Diane Rehm Asks THE IMPORTANT QUESTION

Today, in a segment on Earthquake Update, Diane asked David Applegate, from the U.S. Geological Survey directly:

"My question to you -- because we've talked a great deal on this program about hydraulic fracturing wherein water is injected along with chemicals into shale in order to release gas.  To what extent do you believe that hydraulic fracking could have played a role in this particular earthquake?"

He replied:

Well, for this particular earthquake, we're not aware of any specific activity in that area that would likely have been a trigger. But we have seen association elsewhere.

For example, in Arkansas, we've had quite a swarm of earthquakes in this past year that folks at the Arkansas Geological Survey have been working on the linkage not to the fracking itself, where in a sense you're trying to find places where the rock is not broken up. And you're breaking it up, so you can generate lots of little earthquakes.

But you don't have the kind of big structures or faults that would normally be a conduit that you would have used normally. But you're doing wastewater injection then, very high-pressure injection back into the ground. And there has -- there have been -- well, there are a number of famous cases of linkage there.

Probably the most famous was the Rocky Mountain Arsenal out near Denver, back in the '60s, where they were doing high-pressure injection and managed to generate over a magnitude 5 earthquakes. I think the key thing here is, as this becomes a more common practice, is recognizing that people will be feeling earthquakes in places they're not used to.

Questions for The Diane Rehm Show News Roundup, Friday October 17, 2008

Questions for The Diane Rehm Show, News Roundup, October 17, 2008

[Posted, for the first time, at www.opednews.com]

I've begun to post the questions I send, separately, in each Friday morning to the most listened-to NPR talk show. Feel free to offer some version of these same questions/comments to other broadcasters and journalists:

1. Yesterday on your show analyzing the debate, no one seemed to know what NPR's economy reporter, Chris Arnold, had just stated on Morning Edition in a segment called "Double-Checking Candidates' Claims in Last Debate". Mr. Arnold first acknowledged that if Joe the Plumber earned $250,000, ABOVE AND BEYOND his expenses and supplies, then "yes, under Obama's plan his taxes would go up."

Then he continued, "But, again, that implication that that represents middle income people is misleading. MIDDLE INCOME AMERICANS WOULD GET THREE TIMES THE INCOME TAX BREAK UNDER OBAMA THAT THEY WOULD GET UNDER MCCAIN."

These days, with excellent fact-checking websites quick responses, shouldn't analysts be discussing the accuracy of tactical accusations?

2. I am deeply concerned about the national focus on voter registration fraud or voter fraud. It is not a threat. Major studies have shown that deliberate fraud is extremely rare, and when it happens, it is even more rare for it to result in any fraudulent votes being cast.

In response to the insignificant nuisance of voter fraud, the Republican Congress passed a law ordering states to verify their voter registration lists. Now we find that in key battleground states, the Republican party is particularly aggressive about widespread purging of the lists and challenging new voters, which is highly intimidating and will be enormously time-consuming and labor-intensive on election day.

Have we already forgotten that the ugly reason behind the U.S. Attorney firings was often Republican anger at their failure to prosecute voter fraud cases just prior to the 2006 election?

Are Americans going to be fooled again by Rovian trickery?

3. Isn't purging voter registration lists to prevent voter fraud akin to treating a cold with chemotherapy?

4. To set the record straight, ACORN is a very legitimate organization, a decades-old advocate for the generally disenfranchised low-to-middle income often-minority population. Its work is irritating the McCain campaign because it is so successful in registering low and middle income voters, and these people are less likely to vote Republican. They have a very large workforce and some employees have been problems, but they are fully cooperative with election officials in finding bad apples and reporting problems. When they are accused of turning in fraudulent registrations, it should be noted that they are required by law to turn in all the registrations they collect, and in most cases, they are already flagged as fraudulent.

What good would it possibly do for ACORN to destroy their own voter registration drive?

Friday Questions for Diane, June 6, 2008

Regarding Senator Clinton as Obama’s veep, I would like to shine a light on the McCain campaign’s hiring of Timothy Griffin. Mr. Griffin was one of those chosen to replace the fired U.S. Attorneys – he was the one known as “Karl Rove’s assistant” and he was specifically put in Arkansas, the better to dig up Clinton dirt. He also resigned suddenly on the day investigative reporter Greg Palast turned over Griffin’s emails from the RNC full of voter caging lists to House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, Jr.
Isn’t it clear that Rove is drooling over the concept of Clinton ruining the Obama ticket?

Here's someone who could further energize Obama's ticket and would fit in perfectly with his announced intention to not accept lobbyist money: ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR.

That would be a powerful and deeply satisfying Democratic ticket.

Friday Questions for Diane, May 21, 2008

Today, Good Friday, 2008, I begin a new series I'm calling "Friday Questions for Diane".

I listen to the Diane Rehm Show. Just about every single day, fully, at work, oh headphones. That's where I started my adult education.

That is where I was introduced to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Kevin Phillips, and David Corn.

That is also where I first heard Kenneth Tomlinson and various voices of the American Enterprise Institute.

That is where one question I sent in was asked of Seymour Hersh. I asked him about the General who I'd read was fired not for the official reason given, but because he was ready to blow the cover of Cheney's plot to attack Iran -- long before the public was aware of his determination to do so. Hersh stunned me by pausing, telling Diane that this was why he loved doing this because he could sometimes learn from his audience, and then speaking to me directly -- telling me to contact him.

Diane Rehm is the Oprah Winfrey of the NPR world -- mainstream enough to have a wide audience, but unexpectedly courageous at times. I have heard her fearlessly question both Kissinger and Lynne Cheney -- who were not pleased.

That is why she was the other target of investigation (along with Bill Moyers) by th aforementioned Ken Tomlinson, who was Rove's lacky leading the Corporation for Public Broadcasting back in 2005, pushing propaganda and squashing the truth by calling it "liberal bias".

A while ago, Diane found that she needed to change her Friday scheduled News Roundup to take both of her 2 hours - one for international news and one for national news.

I send in questions. They are rarely asked. She must get so very many.

Still I send them. They make me think about what do I want more interested, thinking people to know about -- this week. Right now. And I know in the long run, they have an affect.

I have decided to post them. They are what I want YOU to know about, to think about, to ask about. I may adjust them a little from what I actually send in the wee hours before I leave for work on Friday, but only to make them more clear.

If more of us demand answers, we'll get them.

So, on this day, May 21, 2008, 5 years after the 5th Anniversary of the United States invasion of Iraq, I sent two separate questions, admittedly on the same theme.

FQFD #1:

Last weekend, the Iraq Veterans Against the War hosted “Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan”, a 4 day event in Washington, D.C. at which veterans and their families testified about their experiences on the ground and since returning home.

Mainstream media coverage has been minimal; NPR gave it 3 minutes. But “Democracy Now” devoted 3 one-hour shows to the testimony.

Nothing that was said indicated that their experience was, in Mr. Bush’s word’s, “exciting” or “romantic.”

What should be done to make any of the consequences of this unnecessary invasion, on any level, real to this man?


* * * * * * *

FQRD #2:

I think your audience, more Americans, should know about this:

In response to hearing about testimony from veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan at last weekend's "Winter Solder" Conference, a Defense Department Spokesman, Lt. Col. Mark Ballesteros, stated:

"When isolated allegations of misconduct have been reported, commanders have conducted comprehensive investigations to determine the facts and held individuals accountable when appropriate."

The Iraq Veterans Against the War, sponsor of the event, immediately responded:

“These service members and veterans’ testimonies are ultimately not about individual conduct, but about the nature of occupation. The military is being asked to win an occupation. The troops on the ground know this is an impossible task. Their commanders know this is an impossible task." (http://ivaw.org/files/IVAWresponse_to_DOD_0.pdf)


* * * * * * *

Whatever Spitzer's testosterone was doing, it wasn't for prostitution he was targeted. . .

After spending a couple of early morning hours Googling the likes of John Fund, Michael Garcia, and Roger Smith, I went to my email and there was an email from Greg Palast, entitled "Eliot's Mess and the $200 Million Bailout" -- now available on his website here -- with that cutting edge of brightly lit clarity. Others got close but he nailed it. Uh-gain.

Greg found Spitzer's greatest crime: daring to point the finger at the greatest culprit of our times, Mr. Bush, and his own part in protecting the predatory bank thieves while ignoring the ambushed victims.

If you read nothing else, read Palast's story.

Meanwhile, back in the shooting gallery, I also found an angle that probably carries some weight as well -- though I'm sure Greg's revelation is at the very core.

In fact, the mystery of who would have targetted Spitzer reminds me of Agatha Christie's "Murder on the Orient Express" -- where it turns out that all the suspects murdered the victim that night. They each had strong reasons, and each did the deed.

By Tuesday morning I'd submitted the following to OpEdNews, where it was posted on Wednesday:

*****

Spitzer and the Giuliani Shell Game

March 12, 2008

Is there a connection?

Shell Energy Company, in partnership with TransCanada Corporation, has a proposal awaiting approval by Elliot Spitzer that would allow the companies, working as Broadwater Energy, to build and operate a floating liquified natural gas terminal in Long Island Sound.

The terminal, a 1215 foot barge, could provide Connecticut and New York with a billion cubic feet of the liquified natural gas per day, but, as the Government Accountability Office reported in February of 2007, could also become a firebomb of huge proportions.

This year, Broadwater Energy launched an intense media campaign designed to sway public opinion about both the project and the company, with large publicized donations to Long Island United Way, and a blitz of commercials citing questionable studies and claiming customers will see huge economic savings.

However, the ads have also drawn a backlash, with both local activists and public officials calling for the New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo to investigate the dangerous “false advertising”.

Worth noting is that the campaign was created by none other than Rudy Giuliani’s own Giuliani Partners LLC – hired on to provide security and strategic planning services less than a week after the 2004 presidential election. According to Eric Hatzimemos, a managing director of the firm, “Security, safety, & reliability have been top priorities for Broadwater from the outset.”

This comes from the same law firm that lobbies for the Indian Point Nuclear facility (“as safe as a facility can be”) to be relicensed despite multiple security and safety problems, and for respiratory gas mask manufacturers to be immune from lawsuits for failure to provide protection.

After years of battles between environmentalists and industry, in February all eyes were on New York Governor Elliot Spitzer.

He, in turn, claimed to be waiting for the New York State Department to provide its review of the vast information presented from both sides, due on February 12th. But on February 7th, the State Department announced it had made an agreement with Broadwater which granted a 60 day extension of the deadline to allow for “further discussion of what is a very complex proposal”.

The next day, the New York Department of Environmental Conservation issued its second Notice of Incomplete Application letter to Broadwater Energy, noting that Broadwater’s response to the first Notice was entirely inadequate. Documentation on emissions calculation was lacking, and even with design changes, the barge was projected to destroy 274 million aquatic organisms annually.

Less than a week later, Spitzer was customer number 9.

On March 5, though they did not yet have the required approval of Spitzer and New York State, Shell announced it was ready to begin setting up contracts for purchasing the liquid natural gas that would be brought to New York and Connecticut.

Did they already know they’d won?

*****

Then, at work yesterday, I listened to NPR's The Diane Rehm Show, and her hour on Spitzer. One of her guests was John Fund, from The Wall Street Journal, who uses as a noteworthy credential his authoring the book, of "Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy." So already I know this is one of THOSE guys, the guys pushing the phony crime that is supposed to distract from the real method of election theft and provide fodder for Bush's "good" U.S. Attorneys.

Coming back from a break, Diane turned to Fund with a question. This is how it went:

DR: John Fund, is there any indication whatsoever that because of Eliot Spitzer’s behavior and his pursuit of Wall Street ne’er-do-wells that somehow he was targeted?

JF: I think the real targeting came from his personality and his style. THERE IS NOT A SINGLE PERSON IN NEW YORK STATE GOVERNMENT OR IN MANY BUSINESS CIRCLES WHO DIDN'T THINK ELLIOT SPITZER WAS A JERK -- and I’m being very specific here. He would yell and intimidate, threaten people. I mean he told one person I’m going to drive a stake through your heart. He basically said get out of my way to ano– to an assemblyman, saying I’m an f’ing steamroller. He managed to alienate people in his own party, people who would normally have ideological affinity for him. He had anger management issues. So I think that If you end up with 3 enemies in your life you’ve got, you know, an irritant; if you have 30 enemies you have a problem; and if you have 300 enemies eventually people are just going to try to remove you from the stage. I don’t think he was targeted; I think he took himself out because his behavior was so extreme and so far out of the bounds. And I think– I hope we get to some discussion of his civil liberties record here because he did go after some bad guys on Wall Street, he did do some good, but he went to more and more marginal targets, less and less substantial targets, and I think really rode roughshod over due process laws.

****

Okay, I know I just pointed out how many enemies he had, but Fund was so absolute and clearly wanted the public to understand that Spitzer deserved to be hated by reasonable people.

Once a pathetic propagandist. . .

****

So I wrote to Diane's show, in time, I hoped, to have the email read during today's Friday 2-hour review of the week's news:

Let's see, who would want Spitzer gone? Maybe Shell Oil and Giuliani, who are together fighting to get New York to approve an incredibly dangerous liquified natural gas barge in Long Island Sound.

Or maybe even Mr. Bush, who -- as the BBC investigative journalist Greg Palast pointed out -- Spitzer called the "Predator Lenders Partner in Crime" just THIS WEEK in The Washington Post, just before Bernanke provided $200 billion to rescue bankers.

Whatever Spitzer's testosterone was doing, it wasn't for prostitution he was targeted.

****

Meanwhile, on another of the many fronts, on Monday night we heard about Spitzer and prostitution, instead of hearing Congressman John Conyers, Jr. demanding that former White House aides Harriet Myers and Joshua Bolten obey the law and respond to Congress -- announcing the law suit against the two:

"We will not allow the administration to steamroll Congress. Under our system of checks and balances, Congress provides oversight of the executive branch to make sure that government power is not abused. The administration’s extreme claims to be immune from the oversight process are at odds with our constitutional principles on which this country was founded, and I am confident the federal courts will agree."

Phew. There's still hope.