The Deepwater Horizon Disaster: Shades of Things To Come?

While Mr. Obama wades around the sandy beaches of Pennsacola, and prepares for his tongue lashing, finger pointing, sleight of hand speechifying scheduled for this evening over the Deepwater Horizon disaster that left eleven Americans dead once again at the hands of foreigners, it doesn't appear that the true redressive steps are being taken, nor the right questions being asked.


British Petroleum, a British based global corporation and one of the largest in the world, held the mineral rights to the well involved in the explosion through its lease with the U.S. government for deep water offshore drilling rights to America's oil reserves off the coast of Louisiana.

Quite clearly, there was little or any regulation over this global concern and their practices, or else there was much "looking the other way" involved by those government agencies that would have been charged to oversee that foreign based corporation's practices which would have most likely prevented the explosion which occurred, the second in which BP has been involved in during the last decade - the other at an oil refinery in Texas - and those men might still be alive today.

Eleven Americans died, but thus far most of the news and media attention has been focused on the ever widening expanse and coastline that this horrendous spill has now impacted, rather than the American lives that were lost at the hands, once again, of foreigners.


I know, those lives that were lost were simply eleven, most likely redneck Southern construction workers, not on the level of the 9-11 disaster and lives lost of those global bankers, firefighters and police officers from the Big Apple.

These were people instead from the Big Easy, or thereabouts.

Southerners and Southwesterners mostly.

Where's the Hollywood telethon on this one, for those eleven men's families, and those poor oil slicked pelicans, turtles and the like all of you in LaLa Land? Why aren't you scheduling that star studded event?

The globalism and "go global" agendas of those in high seats of government throughout the world is quite clearly adversely impacting this country in the body counts by the decade.

Most of our nuclear reactors at this point have been "privatized," and shares now sold over the global market and stock exchange, a fact becoming more widely known as incidents such as these, and those airline terrorism attacks now that shares of our airlines also are sold over the global stock exchange, continue to make the headlines and which incidents were nonexistent prior to the huge push toward merging all nations economies, and this "global economy" and big businesses focus in competing in this global economy as a result.


Which is, after all, diametrically opposed to the sovereign America our founders created, and is quite regressive in its agendas.


Although the Nuclear Regulatory Agency is charged with oversight of our nuclear reactors, the fact that these privately owned now "public utilities" could at this point, especially with the ever declining dollar and U.S. recession, literally be owned by foreigners makes the mind boggle at just what impact such an accident might have at possibly Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, the largest and a mere 50 miles outside the Phoenix metropolitan area.

Just what is Washington smoking at this point? Or reading?



The Communist Manifesto or America's Constitution?

It will be interesting to see what kind of prepared speech Mr. Obama has addressing this disaster, and if mention is made of the 11 Americans who were victims of this disaster, or whether most of the focus will be on setting up his "escrow" account to pay off the claims of those who have been affected in the various industries and for clean up monies, and more of a PR appearance on behalf of BP in publicizing their efforts and willingness to escape the American court system, and establish a fund for any and all directed impacted.


But what about the indirect victims - the American people, and the families of those eleven killed?

This explosion and its results is sure to be the basis for hikes in gas and oil prices at the pump, and also higher prices for that Gulf seafood that is become more and more scarce the wider this oil tsunami spreads.

No formal charges or investigations, it appears, are being widely reported insofar as criminal negligence charges against BP or some of those executives or governmental officials personally for the loss of lives of those eleven men, nor does it appear that BP's lease rights will be rescinded for any further explorations along America's coastline, or investigations of their practices along the pipelines in Alaska - for which they also are or were major leaseholders.

Which might explain the push for Sarah Palin also and her sudden appearance on the national scene this last election.

Does seem a little coincidental, doesn't it?



And wonder how much BP has donated to state and federal campaigns across the board - although as a foreign domiciled corporation, clearly those that received and accepted such contributions should be hauled up on not simply ethics charges, but criminal charges.

Foreigners "sponsoring" candidates in this country?



The founders are not only spinning, they are levitating.

While, of course, instead of exploring the reserves "owned" by the American people which would result in cheaper oil and gas prices for the domestic variety (and not owned by U.S.A., Inc., with Congress and the President a Board of Directors, since "trading" our mineral rights or leasing to Great Britain a non-renewable energy source much needed in the U.S. definitely was not those founders intent), we are over in Iraq fighting to secure our presence there for those purported needed more expensive barrels, and in which it just so happens that the biggest news story today is about a massive mineral discovery made by U.S. geologists in Afghanistan.

Appears our standing army in their "pursuit" of bin Laden has been put on hold again, and does appear that our occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan more and more does appear to have ulterior motives.

I wonder who is truly directing this farce of a show?

Stay tuned, since it appears the after this evening, most Americans will need either nose plugs, or that sea sickness medication, dramamine.

It was reported today also that Wall Street had a small rally, due to the increases which occurred in the European markets - a market that increasingly is benefitting from the U.S. recession and deflation of our dollar by most of those British bankers that manipulate the world's economy, by and large, by the day.

What's that saying - that it is easier to conquer a country from within, than from without - especially in this day and age.


I mean, I think we have trained half the military might in the world, especially the British and Canadian troops, many of those Canadian troops are now based in the U.S., or going to some of our finest military academies as are a greater and greater number of foreigners.


And especially such a likely scenario seems possible with the assistance of "sponsored" and appointed representatives by Britain - I wonder how many are sponsored by China or Germany, since we know a bucketload of them are sponsored by Israel and Britain now - to facilitate the process with those "foreign" campaign donations.

And how convenient it appears now that the Supreme Court "accepted' that "Citizens United" case, clearly in order to further the global and U.S. corporate dominance in America's election process and the march toward global socialism, diametrically opposed to the intent of this nation's founders from the outset and their clear "war" against the East India Tea Company - the AIG, BP and U.S. Chamber of their time buying influence through the "sovereign" gain of both political parties and their "corporate" politicians particularly who have hijacked America's election process at this point fundamentally.

AIG, and now BP.

While Mr. Obama reassures the British publicly that in no way would the Deepwater Horizon incident affect this country's loyalty and alliance with Great Britain.

I wonder how the families of those victims felt upon hearing that on the local news?

In fact, this little incident and blip it was reported merely delayed his scheduled appearance and next road trip to Australia, another British holding.

And Britannia rules the waves in more ways than one.

Both on land (air waves) and on sea (continued drilling and mineral rights to America's oil reserves).

I wonder how many bridges the British own or lease in this country, and whether that one in Lake Havasu, Arizona they didn't want and we got as a hand-me-down has been inspected lately?

Mixed Messages: Obama Speaks At Notre Dame, Protestors Escorted Out

Recently Barack Obama presented another one of his speeches to the graduating class of Notre Dame University in South Bend, Indiana - a private Catholic University.

Since the announcement of Mr. Obama's handpicked universities for his appearances, there had been much controversy and debate with respect to his choice of Notre Dame due to his clear advocacy and support for unrestricted access to abortions in this country, even going so far as to oppose an Illinois bill attempting to ban the heinous late term "partial birth" abortion practice within that state prior to his election to the Senate, which did come up during the election campaign a few times and which he never convincingly explained.

This practice has also been known due to its brutal method, to cause trauma and injury to the woman in the process, and the U.S. Supreme Court recently upheld its ban due to both the timing and the method which is then used, and the risks to the mother.

The Catholic Church, of course, takes exception to this position as in violation of their church teachings on the sanctity of human life.

There was much build up reported in the mainstream media in this country, with some in the academic community vocalizing their objections, and others apparently more interested in the press that such a visit would entail for the university who attempted to downplay the conflict.

Its hard to fault some at the school, since they were in a "no win" political situation. Although if ever there was a time for the head of the university to take a stand for his Church's teachings, you would think this would have been one of them in order to set that example for those graduating seniors. But does appear that there was some force preventing him from doing so.

Perhaps this was the point all along.

It truly was interesting in light of Mr. Obama's positions that he would choose Notre Dame to begin with, and sort of makes one wonder what his true agenda actually was all about.

There are literally thousands of college campuses in this country, and it did appear there was a method to his madness in that of the three universities selected - Arizona State University in Tempe, Arizona; Notre Dame in South Bend, Indiana; and the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland - one was a public university, another a private religious institution, and the third a military academy.

According to the local South Bend newspaper, the final event was pulled off without a hitch. The reason being, of course, that as soon as some of the more vocal members of the student body decided to use their freedom of speech, they were summarily escorted from the auditorium by the security detail assigned for the event.

Interestingly, the piece from the local paper also summarized the gist of the message Mr. Obama had chosen for those graduating seniors. The final paragraph of which quoted Mr. Obama's final instruction and message:

"In this world of competing claims about what is right and what is true, have confidence in the values with which you've been raised and educated," he said. "Be unafraid to speak your mind when those values are at stake. Hold firm to your faith and allow it to guide you on your journey. Stand as a lighthouse."

Based upon the treatment of those in the audience who were "unafraid to speak their minds when their values were at stake," and their subsequent ejection from the event, I hope I'm not the only one that caught the hypocricy there.

Although Notre Dame is a private university, it receives much in the way of public funding in grant monies from the American taxpayers, and is not at all truly privately funded at all. And most of those private funds also come from members of the Catholic community.

I wonder who spoke at Mr. Obama's graduation ceremony from Harvard as one who was schooled and would gather passed his Constitutional law classes?

Mikhail Gorbechev?

http://www.southbendtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090518/News01/905189969/1011/News

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/16/obama.notre.dame/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Obama To Speak At ASU, Notre Dame and U.S. Naval Academy

It was announced recently that Barack Obama has scheduled appearances within the next two weeks at three major U.S. universities in order to speak at their commencement exercises. Arizona State University, a large Southwestern public college; Notre Dame, a private Catholic university; and the U.S. Naval Academy, a military academy.

Let's examine the three universities hand picked and selected out of the literally thousands of graduations which will occur this month throughout the nation:

Arizona State University is located in Tempe, Arizona and is the largest public university in the nation. It also just so happens to be a state that is and has been facing severe economic crisis due to both the housing and foreclosure crisis, and also the illegal immigrant situation and drug cartel wars which have erupted on the American Southwestern border.

It has been announced that despite the fact that over 74% of the American people are opposed to any amnesty of the estimated over 12 million illegal immigrants in this country, primarily from Mexico, that Mr. Obama, Ms. Pelosi and Congress are geared up to push and pass such legislation over the American citizens objections.

And in spite of the failure of the Bush Administration in the last McCain/Kennedy amnesty attempt in 2006 in a move to extend such privileges to foreigners who entered this country illegally, for which as in its provisions again as "undocumented," and here using counterfeit IDs, includes no really viable method of screening these individuals for any prior criminal activity either in this country or their former country of origin.

These workers have displaced literally thousands of U.S. workers, many legal Mexican-Americans, in both the construction and tourism industry in the border states, states which rely heavily on those industries and are facing increasing joblessness and homelessness as a result.

Iraq war veterans working on the reconstruction in Iraq are returning home now to find many of their jobs also now "outsourced" to foreign workers. Some of those same students graduating in the technology fields will find even limited success due to the degree of outsourcing in the technology fields which have occurred progressively under the Bush and prior administrations.

Arizona also has the highest property theft and drug related crime rate in the nation due to the continuing open border situation from both the auto theft rings, and drug cartel operations which have impacted both the Phoenix and Tucson metropolitan areas substantially since the first Reagan amnesty back in the 1980's.

The second college selection, the University of Notre Dame, also appears politically motivated. As a Catholic university which teaches also religion classes, Mr. Obama's positions on both abortion and stem cell research resulted in petitions being circulated at the university requesting that the "invitation" be withdrawn and was signed by over 11,000 students.

Although as a Catholic university, the Pope and church also have come out in support of Mr. Obama's illegal immigrant positions due to the fact that the majority of those illegal immigrants are of the Catholic faith.

In fact, the Pope in his last visit to this country used the opportunity to address the situation with his Church members with respect to Catholic church teachings, although with respect to border security, a separate but somewhat related issue due to the negative impact it has had on border residents, the Pope himself has a fortress surrounding Vatican City separating his country from Italy.

Border fencing and true security for those living in the border states, however, are not part and parcel of the intended legislation from all reports now coming out of Washington. Increased domestic screenings on American citizens, however, have increased at unprecedent levels instead rather than securing and limiting U.S. international ports of entry in placing global commerce and Big Business concerns over the lawful citizens rights to basic domestic and national security.

Due to this Constitutional federal negligence, the borders states are now hardest hit but the ramifications of which has been spreading at a rapid pace throughout the country due directly to those open borders.

With increasing American unrest with the progression and increases in troop levels for the Middle East war in direct opposition to Mr. Obama's stated positions while running as a candidate, the choice of the U.S. Naval Academy as the third selected university also appears to be a public relations appearance in order to gain further support from those graduates for the ongoing conflicts which are now occurring and continuing with increases and shuffling of troop levels.

The Anti-Bush appears to be needing some future military support, and the Naval Academy graduates will most likely be involved in the continuing conflict and eventually stationed within the Middle East who are obligated to serve in the military in some capacity upon their graduations.

And to this writer using America's children for governmental agendas due to the political climate with many Americans now questioning some of Mr. Obama's policies since gaining office in the war, stimulus, bailouts and his positions on illegal immigration and border security in spite of a lack of genuine citizen support for any of those recent measures or stated intentions, appears to be the lowest of the low in political posturing and public relations propaganda.

Congress Introduces "CyberSecurity Act of 2009"

For free speech and privacy activists it appears that the Patriot Act was not enough. Nor the Patriot Act II signed into law shortly after newly elected Barack Obama was sworn into office hiding the provisions of a National Health Care database of citizen's health care records to be created by the government violating privacy rights at taxpayer's expense.

Now there is a move by Congress to grant powers to the President to regulate and control internet access. This "hope" and "change" is getting worse by the day. In it's current form, it appears the powers given are fairly broad in an effort to protect America's infrastructure in times of "crisis." However, the definition of a "crisis" is left to the sole discretion of the President.

Senate bills No. 773 and 778 (The "Cybersecurity Act of 2009) introduced by Senator Jay Rockfeller D-W.V. creates a new government agency (expanding government jobs and taxpayer expense once again) entitled the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor which would be accountabl directly to the president whose main publicized function would be in defending the U.S. from "cyber attack."

The purpose of the bill as stated in its draft form is as follows:

"To ensure the continued free flow of commerce within the United States and with its global trading partners through secure cyber communicatons,

to provide for the continued development and exploitation of the Internet and intranet communications for such purposes,

to provide for the development of a cadre of information technology specialists to improve and maintain effective cyber security defenses against disruption,

AND FOR OTHER PUPOSES."

In the working draft of the legislation recently obtained by an Internet privacy group, the plan also grants the Secretary of Commerce access to all internet service providers which can in any way be deemed to be critical to the nation's infrastructure and defense "without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule or policy restricting such access."

This measure as defended by Mr. Rockefeller and Olympia Snowe, co-sponsors of the bills, is meant to give the Secretary of Commerce discretion to protect American's banking and health records in order to shut down those providers the President designates in the event of a "cyber attack."

The problems most in the cyber industry have brought up most often in response to these proposals is the lack of a clear definition of just what are the "critical infrastructure" networks, and the lack of any accountability of the President or the Secretary of Commerce given such powers and simply left at their sole discretion.

And the potential for access of the government, of course, to citizens private records in violation of the Constitution's "search and seizure" provisions.

The bills have been read twice on the floor, and have now been referred to Committee.