Tag Archives: Uranium

An Inconvenient Truth; Al Gore in the Balance

Posted on by
1

This last Friday I headed over to see a herd of well-fed liberals that rodeoed themselves into the Unitarian Church for a free showing of the film, ‘An Inconvenient Truth’. The corral was packed and after we were informed that a pastor was on the way from Denver to moralize to us later, the film began to roll. Another showing of ‘Al Gore, the Intellectual Politican’ was under way. Hey, it kinda of reminded me of the repeated US`showing of ‘Jimmy Carter, Born Again Liberal Christian’, too. Holy Mackeral. Why buy a used car from the other guys, when we got such a sincere team over at Slick’s Used Cars Emporium?

My daughter was one of about 5 church-like kids dragged into the Unitarian Church that evening. And she lasted only 30 minutes, and then I had to go. She had to go that is, since I actually kind of wanted to stay. The film had a ‘Don’t Feed the Bears’ ambience to it, that made me feel like I was watching a Yogi Bear and Boo-Boo Bear rerun from my youth. Plus, it had that feel of those professional ‘Why You Need to Join Your Local Union’ stuff the AFL-CIO occasionally puts out. But my daughter was demanding that I rent her some obscure foreign film from over at Toons Video instead of staying and watching more of the freebee.

So how the Hell can I review a film when I watched only 30 minutes of it? Easily. I have been watching Al Gore for much longer than just the 90 minutes the film lasts. Here is Mr Environmental Guru as I have seen him over the years.

1) Supported Poppy Bush’s so-called Desert Strom that resulted in the deployment of Depleted Uranium radioctivity across the region. It also led to further environmental catastrophe as Hussein retaliated by incinerating the oil refineries of Kuwait.

2) As VP, he later went on to head up an Adminstration that deliberately targeted Yugoslavia’s civilian infrastructure through a US bombing campaign. As a result, the Danube was totally polluted with highly toxic waste. He also supported 8 years more of continued bombing of Iraq during that time, which certainly did not improve the ecology already destroyed by US warmaking he had supported even when a Republican had been directing the effort.

3) He supported the invasion of Afghanistan, which has left entire regions there decimated by so-called ‘bunker busting’ weaponry. Hardly a major ‘green’ effort on the part of Gore.

4) Gore has sat quiet as Israel bombed a civilian installation in Lebanon, which is a country invaded with total Bush support and complicity. Result?… a tidal wave of petro pollution that is the worst spill ever experienced in the Eastern Meidterranean. It will take decades to repair the damage, yet ‘Green’ Al Gore is silent.

5) Al Gore holds large number of shares in Occidental Oil, the company that polluted the Love Canal in New York State. It is also a company heavily invested in Colombia where Gore has helped have tons of isecticide dropped onto rural areas under the guise of waging a Clinton made ‘drug war’. The company sold off its holdings from the area after their drilling in U’wa tribal lands came up negative. Despite U’wa protests against this drilling, the Gore family held its shares in the company. Too bad the U’wa’s note to Gore was not part of the movie.

We could go on, but why should anyone believe Al Gore is doing anything other than image restructuring for himself, and the Democratic Party? If you are depending on him to be pro-environmental, then I got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn. If you are depending on the Democratic Party to stop the Pentagon (which is the main danger to global environments), then you should have your head examined.

Protest concept 4 BODY BAGS

Posted on by
Reply

Instead of coffins, let’s reflect upon the returning U.S. corpses at an earlier stage, in their body bags.

Instead of uniform boxes, we’ll sample the various sizes of body bags used, dependent upon what remained of the lost soldier. IED, mortar,fire.

Instead of names, we’ll mark each variant bag with a likely cause of death, and the corresponding number of fatalities for each.

Instead of limiting ourselves to those soldiers lost in Iraq, we’ll mark those lost -and to be lost- who’ve already returned home.

A hospital bed will mark those lost to Depleted Uranium or Anthrax. A bottle will mark those lost to alcoholism. Etc.

Hubris-gate

Posted on by
Reply

A big question regarding Rove-gate, ignoring for the moment that it’s taken the Downing Street Memos off the table, is how could the man who is Bush’s brain have committed such a blatant and easily prosecutable act?

It is being argued that the man who got Bush elected, the man behind the most nefarious machinations of the current regime, has orchestrated even the accusing fingers pointing his way. It is contended to be his plan that he’ll be vindicated on the revelation that it wasn’t actually him but a subordinate. Henceforth Rove will be be beyond critique for having been falsely accused.

The theory is plausible, considering again that it has taken the Deerlove revelation off the radar, which threaten a larger indictment of our administration. It might be a better strategy not to pursue Rove at this time.

But let’s address what may have happened as opposed to the debate over whether it matters.

I contend that it was hubris, ego maniacal hubris that lead Rove to leak the CIA identity of Valerie Plame to the press. The same battle of egos that sees our leaders on the left wishing to see Rove fired.

Hubris

The Plame leak is being summarized as a politically motivated reaction for Ambassador Wilson’s stand against the war. Well that would be half the story. It’s seen as a warning to others who might consider blowing the whistle. That would be another half. Can you see the Republicans as spoilsports, saying “damn that Joe Wilson, let’s burn him?” Maybe. I can envision an even less flattering scenario.

Wouldn’t it be more likely that Valerie Plame’s CIA role, and the safety of all her friends and contacts worldwide, was the Achilles heel that kept Joe Wilson in line? That might even be the technique used with most of our diplomats overseas: recruit their family members and friends into the CIA where they will forever be compromised?

It is often contended by host nations that our diplomatic corps are ridden with security operatives. Memoirs and historical accounts bear this out. We’re learning with the Plame revelation that there’s an acronym for operating under diplomatic cover, just as there is an acronym for operating without diplomatic cover. And it seems the former is more common than the latter, without the black passport that’s a get out of jail free card.

Yes the Plame leak revealed much about how our intelligence agencies work. But let’s get back to what may have happened to Joe Wilson.

Joe Wilson was sent to Niger to investigate suspicions that Iraq tried to buy uranium. Was this a real fact finding mission? The letters which suggested such a transaction were already considered to have been fake. Let’s not forget that they were faked by someone, and it’s hard to imagine it would have been anyone but us who would have produced them. No other interest is served. So let’s say Joe Wilson is sent to Niger to confirm the suspicions and build upon our case for a war against Iraq.

Joe Wilson was a safe choice. In the lingo of the mob, he was a made man. His wife being a CIA operative, their friends and acquaintances in every country they’d been would be in jeopardy if Plame’s identity was revealed. Plame’s coworkers at the fake firm which gave her cover would be suspect and jeopardized, as would all their contacts and friends.

And so Joe Wilson had too much to lose if he come back from Niger and reported that the documents were fake, as was the fabrication that Iraq was accelerating its acquisition of uranium.

And Joe Wilson did not make a big deal about it when he came back. It was only on the verge of war that Wilson had a pang of conscience and he made his case. Again, not as a spoilsport but as leverage to stop the inevitable war.

What would you do if you held a whistle blower’s secret? Would you sing to the press and wreck every future job prospect for having shown disloyalty or would you go to your boss and try to influence a rehabilitation?

Joe Wilson did just that. He contacted his superiors in hope that the truth about the false charges against Iraq would deter the administration from going to war.

And so it would have been a battle of wills. Who does Joe Wilson think he is?! We can burn your wife, you know that?! How dare you think you can upset our plans! You are made and we can break you.

And Joe Wilson was playing a similar tack, I can show this Niger story to be false, how dare you nutcases go to war!

And as the cat got out of the bag, the administration threat couldn’t be seen to come to nothing. If Wilson was a made man, there had to be some means to make it mean something.

I see it very likely that Rove made the call himself to Robert Novak. Rove has top billing as the brains of the outfit, he may have felt invincible. And to remain invincible you have to cut Johnny come lately off at the knees.

When someone says “fuck you!” How hard is it not to say “fuck you” back? There’s not much satisfaction in having someone else say it for you. You certainly don’t creep off and have an underling go back and say it for you.

When you’re powerful, you want to say it yourself. Joe Wilson can’t cross me. Imagine the phone call. “If you cross me Joe, I will personally see your world destroyed.”

Support the troops

Posted on by
1

Supporting the troops? What is that?! I don’t SUPPORT OUR TROOPS! What a laugh! As the slogan goes: better to support the troops by bringing the troops home! I don’t support what the troops are doing. I don’t support that they’ve been put in harm’s way. I don’t support that they are putting thousands of others in harm’s way.

They are firing on children, firing on women, firing on civilians, using napalm, cluster bombs and depleted uranium projectiles. They’re making snap judgments that are often fatal for innocent civilians, journalists and even their own comrades.

I heard the other day a TV anchor asking if we are being too concerned about civilian casualties at the expense of our soldiers’ safety? I’m sorry but is the life of an American soldier more valuable than that of an Iraqi? I think it’s the opposite unfortunately. The Iraqi is an innocent bystander to this affair, whereas the soldier has been hired to do a dangerous job. Inherently dangerous.