You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Paul Wolfowitz’ category.
Right click to open full image… Pictograph Courtesy of Viral..
So, can someone tell me again, why we shouldn’t tax the rich, and instead, balance the budget on the backs of everyone else?…….
I seem to be missing that little detail where that all makes sense……
“I’m starting to think we really ticked off Mother Nature somehow, because we’ve been getting spanked by her for about a year now,” he said while grabbing some coffee at a convenience store…..
OF COURSE YOU DID, DUMMY. YOU VOTED FOR REPUBLICANS!
This is just so rich… It is what is wrong with America encapsulated in one tiny story?
Remember those silly people wearing red and holding up signs that said “Drill, Baby, Drill”? Remember our local political candidate who stood up to argue we should be drilling oil on the beach at Rehohoth? Remember the huge push to open all environmentally sensitive areas in Alaska and off Florida immediately, so oil companies could scoop up rights?
We needed it desperately then… or so we were told… Not everyone agreed or course…
So what’s happening now? Courtesy of WDEL and CBS news, we see that oil companies aren’t drilling any more…
But despite making record profits, today, oil companies are drilling on less than one-third of the acreage in this country that they have the rights to.
The answer given by those who cannot be trusted? “The leases aren’t being used because there’s probably no oil there,” said Felmi, the chief economist with the American Petroleum Institute.
The true answer is different. A recent U.S. Government Accountability Office report suggests otherwise. Bottom line: oil companies only “develop leases when it is most profitable to do so.”
“There are clearly oil and gas resources that are undeveloped in some of the existing leases,” said Frank Rusco, with the GAO.
The Department of the Interior estimates 68 billion barrels of oil lie in areas already accessible to drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska. But today, nearly half of the existing rigs sit idle.
Yes, half of the EXISTING rigs sit idle…. Were we schmoozed? Obviously.
The oil industry, which made nearly a quarter of a trillion dollars in profits in the last two years, an all-time high, argues that its hands are tied to shareholders. Bullshit.
When Exxon-Mobil’s earnings last year were a staggering $45 billion – the largest corporate profit ever. and while Exxon is increasing its spending on oil production by $3 billion, it is pumping over 10 times that – $35 billion – back into its stock, shareholder dividends and cash reserves. At a time when America needs more energy, needs more oil, Exxon is raking in record profits and stashing away $35 billion.
Todays reality renders moments like the cheering at the Republican National Convention virtually meaningless – at least until Exxon decides the price is finely high enough to “drill baby, drill”..
Anyone who stood up to argue in Exxon’s favor last summer… can NEVER be trusted again….They are bought out. They are just too stupid and don’t belong in government….
They should remain at home, clutching forks and knives… to eat their bacon….
Hi, this is an open letter to those at Quantico who have the unfortunate task of monitoring me. Yeah, I know that I am the most boring case you have had to deal with, but, orders are orders.
I hope in the short time you have been impressed by how much I love this nation, how exciting it is to see it grow. I know many of you had preconceived notions about bloggers, particularly those who disagree with your commander in chief, but I hope over time, you have changed your opinion.
As you know, I am a human, and have to deal with human issues…..such as needing more money than I have to raise a family. But still, life is good when you suscribe to a simple code: Duty, Honor, Country.
That is what I want to talk to you about…..You have jobs to do and you have been told that doing such will benefit our country. Hopefully you have come to understand that I love this country as much, if not more than you do…….. That arguing for a better way is not destructive to this country’s interests.
I guess the difference between you and I is that, as someone who himself must use people to accomplish my means, I can see when others are doing the same. It is one thing to do what I do in the context of making money, and sharing it with those who work for me. For when I am successful, so are they. But it is far different for someone to delude others into giving all, and then taking it for himself and disappearing.
As you have so sworn, you are there to defend the Constitution. As a matter of fact, that is why I am here as well. Following orders, makes you loyal to your commander in chief… That is fine except in this rare case. But what if …….he is not pursuing America’s best interests, which are those outlined in the Constitution? Do you still have a duty to protect the reputation of our president, or then does it become your duty to honor your country?
Most of you, who hail from a rural beginning, know what it like to take a walk in the woods. Most of you would give anything now to be back home, wandering around your homesteads. So in a sense we are working on the same line. You are working to keep America safe from external threats….That is your job and you do it well. Me, and those like me, are working to keep America safe from internal threats, often more dangerous in the long run, than those outside the country.
One must fight a bar bully and cancer in different ways. Being tough helps in a bar fight, but being sensitive, knowing exactly where the cancer is, can save ones life in this other fight. Both fights require great courage……
I know as youthful persons, you have the belief that you need to channel peoples attention away from what you are doing. You need to watch us in secret. But think for a minute of the real reason and of whom you are fighting for……Your commander in chief, or you mom and dad, brother and sisters, family and friends?……..
If your leaders actions endanger their safety, are you helping the right side?
Just questions only you can answer……But I hope as you plod through my boring epistles and phone conversations, that you keep in mind that sometimes , those in power can go a little too far off center for this country’s own good……..
And when something leans to far and starts to fall, it takes quite an effort to straighten and right it up again………..
Just keep it in mind, that’s all……
Cheney allowed civilian wiretaps before 9/11. What? Wasn’t that illegal? Apparently that was overridden by the Vice President.
Wait a minute. Didn’t the NSA have apparatus that listened for various words such as “Jihad” or “terrorist”? Yes, it did, but as soon as that was discovered to be coming from an American, the tap was dropped and the name of the person was expunged. The NSA was following the letter of the law…….
In fact, as the Bush administration was coming in, the Clinton administration, in their freshman orientation guide for incoming republicans, said in their packet Transition 2001. “Warning to the incoming administration: the agency in its quest to compete on a technological level with terrorists who have access to state-of-the-art equipment, some American citizens would get caught up in the NSA’s surveillance activities. However, in those instances, the identities of the Americans who made telephone calls overseas would be “minimized,” one former NSA official said, in order to conceal the identity of the American citizen picked up on a wiretap.”
Or so was the intent. “What we were supposed to do, was delete the name of the person,” says a former NSA encryption analyst. “Even during the Clinton years, the computers would accidentally pick up some of the key words said by Americans.” The analyst deleted those name in the reports he sent the senior analysts.
That changed in 2001. Under orders by Cheney the names were included. Furthermore, Cheney sent back orders that those persons were to continue to be surveilled 24/7. What disturbed this analyst was that some or most of these terrorists he was ordered to listen to, worked in the White House or State Department.
In a revealing statement, another analyst says: “There was a real feeling or paranoia emanating from the Vice President’s Office, and I don’t think it had to do with anything with the threat of terrorism……”
According to James Bamford, author of the best selling books The Puzzle Palace and The Body of Secrets, before 9/11 the agency was not poking as hard among regular citizens as it does now. That all changed after 9/11. However a strong case for selective spying on government officials, seems to be the focus of the Vice President during the summer before 9/11.
If you remember it was that summer(2001) that the NSA took the unprecedented step or opening its doors to reporters. The director even said on Nightline : ”
“We’re a foreign intelligence agency. We try to collect information that is of value to American decision-makers, to protect American values, America–and American lives.”
American values? Isn’t that one of the code words used by the neo-cons? American values such as the destruction of the social net, establishment of an untouchable rich caste, and the wearing down of our Armed Services through unnecessary deployments?
But in answer to that question: he continues:
“We aren’t off the leash, so to speak, guarding ourselves. We have a body of oversight within the executive branch, in the Department of Defense, in the president’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, which is comprised of both government and nongovernmental officials. You’ve got both houses of Congress with–with very active–in some cases, aggressive–intelligence oversight committees with staff members who have an access badge to NSA just like mine.”
(Hasn’t that all changed, as of August 11th?)
Today that spokesperson is head of the CIA.
So while the official voice who I believe is still today trustworthy and genuine, was speaking still on the Clinton platform of government within the law, his superior. the VP, was going behind his back to wiretap illegally.
Final thought: remember when Paul O’Neil left the administration fuming and 24 hour later 180’d and clammed up? Inner beltway speculation was that they got to him somehow.
We now know how…………………
Bottom line, before there was a war……there was an illegal act instigated by the Vice President…….Are we safer than we were under Clinton?
“I see nothing…….nothing!….”
Thanks to fellow live bloggers: Ryan Singel and David Kravets for their words and images.
Based on the judges question, an apparent victory may be at hand……..
The hearing involves two cases: one aimed at AT&T for allegedly helping the government with a widespread data-mining program allegedly involving domestic and international phone calls and internet use; the other a direct challenge to the government’s admitted warrant-less wiretapping of overseas phone calls.
In questioning of the governmental witness, this exchange occurred.
Judge Harry Pregerson suggests the government is asking the courts to “rubber stamp” the government’s claim that state secrets are at risk “Who decides whether something is a state secret or not? … We have to take the word of the members of the executive branch that something is a state secret?”
Garre counters that the courts should give “utmost deference” to the Bush administration.
Judge Pregerson: “What does utmost deference mean? Bow to it?”
Fifteen minutes later, this exchange occurs.
Judge McKeown asks whether the government stands by President Bush’s statements that purely-domestic communications, where both parties are in the United States, are not being monitored without warrants.
“Does the government stand behind that statement,” McKeown asks.
Garre: “Yes, your honor.”
But Garre says the government would not be willing to sign a sworn affidavit to that effect for the court record.
Blogger’s opinion: Pregerson, by his record, is the most liberal judge on the panel, and he clearly thinks the government is just looking for a blank check for their secret program. But the other two judges aren’t thrilled either. They seem perplexed that the government attorney can’t swear under oath that the Bush Administration isn’t warrant-lessly spying on domestic phone calls.
Proceed to the second case:
Whether the foundation’s lawyers were spied upon, which is the subject of the case, “Is itself a state secret,” Bondy argues. Expanding on that theme, the government argues that the Al-Haramain case needs to be thrown out because the secret document that the government accidentally gave the foundation is so secret that it is outside of the case.
The government claims that the plaintiff’s memories of the document can’t be allowed into the case because the only way to test them is against the “totally classified” document.
This leads to this exchange :
Judge McKeown on the TOP SECRET/TOTALLY document: “I feel like I’m in Alice and Wonderland.”
Eisenberg: “I feel like I’m in Alice in Wonderland, too.”
Al-Haramain lawyer Eisenberg argues that the government’s rationale for dismissing the cases on state secrets grounds doesn’t apply to his clients, since they already know they were surveilled from seeing the secret document.
Judge Margaret McKeown and Judge Hawkins seem unconvinced that the Al-Haramain case can continue without relying on a top-secret document that can’t be used in court.
Eisenberg also offered that the government could have the case dismissed simply by proving the court that they got a warrant.
But the panel seemed unpersuaded that the document can be used at all and generally seemed to be sympathetic to the government’s position.
Bondy, the government’s attorney, finished by reiterating that giving out any information on the alleged surveillance would help the enemy: “We just cannot confirm or deny whether they were surveilled.”
Bondy, for the government, gets the last word and neatly sums up the case for the three judges. Al-Haramain Foundation attorneys, he points out, “think or believe or claim they were surveilled.”
“It’s entirely possible that everything they think they know is entirely false,” he says.
kavips 