“The women were incredibly brave,” Sanchez said. “They were pushing and shoving the women.”

So what is Loretta Sanchez talking about? Well, the Vietnamese government won’t let dissidents meet her. So why is the Vietnamese government afraid of my fabulous Congresswoman? Here’s what I just saw from AP via The Guardian (UK):

Vietnamese police blocked dissidents’ wives from attending a tea at the U.S. ambassador’s house, creating a scene that he feared “was at risk of spiraling out of control,” the diplomat said Friday.

U.S. Ambassador Michael Marine had also invited Rep. Loretta Sanchez, who said police had “manhandled” the women.

Sanchez, D-Calif., who has criticized Vietnam’s communist government, said 15 police officers surrounded two women when they arrived at U.S. Ambassador Michael Marine’s home on Thursday evening.

So what’s happening with the dissdients, and how did my Congresswoman get involved? Follow me after the flip for more…

So what’s going on? Here’s what Loretta’s office has to say:

U.S. Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D- Garden Grove) joined an armed services congressional delegation in Vietnam after three previous visa denials by the Vietnamese government. The delegation held meetings regarding the Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command’s mission to account for missing American soldiers.

Sanchez, who represents one of largest Vietnamese constituencies outside of Vietnam, seized the opportunity to meet with the wives of political dissidents (many who are imprisoned or under house arrest) at the invitation of U.S. Ambassador Michael W. Marine to discuss the recent escalation of human rights violations by the Vietnamese government.

Unfortunately, the wives were blocked entrance to the Ambassador’s residence and physically coerced off the premises by Vietnamese police.

“The situation in Vietnam has reached a boiling point when Americans cannot freely meet with regular citizens,” stated Sanchez. “None of the women face criminal charges; other invited guests were barricaded at their homes by Vietnamese officials preventing them from attending.”

“The recent crackdown on pro-democracy advocates in Vietnam is unacceptable,” said Sanchez. Recent incidents include: the sentencing of 8 years in prison for Father Nguyen Van Ly, the arrests of human rights attorneys Nguyen Van Dai, Le Thi Cong Nhan and Le Quoc Quan; and the unmet medical needs of incarcerated journalist Nguyen Vu Binh. Nearly 200 people are thought to have been held without trial, including the Venerable Thich Quang Do and Thich Huyen Quang, leaders of the outlawed Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam.

“The Government of Vietnam has ignored the countless requests from our Congress to improve its human rights record, stop oppression and grant citizens greater political and religious freedoms.”

Sanchez, co-founder of the Vietnam Caucus, opposed the U.S. granting Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) to Vietnam due to the lack of human rights protections in the trade agreement.

A tireless advocate for human rights, Sanchez has continuously challenged the Government of Vietnam to change its repressive human rights policy that is implicated in political and religious persecution. She has promoted awareness and policy debates in the U.S. Congress, urging her colleagues to address the human rights violations as it considers the United States’ relationship with Vietnam.

So why is the Vietnamese government afraid of Loretta? And why are they afraid of allowing their citizens to meet with a member of the US Congress and a US Ambassador? Perhaps because this member of Congress has spoken up on behalf of the Vietnamese people? Perhaps because she’s trying to shed some light on the Vietnamese government’s reprehensible human rights abuses? Perhaps because she supports real democracy in Vietnam?

Well, I’m glad to see that Loretta’s continuing to raise hell on this…
Now I’d just feel better if the Vietnamese government were to actually pay attention to her, and stop repressing their own people.

In his 1998 environmental history of Southern California, Ecology of Fear, UCI radical historian Mike Davis argued that one of the major ecological threats to SoCal was massive drought. He cited recent scholarship that showed medieval California saw the Sierra snowpack drop to 25% of its norm (the 1986-93 drought saw the snowpack at 65%) for periods of over 200 years.

At the time some critics said Davis was being overblown and apocalyptic. But today’s LA Times suggests that not only was Davis right, but that we may be on the verge of such a megadrought:

The driest periods of the last century – the Dust Bowl of the 1930s and the droughts of the 1950s – may become the norm in the Southwest United States within decades because of global warming, according to a study released Thursday.

The research suggests that the transformation may already be underway. Much of the region has been in a severe drought since 2000, which the study’s analysis of computer climate models shows as the beginning of a long dry period.

As the article goes on to note, this will inevitably lead to more water wars, both among Southwestern states, as well as intrastate battles between agriculture and urbanites. These battles have, in fact, already begun. San Diego has been battling the Imperial Irrigation District for years over allocation rights, as SD needs more water for its sprawl and the Imperial Valley needs water to continue irrigating the desert. Recently SoCal water districts began paying farmers along the Colorado near Blythe to let their fields lie fallow in order to send more water to the Inland Empire. Monterey County is seeing increasingly intense battles between farmers of the “Salad Bowl of the World” and developers; and the Monterey Peninsula has been under severe water restrictions for 12 years.

Back in January a state water official was quoted in the Chronicle as stating that since the last major NorCal drought, 1976-77, the demand for water has soared. For those of you who don’t remember (or like me weren’t even alive) then, the 1977 drought saw such things like Marin County running a hose across the Richmond Bridge to tap EBMUD’s reservoirs since theirs had run dry. Obviously that will be less possible given the rapid growth in the East Bay since 1977.

Desalination is also mentioned in the article, and the authors (Alan Zarembo and Bettina Boxall) correctly note that CA will come under intense pressure to build such plants. Monterey Bay is witnessing this firsthand. The Monterey Peninsula has been under strict water limits since the state ordered them to stop pumping the Carmel River dry in 1995. To develop an alternative source of water, the region has begun planning a desalination plant right on the bay at Moss Landing. The environmental concerns are serious – after all, the entire Monterey Bay and the coastline for a hundred miles in either direction is federally protected. But it seems there is no other option.

A “permanent drought” will cause all kinds of problems for California. Mike Davis was absolutely right to strike an apocalyptic tone. Sure, it could be worse, we could be in Vegas or Phoenix…but CA is going to have to make some very hard decisions, and some significant lifestyle changes, if it is going to weather this crisis.

Oh my! I just noticed this on Total Buzz:

Attorney Jim Lacy rang to report that Judge Randell Wilkinson has turned down Minuteman Project co-founder Jim Gilchrist‘s request to have three more months before the court will consider putting the organization into the hands of a third-party receivership.

Ah, so Mr. Minuteman Gilchrist can’t reclaim the group that he created… And caused havoc upon. Now why don’t I fell sorry for him? Oh yeah, this is why. Yes, I kinda sense poetic justice here.