Sufficient Grounds For IMMEDIATE Impeachment: Iraq Oil Was Stolen & Cheney Planned Theft In Advance

[kpete]

Some people -- deny that oil theft motivated the decision to invade Iraq. All such "alternative" theories face one problem: The oil was, in fact, stolen -- and Cheney planned the theft well in advance:

http://www.pubrecord.org/nationworld/262-the-secret-deal-for-iraqs-oil.html

Previously undisclosed Halliburton documents obtained by The Public Record confirm that controlling the world's second largest oil reserves was a top priority for the Bush administration. Additionally, the deal between the Department of Defense and Halliburton unit Kellogg, Brown & Root to operate Iraq's oil industry saved Halliburton from imminent bankruptcy.

A March 6, 2003 internal Pentagon e-mail sent by an Army Corps of Engineers official says "action" on a multibillion-dollar Halliburton contract was "coordinated" within Cheney's office.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/35581

The e-mail says Douglas Feith, the former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, received authorization from then Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz to “execute” the Restore Iraqi Oil contract to Halliburton in 2002.

Feith was one of the architects of the Iraq war who operated the Pentagon’s Office of Special Plans that exaggerated the Iraqi threat and provided the White House with bogus information about links between Iraq and al Qaeda.

Right there, you have sufficient grounds for immediate impeachment of Dick Cheney. Not just impeachment: A RICO suit.

http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2008/08/oil-and-impeachment.html

[babylonsister]

1. Oh, Nancy, hello? Nancy?? nt

[bvar22]

17. Oh, Nancy....

Your check is in the mail.
Keep up the good work.

Dick C.

[truedelphi]

27. Just another beautiful morning for the elite

In the world's biggest Banana Republic!!

[The Stranger]

28. Ode to the Nancy Disaster (brought back by popular demand)

Oh, Nancy,
Words cannot begin to describe,
What you have put us through,
Disaster may not quite cut it as your appellation,
You held us down while they raped the nation.

[MissWaverly]

2. when is this collusion between big oil and big government

going to be dealt with, we have had 8 years of a government for the special interests, of the special interests and by the special interests.

[CaptJasHook]

38. At least we know what went on in those closed secret Energy meetings

back in 2002.....

[MissWaverly]

49. yes, but if there is no accountability????

but it may come, I have been hearing that we have made serious foreign policy blunders in Georgia, maybe, somebody will wake up and realize that frat boy diplomacy is not such a cool idea.

[defendandprotect]

61. Well . . . it certainly goes back to the '63 coup on our government . . .

and their suicidal drive for profits will probably shortly cost us the

loss of our species and who knows what levels of damage to the planet --- !!!

[MissWaverly]

65. actually I think it started after WW II

How much was Russia a threat that justified the spending of millions and millions in nukes and sophisticated weaponry,
I think much of this is related to the military industrial complex and the determination to turn us into a war machine.
A war machine that would also protect corporate profiteers on their global conquest.

[defendandprotect]

66. Well . . . just dealing with the NATIONALIZATION of the oil industry . . ..

and perhaps even all of our natural resources ----

I know that FDR was considering it -- and asked for LBJ's advice!!!! ????

Picture that --- !!! LBJ was deeply involved with Clint Murchison - oil/Mafia ---

If you've ever seen the movie "3 Days of the Condor" you can also recognize how the

CIA/military intelligence would also have an "interest" in oil industry for military

purposes.


JFK ran on a Democratic Platform which called for nationalizing the oil industry ---

and he was after the oil depletion allowance --- quite hot stuff!!!!


IMO, Russia wasn't a threat --- and agree that they had to create one!

Kinda like what they just did with "terraism" --- terrorism being the new Communism!


These are suicidal impulses and if we don't stop them soon they're gonna take us all

with them!

[Enthusiast]

85. The U.S.A. was a threat to them, however.

Here if you even thought 'communism' you were put on a double secret list.

[MissWaverly]

101. I vote for peace and social programs

enough bullying the world, let's try diplomacy and sanctions.

[rucognizant]

70. No that would be St Ronnie in 1981!

[MissWaverly]

102. Him, too

widely credited with singlehandedly destroying Russia with his star wars program. He was the role model for both Bushes and the bull in the china shop diplomacy so popular with the GOP.

[JFN1]

82. The planet has survived worse than us

I'm more worried about the preservation of the species. Earth will go on just fine without us around...

[global1]

3. It Just Blows My Mind That We Have Such Sinister People In Our Government That......

plan and plot behind the scenes to do these kinds of things. Patriots? I think not. These criminals are motivated by power and greed and unfortunately take advantage of the American people by lying to them. The get the American people to vote for them and to put them in office so let them get away with these crimes.

What kind of conscious do these guys have? How do they live with themselves and justify this in their mind?

When you think about this we implicate all of the *Co administration for going along with this and throw in the Republican Congress that let them get away with this early on and unfortunately we have to lump in the Dems that are continuing to let them get away with these crimes.

This has got to stop. We have to put our foot down and not tolerate this behavior of public officials. Otherwise you can just kiss our way of life good-bye.

[Loge23]

13. ...and this election is close??

There are so many smoking guns from this band of criminals that I've lost count.
Downing St., Gonzales, Cheney, rendition, torture, wiretapping, on and on and on.
But to many Americans, the biggest dilemna is who to vote for.
The hoods will come out in the voting booths and the media machines will cleanse the horrendous record of this admin.
I'm all for more political party's , not less - but in light of the absolutely heinous Anti-American performance of the republican party it is mind-boggling that people in this country even allow this party to exist anymore.

[orleans]

71. I KNOW!

how the FUCK can this election be close??

i don't get it...

[CubicleGuy]

74. You don't get it?

When you become a member of the Republican party, you check your brains at the door and pick up your crayons.

The average member of the Republican party is completely incapable of understanding the scandals that surround their leadership. It's over their heads. Consequently, there's no follow-up by those who should most care about ridding their party of vandals and traitors.

And the hits just keep on comin'...

[Enthusiast]

87. CubicleGuy-WRONG!

The average Republican has never even heard of these scandals. If they did hear of them they would simply dismiss them as Liberal lies. They listen exclusively to Fox News where Republican scandals are not mentioned.

[orleans]

96. (smile)

"you check your brains at the door and pick up your crayons."

i think you're on to something here....

[hootinholler]

14. It blows my mind that congress is unable or unwilling to do anything about it.

Good luck with the putting our foot down thing. I've tried, not that I'm giving up, but things are going to have to get 1930's bad to get enough people together to do that.

I have little hope that an Obama administration will hold them accountable.

-Hoot

[EFerrari]

33. This is the kind of corruption that banana republics have always dealt with.

My family comes from one of them and all of this is just every eerily familiar. They all had US corporate interests running things; we have globalization.

And I only hope it's no so entrenched that a Democratic White House and majority can't fix it over time.

[hootinholler]

37. C'mere, you!

:hug:

-Hoot

[EFerrari]

46. Thank you, hoot.

:hug:

:hi:

[earth mom]

41. Yep, the dems in Congress are complicit. Obama is in on it too. Nothing will change in '09.

:argh:

[Enthusiast]

88. I have little hope there

will be an Obama Administration.

[Frisbee]

40. That doesn't blow my mind...

but that the vast majority of the American public isn't screaming for their heads on platters, does.

[NoSheep]

73. Ditto. That is also the thing I wake up reeling from every day. Must be someting in the water.

Or the MEDIA THEY OWN. Or could it be those clandestine mind-control experiments the CIA has been toying with for eons...lol

Can you say Conspiracy-REALITY?

[Enthusiast]

89. Most Americans don't

hear this stuff. They are watching Fox News or the Olypics. Hey, gas prices are going down, everything is good.:sarcasm:

[bjobotts]

53. Get it straight-we don't tolerate this behavior-we are powerless to stop it

[bjobotts]

54. We elect reps who lie to us, get in office, and ignore their promises

[bjobotts]

55. We demand accountability and they pamper us with rhetoric, then vote to immunize

[bjobotts]

56. "Armed revolution cannot beat the US militarty but it can eliminate its politicalleaders"-

anonymous. The time has come if Obama loses this election and it is stolen by repubs voting machines...then we have run out of alternatives to save our democracy or restore our constitution.

[defendandprotect]

62. Are you looking to Reed/Pelosi to "put their foot down" . .. ????

[Enthusiast]

86. Smooch.

"Otherwise you can just kiss our way of life good-bye."

[elehhhhna]

4. Treason, self-dealing...these are capital offenses.

Swing low, Cheney.

[Subdivisions]

21. A million murders. Beginning on 9/11. n/t

[OneGrassRoot]

5. K&R n/t

[jtrockville]

6. Isn't it better to let these criminals off the hook?

Otherwise, we'll divide the country into those who support criminal behavior and those who don't. Isn't it better that we remain UNITED in supporting criminal behavior?

[bbgrunt]

16. you got that right!

[SammyWinstonJack]

32. ...

:evilgrin: Snotty Scotty thinks so.

[H2O Man]

7. Thank you.

Nominated.

[Sgent]

8. Maybe I'm dense

and I believe that he should be impeached for FISA / Gitmo issues, but I'm not sure how this is a violation of law.

[Gregorian]

69. FISA violations. Spying on Americans.

There are multiple reasons that Pelosi doesn't seem to get. You're not dense.
It's pretty damned difficult to sit here waiting.

[malaise]

9. K & R n/t

[cyberpj]

10. Is anyone keeping a list of the real and sufficient reasons - there are several by now aren't there?

Someone should ram that list down Miss Nancy's throat.

[truedelphi]

29. We've had people like kpete assemble those lists

They went on and on.

There are probably 75 reasons that you can impeach.

I mena, Kucinich came up with 35.

[elocs]

11. Does anyone here actually believe that there will be immediate impeachment of anyone

in the middle of a presidential election campaign? That question is really rhetorical because we all know there will not be any impeachment of anyone.

[GliderGuider]

12. Here's another theory - not impeachable, but it makes you say "Hmmm..."

http://www.paulchefurka.ca/Iraq%20and%20Saudi%20Arabia.html

In this article I will present research that supports a rather startling hypothesis: that the USA invaded Iraq primarily to enable the secret diversion of a portion of Iraq’s oil production to Saudi Arabia. This was done in order to disguise the fact that Saudi Arabia’s oil output has peaked, and may be in permanent decline. The evidence for this conclusion is circumstantial, but it does knit up many of the loose threads in the mystery of the American administration’s motivation for invasion.

To lay the groundwork we need to set out a couple of assumptions.

The primary assumption is that the world’s oil production has been on a plateau for the last two years, and in fact we may be teetering on the brink of the production decline predicted by the Peak Oil theory. Such a decline could be dangerous to the world economy, both directly through the loss of economic capacity and indirectly (and perhaps more importantly) through the loss of investor confidence in the global economic structure.

The second assumption is that the oil production of Saudi Arabia is key to maintaining the global oil supply. Saudi Arabia supplies over 10% of the world’s crude oil, with over half of that coming from one enormous field named Ghawar. There is a large and well-informed body of opinion that believes that if Saudi oil production goes into decline the world will follow because there is not the spare capacity anywhere else to make up for such a decline. Saudi Arabia is notoriously tight-lipped about the state of their oil fields, and in fact oil production information is considered to be a state secret. The only trustworthy information the world really has about Saudi Arabia’s oil are their aggregated production figures.

The conclusion that can be drawn from these two assumptions is that if Saudi Arabia’s production began to decline and the world found out about it, there would be a significant risk of a world-wide economic panic that would destabilize markets and throw nations like the USA into a recession or depression that would be worse than the actual damage done by the loss of the oil. We can assume that the prevention or postponement of such a crisis would be an extremely high priority for the administrations of both the USA and Saudi Arabia.

(snip)
The speculation of this article is that the real background of the Iraq war goes something like this:

* The Bush administration is composed primarily of oilmen. They are well aware of the Peak Oil theory.
* They are also aware of the risks that a decline in global oil production could pose to the world’s political and economic stability, especially if it is generally perceived to be the result of irreversible geological conditions (i.e. we start to realize that the world is running out of oil and there’s nothing we can do about it).
* The Bush administration and the Saudis are also well aware of the role Saudi Arabia plays as the linchpin of world oil production.
* The Bush administration and the Saudis are very good friends, and share intimate secrets like the actual state of Saudi oil production.
* In early 2001 the Saudis tell George and Dick that Ghawar has started to “water out”: the oil they are pumping up contains more and more of the water that they are using to force oil into the wells. This is a sure sign that the field is nearing the end of its useful life.
* This news triggers very loud alarm bells in Washington and Riyadh, because if Ghawar and overall Saudi production are about to decline this brings the risk of global instability that much closer.
* The two administrations decide they need to keep the imminence of Saudi oil decline out of the public consciousness for as long as possible. To do this they need to accomplish two things: mask the decline of Saudi Arabia, and make it appear as though any decline in Middle East production is due to above-ground factors.
* Fortunately, they have a ready target in Iraq. Saddam is vulnerable, he has lots of oil, and Iraqi oil production has been in chaos since Gulf War 1. And he controls the input end of the IPSA pipeline.
* At Cheney’s Energy Task Force meetings the plan is developed and western oil companies are brought into the picture. This ensures they will be onside and will not start asking awkward questions later about the provenance of Saudi oil.
* As a parallel effort, the Saudis agree to sponsor an attack on US soil to provide the Bush administration with the required “casus belli”. The Saudis recruit 15 of their own citizens to form the core of the September 11 attack team.
* Once the attack has taken place the march to war begins. It doesn’t matter how flimsy the excuses are, all that matters is that the progress of the plan cannot be derailed under any circumstances. No penetration of the ruse, however small, will be permitted. This determination results in the Wilson/Plame reprisal, the killing of Dr. David Kelly and possibly other killings like that of State Department WMD analyst John Kokal (http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/112003_kokal.html ). The real reason for the invasion must never be discovered.
* Iraq is duly invaded and Baghdad is captured. The Oil Ministry is the only facility to be secured because it’s the only one that matters to the plan.
* The meters in the southern oil fields are immediately shut off and sabotaged so nobody can tell how much oil is missing.
* The un-metered oil is redirected into the perfectly functional IPSA pipeline and enters Saudi Arabia.
* There are now two possibilities for what happens to the purloined oil:

1. It arrives at the Saudi port of Yanbu where it is loaded onto tankers as legitimate Saudi oil, and shipped to international customers. There is a problem with this scenario, because the oil coming in from Iraq has a slightly different chemical signature from Saudi oil. This small difference would be noticed by customers, because the refineries need to know the characteristics of their feedstock very precisely.
2. A more reasonable solution is that this oil is piped to refineries in Saudi Arabia and is used to satisfy domestic demand. The Saudi oil spared by this substitution is shipped out to customers, and no one is the wiser. This is both safer and easier than the first suggestion, because the stolen oil never leaves Saudi Arabia, and its disposition falls under the obscuring veil of Saudi secrecy. This also makes the case harder to prove, of course.

* The 1.7 million barrel per day volume of the IPSA pipeline and the timing of the rise seen in Saudi oil production in early 2004 fit the scenario perfectly.
* Any decline in overall Middle Eastern oil production can now be blamed on the civil war in Iraq, which has been either a blessing in disguise or a calculated part of the plan. The attacks on oil installations have also made it easy to disguise the disappearance of a full tanker-load-equivalent of oil every day.
* It was all going well, except that the decline in Saudi oil production exceeded everyone’s expectations. Even with the Iraqi subterfuge in place the decline of 800,000 barrels per day over the last year could not be masked.

[dixiegrrrrl]

18. Hmmmmmmmm

[JDPriestly]

34. GuilderGuider, you are assuming that oil is fungible. Actually, oil can differ in its

chemical makeup. I'm not sure, but I think that an expert might be able to tell oil from specific Saudi wells from, say Libyan oil, by measuring the difference in, let's say the lead in it. I'm not expert enough to know all the details, but I am pretty sure that it might be possible to differentiate oil from Basra from oil from a certain well in Saudi Arabia.

[GliderGuider]

58. I addressed that issue in the article

* There are now two possibilities for what happens to the purloined oil:

1. It arrives at the Saudi port of Yanbu where it is loaded onto tankers as legitimate Saudi oil, and shipped to international customers. There is a problem with this scenario, because the oil coming in from Iraq has a slightly different chemical signature from Saudi oil. This small difference would be noticed by customers, because the refineries need to know the characteristics of their feedstock very precisely.
2. A more reasonable solution is that this oil is piped to refineries in Saudi Arabia and is used to satisfy domestic demand. The Saudi oil spared by this substitution is shipped out to customers, and no one is the wiser. This is both safer and easier than the first suggestion, because the stolen oil never leaves Saudi Arabia, and its disposition falls under the obscuring veil of Saudi secrecy. This also makes the case harder to prove, of course.

If anything like this actually happened, option 2 would definitely have been preferred. The Saudis would just run the Iraqi oil through their own refineries, and either export the refined product or use it domestically and export their own oil which had been spared by the replacement.

[JDPriestly]

78. I just don't think that would deal with enough oil to warrant the ruse.

I just don't think it would work.

[GliderGuider]

81. You might be right. However, there is this:

Saudi Arabia plans huge refinery investments
Saudi Arabia: Saturday, July 23 - 2005

The scale of Saudi Arabia's commitment to meeting market needs is shown by plans for a new export refinery at Yanbu on the Red Sea to produce 400,000 bpd of clean fuels involving a $5 billion-$8 billion investment.

The planned refinery at Yanbu could supply the US east coast market with high-quality gasoline while low-sulphur diesel could be exported to Europe and naphtha to East Asia.

A number of US, European and Asian companies have expressed interests in becoming a joint venture partner to operate the refinery. Saudi Aramco vice president Isam Al-Bayat has also disclosed intriguing plans for an initial public offering of shares in the new export refinery.

Saudi Aramco already has two joint venture partners in Saudi-based refinery operations, The 320,000 bpd Sasref refinery at Jubail is operated with Royal Dutch Shell while ExxonMobil is the partner in the Samref already established refining complex at Yanbu. In addition, Saudi Aramco operates five wholly-owned domestic refineries at Ras Tanura, Rabigh, Yanbu, Riyadh and Jeddah which are used to supply domestic needs.

Saudi Arabia's combined capacity from domestic refineries is around 2.05 million bpd. In addition, Saudi Aramco maintains 1.6 million bpd of refining capacity overseas. The company continues to move ahead steadily with multi-billion dollar investments for construction, upgrading and integration of its domestic refineries.

They do have the raw capacity to pull off an 800 kbpd switch, but not without a lot of work. We may never know. At this point it's all speculation -- it may not have happened, and if it did it's already a done deal.

[Triana]

15. Pfft! Don't we wish. bu$hit/Tricky Dick II could do ANY THING and they won't be impeached...

...and they full well know it.

[bobthedrummer]

19. K&R

[LeftHander]

20. Cheney is the Best CEO halliburton ever had....

Took HAL from $9 low in 2002 to Recent high of over $50...

Look at the chart on Yahoo HAL....when HAL was rock bottomed and was looking at junk status...Cheney started promoting WMDs in Iraq.


Been saying this for EFFING YEARS!

[jgraz]

22. I wonder if THIS crime is "egregious" in Obama's mind...

Of course, at this point he may not have to worry about making the call.

[AzDar]

23. Kick!

:kick:

[Cleita]

24. Well, how do we pry Nancy Pelosi off her throne to start proceedings? n/t

[indepat]

25. All who continue to support, aid and abet, enable, and shill for junior's little war of aggression

and torture don't give a shit about these little details. :P

[Kablooie]

26. Since impeachment is still off the table it makes me want to see what's being passed under the table

[EFerrari]

31. No kidding. n/t

[truedelphi]

30. Also, my understanding is that Colin Powell was

Letting people in the Afghan government know that we needed to put in the oil pipeline and that bombs would be falling if they didn't agree to it.

That was back during the summer of 2001

[Kweli4Real]

44. I read that article, but that wasn't Powell ...

It was big oil representatives. I can't think of whom the article identified or the link, but I will look for it.

[Rhiannon12866]

64. You're right, it wasn't Powell. This is my understanding of what took place at that August 2001

meeting, after reading this book, written by two French authors, when it became available in this country. It got a lot of publicity overseas, but not here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3831308&mesg_id=3834696

[truedelphi]

98. Well the article below details what others here are saying But...

Believe me, I know well of what they speak, as I wrote this article way back in Dec of 2001 and it was published Jan 2002:
http://www.coastalpost.com/02/01/03.htm

But while talking to some experts on various other matters Monday and Tuesday, I was given Colin Powell's name as well

Will need of course to double and triple check it, but that is what I am now coming to believe - Powell was in the mix as well. Whether Afghan ministers were meeting with him in Washington, I have no idea. So I will also have to get a location for the event, if the event happened.

[tanyev]

57. July 2001 - talks with the Taliban

Four months later, American diplomats met with Taliban emissaries as well as representatives from Pakistan, Iran and Russia for four days of talks in Berlin in mid-July. Again, the message was that if the Taliban would extradite bin Laden and form a broad-based national government, it could win international recognition and reap extensive economic subsidies from the construction of a pipeline. The meeting was one of several convened by Francesco Vendrell, a Spanish diplomat who serves as the U.N.'s chief representative on Afghanistan. The delegates at the July meeting included Robert Oakley, former U.S. ambassador and Unocal lobbyist; Karl "Rick" Inderfurth, former assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs; Lee Coldren, head of the Office of Pakistan, Afghan and Bangladesh Affairs in the State Department until 1997; Tom Simons, former U.S. ambassador to Pakistan and the most recent official negotiator with the Taliban; Niaz Naik, former Foreign Minister of Pakistan; Nikolai Kozyrev, a former Russian special envoy to Afghanistan; and Saeed Rajai Khorassani, formerly the Iranian representative to the U.N. The Taliban ambassador to Pakistan, Abdul Salam Zaeef, attended several sessions with some of the delegates in Berlin, according to Naif Naik, though officially the Taliban had not been invited. Naik was expected to carry the U.S. message to the Taliban.

According to Naik, the point of the meeting was that "we would try to convey to them that if they did certain things, then, gradually, they could win the jackpot, get something in return from the international community." It might, Naik said, "be possible to persuade the Taliban that once a broader-based government was in place and the oil pipeline under way, there would be billions of dollars in commission, and the Taliban would have their own resources."

It was at the July meeting, according to Naik, that Tom Simons suggested that Afghanistan could face an open-ended military operation from bases in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan if it didn't accede to U.S. demands. "Ambassador Simons stated that if the Taliban wouldn't agree with the plan, and if Pakistan was unable to persuade them, the United States might use an overt action against Afghanistan," Naik says. The words used by Simons were "a military operation," according to Naik. Another participant reportedly said the Taliban's choice was clear: either accept a "carpet of gold" riches from the pipeline or "a carpet of bombs," meaning a military strike.

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2002/06/05/memo/index1.html

[truedelphi]

99. See reply 98. n/t

[Rhiannon12866]

63. Nope, it wasn't Colin Powell. He was the one who was forced to lie to the UN. The book on this was

"Forbidden Truth: U.S.-Taliban Secret Oil Diplomacy And The Failed Hunt For Bin Laden " which I have and read when it became available here.

It's been awhile, but remember that it was a female administration official who threatened the Taliban when the oil execs were attempting to build an oil pipeline through Afghanistan, during a meeting that took place in August of 2001. I forget the exact quote, but she said that if they refused the U.S. "carpet of gold" (meaning a fortune in money), then we would "carpet their country with bombs."

A month later, 9/11 happened. It was written by two French authors who researched this thoroughly, but it received next to no publicity in this country, no big surprise. The only show I remember them appearing on was Phil Donahue's MSNBC show, which was suddenly yanked just before the administration invaded Iraq. It's well worth the read...

http://www.amazon.com/Forbidden-Truth-U-s-taliban-Secret-Diplomacy/dp/0756776619/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1219366324&sr=8-2

[annabanana]

35. oh kickkickkickkick. . damn. . . . n/t

[JDPriestly]

36. I have always suspected that the real reason for the Iraq War was

to save Halliburton from its asbestos debt -- with taxpayer money.

"Tort reform" is still a favorite right-wing "issue" (a phony issue), but it is less of a focal point of their propaganda than it was before the Bush/Cheney regime. The reasons for the panic over tort liability were many, but two of them, most likely, were the asbestos liability and the tobacco liability.

Bush/Cheney have taken care of both of those little problems in their own unforgettable fashion -- robbing the American people to rescue their corporate buddies. We been robbed. No doubt about it. And the brunt of the asbestos damage may not yet have been felt.

[librechik]

39. Too bad the current Attorney General will NEVER bring that charge

That's why he was put there--to resist anything like a fightback from the American People on that issue
(and others)

[HowHasItComeToThis]

43. CAN SUBSEQUENT ADMINS CHARGE MUKASSEY WITH TREASON???

DERIILECTION OF DUTY, JUST WONDERING

[librechik]

47. I sure as hell hope so, but they are already preparing to make any future investigation look like

treason itself. Or just too much trouble. Or anything but the natural thing that should happen in a sane America.

I don't get it. They throw our great privileges and rights in the toilet, just to avoid embarrassment.

[HowHasItComeToThis]

79. THEY DON'T KNOW THE FIRST THING ABOUT DEMOCRACY

[FiveGoodMen]

100. They know how to destroy it.

[HowHasItComeToThis]

42. JUST ANOTHER BUSINESS DEAL.... ARE YOU PUKING YET??

[Disturbed]

45. Criminal Charges can be brought forth after Cheney is no

longer VP.

[fascisthunter]

48. This is Treason... the use of Our Military for Private Means

US oil companies are not nationalized, so yes, this was treason.

[SalmonChantedEvening]

50. Now now now now NOW.

No other word besides Treason applies to this.

And there is no Higher Crime than that. Impeach these traitors. NOW.

K&R!

hi kpete :D :hug: :loveya:

[cadaverdog]

51. Something that gets very little mention is the oil contracts that Saddam had

with Russia and their giant Lukoil. While US oil companies were forbidden to do business in Iraq during the embargo, Lukoil signed contracts with Saddam for development of rich oil fields. How well do you think this went over with Chaney and his oil conglomerate friends, knowing that when the embargo was lifted, the Russians would be in line for a windfall, er, make that a "gusher"? Then, acting all noble, the US asks Russia to join them in overthrowing Saddam, and surpise! The Russians tell the US to pound salt. Now the Russians are trying to get the Iraqis to honor the old contracts and the US is thumbing their nose at the Russians. Think the Russians will pull out of Georgia because we ordered them out? Hmmm?

Here's one link of many on the web with info: http://oilandgaseurasia.wordpress.com/2007/08/13/lukoil-contract-to-develop-prized-iraqi-oil-field-“scrapped”/

[Gman]

52. This is a "duh... no shit"

Cheney, as HAL CEO assumed the liability for the asbestos companies they bought along with the litigation. They were about to go belly up because of this horrible decision. Iraq saved HAL.

Then, HAL ran for the border and set up HQ in Dubai.

[file83]

59. Does this ever end?

This seemingly limitless sequence of criminal actions of the Bush/Cheney Administration, followed by a correspondingly infinite silence of justice?

[lonestarnot]

60. Son of a bitch!

[David Zephyr]

67. This is really going to piss off Iraqis, be they Shi'a or Suni

Way to go, Cheney, you greedy idiot.

[ejbr]

68. Quote from Pelosi's office

"Nothing to see here folks. Move along. Nothing to see here."

[orleans]

72. 100th recommendation. WHERE IS ANYBODY???

(i feel like fucking neely o'hara from valley of the dolls!)

[QueenOfCalifornia]

75. RECOMMEND 110

I wish that this would make a difference. Make the M$M say something, ANYTHING.

But I have little hope that our so-called Democratic congress, led by Nancy the Neocon Pelosi, will do squat.

Hope is a four letter word.

Thanks Kpete.

(BTW - love your art :))

[jeff30997]

77. "Make the M$M say something, ANYTHING"

Well that's pretty much what they do all day long:Britney blablabla,100lbs newborn baby blablabla...

[Marnieworld]

76. What it comes down to is that people are actually happy about this

Like it's good for the U.S. toa ctually have this oil. That the world is running out and it's better for the U.S. to just take it so be it. My Parents and brother are both Fox News watching Republicans and they would be ok with this. They are ok with Iraqis dying because they somehow deserve it, that they'd hurt the U.S. if they could so who cares about theM? It's the same with the oil someone has to have it- they'd rather be the toughest guy, the winning team etc.

I almost think that the people in Congress that we are depending on to fight the good fight, do what's right in the face of criminality, are privately content with this. That morality aside, it's for the greater good and that they know more than we do, they are looking out for us. I do not imagine any justice about this or any other crime in past 8 years even with an Obama administration.

[lisainmilo]

80. I don't think they will do a damn thing about it!

They vast wealth they have obtained from the blood oil of our soldiers and the blood of the Iraqi people has lined their pockets so deep that they concious is no where to be found. BLOOD IS ALL OVER THEIR HANDS! Day after day, week after week, month after month, and year after year, nobody who matters seems to make a stand. It is sickening. I HOPE I AM WRONG, I WOULD LOVE TO BE WRONG ABOUT THIS.

[Norrin Radd]

83. kr

[judasdisney]

84. I M P E A C H . P E L O S I . N E X T .

And then so forth, down the list, beginning with Reid and Rahm and Schumer and Feinstein and Lieberman.

[Phred42]

95. Pelosi will need to be FIRST before anything else can get done

[judasdisney]

103. Impeach Pelosi first? I can live with that

[arthritisR_US]

90. good luck...get rid of Reid and Pelosi and then maaaaybe you have a chance. n/t

[cartach]

91. Re "world's second largest oil reserves"

Prior to the invasion there was a piece in documentary format on CNN as I recall, that outlined,complete with maps and explanation from experts,that provided all you wanted to know about the existing oil production,unexplored but highly potential areas and the enormous proven and probable oil reserves of Iraq. After viewing that program I could'nt help but be convinced,after the invasion of Iraq and since, that oil and the securement of same was the main reason. Despite all the comments from some pundits on MSM and from bloggers regarding oil as the main motive I've yet to see or hear any definitive proof laid out such as was contained in that program I saw. As far as I know it was never repeated but if anyone needed convincing, that program would go a long way to accomplish same. And if it was repeated you can be sure the ratings would take a big jump. You can draw your own conclusions as to why that particular program has apparently been buried, and at the same time ask yourself why,considering all the comment about oil being the main reason, a similar documentary has'nt been put together. It's certainly newsworthy and all the information required to prove the point is out there.

[DailyGrind51]

92. Even if Nancy saw a video of Cheney strangling someone, she wouldn't think it was enough to impeach!

[WillyT]

93. Big K & R !!!

:kick:

:mad:

[grannie4peace]

94. thank you kpete!!!!!!!!

[JerseygirlCT]

97. New administration. New AG. RICO suit.

That's my hope.

Far ranging one, too.

Right now, not a damn thing will get done. They could commit murder on live TV and nothing would happen.