NoShootFoot

Palestinians = Native Americans

2009-07-10T10:49:00.000-07:00

Just take a look at the maps.

Native American Lands

The pattern is obvious.
The results are the same.
This is manifest destiny all over again.

Moreover, some of the techniques Israel is using oppress the Palestinians look just like what the Nazis did to them.

We know Israel is up to something evil. They wouldn't cooperate with the UN War Crimes Council. Israel wouldn't even allow them access to Gaza. (The UN human rights investigators had to enter through Egypt.)

Naomi Klein, who is Jewish, has recommended a boycott of Israel.

And what is the United States doing about this? Apparently we're helping pay for it.

Where your tax money is going!

Israel's Iron Wall

Split CO2 – and Solve Climate Change – for a Profit

2009-06-16T17:49:00.000-07:00

I found this website recently that's proposing a revolutionary new technology... But most likely, it is not. At least not like the fossil fuel industry wants you to think.

This new technology has been promoted as the “best hope for solving Climate Change.” It is CO₂ Reduction Technology.

A company called Integrated Environmental Services, Inc. claims to have a process that “converts CO₂ emissions into graphite and carbon” (and oxygen).

On the surface, this sounds amazing. But the ability to split CO₂ into it's component elements has been what plants have been doing for millions of years.

Nonetheless, at this point in time, plants need all the help they can get. So let's consider just what this company has to offer. They claim that they can break the CO₂ molecular bond energy with one third the bond energy.

O.K. This is the part where everybody's brain goes numb. One third! That sounds too good to be true! Well guess what? We need to do the math. Don't panic.

Let's consider just what one third really means:

If a coal-fired power plant were a small one and burnt only a million tons of coal a year, then it would have to burn another 333,333 tons of coal to generate the energy to reduce the CO₂ to carbon and oxygen of the original million tons of coal. Of course, another 111,111 tons of coal would have to be burnt to reduce the CO2 from the 333,333 tons – and on and on. It looks like this:

1 + 1/3 + 1/9 + 1/27 + 1/81 + ….

which an infinite series that adds up to 1.5

So...

Just the energy costs to reduce this CO₂ to graphite and carbon will be 50% higher than now. Just the energy costs.

How much Integrated Environmental Services will change for their services is an unknown. They didn't mention it on their website. That's usually a very bad sign. If something is going to be cheap, they usually advertise that in BIG letters.

But for this example, let's give these guys the benefit of the doubt. (Yes, I'm willing to bet they don't deserve it.) But let's say that the costs of reducing CO₂ are negligible (ha ha).

Wind generated energy is almost as cheap as coal generated energy now. If coal power were to incorporate CO₂ Reduction Technology, costs would rise at least 50%. Then, wind power would be consistently cheaper. In other words, no coal-fired energy company is going to invest in CO₂ Reduction Technology. They won't be able to compete.

And thermal solar generated power would be very competitive if the price of coal-fired power were to jump at least 50%. So, why invest in a coal-fired power plant that depends upon the fluctuating cost of coal, when solar energy costs are far more reliable? Investors wouldn't do it.

By the way, solar power just keeps getting cheaper and is predicted get much cheaper. Solar power prices are predicted to be cheaper than coal by 2016, and as much as 30% cheaper than coal or nuclear by 2025.

This isn't the first time some pie-in-the-sky technology has been paraded by us to convince us that coal is still a viable option. Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is one of those “someday” in the future concepts. Is any power company doing CCS now? No. Does any power company have CCS scheduled into their future plans? No. Will CCS cause coal power to become more expensive than renewable? Yes. CCS is not going to happen unless we, the taxpayers and ratepayers cover the expenses. And that's just what the coal industry hopes we'll do. Pay more to clean up what we could have avoided messing up (if we just did it right to begin with).

How about Coal Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)? To do Carbon Capture (and maybe CO₂ Reduction), coal-fired power plants will need to separate the CO₂ . Are the power companies rushing out to build IGCC coal-fired power plants? No. And estimates suggest that IGCC is far less than 50% more expensive.

The coal industry has been trying to sell us the same old dirty, dangerous, climate changing coal – with a different marketing plan. Yes, the same old pig – with lipstick.

A good indicator of where the power companies really stand is in the recent decision to decommission the Mojave Generating Station near Laughlin. It was a coal-fired power plant that was forced to shut down after running for six years without required pollution control equipment. Essentially, they would rather shut this coal-fired power plant down and dismantle it than upgrade it to existing pollution standards. Actions speak far louder than words.

Coal has lost it's appeal. And “Clean Coal” was never anything more than a bait-and-switch marketing ploy.

Oh, and by the way; if we were to get suckered into CO₂ Reduction Technology on fossil fuel fired power plants, we would end up burning 50% more fossil fuels. Which means we would run out that much sooner. Which means the price of fossil fuels would skyrocket. This all sounds like pretty bad news – unless, of course, you sell fossil fuels.

Now, before we give up on CO₂ Reduction Technology, let's consider the possibility of using solar or wind energy to run it – and everything else. With this different paradigm, CO₂ Reduction Technology starts to make sense. If we could use this technology to actually reduce atmospheric levels of CO₂, we might actually be able to reverse Climate Change.

In the very near future, reversing Climate Change might start to sound like our only reasonable option. But don't rejoice just yet. They haven't discovered the magic bullet. It won't be cheap to reduce billions of tons of CO₂ to carbon and oxygen with Integrated Environmental Services' artificial trees.

The Culture of Corruption is a Well-Oiled Machine

2009-05-24T20:51:00.000-07:00

Is America a democracy or a corporatocracy?

The fate of the Climate Bill will answer that question.

...Of course, recent fossil fuel political history could already tell us. (And yes, the facts are here.)

On previous posts I have pointed out that the fossil fuel industries have not only manipulated our nation's energy consumption for decades; they have also lied to us for decades, are lying to us now, and will continue to lie as long as they can throw some doubt in our minds.

They want more money.

It doesn't matter if every government on the planet is being corrupted. It doesn't matter if everyone on Earth is being slowly poisoned. It doesn't even matter if our world's climate is becoming unstable – which could result in the deaths of millions, if not billions.

They will always want more money.

How big is the lie? America's oil, gas, and coal industries are spending hundreds of millions of dollars on industry front groups, lobbying firms, and television, print, and radio advertising. They may end up spending a billion dollars in the US this year – to lie to us.

That's a lot of money. But look what's at risk. Just Chevron had revenues of $263 billion last year.

The US Climate Bill is a threat to their exorbitant profits. Worse, for them, at least some of these cap and trade fees will go to support their business model competition – renewables. (That's right, despite all the ads you've seen, the fossil fuel industries are still in the fossil fuel business.)

Should we trust them? Let's consider some examples of fossil fuel corporate behavior:

This March marked the 20^th anniversary of the Exxon Valdez oil spill – that contaminated 1,200 miles of Alaska's coastline. The spill could have been avoided, and it could have been contained. The Exxon Valdez's radar had gone unrepaired since it's maiden voyage. And oil spill containment equipment, required by law, didn't exist.

The Alyeska Consortium of oil companies had cut every corner. The spill was all but inevitable. But since the Exxon Valdez ran aground, it was Exxon that got sued. And they lost a huge settlement – but they only had to pay pennies on the dollar – almost 20 years later. The effect on the local Natives has been catastrophic. The effect on Exxon has been minimal.

“Lee Raymond, President of Exxon at the time of the spill – and its President when the company made the secret decision to do without the oil spill equipment, retired in April 2006. The company awarded him a $400 million retirement bonus, more than double the bonuses received by all the AIG executives combined.”

For the rest of the Greg Palast story on the Exxon Valdez, please click here.

And then there's what Texaco did in the Amazon:

Our teachers taught us that Indian massacres ended in the 1800s. But I guess that depends upon how you define a massacre.

This isn't the worst of it though. 363 million gallons of oil drain into the oceans every year from municipal and industrial waste. Moreover, “every year oily road runoff from a city of 5 million could contain as much oil as one large tanker spill.” The awful truth is; just humanity's use of oil leads to the equivalent of numerous huge oil spills every year.

The use of products made from oil has consequences also. The oil used in making polycarbonate bottles is poisoning us with bisphenol A (BPA). That's right, you can't drink out of the spring because its been contaminated with oil, and you can't drink bottled water because its been contaminated with oil too. (We could have used bioplastics, made from plants – they were first invented in Henry Ford's time. But that will be another story.)

...Isn't our government protecting us? Aren't there laws? Sure, but they haven't been enforced. Or they have been so watered down they don't matter.

This whole oil industry/pollution/corruption thing is far bigger than most of us realize. In a way, they want to rule the world. In a way, they already have for decades. But they have competition.

BlacklistedNews.com has published a very revealing article about the proposed oil pipelines through Afghanistan and Pakistan. Not only the US, but also Russia, China, India, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Iran are involved. Of course, a number of big oil companies are involved to. And of course, the United States has “coincidentally” stationed tens of thousands of troops there.

You may recall that Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan (once part of the Soviet Union) have been found to be rich in oil. You may also recall that when Gorbachev asked for help to move his country away from communism, America wouldn't help (even though we had spent trillions fighting communism). I guess America's “leaders” would rather watch the Soviet Union fail, the people of the former Soviet Union suffer, and Russia eventually return to totalitarianism. It all makes sense now that American oil companies want to profit off of Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan oil. Apparently, freedom didn't really matter. Democracy didn't matter. Only profiting off of another country's resources mattered. It was all about the spoils of war.

If you haven't been living under a rock for the past six years, you've heard of Halliburton, their questionable practices and their extraordinary profits. If you get a chance, read Halliburton's Army: How a Well-Connected Texas Oil Company Revolutionized The Way America Makes War. Publishers Weekly has written that the author, Pratap Chatterjee, “marshals his extensive evidence to reveal... Haliburton's record of corruption, political manipulation, and human rights abuses.” (Let me know what you think.)

I find the title of this book very revealing. It reminds us that Halliburton was once only an oil company – and Dick Cheney was only it's CEO.

But then something happened – on 9/11/2001.

9/11 was the spark that set us in an endless war with an undefined enemy. For some people, it was a damn good excuse to go “medieval” on the Middle East. For others, it was a great excuse to get no bid, cost plus contracts. For Bush Jr.; he got his highest approval ratings ever (for not protecting America on 9/11). And for a while, he ruled this country with more power than any President.

There's just something about the response to the 9/11 tragedy (you know, the total lack of air defense on the entire North East Coast - and the instant subversion of the US Constitution) that was just all too prepared...

A number of high level government intelligence agents are still calling for a more thorough investigation of 9/11.
Physical evidence of active thermitic material was found in World Trade Center dust.
The Bush Administration was looking for a way go after Iraq from the very first days Bush took office.
Though there were leads before 9/11, they were not followed up – and key investigators were reassigned elsewhere.

None of the accused 9/11 terrorists were Iraqi.

Torture is a lousy way to get good information. But it was the only way to get Iraqis to lie that there was a link between Iraq and Al-Qaeda.
A New York Times reporter, David Barstow, has received a Pulizter Prize for exposing a Pentagon pro-war propaganda media campaign.
The only people to benefit from the unnecessary invasion of Iraq were military contractors, a small group of big oil companies, and a small group of big banks.
We have stumbled into what is essentially a never-ending World War over oil. No declarations. No explanations. No exit strategy.
Defense Secretary and Pentagon Chief Robert Gates has said that the Obama White House has not ruled out the possibility of a military strike on Iran.
Northern nations (and their respective oil companies) are already posturing for oil reserves in the Arctic – when the ice cap melts from global warming.

This is bigger than Chevron. This is bigger than Exxon. This is bigger than Halliburton. This is world wide. Just Google the words oil and corruption. The number of articles is overwhelming.

Actually, this corruption is even bigger than the oil industry. This is systematic. For well over a hundred years now, our dominant world economic system has been based upon the exploitation of Earth's natural resources – with little regard for the consequences. Humanity has gotten away with this because we weren't that good at it. But we can screw it all up now, and we seem to be hell-bent on doing just that.

This is worse than crazy. This is criminally, psychopathicly, even sinfully self-destructive and suicidal!!! We have created the machines that will destroy us all. And they're not Terminator robots, they're unbridled corporations.

Capitalism is crushing our democracy.

Corporatism is destroying our environment.

Oil is corrupting our souls.

If you are under 50 years old, it is quite likely that there won't be anything left to fight over – in your lifetime.

The absolute horror of this tragic travesty is that it doesn't have to be this way.

We still might be able to fix this.

It would be crazy not to try.

In fact, it is (life-or-death) imperative that we invent better ways of doing things.

We have to get away from a system that runs on a limited and vanishing resource that has to be delivered by a few big companies. These companies will systematically exploit scarcity to drain us and our planet of everything. The irony is that the people who “manage” these companies seem unable to stop the undermining of their very own future.

Humanity has created a system that rewards irresponsible behavior. And at the moment, we are committed to that system. It doesn't have to be that way.

I don't want a violent revolution.

...I just don't want humanity to win the Darwin Award.

Political Reality is Not as Important as Reality

2009-05-20T19:41:00.000-07:00

Have the political realities of Washington weakened the momentum of those of us who elected President Obama?

... Is this all the change we're going to get?

I believe our political system can't ignore us if we keep pushing. But recent news has me very concerned.

Funds are being cut for the development of hydrogen powered cars. The Department of Energy will be cutting research money for hydrogen fuel by almost 60% ($100 million). Yet at the same time, the budget now includes $2.4 billion for “clean” coal.

Hey wait a minute. We can't afford to spend $100 million for a fuel that essentially burns totally clean, but we can afford to spend $2.4 billion on a fuel that can never be clean? (The very best we can hope for with “clean” coal is that they bury those millions and millions of tons of effluents.)

Now, before I go off, let me say a couple of things (and then I'll go off).

I heard a rumor that a lot of the money for hydrogen research has been wasted. I don't know this, but I do know how hydrogen research has been funded. You may recall Bush Jr.'s call for hydrogen research. His plan was to get hydrogen from hydrocarbons and distribute it to hydrogen gas stations.

Now, whether this is the best way to utilize hydrogen or not is a great question, but it begs the real question. Why should a politician be telling scientists what to study?

There is another option, of course. We could make hydrogen by running an electric current through water. But, for some reason, the Bush Jr. administration didn't even want to think about that. Now why would they not want to fund research into a fuel you could make at home?... They're oil men, remember?

So when it came time to fund research, it only made sense (in the political reality of Washington) to keep the money coming in for the oil companies. I have my suspicions that the scientific research for hydrogen for cars was intentionally misdirected. Maybe it was time to clean house at the DOE.

But, my fear is that the political reality has not changed.

Could the Obama administration have folded to pressure from the fossil fuel industry? Did the Obama administration shut down hydrogen research to keep hydrogen fuel from displacing gas and diesel?

This video about hydrogen from Honda is the best advertisement I have ever seen:

To see Honda's hydrogen powered FCX Clarity, which is already on America's roads today - click here

The National Hydrogen Association and the US Fuel Cell Council issued a joint statement that stated:

“The newest fuel cell vehicles get 72 miles per gallon equivalent with no compromise in creature comforts. Fuel cell buses operating in revenue service achieve twice the fuel economy of diesel buses. Hydrogen production costs are already competitive with gasoline. Projected vehicle costs have been reduced by 75%. These are accomplishments of the Department's (DOE's) own program in partnership with industry. It would truly be a government waste to squander them by walking away just as success is in sight.”

Oh... did I mention that the price of gasoline is rising again?

One more thing; there is a NASA backed project that would produce hydrogen power from a windmill and solar panels to generate hydrogen from water with an electrolyzer. This hydrogen is to be used in buses in Cleveland Ohio. (If the Obama administration chose to increase funding on projects such as this, I'd be really impressed.)

You have to wonder though; engineers in Spain have announced manned flight with a hydrogen fuel cell powered airplane – yet, Energy Secretary Steven Chu claims that hydrogen fuels for cars are over 20 years away. Something just doesn't add up. The evidence doesn't warrant giving up on hydrogen cars. Especially when Masatami Takimoto, an executive vice president for Toyota has recently said about hydrogen; “by 2015, we will have a full fledged commercialization effort.”

The truth is, at this point, we don't really know what technology will provide us with the best option. Battery technology just keeps getting better. But hydrogen electrolysis and storage just keep getting more practical too.

Energy Secretary Chu has claimed that we should concentrate on electric hybrids. Sounds good, but is this just a political move to assure that gasoline stays in the mix? There is no clear answer. But some reports are questioning the advantage of electric hybrids. In real world conditions, people get lazy and don't plug in their hybrids. Moreover, they often floor it to make up for the lack of power – which negates any gas savings for these hybrids.

This all sounds a little too convenient for the oil companies, who, by the way haven't spent much money on renewables. (Don't believe the hype.) The oil and gas industries have, however, spent $44.6 million on lobbying Congress this year. And the electric utilities have spent $34.4 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. With that kind of spending, is it any wonder the Climate Change Bill is becoming a subsidy bill for the oil and power companies.

The political reality in Washington is as ugly as ever. The bureaucrats who gave away the nation during the Bush Jr. presidency are now back as lobbyists. Republicans in the Senate blocked Obama's choice for the top environmental post in the Department of the Interior until Interior Secretary Salazar backed down on stopping illegitimate Utah oil leases. Robert Kennedy Jr. claims Obama is an “indentured servant” to the coal industry. And the surprise winners in the Climate Bill have been the coal industry and the electric companies. I have to wonder sometimes, is Washington even capable of doing the right thing?

The self-evident truth is that our political movement is losing momentum. We worked hard for change – and to some extent, we got it. But the American people get tired easy. Many have quit in the last mile of the marathon. And unfortunately, Obama can't fix things on his own.

In the political “real world” of Washington, this Climate Bill may be the best we can hope for. It may be that the only way this Climate Bill will ever get passed is if decent Representatives and Senators sell out to the very corporations we want to change. This Climate Bill is a step in the right direction, but we need a leap.

We all know that there's no such thing as a perfect bill in Washington – but if we're diligent, we can put pressure on them to do better. And if we keep paying attention, we can weed out the self-serving politicians in the next election.

The political reality in America is that if an elected representative tries to cut of the profits of an established (rich and powerful) industry, no matter how wrong those profits may be, that industry will do everything within it's power run he or she out of office.

But also, the political reality is that we can play that game to. Can you say boycott?

Moreover, we can realize the obvious;

The more money a candidate has, the more suspicious we should be of them.
The more the corporate media attacks a candidate, the more likely that candidate is on the people's side.
And if WE don't make the difference, politics will always be a corrupted system of too little, too late.

If we act too late on the environment, it will be too late for our economy, it may be too late for our civilization, and it may even be too late for humanity.

Reality is more important than political reality.

(If you live in Nevada, check out the Nevada Conservation League to see which politicians have the best and worst environmental records.)

Junk Science? No... Junk Reporting

2009-05-07T06:55:00.000-07:00

Is there a mechanism for suppressing great ideas in America? This should convince you:

60 minutes recently aired a revealing report on Cold Fusion. You know, that “crazy” idea that was discredited years ago. Well it seems the phenomenon may have been crazy and discredited, but it continues to happen anyway.

To see the 60 minutes video click here

To read the 60 minutes transcripts click here

I remember when the first reports of Cold Fusion came out. I was cautiously enthusiastic. Observations in science don't always lead to practical, economical technologies (just consider hot fusion). But I enthusiastically read everything I could find about Cold Fusion. The potential for humanity was huge! The possibility of no longer being dependent upon coal, oil, and nuclear power – and their civilization destroying pollution, was extraordinary. And the liberating dream of generating our own power seemed almost within reach.

And then, in just a couple weeks, the press saturated stories that a couple other universities couldn't replicate the findings. The scientists who made the announcement were effectively accused of being frauds. The world was quickly convinced that Cold Fusion was a hoax. And it was almost instantly back to business as usual...

This was shocking to me. How had this all happened so fast. I never felt right about it. Something as important as this was studied just a few weeks and then shelved forever.

So what if a couple more “prestigious” universities couldn't replicate the experiments the first time they tried. But it happened. The once distinguished scientists who made the announcement were now banished. And anyone who continued to work on Cold Fusion was immediately considered a “quack.” How convenient...

And now we find out that the banished scientists were right. There really is a Cold Fusion phenomenon. What a waste of 20 years of scientific inquiry. We might have figured out how to utilize Cold Fusion by now. We might have been free from the fossil fuel industry by now. We might have stopped Global Warming. We might not have been at war in the Middle East. And we might have stopped our hemorrhaging of money. (Which of course, is what some people actually want).

Back when the suppression of Cold Fusion happened in the press, it was surprising to me how one-sided the story was covered as a fraud. Why didn't anyone in the press stand up for these once respected scientists? Why didn't anyone point out the obvious; that just because a phenomenon isn't consistently repeatable, doesn't mean it never happened. What conditions were there that made the coverage of something so positive so undesirable? ...And later I realized what it was; “diversified portfolios.”

That's right, diversified portfolios. Everyone has their hands in everyone else's pockets. Everyone has investment in the status quo.

What seems like a wise investment strategy has turned us all into frightened fools in fear of change. Because change might hurt our investments. Change might reduce our profit margins. Change might cut our advertising revenue. Change might bring others into power.

That's what it was. That's what generated the almost universal press attack on Cold Fusion. The mass media, owned and controlled by established big business, didn't want their formula for profits changed. And they were more than willing to suppress a great discovery to keep the advertising (etc.) money flowing in.

I also remember how President Jimmy Carter tried to bring about a new energy paradigm in the '70s.

Jimmy Carter knew that if we didn't develop alternative sources of power, America would someday be at constant war over the remains of the world's oil. Jimmy Carter knew that our nation's wealth was draining away to the fossil fuel industry. Jimmy Carter knew that our nation was in crisis, and that business as usual would eventually break us. President Jimmy Carter was right... and his efforts were suppressed. (Much of the mass media still vilifies President Carter.)

As a consequence of his support of alternative energy, the fossil fuel industry (and the mass media) supported Ronald Reagan in the election of 1980.

The Reagan Era was essentially a sell-out to the fossil fuel industry. Alternative Energy was not only no longer supported, it was suppressed. What else would you call multi-billion dollar subsides for fossil fuels and none for alternatives? Bush senior was an oil man. So its pretty obvious where his alliances stood. Clinton got slapped down within the first year of his first term. But some progress was made. And then, Bush Jr. practically gave away the country to the fossil fuel industry.

We now have a new President who is trying to change things. President Obama's support of renewable energy is a refreshing, and absolutely imperative decision.

So, is the suppression machine at work? Just check this out.

One more thing; hydrogen.

The U.S. military has just invested $3.3 million on drone airplanes powered by hydrogen fuel cells. These hydrogen fuel cell powered drones operate two to four times as long as battery powered drones.

And yet, the American people have been led to believe that hydrogen can't store enough power to drive a car – or that the technology is somehow not ready for prime time. We hear that hydrogen is flammable – like gasoline isn't. And we hear that there needs to be a massive hydrogen infrastructure built to replace the oil industry.

What we rarely hear is that America could generate our own hydrogen from renewable resources.

The liberating dream of generating our own truly clean power is even closer now. Don't let them fool us again.

Busted Lying About Global Warming

2009-04-27T23:41:00.000-07:00

“Clean Coal is like healthy cigarettes, it does not exist.”

Al Gore

Guess what?

The fossil fuel industry has spent years conducting a disinformation campaign about global warming – and have ignored their own scientists... on record.

Oh oh....

Somebody might go to jail.

“These large polluters committed a massive fraud far larger than Bernie Madoff's fraud. They are the Bernie Madoffs of global warming. They ordered the censoring and removal of the scientific review that they themselves conducted. And like Bernie Madoff, they lied to the people who trusted them in order to make money.”

Al Gore

But will the prosecutions happen? You may be able to get away with torture, but can you get away with causing the deaths of millions? Can you get away with causing the extinction of thousands of species? Can you get away with a crime against our economy so great it could result in the collapse of our Nation, maybe even our civilization?

I think so.

I don't expect anyone to do time.

Who's going to convict them?

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has called President Obama and other politicians who commit money to developing “clean coal” “indentured servants” to the coal industry. (I shouldn't have to explain how our nation's elections are financed.)

Our politicians aren't stupid, but enough money can get them to act that way.

Our system has been corrupted.

Pollution is “clean.”

Progress is profits.

Money is god.

God wants money.

The truth is what gets you ahead.

And the future doesn't matter.

Except for one thing,

...the future is now the present...

We're going about this all wrong.

No one wins at this game.

Las Vegas Loses $20 Million

2009-04-22T10:14:00.000-07:00

How do you beat Vegas? Ask Harvey Whittemore and Vidler Water. They've “profited” almost $20,000,000 from two very questionable water “deals” with Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA).

In the report I-Team: Deals for Coyote Springs Raise Questions; George Knapp reported that Clark County didn't buy Coyote Springs, so Harvey Whittemore did – for $23 million. And then SNWA paid him $25 million for some of it's water rights.

What's wrong with this picture? Why didn't Clark County just buy the property for $2 million less – and SNWA could have had all the water rights?

It could mean that SNWA got away with an unpopular move the County would not take.
It could mean that Harvey Whittemore somehow outmaneuvered SNWA.
Or, it could mean that some inside information was given and backroom deals made to drain $2,000,000 of wealth from Southern Nevada.

And then there's that Robison Ranch in Spring Valley Vidler Water bought for $4.5 million, and then six years later sold it to SNWA for $22 million! That's a questionable profit of $17,500,000!

Together, these two deals amount to almost $20 million that Las Vegas overpaid.

If Harvey Whitemore or Vidler Water had pick-pocketed Las Vegas residents, they'd be doing time. But they make questionable millions at Las Vegas' expense and somehow they're shrewd businessmen? Something is very wrong here. This deserves more than an I-Team investigation. Where are the cops when we really need them?

It is self-evident that something is very wrong with our system. Situations like this point out that our criminal justice system has essentially been used as a diversion. Politicians like to look like they're “tough on crime.” But they don't really mean all crime – just the crimes of the poor.

If you've got a drug addiction problem, and you get caught, you're going to prison.

If you get filthy rich destroying the future of the State, you get treated like a damn hero.

This is what corruption looks like. I feel like I'm watching a train wreck in slow motion. If Harvey Whittemore can get away with it, he's going to build 150,000 homes out there in the desert – with only enough water to sell the homes. This is a scam! Haven't we figured out yet what a scam looks like?

WARNING: That $20 million scam might only be the beginning. Harvey Whittemore also wants the State of Nevada to pay for 75% of a solar facility on his Coyote Springs development. Since the Federal government has already promised to pay 30% of all solar installations, Harvey Whittemore might make money on what would cost the rest of us money. And he still wants SNWA to build him a watergrab pipeline – at a cost of between $3.5 and $20 BILLION!

Is there no end to this man's greed?

Is there no limit to how much damage some will do for a profit?

...Of course, Harvey Whittemore isn't the only “law abiding” criminal committing this kind of mayhem. This is systematic. It's happening all over our Country. We all know this. In so many ways, our natural and economic wealth has been gutted. And we all know that it will just get worse if we ignore it.

So...

DO SOMETHING!!!

Tell your friends.

Write some letters.

Join the Bristlecone Alliance, PLAN, and the Sierra Club.

Make a donation to Great Basin Water Network (and sign our petition).

Or,

if you have an idea, leave a comment.

Organized Crime – Way Bigger Than the Mob

2009-04-14T15:49:00.000-07:00

“The Best Way to Rob a Bank is to Own One”

This is the title to William K. Black's new book. The former senior regulator (during the savings and loan crisis of the 1980's) explains; “Financial control frauds cause greater financial losses than all other forms of property crime – combined.” and … “The FBI correctly identified the epidemic of mortgage control fraud at such an early point that the financial crisis could have been averted had the Bush administration acted with even minimal competence.”

If you want to understand what happened with these corrupt banks (and our just as corrupt government), PLEASE CLICK HERE to watch William K. Black's interview on PBS's Bill Moyers. This is the best explanation of the financial collapse I have seen so far. It is not only conclusive, it warns us that the worst is yet to come. Nothing has really been fixed. And they will be back for more money – again and again, until we stop them... or they push our economy over the edge.

William K. Black is not alone. Eliot Spitzer has written (in Slate); “Washington had the power to regulate misbehaving banks. It just refused to use it.” As Governor of New York, he tried to stop predatory lending. As a likely consequence, the Federal Government “investigated” him until they could arrest him for something.

In Eliot Spitzer's same Slate article, The Regulatory Charade, he writes; "Financial-services companies have been given multiple blank checks, worth hundreds of billions, yet there have been virtually no mandated changes in management, behavior, or lending practices."

In Eliot Spitzer's article The Real AIG Scandal, he writes; “Everybody is rushing to condemn AIG's bonuses, but this simple scandal is obscuring the real disgrace at the insurance giant: Why are AIG's counterparties getting paid back in full, to the tune of tens of billions of taxpayer dollars?”

In another of Eliot Spitzers' articles, he writes; “It is time the government realizes it has two simple options: tightly regulate entities that are too big to fail or break them up so they aren't.”

This crisis has the potential to destroy the Obama Presidency.

Matt Taibbi has written in Rolling Stone; “what you see is a colossal power grab that threatens to turn the federal government into a kind of giant Enron — a huge, impenetrable black box filled with self-dealing insiders whose scheme is the securing of individual profits at the expense of an ocean of unwitting involuntary shareholders, previously known as taxpayers.”

--------

Check out A New Way Forward

Sign a petition at Democrats.com

also: goldmansachs666.com

The Two Documents Everyone Should Read

Predatory Lender's Partner In Crime

Environmental Blowback

2009-04-13T22:20:00.000-07:00

My greatest fear is that the cumulative combination of all the consequences of all our actions for over the past 100 years are starting to bite back... very hard – and that we aren't nearly prepared to deal with this.

My greatest hope is that the cumulative combination of all our intelligence will be enough to recognize our circumstances/deficiencies/opportunities and find a way to make this a so much better world.

Pinko Humor

2009-04-10T22:24:00.000-07:00

What a strange coincidence...
Someone starts a rumor that our President is gay,
and all of sudden Republicans organize to Tea Bag Obama????

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Or...

You can go to a legitimate protest to fix the actual cause of the problem - a banking system that is in a state of corporate anarchy.

What these Tea Baggers don't seem to understand is that America was destined to be a third world nation if Obama didn't shoot for the cross court 3 pointer. Our economic system was gutted before President Obama took office.

Amazingly, some people want want Obama to fail. They see opportunity in driving down wages and the selling off of everything at fire sale prices.

How Freedom Was Perverted

2009-04-09T19:16:00.000-07:00

There were times in America when the word “freedom” meant something very different.

One of those times was during the 60's and 70's. Back then; freethinkers, whom we called “hippies,” believed in a personal laissez-faire – you know, real freedom. They felt free to “find themselves” and “do your own thing.” Hippies didn't quite fit in with the rest of America, because they saw no point in not living free.

Hippies didn't trust the government (the “Man”). But they realized that the true corruption of government lie with those who had the power and money to influence government. Many hippies consequently wanted “power to the people” – which often meant they wanted government to limit the influence of potential modern day robber barons.

The peak of the “hippie” influence was during the presidency of Jimmy Carter. Not that President Jimmy Carter was a hippie, or that hippies ever really had that much power. This was more of a time when people actually listened to hippies and freethinkers (for a change).

Though right-wingers may condemn the Carter years, I remember them as open, happy, and hopeful. This was a time when America was more-or-less at peace. This was a time when we all thought there would never be another Viet Nam “War.” This was a time when our government (prompted by Nader's Raiders and others), worked to protect Americans from pollution, oppression, and greedy corporations. This was a time when we actually started to become free from the big fossil fuel corporations. This was a time when we believed we might overcome the perfect storm of population, pollution, and politics. We even thought marijuana would be legal within a few years.

...This was a time when many put down their protest signs – thinking we had won.

This was before the Reagan counter-revolution.

This was before right-wing “family values” carried more weight than personal freedom.

This was before laissez-faire “economics” and government deregulation.

This was before the oil wars and the Patriot Act.

This was before “freedom” meant a never ending war with “terrorists” (who ironically must also perceive themselves as “freedom fighters”).

We all want freedom. But there are powerful people who want to be above the law – and they see freedom from regulation (corporate anarchy) as their ultimate form of “freedom.” Throughout most of history, inconsiderate people with the power to write laws to benefit themselves have striven for “freedom” to oppress. They may seem like nice people. They are rarely evil to the people they know. But it is always easier to be evil when you're removed from the suffering.

And its also easier to be blatantly ignorant of the other side's opinion when you can characterize your opponent as a “freak”.

If you are old enough, you may remember Tiny Tim. I was just a kid during the late 60's. But I remember this tall, effeminate, guy with really long hair essentially making a total fool out of himself to be famous. He's a guy who would have been “gonged” on the Gong Show (a later amateur talent show of poor talent that got people to shut up with a gong). Tiny Tim didn't seem like anyone I knew. And this is very important. He looked like a hippie, but I never met a hippie that acted like him. So, why was he important?

As one might have guessed, there were a lot of people during the 60's who never associated with hippies. The separation was so complete that even today, 40 years later; I recently saw a bumper sticker that said “Shut Up Hippie.”

There were people who neither knew, wanted to know, or most importantly; wanted to hear the opinions of “hippies.” These were the people who must have believed that Tiny Tim represented some portion of the hippie movement. These were the people who wanted to believe that hippies were “pinkos.” These were the people who believed hippies were somehow weakening America – by having an independent opinion.

Since a big part of the youth movement of the 60's and 70's was a “do your own thing” live and let live attitude, the hippies didn't reject Tiny Tim as a pinko stereotype meant to demean their anti-Viet Nam War opinions. As a kid, I just saw Tiny Tim as weird – which is just what they wanted us to think... Using guilt by association – a form of ignorance logic: If Tiny Tim is weird, and Tiny Tim looks like a hippie; then hey, hippies must be weird to.

Because of Tiny Tim's image, it became easier ignore the personal freedom movement. And because those who embraced the personal freedom movement also embraced the freaks, those in established power apparently agreed that this had to be stopped – by any means necessary.

For decades now, many people have purported that the war on drugs is really a culture war on political opposition. President Richard Nixon, who started the drug war, obviously wanted to put every pot smoking hippie he could find in prison. It was the hippies who opposed Richard Nixon's war policies. It was the hippies who opposed the bleeding dry of our economy by the military/industrial complex. It was the hippies who wanted to live in peace – with real, personal freedom. Looking back, it only seems inevitable that not just a public relations campaign, but also a virtual war would be declared on hippies. But it had to be a covert war... So they called it the “drug war.”

The law enforcement policies of the drug war have been oppressive, hideously expensive, and have ruined millions of lives. Presently the United States has the highest rate of incarceration per capita in the world. Approximately half of American prisoners are (or have been) in prison for non-violent drug related “crimes.” And why? To lock away the freaks, of course. To take away their right to vote. Sure, some of them should be locked away. But other countries have shown us that there are more rational ways to deal with recreational drug use, and we've ignored them. Why? Some people still want to lock away the pot smoking hippies because they are just too dangerous to the status quo. You see; not all people believe hippies are “pinkos.” And sometimes the “silent majority” agrees with the “freak” minority. This has threatened a lot of peoples' income...

Some of you may also remember the Rainbow Coalition. It was a political group, started in 1984 by Rev. Jesse Jackson, that pursued social justice, civil rights, and political activism. The Rainbow Coalition desired to include everyone on the fringes of political power. It's symbol was the rainbow – representing all of the diverse colors and types of people welcome. But somehow now, in the minds of most Americans; this rainbow symbol represents homosexuals. How did that happen? It definitely didn't just happen. Evidently, the corporate media must have used their Tiny Tim experience to marginalize a mass movement for political participation and personal freedom. (If you know more about this, please leave a comment.)

There are people who don't want us to know the truth. And they will go to extraordinary lengths to keep some people marginalized.

Just a couple of weeks ago, I noticed a cover story about Barack Obama on one of the tabloids at the supermarket. I guess I should have been prepared for the same old smear tactics. But the article shocked me anyway. It claimed our President is secretly bisexual. Here we go again. If you don't support the status quo, if you try to stop a war, and if you support the personal freedom that is implied in our constitution; you must be some kind of “pinko.”

Oh by the way, just in case you might have doubts, this accuser FAILED his lie detector test.

There are zealots willing to use any means necessary to win. They will lie every chance they get. They will call us every name they can conjure. They will imprison us for minor offenses. They will steal elections. They will even give trillions of dollars to the very banks that have been ruining our economy - so they we won't be able to provide for those truly in need. Apparently, they believe that they are so right that its OK for them to do wrong... And they will be back, no matter how many times we prevail.

For some; “freedom” is the freedom for them to tell you how to live.

Of course, that would be more accurately defined as oppression.

The Empire Has No Clothes

2009-03-26T19:54:00.000-07:00

In some ways, it could be argued that the system we call the United States of America has already lost it's momentum... Worse. In some ways, our system has already been monkey-wrenched and mugged. Worse. We've already consumed our easy to get resources. We've already polluted our back yards... Even worse. We've been immersed in American capitalist supremest culture so completely that we're unwilling to see the obvious. The Empire has no clothes.

That's what this financial meltdown has been all about.

We've been slapped with a reality check.

That reality check; we're not prepared for the present, much less the future.

But we don't want to think about it. All we want is for things to be like they used to be. Of course, that's the one thing we cannot have. We want an economic recovery, when what we need is an economic discovery. Part of that discovery is that we've been living a multi-layered Ponzi scheme. Next to nothing is sustainable.

We now know, without a doubt, that the “free market” can be played. The whole world has been played. Everyone who was anyone had a scheme to get filthy rich. And the consequences? Nobody really thought about the consequences. We still don't really want to be responsible.

“They say that if we pump a few hundred billion dollars into the system and tighten up regulation a bit, consumer confidence will start building and we’ll pull out of this recession within a year.” And though we need these changes: “What they don't point out – and don't seem to understand – is that this prosperity came at a staggering price. We got rich by violating one of the central tenets of economics: thou shall not sell off your capital and call it income. And yet over the past 40 years we have clear-cut forests, fished rivers and oceans to the brink of extinction, and siphoned oil from the earth as if it possessed an infinite supply. We've sold off our planet's natural capital and called it income. And now the earth, like the economy, is stripped.”

... The party's over. Remember peak oil? Its already happened here in the US. How about peak water? Peak metal? Peak soil? Even peak food? We've got some real heavy issues to confront very soon. We simply can't afford to get into another war over resources (like we did in Iraq). Yet, though it all sounds so awful, for some people this means profit. That's what's wrong with our economic system.

We keep thinking in terms of profits (from scarcity).

- We need to be thinking in terms of benefits (from creating abundance).

We keep thinking in terms of paper wealth.

- We need to be thinking in terms of natural wealth.

We keep thinking in terms of status.

- We need to be thinking in terms of purpose.

We keep thinking in terms of better stuff.

- We need to be thinking in terms of better experiences.

We have flogged this horse long enough.

We can't go back.

The world has changed. We can argue about whether we caused it, but what we need to do is adapt.

Obama ran on a platform of “change.” But actually, the change has already happened. Our whole world has changed. The big question is; will we change with that change, or will we let it overwhelm us?

The American people can change. We want sensible, sustainable, healthy change. American people can create better ways of doing things. We are creative. But many of those in power don't want change. It might not be good for their profits. The real question is can we fix our systems enough to change – or will it be the same as it so often is with politics; too little, too late?

You Were A Fascist

2009-03-18T07:19:00.000-07:00

If you were an American living here in the U.S. between late 2001 and January 15, 2009; you were living in what could be technically described as a Fascist Dictatorship.

Is there proof? Now there is:

President Obama just declassified critical memos written by “President” Bush's lawyer, John Woo, which nullified the Bill of Rights and created a legal dictatorship.

What... you didn't know? Don't be so surprised, truth is the first casualty of war.

You didn't read about this in the news. No wonder. It was classified. Secret. That's right, the documents that gave President Bush dictatorial powers were too sensitive for American citizens to know about. We weren't supposed to know that Bush's legal team had declared him Commander-In-Chief, with the self-awarded right to do anything he wanted to, to anyone he wanted to, for whatever reason he chose. Of course, there was one requirement. Bush would have to call you a terrorist. But once the enemy combatant claim was made, he could do anything he wanted with anyone his military or “intelligence” forces could kidnap – including Americans. That sounds like dictatorial power to me.

Were there death squads? Apparently so. Seymour Hersh (the reporter who first informed us of the My Lai massacre) has revealed that Vice President Dick Cheney headed an “executive assassination team” – that had no Congressional oversight. “Under President Bush's authority, they've been going into countries, not talking to the ambassador or the CIA station chief, and finding people ... and executing them.” ...Of course we were at war, but that's not the point. The point is that Dick Cheney, without having to answer to anyone, could have almost anyone in the world killed... all he had to do was give the order.

The elephant in the room is, of course, Iraq. There were no Iraqis in the 9/11 attacks. There were no WMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction) in Iraq. And the Bush Administration knew all of this. The United States invaded a country that had neither attacked us, nor were a real threat to us. (Even if they would have had WMDs, it would have been mass suicide to use them. Doesn't anybody remember MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) theory?) The Bush Administration knowingly lied about WMDs to get us to invade and occupy a country that wasn't a military threat to us. That's what dictatorships do. Hundreds of thousands of people have died, including thousands of patriotic Americans. And what for? Well... some military contractors made billions – and some big oil corporations got no-bid contracts. They (including Dick Cheney) got richer. However, our dollar is now on the brink of total collapse from 10 trillion dollars of deficit spending during the Bush terms.

And the press? Weren't they supposed to tell us about all this? One Woo memorandum said that “First Amendment speech and press rights may also be subordinated to the overriding need to wage war successfully.” The Bush Administration felt they could shut out the press if they were so inclined. Nonetheless, most reporters kept quiet on their own, since they all knew about the warrantless surveillance going on. Evidently, reporters knew that rocking the boat would have gotten them worse treatment than suspected communists during the McCarthy era.

But of course, there is another reason the mainstream press overlooked our little 7-year trial dictatorship. Only a handful of corporations controlled most of the mass media. For years, it was already known within the news business that promotions were only for “team players.” Most every reporter with a penchant for honest reporting had already been weeded out.

Which leads us to my Fascism accusation. Just what type of governmental system did we actually have? It doesn't make any sense that we had a Democratic Republic Dictatorship. That's a contradiction of terms. We only had Socialism for the banks and military/industrial complex. And we obviously weren't Communists. That only leaves something new – a new form of concealed proto-Fascism.

But where were the goose stepping troops? We didn't have any goose stepping troops. How could there be Fascism without goose stepping troops? Of course, that's not actually what defines a fascist state. Let's consider the dictionary's definition of Fascism; “a system of government characterized by dictatorship, belligerent nationalism, racism, and militarism.”

I've already shown that we were a “secret” dictatorship.
Our military spending is more than the next 14 countries combined.
I'd say our unprovoked invasion and occupation of Iraq has proved us to be belligerently nationalistic.
And for a while, if you were a Muslim, many Americans immediately suspected you of being a terrorist. That sounds pretty racist to me.

Were we fascists? I wasn't. At least I thought I wasn't. But reality is more complicated than that.

Another more technical definition of one form of “Fascism” is; an unholy alliance between the military, rich industrialists, and radical right wingers. If you don't believe we had that during the Bush Jr. years, you're probably one of those three.

During the Bush years the wealthy who owned the mass media convinced the radical right wing fundamentalists that stealing another country's oil and bringing them “American” values was what God somehow wanted – and if you didn't agree with them, you weren't a patriotic American. Of course, that's the Cliff Notes version of the argument they used, but the results were the same.

And the results? The results were exactly what you would expect considering what the real goal is for fascists. Fascists want to get filthy rich, and they don't care who they hurt in the process. Fascism is about money. In my opinion, fascism is the ultimate corruption of capitalism. And it doesn't last for long. In very short order, all of the sheep get fleeced. And then the system collapses. Is this sounding familiar?

But it could have been worse. When the financial system first started to collapse back in Fall of 2008, the Bush administration could have declared martial law. (This was a real possibility. We were already in a state of partial martial law after the Patriot Act.)

If President George W. Bush did anything truly extraordinary during his terms as President, it was not declaring total martial law. For that, I admire him.

However, declaring martial law last Fall wouldn't have been easy. The Bush administration had alienated the military by their tactics in Iraq. The Bush administration was very unpopular due to the “war,” the economy, the environment, etc. And activists on the internet were getting the message out. These guys didn't have our best interests in mind. In reality, declaring total martial law wouldn't have been a slam dunk. It very likely would have failed.

We Americans like our freedom. If we really knew how close we came to losing it all, we might have stood up and said no for a change.

...But then again, I guess we did.

Where's Cancer's X-prize?

2009-03-16T13:13:00.000-07:00

What's wrong with the drug companies?

The answer is really simple.

They're getting paid for doing the wrong thing.

The “free market” system gives the best rewards for creating drugs that only treat, not cure patients. The logic is simple. Why make a cure that you only sell once, when you can sell a treatment for the rest of your patients' lives. The really big money is in keeping people sick.

With a totally “free market” system, we can't fix this. Its just a flaw of the “free market” that a company's best customers are like addicts. It is just a flaw of the “free market” that the ultimate goal of maximizing profits leads to making your customers as desperate as addicts. Its just a flaw of the “free market” that leads the drug companies to wish to manipulate and deregulate the U.S. regulatory system until its difficult to tell the difference between the legitimate drug industry and the street corner pusher.

Even free markets need some regulations. Even free markets need some direction. In a free country, is it legal to steal? Of course not. Without some conscious purpose, a free market is just corporate anarchy.

But we can fix this. We can pay the drug companies to come up with cures. This is sort of like the “free market,” but with a purpose and a conscience.

We could set up the equivalent of an “X-prize” for diseases. (You may recall the X-prize is essentially a reward for accomplishing something groundbreaking.) Wouldn't it be great if we could give a reward for curing cancer? How about a really big reward that would entice even the biggest corporations?

I'll bet we've spent billions during the war on cancer over the past decades. And we'll keep spending more if we don't find a cure.

What if we set up a prize for a treatment that rids us of at least 98% of all cancers. The treatment would have to be non-invasive and have few side effects. It would also have to be relatively inexpensive. In other words, we would pay good money for a practical cure for cancer.

Where would we get the money for this huge prize? Where is the money now? Right now the money is being drained from our savings accounts and insurance companies. That's right, the drug companies have lots of our money from the “treatments” they charge us (and often overcharge us) for.

Why not set up a tax on drug “treatments” that don't cure us? We would have to set things up so that the drug companies, not the consumers, would actually pay this tax. And to limit price gouging, the tax could be much higher for price increases greater than inflation.

Even a 1% tax would really add up over the years. If there had been a 1% tax on drug treatments for cancer for the past 50 years, the reward would now be astronomical! Every company, lab, and university on the planet would be scrambling for the prize.

In fact, I suspect that if we had offered a huge “X-prize” for curing cancer, we might already have a cure by now.

What would something like this X-prize take? Unfortunately, it might take the restructuring of our government. So much drug money influences our politicians now that doing the right thing is an uphill battle... But, we could get the drug companies on our side if Government funding were to match the contribution they provide. This would double the size of the prize – and bring new money into the health care system. I'd bet the drug companies would go for new profit opportunities.

Of course most importantly, in the long run, if we can find cures to the major illnesses that plague us; we will save far more money (and lives) than with our present system.

Isn't a cure worth paying for?

Maybe we just don't understand how to direct a “free” market.

The REAL Controversy

2009-03-15T13:19:00.000-07:00

To the mass media, a controversy means money. Controversies get people to pay attention, which gets companies to pay for advertising. However, there are controversies that reduce advertising dollars – controversies that make advertisers look bad.

The reality of the “free market” controlling the mass media is that the mass media doesn't tell the whole truth. We all know this, and have passively accepted it. We even continue to spend money with those who actively manipulate our information.

Presently, our own money is being used to bore us into submission. And since omission is a form of a lie, our own money is being used to mislead us into believing what advertisers want us to know.

Moreover, our perception of today's relevant controversies has been manipulated into extraordinarily simplistic “us and them” concepts. This has been so ingrained into our minds that we often actually believe (without thinking) that this is just the way things are.

Take for example; the mass media has handed us two choices for how to view the world – you're either a Conservative or a Liberal. This simply cannot be more oversimplified. Are those who control the mass media actually trying to confuse us?

If you ask a conservative what a liberal is, your answer would be quite different from the answer a liberal would give you. Actually, Conservatives and Liberals can't even clearly define themselves. As the investigative reporter, Greg Palast once said; “In confusion is profit.”

So, why the confusion? Why not talk about the actual controversies? We know what they are:

Up until the economic crisis, the rich were getting richer, while the rest of us were getting poorer.
Those who actually caused the economic crisis have been bailed out with our tax dollars and (inflationary) deficit spending.
Those with money have the influence to convince our government to effectively take from those without influence.
Companies have influenced our government to privatize government functions in such a way as to provide less services for more money.
Our budget surplus from 2000 was squandered... and much worse.
In order to maximize short-term profits, companies have sold out American labor to foreign competitors.
In order to maximize short-term profits, companies have environmentally sold out future generations – and all life on Earth.
Established companies have been able to suppress competitors with safer and cleaner technology.
The military/industrial complex has been bleeding the civilian economy dry for decades now.
And our public airwaves have been bought out by corporations committed to convincing us that these stated controversies are less important than the vague differences between the Right and Left.

I'll tell you why we're not actually talking about the real controversies in America; because if presented in a way that made sense, most of us would agree about what needed to be done. Remember the saying “Divide and conquer.” By arguing ethereal concepts like Right and Left, we ignore what's really going on.

What's really going on? This:

The rest of the world sees the US on the same path as the Soviet Union, about to collapse, and yet today America is not addressing the issues that collapsed the Soviet Union.
The war on the rich is being waged by other rich people.
Our government is being run by lobbyists.
There is indisputable proof that other health systems work better than the American system – people in other countries live longer (and they haven't always). Yet Americans have been led to believe a system without price gouging and non-paying insurance companies would be a bad thing.
Drug companies don't get rewarded for coming up with a cure. So, we get stuck with expensive “treatments” for life.
We're still fighting a war on terrorism against a country that never attacked us (not even on 9/11).
For 30 years; the fossil fuel industry (although polluting, profiteering, and running out of resources), has received orders of magnitude more subsidies than renewable energy.
etcetera
etcetera
etcetera...

What's really going on is that the greedy have run our nation into the ground.

President Obama is in an extraordinarily difficult position. He has been handed a country that is a mere shell of it's former self. This reminds me of South Africa after Apartheid. (They gutted the system before the black guy took over.)

But President Obama is also in a unique position to lead us into the 21^st century. We now realize we've been lied to. We're open to better ideas. We want change. This is his moment. History may someday see President Obama as even greater than President Franklin D Roosevelt. His challenge is greater. He not only has to fix the economy, but he has to do it in such a way so that we can support far more people in an increasingly environmentally fragile world.

Obama won't be able to do it on his own. In fact, I have doubts he wants to. The American people will have to see through the smokescreen of the mass media – and push hard for real, sensible reform – and change that ultimately leads to a sustainable economy.

Its not about Right or Left.

Its about fixing our failing systems.

After 30 years of neglect, we'd better be in a big hurry.

we won

2009-03-10T22:02:00.000-07:00

As everyone knows by now, the two coal-fired power plants planned for the Central Great Basin in White Pine County, Nevada have been delayed indefinitely.

We won.

ALLRIGHT!!!

Actually, everyone won. We'll all breath better now.

It has been a tough battle. Our odds looked pretty bad at the start. We didn't win any popularity contests. We always felt outnumbered. And we always felt we were fighting City Hall.

For a while; I felt like I was the only one in White Pine County who believed we could stop these companies from bringing us their problems.

I remember our first coal meeting. The people of our neighborhood got together to discuss there being a major pollution source being constructed less than 5 miles from our homes. Nobody there was happy about this. Nonetheless, after the representative from the power company explained to us what their plans were, we had a discussion. I was astounded by what I heard.

No one seemed angry. Everyone was upset, but not to the point that anyone looked upset. Everyone kept their composure – in the face of being poisoned. But worse, they all kept their expectations low. Most of the people in the meeting would have been happy if the power company just built the massive coal burner a little further away.

...These people were the resistance?

I can only speculate as to why their aspirations were so low. Maybe they felt so overwhelmed by the circumstances that they felt powerless to stop it. Maybe they felt that they might be ridiculed for dreaming that we could stop this. Maybe they just didn't know yet how dangerous living near a coal-fired power plant really is.

I got up after everyone else had spoke, and I said what none of them would. I said we should try to stop this thing. I said we should at least try.

...Now I realize that neither I, nor Bristlecone Alliance stopped the construction of these coal-fired power plants. But we did our part. And I believe we made a difference.

I am both grateful and proud. We did it. We encouraged the transition to safer, 21^st Century technology.

Our Prime Directive

2009-03-07T14:06:00.001-08:00

I was recently reminded of the “prime directive” watching an encore presentation (rerun) of Star Trek – Next Generation.

If you've ever watched Star Trek, you'd remember that the “prime directive” was very important... hey, it was the “prime” directive.

This got me to thinking. We should have a prime directive. Humanity should have a prime directive. Maybe you can help me out here. I don't really know what that prime directive should be. But I guess I would start with something like; “to respect all life.”

This isn't anything new. Our ancestors often had cultural traits “to respect all life.” I would say this is merely common sense. But a common sense prime directive makes sense to me. Our prime directive should make “common” sense. In fact, it should make sense not just now, but also in the long run.

A prime directive should be well thought out, yet obvious to anyone.

...And then I got to thinking. Wait a minute. We already have a prime directive. But it was not well thought out. It's never been voted on. It's never even been openly considered. But there it is – standing out like an oh so sore thumb. Humanity has decided on a prime directive without ever consciously having thought about it. Our civilization's prime directive? “To make as much money as we can.”

Present day humanity's prime directive is to be as greedy as possible – essentially at all costs.

If there is intelligent life out there, it's no wonder they don't wish to associate with us.

Our prime directive is to care only about money.

Our prime directive is to convert anything of tangible wealth into money.

Our prime directive will ultimately lead to the conversion of everything of real wealth into money – which is only a perceived wealth. (Hey; you can't eat money.)

Our prime directive is to consume and pollute everything on our planet.

Our prime directive is effectively to self-destruct as quickly as possible!

It is time for our civilization to consciously decide what we really want.

Otherwise, we'll only get what we think we want.

---

OK, here goes – my personal prime directive (subject to revision):

To learn from the past,

to plan for the future,

to respect all life.

Where There DEFINITELY Was A God

2009-03-04T07:49:00.000-08:00

What if you visited a parallel universe where there definitely was a God?

What if there were a place where everyone just knows all about God, right from birth?

What would it be like if there were no mystery?

There would be no need for a Bible, Koran, or Talmud. Everyone would already know what God wants.

There would only be one church – in all of history. Because no one would be confused.

The church wouldn't need money. Money would obviously be trivial to this more revealed God. (In fact, if this God wanted people to go to church; maybe all people would have to do is pray for a church – and one would just miraculously appear.)

Yet, the people would not pray for God to change things, because they would know and appreciate this all-knowing God's will and purpose.

Since this God is all-powerful in this parallel universe, there would also be no Heaven and Hell. It would only make sense there – that if God created you knowing that you would end up doing whatever he created you to do, your destination is God's decision. And if God loved his people, he wouldn't create any of them destined for Hell.

...Of course, these people would still have free will. They would simply not be created so flawed that they deserve Hell. The only thing anywhere near hellish for them would merely be the undesirable consequences of their actions.

...And maybe the people there would know God so well that they would realize that God will not rescue them from a crisis they themselves create... Consequently, the people there would act rationally.

Therefore:

In this parallel universe where God definitely exists; the people would trust their common sense, they would not need to financially support authorities who scare them into submission, and they would logically take on the responsibilities to which God has entrusted them.

Maybe even, in this parallel universe where God definitely exists, everyone would respect all of God's kingdom – even each other.

Is Rupert Murdoch a Fascist?

2009-02-20T15:21:00.000-08:00

I can't believe this... There is no question whether this is racist or not. How else could it be interpreted?

It looks to me like this New York Post political “cartoonist” is saying that our popularly elected president is a monkey who deserves to be shot. Where the hell is Homeland Security? This is a real threat – though it sounds more like a cheap script from one of Fox's mindless TV shows. How about a Manchurian Candidate meets Taxi Driver plot?

And this isn't the first time... Remember when a Fox News guest joked wistfully about someone killing Obama?

Rupert Murdoch's “news” organizations have repeatedly gone way over the line. They are as far from “fair and balanced” as I have ever seen in my lifetime. They even lie (the video “the Corporation” points out that it is perfectly legal for them to lie). Where the hell is the FCC?

Rupert Murdoch has consistently hired and promoted “newscasters” who verbally attack and denigrate our president at every opportunity. That is legal (whether it is fair or not). But, now they've reached the point where they're actually joking about someone killing the President of our Country.

Allow me to speculate for a moment. By allowing, even promoting racist attacks like this cartoon; it looks to me like Rupert Murdoch wants someone to kill Obama and set up a police state. It looks to me like Rupert Murdoch could be a Fascist trying to manipulate some disturbed American into killing President Obama so that Mr. Murdoch's Fascist buddies can take over.

Now I realize that Rupert Murdoch doesn't approve every thing that his publishing empire prints or airs. Rupert Murdoch just dictates the working environment. Well, Mr. Murdoch's dictates have resulted in calls for President Obama's assassination.

Whether it was intended or not (it was), this is a threat to our National Security. And we can do something about it. Boycott Fox News and all other news publications that Rupert Murdoch owns. Better yet, let's boycott Rupert Murdoch's advertisers.

Go ahead and watch Fox News and read the New York Post just enough to find out who their sponsors are. A few emails to the sponsors of these news/propaganda shows from a number of us will likely be far more effective than Homeland Security ever has been.

Nothing But Blue Skies... From Now On.

2009-02-16T22:46:00.000-08:00

Good News, More Good News, And Even More...

2009-02-16T22:27:00.000-08:00

NV Energy has decided to postpone the construction of the coal fired power plant in White Pine County until carbon sequestration becomes practical – which, in all this limestone, is never.

NV Energy still wants to build a big power line through White Pine County. Its quite apparent that they realize our potential for solar, wind, and geothermal power generation.

The last minute Bush Administration give away to the oil companies of leasing “rights” to Southern Utah public lands was stopped.

The new Secretary of the Interior sounds like he might be more in favor of ocean current, wave, and offshore wind power than “drill baby, drill.”

The 50 billion dollar give away to the coal and nuclear industry was excluded from the Stimulus Package.

It's looking more and more like SNWA won't be able to afford the watergrab pipeline anytime soon.

...Even this recession has a silver lining. People are starting to pay attention. Those who have paid attention are angry. We want the change we've been promised. And we'll continue to push, because we realize no-one is going to just give us a better world.

Desalination Is Cheaper Than Defoliation

2009-02-01T17:46:00.000-08:00

Investigative reporter George Knapp has reported that desalination is not only cheaper than the watergrab, but that California is NOT resistant to the idea.

The Las Vegas CBS I-Team report states:

"SNWA says California's water plans are what they look at when deciding the viability of desalination. The Golden State has formed a desalination task force within it's water department and there are two dozen desalination plants operating there, with at least another 30 in some phase of design and construction. Worldwide there are more than 7,500 desal plants in operation. But in Nevada, nothing.

"It's political and lack of will, and maybe the fact that Nevadans invested these hundreds of millions of dollars on the ranches, so they feel compelled to continue this scheme that was developed over a decade ago," said Byrd. "The fact that Arizona, California, Texas, Florida, Georgia, and a dozen countries around the world are investing in desalting tells us something.""

The Time Has Come...

2009-01-22T08:25:00.000-08:00

The time has come for us to change our power structure.

The time has come to for us to generate our own power.

The time has come for us to save some money!

This may be the very best time to invest in sustainable energy for your home. Many people are deciding to buy now. The rebates and incentives have really brought our effective costs down. I was quite surprised.

Of course, you could wait to see what incentives the Obama administration might add. But, if demand goes up, near-term prices are bound to go up too. And the longer you wait, the more CO2 gets emitted into the atmosphere.

Of course, you could wait a few years for new technology to bring the price of some of these components down. But remember, the longer you wait, the more monthly payments you keep sending away. Many of us have put this off for up to 30 years. Imagine how many power bills you could have saved on already.

With your own power generation comes

independence (wouldn't it be great to not care about energy policy)
self sufficiency (wouldn't it be great not care about fuel prices)
sustainability (wouldn't it be great to know you're doing the right thing)

We want all these – as soon as possible.

Besides, your own power generators are a very tangible and practical investment. For example; home wind and solar are far better investments than stocks right now.

US currency isn't stable now either. Market Watch reports, in their article; Fault Lines Emerge At The Fed “they believe an inflation storm is already in train” and “the danger of inflation is very high.” Inflation robs your savings. At 3% inflation – your money's worth half as much in 24 years. At 6% inflation – your money's worth half as much in 12 years. And at 12% inflation – your money's worth half as much in 6 years! The 1970's saw inflation rates over 14%. (We presently have some of the same economic conditions that caused the inflation of the 1970's. Most notably; a long, protracted, expensive war financed by deficit spending. Hyper-inflation could happen again – maybe even worse.) Translation; the price of energy independence may never be cheaper!

But (of course) the price of fossil fuels are down. Why would you want to buy now?

I think we all know that the price of fossil fuels will rise again and again. Somebody's playing us... again.

60 minutes has pointed out that the speculation tactics that Enron used during the 2001 rolling blackouts (in California) were used during the run-up in gas prices in 2008. Sadly, with deregulation, 7 years later, our government still hasn't put in place laws to protect us from another Enron.

However, we saw something even more frightening this winter. In the CNN article; Freezing Europeans Suffer As Gas Dispute Drags On Russia shut down whole economies in Bulgaria and Slovakia, during the dead of winter – because they couldn't afford to pay. Let's hope this doesn't happen here in America... But when you think about it, this happens every day here – to individuals. (Good news; with your own generator, you'll still be warm, no matter how broke you are.)

But hey, with global warming, in a few years we won't need to heat our homes!

Seriously though, Wired Magazine reports that scientists have found that “our atmosphere has 28 percent more carbon dioxide now than any time in the past 800,000 years.”

You'd think that fact, in itself, would be enough to make any reasonable person want to do whatever they can to fix this. But there's more...

Guess what? The coal industry has been lying to us about “clean coal.” Time magazine reports, in their article Exposing The Myth Of Clean Coal that the toxic coal ash spill in Tennessee contained “100 times more waste than the Exxon Valdez disaster.” ... “This is hazardous waste, and it should be classified as such.” But it isn't. ... “Though the EPA in the past has come close to imposing stricter rules on the treatment of coal ash, the agency has repeatedly backed down in the face of opposition from utilities and the coal industry.”

Government is definitely the problem now. Our government has been privatized. And just when we thought things might change. The Wall Street Journal reports in the January 15 article; Coal industry (miraculously) Digs Itself Out Of A Hole In The Capitol that “Big Coal is on a roll in the nation's capitol.”

What???

Didn't America vote against Big Coal. We voted for that other guy. Didn't he win?

We can't allow him to back down now.

It looks like we have to vote again.

But this time with our check books.

This is the only vote they really understand...

They won't build the coal-fired power plants when they realize they don't have the customers...

I don't hate the power companies. I just want them to do the right thing. And until they see us leaving in mass, their customers' health won't be the priority.

We can make a big difference. And I hope to accomplish this for even less money than we would expect purchasing these systems ourselves.

I would like to get together with others and buy sustainable energy components at volume discounts. If this works out locally, I would like to organize a nationwide buying cooperative.

Email me at rickspils@excite.com

If you live in rural Nevada, Utah, or Idaho; we can buy together and negotiate a better price.

If you live elsewhere, email me anyway so that I can gage how big the demand is for a cooperative.

No Excuses Left

2009-01-18T23:01:00.000-08:00

Yale University spin-out company Oasys has developed a desalination technology that uses ONE TENTH the energy of conventional desalination systems.

The paradigm has changed...

SNWA now has no excuses left for the watergrab.

Toxic Sludge from "Clean Coal"

2008-12-28T14:50:00.000-08:00

Democracy Now! has reported a huge spill of toxic sludge that has buried a part of Tennessee in as much as six feet of coal-fired power plant toxic coal ash. CNN has reported that the toxic spill was over a billion gallons – “enough to fill 1,660 Olympic-sized swimming pools.”

The toxic spill is more than fifty times larger than the Exxon Valdez oil spill. “Coal ash typically contains high concentrations of toxic chemicals like mercury, cadmium, (arsenic, lead, selenium, uranium, thorium,) and other heavy metals.” The New York Times has reported the EPA found that “concentrations of arsenic to which people might be exposed through drinking water contaminated by fly ash could increase cancer risks several hundredfold.”

“The sludge has flowed into the Emory River, a tributary of the Tennessee River, which provides drinking water to millions of people downstream in Tennessee, Alabama, and Kentucky.”

And this isn't the first time. Toxic sludge floods also happened in Martin County, KY in 2000 and in Buffalo Creek, WV in 1972.

Moreover; “The toxic sludge we are seeing pollute Tennessee today is actually from air pollution control devices.” That's right. The cleaner the air is from a coal-fired power plant, the dirtier the toxic sludge. And this disaster shows us again that a real threat exists that coal-ash toxic sludge will not be contained. The regulations for landfills are far more lax than regulations for air quality. High Country News has reported extensive health problems near coal-fired power plant toxic landfills in Arizona. In Arizona, however, there have been no huge breaches. The toxins just blow in the wind.

This disaster in Tennessee is just a catastrophic example of what we already know. There is no such thing as clean coal.

Environmental disasters such as these continue to remind us of how important it is for us to utilize safer technology to generate power. Unfortunately, the coal industry won't do this FOR us... For them, it costs too much to do the right thing. For us, it costs too much not to.