Treatment and Re-education

Listening to John Walters on C-span, March 21, 2005

John Walters is the Director of ONDCP (Office for National Drug Control Policy) and was a guest on Washington Journal for an hour today.

Among his remarkable statements, Official Policy is clear: Marijuana is more dangerous than alcohol and tobacco. Marijuana is the most dangerous illegal drug there is. Marijuana is destroying our youth. To prove this, the Director said that more young people are being admitted to treatment programs for marijuana than for alcohol.

All this really proves is that there are more government agents manipulating the minds of our young people with these ‘treatment’ programs administered by right wing professionals intent on indoctrinating their young minds with the closed minded religious fanaticism that drives their agenda.

I recall from my education that one of the evils of the communist empire is the ‘re-education’ program used to correct the behaviors of those who did not comply with official party policy, no matter how right or wrong the policy may be. I was told that people were regularly imprisoned and their lives destroyed in order to break down resistance to ‘official government policy’. Clearly this is inhumane, and it is supposed to be one of the cultural norms that make the American experience so much better than the barbarian’s ways.

Yet today there is a political force, funded by American Consumerism, that is doing exactly the same thing the communists were decried for, using cages, punishment, and brainwashing to indoctrinate and coerce those who do not comply with their particular view of things, no matter how absurd or false that view may be found to be. These fanatics require conformity at any cost and thrive on scandal. They love to stare as they pass a tragedy, eager to get a glimpse of blood. They love war and celebrate it with great pomp and ceremony every chance they get. Killers that rain death on innocent people from 30,000 feet through the eyepiece of a computer are rewarded with high honors and luxury living.

The workers, scientists, engineers, suppliers and politicians that conspire to equip and mobilize these warriors have grown dependent on the benefits of a war economy. They may not admit it, but their actions demonstrate; they love war, they are warmongers.

Pot smokers on the other hand really don’t like war at all. Now it is clear why the government considers pot so evil! It is because pot smokers are difficult to brainwash into warriors. Alcohol users on the other hand are very easy to manipulate into killers, and there is a growing dependence on the economy of war. The ‘Military Industrial Complex’ isn’t an abstract idea; it is a reality right now. Pot smokers don’t even make good employees for the military industrial complex, so here is the reason for the statement by John Walters today; that marijuana is more dangerous than alcohol or tobacco; it is because they need to prepare the next generation of warriors and pot smokers are hard to recruit for indoctrination. This is why they need to expand the ‘drug war’ with more government programs and agents to monitor citizen’s behavior.

Terrorists AND Extremists

Porter Goss, CIA Director, introduced this combination of words during testimony regarding Threats to U.S. Security before the Senate Armed Services committee on Thursday, March 17, 2005.

By combining the terms, the line is blurred. Later the waters are further muddied with one sentence, completely out of place and context:

“More people are killed each year because of illegal drugs than terrorism.”

The very next sentence he, and his aids, continued the familiar chant using all the important keywords, war on terrorism, Islamic extremists, terrorism, 9/11, terrorists, freedom, democracy, counter-terrorist, weapons of mass destruction, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, mushroom cloud, national security, god and country.

The good news, the “insurgency” is only active in the 4 largest regions, including Baghdad.

So let’s take a look at the score on this 2nd anniversary of the invasion affectionately known among the warmongers as OIF, which is guvspeak for Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Our task is made difficult due to a few U.S. government policies regarding casualty and death tolls.

1. U.S. military casualties are inaccurately reported as follows:

a. Combat deaths only count if the victim is dead before leaving the battlefield. Those that die in the hospital, or on the streets back home-less, are not included in this daily number reported by the media.

b. Advanced medical technology, body armor and increased distance between adversaries all combine to create many more that live, but without arms and legs. The economic reality of the long-term medical and societal costs is completely ignored.

2. Iraqi military casualties and deaths tolls are not reported.
3. There are no “Official” records of Iraqi civilian casualties and death tolls.

However, entities other than the fascist agents of the U.S. have made attempts to compile this pertinent data, and I suggest this be included on the price sticker of every new car, on every gas pump in the nation and be required reading for every applicant for a drivers license. Maybe something like this:

In IRAQ since 3/19/03

U.S.

Them

Dead

1,500

30 – 250,000

Maimed

25,000

1 Million or so

California Laws about petroleum and conservation

Following are selected citations from California law related to petroleum, transportation, Alaska oil, California offshore oil drilling, and conservation policy. These are laws, not ideas. Please note the order of priority, environment before economic, in all cases except state fleets in which case economics are mentioned first in the legislation.

Selected sections from the Warren-Alquist State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Act 2005.

§ 25000.5. Legislative findings; overdependence on petroleum based fuels; evaluation of economic and environmental costs of petroleum use; definition

(a) The Legislature finds and declares that overdependence on the production, marketing, and consumption of petroleum based fuels as an energy resource in the transportation sector is a threat to the energy security of the state due to continuing market and supply uncertainties. In addition, petroleum use as an energy resource contributes substantially to the following public health and environmental problems: air pollution, acid rain, global warming, and the degradation of California’s marine environment and fisheries.

(b) Therefore, it is the policy of this state to fully evaluate the economic and environmental costs of petroleum use, and the economic and environmental costs of other transportation fuels, including the costs and values of environmental impacts, and to establish a state transportation energy policy that results in the least environmental and economic cost to the state. In pursuing the “least environmental and economic cost” strategy, it is the policy of the state to exploit all practicable and cost-effective conservation and improvements in the efficiency of energy use and distribution, and to achieve energy security, diversity of supply sources, and competitiveness of transportation energy markets based on the least environmental and economic cost.

(c) It is also the policy of this state to minimize the economic and environmental costs due to the use of petroleum-based and other transportation fuels by state agencies. In implementing a least-cost economic and environmental strategy for state fleets, it is the policy of the state to implement practicable and cost-effective measures, including, but not necessarily limited to, the purchase of the cleanest and most efficient automobiles and replacement tires, the use of alternative fuels in its fleets, and other conservation measures.

(d) For the purposes of this section, “petroleum based fuels” means fuels derived from liquid unrefined crude oil, including natural gas liquids, liquified petroleum gas, or the energy fraction of methyltertiarybutylether (MTBE) or other ethers that is not attributed to natural gas.

——–

§ 25004.3. Legislative finding; advanced transportation technologies

The Legislature further finds and declares all of the following:

(a) Advanced transportation technologies hold the promise of conserving energy, reducing pollution, lowering traffic congestion, and promoting economic development and jobs in California.

(b) There is a pressing need to provide business assistance to California companies engaged in producing and commercializing advanced transportation technologies.

(c) It is the policy of the state to provide financial assistance to California companies, particularly small businesses, that are engaged in commercial efforts in the field of advanced transportation technologies.
————

§ 25005.5. Legislative policy; future energy problems, information, acquisition, and analysis

The Legislature further finds and declares that information should be acquired and analyzed by the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission in order to ascertain future energy problems and uncertainties, including, but not limited to:

(a) The state’s role in production of oil from domestic reserves, especially within Petroleum Administration for Defense District V.

(b) The production of Alaskan North Slope oil and its projected use in the state.

(c) Plans of the federal government for development of oil in the Outer Continental Shelf adjacent to the state.

(d) Impacts of petroleum price increases and projected conservation measures on the demand for energy and indirect effects on the need for offshore oil development and Alaskan oil delivery into the state.

(e) Potential shipment of Alaskan oil through the state.

(f) Proposals for processing petroleum outside the state to supply the needs within the state.

(g) The impact on the state of national energy policies, including Project Independence.

———–
§ 25007. State policy; reduction in certain uses of energy; conservation; statewide goals

It is further the policy of the state and the intent of the Legislature to employ a range of measures to reduce wasteful, uneconomical, and unnecessary uses of energy, thereby reducing the rate of growth of energy consumption, prudently conserve energy resources, and assure statewide environmental, public safety, and land use goals.

——-

Read the complete 421 page document here:
http://www.energy.ca.gov/reports/Warren-Alquist_Act/index.html

3000 ballistic missiles overhead now

At any given moment there are about 3000 jet aircraft hurtling along at nearly 600 MPH carrying several tons of explosive fuel and around one hundred passengers. On holidays the number doubles to 6000 potential Weapons of Mass Destruction blasting in and out of the very heart of our population centers hundreds of times per day.

All it takes is a few dedicated individuals, or even just one person with nothing left to lose… well, who has not seen the potential for devastation worldwide on color TV from the events of 9/11/01?

This industry that serves less than 1% of the public each day consumes tens of billions of taxpayer dollars in the form of subsidies, tax relief, grants, and political favor. How many tens of billions? It is hard to calculate the total because of the industries relationship to the defense industry. The very same companies that build, maintain and profit from passenger aircraft also build bombs and weapons to wage war from the air, raining death and destruction from 30,000 feet. The crossover into space should not be forgotten, and all of the related industries and jobs that result from all this technological ingenuity that always needs an enemy to destroy.

But wait! It gets even more disgusting when we come face to face with the reality that it is the average American who likes jet air travel so much that they are willing to ignore this reality of the most energy intensive, polluting, hazardous way to travel ever devised.

Even the most vocal and active ecological preservation groups are consumers, even promoters, of jet air travel. None has taken this particular bull by the horns. In fact, the few who have dared to propose real conservation are rejected and marginalized by the very organizations blowing their horn the loudest.

Meanwhile, since 9/11, 10,000 more pedestrians have been killed and tens of thousands have been struck and maimed by cars and trucks for the crime of walking or riding a bike. The national passenger rail system is in shambles due to neglect, under funding and outright sabotage by corrupt politicians made wealthy by the auto, defense and petroleum industries. In fact, it is outright embarrassing that the nation that sent a man to the moon decades ago cannot get a passenger train over the grapevine from Bakersfield to Los Angeles and you cannot take a train from Los Angeles to Phoenix because non stop there anymore.

The MISSION of the PEACE TRAIN to DC is to deliver a message of PEACE THROUGH CONSERVATION to the WORLD.
http://TantricTravel.com

The MISSION of the Drive 55 Conservation Project is to reduce petroleum consumption by 20%-50%.
http://Drive55.org

Average BTU consumed Per Passenger mile by mode of travel:

SUV: 4,591
Air: 4,123
Bus: 3,729
Car: 3,672
Train: 2,138

Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics
http://199.79.179.77/publications/nts/index.html

According to a 2004 Transportation Research Board report, public transportation:
* Reduces CO2 emissions by more than 7.4 million tons per year in the U.S.
* Produces 95% less CO, at least 92% fewer VOCs, and nearly half as much CO2 and NOx for every passenger mile traveled than private vehicles

Tim Castleman

They are Volunteers, not Victims

There is a great clamor these days to “Support our troops” and “Honor our military”. Someone who questions the war is presumed to not be supporting the troops. This is the backlash from the Vietnam War era when returning military were greeted with disdain and rejection when they arrived home from combat.

Recognizing the trauma this added to the emotional burden these returning service members already carried, America seems resolved not to repeat that part of our history. After all, many were draftees and/or only went believing they were serving their country.

The conflict in Vietnam ended but the war is still raging between hard-core military types and those who hate war. It is revenge time for the Vets who have felt abused and unappreciated all these years. Americans will appreciate their warriors and honor them this time by-god!

But I am writing to remind everyone that every member of the US Military volunteered. It is fair to recognize that they were coerced by government agents that can sell ice to Eskimos with all sorts of false promises, and in some cases outright cash bribes, to join up, but at the end of the day, they volunteered.

Now, a person that recently emerged from under a rock may be excused from knowing about the ongoing controversy about U.S. military actions worldwide, but most folks are completely aware of the protests and public debate that has America just about evenly divided on this issue. It is unlikely that anyone has not accumulated enough information by now to take a stand, one way or the other.

Returning to my original point, that our troops are Volunteers, not Victims. While there may be many troops that volunteered years ago, and were caught in the stop-loss gimmick to keep them in the military, many more, even most are serving because they want to. Think about this for minute, please! These are people who WANT to kill other people. They enjoy getting dressed up in soldier outfits and playing with the high tech weapons made back home by the military industrial complex that is employing their friends and family. Perhaps a few thousand innocent people will die, but this is called “Collateral Damage” – not murder. And they have VOLUNTEERED to do this.

Even now, when it is clear that the fascist Bush regime has lied and deceived the frightened U.S. public into war and more war, about half of Americans still defend this illegal action while most of the other half cannot be bothered to care. The remnant that dares to speak out is marginalized, accused of treason, jailed, persecuted and ignored by the masses as they race from red light to red light in pursuit of the American Dream.

These volunteers have committed crimes in YOUR name, to support YOUR petroleum addiction not mine, and they VOLUNTEERED to do it. These volunteers are the people who tortured prisoners in Afghanistan, Cuba, and Iraq to name a few and participated in the murder of 100’s of thousands of innocent civilians, voluntarily.

U.S. WMD Death Toll

In 2002 42,850 people were killed on U.S. roadways.
Of these, 2,584 were children under 15 years of age.
2,914,000 people were injured by US motorists.
Of these, 334,000 were children under the age of 15.
4,776 were pedestrians, of these 646 were on bicycles.
72,000 pedestrians were injured by cars.
48,000 bicycle riders were struck and injured by cars.
Young drivers (16-20 years old) will account for 8,996 deaths and 544,000 injuries.

Motor Vehicle Traffic Crash Fatality & Injury Estimates
National Center for Statistics and Analysis, April 2003
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/Rpts/2003/2002EARelease.pdf

Traffic fatalities have steadily risen since 1995, the year the national 55 MPH speed limit was rescinded.

Is it any safer to walk?

1 pedestrian is killed by a car every 108 minutes.
In 2001 4,882 pedestrians were killed on America’s roads.
This was 12% of the 42,116 traffic fatalities.
484 of these pedestrians were children under 16.
45% of these 484 children were killed by cars between 3 & 7 PM
Alcohol was involved in 37% of these fatalities.

“Pedestrian Roadway Fatalities”
Technical Report published by National Center for Statistics and Analysis, April 2003 DOT HS 809-456
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/Rpts/2003/809-456.pdf

Please visit www.drive55.org to sign a petition urging Congress to restore the 55 MPH speed limit and take a pledge to obey existing speed limits, never exceeding 55 MPH.

Think it will take longer to get where you’re going if you slow down? Studies indicate the increased number of accidents due to high speed driving also increase congestion as we are delayed waiting for the mangled tons of steel and bloody bodies to be cleaned up. Simple math proves slowing down from 65 MPH to 55 MPH will cost you 5 minutes for every 30 miles.

Can we spare a dime for our troops?

$87 billion dollars is needed to fund the next 15 months of the US occupation in Iraq. The illusion that we are there to “liberate” the people has faded, and with no WMD found after months of searching there is very little doubt of the truth now. We invaded that country to secure “vital American interests”, to be more precise: OIL.

There is some clamor to insure the $87 billion is spent fairly, but little resistance to the fact that we will spend it. $20 billion will go toward rebuilding Iraq’s infrastructure and $67 billion will go to support our troops. The US will spend that money, now my main concern is where will it come from? Will there be any roll backs of tax cuts? Not likely, cuts to social services, probably.

I have a better idea.

How about we collect a special tax on imported oil? We all agree that the root issue is geopolitical control of the region with the majority of the worlds known reserves, and we all agree that America’s reliance on imported petroleum is unhealthy. Yet we do have this responsibility to support our troops and clean up the mess we have made in our quest for perpetual world dominance, so how about we spread the cost in the most equitable, yet accurate way possible?

Let’s collect a ten cent tax on each gallon of imported petroleum!

This will equitably spread the cost of our addiction across the board, with those who use the least paying the smaller portion of the tab. SUV & Hummer drivers will pay the larger portion while drivers of hybrids & economy cars will pay the least. Everyone will pay some part in the price of goods trucked in from across the nation, and considering the volume of petroleum we use every day, it will not take long to raise sufficient funds to cover the cost of our war to “liberate” Iraq.

So, let’s do the math! The US uses about 21 million barrels each day, and about 60% of that is imported. That means 12.6 million barrels @ 42 gallons per barrel, or 529 million gallons each day. So at ten cents per gallon, every ten days we will raise $529 million dollars. At that rate it will only take about 160 days, less than 6 months, to pay for this phase of the war. At a billion dollars per week, we will be going into debt if we rely on this tax entirely, so we will still have to fund our military ($50 billion per year) with our regular income taxes, so this special supplemental tax is just to pay for our occupation in Iraq.

Can we spare a dime for our troops?

California Climate Change Window Dressing Report ‘05

The February 23, 2005 California Energy Commission and the California Public Utilities Commission’s meeting on Global Climate Change offers more of the same and no real solutions.

There is a group of well-paid and connected policy makers that is congratulating itself for their window dressing that once again avoids the elephant in the living room. What is particularly confusing is the way they couch their report, using phrases like the following:

“Climate change has been studied extensively for more than thirty years. In the face of clear and overwhelming scientific evidence, the time has come for California to act.”

“The major contributors of greenhouse gases are transportation (nearly 50%) and electricity consumption (25-30%).”

“The implications on vital resources are projected to be significant by 2070:

Examples include:
• Water Availability: The amount of water available for use in agriculture, hydropower, cities, and other needs could drop by as much as 30%. This does not necessarily result from decreasing precipitation. In fact, as climate change occurs, the Sierras will get more rain and less snow, which will result in a significant increase in winter runoff and lower rivers during the summer. Our system of reservoirs is not currently designed for this scenario, and until they are reconfigured, we will alternate between floods and shortages.
• Smog: Southern California is expected to warm significantly, with resulting sharp increases in smog and all related health problems.
• Sea level: As the sea level rises, everything along the sea will be subject to damage. The Sacramento River delta may be damaged by increases in salt water inflow which may put at risk one of the state’s major sources of fresh water, depending how far upstream the salt water flows.”

This sounds rather alarming to me, but it is clear from the solutions proposed in their report that 50% of the problem (the elephant in the room) is virtually ignored, again, still. The only transportation related solution included is the fleet program. Here it is:

“Fleets- Working with other relevant state agencies, require early adoption of low emission vehicles for all utilities’ fleets including light and heavy-duty vehicles. Efforts should include transportation and all other CPUC regulated entities. Recognize economic value implicit in travel reduction efforts. Enhanced-efficiency-factor costing methodologies have been developed and are one example of how a purchasing methodology can reduce petroleum consumption and vehicle-related emissions of pollutants.”

The rest of their solutions are to conduct studies, create regulations, set up commissions, share information, and have more meetings to plot and plan to best avoid dealing with the elephant in the living room.

Complicit in this evil charade are not only corporate players representing the auto and energy industries, but also the professional lobbyists who could just as easily be selling tobacco to kids as saving polar bears, so long as the pay is right. I have met these slimy professionals, stuffed into their cheap JC Penney suits with phony smiles and limp handshakes. It is a brother-sister-hood, well they are hoods and they have a language all their own. Compromise is the name of the game, and the richest gorilla is usually the one who gets to decide what compromise will be made.

In this case, the ongoing compromise is to focus on things like solar energy and fanciful trading programs wherein everything is related to commerce. This provides a handy and acceptable escape route from real responsibility by providing the cover of “COSTS” – if something costs too much, it is dismissed. Never mind if it is the correct solution, if it costs too much, it is dismissed.

Please, just ask yourself; How is it that 50% of the problem that is causing climate change is solved by supplying a new fleet for government agents?

Knowing most of the general public will not bother to read them, they boldly put their plans online, and will later correctly state that everything was done in public hearings, and the majority ruled. Visit the following for their latest offering:
http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/events/2005-02-23_enbanc_cpuc/index.html

I realize there are some good people involved and that at least something is being done, but it is really amazing to me that these learned professionals who know the truth can settle for such an anemic response to a very real problem. On the other hand, folks are folks, and if no one from the general public is watching, and someone with a fat checkbook is offering, well, we all have families to take care of, right? This payoff is rarely anything blatant, unless you call a paycheck or consultant fee blatant. The brainwashing is all very subtle and this is the purpose for all of the meetings and hearings. Not to discover anything new, or implement any real solutions, but only to pound the existing agenda into the heads of participants, supporting each other’s half-truths and compromises to perpetuate the cycle of studies, meetings and conventions, and to get a new fleet for government agents.

What a joke. Here are two solutions that will solve the problem, right now.

1. The MISSION of the PEACE TRAIN to DC is to deliver a message of PEACE THROUGH CONSERVATION to the WORLD.
http://TantricTravel.com

2. The MISSION of the Drive 55 Conservation Project is to reduce petroleum consumption by 20%-50%.
http://Drive55.org

Average BTU consumed Per Passenger mile by mode of travel:

SUV: 4,591
Air: 4,123
Bus: 3,729
Car: 3,672
Train: 2,138

Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics
http://199.79.179.77/publications/nts/index.html

According to a 2004 Transportation Research Board report, public transportation:
* Reduces CO2 emissions by more than 7.4 million tons per year in the U.S.
* Produces 95% less CO, at least 92% fewer VOCs, and nearly half as much CO2 and NOx for every passenger mile traveled than private vehicles

Tim Castleman, 2005

An Energy Bill letter to Congress

Dear Senator or Member of the House of Representatives:

I am writing to urge you to oppose the omnibus energy legislation.

Our nation’s energy plan should include strong CAFE standards to reduce our reliance on oil, commit the nation to reasonable renewable energy requirements, and protect our precious natural areas like the Arctic Refuge for generations to come. Without these assurances, we’re left with an energy executive’s wish list disguised as energy policy.

We’re better off with no energy bill at all than the pro-drilling, pro-nuclear, anti-environmental legislation that is currently before you.

Numerous studies have concluded there is a dramatic reduction in fuel consumption, and pollution created simply by reducing your highway speed from 65 MPH to 55 MPH.

When driving 65 MPH you are:
Using 20% more fuel
Polluting 56% more VOC’s, 153% more CO and 10% more NOX

Further, simply enforcing existing speed limit laws would create a new revenue stream for the state while only penalizing those with little or no regard for our environment and safety anyway.

Analysis of the Effects of Eliminating the National Speed Limit on NOx Emissions
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/reports/env-spds.htm

Environmental Impacts of Removing National Speed Limit Requirements
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/reports/envspmem.htm

Bridgestone has tested the fuel economy effects of speed, load and tire-related factors at the Transportation Research Center, Inc. in East Liberty, Ohio, and at the Bridgestone/Firestone Test Center in Fort Stockton, Texas.
http://www.trucktires.com/library/technical/bftechnical/fuel_economy_b.htm

These are just a few of the many resources available, and we have not even discussed safety!

Remember:

Average BTU consumed Per Passenger mile by mode of travel:

SUV: 4,591
Air: 4,123
Bus: 3,729
Car: 3,672
Train: 2,138

Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics
http://199.79.179.77/publications/nts/index.html

According to a 2004 Transportation Research Board report, public transportation:

* Reduces CO2 emissions by more than 7.4 million tons per year in the U.S.
* Produces 95% less CO, at least 92% fewer VOCs, and nearly half as much CO2 and NOx for every passenger mile traveled than private vehicles

I look forward to hearing how you will address this important issue.

Sincerely,

—————–
Please modify this and contact your Senator & House Representative today! Click here for a super easy, quick way to do this!

http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/index.htm