The U.S. Senate has asked residents that were forced out of their homes by tarsands in Alberta, Canada, to testify about their experience.
They say in the report that they don’t want to be used for political gain. I can’t blame them for that–enough evidence of people being used by politicians for them to be wary.
Tailings ponds which now cover an area the sized of Washington DC contain multiple toxic chemicals including arsenic, benzene, lead, mercury, naphthenic acid, and ammonia. As much as 2.9 million gallons of toxic tailings leak into the environment every day. A 2014 study showed that extreme concentrations of PAHs present in tailings may be evaporating into the air and then deposited into water. New federal research by Environment Canada released in February 2014 confirms that leaking tailings ponds are leaching into groundwater and then into the Athabasca River.
~~~~~~~~
As someone whom has suffered from mercury toxicity, this is particularly alarming to me. I can be a witness to how devastating this heavy metal is and how difficult it is to get it out of your system and get well again.
Meanwhile, the Enbridge pipeline project is due to get underway in Indiana. Yet, there are *crickets* from the environmental groups, media, etc. This is our “XL”…and no one gives a sh*t.
As a side note~ I know there are folks in the oil industry who read my blog–this is not meant to offend, but I can’t be silent on the destruction of the environment for humans, animals, plants, water, and soil.
A problem that plagues peaceful protestors are those that wish to cause trouble.
The problem is in knowing if they are bad actors looking to stir things up for their own amusement or agent provocateurs–sent in by agencies or the oil companies themselves to give the non-violent activists a bad name. The next problem is banishing them from the movement.
The person calling himself “james Moore” in the piece is typical. Not knowing the writer of the piece, it’s hard to know if this person said those things or whether it is fabricated to make them look bad. Or worse–to put this out there to justify police crackdown.
Like I’ve said before, I won’t support violence and many folks who would otherwise support environmentalists will back away from violent protests.
Setting police vehicles on fire is not violence in that it hurts a human being, but it is destructive…and is counterproductive if you think about all the toxins you’re sending into that very environment you’re trying to protect. You might feel a release of frustration for a moment or two, but in the end, it doesn’t further your cause.
Just how dehumanizing is it to refer to people you kill as “bug splats”?? Good God.
Dehumanizing the “other” is as old as…well, war…I suppose. The “other” are portrayed as dogs, rats, and other things to dehumanize them. It makes it easier to shoot someone if you no longer see them as a human being.
200 innocent children dead. We should hang our heads in shame.
California has a bill up to force Sea World to stop using orcas in its shows and release them from their tanks.
They are too large, too intelligent, too socially complex and too far-ranging to be adequately cared for in captivity,” said Naomi Rose, a marine mammal scientist with the Animal Welfare Institute, the bill’s sponsor.
[…]
“That argument is not based on credible peer-reviewed science,” said John Reilly, president of SeaWorld San Diego Park. “It’s based on emotion and a propaganda film.”
~~~~~~~~
Really? Because I’m pretty sure a marine mammal scientist knows the behavior of the orcas. Anyone with two eyes can see how the behavior of Tillikum is directly related to being held captive.
Even if there is no “scientific” standard, it’s just not right to keep an animal in captivity for the amusement of humans. We would not want to be treated that way.
Canadians are also moving to release dolphins and orcas from captivity. Good for them.
Dispatches from the Underclass has a post up on academic freedom and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
I clicked on the link to the letter, and the part about the union’s collective bargaining agreement stood out:
“institutional discipline or restraint in their discussion of relevant matters in the classroom…” [the CBA prohibits] “explicit or implicit threat of termination or discipline for the purpose of constraining a faculty member in the exercise of his or her rights under such principles of academic freedom.”
~~~~~~~~
“Teachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to their subject.”
This was clarified later with the following:
“The intent of the 1940 statement is not to discourage what is “controversial”. Controversy is at the heart of the free academic inquiry which the entire statement is designed to foster. The passage serves to underscore the need for teachers to avoid persistently intruding material which has no relation to their subject.”
~~~~
This is one of the reasons that teacher’s unions must be protected–they protect teachers that bring up uncomfortable subjects with passionate debate. The Vietnam War would probably still be going on if it weren’t for the passionate debates of that time. And the Afghan war would have ended long ago. The Iraq War would have never begun had there been passionate debate on the subject of Weapons of Mass Destruction and as I previously posted, the way that Iraq society was presented to us and the reality of their society.
As the letter continues, the use of the word “balance” is questionable (Faux News, anyone?). It’s a vague term that can be interpreted in many ways…it’s a word that anyone in power can use to silence those that present valid complaints. One student made a complaint against the professor. Then Dr. Corey had the student “spy” on the professor and report back on whether it was “balanced” or not. WTH?
I disagree, however, with the letter’s statement that “students don’t possess the training or expertise to challenge a professor”…this is not giving students enough credit. Again, I’m thinking of the 60s and the students questioning professors and all authority. They raised valid questions. It’s not that students don’t have the training or expertise, but that one single student, with biases, should not be allowed to shut down an entire class because he/she does not agree with the way the subject is presented. He/she is a student, and as such, has to take some responsibility towards his/her education, and that means not always agreeing with a professor.
If the student disagrees, then he/she has options: quit the class, or listen and perhaps examine why he/she is opposed to the professor/subject matter….and maybe, just maybe, change one’s mind after evaluating the subject. It’s known that Israel does not present the Palestinian side of things in their schools. I don’t think they speak of the Palestinians at all, but in negative terms. Where’s the balance there?
The assessment of Professor Chehade’s classroom was one of openness. He allowed differing viewpoints…which is what you want in…ahem…a balanced classroom. Other students’ assessments were one of openness.
Something else that nags at me while reading this–did this student purposely take this class in order to get it cancelled? Because a class such as this is probably an elective–one that a student has an option of taking among several in that particular subject matter–so I would question the student’s motives if that were the case. The more I read, the more it sounds like a set-up. And the spineless administration caved at the first “shove”.
Another thing that bothers me is that we don’t live in a vacuum–this is only one class in that student’s career. If the student wants to get at the truth, he/she can take more classes taught by other professors whom will offer a different perspective. The student can also take the initiative and read books on the subject to gain a broader perspective. There is also the community- other students, friends, parents, neighbors, whom also can offer their perspectives. My experience has been that the truth is somewhere in between.
It’s important to note that professors are not given free reign to do as they please in their classrooms–as the letter states–proselytizing (although I can state that some of my professors came close to this, thankfully, it was just a few of many good professionals); and teaching subjects that are not a part of that section.
And just for the record, I would love to attend Professor Chehade’s class.
I found 5 Broken Cameras on youtube:
In the next part of the report, the controversy about free speech about the Palestinian/Israeli conflict at the University of Michigan. Be sure to click on the link where Max Blumenthal writes about the smear campaign. There is a video by Dishell up that speaks volumes.
In the speech, Max is passionate. He is Jewish and yet is speaking out on what he calls apartheid by Israel. The whole idea of Israel being “pure” is so ludicrous. There is no such thing as a “pure” race. We’re all mutts, so to speak. And as Blumenthal illustrates, one couple can’t even be together because of this stupidity. Can you say Romeo and Juliet? Can we ever learn anything from history…?
This photo is really hard to look at–but the discussion needs to continue until the evidence overcomes the marketing savvy of the chemical industry, and specifically Dow and Monsanto...which don’t want to own their legacy.
These photos document the toxicity of chemicals and how extremely devastating they are to the human body.
So…Dow Chemical now wants to make it even more toxic…and the brain-dead FDA will not think of the consequences, only the $$$ to be made. Here’s a petition to stop its approval.
In Russia, the will of the state is expressed with signals of varying subtlety; the invocation of “national traitors” is among the less oblique examples of the genre. A new Web site called predatel.net—the word means “traitor”—has recently launched, featuring a list of public figures that the site’s anonymous creators deem to have betrayed Russia, whether by criticizing the annexation of Crimea or by supporting Western sanctions. As the site’s short manifesto puts it, “We believe that Russian citizens who insult our soldiers and who cast doubt on the need to fight neo-Nazis are traitors, no matter whether they are talented journalists, writers, and directors.” The site has a form for users to “suggest a traitor.”
~~~~~~~
Holy crap. The Salem Witch Hunt on steroids. Label someone a “witch” on the internet, where the accused has little access to protest their innocence…or put forth a differing point of view without being labeled a “traitor”…pfft. Cowards.
Weak arguments attack the person (Ad Hominem). Strong arguments attack the idea.
I found a news piece on Alexi Navalny’s sentencing hearing:
Finally, the link to Irina Kalinina has this:
Dmitry Kiselyov, probably the single most influential person in the Russian mass media, considered by many as the Kremlin’s chief propagandist, provides another distinctive voice on Russian television. He is best known in the West for his idea that the internal organs of gays were not fit for donation and, more recently, for his reminder that Russia could turn America into “radioactive ash.”
~~~~~~~~~
…and he calls the Ukraine people’s fight to keep their independence, a “mass psychosis”. Seriously.
But the federal government says to Indian people, “I will recognize your sovereignty if you have either a nuclear or toxic-waste dump or casino.” That’s pretty much the only way you get your sovereignty recognized as Indian people. Let me be clear about this: We are sovereign. I don’t care if the federal government recognizes me, my nation, and my people. That’s of little consequence to me in the long-term picture. The federal government, as far as I’m concerned, is by and large illegal. Most transactions are illegal. It’s like being recognized by a bunch of hoodlums. But under the law, they recognize your sovereignty in those two things, a dump or a casino. So Indian people are in an ironic situation, in that our choices for economic development are so limited.
In Minnesota, I see two examples. I see a reservation like Mille Lacs. They have two casinos. They built schools, houses, roads, clinics, and community buildings. They bought land. Nobody was going to do that for them. No federal appropriation was going to be made for those Indian people to do that, although their land was mostly taken from them. The federal government is supposed to provide those things for them. That’s not going to happen, so they did that with their casinos, and that’s right. They’re making some long-term investments that are smart. They don’t think those casinos are going to last forever, but they’re doing the right thing.
~~~~~~~
I have heard of folks willing their land to a tribe native to the area. Cool.
The grassroots people of Kul Wicasa oppose the development of the power line infrastructure planned by Basin Electric. The Lower Brule substation is to be located two miles from the Big Bend Damn. The thick, corrosive nature of tarsands oil (which in its natural state is the consistency of peanut butter) requires a constant temperature of 150 degrees Fahrenheit and necessary dilutants to liquify it enough to be slurried through the pipeline. This will require an enormous amount of power. Basin Electric stated at a public utilities commission meeting in Winner, SD “the pipeline apparently moves oil under 1440 pounds of pressure per square inch. If the line is to move 700,000 barrels of crude per day, each pumping station requires three 6500 hp electric motors running on 17 megawatts of power night and day. If the flow rate is increased to 900,000 barrels per day, five 6500hp electric motors are required. That would use 25 megawatts of power.”
This increasing demand for electricity forces the need for the additional power station at Lower Brule. Transmission studies indicate the current system has reached its load limit. Given the location of the Lower Brule substation, 2 miles south of the Big Bend Damn, it is apparent Missouri River water will be used to produce electricity.
~~~~~~~~~~
Soooo…..they toss a few crumbs with wind turbines…but what they don’t tell them is that the pipeline is going to require even more energy…and precious water to move the “peanut butter” through the lines…um-hmmm…
This is just stunning:
…the land isn’t even there now; it’s an oil mine; there was a lake there that was 200 miles long and 100 miles wide. Now, the elders are saying, for the first time, the shoreline is receding and the rocks at the bottom of the lake are exposed. Water is being taken from the rivers and lakes to support the destruction by the tarsands mine.
~~~~~~~~
It’s really hard to imagine that much water being used. It’s gone. No longer usable by humans or animals.
This pipeline would destroy farmland and jobs, contrary to Big Oil myth. The First Nations are trying to support themselves with the food production, but once again Big Oil has other ideas. If you know anything about history, the Native Americans were moved to areas out West…once oil was discovered, suddenly they were in the way and once again moved. This continued on…and now we have the modern day version of it–pollute the land so it is no longer inhabitable.
You would think that Rahm Emanuel would think twice before messing with Karen Lewis, but he apparently hasn’t been, um…schooled. (sorry, bad pun I know)
She once again delivers a smackdown of the mayor by calling him on the divide-and-conquer politics.
Be sure to click on the links to Fred Klonsky’s blog, which also gives some insight to what is going on in Chicago. What goes on there, is most certainly going on around the country. Bless Karen Lewis.
Diane Ravitch has a post up on the “new” SAT. I haven’t seen the test, so I have to go by what Diane is describing. I do know that I when I first heard of the “new” SAT, I was sure there was some connection to the brainless Common Core. Yep.
It’s troubling that the writing section will be optional. Being able to write well-constructed sentences is an art. It should be a part of the test.
Diane quotes Superintendent Cohen, whom is critical of the “new” SAT:
Nowhere in our new, vaunted Common Core State Standards are teachers told to be concerned with nurturing young people’s imaginations or their original thoughts about the books they read, about the way nature works, about whether our government’s policies are good or bad, about whether the Pythagorean theorem could be used to help design a better bridge over the Hudson river, or whether “a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” Nor will the “new” and “fairer” SAT ask students to write about such matters.
~~~~~~~~
Absolutely. Spot on. It’s not enough to be able to repeat what another wrote–but to be able to interpret what they wrote and take it beyond that to expand the dialogue. Or to offer another point of view and facts or theory to back what you’re saying.
As I’m reading the article, I thought about when I took the SAT’s in high school. It was a gamble on my part, because I did not take the college-bound courses offered. That was the time that my Mom was pouring cheese soup over crackers for dinner sometimes….college seemed like an unreachable dream, so I took the easier courses offered. Personally, I don’t think those courses should have been an option–all the students who were capable should have been in the college courses. One really can’t know their potential until they are tested. And when you’re young and unsure of yourself, being tested means taking a risk–putting yourself out there for possible failure. Teenagers would rather die than face what they perceive as humiliation (when in fact it is a growing moment that should be supported, and not humiliated, as some like to do.) And when you’re poor, your options become even more limited because taking a risk could mean consequences for the family (if one risked going to college, and failed, that money spent on tuition is lost.)
I did pass the SAT’s, and was admitted to Indiana University but on a probationary status. I ended up not going because of being unsure of myself (probationary status to me meant “failure”) and interference by someone else. Being supported would have made all the difference at this point in time–maturity, too.
I’m telling this story because I had some rough years in middle school and high school. My grades reflected that. But they didn’t reflect my potential. As you know, I went on to college and graduated much later. It illustrates how badly misguided the Common Core and Race to the Bottom are–we are who we are at any point in time, but who we might grow to be is not measurable by any human tool.
Eagle 
You must be logged in to post a comment.