California attempting to stop Longest Walk Northern Route By Brenda Norrell, Posted on Fri Feb 15th, 2008 at 03:13:38 PM EST Longest Walk runners risk arrests today to continue
SHINGLE SPRINGS, Calif. – The Longest Walk 2 Northern Route is combating an attempt by the California Department of Transportation to stop the sacred walk.
Jimbo Simmons, coordinator for the Longest Walk 2 northern route, said the California Department of Transportation is attempting to halt the walk now leaving Shingle Springs and heading east.
"We're going to walk today, even if we are going to be arrested," Simmons said on the live northern route broadcast on www.earthcycles.net/ from Shingle Springs Miwok Nation. "They can't stop us."
"We have permission. Grandfather Creator has given us the permission," Simmons said. "We're going to do it. If we have to walk over the mountain, we are going to do it."
Simmons asked people to call Julio Elver, chief officer on permits, 530-741-4403, and demand that permission be given for the sacred walk to continue through California to Nevada.
"Every step is a prayer," Simmons said. The walkers are now being joined by long distance runners. "In time of need, we call our runners."
Simmons said the sacred walk is underway because of the issue of survival for Mother Earth, to halt the destruction of the Earth, and for the continuance of the sacred way of life of Indigenous Peoples.
"This is a continuation of this 500 year struggle. The Longest Walk is one way of making those views known," Simmons said.
When the first walk departed Alcatraz in 1978, Congress was attempting to abrogate treaties. While some progress was made, the struggle continues as is obvious today in the attempts by California to halt the sacred walk.
Today, Friday, Feb. 15, young Miwok runners, including a group of fifth graders assisting with the sacred ceremonies, will run toward the snowline at the summit.
"We are in prayer. All of this land is our temple," Simmons said as runners gathered at noon.
Please call the Department of Transportation and demand that the Longest Walk be given permission to proceed without arrest.
--Brenda Norrell, on the northern route brendanorrell@gmail.com
Support is urgently needed for the Northern Route of The Longest Walk!
The route is currently heading from Shingle Springs to Pollock Pines and needs supplies of warm clothing, food, and monetary donations as they head towards the snowy regions of Nevada, Utah, and Colorado!
Aboriginal children in Kakadu National Park. Photograph: John Van Hasselt/Sygma/Corbis
Australia's government today announced it would formally apologise to the country's Aborigines for past injustices, but said it had no plans to compensate them financially.
The Aboriginal affairs minister, Jenny Macklin, said the aim was to make the apology, the wording of which has been discussed with indigenous leaders, "as early as possible" after the resumption of parliament on February 12.
The apology would fulfil a pledge made by the prime minister, Kevin Rudd, after his Labor party won the November elections.
In 1997, a government-commissioned inquiry into the practice of removing children from Aboriginal mothers to be raised by white Australians recommended an apology by parliament to the so-called "stolen generation".
All six state governments have already made official apologies, but the former prime minister, John Howard, refused, arguing that contemporary Australians were not responsible for past policies.
"What is important here is to do everything we can to really see this as a positive way forward for the nation," said Macklin. "We want it to be above politics, we want to make it as positive as possible."
But the government remains opposed to demands from some Aboriginal leaders for financial reparations. Rudd has said his policies on health and education would attempt to lift living standards for Aborigines, and "we can do that in the absence of any compensation arrangement".
Some say an official apology may leave the government open to legal claims of compensation, though most lawyers disagree.
Numbering about 450,000 in a population of 21 million, Aborigines are the poorest ethnic group in Australia and are most likely to be jailed, unemployed and illiterate. They have a far higher infant mortality rate and die, on average, 17 years younger than other Australians.
Rudd said yesterday, during the annual Australia day holiday weekend that celebrates the arrival of Australia's first white settlers on January 26, 1788, that an apology would help unite the country.
"The key thing is to build a bridge with indigenous Australia through an apology, through saying sorry, because that bridge is a pathway to respect," he said.
Many Aborigines call Australia day "Invasion day" and regard it as a day of mourning because Britain colonised the country without the agreement of its indigenous inhabitants.
Dear Friend, > > > > I thought you might be interested in this HSUS > campaign to stop > > Amazon.com's sales of illegal animal fighting > materials. Amazon > > sells both cockfighting magazines and bloody, > graphic > > dogfighting DVDs. The company is so determined to > continue > > selling these materials that it filed a motion > against The HSUS > > in federal court, essentially asking that federal > and state laws > > to protect animals be gutted to accommodate > Amazon's sales of > > animal fighting paraphernalia! > > > > Please ask Amazon to remove these materials from > its website. > > Here is a link for more information: > > > community.hsus.org/campaign...fighting3
AMAZON IS HIDING THEIR GREED AND CRUELTY BEHIND "FREE SPEECH LAWS" ...SO HIT THEM WHERE IT HURTS...CANCEL YOUR ACCOUNT AND ASK EVERYONE YOU KNOW TO BOYCOTT THEM....WHEN SALES DROP, SUDDENLY THEY WONT CARE ONE BIT ABOUT "FREE SPEECH" AND THEY WILL STOP CARRYING AND PROMOTING THE PRODUCTS THAT TORTURE ANIMALS.
> I am appalled by this news of Amazon's support of > the illegal dog and > cock fighting industry. After I got this I went to > Amazon and typed in > dog fighting and a bunch of horrifying titles popped > up. I say this > petition and phone call (I did both) are a good > first step, but it > isn't enough.
NFL star Michael Vick has been indicted for his participation in a terrifying dog fighting underworld most of us knew nothing about. Associates have testified that Michael Vick bred dogs for fighting, forced them to fight, ran dog fights, bet on dog fights, and personally killed dogs who lost fights in gruesome ways. He kept the dogs on his property starved to make them meaner and more aggressive in fights.
It’s hard to even find words for this. Someone who can kill dogs in this way, someone who can enjoy and bet on their suffering and agony is one thing: a sociopath. There’s no other way about it. Nobody can have the ability to feel empathy and participate in this kind of blood fest.
The news showed footage of forensic crews combing Vick’s property looking for dead dogs. The living dogs were whisked away, though one presented his battered face on the header of the email from HSUS. The email asked for donations to provide care for the living dogs.
Warm Greetings my friends! This press release may have already passed over your desks and so I apologize. I've just now opened this new release today. Love and light - have a blessed day! Judy Talaugon
UNITED STATES PUBLIC LAW 103-150 103d Congress Joint Resolution 19 Nov. 23, 1993
To acknowledge the 100th anniversary of the January 17, 1893 overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, and to offer an apology to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii.
Whereas, prior to the arrival of the first Europeans in 1778, the Native Hawaiian people lived in a highly organized, self-sufficient, subsistent social system based on communal land tenure with a sophisticated language, culture, and religion;
Whereas, a unified monarchical government of the Hawaiian Islands was established in 1810 under Kamehameha I, the first King of Hawaii;
Whereas, from 1826 until 1893, the United States recognized the independence of the Kingdom of Hawaii, extended full and complete diplomatic recognition to the Hawaiian Government, and entered into treaties and conventions with the Hawaiian monarchs to govern commerce and navigation in 1826, 1842, 1849, 1875, and 1887;
Whereas, the Congregational Church (now known as the United Church of Christ), through its American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, sponsored and sent more than 100 missionaries to the Kingdom of Hawaii between 1820 and 1850;
Whereas, on January 14, 1893, John L. Stevens (hereafter referred to in this Resolution as the "United States Minister"), the United States Minister assigned to the sovereign and independent Kingdom of Hawaii conspired with a small group of non-Hawaiian residents of the Kingdom of Hawaii, including citizens of the United States, to overthrow the indigenous and lawful Government of Hawaii;
Whereas, in pursuance of the conspiracy to overthrow the Government of Hawaii, the United States Minister and the naval representatives of the United States caused armed naval forces of the United States to invade the sovereign Hawaiian nation on January 16, 1893, and to position themselves near the Hawaiian Government buildings and the Iolani Palace to intimidate Queen Liliuokalani and her Government;
Whereas, on the afternoon of January 17,1893, a Committee of Safety that represented the American and European sugar planters, descendants of missionaries, and financiers deposed the Hawaiian monarchy and proclaimed the establishment of a Provisional Government;
Whereas, the United States Minister thereupon extended diplomatic recognition to the Provisional Government that was formed by the conspirators without the consent of the Native Hawaiian people or the lawful Government of Hawaii and in violation of treaties between the two nations and of international law;
Whereas, soon thereafter, when informed of the risk of bloodshed with resistance, Queen Liliuokalani issued the following statement yielding her authority to the United States Government rather than to the Provisional Government:
"I Liliuokalani, by the Grace of God and under the Constitution of the Hawaiian Kingdom, Queen, do hereby solemnly protest against any and all acts done against myself and the Constitutional Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom by certain persons claiming to have established a Provisional Government of and for this Kingdom.
"That I yield to the superior force of the United States of America whose Minister Plenipotentiary, His Excellency John L. Stevens, has caused United States troops to be landed a Honolulu and declared that he would support the Provisional Government.
"Now to avoid any collision of armed forces, and perhaps the loss of life, I do this under protest and impelled by said force yield my authority until such time as the Government of the United States shall, upon facts being presented to it, undo the action of its representatives and reinstate me in the authority which I claim as the Constitutional Sovereign of the Hawaiian Islands.".
Done at Honolulu this 17th day of January, A.D. 1893.;
Whereas, without the active support and intervention by the United States diplomatic and military representatives, the insurrection against the Government of Queen Liliuokalani would have failed for lack of popular support and insufficient arms;
Whereas, on February 1, 1893, the United States Minister raised the American flag and proclaimed Hawaii to be a protectorate of the United States;
Whereas, the report of a Presidentially established investigation conducted by former Congressman James Blount into the events surrounding the insurrection and overthrow of January 17, 1893, concluded that the United States diplomatic and military representatives had abused their authority and were responsible for the change in government;
Whereas, as a result of this investigation, the United States Minister to Hawaii was recalled from his diplomatic post and the military commander of the United States armed forces stationed in Hawaii was disciplined and forced to resign his commission;
Whereas, in a message to Congress on December 18, 1893, President Grover Cleveland reported fully and accurately on the illegal acts of the conspirators, described such acts as an "act of war, committed with the participation of a diplomatic representative of the United States and without authority of Congress", and acknowledged that by such acts the government of a peaceful and friendly people was overthrown;
Whereas, President Cleveland further concluded that a "substantial wrong has thus been done which a due regard for our national character as well as the rights of the injured people requires we should endeavor to repair" and called for the restoration of the Hawaiian monarchy;
Whereas, the Provisional Government protested President Cleveland's call for the restoration of the monarchy and continued to hold state power and pursue annexation to the United States;
Whereas, the Provisional Government successfully lobbied the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate (hereafter referred to in this Resolution as the "Committee") to conduct a new investigation into the events surrounding the overthrow of the monarchy;
Whereas, the Committee and its chairman, Senator John Morgan, conducted hearings in Washington, D.C., from December 27,1893, through February 26, 1894, in which members of the Provisional Government justified and condoned the actions of the United States Minister and recommended annexation of Hawaii;
Whereas, although the Provisional Government was able to obscure the role of the United States in the illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy, it was unable to rally the support from two-thirds of the Senate needed to ratify a treaty of annexation;
Whereas, on July 4, 1894, the Provisional Government declared itself to be the Republic of Hawaii;
Whereas, on January 24, 1895, while imprisoned in Iolani Palace, Queen Liliuokalani was forced by representatives of the Republic of Hawaii to officially abdicate her throne;
Whereas, in the 1896 United States Presidential election, William McKinley replaced Grover Cleveland;
Whereas, on July 7, 1898, as a consequence of the Spanish-American War, President McKinley signed the Newlands Joint Resolution that provided for the annexation of Hawaii;
Whereas, through the Newlands Resolution, the self-declared Republic of Hawaii ceded sovereignty over the Hawaiian Islands to the United States;
Whereas, the Congress, through the Newlands Resolution, ratified the cession, annexed Hawaii as part of the United States, and vested title to the lands in Hawaii in the United States;
Whereas, the Newlands Resolution effected the transaction between the Republic of Hawaii and the United States Government;
Whereas, the indigenous Hawaiian people never directly relinquished their claims to their inherent sovereignty as a people or over their national lands to the United States, either through their monarchy or through a plebiscite or referendum;
Whereas, on April 30, 1900, President McKinley signed the Organic Act that provided a government for the territory of Hawaii and defined the political structure and powers of the newly established Territorial Government and its relationship to the United States;
Whereas, on August 21,1959, Hawaii became the 50th State of the United States;
Whereas, the health and well-being of the Native Hawaiian people is intrinsically tied to their deep feelings and attachment to the land;
Whereas, the long-range economic and social changes in Hawaii over the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries have been devastating to the population and to the health and well-being of the Hawaiian people;
Whereas, the Native Hawaiian people are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territory, and their cultural identity in accordance with their own spiritual and traditional beliefs, customs, practices, language, and social institutions;
Whereas, in order to promote racial harmony and cultural understanding, the Legislature of the State of Hawaii has determined that the year 1993, should serve Hawaii as a year of special reflection on the rights and dignities of the Native Hawaiians in the Hawaiian and the American societies;
Whereas, the Eighteenth General Synod of the United Church of Christ in recognition of the denomination's historical complicity in the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii in 1893 directed the Office of the President of the United Church of Christ to offer a public apology to the Native Hawaiian people and to initiate the process of reconciliation between the United Church of Christ and the Native Hawaiians; and
Whereas, it is proper and timely for the Congress on the occasion of the impending one hundredth anniversary of the event, to acknowledge the historic significance of the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, to express its deep regret to the Native Hawaiian people, and to support the reconciliation efforts of the State of Hawaii and the United Church of Christ with Native Hawaiians;
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND APOLOGY.
The Congress -
(1) on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii on January 17, 1893, acknowledges the historical significance of this event which resulted in the suppression of the inherent sovereignty of the Native Hawaiian people;
(2) recognizes and commends efforts of reconciliation initiated by the State of Hawaii and the UnitedChurch of Christ with Native Hawaiians;
(3) apologizes to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the people of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii on January 17, 1893 with the participation of agents and citizens of the United States, and the deprivation of the rights of Native Hawaiians to self-determination;
(4) expresses its commitment to acknowledge the ramifications of the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, in order to provide a proper foundation for reconciliation between the United States and the Native Hawaiian people; and
(5) urges the President of the United States to also acknowledge the ramifications of the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii and to support reconciliation efforts between the United States and the Native Hawaiian people.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Joint Resolution, the term "Native Hawaiians" means any individual who is a descendent of the aboriginal people who, prior to 1778, occupied and exercised sovereignty in the area that now constitutes the State of Hawaii.
SEC. 3. DISCLAIMER.
Nothing in this Joint Resolution is intended to serve as a settlement of any claims against the United States.
Approved November 23, 1993
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY - S.J. Res. 19: SENATE REPORTS: No. 103-125 (Select Comm. on Indian Affairs) CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 139 (1993):
"...the logical consequences of this resolution would be independence." - Senator Slade Gorton, US Senate Congressional Record Wednesday, October 27, 1993, 103rd Cong. 1st Sess.
Click on 2006-06-07 2nd round of consultation, draft next ICRP Recommendations
Click on comments page and scroll down to box for comments or
On left is place to click to Submit comments
ICRP has accepted comments in the past via e-mail to Jack.Valentin@ssi.seorscient.secretary@icrp.orgbut prefers posting on the web site so that others may see them. You can see all posted comments on the website as well.
We encourage all to give input on the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) on its 2006 radiation recommendations, which most nuclear nations will adopt into law or rule to “regulate” (or deregulate) radioactive materials and the nuclear industry and which have several seriously bad provisions.
2 IMPORTANT COMMENTS TO MAKE:
1) Delete all discussion and recommendations for EXEMPTIONS and Exemption levels (delete section 2.4 and any tables supporting exemptions)
2) Encourage ICRP to adopt and incorporate the PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE in the overall framework.
More details on both below.
ICRP is making recommendations which are stated to update their 1990 recommendations.
KEY QUESTIONS and NIRS responses
Should radiation from human-made nuclear waste be “exempted” from regulatory control? (Section 2.4 Exclusion and Exemption)
Be sure to let ICRP know your views regarding EXEMPTIONS—the latest term for deregulating, releasing, dispersing radioactive materials into the marketplace and environment or to regular trash dumps and incinerators.
In recommending that some level of radiation is too low to worry about—trivial—doesn’t warrant regulation, ICRP is inappropriately taking on the societal role of “justifying” unlimited and unknown numbers of unnecessary and preventable public exposures. ICRP is mixing its self-designated roles as provider of scientific information with societal risk decision-maker. Since ICRP is a closed, self perpetuating body, without nuclear power critics, it has no moral or representative authority for making assumptions about the acceptability of risks from involuntary doses to members of the public from the nuclear power fuel chain. ICRP simply does not have public representation thus has no authority to assess what additional, unnecessary radiation risks members of the public around the world in this and future generations consider trivial or acceptable.
ICRP claims itdoes not have enough certainty about the effects of low dose radiation on large populations (termed “collective dose” estimates) to estimate the number of cancers that will result in that population now or in the distant future, yet ICRP thinks it has enough scientific and socio-political information to actually release radiation to large populations – with no limit on the number of worldwide releases or “exemptions”— with no limit on the number of exemptions per facility or to a community—without their consent or knowledge. ICRP makes a self-determination that the risks are trivial and acceptable by the public (at the same time it discourages estimating what those risks are). ICRP does not know how much total radiation will be released or received when it, across-the-board, recommends not only that countries adopt release levels but also specifies a suggested level or range. There is absolutely not scientific justification for this recommendation – it is purely economic for the sake of the industry. The whole concept of exemptions should be deleted from the ICRP 2006 Recommendations.
Furthermore, the ICRP should remove the lower bound (essentially an exemption level) from the radiation levels throughout its text and in its charts on “constraints,” doses, and bands of regulatory control (including Section 5.8.2 para (204) and Table 4, p. 61). Industries should be responsible for and protect the public from all doses not just those above an ICRP-selected level.
ICRP suggests governments decide what they want to regulate and what they don’t, then establish “what could be exempted from some regulatory requirements because regulatory action is unwarranted...the legislative framework should provide the regulator with the authority to exempt situations from regulatory requirements, particularly from those of an administrative nature such as notification and authorization…Exemption…relates to the power of regulators to release from specific regulatory obligations…waiving…legal obligation. ” [page 17, paragraph (42) of Section 2.4] We suggest ICRP completely get rid of this strongly objectionable and unacceptable recommendation and all of Section 2.4.
In the US, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has delayed its rulemaking that would generically deregulate much radioactive waste and material, but NRC is regularly taking applications for case-by-case exemptions such as those from owners of nuclear reactors undergoing decommissioning —allowing some of the nuclear waste to go to sites without radioactive licenses, permits or controls. The US public actively opposes and challenges these and opposes US and ICRP to allow generic and case-by-case exemptions. We are working to prevent all efforts to allow industry-generated radioactive materials and wastes to be exempted or excluded from nuclear regulation with the goal of preventing public release and exposure. We suggest ICRP acknowledge and accept this perspective on public protection from radiation.
ICRP should immediately cease this recommended abrogation of regulatory responsibility by removing all of Section 2.4 from the 2006 recommendations and all subsequent documents.
Should ICRP officially adopt the Precautionary Principle—when in doubt, prevent unnecessary radiation exposures?
ICRP should restructure its framework to incorporate or replace its basic principles with the Precautionary Principle. ICRP should stop pretending its value judgments have a technical scientific or even a sociological basis.
ICRP’s composition is completely one-sided; its mission is promotional not protective of human health and other living beings or biosystems. As ICRP claims to attempt to open up –become more transparent, it must include members who are not fully committed to the continuation of all nuclear activities as there is no objectivity, balance, credibility when those risking the dose are not even represented. ICRP should be clear about which of its assertions are scientific and cite the sources for those statements, and just as clear about which are value judgments (such as the misguided claim that there is a trivial or acceptable dose that can be exempted, below which resources are not justified to regulate, or a lower band of constraint dose that does not need to be regulated). Removing the unjustified or one-sided societal judgments could potentially help the credibility of the ICRP.
ICRP has 3 basic principles for radiation exposure:
Justification—a government body (such as the national legislatures or nuclear agencies) or the nuclear industry licensee/operator decides that an activity which releases radioactivity and exposes people to radiation is “justified.” The general public which is exposed does not get to decide but does receive the doses—This is clearly unethical and immoral, unfair, unacceptable. Yet ICRP sees it as a basis for permitting doses and proceeds to provide ranges of acceptable doses in various situations…all the way up to 10,000 millirads per year! A level that will give cancer to 1 in 3 exposed for 30 years. (This is the ICRP-recommended level that US Department of Homeland Security adopted in January 2006 as acceptable for moving people back in after a dirty bomb.) Justification makes sense when the exposed person decides, not when that person has no say but the entities making and controlling the potential hazard decide. It is even more questionable in non-Democratic societies, more and more of which are establishing nuclear power and weapons industries right now.
Optimization- a convoluted process by which the nuclear promoters determine how much it is worth to regulate and reduce exposures. It is used as a justification for exposing people in all situations. There is no guarantee or mechanism for the exposed individuals to determine if or how much radiation is imposed on their bodies. Includes the concept of ALARA – as low as reasonably achievable – taking the industry’s economic factors into consideration in deciding what is “reasonable.”
Limitation of Dose- The assumption that the radiation establishment chooses protective dose limits …A major fault is that public doses are not simply, economically and practically measurable thus are not verifiable or enforceable. Another serious flaw is that low, chronic doses are potentially more harmful per unit dose than single higher doses so simply limiting doses does not necessarily protect people. In addition, doses are calculated based on standard man or, as this update encourages, “gender-averaging” and a “representative individual” who does not have “extreme” habits. Thus, doses are not based on risks to the more vulnerable like women, fetuses, older adults, children, people with AIDS or other reduced immunity or preexisting high cumulative doses. Unnecessary radiation doses should be prevented and avoided, not permitted at low or continuous rates. If they are to be set, they should protect the most susceptible taking uncertainties including synergistic effects into account.
What do you think about “averaging” radiation risks?
Do you think it is time that ICRP acknowledged and accounted for non-cancer health risks from radiation like cardiovascular diseases, reduced immunity, as well as cancer?
Isn’t it about time radiation risks are considered along with those of other carcinogens and pollutants in the environment, workplace and body?
How should (relatively new) biological knowledge, like the bystander effect and other uncertainties about the impact of radiation at low doses be incorporated into existing radiation standards?
Rather than attempting to protect the most vulnerable, ICRP estimates averages risks to men and women and among age groups to protect the average rather than the most vulnerable of those studies…ignoring those groups and individuals. ICRP also ignores non-cancer health effects--- how much longer can the connections between radiation and other diseases and conditions including cardiovascular and immune deficiencies be ignored by the Commission that claims to be comprised of international experts. ICRP also needs to acknowledge and account for the large potential for much greater health damage from multiple exposures to radiation and other hazardous materials and conditions in the environment. Radiation damage is multiple, additive, cumulative and synergistic and should be considered such by ICRP. Some of these concerns are addressed with suggestions for quantifying the risks and uncertainties in the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR) in its 2003 Recommendations of the ECRR: The Health Effects of Ionising Radiation Exposure at Low Doses and Low Dose Rates for Radiation Protection Purposes: Regulators’ Edition. We recommend ICRP more carefully review this report before proceeding with new recommendations.
Should “acceptable” radiation levels (above natural background) be set for BIOTA (animals, plants and the environment)?
We are glad to see that ICRP is acknowledging that protecting humans does not de-facto protect other species or ecosystems (as has been the mantra of the radiation hierarchy until now—and some still espouse it), however, we oppose the legalization or setting of acceptable contamination levels for animals, plants and environments. The motivation is clearly to relieve radiation polluters of liability and should be replaced with the precautionary principle approach. ICRP should be asking the question “How can we prevent radiation exposure of nonhuman species?” rather than relieving of liability those that cause contamination and exposure.
ICRP suggests it will follow the same framework as it has for human beings—we repeat our call for replacing that framework with precaution—not spreading it to other species who have absolutely no way of participating in “justification” or “optimization” decisions. ICRP, ignoring all previous complaints about the “standard man” now “reference person,” is pursing the untenable concept of identifying and using reference animals and plants, when there is such immense diversity at the cellular and organismic level that such efforts are almost laughable. The complexity of cells, tissues, individuals, populations, species, interaction of species, and ecosystems cannot be simplified to a reference mammal, reference duck or reference fish. Synergistic effects will further compound the equations. These increased uncertainties should be accounted for with increased conservatism and the goal of preventing exposures. ICRP has not proceeded very far in this effort, but we repeat our concern that our nominations of highly qualified members of the public interest community to work on the ICRP committee on this topic were completely ignored by the ICRP.
Some additional areas being addressed include:
àsetting exempt and excluded levels of radiation exposure that no longer need regulatory control (something many of us have been fighting for decades and essentially outlawed in some US states);
àdiscouraging projection of “collective” or population doses— preventing estimation of harm to populations now or in the future from radiation exposures—supposedly due to the uncertainty of health effects at low doses and into the future.—ex: recommending against calculations of the numbers of cancers from allowable cleanup levels from dirty bombs or from releasing radioactive materials into commerce from regulatory control or from exposures to populations in 10,000 to a million years from the proposed Yucca Mountain site if it were to be used a nuclear waste dump. Unfortunately not guessing the damage does not prevent the damage. Hypocritically, that same uncertainty does not stop ICRP from recommending actually releasing the radioactivity in its Exemption and Exclusion section;
àsetting legal radiation exposure levels for animals, plants, and ecosystems—in order help radiation polluters escape liability for environmental contamination and exposure to non-human species;
àcontinuing to recommend the same public and worker exposures even though known cancer incidence risks have increased somewhat (by a third in National Academies of Science BEIR VII report from 8.46 to 11.41 cancers per 10,000 person rads or 100 person grays) and new (since the mid-1990s) biology indicating that radiation damages more cells in the current and future generations of cells than those directly hit by radiation (bystander effect);
à averaging radiation damage over age and gender, leaving the most vulnerable humans unprotected. This may be an improvement to protecting the hardiest members of the population but ICRP should adopt the precautionary approach and protect us all;
à continuing its precedent of disregarding radiation damage to future generations beyond the first 2 generations
à allowing “low-level” releases of radiation while claiming not to know exactly what damage is done at these doses.
à recommending use of a “representative individual” or “representative person” that is who appears to be designed to prevent anything but average assumptions in dose calculations, appears to be evolving from the standard man, the most exposed individual, the average member of the critical group, all created by the radiation establishment to enable mathematical manipulations which in many recent cases, allow more radiation contamination and reduce real public protection, prevention and precaution.
Many Thanks! Diane D’Arrigo, Nuclear Information and Resource Service dianed@nirs.org; US phone: 301 270 6477 x 16
Arson suspected in burning down of sacred Karuk dance house - excerpt
by Christine Bensen-Messinger, 7/4/2006
For the second time in less than 10 years, the sacred dance house of the local Karuk Tribe, the Kaatimiin dance house, was destroyed, and because many tribal members think it was intentional, they are planning to offer a reward for the arrest and conviction of those responsible for its destruction.
Julian Lang, a spiritual leader with the Karuk tribe, said he received a call from a friend early Sunday morning about the fire which he said firefighters from Somes Bar and Orleans Volunteer Fire Department responded to shortly before 1:30.
The fire remains under investigation, a cause has not yet been determined, he said.
The sacred dance house, which is located on the Klamath River in the northeastern part of the county, was first constructed in the early 1970s, he said.
“It’s a house, (with) kind of semi-subterranean, sunken living room,” Lang said. “(It has) a dance area, that’s where we have our healing ceremony for children.”
Other local tribes, including the Yurok and Hoopa are also involved in the healing ceremony for children, which he said is called the Brush Dance Ceremony and have already offered their support in raising funds for a reward and rebuilding.
Lang estimates the value of the structure itself at somewhere around $50,000 including materials and man hours, but said he has difficulty putting a price tag on what it means to the tribe.
“The spiritual value is kind of what it’s all about because it represents the culture of all the local tribes … it’s kind of invaluable,” he said.
Lang said a meeting has been scheduled with local law enforcement about the incident and it will be contacting the FBI to get involved as well, especially since this is the second time it has been destroyed.
Complete article is located at: http://www.eurekareporter.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?ArticleID=12736
- - - - -
To find out ways that you can support the Karuk Tribe during this time, and/or their rebuilding efforts please visit their website www.karuk.us Updates and information on ways to support will be posted there shortly.
The UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues is an advisory body to the Economic and Social Council, with a mandate to discuss indigenous issues related to economic and social development, culture, the environment, education, health and human rights.
The Report of the Fifth Session has been released. It is available in all languages on the Fifth Session page.
Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples adopted by Human Rights Council
June 29, 2006
The Human Rights Council, on Thursday adopted the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples by a favour of 30 votes in favour and 2 against and 12 abstensions, while 3 countries were absent during the vote.
The UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues is an advisory body to the Economic and Social Council, with a mandate to discuss indigenous issues related to economic and social development, culture, the environment, education, health and human rights.
The Report of the Fifth Session has been released. It is available in all languages on the Fifth Session page.
Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples adopted by Human Rights Council
June 29, 2006
The Human Rights Council, on Thursday adopted the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples by a favour of 30 votes in favour and 2 against and 12 abstensions, while 3 countries were absent during the vote.
Subject: Action Alert: Support the Winnemem Wintu Tribe!!
ACTION ALERT
Support the Winnemem Wintu Tribe and Protect Religious Freedoms!!
Two ways you can help: send in a letter of support or volunteer at the ceremony! see below for more info
The Winnemem Wintu Tribe are fighting the US Forest Service for access to one of their sacred sites along the McCloud River, south of Mount Shasta. The Winnemem Wintu Tribe has been planning a coming of age ceremony at a campground along a section of the McCloud River. Known as the Puberty Ceremony, it honors the coming of age for young women from the Tribe and sets the Tribal foundation of existence.
While the Winnemem Wintu have prayed for millennia along the McCloud River, today the US Forest Service owns the campground and subcontracts with Shasta Recreation Company to operate the campground. The Tribe needs to use the campground privately for four days, but the government has effectively stopped the ceremony by refusing to waive campground fees and close a 200 yard section of the river.
The US Forest Service has reluctantly negotiated with the Winnemem Wintu to secure safe, private access to the ceremonial site. The Forest Service has supported the Shasta Recreation Company's demand for $1000 out of the Tribe's own pocket to cover costs for closing the campground and lost profits.
"Isn't this country supposed to uphold religious freedoms?" asks Caleen Sisk-Franco, spiritual leader of the Tribe. "By refusing to close the campground and this section of the river, it means our whole ceremony will be in danger. It is our right to practice our religion without fear, in privacy, and they are basically denying us that right."
HELP SECURE THE WINNEMEM WINTU'S RIGHT TO ACCESS THEIR SACRED SITES (scroll down for more info on this struggle)
Make your voice heard!
Send a letter supporting the Winnemem Wintu Tribe to the US Forest Service Supervisor Sharon Haywood - see attached sample letter and below addresses for the letter. We encourage you to make your own personal modifications to the letter to reflect your sentiments about this injustice.
Volunteer at the ceremony!
The Winnemem Wintu Tribe has sent out a call to any people who are interested in supporting their efforts. The Tribe will need people to help alert other campers and boaters to the ongoing ceremony and ask for individuals to respect the ceremony and chose another campground for the weekend. The campground, Kaibai, is located along the beautiful McCloud River and is a chance to provide crucial support on an issue that is about religious freedom and cultural survival for the Winnemem Wintu Tribe.
A group of volunteers will be camping at the Kaibai Campground during the weekend of the ceremony, July 8th - July 11th. We need people to outreach to local campers as well as boaters, so rafters please step forward!
CONTACT AMY VANDERWARKER, ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE COALITION FOR WATER, FOR INFORMATION ON VOLUNTEERING amy@ejcw.org; 510-504-2876
We are asking that all letters be sent not only to the US Forest Service, but also to the following addresses:
Most people cannot imagine being charged to enter their church or temple, but if the US Forest Service has its way, the Winnemem Wintu Tribe may have to do just that: pay in order to use their place of worship. The US Forest Service is supporting a private company's right to profit from campground fees over the Tribe's religious freedom right to pray at their traditional sacred site.
Who are the Winnemem Wintu?
The Winnemem Wintu Tribe are a traditional Tribe whose ancestral lands are located along the McCloud River, south of Mount Shasta. The vast majority of the Tribe's sacred sites and lands are inaccessible - they were flooded after the construction of the Shasta Dam. "While our men were fighting for this country during World War II, we were displaced without due process or compensation in order to make way for Shasta Dam," explains Caleen Sisk-Franco, spiritual head of the Tribe. "If you want to talk about the letter of the law, the US Bureau of Reclamation didn't even fulfill the obligations set out in law when the dam was constructed. We are still waiting for the government to fulfill its promises to our people."
What is the Puberty Ceremony?
The Winnemem Wintu have prayed for millennia along the McCloud River, which was once a sprawling village known as Kaibai. Today, tourists go there to picnic, camp and park their powerboats. The US Forest Service subcontracts with Shasta Recreation Company to operate the campground.
The Puberty Ceremony honors the coming of age for young women from the Tribe and sets the Tribal foundation of existence. Fourteen year-old Waimem Sisk-Franco, the daughter of Winnemem leaders Caleen Sisk-Franco and Mark Franco, by tradition should undergo the ceremony this July. The ceremony is planned in correspondence with lunar and seasonal cycles and lasts four days. It consists of the young woman camping on one side of the river for three nights, learning from older women who visit her there, grinding herbs and medicines at a sacred rock, known as Puberty Rock. On the fourth day, when the moon is full, the fourteen year-old swims across the river and joins tribal dancers as a full-fledged woman.
The Winnemem Wintu Tribe has been planning a coming of age ceremony at a campground along a section of the McCloud River, which is owned by the US Forest Service. The Tribe needs to use the campground privately for four days, but the government has effectively stopped the ceremony by refusing to waive campground fees and close a 200 yard section of the river.
US Forest Service Refuses to Protect Winnemem Wintu's Religious Freedoms
According to the Shasta Recreation Company, the Winnemem Wintu should pay $1000 dollars out of their own pockets so the company can make a profit off the Tribe's use of the site. The US Forest Service has decided to uphold the contractual rights of the vendor over the Tribe's religious right to access the sacred site.
"We are basically being told we have to pay to practice our religion, and we can't afford that. We have enough trouble making payments on PG&E bills - we didn't plan on payments or an entrance fee for our religious ceremonies. And no one should be able to make money off our ceremonies," declared Mark Franco, political Headman of the Tribe.
The Winnemem Wintu face additional challenges due to the Shasta Dam. Puberty rock is under water half the year due to the fluctuating water levels of Shasta Reservoir, and it may be under water in July. The dam and management of the reservoir have prevented the Tribe from accessing many of their sacred sites, and they might face this challenge during the Puberty Ceremony.
"Isn't this country supposed to uphold religious freedoms?" asked Sisk-Franco. "By refusing to close the campground and this section of the river, it means our whole ceremony will be in danger. It is our right to practice our religion without fear, in privacy, and they are basically denying us that right."
What does the US Forest Service say?
The US Forest Service insists that the letter of the law does not allow for exclusive use of 'public lands.' But according to allies who support the Tribe's usage of the site, this isn't about access to public land. "This is about access to a place of worship, like a church. And the government is trampling on the Tribe's religious freedoms to ensure a company makes a profit," said filmmaker Toby McLeod. "This is a disturbing step backwards."
Throughout year-long negotiations with the US Forest Service, the Tribe has been shunted back and forth between the US Forest Service and the Shasta County Sheriff's Department in their effort to create a safe passage across the river for the ceremonial swimmers. Both agencies say it is someone else's responsibility to post signs or buoys. "One agency tells us one thing, another agency tells us another thing. And we have jumped through hoops to work with all of them for over a year now," says Gary Mulcahy, governmental liaison for the Tribe. "At some point, we have to ask ourselves, does the government value us so little that they would put our Tribal members at risk?"
What is at stake for the Winnemem Wintu Tribe?
Even the impediments to the ceremony put the Tribe at risk, points out Sisk-Franco. "Maybe in all our meetings we have not made clear to the Forest Service what this ceremony means to the Tribe. This is a matter of survival - the Winnemem people need our ceremonies and our sacred places to live. The government is endangering our entire way of life by refusing to cooperate. All we are asking is for four days of campground use. That does not seem like too much to ask for the survival of an entire people."
FW: Action Alert: Support the Winnemem Wintu Tribe!!
Date:
Fri, 30 Jun 2006 19:46:17 +0000
Subject: Action Alert: Support the Winnemem Wintu Tribe!!
ACTION ALERT
Support the WinnememWintu Tribe and protect religious freedoms!!
Two ways you can help: send in a letter of support or volunteer at the ceremony! see below for more info
The WinnememWintu Tribe are fighting the US Forest Service for access to one of their sacred sites along the McCloud River, south of Mount Shasta. The WinnememWintu Tribe has been planning a coming of age ceremony at a campground along a section of the McCloud River. Known as the Puberty Ceremony, it honors the coming of age for young women from the Tribe and sets the Tribal foundation of existence.
While the WinnememWintu have prayed for millennia along the McCloud River, today the US Forest Service owns the campground and subcontracts with Shasta Recreation Company to operate the campground. The Tribe needs to use the campground privately for four days, but the government has effectively stopped the ceremony by refusing to waive campground fees and close a 200 yard section of the river.
The US Forest Service has reluctantly negotiated with the WinnememWintu to secure safe, private access to the ceremonial site. The Forest Service has supported the Shasta Recreation Company’s demand for $1000 out of the Tribe’s own pocket to cover costs for closing the campground and lost profits.
“Isn’t this country supposed to uphold religious freedoms?” asks Caleen Sisk-Franco, spiritual leader of the Tribe. “By refusing to close the campground and this section of the river, it means our whole ceremony will be in danger. It is our right to practice our religion without fear, in privacy, and they are basically denying us that right.”
HELP SECURE THE WINNEMEM WINTU’S RIGHT TO ACCESS THEIR SACRED SITES (scroll down for more info on this struggle)
Make your voice heard!
Send a letter supporting the WinnememWintu Tribe to the US Forest Service Supervisor Sharon Haywood - see attached sample letter and below addresses for the letter. We encourage you to make your own personal modifications to the letter to reflect your sentiments about this injustice.
Volunteer at the ceremony!
The WinnememWintu Tribe has sent out a call to any people who are interested in supporting their efforts. The Tribe will need people to help alert other campers and boaters to the ongoing ceremony and ask for individuals to respect the ceremony and chose another campground for the weekend. The campground, Kaibai, is located along the beautiful McCloud River and is a chance to provide crucial support on an issue that is about religious freedom and cultural survival for the WinnememWintu Tribe.
A group of volunteers will be camping at the Kaibai Campground during the weekend of the ceremony, July 8th – July 11th. We need people to outreach to local campers as well as boaters, so rafters please step forward!
CONTACT AMY VANDERWARKER, ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE COALITION FOR WATER, FOR INFORMATION ON VOLUNTEERING
Most people cannot imagine being charged to enter their church or temple, but if the US Forest Service has its way, the WinnememWintu Tribe may have to do just that: pay in order to use their place of worship. The US Forest Service is supporting a private company’s right to profit from campground fees over the Tribe’s religious freedom right to pray at their traditional sacred site.
Who are the WinnememWintu?
The WinnememWintu Tribe are a traditional Tribe whose ancestral lands are located along the McCloud River, south of Mount Shasta. The vast majority of the Tribe’s sacred sites and lands are inaccessible – they were flooded after the construction of the Shasta Dam. “While our men were fighting for this country during World War II, we were displaced without due process or compensation in order to make way for Shasta Dam,” explains Caleen Sisk-Franco, spiritual head of the Tribe. “If you want to talk about the letter of the law, the US Bureau of Reclamation didn’t even fulfill the obligations set out in law when the dam was constructed. We are still waiting for the government to fulfill its promises to our people.”
What is the Puberty Ceremony?
The WinnememWintuhave prayed for millennia along the McCloud River, which was once a sprawling village known as Kaibai. Today, tourists go there to picnic, camp and park their powerboats. The US Forest Service subcontracts with Shasta Recreation Company to operate the campground.
The Puberty Ceremony honors the coming of age for young women from the Tribe and sets the Tribal foundation of existence. Fourteen year-old Waimem Sisk-Franco, the daughter of Winnemem leaders Caleen Sisk-Franco and Mark Franco, by tradition should undergo the ceremony this July. The ceremony is planned in correspondence with lunar and seasonal cycles and lasts four days. It consists of the young woman camping on one side of the river for three nights, learning from older women who visit her there, grinding herbs and medicines at a sacred rock, known as Puberty Rock. On the fourth day, when the moon is full, the fourteen year-old swims across the river and joins tribal dancers as a full-fledged woman.
The WinnememWintu Tribe has been planning a coming of age ceremony at a campground along a section of the McCloud River, which is owned by the US Forest Service. The Tribe needs to use the campground privately for four days, but the government has effectively stopped the ceremony by refusing to waive campground fees and close a 200 yard section of the river.
US Forest Service Refuses to Protect WinnememWintu’s Religious Freedoms
According to the Shasta Recreation Company, the WinnememWintu should pay $1000 dollars out of their own pockets so the company can make a profit off the Tribe’s use of the site. The US Forest Service has decided to uphold the contractual rights of the vendor over the Tribe’s religious right to access the sacred site.
“We are basically being told we have to pay to practice our religion, and we can’t afford that. We have enough trouble making payments on PG&E bills - we didn’t plan on payments or an entrance fee for our religious ceremonies. And no one should be able to make money off our ceremonies,” declared Mark Franco, political Headman of the Tribe.
The WinnememWintuface additional challenges due to the Shasta Dam. Puberty rock is under water half the year due to the fluctuating water levels of Shasta Reservoir, and it may be under water in July. The dam and management of the reservoir have prevented the Tribe from accessing many of their sacred sites, and they might face this challenge during the Puberty Ceremony.
“Isn’t this country supposed to uphold religious freedoms?” asked Sisk-Franco. “By refusing to close the campground and this section of the river, it means our whole ceremony will be in danger. It is our right to practice our religion without fear, in privacy, and they are basically denying us that right.”
What does the US Forest Service say?
The US Forest Service insists that the letter of the law does not allow for exclusive use of &lsquoublic lands.’ But according to allies who support the Tribe’s usage of the site, this isn’t about access to public land. “This is about access to a place of worship, like a church. And the government is trampling on the Tribe’s religious freedoms to ensure a company makes a profit,” said filmmaker Toby McLeod. “This is a disturbing step backwards.”
Throughout year-long negotiations with the US Forest Service, the Tribe has been shunted back and forth between the US Forest Service and the Shasta County Sheriff’s Department in their effort to create a safe passage across the river for the ceremonial swimmers. Both agencies say it is someone else’s responsibility to post signs or buoys. “One agency tells us one thing, another agency tells us another thing. And we have jumped through hoops to work with all of them for over a year now,” says Gary Mulcahy, governmental liaison for the Tribe. “At some point, we have to ask ourselves, does the government value us so little that they would put our Tribal members at risk?”
What is at stake for the WinnememWintu Tribe?
Even the impediments to the ceremony put the Tribe at risk, points out Sisk-Franco. “Maybe in all our meetings we have not made clear to the Forest Service what this ceremony means to the Tribe. This is a matter of survival – the Winnemem people need our ceremonies and our sacred places to live. The government is endangering our entire way of life by refusing to cooperate. All we are asking is for four days of campground use. That does not seem like too much to ask for the survival of an entire people.”
We moved our EarthLife
Shop to etsy and pledged
for Handmade Items
http://earthlifeshop.etsy
.com/ we moved our shop
to etsy and took the
pledge for handmade items
... at the time being you
find Healing Gemstone
Jewelry and Scandinavian
Sacred ...
in case you are
interested in having it ,
here is the link :
http://bit.ly/LkJtR
Created with coloured
Mother of Pearl, TigerEye
wand and four Lapislazuli
beads... in the middle
you find a silver spiral
symbolizing the Spiral of
Life .. Th...
Happy To announce :
We now have a variety of
Scandinavian Sacred Land
Smudge
as well as a wonderful
German Item -
Raeucherstoevchen - to
burn herbs , resins and
more in the most gentle
way
Experience the silence
and vastness of the No...
Dear Ones ,
I send this letter from
Magdala to you in request
for support in whatever
ways you are capable...
prayers are needed , as
much as they can get,
and if you know someone
in that area (
Arkansas-Harrison and
surrounding), please get
the ...
25 May 2009
Andrew Hetherington /
Redux for Newsweek
A Disease In Disguise
Lyme can masquerade as
migraine, or as madness
Eckl's Lyme disease was
masked as a migraine
By Geoffrey Cowley and
Anne Underwood
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/.
..
We are happy to announce
that a special project of
EarthLife Institute
Europe was just born in
March 2009 . Marita
Léonie Niedenfuehr
opened her Atelier/
Atelje for woodwork ...
Very timely at spring she
is ready to show her
colourful woodwork ...
Osteoarthritis Patients
Experience Significant
Pain Relief from Tart
Cherry Supplement at
Baylor
by Baylor Research
Institute*March 19, 2009
Baylor researchers now
recruiting for
placebo-controlled
trialFor the estimated 27
million Americans who
s...
Hi EveryOne, I want
to give you a quick tip
about someone who could
honestly change your
business and your life.
Have you heard of Kendall
SummerHawk, aka, the
"Horse Whisperer" for
business? Kendall is a
leader in the new wave of
"money and sou...
Something new has been
created and born.
I have developed the
I.G.N.I.T.E.
Method
(Intention-Growth-Nurturi
ng-Initiation-Transformat
ion-Empowerment )This
method will be
consumating all we have
done so far in the
EarthLife Distance
Train...
more information
ublic lands.’ But according to allies who support the Tribe’s usage of the site, this isn’t about access to public land. “This is about access to a place of worship, like a church. And the government is trampling on the Tribe’s religious freedoms to ensure a company makes a profit,” said filmmaker Toby McLeod. “This is a disturbing step backwards.” 
get the feed
