What’s the Difference?

What’s the Difference?
” …while there is a widely held perception that some pesticides are safer than others, this is not backed up by the evidence.” — The Ontario College of Family Physicians

“All pesticides are lethal.” –Patricia Thomas, What’s In This Stuff?”

“Some so-called torture is more humane than other ‘torture’.” — Stanley A. McChrystal, Obama’s Commander in Afghanistan… antically leading the way, semantically.

I may, in my rush, spell some of what’s below incorrectly. But what’s the diff? You’ll get the thrust, I’m sure. The urgent action called for is all, means everything.

The main representatives of chlorinated pesticides are aldrin, dieldrin,chlordane, heptachlor, transonachlor, DDT and its metabolites (DDE, DDD), endrin, hexachlorobenzene, and lindane (alpha, beta, delta, BHC). This group of chemicals also includes polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), orginally used as electrical coolants, but which have also been used to kill bugs. These have been used extensively in agriculture, in forestry, and even in households over the last twenty years. Some organochlorines have been banned in Canada and the United States due to their persistance in the environment. They are still manufactured in Canada and the United States and exported to developing countries for use in agriculture there, however. Chlorinated pesticides are hormone-disrupting and can cause various conditions in humans, including cancer. PCB exposure can result in neurological disorders, malignant melanoma, and liver cancer.

If we don’t allow the stuff here, what’s the difference if we allow it to be exported elsewhere?


Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld et al. introduced important innovations respecting torture. Particularly for Arabs who happened to be Muslims. Ordinarily, torture is farmed out to subsidiaries, not carried out by Americans directly in their government-established torture chambers (which have been in operation for a very long time). Alan Nairn, who has conducted some of the most respected, revealing and courageous investigations of torture, points out that “What the Obama [ban on torture] ostensibly knocks off is that small percentage of torture now done by Americans while retaining the overwhelming bulk of the system’s torture, which is by foreigners, under U.S. patronage. Obama could stop backing foreign forces that torture, but he has chosen not to do so.”

Obama did not shut down the practice of torture, but, rather, merely repositioned it.

What’s the difference?

There’s a parallel here with the biz about organochlorines above.

Forgive me if I hurt you just now hitting you over the head with my heavy-handed writing style, driving my point home mercilessly.

But, then again, I am writing about torture and related matters.

To help citizens self-educate about issues such as this in time there is no alternative to the proposal delineated at http://oxtogrind.org/archive/315. Well-meaning, piece-meal “reform” proceeding at an arthritic snail’s pace will not do the trick. There’s nothing else on the table at this time, as far as I know.

We cannot tolerate torture. Nor can we accept sending carcinogenic chemicals to others.

Absolutely not. For any reason.

If citizens got behind a candidate for Governor of California only on the basis of the promise that he/she would forcefully, incessantly and creatively speak out against such practices… that candidate — either once elected, or even coming close to being elected — would potentially change everyone’s life for the better. And not just with regard to those particular issues.

That person could truly make a difference. And inspire others to do the same.

And I am not speaking of the cancer-like, torturous “inspiration” provided by Obama for the hypnotized, actionless American masses.

The candidate of whom I speak would tackle the real problem… which is not hypnosis related to Obama, but — to put it more accurately — hypnosis with respect to the United States of America.

As Green Day says, you must know your enemy.

Respectfully in potential solidarity,