Email List


Powered by dBMonkey
The Rise of Fascism in the American Energy Business
Posted Dec 8, 2018

The following ebook was originally published by Brother Jonathan Gazette (brojon.org). That website no longer exists. It is archived at archive.org, but since there is no guarantee it will remain there (don't be surprised if that entire site eventually gets shut down for "copyright infringement") I have decided to reprint here as well. It's always good to have multiple backups, and this is a story that everyone needs to know. Of course there's no guarantee it will remain here either, so print it out and save to your own computer!

It is problematic that there are no references included and I have not been able to find support for some of the specific claims (particularly Herbert Hoover's alleged discovery of oil off the coast of Vietnam). I would prefer more substantiation, but it hardly sounds like the incoherent ramblings of a madman. Relative to everything else we know, the motives for war outlined here are more plausible than any other theories, and far more so than what our government and mass media would have us believe.

BLACK GOLD HOT GOLD
The Rise of Fascism in the American Energy Business
by Marshall Douglas Smith
May 7th, 2001

The Hidden History of the International Corporations which Created and Controlled the Events of the 20th Century. As We Enter the 21st Century "... The new Empire of Energy was just scant years away from complete world domination." Price rises and world oil wars were the payoff.

Chapter 1: World War I

Chapter 2: World War II

Chapter 3: Viet Nam "War"

Chapter 4: The Nuclear Age

Chapter 5: WTC, Towers of Siloam

Chapter 5 was never published and Marshall Douglas Smith seems to have disappeared off the face of the Internet. Hmmm.




Black Gold Hot Gold Chapter 1: World War I
Posted Dec 8, 2018

What is often called the German or Italian form of Fascism had its roots in America. Both Hitler and Mussolini were funded and brought into power in the 1920's and '30s by international bankers, including the 12 banks which now make up the American Federal Reserve System. But I get ahead of myself.

Beginning in the late 1800's, John D. Rockefeller, by means of a deception, using a ploy with his Union Tanker Car Company was able to control or "corner" the oil market. In this scheme, he owned the company which had the design patent for the all-metal sealed oil tanker railroad car. The same type of tanker cars are still in use today. Rockefeller, through Union Tanker Car, leased tanker cars by the hundreds to the owners of newly discovered oil fields so they could ship the crude to the refiners. This often included kickbacks from the railroad for increasing the profitable traffic on their rails.

In the late 1800's, prior to the design of the tanker railroad car, petroleum was shipped to the refiner in open wooden barrels on flatbed cars. Some of the oil was lost as it sloshed out whenever the train stopped or started or went around corners. Much of the valuable part of the crude oil simply evaporated from the open barrels before it got to the refiner, often leaving only a heavy black tar. The wooden barrels were difficult and time consuming to fill and drain.

The closed metal tanker car was a boon to the new petroleum business. After several months of oil field development and shipments from the numerous wells being sunk in the ground, and after the refiner had built new facilities to handle the increased flow of crude, Union Tanker broke the lease and took back all of its tanker cars.

Since there was no other source for the tanker cars, both the oil field developer and the refiner began to lose money caused by the instantaneous stoppage of the oil flow from field to refinery. Within months the oil producer and the refiner, after making large investments, were now on the verge of bankruptcy. Then John Rockefeller, through his holding company, Standard Oil, simply walked in and purchased both the oil fields and the refinery at pennies on the dollar. He usually also ended up with the railroad in between.

Despite his reputation as an oil magnate, John D himself was not really an oilman. He had little experience as either an oil driller or refiner. He simply leased oil tanker cars and made money buying oil fields and refineries at "distressed" prices. To run his oil fields and refineries, Rockefeller often hired the very same entrepreneurs whom he had just defrauded. They now worked for him. Only many decades later was it discovered who caused the "distress." And any Rockefeller today will point out, "...but it was not illegal."

In the period of 1900 to 1910 this conspiracy was repeated numerous times and Standard Oil then owned almost all the oil fields in California, Texas, Arkansas, New Jersey and Ohio, and several other states. Thus John D. Rockefeller either owned or controlled about 90% of what we now call the energy business. At that time, research shows, not many people knew that Rockefeller owned the Union Tanker Car Company. Otherwise, very few oilmen would have signed bogus leases for the cars if they had known that John D. and Standard Oil owned all the tanker cars.

Many "muckraker" authors of the early 1900's, such as Ida Tarbell, exposed the predatory monopolist marketing practice of Standard Oil. But the Rockefeller connection with Union Tanker, and how Standard came into being, was not discovered until many decades later. And it still is not in the history books. And most of those few books which did show the connection between John Rockefeller and the Union Tanker Car Company have somehow mysteriously disappeared, but not all.

In 1911, the US government brought charges of monopoly against John D. and Standard Oil, and the company was broken apart. The many new companies all had names which were variations of the initials S.O., such as SOHIO in Ohio, SOCONY in New York, ESSO ("S.O.") which later became EXXON, etc. The splitting of the company was a mere inconvenience for Rockefeller. In retaliation, John D. made a vow. He vowed he would put his company back together. He also vowed in turn he would "break apart" the United States. He and his sons and grandsons and their companies have accomplished both. It was completed about 8 years ago. Again, I get ahead of myself.

In the period of 1910 to 1914 there were only three major oil companies in the world, (1) Standard Oil in America and its many "mini-S.O.-standards" after the 1911 breakup, (2) the British-Persian Petroleum Company, which controlled the large oilfields in Persia (now Iran), roughly extending up into southern Russia, and (3) Royal Dutch Shell which controlled the vast oil fields in the old Dutch East Indies Colonies in Indonesia and southeast Asia. John D. resolved to take over control of both the British-Persian Petroleum company and Royal Dutch Shell.

Rockefeller believed the world would be better served if all nasty corporate competition were eliminated. Then he could make the decisions to market petroleum like an efficient, smooth running, well oiled machine. It was simply a continuation of his business practice in the US for the previous 10 years. In several inter-corporate meetings around 1910 this was almost accomplished. He was distracted when the US government broke apart his oil holdings, but he was not deterred.

The big three oil companies agreed, instead, to act jointly as if they were one company, the first oil cartel. They settled on one world price for oil, which from 1910 to about 1975 was the world pegged price of "West Texas Sweet Crude." The law of "supply-and-demand" had been subverted. It was as if everyone bought their oil in Texas from Standard Oil regardless of from where in the world the oil came. They also agreed to divide up the world into three oil zones to match their local oil supplies and markets. To accomplish this they would need to eliminate or take over control of all other smaller local national ownerships of crude oil, or even the colonial ownership of any oil fields, such as in the old colonies of France, Germany, Spain and Portugal.

This was the purpose of World War I from 1914 to 1918, though few people realized it. The elimination of most of the colonialism of the 1800's and the carving up of the world was completed with the Treaty of Versailles. The arbitrary carving of the world into three primary areas is well documented in history books. Until recently, whose hands were behind the carving had not been disclosed.

For Standard Oil to participate in the drawing up of the Treaty of Versailles, the United States would need to participate in WWI. Although the US entered the conflict belatedly and actually had a minimal affect on the outcome of the European war, the US was in on the negotiations and a signatory to the treaty. All went well, but, there was a fly in the ointment. In 1917, Russia did not go along with the plan to steal their huge oilfields. Russia had pulled out of WWI and did not participate in the Treaty of Versailles. The Bolsheviks, after several years of revolution, now had the world's largest supply of oil in southern Russia. Those vast oil fields were not under the control of either Standard, British Petroleum or Royal Dutch.

Prior to World War I, the most common use for petroleum was to make kerosene, a cheap replacement for the smelly whale oil or smoky coal oil in lamps for homes or businesses. Before the general use of electric light bulbs, kerosene was a product which was highly desirable, with a world-wide market. During WWI, it was discovered that petroleum could also be easily refined to make gasoline or diesel fuel for the internal combustion engines that were in the new airplanes, trucks, ships, submarines and tanks developed during the war.

Thus it became clear after 1918, ownership of oil was not only highly profitable but could now determine who won or lost a war. No longer would empires be built on, nor wars fought in the search for and conquest of gold. Gold had been superseded as the means to obtain political power. The internal combustion engine had replaced the war horse. In a period of only several years, a sudden shift in the geopolitics of the world had just occurred. And most people never noticed. He who has the most oil rules. Oil, black gold, became the fuel for the engines of war. A new world empire was about to be created. A new empire, not based on countries or nations, but of private corporations.

The arbitrary carving of the world into three pieces by the Big 3 oil companies in 1918, as determined by the Treaty of Versailles, was one of the reasons why Adolf Hitler wanted to get rid of the Jews. John D. Rockefeller, whose family name had originally been something like the Germanic Rogenfelder, was considered Jewish by most Europeans. Since Germany had just lost all its colonies with their oil fields under the arbitrary carving of national boundaries along oil market lines by the Versailles Treaty, Hitler blamed the "Jews" for all of Germany's problems. Hitler believed those whose hands had done the carving were all Jewish. That's right out of Hitler's book.

For John Rockefeller to overcome the problem of his oil holdings being broken apart by the US government in 1911, he created another stratagem even larger than the Union Tanker Car Company. He took his vast wealth and created 12 large holding banks we now know as the private Federal Reserve. The plot was to somehow sell his banks to the US Congress. He succeeded two years later in 1913.

All federal taxes collected since 1913 go through the private Federal Reserve System banks, whether they are gas taxes, import excise taxes or income taxes. You file your tax return with the Internal Revenue Service, but all the tax money withheld by your employer is sent to a Federal Reserve Bank. At the end of the fiscal year, the government IRS reports to the private Federal Reserve Banks how much income tax is reported on tax returns and then that amount should be transferred to the Federal government. The private Federal Reserve then pays that amount, but does not report or pay the interest earned on that money during the year. That is profit to the Federal Reserve Banks. This is now true of the so-called "central banks" of most nations, which were chartered along the same lines as the American Federal Reserve banks.

That is why they want you to "overpay" your taxes, and then at the end of the year, when you file your return with the IRS, you get back a refund, not from the Fed Banks, but with a check from the US Treasury. The private Fed earns interest on the amount you overpay, but the government Treasury loses the amount you get refunded. The private Federal Reserve pays no taxes and reports to no one. Thus, John Rockefeller and his heirs and assigns, have a cash flow each year equal to a good percentage of the American gross national product and that would be enough to buy out British Petroleum and Royal Dutch Shell, even if Standard Oil was broken into smaller pieces.

Thus financially armed, the very next year, Standard Oil, British Petroleum and Royal Dutch set out to carve up the world into three markets in 1914, in what we call World War I. But ended up with the lion's share of the world's oil still in the hands of the Bolsheviks, later ignominiously called "communists." The Socialists wanted the Russian state to control the national resources such as oil, and not private profit making companies like Standard, British Petroleum or Royal Dutch.

It would be hard for the Big 3 to corner and control the world oil market if the Russians still had the lion's share. To counter the Russian socialists, the Big 3 created and supported numerous "anti-communist" movements, which we now call Fascist. In Fascism, private profit-making corporations work hand-in-hand with governments, as opposed to Socialism where private companies are eliminated, and the country's resources and means of production are controlled by the government, usually a dictator, and the people. The profit from the sale of resources or goods produced goes to the people of the country, not some private corporation.

It was John D. Rockefeller who called the shots at the early Big 3 oil company meetings, even though he could not yet buy out his competitors, the British and the Dutch companies. Thus, as I said previously, Fascism, as a counter to Russian "communism," came right from the US. The Bolsheviks, Marxists and Leninists had long called themselves "socialists." The USSR was the Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics. They never called themselves "communists." It was John D. and the Big 3 who coined the word and branded them "communists." This was because the Russian Socialists held the oil fields as "community property" and did not allow private corporations like Standard to come in and privately own or steal the oil resources.

Fascism grew out of the attempt of the Big 3 oil companies to form a world cartel to control the world's supply of petroleum and eliminate any other competitors which they branded as "communists." Thus at the end of WWI, after the Treaty of Versailles, and the take over of the large oil fields in southern Russia by the socialists, came the creation of both "communism" and "fascism." Both were constructs, inventions and ploys of the Big 3: Standard Oil, British Petroleum and Royal Dutch Shell. It was a deception which would lead to world empire.

In the 1920's and '30s the Big 3 decided on a plan to eliminate Russian control of oil by "hiring" the small "fascist" movements in Germany and Japan to attack and take over Russia and thus eliminate any state control of oil fields. Most historians would blame large international bankers for funding the rise of fascism. But the bankers had no motivation and fringe fascists parties in Germany, Italy and Japan did not look like good financial risks. But for the Big 3 Oil companies there was a strong motivation to use the "fascists" to defeat the "communists" in Russia and take over the world oil market. And the vast oil wealth which they stored in their international banks provided them with the means. In the 1920's the opportunity was ripe.

Thus the small fascist political parties in Germany, Japan and Italy were given massive Big 3 financial backing to help those minor political parties come to power and build up their military. But things did not go quite as they had planned. The aging John D. had died and his son and four grandsons had decided they would carve up the world along different lines, and at the same time eliminate their competitors, the British and Dutch oil companies.

In 1939 and '40, the Germans did not attack Russia as the Big 3 had expected. Instead German General Rommel went rushing across north Africa to grab the Suez Canal and control all oil shipping through the canal. He then planned to continue on to Persia and toss out the British from the British-Persian oil fields. Also in 1939 the Japanese, after a short abortive attack on Russia in which they were driven out, instead went through southeast Asia and grabbed up all the oil holdings of Royal Dutch Shell. Most of those Royal Dutch fields at the end of the WWII came under the control of Standard Oil.

The British and Dutch companies probably knew in 1939 that their "fascist oil" plan to grab the fields in southern "communist" Russia had gone astray when both the Germans and the Japanese signed non-aggression pacts with Russia, and instead went after the Persian and East Indies oil fields. The grandsons of John D. were as sneaky and devious as their grandfather, but that's the competitive nature of the oil business in the new empire of energy.

The new Standard Oil plan was to have Germany and Japan attack and control Russia and its oil, along with the fields in Persia and Indonesia, then the US would attack and defeat Germany and Japan, thus leaving all the Russian oil in the hands of Standard Oil. And at the same time the holdings of British Petroleum and Royal Dutch Shell would then be taken from the Germans and Japanese, which would then also be controlled by Standard. And no one would be the wiser, since the British and Dutch fields would then just be the spoils of war.

When it became clear that neither the Japanese nor Germans "fascists" could complete the jobs for which they were "hired," the American people were tricked into supplying the man-power by entering WWII after the Pearl Harbor incident. In 1941, while nobody seems to have been watching, the Japanese had become a very powerful militaristic nation, well endowed with foreign funding from the Big 3, but they had no energy or oil supply of their own. They relied on the supply of oil for their new planes, ships, tanks and trucks coming from the Royal Dutch fields in nearby Indonesia.

In July 1941, President Roosevelt signed an embargo to stop all shipping to Japan, presumably in retaliation for the recent Japanese invasion of French Indo-china. The Roosevelts and the Rockefellers had long had friendly family ties. Roosevelt's US embargo cut off the Japanese oil supply, which would have quickly shut down Japan, with the obvious result. In late November 1941 the Japanese sent a written "war warning" through diplomatic channels to Washington, declaring the embargo should be stopped, or else many American sites in the Pacific would be attacked in retaliation. That formal diplomatic warning was ignored and the US sent back no reply. Just two weeks later the Japanese broke the embargo, by bombing the American embargo ships parked in Pearl Harbor.

It was no surprise attack. The Japanese had formally announced it two weeks before. It was only the obvious result of the American strangulation of the oil flow to Japan, and a clearly stated Japanese warning which had been received and ignored. The American public had been fooled into thinking it was a sneak surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. Since Franklin Roosevelt said so, it must be true. The Pacific war turned out to be a prolonged aircraft carrier war. Strangely, the US aircraft carriers in the Pacific Fleet had been sent on maneuvers just several days before the attack and none were in Pearl Harbor on Dec 7, 1941. Coincidence?

And it must also be by some strange logic, if Japan attacks the US, then the US also declares war on Germany. Unless, of course, there is some other larger plan afoot. The historical record shows Germany had not attacked nor engaged the US in conflict, so why did Roosevelt declare war on Germany in December 1941?

Records now show, that Hitler's plan had been to first capture the oilfields in Romania by 1939 so Germany would have its own supply of oil. This was accomplished. Then Rommel would capture the oilfields in Persia by 1941, then capture the oilfields in Russia in 1942, and only then would Hitler have sufficient fuel for prosecuting a war with the United States. But the Japanese, on December 11, 1941, less than a week after the Pearl Harbor incident, convinced Hitler to also declare war on the United States. Hitler agreed only if the Japanese would attack Russia, since the fascists were now bogged down in Russia and Hitler would be helped if the Russians had to defend themselves from Japan. But the Japanese did not attack Russia. Hitler was driven out of Russia and now was without a fuel source. Was this the war plan of the new Empire of Energy?

The Romanian oilfields in Ploesti were insufficient for Germany to carry on a war on two fronts. With American assistance going to Stalin to protect his southern Russian oilfields and with Rommel stopped in Africa so he could not reach the Persian oilfields, it was only a matter of time until Germany's war engines would run out of fuel. By the time of the Allied invasion of Europe on June 6, 1944, Germany was running on fumes. The last major German attack against the Allied invasion force was the Battle of the Bulge. Hitler had intended for Rommel to attack the invading allies with his tanks, then capture the fuel dumps which the allies had amassed. This would stop the American and British forces, and obtain needed fuel.

But when German General Rommel got to the fuel dumps he found American General Eisenhower had ordered them burned. No, the Allies did not win the Battle of the Bulge. It was Rommel and Hitler who lost. Rommel's panzer tanks simply ran out of gas. The German army abandoned their tanks right where they had quit. After that it was a rather swift footrace with the Allies chasing the Germans in a fast retreat back to Berlin. Is there something wrong with this picture? Yes. Its not the one you were taught in school. You were taught the story about the horrors of "fascism" and "communism" but you weren't taught about how black gold had now become the motive and the means for war. He who owns the oil rules. World War II was a demonstration of both, and the new power of the Empire of Energy.

So the Japanese, the Germans and even the Americans were deceived into fighting the "enemy." But in fact, at the end of the war in 1945, it was Standard Oil who won the war in the Pacific and had taken control of most of the oil fields in the Pacific area from Royal Dutch Shell. All that was left was to acquire the oil fields in Persia and Russia. The new Empire of Energy was just scant years away from complete world domination.

Next Chapter | Return to Table of Contents




Black Gold Hot Gold Chapter 2: World War II
Posted Dec 8, 2018

Following World War II, the British-Persian Oil Company still controlled the vast oil fields in Iran. The Persians had already shown they were aligned with Adolf Hitler's fascist "Aryan Race" movement and were fully expecting German General Rommel to come rushing across Africa and "free" them from the British. They showed this by even changing the name of their country from Persia to "Aryan," or "Iran" in the Farsi language. But the Germans failed to arrive.

After the war, British control of the Persian oilfields was soon easily eliminated. In 1954 Kermit Roosevelt, nephew of Franklin, led an American CIA coup to wrest control of Iran and placed in power the American-backed Shah of Iran. The Shah drove out the British. Standard Oil now had control of the British-Persian petroleum fields.

But what of the still vaster oil fields in southern Russia? Also in 1954, with negotiations made through Occidental Petroleum's Armand Hammer, a deal was made with Russian dictator Nikita Khruschev. The arrangement was to buy his oil, actually steal it from the Russian people, and sell it on the world market at a much higher price than Khruschev could get by selling it himself. Khruschev was no oil marketer. Few countries would be willing to deal with or buy oil from Khruschev, thus there was almost no market for the Russian oil.

The simple but devious method was to build two large pipelines, which still exist today, going from the Russian oil fields down along both sides of the Caspian Sea and then terminate in the old British-Persian oil fields in Iran, which by then were controlled by Standard Oil. Was Russia selling oil to oil-rich Iran? Or Iran selling to oil-rich Russia? There would seem no logical reason for building those two huge pipe lines simply going from one oil field to another.

For over 45 years, Russia has been sneaking its oil out through those pipe lines and selling its oil on the world market at the "West Texas Crude" price by calling it Iranian oil. Its what most Americans have been putting in their cars for almost 50 years. This is made evident by the fact that most large American oil refineries which produce gasoline from crude oil are located at large sea ports like San Francisco, Houston or Los Angeles, and not near any of the large American oil fields. Oil is mostly shipped in oil tankers, not explosive flammable gasoline, so those large American refinery-ports are only for the import of crude oil, not for the export of refined gasoline. Thus there is a simple one-way massive flow of oil from Russian fields, through Iran to large super oil tanker ships, to American refineries, and then into American cars.

Many times, since 1973, whenever the price of gasoline skyrockets, American's are told its their own fault, since they are relying on using too much expensive foreign oil. When was the last time you went to the gas station to fill your tank and were given a choice of pumping either the American gas or the expensive foreign gas, and you decided, "Hmm, I think I'll buy the foreign gas." It turns out somebody else has already chosen for you. Guess who?

Standard now had almost complete control of the world market for energy. To make this scheme work, both Khruschev in Russia and the Shah in Iran had to be paid handsomely. But buying off the leaders of dictatorships is easy when money is no object. The problem is maintaining the dictators in power, especially when the local populace learns their natural resources are being stolen.

In 1979, when the Standard Oil-backed Shah of Iran was thrown out by his own people as a harsh iron-fisted "profiteering" dictator and the nationalist Ayatollah took over, the flow of Russian oil through Iran suddenly stopped. Other pipelines were constructed through Iraq and Turkey. The Russian oil was now called OPEC Arabian-Middle Eastern oil and marketed at the even higher "spot market" price. This accounts for the gas shortages and the rise of the price of gasoline in 1979.

On November 4, 1979 the Iranian “revolutionaries” captured and held hostage 65 Americans. The very next day Iran canceled all treaties with the US and USSR, which meant the oil flow had been stopped. In response, President Carter froze the Iranian “assets” in the US. Why would the US have nearly $8 billion in Iranian assets? Were those the regular payments which were to be made to the Shah for covering up the Russian oil transfer? Did the new Iranian government want the money which was due and payable or else they would expose the oil scheme? The lengthy Iran-Iraq war had just started and Iran needed the money.

Most Americans and historians believe somehow the election of President Reagan was the reason for holding the remaining 52 American hostages until the very day when Reagan was inaugurated. Most people are not aware the hostages were actually released only moments after the year-long negotiations and the complex electronic transfer was completed of 7.9 billion dollars from US accounts to the Iranian accounts on January 20, 1981. Carter had announced the day before on January 19th that the arrangements had been made, but the news media paid little attention. It was Standard Oil, not the United States, which was being “blackmailed” by the Iranians. President Carter had “frozen” the Iranian accounts, but that was not US money. It was oil money, and Ronald Reagan was not a player in that game.

Also in 1979 an attempt to secure an alternate short safe oil pipeline route from Russia through neighboring Afghanistan only resulted in a prolonged war and that project was dropped. Sometimes you can fool some of the people, but not always.

Another, safer and more profitable oil route was desperately needed which would not be open to revolution and warfare. Both of which could affect the flow of oil. For over 25 years, it appears the new method has been to transfer oil through the long Trans-Siberian pipeline stretching from the southern Russian oilfields to the Arctic Sea in eastern Siberia. Then the Russian oil is brought down through the Alaska Pipe line and marketed as North Slope American oil. All during this time something called the “anti-communist” Cold War was occurring, but in the larger Empire of Energy, such things do not exist.

In early 1990, the USSR announced through the TASS news service that the Trans-Siberian Pipeline would need extended maintenance and for about a year would be reducing their oil output by 25%. Four days later the Alaska Pipeline company, announced they would be doing extended maintenance and for about a year would be reducing their oil output by 25%. Coincidence? Those two stories were both reported by the Associated Press several days apart in 1990, but nobody seems to have put them together. The Arctic Sea is a navigational "no-mans" land and only "military" ships are allowed there, so any transfer is easily hidden.

OPEC itself is another Standard Oil scheme which, by arbitrarily withholding supplies of oil, can drive up the price. This is reminiscent of the old Union Tanker Car Company method of getting the customer to start the oil flow going, then arbitrarily cutting off the supply in order to "corner" the market, drive out competitors, and raise the prices. OPEC should not really have any affect on the world price of oil since it controls only about 10 percent of the total world supply, unless one wants to believe all American oil comes from Arabia. Which it doesn't, since most world oil comes from the vastly larger oil fields in Russia. And it is Standard and its spin-offs which control most of the Russian and Arabian oil.

You probably think most of what I said here doesn't make sense. How could Rockefeller's Standard Oil be doing all that? You probably think, wait a minute, where is Standard Oil? I never even hear about them anymore. Does it still exist? Yes. In the Wednesday January 27, 1988, Wall Street Journal, in a full two-page double-truck ad, it was announced that little Standard Oil was merging with big brother British Petroleum. Could this be true? British Petroleum then had very few productive holdings compared to Standard Oil which controlled much of the world market.

The scheme was, when they announced the merger, actually finally a Standard Oil buyout of British Petroleum, the name of the new merged company was BP-America. In other words, BP is Standard Oil. Standard Oil simply took over the assets and the name of British Petroleum. The name was chosen to hide that fact. Seemingly, all fears and worries about the world-wide predatory marketing practices of Standard Oil have now been allayed and put to rest -- since the name Standard Oil is never mentioned again.

In the last 12 years, during a period of many large companies merging, such as AOL-Time-Warner, etc., BP-America has also merged again and again and changed its name. It is now known as BP-AMOCO but it has in fact bought up, merged with, or controls all of the old Standard Oil "mini-companies" which came from the original breakup by the US government way back in 1911.

Thus, John D. Rockefeller's vow of recombining his original Standard Oil Company has been accomplished, even though it was done by his grandsons and their progeny. BP-AMOCO recently took over control of the Alaska Pipeline. There may appear to be several companies like Texaco or Mobil all drilling on the north slope of Alaska, but it's John D's offspring who now control the price at the spigot in Valdez Harbor. And of course, it's that spigot which is at the end of a very long pipeline stretching all the way to the world's largest oil source in southern Russia. The Empire of Energy now seemed to only have one obstacle left in its way.

Next Chapter | Previous Chapter  | Return to Table of Contents




Black Gold Hot Gold Chapter 3: Viet Nam "War"
Posted Dec 8, 2018

In 1945, at the end of WWII, when the Japanese surrendered, General Douglas MacArthur became the military Governor of Japan. MacArthur's assistant was Laurence Rockefeller, one of John D's four grandsons. Just before the Japanese surrendered, the US had been preparing for a massive invasion of the Japanese home islands and had stockpiled vast supplies of weapons and munitions on the island of Okinawa. Enough weaponry to invade Japan. What ever happened to all those military supplies?

With Vice-governor Laurence Rockefeller's assistance most of them were sold to the leader of Viet Nam, Ho Chi Minh, for something like one US dollar and Ho’s "goodwill." Why would Laurence do that? That was US taxpayer property. Ho Chi Minh had been an ally to help fight the Japanese during the war. But the Chinese had been an even greater ally, so why didn’t the weapons go to China? Those weapons might have prevented Mao Tse Tung from taking over China just four years later if they had been given to China. But that wasn’t the plan. From where did Mao get his weapons?

In the 1920's an insider secret became known to a few people. It was published in an exhaustive world resources survey book written by a renowned world-traveling geologist named Hoover, who later became a US President. Not many copies were printed and few people read the book. The secret was that one of the world's largest potential oil fields ran along the coast of the South China Sea right off French Indo-China, now known as Viet Nam. But in the 1920's the method of deep sea oil drilling had not yet been developed. In 1945, the French still held small oil-poor Viet Nam as a colony. Laurence knew about Hoover’s book and the off shore oilfields. The French could be driven out if the Vietnamese nationals, lead by Ho Chi Minh, could be supplied with weapons. Did the French know about this?

Laurence Rockefeller thought he could trick Ho Chi Minh by offering him the weapons to drive out the French and then in return Standard would take over the as yet undeveloped offshore fields. But in 1954 when Vietnamese General Giap finally defeated and drove out the French at Dien Bien Phu, Ho reneged on the deal. Since by then, everybody including the French, the Vietnamese, the Japanese and the Chinese had all read the same Hoover resource book and knew there was a vast supply of oil off the Vietnamese coast. Many people have wondered why the French have been so recalcitrant toward the US ever since French President Charles DeGaul wanted to pull out of NATO in the mid-1950's.

Ho Chi Minh would not let Standard Oil simply walk in and walk off with all the Vietnamese oil. So as before, any country which owns the oil is branded as "communist" since they hold the oil as "community property" and won't allow private corporations, like Standard, to develop the fields and steal the oil. In this case, young American's themselves where "hired" directly to be the "fascists" to go fight the Vietnamese "communists."

The whole 20 year Viet Nam “war” from 1955 to 1975 was an oil scam. And all during the "war," Vietnamese General Giap fought the Americans with weapons he got from Laurence for a dollar. Did you ever wonder why the US, despite, greatly superior weapons, and the loss of 57,000 Americans and half a million Vietnamese, never won the "war?" Ever wonder why the US President issued such strange “rules of engagement” for the American troops that made sure they didn’t win? Ever wonder why Henry Kissinger, a personal assistant to Nelson Rockefeller spent so much time in the Viet Nam/Paris Peace talks which never went anywhere but simply dragged on for years. Maybe winning the “war” wasn’t part of the plan of the Empire of Energy. Maybe the timing of the “war” was more important.

In the 1950's a method of undersea oil exploration was perfected which used small explosions deep in the water and then recorded the sound echos bouncing off the various layers of rock below. The surveyor could then determine the exact location of the arched salt domes which hold the accumulated oil beneath them. But if this method were used off the Viet Nam coast on property Standard didn't own or have the rights to, the Vietnamese, the Chinese, the Japanese and probably even the French would quickly run to the United Nations and complain that America was stealing the oil, and that would shut down the operation.

In 1964, after Viet Nam was divided into North and South, and the contrived Gulf of Tonkin incident, several US aircraft carriers were stationed offshore of Viet Nam and the "war" was started. Every day jet planes would take off from the carriers, bomb locations in North and South Vietnam, and then using normal military procedure when returning would dump their unsafe or unused bombs in the ocean before landing back on the carriers. Safe ordnance drop zones were designated for this purpose away from the carriers.

Even close-up observers would only notice many small explosions occurring daily in the waters of the South China Sea and thought it was only part of the "war." The US Navy carriers had begun Operation Linebacker One, and Standard Oil had begun its ten year oil survey of the seabed off of Viet Nam. And the Vietnamese, Chinese and everybody else around, including the Americans, were none the wiser. The oil survey hardly cost Standard Oil a nickel, the US taxpayers paid for it.

In 1995, in a multi-hour BBC TV documentary broadcast about the oil industry, the president of one of the oil companies, a spin-off of Standard, stated, ".. It was quite a coincidence, that we finished our offshore oil survey on the very last day of the war, just as the last helicopter was leaving the roof of the embassy in Saigon." A coincidence?

Fifteen years later, after North and South Viet Nam were unified and all the dust settled and most people had forgotten about the "war," the Vietnamese decided they needed some cash and would allow offshore oil exploration. They divided up their coastal area into many oil lots and let foreign companies bid on the lots, with the proviso that Viet Nam got a cut of the action.

Oil companies from 12 countries put in bids. Norway's Statoil, British Petroleum, Royal Dutch Shell, even Russia, Germany and Australia all put in bids. But when those countries drilled in their oil lots they all came up with dry holes. Only the "American" company had gushers and since 1990 has pulled billions of dollars out of their Golden Dragon, Blue Lotus, and White Tiger oil fields in the South China Sea off Viet Nam. Coincidence? Were they just lucky? Or did they know something those other oil companies didn’t?

In order to cover for the fact that the Viet Nam “war” was a "phoney" war with the Vietnamese branded as "communists," and the US as a country having no intention of winning, the US would need to withdraw as soon as the oil survey was done. A reason would be needed to explain the withdrawal. In the late 1960's Standard recruited large numbers of idealistic youth who were against the war and the military draft. The oil companies supplied them with monetary assistance and organization.

Those oil-backed and organized youth became the large anti-war demonstrations of the 60's and 70's. Almost none of the demonstrators knew they were being used. Most people still believe the “war” ended because of the strong US sentiment against the “war,” and President Nixon's withdrawal plan was a reaction to the demonstrators. There is too much information which explains the strange relationship between Richard Nixon and Nelson Rockefeller, the Nixon withdrawal plan and the resulting Watergate incident and Nelson's rise to power to become Vice President after Nixon resigned, so I will explain that later.

So it appears there are many oil companies but they are, in fact, all under one controlling marketeer, BP also known as Standard Oil, which sets the world price of energy. Ever wonder why President G.W. Bush wanted to open up new drilling in Alaska? There is a vast new undeveloped oil field discovered in 1989 around and under the Caspian Sea in central southern Russia. This one oil field is larger than any other field ever discovered. This oil could be sent out through the Siberian Pipeline to the Arctic Sea, then down the Alaska Pipeline, as is the Black Sea oil. Something would need to account for the greatly increased and continuous flow of oil in the Alaska pipeline.

New drilling in Alaska, whether oil is found or not, could be used to explain why so much oil is still coming from the Alaska pipeline. Nobody ever mentioned that the North Slope Alaska oil fields, around the Duck Island Western Facility, operated by BP, were running dry and that was the reason why new drilling was needed. Maybe because its not true. Nobody ever mentioned that the Prudhoe Bay Eastern Facility, just a mile or so east of Duck Island, also operated by BP, at the very top of the Alaska Pipeline is a harbor. Maybe nobody wanted you to know.

And exactly where is this new freshly discovered mother of all oil fields in southern Russia? In a province called Chechnya. Is it any wonder the Chechens wanted to become an independent state? Is it any wonder there had been an ongoing ten year war between the Russian and Chechen troops. Did the Russians “brand” the Chechen rebels as “communists” because they want to keep their own oil? Most Russian mothers have no clue why their sons were sent to die in Chechnya. The same was true of the many Russian mothers whose sons died in Afghanistan. And also the very same is true of many American mothers whose sons died in Viet Nam.

The vast new oilfield under Chechnya, by itself, could meet the world’s needs for energy for several hundred years. This new oil supply was far more than could be handled by the aging Trans-Siberia and Alaska pipelines. With the collapse of the USSR in 1991, the Russian oil could then be marketed directly. A new overland transport method needed to be built. An obvious and short method would be to build a pipeline westward from the Caspian Sea to the Black Sea and then existing oil tanker ships could take the oil across the Black Sea, through the narrow Bosporus channel at Istanbul, Turkey to the Mediterranean Sea and then on to the rest of the world.

There was only one problem with that route. The older Russian oil fields around the Black Sea still produced enough oil to create a daily traffic jam of tanker ships through the narrow Bosporus channel. That long channel is barely wide enough in some places for two ships to pass each other. The Turks live in constant fear of an ecological disaster caused by an oil tanker accident on the very doorstep of Istanbul, which surrounds the channel.

The Bosporus Channel was already beyond the safe limit for tanker traffic so the massive supply of new Chechen oil could not be shipped that way. Seven other long pipeline routes had been proposed in the 1990's. All of them required reaching the Mediterranean Sea by going through politically unstable regions such as eastern Turkey, Syria or Lebanon, all of which are areas of unrest and open to terrorist attack. None of those routes were viable.

In 1995 a seemingly safe and short alternative route was discovered to get around the unsafe overloaded Bosporus Channel in Turkey. The oil tankers on the Black Sea, instead of going south through the narrow Bosporus, would turn northward up the wide Danube River toward Europe. But then at Belgrade, in Serbian Yugoslavia the tankers would make a quick left turn up a tributary river, unload the oil, and with only a short 50 mile pipeline could reach the large Mediterranean seaport of Tirana, Albania and then on to the world. It looked cheap and easy. And where would that short pipeline be built? Across a small province called Kosovo. If only Kosovo could be placed under some international control to eliminate terrorist attacks and ensure a safe pipeline.

The US Air Force tried to put Serbia and Kosovo under NATO control in 1999. It almost worked. But, Albania was unlike all the other old Yugoslavian ethnic states which had been client states of the USSR under the dictator Tito. Albania, alone in that region, had been a client state of China since 1949. The Chinese had long used Tirana, Albania as a European opium and heroin shipping point, in an operation far larger than the “French Connection” in Marseilles. The Albanians still maintain ties with China.

The Chinese, did not want to see large amounts of new energy supplies flowing to the west under BP-Standard control. The Chinese supported and used the “ethnic-Albanian rebels," since the breakup of Yugoslavia in the early 1990's, to ensure continuous unrest in the whole region around Kosovo, Serbia, Bosnia and Macedonia, and thus no pipeline. Ever wonder why the Chinese embassy in Belgrade was "accidently" bombed and obliterated in 1999? The US Air Force claimed the old street maps their pilots were reading didn't show the Chinese Embassy. You can fool some of the people some of the time, but not always. Within a year the Empire of Energy would find an alternative. To most Americans and to the rest of the world that alternative would look like a very strange Presidential election.

Next Chapter | Previous Chapter  | Return to Table of Contents




Black Gold Hot Gold Chapter 4: The Nuclear Age
Posted Dec 8, 2018

[Kenric's note: Fukushima has since highlighted how nuclear energy is potentially dangerous on a global scale, but that doesn't negate oil conglomerate fears of losing their vast wealth, and therefore may have been responsible for demoninzing it and covertly manipulating environmentalists to do their PR work. And who knows, maybe Fukushima has been greatly exaggerated as well? Either way, most of this chapter remains relevant, and keep in mind while reading that he supports true environmentalists. What he's opposing here is the fakers jumping on the bandwagon for their own gain.]

About the same time as the beginning of the Viet Nam war there arose another large threat to Standard Oil control of the world's energy supply. And that was the development of nuclear energy. The ability and knowledge to extract uranium ore from the ground and turn it into a cheap, clean non-polluting energy source had been developed during WWII. Unlike all carbon- based petroleum products, which when burned or oxidized emit carbon dioxide, along with other contaminates into the atmosphere, nuclear fuel in a properly sealed reactor has no emissions.

For reasons of national security, all supplies of uranium ore were placed under strict national control of primarily the governments of the US and the USSR. Private ownership or control of uranium and plutonium as an energy source was not allowed. The new concept of taking another natural resource and turning it into energy with enough supply already currently mined and available to supply the world's energy needs for the next 500 years, would have put all oil companies, including Standard, quickly out of business. Something needed to be done to counter that and fast.

Using the same technique as setting up and organizing the anti- war demonstrators to cover for the Vietnamese offshore oil surveys and blaming the "war" on the "military-industrial- complex" -- Standard organized the "environmentalist" movements to shut down the development of nuclear power plants. But there was a slight difference. In the case where countries owned the oil fields, the countries could be branded as "communists" since they held the oil as community property and then "fascists" could be "hired" to go fight the "communists" to allow the private companies to come in and take over the fields.

In many countries of the world, this process of allowing private corporations to take over the natural resources in a country is often called capitalism, free-enterprise, or even just democracy, though none of those has anything to do with the outright theft of natural resources. It is more properly defined as fascism.

Ever since, Rachael Carson's book "Silent Spring," written in the mid-1960's, people have become aware of how we can unintentionally pollute large areas. A new word was coined in the 60's called "ecology." Everybody is against pollution and everybody wants a clean environment. In that sense, we are all "environmentalists." But the words have become twisted and morphed into grotesque new meanings.

The purpose of the organized environmentalist movements was to be a cover for the oil company stoppage of the building of nuclear power plants. Thus, instead of branding the country which owned the nuclear fuel as "communist," since it was the US which owned most of the fuel, the uranium and plutonium fuel itself needed to be "branded" as the worst mass killer since Stalin, Hitler and Foo Manchu.

The new "phoney" environmentalists would point out Hiroshima, Nagasaki and even Chernobyl as proof of the dangers of nuclear energy. But if you explain that Chernobyl was never built to be a safe nuclear power plant, but was an old Soviet bomb factory for quickly converting raw uranium into plutonium for making nuclear bombs. And, if you further explain that it did produce electricity as a byproduct but it was not designed to be a safe power plant, the average environmentalist only stares blankly. And no nuclear reactors like Chernobyl, without any safety-sealed containment vessel, have been built for over 50 years. But that wasn't in any "environmentalist movement" handout literature they read.

Are nuclear reactors safe, clean and reliable? Go ask the US Navy. They have been running hundreds of nuclear reactors for over 40 years in their ships, submarines and aircraft carriers. Not one accident or radiation leak. When it comes time to change the used nuclear fuel, after the old fuel is removed and they wait two days for the short-term radiation components in the core container to fade away, the nuclear swabbies actually enter the reactor core, and do their regular maintenance work.

Often the Navy nuclear technicians sit for several days right on the reactor core with their tools and instruments during the maintenance procedure. The dosimeters they wear measure the amount of radiation they are getting. The dosimeters always show the total radiation they get while sitting in the reactor core during maintenance is much less radiation than the average web- surfer gets from sitting in front of a color VGA computer monitor while surfing the web for an hour. What? That wasn't in the "phoney environmentalist" handouts?

The US Navy runs more nuclear reactors than anybody else in the world. The radiation output from a fully operating sealed and shielded Navy nuclear reactor is zero. If you want proof of that, go ask the Navy, especially the thousands of Navy-trained nuclear technicians and engineers who work on those reactors. And go ask the Navy submariners who may spend up to six months of sea duty within feet of an operating nuclear reactor. They should know. And they will all tell you the same thing.

And if you point out that hundreds of times more people have been killed and maimed with Napalm, a simple half-and-half jelly mixture of gasoline and coconut palm oil, than were ever killed in both the Hiroshima and Nagasaki explosions. Specifically, the massive firestorm bombing of most of Tokyo and several other large Japanese cities, and even German cities, near the end of WWII were all the result of Napalm. Again a blank stare. All petroleum products can be turned into Napalm, or even now the very large gas-air explosive devices, almost rivaling nuclear weapons in destructive power. Why don't we also outlaw and prevent the production of energy using dangerous petroleum?

Then it becomes obvious. Most of the "environmentalist" movements are really being directed by the petroleum industry to shut down nuclear energy in order to keep the huge profits flowing into the oil companies, until the time comes when the energy companies can also take control of nuclear fuel.

The purpose of the Kyoto Treaty was to sharply limit the emissions of carbon dioxide, branded as a dangerous greenhouse gas. The only way the US could comply with the treaty was either (1) sharply limit the generation of electrical energy from carbon-based petroleum and thus shut down the US, or (2) switch over to nuclear-based electrical generation by allowing the energy companies to own and use nuclear fuel. This switchover has been done in France, Germany and Japan and other countries that don't have their own supply of oil and find nuclear fuel is much cheaper and cleaner than oil. Of course, they all agree with the Kyoto accords.

Thus the "phoney environmentalists," who are still clamoring for the US to enact the Kyoto accords, are both in favor of the switchover to nuclear generated energy, and at the same time are opposed to building new nuclear plants in the US. I will leave it to the "environmentalists" to figure out the illogic of that position.

This is sad, since most of the people in the environmental groups are truly concerned about pollution and are simply unaware they are being misdirected and misused by the oil companies, specifically BP-Standard Oil. If you visit the national headquarters of the environmental groups, like Earth First, Natural Resources Defense Council or the Sierra Club, you won't find a grass roots people operation. Instead you will see vast, palatial, well-appointed suites of offices only rivaled by the corporate headquarters of the oil companies for which they front.

This will soon become obvious when the environmental groups, to help solve the impending energy shortages, as in California and soon to be coming to a neighborhood near you, actually make recommendations to build more power plants using natural gas or clean oil, but never recommend nuclear energy plants. The Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council will probably be the first, and then all the other groups will follow.

Within several years, when the US laws prohibiting nuclear waste recycling are dropped, the "environmentalists" will become the strongest advocates of clean nuclear energy. They will point out that nuclear fuel is recyclable with no emissions, while that nasty petroleum fuel is not recyclable and has terrible emissions dangerous to health and the planet. But before that happens the "environmentalists" must complete their current project of changing the US laws prohibiting recycling and private ownership of nuclear fuels.

Thus fascism in America is not only alive and well, but is a thriving mainstream growth industry. It has been entrenched in the center of the US Federal government since the founding of the Federal Reserve System in 1913 and controls the US economy. With the creation of the US Department of Education in the 1970's, instruction in the "fascist oil company plan" has taken over all state and local education systems and reached its goal about 15 years ago with the introduction of what is called the "Goals 2000" program. Ever wonder why it was called "Goals 2000"?

That program was produced and pushed through congress by something called the General Education Board. The plan of the Goals 2000 program is to divide children from parents, prevent any reasonable education that would produce children who might ask who really runs the world, and foment division among racial groups through diversity training, along with a healthy dose of oil company environmentalism. This almost exact same education plan was used by Adolf Hitler in the 1930's and 40's in his Hitler Youth movement. It later was adopted by Stalin in the 1950's and Fidel Castro in the ‘60s. It can now be found in many countries.

The Diversity training in the new curriculum is similar to the German "racial hygiene," or awareness of racial differences, which was based on the earlier "eugenics" movement that started in the US and was made into law in most of the states starting with South Dakota in the 1920's.

And from where did Adolph Hitler get his education plan? And where did Stalin and Castro get their education plans? And now even the education plans being sent worldwide by the United Nations through UNICEF and UNESCO? They all got them from the working papers written by the General Education Board, founded in 1905 by John D. Rockefeller. Almost all textbooks in American schools now say at the bottom of the inside cover, "Approved by the General Education Board." Now you know who they are and what has happened to the American education system.

The federal government through the Department of Education, which provides no education nor instruction, has done nothing in the last 30 years to improve education in the US. Multiple billions of US dollars have been spent, not to improve academic achievement, which has seriously declined, but to ensure the complete and proper implementation of the fascist oil General Education Plan in every state and local school district throughout the nation. Most of the money is spent on overcoming the great resistance of both teachers and parents who don't like what they see in the Goals 2000 plan. John D. Rockefeller would be proud of his achievement, and it didn't cost him a nickel. He got the taxpayers to pay for it.

There are numerous other examples in American life and culture where the clear hand of Oil Company Fascism has taken complete control in the last 20 to 25 years. So it would not be correct to say there is a growing movement of fascism in the world. It has been here for over 80 years and anything which does not fit into the framework of Oil Company Fascism is branded as polluting, dangerous to health, or communist. And soon even the need for that will be superfluous and then you are only left with the worldwide Hi-test ethyl-supreme Fascism of the Empire of Energy. Can you say "New World Order?"

In the early days of the discovery of large oil fields, the first being in Arkansas, followed quickly by discoveries in Texas and California, all three of those states were swiftly made "safe" for the oil business. All of the candidates for legislators and governors were bribed with handsome political campaign war chests filled brimming with oil profits. In those three states the only way to get into state office was to buddy up with the oil companies and then make sure all the laws you passed were kindly to your benefactors.

Thus Arkansas, Texas and California have been "Oil Company States" since about 1920. Did you notice in the last 21 years, all the Presidents of the US were governors or senators from Arkansas, Texas or California? And before that, "Viet Nam War" Johnson was a Texas oilman, and "Viet Nam War" Nixon was a California oil senator. Just a coincidence? The oil business is non-partisan. It makes no difference whether a Republican or Democrat wins an election. Just as when you go to fill up your tank at the gas station, somebody else has already chosen for you whether you buy foreign or American gas. Likewise, who you select on the voting ballot doesn't matter. Somebody else has already chosen for you. The Fascist Oil Party always wins either way.

Thus for the last 38 years, all the presidents have been Standard Oil men from Oil Company states, except for Georgia's Jimmy Carter. And in 1977, it was ex-Navy nuclear engineer, President Carter, who signed a law which forbade the recycling of used nuclear material through reprocessed fuel as is done throughout the rest of the world as in Japan, France and Germany. This produced, only in America, a vast nuclear waste dump problem which effectively shut down any new nuclear plants in the US. There is no waste problem in other countries, where the waste is all continuously recycled as enriched uranium fuel. There is virtually no waste. But, of course, that is not in the "phoney environmentalist" handouts.

The Big Four Rockefeller Brothers, the grandsons of John D, each took a different slice of the world pie. Laurence Rockefeller took the Asian region as assistant regent of Japan under General MacArthur after WWII, which lead to the Vietnam "war" and the vast oil profits there.

Nelson Rockefeller became governor of New York, based on his childhood home on the vast Rockefeller estate in Terrytown on the Hudson, just north of Rye. Nelson had his eyes on stealing his way into the presidency, not by election, but by simple appointment using something he created, and slammed through Congress in 1967 in a matter of weeks. It was called the "Rockefeller Amendment," also known as the 25th Amendment to the US Constitution. It happened so fast, most people never even noticed. And the source of that amendment is not taught in schools.

The 25th Amendment allows any person, qualified or not, to become president of the US, by simple appointment, not by election. And which Nelson Rockefeller used to become vice president only 7 years later. But he had hoped to be appointed 4 years earlier by an agreement with Richard Nixon. But Nixon reneged, which lead to Nelson getting rid of Richard through the Watergate scandal set up by Nelson. Ever wonder who the deep-throated gravely voice belonged to, who spoon fed the Watergate information against Nixon to Woodward and Bernstein in the darkly lit underground garages? Go ask Woodward, he knows. But he's not telling. Ever wonder what happened to the American press?

The baby brother of the Big Four, David Rockefeller, set himself up as the monetary head of the world, using his control of the monetary system in the US through the Federal Reserve System, and then later expanded around the world by using the newly created World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to control the central banks and economies of most, and now all, nations. And what of the fourth grandson, Winthrop? Winthrop and his vast inherited wealth and power only took over a state. The state of Arkansas. Winthrop owned Arkansas and everything in it. But it was such a minor state, with many uneducated people and who would want such a puny job? Winthrop did. Winthrop owned Arkansas.

In 1973 during the Watergate Scandal hearings, Nixon was being maneuvered out of the Oval Office and a Rockefeller friend, Jerry Ford who had been "appointed" by Nixon, was being maneuvered into office as interim president. Then using the Rockefeller 25th Amendment, Jerry in turn "appointed" Nelson Rockefeller as his Vice President. This would seem a rather strange game of Rockefeller musical chairs, and even more strangely the American press and the public never even noticed.

The press was too busy with the "leaked" Nixon Watergate scandals to notice what was happening just behind the scenery. The fascist energy empire was learning how to use outrageous scandal as a cover for the next phase of political activity. Even though the political activity is in plain sight for all to see, it simply is not reported by the press, therefore it disappears.

It was a young Hillary Rodham Clinton, as one of the lead congressional law counsels during the Watergate hearings, who helped put Nelson Rockefeller in position. As payback, Hillary's husband would be made Governor of Arkansas, with the assistance of Winthrop Rockefeller, who owned Arkansas.

That deal was a slam dunk and William Clinton became Arkansas governor. But Bill Clinton was such a scandalous ruffian, even the simple folk of Arkansas wanted to quickly impeach him and toss him out of office. So Winthrop had to save the day and step in for a while as interim Governor of Arkansas until the scandals quieted down. Then Clinton returned for a second term as governor. And why would Winthrop do all that? Because Rockefeller-BP-Standard was grooming "scandalous" Bill Clinton to take over as their man in the Presidency. Bill Clinton had been a Rockefeller oil man ever since his college days as a Rhodes scholar, and his trip to visit the oil men in the USSR back in the 1960's.

With eight years of Bill Clinton in office as President of the US, his many wild and continuous scandals would cover up the workings behind the scene as the oil company fascists took over control of the federal government and the press. That process was completed and proven when even a scandalized publicly self-admitted perjurer like Bill Clinton, could not be impeached and convicted by the US congressmen -- because BP-Standard now owned them all. In accord with John D. Rockefeller's vow 90 years before, the takeover of the American government by the fascist oil empire was now complete, thanks to Winthrop Rockefeller, who owned Arkansas. The next and final scene of world domination by the New Empire of Energy was now only one short step away. Enter George W. Bush stage right.

Previous Chapter  | Return to Table of Contents




Why I Lost Trust in Telegram Messaging App
Posted Jan 6, 2018

I have decided to stop endorsing Telegram as my preferred encrypted messaging app! I now recommend Signal. Two reasons for this change: 1) leaking metadata is too big a privacy/security design flaw and 2) controversy vs Iran has me no longer trusting Telegram founder Pavel Durov. Willing or not I fear he could become a tool of warmongering profiteers seeking yet more "regime change" resulting in the total unjust destruction of Iran just like Iraq, Lybia, etc.

Details:

1) It came to my attention that Telegram has a design flaw of leaking metadata:

https://oflisback.github.io/telegram-stalking/

https://medium.com/@thegrugq/operational-telegram-cbbaadb9013a

"This metadata would expose who talked with who, at what time, where they were located (via IP address), how much was said, etc. There is a huge amount of information in those flows that would more than compensate for lacking access to the content (even if, big assumption, the crypto is solid)."

2) Telegram's founder Pavel Durov is now in the midst of controversy vs the Iranian gov't which he *claims* has shut down Telegram in Iran (this claim has been disputed see below). He says this is a freedom of speech issue, but he's being inconsistent in which groups are censored by Telegram due to promoting violence. Telegram shut down the @amadnews channel for this reason, but it appears that group simply rebranded themselves as @sedaiemardom. There are dozens of replies from Iranian citizens to Pavel's tweet about this and so far I haven't seen any acknowledgement from Pavel. So, unfortunately I have lost a great deal of trust in Pavel and therefore Telegram. While I believe the protests in Iran are legit (other than the potential for influence from foreign agents provocateur transforming peaceful into deadly), I fear that Pavel will become a tool of my own warmongering U.S. gov't which doesn't care about these *economic* protests, the exact same kind which happen right here in the USA e.g. Occupy. What they really want is yet another excuse for "regime change" which will result in the unjust total destruction of Iran exactly like Lybia. I'm so disappointed that Pavel isn't addressing this hugely important issue.

Here are his tweets and a selection of replies:

@durov
Iranian authorities are blocking access to Telegram for the majority of Iranians after our public refusal to shut down https://t.me/sedaiemardom and other peacefully protesting channels.
https://twitter.com/durov/status/947441456238735360

@h_meysami
You're promoting a channel that promoting violence?!

@sintux
He's promoting freedom of speech piece of c...

@kenricashe
Was he promoting freedom of speech when he banned the reportedly-related amadnews channel? "Be careful - there are lines one shouldn't cross."

@durov
A Telegram channel (amadnews) started to instruct their subscribers to use Molotov cocktails against police and got suspended due to our "no calls for violence" rule. Be careful – there are lines one shouldn't cross. Similar case from October –
https://twitter.com/durov/status/947179988213624832

@IRI_SEAMAN
We still access to telegram
https://twitter.com/IRI_SEAMAN/status/947443223122862081

@theosint
Thanks Pavel for the update. Are you sure it’s blocked or are you just extrapolating this from usage data? It’s relevant to notice that the Internet is down in a lot of places.
https://twitter.com/theosint/status/947442704086130690

@svershin
I heard that one of the international links to Egypt may be down. Lots of my friends from Cairo are reporting issues with accessing all sorts of services, with broadband stuff being the worst affected.
https://twitter.com/svershin/status/947444404234670080

@ZandSaman
Everyone in Iran knows that SedaieMardom Channel is the reseved channel for Amadnews that @telegram shut it dawn last night. Both have the same admins and same strategy!
https://twitter.com/ZandSaman/status/947442249213906945

@hr_salehi
Because the same person and group started that new channel with the same approach. Everyone knows “sedaiemardom” is the new “amadnews”
https://twitter.com/hr_salehi/status/947449862911680513

@arvinhashempur
Peacefully?? You must be kidding. They killed three people yestarday including one 12 y.o kid. This channels are telling them where to go. And when they go the place the channel said they kill people and attack different governmental places and stores. Be careful. We love telgram
https://twitter.com/arvinhashempur/status/947739475089780736

@tohidian
peaceful?!?
how do u define peace Pavel? so disappointed in u.... so disappointed
https://twitter.com/tohidian/status/947744242650243072

@FardadArmin
You've blocked the "آمدنیوز", but alternative channels, such as the voice of the people, still invite people to chaos.
https://twitter.com/FardadArmin/status/948465958607294464

@mohammadHos6
https://t.me/sedaiemardom  ;;; = ISIS
https://twitter.com/mohammadHos6/status/948492253172912129

@genghis498
online campaign is being done to turn iran into syria..we have seen it on the onset of syrian war.
https://twitter.com/genghis498/status/947446707607937025

Ditch All Those Other Messaging Apps: Here's Why You Should Use Signal Wired.com/story/ditch-all-those-other-messaging-apps-heres-why-you-should-use-signal

Signal Desktop App With End-to-End Encryption Now Available to All Gadgets.ndtv.com/apps/news/signal-desktop-app-with-end-to-end-encryption-now-available-to-all-823468

It's also worth mentioning that I heard through the grapevine how the Cannabis industry is mostly using Signal, which sounds like a trustworthy endorsement to me!




2016 Year In Review
Posted Jan 9, 2017

I compiled this summary mostly for myself, but it might also be of interest to family, friends, maybe a few acquaintances, total strangers, and potential stalkers.

And I'm putting this on my own damn website instead of Facebook. I'm going to try doing this more often unless they start giving me a % of the ad revenues generated from my content. But it's also for those who aren't on Facebook.

Most people do their annual reviews in December, which has always seemed wrong to me because, well ... the year isn't over yet! What if something amazing happens after it's already been published?! Although now that I see how long it's taken me I concede it is reasonable to at least get a head start before year's end. Then maybe next year I'll get this published on New Year's Day.

Meanwhile, here's my review of 2016! While most people perceive it as being one of the shittiest years ever, for me it was the best I've had in at least this entire decade, mostly because of self-improvement but also because I don't perceive the major social events of 2016 -- most notably celebrity deaths, the U.S. presidential election, and "fake news" to be as depressing and/or as profound a change as what's already been happening for decades.

Celebrity deaths are sad when they mean so much to us on a personal level, but I focus on celebrating their lives while taking charge of my own. The David Bowie party at Club 21, for example, was hella fun. Never forget the purpose of life is to live.

For many people the country appears to have gone insane re: politics, but I was emotionally prepared for either of the terrible outcomes from the dog and pony show that is our presidential election. Nothing profoundly new has actually happened. Yes, Trump will likely be the worst president we've ever had, but put it in context of the Bush-era crimes against humanity ... which Obama expanded upon as well. The best thing about Trump winning is that self-professed "liberals" are finally getting off their asses again and fighting against the tyranny of our own government and hopefully they'll stop believing in the insidious false propaganda of "humanitarian intervention" and "Just War".

Unfortunately there are still so many Americans who are manipulated by "fake news", and what they don't realize is that the fake news actually comes from the mainstream sources who are controlled by those who profit from endless unjust war and other forms of corruption. I feel good about all the work I did towards exposing more truth about American Imperialism and what our government and the Deep State's ulterior motives are in Syria, etc. While I'm wary of all politicians, especially presidents because no one person should have so much power in any nation, nevertheless Assad's liberation of Aleppo is far better for the citizens of Syria than replacing him with an exponentially worse puppet of Western Big Oil. I don't necessarily trust Putin either, and he has his own motives re: energy transportation from the Middle East, but at least Russia actually defeated ISIS instead of what our own gov't has done, i.e. covertly supporting the worst terrorists on this planet for the purpose of "regime change".

In 2016 I also continued researching and learning about Endocannabinoid Deficiency and how Cannabis is a conditionally essential nutrient. Meanwhile, Cannabis laws across the nation are finally progressing and I still have hope that we can recover from the brink of disaster. 

Now on to my personal accomplishments & milestones:

First off at the beginning of the year I conquered a 3-month migration of servers and hosted domains into the cloud, finally giving myself the peace of mind knowing that I'm not the only one responsible for handling what had become increasingly less rare moments of extreme technical difficulty. I'm no longer blasted with alerts from my phone in the middle of the night, I'm not having to rush downtown to reboot when there is no other option, I'm not worrying about my businesses when I'm out of town, and surpisingly I ended up saving $200/mth in hosting fees!

Continued development of dBMonkey's event ticketing service and sold more tickets this year than in 2015, which isn't saying much but it's progress nonetheless.

Branched out into yet another business model of e-commerce powered by Magento. East Portland Coffee Roasters is my first client for that service and online ordering will be available soon.

Accepted the invitation from my great friends at AFRU Gallery to join their crew, serving as marketing guru, booking bands, and occasional DJ. I've met so many amazing people! I've already booked some great bands and more to come. And I also got the ball rolling to add Curator to my list of titles. The date is TBA but next year there will be a First Friday featuring Chris Bigalke aka Showdeer!

Finished Sam Henry's website! www.samhenrydrums.com

Brought DAVID YOW to the Clinton Street Theater and after party at Dot's Cafe! Thanks also to Lani Jo Leigh and Eli Johnson!

In September Angela and I had a really fun two-week vacation first in Astoria, one of many places where we've actually considered moving to at some point in the future if Portland becomes completely unbearable. The weather on the coast was perfect! The next week we went to Mt Rainier and it was so much fun that we're going back in the springtime to see how much the water rises, especially at the stunning viewpoint of the Nisqually River from the bridge on Paradise Road.

Then in October I completed my fifth decade of out-of-womb existence! Details below re: amazing show at The Know! (How's that for some rhyming huh?) I came to realize shortly after my 50th that I needed to finally follow through on those major lifestyle changes I've been promising to myself. I've quit the binge partying, dialed in my nutrients and exercise, and found the courage to have my lower right wisdom tooth extracted before it caused too much trouble. I now weigh less than I have in at least two decades! At 50 years old I'm in better health since I can't even remember when.

I've also been organizing and cleaning up the huge mess in my office. At the bottom of a pile of all kinds of shit on one of my desks I found what may have been the literally and figuratively buried reason for why I let it go for so long, greeting cards from family and friends expressing their condolences after the death of my mother in 2009. I will always miss her, but I've come to learn from past mistakes instead of dwelling on all the regrets for things I wish I had done differently. Though it's a myth that the body replaces itself every 7 years, in many ways I'm not the same person at all that I was back then.

I do regret having not attended some recent birthdays. Here's a belated shout out to Haggy, Sam Henry, and Kitty Diggins. Nothing personal, I just need to avoid bars indefinitely! I'm hopeful that some day I'll learn how to cope with loud 'n crowded sardine cans without alcohol, and I don't regret getting my life in order and getting shit done. Not in the least!

And finally at the end of the year I found myself for the first time in as long as I can remember ... NOT overly anxious nor depressed about the holidays. Remember kids, allowing these arbitrary dates on the calendar to have such an effect on us is like "letting the terrorists win"!

Memorable events (if yours not listed here don't take it personally as there were many I missed for various reasons):

1/8 Federale, David J, The Upsidedown @ Mississippi Studios

1/12 Todd Rundgren @ Star Theater

1/23 European Tour Kickoff and Gator's Birthday with P.R.O.B.L.E.M.S., High Horse, Breaker Breaker @ Twilight

2/5 BYTE ME! 5.0 @ AFRU

2/9 Premier of Holochronics @ Star Bar

2/18 Broncho @ Doug Fir

2/19 P.O.C. Reunion!, Power of County, Archangels Thunderbird, Clampitt, Gaddis & Buck, Hearts of Oak @ Secret Society

2/20 Down Gown, High Praise, Grand Head @ Black Water where I had my first vegan Philly "cheese steak" and it was awesome

2/25 Ben Munat's bday (went to Cravedog happy hour, Supersuckers @ Dante's & Ringo Deathstarr @ Star Theater)

3/4 John Prine @ Arlene Schnitzer (w my buddy Rick Bain!)

3/9 Mister Tang @ Liquor Store then Jen Lane's bday @ Valentines

3/19 MAGMA @ Wonder Ballroom

3/25 Andrew Loomis Memorial @ Dante's

3/30 Wow and Flutter, Down Gown, Human @ High Water Mark

4/12 The Residents present Shadowland, The Residents @ Aladdin Theater where I met & smoked weed with Helios Creed!

4/18 Paul Allen's Birthday Bash @ Star Theater

4/29 Neil Stryker and the Tyrant of Time @ Hollywood Theatre

5/3 Napalm Death, Melvins, Melt Banana @ Roseland Theater

5/6 SCI-FI SHOW, Comet Talk @ AFRU

5/7 Don't Returns From Europe! w The Lovesores & Down Gown @ Twilight Café

5/8 Barret's 40th Birthday Party, The Stolte Boys, Barret C. Stolte (theGoodSons) @ Ash Street Saloon

5/13 Violent Femmes @ Crystal Ballroom

5/14 dBMonkey Presents DAVID YOW (Scratch Acid, Jesus Lizard, Flipper) LIVE IN PERSON, Walden Pink, All Roads Lead @ Clinton Street Theater + after party @ Dot's Cafe

6/3 Finding Your Light @ AFRU

6/6 The Sadies, Shadowy Men on a Shadowy Planet, DRC3 @ Star Theater

6/14 Battles, Chanti Darling, Máscaras @ Wonder Ballroom 

6/20 Summer Solstice Full Moon @ Planet Earth!

6/24 Piano Push Play @ Portland Art Museum and all over Portland!

7/1 URBAN DECAY, Damn Family @ AFRU

7/8 Neil Hamburger, JP Incorporated @ Star Theater 

7/12 Boss Hog, Hurry Up @ Doug Fir

7/14 Benefit for FreeForm Portland Radio!, Down Gown, Killed By Health, New Modern Warfare @ The Know 

7/15 Get Thee Slayer Hippy back on the Throne!, Toe Tag, IT, GUN, Sweatpants, Street Tramps, Jennifer Robin, DJ Keebler @ Dante's 

7/22 The Colossus of Destiny - A Melvins Tale @ Hollywood Theatre 

7/23 The Claypool Lennon Delirium @ Roseland Theater 

8/5 Funeral for Old Portland from Skidmore Fountain to AFRU

8/17 Drinks & chess w Ted Imel @ Lotus Card Room (their last week and this night was also a full moon)

8/25 Clan of Xymox @ Star Theater and art shows at Goodfoot and The Trap

8/26 David J & Soriah private show in Enrique's home!

9/1 Portland Film Festival Presents West Coast Premiere of Neil Stryker and the Tyrant of Time @ Laurelhurst Theater w after party @ Beuhlahland where I hadn't been in ages!

9/2 Sylvia Mann, DJ Futropolis @ AFRU Gallery 

9/4 Swans @ Wonder Ballroom (not their best show but memorable haha)

9/8 Gooo, Dan Dan, Consumer., Colin Manning @ Turn Turn Turn

9/12 3 Leg Torso Performs at The Lake Theatre

9/23 The Monkeywrench, Audios Amigos, DRC3 @ Star Theater

9/23 Northwest Hesh Fest, Uncle Acid & the deadbeats, Danava, Banquet @ Dante's 

9/29 Psychic TV @ Star Theater

10/6 Elvis's Birthday w parade from Skidmore Fountain to Dante's

10/6 Gar Gar @ Lovecraft 

10/7 Rustyn Birch, Chris Newman Deluxe Combo, DJ Kenric @ AFRU

10/12 Kenric's 50th Birthday! Holochronics w special guest Helios Creed (of Chrome), The Decliners, Gooo @ The Know

10/14 Poster Children, The Secret Sea @ Doug Fir (on my actual birthday & the reason I celebrated on 10/12 instead of 10/14!)

10/19 Yonatan Gat, Eternal Tapestry, Don Gero @ White Eagle

10/26 Lol Tolhurst (of The Cure) @ Lovecraft

10/27 Slept 18.5 hours!!! (an example of why I've quit the late-night partying hehe)

10/28 Peter Vaughn Shaver's Dia De Los Musicos Muertos

10/29 Halloween Party @ "The Shop" in St John's w Fruit of the Legion of Loom & Smokey Kingdom

11/4 From the Odd to the Macabre, Jeremy Twin-Bears Wetter, Sienna Morris, Cora Lee Poole, Cody Buttcheeks Long, Julia Alora, The Deadlurk Dollymops @ AFRU

11/11 Sam Klein @ Rising Room Gallery 

11/12 Guy Burwell @ Po'Boy Art & Framing 

11/30 WHEN THE FUTURE WAS NOW EPISODE #5, Dreckig, Dr. Burtrum, Bobbi Wasabi, Jon Timm @ Valentines 

12/2 AFRU First Friday Santa Edition, Santa vs Santa Boxing Match, Mutant Toys, Gooo, DJ Bad Santa @ AFRU Gallery 

12/21 The Blind Shake, Paul Cary, Fire Nuns @ Bunk Bar 

12/31 NYE had a great evening at home with my wife!

Read and/or Post Comments on Facebook




Lauren Bacall Wiggle (from To Have and Have Not 1944)
Posted Dec 16, 2016




Film Review: Six Degrees of Separation (1993)
Posted Nov 30, 2014

Thanksgiving 2014, I was feeling lazy and in the mood for lighthearted easy-to-watch popcorn fluff, so I dug into some old John Hughes, starting with Planes, Trains, and Automobiles (which in the end I was reminded actually has a pretty deep message about the things that are important in life) and then National Lampoon's Vacation.
 
Maybe I just didn't remember but I'm pretty sure I'd never made the connection before that Rusty Griswold is played by the same actor -- Anthony Michael Hall -- who played Brian "The Brain" Johnson in The Breakfast Club. Then I started wondering how Anthony's career developed. Well it turns out I have seen him in other films and I didn't make the connection in those either: "The Geek" in Sixteen Candles, "Jim" in Edward Scissorhands, and "Engel" in The Dark Knight.
 
And then I discovered he's also in this 1993 film I'd never even heard of before: Six Degrees of Separation. No, it does not have Kevin Bacon in it. It is adapted from the Broadway play of the same name. The main star is Will Smith, and having just watched it I agree with the critics who say it's his most powerful performance ever. From the poster I wondered if it would be like Eddie Murphy's Trading Places, and maybe it is a tiny bit on the surface, especially from a marketing exec's perspective, but it is way deeper than that.
 
The other major roles are played expertly as well by Stockard Channing and Donald Sutherland, and then there are minor roles from other big names like Ian McKellen, Heather Graham, and even J.J. Abrams! There's not a bad apple in the bunch. Well, the college kids are snotty but that's the role they're supposed to be playing.
 
Around the 1:20:00 mark of the film there's a scene in which Will's character Paul says: "Always remember the wine from the even numbered years is superior to the wine from the odd numbered years." Skeptical of that claim, I paused to do some research. Turns out there's a small amount of truth to it if limited to specific region and decade, although it's still purely coincidental. (Some wine expert please correct me if I'm wrong.) But the far more interesting revelation of my side-track research was that Six Degrees of Separation is based on the real life story of David Hampton. This is surprisingly not mentioned anywhere in the reviews on Rotten Tomatoes nor IMDB.
 
From Wikipedia:
 
"Hampton was born in Buffalo, New York and was the eldest son of an attorney. He moved to New York City in 1981 and stumbled upon his now-famous ruse in 1983 when he and another man were attempting to gain entry into Studio 54. Unable to obtain entry, Hampton's partner decided to pose as Gregory Peck's son while Hampton assumed the identity of Sidney Poitier's son. They were ushered in as celebrities. Hampton began employing the persona of "David Poitier" to cadge free meals in restaurants. He also persuaded at least a dozen people into letting him stay with them and give him money, including Melanie Griffith, Gary Sinise, Calvin Klein, John Jay Iselin, the president of WNET, Osborn Elliott, the dean of the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, and a Manhattan urologist. He convinced some that he was an acquaintance of their children, some that he had just missed a plane to Los Angeles with his luggage still on it, and some that his belongings had been stolen.
 
Playwright John Guare became interested in Hampton's story through his friendship with two of his duped hosts — Osborn and Inger Elliott, who had been outraged to find 'David Poitier' in bed with another man the morning after they let him into their home. Six Degrees of Separation opened at the Lincoln Center in May 1990 and became a long-running success.
 
Hampton attempted to parlay the play's success to his benefit, giving interviews to the press, gate-crashing a producer's party, and beginning a campaign of harassment against Guare that included phone calls and death threats, prompting Guare to apply for a restraining order in April 1991, which was unsuccessful. In the fall of 1991, Hampton filed a $100 million lawsuit, claiming that the play had infringed on the copyright on his persona and his story. The lawsuit was eventually dismissed."
 
The budget for the film was estimated at $12 million and in the USA it grossed only $6.4 million, so obviously David asked for way too much. In fact, one could look at this as yet another loss for those who became involved with his series of cons. On the other hand, there may have been huge profits from the play. I don't know, but for the sake of discussion let's imagine that profits were made from his life. Would he have deserved a portion of that since he was the one who literally created the story? It seems highly debatable, and leads to a slippery slope. Do serial killers deserve royalties for all the millions of dollars that have been made from the dramatizations of their stories? Is their fame from that already crossing the line? It's a far more complicated debate when the criminal is so charming and most of his victims actually enjoyed his company and were even entertained by his presence, so at least they got something out of it and for the most part he wasn't so scary.
 
As is the nature of drama, the play and film probably both over-romanticize David Hampton. His not-so-charming criminal charges included (again according to Wikipedia) credit-card theft, threats of violence, burglary, and harassment. Sounds like he wasn't always such a pleasant fellow after all. On the other hand, it's equally likely that some of his charges were trumped up. He was acquitted on the harassment charge, for example.
 
For the sake of philosophy and returning to the original purpose of reviewing this film, let us now take it at face value and enter the realm of imagination, which by the way is one of its important themes.
 
Much of what the character in this story did was arguably not criminal. Posing as Sidney Poitier's son doesn't sound so bad when all he got from it was food and drink, a room for the night, and a tiny fraction of his victims' massive wealth. They offered it all willingly, and they received amazing conversation and companionship in return. He could have stolen the Kittredge's very valuable art possessions, but did not. Dr. Fine not only invited him into his house, but even gave him his keys. The doctor's son was perhaps somewhat justified when he called his father an idiot.
 
The film also contains some very important messages and a series of conundrums for everyone involved.
 
How does one succeed in the face of racism? If he had been born white, would he have felt the need to pretend, or would he have been accepted without question right away into the veritable country club?
 
How do you accumulate wealth and fame when you have neither? Of course there are more important values in life, but shouldn't every person have the same opportunities? Conversely, should every person -- including the "legitimately" wealthy and famous -- be despised for their varying degrees of fakery?
 
Pretending to be a celebrity seems not much different than being an actual celebrity, particularly when the latter comes from inherited wealth or an attractive body instead of talent, ingenuity, and hard work, with the latter quality -- effort -- being the most deserving of reward. The irony of this person's life was that he taught himself all the qualities to achieve social status, but he wasn't accepted because he was a Confidence Man. I love that phrase because it implies that being a con artist requires confidence. As Hunter said, "Stride confidently into their midst." It also requires con-vincing people, which is so much easier when they want to believe. Compared to many people in the upper echelons of society, was his fraud so very different? Maybe it's misguided, but I can't help having sympathy for him, especially after reading the NY Times article (see in the references below) which details how it all started relatively innocently and in a humorous way gaining entrance to Studio 54 and then getting VIP service at a restaurant because he was hungry and broke. If such fraud is illegal, aren't those who fall head over heels for the cult of personality at least accessories to the crime?
 
Six degrees of separation is the obvious main theme of this film, and it's ironic how that concept is exactly what I just experienced, from John Hughes to Anthony Michael Hall to this film with its screenwriter and playwright John Guare, and all the actors in it, and then to the real life David Hampton. We truly are all connected.
 
There are so many reasons why this is a very important film that I wish everyone would see and I'm amazed it took me 48 years to discover and experience myself. The fact that this is the first movie review I'm posting to my blog proves how much I liked it and how seminal I believe it is. It's also very timely at the moment as J.J. Abrams' post-holiday Star Wars trailer is all the rage and the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson has renewed racial tensions. Five thumbs up! See it today!
 
REFERENCES
 
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/six_degrees_of_separation
 
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108149
 
http://sonomacountygazette.blogspot.com/2010/05/wine-banter-vintage-to-vintage-by-john.html
 
http://wizardofvegas.com/forum/questions-and-answers/advice/12400-is-wine-better-in-even-or-odd-numbered-years/
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hampton
 
http://books.google.com/books?id=9ugCAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PP1&pg=PA40#v=onepage&q&f=false
 
http://www.nytimes.com/1990/06/21/theater/the-life-of-fakery-and-delusion-in-john-guare-s-six-degrees.html
 
http://www.nytimes.com/1990/07/31/theater/impersonator-wants-to-portray-still-others-this-time-onstage.html
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/19/nyregion/about-new-york-he-conned-the-society-crowd-but-died-alone.html
 
http://www.playbill.com/news/article/david-hampton-con-man-whose-exploits-inspired-six-degrees-dead-at-39-114376
 



I feel sorry for the hippie woman.
Posted Oct 16, 2014




I am a gun-toting, tree-hugging, UP-winger!
Posted May 27, 2014

Recent events have called into question yet again whether I am left or right in the tired old paradigm of the political spectrum. It doesn't really matter what the debate is on any given day, but as a basic example years ago when I criticized the GW Bush admin for False Wars I'm sure that everyone assumed I was a Democrat. Then when I criticized the Obama admin for False Wars yet again (as I still do), some people who knew nothing about me assumed I was a Republican.
 
I personally don't give much of a shit which side of the aisle anyone leans. I was a registered Democrat for a long time. I eventually (years ago) decided I didn't want to belong to either of the two monopoly parties because they both support war profiteers and constituents on both sides are easily manipulated. In fact I decided I didn't want to belong to any party at all. I want the entire U.S. to break apart just like the Soviet Union. It has been an Empire for far too long. I support all efforts towards the formation of a Cascadian nation. And fuck it, let Texas be it's own country, too, just as it's wanted for a very long time. Let's break it all up into 6 to 8 equal regional nations with no single one having too much military power, and convert the Pentagon into a massive public library or something.
 
I personally believe the average Progressive -- a label which I suppose applies to me more accurately than most political terms -- aligns more with some Libertarians than some Democrats. But I'm afraid of belonging to any group. I don't trust the herd mentality, nor their tendency to be easily manipulated by fear and/or hope, and they are especially dangerous if they can be convinced to hate on a scapegoat or to believe that someone is their enemy without even having a chance to talk it over and reach common ground.
 
I don't care about left or right. I care about ISSUES.
 
I support free speech.
 
I support civil rights.
 
I support marriage equality.
 
I choose science over religion (e.g. stem-cell research).
 
I support a woman's right to choose an abortion. (I've paid for one myself ... not that I'm proud of it but the proof is in the pudding.)
 
I support the environment in many ways. I keep myself educated as much as possible. I minimize plastic in all my purchases. I recycle. I pay extra to my utility company for salmon habitat. I pay extra for the salmon plates on my car which goes to funding for various salmon-related aid. Uh oh, do I lose points for owning a car? Do I win points back for not commuting because I have a home office? Do I score triple points for having not reproduced and recognizing that global human overpopulation is the #1 cause of pretty much every problem on this entire planet?
 
Okay so I'm looking a lot like a registered card-carrying Democrat huh?
 
But hey guess what ... I also support the 2nd Amendment. I believe a well-regulated militia -- as opposed to a standing army -- is one of our best defenses against potential tyranny ... including our own government! History (e.g. fascist martial law resisted by armed citizens) has proven that many times over.
 
My mother was born in meat-heavy Germany and I was born in the meat-heavy South. In my life I have slowly evolved from meat-centric to vegetarian, yet at the same time I understand the value of knowing how to survive in the woods in cases of disaster. I would eat a mammal IF my life depended on it. And let's not forget ... humans are mammals, too. Cue ominous Walking Dead music. Haha.
 
But seriously, it's important to recognize that humans are part of the environment. It's ironic when human beings are left out of the equation and seemingly considered less important than the spotted owl or whatever. The greatest irony of holier-than-thou city-dwelling environmentalists? Well the answer is one word hidden in plain sight right there in that sentence. They. Live. In. The. Fucking. CITY! Yes, they have chosen to live in a place that's covered in concrete, disconnected from the Earth instead of out in the woods with dirt and flowers and trees. How funny is that? I'm generalizing now but you see my point, right? For some it's quite an epiphany. Where do the vast majority of farmers live? Ignore them at your own peril. Truck drivers in general align mostly to the right, I suppose, but 3 days without them with no groceries on the shelves and we're all screwed.
 
What I'm trying to say is that I understand both points of view. I was born and raised in Tennessee and for six months I even lived in a trailer park, but I also lived for a year in Berlin when I was five and as an adult for two years I lived in New York City and worked 4 blocks from the World Trade Center. I empathize with both the "fancy" city people and the "simple" country folk. And we ALL need to get along to keep this human experiment from self-destructing.
 
So, for many years I have eschewed myself from aligning neither right, nor left, nor even center! You may ask ... how is that possible? Well, all you have to do is think outside that oh-so-restrictive box. I've seen the x/y alignments, too, where they separate social vs economic liberalism vs conservatism. That's an evolution in ways of thinking, but still too restrictive. If I must choose one particular direction, I'll take the undefined z-axis and go ... UP!
 



Portland Water Boil Notice = Politics As Usual
Posted May 24, 2014

Do we really need to boil our water?

Anna Canzano of KATU (see all references below) asked: "Why did it take three days to inform Portlanders about the water?" The question should have been, why was there a water boil notice at all for unconfirmed tests that are frequently false positives?

"[Commissioner Nick Fish and the Oregon Health Authority's drinking water services regional manager Kari Salis] both agree that issuing a preliminary notice of a single routine sample testing positive for fecal bacteria is a bad idea, given the possibility of false positives. (False positives can come with errors in the testing process, a tester not washing his/her hands, an animal defecating on the faucet that was tested, etc). And in this situation, the way the testing and results played out, officials say no mandatory public notification was required."

"three positive tests for fecal bacteria at three different locations in Portland on three separate days but no secondary confirmation test"

From the boil water notice itself: “The chance of any health problems related to this water test result is low. If any problems occur, we would expect diarrhea,” said Dr. Paul Lewis, Interim Tri-County Health Officer. “We monitor cases of bacterial diarrhea and will be aware of any increase following this event.”

Scott Fernandez's response on KOIN.com implies there is more of a health risk from scalding hot water than from these unconfirmed bacteria.

xnonymous on PIMC makes a good point: "e. coli is a general term, and doesn't mean the deadly H57:0157 strain. If THAT were in the water, the authorities would say so, and loudly."

Reports of some people getting sick, but how do we know it's from the water?

So far I've seen one 3rd party report but it's a woman who recently had a baby so she "may be sensitive" (whatever that means) and unconfirmed how exactly she "knows" it was the water, whether her water was tested for bacteria, whether her doctor confirmed it was E. coli, etc.

Interesting hypothesis from "xnonymous" on PIMC:

Dramatically, most of the city has been told to boil its water, and to call the Water Department with reports of gastrointestinal upset. Gastrointestinal upset is a normal human reaction to stress, and an easy target for suggestion. Most people who even suspect that something they just ate or drank was "off" will immediately focus their attention to their guts, and the resultant stress will almost instantly produce "gastrointestinal stress" from gas to diarrhea. These people are now hysterically calling the Water Bureau, "proving" by sheer numbers that there is a terrible, terrible contamination of the water supply.

I have yet to see any news report of anyone ending up in the hospital with Tabor water being the cause of their illness. If that were to happen, Nick Fish would be all over that in a heartbeat.

PWB HYPE MACHINE

A very good reason to be skeptical of PWB's alleged reluctance to issue the notice is the degree to which they publicized it.

This the first time they've ever used the robo-call method for water notices.

And for most people I'm sure it sounded very scary.

"Do not call 9-1-1 unless you have an emergency."

I archived a copy from my phone to mp3 format here:

http://www.kenricashe.com/blog/2014-05-23-water-boil-notice.mp3

Melissa Binder at OregonLive.com reports:

The city implemented the reverse 911 emergency alert system shortly after publishing the press release Friday morning, Fish said.

The citywide boil alert is the most broadest boil alert in Portland's history, Shaff said. Alerts in 2009 and 2012 were limited to one side of the river.

Open vs Closed Reservoirs: Nick Fish Takes Advantage of the "Crisis"

Is it just a coincidence how they go into hype machine overdrive when it has anything to do with the open reservoirs? Last year they delayed any notice at all for the bacteria detected when the source was a broken underground pipe. How convenient. PWB and/or OHA have demonstrated a very selective observance of OHA's Drinking Water Program.

Nick Fish told KATU the boil notice was a bad idea, but then he goes on NPR saying that if we closed the reservoir then this wouldn't happen. How convenient!

And of course it is NOT TRUE.

For starters, PWB's own boil notice says:

Contamination can occur when there is a loss of water pressure, a pipe breaks, or conditions that expose drinking water to outside elements. The Portland Water Bureau is performing a full investigation to identify the cause of the contamination. However, it is not always possible to make an exact determination.

I assume there is nothing about these conditions unique to open reservoirs, that they can also apply to closed reservoirs. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. But think about this: Our open reservoirs have been used for 100+ years. Where are the cases of anyone dying or having severe or even moderate illness from that? Would not PWB have referenced such reports long ago as the best support for their argument for closed reservoirs?

Also, E. coli was detected in two separate reservoirs, which might indicate the source was upstream from both. It could be from backflushing due to the incredible pressure drain from Powell Butte flushing operations. How ironic if this was actually caused by a covered reservoir. Let's hear Nick Fish on NPR talking about that!

And in case anyone's wondering, this event also has no bearing on the EPA LT2 "federal mandate", which is about the detection of Cryptosporidium.

CONCLUSION

A great summary by "0rganism" on democraticunderground.com:

i don't remember this happening in the 18 or so years i lived in SE Portland

1987 - 2004, not a problem.

Fed orders everyone to use only covered/sealed reservoirs because terrists ya know
City water bureau goes ahead looking into contracts for underground reservoirs & pumping & so on
Movement to save the mt tabor reservoirs happens
People get caught pissing in the reservoirs (like noone ever did before?)
E-coli alert, everybody boil your water, oh by the way do you know how open your reservoirs are?

i dunno, it feels like a hard sell...

Yes. Yes it does.

UPDATES

Boil Alert Fails to Serve Community
http://mtna-landuse.blogspot.com/2014/05/boil-alert-fails-to-serve-community.html
 
"County health department officials have yet to report any discernible uptick in disease reporting (diarrhea) for the Water Bureau service area, so, how questionable was the water?  I think we can assume one of the following: 1) the bacteria were all dead, present but DEAD, and therefore harmless -- our tests don’t distinguish live-and-harmful from dead-and-harmless, and since PWB does not wear gloves (they use chemical hand-sanitizer instead) when they collect samples, dead-but-still-present bacteria can be transferred from hands to sample, 2) the E.coli was a friendly variety regularly found in our gut, 3) the bacteria count was really low and within a range most immune systems could handle, 4) the contamination wasn't widespread, or 5) the tests were misleading, possibly even wrong (after all, the immediate follow-up tests ALL reversed the results)."
 
As a community we should also ask the following:

3) Is it possible for PWB to use tests that distinguish live vs dead bacteria, pathogenic vs non-pathogenic, etc?

4) Nick Fish what is your scientific reference for the claim you rather quickly made on NPR that this would not happen with covered reservoirs? Microbiologist Scott Fernandez recently told me that E. coli and other microorganisms are actually more likely in covered reservoirs because they are only cleaned every 5+ years as opposed to our open reservoirs which are cleaned every 6 months. You may have seen Scott on KOIN6 TV. He was formerly a member of the Portland Utility Review and before that the Water Quality Advisory Board and he also testified at EPA headquarters in Washington, DC.

KOIN6 investigation: No gloves required for PWB water testers
http://youtu.be/XVC1Cb0ebSU

Proof that not all strains of E. coli are deadly but some even have health benefits
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673698063430

"Our results suggest that treatment with a non-pathogenic E coli has an equivalent effect to mesalazine in maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis. The beneficial effect of live E coli may provide clues to the cause of ulcerative colitis."

REFERENCES

Portland Water Bureau (PWB) Water Boil Notice
http://www.portlandoregon.gov/water/boil/

KATU: Why did it take three days to inform Portlanders about the water? by Anna Canzano
http://www.katu.com/news/local/Why-did-it-take-three-days-to-inform-Portlanders-about-the-water-260480051.html

KGW: City alerts some hours after water advisory issued
http://www.kgw.com/home/City-activates-emergency-system-for-water-alert-260474361.html

Oregonian: Portland issues boil water notice for the entire city after E. coli detected in 3 tests by Andrew Theen
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2014/05/portland_issues_boil_water_not.html

Oregonian: Portland boil water alert: E. coli unlikely to endanger health, officials expect to lift alert tomorrow by Melissa Binder
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2014/05/portland_boil_water_alert.html

KOIN: Microbiologist on Portland’s water: Don’t worry by Joel Inawaga
http://koin.com/2014/05/23/microbiologist-on-portlands-water-dont-worry/

Casey Joyce reports about Nick Fish going on NPR
https://www.facebook.com/caseycaseyjoyjoy/posts/781991685174654

PIMC: I'm not boiling water (opinion by "xnonymous")
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2014/05/427296.shtml

Who Is Joe Glicker?
http://whoisjoeglicker.wordpress.com




Cautious Endorsement of People's Water Trust
Posted May 21, 2014

At the moment as I'm writing this, I'm still bitter about the way certain members of the People's Water Trust campaign treated the longtime grassroots activists behind the PPWD water/politics reform attempt with such disrespect. I definitely understand the frustrations and in fact I was one of the first to lean against it and point out all of its various flaws and corporate funders and question whether it might impact environmental services. But the abuse, arrogance, deception, and hypocrisy that even I as a relative newcomer received from those Trust supporters (you know who you are) on a personal basis does not bode well for them. The paranoid thought even occurred to me ... what if the Sith lord Darth Glicker is subtly influencing the science-minded among them as part of his master plan as he wrote in 1990: Convincing the Public that Drinking Water is Safe.

HOWEVER, yesterday I had a great conversation with Jonah Majure, chief petitioner of the Trust referendum, and I now realize that the behavior of a few does not necessarily represent the whole. Also, I've done things in the past in the heat of a campaign battle -- particularly the fluoride fight -- that I regret myself. Never forget, but forgive.

More importantly, as Jonah said: "The Trust itself is pretty honest and straightforward. If you think it sounds like a good charter amendment to affect city policy and/or relationship with city government, then that's all there is to it." Of course there's no way of knowing until it passes whether it will be effective legislation or whether the City Attorney will ... ahem ... water it down (zing!) and relegate it to the status of a kangaroo court.

But MOST importantly, what else do we have left in our arsenal?! Short of a lawsuit -- which I believe is extremely unlikely to be successful -- this is our last line of defense.

I'm sure that many are still asking, defense against what? The PPWD went on and on about pet projects and rising rates, which are indeed valid concerns, but the main focus should have been on the major issues of revolving door collusion for profit & personal gain that prompted the water reform movement a decade+ ago.

For starters, what I believe is still the most important issue:

Let's take a closer look at the claim that these new covered reservoirs are a federal mandate, and how that came to be. First of all, former PWB director Joe Glicker (now CH2M Hill) and Rhodes Trussell (of MWH at the time) were involved in the EPA LT2 rule making process, including the National Academies' report on radon in drinking water. Huge conflict of interest! And there are allegations of manipulation as well. Second, the EPA transferred the decision on the City's open reservoir waiver request to the Oregon Health Authority. It has since been a state mandate for quite some time. City Council repeatedly claims they did everything they could to convince the OHA to approve the waiver, but actually Randy Leonard was all for complying with LT2. His public spin on that decision was based on the mere possibility that increased frequency of testing in the future might detect Cryptosporidium. I also find it interesting how the City conceded so quickly to the OHA's 2013 letter, especially when it took Friends of the Reservoirs 3 weeks for a proper scientific analysis and response, to which as far as I know the OHA has never acknowledged. There are many other details to this long and complicated story. Please refer to www.portlandwater.info for a 40+ year chronology of cronyism and conflict of interest with negative impact against the common good.

The Trust measure addresses EPA LT2 -- without actually naming it specifically, but still for anyone in the know obvious what's implied -- in Section 6:

The City of Portland is bound by the affirmative duty ... to make all available efforts, in good faith, to keep Portland’s reservoir system operational including seeking exemptions, deferrals, and waivers on all possible grounds from the Environmental Protection Agency, the Oregon Health Authority, and the Oregon Congressional Delegation, and any other actions in the best interests of the residents of the City of Portland and the integrity of the City of Portland’s drinking water.

People's Water Trust should go even farther in its campaigning by discussing in great detail the elephant of which I speak, but it is nevertheless the last chance we have to save our open reservoirs and to protect our pristine Bull Run water from potential future privatization, regionalization, river commingling, and other important water issues.

www.peopleswatertrust.org

www.facebook.com/cascadianpublictrustinitiative




Open Letter to Bob Sallinger
Posted May 18, 2014

Bob, I hate that it's come to this. You look like a nice guy. Heck, you look like ME! Haha. It was funny when I did a google image search for you and five pages down I see my own face from my website www.kenricashe.com where your name appears several times in excerpts from references.
 
I know we share many common interests, although I suspect I like cats a hell of a lot more than you do ahahaha. But hey I like birds, too! In fact, my cats have always been indoor-only. I feed birds in my backyard on a regular basis, give them fresh water when it's freezing outside, and shoo away neighborhood cats that wander into my yard. I've always spayed or neutered every one of my cats as well. I have visited the Audubon Society more than once. And recently I was one of many who helped save the ancient Paradox walnut tree in SE PDX, an important eco-habitat for many animals including birds. I hope you at least appreciate all I've done for birds and how much I love them.
 
You and I also share a common interest in the environment and environmental services, so it's very perplexing how it's turned out we're on the opposite ends of the political spectrum in this Water District debate. I wish we had met and become at least Facebook friends before all this. But you've put yourself in the spotlight and it appears you've been the major force behind all the environmental groups officially opposing the PPWD water & politics reform initiative, which by the way reminds me eerily of the Healthy Kids Healthy Portland propaganda group who convinced so many people of a "dental emergency" that did not actually exist.
 
What I'm posting here is not a personal attack, but a response to many claims that have been made that are either unsupported by facts or missing the other side of the story.
 
I have no problem with the need to accept funding from people you don't like when the end justifies the means. I'm wary of many of the people supporting PPWD, too, so I was glad to hear that you'd already provided the justification for it.
 
I have no problem with anyone pointing out the logging interests on the PPWD side, but what about CH2M Hill funding the opposition? Has everyone forgotten how Joe Glicker's support for illegal Bull Run logging was stopped by water quality expert Doug Larson? And instead of getting fired for that, PWB gave him a promotion. Do you care about the threats to our drinking water at all? Do you see how water is the #2 most important part of our environment second only to air? Do you recognize how Bull Run logging and the quality of our drinking water are inextricably linked?
 
Next, you rave on about "corporate polluters". Siltronic receives environmental awards, while the worse corporate polluter NW Natural funds the PPWD opposition.
 
I have yet to see any STBRT PAC argument that isn't full of hypocrisy. And when it comes to your concern for environmental services, you're simply -- ahem -- barking up the wrong tree.
 
Hah! Sorry, couldn't resist that one.
 
UPDATE: Exchanged some facebook messages with Bob. First thing he said was: "The quote is a fake. Have not met you and never said that." I told him I never claimed he said it to me. I asked him if he remembers what he did say (just playing along) at the MTNA meeting. He dodged the question entirely, repeated his talking points, and of course remained completely silent on all my other questions and the overall issue of hypocrisy. Of course I expected no less from a person who's put everything he's got into such a misleading propaganda campaign. He would look quite foolish changing his position now, so he's stuck with it, and so are we.
 
UPDATE II: Digging deeper into the funding debate, turns out NW Natural is not just a funder of STBRT PAC. Superfund corporate polluter NW Natural is also a "Corporate Friend" of Portland Audubon. In fact they are currently listed at the top of their Business Members section in their own special category as "Business Benefactor". The conflict of interest could not be more obvious.



Introducing PortlandWater.info
Posted May 16, 2014

I entered into Portland's Water War back in June of 2013, earlier than that if you count the anti-fluoride campaign. Along the way, two major events happened that I did not expect. More recently of the two, Melissa Binder at The Oregonian mentioned my name as a reference and linked to my blog.

That's way better than the time back in 2001 when I was interviewed at Escape From New York Pizza by a local TV news station (sorry I don't remember which one and I don't have a working VCR at the moment to check the tape). They were fishing for no doubt predetermined sound bites from naive people like me (at the time) who believed that invading Afghanistan was necessary, but were also concerned for innocent civilians. What a sucker I was for "humanitarian intervention".

And it was much more personal exposure than the time I got on the front cover of the Oregonian, one of a small percentage of the 10,000 opening day Occupy Portland protesters who happened to be in that photo.

I also exchanged emails with Carla Castaño at KOIN6 and had in-person conversations with Matthew Korfhage at Willamette Week. I'm glad to see the investigative journalism and honored to be recognized as an activist for Portland water & political reform.

I also had the good fortune of being invited by fellow activists to host, develop, and generally get involved in a new fact checking & whistleblowing website. Our first offering -- which I hope will receive thorough examination and ideally widespread dissemination by the above-mentioned media sources and many others hint hint wokka wokka -- is a 40+ year chronology of cronyism and conflict of interest with negative impact against the common good. It reveals the parties involved in manipulating the EPA LT2 rule making process, the National Academy's report on radon in drinking water, the Oregon Health Authority's "decision" on a variance for our open reservoirs, the City's feigned "attempt" to save them, the potential for a west coast intergovernmental agency fronted by CH2M Hill that could be formed without a public vote, the ubiquitous involvement of former PWB director Joe Glicker (current CH2M VP), and more.

Ladies and gentlemen I present to you:




Illegal Bull Run Logging Stopped By Water Quality Expert
Posted May 14, 2014

Friends of the Reservoirs Background
www.friendsofreservoirs.org/background.html

Excerpts:

While employed by the PWB, [Joe] Glicker authored an article describing how public understanding with regard to drinking water can be manipulated and managed, and he subsequently demonstrated strategies for silencing community advocates of quality water and Bull Run. Glicker’s 1990 article entitled Convincing the Public that Drinking Water is Safe, discusses ways of controlling the conversation, determining what the public ought to know, using the media, as well as influencing state and federal regulations, and much more.

There's nothing inherently wrong with educating the public and media if the premise is correct that there's no basis for their concerns. What's sinister about it is Glicker's chosen target:

In 1993, as a high-ranking PWB official, Glicker orchestrated a campaign to discredit (silence) a highly respected and credentialed water quality expert, Doug Larson. Glicker contacted various conference organizers in order to get Larson removed as a speaker, and used e-mail to organize a harassment effort.

Glicker had been disputing that logging negatively impacts water quality. Eventually, a lawsuit was filed against the City resulting in Portland issuing a public apology and paying out $73,000. Rather than fire Glicker, the Portland Water Bureau promoted him later that year. Illegal logging in Bull Run was stopped.

If Joe had used legal means of subverting Doug, that would have been no less sinister. I wonder how many times he's done that where it did not end up in a lawsuit or get media attention.

This is the person of such low moral character who's convinced just enough people to earn himself lucrative contracts from his crony friends in Portland with no public input.

Who Is Joe Glicker?
http://whoisjoeglicker.wordpress.com

Portland, Oregon: A Locus of Undue Corporate Influence on Drinking Water Regulations & Public Works Contracts?
www.portlandwater.info/chrono.pdf




STOP CORPORATE POLLUTERS
Posted May 14, 2014

The REAL corporate polluters are OPPOSED to the Portland Public Water District.
 
STOP THE LIES!
 
2014-04-01: Facts about the PPWD
http://southeastexaminer.com/2014/04/facts-about-the-ppwd/
 
When criticized about the financial backers of the PPWD initiative, i.e. Portland Bottling and Siltronic, some of the largest water users in Portland, Jones’ response was that she didn’t think they were in a position to judge these large water users who at least showed up at Council utility rate hearings and hearings on reservoir contracts and Bull Run treatment issues arguing like FOR, to protect the best water system in the country. She in turn questions the opposition backers including utility contractors and PGE who contribute ninety percent.
 
2014-04-10: Look who's funding the anti-utility district campaign
www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/04/look_whos_funding_the_anti-uti.html
 
Audubon Portland has tried to smear corporate donors to our public water district campaign, calling them “corporate polluters.” The truth is, for all their anti-corporate rhetoric, Audubon Portland relies heavily on corporate contributions, too.  In fact, they receive funding from Portland General Electric, and even NW Natural — the local natural gas monopoly and a major Superfund polluter.
 
2014-04-13: Friends of the Reservoirs Mailing List
www.friendsofreservoirs.org
 
The above was published on Friday, April 10. The night before on Thursday, April 9, at a Buckman sponsored PPWD forum Bob Sallinger representing Audubon in theatrical fashion shouted to me "you should not get in bed with "polluters" referring to one of Kent Craford's previous 20 clients. Sallinger  ignores the fact that when my co-chief petitioner Kent Craford did previously represent Portland's large water customers, Darigold, Widmer, Alsco American Linen were among his clients. Sallinger focuses on Siltronic but says polluters as if all of Portland's large water customers are polluters and fails to mention the fact that Audubon is in bed with corporate Superfund polluter NW Natural Gas. NW Natural Gas is expected to be the next big  contributor to the no campaign, another that benefits from the status quo of big budgets, and high rates. 
 
2014-04-24: Portland Public Water District: Truth-squadding risk to environmental programs and link to utility lawsuit
www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2014/04/portland_public_water_district_2.html
 
“We don’t have any problem with stormwater management. That’s the mission of the bureau,” Floy Jones, a co-backer with Craford, said during a March 6 forum.
 
But when asked why Audubon would oppose the measure if that were true, Jones shot back: “Because Bob Sallinger has an interest in expanding the mission of the bureau.”
 
2014-04-25: Portland Public Water District: Truth-squadding the liability over Superfund cleanup and loss of union jobs
www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2014/04/portland_public_water_district_3.html
 
Will the ballot measure impact who is liable for the multi-million-dollar Superfund cleanup?
 
Again, that’s what Portland Mayor Charlie Hales says.
 
“Some corporations will potentially be able to escape their Superfund liability if that measure passes,” he told Willamette Week last year.
 
Asked recently to elaborate, Hales declined.
 
In 2000, the federal government named a portion of the Willamette River a polluted Superfund site. The designation impacts the Portland Harbor between the Broadway Bridge and the Columbia Slough.
 
Cleanup costs could range from $200 million to $1.7 billion. About 150 private businesses or government agencies have been identified as potentially contributing to contamination - and they’ll be responsible for picking up the tab.
 
Kent Craford, one of the sponsors of the ballot measure, said corporations will have to pay whatever the federal government decides. He has challenged the veracity of Hales’ claim.
 
But when it comes to Portland’s liability, Craford said, sewer customers should pay an appropriate level of Superfund costs. And he thinks the burden should largely fall on city property taxes - paid by homeowners - not utility customers.
 
“But the question is, who does the liability reside with? Does it reside with the family of four who is having to pay this big bill on their sewer bill. Or does it reside with the property tax owner who’s got a penthouse in the Pearl District?” he said at a March 6 forum.
 
“These are general obligations of the city and so they should be apportioned based on people’s property tax value or based on their income. It shouldn’t be apportioned based on how much water they use.”
 
2014-05-02: Friends of the Reservoirs Mailing List
www.friendsofreservoirs.org
 
The anti camp has 3 polluters supporting their money grabbing cause, while Siltronic has received environmental awards from the City for 11 years. But they continue on with the plural "polluters" rhetoric.
 
2014-04-28: Why Siltronic supports creation of Portland utility district
www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/04/why_siltronic_supports_creatio.html
 
After we reuse the water and are finished with it, we treat it and dispose of it, making us also one of the city’s largest sewer customers.  We ensure the highest quality of that effluent, and the city of Portland has honored Siltronic with the Perfect Wastewater Pretreatment Award for 11 straight years.
 
2007-05-09: Siltronic Corporation receives EPA’s National Environmental Performance Award
http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/6427a6b7538955c585257359003f0230/2f646e1ed2e58f1f852572d600811229!OpenDocument&Start=2.3&Count=5&Expand=2.3
 
Portland based Siltronic Corporation (Siltronic), is being recognized by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) for their outstanding commitment to consistently exceed environmental requirements and continuously improve their overall environmental performance.
 
2007-06-01: Siltronic Receives Oregon Sustainability Award
www.oregon.gov/DAS/EAM/SUST/pages/osb_awards_main.aspx
 



STOP THE BULL RUN TAKEOVER
Posted May 13, 2014

Yes! I assume we're 99% agreed against privatization! So ... vote YES on the Portland Public Water District. Wait ... what? Are you confused now? Isn't PPWD the Bull Run takeover? Well let's look at that. Exactly who has been planning a corporate takeover for about 20 years?

First, look at how www.stopthebullruntakeover.com changed to: www.stopcorporatepolluters.com

Facebook urls are permanent so that one is still: www.facebook.com/StopTheBullRunTakeover

Their old meme is still appearing in google searches: www.stopcorporatepolluters.com/media/images/fbthumb.png

And it's still paid for and authorized by Stop the Bull Run Takeover PAC.

But now the meme is STOP CORPORATE POLLUTERS. (details here)

So why did they discontinue that marketing strategy? Could it be because they had no actual evidence? Could it also be because it's too embarrassing for them when you start looking at who's funding them and what one specific funder's long-term plans are? Changing the focus to "Corporate Polluters" is no less ironic since the the Superfund liability is actually much heavier for the corporations that are funding the opposition to PPWD, but let's stay on the original topic for now ...

CH2M Hill Implementation Plan for the Formation of a Bull Run Regional Drinking Water Agency
http://books.google.com/books/about/Implementation_Plan_for_the_Formation_of.html?id=tuF3HAAACAAJ

2013-10-01: Portland Water Needs Solutions
http://southeastexaminer.com/2013/10/portland-water-needs-solutions

In The Southeast Examiner’s August issue, the article “The Cost of Decommissioning” suggests that during the late 1990’s and early 2000’s onward, there was an insiders link between City Council (Commissioner Hales), PWB, Joe Glicker, Rosemary Mennard and Montgomery Watson Harza and eventually CH2M Hill.

The aftermath of that liaison includes the EPA LT2 ruling, covering the reservoirs, building more underground reservoirs and continuing with what could one day be a regional water supply system.

CH2MHill, one of the main contractors for the PWB, is the author of the Strategic Plan Final Report launching a group called the West Coast Infrastructure Exchange (WCX).

WCX includes California, Oregon, Washington and the Province of British Columbia. The intention of this public-private partnership is to build an alliance of West Coast governments to fund the development of an infrastructure to serve a population predicted to grow by 6.5 million people in the next decade.

West Coast Infrastructure Exchange Final Report CH2M Hill
http://westcoastx.com/assets/documents/WCX_CH2MHill-report.pdf

Regional Water Providers Consortium
Regional Transmission and Storage Strategy
http://www.conserveh2o.org/sites/default/files/completefinaltransstudy.pdf

Table 6-1: "Intergovernmental agreements may be formed at any time with the consent of the several governing councils or boards of the participating agencies. No public vote is required for formation."

Also potential for river blending via "demand centers". See pg 1-2:

"Powell Butte (input from Columbia River and Bull Run)"

Friends of the Reservoirs Background of Cozy Consultants
www.friendsofreservoirs.org/background.html

MWH’s regional president, Joe Glicker, P.E. (engineer), is a 14-year Portland Water Bureau (PWB) veteran who left the Bureau in 1994 to become a revolving-door MWH consultant (1995), immediately securing two lucrative PWB consultant contracts.  Many Bull Run advocates consider him the architect of plans and actions that would force the unnecessary construction of a Bull Run filtration plant and burial of Portland’s 5 open reservoirs.  These advocates include members of the highly respected and long-running Bull Run Interest Group (BRIG), Citizens Interested in Bull Run Inc. (CIBRI) and Citizens Interested in Safe Water.

While employed by the PWB, Glicker authored an article describing how public understanding with regard to drinking water can be manipulated and managed, and he subsequently demonstrated strategies for silencing community advocates of quality water and Bull Run.  Glicker’s 1990 article entitled Convincing the Public that Drinking Water is Safe, discusses ways of controlling the conversation, determining what the public ought to know, using the media, as well as influencing state and federal regulations, and much more.

In 1993, as a high-ranking PWB official, Glicker orchestrated a campaign to discredit (silence) a highly respected and credentialed water quality expert, Doug Larson.  Glicker contacted various conference organizers in order to get Larson removed as a speaker, and used e-mail to organize a harassment effort.

Glicker had been disputing that logging negatively impacts water quality.  Eventually, a lawsuit was filed against the City resulting in Portland issuing a public apology and paying out $73,000.  Rather than fire  Glicker, the  Portland Water Bureau promoted him later that year.

Who Is Joe Glicker?
http://whoisjoeglicker.wordpress.com

CH2M Hill is funding the OPPOSITION to PPWD, including a $5,000 donation to Stop the Bull Run Takeover PAC.
https://secure.sos.state.or.us/orestar/gotoPublicTransactionDetail.do?tranRsn=1696306

STOP JOE GLICKER'S BULL RUN TAKEOVER

STOP THE BULL

Vote YES on the Portland Public Water District




KAVA REVOLUTION!
Posted Jan 28, 2014

Image Source: www.stosunki.pl
"Kava and valerian are herbal remedies that are claimed to have anxiolytic and sedative properties respectively, without dependence potential or any appreciable side effects."
 
"Compared with placebo, kava extract appears to be an effective symptomatic treatment option for anxiety."
 
"When taken for anxiety or stress, kava does not interfere with mental sharpness."
 
"Kava may be used instead of prescription antianxiety drugs, such as benzodiazepines and tricyclic antidepressants."
 
"Nature's most effective stress-relieving plant, now considered comparable or superior to anti-stress prescription drugs. Kava is consumed throughout the Pacific as a relaxing beverage for social interaction and as a support to religious inspiration. Because of its many beneficial qualities it is superior to alcohol, nicotine, tranquilizers, and other substances that serve to reduce stress and improve mood."
 
I just realized the cause of my confusion for years stems from Kava being a brand of coffee. Dammit that's the reason I didn't know about kava! Wow this sounds like exactly I've been looking for to treat my social anxiety, even more effectively than lemon balm extract and with far less risks than alcohol. I'm imagining how awesome it would be if everyone partook more in kava than booze. The biggest drawback I can see from that would be the huge impact it would have on most of our event venues, bars, pubs, restaurants, Portland's music scene, etc. Like it or not, alcohol sales are the life blood of that economy.
 
But bars/etc can still benefit by creating a new revenue stream from people who'd otherwise just be drinking water. Maybe someday in the future kava could be a significant portion of their revenues. Maybe someday we can get away from the paradigm of toxin as medicine. Maybe someday we can all just get along and there's be peace on ...
 
Ah who'm I kiddin'? Hipsters never gonna put down the PBR. But hey you can even smoke kava. I'm gonna vaporize it! I'll mix with cannabis and call it Kavabis!
 
The "dreamless sleep" claim on Wikipedia had me worried, but it is contradicted by WebMD: "When taken for sleep problems, kava promotes deep sleep without affecting restful REM sleep." And confirmed with some pretty damn funny anecdotal evidence. Here's the introductory excerpt: "To start with, I'm a white male, I have no sister, (only one brother), and I have never worked in a hospital. Last night I dreamed that I was a black woman."
Continue reading here: http://kavalounge.yuku.com/topic/413#.UuecVRDTkS0
 
The FDA warning about potential liver effects is justified (in the same way that minor risks from relatively inocuous chemicals such as Tylenol require full disclosure), but without any context it seems like excessive fearmongering. Yet another example of influence from Big Booze and Big Pharma? Just look at what they did to Cannabis for decades. Fortunately the tide of public opinion is finally changing government policy.
 
To minimize the risk of adverse effects:

REFERENCES
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kava
http://meded.ucsd.edu/isp/2003/thomas/herb_kava.html
http://ods.od.nih.gov/Health_Information/kava.aspx
http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22331
www.erowid.org/experiences/subs/exp_Kava.shtml
www.fda.gov/food/resourcesforyou/consumers/ucm085482.htm
http://kavalounge.yuku.com
www.livestrong.com/article/437498-how-to-smoke-kava-tea
www.webmd.com/balance/stress-management/tc/kava-topic-overview
www.webmd.com/vitamins-supplements/ingredientmono-872-KAVA.aspx?activeIngredientId=872&activeIngredientName=KAVA
 
Kava: The Pacific Elixir: The Definitive Guide to Its Ethnobotany, History, and Chemistry
http://store.innertraditions.com/isbn/0-89281-726-7
www.scribd.com/doc/102724109/Kava-The-Pacific-Elixir
www.amazon.com/Kava-Pacific-Definitive-Ethnobotany-Chemistry/dp/0892817267
 
Stress-induced insomnia treated with kava and valerian: singly and in combination.
Hum Psychopharmacol. 2001 Jun;16(4):353-356. Wheatley D.
Psychopharmacology Research Group, 10 Harley St, London W1G 9PF, UK
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12404572
 
Kava extract for treating anxiety.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;(1):CD003383. Pittler MH, Ernst E.
Department of Complementary Medicine, University of Exeter, 25 Victoria Park Road, Exeter, Devon, UK
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12535473
 
WHERE TO BUY
Online: www.kava.com (also a great info source) and www.bulakavahouse.com
In Portland: Bula Kava House at 3115 SE Division
 
BULA VARIETIES



Open vs Covered Reservoirs Health Risk/Benefit Analysis
Posted Aug 11, 2013

In an attempt to be as unbiased as possible, I have done hours of research with the ultimate goal of finding definitive health risk/benefit studies, white papers, and other documents on the issue of open vs covered reservoirs. With all the huge controversy one would expect there to be at least one definitive answer provided by the EPA, but so far I haven't found it. I was amazed first of all when I started searching that Portland is the veritable center of the Universe on this issue:

www.google.com/search?q=open+covered+reservoirs+risk+benefit

ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF COVERED RESERVOIRS

The following report was presented to me by one of the "skeptics" in the comments of a Portland Water Bureau page who referenced it in support of their claim that "the long scientific consensus has been that Uncovered reservoirs are less safe & healthy":

EPA - Uncovered Finished Water Reservoirs Guidance Manual
www.epa.gov/ogwdw/mdbp/pdf/uncover/ufw8p.pdf

But when you actually look at it you can see very quickly even just from the opening description that it is merely a maintenance and risk mitigation instruction manual for uncovered reservoirs: "The purpose of this document is to provide a basic understanding of the potential sources of external contamination in uncovered finished water reservoirs and to provide guidance to water treatment operators for evaluating and maintaining water quality in these reservoirs."

But that is not a valid reason on its own to necessitate covered reservoirs because there are health risks to ANY water storage method.

Furthermore, while this is ostensibly a neutral source since it is published by the EPA, and at first glance it might seem that Joe Glicker's name appears in the Acknowledgements section merely because he is an expert in the field, a funny thing happens when you look for the Word doc version instead of the pdf. Google says: "by J Glicker"

www.google.com/search?q=water.epa.gov%2Flawsregs%2Frulesregs%2Fsdwa%2Fmdbp%2Fupload%2Fufw8p.doc

Seattle Public Utilities Drinking Water Quality Report 2008
www.seattle.gov/util/groups/public/@spu/@water/documents/webcontent/spu01_005056.pdf

I'm referencing 2008 because their most recent report does not go into the same level of detail on claims of risk from open reservoirs and benefits of closed reservoirs. The look and feel of this one also is that of the usual Public Relations spin to justify what was surely a controversial expenditure.

First of all keep in mind that this report says that "very low levels of Cryptosporidium have been detected in our raw water". This does not apply in Portland, as confirmed by the Oregon Health Authority whose main argument for denial of exemption from LT2 was E. coli (a vastly overstated risk which did not result in any known health incident other than a boil water warning which I assume was just to avoid litigation in the highly unlikely case that anyone actually did get sick).

Trihalomethanes: "You have to treat surface water with chlorine to prevent microbial growth. But a by-product of the chlorination process is trihalomethanes and haloacetic acids, which are linked to certain cancers. In Seattle’s water, because it starts off cleaner and we cover our reservoirs, we can use less chlorine and as a result, we have rates of these compounds well within safe ranges."

What they don't mention is how open air reservoirs allow those gases to dissipate, as opposed to covered reservoirs whose vents (according to Scott Fernandez) are not large enough for 100% of the gases to escape. This is verifiable by simply comparing to Portland's report which shows half as much trihalomethanes:

www.portlandoregon.gov/water/article/244813

Of course even Seattle's maximum of 60 ppm is below the EPA's MCL of 80 ppm, but the point is that Seattle's covered reservoirs have higher risk in that category.

Reservoir Covering (here's where you can virtually hear the spinmeister wheels turning): "Our reservoir-covering program -- which will create 76-acres of new public open space -- is one example of a multiple-benefit project. Reservoir covering improves water quality and saves costs by reducing chlorine requirements and increases security. And when they are covered with grass, reservoirs become open space we all can enjoy. Talk about a win-win!"

Public space is nice but so are the aesthetics of open reservoirs.

Increased security is a benefit (but see more on this below).

Chlorine. Now finally here's a solid argument. Chlorine levels are important, even more so since recent studies have demonstrated some food allergies can be caused by chlorine. Seattle has half as much chlorine residual compared to Portland and their report claims that less chlorine is required in covered reservoirs. So this is one factor to consider in the overall risk/benefit analysis but keep in mind that Portland's average 2.2 ppm is still well below the MCL of 4 ppm.

Saving Water: "SPU has done its job reducing distribution system leakage through our reservoir-covering program that reduces evaporation."

Okay, that sounds reasonable, though there is no indication exactly how much is saved nor whether it's worth the cost and potential health risks.

ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF OPEN RESERVOIRS

Please at least skim over the first two references because they explain so much and they are relatively easy to understand:

Friends of the Reservoirs - Water Quality Issues
www.friendsofreservoirs.org/resources/IRP/Water%20Quality%20Issues.pdf

Benefits of Deep Open Water Reservoirs by Scott Fernandez
www.friendsofreservoirs.org/resources/IRP/Benefits%20of%20Deep%20Open%20Water%20Reservoirs.pdf

History of LT2 Rule as it pertains to City of Portland
www.oregonwild.org/waters/bull_run/City_of_Portland_and_the_LT2_Rule.pdf

January 9, 2004: Official comments submitted by “Unfiltered Systems Working Group” (Boston, NY, San Francisco, Seattle, Tacoma) state that draft rule overestimates risks and benefits, while underestimating major capital costs. NYC requests language that would allow for exemptions or variances to rule.

2004: An EPA LT2 Federal Advisory Committee consultant leads a Portland Reservoir Review panel that comprehensively examines the open reservoir issue, looking at all issues including water quality, security, age of facilities, costs, and historical significance. The reservoir panel remains unconvinced that there is any need or that there would be any public health benefit to eliminating the open reservoirs. The committee supports risk mitigation.

January 5, 2006: The risk mitigation option was inexplicably eliminated in the final rule despite the lack of any data collection on open reservoirs and any science to support burying or covering open reservoirs. The EPA documented public health problems in covered and buried storage only, none in open reservoirs.

EPA - Finished Water Storage Facilities
www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/tcr/pdfs/whitepaper_tcr_storage.pdf

"The goal of this document is to review existing literature, research and information on the potential public health implications associated with covered storage reservoirs."

The security risks of open reservoirs are greatly exaggerated plus there are ways that they could be mitigated such as video cameras and patrols. Also, covered reservoirs do not eliminate security risks. For example:

Vandals tossed sealed bottle of hydrochloric acid into Portland reservoir [underground]
www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2012/08/vandals_toss_sealed_bottle_of.html

Discovering an incident with a major covered reservoir may take a long time because they are cleaned so infrequently and because people can't easily see the water. In contrast, water in open reservoirs is visible and they are cleaned frequently.

If people are worried about terrorists or crazy people putting stuff in our water, this article from 2011 discusses how public water is an unlikely target:

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/us-cities-cover-open-drinking-water-reservoirs

And furthermore, moving the water underground doesn't eliminate terrorist threats, which can potentially include an inside job perpetrated by a utility employee or national "security" establishment false flag event. I personally feel safer when citizens also participate in the monitoring process.

And finally, the risks from wildlife have also been greatly exaggerated.

Don’t Drink the Water! If you did, you’d know what a crazy, panicked overreaction we had to the latest contamination scare.
www.wweek.com/portland/article-19505-don%E2%80%99t_drink_the_water_.html

"Number of bears it would take defecating in the reservoir to cause a disease outbreak, according to Oxman: Many, many bears defecating continually, or 'one bear that had just the right organism, defecating repeatedly'."

Now with that wonderful image keep in mind that the Oregon Health Authority's main reason for denying the City's request for deferral was NOT Cryptosporidium, but the overhyped non-infectious E. coli non-incident that was later traced to a solitary seagull.

So it's worth repeating: “An overestimate of risk reduces the consumer’s confidence in public water supply and may be misused by less scrupulous interest groups.”

MICROBIOLOGIST vs CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER

The scientific debate centers on two people, Scott Fernandez vs Joe Glicker. When you have two scientists debating each other and the layman is not qualified and/or too busy to delve deep enough into the science, it generally comes down to the question of which one you trust.

1) Which person's arguments sound more reasonable?

2) Which one has demonstrated more competence?

3) Which one has a profit motivated conflict of interest?

Portland Water Bureau's public relations manager Tim Hall claims that CH2M Hill is "one of the best engineering firms for reservoir design", but the next two references reveal major flaws in their Seattle reservoirs, the exact same design as the one they're building on Powell Butte:

Major do-over for two Seattle reservoirs
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2009485902_reservoir17m.html

Questions over whether 4 buried reservoirs can withstand quake
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2019692615_reservoirs16m.html

Some have argued that Seattle Public Utilities bears the responsibility for decisions they made as opposed to contractor negligence. At the very least, these reports prove how complications can arise when building new reservoirs.

As for Joe Glicker, for starters going back two decades ago it is documented that he was found guilty of defamation and harassment when he was PWB's Director of Water Operations:
www.pamplinmedia.com/component/content/article?id=120518

And check out this Oregonian article:
www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2011/03/concerns_rise_on_portlands_cos.html

"The most alarming example in EPA's 1999 manual on open reservoirs -- a pigeon-spurred salmonella outbreak that killed seven people and sickened 60 percent of the population of Gideon, Mo., in 1993 -- actually started in a covered tank with unscreened vents, giving the birds a secluded spot to roost."

I've heard that Portland's covered reservoirs will have screened vents, but keep in mind that's the same manual as mentioned above that appears to have been primarily authored by Joe Glicker, which greatly calls into question his credibility.

A Friend in the Business
Reservoir advocates accuse Portland's Water Bureau of playing favorites.
www.wweek.com/portland/article-2423-a_friend_in_the_business.html

Allegations of MWH and CH2M Hill corruption are not limited to Portland and Seattle:

Central Coast of California
www.slocoastjournal.com/docs/archives/2010/Nov/pages/news2.html

"Portland residents' allegations of inappropriate government influence by MWH, have some similarities to allegations made and concerns expressed by residents of Morro Bay and Los Osos.  In both communities, it has been suggested that former MWH employees in positions of influence have steered local projects toward contracts with MWH, when better alternatives were available."

Tampa Bay, Florida
www.thebradentontimes.com/news/2013/07/06/opinion/usace_adopts_flawed_study_..._again

"During the 10-year period of construction and repair, the price of water from Tampa Bay Water (TBW) has almost doubled, even though a successful water conservation program reduced the overall use of water throughout the region."

The same trend of higher rates with lowered consumption has happened here. Now take a guess which global corporation is behind that as well as the Water Wars here in Portland. That's right, CH2M HILL!

There is also the following website which I have not verified and it could use more references, but it's worth taking a look:

Who Is Joe Glicker?
http://whoisjoeglicker.wordpress.com

CONCLUSION?
 
Well I suppose I haven't found strong evidence of excessive health risks from covered reservoirs. The argument that finished reservoirs are Safe Enough™ seems reasonable, but I'm not convinced that they are safer than open reservoirs. To be sure of that I need peer-reviewed confirmation that Scott's claims are invalid. That's my own personal application of the Precautionary Principle!
 
One thing that seems likely to me is that the decision to sign contracts for new reservoirs was likely based more on revolving door profits and political donations than science. Randy Leonard's decision was based on the mere possibility that increased frequency of testing in the future might detect Cryptosporidium. I find it interesting how the City conceded so quickly to the OHA's 2013 denial, especially after the cogent points raised by Friends of the Reservoirs in their response which was published 3 weeks after.
 
“Burial proponents claim that open reservoirs are obsolete and scarce. They don’t tell you that millions of people in major cities, including New York and San Francisco, continue to drink unfiltered water from open reservoirs. Why does this continue? The reason is that these cities rely on the expertise of microbiologists who scientifically evaluate all aspects of water safety, rather than construction engineers whose reflex is to solve every supposed problem with an expensive structure.” -Scott Fernandez

Click Here for Comments on Facebook




Home Page

Powered by dBMonkey