From italysbadboy at yahoo.com Mon Jan 24 00:05:38 2005 From: italysbadboy at yahoo.com (ItalysBadBoy) Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 00:05:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Shadow_Group] Guess where Germans plant "Bush" flags? Message-ID: <20050124080538.5072.qmail@web13606.mail.yahoo.com> Sunday, January 23, 2005 Planting flags in dog poop German pranksters have planted 2,000-3,000 miniature US flags and pictures of Bush in piles of dog poo in public parks. http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1248811.html http://www.madeyouthink.org/ Protest the coronation II on Black Thursday ++++++++++++++++++++++++++STOP THE WALL++++++++++++++++++++++++++ www.stopthewall.org www.nad-plo.org www.hrw.org www.pal-arc.org www.endtheoccupation.org www.sustaincampaign.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From italysbadboy at yahoo.com Mon Jan 24 10:12:44 2005 From: italysbadboy at yahoo.com (ItalysBadBoy) Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:12:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Shadow_Group] =?iso-8859-1?q?Protesters_disrupt_Bush_coronation_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?and_drunken_orgies_of_excess=3B_Obnoxious_Republica?= =?iso-8859-1?q?ns_display_their_=91family_values=92_in_D=2EC=2E?= Message-ID: <20050124181244.86159.qmail@web13607.mail.yahoo.com> Protesters disrupt Bush coronation and drunken orgies of excess; Obnoxious Republicans display their ?family values? in D.C. If you read most mainstream media accounts, you?d think there wasn?t much of a protest during Bush?s January 2005 coronation week. You probably wouldn?t read about the protesters who obtained tickets to the inauguration from their Congress reps and disrupted Bush?s address with chants and signs. Or the protester who threw a snowball that hit Cheney?s vehicle as he was waving. Or the thousands who marched and clashed with police and actually halted Bush?s motorcade. Or the hundreds who didn?t quit when the parade stopped and protested in front of those inaugural orgies of excess, making the tuxedo-and-fur-clad, drunk Republican partiers feel some heat. Or the thousands who attended more hip counter-inaugural parties. Or the family-value Republicans who paid for prostitutes and made fools of themselves in public. Or the DC mayor who criticized protesters for supposedly being selfish and for the few who shouted obscenities, then hypocritically ripped off an obscenity to a reporter himself. Read it here ? writer Jackson Thoreau was there. http://www.smirkingchimp.com/article.php?sid=19596&mode=nested&order=0 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++STOP THE WALL++++++++++++++++++++++++++ www.stopthewall.org www.nad-plo.org www.hrw.org www.pal-arc.org www.endtheoccupation.org www.sustaincampaign.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From italysbadboy at yahoo.com Tue Jan 25 01:10:56 2005 From: italysbadboy at yahoo.com (ItalysBadBoy) Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 01:10:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Shadow_Group] The Three Technologies That Will Blow Oil Away Message-ID: <20050125091056.622.qmail@web13608.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.whizzyrds.com/Windblog.html The Three Technologies That Will Blow Oil Away ? By Daniel A. Stafford 01/24/2005 There are currently three relatively new technologies poised to put oil to rest in the United States. Each has been years in development, each is reaching a production price range that is directly competitive with traditional power sources. Together, they overcome seasonal limitations on renewables generation and vastly reduce atmospheric pollutants, virtually eliminating carbon dioxide being added to the atmosphere in their use. There is enough energy potential in the United States that the U.S. could in effect become an energy exporter. Biofuels for the heating and transportation sectors: The first is biofuels - especially biodiesel. ( http://www.biodiesel.org ) Biodiesel is wonderful, because it can be run in conventional diesel engines without modification. Additionally, (unlike even petroleum diesel) just above three units of energy are gained for every unit of energy put in to produce biodiesel. The added energy comes from sunlight stored by plants while they are growing. Biodiesel is derived from vegetable oils. It greatly reduces PAH emissions, nearly eliminates Nitrous PAH emissions, and has no sulfur content. Sulfurous gasses produced by burning petroleum diesel are a major component of acid rain. Ozone production from burning biodiesel is roughly half that of petrodiesel. Carbon dioxide emitted from burning biodiesel is the same carbon dioxide the plants the fuel came from took out of the air while growing. In contrast, the carbon dioxide put into the air from burning petrodiesel had been buried underground for millions of years. Biodiesel is so clean, burning it will clean out sediments deposited in your fuel system from burning petroleum diesel. Be prepared to replace fuel filters for awhile if you switch from dirty petrodiesel to clean biodiesel. This also greatly extends the life of a diesel engine burning biodiesel. (Diesel engines already are long-lived compared to their gasoline counterparts.) Biodiesel can also be burned in place of petroleum heating oil. Oil furnace technology could see a significant boost as people become more aware of the benefits of biodiesel over petroleum oil. There are two other wonderful benefits to using biodiesel. They generate more demand for agricultural products, which will help improve the economics of American farmers. They also require no modifications to existing diesel engines or oil furnaces to use. In fact, using biodiesel that meets ASTM standard D 6751 will not not void the warranty on American-made diesel engines. Biodiesel is able to be blended with petroleum diesel in any percentage. It is sold in various blends in every state of the nation, with more stations being added all the time. There are currently about twenty producers of biodiesel and twenty proposed production companies within the United States. Willie Nelson recently started a biodiesel distribution company as a companion to his Farm Aid efforts. You can find his company's site at http://www.wnbiodiesel.com/index.html . Additionally, ethanol and methanol are useful fuels for transportation purposes, and can supplement biodiesel use. Wind-generated electricity: The second technology is wind energy. Wind energy generation systems are going online at an accelerated rate around the world, including here in the U.S. (See http://www.awea.org ) Wind energy is also cost-competitive with fossil fuels and cheaper than nuclear power when generated with utility-scale turbines in the 1.5 MW to 3 MW size range. There is enough wind energy potential in three states to produce as much electricity as the entire U.S. currently consumes. The U.S. has more potential for wind energy production than any nation on Earth. Additionally, land-based wind energy production often is owned by cooperatives of farmers, or produced on farmland leased from farmers. The farmers can still grow crops right up to the base of the wind mills. This generates much-needed additional revenue for our farmers. Wind mills kill less birds by far than stationary communications towers and high-rise buildings, as they make a gentle whooshing sound that scares the birds off, in addition to the slow and usually visible rotation of their huge blades. Yet despite this, their noise levels are so quiet that you almost need to be standing under them to hear them. Wind is generally more available in winter months than in summer months, although it is available year-round at significant levels. This means that wind power income will tend to go up for farmers precisely when they are growing the least crops. In time, the U.S. could export great quantities of wind-produced energy to other nations, most likely in the form of burnable hydrogen, whose only exhaust is water and a small amount of nitrous oxide. Stirling cycle solar power dishes: The third major technology development is Stirling cycle solar energy dishes. ( http://eetimes.com/at/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=53700939 ) These systems have been in development by DOE and others for nearly twenty years. Unlike all other solar energy systems, Stirling cycle systems routinely achieve 30% or better efficiency. Once mass production of these systems is begun, they should be producing electricity at prices about in the middle of the production cost range for electricity in the U.S. It is estimated that an area of the Mojave Desert 100 miles by 100 miles filled with solar Stirling dishes could produce as much electricity as the U.S. currently consumes. Additionally, this power is most available on clear, sunny summer days - at precisely the opposite times as when wind energy is most available. Used in conjunction with wind energy, Stirling solar dishes could power direct electricity consumption, production of truly clean hydrogen, and increase energy available for export by the U.S. Major transformation potential for the U.S. economy: These technologies will all require large amounts of manufacturing capacity, and installation and maintenance crews. There is the potential to create literally millions of U.S. jobs in the energy sector. Additionally, all the U.S. dollars currently spent importing oil and protecting oil resource access would become unnecessary. Large amounts of U.S. dollars would be spent in the U.S. economy instead of elsewhere, and energy exports could add large amounts of income for U.S. energy producers, including our farmers. All of this would drive up U.S. GNP instead of being a drain on GNP as oil has become. Conclusion: The time has come for the U.S. government to move it's energy subsidies into these areas of energy technology and away from oil, coal, and nuclear power. The time has come to retrofit existing U.S. vehicle fleets to run on biodiesel or ethanol and methanol. Our economy desperately needs this. Our farmers desperately need this. Our workers desperately need this. In the light of global warming, our PLANET desperately needs this. These technologies will become more and more commonplace with or without government subsidies. Requirements for government funds to subsidize our existing fossil fuel energy infrastructure will only increase, as will the disastrous costs in environmental damage and global conflicts over ever-scarcer fossil fuels. These technologies are the leaders to an energy revolution in our nation and our world, but combined with new technologies for energy conservation and energy efficient building techniques, our energy future could be incredibly brilliant and a wonderful example and benefactor of our entire world. The time is now for We The People to stand up and demand that our government put their efforts fully behind these technologies. Daniel A. Stafford publishes the weblog "The Great Lakes Zephyr - Wind Energy & Hydrogen Journal" ( http://www.whizzyrds.com/Windblog.html ) Dan is also a highly experienced telecommunications technician, and advocate of progressive political policies, and an accomplished poet. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++STOP THE WALL++++++++++++++++++++++++++ www.stopthewall.org www.nad-plo.org www.hrw.org www.pal-arc.org www.endtheoccupation.org www.sustaincampaign.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From italysbadboy at yahoo.com Tue Jan 25 10:30:28 2005 From: italysbadboy at yahoo.com (ItalysBadBoy) Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:30:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Shadow_Group] The Godfather of the Hybrid Message-ID: <20050125183028.77030.qmail@web13621.mail.yahoo.com> http://pr.caltech.edu/periodicals/EandS/articles/LXVII3/wouk.html Born in the South Bronx in New York City in 1919, Victor Wouk earned his bachelor?s degree from Columbia University in 1939 before heading west for graduate school. In choosing between Stanford and Caltech, he picked Caltech because, as he said recently, it had open-book exams. Drawn to Caltech?s state-of-the-art High Voltage Lab?the first such laboratory in the country?Wouk received his MS in electrical engineering in 1940 and his PhD in 1942. His first company, Beta Electric Corporation, which he formed in 1946, grew to become in a decade the largest manufacturer of high-voltage power supplies. Then he went on to found other companies, leading to an interest in and then a passion for electric and hybrid automobiles. He holds more than 10 patents, most of them on various features of electric and hybrid vehicles. He was.... http://pr.caltech.edu/periodicals/EandS/articles/LXVII3/wouk.html ++++++++++++++++++++++++++STOP THE WALL++++++++++++++++++++++++++ www.stopthewall.org www.nad-plo.org www.hrw.org www.pal-arc.org www.endtheoccupation.org www.sustaincampaign.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From italysbadboy at yahoo.com Tue Jan 25 18:17:38 2005 From: italysbadboy at yahoo.com (ItalysBadBoy) Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 18:17:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Shadow_Group] U.S. Children Still Traumatized One Year After Seeing Partially Exposed Breast On TV Message-ID: <20050126021738.25048.qmail@web13606.mail.yahoo.com> U.S. Children Still Traumatized One Year After Seeing Partially Exposed Breast On TV WASHINGTON, DC?As the nation approaches the one-year anniversary of the Super Bowl XXXVIII tragedy, an FCC study shows that millions of U.S. children were severely traumatized by the exposure to a partially nude female breast during the Feb. 1, 2004 halftime show. "No one who lived through that day is likely to forget the horror," said noted child therapist Dr. Eli Wasserbaum. "But it was especially hard on the children." The tragic wardrobe malfunction occurred approximately 360 days ago, during Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake's performance of "Rock Your Body," when Timberlake tore Jackson's costume, accidentally revealing her right breast. "By the time CBS cut to an aerial view of the stadium, the damage was done," said Wasserbaum, who has also worked extensively with orphaned and amputee children in Third World war zones. "I've found that children can be amazingly resilient, but this event was too much for many of them to take. The horrible image of that breast is likely to haunt them for the rest of their lives." According to the 500-page report filed by the FCC, more than 90 percent of the children who saw the exposed breast said they were "confused and afraid." "Mommy has dirty chest bumps," said a 5-year-old boy quoted in one of the thousands of case studies compiled by the FCC. "She's like the bad lady on TV. I'm afraid Mommy will take off her shirt and scare everyone. I hate Mommy." Girls were traumatized as well, often expressing apprehensions about sexual development. According to Wasserbaum, one 8-year-old girl told her parents that she didn't "want to get evil breasts." Wasserbaum said children of both genders associate their trauma with footballs, presumably because of the context in which they were exposed to the breast. A great number of children who witnessed the tragedy are still plagued by nightmares of sun-shapes that recall Jackson's nipple ring. Of the infants who saw the breast, 76 percent are unwilling to breast feed or use a bottle, forcing their parents to nourish them intravenously. "When the tragedy took place, we knew it would cause psychological trauma, but we had no idea how long the effects would last," Wasserbaum said."Our worst fears have been confirmed. It will take years to repair the damage." Cases of deviant sexual development induced by breast-glimpsing are widespread amongst older children. Pathologies range from schoolyard exhibitionism to gender-role confusion and violent shirt-tearing. "The FCC imposed the maximum $27,500 penalty on each of the 20 CBS-owned television stations," Wasserbaum said. "But the government offered no recompense to the individuals exposed to the breast. And neither Jackson nor Timberlake has ever specifically apolgized to the children whose lives they ruined, or donated a penny for the adolescents' psychiatric care." Across America, parental concern over the condition doctors have dubbed Nearly Naked Breast Disorder continues to grow. "How can my son Brandon be expected to make it through something like that unscathed?" asked mother of four Shonali Bhomik of the San Francisco-based What About the Children? Foundation, one of many social-awareness groups spearheading the fight for increased NNBD funding in Congress. "For approximately 1.5 seconds, he saw a breast. The image was seared into his innocent, tiny retinas. He can't close his eyes without replaying the whole ugly scene over and over in his little head." "For the love of God?that breast was almost nude," Bhomik added. Bhomik said she has concerns about her son's development. "I shudder to think how this could affect my son once he reaches puberty," Bhomik said. "Little Brandon just wanted to watch the fun halftime show with his family. He was only 10 years old." Bhomik is one of millions of people facing every parent's worst nightmare: that their child will see a partially exposed breast. Wasserbaum said there is no way to predict whether the children will recover. "One thing is certain," Wasserbaum said. "For us as a nation, the horrific consequences of almost-nakedness have only just begun to make themselves apparent." Wasserbaum added that children who saw the televised breast in Europe, Australia, and various other nations throughout the world were somehow unaffected by the sight. http://www.theonion.com/news/index.php?issue=4104 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++STOP THE WALL++++++++++++++++++++++++++ www.stopthewall.org www.nad-plo.org www.hrw.org www.pal-arc.org www.endtheoccupation.org www.sustaincampaign.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From italysbadboy at yahoo.com Wed Jan 26 14:20:55 2005 From: italysbadboy at yahoo.com (ItalysBadBoy) Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:20:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Shadow_Group] A SIGN FROM ALLAH - 36 U.S. Troops Die in Iraq in Their Bloodiest Day Message-ID: <20050126222055.4386.qmail@web13624.mail.yahoo.com> Oh great, just what we need days before the Iraqi election. A sign that god is great and praise Allah. Anyone else thinks this election is a bad idea? I have a feeling this will be the start of civil war there, that is if it hasn't started already. My view is that it has. In some respects it was better that Dubya won, this way he has full responsibility for Iraq. IBB BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Thirty-one U.S. troops were reported killed in a helicopter crash and five more died in insurgent attacks Wednesday in the deadliest day for American forces since they invaded Iraq 22 months ago. The heavy U.S. toll came amid a series of guerrilla bombings and raids that killed 10 Iraqis in a campaign to sabotage Sunday's landmark election -- a cornerstone of U.S. plans in Iraq. Continues......... http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=7437344&src=eDialog/GetContent§ion=news ++++++++++++++++++++++++++STOP THE WALL++++++++++++++++++++++++++ www.stopthewall.org www.nad-plo.org www.hrw.org www.pal-arc.org www.endtheoccupation.org www.sustaincampaign.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From italysbadboy at yahoo.com Wed Jan 26 14:39:26 2005 From: italysbadboy at yahoo.com (ItalysBadBoy) Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:39:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Shadow_Group] Senate Panel OKs Bush's Pick for Energy Job Message-ID: <20050126223926.53782.qmail@web13602.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A37783-2005Jan26? Senate Panel OKs Bush's Pick for Energy Job Reuters Wednesday, January 26, 2005; 9:48 AM WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Sam Bodman, President Bush's pick to be the next U.S. energy secretary, was approved on Wednesday by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. His nomination now goes to the full Senate for final approval, which is expected. Bodman will leave his current post as U.S. deputy treasury secretary to replace outgoing Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, a former U.S. senator from Michigan. Bodman, age 66, said at his confirmation hearing last week that he supports opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling. The Republican-controlled Congress is expected to have enough votes to later this year give oil companies access to the Alaskan refuge. Bodman said he generally supports a "balanced" approach in opening more federal lands to drilling that weighs environmental protection against the nation's growing need for energy. Bodman said passing comprehensive energy legislation is among the most important matters before Congress this year, calling a stable supply of energy "the lifeblood" of the U.S. economy. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said on Monday that clearing an energy bill is one of the top ten legislative priorities for Republicans. Bodman was a chemical engineering professor and chairman of Cabot Corp., a specialty chemicals company from 1987 through 2001. Bodman was confirmed twice before for senior jobs at the Commerce and Treasury departments during the past four years. The Energy Department, with a $23 billion budget, runs a network of nuclear weapons research laboratories and has over 100,000 employees and contractors. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A37783-2005Jan26? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++STOP THE WALL++++++++++++++++++++++++++ www.stopthewall.org www.nad-plo.org www.hrw.org www.pal-arc.org www.endtheoccupation.org www.sustaincampaign.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From italysbadboy at yahoo.com Wed Jan 26 14:54:43 2005 From: italysbadboy at yahoo.com (ItalysBadBoy) Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:54:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Shadow_Group] Mark Morford: SpongeBob, Evil Gay Heathen Message-ID: <20050126225443.52800.qmail@web13603.mail.yahoo.com> ===== Mark Morford's Notes & Errata ===== SFGate.com - January 26, 2005 --------------------------------- SpongeBob, Evil Gay Heathen How sad to be a right-wing Christian in a world full of homo cartoons and scary nipples By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist And oh my God, you think, how these people's lives must be one screaming firehouse of inexorable, nipple-torquing, kidney-stabbing pain. I mean, really. Because then you read about how James Dobson, the cute little founder of the cute little ultraconservative rabidly backward happily neo-homophobic Focus on the Family, actually stood up and proclaimed, to the media, to the world, with a straight face, with no sense of irony or shuddering humiliation or an overpowering sense that he was, in fact, contributing quite nicely to the overall violent oatmealy ignorance of the planet, came right out and announced that the wildly popular and much-loved SpongeBob Squarepants cartoon character is, actually and truly, probably gay. And therefore, of course, SpongeBob is a dire threat to all childrenkind and must be avoided at all costs lest the wee ones watch the cartoons and become overwhelmed with a mad desire to wax their chests and buy a new Miata and drink cocktails made with lemonade. More or less. And why? Why is the adorable yellow sea sponge suddenly considered to be contributing to the mental and spiritual and genital degradation of millions of innocent children? Because he's a hyperactive none-too-bright short-attention-spanned spazzball of lovable non-sequiturial nonsense who induces rabid devotion among children and gay men and straight adults alike? Why, no. Not quite .... (click here to read the rest) (Full URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2005/01/26/notes012605.DTL&nl=fix ) --------------------------------- --------------------------------- All contents (tm) (c) 2005 SF Gate Have a lovely day ++++++++++++++++++++++++++STOP THE WALL++++++++++++++++++++++++++ www.stopthewall.org www.nad-plo.org www.hrw.org www.pal-arc.org www.endtheoccupation.org www.sustaincampaign.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From italysbadboy at yahoo.com Thu Jan 27 11:52:52 2005 From: italysbadboy at yahoo.com (ItalysBadBoy) Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 11:52:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Shadow_Group] WAR ON PLASTIC Message-ID: <20050127195252.40545.qmail@web13622.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.culturechange.org/e-letter-plastics.html Rejecting the toxic plague WAR ON PLASTIC by Jan Lundberg Northern Californians Against Plastic Plastic as toxic trash is barely an issue with health advocates, environmentalists, and even those of us looking toward the post-petroleum world. Instead, "recycling" and future "bioplastics" distract people from keeping plastic out of their lives. As the evidence from our trashed oceans and damage to human health mounts, plastic can no longer be conveniently ignored. The days of naive trust and denial need to be put behind us, and a war on plastics declared now. If this sounds unreasonable, decide after reading this report. One recently discovered principle about exposure to toxic chemicals is that very low concentrations can trigger worse damage in many individuals than larger exposures, in part due to the sensitivity of our genes. Also, potency is not possible to predict when various plastics' chemicals combine in our bodies and cause synergistic reactions later on. One must acknowledge today's extreme dependence on plastics. They are pervasive, cheap, effective, and even "essential." The list of plastic types goes far beyond what we can start listing off the top of our heads. If a product or solid synthetic material is not clearly wood or metal, chances are it is plastic -- almost entirely from petroleum. Computers, telephones, cars, boats, teflon cookery, toys, packaging, kitchen appliances and tools, and imitations of a multitude of natural items, are but part of the world of plastics. Living without them would seem unthinkable. However, these plastics are essential to what? Answer: essential to a lifestyle that is fleeting -- historically speaking. There are people who say they cannot live without something, and those who yearn to do so. People think it is a matter of choice. However, when the coming petroleum supply crunch hits and cannot be alleviated by more production -- world extraction is soon passing its peak -- a combination of factors will deprive global consumers of the constant flow of new products now taken for granted. Therefore, we will not have a choice when we must do without. Secondly, but not less critically, the ongoing use and "disposal" of plastics is a health disaster, because we are never rid of the stuff. All the plastic that's ever been produced is still with us today... unless, of course, it has been incinerated which spews a plethora of toxic substances into the air. But wait, hasn't there been progress? Plastic grocery sacks are 40 per cent lighter today than they were in 1976, and plastic trash bags are 50 per cent lighter today than in the 1970's. However, growth of the market cancels out any gains, and plastics' pollution just accumulates whether in the air, water or soil -- or our bodies. In the case of the picture at right, paradise is clearly trashed by modern "convenience" [source: cawrecycles.org] Most North Americans urinate plastics. Sperm counts are at an historic per capita low. Cancer is an epidemic. Birth deformities, sex organ abnormalities and eventual cancers are becoming more common -- all traceable to certain chemical exposures to the fetus. If the human race is not driven extinct by nuclear holocaust or complete distortion of the climate, it may happen through wonderful plastic and other petrochemicals. The foregoing is an "unscientific" assertion, but later in this report we provide some evidence to give everyone pause. Iraqis behind U.S. forces' barbed wire, petroleum bottle The movement's first U.S. battle The current, high-profile battleground is San Francisco. Following the example of Ireland and other countries that have put a fee on plastic bags, the grocery shoppers of San Francisco may soon start paying a fee of 17 cents per bag. That figure is the cost that the citizenry is already paying in general taxes for some of the costs of plastic-bag trash, such as cleaning up the litter and unclogging the waste system. The American Plastics Council claims that the bag fee is a crazy idea, saying in the San Francisco Chronicle that "this will hurt those who can least afford it." Just the opposite is true. Northern Californians Against Plastic presented figures to show that if each of the 347,000+ households in San Francisco were to purchase a couple of cotton or canvas bags, over the approximate 10-year life of those bags the total amount saved -- compared to everyone using eight bags each week at 17 cents each -- by consumers would collectively be over $300 million. And, the bag fee would mean revenue to fund programs for the poor such as free reusable natural-fiber bags. The Chronicle and the Commission on Environment (the San Francisco body putting the bag fee proposal to the Supervisors for an ordinance) have this new information. A movement to spearhead the fight against plastics is forming now. While there have been municipal bans of polystyrene (styrofoam), the plastics/petroleum industry has had a free ride at the expense of the health of the planet and our bodies. While endocrine disruptors and estrogen imitators have been targeted by researchers and public-spirited writers and health organizations, government has done next to nothing as it bows down to industry interests. The War On Plastic will encompass not just a few "problem chemicals" or "the worst plastics," because they are all bad in at least some single way. We must reject the entire toxic petroleum plague to our fullest capability, beginning now. In California, to complement the fledgling Campaign Against the Plastic Plague formed this year in southern California, we at Culture Change have joined this effort with a northern California emphasis. One of our first projects is to support the San Francisco bag fee. We are visiting more Californian communities as you read this, promoting bag fees and bans on certain plastics. Next, the whole state. We will face increasing opposition. But when our rationale and data are considered, almost no one will be able to turn away and ignore the issues. Waiting for technology to save the lifestyle of using unlimited plastics, by having bioplastics replace the petroleum, is no help. We find that after studying the problems with plant-based replacements (see end section), and seeing the examples of other environmental problems saddled with non-solutions, fundamental change is the only reasonable approach. Such change will address the whole -- our social system, the ecosystem and the economy -- instead of spinning our wheels on the ineffectual reforms of mere symptoms of our extremely wasteful society. Science misleads in the cancer game The ubiquitous presence of plastics is already killing us. Exactly "how" is never going to be completely isolated. Eighty per cent of cancers are environmentally derived. When we wonder where the epidemic of cancer is coming from, can we say that plastics gave Ms. Jane Doe cancer? Perhaps, but cancer is coming from not only plastics and their associated toxins as well as from radiation sources, smog, the modern chemically tainted diet, household and workplace chemicals, etc. To say cancer is "genetic" is to put the onus on our intrinsic humanity, so as to ignore the 80% environmental-source principle. The absolute proof that a case of cancer came from a particular cause or chemical is usually lacking, except in the case of certain rare cancers from identifiable chemicals. Or, a massive exposure can be blamed for specific cancers when it assaults a community such as Union Carbide's mass poisoning of Bhopal, India. The lack of exact, causal evidence clearly pointing to plastics, for example, when considering cancer, is most convenient for the status quo. This points up the faulty approach of focusing on a certain chemical villain, or set of bad chemicals -- as if the rest are safe and the technocratic bureaucracy will save us. The public is encouraged by industry to think a certain cancer is caused by overexposure to a certain chemical not yet regulated, so corporate profits can roll along in the context of technological progress that the public has been trained not to question. In reality, thousands of marketed chemicals and their combinations have not been tested to see if they are harmful. Whether or not scientists can measure a substance should not be the point. What we don't see or detect can be lethal enough. Migration and release of plastics' chemicals into our food, water and skin is of little interest to the government and its corporate friends. But certain principles won't go away:. For example, polymerizing does not perfectly bind the petroleum chemicals together, especially when substances such as carcinogenic plasticizers are added after polymerization. Did you think that cute "rubber" duckie in the bath tub was harmless? Think again. The U.S. public is thus treated every bit as shabbily as the Third World victims of plastic pollution. In India, where much of Americans' plastic "recycling" (mostly trash) is sent, the authorities dismiss the sad public health impact there by asking, "How can you prove that these plastic and lead recycling factories are causing these problems?" [source: Plastic Task Force, Berkeley Ecology Center] In a land like India where biotech crops and corporate fast-food outlets have been sabotaged, it is possible that folks there may intensify their destroying whatever is destroying them. When the environmental movement holds back forthright judgment, and the environment and our health are not protected, people do need to take on plastics and other threats personally. This is because the mainstream movement to protect the environment and public health is going practically nowhere. This is exactly what industry and its scientists want. It's as if industry is funding the environmental movement; in large part it is. Your War on Plastics We all need to be awakened, as if a "Pearl Harbor" event suddenly was telling us that plastics threaten us. However, the prevailing attitude by those already concerned about plastics is that we must just focus on reducing the use of one or two key plastics while continuing to push recycling. This philosophy of compromise, without stating the whole truth that plastics must be eliminated as much and as fast as possible, is a deadly mistake. The funded environmental movement and public health officials are needlessly resigned to accepting a plastic world just because ignorant consumers have habits. The approach of promoting only the bringing of one's own bag for shopping, along with the recycling con game and waiting for bioplastics, has failed and needs to be abandoned publicly. Paul Goettlich is the director of Mindfully.org, a nonprofit dedicated to exposing the effects and costs of technology on our bodies and society. The plastics section on Mindfully.org is the most extensive wholistic set of documents and scientific data that exists on plastics. "There are no safe plastics," Goettlich says. "The tendency of environmental organizations is to proclaim what the worst or the best plastics are, so we can go on using them. It is ill conceived and does not address the relevant issues. All plastics migrate toxins into whatever they contact at all times. It does not matter if it is water- or oil-based; hot or cold; solid or liquid," says Goettlich. Analogy:: When war is used as a solution in reacting to an alleged threat or terror, etc., (Saddam, Noriega, ad infinitum) we fail to focus on the real problem -- the cause of the war, which is usually corporate America. We are distracted by one alarm after another, while war profiteers and jingoistic politicians bleed us dry. It?s the same with plastics -- the chemicals are the battles but the war is really about plastic and petroleum dependence. The focus of environmental organizations is the individual chemical, while refusing to promote real solutions such as reusable nontoxic, nonplastic replacement of containers and bags. Instead of wondering what plastic might be safer to microwave, we say "None. And don't microwave anyway. It creates free radicals -- the precursors to cancer -- in your food." This is war, and we've already been critically damaged. Join us! As discussed in "Plastics your formidable enemy," published last August in this column, the supply of petroleum products such as plastics will dry up thanks to the extreme market response that we can anticipate as soon as geologic reality triggers panic. The peak of oil extraction is imminent, with natural gas to follow soon after. Most plastic bags are made from natural gas (methane). A host of poisonous chemicals are imbedded in plastic that are unstable, causing genetic damage and resultant disease. To reiterate, as it is not possible to attribute most environmental diseases to specific chemicals or products, industry gets a free ride in killing people and the planet for profit. The reductionist approach of science, and the domination of research by corporations and corrupt government agencies, tricks citizens into ceding their power to specialists wedded to the economic/academic system and its inherent flaws. Here are a few of the critical, insurmountable challenges from plastic's production and disposal: = Clear plastic food wrap contains up to 30% DEHP [di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate]. This substance is also in intravenous blood bags. This poison was identified by the State of California for its Proposition 65 list of carcinogens and mutagens, but industry pressure got the listing weakened. = In the middle of the Pacific Ocean, it was found that 1,000,000 times more toxins are concentrated on the plastic debris and plastic particles than in ambient sea water; = Six times as much plastic per weight than zooplankton is in any given amount of sea water taken from the middle of the Pacific Ocean; = Triclosan, in plastics as well as antibacterial soaps, deodorants, toothpastes, cosmetics, and fabrics, is shown to cause health and environmental effects and compound antibiotic resistance. Researchers found that when sunlight is shined on triclosan in water and on fabric, a portion of triclosan is transformed into dioxin. = Migration from all seven categories of plastic designated with numerals on packaging, including the recyclable types 1 and 2, are (partial list): Acetaldehde, antioxidants, BHT, Chimassorb 81, Irganox (PS 800, 1076, 1010), lead, cadmium, mercury, phthatlates, and the acknowledged carcinogen diethyl hexyphosphate. = Many more such additives are often present, creating in our bodies synergisms that can be 1,600 times as strong as an estrogen imitator/endocrine disruptor/single chemical may be. = The main issue surrounding the use of polyvinylchloride (PVC) is the impact of toxic pollutants generated throughout its life cycle. A Greenpeace (UK) study from October 2001 stated in its headline, "UK Government report on PVC misses the point, but still condemns PVC windows and floors." Unfortunately, Greepeace did not quite get it either when it advocated for plastic replacements seemingly less poisonous: "PVC should be phased out and replaced with non chlorinated materials - timber, linoleum, polyethylene, PET, polypropylene and others." Will Greenpeace declare War on Plastic? Who is the enemy in this war on plastic, besides you and me? At the December 1, 2004 meeting of the Campaign Against the Plastic Plague, a spy from Dart packaging was present and kept entirely to himself. Dart touts its "single-use foodservice products worldwide." Another adversary is the American Plastics Council (APC) which has sent its "suits" to interfere in the city of San Francisco's process of cleaning up the plastic bag mess. APC has a website that promises to answer all your questions about plastics. But its search engine comes up empty for "migration", "endocrine disruptors" and "estrogen." Bioplastics? "A lot of bio-engineered row crops, using petroleum fertilizers and plasticizers to make the throw away society perpetuate itself, is not appropriate. A mess of slowly degrading rubbish on our fences and shores could be worse than non-degradables." - Captain Charles Moore, plastics pollution researcher. Because of our huge population size and high consumption levels, there would not be much arable land or species-diversity left over if the consumer demand for plastics, for example, were to come from agriculture (no matter if it were organic or GMO-maximum pesticide), even if it were possible to do this to the Earth and our communities. We cannot imagine a plant-based approach only for plastics and not expect that other fossil fuel needs would not be part of the same approach of agricultural strip-mining. There would be competition for land from many pressures and interests, trying in vain to replicate the petroleum economy with a plant-based one.. That is another reason the real solution comes down to just cutting consumption of petroleum to the max. How about no plastics -- not using plastics to the extent we can manage doing so. We will be forced to deal with virtually total shortage of plastic production due to imminent petroleum crash. So there goes bioplastics and other technofixes right out the window, because they will not be in place to ramp up. Better not to dream about them, but rather get on with preparing for a sustainable future based on reality. The promise of the technofix (bioplastics in this case) gives the consumer the idea that tomorrow and for some years one will probably do just what one did today as to consuming. The rationalization is that although we are doing wrong and it can't go on long, "human ingenuity" and "science" will "solve our problems" some day; as "they" will "think of something." As we've seen with energy issues, this mindset of the technofix and "clean" energy down the road just puts off facing the fact that consumption must be slashed immediately, particularly when the infrastructure for the "green" Utopia for energy consumption would rely on the present petroleum-based infrastructure. The critical context is vast overpopulation, already achieved thanks to petroleum dependence. I would predict that plant-based plastics will be niche products and used very locally, similar to alcohol fuels which are only realistic for meeting very local, limited needs possibly, in certain parts of the world. Bioplastics would also attract toxins in the ambient sea water, as petroleum plastics do. All the more reason to declare War on Plastics. Period! The following is from a government analyst friendly to the campaign against plastics: "Biodegradable plastics are often (not always) made from soy and corn. Making plastics from agricultural products will encourage a massive shift of production from petroleum-based products to products that rely on petroleum-based pesticides, insecticides, and fertilizers. So, we are not moving away from reliance on petroleum products, rather we would be encouraging the use of more toxic forms of them. Mass agriculture on the scale that would be necessary to produce the plastics to feed our consumer society will significantly increase the degradation already caused by industrial-style agriculture -- that is, the use of water, energy, the use of pesticides, the depletion of top soil, and the resulting sedimentation of rivers and nearby waterways caused by soil erosion. "If additional criteria were added to plastics that are biodegradable or compostable that made them sustainable, then I might feel more comfortable with the shift away from plastics made from hydrocarbons. Specifically, sustainable agricultural practices should be used with the development of any agricultural materials grown for plastic production (i.e. no GMOs, no pesticide/insecticide/ fungicide use, and other principles of sustainable agriculture that prevent soil erosion). Use of waste agricultural materials, such as byproducts from growing sugar cane, should be given a higher priority since it closes the loop on production. "Another concern is that the ASTM standards for biodegradable and compostable plastics do not address the issue of plastic additives. So, there is no reason to believe that the plasticizing additives that cause cancer and hormone disruption will not be used in these new plastics. Prohibition on the use of harmful chemicals additives should be added to the criteria for sustainable plastics. For example, Dupont is marketing "Greenpla." When you check their website about biodegradable plastics and see Dupont's "Biomax," we see its generic name is "Polybutylenesuccinate/terephthalate" [Note that the last phrase, phthalate, is in a class of highly toxic compounds. - ed.] >From Paul Goettlich, whose comments were directed, as were the above comments in this section, to the Campaign Against the Plastic Plague participants in early December 2004: "The concept of "biodegradable plastic" is at best a ploy by industry meant to divert our focus away from the real problem: single-use containers and packaging. "The concept that something can take on the properties required for containers to then be composted into its original components -- just as found in nature -- is a stretch at best. Engineers and scientists may come up with any number of standards that attempt to define nature, but what it conforms to is a reductionist model that does not work when applied to whole systems. "I am completely against promoting biodegradable products. They are the happy alternative that allows people to continue consuming without regard to many associated issues. PLA plastics utilize corn grown on corporate monoculture farms and will be some variety genetically engineered corn that will be resistant to Monsanto's Roundup. "This type of farming will never be sustainable. It uses more pesticides than normal conventional farming, and nearly 100% more than sustainable organic farming. Conventional farming uses pesticides because it is a monoculture -- one crop is grown on thousands of acres. That fact alone is the very reason why pesticides must be used. Monoculture farming's lack of diversity is the chief cause of the pestilence require pesticides. "In genetically engineered crops such as Roundup Ready corn -- as opposed to normal conventional corn -- pesticide use is actually increased rather than decreased. Crop output is also reduced rather than increased. And it is impossible to contain the pollen from genetically engineered crops, making organic agriculture a doomed concept at best. Everything that the industry claims about its GMO crops is categorically false. "Industrial farms also destroy communities they are in. Unions are busted. Communication between farmers is destroyed. An adversarial mood is instilled in the community. The farmer is rapidly being disappeared by the likes of Monsanto. It will do anything and say anything to make a buck. Percy Schmeiser [sued by Monsanto for having Round-Up-ready plants inadvertently growing on his farm) is a perfect example. It is not wise to ignore the consequences of dealing with Monsanto, Cargill, and any of the other agribusiness giants. "Consolidation of farms is having an enormous effect on farmers. So many farmers have left farming that it is no longer a category in the US Census -- disappeared on paper. And the ones that remain generally need to supplement their income with one or more extra jobs, meaning that farming is almost considered a hobby rather than a profession. "The message I'd like to leave everyone with is "watch the doughnut not the hole." In other words, watch the real issues and don't be distracted by corporate smoke and mirrors. The hole is the allure of being able to maintain our current lifestyles while not causing environmental and social harm. But there is no easy way out. Consumption is consumption no matter what pretty picture is painted of it. Corporate America has many millions of dollars to invest in promoting products. "At first look, the concept of biodegradable seems admirable. But follow the links out in all directions until you think there are no more, and then dig deeper. It is not enough to merely see that a plastic degrades. What we don't see amounts to so much more and must be considered before any new technology is accepted." "Alternatives to (petroleum) plastics," according to the Berkeley Ecology Center's Plastic Task Force do not include bioplastics: Reduce the use ? source reduction. Reuse containers. Require producers to take back resins. Legislatively require recycled content. Standardize labeling and inform the public. Could it be that the solid waste nightmare precludes their embracing bioplastics? The Berkeley Ecology Center is the oldest and one of the most thorough recycling operations in the U.S. - December 9-20, 2004, Berkeley/Oakland, California ***** Resource links Jan Lundberg's first report on the subject: Plastics: Your Formidable Enemy - Culture Change Letter #70 Paul Goettlich's mindfully.org has almost everything on plastics: http://www.mindfully.org./Plastic/plastic.htm Campaign Against the Plastic Plague: http://earthresource.org/campaigns/capp/capp-overview.html Algalita Marine Research Foundation, maker of the award-winning movie, "Our Synthetic Sea" available for purchase. http://beyondpesticides.org/news/daily.htm www.ourstolenfuture.org Scientific American article on "green plastics" Sustainable business: reuseablebags.com Plastic Oceans news article. "Plastic disaster is creeping on me..." - the Depavers song Green is the Shelter Berkeley Plastics Task Force report. 78 Reasonable Questions to Ask about Any Technology by STEPHANIE MILLS / Clamor, i.18, Jan/Feb03 http://www.mindfully.org/Sustainability/2003/78-Questions-TechnologyFeb03.htm Funding link for Northern Californians Against Plastic: Donate to the NCAP (tax deductible)) to help us help you and the countless creatures harmed by petroleum/plastics. Thank you. To support Culture Change and its projects, make a tax-deductible donation. Back to home page Jan Lundberg's columns are protected by copyright; however, non-commercial use of the material is permitted as long as full attribution is given with a link to this website, and he is informed of the re-publishing: contact info at culturechange.org Are you ready for the FALL OF PETROLEUM CIVILIZATION? Articles of interest: Measuring and controlling the actions of governments Anti-globalization protest grows, with tangible results. WTO protests page Tax fossil-fuel energy easily by Peter Salonius UK leader calls War on Terror "bogus" Argentina bleeds toward healing by Raul Riutor The oil industry has plans for you: blow-back by Jan Lundberg It's not a war for oil? by Adam Khan How to create a pedestrian mall by Michelle Wallar The Cuban bike revolution How GM destroyed the U.S. rail system excerpts from the film "Taken for a Ride". "Iraqi oil not enough for US: Last days of America?" Depaving the world by Richard Register Roadkill: Driving animals to their graves by Mark Matthew Braunstein The Hydrogen fuel cell technofix: Spencer Abraham's hydrogen dream. Ancient Forest Protection in Northern California. Forest defenders climb trees to save them. Daniel Quinn's thoughts on this website. A case study in unsustainable development is the ongoing crisis in Palestine and Israel. Renewable and alternative energy information. Conserving energy at home (Calif. Title 24) Culture Change mailing address: P.O. Box 4347 , Arcata , California 95518 USA Telephone 1-215-243-3144 (and fax) Web: http://www.culturechange.org E-Mail info at culturechange.org Culture Change was founded by Sustainable Energy Institute (formerly Fossil Fuels Policy Action), a nonprofit torganization. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++STOP THE WALL++++++++++++++++++++++++++ www.stopthewall.org www.nad-plo.org www.hrw.org www.pal-arc.org www.endtheoccupation.org www.sustaincampaign.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From italysbadboy at yahoo.com Thu Jan 27 12:28:15 2005 From: italysbadboy at yahoo.com (ItalysBadBoy) Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:28:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Shadow_Group] The Boxer Rebellion Message-ID: <20050127202815.557.qmail@web13609.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.alternet.org/story/21098/ The Boxer Rebellion Give Barbara Boxer credit for sparking the most engaged debate that the Senate has yet seen over the Bush administration lies that led the United States into the quagmire that is Iraq. Boxer, the California Democrat who has been increasingly vocal in her objections to the administration's reign of error and excess, seized the opening provided by President Bush's nomination of Condoleezza Rice to serve as secretary of state to try and force a necessary discussion about the misstatements, misconceptions and misdeeds that Rice and others in the administration used to make the "case" for the invasion and occupation of Iraq. And, to the surprise even of some war foes, she got it. Yes, of course, Rice's confirmation was certain. In a Senate where the balance is now tipped 55-45 toward a Republican caucus that for the most part puts party loyalty above duty to country, and where there are still too many Democrats who continue to preach the failed "can't-we-all-just-get-along" mantra that has relegated the party to minority status, there was never any chance that the national security advisor's record of failure and deception would prevent her from taking charge of the State Department. But Rice's road to Foggy Bottom proved to be far rockier than had been expected. Tuesday's Senate debate on her nomination was one of the most charged that the chamber has seen in recent years, and while Rice survived, she did not finish the day unscathed. Senator after senator rose to recall what Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., described as Rice's "false reasons" for going to war, and to charge, as Kennedy did, that had Rice told the truth "it might have changed the course of history." Though he and others were eloquent in their critique of Rice on Tuesday, the person who changed the course of history with regard to the debate over the Bush administration's nominee for secretary of state was not Kennedy, nor West Virginia's Robert Byrd, nor any of the other more senior senators who ripped Rice. Rather, it was Barbara Boxer, the diligent if not always prominent senator from the Golden State. When Rice appeared on Jan. 18 before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on which Boxer sits, it was the California senator who did the heavy lifting. She began by announcing that, "I will ... not shrink from questioning a war that was not built on truth." And she then detailed the role that Rice played in creating the foundation of lies for the war. "Perhaps the most well known statement you have made was the one about Saddam Hussein launching a nuclear weapon on America, with the image of a 'mushroom cloud.' That image had to frighten every American into believing that Saddam Hussein was on the verge of annihilating them if he was not stopped," said Boxer, who then announced that, "I will be placing into the record a number of other such statements which have not been consistent with the facts nor the truth." Then Boxer hammered home the point that really mattered: That when Rice and her team lied, people died. "This war was sold to the American people ? as chief of staff to President Bush Andy Card said ? like a 'new product.' You rolled out the idea and then you had to convince the people, and as you made your case, I personally believe that your loyalty to the mission you were given overwhelmed your respect for the truth," Boxer calmly declared. "That was a great disservice to the American people. But worse than that, our young men and women are dying. So far, 1,366 American troops have been killed in Iraq. More than 25 percent of those troops were from California. More than 10,372 have been wounded." When Boxer read out the statistics, it was a devastating moment ? and a rare one. Seldom do senators accuse prospective Cabinet members of lying. Rice knew she was taking a harder hit than anyone had expected. The nominee tried to get the upper hand with classic Washington spin. "Senator," Rice whined, "I have never, ever lost respect for the truth in the service of anything. It's not in my nature. It's not in my character. And I would hope we could have this conversation ... without impugning my credibility or my integrity." Rice's problem was that her credibility and integrity had been impugned ? not by Boxer but by the nominee herself. All Boxer did was bring Rice's deceptions to light and, perhaps most significantly, to link them to the continuing crisis in Iraq. In so doing, she shamed a number of her fellow Democrats into joining her in opposition not just to Rice but to the administration's entire approach to the war. Tuesday's Senate debate was distinguished by the bluntness of the criticism of Rice's record. "She exaggerated and distorted the facts," said Michigan's Carl Levin, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee. Minnesota Democrat Mark Dayton announced that he was opposing Rice's nomination in order to hold the administration accountable for its lies. "I don't like impugning anyone's integrity," Dayton said. "But I really don't like being lied to ? repeatedly, flagrantly, intentionally." "My vote against this nominee is my statement that this administration's lies must stop now," the Minnesotan explained. Other senators were equally pointed in their condemnations of the nominee. "Dr. Rice is responsible for some of the most overblown rhetoric that the administration used to scare the American people," thundered West Virginia's Byrd, who argued that, "Her confirmation will most certainly be viewed as another endorsement of the administration's unconstitutional doctrine of pre-emptive war, its bullying policies of unilateralism and its callous rejection of long-standing allies." Byrd remarks were, as always, historically rich and intellectually powerful. But the dean of the Senate did not hesitate to give credit where credit was due. Recalling the Senate Foreign Relations Committee session at which his colleague from California had grilled Rice, the senior senator said, "I was particularly impressed by Senator Boxer, who tackled her role on the committee with passion and forthrightness ... ." Expressing his dismay with Republicans who have accused Senate Democrats of engaging in "petty politics" by demanding a debate on Rice's nomination, Byrd argued that, "Nothing could be further from the truth. The Senate's role of advice and consent to presidential nominations is not a ceremonial exercise." Byrd was right to assert that the Senate's constitutionally dictated "advice and consent" duty "is not a function of pomp and circumstance" and that senators must never "acquiesce mutely to the nomination of one of the most important members of the President's Cabinet." He was equally right to recognize the critical role that Boxer played in assuring that so many Democratic senators recognized their responsibility to assume that the consideration of Rice's nomination was something more that "a ceremonial exercise." John Nichols is The Nation's Washington correspondent. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++STOP THE WALL++++++++++++++++++++++++++ www.stopthewall.org www.nad-plo.org www.hrw.org www.pal-arc.org www.endtheoccupation.org www.sustaincampaign.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From italysbadboy at yahoo.com Thu Jan 27 12:53:32 2005 From: italysbadboy at yahoo.com (ItalysBadBoy) Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:53:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Shadow_Group] Rejected Last Year, Bush Anti-Environmental Judicial Nominees Are Back Message-ID: <20050127205332.3867.qmail@web13609.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.bushgreenwatch.org/ --------------------------------- Tell a friend about BushGreenwatch .............................. Take Action Sign a petition on People for the American Way's website. .............................. January 27, 2005 | Back Issues Rejected Last Year, Bush Anti-Environmental Judicial Nominees Are Back Hearings will begin soon in the Senate Judiciary Committee on a series of President Bush's federal court nominees who were rejected by the Senate last year. President Bush has renominated seven appeals court nominees who were blocked in the last session. First up is one of the most anti-environmental of the Bush nominees, William G. Myers III. Mr. Bush aims to seat Myers on one of the most important benches in the nation, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The 9th Circuit has jurisdiction over three-fourths of all federal lands, covering nine western states -- the scene of perennial battles over mining, drilling, grazing and timber. Until he resigned in October, 2003, Myers was chief attorney for the Bush Department of Interior, where he helped shape the weakening of the Endangered Species Act. He also helped curb federal protections designed to prevent destructive mining and overgrazing of public lands. During Myers' tenure at Interior, the department's inspector general ruled that despite meeting 37 times with representatives of the grazing and mining industries, including former clients, Myers--a former lobbyist for mining and grazing interests--did not violate an ethics agreement. Noting that the Senate has already approved 204 of President Bush's 260 nominees, Earthjustice senior legislative counsel Glenn Sugameli says "Renomination of so many judges who the Senate has refused to confirm has never happened before. President Bush is trying to convert the Senate into a rubber stamp." Before joining the Bush Interior Department, Myers served as a lobbyist for the National Mining Association. He was also executive director of a trade association promoting the interests of ranchers who graze sheep and cattle on public lands, and was director of federal lands for the National Cattlemen's Beef Association. In one legal opinion he wrote at Interior, Myers overturned the opinion of his predecessor so that Interior Secretary Gale Norton could approve a 1,650-acre cyanide heap-leach gold mine in California. During his previous nomination for the 9th Circuit last January, not a single member of the American Bar Association's committee that rates federal judicial nominees found Myers "well qualified." More than a third rated him "unqualified." Unlike most judicial nominees, Myers has never been a judge. His nomination was opposed by the National Congress of American Indians, representing more than 250 tribal governments, and by 23 public interest organizations. ### TAKE ACTION Sign a petition on People for the American Way's website. --------------------------------- Spread the Word | Back Issues --------------------------------- BushGreenwatch | 1320 18th Street NW 5th Floor Washington, DC 20036 | (202) 463-6670 Web site comments: info at bushgreenwatch.org Copyright 2003 Environmental Media Services --------------------------------- If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for BushGreenwatch. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++STOP THE WALL++++++++++++++++++++++++++ www.stopthewall.org www.nad-plo.org www.hrw.org www.pal-arc.org www.endtheoccupation.org www.sustaincampaign.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From italysbadboy at yahoo.com Thu Jan 27 21:27:57 2005 From: italysbadboy at yahoo.com (ItalysBadBoy) Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 21:27:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Shadow_Group] STOP Mr. Torture (Alberto Gonzales) Message-ID: <20050128052757.22724.qmail@web13626.mail.yahoo.com> Alberto Gonzales Supported Torture and Won't Answer Senators' QuestionsTell Your Senator That America Can Find a Better Attorney General Dear Reader, Alberto Gonzales duly renounced torture during his Senate confirmation hearings. But, excuse me, this does not erase his frightening record of supporting torture! As the top White House attorney, he opined that our country should not be bound by laws or agreements such as the Geneva Conventions that prohibit torture. This opened the door to the Abu Ghraib disaster. As if this weren't enough, Gonzales refused under intense questioning to explain his role in the development of the Bush administration's policies on interrogation and torture. That is why yesterday, even under immense pressure from the president and Senate leadership, eight members of the Senate Judiciary Committee voted against recommending Gonzales to the full Senate?just two votes shy of an outright rejection. Our country can surely find an attorney general whose record is not fundamentally at odds with our values of decency and compassion?and who's willing to answer basic questions about his record. If you'd like to send a message (text below) to your senators urging them to oppose the Gonzales nomination, and you're a TrueMajority member, just click "reply" and "send" in your e-mail program. If this was forwarded to you or you'd like to customize the message to your senators, click here: http://truemajority.kintera.org/gonzales-no Click here for more information on the Gonzales nomination: http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/ Yours for an attorney general we can trust, Darcy Scott Martin TrueMajority Washington Liaison Here's the message that we will send to your senators: Dear Senator: I'm sure you and I agree on the qualities we'd like to see in our nation's attorney general: honesty, compassion, decency, and respect for the rule of law. Unfortunately, President Bush's nominee for attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, seems to lack these basic qualities. First, you have to question the compassion and decency?not to mention the respect for the rule of law?of anyone who would ever argue that our nation should allow torture. As you know, this is what Gonzales did as the White House's top attorney. Then, later, during his Senate confirmation hearings, Gonzales brought his honesty into question by refusing to explain his role in the development of the Bush administration's disastrous policies on interrogation and torture. Our great country deserves a great attorney general, and Alberto Gonzales does not fit the bill. Please vote against him. Sincerely, (We'll put your name and address here.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++STOP THE WALL++++++++++++++++++++++++++ www.stopthewall.org www.nad-plo.org www.hrw.org www.pal-arc.org www.endtheoccupation.org www.sustaincampaign.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From italysbadboy at yahoo.com Thu Jan 27 22:23:02 2005 From: italysbadboy at yahoo.com (ItalysBadBoy) Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 22:23:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Shadow_Group] US Copter Downed By Surface-To-Air Missile - Witnesses 31 killed Message-ID: <20050128062302.48245.qmail@web13601.mail.yahoo.com> US Copter Downed By Surface-To-Air Missile - Witnesses 31 killed Address:http://www.rense.com/general62/surf.htm (What goes around comes around and payback is a Bitch) US Copter Downed By Surface-To-Air Missile - Witnesses Daily Dispatch - South Africa 1-27-5 BAGHDAD (Sapa-AFP) -- At least 31 US Marines were killed in a US transport helicopter crash near the western Iraqi city of Rutbah, according to military and media reports yesterday. It is the highest number of US fatalities to result from a single incident since the US first occupied Iraq almost two years ago. Earlier yesterday the US military in Baghdad confirmed the crash saying it happened overnight as the helicopter was transporting soldiers from the 1st Marine Division, headquartered in Fallujah. Witnesses said the helicopter appeared to have been hit by a surface-to-air missile and exploded on hitting the ground. A second helicopter also came under fire but was able to reach safety, the witnesses said. A further five US soldiers were killed in two other incidents yesterday, bringing the day's death toll to 36, the highest since March 23, 2003, when 31 soldiers died. Four US soldiers were killed yesterday during clashes with insurgents in the western province of Anbar, while a fifth soldier died in an attack on a military patrol north of Baghdad. Meanwhile seven people died when a car bomb exploded at a police station in the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk yesterday, a police spokesman said. Three policemen, two Iraqi soldiers and two civilians died and three policemen were injured, police said. Witnesses spoke of two more car blasts, one near a city marketplace and another outside the town near a US patrol, but there were no immediate reports of casualties. Seven soldiers were injured in two separate car bombs targeting US convoys on the main road leading to Baghdad International Airport yesterday morning, the US military said. The bombs exploded within four hours of each other along a route that has frequently been targeted by insurgents. One Iraqi was killed and two were wounded in a firefight between US troops and insurgents in the centre of the city of Ramadi, hospital sources said. In the village of Bu Nimr, 20 kilometres from Ramadi, US troops rounded up 40 Iraqis on suspicion of helping insurgents carry out attacks against US convoys. Saboteurs blew up a school designated as a polling station for Sunday's elections, witnesses said. No one was injured in yesterday's blast at a girls' school north of Baghdad. A number of would-be polling centres have come under attack by insurgents seeking to derail Sunday's vote for a new National Assembly. http://www.dispatch.co.za/ Disclaimer Email This Article MainPage http://www.rense.com This Site Served by TheHostPros ++++++++++++++++++++++++++STOP THE WALL++++++++++++++++++++++++++ www.stopthewall.org www.nad-plo.org www.hrw.org www.pal-arc.org www.endtheoccupation.org www.sustaincampaign.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: