NoShootFoot

How They Intend To Collapse Our Economy

2012-01-18T10:12:00.000-08:00

Everyone knows that competition in themarketplace leads to innovation.

Everyone knows that monopolization of amarket leads to stagnation and price gouging.

So why is Congress trying to passlegislation to destroy competition to the music and movie industry?

That's what they've been paid off todo.

The SOPA and PIPA are bills that wereessentially written by the established record industry and theestablished movie industry. Without huge donations to members of theHouse and Senate, these bills would have gone nowhere. This is whatlegislation for sale looks like.

For years we've witnessed theestablished music and movie industry trying to sue their competitionout of business.

Quite a few years ago, I committed tonever buy music again from the music monopoly – after they suedMP3.com out of business.

The music industry's goal isn't tobuild a better mousetrap.

Their goal is to dominate the mousetrapmarket – and make you eat their crappy cheese.

And if they stifle freedom of speech - too bad.

As far as they're concerned, only money is speech.

But this isn't just the music and movieindustry committing what should be crimes.

Every industry that has paid to movelegislation through Congress has pushed monopolistic laws. That's whywe see almost every industry out there monopolized.

A government for sale to the highestbidder writes the worst legislation. Because the people who want theworst legislation are willing to bid the highest.

This is the root of our crisis.

We have to get money out of politics,or our system is guaranteed to fail.

This Is The Price For Not Wanting To Pay The Price

2012-01-05T20:22:00.000-08:00

We have lulled ourselvesinto a false sense of dependency.

We are a nation sodependent upon a life with fossil fuels that we've been unwilling toaccept that we're running out of them. Technology has buttressed ourfantasy that things could keep on just as they have. But the realworld costs of deep water drilling, fracking, mountain top removal,tar sands mining, combustion pollution, and global warming has leftus far worse off than if we had simply dealt with the issue.

It is time to deal withthe issue.

Most of you have probablyalready figured out why finagling a Bill that forces President Obamato decide on the Keystone XL pipeline before theelection puts Obama on the hot seat... If President Obama were tocancel the pipeline deal, the oil companies would spend whatever ittakes to get an oil sell-out elected in 2012. For the big money oiloligarchs, this only makes “fiscal” sense. The potential tarsands oil profits will more than make up for the campaigncontribution expenses. The oil oligarchs are willing to spendmillions – to make billions.

This isn't about what isright. This isn't about what is best for Americans – or even forAmerica. This is about maximizing profits – at whatever the cost(to the rest of us).

President Obama hasalready been publicly threatened. Does “huge politicalconsequences” sound like a threat to you... especially when itcomes from the oil industry's top lobbyist? “Huge politicalconsequences” sounds a lot to me like; “Don't mess with usbillionaires. We can take you out.” (Of course, you're entitled toyour own interpretation. I'm open to other ideas. Maybe some of youthink this oil man could be talking about an “intervention.”)

Most of you probablyalready know that the Keystone XL pipeline is an investment in an environmental disaster on a scale we have never seen before. But didyou know this pipeline will be a broken down hunk of junk right fromthe start? A former Bechtel pipe inspector, now whistle-blower, hascome forth to warn us that the previous pipeline project Bechtelworked on was built with “shoddy materials and poor craftsmanship.”That's right, on top of it all; they're going to cut every corner inthe construction of this pipeline too. It may as well be guaranteedto leak – and spill.

Here we go again; maximizethe profits – socialize the costs. Privatize our government –socialize its losses... Or as the band Rage Against the Machineput it; “bury the past, rob us blind, and leave nothingbehind.”

However, the fossil fuelindustry does plan on leaving something behind; the biggestenvironmental, political, and economic mess in human history. They'vealready corrupted our government. They can't wait for when thesupplies of fossil fuels drop, so they can price gouge us into a permanent depression. And hey, if they poison us all in the processof getting filthy rich; oh well...

The fossil fuel industryhas a well documented history of leaving a poisonous mess where everthey go. And their inexcusable record extends to consistentlyfighting cleanup expenses or conducting much of any mitigationefforts. For example; Chevron is still fighting an $18 billion settlement in Ecuador. I wouldn't be surprised if Chevron/Texaco hasspent more on advertising to con us into believing that they're thegood guys than they ever will helping Ecuador.

It is blatantly obviousthat the Canadian tar sands pipeline companies won't pay squat tohelp the people they harm from the pipeline's consequences – ifthey can get away with it. Hey, the industry is already trashingCanada.

…

And then, of course;there's global warming. The extreme climate change brought on byglobal warming is already being felt world wide. Australia is in serious trouble – serious trouble! And here? Our snow cappedpeaks aren't. And there's no significant snow in the10-day forecast. That would put us into mid-January without anysnowpack at all! As far as I know; nobody has ever seen this before.This could be a very dry year. And last year was an unusually wetyear. Which means we could see a lot of big wildfires this summer. Wemight even suffer a mega-fire in Nevada (like in Texas last year andCalifornia a couple of years ago).

Of course, the (paid off)fossil fuel industry sympathizers will probably claim that thisclimate change is all just natural fluctuations, sun spots, oranything other than millions of tons of carbon dioxidebeing extracted from the ground every year. Can they be trusted? No.No way. For a part of billions of dollars, would you lie? Somebodywould. Even a hand full of scientists would lie for the right price.

Usually I say follow themoney. But this time I have a much more gruesome trail for you tofollow. Follow the dead bodies. Not just the animals and plants. Notjust the scores of cancer victims and victims of other pollutionrelated diseases. Follow the murder victims...

…

In case you hadn'tnoticed; there's nobody getting murdered on the other side. Andironically, it's the environmentalists that get accused of beingterrorists by Homeland “Security.” Face it; our police statesecurity system is in place to protect the very people causing themost damage – and we, the taxpayers, got stuck paying for our ownoppression.

In the realworld, the biggest security risk we face is the loss of our home –a healthy Earth. But apparently, we haven't wanted to pay the priceto keep from losing our home – and our situation continues toworsen.

Now we, all of us, mustpay the price for the fossil fuel industry not wanting to give uptheir outrageous profits.

And if President Obamadoesn't stand up to these greedy fools, the price the whole planetwill have to pay will be that much worse.

And if President Obamacan't get elected after doing the right thing, then I guess wedeserve what we get.

Consequences. That's theprice we'll pay for not being willing to pay the price of doing whatis best for us in the long run. And the consequences are horrifying.

The OK-NIMBYs

2011-12-31T20:13:00.000-08:00

In case you didn't know,NIMBY stands for “Not In My Back Yard.”

Polluting industries haveused this “NIMBY” accusation to marginalize resistance topolluting for years now. But there is a converse attitude that nevergets mentioned. The financiers of the polluters appear to finddestructive and poisoning behavior perfectly OK as long as thepollution is not in their own overpriced back yards.

I would like to call theseOK-NIMBYs.

OK-NIMBYs find it OK thatthey make money on others' suffering. But don't get me wrong.OK-NIMBYs may not be so much evil as callus (or even ignorant). Theyinvest their money in hedge funds, the stock market, or even theirretirement plan with no real idea how the money gets invested. Allthey want is to maximize their investment.

But what are thereal-world consequences of that?

Their back yards getpolluted too.

They get poisoned too.

Their future getscompromised too.

That is the inherent fatalflaw of paper profits.

...My story begins in2006.

That was when a powerutility paid $100,000 to a global warming skeptic. Now, this wasn'tjust any power utility. This was a rural cooperative. Which means theboard spent $100,000 of its customers' money to pay an opinionated“scientist” to speak out against global warming science.

Now, your first questionmight be; what in the world is a rural cooperative paying a scientistfor anyway – to do anything? That has nothing to do with theirmission. However, many members of the National Rural ElectricCooperative Association burn coal. And Intermountain Rural ElectricAssociation General Manager Stanley Lewandowski must have believed somuch in the cooperatives' decision to burn coal without pollution“controls” that he wrote a memo to the National Association toconvince other rural cooperatives to send money to global warming skeptics also.

(Did more contributionscome from other rural electric cooperatives? We don't know yet. If ithappened here with Mt. Wheeler Power, no one who would be critical ofthe act is likely to have checked.)

The “scientist” whowas paid (off) was Patrick Michaels, former Virginia StateClimatologist – who was drummed out of his position for hiscontroversial industry funding.

Here in lies a paradox.When you think about the thousands of scientists who have contributedtons and tons of evidence for man-made global warming, it seems verypeculiar that a dozen or so vocal global warming skeptics shouldcarry so much weight. But there it is, right on mass media news forall of us to see. What they call fair and balanced reporting justhappens to weigh greatly in favor of their fossil fuel sponsors.Ain't that a coincidence? NOT!!!

So, after five years of donothing politics on global warming, I'm looking out my window here inthe mountains of Eastern Nevada. It's new year's eve day, and thereisn't any snow. In fact, it's quite warm for the middle of the Winterin the mountains. If there were snow, it probably would have melted.WHERE'S WINTER???

...But that's just the tipof the iceberg.

Russian science vesselshave located huge fountains of methane evaporating from the oceanfloor. “We found more than 100 fountains, some more than akilometer across... there should be thousands of them.” Said Dr.Igor Semiletov. (In case you didn't know; methane is 30 times morepowerful a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.)

Can you say “tippingpoint”?

(In case you didn't knowwhat “tipping point” means; that is the point in time where thereis no turning back. In the case of global warming; it is when, evenif we totally stopped emitting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere,the Earth would continue to get hotter.)

This isn't just evidence.

This is proof!

Methane is melting in massamounts!

We're already at the pointof no return.

We can believe thescientists, or we can believe the sell-outs.

If he's still gettingpaid, I'd bet our Cato Institute “scientist” would still beclaiming that either there is no global warming, global warming isnot caused by human activity, we are not near any tipping point, or“sorry, it looks like we're past the tipping point – there'snothing we can do about it now. You may as well buy more fossilfuels.”

This is exasperating! Airtemperatures near the poles have increased by about 4°F! Water temperatures are higher too. The polar ice caps are melting!And the only people excited about this are the oil companies!

Oh, and one more thing. Ifyou have read my blog before, you may recall a post where I suggestedthat some of the recent earthquake activity may have been caused byglobal warming. Well, more evidence is in. Read here.

So, with all this badnews, one would expect that we might see some changes... Nope.

The big issue at the endof the year wasn't extending the renewable energy rebate. No, it wasextending unemployment benefits. That was important, of course. Butin the long run, it's going to look like re-arranging deck chairs onthe Titanic. Without an environment to support us, nogovernment can keep extending unemployment benefits indefinitely.

The verybest America (and the world) can hope for won't happen until yearafter next. If the Democrats (or some Partyeven more enlightened) win many new seats – and take over theHouse, maybe – just maybe; we can get a comprehensive Energy BillPassed.

But don't expect that tobe the end of it.

Even though we've hadanother big oil spill...

Even though closeranalysis shows that that big American natural gas strike is all on paper – and the supply most likely won't last anywhere near 100years (more likely 10 to 20 years)...

Even though The Daily Showgets more viewers than Fox “News” now...

Even though most Americanswant clean energy, and are willing to pay for it...

...The exploiters havebeen able to keep this in court for years.

A Federal Judge just blocked one of California's greenhouse gas emission regulations.The regulation was written to force producers and refiners to reducetheir fuel's carbon footprint by 10 percent by 2020. Though the lawwould have only reduced California's greenhouse gas emissions to 1990levels, it would have been a major step in the right direction.

And another Federal Court just delayed an EPA rule on coal-fired power plants. Theserules were originally mandated by a bipartisan Clean Air Act in1990! It's been over 20 years, and it's still in court.Amazing! ...Amazingly stupid. This EPA rule would limit emissions ofmercury, arsenic, and other poisons. In fact, the EPA claims that 11,000 Americans might not die every year if the rules were adheredto. This isn't about doing what is right. It's about holding the doorshut until they've taken everything – and left us with the mess toclean up.

And have we learned ourlesson?

With all of the damagethat has already been caused by global warming, which has beendocumented by the insurance industry; we still hear people claimingthat the answer to our problems is to drill for more oil.

This is the biggestconspiracy in the history of humanity.

It is so big that itpermeates our entire information system.

For, example; theDiscovery Channel is airing a seven part documentary with only one ofthe parts missing – the issue on global warming.

...Of course, this happensevery day on the mass media news channels.

The OK-NIMBYs are gettingtheir way. And if we really are about to run out of fossil fuels,they're about to make a killing... on us. Which means we will bedouble-over-charged. We will have to pay the over-inflatedprices of diminishing fossil fuels (and the peculiar rate increasessuch as Nevada Energy's recent 10% rate hike). And much worse, wewill have to pay the huge environmental consequences of burning fossil fuels.

We know better.

It's not OK.

Even if it's not in myback yard.

Follow The Money

2011-12-31T11:38:00.000-08:00

My guess is that yoususpect something is wrong – terribly wrong.

Somewhere along the way,our marginally functioning system has become criticallydysfunctional. What went wrong? Follow the money...

Ignorance of bliss is notbliss.

Ignorance of reality isdangerous.

Ignorance of danger isself destructive.

In every society, there isa constant struggle between the builders and the predators – theinnovators and the extractors – the nurturing and the exploiters –sometimes even the slaves and the slave-holders. The course is neverclear, and the choices never easy. But the struggle has made usstronger. It has also made our would-be exploiters smarter.

The primary issue issimple; carrying capacity.

There's only so much milkthe cows can give – especially when they aren't fed well any more.And there are only so many taxes the people can pay – especiallywhen they aren't paid well any more.

The wealth extractorsalways want more – because there are always more of them.

...And as always has been,the more powerful the wealth extractors get, the more they becomelike slave-holders (or even predators).

It appears that today'swealth extractors have become more powerful than the government ofthe United States of America. Face it; we know who tells whom what doin our government... We know that our votes don't count nearly asmuch as they should... The oligarchy ignores us. But only because welet them.

The biggest monopolies aremultinational now. Our nations will have to work together to limittheir power. This is the one thing the super-rich oligarchs fear –which is why you see so much “one world government” negativepropaganda. They want us to keep fighting amongst ourselves. Theydon't want us to organize. They don't want a UN withreal power.

If humanity organizedworldwide, we would have the power to break these monopolies up –and sometimes, we really really should.

If they come to us forbail-out money; we should break them up.

If they callously breakthe law, and people die; we should break them up.

If they stifle life-savinginnovation; we should break them up.

If they manipulate ourgovernments to loot our wealth; we should break them up.

But we haven't promotedauthentic capitalism. We've allowed the biggest companies to mergeand acquire each other for decades now – until they've become “toobig to fail.” (Translation; too big.) These dangerously bigcompanies are growing even stronger now – and more predatory. Forexample; the big banks forced America and Europe (and the world) togive them billions of dollars because they gambled away our savings.And behind our backs; they borrowed trillions from theFederal Reserve (at our expense).

…

Most of the time; what wesee anymore is really only pretend capitalism. Checkfor yourself. Take a drive across town in the nearest city. Everyfive minutes, you see the same set of big corporate business signs(and you know that many of them are owned by one of the othercorporations). Local businesses are like endangered species. I see anoligarchy. I see a small group of people making greedy decisions thatare, at best, only good for themselves, and only for only a shortwhile.

As simply as I can put it;taking is not making. And a take over is not a make over.

Monopolies are well knownfor two things: eventually selling us garbage, at over-inflatedprices. Ultimately, this isn't good for anyone – because good ideas(which our society desperately needs) get ignored.

Let's face it; we're alltrying to get ahead on the same planet.

But if we trash the planetin the process, nobody gets ahead.

Paper profits don't amountto shit in a crappy world.

If we bring back realcompetition, good ideas will follow. If we nurture that competitionin the right direction, we could even create a stronger civilizationin a healthier environment. That's what we really want.

How To Bypass The Corporatocracy

2011-12-29T11:49:00.000-08:00

Have you beenthinking that the monopolization of just about every industry inAmerica is somehow inherently wrong?

Are you tiredof voluntarily financially supporting the oligarchy?

Have youdecided to support small (even mom and pop) businesses?

But there's one big issueholding you back; you're caught up in the machine? You know who thebig companies are, because they spend millions on advertising. Andyou know that some of those small businesses are small becausethey're lousy. So, you spend your money with the big mediocrecompanies because you don't want to deal with the bad ones. In time,most everyone herds to the big companies. And eventually, there areno small companies left to do business with. We have to face thereality that we are a part of the problem.

At least for someindustries, it doesn't have to be that way. The service and travelindustries still have small and mom and pop businesses. All you haveto do is figure out whom to do business with.

Enter “yelp.com”

...I know. What a strangename for a website that ultimately could help us save capitalism.

Of course, the answer toour problem is both simple and complicated. If we don't want tosupport big remotely owned companies that siphon off our localeconomy, all we have to do is support local businesses. But whichones?

In a nutshell, Yelpis a referral system. We submit the reviews. We share our knowledgeof local businesses. If the big business chains stand out, and arefar better than the local businesses; the reviewers will tell you.But much of the time, at least one local business isthe best.

When we travel, the pointis to get out. So, why go to the same old place in a differentlocation? For example; here in Ely there is a McDonald's. It getstons of business from travelers, who are too scared to take a chanceon local mom and pop restaurants. But with Yelp, travelers cancheck to see the reviews of the local non-corporatefood. One of the highest rated restaurants here is the Twin Wok(locally owned and operated by authentic orientals). Twin Wok isalmost across the street from McDonald's. So it isn't out of the way.And they serve a lunch buffet, which is even faster than fast food.

But until travelers hadYelp, they didn't know.

What Is The Matrix?

2011-12-05T20:23:00.001-08:00

The Matrix is the web oflies that keep us slaves to an irresponsible and corrupt system thatwill ultimately collapse.

Why do we accept theMatrix?

Because it gives uspermission to be irresponsible too.

But... not like this...

They have systematically rigged the game.

To see how the most dangerous of them do it click here.

How can we wake up?

By committing to thorough,common sense, long term, outside of the box thinking – with thewill to do what is necessary to develop a healthy systematic processof living and interacting.

In other words; by keepingan open mind about doing what is right – and mustering the will tofollow through.

In other words; byconsciously evolving.

But how will that matter?
Because then our society will be compelled to force America to become a true democracy - and we will vote on issues directly.

When our representatives' authority is reduced to the authority of clerks, it won't be worth corrupting them.

And maybe, just maybe, those who are draining America's strength will consciously evolve and realize that in the long run we all lose if we allow America to fail. No collapsed civilization in history has ever had a group of people cruise through unscathed - no matter how rich they were before the collapse. In the end, the rich just become the biggest target for crime.

(...Or you can watch Fox "News", CNN, or CNBC...
They blame it all on the liberals.)

Toxic Air Fresheners

2011-11-29T08:48:00.001-08:00

Think about the insane irony of this:

We live in a country thatallows companies to sell us toxic air-fresheners.

...This is a sign.

This is a really badsign.

This is a sign that oursystem is fundamentally flawed. And this isn't the only sign.

We live in a country thatsubsidizes (with billions of taxpayers' dollars) the sale of toxicfossil fuels by filthy rich companies – who make tens of billionsof dollars in profits every fiscal Quarter by hiding the real cost of fossil fuels.

We live in a country thatessentially authorized the sale of hundreds of billions of dollars intoxic debt – only to force the taxpayers (us) to pay the crooked banks' debts when their schemes failed.

Are we all so jaded by badnews that we aren't willing to see the obvious?

Our system rewards badbehavior. We're shitting in our own mess kit. Or at least we'reallowing others to pollute, in some way or another, everyone's messkit.

We can't just keep lettingthem get away with this. Everybody suffers.

Our country is being runby the least scrupulous among us. They're the ones willing to pay thehighest price to influence politics. This process is so infused intoour system that we perceive it as the “real world.”

But our “real world”is in dire trouble. And if we don't fix things, ultimately there won't beanything left to fix.

We desperately have to fixour political and reward system, and we're running out of time.

But fixing things won't beeasy.

Because we can't fixanything until we've fixed everything.

I believe a lot of peoplehave figured this out.

I think this may be whatthe #OCCUPY movement is about.

I support them. And I hopeto join them soon.

What this Country needs ismore democracy.

It Doesn't Make Sense To Rob From Our Own Future

2011-11-05T11:41:00.000-07:00

First the good news:

Actress/Writer SuzanneSomers has grown a new breast.

This may not seemimportant to anyone but Suzanne Somers, but the implications areastounding.

Back in 2001, SuzanneSomers had a lumpectomy and radiation therapy that left one of herbreasts as flat as if had been a mastectomy. To rebuild the breast,she chose Cell Assisted Lipotransfer – which involves transferringfat from another part of her body and mixing in stem cells to enhancethe survival rate of the fat grafts.

To best explain thesuccess of the procedure, I'll quote Suzanne Somers in LifeExtension Magazine:

“If I can brag a little, it is beautiful – high andfirm and real and soft and unscarred. Talk about reverse aging. Mybreasts look like they're from a young woman. I cannot tell you whatthis has done for me psychologically.”

…That's going to sell...

How about some more goodnews:

Mayo Clinic researchershave shown that “senescent cells” contribute to aging relateddiseases. They have shown, in genetically altered mice (that allowsenescent cells to be killed by drugs), that many age relateddiseases can be avoided. In the picture here, both mice are 9 monthsold. The mouse on the right received drugs to eliminate its senescentcells.

The NewYork Times article reporting on senescent cells states:

“Inboth mice and people, senescent cells are few in number but havemajor effects on the body’s tissues. Killing the cells shouldtherefore have large benefits with little downside. The gene-alteringapproach used on the mice cannot be tried in people, but now thatsenescent cells appear to be harmful, researchers can devise ways oftargeting them.

Drugs already exist tocombat some of the inflammatory hormones secreted by senescent cells.The body’s immune system, which probably clears away senescentcells all the time but does so less efficiently with age, couldperhaps be trained to attack senescent cells more aggressively. Orresearchers could one day develop specific drugs to kill the cells,when the differences between ordinary and senescent cells are betterunderstood.”

… That's going to selltoo...

Science has been marching on. The technology to help us live a healthier old age and likelylive far longer is being worked on. At this point, we have no clearidea where this is taking us. But we have to consider thepossibilities. We have to consider the possibility that those of uswho can afford it may live far longer than we might expect.

In other words, thoseamong us who have the most power to influence history really need tostart thinking longer term – because they might still be alive inthe distant future.

The irony of thesuper-rich money making tactics could be that they may be creatingtheir own hell. They need to consider what is the pleasure of livingfor hundreds of years on a polluted and dying planet?

Environmentalists worryabout animals and plants and ecosystems. “Captains of Industry”worry about profits. But the reality is that damaging the only homehumanity has is damaging our future. And not just our distant future.And not just the future for the poor. Everyone will suffer. The airis polluted for everyone. Our food is contaminated for everyone.Everyone is already suffering theinitial consequences of Climate Change. And the Earth is alreadysuffering the biggest mass extinction since the loss of thedinosaurs.

The #occupy protestors areright. We need radical and fundamental changes to our systems if weintend to create something more like a Heaven on Earth instead of aHell.

This shouldn't be justabout taxing the rich. This should be about rewarding good businessbehavior – and changing bad behavior to sensible behavior.

What our systems need alot more of is common sense.

The 'invisible hand” ofcommerce would work far better if long-term greed were rewardedbetter than short-term greed.

This will require afundamental change in how our economy works – which will requirethe pressure of those most rewarded by our present systems.

Think about it; what wouldyou do different if you knew you might live to 150?

Success at the Great Basin Water Forum

2011-10-14T23:20:00.000-07:00

I witnessed abeautiful moment today. I witnessed the metamorphosis of an idea intoa movement. I won't claim it is my idea. Many people should havefigured this one out by now. But I have been promoting this idea fora couple of years now. It felt good to see it accepted. Today I sawan idea become everyone's idea. Within hours, we came to an informalunanimous consensus that desalinating water for California inexchange for more water from the Colorado River is a far better goalthan the SNWA Groundwater Development (desertification) Project.

We now have anagenda.

We have abetter idea... an idea that will get us all more water.

One of thespeakers, Mike Dunbar, made it perfectly clear to everyone. Sometimesthe best answer is not the simplest. Sometimes the best answer is notstealing water from your neighbors. Sometimes the best answer is tocreate more – and live in abundance. Mike Dunbar is the GeneralManager of The South Coast Water District – who provides water toDana Point and Laguna Beach, in Southern California. During hispresentation, he practically asked us to build them adesalination plant. Of course, what he was actually asking us to dowas to press SNWA to buy them a desalination plant. And he madesense. He told us that 70 to 80% of his community realizes the needfor desalination. Many Southern Californians live in dreadthat if an earthquake were to damage the levies on the SacramentoDelta, their community could be out of reliable water for up to sixmonths – when there's an ocean of water right there.

He even soundedlike he already had a desalination plant sight in mind.

Someone else inthe crowd stood up and said power shouldn't be a problem either. SNWAcould build solar power facilities in Nevada to send to (or tradefor) power for the desalination facility. This would mean jobs inSouthern Nevada. Jobs saving rural Nevada.

There isa win/win option. Of course, the organization formerly known as SNWAwill end up owning some desalination and solar energy facilities. Butin the long run, my guess is that they will be more profitable thandrilling for water in the desert.

It appears thateveryone at the forum all agreed. All we have to do now is get themessage out.

And finally,with this many of us clamoring for a response, SNWA can no longerignore the better idea.

To thespeculators:

Instead of justmaximizing your profits, let's maximize everyone's profits. All I'msaying is that we could all live happier. All I'm saying is let's gettogether and decide together what the best course ofaction should be. Let's vote on it.

Organized Crime - In Power

2011-10-10T11:35:00.000-07:00

There are anumber of psychologists who have compared the captains ofindustry and the richest investors on Wall Street to criminals andpsychotics. Their results are alarming. Not only do the greediestamong the criminals and the most dangerous among the psychotics sharetraits with some of the richest Americans, they also share traitswith our corporate and government systems. These traits are sopowerful that they have become the dominant traits of our culture.

We love money.

We covet it.

And some people are morethan willing to bend the rules, accept some collateral damage, andnot even care about anyone or anything else to get it.

… and get all of it, ifthey can.

There are some among uswho treat capitalism like it's war. And of course, all is fair inwar. There will be blood. But there also will be the spoils of war –the exploitations gained from the exploits of war.

There are those whobelieve that this is just the best way to win at this game.

Which is the fatal flaw intheir thinking.

They treat life like it'sa game.

We have been trained tothink inside of the box. We've been trained to think that life islike the game of Monopoly. We've been trained to think that moneybuys happiness. We've been trained to think that it's patrioticto go shopping. We've even been trained to think we can buy our way out of any crisis.

Our culture ignores thereal world.

Moreover, our oligarchycontrolled mass media omits the information that might offend theiradvertisers (or them). Our free news isn't free. It has cost us apart of the truth. Our perception of reality has been tampered with.

All I ask of you is that to tryto think outside of the box.

We can create a betterfuture.

We can make betterdecisions.

We can fix our systems.

We can create a morefunctional democracy.

But we can't do it byletting the craziest among us run amok!

Consider the Watergrab(the Southern Nevada Water Authority Groundwater DevelopmentProject). If someone could get $5,000 an acre foot for the “delivery”of the estimated 200,000 acre feet per year SNWA wants to cannibalizefrom its neighbors, that would amount to one billion dollars ayear! ...And SNWA has already paid as much as $10,000an acre foot for water from the Mesquite area. This is a sign.Someone may be hoping to get as much as $10,000 an acre foot fromSouthern Nevadans soon. That would be two billion dollars a year.

But is this what is bestfor the people of Southern Nevada?

They'll be the one'spaying for this.

We already know that thisisn't what is best for all of the people of Nevada. Wealready know that the Watergrab is exactly what ecocide lookslike. And we already know that offshoredesalination is cheaper, far less financially risky, and far lessenvironmentally destructive.

The Watergrab should onlybe a last resort for a civilizedpeople. Draining our reserves is an act of desperation. Or at leastit should be. Especially when there are less expensive alternatives.Especially when there are alternatives that will provide morewater. Especially when there are alternatives that won't turn ruralNevada into a giant dust bowl.

This isn't that difficultof a problem. SNWA cold just desalinate water off the West Coastfor California in exchange for more water from the Colorado River.Problem solved. No pipeline necessary.

But then they wouldn't beable to charge $10,000 an acre foot for water. We already know thatdesalination costs far less than $2,000 an acre foot. They can onlycharge so much more for desalinated water before they're accused ofovercharging. ...But if it's the last of the desert's water, they cancharge whatever the market will bear.

In short, creating anartificial shortage is good for business. If you're in the businessof destroying our economy, our government, our civilization, and mostof life on Earth.

We do love money, don'twe...

Since no one couldaccomplish this scam on their own, our hypothetical “someone”would have to share the wealth. Which is what makes this scam socommon. Municipalities all across the country have been gettingthemselves deeply into debt with boondoggle projects. This leads tothesame scam that brought down Greece. The construction companiesmake exorbitant profits with cost overruns. And the banks makeexorbitant profits from predatory loans.

On top of that, since themunicipalities will consequently lose the faith of the community,they are vulnerable to privatization – and subsequent pricegouging.

Scarcity favors of thosewho control what is left.

As we all know; we theconsumers want abundance. Of course we want abundance. It's onlynatural. It's only healthy. More water is good. And no matter how onelooks at it, desalination means more water.Desalination means more water for the people of Southern Nevada andRural Nevada. Desalination means more water for future generations.Desalination means more water for the environment. And desalinationalso means more water for California.

But the samescam is also going on in California. The oligarchs of Californiahave already conned the people of California to pay for waterprojects to make the oligarchs even richer.

Here's the scheme:

The speculators and developers cash in because they con the people into paying for developments for somebody else.
The big construction companies cash in on the project and the inevitable cost overruns.
The banks cash in on the loans, the many fees, and high interest loans for the cost overruns - on a project that has extraordinary commitment (to be finished or it's worthless).
The water “providers” cash in when they privatize and charge what the market will bear. (They'll find a way around Nevada Water Law. If they can't, they'll find a way to change it.)
Smaller construction companies cash in when even more people move into Southern Nevada – no matter how unsustainable the population becomes.
Local retailers expect to cash in when more people move into Southern Nevada. (But these new people will probably move into new communities with new stores. So most likely, the retailers will be disappointed).
And some construction workers will cash in when they get jobs – jobs to devastate the environment (which ultimately will cost them more than the money they earn).
While the unsuspecting populous get stuck with the bill.
And the hotel/casinos get stuck with the image of Evil Empire destroyers of the Environment. (Which can't be good for their tourism business.)

This super-projectboondoggle scheme is so profitable for so many people, that graduallythe scheme has become the system. And the system that was created tofunction for the people has been transformed into thesystem that feeds off the people. Our democracy isbecoming a cleptocracy.

And what was once ademocratic republic becomes a nation of debt slaves and oligarchs.

Our government system hasreached a stage where it can't make the rightdecisions.

SNWA could offer a tradewith California for more water than they are presently getting fromthe Colorado River – and financially help the negatively effectedfarmers. This is a win/win arrangement. California's coastal citiescould get more water. And SNWA could help California farmers withinvestments in water conservation technologies such as:

water capture technology such as TerraCottem soil conditioning polymers
smart breeding research to develop more drought resistant crops
low water use irrigation upgrades
environmentally friendly sprays that will get crops' pores to close up and resist drying and drought

...If there were the willto do it, we could all end up with more water and morefood.

But the executives at SNWAdon't want to do the right thing. They know the cost of desalinationhas dropped drastically. But they would look like fools for wastinghundreds of millions of dollars on an unfinished boondoggle. Theyfear that they might lose their high paying jobs if they admittedthat desalination is cheaper now. They might even lose theopportunity at those even higher paying jobs they might have beenoffered when the revolving door swings their way – as they step outof public “service.”

And where are theregulators and bureaucrats who are supposed to see that things likethis don't happen? Most likely, some of them are looking forward tothe high paying jobs they might get when the revolving door swingstheir way too.

But even if they're not;most of the time, the regulators' hands are tied. In the case of thisWatergrab EIS; the BLM is only able to decide on whether the pipelineis a bad idea – not on whether taking out a river of water from aplace that has no rivers is a bad idea. The pipeline is only atool. The pipeline is like a knife. It doesn't really do that muchdamage – unless it drains the life blood from something. But, of course, drainingthe water is not to be considered in the EIS.

If those at the BLM can'tconsider the water, they're not really considering the Watergrab.This just looks good on paper. In reality, the EIS is just anexercise in distraction and whitewashing.

But it doesn't have to be.If those within the BLM were to deny the Watergrab pipeline, it wouldbe a serious setback on a ridiculous effort that could end up beinghighly disruptive to Nevada's economy and the world's future. Sure,SNWA could go to court and probably win in the long run. But whatwould they win if public sentiment were solidly and enthusiasticallyagainst them.

A no action decision wouldbe a serious blow to the legitimacy of the Watergrab. It would be anopportunity for the public to pay more attention to the implicationsof this boondoggle project.

This “robing Peter topay Paul” project will ultimately drive us closer to a more seriousshortage in the long run.

The Watergrab may as wellhave been designed for maximum exploitation.

A no action decision wouldnot hurt Southern Nevada. It would help them take a moresustainable path.

The Watergrab Has Become A Multi-Billion Dollar Predatory Loan Scam

2011-10-05T11:32:00.000-07:00

Want to know what the nextbig bank predatory lending scandals will be?

Hint, they'll have helpfrom local insiders – pushing boondoggle municipal projects.

The Southern Nevada WaterAuthority (SNWA) Groundwater Development Project (Watergrab) is anexcellent example. Even though water deliveries in Southern Nevadahave gone down for the past three years, and no one is going withoutwater, SNWA wants to start construction on the Watergrab nextyear!

This isn't about water, it's about money.

SNWA's Abilityto Finance Report (page 36) estimates that the Watergrab willonly cost Las Vegas households about $57.91 a month –until the year 2078 (page 35) – projected worst case scenario.That's eventually $700 per year, or a total of $35,869.73 perhousehold! (With corrections made for lower payments initially andpayments towards other projects removed.) Sounds bad enough, but...we're being low-balled again. And bait and switched.

I won't go into how manytimes we've been lied to by SNWA here. But I will say that Ipersonally expect more lies than truth from them. The half-truth listis very long. And the price just keeps on rising.

Will it continue to rise?Absolutely.

First:

All the while being lessthan forthcoming about the cost of construction of the watergrabpipelines and pumps, SNWA has never given us a price tag on the costof power to pump all that water south. Pumping water takesenormous amounts of power. And the price of power just keeps onrising.

For example: TheCalifornia Energy Commission reported (in the report; California'sWater-Energy Relationship) in 2005 that “California's waterrelated energy use consumes 19 percent of the state's electricity, 30percent of its natural gas, and 88 billion gallons of diesel fuelevery year.”

That's a mighty big chunkof change to omit.

The cost of power tooperate the SNWA watergrab pumps will be huge. But noone knows how huge, because we can't predict the cost of power.

Since SNWA hasn't sharedaccurate numbers for the consumption of power to commit thewatergrab, I'll have to consider a likely scenario – SNWA powerbills will likely be comparable to California's. Using California'sstatistics, we can estimate what Southern Nevadans might be expectedto pay. I'll be conservative and ignore the natural gas and dieselconsumption. That leaves 19 percent of Southern Nevada's electricitybill.

So, for a quick and dirtyestimation; Las Vegans will be called upon to pay an even higherwater bill to pay the watergrab power bill – maybe about 19percent of their total power bill. The average Las Vegas power billin Las Vegas is about $135. That calculates to about $30 a month moreresidents of Las Vegas could pay in water bill. (Remember youralgebra. Thats 19% of the new higher power bill. Not 19% of whatthey're paying now. $135/81% = x/19%)

Which brings the subtotalhousehold water bill increase up to $88 a month more – topay for power and to pay off multiple loans for the next 50 to 66years. (That's over $53,000 dollars per household.)

But that's not all.

Second:

No construction costoverruns were predicted. No cost overruns? Sure, there could be amiracle; and no cost overruns. But that isn't anywhere near anaccurate prediction when you look at past SNWA projects. They've allhad cost overruns.

(1990s) The second intakeand Lake Mead had a 31%cost overrun.

($83 million - $63million) / $63 million = 0.317

(2000) The River Mountainswater treatment facility had a 27%cost overrun.

$31.3 million / ($146.6million - $31.3 million) = 0.271

(2007) The SpringsPreserve had a 30% cost overrun.

($235 million - $180million) / $180 million = 0.305

And the cost overruns forthe third water intake arestill mounting. They already have a 10% cost overrun with only athird of the project completed.

Stuff happens. Costoverruns happen. We have to be prepared for that. But it looks likeSNWA doesn't want us to think about that possibility.

We've been consistentlylied to about the cost of the project. For years, we've been told 3.5billion dollars. But that's not what they told the State Engineer.They told him 7.3 billion dollars. I guess you could call thatextra 3 billion dollars a cost overrun. (I see it more as acover-up.) But the next big question is; is this the lastcost overrun? ...SNWA haven't even gotten started yet. Not a chance.

It wouldn't be out of lineto expect at least a20 percent cost overrun. That would amount to at least another $12more per month, or $144 per year – for the rest of most Las Vegan'slives. But it could be worse. Cost overruns are a huge financial risk(read higher interest rates) and potentially a huge burden on LasVegas' economy. Someday, in order for ratepayers to continue to payat the same level on these loans and cost overrunloans, SNWA might be forced to refinance some of their 30 year loansfor a longer period. The fees for that can be very high. That's partof the scam. (Just add another decade of payments to the bill.)

So, add another $12 amonth to that water bill increase. Which leads to a probable worstcase scenario increasein household water bills by at least $100 amonth – $1,200 a year – forat least 50 years ... whichadds up toat least $60,000.00 perhousehold!

SNWA's argument is thatthis isn't as bad as it looks; because new people will move toSouthern Nevada and help pay this massive bill. But don't expectrates to drop that much – especially if there are cost overruns andunexpected bank fees to cancel out any new source of revenue. Infact, the increase in Southern Nevadan's water bills will be so muchthat they might even chase many Las Vegans away. There is noprovision in the SNWA plan to deal with a contracting Las Vegaspopulation – except to raise the rates on those who are left.

The banks will insist onbeing paid – no matter what condition Las Vegas' economy is in,whether the pipeline delivers water or not, or even whether theproject gets canceled half way through construction.

Of course, bankers have tomake a profit too. And for every feature, you would expect a charge.But sometimes bankers just get out of hand. They can charge higherinterest rates for financing the cost overruns. They can charge extrafees. They can get SNWA to refinance for longer terms – with morefees... etc. etc.

This watergrab smellsfishy.

This project is risky,expensive, and unnecessary. Which makes it a candidate for being amassive con job... Follow the money.

A likelyoutcome that needs to be seriously considered is that Las Vegas coulddrown in debt for water they could get for much cheaper. This isn'tjust happening here. It's happening all over the country.Municipalities are getting themselves in way over their heads onboondoggle projects all across the Country.

There is a pattern ofcorrupt local officials working hand in hand with predatory lendersthat has driven many U.S. communities to the verge of bankruptcy...And the ball is already in motion in Southern Nevada. Follow themoney. It's leaving Las Vegans.

Here's an example of whata likely (real life) worst case scenario might end up looking like;Jefferson County, Alabama. A Jefferson County sewer project, that wasoriginally estimated as low as 250 million dollars ended up puttingtheir community over5 billion dollars in debt! That's 20 times the original estimate!SNWA has been throwing around a cost estimate of 3 billion dollarsfor a few years now. Imagine, 20 times the original estimate. Thatwould be 60 billion dollars! Preposterous, you say? Maybe, butI'm sure that's what the people of Jefferson County, Alabama oncethought too.

Nonetheless, thisJefferson County scenario does beg the question; how much is toomuch? 20 billion? 30 billion? 40 billion? For the executives at SNWA,there is no price too high. They have already committed hundreds ofmillions of dollars. The project is worthless until it is finished.And no matter how much cheaper desalination gets, they don't intendto quit now. It would be an admission of their poor managementskills. And besides, they don't really care how much this projectcosts. It's not their money.

Now is the time to be onguard for a massive scam.

Big municipal projectshave the perfect storm potential for multi-billion dollar cons.They're expensive, which means there's plenty of money to go around.One can spread the con over thousands, if not millions of ratepayers,thus maximizing windfall profits. And municipal representatives, notratepayers, make the spending decisions. (Remember, representativescan be “influenced.” The revolving door swings wide when there'sbig money involved. Just ask the former State Water Engineers wholater worked for SNWA.)

Not surprisingly though,some Southern Nevada “representatives” won't have to beinfluenced. They already expect windfall profits from growth towardstheir own land “investments.” This is how local politicians havebeen getting rich in Southern Nevada for decades. They buy some cheapremote land, develop around it, and sell high.

It sure would beinteresting to know who among the SNWA board, Clark CountyCommissioners, and City Councilmen has property alongside I-15 out tothe California border (or in Pahrump, Coyote Springs, or out alongthe Tonopah highway). This seems to me like it would be a conflict ofinterest.

...But of course, this isall just the tip of the iceberg in this scam.

Third:

All of this debt that LasVegans will be burdened with – all of this financial risk – allof this responsibility for so much environmental damage – will beto pay for water for somebody else.

The people of Las Vegasalready have enough water. In fact, consumption has dropped for threeconsecutive years.

Even if water rationingrestrictions were imposed, and the people of Las Vegas had to use 15%less water, they could comfortably handle it. So, what's the bigpanic? There isn't one.

The watergrab is a backdoor maneuver to get the people of Las Vegas to pay billions fordevelopment, so greedy developers don't have to.

This is how oldcommunities end up subsidizing new ones.

This is how the poor endup subsidizing the rich.

This is how the workersend up in debt to the bankers.

This is how theenvironment ends up ruined for us all.

Nevada is not a wasteland.

Let's be certain it neverbecomes one.

The Watergrab is not anact of a healthy democracy.

Obviously, even the peopleof Las Vegas would vote against this.

Top 10 Reasons Why Desalination Is Better Than Desertification

2011-09-15T22:44:00.000-07:00

The Southern Nevada WaterAuthority (SNWA), speculators, and developers have been fearmongering us to believe that the 15 billion dollar (minimum)Groundwater Development Project (Watergrab) is our only option tosave Las Vegas from the reality of living in the desert. Anyrational person would advise them to live within their means – andthat sustaining unsustainable growth is not sustainability.

We've tried. But since themoney grabbers don't want to hear that, the rest of us need tominimize their plundering. Just in case nobody noticed, there is anocean of water just one state away. And desalination costs haveplummeted in the over 20 years since the official commitment to takewater away from Las Vegas' less politically powerful neighbors. Let'sconsider the costs/benefits:

With desalination, there will be more water. No matter how we look at it, desalination adds to the total fresh water available to Southern Nevada. And by saving Nevada's underground reserves for desperate times and/or future generations, we add to the economic stability of the area. Nevada has a simple choice; we can plan for abundance, which is good for the people. Or, we can plan for scarcity, which is only good for the profits of the water providers.
Every big project has environmental consequences. However, wisely designed desalination facilities can greatly minimize potential environmental damage. Presently, most municipal plans for desalination plants are massive facilities right on the beach – with lots of consequences. But desalination plants don't have to be designed that way. Floating desalination plants have been used for decades on ships and near oil rigs. Floating desalination plants can be located out to sea, away from sensitive coastal waters. And floating desalination plants will likely be smaller, creating a smaller impact in the immediate area. Floating desalination plants can even be powered by wave and wind energy. And most importantly, Florida based Water Standard Company claims that they can desalinate water offshore for 30% less cost than land-based facilities.
...On the other hand, the Watergrab environmental effects will be severe and immediate. Localized areas of mass extinction are inevitable when what little water there is in the desert is taken away. Water tables will drop within just a few years, which will result in the killing of everything dependent on ground water and springs. “Mitigation” can never be more than the equivalent of band-aids on severed limbs. A few water troughs may provide enough water for larger animals, but what are they going to eat? Moreover, not just the valleys are in danger. Water flows downhill – even underground. Which means water levels in the surrounding mountain ranges will drop also. Inevitably; open range will become desert, forests will burn, plants and animals will die in mass, Wilderness Areas will lose their wildlife, and the natural environment of Nevada's only National Park will be irreparably damaged.
A common misconception is that desalinated water will have to be piped to Las Vegas. Actually, no pipeline is necessary. SNWA can just trade the desalinated water for more water from the Colorado River. In fact, SNWA has already committed to this concept by teaming up with the Yuma Desalination Facility.
...What this means is SNWA has a choice of building a multi-billion dollar (economy crushing) Watergrab pipeline or desalinate water and not build a multi-billion dollar pipeline. If politics weren't involved, the decision would be obvious.
Desalination is cheaper. The price of desalination has dropped to about $2000 an acre foot. Yet SNWA has spent as much as $10,000 an acre foot for water in Mesquite. Is this an indicator of what SNWA plans on charging for water? (If so, this isn't about need, it's about greed.)
...But we can look at this is a different way. Aquafornia reports that a new desalination facility will be built in Baja California that will make 5.7 million gallons of fresh water per day (6385 acre feet per year). The Watergrab, on the other hand, is expected to steal about 180,000 acre feet per year. That's 28 times as much water as the desalination plant. The cost of the desalination plant is 41.5 million dollars. So, 28 x 41.5 million = 1.2 billion dollars. That may sound like a lot of money, but the projected cost of the watergrab construction is 7.5 billion dollars! Which means the Watergrab construction costs are over 6 times the cost of building the equivalent in desalination facilities!
Desalination just keeps getting cheaper – while the cost of pumping water from some other part of the State just keeps getting more expensive. For example:
a. NanoH20 Quantum Flux reverse osmosis membranes increase water production by as much as 70%.
b. Spectra Watermakers Inc. sells a pump that recaptures up to 80% of the energy wasted in a conventional desalination system.
c. The Aqualyng Recuperator recycles waste desalination energy up to 98.5%.
d. Energy Recovery Inc. pressure exchanger energy recovery technology promises over 60% energy savings.
e. Memsys Clearwater combine both thermal and membrane technologies to utilize low-level waste energy for thermal Vacuum Multi Effect Membrane Distillation (desalination). The main advantage of this process is that it does not require high pressures.
f. Oasys Water has developed a forward osmosis desalination technology that uses one tenth of the power of conventional reverse osmosis.
g. Researchers have also come up with many more ways to bring the price of desalination down. In time, many of these designs may augment, or even replace the least expensive desalination methods possible now.
...The reason falling costs of desalination are so important is because SNWA wouldn't have to buy some of the desalination plants until much later. Desalination plants can be built as needed (in much less grandiose of efforts than the Watergrab). This means it is very likely that Southern Nevada's desalination needs can be achieved even cheaper than we expect.
...And since the price of power keeps rising, the cost of pumping water out of the ground and across the state will very likely be much more expensive than we expect.
Risk is very important. Finance charges are higher for riskier projects. And the risk of huge cost overruns for big projects are often very high. Since the Watergrab project is hideously expensive – and worthless until it's finished, commitment to it is very risky. Smaller projects that can be built as needed are a much lower risk. With desalination, SNWA doesn't have to invest billions of dollars all at once – hoping that there really is water out in the desert – and there will be someone left in Las Vegas to pay for it when the bills come due.
Who pays for the project is very important. With smaller, less expensive (desalination) projects, the burden of paying for new water projects can be paid for by new residents. On the other hand, the cost of the Watergrab is so expensive that present residents will be paying a huge bill for water for other people.
Offshore desalination doesn't ruin anyone's tourism economy. California beaches can still look pristine, and Nevada deserts can too.
Offshore desalination can actually help Las Vegas' tourism economy – by Las Vegas not being perceived as the evil empire. Las Vegas does not want to project their image as callus destroyer of vast ecosystems (like in the movie Rango). That image just doesn't sound like a fun place to go.
Without a watergrab, the rural counties next to Southern Nevada will continue to have viable economies, which will prevent them from becoming the nation's toxic waste dump site – right next door to Las Vegas.

Bonus Reason:

With offshore desalination, no one will have to explain to their children what the desert, the open range, and the mountains of Nevada looked like before Southern Nevada killed them.

So...

If offshore desalinationis such a good idea, why didn't SNWA commit to it 20 years ago?

Because no one anticipatedthe cost of desalination, wind, and wave energy to drop like theydid. (Waveenergy is as cheap as PV solar now.)

So...

If offshore desalinationis such a good idea now, why hasn't SNWA changed their minds?

After spending hundreds of millions of dollars on the Watergrab, it would be political suicide to admit they made a mistake.
Nevada water law is written such that if SNWA backed down, somebody else would just take the water. Sadly, there is no provision in Nevada water law to save water for future use. (The future doesn't have any lobbyists to support their cause.)
Because of the way our political and campaign systems (dys)function, our politicians and bureaucrats are not politically permitted to make wise long term decisions.
There is a potential here for a few corrupt local officials to get very wealthy by selling out Las Vegas to predatory lenders.

This is too important adecision not to be voted on.

How Much Is The SNWA Watergrab Really Going To Cost?

2011-09-05T20:35:00.000-07:00

Well now, that depends on how you ask the question.

There's the up front cost, which doesn't mean anything, since SNWA intends to borrow the money to pay for it – and the finance charges will dwarf the up front charges.
There's the cost the SNWA admits to just before you're committed
There's the cost experts estimate
There's the cost if there are construction cost overruns, more loans, refinanced loans, penalties, and whatever else the bank can come up with to charge Las Vegans even more.
There's the economic cost devastating rural economies.
And then there's the hidden costs which we rarely even think about...

Three billion dollars. That's what Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) told us for years. Which, in the real world, didn't mean dehydrated antelope poop. After 20 years, the estimate was up to 3.5 billion dollars now – because they expanded the project. This, in itself, tells us that the figure means nothing. It didn't keep up with inflation. In fact, they totally ignored inflation.

Twenty years ago, there was an expert opinion that estimated the watergrab cost at up to 20 billion dollars. But most people forgot about that.

Originally, SNWA told us that Las Vegas needed to steal water from the rest of the State to accommodate the exponential growth they were experiencing. But then the growth stopped. So, they needed another excuse. They chose drought. They told us that someday, maybe even soon, the Colorado River might dry up. Of course, they didn't admit that if that were to happen; drought would hit the rest of Nevada too – and there wouldn't be any water to take.

SNWA wants us to believe the watergrab isn't about growth. ...Yeah, right.

But let's consider that option.

And what do the people of Las Vegas gain for this outrageous bill? Well, they already have enough water. There are no shortages now. So, I guess the watergrab pipeline would be turned off most of the time – because Las Vegas wouldn't need the water. If the population of Southern Nevada were to remain stable, the only real need would occur when the Colorado River drys up.

Now wait a minute, the Colorado River didn't dry up this year. I'm not saying it couldn't, but it hasn't.

So, SNWA wants the people of Las Vegas to pay what could be well over $9,000 per person for water they don't really need, to avert the risk of rationing. Now, since the people of Las Vegas already use more water, per capita, than most people in the world; water rationing really wouldn't be that big a deal. And I would bet, that to save $9,000 per person, most of the people of Las Vegas would be willing to risk a little water rationing. (Or conservation, if you want to use a nicer term.)

Will Las Vegas Drown... In Water Debt?

2011-08-18T16:19:00.000-07:00

Have you ever heard of a hidden tax? It's a tax you pay when you buy something, but you don't realize you're paying it. One of your suppliers paid it, and transferred that cost to you – in the price. Most often, we never notice – until the tax, and the price, goes way up.

What if, somehow, a new tax was imposed by a far away power – on something you absolutely had to have? What if this “tax” was a huge tax on water? In fact, what if it was even worse than any tax? What if it was interest on debt?

This isn't some imaginary exercise, however. People, communities, and nations all over the world have found themselves drowning in debt. One could even argue that usury has become an imperialist tactic – and that financial looting is happening everywhere. So, why don't we just stop borrowing? It's complicated. But sometimes, we feel that what we need is worth the risk of borrowing money for it. Of course, sometimes, the decisions are made for us.

Everyone who has ever lived in the desert knows that the most valuable resource in the desert is water. It's the only thing you can get a whole community “fight'n mad” upset over. Nobody ever wants to run out of water. Not ever...

The fear is so elemental, so beyond reason; that water shortages may be the ultimate weapon to con a community. We all know that we will pay whatever it costs to have water. When it comes to water, we're no better off than a junkie. And we know there are people salivating over business deals like that. They want to be Southern Nevada's “supplier” – so they can charge any price – for rural Nevada's water. That's right. This “plan” looks like someone is scheming to steal from the right hand to overcharge the left. And this won't just be an up front charge. Prices are subject to change.

Just think about other forms of credit. You don't just pay back what you borrow. And there isn't just interest. There's fees. There's hidden fees. And there's refinancing fees. SNWA's estimate of 3.5 billion dollars is just the principle for the Groundwater Development Project. You can be rest assured that the banks involved will work every trick in the book to make the true cost far higher.

What a scam.

What a multi-billion dollar, economy crushing scam!

Yes; it's true I don't want the watergrab to happen because I feel that the act of a community stealing the natural wealth of it's neighbors to artificially sustain unsustainable growth is just wrong – inherently amoral. But I also fear for Las Vegas. Because I see another banking loan scam coming that would ultimately financially ruin Las Vegas. Everyone remembers the housing bubble, fueled by senseless loans that ultimately crashed the world economy. Well, they can't run that scam any more. Nobody has any more money. So, the next scam is to loot their community's money.

It is likely that there have been a number of powerful international bankers, over the course of the years, who've lost a lot of money in Las Vegas (gambling). Some of them might have even gone away angry. Couldn't it be possible that someone among these powerful bankers finally just said; “My turn.” Or then again, maybe this is just another step in a systematic looting of the world.

Is Las Vegas under attack? I'm not certain. But there are terrifying signs...

There is this boondogle of a watergrab going on – right under under everyone's feet. It will cost billions. (I have a good idea of how many billions now. I'll let you know in my next post.) And though Las Vegas doesn't need the water, Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) intends to start construction next year.

An unelected “Authority” (and some Clark County Commissioners) are going to plunge Southern Nevada into billions of dollars in debt for water they don't really need – when the area doesn't really have that much money.

What's wrong with this picture?

It would take a drought of disaster capitalism proportions to get this through. (Either that, or a mega-greedy attitude that Las Vegas should just keep doubling in population every few years – forever – or at least for the rest of the investors' lives.)

We already know that most Las Vegans don't really want to see that much more growth in Las Vegas. And we can already surmise that no Las Vegans want to pay billions for water for some other community. So; there is no need - at least not at this cost.

The SNWA watergrab is not popular. “We the people” wouldn't vote for it. When you look at it that way, the SNWA watergrab is in fact an act of usurping the citizens' sovereignty. The watergrab is undemocratic. We wouldn't vote for it!

But that's OK. Some County Commissioners will decide for us. ...And if somebody were to pay them a bunch of money (under the table), maybe they will decide against us.

What's at stake is the future of Las Vegas and Nevada. Both of our economies will be devastated when this (robbing Peter to pay Paul) water scheme doesn't work out. Someday, we may look back and see this as an attack.

(I'm starting to suspect a conspiracy here.)

Other American cities have come under attack already. Not a violent attack, but just as destructive as a violent attack in the long run. They owe billions. They've had to make ludicrous cutbacks. People are sick, and dying without health care. Children aren't getting an education. Critical services, such as police and fire departments have had to cut back. Everyone involved is in debt... because their community is in debt.

Maybe it's just our turn now... Oh yeah... It already is.

Most Third World countries are far too familiar with conquest by debt. Europe and America are next. Portugal, Italy, Greece, and Spain have already been looted by international investors (banks). All that's left for these countries is debt and deconstruction. But that's not how the banks see it... They're just maximizing their profits.

I used to think that SNWA was going to privatize and overcharge it's customers. I don't think that anymore. Straightforward water privatizing is so 20^th century. We wouldn't fall for that. (But we might fall for a water project.)

I now realize that banks don't have to privatize municipalities.

All they have to do is socialize the costs.

Las Vegas is small time compared to these Banksters.

But they're still a big catch.

Something smells very fishy about this whole project.

We want to make win-win decisions.

This smells lose-lose-game over.

What If The Watergrab Is Not Really About Water?

2011-08-13T11:18:00.000-07:00

What if it's about money?

Why would a (quasi)municipality want to undertake a financially risky, devastatingly destructive, hideously expensive, and unpopular expansion project when it's customer base has shrunk significantly in the past few years?

This doesn't make sense. Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) plans to start construction next year on a project who's cost is approaching SNWA's total assets at present.

...And of course, that's before the construction cost overruns.

...And of course, that's before the new loans to pay off the cost overruns

...And of course, that's before the hidden fees and penalties.

...And of course, that's before the refinancing fees.

The SNWA Groundwater Development Project is so massive, so expensive; it would be almost like building Las Vegas' total water infrastructure all over again. The watergrab is projected to cost “about” 3.5 billion dollars. SNWA's total assets at present are about 4.7 billion dollars.

That's a whole lot of money for some construction company. Maybe Halliburton, KBR, or Bechtel (the multi-national corporation that was kicked out of Bolivia by rioting citizens for mismanaging and price gouging a water project there) has already provided the estimate? They haven't told us who will build this, have they? Maybe we might get suspicious if the companies involved are known for padding contracts?

If there is collusion, you can bet there are some very high paying jobs waiting just on the other side of the revolving door for some of those SNWA executives.

And we all know that SNWA doesn't have the cash to pay for this huge project. So where are they going to get the money? Borrow it, of course. And some bank must have already given SNWA an idea of how much the financing costs are. So, why haven't they told us what banks are involved?

What if the bank involved is JP Morgan Chase, UBS, Goldman Sachs, or Bank of America? Since 2008, these banks have earned a scary reputation of unscrupulous financing. JP Morgan Chase, for example, was recently fined 228 million dollars for running a bid rigging scheme involving municipal bonds in 18 states. Did you get that? Municipal bonds!

Have the people of Las Vegas already forgot about the financial “crimes” that led to the housing crisis – and Las Vegas' present economic state? No. Of course not. Maybe that's why we don't know who SNWA wants to borrow from.

I'm not just making this up. All across the country, communities are being driven into crushing debt by greedy multi-national banks.

All it takes is a few corrupt officials – and a whole lot of bribe money.

In this Max Keiser video interview; Matt Taibbi shows an example of a small community that wanted to upgrade it's sewers – ending up with billions of dollars in debt.

This video has about three minutes of related information before the actual interview. Max Keiser is a bit over the top, but it's worth the information about whole communities being driven to debt servitude for the next generation.

…

The original cost estimates of the sewer upgrade were $250 million. With all of the contract padding and finance costs, the bill ended up at $3 billion, 12 times the original cost!

For more information; Matt Taibbi's report Looting Main Street explains how the nation's biggest banks are ripping off American cities with the same predatory deals that brought down Greece.

Is Southern Nevada above this kind of thievery? Nope. In fact, they are ripe for the picking.

And worse, the crushing debt would practically guarantee that the hoped for growth to pay for the Groundwater Development Project won't be as robust as anticipated. In other words, there won't be a need for more water – and those who don't leave Las Vegas will have to shoulder the whole bill.

Can We Survive All This – Happier Than We Are Now?

2011-08-05T12:26:00.000-07:00

It has been said that if you want to make an omelet, you'll have to break a few eggs. True, but you definitely don't want to break all the eggs – and kill off the chickens.

Collectively as a civilization, in many ways, that's exactly what we are doing. For example; our extractive industries are racing to extract most of our planet's resources. And then they're planning on getting even richer price gouging when the supply gets low. There are so many cases of industries turning into rackets that we've passively accepted this as merely what capitalism looks like. Many executives just don't see enough financial incentive for their companies to be sustainable, safe, or even responsible. They want to be above the law. Hell, they want to write the laws! The foxes are now telling us how to run the chicken coop. This is not only dysfunctional, it is ultimately economic suicide. But it doesn't have to be that way. Humanity can do far better. We just have to fix our flawed system processes.

Consider this; what is the most basic flaw of our civilization's economic and political systems?

I would suggest it is our collective inability to utilize common sense.

Short-term self interest has driven our society toward corporate anarchy. Consequently, our society is unable to democratically adapt to a changing reality with objective, rational plans.

Take for instance; consider how our lust for money has clouded our capacity to maximize our happiness to such an extent that humanity runs the risk of self-induced extinction.

Humanity has still not effectively addressed our obsession for money. I suspect this is so because we have never actually tried.

When money was invented, nobody sat around thinking about how we should best create a better future with it. Nobody sat in planning meetings to figure out what type of society we should create with money. The whole monetary basis for all of our planet's major economies just sort of happened. The fundamental basis for our world economy, money, was never designed to maximize our happiness. Money was, and is, just an overrated tool. Money is just paper.

Of course, using money was far easier than trading chickens for medical services. And, of course, money represented wealth. So, people tried to accumulate as much of it as they could... Whether capitalist, communist, or socialist – in a nutshell; this is our economic system... That's right. No overall plan. No sustainable objective. Not even any logical methodology for determining the wisest course. Let's face it; nobody has really thought this all through to any kind of logical conclusion. Humanity is simply running amok to accumulate colored paper.

Which leads to disasters such as this:

…

This is insane. This type of behavior in a society is literally insane, profoundly self-destructive, and ultimately suicidal.

Draining water from the desert has obvious results: death... mass death, economic devastation in the effected areas, and unsustainable Ponzi scheme growth.

So, why would Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) want to do something like this?

Let's see... SNWA is a quasi-municipality at a time where municipalities across the nation are privatizing. Hmm... could it be that SNWA secretly wishes to privatize also? If so, having water rights to huge swaths of Rural Nevada water would fetch them a much higher asking price – likely billions more, in fact. And moreover, there just might be some high paying jobs on the other side of that revolving door too.

Could it be that SNWA is just trying to drive up their asking price – when they eventually decide to privatize? Could it be that SNWA is essentially speculating with Nevadans' water?

In a way, this watergrab is already a form of privatization. That's right, if this watergrab effort is permitted, Southern Nevada's private entities will end up with water that has been the commons for all from time immemorial.

It is very likely that this watergrab is just another step towards quasi-privatization of much of our State's groundwater.

Think about this: What's to keep any private company that takes over SNWA from price gouging? Nothing. Sure, Nevada water law doesn't permit them to sell State water. But so what? All they have to do is sell the delivery of the water. It is very likely that SNWA is taking the first steps towards overcharging Nevadans for our own water.

The amazing irony of all this is that Nevada water law is written to expedite this exploitation. Nevada water law is essentially written; “the first to exploit our water can have it all to themselves for free.” SNWA has to apply for the water, or somebody else will take it.

This is a sign. This is a sign of a dysfunctional system. We need to fix this. It is of utmost importance. But unfortunately, our economic and political systems are so broken that it is very likely that we can't really fix anything without fixing everything.

The inertia of our (historically cobbled together) economic system is on a crash course at full speed to convert everything of any real value into money. (Need I remind you, money is only paper.) Massive profits have become more important than the survival of at risk plants, animals, ecosystems, even our own species – even all life on the planet.

No individual wants this.

We wouldn't vote for this.

But we're all caught up in the game.

This game has been compared to running a rat race with a monkey on your back, but it's the only game we know. Humanity has forgotten what worked for tens of thousands of years. We now believe that “greed is good” – because we don't comprehend anything else. On the other hand, ask even the dimmest among us, and they understand “supply and demand.” If supply becomes scarce, prices will rise. And if demand grows, prices will rise. Everybody knows that. We're all caught up in the game. But it's the people willing to manipulate supply and/or demand that we have to watch out for.

Massive profits are most often accumulated by utilizing two strategies; increasing scarcity and/or increasing growth. Here; we see both scarcity of water in the desert and growth in Southern Nevada. There are schemers who must see this as an opportunity to take advantage of others' desperation. Is there a conspiracy? We'd be fools to blindly trust otherwise. But initially, I think this was more of a trend – a trend we all too often see.

Historically, we have seen a trend (such as people moving to Las Vegas), turn into an industry (construction, etc.), now turning into a racket (crisis water supply).

…

And who pays? Well, check out the movie Chinatown. It's as if SNWA executives watched this movie about corruption and greed over and over again to plan the watergrab. The plays are all there. The names have been changed. There is, of course, a legitimate facet to who pays and who benefits from this water project. New residents to Southern Nevada will bear some of the expenses – and so they should. But existing residents will also bear billions of dollars in expenses for a pipeline network they don't need. Current residents of Las Vegas already have all the water they need. But like in the movie Chinatown, they've been panicked into thinking there is a shortage. What's worse is the economic benefits of Southern Nevada growth won't be shared evenly. Existing residents won't get new development in their neighborhoods. No, older neighborhoods will be left to rot – as they pay higher and higher taxes and fees to pay for water development in newer parts of Southern Nevada.

So, who benefits? The pro-growth supply/demand manipulators I warned you about earlier. The speculators. The developers. The Southern Nevada construction industry (which was morphing into an endless unsustainable growth racket). And those who can sell the one thing that is most precious in the desert – water.

Right about now, the pro-growth manipulators reading this will start in with the name calling. Most likely they will call me a Luddite, a tree hugger, or maybe a granola-head. They don't want people to realize that personally all I want is what is best for all of us in the long run. On the other hand, the pro-growth types tend to be more short-sighted and self-interested. Of course, the pro-growth types like to think of themselves as captains of industry, not selfish manipulators of our economy... And some of them own newspapers.

Our economic system is critically dysfunctional. This is all a big Ponzi scheme. Humanity takes from nature. We take from future generations. We take from our neighbors. We take from our customers. And if we can help it, we don't give back. That's just the way it is. We've got to maximize our profits.

In this dysfunctional system, the biggest exploiters are (temporarily) the biggest winners. Our businesses often promote those with psychopathic traits – to maximize profits. And once in position, the economic pressures on an executive push them to make psychopathic decisions – to maximize profits. Corporations are not models of democracy. They are effectively dictatorships. Corporate CEOs are not models of morality, they are fallible people with one overriding mission; increase the company's profits. It's that bad. Worse even. If any of these executives gain a sense of morality, it doesn't make any difference. Someone else will step in to take their place in a heartbeat.

All of the people of Nevada are being played. The endgame of this process is a hellish mess – with two overcrowded, overpriced, unsustainable, mono-culture mega-cities (near Las Vegas and Reno), and a vast uninhabitable desert that will ultimately become the toxic dump site for the nation... Things could get that bad. In fact, the trend has been going that way for well over 50 years.

We wouldn't vote for this...

Humanity doesn't want scarcity. We want abundance. But abundance doesn't concentrate money. SNWA could desalinate ocean water – which would mean more fresh water for Nevadans and Californians. (SNWA could desalinate water offshore for Californians, in exchange for more water from the Colorado River.) The environment crushing watergrab wells and pipelines are simply not necessary – and they're more expensive. However, an abundance of water means less scarcity, and therefore less profits. Besides; SNWA has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on this project. Politically, they can't admit that the money was wasted. They simply can't back down now, even though the price of desalination has dropped precipitously.

Collectively, Nevadans are unable to utilize common sense on this water issue – because our “leaders” are afraid of losing their jobs.

So, what do we really want?

I would suggest that we really want to maximize our happiness. And not just this quarter, not just this fiscal year; but for the rest of our lives – and for the lives of those we leave behind too.

What we really want is the collective opportunity to make the most sensible decisions. Our elected representatives have failed us. Our corrupt electoral system forces them to sell out to the highest bidder. What we need is more direct democracy.

What we really want is the intelligent management of the Earth's resources, based upon science – not Fox “News” style sell-out pseudo-science.

What we really want is more common sense.

Why should this even be remotely controversial?

...Because some companies' short-term profit margins might suffer.

... that's it.

... that's it!

They Think We're Too Stupid To Notice

2011-07-27T07:26:00.000-07:00

They think we're too stupid to notice... Or too ignorant... Or too brainwashed by big money propaganda. Or maybe we're just too willing to look the other way... because it might mean having to do something about it... if we realized the severity of our predicament.

A radically right leaning faction of our government is holding us hostage, and they are willing to trash our economy – and our nation, to get their way. Because they know that some of us are too ignorant to remember by the next election.

They believe they can crash the economy and blame it all on Obama… and that some of us will believe it.

Maybe the radicals hope to write a last minute bill that Obama will have to sign, no matter how much he may not want to... to avert a debt default. Maybe the radicals just want to have it all their way, or else. But most obviously, they don't care if they ruin the economy, because they think they can just blame it all on Obama.

And then again, maybe some behind the radical right don't fear the collapse of the United States. Maybe some of them hope to be like Vladimir Putin, and rake in the money after the fall.

There is no immediate debt crisis. The stock market hasn't budged. And we're less than a week from defaulting. This whole debt ceiling crisis is contrived.

This debt ceiling debate has once again proven the obvious:

Pure representative democracy has failed us. Our elected representatives don't represent us any more. Technically speaking, we no longer have a democracy any more.

The American people wouldn't vote for this.

Face it; if we had a real democracy, we would be voting on issues such as this.

There is no reason we should have to rely on “representatives” to make our long-term policy decisions for us.

Pure representative democracy is just part of a corrupt system that keeps power out of the hands of the citizens of the United States. Combine that with a blatantly corrupt electoral system, and we get a political system that ignores the will of the people. That's not a democracy. That's a pretend democracy. Our government has gone “free market.” Legislation is for sale to the highest bidder. Our candidates are hand picked by the oligarchy before we ever get to vote for them. And our “for profit” news providers get richer every day telling us what they're paid to – and ignoring the obvious.

But they think we're too stupid to notice.

… or at least too lazy (or afraid) to do anything about it.

Star Trek was Just a Fantasy

2011-07-10T09:44:00.000-07:00

Of course, we haven't completely given up on manned space travel. It's just that the Star Trek vision of space exploration is on the junk pile.

Forget about the prime directive.
We're all about profit now.

It looks like future space travel will look more like the movies Total Recall or Alien.

(from the movie Total Recall)

(from the movie Alien)

Spoiler Alert!!!

You may recall that in the movie Total Recall, the evil corporate CEO wouldn't turn on the atmosphere generator on Mars because it would have made air free.

You may recall that in the movie Alien, their corporate bosses sent out astronauts to pick up the dangerous alien so that they could have possession of a new type of weapon.

Space is now all about the money.

Our new mantra:

To go where no corporation has gone before.

Weinergate Was A Political Assassination

2011-06-17T09:37:00.000-07:00

What is politics about? Power.

Power to do what? To make more money.

Anthony Weiner got in the way of those who want to make more money... at your painful expense. They want as much as they can get. In fact, many of you may be driven to bankruptcy because Anthony Weiner has been driven from office. Worse, many of you may die.

Weinergate is about power. Weinergate is about corrupt power. And Weinergate is about immoral activity far worse than flirting on the internet while married.

Anthony Weiner never actually committed a crime. He never exposed his genitals (in what he thought were private communications). And most likely, in time, it will come out that his shirtless pictures were sent before he was married.

Weinergate has all the signs of being a political attack.

All Anthony Weiner is guilty of is lying about an embarrassing matter that should have been a private subject between him and his wife.

Doesn't any of this sound familiar? Doesn't anyone remember the (likely set-up) Monica Lewinsky affair? And doesn't anyone remember what happened when Elliot Spitzer was brought down over a $4,000 and hour hooker?

Allow me to remind you. President Clinton's power was severely crippled for the rest of his presidency. And Eliot Spitzer was prevented from stopping the perpetrators of the 2008 financial meltdown (before it happened).

It's as if the same people from the same right-wing conspiracy (the plutocracy) are now using the same tactics for essentially the same criminal ends. We are being played – again.

The important question we need to ask is not one of the questions reporters from for-profit news usually ask. No. It's not about who, what, where, or when. It's about why? And why now? Why were these pictures released on the same day Justice Clarence Thomas was supposed to release his 2010 financial disclosure form.

Anthony Weiner had been insisting that Justice Thomas recuse himself from an important upcoming health care reform case. It is blatantly obvious that Justice Thomas has a conflict of interest in this case. It is also blatantly obvious that releasing these pictures on this day would kill two birds with one stone. Nobody would pay attention to Justice Thomas' statements and Anthony Weiner would be stopped – permanently.

Of course, I would expect the Republicans to be all over Weiner – and they should. But what about the Democrats? Aren't they supposed to be on his side. He never committed a crime. And they don't even know if he committed an ethics violation. But they already mobilized to strip him of his power in Congress. Who's side are the (new post-Citizens United) Democrats really on? Is this really what it looks like; that the new Democrats are willing to purge their ranks of legitimate liberals even before the next elections.... And where does President Obama stand on all of this? Oh... yeah... Right there with the very people who wish to kill health care reform (by declaring it unconstitutional).

This certainly sounds like the new Democrats are unwilling to fight now for a bill they just passed a couple of years ago. Are they afraid that if they stand up for fellow Democrat Anthony Weiner, that they're next.

(Think about it. If the press can take somebody down for something this minor, nobody is safe. And think about one more thing. If big money has the choice of backing somebody who is squeaky clean or somebody they have blackmail info on, who would you expect them to give campaign contributions to?)

Could Weinergate and its response by Democrats be evidence of just how vast the “vast right wing conspiracy” really might be.

Weinergate isn't about family values or traditional marriage relationships. Weinergate is about crushing the careers of anyone who challenges the plutocracy. And apparently, the Democrats in Congress are willing to play along.

(This may be a sign. If the elected representatives of our democracy are afraid to stand up for each other and us, this may be a sign that our American style representative democracy has already effectively failed. This is certainly a sign that this country needs more direct democracy. And this is definitely a sign that it is time to think outside of the box.)

You may recall that when journalists Woodward and Bernstein were investigating the original Watergate break-in, their informant (Deep Throat) advised them to; “follow the money.”

“Follow the money.”

But there was no money involved in Anthony Weiner's online flirting.

...This is a sign.

This is a sign that this is much bigger than what we've been told.

It's very likely that billions, if not trillions of our dollars are at stake; while we're being shown pictures of a Congressman in his underwear.

America is under siege, and we are losing.

The counter-revolution will continuously be televised.

What hasn't been reported by the mainstream press (and won't be reported until long after it's too late), is the real reason why such a minor issue has been brought to the forefront. Anthony Weiner was trying to get Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from a case where there is an obvious big-money conflict of interest. Billions, if not trillions of American taxpayer and ratepayer dollars are at stake – not to mention, our health.

Which brings us to the fatal flaw of for-profit news reporting.

The primary purpose (by far) of the mass media is to make money. And when there is a conflict between informing the American people and making money, we almost always end up misinformed. (Even Eliot Spitzer, who suffered a similar conspiratorial fate, was afraid to say anything about the motives behind Weinergate. He works for for-profit news now.)

Distraction is being used as a weapon.

And if they succeed, this weapon will kill tens of thousands of Americans a year.

So, what case is it that gives Judge Clarence Thomas the power to kill tens of thousands of Americans a year? A case challenging the constitutionality of the health care reform bill.

This isn't about Weiner's wiener. This is about real world privatized death “panels” who intend to deny insurance customers payouts again. This is about insurance companies keeping all the money – and letting us die. This is about overturning a law they don't feel like abiding. This is about subverting the will of the American people. This is about insurance companies overthrowing this part of our democracy.

Anthony Weiner never committed any crime. Contrast that with Justice Clarence Thomas:

Judge Clarence Thomas' wife, Ginni, has received almost $700,000 in money from right wing organizations – that they somehow “forgot” to report... for the past 20 years. Is this illegal? Oh hell yeah.

But there's more. What looks like judicial insider trading has already occurred. Back when Clarence Thomas was having a hard time getting his conformation for Supreme Court Justice (because he was being accused of sexual harassment by a respectable attorney, Anita Hill), an organization known as Citizens United spent $100,000 on attack ads against his Congressional detractors. And guess what; years later, Clarence Thomas (in what was obviously a conflict of interest) ruled in favor of Citizens United in a case that allows big money to flood electoral politics.

Weiner's wiener is a distraction.

The real crime is that the Supreme Court has been corrupted.

The consequences of this corruption is essentially the loss of our democracy.

The consequences of this corruption is the control of our nation by a cleptocracy.

The consequences of this corruption is one more step towards the citizenry becoming a nation of sweat shop wage/tax slaves with no hope for fair health care – or justice.

Weinergate is an act of war against the American people.

Weinergate is a distraction from the blatant “crimes” Justice Clarence Thomas has and will commit against us.

If the health care reform bill were to be declared unconstitutional:

Tens of thousands of people will become at risk of dying untimely deaths every year without adequate health care – while the insurance industry will make grossly unfair profits.

By voting for Obama, the American people voted for better health care – and we would again, whoever the candidate. However, it appears that our present political system is incapable of stopping the plutocracy from gutting our democracy and denying us reasonable health care that other countries all over the world already provide. Think about what this says about our health “care” system. They'll let you die if it means more money for them. Being above the law isn't good enough for them. They want to be the law. That's how fascists think.

It appears that the only thing that can stop them now is a real threat of a real revolution. It appears now that the oligarchs feel so in control that they don't fear anything – except being murdered... Frighteningly, it just may be that it really is getting that bad. But what else can we expect. When we reach a point where the rule of law no longer exists, what other threat is there?

Humans are extraordinarily peaceful. People have to be pushed hard to kill. I don't expect a nation full of Ted Kaczynski (Unabomber) copycats. But think about this: Every year, tens of thousands of people are being told that they are terminally ill. If health care reform is killed, some of these people will realize that they could have lived – if we were allowed to better control our health care system. Wouldn't you expect them to be angry? Maybe even angry enough to kill?

If health care reform is killed, maybe the next “terrorist” attacks will be revenge attacks against insurance company executives – maybe even against their investors.

Let's avoid that. Let's finish what Anthony Weiner was trying to do. Let's convince Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from this case.

...And maybe we can get a little justice out of the Justice Department too.

Fear This

2011-05-31T09:37:00.000-07:00

When President Franklin D. Roosevelt said; “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself”... he lied. Roosevelt told America the lie we wanted to hear. He told Americans that everything was OK.

But America wasn't OK. It was the Great Depression. Many people were going hungry (including my grandparents). American style capitalism had failed us. American style representative democracy had failed us. And God had not come to rescue us. In fact, just the opposite; the Dust Bowl showed America that the environment could fail us too.

The consequences of years of corruption in government before the Great Depression were quite painful – especially for those who hadn't been corrupt.

For many, it felt like it was time for a change.

FDR tried many things to get America out of the Great Depression. But America's rich oligarchy weren't all that enthusiastic about helping their fellow man. Some of the changes FDR tried were very unpopular with the rich. (Those on top fear change – they might not stay on top.)

One of the things FDR tried was Keynesian economics. He figured he could stimulate America's economy back to life with government spending. FDR hired scores of the poor in huge jobs programs with Federal money. America's infrastructure was significantly improved because of these projects. And as one might expect, this was very popular among the poor (who had been going hungry). But nonetheless, many among the rich hated FDR. They weren't going hungry. And they would have been perfectly happy with a two tier society – with them on top and our tax money only being spent on them. (Here's a sign; it helps to be greedy to get rich. So, expect many among the rich to be greedy.)

As one might expect, America's rich oligarchy still had plenty of power in Washington. And those who didn't like FDR “wasting” their tax dollars on the poor still had plenty of influence with their (financially well off) appointed judges in the “Supreme” Court. True to their station in society, the “Supreme” Court struck down a number of FDR's jobs programs.

The irony of all this is that it was huge government spending for military programs in World War II that later pulled America out of the Great Depression. Keynesian economics worked. (And the “Supreme” Court didn't fight this jobs program because rich people were making big money selling weapons.) However, there were consequences. Simply put; you can't eat weapons. All one can do with weapons is stockpile them, or use them – neither option productive. The “Supreme” Court had curtailed all of our Keynesian jobs programs other than military spending. And once America was used to the stimulus, the economy would suffer if the government stopped providing it.

What WWII spending led to is the biggest (under the table) Keynesian jobs program in the history of the world. (This isn't some new concept. I remember back when I used to work for the military/industrial complex; when we used to jokingly refer to our paychecks as “Fedicare.”)

U.S. military spending has provided the stimulus to keep America's economy going “strong” for the past 60 years – sort of. Unfortunately, there were consequences to excessive military spending. Our economy didn't grow in the right direction. America has slowly slipped towards militarism. More important domestic issues have been neglected. Our government has been corrupted. But worst of all, all of that continual “stimulus” was like speed to a junkie's body – and eventually our economy and environment have been pushed to exhaustion.

Multi-trillion dollar deficit military spending has provided the temporary stimulus for America to ignore all of the lessons of the Great Depression for six decades. But the reality bill has come due again. And this time, with interest, it is huge.

We don't have a Dust Bowl this time. But we do have extreme drought in Texas and many parts of the West. And record tornadoes. And record snowfall in the East. And record flooding. And forecasts are for a big hurricane season this year. And if we have a dry summer again this year locally, we will likely see mega-fires... And the polar ice caps are the smallest they've been in history. And the world's mountain top glaciers are the smallest they've been in tens of thousands of years. And the oceans are the warmest they've been in thousands and most acidic they have been in millions of years.

By now, you might think all this is a sign. You should. In fact, you should have 30 years ago. We're way past the signs. (Of course, those who are raking in billions off of making things worse don't think so. But what would you expect them to think.)

The evidence keeps blowing in. Extreme climate change brought on by man-made global warming is already here. The “Eaarth” that Bill McKibben speaks of – the new climate that we all will just have to suffer with, may now just be the new norm. (...Oooh shhhit!!!)

Why am I afraid? Need I remind you that every economy from every civilization that has ever existed stands or collapses upon the shoulders of the environment. It is that important.

But have you noticed; the mass media “news” doesn't report on global warming any more. They're more or less silent about it. Even with all these environmental disasters, climate change rarely gets mentioned (and usually not without some fossil fuel industry funded “expert” to cast doubt about it.) ...This too, is a sign. Every one of the mass media news reporters is afraid. That's right; every one of them, afraid. They are afraid to tell truth to power, because they know that if they did, they would never be promoted again – if they're lucky. Though you may not remember, they remember what happened to Dan Rather when he exposed Bush Jr. as skating past his draft and deserting the National Guard. [Dan Rather was once the most powerful reporter on television news. I saw that 60 minutes episode on Bush's questionable history. Dan Rather should have received an award. Bush Jr. should have been investigated. But like a pack of angry attack dogs, the mass media press turned on Dan Rather. Not one of the other reporters in all of mass media I watched ever even mentioned one of the many points made in that report... But those gutless reporters did however report the Swift Boat Veterans' lies about (Bush Jr.'s opponent) John Kerry quite extensively.] Every mass media reporter knows that Dan Rather was essentially banned from television news for telling truth to power. And they know that their reporter comrades will lie about them to save their own skins. They are all afraid.

The reporters' bosses are even more afraid. They are dependent upon advertisers dollars to stay in business. Let's face it, the for-profit news companies do what they're told. In fact, they're so subservient, they don't even have to be told. Even the best of them promote by agenda. And the agenda is to make money – even if their reporters have to lie by omission (or worse).

Hey, wait a minute. We didn't elect these people to be our public information systems. And in the most gut-wrenching of dirty tricks, we certainly didn't spend our money in good faith expecting these corrupt “advertisers” to manipulate our news.

The money advertisers use to pay the mass media is our money. These advertisers wouldn't have a dime of it if we hadn't given it to them. They are using our own money to sucker us in – to take even more of our money. We don't have to put up with that.

And we don't have to put up with failed-state politics either. Pure representative democracy has failed us – again. Corruption is rampant. Waste is rampant. Destruction of the commons (our environment) is rampant. And our economy is faltering. Why would we want to put up with politicians making all the (wrong) decisions when we-the-people have the capacity to hold yearly elections on long-term policy decisions? I strongly believe that if we were more honestly informed, we-the-people couldn't possibly do any worse (for everyone) than this hopelessly corrupt system we are stuck with now.

Our politicians have been forced to legislate by the “free market.” Bribes are required – in the form of campaign contributions. Laws are being written, and subsidies being given to those who can afford to buy them. This is no way to run a country. This is how to run a country into the ground.

The massive bank bailouts didn't actually fix anything, they just allowed the big banks to take more from us.

The massive military spending America has been doing hasn't made us safer, it just prepared us to get into more unnecessary wars.

And the massive social cuts we are experiencing now aren't going to make our lives any better or our country any more solvent, they're just going to allow the banks and the military/industrial complex to get more.

“Defense” has become more important than common sense. Profits have become more important than happiness. “Truthiness” has become more important than the truth. And America has been turned from a democratic republic into merely a flag – a flag that supposedly represents freedom. (But what kind of freedom? Freedom to oppress? The recently renewed Patriot Act doesn't give us freedom. In the past 30 years we've only lost personal freedoms. The only new “freedoms” we have seen, in the guise of “free” trade, look far more like corporate anarchy. Just look around. Every industry in America has been monopolized. In the real world, you don't have the freedom to start a small business of your own any more.)

I expect to be labeled unpatriotic for bringing up these points. We've been trained since birth that our American political/economic system is as good as it gets. Somehow, in spite of all our system's flaws (and our nation's teetering on the edge of collapse in 2008); we have been convinced that America is the epitome of human development. Essentially, we've been led to believe that we can't even consider the possibility... of considering our possibilities.

All I ask is that we fix things.

All I suggest is that we first make America more of a democracy.

And all I insist on is that we don't kill the goose that lays the golden eggs (the Environment.)

But don't expect our present government to actually fix anything on their own. We have a few champions. But not enough. And they won't achieve a thing without our help. Those in power don't like change – surprisingly, even if it's change that may save everyone's lives in the long run.

Think about it. You know that every time you're filling up your gas tank, and you smell a whiff of gas, your chances of getting cancer just went up a little. You know this. You know that air pollution in the cities sickens and prematurely kills tens of thousands of Americans. You know that pollution is dangerous. A recent study has concluded that 40 percent of deaths worldwide are caused by pollution! You know that multinational fossil fuel companies have taken control of our government and our economy (and with that power, they have utilized multi-billion dollar subsidies to themselves to suppress cleaner, safer, and more reliable alternatives for 50 years). And you know that if they're drilling miles into the ocean, that the planet is running out of economically available oil.

Moreover, what the petro/agro industry has promoted as the “green revolution” has been the most Orwellian opposite. Our food production systems (factory farms) are now the most petrochemically dependent they have ever been. Just the act of growing our food now alters our climate to make future food production even more difficult. And of course, even as dangerous as using all those chemicals is;we have become heavily dependent upon a resource that has already reached its peak in world “production.”

The time for a change was back in the 1930's. Do we have to wait a hundred years to be convinced? Does it all have to collapse before we are willing to start anew?

We're all frustrated and angry right now. Some might even be tempted to let America collapse and start over. But we don't want that. We don't want to lose the Bill of Rights. We don't want to lose what elections we do have. The American people actually do have some power in this country. We don't want to lose that. But if we don't do anything about it, it's very likely we will lose it all – very soon.

We are a nation motivated by fear. But we fear not having a paycheck or losing our profits even more than we fear not having a viable future.

Our economy has been running on borrowed time since WWII.

Our government has been running on borrowed time since the growth of big business.

Our mental health has been running on borrowed time since the invention of money.

And our culture has been running on borrowed time since the acceptance of “leaders” making all our decisions for us.

Our time has run out.

The world needs to make substantial changes.

We need to make fundamental changes in how we think.

But this is not all that complicated. Think of it like this:

When you are crossing a stream, and the rock you've stepped on starts to sink into the mud, take the next step.

It's time for us to take the next step.

And if it means amending our constitution, let's get started. NOW!

.........................................................

We need to fully financially support independent public broadcasting again – including some Internet broadcasters.
We need to require mass media news to tell the whole truth. And it is a misinterpretation by the courts that freedom of the press permits them to lie. (All it takes is a little common sense to figure that one out.)
We need to get big money out of politics – especially big money from multinational corporations and foreign entities (they don't care about America).
We need more direct democracy. Our representatives have failed us. The American people wouldn't vote for half the boondoggles we are now forced to pay for. American representative democracy has become a tool to subvert actual democracy. Individual representatives can be corrupted, threatened, blackmailed, or fooled. Individual “representatives” are the weak link in our democracy. Our representatives should not be our kings while in office. They should be carrying out our demands. And if our demands aren't clear enough now, we need policy elections to let them know exactly what we want – and rule of law to enforce true democracy. I have real hope for a system like this. It would be far more difficult to corrupt. In fact, I believe that we-the-people would be responsible enough to vote for long-term policies which our (big money manipulated) representative democracy should have implemented 70 years ago.
We need a popular vote option to amend the U.S. Constitution. When the “Supreme” Court does a lousy job of interpreting the Constitution, and Congress won't do anything about it; the people of America need a method to fix things. Obviously, changing the U.S. Constitution shouldn't be an easy thing to do. But if say, two thirds of the eligible American voting public want to change the Constitution, and come out to vote for it, we should be able to change the Constitution.

For example; America's military/industrial complex has slowly digressed into a flag waving proto-fascist arms dealer to the world that presses our nation to go to war for the slightest of offenses. If the American people could have voted to change the Constitution to allow public works programs to continue back during the Great Depression, the American economy might have grown into something extraordinary by now. I am convinced we can still do it. But we can't expect the plutocracy to do this for us. We have no choice but to reduce their illicit power back to one citizen/one vote. That's what a true democracy looks like.

If you have a suggestion, please leave a comment. Thank you.

Bad News

2011-05-28T15:51:00.000-07:00

I was sitting at my computer this morning when I got this audio voice saying; “Threat Detected.” I looked down in the right corner of my screen and my (up to date) virus protection software reads; “Trojan Horse.” … To make a long story short; my computer has been attacked.

I don't claim that the CIA, Mossad, or some private spy company has done it. It could very well have been just a random virus attack. These things happen all the time.

Yes, stranger things have happened and been nothing. But, then again, there is that slight possibility that I've struck a nerve.

Just in case; if you like my writing, would you please keep a copy for yourself.

Thank you,

Rick Spilsbury

Noriega = Hussein = Bin Laden?

2011-05-21T09:31:00.000-07:00

What do Manuel Noriega, Saddam Hussein, and Osama Bin Laden all have in common?

They all used to work with, or even for the United States.

And for some reason, they all had a falling out with U.S. (o)operatives.

Is there a pattern here?

Let's see.

Manuel Noriega:

The official story is that Manuel Noriega was some kind of narco-terrorist, or at least a brutally corrupt Central American strong man; guilty of taking bribes from narco-trafficers. Like that's a rarity in Central America. (Remember the Contras - the illegally U.S. backed Honduran forces that make Noriega look like a Boy Scout?) If this were actually an effort to clean up Central American politics, it was the lamest effort I've ever seen. No, somehow Manuel Noriega wasn't doing what he was told.

(I've also heard that Manuel Noriega was ousted because he had turned over U.S. secrets to the Soviet Union... But of course, the Soviet Union had collapsed years before. So, why bother?)

“According to Larry Burns, director of the Washington based Council on Hemispheric Affairs,... Noriega told Burns … he had had a spat with Vice President Dan Quayle when he refused to commit Panama to a more confrontational role in fighting against Washington's Central American Enemies.”

(Translation: Noriega wasn't being violent enough.)

Could it be that Manuel Noriega, who was apparently placed into power by U.S. (o)operatives to violently keep control of the Panama Canal, was removed by U.S. forces for not being oppressive enough?

Saddam Hussein:

The official story is that Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator/terrorist supporter who had weapons of mass destruction, and he might someday carry out a nuclear attack on America. Well... first, and almost never mentioned; is that America has had thousands of weapons of mass destruction. And if we ever really wanted to, we could wipe Iraq clear off the map – literally. It would be silly stupid to attack the U.S. with one nuclear weapon. Second, those weapons of mass destruction likely came from the U.S. – when Saddam Hussein was our “friend” (before Kuwait).

Of course, there was that oil thing. Iraq had it. The rest of the world wanted it. America took it... at least for a while. But I have heard that Saddam Hussein, at the last minute before the second invasion of Iraq, was willing to deal on the oil fields. He may have even been willing to go into exile. Which begs the question, why bother invading Iraq when we already could get most everything we wanted?

Which leaves only one thing left to suspect. The Iraqis had done something so heinously offending to the U.S. that total control of the country was deemed necessary. What could that possibly be? Was it that Iraq was rebuilding its military arsenal? United Nations inspectors didn't believe so – and they turned out to be right. There were no weapons of mass destruction.

So think about it. What was the one thing that Iraq could do that would get the powerful in America so up in arms? Which begs the question; who are the most powerful people in America? The people? Not a chance. (At least not yet.)

Who really runs America? That's easy. Who gets the most benefits? We found out in 2008, when America's biggest banks were bailed out for gambling with our money – all along knowing that eventually the American people would lose – and have to pay for it - and the bankers bonuses. The big banks are the biggest of America's oligarchs. And any threat to them would be a threat treated with the highest priority.

Senator Ron Paul said; “In November 2000 Saddam Hussein demanded Euros for his oil. His arrogance was a threat to the dollar...”

Apparently, some very powerful bankers in the U.S. wanted to be very sure that no other Iraqi ever has Saddam Hussein's arrogance.

Osama Bin Laden:

So, here's a wealthy pious Saudi who helps the Afghan Mujahiddin defeat the Soviet Army (with hi-tech American weapons). For a while, this guy was our man. You may have even cheered him on (if only as a member of the Afghan resistance).

But this was not our man. He was his own man. And sooner or later there would be differences.

Did Osama Bin Laden support terrorists? America didn't seem to think so back when he was supporting the Afghan Mujahiddin. It was only later that the American mass media fell in line with the revised (terrorist) perception of Osama Bin Laden. Let's face it, Osama Bin Laden hadn't changed, he had just beaten his primary enemies and was now working on his secondary enemies... I'm not reading a madman here. I sense a man with convictions who never trusted (or was to be trusted by) the U.S. – even when we were his allies.

So, did Osama Bin Laden support violent terrorist attacks against unarmed Americans? That's what we've been told. And it may very well be true. I doubt he held the U.S. in much higher esteem than the U.S.S.R. I definitely wouldn't be surprised if he were to support an Afghan style resistance to what he saw as American imperialism – just as he had with the U.S.S.R. But there hasn't been any resistance of that type happening since Afghanistan. Sure, there have been some terrorist attacks – but nothing like an armed Afghan resistance. Yet. That's right. The key word is “yet.” As long as Osama Bin Laden lived, there still survived the threat of another Afghan like resistance somewhere. Where? Osama Bin Laden was a Saudi. It only makes sense to look there first.

Osama Bin Laden was adamantly against U.S. troops stationed in Saudi Arabia. Could he have drummed up an Afghan style resistance in Saudi Arabia? Well... Americans did pull their troops out of Saudi Arabia.

This wasn't just a coincidence. Osama Bin Laden spoke out against military bases in Saudi Arabia, and American troops moved out. Osama Bin Laden got real, significant results standing up to the United States of America.

That must have been a wake up call. When was the last time the American military/industrial complex closed up shop in a country – just because somebody spoke out against it? …Yes. There were the 9/11 attacks. And most of the reported attackers were Saudi. If the official 9/11 stories are true, Bush Jr.'s pulling out of Saudi Arabia was much like Reagan's pulling out of Lebanon after the “terrorist” attacks on U.S. barracks (troops). However, if the official 9/11 stories are not true, just the threat of another Lebanon type of attack was enough to pull out of Saudi.

To some, it must have been a sign that we are weak – or at least that America's power has realizable limits.

Some very influential Americans must certainly have felt that this weaker image of America was inexcusable – and that Osama Bin Laden had to be dealt with... brutally. So; why not hunt him down as a terrorist mastermind? He could have been. But I don't think we understand the man's stature. All he had to do was wish for it. All he had to do was preach to the willing. That kind of influence makes one surprisingly powerful – and not very accountable. The only realistic option to crush this man may have been to pin a false accusation on him.

Was Osama Bin Laden the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks? I doubt it. How could Bin Laden have gotten U.S. air defenses to be too busy with “exercises” to intercept four planes? How could Bin Laden have gotten both the Pentagon and the flight 93 crash debris (and bodies) to just vaporize? How could Bin Laden get those lame pilots to fly so good? And how could Bin Laden get those Federal investigations into those suspicious student pilots derailed? That would have taken one hell of a terrorist mastermind – or at least one very powerful insider.

Which brings me to my point:

The histories of Manuel Noriega, Saddam Hussein, and Osama Bin Laden appear to form a loose pattern.

Though the stories of these three men are far different, there is a common thread; U.S. money, U.S. weapons, U.S. oligarch interests, and cover stories that just don't add up.

Were these three people framed? To some point, I would have to say yes, absolutely. But then again, that's just what American mass media does – frame the story. We're the good guys... they're the bad guys – always.

I don't want to sound like Noriega, Hussein, and Bin Laden were innocent victims.

At the very least, Manuel Noriega was totally corrupt – not someone I would ever want for a “leader.” And if you looked up “evil dictator” on Wikipedia, you would probably find a picture of Saddam Hussein (and no, I haven't looked.) But Osama Bin Laden was different. I don't think he was corrupt. And Osama Bin Laden was popular. He had a following - who showed him respect.

Osama Bin Laden may have had a conscience – a sense of right and wrong, however twisted we see it... Was he crazy? Only as crazy as any man's culture can make him. His perspective was different than ours. Natives of any conquered nation will understand. Might does not necessarily make right. In fact, it pretty much guarantees wrongs. But don't expect to read about it in the papers. Might decides who's “wrong.” And any resistance will brand you a “savage,” a “subversive,” or a “terrorist.”

If world politics teaches us anything, it is that right and wrong are not that simple.

But then the question begs; who's mind is twisted? His or yours? Or both? The twisters don't want you to ask that question of yourself. You might grow.

And you might ask some tough questions.

...Are these three just people who didn't fit into our New World Order?

Was Manuel Noriega just unwilling to order acts of violence (war) against the emerging pro-democracy movements in South America?

Was Saddam Hussein just unwilling to continue to allow big U.S. banks to skim Iraqi oil profits?

Was Osama Bin Laden just unwilling to allow U.S. military dominance in Saudi Arabia?

If so:

Is this the real America – constantly scheming for world dominance with no real sense of principle?

Was the “freedom” we constantly heard about in the War on Terror actually the freedom to oppress?

Just what are patriotic Americans fighting and dying for over there in Far-off-istan?

And most importantly; why don't the people get to decide what the New World Order should be?

One More Thing About Osama Bin Laden

2011-05-06T09:19:00.000-07:00

Remember the anthrax scare right after 9/11?

Remember the anthrax letters that said; “Death to America...Allah is great”.

Remember how we all suspected Osama Bin Laden, until we found out it was American made military grade anthrax?

How ironic. We were so afraid of Osama bin Laden and/or Iraq having weapons of mass destruction, while our own weapon of mass destruction was being used against us – by one or more Americans.

The implications of a conspiracy by insiders to commit a multi-pronged attack against Americans in the Fall of 2001 are worthy of consideration.

First, there's the 9/11 attack on Washington D.C... with so many peculiar twists millions suspect a false flag operation. And then there's the anthrax attack on Washington D.C... from questionable origins... within America. The first attack gets blamed on crazy fundamentalist Muslims. And the second attack gets blamed on a mad scientist (much like the lone gunman theories of the Kennedy and Martin Luther King assassinations).

For years now, the official explanations of the 9/11 and the anthrax attacks haven't been complete, or even credible. (See the recent Wired article; “The Strain... could the Feds have gotten the wrong man?”) Many Americans, maybe even most of us, don't feel like we've been told the whole truth about 9/11 or the anthrax attacks.

(For example: On 9/11, we saw the second tower hit by a jet liner on the right side of the building. We saw a huge plume of fire, from the jet fuel. And we're supposed to believe that the building fell straight down from partial melting of the multiple giant steel beams from the burning of what was left of the jet fuel? I don't think so.)

Personally, I feel like we've been given cover stories. Our relevant questions are ignored. Those who publicly speak out are mercilessly ridiculed and exiled from the mass media. And to top it all off, we are fed dozens of diversionary “conspiracy theories” by the mass media. This is exactly what one would expect a massive cover up to look like.

Maybe I just have too high of expectations for the thoroughness of the investigators. Often the truth is just what we would have expected. Most of the time, there are no surprises. The jealous lover did it. Or the guy just got drunk and drove off the road. But sometimes, the stories are just too full of holes to ignore.

Could the 9/11 attacks and the anthrax attacks have been planned together? We were pretty sure of it when we suspected Osama bin Laden. And then we were immediately convinced (by the mass media pundits) that it wasn't possible. Why?

…Let's go into speculation mode:

What if some inside group was trying to kill off the members of Congress and the Supreme Court? What if the killing of others was just part of a cover story to make it look like terrorists?

We don't know where that fourth plane was headed for on 9/11. It could have been headed for the White House, but we all know President Bush was out of town. Maybe flight 93 wasn't headed for the White House. What if it had hit the Supreme Court building? If so; the balance of power in America could have changed drastically. (The Bush administration would have been able to pick all of the new Supreme Court Justices.)

And in the case of the anthrax attacks; we do know that one anthrax attack was aimed at Senator Tom Daschle.

If these attacks sound related, maybe they are. When we mentally separated these attacks (as soon as we could no longer blame Osama bin Laden for both) we may have overlooked a significant motive – a government takeover – a coup d' etat.

The question we really need to ask ourselves is; what if these attacks had succeeded? What if the Supreme Court was gone and most of Congress was dead?

As you may recall, this was before Homeland Security.

With only the President and the Vice President left alive, what would our government have looked like? It would have looked like the President and the Vice President. In fact, it would have very much looked like a takeover – a coup d' etat of the U.S. balance of power.

As we all know, because of the timing; the probable attack on Washington by flight 93 would have failed because our legislators and Supreme Court Justices were forewarned by the attacks on the World Trade Center. Maybe the timing of the 9/11 attacks went wrong. Maybe flight 93 was supposed to hit first. Maybe the flight 93 “plane” went down in Pennsylvania because it had no mission left to accomplish.

And the anthrax attack? Any scientist worth his microbiology degree would likely have known that this type of anthrax attack wouldn't have worked effectively to kill more than a handful of people... and that it would have been traced. So... what if it wasn't a mad scientist who did it?

What if there was a coordinated effort by American insiders to kill most of America's political leaders in the Fall of 2001? What if they just screwed up?

Over 3,000 people died in the attacks of 9/11. Many more could have died from an anthrax epidemic. If there was an insider conspiracy, they don't care much about human life – and now they've been convinced that surgical attacks aren't effective enough.

What if they try again?

What if next time they just decide to nuke Washington?

If there are insiders who got away with the 9/11 attacks – and have access to highly protected anthrax spores, they may have access to a nuclear weapon.

Is the concept of a nuclear coup d' etat realistic? It would seem so. In fact, if one were not on the short list of next in line for the presidency, killing off all of the leaders might just seem like a practical way of eliminating all the competition.

...Even if all of this speculation about 9/11 and the anthrax attacks is wrong, one thing is still for sure. We need to be seriously concerned about protecting our leaders from a nuclear coup d' etat. Our elected leaders in Washington are at serious risk – because Washington D.C. can be obliterated in an instant.

I'm convinced that the best way to insure against this vulnerability is for there to be more democracy.

If the American people make long-term policy decisions – by vote; there would be far less incentive (for terrorists or insiders) to nuke Washington.

If our leadership were more distributed, there would be no way to cut off our head.

So, Osama Bin Laden Is Dead?

2011-05-04T09:53:00.000-07:00

I guess we're supposed to be rejoicing now?

But I can't rejoice with a clear conscience yet. There are just too many unanswered questions. And maybe – just maybe, Osama bin Laden could have answered some of those questions.

The truth seems farther away than ever now...

I don't have doubts about the death of Osama bin Laden. Yes, the assassination story sounds a little fishy, and so does the burial at sea. The burial at sea left no remains to check, but also no place for mourners to congregate. And most likely, just as officials have said, no country would take him. The unarmed guy the Navy Seals shot in the face was most likely Osama bin Laden. And if it wasn't, Osama bin Laden has probably been dead for years now anyway.

No. My unanswered questions are not about Osama bin Laden's death, but about his life. My doubts remain on the “Osama bin Laden – 9/11” story. Was the story the press told us real or fabricated? Did Osama bin Laden really mastermind the 9/11 attacks? Was he even a terrorist? Or was he just a boogey man for us to blame?

I remember reading that Osama bin Laden never took claim for masterminding the attacks of 9/11. I remember videos of someone claiming to be Osama bin Laden – but the guy didn't look a thing like him. I remember a Congressional hearing that concluded that U.S. forces, in the initial invasion of Afghanistan, had total domination of an area around Tora Bora, and apparently just let him escape. And I remember Bush Jr. talking tough on the television about how he was going to “smoke him out.”

I got the feeling that the Bush administration really liked having Osama bin Laden around. He was great for their ratings in the polls. And you may remember that all Bush Jr. had to do was mention the name of Osama bin Laden – and he would instantly get his way.

...But now; here we are – almost a decade later, and Osama doesn't get us all worked up anymore. Slowly, the scales have tipped; and the public relations machine may have realized that Osama was worth more dead than alive. Or maybe his name just sounded too much like Obama to let him stay at large. Or then again, maybe it was just a coincidence that they killed him now.

The timing of this event should put to rest some possible speculations.

We're not near an election; so I don't think it's a stunt to make President Obama look good.

It's been over two years since President Obama became President. So it doesn't make President Bush look bad.

But we needed some good news. Americans have tired of these “wars” that look more like occupations. We don't really have anything against these Muslims. We don't want to pay billions and billions in taxes to be there. And it really saddens us to think that people are still dying – over what? Over what? Our nation's prestige? Personally, I'd like to see our nation have some legitimate prestige. No one really admires our willingness to fight forever to win, even if we're wrong. All these “wars” do is show America's tenacity to oppress. I don't call that prestige.

But, of course, there are those in power who believe we have to be the “bully on the block.” And then, of course, there are those military contractors who are getting filthy rich on taxpayer money – and they need “wars” to keep the money coming in.

Was this just a publicity stunt by the military/industrial complex? Have we just been thrown an (Osama) bone to keep us happy about our taxes (and warriors) being wasted?

We may never know.

Maybe it just happened now... because that's just when they found him (again).

Either way; Osama bin Laden is officially dead and Al Queada is more or less eviscerated.

So, what does Osama bin Laden's death really mean? Or does it mean anything?

I remember reading that Osama bin Laden hadn't been leading (what is left of ) Al Queada for quite a few years now.
I find it highly unlikely that we will be seeing any troops coming home because of this.
And there is still this nagging doubt in my mind that Osama bin Laden wasn't responsible for the 9/11 attacks.

What if the skeptics that suspected that 9/11 was an inside job were right?

…

What if Osama bin Laden was just a patsy?

What if the Osama bin Laden story is a cover story for a takeover attempt of the United States?

What if terrorism was the excuse necessary to take away our freedom – with the Patriot Act?

What if terrorism was the excuse necessary to create a shadow government (Homeland Security), ready to take over when the conditions are right?

What if we've been playing to these insiders' democracy hating hand for years?

What if they have been emboldened by these events?

What if they're planning their next strike?

What if President Obama hasn't been told a thing about any of this?

America is vulnerable, in Washington D.C. – 9/11 proved that.

But there won't be another 9/11 attack with hijacked planes. Apparently, we're prepared for that now.

So, what might happen?

I was watching a show on the History Channel about some possible, but not likely disasters animators could report on before they happened. One particularly interesting disaster they mentioned was about the potential for a “terrorist” nuclear attack on Washington D.C.

Now, here's where it gets interesting.

What if Washington D.C. were to be devastated by a nuclear attack. With the President, Congress, and the Supreme Court all dead, who would run our government? The Department of Homeland Security, I guess.

So, let me get this straight. A country that has existed for 235 years would be taken over by a “Department” that hasn't been around for 10? And this “Department” came into existence over what many have claimed to have been a false flag operation... an attack from within our own Country? Now wait a minute...

If the skeptics' worst fears were right – if the 9/11 attacks were an inside job, and there really do exist “Americans” so heartless that they would plan a coordinated attack on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and possibly the White House (or the House or Senate); then nothing is beneath them.

If there was a 9/11 conspiracy, they got away with it.

If they got away with it, why not try it again?

The insiders' next big false flag operation just might be a nuclear attack on Washington D.C. to destroy the last vestiges of our democracy and take total control of our country. In fact, the killing of Osama bin Laden may be a part of their cover story. Americans are now expecting a revenge attack.

It has been a while since the 9/11 conspiracy theories so negatively effected our collective trust of American leadership. Maybe the insiders now think this has all blown over – and their opportunity for another 9/11 type of false flag attack is coming again. And with the assassination of Osama bin Laden, America is bracing for another “terrorist” attack.

But personally, unless the alleged 9/11 insiders are not members of the American oligarchy, I doubt that Washington D.C. will be nuked. There just isn't a need. Our government appears to be giving in to the plutocracy's wishes now. So why bother?

We've seen this before:

Remember, the Soviet Union never fell until Gorbachev and Glasnost.

Remember, just when things started looking better for the common people in the Soviet Union, the Soviet Union collapsed.

As long as the takers are getting away with everything – as long as Washington politicians and bureaucrats are for sale; why bother with another 9/11?

Americans have lost control. Washington has been nuked – with money. And if we succeed at fixing things in Washington, someone just may wipe it off the map – and blame “terrorists.” But we have to try to fix America anyway. And, whatever we do; we better not allow the privatization of Homeland Security – not even TSA.

How do we save Washington? By making it less important. So long as politicians and bureaucrats run our country, Washington will be vulnerable.

If Americans were to hold elections on policy issues, however; Washington would just house administrators.

If we had more real democracy, there would be no point in attacking Washington.

Our Civilization's Status Report

2011-04-30T09:47:00.000-07:00

My report begins with us; all of us, all six – almost seven billion of us. That's a lot of people. Ask any biologist; this is what overpopulation looks like. Even common sense would conclude that there are more than enough of us to consume most everything on the planet. But common sense is not so common amongst our “leaders.” In fact, some of our major religions' “leaders” have selfishly admitted to being in a population race with each other. Consequently, God's little bunnies have been fruitful and multiplied right beyond the planet's capacity to sustain us all.

So... what are we going to do?

…So far, not much.

I remember back in the 70's, when pretty much all of us (everyone I knew, and everyone I knew of) agreed that if we didn't do something dramatic soon about the environment, life would be very rough for our grandchildren.

…and what have we done since then? Well, we've recycled our beer cans. Obviously that's not enough. It's over 30 years later now. The grandchildren are here – and it's time to face the frightening consequences.

What are the consequences? At the top of the list is the very real and immediate threat of total environmental collapse. We knew of the risk back in the 70's. We tried to do something about it. We thought we were winning. And then we relaxed.

Abolitionist Wendell Phillips once said; “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” We stopped paying attention. We had lives to live. And somehow, in the process of living our lives, we lost our lives' purpose – to save the earth – from us.

We lived our lives like we had been raised. And we were raised on television – with its entertaining distractions, half-truth news, and religious propaganda channels. Somehow, television became more real to us than the reality of our life experiences.

But apparently, maybe because of television, those lives weren't all that satisfying. And somehow a number of Americans turned to prescription psycho-drugs.

We now have adults who've been on prescription mood altering drugs since they were children... And we wonder why there isn't a viable counter-culture any more. It's simple, they've been neutralized. And if that didn't work, somehow we've ended up with the largest prison system America has ever seen.

The rest of us – we somehow just became too afraid to speak up. For some of us, speaking up might risk our job – or our job prospects. For others, somehow it just didn't seem like the risking of our boring little comfort zones would make any difference.

Personally, I just got tired of it all and decided to move as far away from it I could. But that didn't work. Even in the most remote place I could find, I couldn't get away from it all. It was then that I realized that I was cornered – that we've all been cornered. And that I couldn't run, I couldn't hide, I had to fight.

But what was I fighting? In a word; exploitation. In a phrase; exploitation to the point of self destruction.

We have allowed the few to rule the many. And guess what? Somehow they cared more about their own personal issues more than they cared about the fate of humanity.

Our system is out of control - because we have so little control. What this world needs is more democracy.

What our civilization needs is to pay more attention to common sense.

What the powers-that-be need is to realize that by somehow controlling us for their own immediate personal or organizational swindles, there is a cost that is far too high - for everyone. No empire, no matter how close to God, will prosper during a total environmental collapse.

Democracy or FAIL!

2011-04-13T22:52:00.000-07:00

This isn't working...

They're dismantling everything.

...But we'll still have to pay taxes.

America should just give up on pretending to be a democracy.

You may recall that the Soviet Union had elections too. But the elections didn't matter. The nation's decisions were made in back rooms before the elections. Doesn't that sound familiar?

We've been distracted from the truth. The truth is that the U.S. government cares less and less about its citizens.

While you were being distracted by the U.S. (B.S.) budget debate:

The Obama administration returned to oil drilling business as usual in the Gulf – even though no significant technical changes have been made to the drilling process and the damages continue to devastate the Gulf.

…the American people wouldn't have voted for that.
The Obama administration continues to guarantee 32 billion dollars in loans to the nuclear power industry – in spite of the fact that the (General Electric made) Fukishima power plant is likely to emit as much radiation as the Chernobyl disaster – and the fact that the nuclear industry has made no significant technical changes to avert another disaster – and, of course, solar power is cheaper.

…the American people wouldn't have voted for that.
The Obama administration has just given the go ahead to the first tar sands petroleum mines in America. These hideously polluting mines have devastated areas in Canada.

…the American people wouldn't have voted for that.
The U.S. Congress has just declared the Endangered Species Act not really law anymore. By declaring Rocky Mountain wolves expendable, they have established a precedent for political influence to gut the Endangered Species Act.

…the American people wouldn't have voted for that.
Rich speculators are drastically raising our oil prices again (like in 2008) with impunity.

…the American people wouldn't have voted for that.

Washington is for sale.

What we have is legislation for the highest bidder. And the bidding is high.

In the past ten years, just 12 companies have spent a billion dollars... think about it; a billion dollars influencing Washington. And guess who gets their way... at your expense.

What America needs is more democracy. We should be voting on issues, not people. Our elected officials should be carrying out our priorities, not dictating them.

That's right, they're dictating our country.

We the people are not making the decisions.

When you actually weigh the characteristics, we're closer to a proto-facsist oligarchy than we are to a democracy. Don't just trust my opinion. Check for yourself.

Besides; how can they accurately know what we really want? Polls? Now that's official. It makes one wonder how much they really care what your opinion is.

And if you have been paying attention to the budget debate, you would know:

The American people wouldn't vote to give away our Medicare money to enrich private insurance companies.
The American people wouldn't vote to privatize our schools – and leave the poor without an adequate education.
The American people wouldn't vote to raise “Defense” spending another 5 billion dollars while gutting our social safety nets.
And the American people wouldn't slash green jobs in a time of recession either.

The time to act was 30 years ago.

But if we don't act now, America will be no more.

Oh, and by the way; there are powerful (un-American) people in this country who want our economy to fail. Face it; desperate people will work for lower wages. Desperate people will sell off their assets for yard-sale prices... Those with money in hard times can take advantage of those without. This has happened before.

But, our time is different.

If we allow this to continue, the consequences will be unthinkable.

Let's extrapolate from current conditions:

Much of the middle class is becoming poor.

The poor are losing their social safety net.

The remaining middle class are being burdened with the cost of supporting the nation – because the rich aren't being taxed fairly.

Eventually, most of us will have no use for America. There will be no benefit for supporting a system that has no benefits.

This is what happened to the Soviet Union.

And if we the people get so unhappy that we force America to change for the better, it will cost money. That money would have to come from the rich.

If the powerful decide there is no benefit in supporting America, and the rest of us haven't had any benefits in years; who will fight for America? We cant' let things get to that point.

One of the scariest things I can think of is;

there are likely powerful Americans who are envious of Vladimir Putin.

…

Is this our fate? Or worse?

What if the recently poor aren't happy with their condition?

What if they join some corrupt political party intent on taking over Washington and trashing everything?

Oh yeah... that already happened... and we're not going to be happy with the results.

Only America's future Vladimir Putin will have the opportunity to be happy.

But he won't be.

Because without sustainability, everything falls apart – and quickly; when you burn the environment at both ends.

Rango Is Real

2011-03-30T11:12:00.000-07:00

Reality is sometimes stranger than fiction.

And the best fiction feels like reality.

You probably thought the movie Rango was fiction.

But it isn't.

…

Rango Trailer

Rango is actually a true story. The names have been changed. And the animals in the story have been given a few too many human characteristics for them to be recognizable.

But the story of them dying in desert of thirst is true.

The story of their water being piped out of the desert is true.

The story of their water being pumped to Las Vegas is true.

And the story of this all being about greed is true.

The pyramid schemers in Las Vegas want endless growth. They want endless growth because it makes them richer – at least until everything falls apart.

One of their schemes is to legally steal the water from deserts of nearby valleys; Delamar Valley, Dry Lake Valley, Muleshoe Valley, Cave Valley, Spring Valley, Snake Valley, Lake Valley, Hamlin Valley, Railroad Valley, and now Steptoe Valley.

The town of Dirt in the movie Rango is in reality wildlife communities of millions.

There's a corporate gold rush going on all over the world. But the new gold is water. The goal is to charge us the price of gold for what we once got for free. Not only are our laws not protecting us from this, in Nevada, they're giving the water away for free. In Nevada, all that you have to do is promise that you'll take it... How's that for water law in the desert?

The bad guy in the movie could be a number of people in Nevada. It could be the Nevada legislators, who won't reform Nevada water law to save all those plants and animals in all those valleys. It could be the Lincoln County politicians, who sold out to Southern Nevada Water Authority. Or it could be developers, such as the developer of Coyote Springs, who wants to build another Las Vegas out in the desert (using neighboring valleys' water).

The rush for water in Rural Nevada has totally ignored the Native Americans who live here, and have a right, by treaty with the United States of America to at least some of that water. The rush for water totally ignores future generations. And of course, the rush for water totally ignores the life that is already there.

You didn't hear the term in the movie Rango, but the water thieves have a emotionless term for all the wildlife they are going to kill; “phreatophytes.” In Nevada, it's legal to kill phreatophytes. In fact, Nevada law is written in such a way that there may as well be a bounty on phreatophytes. If ever there were such a thing as government sanctioned ecocide, this is it.

But it doesn't have to be this way.

Southern Nevada doesn't have to pay billions of dollars to kill every living thing dependent upon aquifers in a huge portion of the rest of the state. And the corporations that just want to make a killing on water speculation could go make legitimate money doing something productive for a change.

The people of Las Vegas could save billions of dollars if they desalinated water from the ocean. The desal plants could be built offshore, so as to protect life on the coasts. And the fresh water produced could be given to Californians in exchange for more water from the Colorado River. No giant multi-billion dollar pipeline from the desert is necessary – at all.

Companies have offered to desalinate water offshore. At least one company has offered to do this for about $2000 an acre foot. Southern Nevada Water Authority could make water, instead of take water. But no. They'd rather pay $10,000 an acre foot for water that they can take from nearby Mesquite, Nevada.

This is not about need. This is about greed. This is about supply and demand. This is about limiting supply and instigating over-demand.

The people of the deserts are about to be played. The wildlife of the deserts are about to be killed. The message has to get out. The movie Rango has helped immensely to warn us of what is to happen if the bad guys get their way.

What we need are champions. We need people who are willing to stand up for the environment. Especially when there are better ways to address these issues. We need you.

Rango is you.

The Koch-Conspirators

2011-03-26T10:31:00.000-07:00

“If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're mis-informed.” Mark Twain

I remember years ago watching science fiction movies that predicted the corporate takeover of government (the original Rollerball), the complete corruption of the capitalist system (Robocop), the suppression of innovation by those in power (Total Recall), and a total environmental collapse (Soylent Green).

We were warned.

I remember a decade ago, a friend of mine often saying; “Hard times are coming.”

I remember three decades ago, everyone I knew agreeing that if we didn't do something about the environment, things would be really tough for our grandchildren.

We knew.

Deep down, we have known for some time that something is wrong with our system – and that things are getting worse.

But we played along. As long as the money kept coming in, as long as we kept getting paid; nobody cared to rock the boat – even if it was slowly sinking.

And now; we are on the verge of losing our democracy, our incomes, our social safety nets, and the environment we ultimately all depend on.

A more recent science fiction movie (The Road) has warned us that money has no value if there is nothing left to buy – and that no one will be spared if the system collapses.

It is imperative that we fix things.

What we have been erroneously programed (by corporate owned mass media) to call “free market capitalism” has only made things worse – on many levels. In fact, what is called “free market capitalism” has actually been a back-door tool for exploitation, corruption, innovation suppression, and a monopolistic takeover by the greedy among the super-rich that will leave the rest of us desperately poor and overcharged for what used to be the commons (free). However, even all of this might be something the world might be able to tolerate if it were not for the obvious fact that we continue to push ever closer to a total environmental collapse.

The fatal flaw of capitalism is in the details.

The fatal flaw of capitalism is in the accounting.

The holy grail of capitalism, the “bottom line,” is not really the bottom line. What the bottom line is supposed to be is a thorough assessment of the costs and benefits of some endeavor. But it isn't. It's just a number on a sheet of paper. And that number often just actually represents what one can steal. Because, as every good accountant knows, a whole lot of information gets left out. Accountants call these ignored issues “externalities” – the costs to society and the environment that don't get counted on their profit and loss statements. For example; the environmental nightmare that is a result of mining tar sands in Canada is nowhere to be found on any paperwork relating to the bottom line.

The “bottom line” is a lie. It is a lie perpetrated by those who don't want to consider all of the costs. In the real world, the “bottom line” is often literally what they can get away with.

Which leaves the rest of us to pay the real costs.

Which leaves future generations to pay the real costs.

Which leaves the environment to pay the real costs.

This is how a pyramid scheme plays out.

Which means that our present form of capitalism is actually a form of officially sanctioned theft – a free-for-all for those in power. The unwritten goal is to take as much as you can, for as long as you can, until there is no more to take – and then the whole system collapses.

Our whole world economy is essentially a Ponzi scheme.

We have lied to ourselves. Some smart (but not wise) capitalists have written up some equations and some economic “theories” to give us a sense of arrogance about our ignorance of the real world. And we have been willing to believe the expedient – to get us what we wanted in the short run. But the short run is over. And if we don't face the reality of our limits very soon, it will all come crashing down upon us.

What we need is a more accurate way of seeing our predicament. What we need is a new, more realistic, real-world definition for the term “bottom line.” I recommend calling it a “real-world bottom line.”

If we could assess our actions with real-world considerations, we might not make so many blatantly ignorant mistakes in the name of selfish short-sighted “making a killing” blind greed.

But this won't happen until we make fundamental changes to our governmental systems.

What our governments need is an infusion of common sense. What our governments need is to get rid of the inherently designed favoritism to those who actually run our governments. That's right. Every government so far has been designed to favor the designers. And over time, whatever rights and protections guaranteed to the citizens get whittled away by those favored.

We need to accept the obvious fact that our economic system in not the ultimate. We need to remember that the governmental system of the United States of America was designed by a rich, white gentry. When the Constitution was drawn up; there were no Indians there, there were no blacks there, there were no women there, and there were no poor people there.

To claim that, from the very beginning; our nation was designed to favor a certain section of the population... just should be obvious.

…But hey; it was better than having a king.

It was way better than having a king.

The people who wrote the Constitution are my favorite heroes. They have created something extraordinary.

But we can build upon their work. We can do even better.

What this country needs is more democracy.

Direct democracy.

Politicians can be blackmailed.

Politicians can be intimidated to work back room deals.

Politicians can be paid off.

Ultimately, politicians and bureaucrats are the key to undermining common sense.

Individuals can be manipulated.

It is a whole lot tougher to manipulate everyone.

Just look around. There are so many things our government is doing that we, the people, never would have voted for.

Recently, we have witnessed a world-wide class war – implemented in the name of “austerity.” These austerity measures have only served to hurt the overall economies of those cut. But the filthy rich are getting even richer. This is a sign. We are being robbed.

Even the less informed among us have figured out that the economic crisis that created the impetus for gutting all the benefits to paying taxes was caused by the greedy among the rich (mega-bankers) gambling with our savings... And did they have to suffer the consequences of a free-market economy? No, of course not. And they won't have to next time either. This is what a hopelessly corrupt economic system looks like.

These greedy, self-centered, cold-hearted, un-American destroyers of democracy want to be king. That's what they want. They want us to go back to having kings. It's not good enough to be above the law. They want to be the law. They not only want to do anything they please, they want be able to force you to do it too... They don't just want to be filthy rich, they want all the money. All of it.

They want to be king.

And like back in the days of Washington and Jefferson, it may take a revolution to stop them. Only this time, it isn't just about freedom and liberty, it's about the quality of life on our planet – and it's quite possibly about the ultimate survival of our species.

We Wouldn't Vote For This

2011-03-20T09:08:00.000-07:00

Solar power is cheaper than nuclear power – at the counter – no need to add in the cost of externalities (such as the cost of nuclear waste storage - to be footed by the taxpayer, or the cost of cleanups - to be footed by the taxpayer, or the cost of more cancer - to be footed by the sick - and the taxpayer).

Therefore, the Obama administration wants to give the nuclear industry eight billion dollars in loan guarantees. That's right. They want to give away billions of dollars in taxpayer money for something the taxpayers would never vote for.

The American government continues to fight legitimate renewable energy – even though there's a nuclear power plant in Japan on the verge of meltdown, and every other country on the planet is having second thoughts about nuclear power.

And why is this reactor about to meltdown? Because it lost power. That's it. It lost power. Did you know that we would never completely lose power if it were distributed amongst multiple renewable sources. And if we somehow did, what would happen? Nothing.

On top of all that; when it looks like hydrogen energy is becoming viable (without the use of hydrocarbons as a feedstock), the Obama administration de-funds it.

Forget about the Tea Party; the Obama Administration makes Alice in Wonderland's tea party look sane.

There's more. It looks like we've got another oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. That's right, the massive BP oil spill wasn't enough to get Congress to act – and write a sane Energy Bill. So, now we have another chance to act. But it won't happen. They'll just let this new catastrophe play out too, continue to give the fossil fuel industry billions of our money in subsidies, and hope Americans can't pay attention.

The American people voted for President Obama and the Democrats because we were tired of the Republican party lying to us about what they were going to do about global warming. And now we've got Democrats doing the same damn thing.

Richard Nixon was a better environmental President.

It is time to realize that the American government has lapsed into total corruption.

The Republican Party exists to make the rich richer.

The Democratic Party exists to make you think you have an alternative.

This is not free trade. This is government sanctioned suppression of innovation.

This is not freedom. This is a militaristic empire draining the wealth of its citizens.

This is not democracy. This is legislation for sale to the highest bidder.

This is not sustainable.

This is not even functional.

This system is doomed.

No new politician is going to be able to change this.

No desperately needed internal reform is going to happen.

No business as usual fix is going to be anywhere near enough.

Either we the people fix it, or we go down with it.

What this country needs is more democracy – direct democracy.

The masses may not be very smart, but we're smarter than this.

Maybe It's Not The Immigrants

2011-03-19T14:21:00.000-07:00

If it's the immigrants who are taking our jobs,

how are they taking them to China?

Being In Nature Is Like Going Back To Your Soul

2011-03-09T12:14:00.000-08:00

Being in Nature is like going back to your soul.

...You know what I'm talking about; that feeling that you are more complete when you feel you're a part of a natural place.

And you should. No man is an island. We are just a part of life on Earth – but we should relish that.

Have you ever thought about how the words soul and Sol sound so much alike. One word represents the energy within us and the other word represents the energy from the Sun. If this were a coincidence, I would be very surprised. Our ancestors knew. Our ancestors knew that we are more than that which is contained in our bodies.

We are a part of life on Earth.

That is so special.

Just consider the alternative: If we were to be truly alone (say floating in a spacecraft) – we would die – of hunger, stale air, and loneliness. We crave the Grand Central Station of life. We crave the beauty of life all around us. We crave the balance. We crave the feeling of completeness.

We crave the feeling of a complete soul. And we are more likely to feel that feeling when we are in Nature. In fact, fresh air actually feels like the breath of life – because it is.

This perception makes sense if we think of the life all around us as the rest of our soul. And this perception of our soul makes sense if we think of the life around us as that consciousness which lives on after our body dies.

And if this all makes sense, then destroying nature for money is destroying a part of your soul.

It seems some people will do most anything for money...

Including sell their soul.

Egypt Isn't Out Of The Woods Yet

2011-03-02T06:36:00.000-08:00

Remember a couple of weeks ago when Senator John McCain called the democracy movement in Egypt a "virus"?

Well, now he's extolling how wonderful the movement is (now that they've won).

That could just mean he's a hypocrite. But it likely means a lot more. It likely means that the change at the top in Egypt isn't really significant.

It likely means that the Egyptian people still have a lot of work to do to get that democracy they so dearly want.

We Americans need to watch for signs such as this here. Those in power have far too many times told us that we got what we wanted, when in reality nothing has significantly changed.

Our Government Should Be Demoted

2011-02-21T09:21:00.000-08:00

In my last post I recommended three changes to our U.S. government.

Direct Democracy
Political Decision Limits

Automatic Shutdowns of Illegitimate Programs

Imagine a political system:

that inherently makes long-term policy decisions based upon common sense and reason – determined by the majority of citizens (rather than the “invisible hand” of a super-rich, super-greedy plutocracy).
that prohibits sell-out politicians from propagating a dysfunctional system of privilege.
that automatically defunds dangerous programs as soon as the funding mistake becomes blatantly apparent.

These are major changes – revolutionary. Essentially they are a demotion of all three of our branches of U.S. government.

“We the people” should directly determine our long-term policy.

“We the people” should decide what decisions politicians cannot make.

“We the people” should determine what programs are just bad ideas.

“We the people” should run our own country.

I find it hard to believe we could have done any worse than things have turned out.

…

Joe Rogan commentary

…

Dennis Kucinich commentary

…

Bernie Sanders commentary

The government that ignores our votes, opinions, and best interests ceases to be “our” government.

...In the 2008 election Americans voted (indirectly) to get out of Iraq. But did it happen? Not really – even though we thought we won the election. Like some shell game, our soldiers are still in Far-off-istan.

These “wars” would end immediately – if we had the right to quit paying for them. And why shouldn't we have the right to quit paying for violence we never voted for – and were conned into supporting? Americans are a peace-loving people who have been at war or preparing for war since before most of us were even born. All I'm saying is we should have the right to vote on this.

For example: If our nation has been at war for more than a year, it should go to a vote. We should be asked; “Should America continue its hostilities? Yes or No?” And we should be asked every year thereafter too. And if a majority of voting Americans choose to end the fighting, the funding should be automatically ended.

Essentially, American taxpayers have become slaves for a military/industrial complex never ending war machine. Sadly, we can't trust our politicians to end these wars, no matter how big a waste they are. There's just too much money to skim. I'm not saying that any “war” that lasts more than a year should be canceled automatically. But at least those of us who are paying for it should automatically be able to vote whether to discontinue payments or not.

We should vote on foreign military aid too.

Do you really think that, if we had had the chance to vote on it; we would have been giving Egypt over a billion dollars a year to essentially build up their military? No! Hell No! We wouldn't have supported a dictator so that U.S. military contractors could sell arms to a government that only professed peace with Israel so that they could get more arms... And if Hosni Mubarak hadn't had so much of our money, maybe he wouldn't have been nearly so powerful a dictator. Who knows – we might have been able to avoid 30 years of oppression in Egypt – and save over 40 billion dollars – if only we had had the chance to vote on it.

Of course, our elected officials sometimes do make the right decisions. Events in Egypt should now persuade us that President Obama has now convincingly earned his Nobel Peace prize... But it took 30 years to get to this point, and it still might not have happened now.

When former presidential candidate Senator John McCain called the democracy movement in Egypt a “virus,” it reminded us that things could have turned out very different. Had John McCain been president, it is very likely U.S. “interests” would have taken precedence over democracy. Had John McCain been president, most likely America would have given Hosni Mubarak the go ahead to violently oppress its own people (again).

…

McCain democracy “virus” video

Which is another reason why decision limits are so important. No democratically elected leader should be allowed to suppress democracy in other countries. That is simply not what we should stand for. Because ultimately, the oppression spreads – as it has from third world countries to America.

…

Jesse Ventura interview

(Of course, there is no way to know for sure whether a political resistance movement will result in democracy. But when a country is afflicted with despotism, we obviously should err on the side of democracy movements. Which is why we should implement these ideas for more democracy – and less corrupt “leadership” autonomy.)

...Inevitably, even in the best run governments, mistakes will be made. Which means decision limits aren't always enough. There has to be a way to automatically shut down bad programs. Because our politicians just don't seem to be able to shut off the flow of money, no matter how bad a program is. We need Constitution driven automatic shutdowns of funding under certain conditions.

For example:

When the fossil fuel industry makes the mistake of destroying a huge chunk of the environment with an avoidable oil spill – such as what happened with BP in the Gulf last summer, and Exxon in Alaska etc. etc.; it should be written into our Constitution that their subsidies, tax breaks etc. etc. be revoked.

No politician should even be asked their opinion on this. The revocations should be automatic – especially when alternative technologies exist that have no significant environmental effects compared to these catastrophes.

Automatic shutdowns are just good management. Or at least they are the avoidance of bad management. These shutdowns don't have to be permanent. We could still vote them back.

If BP or Exxon want their subsidies back, they can petition (or pay) for an election vote on the issue. And if a majority of the voting population (not just a majority of the people voting in the election) choose to reinstate their subsidies, so be it. We would have chosen to pay. But we're not choosing to pay now, and many many people are very very angry about this.

Our present political system has failed us; by making atrocious decisions that have cost us trillions, our health and environment, and the lives of thousands of our soldiers. It doesn't have to be that way.

We can create a system that does a much better job of self-correction – in part because we hardly have one at all now. Let's face it; any implementation of common sense would be better than what we have now.

Americans should have the right to kick the bums out of the Supreme Court too. If over half of Americans capable of voting choose to replace a Supreme Court Justice, we should have the right.

The “Supreme” Court has a long history of supporting plutocracy and corporatocracy over democracy. Or don't you think it's strange that the “Supreme” Court can declare most of the New Deal unconstitutional and now throw out our campaign finance laws, but somehow they just don't seem to be capable of noticing that the Patriot Act is in direct defiance of the Bill of Rights.

Which brings us to issues of freedom and liberty. Shouldn't Americans be allowed to vote on issues that reduce our freedoms? Why is it that unelected bureaucrats should have more power over our freedom than we do? When it comes to issues like net neutrality, we should be the ones to vote on it. Anything else is an attack on our sovereignty. There shouldn't even be a question about it. We should be the ones voting on issues such as this.

...Of course, there are some things even we Americans should not be able to vote on. We should not be allowed to vote against the Bill of Rights. Majority rule is not the answer to everything. But at least it's better than minority rule by a privileged class. Especially when that privileged class is ever faster running our nation and planet to self-destruction.

Direct Democracy on long-term policy issues would spread the decision making process out to all those effected, and thus reduce policy manipulation for the benefit of the short-sighted.
Political Decision Limits can help keep politicians honest.
Automatic Shutdowns of Illegitimate Programs could save us billions if not trillions of dollars on programs, subsidies, and tax breaks that are essentially just socialism for the rich.

What America needs is more democracy.

What America Needs Is More Democracy

2011-02-18T10:42:00.001-08:00

Most everyone agrees; America is broken. Our government is dysfunctional. Our future looks uncertain. And worse, our long-term future looks bleak.

Why? At least in part because our “leaders” keep making bad decisions. And they keep making those bad decisions because that's what keeps getting them money to get re-elected... at least until our economy collapses... even worse than it did in 2008.

Casino Jack and the United States of Money Trailer

Inside Job Trailer

Noam Chomsky Democracy Uprising

What we have in America only looks like democracy.

What we have in America is socialism for the highest bidder.

What we have in America does not look at all like equality.

What we have in America is a privileged class running “our” government for their own selfish benefit – a plutocracy.

And what does that mean for the rest of us?

Servitude.

That's right. You are like a slave. You are like a slave who votes for “leaders” who almost always decide against you. Because your vote never counts as much as the privileged class payoffs. Things have been somewhat this way for a long time. But now, we have a free-for-all race to the bottom. This has become totally unsustainable.

Common sense no longer matters.

This is a sign.

Disregard for common sense is a sign that our system is falling apart – failing. Even the privileged class should be afraid. This cannot last. And it won't last for much longer.

What we need is an infusion of sanity.

What we need is a way to keep our “leaders” from making decisions that don't make sense.

What we need is to think outside of the box.

But thinking outside of the box is the last thing the privileged class wants us to do. Limiting our thinking is how they keep us in line.

The ultimate point of controlling mass media is to distract us. The mass media only gives you the alternatives they want you to consider. We have been misdirected into believing that the system we have is the ultimate system of democracy. It is not.

Consider this: When was the last time Americans voted on a national issue?

Never.

That's not really democracy.

That's representative democracy.

And it's only pretend democracy when our “representatives” don't really represent us.

America's government has devolved into a culture of compulsory corruption – financed by required bribes (campaign contributions etc.).

Free market politics is payola politics.

Free market politics is legalized corruption.

Free market politics is multi-national corporate control.

And after thirty years of gutting of U.S. manufacturing and suppressing of Americans' wages, there is overwhelming evidence to prove that multi-national corporations don't really care about America.

So, what do we do about it?

I would suggest the opposite of the “Supreme” Court Citizens United decision.

We need less, much less multi-national corporate control.

In fact;

Americans should be directly determining our long-term policies.

There is no reason, with the technology we have today, for not having an election every year – on a dozen or so of the issues. We should be voting for (or against) particular issues – not some candidate who promises to address your issue – and then later acts like you don't exist.

Representative democracy has failed us. Our proxies can too easily be mislead, corrupted, and/or intimidated. Our politicians have failed us. The flaw is systemic. But it doesn't have to be this way.

There is no reason we should have to rely on politicians and bureaucrats to make our most important decisions for us.

What America needs is more democracy.

but what America has been getting is less and less democracy. We've ended up with more and more authoritarianism from the very people who have promised us smaller government. And worse, they keep making poor decisions that have led us closer and closer to total economic collapse.

What we need are limits to bad government.

What we need are guidelines, procedures, decision trees, or at least some kind of limitations on politicians that keep them from making bad decisions. And most importantly, we the people need to set policy. Our “leaders” should only have the power to implement our democratically issued orders. That's what elections were supposed to do. That's what direct democracy can do.

And when certain things happen, with obvious bad consequences; the right to decide on the issue should be out of politicians' hands.

Of course, don't ever expect any politician or bureaucrat to give up their power for us - no matter who we vote for. They have no intention – and never will – of sharing our power with us. We will have to take it.

The process of getting the power we should already have will likely look a lot like Egypt did. Yes it will take us taking to the streets. The protests in Wisconsin and Egypt should only be a beginning.

I don't wish to fight America.

I intend to make America better.

What America (and all of the world's governments) need more of is:

Direct Democracy
Political Decision Limits

Automatic Shutdowns of Illegitimate Programs

(I will give examples on my next post.)

Utilizing the Scientific Method to Fix Things

2011-02-02T10:16:00.000-08:00

Here is the next Zeitgeist video:

the Zeitgeist Movement Activist and Orientation Guide

This video shows how the Venus Project wants us to develop a resource based economy that recognizes natural law to develop a sustainable equilibrium and abundance for all – or in other words; how to fix our dysfunctional economy.

Our love of money is the basis for most evil. Profits are earned based upon a system that rewards scarcity – not responsibility. Consequently, so many good ideas are ignored because the profit potential isn't as great as with exploitation.

What makes sense is to develop a system where the best ideas rise to the top, corruption is unprofitable, a functional based spirituality replaces the blind obeying of self appointed leaders, and where people treat each other (and the environment) with respect.

I think they're onto something extraordinary.

But until we develop a system such as they recommend, we can utilize the Internet to communicate what works best.

For example:

The website GoodGuide.com has rated household products we use based upon how healthy they are, how they effect the environment, and how well the company functions in society. If we spend our money wisely, and buy the greenest and most socially responsible products; then we will at least not reward irresponsibility.

Though not nearly as game changing as moving away from a money-based economy, this is something significant we can do right away.

From Truth To Freedom

2011-01-31T10:42:00.000-08:00

The truth will not set you free.

The truth only clears your mind for you to set yourself free.

Wikileaks, internet news, and social networks are now much more than just a PR problem for politicians, corporatocracies, and tyrants. They have now become the truth that inspires revolutions.

We saw this happen in Tunisia.

Wikileaks documents showed examples of the vast corruption at the top in Tunisia. This was just too much for the people of Tunisia to take. They stood up and overthrew the tyrant who had oppressed them for years.

And when Egyptians saw this happen, they too stood up against tyranny. We could call this the domino theory of democracy. But you won't hear that from Vice President Joe Biden. Instead we hear Biden say (about Hosni Mubarak); “I would not refer to him as a dictator.” …And why not?

Wikileaks has published U.S. documents that point out that Hosni Mubarak definitely fits the description. Our government knows this. They're just lying to us – and worse. “Our” U.S. Government gives $1.3 billion to Egypt every year in “aid.” (That's Orwellian speak for military support to a totalitarian government.) And our tax dollars have been going towards this for over 30 years now!

Why? Supposedly so that Egypt won't go to war with Israel again. But, the money we've sent to Egypt has resulted in that nation now having the 11^th largest military on the planet. So, if we cut off their aid, they now have the military buildup to go to war with Israel. WTF? We've been played... We've been hosed by Hosni. But not just Egypt is behind draining our National treasure. You can bet that much of that (military) aid money got spent on U.S. made weaponry (enriching the usual military/industrial complex suspects).

And what do we hear about this from the mass media? Not much. But we do hear about the Muslim Brotherhood. We hear about terrorism. We hear about rioting, looting, and anarchy... all of which are minor issues so far. However, we also hear about the stock market dropping. U.S. “interests” are at risk.

Most people don't really think about what the term “U.S. interests” really means. Personally, I (and most Americans) don't have any “interests” in Egypt – other than my concern for the welfare of the Egyptian people. However; U.S. (and international) corporations do. (Once again, capitalists are favoring a totalitarian government over a democracy.) And just why should international corporations care who runs the Egyptian government? Of course, the answer is obvious. The present Egyptian government gives"favors" to these corporations – at the expense of the Egyptian people. The only logical conclusion is that the corporate economic cycle of oppression is at risk if the Egyptian people take over.

And we're supposed to be concerned about that.

... I guess I am.

I want Egypt to be free.

But maybe I'm asking too much. Maybe the radicals are on their way to power.

Is this another Iran? Maybe. But it doesn't look like it. Iran had the Ayatollah Khomeini. Egypt doesn't seem to have an equivalent. One thing for sure however; if we continue to support a tyrant in Egypt, and he continues to suppress his people, when they finally do overthrow him, we will have another Iran – with a military infrastructure we paid for.

One more thing. It's obvious that the events in Tunisia aren't the only reason Egyptians are out in the streets demanding democracy. The crippled Egyptian economy has played a major role in the peoples' unrest. Yes, the 2008 banking crisis hurt Egypt's economy too. Which means U.S. and international banks played a significant role in this political turmoil. In other words, we helped bring all this on.

That's right; we.

The American people have allowed our politicians to gut responsible laws that regulated the banks. We too, have to deal with rampant corruption. The banking meltdown may not have been our fault, but the dysfunctional government we have allowed to exist is.

We know the problem here. Campaign contributions are essentially required bribes. If a candidate refuses to take these “contributions,” they won't win any elections. And if business owners don't give out these “contributions,” their markets will eventually be legislated away. This is how a democracy slowly becomes a corporatocracy, and then eventually a fascist state. So far, we've just let it happen. And things just continue to get worse.

We've seen that when the free market dominates democracy, our government is for sale. And when our laws are for sale, we no longer have effective laws. And when our laws are for sale to the highest bidder, those with the gold make the rules with no regard for right and wrong. When established industries dominate a market, innovation gets stifled. When a monopoly dominates a market, eventually quality goes down and price goes up. When international corporations control our government, domestic issues get ignored.

Eventually, the consequences of systematic corruption will inevitably lead to our downfall. The consequences of doing things callously wrong result in poverty, sweatshops, resource depletion, pollution, and Climate Change. Even in America, we can only ignore this for so long...

Maybe someday things will get so bad here that Americans will take to the streets too.

Which is likely why we see “our” U.S. Government taking preemptive steps to stop democracy on the streets here.

“Our” government is trying to legislate an Internet “kill switch” which could shut down the U.S. Internet during those times revolutionaries might need it to communicate (during any uprising against the powers that be). Also, the Internet is being privatized right before our eyes, against our will. Freedom of speech is gradually being usurped on the Internet by an undeserving system of greed - controlled by monopolistic corporations intent on charging you for what we built for free!

Like Egypt; the U.S. has been in a state of emergency for years (almost a decade now).

Moreover, it has been exposed that rampant civil liberties violations (approximately 40,000) have occurred in the U.S. since 9/11.

Of course, there's much more. Just check out Project Censored.

And what are we doing about all this? Not much.

At least the Tunisians and the Egyptians love freedom enough to do something about it.

...Freedom is more than just the freedom to pay taxes.

We know that, but we aren't hungry enough yet to assert ourselves.

Apparently, that time is coming.

Robert F. Kennedy (in a speech to the US Senate):

“A revolution is coming – a revolution which will be peaceful if we are wise enough, compassionate if we care enough, successful if we are fortunate enough – But a revolution which is coming, whether we will it or not. We can effect its character. We cannot alter its inevitability.”

I Was Taught Wrong

2011-01-22T06:53:00.000-08:00

I spent over a decade working as a Systems Engineer. It took a Bachelor's Degree in Electrical Engineering qualify for this position. My classes and work were all very advanced and seemed very thorough. Yet, in all that time I never studied or worked on a truly functional system.

I was taught wrong what a system is.

I took Economics classes back in college too. Their idea of what an economic system is fell just as short.

They tried to teach me that a system is something linear, with an input and an output. They tried to get me to ignore the consequences – the rest of the system. They tried to teach me that dysfunctional systems were normal.

My professors back in college weren't evil or stupid. They were just caught up in a dysfunctional society that didn't want to hear that we were dysfunctional...

Nature can teach us what a functional system looks like. Functional systems are cyclical. There is no input and output. Or more appropriately, everything along the functional system process is output to the next input. Most importantly, profit is something that happens at every step. For example:

Once upon a time; there were no animals. Plants breathed carbon dioxide and exhaled oxygen. In time, they used up much of the carbon dioxide. That was a dysfunctional system – much like the systems humans rely on now. Had life not figured out a way, the plants would have breathed up all of the carbon dioxide and gone extinct. But every generation of new life is essentially a new idea – a new combination of genes that just may have the answer to the last generations' problems. Animals evolved. We breath oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide. A cycle evolved. And a functional system was born. This functional system has served the balance life well for billions of years.

My Native American ancestors were not trained as System Engineers. But they comprehended better than we do that complete, healthy systems are cyclical. This is why the circle was of such importance to so many Native American cultures. They saw how life worked. They paid attention.

Though scientists understand these systems much better than my ancestors did, our present culture doesn't pay attention to the systems of life. We pay attention to profits. We want output.

Humanity has developed a way to get ahead in the short term. But the cost is predictably catastrophic in the long term. Our dysfunctional systems are destroying functional systems. Our quick profit economic rewards have blinded us. But the short term is now over. Now we have to deal with the consequences of our actions.

Years ago, climate scientists predicted that (due to Global warming) the American West would see heavy snowfalls – which would melt early. And then we would see much less precipitation for the rest of the year. This last year has played out exactly as predicted – with frighteningly damaging consequences.

Recently, climate scientists have let us know that the effects of massive excesses of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (released by fossil fuel reliant humans) will not dissipate for over a thousand years.

We have damaged the balance of the functional system of the life cycle of the air we breath. And we are going to have to live with the consequences for at least a thousand years.

To see an ABC news report video on Climate Change already happening click here.

Like when life once faced the challenge of what to do with all that oxygen, we are now faced with the challenge of what to do with all that carbon dioxide. We could just wait and see. Life will let the poorly prepared die off, and the next generations may just have the answer. But life has evolved almost seven billion human brains to deal with this issue. Humanity doesn't have to die off in droves (or evolve genetically) to find a better way.

What we have to do, if we don't wish to eventually go extinct, is to learn how to create functional systems.

We have created economic systems that reward destruction and waste. This is not just irresponsible. This is insane in the long run. INSANE!

So, why do we keep doing it? Too many people are just making too damn much money.

And if they stopped, others would just jump in to take their place.

We have created a self-perpetuating system of self destruction – by rewarding unhealthy greed. To see just how entrenched this dysfunctional system has taken over our beloved U.S. government, I highly recommend watching the video “Casino Jack and the United States of Money.”

CASINO JACK AND THE UNITED STATES OF MONEY: Movie Trailer. Watch more top selected videos about: Casino Jack and the United States of Money, Alex Gibney

As stated in the video, all we really have to do to fix most of the corruption problem is to get money out of the election process. Until then, free market economics will mean politicians for sale to the highest bidder.

This is a very entrenched system. The politicians make tons of money and the “contributors” get special favors – for pennies on the dollar. Some of those favors include unfair economic advantages over better ideas.

Part of the reason so many small businesses have failed over the past 30 years – crushed by monopolies; is that our government has legislated unfair advantages for the monopolies (with subsidies for established industries, tax breaks for the rich, monopoly favoring red tape, and trade treaties that give unfair advantages to multi-national corporations). This in turn, has resulted in the suppression of good ideas. Some of these ideas would have already been saving us from environmental destruction – had we implemented them.

I named my blog NoShootFoot for this very reason. As a Native American with formal training as a Systems Engineer, I have seen what we as a culture don't want to see. We look at the world as a resource to be exploited. We ignore the fact that our systems weren't designed to last. We are failing. We need massive change to survive. But surprisingly, I don't believe we really have to change our system of government. What we really need to do is change our system of rewards.

This will take a change in our Constitution. (To see how to change our Constitution click here.) And it will take a change in our power structure. Moreover, it will take a change in our information distribution system. And most importantly, it will take a total change in the way we reward long-term behavior.

We need to know what works, be able to implement it, and be rewarded for our good deeds.

We need to evolve... socially.

How Low Can They Go?

2011-01-14T10:33:00.000-08:00

After a while, one begins to expect the bad guys to cheat at every opportunity.

We Western Shoshone were invited on 1/12/2011 to a meeting with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), concerning Native American cultural, historical, and religious concerns in the construction of the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) Ground Water Development Project (watergrab).

Of concern was the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS).

A number of subjects were covered – mostly updates. We appreciate being kept up to date. And I personally believe that the local BLM officials are on our side. But as time went by, it became more and more apparent that someone (above the BLM representatives attending) wants this project to happen – and is willing to stack the deck in favor of SNWA.

Case in point; the BLM publication “Right-of-Way Project Update” (December 2010 – Newsletter No. 6) lists nine different “Alternatives,” but somehow overlooked the do-nothing (don't drain Nevada) alternative.

Moreover; It took years to develop the hydrological model to assess the damage the watergrab will have on Rural Nevada and Utah, while we get ninety days to review it.

And it is estimated that there will be somewhere near three thousand pages to review in the DEIS, while we only get ninety days to review and write comments on it.

But the real fox-in-the-hen-house moment came when Washington DC attorney John Clark handed us a Programmatic Agreement to sign.

This Programmatic Agreement was the only actual item that we would be asked to act upon that day. So, it isn't unreasonable to assume that this was the main reason for the meeting.

Washington DC attorney John Clark introduced himself as an authority on historic preservation and proceeded to inform us on BLM responsibilities. He did happen to mention that SNWA was paying his bills, but he reassured us that his priority was protecting our traditional cultural properties.

And then he started to explain this Programmatic Agreement. Let's just say it became easy to fall asleep during his explanation. Most of what he said concerned the procedures the BLM would go through to “protect” us. The explanation was tedious. But I paid attention and tried to read along as he spoke.

The draft of the Programmatic Agreement had been handed out at the meeting. This was the first time we had seen it. Most of it looked like basic procedural blah blah blah. But hidden in it was what looked to me like a trap. So, after his presentation, I asked about it.

To the best of my recollection, this is what we said:

Rick Spilsbury; “I'm not a lawyer, and I don't know bureaucrat-speak, but something about this Programmatic Agreement just doesn't look right. For example; right at the top, the agreement is between the DOI, the BLM, the SHPO, etc. etc. including SNWA, but the only place the Tribes are mentioned is back where we sign as “Concurring Parties.”

And if there is a dispute, is says here in the Dispute Resolution section that the BLM Nevada State Director will have authority to make a “final determination.”

Washington DC attorney John Clark; “Well, that's just the way these issues are typically handled.” (Not his exact words, but close.)

Rick Spilsbury; “It looks to me like this is just going to eliminate our opportunity to sue.”

Washington DC attorney John Clark; “Oh, you can still sue.”

(Note: Of course, we can still sue; but our odds of winning would be greatly reduced if we have signed our rights away.)

Rick Spilsbury; “I just don't get this. What's in it for us?”

Washington DC attorney John Clark; “It's the law that we follow these procedures.” (More was said. However, it wasn't particularly relevant. It felt like he was trying to change the subject.)

(Note: If the law is so concrete, what is the point of us signing this agreement?)

Rick Spilsbury; “So, what if we don't sign this agreement?”

Washington DC attorney John Clark; “Then they will proceed with this anyway.” (More was said. However, it wasn't particularly relevant. It felt like he was trying to change the subject.)

Essentially, all of these U.S. Government agencies got together and decided how they will do things, and a lawyer paid by SNWA wanted us to just sign away that we agreed to let them handle it for us.

Not no, but NO WAY!

We're not signing any more Treaties.

The most telling part of this document is the Dispute Resolution section. As I mentioned earlier, final determination for any objection was written into the fine print (which Washington DC attorney John Clark conspicuously passed over). This document gave the BLM Nevada State Director final say on most issues. How convenient...

Allow me to remind you that we were told it was the BLM Nevada State Director who agreed to the Stipulated Agreement with SNWA that led to the BLM dropping all its Protests to the State water applications for the watergrab.

Hmmm....

Protests from the BLM to the State Engineer could have reduced the amount of water approved for export from BLM land. The Stipulated Agreement eliminated any possibility of the BLM warning the Nevada State Engineer that the environmental effects of draining a river of water from a place that has no rivers just might be catastrophic.

And the Stipulated Agreement doesn't have any teeth. The Stipulated Agreement doesn't have any actual real world triggers. SNWA agrees to “monitor and mitigate.” So what? Everything else is going to have to be determined in court. Dan Netcher, from the BLM, claimed that this Stipulated Agreement was the only way the BLM would have any control over what happened later – if the State Engineer permitted the watergrab. There may be some merit to this argument, but the BLM sure could have agreed to something with more substance.

And what did the BLM gain by stipulating out? They can complain later – that's it. It was a give-away – with lots of fancy words to make it sound like they were being responsible.

(Oh, and one more thing; since the Nevada State Supreme Court has forced SNWA back to square one because the Nevada State Engineer favored them so much over the citizens of Nevada, the BLM quietly stipulated out again!)

Up until the end of 2010, the BLM Nevada State Director has been Ron Wenker. It is most likely he has been behind the Stipulated Agreements with the BLM (though the order to stipulate out came from the Department of the Interior). It will be interesting to see whether he ends up with a “job” at SNWA.

This draft Programmatic Agreement states that Amy Lueders is the acting BLM Nevada State Director. Is she to be trusted? I didn't vote for her. And since she is just “acting” Director, we don't really know who will end up making final determinations.

If I were a paranoid conspiracy nut, I might suspect that SNWA has offered someone in the Department of Interior (and/or higher up in the BLM) a “job.” The revolving door between Government regulators and private industry has been spinning quite often lately. This may be no different. We need to watch very closely who ends up with the position of BLM Nevada State Director.

And we definitely DO NOT want to sign anything that just agrees to let them handle it.

… You know; if SNWA had spent the money they have spent on trying to lie, cheat, and steal this water from Native Americans, Rural Nevadans, Americans, the wildlife that needs this water, and future generations that may need this water far more than Southern Nevada developers; they would have already built an offshore desalination plant and been able to trade that water for more water out of the Colorado River. Or they could have used the money to reform Nevada water law to save some water for the future.

I guess scheming minds rarely think about what's best for us all.

Who Are We Really?

2011-01-10T19:41:00.000-08:00

from Sarah Palin website

Kennedy poster distributed in Dallas before his assassination.

I recall the statement made by Malcolm X, about the inevitability of the assassination of John F. Kennedy; “the chickens have come home to roost.”

It appears to have happened again.

The press will likely frame the story of the assassination attempt on Congresswoman Giffords as the act of an insane lone gunman. Where have we heard this before?

John F. Kennedy

Robert Kennedy

Martin Luther King

George Wallace

Gerald Ford

Ronald Reagan

and now Representative Gabrielle Giffords

This has happened so many times that we can't help but consider; is this a reflection on us? Does America condone, even promote political violence?

Is this a part of the War on the Left I have posted about before? Or is it even bigger?

Well, we definitely can blame Sarah Palin, Fox News, John Boehner, and the Tea Party for creating an environment of hate that makes it more socially acceptable (in potential assassins' minds) to commit such heinous crimes. Had there not been such an atmosphere of violent anger, maybe Jared Loughner would have chosen to seek help – instead of a gun.

However, I recently read a comment on one of the articles about the assassination attempt.

The comment reads:

“Democrat or Republican really doesn't matter. What we have here is a government that is pushing people over the edge by caring about special interests (their own, mostly) rather than us.”

This is much bigger than Sarah Palin.

Though Jared Loughner is likely insane, this killer may have seen himself as a revolutionary.

This is a key point.

America has created an atmosphere of violence that has now bred even more violence.

If it's OK to expose a CIA agent (Valerie Plame) to potential harm for anti-war comments made by her husband. If it's OK to torture Bradley Manning, who was trying to expose the callus and self-serving nature of our political and war machine on Wikileaks. If it's OK to imprison (for no apparent reason) the CIA asset (Susan Lindauer) who knew the real motivation behind the 9/11 attacks. If it's OK to kill or allow the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis for the 9/11 attacks (of which no Iraqis participated in). If it's OK to invade and occupy at least two countries on the slimmest of excuses. If it's OK to run our nation into financial ruin to pay for a military budget that exceeds the next six countries combined. Then what have we become?

This isn't just about a crosshairs map. This is about a systematic failure within our Nation. This is about a kingdom of hate and fear on the verge of coming apart at the seams. This is a sign... And this will not be televised – because there are powerful people making too damn much money not fixing anything.

Oh, by the way...

There is another list.

This list of (likely) assassinated public figures is less well known because the official records claim they were accidents. However, these people all died in plane crashes:

Senator Paul Wellstone – the most outspoken critic of the Bush Jr. administration

Mike Connell – Carl Rove's chief IT consultant, the key witness to the 2000 and 2004 election thefts

Former Senator John Tower – chair of the commission that investigated the Iran/Contra scandal

Senator John Heinz – an outspoken critic of the Viet Nam war

House Majority Leader Hale Boggs – one of the members of the Warren Commission who had strong doubts that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone

In all, 23 air crashes have killed 48 U.S. politicians.

Needless to say, most of these plane crashes were just accidents. But when a pattern emerges, the possibility of them all being accidents becomes less and less likely. Especially when it is generally accepted that two South American leaders (Jamie Roldos and Omar Torrijos) were assassinated by the CIA in airplane crashes.

We live in a country where, whether true or not; violence is seen as a commonly used option by those in power. So, why are we surprised when we see others emulate them?

In what is supposed to be the greatest democracy on Earth, we now have a huge, angry mob of people who don't feel they are being represented. And a few of them feel the only option they have is violent revolution... Maybe, just maybe, we need the threat of that to get motivated. Of course, we now have that threat, whether we want it or not. The big question is will we dismiss this assassin as a lone gunman, panic and further push our Nation towards a police state, or try to fix the system that created him.

This is not about freedom or security.

It's about money and our insane economic reward system. It's about an unhealthy culture. It's about an abundance of man-made chemicals in our environment. It's about our Big Pharma and illegal drug culture. It's about concentrated power over what we know. It's about the powers-that-be making every decision with brutal self interest. It's about the rest of society following along.

This is about our society's violent collective mental illness – which we don't understand and don't even want to admit exists.