy legislation. He could not even get members of his own adminstration, appointed by him that worked for him, to agree on an effective economic stimulus package. He failed at all levels.

Now, here's a little indication of Carter's domestic and foreign failures: he lost in one of the biggest presidential landslides ever. You're too young to have lived at that time, but believe me, it was the worst economic situation in my lifetime.

Haha, ok then, prove to me that Reagan was responsible. Give me every piece of legislation that he spearheaded that helped in employment, inflation, or the deficit. Or tell me whether he battled with the Fed about interest rates. Just prove it to me, and I will admit I am wrong . And your comparison is faulty, designed to rile members up about the war in Iraq. Who has more control, a president over domestic and international finance, or a president's role in warfare? Here is a hint, check the Constitution .

"It's called lack of leadership. Is that a concept that is too difficult to understand for you? Presidents are supposed to provide leadership, both domestically and abroad. He did not do this. He could not work with a Democratic Congress to pass any type of effective tax legislation, job growth legislation, energy legislation. He could not even get members of his own adminstration, appointed by him that worked for him, to agree on an effective economic stimulus package. He failed at all levels."

I suppose it is too difficult, but what tax legislation would have helped? What job growth legislation could not be passed? You are just kind of using hindsight to claim that there was viable legislation that would have definately worked... all I am asking is for you to prove it. What was this legislation?

"Now, here's a little indication of Carter's domestic and foreign failures: he lost in one of the biggest presidential landslides ever. You're too young to have lived at that time, but believe me, it was the worst economic situation in my lifetime."

Umm, that does not prove anything, for do you not support a President that disregards public opinion? Should not a great leader be judged by staying the course, no matter the difficulty? Sorry, could not resist, but you are being a little too dramatic here. More people lost their jobs and purchasing power under Reagan than under Carter, I just find it funny that they were somehow considered golden years. To each his own I guess...

[Predicto]

You arenever going to win this one Winslow, because Carter did, in fact, suck as a president.

Of course, Reagan was pretty much crap too, but don't try telling the kool-aid drinkers around here that - the think he invented Beer or something

[nelms]

Haha, ok then, prove to me that Reagan was responsible. Give me every piece of legislation that he spearheaded that helped in employment, inflation, or the deficit. Or tell me whether he battled with the Fed about interest rates. Just prove it to me, and I will admit I am wrong . And your comparison is faulty, designed to rile members up about the war in Iraq. Who has more control, a president over domestic and international finance, or a president's role in warfare? Here is a hint, check the Constitution .

"It's called lack of leadership. Is that a concept that is too difficult to understand for you? Presidents are supposed to provide leadership, both domestically and abroad. He did not do this. He could not work with a Democratic Congress to pass any type of effective tax legislation, job growth legislation, energy legislation. He could not even get members of his own adminstration, appointed by him that worked for him, to agree on an effective economic stimulus package. He failed at all levels."

I suppose it is too difficult, but what tax legislation would have helped? What job growth legislation could not be passed? You are just kind of using hindsight to claim that there was viable legislation that would have definately worked... all I am asking is for you to prove it. What was this legislation?

"Now, here's a little indication of Carter's domestic and foreign failures: he lost in one of the biggest presidential landslides ever. You're too young to have lived at that time, but believe me, it was the worst economic situation in my lifetime."

Umm, that does not prove anything, for do you not support a President that disregards public opinion? Should not a great leader be judged by staying the course, no matter the difficulty? Sorry, could not resist, but you are being a little too dramatic here. More people lost their jobs and purchasing power under Reagan than under Carter, I just find it funny that they were somehow considered golden years. To each his own I guess...

Dude, prove it to yourself, you know how to google don't you? I've already giving you enough evidence about Carter's effed up presidency. You must be the only one on this whole planet that can sit there and defend this guy's presidency. Simply amazing.

"More people lost their jobs and purchasing power under Reagan than under Carter, I just find it funny that they were somehow considered golden years."

This is the single dumbest statement that I have ever witnessed, not only on this board, but on any board that I have ever been a member of. Congratulations and may God have mercy on your soul.

[chomerics]

You're too young to actually live through the economic mess of the Carter years. Double digit inflation, double digit employment, double digit inflation rates. It was a really horrible time to live through. You literally could not buy a house because of the rates. The economic misery index was invented because of Carter.

Despite 9/11 and Katrina, the economy is humming along. Is it perfect? No, but it is very resilient and seems to be growing at a pretty good clip.

I don't even want to get into the weak-kneed forgein policy of the Carter years. He may be a smart man, but he was a horrible leader.

Any moron can cut taxes and spend money to get the economy moving :doh:

[nelms]

Any moron can cut taxes and spend money to get the economy moving :doh:

:doh: :doh: :doh:

[chomerics]

So Reagan didn't get inflation under control, huh? It just happened to "occur" under his administration, huh? So, I guess Bush isn't responsible for the war in Iraq. It just happened to "occur" under his administration. :doh:

Didn't I just cover what Carter did to eff it up? :doh: It's called lack of leadership. Is that a concept that is too difficult to understand for you? Presidents are supposed to provide leadership, both domestically and abroad. He did not do this. He could not work with a Democratic Congress to pass any type of effective tax legislation, job growth legislation, energy legislation. He could not even get members of his own adminstration, appointed by him that worked for him, to agree on an effective economic stimulus package. He failed at all levels.

Now, here's a little indication of Carter's domestic and foreign failures: he lost in one of the biggest presidential landslides ever. You're too young to have lived at that time, but believe me, it was the worst economic situation in my lifetime.

Nelms, you are so full of crap it's coming out of your eyeballs. You don't remember "the worst economic situation in your lifetime." because you weren't even out in the world then. Everyone here knows you're not 70, you changed your age for god knows what reason, maybe because you thought people would respect your drivel if you said you were older, but you are not. So please stop the BS posts, making it look like you suffered through something that did not happen, just to prove a point.

[Winslowalrob]

Dude, prove it to yourself, you know how to google don't you? I've already giving you enough evidence about Carter's effed up presidency. You must be the only one on this whole planet that can sit there and defend this guy's presidency. Simply amazing.

"More people lost their jobs and purchasing power under Reagan than under Carter, I just find it funny that they were somehow considered golden years."

This is the single dumbest statement that I have ever witnessed, not only on this board, but on any board that I have ever been a member of. Congratulations and may God have mercy on your soul.

Ok then, I dare you to look up the statistics. I gave you a little evidence, now its your turn. Until you back up what you say, I am sorry but you are wrong. Thanks for playing!

[nelms]

Nelms, you are so full of crap it's coming out of your eyeballs. You don't remember "the worst economic situation in your lifetime." because you weren't even out in the world then. Everyone here knows you're not 70, you changed your age for god knows what reason, maybe because you thought people would respect your drivel if you said you were older, but you are not. So please stop the BS posts, making it look like you suffered through something that did not happen, just to prove a point.

Dude, you don't know my age. Who the eff do you think you are? For what it's worth, MR. KNOW-IT-ALL, I was in the military from 1974 - 1978. But you wouldn't understand that being in the military is a real life, real world experience. So, next time, keep your opinions to yourself if you don't know who your talking to.

By the way, my age (whether it's 70 or not), isn't your GD business, nor anyone elses. Get it, Paco?

[nelms]

Ok then, I dare you to look up the statistics. I gave you a little evidence, now its your turn. Until you back up what you say, I am sorry but you are wrong. Thanks for playing!

You didn't do anything. Stop being lazy and look it up for yourself.

[Winslowalrob]

You didn't do anything. Stop being lazy and look it up for yourself.

Ok friend, I will make you a deal. If I prove it, statistically, what will you do? Lay out the paremeters, because I do not want any "yeah buts". Put the ball in my court, I want to know what I have to do to prove it.

[chomerics]

Dude, you don't know my age. Who the eff do you think you are? For what it's worth, MR. KNOW-IT-ALL, I was in the military from 1974 - 1978. But you wouldn't understand that being in the military is a real life, real world experience. So, next time, keep your opinions to yourself if you don't know who your talking to.

By the way, my age (whether it's 70 or not), isn't your GD business, nor anyone elses. Get it, Paco?

You are full of crap Nelms, completely. You see, when you lie once, people don't take believe a single word you say. . . maybe if you were honest and up front, I wouldn't expose you, but when you constantly lie, people don't believe a word you say.

[nelms]

You are full of crap Nelms, completely. You see, when you lie once, people don't take believe a single word you say. . . maybe if you were honest and up front, I wouldn't expose you, but when you constantly lie, people don't believe a word you say.

Expose me? Do I need to post a link to my birth certificate? :doh: Between you and Liberty, I don't know who is denser.

Dude, you also need mental help with your narcissistic self-importance. You don't know half of what you think you know, including how old I am. Once again, it's none of you GD business.

[nelms]

Ok friend, I will make you a deal. If I prove it, statistically, what will you do? Lay out the paremeters, because I do not want any "yeah buts". Put the ball in my court, I want to know what I have to do to prove it.

Yeah, I'll get back to you on that one.

[Chopper Dave]

Dude, you also need mental help with your narcissistic self-importance.

God damn, you could cut the irony with a butter knife.

[nelms]

You are full of crap Nelms, completely. You see, when you lie once, people don't take believe a single word you say. . . maybe if you were honest and up front, I wouldn't expose you, but when you constantly lie, people don't believe a word you say.

You told everyone on this board 2 weeks ago that you were putting me on your ignore list. What happened? Why did you lie about that?