Re: [Biofuel] Off Topic - More on the Holocaust if you can stand it.
Hello Guag et al. The reason for the Germans during ww2 to spend time and resources on collecting racial, religious and political non-approved people was simple: Idelogical. Germany was during this time built up on a lie and the money for this lie was borrowed from domestic and foreign lone providers so as for building up the war industry itself. It was necessary for the German government to keep this lie, since their complete build-up was based upon that. But, when it came to the final solution it grew forward little by little, goverened by directives from the government and performed practically by the lower parts of the administration with the concentration camps adminstrations in the bottom. There were meetings held where administrates discussed how to kill as many as effiectively as possible within a certain time frama = executing the directives from the government. So, the reason for spending resources on these collection activities was that they did not know how the final solution would look like. A completely mad system from the very beginning until the end, if you ask me. Jan Warnqvist - Original Message - From: Guag Meister [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 4:57 AM Subject: [Biofuel] Off Topic - More on the Holocaust if you can stand it. Hi Keith and all List Members I like the part about Fred Dr. Death Leuchter, the designer of the US Prison system's execution apparatus, as an expert defense witness who tested purported execution gas chambers ON-SITE in Auschwitz, Poland tesitified in a court of law under oath and determined they had never been used to kill anyone. The other question I have is this. The war machine runs on fuel. During a time of war for Germany, fuel would be incredibly important. So why would the Germans waste precious fuel to transport all the prisioners to the camps if they intended to kill them? Wouldn't a sharp bayonette be much cheaper? Best Regards, Peter G. Thailand 20th Anniversary of the Great Holocaust Trial by Michael A. Hoffman II Copyright 2005 by revisionisthistory.org January 7, 2005 marks the 20th anniversary of what came to be known throughout the world as The Great Holocaust Trial thanks chiefly to the drive, determination, courage and vision of one man, Ernst Zundel, supported by those he inspired. In 1985 Zundel was a German immigrant residing in Toronto, Canada where he had built a highly successful advertising and graphic arts business based in a rambling Victorian mansion in the bohemian Cabbagetown section of metropolitan Toronto. Zundel viewed the Six million story as a form of mental genocide against the German people; ostensibly a noble tale of the epoch struggle for human rights that in actuality was a form of devious hate propaganda, leveling every conceivable blood libel at the Germans and branding them with the Mark of Cain. Having survived the Allied firebombing of his native city of Pforzheim as a child, Zundel was well familiar with the war crimes of the hypocritical Allies and he made it his life's work to clear the name of his own people. For this commendable enterprise, Zundel had his mailing privileges revoked by the Canadian government in 1983, forcing him to open a post office box in Buffalo, New York and send a messenger to commute hundreds of miles just to receive mail. In 1985 he was charged under an archaic False News provision of an old Edwardian municipal code, for having published the pamphlet Did Six Million Really Die? He faced two years in prison if convicted. In reponse Zundel put the so-called Holocaust itself on trial, hiring a little-known maverick lawyer from British Columbia, Douglas Christie, to argue his case before Judge Hugh Locke. Seated next to Christie was the learned revisionist historian Prof. Robert Faurisson of France, who guided Christie's withering cross-examination of a long train of saintly 'Holocaust' survivors offered by the Crown. Zundel's defense was initially regarded by the press and public as preposterous. How can anyone deny the 'Holocaust? was the incredulous response to the news that Zundel would vigorously defend himself and the free speech rights of all Canadians. The trial was expected to be a quick and ignominious rout of Zundel and his motley crew. How wrong the odds-makers were! For the first time in history the holy survivors finally had to submit their testimony to scrutiny, to the rules of evidence and cross-examination, something that has never happened before or since. Seated in the press gallery, I watched as my colleagues of the fourth estate grew ever more surprised and shocked at the amazing admissions Christie and Faurisson elicited from the eyewitnesses to the gas chambers. TV reporters like Claud Adams and journalists from the Toronto Star and Globe and Mail produced footage and headlines that
[Biofuel] Rép. : First Jet aircraft flight powered by 100% biofuel.
This is not completely brand new... Earlier Brazilian development of Prosene (biojet fuel) has led to a first jet flight between Brazilia and Sao Paulo making use of entirely bio kerosene... But much focus is going to be placed on this matter on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean in coming years... Guy MARLAIR Scientific Delegate Certification Div INERIS tel +33(0)344556570 Bruno M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 16/10/2007 18:06:22 www.greenflightinternational.com/pr.htm Contact: Doug Rodante Green Flight International (727) 415-7253 WORLDS FIRST JET FLIGHT POWERED ENTIRELY ON RENEWABLE BIODIESEL FUEL Green Flight International and Biodiesel Solutions partner to set a new precedent in the use of renewable fuels in transportation. RENO, NV. (October 5)* Aviation history was made earlier this week in the high desert at the Reno-Stead Airport when an L-29 military aircraft piloted by Carol Sugars and Douglas Rodante succeeded in completing the worlds first jet flight powered solely by 100% biodiesel fuel. The Czechoslovakian-made aircraft is rated to fly on a variety of fuels including heating oil, making it the preferred platform for testing biodiesel in jet engines. The experimental test flights were conducted starting with a blend of jet fuel and biodiesel. The engine data was measured and the performance was evaluated and found acceptable for continued use, eventually resulting in the landmark flight using 100% renewable biodiesel fuel. According to Chief Pilot Carol Sugars who wrote and conducted the test program, As we gradually increased the amount of biodiesel in the fuel blend, the data confirmed that the aircraft continued to perform well, giving me the confidence to transition to 100% biodiesel. Flight tests were conducted up to an altitude of 17,000 feet showing no significant difference in performance compared to conventional jet fuel. This test program between Green Flight International and Biodiesel Solutions was a unique and exciting opportunity to show what can be done in renewable fuels. said Rudi Wiedemann, president of Biodiesel Solutions. The very idea of using 100% biodiesel to fly a jet aircraft makes a compelling statement about the possibilities for the future of renewable energy and a healthier planet. Out of concern for our global environment, Green Flight International was conceived by Douglas Rodante in April 2006 to serve as a platform for future development in the use of environmentally-friendly fuels in aviation and elsewhere. It is imperative that the global community take immediate steps to reduce our carbon footprint, because we can no longer afford to wait while our environment continues to degrade. said Rodante. By implementing even a small amount of bio-degradable fuel in our transportation system we can significantly reduce the CO2 (greenhouse gasses) and NOx (the precursor to smog) that contribute to global warming. In the near future Green Flight International expects to announce plans for another record-breaking aviation event. They invite aviation and biofuel enthusiasts to inquire about how they might be able to participate in this exciting venture. For more information contact Doug Rodante at (407) 880-2501 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] About Green Flight International Green Flight International ( www.greenflightinternational.com ) was founded in 2006 to promote wider adoption of environmentally-friendly fuels in commercial aviation through international television media and print outlets. About Biodiesel Solutions Biodiesel Solutions, Inc. ( www.biodieselsolutions.com ) based in Sparks, Nevada is the worlds leading manufacturer of community-scale biodiesel production equipment, empowering communities worldwide to produce their own clean biodiesel fuel from their own locally-grown materials. The company is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Renewal Fuels, Inc. (OTC-BB: RNWF) ( www.renewalfuels.com ), a publicly-traded company which focuses on non-food based technologies for producing renewable fuels and energy. -- [ Article found via www.ecogeek.org/ ] = -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.12/1073 - Release Date: 16/10/2007 8:22 ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
Re: [Biofuel] Off Topic - More on the Holocaust if you can stand it.
Peter, Germany did not at any time lacked coal, which at that time was the fuel of trains. Germany did at the time developed synthetic fuel from coal, but because of the time element it never grew to a large enough production and South Africa continued this development. In the allies getting to Auschwitz, it is actually quite irrelevant if the gas chambers was used or not, but the number of human corps laying around and later also excavated, was quite telling and executed in a number of ways. It was also many survivors who took care of the corps as work details and that could testify. It was even some who survived the gas chambers or as the victims were told the disinfection and anti bug chambers. It is not the first nor the last genocide in history and I am not surprised if you soon will deny that Pol Pot existed or that it was not a genocide in Cambodia or that all the African genocides are only propaganda, or that the US use of chemicals in Vietnam was a cleaning service that the Vietnamese should be grateful for. It is a very worrying discussion line, from denial to how the Israelis have used it as alibi for their own war crimes. It is however very important that all will be a part of the future history in a correct way, but as it is said it takes 100 years to write history. Concerning WWI we are almost there and it is not far to WWII. As one who was born in the beginning of WWII and old enough to understand the histories that I personally heard from several survivors in end of 1940's and during the 1950's, I have no reason to express doubts as you do. I even have the right and experiences to be upset about what you are saying and consider you as a dangerous person. Hakan At 04:57 AM 10/17/2007, you wrote: Hi Keith and all List Members I like the part about Fred Dr. Death Leuchter, the designer of the US Prison system's execution apparatus, as an expert defense witness who tested purported execution gas chambers ON-SITE in Auschwitz, Poland tesitified in a court of law under oath and determined they had never been used to kill anyone. The other question I have is this. The war machine runs on fuel. During a time of war for Germany, fuel would be incredibly important. So why would the Germans waste precious fuel to transport all the prisioners to the camps if they intended to kill them? Wouldn't a sharp bayonette be much cheaper? Best Regards, Peter G. Thailand 20th Anniversary of the Great Holocaust Trial by Michael A. Hoffman II Copyright 2005 by revisionisthistory.org January 7, 2005 marks the 20th anniversary of what came to be known throughout the world as The Great Holocaust Trial thanks chiefly to the drive, determination, courage and vision of one man, Ernst Zundel, supported by those he inspired. In 1985 Zundel was a German immigrant residing in Toronto, Canada where he had built a highly successful advertising and graphic arts business based in a rambling Victorian mansion in the bohemian Cabbagetown section of metropolitan Toronto. Zundel viewed the Six million story as a form of mental genocide against the German people; ostensibly a noble tale of the epoch struggle for human rights that in actuality was a form of devious hate propaganda, leveling every conceivable blood libel at the Germans and branding them with the Mark of Cain. Having survived the Allied firebombing of his native city of Pforzheim as a child, Zundel was well familiar with the war crimes of the hypocritical Allies and he made it his life's work to clear the name of his own people. For this commendable enterprise, Zundel had his mailing privileges revoked by the Canadian government in 1983, forcing him to open a post office box in Buffalo, New York and send a messenger to commute hundreds of miles just to receive mail. In 1985 he was charged under an archaic False News provision of an old Edwardian municipal code, for having published the pamphlet Did Six Million Really Die? He faced two years in prison if convicted. In reponse Zundel put the so-called Holocaust itself on trial, hiring a little-known maverick lawyer from British Columbia, Douglas Christie, to argue his case before Judge Hugh Locke. Seated next to Christie was the learned revisionist historian Prof. Robert Faurisson of France, who guided Christie's withering cross-examination of a long train of saintly 'Holocaust' survivors offered by the Crown. Zundel's defense was initially regarded by the press and public as preposterous. How can anyone deny the 'Holocaust? was the incredulous response to the news that Zundel would vigorously defend himself and the free speech rights of all Canadians. The trial was expected to be a quick and ignominious rout of Zundel and his motley crew. How wrong the odds-makers were! For the first time in history the holy survivors finally had to submit their testimony to scrutiny, to the rules of evidence and cross-examination, something that has never happened before or since. Seated in
Re: [Biofuel] Off Topic - More on the Holocaust if you can stand it.
Hi Peter I think Hoffman's a bit of a nutcase, or so swathed in conspiracy theories he might as well be one. Anyway, IMHO, what's interesting isn't the questions themselves so much as the fact that it's forbidden to ask them. It's the 21st Century after all, not the Middle Ages anymore. As Bob said last time around: ... But in fact it begs the question, posed in items 18-20 of Santomauro's piece. This is the nub of the matter. Why is this subject banned from discussion in 11 countries (with a 12th about to come on line i.e. the recent American hate speech law which sailed through Congress) and why do otherwise apparently sane and intelligent people suddenly go la-la when asked to contemplate the anomalies? ... Over the years I have come to wonder if perhaps the Holocaust story has been used to weave a political hair shirt to keep likely dissenters in line while another holocaust - an ever-increasing obscenity of more than 50 years standing - is pursued with even more inhuman zeal than ever fascism could summon to its cause. That was about this: Ahmadinejad's Holocaust Problems are My Holocaust Problems Michael Santomauro - ReportersNoteBook Sept 27, 2007 http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg71100.html Indeed, if you question Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, Bob's another holocaust, something similar happens, the Israel lobby gets you, in the US at least, with much the same tactics, kiss your reputation goodbye and probably your career too. Because of this taboo, it's difficult or impossible to make any sense of what's happening in the Middle East, or of energy politics. It's in the way, it has to go. Indeed opposition is spreading, especially in the last two years, the iron grip is weakening. Another reason it's a false sacred cow is that as I said genocides are two a penny these days, why is this particular genocide any more important than the others, especially since they're happening right now, not just a thing of the past? We're living amid an ongoing global holocaust. It's not just an accident, an unfortunate side-effect or something. Life is cheap. But life is not cheap - as Fritz said, even one is too many. Life is sacred, all life is sacred. http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg71185.html Re: [Biofuel] Holocaust error In Rulers and Ruled in the US Empire (see next) James Petras talks of an accelerating predisposition to genocides to accomplish political aims. Meanwhile, if you happen to like Holocausts, these same folks who won't allow questioning or criticism of Israel and the Holocaust are in cahoots with America's ultra-rightwing End Times so-called Christian so-called fundamentalist nutters who're hellbent on killing everyone except them. (See America's Armageddonites.) We definitely do need a little more focus on these issues. If prying away at Holocaust doctrine helps then that's okay by me. Best Keith Hi Keith and all List Members I like the part about Fred Dr. Death Leuchter, the designer of the US Prison system's execution apparatus, as an expert defense witness who tested purported execution gas chambers ON-SITE in Auschwitz, Poland tesitified in a court of law under oath and determined they had never been used to kill anyone. The other question I have is this. The war machine runs on fuel. During a time of war for Germany, fuel would be incredibly important. So why would the Germans waste precious fuel to transport all the prisioners to the camps if they intended to kill them? Wouldn't a sharp bayonette be much cheaper? Best Regards, Peter G. Thailand 20th Anniversary of the Great Holocaust Trial by Michael A. Hoffman II Copyright 2005 by revisionisthistory.org January 7, 2005 marks the 20th anniversary of what came to be known throughout the world as The Great Holocaust Trial thanks chiefly to the drive, determination, courage and vision of one man, Ernst Zundel, supported by those he inspired. In 1985 Zundel was a German immigrant residing in Toronto, Canada where he had built a highly successful advertising and graphic arts business based in a rambling Victorian mansion in the bohemian Cabbagetown section of metropolitan Toronto. Zundel viewed the Six million story as a form of mental genocide against the German people; ostensibly a noble tale of the epoch struggle for human rights that in actuality was a form of devious hate propaganda, leveling every conceivable blood libel at the Germans and branding them with the Mark of Cain. Having survived the Allied firebombing of his native city of Pforzheim as a child, Zundel was well familiar with the war crimes of the hypocritical Allies and he made it his life's work to clear the name of his own people. For this commendable enterprise, Zundel had his mailing privileges revoked by the Canadian government in 1983, forcing him to open a post office box in Buffalo, New York and send a messenger to commute hundreds of miles just to
[Biofuel] America's Armageddonites
Lots of links to further information in the online version. - http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4630 America's Armageddonites Jon Basil Utley | October 10, 2007 Editor: John Feffer Foreign Policy In Focus www.fpif.org Utopian fantasies have long transfixed the human race. Yet today a much rarer fantasy has become popular in the United States. Millions of Americans, the richest people in history, have a death wish. They are the new Armageddonites, fundamentalist evangelicals who have moved from forecasting Armageddon to actually trying to bring it about. Most journalists find it difficult to take seriously that tens of millions of Americans, filled with fantasies of revenge and empowerment, long to leave a world they despise. These Armageddonites believe that they alone will get a quick, free pass when they are raptured to paradise, no good deeds necessary, not even a day of judgment. Ironically, they share this utopian fantasy with a group that they often castigate, namely fundamentalist Muslims who believe that dying in battle also means direct access to Heaven. For the Armageddonites, however, there are no waiting virgins, but they do agree with Muslims that there will be no booze, no bars, in the words of a popular Gaither Singers song. These end-timers have great influence over the U.S. government's foreign policy. They are thick with the Republican leadership. At a recent conference in Washington, congressional leader Roy Blunt, for example, has said that their work is part of God's plan. At the same meeting, where speakers promoted attacking Iran, former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay glorified end times. Indeed the Bush administration often consults with them on Mideast policies. The organizer of the conference, Rev. John Hagee, is often welcomed at the White House, although his ratings are among the lowest on integrity and transparency by Ministry Watch, which rates religious broadcasters. He raises millions of dollars from his campaign supporting Israeli settlements on the West Bank, including much for himself. Erstwhile presidential candidate Gary Bauer is on his Board of Directors. Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson also both expressed strong end-times beliefs. American fundamentalists strongly supported the decision to invade Iraq in 2003. They consistently support Israel's hard-line policies. And they are beating the drums for war against Iran. Thanks to these end-timers, American foreign policy has turned much of the world against us, including most Muslims, nearly a quarter of the human race. The Beginning of End Times The evangelical movement originally was not so end times focused. Rather, it was concerned with the moral decline inside America. The Armageddon theory started with the writings of a Scottish preacher, John Nelson Darby (1800-1882). His ideas then spread to America with publication in 1917 of the Scofield Reference Bible, foretelling that the return of the Jews to Palestine would bring about the end times. The best-selling book of the 1970s, The Late, Great Planet Earth, further spread this message. The movement did not make a conscious effort to affect foreign policy until Jerry Falwell went to Jerusalem and the Left Behind books became best sellers. Conservative Christian writer Gary North estimates the number of Armageddonites at about 20 million. Many of them have an ecstatic belief in the cleansing power of apocalyptic violence. They are among the more than 30% of Americans who believe that the world is soon coming to an end. Armageddonites may be a minority of the evangelicals, but they have vocal leaders and control 2,000 mostly fundamentalist religious radio stations. Although little focused on in America, Armageddonites attract the attention of Muslims abroad. In 2004, for instance, I attended Qatar's Fifth Conference on Democracy with Muslim leaders from all over the Arabian Gulf. There, the uncle of Jordan's king devoted his whole speech to warning of the Armageddonites' power over American foreign policy. Armageddonite Foreign Policy The beliefs of the Armageddon Lobby, also known as Dispensationalists, come from the Book of Revelations, which Martin Luther relegated it to an appendix when he translated the Bible because its image of Christ was so contrary to the rest of the Bible. The Armageddonites worship a vengeful, killer-torturer Christ. They also frequently quote a biblical passage that God favors those who favor the Jews. But they only praise Jews who make war, not those who are peacemakers. For example, they vigorously opposed Israel's murdered premier Yitzhak Rabin, who promoted the Oslo Peace Accords. Based on this Biblical interpretation, the Armageddonites vehemently argue that America must protect Israel and encourage its settlements on the West Bank in order to help God fulfill His plans. The return of Jews to Palestine is central to the prophetic vision of the
[Biofuel] The real 9/11 culprit - Winston Churchill?
Meeting Mountbatten a few months after partition, Churchill assailed him for helping Britain's enemies, Hindustan, against Britain's friends, the Muslims. Little did Churchill know that his expedient boosting of political Islam would eventually unleash a global jihad engulfing even distant New York and London. The rival nationalisms and politicized religions the British Empire brought into being now clash in an enlarged geopolitical arena; and the human costs of imperial overreaching seem unlikely to attain a final tally for many more decades. - http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2007/08/13/070813crbo_book s_mishra?printable=true Exit Wounds: Books: The New Yorker Books Exit Wounds The legacy of Indian partition. by Pankaj Mishra August 13, 2007 Sixty years ago, on the evening of August 14, 1947, a few hours before Britain's Indian Empire was formally divided into the nation-states of India and Pakistan, Lord Louis Mountbatten and his wife, Edwina, sat down in the viceregal mansion in New Delhi to watch the latest Bob Hope movie, My Favorite Brunette. Large parts of the subcontinent were descending into chaos, as the implications of partitioning the Indian Empire along religious lines became clear to the millions of Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs caught on the wrong side of the border. In the next few months, some twelve million people would be uprooted and as many as a million murdered. But on that night in mid-August the bloodbath-and the fuller consequences of hasty imperial retreat-still lay in the future, and the Mountbattens probably felt they had earned their evening's entertainment. Mountbatten, the last viceroy of India, had arrived in New Delhi in March, 1947, charged with an almost impossible task. Irrevocably enfeebled by the Second World War, the British belatedly realized that they had to leave the subcontinent, which had spiralled out of their control through the nineteen-forties. But plans for brisk disengagement ignored messy realities on the ground. Mountbatten had a clear remit to transfer power to the Indians within fifteen months. Leaving India to God, or anarchy, as Mohandas Gandhi, the foremost Indian leader, exhorted, wasn't a political option, however tempting. Mountbatten had to work hard to figure out how and to whom power was to be transferred. The dominant political party, the Congress Party, took inspiration from Gandhi in claiming to be a secular organization, representing all four hundred million Indians. But many Muslim politicians saw it as a party of upper-caste Hindus and demanded a separate homeland for their hundred million co-religionists, who were intermingled with non-Muslim populations across the subcontinent's villages, towns, and cities. Eventually, as in Palestine, the British saw partition along religious lines as the quickest way to the exit. But sectarian riots in Punjab and Bengal dimmed hopes for a quick and dignified British withdrawal, and boded ill for India's assumption of power. Not surprisingly, there were some notable absences at the Independence Day celebrations in New Delhi on August 15th. Gandhi, denouncing freedom from imperial rule as a wooden loaf, had remained in Calcutta, trying, with the force of his moral authority, to stop Hindus and Muslims from killing each other. His great rival Mohammed Ali Jinnah, who had fought bitterly for a separate homeland for Indian Muslims, was in Karachi, trying to hold together the precarious nation-state of Pakistan. Nevertheless, the significance of the occasion was not lost on many. While the Mountbattens were sitting down to their Bob Hope movie, India's constituent assembly was convening in New Delhi. The moment demanded grandiloquence, and Jawaharlal Nehru, Gandhi's closest disciple and soon to be India's first Prime Minister, provided it. Long years ago, we made a tryst with destiny, he said. At the stroke of the midnight hour, while the world sleeps, India will awaken to life and freedom. A moment comes, which comes but rarely in history, when we step out from the old to the new, when an age ends, and when the soul of a nation, long suppressed, finds utterance. Posterity has enshrined this speech, as Nehru clearly intended. But today his quaint phrase tryst with destiny resonates ominously, so enduring have been the political and psychological scars of partition. The souls of the two new nation-states immediately found utterance in brutal enmity. In Punjab, armed vigilante groups, organized along religious lines and incited by local politicians, murdered countless people, abducting and raping thousands of women. Soon, India and Pakistan were fighting a war-the first of three-over the disputed territory of Kashmir. Gandhi, reduced to despair by the seemingly endless cycle of retaliatory mass murders and displacement, was shot dead in January, 1948, by a Hindu extremist who believed that the father of the Indian
[Biofuel] Rulers and Ruled in the US Empire - James Petras
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18541.htm Reviewing James Petras' Rulers and Ruled in the US Empire By Stephen Lendman 10/12/07 ICH -- - -James Petras is Binghamton University, New York Professor Emeritus of Sociology whose credentials and achievements are long and impressive. He's a noted academic figure on the left, a well-respected Latin American expert, and a longtime chronicler of the region's popular struggles as well as being an advisor to the landless workers (MST) in Brazil and unemployed workers in Argentina. Petras is also a prolific author. He's written hundreds of articles and 63 books (and counting), published in 29 languages, including his latest one and subject of this review - Rulers and Ruled in the US Empire. The book is information rich on a core issue of our time. It discusses the US empire's systemic dimensions, evolving changes in its ruling class, its corporatist system, myths about its coming collapse, contradictions in the current debate on immigration and market liberalization policies, the use of force and genocidal carnage, corruption as a market penetrating tool, the Israeli Lobby's power and influence, Latin American relations and events in the region, social and armed resistance, and much more in four power-packed parts under 17 subject chapter headings. It's all covered below giving readers a detailed sampling of Petras' thoroughly documented, powerful and insightful account of his subject - who rules America, who's ruled, the US imperial role in the world economy and politics, and challenges to it in China, Latin America and the Middle East. This is another must-read book by a distinguished intellect and major figure on the left who writes dozens of them. This is his latest. Part I: The US Empire As A System Petras distinguishes between who sets policies and rules America and whose interests are served. He defines the ruling class as people in key positions in financial, corporate and other business institutions with rules established, modified and adjusted as the composition and shifts in power within the ruling class change over time. One example is manufacuring's decline (from outsourcing to low cost countries) as a multidimensional financial sector (finance capital) rose in prominence with Wall Street's influence especially dominant. Petras defines finance capital to include investment banks, pension funds, hedge funds, saving and loan banks, investment funds and many other operative managers of a multi-trillion dollar economy they've all benefitted hugely from. They've been the driving force powering real estate and financial markets speculation, agribusiness, commodity production and manufacturing. Petras calls finance capital the midwife of wealth and capital as well as a direct owner of the means of production and distribution. He stratifies it into three sub-groups from top to bottom in importance: big private equity bankers and hedge fund managers, Wall street executives, and senior officials of private and Wall Street public equity funds as well as major figures in top law and accounting firms. Political leaders are drawn from their ranks with Wall Street in the lead and one firm in particular standing out - Goldman Sachs. Today, its former CEO Henry Paulson is the de facto US economic czar in charge of proving doomsayers wrong about the US economy with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke's money creation power partnered with him. Both of them must also navigate around the powerful Israeli Lobby and its pro-war agenda that could lead to catastrophic consequences if the US and/or Israel attack Iran and the Middle East explodes and disrupts oil flows. Petras sees an inevitable split between wealth-first financial ruling class objectives and militarists in the Bush administration, their counterparts in Israel, and the Lobby representing Israeli interests with a stranglehold on most of Congress. The battle lines shape up over Israeli Middle East dominance at the cost of imperial overreach, an escalating trade deficit, a ballooning national debt, decreasing capital inflows to offset it, and a declining dollar as other nations move to euros, yen and pounds sterling. Something has to give, says Petras, as both sides support opposing agendas that only a crisis-provoking widespread backlash may resolve. For now, however, things couldn't be better for the ruling class (despite their disrupted plans in Iraq and Afghanistan) with the top 2% of adults in the world owning half its wealth, the top 10% with 85% of it, and the bottom half with just 1%. The result is an unprecedented wealth disparity with corporate CEO's on average earning over 400 times the median income of wage and salaried workers, and for top-earning speculators and hedge fund managers the ratio is 1000 to one with some having incomes topping a billion dollars a year. In addition, corporate wealth was at a record
Re: [Biofuel] The real 9/11 culprit - Winston Churchill?
One can find Churchill's fingerprints on just about every Western historical artifact, both good and bad, for the roughly the past 120 years. Keith Addison wrote: Meeting Mountbatten a few months after partition, Churchill assailed him for helping Britain's enemies, Hindustan, against Britain's friends, the Muslims. Little did Churchill know that his expedient boosting of political Islam would eventually unleash a global jihad engulfing even distant New York and London. The rival nationalisms and politicized religions the British Empire brought into being now clash in an enlarged geopolitical arena; and the human costs of imperial overreaching seem unlikely to attain a final tally for many more decades. - http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2007/08/13/070813crbo_book s_mishra?printable=true Exit Wounds: Books: The New Yorker Books Exit Wounds The legacy of Indian partition. by Pankaj Mishra August 13, 2007 Sixty years ago, on the evening of August 14, 1947, a few hours before Britain's Indian Empire was formally divided into the nation-states of India and Pakistan, Lord Louis Mountbatten and his wife, Edwina, sat down in the viceregal mansion in New Delhi to watch the latest Bob Hope movie, My Favorite Brunette. Large parts of the subcontinent were descending into chaos, as the implications of partitioning the Indian Empire along religious lines became clear to the millions of Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs caught on the wrong side of the border. In the next few months, some twelve million people would be uprooted and as many as a million murdered. But on that night in mid-August the bloodbath-and the fuller consequences of hasty imperial retreat-still lay in the future, and the Mountbattens probably felt they had earned their evening's entertainment. Mountbatten, the last viceroy of India, had arrived in New Delhi in March, 1947, charged with an almost impossible task. Irrevocably enfeebled by the Second World War, the British belatedly realized that they had to leave the subcontinent, which had spiralled out of their control through the nineteen-forties. But plans for brisk disengagement ignored messy realities on the ground. Mountbatten had a clear remit to transfer power to the Indians within fifteen months. Leaving India to God, or anarchy, as Mohandas Gandhi, the foremost Indian leader, exhorted, wasn't a political option, however tempting. Mountbatten had to work hard to figure out how and to whom power was to be transferred. The dominant political party, the Congress Party, took inspiration from Gandhi in claiming to be a secular organization, representing all four hundred million Indians. But many Muslim politicians saw it as a party of upper-caste Hindus and demanded a separate homeland for their hundred million co-religionists, who were intermingled with non-Muslim populations across the subcontinent's villages, towns, and cities. Eventually, as in Palestine, the British saw partition along religious lines as the quickest way to the exit. But sectarian riots in Punjab and Bengal dimmed hopes for a quick and dignified British withdrawal, and boded ill for India's assumption of power. Not surprisingly, there were some notable absences at the Independence Day celebrations in New Delhi on August 15th. Gandhi, denouncing freedom from imperial rule as a wooden loaf, had remained in Calcutta, trying, with the force of his moral authority, to stop Hindus and Muslims from killing each other. His great rival Mohammed Ali Jinnah, who had fought bitterly for a separate homeland for Indian Muslims, was in Karachi, trying to hold together the precarious nation-state of Pakistan. Nevertheless, the significance of the occasion was not lost on many. While the Mountbattens were sitting down to their Bob Hope movie, India's constituent assembly was convening in New Delhi. The moment demanded grandiloquence, and Jawaharlal Nehru, Gandhi's closest disciple and soon to be India's first Prime Minister, provided it. Long years ago, we made a tryst with destiny, he said. At the stroke of the midnight hour, while the world sleeps, India will awaken to life and freedom. A moment comes, which comes but rarely in history, when we step out from the old to the new, when an age ends, and when the soul of a nation, long suppressed, finds utterance. Posterity has enshrined this speech, as Nehru clearly intended. But today his quaint phrase tryst with destiny resonates ominously, so enduring have been the political and psychological scars of partition. The souls of the two new nation-states immediately found utterance in brutal enmity. In Punjab, armed vigilante groups, organized along religious lines and incited by local politicians, murdered countless people, abducting and raping thousands of women. Soon, India and Pakistan were fighting a war-the first of three-over the disputed territory of Kashmir. Gandhi, reduced to despair by the
[Biofuel] Don't let's be beastly to the Germans
What I can't stand is when someone says begs the question when they mean raise the question. Begging the question describes a logical fallacy. As for political hair shirt - that's too obtuse for comment. Having survived the Allied firebombing of his native city of Pforzheim as a child, Zundel was well familiar with the war crimes of the hypocritical Allies and he made it his life's work to clear the name of his own people. For this commendable enterprise, Clearing Germany of culpability for the deaths of jews, Gypsies, homosexuals and other undesirables is indeed commendable. Next up: Clearing the record on slavery, Stalin, Belgium in the Congo, war in Iraq, and heck, why not Darfur? Besides, Noel Coward is way ahead of you on Germany: *Don't Let's Be Beastly To The Germans - Noel Coward* Verse 1 We must be kind And with an open mind We must endeavour to find A way- To let the Germans know that when the war is over They are not the ones who'll have to pay. We must be sweet- And tactful and discreet And when they've suffered defeat We mustn't let Them feel upset Or ever get The feeling that we're cross with them or hate them, Our future policy must be to reinstate them. Refrain 1 Don't let's be beastly to the Germans When our victory is ultimately won, It was just those nasty Nazis who persuaded them to fight And their Beethoven and Bach are really far worse than their bite Let's be meek to them- And turn the other cheek to them And try to bring out their latent sense of fun. Let's give them full air parity- And treat the rats with charity, But don't let's be beastly to the Hun. Verse 2 We must be just- And win their love and trust And in additon we must Be wise And ask the conquered lands to join our hands to aid them. That would be a wonderful surprise. For many years- They've been in floods of tears Because the poor little dears Have been so wronged and only longed To cheat the world, Deplete the world And beat The world to blazes. This is the moment when we ought to sing their praises. Refrain 2 Don't let's be beastly to the Germans When we've definately got them on the run- Let us treat them very kindly as we would a valued friend We might send them out some Bishops as a form of lease and lend, Let's be sweet to them- And day by day repeat to them That 'sterilization' simply isn't done. Let's help the dirty swine again- To occupy the Rhine again, But don't let's be beastly to the Hun. Refrain 3 Don't let's be beastly to the Germans When the age of peace and plenty has begun. We must send them steel and oil and coal and everything they need For their peaceable intentions can be always guaranteed. Let's employ with them a sort of 'strength through joy' with them, They're better than us at honest manly fun. Let's let them feel they're swell again and bomb us all to hell again, But don't let's be beastly to the Hun. Refrain 4 Don't let's be beastly to the Germans For you can't deprive a ganster of his gun Though they've been a little naughty to the Czechs and Poles and Dutch But I don't suppose those countries really minded very much Let's be free with them and share the B.B.C. with them. We mustn't prevent them basking in the sun. Let's soften their defeat again-and build their bloody fleet again, But don't let's be beastly to the Hun. Keith Addison wrote: Hi Peter I think Hoffman's a bit of a nutcase, or so swathed in conspiracy theories he might as well be one. Anyway, IMHO, what's interesting isn't the questions themselves so much as the fact that it's forbidden to ask them. It's the 21st Century after all, not the Middle Ages anymore. As Bob said last time around: ... But in fact it begs the question, posed in items 18-20 of Santomauro's piece. This is the nub of the matter. Why is this subject banned from discussion in 11 countries (with a 12th about to come on line i.e. the recent American hate speech law which sailed through Congress) and why do otherwise apparently sane and intelligent people suddenly go la-la when asked to contemplate the anomalies? ... Over the years I have come to wonder if perhaps the Holocaust story has been used to weave a political hair shirt to keep likely dissenters in line while another holocaust - an ever-increasing obscenity of more than 50 years standing - is pursued with even more inhuman zeal than ever fascism could summon to its cause. That was about this: Ahmadinejad's Holocaust Problems are My Holocaust Problems Michael Santomauro - ReportersNoteBook Sept 27, 2007 http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg71100.html Indeed, if you question Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, Bob's another holocaust, something similar happens, the Israel lobby gets you, in the US at least, with much the same tactics, kiss your reputation goodbye and probably your career too. Because of this taboo, it's difficult or impossible to make any sense of what's happening in the Middle East, or of
[Biofuel] On a lighter note...
Oct. 12-13, 2007 Yesterday, Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize for his work with the environment. Then, in a stunning reversal, the Supreme Court awarded it to George Bush. --Amy Poehler I think I know why you're happy tonight ... 'cause Al Gore won the Nobel prize. Al Gore won the Nobel prize. Or, as President Bush announced it, 'Sweden is with the terrorists.' No, the president did not say that. What he said was, 'The Nobel Prize is just a theory. It needs more study.' --Bill Maher You can tell Al Gore is still worrying about these kind of things. They told him today, 'You received the most votes.' He said, 'Yeah, who won?' --Bill Maher Congratulations to former Vice President Al Gore. He won the Nobel Peace Prize. ... And he did it without a single vote from Florida. --Jay Leno A White House spokesman said President Bush is very happy Al Gore won. Not Dick Cheney. Oh, no. Dick Cheney said today now he wants to bomb Norway. --Jay Leno A lot of people are now wondering if Al Gore will run for president, which would make it a Gore vs. Hillary Democratic primary. Kind of global warming vs. global cooling. --Jay Leno I have become such a fan of these Republican debates. There was another one this week. ... Mitt Romney and Giuliani went at each other. It was like watching a mannequin fight a Halloween costume. --Bill Maher And Mitt Romney was asked if he would seek congressional approval to attack Iran. ... He said he would check with his attorneys. Is that the right answer? I'm not sure. ... And then Fred Thompson said he would check with his manager and his publicist. That's the right answer. --Bill Maher This was Fred Thompson's first debate. You know, the long-awaited savior for the Republicans, Fred Thompson, is finally in the debates. It was a good chance for the voters to finally put the name with the cadaver. --Bill Maher Hillary Clinton ... said this week that she would negotiate with Iran. Barack Obama jumped on that. He said that's a flip-flop because she criticized him for basically saying the same thing back in July. But she said that's just her way of adopting something from Africa. --Bill Maher The people who are really getting tough with the Middle East is the House Foreign Relations Committee. Those motherf-- are not kidding around. They voted yesterday to condemn, as an act of genocide, the killings of Armenians in Turkey in 1915. See, this is exactly why the voters gave control to the Democrats. They send a stern message to the Ottoman Empire. --Bill Maher On the peaceful side of the equation, the Dalai Lama is coming to the United States next week. He's going to get the Congressional Medal of honor, meet with President Bush. He is going to, of course, be wearing his famous flowing orange robes. Nothing religious about that, he just doesn't want to get shot by Cheney. --Bill Maher Ramsey Usef, you know that name? He was the mastermind of the first World Trade Center attack back in '93. He's been rotting in prison -- as he should -- for many years. He said he's now converted to Christianity. He has seen the light. He can't wait to get out and bomb an abortion clinic --Bill Maher Congratulations to our own Matt Lauer of the 'Today Show.' Matt has secured the very first TV interview with Idaho Senator Larry Craig. I believe it will be conducted in the men's room at Rockefeller Center. ... Senator Craig said he's looking forward to meeting with Matt and going toe to toe. --Jay Leno This week, President Bush said that Congress needs to give him more power to spy on Americans by making changes to the Protect America Act. Did you ever notice they always give these pieces of legislation names you can't disagree with? The Protect America Act. ... Give it a fair name. At least call it the Ignore The Constitution Act. --Jay Leno On Tuesday, the Republican presidential candidates gathered in Michigan for a debate. The last time there were this many old white dudes in one place, Steve Guttenberg was trying to get them out of a swimming pool [on screen: the movie 'Cocoon']. --Seth Meyers Communist Cuba paid tribute on Monday to Ernesto Che Guevara, the populist revolutionary and guerrilla fighter, and not, as most college students believe, the founder of Urban Outfitters. --Amy Poehler ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] The real 9/11 culprit - Winston Churchill?
I think Winnie was a pretty mixed bag myself. A better question might be why the British were so anxious to go *back* into Iraq? I think it was Stanley Maude ? who went stomping into Mesopotamia around 1916 and I don't think the Brits were out until '56 or so. No guarantee on those dates. Keith Addison wrote: Hello Mike One can find Churchill's fingerprints on just about every Western historical artifact, both good and bad, for the roughly the past 120 years. Maybe, but that doesn't explain it away. Mishra makes some good points. Ugly racism aside, what excuse is there for sheer ignorance? According to his own Secretary of State for India, Leopold Amery, Churchill knew as much of the Indian problem as George III did of the American colonies. Or as much as George W. Bush knew of Iraq? Iraq was also Churchill's doing, chucked together out of incompatible parts, despite warnings from people who knew better that it couldn't work. Famous Churchill quote: I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against uncivilised tribes (Iraqis). (Lawrence of Arabia agreed.) Good and bad? Maybe you can remind me of something good about Churchill, I forget. I wrote something similar to what you say about him about 25 years ago, not about Churchill though, it was about the British Empire - take just about any trouble-spot in the world and dig a little and you'll find something nasty the British Empire swept under the carpet long ago. Divide and conquer, force folks to compete for what's theirs, turn peaceful differences into vicious enmities that'll fester away forever. I guess one empire's much the same as another. Best Keith Keith Addison wrote: Meeting Mountbatten a few months after partition, Churchill assailed him for helping Britain's enemies, Hindustan, against Britain's friends, the Muslims. Little did Churchill know that his expedient boosting of political Islam would eventually unleash a global jihad engulfing even distant New York and London. The rival nationalisms and politicized religions the British Empire brought into being now clash in an enlarged geopolitical arena; and the human costs of imperial overreaching seem unlikely to attain a final tally for many more decades. - http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2007/08/13/070813crbo_book s_mishra?printable=true Exit Wounds: Books: The New Yorker Books Exit Wounds The legacy of Indian partition. by Pankaj Mishra August 13, 2007 Sixty years ago, on the evening of August 14, 1947, a few hours before Britain's Indian Empire was formally divided into the nation-states of India and Pakistan, Lord Louis Mountbatten and his wife, Edwina, sat down in the viceregal mansion in New Delhi to watch the latest Bob Hope movie, My Favorite Brunette. Large parts of the subcontinent were descending into chaos, as the implications of partitioning the Indian Empire along religious lines became clear to the millions of Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs caught on the wrong side of the border. In the next few months, some twelve million people would be uprooted and as many as a million murdered. But on that night in mid-August the bloodbath-and the fuller consequences of hasty imperial retreat-still lay in the future, and the Mountbattens probably felt they had earned their evening's entertainment. Mountbatten, the last viceroy of India, had arrived in New Delhi in March, 1947, charged with an almost impossible task. Irrevocably enfeebled by the Second World War, the British belatedly realized that they had to leave the subcontinent, which had spiralled out of their control through the nineteen-forties. But plans for brisk disengagement ignored messy realities on the ground. Mountbatten had a clear remit to transfer power to the Indians within fifteen months. Leaving India to God, or anarchy, as Mohandas Gandhi, the foremost Indian leader, exhorted, wasn't a political option, however tempting. Mountbatten had to work hard to figure out how and to whom power was to be transferred. The dominant political party, the Congress Party, took inspiration from Gandhi in claiming to be a secular organization, representing all four hundred million Indians. But many Muslim politicians saw it as a party of upper-caste Hindus and demanded a separate homeland for their hundred million co-religionists, who were intermingled with non-Muslim populations across the subcontinent's villages, towns, and cities. Eventually, as in Palestine, the British saw partition along religious lines as the quickest way to the exit. But sectarian riots in Punjab and Bengal dimmed hopes for a quick and dignified British withdrawal, and boded ill for India's assumption of power. Not surprisingly, there were some notable absences at the Independence Day celebrations in New Delhi on August 15th. Gandhi, denouncing freedom from imperial rule as a wooden loaf, had remained in Calcutta, trying, with the force of his moral authority,
Re: [Biofuel] The real 9/11 culprit - Winston Churchill?
Hello Mike One can find Churchill's fingerprints on just about every Western historical artifact, both good and bad, for the roughly the past 120 years. Maybe, but that doesn't explain it away. Mishra makes some good points. Ugly racism aside, what excuse is there for sheer ignorance? According to his own Secretary of State for India, Leopold Amery, Churchill knew as much of the Indian problem as George III did of the American colonies. Or as much as George W. Bush knew of Iraq? Iraq was also Churchill's doing, chucked together out of incompatible parts, despite warnings from people who knew better that it couldn't work. Famous Churchill quote: I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against uncivilised tribes (Iraqis). (Lawrence of Arabia agreed.) Good and bad? Maybe you can remind me of something good about Churchill, I forget. I wrote something similar to what you say about him about 25 years ago, not about Churchill though, it was about the British Empire - take just about any trouble-spot in the world and dig a little and you'll find something nasty the British Empire swept under the carpet long ago. Divide and conquer, force folks to compete for what's theirs, turn peaceful differences into vicious enmities that'll fester away forever. I guess one empire's much the same as another. Best Keith Keith Addison wrote: Meeting Mountbatten a few months after partition, Churchill assailed him for helping Britain's enemies, Hindustan, against Britain's friends, the Muslims. Little did Churchill know that his expedient boosting of political Islam would eventually unleash a global jihad engulfing even distant New York and London. The rival nationalisms and politicized religions the British Empire brought into being now clash in an enlarged geopolitical arena; and the human costs of imperial overreaching seem unlikely to attain a final tally for many more decades. - http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2007/08/13/070813crbo_book s_mishra?printable=true Exit Wounds: Books: The New Yorker Books Exit Wounds The legacy of Indian partition. by Pankaj Mishra August 13, 2007 Sixty years ago, on the evening of August 14, 1947, a few hours before Britain's Indian Empire was formally divided into the nation-states of India and Pakistan, Lord Louis Mountbatten and his wife, Edwina, sat down in the viceregal mansion in New Delhi to watch the latest Bob Hope movie, My Favorite Brunette. Large parts of the subcontinent were descending into chaos, as the implications of partitioning the Indian Empire along religious lines became clear to the millions of Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs caught on the wrong side of the border. In the next few months, some twelve million people would be uprooted and as many as a million murdered. But on that night in mid-August the bloodbath-and the fuller consequences of hasty imperial retreat-still lay in the future, and the Mountbattens probably felt they had earned their evening's entertainment. Mountbatten, the last viceroy of India, had arrived in New Delhi in March, 1947, charged with an almost impossible task. Irrevocably enfeebled by the Second World War, the British belatedly realized that they had to leave the subcontinent, which had spiralled out of their control through the nineteen-forties. But plans for brisk disengagement ignored messy realities on the ground. Mountbatten had a clear remit to transfer power to the Indians within fifteen months. Leaving India to God, or anarchy, as Mohandas Gandhi, the foremost Indian leader, exhorted, wasn't a political option, however tempting. Mountbatten had to work hard to figure out how and to whom power was to be transferred. The dominant political party, the Congress Party, took inspiration from Gandhi in claiming to be a secular organization, representing all four hundred million Indians. But many Muslim politicians saw it as a party of upper-caste Hindus and demanded a separate homeland for their hundred million co-religionists, who were intermingled with non-Muslim populations across the subcontinent's villages, towns, and cities. Eventually, as in Palestine, the British saw partition along religious lines as the quickest way to the exit. But sectarian riots in Punjab and Bengal dimmed hopes for a quick and dignified British withdrawal, and boded ill for India's assumption of power. Not surprisingly, there were some notable absences at the Independence Day celebrations in New Delhi on August 15th. Gandhi, denouncing freedom from imperial rule as a wooden loaf, had remained in Calcutta, trying, with the force of his moral authority, to stop Hindus and Muslims from killing each other. His great rival Mohammed Ali Jinnah, who had fought bitterly for a separate homeland for Indian Muslims, was in Karachi, trying to hold together the precarious nation-state of Pakistan. Nevertheless, the significance of the occasion was not
Re: [Biofuel] Don't let's be beastly to the Germans
Hello Mike Nice bit bit of ol' wartime jingoism you dragged up there eh? That'll help a lot. What it doesn't help do though is hide the fact that for all this flailing about you still haven't answered the question, since it was you Bob put it to in the first place. So I'll ask it again, right here at the top: ... But in fact it begs the question, posed in items 18-20 of Santomauro's piece. This is the nub of the matter. Why is this subject banned from discussion in 11 countries (with a 12th about to come on line i.e. the recent American hate speech law which sailed through Congress) and why do otherwise apparently sane and intelligent people suddenly go la-la when asked to contemplate the anomalies? ... Over the years I have come to wonder if perhaps the Holocaust story has been used to weave a political hair shirt to keep likely dissenters in line while another holocaust - an ever-increasing obscenity of more than 50 years standing - is pursued with even more inhuman zeal than ever fascism could summon to its cause. Last time you said this: What's next? A cut and paste proof that global warming is a hoax? The war in Iraq is about liberation? Apartheid didn't happen? This time: Next up: Clearing the record on slavery, Stalin, Belgium in the Congo, war in Iraq, and heck, why not Darfur? Why not Palestine? Whether begged or raised, why not drop all the obfuscation and just answer the question? Best Keith What I can't stand is when someone says begs the question when they mean raise the question. Begging the question describes a logical fallacy. As for political hair shirt - that's too obtuse for comment. Having survived the Allied firebombing of his native city of Pforzheim as a child, Zundel was well familiar with the war crimes of the hypocritical Allies and he made it his life's work to clear the name of his own people. For this commendable enterprise, Clearing Germany of culpability for the deaths of jews, Gypsies, homosexuals and other undesirables is indeed commendable. Next up: Clearing the record on slavery, Stalin, Belgium in the Congo, war in Iraq, and heck, why not Darfur? Besides, Noel Coward is way ahead of you on Germany: *Don't Let's Be Beastly To The Germans - Noel Coward* Verse 1 We must be kind And with an open mind We must endeavour to find A way- To let the Germans know that when the war is over They are not the ones who'll have to pay. We must be sweet- And tactful and discreet And when they've suffered defeat We mustn't let Them feel upset Or ever get The feeling that we're cross with them or hate them, Our future policy must be to reinstate them. Refrain 1 Don't let's be beastly to the Germans When our victory is ultimately won, It was just those nasty Nazis who persuaded them to fight And their Beethoven and Bach are really far worse than their bite Let's be meek to them- And turn the other cheek to them And try to bring out their latent sense of fun. Let's give them full air parity- And treat the rats with charity, But don't let's be beastly to the Hun. Verse 2 We must be just- And win their love and trust And in additon we must Be wise And ask the conquered lands to join our hands to aid them. That would be a wonderful surprise. For many years- They've been in floods of tears Because the poor little dears Have been so wronged and only longed To cheat the world, Deplete the world And beat The world to blazes. This is the moment when we ought to sing their praises. Refrain 2 Don't let's be beastly to the Germans When we've definately got them on the run- Let us treat them very kindly as we would a valued friend We might send them out some Bishops as a form of lease and lend, Let's be sweet to them- And day by day repeat to them That 'sterilization' simply isn't done. Let's help the dirty swine again- To occupy the Rhine again, But don't let's be beastly to the Hun. Refrain 3 Don't let's be beastly to the Germans When the age of peace and plenty has begun. We must send them steel and oil and coal and everything they need For their peaceable intentions can be always guaranteed. Let's employ with them a sort of 'strength through joy' with them, They're better than us at honest manly fun. Let's let them feel they're swell again and bomb us all to hell again, But don't let's be beastly to the Hun. Refrain 4 Don't let's be beastly to the Germans For you can't deprive a ganster of his gun Though they've been a little naughty to the Czechs and Poles and Dutch But I don't suppose those countries really minded very much Let's be free with them and share the B.B.C. with them. We mustn't prevent them basking in the sun. Let's soften their defeat again-and build their bloody fleet again, But don't let's be beastly to the Hun. Keith Addison wrote: Hi Peter I think Hoffman's a bit of a nutcase, or so swathed in conspiracy theories he might as well be one. Anyway, IMHO, what's interesting isn't the questions themselves so
Re: [Biofuel] The real 9/11 culprit - Winston Churchill?
I think Winnie was a pretty mixed bag myself. First you said good and bad, now you say mixed. If you can't remind me of something good about him, how about something that's not outright bad? A better question might be why the British were so anxious to go *back* into Iraq? I think it was Stanley Maude ? who went stomping into Mesopotamia around 1916 and I don't think the Brits were out until '56 or so. No guarantee on those dates. Try Geoff Simons' Iraq: From Sumer to Saddam. Anyway, the League of Nations awarded Britain the new mandate of Iraq as part of secret deals made during World War I. Ho-hum. Lots of horse-trading with the French, and there was this stray king who needed a kingdom somewhere or other. Anyway, heavy application of Churchill's usual hamfist, with Bomber Harris delivering prototype terror bombing raids on tribal villages and so on. So what's new. Keith Keith Addison wrote: Hello Mike One can find Churchill's fingerprints on just about every Western historical artifact, both good and bad, for the roughly the past 120 years. Maybe, but that doesn't explain it away. Mishra makes some good points. Ugly racism aside, what excuse is there for sheer ignorance? According to his own Secretary of State for India, Leopold Amery, Churchill knew as much of the Indian problem as George III did of the American colonies. Or as much as George W. Bush knew of Iraq? Iraq was also Churchill's doing, chucked together out of incompatible parts, despite warnings from people who knew better that it couldn't work. Famous Churchill quote: I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against uncivilised tribes (Iraqis). (Lawrence of Arabia agreed.) Good and bad? Maybe you can remind me of something good about Churchill, I forget. I wrote something similar to what you say about him about 25 years ago, not about Churchill though, it was about the British Empire - take just about any trouble-spot in the world and dig a little and you'll find something nasty the British Empire swept under the carpet long ago. Divide and conquer, force folks to compete for what's theirs, turn peaceful differences into vicious enmities that'll fester away forever. I guess one empire's much the same as another. Best Keith Keith Addison wrote: Meeting Mountbatten a few months after partition, Churchill assailed him for helping Britain's enemies, Hindustan, against Britain's friends, the Muslims. Little did Churchill know that his expedient boosting of political Islam would eventually unleash a global jihad engulfing even distant New York and London. The rival nationalisms and politicized religions the British Empire brought into being now clash in an enlarged geopolitical arena; and the human costs of imperial overreaching seem unlikely to attain a final tally for many more decades. - http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2007/08/13/070813crbo_book s_mishra?printable=true Exit Wounds: Books: The New Yorker Books Exit Wounds The legacy of Indian partition. by Pankaj Mishra August 13, 2007 Sixty years ago, on the evening of August 14, 1947, a few hours before Britain's Indian Empire was formally divided into the nation-states of India and Pakistan, Lord Louis Mountbatten and his wife, Edwina, sat down in the viceregal mansion in New Delhi to watch the latest Bob Hope movie, My Favorite Brunette. Large parts of the subcontinent were descending into chaos, as the implications of partitioning the Indian Empire along religious lines became clear to the millions of Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs caught on the wrong side of the border. In the next few months, some twelve million people would be uprooted and as many as a million murdered. But on that night in mid-August the bloodbath-and the fuller consequences of hasty imperial retreat-still lay in the future, and the Mountbattens probably felt they had earned their evening's entertainment. Mountbatten, the last viceroy of India, had arrived in New Delhi in March, 1947, charged with an almost impossible task. Irrevocably enfeebled by the Second World War, the British belatedly realized that they had to leave the subcontinent, which had spiralled out of their control through the nineteen-forties. But plans for brisk disengagement ignored messy realities on the ground. Mountbatten had a clear remit to transfer power to the Indians within fifteen months. Leaving India to God, or anarchy, as Mohandas Gandhi, the foremost Indian leader, exhorted, wasn't a political option, however tempting. Mountbatten had to work hard to figure out how and to whom power was to be transferred. The dominant political party, the Congress Party, took inspiration from Gandhi in claiming to be a secular organization, representing all four hundred million Indians. But many Muslim politicians saw it as a party of upper-caste Hindus and demanded a
Re: [Biofuel] The real 9/11 culprit - Winston Churchill?
Good: Early in his political career he worked hard to implement a minimum wage in England. But probably the one thing he's rightly remembered well for is his refusal to capitualte to Hitler, although I think David Lloyd George probably got that ball rolling. His speeches rallied Britain during WWII. He, along with FDR, played in instumental role in defeating Nazi Germany. Despite his myriad flaws, he was a great source of quotes. Bad: Rotten policy on India. At least up until 1937, didn't seem to have much problem w/ Hitler OR Mussolini. Saw no problem with the concept of an Empire. Miseable views on race. Had a hand in any number of bad policies...the list goes on. Keith Addison wrote: I think Winnie was a pretty mixed bag myself. First you said good and bad, now you say mixed. If you can't remind me of something good about him, how about something that's not outright bad? A better question might be why the British were so anxious to go *back* into Iraq? I think it was Stanley Maude ? who went stomping into Mesopotamia around 1916 and I don't think the Brits were out until '56 or so. No guarantee on those dates. Try Geoff Simons' Iraq: From Sumer to Saddam. Anyway, the League of Nations awarded Britain the new mandate of Iraq as part of secret deals made during World War I. Ho-hum. Lots of horse-trading with the French, and there was this stray king who needed a kingdom somewhere or other. Anyway, heavy application of Churchill's usual hamfist, with Bomber Harris delivering prototype terror bombing raids on tribal villages and so on. So what's new. Keith Keith Addison wrote: Hello Mike One can find Churchill's fingerprints on just about every Western historical artifact, both good and bad, for the roughly the past 120 years. Maybe, but that doesn't explain it away. Mishra makes some good points. Ugly racism aside, what excuse is there for sheer ignorance? According to his own Secretary of State for India, Leopold Amery, Churchill knew as much of the Indian problem as George III did of the American colonies. Or as much as George W. Bush knew of Iraq? Iraq was also Churchill's doing, chucked together out of incompatible parts, despite warnings from people who knew better that it couldn't work. Famous Churchill quote: I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against uncivilised tribes (Iraqis). (Lawrence of Arabia agreed.) Good and bad? Maybe you can remind me of something good about Churchill, I forget. I wrote something similar to what you say about him about 25 years ago, not about Churchill though, it was about the British Empire - take just about any trouble-spot in the world and dig a little and you'll find something nasty the British Empire swept under the carpet long ago. Divide and conquer, force folks to compete for what's theirs, turn peaceful differences into vicious enmities that'll fester away forever. I guess one empire's much the same as another. Best Keith Keith Addison wrote: Meeting Mountbatten a few months after partition, Churchill assailed him for helping Britain's enemies, Hindustan, against Britain's friends, the Muslims. Little did Churchill know that his expedient boosting of political Islam would eventually unleash a global jihad engulfing even distant New York and London. The rival nationalisms and politicized religions the British Empire brought into being now clash in an enlarged geopolitical arena; and the human costs of imperial overreaching seem unlikely to attain a final tally for many more decades. - http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2007/08/13/070813crbo_book s_mishra?printable=true Exit Wounds: Books: The New Yorker Books Exit Wounds The legacy of Indian partition. by Pankaj Mishra August 13, 2007 Sixty years ago, on the evening of August 14, 1947, a few hours before Britain's Indian Empire was formally divided into the nation-states of India and Pakistan, Lord Louis Mountbatten and his wife, Edwina, sat down in the viceregal mansion in New Delhi to watch the latest Bob Hope movie, My Favorite Brunette. Large parts of the subcontinent were descending into chaos, as the implications of partitioning the Indian Empire along religious lines became clear to the millions of Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs caught on the wrong side of the border. In the next few months, some twelve million people would be uprooted and as many as a million murdered. But on that night in mid-August the bloodbath-and the fuller consequences of hasty imperial retreat-still lay in the future, and the Mountbattens probably felt they had earned their evening's entertainment. Mountbatten, the last viceroy of India, had arrived in New Delhi in March, 1947, charged with an almost impossible task. Irrevocably enfeebled by the Second World War, the British belatedly realized that they had to leave the subcontinent, which had spiralled out of
Re: [Biofuel] Don't let's be beastly to the Germans
Thanks, I thought so. These are 18-20 of Santomauro's piece.Which question(s) are you asking? 18) Why has Holocaust Revisionism been criminalized in at least eleven countries…what other historic truth needs the threat of prison or the destruction of one's career to maintain itself. Should someone be sent to prison for expressing skepticism about the official Chinese claim that they suffered thirty-five million dead in World War II. 19) Why do the court historians insist that denying the Holocaust is like denying slavery or saying the earth is flat when it is nothing of the sort. The leading Revisionists are first rate scholars who hold advanced degrees from the world's leading universities. Is there anyone comparable among those who say the world is flat or that slavery never existed? 20) Promoters of the Holocaust have expressed concerns about the remembering the Holocaust once the last survivors die. Why haven't Civil War historians expressed similar concerns since the last survivor of that conflict died in 1959? Keith Addison wrote: Hello Mike Nice bit bit of ol' wartime jingoism you dragged up there eh? That'll help a lot. What it doesn't help do though is hide the fact that for all this flailing about you still haven't answered the question, since it was you Bob put it to in the first place. So I'll ask it again, right here at the top: ... But in fact it begs the question, posed in items 18-20 of Santomauro's piece. This is the nub of the matter. Why is this subject banned from discussion in 11 countries (with a 12th about to come on line i.e. the recent American hate speech law which sailed through Congress) and why do otherwise apparently sane and intelligent people suddenly go la-la when asked to contemplate the anomalies? ... Over the years I have come to wonder if perhaps the Holocaust story has been used to weave a political hair shirt to keep likely dissenters in line while another holocaust - an ever-increasing obscenity of more than 50 years standing - is pursued with even more inhuman zeal than ever fascism could summon to its cause. Last time you said this: What's next? A cut and paste proof that global warming is a hoax? The war in Iraq is about liberation? Apartheid didn't happen? This time: Next up: Clearing the record on slavery, Stalin, Belgium in the Congo, war in Iraq, and heck, why not Darfur? Why not Palestine? Whether begged or raised, why not drop all the obfuscation and just answer the question? Best Keith What I can't stand is when someone says begs the question when they mean raise the question. Begging the question describes a logical fallacy. As for political hair shirt - that's too obtuse for comment. Having survived the Allied firebombing of his native city of Pforzheim as a child, Zundel was well familiar with the war crimes of the hypocritical Allies and he made it his life's work to clear the name of his own people. For this commendable enterprise, Clearing Germany of culpability for the deaths of jews, Gypsies, homosexuals and other undesirables is indeed commendable. Next up: Clearing the record on slavery, Stalin, Belgium in the Congo, war in Iraq, and heck, why not Darfur? Besides, Noel Coward is way ahead of you on Germany: *Don't Let's Be Beastly To The Germans - Noel Coward* Verse 1 We must be kind And with an open mind We must endeavour to find A way- To let the Germans know that when the war is over They are not the ones who'll have to pay. We must be sweet- And tactful and discreet And when they've suffered defeat We mustn't let Them feel upset Or ever get The feeling that we're cross with them or hate them, Our future policy must be to reinstate them. Refrain 1 Don't let's be beastly to the Germans When our victory is ultimately won, It was just those nasty Nazis who persuaded them to fight And their Beethoven and Bach are really far worse than their bite Let's be meek to them- And turn the other cheek to them And try to bring out their latent sense of fun. Let's give them full air parity- And treat the rats with charity, But don't let's be beastly to the Hun. Verse 2 We must be just- And win their love and trust And in additon we must Be wise And ask the conquered lands to join our hands to aid them. That would be a wonderful surprise. For many years- They've been in floods of tears Because the poor little dears Have been so wronged and only longed To cheat the world, Deplete the world And beat The world to blazes. This is the moment when we ought to sing their praises. Refrain 2 Don't let's be beastly to the Germans When we've definately got them on the run- Let us treat them very kindly as we would a valued friend We might send them out some Bishops as a form of lease and lend, Let's be sweet to them- And day by day repeat to them That 'sterilization' simply isn't done. Let's help the dirty swine again- To occupy the
Re: [Biofuel] Off Topic - More on the Holocaust if you can stand it.
Hi Hakan ; but the number of human corps laying around and later also excavated, Well, no one is denying that war is a terrible thing, and that there were many corpses lying around, but possibly they were caused by starvation and disease due to relentless Allied bombings of supply routes for food? How does eye witness accounts of many corpses lying around during a time of war translate into a coordinated plot for extinction? be upset about what you are saying and consider you as a dangerous person. Sorry to hear that. If you consider me to be a dangerous person, then I am afraid to think of what you consider Fred Leuchter. He is the one who testified as an expert witness, not me. Best Regards, Peter G. Thailand __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Don't let's be beastly to the Germans
Hi Mike, Greetings and felicitations from Godzone. Loved your Noel Coward piece. Wasn't he the bloke who also bracketed mad dogs and Englishmen? Hmmm, perhaps we're dealing with satire here. Not the best basis for clarity in any discussion. Re points 18-20 of Santomauro's article: they boil down to a single issue - that the word holocaust (originally meaning major destruction by fire) has been expropriated to serve a single meaning: the Shoah or mass murder of European Jewry by the Nazis (note: I didn't say the Germans) between 1936 and 1945. Hence mention of the Holocaust (note: I didn't use the correct word Shoah because it is meaningless to most people) evokes emotions of both sympathy and guilt in non-Jewish western communities. Such emotions can be, and are, focused for political purposes. Among them is the need by Zionists (note: I did not say Jews, there is a very clear difference) to cover their crimes and misdeeds in the Middle East, not least being the Nakba or genocide of Palistinians and expropriation of their property during and after the formation of the present State of Israel, and also the ongoing war of attrition in which thousands of Palestinians and Lebanese have lost their lives. Such crimes, if committed by any other nation, would bring major world condemnation if not actual military intervention as in the case of Serbia. Thus the holocaust is the notional hairshirt, the red herring if you like, which serves to keep the non-Jewish westerner in a state of unease and indecision when he or she dares to question Zionist politics or their criminally insane foreign policy. In brief: the Holocaust and criticism of Zionism are conflated into a single issue so that the emotions generated by the one serve to cover the crimes of the other. The second and perhaps most succesful part of this semantic sleight of hand is that criticism of Zionism is then seen as rejection of Judaism or anti-semitism. Of course, once you have released the anti-semitism beast into any debate all logical discussion comes to a halt. Recommended background reading: My Israel Question by Anthony Loewenstein, Melbourne University Press, 2006. Also - if you have a strong stomach - Google Nakba and read the first few entries. Then Google B'Tselem, the Jewish (note, I didn't say Zionist) peace group located in Tel Aviv. That should keep you queasily reading for a least a month, after which we can talk about Noel Coward - a subject easier to digest. Alternately come and visit me here in the stunning Bay of Islands where if I turn off my computer, throw the telly out of the window, stop all the papers, toss a few rods and some beers into the boat, and raise sail I can truly believe we live in Paradise. Best wishes Mike, Bob. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ What are theseWhen properly untries - Original Message - From: Mike Weaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 9:31 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Don't let's be beastly to the Germans Thanks, I thought so. These are 18-20 of Santomauro's piece.Which question(s) are you asking? 18) Why has Holocaust Revisionism been criminalized in at least eleven countries…what other historic truth needs the threat of prison or the destruction of one's career to maintain itself. Should someone be sent to prison for expressing skepticism about the official Chinese claim that they suffered thirty-five million dead in World War II. 19) Why do the court historians insist that denying the Holocaust is like denying slavery or saying the earth is flat when it is nothing of the sort. The leading Revisionists are first rate scholars who hold advanced degrees from the world's leading universities. Is there anyone comparable among those who say the world is flat or that slavery never existed? 20) Promoters of the Holocaust have expressed concerns about the remembering the Holocaust once the last survivors die. Why haven't Civil War historians expressed similar concerns since the last survivor of that conflict died in 1959? Keith Addison wrote: Hello Mike Nice bit bit of ol' wartime jingoism you dragged up there eh? That'll help a lot. What it doesn't help do though is hide the fact that for all this flailing about you still haven't answered the question, since it was you Bob put it to in the first place. So I'll ask it again, right here at the top: ... But in fact it begs the question, posed in items 18-20 of Santomauro's piece. This is the nub of the matter. Why is this subject banned from discussion in 11 countries (with a 12th about to come on line
Re: [Biofuel] Hydropower doesn't count as clean Power
Hi Fritz, Sorry for taking so long to get back to you and answering your questions. In BC the mountains are very high and there are rivers in these high mountains. I believe that it is possible to have some high river water diverted to a hole made in the mountain to create a drop for the water to create electricity. At the lower end of the mountain the water simply goes back to its original stream. Terry Dyck From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2007 08:23:42 -0400 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Hydropower doesn't count as clean Power Hi Terry, and how do de get the Water on top of the mountain?? :)) But wont this water be missed in the river it belongs? Fritz - Original Message - From: Terry Dyck To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 3:19 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Hydropower doesn't count as clean PowerHi Fritz, A new Hydro project in BC, Canada is being planned which does not involve a dam. The water will spill into a hole in the top of a mountain and produce a lot of electricity. The project will not interfere with fish or the forest. Only damage will be roads to the facility. Terry Dyck From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 08:47:12 -0400 Subject: [Biofuel] Hydropower doesn't count as clean Power Hi Keith and all, if one counts how sloppy Hydro-dams have been built here in Quebec,Valleys had been flooten with little clesn up before flooding!Whole eareas of Forest submerged (a lot of them also in BC),wich creates on top of the Methane also a high Mercury-pollution (via Tannin/zyanide),so the Government recomend only restrictet Fishconsumption! Fritz -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20071006/cf5409a0/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archiv! es (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ _ Have fun while connecting on Messenger! Click here to learn more. http://entertainment.sympatico.msn.ca/WindowsLiveMessenger -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20071006/58346788/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20071007/efba733e/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ _ Are you ready for Windows Live Messenger Beta 8.5 ? Get the latest for free today! http://entertainment.sympatico.msn.ca/WindowsLiveMessenger -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20071017/67a69ecb/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Hydropower doesn't count as clean Power
Hi Terry, my comment was made more as a joke :)), But so or so Water taken from the River will have a negative effect on Fishes! We should focus on reducing electric consumption and not increasing production! A small example,Northamerican Machines of almost any kind are swiched directly to full power! This takes about threfold the consumption as if they where switched Star -Delta,wich means in layterms you start your Motor slowly up an then when it reaches the full rotation you swich to delta!Any european Machine of 3HP or so is equiped with such a switch!cost a little more for the Machine but you save on consumption! Fritz - Original Message - From: Terry Dyck To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 2:24 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Hydropower doesn't count as clean Power Hi Fritz, Sorry for taking so long to get back to you and answering your questions. In BC the mountains are very high and there are rivers in these high mountains. I believe that it is possible to have some high river water diverted to a hole made in the mountain to create a drop for the water to create electricity. At the lower end of the mountain the water simply goes back to its original stream. Terry Dyck From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2007 08:23:42 -0400 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Hydropower doesn't count as clean Power Hi Terry, and how do de get the Water on top of the mountain?? :)) But wont this water be missed in the river it belongs? Fritz - Original Message - From: Terry Dyck To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 3:19 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Hydropower doesn't count as clean PowerHi Fritz, A new Hydro project in BC, Canada is being planned which does not involve a dam. The water will spill into a hole in the top of a mountain and produce a lot of electricity. The project will not interfere with fish or the forest. Only damage will be roads to the facility. Terry Dyck From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 08:47:12 -0400 Subject: [Biofuel] Hydropower doesn't c! ount as clean Power Hi Keith and all, if one counts how sloppy Hydro-dams have been built here in Quebec,Valleys had been flooten with little clesn up before flooding!Whole eareas of Forest submerged (a lot of them also in BC),wich creates on top of the Methane also a high Mercury-pollution (via Tannin/zyanide),so the Government recomend only restrictet Fishconsumption! Fritz -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20071006/cf5409a0/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archiv! es (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ _ Have ! fun while connecting on Messenger! Click here to learn more. http://e ntertainment.sympatico.msn.ca/WindowsLiveMessenger -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20071006/58346788/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20071007/efba733e/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined B! iofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ _ Are you ready for Windows Live Messenger Beta 8.5 ? Get the latest for free today! http://entertainment.sympatico.msn.ca/WindowsLiveMessenger -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20071017/67a69ecb/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org
Re: [Biofuel] Don't let's be beastly to the Germans
Hello Mike Thanks, I thought so. I didn't. These are 18-20 of Santomauro's piece.Which question(s) are you asking? This is the question that was asked: This is the nub of the matter. Why is this subject banned from discussion in 11 countries (with a 12th about to come on line i.e. the recent American hate speech law which sailed through Congress) and why do otherwise apparently sane and intelligent people suddenly go la-la when asked to contemplate the anomalies? What's the excuse for this taboo? Such things didn't go amiss four centuries ago when the Earth stood still and the sun moved around it because that's what it says in the Bible and to question that meant being sent to Gitmo, um, the Inquisition, but we're supposed to have grown out of that kind of stuff by now. Except for this one case. Why is that? Is it something that we should accept? The further question was whether the taboo is used as a cover to stifle criticism of something just as heinous, Israel's brutal oppression of the Palestinians. There's no doubt that it is so used. That Israel can do no wrong because of the Holocaust is simply untenable, but that's the way it is - question Israel and kiss your career goodbye, question the official Holocaust dogma and risk being jailed. Let's get this straight please: I'm not saying and haven't said that the official version isn't true, I haven't questioned it. You're not allowed to question it, which makes it dogma whether it's true or not. That's what I'm questioning, because of all the victims - not just the Palestinians, much has been written recently on Israel's role in the Iraq disaster, and in the downright terrifying push for an encore in Iran, along with an endless stream of more minor atrocities such as this: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/10/15/4541/ Published on Monday, October 15, 2007 by Inter Press Service What 'Safe' Cluster Bombs Do In Lebanon Jenin, Sabra, Shatila... All very much enabled by the Holocaust taboo. It's about the most dangerous thing in the world, there's no excuse for it. Bob also said sane and intelligent people suddenly go la-la over this subject, indeed they do. Hakan said this yesterday in a reply to Peter: It is a very worrying discussion line, from denial to how the Israelis have used it as alibi for their own war crimes. It is however very important that all will be a part of the future history in a correct way, but as it is said it takes 100 years to write history. Concerning WWI we are almost there and it is not far to WWII. But then he says this: ... I have no reason to express doubts as you do. I even have the right and experiences to be upset about what you are saying and consider you as a dangerous person. How are we to arrive at the future history in a correct way if expressing doubts makes you a dangerous person? Surely the truth can withstand doubts and questions, if it requires this kind of protection then it's to be doubted that it's the truth. Which is just what happens. Otherwise, to use your examples, why don't we start jailing global warming deniers, or Iraq war dissenters? (Oh sorry, we're already doing that last one.) Hence Santomauro's points 18 to 20. Questioning the Holocaust dogma dishonors the victims and belittles their sufferings we're told. But it's difficult to imagine a worse abuse of the victims and their sufferings than the ongoing atrocities conducted under cover of this taboo. It's those who defend it who're in denial. But Israel has the right to exist - further denial: Israel has the right to co-exist, and if it can't learn to do that then it has no rights. Same as the white South Africans (another of your examples). Anyone who's thinking of jerking their knee my way because of this should please read this first: http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg35355.html Re: [biofuel] Re: Oil and Israel - Keith 3 Jun 2004 Best Keith 18) Why has Holocaust Revisionism been criminalized in at least eleven countriesÖwhat other historic truth needs the threat of prison or the destruction of one's career to maintain itself. Should someone be sent to prison for expressing skepticism about the official Chinese claim that they suffered thirty-five million dead in World War II. 19) Why do the court historians insist that denying the Holocaust is like denying slavery or saying the earth is flat when it is nothing of the sort. The leading Revisionists are first rate scholars who hold advanced degrees from the world's leading universities. Is there anyone comparable among those who say the world is flat or that slavery never existed? 20) Promoters of the Holocaust have expressed concerns about the remembering the Holocaust once the last survivors die. Why haven't Civil War historians expressed similar concerns since the last survivor of that conflict died in 1959? Keith Addison wrote: Hello Mike Nice bit bit of ol' wartime jingoism you dragged
Re: [Biofuel] Hydropower doesn't count as clean Power
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ _ Are you ready for Windows Live Messenger Beta 8.5 ? Get the latest for free today! http://entertainment.sympatico.msn.ca/WindowsLiveMessenger -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20071017/67a69ecb/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Don't let's be beastly to the Germans
Bob, Salaam, Shalom und Guten Tag. Thank you for your concise and well-constructed message; it is certainly better articulated than the piece by Santomauro, which I personally think is poorly reasoned, poorly argued, and full of pointless rambling. I found most of the analogies bizarre. At the risk of making assumptions, I'm betting the gist is contained here: In brief: the Holocaust and criticism of Zionism are conflated into a single issue so that the emotions generated by the one serve to cover the crimes of the other. I don't deny that this has happened, and that it will no doubt continue to happen. However, I have never advanced this argument, and have not made any statements supporting it. With regards to the above, it is my belief that the following is relevant. The reality of the Holocaust as a well documented historical event, and the criticism of Zionism are two different things. With regards to the first: I do believe, based on a fair amount of my own research, and discussions with several WWII veterans, that there was systematic mass murder of European Jewry by the Nazis. I do not believe it is an elaborate hoax, that it did not happen, or that it was a few random instances. I think the discussion of whether it was six million, four million or five and half million is pointless. The key metric is million. I believe the West, including the US, has plenty of blood on its hand with regards to the mass murder of European Jewry. It's not well known, but Hitler was willing to let Jews leave, at least up until 1939/40, but no country would take them, not even the pious USA. The US turned boats back, and the refugees went back to their doom. FDR did this. The State Department worked overtime to keep Jews out. With regards to the second, I think that it is relevant to recall that the early notions of Zionism had its genesis as a reaction to pervasive and deadly anti-Semitism in Europe. Proto-Zionism envisioned a return of the Jews to their historic homeland as a means of escape. Early Zionists, Herzl for instance, did not envision the Arab resistance to the movement, however, by the turn of the century most Zionists began to acknowledge this reality. Interestingly, until WWII, there was a great deal of Jewish resistance to Zionism; after the Balfour declaration, British Jewish member of parliament Edwin Montagu was completely opposed to the notion of a Jewish state: he argued it would inflame the Arabs; Jews had a right to live wherever they wanted; and this was caving in to anti-Semites. (One can find Winston's Churchill's fingerprints here as well). At the risk of over simplifying the subject, Zionism fractured and morphed; it is not strictly true that the only meaning of Zionism is an unyielding belief that Jews belong in Israel/Palestine, and that Israel/Palestine belongs to them; however, for the purpose of debate let us move forward with /this/ meaning. I would not argue that Zionism really resolved anything; I categorically think that in its short history the modern state of Israel has perpetuated a long list of criminally indefensible actions; e.g., Ariel Sharon was implicitly involved in aiding and abetting the massacre of Palestinian refugees by Christian militias. I do not think that much of the Israeli government's current actions with regards to Palestinians are moral, legal or sensible. I can't see any instance where blowing up houses, bulldozing olive groves and building ill-conceived settlements has made Israel better or safer. In short, I do not condone Israeli acts of violence against Palestinians. But I don't condone Palestinians acts of violence either. I think the PA is easily one of the most corrupt and inefficient governmental bodies on earth. Not only do Palestinians have to deal with a malevolent Israeli government, they have to deal with their own clueless, inept and sticky-fingered administration. Recently, I couldn't have imagined any two people less-suited to working out any sort of peaceful accord than Arafat and Sharon. When they were both off the stage, I had hoped that perhaps there may have been a chance for something better. Throw in Bush's inability to see beyond his own extremely narrow world interests, and the possibility dims even further. I see no black and white/right or wrong answer. I don't see either party doing much constructive. The tit for tat has been going on for as long as I can remember, and has done nothing positive as far as I can tell. With all due respect, and I did consider your explanation carefully, I still don't think hairshirt advances your point. Red herring is a better choice, in that I assume you mean it diverts attention from the Israeli government's policies and activities. However, I freely admit I enjoy the semantic and logical splitting of hairs. Mea culpa with regards to my own previous bloviations; you have my apologies for laying into
Re: [Biofuel] The real 9/11 culprit - Winston Churchill?
did i sleep through a lecture back wien i was in school, or something? because i don't remenber about a loud outcry in favor of capitulation during the blitz. and where defeating nazi germany is concerned, the soviets deserve at least 50% of the credit, maybe even two thirds. On 10/17/07, Mike Weaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good: Early in his political career he worked hard to implement a minimum wage in England. But probably the one thing he's rightly remembered well for is his refusal to capitualte to Hitler, although I think David Lloyd George probably got that ball rolling. His speeches rallied Britain during WWII. He, along with FDR, played in instumental role in defeating Nazi Germany. Despite his myriad flaws, he was a great source of quotes. Bad: Rotten policy on India. At least up until 1937, didn't seem to have much problem w/ Hitler OR Mussolini. Saw no problem with the concept of an Empire. Miseable views on race. Had a hand in any number of bad policies...the list goes on. Keith Addison wrote: I think Winnie was a pretty mixed bag myself. First you said good and bad, now you say mixed. If you can't remind me of something good about him, how about something that's not outright bad? A better question might be why the British were so anxious to go *back* into Iraq? I think it was Stanley Maude ? who went stomping into Mesopotamia around 1916 and I don't think the Brits were out until '56 or so. No guarantee on those dates. Try Geoff Simons' Iraq: From Sumer to Saddam. Anyway, the League of Nations awarded Britain the new mandate of Iraq as part of secret deals made during World War I. Ho-hum. Lots of horse-trading with the French, and there was this stray king who needed a kingdom somewhere or other. Anyway, heavy application of Churchill's usual hamfist, with Bomber Harris delivering prototype terror bombing raids on tribal villages and so on. So what's new. Keith Keith Addison wrote: Hello Mike One can find Churchill's fingerprints on just about every Western historical artifact, both good and bad, for the roughly the past 120 years. Maybe, but that doesn't explain it away. Mishra makes some good points. Ugly racism aside, what excuse is there for sheer ignorance? According to his own Secretary of State for India, Leopold Amery, Churchill knew as much of the Indian problem as George III did of the American colonies. Or as much as George W. Bush knew of Iraq? Iraq was also Churchill's doing, chucked together out of incompatible parts, despite warnings from people who knew better that it couldn't work. Famous Churchill quote: I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against uncivilised tribes (Iraqis). (Lawrence of Arabia agreed.) Good and bad? Maybe you can remind me of something good about Churchill, I forget. I wrote something similar to what you say about him about 25 years ago, not about Churchill though, it was about the British Empire - take just about any trouble-spot in the world and dig a little and you'll find something nasty the British Empire swept under the carpet long ago. Divide and conquer, force folks to compete for what's theirs, turn peaceful differences into vicious enmities that'll fester away forever. I guess one empire's much the same as another. Best Keith Keith Addison wrote: Meeting Mountbatten a few months after partition, Churchill assailed him for helping Britain's enemies, Hindustan, against Britain's friends, the Muslims. Little did Churchill know that his expedient boosting of political Islam would eventually unleash a global jihad engulfing even distant New York and London. The rival nationalisms and politicized religions the British Empire brought into being now clash in an enlarged geopolitical arena; and the human costs of imperial overreaching seem unlikely to attain a final tally for many more decades. - http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2007/08/13/070813crbo_book s_mishra?printable=true Exit Wounds: Books: The New Yorker Books Exit Wounds The legacy of Indian partition. by Pankaj Mishra August 13, 2007 Sixty years ago, on the evening of August 14, 1947, a few hours before Britain's Indian Empire was formally divided into the nation-states of India and Pakistan, Lord Louis Mountbatten and his wife, Edwina, sat down in the viceregal mansion in New Delhi to watch the latest Bob Hope movie, My Favorite Brunette. Large parts of the subcontinent were descending into chaos, as the implications of partitioning the Indian Empire along religious lines became clear to the millions of Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs caught on the wrong side of the border. In the next few months, some twelve million people would be uprooted and as many as a million murdered. But on that night in mid-August the bloodbath-and the fuller
