Re: [CPEO-MEF] Credibility Gap

[uxogypfy@bellsouth.net]

I just wanted to add a little something here regarding Steven's posting and
Wayne's response.

I use to believe the military was an accountable and responsible
organization.  To some degree I still do BUT how does one argue with facts?
'How many BRAC and FUDS sites have used the money and time for each site in
actual cleanup?  How many 'military contractors-like USACE' - sit in debate
with the regulators - for Camp Bonneville, that figure is 8 years-while
groundwater becomes more polluted and uxo's became even more unstable?
Exactly, what is the point of debate and arguing in these cases?  I
researched the archives consistently in 1999 regarding Camp Bonneville
during 1999.  My conclusion was the entire 3800 acres was contaminated with
UXO.  When I went to the 'responsible parties' with this information I was
berated over my conclusions.  Due to whatever circumstances those 3800 acres
are accepted as being contaminated with UXO as fact today.  Please tell me,
IF the military is so 'responsible' then what was the purpose of 'them'
denying and arguing with me or anyone and then conceding years later?  The
same documents available to me was available to them.  I sole purpose was to
find the truth.  I watched the Army ask for veterans who trained upon that
land to come forward and speak out only to be humilated.  The military is a
'massive machine' and those who've served in it knows what happens to those
who speak the truth.  I don't believe many of us would ever willingly want
to live through such humilation.

Stella
----- Original Message -----
From: <themissinglink@eznetinc.com>
To: "cpeo-military" <cpeo-military@igc.topica.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 11:11 AM
Subject: [CPEO-MEF] Credibility Gap


> I am wondering if the recent flap over the administration overstating the
> intelligence used to attack Iraq has had any tangible effect on the DOD's
> misguided plan to exempt itself from environmental laws.  It is obvious
that
> the administration is looking to roll back environmental regulations as a
> philosophical matter and tried to manufacture issues where training was
> affected by these regulations.
>
> It is also clear that the DOD is using taxpayer money to push this
> philosophical proposition which I something I resent.  The rush of media
> talking points in the run up to proposed legislation can be explained in
no
> other way than DOD marketing and lobbying this position. It is one more
> reason, the DOD being partisan against environmental regulation, that
> strengthens my belief that having the DOD be the lead agency in their own
> cleanups is an illegal conflict of interest in an administrative action.
>
> There is nothing more un-American than poisoning Americans and polluting
> America.
>
> Steven Pollack
> www.FamilyJeweler.com/Fortweb.htm
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> You can find archived listserve messages on the CPEO website at
>
> http://www.cpeo.org/newsgrp.html
>
> If this email has been forwarded to you and you'd like to subscribe,
please send a blank message with no subject to:
>
> cpeo-military-subscribe@igc.topica.com
>
>
>
>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~