Sunday, November 17, 2019

80% El Nino in 2020 could easily trigger ESAS Methane Bomb

http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2019/11/2020-el-nino-could-start-18-degree-temperature-rise.html

As the NASA map [above] shows, heating in October 2019 was particularly pronounced over the Arctic Ocean.
 Oh you spin a wonderful web of liberal semantics and polemics but what Empirical Evidence do you have to back your claims of dismissal? NONE!! Arctic-news is simply citing already proven and PUBLISHED empirical evidence. And your reaction? The Alchemy of DeNile. It's quite amazing that even the Doomosphere can't handle the evidence. Such is the interwebs. So let's test your theory? Shall we?

 I just googled Natalia Shakhova Nature. Let's see the results that you call Unsupported by Thorough Research and evaluation of the interaction of Variables by Qualified Experts - what a mouthful of B.S. you wrote! Talk about pandering to a bunch of bourgeois lies smitten with delusion! OH now let's Bask in the Results of my Radical Search on Google!

 Current rates and mechanisms of subsea permafrost ... -
Nature https://www.nature.com › nature communications › articles by N Shakhova - 2017 - Cited by 46 - Related articles Jun 22, 2017 - When natural warming over this area started ∼15 kyr ago, ..... Natalia Shakhova; , Igor Semiletov; , Oleg Dudarev; , Alexey Mazurov ... Geosciences | Free Full-

Text | Understanding the Permafrost ... https://www.mdpi.com › ... by N Shakhova - 2019 - Cited by 2 - Related articles Sep 2, 2019 - by Natalia Shakhova 1,2,*, Igor Semiletov 1,3,4,5 and Evgeny Chuvilin 6. 1. Institute of Natural Resources, National Tomsk Research ...Abstract · Share and Cite · Article Metrics

Two recent publications in the top science journal in the world. NOW - let's consider that the recent 9 times the global average rate of methane release in ESAS was documented by an INTERNATIONAL team of scientists! So what sayeth now oh pandering of brown-nosing empty signifiers with no empirical validation what so ever?

 It's sheer LUNAcy!! It's a Nuit-case (Nuit the Egyptian Cosmic Mother). Yes we Erected our Solar Dynasty Priesthoods via Pyramids - and look what's happened! the Lunatics have returned - the Moon controls life on Earth and she's Cray-Cray to be sure!

 yes "possible - anything possible" - sounds very post-modern! Like Gary Webb shot himself since the CIA wasn't really dealing crack! yes I would "suggest" changing your "anything is possible" argument to something more specific like - the ESAS methane is ALREADY bubbling up at 9 times the global average and at "any year" the methane rate will go exponential in growth of emissions. So it "appears" that this has already HAPPENED based on the empirical evidence. that's a pretty specific analysis - admittedly not as fashionable as "anything is possible" - (i.e. Unisex bathrooms at airports, etc.).

 You've been "following" - as in a Liberal that looks for the best "buying" options? what have you DONE to "mitigate" our current abrupt global warming crisis? In 1992 I was studying conservation biology and sustainable development in Costa Rica for 3 1/2 months at the School for Field Studies. Yesterday I got a mailer from them asking me for money. Sorry I don't have any since I spent my time from 1992 doing activism. haha. I have already gone over the activism I've done - including being arrested eight times - but also organizing coalitions and campaigns and working at half a dozen environmental/social justice nonprofits.

I can assure you that lots of so-called "progressive" activists have PUT THE BRAKES on reality of abrupt global warming just as you are doing right now - by saying "I don't buy it" - let's SIT BACK And wait for a better "off the shelf" product to be released. Hilarious!! Sorry buddy but it's TOO LATE - too little too late. You can't have you Liberal "sit back and observe" the environmental crisis Jouissance!! You're part of the problem and Mother Nature is pissed and she's about to suck you into her Cosmic spacetime Void Vortex. haha.

I'm assuming LBJ wasn't wearing any clothes as he ate this mythical lobster - as LBJ was wont to be an exhibitionist of Missile Envy genocide. Lobsters have an amazing sense of smell via their tentacles antennae. So the "smell of lobster" is ironic in itself. Smell is a non-local perception based on quantum frequency and noncommutative phase. We modern humans don't smell well due to left brain dominance that shuts off perception of our theta REM brainwaves. So we no longer PERCEIVE the "continued" smells of lobster whereas the lobsters continue to perceive the smell of Ecocide. You jiggy?

You shirley mean the Two-headed DU babies that will be keeping the nuke power plants from melting down? Yes that truly is "spiritual evolution" according to the Liberal Freemason Theosophist elites. Radioeugenics was the original term for it. Now it's called "medical hormesis." Keep "planning" - I'm very fascinating by your gleeful future of liberal progressive technocrats that survive!


@Voidisyinyang Voidisyinyang Thank you for responding to my comment. While I firmly believe that devastating effects from anthropogenic causes are occurring, and will continue to occur, I cannot--and should not--accept the conclusions in the posted piece on its face. I also would never recommend these posts by Arctic News to anyone in their current state. There are much better sources of material that provide well-supported claims and other items. Shakova and her colleagues are doing ground-breaking research that I support. So are many of the people whose work Arctic News blog places in its posts. Void: Please learn to avoid spewing meaningless "word salad" and what you perceive to be denigrating blanket labels to total strangers who post information on comment boards. It is disrespectful, and unhelpful. Thank you. I don't actually need to provide evidence when I state that the material provided by someone else is not well-supported, unless someone cannot determine that for themselves, and asks for specific clarification. You can read it and observe the problems with the posts in Arctic News for yourself. The site cherry-picks and generates its own altered graphics from government and research sources, and those who alter the graphics are not necessarily subject matter experts. The written content in the post shown in THIS video, and related posts linked to the post shown in THIS video, are primarily editorializing and guessing. They do not in conclusively make the connections between observed events and the future projections they make. If you are unable to parse that when you read this type of material, then perhaps completing coursework in information research techniques, evaluation, and reporting at a local or online community college would be helpful for you. I have been teaching courses of that type for around twenty years, and I am a technical and scientific writer and editor who has served major projects for the Federal government, top-level sci-tech contract corporations, and university systems for many years.
@myra7273 So what are the better sources than Nature science journal please? It's considered the top science journal in the world. I'm waiting your response.
@myra7273 You confess that you work through official corporate-state Imperial Channels. Care to give any more details? You disagree with an independent scientist making their own graphs? Can you specify what particulars you think are false? You state the post is giving their own predictions. Yes that is obvious but it goes against your corporate-state salaried sellout Group Think mentality? Thanks for corroborating specifically WHY we are in such an abrupt global warming crisis as this. You do agree that Universities and corporate-state institutions are built on Western genocide and ecocide? It's pretty simple isn't it? You sold out to get a nice generic well-paying job to have a nice normal life while trying to ignore the obvious fact that the US is an empire with 900 military bases in other countries, blatantly destroying the planet. Let's start with an easy question: What's the official reason that the US military killed 200,000 people in the Philippines in the 1890s? Care to post some official source that shows how that did not contribute to abrupt global warming?
@myra7273 As Noam Chomsky points out, he just wants to be able to look himself in the mirror. And yourself? That's not an issue for you?
Are you being PAID to troll this site to try to discredit the work of http://arctic-news.blogspot.com? If so is anyone personally directing you to do so? Are you paid by the taxpayers?
Have you ever been arrested for civil disobedience against the blatant gencodial and ecocidal policies of the US Empire and if not, how can you look yourself in the mirror?
Are you just a cyber "activist" safely sitting behind your computer without having done anything of real impact to stop abrupt global warming? If so, then when are you willing to speak out publicly and get arrested?
If you don't want to answer my questions, don't worry about it as it's obviously too little too late. But thanks for corroborating your fake supposed "objective reality" neutral b.s. position.
Do you work for any of these governments that the US blatantly tried to overthrow? If not, why do you think your official corporate-state jobs are some sort of moral high horse when in fact the opposite is the truth? Instances of the United States overthrowing, or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government) China 1949 to early 1960s Albania 1949-53 East Germany 1950s Iran 1953 * Guatemala 1954 * Costa Rica mid-1950s Syria 1956-7 Egypt 1957 Indonesia 1957-8 British Guiana 1953-64 * Iraq 1963 * North Vietnam 1945-73 Cambodia 1955-70 * Laos 1958 *, 1959 *, 1960 * Ecuador 1960-63 * Congo 1960 * France 1965 Brazil 1962-64 * Dominican Republic 1963 * Cuba 1959 to present Bolivia 1964 * Indonesia 1965 * Ghana 1966 * Chile 1964-73 * Greece 1967 * Costa Rica 1970-71 Bolivia 1971 * Australia 1973-75 * Angola 1975, 1980s Zaire 1975 Portugal 1974-76 * Jamaica 1976-80 * Seychelles 1979-81 Chad 1981-82 * Grenada 1983 * South Yemen 1982-84 Suriname 1982-84 Fiji 1987 * Libya 1980s Nicaragua 1981-90 * Panama 1989 * Bulgaria 1990 * Albania 1991 * Iraq 1991 Afghanistan 1980s * Somalia 1993 Yugoslavia 1999-2000 * Ecuador 2000 * Afghanistan 2001 * Venezuela 2002 * Iraq 2003 * Haiti 2004 * Somalia 2007 to present Honduras 2009 * Libya 2011 * Syria 2012 Ukraine 2014 * https://williamblum.org/essays/read/overthrowing-other-peoples-governments-the-master-list
Do you think that Western science CAUSED abrupt global warming? If you don't then why not?
By qualified experts do you mean the Imperial corporate-state control of science? https://www.mndaily.com/article/1999/11/university-sells-out-corporate-interests Here is an op-ed I wrote. Care to disagree with any particulars of it? University sells out to corporate interests Because of the general neglect in systemic analysis of the priorities at the University, I encourage all taxpayers to read my report, "Goldie X-Po$er: The State of Dis-Union." This report highlights genetic engineering -- a particularly timely "hidden-history" considering the University's upcoming 150th anniversary. Free copies can be obtained by e-mailing hemp0027@tc.umn.edu. The results of my research make clear the simple rules of conduct at this outlet of unfortunately devastating imperial corporate-state action. The University's primary function is exactly what's been recently called "tobacco science." My research has exposed that there are over 350 different corporations "donating" tax-deductible finances at the University -- including over 225 corporate-driven genetic engineering projects. With research costs tripling since the 1980 corporate "free lunch" laws, as Lawrence Soley documents in his "Leasing the Ivory Tower: The Corporate Takeover of Academia," the University is now financially, as well as socially and environmentally, unaffordable. Consider that Minnesota's largest citizen-run environmental organization, Clean Water Action Alliance, was forced to resign this spring from the state agriculture (genetic engineering review board) because of the "Corporate U." As the resignation letter states, "The institution responsible for conducting the research must be credible and one which inspires public confidence in the (genetic engineering review) process. We do not believe that the University is capable of such trust. Many already know that the University has had long and close ties with the livestock industry and corporate agribusiness. The University is viewed as an integral part of the problem." The recent dean of the College of Agricultural, Food, and Environmental Sciences, Mike Martin, exposes the true priorities of the University to be bold, elite marketing. In his lead Research Review, May 1998, article, "This University Must and Will Lead in Biotechnology Research," Martin states: "The millers told our breeder, Jim Orf in Agronomy and Plant Genetics, that it would be a little better for them if the bean could be just a little bit bigger. Jim, a good biotechnologist, said, 'for enough money I'll make 'em the size of basketballs.'" Martin continues in a context of glee, "We've acquired the rights to Monsanto's Roundup-ready gene: You put the gene into a crop plant, plant the plant, blast the area with the weed-killer Roundup, and everything dies but the crop. In southern Minnesota, they raised a lot of Roundup-ready soybeans last year, and we're working on Roundup-ready turf grass, Roundup-ready canola, and perhaps Roundup-ready barley." With concentrated corporate control comes unaccountability, and my report details a long list of white-collar crime indicative of the Corporate U. It's to be expected, then, that Martin left the state while at the center of a scandal. Sen. Ember Reichgott Junge, DFL-New Hope, chair of the State Ethics Committee, stated, "Dean Martin has provided us now with two to three different accounts of the facts." The alleged issue: State Sen. Dallas Sams was paid University funds ($12,500) to secure public funding ($1 million) that will be focused on corporate agriculture. Junge added that she "believe(s) that Dr. Martin was the center person in all of this." Tragically, the University's image of sifting through the ethics of biotechnology is a blatant lie. For instance, the scientific hazards of rBGH, already pushed onto suicidal farmers and exploited consumers, was exposed recently by the distinguished Codex Alimentarius. The commission ruled unanimously that rBGH is unsafe on the grounds that the resulting milk has excessive levels of an insulin growth factor that is linked to spreading of various cancers, notably breast, prostate and colorectal. In the United States, 1 out of 2 men and 1 out of 3 women now get cancer. The University still has Monsanto tax-deductible financing of synthetic growth hormones on campus. All of this might seem shocking, since the University constantly promotes an image of ethical analysis regarding genetic engineering technology. But the public continues to become guinea pigs to this fundamentally deadly technology, and the Corporate University does public relations damage control. For the 25-year Celebration of the Women's Studies Program, an anti-genetic engineering presentation was held, titled, "The Sacred Cow and the Mad Cow: metaphors of ecofeminism and technofeminism" by physicist and ecologist Dr. Vandana Shiva, Director of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology. Inherent dangers of genetic engineering include: genetically engineered potatoes, being poisonous and damaging to mammals; increased cancer risks from genetically engineered products; damage to food quality and nutrition, increased antibiotic resistance, increased pesticide residues, genetic pollution, damage to beneficial insects and soil fertility, creation of genetically engineered "superweeds" and "superpests," creation of new viruses and pathogens, genetic "bio-invasion," socioeconomic hazards and ethical hazards. Because of Cargill's genetic engineering partnership with Monsanto and Cargill's invasive global corporate destruction, Shiva is part of a mass movement against Cargill and corporate capitalism. In 1996, this movement involved a march of 500,000 Indian farmers against corporate-controlled trade agreements and 1,000 farmers' destruction of a Cargill factory and corporate records. Shiva stated that Minnesota needs a democracy movement. We taxpayers of Minnesota, where Cargill is based, have a moral responsibility to act in compassion for self-reliant farmers worldwide. The public retains the constitutional right to revoke chartered entities (i.e. the University and corporations) when those entities are repeatedly violating the public good. Drew Hempel is a Unviersity graduate student. He welcomes comments at hemp0027@tc.umn.edu.
By qualified experts are you referring to the British Medical Association that banned genetic engineering research? If not then what qualified experts are you considering because the U.S. corporate-state empire is full of corrupt experts. https://www.mndaily.com/article/1999/10/genetic-engineering-protest-disrupts-address Here I am protesting directly such imperial corporate-state corruption of such qualified experts! Maybe you're protesting against a real qualified expert while you are part of the corrupt corporate-state imperial system? Care to prove otherwise? During the question and answer portion of the address, graduate student Drew Hempel questioned Yudof directly about the University's involvement in genetic engineering. Hempel said the University is out of line in continuing research into genetic engineering of crops without full knowledge of the problems and benefits it might bring. Hempel also distributed about 40 copies of the "Dis-orientation Report," a self-published paper alleging University abuse of power and funding....The British Medical Association recently called for a moratorium on genetically engineered crops, which Hempel highlighted by carrying a sign advertising the decision. "Over 237 countries have called for a ban on genetic engineering, but, for some reason, the University has taken it upon itself to be a leader in the field," Hempel said. Research persists at the University -- as opposed to most European countries, where the practice has been halted -- because of large private donations by corporations, Hempel said. In September, the University received a $10 million gift from Cargill for a microbial and plant genomics facility. "Basically, public universities have become extensions of large corporations. They donate $50 million biotech centers so they can get free research and then wait for the patents. They can't stop without giving the money back," Hempel said. "The University is a public, nonprofit organization. It should be democratic and operate toward the public good. This hasn't happened in this case."
What do you think of the largest private corporation in the world? Do you think they are qualified experts? MAR. 2, 2000 – EDITORIAL/OPINIONS ———————————————————————————————————————— Cargill: Our taxes, global destruction Minnetonka-based Cargill is often noted as the world’s largest private corporation, with reported annual sales of over $50 billion and operations at any given time in an average of 70 countries. The “Lake Office” of Cargill is a 63-room replica of a French chateau; the chairman’s office is part of what was once the chateau’s master-bedroom suite. A family empire, the Cargills and the MacMillans control about 85 percent of the stock. Not only the largest grain trader in the world, with over 20 percent of the market, Cargill dominates another 12 sectors, including destructive speculative finance, according to “Invisible Giant: Cargill and its Transnational Strategies,” by Brewster Kneen. Taking advantage of the capitalist speculative collapse of 1873, Cargill quickly bought up grain elevators. After vast cooperation with the state-sponsored railroad robber barons, central grain terminals averaged extremely high annual returns on investments of 30 to 40 percent between 1883 and 1889. Cargill hired a Chase Bank vice president to secretly help the corporation through the Depression, writes Dan Morgan in “Merchants of Grain.” “There are only a few processing firms,” and “these firms receive a disproportionate share of the economic benefits from the food system,” states William D. Heffernan, professor of rural sociology at the University of Missouri. Details of Cargill’s price manipulations at the expense of farmers worldwide was documented in the classic study, “Food First: Beyond the Myth of Scarcity” by Frances Moore Lappe and Joseph Collins. They report that Cargill has had a history of receiving elite government price information that should be told to U.S. farmers. That secrecy, along with tax-subsidized market control, enables Cargill to buy from U.S. farmers at extremely low prices and then sell abroad to nations pressured under the same destructive elite corporate control. See the Institute for Food and Development Policy’s Web Site at www.foodfirst.org.... Between 1985 and 1992, the legal entity called Cargill received $800.4 million in tax subsidies via the Export Enhancement Program, a continuation of the infamous “Food for Peace” policy, writes Kneen. Promoted by Hubert H. Humphrey and instituted as PL 480, food became a Cold War tool, i.e. “for Peace.” If we can induce people to “become dependent on us for food,” then “what is a more powerful weapon than food and fiber?” Humphrey declared, according to “Necessary Illusions: Thought Control in Democratic Societies” by Noam Chomsky. Actually, most of the nation recipients of tax-subsidized Cargill food dumping were, and are, net exporters of food already — policies imposed by colonial trading patterns. The food (for Peace) has been bought cheaply by neocolonial regimes, and then sold at a huge discount on the local market — in Somalia, for example, at one-sixth of the local prices. Many examples of these misguided policies can be found in “Betraying the National Interest: How US Foreign AID Threatens Global Security by Undermining the Political and Economic Stability of the Third World,” by Frances Moore Lappe, et al. Cargill’s undercutting wipes out the local farmers’ self-reliance, while the revenues (going to the elite) are tied to required purchases of U.S. weapons, writes Chomsky, citing “The Soft War” by Tom Barry, 1988. But the main beneficiary of “Food for Peace” has been Cargill. Keen writes, “From 1954 to 1963, just for storing and transporting P.L. 480 commodities, the heavily subsidized giant Cargill made $1 billion.” Indian lawyer N.J. Nanjundaswamy reports that a Cargill motto is, “One who controls the seed, controls the farmer, and one who controls the food trade, controls the nation.” Yudof’s recently stated support of federal foreign policy Title XII is another public promotion of the University of Minnesota-Cargill partnership’s raiding of sustainable agricultural cultures. Cargill is such a damaging threat that in Dec. 1992, 500,000 peasants marched against corporate-controlled trade, and the irate farmers ransacked Cargill’s operations. Fifty people were arrested at the partially completed — and subsequently destroyed — seed-processing plant in Bellary, India. In 1996, 1,000 Indian farmers gathered at Cargill’s office and destroyed Cargill’s records. For more, see www.endgame.org... Cargill has been doing bio-piracy, stealing traditional products. For instance, it used Basmati, a rice from India, as its trade name, and the company continues to be one of the main promoters of corporate-driven intellectual property rights. The U.S. Trade Act, Special 301 Clause, allows the United States to take unilateral action against any country that does not open its market to U.S. corporations. The United States, for example, has threatened to use trade sanctions against Thailand for its attempt to protect biodiversity. A bill that has been before parliament in India and promoted by Cargill, “takes away all the farmers’ rights, which they have enjoyed for generations — they will no longer be able to produce new varieties of seed or trade seed amongst themselves,” writes Nanjundaswamy. The research center, Rural Advancement Foundation International, found that “fifteen African states, among them some of the poorest countries in the world, are under pressure to sign away the right of more than 20 million small-holder farmers to save and exchange crop seed. The decision to abandon Africa’s 12,000-year tradition of seed-saving will be finalized at a meeting in the Central African Republic. The 15 governments have been told to adopt draconian intellectual property legislation for plant varieties in order to conform to a provision in the World Trade Organization.” Cargill, with extensive funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, is also destroying the world’s largest wetland — the Pantanal, in South America — in order to dredge a channel that’s designed for convoys of up to 16 soybean- and soymeal-carrying barges, according to the Institute on Food and Development Policy. Cargill has been on the Council of Economic Priorities’ list of worst environmental offenders. Mother Jones magazine and Earth Island Journal report that Cargill is responsible for 2,000 OSHA violations, a 40,000-gallon spill of phosphoric solution into Florida’s Alafia River, poor air pollution compliance and record-high releases of toxic waste. With help from the Program on Corporations, Law and Democracy, located at www.poclad.org..., states have recently begun to respond to citizen pressure and revoke corporate charters. The assets of Cargill should be revoked, allowing the citizens of the United States to give farmers the benefits of fair trade instead of Cargill’s secretive policy of tax-subsidized global destruction.
Do you consider former V.P. Al Gore to be a qualified expert on global warming? I personally confronted him about his corruption. I told him, "Everyone knows the CIA is complicit in drug trading!" Do you think the CIA is a qualified source of experts? Do you work for the FBI? https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/corporations/conversations/topics/803 For Immediate Release March 10, 2000 Activists Confront Gore about the U'WA in half-hour mtg. Contact Drew Hempel at hemp0027@... Rainforest Action Network activists in the Twin Cities Minnesota, on the night of March 10th, had about a half hour confrontation with Vice President Gore--a private meeting. that occurred in the basement of the VFW, just after his campaign speech. The meeting was extremely interesting since we confronted him on many issues and basically spelled out an anti-elite democratic vision to Gore. Below is my description of the event--(I refer to other activists as "another" even though sometimes it maybe the same person again--names were never ok'd for this breaking news release. Following the description is further background info. on the issue). The general protest during his speech was scantily dismissed on National Public Radio and in the Twin Cities paper--the corporate media just regurgitated the destructive views of Gore as usual. Upon Arrival at the VFW....The "Speech" "He's a protester, He's one of them!" cried out one of the Gore campaigners. I was pulled aside by secret service as I approached the entryway. The secret service dog was enjoying my smelly socks in my backpack but the man looking through the bag did not even notice the stack of "Who is Al Gore?" fliers. According to the campaigners, apparently if I disagree with Gore, I can't go see him. But after promising that I hadn't handed out the fliers, that I would not yell anything, that I didn't have a banner, and that I would not hand anything out inside, they let me in. So much for first amendment rights. The VFW Hall was an intimate gathering of mainly union people, VFW people, the mayor of Mpls., Senator Wellstone, Rep. Sabo, Walter Mondale, their partners, and the corporate media. When Gore came out to speak--to the tacky blaring of "We Are Family," there was about 15 of us protesters inside and along with other "non-protesters" many soon began yelling stuff. I was yelling it's all "the same corporate elite" and "what about the U'WA!?" Others yelled "stop killing the U'WA!" and similar statements about Occidental Petroleum (OXY). Gore said "And about you protesters out there I'll meet with you afterwards," telling us to be quiet. Paul Wellstone, the sell-out, looked extremely dismayed. We continued to cry out, since Gore has ignored the 20 or so previous confrontations with him about the U'WA. When Gore claimed to want open meetings with Bush and to challenge Bush, I yelled out, "We challenge Gore about the U'WA!" The Gore campaigners quickly brought signs to have people hold up all around us so that we were hidden by the signs. But since we were right in camera view of Gore, the campaigner had to then ask that the Gore signs be taken down because the view was blocked but I raised Gore's book "The Earth in Balance," yelling "Read your Book!" Two others held up a banner several times before getting ejected from the VFW hall. When Gore walked out I got to the exit line, shook his hand saying, "What about the U'WA? What about the meeting?" Media people surrounded us and I heard Gore saying "I'd meet with you but you didn't keep up your end of the bargain." Implying we had successfully disrupted him. But these two media guys claimed he said he'd meet with us. They were standing next to me and could hear Gore better as he left the room. I thought, "we'll if they say so," so I quickly looked for the Gore campaigners and the other protesters. Soon after Gore's assistant came out with the secret service and asked us to have one leader/spokesperson. She told us this meeting was highly unprecedented, especially with so many of us. She allowed no media. We refused to have a leader. We were told to remove jackets, bags, and potential weapons and we were lead to a backroom to be scanned. The Meeting with GORE about the U'WA We decided that one of us would say a short introduction, stating that two other people would make brief statements with the second person asking the question. Having experience with corporate elite at the U of MN, I predicted that he'd try to control the talk and fill us with irrelevant information that ignored the issue. After being scanned by secret service and led to a basement room where about 20 secret service people stood, about 15 of us waited in a semicircle. Gore came out and tried to shake our hands. He got to the second person, after shaking the first hand, but the second refused to do so. So then our introduction began. Gore, after the first person mentioned the two other coming statements, interrupted the introduction and tried to go into a long tirade about us, just as we predicted! I interrupted him and told him to let us finish so we can ask the question and then I began reading off his connections to Oxy, as stated in the NY Times ad. He tried to cut me off before the last connection but I insisted we should just have two more minutes. I finished then the third person began to speak. She was also cut off by Gore so I interjected and read, as we had planned to do, the quote from his book about the need to protect indigenous peoples. The I asked him if he was going to divest or not? He laid into us about how we didn't know what a trust was, how his mom was on life support, how his family had debts, and how legally he couldn't do anything. I pointed out that slavery was legal too and we stated that it wasn't just his financial holdings but that he had alot of influence otherwise especially since the US Aid to Colombia was coming to vote soon. He stated the Occidental Navy Reserve privatization was an "open bid." Another asked him if he knew about the Geneva Convention on Genocide. He argued that the Environmental Minister supported the oil project and that he had won the prestigious Goldman Environmental Award. He claimed it was Colombia's choice to drill and that this will help offset their debt and help stabilize their guerilla and drug problem. Another pointed out that it's precisely because of that guerilla/drug problem that oil drilling is a direct threat to the U'WA. Another stated that Gore could pull strings and asked if Gore has been to Colombia. He said he hadn't. She stated that she had been to Colombia and she didn't know how anyone could trust government officials in Colombia and that "you [Gore] would probably not be safe in Colombia." Confronting Gore on Structural Issues of Corporate Capitalism While he went on about free markets, democracy and the environment, another person pointed out that the U'WA is a democratic government and how "nice" that the colonizers gave back some of the land they stole--commenting on a recent expansion of U'WA territory that Gore referenced. "What about all the democratic governments we've overthrown in Latin America?" I asked. He named two democratic presidents from the 50s but said there were no recent examples. I asked him, "What about Noreiga and Panama? Did you see the documentary Panama Deception that was banned from PBS?" He went on about Colombia being full of Narcotraffickers and guerrillas. I asked him, "Don't you know about Professor McCoy's book on the CIA? Their complicity with the global drug trade is well documented." (the secret service seemed to get edgy about this remark). He stated he's been leading OAS mtgs. to help promote democracy. I asked him why is it that there is a direct correlation with increased U.S. aid and an increase in human rights violations in Latin America. I asked why is it that Colombia is the highest recipient of U.S. Aid and has become the number one abuser of human rights.
You do agree that corporations are fundamentally anti-democratic since they are legally persons while persons on corporate property lose their personal Bill of Rights protection (freedom of speech, freedom of association)? What corporations have you worked to REVOKE? If you haven't done so then how can you look in a mirror? BACK To the U'WA He said he knew the U'WA chief. One of us asked did he think the Chief liked him. Gore responded well I think so. A latina women stated to Gore that they were her people, that she could speak for them and so why are they planning to commit mass suicide? Gore asked is she was U'WA and she said she was Native American and "shame on you Gore." He tried to counter her and she commented he was saying lies. Another pointed out that his mom would be retiring but will have $600 a month social security to live on [in comparison to Gore's mom]. Another asked "Why can't you transfer the stocks to another equally profitable company?" Another pointed out that if he cares so much about the environment did he know that the equivalent of ten Exxon Valdez oil spills have occurred in Colombia. Gore said that he didn't know this. Another pointed out that the U'WA are people too and just as valuable as his life even if he didn't think so. Also that the U'WA's environment is connected to everyone's environment. Another asked who had the power to move the stocks and Gore said the trustee did but that the trustee was legally required to do otherwise--implying he was required to maximize profits. I pointed out that as a graduate student at the University we just worked to divest $1.5 million and that citizens are sovereign not corporations. I stated that we have the right to revoke the charter of corporations that continuously violate the public good. Others urged him to have the trustee move the stocks and asked him if he was going to make a public statement. He said we had brought up some points he hadn't thought of but that we hope he takes in mind the clarifications [sic.] he made and that the information we've been providing incorrectly implies he owns personal stock. (but he never specifically countered our information which states very clearly its family holdings). Gore stated he decided 26 years ago to never have personal stocks so he wouldn't have a conflict of interest. The secret service, getting quite impatient with Gore being put on the defensive for so long, motioned for him to leave. As he walked off we told him the issue was not going away and that the suicide of the U'WA would be on his conscience. My Impression of GORE The researcher Hannah Ardent used a term, "the banality of evil." The issue of the U'WA is only one of many that Gore could be confronted with--the genocidal war-crime sanctions on Iraq come to mind as well. I think Gore is evil: he tried to cut us off and manhandle us by berating us with irrelevant information. He tried to push responsibility onto others that have less power, he avoided the direct issue. I perceived a lust for power and disdain for the truth. He hid in ignorance and kissed up to corruption by trying to hold out his life-support mother as a shield. He left a wake of cynicism as he left the room, while his presence was disgusting maybe we got through to him and maybe this information will help keep the pressure on! For Further Information see www.ran.org, www.amazonwatch.org or www.moles.org AMAZON WATCH RAINFOREST ACTION NETWORK PROJECT UNDERGROUND For Immediate Release March 6th, 2000 Contact: Stephen Kretzmann, 510-551-7953 or Atossa Soltani, 310-317-7045 Lauren Sullivan, 415-398-4404 or Danny Kennedy, 510-705-8981 Enviros Question Gore's Commitment in a N.Y. Times Ad Expose V.P.'s "Deep Ties" to Occidental Petroleum Gore Urged to Act in Defense of the U'wa People of Colombia Escalating a campaign questioning Vice President Al Gore's environmental commitment, environmental organizations today placed a full-page ad in the west coast edition of the New York Times. The ad, whose headline reads "Who is Al Gore? Environmental Champion or Petroleum Politician? The U'wa people need to know" substantiates Gore's connections to Occidental Petroleum and argues that the Vice President has a specific responsibility to act on behalf of the U'wa people. The U'wa, a remote Colombian tribe, are engaged in a tense standoff with Los-Angeles based Occidental Petroleum (Oxy) over the drilling of the Gibraltar 1 oil well. The U'wa, a deeply spiritual people who believe that oil is the "blood of Mother Earth", have repeatedly stated that they "are willing to die" to keep oil drilling off of their ancestral lands. More than 2,500 local farmers, union members, and students have joined thousands of U'wa and other indigenous peoples in non-violent blockades and protests near the well site to stop Oxy's project. The heavy military presence around the oil project has already led to violence against peaceful indigenous peoples. In the last month, many have been injured and at least three have died. The situation remains very tense. Gore has enjoyed the corporate sponsorship of Oxy throughout his political career. He controls up to $500,000 in Oxy stocks and has received $20,000 a year for almost 30 years from mining rights to his land that Oxy never mined. Gore's father made a great deal of his wealth while working for Oxy and its ex-chairman, Armand Hammer. Gore Sr. sat on the Board of Oxy for twenty-eight years. Since Gore was elected Vice President, Oxy Chairman Ray Irani has given more than $400,000 to the Democratic Party. Furthermore, Gore's "reinventing government" initiative resulted in the sale of the Elk Hills Naval Petroleum Reserve to Occidental in 1998. The unprecedented closed bidding process was the largest privatization of federal property in U.S. history, one that tripled Occidental's U.S. oil reserves overnight. Environmental and human rights leaders have been attempting to direct the Vice President's attention to this issue for years. In March 1998, the Amazon Coalition wrote the Vice President on this issue requesting his assistance. There was no reply. A month later a full-page ad in the New York Times generated hundreds of letters to Gore. Gore also met briefly with the spokesman for the U'wa people, Berito Kuwaru'wa, after the Indian chief received the 1998 Goldman Environmental Prize. Despite repeated attempts, Gore has consistently ducked the issue by attempting to both deny his connections to Oxy and claim political impotence. In January, grassroots environmental activists from around the country began targeting Gore at his campaign appearances. Eight were arrested at a sit-in at Gore's campaign headquarters over the U'wa issue in Manchester, New Hampshire. The Democratic debate at the Apollo Theatre was briefly interrupted by protesters, and in Olympia Washington, U'wa supporters reportedly drowned out Gore supporters. Just Saturday, activists in Boston disrupted yet another campaign rally. In all, organizers estimate that at least twenty-five campaign appearances over the last 6 weeks have been marred by protests around the U'wa issue. Activists continue to demand that Gore take action that results in an immediate suspension of Oxy's project, and a significant reduction of tension on the ground. "Neither we, nor the U'wa, are going to go away", said Steve Kretzmann of Amazon Watch. "As a professed champion of the environment, Gore has a general moral obligation to take action in defense of the U'wa and their homeland. More importantly, as someone with deep ties and access to Occidental, Gore clearly has a specific duty to take action in this case. We won't accept the excuse that he's powerless to stop this situation. As Vice President of the United States, he has the power to make a difference".
Have you made an y public statements that you're against the corporate-state privatization of water? If not, how can you look yourself in the mirror? Here's my public statement: April, 2000 MN Daily staff op-ed, drew hempel The Great Lakes will be at record lows because of lack of snow that feeds 40 percent of their annual water supply. This disturbing situation has been attributed to global warming, and according to the United Nations, the influence of major transnational corporations extends over about 50 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions. What's received less attention is that large corporations are also attempting to raid the Great Lakes. One government agency already gave permission for 600 million liters of Great Lakes water to be filled into tankers and sent to Asia over the next five years. A temporary moratorium was achieved, but the move to conserve water will be brought to the World Trade Organization as a violation of the supposed rights of corporate rule. Through Reaganite corporate-state subsidies, California ironically has become the new dairy state at the expense of rural Wisconsin family livelihood -- including their future ability to drink water. California recently attempted to pipe water from Wisconsin. According to the Worldwatch Institute, agriculture accounts for two-thirds of all irrigated fresh water use while industrial production in general accounts for 50 to 80 percent of fresh water demand. But it's not just corporate-state water use in California; it's also the corporate pollution of water. Silicon "computer" Valley has more Superfund sites -- most of them affecting groundwater -- than any other area its size in the country. And 60 percent of the United States' liquid hazardous wastes -- 34 billion liters of solvents, heavy metals and radioactive materials -- is directly injected into the ground, the main source for fresh water. In 1996, the journal Science reported that the global supply of fresh water will be used up in 30 years at current usage rates. According to the Stanford researchers who authored the study, there is no "hidden water," and current foreseeable technologies, like desalinization, were factored into their findings. But greed-driven corporations are tapping into that grim projection to maximize profits for their own pea-brained drive to extinction. In just a few short years, through more than 130 acquisitions, American Toxic Control has been transformed into U.S. Filter Inc., with $5 billion in annual revenues, making it 10 times the size of its nearest competitor. As controller at U.S. Filter, Richard Heckmann states, "How could it be that there is no Intel, I.B.M., General Motors or Toys 'R' Us in the water business?" he asked. "You can live without all those things. Five days without water, you're dead." Apparently Dan Quayle agrees since he sits on the U.S. Filter Inc. board, joined by the Bass brother finance speculators who threw in a cool, refreshing $250 million. The time is right to create a giant corporation that transforms the public right to water into a scarce luxury item for those privy to the secret magic of money. Based on a 1998 water study by Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health, "To avoid catastrophe ... it is important to act now." Our clear answer to the water crisis, according to the scientific researchers, can be summed up in one word: conservation. Secret global corporate rule, though, blocks environmental issues, labeling them barriers to corporate WTO trade. U.S. corporate-state rule has been consistent in its priorities ever since the founding aristocrats, like John Jay, planned to keep the rich in power against the threat of democracy. George Kennan, as head of the State Department, authored a top-secret document that reflects these elite goals on a global scale: "We have about 50 percent of the world's wealth, but only 6.3 percent of its population ... Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity ... We should cease to talk about vague and -- for the Far East -- unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standards and democratization ... The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better." Similarly, now declassified U.S. National Security Council documents clearly outline policies to support destructive regimes in order to maintain wealth for the corporate-state elite. In fact, after World War II, the U.S. corporate-state elite attacked democracy movements worldwide and reinstated fascist regimes, brutally promoting power to a few. There's an interesting hidden history to undemocratic, destructive corporate rule. Did colonists plead for a more "socially responsible" king? The colonists demanded their inalienable, natural right to sovereignty. The king, though, was the only sovereign of the land and the king was also the only source of corporate charters. Most of the 13 colonies were actually crown charters (i.e. the Massachusetts Bay Trading Company). The list of grievances attached to the Declaration of Independence stemmed from the corporate rule of the king. After democracy was achieved, corporate charters were deliberately put into the hands of the state legislatures, were issued for only special purposes and had extremely limited powers. Corporate charters were routinely revoked and the corporate assets reinvested by the public. President Lincoln warned, though, shortly after the Civil War, that the growing threat of corporate rule was worse than the war and would, unless stopped, destroy the republic. Just as he predicted in 1886, a bought-out robber-baron judge declared that corporations are protected by the Bill of Rights and have legal "personhood" -- thus subverting our democracy. That same year 230 state laws controlling corporations were overturned in district courts. Between 1890 and 1910, 307 cases went to the Supreme Court based on the anti-slavery 14th Amendment. But only 19 cases were from African-Americans, while 288 were corporations seeking their new constitutional personhood "right to due process." The Bill of Rights ironically continues to be the main vehicle for destructive undemocratic corporate rule. Most state constitutions still require the attorney general to revoke the charter of any corporation that continuously violates the public good. With the knowledge of this hidden history exposed, in the last few years the public has rescinded two corporate charters. The global sovereignty movement grows increasingly thirsty for democratic revolution. The future of water depends on declaring independence from corporate rule.
Here I am getting the University to divest from Total Oil for use of slave labor and deforestation in Burma. https://www.mndaily.com/article/1998/04/resolution-bars-future-investments-total-oil-stocks Why have you not worked for oil divestment? Or is that the role of a "qualified expert" - to sit back and do nothing and then complain when independent scientists post details on empirical evidence showing that we're doomed? Resolution bars future investments in Total oil stocks The University's Social Concerns Committee passed a resolution Thursday against further stock investment in Total, an oil company building a pipeline in Burma. Although the University's Office of Asset Management sold off the remainder of the stock earlier this year, the committee wanted to make sure it wasn't picked up again. The resolution will ensure that no investments are made with Total until the political situation in Burma changes. It also requires the University to be sensitive when dealing with other cases such as the one in Burma. Burma, a country in Southeast Asia, has been a source of controversy since 1988, when an oppressive military regime took control. The Minnesota Free Burma Coalition, the force behind the resolution, is upset because they say Total's money goes to support the regime. "This is the first big hurdle," said Drew Hempel, the coalition's founder. The resolution goes next to the University Faculty Senate, which will make the final decision on the issue. Although no date is set, the senate is expected to make a decision before the school year ends.
Your claim of So-called "Hyperbole" (without any specifics) is called the Prevention Principle and it is precisely your complaint about "Hyperbole" that explains WHY we are in our abrupt global warming crisis today.
Do you work for the military as most of physics is for the military? https://www.mndaily.com/article/1998/05/military-keeps-playing-big-toys With Mother's Day as its focus, this past week has been an ode to anti-militarism in the Midwest. I have been quoted in The Minnesota Daily as one of three University students to conduct civil disobedience at Alliant-Tech, a Hopkins-based conglomerate peddling $1.3 billion per year in tax-funded killing machines. On Mother's Day, I also joined 50 other people in an annual demonstration at Project Extremely Low Frequence (ELF). ELF is the Northern Wisconsin-based electromagnetic "first strike" trigger system for one half of the U.S. nuclear weapons force. As a result of this demonstration, I have been charged with trespassing, which carries a five-year suspension of my driver's license as its penalty. Here in the United States and specifically the Twin Cities, we are in "the belly of the beast," and nonviolent direct action is the only means of confronting the corporate-military's escalating addiction to world annihilation. Fellow students must recognize that the University and other centers of higher learning play critical roles in promoting war-mongering. For example, only a handful of contractors receive more military research funds than the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and John Hopkins University. Why does the University research how to better disseminate chemical weapons at high-mach, high altitudes? New techniques for missile design analysis, stronger tank and weapon materials and the development of an aggressive tailless fighter jet are just a few of the other underground "higher education" projects at the University. In fact, with the University receiving $17 million in Department of Defense funds for 1997 (up from $11 million in 1993), it seems that the post-Cold War peace dividends are delayed at best. The research contracts on campus reveal that nano-technology, or "the mechanizing of the molecular level," is a dominant interest at the University. Computers are taking on a crucial role in designing a brave new world of fabricated nano-structures that will display two-way memory effects in nano-magnetic devices. The broad military implications start with machine-to-machine air traffic control and end with cellular automata used for self-propagating molecular robotics, brain implants and other man-machine surveillance devices. The grand achievement exposed on campus is geared towards a "NATO neural network" emphasizing how the University is contributing to the most bloated and destructive system in the world. The federal Office of Management and Budget states that the military is only 17 percent of the national budget, but several factors are obfuscated by this misleading figure. The correct percentage hovers around 50 percent. During the Vietnam War, when the government created the so-called "Unified Budget," which includes unallocatable trust funds -- social security is not part of the dispensable congressional budget -- the military percentage instantly shrank. Retired generals and admirals at the Center for Defense Information also point out that military spending was hidden in non-military portions of the budget. For instance, here at the University further military research is most likely being funded by NASA, the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation. Very significantly, the 17 percent federal figure does not include past military spending costs, i.e. the cost of veterans benefits and the 80 percent of the interest on the national debt that is from military spending -- thank you, Ronald Reagan. Since the combined military budgets of Iraq, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Cuba, Russia and China are still less than half of the United State's official 17 percent figure, obviously "defense" is not our defining military role. Among the world's recent major conflicts, 90 percent involved one or more parties receiving U.S. weapons or military technology prior to the outbreak of war. Recently, the U.S. share of world arms exports has increased by 50 percent and the United States now supplies more than 60 percent of the world's military weapons, with half of the cost funded by U.S. taxpayers. The government has consistently ignored recommendations by the Congressional Budget Office that suggested cutting the incompetent B-2 stealth bomber, the F-22 jet, the Trident II D-5 nuclear missile and Star Wars. President Clinton just last fall ended a 20-year ban on advanced weapons sales to Latin America. Now Lockhead-Martin, which has operations in the Twin Cities, can sell F-16s to be used against democracy movements in our hemisphere. Recent military scandals include training death squads for use against grass roots democracy in Indonesia, Columbia and Mexico coupled with the approval of bio-weapon testing within U.S. cities. The addition of 13 more countries to NATO promises the further exportation of military jobs along with corporate welfare costs estimated at $250 billion. Even though the Twin Cities receives hundred of millions of dollars per year in military projects -- 500 pages list just 1993 contracts -- downsizing, increased profits and further environmental superfund sites are definitive of military spending. Ironically, federal corporate arms export subsidies equal the total amount of subsidies cut from federal social service programs. These unabashed acts of greedy, bloody U.S. militarism are not surprising considering that in 1994 Congress passed a law enabling the Department of Defense, or any of its contractors, to test biological weapons in any U.S. city, provided that they give a city official 30 days notice. Currently, the Pentagon, at the behest of the military industry, is requesting a waiver of the anti-personnel land mine moratorium, even though 124 nations have already signed the international mine ban treaty. Furthermore, the United States, like India, is hypocritically in the process of conducting six underground nuclear tests, in direct violation of the International Test Ban Treaty. Direct global democracy inspires hope, though, as the protests of French nuclear testing proved, as well as Alliant Tech land mine production and Project ELF recently being judged illegal by international law. Students at the University, which has $110,000 invested with Alliant Tech, have a duty to rise up and take action against our rogue state. Under the 1996 Solomon Amendment, if military recruitment is cancelled on campus, all federal funding for the University would be stopped. Just as the United States-funded military regime of Indonesia is now shut down by students, we here need to take similar measures. Conversion to an efficient, productive and sustainable society is the clear choice in the face of our behemoth killer monster. Students should demand an end to the profit-driven U.S. war machine. Only by converting the military will a sustainable society be achieved.

at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)