Peter Fonda...Barack Obama a Fu**ing traitor! Hanoi Jane's bro attacks BP Brass!

This year, the picturesque Riviera was graciously hosting the annual Cannes Film Festival, when the prestigiousous proceedings were disrupted by a producer who was bent on levelling a vicious verbal attack on President Barack Obama.

At a press conference to promote a documentary, Peter Fonda noted that he recently pointed an accusing finger at Mr. Obama and labelled him a "fu**ing" traitor.

The "Easy Rider" star was prompted to make the accusation on the eve of the unveiling of a documentary he co-produced aptly titled - The Big Fix - which zerodx in on the alleged BP scandal which prompted many to cry foul in the aftermath of the oil spill when Obama (and the U.S. Government) were slow to respond to the crisis.

An active environmentalist, Fonda also accused Washington of engaging in a cover-up to protect BP and its officials.

"I sent an email to President Obama saying - 'You are a f(expletive) traitor" - Fonda confessed to the startled media present.

'You're a traitor, you allowed foreign boots on our soil telling our military -- in this case the coastguard -- what they can and could not do, and telling us, the citizens of the United States, what we could or could not do," he summed up angrily.

Fonda apparently zipped off the e-mail last week before the film was presented at Cannes for screening.

In addition to his role as co-producer, the offbeat actor (brother of Hanoi Jane and celebrated Thespian Henry Fonda) is featured as a concerned citizen in disturbing scenes which reveal that he (and others) were turned away on the Louisiana Beaches when they voiced their concerns about the disastrous spill which displaced thousands of U.S. Citizens for weeks on end.

The normally easy-going high-profile celebrity (by virtue of his birthright) had no qualms taking questionable potshots at BP Officials across the big pond either.

"I thought we kicked them (the Brits) out a long time ago. They tried to get back in in 1812, but they didn't make it."

Oh Peter, not very diplomatic, at all.

News at 11!

http://www.thetattler.biz

BP...Tony Hayward gets boot! Smug over pension & benefits! Argh!

The face that launched a thousand ships!


 

Executives at BP - insiders, too - swore up-and-down all day that Tony Hayward was not only - "in-like-Flynn" - but would also stride into a Board Meeting tomorrow with head held high.

Not!

Tonight, the latest scuttlebutt was racing around the globe.

Tony Hayward got the boot!

According to sources close to the checkbook, Mr. Hayward's "deal" will be on the table tomorrow and in the spotlight for close scrutiny.

At press time, it was duly noted that Tony Hayward would walk with a generous package, which would include a pension, bonus, you name it.

I expect there'll be a lynch mob down in front of the BP Executive Offices ready to tar-and-feather the incompetent, greedy Exec, for a proper send-off.

News at 11!

http://www.julianayrs.com

BP...fined 5.2 million by Bureau of Ocean Management! Irregular bookkeeping on Tribal land!

The newly-formed "Bureau of Ocean Energy Management" levied their first fine against BP Oil for “submitting false, misleading, or inaccurate” reports in respect to Natural gas production on Southern Ute Tribal land in Colorado.

Although Tribal auditors notified BP Oil of the errors three years ago, the company continued to drag its feet when it came to acknowledging - and correcting - the discrepancies singled out by the Tribe’s leaders.

Allegedly, BP oil failed to correctly report royalty rates, sales prices, and production data related to the leases in Utah.

BP racked up a staggering 25, 949 violations which triggered fines totaling 5.2 million.

A spokesperson for BP blamed “coding errors” on the glaring irregularities.

According to the Government, the whopping penalties were warranted to reflect a pattern of behavior that flagrantly disregarded the importance of proper record-keeping.

“It is simply unacceptable for companies to repeatedly misreport production, particularly when it interferes with the auditing process,” summed up Michael Bromwich, director of the Ocean Energy Management agency.

 
http://www.julianayrs.com/
 

Barack Obama...News alert! Judge rules against Prez on oil moratorium!

The word out of New Orleans from inside sources is that the Federal Judge in New Orleans, presiding over the legal proceedings on the off-shore drilling moratorium, has ruled against Obama and his administration.

This morning, I posted an in-depth report on the hearings that were underway back East, which focused on the key legal issues.

Post: 06/22/10

http://ijulian.blogspot.com/2010/06/bptony-hayward-faces-axe-plaintiffs.html

President Obama's reaction was swift and severe.

"We're going to appeal," a spokesperson for the administration noted in so many words.

News updates to follow!

http://www.julianayrs.com

BP...Tony Hayward faces axe? Plaintiffs seek lift on oil drill ban!

Sources are whispering that Tony Hayward - possibly one of the most-hated men in America - may be given the BP boot.

In every scandal, there always has to be a fall guy, and it is doubtful that the BP Chairman - in spite of his thoughts on the "small people" in the Gulf - will "go down" to appease irrate Americans who are still out for blood.

How appropriate on the eve of the Twilight Vampire thriller "Eclipse."

Meanwhile a dispute among the "partners" has been brewing.

One investor vowed yesterday that cash for damages wasn't going to be forthcoming from their coiffers.

'Ya think so?

According to an insider, contract agreements are replete with provisions that stipulate all partners  share  in costs that may arise from unexpected catastrophes due to malfunctioning equipment such as the one in the Gulf of Mexico.

Although the media has "cooled" down a mite - in the aftermath - BP is still in a troubling dilemma.

BP has been quite vocal about the fact the company has spent $2 billion fighting the spill for the last two months and compensating victims (with no end in sight).

Experts in the field note that - realistically - it won't be until August before crews finish two relief wells that are the best chance of stopping the flow of oil.

The owner of the drill rig, criticized the U.S. government's six-month ban on deepwater drilling in the area, in the wake of a court hearing this week.

Judge Martin Feldman  - presiding over the proceedings in New Orleans - informed lawyers that he would issue a directive by Wednesday in respect to the current ban imposed by President Obama and the administration.

The plaintiff's argued that the six-month suspension of oil drilling would end up being a double whammy because the moratorium in-of-itself would be economically devastating.

Government lawyers inferred that President Obama jumped-the-gun when he imposed the ban.

"The risks of deepwater drilling and ways to make the drilling safer need to be more fully explored," legal counsel summed up.

And so, the battle rages  on all fronts!

News at 11!

 

http://www.julianayrs.com/

BP...the disposal of "muck" a dilemma! Oil giant mum on stickling problem...

According to experts in the field, the - skimming and sucking up - of 21.1 million gallons of oil mixed with water is the way to go in the Gulf.

However, disposal of the skimmed oil is not only difficult, but expensive.

For starters, oil that has mixed with water and debris, is not profitable to refine.

"It has no longer got any economic value. It has to be disposed of as garbage," noted Marc Jones, a former Naval Officer, who has pitched in and helped with clean-ups at a myriad of spill sites over the past few years.

"Sending it to landfills and incinerators is wasteful," elaborated Merv Fingas, a former scientist with Environment Canada.

Therefore, researchers  are feverishly working around the clock to come up with an equitable solution to the problem.

Fingas appeared this past week before the House Committee on Natural Resources to stress that there needed to be more studies conducted to determine how to process the gooey  mess into useful by-products.

To date, the brightest minds have been baffled as to how to accomplish that end, though.

At least four barges brimming with the sludge have been shipped to Texas and Alabama for disposal.

Amidst the stickling crisis, BP execs - typical - have remained mum on the growing dilemma.

Is another bull session warranted at the White House?

News at 11!

http://www.julianayrs.com/

Barack Obama...BP Chairman selects words wisely! Prez shuns BP execs!

BP Chairman reflects on the issues!

The Chairman of BP Oil ruffled a few feathers when he stepped out into the cold light of day - after his much ballyhooed meeting with the President - and flippantly referred to Americans involved in the gulf crisis as the "little people".

But, Critics applauded BP suits for their decision - announced publicly today - to forego on payments of dividents to their stockholders until the issue of BP claims was resolved to the satisfaction of all concerned.

Many were ecstatic to hear that $20 billion dollars was being set aside in an escrow account - to be managed by an impartial third party - when  claim settlements come due.

However, the Chairman's select choice of words  put the astute on the alert.

When the BP top dog referred to "proper" claims - and pay-outs on those that were legitimate - that put many on notice that BP wasn't about to rubber-stamp any checks without the individuals jumping a few necessary hurdles first.

The promise to conduct their own independent investigation caused me to sit bolt upright!

Just betcha, that down the road a-ways, BP may end up balking a tad.

After all, the agreement that was pacted today, does not include an allotment of funds to cover unexpected future claims or civil lawsuits filed for recovery of damages that may be launched by injured third parties.

One bone of contention pertains to existing claims - which some grumble in the Gulf region - have been slow to process from the BP end.

Claimants have angrily lamented to all within earshot - that although they have turned in bundles of paperwork ad nauseam in recent weeks - the monies have not been forthcoming.

One lucky man - who received a check yesterday - posed for a BP photo op.

A public relations ploy?

More shocking was an allegation that a man - age 102 - was mailed a check this past week.

The problem with the pay-out on this particular claim?

Apparently, the man is dead.

Was that paperwork processed in error, or were BP officials just anxious to get payments out - to anyone dead or alive - to establish good faith in the eyes of the public?

Meanwhile, it didn't escape the watchful eye of  by-standers that when the landmark bull session was over at the White House today, the Prez made a point of issuing his statement to the press at a perch a stone's throw away  from the BP gang.

The BP Chairman was forced to address media hounds who descended on his weary body like flies on sh** - on the scorching pavement - a lonely hop-and-a-skip away.

To many, it appeared that the President had deliberately shunned the BP contingent, for some inexplicable reason.

Was Barack Obama left with a bad taste in his mouth during that intriguing hour-or-so of head-butting behind closed doors?

News at 11!

http://www.julianayrs.com

BP...shocking revelations about Oil Giants! Dead people offered advice!

The allegations were pretty startling to say the least!

Shortly after the President signed off on his hum-drum speech to his fellow Americans, news began breaking around the country that at least three of the major oil companies (BP included) relied on the same celebrated scientist for input on the Gulf  crisis.

There was one glaring problem, however.

The expert in the oil industry field died years ago!

But, that wasn't the only revelation that triggered a shockwave on news wires at dusk this evening.

Upon close scrutiny, investigators - hot on the oil spill scandal - spotted other telling irregularities in respect to researched materials (allegedly backed up by legitimate thorough studies by academics) that the industry brass relied on to monitor and maintain their facilities.

With the exception of a phrase or two altered here and there, the exalted reports were almost carbon copies of each other, informed sources revealed.

As tongues began to wag, inquisitive truth seekers reflected on the phenomenon - and likewise - offered up their thoughts on the bizarre coincidence.

"Perhaps one consulting firm was hired (and duly paid) to compile the manual book initially," one astute news hound speculated.

Down the road, when another industry giant sought reference material on the same subject, clearly an unscrupuolous (lazy) employee at the firm had enough larceny in them to just alter a few words in the original report with an eye on racking in a wad of cash for a similar version without much effort.

Who knows!

Just maybe, a clever devil "cut & paste" the material right off the Internet.

As one anchor pointed out, in the event management at either of the big three had ventured beyond the eye-catching cover page, they have have spied embarrassing errors just beyond the first page.

For example, in at least one chapter, the author's factual data is way off-base.

What a hoot!

As was the case with the controversial Immigration Reform Law in Arizona, I just betcha a fiver, that the President hasn't even cracked open the cover to that ambitious  historical tome.

Bet he's familiar with the criteria for submitting a candidate for a Nobel Peace Prize, though.

http://www.julianayrs.com

Barack Obama...cliches dominate speech! General three prong approach falls flat!

In a bold-faced effort to reflect the gravity of the situation, President Obama elected to address the Nation on the status of the oil spill crisis (for the first time ever) from the lofty climbs of the Oval Office at the White House.

In the spite of the rare opportunity to focus on the lush environs, the probing cameras preferred to focus up-close on President Obama's face - and in the process - managed to capture every nervous tick and subtle nuance.

Face readers must have been having a field day interrupting the wave of emotions that fluttered across the screen non-stop during the course of a three-pronged speech crafted to assuage the fears of Americans - and ultimately - restore their faith in the Commander-in-Chief, BP, and the Government-at-large.

A battalion of journalists and political analysts waited with bated breath on the sidelines to pitch their two cents worth at the conclusion of what amounted to a maudlin dissertation that touched all the bases.

For many, Obama's approach was too generalized, and lacked the specifics to instill much confidence.

In recent days, a host of critics were quite outspoken about his stance on the issues, and wondered aloud if the Chief even had the "right stuff" in him.

"He didn't care," one grumbled when a mic was shoved in their face.

"Well, he never gave it much thought for the first five weeks," another piped in.

"Not until he needed to cover his butt, did he pay attention, that's for sure."

Another lynch mob questioned the extent of the Government's involvement and the wisdom in it.

Coincidentally, a poll out today, underscored that the "people" preferred that BP remain in charge of the "clean up", "that solutions to the devastating problem be left to  the professionals", and "that BP be held accountable for their gross negligence".

If anything, the President used the occasion of the address this afternoon to bring the American people up to speed (though Barack hasn't been, ironically), clarify the status of all pressing issues, and - ultimately - inform the Nation where the industry (and Government) go from here to win back the support of the "people" (and - likewise - scrub up the mess).

Part of that concentrated effort will include the funding of an Escrow account (courtesy BP) to facilitate the claims process for recovery of damages, heal the ravaged Gulf, and answer a call to actively pursue other forms of alternative "clean energy" with the aim of reducing  dependency on oil and gas reserves in the decades to come.

Amen!

http://www.julianayrs.com/

President Obama...White House summons BP Chairman to meeting! Brits cry "Inexplicable but Despicable"...

Carl-Henric Svanbergth

(face behind BP mask)

White House senior administration officials have summoned the Chairman Of BP Oil - a shadowy figure by the name of Carl-Henric Svanbergth (in addition to CEO Tony Hayward and BP’s top executives) - to a closed-door meeting on June 16th to probe the width-and-breadth of the oil-spill crisis.

At press time, sources close to the President acknowledged that the Commander-in-Chief would be participating in some of the intense discussions, that will obviously go down before the dust settles.

Pundits who have questioned the way the President has handled the BP crisis, thus far, are now chortling that - if anything - Obama’s shortcomings have unified the British Press.

The headlines have been devastating for the White House overseas.

One daily described Barack Obama’s debacle this way:

“Explicable but despicable.”

And, a handful top-level Officials are accusing outright, that Obama’s ineffectiveness (wanton negligence and disregard for their Corporate entities) has financially burdened the backs of Brits.

“The elderly rely on BP dividends from BP to survive in these tough economic time,” one irate Politician  noted for the record.

However, the Mayor of London overstepped the line - in my opiniion - when he alleged that Obama was "roasting" BP and its Corporate Brass because he "hates" Brits.

Hogwash!

Fleet street madness at its worst.

I laughed out loud when one political analyst on Fox wondered aloud why Barrack Obama held back so long in meeting with CEO Tony Hayward, and his boss, the Chairman of the BP Board.

“He’s the President of the United States. The executives at the oil giant are merely in charge of a company," he snorted, in so many words.

"Obama has the upper hand,” he summed up to panelists who gave their nod of "right on" from the sidelines.

Duh!

The namby-pamby accusations about Barack Obama come to the fore again.

Well, at least he didn't tour the disaster area in Mom jeans.

Wouldn’t it be refreshing to hear Barack Obama utter a memorable quote from the Academy award-winning film - Network - starring William Holden.

Uh-huh.

It goes something like this:


“I’m mad as hell and I’m not taking it anymore.”

  http://www.thetattler.biz/

President Obama...plug the damn hole! Squeaky wheel gets oil....

The hell with those bastards!

In the wake of the BP disaster  the tensions on Capitol Hill have been mounting

Now that the finger-pointing phase has died down, the focus has shifted to conjuring up solutions to resolving the ongoing crisis in Florida.

TV pundits and insiders at the White House are whispering to all within earshot that President Obama has not been tough enough with the British Petroleum company.

Understandably, over the past couple of days, the attitude of BP has been appalling.

Right now, the English-based company is operating in damage-control mode.

Do they even care about the wildlife that has been devasted by what is being caused the worst disaster in U.S. History?

The White House hasn't faired much better in the image department around the globe.

Those charged with the task of updating the status of the spill also complain that Obama becomes tighter-lipped by the day.

Without doubt, the President is reaching a near-breaking point and about to come unglued.

A recent outburst behind-closed-doors a few scant hours ago would tend to suggest that.

After cutting off an aide, he reacted in  knee-jerk style.

"Plug the damn hole," Obama ordered.

Yes, Sir!

Hail to the Chief.

htp://www.thetattler.biz

Crude...Judge issues subpoena for director's footage! Michael Moore objects...

Over the past year or so, CRUDE, has been making the rounds at Film Festivals around the country - and garnering a handful of prestigious awards and widespread critical acclaim - among filmmakers and film fans alike.

Three years in the making, this cinéma-vérité feature from acclaimed filmmaker Joe Berlinger (Brother’s Keeper, Paradise Lost, Metallica) weaves  the intriguing true story of one of the largest and most controversial environmental lawsuits on the planet.

"Crude is a real-life high stakes legal drama, set against a backdrop of the environmental movement, global politics, celebrity activism, human rights advocacy, the media, multinational corporate power, and rapidly-disappearing indigenous culture," according the film's producers.

The film explores a myriad of complex issues from all angles in a bold-faced effort to reveal the truth about environmental peril and human suffering  as seen through the eyes of Berlinger's searing penetrating lens.

Now there is a new twist to the complicated drama!

Recently - Chevron demanded 600 hours of outtake footage from the "Crude" production offices (by way of a subpoena submitted to the court) - arguing in its defense that said evidence may be able to establish that the filmmakers intentions have not always been so lily-white and pure (or  altruistic in nature).

In a nutshell, Chevron is seeking  to establish corruption and misconduct on the part of the plaintiffs.

In a knee-jerk response, the Plaintiffs submitted a vigorous defense to the Judge presiding over the case.

For example, in their legal brief, the filmmaker argued that his work was protected by journalist privilege which protects reporters and others in the news-gathering business from being compelled to reveal confidential sources or divulge confidential material.

Judge Lewis A. Kaplan of Federal District Court in New York found little merit with the arguments and proceeded to grant  the request for the subpoena.

The filmmakers did qualify for the privilege, Judge Kaplan wrote, but the conditions for overcoming that privilege had been met.

The judge’s decision sparked outrage among documentary filmmakers, who said it endangered their form of journalism.

Michael Moore said the decision could have “a chilling effect.”

“If something like this is upheld, the next whistle-blower at the next corporation is going to think twice about showing me some documents if that information has to be turned over to the corporation that they’re working for,” Mr. Moore said.

“Obviously the ramifications of this go far beyond documentary films, if corporations are allowed to pry into a reporter’s notebook or into a television station’s newsroom.”

Chevron lawyer, Randy M. Mastro, said that those criticizing the subpoena were on the wrong side of established law concerning what kinds of materials can be obtained -  and that whatever “Crude” is  it should not be considered journalism.

“This isn’t about the First Amendment,” Mr. Mastro said.

“This is about a plaintiffs’ lawyer who decided he wanted to star in a movie and gave a sympathetic filmmaker extraordinary access to the plaintiffs’ case and strategy," he accused.

The outtakes provide - “a compelling video record of exactly the activities that these plaintiffs’ lawyers have engaged in to corrupt and taint the political process in Ecuador” - he summed up.

Ilann Maazel, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, called the efforts by Chevron to get the outtakes “another last-minute attempt to delay the proceeding and avoid justice.”

He accused the defendants of  - “twisting  the truth” and mischaracterizing the scenes from the film -  to make the plaintiffs’ actions appear to be corrupt.

“The corruption is not in some 600 hours of videotape."

“It’s in the ground and water of the rainforest for anyone to see and smell.”

In his decision, Judge Kaplan acknowledged that the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recognizes the existence of a “qualified privilege for journalistic information” and declared that “Crude” merits that protection.

But that is only the beginning of the process, since the privilege does not grant absolute protection of materials.

“It doesn’t necessarily mean you’re exempt from the subpoena,” said David Hudson of the First Amendment Center in Nashville.

“It just means that there are hoops the party seeking the material has to jump through.”

Judge Kaplan referred to those hoops in citing a 1999 case (Gonzales v. NBC) which upheld a District Court subpoena for outtakes from a “Dateline NBC” program that reported on what it called racially-based traffic stops by Louisiana law enforcement officers.

Materials can be released - the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held -  "if they are confidential, are likely to be relevant to a significant issue in the case and are not reasonably obtainable elsewhere."

The conditions were met in this case, Judge Kaplan concluded; the outtakes, he wrote, “will contribute to the goal of seeing not only that justice is done, but that it appears to be done.”

Experts in media law said Judge Kaplan’s opinion did not fall outside of the mainstream of First Amendment jurisprudence.

Dave Heller, senior staff attorney at the Media Law Resource Center in Manhattan, said that if someone seeking a subpoena says the material is relevant to significant issues, “it’s appropriate for the judge to take that seriously.”

However, Mr. Heller added that he was not sure this request should have been granted.

“The common-sense reaction is, ‘This is just a documentary — it speaks for itself,’ ” he said.

“It suggests that Chevron and the other defendants in Ecuador would have more than enough leads to follow up and question people to obtain relevant information to their litigation there, without imposing on the documentary filmmaker to compromise his relationship with his sources and disgorge his own unpublished material.”

The film’s director, Joe Berlinger, said Judge Kaplan’s order came as a shock.

“To have this broad request to turn over everything related to the case, to me, is just a trampling of the First Amendment and the journalist’s privilege,” he said.

Even though the people on camera had agreed to participate in the film and had signed waivers, Mr. Berlinger argued, they still had a measure of confidentiality that should have counted for more in Judge Kaplan’s consideration of the case.

“People who agree to be in a film don’t agree to have their lives exposed as if they agreed to be on a 24/7 Web cam, which is in essence what’s happening,” he said.

He said he hoped the order could be overturned.

“At the end of the day, if I lose all my options, yeah I’m going to comply with the subpoena and turn it over. I’m the father of two children, and this is certainly not worth going to prison over.”

In response, the filmmakers have organized a petition - which has been signed by a who's who's of the Hollywood elite (Oscar-winners are on the list) - and have submitted an "open letter" urging a reconsideration.

Since I personally have some knowledge of the court system ( I studied law) - I am keenly aware that while the petitioners have a right to urge a reconsideration - it must be submitted in the proper format in the correct forum with legal jurisdiction over the issues.

To clarifty this, I asked the Public Relations firm handling the dialogue between the filmmakers and the press, to kindly advise as to what they hoped to accomplish wth an open letter - which in my estimation - carries no legitimate weight in the eyes of the judiciary in its current incarnation.

As of this date, there has not been any response back.

Subsequently, I am publishing their "open letter" herein below verbatim to at least get their protest arguments out to the general public so that a dialogue may commence in the community at large.

_________________________________________________

May 13, 2010

An Open Letter in Support of Joe Berlinger
(Documentary Filmmaking Team of "Crude")

As members of the documentary film community, we the undersigned strongly object to the Honorable Judge Lewis A. Kaplan's ruling last week in the case involving our colleague Joe Berlinger, the Chevron Corporation, and Berlinger's 600 hours of raw footage shot during production of his documentary film "Crude".

Judge Kaplan sided with Chevron and ruled that Berlinger must turn over all of his raw footage to Chevron for their use in the lawsuit discussed in the film. Berlinger and his legal team plan to appeal the ruling.
In cases such as these involving access to a journalist's work material, whether they involve a newspaper or online reporter, a radio interviewer, a television news producer, or a documentary filmmaker, it is understood that First Amendment protection of the journalist's privilege is never absolute.

Typically, if such privilege is successfully rebutted in court, a turn-over order demanding a document or other thing is issued and the journalist must comply or face the consequences. Therefore, it is astounding to us that Judge Kaplan demanded that all of the footage shot during the production of the film be handed over to the attorneys of Chevron, given that the privilege exists primarily to protect against the wholesale exposure of press files to litigant scrutiny.

While we commend Judge Kaplan for stating "that the qualified journalists' privilege applies to Berlinger's raw footage", we are nonetheless dismayed both by Chevron's attempts to go on a "fishing expedition" into the edit rooms and production offices of a fellow documentary filmmaker without any particular cause or agenda, and the judge's allowance of said intentions.

What's next, phone records and e-mails?

At the heart of journalism lies the trust between the interviewer and his or her subject.

Individuals who agree to be interviewed by the news media are often putting themselves at great risk, especially in the case of television news and documentary film where the subject's identity and voice are presented in the final report. If witnesses sense that their entire interviews will be scrutinized by attorneys and examined in courtrooms they will undoubtedly speak less freely.

This ruling surely will have a crippling effect on the work of investigative journalists everywhere, should it stand.

Though many of us work independently of large news organizations, we nevertheless hold ourselves to the highest of journalistic standards in the writing, producing, and editing of our films. In fact, as traditional news media finds itself taking fewer chances due to advertiser fears and corporate ownership, the urgency of bold, groundbreaking journalism through the documentary medium is perhaps greater than ever.

This case offers a clear and compelling argument for more vigorous federal shield laws to protect journalists and their work, better federal laws to protect confidential sources, and stronger standards to prevent entities from piercing the journalists' privilege.

We urge the higher courts tooverturn this ruling to help ensure the safety and protection of journalists and  their subjects, and to promote a free and vital press in our nation and around the world.

Patrick Creadon
Los Angeles, CA

Doug Blush
Los Angeles, CA

Eddie Schmidt
President
International Documentary Association
(IDA)

http://www.thetattler.biz

Robert F. Kennedy Junior...polar bear SOS! Sign petition to protect endangered species...

Robert F. Kennedy SOS!

Recently, I caught a thought-provoking (disturbing) documentary on the plight of the Polar Bear at the Artivist Film Festival at the Egyptian Theatre (Hollywood).

Post:  12/06/09

http://ijulian.blogspot.com/2009/12/ice-bears-of-beaufortcaptivating.html

Now, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has also sprung into action to prevent the Polar Bear from disappearing off  the face of the globe.

Early this week, for example, I opened my snail mailbox -  and a well-researched packet on global warming and its impact on the Polar Bear - fell out into my hands.

In the informative documents fired off under the auspices of the NRDC (Earth's Best Defense) - Mr. Kennedy noted that in spite of the mounting death toll in the Arctic - the Interior Department has refused to give the polar bear the highest level of endangered species protection it so urgently needs and deserves.

Dumb politicians, with no compassion or foresight - such as Sarah Palin - have actually put their energy into ensuring the Polar Bear is not protected or included on the endanagered species list.

Shocking, in view of the facts, staring mankind in the face.

Right now the muffled cries of newborn polar bears can be heard far and wide as their snowy dens collapse from unseasonable rains.

The young are also succumbing to starvation after enduring longer and longer periods without food.

By virtue of a petition, Kennedy notes that over one million Americans are now preparing to call on the Obama administration to give the polar bear full-fledged protection.

In addition, the politician-turned-environmentalist, is fighting alongside other concerned citizens in federal courts around the country to put an end to industry groups and trophy hunters pushing the bear one step closer to extinction.

Inside the envelope, the NRDC has included a petition to sign and return to their headquarters in Merrifield (VA), with a plea to Interior Secreary Ken Salazar to launch a program to protect the bears right now.

Concerned citizens may also contribute donations (five dollars, ten  dollars, whatever) to help fund the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).

In closing, Kennedy underscores that it will be an uphill battle, because there will be pressure from Oil lobbyists to maintain the current George Bush policy to promote oil exploration first and foremost.

If you recall, before leaving office - in the 11th hour of his Presidency - George W. auctioned off a vast expanse of Alaska's Chukchi Sea (home of half-a-million polar bears) to Shell and other oil corporations.

For starters, that could place the imperiled polar bear population in the path of any disastorous oil spill.

Act now, eh?

Info:  www.polarbearSOS.org

National Resources Defense Council
40 West 20th Street
New York, New York
10011

http://www.julianayrs.com

George Bush...military arms for oil? Sinister purpose of trip to Middle East revealed!

George Bush does "two-step"...


Curious, that.

As George Bush was touring the Middle East this past week the issue of supplying arms to Saudi Arabia popped up.

Mixed in with the talks, the topic of oil prices reared its ugly head, too.

Bush took the occasion to enlighten his "this-close" good friends in Saudi Arabia, that if the U.S. economy was "hurt" by oil shortages, common sense dictated there would not be much money available to purchase their precious product.

In sum, the President urged the Saudis to consider reducing the cost of the black gold, "...for one of their best customers".

Meanwhile, leaders in Saudi Arabia issued a release noting that oil-producing nations should take measures to ensure the oil market stays "healthy" and "competitive".

This evidently signaled the road that the Saudis and Bush will venture down next...

Negotiations no doubt focused on arms for oil?

Let the games begin!