Una de las medidas que pueden desencadenar más desequilibrios en el futuro es la posible aprobación del tratado de Copenhague respecto a las emisiones de CO2, tema que ya hemos tratado en varios artículos. La aprobación de este nuevo convenio sobre las emisiones de dióxido de carbono tiene como objetivo, al igual que toda las manifestaciones ante esta farsa sin ninguna evidencia científica, la reducción del desarrollo tecnológico hasta llevarnos a una sociedad postindustrial, que es uno de los objetivos del Club Bilderberg [1], junto con la reducción de población, y la instauración de un Estado Policial, lo que realmente se ha conseguido, gracias a la Patriot Act, en Estados Unidos y al Tratado de Lisboa, en la Unión Europea. Este objetivo de frenar el crecimiento industrial ha quedado tan claro que Maurice Strong, en el discurso de apertura de la Cumbre Medioambiental de la ONU de 1992 en Río, afirmo que la única esperanza para el planeta era que los países industrializados colapsaran [2]. Las últimas noticias sobre la Cumbre sobre el Calentamiento Global de la ONU, basadas en las mentiras deliberadas del IPCC, que han sido denunciadas por científicos como Vincent Gray [3] o Paul Reiter [4], es la limitación por parte de los Estados Unidos de las emisiones de CO2 [5], en la declarada mayor subida de impuesto de la historia de América [6]. Todo esto como se ha demostrado, sin ninguna consideración por la ciencia y por lo que escépticos deban decir. Obama, según las últimas noticias, ofrecerá reducir las emisiones de Estados Unidos de dióxido de carbono, como buen seguidor de los objetivos de la oligarquía mundial [7], mientras Estados Unidos tiene la tercera media de temperaturas más fría desde 1895 [8]. Hasta el mismo Al Gore, el predicador de la climatología, pide un Gobierno Mundial. Por último, China ha prometido reducir en un 25% las emisiones del dichoso gas para 2020 [9] .

Otro tema interesante a tratar, y paso importantísimo ante el gobierno mundial es la creación de la moneda mundial. Mientras se anuncia el Nuevo Orden Mundial, con Obama visitando China, incitando a un nuevo orden internacional del que Estados Unidos sea la cabeza, colaborando en temas como el calentamiento global [10], se trata de formar la nueva divisa mundial. Desde septiembre saltaban noticias sobre el desarrollo por parte de la ONU de una moneda mundial que sustituyera al dólar como moneda de reserva, proponiéndose a la vez al Fondo Monetario Internacional como banco central global [11]. Recordemos el papel que jugó el FMI en la creación de la deuda en la guerra de Iraq, cuando las obras de reconstrucción de asignaban a empresas multinacionales como Halliburton, estrechamente relacionada con Dick Cheney, vicepresidente americano en aquellos momentos, con presupuestos que superaban los 50 millones de dólares para obras que empresas iraquíes estimaron que costarían 300.000 dólares [12]. Después de todas las mentiras dichas por la ONU, desde la guerra de Iraq hasta el cambio climático, ¿alguien puede creer, de verdad, que lo que proponga esta organización puede ser de provecho? Más pasos para la esclavitud global. Este es uno de los objetivos principales del Nuevo Orden Mundial [13], aunque el mayor paso adelante no ha sido desarrollado todavía: la implantación de microchips en los que todas las transacciones económicas queden registrados, es decir, el fin del dinero en efectivo y, por tanto, de una posible caída de los bancos provocada por la población ante una masiva demanda del dinero en efectivo, lo que se entiende al comprender que más del 97% del dinero únicamente existe en transacciones entre ordenadores [14]. Quizá quede alguna esperanza para quienes todavía creemos en la libertad.

Fuentes:

[1] La Verdadera Historia del Club Bilderberg, Daniel Estulin

[2] Fall Of The Republic, Alex Jones. Parte 2; Minuto 4.13

[3] Un miembro del IPCC destapa la “gran mentira” del cambio climático

[4] La Gran Estafa del Cambio Climático

[5] EEUU propondrá en Copenhague una cifra para reducir el CO2

[6] Fall Of The Republic, Alex Jones

[7] Obama irá a Copenhague y ofrecerá recortar las emisiones un 17%

[8] Frío en mal momento, Antón Uriarte 

[9] China da el gran salto por el clima

[10] Obama inaugura con China un nuevo orden

[11] La ONU propone una nueva moneda mundial para sustituir al dólar

[12] Bagdad en llamas: el blog de una joven de Iraq; Riverbend

[13] La Verdadera Historia del Club Bilderberg, Daniel Estulin

[14] Zeitgeist Addendum

John Perkins decided to finish Confessions of an Economic Hit Man after the September 11 terrorist attacks.

According to some, the September 11 terror attacks “changed everything.”

While the subsequent eight years have proven that initial assessment to be a bit overarching, there is no denying the attacks’ real impact on people throughout the world.

For the families of the victims, the death of their loved ones created a gaping and irreplaceable hole in the center of their lives.

For many in the United States, an illusion of security and invulnerability was permanently ruptured.

For other people, the attacks sparked actions that they had long considered, but not yet taken.

Childhood friend and award-winning photographer Andrew Lichtenstein married his then-longtime girlfriend Linda, for instance.  The couple has since had two children.

And for self-described Economic Hit Man John Perkins, the planes flying into the World Trade Center towers prompted him to complete Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, the book he had begun nearly 20 years before, but deferred for several reasons.

The book’s title is apt.

Perkins’ work interweaves two related narrative strands.

The first is the role of hit men like him working for a few key companies-in addition to MAIN, the company for which he worked, he also writes extensively about Bechtel and Halliburton-to perpetuate the simultaneous economic and political domination of elites and environmental degradation and exploitation of the masses in the countries throughout the world.

The second is his personal journey, starting in a small and politically conservative New Hampshire town, going through prep school at Tilton and an unsuccessful stint at Middlebury College, serving as a Peace Corps volunteer in Ecuador with his first wife, and then, through her uncle, entering the far-flung world of the hit men that takes him to, among other countries, Ecuador, Panama, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Iraq.

Perkins is a skillful writer who knows how to turn a phrase and keep the action moving briskly forward.  He has plenty of material to work with, too.  At times, Confessions reads like a James Bond yarn, with the difference being that he is working to develop models of long-term economic growth that he and others use to convince government officials to accept.  Padded with hefty profits for the contracting companies like Bechtel, the contracts also tend to ensure the country’s dim financial prospect and nearly permanent indebtedness to financial institutions like the World Bank.

Confessions also effectively provides brief historical background on the countries on which Perkins focuses before launching into his experiences in that country.

The chapter on Saudi Arabia, which takes places in 1974, shortly after the OPEC oil embargo staggered the American economy, sheds much light not only on a massive money-laundering scheme, but on many of the relationships and forces in Saudi society that received so much attention in the aftermath of September 11.

At times, Perkins reminds the reader of a economically savvy Forrest Gump, zipping from country to country, forging relationships with novelist Graham Greene and General Omar Torrijos in Panama, reconnecting with a college friend in Iran who tells him in the late 70s to leave the country, and returning in the early 2000s to the Ecuador where he had served in the Peace Corps 35 years earlier.

Perkins does not spare himself either from noting his own seduction, immersion into, and dulling of his critical faculties about, the world he enters.   At different points in the book, he says that he helped to continue a system of slavery and was himself enslaved by the material goods and lifestyle to which he had access-the second claim is less convincing than the former.

He credits a number of people, including a Colombian woman named Paula, who nudge him to consider the moral consequences of his actions.  Looking at his inflated resume is one choice of many that moves Perkins eventually to quit the agency in 1980.

The path to the book was far from a linear one, though.

Perkins started working on it after his second marriage and birth of his daughter Jessica, but decides instead to accept what amounts to a bribe to keep the project unfinished and unpublished.

He works in the energy field for a time in the 80s, deciding eventually that advocating for nuclear energy may not be the best way to go, and picks up the story after the two planes flew into the towers.

Confessions contains an epilogue, some recommendations for action, and a timeline of key personal and professional events in his life.  He closes the work by citing both Tom Paine in Common Sense and Thomas Jefferson’s fabled words to begin the Declaration of Independence.

In the end, Confessions does pull back the veil on the workings of the global economic system from the late 60s to the 80s, with a reminder in the epilogue that Bechtel and Halliburton’s strong connections to the Reagan and Bush White Houses that the ties still run deep.  This is the book’s most distinctive and sobering aspect.  The confessional dimension works less well, but still brings the reader along to the end.

While Perkins’ words may not be enough to undo his actions, but we should be glad that the terror attacks moved him to finish the project he had begun shortly after his daughter’s birth.

Length – 1:34:22

This film is astonishing, it goes in detail through the untold history of The Project for the New American Century with tons of archival footage and connects it right into the present.

This film exposes how every major war in US history was based on a complete fraud with video of insiders themselves admitting it.

This film shows how the first film theaters in the US were used over a hundred years ago to broadcast propaganda to rile the American people into the Spanish-American War.

This film shows the white papers of the oil company Unocal which called for the creation of a pipeline through Afghanistan and how their exact needs were fulfilled through the US invasion of Afghanistan.

This film shows how Halliburton under their “cost plus” exclusive contract with the US Government went on a mad dash spending spree akin to something out of the movie Brewster’s Millions, yet instead of blowing $30 million they blew through BILLIONS by literally burning millions of dollars worth of hundred thousand dollar cars and trucks if they had so much as a flat tire.

I have seen a ton of films, this film contains a massive amount of incredible footage I have never seen before anywhere, it is an historical documentary which exposes all the lies of the past so that you can understand the present. This film is a must see.

“A stunning film. It should be seen as widely as possible, in cinemas, bars, clubs, at meetings and, of course, through the internet.

I’m sure the film will continue to be a source of debate and political education for many years. Maybe until the war criminals have been brought to trial.” – Ken Loach

“In the White House, they weren’t thinking of 9/11 as an attack, but as a gift!” – Robert Steele, former CIA agent

While Massimo Mazzucco’s first political documentary, Global Deceit (2006), focused on the long list of inconsistencies in the official version of the 9/11 attacks, The New American Century explores the historical, philosophical and economic background that suggests a matrix for such events that is much closer to home than the so-called “Islamic terrorism”.

The film provides solid evidence for the true reasons behind the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, whose unfolding is described in chilling detail in a document called
“Project for the New American Century”, published in the year 2,000, that seems to have served as the actual blueprint for such dramatic events

Heard of the Yes Men? They’re an awesome group of anti-corporate, anti-globalization tricksters headed up by Andy Bichlbaum and Mike Bonanno. In their own words, they engage in “identity correction”: “Impersonating big-time criminals in order to publicly humiliate them. Targets are leaders and big corporations who put profits ahead of everything else.” Exposing the greed and dehumanization of corporate culture, they set up fake websites, get invited to speak at conferences and on television, and—in outrageous fashion—point out the seriously misguided, destructive, irresponsible actions of some of the largest corporations in the world. They also print spoof issues of major newspapers that highlight the realities of the world we live in and visions for a better one.

The Yes Men Fix the World

This past Friday, they screened their new movie, The Yes Men Fix the World, at the Mahaiwe in Great Barrington, followed by a Q&A (Andy appeared in person, Mike appeared virtually via a laptop Skype hookup)—all to benefit WBCR (Berkshire Community Radio). While I find watching their movies a little stressful, I think they’re innovative, entertaining, and important. Whether they’re impersonating Dow Chemical and highlighting their refusal to do the right thing and take responsibility for the Union Carbide disaster in Bhophal or taking on Halliburton with fake Survivaball pitches (side note: a WBCR board member appeared in a Survivaball at the beginning of the Q&A), they’re exposing the cult of consumerism and capitalism. As they say in the movie, what looks normal to those on the inside of it looks crazy to those on the outside. They provide the much-needed view from outside of the cult, offering up the craziness for all to see.

Check out their latest stunt—announcing that the Chamber of Commerce has reversed their stance on climate-change legislation (which the CoC is strictly opposed to):

Last month, as Andy was telling us in the Q&A after the screening, the Yes Men were sued for the very first time, by the Chamber of Commerce. Surprised that they haven’t been sued more often? The way Andy explained it, engaging in a lawsuit that would give the activists more opportunity to state their case and point out to the world why the corporations they target are the ones that deserve to be on trial usually isn’t in the best interests of said corporations, who spend millions of dollars trying to present a clean, shiny image to the public at large.

Next they’re screening their film in DC, and then they’re off to Copenhagen. Be sure to see the new movie, check out what they’re up to, and find out how you can get involved.

Other gems from the Q&A:

• “We’re not actually great actors at all, we just play them in front of corporate audiences.”
• “There are progressive people in government, they just don’t act that way because we’re not taking to the streets and carrying pitchforks and setting cars on fire.” (One of them noted how hard it is to find a pitchfork nowadays.)
• They’re starting to organize educational workshops for people interested in anti-corporate pransktering, “the Yes League for Something Something” (they’re still working on the name). “We give away our secrets and you can do it yourself!”

Seen either of their movies? What did you think?

Houston Chronicle

A Houston judge ruled today that Halliburton must remain as a defendant in a lawsuit alleging it and its former subsidiary KBR knowingly sent civilian truck convoys into dangerous conditions the day six drivers were killed in 2004 in Iraq.

U.S. District Judge Gray Miller found that Halliburton should remain in the case because plaintiffs have “numerous evidentiary examples of Halliburton’s involvement in the allegations giving rise to this litigation.”

Miller is considering a series of motions raised by the defendants to end three cases brought by injured plaintiffs and family members of the dead. The plaintiffs allege that KBR and its former parent, Halliburton, put profit above life in April 2004 when they deployed a convoy knowing about the heightened danger.

Miller previously dismissed the case, ruling that a civilian court could not second-guess military decisions. But the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sent the case back to Miller saying it may be possible to resolve the lawsuits without making a “constitutionally impermissible review of wartime decision-making.”

Halliburton spun off KBR in 2007. Last January it stated that it was paying off its final bill for KBR when it agreed to pay about $560 million to settle a Foreign Corrupt Practice Act case involving improper payments to Nigerian officials.

Halliburton has maintained the truck convoy lawsuits are based on KBR activity in Iraq, and Halliburton will be found to have no responsibility, legal or otherwise.

Miller did toss other corporate entities out of the lawsuit. KBR Inc. stays in the case. But KBR Holdings LLC and KBR International Inc. were let out. Also dropped from the suit were Halliburton Energy Services and DII Industries.

mary.flood@chron.com

11/24/2009 9:57:59 PM

InfoMoney:

Na manhã desta quarta-feira (25), os contratos futuros dos principais índices de ações norte-americanos negociados na Chicago Mercantile Exchange, como o S&P 500 e o Nasdaq 100, indicam uma abertura em alta das bolsas dos EUA.

Em face da procura crescente por ouro, em decorrência do enfraquecimento do dólar e do hedge contra a inflação, a cotação do metal precioso renova a máxima histórica e avança na sessão, em linha com o petróleo, que também sobe. Como resposta, as ações da Newmont Mining valorizam-se 1,5% nas negociações que precedem a abertura de Wall Street.

A Halliburton afirmou em nota que sua principal consumidora no México, a Petróleos Mexicanos, passa por dificuldades financeiras, o deverá resultar em uma queda de US$ 0,02 no lucro líquido por ação do quarto trimestre. Em meio ao cenário, os papéis da provedora de serviços petrolíferos caem 0,5% no pré-market dos EUA.

Indicadores
Na agenda econômica, destaque para o Initial Claims (11h30), medindo o número de pedidos de auxílio-desemprego por trabalhadores norte-americanos. Além disso, serão divulgados o Durable Good Orders (11h30), que avalia o volume de pedidos de bens duráveis, e a dupla Personal Income (11h30) e o Personal Spending (11h30), que avaliam a renda e o gasto pessoal do cidadão norte-americano, respectivamente.

Mais tarde, a Universidade de Michigan publica o Michigan Sentiment (12h55), que traz a confiança dos consumidores. Por fim, será divulgado o New Home Sales (13h00), que mede o número de casas novas com compromisso de venda no país; e os Estoques de Petróleo (13h30), avaliando a demanda norte-americana da commodity.

Contratos futuros

Confira o último fechamento
No pregão de terça-feira, o índice S&P 500 fechou em leve desvalorização de 0,05%, atingindo 1.106 pontos. Já o Dow Jones caiu 0,17%, em linha com o índice Nasdaq Composite, que encerrou em leve baixa de 0,31%.

	%Var Dia		Pontos	%Var 30D	%Var Ano
	S&P 500	-0,05	1.106	+2,41	+22,41
	Dow Jones	-0,17	10.434	+4,63	+18,88
	Nasdaq	-0,31	2.169	+0,68	+37,55

Tracy Barker Says State Department Employee Assaulted Her in Iraq – Feds Refused to File Charges

abc news

By DREW SANDHOLM

Nov. 20, 2009

Tracy Barker, who says a U.S. State Department employee sexually assaulted her in Iraq in 2005 has won $2.93 million in arbitration from KBR, the military contracting company that employed her. As ABC News exclusively reported, the federal government had refused to prosecute the man Barker says attacked her, even though the State Department recommended he be charged. …

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/woman-wins-million-sexual-assault-claim/story?id=9138900

The Halliburton name almost became a “household word” after the neocons started their Iraq war. I found that name “attached” to my Internet ports after sending an email to a columnist who spoke “admiringly” of what the then Vice President, Dick Cheney, liked when he travelled – diet Sprite and FOX NEWS. I sent that columnist the Internet link to pollingReport.com because FOXNEWS/Opinion Dynamics seemed to have a more favorable opinion than other polls of the work of then President George W. Bush.

I must have “spoken” out of turn – for three days later my Internet ports had visits from the Halliburton Company and DoD Network Information Services. I thought it strange to be hacked by the United States Government – for  I received my cryptographic security clearance(only thing higher was atomic) from the United States Government. But I wasn’t a neocon. If I wasn’t a neocon then, perhaps, the next question was – is he a terrorist?

Isn’t it weird when a political group – so far RIGHT that even America’s Constitution([EXPLETIVE DELETED] piece of paper) has a problem with them  – decides to check the American credentials of all other Americans – using the NSA tool?

The neocons are in a class by themselves. And the two graphs – that I have often displayed clearly shows that fact.

Although America is now on wobbly feet, many companies made a whole lot of money as America started to loose its balance.  And although America has not yet made it to fascism, there are those in America who would not mind business having the final say on things political. And business rules could take the place of that “God Damn piece of paper”. And males could take sex where ever they found it – like during cave man days. And wrong doers could be persuaded to confess using the “enhanced interrogation” technique of the  “rack and wheel”.  It’ll be just like old times – REALLY old times!

Par George Malbrunot

Le Figaro s’est procuré le « papier » que Denis Bauchard, ancien diplomate et spécialiste du Moyen-Orient à l’Institut français des relations internationales, vient de rédiger à l’issue de son séjour à Bagdad, pour le compte, notamment, des autorités françaises. Il m’a paru intéressant de vous livrer les conclusions tirées par cet analyste, bon connaisseur de l’Irak.

Bagdad est méconnaissable avec ses multiples check points gardés conjointement par des militaires irakiens et des forces de protection fournies par les contractors et ses murs anti-déflagration qui enlaidissent encore une ville ingrate.

Chaque bâtiment officiel est une forteresse fortement gardée et protégée. Ainsi Bagdad a toutes les apparences d’une ville en état de guerre même si l’ennemi reste invisible.

Cependant derrière ce quadrillage pesant, la vie continue, le pays recommence à retrouver une certaine normalité, la réalité irakienne apparaît dans toute sa complexité.

Après plus de trente ans de régime baathiste, huit ans de guerre meurtrière ave l’Iran et treize ans de sanctions internationales particulièrement rudes, l’Irak reste encore un pays sinistré même si, l’optimisme aidant, il a touché le fond de la détresse et apparaît de nouveau sur une pente ascendante de réconciliation politique et de reconstruction économique.

Almost a year after Barack Obama ascended to the White House, many of his supporters are bemused. His health care bill is a hefty improvement but it still won’t provide coverage for all Americans, and may not provide a public alternative to the over-charging insurance companies – if it passes at all. His environmental team is vandalizing the vital Copenhagen conference by saying the US — the single biggest emitter of warming gases — will not sign up to any legally binding restrictions there. He has placed the deregulation-fanatics who caused the New Depression, like Lawrence Summers, in charge of the recovery. Despite the real improvements on Bush — such as the end of torture, the resumption of stem-cell research, and opposition to the coup in Honduras — many people are asking: why he is delivering so little, so slowly?A pair of seemingly small stories about the forces warping American politics can help us to answer this question. At first glance, they will seem like preposterous caricatures, but the facts are plain. The institutions that are blocking progress on all these issues — Republicans in the Senate, and the mighty corporate lobbying machine that bankrolls both parties — have rallied over the past few months to defend two causes with very little popular support in the United States: rape and slavery. No, really. If we begin to explain how this came to pass, then we might see why the American political system is malfunctioning so badly, even after a landslide victory for change. continue reading

via Johann Hari: The Real Reason Obama Isn’t Making Much Progress.

My cousin recently wrote a blog post about how he believes the honesty of students is decreasing. He’s a teacher in the Midwest. He sees firsthand how the kids these days will not hesitate to cheat or lie to make their lives easier. And while I don’t disagree with this, I don’t really think it’s anything new. I made some pretty good money in my 2-year stint as a term paper writer in the early 2000s. But that’s neither here nor there.

Chuck Klosterman has a theory that Generation X became a generation of lazy, pessimistic slackers because the first movie we were old enough to understand was The Empire Strikes Back. I you remember that movie, you remember it ended with Han Solo being captured by Boba Fett and frozen in carbonite. It was also the episode where Luke learned that his father was Darth Vader and Leah was his sister. It was a prequel to Jerry Springer. So Klosterman’s theory is that because this was really our first memorable taste of culture, us Generation Xers grew up with a darker view of the world around us.

Let’s look at the generation going through high school right now. For some, their first cognizant memory is 9-11. They may have been alive during America’s prosperous years but they weren’t old enough to recognize it. Some of them might not even have been old enough to understand what was going on, but certainly absorbed some of the tension their parents carried around.

Enter George W. Bush.

You can say all you want about Barack Obama, but the one quality he has that George Bush lacked is the ability to think things through and not jump at the country’s whims.

So with Bush chomping at the bit to get revenge and appease the cries of the angry American mob, the leader of the free world, the most powerful person in the world, fed us a lie. Weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). Then add to that the Patriot Act and numerous other infractions against the Constitution and you’ve got yourself a guy who will put his integrity aside to further his own agenda. I mean, just look what came from it. Halliburton. Blackwater. All of the administration’s cronies were getting in on the action and getting rich off the lies of the President of the United States of America.

So why then would kids who were 10 years old at the time and have grown up seeing their President lie, cheat, and steal his way into infamy think it’s wrong to do any different? I mean, if he can do it, why can’t they? He didn’t talk like an educated man. In fact most of what came out of him mouth was unintelligible. Why would they value an education? George W. Bush didn’t put any effort into finding a middle ground with anyone else in the world. He didn’t respect other cultures. Why would the kids think they should respect anyone around them? Why wouldn’t they think that it’s ok to do whatever you want in the name of self-serving purpose.

If you think about it, it all makes sense.

Or am I way off base here. Please weigh in.

[Image Credit]

By now, you’ve probably heard about the story of Jamie Leigh Jones. In 2005, she was working for a Halliburton subsidiary in Iraq when she was gang-raped by coworkers. Four years later, Jamie is still being denied justice.

Jamie can’t pursue justice in criminal court because the rape took place overseas, and a forced arbitration clause in her contract takes away her right to file a lawsuit in the U.S. Big corporations, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, have worked for years to prevent workers from suing their employers in almost any circumstance, even sexual assault, by inserting forced arbitration language into their contracts. No one should ever be forced into arbitration just by taking a job.

Sign our petition telling the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to stop opposing the rights of rape and discrimination victims!

Concerned activists like you helped urge lawmakers to pass Sen. Al Franken’s (D-Minn.) amendment to the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill (H.R. 3326). The Franken Amendment would prevent defense contractors from requiring their employees to sign away their rights, ending once-and-for-all the practice of covering up sexual assault and discrimination claims by forcing them into arbitration.

But, shockingly, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is fighting the Franken Amendment. It sent a letter to Congress saying that it would “set a dangerous precedent” to allow rape victims into court. Sign our petition telling the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to stop opposing the rights of victims of rape and discrimination! Go to http://www.fairarbitrationnow.org.

Jamie has teamed up with organizations like Public Citizen, MoveOn.org, and others to end this injustice. Congress is still finalizing the defense appropriations bill, and considering whether to keep the Franken Amendment. Meanwhile the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is waging a massive lobbying campaign.

Don’t let the Chamber of Commerce kill the Franken Amendment! Stand up for victims of sexual assault and discrimination. Then, forward this petition to your friends so we can deliver a strong message to the Chamber of Commerce and Congress.

KBR security personnel expected casualties the night before six civilian drivers were killed and others injured in an Iraqi ambush, but sent the convoy into a combat zone anyway, according to e-mails presented in a Houston federal court Wednesday.

“There is tons of intel stating tomorrow will be another bad day,” wrote George Seagle, director of security for KBR government operations, the night before the April 9, 2004, attacks. In the e-mail presented in court, he suggested KBR halt convoys for the next day, the first anniversary of the day Baghdad fell in the U.S.-led invasion.

In a flurry of e-mails, many held under seal in the court case for the last year, various KBR employees discussed their concern about possible loss of life.

Seagle responded that he understood the pressures of big politics and contract issues might cause the fuel-delivering convoys to be sent out anyway but “we will get people injured or killed tomorrow.”

And before the ambush but on the same day, Keith Richard, chief of the trucking operation in Iraq, e-mailed KBR’s Houston headquarters saying, “we need to expedite the hiring of drivers. We need drivers in theater soon.”

Plaintiff lawyer Scott Allen presented the e-mails in a hearing before U.S. District Judge Gray Miller to determine whether a jury should hear three lawsuits against KBR.

KBR argues that as a contractor it was acting on the basis of military decisions that are not subject to review by civilian courts.

But a group of injured plaintiffs and family members of the dead allege that KBR and its former parent, Halliburton, put profit above life. They say that drivers were promised safety, but their supervisor, who had been in the military, put them in harm’s way to show the civilian company was tough enough to do jobs the military did in former conflicts.

“They were sacrificed for the profit of KBR,” said Tommy Fibich, whose client is still in a coma.

Sent back on appeal

Fibich said most of the drivers were promised that their safety would come first and they took the job to pay off debts or help put a first generation through college.

KBR lawyers argued that the e-mails and contract details are beside the point and that the case should be tossed because the military and the civilian company were intertwined and federal law prohibits courts from second-guessing military decisions.

“While KBR of course knew about the threats, the company ultimately relied on the judgments and representations of the military,” KBR attorney Ray Biagini told the judge.

Miller accepted that argument once before, tossing out all three suits on grounds that the court could not try a case questioning wartime military decisions.

But the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sent the cases back, ruling it may be possible to try the cases without making a “constitutionally impermissible review of wartime decision-making.”

Army not party to case

The cases center on the April 2004 insurgent attack on a KBR convoy of military supply trucks, which killed six civilian truck drivers and wounded 14.

The drivers caught in the ambush were delivering fuel under a multibillion-dollar contract for KBR to transport supplies, build bases, serve meals and provide other logistical support services for American troops in the Middle East.

Plaintiffs in the Houston suits are two injured workers and the family of one who was killed in the attack.

Biagini argued that nothing has changed since the appellate court asked the judge to take another look at the case. He said KBR and the military were indivisible and KBR acted in good faith on the military’s assurances of protection.

KBR lawyers argued that there are half a dozen legal theories under which the lawsuits should be thrown out of court again.

KBR lawyer David Kasanow noted that the U.S. Justice Department sent a letter agreeing the suit should not go to trial. The government letter said the Defense Base Act protects civilian employers like KBR from being sued in a case like this unless they specifically intended employees be injured or killed.

The plaintiffs argued a jury should hear the case because the e-mails show that KBR bosses did know drivers would be injured or killed.

Miller ruled earlier this year that the U.S. Army itself will not be a party to the case. The judge is now expected to take the many legal issues under advisement.

He could toss out the case, or could remove Halliburton as a defendant. Halliburton argues it is improperly named in the suit and it had no control over the events at issue.

If Miller lets the case stand, it is scheduled for jury trial next May.

Read Original Story here

mary.flood@chron.com

KBR security personnel expected casualties the night before six civilian drivers were killed and others injured in an Iraqi ambush, but sent the convoy into a combat zone anyway, according to e-mails presented in a Houston federal court Wednesday.

“There is tons of intel stating tomorrow will be another bad day,” wrote George Seagle, director of security for KBR government operations, the night before the April 9, 2004, attacks. In the e-mail presented in court, he suggested KBR halt convoys for the next day, the first anniversary of the day Baghdad fell in the U.S.-led invasion.

In a flurry of e-mails, many held under seal in the court case for the last year, various KBR employees discussed their concern about possible loss of life.

Seagle responded that he understood the pressures of big politics and contract issues might cause the fuel-delivering convoys to be sent out anyway but “we will get people injured or killed tomorrow.”

And before the ambush but on the same day, Keith Richard, chief of the trucking operation in Iraq, e-mailed KBR’s Houston headquarters saying, “we need to expedite the hiring of drivers. We need drivers in theater soon.”

Plaintiff lawyer Scott Allen presented the e-mails in a hearing before U.S. District Judge Gray Miller to determine whether a jury should hear three lawsuits against KBR.

KBR argues that as a contractor it was acting on the basis of military decisions that are not subject to review by civilian courts.

But a group of injured plaintiffs and family members of the dead allege that KBR and its former parent, Halliburton, put profit above life. They say that drivers were promised safety, but their supervisor, who had been in the military, put them in harm’s way to show the civilian company was tough enough to do jobs the military did in former conflicts.

“They were sacrificed for the profit of KBR,” said Tommy Fibich, whose client is still in a coma.

Sent back on appeal

Fibich said most of the drivers were promised that their safety would come first and they took the job to pay off debts or help put a first generation through college.

KBR lawyers argued that the e-mails and contract details are beside the point and that the case should be tossed because the military and the civilian company were intertwined and federal law prohibits courts from second-guessing military decisions.

“While KBR of course knew about the threats, the company ultimately relied on the judgments and representations of the military,” KBR attorney Ray Biagini told the judge.

Miller accepted that argument once before, tossing out all three suits on grounds that the court could not try a case questioning wartime military decisions.

But the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sent the cases back, ruling it may be possible to try the cases without making a “constitutionally impermissible review of wartime decision-making.”

Army not party to case

The cases center on the April 2004 insurgent attack on a KBR convoy of military supply trucks, which killed six civilian truck drivers and wounded 14.

The drivers caught in the ambush were delivering fuel under a multibillion-dollar contract for KBR to transport supplies, build bases, serve meals and provide other logistical support services for American troops in the Middle East.

Plaintiffs in the Houston suits are two injured workers and the family of one who was killed in the attack.

Biagini argued that nothing has changed since the appellate court asked the judge to take another look at the case. He said KBR and the military were indivisible and KBR acted in good faith on the military’s assurances of protection.

KBR lawyers argued that there are half a dozen legal theories under which the lawsuits should be thrown out of court again.

KBR lawyer David Kasanow noted that the U.S. Justice Department sent a letter agreeing the suit should not go to trial. The government letter said the Defense Base Act protects civilian employers like KBR from being sued in a case like this unless they specifically intended employees be injured or killed.

The plaintiffs argued a jury should hear the case because the e-mails show that KBR bosses did know drivers would be injured or killed.

Miller ruled earlier this year that the U.S. Army itself will not be a party to the case. The judge is now expected to take the many legal issues under advisement.

He could toss out the case, or could remove Halliburton as a defendant. Halliburton argues it is improperly named in the suit and it had no control over the events at issue.

If Miller lets the case stand, it is scheduled for jury trial next May.

Original Story here

mary.flood@chron.com

US Contract Companies are hiring 15 to 20 Third Country Nationals (Indians, Filipinos, etc) for every one American in Afghanistan. 10% of Americans out of work and DynCorps, Fluor, CACI, AECOM, KBR and all of these other “American” International Contract companies aren’t interested in hiring any of them.  Maybe they’ll hire some illegal immigrants as well.

They are keeping their bottom line in check with these moves.  Making millions of dollars in profit by stiffing the American worker.  DynCorps, KBR and Fluor can hire 20 Indians for the cost of hiring one US Citizen.  The US Government is awarding these multi-million dollar contracts to these “American” companies and they here 80-90 percent foreign employees.

What I think is even more humorous is that the US Government is making this concerted effort to break up large contracts such as the KBR LOGCAP II contract as well as others.  There are very few companies that can handle the logistics of these operations.  What ends up happening is that Company A wins the contract from the US government.  Company A then subcontracts to KBR (or whatever company) or a subsidiary of KBR.  The same company winds up with all of the contracts that they had before.  The difference is that there is now a middle man.  It’s all a shell game.  I guess Congress and the average American out there are idiots and are fooled by all of this muddling of facts and actions.

Another thing that Company B (KBR) does is form another company/corporation.  It looks like a separate company on paper but it’s indirectly owned by the same people.  They even hire the same folks from earlier contracts to run them.  Same PM, same DPM, same cast and crew.  On the surface, a new company is in business and winning contracts.  In reality, it’s the same group of folks making the same money.

And it’s easy to see.  Easy to investigate, but, the US government is too lazy or incompetent to see the obvious.  I’ve been laughing for 5 years.  Same crooks winning the same contracts and the same Congress and DOD/DOS getting scammed for more and more tax dollars.

Fools!

It’s been the same story since at least World War II.  I bet that some of these companies can be traced back to the War between the States.  The US Government never learns.  They just open that check book and sign more checks.

No, I’m not a disgruntled employee or former employee.  Most of my contract work requires that I am a US citizenship.  This doesn’t affect me and never will.

Remember when Republicans acted so tough on the issue of terrorism? You know, the days and months after 9/11. Remember when we weren’t going to allow terrorism to defeat us? Most Americans bought into that then, and we came together as a nation because of that belief, but fewer and fewer believe that in the subsequent years.

After our nation was attacked by religious extremists, our president assured us that those responsible would face justice–there was reason to believe in our nation. All that we needed to do was to go shopping, for if we allowed those terrorists to change our ways of life, they will have won. Do you remember that? All of that tough-sounding cowboy talk really got the red-blooded, “real” Americans’ juices flowing.

Time and truth, however, uncover the facades of even the most strident conservatives. As we moved farther and farther away from that infamous date of 9/11, the attacks have become less of a cause to do good, while becoming an excuse to forget that we have stronger values than others.  Behind the leadership of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, conservatives used the attacks of 9/11 to justify just about anything:  wars, wiretapping of American citizens, holding prisoners without charge, torture, assassinations, the corporate rape of the American people (think Halliburton, KBR, Blackwater), etc. 

Recently, current United States Attorney General, Eric Holder announced that the mastermind behind 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, and four of his cohorts would be tried before a federal court in New York City, the site of the attacks on the World Trade Center.  Republicans, conservatives, and some Democrats seem to have forgotten that we are a nation of laws, and they are huffing and puffing about how scary it will be to try these terrorists on American soil.  They are outraged and afraid; they want you to be outraged and afraid. 

Is it that they have so little faith in our justice system that they fear that the killers might be acquitted?  Do they fear that our law enforcement system cannot protect New York civilians?  Those are a couple of the excuses that you’ll hear, all designed to make you afraid of terrorism, all designed to paralyze this nation in fear.  It should be of no surprise, however, because conservatives have been doing this for years–using the threat of terrorism to weaken domestic opponents.  This time it is to weaken the President of the United States, Barack Obama.  It is easy to see that is the case, because terrorists were successfully tried in civilian courts during the Bush Administration, including the so-called 20th hijacker, Zacharias Moussavi.  That prosecution was supported by conservatives as a triumph of the American way of life.

Well, guess what fraidy-cats.  Trying these terrorists in the courts is not only the right thing to do constitutionally, but it is quintessentially American.  In our country, even the worst of the worst get due-process under our laws.  Even admitted murders get their day in court.  Even admitted child molestors have a right to a trial.  And yes, terrorists, domestic and foreign, must be tried and convicted if they are responsible for crimes on our soil.  Why?  Because we are America, stupid.  We do things the right way, no matter the fears of partisan politics.  If we forget that we are a nation of laws, then the terrorists have won.

This is the man that makes Republicans/conservatives wet their beds.  As an American, are you afraid of Khalid Sheikh Muhammad?

Mexico. Country to the south that has constructed a long, tall wall to separate our two frigidly friendly countries and people.  Why would Mexico do this to us? Why?

Medieval Times. Roughly 600 AD to 2009 AD; Republican Party philosophy born, adopted, adapted and subsequently spread from Florida to Louisiana. Major participants and events include Michael Steele, Rush Limbaugh, Secession, Palintology, Paleontology, War and Peace, Peace and War, Divorce, B. Kerik, Galileo, Male, Trial by Error, Wheel of Fortune, Jeopardy, Fox News, Football. (“Are you ready for some…?”)

Miscegenation. Unlawful coupling of Elephant and Donkey.

Misguided. Attempted coupling of Elephant and Donkey.

New York. Once called The Empire State now officially listed by Sotheby’s as For Sale by owner. Call M. Bloomberg. 212-$$$-$$$$.

Opinion. Thoughts of the loudest, often most incoherent. 

Palin. A rogue. See also Octomom, Cleopatra, any of The Gabors

Quest.  Search for the Holy Grail of 60 Senatorial votes. Also allergic reaction to discussion.

Republic. A substantial gathering of individuals.

Republicans. A small gathering of individuals. Sound of one hand clapping.

Scandal. Generally believed to be widespread; a form of Swine Flu and contagious. See Alleghany Trail, C Street Brotherhood, B. Madoff, N. Gingrich, Republican, Wall Street, D. Cheney, Blackwater, Halliburton, Barry and Stock Exchange Bonds, Republican Party.

Secession. See Session at Sea, Slavery, Carpetbaggers, Tea baggers, Ulysses S. Grant, “Free at last,” South Carolina, Argentina (“Don’t Weep for Me”), Rhett Butler, Levi Johnston, General Joe Johnson, Johnson & Johnson, Fort Sumter, Atlantic Ocean, Root Canal. Also “Lafayette we are here!” Merrimac and School Monitor.

Texas. A second state of denial. (Considerably larger than Florida.) See Bush 41, Bush 43, Ship of Fools, Imperfection, Palintology, Governor Perry, Hair, Fort Hood, Santa Ana Winds, Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, Santa Claus, Remember the Alamo, Remember the Titans, Tulia and Texas Monthly. Also Dallas Cowboys, Jerry and Shirley Jones, Cowboys, Indians, sharpshooters Annie Oakley and Dick (“I never heard of Valerie Plame. Isn’t that a French name?”) Cheney. Also Halliburton, Enron, Bulls—t, Global Warming – not here, Death Penalty – here, Tom Delay, Fraud, Freud, Oil, Ail, Ale, Osama bin Cheney.

Texas. Universe. Native Americans believe the word derives from Friends or Allies. (Example: With friends like these you don’t need enemies.)

University of Texas. Where no children left behind are sometimes left behind.

Utopia. Texas?

Virginia. Believer in Santa Claus. (“Yes Virginia, there is a Santa Claus…”) East of West Virginia. See also “Who’s afraid of Virginia Wolfe?” “Wolf in sheep’s clothing.” Also Ship of Fools.

War. A game likened to Monopoly, often with similar results. Preferred 17 to 1 by Republican Party members, George W. Bush and Dick (“I like shotguns”) Cheney. See also Tug Of, Decline and Fall, Hundred Years, Civil and … of the Roses.

Washington. A single United States State owned and operated by W. and M. Gates. Home of Evil Empire where lay hidden the Forbidden Apple.

Xenophobia. Fear of strangers. See Republican.

Yale. Where George W. Bush was under-educated; majored in obfuscation, Muddle East.

Zip. Number of thoughtful Republican United States Senators.

Note: See also Abridged, Unabridged, “Bridge Over the River Kwai”, Pictionary, Punxatawney.

Although this is a notably reliable compilation of “dictionary” terms and meanings that refer to politics, political parties and Ships of Fools it is possible that some definitions have been omitted. I apologize in advance for errors of omission, commission, long division, Missions Accomplished or Unaccomplished.

Warren Langer

langerw@comcast.net

illini1000@gmail.com

http://warrenlanger.wordpress.com

Those damn dirty contractors.

Each night, KBR throws out garbage cans full of food.  Contractors are not allowed to take food out of the Dining Facility.  I suppose the US Army thinks that Contractors get paid enough and they should be satisfied.  Contractors don’t need any extra benefits like taking all of that fabulous food out of the Dining Facility.  The US Army would rather throw it all in the garbage.

The message here is what?

“Fuck Contractors!  We’d rather throw all that extra food in the garbage than let them take a few scraps back to their rooms to eat.”

Typical Army bullshit.

The guy who made this rule is probably a pissed off Master Sergeant who wound up a Contractor after he retired.

That’s usually what happens.

I’ve seen it hundreds of times.  The biggest assholes that I’ve had to deal with overseas while contracting with the Army were guys who came to you at the end of their tour of duty begging for a job.  If it were up to me, I’d not hire one of them.

Bunch of hypocritical assholes all.  Fuck ‘em.

The grotesque dance of corporate legislators.

Bryan Zepp Jamieson, November 15, 2009

One of the early fallouts of “tort reform”, the ongoing drive by corporations to put themselves beyond the reach of the law, has been the widespread use of waivers mandating private arbitration in the event of any dispute. Corporations have then slipped this language into employment and service contracts, and would-be employees and customers often sign this waiver unwittingly, but in any event, if they don’t sign, they don’t get the employment or service they wanted.

How widespread is it? If you have health insurance, even if it’s through your employer, then you’ve probably signed this waiver. Nearly all health insurance companies have such a waiver, and it mandates that in the event of dispute (as, for instance, when the company decides you aren’t worth the trouble and arbitrarily decides not to pay your claim), you take it to private arbitration, the board of which is selected by the insurance company. In forty-nine states, you aren’t even allowed to discuss the results of the arbitration with anyone, and may not even reveal if you prevailed or not. California is the exception, since the state passed a sunshine law requiring the companies to publicly show the ratio of wins and losses of consumers who go through their arbitration process. The only real surprise is that the insurance companies only prevailed 95% of the time. Maybe the members of the panels would toss small bones to the most deserving, so they could go home and night and assure themselves that they weren’t total whores.

In the meantime, if you have health insurance, you’re pretty much reduced to hoping your company treats you honestly and fairly. You’ve signed away your First Amendment Right to Redress to an outfit that sees you as nothing more than a vehicle to maximizing profits. In other words (Representative Grayson’s), just hope you don’t get sick, and if you do, die quickly.

Kellogg-Brown Root, the former subsidiary of Halliburton and now spun off and known as KBR, Inc., had such a waiver as part of its terms of employ. Now, normally, that protects the company from civil suits, but not criminal complaints. You can’t sign away your right to redress under criminal law. But a lot of employees got sent over as part of the mercenary forces taking part in the occupation of Iraq.

First, because of Coalition Provisional Authority Order 17, employees of American firms over there were not subject to Iraqi legal authority unless they were acting outside the specifics of their job descriptions. The order reads, “Contractors shall not be subject to Iraqi laws or regulations in matters relating to the terms and conditions of their Contracts, including licensing and registering employees, businesses and corporations; provided, however, that Contractors shall comply with such applicable licensing and registration laws and regulations if engaging in business or transactions in Iraq other than Contracts.”

So all a Halliburton employee had to do if someone thought they were doing anything criminal was show it was just part of their job, and the local authorities couldn’t touch them.

Well, what did you expect from an occupying force? Justice?

CPA 17 was abolished after a bunch of Halliburton contractors slaughtered a dozen or so civilians at a busy down-town intersection, apparently for sport. The US was given a choice by furious Iraqis: annul that order and get the mercenaries the fuck out of there, or have the whole country blow up in their faces.

Now, there is a section of the US Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 1, § 7, called “Special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States defined”, which gives the federal government jurisdiction over crimes committed against American nationals where no other law applies. This was meant to protect Americans on the high seas, but could be applied to occupied Iraq. But the Bush administration’s Justice Department wasn’t about to enforce any laws against Dick Cheney’s former and future meal ticket.

So when Jamie Leigh Jones “found her body naked and severely bruised, with lacerations to her vagina and anus, blood running down her leg, her breast implants ruptured, and her pectoral muscles torn – which would later require reconstructive surgery” the only place she could turn to to complain about the drugging and subsequent gang rape she suffered from her coworkers, was Kellogg Brown Root itself. Armed with the rape kit she obtained from an army doctor, she approached the brass of KBR at Camp Hope in Iraq with the evidence of the assault upon her. They responded by locking her up in a storage shed with only a cot until she agreed to drop the complaint. In the meantime, the rape kit vanished.

Remember, it’s entirely possible that there are people in the employ of KBR Inc., who are not amoral human filth. It’s entirely possible.

That left her with no recourse at all. No criminal law could be applied, and she discovered, when she tried to sue, that the waiver she signed also included such on the job injuries as gang rape and sexual mutilation. Great stuff, that tort reform.

Fortunately, the 5th Circuit Court got the case anyway, and decided that justice superseded the right of corporations to evade justice. Her suit proceeded.

But freshman Senator Al Franken, when he heard about the case, realized that those waivers were a big part of the problem.

There may come a time when the vast majority of Republicans in Congress and far too many of the Democrats stop being monkeys on a stick, dancing for the corporations, but it isn’t today. Franken reached for what was in his grasp. He got an amendment through on a bill that allowed the government to refuse federal funds for companies that forced their employees or customers to sign such waivers.

Given the circumstances, a truly horrific rape followed by an even more horrific denial of justice, it’s hard to imagine that anyone would not support such an amendment. But 30 Senators, the following, voted against it: Alexander (R-TN) Barrasso (R-WY) Bond (R-MO) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burr (R-NC) Chambliss (R-GA) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Corker (R-TN) Cornyn (R-TX) Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) Ensign (R-NV) Enzi (R-WY) Graham (R-SC) Gregg (R-NH) Inhofe (R-OK) Isakson (R-GA) Johanns (R-NE) Kyl (R-AZ) McCain (R-AZ) McConnell (R-KY) Risch (R-ID) Roberts (R-KS) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Thune (R-SD) Vitter (R-LA) Wicker (R-MS)

Yup. All Republican. All men. The four Republican women in the Senate voted for it. A lot of people were furious at those 30 Senators.

A viral video of David “Diapers” Vitter, stalwart champion against sexual misbehavior, running away from a young woman and self-described rape victim who demanded he account for his vote against the amendment kept the vote in in the public eye, and a month later, Republican Senators were astounded by the fact that they were still getting political blowback over it. One of them, Thune, even whined that they only wanted to protect Halliburton/KBR from the vile liberal machinations of Franken. (The legislation does not mention Halliburton/KBR).

A Think Progress article marveling over the Republican tone deafness quoted one of their bloggers, BarbinMD as writing, “Seriously? They voted against an amendment that was prompted by the brutal gang-rape of a young woman by her co-workers while she was working for a company under contract for the United States government, after which she was locked in a shipping container without food or water, threatened if she left to seek medical treatment, and was then prevented from bringing criminal charges against her assailants. And they failed to anticipate the political consequences?”

Well, Thune, like his 29 fellow Senators, is just a monkey on a stick.

I wonder what he would think of similar legislation that went a little beyond requiring companies doing contractual work for the government to not have that waiver clause. This legislation, passed several days earlier, cuts off federal funding immediately for any organization that has been accused of any of the following:

1. Any organization that has been indicted for a violation under any Federal or State law governing the financing of a campaign for election for public office or any law governing the administration of an election for public office, including a law relating to voter registration.
2. Any organization that had its State corporate charter terminated due to its failure to comply with Federal or State lobbying disclosure requirements.
3. Any organization that has filed a fraudulent form with any Federal or State regulatory agency.
4. Any organization that (A) employs any applicable individual, in a permanent or temporary capacity; (B) has under contract or retains any applicable individual; or (C) has any applicable individual acting on the organization’s behalf or with the express or apparent authority of the organization.

Well, that would certainly eliminate Halliburton/KBR from any federal funding. Halliburton/KBR are under indictment for murder, rape, torture, endangering American troops, poisoning American troops, and selling arms to the insurgents.

In fact, it’s a tad broad. You could apply it to nearly every private contractor doing business with the government. Certainly every major military contractor would be disallowed under those provisions. Most of them haven’t just been accused of such items, but indicted and convicted. There are outfits that have been fined hundreds of millions of dollars for committing fraud against the government who are still doing business with the government, and getting billions of tax dollars, often so they can lie to and cheat the taxpayers even more.

But so far, it’s only been applied to one contractor, a real tiny one that only got a measly $25 million a year from the Feds. And it wasn’t convicted of anything; in fact, it hasn’t even been indicted.

That outfit, of course, was the dread ACORN. They got their funding cut in what was supposed to be “one-armed blind man” legislation (H. R. 3571) that in fact, was written so broadly that it can be used to eliminate the entire military industrial complex. All because an ACORN volunteer got caught groping on a highly suspect video for an answer to an outlandish question about the tax status of child prostitution.

I think you’ll agree that’s right up there with drugging, gang-rape, false imprisonment and destroying evidence, wouldn’t you?

So where were the thirty Republicans who were incensed at legislation designed to make sure that companies getting tax dollars respect the legal rights of their customers and employees?

Oh, they all supported it, of course.

Monkeys on a stick.

In New York State, no horizontal wells have been drilled in the Marcellus or Utica shale, though these formations have been tapped in Pennsylvania and Canada. (Horizontal wells access more of the formation, allowing for greater recovery rates of natural gas, but this makes them more likely to contaminate water supplies.)

Tapping these huge reserves helped push natural gas prices down to less than $3 per thousand cubic feet earlier this year. Because of the high production costs of shale plays, some energy analysts say a price of $7 to $8 is needed to turn a profit.

But the price crash hasn’t stopped the gas rush. While the severe recession has reduced consumption, it has made many rural residents look to the gas companies for jobs and royalties to stimulate moribund regional economies.

Companies such as Hess Corp., Chesapeake Energy, Fortuna Energy and XTO Energy are offering hundreds of millions of dollars to lease land in New York State. In one instance, Fortuna Energy offered some landowners in New York State $500 an acre now with an additional $5,000 if the state approve drilling. It was a naked attempt to organize a small, but vocal constituency for unfettered drilling.

via The Indypendent » The Boom.

Earlier this week I posted an article from a guest author to my blog.  Since reading her post and doing some additional research, the issue has come to disgust me even more.  As I posted in a comment to her article, Politico stated that the Republicans had a strategic error in allowing the vote to go for a Roll Call rather than a voice vote.  I think this error is a blessing, for it lets the public know where elected representatives really stand.

The text of Senator Franken’s Amendment is as follows:

• Sec. 8104. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used for any existing or new Federal contract if the contractor or a subcontractor at any tier requires that an employee or independent contractor, as a condition of employment, sign a contract that mandates that the employee or independent contractor performing work under the contract or subcontract resolve through arbitration any claim under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or any tort related to or arising out of sexual assault or harassment, including assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, false imprisonment, or negligent hiring, supervision, or retention.
• (b) The prohibition in subsection (a) does not apply with respect to employment contracts that may not be enforced in a court of the United States.”

In interviews I have watched, those who voted against the Amendment (Franken Amdt. No. 2588), seem to be under the misguided idea that they have no responsibility to change the actions of Halliburton / KBR, or any other Government Contractor.  I have italicised Government contractor because of the first word – Government.  This means that our government, with our tax money, has selected these companies.  It means that they are beholden to the citizens of the US for their actions.  For any elected representative to state otherwise is absolutely ridiculous. 

In most business, I always like to ask myself the question, “How would you feel if it was yourself/family member/neighbor in this situation.”  I can guarantee you, that if it was the representative’s daughter who was gang raped, that there would be a witch hunt going on.  Instead, what we have, is the revealing of what these representatives really feel about the appropriate actions the government and its hired help should take towards your daughter, sister, wife, or neighbor. 

In the uproar’s aftermath, the great responses included such fallacy as this: ““This would be a major, fundamental change in U.S. labor law and I believe it would be very detrimental to employees to eliminate arbitration as an option,” Isakson said.”  (The Sun News)    I’ll convert this statement by Senator Isakson to english for the rest of us: “Allowing rape by US contractors is fine.” 

Before my anger at these Senators overrides the rest of my good judgement and I go overboard, I’ll present the good names, and states, of those who oppose allowing American citizens the chance to have their day in court against companies, funded by the US government, that allow these practices to go on:

I have bolded Senator McCain’s name here for a specific reason.  He is one of the members of Congress that I used to respect the most.  However, I believe the Maverick has lost his steam, his drive, and his innate, fundamental sense of what is right and wrong.  Not only did he oppose Franken’s amendment, last year he also voted against the torture ban. 

My only question really at this point for the Republican Party is this – WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?

Des dizaines de militaires américains ont déposé 34 plaintes un peu partout aux Etats-Unis contre la société KBR qu’ils accusent d’avoir incinéré dans des décharges à ciel ouvert toutes sortes de déchets toxiques pour leur santé en Irak et en Afghanistan.

Selon une de leurs avocates Susan Burke interrogée mardi, «34 plaintes ont été déposées depuis novembre 2008, dont 18 ces derniers jours». «Toutes les actions réparties dans plus de 30 Etats sont rassemblées en une devant un juge fédéral du Maryland pour toute la procédure précédant les procès qui se tiendront séparément», a-t-elle expliqué à l’AFP.

Chacune des plaintes représente plusieurs soldats mais parle au nom d’«au moins 100 00 autres» qui souffrent de problèmes de santé en raison des émanations provenant de l’incinération des déchets sur des bases militaires.

Les sociétés de services pétroliers Kellog Brown & Root et son ancienne maison-mère Halliburton, qui a été dirigée par l’ancien vice-président Dick Cheney, étaient sous contrat avec le gouvernement américain pour détruire les déchets des bases et des camps en Irak et en Afghanistan.

Dans une des plaintes, déposée devant le tribunal fédéral de Nashville et dont l’AFP s’est procuré copie, les plaignants affirment que les faits «ont commencé en 2003 et demeurent inchangés jusqu’à la date d’aujourd’hui». Pour eux, KBR et Halliburton étaient «motivés par le gain financier».

Ils décrivent le type de déchets brûlés dans ces décharges: «camions, pneus, piles au lithium, mousse de polystyrène, papier, bois, caoutchouc, produits pétroliers lubrifiants, métaux, huile hydraulique, boites de munitions, déchets médicaux, corps humains, articles médicaux, peinture, solvants, amiante, produits contenant des pesticides, tuyaux en plastique, carcasses animales, produits chimiques dangereux, et centaines de milliers de bouteilles en plastique».

L’exposition à l’«épaisse fumée» qui émanait de l’incinération a, toujours selon la plainte, «créé un grave danger pour la santé» des militaires en poste en Irak et en Afghanistan, dont certains souffrent aujourd’hui de troubles respiratoires ou d’asthme.

Les plaignants accusent KBR et Halliburton entre autres de «négligence», «mise en danger de leur intégrité physique», «nuisance», «détresse émotionnelle», «conduite délibérée et volontaire», «négligence dans l’embauche, la formation et la supervision» des personnels ou encore «non respect de l’obligation d’alerte». Ils réclament des compensations financières.

Dans un communiqué sur son site internet, KBR rejette ces allégations. La société affirme notamment que c’est l’armée américaine qui «créé une liste des articles interdits à l’incinération déterminant quel déchet peut être placé dans la décharge»
cyberpresse

Pauvres soldats, encore une fois, ils sont sacrifiés sur l’hotel du pognon et de la cupidité. Et dire que ces jeunes ont signé….

Plus de 100 000 soldats, ce n’est pas rien, et quand on apprend que c’est le vice président lui même, celui qui envoyait les soldats, qui possède des parts dans les sociétés incriminées, je ne comprends pas qu’un ancien soldat empoisonné n’aille se venger !

C’est le comble du malsain, empoisonner ses propres soldats, ils l’avaient déja fait lors de la première guerre du Golfe, et voila qu’ils remettent ça.
C’est dans ces moments là que l’on comprend comment les élites se foutent de leurs propres concitoyens.Ils se foutent de tuer, empoisonner, massacrer, ou emprisonner n’importe qui.Nous sommes tous pareils pour ces gens la, nous sommes du bétail.
Et c’est le moment d’aller à l’abattoir, nous avons fait ce que nous avions à faire, enrichir les élites et maintenant, nous ne servons plus à rien.

C’est tout même stupéfiant que les plaintes ne concernent que les soldats déployés dans ces pays et n’associent pas les habitants.
Ces soldats sont trop cons, égoïstes jusqu’au bout.