Posted by
King Vinyl on Monday, July 19, 2010 1:51:03 PM
As recently as I can remember many on the left trully believe in some zany 9/11 Bush did it theory. No matter how much evidence contradicts their arguments they just ignore the facts don’t report it and “move on” as they say it.
The other day I heard Chuck Schummer blast BP for having a role lobbying for the realse of the Lockerbie bomber. He then went on to say that there was a link between that effort and an oil contract they long sought with the Libian government. Now all of this may well be true and if laws, trade rules, or other codes of conduct were violated they should be made examples of that .
However there is a very significant monetary link between this administration and British Petroleum that needs to be examined. For instance is it at all possible that at the time this lobbying occurred and BP has since admitted to this effort to some degree that this administration was aware of BP’s actions? Is it further possible that members of this administration acted in concert or apart from to these same ends? Or maybe not..
Keep in mind Ken Salazar said in ‘his’ words ,”we have our boot on the neck of BP” .
My question to you is this; How long has this administration had it’s boot on the neck of BP? Did Democrats learn of these efforts years prior to divulging their findings? If so was their silence part of some kind of a return for campaign contributions, investing in phony alternative energy programs, or even worse arranging dare I say it; for the worst natural disaster in US history?
Well while I admit to you this may just be a wild eyed theory a whole lot of coincidence and the cliched actions of this administration make me think it might be just a little more to it than that.
For instance remember all the hub-bub about the picture of President Obama with his feet up on the oval office desk while speaking to the Israeli Prime Minister ? Israeli’s knew what the staged photo meant it was Obama’s way of ‘making them an offer they can’t refuse’ minus the horses head (that only happens if he has to ask twice)”.
When the Iraqi reporter threw his shoe at President Bush it was said to be an insult in Islamic countries throw ones shoe. However in most cultures when a shoe is part of conversation or physical jesture unless discreetly removed it is a sign of direct disrespect of almost the highest order.
When a president of these United States empowered by our constitution acts outside of his authority to do with majorities in both houses of congress and an even split in the courts without dire threat or consequence what is the motive? Which actions declare Obama’s true alliances if not his visits, speeches, and accolades to the muslim community.
So were those really the words of Ken Salazar or was he just reading it off a script? I think it was a direct sign to BP of how this administration intends to conduct itself. But were there also other signs such as millions in campaign contributions Obama received? Or what about BP’s image change trying to redefine itself as being on the cutting edge of “green energy”? What about the facts that the labor union own much of BP whose CEO was “someone” to the White House to write a 30 billion dollar check. Our government says it can’t keep illegal aliens out of our country but it can keep the media out of the Gulf of Mexico.