When Halliburton needs him the most...
Dick Cheney, so vocal during the first year of
Obama's administration in his attempt to scare us to death
on national security, has been remarkably silent
since the Gulf oil spill began its slow motion march.
There was not a decision on war or energy the
current president made that was not questioned, even ridiculed,
by the former number
However, since the spill, Cheney has been remarkably silent.
Cheney is usually a vociferous defender
of his time in government. But not on the disaster in the gulf.
When the Obama administration, or the media,
or just about anybody contradicts Dick Cheney's views on
national security, he is far from shy about responding.
But facing a firestorm of criticism over the oil spill,
he's been notably silent. More than national
security, energy policy and the oil industry might be considered
Cheney's real areas of expertise. He was chairman
and CEO of oil-services company Halliburton between
1995 and 2000. And, of course, he worked prominently
Halliburton was working on the Deepwater Horizon
rig just before it blew up. Some experts say that Halliburton
may have been to blame for the explosion. The
pro-oil atmosphere (and Cheney's continued links to Halliburton)
during his vice presidency, have also come to
the fore since the April 20 accident.
What is a more important to our national security
than our dependence on fossil fuels during an unprecedented
catastrophe involving oil? Is this not the former
VP's expertise? Did he not hold (secret) energy meetings,
because he was the expert from Halliburton, where
it has been suggested many of the policies that led to
deregulation were decided? What really did happen
at that meeting?
This is an important question since Halliburton
was a player in this worst environmental disaster in history.
It was their cementing of the well that did not
hold. They were involved.
Is that why Mr. Cheney has been so silent?
Those secret energy meetings that Cheney had with
the greedy bastards from BIG OIL,
the meeting that the Supreme Court said we have
no right to ask about - they caused this?
I think they were trying to hide the fact that
the Bush bastards had Iraq invasion plans drawn up
even before they stole the White House.
I think pre-911, they got a map of Iraq and decided
which componies would drill in which parts of
Iraq and they had to hide that to pretend that
Bush accidentally and stupidly went to war with
Iraq when that was their plan all along.
But as long as the Supreme Court is in on the scam, it's legal.
Paula Jones had all the rights in the world because she was no-proof
accusing a Democrat.
But America's right to know why we went to war and why we lost the
The Supreme Court told us to go fuck ourselves.
Back to Bartcop.com