[Vision2020] Two Seperate Issues
starbliss at gmail.com
Mon Jun 13 11:56:42 PDT 2011
On 6/12/11, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote
"WTF? I mean, seriously, what the frak? We're talking about permits for
moving large loads across state highways. How is this in any way
comparable to the civil rights movement?"
To make the connection to human rights that the Moscow City Council
could address, consider the resolution from the Bellingham Wa. city
council regarding the tar sands (at website below), which the
mega-loads facilitate expansion of, then read Nobel Prize nominee
Sheila Watt-Cloutier's statement on human rights and global warming.
I suppose you will argue such a resolution that addresses a global and
"Inter-American" issue is not the business of a city council, so the
Moscow City Council should remain mute regarding the fact that the
mega-loads will facilitate global warming and other environmental
damages, and the human rights impacts?
Even if law does not provide a legal basis to block the mega-loads
because of the environmentally disastrous tar sands expansion, which
includes other very serious environmental impacts in Canada besides
global warming, the Moscow City Council could nonetheless pass a
resolution recognizing the profound implications of tar sands oil
And the other US impacts of the mega-loads on Idaho and Moscow also
appear to have some factual basis regarding whether the permits for
the mega-loads should be granted, or at least halted till more study
is undertaken of the potentially long term impacts of a permanent
industrial corridor through Idaho, as this Vision2020 post from an
Idaho State Representative suggests:
As a policy maker, I have expressed the following concern on more than
"In the 2000 Legislative session, we opened experimental routes in
southeast Idaho for trucks weighing 135,000 pounds. There was
supposed to be a report concerning their effect on pavement and
bridges. That report never came (was inconclusive), yet ITD is
comfortable with approving at least 200 shipments of mega loads."
The statement above was part of a letter I submitted to the opinion
page of the Daily News. I am very concerned about the way these loads
will affect our infrastructure.
I would add that I deplore aiding and abetting the project in Canada.
My readings on the topic convince me that the project constitutes
declaring war on the planet. I think it is irresponsible to allow
such projects to go forward without objection.
[Vision2020] Bellingham, Wa. City Council Passes Resolution Jun. 2010:
"Whereas... Canada's Tar Sands Generates Three Times More Global
Sheila Watt-Cloutier, Nobel Prize nominee who lost to Al Gore,
addressing the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights:
Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
On 6/12/11, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 06/09/2011 10:49 AM, Art Deco wrote:
>> So when Johnson and Rumelhart say that the so-called legal issues are
>> the only considerations, they exhibit where their real values lie:
>> so-called local legal issues are far more important that genocide,
>> aiding and abetting the enemy, and environmental damage. They may be
>> comfortable with these values. But when they claim they are
>> "concerned" about the oil sands projects, what a bunch of hypocritical
>> bullshit. They made be "concerned" but hardly a whit's worth.
>> If people, including Johnson and Rumelhart, are really concerned, then
>> they can act. Most of us are limited to acting locally through
>> influencing our elected representatives and other agencies, not
>> globally. That's what we are doing. There is a big difference
>> between Johnson, Rumelhart, and their ilk and Rosa Parks. I hope most
>> of us are of her image, though none of us will shine nearly, nearly as
> WTF? I mean, seriously, what the frak? We're talking about permits for
> moving large loads across state highways. How is this in any way
> comparable to the civil rights movement? If you care so gods damned
> much, get off your ass, go to wherever the headquarters of Imperial Oil
> is located, and protest the oil sands project. Go save the world.
> There are better avenues for doing this than abusing the IDT permit process.
> I guarantee that you restrain your actions due to legal concerns, too,
> else you'd have popped a cap in the ass of whoever is in charge of the
> oil sands project by now.
More information about the Vision2020