Gobby Goo By: Amelie Lillith

After nearly three months of oil gushing into the gulf I have finally gotten a poem written about it. Feel free to pass this on if you feel the need.

Gobby Goo
By: Amelie Lillith

4/20 means different things to different people
to me, it is a black day...or it was this year
a day followed by day after day...and yes, even today
of death slowly creeping near
4/20 was a horrid day
a day where men working just to pay their way
lost their lives and their families
lost the only way they had to be free
the beaches and the wetlands tooslowly clogged with that gobby goo
and what did the corporation do?
they did everything they could to hide the very truth.

And so now it's been three long months
and all those families have is more thick black gunk
and air tainted with a poisoned tinge
even angels can't fly with oil soaked wingsand so what is it that we can do
to stop the lies and find the fucking truth
we can clog that gusher with the best thing we've got
the CEOs themselves, the only true junk shot
it will take dozens, hundreds, possibly more
because they are mostly filled with lies and lore
but to stop the creeping death blackening the shores
is something they'll never do with stockholders on board
we can't rely on our government
we're all seeing the difference between what they saidand what they meant
It's time to activate
to tell them all that we'll no longer wait
to take control of the way things are run
I'll bring my voice, you bring your gun
and we'll show those in charge that we are done playing their game
that black beaches in the gulf just are not the same
and tell their EPA that the poisons sprayed
need to stop, because it could already be too late

the dolphins are swimming up onto our shores
hoping for a fast death escaping the oil, but just find even morethe corporations and the government, are just two branches
of the same old camp
and the people are starting to see this truth
tell your friends and your family too
it's time to do more than congregate
time to do more than just relate
it's time for all of us to fight this fight
to show them the difference between wrong and right
and if that lesson comes with guns or marches
I don't care, and neither do the coated marshesthe waterbirds don't care which way we choose
peace or violence or a combination of the two
their legs and wings are still coated with sticky death
and they'll wonder why we aren't fighting with their dying breaths
so grab your weapons be they sword or pen
it's about time that we all begin

it's been three long months since this all started
and all that's changed is the beaches have darkened
the poor and the southern are being ignoredit's time to reclaim our shores
The air is tainted with a poisoned tinge
even angels can't fly with oil soaked wings

You can pray to whatever god you've got
under the current system we'll need the lot
say your prayers and meditate
but your loving kindness will just have to wait
the corporations and their CEOs
and the government and their two party dronesdon't want us to activate
they keep preaching that we should just wait
but even most gods weren't afraid to activate their people
let's part the seas of lies and demand we be equal
to those very corporations and the government
the ones raising our taxes and hiking up rent
we'll yell from oil slick to sandy shore
WE CAN'T TRUST YOU ANYMORE
we can't rely on our government
we're all seeing the difference between what you saidand what you meant.
We see that it's time to activate
And no, we will no longer sit around and wait
we'll take control of the way things are run
We'll bring our voices...they'll bring their guns
and we'll show those in charge that we are done playing their game
that black beaches in the gulf just are not the same
and tell their EPA that the poisons sprayed
need to stop, because it could already be too late.

These three months have been three months too longso I'm going to stop talking and let's get things done.
Tell your friends and neighbors to demand the truth
Let's take the power back, and start to revolute.

Obama: Breaking One Promise at a Time

We have all heard the mantra "save the whales", seen the grotesque images that are the results of whaling, and cheered on the fictional "Willy" as he was saved from whalers time and time again in the sequels to Free Willy…I have never met a person that has actually been FOR whaling. I think there are really not many people that are.

Obama said in 2008, when campaigning on a GreenPeace Candidate Questionaire:

As president, I will ensure that the U.S. provides leadership in enforcing international wildlife protection agreements, including strengthening the international moratorium on commercial whaling. Allowing Japan to continue commercial whaling is unacceptable.”

— Barack Obama, March 16, 2008

Here is an excerpt from GreenPeace's response flier that explains the issue with whaling and Obama (the flier can be found here http://us.greenpeace.org/site/DocServer/Photos_to_Save_the_Whales_Toolkit.pdf?docID=521)

"Back in 1975, Greenpeace launched the world’s first-ever Save the Whales campaign. The images we brought back from our maiden anti-whaling voyage sparked an international outcry and moved a generation of environmentalists into action. Eventually, after a decade of intense activism, the International Whaling Commission (IWC) agreed to ban commercial whaling. That was 1986 and it was one of our greatest moments as an organization— it was also one of the greatest moments for activists like you.

We could lose it all this June.

In an altogether shocking move, President Obama’s delegation to the IWC has decided to back a plan that would legitimize commercial whaling for the first time since the ban was passed over 20 years ago. We simply can’t let that happen. President Obama needs to hear from Americans everywhere that we oppose this bad deal and demand that he lives up to his campaign promise to work to end all commercial whaling.

That’s why we’re asking everyone who cares about whales to take action and send a message to the President that supporting any deal that would legitimize commercial whaling is, as he himself said, 'unacceptable.'”

So, wait, you are probably thinking I must be kidding. Someone FOR whaling? That's unheard of…well no, I'm not kidding and GreenPeace isn't crazy. Here's another article on it.

Here is a statement from Edward Dorson (Edward Dorson is Director of Conservation Strategies for the Shark Research Institute) taken from the Huffington Post article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carol-muskedukes/a-sea-of-deceit-and-capit_b_551858.html Bold has been added by me.

A Sea of Deceit and Capitulation
by Edward Dorson
April 25, 2010

The trajectory of the International Whaling Commission (IWC), meeting in Morocco this June, is on a disastrous course for the world's whales. A new proposal to resume commercial whaling will be presented at the IWC summit. Simply put, it's an awful deal. In order to foresee the fate of the whales with this proposal on the table, look no further than how all the marine species fared at the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) last month, where each and every proposed aquatic species was denied protection. This was a Japanese orchestrated "victory," and the same bullying, vote swapping and "influencing" that Japan deployed at CITES to prevent marine protection is also entrenched to dictate the fate of the whales at the IWC.

The IWC proposal would actually reward the whaling abuses of Japan, Norway, and Iceland. This "compromise" deal allows whaling countries to continue killing for at least the next 10 years, with an unachievable requirement for reduced kill quotas. It offers no true enforcement, it can't hold the whalers to any promises, and it obviously undoes all conservation measures made since the 1986 declaration of a whaling moratorium. Furthermore, it would legitimize Japan's slaughter in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary and promote a Japanese generated ploy wherein "Indigenous" whaling would apply to Japan's coastal whalers, allowing more killing of whales in the North Pacific.

Japan has unfailingly undermined every marine regulatory convention that may affect its ability to plunder the world's oceans -- systematically rolling back years of international conventions and marine protections. Removing the moratorium on commercial whaling would also remove the most recognizable boundary to Japan's hubris and greed, and would assist in the unrestrained taking of the less "cuddly" species such as the highly lucrative tunas and other fish species.

Japan wants a resumption of commercial whaling to divert the focus away from its unsustainable pillage of the seas. Whales are highly sentient beings, and, despite what Japan projects, they aren't universally perceived as a "product." From elaborate scientific study to casual observation, they've proven to be extremely social, communicative, highly intelligent, and able to feel intense emotion and pain. Japan realizes that if the killing of such iconic species is sanctioned, the remainder of what's left of aquatic life will be theirs for the taking.

A recent document by Professor Shohei Yonemoto, titled "Useless Research Whaling Should Be Abolished," gives his pragmatic perspective on Japan's ambitions of dominance of the dwindling life in the oceans. He speaks of trading off "research" whaling only to go unhampered in the whaling closer to Japan. In the last two paragraphs, Dr. Yonemoto reveals Japan's ultimate objective in relentlessly exploiting the more valuable tunas, sharks and other fish:

"It is said that eating whales is Japan's traditional culture. But this is a myth that was started through a PR company during the mid-1970s. Actually, whale meat does not sell well and there is surplus stock. If Japan proposes to the IWC to allow it to engage in coastal whaling in exchange for giving up research whaling, I expect the long-standing opposition to be immediately settled.

Currently, there is a growing trend for strengthening control over marine resources such as tuna on a global scale. Also in order not to raise questions over Japan's scientific data in international forums to discuss regulations on fishing of tuna and other fish, Japan should abolish research whaling as a government project."

Japan now has a formidable ally in its quest to lift the ban on commercial whaling: President Barack Obama. In the March intersessional IWC meeting, the Obama Administration was the chief proponent in advancing the plan to resume commercial whaling and is currently urging other nations to follow. This is clearly based on geopolitical maneuvering and Japan's leverage with our debt obligation; devoid of scientific or ethical consideration.

The U.S. position is a drastic departure from then-Senator Obama's campaign promise made on March 16, 2008, when he stated: "As president, I will ensure that the U.S. provides leadership in enforcing international wildlife protection agreements, including strengthening the international moratorium on commercial whaling. Allowing Japan to continue commercial whaling is unacceptable."

As the current proposal is written, pro-whaling countries will directly benefit with a return to what was described by the president as "unacceptable" commercial whaling. Nearly 25 years of conservation efforts may be swept aside if former staunch allies of the whales, the U.S. and other nations following our lead, capitulate to Japan as they have indicated.

The president's unfulfilled pledge to "ensure that the US provides leadership in enforcing international wildlife protection agreements" could be achieved by compelling Japan to honor all the agreements it has broken with impunity. Japan has violated the Law of the Sea Convention, the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling, the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).

If the president truly wanted to see these agreements upheld, he could seek redress from the rogue whaling nations by using the sanctioning powers available under the Pelly Amendment against Japan, Norway, and Iceland until they stop whaling completely.

The president should be urged to be true to his word and protect the whales -- and not to insure their demise. Over 75% of Americans oppose the barbaric practice of whaling, and the U.S. government should mirror their demands. In order to fulfill his promise of "strengthening the international moratorium on commercial whaling," President Obama should be lending his full support towards the rapid passage of the International Whale Conservation and Protection Act of 2010, sponsored by Senator John Kerry.

Of critical importance: there's absolutely no method to kill a whale "humanely." An explosive harpoon is shot into them, they're then electrocuted through an attached cable, repeatedly shot by high caliber rifles, and drowned by being dragged through the water. Even with this torture, which wouldn't be tolerated in the most hellish slaughterhouse, it's not unusual for a whale to take over an hour to finally die. With a fiendish abuse of language, this atrocity has been labeled by pro-whaling states as "harvest" or "culling," and any dissent is dismissed as "emotional."

It's high time to make all whale species off-limits to slaughter and to acknowledge them as unique beings that are fully deserving of inherent rights. It's now been empirically shown that the cetaceans (whales and dolphins) possess such a high order of sentience that they can't rationally be designated as some "product" to be butchered, bartered, or compromised.

If mankind is going to continue in benefiting from the gifts that the ocean offers, we must recognize that no nation or cartel of nations should be allowed to dominate the seas and deplete its bounty at the expense of the future. Experience and knowledge are there to reveal the boundaries of not only sustainability, but of sentience and sanity as well. We must now realize that this threshold has been breached by Japan with its continuing assault upon the world's whales and its accompanying lust to eliminate what's left of the oceans. This must be stopped, not revived.

It's Time to Connect the (Oily) Dots

A huge oil rig off Loisiana explodes and sinks causing a gigantic (and growing) oil leak. Wasn't it just a month ago that Obama talked about opening up more locations for off shore drilling (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/31/science/earth/31energy.html)? This went in direct opposition of what he said in 2008: "When I’m president, I intend to keep in place the moratorium here in Florida and around the country that prevents oil companies from drilling off Florida’s coasts. That’s how we can protect our coastline and still make the investments that will reduce our dependence on foreign oil and bring down gas prices for good.”

Well, any sort of illusion that the Obama administration in conjunction with big oil (because let's face it, everyone KNOWS by now that big oil has their fingers deep into the governmental body of America) wanted to pull over Americans' eyes isn't going to be very easy now. Offshore drilling is not only barely regulated, unsafe for workers, and contributing to global warming, it is also HORRIBLY UNSAFE for the environment as a whole.

So, let's connect the dots and see the disastrous effects of off shore drilling once and for all…

Here are some pictures to illustrate the outcomes of an industry not regulated nearly enough…

In this aerial photo (above) taken in the Gulf of Mexico off Louisiana's tip, oil is seen near the site last week's collapse and spill of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig Wednesday, April 28, 2010. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)

One thing that mainstream media is doing is saying that this could result in a "possible environmental disaster" if the oil reaches shore. They fail to realize that the ocean is itself an ecosystem and that all of this oil is killing living creatures RIGHT NOW. They should be saying that the oil leak could cause "possible economic disaster"; these are two different and sometimes linked issues. A large portion of the ocean environment is going to be destroyed regardless of what happens in the coming days. Whether or not 'viable fishing industries' will be hurt is yet to be determined.

So make your voice heard. Talk about this issue and let's DEMAND that offshore drilling no longer happens and that opening NEW SITES for it is NOT the answer. Obama has shown Americans that he cannot be trusted at his word on the oil issue and it is incredibly obvious where his interests lie (with oil giants) and where they don't (with the environment and people of the world).

Convenience, Black Blood, and War

I’m sure by now that you have all heard the story about the “attempted terrorist attack” on the Northwest Airlines jet that was bound for Detroit. This was an attack that was apparently only NOT SUCCESSFUL because the bomb didn’t go off properly.

From the moment I heard about this my skeptics glasses went on; this just seems too, what’s the word? CONVENIENT. It seems to me that whenever public opinion of the war(s) goes down, something happens to reinstate the fear that lets people forget their rights, personal freedoms, and opposition to wars.

I was skeptical before I started reading about Yemen and the United States. Yemen is where the accused terrorist, Abdulmatallab, reportedly made contact with Al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda has taken responsibility for the botched terrorist attack and says it was in response to attacks on them in Yemen. The US did actually attack Yemen. This is what ABC news had to say about the attack:

On orders from President Barack Obama, the U.S. military launched cruise missiles early Thursday against two suspected al-Qaeda sites in Yemen, administration officials told ABC News in a report broadcast on ABC World News with Charles Gibson.

ABC's Brian Ross details missile strike on al-Qaeda militants in Afghanistan.

One of the targeted sites was a suspected al Qaeda training camp north of the capitol, Sanaa, and the second target was a location where officials said "an imminent attack against a U.S. asset was being planned."

The Yemen attacks by the U.S. military represent a major escalation of the Obama administration's campaign against al Qaeda.

In his speech about added troops for Afghanistan earlier this month, President Obama made a brief reference to Yemen, saying, "Where al Qaeda and its allies attempt to establish a foothold -- whether in Somalia or Yemen or elsewhere -- they must be confronted by growing pressure and strong partnerships."

The entire article can be found here: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cruise-missiles-strike-yemen/story?id=9375236&page=1

Okay, so in the war on terror America is going to find the terrorists wherever they are hiding. This is old news, Bush loved saying stuff like this, and apparently Obama does too. There is another similarity besides terrorists between Yemen and the other countries America is attacking however. What is this similarity?

OIL.

Here’s some information on Yemen’s oil industry: http://www.mbendi.com/indy/oilg/as/ye/p0005.htm

Yemen is a small, non-OPEC oil producer. The country’s economy is highly dependent on oil production, with the country’s oil exports accounting for around 85 percent of export revenues and 33 percent of gross domestic product. According to the 2008 BP Statistical Energy Survey, Yemen had proved oil reserves of 2.78 billion barrels at the end of 2007 or 0.22 % of the world's reserves and produced an average of 336 thousand barrels of crude oil per day, 0.4% of the world total and a change of -11.5 % compared to 2006.

Though the government of Yemen is fairly stable following the re-election of President Ali Abdullah Saleh in 2006, security remains a concern of foreign firms doing business in Yemen. Yemen is divided into 87 blocks, of which 12 actually produce oil.

The oil is concentrated in five areas: Marib-Jawf in the north, Masila in the south and East Shabwa, Jannah and Iyad in central Yemen. Oil production in Yemen is heavily reliant on private foreign companies, with more than 20 foreign firms currently operating concessions. International companies currently operating in Yemen include Canada’s Nexen, Hunt Oil, Total, Occidental and DNO.

The national oil company, Yemen General Corporation for Oil & Gas/Mineral Resources, is an affiliation of several state-owned subsidiaries including: the Yemen Oil Company (YOC); the Yemen Refining Company (YRC); the Petroleum Exploration and Production Authority (PEPA) and the General Department of Crude Oil Marketing (GDCOM). All branches report to the MOMR. The national oil company is responsible for managing the industry contracts and relations with operators and partners, as well as the government's share of crude exports.

According to the 2008 BP Statistical Energy Survey, Yemen had 2007 proved natural gas reserves of 0.48 trillion cubic metres, the bulk of which are concentrated in the Marib-Jawf fields. Despite Yemen’s longstanding plans to develop an export-based natural gas industry, Yemen has yet to produce any natural gas.

What is an OPEC producer vs a non-OPEC oil producer? Here’s the answer http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/ftproot/presentations/ieo99_3im/sld010.htm :

By the middle of 1998, declining world oil prices caused renewed efforts to lower oil production under the sponsorship of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). In both March and June, OPEC and key non-OPEC producers Mexico and Norway agreed to restrict crude oil sales, and there were indications from several other producers that they would cut back production. Their efforts were not supported by Iraq, which wanted to increase oil sales. As a result, oil production management efforts had only modest success.

WAIT A MINUTE! So IRAQ is non-OPEC too…hmm. Just thinking here…

When Peace Isn't Given A Chance

Alright everyone—this morning I am confused. As I’m sure most of you have already heard, the President of the United States, Barack Obama, has won the Nobel Peace Prize.

I’m trying to wrap my head around how any United States President (or any governmental leader in any country) could win this award.

OSLO (Reuters) “The Norwegian Nobel Committee praised Obama for ‘his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.’ But critics -- especially in parts of the Arab and Muslim world -- called its decision premature.”

Maybe I’m missing something but I thought that America was AT WAR? Perhaps a short review of things America has done (and is doing) since Obama has been in office will shed some light on this?

Maybe we need to look at the Nobel Peace Prize itself, and what it is supposed to represent? According to their website On 27 November 1895, Alfred Nobel signed his last will and testament, giving the largest share of his fortune to a series of prizes, the Nobel Prizes. As described in Nobel's will, one part was dedicated to "the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses".

10/4/09 “President Obama is overseeing a review of U.S. strategy in Afghanistan, with his top general in that country, some other military leaders and opposition Republicans pressing him to act quickly to increase the present 68,000-troop level by up to 40,000 troops.”

Deaths in Afghanistan :

There have been 1,435 coalition deaths -- 865 Americans, 11 Australians, one Belgian, 219 Britons, 131 Canadians, three Czech, 25 Danes, 21 Dutch, six Estonians, one Finn, 35 French, 30 Germans, two Hungarians, 20 Italians, three Latvian, one Lithuanian, four Norwegians, 13 Poles, two Portuguese, 11 Romanians, one South Korean, 25 Spaniards, two Swedes, two Turks and one NATO/ISAF -- in the war on terror as of October 8, 2009, according to a CNN count. Below are the names of the soldiers, Marines, airmen and sailors whose deaths have been reported by their nation's governments. The list also includes one U.S. Defense Department civilian employee. The troops died in support of the U.S.-led Operation Enduring Freedom or the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan. At least 4,178 U.S. personnel have been wounded in action, according to the Pentagon.

Obviously not all of these deaths occurred while Obama was in office, but he has failed to end this war and the death toll continues to grow. In September of 2009 alone CNN lists 70 deaths in Afghanistan. Obama is not directly responsible for any of these deaths but his leadership and continuing the war did lead to most of them. Yet he deserves a peace prize?

Perhaps we should define peace. Here’s what Merriam Webster has to say on the topic: Main Entry: ¹peace

Pronunciation: \ˈpēs\

Function: noun

1 : a state of tranquility or quiet: as a : freedom from civil disturbance b : a state of security or order within a community provided for by law or custom
2 : freedom from disquieting or oppressive thoughts or emotions
3 : harmony in personal relations
4 a : a state or period of mutual concord between governments b : a pact or agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity
5 —used interjectionally to ask for silence or calm or as a greeting or farewell

It’s possible I’m missing something, but I don’t think America in the last year (or Obama’s leadership of it) fits into any of these definitions. Let’s go through examples of why (and where) it hasn’t.

1. State of tranquility or quiet, freedom from civil disturbance (Iraq, Afghanistan)
2. Freedom from disquieting or oppressive thoughts or emotions (G20 Protests )
3. Harmony in personal relations (I don’t know much about Obama’s family life, MAYBE he qualifies here).
4. a. A state or period of mutual concord between governments (it doesn’t say it needs to be ALL governments here, so maybe Obama squeaks past with America’s “allies”.

b. a pact or agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity (hasn’t happened with Iraq or Afghanistan)

5. Used interjectionally to ask for silence or calm or as a greeting or farewell. (I don’t think this much applies, but perhaps Obama would qualify here).

I better congratulate Obama however, I wouldn’t want all of his “Peace Keeping Forces” (with guns) to get mad at me or anything.

Change you can't forget to QUESTION

My views on inauguration day were mixed. I was excited, and there is no question about that, but I was pretty scared too. I voted for Obama, as most of you know, and I am nervous for him and all that he will have to face in his presidency. More than experiencing nerves for him, I am nervous for the well being of the citizens of this country. What on earth could I mean by that? I mean that blind faith is a very dangerous thing to play around with.

I watched the swearing in and the inauguration speech by Obama while sitting at work, and the obvious bias of the newscasters on MSNBC unnerved me even more than the clouded and slightly shadowed bias that was apparent during election time. I watched as the nearly two million were brought nearly to tears (some did cry) by the swearing in of “America’s first African American President”. I found myself go from anger to joy as Obama said all of the things I needed him too, and as he filled me up with the hope he has preached for the last two years.

As I sat in my office I kept hoping no one would walk in because I was so entranced by the proceedings. I was merely 18 during the last presidential election and didn’t pay much attention when Bush continued his term. This was, for me, the first inauguration I will remember into my adult life, and so I paid attention. It was while I paid attention over the last two days that I began to get a little panicked.

I know that Obama just had his first full day in office today and that not much is expected to happen, but I am panicked because I feel like the American public is brainwashed. For those of you who know me, or even read this blog, I am sure you know I don’t think much of the average American voter to begin with, but this is different. I have watched as my insanely intelligent and critical friends cease to question, cease to push, when it comes to Obama. They tear up and smile, and that is all.

If Obama is to be successful we cannot hand him a get out of jail free card before he even unpacks! America, we have to be sure that our President understands that we will not follow him no matter what. He is elected because of what he promised to do, and if he isn’t going to follow through on his word (or at least most of it) then he has to know we will be outraged.

The media all but slaughtered our previous president over the last four years he was in office, yet they label Michelle Obama as “the next Jackie O”. The media talks about the handsome youth of our new president and fails to mention how he stumbled over his words when he was sworn in. I understand he was nervous and that stumbling over words doesn’t mean much when it comes down to it, but I haven’t seen ONE mention of it since I saw it happen live.

When will the media stop gloating over their young handsome president and start treating him as what he is, the leader of a nation in trouble. A leader that will, undoubtedly, make mistakes. The media is responsible for sharing the news, telling the truth, and (hopefully) showing many sides to a story. I have not seen anything negative about Obama on mainstream media since Hillary dropped out of the race, and that worries me.

To my friends and fellow educated people out there—don’t forget to pay attention and to question, because when a media is openly biased and doesn’t even hide their favoritism anymore is when we are most called upon to look closely.

Hope is a very powerful thing—but without pressure many, namely politicians, tend to accomplish much.