Important editorial re government response.
Yes, Steve Aftergood is made out to be wearing a black hat re wikileaks indiscretions, BUT better safe than sorry, as the disclosures ARE highly risky if taken out of a whole context of reactions. This outlines but one of them.
The US State Department is a sorry mess, imho. Will it straighten out?
Cumbaya ...
TREASURY CLASSIFICATION GUIDE, AND OTHER RESOURCES
The Department of the Treasury has recently produced a consolidated classification guide, detailing exactly what kinds of Treasury information may be classified at what level and for how long. It is in such agency classification guides, not in high-level government-wide policy statements, that the nuts and bolts of government secrecy policy are to be found, and perhaps to be changed. See "Security Classification Guide" (pdf), Department of the Treasury, December 2010.
The Congressional Research Service yesterday offered its assessment of the Stuxnet worm, which was evidently designed to damage industrial control systems such as those used in Iran's nuclear program. See "The Stuxnet Computer Worm: Harbinger of an Emerging Warfare Capability" (pdf), December 9, 2010.
Intelligence historian Jeffrey Richelson has written what must be the definitive account of the rise and fall of the National Applications Office, the aborted Department of Homeland Security entity that was supposed to harness intelligence capabilities for domestic security and law enforcement applications. The article, which is not freely available online, is entitled "The Office That Never Was: The Failed Creation of the National Applications Office." It appears in the International Journal of Intelligence and Counter Intelligence, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 65-118 (2011).
The latest issue of the Journal of National Security Law & Policy (vol. 4, no. 2) is now available online. Entitled "Liberty, terrorism and the laws of war," it includes several noteworthy and informative papers on intelligence and security policy.
Showing posts with label rule of law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rule of law. Show all posts
December 10, 2010
Govt Response to Wikileaks Said to Cause More Damage | Secrecy News
September 24, 2008
Secret CIA prison scandal will affect Polish relations with Europe and America
Agnieszka Bienczyk-Missala [Analyst, Polish Institute of International Affairs]: "In August 2008 the Public Prosecutor's Office in Poland started an investigation on the existence of secret CIA detention facilities in Poland. It happened three years after the revealing information published by the Washington Post and Human Rights Watch. So far, all consecutive Polish governments have neglected the issue, denying the CIA operated a secret prison in Poland.
Yet it is highly probable that the state investigation will confirm Poland hosted illegal CIA prisons. The crucial step will gathering evidence of practicing torture. According to the Polish Penal Code, legal proceedings should be launched against decision makers and perpetrators. Any person who commits this kind of act shall be subject to imprisonment of from one to ten years. In cases of crimes against prisoners of war the term of imprisonment could be as much as twenty five years. As alleged offenders will likely be CIA officers and other American citizens, it will be extremely difficult to bring the legal proceedings to an end, as the American government will probably not be willing to cooperate. In addition, it is worth mentioning, that all victims of unlawful detention, torture and ill-treatment in Poland can claim compensation before Polish courts and have a right to submit a complaint against Poland to the European Court on Human Rights in Strasbourg.
At the beginning of scandal three years ago, representatives of the European Union and the Council of Europe turned attention to serious consequences, which may happen in cases of evidence of torture and detention of terrorism suspects in secret locations in Poland and Romania. According to Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union, the member state, which seriously violates principles of democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law can be suspended from certain rights, including voting rights. Similar procedures are envisaged by the statutes of the Council of Europe. Any member of the Council of Europe which has seriously violated the principles of the rule of law and of the enjoyment by all persons within its jurisdiction of human rights may be suspended from its rights of representation and even requested to withdraw.
Launching the above procedures seems rather unlikely. It would be necessary to interpret whether administering secret prisons and practicing torture by foreign secret service personnel constitutes a serious breach of the afore mentioned principles. The Council of Europe has never taken the decision of suspending a state that systematically practices torture, like Russia or Turkey. Moreover, the international reports suggested that 14 European countries had cooperated with the CIA program and some European leaders, like Javier Solana, EU High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy, were aware of CIA rendition flights. Political reasons will play a decisive role, and Poland and Romania are unlikely to suffer serious consequences on the international level. At the same time the present Polish government will be able to use the issue of secret detention facilities in political fights with opposition parties who can be held responsible for cooperation in the rendition program.
The whole issue has a very negative impact on the image of Poland in Europe. It will also influence, to some extent, Polish-American relations. Most Poles are very critical about the existence of CIA prisons in Poland and they become more and more critical of US policy. For years Polish society has been the most pro-American group in the European Union, but this attitude is changing. Now Poles pay greater attention to the behavior of their government toward Washington and the government cannot disregard the state of public opinion."
Yet it is highly probable that the state investigation will confirm Poland hosted illegal CIA prisons. The crucial step will gathering evidence of practicing torture. According to the Polish Penal Code, legal proceedings should be launched against decision makers and perpetrators. Any person who commits this kind of act shall be subject to imprisonment of from one to ten years. In cases of crimes against prisoners of war the term of imprisonment could be as much as twenty five years. As alleged offenders will likely be CIA officers and other American citizens, it will be extremely difficult to bring the legal proceedings to an end, as the American government will probably not be willing to cooperate. In addition, it is worth mentioning, that all victims of unlawful detention, torture and ill-treatment in Poland can claim compensation before Polish courts and have a right to submit a complaint against Poland to the European Court on Human Rights in Strasbourg.
At the beginning of scandal three years ago, representatives of the European Union and the Council of Europe turned attention to serious consequences, which may happen in cases of evidence of torture and detention of terrorism suspects in secret locations in Poland and Romania. According to Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union, the member state, which seriously violates principles of democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law can be suspended from certain rights, including voting rights. Similar procedures are envisaged by the statutes of the Council of Europe. Any member of the Council of Europe which has seriously violated the principles of the rule of law and of the enjoyment by all persons within its jurisdiction of human rights may be suspended from its rights of representation and even requested to withdraw.
Launching the above procedures seems rather unlikely. It would be necessary to interpret whether administering secret prisons and practicing torture by foreign secret service personnel constitutes a serious breach of the afore mentioned principles. The Council of Europe has never taken the decision of suspending a state that systematically practices torture, like Russia or Turkey. Moreover, the international reports suggested that 14 European countries had cooperated with the CIA program and some European leaders, like Javier Solana, EU High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy, were aware of CIA rendition flights. Political reasons will play a decisive role, and Poland and Romania are unlikely to suffer serious consequences on the international level. At the same time the present Polish government will be able to use the issue of secret detention facilities in political fights with opposition parties who can be held responsible for cooperation in the rendition program.
The whole issue has a very negative impact on the image of Poland in Europe. It will also influence, to some extent, Polish-American relations. Most Poles are very critical about the existence of CIA prisons in Poland and they become more and more critical of US policy. For years Polish society has been the most pro-American group in the European Union, but this attitude is changing. Now Poles pay greater attention to the behavior of their government toward Washington and the government cannot disregard the state of public opinion."
Opinions expressed in JURIST's Hotline are the sole responsibility of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of JURIST's editors, staff, or the University of Pittsburgh.
September 21, 2008
ACTIVISM: Recommendations From Bush War Crimes Prosecution Conference
I also suggested a WAR CRIMES SCHOLARSHIP FUND !!!
And believe me, it WAS a conference !!
Virginia
Submitted by davidswanson on Thu, 2008-09-18 15:01.
* Criminal Prosecution
By Sherwood Ross
ANDOVER , MASS. (Special) -- Twenty recommendations made at a conference on prosecuting President George Bush for war crimes are under consideration for action, according to conference convener Lawrence Velvel, a prominent law school dean.
"Attendees discussed the violations of international and domestic law that were committed and are now studying recommendations for action," said Velvel. “All of us feel that those who committed war crimes and other crimes against humanity must be held accountable," he said. “The continued viability of Nuremberg Principles barring aggressive war and torture depends on it.”
More than 120 public officials, lawyers, academics, and authorities on the U.S. Constitution and international law attended the two day conference, which was held in Andover , Massachusetts on September 13th and 14th.
The conference resulted in recommendations ranging from asking the next U.S. Attorney General to prosecute Bush, to having any of some 2,700 county district attorneys launch proceedings against him for murder, to having Bush prosecuted for war crimes in other countries.
A newly formed committee will decide which of the suggestions can practicably be pursued.
The complete list of possible actions is:
1. Working for the election of district attorneys who pledge to prosecute high level war criminals for murder under state law, and working for the reelection of district attorneys who pledge to prosecute such criminals for murder.
2. Working for the election of state attorneys general who pledge to prosecute high level war criminals for murder under state law.
3. Working for the election of local executive and legislative officials (e.g., city council members) in specified localities who will formally denounce war crimes and might even seek to take action against them, as apparently has occurred in Vermont.
4. Mandamus proceedings to force local prosecutors to act.
5. Requesting state bar authorities to disbar the lawyers who were part of the executive cabal to authorize torture and other abuses that are crimes under international law, domestic law, or both.
6. Teach-ins at universities on the question of war crimes.
7. Asking universities to conduct hearings on whether certain individuals (e.g., John Yoo, Jack Goldsmith) should be dismissed from faculties for aiding and abetting criminal acts.
8. A march of many thousands of American lawyers on the Department of Justice (a la Civil Rights or Viet Nam war marches or the million man march). The purpose of the march would be to highlight lawyers’ belief that crimes were committed and must be punished.
9. Seeking prosecutions of high level war criminals before foreign courts or before international tribunals such as the International Criminal Court.
10. Asking the next federal Attorney General to prosecute war criminals.
11. Seeking major congressional investigations of what occurred.
12. Obtaining inspector general reports of what was done in given federal departments like the Department of Justice, the Pentagon, the State Department, the CIA, etc.
13. A truth and reconciliation commission.
14. Impeachment, even after the culprits leave office. And, unless he resigns from the federal bench, Jay Bybee, who collaborated with John Yoo on the first torture papers, will still be in office after the election.
15. Legislative or judicial action to dramatically cut back on, and sometimes totally eliminate, the present vast overuse by the federal government of the state secrets doctrine, executive privilege and other such doctrines.
16. Repeal of immunity amendments (which, even if not repealed, may have tremendous holes in them with regard to federal prosecutions, are unlikely to have any immunizing effect at the state level (though they may nonetheless be claimed as a defense), and whose only effect on foreign and international prosecutions would be to encourage them because these amendments indicate that the American federal government (like the governments of Argentina and Chile for many years) refuses to take action against federal criminals.
17. Resisting pardons, particularly advance pardons by Bush or the next president before there are convictions.
18. Creating an office of Chief Prosecutor(s), with Vince Bugliosi as Chief Prosecutor for domestic actions and perhaps a Co-Chief Prosecutor, with international prosecutorial experience, as Chief Prosecutor for foreign and international actions. This office would handle prosecutions in which governmental officials are willing to use “our” designated chief prosecutor as the lead lawyer, and would advise governmental prosecutors who desire to handle the prosecutions themselves but are willing to use “our” chief prosecutor as an adviser.
19. Setting up an internet-accessible repository, or library, of information on the pertinent war crimes, so that persons will have ready access to all relevant information. The repository, or library, should be cross indexed by subject matter, and should include briefs, articles, books, memos, speeches, etc. -- anything that sheds light on what was done.
20. Considering what, if anything, can be done to overcome the current ineptitude, failure and sometimes even deliberate hiding of facts by the corporate mass media, and to consider how the web might be used to accomplish this.
Vincent Bugliosi, former Los Angeles county prosecutor, extensively explained the legal reasoning under which Bush can be prosecuted for murder once he is no longer president. Bugliosi added that “No Federal, state or local statute says there is any person who can't be prosecuted for murder."
Bugliosi said that, of the 2,700 district and county attorneys having the power to prosecute, "There should be one prosecutor bold enough to say 'No man is above the law'. I am looking for that courageous prosecutor and I am not going to be satisfied until I see George W. Bush in an American courtroom prosecuted for murder."
Bugliosi said the evidence of U.S. war crimes in Iraq was overwhelming. "There are over 100 books” providing facts to underpin“ bringing Bush to prosecution for the deaths of 4,000 American soldiers under false pretenses," Bugliosi said.
Philippe Sands, director of the Centre of International Courts and Tribunals at University College , London , discussed violations of law such as torture. He said that "Under the Convention Against Torture, any person who has tortured anywhere in the world can be arrested in the United Kingdom " if they enter that country.
Political scientist Christopher Pyle of Mt. Holyoke College , S. Hadley, Mass. , spoke for many Conference attendees when he said, “The evidence is overwhelming. The torture, kidnapping, and degradation of suspected terrorists was part of a deliberate policy, hatched and concealed at the highest levels of the Bush administration.” Pyle said the nation does not need any “truth commission” that will offer immunity to suspects who confess their crimes because “if there is no threat of punishment, and therefore no prospect of plea bargains, why would underlings admit anything?”
Any attempt by President Bush to pre-pardon himself or any of his aides involved in war crimes and torture would be “an obstruction of justice,” said Pyle.
He suggested one approach could be to appoint “a non-partisan prosecutor with considerable independence,” much as Attorney General Elliot Richardson did when he chose Archibald Cox to lead the Watergate team. “A special prosecutor could be chosen by the next attorney general from among any number of distinguished Republican attorneys.”
Professor Amy Bartholomew of Carleton University , Ottawa , told the conference that the Bush administration was attempting to replace the Nuremberg Principles adopted after World War Two with “a global and transnational state of exception” under which the U.S. can invade countries with impunity.
Peter Weiss of the Center For Constitutional Rights pointed out that there is no need for any new legislation to outlaw aggressive war, since “It is already outlawed by Article 2 of the United States Charter.”
Dean Velvel summarized the conference proceedings by saying, “In a nutshell, this conference was about giving continued life to the Nuremberg principles, which our country itself established, instead of allowing guilty members of the Bush Administration to destroy those principles wholesale by committing aggressive war and torture with impunity.”
(For additional information contact Sherwood Ross, sherwoodr1@yahoo.com)
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.
"Attendees discussed the violations of international and domestic law that were committed and are now studying recommendations for action," said Velvel. “All of us feel that those who committed war crimes and other crimes against humanity must be held accountable," he said. “The continued viability of Nuremberg Principles barring aggressive war and torture depends on it.”
More than 120 public officials, lawyers, academics, and authorities on the U.S. Constitution and international law attended the two day conference, which was held in Andover , Massachusetts on September 13th and 14th.
The conference resulted in recommendations ranging from asking the next U.S. Attorney General to prosecute Bush, to having any of some 2,700 county district attorneys launch proceedings against him for murder, to having Bush prosecuted for war crimes in other countries.
A newly formed committee will decide which of the suggestions can practicably be pursued.
The complete list of possible actions is:
1. Working for the election of district attorneys who pledge to prosecute high level war criminals for murder under state law, and working for the reelection of district attorneys who pledge to prosecute such criminals for murder.
2. Working for the election of state attorneys general who pledge to prosecute high level war criminals for murder under state law.
3. Working for the election of local executive and legislative officials (e.g., city council members) in specified localities who will formally denounce war crimes and might even seek to take action against them, as apparently has occurred in Vermont.
4. Mandamus proceedings to force local prosecutors to act.
5. Requesting state bar authorities to disbar the lawyers who were part of the executive cabal to authorize torture and other abuses that are crimes under international law, domestic law, or both.
6. Teach-ins at universities on the question of war crimes.
7. Asking universities to conduct hearings on whether certain individuals (e.g., John Yoo, Jack Goldsmith) should be dismissed from faculties for aiding and abetting criminal acts.
8. A march of many thousands of American lawyers on the Department of Justice (a la Civil Rights or Viet Nam war marches or the million man march). The purpose of the march would be to highlight lawyers’ belief that crimes were committed and must be punished.
9. Seeking prosecutions of high level war criminals before foreign courts or before international tribunals such as the International Criminal Court.
10. Asking the next federal Attorney General to prosecute war criminals.
11. Seeking major congressional investigations of what occurred.
12. Obtaining inspector general reports of what was done in given federal departments like the Department of Justice, the Pentagon, the State Department, the CIA, etc.
13. A truth and reconciliation commission.
14. Impeachment, even after the culprits leave office. And, unless he resigns from the federal bench, Jay Bybee, who collaborated with John Yoo on the first torture papers, will still be in office after the election.
15. Legislative or judicial action to dramatically cut back on, and sometimes totally eliminate, the present vast overuse by the federal government of the state secrets doctrine, executive privilege and other such doctrines.
16. Repeal of immunity amendments (which, even if not repealed, may have tremendous holes in them with regard to federal prosecutions, are unlikely to have any immunizing effect at the state level (though they may nonetheless be claimed as a defense), and whose only effect on foreign and international prosecutions would be to encourage them because these amendments indicate that the American federal government (like the governments of Argentina and Chile for many years) refuses to take action against federal criminals.
17. Resisting pardons, particularly advance pardons by Bush or the next president before there are convictions.
18. Creating an office of Chief Prosecutor(s), with Vince Bugliosi as Chief Prosecutor for domestic actions and perhaps a Co-Chief Prosecutor, with international prosecutorial experience, as Chief Prosecutor for foreign and international actions. This office would handle prosecutions in which governmental officials are willing to use “our” designated chief prosecutor as the lead lawyer, and would advise governmental prosecutors who desire to handle the prosecutions themselves but are willing to use “our” chief prosecutor as an adviser.
19. Setting up an internet-accessible repository, or library, of information on the pertinent war crimes, so that persons will have ready access to all relevant information. The repository, or library, should be cross indexed by subject matter, and should include briefs, articles, books, memos, speeches, etc. -- anything that sheds light on what was done.
20. Considering what, if anything, can be done to overcome the current ineptitude, failure and sometimes even deliberate hiding of facts by the corporate mass media, and to consider how the web might be used to accomplish this.
Vincent Bugliosi, former Los Angeles county prosecutor, extensively explained the legal reasoning under which Bush can be prosecuted for murder once he is no longer president. Bugliosi added that “No Federal, state or local statute says there is any person who can't be prosecuted for murder."
Bugliosi said that, of the 2,700 district and county attorneys having the power to prosecute, "There should be one prosecutor bold enough to say 'No man is above the law'. I am looking for that courageous prosecutor and I am not going to be satisfied until I see George W. Bush in an American courtroom prosecuted for murder."
Bugliosi said the evidence of U.S. war crimes in Iraq was overwhelming. "There are over 100 books” providing facts to underpin“ bringing Bush to prosecution for the deaths of 4,000 American soldiers under false pretenses," Bugliosi said.
Philippe Sands, director of the Centre of International Courts and Tribunals at University College , London , discussed violations of law such as torture. He said that "Under the Convention Against Torture, any person who has tortured anywhere in the world can be arrested in the United Kingdom " if they enter that country.
Political scientist Christopher Pyle of Mt. Holyoke College , S. Hadley, Mass. , spoke for many Conference attendees when he said, “The evidence is overwhelming. The torture, kidnapping, and degradation of suspected terrorists was part of a deliberate policy, hatched and concealed at the highest levels of the Bush administration.” Pyle said the nation does not need any “truth commission” that will offer immunity to suspects who confess their crimes because “if there is no threat of punishment, and therefore no prospect of plea bargains, why would underlings admit anything?”
Any attempt by President Bush to pre-pardon himself or any of his aides involved in war crimes and torture would be “an obstruction of justice,” said Pyle.
He suggested one approach could be to appoint “a non-partisan prosecutor with considerable independence,” much as Attorney General Elliot Richardson did when he chose Archibald Cox to lead the Watergate team. “A special prosecutor could be chosen by the next attorney general from among any number of distinguished Republican attorneys.”
Professor Amy Bartholomew of Carleton University , Ottawa , told the conference that the Bush administration was attempting to replace the Nuremberg Principles adopted after World War Two with “a global and transnational state of exception” under which the U.S. can invade countries with impunity.
Peter Weiss of the Center For Constitutional Rights pointed out that there is no need for any new legislation to outlaw aggressive war, since “It is already outlawed by Article 2 of the United States Charter.”
Dean Velvel summarized the conference proceedings by saying, “In a nutshell, this conference was about giving continued life to the Nuremberg principles, which our country itself established, instead of allowing guilty members of the Bush Administration to destroy those principles wholesale by committing aggressive war and torture with impunity.”
(For additional information contact Sherwood Ross, sherwoodr1@yahoo.com)
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.
Washburn Conference on Global War on Terrorism, November 13-14
Some folks at Washburn University law school asked me to announce this conference, set for November 13-14, and I’m delighted to do it:
***
The Rule of Law and the Global War on Terrorism: Detainees, Interrogations, and Military Commissions
November 13-14, 2008
Sponsored by the Washburn University School of Law Center for Law and
Government and the Washburn Law Journal
http://washburnlaw.edu/ruleoflaw/
The United States Constitution was founded on the Rule of Law. The Global War on Terrorism has tested the limits of our constitutional values and has posed unprecedented challenges for the U.S. legal system. Throughout these difficult times, the federal courts have been instrumental in upholding the Rule of Law.
The Rule of Law and the Global War on Terrorism Symposium will examine legal implications of governmental actions taken in response to the attacks of September 11, 2001. Our speakers and participants will reevaluate and reassess these complex issues to explore possible ways forward as our nation prepares for a new administration.
Speakers and presenters include: William C. Banks; Christopher W. Behan; George P. Fletcher; David J. R. Frakt; David E. Graham; Amos Guiora; Samuel V. Jones; Joseph Margulies; The Honorable Alberto J. Mora; Mary Ellen O'Connell; Michael P. O'Connor; Ambassador Pierre-
Richard Prosper; Celia Rumann; Thomas J. Romig; Philippe Sands; Charlie Savage; Robert F. Turner; Sean Watts; and Noah S. Weisbord. Papers by some of these speakers will be published in upcoming issues of the Washburn Law Journal.
Themes for the symposium are:
- Setting the Conditions for the War on Terrorism
- The U.S. Administration Responds: Detain and Interrogate
- The U.S. Congress and Courts Respond: Detainee Treatment Act, Military Commissions, and Habeas Corpus
- A New Administration: The Way Forward
Registration for the symposium is complimentary. Seating is limited. To ensure sufficient accommodations you must pre-register online at the above website.
August 19, 2008
MOHAWK WOMEN FILE ‘DEMAND’. CANADA MUST RESPECT THE “RULE OF LAW”.
MOHAWK WOMEN FILE ‘DEMAND’. CANADA MUST RESPECT THE “RULE OF LAW”.
MNN. Aug. 4, 2008. The following “Letter of Demand” was sent to the Attorney General of Canada. We are reminding them to fulfill their obligation to us as our historic allies to protect our rights. Canada Border Services Agents has illegally erected facilities in the midst of our community of Akwesasne and is illegally interfering with our right to live peacefully among our people. In particular, criminal assaults have been conducted against members of our community, including the assault against Kahentinetha and Katenies on June 14th 2008 at the “Cornwall Ontario” check point. According to the Canadian Constitution Canada is governed by the rule of law and everyone is equal before the law. This means that Canadian officials must obey the law, just like everyone else. When they commit an assault they should be charged with an assault under the Criminal Code just like anyone else who commits an assault. According to Federal Court of Canada rules, the Attorney General must answer this letter by August 22, 2008.
LETTER OF DEMAND
Date: July 23, 2008
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
TO: Hon. Robert Douglas Nicholson
Minister of Justice & Attorney General of Canada
284 Wellington Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H8
613-941-6900 nicholson.r@parl.gc.ca
TAKE NOTICE THAT ON JUNE 14, 2008, KAHENTINETHA AND KATENIES, MEMBERS OF THE KANION’KE:HAKA/MOHAWK NATION, WERE ASSAULTED, BRUTALIZED, ARRESTED AND DETAINED ILLEGALLY AT THE CORNWALL BORDER.
The following are the facts giving rise to this incident.
1. On June 14, 2008 Sakowaiaks and Kahentinetha went to Akwesasne to pick up Katenies. Kahentinetha is a 68 year old grandmother. Katenies is 43 years old and also a grandmother.
2. At approximately 2:00 pm they were passing through the Canadian border control on the Cornwall portion. Akwesasne is a small community. The Canada-U.S. border has been placed in the middle of the Mohawk community. The people have to cross the border many times a day for groceries or to visit relatives.
3. Katenies, Kahentinetha and Sakowaiaks went through the border and were told to wait under the canopy. They sat there peacefully for an hour surrounded by guards. Some Mohawk elders showed up to witness. Several other vehicles were searched and released. Only Indigenous people were stopped. Eventually a platoon of about a dozen guards marched towards the car, all wearing leather gloves, flack jackets and all kinds of equipment hanging about their waist. One officer, Maurice Saucier [Badge #16121], was on the cell phone throughout directing operations during the attack on Kahentinetha and Katenies.
4. At approximately 3:00 pm Katenies was dragged violently from the back seat of the car by a gang of hefty young men and women. They knocked her down, pinned her to the ground, and forced their knees into her head and back. They handcuffed her and smashed and rubbed her face into the pavement. Sakowaiaks still remembers the sound of flesh hitting the pavement. She received bleeding scrapes and bruises on her face, shoulders, arms and legs. Katenies’ was taken into the customs building and later to Ottawa. She was not given any medical attention. She was not allowed to call her mother and her mother was not permitted to see her or speak to her. Katenies was held incommunicado for three days until she appeared in Cornwall court on June 17, 2008.
5. There were no warrants or charges out for Kahentinetha. Her ID and car keys had already been taken. Katenies’ has not been returned. Also missing are documents that were in the trunk and the shoes taken from Kahentinetha’s feet.
6. It was only after the assault on Katenies began that Kahentinetha was ordered to get out of the car. She saw what they were planning to do to her. Kahentinetha heard Maurice Saucier tell the other agents to “Take her out”. On June 14th 2008 she was afraid for her life if she got out of the car. She was right and continues to be afraid.
7. She was handcuffed, assaulted and imprisoned. Once in the cell, the attack continued. Some of the officers deliberately tightened the handcuffs she was wearing several times. This cut the circulation to her hands. The pain shot up her arms and she experienced flashes of light and pains in the middle of her chest and back. She cried for help. The guards ignored her and tightened the handcuffs more. They yelled threats at her and kept ordering her to bend down. A man stood behind her and had his hands on her pants. She received scrapes and bruises on her arms and legs.
8. Frank Horn, a Cornwall lawyer, and his son Kanatase, happened to be waiting in the line at the border. [613-935-8882]. They wouldn’t let him see his sister, Kahentinetha, until they took off the cuffs and gave her a chair to sit on. When he saw her, he immediately insisted on calling an ambulance. The Akwesasne Police stood and watched in silence. The ambulance took her to Cornwall Community Hospital and the Ottawa Ontario Heart Institute. She remained in hospital for 5 days in the trauma unit and intensive care unit. Since that time she had a relapse and was hospitalized at the Anna Laberge Hospital in Chateauguay Quebec.
9. The medical record confirms that despite excellent physical condition Kahentinetha had a trauma induced heart attack. Her recovery will take a long time. Part of her heart was killed. Her health will never be the same. Both women are now recuperating in the company of their children and grandchildren.
10. None of these women is associated with any kind of criminal activity.
11. The video footage of the assaults on Kahentinetha and Katenies on June 14th 2008 have been confiscated by Canada‘s Department of “National Defense”. We are informed the only way to obtain these videos is to “waive our rights”. .
12. Some of the CBSA officers had the following badge numbers: 17012; 16320; 16511; 16121; and 16275; Some of those involved and responsible for border issues are Alain Jolicoeur, President of CBSA 613-952-3200; Lance Markel, District Director CBSA 613-930-3234; Hon. Stockwell Day, Public Safety & Emergency Preparedness 613-995-1703 day.s@parl.gc.ca; Dave MacKenzie, Parliamentary Secretary, Public Safety, 613-995-4432 mackenzie.d@parl.gc.ca; Akwesasne Mohawk Police 613-575-2250 ext. 2400; and Louis Mitchell, Mohawk Security 613-932-5183, 613-575-2340;
DEMAND FOR RELEASE:
14. The individuals who assaulted the three women must be charged, tried and punished.
15. Full and complete undoctored copies of the video footage of this event.
16. Full disclosure of all files and official communications concerning the cases of Kahentinetha and Katenies.
17. $10 million for physical, psychological and punitive damages and such other relief as this court may deem fit.
Deadline for settlement:
18. An order that all Canadian government agencies will respect the time delays set out in the rules of court.
From:
Kahentinetha, Bear Clan __________________ kahentinetha2@yahoo.comj
Katenies, Bear Clan ______________________ katenies20@yahoo.com
% Box 991, Kahnawake, Quebec, Canada J0L 1B0, 450-635-9345
Address for service: for the purposes of this proceeding only, service to be made % Julio Peris, 625 Rene-Levesque West, Suite 900, Montreal Quebec H3B 1R2 – 514-933-4656 Fax 514-933-9587.
PLEASE NOTE : As can be seen, it’s becoming critical for legal actions to be taken to protect our rights. We have no funds. Canada is hiring costly law firms to suppress our rights. If you can donate anything to our cause, it will be greatly appreciated. Donate to: PayPal, www.mohawknationnews.com, or “MNN Mohawk Nation News”, Box 991, Kahnawake [Quebec, Canada] J0L 1B0. Nia:en/Thank you very much.
August 12, 2008
More on Mary Beth Buchanan's (US attorney) improper legal behaviour
Improper FBI Access to Wecht Juror Files Taints Prosecutor Reviews of 9-11 Investigation
[Ethics, anyone? Not likely it seems when the US Department of Justice wants to defocus from its own crimes, as evidenced, in the Wecht case as well as the Seligman and the firing of US attorneys. They and the White House think they really are above the law. So here we go! Let's those of with an eye to justice keep investigating the official "investigators"/prosecutors in the US DOJ. - V]
By testing - from TPM Muckraker
Government Fails To Address Why FBI Agents Had Access To Wecht Jury Lists
The rest of the story behind the Wecht Jury lists relates to the emails and the files. The Western District of Pennsylvania was brought into conduct a review of a high profile terrorism case. The improper FBI access to those juror names would show the prosecutors -- providing an "independent" review of the District's attorneys -- were not impartial, as required.
The questionable FBI access is only part of the problem. The question is how long Buchanan has known about the questionable file access; and why she didn't ensure her office recused itself from the 9-11-related misconduct investigation. The public needs some assurances from the Buchanan-DOJ camp on what they were really doing with the files containing the Wecht Juror names.
There is no reasonable explanation for why the names of the prospective or seated jurors were released to anyone outside the counsel. There is no language permitting anyone other than the government counsel to have access to these seated juror names. Critics have said that the court orders permitted changes or disclosures. That language does not exist.
The 3d Circuit reminds us what legal standard applied to the Wecht Juror names: There was no provision to to permit anyone other than counsel to have access these lists:
3rd Circuit (Citations omitted):
"The order further provided that “any and all juror lists generated by this Court for use in the jury selection process shall be deemed confidential and property of the Court and shall not be removed from the Court at any time.” . . .
The jury selection lists used during the jury selection process were only available to counsel. Critics have provided no language permitting anyone other than counsel to have access to the prospective or seated juror lists:
3d Circuit: "The juror lists were available only to counsel who were required to execute a receipt for the list and to return it upon completion of jury selection."
There is no language permitting anyone other than counsel to have access to the lists. The 3d Circuit made changes to how the media would be notified of the jury names, but there were no changes to any rules in how the juror names were or were not available to counsel.
This language has no relationship to how the FBI agents got access to the seated or prospective juror names:
"Schwab, however, released jurors' names in a list that did not differentiate from those who actually served and those in the overall jury pool. He also redacted the actual jurors' names from the transcript of the jury selection process."
There is no adequate explanation for how the FBI agents got access to the information only provided to the counsel. Critics have pointed to no language or court order which specifically authorized non-counsel to get access to these prospective or seated juror names. We've shown the method to supposedly "derive" the names of the seated jurors from the list of prospective jurors is inadequate.
The FBI agents, in defiance of the court orders, had access to information they were not authorized access. The government's explanations have not provided a coherent reason why the FBI agents were doing what they were doing.
The FBI agents, in defiance of the court orders, had access to information they were not authorized access. The government's explanations have not provided a coherent reason why the FBI agents were doing what they were doing.
If the FBI agents were doing nothing wrong, then the government should not have said the FBI agents were "scheduling" appointments. There is no evidence the US Attorneys office was using the FBI agents for a scheduling function. The US Attorneys office has not explained why counsel did not participate in the FBI-Wecht Juror home meetings.
Jury polls are judicial actions. FBI agents are not part of the Judicial Branch. Whether a jury poll was or wasn't done during or after the Wecht trial is unrelated to whether executive law enforcement can or cannot access information the court has sealed from non-counsel. Even if the court "failed" to do a final jury poll, that has no relationship to whether that judicial failure would trigger an executive branch action or follow-up.
Critics have not adequately discussed how long the prosecutors have had a formal process to review systemic trends across general cases. The prosecution would have us believe that a focused review on a specific defendant, not case-type, was appropriate.
No one has provided a copy of the e-mail, policy, or other controlling language establishing these non-prosecutorial reviews; or justifying why the FBI agents should be involved with a specific case or specific defendant.
Critics have failed to point to a specific date when the prosecutors had either a formal or informal process to review general case trends with classes of case types. It is misdirection to argue that the jury polls are the same as post-trial prosecutorial assessments; or that these prosecutor reviews have always been done.
- How long have the prosecutors been doing these post-trial reviews; where is the copy of the email or policy which established this specific review procedure?
- Have the post-trial reviews always been mandatory; or were there some reviews which were discretionary?
- Was there a reason some classes of cases were not reviewed?
- Who said FBI agents gather information to do a risk assessment of adverse prosecution trends?
- Why is the Wecht-defendant targeted for this post-trial review; but other reviews have not focused on a specific case-defendant, but on a general class of cases?
The US Attorneys office has issued inconsistent statements. There problems were identified in the DOJ IG report, and raise doubts about Buchanan's credibility. The government and Buchanan have not adequately explained why Buchanan omitted important information, or why she was not investigated for deception through omission when she testified before Congress, and as reported by the DOJ IG into their investigation.
Critics have not adequately discussed the timing of the emails, or what risks there might be if the Western District of Pennysylvania's Attorney's Office was involved with any improper file transfers. It would be a problem, while the FBI agents were given improper access to the Wecht Juror names, for the government to use the US Attorneys office to investigate in a separate case the DC office for improper file transfers. The government has not adequately discussed the implications of improper file transfers in Pennsylvania; and how they might relate to required recusals for other investigations.
The public needs assurances about the file reviews the Western District did; and receive confidence Buchanan was not aware of any improper file transfers that would taint her office's investigations in other high profile cases. It would be a shame to learn, adding insult to injury, for the 9-11 victims to learn the government improperly conduct an investigation into prosecutorial misconduct related to the 9-11 prosecution.
- How long has Buchanan known about the problems with the file transfers; and the questions this would raise about whether her office was or was not adequately tainted on problems with file transfers?
Incomplete Buchanan Denials Mirror Rove
Critics have not adequately addressed the failure of the government to broadly deny that anyone was involved with any direction to engage in any politically-related prosecutions. As with Rove's incomplete denials, Buchanan's incomplete denials did not exclude the possibility the President was providing direction.
The public needs a definitive statement of complete denial from Buchanan -- in her own words, not coordinated with DOJ -- that she is not aware of anyone -- including the President, of -- providing any direction or leadership to prosecute anyone for political reasons. Her statement needs to adequately explain why, despite this denial, Republican lawyers have provided affidavits discussing what they overhead about White House influence.
Buchanan's denial must broadly include the DoJ-DoD military analyst program, and adequately deny that she was aware of any communication, discussion, or meeting involving the military analysts, DOJ personnel, or anyone else connected with the White House in making any prosecutorial decision related to Wecht.
Public Statement Shows Non-Independence of DOJ
Buchanan has failed to explain why the language within her denial -- supposedly evidence of her independence -- matches language within a DOJ press release. It would be a problem if the US Attorney, through outside counsel, issued a statement designed to mislead the public about who was directing the political prosecutions. The DOJ IG raised a similar concern.
It would also be a problem if her counsel, as a government attorney, had previously issued a public statement designed to show independence and a commitment to reform, but that public statement substantially matched language from a previous US prosecutor. This would show, contrary to Buchanan's assertions, that the public statements were not linked with one office, but driven from the Department of Justice.
Buchanan, when she provides the statement, must disclose who provided input to that final release; whether she had any help from outside counsel; and what input, if any, she had from the DOJ, White House, or GOP staff in crafting this statement of denial.
Buchanan's Conduct Subject To Similar Admonishments
It would be a problem if the US Attorney was connected with anyone who previously made statements about the responsibility of US prosecutors to do things, but Buchanan is not adequately showing she is fully complying with these reasonable requirements.
It would also be a problem if Buchanan would have us believe that her incomplete statements to the DOJ IG were acceptable; but her counsel was linked with earlier admonishments against uncooperative witnesses. Buchanan and her private counsel need to explain why something less than full cooperation with the DOJ IG is acceptable; but her counsel did not agree on another legal issue.
It would also be a problem if Buchanan would have us believe that her incomplete statements to the DOJ IG were acceptable; but her counsel was linked with earlier admonishments against uncooperative witnesses. Buchanan and her private counsel need to explain why something less than full cooperation with the DOJ IG is acceptable; but her counsel did not agree on another legal issue.
Buchanan must address why her counsel would have one standard of cooperation for one class of investigation targets; but a different standard when it comes to Buchanan appearing before Congress. Cooperation should require a cooperative agreement on what cooperation means; not selective parsing for one audience or administration over another.
- What do Buchanan and her counsel think "cooperation" means today?
- Why is there a moving target on where incomplete cooperation is or isn't admonished?
US Attorneys Office Tainted By Improper File Transfers
The objective of Buchanan and the FBI re the Wecht jury names is to deflect attention from the emails showing that there was a problem with improper file access. This is a smokescreen from the integrity problem of asking the Pennsylvania prosecutors to conduct an investigation of
misconduct in DC that the prosecutors in PA were engaged: Improper file transfers.
misconduct in DC that the prosecutors in PA were engaged: Improper file transfers.
It would be a problem if, when the FBI had improper access to the Wecht Juror names, the US Attorneys office in Pennsylvania was conducting a review of the DC office on improper file transfers.
Buchanan must explain what her concerns are with the FBI improperly accessing information; which cases would be jeopardized if the US government improperly transferred key evidence or files during any prosecution; and how this misconduct would jeopardize other high profile cases of interest to the United States.
It does not follow, in this supposed "war on terror," for the US Attorney to do nothing about Geneva violations; but then claim she is concerned about judicial independence. Her actions do not match her words, as the DOJ IG warned us. It would be a sham, on top of the failed combat operations in Afghanistan, to discover the prosecutions are at risk because legal counsel decided to cross the line on what evidence or files should or should not be transferred in defiance of court orders.
- Which terror-related cases are at risk because of improper file transfers?
- Which audits did prosecutors do that need to be re-accomplished?
- Which reviews is Buchanan aware that must be reaccomplished because her office didn't follow the court orders, and this conflict taints her office on whether they can or cannot independently review other reports of prosecutorial misconduct?
- Why wasn't the DOJ OPR and DOJ IG, rather than the Pennsylvania office, brought into the nexus to review the prosecutorial misconduct and improper file transfer?
August 05, 2008
Freedom Rider: Obama Pardons Bush
Freedom Rider: Obama Pardons Bush
Presidential Politics 2008 - Obama
Wednesday, 30 July 2008
by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
There will be no need for George Bush to pardon himself and his fellow criminals. Barack Obama promises to let the "W Gang" off, scott-free, when he takes over the White House. Impeachment? Heavens, no!
"That is not something I think would be fruitful to pursue because I think
that impeachment is something that should be reserved for exceptional
circumstances,"
says Obama, apparently in the belief that Bush's behavior has been routine for an American president. Obama surrogates say bipartisanship should decide the question of investigating current and past presidents. In other words, Obama will let the Republicans decide if Bush gets away with murder. "So Bush crimes will be buried by a Democrat."
Freedom Rider: Obama Pardons Bush
by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
Barack Obama, like previous presidential candidates before him, is very good at sucking up. The candidate who sucks up best to the largest number of wealthy donors and check bundlers usually becomes the party nominee. Obama is no exception to that rule. The Senator would never have been able to launch a successful presidential race if he did not already have buy-in from very rich, very powerful people. Not only did he have to secure their support in order to run, he must continue securing it in order to win. That is why he will never investigate the Bush administration's well documented criminal activity. The rule of law doesn't apply to presidents, to their cabinet members, to members of Congress or to criminal corporations. Obama's backers would be most unhappy if they thought their guy was going to get into office and start calling powerful people to account on any issue.
"Obama will never investigate the Bush administration's well documented
criminal activity."
"Obama is a genius at double talk."All of which means that Barack Obama will never investigate any of the crimes committed in the Bush administration. When pressed because of the long campaign against Hillary Clinton, Obama was sometimes forced to give an appearance that he would actually preserve, protect and defend the constitution if he became president. The Senator spoke on the issue himself in April, and once again proved that he is a genius at double talk:
"What I would want to do is to have my Justice Department and my AttorneyAgain Obama emphasizes that he would look at what we know "right now." It is also worth noting that while Obama says "nobody is above the law," he doesn't say what he would do if he actually discovered that deliberate law breaking took place. Keep in mind that this parsed statement took place when he was still in the midst of a democratic campaign when he was trying to make the case that he was the progressive candidate. After Hillary Clinton's campaign ended he no longer had any need to pretend he was progressive. The FISA double cross was the first signal that the end of his need to win Democratic votes meant the beginning of his take no prisoners march to the political sea."
General immediately review the information that's already there [emphasis mine]
and to find out are there inquiries that need to be pursued. I can't prejudge
that because we don't have access to all the material right now. I think that
you are right, if crimes have been committed, they should be investigated.
You're also right that I would not want my first term consumed by what was
perceived on the part of Republicans as a partisan witch hunt [emphasis mine]
because I think we've got too many problems we've got to solve." What kind of
investigation pursues only what is already known? It seems that Obama would
investigate only what he wouldn't have to look for, but not so much that
Republican sensibilities would be bruised. In other words, he won't try to find
wrong doing. If he did, he might have to take action and he is telling us in no
uncertain terms that he has no intention of doing that: "So this is an
area where I would want to exercise judgment -- I would want to find out
directly from my Attorney General -- having pursued, having looked at what's out
there right now [emphasis mine] -- are there possibilities of genuine crimes as
opposed to really bad policies. And I think it's important -- one of the
things we've got to figure out in our political culture generally is
distinguishing between really dumb policies and policies that rise to the level
of criminal activity. You know, I often get questions about impeachment at town
hall meetings and I've said that is not something I think would be fruitful to
pursue because I think that impeachment is something that should be reserved for
exceptional circumstances. Now, if I found that there were high officials who
knowingly, consciously broke existing laws, engaged in coverups of those crimes
with knowledge forefront, then I think a basic principle of our Constitution is
nobody above the law -- and I think that's roughly how I would look at it."
Obama has no intention of exposing Bush administration crimes."
Obama took a well deserved beating from angry supporters after he openly supported Bush and telecom industry law breaking. The brief moment of challenge was enough to make Obama leery of speaking for himself when he knows he is wrong. He now sends surrogates to tell us that he has no intention of exposing Bush administration crimes. Cass Sunstein is a friend of Obama, a law professor at the University of Chicago and new husband of former Obama aide Samantha Power. Lately he has been the Obama campaign go-to-guy on the issue of Bush criminality. Sunstein's job is to tell us to shut up and let Obama let Bush off the hook. Sunstein is also nervous about pursuing the law breakers. The professor thinks that only the commission of "egregious" crimes ought to be considered for investigation. The argument can be made that any crime emanating from the White House is egregious in and of itself. But Sunstein considers that point of view to be overly "emotional." He thinks that outraged citizens ought to just chill out and accept government torture, spying on citizens and lies used to start wars.
"So I guess I'm saying that emotions play an important role in thinking about"Bush's crimes will be buried by a Democrat." Even Republicans expect Democrats to maintain and perhaps increase majorities in both houses of Congress. A Democratic president with a Democratic congress should not have to be bipartisan about anything he wants to pursue. The call for bipartisanship is a ruse, it is a call for doing nothing. So Bush crimes will be buried by a Democrat. We will never know what the government knew on September 11, 2001. We will never know the extent of spying on American citizens. We will never know about the manipulation of intelligence used to justify the invasion of Iraq, which violated the Geneva Conventions and universally accepted international law. We will never know what the Bush administration told Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, their partners in crime. We will never know anything we should know because the system won't permit that to happen.
what the legal system should be doing. But under our constitutional order, we go
back and forth between the emotions and the legal requirements, and that's a way
of guaranteeing fairness. And as I say, very important to have a degree of
bipartisanship with respect to subsequent investigations [all emphasis mine]."
Margaret Kimberley's Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR.
May 16, 2008
Afghan death squads 'acting on foreign orders'
Friday, 16 May 2008
Secret Afghan death squads are acting on the orders of foreign spies and killing civilians inside Afghanistan with impunity, a senior UN envoy has claimed. Professor Philip Alston, the UN special rapporteur on illegal killings, said "foreign intelligence agencies" had used illegal groups of heavily armed Afghans in raids against suspected insurgents.
He said the attacks were beyond the legitimate military chains of command, and they were "completely unacceptable" and "outside the law".
At the end of a 12-day fact-finding mission to Afghanistan, Professor Alston said: "There have been a large number of raids for which no state or military appears to take responsibility. I have spoken with a large number of people in relation to the operation of foreign intelligence units. I don't want to name them but they are at the most senior level of the relevant places. These forces operate with what appears to be impunity."
Professor Alston said he knew of at least three recent raids. In one, two brothers were killed by troops operating out of an American Special Forces base in Kandahar, in southern Afghanistan. Afghan government officials admitted neither was linked to the Taliban, but no army has claimed responsibility for the raid.
Another group, known as Shaheen, operates out of Nangahar, in eastern Afghanistan, where US forces are in charge, Professor Alston said. "Essentially, they are companies of Afghans but with a handful, at most, of international people directing them. I'm not aware that they fall under any command."
In Helmand, where most of Britain's 7,800 troops are based, Special Forces were accused of slitting a man's throat in a botched night raid last year. Security sources now claim the operation was mounted by a secret spy unit.
In a preliminary report, Professor Alston added: "It is absolutely unacceptable for heavily armed internationals accompanied by heavily armed Afghan forces to be wandering around conducting dangerous raids that too often result in killings without anyone taking responsibility for them."
He refused to name the spies behind the secret units, or their nationality, but most of the provinces he identified where these raids have been mounted fall under American command. He also refused to rule out the possibility that raids may have been made in Helmand, where British troops are in command.
A Western official close to the investigation said the secret units are still known as Campaign Forces, from the time when American Special Forces and CIA spies recruited Afghan troops to help overthrow the Taliban during the US-led invasion in 2001. "The brightest, smartest guys in these militias were kept on," the official said. "They were trained and rearmed and they are still being used."
A British embassy spokesman in Kabul said UK officials were "examining the independent expert's report closely". But they refused to comment on whether MI6 was involved.
Professor Alston accused the international community, the Afghan government and the insurgents of "gratuitous civilian killing". He attacked the Nato-led International Security Assistance Force for not keeping better records of civilian casualties, criticising it for the complex and at times deliberately "opaque" processes that stop victims' relatives finding who raided their house or bombed their village.
"The level of complacency in response to these killings is staggeringly high," he said. "They [international military forces] have not taken the steps which are necessary, at the political level, to ensure a degree of transparency and accountability."
He said Nato commanders he met kept records only for the duration of their tour, in some cases just four months. Isaf officials rejected the report's claims, insisting they are as accountable as they can be "in a very complex situation".
Afghan police also faced strong criticism for killing civilians, and Professor Alston criticised the impunity afforded the "wealthy and the powerful" by the endemic corruption in Afghanistan's legal system. His full report is due out by autumn.
May 05, 2008
More on Infragard!
The Last Round Up By Christopher Ketcham 'One knowledgeable source claims that 8 million Americans are now listed in Main Core as potentially suspect.'
According to a senior government official who served with high-level security clearances in five administrations,
"There exists a database of Americans, who, often for the slightest and most trivial reason, are considered unfriendly, and who, in a time of panic, might be incarcerated. The database can identify and locate perceived 'enemies of the state' almost instantaneously." He and other sources tell Radar that the database is sometimes referred to by the code name Main Core... In the event of a national emergency, these people could be subject to everything from heightened surveillance and tracking to direct questioning and possibly even detention. Of course, federal law is somewhat vague as to what might constitute a "national emergency."
April 09, 2008
Oil rises to new high of $112.21 as inventories fall + comments from those who KNOW
My comment:
Until such time as the wars in Afghanistan and Irak END and definite timetables to withdraw troops are SET IN STONE
and the borrowing agenda of the US Treasury is stopped
and the SEC puts on real monetary regulation
Then all the Bad News will just continue.
I remain convinced that at some point that the middle class is going to get pissed enought to DEMAND IMPEACHMENT before the election.
Meanwhile, the KlusterfucK just advances in the United States and Canada.
A SHOCK event - war with Iran or Syria, martial law declaration somewhere because of a natural catastrophe such as an earthquake or a manufactured pandemic are just about due NOW.
Computer runs put the date for a Big Event for tomorrow- April 10th.
Hmmm mmmm.
I wonder what Dick the Prick and Hankie Poo are up to today.
Don't YOU??
Time to haul out the Big Scare agenda once again. I wonder if they discussed it over a seafood dinner inside the bunker last night.
If you ARE reading this - HAVE you signed an impeachment petition yet?
Have you?
Without rule of law, things are gonna get REAL ugly!!
Here, below, is the continuing saga about $ociali$m for the RICH, where THEY share the profit$ at the top- and we get the losses.
Veeger
SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Crude-oil futures rallied nearly $4 Wednesday to a new record of $112.21 a barrel as government data showed a surprising drop in U.S. inventories.
Until such time as the wars in Afghanistan and Irak END and definite timetables to withdraw troops are SET IN STONE
and the borrowing agenda of the US Treasury is stopped
and the SEC puts on real monetary regulation
Then all the Bad News will just continue.
I remain convinced that at some point that the middle class is going to get pissed enought to DEMAND IMPEACHMENT before the election.
Meanwhile, the KlusterfucK just advances in the United States and Canada.
A SHOCK event - war with Iran or Syria, martial law declaration somewhere because of a natural catastrophe such as an earthquake or a manufactured pandemic are just about due NOW.
Computer runs put the date for a Big Event for tomorrow- April 10th.
Hmmm mmmm.
I wonder what Dick the Prick and Hankie Poo are up to today.
Don't YOU??
Time to haul out the Big Scare agenda once again. I wonder if they discussed it over a seafood dinner inside the bunker last night.
If you ARE reading this - HAVE you signed an impeachment petition yet?
Have you?
Without rule of law, things are gonna get REAL ugly!!
Here, below, is the continuing saga about $ociali$m for the RICH, where THEY share the profit$ at the top- and we get the losses.
Veeger
SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Crude-oil futures rallied nearly $4 Wednesday to a new record of $112.21 a barrel as government data showed a surprising drop in U.S. inventories.
Similarly, gains were seen in petroleum-products futures trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange.
The nation's stockpiles of crude fell to 316 million barrels in the week ended April 4, the Energy Information Administration reported.
This was down 3.2 million barrels on the week. Analysts surveyed by energy information provider Platts had been looking for an increase of 2.7 million barrels.
Crude oil for May delivery surged $3.71, or 3.4%, to a record of $112.21 a barrel in Nymex action in mid-afternoon trading. The benchmark contract had been up less than $1 before the data came out.
Chris Lafakis, an analyst at Moody's Economy.com, called last week's reduction in inventories "supportive of record oil prices." Crude's previous all-time high record was $111.80 hit on March 17.
Also Wednesday on Nymex, May reformulated gasoline rose 5.83 cents to $2.8087 a gallon and May heating oil gained 7.7 cents to $3.1872 a gallon, while May natural gas futures rose 41.3 cents to $10.11 per million British thermal units. Weekly data on U.S. gas in storage are due out on Thursday.
Crude inventories in detail
The unexpected drop in crude inventories came from sliding imports, the government's data showed.
U.S. oil imports averaged 8.9 million barrels a day last week, down nearly 1.4 million barrels a day from the previous week, the EIA reported.
"While imports will probably rebound next week, oil prices will nonetheless go up in the interim," said Lafakis.
The EIA also reported crude inventories at Cushing, Okla., the delivery point for crude traded on the Nymex, were unchanged at 17.5 million barrels.
Meanwhile, U.S. gasoline supplies fell 3.4 million barrels in the latest week, while distillate supplies, which include heating oil and diesel, dropped 3.7 million barrels. Analysts surveyed by Platts had been anticipating declines of 2.3 million barrels for gasoline stocks and 1.3 million barrels for distillates.
U.S. refineries operated at 83% of their operable capacity last week, up from the previous week's 82.4%.
In a separate report, the American Petroleum Institute said U.S. crude inventories rose by 6 million barrels in the week ended April 4, reaching to 315.5 million barrels. The API, an association of the U.S. oil and natural gas industry, calculates inventories based on different criteria.
Distillate stocks fell to 112.8 million barrels, down 177,000 barrels, while gasoline stocks rose by 1.8 million barrels to stand at 219.2 million barrels, the API said.
Weak demand
Crude's new record came even when the EIA is forecasting lower energy demand in the U.S.
EIA said in a monthly report released on Tuesday that consumption of liquid fuels and other petroleum products is projected to grow by 40,000 barrels a day in 2008, a downward revision of 100,000 barrels a day from the previous monthly forecast.
After accounting for increased ethanol use, U.S. petroleum consumption actually will fall by 90,000 barrels a day, EIA said.
West Texas Intermediate crude, or the underlying product of the Nymex crude futures, is expected to average $102 in March, EIA said in the report. The annual average WTI price, which was $72 per barrel in 2007, is projected to average $94 per barrel in 2008, but ease to about $86 per barrel in 2009. 
Moming Zhou is a MarketWatch reporter, based in San Francisco.Polya Lesova is a MarketWatch reporter based in New York.
mikeyl2826 3 hours ago
mikeyl2826 is ranked in the community as Vice President
92.9% of Community members have fewer points">
92.9% of Community members have fewer points">
Thats about right...he predicted something like 5-8 named storms with 1-2 being CAT 5s and for three yrs since Katrina he has been wrong...I don't understand how somebody estimating how many hurricanes there will be drives up oil prices...at least wait until they form off the coast of Africa, try and make us believe you arent screwing us at every turn....
numisman 3 hours ago
numisman is ranked in the community as President
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
You're right. The hurricane predictions are pretty boilerplate stuff. Take the long term average and add or subtract a storm or two.
BlueHorseshu 3 hours ago
BlueHorseshu is ranked in the community as Analyst
% of Community members have fewer points">
% of Community members have fewer points">
Guys we need to hold on tight here. Oil is going to fall off a cliff after this announcement but it will be volatile. Next stop $101 watch this space!
numisman 3 hours ago
numisman is ranked in the community as President
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
$101 is still way overcooked in my book.
DOWJONI 18 minutes ago
DOWJONI is ranked in the community as Analyst
% of Community members have fewer points">
% of Community members have fewer points">
Im with you this is a CROCK SHORT OIL. The lyin thieves!!!
ARay 2 hours ago
ARay is ranked in the community as Analyst
53% of Community members have fewer points">
53% of Community members have fewer points">
Want some more Busish news?
"The Bush administration is currently adding 70,000 barrels of oil a day to the SPR, which is scheduled to hit a record volume of 700.7 million barrels by the end of the month.
Shipments to the reserves could shoot up to 125,000 barrels a day under a plan by the U.S. Energy Department that would put the government in competition with refiners for oil during the busy summer driving season."
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1444397720080314?pageNumber=2%26virtualBrandChannel=10112
"The Bush administration is currently adding 70,000 barrels of oil a day to the SPR, which is scheduled to hit a record volume of 700.7 million barrels by the end of the month.
Shipments to the reserves could shoot up to 125,000 barrels a day under a plan by the U.S. Energy Department that would put the government in competition with refiners for oil during the busy summer driving season."
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1444397720080314?pageNumber=2%26virtualBrandChannel=10112
rockrat 59 minutes ago
rockrat is ranked in the community as Vice President
91.3% of Community members have fewer points">
91.3% of Community members have fewer points">
The SPR is still accumulating oil? The only reasons for that are to prop up the oil prices, or as preparation for the invasion of Iran. Congress should override this lunacy.
JanPaul 2 hours ago
JanPaul is ranked in the community as President
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
I believe that the U.S. needs oil at these prices so OPEC has enough money to lend our government the money it is spending. With our deficit rising and the need for loans and some countries backing off from our debt, OPEC is our "loan lifeline."
When Japan and China sold off debt a few months back, OPEC stepped in to buy and still loan us the money we need.
Well the numbers are in. So much for a surplus.
When Japan and China sold off debt a few months back, OPEC stepped in to buy and still loan us the money we need.
Well the numbers are in. So much for a surplus.
true2you 2 hours ago
true2you is ranked in the community as Vice President
97.2% of Community members have fewer points">
97.2% of Community members have fewer points">
Still looking for an answer do we have an open order for as much crude as we can get or is it an agreement between buyers and sellers that they will buy so much?
FuelMangerServices 2 hours ago
FuelMangerServices is ranked in the community as Manager
79.5% of Community members have fewer points">
79.5% of Community members have fewer points">
I repeat - Senate Bill S. 577 would stop most of this c*** happening on the commodity markets especially in the energy sector...Today, Oil and Gas traders do NOT report any trades and more importantly WHO'S funding the trade. My Gut and Heart tells me it's the big three oil companies via oil money supported trading companies and also OPEC...Before you don't believe it could be that simple - PLEASE google Senate Bill S. 577 and you'll most likely be as upset as I am due to I monitor the NYMEX daily and for the last 24-years....The NYMEX was originally established to CONTROL major up/down swings in the energy markets. When this administration came into office they re-wrote the play book...This is exactly what they want to happen...KAOS is great for the very wealthy "have mores" -
jerryl 1 hour ago
jerryl is ranked in the community as Director
85.3% of Community members have fewer points">
85.3% of Community members have fewer points">
The big banks are the ones who are holding the oil price and futures. They can no longer make money with loans. The futures market gives them BIG short term returns... They have been doing this since they had no real profitable place to put their funds.
JerryL
JerryL
JanPaul 2 hours ago
JanPaul is ranked in the community as President
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
The big three only control about 5% of the oil reserves but, the government does want high oil prices because the value of the dollar is tied to oil demand. The less dollars needed to buy oil with and the lower the dollar falls.
High oil prices are all about propping the dollar up and having enough wealth in OPEC nations to loan us the money we need.
High oil prices are all about propping the dollar up and having enough wealth in OPEC nations to loan us the money we need.
loangstar 2 hours ago
loangstar is ranked in the community as President
98.2% of Community members have fewer points">
98.2% of Community members have fewer points">
Why we need to borrow money from these countries? Can we just ask them to pay us for protecting them against Ir**.
BobP863 26 minutes ago
BobP863 is ranked in the community as President
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
Loangstar, good question. Bush Sr managed to get Kuwait to pay us in full for the Gulf War. So far Junior has only managed to get loans, loans, and more loans, while cutting taxes, to pay for Iraq and now he want to do the same for waging a war against Iran. Can't seem to get too many countries interested though.
mgrg 2 hours ago
mgrg is ranked in the community as President
99.7% of Community members have fewer points">
99.7% of Community members have fewer points">
You forgot to mention that Bush is responsible for everything
numisman 1 hour ago
numisman is ranked in the community as President
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
What's the end-game to this strategy?
sands8oo 1 hour ago
sands8oo is ranked in the community as Vice President
97.5% of Community members have fewer points">
97.5% of Community members have fewer points">
Excellent point JP - it boggles my mind trying to explain to folks that the rising oil prices are all in direct correlation with higher spending (ie bailouts, the Iraq war, etc etc)
How do you keep the dollar from collapsing? You get people to buy our treasuries. What happens when Japan and China no longer are buyers? You ask the Middle East to do so - and they comply, however, to get the money to do it, they need prices to go up so they have the cash flow.
Dont send these silly proposals for commodities price regulation - send proposals against continued expenditure of tax dollars for federal housing and banking bailouts.
Oh wait, that might cause an economic pandemonium - so lets just stick with higher oil to prevent chaos and let everyone complain and play nicely.
How do you keep the dollar from collapsing? You get people to buy our treasuries. What happens when Japan and China no longer are buyers? You ask the Middle East to do so - and they comply, however, to get the money to do it, they need prices to go up so they have the cash flow.
Dont send these silly proposals for commodities price regulation - send proposals against continued expenditure of tax dollars for federal housing and banking bailouts.
Oh wait, that might cause an economic pandemonium - so lets just stick with higher oil to prevent chaos and let everyone complain and play nicely.
sl1966 27 minutes ago
sl1966 is ranked in the community as Vice President
90.1% of Community members have fewer points">
90.1% of Community members have fewer points">
When oil went below 100 a couple of weeks ago the dollar went up so that doesn`t completely go along with what you said.
zymurguy 2 hours ago
zymurguy is ranked in the community as Vice President
95.5% of Community members have fewer points">
95.5% of Community members have fewer points">
I love how these shortages in oil reserves are always "unexpected". The people in charge of watching and managing the volume of oil reserves are worse than the weatherman... YOU'RE FIRED! I mean, c'mon, what does it take to check the dipstick each day, make a few phone calls... "hey Jim, what's the tank look like today?"... "oh, it's unexpectedly low, Bob, I dunno what happened." Sheesh.
mikeyl2826 1 hour ago
mikeyl2826 is ranked in the community as Vice President
92.9% of Community members have fewer points">
92.9% of Community members have fewer points">
I know when it drops it is totally unexpected but when they rise, it is usually not building enough so prices are still bullish....what a crock!
theargo7 1 hour ago
theargo7 is ranked in the community as Analyst
% of Community members have fewer points">
% of Community members have fewer points">
Especially since it is normal for gasoline inventories to drop at this time of year (The inventories fell this week last year by almost the same amount as this year). Yet they forecast the drop to be very small so they can sell the "soaring demand" or "shrinking capacity" theory when it comes out as a larger drop than expected. The whole thing is a farce.
JanPaul 1 hour ago
JanPaul is ranked in the community as President
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
What is the "end game?" It was set in motion in 1971 when Kissinger made the deal to save the dollar with OPEC. Collapse of the dollar.
From that time on, the Fed, oil, trade deals, wars, etc. have all been to keep the dollar from collapsing. It is a game where you have to keep expanding the need for dollars one way or the other. Anytime demand falls, like when Saddam started selling oil in Euro's you have to find a way to counter that fall in demand. One way is war and another, in the case of Iran, is to raise prices so that what Iran sells in other currencies is made up for by the other nations selling at higher prices in dollars.
This continues until a "panic sell" takes place. If another nation sells in other currencies in a large quantity, it sets in motion a chain reaction where first out, gets the most for their dollars and last out loses most of the value they had. They don't want to do this yet. The U.S. consumer is still important to the global economy that they want us buying. That is declining but we aren't to a decoupling yet.
From that time on, the Fed, oil, trade deals, wars, etc. have all been to keep the dollar from collapsing. It is a game where you have to keep expanding the need for dollars one way or the other. Anytime demand falls, like when Saddam started selling oil in Euro's you have to find a way to counter that fall in demand. One way is war and another, in the case of Iran, is to raise prices so that what Iran sells in other currencies is made up for by the other nations selling at higher prices in dollars.
This continues until a "panic sell" takes place. If another nation sells in other currencies in a large quantity, it sets in motion a chain reaction where first out, gets the most for their dollars and last out loses most of the value they had. They don't want to do this yet. The U.S. consumer is still important to the global economy that they want us buying. That is declining but we aren't to a decoupling yet.
MrRaz 1 hour ago
MrRaz is ranked in the community as Vice President
95.6% of Community members have fewer points">
95.6% of Community members have fewer points">
Very interesting JanPaul. Would you be so kind to suggest a bit further reading on the Kissinger "end game." Thanks in advance. Raz, I see that you already have!
heffer 1 hour ago
heffer is ranked in the community as Analyst
% of Community members have fewer points">
% of Community members have fewer points">
OPEC has the world right where they want them. They can control the world economy with the price of oil. All they have to do is say they are cutting production and the price of a barrel will skyrocket. There is no stopping of the rising price. With the dollar not worth anything Look out for the $200 barrel.
JanPaul 1 hour ago
JanPaul is ranked in the community as President
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
US DOLLAR HEGEMONY:
THE SOFT UNDERBELLY OF EMPIRE (AND WHAT CAN BE DONE TO USE IT!)
by Rohini Hensman and Marinella Correggia
http://www.sacw.net/free/rohini_marinella30012005.html
======================
This article is one that details the role of dollar hegemony and our "empire."
Ron Paul also covers dollar hegemony
quote:
It all ended on August 15, 1971, when Nixon closed the gold window and refused to pay out any of our remaining 280 million ounces of gold. In essence, we declared our insolvency and everyone recognized some other monetary system had to be devised in order to bring stability to the markets.
Amazingly, a new system was devised which allowed the U.S. to operate the printing presses for the world reserve currency with no restraints placed on it-- not even a pretense of gold convertibility, none whatsoever! Though the new policy was even more deeply flawed, it nevertheless opened the door for dollar hegemony to spread.
Realizing the world was embarking on something new and mind boggling, elite money managers, with especially strong support from U.S. authorities, struck an agreement with OPEC to price oil in U.S. dollars exclusively for all worldwide transactions. This gave the dollar a special place among world currencies and in essence “backed” the dollar with oil. In return, the U.S. promised to protect the various oil-rich kingdoms in the Persian Gulf against threat of invasion or domestic coup. This arrangement helped ignite the radical Islamic movement among those who resented our influence in the region. The arrangement gave the dollar artificial strength, with tremendous financial benefits for the United States. It allowed us to export our monetary inflation by buying oil and other goods at a great discount as dollar influence flourished.
http://tinyurl.com/54ywk2
================
Understanding the problems with the dollar is important if we are to understand many of the policies of the U.S. over the last 3 decades. As things get worse with it, the more the government has to intervene in things.
THE SOFT UNDERBELLY OF EMPIRE (AND WHAT CAN BE DONE TO USE IT!)
by Rohini Hensman and Marinella Correggia
http://www.sacw.net/free/rohini_marinella30012005.html
======================
This article is one that details the role of dollar hegemony and our "empire."
Ron Paul also covers dollar hegemony
quote:
It all ended on August 15, 1971, when Nixon closed the gold window and refused to pay out any of our remaining 280 million ounces of gold. In essence, we declared our insolvency and everyone recognized some other monetary system had to be devised in order to bring stability to the markets.
Amazingly, a new system was devised which allowed the U.S. to operate the printing presses for the world reserve currency with no restraints placed on it-- not even a pretense of gold convertibility, none whatsoever! Though the new policy was even more deeply flawed, it nevertheless opened the door for dollar hegemony to spread.
Realizing the world was embarking on something new and mind boggling, elite money managers, with especially strong support from U.S. authorities, struck an agreement with OPEC to price oil in U.S. dollars exclusively for all worldwide transactions. This gave the dollar a special place among world currencies and in essence “backed” the dollar with oil. In return, the U.S. promised to protect the various oil-rich kingdoms in the Persian Gulf against threat of invasion or domestic coup. This arrangement helped ignite the radical Islamic movement among those who resented our influence in the region. The arrangement gave the dollar artificial strength, with tremendous financial benefits for the United States. It allowed us to export our monetary inflation by buying oil and other goods at a great discount as dollar influence flourished.
http://tinyurl.com/54ywk2
================
Understanding the problems with the dollar is important if we are to understand many of the policies of the U.S. over the last 3 decades. As things get worse with it, the more the government has to intervene in things.
wikimikey 1 hour ago
wikimikey is ranked in the community as Vice President
97.5% of Community members have fewer points">
97.5% of Community members have fewer points">
Were we not discussing these same issues with oil back in the early 1980's? Wasn't gasohol gonna be the savior of our energy independance? Were we not warned that oil was too powerful back then? This country seems too have a bad memory or is it because the amount of junk that is daily spoon fed to us since the start of the misinformation age has us jaded?
It begs to ask... Why would you want the government to head anything? Why would you rely on them to fix anything? It truly is the disconnect that Washington DC has with the country at large.
It begs to ask... Why would you want the government to head anything? Why would you rely on them to fix anything? It truly is the disconnect that Washington DC has with the country at large.
zymurguy 30 minutes ago
zymurguy is ranked in the community as Vice President
95.5% of Community members have fewer points">
95.5% of Community members have fewer points">
yeah, like ethanol. "Let's financially support and supplement the development of an alternative fuel element with guv'ment money... what's that? ethanol is made with corn? great! we have lots of that right? and it's cheap." doh! "wha'? oh, we didn't really think about the fact that corn is used in everything else and the free market we haven't taken control of yet responded by farmers selling high to ethanol producers rather than their past buyers." double doh! "we can still fix this, don't report fuel or food inflation anymore, we'll call it "core inflation"... yeah, that's it... nothing to see here, move along."
biker 36 minutes ago
biker is ranked in the community as Manager
77.6% of Community members have fewer points">
77.6% of Community members have fewer points">
Crude oil rallied today when a corn fell off of an old womans big toe today as she crossed the street to sign up for food stamps. It was not expected to have an affect on the price of corn used for the ethanol market as that does not matter anymore with farmers cutting back to 80% of production for this year. However, she did pass gas and that sparked a rally for green house friendly stocks as Greenpeace beat her senseless.
more to come....
more to come....
jwlivingston 35 minutes ago
jwlivingston is ranked in the community as Director
84.3% of Community members have fewer points">
84.3% of Community members have fewer points">
The refiners have decreased utilization down to 83% whereas last year they were at 88% and they were surprised that there was a decrease in gasoline inventories which are quite a bit higher than they werelast year at this time. Last year this time they hovered around 200 million barrels versus the 219 million this year. Last year prices "went up due to a new additive is short supply. So they have more on hand, demand is down, (depending on what you read by 2% or 6.8%)and we should have to pay more because the refiners are manipulating the "stockpile numbers" by their production output. Common sense is thrown out and our government who is bailing out wall street, the perpetrators of the dot com bubble, housing bubble, and now the commodities bubble, stand by and say the price of gas of 3.50 a gallon concerns them. Probably concerns them because they could benefit a lot more at 4.00 a gallon. I think it's time for them to go and go quickly.
theargo7 31 minutes ago
theargo7 is ranked in the community as Analyst
% of Community members have fewer points">
% of Community members have fewer points">
I never heard them say it concerns them (although I agree that they are probably concerned that it isn't $4 yet). They are probably subsidizing the refiners to curtail gasoline production.
JanPaul 32 minutes ago
JanPaul is ranked in the community as President
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
I saw an awful lot of people filling up at the station I use this week. Why?
Were they thinking prices were going to go up and trying to get a tank filled prior to that? If so, maybe inventories will improve next week.
However, "one station does not a trend make," so, it is just a thought.
Were they thinking prices were going to go up and trying to get a tank filled prior to that? If so, maybe inventories will improve next week.
However, "one station does not a trend make," so, it is just a thought.
sbenard 27 minutes ago
sbenard is ranked in the community as President
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
99.9% of Community members have fewer points">
This news, in turn,is causing grain prices -- biofuels -- to explode through the roof today! Soybean prices have hit lock limit up! See today's corn, wheat, and soybean charts, which I posted to my blog:
http://globalcapital.blogspot.com/
What commodity bubble?
http://globalcapital.blogspot.com/
What commodity bubble?
kudlowpet 25 minutes ago
kudlowpet is ranked in the community as Manager
70.4% of Community members have fewer points">
70.4% of Community members have fewer points">
Even OPEC acknowledged big institutions control prices...
correctthinking 14 minutes ago
correctthinking is ranked in the community as Analyst
% of Community members have fewer points">
% of Community members have fewer points">
It's clear that the "free market" system does not work where energy is involved. Perhaps it's time for the government to sieze the oil companies and run them. Price will drop when profit is eliminated. Or better yet, how about we get off our collective a##, and insist that the government and the oil companies begin immediate construction of 100 large refineries across the nation...we can import all the oil we want, we can pump it out of the ground all we want, we can fill SPR with ten billion barrels of the stuff, but if you can't refine it, you can't use it. Build more refineries, triple or quadruple the capacity, and the cost comes down. And while we're at it, we need to drill for more oil domestically, in Alaska, off the coast of California and Florida. The tree-hugging enviros can no longer dictate energy policy, they need to shut the h*** up before we all go bankrupt.
connemarasports 13 minutes ago
connemarasports is ranked in the community as President
99.4% of Community members have fewer points">
99.4% of Community members have fewer points">
I think 4-5 a GAL. is great in that we still get it much cheaper then euroland and the govt''s at all levels get a cut on each gal which help to stabize our Taxes at local,state,county and fed's levels.I think all you Repub's who our awash will tax cut monies and your oil stocks really our enjoying this.I do have oil/metals in some of my mutual funds and have seen 38%+ increase yoy last four years,but previous to thoses years only 3-5%-so its nice and hopfully it will cut down on enviroment issues as oil hits 4-5 within the next few months and years{plus 13-19 billion congress gives us for new ways to find more oil and metals}!God sure is GREAT!
ARay 9 minutes ago
ARay is ranked in the community as Analyst
53% of Community members have fewer points">
53% of Community members have fewer points">
Here's a good one I just came across. Directed at the housing bubble, but I hope it applies here!
Greater foolishness
In fact, off-plan ‘investing’ is not investing at all - which implies a long-term commitment- but speculation. It is based on the expectation that there will be willing buyers you can sell to at a good profit. And the big risk is: what if there aren’t? The ‘greater fool’ theory says that it’s OK to be an idiot when you buy something so long as there’s an even bigger idiot who you can sell to.
But as US off-plan speculators have discovered, the ‘greater fool’ game gets very ugly when the music stops and the idiots suddenly all wise up. So the rule you should apply if you want to join this or any other speculative game is: only play with money you can afford to lose.
http://money.uk.msn.com/Mortgages/BuyToLet/article.aspx?C***-documentid=5182780
Greater foolishness
In fact, off-plan ‘investing’ is not investing at all - which implies a long-term commitment- but speculation. It is based on the expectation that there will be willing buyers you can sell to at a good profit. And the big risk is: what if there aren’t? The ‘greater fool’ theory says that it’s OK to be an idiot when you buy something so long as there’s an even bigger idiot who you can sell to.
But as US off-plan speculators have discovered, the ‘greater fool’ game gets very ugly when the music stops and the idiots suddenly all wise up. So the rule you should apply if you want to join this or any other speculative game is: only play with money you can afford to lose.
http://money.uk.msn.com/Mortgages/BuyToLet/article.aspx?C***-documentid=5182780
dryheavesdaily 4 minutes ago
dryheavesdaily is ranked in the community as President
99.8% of Community members have fewer points">
99.8% of Community members have fewer points">
Breaking news
Merrill Lynch May Post First-Quarter Loss on $6 Billion to $6.5 Billion in Further Write-Downs
Merrill Lynch May Post First-Quarter Loss on $6 Billion to $6.5 Billion in Further Write-Downs
dryheavesdaily 4 minutes ago
dryheavesdaily is ranked in the community as President
99.8% of Community members have fewer points">
99.8% of Community members have fewer points">
Breaking news
Merrill Lynch May Post First-Quarter Loss on $6 Billion to $6.5 Billion in Further Write-Downs
Merrill Lynch May Post First-Quarter Loss on $6 Billion to $6.5 Billion in Further Write-Downs
Silverbull 25 seconds ago
Silverbull is ranked in the community as Analyst
58.2% of Community members have fewer points">
58.2% of Community members have fewer points">
G7 Meeting on Friday, are we going to see another manipu.... manual adjustment?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
53% of Community members have fewer points">
Any thoughts?