It's a Gas, Gas, Gas

Gas prices are averaging $3.96 a gallon nationally and a record-breaking $4.26 a gallon here in Michigan. Some families spend over 13% of their income on fuel. And yet oil companies receive $4 billion annually in subsidies from the federal government. Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Valero Energy, ConocoPhillips, and even BP have all received tax breaks from the IRS.

This is ridiculous. (Even more ridiculous is that we knew this was a problem during the 1970s oil embargo and yet we have spent the last 3 to 4 decades DOING NOTHING.) And gas is going to get even more expensive as demand increases, especially from the burgeoning economies of China, India, etc., and as remaining oil supplies dwindle and become harder both to access and to refine.

So here's what we do: End oil subsidies and put that money into R&D and subsidizing clean energy. The sooner our economy is based on renewable energy instead of being shackled to dirty, foreign oil, the better.

More Bad News and Bad Press for BP

The dome that BP had placed over one of the oil leaks from the downed Deepwater Horizon rig has apparently failed. The reverse funnel was moved after being clogged by methane hydrates, compounds that consist of methane and other hydrocarbons trapped in the crystalline structure of ice. BP hopes either to melt the hydrates by pumping warm water down to the dome or to thin them out using methanol. Both practices are risky as both methanol and the hydrates are flammable. A sudden thaw would precipitously release methane, causing an increase in pressure and potentially an explosion much like the one that took down the rig originally.

And as if the revelations that BP was exempted from conducting an environmental impact assessment and lobbied against stricter safety measures weren't enough, Democracy Now examines the role of BP--then the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company--in the overthrow of Mohammad Mossadegh and the Iranian republic:

Also, BP was on the grassy knoll.

Will All Great Neptune's Ocean Wash This Clean?

BP is lowering a dome into the Gulf of Mexico in an attempt to capture oil leaking from the Deepwater Horizon rig that sank over two weeks ago. The dome would work like a funnel in reverse; oil would rise to the top of the dome and be pumped to a ship on the gulf surface.

BP was apparently exempted from conducting an environmental impact assessment on the rig after it was concluded that a massive oil spill was "unlikely." Now this is probably true; according to American Petroleum Institute director Erik Milito, "There have been in excess of 30,000 Gulf of Mexico wells drilled in the last 40 years and there hasn’t been a major spill [ed: I'm gonna let him finish, but Ixtoc I was one of the greatest spills of all time.] so I’d say the safety rates were good." Still, the fact that there is at least some probability of a significant oil spill should require an impact assessment.

Meanwhile, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has responded by calling for a "pause" in pursuing legislation on climate change. According to The New York Times, Graham "said that the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico had heightened concern about expanded offshore drilling, which he considers a central component of any energy legislation. Mr. Graham also said that Democratic insistence on taking up immigration policy before energy had chilled his enthusiasm for any global warming measure."

Sorry, Senator Graham, but limiting offshore drilling or at least regulating it more tightly after an unexpected explosion kills 11 and spews thousands of barrels of oil into an ecologically sensitive area of the Gulf of Mexico seems like a rational response to me.

How Convenient!

Who else? Quoth Rush Limbaugh:

I want to get back to the timing of the blowing up, the explosion out there in the Gulf of Mexico of this oil rig. … Now, lest we forget, ladies and gentlemen, the carbon tax bill, cap and trade, that was scheduled to be announced on Earth Day. I remember that. And then it was postponed for a couple of days later after Earth Day, and then of course immigration has now moved in front of it. But this bill, the cap-and-trade bill, was strongly criticized by hardcore environmentalist wackos because it supposedly allowed more offshore drilling and nuclear plants, nuclear plant investment. So, since they’re sending SWAT teams down there, folks, since they’re sending SWAT teams to inspect the other rigs, what better way to head off more oil drilling, nuclear plants, than by blowing up a rig? I’m just noting the timing here.

Of course! It is a little too convenient that an oil rig explodes, dumping barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico right when environmentalists are starting to protest expansions to offshore drilling. Just like 9/11 was a little too convenient for an administration searching for a pretext to go to war with Iraq. They must have been inside jobs! What's that, Rush?

Well said, Rush. You are "a glittering jewel of colossal ignorance." Why don't you learn something about environmentalism or at least probability before you go off making claims without evidence? Last word from Justin Gardner:

For some reason…I don’t think folks who have spent their lives defending the environment would deliberately cause one of the worst environmental disasters in our lifetime just to get legislation passed that they felt was inherently compromised.

Call it a hunch.

Palin Problems

Personally, I think Sarah Palin is a terrible choice for McCain's running mate. But the general public seems to disagree. Palin embodies the conservative myth of small-town America. And McCain is now leading among white women 52% to Obama's 41%, when they were basically tied a month ago. (Some of this is probably attributed to a post-convention bounce, so don't worry too much, but worry a little.) And she's received 10% more press attention than Obama last week, and nine times more than Biden. (Who's the real celebrity?) So, for all of you enamored by the Palin story/myth, here are the facts.

THE TOP TEN REASONS TO DISLIKE SARAH PALIN:

10. She may have odd political affiliations. Her husband Todd was a registered member of the Alaskan Independence Party from 1995 to 2002. The AIP advocates greater state sovereignty for Alaska, and some members, including its founder Joe Vogler, have advocated secession. (Rumors have circulated that she supported Pat Buchanan in 1996 and 2000. These appear to be untrue.)
9. She taxes your oil. Sarah Palin is the most popular governor in the U.S. Perhaps because Alaska makes 89% of its revenue on four different taxes on oil. Enough for every Alaskan to get a $3200 check from the state government last year.
8. She was for the "Bridge to Nowhere" before she was against it. Thanks, then no thanks. When running for governor, she was asked if she supported the bridge. She answered, "Yes...The window is now — while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist.” Congress stripped the appropriations bill of language saying the $233 million had to be used for the bridge, so Alaska still received the money.
7. She supports shooting wolves from helicopters. I'm not making this up. She even offered a $150 bounty per wolf.
6. She charges the state more than a "crusader for fiscal rectitude" should. Governor Palin received per diem allowances, intended to cover travel costs, when she stayed at home, which is perfectly legal if not exactly in accordance with her principles.
5. She supports teaching creationism in public schools. Of the three candidates running for governor of Alaska in 2006, she was the only one to support it.
4. She believes humans are not responsible for climate change. She even sued the Bush Administration for listing the polar bear as an endangered species because it would hamper drilling for oil and gas in Alaska.
3. She is inexperienced, making her an especially odd choice for McCain, seeing how his best attack against Obama was Obama's inexperience. (For those keeping score, Obama has spent four years in the Senate, and Palin has been Alaska's governor for two.) And it's telling that she thinks Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are taxpayer-funded, especially when they hold 80% of the country's mortgages and are being bailed out by the Treasury Department.
2. She tried to ban books from the Wasilla library. She asked the librarian how one would ban books from the library, particularly Go Ask Alice (about drug use) and Pastor, I Am Gay. When the librarian refused to answer the question, she was fired then reinstated after a public outcry.
1. She does not support abortion, even in cases of rape or incest.

Headlines: 26-29 June 2008

• 6/26: Afghans See Pakistani Role in Karzai Plot: Members of Pakistan's intelligence service seem to have played a role in the attempted assassination of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
• 6/27: Feds raid Blackwater's armory in firearms probe: Everybody's least favorite military contractor gets a visit from ATF.
• 6/28: Oil Hits New High as Dow Flirts with Bear Territory: Amid high oil prices and mortgage worries, the Dow entered then retreated from bear territory (defined as less than 80% of the value of its all-time peak) on Friday.
• 6/29: Hersh: U.S. escalating covert ops against Iran: Operations originally intended to investigate Iran's nuclear development and destabilize hard-line elements of the regime "have now been significantly expanded."

History 101 - Lessons of the Past

Boys and Girls, today in History 101 we are going to begin with the basics of how to understand historical mistakes and how not to repeat them. Due to recently escalating events in the Middle East, understanding the past mistakes is crucial to resolve conflicts in this region. Our case study for today is Iran. Let's begin with the historical events and then move to their implications in the modern day.

In March of 1951, Mohammad Mossadegh was democratically elected within the political structure of Iran and became prime minister. He enforced the Oil Nationalization Act, which involved the expropriation of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), a British company that monopolized Iran’s oil. Britain feared that Mossadegh was becoming too closely allied with Iran’s communist party, Tudeh, and that Soviet influence could spread to Iran. In 1952, British officials met with officials from the CIA and expressed Britain’s interest in a participating in a coup in Iran with the United States. In March of the following year, the CIA began to draft a plan called Operation AJAX that would overthrow Mossadegh and his administration through a covert action and establish a government that would cater to the United States and would remain open to British interests. Retired Iranian general Fazlolah Zahedi was chosen to be the replacement prime minister. In May of 1953, CIA officials in Tehran began a propaganda campaign against Mossadegh. On July 1, Churchill approved the final draft of the plan for the coup, and ten days later, U.S. President Eisenhower gave his approval. On August 15, the coup is begun but failed because Mossadegh had advanced warnings of a plot. Zahedi went into hiding and Shah Reza Pahlavi fled to Baghdad. On August 19, Zahedi led the coup while American CIA agents in Tehran created a riot against Tudeh and Mossadegh. The next day, Zahedi became Prime Minister, the Shah reassumed power, and members of Mossadegh’s government were in prison or in hiding. In 1954, the AIOC resumed its operations in Iran. Mossadegh was tried for treason, served three years in prison, and then placed under house arrest until his death on March 5, 1967.

The impact of the 1953 coup in Iran is extremely significant in assessing today’s strained relations with Iran. After the coup, Shah Reza Pahlavi regained power and became a puppet of the United States. Due to Iranians’ contempt for Pahlavi, a revolution broke out in 1979 that placed Ayatollah Khomeini in power. On November 4, 1979, militant students occupied the American embassy in Tehran and held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days. The United States ended diplomatic relations with Iran on April 7, 1980. The Islamic Revolution in 1979 established the system of government Iran has today as well as gave way to the fundamentalist and conservative ideas embodied by the current Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Iran’s statements to the United States in regard to its nuclear program are clearly a reaction to the history of American and western manipulation in Iran as well as in the rest of the Middle East. As a result of American Cold War policy, Iran has a government the United States deems undemocratic and the country is impoverished due to control and manipulation of its economy and natural resources by the United States and its greatest ally, Britain. As Madeline Albright stated in March of 2000, “The Eisenhower administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons. But the coup was clearly a setback for Iran’s political development and it is easy to see why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America,” (Risen, How a Plot Convulsed in Iran in ’53 [and in ’79]).

With President Bush and Ahmadinejad’s hostility towards one another and Bush’s current regime change policies as exhibited by the invasion of Iraq, an American-led regime change in Iran appears more likely to occur, given that the tensions between each nation are similar to what they were in 1953. Such action would create further instability in the region as well as destroy any hope of improving relations and resolving conflicts diplomatically. Currently, Ahmadinejad has angered the United States and other nations such as the United Kingdom with its developing nuclear program. The United States wants Iran to abandon its program while Iran insists that the program is simply for peaceful energy uses. However, with the capture of an Iranian diplomat on February 4, 2007 by uniformed gunmen in Baghdad, his accusations of torture, as well as the capture and release of fifteen British sailors recently, tensions continue to escalate and, due to historical policies, Ahmadinejad is not willing to efficiently compromise and Bush is refusing to pursue any diplomacy with Iran.

This tension is especially significant given the foreign policy of the Bush administration. Diplomacy between the United States and Iran is gravely needed in order to establish trust, improve relations, and to reach a compromise. "JustForeignPolicy.org" says it best:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJRcOF7rEfQ


Now go tell Mommy and Daddy what you learned in school today.


************************

Works Cited/Consulted

Ahmadinejad’s ‘Gift’ to Britain. The WEEK. Volume 7, Issue 305. April 13, 2007. Page 4.

Barth, Linda. Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers, 2003. Pages 37 – 42.

Buncombe, Andrew. Freed Iranian Diplomat Claims He was Tortured by the CIA in Iraq. April 9, 2007. The Independent. April 10, 2007.

Gasiorowski, Mark J. Mohammad Mosaddeq and the 1953 Coup in Iran. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 2004. Pages 227 – 246.

Iran. October 2006. U.S. Department of State. April 11, 2007.

Iraq: Should the War Have an End Date?. The WEEK. Volume 7, Issue 305. April 13, 2007. Page 6.

Oren, Michael B. Power, Faith, and Fantasy: America in the Middle East 1776 to the Present. New York: Sike, Inc., 2007. Pages 479-483, 544-549.

Risen, James. How a Plot Convulsed in Iran in ’53 (and in ’79). 2000. The New York Times. April 10, 2007.

Secrets of History: The CIA in Iran. 2000. The New York Times. April 10, 2007.

Zabih, Sepehr. The Mossadegh Era: Roots of the Iranian Revolution. Chicago: Lake View Press, 1982. Pages 20 – 32.