|Government deception is getting old|
Please allow me to respond to Terrance Moe’s letter from last week, “Blueways System is just a baby step,” which was a response to mine several weeks prior, “Beware of government’s generalizations.”
I appreciate the fact that Mr. Moe continued the conversation on the beginnings and future vision of today’s environmental movement (which opponents largely view as government oppression and elitism), however, there were inaccuracies that must be addressed so that citizens have the proper materials to develop solid convictions of the world around them, especially at this unprecedented time when nothing ever turns out to be as advertised.As Mr. Moe noted, the blockbuster book, “Silent Spring,” created awareness of the bio-accumulation of DDT through the food chain, environmental impact, decline of birds of prey, cancer and genetic damage. But to those emotionally invested in Rachel Carson’s heart-tugging story line, all of the aforementioned claims have since been proven substantially false making the benefits of DDT far outweigh any risks, particularly when the life-saving chemical is employed in a judicious manner.
Unfortunately, space limits a detailed rebuttal, so the following quotes will suffice in painting a clear picture of what many believe is the impetus behind DDT restrictions. For example, former Sierra Club director Michael McCloskey stated in 1971 that his organization “wants a ban on pesticides, even in countries where DDT has kept malaria under control.”
In a similar population-control mind set, Alexander King, the director of the global think tank Club of Rome, complained in 1990, “My chief quarrel with DDT in hindsight is that it greatly added to the population problem.”
And,?Environmental Defense Fund’s senior scientist Charles Wurster enthusiastically told the Seattle Times, “If the environmentalists win on DDT, they will achieve a level of authority they have never had before.”
Then, while making a collectivist case for limiting American’s sacred and interconnected unalienable rights of liberty and property, Mr. Moe attempted to discredit my warning about the National Blueways System and its heavy-handed edict. In effect Mr. Moe rationalizes that government isn’t concealing any unscrupulous motives, because according to official documents, participation is “entirely voluntary and locally driven” and it involves no “changes in private property or water rights.”
Yet, not only do we have a glaring track record of similar rhetoric and corresponding broken promises coming out of the Obama administration on a number of other issues, but Barack Obama when peddling ObamaCare, fallaciously said, “If you like your doctor, you’ll be able to keep your doctor,” and the health-care law will “cut the cost of a typical family’s premium by up to $2,500 a year.”
That said, a reference cited in my initial letter was an official report from a recent House Natural Resources Subcommittee field hearing in Missouri, titled “Stopping Federal Land and Water Grabs: Protecting Property Rights from Washington, D.C. Edicts.” The hearing examined the burdens of the National Blueways Order which imposes a federal watershed designation process with questionable legal authorities.
According to Subcommittee Chairman Tom McClintock of California, “The principle focus of today’s hearing is the fever-dream of leftist environmental groups in conjunction with the Interior Department to declare vast watersheds as National Blueways. As we review Obama Administration documents, we discover that the so-called rewards for the White River Blueway included imposing buffer zones, seizing almost 300,000 acres of land, forcing conservation plans on the region’s farms, and banning human activity from flood plains.”
Government deception is getting old.
For eye-opening information, please search online: “Malaria Victims: How Environmentalist Ban on DDT Caused 50 Million Deaths,” and “DDT Ban Breeds Death.”
Prospect Heights, Ill.,
and Eagle River
|Tuesday, September 10, 2013 12:01 PM|