The tribes maintain that iron mining in the Penokee Hills will release arsenic, mercury and lead into the Bad River watershed and will pollute the water which sustains their way of life.
The request is timely given that First Lady Michelle Obama will be in Watertown today encouraging children to drink more water. As long as she’s in Wisconsin perhaps she could make a quick fact finding trip up to the Bad River reservation located on the south shore of Lake Superior, the largest body of fresh water in the world.
In the meantime the Lac Courte Oreilles Harvest and Education Camp, established to raise public awareness of the mine’s threat to the water and other natural resources, prepares to dig in for the winter. The camps legal status remains in limbo while Lac Courte Oreilles tribal officials continue to negotiate with Iron County officials for a long term permit for the camp.
Anyone wanting to support the efforts to stop G-TAC’s mine can donate to the LCO Harvest Camp or the Bad River Legal Defense Fund.
This is the best news of the day unless both Walker and K. resigns this afternoon.
Perhaps one thing all of us could do is to write follow up letters to Obama as well and maybe even to Michelle Obama.
Dear Barry,
Now that you’ve fast-tracked alternate pipelines and rail routes moving Alberta crude and making obsolete any necessity of the northern leg of the KXL, now that you’ve approved the 20 year permit for a shipping terminal for US fracked natural gas to be sold on the world market, leaving US drilling sites and ground-water untouchable, (take that Putin) and your EPA has dropped environmental protection standards to be near meaningless, (see any blog here for some eye openers: http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/09/05/fracking-away-our-water-supply ) we hope you’d be able to find the time to listen to our urgent request…
Yeah he’ll get right on that for sure.
NQ,
Great letter and excellent link. Though it might be helpful to mention the purpose for your correspondence in your text – supporting the letter sent by the tribal leaders outlining the concern here in Wisconsin. CC a letter to Michelle. Or you can just omit any reference to the Gogebic Taconite mine and the legislation pertaining to it. In that case, yeah. I’m sure he’ll get right on it. Let us know when you send it off.
Not surprised in the least that you missed the point of my comment.
NQ,
I didn’t miss the point of your comment. I even agree with it. Not surprised you missed the point of mine.
You agree with my point of the near certainty of zero being completely unresponsive letters to him about this situation, as you suggested would be helpful to the enforcing treaty concerns, and then you claim I didn’t understand your point.
“Holy irreconcilable logic Batman. paradoxically challenged punditry in the extreme.”
So then the purpose for your letter wasn’t constructive? The purpose of your letter was some kind of display? Gee, I kind of thought that the content of your letter was the matter of importance. I guess I was wrong about that. My mistake, indeed. The purpose of your letter is only discouragement and promotion of inaction. Well, onward then. By all means let your point proceed.
Your pretense of missing the point to indulge in clear ad hominem attack is duly noted.
Using the rhetorical device of dark satire (as I attempted @ 6:10 pm above) to suggest peoples’ efforts to help might be better directed and eminently more effective elsewhere, based on Obomba’s verifiable clear and dismal track record on the environment (see supporting link I provided above) and his dubious willingness to honor international treaties or US law (gang of 8 still determined to oblige Obomba’s desire for a new AUMF threat in Syria), apparently only appeared as deliberately destructive toward a laudable objective to you.
Sent your cash donation to the tribal cause yet? Driven up north to testify or stand with people yet? Made a phone call to the tribal contacts that have been listed in BB yet to find out what they might want you to do? You obviously consulted them then, to suggest the tribes want you to begin promoting an independent letter writing campaign. Fill us in, please.
Oh no, NQ. I’m not offering any sort of pretense at all. I’m sorting out the purpose for your reply. That I concluded from your clarification the purpose for your letter was to discourage and promote inaction isn’t an Ad Hominem attack. I’ve merely ascertained the purpose you intended to achieve with your comment.
As I’ve mentioned on previous occasion, satire and sarcasm aren’t strategies you’ve quite grasped yet. Both are accomplished either through protracted or concise witticism. You’ve done neither. What you’ve done is clearly expressed your purpose, and that purpose is to dissuade anyone from lending support to the letter posted. Or perhaps by people’s efforts you mean the tribal leaders shouldn’t have sent their letter to Obama? Neither the tribal leaders nor commenters here on Blogging Blue should contact Obama?
Ah, I do relish those moments you like to talk about me. As it happens, I do have an idea for generating awareness and concern for the situation that might creatively engage those “Madison Liberals” and other self-consumed contrarians in the South. I will definitely fill you in if it pans out – if you are genuinely interested. I suspect you’re not. I suspect what you are interested in is what you’ve already achieved. In addition, I know how much you dislike verbosity so I’ll refrain from the details. But thank you for asking all the same.
The qualifier, “might,” to you, appears to be of absolutely no consequence in my statement. It is there for a reason, and to anyone so far, besides you, it seems, is not even slightly indicative of a suggestion for people doing nothing to support the cause of tribal treaty rights.
So here’s another go at actually answering the questions I posed.
Your qualifier of “might” is of no consequence, true. “Might” does not negate your dissuasion. The purpose for your letter was to discourage and to promote inaction.
To answer your questions:
1. No
2. No
3. Sort of
4. No
Your statement in bold doesn’t follow from anything previous, therefore must be an assumption with intended purpose. Do tell.
I know it must be tough to remember everything you write but my statement in bold followed on your suggestion to write to zero and ms zero to support the tribes in northern WI.
http://bloggingblue.com/2013/09/12/six-northern-wisconsin-tribes-ask-obama-to-stop-g-tacs-proposed-open-pit-iron-mine/comment-page-1/#comment-136819
But, “Sort of,” your answer for #3 immediately above, begs the question. Your answer is akin to sort of pregnant, or Blaska’s piece claiming people outside the Mad City beltway have a particular view unfavorable to the SSA, yet he fails to cite any data about the size of the sample he interviewed to come to his conclusion, you know, like those three tattooed motorcyclists at his favorite biKKKer bar.
Just noticed this convenient opportunity to actually support the tribes.
http://www.uppitywis.org/event/fundraiser-penokees-madison
So, instead of bloviating about “…I do have an idea for generating awareness and concern for the situation that might creatively engage those “Madison Liberals” and other self-consumed contrarians in the South. I will definitely fill you in if it pans out…” your superior thinking and using it as a false construct to make derogatory implications about how I might react to your as yet unstated idea, you might want to do something tangible and to attend in actual support of the cause, if you are in the area.
Looking forward to a diary reporting on the event if you are able to attend it.
Thought I’d inject a bit of online satire for those of you with a mind to think writing to zero would be part of a productive political action on this issue. By all means, have at it.
http://www.thenation.com/sites/default/files/user/20/tmw2013-09-11colorlarge.jpg
So PJ, as I suspect your buddy Last-word-Larry can’t be kept in the closet, have at it.
NQ,
Perhaps you should review what you have written. Your initial reply and your confirmation of purpose both express the message conveyed in your letter; this in addition, is reinforced by your comments that followed: The purpose of your letter is only discouragement and the promotion of inaction. Your remaining commentary, like so much of your commentary is caustic and it detracts from the important matters at hand. Your primary concern clearly pertains to something other than mine legislation and constructive dialogue for assisting in the issue. I reiterate: your commentary is corrosive.
Your Blaska paragraph is insensible, I’ll not address it.
As for my replies to your questions and to my idea: You are delving far too personally into my private life for my comfort level. I would ask that you be satisfied with my replies and respect my right to privacy. I said previously if my idea pans out I’ll let you know, but at this juncture I’ll retract that promise. I’ll ask you not to delve into my private life again. You are free to judge my commitment to the cause in any way you choose. Your judgment means nothing to me, but your inappropriate inquiries into my private life I do care about. I’ll ask you to please not do it again. Your irrational constructions are one thing, but in your zealotry you are broaching the acceptable bounds of commentary.
I’d add here that if the narrow frame of options you’ve outlined are a standard of one’s commitment to the issue or contribution toward it, then unfortunately a great many people interested in supporting the Harvest Camp but who can’t meet these conditions will be dissuaded. Again, your intense negativity and overriding hatefulness induce defeatism and inaction. Your commentary is corrosive.