Re: [Biofuel] Oil and democracy -was-Scientific method
I don't remember exactly where I first found this quote (either The Future of Freedom Foundation - www.fff.org or www.LewRockwell.com). It was from some speech or address that Teddy gave on April 19, 1906. It pops up on several quote websites (search for roosevelt april 19 1906 or Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government on your favorite search engine). At first glance this quote appears to refer to some conspiracy group or secret society that is behind the government, but I think it refers to the growing government bureacracy that runs the day-to-day operations regardless of who is in power. Good luck finding a sound byte. Thanks, Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- That government is best which governs least. -- Thomas Paine -- Check out my latest blogs at http://KinsleyForPrez08.blogspot.com - Original Message - From: Jason and Katie [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 3:22 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Oil and democracy -was-Scientific method Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmen of today. - President Theodore Roosevelt - 1906 Hey Mr. Kinzley, do you know where i can get that quote in a soundbyte? we have a DJ here at home who is paying ungodly FCC fines because he doesnt really care, and i bet he would play this as a bump for his Church of Lazlo rant session. i wonder how many people have actually heard or read that, that are still alive... --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Oil and democracy -was-Scientific method
- Original Message - From: Chip Mefford [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 11:16 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Oil and democracy -was-Scientific method -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Paul S Cantrell wrote: The last 2 elections would have probably gone the other way if it were simple majority. I think the concerns over time zones and the like could be worked out and we might have more than 2 twin parties. Personally, I think some simple changes would fix a lot of what is currently borked in the US political system. Debates for instance, pretty much all public debating (meaning televised) is done of, by and for the Twin Partys. This should cease immediately. This much of the system process would be well served by true open debate, including by design third or fringe party candidates. I think this alone would be easy to handle under law. I think it could make a huge difference. In the last Presidential election, both the Libertarian Party candidate (Mike Badnarick) and the Consitutional Party Candidate (Mike Peroutka) filed a lawsuit against the Commission on Presidential Debates to allow fringe candidates access to the debate held in Arizona. The judge ruled against them, stating that they waited too long to file and there wasn't enough time to allow for a thorough review of the case. Basically, better luck next time. Both candidates proceeded to crash the debates anyway, and were arrested trying to get in the building. These Presidential candidates spent a night in jail trying to defend open debates, and the mainstream new outlets didn't even mention it. When the Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum Parties (you decide which one is which) finally succumb to letting the rabble in on their choreographed debates, they would be acknowledging that there really are more than two parties in the U.S. And that would be a bad thing for them. Thanks, Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmen of today. - President Theodore Roosevelt - 1906 ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] noryl impellers
Chris, I don't think that noryl will hold up. My company had a problem with esterized hydrocarbons (in the form of machine oil) attack a mechanical shaft made with noryl in one of our aircraft instruments. After a few months the oil weakened the noryl to the point that it fractured. We had to repair half our altimeters at our expense. We found that cleaning the machine oil off of the metal part of the shaft before mating it with the noryl part eliminated the problem. Oops. There are plastics that will hold up in fuel. We are using glass-filled PPS (don't remember what is stands for offhand), and ULTEM in one of our aicraft fuel probe designs (JP-8 resistant). You may be able to find other impellers made from these materials. Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmen of today. - President Theodore Roosevelt - 1906 - Original Message - From: Chris Tan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2005 3:27 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] noryl impellers Keith and Everyone: Have any of you tried a clear water pump with noryl plastic impellers? Will esters dissolve noryl plastics? Thanks. Best regards, Chris ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] oil price gouging poll
Zeke, I'm not sure how we got sidetracked. I was only trying to point out that the Federal government cannot effectively do anything to artificially stop or slow the increasing price of oil, and that as consumers, we usually have the ability to take our business elsewhere if we feel we are being gouged at the pump. Thanks, Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmen of today. - President Theodore Roosevelt - 1906 - Original Message - From: Zeke Yewdall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 12:16 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] oil price gouging poll I wasn't around in the 60's, but as long as I remember, we wore seatbelts. My dad refused to start the car if everyone didn't have their belt on, and he even added belts to some older vehicals that didn't have them. How did this thread turn from price gouging to seat belt use anyway? On 10/20/05, Mike Weaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thet were lapbelts in the 60's. We wore them. Most of my friends didn't. I had one friend get offended when I put mine on while in the passenger seat. His comment was: I thought you trusted my driving - I said, I do, but if you are at a red light and someone plows into you from behind, what does that have to do with your driving skill? Are you going to look in the rear view mirrow and levitate over the car in front of you? No response. I've always felt that any idea Detriot is dead set against means it must be a good one. It's a good way to judge whether or not the country should do it. CAFE, emissions, safety - the list goes on. I am not a big fan of automotive black boxes - I don't want my car spying on me. I'm not buying a new car because of it, or until I figure out how to disable it or crack it. -Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John, I completely agree with your first point that corporate welfare should be stopped. However, I have to disagree with you on your second point. Labor laws and government-mandated worker safety standards have had a crippling effect on many small-to-medium sized companies. Many of these regulations began as corporate-union concessions, or industry-standard committees. By the government stepping in and enacting regulations, both labor unions and corporate negotiators have lost much of their bargaining powers and industry participants have less and less say in how their industries should be operated. Also, while I agree you that market forces do not always choose the path that is best for everyone, consumer choice can be a powerful balancing weapons to keep those market forces on the right path. As a side note, both Ford and Chrysler began offering seat-belts in 1956 as a result of pressure from several industry groups, including the SAE and AMA. This was 5 years prior to the first seat-belt law (WI NY in 1961). And I know my family (and I'll bet your's too) didn't wear the seat belts in our cars until the late 1980's. Does this prove how ineffectual government safety regulations can be? You be the judge. Thanks, Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- That government is best which governs least. -- Thomas Paine -- Check out my latest blogs at http://KinsleyForPrez08.blogspot.com - Original Message - From: John E Hayes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 9:29 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] oil price gouging poll [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Government meddling in a free-market economy is never a good thing. a) Well, removing the billions in corporate welfare the petroleum industry gets from the government might be a good place to start. Why ExxonMobil needs my tax dollars to fund RD when they had $25 billion dollars in profits last year, I don't really know. b) I disagree with your contention that the the government doesn't have a place in the market. First of all, laize-fair capitalism was rejected by the American people over a hundred years ago. We have labor laws and worker safety standards for a reason - a pure free market sucks for almost everybody except those at the very top/ Second, market forces will *not* always result in choices that are best for society as a whole. Without governmental regulations, we'd still be driving seatbelt-less, no-crumple zone cars powered with leaded gasoline. Free market ideologues always seem to ignore this little detail. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org
Re: [Biofuel] oil price gouging poll
John, I completely agree with your first point that corporate welfare should be stopped. However, I have to disagree with you on your second point. Labor laws and government-mandated worker safety standards have had a crippling effect on many small-to-medium sized companies. Many of these regulations began as corporate-union concessions, or industry-standard committees. By the government stepping in and enacting regulations, both labor unions and corporate negotiators have lost much of their bargaining powers and industry participants have less and less say in how their industries should be operated. Also, while I agree you that market forces do not always choose the path that is best for everyone, consumer choice can be a powerful balancing weapons to keep those market forces on the right path. As a side note, both Ford and Chrysler began offering seat-belts in 1956 as a result of pressure from several industry groups, including the SAE and AMA. This was 5 years prior to the first seat-belt law (WI NY in 1961). And I know my family (and I'll bet your's too) didn't wear the seat belts in our cars until the late 1980's. Does this prove how ineffectual government safety regulations can be? You be the judge. Thanks, Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- That government is best which governs least. -- Thomas Paine -- Check out my latest blogs at http://KinsleyForPrez08.blogspot.com - Original Message - From: John E Hayes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 9:29 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] oil price gouging poll [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Government meddling in a free-market economy is never a good thing. a) Well, removing the billions in corporate welfare the petroleum industry gets from the government might be a good place to start. Why ExxonMobil needs my tax dollars to fund RD when they had $25 billion dollars in profits last year, I don't really know. b) I disagree with your contention that the the government doesn't have a place in the market. First of all, laize-fair capitalism was rejected by the American people over a hundred years ago. We have labor laws and worker safety standards for a reason - a pure free market sucks for almost everybody except those at the very top/ Second, market forces will *not* always result in choices that are best for society as a whole. Without governmental regulations, we'd still be driving seatbelt-less, no-crumple zone cars powered with leaded gasoline. Free market ideologues always seem to ignore this little detail. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] oil price gouging poll
There is not much we, as consumers do about the price gouging, except perhaps to use less oil. Not just in your cars, but by using less energy overall. As Mike already pointed out, President Carter wore a sweater around the White House and turned the thermostat down. But turning off lights in rooms not in use, turning down your hot water heaters in the summer months, getting heavier drapes to keep out the hot sun/cold drafts, etc. Oh yeah, and maybe try using some of that fancy biofuel. If W is encouraging us to use it, then it must be good stuff. Seriously, it is good to see that more and more people are waking up and realizing that the United States has a profit-driven economy, and that supply and demand works (supply runs short, demand doesn't, so raise prices). But to think that the Federal Guvment will fix it by taxing us more? What are they thinking? OK, let's assume (snicker, ha-ha) that the Federal Guvment was able to efficiently and effectively manage the dispersement of RD funds towards alternative fuels research. And let's also assume that the Federal Guvment were to add an additional tax on the windfall profits that oil companies are making on this price gouging (yeah, like W's puppetmasters would go for that). Well, how do they define windfall profit? All profit? Only profit that is considered excessive? How excessive is excessive - 10%, 20%, 30%? Who sets the bar? Would you trust W to set the bar? How about Congress? Given their (W, his administration, the Congress, etc.) track record with collecting taxes and spending money on the right things, IMHO, they should just stay out of it. Government meddling in a free-market economy is never a good thing. Enjoy! Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- That government is best which governs least. -- Thomas Paine -- Check out my latest blogs at http://KinsleyForPrez08.blogspot.com - Original Message - From: Alt.EnergyNetwork [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 5:27 AM Subject: [Biofuel] oil price gouging poll H, so in light of this poll, does anyone believe that the oil co's, auto co's and politicos are going to actually do anything about it, besides some feeble, feel good conservation PR?? regards tallex Most Americans say oil companies are price gouging Four out of five Americans would support a tax on the windfall profits of oil companies if the resulting revenues were devoted to alternative energy research, according to an Opinion Research Corp. (ORC) poll conducted for 40mpg.org and the Boston-based nonprofit and nonpartisan Civil Society Institute (CSI). CSI is a think tank and the 40mpg.org campaign is a project of CSI. Other key survey findings include: 87 percent of Americans think that oil companies are gouging gasoline consumers today; 81 percent say the federal government is not doing enough about high energy prices and America's overreliance on Middle Eastern oil; 73 percent believe that recent gasoline price hikes now make it more important that the federal government impose higher fuel-efficiency standards; and four out of five adults say that U.S. automakers should follow the same path as Toyota, which intends that all of its new cars going forward will use fuel-saving hybrid technology. In response to the poll, 40mpg.org has launched an online petition at www.40mpg.org allowing Americans to tell their members of Congress and the White House that they want major steps taken in terms of a windfall profits tax on oil companies and tougher fuel-efficiency standards on vehicles. CSI president Pam Solo said: Americans have seen too much price gouging and too little action from Washington on energy prices, fuel-efficient vehicles and our dangerous reliance on foreign oil. The benefits of making 40 miles per gallon the standard for all autos in the United States are obvious to Americans: consumers save money; we reduce our dangerous reliance on Middle Eastern oil, making us more secure in the world; air pollution is reduced; and we can cut the U.S. contribution to global warming by nearly a third. Greater fuel efficiency makes sense, it is technologically possible, the benefits are real and the challenges can be overcome. Some key highlights of the poll are: + Price gouging. Some 87 percent think big oil companies are currently gouging consumers at the gas pump, with 57 percent saying there is a great deal of such price gouging going on. Fewer than 4 percent say no price gouging is going on. Political affiliation makes almost no difference in how Americans respond to this question with 87 percent of independents, 82 percent of Republicans and 91 percent of Democrats saying there is a great deal or some price gouging going on. + Windfall profits tax on oil companies. Seventy-nine percent would support a tax
[Biofuel] W @ NED in DC - 10-6-2005
Yesterday, our esteemed Imperial leader, W, gave a speech at a National Endowment for Democracy event that attempted to both alleviate our fears and cultivate our terror in order to garner support for his administration's illogical foreign and domestic security policies. Below are the transcripts from his speech, courtesy of the NED (http://www.ned.org/events/oct0605-Bush.html). Because of W's tendency to use double-speak, I offer translations for W's passages, preceded by the phrase (Translation). Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- That government is best which governs least. -- Thomas Paine -- Check out my latest blogs at http://KinsleyForPrez08.blogspot.com -- Thank you all. (Applause.) Thank you all. Please be seated. (Applause.) Thank you for the warm welcome. I'm honored once again to be with the supporters of the National Endowment for Democracy. Since the day President Ronald Reagan set out the vision for this Endowment, the world has seen the swiftest advance of democratic institutions in history. And Americans are proud to have played our role in this great story. (Translation) Welcome, fellow imperial nation-builders! I am happy to report that the puppet mastering plans begun by Emperor Ronald the Jelly Belly have been succeeding as planned. You should be proud of yourselves for the role you played in placing Americanized governments in many second- and third-world countries. Our nation stood guard on tense borders; we spoke for the rights of dissidents and the hopes of exile; we aided the rise of new democracies on the ruins of tyranny. And all the cost and sacrifice of that struggle has been worth it, because, from Latin America to Europe to Asia, we've gained the peace that freedom brings. (Translation) We have proved time and time again that bigger guns and better technology always wins, regardless of whether we are right or wrong. We've managed to give many foreign citizens the ultimate form of peace and freedom -- death. In this new century, freedom is once again assaulted by enemies determined to roll back generations of democratic progress. Once again, we're responding to a global campaign of fear with a global campaign of freedom. And once again, we will see freedom's victory. (Applause.) (Translation) In less than three years, my term will end and we face the possibility of a Democrat in the White House. We must prevent this at all costs to secure our freedom to steal other's liberties. Vin, I want to thank you for inviting me back. And thank you for the short introduction. (Laughter.) I appreciate Carl Gershman. I want to welcome former Congressman Dick Gephardt, who is a board member of the National Endowment for Democracy. It's good to see you, Dick. And I appreciate Chris Cox, who is the Chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and a board member for the National Endowment of Democracy, for being here, as well. I want to thank all the other board members. (Translation) Vin, it is my turn to speak now, so sit down and shut up. (Ha-ha-ha.) Let's see how many names I can throw out as a token of my appreciation for being here -- Carl, Dick (who let the Dem in here?) and Chris. I appreciate the Secretary of State, Condi Rice, who has joined us -- alongside her, Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld. Thank you all for being here. I'm proud, as well, that the newly sworn-in Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the first Marine ever to hold that position, is with us today -- General Peter Pace. (Applause.) I thank the members of the Diplomatic Corps who are here, as well. (Translation) Let me introduce my posse that will help us achieve our global dominance - Condi, Donny and Peter Pan (well he is dressed in green). I also want to recognize all of the minions who propagate our message of, What out for the United States - We're coming your way. Recently our country observed the fourth anniversary of a great evil, and looked back on a great turning point in our history. We still remember a proud city covered in smoke and ashes, a fire across the Potomac, and passengers who spent their final moments on Earth fighting the enemy. We still remember the men who rejoiced in every death, and Americans in uniform rising to duty. And we remember the calling that came to us on that day, and continues to this hour: We will confront this mortal danger to all humanity. We will not tire, or rest, until the war on terror is won. (Applause.) (Translation) Remember when I did that bullhorn thing in the rubble of the WTC? I looked really cool! (Clap-clap-clap) The images and experience of September the 11th are unique for Americans. Yet the evil of that morning has reappeared on other days, in other places -- in Mombasa, and Casablanca, and Riyadh, and Jakarta, and Istanbul, and Madrid, and Beslan, and Taba, and Netanya, and Baghdad
Re: [Biofuel] W @ NED in DC - 10-6-2005
I'm glad you liked it. I think CNN has audio of the speech. That is I first found the transcripts. - Original Message - From: Joe Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 2:49 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] W @ NED in DC - 10-6-2005 ROFL ROFL ROFL Excellent Earl! Are there audio clips available? I could use more audio for my next protest song. Joe ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] US army plans to bulk-buy anthrax
Kieth, Yes, the B-2 program was accomplished on the up and up, but the F-117 was designed and built almost entirely under a cloak of secrecy. In fact, much of the individual pieces of the F-117 design were compartmentalized so much that the contractors and suppliers working on the aircraft did not even know what they were working on. There is a story at my company of a time in the mid-80's when we received a specification for a fuel gauging system for a nameless aircraft. We were told that when the system was ready for shipment, we should call a telephone number and leave the package on our loading night that evening. The next morning the package was gone. We never knew who picked it up or where it went. A few weeks later a check would arrive in the mail from some third party company. The money was good, so we kept delivering this way for several years. It was only after the F-117 was made public that we knew what the fuel system was for. Thus it is hard to leak information on something that you don't anything about. Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe -- Check out my latest blogs at http://KinsleyForPrez08.blogspot.com - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 3:43 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] US army plans to bulk-buy anthrax Remember the F-117 and B2 were build by 10's of thousands of people, costing 10's of billions, and not one significant leak. Sorry, what's this got to do with it? What does it mean anyway, not one significant leak? What didn't leak? The whole world knew about the F-117 and B2 and what they were intended for. And what they cost - at one time it was slang in the financial world, 1 Stealth = $1 billion. That was when they were still cheap. (They're not that good anyway, according to the GAO, serious shortcomings.) Anyway, it's thought by some that the high cost of the B2, the most expensive plane ever at $2.2 bn, was a cover for, uh, black ops. Is that what didn't get leaked by 10's of thousands of people? ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Draft US Defense Paper Outlines Preventive Nuclear Strikes
You can find a copy of the draft paper at http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/policy/dod/jp3_12fc2.pdf. I have only just started reading it, but it already looks like most of the other DoD policy papers I have read - a lot of fluff, but not much substance. The DoD is always putting out things like this, asking (and answering) the question, What if... It is scary that the US has to make plans for the potential use of its nuclear arsenal, and I eagerly look forward to the day when the last nuclear weapons is disabled or destroyed, but not making these plans is like keeping a shotgun in your home for protection and not keeping any shells because you are afraid what will happen if it goes off. BTW, do you notice that when the DoD refers to its enemies' nuclear, chemical or biological arsenal, it uses the term Weapons of Mass Destruction, but when it refers to its own, these are Deterrents against WMD or just nuclear weapons. I think they are trying to downplay the fact that the US has enough nuclear weapons to massively destroy the entire earth. Perhaps we should coin a term for this - Weapons of Gargantuan Destruction (WGD) or maybe Gigantic Wicked Bombs (GWB - oh wait, those initials are already taken). I like Weapons of Planetary Destruction (WPD) - it has a nice, though eerie ring to it... Enjoy the time you have left... Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe -- Check out my latest blogs at http://KinsleyForPrez08.blogspot.com - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 5:49 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Draft US Defense Paper Outlines Preventive Nuclear Strikes http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0911-02.htm Published on Sunday, September 11, 2005 by Agence France Presse Draft US Defense Paper Outlines Preventive Nuclear Strikes A new draft US defense paper calls for preventive nuclear strikes against state and non-state adversaries in order to deter them from using weapons of mass destruction and urges US troops to prepare to use nuclear weapons effectively. Archive picture of a US nuclear bomb exploding over Nagasaki, Japan, on August 9, 1945. A new draft US defense paper calls for preventive nuclear strikes against state and non-state adversaries in order to deter them from using weapons of mass destruction and urges US troops to 'prepare to use nuclear weapons effectively.' (AFP/File) The document, titled Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations and dated March 15, was put together by the Pentagon's Joint Staff in at attempt to adapt current procedures to the fast-changing world after the September 11, 2001, attacks, said a defense official. But the official, who spoke to AFP late Saturday on condition of anonymity, said it has not yet been signed by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and thus has not been made official policy. It's in the process of being considered, the official said. A copy of the draft obtained by AFP urges US theater force commanders operating around the world to prepare specific plans for using nuclear weapons in their regions -- and outlines scenarios, under which it would be justified to seek presidential approval for a nuclear strike. They include an adversary using or planning to use weapons of mass destruction against US or allied forces as well as civilian populations. Preventive nuclear strikes could also be employed to destroy a biological weapons arsenal belonging to an enemy, if there is no possibility to take it out with conventional weapons and it is determined the enemy is poised for a biological attack, according to the draft. They could also be seen as justified to destroy deep, hardened bunkers containing enemy chemical or biological weapons or the command and control infrastructure required to execute a chemical, biological or nuclear attack. However, a number of scenarios allow nuclear strikes without enemy weapons of mass destruction in the equation. They could be used, for instance, to counter potentially overwhelming conventional adversaries, to secure a rapid end of a war on US terms, or simply to ensure success of US and multinational operations, the document indicates. In the context of the US-led war on terror, the draft explicitly warns that any attempt by a hostile power to hand over weapons of mass destruction to militant groups to enable them to strike a devastating blow against the United States will likely trigger a US nuclear response against the culprit. Regional US commanders may request presidential approval to go nuclear to respond to adversary-supplied WMD use by surrogates against US and multinational forces or civilian populations, the draft says. The doctrine also gives the Pentagon the green light to deploy nuclear weapons to parts
Re: [Biofuel] Morality test for you all
Greg, I agree wholeheartedly. It doesn't matter who it was, letting them drown isn't even an option. Not trying to save him would mean we were no better than the low life scum out there drowning? Besides, there will be plenty of time to take photos of the idiot fool in his true form (floundering) in the boat. Earl - Original Message - From: Greg and April [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 11:53 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Morality test for you all I find it funny that the first time I saw it, it was about Bill Clinton, then the second time it was about Hillary Clinton. What is not funny is that my answer remains the same.Neither, I would try and save them. Now granted, after I saved them, I might punch them in the nose for things they have done, but, I would try and save them. Greg H. - Original Message - From: malcolm maclure [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2005 13:06 Subject: [Biofuel] Morality test for you all This is a tough one Check this - Morality Test: This test only has one question, but it's a very important one. By giving an honest answer, you will discover where you stand morally. The test features an unlikely, completely fictional situation in which you will have to make a decision. Remember that your answer needs to be honest, yet spontaneous. Please scroll down slowly and give due consideration to each line. You are in Florida, Miamito to be specific. There is chaos all around you caused by a hurricane with severe flooding. This is a flood of biblical proportions. You are a photojournalist working for a major newspaper, and you're caught in the middle of this epic disaster. The situation is nearly hopeless. You're trying to shoot career-making photos. There are houses and people swirling around you, some disappearing under the water. Nature is unleashing all of its destructive fury. Suddenly you see a man floundering in the water. He is fighting for his life, trying not to be taken down with the debris. You move closer... somehow the man looks familiar. You suddenly realize who it is. It's George W. Bush! At the same time you notice that the raging waters are about to take him under ... forever. You have two options--you can save the life of G.W. Bush or you can shoot a dramatic Pulitzer Prize winning photo, documenting the death of one of the world's most powerful men. So here's the question, and please give an honest answer: Would you select high contrast colour film, or would you go with the classic simplicity of black and white? Regards to all Malcolm :-) ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] There's no proof of global warming
Are you implying that the boogie man doesn't exist either?!?!?!? How can this be? I know I saw him in my closet last night, at least I stay awake imagining that he was in my closet, ready to pounce the moment I closed my eyes - Original Message - From: bob allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 7:48 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Dear Bob Allen was Re: There'sno proof of global warming so I'm a skeptic. you can believe in the boogie man if you wish. And a comment for future reference. I find it mildly disconcerting the you plant my name in the subject line. I know that I am trying to talk about chemtrails and your trying to talk about me, but let's please keep the discourse civil and at the very least keep the personalities out of the subject line. I get enough spam as it is thank you. Appal Energy wrote: Nice song and dance Bob, -- Bob Allen http://ozarker.org/bob Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves - Richard Feynman ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Cuba Willing to Send Immediate Medical Help
Castro: U.S. hasn't responded to Katrina offer From Lucia Newman CNN Monday, September 5, 2005; Posted: 11:48 a.m. EDT (15:48 GMT) HAVANA, Cuba (CNN) -- Cuban President Fidel Castro told more than 1,500 doctors Sunday night that American officials had made absolutely no response to his offer to send them to the U.S. Gulf Coast to help victims of Hurricane Katrina. Castro, a longtime adversary of the United States, initially offered to send 1,100 doctors and at least 26 tons of supplies and equipment, but the Communist leader announced Sunday during a televised speech that he had increased the number of physicians to 1,586. Each doctor would carry about 27 pounds of medicine. You could all be there right now lending your services, but 48 hours have passed since we made this offer, and we have received absolutely no response, Castro said at Havana's Palace of the Revolution. We continue to wait patiently for a response. In the meantime, all of you will be taking intensive courses in immunology and also something that I should be doing -- an intensive brush-up course in English. Besides Cuba, several other countries and international agencies have offered money and supplies to the hurricane victims. (Full story) In the past, Cuba has refused U.S. offers of aid, the most recent following Hurricane Dennis. That storm killed more than 10 people in the Caribbean island nation in July. At that time, Castro said he would not accept help from Washington because of the U.S. trade embargo against his country. The United States has no diplomatic relations with Cuba. Castro has named the Cuban rescue team the Henry Reeve Brigade in honor of an American who fought with Cuba's rebel forces during the Cuban War of Independence against Spain that began in 1895. The doctors who have been mobilized went to South Asia after the December tsunami and have worked in other disasters. Find this article at: http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/americas/09/05/katrina.cuba/index.html I guess George Bush is ignoring Fidel Castro, much like Mike Weaver was ignoring Kieth Addison (or was it the other way around?). Perhaps the Cuban doctors should brush up on English phrases like, Don't shoot, I am not a spy!, Yes, this medicine is legal (wink,wink). and Insurance, you don't need no stinking insurance. Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe -- Check out my latest blogs at http://KinsleyForPrez08.blogspot.com - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 5:35 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Biofuel Digest, Vol 5, Issue 51 'soldiers' with a capital 's'? nice touch. so, these doctors castro has offered to send, since they were at one point in their youth soldiers by virtue of universal conscription, they are condemned to be forever regarded as such? i guess that means that all cuban immigrants since 1959 should be regarded with suspicion. best round them up and cart them off to gitmo posthaste. -chris b. In a message dated 9/6/05 Juan Gutierrez writes: See I thought you guys had some idea. In Cuba all 18 year olds go to military trainning before thats women and men before they get put in the career choice of the government. Including Doctor's and Scientists. From: bob allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Cuba Willing to Send Immediate Medical Help Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2005 08:11:37 -0500 When did he offer soldiers? this article is about 1100 doctors. Oh, you're joking? I take it then that you think Castro is insincere? Juan Gutierrez wrote: He such a nice guy he wants to send 1100 fully specially trained Soldiers to this country ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Katrina slams New Orleans. Is There Blame?
By George, I think he's figured it out! Somebody give Jeff an attaboy, maybe appoint him as Director of FEMA. Perhaps this is the mantra that has been taught in our public schools for the last 50 years? We are all a product of our environment, and as such cannot be held accountable for our actions or inactions. I've been behind on reading my emails, but they (the emails, just so no one misconstrues what I amd referring to) have been entertaining. Regardless of our opinions of the stupidity of some people* in the Katrina-ravaged areas, we should do what we can to help all of the victims of this disaster. After all is said and done, let's try and change the way people think and help prevent this situation from happening again. *By some people, I am excluding the following: children, elderly, disabled, invalid, mentally-challenged, non-English speaking immigrants, Saints fans and anyone named Forrest (stupid is as stupid does). Thanks, Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmen of today. - President Theodore Roosevelt - 1906 - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, September 02, 2005 11:15 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Katrina slams New Orleans. Is There Blame? I just got it. The less we hold people accountable for there own actions, the more we can blame the administration for all their troubles. Makes perfect sense to me. Jeff ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Katrina slams New Orleans. Is There Blame?
Kim, You and Greg are not the only ones who feel that way. I am just getting caught up on the day's email, and I found that I agree more with you two that most of the others on this particular topic. If I lived in a disaster-prone area, like Southern Louisiana, Florida, Southern California or even Seattle/Tacoma area, I would certainly prepare for the worst. I also do not condemn the people who attempted to help themselves. In fact, I do feel sorry for those souls who did evacuate (or tried to) and now do not know where their homes are still standing or have been stripped clean by selfish looters. I would gladly open my home to someone in that situation, whether I knew them well or not. For those who stayed behind against the warnings of the weather experts (including the non-governmental ones), state and local governments, don't worry, the Fed's will come in and bail you out as they always do. I just hope that the local police get a copy of the news tapes showing the faces of those looters carrying TVs DVD players out of the abandoned stores. What do you need a TV for when the power is expected to be out for weeks or months? It would be nice to see some prosecuted. Thanks, Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmen of today. - President Theodore Roosevelt - 1906 - Original Message - From: Garth Kim Travis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2005 7:15 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Katrina slams New Orleans. Is There Blame? Greetings, I am wondering, are Greg and I the only ones that feel frustration with people who don't care about their lives, then expect someone else to pick up the pieces? Greg has not condemned anyone who tried to help themselves, just those who don't. I can remember my parents being irate with a neighbor when we were growing up for the same kind of behavior. There was a broken water main and it flooded the basements of the houses. The one guy on the street that was always bragging about his new toys, was the one that didn't have the money to fix his house, because he didn't pay his insurance premiums. I mean, who expects a flood in Calgary, Alberta, Canada? I am afraid they were not very polite when someone came canvassing for money to help the guy. How about: God helps those who help themselves? I don't see that a rant against people who have endangered themselves and others is out of line. And yes, I have already donated help and I am working on more for the people of Louisianna. Bright Blessings, Kim At 03:54 PM 9/1/2005, you wrote: I'm sure that there is a percentage of people who have exercised poor judgment. Who hasn't exercised poor judgment? The irony here is how you express less sympathy as the suffering from those mistakes gets worse. Mike ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Hakan, If only one of the cohabitants were married, I think that would satisfy the letter of the law. But with the high moral values of the majority of citizens (especially the followers of TV evangelists like Pat Robertson), these two might get linched for living in sin! As far as being the land of the free, Goethe said it best - None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. We are only as free as the governments let us be... BTW, thank goodness I am married (to my cohabitant). I wouldn't want to give the police, or the linch mob, any reason to come take me (or my wife) away. Thanks for the brief respite from bioenergy and serious politics. Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 10:11 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers Mike, Never heard about it before. LOL This is fantastic, a long time since I had such a good laugh. Not since Bush said that they did the best to kill their own military. LOL In a range of ...so do we statements, he actually said. They try their best to kill our people, so do we. LOL Is it enough that one of them are married? Do they have to be married to each other, or just married? Amazing!! How can they call it the land of the free, when it is against the law to be free? Hakan At 14:28 29/08/2005, you wrote: Hakan: To condition the cohabitation of a men and a women on if they are married or not? Unmarried cohabitation. Eight states continue to make it a crime for an unmarried man and a woman to cohabit together: Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Virginia and West Virginia fall into this category. http://www.unmarriedamerica.org/Court/privacy-ruling.htmhttp://www.unmarriedamerica.org/Court/privacy-ruling.htm Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike, I did not know of the sedition act of 1918: ...shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States... This make any talk about freedom of speech a joke. The unravelling of the lack of democracy, has never been so obvious as the execution and results from the two last elections and the way the Iraqi war has been pursued. I still think that Corprocracy is a better word for the governing method of US. It seems that we have to change the phrase the nation of the free to the nation of the blind. To condition the cohabitation of a men and a women on if they are married or not? Do they have to be married to each other, or just married? Is it enough if onl! y one of them is married? This info I keep as one of the most bizarre I have. LOL Hakan ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] The New Blue States/Country
Robert, Thank you for the reminders - I forgot a few things - Original Message - From: robert luis rabello [EMAIL PROTECTED] You live in a country where you have the ABILITY to earn your money, and you question the legitimacy of the government in taxing your income? You live in a country with an elaborate infrastructure undreamed of by the Constitutional framers, and you have a problem with supporting that infrastructure? It is true that many of the Constitutional framers never intended the federal government to become the beaurocratic behemoth that is is today. They would have probably have revolted by now if they were alive today. I think we have career politicians to thank for our unsupportable infrastructure. Now, there are legitimate things that each of these levels of government can spend taxpayer dollars on, namely, those outlined in their constitution or charter. We do not live in the same nation that existed in 1789 when the Constitution was ratified. Which is why the Constitution is a living document, and there are currently 27 amendments to the Constitution. Perhaps we need a few more to bring it up to today's standards. But the President and Congress have already demonstrated that they can expand federal powers without the need for a Constitutional Amendment, so why bother trying. And the citizens won't notice the difference. In the case of the U.S. Government, these include national defense (not necessarily offense, though), minting currency, postal services, etc. When the U.S. Government (or perhaps the state governments) start spending my money outside the bounds of the Constitution, it is no longer legit. Not so, else that kind of activity would have been deemed unconstitutional long ago. Yours is a tired argument from the 1930s. How do you explain Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid? Is it in the Constitution? Then why does the FY2006 budget include over $1 trillion in expenditures for these programs? I would like to see Congress try and pass an Amendment to allow giving loans to foreign nations and never expecting repayment of those loans. How much support do you think they would get from the populace? What on earth are you talking about? If you're so concerned with fiscal restraint, why not encourage the Federal Government to pass a balanced budget amendment? Deficit spending is a serious problem, of which foreign aid is a vanishingly small percentage. Bravo - I think that a balance budget amendment would be a great addition to our Constitution! Then perhaps the Federal Government wouldn't be allowed to increase our public debt by $390 billion next year (not including interest on the debt). You do make a good point about direct foreign aid - it only amounts to $950 million, or 0.037% of the total federal budget. I stand corrected. But private contributions have had a significant impact on international aid when the need arises - US-based relief groups and non-governmental organizations raised over $1.031 billion towards the Asian Tsunami Disaster Relief last year. Governments, such as our federal government, do not own the money they give to others - the money belongs to the taxpayers (and bond holders) who provide the money. If you look on a dollar bill, you will find a statement that reads: Federal Reserve Note. Read Section 8 of Article 1 for further enlightenment on this issue. I apologize for mispeaking. I meant that the federal government does not add value to the gross domestic product (GDP). It is the citizenry (and non-citizen residents) who add value to the GDP. Money is something created by the federal government (constitutionally, of course) to measure the GDP and each citizen's contribution to the GDP. And by measuring this, they have the ability to tax it. The percentage of spending that goes to aid nations in the Third World is tiny, compared to overall government spending, and while much of that spending goes right back into American corporations, the largest dollar amounts invested overseas occurs in the form of military assistance. Israel, by the way, is the biggest recipient of American foreign aid. We have discussed this issue to death previously. A search of the archives is in order. Hence the something in return mentioned below... I completely forgot about the fact that much of the government-based aid spent overseas comes right back to U.S. Corporations. Thank you for adding strength to my point below. As I mentioned previously, if the U.S. Government would stop taking my hard earned money and donating away, perhaps I would have more money that I could freely give to organizations like the Red Cross (this is only one example, there are others) as charity. The amount of money that you and I could donate for foreign aid would do very little to help. Only governments have the financial wherewithal
Re: [Biofuel] Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Worst terror attacks in history
Robert, Your closing statement is as profound as it is humbling. Changing the world begins with changing ourselves. Thank you, Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: robert luis rabello [EMAIL PROTECTED] Perhaps the best answer lies in addressing the root causes of conflict. We need to limit our own desires and work cooperatively for the benefit of everyone who lives in our world. Yet I see the seminal cause of human conflict every time I look in the mirror. Until I can deal with my own attitude, prejudices, rage and greed, I see little hope in avoiding terror in the future. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] The New Blue States/Country
Keith, I think you are confusing what I said. I perfectly agreed with you that the U.S. is not a charitable organization, and does take much more than it gives (here and abroad). I can't speak for other developing nations, as I have only lived in the U.S. (answering Harkan's question in another email). But I expect you are correct about that too. And the end result is an even bigger gap between the haves and the have-nots. The charity I was referring to is when individuals like your or I give something (money, food, clothing, medicine, etc.) to someone else, without expecting anything in return. It would be nice to know that if I send a dollar to help provide clean water to a village in Sudan, that 90 cents isn't being sucked up by some U.S. corporation before it even gets there. Thanks, Earl. - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] No it is not charity, and this is the point you miss, I hope it's through ignorance rather than convenience, but I think it's already been pointed out to you. There is LOTS about it in the archives, and the gist of it is that all the industrialised nations, the so-called developed nations, and especially the US, take VERY much more than they give to poor countries, and even the giving, in the form of aid, is often or usually tied to benefiting commercial interests in the donor countries rather than benefiting poor people at the receiving end as alleged. All they get dumped on them is harsh neo-liberalism and yet more imported poverty. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] The New Blue States/Country
Harkan, I have lived in the U.S. all my life, but can't say I am that happy about everything in this country. The only other countries I have been to are Canada (not much different to the tourist) and Russia (post-Soviet Union). I have worked and socialized with people from other countries, including Russians, Canadians, Swedes, Indians, Turks, Germans, Frenchmen, Japanese, Mexicans, Brazilians and Chineses, and have seen the same, mostly satisfied patriotism among many of those people. I have lived in 3 separate regions of the U.S., and visited many more, and I honestly like the area I grew up in the best (perhaps because of the socialist services provided by my city government). I do not wish to say that America is better than anywhere else in the world, or that the American people are more enlightened that citizens of other nations (though the Americans on this list are better informed and have more independent thought than most). One of the major problems I see in the U.S. today is the strict categorization that goes on here, whether by corporate marketing, television media or politicians. As an intelligent, relatively well-informed person, I refuse to consider myself as categorized. Though my political views are mostly libertarian, I am a staunch independent politically. I feel that our corporations and citizens as a whole do not give a crap about the environment, whereas I care what happens to the land, air and water around me (hence one of the main reasons I joined this list, to figure out how I can have less of an impact on the earth in general). But I do not consider myself an environmentalist of any sort (I will, however scold my friends and family for littering, not recycling and wasting energy). I agree that money is power in the U.S., which is one of the benefits (and abuses) of capitalism. I would like to believe that government should be above the greed, but it is no different than any other part of American society. Nobody's perfect, but we do the best we can with what we are dealt. It is nice to see people, like those on this list, who can look at the situations around the world rationally and form their own opinions about what is really happening. To all on the list, I would like to thank you for the insightful conversations and vast amounts of information from around the world. I am always learning something new about the U.S. and the world at large. Much of it has strengthened my own opinions, but occasionally, my opinions have changed because of what I have digested here. Thanks, Earl. - Original Message - From: Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2005 4:00 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The New Blue States/Country Earl, Why I asked? I am Swedish and have lived and worked in 8 countries including US, worked in 25 and visited 60+ more. I found many things that I liked and some things that I disliked in all of them. I can make myself understood in 5 languages, not including the Danish and Norweigian which are very close to Swedish. A big majority in all countries, are very proud of their country and would not want to live anywhere else. The less international experiences they have, the more staunch their opinions are. The Americans do not want to live anywhere else and especially not in a country like the socialist Sweden. The Swedes do not want to live anywhere else and especially not the undemocratic US, where money is the only power. Yet, I have never found any countries that has so much in common as US and Sweden, this even if Sweden have a higher general living standard, according to UN and US statistic. That is also why Americans who live in Sweden generally like it very much and the same for Swedes who live in US. What I want to get to, is that you should avoid to have those unqualified opinions about other countries. It is amazing how a little bit international experiences can make you more humble and appreciate that we are all people that basically like each other, once when we get the opportunity to meet. There are also many very good places to live, independent of what you think of their political label. Visited Vietnam last year and it was amazing how Americanized and unsafe the south still was, compared to the north. As a whole, it was a very positive experience and interesting to see the places that I for years followed in the news. They will develop fast and in a positive direction. Hakan At 17:16 13/08/2005, you wrote: Keith, I think you are confusing what I said. I perfectly agreed with you that the U.S. is not a charitable organization, and does take much more than it gives (here and abroad). I can't speak for other developing nations, as I have only lived in the U.S. (answering Harkan's question in another email). But I expect you are correct about that too. And the end result is an even bigger gap between
Re: [Biofuel] Check out Diesel Won't Solve Our Gasoline Woes
I currently drive a 2001 Dodge Neon SE that gets about 31 mpg with the lowest grade of gasoline I can buy. I would like to buy a diesel Jetta and start producing my own BD, but I have to wait until my wife gets a new car, and that isn't in the budget for another year or so. Besides, I really want to get her out of the 1996 Jeep Grand Cherokee (5.2l V-8, no less). Even she is beginning to get squeamish about the 15 mpg she is getting (only because it costs $50 a week to fill it). It is a comfortable ride, but it has got to go! Earl. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 3:08 AM Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Check out Diesel Won't Solve Our Gasoline Woes Hello; You will get far more than 22mpg with diesel. Unless of course you are looking for very large capacity engine (like 6 litres) which and average city user does not need. Over here (outside of USA) you can buy 2.5 to 3.5 litre diesel engined SUV's and Vans. You will get at least 25mpg. And these are 4x4 heavy duty machines. Or you can get small capacity diesel cars (example 1.6 litre Hyundai Getz) and you get something like 40 miles to a gallon easily. These are real life values including city traffic (not test values). I have looked at the article, it mentiones that in US the refineries do not have the capacity for the diesel production. Well hey maybe this is a great opportunity for bio-diesel Start using the vegetable oil or even better waste vegetable oil. You will save the environment, create jobs for local farmers and pollute far less. I would estimate that for a bio-diesel plant it will take maximum 6 months from scratch to be operational. And you can use the local farmers produce or local restaurants WVO (and save the pollution). Even better if you have the talent like many in this list you can make it at home, and save a bundle... Article also mentions that diesel prices are soaring. Yes this is true. I can tell you that this is a great tax revenue for all of the government. I can tell you that over here there are less taxes on biodiesel. The government actually supports the BD production. Therefore the BD sells for less than normal diesel. To save more please refer to the last sentence of the previous paragraph. There is one more issue about commercial transportation. We need to build more railroads. Trucking everything wil not be feasible. Again in Turkiye I believe we have the largest truck population in Europe. But at the end of the day no matter how many roads you build they are always congested and the accident rates are difficult to control. For commercial transportation you need to build railroads and develop the seaways. So there is a solution for all of the claims this article makes. It all comes down to the personal choice of each individual. Do we want to solve problems? Or do we prefer to enjoy the luxury of wasting energy? I gues our kids will be the one to appreciate our efforts or put the blame on us. regards Burak Istanbul, Turkiye ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] The New Blue States/Country
Mike, Where do I start? First, I have a real problem with any government (U.S., state, local) taking my hard earned money (in the form of taxes) and redistributing it to others. Now, there are legitimate things that each of these levels of government can spend taxpayer dollars on, namely, those outlined in their constitution or charter. In the case of the U.S. Government, these include national defense (not necessarily offense, though), minting currency, postal services, etc. When the U.S. Government (or perhaps the state governments) start spending my money outside the bounds of the Constitution, it is no longer legit. I would like to see Congress try and pass an Amendment to allow giving loans to foreign nations and never expecting repayment of those loans. How much support do you think they would get from the populace? Second, some people may consider giving funds or supplies to help poorer nationsor refugee groups as charity, which it is. But charity is you or I freely donating my money to others for the purpose of helping those in need. I have given money to help victims of 9-11, I have helped feed the homeless in soup kitchens, I have given my old clothing and furniture to Goodwill, Salvation Army, etc. Governments, such as our federal government, do not own the money they give to others - the money belongs to the taxpayers (and bond holders) who provide the money. How can the U.S. Government consider giving money to poor African countries as charity, when it isn't their money to give? As I mentioned previously, if the U.S. Government would stop taking my hard earned money and "donating" away, perhaps I would have more money that I could freely give to organizations like the Red Cross (this is only one example, there are others) as charity. Third, the idea of giving for the sake of giving is lost on most politicians. Inside the "Beltway," a politician's power is measured by his or her ability to fundraise - accepting money from some "generous" sole to support some "Cause of the day." Have you ever met a political donor that didn't expect something in return? The President and Congress are just as guilty of wanting something in return for helping other nations. How much money have they pumped intothe poorer nations of the Iraq War Coalition? Socialism and true communism may have its value to some and will thrive in some places of the world, but I prefer not to live under it. Or at least, if I have to, please call it as such - The Socialist Unoin of America. The same goes for the United Nations. Thanks for the opportunity to explain myself. Earl. - Original Message - From: Michael Redler To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 4:35 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The New Blue States/Country Earl, Earl wrote: "It seems to me that be requiring wealthy nations to "donate" any portion of their GDP is just another form of socialism, except on a global scale." Giving it a name (i.e. socialism or ...ism), doesn't explain why you disagree. Pleaseinclude something tosupport your position. There are people in this list who (despite McCarthy's legacy) understand the value ofsocialism and even communism (not to be confused withStalin's mislabeled brand of fascism) as a theoretical model for democracy. Mike From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgSent: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 14:48:58 -0300Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The New Blue States/CountryDale,I don't mean to deflate your dream, but why do we need the government beauracracy (of which the UN most certainly is) to guarranty these basic human rights? Shouldn't that be the responsibility of every person on the planet to protect his or her basic rights?It seems to me that be requiring wealthy nations to "donate" any portion of their GDP is just another form of socialism, except on a global scale.Your other point about not getting involved with those poorer nations is right on the money. The biggest terrorism problems in the US today are a direct result of our meddling in other nations' affairs. If we spent less time and money on controlling other countries, we could spend less time and money on counter terrorism measures. Maybe then my taxes will go down and I would be able to donate my own money to those poorer nations. But that, my friend, is truly just a dream.Regards,Earl Kinsley[EMAIL PROTECTED]--"That government is best which governs least." -- Thomas Paine ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):
Re: [Biofuel] The New Blue States/Country
Dale, I don't mean to deflate your dream, but why do we need the government beauracracy (of which the UN most certainly is) to guarranty these basic human rights? Shouldn't that be the responsibility of every person on the planet to protect his or her basic rights? It seems to me that be requiring wealthy nations to donate any portion of their GDP is just another form of socialism, except on a global scale. Your other point about not getting involved with those poorer nations is right on the money. The biggest terrorism problems in the US today are a direct result of our meddling in other nations' affairs. If we spent less time and money on controlling other countries, we could spend less time and money on counter terrorism measures. Maybe then my taxes will go down and I would be able to donate my own money to those poorer nations. But that, my friend, is truly just a dream. Regards, Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- That government is best which governs least. -- Thomas Paine - Original Message - From: Dale Seto To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 10:10 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The New Blue States/Country This is a very wise and informed comment that Keith made, and I totally agree. I hope someday that the UN will ingrain and apply four basic rights for every human on this planet, and they are; 1) access to food 2) access to clean water 3) access to shelter 4) personal security I also beleive that all wealthy countries be required to donate just 2% of their GDP to a fund to help accomplish this. Just think of all the extra money we are spending on counter terrorism that could be put towards this goal. It would also thwart terrorism because terrorists would not be able to get a foothold or seek refige in the countries that our goodwill has touched. But our help must be unconditional. We must not get involved, or tell their country how to run it. All we would ask is that they be peaceful and abide international law. I know that this is just pie in the sky and whishfull thinking, but its just a dream of mine. Best wishes, Dale ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Workers Rights
Pennsylvania is the same way - an at will state. It means that the employer doesn't need a reason or excuse to fire someone, but it also means that employees can quit with a reason or excuse too (there is some power in this). I believe that the primary reason this situation exists is that there is no law governing it. Thanks, Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe - Original Message - From: Ryan Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 2:10 AM Subject: [Biofuel] Workers Rights My state, South Dakota, is a right to work state. Meaning exactly what you said, employers need no reason to fire you. They can just say that your performance was lacking, or some other excuse. This allows them a lot of control. Ryan - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 8:02 AM Subject: Re: Re[2]: [Biofuel] Hybrid Diesel earl, i'm not familiar with any federal laws protecting workers, except for anti-discrimination laws. if you're referring to more than that, please enlighten me. as fro state laws, don't be fooled by what you found in PA. many states have very poor worker protections. for example, employers in many states can fire an employee for virtually any reason, because they are not required to have one. so although it might be illegal for a company to fire someone for, say, refusing to commit a crime, they can still fire you without justification. leaving it up to the worker to taking legal action, if they can make a solid case. this kind of employer power leads to many workers allowing their employer get away with a whole lot of things from which the law supposedly protects them. best, -chris ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: Re[4]: [Biofuel] Hybrid Diesel
Gustl, I have seen the same thing happen in my hometown of Bethlehem, PA. The big steel company (Bethlehem Steel) closed down in the 90's after being in operation for almost 100 years. Part of the blame rested with the greedy corporate management, and part with the greedy union leadership (I have had family members on both sides, plus those workers in between). There was a time when the USWA was an important part of the community, fighting for workers rights. That time is no more... Thanks for the email. Later, Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: Re[2]: [Biofuel] Hybrid Diesel
Gustl, Which is why I didn't join the Libertarian Party, or any party for that matter. Everytime I look up a particular political party, I find something that I don't agree with. I think I will just stay an independent, as I have for the last 17 years. I voted for Badnarik in the last election because he seemed like a better choice than Candidate R or Candidate D. On unions, it seems like the Government has enacted enough labor laws that the unions no longer seem useful. There are more federal and state laws today (119 in PA stick in my mind from a recent HR seminar I went to) that protect the individual worker, but none that protect the employers. I am not saying that unions aren't worthy endeavors, but the Government has taken away much of their power. Nowadays, unions are really just good for negotiating rates and benefits and keeping senior members employed. I think many of those labor laws should be scrapped, and more power put back into the hands of the individuals, or groups of individuals (i.e., unions). Thanks for the info! Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe - Original Message - From: Gustl Steiner-Zehender [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 7:13 AM Subject: Re[2]: [Biofuel] Hybrid Diesel Hallo Friends, Saturday, 09 July, 2005, 21:49:44, you wrote: 1an Unfortunately voting Libertarian had nothing to do with getting 1an rid of these extreemists... In order to be absolutely fair and consistent I need to be equally hostile to all political parties including the Libertarians. I have been in a discussion with my wife's nephew who is a heavy duty, factory owning, dyed-in-the-wool capitalist and a staunch Libertarian as well. In order to understand his thinking I have recently read the Libertarian party platform and have concluded that they would be closer to the truth if they changed the party name to Licensecarian because while they use the word responsibility quite a lot in their platform I find little evidence of any substance there. There is a lot of talk about individual rights but very little about the rights of society as a whole. One interesting example is that of the unions. Individuals have the right to form a union but as soon as they do they have no right to do what a union is intended to do because the owner of a corporation or business or whatever has the right to refuse to recognize the union thus making it a futile effort in the first place. You may form an orchestra but you may not play. That kind of thought is built in to the platform throughout. Sort of Ayn Randish on steroids and gone psychotic. All lettuce and no meat and potatoes let alone beans and grains. To give with one hand and take away with the other is to do nothing. Social responsibility? Nice concept but MY rights as an individual are paramount. Shove off. No thank you. We are our brothers (and sisters) keepers. Happy Happy, Gustl -- Je mehr wir haben, desto mehr fordert Gott von uns. We can't change the winds but we can adjust our sails. The safest road to Hell is the gradual one - the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts. C. S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters Es gibt Wahrheiten, die so sehr auf der Straße liegen, daß sie gerade deshalb von der gewöhnlichen Welt nicht gesehen oder wenigstens nicht erkannt werden. Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music. George Carlin The best portion of a good man's life - His little, nameless, unremembered acts of kindness and of love. William Wordsworth ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Hybrid Diesel
Paddy, Actually, according to the President's FY2006 budget to Congress, his administration proposed an $18 billion cut from the Dept of Defense budget (compared to FY2005). I haven't finished looking to see if this was just hidden elsewhere (there were increases in National Defense in the Dept of Energy and other agencies), plus it doesn't include the unexpected costs of invading other countries like Afghanistan or Iraq. It is true that the defense budget amounts 19% of the overall $2.568 TRILLION FY2006 federal budget, but what we really should be asking is what else are they wasting our money on? Also, where is the $210 million from and what is it for? From the FY2006 budget, I see a lot more being put into areas of cleaning up the environment - In the EPA's budget alone there is about $1.5 billion for states to clean up water supplies, $121 million to clean up industrial brownfield sites, $10 million to retrofit school buses to reduce their emissions, $73 million to repair or remove leaking underground storage tanks and, finally $1.2 billion to clean up Superfund sites. That's something like just under $3 billion on cleaning up our environmental messes. I agree that this Administration has been rather relaxed on helping to prevent environment problems, but then can you blame them? Many of the members of this administration are from either the oil or defense industries, two areas that are the worse contributors to enviromnental destruction there ever was. To them, saving the environment means losing money. And it is our fault for putting them in office (well not my fault, I voted Libertarian). Next time let's keep the money-grubbing, wilderness-drilling, nation-conquering, we don't count civilian casualties politicians out of office in the next election, and maybe we will have a chance to save the environment (and our own pocketbooks). I encourage you to look at the budget and determine for yourself what they are wasting our money on. Go to http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy06/browse.html to look at the budget. Thanks, Earl Kinsley - Original Message - From: Paddy O'Reilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 5:13 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Hybrid Diesel I do agree, though, that that was a heck of an expensive program for the U.S. taxpayer. I'm sorry, but I have to comment on what's being said here. Basically, the American tax dollar is begrudgingly given to help with cleaning up our environment to the tune of 210 million (ever deflating) US dollars yet a blind eye is being cast on the HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of those same dollars being wasted on the beloved American Defence Budget. I heard somewhere that the INCREASE in the American defence budget this year exceeds the total defence budgets of the next five largest defence budgets of other superpowers put together. And George won't even consider cancelling third nation debt (I suppose it doesn't hold any immediate return for him so he doesn't care). So putting the whole thing into perspective, the payment of 0.175% of the American defence budget (which will be spent on developing new and improved ways of wiping out the planet in the shortest time possible) on helping some other Americans develop ways of reducing our dependence on the Earth's natural resources is a waste of money while creating weapons of mass destruction isn't. Hmmm, methinks there's a slight imbalance in priorities here. The term Heck of an expensive program(me) should be reserved for George Dubya's retirement fund (aka defence budget). As expensive as today's oil consumption is proving to be, in so many different ways? And not just for the US taxpayer either. IIRC, under PNGV the US gave $70 million to each of the big 3 automakers to come up with these 'possible vehicles'. I've cut out as much as is reasonable from this email trail to preserve bandwidth. Hope it still makes sense. By the way, I'm using English spelling in this mail not the American mutated version. The information contained in this e-mail and in any attachments is confidential and is designated solely for the attention of the intended recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient, you must not use, disclose, copy, distribute or retain this e-mail or any part thereof. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all copies of this e-mail from your computer system(s). Please direct any additional queries to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thank You. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000
