Mayor, Bless the Carvalho Curve

SUBHEAD: Our mayor could simply ask HIDOT to nudge the highway centerline mauka off the beach. Why doesn't he?

  Image above: Bernard Carvalho at Saint Francis Home Care Services. From (http://www.stfrancishawaii.org/Pages/Welcome.aspx

By Juan Wilson on 10 June 2010 -

Jonathan Jay, and I, have submitted a plan to improve the alignment of the highway centerline of the highway section that passes in front of Wailua Beach. Jonathan pushed through an idea that the highway could be re-engineered to miss the beach.

I helped out with a handy reference book titled "Highway Curves" for calculating continuous curves and their tangencies. The new plan was derived from the engineering drawings of the highway created by the HIDOT's highway consultant. The match lines at both ends of of the project were left intact and all re-alignment was done within the existing 77 foot wide state highway right-of way.

The change in highway curve did not require narrowing the highway lanes or creating a variable radius curve. What the new curve achieves is allowing a 10 wide right-of-way for the bike path to exist mauka (inland) of the existing stone wall separating the beach from the existing highway. This new alignment would have zero footprint on the sand. It would also be further inland at about 14" higher elevation than the currently planned curve.

This alignment will result in less excavation and probably less disturbance of iwi (archeological human bones). This new alignment will cost no more money than recalculating the placement of pins to locate construction a few feet.

 The Garden Island reported 6/9/10 that the Native Hawaiian challenge to halt the highway widening has been dismissed (see below). The project is going ahead. Therefore, now is the time (the only time) to put this plan in action.
• The plan has been submitted to the HI DOT representative Ray McCormick in Puhi. DOT agrees that it is feasible, but does not initiate this sort of change on its own. • The plan has also been submitted to the Kauai County Council at the request of Chair Kaipo Asing. I am not aware that any action has been taken by the Council. • The plan has been submitted to Kauai Mayor Bernard Curvalho through his assistant Gary Heu. No response has been received from the mayor's office.
The mayor is the power player in this situation. That is why Jonathan titled his design effort the Carvalho Curve. We believe at this time the mayor can use his office to request of the HIDOT to follow the new curve and not force the bike path onto the sand of Wailua Beach. He can be a hero at little political cost. I suspect now that some people really do not care if the "problem" of desecrating the sand can be avoided. Why else ignore the solution.

Road widening project may proceed Image above: Waldeen K. Palmeira, of Wailua, sits near site of highway widening process. From original TGI article. Photo be Dennis Fujimoto. By Paul Curtis on 9 June 2010 in The Garden Island News - (http://thegardenisland.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_019676ee-739a-11df-8224-001cc4c03286.html) Fifth Circuit Judge Kathleen Watanabe on Tuesday dismissed a citizen challenge of the planned widening of Kuhio Highway in Wailua.
Waldeen K. Palmeira of Wailua argued state and federal authorities failed to follow their rules regarding consulting Native Hawaiian cultural practitioners before allowing the project to go forward, and that she is sure ancient Hawaiian burials exist along the road-widening route.
Watanabe said that without testimony from witnesses who have knowledge of the suspected burials, she had no choice but to grant the state Department of Transportation’s motion for summary judgment, effectively giving the project the green light to proceed and ending the legal matter unless Palmeira appeals the decision.
Palmeira and the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation had sought a preliminary injunction and summary judgment in October 2009, saying an environmental impact statement is necessary before the project should be allowed to proceed.
The state motions were to dismiss the lawsuit for lack of merit or, in the alternative, to grant summary judgment in favor of the state, either of which would effectively allow the project to proceed.
The $33 million project is planned to widen Kuhio Highway to four lanes from Kuamo‘o Road to the Kapa‘a bypass road, using federal funds that will lapse if not encumbered by Sept. 30, the end of the federal fiscal year, said William Wynhoff, state deputy attorney general representing DOT.
Palmeira asked for a continuance of the Tuesday hearing, citing her own health issues, but Watanabe denied that last-minute motion, Wynhoff objecting to the motion saying even another one-month delay would likely kill the project.
At the April hearing on the matter Palmeira fired her NHLC attorneys, and on Tuesday struggled to make her case without legal representation.
She requested the continuance to find new representation and because of her health issues.
Wynhoff said the narrow area to be used for the road-widening has already been “fully developed,” and Palmeira’s assertion that the road would be built over a graveyard “is just not so.”
“If we do find bones they’re going to be treated sensitively,” he said. “We might encounter some bones.”
Because the project is adjacent to one of the island’s busiest highways, it is not expected to significantly affect any traditional cultural practices or important cultural areas, said Wynhoff.
Palmeira disagreed, saying the area is the richest cultural and political center on the island, has been for 200 years, and is home to the only known named burial site, a place that translates from Hawaiian as “burials in the sand.”
Palmeira said that site extends from the fishponds at the old Coco Palms Resort to the ocean at Wailua Beach.
“The state is breaking the law on this one,” she said, adding that the shallow depth of the archaeological excavations conducted for the state by Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i failed to discover any human remains, known as “iwi kupuna.”
“They did not look good enough. I feel the entire process has been wrong,” Palmeira said.
Watanabe, who like Wynhoff patiently waited during most of Palmeira’s pauses due to her unfamiliarity with the pleadings bearing her name, finally scolded Palmeira for her rudeness for interrupting both Wynhoff and Watanabe repeatedly during the proceedings.
Watanabe said there was a “clear disconnect” between the written filings and Palmeira’s oral arguments, and that the state has conducted a thorough investigation across the narrow project corridor that has been a transportation route for vehicles including trains for over a century.
Use of ground-penetrating radar and other technologies revealed no bones, and neither did an environmental assessment, Watanabe said.
There are six undisputed facts which led to Watanabe’s decisions, she said:
— Summary judgment is allowed based on the facts and factors of the case;
— The state Department of Land and Natural Resources’ State Historic Preservation Division has jurisdiction over inadvertent discoveries of Native Hawaiian human remains;
— The Kaua‘i Ni‘ihau Island Burial Council has jurisdiction over known burial remains;
— The state has strict rules where graves are concerned;
— There are no known burial sites or remains in the project site, though some may be discovered during construction;
— Palmeira lacks any specific knowledge of graves in the project site, but two people Palmeira said have knowledge of graves in the project site were not present in court Tuesday and are not named or referenced in any of Palmeira’s pleadings.
If burials are discovered during construction, state laws will be followed for disposition of bones, said Watanabe.
“I do sympathize with Ms. Palmeira and what she’s trying to do, but the court has to act on matters of law,” said Watanabe, adding after making her rulings that Palmeira should work with the state Legislature to toughen burial-discovery laws.
Brennon Morioka, DOT director, has repeatedly said state officials felt the suit was without merit. DOT has met all state statutory requirements for proceeding with the project, he has said, and information contained in the state EA shows all necessary due diligence was done and statutory requirements met.
.

Audaciously Hoping

SUBHEAD: The solution to this problem is our future. This is the world’s Dunkirk and every human should be on the Gulf. If not in person, in spirit.

By Bettejo Dux on 9 June 2010 in the Garden Island News -  

 
Image above: BP oil spill with Obama "Hope" button superimposed. Digital collage by Juan Wilson.

May this incredibly brilliant, sound, sane, reasoning young man in the White House have the courage to speak the truth. To say to the world:

“Greed is about to kill this planet. What you see in the Gulf is in your backyard. I will hold responsible — and send — every greedy oil man, BP and all the others, every inept lunatic overseer of government regulations, every politician who sold his soul to Mammon and allowed this dreadful incident to happen in the Gulf, to work for the rest of their lives cleaning up the mess they made.

I think every penny they have in their fat purses, which they intend to use for drilling more wells, be used to create and build factories making alternative sources of energy — windmills, photovoltaics, hydro electric plants, whatever — that people can afford. This will put people back to work, clean up the environment, and help restore and salvage our great nation.

I will, with the power invested in me, see that this is done. I will place in receivership every oil company in America who put dollar signs first, who put the safety, health and well-being of the people of the world and our beloved country at the very bottom of their list of priorities. Many people on the Gulf — rich and poor, brown, white, black and yellow, young and old — will be affec

I have at my fingertips every bright mind in the world helping me — us — find a solution. I will bring our troops home to work with us in this sad venture. Wars run on their sleek oil bellies and that oil and that young energy will also be put to work creating new jobs. Peace and prosperity, an American right, is the goal here. We may not succeed but no one in this country, or the world, will be able to say we didn’t try.

If you chose to pray, pray. If you chose to hope, hope. If you chose to work and help, work and help. The solution to this problem is our future. This is the world’s Dunkirk and every human being who loves mankind and planet earth will be on the Gulf. If not in person, in spirit and thought and prayer. Me and my staff, too.”

I’m sure President Obama will be able to say this better than I. I hope, audaciously, he says it.
.

NOAA & BP Worst Case Scenario

SUBHEAD: When Brice-O'Hara praised "the professionalism of our partner, BP," Napolitano quickly barked, "They are not our partner! Image above: Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano listens as USGS Thad Allen speaks at podium.

[Editor's Note: The following is an excerpt from a long and excellent article on the BP disaster in the Gulf titled "The Spill, The Scandel and the President". This section of the piece deals with the original NOAA worst case estimate of the spill versus the BP public relations number. Again, USCG SuperFerry Unified Command Sally Brice-O'Hare plays bit part in propping up the Empire]

By Tim Dickenson on 8 June 2010 in Rolling Stone - (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/111965?RS_show_page=0)

Within hours, the government assembled a response team at the "war room" of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration in Seattle. The scene, captured by a NOAA cameraman and briefly posted on the agency's website, provides remarkable insight into the government's engagement during the earliest hours of the catastrophe, and, more troubling, the role of top administration figures in downplaying its horrific scope.

At a conference table, nearly a dozen scientists gather around a map of the Gulf. Joshua Slater, a commissioned NOAA officer dressed in his uniform, runs the show. "So far we've created a trajectory [of the slick] that was passed up the chain of command to the Coast Guard and eventually to the president showing where the oil might go," he tells the assembled team. BP's remote operated sub, he adds, "was unsuccessful in activating the blowout preventers, so we're gearing up right now."

An NOAA expert on oil disasters jumps in: "I think we need to be prepared for it to be the spill of the decade."

Written on a whiteboard at the front of the room is the government's initial, worst-case estimate of the size of the spill. While the figure is dramatically higher than any official estimate issued by BP or the government, it is in line with the high-end calculations by scientists who have monitored the spill.

"Estm: 64k - 110k bbls/Day."

The equivalent of up to three Exxon Valdez spills gushing into the Gulf of Mexico every week. Damningly, the whiteboard also documents the disconnect between what the government suspected to be the magnitude of the disaster and the far lower estimates it was feeding to the public. Written below the federal estimate are the words, "300,000 gal/day reported on CNN." Appearing on the network that same day on a video feed from the Gulf, Coast Guard Rear Adm. Mary Landry insisted that the government had no figure. "We do not have an estimate of the amount of crude emanating from the wellhead," she said.

Later in the video, a voice on speakerphone with a heavy Southern accent reveals that government scientists were concerned from the very beginning about underwater plumes of oil – a reality that NOAA administrator Jane Lubchenco and BP executives are still seeking to downplay. "They weren't sure how that oil was going to react once it was spilled," the voice says. "Whether it was going to rise, or form layers and start twisting around." The government, in short, knew from the start that surface measurements of the oil slick – on which it would premise its absurdly low estimate of 5,000 barrels a day – were likely to be unreliable.

By that evening, the White House was gearing up for an urgent response. The president convened an emergency meeting in the Oval Office with Adm. Thad Allen, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and top White House deputies Rahm Emanuel, Carol Browner and Larry Summers. Obama forcefully instructed his team that the response to the oil spill should be treated as a "number-one priority."

But then the fog of war set in. The following day, the Coast Guard – relying on assurances from BP – declared that the spill appeared to be limited to oil that was stored aboard the sunken rig. With a worst-case crisis seemingly averted, Obama checked out, heading off for a long weekend in Asheville, North Carolina, where he and the first lady would stop for ribs at a barbecue joint called 12 Bones Smokehouse before checking into the Grove Park Inn, a golf resort and spa. Asked whether the spill would hamper the president's offshore drilling agenda, spokesman Gibbs made light of the disaster. "I don't honestly think it opens up a whole new series of questions," he said. "I doubt this is the first accident that has happened, and I doubt it will be the last."

The next day, April 24th, Landry told reporters that leaks had been discovered in the riser pipe and estimated the flow at 1,000 barrels a day. "This is a very serious spill," she said. Over the next five days, the administration took significant steps to deal with the spill, but the effort fell far short of what was needed to tackle a crisis that BP was already privately estimating could be as catastrophic as 14,000 barrels a day. A Joint Information Center – a strange partnership involving BP, the Coast Guard and MMS – was set up in Louisiana. Senior officials met with BP CEO Tony Hayward to "receive briefings on the company efforts to stop the flow." The Navy opened a base in Florida as a staging area for BP's cleanup work. Salazar ordered inspections for rigs throughout the Gulf and visited BP's command center in Houston. Napolitano began an investigation into the disaster.

The president himself was occupied elsewhere. After returning from his vacation, Obama spent Monday, April 26th palling around with Derek Jeter and the New York Yankees, congratulating them on their World Series victory. He later took time to chat with the president of Honduras. When he put in a call to Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi, it was to talk about tornadoes that had caused damage in that state, with only a brief mention of the oil spill. On Tuesday the 27th, Obama visited a wind-turbine plant in Iowa. Wednesday the 28th, he toured a biofuels refinery in Missouri and talked up financial reform in Quincy, Illinois. He didn't mention the oil spill or the Gulf.

That evening, administration officials received news that – to judge from their subsequent response – scared the shit out of them. "The following is not public," a confidential NOAA advisory stressed. "Two additional release points were found today in the tangled riser. If the riser pipe deteriorates further, the flow could become unchecked, resulting in a release volume an order of magnitude higher than previously thought. There is no official change in the volume released but the [Coast Guard] is no longer stating that the release rate is 1,000 barrels a day. Instead they are saying that they are preparing for a worst-case release and bringing all assets to bear."

Standing before the cameras, a visibly shaken Landry bumbled through the reading of a press release. Although BP continued to believe its estimate of 1,000 barrels a day, she said, "NOAA experts believe the output could be as much as 5,000 barrels." The remarks established, for the first time, a figure that both BP and the government would stick to long past its sell-by date.

After he was briefed that evening, Obama told his deputies to contact the Pentagon. The following day, Napolitano declared the BP disaster, which was now approaching the size of Puerto Rico, an "Oil Spill of National Significance" – the designation required to draw on regional resources and to appoint an incident commander to coordinate a federal response. It had taken a full week after Deepwater Horizon exploded for the government to become fully engaged – a critical lapse that allowed the crisis to spiral out of control.

The White House press office organized a show of overwhelming force, with Gibbs convening Browner, Napolitano, Deputy Interior Secretary David Hayes, EPA chief Lisa Jackson and Coast Guard Rear Adm. Sally Brice-O'Hara for a single press conference on April 29th. Though clearly meant to signal engagement, the all-star crew didn't have their message straight. When Brice-O'Hara praised "the professionalism of our partner, BP," Napolitano quickly barked, "They are not our partner! They are not our partner!" For her part, Napolitano revealed that she didn't know whether the Defense Department possessed any assets that could help contain the spill, and referred vaguely to "whatever methodologies" BP was using to seal the well.

Instead of seizing the reins, the Obama administration cast itself in a supporting role, insisting that BP was responsible for cleaning up the mess. "When you say the company is responsible and the government has oversight," a reporter asked Gibbs on May 3rd, "does that mean that the government is ultimately in charge of the cleanup?" Gibbs was blunt: "No," he insisted, "the responsible party is BP." In fact, the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan – the federal regulations that lay out the command-and-control responsibilities for cleaning up an oil spill – makes clear that an oil company like BP cannot be left in charge of such a serious disaster. The plan plainly states that the government must "direct all federal, state or private actions" to clean up a spill "where a discharge or threat of discharge poses a substantial threat to the public health or welfare of the United States."

"The government is in a situation where it's required to be in charge," says William Funk, a professor of environmental and administrative law at Lewis and Clark College who previously worked as a staff attorney in the Justice Department.

What's more, the administration failed to ensure that BP was prepared to respond to the mess on the surface, where a lack of ships and equipment has left more than 100 miles of the coast – including vast stretches of fragile marshlands – covered in crude. According to MMS regulations, the agency is supposed to "inspect the stockpiles of industry's equipment for the containment and cleanup of oil spills." In BP's case, the agency should have made sure the company was prepared to clean up a spill of 250,000 barrels a day. But when Rolling Stone asked MMS whether BP had the required containment equipment on hand, the agency's head of public affairs in the Gulf replied, "I am not clear if MMS has the info that you are requesting."

The effect of leaving BP in charge of capping the well, says a scientist involved in the government side of the effort, has been "like a drunk driver getting into a car wreck and then helping the police with the accident investigation." Indeed, the administration has seemed oddly untroubled about leaving the Gulf's fate in the hands of a repeat criminal offender, and uncurious about the crimes that may have been committed leading up to the initial sinking of the rig. The Obama Justice Department took more than 40 days after the initial blast killed 11 workers to announce it was opening a criminal probe.

From the start, the administration has seemed intent on allowing BP to operate in near-total secrecy. Much of what the public knows about the crisis it owes to Rep. Ed Markey, who chairs the House Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment. Under pressure from Markey, BP was forced to release footage of the gusher, admit that its early estimates put the leak as high as 14,000 barrels a day and post a live feed of its undersea operations on the Internet – video that administration officials had possessed from the earliest days of the disaster. "We cannot trust BP," Markey said. "It's clear they have been hiding the actual consequences of this spill."

See also: Ea O Ka Aina: NOAA Insider Vents on Oil Spill 6/4/10 Ea O Ka Aina: EPA Going after BP? 5/22/10 Ea O Ka Aina: Gulf Spill 70,000 Barrels a Day 5/13/10

.

BP Spilling 100K Barrels a Day

SUBHEAD: NASA scientist estimates oil well may be spewing 20 times British Petroleum's guess.

Image above: BP illustration of blownout Deepwater Horizon well disaster site. From (http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t118912.html).

Interview by Amy Goodman on 9 June 2010 for Democracy Now - (http://www.democracynow.org/2010/6/9/scientist_bp_well_could_be_leaking)

On Tuesday, BP and government officials claim that BP’s new cap system has collected over 51,000 barrels of oil since Friday. Tony Hayward has said he is hopeful the new measures would soon contain a major portion of the oil gushing out of the ruptured well, but scientist Ira Leifer says the oil may be gushing out at a rate of more than 100,000 barrels a day, a number that BP once called its worst-case scenario. Leifer is a researcher in the Marine Science Institute at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and a member of the government’s Flow Rate Technical Group.

AMY GOODMAN: The government has confirmed that plumes of dispersed oil from BP’s leaking well are spreading far beneath the surface in the Gulf of Mexico. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said some of the most toxic components of the oil are not necessarily rising to the surface, but are drifting through deep water in plumes that stretch some fifty miles from the gushing well. The admission by the government agency confirms what scientists have been warning for weeks and renews concerns about the catastrophic impact of the oil on marine life. Last week, BP CEO Tony Hayward had declared, quote, "The oil is on the surface. There aren’t any plumes."

Meanwhile, Tuesday, BP and government officials claimed BP’s new cap system has collected over 51,000 barrels of oil since Friday. On Sunday, Tony Hayward told the BBC he’s hopeful the new measures would soon contain a major portion of the oil gushing out of the ruptured well.

    TONY HAYWARD: As we speak, the containment cap is producing around 10,000 barrels of oil a day to the surface, which is being processed on the surface when we take in—

    ANDREW MARR: So what sort of proportion is that of coming out?

    TONY HAYWARD: At the moment, it’s difficult to say, but we would expect it to be the majority, probably the vast majority of the oil.

    ANDREW MARR: So you think this cap will get most of the oil?

    TONY HAYWARD: Well, that is our hope. We are optimizing the operation. We have a further containment system to implement in the course of this coming week, which will be in place by next weekend. So when those two are in place, we would very much hope to be containing the vast majority of the oil.

AMY GOODMAN: But a member of the government panel determining the size of the spill says 10,000 barrels of oil a day could only be a fraction of the total amount of oil spewing out of the BP’s blown-out well. Scientist Ira Leifer says the oil may be gushing out at a rate of more than 100,000 barrels a day, a number BP once called its worst-case scenario.

For more, Ira Leifer joins us now on the phone from California. He’s a researcher in the Marine Science Institute at the University of California, Santa Barbara, a member of the government’s Flow Rate Technical Group.

We welcome you to Democracy Now!, Professor Leifer. Dr. Leifer, explain what we are not hearing from the government or from BP.

IRA LEIFER: Good morning, Amy, and it’s a pleasure to be on Democracy Now! I’ve been a longtime fan and listener.

The flow rates—we’ve now been provided some good data, which has been very difficult to come from before. And this data we’re analyzing, in its absence, what I pointed out is that there’s no reason to disbelieve BP’s worst case and that it could be very large, in the 100,000-plus range, for a freely flowing pipe, which it clearly appears to be. Now, we’re going to find out what the flow rate is, at least as best as we can with the data that we’ve been given.

But I’d like to point out that this is not scientific data that was collected to figure out how much flow, but this is actually data that was just from monitoring, which we’re going to try to use, and that means there’s going to be larger uncertainties than I think anyone would like. And in particular, these uncertainties mean that the ability to, as Tony Hayward suggests, to hopefully contain, we won’t be able to know as precisely as people would like to know whether this is going to happen, whether we will be able to contain the oil coming, gushing into the Gulf, or whether in fact we’ll be able to do this safely. And so, one of the things that I’ve been proposing and other scientists have proposed is to actually measure the flow using available techniques, so that any activities that go into the future can be done safely.

AMY GOODMAN: So explain again what you think the numbers are and this whole idea of of the US government using the lower estimates, the lower end of the scale, and never mentioning that that was just on the spectrum and that there’s a higher end, as well.

IRA LEIFER: Somehow there was a miscommunication, and the report that we had written, which said, based on the data, we can only come up with a lower estimate—the data was such low quality, we don’t know what the upper estimate is—somehow that was miscommunicated and released as the full range. And immediately, the University of California put a copy of the original document on our website to make it available for everyone to see and compare. And within a relatively short time, many of the statements coming out of the administration, some of them, began to reflect the new—the correct interpretation, which was what we had said.

But the other thing, and this is one of the issues I’d like to try to clarify with the audience, this is not—it’s not a pipe coming out of a big tank. It’s a very complex geologic system underneath. And it’s also being affected by activities of BP. So the flow today is not necessarily the flow tomorrow. And it’s hard to speak of a precise number, like this is the flow. So, for example, we have, from previously, forty-five minutes of video from BP, and from that, we were able to estimate—and it should be released very soon—what our range of flows is. But that only reflects that forty-five minutes.

We do not know what was happening five minutes before; we do not know what was happening five minutes afterwards. And this is—and worse is that from looking at the satellite imagery of the evolution of this oil slick strongly suggests that the emission rate has been increasing since the incident occurred. And one of the things that of course has been happening is that various efforts to attempt to stop the spill could easily have had the effect of allowing greater oil to come in. So what I’m trying to say is, this is—it’s a moving target, and we’re trying to actually even keep up so that the next strategies are appropriate.

AMY GOODMAN: So, the lower-bound range, 12,000 to 25,000 barrels of oil a day, the higher range, 100,000 barrels a day, that’s more than four million gallons a day, Ira Leifer?

IRA LEIFER: It is in that range. And while there is no way to say for sure that the system is in fact dumping that much oil into the Gulf, from a geologic point of view, from a freely flowing pipe, there’s no reason it could not. This reservoir is massive, and it could easily flow that kind of oil for the next twenty or thirty years, if it was left to go unattended. So the amount of oil that could end up in the environment if measures are not successful is at what I would call unimaginable.

AMY GOODMAN: Could they just bomb the hole, bomb the hole where the oil is gushing out?

IRA LEIFER: One of the concerns, which has been released, and so I can actually talk about, but there is concern that the rock structure surrounding the pipe is not strong and could, in fact, give out. And for—I guess many of your very long-term listeners might remember, but in 1969, something like that happened here in Santa Barbara, where the oil, instead of coming up the pipe, went through the seabed and the rocks and came out of the seabed in many different areas.

It’s a much harder problem, you know, to do and to solve, because you don’t have a single pipe kind of seal. So one of the very big concerns of such a suggestion is that if that damaged the rock structure around the well pipe, the oil could come right through the seabed, and instead of a leak from a single point, we could have hundreds and hundreds of small leaks spread out over a large area, moving around. Sealing those in 5,000 feet of water, making a cement pad, is so much harder.

AMY GOODMAN: Why is only BP monitoring the spill’s size? What aren’t you, the scientists?

IRA LEIFER: I think that’s an excellent question. And this is one of the areas that I and other team members have indicated, if we are to learn from this oil spill, so that when there is another one, because the reality is that you can’t engineer accidents away. There will be accidents, no matter how much we try to prevent them. And the key, of course, is that when there is an accident, you don’t let the damage occur.

You keep the passenger in the automobile safe. You keep the ecosystem safe. And the scientists have not been able to come in and actually make the measurements so that we can learn from what happened, so that when there is another accident somewhere on the planet, the best science and technology can protect the ecosystem, and we would be talking about a small, but still horrible, spill rather than the very large one that we’re currently faced, where we don’t seem to have any good idea as to really how to stop it.

AMY GOODMAN: Has the US advanced in how it deals with these spills from decades ago?

IRA LEIFER: So, the answer to that is that the advancement has been painfully slow. During the event of a spill, typically, as we’re seeing now, the scientists are kept away. We have to stop the spill right away; we don’t have time to let the scientists come in and take a look. We scientists will come in after the fact, much later. There’s government support for a few years, and then it completely dries up. And little bits of research still continue, and new developments are made; however, these tend not to be implemented.

So there are new technologies available that are—been developed, some of them with government money, but the industry has not done what they needed to do, which is continuously upgrade their boom systems, their monitoring system to the latest technology, so that when an accident like this occurs, they have the latest technology. I think this latest technology we have today will be available for the next accident, but we’ll be twenty years late at that point, too.

AMY GOODMAN: Isn’t it just—not just the industry’s fault? I mean, it’s up to the government to require this. The idea that both BP and the government were saying, "We couldn’t have foreseen this," isn’t that exactly what the government should be demanding of these oil companies doing deep offshore drilling, is "What is the catastrophe scenario, and how are you going to deal with it?"

IRA LEIFER: That is exactly what the regulatory regime is supposed to ensure, and clearly has fell down in that regard in this case. But I do think this is one of the areas where, from industry’s point of view, it’s in their interest. I mean, BP is not going to come out of the current event with a big profit margin because they cut short on safety. They’re going to be feeling a lot of pain for a long time, as President Obama has indicated that he will ensure. And I think that particular bottom line of pain that they’re feeling is also a good wakeup call and incentive for safety to be brought to the forefront on industry and to have the support of government and activists and so on.

AMY GOODMAN: Dr. Leifer, we have to break. Before we do, though, explain your position in monitoring the oil flow and your key role in this oil spill in the monitoring of it.

IRA LEIFER: So, right now I would have to say—well, first off, we’re not monitoring anything. BP is providing video that they have—are collecting. And currently they seem to be quite forthcoming. Previously they were selecting the video for us to analyze, which meant that one could say BP was handing us what they want us to monitor. However, from the point of view, what there really should be at these kind of sites is some acoustic methods, whether it’s sonar or passive listening devices, or other approaches that continuously are monitoring and waiting for something to happen and then would provide a nonstop, steady data stream, so we could actually learn from what happens. If I have time just to say really quickly, these things, they’re not steady states. They belch. They have large eruptions. The blowout is kind of an example. You have to continuously monitor it to see what happens when you’re not watching. • Dr. Ira Leifer is s researcher in the Marine Science Institute at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and the chief mission coordinating scientist on the NASA airborne response to the Gulf oil spill. .

End of World May 21st 2011

SUBHEAD: Christian group's biblical Armageddon must be taught alongside scientists' Global Warming.

By Justin Berton on 1 January 2010 for San Francisco Chronicle -  
(http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-01-01/bay-area/17466332_1_east-bay-bay-area-first-time-camping)

  
Image above: Grade school project depicts end of world according to new ruling on church and state. From Onion News Network video below.  
 
Harold Camping lets out a hearty chuckle when he considers the people who believe the world will end in 2012.

"That date has not one stitch of biblical authority," Camping says from the Oakland office where he runs Family Radio, an evangelical station that reaches listeners around the world. "It's like a fairy tale."

The real date for the end of times, he says, is in 2011.

The Mayans and the recent Hollywood movie "2012" have put the apocalypse in the popular mind this year, but Camping has been at this business for a long time. And while Armageddon is pop science or big-screen entertainment to many, Camping has followers from the Bay Area to China.
Harold Camping lets out a hearty chuckle when he considers the people who believe the world will end in 2012.

"That date has not one stitch of biblical authority," Camping says from the Oakland office where he runs Family Radio, an evangelical station that reaches listeners around the world. "It's like a fairy tale."
The real date for the end of times, he says, is in 2011.

The Mayans and the recent Hollywood movie "2012" have put the apocalypse in the popular mind this year, but Camping has been at this business for a long time. And while Armageddon is pop science or big-screen entertainment to many, Camping has followers from the Bay Area to China.

Camping, 88, has scrutinized the Bible for almost 70 years and says he has developed a mathematical system to interpret prophecies hidden within the Good Book. One night a few years ago, Camping, a civil engineer by trade, crunched the numbers and was stunned at what he'd found: The world will end May 21, 2011.


Video above: Preceded by advertisement. Student will learn how to interpret climate data, sings of Antichrist. From (http://www.theonion.com/video/christian-groups-biblical-armageddon-must-be-taugh,17491)
 
This is not the first time Camping has made a bold prediction about Judgment Day.

On Sept. 6, 1994, dozens of Camping's believers gathered inside Alameda's Veterans Memorial Building to await the return of Christ, an event Camping had promised for two years. Followers dressed children in their Sunday best and held Bibles open-faced toward heaven.

But the world did not end. Camping allowed that he may have made a mathematical error. He spent the next decade running new calculations, as well as overseeing a media company that has grown significantly in size and reach.

"We are now translated into 48 languages and have been transmitting into China on an AM station without getting jammed once," Camping said. "How can that happen without God's mercy?"

His office is flanked by satellite dishes in the parking lot that transmit his talk show, "Open Forum." In the Bay Area, he's heard on 610 AM, KEAR. Camping says his company owns about 55 stations in the United States alone, and that his message arrives on every continent.

'I'm looking forward to it'

Employees at the Oakland office run printing presses that publish Camping's pamphlets and books, and some wear T-shirts that read, "May 21, 2011." They're happy to talk about the day they believe their souls will be retrieved by Christ.

"I'm looking forward to it," said Ted Solomon, 60, who started listening to Camping in 1997. He's worked at Family Radio since 2004, making sure international translators properly dictate Camping's sermons.

"This world may have had an attraction to me at one time," Solomon said. "But now it's definitely lost its appeal."

Camping is a frail-looking man, and his voice is low and deep, but it can rise to dramatic peaks with a preacher's flair.

As a young man, he owned an East Bay construction business but longed to work as a servant of God. So he hit the books.

"Because I was an engineer, I was very interested in the numbers," he said. "I'd wonder, 'Why did God put this number in, or that number in?' It was not a question of unbelief, it was a question of, 'There must be a reason for it.' "

Code-breaking phenomenon

Camping is not the only man to see truths in the Bible hidden in the numbers. In the late 1990s, a code-breaking phenomenon took off, led by "The Bible Code," written by former Washington Post journalist Michael Drosnin.

Drosnin developed a technique that revealed prophecies within the Bible's text. A handful of biblical scholars have supported Drosnin's theory, lending it an air of legitimacy, and just as many scholars have decried it as farce.

One of Drosnin's more well-known findings is that a meteor will strike Earth in 2012, the same year some people believe the Mayan calendar marks the end of times, and the same year the "2012" action movie surmised the Earth's crust will destabilize and kill most humans.

Meaning in numbers

By Camping's understanding, the Bible was dictated by God and every word and number carries a spiritual significance. He noticed that particular numbers appeared in the Bible at the same time particular themes are discussed.

The number 5, Camping concluded, equals "atonement." Ten is "completeness." Seventeen means "heaven." Camping patiently explained how he reached his conclusion for May 21, 2011.

"Christ hung on the cross April 1, 33 A.D.," he began. "Now go to April 1 of 2011 A.D., and that's 1,978 years."

Camping then multiplied 1,978 by 365.2422 days - the number of days in each solar year, not to be confused with a calendar year.

Next, Camping noted that April 1 to May 21 encompasses 51 days. Add 51 to the sum of previous multiplication total, and it equals 722,500.

Camping realized that (5 x 10 x 17) x (5 x 10 x 17) = 722,500.

Or put into words: (Atonement x Completeness x Heaven), squared.

"Five times 10 times 17 is telling you a story," Camping said. "It's the story from the time Christ made payment for your sins until you're completely saved.

"I tell ya, I just about fell off my chair when I realized that," Camping said.


.

Under the BP Oil Spill

SUBHEAD: Reporter dives below slick to witness its impact, and interviews offshore tower scubadivers. Image above: Rich Matthews in wetsuit dives into BP oil slick in Gulf of Mexico. From article. By Rich Matthews on 9 June 2010 for Huffington Post - (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/09/gulf-oil-spill-dive-repor_n_605582.html) Some 40 miles out into the Gulf Of Mexico, I jump off the boat into the thickest patch of red oil I've ever seen. I open my eyes and realize my mask is already smeared. I can't see anything and we're just five seconds into the dive.

Dropping beneath the surface the only thing I see is oil. To the left, right, up and down – it sits on top of the water in giant pools, and hangs suspended fifteen feet beneath the surface in softball sized blobs. There is nothing alive under the slick, although I see a dead jellyfish and handful of small bait fish.

I'm alone because the other divers with me wouldn't get in the water without Hazmat suits on, and with my mask oiled over and the water already dark, I don't dive deep.

It's quiet, and to be honest scary, extremely low visibility. I spend just 10 minutes swimming around taking pictures, taking video. I want people to see the spill in a new way, a way they haven't yet.

I also want to get out of the water. Badly.

Video above: Associated Press film by Rich Matthews reporting on effects of spill under water. From (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGX7krQYI_4).

I make my way to the back of the boat unaware of just how covered I am. To be honest, I look a little like one of those poor pelicans we've all been seeing for days now. The oil is so thick and sticky, almost like a cake batter. It does not wipe off. You have to scrape it off, in layers until you finally get close to the skin. Then you pour on some Dawn dishwashing soap and scrub. I think to myself: No fish, no bird, no turtle would ever be able to clean this off of themselves. If any animal, any were to end up in this same puddle there is almost no way they could escape.

The cleaning process goes on for half an hour before the captain will even think about letting me back in the boat. I'm clean, so I stand up. But the bottoms of my feet still had oil, and I fall back in the water. The process starts again. Another 30 minutes of cleaning and finally I'm ready to step into the boat.

Ironic Replay of Exudus?

SUBHEAD: The recent attack by Israel on the ship Mavi Mamarra, heading to Gaza, may backfire like attack on Exodus.

Image above: The British Navy seized the ship Exodus, and deported all its passengers back to Europe. Extensive media coverage of the human ordeal, however, soon forced the British to find a better solution. From (http://ahoovati.multiply.com/journal/item/317).

By Uri Avnery on 6 May 2010 in Avnery News - (http://www.avnery-news.co.il/english/index.html)

On the high seas, outside territorial waters, the ship was stopped by the navy. The commandos stormed it. Hundreds of people on the deck resisted, the soldiers used force. Some of the passengers were killed, scores injured. The ship was brought into harbor, the passengers were taken off by force. The world saw them walking on the quay, men and women, young and old, all of them worn out, one after another, each being marched between two soldiers…

The ship was called “Exodus 1947”. It left France in the hope of breaking the British blockade, which was imposed to prevent ships loaded with Holocaust survivors from reaching the shores of Palestine. If it had been allowed to reach the country, the illegal immigrants would have come ashore and the British would have sent them to detention camps in Cyprus, as they had done before. Nobody would have taken any notice of the episode for more than two days.

But the person in charge was Ernest Bevin, a Labour Party leader, an arrogant, rude and power-loving British minister. He was not about to let a bunch of Jews dictate to him. He decided to teach them a lesson the entire world would witness. “This is a provocation!” he exclaimed, and of course he was right. The main aim was indeed to create a provocation, in order to draw the eyes of the world to the British blockade.

What followed is well known: the episode dragged on and on, one stupidity led to another, the whole world sympathized with the passengers. But the British did not give in and paid the price. A heavy price.

Many believe that the “Exodus” incident was the turning point in the struggle for the creation of the State of Israel. Britain collapsed under the weight of international condemnation and decided to give up its mandate over Palestine. There were, of course, many more weighty reasons for this decision, but the “Exodus” proved to be the straw that broke the camel’s back.

I AM not the only one who was reminded of this episode this week. Actually, it was almost impossible not to be reminded of it, especially for those of us who lived in Palestine at the time and witnessed it.

There are, of course, important differences. Then the passengers were Holocaust survivors, this time they were peace activists from all over the world. But then and now the world saw heavily armed soldiers brutally attack unarmed passengers, who resist with everything that comes to hand, sticks and bare hands. Then and now it happened on the high seas – 40 km from the shore then, 65 km now.

In retrospect, the British behavior throughout the affair seems incredibly stupid. But Bevin was no fool, and the British officers who commanded the action were not nincompoops. After all, they had just finished a World War on the winning side.

If they behaved with complete folly from beginning to end, it was the result of arrogance, insensitivity and boundless contempt for world public opinion.

Ehud Barak is the Israeli Bevin. He is not a fool, either, nor are our top brass. But they are responsible for a chain of acts of folly, the disastrous implications of which are hard to assess. Former minister and present commentator Yossi Sarid called the ministerial “committee of seven”, which decides on security matters, “seven idiots” – and I must protest. It is an insult to idiots.

THE PREPARATIONS for the flotilla went on for more than a year. Hundreds of e-mail messages went back and forth. I myself received many dozens. There was no secret. Everything was out in the open.

There was a lot of time for all our political and military institutions to prepare for the approach of the ships. The politician consulted. The soldiers trained. The diplomats reported. The intelligence people did their job.

Nothing helped. All the decisions were wrong from the first moment to this moment. And it’s not yet the end.

The idea of a flotilla as a means to break the blockade borders on genius. It placed the Israeli government on the horns of a dilemma – the choice between several alternatives, all of them bad. Every general hopes to get his opponent into such a situation.

The alternatives were:

To let the flotilla reach Gaza without hindrance. The cabinet secretary supported this option. That would have led to the end of the blockade, because after this flotilla more and larger ones would have come.

To stop the ships in territorial waters, inspect their cargo and make sure they were not carrying weapons or “terrorists”, then let them continue on their way. That would have aroused some vague protests in the world but upheld the principle of a blockade.

To capture them on the high seas and bring them to Ashdod, risking a face-to-face battle with activists on board.

As our governments have always done, when faced with the choice between several bad alternatives, the Netanyahu government chose the worst.

Anyone who followed the preparations as reported in the media could have foreseen that they would lead to people being killed and injured. One does not storm a Turkish ship and expect cute little girls to present one with flowers. The Turks are not known as people who give in easily.

The orders given to the forces and made public included the three fateful words: “at any cost”. Every soldier knows what these three terrible words mean. Moreover, on the list of objectives, the consideration for the passengers appeared only in third place, after safeguarding the safety of the soldiers and fulfilling the task.

If Binyamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak, the Chief of Staff and the commander of the navy did not understand that this would lead to killing and wounding people, then it must be concluded - even by those who were reluctant to consider this until now – that they are grossly incompetent. They must be told, in the immortal words of Oliver Cromwell to Parliament: “You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately... Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!”

THIS EVENT points again to one of the most serious aspects of the situation: we live in a bubble, in a kind of mental ghetto, which cuts us off and prevents us from seeing another reality, the one perceived by the rest of the world. A psychiatrist might judge this to be the symptom of a severe mental problem.

The propaganda of the government and the army tells a simple story: our heroic soldiers, determined and sensitive, the elite of the elite, descended on the ship in order “to talk” and were attacked by a wild and violent crowd. Official spokesmen repeated again and again the word “lynching”.

On the first day, almost all the Israeli media accepted this. After all, it is clear that we, the Jews, are the victims. Always. That applies to Jewish soldiers, too. True, we storm a foreign ship at sea, but turn at once into victims who have no choice but to defend ourselves against violent and incited anti-Semites.

It is impossible not to be reminded of the classic Jewish joke about the Jewish mother in Russia taking leave of her son, who has been called up to serve the Czar in the war against Turkey. “Don’t overexert yourself’” she implores him, “Kill a Turk and rest. Kill another Turk and rest again…”

“But mother,” the son interrupts, “What if the Turk kills me?”

“You?” exclaims the mother, “But why? What have you done to him?”

To any normal person, this may sound crazy. Heavily armed soldiers of an elite commando unit board a ship on the high seas in the middle of the night, from the sea and from the air – and they are the victims?

But there is a grain of truth there: they are the victims of arrogant and incompetent commanders, irresponsible politicians and the media fed by them. And, actually, of the Israeli public, since most of the people voted for this government or for the opposition, which is no different.

The “Exodus” affair was repeated, but with a change of roles. Now we are the British.

Somewhere, a new Leon Uris is planning to write his next book, “Exodus 2010”. A new Otto Preminger is planning a film that will become a blockbuster. A new Paul Newman will star in it – after all, there is no shortage of talented Turkish actors.

MORE THAN 200 years ago, Thomas Jefferson declared that every nation must act with a “decent respect to the opinions of mankind”. Israeli leaders have never accepted the wisdom of this maxim. They adhere to the dictum of David Ben-Gurion: “It is not important what the Gentiles say, it is important what the Jews do.” Perhaps he assumed that the Jews would not act foolishly.

Making enemies of the Turks is more than foolish. For decades, Turkey has been our closest ally in the region, much more close than is generally known. Turkey could play, in the future, an important role as a mediator between Israel and the Arab-Muslim world, between Israel and Syria, and, yes, even between Israel and Iran. Perhaps we have succeeded now in uniting the Turkish people against us – and some say that this is the only matter on which the Turks are now united.

This is Chapter 2 of “Cast Lead”. Then we aroused most countries in the world against us, shocked our few friends and gladdened our enemies. Now we have done it again, and perhaps with even greater success. World public opinion is turning against us.

This is a slow process. It resembles the accumulation of water behind a dam. The water rises slowly, quietly, and the change is hardly noticeable. But when it reaches a critical level, the dam bursts and the disaster is upon us. We are steadily approaching this point.

“Kill a Turk and rest,” the mother says in the joke. Our government does not even rest. It seems that they will not stop until they have made enemies of the last of our friends.

See also: Ea O Ka Aina: Attack on Mavi Mamarra 6/6/10

.

Salute to Helen Thomas

SUBHEAD: She started with JFK, survived Bush, but not Obama. It has became politically correct to condemn Helen Thomas.

Image above: Detail from photo in Kennedy Oval Office. Helen Thomas at center. From (http://www.jfklibrary.org)

By Juan Wilson on 8 June 2010 -

Six months ago I wrote an article titled "Israel as Failed State". I still believe that what I once admired as a progressive nation has become its own worst enemy. That is what veteran White House correspondent Helen Thomas was attuned to when she made here indelicate remarks that ended her career this week.

Here's a report from www.jta.org (http://www.jta.org/news/article/2010/06/08/2739500/helen-thomas-enter-the-maverick-exit-the-bigot):

"Teenager Adam Nesenoff and his father, Rabbi David Nesenoff, are pretty far down the media food chain.

The son, an active member of the National Council for Synagogue Youth, the Orthodox Union’s affiliated youth group, runs his own newsy site, Shmoozepoint.com. Dad operates a website called RabbiLive.com and sometimes portrays the satirical character of Julio Ramirez, a Hispanic priest who teams with a rabbi to deliver “Holy Weather” reports.

So it was impressive enough that both managed to snag media credentials for the American Jewish Heritage Month celebration May 27 at the White House. But in the past week, the senior Nesenoff took things to another level, turning his few hours as a hobnobber into 15 minutes of fame as the YouTube journalist who brought down a media icon.

It was the rabbi, armed with a camera and accompanied by his son and his teenage friend, who went around asking notables if they had any "comments on Israel."

As the world now knows, Helen Thomas sure did. "Tell them to get the hell out of Palestine," the doyenne of the Washington press corps said, and laughed. "Remember, these people are occupied, and it's their land."

Nesenoff asked where she thought they should go. "Go home," she responded. Asked to elaborate, Thomas said, "Poland, Germany and America, everywhere else."

Well, the attack by Israel on unarmed ships attempting bring goods to Gaza reinforces my sense that Helen Thomas had it right. The European diaspora of surviving Jews after World War II to Palestine to was a mistake. It has contributed greatly to the growing catastrophe that is Middle East politics. Since WWII thre has been continued emigration from USA a(nd then the collapsed USSR). In my opinion all incursions of Israeli settlements in the occupied lands of West Bank should be dismantled. Plans should begin to dismantle Israel as a nation that is mistakenly intertwined with race and religion. That is what Zionism is - the equivalence of race, religion and nation. It is the antithesis of how we interpret our own founding principles. The unfortunate truth is we are allies with the Israel government not because it shares what are our principles. We are allies because they share our military and geo-political strategy to dominate the Middle East. They are partners in our imperial interests. Our pitbulls in a bad neighborhood. Helen Thomas was born in Detroit, in 1920, of Lebanese immigrant parents. After almost two decades as a reporter for United Press International she began her role in the White House Press Corps in 1960 with the inauguration of President John Kennedy. She never pulled her punches, and touched such embarrassing issues with G. W. Bush that be stopped taking her questions. Helen is almost 90 and it may be a good time for her to retire. She was not pretty and she was very thorny. But I hail her perseverance, courage and dedication to dealing with the tough issues. The "Gotcha!" moment that destroyed her reputation in the end may be seen as what is likely an uncomfortable truth. The current nation of Israel should not exist. It was really not much more than a convenience for Europeans who wished the whole "Jewish Problem" would just go away. Well, it hasn't. .

Hawaiian National Sues Obama

SOURCE:Kenneth Taylor (taylork021@Hawaii.rr.com) SUBHEAD: Hawaiian national sues President Obama in Federal Court in Washington, D.C. on sovereignty. Image above: The scene at Iolani Palace on August 12, 1898. Sanford Dole, president of the Republic of Hawaii, transfers sovereignty to a representative of the United States government following annexation of the Hawaiian Islands by the U.S. Congress. From (http://www.flickr.com/photos/32912172@N00/3031049951). [Source note: The following is a press releaseon 1 June 2010 from the Hawaiian Kingdom (http://www.hawaiiankingdom.org)] Dr. David Keanu Sai, a national of the Hawaiian Kingdom, today filed a complaint in Federal Court in Washington, D.C., against U.S. President Obama, U.S. Secretary of State Clinton, U.S. Secretary of Defense Gates, U.S. Pacific Command Commander Admiral Willard and Hawai`i Governor Lingle for violation of an 1893 Executive Agreement between the United States and the Hawaiian Kingdom and is seeking punitive damages of $10 million dollars for malicious indictment, prosecution and conviction of a so-called felony. The Defendants have 60 days from date of service to file an answer to the complaint. Dr. Sai has a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Hawai`i at Manoa specializing in international relations and public law, with particular emphasis on the legal and political history of the Hawaiian Kingdom. His doctoral dissertation is titled "The American Occupation of the Hawaiian Kingdom: Beginning the Transition from Occupied to Restored State". Dr. Sai also served as lead agent in international arbitration proceedings (Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom) at the Permanent Court of Arbitration, The Hague, Netherlands (1999-2001); filed a Complaint with the United Nations Security Council on July 5, 2001; and has numerous articles on the legal status of the Hawaiian Kingdom as a sovereign and independent State. In the Federal complaint filed today, Dr. Sai alleges the violation of an executive agreement entered into between Queen Lili`uokalani of the Hawaiian Kingdom and President Grover Cleveland of the United States in 1893, whereby Hawaiian executive power was temporarily and conditionally assigned to the President to administer Hawaiian Kingdom law throughout the Hawaiian Islands. This executive agreement, known as the Lili`uokalani assignment (January 17, 1893), was assigned under threat of war, and binds President Cleveland's successors in office in the administration of Hawaiian Kingdom law until such time as the Hawaiian Kingdom government has been restored in accordance with a second executive agreement between the Queen and President, known as the Agreement of restoration (December 18, 1893), whereupon the executive power would be returned and the Hawaiian Kingdom would grant amnesty to those individuals who participated or supported the 1893 insurrection. In U.S. v. Belmont (1937), the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that executive agreements entered into between the President and a sovereign nation does not require ratification from the U.S. Senate to have the force and effect of a treaty; and executive agreements bind successor Presidents for their faithful execution. Other landmark cases on executive agreements are U.S. v. Pink (1942) and American Insurance Association v. Garamendi (2003). In Garamendi, the Court stated, "Specifically, the President has authority to make 'executive agreements' with other countries, requiring no ratification by the Senate or approval by Congress." Dr. Sai alleges that President Barack Obama, being the successor in office to President Cleveland, is legally bound to administer the laws of the Hawaiian Kingdom until the Hawaiian Kingdom government is restored in accordance with the Agreement of restoration. The suit was filed under Title 28, United States Code, §1350, "Alien's action for tort," for maliciously prosecuting and convicting Dr. Sai for complying with Hawaiian Kingdom law, whereby the prosecution and conviction were violations of the Lili`uokalani assignment; the 1907 Hague Convention, IV; and the 1949 Geneva Convention, IV. §1350 provides that "The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States." In the complaint, it states that the Hawaiian Kingdom became a full member of the Universal Postal Union in 1882, and currently has treaties with Austria-Hungary (June 18, 1875), now Austria and Hungary; Belgium (October 4, 1862); Bremen (March 27, 1854) now Germany; Denmark (Oct. 19, 1846); France (September 8, 1858); French Tahiti (November 24, 1853); Germany (March 25, 1879); Great Britain (March 26, 1846); Great Britain's New South Wales (March 10, 1874), now Australia; Hamburg (January 8, 1848), now Germany; Italy (July 22, 1863); Japan (Aug. 19, 1871, January 28, 1886); Netherlands (October 16, 1862); Portugal (May 5, 1882); Russia (June 19, 1869); Samoa (March 20, 1887); Spain (October 9, 1863); Sweden and Norway (April 5, 1855), now separate States; Switzerland (July 20, 1864); and the United States of America (December 20, 1849). On July 7, 1898, the United States unilaterally annexed the Hawaiian Islands for military purposes by enacting a joint resolution of annexation through its Congress over protests by the Queen and political organizations representing the people of Hawai`i that was filed with the U.S. State Department in the summer of 1897, and a 21,269 signature petition protesting annexation that was also filed with the U.S. Senate on December 9, 1897 by Senator George Hoar (R-MA). On August 12, 1898, the Hawaiian Kingdom was occupied during the Spanish-American War and the Hawaiian Kingdom has since been under prolonged occupation under the guise of a U.S. territory. Presently, Hawai`i serves as headquarters for the largest U.S. Unified Combatant Command in the world, the U.S. Pacific Command, which controls 20.6% of lands (nearly 200,000 acres) throughout the islands under troop commands of the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. The complaint alleges that the U.S. military's presence has been and continues to be a violation of the Hawaiian Kingdom's status as a Neutral State under international law and the laws of occupation. According to the complaint, the United States misrepresented Hawai`i to be a part of the United States since the Spanish-American War by enacting Congressional laws claiming to have annexed the Hawaiian Islands in 1898; to have established the Territory of Hawaii in 1900; and to have transformed the Territory of Hawai`i into the State of Hawai`i in 1959. The complaint alleges that these actions by the Congress are in direct violation of the 1893 executive agreements, and that the Congress has no force and effect beyond U.S. territory. In a 1988 U.S. Department of Justice legal opinion by the Office of Legal Counsel, acting Assistant Attorney General Douglas Kmiec stated, "It isÅ unclear which constitutional power Congress exercised when it acquired Hawaii by joint resolution. Accordingly, it is doubtful that the acquisition of Hawaii can serve as an appropriate precedent for a congressional assertion of sovereignty over an extended territorial sea." According to Dr. Sai, "The U.S. Congress could no more annex the Hawaiian Islands in 1898 by passing a joint resolution when it was at war with Spain, than it could annex Afghanistan today by passing a joint resolution while fighting the war on terrorism. U.S. laws do not have extraterritorial force and are limited and confined to U.S. territory. Only through a treaty of cession with the Hawaiian Kingdom could Hawai`i's territorial sovereignty be ceded or transferred to the United States, the 1893 executive agreements and other international treaties being superseded, and only thereafter could Congressional laws be legally enforced throughout the Hawaiian Islands without violating international law." Among the alleged misrepresentations that the United States made to the international community: · That the sovereignty of the Hawaiian Islands was lawfully ceded to the United States by a treaty of cession in 1898; · That the international treaties between the Hawaiian Kingdom and other sovereign States were superseded by the United States' treaties with those States; · That United States laws and not Hawaiian Kingdom laws governed the Hawaiian Islands to include taxation, tariffs and duties; and · That the Hawaiian Islands is the territory of the United States through the State of Hawai`i and not the Hawaiian Kingdom, being a sovereign State, which has been under prolonged occupation since the Spanish-American War. Dr. Sai's complaint alleges Obama, Clinton, Gates, Willard and Lingle with violating the Lili`uokalani assignment, the 1907 Hague Convention, IV, the 1949 Geneva Convention, IV, and for allowing the State of Hawai`i to have maliciously indicted, prosecuted and convicted Dr. Sai of a manufactured felony count of attempted theft of real property on March 7, 2000 for adhering to Hawaiian Kingdom laws, which by definition constitutes a "war crime" under Title 18 U.S.C. §2441(c)(1). The complaint seeks a permanent injunction, including punitive damages, disgorgement and restitution, to prevent and remedy any violations of the Lili`uokalani assignment and the international laws of occupation. Contact: Dr. Keanu Sai phone: 808-383-6100 email: keanu.sai@gmail.com website: http://www2.hawaii.edu/~anu/index.html

We Didn't Start the Fire

SUBHEAD: You and I didn’t start the fire of empire. But we’re about to see it extinguished. Image above: Recent performance by Billy Joel. From (http://media.photobucket.com/image/we%20didn%252527t%20start%20the%20fire/xavier906/art4x.jpg).
Birth control, Ho Chi Minh, Richard Nixon back again. Moonshot, Woodstock, Watergate, punk rock. Begin, Reagan, Palestine, Terror on the airline. Ayatollah's in Iran, Russians in Afghanistan. Wheel of Fortune, Sally Ride, heavy metal suicide. Foreign debts, homeless Vets, AIDS, Crack, Bernie Goetz. Hypodermics on the shores, China's under martial law. Rock and Roller cola wars, I can't take it any more. - Verse from "We Didn't Start The Fire" by Billy Joel in 1989
By Guy McPherson on 1 June 2010 in Nature Bats Last - (http://guymcpherson.com/2010/06/we-didnt-start-the-fire) Actually, to counter singer/songwriter Billy Joel, we did start this FIRE. Not you and me, of course, but our culture. The U.S. industrial economy is all about Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate. The FIRE is about to run its course, extinguished by the absence of fuel in each of those interconnected sectors. The financial sector has been largely nationalized, with the U.S. taxpayer on the hook for trillions of dollars of bad loans made by big banks. Back in February 2009 our national debt was a mere $10.5 trillion, but it already exceeded the value of all the currency in the world and all the gold ever mined. Those were the good old days. Now our national debt exceeds $13 trillion (with more than $8 trillion still hidden from view), and the empire will go down like a tub full of gold bricks if we stop fanning the flames by slowing the printing press. By running the printing presses at full speed, we are inflating the most massive bubble yet. We’ve seen how those bubbles pan out for the industrial economy. If we build them, the pin-pricks will come. Can we create another financial crisis? Of course. After all, a smoke-and-mirrors economic recovery is no protection against a crash in the equities markets. The peak in industrial economic growth is already here, with about ten thousand swords out there vying for attention to burst the bubbles of Treasuries, the U.S. big banks, China’s economic growth, the re-inflated housing market, and a renewed credit crisis. Oh, and of course the interaction between these myriad factors. In summary, the countdown is well under way for completion of the ongoing U.S. economic collapse, and there’s simply no way to soften the blow when we plunge to the bottom of the economic heap. The U.S. has the world’s biggest industrial economy, and the bigger they are, … well, you know. The one-size-fits-all solution of printing money is leading inevitably to hyperinflation, even as the U.S. money supply dwindles. Think Zimbabwe, but with U.S. dollars. And the U.S. dollar is still the world’s reserve currency. All signs still point to a major crash in stock markets (see here and here, too, among a kajillion other sites). At this point in the post-peak oil era, it’s clear to anybody paying the slightest attention we’re headed for full spectrum collapse. How will it end, and when? It seems completion of the U.S. economic collapse will follow on the heels of Europe, which is cheering for its own demise even as all the PIIGS drown in a sea of debt. This is supremely good news, of course, for the dozen or so people who care about non-industrial cultures and the living planet: Our little reign of terror is just about over. We’re an empty garbage can, playing power games enabled by the hologram-like appearance of power. I’ve no doubt the empire will fail to go silently into the night. Instead, we’ll take out individuals and countries with every lethal weapon in our power, including weapons most of us don’t even know about and people we don’t care about. Iran apocalypse? Could be — talk about mutually assured destruction — and soon. How soon? Your guess is as good as mine. But is it as good as the 25 leading trends forecasters, who agree that 2010 could be the year? Hedge funder Hugh Hendry provides a concise summary: “I would recommend you panic.” As much as I appreciation the concision of Hendry’s recommendation, I would recommend you prepare and celebrate. I’ve been recommending the former for several years, while pointing out the good news associated with economic collapse. I have more company now than I’ve had for a while: Economic collapse has gone mainstream, and the occasional worthwhile ecologist is joining Daniel Quinn and Derrick Jensen in recognizing and spreading the good news. Even as the gusher in the Gulf gets much worse by the day (thus diverting our attention from BP’s other large spill), even as Barack Obama tries to use the disaster to push his ill-founded political agenda, even as the cozy relationship between BP and the Obama administration becomes clear, so too do U.S. political policies keep steering straight at the iceberg of economic and environmental collapse. As the industrial economy stumbles along, the world’s biological diversity continues to suffer even as we peer into the abyss of extinction for many of the world’s species (including, ultimately, our own). Where should you be when economic collapse comes to your house? Michael Ruppert and his protégé Rice Farmer suggest staying where you’re most comfortable. Much as I appreciate their efforts to inform and engage economic collapse, this advice seems immoral and short-sighted to me. First, it’s the comfort of city living that got us into this civilized mess to begin with, and it’s exactly this comfort that requires obedience at home and oppression abroad. Second, today’s comfortable urban existence might not be so damned comfortable when the lights go out and the water stops coming out the taps. Rice Farmer points out that people in rural areas will “have to cope with hordes of desperate, starving city people who try to steal our food. Unless you are in a really remote location, expect hungry visitors.” Good point. But why do you think those “hordes of desperate, starving city people” are bound to be desperate and starving? Why do you think they’ll be leaving the cities in hordes? I’d guess it’ll be because they’ll become suddenly and profoundly uncomfortable when the grocery stores run out of food and the water stops coming out the taps. If you think you’ll be comfortable surrounded by a few thousand desperate, starving city people when TSHTF in your backyard, by all means stay in your comfort zone. On the other hand, if you don’t think that’s going to work out well for you, I’d recommend skedaddling out of the city before the real rush gets under way. When will that be? In this case, “better late than never” is the wrong answer. The time to dig a well is not when you’re thirsty. The time to plant a garden is not when you’re hungry. The time for securing your water and food is now, before the industrial economy burns itself out. You and I didn’t start the fire of empire. But we’re about to see it extinguished. .

Siren Song of Kauai

SUBHEAD: County scam to milk Kauai residents so as to increase visitor traffic to our island is a pathetic farce.

By Andy Parx on 4 June 2010 in Parx Daily News - 
(http://parxnewsdaily.blogspot.com/2010/06/asleep-at-wheel.html)

  
Image above: Dickie Chang holding court at Duke's Barefoot Grill on Kalipaki Beach on 8/2/09. Photo by Juan Wilson.

 [Editor's [IB Publisher's Note: In Greek mythology, the Sirens were three dangerous bird-women, portrayed as seductresses who lured nearby sailors with their enchanting music and voices to shipwreck on the rocky coast of their island.]  

Just take a gander at the hook, line and sinker swallowed by “government beat” reporter Leo Azambuja in regurgitating statistics purporting a wondrous job in using the second half-million-dollar county tourism stimulus toilet-flush presented by Sue Kanoho of the Kaua`i Visitors Bureau and the county economic development director George Costa. The story of the “amazing success” Kanoho claimed at Wednesday’s council meeting in bringing more visitors to the island was an example of the worst of the worst in covering government- the unabashed unquestioning rote re-recital of governmental double-talking bulls—t.

Anyone who has been following the story knows that, as we wrote about here, here and here last year, accountability and actually being able to correlate the dollars spent to any increase- if there was one- in tourists and the resulting dollars spent was deemed essential, if not by the council by the many taxpayers who spoke out at the time .

 But of course when Kanoho’s presentation didn’t include one verified example of anyone who came as a result of any promotion- with one exception: the $30,000 spent on the “South Pacific” Mitzi Gaynor appearance- the council just sat and applauded like the trained seals they are.

Seemingly Kanoho and Costa just pulled any-kine numbers and plugged them in to show their self-declared “success”, even admitting in the case of the so-called “radio blitz” that the only thing they could report as “attributable” to the money spent is through an anecdote Chamber of Commerce honcho Randy Francisco reported after talking to someone in a bar who said they came as a result of the promotion The worst waste was in using half the money to bribe the “top six producers” of “on-line bookings”- sites like Orbitz and Priceline.

The problem is that these sites don’t actually report how many bookings were made as a result of our money being spent or provide any proof that it was a successful “buy” because, as the council knew last year when they approved the money, that information is “proprietary”. What a scam. Kanoho admitted that their “coupon book”- one of those pseudo-discount buy a thousand dollar item and get a two cent piece of crap for free promotions- was disastrously unsuccessful... something that many told the council in no uncertain terms would happen last year.

One of the most ridiculous parts of the presentation- one of course unquestioned in the newspaper article along with all of these examples- was the “Northwest media blitz” and trade show appearance by Kanoho and a slew of other Kaua`i people.

Kanoho actually said that although it was “hard to track” Francisco “put 1200” as the number of attributable tourist trips with apparently no real reason to think it was correct. As a matter of fact each item was “hard” or “impossible” to track according to Kanoho although that little fact was distinctly missing from the newspaper coverage. What we saw happening at Wednesday’s meeting- something those who read the “newspaper of record” will never know- was a presentation of a series of made-up, pulled-from-their-asses numbers that had absolutely no verified, documented correlation to the money spent.

The real shibai though wasn’t Kanoho prevarications or Azambuja’s incompetence but the council’s attempt to justify the million they spent in making sure the business community and CofC crowd will fill their campaign coffers this year, and wasting (read: stealing) a cool million (half was spent last year in the same manner) taxpayer dollars to do it. Their performance Wednesday- especially that of tourism industry shill Dickie Chang who engineered the whole debacle- in oohing and ahing at Kanoho’s faux success was just what you’d expect on Kaua`i.

Did anyone really think councilmembers were going to aggressively seek answers that they didn’t want to hear, specifically regarding their use of a million dollars that didn’t do a damn thing- and do it at a time when they just furloughed county employees for two days a month? It’s open season for the council lies and secrecy and with no one to call them on it. And they know it. Don’t ya just love this town?

 .

Old Malls as Urban Farms?

SUBHEAD: An excuse for a food-court? This seems more a publicity stunt than a serious effort to grow vegetables. Is there any petroleum involved? Image above: Roof of failing Cleveland Galleria Mall in Erieview, Ohio, has been converted to "Gardens Under Glass". Talk about blowing green smoke up your skirt.

By Lloyd Alter on 6 June 2010 in TreeHugger.com - (http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/06/new-uses-for-old-malls.php)

Ever since Architect Eb Zeidler riffed on the Galleria in Milan for his Eaton Centre in Toronto in the '70s, a lot of malls have been covered with glorious glass roofs. Many downtown malls were built as urban renewal and revitalization projects, but few of them thrived; after killing off the main street retail around them, they most have died on their own.

But they still have those glorious glass roofs. PSFK points us to Cleveland, where Gardens Under Glass is trying to put them to work, as an urban farm.

The proponents of the scheme note:

It is the ideal location for a project of this nature due to its structural design that provides a year round controlled environment, perfectly conducive to successful implementation. At the project's root is an urban farm that will use a system called "recirculating greenhouse hydroponics" to grow produce such as tomatoes, lettuce, cucumbers, herbs, peppers, sprouts, mushrooms and flowers.

But that year round controlled environment is expensive to maintain. Gardens under glass isn't only about the food, but it is also:

an urban agricultural center that will produce, inform and educate the Cleveland community about the importance of growing green. The gardens will in turn cultivate businesses with a similar mindset.

So the farm becomes a magnet for food related retail, such as restaurants, a year round indoor farmers market, a garden supply store and a health food store. That is the real promise of the idea.

Vicky Poole, who does marketing for the mall, talked to Grist:

Poole's vision for the mall is both a master marketing tool -- this one, like so many of its mid-80s brethren, was in dire straights not long ago, with dozens of vacancies in its 200 stores -- and an inventive way to promote sustainability in what has proven to be a largely unsustainable architectural dinosaur. It's pretty hard to find alternate uses for 100,000-plus square feet of mostly windowless space. "I don't look at us as a mall anymore," she says. "We really serve the downtown business community."
.

Which Horizon?

SUBHEAD: Petroleum, its vehicles, and their consequences are central to world problems. Image above: Photograph of downtown Atlanta by James Kunstler who says of this place of parking garages "Even the homeless avoid it." For a photo-essay tour of downtown Atlanta with Jim try(http://www.kunstler.com/Grunt_Atlanta%20Tour.html) By Jamesd Kunstler on 8 June 2010 in Kunstler.com - (http://kunstler.com/blog/2010/06/which-horizon.html) Did the nation heave a sigh of relief when BP announced that their latest gambit to "cap" the Deepwater Horizon gusher will result in hosing up fifty percent of the leaking oil? If so, the nation may be sighing too soon since the other half of the oil will still collect in underwater plumes and hover all around the Gulf Coast like those baleful mother ships in the most recent generation of alien invasion movies. I shudder to imagine the tonnage of dead wildlife flotsam that will wash up with the tide for years to come. It will seem like a "necklace of death" for several states, though even that may not be enough to distract them from the more gratifying raptures of Nascar and NFL football.
For the moment we can only speculate on what the still-unresolved incident will mean for America's oil supply. The zeal to prosecute BP for something like criminal negligence has bestirred a Department of Justice comatose during the rape-and-pillage of the US financial system. BP may be driven out of business, but then what? The net effect of the oil spill, one way or another, will be the gradual shut-down of oil drilling activity in the Gulf of Mexico. New government supervision will make operations very costly, if not non-viable, and the surviving companies will probably pack up for the west coast of Africa where supervision is almost non-existent. Anyway you cut it, the US will produce less oil and import more -- and have to rely on the political stability of places like Angola and Nigeria, not to mention the simmering Middle East.
So far, also, the US has done nothing in the way of holding a serious national political discussion about the the most important part of the story: our pathological dependency on cars. I don't know if this will ever happen, even right up to the moment when the lines form at the filling stations. For years, anyway, the few public figures such as Boone Pickens who give the appearance of concern about our oil problem, end up down the rabbit hole of denial when they get behind schemes to run the whole US car-and-truck fleet on something besides gasoline.
This unfortunate techno-narcissism shows that almost nobody wants to think about living with fewer cars driving fewer miles. We're going to be dragged there kicking and screaming, but that's our destination, like it or not. All the effort now going into developing alt-fuels and "green" cars is just a form of "bargaining" on the Kubler-Ross transect of grief.
Traveling around the US, it's easy to understand our failure to come to grips with reality. The nation is fully outfitted for extreme car dependency. You go to places like Atlanta and Minneapolis and you understand how deep we're into this. We spent all our collective national treasure -- and quite a bit beyond that in the form of debt -- building the roadway systems and the suburban furnishings for that mode of existence. We incorporated it into our national identity as the American Way of Life. Now, we don't know what else to do except defend it at all costs, especially by waving the talismanic magic wand of techno-innovation.
The obvious remedy for the oil-and-car problem would be to live in walkable towns and neighborhoods served by the kind of public transit that people are not ashamed to ride in. But it may be too late for that. We're going to be a much poorer society from now on. We squandered the financial resources for that transition on too many other things. We're stuck with our investments in houses and their commercial accessories, built where they were built, and no Jolly Green Giant is going to pick them up and move them closer together in an artful way that adds up to real towns. A reorganization of American life will occur, but now it will be on much less deliberate terms, a much messier and more destructive operation, a default to the smaller scale by extreme necessity, with a lot of losses along the way. The Deepwater Horizon incident only hastens the process.
Anyway, the collapse of suburbia is running neck and neck (and hand-by-hand) with the collapse of capital. Angela Merkel, flicked US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner off like a flea over the weekend at the G-20 meeting in Sitges, Spain. Germany doesn't want to hear about bailouts and stimuli anymore. Germany is looking to reinstate something like a "normal" economy based on producing things of value and paying for things when you have the capital to do it. Germany is pulling the plug on the debt-o-rama banking rackets -- at least insofar as these rackets leave Germany holding the bag for a growing list of deadbeat nations. I don't see how the Euro survives. The remarkable appearance of prosperity in places like Greece and Spain turned out to be a combination of borrowed money and all-time-high tourist flows. Both of these "resources" are heading way down. There's a dwindling supply of middle-class candidates for tourism, especially in the US and the UK, and the Europeans have woken up painfully to the recognition that existing debt is unserviceable. National dominos are wobbling left and right, from Hungary to Latvia to Portugal....
Even the severe steps initiated by Germany may not be enough to keep the lights burning in Europe since the continent has little oil and nat-gas of its own. Europe's experiments with wind power have been valiant (and France's nuclear venture has been daring), but neither of these things will offset the problems associated with peak oil, especially if trouble starts in the Middle East. It was chastening for me to bike around Berlin a week ago and realize that even nations with sturdy cities and good railroads can fall into political chaos. Berlin was a charming place when Hitler arrived on the scene and twelve years later it was a smoldering heap of shattered brick and glass.
The American Way of Life is not so charming, but its very sprawling character may prevent a political maniac from controlling enough of a base to hold all the states and regions together in a thrall of fascism -- and there are all those firearms to think about. I maintain that the trend is down for centralized power here, in the direction of impotency and decreasing competence at anything. I don't subscribe to the paranoid themes of Big Brother government domination, the surveillance state and related fantasies. It'll be more Home Alone meets Risky Business -- a dangerous place with no adult supervision.
The New York Times ran a front-page story on Sunday suggesting that maybe there was something to this nutty idea of Americans preparing for trouble in the months and years ahead, paying down debts, putting some food aside, thinking about where to ride out a socio-economic storm. Their attitude was patronizing of course, and where the actual issues of our oil predicament were concerned, the editors went straight to their "go-to-guy" Daniel Yergin and his public relations shop, Cambridge Energy Research Associates, the official PR whore of the oil industry. The Times obviously finds it amusing that some Americans see a collapse on the horizon. The Times is so deep into its own collapse that it doesn't even remember how to cover a story. .