Land resources of indigenous wanted

SUBHEAD: International labor organization helps legalize land grabs on indigenous people's territories.

By Renata Bessi &Santiago Navarro on 24 July 1027 for Truth Out -

Image above: Garifuna community in Honduras, threatened by tourism projects and oil palm monoculture. Photo by Aldo Santiago. From original article.

[IB Publisher's note: This humble homestead looks a bit like rural Hawaii or other pealsant subtropical locations where there are still indigenous people living lightly on the land in preservation with nature. That's not to say that the indigenous do not weigh on nature, but compare their living environment with a goldmine, hydroelectric dam or mono culture palm oil megafarm.]

Indigenous peoples' territories are some of the few places where natural resources are preserved throughout the world. In fact, they protect about 80 percent of the planet's biodiversity but are legal owners of less than 11 percent of these lands, according to the World Bank.

Because of this -- and the fact that so many companies hope to get a piece of these resources -- Indigenous peoples are often in a vulnerable position, and in a permanent kind of war with businesses and governments.

The International Labor Organization's (ILO) Convention 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples' Rights, together with the United Nations 2007 Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, have been the main international legal tools to defend territorial rights.

In theory, Convention 169 guarantees Indigenous people residing in the signatory countries the right to their land. To this end, it establishes that for any project that a company or government plans in their territories, they must be guaranteed a free, prior and informed consultation.

Because Convention 169 commits the signatory states to guarantee the integrity of Indigenous peoples, it's been frequently invoked by Indigenous communities and peoples, especially in Latin America, when defending their territories in court. But the Convention has clear limitations that actually jeopardize its intent.

Indeed, the Convention is unprecedented in that it establishes that "all peoples have the right to self-determination."

But in several official yet not-so-public statements, the ILO makes clear how far it sees Indigenous rights as going: "One of the concerns expressed in both political and business circles has to do with a misinterpretation of the Convention where the outcome of the consultations could be the vetoing of projects.

Said consultations don't imply the right of veto and it's imperative that an agreement or consent be obtained," as stated in the document entitled "ILO Convention 169: Indigenous Peoples and Social Inclusion."

While in many parts of Latin America, Indigenous peoples are defending their struggle for self-determination through consultations, for high-level ILO officials, the mechanism's use is clear.

"It's not a 'plebiscite' to obtain a 'yes or no' vote, nor to obtain a 'veto' around decisions with general benefit.

It's a dialogue in good faith to enhance the benefits for Indigenous people regardless of the decision (the state) makes," said Carmen Moreno, director of ILO's Latin America regional office during the forum "Situation of the Right to Consultation in Convention 169," which was held in conjunction with the World Bank in Guatemala in April.

In fact, according to the international organization, it's governments that have the last word on Indigenous territories. "The power of the Convention is that it's an instrument through which the peoples concerned can participate freely in a dialogue with the State.

But the State, ultimately, is the one who must make a decision," the ILO Convention 169: Indigenous Peoples and Social Inclusion reads. Regarding the most serious cases where peoples must be relocated from their territories, "even in these situations the people have no decision-making power," said Moreno.

In addition, Convention 169 establishes that the rights of Indigenous peoples in relation to natural resources must be protected, but it does not grant them exclusive rights over those resources.

Latin America: Principal Signatory
The Convention was signed in 1989 and went into effect in 1991. To date, 15 of the 22 countries that have ratified it are in Latin America: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominica, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru and Venezuela. (In addition to Denmark, Spain, Fiji, Nepal, Norway, the Netherlands and the Central African Republic.)

The significant number of Latin American adherents to the Convention is not a coincidence. It's an attempt to appease the high-intensity conflicts generated by the massive growth of development projects throughout the region.

The Latin American Mining Conflict Observatory (OCMAL) points out that over the last decade, Latin America has become one of the epicenters of mining expansion.

"Guaranteeing indigenous people's rights in Latin America: Progress in the past decade and remaining challenges," a report put out by the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), registered more than 200 conflicts in Latin American Indigenous territories linked to extraction of hydrocarbons and mining from 2010 and 2013.

Image above: Baudillo Salles Sánchez, member of the Briri tribe with his family in Costa Rica. Photo by Renata Bessi. From original article.

Térraba: Marked Cards
Carmen Moreno claims that development is the main objective. "The consultations established in Convention 169 are an instrument of good governance to contribute to the development and growth of countries," she said.

However, not everyone the Convention supposedly protects feels included. "They just forgot to ask if our definition of development is the same as their plan for our territories," says Broran tribe member Pablo Sivar, from the Térraba-Boruca Indigenous territory in Costa Rica, who is a part of the Council of Elders. "I definitely don't believe in their type of development."

Sivar and his community are aware of impending threats to their lands and water. "In Térraba, there used to be a lot of water, but not anymore. And they wanna finish off the main river we have, the Térraba River, also known as river Diquís, which in the Boruca language means 'big water'."

He went on to explain that the El Diquís Hydroelectric Project would be the largest hydroelectric plant in Central America, despite official statistics that show that about 99 percent of the country already has electricity. "Who will the Diquís Project favor? Who it will develop? Is it the Térraba Indigenous people? Is it the Indigenous people of the south? Or is it just a few people?"

Work on the Diquís Project began in 2006. After much resistance by the local community, the project was halted in 2011.

Without any additional information, the company simply announced -- on the same day the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples James Anaya visited -- that it would withdraw its machinery and infrastructure from Térraba territory.

Approximately three years later, the government arrived to begin developing a consultation protocol for Indigenous peoples, with the financial cooperation of international organizations, such as the ILO and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP).

This was announced at one of the government meetings in Térraba, where Truthout was. "We know why they're here. We know what they want," Pablo Sivar stated.

In the same meeting, the locals wanted to know if the process was linked to the Diquís Project. Immediately, government officials denied any link and tried to change the subject. "This process has nothing to do with the project. We're here to develop a consultation protocol for Indigenous peoples," said Ana Gabriel, Costa Rica's vice minister for political affairs and citizen dialogue.

Government officials aren't transparent about the link between projects and the protocol in these public forums, and make contradictory statements to the media. The plan to build the dam in Broran territory continues.

The Indigenous consultation would be the last stage before handing in all necessary documentation to obtain environmental viability and move forward with the project. Feasibility studies and designs are already in place. The construction is scheduled to start in 2018, and operation in 2025.

The attempt to obscure the relationship between the protocol and the project is not in vain. The Indigenous resistance of the hydroelectric dam is longstanding.

"We know that everything is ready for them to resume the work," Cindy Broran of the Broran Indigenous Movement, founded by Térraba tribe members to resist the hydroelectric Project, told Truthout.

"Consultation is the way to legitimize the company's presence in the territory and with it they'll be able to secure financing from international bodies, such as the World Bank. We know that everything's in place."

Project Halted Due to Lack of Consultation
According to Ana Gabriel, who's responsible for developing the consultation protocol in Costa Rica, the country owes a historic debt to its Indigenous peoples and the current government plans on making up for it.

"It's no small matter that the president himself has issued a directive and given a mandate to develop this consultation protocol," she told Truthout.

Despite the politically correct rhetoric of healing and historical debts to Indigenous peoples, the truth is that development projects, funded by international institutions, are unviable because of the lack of consultation.

The vice minister of Costa Rica himself admitted it: "There have been projects that have had to be stopped in Indigenous territories due to lack of consultation."

Image above: Gold mine in a Honduran indigenous community. Photo by Renata Bessi. From original article.Diquís Project: A Bitter Experience

In 2006, the Diquís Project began in Broran territory with a permit issued by the Development Association, a government entity responsible for land management. "Before we knew it, trucks, cars and people were entering the community," said Broran.

"We went to request information and they told us that they had moved forward with it because they had 76 signatures of people affiliated with the Development Association. The association gave the go-ahead for the company to come in and build the dam."

"When the company moved in, it became chaotic," Broran said. "They messed up the whole river, killing many species. Many shops sprang up to sell food, but mostly canteens and bars for workers from outside.

The association gave permission for these businesses, without considering that Indigenous law prohibits the sale of alcohol within its territory. The illegal sale of land increased. Health centers and schools ran out of supplies."

Additionally, ancestral patrimony of the Broran people was looted. Between 2006 and 2010, archaeologists contracted by the company did intense work, recounts Broran. They dug three tunnels that still exist.

"We learned from folks who worked there that they found many archeological sites, including our ancestors' cemeteries. They took everything they found. They took everything and we don't know where it is."

With Sights on Energy
Since the 1970s, the Costa Rican government has conducted studies to implement a hydroelectric project in the region. "Before, it was called Boruca Hydroelectric Project, which was about 15 km downstream from where the Diquís Project is today, but because of the resistance by the Boruca people, the project was cancelled.

So, they moved it higher, in our lands, but it's the same project. It will affect the same river only now on Broran ancestral lands," Cindy Broran said.

According to a study by the World Rainforest Movement, geologists from the company Alcoa (where former US Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill was the CEO between 1987 and 1999) found deposits of bauxite in the General River Valley's subsoil. Bauxite is the prime material used to make aluminum.

In 1970, Costa Rica's Legislative Assembly passed a law (No. 4562) saying Alcoa -- one of the three largest aluminum companies in the world and considered a defense company since one of its main clients is the United States armed forces -- could exploit up to 120 million tons of bauxite over 25 years and with a possible 15 years of extension, in exchange for building an aluminum refining plant in the same area.

Aluminum foundries require a great quantity of low-cost electric energy. The project is feasible provided a hydroelectric dam were to be built on the Rio Grande de Térraba, the study said.

The dam project triggered major resistance because many people considered it a violation and dangerous. Large demonstrations and protests took place, forcing Alcoa to give up its project.

Energy for the US
The Costa Rican Electricity Institute (ICE) in charge of the Diquís Project has shifted its objectives.

According to the document "National and Transnational Pressures on Energy in Costa Rica," produced by the Association of Popular Initiatives Ditsö, the main reason for resuming construction of the hydroelectric project is the possibility of selling energy abroad, mainly to Mexico and the United States.

The dam is part of the Mesoamerica Project, initially called Puebla-Panama Plan (PPP) and funded by the United States government.

It's an initiative which, among other things, includes an extensive network of infrastructure projects from Mexico to Panama "necessary to export -- or better yet, to plunder -- many of our natural resources, whose common destination is the U.S. and Mexico," the document states.

Diquís: Clean Energy?
To date, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) has financed feasibility, environmental and social impact studies around the Diquís project.

They explained their investment as "contributing to increased energy supply in Costa Rica and Central America, promoting sustainability, efficiency and competitiveness of the region's energy sector, in order to address the impact of CAFTA (a "free trade" agreement between the United States, Central America and the Dominican Republic) in the region, through the implementation of a large-scale clean and renewable energy project."

The Process Is Finalized
The process of developing a consultation protocol was designed by the government to occur in four phases and began in March 2016. Of the 24 Indigenous territories of Costa Rica, 20 agreed to everything up until the last phase, including the people of Térraba. Now, the president must issue an order legitimizing the consultation protocol for Costa Rica.

"We debated a long time over whether or not to participate in this process. We're aware that the government always has political gains in mind," said Broran.

"We also know that they manipulate the term 'consultation,' that they're trying to show good faith for public relations. But we want to be there, and say what we think, in front of all Costa Rica."

The Bribri people of Talamanca, a territory in southern Costa Rica, refused to participate in the development of the consultation protocol. "This whole process is a performance," Bribri tribe member Baudillo Salles Sánchez told Truthout.

"Protocols and consultations are tools to justify entering and exploiting the territory. They do the consultation as they wish, and then they can say that they're exploiting our resources with our consent."


House Science Chair likes CO2

SUBHEAD: Global Warming is good as it melts Arctic Ocean and gives shipping access.

By Chris D'Angelo on 24 July 2017 for Huffington Post -

Image above: San Antonio Express articel says Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) is raising concerns about alleged Russian funding of U.S. environmental activism. Is that the right Russian meddling to focus on? Photo by Bob Owen. From (

Rep. Lamar Smith (Republican-Texas) — who has spent his career cozying up to fossil fuel interests, dismissing the threat of climate change and harassing federal climate scientists — is now arguing that pumping the atmosphere full of carbon dioxide is “beneficial” to global trade, crop production and the lushness of the planet.

Rather than buying into “hysteria,” Americans should be celebrating the plus sides of a changing climate, Smith argues in an op-ed published Tuesday in The Daily Signal, a news website published by the conservative Heritage Foundation.

Smith — who has used his power as chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology to push his anti-science views — kicks off his op-ed by claiming Americans’ perception of the phenomenon is “too often determined by their hearing just one side of the story.”

“The benefits of a changing climate are often ignored and under-researched,” Smith said. “Our climate is too complex and the consequences of misguided policies too harsh to discount the positive effects of carbon enrichment.”

Increased carbon dioxide, Smith writes, promotes photosynthesis, resulting in a “greater volume of food production and better quality food” and “lush vegetation” that “assists in controlling water runoff, provides more habitats for many animal species, and even aids in climate stabilization, as more vegetation absorbs more carbon dioxide.” Warmer temperatures, he notes, results in longer growing seasons

Smith goes as far as to make a case for why a rapidly melting Arctic, which scientists warn could cost tens of trillions of dollars by the end of this century, is a positive thing.

“Also, as the Earth warms, we are seeing beneficial changes to the earth’s geography,” he writes. “For instance, Arctic sea ice is decreasing. This development will create new commercial shipping lanes that provide faster, more convenient, and less costly routes between ports in Asia, Europe, and eastern North America. This will increase international trade and strengthen the world economy.”

The op-ed comes roughly two months after Smith led a group of lawmakers on what BuzzFeed described as a “secret tour of the melting Arctic.” The unpublicized, weeklong, multi-stop outing included meeting with climate scientists and learning about how they track the levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, according to BuzzFeed.

While Smith reportedly canceled an interview with BuzzFeed to discuss the trip, Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.) told the publication that he and Smith had productive discussions about the climate.

Monday’s op-ed would suggest that, while Smith may have accepted the reality of the threat, he’s opted for the when-life-gives-you-lemons-make-lemonade approach.

Michael Mann, a climate scientist at Pennsylvania State University who sparred with Smith during a March hearing on climate science, told HuffPost via email that “it is clear” Smith is “slowly advancing through the stages of denial ... having apparently now moved from ‘it’s not happening,’ to ’ok—it’s happening, but IT WILL BE GOOD FOR US!”

“One step at a time I suppose,” Mann wrote, “but at least there is some apparent progress toward the truth (that climate change is real, human-caused, and already a problem).”

Joseph Kopser, an aerospace engineer and Army veteran from Austin, Texas, is one of several Democratic candidates vying for a chance to unseat the 16-term Republican in the 2018 midterm election. Reach Monday by phone, Kopser described Smith’s op-ed as “stunning.” And he said it is “exactly” what the late English author George Orwell warned about in his dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four.

“He is acknowledging the warming planet,” Kopser said. “And he’s trying to use Orwellian speak to say that, ’No, no, no — These terrible things that scientists have talked about and proven and explained why they are terrible for our planet, are actually good things.”

What Smith is doing, Kopser said, is “equivalent to telling somebody who’s in a flood, ‘Oh no no, all this water is going to be great. Just think how much more drinking water you’re going to have available.’ Or somebody in a burning house, “No no, think, you now no longer need a furnace because you have this wonderful heat source all around your house.’”

First elected in 1986, Smith is the 14th longest-serving member of the current U.S. House. The San Antonio native has received more than $700,000 from the oil and gas industry over those years. In his five years as chairman of the science committee, he has worked to defund climate research and harassed federal climate scientists, whom he has accused of playing “fast and loose” with data. He has also sprinted to defend the fossil fuel industry ― namely Exxon Mobil Corp. ― from investigations into their own records on climate change and used his power to stack hearings with coal and chemical lobbyists and climate skeptics.

Burning fossil fuels, Smith writes in his op-ed, has “helped raise the standard of living for billions of people.”
“The use of fossil fuels and the byproducts of carbon enrichment play a large role in advancing the quality of human life by increasing food production to feed our growing population, stimulating the economy, and alleviating poverty.

Bad deals like the Paris Agreement would cost the U.S. billions of dollars, a loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs, and have no discernible impact on global temperatures. Instead of succumbing to fear tactics and exaggerated predictions, we should instead invest in research and technology that can help us better understand the effects of climate change.”
Smith is among a trio of Republicans that nonprofit political action committee 314 Action is targeting for their anti-science views. Smith’s office did not immediately respond to HuffPost’s request for comment Monday.

In a statement Monday, 314 Action founder Shaughnessy Naughton blasted Smith’s op-ed as the latest of his “industry-funded attacks on scientific consensus around the issue” of climate change.

“Rather than playing the hits to the Heritage Foundation’s mouthpiece, I challenge Mr. Smith to explain the benefits of climate change to the displaced people of Isle de Jean Charles or Tangier Island,” said Naughton, referring to two U.S. islands vanishing as ocean levels rise. “If climate scientists can’t convince him, maybe our country’s first climate refugees can.”

• Chris D'Angelo is a journalist for Huffington Post and a former reporter for Kauai's Garden Island News.

Side effect of Monsanto's Roundup

SUBHEAD: Algae worry about the notorious glyphosate pesticide discovered in Great Lakes.

By Lorraine Chow on 7 July 2017 for Alternet -

Image above: A dead fish surrounded by algae in Lake Erie during a record-setting algae bloom in 2011. Photo by Tom Archer. From original article.

Glyphosate, the controversial main ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup and other herbicides, is being connected to Lake Erie's troubling algae blooms, which has fouled drinking water and suffocated and killed marine life in recent years.

Phosphorus—attributed to farm runoff carried by the Maumee River—has long beenidentified as a leading culprit feeding the excessive blooms in the western Lake Erie basin. Now, according to a new study from chemistry professor Christopher Spiese, a significant correlation has been established between the increased use of glyphosate to the percentage of dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP) in the runoff.

As No-Till Farmer observed from the study, DRP loads in Lake Erie increased in the mid-1990s at the same time that farmers began the widespread cultivation of crops genetically engineered to withstand multiple applications of Roundup.

"For every acre of Roundup Ready soybeans and corn that you plant, it works out to be about one-third of a pound of P [phosphorus] coming down the Maumee," Spiese told the agricultural publication.

Here's how the team came to the conclusion, as No-Till Farmer reported:

Through his own and others' research, Spiese found that depending on the types of metal in the soil, glyphosate does release P. For example, when glyphosate is applied to soil containing iron oxide-hydroxide, P is immediately released. But almost nothing is removed when it's an iron oxide material.

Finally, Spiese took soil samples all over the Maumee watershed, applied P to them and then sprayed glyphosate to see how much P was released vs. soil that wasn't sprayed with glyphosate after 24 hours. He saw desorption occurred all over the watershed, but certain areas were higher than others, specifically in the southeastern corner.

Based on the average two glyphosate applications growers make every year, Spiese estimates that overall, 20-25 percent of the DRP runoff is caused by glyphosate. But depending on the location within the watershed, that percentage could be much lower or much greater.

"Some of those sites, it's less than a percent. Other sites it's almost 100 percent," he says.

Previous studies have tied glyphosate to the phosphorous fueling Lake Erie's blue-green algae. In 2009, Ohio Sea Grant researchers, Drs. R. Michael McKay and George Bullerjahn of Bowling Green State University, found that glyphosate could only be detected in the lake at certain times of year—after crops are planted.

"Our research is finding that Roundup is getting into the watershed at peak farming application times, particularly in the spring," McKay said.

Approximately 1,000 metric tonnes (about 2.2 million pounds) of Roundup is applied in the Lake Erie watershed per year, and it is being detected in adjacent waterways particularly in the spring, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) noted from McKay and Bullerjahn's study.

The researchers also found that the blue-green algae (cyanobacteria) in the lake are capable of using phosophonates.

"It turns out that many cyanobacteria present in Lake Erie have the genes allowing the uptake of phosphonates, and these cyanobacteria can grow using glyphosate and other phosphonates as a sole source of phosphorus," Bullerjahn said.

• Lake Erie’s Toxic Algae Bloom Forecast for Summer 2016 @greenpeaceusa@HuffPostGreen

• EcoWatch (@EcoWatch) 3:55 PM - 13 Jun 2016

Harmful Lake Erie blooms have increased at record levels over the last decade,according to the U.S. EPA and are expected to become more common due to warmer temperatures and heavy rainfall that feed algae growth.

The toxic algae rob oxygen from the waters creating dead zones where fish and other marine life are unable to survive. The algae is also a threat to humans—swallowing it can cause health problems such as rashes, vomiting, numbness and difficulty breathing.

In February this year, the U.S. and Canada announced a goal to reduce the amount of phosphorus entering affected areas of Lake Erie by a total of 40 percent by 2025.

See also:
Ea O Ka Aina: Glyphosate harms gut enzyme 6/20/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Monsanto and EPA collusion 3/29/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Corporate monster Monsanto 3/20/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Monsanto colluded with EPA 3/14/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Monsanto and First Amendment 1/24/17
Ea O Ka Aina: EPA obedient to Monsanto 12/17/16
Ea O Ka Aina: 'Non-GMO' labels not strong enough 9/29/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Monsanto's Bizzaro World 8/13/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Our Right to Health 7/17/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Pope on a roll 7/3/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Gluten or Glyphosate Intolerance? 11/18/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Sri lanka bans RoundUp 3/17/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Roundup and human health 4/25/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Monsanto knew of birth defects 6/7/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Feds lay down for GMOs 2/15/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Monsanto Lies, Again and Again 10/17/09


We need "our" Kauai General Plan

SUBHEAD: Take back the General Plan from the hands of the developers, large land owners and tourism industry.

By Sandy Herndon on 23 July 2017 in Island Breath -

Image above: An indication of how bad the General Plan Update is was indicated with this plan of Kauai. Note the "Districts" in the plan relate to no cultural, historical, bioregional, political, or governing identities, but appears to be the  myopic view from the County Planning Department Office in Lihue. See the New Yorker Magazine map of America below. From (

Organizing meeting to address the County of Kauai’s General Plan Update

August 2, 2017 at 6:30pm - 9pm

Kapaa Public Library
Kuhio Highway, Kapaa

Community Coalition of Kauai

There is a lack of community wide input for this proposed plan which is going to the Kauai County Council for approval.

Take Back the General Plan From the Hands of the Developers, Large Land Owners and Tourism Industry and Make it Your Own


The County Planning Department and Planning Commission have proposed a new General Plan that ignores the hundreds of pages of concerns and input of community members and organizations. The new General Plan proposes town designations, re-zonings, up-zonings and entirely new zoning categories for the benefit of large landowners and developers.

§ We do not need a General Plan that was written by and for developers and the tourism industry.

§ We do need a General Plan that will create balanced/sustainable growth, diversified job opportunities, and protects Kauai’s environment, rural character and quality of life.


We are looking for your input, your participation and your interest in joining a growing group of concerned community members who want to take back the General Plan. We are coordinating our concerns and efforts in preparation for the delivery of the General Plan to the County Council for their approval.

Image above: Ilustration of the  myopic view of America and beyond from Manhattan in this Saul Steinburg cover of the New Yorker Magazine in the fall of 2004. From (

See also:
Ea O Ka Aina: Fact or Fantasy - The Kauai General Plan 8/8/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Commission accepts General Plan 6/15/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Okay given to destroy Paradise 6/10/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Testimony against General Plan
Ea O Ka Aina: Kauai General Plan open house 12/8/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Reject the Kauai General Plan update 11/30/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Kauai County "Keep it Rural" 11/17/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Kauai General Plan Update 9/4/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Kauai General Plan Update 9/3/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Will developers write Kapaa’s future? 5/6/16 
Ea O Ka Aina: Kauai Plan Disappoints 12/9/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Hokua Place comment deadline 5/28/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Coco Palms good to go 3/11/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Lihue Loss of Vision 9/5/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Tax Donkey Purgatory - Lima Ola 7/18/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Annals of pure bullshit - Coco Palms 6/22/14 
Ea O Ka Aina: Coco Palms Travesty 8/10/13  
Ea O Ka Aina: Review 2000-2020 Kauai General Plan 4/2/09
Island Breath: Kauai Sustainable Land Use Plan 11/1/07
Island Breath: LEGS Sustainability Conference 10/13/07
Existing Kauai County General Plan 2000-2020 1999 

Tepco robot finds melted core

SOURCE: Norman Leuter (
SUBHEAD: The melted fuel debris at Fukushima Daiichi Reactor #3 found on floor of containment.

By AP Staff on 22 July 2017 in The Guardian -

Image above: Still from robot video. What appears to be bolted caps on corroding pipe valves amidst melted core debris. From original article.

Robot spots suspected debris of melted fuel for first time since 2011 earthquake and tsunami destroyed the plant.

Images captured by an underwater robot on Saturday showed massive deposits believed to be melted nuclear fuel covering the floor of a damaged reactor at Japan’s destroyed Fukushima nuclear plant.

The robot found large amounts of solidified lava-like rocks and lumps in layers as thick as 1m on the bottom inside a main structure called the pedestal that sits underneath the core inside the primary containment vessel of Fukushima’s Unit 3 reactor, said the plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric Power Co.

On Friday, the robot spotted suspected debris of melted fuel for the first time since the 2011 earthquake and tsunami caused multiple meltdowns and destroyed the plant. The three-day investigation of Unit 3 ended on Saturday.

Image above: Still from robot video. What appears to be disintegrating metal over a bed of blackened corium. From original article.

Locating and analysing the fuel debris and damage in each of the plant’s three wrecked reactors is crucial for decommissioning the plant. The search for melted fuel in the two other reactors has so far been unsuccessful because of damage and extremely high radiation levels.

During this week’s probe, cameras mounted on the robot showed extensive damage caused by the core meltdown, with fuel debris mixed with broken reactor parts, suggesting the difficult challenges ahead in the decades-long decommissioning of the plant.

TEPCO spokesman Takahiro Kimoto said it would take time to analyse the debris in the images to figure out removal methods.

See also:
Ea O Ka Aina: Tepco plan to dump tainted water 7/14/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Bosses on Trail 6/29/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Stop Fukushima as Olympic venue 5/10/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Continuing Fukushima danger 4/14/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Continuing Fukushima danger 4/14/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima worse than ever 2/5/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima radiation on West Coast 1/13/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima cleanup cost to double 12/9/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Tokyo damaged by nuclear pellet rain 9/24/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Nuclear Power and Climate Failure 8/24/16
Ea O Ka Aina: High radioactivity in Tokyo 8/22/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Nuclear Blinders 8/18/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima and Chernobyl 5/29/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima radiation damages Japan 4/14/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima's Nuclear Nightmare 3/13/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Fifth Fukushima Anniversary 3/11/16
Green Road Jounral: Balls filled with Uranium, Plutonium 2/19/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima impacts are ongoing 11/8/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Petroleum and Nuclear Coverups 10/21/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Radiation Contamination 10/13/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Radioactive floods damage Japan 9/22/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Fir trees damaged by Fukushima 8/30/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Japan restarts a nuclear plant 8/11/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima disaster will continue 7/21/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Too many fish in the sea? 6/22/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima prefecture uninhabitable 6/6/15
Ea O Ka Aina: In case you've forgotten Fukushima 5/27/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Radiation damages top predator bird 4/24/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukshima die-offs occurring 4/17/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Impact Update 4/13/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima - the end of atomic power 3/13/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Where is the Fukushima Data? 2/21/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Fuku-Undo 2/4/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima MOX fuel crossed Pacific 2/4/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima worst human disaster 1/26/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Japan to kill Pacific Ocean 1/23/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Japan's Environmental Catastrophe 8/25/14
ENE NEws: Nuclear fuel found 15 miles from Tokyo 8/10/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Earthday TPP Fukushima RIMPAC 4/22/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Daiichi hot particles 5/30/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Japanese radiation denial 5/12/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Entomb Fukushima Daiichi now 4/6/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Disaster 3 Years Old 4/3/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Tsunami, Fukushima and Kauai 3/9/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Japanese contamination 2/16/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Bill for Fukushima monitoring 2/9/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Tepco under reporting of radiation 2/9/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Fallout in Alaska 1/25/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima engineer against nukes 1/17/14
Ea O Ka Aina: California to monitor ocean radiation 1/14/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Demystifying Fukushima Reactor #3 1/1/14
Ea O Ka Aina: US & Japan know criticality brewing 12/29/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Forever 12/17/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Brief radiation spike on Kauai 12/27/13
Ea O Ka Aina: USS Ronald Reagan & Fukushima 12/15/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Pacific Impact 12/11/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Berkeley and Fukushima health risks 12/10/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Madness engulfs Japan 12/4/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Edo Japan and Fukushima Recovery 11/30/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Reaction to Fukushima is Fascism 11/30/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Radioisotopes in the Northern Pacific 11/22/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima cleanup in critical phase 11/18/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima fuel removal to start 11/14/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima, What me worry? 11/13/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Remove other Fukushina fuel 10/29/13
Ea O Ka Aina: End to Japanese Nuclear Power? 10/3/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima & Poisoned Fish 10/3/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fuel Danger at Fukushima 9/27/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Reactor #4 Spent Fuel Pool 9/16/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima is Not Going Away 9/9/13
Ea O Ka Aina: X-Men like Ice Wall for Fukushima 9/3/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima House of Horrors 8/21/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Apocalypse 8/21/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Radioactive Dust 8/20/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Cocooning Fukushima Daiichi 8/16/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima radiation coverup 8/12/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Leakage at Fukushima an emergency 8/5/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima burns on and on 7/26/13
Ea O Ka Aina: What the Fukashima? 7/24/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Spiking 7/15/13
Ea O Ka Aina: G20 Agenda Item #1 - Fix Fukushima 7/7/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima and hypothyroid in Hawaii 4/9/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Japan to release radioactive water 2/8/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima as Roshoman 1/14/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushia Radiation Report 10/24/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Fallout 9/14/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Unit 4 Danger 7/22/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima denial & extinction ethics 5/14/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima worse than Chernobyl 4/24/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima dangers continue 4/22/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima children condemned 3/8/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima fights chain reaction 2/7/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Tepco faking Fukushima fix 12/24/11
Ea O Ka Aina: The Non Battle for Fukushima 11/10/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Debris nears Midway 10/14/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Radiation Danger 7/10/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Abandoned 9/28/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Deadly Radiation at Fukushima 8/3/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima poisons Japanese food 7/25/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Black Rain in Japan 7/22/11
Ea O Ka Aina: UK PR downplays Fukushima 7/1/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima #2 & #3 meltdown 5/17/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima sustained chain reaction 5/3/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Ocean Radioactivity in Fukushima 4/16/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Japan raises nuclear disaster level 4/12/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima No Go Zone Expanding 4/11/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima to be Decommissioned 4/8/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Poisons Fish 4/6/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Learning from Fukushima 4/4/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Leak goes Unplugged 4/3/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Stick a fork in it - It's done! 4/2/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima reactors reach criticality 3/31/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Non-Containment 3/30/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Meltdown 3/29/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Fukushima Water Blessing & Curse 3/28/11

River given human rights

SUBHEAD: A New Zealand river has Human Rights. Now will modern law come to its senses?

By David Korten on 7 July 2017 for Yes Magazine -

Image above: Maori men paddle the river in traditional craft. Photo  by Hagan Hopkins. From original article.

Humanity is slowly reawakening to the simple logic that Mother Earth’s rights must come first.

Our system of law has the rights issue exactly backward. But humanity is slowly reawakening to the simple logic that Mother Earth’s rights must come before human rights.

It was a stunning breakthrough in a rights issue that could be a crucial step toward ensuring a human future. In March, New Zealand passed the Te Awa Tupua Bill making New Zealand’s Whanganui River the first river in the world to hold the same legal rights, responsibilities, and liabilities as a human person. For the Maori people, it was the culmination of a 140-year struggle to gain recognition of the river as an ancestor of the tribe.

The victory quickly had a major consequence far beyond New Zealand’s borders.

Only two weeks later, citing the New Zealand law as precedent, a court in the northern Indian state of Uttarakhand gave the Ganges River and its main tributary, the Yamuna River, the status of living human entities. Henceforth, polluting or damaging these rivers will be a legal equivalent to harming a person.

I learned of New Zealand’s breakthrough from my longtime friend and colleague Shannon Biggs, executive director of Movement Rights and co-founder of the Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature.

Biggs and her Movement Rights co-founder, Pennie Opal Plant, traveled to New Zealand last November as guests of the Maori to learn and share with the world the lessons of their historic victory. Biggs further elaborates those lessons in her report published in Earth Island Journal.

Humanity is slowly reawakening to the essential truth that nature—the living Earth—is the source of human existence and is essential to our nurture. It is simple logic that the needs of Mother Earth must come before ours.

That, in turn, implies that Earth’s rights must come even before human rights.
This logic has sweeping implications for a modern system of law that gives corporations more rights than people and nature no rights at all. Just as our human existence depends on the health and well-being of a living Earth, the existence of corporations depends on the health and well-being of human society.

So at its foundation, modern law has the rights issue exactly backward.

Significant as New Zealand’s action is, it represents only a first step in an essential rethinking and restructuring of a system of law crafted by the rulers of an Imperial Civilization to secure their own power and privilege.

In our transition from Imperial Civilization to Ecological Civilization, we have much to learn from indigenous people as humanity’s elders—keepers of our human memory of a time when we saw ourselves clearly as part of nature.

Earth cared for us, and we cared for her. We organized around the rivers, forests, and prairies. We depended on them for our means of living. We honored them as our ancestors. This was a time when no one had yet invented an exclusive claim or right to own, destroy, or sell a portion of nature’s territory in disregard of the present or future needs of others.

Living in balance with nature came easily when our dependence was self-evident. Now that, despite our technological sophistication, we have reached and exceeded the limits of Earth’s capacity, shouldn’t our dependence once again be self-evident?

Perhaps the anomalies created by giving a river the rights and liabilities of a living person will force us to rethink and revise the foundational principles of modern law. What is the river’s liability to a person whose lands it floods or the swimmer it drowns? How are the seemingly intractable conflicts between legally proclaimed territorial rights of nature, humans, and corporations to be resolved?

My thanks to the Maori people who persevered to compel us all to address these essential questions.
The system is ill-suited to the needs of an Ecological Civilization that is expected to meet the needs of all in a balanced, co-productive relationship with a living Earth.


Monsanto's army of online bullies

SUBHEAD: Trolls for the GMO company are bullies aboard a sinking ship. Show them links to the truth. 

By Jeffery Smith 12 July 2017 for Light on Conspiracy  -

Image above: Graphic for ignoring GMO bullies and supporting World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer. From (

There are hundreds, possibly thousands of them—paid to bully, shame, and endlessly argue with anyone posting a comment deriding GMOs or pesticides. And when a high-profile person stands up to Monsanto’s technology, watch out. The trolls swarm in and gang up.

Take Marion Nestle, for example. When a GMO propaganda film called Food Evolution purposely quoted her out of context, she demanded that her 10-second clip be removed. Nestle’s blog was then ambushed with 870 comments by Monsanto’s minions, forcing her to block all comments from her site, Food Politics.

The presence of a troll army was revealed during the on-going lawsuit against Monsanto over the cancer-causing properties of their herbicide Roundup. The lawyers wrote:

“Monsanto even started the aptly-named “Let Nothing Go” program to leave nothing, not even Facebook comments, unanswered; through a series of third parties, it employs individuals who appear to have no connection to the industry, who in turn post positive comments on news articles and Facebook posts, defending Monsanto, its chemicals, and GMOs.”

Scientists Attacked

The legal brief also points out that, “Monsanto quietly funnels money to ‘think tanks’ such as the ‘Genetic Literacy Project’ and the ‘American Council on Science and Health,’ organizations intended to shame scientists . . .”

As a frequent target of these groups, I know well their unethical bullying tactics. And so too do the scientists who discover evidence that GMOs are harmful.

World renowned biologist Arpad Pusztai, for example, was pummeled by the biotech machinery when he accidentally discovered that GMOs caused massive damage to rats in just 10 days. In the late 1990s. he led a team that was designing test protocols to be used by European authorities to evaluate GMO safety.

His research, however, revealed that the generic process of creating a GMO caused dangerous and unpredictable side-effects that might already be eroding the health of consumers. Because his shocking discovery could have destroyed the entire GMO industry, they came after Pusztai with far more than just a shaming campaign.

Within days, his employer of 35 years terminated his contract. Pusztai’s 20-member team was dismantled. He was silenced with threats of a lawsuit. And the biotech industry and pro-GMO UK government unleashed a campaign to destroy his reputation.

Although Pusztai was the first scientist to undergo this type of industry battering, many others have since been targeted. One told me that these types of attacks have deterred hundreds of other scientists from doing research on GMOs.

The online bullies have a similar intimidating effect. Their well-chosen words are sharp and condescending, designed to scare away others from making comments—lest they become the next target.

The folks at the International Fitness Profesionals Association learned this the hard way. After posting what they considered to be a balanced article on GMOs, a troll got wind of it, posted a negative comment on the Pro-GMO FB site “We Love GMOs and Vaccines,” and asked his comrades to also make comments. The trolls swarmed.

They not only challenged the GMO article, they attacked the integrity and reputation of the organization. And of course, the trolls avoided commenting on details about GMOs, since they would quickly lose that argument with anyone familiar with the science. Facts are not their strong point. They prey on emotions.

Standing up to the Bully
Bullying and shaming can traumatize. In schools, online, at work, they have damaged and destroyed lives. It works. That’s why the biotech industry uses them.

Before discussing what to do, the first step is how to feel. The answer: INVINCIBLE!

After reporting for years about Monsanto’s strong-arm tactics, I finally became their target about eight years ago. Rather than feeling hurt or depressed, I felt uplifted. I viewed their baseless attacks as a badge of honor. I was now such a threat to their business dealings around the world, they invested a significant amount of money trying to distort my work and discredit me.

I considered whether I should spend time countering their spin to set the record straight, but soon realized that it was a black hole that would suck up my life. After all, why would I want to write posts to correct the views of the handful of people who wander onto their site, when I could reach millions of others with real information.

And so I smile, shake my head, and don’t even bother to read their posts about me. We’re winning the battle against GMOs and soon these bounty hunters will be hired by the next toxic industry.

That’s right, I said we are TOTALLY WINNING. Mainstream food companies in the US are falling over themselves to remove genetically engineered ingredients in order to boast a Non-GMO label.

With 57% of surveyed Americans saying that they are concerned about the health impacts of GMOs, we are now the majority. We have the average American on the right side of this issue.

And that’s why Monsanto has unleashed its online army. It’s a last-ditch attempt to turn the tide.

So, if you get a troll on your case or see one doing their dark dance on someone else’s post, feel GREAT! Let it remind you that our collective work sharing the truth about GMO dangers has been so successful, we are seeing the dying embers of a desperate and failing industry.

And have absolutely no anxiety or concern about any details of their accusations. They will portray themselves as mainstream, pretending to have logic and science on their side. They will appear absolutely sure of themselves. And their colleagues will give them support.

It’s their game. It’s just a game. It means nothing. And by the way, we have become the mainstream in this argument (finally).

So What Do We Do? Strike Back!
Arguing with a professional GMO huckster is hopeless. Forget about it. (Or as my NY colleagues say: fugedabowdit.)

If you are in charge of the website or account, just delete their comments. Don’t waste the time or damage the emotions of your readers. Replace their mindless ramble with a statement like:

We just found a Monsanto troll! That’s right. Monsanto hired and trained an online army to attack anyone who dares to reveal the dangers of GMOs and pesticides like Roundup. Their campaign is called “Let Nothing Go.”

So we deleted a post that had all the markings of a troll: It was emotionally bullying or shaming. It used talking points made popular by Monsanto’s PR companies, including myths like GMOs feed the world, increase yield, reduce pesticide use, or are proven safe.

And it was clearly uninformed. So it was either posted by a paid troll, or worse yet, some poor person who actually believes and emulates them. Read more about the GMO trolls and GMO dangers in general.

If you can’t delete the offending post, here’s a similar type of statement you can post in response:

Looks like we’ve found a Monsanto troll! If you haven’t heard, Monsanto hired and trained an online army to attack anyone who dares to reveal the problems with GMOs and pesticides like Roundup. Their campaign is called “Let Nothing Go.” You can decide for yourself if this is one of Monsanto’s minions.

The tone of the trolls are typically emotionally bullying or shaming. They claim the high ground, pretending that science is on their side. They often roll out one of the many talking point myths made popular by Monsanto’s PR companies, pretending that GMOs feed the world, increase yield, reduce pesticide use, and are proven safe, etc.

And they are clearly uninformed. So either this is a troll, or worse yet, some poor person who actually believes and emulates them. Read more about the GMO trolls and GMO dangers in general.

If they engage you in an online argument (and if they’re a troll, they or their friends will) you can ignore the baseless claims and just use the opportunity to post links to one of the many informative articles that shreds Monsanto’s myths.

Find lots of stuff to post at or on our Facebook page.

Please subscribe to our newsletter and like our page so we can get you more ammunition—and stories of success.

This is a time to celebrate our victories, but we can’t let up. Let’s nail the coffin shut on this dangerous and irresponsible use of genetic engineering and protect future generations. With life itself at stake, we can withstand the buzzing of a few online gnats.

Safe eating and posting.

See also:
Ea O Ka Aina: Monsanto colluded with EPA 4/14/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Glyphosate harms gut enzyme 6/21/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Monsanto and EPA collusion 3/29/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Corporate monster Monsanto 3/20/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Monsanto and First Amendment 1/24/17
Ea O Ka Aina: EPA obedient to Monsanto 12/17/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Whole Foods and Monsanto partners 7/1/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Molokai says "A'ole GMO" 9/8/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Monsanto lobbying Congress 5/18/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Roundup and human health 4/25/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Supreme Court Monsanto seed case 2/19/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Hungary denies GMOs & IMF 9/8/12
Ea O Ka Aina: GMO Corn HFCS & Cancer 8/4/10 .

Hawaii readies for N. Korea missile

SUBHEAD: State Emergency Mgt. Agency plans education and monthly tests of “attack-warning” siren.

By AP Staff on 21 July 2017 in Civil Beat -

Image above: Photo shows launch of a Hwasong-14 intercontinental ballistic missile on July 4, 2017 distributed by the North Korean government. From original article.

Hawaii is the first state to prepare the public for the unlikely possibility of a ballistic missile strike from North Korea.

The state’s Emergency Management Agency on Friday announced a public education campaign about what to do. Hawaii lawmakers have been urging emergency management officials to update Cold War-era plans for coping with a nuclear attack as North Korea develops nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles that can reach the islands.

Starting in November, Hawaii will begin monthly tests of an “attack-warning” siren the state hasn’t heard since the end of the Cold War in the 1980s.

The wailing siren will be tested on the first working day of each month, after a test of an “attention-alert” steady tone siren with which residents are already familiar.

Informational brochures, along with TV, radio and internet announcements will help educate the public about the new siren sound and provide preparedness guidance.

“If they’re not educated, they could actually be frightened by it,” agency Executive Director Toby Clairmont said of needing several months to introduce the new siren.

Because it would take a missile 15 minutes — maybe 20 minutes — to arrive, the instructions to the public are simple: “Get inside, stay inside and stay tuned,” said Vern Miyagi, agency administrator. “You will not have time to pick up your family and go to a shelter and all that kind of stuff. … It has to be automatic.”

He stressed that his agency is simply trying to stay ahead of a “very unlikely” scenario, but it’s a possibility that Hawaii can’t ignore.

Hawaii is an important strategic outpost for the U.S. military. The island of Oahu is home to the U.S. Pacific Command, the military’s headquarters for the Asia-Pacific region. It also hosts dozens of ships at Pearl Harbor and is a key base for the Navy, Air Force, Army and Marine Corps.

The Hawaii Tourism Authority supports preparing for disasters, but it is concerned that misinformation about bracing for a North Korea attack could scare travelers from visiting the islands, spokeswoman Charlene Chan said in a statement:
“The effect of such a downturn would ultimately be felt by residents who rely on tourism’s success for their livelihood.”
With that in mind, Miyagi reiterated, “Hawaii is still safe.”

Hawaii residents, who already face hazards including from tsunami and hurricanes, are familiar with disaster preparedness. Because it’s currently hurricane season, residents should already have an emergency kit that includes 14-days of food and water.

“It also works for this type of scenario,” Lt. Col. Charles Anthony, spokesman for the Hawaii State Department of Defense.

Hawaii officials surveyed 28 U.S. states and cities about what they’re doing for the North Korea threat. “They think it’s too soon,” Clairmont said.

But counterparts in California have contacted him asking for guidance now that they are starting to look at a similar effort, Clairmont said.


Not telling the truth

SUBHEAD: Lies, half-truths and cover-ups are all manifestations of fatal weakness in a society.

By Charles Hugh Smith on 21 July 2017 for Of Two Minds -

Image above: Some lies are subtle - like this mashup photo of Donald Trump's small hands. Some lies are obvious - like everything Trump says. From (

When we can no longer tell the truth because the truth will bring the whole rotten, fragile status quo down in a heap of broken promises and lies, we've reached the perfection of dysfunction.

You know the one essential guideline to "leadership" in a doomed dysfunctional system: when it gets serious, you have to lie. In other words, the status quo's secular goddess is TINA--there is no alternative to lying, because the truth will bring the whole corrupt structure tumbling down.

This core dynamic of dysfunction is scale-invariant, meaning that hiding the truth is the core dynamic in dysfunctional relationships, households, communities, enterprises, cities, corporations, states, alliances, nations and empires: when the truth cannot be told because it threatens the power structure of the status quo, that status quo is doomed.

Lies, half-truths and cover-ups are all manifestations of fatal weakness. What lies, half-truths and cover-ups communicate is: we can no longer fix our real problems, and rather than let this truth out, we must mask it behind lies and phony reassurances.

Truth is power, lies are weakness. All we get now are lies, statistics designed to mislead and phony reassurances that the status quo is stable and permanent. The truth is powerful because it is the core dynamic of solving problems.

Lies, gamed statistics and false reassurances are fatal because they doom any sincere efforts to fix what's broken before the system reaches the point of no return.

We are already past the point of no return. The expediency of lies has already doomed us.

Honest accounts of hugely successful corporations that implode share one key trait: in every case, managers were pressured to hide the truth from top management, which then hid the truth from investors and clients.

This is the key dynamic in failed oligarchies as well: if telling the truth gets you sent to Siberia (or worse), then nobody with any instinct for self-perservation will tell the truth.

If obscuring the truth saves one's job, then that's what people do. That this dooms the organization is secondary to immediate self-preservation.

A distorted sense of loyalty to the family, community, company, institution, agency or nation furthers lying as the "solution" to unsavory problems. Daddy a drunk? Hide the bottle. Church a hotbed of adultery and thieving?

Maintain the facade of holiness at all costs. Company products are failing? Put some lipstick on the pig.

The statistical truth doesn't support the party's happy story? Distort the stats until they "do what's needed." The agency failed to fulfill its prime directive? Blame the managerial failure on a scapegoat.

Pathological liars and cheats rely on self-preservation and misplaced loyalty to mask their own failure and corruption.

A hint here, a comment there, and voila, a culture of lying is created and incentivized.
Obscuring the truth is the ultimate short-term expediency. Now that it's serious, we have to lie. We'll start telling the truth later, after everything's stabilized.

But lying insures nothing can ever be truly stabilized, so there will never be a point at which the system is strong enough and stable enough to survive the truth.

We are now an empire of lies. The status quo--politically, socially and economically- depends on lies, half-truths, scapegoats and cover-ups for its very survival. Any truth that escapes the prison of lies endangers the entire rotten edifice.

In an empire of lies, "leaders" say what people want to hear. This wins the support of the masses, who would rather hear false reassurances that require no sacrifices, no difficult trade-offs, no hard choices, no discipline.

The empire of lies is doomed. Lies are weakness, and they prohibit any real solutions. Truth is power, but we can no longer tolerate the truth because it frightens us. Our weakness is systemic and fatal.

"If liberty means anything at all it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear"
~ George Orwell

Louisiana snubs TigerSwan

SUBHEAD: The state won’t give the security firm that tracked DAPL opponents a license to operate.

By Nikhil Swaminathan on 20 July 2017 for Grist Magazine -

Image above: TigerSwan mercenaries at Standing Rock were hired by the Dakota Access Pipeline to fight the indigenous Sioux and others protesting the construction of the pipeline. From (

The state Board of Private Security Examiners rebuffed the North Carolina company known as TigerSwan, citing a legal complaint filed by a similar North Dakota agency charging that the outfit operated in that state without legal permission.

Fabian Blache III, the board’s executive director, said that Louisiana law governing the private security industry is designed to protect the state’s people. He said TigerSwan — which was denied a license in North Dakota twice — had not shown it could follow regulations.

Internal company documents obtained and reported on separately by Grist and The Intercept last month revealed the extent of TigerSwan’s surveillance operations during last year’s protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline.

Earlier this month, the Associated Press reported that Energy Transfer Partners said it no longer had a security presence on the ground in North Dakota, and TigerSwan said it had ended work with the Dallas-based pipeline developer at the end of June.

But apparently the firm was still seeking to work for Energy Transfer Partners in Louisiana, where the company is currently planning to build a 162-mile pipeline known as Bayou Bridge, which would shuttle refined crude oil to hubs in Texas.

That project, like Dakota Access, faces court challenges.
Regional advocacy groups pleaded with the Louisiana board to deny TigerSwan’s license, citing the type of intrusive surveillance reportedly employed by the company in North Dakota.

“TigerSwan follows people as if we were criminals,” said Anne Rolfes, founding director of the Louisiana Bucket Brigade. “We can disagree about the pipeline without resorting to such behavior.”

See also:
Ea O Ka Aina: No DAPL battle not over 6/15/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Defense contractors fought NoDAPL 5/27/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Tribes divest DAPL Bankers 2/13/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Veterans defending NoDAPL 2/11/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Army Corps okays DAPL Easement  2/8/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Trump orders go on DAPL EIS 2/3/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Water Protectors pipeline resistance 2/1/17 
Ea O Ka Aina: Force a full EIS on DAPL 1/27/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Missile launcher at Standing Rock 1/19/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Lockdown at Trans-Pecos Pipeline 1/10/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Standing Rock has changed us 12/9/16
Ea O Ka Aina: As Standing Rock celebrates... 12/5/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Army Corps denies easement 12/4/16
Ea O Ka Aina: My Whole Heart is With You 12/2/16
Ea O Ka Aina: The Loving Containment of Courage 12/1/16
Ea O Ka Aina: The Beginning is Near 12/1/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Feds to shutdown NoDAPL Camp 11/25/16
Ea O Ka Aina: NoDAPL people are going to die 11/23/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Hundreds of vets to join NoDAPL 11/22/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Obama must support Standing Rock 11/21/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Trump's pro oil stance vs NoDaPL 11/15/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Kauai NoDAPL Demonstration 11/12/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Obama to Betray Standing Rock 11/12/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Trump impact on Standing Rock 11/12/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Ann Wright on Standing Rock 11/8/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Turning Point at Standing Rock 11/6/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Jackson Browne vs DAPL owner 11/5/16
Democracy Now: Boycott of DAPL Owner's Music Festival
Ea O Ka Aina: World responds to NoDAPL protests 11/5/16
Ea O Ka Aina: NoDAPL victory that was missed 11/5/16
Ea O Ka Aina: DAPL hid discovery of Sioux artifacts 11/5/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Dakota Access Pipeline will leak 11/5/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Route of the Dakota Access Pipeline 11/4/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Sanders calls for stopping DAPL 11/4/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Obama hints at DAPL rerouting 11/3/16
Ea O Ka Aina: New military attack on NODAPL 11/3/16
Ea O Ka Aina: How to Support NoDAPL 11/3/16
Unicorn Riot: Tweets from NoDAPL 11/2/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Standing Rock & the Ballot Box 10/31/16
Ea O Ka Aina: NoDAPL reclaim new frontline 10/24/16
Ea O Ka Aina: How far will North Dakota go? 10/23/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Amy Goodman "riot" charge dropped 10/17/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Amy Goodwin to face "Riot Charge" 10/16/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Shutdown of all tar sand pipelines 10/11/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Why Standing Rock is test for Oabama 10/8/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Why we are Singing for Water 10/8/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Labor's Dakota Access Pipeline Crisis 10/3/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Standing Firm for Standing Rock 10/3/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Contact bankers behind DAPL 9/29/16
Ea O Ka Aina: NoDAPL demo at Enbridge Inc 9/29/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Militarized Police raid NoDAPL 9/28/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Stop funding of Dakota Access Pipeline 9/27/16
Ea O Ka Aina: UN experts to US, "Stop DAPL Now!" 9/27/16
Ea O Ka Aina: No DAPL solidarity grows 9/21/16
Ea O Ka Aina: This is how we should be living 9/16/16
Ea O Ka Aina: 'Natural Capital' replacing 'Nature' 9/14/16
Ea O Ka Aina: The Big Difference at Standing Rock 9/13/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Jill Stein joins Standing Rock Sioux 9/10/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Pipeline temporarily halted 9/6/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Native Americans attacked with dogs 9/5/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Mni Wiconi! Water is Life! 9/3/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Sioux can stop the Pipeline 8/28/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Officials cut water to Sioux 8/23/16