Al Gore: Inconvenient Truths

Al Gore's star is on the rise again with his documentary "An Inconvenient Truth." However Gore's past is not exactly clean when it comes to the environment.

In 2000 the weekly magazine "The Nation", which is a progressive publication which describes itself as "the flagship of the left," published an article entitled "Gore's Oil Money."

The article describe the ties between Gore's family and Occidental Petroleum. Gore's father U.S. Senator Albert Gore, Sr., represented Occidental Petroleum for years. Upon leaving the Senate in 1970, Gore Sr. was given a $500,000 a year job and a seat on the board of Occidental Petroleum.

According to The Nation:

At the time of his death in 1998, Gore the elder's estate included hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of Occidental stock. The Vice President is the executor of the estate, which still includes the stock and whose chief beneficiary is his mother.

The Nation article goes on to describe Vice President Gore's efforts on behalf of Occidental Petroleum to obtain oil drilling rights in Columbia on land claimed by the 5,000-member U'wa tribe. The Clinton Administration and high ranking officials including Gore and Energy Secretary Bill Richardson (now a presidential candidate) lobbied the Columbia government on behalf of Occidental Petroleum.

The U'wa tribe didn't want the drilling on land they considered sacred. Occidental Petroleum eventually did get the drilling rights. After years of shareholder resolutions, legal battles, extensive civil disobedience and a failed test well, the company eventually abandoned the project.

The Nation also describes Vice President Gore's involvement in the sale of Elk Hills oilfield:

Occidental's investment in Gore has paid rich dividends. In late 1997 the Vice President championed the Administration's $3.65 billion sale to the company of the government's interest in the Elk Hills oilfield in Bakersfield, California, the largest privatization of federal property in US history. On the very day the deal was sealed Gore gave a speech lamenting the growing threat of global warming. Gore also maintains a close friendship with Occidental CEO Ray Irani. In 1996 the latter spent the night in the Lincoln Bedroom. Two days later his company donated $100,000 to the DNC. In 1994 Irani traveled with Commerce Secretary Ron Brown on a trade junket to Russia. Four years later, Irani was invited to a state dinner at the White House for Colombian President Pastrana.

The Center for Public Integrity, which is a "nonprofit organization dedicated to producing original, responsible investigative journalism on issues of public concern," put out a book in 2000 called "The Buying Of The President 2000." Here is an excerpt from that book:

For example, in the Democratic Party, Vice President Al Gore has a long-time relationship with Occidental Petroleum that has been enormously beneficial to the company. Occidental's late chairman, the controversial Armand Hammer, liked to say that he had Gore's father, Senator Albert Gore, Senior, quote, "in my back pocket", unquote. When the elder Gore left the Senate in 1970, Hammer hired him for $500,000 a year. Personally and professionally the vice president has profited from Occidental largess. To this day he still draws $20,000 a year from a land deal in Tennessee brokered between his father and Hammer. The total amount is more than $300,000. The personal relationship between young Gore and Hammer was very close throughout the 1980's, including trips on Hammer's private jet and constant campaign contributions.

Of course Al Gore is not alone in these types of relationships. This type of conduct is the rule rather than the exception among the powerful. This is one of the reasons I believe big government is harmful. Big government winds up serving big powerful interests rather the the common person.

Another quote from "The Buying Of The President 2000":

Each of the leading presidential candidates in the 2000 election has done public policy favors for his campaign contributors. Every major White House contender who has held past elective office has career patrons or long-time financial sponsors who have underwritten his political career. And every major aspirant has used his government position to help those patrons.

This mutually beneficial relationship between a politician and his patrons is seldom acknowledged or discussed publicly. Indeed, none of the current presidential candidates would agree to be interviewed for The Buying of the President 2000. Yet these relationships between candidates and their sponsors can reveal a more accurate picture of the practical logistics and accommodations of achieving power in today's electoral process. It is a vision that extends beyond common political rhetoric.

Ron Paul: Statement on the Iraq War Resolution

It would be great for Freedom to have Ron Paul as our President. Ron Paul's statement on the Iraq War Resolution passed by the House:

This grand debate is welcomed but it could be that this is nothing more than a distraction from the dangerous military confrontation approaching with Iran and supported by many in leadership on both sides of the aisle.

This resolution, unfortunately, does not address the disaster in Iraq. Instead, it seeks to appear opposed to the war while at the same time offering no change of the status quo in Iraq. As such, it is not actually a vote against a troop surge. A real vote against a troop surge is a vote against the coming supplemental appropriation that finances it. I hope all of my colleagues who vote against the surge today will vote against the budgetary surge when it really counts: when we vote on the supplemental.

The biggest red herring in this debate is the constant innuendo that those who don’t support expanding the war are somehow opposing the troops. It’s nothing more than a canard to claim that those of us who struggled to prevent the bloodshed and now want it stopped are somehow less patriotic and less concerned about the welfare of our military personnel.

Osama bin Laden has expressed sadistic pleasure with our invasion of Iraq and was surprised that we served his interests above and beyond his dreams on how we responded after the 9/11 attacks. His pleasure comes from our policy of folly getting ourselves bogged down in the middle of a religious civil war, 7,000 miles from home that is financially bleeding us to death. Total costs now are reasonably estimated to exceed $2 trillion. His recruitment of Islamic extremists has been greatly enhanced by our occupation of Iraq.

Unfortunately, we continue to concentrate on the obvious mismanagement of a war promoted by false information and ignore debating the real issue which is: Why are we determined to follow a foreign policy of empire building and pre-emption which is unbecoming of a constitutional republic?

Those on the right should recall that the traditional conservative position of non-intervention was their position for most of the 20th Century-and they benefited politically from the wars carelessly entered into by the political left. Seven years ago the Right benefited politically by condemning the illegal intervention in Kosovo and Somalia. At the time conservatives were outraged over the failed policy of nation building.

It’s important to recall that the left, in 2003, offered little opposition to the pre-emptive war in Iraq, and many are now not willing to stop it by de-funding it or work to prevent an attack on Iran.

The catch-all phrase, “War on Terrorism”, in all honesty, has no more meaning than if one wants to wage a war against criminal gangsterism. It’s deliberately vague and non definable to justify and permit perpetual war anywhere, and under any circumstances. Don’t forget: the Iraqis and Saddam Hussein had absolutely nothing to do with any terrorist attack against us including that on 9/11.

Special interests and the demented philosophy of conquest have driven most wars throughout history. Rarely has the cause of liberty, as it was in our own revolution, been the driving force. In recent decades our policies have been driven by neo-conservative empire radicalism, profiteering in the military industrial complex, misplaced do-good internationalism, mercantilistic notions regarding the need to control natural resources, and blind loyalty to various governments in the Middle East.

For all the misinformation given the American people to justify our invasion, such as our need for national security, enforcing UN resolutions, removing a dictator, establishing a democracy, protecting our oil, the argument has been reduced to this: If we leave now Iraq will be left in a mess-implying the implausible that if we stay it won’t be a mess.

Since it could go badly when we leave, that blame must be placed on those who took us there, not on those of us who now insist that Americans no longer need be killed or maimed and that Americans no longer need to kill any more Iraqis. We’ve had enough of both!

Resorting to a medical analogy, a wrong diagnosis was made at the beginning of the war and the wrong treatment was prescribed. Refusing to reassess our mistakes and insist on just more and more of a failed remedy is destined to kill the patient-in this case the casualties will be our liberties and prosperity here at home and peace abroad.

There’s no logical reason to reject the restraints placed in the Constitution regarding our engaging in foreign conflicts unrelated to our national security. The advice of the founders and our early presidents was sound then and it’s sound today.

We shouldn’t wait until our financial system is completely ruined and we are forced to change our ways. We should do it as quickly as possible and stop the carnage and financial bleeding that will bring us to our knees and force us to stop that which we should have never started.

We all know, in time, the war will be de-funded one way or another and the troops will come home. So why not now?

Ron Paul: Don't Do It, Mr. President

From Republican Congressman Ron Paul regarding attacking Iran:

Before the U.S. House of Representatives February 6, 2007

It's a bad idea.

There's no need for it.

There's great danger in doing it.

America is against it, and Congress should be.

The United Nations is against it.

The Russians, the Chinese, the Indians, and the Pakistanis are against it.

The whole world is against it.

Our allies are against it.

Our enemies are against it.

The Arabs are against it.

The Europeans are against it.

The Muslims are against it.

We don't need to do this.

The threat is overblown.

The plan is an hysterical reaction to a problem that does not yet exist.

Hysteria is never a good basis for foreign policy.

Don't we ever learn?

Have we already forgotten Iraq?

The plan defies common sense.

If it's carried out, the Middle East, and possibly the world, will explode.

Oil will soar to over $100 a barrel, and gasoline will be over $5 a gallon.

Despite what some think, it won't serve the interests of Israel.

Besides – it's illegal.

It's unconstitutional.

And you have no moral authority to do it.

We don't need it.

We don't want it.

So, Mr. President, don't do it.

Don't bomb Iran!

The moral of the story, Mr. Speaker, is this: if you don't have a nuke, we'll threaten to attack you. If you do have a nuke, we'll leave you alone. In fact, we'll probably subsidize you. What makes us think Iran does not understand this?

We can only hope that the powers in Washington understand this. Recent history, unfortunately doesn't give one a lot of hope.

House OKs Measure Opposing Troop Surge

The House on Friday passed a non binding measure opposing Bush's troop surge in Iraq. This was big news, why? What should be news is the cowardice and the political game playing of the Democratic leadership.

It is time for the Democratic leadership to quit talking and to start actually doing something. A nonbinding resolution is nothing but political posturing. It shows a lack of true leadership.

The president cannot legally conduct a war without being given the authority to do so by Congress. Congress gave this authorization by passing a resolution in 2002. Congress can just as easily withdraw this authorization by passing another resolution. A bill has been introduced in the House (HR413) repealing the authorization for the war in Iraq. It provides for the safe and orderly withdrawal of American forces from Iraq.

All Americans who oppose the War in Iraq need to put pressure on Congress to take real action. Don't give the Democrats a pass on this. They are just as responsible as Bush for everyday that this war continues on.

Atlanta Police to be Indicted.

While the major media is busy with extended stories on the life and times of Anna Nicole Smith, here is some news that is not being carried by the major media:

According to a report published in the Atlanta Journal Constitution "Fulton County District Attorney Paul Howard will seek criminal charges, including felony murder, against three Atlanta narcotics officers involved in a botched drug raid that resulted in the shooting death of an elderly woman."

On November 21, Atlanta narcotics officers went to the home of Kathryn Johnston in northwest Atlanta to execute a "no knock" search warrant for cocaine. Johnston an eldery woman who lived alone, Johnston fired at the officers as they entered her home after breaking down her door. Johnston was killed and three officers were injured in an ensuing shootout.

No cocaine was found in the home and it later was revealed that the narcotics officers had supplied false information in order to obtain the no knock search warrant.

After the raid two of the officers tried to cover up their lies by getting a police informant to falsely claim that he had made a drug buy in the home.

De Plane, De Plane!!!!!

I'm sure everyone has heard of the controversy surrounding House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her alleged request for a larger military plane that can fly her non stop between Washington, DC and San Francisco.

The practice of providing a military plane to the House Speaker began in the wake of September 11. The September 11 attacks in my opinion have been used as an excuse for a multitude of bad and dangerous practices.

Getting past the usual partisan rhetoric being thrown around, my thought is why should taxpayers pay for any size plane to fly the House Speaker around?

In my opinion the House speaker should fly on a regular commercial flight just like real people do.

This country is suppose to be run by citizens who take time from their private lives to serve. Unfortunately we have developed a ruling class that sets themselves above the common citizen.

It also seems a bit hypocritical for politicians like Pelosi and others to call on citizens to reduce their contribution to greenhouse gases while they are flying around in their own jets.

Just this past called Thursday Pelosi called for "mandatory action to reduce greenhouse gas pollution." Pelosi wants legislation ready for July 4th, which she declares "Energy Independence Day."

Pelosi along with numerous other government officials are chauffeured around in large fuel inefficient SUV's at taxpayer expense. To top it off no federal gas tax is paid on the gas used either.

One set of rules for the common people, another set for the ruling class.

Withdrawing US Forces from Iraq HR 413

A bill has been introduced in Congress to deauthorize the Iraq War. I have not seen anything about this bill in the major media. All they are reporting on are the non-binding resolutions which are just meaningless political posturing.

If you believe the Iraq War was a mistake or is a failure, contact your representative and ask them to support HR 413.

HR 413 is simple and direct. It reads as follows . . .



SECTION 1. REPEAL OF PUBLIC LAW 107-243.

The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) is hereby repealed.


SEC. 2. WITHDRAWAL OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES FROM IRAQ.

The President of the United States shall provide for the withdrawal of units and members of the United States Armed Forces deployed in Iraq as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom in a safe and orderly manner.



HR 413 was introduced by Representative Sam Farr of California, and currently has the following co-sponsors:


Rep Blumenauer, Earl [OR-3], Rep Capuano, Michael E. [MA-8], Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [AZ-7], Rep Kucinich, Dennis J. [OH-10], Rep Lee, Barbara [CA-9], Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. [CA-6].