Friday, June 29, 2007

Deliver Our Funds From Evil

The Divest Terror Initiative is an effort aimed at hitting terrorism where it hurts -- in the wallet.

What we did not realize -- until now -- was that each and every one of us actually can play a pivotal role in winning the War on Terror. How? By demanding that our public and private pensions plans, college endowments, individual retirement account managers, 401(k) plans, and other investment vehicles exploit the leverage represented by investments in publicly traded companies that operate in terrorist-sponsoring states. In a unified front, we should make the pledge that "This is my money and it will not go to support terror." is a nationwide campaign aimed at some 400 public companies worldwide that are providing revenues, technology and moral cover to governments that sponsor terrorism.

Whether or not this effort succeeds, it suggests that slowly but surely the "swarming attacks" are beginning to emerge against terrorism, driven not by a single mastermind, but in David Kilcullen's words, but a shared narrative.

Nothing follows.


Blogger Ron said...

Iranian Divestiture Project

I'm working with Assemblyman Anderson's staff on CA AB221 Cal-PERS Divestiture Bill.

X_Dhimmi did this fantastic music video for me using the beat and music of Queen's, "We Will Rock You!"

This should make the Mullahs madder than they are already.



6/29/2007 11:00:00 PM  
Blogger Stephen Renico said...

What I can't understand is the blind spot so many Americans have when it comes to their choice of cars (and the resulting gas they have to buy).

Otherwise completely patriotic and proud Americans, who support their soldiers, detest anti-Americanism, and have served their country in the military, use an H2, an F350, or a Suburban to do nothing more than go to work and pick up their kids from school. Eventually, the money they spend on gasoline to push themselves around in these monstrosities, goes back to OPEC countries.

The problem with money is that it circulates. It doesn't get magically turned into bullion, destined to sit in an oil sheikh's vault. The oil sheikhs (and the Chavezes of the world) use it. And, if they're not already giving money to terrorists directly, the terrorists aren't very far removed from getting the money at that point.

Granted, the middle east would still get oil money from somewhere, like China, Japan, or India. But by wasting gas in large vehicles, Americans actually subsidize their own terror problem. That's just wrong on pure principle.

Some of those I've talked to, who actually do give this some thought, seem to think that the jobs they create by buying such a large vehicle outweighs the harm done by giving more money to OPEC. I'm not sure how they actually came to that conclusion, but it doesn't make sense to me.

6/30/2007 03:04:00 AM  
Blogger PeterBoston said...

If you did a legitimate economic analysis of energy consumption from raw material extraction to final retirement you would find that the energy impact difference between a Hummer and a Honda is an insignificant blip. Probably less than the impact of the CO2 emissions from all the do-gooders who can't keep their mouths shut about what kind of cars everybody else should be driving.

6/30/2007 07:57:00 AM  
Blogger Stephen Renico said...


All of those insignificant blips tend to add up when you think in terms of millions of drivers each day.

It doesn't just end with cars, either. Semitrucks are very inefficient when compared to rail shipping. Americans also waste a huge amount of energy by leaving things on constantly.

As for the enviro-do-gooders which have you upset, hopefully you noticed that my argument isn't about global warming. It's about not subsidizing the head-sawing maniacs who want to blow us up.

6/30/2007 08:34:00 AM  
Blogger geoffgo said...

Mr. Renico,

PB beat me to it; but I'm compelled. Commissar, your solution is based solely on restricitve measures; i.e., you deciding what is good/bad.

Have you ever considered being a contributor, instead of a harpy?

Alternative energy means alternative to the ME oil, of which we only use 12%. It also means drilling for more energy locally, and building nukes, converting coal, ad nausia.

Did you know Steve that a solar panel can never reclaim enough energy to pay for its cost of energy used to manufacture it?

How about saving more gas than all the CAFE standards to be imposed.
Time all traffic signals, allow right-turn-on-red everywhere, make pedestrians responsible for when and where they walk, etc. Yes, reducing congestion requires cooperation and individual responsibility, and enforcement.

These measures are far easier to implement immediately than squeezing 10% better mileage out of todays' technology, and they would save more fuel every year than a 20% bump in CAFE standards. And, we don't have to dictate to others, or preach.

6/30/2007 08:53:00 AM  
Blogger Stephen Renico said...


I'm compelled, as well, because you've mistaken me for something I'm not. Nowhere did I say that standards were to be imposed on the sanctity of the market. To put it simply: if you're a gas waster, you're giving money to wahabbist terrorists and being unpatriotic.

You ask for a solution? Sure: move closer to work and stop driving a 3 ton vehicle to move a single 200 pound person in the city.

As for your suggestions about improving traffic flow, they're great. Why is it impossible for you to see that your suggestions and mine aren't mutually exclusive?

As for the charge of being a "harpy", I'll level the same charge against you, as, in your world, the sky is falling anytime anyone even suggests the notion of efficiency.

6/30/2007 12:14:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Powered by Blogger