Thursday, December 29, 2011

no promises in the wind by irene hunt.

Language: english.
Country: USA.
Genre: historical novel.
Publisher: Follet.
Publication date: January 1970.
This novel is based on Great Depression in United States in 1930s. The book is about the journey of Josh Gronowski as he suffers from the harsh times almost without no money. The year was 1932, turbulent thirties in America, Josh’s family was poor. He was 15 years old and his prime talent lies in the piano. Josh with Howie ( his best friend) enjoyed going to musical school. However, everything was not so beautiful, due to his father’s  continuous( perpetual) temper, he decided to leave his hometown Chicago and find living on his own . His mother  Mary supported him when Josh and Howie decided to leave their home . josh’s little brother Joes also wants to be with them. It was hard decision but they go on with it. Soon they started gaining their first money. Josh was the boss of the group, Joey was singer and Howie played in his banjo. Everything was good before loosing their partner. Howie was strucked by train. Then there was no banjo player, trio was disrupted. Consequently, brothers manage to survive by begging. It toched Josh’s pride, but there was nothing else to do. Soon while their voiture in Nebraska  they met with a lorry man Lonnie, lost a child David who would be as old as Josh. He helped them to find a job at carnival. With great pleasure Josh and Joey started working there. There Josh finds Emily extremely attractive. Emily was a women clown who was 30 years old. Despite to 15 years old difference Josh loves her. After learning about her engagement with Pete Harris he throws relationship with her. Soon they leave the carnival and begun begging. Unfortunately, Josh became ill with pneumonia. But they did not know, so little Joey left his brother alone because of his temper, anger. Josh wants to find him but it was impossible. He falls unconscious from the cold and sickness. When josh wakes he discovered himself at Lonnie’s home, Omaha, Nebraska. There Josh meets Janey, Lonnie’s niece, with whom he soon fall in love. Lonnie and Josh was worried about little Joey, he was alone in the wind. Surprisingly they found Joey by the announcement in the radio …
At the end Josh and Joey return to Chicago where, their father comes to meet them. There he breaks down into tears and they share many things in common. In addition Josh was a chance to work in a restaurant as pianist with good salary. Josh made a decision from his life: “growing up during the depression meant growing up fast”.

Monday, December 26, 2011

orbital debris

Space junk consist of abandoned equipments and sent rockets to the orbit and which are have not any useful purpose  now. Space junk also known as space debris, orbital debris and space waste. Most of the space debris are the small particles less than one centimeter. These include dust from solid rocket motors, surface degradation products such as paint flakes, and coolant released by RORSAT nuclear powered satellites and its urgency will cause erosive damage, like sandblasting. Shortly, it will send out a powerful stream of sand. Another kind of orbital debris are over ten centimeters, however their amount is less than the small ones’. Against this larger debris, the only protection is to maneuver the spacecraft in order to avoid collision with them. The other types of debris are catalogued by their size too. Unfortunately, today there is critical density, new debris occures  more faster than these objects are removed from the orbit by various natural or manmade forces. Waste in the space rising so fast that its amount reached “tipping point”. As NASA said in 2011 over 22,000 different objects were tracked. Especially, throughout the 1980s, Soviet Union has made a large number of launches. In addition, some projects made by humankind play the role of catalizator in this hazardous process. For example, after Chine destroyed an orbiting weather satellite with a missile in 2007 as part of anti-satellite test, and two satellites collided over Siberia in 2009 the treat from space junk became more pressing.in addition, scientists have stated that these events more than doubled the amount of catalogued debris in the space. Unfortunately, sometimes humankind forget about impacts of their experiments to the Mother nature in order to achieve their purposes as quick as possible. As Kessler said “ The longer you wait to do this the more expensive it is going to be”, so it will be better to prevent the spreading of space particles and debris.

                                                                                                                                           

orbital debris

Space junk consist of abandoned equipments and sent rockets to the orbit and which are have not any useful purpose  now. Space junk also known as space debris, orbital debris and space waste. Most of the space debris are the small particles less than one centimeter. These include dust from solid rocket motors, surface degradation products such as paint flakes, and coolant released by RORSAT nuclear powered satellites and its urgency will cause erosive damage, like sandblasting. Shortly, it will send out a powerful stream of sand. Another kind of orbital debris are over ten centimeters, however their amount is less than the small ones’. Against this larger debris, the only protection is to maneuver the spacecraft in order to avoid collision with them. The other types of debris are catalogued by their size too. Unfortunately, today there is critical density, new debris occures  more faster than these objects are removed from the orbit by various natural or manmade forces. Waste in the space rising so fast that its amount reached “tipping point”. As NASA said in 2011 over 22,000 different objects were tracked. Especially, throughout the 1980s, Soviet Union has made a large number of launches. In addition, some projects made by humankind play the role of catalizator in this hazardous process. For example, after Chine destroyed an orbiting weather satellite with a missile in 2007 as part of anti-satellite test, and two satellites collided over Siberia in 2009 the treat from space junk became more pressing.in addition, scientists have stated that these events more than doubled the amount of catalogued debris in the space. Unfortunately, sometimes humankind forget about impacts of their experiments to the Mother nature in order to achieve their purposes as quick as possible. As Kessler said “ The longer you wait to do this the more expensive it is going to be”, so it will be better to prevent the spreading of space particles and debris.

                                                                                                                                           

education

 Education is a process during which one is improving, managing his or her self. This process begins at birth and continues through all life. Similarly, some people think that the process of educating start  before birth, so some parents begin to read stories, listen and play music in the period of pregnancy. As I state that education, developing yourself process, is lasting for whole life, nobody has finished it yet and it is impossible I think. Scientists in our days have divided education into formal and informal education. Schools, colleges and universities are the centers, gardens of formal education. Teachers are gardeners, books are tools and students are plants. Hence, in formal education one require support from outside in other words, information sources, it is imaginary without it. The second part is an informal education, which is developed by life experiences and human behaviors, attitudes. In this type of education teach people techniques of surviving in society and gaining respect of others. In other words, it is more significant for one to managing him or her self in the field of informal education rather than formal’s. In the formal education the most difficult task is being a teacher and report the knowledge to students in an effective and frustrated way. In addition, teachers are models for students, so they have a huge impact on students future life. To illustrate, statistics show that 30 % of teachers considered becoming a teacher as the result of their teacher’s influence. As  the role of teachers in society is really very important, they should know the ways of entertaining others. And education is his or her weapon against their illiteracy in science, politics, economics, literature and etc. Children come to primary school without knowing any letter of the alphabet, without knowing how to compute basic arifmetics and graduate from the university having written their own books, invented some kind of devices, machines. This period nearly include 15 years and one can easily see what does education do with humankind. Step by step it makes scientists from illiterates. Overall, education is nutrition for humanity and without it nothing will improve, manage or emerge…    

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

celebrities

day by day the number of celebrities are increasing. one can easily name thousands of artists, singers, models and etc. why do some people become so popular and the others are not is very interesting and dusty concept, isn't it? in my opinion, voluntiers to become famous will be so only with next two ways. firstly, they must be owners of attractive physical appearance, appealing voice may be hypnotising speaking or humorous to gain attention of audience somehow. another way is to product an ideal. current producers can decide with the first glance how and what can they product. for instance, some singers today do not have a vocal, appealing voice they just posing with their attractive physical appearance. as producers know how to attract audience, businessmen also use celebrities as the tool in today's commersial world. plastic and cosmetic surgery, foods, fashion, technology can be the example of the fields in which ideals are used to earn money. another point that attracted my attention is the fact that celebrities are changing their image, style so rapidly that for what they are doing so, for what they are challenging and what will happen next. i think nobody knows that except producers; however, I can say that most of the producers purpose is to earn money with anyway, not to feed us with perfect art fruits. at the end, for what and how normal people become famous will be secret for us for a lon time.

celebrities

day by day the number of celebrities are increasing. one can easily name thousands of artists, singers, models and etc. why do some people become so popular and the others are not is very interesting and dusty concept, isn't it? in my opinion, voluntiers to become famous will be so only with next two ways. firstly, they must be owners of attractive physical appearance, appealing voice may be hypnotising speaking or humorous to gain attention of audience somehow. another way is to product an ideal. current producers can decide with the first glance how and what can they product. for instance, some singers today do not have a vocal, appealing voice they just posing with their attractive physical appearance. as producers know how to attract audience, businessmen also use celebrities as the tool in today's commersial world. plastic and cosmetic surgery, foods, fashion, technology can be the example of the fields in which ideals are used to earn money. another point that attracted my attention is the fact that celebrities are changing their image, style so rapidly that for what they are doing so, for what they are challenging and what will happen next. i think nobody knows that except producers; however, I can say that most of the producers purpose is to earn money with anyway, not to feed us with perfect art fruits. at the end, for what and how normal people become famous will be secret for us for a lon time.

my video reflection

being an international student in usa.
1. according to the video, foreign students in usa linxi du, krisha oedjaghiz and arata doba more practising, basement on creativity and team works are the main benefits of getting an education in us. in addition linxi du loves american culture and she is very happy that she has an opportunity learning more about this culture. similarly arato doba said that people in usa are very different from his own countries' in a way that americans are outgoing and sociable. finally, krisha oedjaghiz said that a big benefit she has gained from studying in united states is her experiences, she thinks it is a great goal she has created.
2.a)first of all they really want to study in usa. and secondly some factors were the reason for getting an education in us. for example linxi came with school program, krisha's uncle's friend advised them and arota's parents migration were the factors which affected their study in usa.2.b)linxi loves dry machines which they do not use in china. krisha said that teachers in her country are very strict besides it in america people are flexible with each other.3. approximetely studying in united states costs 30-40000 $ a year. however linxi, krisha and arota think that the money they spent for their education is not important.4. in fact they did not have so much difficulties, but cultural shock is as naturally was the main difficulty they have opposed.5. yes i have several plans such as doing my master degree in usa or working there as an english teacher. i know that it will be a bit difficult, but my hope will not die:)))
November 4, 2011 8:06 AM

my reflection on "being an international student"

yes in general a lot of stutendts have adoptation problems after tranforming from high school to university. i am one of them. when i came to metu in addition to adoptation cultural shock and loneliness were my big problems. as turkey metu was foreign to me but now i feel myself as at home. once i said to my friend " i want to go abroad." and she smiled and said " are you joking. you are in turkey." i think that it will be a good example for how i feel now in turkey and at metu.it was hard but i passed through this problems. my family's and mine turkmen, turk, tajik friends' support was great in terms of solving this problems.now i am a metu student, who loves and enjoys her student years. this university will take a huge place in my memory with a colourfull pictures. at the edn my recomondation for new comers: enjoy and decorate your university life with new people.
November 3, 2011 7:48 AM

my reflection on "being an international student"

yes in general a lot of stutendts have adoptation problems after tranforming from high school to university. i am one of them. when i came to metu in addition to adoptation cultural shock and loneliness were my big problems. as turkey metu was foreign to me but now i feel myself as at home. once i said to my friend " i want to go abroad." and she smiled and said " are you joking. you are in turkey." i think that it will be a good example for how i feel now in turkey and at metu.it was hard but i passed through this problems. my family's and mine turkmen, turk, tajik friends' support was great in terms of solving this problems.now i am a metu student, who loves and enjoys her student years. this university will take a huge place in my memory with a colourfull pictures. at the edn my recomondation for new comers: enjoy and decorate your university life with new people.
November 3, 2011 7:48 AM

Saturday, November 19, 2011

being an international student in usa.
1. according to the video, foreign students in usa linxi du, krisha oedjaghiz and arata doba more practising, basement on creativity and team works are the main benefits of getting an education in us. in addition linxi du loves american culture and she is very happy that she has an opportunity learning more about this culture. similarly arato doba said that people in usa are very different from his own countries' in a way that americans are outgoing and sociable. finally, krisha oedjaghiz said that a big benefit she has gained from studying in united states is her experiences, she thinks it is a great goal she has created.
2.a)first of all they really want to study in usa. and secondly some factors were the reason for getting an education in us. for example linxi came with school program, krisha's uncle's friend advised them and arota's parents migration were the factors which affected their study in usa.2.b)linxi loves dry machines which they do not use in china. krisha said that teachers in her country are very strict besides it in america people are flexible with each other.3. approximetely studying in united states costs 30-40000 $ a year. however linxi, krisha and arota think that the money they spent for their education is not important.4. in fact they did not have so much difficulties, but cultural shock is as naturally was the main difficulty they have opposed.5. yes i have several plans such as doing my master degree in usa or working there as an english teacher. i know that it will be a bit difficult, but my hope will not die:)))

Friday, November 11, 2011

once upon a time: Nature is the 99%, too - Opinion - Al Jazeera Engl...

once upon a time: Nature is the 99%, too - Opinion - Al Jazeera Engl...: Nature is the 99%, too - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

once upon a time: someone is rich and someone is sick:(((

once upon a time: someone is rich and someone is sick:(((: What if rising sea levels are yet another measure of inequality? What if the degradation of our planet's life-support systems - its atmosphe...

someone is rich and someone is sick:(((

What if rising sea levels are yet another measure of inequality? What if the degradation of our planet's life-support systems - its atmosphere, oceans and biosphere - goes hand in hand with the accumulation of wealth, power and control by that corrupt and greedy 1 per cent we are hearing about from Zuccotti Park? What if the assault on America's middle class and the assault on the environment are one and the same?

It's not hard for me to understand how environmental quality and economic inequality came to be joined at the hip. In all my years as a grassroots organiser dealing with the tragic impact of degraded environments on public health, it was always the same: Someone got rich and someone got sick.

In the struggles that I was involved in to curb polluters and safeguard public health, those who wanted curbs, accountability and precautions were always outspent several times over by those who wanted no restrictions on their effluents.

We dug into our own pockets for postage money, they had expense accounts. We made flyers to slip under the windshield wipers of parked cars, they bought ads on television. We took time off from jobs to visit legislators, only to discover that they had gone to lunch with fulltime lobbyists.



Naturally, the barons of the chemical and nuclear industries don't live next to the radioactive or toxic-waste dumps that their corporations create; on the other hand, impoverished black and brown people often do live near such ecological sacrifice zones because they can't afford better.

Similarly, the gated communities of the hyper-wealthy are not built next to cesspool rivers or skylines filled with fuming smokestacks, but the slums of the planet are. Don't think, though, that it's just a matter of property values or scenery. It's about health, about whether your kids have lead or dioxins running through their veins. It's a simple formula, in fact: Wealth disparities become health disparities.

And here's another formula: When there's money to be made, both workers and the environment are expendable. Just as jobs migrate if labour can be had cheaper overseas, I know workers who were tossed aside when they became ill from the foul air or poisonous chemicals they encountered on the job.

The fact is: We won't free ourselves from a dysfunctional and unfair economic order until we begin to see ourselves as communities, not commodities. That is one clear message from Zuccotti Park.

Polluters routinely walk away from the ground they poison and expect taxpayers to clean up after them. By "externalising" such costs, profits are increased. Examples of land abuse and abandonment are too legion to list, but most of us can refer to a familiar "superfund site" in our own backyard.

Clearly, Mother Nature is among the disenfranchised, exploited and struggling.

Democracy 101

The 99 per cent pay for wealth disparity with lost jobs, foreclosed homes, weakening pensions and slashed services, but Nature pays, too. In the world the one-percenters have created, the needs of whole ecosystems are as easy to disregard as, say, the need the young have for debt-free educations and meaningful jobs.

"If you are a CEO who skims millions of dollars off other people's labour, it's called a 'bonus'."

Extreme disparity and deep inequality generate a double standard with profound consequences. If you are a CEO who skims millions of dollars off other people's labour, it's called a "bonus". If you are a flood victim who breaks into a sporting goods store to grab a lifejacket, it's called looting. If you lose your job and fall behind on your mortgage, you get evicted. If you are a banker-broker who designed flawed mortgages that caused a million people to lose their homes, you get a second-home vacation-mansion near a golf course.

If you drag heavy fishnets across the ocean floor and pulverise an entire ecosystem, ending thousands of years of dynamic evolution and depriving future generations of a healthy ocean, it's called free enterprise. But if, like Tim DeChristopher, you disrupt an auction of public land to oil and gas companies, it's called a crime and you get two years in jail.

In campaigns to make polluting corporations accountable, my Utah neighbours and I learned this simple truth: Decisions about what to allow into the air we breathe, the water we drink and the food we eat are soon enough translated into flesh and blood, bone and nerve and daily experience. So it's crucial that those decisions, involving environmental quality and public health, are made openly, inclusively and accountably. That's Democracy 101.

The corporations that shred habitat and contaminate your air and water are anything but democratic. Stand in line to get your 30 seconds in front of a microphone at a public hearing about the siting of a nuclear power plant, the effluent from a factory farm, or the removal of a mountaintop and you'll get the picture quickly enough: The corporations that profit from such ecological destruction are distant, arrogant, secretive, and unresponsive.

The one per cent are willing to spend billions impeding democratic initiatives, which is why every so-called environmental issue is also about building a democratic culture.

someone is rich and someone is sick:(((

What if rising sea levels are yet another measure of inequality? What if the degradation of our planet's life-support systems - its atmosphere, oceans and biosphere - goes hand in hand with the accumulation of wealth, power and control by that corrupt and greedy 1 per cent we are hearing about from Zuccotti Park? What if the assault on America's middle class and the assault on the environment are one and the same?

It's not hard for me to understand how environmental quality and economic inequality came to be joined at the hip. In all my years as a grassroots organiser dealing with the tragic impact of degraded environments on public health, it was always the same: Someone got rich and someone got sick.

In the struggles that I was involved in to curb polluters and safeguard public health, those who wanted curbs, accountability and precautions were always outspent several times over by those who wanted no restrictions on their effluents.

We dug into our own pockets for postage money, they had expense accounts. We made flyers to slip under the windshield wipers of parked cars, they bought ads on television. We took time off from jobs to visit legislators, only to discover that they had gone to lunch with fulltime lobbyists.



Naturally, the barons of the chemical and nuclear industries don't live next to the radioactive or toxic-waste dumps that their corporations create; on the other hand, impoverished black and brown people often do live near such ecological sacrifice zones because they can't afford better.

Similarly, the gated communities of the hyper-wealthy are not built next to cesspool rivers or skylines filled with fuming smokestacks, but the slums of the planet are. Don't think, though, that it's just a matter of property values or scenery. It's about health, about whether your kids have lead or dioxins running through their veins. It's a simple formula, in fact: Wealth disparities become health disparities.

And here's another formula: When there's money to be made, both workers and the environment are expendable. Just as jobs migrate if labour can be had cheaper overseas, I know workers who were tossed aside when they became ill from the foul air or poisonous chemicals they encountered on the job.

The fact is: We won't free ourselves from a dysfunctional and unfair economic order until we begin to see ourselves as communities, not commodities. That is one clear message from Zuccotti Park.

Polluters routinely walk away from the ground they poison and expect taxpayers to clean up after them. By "externalising" such costs, profits are increased. Examples of land abuse and abandonment are too legion to list, but most of us can refer to a familiar "superfund site" in our own backyard.

Clearly, Mother Nature is among the disenfranchised, exploited and struggling.

Democracy 101

The 99 per cent pay for wealth disparity with lost jobs, foreclosed homes, weakening pensions and slashed services, but Nature pays, too. In the world the one-percenters have created, the needs of whole ecosystems are as easy to disregard as, say, the need the young have for debt-free educations and meaningful jobs.

"If you are a CEO who skims millions of dollars off other people's labour, it's called a 'bonus'."

Extreme disparity and deep inequality generate a double standard with profound consequences. If you are a CEO who skims millions of dollars off other people's labour, it's called a "bonus". If you are a flood victim who breaks into a sporting goods store to grab a lifejacket, it's called looting. If you lose your job and fall behind on your mortgage, you get evicted. If you are a banker-broker who designed flawed mortgages that caused a million people to lose their homes, you get a second-home vacation-mansion near a golf course.

If you drag heavy fishnets across the ocean floor and pulverise an entire ecosystem, ending thousands of years of dynamic evolution and depriving future generations of a healthy ocean, it's called free enterprise. But if, like Tim DeChristopher, you disrupt an auction of public land to oil and gas companies, it's called a crime and you get two years in jail.

In campaigns to make polluting corporations accountable, my Utah neighbours and I learned this simple truth: Decisions about what to allow into the air we breathe, the water we drink and the food we eat are soon enough translated into flesh and blood, bone and nerve and daily experience. So it's crucial that those decisions, involving environmental quality and public health, are made openly, inclusively and accountably. That's Democracy 101.

The corporations that shred habitat and contaminate your air and water are anything but democratic. Stand in line to get your 30 seconds in front of a microphone at a public hearing about the siting of a nuclear power plant, the effluent from a factory farm, or the removal of a mountaintop and you'll get the picture quickly enough: The corporations that profit from such ecological destruction are distant, arrogant, secretive, and unresponsive.

The one per cent are willing to spend billions impeding democratic initiatives, which is why every so-called environmental issue is also about building a democratic culture.

someone is rich and someone is sick:(((

What if rising sea levels are yet another measure of inequality? What if the degradation of our planet's life-support systems - its atmosphere, oceans and biosphere - goes hand in hand with the accumulation of wealth, power and control by that corrupt and greedy 1 per cent we are hearing about from Zuccotti Park? What if the assault on America's middle class and the assault on the environment are one and the same?

It's not hard for me to understand how environmental quality and economic inequality came to be joined at the hip. In all my years as a grassroots organiser dealing with the tragic impact of degraded environments on public health, it was always the same: Someone got rich and someone got sick.

In the struggles that I was involved in to curb polluters and safeguard public health, those who wanted curbs, accountability and precautions were always outspent several times over by those who wanted no restrictions on their effluents.

We dug into our own pockets for postage money, they had expense accounts. We made flyers to slip under the windshield wipers of parked cars, they bought ads on television. We took time off from jobs to visit legislators, only to discover that they had gone to lunch with fulltime lobbyists.



Naturally, the barons of the chemical and nuclear industries don't live next to the radioactive or toxic-waste dumps that their corporations create; on the other hand, impoverished black and brown people often do live near such ecological sacrifice zones because they can't afford better.

Similarly, the gated communities of the hyper-wealthy are not built next to cesspool rivers or skylines filled with fuming smokestacks, but the slums of the planet are. Don't think, though, that it's just a matter of property values or scenery. It's about health, about whether your kids have lead or dioxins running through their veins. It's a simple formula, in fact: Wealth disparities become health disparities.

And here's another formula: When there's money to be made, both workers and the environment are expendable. Just as jobs migrate if labour can be had cheaper overseas, I know workers who were tossed aside when they became ill from the foul air or poisonous chemicals they encountered on the job.

The fact is: We won't free ourselves from a dysfunctional and unfair economic order until we begin to see ourselves as communities, not commodities. That is one clear message from Zuccotti Park.

Polluters routinely walk away from the ground they poison and expect taxpayers to clean up after them. By "externalising" such costs, profits are increased. Examples of land abuse and abandonment are too legion to list, but most of us can refer to a familiar "superfund site" in our own backyard.

Clearly, Mother Nature is among the disenfranchised, exploited and struggling.

Democracy 101

The 99 per cent pay for wealth disparity with lost jobs, foreclosed homes, weakening pensions and slashed services, but Nature pays, too. In the world the one-percenters have created, the needs of whole ecosystems are as easy to disregard as, say, the need the young have for debt-free educations and meaningful jobs.

"If you are a CEO who skims millions of dollars off other people's labour, it's called a 'bonus'."

Extreme disparity and deep inequality generate a double standard with profound consequences. If you are a CEO who skims millions of dollars off other people's labour, it's called a "bonus". If you are a flood victim who breaks into a sporting goods store to grab a lifejacket, it's called looting. If you lose your job and fall behind on your mortgage, you get evicted. If you are a banker-broker who designed flawed mortgages that caused a million people to lose their homes, you get a second-home vacation-mansion near a golf course.

If you drag heavy fishnets across the ocean floor and pulverise an entire ecosystem, ending thousands of years of dynamic evolution and depriving future generations of a healthy ocean, it's called free enterprise. But if, like Tim DeChristopher, you disrupt an auction of public land to oil and gas companies, it's called a crime and you get two years in jail.

In campaigns to make polluting corporations accountable, my Utah neighbours and I learned this simple truth: Decisions about what to allow into the air we breathe, the water we drink and the food we eat are soon enough translated into flesh and blood, bone and nerve and daily experience. So it's crucial that those decisions, involving environmental quality and public health, are made openly, inclusively and accountably. That's Democracy 101.

The corporations that shred habitat and contaminate your air and water are anything but democratic. Stand in line to get your 30 seconds in front of a microphone at a public hearing about the siting of a nuclear power plant, the effluent from a factory farm, or the removal of a mountaintop and you'll get the picture quickly enough: The corporations that profit from such ecological destruction are distant, arrogant, secretive, and unresponsive.

The one per cent are willing to spend billions impeding democratic initiatives, which is why every so-called environmental issue is also about building a democratic culture.

someone is rich and someone is sick:(((

What if rising sea levels are yet another measure of inequality? What if the degradation of our planet's life-support systems - its atmosphere, oceans and biosphere - goes hand in hand with the accumulation of wealth, power and control by that corrupt and greedy 1 per cent we are hearing about from Zuccotti Park? What if the assault on America's middle class and the assault on the environment are one and the same?

It's not hard for me to understand how environmental quality and economic inequality came to be joined at the hip. In all my years as a grassroots organiser dealing with the tragic impact of degraded environments on public health, it was always the same: Someone got rich and someone got sick.

In the struggles that I was involved in to curb polluters and safeguard public health, those who wanted curbs, accountability and precautions were always outspent several times over by those who wanted no restrictions on their effluents.

We dug into our own pockets for postage money, they had expense accounts. We made flyers to slip under the windshield wipers of parked cars, they bought ads on television. We took time off from jobs to visit legislators, only to discover that they had gone to lunch with fulltime lobbyists.



Naturally, the barons of the chemical and nuclear industries don't live next to the radioactive or toxic-waste dumps that their corporations create; on the other hand, impoverished black and brown people often do live near such ecological sacrifice zones because they can't afford better.

Similarly, the gated communities of the hyper-wealthy are not built next to cesspool rivers or skylines filled with fuming smokestacks, but the slums of the planet are. Don't think, though, that it's just a matter of property values or scenery. It's about health, about whether your kids have lead or dioxins running through their veins. It's a simple formula, in fact: Wealth disparities become health disparities.

And here's another formula: When there's money to be made, both workers and the environment are expendable. Just as jobs migrate if labour can be had cheaper overseas, I know workers who were tossed aside when they became ill from the foul air or poisonous chemicals they encountered on the job.

The fact is: We won't free ourselves from a dysfunctional and unfair economic order until we begin to see ourselves as communities, not commodities. That is one clear message from Zuccotti Park.

Polluters routinely walk away from the ground they poison and expect taxpayers to clean up after them. By "externalising" such costs, profits are increased. Examples of land abuse and abandonment are too legion to list, but most of us can refer to a familiar "superfund site" in our own backyard.

Clearly, Mother Nature is among the disenfranchised, exploited and struggling.

Democracy 101

The 99 per cent pay for wealth disparity with lost jobs, foreclosed homes, weakening pensions and slashed services, but Nature pays, too. In the world the one-percenters have created, the needs of whole ecosystems are as easy to disregard as, say, the need the young have for debt-free educations and meaningful jobs.

"If you are a CEO who skims millions of dollars off other people's labour, it's called a 'bonus'."

Extreme disparity and deep inequality generate a double standard with profound consequences. If you are a CEO who skims millions of dollars off other people's labour, it's called a "bonus". If you are a flood victim who breaks into a sporting goods store to grab a lifejacket, it's called looting. If you lose your job and fall behind on your mortgage, you get evicted. If you are a banker-broker who designed flawed mortgages that caused a million people to lose their homes, you get a second-home vacation-mansion near a golf course.

If you drag heavy fishnets across the ocean floor and pulverise an entire ecosystem, ending thousands of years of dynamic evolution and depriving future generations of a healthy ocean, it's called free enterprise. But if, like Tim DeChristopher, you disrupt an auction of public land to oil and gas companies, it's called a crime and you get two years in jail.

In campaigns to make polluting corporations accountable, my Utah neighbours and I learned this simple truth: Decisions about what to allow into the air we breathe, the water we drink and the food we eat are soon enough translated into flesh and blood, bone and nerve and daily experience. So it's crucial that those decisions, involving environmental quality and public health, are made openly, inclusively and accountably. That's Democracy 101.

The corporations that shred habitat and contaminate your air and water are anything but democratic. Stand in line to get your 30 seconds in front of a microphone at a public hearing about the siting of a nuclear power plant, the effluent from a factory farm, or the removal of a mountaintop and you'll get the picture quickly enough: The corporations that profit from such ecological destruction are distant, arrogant, secretive, and unresponsive.

The one per cent are willing to spend billions impeding democratic initiatives, which is why every so-called environmental issue is also about building a democratic culture.

Nature is the 99%, too - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

someone is rich and someone is sick:(((

Nature is the 99%, too - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

Nature is the 99%, too - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

Nature is the 99%, too - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

Panetta sounds warning on Iran attack - Americas - Al Jazeera English

Panetta sounds warning on Iran attack - Americas - Al Jazeera English