|
Bob's really angling for further burial of the atrocities of the Mil/Ind Complex
|
Magnu-@aol.com
|
Jan 14, 2009 06:26 PST
|
From:
Date: Jan. 14, 2008
Terri Ann Smith,
Board Member,
Portsmouth Site Specific Advisory Board,
Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant
Regarding: Bob Alvarez's Latest
How convenient it will be for all guilty parties, DOE administrators and
contractors alike, to sweep their legacy mess under DOD's rug.
Greetings Anti-Nuke Movement,
If you read between the lines of Bob's latest article (copied below),
you'll find that what Bob's really angling for is further burial of the
atrocities of the Military Industrial Complex, and a complete whitewash of newly
appointed Secretary of Energy, Steven Chu. This newest attempt by Bob to hide
DOE's 30 year record of inept oversight of the nuclear industry through his
proposal for complete transfer of all nuclear weapons projects, including
legacy cleanup, to the most secretive agency of all, the DOD, is craftily hidden
in his hypocritical appeal for focus on alternative energies. Through his
glowing review of Chu's stated "interest" in alternative energies, and his
careful omission of Chu's well-established, pro-nuclear activities (see Chu's
profile below), Bob weaves another tightly knit curtain for DOE to hide behind.
Bob's rationale for his horrible proposal? He's claiming that if the
nuclear cleanup project along with it's extraordinarily expensive bill is
handed over to DOD, there will be more funds and resources available to DOE for
alternative energy projects. Funds from where? I mean, are the funds in the
general federal budget going to miraculously grow several billion dollars as
soon as this transfer occurs? Does this sound childish to anyone? Don't
get me wrong. Bob is no kid. He's just treating everyone else as such with
his propaganda.
Further greasing the skids for his ridiculous proposal, Bob appeals to
the weak-minded by stating in a defeatist manner, "Despite Obama's campaign
pledge to cut nuclear arms, spending for bombs won't come down that much
either." So, seemingly, according to Bob, we should all just forget about nuclear
contamination as there's nothing we can do about it.
As for the controversial Chu and his duplicity, how convenient it will
be for him, as DOE's new Energy Secretary, to pursue his nuclear goals under
cover of DOD, while playing "hero in the limelight", and lobbying for
alternative energy funds that don't exist. The puppet Congress and Administration
may have changed, but their supporting powerful lobbies (lobbies that don't
give a rat's ass about solar and wind) haven't. As eluded to in Bob's above
statement, and per simple research, you'll find the same Military Industrial
Complex with it's supporting corporations and financial institutions
controlling both political parties by buying them off in return for the parties'
diligent funneling of our ever increasing tax dollars into the War Machine. After
all, the large banking houses funded both McCain's and Obama's campaigns,
which is why both candidates are the biggest cheerleaders for the bailouts, and
why Obama is becoming more pro-war everday.
Speaking of convenience, and relating to Bob's references to greenhouse
gases in his article, ironically, further evidence of "War Machine funneling"
is Al Gore's company (GIM) which is set up to trade carbon taxes while at
the same time exhibiting a bi-polar stock portfolio showing 85% of its
holdings in the nuclear, insurance and pharmaceutical industries. To be fair,
however, Gore does invest 15% in alternative energy (see Gore's portfolio below).
Look, Al Gore is a fraud, carbon dioxide is not causing global warming, and
it's the CFC's from past nuclear operations that blasted a whole in the
Ozone (see _www.doewatch.com_ (http://www.doewatch.com/) &
_http://en.sevenload.com/videos/UsTF3KX-The-Great-Global-Warming-Swindle_
(http://en.sevenload.com/videos/UsTF3KX-The-Great-Global-Warming-Swindle) ). These websites and
numerous others point to the "convenience" of The Global Warming Scam for both the
nuclear industry and the large financial houses. Concurrent with the
government/banker Bailout Scam, the Global Warming Scam is simply another product of
government/banker collusions, which is why the scientists that support the
"CO2 induced global warming theory" are always funded heavily by governments
and banks. The World Bank, for example, is the main contributor to the IPCC
(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). The World Bank has also
positioned itself to make a killing off of carbon taxes (see attachment). Side note:
CO2 is what you exhale, what plant life requires in abundance, and what our
own current, moronic government is classifying as toxic waste.
In closing, and still on topic with the fraud theme, for those in this
movement who haven't figured it out yet , Bob is a DOE shill despite all of
his plagiarized, anti-nuclear writings. Judge him based on his actions, not
his clever, fork-tongued, rhetoric. From his history of working as a DOE
contractor, to landing himself a revolving door position on the advisory board
for EEOICPA (legislation that Bob pushed for, earns a substantial salary from,
and that continually leads the majority of 600,000 sick, nuclear industry
veterans through a "never, never land" of "no compensation"), Bob's true colors
become more visible every day.
Cheerfully Looking Forward to a Ten Degree Weekend,
Terri Ann Smith
Bob's Article:
_Restructuring the DOE _
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NucNews/message/29242;_ylc=X3oDMTJwbjNwa2JtBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzYyODE0BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA1OTgz
NARtc2dJZAMyOTI0MgRzZWMDZG1zZwRzbGsDdm1zZwRzdGltZQMxMjMxNjc3ODAy)
Posted by: "Robert Alvarez" _kit-@erols.com _
(mailto:kit-@erols.com?Subject=%20Re:Restructuring%20the%20DOE) _nucnews _
(http://profiles.yahoo.com/nucnews)
Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:09 pm (PST)
Here's a feature article I wrote for the
Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, which ran today
about the need to dramatically restructure the U.S. Energy department.
Best Regards,
Bob
_http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/features/a-new-energy-future-means-a-n
ew-energy-department_
(http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/features/a-new-energy-future-means-a-new-energy-department)
[]
A new energy future means a new Energy Department
By Robert Alvarez | 8 January 2009
As a Nobel laureate in physics and a respected
advocate for reducing greenhouse gas emissions,
Steven Chu, President-elect Barack Obama's choice
for energy secretary, appears to be well suited
to carrying out Obama's pledge to generate new
green energy jobs and reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil.
But among Chu's most d aunting challenges will be
reforming the Energy Department itself. Created
in 1977 in response to oil disruptions, Energy
has done little since to stem the country's
burgeoning energy problems. With about 5.5
percent of the world's population, the United
States consumes more oil than any other nation,
three-fourths of which comes from foreign
sources. And as U.S. energy dependence has
worsened, its greenhouse gas emissions have grown
worse as well--increasing by 17 percent since
1990--accelerating potentially disastrous climate change.
The main reason for Energy's ineffectiveness is
that it's not structured to usher in the
country's energy future. Why? Because its mandate
to maintain the country's large, antiquated
nuclear infrastructure effectively places
budgetary handcuffs on the energy secretary--whoever it is.
For example, last year, Energy's biggest spending
priority was to maintain some 10,000 nuclear
warheads. More largely, for most of its
existence, two-thirds of Energy's annual spending
has gone to maintaining the U.S. nuclear weapons
complex. With a land mass greater than Rhode
Island and Delaware combined and about 100,000
employees, Energy's nuclear complex would rank
high among the country's largest corporations.
Yet, if it were a private business, it would be
well into bankruptcy. Facing hundreds of billions
in liabilities that rivals the Wall Street
bailout, the country's nuclear arms production
legacy has stuck Energy with thousands of
contaminated structures, an enormous amount of
high-level radioactive waste, and some of the
most severely polluted sites in the Western hemisphere.
Taking the perennial backseat is Energy's loose
confederation of energy programs such as
technology research and development, energy
regulatory programs, the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve, management of public power supplies in
19 states, and providing in-depth energy
information. Last year, these programs comprised
only 17 percent of Energy's $23.8 billion budget.
In terms of technology research and development,
nuclear energy, which primarily benefits Energy
sites, received the most at $1 billion. Fossil
fuels came in second, snagging $904 million, and
energy conservation took a distant third with $468 million.
While Chu may have an aversion to coal and want
to support alternative energy sources, his
options are limited because of the heavy legacy
of the weapons program, site cleanup, and the
traditional priorities given to nuclear and
fossil fuels, which have powerful constituencies in Congress.
Despite Obama's campaign pledge to cut nuclear
arms, spending for bombs won't come down that
much either. Energy's National Nuclear Security
Agency has its own constraints, including growing
safeguard and security costs, restoring aged
facilities, and the high price of maintaining the U.S. nuclear arsenal.
What's needed is a major restructuring of Energy.
The first step is to work with Congress to
expeditiously transfer the department's nuclear
weapons programs to the Defense Department. With
the Cold War concluding almost 20 years ago, it's
time to consolidate nuclear arms activities. In
terms of cleaning up Energy sites, the United
States should establish an independent nuclear
decommissioning authority--such as Britain has
recently done--to address its nuclear legacy.
This could assure environmental compliance and
public accountability. At that point, a new
Energy structure should be established, based
explicitly on meeting the nation's energy, economic, and environmental goals.
Freed from its nuclear weapons millstone, there's
much Chu can do to make Energy a major player in
constituting a sustainable U.S. energy
policy--such as helping to establish a national
electricity grid to tap into large potential
sources of renewable wind and solar energy and
investing in conservation that can become a
potent tool to reducing fossil-fuel dependence
and stimulate employment. Energy also can play a
major role in helping the ailing U.S. auto
industry through its research-and-industry through
loan-guarantee programs. And as a premier
scientist, Chu can help strengthen the nation's
science base by sharpening the focus of academia
and Energy laboratories to work toward
President-elect Obama's goals of achieving energy
self-sufficiency and major reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
While undertaking such a comprehensive
restructuring won't be easy, the status quo is
far worse. Therefore, President-elect Obama's
positive energy vision can either be sustained by
a new, more responsive Energy Department, or risk
failing due to the department's dysfunction.
Copyright © 2008 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. All Rights Reserved.
Source URL (retrieved on 01/08/2009 - 18:29):
_http://www.thebulletin.org/node/5383_ (http://www.thebulletin.org/node/5383)
Steven Chu's Pro-Nuclear Position (references):
_http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/12/steven-chu-named-energy-secretary.html_
(http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/12/steven-chu-named-energy-secretary.html)
_http://news.cnet.com/8301-10787_3-9888608-60.html_
(http://news.cnet.com/8301-10787_3-9888608-60.html)
Al Gore's Stock Portfolio:
_http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/news_press_release,210874.shtml_
(http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/news_press_release,210874.shtml) )
**************Inauguration '09: Get complete coverage from the nation's
capital.(http://www.aol.com?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000027)
|
|
 |
|
