Please donate (see sidebar) to help recoup costs of the work to uncover and blog the information contained here


Monday, September 24, 2007

Sour Grapes ...

ASARCO Turnout - Small, Very Small [from Refuse the Juice by David K. the conservative pro-Asarco guy who obviously didn't drive over to the FACES event and see for himself - reporting news from "here-say", Dave?]

The anti-ASARCO crowd is quietly claiming a successful "Faces Against ASARCO" outing this past Sunday. Paul Strelzin, who is a part of their media machine, made sure to focus on the turnout of the pro-ASARCO crowd and less on the anti-ASARCO. I guess the anti-ASARCO group's turnout wasn't worth talking about? [not when Asarco had to PAY their participants 50$ each to show up!] They said they'd have 25,000 people and I've heard numbers from 500 to 1000. Not quite a big turnout.

ASARCO's guest were invited specifically for the commercial they were doing. I saw no call to the public from them, so I didn't expect them to have a bunch of folks.

As for the anti-ASARCO folks, I think they need to rethink their message that all of El Paso wants ASARCO to remain closed. If you give them the higher of the two reported numbers (1000) and you divide that by our estimated population of around 600,000 you get .0016 percent. That means that less than 1% of the people of El Paso cared to gather against ASARCO. So much for "all of El Paso" caring enough about ASARCO to show up in opposition of it. [um, how about recalculating that percentage by the number of people living within the 3 mile EPA official contamination area??]

I think we've been led to believe that there are all kinds of regular El Pasoans up in arms over the opening of ASARCO, when it's obvious that it's only a core group of people who consider themselves "activists." [I would say that Refuse-the-juice classifies as an activist the same as anyone else ... so why imply that being active on community issues is a bad name?] It's the same group who says "no" to everything. They are trying to create a situation where a vocal minority controls the quiet majority. [does this mean that since only a few people in our community are "rich" that those will "create a situation like opening the smelter where a vocal minority (the rich) controls the quiet majority (the ill, the unborn, the babies and the aged)???] Let's hope they are not successful." [Amen, David, the rich shouldn't get off Scot-free from paying their environmental liabilities off or being responsible citizens]

[still no mention of the Toxic waste burning? Why not? Don't want El Pasoans to know?]

No comments: