Custer Katrina: Where Are The Children's Parents?

Seeing dead bodies of children after Katrina is what got me asking questions. I also wondered where their parents were; how would they be properly buried together as families? There were a few possibilities regarding where their parents were:
1). Dead
2). Alive, but in an evacuee site reporters said were like "concentration camps":
http://www.boingboing.net/2005/09/08/kat rina_fema_evacuee.html

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid= -8272096722231303649

http://www.sianews.com/modules.php?name= News&file=article&sid=1062

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?c ontext=viewArticle&code=NIM20050911& amp;articleId=929

There's more...

Your Tax Dollars At Work

Raw Story made a great catch this morning, drawing attention to an Earth Day website put up by Richard Pombo's House Committee on Resources. The site is a disgusting attempt to smear the environmental movement and whitewash the impact of industrial pollution on the planet, essentially claiming that environmental problems don't really exist.

The House Committee on Resources invites you to celebrate the achievements made in protecting the environment over the past several decades. Environmental trendlines continue in the right direction, with cleaner air and fresh water for all Americans. But too often, environmental headlines seem to predict impending apocalypse.

Good news doesn't sell as well as bad news, and the "sky is falling" sensationalism of environmental activists lead people to falsely believe that our environment is getting worse when it's actually getting better....

Unfortunately, the positive trendlines don't fill the pockets of America's environmental activist industry. Scare tactics and sensational rhetoric have enabled the top 30 organizations to generate billions in annual revenue, according to public documents. But how much of this money is spent on real, hands-on, "muddy boots" conservation work for the environment? Almost none. Instead, it is spent on lobbyists and lawyers, partisan politics, direct mail, and more and more sensational fundraising campaigns.

This is, to put it as nicely as possible, propaganda. And this propaganda -- in the form of a professionally designed website hosted on government servers -- is patently unethical, if not downright illegal. I'm not a lawyer, but it would seem to me that this site, with its nakedly partisan attacks on activists, violates the propaganda ban set by the Congress. The Bush administration has already been rebuked for its use of propaganda by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office. Is the Republican Congress next?

Setting aside the legality and ethics of the site, its attacks on scientists and environmentalists are laughable. The "myths" the site claims to dispel are straw man arguments. Last time I checked, "[e]conomic growth harms the environment" was not one of the chief claims being put forward by the environmental movement. Rather, it seems to me that the exact opposite claim has been repeatedly made by mainstream environmentalists, that development of new, more environmentally responsible technologies can help to grow the economy. That's exactly the case being made by the Apollo Alliance, for example.

The Apollo Alliance provides a message of optimism and hope, framed around rejuvenating our nation's economy by creating the next generation of American industrial jobs and treating clean energy as an economic and security mandate to rebuild America. America needs to hope again, to dream again, to think big, and to be called to the best of our potential by tapping the optimism and can-do spirit that is embedded in our nation's history.

This website, full of slander and smear, is just the latest example of Republican rule in disarray. Their policies have run headlong into a wall of scientific facts, so their response is to create a website backed with the imprimatur of the United States Government to muddy the waters and confuse the debate. It's the final flailings of a weak Republican majority desperately trying to stay in power. It's as pathetic as it is disgusting.

We're Way Up Ozzie's Pillar

As we approach this very last Great American Summer, the neocons have clearly given up on boiling the frog.  Time's up.  Now they plan to place it firmly underfoot, take aim, and pull the trigger . . . war it will be.

What transpires over the six short months before Election Day ought to be a steady eruption of hidden Republican corruption, and a steady erosion of patience and polity on the part of the public. Scandal alone should sink the GOP.

We ought to arrive at the second Tuesday in November with sufficient supply of tar and feathers to finish off the neocon experiment in full frontier fashion, and then begin to take back something of what's been stolen from current and future generations.

There's more...

Iranian Nukes in Sixteen Days?

The latest hit in the rapidly building drumbeat for war with Iran is that they could have a nuclear bomb at their disposal in sixteen days. The headline is blared across Drudge even as I type this: "Iran 'Could Produce Nuclear Bomb in 16 Days'." So what's the claim based on? Could it possibly be true? In a word, no. Here's the reporting from Bloomberg on the sixteen days claim currently being trotted out by the administration.

Iran will move to "industrial scale" uranium enrichment involving 54,000 centrifuges at its Natanz plant, the Associated Press quoted deputy nuclear chief Mohammad Saeedi as telling state-run television today.

"Using those 50,000 centrifuges they could produce enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in 16 days," Stephen Rademaker, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, told reporters today in Moscow.

The small amount of uranium that Iran just announced producing was enriched using 164 centrifuges. The 50-54,000 centrifuges Rademaker is talking about? They do not exist. Here's the AP article Rademaker's basing these numbers on, in case you might be curious. (All emphases mine, of course.)

Deputy Nuclear Chief Mohammad Saeedi said Iran has informed the International Atomic Energy Agency that it plans to install 3,000 centrifuges at its facility in the central town of Natanz by late 2006, then expand to 54,000 centrifuges, though he did not say when.

"We will expand uranium enrichment to industrial scale at Natanz," Saeedi told state-run television.

Saeedi said using 54,000 centrifuges will be able to produce enough enriched uranium to provide fuel for a 1,000-megawatt nuclear power plant like one Russia is finishing in southern Iran.

In theory, that many centrifuges could be used to develop the material needed for hundreds of nuclear warheads if Iran can perfect the techniques for producing the highly enriched uranium needed.

Iran, which has made no secret of its plans to ultimately expand enrichment to around 50,000 centrifuges to fuel reactors, is still thought to be years away from a full-scale program.

This 'sixteen days' claim is nothing short of a sick, fear mongering lie, designed to push public opinion in a pro-war direction. Iran is not now and will not soon be sixteen days away from producing enough material for a nuclear bomb. Andy Grotto, a Senior National Security Analyst with the Center for American Progress pegs five years as the minimum amount of time it will take for Iran to build a nuclear weapon. And the State Department is even less optimistic about the abilities of Iran's nuclear program. As John Aravosis has pointed out, their own website says that "it will be ten years before Iran has a bomb."

Josh Marshall and others may choose to point out that people like Rademaker are known for their dishonesty. That's fine -- there's value to that. But this claim is a straight-up lie, and it doesn't take a background check on Rademaker's character and honesty to prove it. At the end of the day, the unavoidable fact is that, on matters of war, the administration of George W. Bush is not to be trusted. They have proven over and over and over again that when they want to go to war, the truth will not stand in their way.

There's more...

9/11 Truth Calling Oprah!

CNN SHOW BIZ TONIGHT CANCELLED ED ASNER'S APPEARANCE...no more 9/11 talk!  Big surprise.  Here's the only way to go:

9/11 Truth Calling Oprah!
An Appeal from TvNewsLIES.org

For more than five years now, the entire mainstream corporate news media apparatus has been controlled by a handful of behind-the-scene power brokers.  In all that time there has been a total blackout on any mention, never mind discussion, of the truth behind the events of 9/11.

Despite their credibility and expertise, high-powered and extremely convincing voices of truth have been denied access to the public via the mainstream media.  In the years following the attacks of 9/11, a significant number of knowledgeable people have attempted to alert the nation about the mountain of evidence that has been unearthed by their investigations, and which shoots large holes in the `official' version of events sold to an unsuspecting and unquestioning public.

There's more...

Diaries

Advertise Blogads