Who are these people and how did YOU find the information?
Care to divulge the information and let everyone decide if the meetings were sinister?

If the meetings were so benign, why were they classified TOP SECRET?

Clinton and Gore preferred Halliburton/KBR

In 1997, when LOGCAP was again put up for bid, Halliburton/Brown & Root lost the competition to another contractor, Dyncorp. But the Clinton Defense Department, rather than switch from Halliburton to Dyncorp, elected to award a separate, sole-source contract to Halliburton/Brown & Root to continue its work in the Balkans. According to a later GAO study, the Army made the choice because 1) Brown & Root had already acquired extensive knowledge of how to work in the area; 2) the company “had demonstrated the ability to support the operation”; and 3) changing contractors would have been costly. The Army’s sole-source Bosnia contract with Brown & Root lasted until 1999. At that time, the Clinton Defense Department conducted full-scale competitive bidding for a new contract. The winner was . . . Halliburton/Brown & Root. The company continued its work in Bosnia uninterrupted.

That work received favorable notices throughout the Clinton administration. For example, Vice President Al Gore’s National Performance Review mentioned Halliburton’s performance in its Report on Reinventing the Department of Defense, issued in September 1996. In a section titled “Outsourcing of Logistics Allows Combat Troops to Stick to Basics,” Gore’s reinventing-government team favorably mentioned LOGCAP, the cost-plus-award system, and Brown & Root, which the report said provided “basic life support services — food, water, sanitation, shelter, and laundry; and the full realm of logistics services — transportation, electrical, hazardous materials collection and disposal, fuel delivery, airfield and seaport operations, and road maintenance.

I repeat, Jackie! There was nothing sinister about the meeting. SOP.

How do you know that information as it is still classified as TOP SECRET!!!

Dubya is fighting tooth-and-nail to maintain that secrecy. Do you know something that no one else does? Oh, forgot, you are extrapolation like you so-called conservatives usually do.

Apparently, you DID NOT!!!!
North Korea uses what it has for bluster, no more.

As for being a wretch, I beg to differ my man!!!!!
You are doing what is usually done by you keyboard warriors, conflate, extrapolate, obfuscate.

Like James Brown’s song says, “Talkin’ Loud and Saying Nuthin’.”

And, how would you know what Nancy Pelosi can’t keep up with? There have been many Reps and Senators indicating that the CIA did not tell the truth; the briefings that were held were either benign if held in the Senate Office Building; they were of the utmost importance if held in the White House; no notes were allowed in the briefings.

Wonder why Boehnier (R-OH), Hoestra(R-MN) amongst those that have spoken out on this matter has publicly stated the CIA lied to them.

Now, how does Nancy Pelosi become culpable for the sins of Dubya. The Pelosi briefing was in September of 2002 and the torture acts were completed in March/April 2002. Was she supposed to give her approval. Secondly, Rep. Harman(D-CA) was the ranking member on the committe – remember, the Repubs controlled the House – wrote a letter of complaint as it was HER responsibility.

Care to find another way to cover YOUR @$$ !!!!!!!

As for the sweet cheeks, it sounds like you and I have the same equipment, bubba!!!!!!!

Let me dispose of a stray thought first. The media notion of excessive secretness, in Cheney’s dealings on energy policy, was, many of us thought at the time, an obvious attempt to excuse the Clinton Administration’s early secrecy over the healthcare deliberations led by Hillary Clinton, Ira Magaziner and Walter Zellman. As the healthcare deliberations had failed, their secrecy was laid to account; as the Clinton healthcare deliberations consequently were thought to have failed in part as a result of their secrecy, so did the media feel somehow justified, or at least symmetrical, in exaggerating the “secrecy” of the Bush Administration’s deliberations on energy. Personally, I believe in Executive Privilege (as long as it’s not in Nixon’s hands), and I don’t care what it costs, in dollars or privacy, to inform the president.

As to the substance of the energy issue, I couldn’t agree more. What I hoped would come out of it would be an even more heterogeneous mix of energy sources than that which you happen to list, together with a very hardassed plan for moving our oil sources elsewhere. (I’d happened to pen a congressional white paper calling for an appreciative shift to the oil deposits lying off the Horn of Africa, in which paper I relished the irony of a prospective infusion of American wealth into the very place America had plundered to build its semi-empire.)

If my memory serves, the meeting focused heavily on how to stimulate domestic oil drilling, promote nuclear power and coal, and respond to the Western electricity crisis, which had caused soaring rates and blackouts in California. Cap & Trade was even discussed provided China and India were on board.

Regardless of what they say, neither China or India is going green. Their economies won’t bare the cost. Ours is going to be destroyed if Obama succeeds with the policy. I don’t think he’s got full support from his own party on cap & trade. When oil prices were soaring, Obama toyed with the idea of domestic drilling. Now that they’ve declined, the support for domestic drilling has too.

Domestic drilling, coal, nuclear? All of those would have weaned us off of middle eastern oil. They were included in the bill. Cheney even supported alternative fuels. Ethanol was one of them. I heard him say it on a NewsHour with Lehrer.

This whole “secret meeting” crap is something environmentalists cooked up. They didn’t get equal face time so their feelings are hurt.

Right on.

Cal,

I’m pretty much in concert with Jackie about the inscrutibility of the Cheney-led meetings on energy. I would hope that they looked in detail at all the challenges that conditioned any further American effort toward energy independence, but I positively resent President Bush’s obvious refusal, in response to 9/11, to declare an all-out national effort toward such independence and to articulate which things each of us might do to cut off the terror-loving petro-tyrants without a cent.

Maybe you can tell us why our newly-elected president voted for the “evil” Bush/Cheney energy bill if the fix was in.

Idle time addles the mind, Jackie.