+menu-


  • Category Archives A Good Read
  • Making Stone Soup

    Making Stone Soup? You’ve never heard of it?

    OK… Let’s start here with the historical record of STONE SOUP, it  is a 1548 folk tale some paint as a lesson in “COOPERATION” found in many parts of the world. others just leave stone soup as a pure and simple confidence trick.

    The is an analogy. that  examines the 1548 “COOPERATION” of the people, by the people, and for the people vs. the pitfalls of the FEDERAL 2015 COORDINATION PROCESS, OF  POLITICALLY appointed  government  agencies, federal, state, tribal, and  local and their employees.

    Reasoning by “ANALOGY”  plays a role in strategic decision making that is LARGE  but largely overlooked.

    It  should inspire People to stop and think about the Politics in the  Federal “COORDINATION” process in America today.

    ———————————————————————

    Making Stone Soup 1548 (a folk tale)

    Soup of the people, for the people , by the people

    Based on COOPERATION by people in a time of need.

    Once upon a time, somewhere in post-war Eastern Europe, there was a great famine in which village people jealously hoarded whatever food they had

    It was a long time ago, after  a war between two kingdoms.  When the war was over, the surviving soldiers were all sent home.

    The soldiers had been given meagre  rations, and many ran out of food on their way home and had to resort to hunting in the woods or begging, and many died of hunger before making it home.

    Now it came to pass, that a group of three hungry soldiers were heading home to the same town, and they had run out of food, when they came upon a village.

    They knocked at every door in the village, but at every one they were told that there was no food. Indeed it was  a time of  great famine and the village people jealously hoarded whatever food they had

    With no other option, they went to the inn.

    “Innkeeper,” said the first soldier, “we have no food and have been walking for days.”

    “If you have money,” said the innkeeper, “then I have plenty of food for you.”

    “Good sir,” said the second soldier, “our army was defeated, and our wages taken as spoils of war, so we have no money.”

    “In that case,” replied the innkeeper, “I can be of no help to you.”

    “But perhaps you still can,” said the third soldier, “If you cannot offer us food, perhaps you would be so kind as to let us use one of your cauldrons today.”

    The innkeeper was perplexed.  If they had no food, why would they want a cauldron?  But he had a cauldron that he would not need that day, so he saw no reason to object.   “Alright,” he said, and led them to the store where his spare cauldron was.

    The three soldiers carried the cauldron out into the village square and began building a fire underneath it.  The innkeeper, still perplexed, looked on as the soldiers drew water from the well to fill the cauldron.  “What are you doing?” he asked.

    “Ah,” said the first soldier, “we are making stone soup.”

    “Stone soup!” cried the innkeeper, “why I have never heard such nonsense.  You cannot make soup from a stone!”

    The soldier smiled, but said nothing. He took a small bag from his backpack, and opened it.  Inside were several stones.  He took each one in turn, examined it closely, and sniffed it.  Eventually he chose three and dropped them in the pot.  “Ah,” he said, “these will make a good soup.”

    The innkeeper was stunned, and went back to his inn.

    Shortly afterwards, another villager appeared. “What are you doing?” he asked.

    “Ah,” said the second soldier, “we are making stone soup.”

    “Stone soup!” cried the villager, “why I have never heard such nonsense.  You cannot make soup from a stone!”

    “Ah no,” said the soldier, “that is where you are wrong.” He took a spoonful of the soup and tasted it.  “Yes, it’s coming along quite nicely now.”

    The villager was intrigued, and wanted to try the soup, but he didn’t say anything.

    “But there’s something missing,” the soldier continued, “maybe a little salt and pepper.”

    The villager jumped in at this point.  “I have some salt and pepper at home.  I’ll give you some in exchange for a bowl of your soup.”

    The soldiers looked at each other for a while, then eventually agreed.  The villager ran off to fetch the salt and pepper, and the soldiers added it to the pot.

    Another villager arrived. “What are they doing?” he asked the first villager.

    “Ah,” said the other, “they are making stone soup.”

    “Stone soup!  Why I have never heard such nonsense.  You cannot make soup from a stone!”

    “Ah, well,” said the first, “I’ll tell you when I’ve tried it.  I swapped a little bit of salt and pepper for a whole bowl!”

    One of the soldiers took a spoonful of the soup and tasted it.  “It’s coming along quite nicely now.  But there’s something missing,” the soldier said, “maybe a bit of carrot.”

    The second villager jumped in at this point.  “I have some carrots at home.  I’ll give you some in exchange for a bowl of your soup.”

    The soldiers looked at each other for a while, then eventually agreed.  The villager ran off to fetch the carrots, and the soldiers added them to the pot.

    One by one more villagers arrived, and one by one they swapped something in exchange for a bowl of the miraculous stone soup: potatoes, barley, cabbage, celery, turnips, beans….  As the ingredients were added, the smell of the soup got better and better, until all the villagers wanted to try it, and swapped something for a bowl.  But eventually the cauldron was full, but only half of the villagers had given anything.

    “Ah,” said the first soldier, “it is ready.  But you know what?  I always like a bit of cheese in my stone soup.”

    “You’re right,” said the second soldier, “it is ready.  But you know what?  I always like a bit of salami in my stone soup.”

    “You’re both right,” said the third soldier, “it is ready.  But you know what?  I always like a bit of bread to soak up every last little bit of my stone soup.”

    Hearing this, the remaining villagers ran home, each returning with a lump of cheese, a salami or a loaf of bread to exchange for his own bowl of this incredible stone soup.

    In the end, everyone in the village — including the soldiers — got a bowl of stone soup, with a lump of cheese and a slice of salami in it, and with a hunk of bread to soak up every last bit, and no-one was hungry.

    ————————————————————————————————————–

    THE SHORT FORM OF 1548  PEOPLES COOPERATION

    Making Stone Soup of the people, for the people , by the people…

    A community effort of PEOPLE, coming together, in a time of great hardship and need.

    1. People bring wood and start a Bonfire in the town square

    2. A huge caldron is provided by the local  innkeeper

    3. A bucket brigade fills it with water from a stream

    4. The soldier throws in the soup starter, a stone

    5. People bring contributions in exchange for a bowl of soup.

    6. A little bit of salt and pepper. some carrots, a chicken, potatoes, onion, rice, barley, cabbage, celery, turnips, beans,  peas, several large bunches of BROCCLI,  seven crawdad’s are added, 2 pork sausages, a hand full of peanuts,  bits of cheese, a few pieces of beef, slices of salami and  loaves of bread.

    The last to arrive was a fisherman,  he said, “I had nothing to give in exchange for bowls of soup for my hungry family, so I went fishing, and by the grace of God, I caught this fish, please put it into the pot”

    7. In the end, everyone, all of the people in the village — including the soldiers, the mayor and the city council,  — got a bowl of stone soup, with a lump of cheese and a slice of salami in it, and with a hunk of bread to soak up every last bit, and no-one was hungry.

    Hmmm.. Stone Soup of the people, for the people , by the people…

     IN SEVEN EASY STEPS

    —————————————————————————————————————–

    Reasoning by “ANALOGY”  plays a role in strategic decision making that is LARGE  but largely overlooked.

    THIS ANALOGY should inspire OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES TO  stop and think about the RESULTS OF THEIR Government coordination process in AMERICA  today.

     ———————————————————————————

    THE LONG FORM OF 2015 GOVERNMENT COORDINATION  POLICY

    Making Stone soup

    Based on the know pitfalls of the POLITICO  government to government coordination plan

    Indeed, Too many government cooks can spoil the broth  in 2015, especially when about  half of them are vegetarians’  and the broth is made from beef, pork  or chicken.

    Under The bipartisan Healthy Sustainable Food Act

    In 2015  THE MAKING OF THE STONE SOUP must be coordinated by  an appointed  Soup committee of government  agencies, federal, state, tribal, and  local and their employees. As it requires  federally mandated access to healthy local foods, the appointed politico Soup Coordination Committee must  approve the Soup Making events and the  ingredients, as required by the best  available science on Healthy food.

    “What are they doing?” asks the first out of town, appointed Soup Commissioner Clueless.

    “Ah,” said a person from the Local Soup Kitchen, “We  are making stone soup for hungry people.”

    Commissioner Clueless  responds with “Stone soup!  Why I have never heard such nonsense.  You cannot make soup from a stone!”

    The mayor exclaims, ” Close it down, it is illegal, the local people  did not get a permit for this event.”

    The director of the Local Soup Kitchen immediately applies for a emergency permit for the event. He is advised that it will take 90-120 days.  The EPA requires an environmental impact statement and the local health dept needs time to review the Soup Kitchen’s health violations prior to issuing a permit.

    Making Stone Soup in 2015

    THE  COMPROMISE  of  GOVERNMENT COORDINATION

    1. People bring wood and start a Bonfire in the town square

    Problem?

    a. Where did you get that wood? It’s illegal to cut firewood in designated wild forests.

    b. Put out that bonfire,  the President signed an executive order on carbon emission, I’m calling Ecology and the EPA, I’m going to report you, there is air quality burn ban in effect,  There is a smog alert in effect, you are contaminating the atmosphere ,We don’t even allow cigarette smoking here,  you’ll start a wildfire, I am allergic to smoke.

    COORDINATION COMPROMISE

    The wood cutter is arrested, the bonfire  is put out. Does anyone have a propane stove?

    2. A huge caldron is provided by the local  innkeeper and placed over the propane stove

    3. The town is in a drought emergency and there is no public water supply. A bucket brigade fills the caldron with water from a nearby stream

    Problem?

    a. You can’t take water from that stream, that water is for the fish, put it back, I calling WDFW enforcement and the tribes and they will arrest  you.

    b. Is that pure filtered water? Does it have chlorine or fluoride in it?

    COORDINATION COMPROMISE

    All of the water is carried back and poured in the stream, pure filtered water must be used or no water at all. The national guard is called and a helicopter arrives with bottled, pure filtered water.

    The huge caldron provided by the local  innkeeper is filled with pure filtered water and placed over the propane stove.

    —————————————————————–

    4. The soldier gets out his soup starter stones to throw in the  caldron.

    Problem?

    I’m from the State Health Dept., don’t you dare put those filthy rocks in the soup, that’s disgusting,   who knows where those stones have been, they could cause a pandemic. Show me your food handlers permit.

    COORDINATION COMPROMISE

    No stones are permitted  in the stone soup.

    Hmmm.. so much for the STONE soup.

    We’ll just call it “soup de jour”

    So far, hours have passed and the hungry people have made it to this point … a cauldron full of water over a propane stove, food handlers permit of all participants have been verified and the local soup kitchen has been reluctantly allowed to continue  because they have a pending emergency permit .

    Yep, that’s how it works for PEOPLE  in 2015 , using the government COORDINATION process.

    ——————————————————————

    5. The local People bring contributions in exchange for a bowl of soup.

    THIS IS WHERE THE SOUP HITS THE PROVERBIAL FAN

     The best  available science for the Healthy Soup Making ingredients.  

    Problems? Problems? Problems?

    From the “SOUP TO NUTS” is an American English idiom conveying the meaning of “FROM BEGINNING TO END”.

    The partisan political agenda that over rules the people’s solution

    Problems? Problems? Problems?

    6. A little bit of salt and pepper, some carrots, a chicken, potatoes, a few pieces of beef, onion, rice, barley, cabbage, celery, turnips, beans, okra, peas, tomatoes, several large bunches of BROCCOLI,  seven crawdad’s are added, two pork sausages, a hand full of peanuts,  bits of cheese, , slices of salami and  loaves of bread.

    The last to arrive was a local fisherman,  he said, “I had nothing to give in exchange for bowls of soup for my starving family, so I went fishing, and by the grace of God, I caught this fish, please put it into the pot”

    Problems? Problems? Problems?

    a. SALT  is a problem? You can’t put salt in the soup it is unhealthy for people. It causes high blood pressure. many people are on a low salt, no salt diet

    b. CHICKEN is a problem?  I am a strict vegetarian, a vegan I do not eat chicken. Was that chicken grown without hormones? Is it a free range chicken? Was it grown under PETA humane conditions?

    c. POTATOES, RICE AND BREAD  are a problem?  White food makes people obese  Are you trying to kill everyone? Obesity has led to over 120,000 preventable deaths … Obesity is an epidemic in America. Bread contains gluten. I must have gluten free food only, I won’t eat anything that is not on my gluten free food list.

    d. BEEF is a problem?  Beef is loaded with cholesterol, High cholesterol affects 42 million Americans, and 63 million more have borderline high cholesterol High blood cholesterol is one of the major risk factors for heart disease. I’m a strict vegan, I don’t eat meat.  Was that cow  grown without hormones? Cows are the  major cause of air pollution, their poop is contaminating the entire earth. Was it grown without hormones, without antibiotics and under PETA humane conditions?

    e. VEGETABLES are a problem? carrots onion, barley, cabbage, celery, turnips, beans, okra, peas and several large bunches of BROCCOLI.

    Don’t try to pull a fast one on us. This committee watched the GMO movie 85% of the food we eat daily contains…    GMO’s  are present in 85% of processed foods in America. I will not eat genetically modified anything. Are those vegetables ORGANICALLY grown?  Show me the ORGANIC labeling. BROCCOLI, Are you an idiot, everybody hates broccoli, it is the most despised vegetable know to man.

     f. CRAWDADS and PEANUTS are a problem?… For God sake are you trying to kill somebody? This is a public health issues We must prohibit fish and seafood, as they  can cause severe allergic reactions, some people are allergic to peanuts, tree nuts, fish and shellfish.

    g. PORK SAUSAGE and SALAMI? are a problem Forget it, pork is pigs meat, it is prohibited among those of the Islamic and the Jewish faith. Muslims are forbidden by God to eat the meat of the pig (pork).,  You don’t feed sausage  and salami, a blend of ground pork, garlic, sea salt, containing, High, fat, cholesterol and salt, to those who cannot eat pork.

    h. CHEESE  is a problem? Forget it, High fat, cholesterol, salt, Cheese made from Cows milk, cows are the  major cause of air pollution, their poop is contaminating the entire earth. And, many people are vegetarians, vegans, and lactose intolerant.

     i. ONE SINGLE FISH  is a big problem? This fish is an endangered salmon. It’s fins have not been cut, this is illegal, arrest that man on the prima facie evidence of possession and confiscate that fish.

     It’s actually a big deal,  for people, as the Federally Appointed Public Soup Committee, we must prohibit putting  illegal endangered salmon in the Public  soup…  for the protection of the public health.

    COORDINATION COMPROMISE

    a. No SALT in the soup

    b. No CHICKEN in the soup

    c. No POTATOES in the soup

    d. No BEEF in the soup

    e. No VEGETABLES

    f. No CRAWDADS and PEANUTS

    g. No PORK SAUSAGE and SALAMI

    h. No CHEESE

    i.  No FISH with or without  fins

    ————————————————————————————

    7. In the end, THIS ANALOGY IS A  BIG DEAL FOR THE PEOPLE, using the FEDERAL 2015 COORDINATION PROCESS, by  appointed  government  agencies, federal, state, tribal, and  local and their employees.

    The Hungry people, everyone single of them, were provided with a bowl of Healthy, Federally approved GOVERNMENT PUBLIC HOT WATER SOUP.

    ——————————————————————————————–

    Reasoning by ANALOGY plays a role in strategic decision making that is LARGE but largely overlooked.

    In this analogy,  Politico Government cooks with good intentions sacrificed (threw out the baby with the bathwater) in an attempt to make their Soup healthier for the public.

    Throw out the baby with the bathwater is an idiomatic expression and a concept used to suggest an avoidable error in which something good is eliminated when trying to get rid of something bad, or in other words, rejecting the essential along with the inessential.

    If you understand this analogy no explanation is necessary

    If you don’t understand this analogy no explanation is possible.

     


  • Clallam County SMP Update

    Clallam County SMP Update

    CLALLAM COUNTY VESTED CITIZENS  HAVE A  VOICE

    A GOOD READ 624 SMP PUBLIC COMMENTS

    MARCH 30, 2015 SMP PUBLIC COMMENTS INCLUDE, CLALLAM COUNTY AFFECTED VESTED SHORELINE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS, INVESTMENT PROPERTY OWNERS, LOCAL BUSINESS,  THE TIMBER INDUSTRY,

    IN PART, OTHERS HAVE THEIR VOICE TOO, PAID  GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES  NGO OUT OF TOWNERS, FEDERAL, STATE, AND COUNTY  AND THE TRIBES.

    2015 Comments

    032115 – PHewett

    032115 – PHewett

    032115 – PHewett

    032115 – PHewett

    032115 – PHewett

    031815 – PHewett

    031815 – KSpees

    2015 Comments

    031515 – KSpees

    031515 – PHewett

    031415 – KSpees

    031315 – KSpees

    030115 – PHewett

    030115 – PHewett

    030115 – PHewett

    022815 – PHewett

    SMP Comments under review by the Planning Commission:

    2015 Comments

    022715 – ForksCity

    022715 – BrandtPtOwners

    022715 – HSmyth

    022715 – SierraClub

    022715 – CGeer

    022715 – LPhelps

    022715 – RFletcher

    022715 – KNorman

    022715 – SBruch

    022715 – RBloomer

    022715 – RBloomer

    022715 – DStahler

    022715 – MDoherty

    022715 – SBogg

    022715 – RKnapp – JKT

    022715 – BLynette

    022715 – BLynette

    022715 – RPhreaner

    022615 – JLarson

    022515 – SierraClub

    022515 – TEngel

    022515 – AMatthay

    022515 – LPhelps

    022515 – KSpees

    022415 – DeptOfInterior

    022415 – TSimpson

    022415 – TFreeman

    022415 – BLake

    022415 – JCress

    022415 – Taylors

    022415 – EGreenleaf

    022315 – GBergner

    022015 – BBrown

    022015 – GBrown

    022015 – TRief

    022015 – RAmaral

    022015 – WCook

    022015 – DKalinski

    022015 – DFrascati

    022015 – JHelpenstell

    022015 – JFletcher

    022015 – CTilden

    022615 – PABA

    022015 – GJensen

    022015 – SWikstrom

    022315 – SBonner

    022215 – JElleot

    022115 – TSage

    022015 – KSpees

    022015 – KSpees

    022015 – KSpees

    022015 – KSpees

    021915 – DWahlgren

    2015 Comments

    021915 – NKoseff

    021915 – KDuff

    021915 – BVreeland

    021915 – CStrickland

    021915 – EStrickland

    021915 – GSmith

    021915 – DOE

    021915 – SGilleland

    021915 – LBowen

    021915 – HMeier

    021915 -DChong

    021915 – SAnderson

    021915 – OEC

    021915 – RHuntman

    021915 – BLynette

    021915 – CWeller

    021815 – WFlint

    021815 – SNoblin

    021815 – LNoblin

    021815 – PHewett

    021815 – KAhlburg

    021815 – EBowen

    021815 – PFreeborn

    021815 – TTaylor

    021815 – KGraves

    0218105 – GCase

    021815 – KCristion

    021815- SReed

    021815 – SLaBelle

    021815 – MGonzalez

    021815 – JAdams

    021815 – SKokrda

    021815 – KFarrell

    0211815 – MMazzie

    021815 -HKaufman

    021815 – MCrimm

    021815 – CCarlson

    021815 – SFarrall

    021815 – JWinders

    021815 – TErsland

    021815 – FWilhelm

    021815 – SPriest

    021815 – RHolbrook

    021815 – LLaw

    021815 – LHendrickson

    021815 – JMaddux

    021815 – DHagen

    021815 – MHinsdale

    021815- DWatson

    021815 – DWarriner

    021815 – DRigselie

    021815 – JBaymore

    2015 Comments

    021815 – Plauché & Carr LLP

    021815 – PHewitt

    021815 – JCollier

    021815 – JCollier

    021815 – CMiklos

    021815 – PMilliren

    021815 – RPhreaner

    021815 – BBurke

    021815 – GCrow

    021815 – CJohnson – NOTC

    021815 – CParsons – State Parks

    021815 – JMarx

    021715 – JDavidson

    021715 – RAmaral

    021715 – CGuske

    021715 – TTrohimovich – Futurewise

    021815 – DSchanfald

    021715 – Port of PA

    021715 – PMillren

    021715 – EWilladsen

    021615 – EChadd-OCA

    021315 – SLange

    021315 – CKalina

    021215 – RCrittenden

    021115 – RKaplan

    021115 – SScott

    021115 – PHewett

    020915 – RMantooth

    020615 – PRedmond

    020615 – CVonBorstel

    020515 – DHoldren

    020515 – JMichel

    020215 -DHoldren

    020515 – DHoldren

    020415 – SCahill

    020215 – CEvanoff

    013115 – MBlack

    013015 – SHall

    013015 – BConnely

    012715 – BGrad

    012715 – DGladstone

    012715 – BBoekelheide

    012715 – KWiersema

    012015 – JBettcher

    011615 – PHewitt

    011615 – ACook

    011415 – PLavelle

    011215 – PHewitt

    010915 – PHewitt

    010915 – RKnapp

    010715 – WSC

    2014 SMP Comments under review by the Planning Commission:

    2014 Comments

    122914 – MQuinn

    121614 – OCA

    111814 – PHewett

    111814 – PHewett

    111714 – PHewett

    091514 – PHewett

    081814 – PHewett

    SMP Comments on earlier drafts of the plan can found here

    ———————————————————————–

    SMP Legal Action Continues

    SMP Update fight moves forward – Great Pen Voice Letter by Gene Farr
    To: Karl Spees <76ccap@gmail.com>

    Gene Farr lives in Jefferson County.

    It is the same imposed govt taking without due process we are having in Clallam County. It will be the same in Grays Harbor County and over the whole state.

    I read the letter in the Peninsula Daily News. It was a little hard to follow.  This version is very clear and easy to follow.

    Is it the editing of the local paper or me?

    Karl Spees – Concerned American

    Thx Gene excellent letter.

    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

    Hope you all saw a slightly modified version this in the PDN today.  They added in Hood Canal Sand & Gravel as one of the litigants and changed the title to Shoreline program:

     

    SMP Legal Action Continues

     

    The PDN reported last week that the State Growth Management Hearing Board rejected appeals by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation, the local chapter of Citizen Alliance for Property Rights and others. These legal actions had been launched when Jefferson County adopted and the State Dept of Ecology approved a highly flawed and onerous update to the County’s Shoreline Master Program.

    You read that right. A county can’t adopt its own regulations to suit its local conditions. It must do what the State Department of Ecology wants in order to get the required approval.  Is that Constitutional?

    These legal appeals noted numerous constitutional, legal and procedural issues. The total was over 200 items, yet this Board of political appointees chose to not validate even one issue.  Now the legal action will move on to a real court of law.

    This SMP Update devalues shoreline property by making it less desirable.  It is now harder to develop, improve, repair or replace damaged shoreline property.  With the lower total value of county property as a tax base, the county then must increase property tax rates on all property to raise the same amount of funds.  This affects all property owners.

    CAPR and OSF are working on behalf of all property owners.  OSF is a local organization that believes “The best stewards of the land are the people who live on the land and care for their homes and property.”  We all should support these organizations.

    Gene Farr

     


  • BCC? The Blind leading the Blind?

    BLIND LEADING THE BLIND definition.An expression applied to leaders who know as little as their followers and are therefore likely to lead them astray:

    I submit this, as my comment and question?

    The huge  NGO email lists, with email address and names I received were, an INSPIRATION to me. These huge special interest global NGO entities know exactly how to promote their green agenda. One NGO bragged on their website that they had sent over 20,000 EMAILS to WA DC legislators, they brag about how they are able to influence our elected representatives voting.

    If these  HUGE NGO email lists, with email address and names, gives NGO’s  the POLITICAL CLOUT to create legislated laws of our land?

    What do we have to fight back with, they are organized, their agenda is “21”?  We have hundreds, thousands, of splinter groups, we have so many with different causes,  beliefs and ideas?

    We all fight back in our own way. I am certainly not an authority on how anyone should  fight back.

    ———————————————

    I am simply fighting back in my own way

    I NEVER BLIND COPY (BCC) for my own  purpose and intent.

    HOW STUPID OR WHATEVER, WOULD I BE?

    IF AFTER,  I  RESEARCHED, DOCUMENTED, DOCUMENTED, DOCUMENTED, COPIED, CUT, PASTED, COMMENTED, POSTED, AND THEN EMAILED BCC?

    WHAT PURPOSE WOULD I SERVE, IF I BBC? IF I FAILED TO BE OPEN AND TRANSPARENT,

    “LACK OF TRANSPARENCY IS A HUGE POLITICAL ADVANTAGE,” “AND BASICALLY, CALL IT THE STUPIDITY OF THE AMERICAN VOTER OR WHATEVER, BUT BASICALLY THAT WAS REALLY, REALLY, CRITICAL FOR THE THING TO PASS.”- JONATHAN GRUBER, THE MIT HEALTH ECONOMIST FOR OBAMACARE

    ————————————————————————————————

    IF I FAILED TO SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFY  THE What? Who? Where? When? How? Why?

     I WOULD SIMPLY BE PROMOTING THE CRITICAL STUPIDITY OF THE AMERICAN VOTER OR WHATEVER  AND PERPETUATING THE SOCIAL PHENOMENA  OF leaders who know as little as their followers, THE BLIND LEADING THE BLIND, and  are therefore likely to lead them astray:

    ———————————————————–

    IT WAS JUST ONE MORE DOCUMENTED EXAMPLE, JUST MORE PROOF THAT HUGE GREEN NGO GROUPS ARE MORE ORGANIZED, MORE INFORMED, SENDING MORE INFORMATION TO MORE GREEN PEOPLE AND CONTROLLING MORE OF OUR GOVERNMENT.

    One NGO bragged on their website that they had sent over 20,000 EMAILS to WA DC legislators

    ——————————————————————–

    WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?

    Huge NGO SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS ARE Political Game Changers

    The power of cyberspace reflected on Face book, twitter, tweet, blogs, EMAILS and websites have become HUGE POLITICAL GAME CHANGERS.

    ———————————————————————

    WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?

    (BCC) Blind listed?  Blindsided? or Black listed?

     (BCC) Blind listed, blind carbon copy in Technology Expand. messaging. (BCC) An electronic mail header which lists addresses to which a message should be sent, but which will not be seen by the recipients. Bcc is defined in RFC 822 and supported by most e-mail systems.

    Blindsided by definition catch (someone) unprepared; attack from an unexpected position. hit or attack (someone) on the blind side.

    Black listed  by definition, (or black list) is a list or register of entities or people who, for one reason or another, ARE BEING DENIED a particular privilege, service, mobility, ACCESS or recognition.

    ————————————————————-

    WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?

    WHY I NEVER BLIND COPY?

    I explained it to Lois, I send my emails to concerned people and groups in about 10 to 15 counties in WA State. Most of the concerned people and groups have been involved in litigation and or appeals with WA State government.

    I send my POSTED COMMENTS AND EMAILS to the “servants of the people”  federal, state and local government ELECTED representative, the anointed appointed etc.

    It is my intention to let these “servants of the people” know, by using the very old journalistic cliché that stories, documented POSTINGS, EMAILS, COMMENTS should always contain answers to these six questions:

    What? Who? Where? When? How? Why?

    What the hell  these  “servants of the people”  doing?

    Who are these “servants of the people”?

    Where are these “servants of the people”?

    When are these “servants of the people”?

    How are these people “servants of the people”?

    AND WHY ARE THESE “servants of the people”?

    How STUPID, would I be,  to identify “servants of the people” as  UNKNOWN SOMEBODY’S?

    —————————————————————————————————

    REPEATED FOR EMPHASIS

    “LACK OF TRANSPARENCY IS A HUGE POLITICAL ADVANTAGE,” “AND BASICALLY, CALL IT THE STUPIDITY OF THE AMERICAN VOTER OR WHATEVER, BUT BASICALLY THAT WAS REALLY, REALLY, CRITICAL FOR THE THING TO PASS.”- JONATHAN GRUBER, THE MIT HEALTH ECONOMIST FOR OBAMACARE

    HOW STUPID OR WHATEVER, WOULD I BE? HOW STUPID IF AFTER,  I  RESEARCHED, DOCUMENTED, DOCUMENTED, DOCUMENTED, COPIED, CUT, PASTED, COMMENTED, POSTED, AND EMAILED AS BBC?

    WHAT PURPOSE WOULD I SERVE, IF I BBC? IF I FAIL TO BE OPEN AND TRANSPARENT, IF I FAIL TO SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFY  THE What? Who? Where? When? How? Why?

    I WOULD SIMPLY BE PROMOTING THE CRITICAL STUPIDITY OF THE AMERICAN VOTER OR WHATEVER  AND PERPETUATE THE SOCIAL PHENOMENA  OF THE BLIND LEADING THE BLIND.

    AS, applied to leaders who know as little as their followers and are therefore likely to lead them astray.

    ——————————————————————————————–

    ASTRAY?

    Behind My Back | Living in Law-Law Land?

    www.behindmyback.org/2015/02/16/3245/

    5 days ago – LIVING IN WA STATE LAWLAW, LA-LA LAND? Definition of LA-LA … www.behindmyback.org/2013/10/16/by-hook-or-by-crook/. Oct 16, 2013 …

    ——————————————————————–

    LEGISLATORS LAWS OF WA STATE LAND?

    April 24, 2011  Welcome to the Washington State Law Library

    OVER 55,000 TITLES AND OVER 330,000, YES, THREE HUNDRED AND THIRTY THOUSAND VOLUMES OF LAW. Our Tax dollars, elected officials and their legislation have provides us with the Washington State Law Library and “Welcomes? us to it”

    FEB, 21,  2015 they have changed the name?

    Hmmm… Go figure?  REALLY? WELCOME TO GEORGE?

    The State Law Library’s primary mission is to serve the Supreme Court, the Legislature, the … The State Law Library’s On-Line Public Access Catalog GEORGE ? The State Law Library’s On-Line Public Access Catalog

    —————————————————————————————–

    Hmmm…  WELCOME TO GEORGE?  “BY GEORGE”

    I DIGRESS TO LONG BEFORE THE YEAR 1598, BUT “BY GEORGE” YOU WILL ENJOY THIS

    The reference is British. St. George is the patron saint of English. HE ALLEGEDLY “SLEW DRAGONS.” “By George” is considered to be a very mild oath. It was originally “Before George.” It also appears as “For George” and “Fore George.”
    The first record of its appearance in WRITTEN English was in the year 1598, by Ben Jonson. The “by George” version was first used by Fielding in 1731. Gradually, the “for and fore and before” were dropped AND THE “BY GEORGE” REMAINED.
    IT WAS USED, ORALLY, AS A BATTLE CRY LONG BEFORE 1598, but no one knows exactly when. The dictionary traces only the first WRITTEN use of words and phrases.

    Source: http://en.allexperts.com/q/Etymology-Mea…

    This type of word/phrase usage is called an “expletive attributive”.

    OLD LADY answered 6 years ago

    “BY GEORGE” The actual origin is in sixteenth century England, when the church was in turmoil and was ATTEMPTING TO EXERT ITSELF AND GAIN MORE CONTROL OVER THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE. Swearing was blasphemy — and brought either a fine or a penance. So instead of saying, ‘by God,’ people started saying ‘by George’ AND THE CHURCH PEOPLE COULDN’T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT

    ——————————————————————————————————

    BY GEORGE, BY GOD

     Feb 21, 2015 WA STATE CITIZENS ARE LIVING IN WA STATES LAW-LAW, LA-LA-LAND

     ————————————————————

    BY GEORGE, BY GOD

    HOW MUCH WORSE CAN LIVING IN WA STATE IT GET?

    ———————————————————

    WA STATE CITIZENS HAVE BEEN, ARE BEING TAKEN FOR A RIDE ON ECOLOGY’S WAC TRACK

    BY GEORGE? BY GOD? HOW BAD IS ECOLOGY’S WAC TRACK?

     ARE WA STATE LEGISLATORS ON THE WRONG TRACK? OR DERAILED?

    Behind My Back | High, Dry and Destitute

    www.behindmyback.org/2015/02/01/highdry-and-destitute/

    Feb 1, 2015 – High, Dry and Destitute WA State citizens, private property owners and … category and have previously been posted on “behindmyback.org”.

    www.behindmyback.org/2013/10/16/by-hook-or-by-crook/ …… have been left HIGH, DRY AND DESTITUTE by WA State DOE WATER RULES.

    Feb 21, 2015  BY GEORGE? BY GOD?  WA STATE LEGISLATORS  ARE ON THE WRONG TRACK

    ——————————————————————-

     Feb. 21, 2015  OLD AMERICAN LADY’S SOLUTION

    BY GEORGE, BY GOD,  A BATTLE CRY BY “WE THE PEOPLE”

    AGAINST  A GOVERNMENT, ATTEMPTING TO EXERT ITSELF AND GAIN MORE CONTROL OVER THE LIVES OF “WE THE PEOPLE”

    AND, THE GOVERNMENT PUBLIC SERVANTS CAN’T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT BECAUSE WE ARE GUARANTEED FREEDOM OF SPEECH BY THE UNITED STATE CONSTITUTION

     BY GOD,  BY GEORGE, WE MUST USE IT OR LOSE IT

    to be continued….


  • NYPD Official Web Site

    NYPD – Official New York City Police Department Web Site

    nyc.gov/nypd New York City The mission is to enhance the quality of life in the city by working in accordance with constitutional rights TO ENFORCE THE LAWS, PRESERVE THE PEACE, REDUCE FEAR, …

    ———————————————————————–

    IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE COMMUNITY, WE PLEDGE TO:

    • Protect the lives and property of our fellow citizens and impartially enforce the law.
    • Fight crime both by preventing it and by aggressively pursuing violators of the law.
    • Maintain a higher standard of integrity than is generally expected of others because so much is expected of us.
    • Value human life, respect the dignity of each individual and render our services with courtesy and civility.

    ————————————————–

    NYC interactive Crime Map

    With unprecedented population levels, NEW YORK CITY “WAS” SAFER THAN EVER WITH HOMOCIDE LEVELS IN 2013 ON PACE TO FALL BELOW RECENT HISTORIC LOWS. The NYPD has relied on data to drive it’s crime fighting and this map helps enhance New Yorkers’ and researchers understanding of where felony and violent crimes persist.

    ——————————————————————

    Crime Stoppers if the information you provide leads to an arrest and indictment the caller is eligible for a reward up to $2000.

    ————————————————————-

    NYPD’s Foreign language Outreach.

    ———————————————————————————————–

    The NYPD is the most diverse police department in the world with thousands of native speakers of foreign languages who routinely use their foreign language skills to assist the public. ———————————————————————————————-

    my comments

    IN SPITE OF THE FACT,  THAT NEW YORK CITY “WAS” SAFER THAN EVER WITH HOMICIDES IN 2013. 

    AND, WAS ON PACE TO FALL BELOW RECENT HISTORIC LOWS.

    —————————————————————————-

    BILL DE BLASIO SHARPLY CRITICIZED THE NYPD’S “STOP-AND-FRISK” TACTICS WHEN HE RAN FOR MAYOR IN 2013.

    ————————————————————-

    New York City Police Commissioner Bill Bratton (was APPOINTED BY MAYOR BILL DE BLASIO) New York City Police Commissioner Bill Bratton

    ————————————————————————-

    Bill Bratton serves at the Mayor’s Bill de Blasio PLEASURE

    —————————————————————————–

    APPOINTED New York City Police Commissioner Bill Bratton has told members of the NYPD not to turn their backs on Mayor Bill de Blasio again at the funeral for Wenjian Liu on Sunday.

    end of my comments

    ————————————————————————————————————– continued

    NYPD – Official New York City Police Department Web Site

    nyc.gov/nypd The Department is administered and governed by the Police Commissioner Bill Bratton, who was appointed by the Mayor Bill de Blasio.

    Technically, the commissioner serves a five-year term; as a practical matter, the commissioner

    Bill Bratton serves at the Mayor’s Bill de Blasio pleasure.

    The commissioner Bill Bratton in turn appoints numerous deputy commissioners.

    ———————————————————————————

    APPOINTED POLICE COMMISSIONER BILL BRATTON AND HIS SUBORDINATE APPOINTED DEPUTIES ARE CIVILIANS UNDER AN OATH OF OFFICE

    —————————————————————–

    THE APPOINTED

    ARE NOT UNIFORMED MEMBERS OF THE FORCE WHO ARE SWORN OFFICERS OF THE LAW.

    WHAT IS THEIR APPOINTED MISSION?

    ——————————————————————————————————–


  • WOW Wild Wilderness Warfare?

    WOW Wild Wilderness Warfare?

    PLUS….  Violations of Federal Law in the US Navy’s Procedures for Obtaining a
    Permit  to Conduct Electromagnetic Warfare Testing and Training in the Olympic National Forest?

    How in the world are Rep Kilmer and Senator Patty Murray going to pull this one off?

    ————————————————————————————-

    Dear elected public representatives and appointed administrative rulers, Federal, state, county and city (AKA Public Servants)

    This is the best OBJECTION, by Karen Sullivan, I have every read on the Olympic Peninsula Electronic Warfare Project

    Described to me by District Ranger Dean Millett as no big deal…

    “JUST A COUPLE OF ROADS FOR A COUPLE OF PICKUPS”

    PS – Just so you know, SHE is only one person, SIMPLY A CONCERNED CITIZEN who
    got a bee in her bonnet about this particular issue and decided to lend a
    hand. HER email volume has increased exponentially, with a lot of requests,
    and SHE cannot always answer every one, but SHE WILL  try. If we all lend our
    voices to Karen Sullivan  AND speak out, just think of the magnificent racket we can make!
    ————————————————————————————–

    Complete  text by Karen Sullivan  November 14, 2014

    Below is a clear proposal from a former employee who maps out why the
    proposed activity is not legal.  From the document:

    *Disclaimer: The author is not an attorney, but is a retired federal
    employee who worked under certain environmental laws and regulations, and
    who has a clear understanding of what a public process should be. *

    Dear Friends and Colleagues,

    Attached both as a PDF file and pasted into the body of this message,
    please find a summary of the ways in which I believe federal law has been
    violated by the Navy and the Forest Service, in the so-called public
    process and documentation associated with the Navy’s proposed
    electromagnetic warfare testing and training program for the Olympic
    National Forest.

    The reason for this lengthy document ( nearly 6000 words) is that neither unanimous public
    opposition nor the 2,000+ public comments submitted to the Forest Service
    so far have been found by the decision-maker, District Ranger Dean Millett,
    to be “substantive.”  Evidently, emotional pleas, descriptions of probable
    harm to small businesses and simple principled objections are discounted.
    Therefore, in order to rectify that lack as perceived by the Forest
    Service, I have attempted to give more substantive reasons why the Navy’s
    Environmental Assessment is defective and deficient and should be withdrawn
    or completely revised, and the Special Use Permit refused.

    I hope we can bring the total to 3,000 comments or more. Please feel free
    to use the information in here, share it and encourage more people to
    comment. You can comment more than once. Just go to:
    https://cara.ecosystem-management.org/Public//CommentInput?Project=42759
    and submit them.
    Best,
    Karen Sullivan

    PS – Just so you know, I’m only one person, simply a concerned citizen who
    got a bee in her bonnet about this particular issue and decided to lend a
    hand. My email volume has increased exponentially, with a lot of requests,
    and I cannot always answer every one, but I’ll try. If we all lend our
    voices to speak out, just think of the magnificent racket we can make!

    —————————————————————————————————————————–

    *Violations of Federal Law in the US Navy’s Procedures for Obtaining a
    Permit *
    *to Conduct Electromagnetic Warfare Testing and Training *
    *in the Olympic National Forest*
    *Contents:*
    *1. Summary*
    *2. Violations of Federal NEPA Law*
    *3. Violation of National Forest Management Act and Forest Plan *
    *4. Cumulative Impacts – Omissions in Documents*
    *5. Fraudulent Noise Measurements*
    *6. No Verification of Navy’s Claim of No Significant Impacts*
    *7. Some Unaddressed Public Concerns*
    *8. Conclusion*

    *Disclaimer: The author is not an attorney, but is a retired federal
    employee who worked under certain environmental laws and regulations, and
    who has a clear understanding of what a public process should be. *

    *Part 1*

    *Summary*
    The US Navy is proposing to take large swathes of Washington’s Olympic
    National Forest plus a large amount of airspace over Olympic National Park
    and the communities in the area, to run electronic warfare attack and
    detection testing and training, for 260 days per year, permanently, using
    at least 36 new supersonic attack jets and radiation emitters on the
    ground, in 15 locations. The Navy has refused to hold true public hearings
    in affected communities on the Olympic Peninsula, citing not enough money
    in their $11.5 million dollar budget. Each new jet costs between $68
    million and $77 million, depending on which figure is used, so the total
    equipment budget is approximately $2,785,500,000. No public notices were
    printed in any newspapers that directly serve the affected communities.

    *The issue boils down to:* Should the Forest Service issue a Special Use
    Permit to the Navy to use roads in the Olympic National Forest to run their
    electronic radiation-emitting truck-and-trailer combinations, which would
    entail numerous unannounced forest closures and other problems? In a
    Machivellian twist, Dean Millett, the Forest Service District Ranger who
    will be making the decision on whether or not to issue the permit, has been
    limited to a very narrow scope, considering only the impacts and effects
    from the truck-and-trailer rigs and nothing else. No jet noise, no jet
    emissions or fuel dumps, no hazards from air-based electronic attack
    weapons, no chronic radiation, no fire danger, or other concerns brought up
    by the public are being considered in issuing this permit. These other
    concerns have been labeled by Mr Millett as being “outside of his decision
    space.” Yet if he issues the permit for road use by the Navy’s emitters, it
    will trigger all of the other testing and training actions and their
    impacts, none of which were evaluated in the Navy’s Environmental
    Assessment of September 2014.  The Navy’s Environmental Impact Statement of
    2010 is unavailable for public comment because the Navy removed it from
    their web site.

    *A military program of electronic warfare on public land* qualifies as a
    major federal action and is thus subject to a public process under the
    National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, or NEPA. This process includes
    hearings in affected communities whenever there is environmental
    controversy. These hearings must be in accordance with NEPA guidelines,
    which safeguard the public’s right to be heard.  In addition, the
    scientific evidence to back up statements must be thorough, accurate, and
    available for public scrutiny. In this case, the public’s right to know and
    participate has been severely abridged and the Navy’s “science” and legal
    maneuverings for justifying all of these impacts to our communities are
    shakier than the San Andreas Fault.
    *If the permit is issued,* it will likely affect other National Forest
    lands as well, all of which have long been considered appropriate for
    “…military training when compatible with other uses and in conformity with
    applicable Forest Plans,” in a Memorandum of Understanding between the
    Department of Defense and the US Department of Agriculture. In the Ocala
    National Forest in Florida, for example, the Navy maintains a live bombing
    range located half a mile from one campground and two miles from another.
    This is probably not what Theodore Roosevelt had in mind when he moved the
    Forest Service from the Department of the Interior to the Department of
    Agriculture.

    District Ranger Millett is expected to sign the permit despite almost
    unanimous public opposition, *unless the Forest Service receives formally
    and in writing what he called “substantive” comments by the end of the
    comment period on November 28*, *2014*. Mr Millett declined to define
    “substantive” when asked at a public informational meeting. Therefore, it
    is the aim of this document to provide readers with the best examples of
    substantive comments possible, short of legal advice from an attorney.

    *Public comments can be sent* to: dmillett@fs.fed.us, gtwahl@fs.fed.us, and
    inputted directly online at:
    https://cara.ecosystem-management.org/Public//CommentInput?Project=42759

    *Part 2*

    *Violations of Federal NEPA Law*

    *1. Failure to notify the public:* The Navy has violated the National
    Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) by failing to adequately notify the
    public. One 8”X11” poster stuck on bulletin boards at a couple of post
    offices, combined with tiny notices placed in a few newspapers many miles
    away from those that directly serve affected communities, are a ludicrous
    excuse for notifying the entire population of the Olympic Peninsula.
    Congressman Derek Kilmer’s office sent the Navy a packet with contact
    information for all the local newspapers in affected communities, along
    with a request to prominently post public notices in those papers. Neither
    the Navy nor the Forest Service placed a single notice in any local papers
    serving Olympic Peninsula communities. This is a clear violation of the
    spirit and intent of NEPA as well, and a bad faith gesture to residents of
    the Olympic Peninsula.

    *Why did the Navy discard requests from a congressman and deliberately
    violate federal law in their public notification process?*

    *2.  Failure to record public comments: *Due to the high volume of
    complaints received, Rep. Kilmer asked the Navy to hold public meetings.
    Since then the Navy has made it repeatedly clear that were it not for
    Congressman Kilmer’s request for public meetings, there would be none on
    the Olympic Peninsula. Instead of holding hearings under NEPA, however, the
    Navy and Forest Service held “Informational Meetings.” The fact that none
    of the public’s comments were officially recorded at any of the meetings in
    Forks, Port Angeles and Pacific Beach has further upset people’s confidence
    in government and muddied the understanding of the NEPA process. Most are
    wondering why they aren’t getting a fair shake under normal NEPA procedure.
    CEQ regulations require that agencies “make diligent efforts to involve the
    public in preparing and implementing their NEPA procedures” (40 CFR
    1506.6(a)). “Informational meetings” fulfill neither NEPA requirements nor
    the public’s desire to comment, ask questions, and receive answers,
    especially when people are given one minute to speak and then interrupted
    frequently. The Navy has failed to conduct a proper NEPA process.

    *Why does the Navy refuse to hold hearings and record public comments?*

    * 3. Commenters are given no legal “standing:”* Since none of the hundreds
    of people who have attended the Navy’s informational meetings have had
    their comments recorded, none have any legal standing in the NEPA process,
    unless they submitted their comments again through other avenues that
    require knowing the email addresses of certain officials, or knowing where
    the Forest Service’s web-based NEPA page is. Had these been true public
    hearings, all of those people would now have legal standing, because many
    also held printed comments in their hands, ready to submit after they
    finished speaking. In the Port Angeles meeting, both the Navy and Forest
    Service dismissed the idea of recording comments despite being repeatedly
    challenged to by attendees. The public’s right to a full hearing is
    codified in the Code of Federal Regulations at 40 CFR, and in the State of
    Washington Revised Code, at RCW 42.30.

    *Why were commenters at public meetings given no legal standing in the NEPA
    process?*

    *4. What legal standing means:* Any grievances the public has about
    electromagnetic warfare testing and training MUST be addressed in public
    comments first, in order to have legal standing, which means we are giving
    the Forest Service and the Navy notice that we, the public, think these
    grievances should be addressed. If those grievances are not rectified, any
    legal actions on behalf of the public that follow would have more
    authority, because the Navy had been aware of the grievances yet chose not
    to address them. Without legal standing, those legal actions on behalf of
    the public would likely have less authority due to the implication of no
    notice of grievance being given in public comments. This is a denial of due
    process as stipulated in NEPA, and a distortion of the true amount of
    public concern. On page 1-8 of the Environmental Assessment, the Navy
    states, “No comments were received on the draft EA.” That is *exactly* the
    fear of people who attended those meetings, that their comments would not
    be acknowledged and that the absence of their comments will be reflected
    similarly by the Navy as it did in the EA, thus implying less public
    interest than there really is.

    *5. When hearings are required:* Public meetings or hearings “…are required
    when there may be substantial environmental controversy concerning the
    environmental effects of the proposed action, a substantial interest in
    holding the meeting, or a request for a meeting by another agency with
    jurisdiction over the action.” (40 CFR 1506.6 (c)).  Proper hearings under
    NEPA have not been held in affected communities, and the usual citizen’s
    right to register comments at public hearings has been denied. Therefore
    the Navy and the Forest Service have violated NEPA in this regard, too.

    *Why are the Navy and Forest Service discounting the extreme level of
    public sentiment that is being amply demonstrated in other ways besides
    formal written comments? *

    *6. Written comments are also being discounted:* Despite the level of
    public concern remaining extremely high, District Ranger Dean Millett was
    recorded on videotape during the meeting in Port Angeles saying that as of
    November 6, with regard to formal written public comments, the Forest
    Service had received “nothing substantive” that would stop him from signing
    the permit. He is looking exclusively for defects in the Environmental
    Assessment, and insists that public opinion doesn’t count if people simply
    express their objections. He also has said that 2,000 written comments are
    “not a lot” and have had no effect on him. The comment period has been
    extended twice, yet the public is still struggling to wade through the
    nearly 5,000 pages of scientific and technical documentation, much of which
    remains unavailable to them. By not allowing the public sufficient time to
    catch up with a process they entered late, through no fault of their own,
    and by not allowing them time to develop substantive comments, the Forest
    Service is compromising NEPA law.

    *What is the point of a public comment process if the Forest Service
    ignores public opinion?*

    *This is why the Forest Service needs to extend the comment period to the
    end of January, so that the public has enough time to understand the issues
    well enough to make “substantive” comments, and so that the holidays won’t
    interfere with that. *

    *7. Other agencies not consulted:*  Neither Olympic National Park nor the
    State DNR, whose lands will be affected by the mobile emitters, were
    consulted during the drafting of the Environmental Assessment. If they were
    consulted afterward, then where is the public record of those
    consultations? This is another failure on the part of the Navy in its NEPA
    procedure.  Also, neither DNR nor the Park Service were represented at any
    of the informational meetings. Why not?  Failure to consult with other
    affected agencies is a violation of federal law.

    *Part 3*

    *Violation of National Forest Management Act and Forest Plan*

    *8. Public interest is paramount: *By signing the permit, the Forest
    Service places itself in violation of its own Forest Management Plan, and
    the National Forest Management Act. No outside agency, including the
    Department of Defense, has the right to override the Forest Service’s own
    Forest Management Plans and conduct activities that place their priorities
    over those of the public. The Forest Service’s own regulations state that
    military use of public lands is not permissible if the military has other
    “suitable and available” lands for their Proposed Action, and Forest
    Service management policy states that when considering issuing such a
    permit, “…the interests and needs of the general public shall be given
    priority over those of the applicant.”  The Navy has not adequately
    demonstrated that it has not investigated the use of private or other
    lands, and its reasons for wanting to move the entire electronic warfare
    program from Mountain Home, Idaho to the Olympic National Forest are not
    enough: fuel savings and ease of scheduling for training are insufficient
    justification to override the overwhelming socioeconomic and environmental
    interests of the public.

    *Why are the needs and desires of the public not being given priority over
    the desires of the Navy?*

    *9. Special Use Permit screening checklist*:  Among its 14 requirements,
    the Forest Service’s own checklist for considering applications says, “Use
    will not pose a serious or substantial risk to public health or safety AND
    Use will not create an exclusive or perpetual right of use or occupancy AND
    Use will not unreasonably conflict or interfere with administrative use by
    the Forest Service, other scheduled or authorized existing uses on or
    adjacent to non-National Forest System lands.”

    (36CFR 251.54; FSH 2709.11 12.2 & 12.3; FSM 2703)

    *Part 4*

    *Cumulative Impacts – Omissions in Documents*

    *10. Documents still unavailable:* Though the Forest Service’s NEPA home
    page links to the Navy’s Environmental Assessment and its decision
    documents, neither it nor the Navy web pages contain links to the 2010 EIS,
    which was removed from public access by the Navy, or the previous EIS’s
    going back to 1989 that have been cited by the Navy in meetings, or the
    Fish and Wildlife Service’s 2010 Biological Opinion, which is not posted
    anywhere, or to the temporary permit that was issued by the Forest Service
    to the Navy three years ago, or to the Memorandum of Understanding that
    declared military training to be an “appropriate use” of national forest
    lands, or to supporting documents referenced in the Navy’s Environmental
    Assessment, such as Joint Publication 3-13.1, which describes the methods
    and intent of electronic attack weapons on the Growler jets that will be
    training in the Olympic National Forest.

    This is a violation of NEPA, which says such pertinent documents shall be
    made available to the public for scrutiny.  (18CFR 380.9).  Moreover, an
    explanation of the Forest Service’s own updated NEPA handbook says, “…NEPA
    procedures regulations [sic] are intended to let interested parties become
    more effectively engaged in the decision making process rather than merely
    as reviewer of proposals and final documents. Specifically, the regulations
    include an option for responsible officials to incrementally develop,
    modify, and document proposed actions and alternatives through an open and
    transparent process.”

    *If District Ranger Dean Millett is the responsible official who has the
    power to make the public review process more open and transparent, then why
    does he not do it?*

    *11. Navy dismisses entire categories of impacts:*  On page ES-2 of the
    Environmental Assessment the Navy states, “Cumulative impacts of the
    Proposed Action, in combination with other past, present, and reasonably
    foreseeable future impacts, were analyzed. Based on the analysis, cumulative
    impacts within the EW Range Study Area would not be significant.” On page
    4-1 the Navy says, “The cumulative impacts analysis in this EA focused on
    impacts that are “truly meaningful,” in accordance with CEQ guidance
    (Council on Environmental Quality 1997). The level of analysis for each
    resource was commensurate with the intensity of the impacts.” Also, “…this
    EA dismissed from further analysis the actions and environmental
    considerations that were considered not reasonably forseeable.” *The Navy
    is not allowed to dismiss environmental considerations* it considers not
    meaningful or foreseeable during a NEPA process; this is a violation of
    NEPA, which does not allow an agency such leeway. In November 2009, a
    federal court judge ruled that a faulty impacts analysis in a NEPA process
    may subject the government to financial liability later. In early 2010, the
    Obama administration announced plans to require analysis of the proposed
    action’s relation to climate change, along with impacts on land use,
    biological diversity, and air and water quality. While analysis of
    cumulative impacts has been the subject of disagreement among agencies, *the
    Navy has provided in its EA neither peer-reviewed citations nor detailed
    analysis on any of the following topics, all of which would be in the
    public’s interest:*

    a. Socioeconomic impacts to communities from increased jet noise and air
    pollution;

    b. Impacts to wilderness values in Olympic National Park;

    c. Cultural factors, including traditional uses of land;

    d. Analysis of multiple stressors on humans, endangered species, and other
    wildlife;

    e. Analysis of chronic radiation effects on humans, wildlife and habitats,
    including aquatic; (There was no mention in the EA of the U.S. Department
    of Interior’s February 7, 2014 critique of the FCC’s outdated dismissal of
    radiation concerns, see

    http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/us_doi_comments.pdf  )

    f. Evaluation of the protection of children, environmental justice, water,
    land use, and geology;

    g. Analyses on population effects on threatened bird species, particularly
    the cumulative effects of noise and electromagnetic radiation on the
    northern spotted owl and marbled murrelet, in whose critical habitat areas
    most of the Navy’s emitter sites will be located;

    h. Analysis of the effects of electromagnetic radiation and loud sounds on
    migrating shorebirds, geese, ducks, and other non-listed birds;

    Additionally, there were none of these:

    9. Cost analysis for jet fuel savings from not flying an extra 400 miles,
    versus effects on the environment.

    i. Analysis of other sites as alternatives to the Olympic MOA, including
    private lands.

    j. Analysis of the increased fire danger posed by jet and drone crashes,
    sparks from vehicle transmitters or operators’ cigarettes, or misdirected
    electromagnetic beams from either the transmitters or from jets, hitting
    tinder-dry vegetation;

    k. Analysis of the interaction and effects of climate change as a potential
    magnifier of impacts.

    *Why did the Navy not do its homework?*

    *Did the Forest Service assess each segment of the Olympic National Forest
    to be used by the Navy with an initial focus on identifying and evaluating
    the wide variety of impacts and potential risks to resources?  Were these
    risks rated as high, medium or low? Did the Forest Service assess impacts
    from jet emissions, jet and drone crashes, possible fires caused by said
    activities, along with other impacts, including but not limited to:  Loss
    of National Forest public revenue, loss of use by the public, the scope and
    number of acres needed for use by the Navy, the scope of the habit in that
    area, etc.  If there is potential damage, how will Navy restore these
    areas?  *

    *Were the above factors, if investigated by the U.S. Forest Service,
    reviewed by the Forest Botany and Wildlife Team? During their review, did
    they specifically consider the influence of electronic and electromagnetic
    affects to species such as fragmentation, disturbance, and potential loss
    of habitat quality?*

    *Part 5*

    *Fraudulent Noise Measurements*

    *12. Jet noise not accurately measured for assessing impacts:*  At a
    meeting with residents in Coupeville on the topic of jet noise, a Navy
    representative described the process of sound measurement as that of
    placing a GE engine on a test platform on the ground, turning it on and
    recording its noise. That data is fed into noise mapping software that
    considers land contour data. The processed data was then averaged with
    quiet time over the length of a year to produce a “Day-Night Average,” as
    is done at commercial airports by the FAA. No live jet takeoffs or landings
    were measured in establishing the Day-Night Average, according to the Navy
    official, nor was the frequent use of afterburners ever factored into those
    sound levels, nor was the significant extra noise from extended flaps,
    landing gear and speed brakes included.

    The Navy developed a decibel average of 65, which is under the limit for
    hearing damage but over the limit, according to the Navy’s own figures, for
    residential development. 65 decibels does not, however, account for the
    times when the decibel level *inside* some residential homes is above 100,
    which is more than enough to cause hearing loss, or the fact that at some
    homes at Admiral’s Cove the decibel level has been measured by an
    independent sound professional, at 134.2.  Growler jets are louder than the
    Prowlers they are replacing, and the Navy has promised that the minimum
    altitude they will be flying over land is 1200 feet. That has been
    frequently contradicted by hikers on mountainous forest trails, who have
    reported seeing jets fly past beneath them. According to the Navy’s own
    figures, a Growler jet flying at 1000 feet produces a “Single Event Level”
    of 113 decibels, which is enough to damage hearing and cause medical
    problems in people subjected to it. In the Roosevelt-Okanogan Military
    Training Area the Navy is authorized to fly at 300 feet above ground level.
    It is not clear what would prevent them from authorizing that lower
    altitude in the Olympic National Forest.

    A recent study called Community Aircraft Noise: A Public Health Issue
    identified serious health effects in Coupeville, WA, caused by chronic and
    acute noise episodes:
    http://citizensofebeysreserve.com/Files/Community%20Aircraft%20Noise_A%20Public%20Health%20Issue.pdf

    *With regard to jet noise and emissions,* the “Citizens of Ebey’s Reserve”
    on Whidbey Island have created a web page which includes this Links and
    Files section, full of valuable information:
    http://citizensofebeysreserve.com/LinksAndFiles.html

    *As a result of the Navy’s apparent underestimation of sound levels* caused
    by jets, the effects of loud noise on threatened and endangered species in
    the Fish and Wildlife Service’s Biological Opinion for the Navy, which was
    begun in 2009 and issued in 2010, may be based on inaccurate or misleading
    information from the Navy. If this is indeed the case, that the Fish and
    Wildlife Service was given inaccurate or misleading information on which to
    base its evaluation of biological impacts, then the Biological Opinion
    should be considered invalid and formal consultation re-initiated under
    Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, using actual sound measurements
    from real jets. Providing deliberately misleading information to a federal
    agency is also considered a form of fraud or false statement under US Code,
    Chapter 47. There may be other applicable laws that were violated.

    *What is the real level of sound produced by Navy jets, and why was this
    information not incorporated into impact studies, and shouldn’t the Navy be
    required to change its measurement system to the full spectrum of noise
    generated by actual aircraft?*

    *Part 6*

    *No Verification of Navy’s Claim of No Significant Impacts*

    *13. The Forest Service conducted no independent research:* At the Port
    Angeles meeting, District Ranger Dean Millett acknowledged and is recorded
    on videotape saying that *the Forest Service did not conduct any
    independent investigation to verify the Navy’s claims of no significant
    impacts*. This violates the Forest Service’s own policies as well as the
    law. For example, the Environmental Assessment dismisses potential impacts
    on everything that does not fall into its category of “observable
    wildlife.” It inaccurately states that amphibians and reptiles only exist
    around marshes and meadows. On page 3.2-6 it says, “The proposed activities
    do not occur on marshes or in meadows; therefore, it is highly unlikely
    that amphibians or reptiles would occur in the project area.”

    A similar statement dismisses the possibility of amphibians or reptiles
    occurring on “disturbed areas” such as roadside pull-outs where mobile
    transmitters would operate.  The Forest Service is presumably aware that
    the Olympic National Forest is designated a temperate rainforest, which
    means it is damp and wet during much of the year, and is prime habitat for
    amphibians such as frogs, newts, and salamanders throughout, which can be
    quite far from “marshes and meadows.” Furthermore, both amphibians and
    reptiles (e.g., snakes and lizards) often frequent cleared or “disturbed”
    areas. Dismissing amphibians and reptiles from consideration is misleading
    and unlawful, because amphibians are especially sensitive to
    electromagnetic radiation, particularly in their larval stages. Along with
    omissions of important analyses and data previously discussed, such blatant
    misstatements of fact *preclude informed public comment*, raise serious
    questions about the integrity of the preparers, and renders the entire
    Environmental Assessment and the permit that is intended to be based on it,
    suspect. *The US Forest Service has a duty to conduct its own independent
    scientific review* of the impacts of activities that it allows or condones.
    An agency cannot simply adopt the conclusions of another agency.

    *If the Forest Service questions the Navy’s data, then why has it not done
    its own independent investigations?  And if it does not question the Navy’s
    data, why not?*

    *14. The Courts have spoken:*  The above comments amply demonstrate the
    need for the Forest Service to conduct its own scientific review.  In Save
    Our Ecosystems V. P Clark E Merrell, http://openjurist.org/747/f2d/1240 the
    Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals said, “The Forest Service must do research
    if no adequate data exists.” In Foundation for North American Wild Sheep V.
    US Department of Agriculture, the Ninth Circuit Court said, “the very
    purpose of NEPA’s requirement that an EIS be prepared for all actions that
    may significantly affect the environment is to obviate the need for such
    speculation by insuring that available data is gathered and analyzed prior
    to the implementation of the proposed action.” 681 F.2d at 1179. In Warm
    Springs Dam Task Force V. Gribble, the Court held that an agency cured the
    defect in its EIS by commissioning a study about the effects of a newly
    discovered fault system on that dam. 621 F.2d at 1025-26.

    *15. Other courts have imposed similar requirements on agencies*. See,
    e.g., Rankin v. Coleman, 394 F.Supp. 647, 658 (highway project enjoined for
    inadequate EIS on effects and alternatives; alternatives must be
    “affirmatively studied”), mod. 401 F.Supp. 664 (E.D.N.C.1975); Montgomery
    v. Ellis, 364 F.Supp. 517, 528 (N.D.Ala.1973) (“NEPA requires each agency
    to undertake research needed adequately to expose environmental harms and,
    hence, to appraise available alternatives”) (project enjoined pending
    preparation of an adequate EIS); Brooks v. Volpe, 350 F.Supp. 269, 279
    (“NEPA requires each agency to indicate the research needed to adequately
    expose environmental harms”), supplemented, 350 F.Supp. 287
    (W.D.Wash.1972), aff’d, *487 F.2d 1344*
    <http://openjurist.org/487/f2d/1344> (9th
    Cir.1973); Environmental Defense Fund v. Hardin, 325 F.Supp. 1401, 1403
    (D.D.C.1971) (interpreting section 102(2)(A) as making “the completion of
    an adequate research program a prerequisite to agency action …. The Act
    envisions that program formulation will be directed by research results
    rather than that research programs will be designed to substantiate
    programs already decided upon”) If the information relevant to adverse
    impacts is essential to a reasoned choice among alternatives and is not
    known, and the overall costs of obtaining it are not exorbitant, the
    agency *shall
    *include the information in the environmental impact statement.

    *Part 7*

    *Some Unaddressed Public Concerns*

    *16. Chronic radiation effects not addressed:* In Section 2.1.1.4, the
    claim that the noise and RF radiation from mobile emitters will not impact
    what the Environmental Assessment calls Biological Resources is entirely
    based on the premise that the mobile emitters are moving around the forest,
    so exposure at any one site is limited. This despite the fact that 3 mobile
    units will be in operation from 8 – 16 hours per day, 260 days per year,
    among 15 different sites on the Olympic Peninsula. According to the EA,
    each mobile emitter site will average 11.15 training events per day, which
    also includes electronic detection and attack weapons from jets. This works
    out to an average of 468 hours of electromagnetic radiation per site per
    year, or 195, 24-hour days per decade. The Department of the Interior has
    criticized the FCC’s standards for cellphone radiation to be outmoded and
    no longer applicable as they do not adequately protect wildlife:
    http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/us_doi_comments.pdf

    *Where is the peer-reviewed research to back up the Navy’s claim of no
    significant impacts?*

    *17. Potential loss of human lives:*  Page 2-7 of the environmental
    assessment says the following: “The activities of the Proposed Action
    center on two divisions of EW, known as electronic warfare support (ES) and
    electronic attack (EA).” Then it goes on to provide this short explanation:
    “Sailors aboard Navy ships, submarines, and aircraft conduct ES and EA
    training as they search for, intercept, identify, and locate or localize
    sources of intentional and unintentional radiated electromagnetic energy
    for the purpose of immediate threat recognition, targeting, planning, and
    conduct of future operations. “(EA 2-7)  This sounds pretty benign.

    The environmental assessment references Joint Publication 3-13.1,
    Electronic Warfare, 08 February 2012 as a source document, and if you look
    at this publication the short explanation above is, verbatim, the
    definition of electronic support but  the environmental assessment leaves
    out any explanation of electronic attack (EA). Joint Publication 3-13.1
    defines Electronic Attack as follow: “EA refers to the division of EW
    involving the use of EM energy, DE (directed energy), or antiradiation
    weapons to attack personnel, facilities, or equipment with the intent of
    degrading, neutralizing, or destroying enemy combat capability…”

    Directed energy is defined as:  “An umbrella term covering technologies
    that relate to the production of a beam of concentrated electromagnetic
    energy or atomic or subatomic particles. ” (GL6) “Examples include lasers,
    electro-optical (EO), infrared (IR), and radio frequency (RF) weapons such
    as high-power microwave (HPM) or those employing an EMP.  (I-4)  Now it’s
    getting serious. Additionally, Joint Publication 3-13-1 also speaks to
    unintended consequences of EW:  “Unintended Consequences. EW planners must
    coordinate EW efforts … to minimize unintended consequences, collateral
    damage, and collateral effects. Friendly EA could potentially deny
    essential services to a local population that, in turn, could result in
    loss of life and/or political ramifications.”  (III-5)

    The Environmental Assessment, which only deals with the ground operations
    (the emitters), is addressing just a part of the impact and is totally
    silent on what may be the bigger concern, which is impact caused by the
    aircraft, ships and submarines engaging in EW training, and particularly
    electronic attack training.

    *What types of electronic attack will be practiced, and what are the
    potential impacts, intended or otherwise, on the local population and the
    environment?*

    *How can a Special Use Permit include the use of Electronic Attack weapons
    if they weren’t even discussed in the Environmental Assessment? *

    *Part 8*

    *Conclusion*

    The U.S. Navy is demonstrably unable to perceive or assess impacts in our
    forests, and is evidently unwilling to assess or disclose impacts to
    humans, wildlife and habitats from a variety of sources that concern the
    public. Because none of these direct, indirect and cumulative impacts have
    been analyzed, and because there have been so many violations of NEPA
    procedure, and because case law has shown again and again that one agency
    cannot rely exclusively on the data from another agency, this Special Use
    Permit should not be issued. For the above reasons, the Navy’s self-serving
    Environmental Assessment should be withdrawn and an honest, independent
    assessment of impacts should be made by the Forest Service, in a valid
    Environmental Impact Statement that places no applicant’s priority above
    the interests of the public, and that allows the public to have a say in
    the management of its public lands.

    It is ironic in the extreme that the Navy forces other agencies to consider
    vast amounts of area when evaluating impacts, such as to endangered species
    in the entire northwestern region of Washington, or on a training range
    that stretches from California to Alaska, yet it forces public commenters
    to restrict themselves to one item on their menu of impacts when foisting a
    program of such potentially immense consequence upon the public.

    As of December 2014, the Navy will also be expanding its sonar and
    explosive activity (http://tinyurl.com/PDN-Sonobuoy2) into waters off
    Indian Island near Port Townsend, in the Strait of Juan De Fuca, and in the
    2,408 square mile Olympic Coast Marine Sanctuary, where the Navy says it is
    exempt from prohibitions. It has, however, said that bombing exercises will
    take place outside the Sanctuary. At the same time, the Navy is developing
    plans for two Carrier Strike Groups to train in the Gulf of Alaska just
    south of Prince William Sound and east of Kodiak Island, using new
    extremely loud weapons systems and sinking two ships per year, in exercises
    that the Navy admits will kill or injure 182,000 whales, dolphins,
    porpoises, sea lions, seals, sea otters and other marine mammals in one
    five-year period. This is less than the original prediction of 425,000
    marine mammals, but still so astonishing it makes one wonder what parts of
    our biologically rich coasts will not become war zones with high casualty
    counts, if the Navy gets its way.

    s/  Karen Sullivan, November 14, 2014


  • Social Phenomena?

    Social Phenomena?

    HELLO CONGRESS ANYBODY HOME?

    STATE LEGISLATORS? COMMISSIONERS? COUNCILMEN? SHERIFFS?

    SOCIAL PHENOMENA by definition, are considered as including all behavior which influences or is influenced by organisms SUFFICIENTLY ALIVE TO RESPOND TO ONE ANOTHER.

    ——————————————————

     PHENOMENA by definition

     A fact, occurrence, or circumstance observed or observable

     something that is impressive or extraordinary.

    A REMARKABLE OR EXCEPTIONAL PERSON

    ——————————————————————–

    TO THOSE OF YOU NOT FAMILIAR WITH JOE ARPAIO..

    HE IS THE MARICOPA ARIZONA COUNTY SHERIFF. 

    I HAVE LONG WONDERED WHEN THE REST OF THE COUNTRY WOULD TAKE A LOOK AT THE WAY HE RUNS THE JAIL SYSTEM AND COPY SOME OF HIS IDEAS.

    ————————————————————-

    SHERIFF JOE IS AT IT AGAIN !

    You may remember Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Arizona , who
    painted the jail cells pink and made the inmates wear pink prison garb.
    Well………

    SHERIFF JOE IS AT IT AGAIN!

    Oh, there’s MUCH more to know about Sheriff Joe !

     ———————————————————————–
    Maricopa County was spending approx. $18 million dollars a year on stray animals, like
    cats and dogs. Sheriff Joe offered to take the department over, and the County supervisors said okay.

    The animal shelters are now all staffed and operated by prisoners. They feed and
    care for the strays. Every animal in his care is taken out and walked twice daily. He now has prisoners who are experts in animal nutrition and behavior. They give great classes for anyone who’d like to adopt an animal. He has literally taken stray dogs off the street, given them to the care of prisoners, and had them place in dog shows.
    THE BEST PART?

    His budget for the entire department is now under $3 million. Teresa and I adopted a
    Weimaraner from a Maricopa County shelter two years ago. He was neutered and current on all shots, in great health, and even had a microchip inserted the day we got him. Cost us $78.

    The prisoners get the benefit of about $0.28 an hour for working, but most would work
    for free, just to be out of their cells for the day. Most of his budget is for utilities,
    building maintenance, etc. He pays the prisoners out of the fees collected for adopted animals.

    I HAVE LONG WONDERED WHEN THE REST OF THE COUNTRY WOULD TAKE A LOOK AT THE WAY HE RUNS THE JAIL SYSTEM AND COPY SOME OF HIS IDEAS.

      Hehas a huge farm, donated to the county years ago, where inmates can work, and they grow most of their own fresh vegetables and food, doing all the work and harvesting by hand.

    He has a pretty good sized hog farm, which provides meat and fertilizer. It fertilizes the Christmas tree nursery, where prisoners work, and you can buy a living Christmas tree for $6 – $8 for the holidays and plant it later. We have six trees in our yard from the prison.

     

    YUP, HE WAS RE-ELECTED LAST YEAR WITH 83% OF THE VOTE.
    Now he’s in trouble with the ACLU again. He painted all his buses and vehicles with a mural that has a special hotline phone number painted on it, where you can call and report suspected illegal aliens. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement wasn’t doing enough in his eyes, so he had 40 deputies trained specifically for enforcing immigration laws, started up his hotline, and bought 4 new buses just for hauling folks back to the border.

    HE’S KIND OF A ‘GIT-R-DUN’ KIND OF SHERIFF.

    TO THOSE OF YOU NOT FAMILIAR WITH JOE ARPAIO..

    HE IS THE MARICOPA ARIZONA COUNTY SHERIFF AND HE KEEPS

    GETTING ELECTED OVER AND OVER.
    THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY:

    Sheriff Joe Arpaio (in Arizona ) who created the ‘ Tent City Jail’
    ** He has jail meals down to 40 cents a serving and charges the inmates for them.

    ** He stopped smoking and porno magazines in the jail.

    ** Took away their weights.

    ** Cut off all but ‘G’ movies.

    ** He started chain gangs so the inmates could do free work on
    county and city projects.

    ** Then he started chain gangs for women so he wouldn’t get sued
    for discrimination.

    ** He took away cable TV until he found out there was a federal
    court order that required cable TV for jails, so he hooked up the cable TV
    again…..BUT only let in the Disney channel and the Weather channel.

    ** When asked why the weather channel, he replied, “So they will know how hot it’s
    gonna be while they are working on my chain gangs.”

    ** He cut off coffee since it has zero nutritional value.

    ** When the inmates complained, he told them, “This isn’t
    The Ritz/Carlton…… If you don’t like it, don’t come back.”

    More On The Arizona Sheriff:

    With temperatures being even hotter than usual in Phoenix (116 degrees just set a new record), the Associated Press reports: About 2,000 inmates living in a barbed-wire-surrounded tent encampment at the Maricopa County jail have been given permission to strip down to their government-issued pink boxer shorts.
    On Wednesday, hundreds of men wearing boxers were either curled up on their bunk beds or chatted in the tents, which reached 138 degrees inside the week before. Many were also swathed in wet, pink towels as sweat collected on their chests and dripped down to their PINK SOCKS.  “It feels like we are in a furnace,” said James Zanzot, an inmate who has lived in the TENTS for 1 year. “It’s inhumane.”

    Joe Arpaio, the tough-guy sheriff who created the tent city and long ago started making his prisoners wear pink and eat bologna sandwiches, is not one bit sympathetic.
    He said Wednesday that he told all of the inmates, “It’s 120 degrees in Iraq and our
    soldiers are living in tents too, and they have to wear full battle gear, but they didn’t commit any crimes, so shut your mouths!”

    Way to go, Sheriff !

    Maybe if all prisons were like this one there would be a lot less crime and/or repeat offenders. Criminals should be punished for their crimes – not live in luxury until it’s time for their parole, only to go out and commit another crime so they can get back in to live on taxpayers’ money and enjoy things taxpayers can’t afford to have for themselves.

    —————————————————————————————-

    bottom line…

    SOCIAL PHENOMENA are considered as including all behavior which influences or is influenced by organisms SUFFICIENTLY ALIVE TO RESPOND TO ONE ANOTHER.

     PHENOMENA

     A fact, occurrence, or circumstance observed or observable

     something that is impressive or extraordinary.

    A REMARKABLE OR EXCEPTIONAL PERSON

    —————————————————————

    Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office

    www.mcso.org/

    Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office

    Welcome to the site of Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. … About Sheriff Joe · Career Opportunities · Deputy Sheriff · Detention Officer · POSSE · Reserve Deputy …

    http://www.mcso.org/About/Sheriff.aspx

    About Sheriff Joe Arpaio

    You probably know him as “America’s Toughest Sheriff,” a name given to him years ago by the media. It’s a name he certainly has earned as head of the nation’s third largest Sheriff’s Office which employs over 3400 people. But even before he became Sheriff in 1993, Joe Arpaio was one tough lawman. After serving in the U.S. Army from 1950 to 1953, and as a Washington, D.C., and Las Vegas, NV, police officer for almost five years, Arpaio went on to build a federal law enforcement career and a reputation for fighting crime and drug trafficking around the world.

    He began his career as a federal narcotics agent, establishing a stellar record in infiltrating drug organizations from Turkey to the Middle East to Mexico, Central, and South America to cities around the U.S. His expertise and success led him to top management positions around the world with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). He concluded his remarkable federal career as head of the DEA for Arizona.

    In 1992, Arpaio successfully campaigned to become the Sheriff of Maricopa County. Since then he has been reelected to an unprecedented six 4-year terms. During his tenure as Sheriff of Maricopa County, Arpaio has consistently earned high public approval ratings.

    With over five decades experience in law enforcement, Arpaio knows what the public wants, “The public is my boss,” he says, “so I serve the public.” He has served them well by establishing several unique programs.

    Arpaio has between 7500 – 10,000 inmates in his jail system. In August, 1993, he started the nation’s largest Tent City for convicted inmates. Two thousand convicted men and women serve their sentences in a canvas incarceration compound. It is a remarkable success story that has attracted the attention of government officials, presidential candidates, and media worldwide.

    Of equal success and notoriety are his chain gangs, which contribute thousands of dollars of free labor to the community. The male chain gang, and the world’s first-ever female and juvenile chain gangs, clean streets, paint over graffiti, and bury the indigent in the county cemetery.

    Also impressive are the Sheriff’s get tough policies. For example, he banned smoking, coffee, movies, pornographic magazines, and unrestricted TV in all jails. He has the cheapest meals in the U.S. too. The average meal costs between 15 and 40 cents, and inmates are fed only twice daily, to cut the labor costs of meal delivery. He even stopped serving them salt and pepper to save tax payers $20,000 a year.

     

    Another program Arpaio is very well known for is the pink underwear he makes all inmates wear. Years ago, when the Sheriff learned that inmates were stealing jailhouse white boxers, Arpaio had all inmate underwear dyed pink for better inventory control. The same is true for the Sheriff’s handcuffs. When they started disappearing, he ordered pink handcuffs as a replacement.

     

    Arpaio has started another controversial program on the website WWW.MCSO.org. Mugshots of all those arrested (about 300 per day) are posted on the Sheriff’s website as they are booked and processed into jail. Just under a million hits daily come into the website, making it one of the most visible law enforcement sites on the internet.

    In addition to these tough measures, the Sheriff has launched rehabilitative programs like “Hard Knocks High,” the only accredited high school under a Sheriff in an American jail, and ALPHA, an anti-substance-abuse program that has greatly reduced recidivism.

    As chief law enforcement officer for the county, Arpaio continues to reduce crime with hard-hitting enforcement methods. His deputies and detectives have solved several high-profile murder cases, including numerous child murders. The posse, whose ranks have increased to 3,000 members under Arpaio, is the nation’s largest volunteer posse. Posse men and women help in search and rescue and other traditional police work as well as in special operations like rounding up deadbeat parents, fighting prostitution, patrolling malls during holidays, and investigating animal cruelty complaints. The posse’s contributions are invaluable and essentially free to taxpayers.

    No wonder Sheriff Arpaio has been profiled in over 4500 U.S. and foreign newspapers, magazines, and TV news programs. His leadership and the excellent work of his staff have catapulted the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office into the ranks of elite law enforcement agencies.

    On a personal note, Sheriff Arpaio and his wife Ava have been married for over 56 years and have two children, both residing in the Phoenix area. The Arpaios have four grandchildren.

     

    Arpaio looks forward to many more years as Sheriff of Maricopa County.

    ——————————————————————————————-

    “Many a true word is spoken in jest” and “Some truths, too painful or too likely to provoke, can be spoken only when the listener has been disarmed by laughter”

    ——————————————————————————-

    January 24, 2009 Below is a report about sheriff Joe that has been circulating in emails for a year or more now but I think many readers here will enjoy reading it. Snopes has confirmed it as factually accurate, though you could almost hear the teeth grinding as they did so. They have a particular devotion to poking holes in anything that encourages conservatism

    http://jonjayray.wordpress.com/2009/01/24/sheriff-joe-is-at-it-again/

     

     


  • International Wars on Electronic Warfare?

    International War on Electronic Warfare?

    As a Canadian (she said, he said) “That was unneighborly”   I object!!

    Has the Canadian government been informed about this exercise?

    Dear Members of the Canadian Parliament… I live in Victoria… living in Saanich British Columbia…. As a resident of West Vancouver, BC, Canada…. We write to express our extreme disagreement……

    Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental …

    citizensforsafetechnology.org/Pacific-Northwest-ElectronicWarfare-Ran…

    Oct 8, 2014 – Dear Members of the Canadian Parliament, The US Navy plans to do testing of powerful RF devices along the shores of northern Olympic …

    ————————————————————————————–

    Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA)

    Excellent Letters written re US Navy testing of in Pacific Northwest

    Below are just some of the excellent letters written today that some of you might find useful in writing your own. Please, take a few minutes and write by the new deadline of Friday, October 31.  If you do so, then there will be the opportunity to have further input in the future.

    Subject: Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA)

    To: comments-pacificnorthwest-olympic-pacific@fs.fed.us

    We are a family of six living in Saanich, British Columbia. We write to express our extreme disagreement with the US Navy’s intention to test RF devices along the shores of the northern Olympic Peninsula.

    Both U.S. residents and residents of Canada, not to mention wildlife in an ecologically sensitive area, will be exposed to high frequencies and high levels of radiation. There is absolutely no evidence that such testing is safe for humans, wildlife, or important plant ecosystems. This is an an enormous and foolhardy risk. It brings to mind the nuclear testing conducted in the southwest United States that contaminated much of the United States with radioactive fallout for many years.

    The dangers of EMF radiation are many and real. The prestigious and respected American Academy of Environmental Medicine has made this an area of concern, and recently gave their highest award to Dr. Martin Pall of Washington State University for his research in this area. Dr. Pall has explored how EMFs act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels, and how EMF exposures can cause physiological effects including cancer, oxidative stress and EHS. In addition many physicians are discovering that their patients are experiencing difficulties because of EMF exposure, and Women’s College Hospital in Toronto has recently established a program to educate doctors about this threat, which some public health professionals call the greatest challenge to human health in the twenty-first century.

    Our family does not give our permission for the US Navy to subject our children to this serious health threat. Both the United States and Canada should look to other countries whose standards regarding EMF exposures are much more demanding, and whose forward thinking should lead the way on this issue. We insist that the residents of this area be considered, and that the US Navy be prevented from such testing.

    Forwarded to : Popham.MLA, Lana ; john.horgan.mla@leg.bc.ca; premier@gov.bc.ca; elizabeth.may@greenparty.ca; leader@greenparty.bc.ca; Randall.Garrison@parl.gc.ca; editor@thetyee.ca; Edward Hill ; contact@straight.com

    ____________________________

    To each BC MP:

    Dear Members of the Canadian Parliament,

    The US Navy plans to do testing of powerful RF devices along the shores of northern Olympic Peninsula (Clallum county faces Victoria and BC). The frequencies are high, 4-8 GHz, and signals using these frequencies travel great distances. We very likely will be exposed to high levels of radiation that the military will be testing.

    Comments are being accepted from the public at comments-pacificnorthwest-olympic-pacific@fs.fed.us until Oct. 10. Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA) must be on the subject line.

    The Navy is saying there is no evidence of harm to animals or humans. Independent scientific evidence proves this statement to be incorrect. Inadvertently, but without doubt, the US Navy will be experimenting on Canadians, on our families and on our wildlife.

    Has the Canadian government been informed about this exercise? If so, what was the reaction? If not, there should be a strong objection to such an exercise from taking place in an area where Canadians will be exposed. There is no way to limit exposure to such emissions which have been shown to have dangerous effects, especially on children and fetuses, those with compromised immune systems, and the elderly.

    This must be stopped. This trespass into our environment must not be allowed. I implore you to ask your leaders to contact the US government and demand that our sovereignty and safety be respected.

    Sincerely,

    Sharon Noble

    ______________________

    I am writing in utmost concern for your intention to permit the Olympic National Forest to be used as an electronic warfare testing ground by the US Navy. If passed, this decision will undoubtedly cause irreversible harm to the plants, birds, animals, ecosystems, and humans directly in, and in areas within a several hundred-mile radius of this site.

    Studies conducted by world-class, non-industry-funded scientists show there is NO SAFE level of radiation, and that radiation from all sources is cumulative. Furthermore, a peer-reviewed study published May 7, 2014 in Nature, International Weekly Journal of Science proves the negative effect of EMF on migratory birds. ” So far, no putative effect of anthropogenic electromagnetic noise at intensities below the guidelines adopted by the World Health Organization 1, 2 has withstood the test of independent replication under truly blinded experimental conditions. No effect has therefore been widely accepted as scientifically proven.  Here we show that migratory birds are unable to use their magnetic compass in the presence of urban electromagnetic noise. These fully double-blinded tests document a reproducible effect of anthropogenic electromagnetic noise on the behaviour of an intact vertebrate.”

    In regards to your comment that “There are no conclusive direct hazards to human tissue as a result of electromagnetic radiation, last August the Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine published a paper by Washington State University Professor Emeritus of biochemistry Martin Pall, which documents how EMF affects the flow of voltage-gated calcium channels in our cells. Pall links this change in cellular activity to a plethora of physical ailments. Basing his conclusions on 24 studies, he has this to say about short high-intensity pulses of microwave radiation: ” We know from the nanosecond pulse studies[that these pulses] can be very damaging and act via VGCC activation, with activation continuing long after the pulse has ceased (7). It has been known for over 30 years that short microwave pulses can cause massive cellular damage (57).” EMF has been recognized as a potential carcinogen by the WHO in 2011 (alongside lead and DDT), and scientifically linked to autism (which is up by 33%), skyrocketing ADHD, the disappearing honeybee, and more. Read the literature, and it becomes clear that the potentially harmful effects of EMF exposure are much greater than the thermal (heating) risks current exposure standards attribute to it. In 2011, the Council of Europe (47 countries, 800-million people) urged all of its member nations to “reconsider” their relationship with ICNIRP (International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) whose radiation Exposure Limits are almost universally adopted and, instead, observe the limits recommended in the BioInitiative 2007 Report. This report, if adopted, would require Canada and the USA to reduce their radiation Exposure Limits 10,000 times. In section 7 (Technological progress and economic growth at the expense of environment and health protection ) subsection 29 of their 2011 parliamentary report on the potential danger of EMF, the Council of Europe states:

    “…it is most curious, to say the least, that the applicable official threshold values for limiting the health impact of extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields and high frequency waves were drawn up and proposed to international political institutions (WHO, European Commission, governments) by the ICNIRP, an NGO whose origin and structure are none too clear and which is furthermore suspected of having rather close links with the industries whose expansion is shaped by recommendations for maximum threshold values for the different frequencies of electromagnetic fields.”

    Lastly, neither Lloyds of London nor Swiss Re Insurance will insure against health-related claims attributed to devices emitting non-thermal microwave radiation.

    In light of all of the above, I sincerely hope that reason and prudence will prevail, that you do not permit the testing of these weapons to proceed, but keep the Olympic National Forest as a pristine refuge, a haven for wildlife and for future generations, a place that promotes not destruction and illness, but health, balance, and well being, _______________________________________________________________________

    Dear Mr. Greg Wahl,

    See below my concerns with the future testing of weapons and RF exposure. Please keep me informed of any and all decisions made in this regard and please ensure that my concerns are included in the decision making, as it impacts my life directly. I appreciate your time and effort in ensuring that people’s quality life is protected at all times, never at the expansion of technology or security.

    Sent: October 8, 2014 9:02 PM

    To: comments-pacificnorthwest-olympic-pacific@fs.fed.us
    Subject: Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA)

    Importance: High

    My name is XXX , I live in Victoria and suffer the daily effect of RF radiation emanating from cell phone, WIFI, cell tower and every devices like microwave etc… and computer in my work place. No one can convince those suffering from these effects that they don’t exist, cause we know the facts and we know they exist. RF radiation is a challenge on our health as we experience them daily. I’ve acquired an RF device to help protect me by making adequate adjustment to my home as to prevent further damage while resting at home. There is a time when as a customer we need to out-way, speed/efficiency against our quality of health and life.

    I do not support anyone bringing danger to my close environment, myself and family, which RF is a danger. WE have a right to protect ourselves. These RF effects are proven scientifically to cause cancer; and I personally don’t need anyone to prove or convince me otherwise, since I experience lots of side effect at first hand, such as the effect of headaches, nausea, sleep deprivation, ringing in the ear, racy heart, chest pressure, sneezing/allergies, my vision having drop way too quickly as they increased Wi-Fi service in my workplace and feeling completely helpless to protect myself, as it’s costing me a fortune in compensating to protect my health and shielding myself from the RF. Meanwhile no one listens, yet those same individuals bringing this new technology are starting to show the same signs I describe but no one bothers to connect the dots, as to work together in stopping this dreadful expenditure for profit and profit only and full harm to your health and quality of life.

    I ask that you reconsider this testing and please do not bring in anymore radiation to our home and environment. All this technology and yet we have less and less freedom and quality of life, the only one seeming to benefit is big business for profits. What’s the use of looking after our health if these test are going to continue destroying us. Contradictory in term, and costly to our Healthcare. I work harder than I ever did when I was younger, and no matter how healthy I try to maintain, there isn’t a day when I’m not having to fight to protect myself not only against RF but against the ignorance perpetuated in our population by our government agency by not providing the truth to the populace and keeping our world inform and safe. Unless you’re planning on killing us, then please take those testing somewhere safe and controlled so that our environment or self aren’t affected. We’ve been working real hard at cultivating bees back at a very slow pace. Everything is linked together. Any damage caused has ripple effect to the masses. Those intelligent enough to understand that, and who are in a role of authority need to protect the planet, and certainly not test to see how far they can go and learn from those testing’s. There has been enough research done already and sufficient proofs have been provided and yet ignored by convenience by those in authority and paid to protect those who pay their services. Who decide who has the authority. Scientists are scientists and too many have spoken and been ignored and continue to be ignored. There is no need for more testing. What more do we need in this world to live happy and peaceful. We don’t need more scientist to do what has been already done and proven and ignored. You do not do research until it fits your bill, you do research to find what action need be taken as to maintain life and quality of life. Refuse to do military or otherwise testing in regard to RF as the risk is already too much. Time to listen and pay attention and protect the planet and every living cellular being on it. I look forward to hear that this project is canceled and look forward to your confirmation of such in support to life in general.

    Thank you for hearing me out and please don’t allow the testing to take place, for everyone’s best interest.

    Best regards,

    ___________________________

    To: ‘comments-pacificnorthwest-olympic-pacific@fs.fed.us
    Cc: ‘gtwahl@fs.fed.us
    Subject: FW: Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA)

    Importance: High

    From: edgar murdock (name left at request of author)

    To: comments-pacificnorthwest-olympic-pacific@fs.fed.us
    Cc: thomas.mulcair@parl.gc.ca ; greg.kyllo.mla@leg.bc.ca ; john.horgan.mla@leg.bc.ca ; una@citizensforsafetechnology.org ; director@stopsmartmetersbc.ca ; billvanderzalm1@gmail.com ; adrian.dix.mla@leg.bc.ca ; info@oipc.bc.ca ; patrick.wruck@bcuc.com

    Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 8:56 PM

    Subject: Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA)

    Dear Sir or Madam,

    As a Canadian, but more importantly as a human being and one of millions of innocent victims of whatever protocol the world’s dominant governments & corporations wish to force on the global population, I take great umbrage at the suggestion that this initiative by the US Navy will have no impact on humans. The information offered also points out that the impact to small animals is unknown at this time. There is no mention of the impact on avian or marine wildlife or that of insects, beneficial or otherwise.

    The impact on humans is quite well-known. This denial, in the light of a mountain of evidence to the contrary by respected, independent medical personnel and research scientists world-wide with absolutely nothing to gain career-wise or financially, is a downright abrogation of responsibility by the American military and its cohorts.

    There is world-wide concern that the biologic effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic low-frequency radiation such as wi-fi and microwave cellular radiation and that emitted by the so-called smart meter and smart grid protocols, is cumulative and considered to be carcinogenic by the WHO and many other health organizations, although not recognized as such by the ridiculously inadequate standards set by Health Canada and the United States FCC, EPA and FDA agencies.

    The politicians, military personnel and corporate entities who, for whatever iniquitous reasons, are attempting to apply Guinea pig status to the population of all living creatures in this geographical quadrant and to use the Pacific Northwest habitat as a testing ground for EMF warfare is an unconscionable, egregious and reprehensible act of aggression to the Nth degree. My mind boggles and my entire psyche reels at the thought.

    MK-ULTRA and the CIA’s Project Pandora and other such nefarious programs by virtue of the Freedom of Information Act are well-known efforts of the US Military to control mankind and it seems to me that this Environmental Assessment is another step in the directed energy experiment designed to bring ordinary people to their knees.

    Please, please when coming to a decision in this matter consider the humanitarian issues at stake here. Apply the Precautionary Principle diligently and with respect to the unwary citizens of both the United States and Canada and remember that accountability goes with the position and if the results are adverse and pernicious to any degree, those promoting the program must all also bear the guilt of the consequences.

    Respectfully submitted,
    _________________________

    Sent: October 8, 2014 10:17 PM
    To: comments-pacificnorthwest-olympic-pacific@fs.fed.us
    Subject: Weapons testing off the Olympic Peninsula

    I object!! Not only does RF destroy marine life, it destroys all life. I am already electrosensitive and don’t need or want any more electromagnetic pollution affecting my body. The USAF have known since WW2 that this stuff is deadly; the Russians proved it by irradiating the US embassy in Moscow, remember? What more do you need to know?

    Stop the psychopathic behaviour before you kill the entire planet.

    __________________________

    Sent: October 8, 2014 9:21 PM
    To: comments-pacificnorthwest-olympic-pacific@fs.fed.us
    Cc: Jerry Flynn; ralph.sultan.mla@leg.bc.ca; weston.J@parl.gc.ca

    Subject: Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA)

    Ladies and gentlemen;

    As a resident of West Vancouver, BC, Canada I am alarmed at the proposed RF tests by the US military on the Olympic Peninsula.

    I have a medically diagnosed condition of electro hyper sensitivity to all electromagnetic radiation, even at very low frequencies, well within what Canada and the US claim to be harmless.

    Today several thousand independent scientific studies call for lowering the allowable levels currently part of standards and emitted by cell towers, and other wireless technologies.

    While these tests may be facing away from American cities,you seem to forget that most of BC’s population lives precisely along the border. This is, as i understand it, the precise direction in which the radiation will be fired.

    Please remember: We are also human, and do not deserve to be showered with military strength radiation!

    I strongly object to having my family and myself treated as collateral damage to the US military experiments! Or should that be experimental rats?

    I hope the US Navy can find a different location for their tests, or better still abandon them altogether. Surely enough is known about the damaging effects of this technology after decades of testing it. . . .

    For your information I am enclosing a powerpoint presentation by Captain (ret.) Jerry Flynn of the Canadian navy, who worked for 22 years in radiological warfare.
    __________________________

    From: Dennis and Sharon Noble dsnoble@shaw.ca
    Sent: October 9, 2014 11:33 AM
    To: ‘comments-pacificnorthwest-olympic-pacific@fs.fed.us’
    Cc: ‘gtwahl@fs.fed.us‘; Christy Clark (premier@gov.bc.ca); John Horgan. Leader NDP; ‘Elizabeth.May@parl.gc.ca‘; randall.garrison@parl.gc.ca; Alex – Riding 1 Atamanenko

    Subject: Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA)

    Dear Sir or Madam,

    I am writing with regard to the US Navy plan to establish a training facility in Northern Washington dedicated to Electronic Warfare. According to information provided, the environmental assessment says:

    “The purpose is to train to deny the enemy “all possible frequencies of electromagnetic radiation (i.e. electromagnetic energy) for use in such applications as communication systems, navigation systems and defense related systems and components,” and

    “There are no conclusive direct hazards to human tissue as a result of electromagnetic radiation.

    “Links to DNA fragmentation, leukemia, and cancer due to intermittent exposure to extremely high levels of electromagnetic radiation are speculative; study data are inconsistent and insufficient at this time”. While it might be argued that there is no “conclusive” evidence of direct hazard to human health, there is a multitude of independent peer-reviewed studies and reports by world renowned scientists that show that prolonged exposure to even low levels of electromagnetic radiation (EMR) is extremely harmful, especially to those most vulnerable: fetuses and children, those with impaired immune systems, and the elderly, and wildlife.

    Even 60 years ago the US military knew the significant danger associated with EMR, recognizing its potential as a military weapon. It therefore is confusing that the US military today denies this science. Further it is of interest that in their documents they admit this radiation “may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect” living creatures.

    The public deserves to have access to information explaining the effects. An effect is either harmful or beneficial. Is the US Navy saying that exposure to manmade, unnatural radiation is beneficial?

    With regard to the transmitters which will be on the northern tip of the Olympic Peninsula, these transmitters plus the associated military equipment (satellites, planes, mobile transmitters) are within a few miles of a major Canadian city, Victoria, British Columbia. Were the Federal and Provincial governments advised of the plans to build a permanent training facility with weapons grade transmitters? Did they agree to allow military weapons to be pointed at a friendly country? Why was Northern Washington selected, rather than an inhospitable location like Death Valley?

    I wish to express my deepest concern about this plan, and ask to be granted standing in order to provide additional information during future considerations.

    Sincerely
    Sharon Noble

    Read On

    read more at, http://citizensforsafetechnology.org/Pacific-Northwest-Electronic-Warfare-Range-Environmental-Assessment-EA,95,4035

    —————————————————————————————————-

    I submit this as an additional objection and comment on the Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA)

    UNTIL SUCH TIME AS A  2014 UPDATED ASSESSMENT ON THE  BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF ELECTROMAGNETIC  RADIATION (RADIOWAVES AND MICROWAVES) IS DOCUMENTED AND FULL DISCLOSURE HAS BEEN MADE TO THE AMERICAN AND CANADIAN  PUBLIC.

     Pearl Rains Hewett


  • Are You Voting In 2014?

    Are You Voting In 2014?

    Was that a “YES?”

    NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE VOTING

    Ask yourself the following questions

    1. Have you fought, worked or agreed with the candidate on a local issue?

    2. Have you gone to candidates meet and greets? debates? etc.?

    3. Listened to candidates speak?

    4. Questioned the candidates during and after?

    5. Have you asked them about and discussed the problems in your area?

    6. Where their answers Credible? Specific? Generalized? Evasive? Misleading?

    7. Have you asked them how they can help?

    8. Are they local? Qualified? Experienced? Informed? Knowledgeable?

    9. Have you researched their voting record?

    10. Do you know the sources of their campaign funding?

    Too often the MOST SERIOUS problems we face in OUR County ARE NOT CREATED IN OUR COUNTY, OR by our County elected and appointed representatives.

    THE MOST SERIOUS PROBLEMS WE ALL FACE ARE CREATED BY FEDERAL ACTS  AND STATE MANDATED WAC AND RCW TRICKLE DOWN.

    ———————————————————————————-

    If it is of interest to you? Many of YOUR LOCAL issues and MINE may be similar.

    For my website I do  in-depth investigation and  research.

    I have done research from the top (WA DC) to the bottom (my county)

    I am voting in 2014 like American Lives depend on it.

    —————————————————————————

    THE WHO’S, WHAT’S, WHEN, WHERE AND WHY’S

    I have four campaign poster in my front yard.

    —————————————————————–

    MY  VOTE IS FOR SHEILA ROARK MILLER.

    For director of Clallam County Department of Community Development.

    Sheila Roark Miller appointed me to be on the Clallam County SMP Citizens Advisory Committee for the Shoreline Management Plan Update (she enabled me)

    WHY VOTE  FOR SHEILA ROARK MILLER?

    IN SPITE OF ECOLOGY’S 500 POUND GORILLA  TIPPING THE SCALE AND CREATING  THEIR  APPOINTED IMBALANCE OF STEWARDSHIP ON CLALLAM COUNTY’S SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PLAN (SMP) UPDATE AND THE DUNGENESS WATER RULE.

    She has been working for BALANCED STEWARDSHIP  on the SMP Update through the entire process with ECOLOGY. AND, on the mitigation for water rights in the Dungeness Water Rule area since the beginning.

    Sheila is absolutely the most qualified and experienced.

    ————————————————————————————-

    MY VOTE IS FOR JUDGE PORTER.

    A man that cares enough about the community, to go door to door and talk with us individually about our local concerns and solutions. we spent nearly a half an hour talking on my front porch. He know the names of our local kids and families that have suffered because of the drug problems in Clallam County.

    The problem of  “No funding” that contributes to the catch and release of criminals back into our neighborhood to become repeat offender. “No funding” would include the lack of compensation for the victims of crime.

    He established the pay or appear program and increased gross revenue for the county by $800,000 dollars a year. He provides incentive programs for GED.

    —————————————————————————————————————————

    MY VOTE IS FOR MARK NICHOLS FOR PROSECUTOR

    A man that cares enough about the community, to go door to door and talk with us individually about our local concerns and solutions. we spent nearly a half an hour talking on my front porch. He know the names of our local kids and families that have suffered because of the drug problems in Clallam County.

    The failure to resolve drug problems in the entire State of Washington have become an American family tragedy

    Mark is the most experienced and qualified for the HOME RULE CHARTER.

    He was involved in the last election of the freeholders eight years ago  and has been the legal advisor for the Clallam County Home Rule Charter fifteen elected freeholders. HOW IMPORTANT IS  IT? The Charter is a county constitution designed to give the control of county affairs to the people of the county rather than requiring legislation from Olympia. In addition to the election  of our public officials, specific powers reserved to the people are initiative, referendum, mini-initiative and recall

     Mark is also the Hearing Examiner for Clallam County.

    He really “HEARS” from a lot of people in our community!

    Incidentally, I did attend the meet and greet for Mark at the Sheriff Benedict’s home.

    The Sheriff Benedict, Deb Kelly and I talked about our local kids and families that have suffered because of the drug problems in Clallam County. We spoke of the failure to resolve drug problems in our county that have become local family tragedies.

    MARK NICHOLS has been endorsed by Sheriff Benedict.

    ———————————————————————————————

    MY VOTE IS FOR SHERIFF BENEDICT (even if he is running unopposed)

    ——————————————————————————————————-

    Last but certainly NOT LEAST

    MY VOTE IS FOR BILL PEACH

    COUNTY COMMISSIONER FOR DISTRICT 3, THE WEST END, WRIA 20.

    A qualified Local Representative like “Bill Peach” is LONG OVERDUE

    For as long as I have been involved with Clallam County issues, the West End, District 3,  has been treated like an ILLEGITIMATE  part of our county.

    ILLEGITIMATE  by definition  not authorized by the law; not in accordance with accepted standards or rules.

    ————————————————————————————-

    WHY DOES DISTRICT THREE THE WEST END NEED A LOCAL COMMISSIONER LIKE BILL PEACH?

    ————————————————————

    BECAUSE OF THE  EXCLUSION AND OMISSION OF DISTRICT 3, THE WEST END, WRIA 20. IN THE DUE PROCESS.

    —————————————————————-

    EXCLUSION AND/OR OMISSION from the SMP Update

    There were no private property owners representing WRIA 20 seated at the table for the Clallam County SMP Update Committee.

    WRIA 20 private property owners are PART OF CLALLAM COUNTY SMP UPDATE

    —————————————————————————————————————

    EXCLUSION AND/OR OMISSION THE DRONES

    Clallam County THE PDN reports to we the people (after the fact)

    Behind My Back | Drones Why the Secrecy?
    www.behindmyback.org/2013/06/22/drones-why-the-secrecy/‎
    Jun 22, 2013 – THE DRONES WERE NO SECRET TO THE LOCAL TRIBES. WHY WAS THERE ADVANCE OUT REACH to the INDIAN TRIBES?

    ——————————————————————————–

    EXCLUSION AND/OR OMISSION Broadband
    The Rest of The Story
    Posted on September 16, 2013 3:19 pm by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment
    Broadband Access and More
    Clallam County THE PDN reports to we the people (after the fact)

    ———————————————————————————–

    EXCLUSION AND/OR OMISSION OF WE THE PEOPLE

    Behind My Back | “Why Bother With Us?”
    www.behindmyback.org/2013/09/17/why-bother-with-us/‎
    Sep 16, 2013 – “WE THE PEOPLE” ARE JUST AMERICAN CITIZENS, VOTERS, TAXPAYERS,VESTED PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS, SMALL BUSINESS …

    —————————————————————————————————————

    AND THE LATEST EXCLUSION AND/ OR OMISSION OF WE THE PEOPLE

    IN THE  PUBLIC NOTIFICATION PROCESS

     THE ELECTRONIC WARFARE PROJECT FOR USFS OLYMPIC PENINSULA

    www.behindmyback.org  Sep 29, 2014 – Electronic Warfare PROJECT for USFS Olympic Peninsula land? EVASIVE AT THE VERY LEAST. IF THIS “PROJECT” IS NOT A COVER -UP?

    ——————————————————————————————————

    MY VOTE IS FOR BILL PEACH COUNTY COMMISSIONER FOR DISTRICT 3, THE WEST END.

    A qualified “LOCAL  CITIZEN” Representative COMMISSIONER like “Bill Peach” is LONG, LONG, LONG, OVERDUE …….

    BILL PEACH  has the courage to tell you what you may not want to hear: OUR COUNTY HAS A PROBLEM WITH UNEMPLOYMENT, HOMELESSNESS AND DRUGS. HE  RECOGNIZE THIS REALITY AND SUPPORT THE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO CHANGE IT, INCLUDING COUNTY GOVERNMENT.

     

     


  • Balance By God!

    “Many a true word is spoken in jest” and “Some truths, too painful or too likely to provoke, can be spoken only when the listener has been disarmed by laughter”

    BALANCE BY GOD

    Once upon a time, God was missing for six days.

    Eventually, Michael, the Archangel, found him, resting on the seventh day. He
    inquired of God. “Where have you been?”

    God sighed a deep sigh of satisfaction, and proudly pointed downwards
    through the clouds, “Look, Michael. Look what I’ve made.”

    Archangel Michael looked puzzled, and said, “What is it?”

    “It’s a planet,” replied God, “and I’ve put Life on it. I’m going to call it
    Earth and it’s going to be a great place of balance.”

    “Balance?” inquired Michael, still confused. God explained, pointing to
    different parts of earth. “For example, northern Europe will be a place of great
    opportunity and wealth, while southern Europe is going to be poor. Over there
    I’ve placed a continent of white people, and over there is a continent of black
    people.” “Balance in all things,” God continued pointing to different countries.

    “This one will be extremely hot, while this one will be very cold and covered in ice.”

    The Archangel, impressed by God’s work, then pointed to a land mass and
    said, “What’s that one?”

    Ah,” said God “That’s Washington State, the most glorious place on earth.
    There are beautiful streams, hills, and forests. The people from Washington
    State are going to be handsome, modest, intelligent and humorous, and they are
    going to be found traveling the world. They will be extremely sociable,
    hardworking, high achieving, and they will be known throughout the
    world as diplomats, and carriers of peace.”

    Michael gasped in wonder and admiration, but then proclaimed, “What about
    balance, God? You said there would be balance.”

    God smiled, “There is another Washington….. wait til you see the idiots I put there.”

    Author unknown

    ———————————————————————————————–

    The bottom line

    “Many a true word is spoken in jest” and “Some truths, too painful or too likely to provoke, can be spoken only when the listener has been disarmed by laughter”