Start A Petition

In Gods Name How Could Bush Do This

Environment  (tags: conservation, ecosystems, forests, habitat, protection )

- 3944 days ago -
The Bush administration revealed today its intentions to remove existing legal protections from over 4.4 million acres of roadless areas in the national forests of Colorado.


We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Robert K (437)
Monday December 31, 2007, 5:43 pm
The Bush administration revealed today its intentions to remove existing legal protections from over 4.4 million acres of roadless areas in the national forests of Colorado. The Forest Service formally announced that it is beginning a process to establish a new rule for managing Colorado's roadless areas. The public was given 60 days to submit comments.

The proposal would completely remove roadless protections from approximately 300,000 acres of wild forestlands, and weaken them for the remaining 4.1 million acres. The announcement follows on the heels of last week’s similar announcement that the Forest Service will begin consideration of a plan to open millions of roadless acres in Idaho to industrial development and road building.

“The Bush administration’s actions in Colorado will turn over some of America’s most pristine wildlands to industry exploitation,” said Amy Mall, senior policy analyst with the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This is part of the administration’s latest strategy to erode, state by state, the protections that safeguard our public forests.

“First Idaho, now Colorado, and in a few short weeks the Forest Service plans to release a new management plan allowing roadless area logging in Alaska’s Tongass rainforest, our largest national forest. The pattern is clear -- the Bush Administration is trying to leave our most pristine forestlands open to corporate special interests -- and it is doing it through death by a thousand cuts.

“The Bush Administration has spent almost seven years trying to undo the Roadless Rule. Now, while most people are home enjoying the holidays, the Forest Service is hard at work in a last effort to try to slice-up America’s wildlands one piece at a time.

“These wild areas represent our last, best places that must be preserved for the unique outdoor opportunities, clean drinking water, bountiful wildlife habitat, and sheer majesty they provide to local residents and visitors alike.

“Coloradans and Americans across the country want to make sure these forests are protected from the Bush administration’s last desperate attempts to help their timber, oil and gas, and mining buddies. If the administration succeeds in any of these states, our country stands to lose some of the most vibrant places within our national forests.”


Jim Phillips (3247)
Monday December 31, 2007, 6:17 pm
Like I've been saying, bush & cronies can still do a lot of damage before the election of 2008.
We must be more vigilant than ever before.

"Now, while most people are home enjoying the holidays, the Forest Service is hard at work in a last effort to try to slice-up America’s wildlands one piece at a time."

We must watch and monitor all other agencies as well.


Past Member (0)
Monday December 31, 2007, 6:18 pm
The man makes me sick!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And he must be metally ill !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

hOW CAN WE THE PEOPLE STOP THIS??????????????????????

PLANT LIFE......PLANT TREES...................

Pamela R (159)
Monday December 31, 2007, 6:43 pm
We have to stop this somehow! Has a petition been started?? Please keep us updated, Robert ~~ I'm sending this story along to everyone I know!

Jenny MacLaren (122)
Monday December 31, 2007, 6:45 pm
I think we'll need at least two double-term democratic administrations to undo what this man has done. Perhaps those who think he's the Antichrist aren't so far off......

Emm Dee W (28)
Monday December 31, 2007, 6:47 pm
. . .sharing the bad news with all in my eMail address book-- However, I am no longer surprised by anything that Bush does to our (the people's that is) disadvantage-- I simply hope for the best and continue to be prepared (as much as possible) for the worse~ Prayer is an awesome tool; therefore, suggest we keep Bush uplifted in prayer for everyone's sake.

Karen Walker (71)
Monday December 31, 2007, 6:48 pm
I don't believe there is a limit to the damage he can and will do if he isn't stopped. I will never understand how he has remained in office this long. Greed, lack of respect for things we hold dear, lies, deceit, it has no end. I wish I knew the process to getting him out of iffice.

gaea r (267)
Monday December 31, 2007, 6:58 pm
dont ever stop sending letters, calling your reps.. the more people that step up and say ImPEACH these boogers,, the more seriously They will take us.. We must let our representatives know, this is priority.. NOW ~

Monday December 31, 2007, 7:00 pm
Noted! Would you please make a petition and we, PLUS can sign it. This is so wrong, I am very sorry you have to go through this rubbish.

Past Member (0)
Monday December 31, 2007, 7:05 pm

But Robert, that's exactly how he does it. In God's name. God wanted him to be President and he takes his orders from a Higher Father directly. He is answerable to nobody except God. God gave him dominion over the earth and he can do what he wants with it.

And Janet, please don't count on the Democrats to do anything. Even if we had a Democratic President, and a 100% Democratic Congress with no Republicans at all, they would still have to do whatever the military-industrial complex and the big corporations wanted them to do, or else they'd get anthraxed or assassinated, or the rigged voting machines wouldn't re-elect them. Haven't you noticed how the Democrats vote for everything Bush wants, give him everything he wants, and protect him from being impeached?

We have a two-party system in this country. As the late great Walter Karp explained it, the job of the Republicans is to represent the political far right, and the job of the Democrats is to co-opt the left so that there cannot be any real opposition to the far right. They're like a good cop/bad cop team. One is brutal, nasty, and thuggish, and the other is gentle, polite, and sympathetic, but they are a team and they both work for the same boss and have the same goals. It is just easier for them to fool people when they used that tired old technique.

And it sure looks to me like a lot of people are going to be fooled again. :(

Sharon D (91)
Monday December 31, 2007, 7:11 pm
I agree with Jocelyn

Margaret M (5)
Monday December 31, 2007, 7:12 pm
Mark S., I have to agree with you. Bush has appointed himself as God and feels he is justified in doing anything his warped mind can conceive. And yes, the Democrats will not do anything to assist us. It is a game of lay the blame on the other party while ignoring the problem. Again, those that have won't be happy until there is nothing left to take.

Past Member (0)
Monday December 31, 2007, 7:12 pm
Is there anyone who has posted willing to start a petition againt this?

I've never set up a petition and this needs a somebody who can dilligently stick with it.
I'm more than willing to sign and pass it on to all on my Care2 friends.

This needs to be started A.S.A.P. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

PLANT LIFE........PLANT TREES..........

Past Member (0)
Monday December 31, 2007, 7:16 pm

Remember when Bush and the Republicans and Democrats in Congress defined domestic terrorism as any attempt to interfere with corporate profits? This is one of the things that they had in mind. So when we protest this, we don't just get beaten and maced and tasered by the cops as usual, homeland security can ship us off to Guantanamo without trial. This is a free country and that means freedom for corporations to maximize profits.

If Bush can't push this through, after Hillary gets through granting blanket pardons to him and everyone in his administration, Hillary will find kinder, gentler way to push it through. And Al Gore will be right by Hillary's side explaining why it is necessary, if slightly inconvenient. The Republicans will destroy what little remaining wilderness is left. The Democrats will do the same, but they'll make you pay for it in carbon credits.


Joycey B (750)
Monday December 31, 2007, 7:27 pm
This man has gone completely insane. I too would love to sign a petition if anyone comes up with one. Noted with disgust. Thanks Boots.

Past Member (0)
Monday December 31, 2007, 7:29 pm

A petition to whom, Bette? To Bush? To Congress? To the National Forest Service?

The Natural Resources Defense Council and other environmental groups will be submitting comments and pursuing litigation to try to stop this. If it goes ahead anyway, more radical groups will attempt to stop the bulldozers. But the people who will be doing the actual destruction are just workers who need to feed their families. The people giving them orders will be just bureaucrats doing the jobs and happy to be paid more than ordinary workers.. And the people in government are rich people with managed stock portfolios who will profit directly or indirectly from the destruction.


Cal W (37)
Monday December 31, 2007, 7:32 pm
Noted and Dugg !! Thanks Robert, I'm no longer surprised by anything bush does. In the next year he will do anything to f**k the citizens of the United States and give his cronies anything they want to make larger and larger profits at our expense. IMPEACH NOW and throw the bastards bush and cheney in prison where they belong before they can screw us anymore.
Peace, and my love to all, Sincerely, Cal, and for Judy also !!!

Past Member (0)
Monday December 31, 2007, 7:35 pm

Hey, I know! We could draw up a petition to God!

Petition to Stop the Destruction of Wilderness Areas
Target: God
Goal: 5,000 signatures

God, we the undersigned would like You to tell Bush to stop what he is doing. He claims that he is doing it on direct orders from You. We know You never told him any such thing, so please tell him to stop. Thank You.


Dave Kane (308)
Monday December 31, 2007, 7:42 pm
Well, God told me he never told Bush to ruin the planet : )

Someone's lying . . .

Lil Judd (70)
Monday December 31, 2007, 7:44 pm
American voters put this man in office - TWICE. I can but hope American has learned. But I doubt it.

Alexander D (79)
Monday December 31, 2007, 8:02 pm
Sorry Lil Judd....We didn't elect this jackas. Sure some Americans voted for him....but you can bet your sweet fanny that he didn't win either time. There is plenty of evidence that points to the elections being bought and paid's just that we're too busy worrying about our stupid jobs/homes/cars/credit card payments/kids/anything and everything to really look into anything. We believe our government and the media because it's easy and we're lazy. Some of us are really pissed and want to do something, but what??? Grab a gun and go Ruby Ridge? My shotgun doesn't have the same range as a cruise missle. Even if enough of us got together...we'd be no match for our military. When our own military gets sick of this whacko's BS, he'll probably get his Blackwater army to take care of them too....It's going to get interesting around here.

Ali Hirst (286)
Monday December 31, 2007, 8:19 pm
When you have a crook running the country you are going to get devious tricks like this all the time...Politicians in general pull stunts when you least expect it ..just like Terrorists ....see what I mean..the biggest Terrorist of all time resides in the White House under the guise of US President...and you voted him in. If you didn't don't complain but make sure you do vote for a decent person in 2008 when you have a chance of voting...take it...and ask for pen and paper voting to be bought back so those machines can't be set to do miscount...we don't have them in Australia ...our votes are done and counted by humans.

June M (395)
Monday December 31, 2007, 8:31 pm
He should have to answer to somebody before he can actually do this! his men - administration - are puppets of his and go along with the Gestapo for fear they'd loose their job. He won't be out of there soon enough, then . . . . . . . . .will he move to South America where he bought the land?

Robert K (437)
Monday December 31, 2007, 8:36 pm
If a poll was ran probably 95% of Americans would want the Wilderness Lands, Pristine Habitats, Ancient Forests, National Parks, Breeding Grounds and other majestic sanctuaries preserved for them, their children and future generations. In as much when a great many people and their families from here and around the world go on vacation they go to see the beauty and magnificance of these Wilderness Lands and other revered places.

Even on many commercials they show these beautiful wonders, which are at the same time being set up to literally destroy and desecrated any way possible. Of the US National debt foreign countries are holding mortages on many of these last remaining Natural Wonders as collateral, that incidentally they could call in any day and turn around and commercial, privitize or whatever, whereas they would be forever lost never to be seen again.

It's not like progress, over population, pollution, bull dozers and chain saws are not going to eviscerate these phenomenal places soon enough, the corporatist and sociopaths just can't it now allowing them to l make tens of millions.

The only solution I see is to hit the streets in a peaceful rebellion like MLK. Have a million man and woman march on Washington demanding a change that's for the people instead of the multibillionaire corporations like it presently is. But it had better begin pretty soon before the police state (Big Brother) takes completely over....and that is likely to happen most any day. Then we are really going to be in a mell of a hess, whereas the rebellion then might not be so peaceful and get real nasty. But we know with the mercenaries and the pentagon backing them the corporate fascists, they would swat us down like flies. So let's get the show on the road while it is still possible which is not going to last long.

Ian S (11)
Monday December 31, 2007, 9:11 pm
Good people worldwide will want to object to this disgraceful proposal!
Where can I sign?

Past Member (0)
Monday December 31, 2007, 10:10 pm

Bush was NEVER elected. In 2000 the Supreme Court STOPPED the vote count and installed Bush. A few people rioted, many were shocked, but there was no revolution. As Alexander said, most were preoccupied with jobs/homes/credit cards, etc. In 2004 Kerry won the election but he didn't bother to ensure that all the votes were counted as he'd promised. Instead he conceded to his fraternity brother Bush and proceeded to vote for everything Bush wanted. And Kerry kept most of the money he'd raised by promising to see that our votes were counted.

After that two convicted felons, Bob Ney and Tom Delay, who are now in federal prison but were Congressmen at the time, passed a law called HAVA that said that everybody had to vote on machines. Never mind that the machines were rigged and that now we have absolutely no say whatsoever in who takes office, they were Congressmen and they got the law passed. It is still in effect. There is a proposal to amend it, but not to do away with it.

America is a funny place. If a crooked Congressperson gets a crooked law passed, and he is later brought to justice, HE goes to prison BUT THE LAW STILL STANDS. And if somebody is fraudulently put into office and it is later (no matter if it is a half hour later, a day later, a week later or whatever) proven that they were NOT elected, they remain in office and there is no way to remove them short of violent revolution.

We have what the United States Supreme Court calls a "Unitary President," which in any other country in the world would be called a dictator. No laws apply to him, the Supreme Court that installed him (now with more justices on it appointed by him) will not hold him accountable, and Congress can not hold him accountable. They cannot impeach him because they voted for all his war crimes and crimes against humanity, so if they impeached him, they'd have to impeach themselves also. Not very likely.

So please stop saying that we voted for him or that we elected him. He has the lowest approval rating of any president in U.S. history. And Congress has an even lower approval rating because they won't impeach him. Among registered Democratic voters who have cosistently voted Democratic and intend to continue to vote Democratic, the Congressional Democrats have a 22% approval rating. And in one poll that was done a while back, the Devil himself had a higher approval rating among U.S. voters than Bush did.

What I'm trying to say is that even if 100% of the American public opposed this destruction, and every single American went out and marched on the White House, it would get maybe 15 seconds coverage on the evening news, which is owned by the military-industrial complex, and would be ignored by the White House and Congress, because they don't need our votes. They have voting machines they can use to elect themselves and there's nothing we can do about it. There's nobody to appeal to. And if we get too close to the White House or Congress, Homeland security will bring out their helicopters and water cannon and those orange plastic nets, and put us all in the Halliburton/Bechtel detention camps that have already been built and are just sitting there waiting for something like that. Then they can put us to work without paying us, and, if they choose, without even feeding us. Bush's grandfather Prescott Bush supported Hitler and that's what Hitler did.

The United States now has more prisoners than any other country in the world. Slavery is illegal in the U.S. according to the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, EXCEPT AS PUNISHMENT FOR A CRIME. And a crime is whatever Bush says it is, in this case interfering with corporate profits, which he and Congress have defined as terrorism, which means that we don't get trials, there is no habeus corpus, and we can be tortured if we refuse to work.

Now for those of you who are not in the U.S.A., or who have been daydreaming for seven years, please go back and read this comment over, slowly, word by word, again and again until you get it. We did not elect Bush. We cannot remove him. He does not respect any law and no laws apply to him. Capish?

Now if you want to get up a petition to China, Japan, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, and any other country in the world with the exception of Israel and Poland, and ask them to please intervene, I'll be happy to sign it. Things will not get any better with a Democratic President whose husband pushed through GATT and NAFTA, and they are going to get much worse. The military-industrial complex took control of this country with a bloody coup in 1963 (Poppy Bush, George's dad, was head of the CIA at the time), they own the media, they own the President, they own Congress, and through the carrot & stick of military bases and defense jobs, they own the state and municipal legislatures also. And they have about 800 military bases around the world, so they probably control a lot of other countries too.

President Eisenhower warned about the military-industrial complex. Analyze the words. Military. Industrial. The merger of government and business. Fascism. Big business backed by the full military strength of the world's sole superpower, including it's uniformed armed services, private mercenary companies, and covert death squads. Did I mention their nuclear arsenal?

But guess what? Hillary will plant two trees for every tree cut down. Okay, so they won't be native species and they might take a while to grow, but they'll be offset by tradiing carbon credits with China. You can't get much greener than that can you?

A New Year on the east coast already, still a couple hours to go here on the west coast. I wonder if George and Barbara Bush and Bill and Hillary Clinton are celebrating the New Year together and Bill is joking about how he he feels George's champagne....


Past Member (0)
Monday December 31, 2007, 10:18 pm

Oops....meant George and Laura Bush. And I don't even drink. ;)

Mara G (411)
Monday December 31, 2007, 10:41 pm
No...I think you were right the first time Mark. He thinks like his mommy. really should try to drink Mark. Even if you've quit, your an AA member...whatever, its an election year and a good time to pick up the bottle. Ha Ha Ha! Not kidding!! Happy New Year!!

Terry Salter (0)
Monday December 31, 2007, 11:21 pm
Bush proving again that hes the bigest asshole USA has ever seen!

Robert K (437)
Monday December 31, 2007, 11:24 pm
WOW Mark I have been pessimistic for a quite a while, and now I do believe I am the one that needs the drink. If a million or two march would not help is there nothing left but hope. If so I think I will take up drinking. Let me ask you this Mark are you going to vote or abstain? Also what do you think about John Edwards, since my man Kucinich has been done away with by the corporatist or military/industrial complex.

Past Member (0)
Monday December 31, 2007, 11:26 pm

thanks, Ron. Happy New Year to you too and to all Care2 too. Care tutu?

I do appreciate the thought, but I think I'll leave the drinking to the young 'uns. When you're young and you hit the floor, you either bounce or you fall asleep. At my age you hit the floor and you need a hip replacement.

Okay, that's my 2008 New Years resolution: Dump this square government and get a hip replacement. ;)


Kathy Chadwell (354)
Monday December 31, 2007, 11:27 pm
My letter has a link for all to read.
Noted with thanks Robert.

Dear Interested Party:
The draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Roadless Area
Conservation; National Forest System Lands in Idaho (Idaho Roadless
Rule) is now available. The draft EIS supports the rulemaking effort for
the proposed Idaho Roadless Rule. The proposed action would apply
management direction to 9.3 million acres of roadless areas in Idaho.
The proposed action – the Idaho Roadless Rule, is also the preferred

The draft EIS (1,050 pages, including appendices) may be found on the
internet at, including supporting
documentation, and the Federal Register notice of the proposed rule. You
may request printed copies or compact disks of the draft EIS by writing
to the Rocky Mountain Research Station, Publication and Distribution,
240 West Prospect Road, Fort Collins, CO 80526-2098. Fax orders will be
accepted at 970-498-1122. Order by email from When
ordering, please specify if you wish to receive the full set of
documents and if the material should be provided in print or on disk.

We invite your comments on this draft EIS. The close of the comment
period will be determined by the publishing date in the Federal Register
of either this draft EIS or the proposed rule, whichever is later. At a
minimum, the comment period will be 90 days. The proposed rule is
expected to be published between December 14 and 21, 2007, and will also
be made available at the Forest Service website. Comments on the draft
EIS or the proposed rule may be sent via email to, or in writing to Roadless Area
Conservation-Idaho, P.O. Box 162909, Sacramento, CA 95816-2909, or via
facsimile to 916-456-6724. The Forest Service and the State of Idaho
will prepare a final EIS based on the comments. We anticipate completing
the final EIS and publishing a final rule in 2008.

The Forest Service and the State of Idaho will hold information meetings
in several communities in January and February. Specific locations,
dates and times, and agendas for the meetings will be posted on the
Forest Service website.

Thank you for participating in this process and your interest in the
management of your national forests.

Brandy Huston (230)
Monday December 31, 2007, 11:51 pm
Noted, To broken hearted to leave a comment.

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 12:01 am

Your post crossed mine, Robert. I'm not voting. I don't vote in rigged elections. This will be the first time in decades that I don't vote. I thought our electoral system just needed some reforms, so I became active in election reform stuff. Started out thinking that we needed to have our votes counted. Made sense to me. But then I realized there was a problem with HOW they are counted. And with voter disenfranchisement. And with the military-industrial complex selecting, bankrolling, and providing favorable media coverage for their puppets. So I figured, okay, we need publicly financed elections. But then I realized that we've got such gerrymandered districts that the results wouldn't be much different.

So then I thought maybe if we had better ballot access for third parties. But since we don't have proportional representation, they'd really be powerless in Congress. And of course with the electoral college AND the Supreme Court able to simply disregard the will of the people, nullify an election and install whoever they want, it gets more complicated.

For a while I concentrated on getting rid of the voting machines. At least then a presidential election couldn't be hacked by one person with a PDA and a magnet. But then I realized that no matter how openly and honestly we count the ballots, the results are announced by local and then state officials and then by the media, and we know who owns the media. I've sat and watched election returns come in on TV where one second it showed one candidate ahead by 20%, and then it instantaneously flipped and showed the other candidate ahead by 20% -- and the news anchor didn't blink an eye.

Then a friend brought by a book about the history of vote fraud in this country and it goes all the way back to George Washington. It's a tradition. American as apple pie.

So I thought about what we chanted at a Zapatista rally. Ni PRI, hi PAN, ni PRD, los obreros al poder! No parties, power to the people. And that made more sense to me. Because if you seek power within a corrupt system, it will corrupt you. And I ended up agreeing with the old Wobbly slogan:


And also with another popular slogan:


So this year the voters guides and sample ballots are going in the trash with the rest of the junk mail. Total waste of trees as far as I'm concerned. Political parties, all of them, are corporations. I'm anti-corporate, so I'm not buying any.

Edwards is a darned nice guy. It was a shame that Kerry kept him out of the loop in '04, but I guess Edwards isn't Skull and Bones, so Kerry couldn't tell him anything. The problem, Robert, is that when you put one good apple into a barrel of rotten apples, you don't get a barrel of good apples. The same Supreme Court and Congress that let Bush do whatever he wants, wouldn't let Edwards accomplish anything. Edwards has fought the corporations as a personal injury lawyer, and they don't like him, so he wouldn't have a chance.

Hillary has gotten the most money from the military-industrial complex, so Hillary is our next President. Hillary will get the nomination and if Edwards or any other Democrat doesn't throw their support to Hillary, they'll become as hated as Nader is. Loyal fans don't care if they game is rigged, or if rich guys own the teams, as long as they can root for their team. It's part of the bread and circuses.

It may be childish and immature, but the only real power we have is boycott power. Like the prisoners in Guantanamo on hunger strikes. That's how bad it is, and that's what we have to do. Don't shop at Wal-Mart, don't buy Belgian chocolate, and don't vote -- it only encourages 'em.


Ali Hirst (286)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 12:14 am
Okay if I was an American I would be immigrating out of there so fast if I had to swim to another Country. We have heaps of land here in Australia that is available for anyone wanting a long swim...oops but there are trees on some of the land still even though we have a drought....but the weather is nice here ..except this week when NZ sent us a New year gift of a Low and caused us rain, wind, and huge seas..beaches are closed and fireworks were cancelled on both North and Gold Coast so had to watch the Sydney ones on TV. The gateway bridge near us has winds so strong the traffic is crawling home after New Year at 60 klm hr...normally 110 zone in most parts ... Apart from that we are doing fine here in Australia........anyone want to immigrate...New Year Resolution 2008 for you poor people in the USA ....get Bush out and get out of the country fast!!! HAPPY NEW YEAR ... is 6.15pm here in Brisbane and almost one day of 2008 is gone already...wish the rain and wind would go with it...

Ali Hirst (286)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 12:18 am
Mark and Robert I really am not throwing off at your discussion....I really do feel for all of you in the USA...the election fiasco is just too complicated for me as we are used to using pencil and paper here to vote and real people marking off our names on the roll, and counting ALL the VOTES

Margaret B (164)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 12:19 am
I also do not believe our votes mean anything especially this year as I feel the next President is already in the wings just waiting to take the oath of office! Bush should never have had a second term, he is an idiot! He has opened Pandora's box and all generations will suffer for it, the sorrors can not be put back in the box now.

Ali Hirst (286)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 12:23 am
Bush is the reason we got rid of Howard in Australia before we ended up like you guys...sad as it is I just wish you could get a decent President and an honest one.....x

Robert K (437)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 12:42 am
Thanks to all of you for caring and your comments here, and it's a shame I couldn't have had access to such exchange about 30 years ago, but that's water under the bridge.

Anyway in reference to Mark's last comment and my not being very optimistic, I was just reading an article by Richard K. Moore of Global Research that is somewhat analogous. Below are the last two paragraphs that resounds Mark with Moore th author not being very optimistic himself...

"Only when you have reached that deep level of hopelessness, where you see no avenue of escape, can you clear your mind enough to begin to see where the real problem lies. The real problem lies, my friends, in the fact that you and I have nothing to say about how our societies are run. Any one of us has more sense than the people who are running things, and we certainly have our fellow beings more at heart. Our problem lies in our own powerlessness, leaving power in the hands of those who always abuse it, in one way or another, in one age after another."

Our challenge as a sentient species, and our response if we seek to do anything about the growth-thru-genocide agenda, is to begin to empower ourselves, us ordinary people, without reference to the useless political process. How to pursue our empowerment must be the aim of our investigations, and pursuing that empowerment must be the point of our activism.


Denice G (45)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 12:54 am
Ali I agree with you, we need a decent honest president. Noted

Carl Nielsen (7)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 1:37 am
What is the supposed benefit of passing the bill ?
Isn't there enough room for factories elsewhere in the US ?
Is there a wood shortage in the US ?
Given the enormous amount of room you have in the US there really should be no reason for doing this.
If the locals need economic development surely another way can be found.

Ramchand R (204)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 1:57 am should be stopped...

Elainna Crowell (174)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 2:18 am
This is breaking my heart. Its a good thing I don't live in the US because I'd probably become one of the violent radicals and end up behind bars.

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 2:20 am
how" in Gods name" do we allow this to happen?

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 3:06 am
In God's name is how... neve have I seen or read or learned of such abuse, violence and human atrocity as that committed in the name of G-d...

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 3:15 am
How i Gods name can you guys put up with this virus of a so called human being, he is a disgust to the world and the human race.
I cannot figure out how he is still alive, stupid stupid man.

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 4:09 am
Because Bush is a pig and he has a litter of piglets to feed, all the capitalists! There is no end to his horror reign over us. Whatever has gone around will come around for that miscreant of an individual.

Candy L (473)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 4:39 am
Well, I'm probably going to piss off a lot of people, but this is how I feel. In Gods name has nothing to do with it. Bush is just pure evil. He & his cronies stole the & election, & have lied & cheated the American People for the last eight years. He started a war, & has dragged our country down, & before his reign of terror is over, he plans to Rape & Ravage Mother Earth. He needs to be impeached right now. What we really need to do is have a revolution, but that will never happen. I don't like war, but what can we do with this mad man that is destroying everything that we hold dear.. Bush & Bin Laden & the most hated two people on the planet. I just hope I don't lose any friends over this, but if you can't except me for how I feel then your not really a friend. Peace to All.

Elena P (549)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 4:56 am
So, so sad! He definitely needs to go, and soon!

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 5:05 am
Candy.........You've got it right.........Right on!!

But, as I look over all the polititcians up for the presidential election there isn't a one worth a grain of salt!! Who has been worth his salt in all the past of presidency?

Before you go vote for anyone November 8th think about all the comments here for there is much truth to all of them.
As I see it there is only one planet, one home for man.................Now think of what the Sahara desert looks like. What is there? Nothing! And here we all sits, yes sits and wonder how can we stop this rape of Mother Earth!

This act of tearing at the land encompasses everything Bush is and the legacy his family carrys four generations back...............The greed for power is insatiable equal to thirst in a desert for that is all these people want. Are anyone one of them thinking of where & how their children & grandchildren will live in the future?!

One can not wring water from stone and the earth will eventually be one big stone. The earth will not have snow or rain without trees!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

PLANT LIFE...........PLANT TREES.......FOR LIFE...........

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 5:25 am


IT WOULD SERVE Far better if they have a campaign we could petitiont hem to start a campaign but if think we should find out first if they have one in the making i will email them now

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 5:30 am
i have sent two emails to nrdc asking them how this situation would best be served by us, we are a large base of activists and will they be starting a campaign i will post the reply

Eileen W (10)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 6:52 am
This is truly sad, and it is a shame that Bush can not be stopped. He will ruin so much before the end of his term. I hope the next president will be FOR the environment and really care about our future.

I really HATE BUSH!
Eileen in Md.

Ana M (1141)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 8:08 am
...unfortunately you have not seen everything. This is really sad :(. Thank you dear friend Robert

Lee D (22)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 8:09 am
Why don't the American peoples riot him out of office NOW????? We all have to become more pro-active in our countries to make sure ALL politicians are towing the line.

Eileen W (10)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 8:13 am
The Electorial process needs to be corrected. Until this happens the majority votes of the people do no work. Bush did not win the majority votes Gore did. The people in the majority were cheated.

Debra Brown BASW (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 8:16 am
This is just another atrocity of the Bush administrtion. They have ravaged out country as much as they ravaged Iran with the bombs they dropped on those people, and for what? Oil? Certainly not terrorisim. I do not beleive in the way the country of Iran was being run, do not get me wrong, but I see the Bush Administration as just as much of a dictatorship. It doesn't surprise me that he wants to destroy the forrests and animal habitats, any more than it would surprize me that he gets us into a war with Iran over nuclear energy, or a war with Russia over a missle base, or whatever else his little greedy depraved mind can wrap around. Still, I will vote. I will sign petitions. I will participate in advocacy groups and in marches, just as I will post my opinions on this website. If we do nothing, then as I see it, we are just blowing off steam and we are a part of the problem. We have the power in numbers if only we had the leadership to come together as one and act on our beliefs. And finally I will pray to God. Not the God Bush uses to justify his own motives, but to the God who is real and wants us to protect the gifts that we have been given.

Debra Brown BASW (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 8:16 am
This is just another atrocity of the Bush administrtion. They have ravaged out country as much as they ravaged Iran with the bombs they dropped on those people, and for what? Oil? Certainly not terrorisim. I do not beleive in the way the country of Iran was being run, do not get me wrong, but I see the Bush Administration as just as much of a dictatorship. It doesn't surprise me that he wants to destroy the forrests and animal habitats, any more than it would surprize me that he gets us into a war with Iran over nuclear energy, or a war with Russia over a missle base, or whatever else his little greedy depraved mind can wrap around. Still, I will vote. I will sign petitions. I will participate in advocacy groups and in marches, just as I will post my opinions on this website. If we do nothing, then as I see it, we are just blowing off steam and we are a part of the problem. We have the power in numbers if only we had the leadership to come together as one and act on our beliefs. And finally I will pray to God. Not the God Bush uses to justify his own motives, but to the God who is real and wants us to protect the gifts that we have been given.

Robert K (437)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 8:17 am
If I sound kinda sound contradictory there is some difference in the two party system on this issume...See the difference between Bill Clinton (though I know he wasn't a saint) and bu$hCon...

The state-by-state roadless rulemaking process is a Bush administration replacement for the Clinton era Roadless Rule, that would have protected 58 million acres of inventoried roadless areas across the United States from development.


Marc Gartmann (142)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 8:18 am
What I don't get, or perhaps are misinformed about, is the absense of strikes in the US. If the US is in the hands of corporate and military interests, why not organise a national strike and lay down the airports, trains and block the roads with trucks. Get yourself a bargaining position by showing them some muscle. I know the American Labor Unions are not as strong as some unions in Europe who can stop the traffic to run when they feel injustly treated, but the people must unite and start to show some power that doesn't depend on the ones in charge to do the right thing, but can force them to back down, or back out.
I know it is easy said, especially when you are no American, but it is essential that we relearn to depend more on our neighbours to stand up for us and help us, then on our leaders.
Then again, it is easy said (and I couldn't deliver it myself as well, because the citizens here are just as dumbed down, apathetic, fearful, disorganised and derived of fighting spirit to stand united against an evil that threatens us all), but we need to go there, even if it seems impossible.

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 8:25 am

I just dont believe anyone could cause as much destruction as what GWB has done, and is still doing.

To destroy such wildlife areas is unforgivable.
Of course, his god is MONEY and OIL for him and his croanies.
It`s just pure unadulterated greed.

Michael Sandstrom (306)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 8:35 am
Noted and Thank You. This IS NOT HIS LAND! It belongs to U.S. It is NOT HIS TO SELL or use has he sees fit. This land is supposed to be PROTECTED by LAW many years ago. Of course, I guess he is ABOVE the LAW?? Did he ASK U.S.??? Are we not the MAJORITY?? Who gave him this right?? Did Congress approve this? I thought we got "shed" of a "King" many years ago? Am I wrong?? Isn't there anyone who can stop this? I thought Congress could stop this? I THOUGHT Congress was supposed to support US?? Something MUST BE DONE! And I LOVE all these GREAT COMMENTS!!

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 9:09 am
Noted.. this is so sick!

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 9:19 am
Please watch this and speak your peace wherever and however you can!!!!!!

Carl Sagan pale blue dot Adapted from the essay ' Reflections ...
Watch video - 3 min 59 sec -


Beverly L (72)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 9:43 am
This is Bush's last year in office and people I think this is only the beginning of the major damage he will leave in his wake! He's counting down like everyone else and he will cause as much devastation as he possibly can.

MadMud Artist (433)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 9:54 am
The horrible thing is he has a whole year to do more damage. With the prospect of change in the new candidates running, there is still so much danger from this BLEEP BLEEP BLEEP MORON in office. Let us fight him every step of the way. CAN'T WAIT UNTIL THEY ARE GONE!!! Powers that be, give us the strength to get through this!!!!!

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 9:54 am

From `The Moscow News`

Will George W. Bush Stay In Power After 2008?

IF that comment is true what they allege he has said - then dont bank on him leaving.


MadMud Artist (433)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 10:00 am
He gets to stay, I move to New Zealand.

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 10:02 am
you cannot have anational strike of that extensive import many many millions of lives also depend on the constant availabiltity and movement of transportation and such
while it would be effective (perhaps) it would also be deadly. WHAT IS NECESSARY IS THE RENEWAL/FIXING OF THE ELECTORAL PROCESS and ridding the country of the republican bush/entourage/corporation/saudi/ conglomerates. and this iwll only happen when he is out of office and an ind or dem is in for a longtime. and to depose bush would have brought cheney and as everyone knows
that is a very serious choice. of horror
being the democratic nation of nations and founding fathers were quite brilliant and dedicated i do believe that in the end ( if bush doesnt sell us out much more) the united states will turn itself around.

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 10:05 am

Much depends on who turns out to `the man of perdition` (the anti-Christ)

Revelation 13:5 And there was given to him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given to him to continue forty [and] two months.

I`m not wanting to be the one who dashes all hopes, but I think we do have to look at it logically - if war broke out, or if there was a major terrorist attack - then quite simply GWB might stay in power.

Maybe Chavez got it right when he said in his U.N. speech `the devil stood here, right here on this stage`

Seems to be a few with not unsimolar thoughts :

From `Catholic New Times`, May 18, 2003

Pope fears Bush is antichrist, journalist contends - Church - journalist Wayne Madsden - Brief Article

Accept it or otherwise there is SOMEONE who is going to rule and case mayhem - and from where I`m standing GWB is looking to be a possibility - but thats only my opinion.


Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 10:08 am
If all past presidents were not as corrupt/evil as Bush then prey tell what circumstance led Bush to the White House????????????? Was it a political train moving in slow motion so we the public would not catch on to the Bush legacy going back four generations????????????

PLANT LIFE.......PLANT TREES......FOR LIFE............

Marc Gartmann (142)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 10:15 am
Sophia, France and Spain and other countries are handicapped by labor strikes every few years. Truckers blocking the roads, airpersonel on strike, trains stop running. We had a friendly police action a few weeks back, where the officers let most people of with a warning, or trainconducters who let the passengers run free. The shame is these strikes are only held to improve the own position and get more wages and not for some general higher goal benifitting all. Instead of a labor union it is time for a justice union who unites people in a common cause of protecting life and justice.

Arielle S (313)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 10:24 am
As pathetic as it sounds, you all can't know how great it is to read your comments here - I am SO weary of the politically corrupt, the morally bankrupt, and, worst of all, the terminally complacent that I often think I will not be so sorry to leave this earth after all. If I ever doubted there is a Devil and devil spawn, I have only to look in the White House.

BUT - as long as there is still even one of us ready to protest, ready to call them out, willing to stand tall, they will not win. They can never ever rest because we will be there, looking over their shoulders, breathing down their necks. They will always be afraid. Always.

RC deWinter (418)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 10:34 am
This has been in the works for some time now...I have a college friend who lives in Elbert, CO, and the road would impinge on his and his wife's land...they and many others have been fighting this for a long time but things looks bleak...BUSHCO reigns supreme and is determined to remove every last vestige of oepn space FOR PROFITEERS.

Karen K (56)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 10:34 am
With one more full year in office, this evil man can still cause so much destruction to our country and the world.
This is just one more example of his stupidity.

Robert K (437)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 10:57 am
Okay a friend of mine just sent me a message. In addition to contacting the NRDC concerning a petition which we all need to do....

Let some one with the technological capability start a petition of our own. Since this is an issue that not only affects us and is going against the ecosystem as a whole, whereto if such injustice is not prosecuted, then humanity itself will succumb. If such a petition was started here and each one of us got as many friends as possible to sign, then a movement might gain momentum to carry it to the media....and who knows maybe even Oprah Winfrey, Keith Olbermann or Bill Moyers.

If such was organized and got the momentum moving then we would be in a stronger position to go into a shutting down or strike mode of which Marc has so favorablly suggested. Now which of my friends is willing to advance this further?

"If you tremble with indignation at every injustice then you are a comrade of mine." -Ernesto Che Guevara

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 11:01 am
Candy i agree with you..God has nothing to do with was tounge and cheek because of the title..

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 11:09 am
Robert wrote: "...there is some difference in the two party system on this issume."

There may be some difference in what they SAW, Robert, and occasionally there is even a difference in how one or two of them may vote, but there is no difference in what actually happens.

The bill introduced in Congress by Kucinich was to impeach Cheney. By first impeaching Cheney, and THEN Bush, the Speaker of the House, Democrat Nancy Pelosi, would become President. But Democrat Nancy Pelosi is the one who took impeachment off the table. There is a movement to remove Pelosi as speaker, but only Congress can do that. There is a movement to remove Pelosi from Congress, but only Congress itself could do that. So it comes down to the next election and THAT will be rigged.

There is a difference between the good cop and the bad cop. If you are being tortured or brutalized, there is all the difference in the world. But they are both cops, they are a team, their goal is the same, to break you down and control you, even though one does it with violence and the other with kindness, and whether you succumb to the violence or succumb to the kindness, you still don't win.

Congress is dependent upon the corporations. It is bankrolled by the corporations. It will do whatever the corporations want no matter which party is in power. The Republicans do it brutally and with contempt. The Democrats do it reluctantly and with apologies. The end result is the same.


Carol Anne Knapp (123)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 11:19 am
What if we start praying for wisdom for him............its worth a try, but kinda sticks in your throat, don't it!!

Ariel H (46)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 11:37 am
As a native of Colorado this is an outrage. But I suspected he might try something like this. A few years back when we had the Hayman fires raging he stated then that if those areas had been open to logging we wouldn't have the fires. As I have said about the man all along - He will sell everything he can to the highest bidder, even his own mother if he could get a high enough price!!!!


Ariel H (46)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 11:40 am
My apologies....Please elect a man or woman who isn't open to the highest bidder!!!

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 11:59 am

First of all, Ariel, our elections are rigged, so we don't really have any choice in who gets "elected." The last two presidents we elected conceded to Bush and our votes were never counted in either election. When researchers finally managed to investigate afterwards, they bound that both Gore and Kerry had won their elections.

But as for somebody who isn't open to the highest bidder, have you read John Perkin's book, "Confessions of an Economic Hitman"? When the military-industrial complex, which consists of the defense establishment and the big corporations, makes somebody an offer, it is one of those offers that people can't easily refuse. In Spanish they call it, "Plomo o plata?" Lead or silver? A bullet or a bribe? The bribes are bountiful and the bullets are fatal. And if you are hesitant about accepting the offer, they can kill a member of your family or someone whom you idolize just to help you make up your mind.

Given the terms of the offer, I'm not sure that I'm not open to the highest bidder myself, and there are very few people who are incorruptible. We usually call them martyrs because they are no longer with us.

Exceptions who refused the offer and still survive are Fidel Castro of Cuba (but his comrade, Ernesto Che Guevara was slain by the CIA), Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, Rafael Correa of Ecuador, and Subcomandante Marcos of the Zapatistas in southern Mexico. Nobody of their caliber would belong to either of the two major parties in the U.S., and due to the fact that our system is totally corrupt, only a major party candidate can "win" a presidential "election."


Marian E (152)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 12:05 pm

I do not believe that bush is a smart man. He is a figurehead, put in place precisely because he isn't a smart man. He signs what he is told and usually tries to say what he is told. I think he really believes that he has God on his side, after all, how would a man with bush's capabilities get into any office if it weren't God's will?

As far as making an effort to stop this, we must do what we can. Write, contact, petition and change the damn voting system, starting with the electoral college.

Thank you.


Annie Neimand (12)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 12:37 pm
what the hell why dont we impeach all their asses... does anyone know where i can write a letter?

Robert K (437)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 12:38 pm
Man I see a glimmer of hope through all the concerned comments here. With people like you there has to be a way to make a difference...Mark what are your thoughts about a petition started among those of us here as I mentioned above and spreading to all of our friends, until we got enough signatures and complaints to get maybe some media attention. Then follow up with the slowing down or striking as Marc mentioned if we had several supporting the cause. Besides us here just talking to each other we have to try and reach those that are so complacent and think everything is going just fine.

I haven't seen the devastation the corporatist or military/industrial/ complex has caused to the natives and the environment in third world countries, but I might not have to as they are getting richer and bolder and bringing it closer to US here each day.

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 1:07 pm

I don't know, Richard. A petition has to have a target. When I posted my petition not to buy Belgian chocolates, the target was us and I simply asked that we pledge not to buy Belgian chocolates. I didn't direct the petition to the Belgian government or the U.S. government because I knew they would be nonresponsive.

As for media, Al Gore has been concerned about global warming for decades. When his father was a Senator, he spoke with his father about it. When he himself because a Senator, he spoke about it. When he was Vice-President for eight years he spoke about it. And now that he has a book and a movie out, global publicity, and millions of followers, he is still speaking about it. Have you seen any reduction in global warming?

I'm sure that the NRDC will get up a petition and that it will get, at a minimum, hundreds of thousands of signatures. The NRDC has half a million members, so we're not all that complacent. I'm sure that activist groups will take whatever measures they can to try to prevent this and, as often happens, some may even die trying to protect the trees and the wilderness.And I'm sure that as soon as the NRDC petition is up, somebody, perhaps you, will post it to Care2 and it will get a few hundred more signatures.

I'm also sure that the NRDC will take whatever legal steps can be taken to attempt to block this. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is their Senior Attorney and someone who daily puts his life on the line for environmental causes.

I know that we are going to stay on top of this and that each of us will do everything within our power to try to stop it. But I don't want to create diversions that might give people false hopes. We really need to let the NRDC take the lead on this one, and to unify our efforts behind them if we're to have any chance of effectiveness at all. And I know that we will.


Melva H (93)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 1:12 pm
"How in God's name could Bush do this?" God had NOTHING to do with it! The Bush family sold their souls to the Devil at least 3 generations ago. Bush was NEVER voted into office!!! We all knew the 2000 and the 2004 elections were stolen. We did not riot in the streets. Had we done so, we would have been gunned down by the military under his command. Ones in the military who refused to open fire on us would have been killed. Should many of us sacrificed our lives so the rest of the World would not be terrorized for 8 years by this mentally deficient madman. Probably! I suppose politicians were always for sale to some extent, but with Bush, it has become absolutely ridiculous. And we are more or less helpless to oppose the crooks who own the Parties. The sad Truth is: We Americans no longer have the genes, the backbone, and the ability to be able to sacrifice ALL for the ideals of Democracy,. in the mold of our ancestors..

Ani Kaspar (371)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 1:18 pm
He isn't doing it in GOD'S NAME. He's not doing it in GODDESS' name. He's doing it in the name of CORPORATE INTEREST, GREED, AVARICE, DECEIT, CORRUPTION, DESTRUCTION, DEATH AND whose name is that, according to Bush and the people who elected this LUCIFER TWICE? You got it!
Blessed be our teachers for they know not what they do.

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 1:20 pm
I have some serious doubts about petitions. They are more or less nothing but paper. The government is no longer serving the people, they are serving their own interests. Having dismantled the Constitution gives them free reign now to do anything they want with no repercusions from the voting masses. This is why I have given up on the electoral process in this country. I see it this way. We must support worker rebellions all over the world in some way shape or form. These little pockets of fresh air like Cuba and Venezuela are not really socialism, they have elements of programs for the people but a real socialist revolution must include all workers in all countries as they are being repressed daily and their labor is making trillions for the banks and money moguls in the world. Only a world revolution will work to bring a just system to the people of this suffering world!

Kim F (114)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 1:25 pm
This is soooooo wrong~ What the hell is wrong with him??? I can't really say what I want ( sure I would be reported) :

Kathleen R (983)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 1:58 pm
BUSH has a lor of gaul pretending to be a religious person!!! I'd sure hate to have that man's karma!!!!!

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 2:01 pm
Nothing shocks me about that megalomaniac anymore , nor the bidding of his greedy minions . Sadly , like Mark , I ' ve also lost faith in the electoral system . First , you get the money...then you get the power....then you get ...well , basically , anyone who is too tired or lazy or busy to think for themselves...and those who can't speak up for themselves , like our wildlife....the trees...and all the rest that's natural and right with the world...they suffer fot it .

...but I don't want to be the voice of gloom and despair the first day of a new year . Those of us who do have a voice...and a mind...and a predictably as " the powers that be " will close their eyes and plug their ears....we need to keep talking ( or shouting ) and writing and doing whatever we can...incessantly....until we bring this crazy world back to its senses and to what truly matters ; to what is real .

Robert K (437)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 3:08 pm
A few were puzzled why I titled this article "In God's Name How Could Bush Do This". Well as you recall bushCon said God told him to invade Iraq. Then Pat Robertson, James Dodson, Jerry Faldwell and other religious bigots fell right in line saying bush was a man of God, and that God wanted to put integrity into the White House. Pat Robertson like bush even said, 'God told him that bush would be elected the second term.' Direct lines of course. Then Robertson bragged that the 36 million religious voting block were the ones that put bush in office. So with all the televangelical soulmoltsters saying bush was doing God's work, well how "In God's Name Could Bush Do This". In other words I was facetiously saying bush being a man of God is a bunch of bull sh*t. One would think a man of God would have a little compassion, a little understanding, some consideration and generosity and a heartfelt reverence for the environment that sustains every living creature on the face of the planet. Amen

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 3:20 pm
Robert........AMEN TO YOU TOO!!

Bush is the Hitler against the environment especially against trees!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The earth will not have rain or snow without trees!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And.....I sure hope there will be no honorary damned library built for this dimwit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


dee d (8)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 4:12 pm
Mabe u can get the next president to overturn that stuff! By the time they r through there will be no wild lands and the whole country will look like a cement jungle...either that or a dirty black strewn town or slum.

Linda G (30)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 4:13 pm
A wolf in sheep clothing. This man is a threat to mankind. His own people and other nations. You all know what you need to do before its too late. Get him and his cronies out of office!!

Michael Sandstrom (306)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 4:26 pm
OK, we know he is insane, criminally insane, a homicidal maniac, his Supreme Being is money along with his “sidekick”. They cannot clam temporary insanity because they have planed their actions well. Their “followers” worship the same Supreme Being. This sounds like a “cult” to me and it IS NOT a Religious Cult. It sounds like the ATF is not doing their job like they did at Waco and at the Jim Jones ranch. Where is our Justice Department? Isn’t it their job to rid us of this cult? What about the Supreme Court? Aren’t they supposed to UPHOLD the Constitution? Do we not have one single “George Washington” in the military who understands the Constitution? What about a Thomas Jefferson or Benjamin Franklin? “America where are you now? Don’t you care about your sons and daughters? Don’t you know we need you now, we can’t fight alone against the Monster” (Steppenwolf Monster) And they “seen” this coming many years ago!!

PS: I am planting trees, Pecan trees in TN! Where the Majestic American Chestnut tree once flurished and the pine beetles are now killing the evergreen trees...

Ali Hirst (286)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 4:41 pm
I am surprised someone hasn't tried to take Bush out long in assassinatation...why not??

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 4:45 pm
Michael........I've been to Clarkesville Tn. and the land developers and the militarty are flattening every tree standing.........I was sickened by what I saw.
I even wrote to Gore about it since that is his home state!

Isn't anything growing out of the belly of Mother Earth sacred anymore?????????????????

P.S. Bless you Michael for planting those trees!!

Robert K (437)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 5:02 pm
Bette, the corporate/human profiteers have the same rights as a human, but they have no conscience. Then there are people with a conscience and those without. The corporatist whose only purpose is to make money are not going to stop until they cut every tree, clear cut the rain forests, strip the oceans clean, blow off the top of every mountain with mountain top removal for strip, kill every endangered species, make more power nuclear bombs and vaporize the entire planet. Of course that just my 2 cents worth.

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 5:11 pm

Ali, I've wondered the same thing. My guess is that the reason that Bush hasn't been assassinated is that the people like us who oppose Bush, also oppose violence and killing, and the people who do not oppose violence and killing, and who assassinate other people for a living, work for Bush. But that's just a guess.


Ali Hirst (286)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 5:13 pm
Mark...I guess it is a bit expectant of us to expect the Head TERRORIST to order his own assassination isn't it?...maybe we need someone on the outside/inside.

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 5:27 pm

LOL! So who does He talk to, Dominick? You?


Barry Seth (118)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 5:28 pm
Because of the fact the Bush is in his last few months, it has been said he is looking for ways to be remembered in a positive way. This is not a good way to start Georgie.

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 5:33 pm

Georgie has always wanted to be remembered in the same way as Ghengis Khan, Attila the Hun, Hitler, Idi Amin, and Pol Pot. And with over a million innocent Iraqis dead, I believe that he will be.

Ali Hirst (286)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 5:53 pm
Mark and don't forget the innocent Troops who have been killed since Bu$h started his War ..WMD that don't and never did exist...the only thing that does exist that he wanted is the OIL so he had to come up with something against Saddam to convince the world that he had a reason to attack Iraq. Now the poor Iraqis are worse off than with Saddam and that is saying that Bu$h has made it that way and called in support from other countries such as Australia and GB who have now got new Prime Ministers who do not dance to Bu$hs lies and have seen the light and are pulling the troops out of there this year. Now if more crap comes our way from Bush at least we have a decent PM who will NOT be so gullible as to hang onto Bu$hs every word and believe his lies..............stage right Bu$h and maybe a stint in Guat. would be a good start for him since he is so insistant that they are not badly treated over there too.......Peace

. (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 6:10 pm
how dare him we need trees and animals in november we will have someone else

Melva H (93)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 6:29 pm
The comments on this article are an excellent example of the best of the smart, caring people of Care2. Robert, I understood your title of the piece from the first. Mark S., you have taken the time to spell it out. Someone even explained to Ali why Bush has not been killed...(I can't remember who said what on everything.) ... And I got the best laugh I've had for several days from Dane Kane's comment. I'm on the same wave length with all of you. I'm glad to be a member of Care2, because of all of you! BTW: I read an article that said Bush had the money - it was a ridiculous number of millions - to build his Library, and that it's main purpose would be to rewrite history to clean up his image. Well. No matter what he does, or how many millions he spends doing it, he will go down in History as the WORST president this country ever got stuck with. He and his cohorts don't have enough money to erase all the records of his insane greed, lack of ethics and morals, and outright criminal acts. Keep in mind that Bush said, when one of his aids told him that he couldn't do something because it was against the Constitution: "Don't tell me I can't do this. The Constitution is just a GD piece of paper!"

nurith k (93)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 8:16 pm
hey mark, by the way, did you read and understand the new constituion of the eu??? i heard a prof from the university explaining it, it is a horror, people in demonstrations can get shot, our country governments are totally under the rule of the eu high court, the people and the governments have little say in anything anymore, death sentences etc., this prof is going to bring this to trial at our highest court in germany, maybe the dutch people should get organised too and find people to tell them honestly what is happening and explain the new eu constituion to you all. no democracy for whole europe. actually we need europewide in all languages people who explain to all the people what it means, they signed already, but we can still stop this, by our high courts and us all.

nurith k (93)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 8:18 pm
i meant mark g. from holland, sorry and excuse my changing the subject, but it is so very important and most of the people in europe don't know,

Vivian F (491)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 8:19 pm
That man is EVIL!! How can he even think to turn the beauty of the West into shopping malls and housing?? America will soon become one big concrete jungle thanks to that IDIOT! It was bad enough that fool was voted into office once but they put him in again! I promise you he will do some real damage before he leaves office! BUT I WANT TO KNOW WHY??? How is able to give himself all this power to side step legal protections?

Vivian F (491)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 8:30 pm
I don't know what Bush worships but it isn't my God! My God provides beauty on Earth - Bush destroys it!! That man is evil incarnate and will not be happy until all of our beautiful lands are one big shopping mall - all concrete and steel. It will truly be HELL cause there will no longer be wildlife, birds, trees or flowers - just people and buildings! How very heartbreaking this is! WHY IS THAT MAN STILL IN OFFICE??

Robert K (437)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 9:26 pm
Vicky as may have already been stated bu$hCon stole the last two elections. There were something like 19 thousand discrepancies with those voting (Democrat or at Democract precincts) in Ohio alone, such as having to stand in line for 12 hours to vote, Dieabold machines wouldn't work(of course Dieabold contributes around a million bucks a year to the Republican Party and said he would do whatever it took to get bu$hCon elected). Then there were not enough machines, people disqualied for no good reason etc. Then there were New Mexico and Fla. with brother Jeb and Katherine Harris who had it all cut and dried for bubba there in Fla. And these weren't the only three state but they were the worst.

Donn M (56)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 10:16 pm
This whole sorry mess goes clear back to the Wilderness Act of 1964, when certain primitive parcels were set aside to be inventoried for possible inclusion as wilderness. By the early seventies there were about 56 million acres to be catagorized into wilderness or nonwilderness use. That 56 million acres was NEVER all supposed to be kept roadless, but the 2001 roadless rule threw nearly 40 years of studies and planning right out the window with the decision to keep it all roadless. Clinton had no more right to do that than Bush has to open it all up. There is plenty of room here for compromise, as was always the intent, so let the experts determine what should remain roadless and what should be opened up and keep the damn poliitics out of it.

Donn M (56)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 10:17 pm
This whole sorry mess goes clear back to the Wilderness Act of 1964, when certain primitive parcels were set aside to be inventoried for possible inclusion as wilderness. By the early seventies there were about 56 million acres to be catagorized into wilderness or nonwilderness use. That 56 million acres was NEVER all supposed to be kept roadless, but the 2001 roadless rule threw nearly 40 years of studies and planning right out the window with the decision to keep it all roadless. Clinton had no more right to do that than Bush has to open it all up. There is plenty of room here for compromise, as was always the intent, so let the experts determine what should remain roadless and what should be opened up and keep the damn poliitics out of it.

Past Member (0)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 10:51 pm
The worst virus on this planet earth..................could we send him into orbit ? very high into orbit where some sort of spontaneous combustion might take place..........just a thought.

Ali Hirst (286)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 11:33 pm
Well it just proves that Bush isn't following the God who sent us the 10 commandments....he has broken all of them by now I am certain...Must be another God he worships in which case he is worshipping an Idol..probably himself!!! If he uses something to stop the 2008 election I am hoping that all of you in America will be out there ready to stop him from doing it, and get rid of him once and for all....along with any of his friends in office too who can follow on from where he leaves off...such as he has done with his father before him........what a mess the USA is in and here in Australia among most civilised countries we looked up to the USA as a super power should any of us get into strife, eg wars , terrorism ..but Bush has started the lot of them on his own since 9/11 and probably before that if we were to look deeper into his minisitries he so calls Christian...devil himself more like it in the office over there well and true.

Michael Sandstrom (306)
Tuesday January 1, 2008, 11:58 pm
PS: I feel that I must add that "his God" is a graven image, a golden statue of himself I guess. He does not have the same God/Supreme Being most of us have.... Maybe he worships his self? After all, he is a self made $%#@& and worships his creator...or, maybe his "vice"?

Ali Hirst (286)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 12:10 am
I agree Micheal and he will probably have a statue of himself installed like Saddam did before he leaves office...he probably already has it in the making.....maybe it was the horses a%% I sent out earlier today in the messages because no makeup will or could make him look any better than that

Past Member (0)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 12:45 am
Geezzzzz does he like lay in bed thinking of what rotten and mean things he can do the next day?
Destroying the forests is a crime and waste ..... all the animals that are going to be displaced ...... more pollution ..... why destroy something that is living and thriving .....he is totally against what global warming is all about......doesn't he know the world is watching ..... why can't he just leave things alone .
So much has been lost during his reign ...... :(

Ali Hirst (286)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 1:20 am
Dianna O ...I am sure he spends his waking and sleeping time scheming what he can do to hurt the American people and also the world while he is at it...notice he was not in office very long in his first round when 9/11 happened and we all know that was an inside job, then he started where his Father left off with Iraq and the WMD that don't and never did exist...sending troops to Iraq and now you have reach over 4,000 of your own troops dead and many more thousands injured or maimed for life....then think about it. Australia sent troops in when Bush "ordered " Howard our previous PM to send troops to Iraq, and we have not lost a troops ( we have lost 2 civilian contractors only) in Iraq from active duty...the one we did lose shot himself accidently in his room, so he was not actually killed on active you think that is strange that even though Australia sent many less troops over the years since Iraq was attacked by Bush that we have been so lucky to have very few casualties even....Yes we have lost a couple recently in Afghanistan but so far we have been secure with our troops in Iraq....very strange and odd to me, and now that our troops are coming home from Iraq before Christmas and would be even earlier if the Senate met earlier than it does or Rudd would have them out of there faster. This is not our is not Americas' war either, it is Bush's lies that bought this war upon Iraq and the Iraqis' are worse off for it than when Saddam was in power and alive...Bush needs to be treated how he treated Saddam and held responsible for all the atrosities he has commited since he came into power. I am against the Death sentence because too many innocent people have been sentenced to death and found innocent when someone decides to come clean on their death bed but with Bush their is no doubt that he is GUILTY of many crimes while holding office of the highest order in America, and ordering the rest of the world what to do at the same in this case I do beleive in the Death I said earlier I am astounded that no-one has managed to assassinate the idiot with all he has done to America and other countries.....he is the dirtiest liar I have heard of so far in my life, in any Politics, and he continues to ride shotgun and rule you all in America like he owns you..Well he doesn't own you and this business where you have lost your freedom of speech is rediculous and is so archiac that it would be something that would be centuries old and abolished with the free are not a communist country but you sure are being treated like one over their by the False God who thinks he owns you all in the White House.I am not afraid to speak out about Bush as I am not an American and he can try all he wants to shut me up but I even called our own previous PM here Howard the Coward and he didn't treat us like you guys are being fact Howard tried to stay in power by handing out billions of $ that were believed we didn't have to win this election in November but it backfired on him and even his own Electorate voted him he could never have won anyway. He has slunk off into hiding somewhere to lick his wounds because Australians stood their ground and didn't want to take any more of his crap especially in the way he bowed down to Bush...Now we have a PM who may not have had experience and is young compared to our previous PM but he is right on the ball and was up early on the Sunday after Election night and started work right from Day 1 before he was even sworn in to right the wrongs that Howard and his sidekick Bush has caused here in Australia and he keeps going on his election promises and keeping them to the best he can since he was elected...You need a Presidient over there with some gumption to stand up and be counted when he does something wrong or breaks a promise because our PM would hear us loud and clear if he did anything remotely like Bush is doing over in the US.

I am going to add some old news about what Australian Legal Authorities said about the Iraq war in 2003 and that it was an Ilegal war .

Forty-three Australian experts in international law and human rights legislation have issued a declaration that an invasion of Iraq will be an open breach of international law and a crime against humanity, even if it takes place with the authorisation of the UN Security Council. The statement concisely argues that any Australian participation in a war on Iraq—as part of the Bush administration’s “coalition of the willing”—will make the government of Prime Minister John Howard and Australian military personnel liable for prosecution in the International Criminal Court.

Submitted as an open letter to Australian newspapers and published yesterday by the Sydney Morning Herald, the signatories include Professor Chris Sidoti of the Human Rights Council of Australia; Sir Ronald Wilson, a former High Court judge and the President of the Human Rights Commission; Simon Rice, the president of Australian Lawyers for Human Rights; the directors of several university centres for human rights law; prominent barristers; and lecturers at Australia’s most prestigious law schools.

The legal experts reject outright the justifications for war being made by the American, British and Australian governments as a violation of the UN Charter, under which there are only two grounds for the use of force in international conflicts. As they explained: “The first, enshrined in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, allows force to be used in self-defence. The attack must be actual or imminent.

“The second basis is when the UN Security Council authorises the use of force as a collective response to the use or threat of force. However, the Security Council is bound by the terms of the UN Charter and can authorise the use of force only if there is evidence that there is an actual threat to the peace (in this case, by Iraq) and that this threat cannot be averted by any means short of force (such as negotiation and further weapons inspections).”

Having outlined the legal basis for war, the declaration concluded: “Members of the ‘coalition of the willing’, including Australia, have not yet presented any persuasive arguments that an invasion of Iraq can be justified at international law.” Moreover, as the authors pointed out, the doctrine of “pre-emptive strike” elaborated by the Bush administration represents a fundamental repudiation of the UN Charter.

“This doctrine contradicts the cardinal principle of the modern international legal order and the primary rationale for the founding of the UN after World War II—the prohibition of the unilateral use of force to settle disputes.

“The weak and ambiguous evidence presented to the international community by the US Secretary of State Colin Powell to justify a pre-emptive strike underlines the danger of a doctrine of pre-emption. A principle of pre-emption would allow particular national agendas to completely destroy the system of collective security contained in Chapter 7 of the UN Charter and return us to the pre-1945 era, where might equaled right.”

In fact, although the lawyers chose not to raise the issue, the indictment of the German Nazi leaders at the 1945-1949 Nuremberg War Crimes Trials was precisely for carrying out preemptive military strikes against neighbouring countries. They were tried and convicted of “planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances”.

The letter goes on to note that there is a “further legal dimension” that would form the basis for a war crimes indictment of those responsible for any invasion of Iraq—the likely extent of Iraqi civilian casualties: “Even if the use of force can be justified, international humanitarian law places significant limits on the means and methods of warfare.

“The Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their 1977 protocols set out some of these limits: for example, the prohibitions on targeting civilian populations and civilian infrastructure and causing extensive destruction of property not justified by military objectives. Intentionally launching an attack knowing that it will cause ‘incidental’ loss of life or injury to civilians ‘which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated’ constitutes a war crime at international law.”

The international media has already carried a number of reports of the “shock and awe” tactics that the US military intends to use to intimidate and terrorise the Iraqi military and population into submission. These include the destruction of power plants, electricity grids, sewerage treatment facilities, water reservoirs, bridges and roads. Washington has specifically warned that it has not ruled out the use of nuclear weapons.

The letter concluded: “The military objective of disarming Iraq could not justify widespread harm to the Iraqi population, over half of whom are under the age of 15. The use of nuclear weapons in a preemptive attack would seem to fall squarely within the definition of a war crime...

“Estimates of civilian deaths in Iraq suggest that up to quarter of a million people may die as a result of an attack using conventional weapons and many more will suffer homelessness, malnutrition and other serious health and environmental consequences in its aftermath. From what we know of the likely civilian devastation caused by the coalition’s war strategies, there are strong arguments that attacking Iraq may involve committing both war crimes and crimes against humanity.”

The fact that 43 eminent members of Australia’s legal establishment felt the need to issue such a public statement is a sign of the breadth of the opposition among many social strata to the Howard government’s support for the Bush administration and its planned war on Iraq. The letter confines itself to pointing out that Australian government leaders, officials and military personnel may find themselves in front of the International Criminal Court. But the comments clearly reflect a far broader public outrage at the criminal character of the war that is about to be launched.

Despite all the efforts of Canberra and Washington and the media, a majority of the population does not accept the government’s claims that war is necessary to eliminate “weapons of mass destruction” and are profoundly disturbed about the consequences of invading Iraq. The largest demonstrations in the country’s history took place on February 14-16, appealing to the government to withdraw the 2,000 Australian troops that Howard has deployed to the Persian Gulf without even a vote in parliament.

Just as the government dismissed the sentiments of the demonstrations—with Howard referring to them as a “mob”—so too it has rejected the statement by the legal experts. The office of Attorney General Daryl Williams issued a perfunctory statement that no Australian could be sent to the International Criminal Court without its approval, and that the court’s jurisdiction did not cover “the legal basis for an armed conflict”.

But neither Williams, nor any other government minister, has attempted to answer the charge that there is no basis in international law for the planned war on Iraq and that those responsible for launching it will be the authors of war crimes

Ali Hirst (286)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 1:23 am
Desperately searching for allies: Washington fetes Australian prime minister
By Richard Phillips
19 February 2003
Use this version to print | Send this link by email | Email the author

Confronted with mass anti-war protests on a global scale and diplomatic resistance from France, Germany and Russia, the US government has been summoning some of its most reliable allies to Washington in a desperate effort to present an image of a growing international alliance for war.

Those visiting over the past two weeks include Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, Polish Prime Minister Leszek Miller and Bahrain’s King Hamad. They have all been given the red carpet treatment, told what will be required of them in the coming military onslaught in the Persian Gulf and then paraded before the US media.

Last week it was Australian Prime Minister John Howard’s turn. Howard, who began planning for participation in the war last June and recently forward-deployed 2,000 troops to the Middle East, cynically told the media his trip was a “peace mission”.

Howard faces increasing public hostility to his commitment to the Bush administration’s war against Iraq. For this reason he continues to argue in parliament and the local media that his government has made no final decision on whether to participate. This blatant lie, which Howard has maintained for months, was blown apart on the second day of his Washington visit.

A journalist at a White House press conference asked Bush if he considered Australia to be part of his “coalition of the willing”. “Yes, I do,” Bush replied, in front of a visibly blushing and somewhat shaken Howard. Belatedly sensing his faux pas, Bush then declared: “You know, what that means is up to John to decide.”

But the clearest indication that the Australian prime minister has given an unconditional commitment to the impending US-led war was demonstrated by the extraordinary treatment he was accorded by the White House.

Howard was given unrestricted access to senior administration officials, who flattered him wildly before the US media. He lunched with Vice President Dick Cheney, met Secretary of State Colin Powell and Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld and held a “fireside chat” meeting and private dinner with the president.

President Bush told a joint press conference in the Oval Office that Howard was a “close personal friend of mine, a person whose judgement I count on, a person with whom I speak frequently. I believe he’s a man of clear vision. He sees the threats that the free world faces as we go into the 21st century... I’m proud to work with him on behalf of a peaceful world and freer society. He’s a man grounded in good values and I respect him a lot.”

At Bush’s private dinner, according to one gushing Australian media report, the president took Howard “out on the balcony to take in the view of the Washington Memorial, floodlit against the snow. The informality of the evening was reflected in the presence of Barney, the president’s black Scottish terrier.”

This sycophantic reportage and the royal reception extended to Howard by both the Bush administration and the Washington press gallery is a remarkable turn around. In September 2001, a few days before he arrived in Washington to mark 50 years of the US-Australia alliance, Howard was bluntly criticised in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and other leading US newspapers over his government’s brutal treatment of asylum seekers and refugees. To add insult to injury, a Los Angeles Times editorial not only denounced the Australian leader, but also repeatedly referred to him as “John Hunt”.

And when Howard committed 1,500 Australian troops to the US-led intervention in Afghanistan in October 2001, the event was given little public recognition by Bush and virtually ignored by the US media, much to Howard’s chagrin. In fact, one of the few mentions of the Australian troop deployment was in the Seattle Times, which went on to describe Howard as “dull as dishwater”.

But, as one unnamed senior US government official told the Australian Financial Review last week, Howard’s current elevation to celebrity status is bound up with two related factors.

“For the US domestic political and media audiences it was important to show there were respected countries that support us, and Australia is one of those,” he said. “The other is that it’s important that we are seen sitting down and consulting with other countries and not just charging ahead. Domestically, it cuts against the unilateralist charge.”

Kurt Campbell, former Pentagon official and head of security programs at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told the newspaper: “The fact that Howard is here today is huge. Any country that steps up to the plate now in support of the administration will get a lot of credit and will be remembered for a long time.”

Puffed up by his treatment in Washington, Howard attempted to posture as an international heavyweight, repeating the latest US policy spin to anybody who would listen. At a joint press conference with Rumsfeld he declared: “Australia does not believe that all of the heavy lifting on something like this should be done by the United States and the United Kingdom alone.

“[H]ope is to be found in the whole world saying the same thing and saying it very loudly to Iraq and most particularly, the Arab states saying, ‘Mate, the game is up’,” Howard said. This transparent attempt to present himself as an ordinary fair-minded “bloke” from “down under” was entirely out of character and obviously scripted by Howard’s media advisors.

In New York, Howard met with UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and Chief UN Weapons Inspector Hans Blix. According to press reports, the Australian leader told Annan that his organisation could be “permanently damaged” if the UN Security Council did not force Iraq to disarm. Howard said Iraq should either disarm or face the consequences and called on the UN Security Council to enforce its resolutions on Iraq in a “very direct, authentic way”.

Before the Blix report was handed down, Howard insisted its delivery would be “a very important event”. But after the weapons inspector’s report failed to provide the US with the military trigger it wanted, Howard simply dismissed it. “I don’t think in the end it adds to anything much,” he intoned, aping the Bush administration’s responses.

Washington’s elevation of Howard into a statesman-like figure is laughable. One of Australia’s most intellectually limited, uncultured and unashamedly provincial prime ministers in recent years, Howard has developed his political career by appealing to the most backward-looking and insular elements in Australia. His newfound praise in Washington last week provides a measure of the increasingly isolated position of the US government on the world arena.

On return to Australia last Sunday morning—after meetings with Tony Blair in London and Indonesian President Megawati in Jakarta—Howard told the local media that he would not be swayed by the mass anti-war demonstrations and arrogantly described the protesters as “the mob”.

He went on to make clear the real motivation underlying his decision to back a war. After repeating the obligatory lies about “weapons of mass destruction” and “defending world peace,” he stressed the importance of the US-Australian alliance. “Given our position in the world,” he said, this “is a very important consideration”.

While Howard refrained from providing any details, Murdoch’s Australian obliged by publishing an article the next day entitled “Spoils of war a US free trade agreement,” which listed those Australian industries that would most benefit from a free trade deal.

“For the first time in half a century,” the newspaper declared, “Australia stands to gain a potential economic benefit after participating alongside the US in a war”. It predicted the sugar, beef, dairy, filmmaking, drug testing and research, and service industries would gain the most.

Far from “fighting terrorism” and “making the world a safe place”, the Howard government’s slavish support for a criminal US-led war is bound up with the mercenary interests of corporate Australia, its economic relations with the US and its broader financial and strategic interests in the Asia-Pacific region.

Ali Hirst (286)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 1:24 am
WSWS : News & Analysis : Australia & South Pacific

US ambassador lambasts Australian Labor Party leader
By Richard Phillips and Linda Tenenbaum
13 February 2003
Use this version to print | Send this link by email | Email the author

US Ambassador Tom Schieffer has publicly denounced Australian Labor Party leader Simon Crean in the local media over criticisms made by Labor MPs of President George W. Bush and Australian participation in the impending US-led war against Iraq.

The unprecedented intervention follows last week’s parliamentary debate on Australian involvement in the military assault during which right wing Labor MP Mark Latham described President Bush as “the most incompetent and dangerous president in living memory”. Several other Laborites also denounced the US administration and the Senate, where the government does not have a majority, passed a no-confidence motion in Prime Minister John Howard.

The ALP has officially stated that it will support a US-led military attack if the United Nations Security Council endorses it, but 15 Labor MPs have defied the policy and said that they will oppose war against Iraq under any circumstances.

While Prime Minister Howard has responded to US requests for military backing and forward-deployed 2,000 Australian troops to the Persian Gulf, his government has little domestic support for a US-led war. With Germany, France and Russia manoeuvring against a unilateral attack on Iraq, any wavering in support from Australia, which Washington regards as one of its most dependable allies, would constitute an international diplomatic disaster for the US.

So when a few Labor MPs began criticising Howard’s commitment of troops the US embassy reacted with fury. Deputy Ambassador Mike Owens phoned ALP leader Simon Crean’s office twice on February 6 claiming that Latham’s speech was “anti-American” and those who accused Howard of deception over the commitment of troops were alleging Bush to be a liar.

The next morning Ambassador Schieffer, a close friend and Texas business crony of Bush, told Channel Seven television that he was “concerned” that the comments were straining relations with the United States. Schieffer claimed he was not trying to bully, but then declared: [W]e’re in the business of trying to express what American foreign policy is. The Australian Labor Party has to make up its mind as to how it reacts to this process.”

Crean, who has a tenuous hold on the ALP leadership, quickly tried to defuse the issue. He met with Schieffer later that day and assured him that Labor’s support for the US-Australia alliance was “unshakeable”. Two days later Crean told the Ten Network that he had cautioned Latham and in future Labor would tone down its criticism of Bush and US policy.

These assurances, however, did little to satisfy the ambassador who stepped up his attack in the Bulletin magazine this week. Schieffer told the national weekly in an interview published yesterday that Crean was making a “rank appeal to anti-Americanism” and “anti-George Bush feeling”.

The US previously had “terrific relationships” with the Labor party, the US ambassador said, and praised former leader Kim Beazley and current Foreign Affairs spokesman Kevin Rudd for their close collaboration with senior US government officials. “Sadly Simon Crean doesn’t have those kind of personal relationships,” he added.

Schieffer said he was “surprised” Crean had not met with US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage on his Australian visit last December or met key US administration figures during a US vacation during the Australian parliamentary Christmas break.

The ambassador predicted a quick and successful victory against Iraq and said: “By the end of March we’ll begin serious negotiations [with Australia] for a free trade agreement. And we want to conclude that very quickly. Inside two years. Now when that happens, that will mean a relationship that literally, I mean literally, does not exist anywhere in the world.”

In other words, a favourable trade deal with the US depends on 100 percent political backing for the US-led war against Iraq. And just in case the Labor leadership did not get Schieffer’s message, the Bulletin spelt it out. Unless Crean fully supports US foreign policy dictates on Iraq, Australian trade negotiations with America might become “painfully, paralysingly slow” if Labor “managed to win the next election.”

Confronted with Schieffer’s crude and unprecedented ultimatum, Crean demanded another meeting. “He does not have the right, nor does any ambassador, to interfere into the domestic politics of this country.... That’s unprecedented and unacceptable,” he said.

Labor backbencher and former foreign affairs spokesman Laurie Brereton, was even more blunt: “I haven’t seen an intervention such as this since then-ambassador Walter Rice in the Nixon administration publicly attacked the Whitlam government after we criticised the carpet bombing of North Vietnam in December 1972.” Schieffer’s comments, Brereton said, constituted a “huge breach of diplomatic protocol” and the ambassador should be “immediately recalled to Washington and counselled.”

Schieffer, however, will not be counselled by Washington but encouraged to ratchet up the pressure. Direct intervention into ALP internal affairs constitutes an extraordinary breach of national sovereignty and diplomatic conventions, but this is how US imperialism now does business with its post-World War II allies and former political partners.

Last September the Bush administration published its National Security Strategy (NSS), which spells out the modus operandi of US foreign policy in the twenty first century. The document makes clear that the American government has dispensed with all principles of national sovereignty and international law and reserves the right to get rid of any regime it considers hostile to its vital interests.

The Howard government, the Labor party and other members of Australia’s political elite may try to console themselves that this doctrine is reserved for Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya or other impoverished ex-colonial countries. But the US ruling class has its sights on any nation that stands in its way.

Soon after releasing the NSS, the Bush administration intervened in the German elections against Gerhard Schroeder’s Social Democratic Party (SPD)-Green government because it made a last minute populist appeal to the anti-war sentiment in Germany, declaring it would not support a unilateral US military attack on Iraq. Furious over this stance, the Bush administration publicly supported the right-wing Christian Democratic Union and its conservative allies and conspired behind the scenes to undermine Schroeder and force his electoral defeat.

US officials seized on private comments by a German cabinet minister comparing Bush with Adolf Hitler to whip up a political scandal and try to turn public opinion against the government. While the SPD-Green coalition was returned with a narrow majority, the Bush administration has blackballed Schroeder and, to this day, has not observed the longstanding practice of formally congratulating the new government.

Likewise, Schieffer has regularly intervened in Australian domestic affairs since his appointment in 2001. He has declared, without a shred of evidence, that David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib, Australian citizens imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay for over 12 months without charge and in contravention of basic human rights and international law, are “terrorists” and likened them to “Nazis”.

Schieffer has also castigated Australians for being “too complacent” about terrorism and urged the Howard government to beef up police and security operations. Last year, in a crude attempt to whip up domestic fears, he declared that terrorists could easily detonate a nuclear bomb in Sydney Harbour.

Under his leadership the US embassy stepped into a federal by-election last October in Wollongong, an industrial city 80 kilometres south of Sydney. Nervous over mounting public opposition to Australian involvement in a US-led war against Iraq, embassy officials demanded meetings with all those contesting the election to discuss their positions on Iraq.

While US officials claimed they simply wanted to gauge public opinion in the run up to the November elections in the US, this information was widely available in Australian opinion polls. The real purpose was to send a message to all those contesting the election that the US State Department was closely monitoring their actions. Union officials have also reported that they have been visited or phoned by US embassy staff over the last few months to discuss their attitude to US plans to invade Iraq.

Notwithstanding their attempts to garner immediate political mileage over Schieffer’s bullying—the overwhelming popular response in Australia has been outrage—Crean and the Labor leadership will eventually fall into line. The ALP is a tried and tested political ally of US imperialism. It initiated the establishment of the US-Australian alliance during World War II and has loyally defended it ever since. Labor Prime Minister Bob Hawke became the first government leader to send troops to the 1991 Gulf War and Crean has stressed the ALP’s continuing and total support for the US-Australian alliance.

Schieffer’s threats to Crean, however, are aimed at intimidating not just the ALP, but the entire political establishment. The Bush administration confronts escalating economic problems at home and a growing domestic and international movement against its planned onslaught against Iraq. Under these conditions, it cannot tolerate anything less than total submission to its reckless and criminal foreign policy agenda.

Ali Hirst (286)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 1:25 am
Australian prime minister assists US push for war
By Terry Cook
30 January 2003
Use this version to print | Send this link by email | Email the author

Australian Prime Minister John Howard is playing his part in the diplomatic offensive for war, launched by the White House following the report by UN weapons inspector Hans Blix to the UN Security Council on January 27. Within hours of the report’s release Howard was insisting that Iraq was in “material breach” of UN resolution 1441 and that the UN Security Council had to “match the rhetoric of that resolution with action.” The prime minister went on to threaten that failure to back a US-led war would “deliver an enormous blow to the authority and prestige of the United Nations”.

Speaking on ABC radio Howard described the report—which failed to advance a shred of evidence that Iraq was harbouring or developing weapons of mass destruction—as “damning,” and accused Iraq of “stubborn non-compliance.”

Under conditions where a US-lead strike on Iraq still lacks the endorsement of any of the major world powers outside of Great Britain, Howard’s unconditional backing—albeit from a decidedly second-rate power—is being touted by Washington as evidence of “international” support for its criminal intentions.

On the eve of the report’s release, Washington sent an official message to Howard declaring: “The President is very grateful and today publicly thanks the people of Australia and the Government of Australia for their actions.”

To comply with US demands, the prime minister has been prepared to ride roughshod over widespread popular opposition to Australian participation in an assault on Iraq that has even found expression within the ranks of Howard’s own conservative Liberal Party.

This week former Liberal Party President John Valder revealed on ABC radio that he had received many phone calls from people inside and outside the Liberal Party supporting his recent letter to the Sydney Morning Herald opposing war with or without UN backing. Recognising the political dangers inherent in backing an unpopular war, Valder condemned the US military buildup as “out of all proportion to the end” and urged Howard to consider its “social and economic” cost.

Howard has not budged, however. Further evidence of his subservience to Washington surfaced as Australian military personnel left for the Persian Gulf. Claims emerged that both the size and the composition of Australia’s commitment were determined directly by Washington. According to a front-page article in last weekend’s Sydney Morning Herald, US Secretary of State Richard Armitage delivered precise requests on the contingent’s composition to senior Howard government officials during his visit to Australia in December. While the Australian government had originally considered dispatching a very limited number of FA-18 strike aircraft, on Armitage’s insistence this was increased to a full squadron.

The article also revealed that Australian forces have already been factored into—and will be deployed in accordance with—Washington’s war plan. The FA-18s, armed with laser-guided bombs and protected by US aircraft equipped with airborne anti-missile systems, will be used in the initial stages against Iraqi troops and command posts. Australian Special Air Service (SAS) teams will operate alongside their US and British counterparts. Australian commandos from the 4RAR battalion will carry out emergency rescue and backup for the special-forces units.

While the timing and composition of the Australian military deployment was decided in the closest collaboration with the White House, it was kept from both the Australian public and the parliamentary opposition parties until the very last minute. Opposition Labor Party leader Simon Crean said he was told that Australian troops were leaving for the Gulf less than 24 hours before they departed. At the same time, Howard ensured that the military contingent was well underway before federal parliament resumes on February 4. Even now, the size and scope of the military commitment remains unclear. When first announced, the military personnel involved numbered 1,500, but this has grown steadily over the ensuing days and now stands at 2,000.

The existence of the detailed engagement plans, together with the dispatch on January 23 of supply ship HMAS Kanimbla loaded with 350 troops and war equipment, and the departure on January 24 of 150 elite SAS soldiers from Perth, make a mockery of Howard’s continuing claims that he has made “no final, nor even tentative” decision to commit Australia to a war against Iraq.

Speaking at a highly publicised ceremony at Sydney’s Garden Island naval dockyard to farewell the Kanimbla, Howard promised the government would continue to “work to bring about a peaceful solution” but that they [Australia’s military forces] should be prepared for the prospect of war.

Subsequently, in an exclusive interview with the Daily Telegraph following the ceremony, all mention of a “peaceful solution” was dropped. Howard justified sending the troops by declaring “if we don’t make sure that Iraq disarms, not only will she keep them and add to them and potentially use them but other countries will copy what Iraq has done.”

A little later, on Melbourne radio, Howard blurted out his real motivation. “I have to take into account the importance of our alliance with the United States,” he said. By evoking the US-Australian alliance Howard revealed that his continuing invective against Iraq’s so-called “weapons of mass destruction” is nothing but a fig leaf for prosecuting the predatory needs of Australian capitalism.

Drawn up at the urging of Australia in 1951, the ANZUS treaty between Australia, New Zealand and the US reflected the major shift in world relations following World War II. Until 1941, the weak and dependent Australian ruling class had pursued its significant imperialist interests in the Asia-Pacific region under the patronage of Great Britain. But with Britain’s final demise as the dominant world power, Australia looked to its alliance with the new world hegemon—the United States—to achieve its ends.

This relationship has continued to function as the cornerstone of Australian foreign policy. Whereas once Australian troops were dispatched to fight wars in far-flung corners of the globe—the Boer War in South Africa, Gallipoli in World War I—at the bidding of Whitehall, since the Second World War, they have been deployed—in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan—at the discretion of the White House.

While posturing as opponents of Howard’s subservience to Washington, the Labor Party is motivated by exactly the same considerations. Crean, whose popularity has been steadily plummeting since he became Labor leader some 15 months ago, has seized on the popular sentiment against war in Iraq to try and claw back support. Addressing the departing troops at the Kanimbla ceremony, Crean declared: “I don’t think you should be going. I think the consequences of going it alone in a narrow group of people does potentially expose us to greater risk.”

In a statement after the ceremony, Crean hastened to make clear that he was by no means opposed to a war—so long as it was sanctified by the UN. “The Australian people hope that the international community, acting with the legitimacy of the United Nations will ensure that Iraq disarms,” he said.

Under the auspices of the UN, the Hawke Labor government—with Crean serving as a cabinet minister—sent forces to the Gulf in 1991. That first Gulf war resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqi people, the destruction of Iraq’s infrastructure and the impoverishment of its population. The Labor Party “lefts,” under the banner of “sanctions not bombs,” backed the imposition of UN sanctions that eventually resulted in the death of an estimated 600,000 Iraqi children and 500,000 adults.

In line with his Labor Party predecessors, Crean’s concern is that the horrific slaughter being carefully prepared by the US be given the cover of United Nations respectability. At the same time, however, he has indicated that the Labor Party will support a US-led assault even without a majority vote in the Security Council.

Debbie Sequichie-Kerchee (53)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 5:07 am
He can for two reasons I can come up with: 1. He is bold enough to think he can, so he can (obviously being backed by the non-action of our elected servants of the people LOL). 2. His 'god' is Money, Lust for Power and Control, Greed, Elitism ..... and all the negatives they create along the way......Don't worry, he'll be out of office, however, the damage he has done over the past seven years is tremendous....and he'll still be there in a corporate or other behind-the-scenes capacity, due to his family's wealth....Peace....

Past Member (0)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 7:56 am
Simply put all Americans who care about America and the trees have been had...................

Yes, we've been conned, lied to and again had!!!!!!!

PLANT LIFE......PLANT TREES........FOR LIFE.........

Vivian F (491)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 8:09 am
Here is an old idea worth resurrecting:


Vivian F (491)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 8:09 am
Here is an old idea worth resurrecting:


Vivian F (491)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 8:10 am
Sorry about the double post but it took so long that I re clicked.

Robert K (437)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 9:31 am
Maybe this has been a little embellished over the years, but it was said when the whiteman discovered America a squirrel could start in a tree on the east coast and go all the way to the west coast and never touch the ground. True or not we do know that 90% to 95% or more of the forests that were originally here have been cut down, clear cut, bulldozed, paved over etc. with total abandon. Even the National Forestry Service is not for protecting the ancient forests but for building roads at taxpayer expense for the internatioanal/multibillionaire/corporations to come in log, strip mine, and drill for oil on taxpayer land....and take away the last remaining vestiges of something that will never be again. And to top it off the corporatist only pay about fifty cents a tree and then ship then overseas to Japan and China where they make millions.. Same way with Big Oil, the taxpayers subsidize these conglomerates to drill and ravish taxpayer land, and then the taxpayer pays exorbitant prices at the pump, while Big Oil makes tens of billions of dollars. So don't say keep this out of politics, politics control everything we do, even the purity of the air we breathe, the water we drink, the cost of gas, roads, school, food, and all. Everything is controlled by the corporatate/politico system that is all the more corrupt.

So instead of cutting down, privatizing, and commercializing these last natural wonders, which over population and progress will eventually do anyway, man or humanity should be doing all it can to save the revered areas, and not even that, but to even set aside more. Then maybe future generations (if there are any not destroyed by greed) will be able to gaze upon these majestic unspoiled natural places in awesome wonder.

Doesn't it say in the good book that, 'We are only the stewards of this Earth) and that we have only borrowed it from future generations. Whereas isn't it the decent and moral thing to do to try and not leave them a rock hard planet, with no humanity only a rock of stone with no heart.

Past Member (0)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 9:51 am

You cannot currently send a star to Robert because you have done so within the last week.


Dominick J. D (1)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 9:57 am
Excellent post Robert. All these greedy people don't look to the future all they they see is the present and what money they can earn and stash away. They don't look forward to the legacy they leave the furture heirs of the earth, even their own, only what they can cash in on now!
I was ever so proud of those people who stood their ground in the trees at Berkely and held at bay those that would cut down those majestic trees. We have to stand strong and fight those that would dissemate the remaining wilderness here in the States as well as other places for sheer profit and greed.

Shirley Shaw (44)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 11:03 am

Past Member (0)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 11:19 am
Robert......At the top left hand corner of my Care2 page is this very famous quote:
"Because we don't think about future generations,
they will never forget us. -Henry Tikkanen".

Our grandchildren will wonder about us alot and ask themselves why they live in stone caves........

Plant Life.......Plant Trees.......For Life........

Roseann d (178)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 11:23 am
If you have a 401K that Bush just made mandatory unless you opt out - you too are or will be funding corporate cronies. I looked on what was offered on mine - on each one, either Halliburton, Monsanto, Exxon, Bechtel and Big PHARM-US dominate them all - and of course timber and chem companies are there. I am opting out - I can't be protesting and funding their coffers at the same time.

Barbara T (431)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 1:17 pm
As Marc said, the time has come for CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE; and that would involve MASSIVE STRIKES, consumer boycotts, not paying taxes, and SOLDIERS REFUSING TO FIGHT, among other things. It is fine to go as far as we possibly can with petitions, letters-to-the-editor, and discussion forums such as this one. What these methods do, is RAISE PUBLIC CONSCIOUSNESS. That prepares people for the more drastic methods of Civil Disobedience.
If this were really the Democracy we have been taught it was -- IF, that is, a big IF -- then petitions, letters, discussions, and Legal methods {such as the NRDC uses} would WORK.
Not ALL of us, are in the position to COMMIT CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE such as is required. A lot of us are in ill health, have family and other responsibilities, etc. We can't afford, for one reason or another, to end up in jail, as often happens with Civil Resisters.

One thing we CAN do, all of us, is Consumer Boycotting. INFORM yourselves; and REFUSE TO BUY things made from wood from endangered forests. Or using gold or oil or diamonds or other metals and substances extracted by destroying the environment. Unfortunately, that is almost EVERYTHING. Things like toilet paper, plastics, your wedding ring, and gas for your SUV. We must LIVE MUCH MORE SIMPLY, without so much Stuff. Don't buy food flown in from thousands of miles away.

Most of us are afraid of the consequences of not paying our taxes. Soldiers and their families, are afraid of the consequences of going AWOL and desertion. We are not all cut out to be tree-huggers and tree-sitters to stop logging.
There are LOTS of people who DO have the courage, tho the media does its best to suppress their stories. We need to inform ourselves on the Internet, and other alternative media; and do our best to INFORM OTHERS. As is being done here.

As I said, we need to MAKE CLEAR OUR SUPPORT FOR ALL DIRECT ACTIONS OF CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE that gum the works and make sure it is NOT just "Business as usual"; EVEN AT THE COST OF SOME PERSONAL INCONVENIENCE TO OURSELVES. The personal inconvenience WE may have to face in our daily lives' disruptions, is NOTHING compared to the "inconvenience" of HAVING OUR EARTH RAPED AND STOLEN OUT FROM UNDER US.
We are not going to just "go out into the streets" and be mowed down. Everybody here knows that. Demos have been tried. They RAISE CONSCIOUSNESS; that is as far as they go.

We need to STOP THE MACHINE. This means doing things that may be "illegal". {Like not paying taxes or refusing to fight once in the military; or "trespassing" on private or government property.} But, after much thoughtful consideration, and, yes, often prayer or meditation, it becomes clear that IT IS THE MORAL THING TO DO, TO DO THE "ILLEGAL" THING, TO BREAK THE LAW FOR HIGHER ENDS. As citizens broke such laws as the Fugitive Slave Act, that all escaped slaves legally had to be returned to their masters, back in the day.

If we ourselves don't quite have the courage to, or are not in a position to, take risks, WE CAN WITH RELATIVE SAFETY AND COMFORT, ENCOURAGE THOSE WHO DO. I urge you all who are reading this, to start doing so, if you are not already doing it. We can CREATE A PUBLIC OPINION.
That is why, in Europe, as Marc states, strikes by workers are frequent and successful. Because the PUBLIC in general supports them; and the Public is willing therefore to put up with the temporary inconvenience to the flow of their daily lives.
Here, a lot of the Public is still brainwashed. Our unions have been weakened, while we were looking the other way, enjoying a false and temporary "prosperity". It is time to UN-BRAINWASH the Public. In Europe and the rest of the world, "Socialism" is not such a bad word. It means the PEOPLE, and not corporations, controlling things in their own interests. We have really been brainwashed more than we can imagine. The rest of the world was raped, to lull the American consumer into a mindless state of "gimme". Now, the "chickens are coming home to roost" and the American consumer is seeing what the REST of the world was up against.

SUPPORT Civil Disobedience, if you cannot commit it yourself. This SUPPORT will make all the difference; it is not "nothing". Support Tax Resisters, Resisters in the Military, Strikes, Boycotts, Sit-ins, Free Speech in illegal "restricted zones"; and ANYTHING ELSE THAT COMES UP, THAT IS MORAL AND NON-VIOLENT.
My name is:

Robert K (437)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 2:36 pm
"We are only caretakers of the Earth, and as such, we are obligated to protect and nurture her, Let's Raise Our Voices - Together We are Strong!"


Blue Bunting (855)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 3:45 pm
Now that oil has hit a record $100/bbl ... the Bu$h oil barons should be dancing for joy!

kx b (5)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 3:48 pm
here is the email address [] for comments on the colo. thing.....the web address for the article describing [] the whole register thing is here [

Lisa A (7)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 4:13 pm
Folks, Since we only get 60 days to give our opinions against this Rape of Colorado's Roadless Forest areas, I found a website where we can instantly petition against this. Check out:

For free you can compose a protest letter that goes to the Senate and Congress, as well as your local newspapers if you choose. I just sent my protest and labeled it "Reject the Bush Administrations Robinhood Plans to Rob Colorado's Forests to Give for Corporate Interests.

Then I explained my feelings and copy/pasted the press release article we just read, stating that I and many Americans support the opinions of that article (except of course, certain Corporate CEO's).

It is free, and since I can't find any online petition to protest against this, I hope everyone will take advantage of this.


Past Member (0)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 4:17 pm
I started reading all the comments and had to eyes are burning!
First, let me say that I am happy to finally find a community of like-minded individuals who are fed-up with our country's false claims to "democracy". And of course, G. Bush haters :)
George Bush does claim to do things in the name of God. He does this because people who are uneducated but religious will believe what he says. I live in a rural area of Western NC and I'm surrounded by southern baptists who would jump off of a cliff if Bush told them to. It's disgusting, but somehow, he has been able to charm the uneducated masses.
For those of you who ask why Americans haven't protested and impeached this man, here's your answer: Americans are lazy and greedy. (This of course, does not include my Care2 comrades).
But I do truly believe that the large majority of legal citizens in this country are not concerned about anything except themselves and whether or not Britney Spears is pregnate again. It's disgusting.
Our country is so out of touch.

Lisa A (7)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 4:23 pm
Here is what I sent to "Blades of Grass", who, for free, composes your letters and sends them directly to the Senate, etc.,:

The Bush Administration Robinhood Plan to Strip Colorado's Forests to Feed Corporate Interests:

I and almost all Americans (except certain Corporate CEO's) feel the article below speaks for all of us. If you have any conscience whatsoever, do not let this happen:

DENVER (December 26, 2007) – The Bush administration revealed today its intentions to remove existing legal protections from over 4.4 million acres of roadless areas in the national forests of Colorado. The Forest Service formally announced that it is beginning a process to establish a new rule for managing Colorado's roadless areas.

The proposal would completely remove roadless protections from approximately 300,000 acres of wild forestlands, and weaken them for the remaining 4.1 million acres. The announcement follows on the heels of last week's similar announcement that the Forest Service will begin consideration of a plan to open millions of roadless acres in Idaho to industrial development and road building.

"The Bush administration's actions in Colorado will turn over some of America's most pristine wildlands to industry exploitation," said Amy Mall, senior policy analyst with the Natural Resources Defense Council. "This is part of the administration's latest strategy to erode, state by state, the protections that safeguard our public forests.

"First Idaho, now Colorado, and in a few short weeks the Forest Service plans to release a new management plan allowing roadless area logging in Alaska's Tongass rainforest, our largest national forest. The pattern is clear -- the Bush Administration is trying to leave our most pristine forestlands open to corporate special interests -- and it is doing it through death by a thousand cuts.

"The Bush Administration has spent almost seven years trying to undo the Roadless Rule. Now, while most people are home enjoying the holidays, the Forest Service is hard at work in a last effort to try to slice-up America's wildlands one piece at a time.

"These wild areas represent our last, best places that must be preserved for the unique outdoor opportunities, clean drinking water, bountiful wildlife habitat, and sheer majesty they provide to local residents and visitors alike.

"Coloradans and Americans across the country want to make sure these forests are protected from the Bush administration's last desperate attempts to help their timber, oil and gas, and mining buddies. If the administration succeeds in any of these states, our country stands to lose some of the most vibrant places within our national forests."

The one click form below will send your personal message to all your government representatives selected below, with the subject "Reject Bush's Proposal to Remove Protection from Colorado's National Forests" At the same time you can send your personal comments only as a letter to the editor of your nearest local daily newspaper if you like.

You can compose your letter or copy exactly from mine at

. (0)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 4:26 pm
He is determined to destroy as much as possible in the time he has left!
Noted with thanks, Robert.

Past Member (0)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 4:47 pm
We humans are like children before we get it right......We have to be told over and over again before we recall and remember.

The following should be remembered in out effort to stop this Devil from cutting down one more tree that took longer to grow than his age..................Read & recall:

They took all the trees
And put them in a tree museum
And they charged all the people
A dollar and a half just to see'em.
Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got
Till it's gone.
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot.
Joni Mitchell,Big Yellow Taxi

Plant Life
Plant Trees...

Past Member (0)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 4:50 pm
We humans are like children before we get it right......We have to be told over and over again before we recall and remember.

The following should be remembered in out effort to stop this Devil from cutting down one more tree that took longer to grow than his age..................Read & recall:

They took all the trees
And put them in a tree museum
And they charged all the people
A dollar and a half just to see'em.
Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got
Till it's gone.
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot.
Joni Mitchell,Big Yellow Taxi

Plant Life
Plant Trees...

Lisa A (7)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 5:16 pm
I am a born again Christian, converted in 1981. After becoming a Christian, I actually was given grace to Love and respect the Environment , all of Nature and the Animal Kingdom. Prior to this, I took it all for granted.

This was not my own common sense teaching me this, but my newfound Faith in Jesus Christ that knocked this Sense into me! So this is why I question what voice Bush is actually listening to. If you accept Christ, you start finding love in your heart for people as well as everything on this Planet. You cannot have the attitude Bush is currently displaying and love God at the same time.

Bush must be careful he isn't allowing his ego to be stroked by demons pretending to be God's voice. Look at who he had by his side until he stepped down. Carl Rove! Carl is an admitted agnostic who played up the 'religious image" for Bush to the masses. When asked why he did this when he was an agnostic, his reply was, "Because it works".

If that's not hypocrisy, then what is?

Elizabeth N (40)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 5:42 pm
It's easy for Bush to do things like this. He has neither a heart nor a brain.

Past Member (0)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 6:51 pm
Hey B. Mutiny, I liked your posting but I have a question for you. I have no control over my income taxes. I am on Social Security and a State Pension and that is all taken out automatically and I always get money back cause I have a new mortgage. I can't even strike. I guess that is why I am such a loud mouth and have over 100 anti government Tee Shirts. I predict something big is about to happen in 2008 that will make this slaugther of the forest look mighty small. We need that man Bush run out of town on a rail!

Vivian F (491)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 7:14 pm
Bush run out of town on a rail? How about we run a rail out of Bush's.......ooops!

Robert K (437)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 8:42 pm
Don't forget Lisa's comment above....send letter to the address and here's the bottom excerpt...and oh yes, thanks Lisa....

The one click form below will send your personal message to all your government representatives selected below, with the subject "Reject Bush's Proposal to Remove Protection from Colorado's National Forests" At the same time you can send your personal comments only as a letter to the editor of your nearest local daily newspaper if you like.

You can compose your letter or copy exactly from mine at


Barbara T (431)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 8:53 pm
Grey Puma: Yes, a lot of us Elders have time on our hands, but less in the way of health or of income. But, just like you say, we can be Loud Mouths!
Public Opinion is a powerful force. As has been said here, a lot of it is swayed because the Bushies have total control over the Corporate Media. People see and hear little else. We can, and must, make the Internet a powerful counter-force.
In future as in the recent past, we will see workers for Peace and Justice slammed as "traitors, spies, helping the terrorists, softies, insincere," and whatever else the Bushco propagandists can think of. To try & turn people against those who protest. This will ESCALATE as the temperature goes up. {And I don't mean just Global Warming -- altho, that, too!}
We have to LOUDLY AND PROUDLY IDENTIFY with those who are taking our places in running the RISKS they run, committing non-violent Civil Disobedience. The propaganda identifying them as "crazy" and "silly" and "irrelevant", is aimed at US as well; to try to SEPARATE "us" from "them". We must, instead, show our support and encouragement in any way possible. It is no use just mouthing rhetoric. We have to SPECIFICALLY support Army Resisters, those who manage to avoid paying taxes {like by having low incomes}, those who insist on taking natural herbs instead of Big Pharma lethal products, those who won't obey the social "norms" by consuming in the way the magazine ads try and teach us to consume. All these, and of course many more, are ways of RESISTING, both legal -- and ILLEGAL ways.

We have to have our own propaganda machine -- for GOOD propaganda!!!

Donn M (56)
Wednesday January 2, 2008, 10:54 pm
It was always intended that some of the roadless areas would be opened up to development, they were only set aside in the first place so they could be studied to determine which were worthy of wilderness designation. Just put the environmentalists in a room with the timber/mining/recreationist interests and let there be compromise, instead of fighting over this for decades.

Steve Donaldson (1)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 12:28 am
When will you people get real? Bush didn't cause Katrina and isn't cutting down these trees. Go after the real villans the ones making money off these deals.

Tassa Rose (13)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 12:39 am
WOW; Mc Lure has a fantastick point about our Nation and it's Priorities! This grotesque micarriage of Justice that extends both from Budgets/Healthcare and National Parks and Forests, has ramififcations now from "SEA to Shining and Polluted SEA!" Noted, and Read, Sadly. YES, indeed; We the People...WHO ARE WE...? Where have we Been? " Where Have All the Flowers Gone....Long Time Passing." I try and sign every Petition that deals with SAVING our National Parks, Wildlands, Forests. Why Should BushCo TAKE ALL? I mean, WHY take EVERYTHING BEAUTIFUL from the People? Again, Sadly Noted.

Marc Gartmann (142)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 12:40 am
You're right Steve, Bush didn't cause all this, but he surely isn't using his position to make it better. He sold his people out as a lot of politicians do. Where do you put the blame? With the one who pulls the trigger when ordered to, the ones ordering from above to below, the ones making the plans for the orders, or the ones who follow complacently and keep playing there games in their secluded area of the world without a care or a notion to look further?
There is blame on a lot of people and instead of apointing blame, we should step up to our responsibilities. We need to change the collective balance into a sustainable, caring and sharing practice where we notice we are all in this together and can only deal with this together. the sidelines will vaporate and at a certain point in the not so far away future people have to choose sides.

Past Member (0)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 12:52 am
Hey Steve, where do get off not blaiming Bush? The chain of evidence in any crime goes all the way to the top my man! Example; Nuremburg Germany WWII war crimes trial. You did not have to work in the ovens to catch a death sentence for the murders of the Jews. Those at the top died in prison or were executed. Maybe you might want to rethink your comments. Bush as the trigger man catches the case the others have a greater chance of getting away with murder by pleading innocent.

Ann T (69)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 2:12 am
I knew the day Bush made himself President that things for the middle man, and the earth was never going to be the same. This man is one who thinks he does not have to follow orders of anyone, listen to anyone but his good old boys. I am sick of these preachers in these get rich quick churches telling my children to listen to Bush he is a man of God, he is the one to lead us into the gates of Heaven. This man has destroyed more earth than anyone man I know. The air is dirty, and he does not care. He even made the statement in his first term to cut down the trees in the forest of the Redwoods, and other forest to stop the fires. Like it was the trees fault that we have forest fires. Those redwoods have been here from the beginning of time. I don't think so if I have my way about it. This man is not just crazy, he is the most stupid man on the face of the earth and he needs to be used as an experiment for cancer, or a new drug since he owns stocks in all the drug companies on top of the oil mills. In Texas they have closed the state parks one at a time and I look at them all being close before Bush's buddy gets out of office in 2009. So yes Bush and his whole right wing party is to blame for this. What took 70 years for the Decorates to build back up from the depressions, it took him less than 9 months to loose, It is going to take another 70 years to build America back up again. Sad to say, but it will. To much damage has been done. We got to keep the house ahead with the Decorates to get anything done.

Joyce C (17)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 5:46 am

Vivian F (491)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 6:59 am
Steve, if you think Bush is not to blame for a lot of what is being destroyed in America then you need someone to sit down with you and explain it real slow so you will comprehend the evil this man is. Of course he didn't cause Katrina! I think the devil (Bush) is doing all these things so that America will get in an uproar and he can declare martial law and become dictator and use some of the concentration camps that have been erected across the U.S. (Indiana and Louisiana for one).

Dominick J. D (1)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 7:13 am
Hi Vicky, here is the the Devil Incarnate and Bush is his sidekick who helps carry out those Facist plans and deeds. Write to your elected official and ask that he be Impeached!

Dominick J. D (1)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 7:31 am
Steve writes: When will you people get real? Bush didn't cause Katrina and isn't cutting down these trees. Go after the real villans the ones making money off these deals.
Duh, Steve, Bush is making money off of these deals, and even if he weren't he's making dam sure his cronies do, and yes we are going after the real villians and Bush and Cheney are at the top of the list, not only for those ills, you mention, but for the War Crimes he's commited and stangely enough since he can't seem to take blame for anything, he's dragging God into it.

Susan L (118)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 11:16 am
Will there be no National Parks left with trees? I get the feeling Bush, and friends want every place to look like the many barren areas of Texas--flat and treeless. I agree, he never was elected for the 2nd term and many times I don't understan what he is saying because he jumps around in one "sentence" which isn't really a sentence. Is there a PETITION???????????????????????

Robert K (437)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 11:25 am
Of course the corporations run the show, but where does most of the corporate money go in goes to the good old GOP conservative republican party. And all know the corporatist play both ends against the middle supporting the dems with just a small amount in case they should win. A good example is the MSM, which the repug spin doctors call the liberal media. Yet the CEOs and the international conglomerates contribute something like 85% of their contributions or bribes to the repug party. And while the corporatist are running the show who is knee deep into their lousy crap. Talk about making money...Cheney and Haliburton, bu$hCon and Exxon/Mobile, Rumsfeld and AOL, Dieabold, Blackwater, Monsanto, G.E., Murcock and the most wealthy elite. Man these thugs are making billions at the expense of the middle class and disadvantaged. Even at the expense of the National Parks, and Colorado Wilderness.

Past Member (0)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 11:37 am

Whichever party is fronting for them at the moment gets the lion's share of the corporate and defense dollars, Robert. This season it seems to be the Democrats as Hillary and Obama are getting more corporate and defense campaign money than the Republicans. And I wouldn't call them donations, exactly, as corporations usually expect and obtain a good return on their investments. ;)


Kim Szabo (53)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 11:40 am
seems there isn't too much more to say. i think everyone has covered this pretty well. all i have to say is i am glad i didn't vote for him and he's a tree hater and a hater of wildlife. we need him gone from office and hopefully replace hiiim with a person that cares about life and not just his own up there in his white house.
God bless and help us all. no wonder the lakotas are taking back what is theirs. at leasst they have the balls to fight.

Dawn H (102)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 1:36 pm
How can we put God and Bush in the same sentence -- It is like like Hell worrying about global warming! Georgie has NEVER had any concern for conservation issues, and I am sure he has no plans to listen to the citizens -- Why would he start now?!?

Past Member (0)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 5:45 pm
Alaska Newsreader
Today's news for the Last Frontier

By Terry Carr

Published: January 3rd, 2008 11:52 AM
Last Modified: January 3rd, 2008 11:57 AM

Trapper to target wolves. An effort is in the works to go after wolves that could have been involved in the recent dog attacks in the Anchorage area, according to a KTUU Channel 2 story. The theory is, according to the story, that nailing one or two of the animals in traps will be enough to discourage future attacks.

Story tools


E-mail a friend


Digg this

Seed Newsvine

Send link via AIM

Font size : A | A | A

Three dogs have died in wolf attacks over the past month, the state Department of Fish and Game says. The KTUU story notes that the limited trapping tactic appeared to work in curtailing a series of wolf attacks 13 years ago.

The story says that Eklutna Native Corp. has agreed to open its land between Eagle River and Mat-Su to the trapping effort. Corporation officials, though, are requiring that notices be posted and residents be kept informed of what’s going on.

Meanwhile, a Fairbanks Daily News-Miner story today says that wolf activity in that part of the state has eased. There have been no reported sightings in two weeks, according to Fish and Game. The Chena Hot Springs Road-Two Rivers area has had three dog killings attributed to wolves.

“I don’t believe the wolves are gone; they’re probably still around in that general area,” said Tom Seaton, assistant area biologist for Fairbanks. “Maybe they got on a couple of moose kills somewhere off the road system and have been hunkered down there.”

Robert K (437)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 8:22 pm
"Corporate Greed has gotten its way in Washington for 25 years and our elected leaders let it happen. If we elect another president appointed by the status quo or just trade corporate Democrats for corporate Republicans the middle class will fall further behind and our children will pay the price." John Edwards

The corporate media over the last couple of months has been pushing a notion that John Edwards sounds "angry". Are we witnessing another attempt to take down a candidate that threatens the corporate power structure? Do we have a repeat of four years ago when the media made a big deal about Howard Dean shouting over the crowd noise?

John Edwards is angry and he has every right to be. All Americans should be angry at what is going on in our country. Our treasure is being sacrificed in an illegal unjust war in Iraq. Our jobs are being exported overseas. Health care costs are rising while wages decline. Our civil liberties have been threatened by an administration that thinks it is above the law.

We don't need another candidate that will just fall into the "looking presidential" trap. Michael Dukakis did it; John Kerry did it and Walter Mondale did it. It doesn't work. The GOP loves it; they make false accusations that stick since they are not responded to in kind.

Lets examine what John Edwards is saying that has caused the corporate media to label him as angry:

"Here's what's happened corporate greed and political calculation have taken over our government and sold out the middle class. Washington isn't looking out for the middle class because Washington doesn't work for the middle class anymore ... that is wrong. It doesn't say life, liberty and the pursuit of endless corporate profit in the Declaration of Independence. America is about opportunity for you ... and your families, your children. But our government is selling out their future at the command of lobbyists and their corporate clients and we have to rise up together and stop it. We have to rise up and say, no more. Not on our watch.

"That's what the American people have always done. Every time in our history that the American people have been faced with great challenges, they rose up and met them. They made certain that they left America better than they found it; they left their children a better life than they had. That's what your parents did. It's what your grandparents did. And it's what my parents did for me.

"I take it very personally when I see powerful, well-financed interests taking over this democracy, and taking it away from regular Americans, people like my parents. We have got to reclaim this democracy for them. For you. For your children. For your grandchildren. Because if we don't, we're going to have to look our children in the eye and say, "we're leaving this mess to you." Our parents didn't do that. Our grandparents didn't do it. Twenty generations of Americans who came before us didn't do it. And I'll tell you something: we're not going to do it. We're going to make absolutely certain that America rises again."

I see a positive patriotic message here. I see Edwards as expressing the view of many patriotic Americans who are fed up with corporate control of our government. It is only the corporate media that is trying to tell the American people Edwards's message is angry and un-presidential.

Dana Goldstein, of The American Prospect, in an article yesterday, concluded "if Edwards takes Iowa in a convincing victory, progressive populism could gain national legs. But three days out, it's looking probable that no matter who wins in Iowa, the victory will be razor-thin. That would leave Edwards' anti-corporate strategy with neither a clear mandate nor a clear rejection, and his presidential hopes without a clear path forward."

Martin K (80)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 10:44 pm
It is not money their after its land. Fascists want land thats the prize, he that controls the land controls those that live upon it. Time for a revolution from tyranny, the IRS was not signed into law and is therefore illegal. Ask them to show you the law that says you have to pay taxes and they can't ,it was never signed into law.

Past Member (0)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 11:15 pm
Amen Robert !!!!!!!!
Now I understans why Bush hates broccoli.....................They look like miniature trees!

The very idea that a tree or trees can undo this idiot is grand so let us all do what the trees have always known.............There are a few political nuts hanging too close to the end of of a branch and will fall hard upon rocks of lies and deceit........................

PLANT LIFE......PLANT TREES.......FOR LIFE...............

Sandra M Z (114)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 11:41 pm
You can bet they want the land here in Colorado. They already know the west coast and probably everything east of the Mississippi will be underwater in the future. They want that land so they can come here and live, we are a mile high, and we've got water. This would be their new base of government, the New Washington. Want an easy story to read? Try Alas, Babylon, a (short) story written in l956, I forget the author. After the cataclysm in the story, Denver is the capital and the head librarian of the country is the president because everyone eise has been killed in Washington! (Could we be so lucky? No offense to the few who truly serve the citizens) The story is about human nature and survival, could come true today. Colorado is traditionally conservative, but if the bastards come to Denver, I bet they won't survive the night. Noted, thanks Mark. I'll sign the petitions, and forward to others on my list here in Colorado. I agree we have to go tougher than petitions, I've signed a thousand, but the destruction continues unabated.

Sandra M Z (114)
Thursday January 3, 2008, 11:44 pm
Oops, I mean thanks Robert K. and BMutiny!

Ali Hirst (286)
Friday January 4, 2008, 1:42 am
Sandra MZ that is interesting as a well known and very accurate clairvoyant here in one of the Australian Mags has predicted that their will be an assassination this year that will shock the world...and it was after teh Pakistan one so will be interesting to see if she is correct....Bush maybe....hmm

Vivian F (491)
Friday January 4, 2008, 6:27 am
Is there anybody running for President that would be good for the people and the land and wildlife? If so please tell me WHO. I just don't know anymore. Thanks everyone! :)

Carolyn T (234)
Friday January 4, 2008, 6:58 am
Noted. Just about everything I would have said has been stated and good dicussion covered my thoughts and concerns thoroughly. Thanks to all of you for this.

Re: Assassinations. We have seen one already in Pakistan; one of a high elected official from Treasury in our country thus far. We've seen what these things can do and they are not who we are or who we say we aspire to be. I pray that anyone is a part of any international killing vendetta will be discovered and stopped.

Thank you, Robert.

Robert K (437)
Friday January 4, 2008, 8:02 am
Well...I can't believe this, but this is what we are going to have to start doing....take action - reaction - rebel..

Sept. 15 arrestees win at trial
Government case collapses during trial -- judge dismisses all charges

An important victory was won today in the case of 11 defendants who were arrested at the Sept. 15 March on the Capitol, which drew 100,000 anti-war protestors to Washington, DC.

Judge Henry Greene of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia dismissed all charges against the defendants, who were accused of crossing a police line. The government's case collapsed in the early stages of the trial during the the testimony of a witness from the Capitol Police.

The protestors asserted that the government and the Capitol Police had illegally and unconstitutionally sought to prevent demonstrators from engaging in First Amendment protected speech and assembly in an area in front of the Capitol building routinely kept open to tourists and others. This attempt to exclude people engaging in free speech activities could not form the basis for a lawful arrest or conviction for "crossing a police line."

The government's case disintegrated as protestors' attorneys demonstrated that the government had withheld key evidence from the defense.

Under pressure from the defense, the government revealed that they had withheld documents and material that was central to the defendants' challenge to the government's efforts to prevent demonstrators from exercising their First Amendment rights at Congress under the pretext of "national security," including a "police sensitive" document supposedly related to "terrorism." The defense argued that the government was using this pretext to prevent antiwar protest at a time when General David Petraeus was making the Bush administration's case that Congress should continue to fund the Iraq war.

Many of the defendants represented themselves and were given pro bono legal counsel and advice from attorneys Michael Madden, Mara Verheyden-Hilliard of the Partnership for Civil Justice, Stephanie Snyder of the Georgetown Criminal Justice Clinic, and Harriet Adams. The defendants, including leaders from Veterans for Peace, the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism), and Iraq Veterans Against the War, were Elliot Adams, Brian Becker, Ellen Barfield, Carla Boccella, Adam Kokesh, Jay Gillen, Rodney Centeno, Polly Miller, Sholom Keller, Shawn Peterson, and Rich Reinhart.

The A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition is organizing antiwar activities and other actions in defense of First Amendment rights across the country. We cannot continue this work without your help. Please make an urgently needed donation right now by clicking this link.


A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition
National Office in Washington DC: 202-544-3389
New York City: 212-694-8720
Los Angeles: 323-464-1636
San Francisco: 415-821-6545
Chicago: 773-463-0311
Seattle: 206-568-1661


Pamela Salomon (255)
Friday January 4, 2008, 12:39 pm
Noted, Bush must think that he is God. Has he gone nuts.

Past Member (0)
Friday January 4, 2008, 3:16 pm
Thanks for this post, Robert.
Bush must be mad: our "untouched, and pure" world is getting smaller all the time.
Forests are cut down, animal resorts are threatened, and we keep on building industries, and houses in area's to for our our own relaxation, but we all forget, that this world is not ours, alone.
We see the same in the Netherlands, were I live. ... all real nature that is left gets smaller all the time.
More, and more commutors are there, and motorways are almost covering our whole country.
Including the left-overs of what once were area's without roads, and houses, or industry.
I guess there are too many people in this world.
Let's at least keep the untouched area's as a sacred world!

Past Member (0)
Friday January 4, 2008, 5:05 pm
Looks a bad deal even from the uk. This land should if possible be left untouched, Iworked for an american company for ten years, and spent one month a year in the US on training courses, I loved it but even though many of the trainies were from Texas and were good people, they all had rather large heads or so they thought. I believe the present guy is from that part of the woods.

Past Member (0)
Friday January 4, 2008, 5:21 pm
This just makes me so sick I can't even think of anything bad enough to say about our fearless leader except...what goes around will come around...I have to believe that or I just couldn't stand it.

Chris C (2)
Friday January 4, 2008, 6:53 pm
Hate to tell you this but GW has been selling & leasing our national lands for years since he was given the presidents seat. He claims & maybe even believes it is for the good of the land but he is dilusional. Can a new person in that post change things and turn things around for the national parks? It may be too late. This adminstration has damaged this country on so many levels it would take a tome to record them all.

Denice G (45)
Friday January 4, 2008, 10:30 pm
Noted Information is forwarded

Chris C (2)
Saturday January 5, 2008, 7:19 am
Denice G-what does "Noted Information is forwarded" mean?
I did forget the final line in my comment-IMPEACH!!
Go to and join Congressman Wexler to get this man out of office now.

Laura R (29)
Saturday January 5, 2008, 7:34 am
HOW can he do this??....easily!!! One, he doesn't "get it." and Two...he doesn't GIVE A RAT'S ASS about it. If it is not putting money in his pocket in some way at some point in is NOT of any personal interest to him!

Charlie H (53)
Saturday January 5, 2008, 8:04 am
How can he do it? He does anything that he wants to. He has for at least the last seven yearsas 'the current occupant'. It's a profit-taking situation for him and his confederates. I think a more accurate question would be, "Where's the outrage?" Why do so many continue to tolerate this criminal and unrepresentative government? I think they should be removed immediately, by any means necessary. I think that it's time for the next American revolution.

Melissa Kush (3)
Saturday January 5, 2008, 10:58 am

Past Member (0)
Saturday January 5, 2008, 11:28 am
I hope you all understand that this road is part of the NAFTA plan of the Global Economy dreamed up by the capitalists to screw us all in keeping the prices high on everything being produced. America is too dumbed down to realize that they are being screwed too. This road will benefit a select few of rich investors that have everything to gain. Marx predicted acts of assault on the environment in the pursuit of profit years ago but few listened and now we are saddled with unbridled capitalism the curse of our nation and the world!

Ali Hirst (286)
Saturday January 5, 2008, 11:52 am
That was in the Australian media a week or more back....mexico and US building road to open the border up...I took it as media hogwash and dismissed it but seems it is TRUE...GET HIM OUT OF THAT OFFICE BEFORE HE DOES ANY MORE DAMAGE!!!!

Ali Hirst (286)
Saturday January 5, 2008, 11:56 am
This iswhat I get when I googled the question now....US to Mexico travel

Returning to the US
US Customs & Border Protection border wait times for an estimate of the length of the lines to cross back from Mexico into the USA are found here. In general, the time to cross from the USA into Mexico is less than a minute because there is no requirement to check paperwork (passports and visas).

Upcoming Passport requirements for crossing from Mexico to the USA.


You will need a passport or Sentri Card (for each border crosser) or other Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI)- compliant document, OR you can use your valid US Drivers License AND your birth Certificate (NOTE YOU MUST HAVE BOTH DOCUMENTS FOR EACH PASSENGER)

Here is the latest information from the US State department website as of 28 November 2007:

LAND AND SEA TRAVEL between the US, Mexico and Canada:
The following summarizes information available on the Department of Homeland Security’s website.

JANUARY 31, 2008
U.S. and Canadian citizens will need to present either a WHTI-compliant document, or a government-issued photo ID, such as a driver’s license, plus proof of citizenship, such as a birth certificate. DHS also proposes to begin alternative procedures for U.S. and Canadian children at that time.

At a later date, to be determined, the departments will implement the full requirements of the land and sea phase of WHTI. The proposed rules require most U.S. citizens entering the United States at sea or land ports of entry to have either a U.S. passport; a U.S. passport card; a trusted traveler card such as NEXUS, FAST, or SENTRI; a valid Merchant Mariner Document (MMD) when traveling in conjunction with official maritime business; or a valid U.S. Military identification card when traveling on official orders.

The implementation date will be determined based on a number of factors, including the progress of actions undertaken by the Department of Homeland Security to implement the WHTI requirements and the availability of WHTI compliant documents on both sides of the border. DHS and DOS expect the date of full WHTI implementation to be in the summer of 2008. The precise implementation date will be formally announced with at least 60 days notice.

read the actual text here Also see the Department of Homeland security site.

Note that this passport requirement is a US regulation for returning to the USA. Mexico does not require a passport or visa for you to visit San Felipe.

Vehicle insurance for the trip back can be bought at many stores and agencies in town (for example, at the Linda Bilyeu agency at El Capitan Motel).

The Mexicali-to-Calexico Crossing Route

Note added 28 November 2007 - Border crossing times have increased significantly in the past 6 months. Allow 45 minutes minimum during quiet periods (midweek before 3 p.m.) and 2-3 hours on weekends.

The majority of travelers return north by retracing their route to Mexicali. Head north from San Felipe to Mexicali (about two and a half hours drive) and you have the option to take either the downtown Mexicali port of entry, which puts you in downtown Calexico, or the "new" east crossing out towards the Mexicali airport that connects to California Route 98 east of Calexico.

For the downtown route, head directly north through Mexicali on Calzada Benito Juarez until you hit the border fence. Turn left and proceed on to the port of entry. Note that the extreme left hand lane is for traffic that is going into downtown Mexicali and also for cars holding SENTRI passes for fast border crossings. Expect a typical wait time during the mid-morning through mid-afternoon hours of 30-60 minutes. This crossing is open 24 hours a day.

To reach the east crossing, head north into Mexicali and at the road just before the border fence (Argentina), turn right. The "new" crossing is 6 miles east of Mexicali. Follow Avenida Argentina (one way eastbound - see our Mexicali map) and you will see the tent-like structures of the port of entry on your left hand side as you get out into open country. This crossing is only open from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. and you will emerge on Route 98 east of Calexico. There are no services on either side of the border for this crossing point, you will have to drive in to Calexico for food and gas stations. Check the border wait times by calling the numbers listed at the top of this page. Expect a typical wait time of 20-40 minutes.

For recorded traffic crossing information for the two Mexicali- Calexico crossing, you can dial while on the road 001-760-768-2383 on your cellphone and hear recorded information in both English and Spanish from the US Customs and Border Agency that is updated every hour. If you are fluent in Spanish you can also call a Mexicali number 700-7000 and hear information that is updated every 15 minutes. Unfortunately, the announcers tend to speak colloquial Spanish and slur their words, making it difficult for a foreigner to understand.

You can take back to the States $400 worth of goods per person, plus one liter of liquor per month (this includes beer, which only amounts to about 3 cans). Uncooked meats and many fruits are not permitted into the U.S. However, hand-crafted, artistic works, are allowed in duty-free as long as you are not shipping commercial quantities.

Alternate border crossing points - Tijuana and Tecate

Other options exist, however, which allow you to see more of the beautiful countryside of this peninsula. For example, you may decide to take the road to Ensenada and use the toll road to Tijuana, from which you can cross to San Diego. Check with us or the tourist office for latest conditions of the road and for maps and discount coupons you can use on the Pacific coast of Baja. Note that the border wait time to cross into California from either the downtown Tijuana-San Ysidro, or the Otay Mesa port of entry can be very long, especially on weekends. Allow two hours for the crossing in your travel planning. If you decide to return to the US via the Tijuana crossings, the phone numbers for the traffic lines are: San Ysidro 001-619-690-8999 Otay Mesa 001-619-671-8999

Another very pleasant return route is to cross at Tecate. Head to Mexicali and take the Libramiento (east-west toll road at about km 13 south of the city). See more details about the highway to Tecate, Tijuana and San Diego on this page. Take this fast and well-maintained toll road up La Rumorosa and enjoy the view. You will pass by one of the water pumping stations and pipelines that sends the Colorado river water to the Rodriguez reservoir outside Tijuana. Pull off at one of the scenic overlooks and take in the vista of the Mexicali and Imperial valleys.

The old city of Tecate is a beautiful place to stop for a meal at one of the restaurants on the tree-lined square in the middle of town. It also gives you the opportunity to buy wonderful fresh bread and pastries at a local bakery or pick up some of the interesting art works and souvenirs in the local shops. The Tecate crossing to California is only a two lane port-of-entry (open 6 a.m. to 11 p.m.) but the traffic moves through rapidly. Note that this border crossing road can only be accessed on the East side of town. When you are coming in from Mexicali,you will come to the road before entering the downtown section of Tecate. If you drive into Tecate to shop or dine, you will have to retrace your path a little to reach the border road. (See a map here).

On very hot days it is definitely more pleasant to avoid the long waits in the lines at Mexicali where car radiators frequently reach the boiling point, along with the tempers of the drivers. Tecate, up in the hills, is a wonderful breath of fresh air. If you have a couple of hours to spare, consider taking a tour of the great Tecate brewery and see how the delicious liquid is prepared.(see also this update on the crossing to California). You can telephone to the border crossing station in Tecate to find out what the wait time is by dialing (from Mexico) 001-619-938-8300.

Sentri Lanes at the border

At various ports of entry between Mexico and the USA, the Customs and Border agency has established fast crossing lanes for vehicles and passengers that have enrolled in the SENTRI program. The fast lanes typically allow vehicles to cross into the US with a delay of 5-10 minutes, though during rush hour there can also be quite a backup. Applicants must complete an extensive background check with interview, and the vehicle must be brought to a designated border crossing point for checking and installation of the electronic passcard. The card will be automatically read as you approach the border in a special lane. Sentri lanes are present at San Ysidro, Otay Mesa and Calexico West in California, Nogalez (AZ), and El Paso, Hidalgo, Laredo and Brownsville in Texas. Note that only the people that have been screened for the designated vehicle are allowed to use the special lane. If you have passengers that are not enrolled in the plan you must use the regular crossing lanes at the border. A family enrollment plan costs about $260 US dollars and is valid for five years. Frequent border crossers should enroll in this plan. Unfortunately, it is difficult for people from distant places (Snowbirds, for example) to enroll because of the requirememts for in-person interviews that can only be conducted at the border stations of Otay Mesa in San Diego and Calexico. For details and enrollment forms look here.

Updated 11/28/07


Ali Hirst (286)
Saturday January 5, 2008, 11:58 am
Sounds like the old Germany has returned they will be building a wall on the border too!!!

Ali Hirst (286)
Saturday January 5, 2008, 12:06 pm
I found this to contact about the intentions of the Bush administration re this post...You can send in a letter from this site.

Colorado's Roadless National Forests

View from Tanner Peak trail, Pike-San Isabel National Forest west of Florence, Colo. Credit: Photo by Penelope Purdy Copyright 2007 by Penelope Purdy. All Rights Reserved. From: Hiking Colorado's Roadless Trails by Penelope Purdy. Colorado Mountain Club Press, 2007

On December 26, 2007, the Bush administration published its Notice of Intent to begin a federal roadless rulemaking to weaken regulations currently protecting 4.1 million acres of national forest land in Colorado.

This rulemaking could open the door to the mining industry, the oil and gas industry, the logging industry, and the skiing industry for new development in the most peaceful, unspoiled areas of Colorado's National Forests.

The Forest Service is now accepting public comments on this proposed rule — send a letter asking for complete protection of Colorado's roadless areas.

December 26, 2007

Dave Bard, 202.486.4426

Statement from Robert C. Vandermark, Director, Heritage Forests Campaign
On the Bush Administration's Plan to Remove Protections for Colorado's Roadless Areas
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration today announced its intention to remove current protections for roadless areas in Colorado's national forests. Colorado's roadless areas are the wild heart of the southern Rockies. Under the administration's proposal, many of these natural landscapes could be lost to logging, mining and oil and gas exploration.

"The Bush administration is continuing its state-by-state campaign to unravel critical protections for our nation's last pristine forests. First it was Alaska. Last week it was Idaho. Today, it's Colorado.

"It's déjà vu all over again. Just one week ago, the Bush administration made almost the same exact announcement for roadless areas in Idaho. The administration wants to open the doors to big, corporate special interests — one state at a time. If this proposal goes through, the administration will have made the next step in its plans to completely undo the federal rule that protects these natural treasures.

"If the administration gets its way, fabled places like Grizzly Creek Gulch and Barr Trail could soon be spoiled by logging, mining and other development. Coloradans and the American public can't afford to let that happen, because once they're gone, they're gone forever."


Roadless areas in Colorado make up 30% of the state's national forests and serve as habitats for fish and wildlife, sources for clean drinking water, and as a source of recreation, to Coloradans and visitors from throughout the country.

The Bush administration's proposal for Roadless areas in Colorado would:

Open some roadless areas to be leased for ski area expansion, coal mining, and in specific areas where the state already owns mineral rights in order to mine these areas;
Allow oil and gas drilling companies to build roads, pipelines and other industrial projects in roadless areas;
Allow new roads to be built for ranchers to access their grazing livestock, and
Loosen restrictions on logging in roadless areas.

Publication of the Notice of Intent (NOI) in the Federal Register will be followed by a 60-day public comment period. For more information, go to and


Ali Hirst (286)
Saturday January 5, 2008, 12:09 pm
and more here.....

In 2001, President Bill Clinton issued the federal Roadless Area Conservation Rule, which largely protects all of the country's roadless areas in National Forests from commercial logging or from new roads being built for logging, coal, gas and other mineral or energy purposes. The rule was created after 600 local hearings in communities near National Forests and over 1 million public comments were submitted. The 2001 rule does not close any existing roads or trails for individual recreation activities, does not restrict access for private property owners, it does not interfere with existing leases or permits for ski areas, mineral development, or oil and gas operations, and it allows for new roads to be built to fight fires and other natural disasters.

Grizzly Gulch Creek, White River National Forest, east of Glenwood Springs, Colorado. Credit: Photo by Penelope Purdy Copyright 2007 by Penelope Purdy. All Rights Reserved. From: Hiking Colorado's Roadless Trails by Penelope Purdy. Colorado Mountain Club Press, 2007

President George W. Bush suspended this rule and implemented a new policy where states can create their own rules for the roadless areas in National Forests in their states. The state of Colorado, under the leadership of former Governor Owens submitted a petition to reduce protection for National Forest roadless areas in Colorado.

Under Governor Owens' plan, existing roadless areas in Colorado National Forests would be accessible for recreation, including hiking, camping, fishing, hunting and off-road vehicle recreation. The plan would also protect current roadless areas from new development with the following exceptions. The plan will:

Open some roadless areas to be leased for ski slopes, coal mining, and in specific areas where the state already owns mineral rights in order to mine these areas.
Allow new roads to be built for ranchers to access their grazing livestock.
Loosen restrictions on the types of logging that can be done in roadless areas.
In 2006, a federal court overturned Bush's policy and reinstated the 2001 national Roadless Area Conservation Rule.

The Bush administration immediately appealed that decision and then went back to the states and asked them to resubmit their petitions and re-start the entire rulemaking process.

Colorado's newly elected Gov. Ritter said that he supports the 2001 nationwide rule, but chose to resubmit Governor Owens' petition as "an insurance policy" in the event that new legal rulings void the 2001 Roadless Rule.

We are asking that the Bush administration not move forward with any rulemaking for Colorado that would create less protection for Colorado's roadless areas than currently enjoyed by roadless areas in the rest of the nation.

Importance of Colorado Roadless Areas
"Colorado's Inventoried Roadless Areas should be protected, managed and maintained to provide the maximum benefit for wildlife and wildlife habitat.... Maintaining the provisions of the 2001 Roadless Conservation Rule would allow us to conserve the values and characteristics of roadless areas that are critical to the Division's mission, and which provide multiple public benefits, without prohibiting such uses as grazing, mineral exploration and extraction, forest health and fire management.... [R]epealing the protections currently afforded these lands could result in irreversible changes." — Colorado Division of Wildlife [Executive Summary of the Analysis of the Public Comments Submitted to the Roadless Areas Review Task Force July 18, 2006. Prepared by Mondo Business Group, Ltd., Page i]

Colorado's economy, quality of life, and environmental health all depend on the existence of protected roadless areas. Places like Thompson Creek in the White River National Forest and the HD Mountains of the San Juan National Forest have supported Colorado traditions of backcountry recreation for generations; these special places have safeguarded the purity of watersheds and the functioning of healthy ecosystems for far longer. As these areas are increasingly under threat of being overrun by unnecessary roads, it is important to understand the wealth of diverse values contained in this ever dwindling reserve.

As the rest of the landscape is increasingly developed and as use pressures continue to mount on our public lands, the importance of preserving our remaining roadless areas becomes more and more important ... Because Once They're Gone, They're Gone Forever.

Colorado's National Forests
Colorado contains a total of 14.5 million acres of national forest land, about 21.8 percent of Colorado's landmass. Colorado's national forests contain 4.4 million acres of inventoried roadless areas, about 30.5% of all national forest land in the state. Download a map of Colorado's roadless national forests [PDF]. Find our more about Colorado's National Forests:

Coloradoans Support for Roadless Areas
Colorado citizens overwhelmingly support the protections of the 2001 Roadless Rule. During public comment on this rule, over 28,000 Coloradoans submitted comments to the U.S. Forest Service and 26,000 of them, or 92 percent, supported the complete protection of all roadless areas in Colorado. In 2004, over 60,000 Coloradoans wrote to the agency asking that the 2001 rule not be reversed and substituted with a state petition process.

During the Colorado Roadless Areas Review Task Force process, Colorado citizens, local governments, businesses, and the Colorado Division of Wildlife again expressed overwhelming support for the continued protection of all the state's roadless areas. More than 19,000 of the 22,000 comments received by the task force confirmed support for protecting roadless areas, as described in the 2001 Roadless Rule.

Colorado's Recreation Businesses Support Roadless Area Protection
"The fate of this country's last wild forests is an issue of great importance for all Americans and has great ramifications for the nation's economy, scenery, wildlife habitat, recreational opportunities, and quality of life. By keeping the Roadless Area Conservation Rule in place in Colorado, we will ensure the economic and ecological health of some of our state's most valuable recreational treasures and the communities and businesses that depend on them." (Download the full letter [PDF]). — Excerpt from a letter to Gov. Ritter from 30 Colorado outdoor recreation businesses, February 16, 2007

Background: Status of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule
On September 20, 2006, U.S. Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Laporte of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California held that the Bush administration violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA) when it repealed the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Furthermore, the court ruled that adoption of the state-by-state petition process as a substitute for the national rule was illegal.

Following the ruling, Undersecretary of Agriculture Mark Rey asked states to submit petitions seeking state-specific rules under preexisting provisions of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). In addition, the administration appealed the decision which reaffirmed the rule. See a complete chronology.


Ali Hirst (286)
Saturday January 5, 2008, 12:15 pm


Carolyn Coffie (66)
Saturday January 5, 2008, 12:42 pm
Noted and I signed all the petitions. All this is so terrible that it's enough to make one cry.


Pamela R (159)
Saturday January 5, 2008, 2:01 pm
Two petitions that address the Colorado wilderness: Please sign.

Let's all do our part to help preserve our planet!!


Michael Sandstrom (306)
Saturday January 5, 2008, 8:03 pm
Thanks Pamela, they are signed!

Joy D. Griffith (34)
Sunday January 6, 2008, 2:28 pm
Thank you Pamela, I'm signing now. Also, everyone, I believe all of you will find this importantly interesting. In better words, we CAN get this accomplished...Please read:

George McGovern | Why I Believe Bush Must Go

Paul Burke (316)
Monday January 7, 2008, 8:52 am
Hope is a living thing - thoughts have power - channel your anger in a positive way - please view this video (link below) from the story of and hit them in the pocketbook - support co-ops, and stay active, sign petitions, and vote - apathy is not the answer and neither is destruction it just trades one evil for another.

Author - Journey Home

Pamela R (159)
Tuesday January 22, 2008, 5:27 pm
Here's another petition (with only 370 signatures :( ~~ TO TRY TO HELP SAVE Colorado's pristine land.
Please sign:

Ruth R (246)
Saturday October 5, 2013, 9:12 am
What I and men, women and children did not know.

John Pierce (228)
Saturday August 23, 2014, 8:30 am

Tomek Malinowski (17)
Tuesday June 23, 2015, 1:16 pm
thank you
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in Environment

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.