Wesley Clark War Crimes amply documented
1. MICHEL COLLON: WILL WESLEY CLARK DO TOMORROW THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT HE
DID YESTERDAY?
2. WILLIAM BLUM: OUR NEWEST SAVIOR - WESLEY CLARK
A VERY IMPORTANT LINK:
Wesley Clark War Crimes amply documented:
NATO's War of Aggression against Yugoslavia
(by Michel Chossudovsky)
-> http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO309C.html
MORE DOCUMENTS:
A militarist as “peace” candidate: Retired general Wesley Clark enters
Democratic presidential race
(by Alex Lefebrve)
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/sep2003/clar-s29_prn.shtml
Enter the 'anti-war' war criminal
(by Fred Goldstein)
http://www.workers.org/ww/2003/bushiraq1002.php
'Wesley & Me': A Real-Life Docudrama
(by Norman Solomon)
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/solomon1.html
Wesley Clark: The Guy Who Almost Started World War III
(by Stella Jatras)
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/JAT309A.html
Who is Wesley Clark?
(by Stephen Gowans)
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/GOW309A.html
Gen. Wesley Clark -- War Criminal, Don't Be Fooled
(by Mitchel Cohen)
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/COH309A.html
General Wesley Clark, From Waco to Yugoslavia:
The US military was at Waco
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/clark.htm
More on Wesley Clark's career:
http://www.counterpunch.org/clark.html
US Army Page
http://www.nato.int/cv/saceur/clark.htm
Foreign Honors and Awards
http://www.jaymarlowe.com/clark.htm
Was Gen. Clark Also "Unprepared" for the Postwar?
(by Zoltan Grossman)
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0910-07.htm
General Wesley Clark (by William Fielder)
http://bigjweb.com/artman/publish/printer_956.shtml
Wesley Clark Jumps in With Kosher-Style Kickoff
http://www.forward.com/issues/2003/03.09.26/news1.clark.html
Wesley Clark: The Score
(by Srdja Trifkovic)
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/News/Trifkovic/NewsViews.htm
---
SEE MORE ARTICLES AND LINKS AT:
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/2795
War Criminal Wesley Clark for President? Including:
1. Links
2. A commentary by Rick Rozoff
3. A commentary by Mitchel Cohen
4. A commentary by Wayne Madsen at counterpunch.org
5. Extracts from http://www.zpub.com/un/clark.html (with many
interesting links!)
=== 1 ===
Will Wesley Clark Do Tomorrow The Opposite Of What He
Did Yesterday?
Latin America, Yugoslavia, China and a few other
targets
MICHEL COLLON, Belgium
September 26, 2003
Is Wesley Clark the long hoped for contender to go up
against Bush II?
Further on we will examine why certain leadership
circles in the U.S. anticipate the possibility to
"change horses". But, first of all, why this silence
about Clark's past record? Yes, you could vote for
Wesley Clark, provided that your forget about...
LATIN AMERICA (1996-97)
Clark, assigned to Panama to lead the US Southern
Command, namely, Latin American operations, supplied
various regimes that practice terror on their
citizenry with a great many military "advisors" and US
mercenaries.
During this period, Latin America experienced a sharp
increase in human rights violations. In Colombia, for
example, there were 2,400 political assassinations
(not taking into consideration the numerous incidents
of people going missing or simply vanishing) committed
by the military as well as paramilitary groups that
were trained and equipped by Wesley Clark.
The Objective: a long series of aggressions against
Chile, Cuba and many others. It's about waging brutal
combat operations against liberation movements in
Colombia, Peru, Guatemala, Mexico and Bolivia. It's
always done for the purpose of allowing U.S.
multi-nationals to continue to keep the upper hand,
with respect to economic relations, in Latin America.
The
fact that these wars were fought far away from news
cameras does not diminish Clark's responsibility.
[http://www.law.northwestern.edu/depts/clinic/ihr/
display_details.cfm?ID=120&document_type=commentary]
[http://www.nato.int/cv/saceur/clark.htm%5d
YUGOSLAVIA (1999):
What about the war against Yugoslavia? Some people saw
it as a humanitarian operation whose real goals
corresponded to its announced goals. Others
saw a hypocritical military operation that foresaw
gaining control of Balkan oil routes and the country's
markets, meanwhile eliminating workers'
self-management and the social benefits of "Yugoslav
socialism".
It seems that Clark himself could have answered this
question by drawing on the following summary he made
of his own mandate: "Potential adversaries should
recognize that Western nations are fully capable -
militarily, diplomatically and industrially - of high
intensity combat operations that include the use of
ground forces when their vital interests are involved
andeven when less-than-vital interests are involved."
Clark forgot to mention of the humanitarian pretexts
that had been so frequently invoked before and
during the war. ("Clark Recalls 'Lessons' of Kosovo,
IHT, May 3, 2000).
Be that as it may, the crimes committed during this
war by NATO, which was under the command of Wesley
Clark, are undeniable. Even though Clark, among
others, will never be convicted because international
law does not exist for the mighty.
What about criminal acts? Even though he hit a
laughably small number of Yugoslav tanks, Clark bombed
the Radio-Television building (killing 16
journalists and technicians), factories, petrochemical
complexes (which resulted in a dramatic rise in
cancers and other maladies), civilian
infrastructure (electric power generating stations), a
convoy of Albanian refugees who were returning to
Kosovo (70 victims), a passenger train...and, last but
not least, the Chinese embassy (3 victims). Which was,
in other words, a "warning" because Beijing was
supporting Yugoslav independence. And let us not omit
the use of "fragmentation bombs", which are deadliest,
in the long term, for children. And the use of
so-called "depleted" uranium shells that has polluted
the region for a long time to come. The Spanish NATO
pilot, Martin de la Hoz, protested openly against the
deliberate bombardment of civilian targets (Articulo
20, Madrid, June 14, 1999).
Far from simply being a "obedient soldier", Clark is
described by one and all as a "super-hawk" who, most
notably, wanted to bomb all the bridges of Belgrade in
order to intimidate the population. This super -
hawkishness could also be seen in his attitude right
after the war when Russian troops moved toward
Prishtina to try to protect the minority Serb
population.
Wesley Clark, in a fit of monstrous rage, demanded
that British General Jackson block the Prishtina
airport to prevent the Russians from landing.
General Jackson replied: "Sir, I'm not going to start
WWIII for you!".
Afterwards, Clark helped the terrorist militias of the
KLA (UCK) escape demilitarization, which had
nevertheless been stipulated by a UN resolution.
Today, these military mafias are conducting a reign of
terror against all of the national communities in
Kosovo as well as against a large part of the
Albanian population.
IRAK (2003):
Now that Bush has gotten entangled with the resistance
put up by the Iraqi people, Wesley Clark brags: "I
told you so". He is even trying to cultivate
an "anti-war" image through the electoral process. But
what did he say before the war? "I am
categorically certain that Saddam possesses weapons of
mass destruction" (CNN, January 18, 2001).
And what did he write on April 10 of this year? Oh,
well, he welcomed the aggression against Iraq, which
was motivated, according to him, by "strong
convictions (...) Bush and Blair can be proud of their
determination." He reasoned that "nothing could be
more moving" than the "liberation" of Baghdad and that
it was necessary to hurry up and "achieve
this great victory". He also applauded General Tommy
Franks, a war criminal who is guilty of having, on the
one hand, ordered or, on the other, having
concealed, the bombardment of civilians and attacks
against hospitals, ambulances, journalists...
And Clark, "a man of peace", has announced that "the
operation in Iraq will also serve as a point of
departure (...) for military actions against
countries that support terrorism and have deployed
weapons of mass destruction". This is an article to
which Bush could have added his by-line.
(The Times of London)
TOMORROW CHINA, AND THEN... ?
Why is Clark scaling the ladders of power? Because the
setbacks experienced by Bush have begun to disturb one
part of the leadership circle in the
United States. They are afraid that, by having
disregarded all of their allies, it is becoming
increasingly more difficult to wage the various
wars of aggression that they have prepared. In fact,
the various factions of the U.S. bourgeoisie are in
complete agreement with the plan to totally
recolonize the world in order to save U.S.
multi-national corporations from an economic crisis.
But these factions disagree on the methods: Should
they share a tiny part of the plunder and booty with
their European allies or not? Should they respect at
least the semblance of international law or not?
If Bush is going to be discredited by the resistance
put up by occupied countries, by his own lies, by
scandals and by the failure of his own economic
policies, then it will be necessary for a replacement
to lead the very same policies more effectively.
The episode demonstrates that the U.S., despite its
superpower status, has its weaknesses. The leadership
circles in the U.S. are now in
trouble because resistance to their policies is
growing worldwide. At the same time, the affair also
shows that the "solutions" put forth by this system
consist of replacing one war criminal with another.
The professional positions that Clark held previously
in his career prove that he too will be a man who
belongs to U.S. multi-nationals and their dangerous
projects. Knowing that China is being singled out to a
greater and greater degree as a major target for the
U.S. around 2015, it is interesting to recall one
recent interview that went almost unnoticed.
Wesley Clark, questioned on the subject of Saddam,
responded that the U.S. would do much better to
express more interest in China: "During the
Cultural Revolution they had cannibalism in China. And
the same guys that ran over the students in Tiananmen,
they're still there." (Fortune Magazine, quoted in
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2003/9/21/102656.shtml)
General Jackson wasn't wrong, it seems, when he
labeled Wesley Clark as the man who wanted to start
WWIII... Progressives, despairing for their cause, do
not chose a shark that appears to be less dangerous
than the one currently in power. Progressive politics
is concerned with eliminating the system of sharks.
P.S. Wesley Clark is president of "Wesley Clark &
Associates" consulting for military industries,
administrator of WaveCrest Laboratories (closely
linked with US Military & Industrial Complex), Sirva
Corp, Messer-Griesheim, EnTrust Inc, Time Domain,
Axiom Corp, etc.. But he will not be influenced by
the interests of the multinationals...
Translated by Milo Yelesiyevich
=== 2 ===
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/BLU309A.html
Our Newest Savior - Wesley Clark
William Blum
September 23, 2003
In case anyone is still embracing any illusions that
General Wesley Clark is likely the hero who can bring
closer to fruition our belief and hope that Another
World Is Possible, here are a few more items about
this charming man.
At the start of the 78-day NATO bombing of Serbia in
1999, which he oversaw as Supreme Allied Commander in
Europe, Clark declared: "We are going to
systematically and progressively attack, disrupt,
degrade, devastate and ultimately destroy these forces
and their facilities and support unless President
Milosevic complies with the demands of the
international community."
(Los Angeles Times, 26 March 1999)
Clark was among 68 leaders charged with war crimes by
a group of international-law professionals from
Canada, the United Kingdom, Greece, and the American
Association of Jurists. The group filed its
well-documented complaints with the International
Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in The
Hague,
Netherlands, charging leaders of NATO countries and
officials of NATO itself with crimes similar to those
for which the Tribunal had issued indictments
shortly before against Serbian leaders. Amongst the
charges filed were: "grave violations of international
humanitarian law", including "wilful killing,wilfully
causing great suffering and serious injury to body and
health, employment of poisonous weapons and other
weapons to cause unnecessary suffering, wanton
destruction of cities, towns and villages, unlawful
attacks on civilian objects, devastation not
necessitated by military objectives, attacks
on undefended buildings and dwellings, destruction and
wilful damage done to institutions dedicated to
religion, charity and education, the arts and
sciences."
At one point in the bombing campaign it was reported
that "[Clark] would rise out of his seat and slap the
table. 'I've got to get the maximum violence out of
this campaign -- now!'" (Washington Post, 21 September
1999)
And last year found our hero in New Hampshire,
endorsing Democrat Katrina Swett for Congress, as
reported by the local paper. "Clark, who supports a
congressional resolution that would give President
Bush authority to use military force against Iraq,
said if Swett were in Congress this week, he would
advise her to vote for the resolution, but only after
vigorous debate."
(The Union Leader, Manchester, NH, 10 October 2002)
Bill Blum
Author, "Killing Hope: US Military and CIA
Interventions Since World War II" and "Rogue State: A
Guide to the World's Only Superpower"
www.killinghope.org
1. MICHEL COLLON: WILL WESLEY CLARK DO TOMORROW THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT HE
DID YESTERDAY?
2. WILLIAM BLUM: OUR NEWEST SAVIOR - WESLEY CLARK
A VERY IMPORTANT LINK:
Wesley Clark War Crimes amply documented:
NATO's War of Aggression against Yugoslavia
(by Michel Chossudovsky)
-> http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO309C.html
MORE DOCUMENTS:
A militarist as “peace” candidate: Retired general Wesley Clark enters
Democratic presidential race
(by Alex Lefebrve)
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/sep2003/clar-s29_prn.shtml
Enter the 'anti-war' war criminal
(by Fred Goldstein)
http://www.workers.org/ww/2003/bushiraq1002.php
'Wesley & Me': A Real-Life Docudrama
(by Norman Solomon)
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/solomon1.html
Wesley Clark: The Guy Who Almost Started World War III
(by Stella Jatras)
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/JAT309A.html
Who is Wesley Clark?
(by Stephen Gowans)
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/GOW309A.html
Gen. Wesley Clark -- War Criminal, Don't Be Fooled
(by Mitchel Cohen)
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/COH309A.html
General Wesley Clark, From Waco to Yugoslavia:
The US military was at Waco
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/clark.htm
More on Wesley Clark's career:
http://www.counterpunch.org/clark.html
US Army Page
http://www.nato.int/cv/saceur/clark.htm
Foreign Honors and Awards
http://www.jaymarlowe.com/clark.htm
Was Gen. Clark Also "Unprepared" for the Postwar?
(by Zoltan Grossman)
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0910-07.htm
General Wesley Clark (by William Fielder)
http://bigjweb.com/artman/publish/printer_956.shtml
Wesley Clark Jumps in With Kosher-Style Kickoff
http://www.forward.com/issues/2003/03.09.26/news1.clark.html
Wesley Clark: The Score
(by Srdja Trifkovic)
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/News/Trifkovic/NewsViews.htm
---
SEE MORE ARTICLES AND LINKS AT:
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/2795
War Criminal Wesley Clark for President? Including:
1. Links
2. A commentary by Rick Rozoff
3. A commentary by Mitchel Cohen
4. A commentary by Wayne Madsen at counterpunch.org
5. Extracts from http://www.zpub.com/un/clark.html (with many
interesting links!)
=== 1 ===
Will Wesley Clark Do Tomorrow The Opposite Of What He
Did Yesterday?
Latin America, Yugoslavia, China and a few other
targets
MICHEL COLLON, Belgium
September 26, 2003
Is Wesley Clark the long hoped for contender to go up
against Bush II?
Further on we will examine why certain leadership
circles in the U.S. anticipate the possibility to
"change horses". But, first of all, why this silence
about Clark's past record? Yes, you could vote for
Wesley Clark, provided that your forget about...
LATIN AMERICA (1996-97)
Clark, assigned to Panama to lead the US Southern
Command, namely, Latin American operations, supplied
various regimes that practice terror on their
citizenry with a great many military "advisors" and US
mercenaries.
During this period, Latin America experienced a sharp
increase in human rights violations. In Colombia, for
example, there were 2,400 political assassinations
(not taking into consideration the numerous incidents
of people going missing or simply vanishing) committed
by the military as well as paramilitary groups that
were trained and equipped by Wesley Clark.
The Objective: a long series of aggressions against
Chile, Cuba and many others. It's about waging brutal
combat operations against liberation movements in
Colombia, Peru, Guatemala, Mexico and Bolivia. It's
always done for the purpose of allowing U.S.
multi-nationals to continue to keep the upper hand,
with respect to economic relations, in Latin America.
The
fact that these wars were fought far away from news
cameras does not diminish Clark's responsibility.
[http://www.law.northwestern.edu/depts/clinic/ihr/
display_details.cfm?ID=120&document_type=commentary]
[http://www.nato.int/cv/saceur/clark.htm%5d
YUGOSLAVIA (1999):
What about the war against Yugoslavia? Some people saw
it as a humanitarian operation whose real goals
corresponded to its announced goals. Others
saw a hypocritical military operation that foresaw
gaining control of Balkan oil routes and the country's
markets, meanwhile eliminating workers'
self-management and the social benefits of "Yugoslav
socialism".
It seems that Clark himself could have answered this
question by drawing on the following summary he made
of his own mandate: "Potential adversaries should
recognize that Western nations are fully capable -
militarily, diplomatically and industrially - of high
intensity combat operations that include the use of
ground forces when their vital interests are involved
andeven when less-than-vital interests are involved."
Clark forgot to mention of the humanitarian pretexts
that had been so frequently invoked before and
during the war. ("Clark Recalls 'Lessons' of Kosovo,
IHT, May 3, 2000).
Be that as it may, the crimes committed during this
war by NATO, which was under the command of Wesley
Clark, are undeniable. Even though Clark, among
others, will never be convicted because international
law does not exist for the mighty.
What about criminal acts? Even though he hit a
laughably small number of Yugoslav tanks, Clark bombed
the Radio-Television building (killing 16
journalists and technicians), factories, petrochemical
complexes (which resulted in a dramatic rise in
cancers and other maladies), civilian
infrastructure (electric power generating stations), a
convoy of Albanian refugees who were returning to
Kosovo (70 victims), a passenger train...and, last but
not least, the Chinese embassy (3 victims). Which was,
in other words, a "warning" because Beijing was
supporting Yugoslav independence. And let us not omit
the use of "fragmentation bombs", which are deadliest,
in the long term, for children. And the use of
so-called "depleted" uranium shells that has polluted
the region for a long time to come. The Spanish NATO
pilot, Martin de la Hoz, protested openly against the
deliberate bombardment of civilian targets (Articulo
20, Madrid, June 14, 1999).
Far from simply being a "obedient soldier", Clark is
described by one and all as a "super-hawk" who, most
notably, wanted to bomb all the bridges of Belgrade in
order to intimidate the population. This super -
hawkishness could also be seen in his attitude right
after the war when Russian troops moved toward
Prishtina to try to protect the minority Serb
population.
Wesley Clark, in a fit of monstrous rage, demanded
that British General Jackson block the Prishtina
airport to prevent the Russians from landing.
General Jackson replied: "Sir, I'm not going to start
WWIII for you!".
Afterwards, Clark helped the terrorist militias of the
KLA (UCK) escape demilitarization, which had
nevertheless been stipulated by a UN resolution.
Today, these military mafias are conducting a reign of
terror against all of the national communities in
Kosovo as well as against a large part of the
Albanian population.
IRAK (2003):
Now that Bush has gotten entangled with the resistance
put up by the Iraqi people, Wesley Clark brags: "I
told you so". He is even trying to cultivate
an "anti-war" image through the electoral process. But
what did he say before the war? "I am
categorically certain that Saddam possesses weapons of
mass destruction" (CNN, January 18, 2001).
And what did he write on April 10 of this year? Oh,
well, he welcomed the aggression against Iraq, which
was motivated, according to him, by "strong
convictions (...) Bush and Blair can be proud of their
determination." He reasoned that "nothing could be
more moving" than the "liberation" of Baghdad and that
it was necessary to hurry up and "achieve
this great victory". He also applauded General Tommy
Franks, a war criminal who is guilty of having, on the
one hand, ordered or, on the other, having
concealed, the bombardment of civilians and attacks
against hospitals, ambulances, journalists...
And Clark, "a man of peace", has announced that "the
operation in Iraq will also serve as a point of
departure (...) for military actions against
countries that support terrorism and have deployed
weapons of mass destruction". This is an article to
which Bush could have added his by-line.
(The Times of London)
TOMORROW CHINA, AND THEN... ?
Why is Clark scaling the ladders of power? Because the
setbacks experienced by Bush have begun to disturb one
part of the leadership circle in the
United States. They are afraid that, by having
disregarded all of their allies, it is becoming
increasingly more difficult to wage the various
wars of aggression that they have prepared. In fact,
the various factions of the U.S. bourgeoisie are in
complete agreement with the plan to totally
recolonize the world in order to save U.S.
multi-national corporations from an economic crisis.
But these factions disagree on the methods: Should
they share a tiny part of the plunder and booty with
their European allies or not? Should they respect at
least the semblance of international law or not?
If Bush is going to be discredited by the resistance
put up by occupied countries, by his own lies, by
scandals and by the failure of his own economic
policies, then it will be necessary for a replacement
to lead the very same policies more effectively.
The episode demonstrates that the U.S., despite its
superpower status, has its weaknesses. The leadership
circles in the U.S. are now in
trouble because resistance to their policies is
growing worldwide. At the same time, the affair also
shows that the "solutions" put forth by this system
consist of replacing one war criminal with another.
The professional positions that Clark held previously
in his career prove that he too will be a man who
belongs to U.S. multi-nationals and their dangerous
projects. Knowing that China is being singled out to a
greater and greater degree as a major target for the
U.S. around 2015, it is interesting to recall one
recent interview that went almost unnoticed.
Wesley Clark, questioned on the subject of Saddam,
responded that the U.S. would do much better to
express more interest in China: "During the
Cultural Revolution they had cannibalism in China. And
the same guys that ran over the students in Tiananmen,
they're still there." (Fortune Magazine, quoted in
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2003/9/21/102656.shtml)
General Jackson wasn't wrong, it seems, when he
labeled Wesley Clark as the man who wanted to start
WWIII... Progressives, despairing for their cause, do
not chose a shark that appears to be less dangerous
than the one currently in power. Progressive politics
is concerned with eliminating the system of sharks.
P.S. Wesley Clark is president of "Wesley Clark &
Associates" consulting for military industries,
administrator of WaveCrest Laboratories (closely
linked with US Military & Industrial Complex), Sirva
Corp, Messer-Griesheim, EnTrust Inc, Time Domain,
Axiom Corp, etc.. But he will not be influenced by
the interests of the multinationals...
Translated by Milo Yelesiyevich
=== 2 ===
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/BLU309A.html
Our Newest Savior - Wesley Clark
William Blum
September 23, 2003
In case anyone is still embracing any illusions that
General Wesley Clark is likely the hero who can bring
closer to fruition our belief and hope that Another
World Is Possible, here are a few more items about
this charming man.
At the start of the 78-day NATO bombing of Serbia in
1999, which he oversaw as Supreme Allied Commander in
Europe, Clark declared: "We are going to
systematically and progressively attack, disrupt,
degrade, devastate and ultimately destroy these forces
and their facilities and support unless President
Milosevic complies with the demands of the
international community."
(Los Angeles Times, 26 March 1999)
Clark was among 68 leaders charged with war crimes by
a group of international-law professionals from
Canada, the United Kingdom, Greece, and the American
Association of Jurists. The group filed its
well-documented complaints with the International
Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in The
Hague,
Netherlands, charging leaders of NATO countries and
officials of NATO itself with crimes similar to those
for which the Tribunal had issued indictments
shortly before against Serbian leaders. Amongst the
charges filed were: "grave violations of international
humanitarian law", including "wilful killing,wilfully
causing great suffering and serious injury to body and
health, employment of poisonous weapons and other
weapons to cause unnecessary suffering, wanton
destruction of cities, towns and villages, unlawful
attacks on civilian objects, devastation not
necessitated by military objectives, attacks
on undefended buildings and dwellings, destruction and
wilful damage done to institutions dedicated to
religion, charity and education, the arts and
sciences."
At one point in the bombing campaign it was reported
that "[Clark] would rise out of his seat and slap the
table. 'I've got to get the maximum violence out of
this campaign -- now!'" (Washington Post, 21 September
1999)
And last year found our hero in New Hampshire,
endorsing Democrat Katrina Swett for Congress, as
reported by the local paper. "Clark, who supports a
congressional resolution that would give President
Bush authority to use military force against Iraq,
said if Swett were in Congress this week, he would
advise her to vote for the resolution, but only after
vigorous debate."
(The Union Leader, Manchester, NH, 10 October 2002)
Bill Blum
Author, "Killing Hope: US Military and CIA
Interventions Since World War II" and "Rogue State: A
Guide to the World's Only Superpower"
www.killinghope.org