On the Nuclear Shoreline... sealife suffers.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Monday, June 20, 2011
Greece & the Eurozone
The Greek economy is in trouble; the population is agitating, trying to avoid financial pain, but their system allowed much unpaid excess - it's likely they'll default.
Too bad for them.
But this will not cause the euro to collapse. Once the Greeks are slapped with the worst their creditors can dish out, the euro will stabilize -- strong as ever.
The Wall Street Journal and other American propaganda rags denigrate the euro, and have done so throughout its history. But they would - the euro is top competitor to the almighty US dollar, and by talking down the euro, they build up their own currency.
Too bad for them.
But this will not cause the euro to collapse. Once the Greeks are slapped with the worst their creditors can dish out, the euro will stabilize -- strong as ever.
The Wall Street Journal and other American propaganda rags denigrate the euro, and have done so throughout its history. But they would - the euro is top competitor to the almighty US dollar, and by talking down the euro, they build up their own currency.
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Oversight
The U.S. Federal Government is responsible for oversight in key areas such as nuclear power generation and regulating financial sectors.
But "oversight" is a weasely and flawed word.
First, the government didn't protect citizen interests in the recent financial meltdown. How could such 'overheating' happen? (Top salespeople and 'oversight' officials regularly switch jobs). Home mortgage-holders have been held to account, but banking & other big industries were bailed out. Risk-taking decisionmakers continue to be obscenely rewarded in those industries. Please note Wall Street's political donations.
Second, what does oversight mean? Squat. Nothing.
Oversight means to regulate or supervise, but oversight is also defined as inadvertent error to notice or failure to do anything.
Confidence you can bank on! A confidence game where you're the hustled mark.
Another example: Nuclear meltdown has yet to occur in US, but the USA has twenty-three GE Mark 1 nuclear reactors like the Fukushima disaster nuclear plant. Oversight?
But "oversight" is a weasely and flawed word.
First, the government didn't protect citizen interests in the recent financial meltdown. How could such 'overheating' happen? (Top salespeople and 'oversight' officials regularly switch jobs). Home mortgage-holders have been held to account, but banking & other big industries were bailed out. Risk-taking decisionmakers continue to be obscenely rewarded in those industries. Please note Wall Street's political donations.
Second, what does oversight mean? Squat. Nothing.
Oversight means to regulate or supervise, but oversight is also defined as inadvertent error to notice or failure to do anything.
Confidence you can bank on! A confidence game where you're the hustled mark.
Another example: Nuclear meltdown has yet to occur in US, but the USA has twenty-three GE Mark 1 nuclear reactors like the Fukushima disaster nuclear plant. Oversight?
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Nuclear New England
Nuclear accident? You must act fast. All will be up to you - suddenly you'll need to protect health & save life. The early problem is avoiding contamination. Get away ! The authorities later will determine exclusion zones and dangerously contaminated areas. Shown here on a local New England map are 15 & 50 mile dirty zones (24 & 80 kms; click for detail). The Fukushima nuclear meltdown (same design as Plymouth Pilgrim plant, with less spent fuel stored on site) resulted in 20 km radius full & continuing evacuation -- residents forced suddenly to wholly abandon their homes, towns & businesses. The property remaining there is irradiated and unsafe. Polluted sea life, spitting distance from the accident, is further poisoning the oceanic food chain, causing unknown troubles...
Alternative power sources were labeled 'too expensive' -- yet the true cost of nuclear power was ignored; monstrous risks were overlooked.
Designers said it couldn't happen. Their failure in Japan has had heavy consequences...
photo source: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Sunday, June 12, 2011
In a Bad State - America
America wages three wars in distant lands. Many other US servant governments are in trouble with their people. Meanwhile at home, basic infrastructure & education are underfunded. Government ignores the law, clever businesses go their own way, and there's no accountability. Deception (when discovered) is labeled "regrettable ignorance" - and we're thus deceived again.
High unemployment will jump higher when the bubble bursts on militarism, and that gravy train slows down.
Where will new jobs come from? What are America's promising growth industries other than military, "security" and prisons?
High unemployment will jump higher when the bubble bursts on militarism, and that gravy train slows down.
Where will new jobs come from? What are America's promising growth industries other than military, "security" and prisons?
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Sunday, June 05, 2011
We the Sheeple
The conquered delight in reflected greatness
And know nothing of being oppressed.
We learn to shun political debate
Nervous to glimpse shackles & muzzles.
Dwelling on inanities
We huddle in shadows of peace.
Rich fertile Commonwealth stripped,
Great Leaders lecture the desperate & homeless.
We're weaned on austerity
As Banks & Military cop our affluence.
Herded to overvalued housing
Our assets were stripped, our futures held ransom.
Yet misled Fools
Still heel to the same advisers.
Mired in negative worth
We're lauded & fleeced repeatedly.
And know nothing of being oppressed.
We learn to shun political debate
Nervous to glimpse shackles & muzzles.
Dwelling on inanities
We huddle in shadows of peace.
Rich fertile Commonwealth stripped,
Great Leaders lecture the desperate & homeless.
We're weaned on austerity
As Banks & Military cop our affluence.
Herded to overvalued housing
Our assets were stripped, our futures held ransom.
Yet misled Fools
Still heel to the same advisers.
Mired in negative worth
We're lauded & fleeced repeatedly.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Permanent War -- Military Industries
America created huge permanent war systems: beggaring U.S. communities, slaughtering & traumatizing military volunteers, destroying people around the earth.
The war systems are unsustainable. U.S. national political leaders fail to dismantle or curtail the wastefulness. Everyone suffers except the military industries.
The war systems are unsustainable. U.S. national political leaders fail to dismantle or curtail the wastefulness. Everyone suffers except the military industries.
Monday, May 23, 2011
Private Profits - Public Pays for Mistakes
Large corporate powers suck out private profits when possible -- but when their speculation goes very poorly, they coerce politicians to use public funds and pay for their mistakes.
The nuclear industry in Japan is in need of bailout. Thousands of people cannot return home due to radiation. More nuclear accidents will occur. Where in the world is next? "Nuclear is safe & economical" was bullshit; the costs of nuclear waste & accidents are huge. The public will be forced to pay huge costs.
Here is a great article (link) from the Japan Times:
U.S. court victories show how to get rid of nuclear plants
By STEPHEN HESSE
Lawyer Tom Twomey knows far more than most of us about the importance of citizen participation in making energy policy. That's because Twomey has spent four decades keeping a watchful eye on electric power suppliers in New York — and he's learned that what we don't know can hurt us.
Certainly, what he's learned about the hubris and underhand dealings of the U.S. nuclear power industry offers some valuable lessons for Japan. But the most important thing he says he's come to realize is that the participation of public-interest lawyers and the media is critical to ensure that energy providers prioritize safety. And that applies just as much to Japan as the United States, he insists, even though Japan is a far less litigious society in which citizens shy away from challenging government and big business.
In the following recent interview with The Japan Times, Twomey shares some insights and experiences from his years helping farmers to challenge the U.S. nuclear power industry — and win.
What was the situation you faced in 1974?
In the 1970s, the local utility on Long Island decided that, rather than simply supplying electricity to homeowners and businesses in the area, they would get into the wholesale production of electricity and produce enough power for the entire northeast region of the United States.
Unlike the other coastal areas from Boston to Washington D.C., which are heavily populated, the east end of Long Island is a rural farming area with a relatively small population. It also has easy access to the cooling waters of the Atlantic, since a nuclear plant requires massive amounts of water to keep its reactors from overheating.
The local utility decided to build 19 nuclear reactors there in Jamesport, and it planned to turn our rural area into "A Nuclear Power Park."
As a lawyer, how did you get involved?
I was retained by farmers in the area to find out what the utility was planning. We didn't realize it at the time, but we were beginning the only successful trial of the nuclear industry in America. Prior to these proceedings, virtually all applications in America were given rubberstamp approvals. Thanks to New York State regulations, we were able to intervene in the legal proceedings and — once we were a party to the proceedings — we were able to force the industry to answer questions under oath about the need for and the safety of nuclear power.
In short, what happened?
When the farmers began their battle, local elected officials were initially bemused. But as the legal fight intensified, these officials took more and more interest in the issue. With thorough reporting in three newspapers, the public began to realize that if even a small accident occurred at the reactor, they might have to evacuate their homes permanently. They might forever lose their businesses. They might suffer untold numbers of cancers.
All of a sudden, the truthfulness of the utility executives become a critical issue. And those utility experts had to repeatedly admit under oath that they were exaggerating the safety of the reactor.
After 80 full days of trial over the course of several years, we finally succeeded in securing a denial of the application, but only after extraordinary efforts by dozens of scientific and engineering witnesses whom my clients retained to testify against the proposal, and only after direct intervention by our governor who, at the request of all the local elected officials, stood up to the powerful nuclear industry.
What did the utility experts reveal in court?
With straight faces, the utility scientists testified that there would never be an accident that would exceed the radiation limits in the regulations. On cross-examination, they were forced to admit that during an accident, maximum radiation safety limits are suspended. In other words, during an accident, an unlimited amount of radiation could spew from a plant but the utility could accurately assure the public the emissions did not exceed safety limits.
The utility scientists also testified that no released radiation would be immediately harmful to the residents living in the vicinity of a nuclear plant. On cross-examination, they were forced to admit that few people die immediately from cancer and leukemia; it takes a period of time for these "health effects," as they euphemistically called them, to occur. In other words, the utility could accurately say, as they are doing now in Japan, that there would be no immediate danger to the residents of the area.
The utility scientists further testified that the Jamesport plants would not kill any fish — even though 10 percent of the waters of Long Island Sound would be sucked through an 8-foot (240-cm) diameter pipe each year to cool the nuclear core.
On cross-examination, they were forced to admit that the water would be heated to 32 degrees, thereby killing billions of fish eggs each year, decimating the number of fish that would spawn in the Sound from then on. They defended their statement that no fish would be killed by sheepishly admitting that there would end up being no fish to be killed.
With these shocking revelations, it became clear that the nuclear industry was built upon an elaborate deception of the public and of public officials who were making energy decisions. The nuclear industry simply could not be trusted.
What were the most convincing arguments you made against the plants?
We concentrated on three arguments: Compared to existing alternatives, the reactors were not needed, they were unsafe, and they were too expensive.
First, we had plenty of natural gas available to boil water to turn the turbines to make the electricity. Second, the pumps and piping supplying water to cool the reactor were so huge that metal fatigue would eventually occur and cause a release of radioactivity into an area that could not be safely evacuated since we are on an island. Third, the industry admitted that massive taxpayer subsidies would be needed to operate the plants.
You are also familiar with the decommissioning of another reactor, at Shoreham, New York. How did the decommissioning come about?
Through civil disobedience and political action, residents convinced the governor of New York to initiate a takeover of the utility company, which had brazenly ignored the wishes of elected officials in the region by starting up the reactor. In the end, the utility was put out of business. A state agency took over the reactor, shut it down, and began tearing it down and decommissioning the radioactive parts.
You also worked as a trustee to the Long Island Power Authority during the decommissioning. What did you learn from that experience?
I was appointed to that $1-a-year job by Gov. Mario Cuomo (father of the current governor) to represent the residents of the area. I volunteered over six years to help oversee the dismantling of the Shoreham reactor and install gas turbines at the site. I learned that after 40 years of talk and study by the nuclear industry about how to safely dispose of nuclear waste from these reactors, there is no way of doing it. That is why the nuclear rods are still stored on the roof of reactor buildings.
From what I learned, I believe there never will be a safe way of storing this waste. Just as there will never be a way to prevent a tsunami.
Do you have any thoughts on what citizens in Japan should be doing?
Citizens in the areas around nuclear plants should form a coalition. They should engage law firms to participate in all administrative proceedings that are scheduled to license or extend the life spans of nuclear plants in the country. The lawyers should cross-examine all utility experts under oath. Highly qualified experts should be engaged to testify on behalf of the residents. Local residents and elected officials should be informed every step of the way through the media. Email addresses should be collected. Databases should be created to quickly disseminate information collected at the hearings.
Eventually, with a lot of hard work, the citizens will prevail.
---------------------------------
Stephen Hesse teaches in the Chuo University Law Faculty and is Director of the Chuo International Center. He can be reached at stevehesse@hotmail.com
The Japan Times, 22 May 2011
The nuclear industry in Japan is in need of bailout. Thousands of people cannot return home due to radiation. More nuclear accidents will occur. Where in the world is next? "Nuclear is safe & economical" was bullshit; the costs of nuclear waste & accidents are huge. The public will be forced to pay huge costs.
Here is a great article (link) from the Japan Times:
U.S. court victories show how to get rid of nuclear plants
By STEPHEN HESSE
Lawyer Tom Twomey knows far more than most of us about the importance of citizen participation in making energy policy. That's because Twomey has spent four decades keeping a watchful eye on electric power suppliers in New York — and he's learned that what we don't know can hurt us.
Certainly, what he's learned about the hubris and underhand dealings of the U.S. nuclear power industry offers some valuable lessons for Japan. But the most important thing he says he's come to realize is that the participation of public-interest lawyers and the media is critical to ensure that energy providers prioritize safety. And that applies just as much to Japan as the United States, he insists, even though Japan is a far less litigious society in which citizens shy away from challenging government and big business.
In the following recent interview with The Japan Times, Twomey shares some insights and experiences from his years helping farmers to challenge the U.S. nuclear power industry — and win.
What was the situation you faced in 1974?
In the 1970s, the local utility on Long Island decided that, rather than simply supplying electricity to homeowners and businesses in the area, they would get into the wholesale production of electricity and produce enough power for the entire northeast region of the United States.
Unlike the other coastal areas from Boston to Washington D.C., which are heavily populated, the east end of Long Island is a rural farming area with a relatively small population. It also has easy access to the cooling waters of the Atlantic, since a nuclear plant requires massive amounts of water to keep its reactors from overheating.
The local utility decided to build 19 nuclear reactors there in Jamesport, and it planned to turn our rural area into "A Nuclear Power Park."
As a lawyer, how did you get involved?
I was retained by farmers in the area to find out what the utility was planning. We didn't realize it at the time, but we were beginning the only successful trial of the nuclear industry in America. Prior to these proceedings, virtually all applications in America were given rubberstamp approvals. Thanks to New York State regulations, we were able to intervene in the legal proceedings and — once we were a party to the proceedings — we were able to force the industry to answer questions under oath about the need for and the safety of nuclear power.
In short, what happened?
When the farmers began their battle, local elected officials were initially bemused. But as the legal fight intensified, these officials took more and more interest in the issue. With thorough reporting in three newspapers, the public began to realize that if even a small accident occurred at the reactor, they might have to evacuate their homes permanently. They might forever lose their businesses. They might suffer untold numbers of cancers.
All of a sudden, the truthfulness of the utility executives become a critical issue. And those utility experts had to repeatedly admit under oath that they were exaggerating the safety of the reactor.
After 80 full days of trial over the course of several years, we finally succeeded in securing a denial of the application, but only after extraordinary efforts by dozens of scientific and engineering witnesses whom my clients retained to testify against the proposal, and only after direct intervention by our governor who, at the request of all the local elected officials, stood up to the powerful nuclear industry.
What did the utility experts reveal in court?
With straight faces, the utility scientists testified that there would never be an accident that would exceed the radiation limits in the regulations. On cross-examination, they were forced to admit that during an accident, maximum radiation safety limits are suspended. In other words, during an accident, an unlimited amount of radiation could spew from a plant but the utility could accurately assure the public the emissions did not exceed safety limits.
The utility scientists also testified that no released radiation would be immediately harmful to the residents living in the vicinity of a nuclear plant. On cross-examination, they were forced to admit that few people die immediately from cancer and leukemia; it takes a period of time for these "health effects," as they euphemistically called them, to occur. In other words, the utility could accurately say, as they are doing now in Japan, that there would be no immediate danger to the residents of the area.
The utility scientists further testified that the Jamesport plants would not kill any fish — even though 10 percent of the waters of Long Island Sound would be sucked through an 8-foot (240-cm) diameter pipe each year to cool the nuclear core.
On cross-examination, they were forced to admit that the water would be heated to 32 degrees, thereby killing billions of fish eggs each year, decimating the number of fish that would spawn in the Sound from then on. They defended their statement that no fish would be killed by sheepishly admitting that there would end up being no fish to be killed.
With these shocking revelations, it became clear that the nuclear industry was built upon an elaborate deception of the public and of public officials who were making energy decisions. The nuclear industry simply could not be trusted.
What were the most convincing arguments you made against the plants?
We concentrated on three arguments: Compared to existing alternatives, the reactors were not needed, they were unsafe, and they were too expensive.
First, we had plenty of natural gas available to boil water to turn the turbines to make the electricity. Second, the pumps and piping supplying water to cool the reactor were so huge that metal fatigue would eventually occur and cause a release of radioactivity into an area that could not be safely evacuated since we are on an island. Third, the industry admitted that massive taxpayer subsidies would be needed to operate the plants.
You are also familiar with the decommissioning of another reactor, at Shoreham, New York. How did the decommissioning come about?
Through civil disobedience and political action, residents convinced the governor of New York to initiate a takeover of the utility company, which had brazenly ignored the wishes of elected officials in the region by starting up the reactor. In the end, the utility was put out of business. A state agency took over the reactor, shut it down, and began tearing it down and decommissioning the radioactive parts.
You also worked as a trustee to the Long Island Power Authority during the decommissioning. What did you learn from that experience?
I was appointed to that $1-a-year job by Gov. Mario Cuomo (father of the current governor) to represent the residents of the area. I volunteered over six years to help oversee the dismantling of the Shoreham reactor and install gas turbines at the site. I learned that after 40 years of talk and study by the nuclear industry about how to safely dispose of nuclear waste from these reactors, there is no way of doing it. That is why the nuclear rods are still stored on the roof of reactor buildings.
From what I learned, I believe there never will be a safe way of storing this waste. Just as there will never be a way to prevent a tsunami.
Do you have any thoughts on what citizens in Japan should be doing?
Citizens in the areas around nuclear plants should form a coalition. They should engage law firms to participate in all administrative proceedings that are scheduled to license or extend the life spans of nuclear plants in the country. The lawyers should cross-examine all utility experts under oath. Highly qualified experts should be engaged to testify on behalf of the residents. Local residents and elected officials should be informed every step of the way through the media. Email addresses should be collected. Databases should be created to quickly disseminate information collected at the hearings.
Eventually, with a lot of hard work, the citizens will prevail.
---------------------------------
Stephen Hesse teaches in the Chuo University Law Faculty and is Director of the Chuo International Center. He can be reached at stevehesse@hotmail.com
The Japan Times, 22 May 2011
Saturday, May 21, 2011
Sunny & Warm
The systems of our world progress
Or maybe stop. We vaguely guess.
We know just bits of all around.
And quibble over scraps we've found.
Discovery! We boldly claim.
While nature winks at human fame
By doing what created now.
We know not why, and guess at how.
Our prayers miss wonders, vision faint
We honor angels in bright paint.
Please choose instead of bickering
Rejoicing in an outdoor spring.
Or maybe stop. We vaguely guess.
We know just bits of all around.
And quibble over scraps we've found.
Discovery! We boldly claim.
While nature winks at human fame
By doing what created now.
We know not why, and guess at how.
Our prayers miss wonders, vision faint
We honor angels in bright paint.
Please choose instead of bickering
Rejoicing in an outdoor spring.
Friday, May 20, 2011
Meddler State
Globalism offers a world of opportunity. But as decrepit nation-states lose primacy, they meddle into indefensible areas. If your government is doing monkeybusiness in distant lands when they should be helping you & your community -- Shout 'em out !
Real change requires we stop meddling. Stop costly adventurism overseas. My community needs healing.
Real change requires we stop meddling. Stop costly adventurism overseas. My community needs healing.
Monday, May 16, 2011
Dictating Libya's Future
NATO and Sweden wage war in Libya under the mandate of 10 votes in the United Nation's Security Council. Supposedly protecting civilians by imposing a no-fly zone, they've instead cruelly fought as executioners for regime change.
USA & NATO forces have flown 6000+ air sorties and bombing missions, destroying hundreds of Libyan government installations and killing an unknown number of Libyan military, Libyan government employees, and Libyan civilians (including three baby grandchildren of the leader).
UNSC Resolution 1973 (2011) is a flawed & deceptive mandate. French-led schemers inserted the word "humanitarian" a full dozen times in the short document, while the five abstaining nations warned armed intervention would bring bad consequences.
While a major part of Resolution 1973 (link) addressed the arms embargo, Allied arms dealers / Allied governments now trample the mandate by funneling weapons into Libya for elements fighting their government. Our news media portray the NATO (and Swedish) governments as smugly satisfied with the situation.
I think it is terrible. I believe this is an illegal war, built on deception. We had no proper justification to intervene in Libya's civil strife. We should not be spending our monies and resources in these activities. The warring powers have made our world less safe. By targeting the Libyan government as "enemy" we ourselves become enemy targets.
The program was marketed by warring powers as a "no-fly zone" and it's now clear more explanation should have been demanded. NATO is widely destroying Libyan government buildings, essentially executing anyone in or near them. What do the warring powers want? Do they seek cheaper access to Libyan resources? Is their purpose to divert attention from heavy-handed repression elsewhere? The Allied weaponry on display is mostly available for sale, and destruction fuels their arms bazaar. "Civilian protection" and humanitarianism is a smokescreen. By our not demanding transparency and a legal basis for warmaking, people & governments anywhere can now be threatened with summary destruction. Not good.
USA & NATO forces have flown 6000+ air sorties and bombing missions, destroying hundreds of Libyan government installations and killing an unknown number of Libyan military, Libyan government employees, and Libyan civilians (including three baby grandchildren of the leader).
UNSC Resolution 1973 (2011) is a flawed & deceptive mandate. French-led schemers inserted the word "humanitarian" a full dozen times in the short document, while the five abstaining nations warned armed intervention would bring bad consequences.
While a major part of Resolution 1973 (link) addressed the arms embargo, Allied arms dealers / Allied governments now trample the mandate by funneling weapons into Libya for elements fighting their government. Our news media portray the NATO (and Swedish) governments as smugly satisfied with the situation.
I think it is terrible. I believe this is an illegal war, built on deception. We had no proper justification to intervene in Libya's civil strife. We should not be spending our monies and resources in these activities. The warring powers have made our world less safe. By targeting the Libyan government as "enemy" we ourselves become enemy targets.
The program was marketed by warring powers as a "no-fly zone" and it's now clear more explanation should have been demanded. NATO is widely destroying Libyan government buildings, essentially executing anyone in or near them. What do the warring powers want? Do they seek cheaper access to Libyan resources? Is their purpose to divert attention from heavy-handed repression elsewhere? The Allied weaponry on display is mostly available for sale, and destruction fuels their arms bazaar. "Civilian protection" and humanitarianism is a smokescreen. By our not demanding transparency and a legal basis for warmaking, people & governments anywhere can now be threatened with summary destruction. Not good.
Friday, May 13, 2011
Nuclear? Not to Worry...
We keep your house. You go back... later.
500 years -- maybe.
This child needs treatment.
Return in 2030.
For compensation, window 9
Look carefully at the nuclear meltdown tragedy in Japan. The power company (TEPCO) has insufficient resources to clean-up & compensate. The public is forced to pay, although claw-back of past TEPCO dividends would help.
Nuclear disaster is hugely expensive. Worst-case cost figures are hidden by the industry. Proper long-term nuclear waste disposal must be foolproof (so sorry - it isn't). Failure means huge regions may not survive or reproduce.
The nuclear industry should be off-limits to flim-flam marketers, due to hidden horrible threats to health & property. Your local power company assures you all is safe. Sure.
500 years -- maybe.
Return in 2030.
For compensation, window 9
Look carefully at the nuclear meltdown tragedy in Japan. The power company (TEPCO) has insufficient resources to clean-up & compensate. The public is forced to pay, although claw-back of past TEPCO dividends would help.
Nuclear disaster is hugely expensive. Worst-case cost figures are hidden by the industry. Proper long-term nuclear waste disposal must be foolproof (so sorry - it isn't). Failure means huge regions may not survive or reproduce.
The nuclear industry should be off-limits to flim-flam marketers, due to hidden horrible threats to health & property. Your local power company assures you all is safe. Sure.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Saturday, May 07, 2011
Ill & Far-Away
Tough to be ill in a foreign land. Sweating, high fever, delirium.
I hope it's unrelated to the lady wearing a Bulgarian Tourist Board jacket who passed on the street the first day and poked me with her umbrella; strange - with no hint of rain...
I hope it's unrelated to the lady wearing a Bulgarian Tourist Board jacket who passed on the street the first day and poked me with her umbrella; strange - with no hint of rain...
Monday, May 02, 2011
Killing Enemy Families
The world may be safer with the killing of Osama bin Laden. But one step forward, two steps back. A few hours before Bin Laden was killed by US forces in Pakistan, a US forces airstrike in Tripoli killed a son and three grandchildren of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. We might rationalize summary justice for bin Laden, who chose his own dangerous path. But it's surely no good butchering families & young children when dispensing our punishments.
Gaddafi's dead son, age 29, was reportedly injured at age 4 in 1986 in a similar American bombing that killed his infant adopted sister. This Saturday evening's bombing killed his 5 month old baby, and 2-year old twins. No allegations yet claim these little kids violated our "no fly zone" before being slain.
In 2003, American forces killed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's 14-year-old grandson, Mustafa, with his father & uncle.
Osama bin Laden was not killed for being insane, though our political leaders speak vaguely of his evil terror. He fought for a cause, believing in a duty to battle Soviet, American & Zionist infidels. His own attacks grew from witnessing heavy-handed military operations by his enemies. I don't agree with his analysis or his methods; few people do. But allowing summary killing outside the legal system is problematic. And we all must question when it's OK we kill children. Our violence generates more violence. We must not abandon legal oversight and courtroom justice. Killing kids is surely bad policy & simply wrong.
Saturday, April 30, 2011
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Emergency Managers
The Governor of Michigan has begun ruling via Emergency Managers. Many taxpayers and citizens will cheer efforts to "break through the logjam of politics" and appoint emergency financial managers to administer local government. Turnaround management of gutted economies sounds great, but the process is short sighted, anti-democratic, dangerous & wrong. Most such places can never become competitive through government directive or extensive privatization; the procedure is a corporate raid, stripping away liens & assets. Free citizens become subject peoples. Never accept or trust such dictatorial bureaucrats. Hopefully it can't long continue...
Me Me as Meme
Where's this place?
From a biting article (link) full of clever phrases, a few excerpts:
+ "aggressive superficiality"
+ "Viagra Capitalism"
+ "proto-fascist"
+ a thinning empire ruled by "two wings of The Money Party"
+ "disparity between facade & content"
+ a "corporate order of Botox Politics"
"Republican Party strategists game the ... bigots of their political base by raising the fearsome specters of child-recruiting gay pedophiles, in alliance with Islamic Caliphate plotters, all of whom, at the behest of dirty hippie socialists, have designs to redistribute their lawn furniture, outdoor grilling equipment, and pool toys to dark and dusky sorts."
Phil Rockstroh writes of a land where Donald Trump gives national problems the comb-over treatment.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
No Fly ==> Combat
We's been hoodwinked again. "No-Fly" was an excuse for combat. Big military nations now wage war in Libya. A remit to protect civilians has been twisted to uncivil intervention. Euro-American conquest in Africa again.
A "No Lie Zone" would greatly change our leadership...
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Japan's Nuclear Disaster Secrets?
Many Japanese people are suffering greatly -- from the unknown... They've learned from past experience not to trust the authorities. Corner cutting, rubber-stamp inspections, shabby attempts to hide "dirt" & error, Japanese nuclear industry mismanagement stems in part from poor checks & balances.
Government / corporate efforts fail to reassure the population. Nuclear safety fears are substantial & genuine.
Some people in Japan look back at the Chisso-Minamata mercury poisoning disaster, when the cause & extent of Chisso's pollution were revealed only after decades of misinformation. "Compensation" for destroyed health & loss of life has been slow.
Corporations often respond poorly to accidents. Union Carbide's Bhopal (India) disaster killed many thousands of people in 1984; legal actions still continue. Key officials (such as Union Carbide Chairman & CEO Warren Anderson) refused to appear in court. Justice becomes more difficult to determine. Deception, spin, legal claptrap, smoke & mirrors -- tough for common folk...
The British remember similar episodes of broken trust. UK Agriculture Minister John Gummer tried to reassure a public scared by BSE vCJD. He claimed beef was "perfectly safe" and in front of the press tried feeding a beefburger to his four-year old daughter Cordelia (she refused to eat it).
Individuals cannot be well informed in the face of official misinformation. We need more Japanese press adversarialism in this critical area. So certainly people are afraid. They worry about being tricked, and truth coming out too late.
We're deceived repeatedly. As Pres. George W. Bush said persuasively in his first term: "Fool me once..." uhhh... mmmm Quickly fooled again.
Government / corporate efforts fail to reassure the population. Nuclear safety fears are substantial & genuine.
Some people in Japan look back at the Chisso-Minamata mercury poisoning disaster, when the cause & extent of Chisso's pollution were revealed only after decades of misinformation. "Compensation" for destroyed health & loss of life has been slow.
Corporations often respond poorly to accidents. Union Carbide's Bhopal (India) disaster killed many thousands of people in 1984; legal actions still continue. Key officials (such as Union Carbide Chairman & CEO Warren Anderson) refused to appear in court. Justice becomes more difficult to determine. Deception, spin, legal claptrap, smoke & mirrors -- tough for common folk...
The British remember similar episodes of broken trust. UK Agriculture Minister John Gummer tried to reassure a public scared by BSE vCJD. He claimed beef was "perfectly safe" and in front of the press tried feeding a beefburger to his four-year old daughter Cordelia (she refused to eat it).
We're deceived repeatedly. As Pres. George W. Bush said persuasively in his first term: "Fool me once..." uhhh... mmmm Quickly fooled again.
Leaky Leaders - Same Script
Chilean dictator General Pinochet also plead that health problems prevented his assisting justice investigations (for 6+ years).
Truth & justice are important -- more than the comfort or survival of former public servants.
Saturday, April 09, 2011
Rah Rah Robbery
Rah rah rip-off.
The USA is waging war in Afghanistan (& Pakistan), the Middle East (Iraq), and in Libya (North Africa).
The people of the USA cannot afford these wars. The USA as a Warfare State cripples home communities. Americans are cheating ourselves.
Our world-encircling military bases network is now horribly toxic. Most host nation people want us gone. Warfare sucks. And we do it Industrial-scale.
What greatly surprises me is the collective amnesia of people age 50 & over, who were thumped with the dark specter of dangerous Vee Yet Nam (rhyming w/ ham and spam). Millions of lives were damaged & destroyed by the U.S. war machine (subordinate allies share blame). Those who waged horrible war escaped being tried & convicted of their crimes. The world should look back at that darkness with horror & dismay; the war's planners should be despised worldwide. But there was no accountability. Too many Americans (if they look back at all) simply think:
Oops
The USA is waging war in Afghanistan (& Pakistan), the Middle East (Iraq), and in Libya (North Africa).
The people of the USA cannot afford these wars. The USA as a Warfare State cripples home communities. Americans are cheating ourselves.
Our world-encircling military bases network is now horribly toxic. Most host nation people want us gone. Warfare sucks. And we do it Industrial-scale.
What greatly surprises me is the collective amnesia of people age 50 & over, who were thumped with the dark specter of dangerous Vee Yet Nam (rhyming w/ ham and spam). Millions of lives were damaged & destroyed by the U.S. war machine (subordinate allies share blame). Those who waged horrible war escaped being tried & convicted of their crimes. The world should look back at that darkness with horror & dismay; the war's planners should be despised worldwide. But there was no accountability. Too many Americans (if they look back at all) simply think:
Oops
Wednesday, April 06, 2011
Baruch Blumberg, RIP
The world lost a great person with the death yesterday of Dr. Barry Blumberg, scientist & inquiring mind.
We met in 1991, as I entered Balliol College at Oxford. We freshers were first addressed by the Dean & Archivist, and offered majestic but harsh advice on disciplinary matters (aimed at the undergrads? -- the "-plinary" of disciplinary rhymed with "winery"). Next the Master of the College came to the podium and surprised me with an American accent, and a warm & friendly greeting. I soon learned that our Master was Nobel prizewinner Baruch Samuel Blumberg, born in Brooklyn (USA), educated at Balliol, a pioneer researcher on Hepatitis B whose vaccine saved millions of lives.
I got to know the Master via many small seminars he held during my years of residence at Oxford. The day-long themes were often outside my expertise, so I'd bring reference texts to study during deliberations (topics ranged from economics & public policy to philosophy, creativity, science & international relations). The Master often sat by me, dipping into my books and articles. I was most impressed with his boldly open mind. He had no pretense or arrogant airs. He was a model of accomplishment. He'll be sorely missed by many.
Saturday, April 02, 2011
Blowback Analysis
Hype & marketing permeate modern daily life.
In public affairs & government, assorted interests argue for their views: best-case examples buttress their position, potential costs are minimized.
Use of military force (whether called "war" or "keeping the peace") is serious & potentially deadly. Decisionmaking processes should be methodical, not driven by hype & spin. Deployment decisions should include blowback analysis.
What potential worst-case scenarios can be linked to assorted options? What are the costs to doing nothing? Can we protect against counteroffensive, and at what cost?
Paths of action & inaction can each be costly - are we prepared to pay the expected price? Blowback analysis is essential. We should not be caught flatfooted, claiming surprise in the midst of failure.
"I don't think anybody could have predicted..."
-- US National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice (on enemies using hijacked airplanes as missiles); 16 May 2002
1994:
Bestselling novel "Debt of Honor" by Tom Clancy depicts a revenge-seeking pilot using a commercial Boeing 747 airliner to destroy the U.S. Capitol Building, killing the U.S. President and most of the nation's leadership.
1999 (two years before Sept. 11 2001 attacks):
"Sociology & Psychology of Terrorism" (link) -- U.S. Government 1999 report which discussed expected "spectacular" al-Qaida airplane strikes against U.S. targets.
March 2001
Nationally broadcast fictional Fox TV show "The Lone Gunmen" portrays the attempted crashing of a hijacked airliner into New York's World Trade Center.
In public affairs & government, assorted interests argue for their views: best-case examples buttress their position, potential costs are minimized.
Use of military force (whether called "war" or "keeping the peace") is serious & potentially deadly. Decisionmaking processes should be methodical, not driven by hype & spin. Deployment decisions should include blowback analysis.
What potential worst-case scenarios can be linked to assorted options? What are the costs to doing nothing? Can we protect against counteroffensive, and at what cost?
Paths of action & inaction can each be costly - are we prepared to pay the expected price? Blowback analysis is essential. We should not be caught flatfooted, claiming surprise in the midst of failure.
"I don't think anybody could have predicted..."
-- US National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice (on enemies using hijacked airplanes as missiles); 16 May 2002
1994:
Bestselling novel "Debt of Honor" by Tom Clancy depicts a revenge-seeking pilot using a commercial Boeing 747 airliner to destroy the U.S. Capitol Building, killing the U.S. President and most of the nation's leadership.
1999 (two years before Sept. 11 2001 attacks):
"Sociology & Psychology of Terrorism" (link) -- U.S. Government 1999 report which discussed expected "spectacular" al-Qaida airplane strikes against U.S. targets.
March 2001
Nationally broadcast fictional Fox TV show "The Lone Gunmen" portrays the attempted crashing of a hijacked airliner into New York's World Trade Center.
Friday, April 01, 2011
The Swedish Poodle Goes to War
In Stockholm today, our Swedish Riksdag debates collaborating in Libya's war. The intervention plans are costly & wrong.
Colonial powers have already discarded the rationale of protecting civilians through a "no fly zone" -- mission creep has morphed operations toward arming militant factions, regime change, erosion of sovereignty, and imposing imperialist controls making Libya a colony again.
Intervention can quickly bite us in the ass -- why create dangerous enemies? Where's analysis of potential blowback? Such costs must be considered. We don't fight for Libyan freedom or dignity. Rather, we want part of the looting, and our Swedish arms exporters are itching to show-off their weaponry...
We obey the USA like a pet.
Give a sweet goodie to Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt.
Such a well-trained little fellow!
Foreign Minister Carl Bildt is on display too!
Colonial powers have already discarded the rationale of protecting civilians through a "no fly zone" -- mission creep has morphed operations toward arming militant factions, regime change, erosion of sovereignty, and imposing imperialist controls making Libya a colony again.
Intervention can quickly bite us in the ass -- why create dangerous enemies? Where's analysis of potential blowback? Such costs must be considered. We don't fight for Libyan freedom or dignity. Rather, we want part of the looting, and our Swedish arms exporters are itching to show-off their weaponry...
We obey the USA like a pet.
Give a sweet goodie to Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt.
Such a well-trained little fellow!
Foreign Minister Carl Bildt is on display too!
"Luck of the Irish" = Bad Luck
Ireland needs more bailout funding. Why? Because their growth over the last 15 years was built on a "lowest taxes" model and non-sustainable.
Ireland sought to attract business investment & clever individuals by undercutting competitors. Ireland's corporate tax rate is 12.5% (compared with 28% in the UK, 35%+ in the USA, 26% in Sweden). They reportedly (link) were also highly forgiving with corporate "administrative expense" allowances. The Irish boom drained resources from elsewhere, and they hoped to generate enough new value-added synergies to operate at low cost. They failed.
Now they're saddled with thousands of deteriorating development projects. Indebtedness forces Dublin to beg competitors for assistance. Pity the Irish...?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
