Thanks Miraki, Davey and Bob N for your replies viz bans on DU.
International bans on DU, as you no doubt agree, are adding a fifth wheel
or reinvinting one of the others. And in my opinion, only worth the time of
those few specialists who may be passionately on-fire and able to do their
mechanics inside the machine.
The question of local bans is an entirely different matter. Local bans,
supported by city and county administrations, state governments, trade
unions and other professional, community and commercial bodies, are worth
pursuing.
If you recognise that all except the international law happens directly at
the local level in some wise, then it makes good sense (to me, at least) to
attack the problem at the local level. It is the local level where DU is
vulnerable: where DU is produced, DU stored, DU transported, DU products
manufactured, DU bought and sold. Well under the radar of international law
and sanctions, but square in the sights of community sanctions.
Local bans also put pressure on stockholders and investors. Have you had a
look at the "effete east-coast" American publications lately ? I will throw
Atlantic Monthly, Smithsonian, Natural History and The New Yorker into that
sated pigeonhole for purposes of argument:
The thoughtful, humane and enlightened readers of these magazines are
targets of a lot of "ethical investment" statements by major corporations.
The advertisers know that "ordinary folks" (even in the rarified strata) are
genuinely concerned about what their tax and investment dollars are buying,
or at least how they might appear if they invest in, say Lockheed or maybe
Alliance Industries.
Lets do the July-August issue of The Atlantic: Page 67 gives Altria's
urbane statement about "the Value of seeing the whole forest" (some of which
winds up as cigarette papers in Phillip Morris products). My guess is that
someone somewhere is being paid to data-mine for the results of a rather
expensive advert, most likely appearing in more than just one magazine, and
aimed at narcotising the comfortable subscriber, providing a polite reply to
any rude questions about social responsibility of cigarette manufacturers.
The same might hypothetically apply to DU munitions manufacturers.
On Page 29, we have BP telling us they have "been selling biofuels for over
25 years". Hey, How Green is That? Add BP to your portfolio, if you think
their biofuels are going to slow global warming! And page 28 precedes, with
"Fuel made from coern adds less CO2 to the atmosphere. That's biofuel for
thought." bp. beyond petroleum. How's that for the ecologically correct
investor and SUV owner?
On page 16, ADM says "... for all of us, there are no limits to a cleaner,
greener world." At least not "west of Omaha", in the corn belt (no pun
intended).
pp 38-39 tells all about GM's renewable energy propulsion systems (well,
sort of - a picture is worth a thousand words, so they only need to include
about 100 words of buzzwords, gadget names, factoids and and reassurances).
The Muppets Holding Company? see page 74: "Technology meets ecology". And
for the worriers from page 29, p75 has a Ford Escape Hybrid getting 36mpg
(with caveat). Kermit looks very happy.
The back cover has Chevron, demonstrating accountability to the folks who
can best afford a conscience (and for the immediately impassioned, a
faux-sticky-note hint: go to willyoujoinus.com)
(And there's a $14,615 exercise machine on page 163 how energy efficient is
that?)
Lockheed Martin is fixing up a home for a retiree (I'll bet) on page 77.
Not an Iraqi retiree, from the looks of the architecture. Their ad says "We
never forget who we're working for". Stockholders interested in ethical
investment might be interested in who they're working against, with DU
weapons.
On page 53, there's a phone number for folks who can't afford to pay the
full price of Glaxo Smith Kline products - (a digression - I wonder if they
might supply antivirals to HIV+ Nigerians who ring them up from a pay phone
in Nigeria?)
Pages 6 and 7 advertise GE's "Ecoimagination". "To learn more, visit
ge.com/ecoimagination".
And there's Domini Social Investments, mentioned on page 49: "Domini social
investments offers mutual funds for people who want to invest with their
values. for information, please call 800 762 6814 or visit www.domini.com
Enough of the Atlantic's adverts - I hope you were entertained and informed.
Local and other targeted DU bans are irrelevant to international law, to
existing sanctions on DU weapons, except insofar as the bans provide an
avenue for educating the public and putting pressure on investors,
legislators and others to examine their values, actions and interests.
Then, the bans provide a context for informing the public about the
consequences of their choices, and an opportunity to change their minds and
actions.
Cheers,
Robert
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
----- Original Message -----
From: <du-watch@yahoogroups.com>
To: <du-watch@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 2:00 AM
Subject: [DU-WATCH] Digest Number 1464
There are 2 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Une bonne nouvelle et un séminaire
From: Michel Collon
2. Re: Digest Number 1462
From: Mohammed Daud Miraki
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1. Une bonne nouvelle et un séminaire
Posted by: "Michel Collon" michel.collon@...
Date: Sat Jul 8, 2006 9:04 am (PDT)
Vous désinscrire ? Changer ou ajouter une adresse ? Ne pas répondre, cliquer
directement: http://www.michelcollon.info/mailinglist.php
NOUVEAU SUR http://www.michelcollon.info
Une bonne nouvelle et un séminaire
Comme indiqué début juin, je suis en retraite pour rédiger un nouveau livre,
et ne pourrai vous répondre avant un certain temps.
Juste deux exceptions pour signaler une très bonne nouvelle : la libération
de Bahar Kimyongür
(voir interview ci-après).
Et pour indiquer que j'animerai un séminaire sur le thème Mondialisation et
Guerre
du 18 au 21 août à Anvers (Belgique).
LE SEMINAIRE :
D'où viennent les guerres ? Des décisions de dirigeants politiques ou des
lois de l'économie ? La guerre économique mène-t-elle à la guerre tout court
et, si oui, par quels mécanismes ? Pourquoi les USA éprouvent-ils « le
besoin » de contrôler le pétrole partout dans le monde ? Y a-t-il, également
entre grandes puissances, une guerre non déclarée pour les matières
premières ? Quelle solution au pillage des richesses ?
Infos sur ce séminaire et toute autre question auprès de :
nessa.kovic@...
LA BONNE NOUVELLE :
Olivier Mukuna - Interview exclusive de Bahar Kimyongür, enfin libéré !
"Je vais déposer plainte contre l'Etat belge"
http://www.michelcollon.info/articles.php?dateaccess=2006-07-08%2006:47:29&log=i\
nvites
AUTRES NOUVEAUTES SUR LE SITE http://www.michelcollon.info :
- Lagardère, July, Paris-Match : le dessous des affaires
- Zone de sécurité ou expansion de l'Etat sioniste ?
- A propos du musée Branly
- Mexique : une aussi longue ingérence
- Les vacances de l'été 36
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2. Re: Digest Number 1462
Posted by: "Mohammed Daud Miraki" mdmiraki@...
Date: Sun Jul 9, 2006 12:27 am (PDT)
People, I completely disagree with this notion of ban, we do not need ban
for weapons that are already illegal. Moreover, as Davey pointed out, it is
an utterly difficult process and meanwhile, it would be useless.
So lets not waste our efforts on this, instead do other productive
efforts,
Miraki,
P.S. Davey I sent you couple of emails requesting information about a
fellow in the UK
davey garland <thunderelf@...> wrote:
to me a ban seems a lot of hard work, when there is already structures in
place which have to be reinforced. the word Ban, though seems for some folk
in the movement an as easy rallying call for those who are unaware of the
subject history of the previous hard work done to make these weapons
illegal. The word ban is a long term view, and always benefits those
organisations who maybe unconsciously feel they would be redundant if their
goals were actually achieved. I'd rather not reinvent the wheel, espeically
a square one!!
Bob Nichols wrote: Robert Rands
Is this actually your comment?
"DU-based dirty bombs need stopping, now. Would this not best be addressed
by a ban?"
DU weapons are already war crimes and illegal by operation of International
and
US law.
Your comment mystifies me, if you actually said it. We have all the laws
that are
needed. We lack the will.
Bob Nichols
On 7 Jul 2006 13:45:43 -0000, du-watch@yahoogroups.com <
du-watch@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
> DEPLETED URANIUM WATCH - Information and analysis about US/NATO use of
> Depleted Uranium
>
> Hazmat Transport - rolling bombs <#10c493df297ced9f_1> From: R Rands
> View All Topics| Create
> New Topic
> Message 1. Hazmat Transport - rolling bombs
> Posted
> by: "R Rands" rrands@...
> dominouglias
> Thu Jul 6, 2006 6:20 pm (PST) DU-based dirty bombs need stopping, now.
> Would this not best be addressed
> by a ban?
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=
>
> Hazardous-materials trucks: terror threat?
> Technology could reduce the risk by a third, but at a cost of $1.1 billion
>
> to the industry.
>
> By Mark Clayton | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
> from the July 07, 2006 edition
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
---------------------------------
The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from
your Internet provider.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK]
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
[Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------------------------------------------------------