Is this realy true

[luckyleftyme2]

I received an e-mail yesterday that a portion of this post has incorporated.

Tell Republicans: Stop forcing the military to use dirty energy. Click here to sign the petition.

Republicans claim these provisions are about the costs of alternative energy sources, but immediately undermined that hollow claim by passing a resolution to promote the use of expensive and filthy coal-to-liquid fuel.

It is literally sick that oil industry campaign contributions to Republicans could so successfully maintain the vicious cycle of our continued dependence on oil, which creates the need to engage with hostile nations, which endangers our troops in military operations, which require even more fossil fuel transported at higher costs and greater risk to military personnel, (all while speeding catastrophic climate change.)

Republicans love to talk about "supporting the troops." We need to remind them that that should mean our soldiers in harm's way, not oil industry lobbyists.

Click below to sign the petition:
http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/repub_biofuels /

Thanks for fighting our dependence on dirty oil.

Elijah Zarlin, Campaign Manager
CREDO Action from Working Assets



* "Republicans Put Oil Money Above Troop Lives," Huffington Post, 5/29/2012
1. "Republicans try to force the military to use dirty energy it doesn't want," Grist, 5/29/12
2. "For the military clean energy saves lives," CNN, 8/17/11
3. "Panetta warns climate change having 'dramatic impact' on national security," The Hill, 5/4/12
4. "15 Military Leaders Who Say Climate Change Is A National Security Threat," Media Matters, 5/30/12
5. "Airlines, Farm Groups Petition Senate for Military Biofuels," Clean Technica, 5/26/2012
6. "Senate blocks biofuel development in draft defense bill," 5/25/12


one of the claims in the e-mail is that one of eight soldier killed in Iraq or afghanistan are protecting oil supplies or routes!