NFR: 58,000 ballots missing in Florida

Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by miyawaki, Oct 27, 2004.

  1. Nailknot Active Member

    Posts: 1,907
    Cascadia
    Ratings: +11 / 0
    SB: Your use of petro oil. Your money funding the Saudis that supported Osama. That connection. Right now, you can choose to give the terrorists and big oil interests more of your money, and continue to support business as usual, or you can choose not to. It's up to you. There is a vialble alternative now.
  2. Steve Buckner Mother Nature's Son

    Nailknot I don't disagree with that...

    The sad truth is that as U.S. citizens, we make up 25% of the world's population, yet we consume 90% of its resources.

    Back when I was graduating with a degree in physics from college, there had already been much research done on switching combustion engines over to hydrogen, and sadly that technology has been put on the backburner. I suspect that it will prevail some day.

    Can you imagine a source of free, clean, renewable energy? How could the government control us then?
  3. Nailknot Active Member

    Posts: 1,907
    Cascadia
    Ratings: +11 / 0
    Steve, Hydrogen is a pipe dream for now. It doesn't add up. Extraction and containment costs are prohibitive. Energy units per output compared to biofuels at this point are a joke- something like 2000/hydrogen units compared to 120 for biofuels for the same distance traveled. USA made biofuels are ready for prime time now, you can run a diesel vehicle on biodiesel or flex fuel car on E85 (85% ethenol)- TODAY. Work locally and demand a pump- if people want it, you bet the USA spirit of entrepreneurship will make it happen. But don't believe the hype.

    A hydrogen vehicle with hydrogen made from petroleum (there is no other energy source to extract hydrogen at this time -other than- dare I say, biofuels) should result in roughly no change, or potentially an increase in greenhouse emissions (can cite plenty of studies that back this up if anyone wants). In comparable vehicles, a hydrogen drivetrain gives at best marginally better efficiency than current gasoline drivetrains (for example, Ford's hydrogen Focus, despite using very expensive ultra-lightweight materials in place of the materials used in a normal Focus, gets 45 miles per gasoline-gallon-equivalent of hydrogen (roughly 1 kg) - only marginally better than a gasoline Focus without all the additional lightweight materials). Reforming the gasoline to get hydrogen results in additional energy input, which decreases the overall efficiency - end result has to be at least the same or more greenhouse emissions than the vehicle with a gasoline drivetrain would get. Zero sum at higher cost.

    Hydrogen fuel cells don't work for transportation, and that is the reality. Its another red herring by the USA auto industry- who have yet to bring any solutions to the table despite 30 years of "research." In fact our avg per vehicle consumption just goes up every year! And they fight every attempt to make the USA energy independent. They value stock price over our future. Big oil and Detroit auto are anti-American, pro middle east. Look at the facts. They are killing us. They *need* this Iraq war. And with or without 9/11 it would have happened. The planning was in place before 9/11 occured.

    Time to wake up- big oil and USA auto have nothing to gain from green, sustainable, or USA grown fuel. They have deep investments in the current dead-end Saudi relationships. What public company would support something that subverts and potentially dominates their investments and positions? None of them. They are lying to us and manipulating us. We can live, with great success and prosperity, without them. Their time has come and gone, they made bad bets, but only us the consumers will prove that out. If you choose to run saudi gas over available biodiesel, you bear the moral burden of dead soldiers, greenhouse gasses and oil spills, future terrorist attacks, supporting king Saud over American farmers. And god bless the USA, you are free to make that decision. And I'm free to tell you to f*ck off for your anti-American, pro-middle east, choice.

    Learn more about biodiesel here: http://www.biodiesel.org/resources/biodiesel_basics/default.shtm
  4. Steve Buckner Mother Nature's Son

    Nailknot,
    It is not anti-american to disagree with the Bush adminstration about their decision to invade another country, in fact, disagreeing with the ruling government of the time is what brought this country into existence. Having an opportunity to disagree with any political decision is the foundation of this country, despite your attempts to argue against that right. Apparently Bush has also pursuaded you to believe such nonsense. You argue that you're opposed to being dependent upon middle-eastern oil, but in the same breath, defend the U.S. position there. Now that's Ironic!!! If this is a cause that you believe so stronly in, I see no other course than for you than to enlist!!!

    It is anti-american to invade another country for capitalistic purposes, and it is anti-american to invent the reasons necessary to justify that end, that is, the american ideals that I was raised to believe in. Maybe things have changed for your generation. Killing innocent people, no matter which country they're from is also anti-american. God should not just "bless this country", but now that you've brought God into the picture, the traits of greed, killing, etc. is also incongruent with Christianity as well other religions. I don't believe you've made the case that you're a holy man.

    It is also not that I don't support those troops that are in Iraq. It is entirely possible to support those who have been sent and who have lost their lives without agreeing with the decision to send them there. I believe their lives are more important than for the U.S. to have cheap oil. This war is not on par with WWII, it is a war of greed.

    As much as biodiesel may be an alternative to petroleum based products, it seems to also be a pipedream. It is not readily available. I'd be surprised if it made up more than a percent or two of even this nation's consumption of fuel. So the throne that you've put yourself upon is made of plastic, made from petroleum based products. Unless you're secretly Amish and living on a farm somewhere, your food, your clothing, and everything you consume as an american, is being brought to you by petroleum burning engines. You are no less dependent upon middle-eastern oil than anyone else in this country. That is the sad reality that you'll have to face, despite your self-righteous attitude.

    One of the Hallmarks of this site is the ability to discuss issues of a great variety and to debate them respectfully. Debating any issue can bring out many emotions. Ufortunately, when you tell me to just "f*ck off" because you disagree, you lose credibility, but based upon your responses, maybe you never had any to lose.
  5. Stellablue Salvenius Secretariat

    Posts: 12
    Seattle, WA, USA.
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    How 'bout dem Huskies ???? :beer2:
  6. BOBLAWLESS New Member

    Posts: 2,879
    Port Ludlow, WA, USA.
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    Stevie Wonder

    Gosh Steve, you make a ton of sense when you write about fishing and maybe eve more so when the world of politics grabs your pen, I am a big admirerer. We gotta have some coffee some day or a good big blast of Democratic bourbon (Republicans will only drink scotch, you know).

    Bob, the Kudos for your prose, my good friend. iagree
  7. Cactus Dana Miller

    Posts: 667
    Tacoma, WA, USA.
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    Yes I was aware of that. I posted it to show conclusions of the Commission in a simplified form. However if you would like information:

    "I don't think there's any doubt but that there were some contacts between Saddam Hussein's government and al-Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden's people." (9-11 Commission Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton, News Hour with Jim Lehrer, June 16, 2004)’

    "Yes, there were contacts between Iraqi and al-Qaeda, a number of them, some of them a little shadowy. They were definitely there." (9-11 Commission Chairman Thomas Kean, News Hour with Jim Lehrer, June 16, 2004)

    "Bin Ladin also explored possible cooperation with Iraq during his time in Sudan, despite his opposition to Hussein's secular regime... A senior Iraqi intelligence officer reportedly made three visits to Sudan, finally meeting Bin Ladin in 1994." (9-11 Commission Staff Statement 15, June 16, 2004)

    "Bin Ladin is said to have requested space to establish training camps, as well as assistance in procuring weapons, but Iraq apparently never responded. There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda also occurred after Bin Ladin had returned to Afghanistan, but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship." (9-11 Commission Staff Statement 15, June 16, 2004)

    I granted that there is no evidence of a collaborative relationship, but there were links!

    You know what, if that was all there was I would agree! However, along with those links, with Saddam Hussain's connections to other terrorist groups such as Hamas, the belief by the entire world that he had WMD, his violation of 17 UN sanctions and the now obvious fact that we are not necessarily secure within our borders from attack, I think that it WAS enough reason to support war.
  8. Cactus Dana Miller

    Posts: 667
    Tacoma, WA, USA.
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    And it puzzles ME that you don't get the fact that there was! See my previous post to Kalm's questions.

    Now as for WMD, Saddam did have them at ONE time. He used them against Iran and against the Kurds. He led the entire world to believe that he still had them and the entire world, including John Kerry, thought he did.

    Nowhere have I said that he still had them at the time of our invasion, it is obvious that he did NOT. However, no one can know with any certainty that he never had them 1 year prior to our invasion. He may have had them and either destroyed or moved them prior to our invasion. Or, he may not have had them and just let the world keep on believing he did in the hope that the UN (who he was bribeing) would prevent an invasion.
  9. Steve Buckner Mother Nature's Son

    At the time that Saddam used WMD's on the Kurds, the U.S. was supporting Iraq, we just managed to turn a blind eye at the time. It would be in Saddam's best interest for the world to believe that he had WMD's, this was the only thing hindering the US from invading earlier. In addition to having UNSCOM inspectors in Iraq for the vast majority of the time between the first Iraq war and the second, the U.S. took every conceivable means to spy and gather intelligence. The CIA now acknowledges that it's information was faulty.

    We haven't managed to invade Korea yet, the real threat of them using an atomic weapon has detered our interest there. North Korea also lacks the huge resevoirs of oil that Iraq does.

    "The roots of the Bush supporters' resistance to information," according to Steven Kull, "very likely lie in the traumatic experience of 9/11 and equally in the near pitch-perfect leadership that President Bush showed in its immediate wake. This appears to have created a powerful bond between Bush and his supporters--and an idealized image of the President that makes it difficult for his supporters to imagine that he could have made incorrect judgments before the war, that world public opinion could be critical of his policies or that the President could hold foreign policy positions that are at odds with his supporters."
  10. Steve Buckner Mother Nature's Son

    Thanks Bob!!! :thumb:
  11. Nailknot Active Member

    Posts: 1,907
    Cascadia
    Ratings: +11 / 0
    Dare I say you spin like Karl Rove there Steve! I simply said it was anti-american to run oil when presented with a choice not to. I never said you couldn't debate the issues, I only encouraged you to take action beyond a vote. As far as christainity, supporting the troops, etc etc never entered my comments. But I understand these are stressful times and why those feelings are near the surface for you. Just don't attribute them to me.

    Your saying- don't bother to use alternative fuels, since we all still use some oil in our lives anyway? This zero sum outlook of yours is becoming all too typical of people who refuse to work for solutions, or simply don't know how. Maybe this is passed on from your generation, I'm not sure. Do you expect the Magic Kazoo to descend to the earth and fix it all with one wink of his magic eyeball?

    If you truly oppose the war and USA oppression of middle eastern nations, then do something about it. As long as we are dependent on imported oil, we will be protecting that dependence militarily. But you have said that biodiesel isn't easy enough for you, and that we are all bound to this web of oil... forever? Or just too complex for you to imagine a solution to the problem instead of this hand wringing? Look at the causes of these issues for the answers, and work to fix the cause. Voting for Kerry (or Bush) won't fix the Iraq problem, of that you must be assured. I agree with your points about the war, Steve. But we all need to look a little deeper here. And that's all from me on this dead horse.
  12. Cactus Dana Miller

    Posts: 667
    Tacoma, WA, USA.
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    I appreciate the thoughtful questions EBOB and feel that you deserve a thoughtful response. I'm hoping this will suffice.

    First off I have to say that I doubt the accuracy of the study due to the political partisanship of its authors. In the article they stated that they released the article when they did in order to influence our election. "Statistics" can be funny things! I can show statistics that will show a much lower rate.

    Most estimates say that approximately 10,000 Iraqis a year disappeared into Saddam's torture chambers never to be seen again. Also, according to Seattle's favorite Congressman, James McDermott, approximately 72,000 people a year were dying in Iraq as a result of UN sanctions. That results in a total of 82,000 Iraqis dying every year because of Saddam's rule.

    According to the sources in Brent's link, approximately 67,000 Iraqis per year have died since our invasion.

    Therefore, I could make the arguement that our invasion and capture of Saddam is saving the lives of 15,000 Iraqis every year. Is that an accurate and true figure? I have no idea! But I find it rather crass, that some organization is attempting to make partisan political hay over death figures.


    My father, uncle and my fathers cousin all fought in WW2. They lost dozens of friends between the three of them. Not once have I heard any of them say that it wasn't worth it. I have heard several soldiers who have returned from Iraq say that it IS worth it and that they are ready to return and if they are killed, they will have died for a good cause.

    As do you, I feel remorse every time I hear of the death of one of our soldiers. I wish that no more of them will die. But, if the mission in Iraq is successful in that we bring democracy to that nation, if it results in the other Arab nation moving away from their current brutish rulers as I think that it may; then yes I would have to say that it is worth it.

    Is it the best way to build democratic values in the Middle East? I don't know. But I do know that history shows us that tyrannical governments are rarely overthrown without bloodshed.
  13. Jim Wallace Smells like low tide

    Posts: 5,663
    Somewhere on the Coast
    Ratings: +544 / 0
    Nailknot, thanks for the links. I don't have the stomach to view the beheadings, but I sure did like the fish art, especially the "Thompson Twins."

    The link to the biodiesel showed me that the closest place to get any is at least 70 miles away (Oly), so it is out of the question for now. I do agree that if enough of us want it and demand it, then suppliers will invest in more widespread distribution. The "Catch-22" is that most Americans only want what they are used to getting and is readily available. Very few want to assume the inconvenience of being an "early adapter" of newer, better technology until it has been proven, widely accepted, readily available, and cheaper. Biodiesel needs more promotion so that everyone knows about it and wants it, and then that demand will, as you noted, stimulate an entrepreneurial response providing us with more readily available supply.
    I'd sell my gas rig and get a diesel rig ASAP if there was someplace to get biodiesel locally.

    However I disagree that there is no other source of Hydrogen than extracting it from petroleum or natural gas. Electricity can be used to split good ol' H2O into oxygen and hydrogen. Solar power can be used for this. BP has a fueling station somewhere in Spain that produces hydrogen this way, using solar panels on the roof. It could be that hydrogen will eventually be produced and stored at the distribution site. This hydrogen fuel cell stuff is interesting, but like you said, we'll not see it's widespread use for at least another 20 to 30 years, if at all. Possibly sooner in fleet or mass transportation, but unlikely by individual drivers.
    The biggest practical hurdle is production, transportation, and storage of hydrogen. There is no hydrogen distribution "infrastructure." Like biodiesel, until this distribution problem is solve, no one will want to own a fuel cell powered vehicle. But like you pointed out, readily available diesel rigs are here now.
    Diesel rigs can also be easily converted to burn natural gas, but there is now a looming shortage of that developing, which will drive the prices sky high in the near future.

    Biodiesel is much more practical and is here now if we want it. We just need more demand and distribution to make it a reality. For now, I try to drive as little as I can. I often inconvenience myself so that I can combine several errands into one trip. I used to ride my bicycle everywhere when I lived on Bainbridge Island, especially commuting to work in Seattle. I'm not so hard core about it anymore.
    I moved to the coast so i wouldn't have to drive so far to enjoy my passions of surfing and fishing. I couldn't find a decent "job" here without having to commute, so I started up my landscape maintenance service. In doing all this, I have cut my driving from 30,000miles/year (can you say "road warrior"?) to less than 10,000! I have no dependents and I realize this is impractical for most people who are raising families. Most people raising families are "locked in" to the mainstream, or so it seems that way. There aren't any easy answers, only alot of tough choices.

    Anyway, Nailknot, thanks for your rants. I have a lot of respect for your point of view.

    And Steve Buckner, thank you for your clear reasoning. However, biodiesel is probably more practical than we think...we just need more people wanting it and demanding it. A letter campaign, perhaps?

    And Cactus, thank you for all your input, even though i don't agree with much of what you say. I am staying out of the Iraq war debate, as i don't think anything I say will add a whole lot or change anyone's mind. Also, I do not feel that I have the "facts." If I had to register for the draft today, I would claim Concientious Objector status.

    Thanks for the stimulating discussion, everyone! :thumb:

    Jimbo
  14. Kent Lufkin Remember when you could remember everything?

    Posts: 7,138
    Not sure
    Ratings: +1,227 / 0
    Puh-leeze! The state of Washington will most likely cast all of it's electoral votes for John Kerry. In the unlikely event that this thread manages to persuade one or two of us to change our vote, it's not likely to make an iota of difference in the the ultimate outcome here.

    If you want to evangelize or pontificate, do it in Ohio, Pennsylvania or Florida where their electoral votes are still in doubt. This debate about 'who shot John' is tedious and ultimately only a variation of pissing on your own leg.

    K
  15. troutfanatic A day not spent wasted is.....wasted.

    Posts: 295
    Monroe WA
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    What a stupid comparison..........

    Weren't we attacked in 1941 by Japan? Didn't Germany then declared war on the United States? Completely different situation with Iraq.

    When were we attacked by Iraq? I thought we were attacked by Al Queda. Wasn't Al Queda in Afghansitan. We don't have Bin Landin but we have Saddam? The American public was suckered into the Iraq war.

    Cactus if your so intent on the spread of democracy go over there instead of some eighteen year old kid that doesn't know anything.

    And why is it people think we should be the worlds policeman. When did all the world get together and decide that. Call me crazy but I think we should fix our own problems before we add other countries problems as our own.

    I have an amazing idea. Use all the billions that we spend in Iraq to build a vast border protection system. Do you realize how many guards and security we could afford for our borders with the estimated $200 Billion Dollars In Iraq! If terrorists can't get in the US, they can't attack us, duh! Do you realize Cactus that money is amolst half of our deficit?

    And why should we (American taxpayers) be paying for the restoration of Iraq when Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world?
  16. T Dub New Member

    Posts: 148
    Seattle, Washington, U.S.A.
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    “If you choose to run saudi gas over available biodiesel, you bear the moral burden of dead soldiers, greenhouse gasses and oil spills, future terrorist attacks, supporting king Saud over American farmers. And god bless the USA, you are free to make that decision. And I'm free to tell you to f*ck off for your anti-American, pro-middle east, choice.”

    Nailnot, you make some good points, and your passion for biodiesel is admirable, but I think you're placing WAY too much emphasis on this. Especially by saying that we bear the moral burden of dead soldiers, greenhouse gasses and oil spills, future terrorist attacks and more. We were all born into this, and I certainly don't think that by burning biodiesel we will suddenly send the big oil and middle east into a frenzy. That's like telling a millionaire that you're going to take a dollar away from him every year, and to call people anti-American for not using biodiesel is a bit of a stretch. Really. Sure, it would be great and it's a step in the right direction, but to be supporting the terrorist and Anti-American. Nope.

    Our Auto fuel consumption can only be a drop in the bucket. The fact is that we live in a country that consumes and produces more than any other by far, as we all know. If every vehicle in this country ran on biodiesel that would sure be great, but it wouldn't really affect the terrorists and big oil companies that greatly, I think.

    Here's just a small list of things made from the terrorists oil.

    Tires, PLASTICS, PLASTICS, PLASTICS, electrical wires, carpets, paint, paper, clothing, cosmetics, insulation, animal food, hoses, shoes, coating, antifreeze, medicine, weed killers, fertilisers, candles, lunch bags, adhesives, brake fluid, propane, asphalt, diesel fuel, butane, kerosene, explosives, jet fuels, styrofoam cups, plastic containers.

    Not to mention that EVERY other thing made takes oil to produce and transport it.

    Again, it's not that I disagree with your view of biodiesel, but certainly do disagree with the emphasis you're placing on it, and the guilt your placing on our shoulders. We could all use biodiesel, and those soldiers and innocent Iraqis would still be dead.

    TDub, the non anti-American
  17. Tom Hawkins Newbie is fine w/me, I havent been FFing too long

    Posts: 60
    Oak Harbor, WA (on Whidbey Island)
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    Your credibility as fishermen far exceeds all else.....

    and, IMHO, don't quit your day jobs for that of the political arena...LOL.
    We shall see who has spoken, after 11/02/2004, now, there is a fact you can count on.
  18. Nailknot Active Member

    Posts: 1,907
    Cascadia
    Ratings: +11 / 0
    You're right TDub, I was over the top. I just wish we could do something other than debate and vote. I'm frustrated and looking to do something, and I wish others felt the same. Biodiesel is something we can do. It's only one thing, a little thing, but its something anyway. And you are correct about the ingrained use of petro for all sorts of things. But you are wrong about USA petro use for cars. Gasoline is by far the largest user of imported oil in the USA. I just hope we all do *anything* besides a vote. And we can do things, I truly believe that. I believe we consumers/citizens NEED to do something. And I would add, if you sit idle, depend on some corporate/gov't delivery, you will encourage them to make things even worse. Who is on our side here? I.E. see Ford, and ask yourself, do they have a stake in USA energy independence, or millionaire stock holders, you be the judge: http://www.greencarcongress.com/2004/10/fordrsquos_evol.html
  19. irishmac10 New Member

    Posts: 16
    Snohomish Washington
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    they found the 58,000 ballots, they where returned to the post office, not enough postage on them. :confused: ;)
  20. Nailknot Active Member

    Posts: 1,907
    Cascadia
    Ratings: +11 / 0
    Live Free or Die.

    Time to stop blabbering and start working to improve USA. No free lunch. Expect better? Make it better.