 |
| Civil Engineer | Electrical Engineer | Manufactur Engineer | Mechanical Engineer | Architecture Engineer | Chemical Engineer | Computer Engineer | Environmental Engineer | Geological Engineer |
Water Resources Analyst Career Training GuideOur job is to help you find the answers and directions you need to ensure you are in full control of your water resources analyst career, we provide you with career training and job hunting skills for your current and future water resources analyst career development. Contact us for more information about water resources analyst career training, degrees, courses, examination, certification, schools, salary and job opportunities. Question: Does this guy's arguments hold any water? I am Dr. XXX, an Anesthesiologist practicing in North County. In a previous life I worked under Surgeon General C. Everett Koop in the Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (ODPHP) as a health risk analyst. I am also a member of the World Wildlife Federation and the Sierra Club. We have a friend in common in XXX, so you can verify with him who I am.
I have been following CARB's effort to force owners of commercial diesel vehicles to retro-fit these vehicles with incredibly expensive "smog" equipment, and after reviewing the studies that Ms. Nichols uses to say these measures will save lives ( written by a CARB staffer with a bogus Phd), I am appalled at the shoddy science. These rules will not effect me, nor am I a paid hack for some special interest group. I am a Physician Scientist that is also an automotive enthusiast, so I believe I have a valuable and unique insight on this situation. I applaud CARB for it's pushing of Manufacturers to produce better vehicles. The cars of the past 3 years are dramatically better than anything from the 70's and 80's, and CARB mandates are a big part of that improvement. But this switch to penalizing end users of already CARB certified vehicles, which will knowingly cost people their jobs, is draconian at best, especially when the expected benefit is non existent and the human toll is very real.
Please consider running my response to Ms. Nichols editorial piece of 11/05.
CARB's 3% Solution
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is pushing through Diesel emission regulations which will force California taxpayers and small businesses to pay billions of dollars to hopefully remove 3% of the dust in California's air. The other 97% of this dust, called PM 2.5 ( particulate matter 2.5 micron), will still be with us even after this massive expenditure on pre-2007 Heavy Duty diesel vehicles. Board member's, such as own Supervisor Ron Roberts, relied upon a report to justify this expenditure that was written by a CARB staffer that lied about having his Phd. "Dr." Tran's report relied upon outdated studies of railway workers from the 1950's, and completely ignored current EPA studies which clearly show NO correlation to premature death and diesel emission PM 2.5 exposure in California- none whatsoever. I can only conclude that "Dr." Tran told CARB what they wanted to hear to get his job, then wrote a report he thought they wanted to see to keep his job. But in his defense, ignoring EPA studies does seem to be part of the culture among the permanently appointed CARB Science Review Panel. These folks are supposed to be rotated out and have new appointees every 3 years, but it is the same folks for the past 20 years.
Ms. Nichol's rightfully pointed to CARB's expert hand in forcing manufacturers to push forward better engine technology since the 1970's, when she was first Chair. Creating ever cleaner future emission standards for manufacturers to meet became the model for the rest of the world. Manufacturers responded by paying the "upfront costs" and we now have much better vehicles today. But CARB's new tactic, of retro-actively creating tougher emission standards for vehicles already in use makes end users responsible for finding the "best available certified technology" to meet these standards. Many vehicles have no retro-fit kits available, and the " up front cost" of retro-fits are ridiculously expensive. The retro-fits actually increase the amount of diesel used to get the same work done. How is that helping global warming? Where is the "better energy efficiency" in that? Is this what the NRDC and the Sierra Club really want?
The cost of these regulations are already being born by the California Taxpayer in several ways. For several years State bonds from Prop 1B have been for sale to raise money for school districts to retrofit buses. ARB "allocated" $192 million of these funds to districts to pay for the costs, but only $17 million has actually been paid out, because no one is willing to buy our State's Bonds.. (http://www.arb.ca.gov/bonds/gmbond/docs/2009_05_20_external_prop_1b_funds_distribution.pdf)
Small business fleet owners are as strapped for cash as the State, so many will be forced to move out of California or just close up for good, because they cannot afford these retro-fits, and the credit market is non existent for this non productive expenditure. There is obviously no money for Ms. Nichol's 3% solution, but she wants it anyways.
"Dr." Tran's report is absent analysis of the health impacts of the certain job losses these regulations will bring. HIgher morbidity and mortality rates among the jobless and their families is an outcome that is documented daily in the Emergency Rooms across our State- which are already overrun with uninsured, unemployed Californians. Taxpayers will end up footing those bills as well, to say nothing of the human toll. If the point of the regulation is to improve the health of Californians,
Remember this is all part of California's insatiable appetite on AGW. The bottom line, these vehicles as equiped will use much more fuel negating the benefits of the laws purpose. Is everybody going mad on this issue?
Question: Why does the UN and G8 allow Israel to commit Genocide? The Israelis and most of our media are lying as usual.
But here's the truth people :)
"basically the current stage of what's going on -- there's a lot more -- begins with the Hamas election, back the end of January. Israel and the United States at once announced that they were going to punish the people of Palestine for voting the wrong way in a free election. And the punishment has been severe.
At the same time, it's partly in Gaza, and sort of hidden in a way, but even more extreme in the West Bank, where Olmert announced his annexation program, what’s euphemistically called “convergence” and described here often as a “withdrawal,” but in fact it’s a formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, most of the resources, including water, of the West Bank and cantonizing the rest and imprisoning it, since he also announced that Israel would take over the Jordan Valley. Well, that proceeds without extreme violence or nothing much said about it.
Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don't know their names. You don’t know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. Militants in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That’s Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that's well known; first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don’t have to repeat. It’s reported on adequately.
The next stage was Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers, they say on the border. Their official reason for this is that they are aiming for prisoner release. There are a few, nobody knows how many. Officially, there are three Lebanese prisoners in Israel. There's allegedly a couple hundred people missing. Who knows where they are?
But the real reason, I think it's generally agreed by analysts, is that -- I’ll read from the Financial Times, which happens to be right in front of me. “The timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously.” David Hearst, who knows this area well, describes it, I think this morning, as a display of solidarity with suffering people, the clinching impulse."
Professor Noam Chomsky(Jewish) - Democracy now! interview 7/14/06
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/14/146258
Bittorrent download -
http://www.chomskytorrents.org/DownloadTorrent.php?TorrentID=1531
When the American people stop their government from sending a total of $90 Billion of their taxes to Israel to support their barbaric acts then the fighting will stop.
http://www.vestedowl.com/counterpoint_results.htm
And also when the American people stop their governments from vetoing any chance of a peaceful settlement, then maybe there will be an agreement.
http://www.action-for-un-renewal.org.uk/pages/isreal_un_resolutions.htm
Question: Why is Israel incapable of telling the truth? The Israelis and most of our media are lying as usual.
But here's the truth people :)
"basically the current stage of what's going on -- there's a lot more -- begins with the Hamas election, back the end of January. Israel and the United States at once announced that they were going to punish the people of Palestine for voting the wrong way in a free election. And the punishment has been severe.
At the same time, it's partly in Gaza, and sort of hidden in a way, but even more extreme in the West Bank, where Olmert announced his annexation program, what’s euphemistically called “convergence” and described here often as a “withdrawal,” but in fact it’s a formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, most of the resources, including water, of the West Bank and cantonizing the rest and imprisoning it, since he also announced that Israel would take over the Jordan Valley. Well, that proceeds without extreme violence or nothing much said about it.
Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don't know their names. You don’t know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. Militants in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That’s Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that's well known; first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don’t have to repeat. It’s reported on adequately.
The next stage was Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers, they say on the border. Their official reason for this is that they are aiming for prisoner release. There are a few, nobody knows how many. Officially, there are three Lebanese prisoners in Israel. There's allegedly a couple hundred people missing. Who knows where they are?
But the real reason, I think it's generally agreed by analysts, is that -- I’ll read from the Financial Times, which happens to be right in front of me. “The timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously.” David Hearst, who knows this area well, describes it, I think this morning, as a display of solidarity with suffering people, the clinching impulse."
Professor Noam Chomsky(Jewish) - Democracy now! interview 7/14/06
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/14/146258
Bittorrent download -
http://www.chomskytorrents.org/DownloadTorrent.php?TorrentID=1531
When the American people stop their government from sending a total of $90 Billion of their taxes to Israel to support their barbaric acts then the fighting will stop.
http://www.vestedowl.com/counterpoint_results.htm
And also when the American people stop their governments from vetoing any chance of a peaceful settlement, then maybe there will be an agreement.
The American, and British role:-
http://www.action-for-un-renewal.org.uk/pages/isreal_un_resolutions.htm
Hateful/insulting answers merely illustrate how extreme you have become ;)
Question: Why were we never told about the kidnappings by Israel? "basically the current stage of what's going on -- there's a lot more -- begins with the Hamas election, back the end of January. Israel and the United States at once announced that they were going to punish the people of Palestine for voting the wrong way in a free election. And the punishment has been severe.
At the same time, it's partly in Gaza, and sort of hidden in a way, but even more extreme in the West Bank, where Olmert announced his annexation program, what’s euphemistically called “convergence” and described here often as a “withdrawal,” but in fact it’s a formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, most of the resources, including water, of the West Bank and cantonizing the rest and imprisoning it, since he also announced that Israel would take over the Jordan Valley. Well, that proceeds without extreme violence or nothing much said about it.
Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don't know their names. You don’t know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. Militants in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That’s Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that's well known; first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don’t have to repeat. It’s reported on adequately.
The next stage was Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers, they say on the border. Their official reason for this is that they are aiming for prisoner release. There are a few, nobody knows how many. Officially, there are three Lebanese prisoners in Israel. There's allegedly a couple hundred people missing. Who knows where they are?
But the real reason, I think it's generally agreed by analysts, is that -- I’ll read from the Financial Times, which happens to be right in front of me. “The timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously.” David Hearst, who knows this area well, describes it, I think this morning, as a display of solidarity with suffering people, the clinching impulse."
Professor Noam Chomsky(Jewish) - Democracy now! interview 7/14/06
http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=20060714103454851
Bittorrent download -
http://www.chomskytorrents.org/DownloadTorrent.php?TorrentID=1531
Question: Do you know how the fighting began? "basically the current stage of what's going on -- there's a lot more -- begins with the Hamas election, back the end of January. Israel and the United States at once announced that they were going to punish the people of Palestine for voting the wrong way in a free election. And the punishment has been severe.
At the same time, it's partly in Gaza, and sort of hidden in a way, but even more extreme in the West Bank, where Olmert announced his annexation program, what’s euphemistically called “convergence” and described here often as a “withdrawal,” but in fact it’s a formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, most of the resources, including water, of the West Bank and cantonizing the rest and imprisoning it, since he also announced that Israel would take over the Jordan Valley. Well, that proceeds without extreme violence or nothing much said about it.
Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don't know their names. You don’t know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. Militants in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That’s Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that's well known; first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don’t have to repeat. It’s reported on adequately.
The next stage was Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers, they say on the border. Their official reason for this is that they are aiming for prisoner release. There are a few, nobody knows how many. Officially, there are three Lebanese prisoners in Israel. There's allegedly a couple hundred people missing. Who knows where they are?
But the real reason, I think it's generally agreed by analysts, is that -- I’ll read from the Financial Times, which happens to be right in front of me. “The timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously.” David Hearst, who knows this area well, describes it, I think this morning, as a display of solidarity with suffering people, the clinching impulse.
It's a very -- mind you -- very irresponsible act. It subjects Lebanese to possible -- certainly to plenty of terror and possible extreme disaster. Whether it can achieve any result, either in the secondary question of freeing prisoners or the primary question of some form of solidarity with the people of Gaza, I hope so, but I wouldn't rank the probabilities very high."
Noam chomsky - Democracy now interview 7/14/06
http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=20060714103454851
Question: Why does Israel think it will get away with lying to us? Here's the truth people :)
"basically the current stage of what's going on -- there's a lot more -- begins with the Hamas election, back the end of January. Israel and the United States at once announced that they were going to punish the people of Palestine for voting the wrong way in a free election. And the punishment has been severe.
At the same time, it's partly in Gaza, and sort of hidden in a way, but even more extreme in the West Bank, where Olmert announced his annexation program, what’s euphemistically called “convergence” and described here often as a “withdrawal,” but in fact it’s a formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, most of the resources, including water, of the West Bank and cantonizing the rest and imprisoning it, since he also announced that Israel would take over the Jordan Valley. Well, that proceeds without extreme violence or nothing much said about it.
Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don't know their names. You don’t know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. Militants in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That’s Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that's well known; first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don’t have to repeat. It’s reported on adequately.
The next stage was Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers, they say on the border. Their official reason for this is that they are aiming for prisoner release. There are a few, nobody knows how many. Officially, there are three Lebanese prisoners in Israel. There's allegedly a couple hundred people missing. Who knows where they are?
But the real reason, I think it's generally agreed by analysts, is that -- I’ll read from the Financial Times, which happens to be right in front of me. “The timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously.” David Hearst, who knows this area well, describes it, I think this morning, as a display of solidarity with suffering people, the clinching impulse."
Professor Noam Chomsky(Jewish) - Democracy now! interview 7/14/06
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/14/146258
Bittorrent download -
http://www.chomskytorrents.org/DownloadTorrent.php?TorrentID=1531
When the American people stop their government from sending a total of $90 Billion of their taxes to Israel to support their barbaric acts then the fighting will stop.
http://www.vestedowl.com/counterpoint_results.htm
And also when the American people stop their governments from vetoing any chance of a peaceful settlement, then maybe there will be an agreement.
http://www.action-for-un-renewal.org.uk/pages/isreal_un_resolutions.htm
Irrational, and often hateful responces merely illustrate how extreme you are :)
Question: Why does Israel think no-one will see through their lies? Don't beleive the propaganda we are subjected to.
This is how the current conflict came about:-
"basically the current stage of what's going on -- there's a lot more -- begins with the Hamas election, back the end of January. Israel and the United States at once announced that they were going to punish the people of Palestine for voting the wrong way in a free election. And the punishment has been severe.
At the same time, it's partly in Gaza, and sort of hidden in a way, but even more extreme in the West Bank, where Olmert announced his annexation program, what’s euphemistically called “convergence” and described here often as a “withdrawal,” but in fact it’s a formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, most of the resources, including water, of the West Bank and cantonizing the rest and imprisoning it, since he also announced that Israel would take over the Jordan Valley. Well, that proceeds without extreme violence or nothing much said about it.
Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don't know their names. You don’t know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. Militants in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That’s Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that's well known; first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don’t have to repeat. It’s reported on adequately.
The next stage was Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers, they say on the border. Their official reason for this is that they are aiming for prisoner release. There are a few, nobody knows how many. Officially, there are three Lebanese prisoners in Israel. There's allegedly a couple hundred people missing. Who knows where they are?
But the real reason, I think it's generally agreed by analysts, is that -- I’ll read from the Financial Times, which happens to be right in front of me. “The timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously.” David Hearst, who knows this area well, describes it, I think this morning, as a display of solidarity with suffering people, the clinching impulse."
Professor Noam Chomsky(Jewish) - Democracy now! interview 7/14/06
http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=20060714103454851
Bittorrent download -
http://www.chomskytorrents.org/DownloadTorrent.php?TorrentID=1531
Question: Do the Israelis take us for fools? The Israelis and most of our media are lying as usual.
But here's the truth people :)
"basically the current stage of what's going on -- there's a lot more -- begins with the Hamas election, back the end of January. Israel and the United States at once announced that they were going to punish the people of Palestine for voting the wrong way in a free election. And the punishment has been severe.
At the same time, it's partly in Gaza, and sort of hidden in a way, but even more extreme in the West Bank, where Olmert announced his annexation program, what’s euphemistically called “convergence” and described here often as a “withdrawal,” but in fact it’s a formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, most of the resources, including water, of the West Bank and cantonizing the rest and imprisoning it, since he also announced that Israel would take over the Jordan Valley. Well, that proceeds without extreme violence or nothing much said about it.
Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don't know their names. You don’t know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. Militants in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That’s Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that's well known; first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don’t have to repeat. It’s reported on adequately.
The next stage was Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers, they say on the border. Their official reason for this is that they are aiming for prisoner release. There are a few, nobody knows how many. Officially, there are three Lebanese prisoners in Israel. There's allegedly a couple hundred people missing. Who knows where they are?
But the real reason, I think it's generally agreed by analysts, is that -- I’ll read from the Financial Times, which happens to be right in front of me. “The timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously.” David Hearst, who knows this area well, describes it, I think this morning, as a display of solidarity with suffering people, the clinching impulse."
Professor Noam Chomsky(Jewish) - Democracy now! interview 7/14/06
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/14/146258
Bittorrent download -
http://www.chomskytorrents.org/DownloadTorrent.php?TorrentID=1531
When the American people stop their government from sending a total of $90 Billion of their taxes to Israel to support their barbaric acts then the fighting will stop.
http://www.vestedowl.com/counterpoint_results.htm
And also when the American people stop their governments from vetoing any chance of a peaceful settlement, then maybe there will be an agreement.
http://www.action-for-un-renewal.org.uk/pages/isreal_un_resolutions.htm
Any extremeists out here, feel free to call me a fool ;)
Question: Why does Israel tell us lies? The Israelis and most of our media are lying as usual.
But here's the truth people :)
"basically the current stage of what's going on -- there's a lot more -- begins with the Hamas election, back the end of January. Israel and the United States at once announced that they were going to punish the people of Palestine for voting the wrong way in a free election. And the punishment has been severe.
At the same time, it's partly in Gaza, and sort of hidden in a way, but even more extreme in the West Bank, where Olmert announced his annexation program, what’s euphemistically called “convergence” and described here often as a “withdrawal,” but in fact it’s a formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, most of the resources, including water, of the West Bank and cantonizing the rest and imprisoning it, since he also announced that Israel would take over the Jordan Valley. Well, that proceeds without extreme violence or nothing much said about it.
Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don't know their names. You don’t know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. Militants in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That’s Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that's well known; first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don’t have to repeat. It’s reported on adequately.
The next stage was Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers, they say on the border. Their official reason for this is that they are aiming for prisoner release. There are a few, nobody knows how many. Officially, there are three Lebanese prisoners in Israel. There's allegedly a couple hundred people missing. Who knows where they are?
But the real reason, I think it's generally agreed by analysts, is that -- I’ll read from the Financial Times, which happens to be right in front of me. “The timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously.” David Hearst, who knows this area well, describes it, I think this morning, as a display of solidarity with suffering people, the clinching impulse."
Professor Noam Chomsky(Jewish) - Democracy now! interview 7/14/06
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/14/146258
Bittorrent download -
http://www.chomskytorrents.org/DownloadTorrent.php?TorrentID=1531
When the American people stop their government from sending a total of $90 Billion of their taxes to Israel to support their barbaric acts then the fighting will stop.
http://www.vestedowl.com/counterpoint_results.htm
And also when the American people stop their governments from vetoing any chance of a peaceful settlement, then maybe there will be an agreement.
http://www.action-for-un-renewal.org.uk/pages/isreal_un_resolutions.htm
Question: Did the Israelis think their lies would go unnoticed? The Israelis and most of our media are lying as usual.
But here's the truth people :)
"basically the current stage of what's going on -- there's a lot more -- begins with the Hamas election, back the end of January. Israel and the United States at once announced that they were going to punish the people of Palestine for voting the wrong way in a free election. And the punishment has been severe.
At the same time, it's partly in Gaza, and sort of hidden in a way, but even more extreme in the West Bank, where Olmert announced his annexation program, what’s euphemistically called “convergence” and described here often as a “withdrawal,” but in fact it’s a formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, most of the resources, including water, of the West Bank and cantonizing the rest and imprisoning it, since he also announced that Israel would take over the Jordan Valley. Well, that proceeds without extreme violence or nothing much said about it.
Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don't know their names. You don’t know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. Militants in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That’s Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that's well known; first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don’t have to repeat. It’s reported on adequately.
The next stage was Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers, they say on the border. Their official reason for this is that they are aiming for prisoner release. There are a few, nobody knows how many. Officially, there are three Lebanese prisoners in Israel. There's allegedly a couple hundred people missing. Who knows where they are?
But the real reason, I think it's generally agreed by analysts, is that -- I’ll read from the Financial Times, which happens to be right in front of me. “The timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously.” David Hearst, who knows this area well, describes it, I think this morning, as a display of solidarity with suffering people, the clinching impulse."
Professor Noam Chomsky(Jewish) - Democracy now! interview 7/14/06
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/14/146258
Bittorrent download -
http://www.chomskytorrents.org/DownloadTorrent.php?TorrentID=1531
When the American people stop their government from sending a total of $90 Billion of their taxes to Israel to support their barbaric acts then the fighting will stop.
http://www.vestedowl.com/counterpoint_results.htm
And also when the American people stop their governments from vetoing any chance of a peaceful settlement, then maybe there will be an agreement.
http://www.action-for-un-renewal.org.uk/pages/isreal_un_resolutions.htm
Question: Should Obama repeal Ethanol Fuel laws and tariffs? Environmentalists promoted biofuels in the 1990s as a "green energy" alternative to oil and the agricultural lobby pushed hard for legislation to promote it. Recently, with strong government backing, production and use has increased many-fold. The biofuel boom is now removing crops and cropland from the food system and bidding up food prices dramatically.
In 2007, producers converted an estimated 80 million tons of grain into biofuels, including a quarter of the US corn crop. In 2008, grain for biofuels will pass the 100 million tons mark. Since less than a quarter ton of grain feeds one person for a year, biofuel production in 2008 will, in effect, remove the food for four hundred million people from the marketplace. Biofuel apologists argue that humans do not eat the corn used for ethanol production. But such arguments are misleading. The corn is used for many food purposes, especially feeding animals that people eat. And its cultivation displaces wheat and other important food crops.
Not all biofuels are equally efficient as energy converters. Brazil points out that its major biofuel - made from sugarcane - is much more efficient than corn ethanol made in the United States. And Indonesia promotes its palm oil biodiesel as efficient also. None can deny that corn ethanol, protected by a steep US tariff, is the least efficient in this product line. But all biofuels suffer from similar environmental and humanitarian problems. Brazilian and Indonesian biofuel plantations have been established by clearing rainforests and planting in fragile soils and ecosystems.
As new and definitive reports set out the ills of biofuels, most analysts have concluded that crop-based biofuels (using corn, oilseed and sugar cane) are unsustainable drivers of the food crisis. Even "second-generation" biofuels (using agricultural wastes, switchgrass, jatropha and wood chips) now appear to have serious problems.
The Bush administration in Washington has brushed off critics, saying that biofuels only contributed 3% to recent grain price hikes. But in April 2008, a Word Bank assessment concluded that biofuels are "the major cause of the increase in food prices," responsible for more than 50% of the overall price increases. The Bank suppressed the report, apparently for fear of angering the Bush administration, but the Guardian newspaper eventually leaked it in July 2008.
Biofuels are now heavily subsidized - about $1.50 per gallon in the United States according to some estimates - and they are mandated by law as a percentage blend in gasoline and diesel fuel - in the US as well as the EU. The mandates call for further regular increases in the percentage blend. Current US legislation requires a five-fold increase by 2022. But the policy momentum may be slowing. The UK government released the Gallagher Report in July 2008, a study that proposed a reduction in blend targets, because of serious questions about biofuel impact on food prices and environmental sustainability. The European parliament has also called for a downward revision of targets.
A number of other studies have shown that biofuel production is contributing to soil erosion and serious depletion of water resources. Ironically, biofuel production requires a great deal of petroleum - nearly as much as it replaces in the case of corn ethanol. So it fails to solve the problems of high petroleum prices and climate change as promoters claim.
Big companies are rushing into biofuel production to capture the big subsidies, creating a powerful lobby to expand mandated use and boost subsidies still further. Unless governments reject these pressures and heed the urgent warnings, biofuels will rapidly worsen the food emergency.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/social-and-economic-policy/world-hunger/48424.html
Question: Israel has just killed 8 Canadians in Lebanon? Are they going to try and call them "terrorists"? How are they going to explain that?
Here's how the current conflict actually began:-
"basically the current stage of what's going on -- there's a lot more -- begins with the Hamas election, back the end of January. Israel and the United States at once announced that they were going to punish the people of Palestine for voting the wrong way in a free election. And the punishment has been severe.
At the same time, it's partly in Gaza, and sort of hidden in a way, but even more extreme in the West Bank, where Olmert announced his annexation program, what’s euphemistically called “convergence” and described here often as a “withdrawal,” but in fact it’s a formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, most of the resources, including water, of the West Bank and cantonizing the rest and imprisoning it, since he also announced that Israel would take over the Jordan Valley. Well, that proceeds without extreme violence or nothing much said about it.
Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don't know their names. You don’t know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. Militants in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That’s Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that's well known; first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don’t have to repeat. It’s reported on adequately.
The next stage was Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers, they say on the border. Their official reason for this is that they are aiming for prisoner release. There are a few, nobody knows how many. Officially, there are three Lebanese prisoners in Israel. There's allegedly a couple hundred people missing. Who knows where they are?
But the real reason, I think it's generally agreed by analysts, is that -- I’ll read from the Financial Times, which happens to be right in front of me. “The timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously.” David Hearst, who knows this area well, describes it, I think this morning, as a display of solidarity with suffering people, the clinching impulse."
Professor Noam Chomsky(Jewish) - Democracy now! interview 7/14/06
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/14/146258
Bittorrent download -
http://www.chomskytorrents.org/DownloadTorrent.php?TorrentID=1531
When the American people stop their government from sending $90 Billion of their taxes to Israel to support their barbaric acts then the fighting will stop.
http://www.vestedowl.com/counterpoint_results.htm
And also when the American people stop their governments from vetoing any chance of a peaceful settlement, then maybe there will be an agreement.
http://www.action-for-un-renewal.org.uk/pages/isreal_un_resolutions.htm
http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/07/16/lebanon-canadians.html
Question: Should oil companies have to drill on land they already have leased before they ask for more leases? Here's what some in Congress and other experts say:
Congressman Ben Chandler:
"Some of my colleagues want to give oil companies still more land for drilling such as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska, but I do not think the solution is to give them more acreage to drill for resources they can already access. Even if additional public lands were opened up for the offshore drilling of oil, it would have little if any immediate impact on the price of gas. In fact, a 2007 study by the Department of Energy concluded that opening up offshore drilling “would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before the year 2030.”
http://chandler.house.gov/ArticleDetails.aspx?NewsID=1465
Speaker Nancy Pelosi:
"There are 68 million acres of federal land already leased by oil companies for energy production now but sitting idle. That’s 75% of leased lands, sitting idle. Oil companies should drill what they have leased—and lease lands already open for drilling first. But instead, President Bush and Congressional Republicans want to make this a fight about our beaches and our threatened wilderness areas, in an apparent attempt to help the oil companies lock up more public lands before he leaves office."
http://www.speaker.gov/legislation?id=0234
"If we were to drill today, realistically speaking, we should not expect a barrel of oil coming out of this new resource for three years, maybe even five years, so let's not kid ourselves," said Fadel Gheit, oil and gas analyst with Oppenheimer & Co. Equity Capital Markets Division."
After eight years, President Bush and [Vice President] Dick Cheney have turned the GOP into the Gas and Oil Party. That's the legacy that they are going to leave," said Rep. Edward Markey of Massachusetts, chairman of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming.
"The White House has become a ventriloquist for the oil and gas industry, repeating the requests of the oil and gas industry: that they be allowed to destroy the most pristine areas of our country," Markey added.
Congressional Democrats introduced a bill last week to compel oil companies to begin utilizing federal land they already lease.
"Oil companies are sitting on 68 million acres they have already leased from the American people for the purpose of oil and natural gas production," said Sen. Bob Menendez, D-New Jersey.
"It is about time they use these resources already at their disposal instead of waiting for more federal handouts and pushing to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge or up and down our coasts," he added.
Opponents of offshore drilling say it would harm aquatic ecosystems by eroding wetlands, contaminating the water with chemicals, polluting the air, killing fish and dumping waste.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/18/bush.offshore/
In addition, China is not drilling offshore here.
Report: No Chinese Offshore Drilling Near Cuba
By Ryan Grim
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/12/politics/politico/thecrypt/main4177282.shtml
I have not speculated at all and back up what I say with reliable sources.
The oil and gas analyst for Oppenheimer, Congressman Ben Chandler, and many analysts agree that it would be years before offshore drilling would have any impact.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/20/new_offshore_drilling_not_a_quick_fix_analysts_say/
"The assertion that China was drilling "very close to our shore" echoed a claim made by Vice President Dick Cheney -- citing nationally syndicated columnist George Will -- in a June 11 speech to the United States Chamber of Commerce that both Cheney and Will have since corrected."
There is exploration,' said Johanna Mendelson-Forman, a senior fellow on energy and Latin America at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. She said China's oil company, Sinopac, has conducted exploratory drilling on a lease on land in western Cuba, but is not involved in the offshore development."
http://mediamatters.org/items/2008070200
If there is no oil on the land they have leased, they need to give it up so something useful can be done with it, and If there is oil, they need to get started and shut up about leasing more land.
Really, Robert B., CBS, CNN, and the House Speaker are unreliable? That is too silly to answer. I take it you think you are more reliable.
No I would not have us be a third world nation. I would have us be a sensible nation, and not allow oil companies to mindlessly destroy the Earth we live on to make billions more, when it is totally unnecessary. Why do you suppose gas prices didn't go down after Bush attacked Iraq? What would make anyone think the prices would go down if the oil companies get what they want again? Time to wake up and start thinking about what is good for us, not what is good for the rich oil barons. They have driven up the prices of everything, not just oil, while they lined their own pockets. They are already destroying the economy.
Question: Obama no comment what are your comments Robert Krentz killing stokes fears of rampant illegal immigration? Los Angeles – The killing of Arizona rancher Robert Krentz has prompted the state’s governor, its most influential senator, and its farming community to say that Washington is not doing enough to prevent illegal immigration and secure the border with Mexico.
Mr. Krentz was found Saturday, fatally shot and slumped over in his all-terrain vehicle, which still had its lights and engine on. Law enforcement officials tracked footprints from the scene back to the border, raising speculation that the killer is an illegal immigrant.
The apparent murder heightens the tension surrounding the immigration reform debate, with advocates of much stricter immigration controls saying Krentz's death highlights the urgent need for significantly increased border security.
Already, Krentz’s death is being held up as evidence that border violence is spiraling out of control as the Obama administration mulls immigration reform that could include a path to citizenship for some illegal immigrants in the United States.
“It’s scary,” says Dawn Garner, a teacher and yoga instructor whose small ranch abuts the border near Naco, Ariz., just miles from Krentz’s ranch. She says she counts “at least 12” immigrants crossing her property every day.
“It’s become Grand Central Station out here since the Obama administration began talking about comprehensive reform,” says Ms. Garner, whose daughter knows Krentz’s son. “They’re all trying to get up here quickly so they can be inside the country when amnesty – or whatever they want to call it – is announced.”
Calls for actionSince Saturday, Gov. Jan Brewer (D) and Sen. John McCain (R) have called on the Department of Homeland Security to deploy the National Guard to the Arizona border. The Arizona Farm Bureau added: “Until Congress addresses securing the border, all necessary resources should be focused on Arizona's border.”
Authorities have not announced any motive for the killing, nor have they officially suggested that the killer was an illegal immigrant.
For his part, Krentz was well known in the area as a rancher who was kind to illegal immigrants he found on his property, despite having been robbed by them once. “You know, if they come in and ask for water, I'll still give them water," he told PBS's "Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly" in 1999. “You know, that's just my nature."
Krentz’s brother, however, had called border patrol agents the day before the killing. The agents stopped a caravan of illegal immigrants carrying 280 pounds of marijuana, raising the possibility of the crime being retaliation.
An appeal for patienceExperts caution that authorities must understand what happened before conclusions should be drawn.
“An important question to ask is whether the killing of Robert Krentz is more an aberration than the norm at the Arizona border,” says Catherine Wilson, an immigration analyst at Villanova University in Philadelphia. “Did the immigrant responsible for Krentz’s death have ties to the drug-trafficking trade? Will we be seeing more violence at the border due to the heightening of drug-related crime in northern Mexico?”
Advocates for immigrants say Krentz’s death is less an issue of illegal immigration than of the increasing lawlessness in the border areas of Mexico, which affects American citizens and immigrants alike.
“It took the life of a Caucasian rancher, an innocent soul, to garner the attention of the violence on the border,” says Angelica Salas, director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA). “Countless individuals have been murdered at the border during the crossing by ... criminals and their sophisticated networks.”
“Without legal channels for entry into the US, without reform, those who control the border are violent criminals, and the victims are innocent people, including the undocumented, who are raped, injured, and killed,” she adds.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20100331/ts_csm/291570_1
Obama still has not issued a statement.Janet has not issued a statement.Clinton has not issued a statement ? Even La Raza has not issued a statement ? Is this because the man is white and a legal citizen ?
Question: What do you think of this article stating from intelligence that nuclear weapons will be used in the future? Question asked on Saturday Morning, November 22, 2008, it is an AFP article
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081121/pl_afp/usintelligenceforecastnuclear_081121001512
Use of nuclear weapons more likely in future: US intelligence
by Jim Mannion Jim Mannion – Thu Nov 20, 7:15 pm ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) – The use of nuclear weapons will grow increasingly likely by 2025, US intelligence warned Thursday in a report on global trends that forecasts a tense, unstable world shadowed by war.
"The world of the near future will be subject to an increased likelihood of conflict over scarce resources, including food and water, and will be haunted by the persistence of rogue states and terrorist groups with greater access to nuclear weapons," said the report.
"Widening gaps in birth rates and wealth-to-poverty ratios, and the uneven impact of climate change, could further exacerbate tensions."
Called "Global Trends 2025 -- a Transformed World," the 121-page report was produced by the National Intelligence Council, a body of analysts from across the US intelligence community.
Officials said it was being briefed to the incoming administration of president-elect Barack Obama. A year in the making, it does not take into account the recent global financial crisis.
"In one sense, a bad sense, the pace of change that we are looking at in 2025 occurred more rapidly than we had anticipated," said Thomas Fingar, deputy director of National Intelligence.
One overarching conclusion of the report is that "the unipolar world is over, (or) certainly will be by 2025," Fingar said.
But with the "rise of the rest," managing crises and avoiding conflicts will be more difficult, particularly with an antiquated post-World War II international system.
"The potential for conflict will be different than and in some ways greater than it has been for a very long time," Fingar said.
The report has good news for some countries:
-- A technology to replace oil may be underway or in place by 2025;
-- Multiple financial centers will serve as "shock absorbers" of the world financial system;
-- India, China and Brazil will rise, the Korean peninsula will be unified in some form, and new powers are likely to emerge from the Muslim non-Arab world.
But the report also says some African and South Asian states may wither away altogether, organized crime could take over at least one state in central Europe; and the spread of nuclear weapons will heighten the risk they will be used.
"The likelihood that nuclear weapons will be used will increase with expanded access to technology and a widening range of options for limited strikes," it said.
The report highlighted the risk of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East where a number of countries are thinking about developing or acquiring technologies that would be useful to make nuclear weapons.
"Over the next 15-20 years, reactions to the decisions Iran makes about its nuclear program could cause a number of regional states to intensify these efforts and consider actively pursuing nuclear weapons," the report said.
"This will add a new and more dangerous dimension to what is likely to be increasing competition for influence within the region," it said.
The report said it was not certain that the kind of deterrent relationships that existed for most of the Cold War would emerge in a nuclear armed Middle East.
Instead, the possession of nuclear weapons may be perceived as "making it safe" to engage in low intensity conflicts, terrorism or even larger conventional attacks, the report said.
The report said terrorism would likely be a factor in 2025 but suggested that Al-Qaeda's "terrorist wave" might be breaking up.
"Al-Qaeda's weaknesses -- unachievable strategic objectives, inability to attract broad-based support, and self-destructive actions -- might cause it to decay sooner than many people think," it said.
"Because history suggests that the global Islamic terrorist movement will outlast Al-Qaeda as a group, strategic counterterrorism efforts will need to focus on how and why a successor terrorist group might evolve during the remaining years of the 'Islamic terrorist wave.'"
The report was vague about the outcome of current conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and nuclear armed Pakistan.
In 2025, the government in Baghdad could still be "an object of competition" among various factions seeking foreign aid or pride of place.
Afghanistan "may still evince significant patterns of tribal competition and conflict."
"The future of Pakistan is a wildcard in considering the trajectory of neighboring Afghanistan," it said.
Question: Arctic Ice Melting is true? Read below!? Alarm over sea ice loss is misplaced.
Recent short-term gains in Arctic ice coverage indicate nothing about the eventual state of the Arctic. Answers to the long-term status of the region lie in the realm of a scientific branch known as paleoclimatology. What does it tell us?
The Earth is currently in the geologic epoch known as the Holocene. This began nearly 12,000 years ago when the last ice age (more precisely, the Weichsal glacial) ended. Temperatures warmed, glaciers began to retreat, and the Arctic began to melt. This began what is called an interglacial: a warmer period between glaciation.
We tend to think of the poles as immutable, but geologically speaking, permanent polar ice is a rare phenomenon, comprising less than 10% of history. Icecaps form briefly between interglacials, only to melt as the next one begins -- this time around will be no different.
So we know the Arctic will eventually be open water. The only question is how it will affect us.
The language the media uses to describe Arctic melting is usually emotionally loaded. Filled with terms such as "concern", "desperate", even "dying" and "doomed", one would think a living organism was being described. Experts are always quoted as "warning" us, rather than simply speaking -- classic propaganda techniques.
Even the scientists themselves have an emotional stake in the argument. After all, when you've spent your entire career studying Arctic ice, the possibility of it vanishing is understandably horrifying. But what about the rest of us? Will Arctic melting be good or bad?
Let's look at the scorecard.
No change in sea level.
Arctic ice, which floats rather than being anchored on bedrock, doesn't influence sea levels at all. Antarctica and Greenland do, but with one on a long-term cooling trend, and the other melting at the infinitesimal pace of 0.25% per century, there doesn't seem to be any call for alarm. Sea level has been rising for thousands of years; the increase over the next century is expected to be less than 1/3 meter.
"Unimaginable" amounts of new resources.
What's at stake is nothing less than millions of square miles of territory, with some of the richest resources known. 90 billion barrels of oil and 1,700 trillion cubic feet of natural gas lie in the region. An ice-free Arctic also means access to other mineral resources, and access to rich new fishing grounds. Analysts have hesitated to put a figure on the total worth.
But that's not all. Just the ability to safely navigate the region is itself valuable.
The Northwest and Northeast Passages
First navigated in 1905, the famed Northwest Passage allows ships to cross between the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. Currently this requires a trip through the Panama Canal, a lengthy, expensive voyage that is barred to the largest "post-Panamax" class of ships. The permanent opening of the Northwest Passage will shave thousands of miles off each crossing, saving millions of barrels of diesel fuel annually, boosting trade and cutting shipment costs for a wide variety of imported and exported goods.
Nearly as important, the Northeast Passage is vital for parts of Northern Europe and Russia. First navigated as far back as 1879, a permanent opening will not only reduce shipping costs between Russia and Northern Europe, it will be a boon for thousands of tiny coastal communities that are currently cut off from the outside world for most of each year.
Though the benefits are unmistakable, a certain segment of the population argues we shouldn't use them. They believe using the planet's resources is immoral, even obscene. But the fact remains that these resources are not just valuable; they're vital. The still-growing populations of China and India are now clamoring for access to the same standard of living the western world enjoys. Granting it to them will require new sources of food, energy, and raw materials.
Russia has already put its foot in the door, claiming some 460,000 square miles of new territory -- an area larger than France and Germany combined. With its fleet of nuclear-powered icebreakers already surveying, Russia is brushing aside objections over its cavalier acts.
Some have pointed out that Arctic territorial disputes may lead to conflict, even war. This is possible. But claiming that we shouldn't wish for new resources because we might fight over them is like wishing you won't win the lottery because you and your spouse might argue over how to spend the money. The unlocking of the Arctic's resources is a windfall, no matter how you look at it.
What about the Polar Bears?
Recent research indicates that the species is significantly older than first thought, about 120,000 years old. This means polar bears have survived at least one interglacial before, and therefore doesn't depend on permanent polar ice.
Bears are not the only wildlife in the region. But floating sea ice is not a primary habitat for any species.
Question: Best way to advance my career? Some quick background. I'm 28 years old with no college. I am currently a Professional Services Manager for a small software consulting company. I have been with the company for over four years; I started as an entry-level developer and quickly converted to business analyst. My primary functions have included: working with new and existing clients to gather requirements, design software systems and document implementation plans, application testing, project management, and end-used training. When our director left two years ago, I took over (although I was only made "manager"). Since then I perform many of the functions I already mentioned, however I am also now responsible for managing a team of five programmers/analysts and managing all client projects at a high level (including resource scheduling).
I got into this industry after high school by fooling around with Microsoft Access and learning relational database theory and a little programming. I have no formal certifications or training.
It has been a bit of a struggle getting my head above water with all of my professional responsibilities over the last few years but I feel that I finally have a good handle on things. Our team is working more efficiently and unfortunately the economy has slowed down our workload a bit. At this point, I would really like to invest in my future and I'm doing research on my options.
I would like to be a CIO or Director of IT eventually. My biggest problem is that I greatly detest the idea of going to college part-time. I don't mind school, but I don't think I can take all of the non-industry-specific classes I'd have to sit through as well as the amount of time it will take. However, if college is far and above the best option I have, I'll have to consider it. The other options I'm looking at are various certifications - PMP (Project Management Professional) or any other Microsoft or other industry certs.
I want to be very open-minded about this and would greatly appreciate any and all advice. Thank you for your time.
Question: Obamacare for illegal aliens overstayers, and deportation fugitives would be spared but not Americans why ? But President Obama lit the fuse in February when he signed the massive expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). That law loosened eligibility requirements for legal immigrants and their children by watering down document and evidentiary standards – making it easy for individuals to use fake Social Security cards to apply for benefits with little to no chance of getting caught. In addition, Obama’s S-CHIP expansion revoked Medicaid application time limits that were part of the 1996 welfare reform law. Immigration activists see the provisions as first steps toward universal coverage for illegals.
“Explosive?” The applause certainly was. President Obama’s praise of the weakened immigrant eligibility rules drew the strongest claps and cheers from members of Congress at the SCHIP signing event.
Immigration analyst James R. Edwards, Jr. reported last week in National Review that “no health legislation on the table requires federal, state, or local agencies — or private institutions receiving federal funds — to check the immigration status of health-program applicants, so some of the money distributed via Medicaid and tax credits inevitably would go to illegal aliens.” Moreover, the Senate Finance Committee plan creates a new preference for illegal aliens by exempting them from the mandate to buy insurance.
That’s right. Law-abiding, uninsured Americans would be fined if they didn’t submit to the Obamacare prescription. Law-breaking border-crossers, visa-overstayers, and deportation fugitives would be spared.
The solution is not to give them health insurance, but to turn off the magnets that draw them to enter illegally in the first place.
For years, advocates of uncontrolled immigration have argued that illegal aliens are not getting free health care and that even if they were, they are not draining government budgets. The fiscal crisis in California gives lie to those talking points. In March, the Associated Press reported that Sacramento and Contra Costa counties were slashing staff and closing clinics due to the prohibitive costs of providing non-emergency health services for illegal immigrants.
At a time when Democrat leaders are pushing rationed care in a world of limited resources, Americans might wonder where the call for shared sacrifice is from illegal immigrant patients like those in Los Angeles getting free liver and kidney transplants at UCLA Medical Center. “I’m just mad,” illegal alien Jose Lopez told the Los Angeles Times last year after receiving two taxpayer-subsidized liver transplants while impatiently awaiting approval for state health insurance.
Now, multiply that sense of entitlement by 12-20 million illegal immigrants. Welcome to the open-borders Obamacare nightmare.
Question: I saw this the other day and I want to know what other's think about it!? 1. Ever heard of the Bakken Formation? GOOGLE it. I did, and again, BLEW my mind. The U.S. Geological Service issued a report in April ('08) that was a revised report ( hadn't been updated since '95) on how much oil was in this area of the western 2/3 of North Dakota: western South Dakota; and extreme eatern Montana... check THIS out:
The Bakken is the largest domestic oil discovery since Alaska's Prudhoe Bay, and has the potential to eliminate all American dependence on foreign oil. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates it at 503 billion barrels. Even if just 10% of the oil is recoverable... at $107 a barrel, we're looking at a resource base worth more than $5.3 trillion. 'When Ifirst briefed legislators on this, you could practically see their jaws hit the floor. They had no idea. ' says Terry Johnson, the Montana Legislature's financial analyst.
'This sizable find is now the highest-producing onshore oil field found in the past 56 years,' reports The Pittsburgh Post Gazette. It's a formation known as the Williston Basin, but is more commonly referred to as the 'Bakken. ' And it stretches from Northern Montana, through North Dakota and into Canada. For years, U.S. oil exploration has been considered a dead end. Even the 'Big Oil' companies gave up searcing for major oil wells decades ago. However, a recent technological breakthrough has opened up the Bakken's massive reserves... and we now have access of up to 500 billion barrels.And because this is light, sweet oil, those billions of barrels will cost americans just $16 PER BARREL!
That's enough crude to fully fuel the American economy for 41 years straight.
2.[And if THAT didn't throw you on the floor, then this next one should - because it from TWO YEARS AGO, people!]
U.S.Oil Discovery- Largest Reserve in the World!
Stansberry Report Online - 4/20/2006 Hidden 1,000 feet beneath the surface of the Rocky Mountains
lies the largest untapped oil reserve in the world is more than 2 TRILLION barrels. On August 8, 2005 President Bush mandated it's extraction.
[(???)] What the!??]
They reported this stunning news: we have more oil inside our borders, than all the other proven reserves on earth.
Here are the official estimates:
-8-times as much oil as Saudi Arabia
-18-times as much oil as Iraq
-21-times as much oil as Kuwait
-22-times as much oil as Iran
-500-times as much oil as Yemen- and it's all right here in the Western United States.
[HOW can this BE!? HOW can we NOT BE extracting this!? Because we've not DEMANDED Legislation to come out of Washington allowing its extraction, that's why!]
James Bartis, lead researcher with the study says we've got more oil in this very compact area than the entire Middle East -more than 2 trillion barrels. Untapped. That's more than all the proven oil reserves of crude oil in the world today, reports The Denver Post.
---
Don't think 'Big Oil' will drop its price - even with this find? Think again! It's all about the competitive marketplace, and if they can extract it (here) for less, they can afford to sell it for less - and if they DON'T, others will. It will come down - it has to.
---
[Got your attention/ire up yet? Hope so! Now, while you're thinking about it... and hopefully P.O'd, do this:
3. Take 5-10 minutes and compose an e-mail; fax or good old-fashioned letter to our elected officials in Washington.. and their respected leaders. We'll start with them, and here how you can send them your e-mail/fax, DEMANDING the immediate Legislation/ an Energy PLAN that calls for tapping into these (OUR OWN!) Reserves, as well as allowing for the offshore drilling for OUR oil, in OUR offshore waters and Inter-continental shelf... not to mention Alaska.
Technology ain't what it used to be people (ever had arthroscopic surgery?).
They can surgically extract YOUR oil, and get us on the way to at least some measure of Energy independence.
If you don't take a little time to do this, then you should stifle yourself the next time you want to compain about gas prices... because by doing NOTHING, you've forfeited your right to complain.
Question: Why does Israel tell us lies? The Israelis and most of our media are lying as usual.
But here's the truth people :)
"basically the current stage of what's going on -- there's a lot more -- begins with the Hamas election, back the end of January. Israel and the United States at once announced that they were going to punish the people of Palestine for voting the wrong way in a free election. And the punishment has been severe.
At the same time, it's partly in Gaza, and sort of hidden in a way, but even more extreme in the West Bank, where Olmert announced his annexation program, what’s euphemistically called “convergence” and described here often as a “withdrawal,” but in fact it’s a formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, most of the resources, including water, of the West Bank and cantonizing the rest and imprisoning it, since he also announced that Israel would take over the Jordan Valley. Well, that proceeds without extreme violence or nothing much said about it.
Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don't know their names. You don’t know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. Militants in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That’s Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that's well known; first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don’t have to repeat. It’s reported on adequately.
The next stage was Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers, they say on the border. Their official reason for this is that they are aiming for prisoner release. There are a few, nobody knows how many. Officially, there are three Lebanese prisoners in Israel. There's allegedly a couple hundred people missing. Who knows where they are?
But the real reason, I think it's generally agreed by analysts, is that -- I’ll read from the Financial Times, which happens to be right in front of me. “The timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously.” David Hearst, who knows this area well, describes it, I think this morning, as a display of solidarity with suffering people, the clinching impulse."
Professor Noam Chomsky(Jewish) - Democracy now! interview 7/14/06
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?s...
Bittorrent download -
http://www.chomskytorrents.org/DownloadT...
When the American people stop their government from sending a total of $90 Billion of their taxes to Israel to support their barbaric acts then the fighting will stop.
http://www.vestedowl.com/counterpoint_re...
And also when the American people stop their governments from vetoing any chance of a peaceful settlement, then maybe there will be an agreement.
Question: Why does Israel tell us lies? The Israelis and most of our media are lying as usual.
But here's the truth people :)
"basically the current stage of what's going on -- there's a lot more -- begins with the Hamas election, back the end of January. Israel and the United States at once announced that they were going to punish the people of Palestine for voting the wrong way in a free election. And the punishment has been severe.
At the same time, it's partly in Gaza, and sort of hidden in a way, but even more extreme in the West Bank, where Olmert announced his annexation program, what’s euphemistically called “convergence” and described here often as a “withdrawal,” but in fact it’s a formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, most of the resources, including water, of the West Bank and cantonizing the rest and imprisoning it, since he also announced that Israel would take over the Jordan Valley. Well, that proceeds without extreme violence or nothing much said about it.
Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don't know their names. You don’t know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. Militants in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That’s Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that's well known; first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don’t have to repeat. It’s reported on adequately.
The next stage was Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers, they say on the border. Their official reason for this is that they are aiming for prisoner release. There are a few, nobody knows how many. Officially, there are three Lebanese prisoners in Israel. There's allegedly a couple hundred people missing. Who knows where they are?
But the real reason, I think it's generally agreed by analysts, is that -- I’ll read from the Financial Times, which happens to be right in front of me. “The timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously.” David Hearst, who knows this area well, describes it, I think this morning, as a display of solidarity with suffering people, the clinching impulse."
Professor Noam Chomsky(Jewish) - Democracy now! interview 7/14/06
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?s...
Bittorrent download -
http://www.chomskytorrents.org/DownloadT...
When the American people stop their government from sending a total of $90 Billion of their taxes to Israel to support their barbaric acts then the fighting will stop.
http://www.vestedowl.com/counterpoint_re...
And also when the American people stop their governments from vetoing any chance of a peaceful settlement, then maybe there will be an agreement.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
