+menu-


  • Category Archives Don’t Kill The Messenger
  • Feb 16, 2017 Pres. Trump’s “OYEZ” Moment

    “OYEZ,” The traditional call of the Town Crier, is an old French word that came to Britain with William the Conqueror almost 1,000 years ago.

    IT MEANS: LISTEN UP.

    Feb 16, 2017 President Trump had an “OYEZ” Moment at his first solo press conference.

    PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP TOLD THE PRESS TO LISTEN UP.

    And took his message straight to the people.

    ————————————————————————-

    1540-2017 Public Media Communication By Proclamation and the Post 

    1540 In England, TOWN CRIERS were the means of communication with the people of the town since many people could not read or write. PROCLAMATIONS, local bylaws, market days, adverts, were all proclaimed by a bellman or crier.

    Bells were not the only attention getting device – in the Netherlands, a gong was the instrument of choice for many, and in France a drum was used, or a hunting horn.

    In order to gain the attention of the crowd the crier would yell, “Hear ye

    IN 1540 The term “Posting A Notice” comes from the act of the town crier, who having read his message to the townspeople, would attach it to the door post of the local inn.

    Some newspapers took the name “The Post” for this reason.

    ———————————————————————

    Feb 16, 2017 President Trumps “OYEZ” Moment

    PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP TOLD THE PRESS TO LISTEN UP.

    And took his message straight to the people.

    The press has become so dishonest that if we don’t talk about it, we are doing a tremendous disservice to the American people. Tremendous disservice.

    We have to talk about it. We have to find out what’s going on because the press, honestly, is out of control.

    The level of dishonesty is out of control.

    I ran for president to represent the citizens of our country. I am here to change the broken system so it serves their families and their communities well.

    I am talking, and really talking, on this very entrenched power structure and what we’re doing is we’re talking about the power structure. We’re talking about its entrenchment.

    As a result, the media’s going through what they have to go through to oftentimes distort — not all the time — and some of the media’s fantastic, I have to say, honest and fantastic — but much of it is not.

    The distortion, and we’ll talk about it, you’ll be able to ask me questions about it.

    We’re not going to let it happen because

    I’m here, again, to take my message straight to the people.

    INDEED, AGAIN, AFTER DONALD J. TRUMP  TOOK  HIS MESSAGE STRAIGHT TO THE PEOPLE IN  “OYEZ”  RALLY’S  DURING HIS PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN.

    —————————————————————————-

    Feb 16, 2017 President Trumps “OYEZ” Moment

    PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP ADDRESSED  THE  PUBLIC MEDIA NEWS REPORTERS, THE NEWSPAPERS THAT POST, FAKE NEWS, FALSE REPORTING, PRESIDENT TRUMP IDENTIFIED THEM BY NAME AND TOOK MANY QUESTIONS, AND EXPLAINED AND EXPLAINED EXAMPLES OVER AND OVER AGAIN, SINCE MANY ATTENDEES  APPARENTLY CAN NOT READ, WRITE OR LISTEN UP!

    ——————————————————————

    DONALD J. TRUMP SAID, “LISTEN UP” AND GAINED THE ATTENTION AND VOTES  OF THE PEOPLE WITH PUBLIC PRONOUNCEMENTS  AT HIS POLITICALLY INCORRECT CAMPAIGN RALLIES,  AS A NON-POLITICIAN,  A  REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT OF LAW AND ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

    AMERICAN VOTERS WERE NOT AND ARE NOT STUPID.

    IN 1954 IT WAS WELL RECOGNIZED BY THOSE IN POSITIONS OF AUTHORITY THAT IT WAS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME, only a few decades, before

    IT WAS JUST A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE THE GENERAL PUBLIC WOULD BE ABLE TO GRASP AND UPSET THE CRADLE OF POWER

    for the very elements of the new silent weapon TECHNOLOGY WERE AS ACCESSIBLE FOR A PUBLIC UTOPIA AS THEY WERE FOR PROVIDING A PRIVATE UTOPIA.

    TRUMP’S AMERICAN VOTERS DID GRASP, AND DONALD J. TRUMPS ELECTION AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA REALLY, UPSET THE CRADLE OF POWER

    ———————————————-

    1540-2017  NOT MUCH CHANGE IN THE HIERARCHY OF
    PROCLAMATIONS, EXECUTIVE ORDERS etal,

    A proclamation (Lat. proclamare, to make public by announcement) is an official declaration.

    ROYAL PROCLAMATIONS OF THIS CHARACTER, MADE IN FURTHERANCE OF THE EXECUTIVE POWER OF THE CROWN, ARE BINDING ON THE SUBJECT,

    “WHERE THEY DO NOT EITHER CONTRADICT THE OLD LAWS OR TEND TO ESTABLISH NEW ONES, BUT ONLY CONFINE THE EXECUTION OF SUCH LAWS AS ARE ALREADY IN BEING IN SUCH MATTER AS THE SOVEREIGN SHALL JUDGE NECESSARY”

    In English law, a proclamation is a formal announcement (“royal proclamation”), made under the great seal, of some matter which the King in Council or Queen in Council desires to make known to his or her subjects: e.g., the declaration of war, or state of emergency, the statement of neutrality, the summoning or dissolution of Parliament,

     OR THE BRINGING INTO OPERATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SOME STATUTE THE ENFORCEMENT OF WHICH THE LEGISLATURE HAS LEFT TO THE DISCRETION OF THE KING IN THE ANNOUNCEMENT.

    —————————————————

    IN 1540  THE  TOWN CRIER, OR BELLMAN, WAS AN OFFICER OF THE COURT WHO MAKES PUBLIC PRONOUNCEMENTS AS REQUIRED BY THE COURT.

    TOWN CRIERS WERE PROTECTED BY LAW, AS THEY SOMETIMES BROUGHT BAD NEWS SUCH AS TAX INCREASES. ANYTHING DONE BY THE TOWN CRIER WAS DONE IN THE NAME OF THE RULING MONARCH

    AND HARMING A TOWN CRIER WAS CONSIDERED TO BE TREASON.[6]

    THE PHRASEdon’t shoot the messengerWAS A REAL COMMAND.[6]

    ———————————————————————-

    2017, PEOPLE TEND TO THINK OF THE TOWN CRIER AS AN AMIABLE GENT WHO AMBLED AROUND TOWN CHANTING “12 O’CLOCK AND ALL IS WELL.”

    THINK AGAIN….

    2017 IN THE  NEW AGE OF GLOBAL PUBLIC MEDIA TECHNOLOGY….

     ALL IS NOT WELL ( FOR WHOM THE BELL TOLLS?)

    THE GLOBAL PUBLIC MEDIA (TOWN CRIER) SOMETIMES BROUGHT BAD NEWS

    VIDEOS OF BEHEADINGS, DOCUMENTS, HOT MIKES, HACKING AND LYING, RIPPED ACROSS THE INTERNET, WIKILEAKED, TWITTER TWEETED, FACEBOOK AND THE POWER OF CYBERSPACE  EXPLODED.

    ————————————————————————–

    1540 THE TOWN CRIER SOMETIMES BROUGHT BAD NEWS

    Hmmm…  Domestic Tranquillity? Sound familiar?

    In 1715, a local man recorded that the ‘Belman at the Cross … READS PUBLICLY A PROCLAMATION IN THE MAYOR’S NAME, COMMANDING

    “ALL PERSONS IN THE CITY TO BE OF PEACEABLE AND CIVIL BEHAVIOUR”

     NOT TO WALK AROUND THE STREETS OR ROWS AT UNREASONABLE HOURS OF NIGHT’.

    ————————————————————–

    Hmmm… Environmental protection?

    IN GOSLAR, “GERMANY” , A CRIER WAS EMPLOYED TO REMIND THE LOCAL POPULACE NOT TO URINATE OR DEFECATE IN THE RIVER THE DAY BEFORE WATER WAS DRAWN FOR BREWING BEER.[1]

    IN 1607, ONE PUBLIC NOTICE READ BY GEORGE TUNNALL, THE BELLMAN, FORBADE TIPPING RUBBISH IN THE RIVER.

    —————————————————

    Hmmm…. BAD NEWS SALMON FISHING SEASON WAS ALSO CLOSED BY THE BELLMAN.[4] [5]

    ———————————————————————-

    1540, THE CRIER ALSO ESCORTED THE DESTITUTE TO THE workhouse, INSTALLED MINOR CRIMINALS IN THE stocks AND ADMINISTERED floggings. DURING PUBLIC hangings HE READ OUT WHY THE PERSON WAS BEING HANGED, AND HELPED TO CUT HIM OR HER DOWN

    The office of town crier persisted into the early 20th century in some places. At least as recently as 1904, Los Angeles and several adjacent towns had official town criers.[9]

    In the observance of Allhallowtide, “it was customary for criers dressed in black to parade the streets, ringing a bell of mournful sound and calling on all good Christians to remember the poor souls.”[2]

    ————————————————————-

    In 2008-2017 dressed in black to parade the streets?

    UNTIL …THE LIBERAL TOWN CRIERS, IN ORDER TO GAIN ATTENTION  AND SHOW SUPPORT FOR HILLARY AND OBAMA’S DEMOCRATS, SANDERS SOCIALISTS, PLUS OUTSIDE ANARCHIST CUSTOMARILY DRESSED IN BLACK,  BECAME CROWDS OF COP KILLING VIOLENT, RIOTING, LOOTING AND BURNING, DESTRUCTIVE MOBS.  IN ORDER TO GAIN ATTENTION THEY WOULD YELL “WHAT DO WE WANT” ….. “DEAD COPS”…. “WHEN DO WE WANT THEM?”

    ———————————————————————-

    EXTRA, EXTRA, READ ALL ABOUT IT….

    From the 1890’s – 2017 Public Media Communications etal., MOST NEWSPAPERS, didn’t and don’t  bother with the original posting of anything.  with the corruption of public media communication, the term yellow rag  , featuring articles, pictures, or other content that is sensational, especially morbidly or offensively so: yellow rags, yellow journalism; yellow press. dishonest in editorial comment and the presentation of news, especially in sacrificing truth for sensationalism.

    ————————————————————————

    Behind My Back | Just a Matter of Time and Money 1790-2016

    www.behindmyback.org/2016/04/28/just-a-matter-of-time-and-money-1790-2016/

    Apr 28, 2016 – JUST A MATTER OF TIME AND FOREIGN MONEY 1790-2016 1790 … www.behindmyback.org/2016/04/11/silent–weapons-for-a-quiet–war/.

    IT WAS JUST A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE THE GENERAL PUBLIC WOULD BE ABLE TO GRASP AND UPSET THE CRADLE OF POWER

    ————————————————————————————-
    The flow of information through the corporate-dominated media is very tightly controlled, and there are a lot of gatekeepers that make sure that

    THE “WRONG STORIES” DON’T GET PUT OUT TO THE PUBLIC. 

     AS A RESULT, MANY OF THE “BIG STORIES” THAT HAVE COME OUT IN RECENT YEARS WERE ORIGINALLY BROKEN BY THE ALTERNATIVE MEDIA.

    ————————————————————–

    Full Video: Watch President Trump’s First Solo Press Conference …

    www.nbcnews.com/video/full-video-watch-presidenttrump-s-first-s…

    Thu, Feb 16. Watch President Trump’s first press conference since entering the White House, where he …

    —————————————————————

    IT WAS JUST A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE THE GENERAL PUBLIC WOULD BE ABLE TO GRASP AND UPSET THE CRADLE OF POWER

    TRUMP’S AMERICAN VOTERS DID GRASP, AND DONALD J. TRUMPS ELECTION AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA REALLY, UPSET THE CRADLE OF POWER


  • Fetal Tissue Transplantation Research?

    Indeed it was LEGALIZED  by an Act of Congress in 1993

    Federal law since 1993 “The National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act” of 1993 103rd Congress (1993-1994) has allowed fetal tissue research. In addition, fetal tissue can be sold at a price that allows an organization to recoup the costs associated with it.

    GIVE CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE

    IF THIS CONGRESS HADN’T PASSED THE LAW

    Sponsor: Sen. Kennedy, Edward M. [D-MA] (Introduced 01/21/1993)

    Committees: Senate – Labor and HUMAN RESOURCES
    With (17) Democratic and (4) Republican Cosponsors (named below)

    … PLANNED PARENTHOOD WOULD NOT HAVE DONE IT

    ———————————————————————–

    I research, read the legalese mumbo jumbo, connect the dots, document, copy, paste and disseminate the good, the bad and the truth…
    ———————————————————————————–
    THE FEDERAL STATUTE AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY ON TRANSPLANTATION RESEARCH USING FETAL TISSUE

    Legitimization of Fetal Tissue Transplantation Research …

    A 32 page document (the good the bad and the truth)

    https://dspace.creighton.edu/…/28_34CreightonLRev895(2000-2001).pd…
    by JL Gonzalez – ‎2001 – ‎Cited by 11 – ‎Related articles

    Jul 12, 1974 – A. The Federal Statute and Legislative History ….. 899. B. State … CREIGHTON LAW REVIEW … Transplantation research using fetal tissue has the po- … See James F. Childress, Ethics, Public Pol- ….. 103-43,. Title 1, §§ 111-12, pt. 2, 107 Stat. 129, 129-33 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 289g-1 to 2 (1994). 28.

    ———————————————————————–
    snippet…
    Through appropriate government regulations a woman’s decision to abort can be effectively separated from the subsequent process of consensual FETAL DONATION and TRANSPLANTATION. Consequently, acknowledging that the Supreme Court has adjudged the woman’s decision to abort to be constitutionally protected,

    the lingering ethical queries encircling FETAL TISSUE TRANSPLANTATION should not be whether abortion itself is morally acceptable, but rather,

    WHETHER SUCH RESEARCH IS JUSTIFIABLE BECAUSE OF ITS OVERWHELMING CURATIVE POTENTIAL.

    THE ONLY REMAINING QUESTION WILL THEN BE NOT “WHETHER” FETAL TRANSPLANTATION RESEARCH SHOULD BE DONE AND REGULATED, BUT HOW.
    ———————————————————————————
    IN JUNE 2001, NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH (NIH) adopted the definition of “CLINICAL RESEARCH” as: (1) Patient-oriented research. RESEARCH CONDUCTED WITH HUMAN SUBJECTS (OR ON MATERIAL OF HUMAN ORIGIN SUCH AS TISSUES (FETAL TISSUE), SPECIMENS AND COGNITIVE PHENOMENA) for which an investigator (or colleague) directly interacts with human subjects.

    ———————————————————————
    WHO REGULATED, CONGRESS LEGISLATED AND HOW……..
    S.1 – National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act of 1993 103rd Congress (1993-1994)
    Law
    —————————————————————————

    DOCUMENTATION OF VOTING RECORD

    Sponsor: Sen. Kennedy, Edward M. [D-MA] (Introduced 01/21/1993)

    Committees: Senate – Labor and Human Resources

    This bill  Became Law
    Cosponsor Date Cosponsored
    Sen. Boxer, Barbara [D-CA]* 01/21/1993
    Sen. Wellstone, Paul D. [D-MN]* 01/21/1993
    Sen. Dodd, Christopher J. [D-CT]* 01/21/1993
    Sen. Lautenberg, Frank R. [D-NJ]* 01/21/1993
    Sen. Mikulski, Barbara A. [D-MD]* 01/21/1993
    Sen. Pell, Claiborne [D-RI]* 01/21/1993
    Sen. Simon, Paul [D-IL]* 01/21/1993
    Sen. Wofford, Harris [D-PA]* 01/21/1993
    Sen. Inouye, Daniel K. [D-HI]* 01/21/1993
    Sen. Sarbanes, Paul S. [D-MD]* 01/21/1993
    Sen. Moseley-Braun, Carol [D-IL]* 01/21/1993
    Sen. Leahy, Patrick J. [D-VT]* 01/21/1993
    Sen. Riegle, Donald W., Jr. [D-MI]* 01/21/1993
    Sen. Durenberger, Dave [R-MN]* 01/21/1993
    Sen. Metzenbaum, Howard M. [D-OH]* 01/21/1993
    Sen. Levin, Carl [D-MI] 01/26/1993
    Sen. Rockefeller, John D., IV [D-WV] 02/02/1993
    Sen. Harkin, Tom [D-IA] 02/02/1993
    Sen. Hatch, Orrin G. [R-UT] 02/02/1993
    Sen. Kassebaum, Nancy Landon [R-KS] 02/02/1993
    Sen. Kerry, John F. [D-MA] 05/20/1993
    —————————————————————————-
    CONGRESS PASSED THE LAW ALLOWING FETAL TISSUE RESEARCH
    ————————————————————————
    REMEMBERING THAT, In June 2001, National Institutes of Health (NIH)
    adopted the definition of “CLINICAL RESEARCH” as:
    (1) Patient-oriented research. Research conducted with human subjects (OR ON MATERIAL OF HUMAN ORIGIN SUCH AS TISSUES (FETAL TISSUE), SPECIMENS AND COGNITIVE PHENOMENA) for which an investigator (or colleague) directly interacts with human subjects.

    AND, THE STATUTE DEFINES “CLINICAL RESEARCH” TO INCLUDE “CLINICAL TRIALS”
    —————————————————————
    NIH Policy and Guidelines on The Inclusion of Women and Minorities
    as Subjects in CLINICAL RESEARCH – Amended, October, 2001

    NOTE: Additional information concerning the NIH Policy on Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in CLINICAL RESEARCH is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/women_min.htm.

    ————————————————
    SUMMARY: This notice updates the NIH policy on the inclusion of women and minorities as subjects in CLINICAL RESEARCH. It supercedes the 1994 Federal Register notice (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not94-100.html) and the August 2000 notice in the NIH Guide to Grants and Contracts (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-048.html).

    It incorporates the definition of CLINICAL RESEARCH as reported in the 1997 Report of the NIH Director’s Panel on CLINICAL RESEARCH.

    Also, this notice provides additional guidance on REPORTING analyses of sex/gender and racial/ethnic differences in intervention effects for NIH-defined Phase III “CLINICAL TRIALS”. The guidelines ensure that all NIH-funded CLINICAL RESEARCH will be carried out in a manner sufficient to elicit information about individuals of both sexes/genders and diverse racial and ethnic groups and, particularly in NIH-defined Phase III “CLINICAL TRIALS” to examine differential effects on such groups. Since a primary aim of research is to provide scientific evidence leading to a change in health policy or standard of care, it is imperative to determine whether the intervention or therapy being studied affects women or men or members of minority groups and their subpopulations differently.

    —————————————————————————-
    In June 2001, NIH adopted the definition of CLINICAL RESEARCH as: (1) Patient-oriented research. Research conducted with human subjects (or on material of HUMAN ORGANS SUCH AS TISSUES specimens and cognitive phenomena) for which an investigator (or colleague) directly interacts with human subjects. Excluded from this definition are in vitro studies that utilize human tissues that cannot be linked to a living individual. Patient-oriented research includes: (a) mechanisms of human disease, (b) therapeutic interventions, (c) clinical trials, and (d) development of new technologies; (2) Epidemiologic and behavioral studies; and (3) Outcomes research and health services research http://www.nih.gov/news/crp/97report/execsum.htm.

    EFFECTIVE DATE: This amended policy is effective immediately and applies to all grants and cooperative agreements currently active and to be awarded. Contract solicitations issued as of October 2001 must adhere to the amended policy.

    —————————————————————–
    I. LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND

    —————————————————–

    REMEMBERING THAT, In June 2001, National Institutes of Health (NIH)
    adopted the definition of “CLINICAL RESEARCH” as:
    (1) Patient-oriented research. Research conducted with human subjects (OR ON MATERIAL OF HUMAN ORIGIN SUCH AS TISSUES (FETAL TISSUE), SPECIMENS AND COGNITIVE PHENOMENA) for which an investigator (or colleague) directly interacts with human subjects.
    AND, THE STATUTE DEFINES “CLINICAL RESEARCH” TO INCLUDE “CLINICAL TRIALS”
    ———————————————————————————–
    THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH REVITALIZATION ACT OF 1993, PL 103-43, WAS SIGNED INTO LAW ON JUNE 10, 1993, directed the NIH to establish guidelines for inclusion of women and minorities in “CLINICAL RESEARCH”.
    The statute states that:
    In conducting or supporting CLINICAL RESEARCH. for the purposes of this title, the Director of NIH “SHALL”… ensure that (a) women are included as subjects in each project of such research; and (b) members of minority groups are included in such research. 492B(a)(1)
    The statute further directed the NIH to establish guidelines to specify:
    (a) the circumstances under which the inclusion of women and minorities as subjects in projects of CLINICAL RESEARCH. is inappropriate …;
    (b) the manner in which clinical trials are required to be designed and carried out; and
    (c) the operation of outreach programs, 492B(d)(1)
    THE STATUTE DEFINES “CLINICAL RESEARCH” TO INCLUDE “CLINICAL TRIALS” AND STATES THAT:
    In the case of any “CLINICAL TRIALS” in which women or members of minority groups will be included as subjects, the Director of NIH “SHALL”. ensure that the trial is designed and carried out in a manner sufficient to provide for valid analysis of whether the variables being studied in the trial affect women or members of minority groups, as the case may be, differently than other subjects in the trial. 492B(c)
    Specifically addressing the issue of minority groups, the statute states that:
    The term “minority group” includes subpopulations of minority groups. The Director of NIH“SHALL”. through the guidelines established…define the terms “minority group” and “subpopulation” for the purposes of the preceding sentence. 492B(g)(2)
    The statute speaks specifically to outreach and states that:
    The Director of NIH, in consultation with the Director of the Office of Research on Women’s Health and the Director of the Office of Research on Minority Health,
    “SHALL”. conduct or support outreach programs for the recruitment of women and members of minority groups as subjects in the projects of CLINICAL RESEARCH. 492B(a)(2)
    The statute includes a specific provision pertaining to the COST of CLINICAL RESEARCH and, in particular “CLINICAL TRIALS”.
    (A)(i) In the case of a clinical trial, the guidelines shall provide that the costs of such inclusion in the trial is (sic) not a permissible consideration in determining whether such inclusion is inappropriate. 492B(d)(2)
    (ii) In the case of other projects of CLINICAL RESEARCH, the guidelines shall provide that the costs of such inclusion in the project is (sic) not a permissible consideration in determining whether such inclusion is inappropriate unless the data regarding women or members of minority groups, respectively, that would be obtained in such project (in the event that such inclusion were required) have been or are being obtained through other means that provide data of comparable quality. 492B(d)(2)
    Exceptions to the requirement for inclusion of women and minorities are stated in the statute, as follows:
    The requirements established regarding women and members of minority groups shall not apply to the project of CLINICAL RESEARCH if the inclusion, as subjects in the project, of women and members of minority groups, respectively-
    (1) is inappropriate with respect to the health of the subjects;
    (2) is inappropriate with respect to the purpose of the research; or
    (3) is inappropriate under such other circumstances as the Director of NIH may designate. 492B(b)
    (B) In the case of a CLINICAL TRIAL, the guidelines may provide that such inclusion in the trial is not required if there is substantial scientific data demonstrating that there is no significant difference between-
    (i) the effects that the variables to be studied in the trial have on women or members of minority groups, respectively; and
    (ii) the effects that the variables have on the individuals who would serve as subjects in the trial in the event that such inclusion were not required. 492B(d)(2)
    II. POLICY
    A. Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in CLINICAL RESEARCH
    IT IS THE POLICY OF NIH THAT WOMEN AND MEMBERS OF MINORITY GROUPS AND THEIR SUBPOPULATIONS “MUST” BE INCLUDED IN ALL NIH-FUNDED “CLINICAL RESEARCH”,
    unless a clear and compelling rationale and justification establishes to the satisfaction of the relevant Institute/Center Director that inclusion is inappropriate with respect to the health of the subjects or the purpose of the research. Exclusion under other circumstances may be made by the Director, NIH, upon the recommendation of an Institute/Center Director based on a compelling rationale and justification. COST IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLE REASON FOR EXCLUSION except when the study would duplicate data from other sources. Women of childbearing potential should not be routinely excluded from participation in CLINICAL RESEARCH. This policy applies to research subjects of all ages in all NIH-supported CLINICAL RESEARCH studies.
    The inclusion of women and members of minority groups and their subpopulations must be addressed in developing a research design or contract proposal appropriate to the scientific objectives of the study/contract. The research plan/proposal should describe the composition of the proposed study population in terms of sex/gender and racial/ethnic group, and provide a rationale for selection of such subjects. Such a plan/proposal should contain a description of the proposed outreach programs for recruiting women and minorities as participants.
    B. NIH-defined Phase III Clinical Trials: Planning, Conducting, and Reporting of Analyses for Sex/Gender and Race/Ethnicity Differences.
    When an NIH-defined Phase III clinical trial is proposed, evidence must be reviewed to show whether or not clinically important sex/gender and race/ethnicity differences in the intervention effect are to be expected. This evidence may include, but is not limited to, data derived from prior animal studies, clinical observations, metabolic studies, genetic studies, pharmacology studies, and observational, natural history, epidemiology and other relevant studies.
    Investigators must consider the following when planning, conducting, analyzing, and reporting an NIH-Defined Phase III clinical trial. Based on prior studies, one of the three situations below will apply:
    1. Prior Studies Support the Existence of Significant Differences
    If the data from prior studies strongly support the existence of significant differences of clinical or public health importance in intervention effect based on sex/gender, racial/ethnic, and relevant subpopulation comparisons, the primary question(s) to be addressed by the proposed NIH-defined Phase III clinical trial and the design of that trial must specifically accommodate this. For example, if men and women are thought to respond differently to an intervention, then the Phase III clinical trial must be designed to answer two separate primary questions, one for men and the other for women, with adequate sample size for each.
    The Research Plan (for grant applications) or Proposal (for contract solicitations) must include a description of plans to conduct analyses to detect significant differences in intervention effect (see DEFINITIONS – Significant Difference) by sex/gender, racial/ethnic groups, and relevant subpopulations, if applicable. The final protocol(s) approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) must include these plans for analysis. The award will require that for each funded protocol, investigators must report in their annual Progress Report cumulative subject accrual and progress in conducting analyses for sex/gender and race/ethnicity differences. If final analyses of sex/gender and race/ethnicity are not available at the time of the Final Progress Report or Competing Continuation for the grant, a justification and plan ensuring completion and reporting of the analyses are required. If final analyses are required as part of the contract, these analyses must be included as part of the deliverables. These requirements will be cited in the terms and conditions of all awards for grants, cooperative agreements and contracts supporting NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials.
    Inclusion of the results of sex/gender, race/ethnicity and relevant subpopulations analyses is strongly encouraged in all publication submissions. If these analyses reveal no differences, a brief statement to that effect, indicating the groups and/or subgroups analyzed, will suffice.
    2. Prior Studies Support No Significant Differences
    If the data from prior studies strongly support no significant differences of clinical or public health importance in intervention effect based on sex/gender, racial/ethnic and/or relevant subpopulation comparisons, then sex/gender and race/ethnicity will not be required as subject selection criteria. However, the inclusion and analysis of sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic subgroups is still strongly encouraged.
    3. Prior Studies Neither Support nor Negate Significant Differences
    If the data from prior studies neither strongly support nor strongly negate the existence of significant differences of clinical or public health importance in intervention effect based on sex/gender, racial/ethnic, and relevant subpopulation comparisons, then the NIH-defined Phase III clinical trial will be required to include sufficient and appropriate entry of sex/gender and racial/ethnic participants, so that valid analysis of the intervention effects can be performed. However, the trial will not be required to provide high statistical power for these comparisons.
    The Research Plan (for grant applications) or Proposal (for contract solicitations) must include a description of plans to conduct valid analysis (see DEFINITIONS – Valid Analysis) by sex/gender, racial/ethnic groups, and relevant subpopulations, if applicable. The final protocol(s) approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) must include these plans for analysis. The award will require that for each funded protocol, investigators must report in their annual Progress Report cumulative subject accrual and progress in conducting analyses for sex/gender and race/ethnicity differences. If final analyses of sex/gender and race/ethnicity are not available at the time of the Final Progress Report or Competing Continuation for the grant, a justification and plan ensuring completion and reporting of the analyses are required. If final analyses are required as part of the contract, these analyses must be included as part of the deliverables. These requirements will be cited in the terms and conditions of all awards for grants, cooperative agreements and contracts supporting NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials.
    Inclusion of the results of sex/gender, race/ethnicity and relevant subpopulations analyses is strongly encouraged in all publication submissions. If these analyses reveal no differences, a brief statement to that effect, indicating the groups and/or subgroups analyzed, will suffice.
    For all three situations, cost is not an acceptable reason for exclusion of women and minorities from clinical trials.
    III. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
    While this policy applies to all applicants/offerors for NIH-SUPPORTED CLINICAL RESEARCH, certain individuals and groups have special roles and responsibilities with regard to its implementation.
    1. NIH Staff
    The NIH staff provide educational opportunities for the extramural and intramural communities concerning this policy; monitor its implementation during the development, review, award and conduct of research; and manage the NIH research portfolio to comply with the policy.
    2. Principal Investigators
    Principal investigators should assess the theoretical and/or scientific linkages between sex/gender, race/ethnicity, and their topic of study. Following this assessment, the principal investigator and the applicant/offer or institution will address the policy in each application and proposal, providing the required information on inclusion of women and minorities and their subpopulations in clinical research projects, and any required justifications for exceptions to the policy.
    For foreign awards and domestic awards with a foreign component, the NIH policy on inclusion of women and minority groups in research is the same as that for research conducted in the U.S. If there is scientific rationale for examining subpopulation group differences within the foreign population, investigators should consider designing their studies to accommodate these differences.
    Investigators and their staff(s) are urged to develop appropriate and culturally sensitive outreach programs and activities commensurate with the goals of the study or objectives of the contract. The objective should be to actively recruit and retain the most diverse study population consistent with the purposes of the research project. Indeed, the purpose should be to establish a relationship between the investigator(s) and staff(s) and populations and community(ies) of interest such that mutual benefit is derived for participants in the study.
    Investigator(s) should take precautionary measures to ensure that ethical issues are considered, such that there is minimal possibility of coercion or undue influence in the INCENTIVES OR REWARDS offered in recruiting into or retaining participants in studies.
    To assist investigators and potential study participants, NIH staff have prepared educational materials, including a notebook titled the, “NIH Outreach Notebook On the Inclusion of Women and Minorities in Biomedical and Behavioral Research.” The notebook as well as the Frequently Asked Questions document, are located at the following URL: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/women_min.htm
    3. Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)
    It is the responsibility of the IRBs to address the ethical issues as outlined in Section IV(2) for Principal Investigators. As the IRBs implement the regulation for the protection of human subjects as described in Title 45 CFR Part 46, “PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS”, http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.html they must also attend to the guidelines for the inclusion of women and minorities and their subpopulations in CLINICAL RESEARCH. They should take into account the Food and Drug Administration’s “Guidelines for the Study and Evaluation of Gender Differences in the Clinical Evaluation of Drugs,” Vol. 58 Federal Register 39406 http://www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/old036fn.pdf.
    —————————————————————————
    REMEMBERING THAT, In June 2001, National Institutes of Health (NIH)
    adopted the definition of “CLINICAL RESEARCH” as:
    (1) Patient-oriented research. Research conducted with human subjects (OR ON MATERIAL OF HUMAN ORIGIN SUCH AS TISSUES (FETAL TISSUE), SPECIMENS AND COGNITIVE PHENOMENA) for which an investigator (or colleague) directly interacts with human subjects.
    AND, THE STATUTE DEFINES “CLINICAL RESEARCH” TO INCLUDE “CLINICAL TRIALS”
    ————————————————————————–
    4. Peer Review Groups
    In conducting peer review for scientific and technical merit, appropriately constituted initial review groups (including study sections), technical evaluation groups, and intramural review panels are instructed, as follows:
    • to evaluate the proposed plan for the inclusion of minorities and both genders for appropriate representation or to evaluate the proposed justification when representation is limited or absent,
    • to evaluate the proposed exclusion of minorities and women on the basis that a requirement for inclusion is inappropriate with respect to the health of the subjects,
    • to evaluate the proposed exclusion of minorities and women on the basis that a requirement for inclusion is inappropriate with respect to the purpose of the research,
    • to determine whether the design of “CLINICAL TRIALS” is adequate to measure differences when warranted,
    • to evaluate the plans for valid analysis for NIH-defined Phase III “CLINICAL TRIALS”,
    • to evaluate the plans for recruitment/outreach for study participants, and
    • to include these criteria as part of the scientific assessment and evaluation.
    THE REVIEW INSTRUCTIONS FOR GRANTS ARE AVAILABLE ON LINE AT THE FOLLOWING URL: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/peer/hs_review_inst.pdf
    For contracts, the contracting officer will provide instructions for contract reviewers. Further information on instructions for contracts may be obtained at the following URL: http://oa.od.nih.gov/oamp/index.html.
    Or contact:
    National Institutes of Health
    Division of Acquisition Policy and Evaluation
    Office of Acquisition Management and Policy
    6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 6C01
    Phone: 301-496-6014
    Fax: 301- 402-1199
    5. NIH Advisory Councils
    In addition to other responsibilities for review of projects where the peer review groups have raised questions about the appropriate inclusion of women and minorities, the Advisory Council/Board of each Institute/Center shall prepare biennial reports, for inclusion in the overall NIH Director’s biennial report, describing the manner in which the Institute/Center has complied with the provisions of the statute.
    6. Institute/Center Directors
    Institute/Center Directors and their staff shall ensure compliance with the policy.
    7. NIH Director
    The NIH Director may approve, on a case-by-case basis, the exclusion of projects, as recommended by the Institute/Center Director, that may be inappropriate to include within the requirements of these guidelines on the basis of circumstances other than the health of the subjects, the purpose of the research, or costs.
    IV. DEFINITIONS
    Throughout the section of the statute pertaining to the inclusion of women and minorities, terms are used which require definition for the purpose of implementing these guidelines. These terms, drawn directly from the statute, are defined below.
    A. Clinical Research
    Clinical research is defined as:
    (1) Patient-oriented research. Research conducted with human subjects (or on material of human origin such as tissues, specimens and cognitive phenomena) for which an investigator (or colleague) directly interacts with human subjects. Excluded from this definition are in vitro studies that utilize human tissues that cannot be linked to a living individual. Patient-oriented research includes: (a) mechanisms of human disease, (b) therapeutic interventions, (c) clinical trials, and (d) development of new technologies, (2) Epidemiologic and behavioral studies, (3) Outcomes research and health services research. http://www.nih.gov/news/crp/97report/execsum.htm
    B. NIH-defined Clinical Trial
    For the purpose of these guidelines, an NIH-defined “clinical trial” is a broadly based prospective Phase III clinical investigation, usually involving several hundred or more human subjects, for the purpose of evaluating an experimental intervention in comparison with a standard or control intervention or comparing two or more existing treatments. Often the aim of such investigation is to provide evidence leading to a scientific basis for consideration of a change in health policy or standard of care. The definition includes pharmacologic, non-pharmacologic, and behavioral interventions given for disease prevention, prophylaxis, diagnosis, or therapy. Community trials and other population-based intervention trials are also included.
    C. Valid Analysis
    The term “valid analysis” means an unbiased assessment. Such an assessment will, on average, yield the correct estimate of the difference in outcomes between two groups of subjects. Valid analysis can and should be conducted for both small and large studies. A valid analysis does not need to have a high statistical power for detecting a stated effect. The principal requirements for ensuring a valid analysis of the question of interest are:
    • allocation of study participants of both sexes/genders (males and females) and different racial/ethnic groups to the intervention and control groups by an unbiased process such as randomization,
    • unbiased evaluation of the outcome(s) of study participants, and
    • use of unbiased statistical analyses and proper methods of inference to estimate and compare the intervention effects among the sex/gender and racial/ethnic groups.
    D. Significant Difference
    For purposes of this policy, a “significant difference” is a difference that is of clinical or public health importance, based on substantial scientific data. This definition differs from the commonly used “statistically significant difference,” which refers to the event that, for a given set of data, the statistical test for a difference between the effects in two groups achieves statistical significance. Statistical significance depends upon the amount of information in the data set. With a very large amount of information, one could find a statistically significant, but clinically small difference that is of very little clinical importance. Conversely, with less information one could find a large difference of potential importance that is not statistically significant.
    E. Racial and Ethnic Categories
    1. Minority Groups
    A minority group is a readily identifiable subset of the U.S. population that is distinguished by racial, ethnic, and/or cultural heritage.
    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Directive No. 15 http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/ombdir15.html defines minimum standards for maintaining, collecting and presenting data on race and ethnicity for all Federal reporting. NIH is required to use these definitions to allow comparisons to other federal databases, especially the census and national health databases. The categories in this classification are social-political constructs and should not be interpreted as anthropological in nature.
    When an investigator is planning data collection on race and ethnicity, these categories shall be used. The collection of greater detail is encouraged. However, more detailed items should be designed in a way that they can be aggregated into these required categories. Using respondent self-report or self-identification to collect an individual’s data on ethnicity and race, investigators should use two separate questions with ethnicity information collected first followed by the option to select more than one racial designation. Respondents shall be offered the opportunity to select more than one racial designation. When data are collected separately, provision shall be made to report the number of respondents in each racial category who are Hispanic or Latino.
    The following definitions apply for ethnic categories.
    Hispanic or Latino – a person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race. The term “Spanish origin” can also be used in addition to “Hispanic or Latino.”
    Not Hispanic or Latino
    The following definitions apply for racial categories.
    American Indian or Alaska Native – a person having origins in any of the original peoples of North, Central, or South America, and who maintains tribal affiliations or community attachment.
    Asian – a person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam. (Note: Individuals from the Philippine Islands have been recorded as Pacific Islanders in previous data collection strategies.)
    Black or African American – a person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa. Terms such as “Haitian” or “Negro” can be used in addition to “Black or African American.”
    Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander – a person having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands.
    2. Majority Group
    White – a person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa.
    NIH recognizes the diversity of the U.S. population and that changing demographics are reflected in the changing racial and ethnic composition of the population. The terms “minority groups” and “minority subpopulations” are meant to be inclusive, rather than exclusive, of differing racial and ethnic categories.
    3. Subpopulations
    Each racial and ethnic group contains subpopulations that are delimited by geographic origins, national origins and/or cultural differences. It is recognized that there are different ways of defining and reporting racial and ethnic subpopulation data. The subpopulation to which an individual is assigned depends on self-reporting of specific origins and/or cultural heritage. Attention to subpopulations also applies to individuals who self identify with more than one race or ethnicity. Researchers should be cognizant of the possibility that these racial/ethnic combinations may have biomedical, behavioral, and/or social-cultural implications related to the scientific question under study.
    F. Outreach Strategies
    These are outreach efforts by investigators and their staff(s) to appropriately recruit and retain populations of interest into research studies. Such efforts should represent a thoughtful and culturally sensitive plan of outreach and generally include involvement of other individuals and organizations relevant to the populations and communities of interest, e.g., family, religious organizations, community leaders and informal gatekeepers, and public and private institutions and organizations. The objective is to establish appropriate lines of communication and cooperation to build mutual trust and cooperation such that both the study and the participants benefit from such collaboration.
    —————————————————————————-
    WHETHER SUCH RESEARCH IS JUSTIFIABLE BECAUSE OF ITS OVERWHELMING CURATIVE POTENTIAL.
    ——————————————————————————————–
    V. NIH CONTACTS FOR MORE INFORMATION
    The following senior extramural staff from the NIH Institutes and Centers may be contacted for further information about the policy and relevant Institute/Center programs:

    ——————————————-
    Dr. Paulette Gray
    National Cancer Institute
    6116 Executive Boulevard, Suite 8001
    Bethesda, MD 20892-8327
    Telephone: (301) 496-5147
    Email: grayp@dea.nci.nih.gov

    —————————————-
    Dr. Lore Anne McNicol
    National Eye Institute
    Executive Plaza South
    6120 Executive Boulevard, Room 350
    Rockville, MD 20892
    Telephone: (301) 496-5301
    Email: loreanne.mcnicol@nei.nih.gov

    ——————————————–
    Ms. Sharry Palagi
    National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute
    Building 31
    31 Center Drive, Room 5A-07
    Bethesda, MD 20892
    Telephone: (301) 402-3424
    Email: palagis@nih.gov

    ——————————————–
    Dr. Miriam Kelty
    National Institute on Aging
    Gateway Building
    7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Room 2C218
    Bethesda, MD 20892
    Telephone: (301) 496-9322
    Email: keltyM@nia.nih.gov

    ————————————————-
    Dr. Eleanor Hanna
    National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
    Willco Building
    6000 Executive Boulevard, Suite 514
    Rockville, MD 20892
    Telephone: (301) 594-6231
    Email: ehanna1@mail.nih.gov

    ————————————————-
    Dr. John McGowan
    National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
    6700 B Rockledge
    6700 Rockledge Drive
    Bethesda, MD 20817
    Telephone: (301) 496-7291
    Email: jm80c@nih.gov

    ———————————————-
    Dr. Julia Freeman
    National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases
    Natcher Building
    Building 45, Room 5AS19F
    Bethesda, MD 20892
    Telephone: (301) 594-4543
    Email: freemanj@ep.niams.nih.gov

    ——————————————————–
    Dr. Susan Streufert
    National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
    6100 Executive Boulevard
    Building 61EB, Room 4A05
    Bethesda, MD 20892
    Telephone: (301) 435-6856
    Email: streufes@mail.nih.gov

    ————————————————
    Dr. Julie Gulya
    National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders
    Executive Plaza South
    6120 Executive Boulevard, Room 400D-7
    Rockville, MD 20892
    Telephone: (301) 435-4085
    Email: gulyaj@ms.nidcd.nih.gov

    ———————————————-
    Dr. Norman S. Braveman
    National Institute on Dental and Craniofacial Research
    Natcher Building
    Building 45, Room 4AN24C
    Bethesda, MD 20892
    Telephone: (301) 594-2089
    Email: BravemanN@de45.nidr.nih.gov

    —————————————————
    Dr. Robert Hammond
    National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
    2 Democracy Boulevard, Room 715
    Bethesda, MD 20892
    Telephone: (301) 594-8834
    Email: hammondr@extra.niddk.nih.gov

    —————————————
    Dr. Teresa Levitin
    National Institute on Drug Abuse
    Neuroscience Building
    6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 3158
    Bethesda, MD 20852
    Telephone: (301) 443-2755
    Email: tlevitin@nida.nih.gov

    ———————————————————
    Dr. Anne P. Sassaman
    National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
    P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-30
    Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
    Telephone: (919) 541-7723
    Email: sassaman@niehs.nih.gov

    ——————————————–
    Dr. Alison Cole
    National Institute of General Medical Sciences
    Natcher Building
    Building 45, Room 2AS49K
    Bethesda, MD 20892
    Telephone: (301) 594-1826
    Email colea@nigms.nih.gov

    ————————————————
    Dr. Richard Nakamura
    National Institute of Mental Health
    Neuroscience Building
    6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 8235
    Bethesda, MD 20852
    Telephone: (301) 443-3675
    Email: rnakamur@mail.nih.gov

    —————————————
    Ms. Lynn Morin
    National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
    Neuroscience Building
    6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 2152
    Bethesda, MD 20892
    Telephone: (301) 496-3102
    Email: morinl1@ninds.nih.gov

    —————————————————–
    Dr. Mark Guyer
    National Human Genome Research Institute
    Building 31
    31 Center Drive, Room B2B07
    Bethesda, MD 20892
    Telephone: (301) 496-7531
    Email: guyerm@exchange.nih.gov

    ——————————————-
    Dr. Carole Hudgings
    National Institute of Nursing Research
    Natcher Building
    45 Center Drive, Room 3AN-12
    Bethesda, MD 20892
    Telephone: (301) 594-5976
    Email: carole_hudgings@nih.gov

    —————————————————
    Dr. Christine Goertz
    National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine
    Building 31
    31 Center Drive, Room 5B-58
    Telephone: (301) 402-1030
    Email: GoertzC@od.nih.gov

    ———————————————-
    Dr. Geoffrey Cheung
    National Center for Research Resources
    Rockledge Centre I
    6705 Rockledge Dr, Rm 6118
    Bethesda, MD 20817
    Telephone: (301) 435-0768
    Email: cheungg@ncrr.ncrr.nih.gov

    ——————————————
    Dr. Kenneth Bridbord
    Fogarty International Center
    Building 31
    31 Center Drive, Room B2C39
    Bethesda, MD 20892
    Telephone: (301) 496-2516
    Email: bridbordk@ficod.fic.nih.gov

    —————————————————
    Dr. Joan T. Harmon
    National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
    Room 697
    6707 Democracy Boulevard
    Bethesda, MD 20892
    Telephone: (301) 594-8813
    Email: joan_harmon@nih.gov

    ———————————-
    Dr. Eric Bailey
    National Center for Minority Health and Health Disparities
    2 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 800
    Bethesda, MD 20817
    Telephone: (301) 402-1366
    Email: baileye@od.nih.gov

    ——————————————————————
    It is important to distinguish fetal research activities performed on the living
    fetus in-utero, which is medically and legally defined as potentially therapeutic,
    from the use of tissue from dead fetuses in research.


  • AG Request on Instream Flow

    NOTICE OF REQUEST FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OPINION  (complete text below)

     QUESTION(S):

    Does RCW 90.82.080 obligate the Department of Ecology to undertake rulemaking to amend an instream flow rule if a LOCAL PLANNING UNIT VOTES TO RECOMMEND AMENDMENTS TO AN EXISTING INSTREAM FLOW RULE? 

    Obligate,  by definition, bind or compel (someone), especially legally or morally.

    The full text of is below, RCW 98.82.080 INSTREAM FLOW COMPONENT –  RULES- REPORT

    —————————————————————————————————

    SECTION V – ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES  THE CENTENNIAL ACCORD

    snippet 3.The Attorneys General of Washington State is elected by popular vote. As the chief attorney for the state, the Attorneys General advises the Governor and state agencies on legal matters, but operates independently of the Governor. Local County and City prosecutors operate independently of the Attorney General’s office.

    ——————————————————————————-

    This is my comment

    It’s not complicated, it’s just another WA State legal conundrum on ECOLOGY’S WATER RULES

    And, it appears to me, that the Attorney General is on a fishing expedition so he can advise the Governor and state agencies on legal matters (like lawsuits)

    ———————————————————————————————–

     THE WORDING IN RCW 90.82.080 IS CONFUSING.

     (it only address’s the “SHALL NOT BE” modified)

    THE QUESTION FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL  IS  ON “SHALL  BE” obligated, to be MODIFIED UNDER THIS CHAPTER.

    THE INSTREAMFLOW, ON THE SKAGIT and DUNGENESS RIVERS, HAS ALREADY BEEN ADOPTED BY RULE.

     IS THE  The AG’s question POINTLESS? …  UNTIL WHEN? SOME  LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRIBES ON THE PLANNING UNIT by a recorded unanimous vote “REQUEST” the department TO MODIFY THOSE FLOWS, the minimum instream flows

    Then legal question then  becomes,

    Does the DOE have the legal authority UNDER THE CENTENNIAL ACCORD GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT POLICY, to “DENY THE REQUEST” of THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRIBES ON THE PLANNING UNIT, TO MODIFY THOSE FLOWS?

    IF THE  DOE is “NOT” legally AUTHORIZED,UNDER THE CENTENNIAL ACCORD GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT POLICY,  to “DENY THE REQUEST” of THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRIBES ON THE PLANNING UNIT.

    Then, yes, under the terms and conditions of RCW 90.82.080 DOE  should be obligated to conduct rulemaking to address the vote.

     And, the DOE is obligated to conduct rulemaking to address the vote.

      ——————————————————————————————-

      ” IF” the members of LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRIBES REQUEST THE PLANNING UNIT to modify instream flows and unanimous approval of the decision to modify such flow IS  ACHIEVED, THEN THE INSTREAM FLOWS SHALL BE MODIFIED UNDER THIS SECTION;

    THE is DOE obligate to conduct rulemaking to address the vote.

     ———————————————————————-

    The legal question is still,

    Does the DOE have the legal authority UNDER THE CENTENNIAL ACCORD GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT POLICY, to “DENY THE REQUEST” of THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRIBES ON THE PLANNING UNIT, TO MODIFY THOSE FLOWS?

     IF THE  DOE is “NOT” legally AUTHORIZED UNDER THE CENTENNIAL ACCORD GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT POLICY,  to “DENY THE REQUEST” of THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRIBES ON THE PLANNING UNIT.

     Then, yes, under the terms and conditions of RCW 90.82.080 DOE  should be obligated to conduct rulemaking to address the vote.

     And, the DOE is obligated to conduct rulemaking to address the vote.

    ——————————————————————————————-

     IF THE  DOE is “NOT” legally AUTHORIZED  to “DENY THE REQUEST” ?

     WHO IS LEGALLY AUTHORIZED AND BOUND  UNDER THE CENTENNIAL ACCORD GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT POLICY,  TO DENY THE TRIBAL REQUEST?

    Washington State/Tribal Government-to-Government Implementation Guidelines

    SECTION V – ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES,  snippet

    2. State Agency Directors: THE CENTENNIAL ACCORD calls for each state agency to develop a plan to implement the government-to-government policy. “Each agency will establish a documented plan of accountability and may establish more detailed implementation procedures in subsequent agreements between tribes and the particular agency.” Some agency directors report directly to the Governor’s office, while some report to an appointed board or commission.

    3. Attorneys General Office: The Attorneys General of Washington State is elected by popular vote. As the chief attorney for the state, the Attorneys General advises the Governor and state agencies on legal matters, but operates independently of the Governor. Local County and City prosecutors operate independently of the Attorney General’s office.

     ———————————————————————————————-

    complete text of


     NOTICE OF REQUEST FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OPINION

    QUESTION(S):

    Does RCW 90.82.080 obligate the Department of Ecology to undertake rulemaking to amend an instream flow rule if a LOCAL PLANNING UNIT VOTES TO RECOMMEND AMENDMENTS TO AN EXISTING INSTREAM FLOW RULE? 


                                       WASHINGTON ATTORNEY GENERAL

    The Washington Attorney General issues formal published opinions in response to requests by the heads of state agencies, state legislators, and county prosecuting attorneys.  When it appears that individuals outside the Attorney General’s Office have information or expertise that will assist in the preparation of a particular opinion, a summary of that opinion request will be published in the state register.  If you are interested in commenting on this opinion request, you should notify the Attorney General’s Office of your interest by March 11, 2015.  This is not the due date by which comments must be received.  However, if you do not notify the Attorney General’s Office of your interest in commenting on this opinion request by this date, the opinion may be issued before your comments have been received.  You may notify the Attorney General’s Office of your intention to comment by e-mail to jeff.even@atg.wa.gov or by writing to the Office of the Attorney General, Solicitor General Division, Attention Jeff Even, Deputy Solicitor General, PO Box 40100, Olympia, Washington 98504-0100.  When you notify the office of your intention to comment, you may be provided with a copy of the opinion request in which you are interested, information about the Attorney General’s Opinion process, information on how to submit your comments, and a due date by which your comments must be received to ensure that they are fully considered.

    The Attorney General’s Office seeks public input on the following opinion request(s):

                                                      Opinion Docket No. 15-02-03-Ericksen 

    Request by Doug Ericksen, Senator, District 42

    QUESTION(S):

    Does RCW 90.82.080 obligate the Department of Ecology to undertake rulemaking to amend an instream flow rule if a local planning unit votes to recommend amendments to an existing instream flow rule? 

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

    COMPLETE TEXT OF RCW 98.82.080

    INSTREAM FLOW COMPONENT –  RULES- REPORT

    (1)(a) If the initiating governments choose, by majority vote, to include an instream flow component, it shall be accomplished in the following manner:

    THE HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY RULE

    (i) If minimum instream flows HAVE ALREADY BEEN ADOPTED BY RULE for a stream within the management area,

    “UNLESS” the members of the LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRIBES ON THE PLANNING UNIT by a recorded unanimous vote REQUEST the department TO MODIFY THOSE FLOWS, the minimum instream flows

    SHALL NOT BE MODIFIED UNDER THIS CHAPTER.

    ” IF” the members of LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRIBES REQUEST THE PLANNING UNIT to modify instream flows

    and unanimous approval of the decision to modify such flow IS NOT ACHIEVED, THEN THE INSTREAM FLOWS

    SHALL NOT BE MODIFIED UNDER THIS SECTION;

    —————————————————————————–

    THIS SECTION OF RCW 90.82.080 DOES NOT APPLY TO THE  NOTICE OF REQUEST FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OPINION

    QUESTION(S):

    Does RCW 90.82.080 obligate the Department of Ecology to undertake rulemaking to amend an instream flow rule if a LOCAL PLANNING UNIT VOTES TO RECOMMEND AMENDMENTS TO AN EXISTING INSTREAM FLOW RULE? 

    (But it is VERY interesting read)

    THE HAVE NOT BEEN ADOPTED BY minimum streamflows RULE

    (ii) If minimum streamflows HAVE NOT been adopted by rule for a stream within the management area, setting the minimum instream flows

    SHALL BE A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING UNIT.

    The department must attempt to achieve consensus and approval among the members of the planning unit regarding the minimum flows to be adopted by the department.

    APPROVAL IS ACHIEVED IF ALL GOVERNMENT MEMBERS AND TRIBES THAT HAVE BEEN INVITED AND ACCEPTED on the planning unit present for a recorded vote UNANIMOUSLY VOTE TO SUPPORT THE PROPOSED MINIMUM INSTREAM FLOWS,

    AND

     ALL NONGOVERNMENTAL MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING UNIT PRESENT FOR THE RECORDED VOTE, “BY A MAJORITY”, VOTE TO SUPPORT THE PROPOSED MINIMUM INSTREAM FLOWS.

    (b) The department shall undertake rule making to adopt flows under (a) of this subsection. The department MAY adopt the rules either by the regular rules adoption process provided in chapter 34.05 RCW, the expedited rules adoption process as set forth in RCW 34.05.353,

    OR THROUGH A RULES ADOPTION PROCESS THAT USES PUBLIC HEARINGS AND NOTICE PROVIDED BY THE COUNTY LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE.

     Such rules do not constitute significant legislative rules as defined in RCW 34.05.328,

    and do not require the preparation of small business economic impact statements.

    (c) If approval is not achieved within four years of the date the planning unit first receives funds from the department for conducting watershed assessments under RCW 90.82.040,

    the department may promptly initiate rule making under chapter 34.05 RCW to establish flows for those streams and shall have two additional years to establish the instream flows for those streams for which approval is not achieved.

    (2)(a) Notwithstanding RCW 90.03.345, minimum instream flows set under this section for rivers or streams that do not have existing minimum instream flow levels set by rule of the department shall have a priority date of two years after funding is first received from the department under RCW 90.82.040, unless determined otherwise by a unanimous vote of the members of the planning unit but in no instance may it be later than the effective date of the rule adopting such flow.

    (b) Any increase to an existing minimum instream flow set by rule of the department shall have a priority date of two years after funding is first received for planning in the WRIA or multi-WRIA area from the department under RCW 90.82.040 and the priority date of the portion of the minimum instream flow previously established by rule shall retain its priority date as established under RCW 90.03.345.

    (c) Any existing minimum instream flow set by rule of the department that is reduced shall retain its original date of priority as established by RCW 90.03.345 for the revised amount of the minimum instream flow level.

    (3) Before setting minimum instream flows under this section, the department shall engage in government-to-government consultation with affected tribes in the management area regarding the setting of such flows.

    (4) Nothing in this chapter either: (a) Affects the department’s authority to establish flow requirements or other conditions under RCW 90.48.260 or the federal clean water act (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1251 et seq.) for the licensing or relicensing of a hydroelectric power project under the federal power act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 791 et seq.); or (b) affects or impairs existing instream flow requirements and other conditions in a current license for a hydroelectric power project licensed under the federal power act.

    (5) If the planning unit is unable to obtain unanimity under subsection (1) of this section, the department MAY adopt rules setting such flows.

    (6) The department shall report annually to the appropriate legislative standing committees on the progress of instream flows being set under this chapter, as well as progress toward setting instream flows in those watersheds not being planned under this chapter. The report shall be made by December 1, 2003, and by December 1st of each subsequent year.

    [2003 1st sp.s. c 4 § 4; 1998 c 247 § 4.]

    Notes:

         Findings — 2003 1st sp.s. c 4: See note following RCW 90.82.040.

     


  • How Complicated is it?

    How Complicated is WHAT?

    THE IF AND WHEN OF US SECURITY STRATEGY? ON TERRORISTS, WARS  and  FOREIGN POLICY?

    “IS SO COMPLICATED” THE PRESIDENT AND HIS PRESS SECRETARIES ARE TIP TOEING AROUND IN THE ROSE GARDEN LIKE IT’S A MINE FIELD.

    “WE DON’T HAVE A STRATEGY YET” OBAMA SAID

    AUG 28, 2014 – FEB 2, 2015?

    ————————————————————————————-

    Hearing National Security Strategy | Video | C-SPAN.org

    C-Span‎ – 2 days ago

    January 29, 2015 … Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger, Madeleine Albright, and George Shultz testified at …

    (I watched it, did you?)

    JANUARY 29, 2015 HISTORY  LESSONS FROM SCHULTZ,  KISSINGER  and ALBRIGHT ON  U.S. INVOLVEMENT IN THE MIDDLE EAST WARS, TERRORISTS, STRATEGY, DIPLOMACY AND  FOREIGN POLICY

    Jan 29,2015,  Is the U.S.A. in trouble?

    “Those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.”

    —————————————————————————————————

    Testimony and comments by Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger, Madeleine Albright, and George Shultz on C-SPAN hearing on National Security.

    THE US SECURITY  STRATEGY?

    January 29, 2015 HISTORY  LESSONS FROM SCHULTZ,  KISSINGER  and ALBRIGHT ON  U.S. INVOLVEMENT IN THE MIDDLE EAST WARS, TERRORISTS, STRATEGY, DIPLOMACY AND  FOREIGN POLICY.

    Jan 29, 2015 SCHULTZ,  KISSINGER  and ALBRIGHT

    “What are your greatest  concerns?”

    ————————————————————————————————

    Meanwhile back ON THE HILL …. BETTER BONE UP ON  YOUR  HISTORY  LESSONS

    “Education: the path from cocky ignorance to miserable uncertainty.”

    “Those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.”

    —————————————————————————————-

    If you are concerned? 62% of AMERICAN’S ARE (continue reading)

    Don’t kill the messenger

    “Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.”

    I’ve spent  over 30 hours, since listening on C-SPAN, to the testimony from SCHULTZ,  KISSINGER  and ALBRIGHT , researching, digging up current and historical documents and facts. I have included snippets and comments from entities with very diverse and well informed backgrounds.

    HOW “COMPLICATED” IS  OBAMA U.S. SECURITY STRATEGY?

    My comment, Based on the understanding of a reasonable person?

    It could be  ESPECIALLY INSIDIOUS because of the domino effect and the feedback runaway and  wherein impacts between offending and offended countries  including  Radical Religious terrorism of sizable mass spalls off on smaller countries from allied support for the force of US military Support and weapons.

    The offending and offended country, Radical Religious entities, terrorists,  can then hit other countries, creating even more widespread refuges problems, genocide, killing of Christians, more beheadings of diversified individuals from international origin and capture, more demands for ransom, from all countries that support the war on terrorism  and if a  large allied defense  backing  US Military support, weapons, boots on the ground, sanctions and  intervention  were to occur?

    Such as between a the U.S.A. , Iran, Iraq, Israel, Afghanistan, Russia,  SYRIA,  and, we must  toss in China and Africa etc. too!   Or as the result of hostile actions in space, bombing, DRONES, then the resulting POLITICA L debris cascade, ESPECIALLY INSIDIOUS because development and proliferation of nuclear weapons could be used and could render the defense of  legal borders  and sovereignty of states  essentially impossible.

    WHAT’S SO COMPLICATED ABOUT THAT?

    THE US GOVERNMENT, OBAMA,  MUST NOT OFFEND ANY OF OUR ALLYS, OUR ENEMIES, TERRORISTS, RELIGIOUS ENTITIES, NATIONALITIES, OR  OFFEND ANY OF  THE LEADERS OF ANY OF THESE FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS AT ANYTIME?

    “The difference between using an offending word and a non-offending word is the difference between lightning and a lightning bug.”

    YOU CAN PLEASE SOME OF THESE FOREIGN  ENTITIES  SOME OF THE TIME?

    Who knows what the future might bring? The nation seethes with ethnic, sectarian, tribal and ideological grievances.

    ——————————————————————————————–

    More news for SCHULTZ, KISSINGER and ALBRIGHT National Security Jan. 29,2015

    Jan 29, 2015 SCHULTZ,  KISSINGER  and ALBRIGHT

    “WHAT ARE YOUR GREATEST  CONCERNS?”

    ————————————————————————————————

    KISSINGER – ISIS

    Iran wants to development and use nuclear weapons to bomb Israel.

    SCHULTZ  Iran wants to development and use nuclear weapons to annihilate  Israel.

    Give Syria us military weapons “YES”  BUT, security to protect the weapons?

    SCHULTZ  SECURITY WARNING.. If there is LOOTING there is no SECURITY.

    SCHULTZ  ON  “MISSION CREEP” one objective at a time, get in, do it and get out.

    Defeating  ISIS, a revolutionary force that doesn’t recognize regional borders.

    Russia and Syria “the NO BORDERS concept and  loss of states SOVEREIGNTY by assertive domination”

    SCHULTZ EUROPEAN DEPENDENCY ON RUSSIAN OIL

    TECHNOLOGY AND COMMUNICATION

    TAKING DOWN OUR POWER GRID

    OBAMA DRAWS LINES? BUT DOES NOT FOLLOW THROUGH…

    my words… “Thunder is good, thunder is impressive; but it is lightening that does the work.”

    ——————————————————————————————-

    Jan 29, 2015 SCHULTZ  STRATEGY, DIPLOMACY and  FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC POLICY

    (his hindsight is 20/20)

    United Religions Initiative

    664 Cooperation Circles in 85 Countries – United Religions …

    www.uri.org/the_world_of_uri

    United Religions Initiative Logo. | Register | Give | The Latest | Resources … 664 Cooperation Circles in 85 Countries.

    —————————————————————————————————

    2009 ALBRIGHT’S  STRATEGY, DIPLOMACY AND FOREIGN POLICY

    May 19, 2006  (nearly nine years ago)

    Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright acknowledges that her new book “The Mighty and the Almighty” flies in the face of conventional wisdom on foreign policy.

    May 19, 2006 “DIPLOMATS IN MY ERA WERE TAUGHT NOT TO INVITE TROUBLE.

     AND NO SUBJECT SEEMED MORE INHERENTLY TREACHEROUS THAN RELIGION.”

    Albright sought to expand relations with AMERICAN MUSLIM LEADERS

    Decision makers need to do a better job of understanding RELIGION’S role in the world. She also suggests the government should use religious leaders to support and explain U.S. foreign policy.

    WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND ISLAM BETTER. I think we all have a tendency to generalize, to focus on the worst part of what is happening under the auspices, SO TO SPEAK, OF ISLAM. AND THAT’S EXTREMISM AND SOME OF THE VIOLENCE.

    —————————————————————-

    TOO BAD THE BOOK WAS NOT A BEST SELLER

    ————————————————————————————————-

    Jan 29,2015 SCHULTZ SECURITY WARNING..

    Give Syria us military weapons “YES” , BUT, secure and protect the weapons?

    If there is LOOTING there is no SECURITY.

    LOOTING Spring 2004. April 2003, during the mayhem that followed the collapse of Saddam Hussein’s regime, looters entered the Iraq National …

    World affairs editor, BBC News March 19, 2008

    Vice-President Dick Cheney came to Baghdad and talked about “the phenomenal improvement in SECURITY”. That day more than 60 Iraqis were killed in bomb attacks.

    Catastrophe! Ten Years Later  2013 Looting, Destruction, and Preservation of Cultural Heritage in Iraq and the Wider Middle East

    LOOTING Apr 28, 2014 – Recently, villagers have increasingly extended their cemeteries, houses, and fields onto these significant Egyptian sites, looting them in the process.

    ISIS: The Spoils of the “Great Loot” in the Middle East

    July 1, 2014 Adding yet more warfare to the current crisis in the Middle East will perpetuate exactly what the imperial powers set out to do: TEAR AN ENTIRE REGION OF THE WORLD ASUNDER.

    By Conn Hallinan,

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

    THE COMMITMENT?  

    COST OF NATIONAL SECURITY – National Priorities Project

    What counts as national security depends on your perspective.

    Some people consider wars overseas to be national security.

    http://nationalpriorities.org/cost-of/

    —————————————————————————-

     Jan. 29,2015  KISSINGER QUESTIONS  ON STRATEGY 

    What do we seek to achieve or prevent?  What lengths are we willing to take to achieve.

    —————————————————————————————

    Iraq War Facts, Results & Statistics at January 31, 2012 … War-Spending – About $1 trillion of US taxpayers’ funds spent or approved for spending through 2011.

    03/14/13 The Iraq War cost the United States,  MORE THAN $3 TRILLION according to the calculations of at least one Nobel prize-winning economist

    Total US National Security Spending, 2014-2015 … as the human costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ( and worldwide)  continue to grow. …

    On-Budget Federal Budget Authority is $2.9 TRILLION IN 2014 and $3.2 TRILLION IN 2015.

    —————————————————————————————

    Indeed, the 62% of concerned American citizens should be asking the same questions of their president and elected representative in WA DC.

    What do we seek to achieve or prevent? 

    What lengths are we willing to take to achieve?

    —————————————————————-

    AFTER THIRTEEN YEARS OF WAR?

    THE WAR TOLL ON THE HUMAN RACE?

    THE TEN $10 TRILLION DOLLARS?

    HOW MANY DEAD AND WOUNDED WARRIORS?

    HOW MANY DEAD CIVILIAN CAUSALITIES?

    HOW MANY HOMELESS MORE REFUGEES?

    WHEN WILL THEY NAME AND IDENTIFY THE ENEMY?

    ————————————————————-

    Just asking…

    HOW ABOUT SOME  HOME LAND SECURITY? TO PROTECT AMERICAN CITIZENS FROM HOME GROWN TERRORISTS? AND PROVIDE DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY?

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

    COST OF CONFLICT?

    The price of conflict TO THE HUMAN RACE?

    To bring new insights to the debate on global SECURITY?

    The idea is to examine this cost, not only in terms of the deaths and casualties and the economic costs borne by the people involved, but also the social, developmental, environmental and STRATEGIC costs of conflict.

    Jan 7, 2015 – Last year saw a dramatic escalation of the MIDDLE EAST’S REFUGEE CRISIS. SYRIA’S … UP TO 13 MILLION  SYRIANS AND IRAQIS HAVE BEEN DISPLACED FROM THEIR HOMES.

    ———————————————————————————————

    History

    Oct 21, 2011 – Pivotal events in Iraq from the March 2003 invasion to the December 2011 withdrawal of U.S. troops

    Who knows what the future might bring? The nation seethes with ethnic, sectarian, tribal and ideological grievances.

    Jan 29,2015  Kissinger said,  A strategy driven budget, NOT  A budget driven by Strategy? (I don’t know what that means?)

    OBAMA Strategy? Aug 28, 2014 – “We don’t have a strategy yet,”

    Obama strategy?  Feb 2, 2015

    Jan. 29, 2015 SCHULTZ  avoid  MISSION CREEP, one objective at a time, get in, do it and get out.

    Sep 18, 2014 – Mission Creep, a term that has come to describe a gradual shift in objectives during the course of a military campaign, often resulting in

    Sep 23, 2014 – America’s Mission Creep To War In The Middle East. BBC. How Obama’s War Against ISIS Just Keeps Growing…

    Nov 7, 2014 – … ask Congress for $5 billion for military operations in the Middle East … suggestions that the doubling of forces amounted to mission creep.

    ———————————————————————-

    My comment and question?

    THE U.S. MILITARY HAS BEEN “MISSION CREEPING”  around in the Middle East for 13 years.

    WHAT WAS THE STRATEGY?

    Middle Eastern oil has enchanted global powers?

    —————————————————————————-

    JAN. 29, 2015 Overall consensus, SCHULTZ,  KISSINGER  and ALBRIGHT

    Speak softly and carry a big stick.

    Oops, About the U.S. Military  big stick?

    JAN. 29, 2015 KISSINGER THE STATE OF OUR “MILITARY POWER?” “IS NOT ADEQUATE”

    ——————————————————————————

    History

    Iraq war shows limits of US power

    World affairs editor, BBC News

     March 19, 2008 More importantly, the war has shown the limits of American power. It is clear the United States can only manage to fight two small wars at a time.

    We have seen how hard it is for the Americans to deal with a few thousand lightly-armed volunteers

    Iraq and Afghanistan have stretched the US armed forces almost to breaking point. America after the invasion of Iraq is no longer the superpower it was before.

    On Monday, Vice-President Dick Cheney came to Baghdad and talked about “the phenomenal improvement in SECURITY“. That day more than 60 Iraqis were killed in bomb attacks.

    Germany’s 19th-Century Chancellor, Otto von Bismarck, said that GREAT POWERS HAD TO BE VERY CAREFUL WHEN THEY PUT THEIR MILITARY STRENGTH TO THE TEST. UNLESS THEY ARE OVERWHELMINGLY SUCCESSFUL, HE MEANT, THE PERCEPTION WILL BE THAT THEY HAVE BEEN DEFEATED.

    ———————————————————————————-

    MORE Albright 2009,

    Well, because I think that in looking at what was going on in the world, it was evident that religion and the force of religion and people’s interpretation of how they saw God, really is very much a part of international relations. Rather than keeping religion and religious leaders out of things, we need their help.

    We are dealing with very basic issues of human existence. And, everybody comes with a certain amount of their own history –thousands of years of culture and history.

    She believes President Bush has alienated potential allies around the world who disagree with his religious beliefs. “GOD IS ON OUR SIDE?” (I remember  the quote, and thought at the time, boy she’s right,  that is really going to set them off)

    Albright sought to expand relations with AMERICAN MUSLIM LEADERS

    Decision makers need to do a better job of understanding religion’s role in the world. She also suggests the government should use religious leaders to support and explain U.S. foreign policy.

    Our diplomats are very well trained and they are very capable. But, they have not really focused on religion per se as a subject of study. A Secretary of State has economic advisors and arms control advisors and environmental advisors. And so, I would advocate having religious advisors that are complementing all the other advisors.

    complete text at

    http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/2006/05/19/may-19-2006-madeleine-albright/1845/

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

    HAVE I GOTTEN YOUR ATTENTION? WATCH THIS

    Hearing National Security Strategy | Video | C-SPAN.org

    C-Span‎ – 2 days ago

    January 29, 2015 … Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger, Madeleine Albright, and George Shultz testified at …

    ———————————————————————–

    WANT MORE HISTORY?

    Behind My Back | The Art of War

    www.behindmyback.org/2013/09/11/the-art-of-war/

    Sep 11, 2013 – 544-496 BC), the author of The Art of War (孫子兵法), an immensely influential ANCIENT CHINESE BOOK ON MILITARY STRATEGY. Sun Tzu …

    “THERE IS NO INSTANCE OF A COUNTRY HAVING BENEFITED FROM PROLONGED WARFARE.

    ————————————————–

    Behind My Back | Kilmer on the art of war

    www.behindmyback.org/2013/10/24/kilmer-on-the-art-of-war/

    Oct 24, 2013 – Subject: KILMER : Responding to “The Art of War” —– Original Message —– From: Representative Derek Kilmer To: phew@wavecable.com …

    ——————————————————————-

    Behind My Back | INHERITING THE NATIONAL DEBT

    www.behindmyback.org/category/inheriting-the-national-debt/

    Nov 13, 2013 – “We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt” Thomas …. at http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Politics/thomasjefferson/jeff1340.htm.

    —————————————————————-

    Behind My Back | NO MORE US WAR AND CONFLICT

    www.behindmyback.org/category/no-more-us-war-and-conflict/

    May 17, 2014 – Cost of Conflict is a tool which attempts to calculate the price of conflict to the human race. … http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_conflict# …

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

    IT’S PERSONAL

     In 1999 FIVE BLOCKS FROM MY HOME in Port Angeles WA, one of “THOSE ISLAMIC EXTREMIST TERRORISTS” with a trunk full of explosives came into my town in the USA, across the international border from Canada.

    STRATEGY ? TERRORISTS? I asked Rep. Kilmer at Port Angeles WA Town Hall Meeting  about  Unmentionable Islamic extremist terrorists?

    Rep. Kilmer did  respond, but Rep. Kilmer did not answer my  question…

     


  • More on the WA Coast Electronic War Games

    More on the WA Coast Electronic War Games

    Don’t kill the messenger, look at the picture, read the article and  the 106 unedited pro and con comments. There are more Questions then Answers.

    Navy wants to conduct war games on Wash. coast | Local …

    www.komonews.com/…/Navy-wants-to-conduct-war-games-…

    KOMO‑TV Sep 27, 2014 – Environmental Assessment for the Electronic Warfare Range. …. encourage everyone who cares about preservation of human life and health to …

    http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Navy-wants-to-conduct-war-games-on-coast-277325531.html

    By Associated Press Published: Sep 27, 2014 at 11:23 AM PDT Last Updated: Sep 27, 2014 at 1:54 PM PDT

    FORKS, Wash. (AP) – The U.S. Navy hopes to post three camper-sized trucks with electromagnetic-radiation equipment on the Olympic Peninsula to conduct war exercises with military aircraft from 15 sites.

    The Navy plans to post warning signs and barriers near the trucks when the machines are operating because getting exposed at close range to the radiation could be dangerous, according to The Peninsula Daily News. The machines that emit the radiation would let the Navy simulate modern electronic warfare, according to a draft environmental assessment for the project posted on a U.S. Forest Service website.

    Officials hope to begin the war games next year in Clallam, Jefferson and Grays Harbor counties. The exercises would be conducted at 12 sites in the Olympic National Forest and three sites on state Department of Natural Resources land. The proposal would be part of the Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range and would involve aircraft from the Naval Air Station Whidbey Island.

    Greg Wahl, an environmental coordinator for the U.S. Forest Service who is leading the project, said it will have no significant impact, which would eliminate the need for a study on the environmental effect of the war games, the newspaper said.

    “Human tissue is directly susceptible to shock or burns when metallic objects, which have absorbed high electromagnetic radiation, are touched,” according to the assessment. “This type of burn would be similar to the type of burn produced inside a microwave oven. 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,” the assessment said.

    The deadline to comment on the draft environmental assessment for the Forest Service permit is Oct. 10.

    Figure 3.5-3: Visual Sensitive Receptors – Area 1 and Area 2. Environmental Assessment for the Electronic Warfare Range. (USDA Forest Service – JUNE 2014)

    ——————————————————————————————-

    106 unedited comments (Selfie’s deleted)

    Carol Hiltner 4 days ago

    Here is the address for submitting comments to the Forest Service:

    gtwahl@fs.fed.us

    The web site is: http://data.ecosystem-management.org/nepaweb/nepa_project_exp.php?project=42759

    Here is a summary, from the Navy, of the damage microwaves do to humans:

    http://www.magdahavas.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Navy_Radiowave_Brief.pdf

    It’s absurd to assert that microwaves being used AS A WEAPON are not damaging to humans.

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    Christopher Earle 5 days ago

    Where do we comment on the environmental issues?? Nice to say that the deadline for comments on the assessment is 10/10, but why not tell us where to comment??

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    BillyBob 6 days ago

    completely unacceptable to do this in our forests.  They know the dangers to humans being close, what about wildlife?  Take this nonsense to a desert somewhere.

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    MajorSkeptic 6 days ago

    @BillyBob You have to be REALLY, REALLY close.  In fact he old technology megawatt radar transmitters from the cold were a lot more dangerous and the wildlife seemed to to survive the cold war better then the rest of us..

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    oldkentguy 6 days ago

    Why not just do it in Syria?

    FlagShare

    4LikeReply

     

    Semolina Pilchard 6 days ago

    woohoo let the games begin !!!

    blup blup blup… blup blup blup… that ship’s a goner : (

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    Father Krampus 6 days ago

    I suggest peninsula residents stock up on tin foil — double-layering the foil will help protect your brain from the mind-control waves.

    FlagShare

    1LikeReply

     

    Tech Translplant 6 days ago

    Lots of ignorance and fear on display by posters here.  Articles like this always bring out the anti-scientific wackos, who all make scientific-sounding claims, but never seem to have evidence to back up their accusations.

    Chances are excellent that if you’ve learned everything you know about radiation by reading random internet websites or listening to your friends tell you stories, then you don’t know enough about the subject to comment intelligently.

    If you’re afraid of reasonable levels of upper-RF and microwave frequency radiation, then you should literally put on your aluminum-foil hats, throw away your cell phones, and move tens of miles away from the nearest cell phone tower.  More power to you.  It’s a free country.

    For the rest of us, the dangers of microwave radiation are well-established at this point, and the conveniences far outweigh the fringe undocumented health concerns.

    As far as this equipment is concerned: 1) it’s temporary, 2) the antennas are not pointed at terrestrial targets, and 3) the dangerous power densities are located within feet of the antenna arrays, so roping or fencing off with big danger signs seems sufficient as a precaution to avoid people wandering in front of the transmitters.

    FlagShare

    2ikeReply

     

    Mary 6 days ago

    @Tech Translplant  You contradict your vague premise.  You first refer to “dangers of microwave radiation” as being “well-established at this point” and then confirm those dangerous power densities by stating “the dangerous power densities are located within feet of the antenna arrays.”  You deny danger and then confirm danger with your incoherent reasoning.  While it’s true that danger from EMF radiation increases with proximity and decreases with distance, the “feet” to which you nebulously refer encompass an area of as much as a half mile to a mile.  In one Swedish study of the effect of standard 60 cycles per second EMF’s, children who lived in close proximity to power lines with diffuse energy dispersal had a 20 percent higher cancer rate than children living a mile or more away.  Low frequency radiation is less dangerous than the high frequency of cell phones, cell towers, and probably the level proposed for this military operation. I agree that there are many scientific “wackos” out there, and those who contradict their own statements and use incomplete information to prove their points are among the scientific “wackos.”

    FlagShare

    2LikeReply

     

    Tech Translplant 3 days ago

    @Mary @Tech Translplant

    1) The frequency of the equipment in question here isn’t even in the same frequency band as the power lines you’re now discussing, making the two completely invalid for comparison, especially because the mechanism by which the two different sources are “dangerous” is completely and utterly different;

    2) The antenna configuration of the equipment in the above article (highly directional) has no comparison whatsoever to the “antenna” configuration of a nearby power line (which is effectively omnidirectional for the purposes of your claims);

    3) You once again referred to a nebulous “Swedish” study without linking to it or citing it more appropriately, expecting everyone to just accept your summary of their research as unquestioned “fact”;

    4) I could cite many more mainstream sources which contradict your claims, the simplest of which is the Wikipedia article on electromagnetic radiation and health:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radiation_and_health

    I could cite many other on-point studies, including one of my college professors who carried out long-term studies of cell phone tissue interaction which were unable to demonstrate any conclusive findings;

    5) I have a master’s degree in electrical engineering with several graduate-level classes in electromagnetic fields and their applications (including in biological interaction), which I suspect makes me more qualified than you to appreciate the likely impact of the technologies involved here.  I don’t toss around credentials lightly, but I would love to know where you received your education which bases your claims.

     

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    BillyBob 6 days ago

    @Tech Translplant Lack of ignorance from those who actually believe this will not have an impact is far more concerning.  At least it should be.

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    Fairlane500 7 days ago

    Next on KOMO: The hidden danger of radio towers. Why staying outside the fence is in your best interest…

    FlagShare

    2LikeReply

    Reality Control 7 days ago

    Today the “China” sea, tommorow the world (courtesy of Wal Mart).

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    Chris 7 days ago

    @Reality Control Just as with drugs, if there was no demand there’s be no supply.  You’re putting the blame in the wrong place.

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    Reality Control 7 days ago

    @Chris @Reality Control They all sink.

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    Orangulo 7 days ago

    inb4 people assume that this kind of electromagnetic radiation is ionizing radiation.

    FlagShare

    1ikeReply

     

    Norma J Todd 7 days ago

    Are we suppose to believe them? Would this be allowed in downtown Seattle? Tell me it is safe enough to use in downtown Seattle and  I will believe that it is safe enough to use in small towns. Use it in Seattle first.

    FlagShare

    3LikeReply

     

    gscott 6 days ago

    @Norma J Todd

    I think if you put on your tin foil hat you will be ok.

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    KOMOdo-dragon 7 days ago

    “The machines that emit the radiation would let the Navy simulate modern electronic warfare, according to a draft environmental assessment for the project posted on a U.S. Forest Service website.”

     

    Interpretation:  These trucks are equipped with radar and microwave frequency transmitters that are designed to emulate fire-control radar, and/or communications emission profiles that closely resemble various surface-to-air missile systems or command and control platforms in use by our global neighbors (think of recent events in a certain Balkan state).  Put a fence around them at a safe distance, some warning signs and be done with it.  No need for any hand-wringing or worrying.  Since its non-ionizing radiation, and the inverse-square law is still in effect (as well as other laws of physical nature), there is no need to worry.

     

    This is just another attempt to “create” news.

    FlagShare

    14LikeReply

     

    Chris 7 days ago

    @KOMOdo-dragon Ukraine is an eastern European state, not a Balkan one.  Other than that, you’re technically correct – the best kind of correct.

    FlagShare

    2LikeReply

     

    Aviano 7 days ago

    @KOMOdo-dragon   “This is just another attempt to “create” news.”

    Exactly; and create fear in people who don’t understand. Better to be proactive than have fluster cluck that requires emergency, or unorganized actions and training to protect America.

    FlagShare

    2LikeReply

     

    Phlipfone 7 days ago

    @Aviano

    The greatest worry of the hand-wringers, here, is that this type of radiation may have an effect on vampires and werewolves.

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    barkleydog 6 days ago

    @KOMOdo-dragon And you are an expert or do you just believe everything you read?

     

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    KOMOdo-dragon 6 days ago

    @barkleydog   I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night. 😉

    FlagShare

    1LikeReply

     

    truth_be_told 7 days ago

    Oh how i love reading some of these posts. How the left leaning libs are afraid that OMG the government can’t be trusted to do military training at one of their bases! Yet out of the other side of their mouth. They put the most important thing they have their health over to government and be oh we can trust the government! Yet won’t trust them with this little thing. What a bunch of hypocrits. The lefts hypocrisy knows no bounds.

    FlagShare

    9LikeReply

     

    oldster70 7 days ago

    Does this mean targeting Bayliner and Tollycraft owners as known domestic terrorists?

    FlagShare

    2LikeReply

     

    Jessica the Phippster 7 days ago

    @oldster70 I bet at their Frequencies, we’d Never Notice a thing, Even on my Boat Radar….   I think it’s More of a FYI…..   FYI Folks, Microwaves Coming At Ya…    No Biggie, the radio Waves and Microwaves are all around anyway….    It would be hard to hide from them all,….  relax, and Start to Fold that Tin Foil….   you will Look right at Home For Halloween

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    oldster70 7 days ago

    @Jessica the Phippster @oldster70  Yes, I would guess my Radar is using WWII frequencies.

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    FZR 7 days ago

    If you need radiation as a requirement for these war games, why not play in hanford radioactive waste land area?

    FlagShare

    1LikeReply

     

    Chris 7 days ago

    @FZR Wrong type of radiation.  Please get your technical facts straight.

    FlagShare

    5LikeReply

     

    White Kitty 7 days ago

    I think this is a great idea.

    We need to train our armed forces for when the bad guys eventually start to try to take us on.  That includes arming the police – but they need to be trained and disciplined to use the weapons they’re getting.

    FlagShare

    3ikeReply

     

    TazZen 7 days ago

    @White KittyI     I must be losing my mind…..I thought we were already training our armed forces.   Is it just a government coverup and we really have no trained forces at all?

    FlagShare

    2LikeReply

     

    PacMan 7 days ago

    @TazZen @White Kitty

    Training is an ongoing thing. You have to constantly refresh that information in the minds of the people living through the exercise.  You probably don’t respond to situations at work now exactly as you did five or ten years ago.

    Things change and so must we.

    FlagShare

    2LikeReply

     

    TazZen 6 days ago

    @PacMan @TazZen @White Kitty My post was sarcastic, damn, where is that font when I need it most?

    FlagShare

    2ikeReply

     

    PacMan 4 days ago

    @TazZen @PacMan @White Kitty

    Sorry, my sarcasm filter  broke when they fired Schram.

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    rjsupersonic 7 days ago

    why is everyone whining?  We need a strong military to protect our freedom. If people don’t like it they can move to North Korea then  you have something to complain about!!!

    FlagShare

    4ikeReply

     

    TazZen 7 days ago

    @rjsupersonic Oh FFS!  Is that the best you can do?  No one is complaining about a strong military to protect our freedom.  I personally support our military; but I also support a healthy living environment where we can bring our families up without having to worry about my relatives and friends dying young because of cancer causing impositions that are unnecessary and useless.  We have proven time and time again that we can live in tandem with the elements necessary to protect our freedom, and we have ALSO proven, time and time again, that there are those who would impose upon us (HANFORD and THREE MILE ISLAND are just two examples) unnecessary dangers in haste in the name of freedom.

    And please, try more original material than the tired, lame, ‘move to North Korea’ crap.

    FlagShare

    4LikeReply

     

    Chris 7 days ago

    @TazZen @rjsupersonic No member of the public has ever been exposed to dangerous levels of ionizing radiation as a result of anything that has ever gone on at Hanford or TMI.  If you’re going to level accusations, please learn the technical facts and try more original material than the tired, lame, unscientific “unnecessary dangers” crap.

    FlagShare

    4LikeReply

     

    TazZen 6 days ago

    @Chris @TazZen @rjsupersonic In response to your first sentence, I did not imply that at all.  MY POINT is, in the past the government has built facilities and implemented processes where they assured the public they were completely safe from any major adverse effects in order to appease them and gain their trust.  You cannot deny that, and if you do, please learn the facts, because otherwise your statement comes across as unscientific crap.

    FlagShare

    1LikeReply

     

    Mary 7 days ago

    “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,”

     

    Does anyone know WHY information about “DNA fragmentation and cancer due to EMF radiation exposure is inconsistent and insufficient at this time?  The government and the high priests of the electronic tech industry WANT effects of electromagnetic radiation to be unknown to the public.  The information has been found and well-hidden.  Research results have been suppressed and held secret in exchange for big bucks.  Or such results are ignored by the public because acknowledging that EMF’s can cause DNA and cancer effects is inconvenient and could remove the fun from that constant cell phone usage or the omnipresence of those cell towers.  For example, in the early 1990’s, a researcher at the UW did a study which revealed damaging effects of EMF radiation exposure in the 900 mega hertz range of cell phones on the DNA in the human brain.  That information was rapidly downplayed by U.S. West and other mobile technology companies at that time.

     

    Then when my neighborhood challenged the installation of a cell tower on top of an apartment building, U.S. West hired a professor emeritus from the UW to allay our fears by assuring our community that the high frequency EMF radiation could have no possible effects on our health.  I had difficulty in believing his assertions since I had previously read in a well-known scientific publication an article by this same professor, now a paid employee of U.S. West, in which he described an EMF radiation experiment he had performed on laboratory mice.  That study showed that in the control group, five percent of the mice developed cancer.  In the group of mice exposed to EMF radiation, 20 percent of the exposed mice developed cancer.  Apparently this professor conveniently forgot the results of his study when U.S. West offered him something he valued more than scientific truth: money.  I learned from that experience that it’s nearly impossible for even whole communities to fight the whims of the huge mobile technology companies, but at least in offering a fight there is a remote chance of stopping the increasing radiation of humans.

     

    As a member of a neighborhood group that tirelessly fought imposition of EMF radiation on our neighborhood, I know exactly how futile and difficult it seems to fight the increasing radiation of our society.  Our input to the government entities in this increasingly undemocratic society is having less impact than ever and may be pointless.  But I still encourage everyone who cares about preservation of human life and health to give input to the increasingly uncaring government by sending comments about this newest threat to the Forest Service by Oct. 10.  Maybe KOMO could save us some research and give us a link? Thanks to KOMO for bringing this to our attention!

    FlagShare

    3ikeReply

     

    Cindertang 7 days ago

    @Mary Your reply reminds me of my fathers story he used to tell us back in the sixties about an article that was in the popular mechanics magazine, It was about this guy who sent in a carburetor that ran off of chicken poop, he had a real working one sent in pictures and diagrams the works, now you would think some thing like that would be the greatest thing ever since chicken poop is so abundant and available. This thing really worked, it also disappeared. So yes I think some one bought it diagrams and all ( namely some big oil company) and are sitting on it waiting for what you might ask, well for the next big money making moment in history I think.

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    Chris 7 days ago

    @Mary One study does not a scientific principle make.  If you believe (vice think) 900 MHz EMR does appreciable physiological damage, then learn the science and dig up the proof instead of blaming some massive government and corporate coverup.

    I once worked for the Feds.  There aren’t enough smart people there to conduct a successful conspiracy.

    FlagShare

    6LikeReply

     

    Aviano 7 days ago

    @Chris @Mary  “I once worked for the Feds.  There aren’t enough smart people there to conduct a successful conspiracy.”

    You just made my day! Too funny.

    FlagShare

    4LikeReply

     

    Mary 6 days ago

    @Chris @Mary  Your reading comprehension level would benefit from giving more attention and focus to what you are reading.  If you again read my comments more carefully, you will see that I have mentioned several different studies here, not just one study, which have suggested that exposure to EMF’s at any frequency can have physical effects.  It’s difficult to “dig up” the absolute proof because results that indicate harm from EMF exposure have indeed been suppressed by corporate and government entities.  We may be seeing yet another example of government disregard for possible harm from EMF’s in this newest proposal to expose humans to EMF radiation.

     

    And if YOU believe that 900 megahertz radiation cannot “do appreciable physiological damage,” you must not be familiar with the operation of microwave ovens.  Microwave ovens generate between 915 megahertz and 2450 megahertz frequency bands, and I think anyone who uses a microwave knows what happens to that pizza or chicken when exposed to microwave radiation!  It’s called “cooking!”  If you want to see the effect of EMF’s on your brain, just look at that microwaved chicken! :-)  But while it’s true that 900 megahertz probably would not successfully cook a chicken, some of the older cell phones (and maybe newer ones, too) could actually cause a warming sensation when held to the ear for more than a few minutes.  More research is needed in this area, but it won’t happen because corporate interests and now the  government have too much at stake to allow that research.  But you may not understand this because, after all, you did work for the federal government which, by your own admission, does not hire smart people. :-)

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    None 7 days ago

    No, no, NO!  “Officials hope to begin the war games next year in Clallam, Jefferson and Grays Harbor counties.”  So, Forks is simply the beginning of something far more extensive and “The Navy plans to post warning signs and barriers near the trucks when the machines are operating because getting exposed at close range to the radiation could be dangerous.”  Oh, dandy.  So, in addition to the Hanford nuclear leakage (that is extant and which is still a very serious problem) as well as whatever the Pacific Ocean currents are bringing over from the Fukushima plant (that is ALSO still leaking directly into the ocean), we are supposed to accept that this is perfectly safe because our government officials tell us not to worry.  (???)

    Anybody in the market for a bridge that is positioned on a nice parcel of swampland?

    FlagShare

    2LikeReply

     

    SeattleJoe 7 days ago

    @None You are clearly not a physics student. You do have the uneducated paranoia part down however.

    FlagShare

    3LikeReply

     

    Mary 7 days ago

    @SeattleJoe @None  What are you talking about?  You may be a physics student, but you clearly have not studied long enough!  Can you more specifically state the scientific basis on which you are discounting the very valid questions raised by “None?”  The current lack of concern about the contamination by Hanford nuclear waste is due to LACK of understanding of the nature and consequences of that radioactive pollution.  And that lack of understanding has been fostered by the government attempts to withhold and downplay frightening information. People have died because of Hanford nuclear contamination. Now this newest EMF radiation experiment is being downplayed by those government entities who just want us to sit passively back and allow them to perform this latest experiment on human health.  “You do have the uneducated” arrogance part down quite well.  Do some reading and educate yourself before you deride others who are more highly informed!

    FlagShare

    5LikeReply

     

    Chris 7 days ago

    @Mary @SeattleJoe @None Here is the scientific basis: the physiological effects of ionizing radiation have been studied and investigated more than any other threat to human health except smoking.  (Saying that there is a lack of understanding of the nature and consequences of radioactive pollution is very disingenuous.)  The entire Hanford Reservation area is monitored, sampled, and tested more thoroughly than any piece of Federally-owned real estate in the US.  Yes, it is a problem that liquid is leaking from underground tanks at Hanford.  But the radioactive elements in the leakage from those tanks are not water-soluble, ergo they have not come anywhere near the Columbia.

    Please learn the scientific facts before succumbing to scare-mongering.

    FlagShare

    4LikeReply

     

    SeattleJoe 6 days ago

    @Mary @SeattleJoe @None Sigh. Ok, where do we begin?

    “What are you talking about? ”

    I think I was pretty clear.

     

    ” You may be a physics student, but you clearly have not studied long enough!  ”

    I’m not a physics student, though I had to take a lot of it for my engineering degrees. I never said I was a physics student, try to read what I say and nothing more.

     

    “Can you more specifically state the scientific basis on which you are discounting the very valid questions raised by “None?” ”

    “None” posted this question: “we are supposed to accept that this is perfectly safe because our government officials tell us not to worry.  (???)”  I don’t trust the government any more than the next rational person but “None” gave nothing more than a couple uninformed and vague examples as the basis of his/her thinking and that soundly put him in the uneducated paranoia category.

     

    “The current lack of concern about the contamination by Hanford nuclear waste is due to LACK of understanding of the nature and consequences of that radioactive pollution.  And that lack of understanding has been fostered by the government attempts to withhold and downplay frightening information. People have died because of Hanford nuclear contamination. ”

    Yes people have died and that is bad. But the danger is currently minimal. Most “frightening information” is irrational speculation touted as fact. If you have some post it otherwise it is only speculation.

     

    “Now this newest EMF radiation experiment is being downplayed by those government entities who just want us to sit passively back and allow them to perform this latest experiment on human health. ”

    OK. So the government is experimenting on human health by telling people to stay away. OK. Interesting experiment. Is it one where they see how people react to not going near EMF radiation? It seems to me if the govt was nefariously experimenting they wouldn’t be telling people to stay away and putting up barricades to prevent people from getting close. You see this is how we differ. I rationally look at the situation, evaluate it and determine possible outcomes. You see something that you think is scary and go off shouting govt conspiracy theories.

     

    “You do have the uneducated” arrogance part down quite well.  Do some reading and educate yourself before you deride others who are more highly informed!”

    No arrogance intended. I simply called out someone who is acting irrational. Also, might I suggest you not make claims about someone’s knowledge on a subject when you don’t know the first think about them. Things like that tend to cause people to look unfavorably upon you.

    FlagShare

    1LikeReply

     

    workingman 7 days ago

    Liberals, as it appears from these comments, don’t know how we maintain our freedom.  Clue: it’s not always being opposed to our military’s needs.

    Liberals are afflicted with a serious lack of common sense.

    FlagShare

    1LikeReply

     

    rockguy 7 days ago

    @workingman You forgot those Socialists, Commies, and the Pinko’s, what ever they are.

    FlagShare

    1LikeReply

     

    TazZen 7 days ago

    @workingman You are SO predictable.  And apparently an easily brainwashed far right shill. If you would back up your contributions here, even on occasion . instead of spewing your ridiculous hate of everything liberal, you MIGHT find more people taking you seriously.  Instead, the only ones who do, for the most part, are far right blatherers themselves.

    FlagShare

    6LikeReply

     

    Sanctuary 7 days ago

    @workingman Looking at the amount of personal freedoms that conservatives want to or have already banned, I’m pretty sure you cons don’t give a rip about our freedom.

    FlagShare

    5LikeReply

     

    truth_be_told 7 days ago

    So what freedoms have been banned? Name a few. Now your going to spout off the patriot act. Well news flash. Joe Biden wrote that bill while he was in the senate. Then you will name the NADA signed in to law by Berry Obama. Seems to me that the Dems love to take your freedom.

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    Sanctuary 7 days ago

    @truth_be_told Abortion, same sex marriage, same sex adoption, early voting, birth control access, marijuana – medical or recreational, to name a few.  The republican war on personal freedom continues.

    FlagShare

    3LikeReply

     

    TazZen 7 days ago

    @truth_be_told Exactly which freedoms have your so called ‘Dems’ taken?

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    TazZen 6 days ago

    @truth_be_told Ah, the usual sound of crickets.

    FlagShare

    1LikeReply

     

    Mr. Roman lions 5 days ago

    @workingman

    So have you ever served your country or have you just been self serving?

    Agent Smith 7 days ago

    Next thing you know, that mega-spaceship from “Close Encounters Of The Third Kind” is going to show up.

    And right after it, the other one, from “The Day The Earth Stood Still”.

    Keep asking for it. You’re going to get it.

    FlagShare

    3LikeReply

     

    White Kitty 7 days ago

    @Agent Smith  That will be so cool!

    FlagShare

    2LikeReply

     

    TazZen 7 days ago

    @Agent Smith Actually, have you read Communion, and the follow up book by Whitley Strieber?  He talks about the possibility of extra terrestrials visiting us, and abducting some (including him) and that those visitations may be subtle warnings about how we as a species are slowly destroying our planet.   He speaks to environmental issues as well.   He writes credibly, intellectually, and poises several different scenarios on why these visitations may be happening.

    Interesting stuff!

    FlagShare

    1LikeReply

     

    Furd 6 days ago

    @TazZen @Agent Smith I’m about 60-70 pages into Communion and I find it hard to read any more.  Too fantastic for me and I TRY to keep an open mind.

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    TazZen 6 days ago

    @Furd @TazZen @Agent Smith It is not an easy read, that’s for sure.  I liked the sequel better, as Strieber is more scientific, but
    you may find that even harder to read than Communion.  His writing is not for everyone.

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    Furd 6 days ago

    @TazZen @Furd @Agent Smith  Although I have set it aside for now I have not given up entirely.  I also have Confirmation.

    FlagShare

    1LikeReply

     

    jocko_homo 7 days ago

    Maybe conduct your war games near the ebola outbreak as an alternative? Why risk the coast of WA where so much sea life and people exist in a relatively healthy environment. We have plenty pollution to deal with as it is.

    FlagShare

    3LikeReply

     

    Shelly 7 days ago

    F**** that!  It’s all fun & games, until they kill us.

    FlagShare

    3LikeReply

     

    garden 7 days ago

    I’m not necessarily for or against this but is there some reason these things need to be positioned in a residential area?  I mean, we have the whole Puget Sound to choose from.

    FlagShare

    2LikeReply

     

    ddeaves 7 days ago

    So we’ll have radiation coming at us from Fukishima and Pacific Beach.

     

    FlagShare

    3LikeReply

     

    Klondiko 7 days ago

    “Links to DNA fragmentation, leukemia, and cancer due to intermittent exposure to extremely high levels of electromagnetic radiation are speculative”

    Are you kidding me?

     

    Guess they got tired of killing dolphins. Find another place. Antartica works for me.

    Where is the link to comment KOMO?

    FlagShare

    8LikeReply

     

    Shelly 7 days ago

    @Klondiko I hope they don’t kill our orca’s.

    FlagShare

    7LikeReply

     

    imright 7 days ago

    Here comes your EMP False Flag folks………………………….

    FlagShare

    4LikeReply

     

    rotups435 7 days ago

    @imright

     

    Trolling AboveTopSecret or BeforeItsNew much?

     

    Maybe bring a little John Titor in as well.

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    Grumpa 7 days ago

    This is Forks people, all you are going to radiate is vampires and werewolves…

    FlagShare

    7LikeReply

     

    Shelly 7 days ago

    Don’t forget about all the seafood that they could destroy.

    FlagShare

    4LikeReply

     

    kittykat1912 7 days ago

    Oh HELL no! Simulated war games calls for *simulated* radiation!

    FlagShare

    5LikeReply

     

    Jubilee 7 days ago

    Conduct these tests in Northern Syria, a win-win situation.

    FlagShare

    7LikeReply

     

    TazZen 7 days ago

    I really like the way a photo shows exactly where some of the trucks would be located, especially being that they’ll be in residential neighborhoods. Also, I totally trust  a government ‘environmental coordinator’ to alleviate any public fear of negative environmental impacts.  Though they will post signs warning people, plus DNA studies are inconclusive as to the danger.   Nope no worries about human guinea pig experiments there.    You know, because it worked so well at Hanford.

    I also have no concerns as to ‘why now’, as the West Coast has been vulnerable for decades, and I was under the impression our government already had it covered.

    Probably just a diversionary tactic……hey!  Look over there!   It’s a squirrel!

     

    FlagShare

    8LikeReply

     

    Opus8no5 7 days ago

    Recent encounters with Russian nuclear bombers and strike aircraft near Alaska.  The West Coast is vulnerable and training is a logical tactical move as the Naval submarine base at Bangor would be a primary target.

    FlagShare

    3LikeReply

     

    usnrbb 7 days ago

    @Opus8no5:  So would Joint Base Lewis McChord.  A major tactical army fort co-joined with a logistics air base, you gotta be kidding me.  That would be an attack  planner’s wet dream!

    Let’s face it  with two aircraft carrier bases, the west coast’s ballistic submarine base, two logistical air bases, a major army base, a naval air station, and who knows what else stuffed in here and there, Washington State is one big target center.

    FlagShare

    1LikeReply

     

    ffej 7 days ago

    @usnrbb @Opus8no5 I would rather burn up in the initial attack than suffer in the aftermath.

    FlagShare

    1LikeReply

     

    White Kitty 7 days ago

    @Opus8no5  Yup, don’t forget Lewis-McChord, Bremerton, or Everett.  Bangor always has a couple of subs on patrol.  Bremerton and Everett could have two aircraft carriers and small boys sitting there, and L-M has all kinds of targets.

    FlagShare

    1LikeReply

     

    Opus8no5 7 days ago

    @White Kitty @Opus8no5

    You are quite correct.  Also, there is the main North-South transport artery (I-5).

    I’m encouraged by this defensive training.

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    Cindertang 7 days ago

    “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,” the assessment said.     Like every thing else these days sure why not, might be harmful might not, who is to say? so go a head and do it, its only life  well maybe.

    FlagShare

    6LikeReply

     

    Pest Outwest 7 days ago

    What’s wrong with going local?  They could maybe use White Center or the U District . . .

    FlagShare

    6LikeReply

     

    White Kitty 7 days ago

    @Pest Outwest Lake Washington near Rainier Beach maybe?

    FlagShare

    2LikeReply

     

    DMT 7 days ago

    “SHALL WE PLAY A GAME?”

    FlagShare

    7LikeReply

     

    lifesux 7 days ago

    go for it!! they need the training from those areas.

     

    FlagShare

    2LikeReply

     

    truth_be_told 7 days ago

    They have a Navy Base at Pacific Beach Big Whoop!

    FlagShare

    2LikeReply

     

    missyk 7 days ago

    Sounds like more high drama.

    FlagShare

    2LikeReply

     

    TylerDurdenforpres 7 days ago

    I’m sure it will be fine, what could possibly go wrong?

    FlagShare

    3LikeReply

     

    dardena 7 days ago

    @TylerDurdenforpres

    “…just a little software patch, won’t hurt a thing…”

    Terry

     

    FlagShare

    3LikeReply

     

    kittykat1912 7 days ago

    @TylerDurdenforpres Haven’t we heard that in a million scifi/horror movies?

    FlagShare

    3LikeReply

     

    flipperjack 7 days ago

    Who the hell are they kidding?  I live on the coast and they have been doing war games on the coast all summer.

    FlagShare

    7LikeReply

     

    Ankle Biter 7 days ago

    Why doesn’t the Navy just practice on Bellevue? With all these “Your Speed” signs around town there’s lots of electromagnetic radiation. There’s nothing like K-Band bathing the front of your house 24/7.

    FlagShare

    2LikeReply

     

    Zoso 7 days ago

    @Ankle Biter Think Skyway would be better.

    FlagShare

    3LikeReply

     

    King Leer 7 days ago

    Start with Hoquiam. It is desperately in need of a Megaton Makeover.

    FlagShare

    4LikeReply

     

    Ankle Biter 7 days ago

    @King Leer What an awesome idea for a TV show.

    FlagShare

    2LikeReply

     

    kittykat1912 7 days ago

    @King Leer NO!

    FlagShare

    1LikeReply

     

    Megan 7 days ago

    According to the photo, Areas 1 and 2 are in Pacifc Beach, WA. They are private residences across the street from the old navy base/MWR resort.

    FlagShare

    1LikeReply

     

    Vince 7 days ago

    So I guess we are looking forward to kids born with three to four eyes…

    FlagShare

    6LikeReply

     

    oldanintheway 7 days ago

    @Vince   But think of the advantages:

    Redundancy, in case of loss.

    Better ability to see what’s going on at busy intersections.

    Making eye contact with the opposite sex……..

    FlagShare

    4LikeReply

     

    dardena 7 days ago

    @oldanintheway @Vince

    Hey, you forgot cornea transplant donors…just saying.

    Terry

     

    FlagShare

    3LikeReply

     

    TrT 7 days ago

    @Vince Seriously though.. the Puget Sound area already leads in the category of childhood cancers, MS, breast and pancreatic cancer, and more.  I don’t know if it’s the toxic stew people call the Sound, or the lack of sun… or perhaps all the radiation from the military bases. This is NOT a healthy place.

    FlagShare

    5LikeReply

     

    Klondiko 7 days ago

    @TrT @Vince  People actually eat things from Puget Sound. Ughhh.

     

    http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Bacteria-causes-shellfish-harvesting-closure-277327041.html

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    Mary 7 days ago

    @TrT @Vince  And don’t forget that radiation at Magnuson Park in the heart of the city.

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

     

    Jessica the Phippster 7 days ago

    I think that sounds cool…… I will stay away with the Ham radio Equipment…

    FlagShare

     

     

    FlagShare

    LikeReply

    KOMO News is happy to provide a forum for commenting and discussion. Please respect and abide by the house rules:

    Keep it clean, keep it civil, keep it truthful, stay on topic, be responsible. Share your knowledge and please suggest removal of comments that violate these standards.

    See full commenting rules