- Russian Company Buys Majority Interest in American Uranium Mine. Why it Matters - May 15, 2015
- Castro’s Message to Cubans Contradicts Obama’s Stated Reforms - January 12, 2015
It was reported by Johathan Allen of Vox, that according to an International Business Times investigation “at least 181 companies, individuals, and foreign governments have given to the Clinton Foundation also lobbied the State Departmentwhen Hillary Clinton ran the place”, and “Bill Clinton accepted more than $2.5 million in speaking fees from 13 major corporation and trade associations that lobbied the U.S. State Department while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State.
Peter Schweizer’s book, “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich”, likewise offers a tough view of the Clinton Foundation. Noted in Schweizer’s book is how the Clinton Foundation is not a “traditional charity” in that the delineation is not clear where the Clinton political machines and moneymaking ventures end and where charity begins. Although the Clinton Foundation does some good like preventing obesity, alleviating AIDS suffering, the Foundation functions mostly as a middleman.
Consider the Kazakhstan dealings where in 2005 Bill Clinton presented himself as an ambassador for low-cost treatment of HIV/AIDs. Although Kazakhstan was a strange place to focus such an effort given infection rates were very low, Kazakhstan did have plenty of uranium. It so happened that a Canadian company, Uranium One, with little experience in the uranium business, led by a generous Clinton donor, gained a lucrative state in Kazakhstan’s uranium mines. As a result of transactions beginning in 2009, the Russian state-owned atomic agency, Rosatom, bought a 17% share in Uranium One, which had uranium mines in Wyoming. This deal required the approval of a number of the U.S. agencies including the State Department under the title of CFIUS (Committee of Foreign Investment in the United States), a small executive task force that evaluates investment transactions by foreign companies in the United States. The deal was approved in 2010 while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State. It allowed Russia, specifically ARMZ an arm of Rosatom, to begin the process of gaining total control of Uranium One in 2013. Senator John Barrosso of Wyoming and several congressmen did raise concerns about this deal.
Meanwhile, donations to The Clinton Foundation were received by investors in Uranium One between 2005 and 2010. In addition, Bill Clinton received half million dollars in 2010 for a single speech in Moscow from a Kremlin affiliated bank.
What can be worse than allowing a Russian company to buy a majority interest in a Uranium mine on American soil in exchange for millions of dollars? It sounds like a 007 movie with Comrade Putin playing Mr. Evil who wishes to control the world’s Uranium. Why is Putin so interested in Russia being the largest producer of Uranium? Do the American people understand the full extend of the deal? We’re talking about URANIUM!
Uranium as a source of nuclear energy
Uranium is a chemical element found in most rocks in concentrations of 2 to 4 ppm (parts per million). Uranium sources are most abundant in Australia, Canada and Kazakhstan. Other countries fairly rich in Uranium are Russia, USA, South Africa, Namibia, Niger, Brazil and Ukraine. Uranium is present in nature as three different isotopes: U 238, the most abundant (over 99%); U 235 (0.7%); and U 234 (traces). U 235 is the isotope that is fissile, that is, its atoms can split while releasing energy. While U 238 is not fissile; it is “fertile”, that is, when bombarded with neutrons it can become Pu 239 (Plutonium) which is fissile.
Scientists can either enrich Uranium sources so as to obtain larger amounts of U 235 or use U 238 to produce Pu 239. Either way nuclear energy is obtained. The latter method uses a breeder reactor. Both can be used for producing electricity and radioisotopes, as well as atomic weapons. For atomic weapons the Uranium 235 and Plutonium 239 must be enriched over 90%. In a nuclear reactor, the fission chain reaction can be controlled to create enough heat to produce steam which spins a turbine to drive a generator, producing electricity. Several countries in the world use nuclear reactors for over 30% of their electricity. European countries using nuclear energy are Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Lithuania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, and Ukraine.
Of note is that Russia currently provides natural gas to Western Europe via its company Gazprom, set up in 1989 as the first “private” company with the state controlling over fifty per cent of shares. Gazprom controls one-fifth of world gas reserves and supplies over 25% of natural gas used by European countries.
Connecting the dots
Putin plays the game much better than Obama. Putin made his career and honed his deceitfulness when serving in the KGB. He understands that he who controls energy and nuclear weapons controls the world. Energy is the blood of a country; it gives life and movement; it commands its economy and its national security. Countries that depend on other countries for its energy can easily become subservient and powerless to direct their own destiny. Not only can Putin take over Ukraine (rich in Uranium mines) but it’s now possible for Putin to blackmail the USA with his capacity to export Uranium to Iran. The deal with Rosatom has given Russia control of about one-fifth of all uranium producing capacity in the United States.
In that Hillary Clinton failed to abide by the terms of a 2008 Memorandum of Understanding with the Obama administration in which she promised to publicly disclose all donors to the Clinton Foundation to avoid possible conflicts of interest, she now finds herself facing questions over the Uranium One-ARMZ transaction [As clarification: AtomRedMetZoloto is a Russian uranium mining company, wholly owned by Atomenergoprom, a part of Rosatom.]. Although Hillary Clinton claims to have had no influence on the CFIUS approval process of the Uranium One-ARMZ transaction, she now finds herself in a position where she is being asked to prove that she was not beholden to Uranium One executives for donations made to the Clinton Foundation prior to the CFIUS approval of the sale of their business to Russian government-owned Rosatom.
Is Bribery of U.S. a possibility by Putin?
The proof of Hillary’s innocence or guilt rests in the hands of Vladimir Putin who may be the only person in the world with the legal right to authorize the release of classified documents that could exonerate Hillary Clinton when serving as Secretary of State. Not only can Putin take over Ukraine (rich in Uranium mines) but is able to blackmail the USA with his capacity to export Uranium to Iran. Rosatom had given Russia control of about one-fifth of all uranium producing capacity in the United States.
The fact that even liberal outlets such as the NYT and the Washington Post are taking Schweizer’s book seriously indicates that the information revealed is not partisan in nature, but instead should concern all Americans regardless of political affiliation.
An investigation is warranted, but will it be forthcoming? Peggy Noonan had this to say in an Opinion piece in the WSJ on May 7th: “I suspect she [Hillary] can because the Clintons are unique in the annals of American politics: They are protected from charges of corruption by their reputation for corruption.”
Does this nation now have a criminal justice system in which the rich and famous now skirt free of punishment, even when there seems to be sufficient smoke to indicate possible fire. I hope not! The rule of law, executed as fairly as possible, is important to maintaining a civil society, without which distrust and anarchy results.
Public trust and integrity must count for something. The 2016 election is important for it will determine this nation’s fate. Will the “great experiment” set forth by our Founding Fathers survive, or will the American people abandon the Constitution to live under a system of government where freedom and liberty are in short order?