Another "Great" Solution from Bush

As a follow-up to my last post, I read an article in the Salt Lake Tribune that turned my stomach. Not only does Bush want to drill offshore and in ANWR, but he wants to exploit the deposits of oil shale deposits in areas of Utah, Colorado, and Wyoming as a way to cut gas prices. What's truly tragic is that so many people think this is a good idea. To get to oil shale, you don't drill. You strip mine. Anyone who has ever been to the Bingham Copper Mine or lived in the Southeast where coal companies were allowed to run rampant can see the effects of his practice. The land is permanently scarred and irreversible damage is done. Why? All for the sake of saving us a few bucks. I really hope we're not at the point where we're willing to permanently change the face of the West to save a few bucks. Again, Bush's ideas should be thrown out the window.

Energy Crisis

I had been at a loss of ideas (as well as time) for new blog posts, but I figured I'd post my ideas about the world's energy crisis. It's tragic, really, that we let it get this far before trying to finally do something about our dependence on non-renewable sources of energy. Bush's solution to our high energy costs is just to feed our reliance on oil by drilling offshore... horrible idea. The Dems in Congress want to nationalize all of the nation's oil refineries... another horrible idea. McCain may have the brightest idea of the group, calling for 45 new nuclear reactors and $2 billion a year toward achieving clean coal. Alternative fuels are not only a bright idea in reducing our reliance on foreign oil, but it's also a step toward reducing our environmental impact. Like I said in an earlier post, the high price of oil is beneficial in the sense that it makes people think twice about letting their car idle forever or in leading the public to demand public transportation and bike paths.

All in all, the solution to our energy problem is not to nationalize the oil industry or to drill offshore or in ANWR, but to find alternative sources of energy, of which nuclear is by far the most effective.

US Prison Ships

So, here's another storyline in the Bush Administration's string of human rights abuses. In addition to the secret CIA prisons in foreign countries, a UK newspaper printed an article citing reports of the United States using ships as "floating prisons". This new report sends another shiver down my spine; is this really what the United States has resorted to in the "war on terror"? This is disturbing because not only can you be held without a trial indefinitely, but now our country is "interrogating" terror suspects on board these vessels then moving them to other undetermined locations without ever reporting how many are being held. This is far worse than Abu Ghraib. People may be killed during "interrogation" on these ships, and no one would ever know. Not to mention the "interrogation" techniques being used. These people are being held without public knowledge, with no hope of a trial, being beaten and tortured all in the name of national security. I have heard the argument that those who are innocent have no need to fear, but how many innocent people are being held on these ships or in Guantanamo? We may never know, because many of them may never receive a fair trial. Again, who would know if one of these ghost prisoners were killed on board these ships? The price we are paying for security is too high, and we have allowed the President, mainly W, but all are to fault, to exercise unchecked powers and go to war unilaterally. The public needs to pay attention to these and other civil rights violations being perpetrated by our nation. The United States is in the process of "spreading democracy" across the world, but when we torture, kill, and deny humans their most basic and fundamental rights, how are we justified?
For more information on civil rights, visit Amnesty International or Reprieve.