[CTRL] Enviros Target Target
-Caveat Lector- Subject: Enviros Target Target == Enviros Target Target September 29, 2006 == JunkScience.com Fans, -- New from JunkScience.com, http://www.junkscience.com Enviros Target Target -- By Steven Milloy September 29, 2006, FoxNews.com Target???s ubiquitous red-and-white logo has proved prophetic. The discount retailer has become the bullseye-du-jour for a nationwide protest-attack by an environmental group that equates plastic with ???poison... Read the full column...: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,216438,00.html Celebrate the lifting of DDT ban with a DDT T-shirt! -- JunkScience.com is celebrating the lifting of the DDT ban by slashing the price of our great-looking DDT T-shirts! Get a DDTee while supplies last...: http://store.junkscience.com/ddtee.html Support JunkScience.com! -- Our work has helped lift the DDT ban and is working to stop global warming hysteria. A donation of $25 or more gets you an autographed copy of the book that helped launch JunkScience.com -- the Junkman's Science Without Sense: The Risky Business of Public Health Research. Visit JunkScience.com and click on the PayPal link!: http://www.junkscience.com == JunkScience.com Web Site: http://www.junkscience.com E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Powered by Microsoft Small Business To unsubscribe follow the link: http://lb.bcentral.com/ex/sp?c=11190s=D15D5282DDEF1E1Fm=365 www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance???not soap-boxing???please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'???with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds???is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/ A HREF=http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/;ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om gifYUwRWDGeiy.gif Description: GIF image
[CTRL] Enviros wil find it harder to stick property owners with the bill
-Caveat Lector- Enviros will find it harder to stick property owners with the bill. Tuesday, July 10, 2001 12:01 a.m. EDT As the Supreme Court closed shop for the term, it issued an opinion that strongly reaffirmed property rights. That alone was cause for cheer. But the court's ruling in Palazzolo v. Rhode Island also had an important side effect: It sent a message that all of society--not just a few unlucky landowners--must be prepared to bear the cost of environmental regulation. Anthony Palazzolo, an 80-year-old retired auto wrecker, wanted to build on coastal property in Rhode Island that he'd owned for 40 years. The problem? At some point in his tenure the land had been designated protected wetlands. Mr. Palazzolo's many requests for building permits were denied; he finally sued for compensation. The state courts said he had no case. The U.S. Supreme Court disagreed, and ordered Rhode Island's courts to revisit the question of whether he is owed just compensation for the lost value of his property. What happened to Mr. Palazzolo is an increasingly common and nefarious practice known as a regulatory taking. The Constitution prohibits the government from taking a citizen's land for public use, such as bridges or roads, without just compensation. But regulatory takings are trickier: The state doesn't actually grab your land; it just bars you from doing anything with it. Politicians and activist groups figured out that regulatory takings were a speedy--and extremely cheap--way of delivering on environmental promises. And so in Virginia, retired contractor John Taylor is unable to build a house on a lot he owns (in the middle of a development) because it might disturb a nearby bald eagle. In Oregon, Alvin and Marsha Seiber were made to set aside 37 acres of their 200-acre commercially harvestable forest land to protect the northern spotted owl. And in California, vintners and farmers have found themselves effectively barred from activity because it might hurt the emergency-listed tiger salamander. The difficulty here isn't necessarily that society passed laws to save the environment. Rather, it's that one group of people--individual property owners--are footing the bill for everyone else. Owners who have the bad fortune of landing in the (protected) silver rice rat's natural habitat find themselves barred from commercial enterprise and watch their land values plummet. Property-rights groups estimate that owners have shouldered hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of the nation's environmental good. Property owners who fight back run into a steely opposition. Florida passed the Bert Harris Property Act in 1995, allowing owners compensation when restrictions cause property values to decline. Environmental groups have vowed to overturn the law. Last year, Oregon citizens passed Measure 7, an initiative that would provide similar financial relief. Within weeks, several of Oregon's largest cities and counties had a lawsuit seeking to have the measure declared unconstitutional. Politicians in the state have complained (without irony) that the government could never afford to compensate landowners for all the property it takes each year (by the state's own reckoning, $5.4 billion annually). But at least one part of government seems to be catching on to all this rights-trampling: the courts. In addition to Palazzolo, a key precedent in environmental law was just set in California, where farmers and ranchers in the Tulare Lake Basin sued the state after being cut off from water between 1992 and 1994 because of endangered fish. In April, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims held that the loss of water constituted a clear government taking of property, and that the farmers must be compensated. The court hit the mark in noting that the Fifth Amendment is intended to bar government from forcing some people alone to bear public burdens which, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole. What the claims court has potentially done is to set the stage for a new era of environmental responsibility. The key problem in America's environmental debate is that most people have no concept of how much it costs to protect natural resources, and so feel there's nothing to lose from more regulations. This might start to change. The Tulare farmers say the damages for the loss of water come to $25 million. Mr. Palazzolo--should he now win in Rhode Island--says his lost economic opportunity is more than $3 million. Up to now, everyone has gotten a free ride on the backs of individuals whose property happened to be standing in the middle of the latest set-aside whim of the local bureaucrats or activists. In the future we may have to set some environmental priorities. The specter of spiraling tax bills to compensate innocent property owners may cause some long overdue second thoughts about environmentalist overreaching. That in turn could instill some common sense into that famous phrase, earth in the
Re: [CTRL] ENVIROS
-Caveat Lector- hi Howard, So, finally someone who agrees with me that the world is not overpopulated! Though I hadn't thought that with a population of some 3 billion we were on the verge of extinction. Of course, with the decreasing birth rates in Europe and America perhaps you may have a point. Do you recommend the banning of birth control and abortion to solve this problem? Yep I totally agree that the EIGHT BILLION GLOBAL POPULATION is Not Excessive and that should the Elite 10% invest in Infrastructure and food and medicine and education that isn't poisonous trash - we could help them all live happily. Unfortunately, I keep coming across categories of information that suggest that a Cull is about to take place: 1. Earth Crust Displacement 2. A series of Comets 3. a la 'Report from Iron Mountain' - wars as an elite invention 4. genetically engineered Race-Specific Ethnic Cleansing Viruses etc etc and other anti-population Biology 5. alien invasion of Clinton Clones with reptilian implants 6. Lunatic Right Wing Cabals worshipping ET's in the Theosophical Society who create Earthquakes to 'Shake Out' the undeserving non-Aryans. The Aryan plan is to get the Global population down to the 3 Billion that you mention Howard. Do you belong to any group involved in promoting this Cull Howard coz where did you hear about 3 Billion ?? Andrew Hennessey Transformation Studies Group Edinburgh Scotland DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] ENVIROS
-Caveat Lector- Andrew Hennessey wrote: snip You have the right to ignore that the World Race is on the Brink of Extinction facts that are available to any person who chooses to look snip So, finally someone who agrees with me that the world is not overpopulated! Though I hadn't thought that with a population of some 3 billion we were on the verge of extinction. Of course, with the decreasing birth rates in Europe and America perhaps you may have a point. Do you recommend the banning of birth control and abortion to solve this problem? Howard Davis DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] ENVIROS
-Caveat Lector- Howard R. Davis III wrote: So, finally someone who agrees with me that the world is not overpopulated! Though I hadn't thought that with a population of some 3 billion we were on the verge of extinction. Of course, with the decreasing birth rates in Europe and America perhaps you may have a point. Do you recommend the banning of birth control and abortion to solve this problem? I recommend as much sex as possible ;-) DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] ENVIROS
-Caveat Lector- -Original Message- From: Source - Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, January 28, 1999 8:31 AM Subject: Re: [CTRL] ENVIROS -Caveat Lector- Howard R. Davis III wrote: So, finally someone who agrees with me that the world is not overpopulated! Though I hadn't thought that with a population of some 3 billion we were on the verge of extinction. Of course, with the decreasing birth rates in Europe and America perhaps you may have a point. Do you recommend the banning of birth control and abortion to solve this problem? Comment from Agent Smiley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Closer to six billion. Comment from Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] I recommend as much sex as possible ;-) Comment from The Pied Piper [EMAIL PROTECTED] I do not think sex will help with the population problem part. Good for distraction only. But what a distraction! :-) BUT - Why do I say that? Were the dinosaurs under or over populated? Oh, I frogot - it was suppose to be a meteror that took them out ===? http://members.xoom.com/ThePiedPiper/Intro2.htm DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] ENVIROS
-Caveat Lector- hi Robert - here are some thoughts on your neologism 'ENVIROS' which I hope that you can evaluate constructively. You have the right to ignore that the World Race is on the Brink of Extinction facts that are available to any person who chooses to look - but in case you need a handle on what more responsible people think of the term 'enviros' - try to fix on the idea that it isn't a Cult of Whakos but a global realisation by ordinary decent taxpayers that there is an OBVIOUS global problem for the future wellbeing of their children for whom they care. By attempting to publicly diminish the catastrophic nature of the problem you are perhaps, 'psychologically' hoping that it may go away by re-inventing the appearance of the problem on screen - making it more easy for you to reject. But dealing with this problem will only happen, in my opinion, by an increased ability of the voter to elect officials who are effective. This awareness can only be achieved by stating the simple facts not disguising them. Trivialising what appears to most of us as rapacious 'Global Genocide' is IMO a bit 'detached from reality' - [eg. potatos, tomatos, wacos, enviros etc] so I don't think much of the term 'Enviros' :) Andrew Hennessey Transformation Studies Group Edinburgh Scotland DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Enviros support removal of 8000 trees
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 1/25/99 12:03:57 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The enviros A blanket term used to discredit. What are you up to here? One would assume from your post that your only hang up with logging 8000 trees is the fact that I refered to the movement in the generic sense..the enviros. Assume all you want. No, I did not give you the pleasure of reacting to a piece of doo doo. I didn't deem the post worth any more of my time. It WAS worth it to me, however, to point out the obvious attempt to discredit that was to be found only a little into the piece. I predict that there will be no outrage, no outcry from the enviros in general.. This HAS been an issue in the environmental community. .because their leaders are the ones doing it. We don't have leaders. I find it interesting that leaders/followers in the enviros proclaim logging to be evil UNTIL it suits their purposes and their leaders advance the plan...then its OK. They have discredited themselves yet AGAIN. Cheers, Robert Lame. I have given you too much attention already. Good bye. smile DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Enviros support removal of 8000 trees
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 1/26/99 9:44:38 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 1/25/99 12:03:57 PM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The enviros A blanket term used to discredit. What are you up to here? One would assume from your post that your only hang up with logging 8000 trees is the fact that I refered to the movement in the generic sense..the enviros. Assume all you want. No, I did not give you the pleasure of reacting to a piece of doo doo. I didn't deem the post worth any more of my time. It WAS worth it to me, however, to point out the obvious attempt to discredit that was to be found only a little into the piece. What you refer to as a piece of doo doo was a news article about Bruce Babbitt and other so called mainstream enviros advancing plans that call for the cutting down 8000 trees. No matter what anybody says or does, it is Bruce Babbitt and people within the enviro movement that want to log this batch of trees.Where is the public outcry, commentary from inside the "movement?" Likely it won't happen. I predict that there will be no outrage, no outcry from the enviros in general.. This HAS been an issue in the environmental community. It won't get the outrage/outcry that would have been had if it was a logging company who had proposed to cut 8000 trees. Are the people within the enviro movement going to file lawsuits against the Dept of Interior, Bruce Babbitt, and the various enviro groups and organizations that are involved as they would have done if a logging company had wanted to do the same thing? Has anybody in the enviro movement sought a court injunction to stop the plan until an EIS (which would take years) was done? I hope I am wrong, but the likely answer to those questions is a big fat NO, and it is not likely to happen in the future. Why? Because it is people within the enviro movement supporting the cutting of trees. .because their leaders are the ones doing it. We don't have leaders. While you may not have any, most of the others dance to the drums of either the Sierra Club, and other so called mainstream groups. Yet others dance to the drums of the more militant groups like Earth First and others. I find it interesting that leaders/followers in the enviros proclaim logging to be evil UNTIL it suits their purposes and their leaders advance the plan...then its OK. They have discredited themselves yet AGAIN. Cheers, Robert Lame. I have given you too much attention already. Good bye. smile I noticed how you dodged the issue when confronted with the fact that it is enviros and Bruce Babbitt who want to cut down trees. The article merely demonstrates how two faced those people are. Had this been a logging company that made the proposal, the screaming would have gone on, and on, and on, and on. People would have been filing lawsuits and climbing the trees in grand canyon in protest. As I have observed this is an example of when some people in/around/connected to the environmental movement consider it "expiedent" to log trees by the 100s or thousands, then its OK. But if a logging company wanted to do the same exact thing, they would be instantly denouced as evil, lawsuits would be filed, and on and on. Since you claim to be concerned about tree issues,and such, you also apparently have no "leader" to worry about, nor are you a follower of any of the major groups involved , I would expect that you will probably be the first one of many lawsuits to be filed against the plan. Cheers, Robert DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Enviros support removal of 8000 trees
-Caveat Lector- Ain't it *rich* so to speak. The enviros don't have a problem in the world with removing 8000 trees from Grand Canyon Park but they are concerned about the "means" Apparently it was suggested using horses instead of trucks to haul the cut down trees. Sec of Interior Babbitt (who is consided to be a God by some enviros) claims this so called experiment is "necessary."I would point out that if some logging company had made the suggestion, the enviros as a whole would have been foaming out the mouth, but when it comes from their own, and from "god" Bruce, then its ok. Apparently while the enviros still worship "old growth" we are to realize that growth less then 15 inches is considered expendible. Never mind the fact that those trees are the "old growth" of the future. Grand Canyon Plans Experiment and the Removal of 8,000 Trees By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS PHOENIX -- A proposed experiment in Grand Canyon National Park would mean cutting down about 8,000 trees, and though environmentalists support the project's ends, they are concerned about the means. If allowed this summer, it would apparently be the first time one of America's 52 national parks had been logged. But park officials said the experiment would not be a timber operation. The experiment is intended to find the most effective way to improve the overall health of the forest by creating restoration areas for cutting and controlled burning. Park officials released a draft environmental assessment this week indicating that about 8,000 trees would be removed in the project. They also scheduled public hearings for next month in Arizona and Utah. Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt said the experiment was necessary because "for many years we suppressed naturally occurring fire and, without meaning to, created artificial, unhealthy and dangerous forests." The Sierra Club and the Grand Canyon Trust agree that something must be done about years of fuel buildup in the park, which they say could cause fires, insect and disease outbreaks. But some environmentalists fear too many trees will be cut down. "You can always cut down more trees, but you can't put them back," said a Sierra Club forest specialist, Sharon Galbreath. "Should we be experimenting in a national park, with a method that resembles full-scale logging?" R. V. Ward, a Grand Canyon Park biologist, says trees are cut all the time," like in road-widening projects. He said the experiment must be conducted in the park because no place else could duplicate the conditions. Ward said every effort will be made to prevent damage to the forest, including the possibility of using horses instead of trucks to haul cut trees. According to the plan for the Grand Canyon, none of the trees cut will exceed 15 inches in diameter and none will be sold commercially, a park spokeswoman, Maureen Oltrogge, said on Friday. Sunday, January 24, 1999 A HREF="aol://4344:104.nytcopy.6445375.574106743"Copyright 1999 The New York Times/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
