Designing Web Success

“The judge’s decision was wrong,” yelped environmental activist Chris Shuey into his cell phone, during a chat with StockInterview.com this past Friday. “It sets a horrible example for other mining companies.” Shuey, whose Southwest Research and Information Center is based in Albuquerque, New Mexico, clearly didn’t like the recent federal ruling in favor of Texas-based Uranium Resources’ (OTC BB: URIX) subsidiary, Hydro Resources Inc. (HRI). For nearly two decades, Southwest Research and Information Center (SRIC) and Chris Shuey have clung to a fanatical position: Uranium mining is bad. Federal and local government regulatory panels disagree, having voted SRIC and Mr. Shuey down every step of the way.

A January 6th ruling by a three-judge panel of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in Rockville, Maryland shot down Shuey’s challenges of radiological air emissions. “The NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) and the judge continue to support mining,” Shuey lectured into his mobile phone. “We continue to legally challenge.” For more than eight years since the NRC granted HRI a materials license to perform ISL mining at four sites in McKinley County, SRIC has engaged in what the licensing board calls “protracted litigation” to stop HRI from supplying much-needed uranium for U.S. utilities. The recent federal ruling stated, “HRI’s operations will not be inimical to public health and safety.”

Other uranium companies in the area rejoiced on the ASLB ruling. According to an historic geological report, authored by McLemore and Chenoweth in 2003, suggested about 588 million pounds of uranium remains after the area produced 348 million pounds through year 2001. An asset valued at greater than $21 billion, and growing more valuable each month, is certainly worth celebrating. The recent ruling may help accelerate the permitting and development of uranium assets in New Mexico.

“It helps that the regulatory community shed light on the inaccuracies, and on the disingenuous approaches the anti-nuclear contingent brings to the argument,” explained Juan Velasquez, Vice President of Environmental and Regulatory Affairs for Strathmore Minerals (TSX: STM; Other OTC: STHJF) in a telephone interview from Strathmore’s permitting office in Santa Fe, New Mexico. “Anything that moves those properties closer to production is a good thing for Strathmore, for the environment and for the country as a whole, as we move forward and look toward energy independence.” William Sheriff, Director of Corporate Development for Energy Metals (TSX: EMC), agreed, “I think the rulings by the NRC (on URI, and HRI’s applications, are very positive. It’s just another step toward production.” Dallas-based Sheriff is considered one of the leading prospect developers in the United States. Energy Metals Corp also plans to develop properties in New Mexico’s Grants Uranium Belt over the next decade. Velasquez, who was now more optimistic Strathmore’s Church Rock project would move forward to production, added, “The decision gives some faith to those of us that are regulated that the NRC does use common sense in coming to its decisions.”

StockInterview.com solicited an opinion from a Santa Fe attorney not involved in the recent case, but who was familiar with the ruling. While asking that he not be named in this article, the lawyer stated, “It was a very reasonable decision, and what one might expect. The decision was scientifically sound.” Chris Pugsley, HRI’s attorney at the Washington, DC-based law firm Thompson and Simmons, which defended the case, echoed that attorney’s sentiments, saying, “It was a decision based upon sound technology and extensive industry experience. The ruling was an endorsement that ISL mining is environmentally safe and will be the future of the domestic uranium mining industry.” Pugsley added, “This was sound science and the proper interpretation of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s regulations and requirements.” John DeJoia, Strathmore’s Vice President of Technical Services, concluded, “It makes me feel very optimistic about the production of uranium, domestically and especially in the Gallup (New Mexico) area. It validates the original determination by the NRC.”

These weren’t the first legal setbacks for SRIC. In November, New Mexico’s McKinley County Water Board denounced SRIC’s allegations of groundwater contamination, a cause the environmental group championed for a decade. The Water Board criticized the group, writing, “What we find however, are unsupportable propositions. The expert witness from the Southwest Research and Information Center provides lots of speculation, theories that could never be proved or disproved and headlines of gory consequences. This is not science. Science asks that we look at the data and come to a conclusion based on the evidence presented.” They concluded, “The mining operation as proposed by HRI and approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is safe and effectively protects our groundwater sources.”

In a July 20th ruling, the ASLB used stronger language, labeling much of SRIC’s arguments of possible contamination of Crownpoint water wells by HRI’s operations as “insubstantial” and “disingenuous.” In a separate January 6th ruling, the ASLB described a key SRIC claim as a “groundless assertion.” It has been one defeat after another for SRIC and their lead attorney, Eric Jantz. His law firm, New Mexico Environmental Law Center, had recently hosted “A Special Evening with Ted Turner,” the maverick billionaire, as a fund raiser to help stop uranium mining. On January 11th, five commissioners comprising the full commission of the NRC rejected SRIC’s appeal. They refused an SRIC petition to review the groundwater case. Strathmore’s Velasquez said of the recent legal decisions nullifying SRIC’s challenges, “If you are an environmentalist, it has to make you wonder at what point you are going to stop being taken seriously.” As the spot price of uranium continues its march to $40/pound and higher, the SRIC voice may need to find a new audience or a new cause.

ISL Mining and “Pristine” Groundwater

According to the World Nuclear Association (WNA), “ISL mining means that removal of the uranium minerals is accomplished without any major ground disturbance. The WNA explains ISL, or In Situ Leaching. as follows, “Weakly acidified or alkaline groundwater with a lot of oxygen injected into it is circulated through an enclosed underground aquifer which holds the uranium ore in loose sands. The leaching solution with dissolved uranium is then pumped to the surface treatment plant.” According to the WNA, over 20 percent of the world’s uranium is mined using the ISL method. At least four uranium companies plan to develop ISL operations in New Mexico: Uranium Resources (URI), Strathmore Minerals, Energy Metals and Max Resources (TSX: MXR). URI, Strathmore Minerals and Energy Metals specifically plan for the development of operations in the Churchrock or Crownpoint areas. None of the properties are located on the Navajo reservation.

One of the anti-nuclear movement’s arguments about ISL mining is that the injected water can not be contained. In the SRIC house organ, Voices from the Earth, Mitchell Capitan, a Navajo activist, is given top billing in the Spring 2005 edition. Pumped up as a former Mobil Oil lab technician, SRIC has mysteriously made Capitan an expert on ISL mining. In his interview, Capitan said, “Mobil was doing a pilot project with the in situ leach mining west of Crownpoint. I worked in the lab with the engineers. And no matter how hard we tried we could never get all the uranium out of the water, so Mobil gave up. We closed the project.”

Craig Bartels, president of Hydro Resources whose parent company Uranium Resources helped pioneer ISL mining in the United States, differs with Capitan’s assessment of the Mobil Oil closure. “It is incorrect for someone to say Mobil shut down ISL because they could not contain it. It’s also incorrect to say that Mobil shut down because they could not restore, or clean up, the water.” Bartels explains what did happen, “They ran a pilot plant, including restoration, in the early 1980s. When the price (of uranium) dropped dramatically, they plugged that well field and got out of the business.” Bartels believes Mobil “would be out there today, if the price had stayed up.”

Nonetheless, SRIC and Capitan’s grass roots Navajo group, ENDAUM (Eastern Navajo Dine Against Uranium Mining) continue arguing that ISL mining would contaminate the ground water and that ISL process is flawed or dangerous. Dr. John Fogarty, Chief of Staff for the Indian Health Service Hospital in Crownpoint, New Mexico, argued as the ad hoc medical expert, “The mining company intends to inject chemicals down into the aquifer, next to the community water supply. Those chemicals will leach, or strip the uranium off of the rock into the aquifer creating basically, a toxic soup.”

Unfortunately, Dr. Fogarty failed to describe the “chemicals” used in ISL mining. The lixiviant solution commonly used in the United States is sodium bicarbonate, or as known in the kitchen, baking soda. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) describes this process, “The extraction of Uranium using injection wells is the most prevalent mining technique for this mineral. An injection well is drilled to the formation containing the mineral salt.” The EPA describes the steps of the ISL method:

“The process used for the extraction of the uranium salts includes:

• Injection of a leaching solution, called lixiviant, into the mineral containing formation;

• Allowing for adequate contact of the lixiviant in the mineral zone;

• Extraction of the nearly saturated lixiviant to the surface;

• Separation of the uranium salts from the lixiviant.”

In an interview with world-renown nuclear physicist Dr. Fred Begay, who is also Navajo and resides in the Los Alamos (New Mexico) area, he described to StockInterview.com the chemicals used in ISL mining, “What you pump down in there is baking soda.” We asked Dr. Begay, “That’s it?” He compared it to working in the kitchen and the procedure was as safe as baking bread. What about water contamination? Begay responded, “The uranium is already there.” And because the uranium is already there, the groundwater has an a priori contamination.

Bartels also disagreed with Dr. Fogarty’s accusation. “We hear this all the time: ‘The water is pristine drinking water.’ That is not at all correct. The water is already toxic.” Bartels carefully explained why the water in question is already damaged goods, “Any place where there is a commercial ore body, that water is not going to be fit to drink. The ground water is already contaminated.” He pointed out, “There is a huge amount of uranium all through this area, not just in this aquifer but in the overlying aquifer that they call the Dakota Sandstone.” In all, about one billion pounds of uranium may have been scattered throughout the area before uranium mining began in the 1950’s. In comments he made January 11th to the Gallup Independent newspaper HRI’s Mark Pelizza pointed out SRIC’s hypocritical stance, “It appears that fund raising is a driving force for their rhetoric… they completely ignore the health effects of that same radon gas from the uranium ore body if produced directly as drinking water - instead, they call this water ‘pristine,’ and do not alert people to its hazard. Why is that?”

Radon Gas and ISL Mining

What about the radon released during the mining of uranium? “If you have any commercial quantity of uranium, the radon is already there,” explained Bartels. “But, we don’t do anything to it. We don’t mobilize it. We have no effect on it, other than we are not allowed, and we won’t release it to the atmosphere.”

Why did the NRC rule in favor of HRI that ISL mining would not be a danger to the public health? Bartels described the process, “We use pressured vessels. It is contained in the solution that goes around and around. Everything comes up to the surface but doesn’t get into the atmosphere. There is a model that simulates and estimates how much radiation dose you are releasing to ensure that the health of the people in the surrounding area is not affected.”

Velasquez was adamant about SRIC’s air emission claims, “The representations they make with regards to radon are simply unsupportable and incorrect.” Few realize how common radon gas is found throughout the earth. Velasquez added, “You and I release radon every time we turn over a spade of dirt in our garden. The single largest emitter of radon gas in this country is the agricultural industry because they till the soil. Nobody is upset about that.” Scott Heaberlin writes in his widely read treatise, A Case for Nuclear Generated Electricity (Battelle Press, 2004), “Because uranium is essentially everywhere on the planet so is radon.”

Highly respected Strathmore Minerals President David Miller, who has served as an ISL geological consultant to the International Atomic Energy Agency and is a three-term Wyoming legislator, believes ISL mining will actually reduce the radon problem for the Navajos, “Removing the uranium now and moving the uranium off the project will lower future radon gas generation in the area.” He appealed on the basis of common sense that the Navajos were doing a disservice to their own health, “If the Navajos allow uranium mining on the reservation, then trillions of future radon atoms will not be formed on the reservation.”

The SRIC panic concerning background radiation may be for naught. In a General Accounting Office report, entitled, Radiation Standards (June 2000), stated, “… we examined 82 studies, which generally found little or no evidence of elevated cancer risk from high natural background radiation levels… Overall the studies’ results are inconclusive, but they suggest that at exposure levels of a few hundred millirem a year and below, the cancer risks from radiation may either be very small or nonexistent.” To put this in perspective, by taking a chest x-ray in your doctor’s office, you are exposed to between 20 and 40 millirem (mrem) of radiation. Those living in Gallup, New Mexico, the largest city near the Church Rock uranium projects, would get an annual dose of about 60 mrem. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s annual permissible exposure to radiation is 5,000 mrem. By virtue of where they live, some on this planet continue to survive despite extraordinarily strong terrestrial sources of very high radon concentrations. A few places in Europe can give inhabitants of 5000 mrem per year. In Iran, Sudan and Brazil, one might get up to 3800 mrem annually. Some places in India can dose the locals with up 1500 mrem per year.

Radon studies have been conducted. The prestigious New England Journal of Medicine published a study entitled, “Residential Radon Exposure and Lung Cancer in Sweden” (January 20, 1994). The scientific team investigated residential radon as the principal source of exposure to ionizing radiation. The study concluded, “As a rule, the radon concentration decreases when a window is kept open. A window ajar can provide an exchange of 10 to 30 cubic meters of air per hour at a wind velocity of 3m per second. This may be two to three times the normal rate of air exchange and thus may reduce radon concentration by 50 to 70 percent.”

The same principle applies to uranium mining. The industry has been using fans for several decades to vent radon gas and increase the safety of their labor force.

James Finch frequently contributes to StockInterview.com, where you can read his archived articles: http://www.stockinterview.com Mr. Finch does not invest in the companies he writes about.

While we talk about political correctness ad nauseam, we sometimes tend to overlook the perpetrators of this noxious activity. Just who are the ones who act as the enforcing agents; who are the, ugh, police people? Who are these self-appointed moral vigilantes who continue to impose their views on us?

Well, for starters, I suggest we look at the work place to see what we can come up with. It appears those who would remind us of what is correct and not correct at work seem to be none other than the Human Resources people. Rather than spend their time rectifying the despicable compensatory behavior of their bosses or trying to preserve a modicum of traditional employee benefits, they seem hell bent on pointing out the ABC’s of what some greedy consultant told them was proper corporate behavior. I recall years ago when I was braced by one of these types for using the phrase “mensch” while referring to a Jewish associate. (Mensch means a caring, decent and honorable person who can be trusted and who always tries to do the right thing.) Given the horror in this lad’s eyes, you would have thought I had just been booked for star-chamber punishment. I do recall, however, that this same “enforcer” was discharged some years later for a rather explicit sexual harassment incident. These types, while probably well intended, seem to spend too much time finger pointing and otherwise acting as corporate enforcers, and not enough time demonstrating a modicum of courage in doing something about the obscenely excessive severance packages granted to those who fail. Indeed, during the period of corporate accounting scandals from 2001 -2003, HR people were shamefully invisible when they they should have been spending their time serving as protectors of company values.

At many schools, we have the administrators to help us behave properly……and to help make their task easier, they have a one size fits all approach; namely, the dreaded, take-no-prisoners bastion of political correctness, the zero-tolerance policy. If ever there was a road to hell paved with righteous intentions, this is the one. Think not? A 10-year-old girl at McElwain Elementary in Thornton, Col., was one of a group of girls who asked a certain boy on the playground if he liked her. The boy complained to a teacher with the result that school administrators, citing the district’s “zero-tolerance sexual harassment policy,” decided to suspend her. Nothing like spreading penut butter to evade consideration of each individual’s personal history and the intentions that inspired their actions. Zero-tolerance policies do just that. They deny the unique worth and dignity of every student by homogenizing the playing field. How about reconsidering concepts like mediation, negotiation, forgiveness, compassion, and empathy? How about making zero-tolerance a last resort rather than the first option?

And as we look at the greater community in which we function, the PC police seem to be everywhere telling us, for example, how to speak and act. We have to be fearful of what we say, write, and think. We are fearful of using a word denounced as offensive or insensitive. Maintenance cover instead of manhole cover. Strawman is now straw; chairman is now chairperson, assemblyman is assembly person. When will selectmen become selectpeople? No more using the words cowboy or cowgirl, landlady, or landlord. The phrase Founding Fathers has been removed from America’s textbooks and, if used at all, is replaced with “framers.” Illegal immigrants are now referred to as “undocumented immigrants.” Easter vacation is now spring break and Christmas is winter break. You can’t sing traditional Carols in our public schools any more. But the PC police are involved in more than just changing words. In New Jersey, even though there had been patients across the nation who may have been infected by their dentists with AIDS and then died, NJ health providers who are HIV-positive do not need to tell their patients that they are so infected. Almost as scary, The Boulder City, Colorado Town Council will soon be taking up the matter of allocating public funding for a “hate hotline,” which would give residents an opportunity to report incidents in which Boulderites use tactless language. No “mensch” comments in Boulder.

Political correctness is alive and well in religion, too. As just one example, we find that some foster intellectual supression by ostracizing others who wish to preserve the sanctity of science by keeping so-called intelligent design out of the public classrom.

The beat goes on and on, but if it were just about politeness and good manners, no big deal. However, it’s about a lot more and it’s time we acknowledge that this insanity is changing our society from within and that we, the the citizens of this nation, are increasingly censoring ourselves and losing our freedom of speech out of fear of socially engineered repression. We also need to understand that those who enforce political correctness are enforcing nothing more than an illusion. A dogma, a creation, if you will, to keep people in check and and from running amuck. A creation that in turn generates its own bodies of work, entire fields of study, and even new uses of language to go with them. In this strange universe, the rules of engagement are so vague no one is quite sure how to challenge them and yet we labor to incorporate them into our lives. Unless we begin to push back, more people will lose their careers, children their privileges, citizens ostracized, all because the fashionable and appropriate behavior of the day is so oblique no one can possibly see what exactly they are to do. Very insidiously and subtlety, we seem to be creating for ourselves an intellectual handicap that limits free-thinking, irreverence, push back, being analytically independent and/or intellectually curious.

The real shame is that we seem to turn away from the simple and move to the complex each and every time. We know what is innately and instinctively the right thing to do in any given situation, what behavior to display at what moment. But until we learn to follow our own simplest behaviors, how can we possibly be correct about anything? Perhaps some of us are tuned to a higher and more eloquent frequency, but each of us knows the small, easy-to-understand truths that are so manifest…….. no insulting, show kindness, be sensitive and empathetic to the feelings of others, be honest and frank, but in so doing try to cause no pain, avoid securing laughs at somebody’e else expense, understand that no one is any “better” than anyone else, and above all, realize that the intent of your communication may not always square with the way it is received. Being wounded by a warning shot is still being wounded.

In the words of Wendy McElroy, “Sweeping up the debris of political correctness means demolishing the laws, the institutions and the tax-funded bureaucracies that are its structure. But it also means eliminating the vicious attitudes of intolerance and anger that are its spirit.” More to the point are these words of Anthony D’Angelo, “transcend political correctness and strive for human righteousness.”

“If all printers were determined not to print anything till they were sure it would offend nobody, there would be very little printed.” Benjamin Franklin, statesman, philosopher, publisher, and scientist (1706-1790)

Ted Sares, PhD, is a private investor and syndicated writer who lives in the White Mountain area of Northern New Hampshire with his wife Holly and Min Pin Jackdog. He writes a bi-weekly column for a local newspaper, is a regular contributor to the NH Business Review, and many of his other pieces are widely published.

His works focus on issues and themes dealing with socio-political topics, business and (economics in which he advocates a free market approach to capitalism), patriotism, and matters dealing with individual freedom.They are frequently inspirational in nature and sometimes reflect the Objectivist philosophy of novelist and philosopher Ayn Rand.

The current event that is on Ms. Fox’s mind this month concerns the three branches of our government. You see, they all believe they are in public office to represent themselves and their personal interest; however, they need us, the American Citizens, to inform them that they were voted into public office to represent us. Each branch is now speaking a different language of English. Genesis 11 v 6 and 7.

The Executive Branch formed an institution in America called Homeland Security: This institution protects all Americans from foreign enemies. This institution allows National Security Agency to eavesdrop on every American who speaks on the phone or who uses the internet. This institution will be able to stop all danger before it happens. This institution will not be forced to follow all the written laws on the books in America. This institution does not need Congress or the Supreme Court to approve anything they decide to do in order to keep all Americans safe. Now I could go on America, but I won’t…because by now you get my point. Homeland Security has been created to be a God that all Americans can look to for protection.

Then we have Congress who is in charge of writing legislation to protect the American Citizens. However, they appear to be in a fight with the Executive Branch regarding its abuse of power. So Congress spends all day on the floor discussing legislation that will prevent the Executive Branch from protecting the American Citizens in the manner they need to be protected. Then Congress claims their focus is also to protect America. However, they only started passing legislation that would protect their jobs so they could remain in office: legislation for redistricting, lobby reform, campaign contributions reform, capital gains tax reform and of course taxation without representation…I could go on but you get my point by now don’t you? You see they are speaking a different language than the Executive Branch, yet they both are talking about protecting all the American Citizens.

Then we have the Supreme Court who is in charge of interpreting the written legislation that is written by Congress. Well, at this current time they are only listening to cases that deal with young women marring old men who die a year after they are married from old age…Anna Nicole Smith. Umm! In case you are wondering, the case that Congress presented to the Supreme Court was concerning the Executive Branch using the N.S.A. without first going through the secret courts, to eavesdrop on all Americans who are using the internet and the phones. The Supreme Court will not be hearing this case at this time. You see they are probably trying to protect the Executive Branch who wants to protect the American Citizens from Congress who is also trying to protect the American Citizens from the Executive Branch who has violated our Constitutional Rights trying to protect us all from the Terrorist. Whew!!!

Now let me try to remember how this language barrier got started. On September, 11 2001, I believe all the American Citizens, witnessed airplanes crashing into the WTC Building and later the WTC building imploded from the bottom up!! Strange. We saw people of all nations and races jumping out of windows trying to get away from the fire. Then the media stated that a plane crashed into the pentagon too. However, I never saw plane parts around the pentagon. I just saw a wall being blown out from the inside of the pentagon….strange. Later the media showed us a crashed plane site with a hole in the ground; no plane wreckage was showed by the media at the site. Umm!! Well, maybe I just do not remember seeing the plane parts. In 2005, the weather crippled the Institution of Homeland Security when hurricane Katrina came through the city of New Orleans. By the way New Orleans is my birth place. Now the Executive Branch, Congress, or the Supreme Courts has no immediate solution or immediate help for the American Citizens who still today are funding this new institution so the American Citizens can be safe from danger.

American Citizens, it appears to me that something strange is going on here with our public servants who are wearing the title of Executive Branch, Congress, and the Supreme Court. Remember Genesis 11 verse 6 at the beginning of my article? Well let me write it out for you….. “And the Lord said, Behold the people is one and they have all one language; and this they begin to do; and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.” Example: Preemptive Strike against a small nation. To answer my own question: Is there a language barrier between our public servants? Yes! We have a language barrier. It appears that all three branches of our government language have been confounded by God to the point that they cannot communicate with each other concerning protecting all of America Citizens…Ummmm!! “Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language that they may not understand one another’s speech.” Genesis 11 verse 7.

If I may give my perspective on these two scriptures it would be this: Before 9/11 all of our public servants were speaking the same language, which is why America is at war with Iraq. I guess our National symbol the Bald Eagle is a scavenger for a reason. The people who died on 9/11 and the people who died in New Orleans, hopefully, are both in a better place. We who are still alive need to get on with our lives. We are all going to die according to the Word of God and I quote “It is appointed unto mankind once to die and after that the judgment of God.” Hebrews 9 v 27. Now are you, the reader, spiritually dead as you live? I hope and pray that the people who died physically on 9/11 and in New Orleans in 2005 were spiritually alive in Christ Jesus our Lord and Savior.

American Citizens please know that accidents, sickness and disease do not cause death to the earthly body. It only interferes with the earthly body’s ability to function correctly or exist normally. Physical death is caused by our human spirit departing from our earthly body, this is sad but true. Our born again spirit being absent from our earthly body is our born again spirit being present with the Lord Jesus Christ. (2 Corinthians 5 v 8). I suggest you all read the whole chapter to get the full understanding.

We as a nation cannot continue to allow all three branches of Americas’ public servants to keep every American Citizen in a state of fear. American Citizens, come on! Let us tell our public servants again to start earning their paycheck. We elected them for public service, not so they will earn credit with their political party. We can show them what we mean by voting them all out of office. All we need to remain an American Nation, in the truest sense, is our individual self-preservation. This attitude will allows us to remain free from an oppressive government regime. There will never be an institution created by any government that will protect America from terrorist. American citizens are the government and our public servants will represent the will of the American Citizens or they will be voted out of office. We will not tolerate a language barrier!

Hollar If You Hear Me!!

In the absence of Palestinian Authority efforts to disarm and dismantle the terrorist infrastructure in accordance with signed peace agreements, Israel Tuesday gave a green light to its security forces to go on the offensive against Islamic Jihad.

IDF soldiers arrested over 50 members of the terror group during predawn raids in Judea and Samaria, less than a day after Islamic Jihad gunmen murdered an Israeli motorist in northern Samaria.

The detainees included the local Jenin-area Islamic Jihad commander, who security officials said was involved in the manufacture of rockets and in planning a series of attacks against Israeli Jews.

Israel had refrained from acting against the “Palestinian” terror groups outside of arresting “ticking bombs” for the past several months, following the announcement of a one-sided ceasefire brokered by PLO chief Mahmoud Abbas.

That ceasefire, however, was marked by unabated Arab aggression against Israel’s Jewish population, while Abbas demanded additional Israeli concessions in return for the purported truce.

Israel’s patience finally wore out Tuesday, after weeks of security officials warning Jerusalem would not sit quiet indefinitely in the face of escalating terror.

Defense Ministry Sha’ul Mofaz told Israel Radio that after months of restraint, Israel had no choice but to now go on the offensive as a result of Abbas’s continued failure to eliminate the threat of anti-Jewish terrorism as stipulated in the Road Map peace plan.

Lt. Col. Erez Winner, the IDF operations officer for Judea and Samaria, said the renewed anti-terror activity would focus on Islamic Jihad, for the time being.

“Anyone we know who is affiliated with this organization is a legitimate target,” Winner told reporters.

Following the early morning arrests, “Palestinian” terrorists in the Gaza Strip fired mortar shells and a Kassam rocket at area Jewish communities, damaging several homes and vehicles.

About the Author

Ryan Jones is Co-Editor of Jerusalem Newswire.

Clint Eastwood recently plunged into the murky political pond with his statement, “Extremism is so easy. You’ve got your position, and that’s it. It doesn’t take much thought. And when you go far enough to the right, you meet the same idiots coming around from the left.”

Is it easy to be an extremist, and is the political scale truly circular, so that the “far right” clasps hands with the “far left”? Does the left-right continuum serve as a constructive paradigm upon which society can be structured?

Today’s “extremists” are in good company: Jesus, Martin Luther, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, and Baruch Spinoza all bore this label at one time. Jan De Witt and his brother Cornelius17th Century Dutch politicianswere hacked to death by the populace, largely due to their “radical” and “unsavory” political perspective. Their crime? They were proponents of democracy. Their body parts were displayed in storefronts all over town.

Who shall we call extreme? The vigilantes who did the lynching? The shopkeepers who showcased the body parts? Or the De Witts with their pro-democracy stance?

Do “extreme” beliefs emanate from a mechanical thought process, as Eastwood suggests, rather than an intense philosophical journey? It arguably requires reflection and hypercritical analysis to defend ones theories against the cloned, echoed and mass produced opinion of the common folk; it requires conviction to risk social ostracism and other forms of retaliation.

The “approved” or popular view is more likely to be perfunctory. Why think when one can plagiarize? Why go out on a limb when one can cling onto the tree or never climb in the first place?

Eastwood may view those on the “far right” and “far left” as moralistically shrill, as manifesting a tone level of fear and anger. Perhaps this is how the “right” and “left” overlap or come full circle in his mind. But this is a gross generalization, since the “extremes” are subjective and the political continuum fallacious.

Suppose we accept the commonly accepted paradigm of a left to right political continuum, as Eastwood offers. If we define the “left” as the group that protects the voiceless, the powerless, and the forgotten, then the natural progression would be to protect the truly voiceless - animals and nature.

Nonhumans are excluded from our political system, without representation. They have no standing in court; yet corporations do. In fact, nonhumans are virtually omitted from the conversation in our anthropocentric and speciesist society.

A move “left” arguably means to move away from Democracy–which is really just a rule by the elite (humans)–to an Omniocracy (which I describe as a government of, by and for all living beings). The European Union has added nonhumans to their Constitution, as have Switzerland and Germany. New Zealand, India and Reggio Emilio, Italy have outlawed using animals in ways we normally think acceptable in the U.S. (boiling lobsters alive, keeping fish in small bowls, vivisection, etc.).

We are trailing behind other nations, but it would be difficult to sell a Constitutional amendment to our “What’s the Matter With Kansas?” country at this time. It would be easier to convince certain states. You may be thinking what would stuffing a few extra words in a state Constitution really do. Well, words are a powerful tool and an important start.

Lastly, does this move to the left spit us out on right? Probably. One could argue that traditional “right” politics prompts a gap between the rich and poor, thus culminates in the rule by a few, such as corporations. To implement policies that foster the idea that nonhuman species have value “in and of themselves,” a “top down” government or rule by a few (although not corporations) again seems required.

People are self-interested (as are all species) thus cannot be expected to vote against their desires. Legislators, however, are different (or should be) because they attain self-worth from helping others, being fair and inclusive, and consulting the “big picture.” There will naturally be conflicts of interest between species and individuals; but government’s jobin an omniocracy as in our current system– will be to mediate and arbitrate these “disputes.”

We are taught democracy is the most inclusive, just and beneficent political system in the world. It is time to re-evaluate. Successful ideas advance through three stages: first ridicule, then discussion, finally adoption. I say we begin the discussion to which Eastwood’s words have provided a starting point.

The Clint Eastwood quote is posted on Oakland Mayor Jerry Brown’s blog and is taken from Feb 28, 2005 issue of Time Magazine. Charlotte Laws explores this topic in greater depth on the blog.

Charlotte Laws, Ph.D. is a member of the Greater Valley Glen Council and the President of the League for Earth and Animal Protection (LEAP). Her website is http://www.CharlotteLaws.org

George Bush is ready to spend $7.5 billion dollars to protect the US from a disease that currently poses no danger and has so far killed no Americans, and only 62 people worldwide. Meanwhile, Bill Gates, much maligned by the media and internet geeks, is spending over $258 million in research toward Malaria, a disease which kills 1.2 million every year.

Of the $258 million that Mr. Gates is spending, $107 million will go towards accelerating the development of a Malaria vaccine. The added money could lead to the development of a vaccine within 6 years. Experts estimate that a malaria vaccine will cut the number of Malaria deaths in half. In other words, it will save 600,000 lives a year, most of them children.

Bill Gates is quoted in the Washington Post:

“It’s really a tragedy that the world has done so little to stop this disease that kills 2,000 African children every day,” Gates said in a conference call with reporters. “If those children were in rich countries, we’d have headlines, we’d take action, and we wouldn’t rest until every child was protected.”

Exactly right, Mr. Gates. So why would we spend $7.5 billion to fight a disease that maybe, someday, sorta, could possibly become a pandemic that will, at its worst, do no more damage in total than Malaria does every single year? Why would we not spend a fraction of that money to save 600,000 children every year? Some Liberal pundits would cry racism or classism, but that answer is too simplistic. The real answer is: The Media.

Quite simply, there is a media frenzy around the Bird Flu, and there isn’t a media frenzy around Malaria. Even the leaders of the world are susceptible to influence by the media, and they will spend their time, resources, and money fighting perceived threats while ignoring real, but hidden, threats.

So why is the media doing this? why is there more coverage of the Bird Flu, which has only killed 62 people, than there was of the earthquake in Pakistan, which killed tens of thousands? Because panic sells. Alarmism sells. The only thing that sells more media viewing time than a disaster, is a disaster that hasn’t happened yet.

There is hope. Eventually, people will tire of hearing about the Bird Flu, and in 6 months you won’t hear a peep about it. The Bird Flu will go the way of Anthrax letters, Ebola virus, flesh-eating bacteria, and a host of other medical disasters that never quite managed to manifest.

Terry is a Gen-X family guy with 2 step-kids and a loving, supportive wife. He frequently blogs about current events, especially if there is a scientific angle to the news item. You can read more of his writing at: Another Stupid News Blog - http://news.virtualdominion.net

All work is copyright, Terry Connors 2005

Political campaigns can be tense and stressful. There is so much to do and often not enough time to do it. If you are a candidate or campaign manager, you should not be without a button maker machine. These machines will help you with some of the most critical areas of your campaign - getting the word out, addressing issues, and rallying support. Not only will buttons help acknowledge the issues and rally support, they will do it inexpensively and that is a word that any campaign manager likes to hear.

Mass mailings and phone campaigns take time and money. Postal rates continue to go up as well as the cost of paper, printing, and labels. You need paid staff or volunteers to organize the mailing list and put the mailers together for shipping. A great percentage of these mailers will never be read or even opened. The recipient who has other more important things on his or her mind will classify these mailers as “junk mail” and toss it in the trash. However, if you and your staff are wearing buttons, you are inviting the viewer to ask you questions. This gives you one on one face time with the public to answer directly and discuss the issues important to you candidate and party.

Your volunteers are some of the most important people you will deal with in a political campaign. They give their time and efforts in order to see their candidate win the election. Buttons for your volunteers are great for inexpensive nametags. Making buttons for your volunteers with the candidate’s name, party affiliation and the date of the election will help them be identified in public. This is especially helpful if your volunteers are doing door to door campaigning or are out at a public event. Buttons are a great conversation starter and will give your volunteers an opportunity to tell people about your candidate and the issues he or she cares about.

Rallies are another great opportunity to pass out buttons. Political rallies are high excitement and these buttons with your candidate’s name and what he or she is running for can be sold at rallies and fundraising events. Speeches and debates are other events that these buttons can be worn or sold at. These buttons will help accelerate the campaign and give your candidate name recognition.

Educating the voters on the issues is a major part of any election or race. Making buttons that read “Vote No on Amendment Two” will let people know just where you stand. Getting the word out about how your candidate or party wishes to vote is important. Buttons with the date of the election and an encouragement to get out and vote is equally important. A button that reads “Vote on November 2nd” will remind everyone who sees it to vote and this will enhance the odds of your candidate’s success.

Fundraising events are a part of every campaign. Contributors to your campaign can receive buttons that say “I support John Doe”. The campaign slogan should be made into a button and either sold to raise money or given away at party meetings and fundraisers. These also make a great keepsake for the candidate and the voters.

If there are particular activist groups that support your candidate, then make buttons with their organization name stating that the organization supports your candidate. This goes along way in showing that your candidate cares about that group and its agenda. For example, a button that says “John Doe Supports Local Commerce” given out to the local businesses will encourage others with that same feeling to vote for your candidate. You can never thank your supporters enough, and having custom buttons with their group name and the election year on it will be a keepsake at the close of the election.

Urging people to vote is critical in this day and age. Elections have become closer and every vote counts. Making “I Voted” buttons to give away after voting has taken place can encourage other people to step up and be heard as well. Make sure that you have some buttons made up with the date the voting takes place and encourage your staff and volunteers to wear them. If no one votes then no one gets elected and no issues are resolved. Buttons are a great way to remind people to perform this great civic duty.

You have probably already seen buttons in the political arena. Some of the major reasons those political parties and campaigners use buttons is that they are handy to pass out, inexpensive to make, and people will wear them. Buttons get your message out, identify your support staff, and encourage the public. Be it for the presidency or the local town mayor, every candidate and political movement should have a button-making machine.

Greg Allison is the marketing director for Button Biz. Button Biz is an online distributor of button maker machines and button supplies. Each button making system includes a button maker, button parts, and circle cutter. Make round or rectangle buttons and choose from eleven different badge sizes.

The aftermath of Katrina has affected more that just New Orleans
and the surrounding gulf coast. There are huge financial
implications associated with the catastrophe, from the initial
humanitarian aid to the rebuilding and repairing needed to get
the local area back on its feet. Eight oil refineries shut down
as a result of Katrina could take many months to restart. The
Gulf Coast is a prime supplier of oil, through pipelines now
shut due to lack of power and ocean-going barges unable to load
from ports eradicated by the storm.

>From a global perspective, the loss of oil production in the
area is sending shockwaves through the world’s financial
institutions and economies. Even before hurricane Katrina’s
damage to oil production the price of fuel has increased to a
major degree. The following data compares price increases from
September 2004 to August 2005 in the United States of America
and the United Kingdom.

US Fuel Price Increases
September 2004

Unleaded: £0.28 ($0.48) per Litre
Diesel: £0.29 ($0.51) per
Litre
August 2005
Unleaded: £0.38 ($0.67) per
Litre
Diesel: £0.39 ($0.68) per Litre

UK Fuel Price Increases
September 2004

Unleaded: £0.87 ($1.59) per Litre
Diesel: £0.83 ($1.52) per
Litre
August 2005
Unleaded: £0.96 ($1.76) per
Litre
Diesel: £0.94 ($1.73) per Litre

In the United Kingdom, motorists are burdening more fuel
increases with the price of 1 litre soon to exceed £1 ($1.84).
About 65% of the price UK motorists pay goes to the government
in tax so the additional revenues generated are unlikely to
direct the government to rebalance tax levels on fuel unless the
wider economy comes under threat.

“…If it keeps on rainin’, levee’s goin’ to break
And the
water gonna come in, have no place to stay…”

When The Levee Breaks
Memphis Minnie
recording of
1929 written after the devastating Mississippi flood of 1927

My next visit to fill up my car is once again bound to force a
whimper from my wallet especially when the litre dial spins at
the same rate as the total cost dial. But as my day to day
problems range from the extra few pounds I have to pay on the
weekly fuel to what colour to paint my children’s bedrooms, I
consider myself very lucky and certainly very selfish… shame
on me!

When former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore acted
on principle and refused to adhere to a federal court order that
he considered was both unlawful and improper, he never thought
that his actions would lead to an overwhelming groundswell of
support from across the country. His stance made headlines and
brought international attention to this modern-day, David vs.
Goliath showdown. Now, the same group of political and religious
leaders that supported his actions then, are calling for Justice
Moore to get back into the political arena and run for Governor
of Alabama, where they believe his “no nonsense” approach and
strong personal convictions will clean up a state known for its
“good ole boy” politics and special interest groups.

Moore was forced off the bench in November 2003 for defying a
Federal judge’s order to remove a Ten Commandments monument from
public display in the state judicial building. The U.S. Supreme
Court refused to hear the case on appeal.

Moore struck a nerve in the nation’s psyche as evidenced by the
reactions of the public, both pro and con. Former senator, Zell
Miller, flatly stated, “Throughout recorded history, brave men
have been called on to stand take a stand–sometimes for
country, sometimes for family, sometimes for the Lord above. Roy
Moore is such a man.”

Former Ambassador to the United Nations and Presidential
candidate, Alan Keyes, went even further when he was asked about
his thoughts on Judge Moore, “There have been times in American
history when the courage or understanding of one individual
opened the door to the reform of major mistakes and injustices.
When Chief Roy Moore refused the unlawful order of a Federal
judge to remove the Ten Commandments from the Judicial Building
in Alabama, he proved himself to be such an individual. We
cannot yet know the full consequences of his principled stand .
. . but it will be profound.” There were certainly statements to
the contrary, voiced by the political left, but the ratio of
detractors versus Moore fans was unbalanced in Moore’s favor, to
say the least.

Roy Moore stood up yet again on another controversial issue when
certain special interest groups tried to impose on the citizens
of Alabama a significant additional tax called “Equity Funding,”
referred to by many as The Billion Dollar Tax increase. Judge
Roy Moore stood up to these special interest groups again when
they tried to sneak by Amendment 2 in 2004 which would have
given the courts the ability to raise taxes.

As a result of his outspoken position during speeches around the
country, quiet back room discussions about a possible run for
Alabama Governor started taking on a life of their own. A
committee was formed to draft Judge Moore for Alabama State
Governor. Judge Moore, upon hearing about the efforts of so many
people to convince him to run, expressed an interest in the
race, but is still officially undecided at this point. The
Committee is being co-chaired by former Alabama State Senator
Roy Smith of Gadsden, Alabama, and by George Hundley. George
Hundley served as Judge Moore’s bailiff and personal assistant
in the circuit court in Gadsden. The committee has been focusing
on a petition drive, with the hope that enough signatures
statewide and nationwide will successfully result in encouraging
Judge Moore to make the decision to run.

The prospect of Judge Moore running for office became a national
topic of interest when he visited the Fox studios, where he was
questioned by Sean Hannity, of the highly popular Hannity and
Combs show. Hannity asked Moore point blank about his interest
in running and this now famous dialogue ensued:

HANNITY: All right. There is a lot of talk about you running for
governor of the State of Alabama.

MOORE: There is a lot of talk. I’ve been asked many times to
run, and I am seriously considering it. I’m praying about it,
and I’ll make my decision sometime in the fall.

HANNITY: Has the door been opened for you?

MOORE: I think the door is open.

The show ended with Hannity asking Judge Moore to please come
back to the show and reveal the answer as to whether he would,
in fact, run.

For now, Moore continues to be showered by appeals by both
statewide Republican officials and national leaders to throw his
hat in the ring. He says he may decide as early as October on a
run for Governor. Meanwhile, the current Republican Governor Bob
Riley’s approval rating was low in a recent poll that showed him
running behind both Moore and ex-Governor Don Siegelman in a
2006 re-election scenario.

United States Senator, Richard Shelby (R - Alabama), who has
been a vocal supporter of Judge Moore, was very clear about
Moore when he stated, “Former Chief Justice Roy Moore has raised
critically important issues facing our country today regarding
the acknowledgement of God. He reminds Americans that we cannot
allow activist judges to continue their disregard of some of the
basic principles on which our country was founded.”

In recent days, the volume has been rising steadily from other
corners of the Republican party when Moore’s name is mentioned.
Prominent conservative writer Ann Coulter recently stated, “In
the face of all our travails, Americans can take hope that God
has given us men like Roy S. Moore.” Similar statements were
made by Oliver North, the host of “War Stories” on the Fox News
Channel, when the topic of Moore’s faith was brought up: “Roy
Moore is a proven fighter for his faith and freedom.”

The Draft Moore Campaign has taken a new turn recently as many
Moore devotees started asking about how they could help out. The
demands for a focal point for potential candidate Moore to run
grew to such a level that a web site was established to channel
the enthusiasm. The site, aptly named www.WeNeedMoore.com, is
now being visited by thousands of Moore supporters who wish to
either volunteer time or provide support in the form of
donations. The site also features an inspiring video with Moore,
which includes some very surprising twists and turns. You can
watch the video by going to www.WeWantMoore.com.

Judge Moore has often stated he is praying about his decision to
run. We believe God will answer his prayer. Please join me in
showing him our support.

Bruce Prokopets

Executive Editor

Press Direct International

www.pressdirectint
ernational.org

How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Calling the tail a leg doesn’t make it a leg. — Abraham Lincoln

Whew! I almost wrote a really long article about the Social Security System and what it means to Black folks.

Fortunately, I fell asleep while writing it just like you would have reading it. I can’t think of anything more boring then an in depth analysis of what is wrong with Social Security.

I think that one thing the under 40, Black American, internet savvy crowd already knows is that the Social Security system is in trouble and that it won’t be there for us when we retire the same way it is for our parents and grandparents. Something has to give.

One thing is definitely true, the Social Security system won’t exist in the same form and with the same level of promise that it has now.

So, with all the boring stuff out of the way, I want to say a few things about private accounts and what I think they mean for African Americans. I’ll start with the bottom line up front. I think that Social Security private accounts are a good deal for African Americans but with some very serious reservations.

First of all, a private account is the government’s attempt to add an ownership component to the system. However, in this case, your ownership rights will be severely restricted.

I can invest MY money in stocks, bonds, cash, real estate, businesses, mutual funds and any other investment vehicles I so choose. The private accounts system will likely offer a limited range of choices in nothing but paper assets like stocks, bonds and money market accounts that are managed by large Wall Street brokerages and mutual funds - the so-called experts.

Ownership with restrictions is merely the illusion of ownership. Very few things you own will have as many complex rules, restrictions and legal entanglements as private account will have attached to it.

Second, the government is forcing every American to become an investor without committing the resources to raise the level of basic financial literacy in this country. Alan Greenspan has said that basic financial literacy should be taught in our public schools.

The government did this very thing before when they created the 401K retirement system. That system has been a boon to Wall Street, Corporate America and many fellow Americans. However, the pain felt when the 401K gets hurt is not shared as freely as the benefits. Ask employees at Sun Microsystems, Enron, Martha Stewart Omni Media and other companies that have gone belly up or otherwise taken a brutal pounding in the stock market because of mismanagement and corruption.

Who will get hurt when Social Security private accounts take a beating? Will the average citizen be the last to know, as is already the case, when their private accounts hit rock bottom? Without a major, national effort to boost the financial literacy in this country, how will people react to negative news about private accounts? Will the government restrict our ability to react to negative news?

Third, what will the government do should you out-live your private account? Because the account only offers limited ownership not real ownership, I expect that we won’t be able to bet their private account at the casino on the day they retire. I do expect the withdrawals from our private accounts to be amortized over a period of time based on something like the average life expectancy. What happens if you are the lucky somebody that lives a long, healthy life to 120 years old? If your account goes broke, what will the government do for you? If you enroll in private accounts, you agree to a cut in your benefits. Will you suffer if your private account suffers?

Fourth, the new promises are just as shady as the old ones. Private accounts will salvage the system for some time but ultimately will become plagued by their own, new and different challenges that will need to be fixed by a future generation.

No one in either political party wants the truth to get out about Social Security. Socialism is a miserable failure. Taxes will ultimately have to be increased on us no what fix we decide today for the system. When and by how much are the only questions that need to be answered. Cuts and elimination of some benefits are inevitable. Retirement will become anathema in the future.

In the past 10,000 or so years of human history, retirement didn’t exist in any way, shape or form as it does today. People either got too sick to work or died. We’ve tried to change history with our current system but we can’t change humans.

If you send someone a check and tell them they don’t have to work anymore, they won’t work. There are able-bodied and able-minded senior citizens that are not working because the governments sends them a check every month regardless. The truth is, a system set up like this will collapse one day on its own because its not the way of humanity.

I think its good that my generation believes more in UFOs then in Social Security being there for us when we retire. maybe that belief will be the motivation we need to save outside of Social Security to secure our own retirement.

So, with all of these reservations, you may wonder why I think that Social Security private accounts are a good for Black Americans. The answer to that is simple math.

Simple Math Reason Number One: Black males live to an average age of 66 years old. The average Black male now collects one year of full Social Security retirement benefits. The age of full retirement for the under 40 crowd is now set at 67. Watch for proposals to raise that age even more. The average Black female has a live span of 72 years meaning that she collects 5 years of benefits. The average White male and White female have life spans of 76 and 78 years, respectively.

Personally, I would rather pass my life time of Social Security tax dollars on to my children and grandchildren then to a little, old white lady I’ve never known in my life like we do now under the current system. You may not like this truth but that is who is getting your benefits now.

Simple Math Reason Number Two: It is not hard at all for the to earn more then the 2% return on investment that Social Security provides now. A money market mutual fund is paying anywhere from 3% - 5% interest at this time. You could easily and safely earn double what Social Security offers.

Simple Math Reason Number Three: The average Black American has a net worth less then $5,000 and that is only one-tenth of the average White American. Social Security private accounts, because they are form of forced savings, will add to the net worth of Black Americans. All other Americans will see their personal wealth build also so I don’t expect that private accounts will close the racial wealth gap. I do believe that private accounts will inject much needed wealth into the accounts of African Americans and we need the boost most of all.

Also, because we don’t live as long beyond the retirement age (which I hope will one day change), more of the wealth in our private accounts will get passed to our children, helping them to build wealth. So, a legacy of wealth will begin to grow from the seeds of investment into private accounts.

Simple Math Reason Number Four: This relates to what I said about bucking human history by creating this artificially constructed, man-made system of retirement and actually believing that it will sustain us unchanged in perpetuity. The system is breaking down. We need to start taking complete ownership - and control - for our retirement security.

Partial privatization is a step in the right direction. Even if the step is one small incremental one, we must begin somewhere.
I don’t think the destitute and disabled should be left out in the cold without our help and support. I do believe that the truth needs to be told and that no one is telling it today.

So, here is what I have to say: make a plan to provide for your own financial independence, invest heavily into your own financial education, invest your money wisely, prepare for the absolute worst and hope for the absolute best.

God Bless

Bret Searles wrote the book titled “The 7 Simple Secrets to Wealth Building: An African American’s Guide to Wealth Building in the 21 st Century and Beyond” and publishes the ezine Black Wealth Now at http://www.blackwealthnow.com