Re: [Biofuel] Anybody wants the biofuel gear of Journey to Forever?
Dear biofuel friends, This is Midori. Sorry for not having followed up this issue. I've received a few respondents to this message on- and off- list, but I have not decided to whom I'd like to send the processors. More people showed interest in Keith's library - sorry if there was misunderstanding, but even before I posted the message, I had decided to donate the library to an organization, who had been old collaborative with Keith and is ditigalizing important books. Soil And Health Library http://www.soilandhealth.org/ So what concerned are: JTF biodiesel processors (90L, 15L, and mini-processors), and the ethanol still. I want to donate them to somebody or an organization who really value them and make good use of them. It may sound emotional, but I'd rather destroy them rather than giving them to might as well take them persons. They are made from scratch by Keith, and worked on again and again by Keith - hope you understand. The uncertainty is also an issue - I cannot guarantee the condition of the processors and the still because of the reason below; I cannot find the transport cost beforehand either. I need somebody who can share the risk and the cost with me. Time is running out. I'm going to Cork, Ireland, to sort Keith's possession in the first week of March. We need to sort everything in one week, and chuck everything else by 8th March. I really hope Keith's works be useful to somebody rather than wasted, but the situation is like this. If you really care about the processors and the still, please email me at i...@journeytoforever.org as soon as possible. Many thanks, Midori On 2014/12/16 21:40, Keith Addison wrote: Dear biofuel friends, This is Midori, Japanese partner of Keith Addison. I'm looking for somebody who wants to have the biofuel gear of Journey to Forever, made by Keith. Because of many complications, they are still packed in a warehouse in Oxford, UK, together with Keith's 300+ books and other personal possessions. I really hate to dump them, but as a poor PhD student living in a small flat, I cannot keep them. So I hope somebody on the list to accept them and make good use of them. The gear should include the disassembled JTF biodiesel processors (90L, 15L, and mini-processors), and the ethanol still. http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_processor10.html http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_processor5.html http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_processor7.html They are disassembled, and might be missing tanks or some parts. I cannot guarantee because I didn't see how they were packed when Keith shipped them out before he died. Still, there should be enough to help you easily start biofuel project. We need the recipient to bear the expense of transfer and related cost. Some additional donation for the gear is also appreciated too because there's been lots of difficulty to retrieve Keith's possessions. I and Keith's close friends have been bearing the cost and trouble because we care of Keith and hate to waste his efforts. We plan to retrieve them from the wharehouse first, and sort them out (maybe in Cork, Ireland), then will ship the biofuel gear to those who want them. (IF somebody near Oxford UK could provide a storage place for about 70 boxes/220Cuft of goods including the JTF biofuel gear and Keith's library until March 2015 and help me sort them out, that would be really appreciated too - but I suppose I'm asking too much so don't worry about this bit). Please email me at i...@journeytoforever.org (specify to Midori in the title) if you are interested. I really appreciate for your support and contribution for Keith over these years. Thank you so much. I hope we all remember Keith and what he taught us. Many thanks and best wishes, Midori Kyoto, Japan ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Anybody wants the biofuel gear of Journey to Forever?
Dear biofuel friends, This is Midori, Japanese partner of Keith Addison. I'm looking for somebody who wants to have the biofuel gear of Journey to Forever, made by Keith. Because of many complications, they are still packed in a warehouse in Oxford, UK, together with Keith's 300+ books and other personal possessions. I really hate to dump them, but as a poor PhD student living in a small flat, I cannot keep them. So I hope somebody on the list to accept them and make good use of them. The gear should include the disassembled JTF biodiesel processors (90L, 15L, and mini-processors), and the ethanol still. http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_processor10.html http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_processor5.html http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_processor7.html They are disassembled, and might be missing tanks or some parts. I cannot guarantee because I didn't see how they were packed when Keith shipped them out before he died. Still, there should be enough to help you easily start biofuel project. We need the recipient to bear the expense of transfer and related cost. Some additional donation for the gear is also appreciated too because there's been lots of difficulty to retrieve Keith's possessions. I and Keith's close friends have been bearing the cost and trouble because we care of Keith and hate to waste his efforts. We plan to retrieve them from the wharehouse first, and sort them out (maybe in Cork, Ireland), then will ship the biofuel gear to those who want them. (IF somebody near Oxford UK could provide a storage place for about 70 boxes/220Cuft of goods including the JTF biofuel gear and Keith's library until March 2015 and help me sort them out, that would be really appreciated too - but I suppose I'm asking too much so don't worry about this bit). Please email me at i...@journeytoforever.org (specify to Midori in the title) if you are interested. I really appreciate for your support and contribution for Keith over these years. Thank you so much. I hope we all remember Keith and what he taught us. Many thanks and best wishes, Midori Kyoto, Japan ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Keith Addison passed away
Dear biofuel friends, Keith, who contributed so much to the handmade biofuel movement and related appropriate technology and organic movements, died of pneumonia in August 2014. This is Midori, Japanese partner of Keith Addison. My apology for being late to tell you this sad news. It took a while for me to recover from his death and rearrange related matters. Still continues.. I'd like to maintain his projects available online, in which Keith devoted so much - literally he devoted more than 10 years of his life to journeytoforever.org and biofuel mailinglists. I cannot contribute to it anymore, but at least I will keep them as they are, available to the public for coming years. Regarding to this mailinglist, I suppose he left the managing to somebody else around 2013 - please advise me how this is arranged now, off-list if it's more suitable. I now manage his emails at ke...@journeytoforever.org and I see more than 100 moderator requests piling up (most of them are Post by non-member to a members-only list). I also manage the domain name sustainablelists.org. Do we still need it for the list? Please advise. There have been so many issues on and around these mailinglists over the decade. Keith used to tell me hours about what's going on on the list, both happy and annoying issues. No matter what - I really appreciate for your support and contribution for Keith over these years. Thank you so much. I hope we all remember Keith and what he taught us. Many thanks and best wishes, Midori Kyoto, Japan - I can be reached at i...@journeytoforever.org. Please specify to Midori in the title. Thanks. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Fwd: WVO car fuel cartoon and song.
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 11:20:13 -0700 From: Nancy Ibsen malvinapa...@yahoo.com Subject: WVO car fuel cartoon and song. To: ke...@journeytoforever.org ke...@journeytoforever.org I thought you or people you know would be interested in seeing this animated video. Please enjoy and pass on the link. Thanks, Nancy Ibsen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YnKUecTwY0Vegetable Car View on www.yo... Preview by Yahoo ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Fwd: NEW VIDEO SHOWS WOOL INDUSTRY WORKERS KILLING, PUNCHING, STAMPING ON SHEEP
Contact: Hannah Levitt +44 (0) 20 7837 6327, ext 235; mailto:hann...@peta.org.ukhann...@peta.org.uk NEW VIDEO SHOWS WOOL INDUSTRY WORKERS KILLING, PUNCHING, STAMPING ON SHEEP PETA US Releases Footage Shot Secretly at Farms and Shearing Sheds in US and Australia From First Undercover Investigation of Its Kind London - PETA US' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aE66ZC7RJQAbrand-new exposé of the wool industry in the US and Australia - the source of 90 per cent of merino wool in the world - shows workers violently punching scared sheep in the face, stamping and standing on the animals' heads and necks and beating and jabbing them in the face with electric clippers and a hammer. Some sheep even died from the abuse, including one whose neck was twisted until the animal died. Investigators also documented that large, bloody wounds were left on the sheep's bodies and that workers stitched gaping wounds closed using a needle and thread without administering any pain relief. The video highlights just some of the cruelty observed by investigators at each of the 19 shearing sheds visited in Australia and at 14 US farms in Wyoming, Colorado and Nebraska. In one incident in Colorado, a shearer who was muttering, F***, over and over killed a sheep by repeatedly twisting, severely bending and breaking her neck. As he kicked the dying animal head-first down a chute, he said, I might have killed it. He admitted that he had previously injured another sheep by bending the animal's neck back, excusing himself with the words, I get angry. Sheep are gentle prey animals who are petrified of even being held down, yet these sheep were punched in the face, kicked and stamped on and had their heads slammed into the floor by unsupervised, impatient shearers, causing them great distress, injury and even death, says PETA UK Associate Director Mimi Bekhechi. PETA is calling on shoppers around the world to reject cruelty to animals - and that means never buying wool. PETA is sending the video to UK retailers that sell wool, with a unique appeal to them to end their sale of wool products, citing the abuse of sheep during shearing, live export and mulesing (flaying of live lambs) as three reasons to avoid wool. PETA US has asked state and local law-enforcement agencies to investigate and file criminal charges against the workers, as appropriate, for what are believed to be violations of cruelty-to-animals laws. Photographs from the investigations are available http://petaav.com/4broadcast/photos_from_international_wool_expose/index.htmlhere. Broadcast-quality video footage from the US investigation is available http://petaav.com/4broadcast/us_wool_investigation_2014_web_peta_uk_c2_PAL.htm here, and broadcast-quality video footage from the Australian investigations is available http://petaav.com/4broadcast/australian_wool_trade_investigations_peta_uk_web_c2_PAL.htm here. For more information, please visit http://www.peta.org.ukPETA.org.uk. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Fwd: tests of FAME
From: Allan Barberio allan.barbe...@emcee-electronics.com To: ke...@journeytoforever.org Subject: tests of FAME Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 16:19:02 -0400 Keith We are currently doing research on detection of bio in diesel. I have attached the results of our first tests. It appears you have an interest in all things bio. Your website is incredible. Thanks Allan Allan J Barberio, CPA General Manager Emcee Electronics Inc http://www.emcee-electronics.com/www.emcee-electronics.com 520 Cypress Ave. Venice, Fl. 34285 941-485-1515 Ex 119 941-356-6522 Cell ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Biodiesel question
Hi all Sorry I'm not around more (but I still read a lot at the list). I received this email: ... last night I found some discouraging information that suggests that modern diesel cars (from 2007 forward) will have problems with running B100 and furthermore that running B100 is discouraged by the major car manufacturers. I had hoped to run B100 in a 2015 Volkswagen Golf or Jetta, but now I'm concerned that I'll only be able to run B5 or B20 at best. Am I understanding this correctly? The answer, as I'm sure we all know, is that B100 can be used in ANY diesel, as long as it's top-quality biodiesel, which is easy to make as long as you follow the method correctly, and that car manufacturer discouragement or warrantees mean nothing unless the fault can be directly related to the fuel. What I don't know is this: Is there anything different about 2015 VWs? All best Keith ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Hungry for land: small farmers feed the world with less than a quarter of all farmland
http://www.grain.org/article/entries/4929-hungry-for-land-small-farmers-feed-the-world-with-less-than-a-quarter-of-all-farmland Hungry for land: small farmers feed the world with less than a quarter of all farmland GRAIN | 28 May 2014 | Reports It is commonly heard today that small farmers produce most of the world's food. But how many of us realise that they are doing this with less than a quarter of the world's farmland, and that even this meagre share is shrinking fast? If small farmers continue to lose the very basis of their existence, the world will lose its capacity to feed itself. GRAIN took an in depth look at the data to see what is going on and the message is crystal clear. We need to urgently put land back in the hands of small farmers and make the struggle for agrarian reform central to the fight for better food systems. Download the PDF version of this report here http://www.grain.org/article/entries/4929-hungry-for-land-small-farmers-feed-the-world-with-less-than-a-quarter-of-all-farmland.pdf Download a printer friendly dataset in PDF format here. http://www.grain.org/attachments/3011/download Download a fully-referenced dataset as a spreadsheet here. http://www.grain.org/attachments/3003/download Governments and international agencies frequently boast that small farmers control the largest share of the world's agricultural land. Inaugurating 2014 as the International Year of Family Farming, José Graziano da Silva, Director General of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), sang the praises of family farmers but didn't once mention the need for land reform. Instead he stated that family farms already manage most of the world's farmland1 - a whopping 70%, according to his team.2 Another report published by various UN agencies in 2008 concluded that small farms occupy 60% of all arable land worldwide.3 Other studies have come to similar conclusions.4 But if most of the world's farmland is in small farmers' hands, then why are so many of their organisations clamouring for land redistribution and agrarian reform? Because rural peoples' access to land is under attack everywhere. From Honduras to Kenya and from Palestine to the Philippines, people are being dislodged from their farms and villages. Those who resist are being jailed or killed. Widespread agrarian strikes in Colombia, protests by community leaders in Madagascar, nationwide marches by landless folk in India, occupations in Andalusia - the list of actions and struggles goes on and on. The bottom line is that land is becoming more and more concentrated in the hands of the rich and powerful, not that small farmers are doing well. Rural people don't simply make a living off the land, after all. Their land and territories are the backbone of their identities, their cultural landscape and their source of well-being. Yet land is being taken away from them and concentrated in fewer and fewer hands at an alarming pace. Then there is the other part of the picture: that concerning food. While it is now increasingly common to hear that small farmers produce the majority of the world's food, even if that is outside of market systems, we are also constantly being fed the message that the more efficient industrial food system is needed to feed the world. At the same time, we are told that 80% of the world's hungry people live in rural areas, many of them farmers or landless farmworkers. How do we make sense of all this? What is true and what is not? What action do we take to deal with these imbalances? To help answer some of these questions, GRAIN decided to take a closer look at the facts.5 We tried to find out how much land is really in the hands of small farmers, and how much food they produce on that land.6 The figures and what they tell us When we looked at the data, we came across quite a number of difficulties. Countries define small farmer differently. There are no centralised statistics on who has what land. There are no databases recording how much food comes from where. And different sources give widely varying figures for the amount of agricultural land available in each country. In compiling the figures, we used official statistics from national agricultural census bureaus in each country wherever possible, complemented by FAOSTAT (FAO's statistical database) and other FAO sources where necessary. For statistical guidance on what a small farm is, we generally used the definition provided by each national authority, since the conditions of small farms in different countries and regions can vary widely. Where national definitions were not available, we used the World Bank's criteria. In light of this, there are important limitations to the data - and our compilation and assessment of them. (See Annex 1 for a fuller discussion of the data.) The dataset that we produced is fully referenced and publicly available online and forms an
[Biofuel] List down
testing... testing... Er, Houston? ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] List up again
Hi all Sorry the list's been down. My records said the domain name was paid up to April 2015, but, um, it should have been 2014. I've renewed it now, and all is well. Regards Keith ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
The Russians are coming � again � and they're still ten feet tall!
http://williamblum.org/aer/read/128 The Anti-Empire Report #128 By William Blum - Published May 9th, 2014 The Russians are coming again and they're still ten feet tall! So, what do we have here? In Libya, in Syria, and elsewhere the United States has been on the same side as the al-Qaeda types. But not in Ukraine. That's the good news. The bad news is that in Ukraine the United States is on the same side as the neo-Nazi types, who - taking time off from parading around with their swastika-like symbols and calling for the death of Jews, Russians and Communists - on May 2 burned down a trade-union building in Odessa, killing scores of people and sending hundreds to hospital; many of the victims were beaten or shot when they tried to flee the flames and smoke; ambulances were blocked from reaching the wounded. Try and find an American mainstream media entity that has made a serious attempt to capture the horror. And how did this latest example of American foreign-policy exceptionalism come to be? One starting point that can be considered is what former Secretary of Defense and CIA Director Robert Gates says in his recently published memoir: When the Soviet Union was collapsing in late 1991, [Defense Secretary Dick Cheney] wanted to see the dismemberment not only of the Soviet Union and the Russian empire but of Russia itself, so it could never again be a threat to the rest of the world. That can serve as an early marker for the new cold war while the corpse of the old one was still warm. Soon thereafter, NATO began to surround Russia with military bases, missile sites, and NATO members, while yearning for perhaps the most important part needed to complete the circle - Ukraine. In February of this year, US State Department officials, undiplomatically, joined anti-government protesters in the capital city of Kiev, handing out encouragement and food, from which emanated the infamous leaked audio tape between the US ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, and the State Department's Victoria Nuland, former US ambassador to NATO and former State Department spokesperson for Hillary Clinton. Their conversation dealt with who should be running the new Ukraine government after the government of Viktor Yanukovich was overthrown; their most favored for this position being one Arseniy Yatsenuk. My dear, and recently departed, Washington friend, John Judge, liked to say that if you want to call him a conspiracy theorist you have to call others coincidence theorists. Thus it was by the most remarkable of coincidences that Arseniy Yatsenuk did indeed become the new prime minister. He could very soon be found in private meetings and public press conferences with the president of the United States and the Secretary-General of NATO, as well as meeting with the soon-to-be new owners of Ukraine, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, preparing to impose their standard financial shock therapy. The current protestors in Ukraine don't need PHDs in economics to know what this portends. They know about the impoverishment of Greece, Spain, et al. They also despise the new regime for its overthrow of their democratically-elected government, whatever its shortcomings. But the American media obscures these motivations by almost always referring to them simply as pro-Russian. An exception, albeit rather unemphasized, was the April 17 Washington Post which reported from Donetsk that many of the eastern Ukrainians whom the author interviewed said the unrest in their region was driven by fear of economic hardship and the IMF austerity plan that will make their lives even harder: At a most dangerous and delicate time, just as it battles Moscow for hearts and minds across the east, the pro-Western government is set to initiate a shock therapy of economic measures to meet the demands of an emergency bailout from the International Monetary Fund. Arseniy Yatsenuk, it should be noted, has something called the Arseniy Yatsenuk Foundation. If you go to the foundation's website http://openukraine.org/en/about/partners you will see the logos of the foundation's partners. Among these partners we find NATO, the National Endowment for Democracy, the US State Department, Chatham House (Royal Institute of International Affairs in the UK), the German Marshall Fund (a think tank founded by the German government in honor of the US Marshall Plan), as well as a couple of international banks. Is any comment needed? Getting away with supporting al-Qaeda and Nazi types may be giving US officials the idea that they can say or do anything they want in their foreign policy. In a May 2 press conference, President Obama, referring to Ukraine and the NATO Treaty, said: We're united in our unwavering Article 5 commitment to the security of our NATO allies. (Article 5 states: The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them shall be considered an attack
Re: [Biofuel] Autism Nation: America's Chemical Brain Drain
Hi Zeke Great... so the same chemicals that are killing the bees and the monarch butterflies (and probably frogs and who knows what else) are also killing us. And someone said that humans are intelligent life You think Monsanto is a human? Bests Keith On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Darryl McMahon dar...@econogics.com wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/23267-autism-nation- americas-chemical-brain-drain [image and multiple links in on-line article] Autism Nation: America's Chemical Brain Drain Thursday, 24 April 2014 09:04 \ By Dr Brian Moench, Truthout | News Analysis While autism rates in Europe have remained virtually flat for the last decade, in the US, they have risen from 1:10,000 in 1981 to 1:68 in 2014. Many studies point to the prevalence of toxins in our environment as the culprit. As flowers burst on the scene, blossoms unfold, and lawns awaken from winter's sleep, nature's spring rituals are joyful to watch. Unfortunately, many home owners, gardeners, landscapers, farmers and state agencies launch an anti-nature spring ritual - mounting an arsenal of poisons to kill insects and weeds. This ritual comes at a tremendous cost. Last month, leading scientists warned of a silent pandemic, citing strong evidence that children worldwide are being exposed to unrecognized toxic chemicals that are silently eroding intelligence, disrupting behaviors, truncating future achievements and damaging societies. These brain toxins - heavy metals, fluoride, chemicals like PCBs, toluene, solvents, flame retardants, BPA, phalates and pesticides - are found in the furniture you sit on, the clothing you wear, the air you breathe, the food you eat and soil your kids play in. And this short list of chemicals and compounds is just the tip of a very large toxic iceberg. It's time to start looking for the environmental culprits responsible for the remarkable increase in the rate of autism in California, said Irva Hertz-Picciotto, an epidemiology professor at University of California, Davis. In 1981, the autism (ASD) rate in the United States was 1:10,000. In 2007, it was 1:150. In 2009, it was 1:100. In 2012, it was 1:88. In 2014, it is 1:68. At this rate of increase, by 2025 it will be 1:2, or 50 percent. For those of you tempted to think this is just greater awareness and expansion of the criteria for diagnosis, the CDC says that since the 2012 estimate of 1 in 88 children identified with ASD, the criteria used to diagnose, treat, and provide services have not changed, but the rate has increased another 30 percent. Meanwhile, autism rates in Europe have remained virtually flat for the last decade. Recent estimates in European countries range from 1 in 5,000 in Germany to 1 in 700 in Portugal. So what are Americans doing to harm themselves and their children's brains that Europeans aren't, besides watching Fox News? No one knows for sure, but one thing to consider is the massive increase in Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) and the concomitant upsurge in pesticide and herbicide use. David Vogel, professor at the Haas School of Business and in the Department of Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley, points out that between 1960 and 1990, American health, safety, and environmental regulations were more stringent, risk averse, comprehensive, and innovative than those adopted in Europe. Vogel's book, The Politics of Precaution, explains that since around 1990, global regulatory leadership has shifted to Europe. With many types of environmental risks, extreme conservative ideologues in the US have brought regulatory protection of public health to a screeching halt. America's failure to deal with the climate crisis is probably the most conspicuous casualty. But what is happening to the brains of our children may be just as important. In more than 60 countries around the world, including Australia, Japan, and all of the countries in the European Union, there are significant restrictions or outright bans on the production and sale of GMOs. In the US, federal agencies have approved the GMO/pesticide industrial agriculture system based on studies conducted by the same corporations that created them and profit from their sale. The best-selling herbicide in the world is glyphosate, originally patented and sold by Monsanto as Roundup. Glyphosate is a potent endocrine disruptor, meaning it can interfere with the production, release, transport, metabolism, or elimination of the body's natural hormones, which are the most potent biologic substances known to science. Fetuses and infants are particularly at risk, as any disruption of endocrine systems can affect brain development. Last week a study was done that proved yet again Monsanto has been lying to the public. Monsanto has defiantly proclaimed all along that Roundup breaks down quickly and doesn't accumulate in the human body. Not so. Moms
Re: [Biofuel] Autism Nation: America's Chemical Brain Drain
LOL... you have a point there. More like one of those aggressive flesh eating bacteria. Yes - probably special GMO'd aggressive flesh eating bacteria. :-) On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Keith Addison ke...@journeytoforever.orgwrote: Hi Zeke Great... so the same chemicals that are killing the bees and the monarch butterflies (and probably frogs and who knows what else) are also killing us. And someone said that humans are intelligent life You think Monsanto is a human? Bests Keith On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Darryl McMahon dar...@econogics.com wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/23267-autism-nation- americas-chemical-brain-drain [image and multiple links in on-line article] Autism Nation: America's Chemical Brain Drain Thursday, 24 April 2014 09:04 \ By Dr Brian Moench, Truthout | News Analysis While autism rates in Europe have remained virtually flat for the last decade, in the US, they have risen from 1:10,000 in 1981 to 1:68 in 2014. Many studies point to the prevalence of toxins in our environment as the culprit. As flowers burst on the scene, blossoms unfold, and lawns awaken from winter's sleep, nature's spring rituals are joyful to watch. Unfortunately, many home owners, gardeners, landscapers, farmers and state agencies launch an anti-nature spring ritual - mounting an arsenal of poisons to kill insects and weeds. This ritual comes at a tremendous cost. Last month, leading scientists warned of a silent pandemic, citing strong evidence that children worldwide are being exposed to unrecognized toxic chemicals that are silently eroding intelligence, disrupting behaviors, truncating future achievements and damaging societies. These brain toxins - heavy metals, fluoride, chemicals like PCBs, toluene, solvents, flame retardants, BPA, phalates and pesticides - are found in the furniture you sit on, the clothing you wear, the air you breathe, the food you eat and soil your kids play in. And this short list of chemicals and compounds is just the tip of a very large toxic iceberg. It's time to start looking for the environmental culprits responsible for the remarkable increase in the rate of autism in California, said Irva Hertz-Picciotto, an epidemiology professor at University of California, Davis. In 1981, the autism (ASD) rate in the United States was 1:10,000. In 2007, it was 1:150. In 2009, it was 1:100. In 2012, it was 1:88. In 2014, it is 1:68. At this rate of increase, by 2025 it will be 1:2, or 50 percent. For those of you tempted to think this is just greater awareness and expansion of the criteria for diagnosis, the CDC says that since the 2012 estimate of 1 in 88 children identified with ASD, the criteria used to diagnose, treat, and provide services have not changed, but the rate has increased another 30 percent. Meanwhile, autism rates in Europe have remained virtually flat for the last decade. Recent estimates in European countries range from 1 in 5,000 in Germany to 1 in 700 in Portugal. So what are Americans doing to harm themselves and their children's brains that Europeans aren't, besides watching Fox News? No one knows for sure, but one thing to consider is the massive increase in Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) and the concomitant upsurge in pesticide and herbicide use. David Vogel, professor at the Haas School of Business and in the Department of Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley, points out that between 1960 and 1990, American health, safety, and environmental regulations were more stringent, risk averse, comprehensive, and innovative than those adopted in Europe. Vogel's book, The Politics of Precaution, explains that since around 1990, global regulatory leadership has shifted to Europe. With many types of environmental risks, extreme conservative ideologues in the US have brought regulatory protection of public health to a screeching halt. America's failure to deal with the climate crisis is probably the most conspicuous casualty. But what is happening to the brains of our children may be just as important. In more than 60 countries around the world, including Australia, Japan, and all of the countries in the European Union, there are significant restrictions or outright bans on the production and sale of GMOs. In the US, federal agencies have approved the GMO/pesticide industrial agriculture system based on studies conducted by the same corporations that created them and profit from their sale. The best-selling herbicide in the world is glyphosate, originally patented and sold by Monsanto as Roundup. Glyphosate is a potent endocrine disruptor, meaning it can interfere with the production, release, transport, metabolism, or elimination of the body's natural hormones, which are the most potent biologic
[Biofuel] Police State and Mounting Poverty in Britain: David Cameron's Concept of a Big Society is Continuing Jesus' work
http://www.globalresearch.ca/police-state-and-mounting-poverty-in-britain-david-camerons-concept-of-a-big-society-is-continuing-jesus-work/5380215 Police State and Mounting Poverty in Britain: David Cameron's Concept of a Big Society is Continuing Jesus' work Prime Minister Finds God, Bans Bishops, Priests, the Poor - and Crutches By Felicity Arbuthnot Global Research, May 03, 2014 When Prime Minister David Cameron pulls a stunt, or indeed, announces a ground breaking new policy, it is pretty well guaranteed to back fire. Indeed, his coalition government policy U-turns are heading for encyclopedic.(1) Is he opportunistic, spineless - or a lethal combination of the two? In opposition, to prove his green credentials he headed for the Arctic for a photo-op with Huskies, leaping: aboard a Husky-powered sled to visit a remote Norwegian glacier to see first hand the effects of global warming. As the (UK) Telegraph put it at the time: Cameron turns blue to prove green credentials.(2) In office, the environment is an inconvenience rather than a concern. Protected historic sites of natural beauty, ancient woodlands and sites of special scientific interest are to be sacrificed to quick-build homes in their thousands and a multi billion £ train line that cuts mere minutes off journeys hours long. Homes are needed, but the country is filled with sturdily built abandoned office blocks, warehouses, large homes, smaller ones, which could be restored, converted, refurbished and landscaped at a fraction of the cost, without destroying the irreplaceable. Ironically, homes across the country are anyway at threat. Cameron has thrown the country open to fracking with the manic enthusiasm of an alcoholic given the run of a liquor warehouse. Never mind that there have already been a few earthquakes linked to fracking and that the scientific evidence of the massive dangers are ever mounting. Public and scientific concerns are to be over-ridden to the extent that Cameron is to rule that fracking companies can drill on privately owned land and even under people's homes, with the land and home owners having no say. Huskies and green are a distant memory for the Prime Minister. Last year Downing Street denied reports that David Cameron ordered aides to get rid of all the green crap in policies. Never believe anything until it has been officially denied, advised the late, great journalist, Claud Cockburn. However, Husky stunts long forgotten, his new prop is God. And it is not going too well. Following an Easter reception for Christians at his Downing Street residence (3) he wrote an article in the Church Times (4) in which he argues that: faith compels us to get out there and make a difference to people's lives the Christian values (include) charity, compassion Christians are the driving force behind some of the most inspiring social-action projects in our country (playing) a fundamental role in our society. So being confident about our Christianity we should also be ambitious in supporting faith-based organizations to do even more. Cameron urged: supporting local projects. I welcome the efforts of all those who help to feed, clothe the poorest in our society (inspiring) belief we can get out there and change people's lives to improve our society tackle poverty He also welcomed: the debate with church leaders on the issues, especially in the desire: not to write anyone off and anticipated seeing: our churches as partners. If we pull together, we can change the world and make it a better place. The article was entitled: My Faith in the Church of England. As ever with Cameron words and deeds are a parallel universe. In his rural Oxfordshire constituency, on the day the article was published, the Bishop of Oxford, the Rt Revd John Pritchard and the Revd Keith Hebden were absolutely committed to helping feed, clothe, tackle poverty and making Britain, their part of the word, a better place. Indeed, Revd Hebden had fasted for the forty days and nights of Lent in solidarity with those who find themselves in the direst straights, often as the result of the Cameron led government's ferocious welfare cuts. In context, the cuts are cited as being largely responsible for nearly a million people, including over 300,000 children, having been given charity emergency food in the last year, by one charity alone, the Trussel Trust. Shockingly, at least 4.7 million people living in food poverty in the UK, roughly one in thirteen - yet London has the fifth largest city economy in the world, is the world's leading financial centre, regarded as a command centre for the global economy. (Economy of London, Wikipedia.) The Trust cites the reason for people turning to food banks as the result of impoverishment by the welfare changes, with some recipients having had their only income completely severed. Ironically this by a Prime Minister and
[Biofuel] What Neocons Want from Ukraine Crisis
US and Russia fail to reach Ukraine deal on day of frantic diplomacy John Kerry and Sergey Lavrov to resume talks on Thursday as pressure grows on EU to pass punitive measures against Moscow http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/05/russia-us-talks-ukraine-crisis-kerry-lavrov?CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2 No War, says Putin as US Threatens Sanctions over Ukraine As US Secretary of State arrives in Kiev with 1 billion dollar loan package, Putin explains Russian intentions in Crimea Published on Tuesday, March 4, 2014 by Common Dreams http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2014/03/04 The fascist danger in Ukraine 6 March 2014 A politically sinister propaganda offensive is underway in the media to either deny the involvement of fascists in the US-backed coup in Ukraine or present their role as a marginal and insignificant detail. http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/06/pers-m06.html Leaked phone call suggests opposition snipers killed Maidan protesters 6 March 2014 http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/06/ukr2-m06.html Amid Ukraine crisis, US launches military escalation in Eastern Europe 6 March 2014 http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/06/ukra-m06.html --0-- http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/03/03-2 Published on Monday, March 3, 2014 by Consortium News What Neocons Want from Ukraine Crisis by Robert Parry President Barack Obama has been trying, mostly in secret, to craft a new foreign policy that relies heavily on cooperation with Russian President Vladimir Putin to tamp down confrontations in hotspots such as Iran and Syria. But Obama's timidity about publicly explaining this strategy has left it open to attack from powerful elements of Official Washington, including well-placed neocons and people in his own administration. The gravest threat to this Obama-Putin collaboration has now emerged in Ukraine, where a coalition of U.S. neocon operatives and neocon holdovers within the State Department fanned the flames of unrest in Ukraine, contributing to the violent overthrow of democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych and now to a military intervention by Russian troops in the Crimea, a region in southern Ukraine that historically was part of Russia. Though I'm told the Ukraine crisis caught Obama and Putin by surprise, the neocon determination to drive a wedge between the two leaders has been apparent for months, especially after Putin brokered a deal to head off U.S. military strikes against Syria last summer and helped get Iran to negotiate concessions on its nuclear program, both moves upsetting the neocons who had favored heightened confrontations. Putin also is reported to have verbally dressed down Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then-Saudi intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan over what Putin considered their provocative actions regarding the Syrian civil war. So, by disrupting neocon plans and offending Netanyahu and Bandar, the Russian president found himself squarely in the crosshairs of some very powerful people. If not for Putin, the neocons - along with Israel and Saudi Arabia - had hoped that Obama would launch military strikes on Syria and Iran that could open the door to more regime change across the Middle East, a dream at the center of neocon geopolitical strategy since the 1990s. This neocon strategy took shape after the display of U.S. high-tech warfare against Iraq in 1991 and the collapse of the Soviet Union later that year. U.S. neocons began believing in a new paradigm of a uni-polar world where U.S. edicts were law. The neocons felt this paradigm shift also meant that Israel would no longer need to put up with frustrating negotiations with the Palestinians. Rather than haggling over a two-state solution, U.S. neocons simply pressed for regime change in hostile Muslim countries that were assisting the Palestinians or Lebanon's Hezbollah. Iraq was first on the neocon hit list, but next came Syria and Iran. The overriding idea was that once the regimes assisting the Palestinians and Hezbollah were removed or neutralized, then Israel could dictate peace terms to the Palestinians who would have no choice but to accept what was on the table. U.S. neocons working on Netanyahu's campaign team in 1996, including Richard Perle and Douglas Feith, even formalized their bold new plan, which they outlined in a strategy paper, called A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm. The paper argued that only regime change in hostile Muslim countries could achieve the necessary clean break from the diplomatic standoffs that had followed inconclusive Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. In 1998, the neocon Project for the New American Century called for a U.S. invasion of Iraq, but President Bill Clinton refused to go along. The situation changed, however, when President George W. Bush took office and after the 9/11 attacks. Suddenly, the neocons had a Commander in Chief who agreed
Re: [Biofuel] The Anti-Empire Report #125
Hey, Dawie, howzit? The problem here is, of course, not that industrial secrets are being stolen, but that industrial secrets are being kept in the first place. -D Would you care to expand on that a little? Or even a lot? Not picking a squabble, I'd like to know how you see it. I didn't think it was an of course. Also, I've never managed to find anything I'd argue about with William Blum. Bests Keith From: Keith Addison ke...@journeytoforever.org To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org Sent: Saturday, 8 February 2014, 0:52 Subject: [Biofuel] The Anti-Empire Report #125 William Blum writes: ... So what do we have here? The NSA being used to steal industrial secrets; nothing to do with fighting terrorism. And the NSA stealing money and otherwise sabotaging unnamed financial systems, which may also represent gaining industrial advantage for the United States. Long-time readers of this report may have come to the realization that I'm not an ecstatic admirer of US foreign policy. But this stuff shocks even me. It's the gross pettiness of The World's Only Superpower. A careful search of the extensive Lexis-Nexis database failed to turn up a single American mainstream media source, print or broadcast, that mentioned this revelation. I found it only on those websites which carried my report, plus three other sites: Techdirt, Lawfare, and Crikey (First Digital Media). ... The EU has been complaining about the US using its spy network to steal industrial secrets for a long time. The NSA and Britain's GCHQ started construction of the Echelon global wide area network surveillance system in 1981, soon joined by Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and Hong Kong. Europe was excluded. Europe started complaining about industrial eavesdropping in the 80s. British journalist Duncan Campbell has covered this story from the start: Somebody's listening Duncan Campbell New Statesman August 1988 http://praxis.leedsmet.ac.uk/praxis/documents/echelon_enc.doc? Interception Capabilities 2000 (report written for the EU) Duncan Campbell http://www.cyber-rights.org/interception/stoa/interception_capabilities_2000.htm pdf: http://www.duncancampbell.org/menu/surveillance/echelon/IC2001-Paper1.pdf Up to now: Revealed: Britain's 'secret listening post in the heart of Berlin' Claims that GCHQ has maintained spying operations even after US pulled out DUNCAN CAMPBELL , CAHAL MILMO , KIM SENGUPTA , NIGEL MORRIS , TONY PATTERSON Tuesday 05 November 2013 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/revealed-britains-secret-listening-post-in-the-heart-of-berlin-8921548.html UPDATE: Germany calls in Britain's ambassador to demand explanation over 'secret Berlin listening post' http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/germany-calls-in-britains-ambassador-to-demand-explanation-over-secret-berlin-listening-post-8923082.html --0-- snip ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] Injector pumps Jetta TDI
Hi Ken I have been mostly a lurker in this group but lost interest when it became a political group rather than a DIY on biofuel. Well, that didn't happen. I'm not trying to be argumentative, but there's MUCH less politics (whatever that might be) now than there was when the group was at it's height, between 2001 and about 2009. I could easily prove that, but I'm sure there's no need. We said, quite a number of times, that politics is in the eye of the beholder, and it usually means stuff I don't agree with. Never mind - what happened was that by 2009 the list had covered the ground as far as DIY biofuels is concerned. Good job, well done. What would it be about DIY biofuels that you won't find in the list archives (http://www.mail-archive.com/sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org/), or at the Journey to Forever website's Biofuels section, or, even better, in JtF's two books on biofuels, Make your own ethanol fuel (http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_still.html) and The Biodiesel BIble (http://journeytoforever.org/biodieselbible.html)? Anyway, most of the the posts now are about biofuels or energy issues. (Thanks Darryl!) I like the content of the posts but there is just too much to read. Anyhow I have a technical question. Previously I had read disputes about whether biodiesel or SVO could be used in a Jetta. I bought my Jetta with the expressed desire to use biofuel but it because difficult because most of the sources of vegetable oil dried up so I just wound up using regular diesel. There are solutions to that. Anyway recently my injector pump broke and needed to be replaced. My repair guy said that he could not find a used or reliable reman pump because the veggie crowd is buying them all up because they are ruining them and having to replace them too often. I would like to hear comments on this. Is there any truth to this. No offence mesnt, but there are a couple of sad truths about SVO users, or many of them. First is that, though biodiesel is much better fuel, a very common reason for taking the SVO route instead of biodiesel is that people are afraid of titration. They often say it's all those dreadful poisonous chemicals they're afraid of, but usually it's because they don't want to learn titration (and as we know, the chemicals are perfectly safe when you know how). So they get an SVO kit (usually a half-assed kit), LOTS of filters, and use SVO - blithely unaware that you have to titrate the SVO anyway. If it titrates at more than 2.5 ml of 0.1% NaOH solution it's no good for SVO. This is spelled out loud and clear at the JtF SVO page (http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_svo.html). But they think filtering it will solve the problem. It won't. And hence, methinks, the run on ruined fuel pumps. All best Keith After about a month my repair guy managed to find a used one in North Carolina. Ken ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] The Anti-Empire Report #125
William Blum writes: ... So what do we have here? The NSA being used to steal industrial secrets; nothing to do with fighting terrorism. And the NSA stealing money and otherwise sabotaging unnamed financial systems, which may also represent gaining industrial advantage for the United States. Long-time readers of this report may have come to the realization that I'm not an ecstatic admirer of US foreign policy. But this stuff shocks even me. It's the gross pettiness of The World's Only Superpower. A careful search of the extensive Lexis-Nexis database failed to turn up a single American mainstream media source, print or broadcast, that mentioned this revelation. I found it only on those websites which carried my report, plus three other sites: Techdirt, Lawfare, and Crikey (First Digital Media). ... The EU has been complaining about the US using its spy network to steal industrial secrets for a long time. The NSA and Britain's GCHQ started construction of the Echelon global wide area network surveillance system in 1981, soon joined by Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and Hong Kong. Europe was excluded. Europe started complaining about industrial eavesdropping in the 80s. British journalist Duncan Campbell has covered this story from the start: Somebody's listening Duncan Campbell New Statesman August 1988 http://praxis.leedsmet.ac.uk/praxis/documents/echelon_enc.doc? Interception Capabilities 2000 (report written for the EU) Duncan Campbell http://www.cyber-rights.org/interception/stoa/interception_capabilities_2000.htm pdf: http://www.duncancampbell.org/menu/surveillance/echelon/IC2001-Paper1.pdf Up to now: Revealed: Britain's 'secret listening post in the heart of Berlin' Claims that GCHQ has maintained spying operations even after US pulled out DUNCAN CAMPBELL , CAHAL MILMO , KIM SENGUPTA , NIGEL MORRIS , TONY PATTERSON Tuesday 05 November 2013 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/revealed-britains-secret-listening-post-in-the-heart-of-berlin-8921548.html UPDATE: Germany calls in Britain's ambassador to demand explanation over 'secret Berlin listening post' http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/germany-calls-in-britains-ambassador-to-demand-explanation-over-secret-berlin-listening-post-8923082.html --0-- http://williamblum.org/aer/read/125 The Anti-Empire Report #125 By William Blum - Published February 4th, 2014 Bias in favor of the orthodox is frequently mistaken for 'objectivity'. Departures from this ideological orthodoxy are themselves dismissed as ideological. - Michael Parenti An exchange in January with Paul Farhi, Washington Post columnist, about coverage of US foreign policy: Dear Mr. Farhi, Now that you've done a study of al-Jazeera's political bias in supporting Mohamed Morsi in Egypt, is it perhaps now time for a study of the US mass media's bias on US foreign policy? And if you doubt the extent and depth of this bias, consider this: There are more than 1,400 daily newspapers in the United States. Can you name a single paper, or a single TV network, that was unequivocally opposed to the American wars carried out against Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Panama, Grenada, and Vietnam? Or even opposed to any two of these wars? How about one? In 1968, six years into the Vietnam war, the Boston Globe surveyed the editorial positions of 39 leading US papers concerning the war and found that none advocated a pull-out. Now, can you name an American daily newspaper or TV network that more or less gives any support to any US government ODE (Officially Designated Enemy)? Like Hugo Chávez of Venezuela or his successor, Nicolás Maduro; Fidel or Raúl Castro of Cuba; Bashar al-Assad of Syria; Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran; Rafael Correa of Ecuador; or Evo Morales of Bolivia? I mean that presents the ODE's point of view in a reasonably fair manner most of the time? Or any ODE of the recent past like Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia, Moammar Gaddafi of Libya, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, or Jean-Bertrand Aristide of Haiti? Who in the mainstream media supports Hamas of Gaza? Or Hezbollah of Lebanon? Who in the mainstream media is outspokenly critical of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians? And keeps his or her job? Who in the mainstream media treats Julian Assange or Chelsea Manning as the heroes they are? And this same mainstream media tell us that Cuba, Venezuela, Ecuador, et al. do not have a real opposition media. The ideology of the American mainstream media is the belief that they don't have any ideology; that they are instead what they call objective. I submit that there is something more important in journalism than objectivity. It is capturing the essence, or the truth, if you will, with the proper context and history. This can, as well, serve as enlightenment. It's been said that the political spectrum concerning US foreign policy in the America mainstream media runs the gamut from A to B.
[Biofuel] Fwd: Farming Matters - Family farming: a way of life
Subject: Farming Matters - 29.4 - Family farming: a way of life From: Farming Matters magazine webmas...@ileia.nl To: ke...@journeytoforever.org Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 18:32:24 +0100 If you are having trouble viewing this newsletter, click here for an http://www.agriculturesnetwork.org/farmingmatters/emag/fm-dec-2013online version. Farming Matters - Family farming: a way of life December 2013 | Vol. 29 no. 4 The United Nations declared 2014 as the International Year of Family Farming, recognising the multiple social, economic, environmental and cultural functions of family farmers. Many family farmers have proven to be innovative and resilient under the right socio-political framework and conditions - especially when supported by the right policies. Using agro-ecological practices, family farmers can exert a large degree of autonomy and still be part of the global economy - working with, rather than against nature. They pool their labour and resources, and increase their yields. They organise themselves and make their voices heard. They build their own educational spaces where they learn from each other and teach others. Women play a key role in these strategies. This issue of Farming Matters highlights inspiring experiences of strengthening family farming, while maintaining the values and knowledge that characterise this particular and resilient type of agriculture. http://www.agriculturesnetwork.org/farmingmatters/subscribe/?utm_source=mag-dec-2013utm_medium=Emailutm_content=Subscribeutm_campaign=29-4 http://www.agriculturesnetwork.org/magazines/global/family-farming http://www.agriculturesnetwork.org/farmingmatters/emag/fm-dec-2013/resolveuid/8a2ba11a92b5d8dbf568d82a4ba1e082?utm_source=mag-dec-2013utm_medium=Emailutm_content=Readutm_campaign=29-4Read | http://www.agriculturesnetwork.org/magazines/global/family-farming/at_download/magazineissue_pdf?utm_source=mag-dec-2013utm_medium=Emailutm_content=Downloadutm_campaign=29-4Download | http://issuu.com/agricultures/docs/29_4_family_farming?mode=windowPreview http://www.agriculturesnetwork.org/farmingmatters/emag/fm-dec-2013/resolveuid/f434ce005b759951f57cc75c25e3c50b?utm_source=mag-dec-2013utm_medium=Emailutm_content=Feature1utm_campaign=29-4 The mother of our breath Palauan traditional farming shows how agriculture, family values and culture are interconnected. Facing challenges, family farmers selectively adopt and adapt new approaches while trying to maintain their values. To strengthen their voice and their position, the small-scale family farms of these islands are collectively standing up for their rights and calling for support to maintain important (agri)cultural customs. http://www.agriculturesnetwork.org/farmingmatters/emag/fm-dec-2013/resolveuid/f434ce005b759951f57cc75c25e3c50b?utm_source=mag-dec-2013utm_medium=Emailutm_content=Feature1utm_campaign=29-4Read more http://www.agriculturesnetwork.org/farmingmatters/emag/fm-dec-2013/resolveuid/d25870795b911227367a68e0fbda469e?utm_source=mag-dec-2013utm_medium=Emailutm_content=Feature2utm_campaign=29-4 We are a political and economic force In countries where big businesses receive favourable treatment, peasants, indigenous peoples and pastoralists fight for their survival. Deo Sumaj, one of the leaders of the Peasant Movement of Santiago del Estero Via Campesina in Argentina, talks about this struggle against threats such as land grabbing, and about ways the peasant movement builds food sovereignty. http://www.agriculturesnetwork.org/farmingmatters/emag/fm-dec-2013/resolveuid/d25870795b911227367a68e0fbda469e?utm_source=mag-dec-2013utm_medium=Emailutm_content=Feature2utm_campaign=29-4Read more http://www.agriculturesnetwork.org/farmingmatters/emag/fm-dec-2013/resolveuid/73fb7ebc06ae999ea81ef81653146158?utm_source=mag-dec-2013utm_medium=Emailutm_content=Feature3utm_campaign=29-4 From conflicts to profitable alliances In the North-West Region of Cameroon, conflicts have been increasing between sedentary family farmers and pastoral communities as pressure on the available land increases. Farmer-pastoralist alliances are helping to resolve the conflicts by transforming the relationships between these families. By engaging in dialogue, both groups can benefit from synergies between their different farming systems. http://www.agriculturesnetwork.org/farmingmatters/emag/fm-dec-2013/resolveuid/73fb7ebc06ae999ea81ef81653146158?utm_source=mag-dec-2013utm_medium=Emailutm_content=Feature3utm_campaign=29-4Read more AND MORE - http://www.agriculturesnetwork.org/farmingmatters/emag/fm-dec-2013/resolveuid/32dac6f8313f166f71b0e409256cb67c?utm_source=mag-dec-2013utm_medium=Emailutm_content=Farmers-in-focusutm_campaign=29-4Farmers in Focus - http://www.agriculturesnetwork.org/farmingmatters/emag/fm-dec-2013/resolveuid/de071098da59faaefa79886d85fbf497?utm_source=mag-dec-2013utm_medium=Emailutm_content=Theme-overviewutm_campaign=29-4Theme
[Biofuel] Conservative Donors Pump $1 Billion A Year Into Climate Denying Groups, Study Finds
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/12/22/3099141/climate-denying-groups-funding/# Conservative Donors Pump $1 Billion A Year Into Climate Denying Groups, Study Finds BY KILEY KROH ON DECEMBER 22, 2013 Organizations that actively block efforts to address climate change are funded by a large network of conservative donors to the tune of nearly $1 billion a year, according to the first in-depth study into the dark money that fuels the denial effort. The study http://www.drexel.edu/~/media/Files/now/pdfs/Institutionalizing%20Delay%20-%20Climatic%20Change.ashx, published Friday in the journal Climatic Change, analyzed the income of 91 think tanks, advocacy groups, and industry associations, funded by 140 different foundations, that work to oppose action on climate change. The study's author, Robert Brulle, refers to these organizations as the climate change counter-movement, and concludes that their outsized influence has not only played a major role in confounding public understanding of climate science, but also successfully delayed meaningful government policy actions to address the issue. It is not just a couple of rogue individuals doing this, Brulle told the Guardian. This is a large-scale political effort. From 2003 to 2010, the organizations had a total income of more than $7 billion, averaging out to over $900 million per year. Over the eight year span, their funding has increased by 13 percent and in 2010, total funding for the organizations was nearly $1.2 billion. An important caveat, as Brulle notes, is that many of the organizations are multi-purpose, so not all of the income was devoted to anti-climate change initiatives. Brulle defines the climate change counter-movement as the organized effort to prevent policies that will limit the carbon pollution emissions that drive man-made climate change. Their efforts cover a range of activities, from lobbying to political contributions to media campaigns that attempt to discredit the scientific consensus around global warming. The 91 groups include trade associations, think tanks, and advocacy organizations. The vast majority of the groups - 78 percent - were registered as charitable organizations and enjoyed considerable tax breaks. The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and the Heritage Foundation, two of the best-known conservative think tanks in the U.S., were also among the top recipients of funding. AEI received 16 percent of the total grants that were made to organizations active in the climate change counter-movement and Heritage was close behind, receiving 14 percent of total grants. The largest and most consistent funders of organizations leading the charge on climate change denial are a number of well-known conservative foundations, such as the Searle Freedom Trust, the John William Pope Foundation, the Howard Charitable Foundation and the Sarah Scaife Foundation. A key shift Brulle uncovered is that traditionally high-profile funders of climate denial, such as the Koch brothers and ExxonMobil, have moved away from publicly funding organizations that oppose action on climate change. The single-largest funders are the combined foundations Donors Trust/Donors Capital Fund, providing more than $78 million in funding to the groups over the eight year span. These donor directed foundations make grants on behalf of an individual or corporation, thereby funding their preferred causes while keeping their identity a secret. As a result, writes Brulle, these two philanthropic organizations form a black box that conceals the identity of contributors to various CCCM organizations. The Donor Trust/Capital giving increased dramatically over the period of time Brulle examined, from just 3.3 percent in 2003 to 23.7 percent in 2010. At the same time, the funding from Koch Affiliated Foundations and ExxonMobil Foundation declined significantly, with Exxon effectively ending public funding of climate change counter-movement groups in 2007. Just as it's impossible to know whether Koch Foundations and ExxonMobil are channeling their climate-denying funds through third party groups such as Donors Trust, most funding for denial efforts is untraceable. Despite extensive data compilation and analyses, only a fraction of the hundreds of millions in contributions to climate change denying organizations can be specifically accounted for from public records. According to Brulle, approximately 75 percent of the income of these organizations comes from unidentifiable sources. Despite the significant amount of dark money being funneled into efforts that seek to obstruct action on climate change or misinform the public, Brulle concludes that sufficient evidence exists that a number of major conservative foundations have clearly played a crucial role in the development and maintenance of the [climate change counter-movement]. The result is not just an obfuscation of fact and
[Biofuel] NSA Program Stopped No Terror Attacks, Says White House Panel Member
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37174.htm NSA Program Stopped No Terror Attacks, Says White House Panel Member By Michael Isikoff December 20, 2013 Information Clearing House - NBC News - A member of the White House review panel on NSA surveillance said he was absolutely surprised when he discovered the agency's lack of evidence that the bulk collection of telephone call records had thwarted any terrorist attacks. It was, 'Huh, hello? What are we doing here?' said Geoffrey Stone, a University of Chicago law professor, in an interview with NBC News. The results were very thin. While Stone said the mass collection of telephone call records was a logical program from the NSA's perspective, one question the White House panel was seeking to answer was whether it had actually stopped any [terror attacks] that might have been really big. We found none, said Stone. Under the NSA program, first revealed by ex-contractor Edward Snowden, the agency collects in bulk the records of the time and duration of phone calls made by persons inside the United States. Stone was one of five members of the White House review panel - and the only one without any intelligence community experience - that this week produced a sweeping report recommending that the NSA's collection of phone call records be terminated to protect Americans' privacy rights. The panel made that recommendation after concluding that the program was not essential in preventing attacks. That was stunning. That was the ballgame, said one congressional intelligence official, who asked not to be publicly identified. It flies in the face of everything that they have tossed at us. Despite the panel's conclusions, Stone strongly rejected the idea they justified Snowden's actions in leaking the NSA documents about the phone collection. Suppose someone decides we need gun control and they go out and kill 15 kids and then a state enacts gun control? Stone said, using an analogy he acknowledged was somewhat inflammatory. What Snowden did, Stone said, was put the country at risk. My emphatic view, he said, is that a person who has access to classified information -- the revelation of which could damage national security -- should never take it upon himself to reveal that information. Stone added, however, that he would not necessarily reject granting an amnesty to Snowden in exchange for the return of all his documents, as was recently suggested by a top NSA official. It's a hostage situation, said Stone. Deciding whether to negotiate with him to get all his documents back was a pragmatic judgment. I see no principled reason not to do that. The conclusions of the panel's reports were at direct odds with public statements by President Barack Obama and U.S. intelligence officials. Lives have been saved, Obama told reporters last June, referring to the bulk collection program and another program that intercepts communications overseas. We know of at least 50 threats that have been averted because of this information. But in one little-noticed footnote in its report, the White House panel said the telephone records collection program - known as Section 215, based on the provision of the U.S. Patriot Act that provided the legal basis for it - had made only a modest contribution to the nation's security. The report said that there has been no instance in which NSA could say with confidence that the outcome [of a terror investigation] would have been any different without the program. The panel's findings echoed that of U.S. Judge Richard Leon, who in a ruling this week found the bulk collection program to be unconstitutional. Leon said that government officials were unable to cite a single instance in which analysis of the NSA's bulk collection metadata collection actually stopped an imminent attack, or otherwise aided the Government in achieving any objective that was time-sensitive in nature. Stone declined to comment on the accuracy of public statements by U.S. intelligence officials about the telephone collection program, but said that when they referred to successes they seemed to be mixing the results of domestic metadata collection with the intelligence derived from the separate, and less controversial, NSA program, known as 702, to intercept communications overseas. The comparison between 702 overseas interceptions and 215 bulk metadata collection was night and day, said Stone. With 702, the record is very impressive. It's no doubt the nation is safer and spared potential attacks because of 702. There was nothing like that for 215. We asked the question and they [the NSA] gave us the data. They were very straight about it. He also said one reason the telephone records program is not effective is because, contrary to the claims of critics, it actually does not collect a record of every American's phone call. Although the NSA does collect metadata
Re: [Biofuel] The great biofuels scandal - Telegraph
Hi all Bjorn Lomborg is, was, or used to be into various shades of global warming denial, depending, I think, on which way the wind's blowing. Recent big winds may have deepened his apparent shade of green. Professional contrarian, author of the infamous The Sceptical Environmentalist. He's a statistician, without environmental qualifications. At a promotional reading of his book in London in 2001 he had a cream pie thrown in his face by none other than Mark Lynas - he who recently changed coats to become a supporter of nuclear power. Maybe they deserve each other. I don't think we deserve either of them. More here: http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=sustainablelorgbiofuel%40lists.sustainablelists.orgq=Lomborg All best Keith On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Bjørn Lomborg wrote: The costs of global climate policies is running at about $1billion every day. Wind turbines cost 10 times the estimated benefits in terms of emissions cuts, and solar panels cost close to 100 times the benefits. Yet, with spending on these technologies of about £136 billion annually, there are a lot of interests in keeping the tap open. But opposition to the rampant proliferation of biofuels also shows the way to a more rational climate policy. If we can stop the increase in biofuels we can save lives, save money, and start finding better ways to help. This is about investing in more productive agriculture that can feed more people more cheaply while freeing up space for wildlife. It seems to give a fairly rational explanation of how bad mega-biofuels are. then concludes with these two paragraphs which all of a sudden attack wind turbines and solar panels without giving any data to back up their fairly wild claims. And gives a fairly vague sentence about more production agriculture. Does that mean urban farms, edible landscapes or more intensive chemical use and GMO crops, or what I was pretty on to agreeing with everything he said till the end, but now I kind of question exactly where he's coming from and what his agenda is... Z ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Plastic forest
http://livinggreenmag.com/2013/12/09/home-garden/the-great-annual-christmas-tree-debate-real-vs-artificial-aka-fake/ The Great Annual Christmas Tree Debate: Real vs. Artificial (aka Fake) December 9, 2013 By Richard Kujawski, Managing Editor Decorating for the holidays often involves a Christmas tree. Each year, Americans buy about 30 million real trees and about 13 million fake ones. However, since artificial trees are usually reused, the number of artificial trees actually strung up each year is about 50 million. But which choice is greener-cutting down a living tree that sequesters carbon, or buying a plastic one from China that could last 6 or more years but still end up in a landfill? The right environmental choice may not be clear-cut. Brief History of the Artificial Tree The first artificial tree, according to some source, is the wooden tree-shaped pyramid with candles built by a church in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania in 1747. But much more attention was paid to the feather trees first built in the 1880s in Germany, where deforestation encouraged an alternative to the traditional tannenbaum. Feather trees were made of green-dyed goose feathers attached to wire branches around a thin wooden post that served as the tree trunk. Candles and ornaments were also hung. Then in 1930 the Addis Brush Company created an artificial Christmas tree made from the same animal-hair bristles used for their toilet brushes, but dyed green. The bristle trees were less flammable and sturdier than feather trees. Aluminum trees showed up around 1958 and were sold for about 20 years. Ironically, they were most popular in 1965, when A Charlie Brown Christmas aired for the first time. The negative treatment of the tree and poor Charlie Brown changed the public's mind about their cool factor. Today, most artificial trees are made of petroleum-based PVC, with carcinogens produced during production. Fake trees may also contain lead that can be spread indoors. If pre-decorated, they can't be recycled at the end of their lifecycle. What the Trade Groups That Represent Christmas Trees Have to Say Both trees have plusses and minuses in the eco-footprint department. And who better to talk about each tree's strength (and point out the shortcomings of the other) than their respective trade associations. The National Christmas Tree Association (www.realchristmastrees.org) represents the farms and growers of real tree. The website doesn't say much about artificial trees except that Real Christmas Trees are not just fragrant and beautiful, they are also better for the environment than fake trees, inexpensive, safe, easy to care for, and an excellent choice for your family's traditional Christmas celebration. The White House Christmas Tree is real, as the site points out, and the nonprofit supports Trees for Troops, which will provides18,000 free, farm-grown Christmas Trees to armed forces members and their families in the U.S. and overseas. The selecting, caring for, and recycling of a real tree is explained on the site. The American Christmas Tree Association (www.christmastreeassociation.org) represents the interests of the artificial trees in this country-which have about an 85 percent chance of having been made in China. Their site has lots of scare content about real trees catching fire, and making sure bugs aren't in that real tree you were just about to buy. What is not mentioned is the fact that nearly all fake trees are made from harmful plastics that are non-recyclable. (To find an artificial tree made in the USA, do an internet search for Artificial Christmas trees made in USA. Pros and Cons So which tree is naughty and which is nice? Many experts point out that the carbon footprint and overall environmental impact is minimal compared to what's caused by our daily driving. So you could do penance for a few days by biking or carpooling and then enjoy the rest of the holiday season. Perhaps the real choice to make is: Which will bring more enjoyment and happiness. For some, the guilt of cutting down a tree drives them toward fake needles, which can also be more convenient. For others, the thought of replacing natural with artificial is not their idea of a joyous noel. However, for those ruled by their head and not their heart, here are some factoids gathered from various sources, including the New York Times, EarthTalk, and Earth911. * Real trees are primarily grown on farms to minimize deforestation. These farms are often marginal for crops but work for trees, and preserve green spaces. However, pesticides and chemicals are used to some amount. * Real trees generate oxygen and absorb carbon from the air while alive. Artificial trees create factory pollution. * Real trees are often recycled into mulch. They also leave a mess of needles, and require regular watering-especially if you want to minimize needle
[Biofuel] Journal Retracts Independent Study Linking Monsanto GMO Corn to Cancer in Rats
Argentine Protesters vs Monsanto: The Monster Is Right on Top of Us Monday, 09 December 2013 13:41 By Fabiana Frayssinet, Inter Press Service | Report http://truth-out.org/news/item/20526-argentine-protesters-vs-monsanto-the-monster-is-right-on-top-of-us --0-- http://truth-out.org/news/item/20516-in-depth-journal-retracts-independent-study-linking-monsanto-gmo-corn-to-cancer-in-rats In Depth: Journal Retracts Independent Study Linking Monsanto GMO Corn to Cancer in Rats Monday, 09 December 2013 13:19 By Mike Ludwig, Truthout | Report Last September, an alarming study rocketed through media and unleashed a storm of controversy. French researchers appeared to have uncovered a link between a Monsanto genetically engineered corn variety and cancer in lab rats. Now, more than a year later, a respected American scientific journal has taken a black eye and retracted the study, reigniting a global debate that raises serious questions about the media's coverage of biotechnology research and the deep divisions between industry-backed researchers and independent scientists. The two-year study, conducted by a team lead by French biotech critic Gilles-Eric Séralini of the University of Caen, found that groups of lab rats fed a lifetime diet of either Monsanto's NK603 corn (NK603 is treated with Roundup herbicide) or exposed to varying levels of Roundup herbicide in drinking water died earlier and had higher rates of tumors and organ damage than controls. NK603 is a genetically modified organism, or GMO, that is bioengineered to tolerate Roundup. On November 28, the Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology officially retracted the study, effectively removing Séralini's findings from the realm of accepted science. In a statement, chief editor, A. Wallace Hayes, echoed critiques from scientists around the world who pointed out that Séralini did not experiment on enough rats to support his explosive cancer claims, and the Sprague Dawley lab rats used in the study are prone to developing tumors if allowed to live long enough. Independent scientists, however, say the Sprague Dawley breed is an industry standard for toxicity research, and while the Séralini study is not perfect, there is no legitimate reason to remove it from scientific debate. Séralini and his team refused an offer from Hayes to voluntarily retract the study and continue to publically defend their findings. Inconclusive, But Not Incorrect Hayes said that he found no evidence of fraud or intentional misrepresentation of the data, but after reviewing Séralini's raw data, determined the results were not incorrect, but inconclusive, and therefore not suitable for publication. Séralini's supporters were quick to point out that Hayes' journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics and guidelines issued by the committee state that editors should only consider retracting a study if there is evidence of plagiarism, unethical research, or unreliable findings based on misconduct or honest error. Simply being inconclusive does not make the cut. You don't get papers retracted for this, said Michael Hansen, a biotechnology analyst for Consumers Union, which publishes Consumer Reports. Hansen added that plenty of published scientific studies are inconclusive, and the retraction borders on scientific censorship. Here's where the Séralini Affair gets tricky. The French team never definitively concluded that Monsanto products caused bulging tumors in the rats; his team simply reported the high tumor rates along with its analysis of kidney and organ damage. The project was a long-term toxicity study model of a 90-day Monsanto safety study, which also used Sprague Dawley rats, not a carcinogenicity study, which would have required a larger number of lab rats. In response to heaping criticism, Séralini's team members said they had simply pointed out the alarming tumor data and called for further research on the safety of GMO corn. While ANSES, the French food safety authority, joined other European food regulators and scientific academies in dismissing the study, the French officials also called attention to the originality and agreed that more research should be done on the long-term health effects of consuming GMO crops and the pesticides associated with them. The European Commission has also considered funding a long-term feeding study on Monsanto corn. Séralini did hype the cancer findings in the media while simultaneously releasing a book on his GMO research. The study was initially released to journalists under a heavily criticized embargo and included grotesque images of rats with giant tumors. The breaking news generated alarming headlines around the world, setting off a general panic among politicians and regulators in several countries where GMOs are unpopular. France launched an investigation into the findings, and Russia declared a temporary ban on NK603 while food
[Biofuel] Skyrocketing energy prices increase Britain's winter death rate
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/12/10/wint-d10.html Skyrocketing energy prices increase Britain's winter death rate By Zach Reed 10 December 2013 An estimated 31,100 excess deaths occurred in Britain last winter according to the Office of National Statistics (ONS)-a rise of almost a third. Excess winter deaths are the number of additional deaths occurring between December and March in comparison with the rest of the year. March 2013 was the coldest recorded since 1962, with an average monthly temperature of 2.6°C (36.7°F) Most of the deaths, some 25,600, were of people over 75 years of age and largely the result of cold-related illnesses affecting the heart and respiratory systems. The ONS figures show that there has been a tendency for excess winter deaths to increase since 2005, reversing a statistical decline over the previous 60 years. Studies have shown that excess winter deaths are primarily the result of social and housing conditions. Both England and Wales witness a higher winter death rate compared to other European countries where weather conditions are much more severe. A report by the World Health Organisation estimated that a third of excess winter deaths are due to people living in poorly heated homes. The skyrocketing cost of gas and electricity has been a big contributory factor. Government guidance in Britain advises living rooms should be heated to at least 21°C (70°F) and bedrooms to 18°C (64°F). It warns that sustained lower temperatures cause physiological effects on the body that drastically increase the chance of death in people who are physically at risk. Research has found that lower indoor temperatures cause increased blood pressure, thickening of the blood leading to clots (thrombosis), and increased risk of respiratory infections and flu due to lowering the body's immunity system, which can lead to more serious health issues such as bronchitis and pneumonia. Most telling of all, research has linked lower indoor temperatures to increased cardiovascular disease, which accounts for almost half of all excess winter deaths. The number of people becoming ill due to cold homes has also led to increased pressure on hospitals and contributed to the crisis that has engulfed the Accident and Emergency service. The Herald reported that hospital wards were so short of beds to treat patients that hundreds were forced to wait 12 hours for one to become available, further raising the chance of death. The ONS report does not probe the link between cold homes and excess winter deaths. Over the last few years, there has been an ever-increasing rate of fuel poverty in Britain-from just under 1.5 million people in 2003 to 6 million today. It is expected that in the next three years, this will increase by another 3 million. There is every reason to believe that this is a gross underestimation of the real situation. A recent survey by the Trussell Trust found that 37 percent of British families are forced to choose between eating or heating during the winter period. At the same time, the energy industry regulator Ofgem reported that the Big Six energy suppliers saw their profits rise by 75 percent last year after raising prices by almost 20 percent. Prices have increased tenfold in the last four years. The situation is compounded by the huge number of houses that lack adequate insulation and efficient heating. Ed Matthew of the Energy Bill Revolution organisation points out that in Germany 250,000 homes were insulated in just one year, whereas in the UK only 219 homes had been insulated through the government's Green Deal, despite collecting £1.5 billion a year from carbon taxes. Calling the deaths unnecessary, preventable and a damning indictment of our failure to address the scandal of cold homes in this country, Age UK's charity director, Caroline Abrahams, blamed the deaths on poor insulation and high energy costs. She added that those living in the coldest homes are three times more likely to die a preventable death than those living in warmers ones. The only sustainable solution to the scourge of fuel poverty and escalating energy prices is a major overhaul of our poorly insulated housing, to ensure that cold homes are a thing of the past. In 21st Century Britain, older people's lives should not be at the mercy of the weather, Abrahams concluded. Abrahams's pleas will fall on deaf ears. They are diametrically opposed to the programme being carried out by the Conservative/Liberal-Democrat coalition. The dire situation facing an ever-increasing proportion of society is the direct outcome of the attacks on wages, jobs and welfare while the privatised energy sector is given a free hand to extort millions for private profit. This situation is set to worsen. The government is clearing the way for the energy giants to increase their profits further by cutting Green levies on power companies and
[Biofuel] Seymour Hersh exposes US government lies on Syrian sarin attack
Seymour Hersh: Obama Cherry-Picked Intelligence on Syrian Chemical Attack to Justify US Strike Monday, 09 December 2013 12:30 By Amy Goodman, Democracy Now! | Video Interview http://truth-out.org/news/item/20523-seymour-hersh-obama-cherry-picked-intelligence-on-syrian-chemical-attack-to-justify-us-strike New Yorker, Washington Post Passed On Seymour Hersh Syria Report By Michael Calderone December 09, 2013 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37059.htm --0-- http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/12/10/pers-d10.html Seymour Hersh exposes US government lies on Syrian sarin attack 10 December 2013 Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh has published an article demonstrating that the US government and President Barack Obama knowingly lied when they claimed that the Syrian government had carried out a sarin gas attack on insurgent-held areas last August. Hersh's detailed account, based on information provided by current and former US intelligence and military officials, was published Sunday in the London Review of Books. The article, entitled Whose sarin?, exposes as a calculated fraud the propaganda churned out day after day by the administration and uncritically repeated by the media for a period of several weeks to provide a pretext for a military attack on the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The article also reveals sharp differences within the state apparatus over the launching of an air war that one high-level special operations adviser said would have been like providing close air support for [Al Qaeda-affiliated] al-Nusra. In the end, internal differences over the launching of direct military action, compounded by massive popular opposition to another unprovoked war in the Middle East, led the administration to pull back and accept a Russian plan for the dismantling of Syrian chemical weapons. This was followed by the opening of talks with Syria's main ally in the region, Iran. Hersh's account of systematic manipulation of intelligence aimed at dragging the American people into yet another war based on lies underscores the fact that Obama's retreat in Syria by no means signaled a turn away from militarism. Rather, it reflected a provisional change in tactics in relation to US hegemonic aims in the oil-rich Middle East, and a decision to focus more diplomatic and military resources on Washington's drive to isolate and contain what it considers more critical antagonists: Russia and, above all, China. Barack Obama, Hersh writes, did not tell the whole story this autumn when he tried to make the case that Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical weapons attack near Damascus on 21 August. In some instances, he omitted important intelligence, and in others he presented assumptions as facts. Most significant, he failed to acknowledge something known to the US intelligence community: that the Syrian army is not the only party in the country's civil war with access to sarin, the nerve gas that a UN study concluded-without assessing responsibility-had been used in the rocket attack. In the months before the attack, the American intelligence agencies produced a series of highly classified reports, culminating in a formal Operations Order-a planning document that precedes a ground invasion-citing evidence that the al-Nusra Front, a jihadi group affiliated with Al Qaeda, had mastered the mechanics of creating sarin and was capable of manufacturing it in quantity. When the attack occurred, al-Nusra should have been a suspect, but the administration cherry-picked intelligence to justify a strike against Assad. Hersh cites Obama's nationally televised speech on September 10 in which he categorically asserted, We know the Assad regime was responsible for a sarin gas attack on Eastern Ghouta that reportedly killed hundreds of people. In that speech, Obama claimed that US intelligence had tracked Syrian government preparations for the attack for several days before it occurred. As Hersh documents, citing his intelligence and military sources (who are not named for obvious reasons), the US government had no advance warning of the sarin attack. Instead, it used intelligence on a previous Syrian nerve gas dry run to concoct a scenario and present it as real-time intelligence of the August 21 attack. Hersh cites one of his sources as comparing this falsification of intelligence with the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident, in which the Johnson administration reversed the sequence of National Security Agency intercepts to justify the launching of bomb attacks on North Vietnam. Perhaps even more damning than the cherry-picking and falsification of intelligence was the decision to ignore and conceal a series of intelligence reports the previous spring and summer that had concluded the Western-backed and jihadi-dominated rebels had the capability to acquire and use sarin. These included CIA
[Biofuel] The Hijacking of Mandela's Legacy
If Nelson Mandela Really Had Won, He Wouldn't Be Seen as a Universal Hero Mandela must have died a bitter man. To honor his legacy, we should focus on the unfulfilled promises his leadership gave rise to http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/12/09-1 Published on Monday, December 9, 2013 by The Guardian Mandela: Hero Thwarted Posted on Dec 8, 2013 By Alexander Reed Kelly http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/truthdigger_of_the_week_nelson_mandela_20131207 --0-- http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37065.htm The Hijacking of Mandela's Legacy By Pepe Escobar December 09, 2013 Information Clearing House - Beware of strangers bearing gifts. The gift is the ongoing, frantic canonization of Nelson Mandela. The strangers are the 0.0001 percent, that fraction of the global elite that's really in control (media naturally included). It's a Tower of Babel of tributes piled up in layer upon layer of hypocrisy - from the US to Israel and from France to Britain. What must absolutely be buried under the tower is that the apartheid regime in South Africa was sponsored and avidly defended by the West until, literally, it was about to crumble under the weight of its own contradictions. The only thing that had really mattered was South Africa's capitalist economy and immense resources, and the role of Pretoria in fighting communism. Apartheid was, at best, a nuisance. Mandela is being allowed sainthood by the 0.0001% because he extended a hand to the white oppressor who kept him in jail for 27 years. And because he accepted - in the name of national reconciliation - that no apartheid killers would be tried, unlike the Nazis. Among the cataracts of emotional tributes and the crass marketization of the icon, there's barely a peep in Western corporate media about Mandela's firm refusal to ditch armed struggle against apartheid (if he had done so, he would not have been jailed for 27 years); his gratitude towards Fidel Castro's Cuba - which always supported the people of Angola, Namibia and South Africa fighting apartheid; and his perennial support for the liberation struggle in Palestine. Young generations, especially, must be made aware that during the Cold War, any organization fighting for the freedom of the oppressed in the developing world was dubbed terrorist; that was the Cold War version of the war on terror. Only at the end of the 20th century was the fight against apartheid accepted as a supreme moral cause; and Mandela, of course, rightfully became the universal face of the cause. It's easy to forget that conservative messiah Ronald Reagan - who enthusiastically hailed the precursors of al-Qaeda as freedom fighters - fiercely opposed the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act because, what else, the African National Congress (ANC) was considered a terrorist organization (on top of Washington branding the ANC as communists). The same applied to a then-Republican Congressman from Wyoming who later would turn into a Darth Vader replicant, Dick Cheney. As for Israel, it even offered one of its nuclear weapons to the Afrikaners in Pretoria - presumably to wipe assorted African commies off the map. In his notorious 1990 visit to the US, now as a free man, Mandela duly praised Fidel, PLO chairman Yasser Arafat and Col. Gaddafi as his comrades in arms: There is no reason whatsoever why we should have any hesitation about hailing their commitment to human rights. Washington/Wall Street was livid. And this was Mandela's take, in early 2003, on the by then inevitable invasion of Iraq and the wider war on terror; If there is a country that has committed unspeakable atrocities in the world, it is the United States of America. No wonder he was kept on the US government terrorist list until as late as 2008. From terrorism to sainthood In the early 1960s - when, by the way, the US itself was practicing apartheid in the South - it would be hard to predict to what extent Madiba (his clan name), the dandy lawyer and lover of boxing with an authoritarian character streak, would adopt Gandhi's non-violence strategy to end up forging an exceptional destiny graphically embodying the political will to transform society. Yet the seeds of Invictus were already there. The fascinating complexity of Mandela is that he was essentially a democratic socialist. Certainly not a capitalist. And not a pacifist either; on the contrary, he would accept violence as a means to an end. In his books and countless speeches, he always admitted his flaws. His soul must be smirking now at all the adulation. Arguably, without Mandela, Barack Obama would never have reached the White House; he admitted on the record that his first political act was at an anti-apartheid demonstration. But let's make it clear: Mr. Obama, you're no Nelson Mandela. To summarize an extremely complex process, in the death throes of apartheid, the regime was mired in massive corruption, hardcore
[Biofuel] Shooting the Messenger
Chickens Coming Home To Roost By Charles P. Pierce at 10:15am http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/trans-pacific-partnership-documents-released-120913 The Guardian Falls Under the Shadow of McCarthyism The persecution of the UK newspaper over the NSA espionage case shows how the Cameron administration has moved away from moderation By Walter Oppenheimer December 09, 2013 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37054.htm --0-- http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/shooting_the_messenger_20131208 Shooting the Messenger Posted on Dec 8, 2013 By Chris Hedges There is a deeply misguided attempt to sacrifice Julian Assange, WikiLeaks, Chelsea Manning and Jeremy Hammond on the altar of the security and surveillance state to justify the leaks made by Edward Snowden. It is argued that Snowden, in exposing the National Security Agency's global spying operation, judiciously and carefully leaked his information through the media, whereas WikiLeaks, Assange, Manning and Hammond provided troves of raw material to the public with no editing and little redaction and assessment. Thus, Snowden is somehow legitimate while WikiLeaks, Assange, Manning and Hammond are not. I have never understood it, said Michael Ratner, who is the U.S. lawyer for WikiLeaks and Assange and who I spoke with Saturday in New York City. Why is Snowden looked at by some as the white hat while Manning, Hammond, WikiLeaks and Julian Assange as black hats? One explanation is that much of the mainstream media has tried to pin a dumping charge on the latter group, as if somehow giving the public and journalists open access to the raw documents is irresponsible and not journalism. It sounds to me like the so-called Fourth Estate protecting its jobs and 'legitimacy.' There is a need for both. All of us should see the raw documents. We also need journalists to write about them. Raw documents open to the world give journalists in other countries the chance to examine them in their own context and write from their perspectives. We are still seeing many stories based on the WikiLeaks documents. We should not have it any other way. Perhaps another factor may be that Snowden's revelations concern the surveillance of us. The WikiLeaks/Assange/Manning disclosures tell us more about our war crimes against others. And many Americans do not seem to care about that. The charge that the WikiLeaks dump was somehow more damaging to the security and surveillance state because it was unedited, however, is false. Snowden's revelations to the journalist Glenn Greenwald, which are ongoing, have been far more devastating to the security apparatus than the material provided by Manning. Among the four larger data sets released by Manning-collectively 735,614 documents-only 223 documents were charged against the Army private first class under reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, as stated in the Espionage Act. Specifically there were 116 diplomatic cables, 102 Army field reports from Iraq and Afghanistan, and five Guantanamo Bay detainee assessment briefs, as the journalist Alexa O'Brien has reported. As O'Brien points out, many of the individual documents that resulted in charges have not been identified and those that have been are turning out to be very, very benign. For example, the government prosecuted the soldier, then known as Bradley Manning, for three detainee assessment briefs from Guantanamo Bay that were nothing more than profiles of the Tipton 3, British citizens who were held for years without trial or charges before finally being released. The information Manning made public was not top secret. There was much in the WikiLeaks release that was already public or unclassified. All the leaked material had been widely circulated to at least half a million military and government officials as well as private contractors. It had no serious impact on U.S. operations at home or abroad. Even then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, in a letter to the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, admitted that a Department of Defense review of the leaked Manning documents had not revealed any sensitive intelligence source and methods. But what the leaks did do was expose the deep cynicism of U.S. policy, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the plethora of government lies about what was happening under U.S. occupation. The WikiLeaks material documented several important war crimes that the government had covered up. Manning wrote, correctly, in a letter last October to The Guardian newspaper: ... [T]he public cannot decide what actions and policies are or are not justified if they don't even know the most rudimentary details about them and their effects. Manning, whose material was published by WikiLeaks as the Iraq War Logs and the Afghan War Diary, was sentenced to 35 years in prison in his
[Biofuel] Report: One in Four 'Activists' May be Corporate Spies
http://www.popularresistance.org/report-one-in-four-activists-may-be-corporate-spies/ Report: One in Four 'Activists' May be Corporate Spies By Nafeez Ahmed, www.theguardian.com December 2nd, 2013 How corporations and spy agencies use security to defend profiteering and crush activism A stunning new report compiles extensive evidence showing how some of the world's largest corporations have partnered with private intelligence firms and government intelligence agencies to spy on activist and nonprofit groups. Environmental activism is a prominent though not exclusive focus of these activities. The report by the Center for Corporate Policy (CCP) in Washington DC titled Spooky Business: Corporate Espionage against Nonprofit Organizations draws on a wide range of public record evidence, including lawsuits and journalistic investigations. It paints a disturbing picture of a global corporate espionage programme that is out of control, with possibly as much as one in four activists being private spies. The report argues that a key precondition for corporate espionage is that the nonprofit in question: impairs or at least threatens a company's assets or image sufficiently. One of the groups that has been targeted the most, and by a range of different corporations, is Greenpeace. In the 1990s, Greenpeace was tracked by private security firm Beckett Brown International (BBI) on behalf of the world's largest chlorine producer, Dow Chemical, due to the environmental organisation's campaigning against the use of chlorine to manufacture paper and plastics. The spying included: pilfering documents from trash bins, attempting to plant undercover operatives within groups, casing offices, collecting phone records of activists, and penetrating confidential meetings. Other Greenpeace offices in France and Europe were hacked and spied on by French private intelligence firms at the behest of Électricité de France, the world's largest operator of nuclear power plants, 85% owned by the French government. Oil companies Shell and BP had also reportedly hired Hackluyt, a private investigative firm with close links to MI6, to infiltrate Greenpeace by planting an agent who posed as a left -wing sympathiser and film maker. His mission was to betray plans of Greenpeace's activities against oil giants, including gathering information about the movements of the motor vessel Greenpeace in the north Atlantic. The CCP report notes that: A diverse array of nonprofits have been targeted by espionage, including environmental, anti-war, public interest, consumer, food safety, pesticide reform, nursing home reform, gun control, social justice, animal rights and arms control groups. Many of the world's largest corporations and their trade associations - including the US Chamber of Commerce, Walmart, Monsanto, Bank of America, Dow Chemical, Kraft, Coca-Cola, Chevron, Burger King, McDonald's, Shell, BP, BAE, Sasol, Brown Williamson and E.ON - have been linked to espionage or planned espionage against nonprofit organizations, activists and whistleblowers. Exploring other examples of this activity, the report notes that in Ecuador, after a lawsuit against Texaco triggering a $9.5 billion fine for spilling 350 million gallons of oil around Lago Agrio, the private investigations firm Kroll tried to hire journalist Mary Cuddehe as a corporate spy for Chevron, to undermine studies of the environmental health effects of the spill. Referring to the work of US investigative reporter Jeremy Scahill, the report points out that the notorious defence contractor Blackwater, later renamed XE Services and now Academi, had sought to become the intel arm of Monsanto, the agricultural and biotechnology corporation associated with genetically modified foods. Blackwater was paid to provide operatives to infiltrate activist groups organizing against the multinational biotech firm. In another case, the UK's Camp for Climate Action, which supports the decommissioning of coal-fired plants, was infiltrated by private security firm Vericola on behalf of three energy companies, E.ON, Scottish Power, and Scottish Resources Group. Reviewing emails released by Wikileaks from the Texas-based private intelligence firm Stratfor, the report shows how the firm reportedly conducted espionage against human rights, animal rights and environmental groups, on behalf of companies such as Coca-Cola. In one case, the emails suggest that Stratfor investigated People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) at Coca-Cola's request, and had access to a classified FBI investigation on PETA. The report uncovers compelling evidence that much corporate espionage is facilitated by government agencies, particularly the FBI. The CCP report examines a September 2010 document from the Office of the Inspector General in the US Justice Department, which reviewed FBI investigations between 2001 and 2006.
[Biofuel] John Pilger: Apartheid Did Not Die
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37035.htm John Pilger: Apartheid Did Not Die Video Apartheid Did Not Die is a 1998 Carlton Television documentary, written and presented by John Pilger, which was directed and produced by Alan Lowery, which provides analysis of South Africa's then new, democratic government. Posted December 07, 2013 A Dissenting Opinion on Nelson By Jonathan Cook December 07, 2013 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37033.htm Mandela Will Never, Ever be Your Minstrel By Musa Okwonga December 07, 2013 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37034.htm The real Mandela: Don't let his legacy be abused By John Wight December 07, 2013 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37037.htm US government considered Nelson Mandela a terrorist until 2008 By Robert Windrem, Investigative Producer, NBC News http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/12/07/21794290-us-government-considered-nelson-mandela-a-terrorist-until-2008?lite Nelson Mandela funeral: George W. Bush, Bill and Hillary Clinton to attend Mandela memorial By JENNIFER EPSTEIN | 12/6/13 http://www.politico.com/politico44/2013/12/nelson-mandela-funeral-george-w-bush-will-attend-mandela-179061.html ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] The Anti-Empire Report #123
http://williamblum.org/aer/read/123 The Anti-Empire Report #123 By William Blum - Published December 3rd, 2013 - If nature were a bank, they would have already rescued it. - Eduardo Galeano What do you think of this as an argument to use when speaking to those who don't accept the idea that extreme weather phenomena are man-made? Well, we can proceed in one of two ways: * We can do our best to limit the greenhouse effect by curtailing greenhouse gas emissions (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide) into the atmosphere, and if it turns out that these emissions were not in fact the cause of all the extreme weather phenomena, then we've wasted a lot of time, effort and money (although other benefits to the ecosystem would still accrue). * We can do nothing at all to curtail the emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and if it turns out that these emissions were in fact the cause of all the extreme weather phenomena (not simply extreme, but getting downright freaky), then we've lost the earth and life as we know it. So, are you a gambler? Whatever we do on a purely personal level to try and curtail greenhouse gas emissions cannot of course compare to what corporations could do; but it's inevitable that the process will impinge upon the bottom line of one corporation or another, who can be relied upon to put optimization of profit before societal good; corporate personhood before human personhood. This is a barrier faced by any environmentalist or social movement, and is the reason why I don't subscribe to the frequently-voiced idea that Left vs. Right is an obsolete concept; that we're all together in a common movement against corporate and government abuse regardless of where we fall on the ideological spectrum. It's only the Left that maintains as a bedrock principle: People before Profit, which can serve as a very concise definition of socialism, an ideology anathema to the Right and libertarians, who fervently believe, against all evidence, in the rationality of a free market. I personally favor the idea of a centralized, planned economy. Holy Lenin, Batman! This guy's a Damn Commie! Is it the terminology that bothers you? Because Americans are raised to be dedicated anti-communists and anti-socialists, and to equate a planned economy with the worst excesses of Stalinism? Okay, forget the scary labels; let's describe it as people sitting down and discussing what the most serious problems facing society are; and which institutions and forces in the society have the best access, experience, and resources to offer a solution to those problems. So, the idea is to enable these institutions and forces to deal with the problems in a highly organized and efficient manner. All this is usually called planning, and if the organization of it all generally stems from the government it can be called centralized. The alternative to this is called either anarchy or free enterprise. I don't place much weight on the idea of libertarian socialism. That to me is an oxymoron. The key questions to be considered are: Who will make the decisions on a daily basis to run the society? For whose benefit will those decisions be made? It's easy to speak of economic democracy that comes from the people, and is locally controlled, not by the government. But is every town and village going to manufacture automobiles, trains and airplanes? Will every city of any size have an airport? Will each one oversee its own food and drug inspections? Maintain all the roads passing through? Protect the environment within the city boundary only? Such questions are obviously without limit. I'm just suggesting that we shouldn't have stars in our eyes about local control or be paranoid about central planning. - We are all ready to be savage in some cause. The difference between a good man and a bad one is the choice of the cause. - William James (1842-1910) So, George W. Bush is now a painter. He tells his art teacher that there's a Rembrandt trapped inside this body. 1 Ah, so Georgie is more than just a painter. He's an artiste. And we all know that artistes are very special people. They're never to be confused with mass murderers, war criminals, merciless torturers or inveterate liars. Neither are they ever to be accused of dullness of wit or incoherence of thought. Artistes are not the only special people. Devout people are also special: Josef Stalin studied for the priesthood. Osama bin Laden prayed five times a day. And animal lovers: Herman Goering, while his Luftwaffe rained death upon Europe, kept a sign in his office that read: He who tortures animals wounds the feelings of the German people. Adolf Hitler was also an animal lover and had long periods of being a vegetarian and anti-smoking. Charles Manson was a staunch anti-vivisectionist. And cultured people: This fact Elie Wiesel called the greatest discovery of the war: that Adolf
[Biofuel] Syria conflict: Children 'targeted by snipers'
Unspeakable Horrors in a Country on the Verge of Genocide Militias in the Central African Republic are slitting children's throats, razing villages and throwing young men to the crocodiles. What needs to happen before the world intervenes? By David Smith Bossangoa November 23, 2013 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36937.htm Number of child soldiers in CAR has nearly doubled since March: UN By Jonathan Fowler (AFP) - 22 November 2013 http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ga3KckbUiDkROf00R49k-r3Rg-fQ?docId=b790ef79-ce41-4fa3-b12a-d8b2f026a615 --0-- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25055956 24 November 2013 Syria conflict: Children 'targeted by snipers' More than 11,000 children have died in Syria's civil war in nearly three years, including hundreds targeted by snipers, a new report says. Summary executions and torture have also been used against children as young as one, the London-based Oxford Research Group think tank says. The report says the majority of children have been killed by bombs or shells in their own neighbourhoods. It wants fighters trained in how not to put civilians' lives at risk. Their report, Stolen Futures - the Hidden Toll of Child Casualties in Syria, examines data from the start of the conflict in March 2011 to August 2013. Of the 11,420 victims aged 17 and under, 389 were killed by sniper fire. Some 764 were summarily executed, and more than 100 - including infants - were tortured, the report says. Boys outnumbered girls among the dead by around two to one. Boys aged 13 to 17 were most likely to be victims of targeted killings, the report says. The highest number of child deaths occurred in the governorate of Aleppo, where 2,223 were reported killed. Report co-author Hana Salama said that the way children are being killed is disturbing. Bombed in their homes, in their communities, during day-to-day activities such as waiting in bread lines or attending school. Shot by bullets in crossfire, targeted by snipers, summarily executed, even gassed and tortured, she said.The data was provided by Syrian civil society groups recording casualties. The report only considers the deaths of named victims, and only cases where the cause of death could be identified. But it stresses the figures are incomplete as access is impossible in some areas. The figures should be treated with caution and considered provisional: briefly put, it is too soon to say whether they are too high or too low, the report says. The conflict in Syria has had a catastrophic effect on children in Syria, the report says, and calls for all sides to refrain from targeting civilians and buildings such as schools, hospitals and places of worship. Amongst its recommendations, the Oxford Research Group also calls for access and protection for journalists and others contributing to the recording of casualties. More than 100,000 people are estimated to have been killed in the conflict. More than two million Syrians have fled the country; around half of those are believed to be children. Analysis Lyse Doucet Chief international correspondent This report is the first major examination of how children are being killed in Syria. It confirms what has long been regarded as one of the most disturbing aspects of this brutal conflict. Syrian children are not just being caught in crossfire. They're being deliberately targeted, and even tortured. The very start of this uprising is usually traced to the arrest in March 2011 of schoolboys in Daraa who were reportedly tortured for painting anti-government graffiti. Nearly three years on, this report urges all sides in this conflict to spare the children, and calls for the threat of prosecution against those who commit the most egregious of atrocities. Casualties are only one part of what this report calls the war's catastrophic effect on children. With so many schools and neighbourhoods in ruin, and children making up half of the refugees, Syria's conflict is also a war on childhood. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Robert Fisk: He may huff and puff but Benjamin Netanyahu is on his own now as nuclear agreement isolates Israel
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36967.htm Robert Fisk: He may huff and puff but Benjamin Netanyahu is on his own now as nuclear agreement isolates Israel Sudden offer by Tehran to negotiate a high-speed end to this cancerous threat of further war was thus greeted with almost manic excitement By Robert Fisk November 25, 2013 Information Clearing House - The Independent - It marks a victory for the Shia in their growing conflict with the Sunni Muslim Middle East. It gives substantial hope to Bashar al-Assad that he will be left in power in Syria. It isolates Israel. And it infuriates Saudi Arabia and Qatar and Kuwait and other Sunni Gulf States which secretly hoped that a breakdown of the Geneva nuclear talks would humiliate Shia Iran and support their efforts to depose Assad, Iran's only ally in the Arab world. In the cruel politics of the Middle East, the partial nuclear agreement between Iran and the world's six most important powers proves that the West will not go to war with Iran and has no intention - far into the future - of undertaking military action in the region. We already guessed that when - after branding Assad as yet another Middle Eastern Hitler - the US, Britain and France declined to assault Syria and bring down the regime. American and British people - those who had to pay the price for these monumental adventures, because political leaders no longer lead their men into battle - had no stomach for another Iraq or another Afghanistan. Iran's sudden offer to negotiate a high-speed end to this cancerous threat of further war was thus greeted with almost manic excitement by the US and the EU, along with theatrical enthusiasm by the man who realises that his own country has been further empowered in the Middle East: Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov. Assad's continued tenure in Damascus is assured. Peace in our time. Be sure we'll be hearing that Chamberlonian boast uttered in irony by the Israelis in the weeks to come. But there's no doubt that Geneva has called Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's bluff. He may huff and puff, but if he wants to bash Iran now - on the basis that Israel must remain the only nuclear nation in the Middle East - he's going to be on his own when his planes take off to bomb Iran's nuclear plants. The Aipac attack dogs can be sent up to Congress again by that most infamous of Israeli-American lobby groups to harry Republicans in support of the Likudist cause, but to what purpose? Did Mr Netanyahu really think the Iranians were going to dismantle their whole nuclear boondoggle? When he said yesterday that the most dangerous regime in the world took a significant step towards obtaining the world's most dangerous weapon, many Arabs - and an awful lot of other people in the world, including the West - will have wondered whether Israel, which long ago obtained the world's most dangerous weapon, is now - in rejecting the Geneva deal - the world's most dangerous government. If Mr Netanyahu and his clique in the government decide to twit the world's major powers amid their euphoria, he may bring about - as several Israeli writers have warned - the most profound change in Israel's relations with the US since the foundation of the Israeli state. It would not be a change for Israel's benefit. But six months - the time it takes to solidify this most tangential of nuclear agreements - is a long time. In the coming days, Republicans in Washington and the right-wing enemies of President Rouhani will demand to know the real details of this febrile game at Geneva. The Americans insist that Iran does not have the right to enrichment. Iran insists that it does. The percentages of enrichment will have to be examined far more carefully than they were yesterday. Mr Rouhani - or Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader whose dark wings hover over every elected Iranian leader - says that the fear of an Iranian nuclear weapon will be seen by future generations as a historical joke. Netanyahu says the whole shenanigans in Geneva will prove to be a historic mistake. The Sunni Saudis, always waiting to spot the winner before opening their mouths, have already sat down with their Sunni Qatari and Kuwaiti allies to commiserate with each other over Shia Iran's new victory. In Damascus, I suspect, Bashar, himself an Alawite-Shia, will tuck the kids into bed and share a glass with wife Asma and sleep well in his bed tonight. © independent.co.uk ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] How Factory Farms Are Pumping Americans Full of Deadly Bacteria and Pathogens
http://www.alternet.org/story/145068/how_factory_farms_are_pumping_americans_full_of_deadly_bacteria_and_pathogens By Kathy Freston How Factory Farms Are Pumping Americans Full of Deadly Bacteria and Pathogens January 12, 2010 | We're getting sicker and sicker, thanks to gruesome conditions in animal agriculture nationwide. After reading www.BirdFluBook.org [3], by Dr. Michael Greger, I was stunned to realize the extent to which we have endangered our health by allowing factory farms to flourish and produce 99 percent of the meat, dairy and eggs we eat. Not only are dangerous flu viruses mutating because of these concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), but we are also being exposed to some other very serious bacteria and pathogens. Things have gotten out of hand in our food production, especially in the livestock sector. In Part I of my interview [4] with Dr. Greger, he explained the growing potential of deadly flu viruses. In Part 2 of the interview, we discuss E. coli, salmonella and other worrisome pathogens. Kathy Freston: Where does E. coli come from and how does it get into food? Why is it often found on vegetables? Michael Greger: E. coli is an intestinal pathogen. It only gets in the food if fecal matter gets in the food. Since plants don't have intestines, all E. coli infections-in fact all food poisoning-comes from animals. When's the last time you heard of a person getting Dutch elm disease or a really bad case of aphids? People don't get plant diseases; they get animal diseases. The problem is that because of the number of animals raised today, a billion tons of manure are produced every year in the United States-the weight of 10,000 Nimitz-class aircraft carriers. Dairy cow and pig factories often dump millions of gallons of putrefying waste into massive open-air cesspits, which can leak and contaminate water used to irrigate our crops. That's how a deadly fecal pathogen like E. coli O157:H7 [5] can end up contaminating our spinach. So regardless of what we eat, we all need to fight against the expansion of factory farming in our communities, our nation and around the world. KF: What percentage of the population gets hit by the bacteria? How many of them die? Could that number increase? MG: While E. coli O157:H7 remains the leading cause of acute kidney failure in U.S. children, fewer than 100,000 Americans get infected every year, and fewer than 100 die. But millions get infected with other types of E. coli that can cause urinary tract infections (UTIs) that can invade the bloodstream and cause an estimated 36,000 deaths annually in the United States. KF: We only occasionally hear of the very few fatal E. coli cases; is it really a widespread problem? MG: When medical researchers at the University of Minnesota took more than 1,000 food samples from multiple retail markets, they found evidence [6] of fecal contamination in 69 percent of the pork and beef and 92 percent of the poultry samples. Nine out of 10 chicken carcasses in the store may be contaminated with fecal matter. And half of the poultry samples were contaminated with the UTI-causing E. coli bacteria. Scientists now suspect that by eating chicken, women infect their lower intestinal tract with these meat-borne bacteria, which can then creep up into their bladders. Hygiene measures to prevent UTIs have traditionally included wiping from front to back after bowel movements and urinating after intercourse to flush out any invaders, but now women can add poultry avoidance as a way to help prevent urinary tract infections. KF: Are there any long-term problems for people who ingest E. coli and have a bad day or two with diarrhea, or is the problem over once out of the system? MG: Last month the Center for Foodborne Illness Research Prevention released a report [7] on the long-term consequences of common causes of food poisoning. Life-long complications of E. coli O157:H7 infection include end-stage kidney disease, permanent brain damage and insulin-dependent diabetes. KF: Is E. coli a problem if the meat is cooked? MG: With the exception of prions, the infectious agents responsible for mad cow disease and the human equivalent-which can survive even incineration at temperatures hot enough to melt lead-all viral, fungal and bacterial pathogens in our food supply can be killed by proper cooking. Why then do tens of millions of Americans come down with food poisoning every year? Cross-contamination is thought to account for the bulk of infections. For example, chicken carcasses are so covered in bacteria that researchers at the University of Arizona found [6] more fecal bacteria in the kitchen-on sponges and dish towels, and in the sink drain-than they found swabbing the toilet. In a meat-eater's house it may be safer to lick the rim of the toilet seat than the kitchen countertop, because people aren't preparing chickens in their toilets.
[Biofuel] Why TEPCO is Risking the Removal of Fukushima Fuel Rods. The Dangers of Uncontrolled Global Nuclear Radiation
http://www.globalresearch.ca/why-tepco-is-risking-the-removal-of-fukushima-fuel-rods-the-dangers-of-uncontrolled-global-nuclear-radiation/5359188 Why TEPCO is Risking the Removal of Fukushima Fuel Rods. The Dangers of Uncontrolled Global Nuclear Radiation By Yoichi Shimatsu Global Research, November 24, 2013 After repeated delays since the summer of 2011, the Tokyo Electric Power Company has launched a high-risk operation to empty the spent-fuel pool atop Reactor 4 at the Dai-ichi (No.1) Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant. The urgency attached to this particular site, as compared with reactors damaged in meltdowns, arises from several factors: - over 400 tons of nuclear material in the pool could reignite - the fire-damaged tank is tilting badly and may topple over sooner than later - collapse of the structure could trigger a chain reaction and nuclear blast, and - consequent radioactive releases would heavily contaminate much of the world. The potential for disaster at the Unit 4 SFP is probably of a higher magnitude than suspected due to the presence of fresh fuel rods, which were delivered during the technical upgrade of Reactor 4 under completion at the time of the March 11, 2011 earthquake and tsunami. The details of that reactor overhaul by GE and Hitachi have yet to be disclosed by TEPCO and the Economy Ministry and continue to be treated as a national-security matter. Here, the few clues from whistleblowers will be pieced together to decipher the nature of the clandestine activity at Fukushima No.1. Accidents happen The delicate rod-removal procedure requires the lowering of a steel cylinder, called a transfer cask, into a corner of the pool and then using the crane to lift the 300-kilogram fuel assemblies (4.5-meter-tall bundle of fuel rods held inside a metal cage) one at a time from the vertical array of rods up and then down into the cask. The container can hold 22 assemblies for transfer to a temporary cooling unit built next to Reactor 4 before these are moved to a storage building.(1) Lifting the 1,533 fuel bundles out of the pool is fraught with danger. If an assembly breaks away and falls, the impact could shatter other rods below, triggering an uncontrolled nuclear reaction. Compounding the threat, many rods are not intact but were fragmented into loose shards by a collapsing crane. In addition, many of the rods likely lost their protective cladding during the two fires that engulfed the spent-fuel pool on March 14 and 15, 2011. The urgency of this transfer operation is prompted by the warping of the supporting steel frame by the twin fires that followed the March 11 quake. The pool is also tilting. If the unbalanced structure topples, the collapse would trigger nuclear reactions. A cascade of neutrons could then ignite the nearby common fuel pool for Reactors 1 through 6. The common pool contains 6,735 used assemblies.(2) The Reactor 4 spent fuel pool contains an estimated 400 tons of uranium and plutonium oxide, compared with just 6.2 kilograms of plutonium inside Fat Man, the hydrogen bomb that obliterated Nagasaki in 1945. (While predictions are bandied about by experts and bloggers, there exists no reliable method for calculating the potential sum or flow rate of radiation releases, measured in becquerel or sievert units, after an accident. The tonnage involved, however, indicates only that a large-scale event is likely and a cataclysm cannot be ruled out.) More than 1,700 tons of nuclear materials are reported to be on site inside Fukushima No.1 plant. (My investigative visits into the exclusion zone indicate the existence of undocumented and illegal large-scale storage sites in the Fukushima nuclear complex of undetermined tonnage.) By comparison Chernobyl 's reactors contained 180 tons of fuel not all of which melted down. Despite the looming threat to residents in Fukushima, surrounding provinces and the capital Tokyo, the office of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe along with TEPCO hews to the tradition of risk denial and blackout of vital information. No contingency plan has been issued to Fukushima residents or to the municipalities of the Tohoku and Kanto region in event of a nuclear disaster during the SFP clearance effort. A concurrent drive to impose a draconian law against whistleblowers on grounds of national security is reinforcing the cover-up of data and testimony related to nuclear power plants, including the Fukushima complex. Mystery of MOX super-fuel A Mainichi Shimbun editorial mentions in passing that the Reactor 4 pool contains 202 fresh fuel assemblies.(3) The presence of new fuel rods was confirmed in the TEPCO press release, which described the first assembly lifted into the transfer cask as an un-irradiated fuel rod. Why were new rods being stored inside a spent-fuel pool, which is designed to hold expended rods? What threat of criticality do these fresh rods pose if the steel
[Biofuel] Is a Global Green Revolution Coming?
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/11/18-2 Published on Monday, November 18, 2013 by TomDispatch.com Is a Global Green Revolution Coming? Is an international energy revolution on the march? by Michael T. Klare A week after the most powerful super typhoon ever recorded pummeled the Philippines, killing thousands in a single province, and three weeks after the northern Chinese city of Harbin suffered a devastating airpocalypse, suffocating the city with coal-plant pollution, government leaders beware! Although individual events like these cannot be attributed with absolute certainty to increased fossil fuel use and climate change, they are the type of disasters that, scientists tell us, will become a pervasive part of life on a planet being transformed by the massive consumption of carbon-based fuels. If, as is now the case, governments across the planet back an extension of the carbon age and ever increasing reliance on unconventional fossil fuels like tar sands and shale gas, we should all expect trouble. In fact, we should expect mass upheavals leading to a green energy revolution. None of us can predict the future, but when it comes to a mass rebellion against the perpetrators of global destruction, we can see a glimmer of the coming upheaval in events of the present moment. Take a look and you will see that the assorted environmental protests that have long bedeviled politicians are gaining in strength and support. With an awareness of climate change growing and as intensifying floods, fires, droughts, and storms become an inescapable feature of daily life across the planet, more people are joining environmental groups and engaging in increasingly bold protest actions. Sooner or later, government leaders are likely to face multiple eruptions of mass public anger and may, in the end, be forced to make radical adjustments in energy policy or risk being swept aside. In fact, it is possible to imagine such a green energy revolution erupting in one part of the world and spreading like wildfire to others. Because climate change is going to inflict increasingly severe harm on human populations, the impulse to rebel is only likely to gain in strength across the planet. While circumstances may vary, the ultimate goal of these uprisings will be to terminate the reign of fossil fuels while emphasizing investment in and reliance upon renewable forms of energy. And a success in any one location is bound to invite imitation in others. A wave of serial eruptions of this sort would not be without precedent. In the early years of twentieth-first century, for example, one government after another in disparate parts of the former Soviet Union was swept away in what were called the color revolutions -- populist upheavals against old-style authoritarian regimes. These included the Rose Revolution in Georgia (2003), the Orange Revolution in Ukraine (2004), and the Pink or Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan (2005). In 2011, a similar wave of protests erupted in North Africa, culminating in what we call the Arab Spring. Like these earlier upheavals, a green revolution is unlikely to arise from a highly structured political campaign with clearly identified leaders. In all likelihood, it will erupt spontaneously, after a cascade of climate-change induced disasters provokes an outpouring of public fury. Once ignited, however, it will undoubtedly ratchet up the pressure for governments to seek broad-ranging, systemic transformations of their energy and climate policies. In this sense, any such upheaval -- whatever form it takes -- will prove revolutionary by seeking policy shifts of such magnitude as to challenge the survival of incumbent governments or force them to enact measures with transformative implications. Foreshadowings of such a process can already be found around the globe. Take the mass environmental protests that erupted in Turkey this June. Though sparked by a far smaller concern than planetary devastation via climate change, for a time they actually posed a significant threat to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his governing party. Although his forces eventually succeeded in crushing the protests -- leaving four dead, 8,000 injured, and 11 blinded by tear-gas canisters -- his reputation as a moderate Islamist was badly damaged by the episode. Like so many surprising upheavals on this planet, the Turkish uprising had the most modest of beginnings: on May 27th, a handful of environmental activists blocked bulldozers sent by the government to level Gezi Park, a tiny oasis of greenery in the heart of Istanbul, and prepare the way for the construction of an upscale mall. The government responded to this small-scale, non-violent action by sending in riot police and clearing the area, a move that enraged many Turks and prompted tens of thousands of them to occupy nearby Taksim Square. This move, in turn, led
[Biofuel] UN Climate Chief Slammed for Pushing Coal as Solution in Poland
'Who Rules the World? Fossil Fuel Industry or the People?' Global coal conference targeted by climate activists in Warsaw Published on Monday, November 18, 2013 by Common Dreams http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/11/18-0 --0-- http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/11/18-4 Published on Monday, November 18, 2013 by Common Dreams UN Climate Chief Slammed for Pushing Coal as Solution in Poland Once again campaigners are forced to remind world leaders: There is no such thing as clean coal - Lauren McCauley, staff writer Speaking before an assembly of lobbyists and corporate heads at a global coal industry conference in Warsaw, Poland Monday, United Nations Climate Chief Christiana Figueres has spurred the ire of environmentalists as she characterized the leading greenhouse gas emitters as possible leaders in a clean energy future. The coal industry has the opportunity to be part of the worldwide climate solution, Figueres said in her keynote address before the summit of the World Coal Association. Complimenting the knowledge and experience of the gathered coal executives as an asset to be utilized in the effort to keep global warming beneath the two degree Celsius limit agreed to by the international community, Figueres vowed that her position was not a call for the immediate disappearance of coal. Figueres' address defied the request of green groups who asked that she boycott the summit. As Sophie Yeo of RTCC.org reports, climate campaigners have repeatedly said the presence of the coal groups is a provocation and a distraction from the COP19 UN climate conference that is also being held in Warsaw this week. During the address, Figueres recommended a set of fundamental parameters for what she described as green transition for coal. Her recommendations included closing all existing subcritical plants and implementing safe Carbon Capture Use and Storage (CCUS) technology on all new plants, which environmental groups have been long-critical of. In a turn that environmentalists such as 350.org spokesperson Jamie Henn heralded as a step in the right direction, during the speech Figueres also called upon the coal industry to leave most existing reserves of coal in the ground. The good news about the speech is that if you read it closely, it basically spells the end of coal, Henn told Common Dreams in an emailed statement. The Secretary told the industry to shutdown dirty plants and keep coal in the ground. The bad news is she softened the blow with fantasies about carbon capture and so-called 'clean coal.' Henn added that her presence at the coal summit legitimized what he called an industry greenwashing extravaganza in an unnecessary way. Following the speech, John Gummer, chair of the UK government's climate advisers and former UK environment minister, tweeted: And outside the summit, protesters donned face masks of Figueres' image and held banners reading, There is no such thing as clean coal. They also carried a pair of large, inflatable lungs to highlight the huge health impacts and costs to climate. The conference is a desperate attempt by the coal industry to greenwash their industry, writes 350.org's Hoda Baraka, who took part in the action along with representatives from groups including the Polish Youth Climate Network, CEE Bank Watch, Corporate Europe Observatory, Klima Allianz, 350.org, Tools For Action, and the #Cough4Coal Initiative. Our movement's demand is clear: an immediate phase out of all coal technologies and a shift of investments towards energy technologies that respect peoples' health, the climate and environment, Baraka continued. Dirty fuel sources like coal have no place in a 21st century clean energy economy; this reality can no longer be ignored. The protest was part of a day of action in Warsaw which began with Greenpeace dropping a banner which read, Who rules the world? Fossil Industry or the People? on the Polish Ministry of Economy building where the coal industry summit is being held. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] TEPCO risks all at Fukushima
Fukushima operators begin risky nuclear fuel rod removal Published time: November 18, 2013 http://rt.com/news/fukushima-start-fuel-removal-883/ --0-- http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Japan/JAP-02-181113.html TEPCO risks all at Fukushima By Victor Kotsev Nov 18, '13 On Monday, by far the most dangerous nuclear operation attempted in human history was set to begin in the crippled Fukushima Daiichi power plant in Japan, the removal of more than 1,300 spent fuel rods and some 200 unused rods from a reservoir on top of Unit 4. While the undertaking is necessary, the worst-case scenario would pale in comparison the triple meltdowns of 2011 and necessitate the evacuation of the capital Tokyo. Experts are unanimous that the engineering challenges are on a scale unseen to date, given that the fuel pool was damaged in a fire caused by a cooling failure and a subsequent explosion during the meltdowns. If the fuel rods, some of which may be damaged, come too close to each other, there is a chance that the nuclear chain reaction would resume, which would be catastrophic in the presence of so much fissile material, as well as extremely difficult to stop. If, on the other hand, a fuel rod breaks or is exposed to air and ignites, this would release into the atmosphere a massive amount of radiation, likely necessitating the evacuation of the plant. The total amount of radiation present in the pool is estimated at 14,000 times that released by the atomic bomb dropped at Hiroshima, or about the same as in the combined cores of the three reactors that melted down. [F]ull release from the Unit-4 spent fuel pool, without any containment or control, could cause by far the most serious radiological disaster to date, states The World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2013, compiled by two independent nuclear energy consultants. [1] In several recent interviews with different media, Arnie Gundersen, a former nuclear industry executive and chief engineer of the Fairewinds Energy Education non-profit, cautioned that there was no system to stop a nuclear chain reaction, if one should occur, at the pool, and recommended that the operators throw all sorts of boron into the water (boron captures neutrons and slows down chain reactions) before they start pulling the rods out. I ran a division that built fuel racks, and these high density fuel racks like they have at Fuksuhima are very close to going critical anyway. ... Normally its 0.95, and it can get as high as 0.99; that means there's a 1% margin before a self-sustaining chain reaction can occur. [2] Gundersen said in a separate interview with Radio Ecoshock, expressing his opinion that the Japanese government rather than Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), the plant's operator, should take charge of the operation: I suspect come November-December-January we are going to hear that the building has been evacuated, they broke a fuel rod, the fuel rod is off-gassing, we have to wait a couple of days and then go back in. [3] But even the most vocal critics of TEPCO's and Japan's response to the crisis so far acknowledge that the fuel has to be removed because the danger of doing nothing far outweighs the dangers of doing something wrong. If there is another earthquake and building four collapses ... I am going to evacuate my family from Boston, Dr Helen Caldicott, an influential Australian anti-nuclear advocate, said during a recent conference. While the other exploded buildings hold less nuclear material than Unit 4, moreover, the challenge of removing molten and spent fuel from them is far greater. At least some of the reactor cores are believed to have melted through the containment vessels, and possibly into the ground, contaminating groundwater with unprecedented levels of hot particles. Some of the buildings are off limits to workers due to the deadly levels of radiation inside, and TEPCO does not even plan to start working there until a few years to a decade from now. Engineers say the present undertaking will be a learning experience and a practice test for that work. The effort to secure and decontaminate the site has run into numerous snags recently, with critics claiming mismanagement (a story about how the Japanese mafia runs many of the low-paid workers at the plant recently made headlines [4]) and attempts to cover-up the real severity of the situation. Over the summer, it emerged that the Pacific Ocean was being continuously contaminated with highly radioactive groundwater and that some of the hundreds of make-shift water tanks on site were leaking. Workers are pumping out some 400 tons of water a day from the reactor basements and the ground nearby, to a total of almost 500,000 tons at present stored at the plant, while another 300 tons a day are running into the ocean. The three molten cores require constant cooling with water, most of which escapes the breached reactor vessels. To
[Biofuel] Guardian Editor Discusses Snowden Leaks and a Security State Run Amok
Guardian Editor Discusses Snowden Leaks and a Security State Run Amok Posted on Nov 17, 2013 Alan Rusbridger, the editor of Britain's Guardian newspaper, has an essay http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/guardian_editor_discusses_snowden_leaks_and_a_security_state_run_amok# in the new issue of The New York Review of Books that stands out as a reasoned explanation of the role The Guardian has played in bringing Edward Snowden's revelations to light, and why the full-throttle pursuit of data by governmental security apparatuses is an affront to individual freedoms. http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/guardian_editor_discusses_snowden_leaks_and_a_security_state_run_amok --0-- http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2013/nov/21/snowden-leaks-and-public/?pagination=false The Snowden Leaks and the Public Alan Rusbridger November 21, 2013 Issue It is harder than you might think to destroy an Apple MacBook Pro according to British government standards. In a perfect world the officials who want to destroy such machines prefer them to be dropped into a kind of giant food mixer that reduces them to dust. Lacking such equipment, The Guardian purchased a power drill and angle grinder on July 20 this year and-under the watchful eyes of two state observers-ripped them into obsolescence. It was hot, dusty work in the basement of The Guardian that Saturday, a date that surely merits some sort of footnote in any history of how, in modern democracies, governments tangle with the press. The British state had decreed that there had been enough debate around the material leaked in late May by the former NSA contractor Edward Snowden. If The Guardian refused to hand back or destroy the documents, I, as editor of The Guardian, could expect either an injunction or a visit by the police-it was never quite spelled out which. The state, in any event, was threatening prior restraint of reporting and discussion by the press, no matter its public interest or importance. This was par for the course in eighteenth-century Britain, less so now. In our discussions with government officials before July 20 we had tried to impress on them that, apart from being wrong in principle, this attempt at gagging a news organization was fruitless. There were, we told them, further copies of the Snowden material in other countries. We explained that The Guardian was collaborating with news organizations in America. Glenn Greenwald, the journalist who first dealt with Snowden, lived in Rio. The filmmaker Laura Poitras, who had also been in contact with the former NSA analyst, had more material in Berlin. What did they imagine they were achieving by smashing up a few hard drives in London? The government men said they were painfully aware that other copies existed, but their instructions were to close down the Guardian operation in London by destroying the computers containing information from Snowden. At some level I suspect our interlocutors realized that the game had changed. The technology that so excites the spooks-that gives them an all-seeing eye into billions of lives-is also technology that is virtually impossible to control or contain. But old habits die hard-hence the appeal of using the courts to stop publication. Both the 1917 US Espionage Act and the 1911 British Official Secrets Act-each with roots in wartime sedition and spy fever-cast a long shadow. America has its own difficulties with journalists and their sources. But it is, nevertheless, a kinder environment for anyone trying to inform the sort of public debate regarding security and privacy that, post-Snowden at least, everyone seems to agree is desirable. The main advantage in the US is that it is, I hope, unthinkable that the American government would try to prevent publication in advance. A written constitution, the First Amendment, and the Supreme Court judgment in the Pentagon Papers case in 1971 have all played their part in establishing protections that are lacking in the UK. Jill Abramson, executive editor of The New York Times, is not going to be buying drills and angle grinders anytime soon. And so the reporting goes on, much of it edited out of New York, as before, by our US editor, Janine Gibson. What's gradually being revealed is that in the last ten or so years the US and UK governments, working in close collaboration, have been seeking to put entire populations under some form of surveillance. The apparent aim is to be able to collect and store all the signals all the time-that means all digital life, including Internet searches and all the phone calls, texts, and e-mails we make and send each other. Some of it is data, some of it is so-called metadata-information about who sent a communication to whom, from where to where, not about specific contents. But as Stewart Baker, the former general counsel of the NSA, said in a recent discussion in New York, these are tricky
[Biofuel] Feeding the Flame of Revolt
Jailed Anonymous hacker Jeremy Hammond: 'My days of hacking are done' Hammond calls his 10-year sentence a 'vengeful, spiteful act' by US authorities eager to put a chill on political hacking Ed Pilkington in New York theguardian.com, Friday 15 November 2013 http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/nov/15/jeremy-hammond-anonymous-hacker-sentenced --0-- http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/feeding_the_flame_of_revolt_20131117 Feeding the Flame of Revolt Posted on Nov 17, 2013 By Chris Hedges NEW YORK-I was in federal court here Friday for the sentencing of Jeremy Hammond to 10 years in prison for hacking into the computers of a private security firm that works on behalf of the government, including the Department of Homeland Security, and corporations such as Dow Chemical. In 2011 Hammond, now 28, released to the website WikiLeaks and Rolling Stone and other publications some 3 million emails from the Texas-based company Strategic Forecasting Inc., or Stratfor. The sentence was one of the longest in U.S. history for hacking and the maximum the judge could impose under a plea agreement in the case. It was wildly disproportionate to the crime-an act of nonviolent civil disobedience that championed the public good by exposing abuses of power by the government and a security firm. But the excessive sentence was the point. The corporate state, rapidly losing credibility and legitimacy, is lashing out like a wounded animal. It is frightened. It feels the heat from a rising flame of revolt. It is especially afraid of those such as Hammond who have the technical skills to break down electronic walls and expose the corrupt workings of power. People have a right to know what governments and corporations are doing behind closed doors, Hammond told me when we met in the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan about a week and a half before his sentencing. I did not hope for justice from the court. Judge Loretta A. Preska is a member of the right-wing Federalist Society. And the hack into Stratfor gave the email address and disclosed the password of an account used for business by Preska's husband, Thomas Kavaler, a partner at the law firm Cahill Gordon Reindel. Some emails of the firm's corporate clients, including Merrill Lynch, also were exposed. The National Lawyers Guild, because the judge's husband was a victim of the hack, filed a recusal motion that Preska, as chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, was able to deny. Her refusal to recuse herself allowed her to oversee a trial in which she had a huge conflict of interest. The judge, who herself once was employed at Cahill Gordon Reindel, fulminated from the bench about Hammond's total lack of respect for the law. She read a laundry list of his arrests for acts of civil disobedience. She damned what she called his unrepentant recidivism. She said: These are not the actions of Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela or even Daniel Ellsberg; there's nothing high-minded or public-spirited about causing mayhem-an odd analogy given that Mandela founded the armed wing of the African National Congress, was considered by South Africa's apartheid government and the United States government to be a terrorist and was vilified, along with King and Ellsberg, by the U.S. government. She said there was a desperate need to promote respect for the law and a need for adequate public deterrence. She read from transcripts of Hammond's conversations in Anonymous chat rooms in which he described the goal of hacking into Stratfor as destroying the target, hoping for bankruptcy, collapse and called for maximum mayhem. She admonished him for releasing the unlisted phone number of a retired Arizona police official who allegedly received threatening phone calls afterward. The judge imposed equally harsh measures that will take effect after Hammond's release from prison. She ordered that he be placed under three years of supervised control, be forbidden to use encryption or aliases online and submit to random searches of his computer equipment, person and home by police and any internal security agency without the necessity of a warrant. The judge said he was legally banned from having any contact with electronic civil disobedience websites or organizations. By the time she had finished she had shredded all pretense of the rule of law. The severe sentence-Hammond will serve more time than the combined sentences of four men who were convicted in Britain for hacking related to the U.S. case-was monumentally stupid for a judge seeking to protect the interest of the ruling class. The judicial lynching of Hammond required her to demonstrate a callous disregard for transparency and our right to privacy. It required her to ignore the disturbing information Hammond released showing that the government and Stratfor attempted to link nonviolent dissident groups, including
Re: [Biofuel] UN Climate Chief Slammed for Pushing Coal as Solution in Poland
LOL! Of course there is clean coal. It's the stuff we leave in the ground and don't disturb, let alone burn. But Darryl, what earthly use would that be to the likes of Charles and David Koch (pronounced coke)? Or Sasol? Et al? Sasol - Clean Coal http://www.sasol.com/innovation/new-energy/clean-coal Can Poland turn coal into a green energy source? 19 November 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24997778 Poland: Can country shake off 'coal land' label? 18 November 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24979270 Haven't we heard all this before somewhere? Best Keith Of course there is clean coal. It's the stuff we leave in the ground and don't disturb, let alone burn. Darryl McMahon On 19/11/2013 10:55 AM, Keith Addison wrote: 'Who Rules the World? Fossil Fuel Industry or the People?' Global coal conference targeted by climate activists in Warsaw Published on Monday, November 18, 2013 by Common Dreams http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/11/18-0 --0-- http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/11/18-4 Published on Monday, November 18, 2013 by Common Dreams UN Climate Chief Slammed for Pushing Coal as Solution in Poland Once again campaigners are forced to remind world leaders: There is no such thing as clean coal - Lauren McCauley, staff writer Speaking before an assembly of lobbyists and corporate heads at a global coal industry conference in Warsaw, Poland Monday, United Nations Climate Chief Christiana Figueres has spurred the ire of environmentalists as she characterized the leading greenhouse gas emitters as possible leaders in a clean energy future. The coal industry has the opportunity to be part of the worldwide climate solution, Figueres said in her keynote address before the summit of the World Coal Association. Complimenting the knowledge and experience of the gathered coal executives as an asset to be utilized in the effort to keep global warming beneath the two degree Celsius limit agreed to by the international community, Figueres vowed that her position was not a call for the immediate disappearance of coal. Figueres' address defied the request of green groups who asked that she boycott the summit. As Sophie Yeo of RTCC.org reports, climate campaigners have repeatedly said the presence of the coal groups is a provocation and a distraction from the COP19 UN climate conference that is also being held in Warsaw this week. During the address, Figueres recommended a set of fundamental parameters for what she described as green transition for coal. Her recommendations included closing all existing subcritical plants and implementing safe Carbon Capture Use and Storage (CCUS) technology on all new plants, which environmental groups have been long-critical of. In a turn that environmentalists such as 350.org spokesperson Jamie Henn heralded as a step in the right direction, during the speech Figueres also called upon the coal industry to leave most existing reserves of coal in the ground. The good news about the speech is that if you read it closely, it basically spells the end of coal, Henn told Common Dreams in an emailed statement. The Secretary told the industry to shutdown dirty plants and keep coal in the ground. The bad news is she softened the blow with fantasies about carbon capture and so-called 'clean coal.' Henn added that her presence at the coal summit legitimized what he called an industry greenwashing extravaganza in an unnecessary way. Following the speech, John Gummer, chair of the UK government's climate advisers and former UK environment minister, tweeted: And outside the summit, protesters donned face masks of Figueres' image and held banners reading, There is no such thing as clean coal. They also carried a pair of large, inflatable lungs to highlight the huge health impacts and costs to climate. The conference is a desperate attempt by the coal industry to greenwash their industry, writes 350.org's Hoda Baraka, who took part in the action along with representatives from groups including the Polish Youth Climate Network, CEE Bank Watch, Corporate Europe Observatory, Klima Allianz, 350.org, Tools For Action, and the #Cough4Coal Initiative. Our movement's demand is clear: an immediate phase out of all coal technologies and a shift of investments towards energy technologies that respect peoples' health, the climate and environment, Baraka continued. Dirty fuel sources like coal have no place in a 21st century clean energy economy; this reality can no longer be ignored. The protest was part of a day of action in Warsaw which began with Greenpeace dropping a banner which read, Who rules the world? Fossil Industry or the People? on the Polish Ministry of Economy building where the coal industry summit is being held. -- Darryl McMahon Failure is not an option; it comes standard. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http
[Biofuel] Electric superbike creators chosen to represent British cleantech innovation by UKTI
You live and learn - I just didn't realise that ecosystem means an industrial infrastructure for entrepreneurship and innovation. Sigh. Sorry, allergic to PR-speak, and thus to those who created this message rather than simply writing it. mumblemumble... Nice bike, I guess. - K. Agility Global http://www.agilitymotors.com/ From: Lyndon-Marc Adade lyndon.m.ad...@dragonassocs.com To: Lyndon-Marc Adade lyndon.m.ad...@dragonassocs.com Subject: Electric superbike creators chosen to represent British cleantech innovation by UKTI Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 13:43:10 + Good afternoon, The manufacturers of the world's first high-performance electric motorcycle have been selected by UK Trade Investment (UKTI) to represent Britain on a trade mission to Colorado to showcase UK innovation in clean technology. Agility Global created Saietta R, which is set to launch in January 2014. Please see images attached. For further information, please see the full press release below. Please email mailto:lyndon.m.ad...@dragonassocs.com lyndon.m.ad...@dragonassocs.com should you have any further enquiries or wish to speak with Agility Global CEO, Lawrence Marazzi. Best, Lyndon-Marc AGILITY GLOBAL SELECTED AS UK REPRESENTATIVES OF CLEANTECH INNOVATION Agility Global, the London-based cleantech SME has been selected amongst a handful of start-up companies to represent the UK in a trade mission to showcase British innovation in green technology. Agility is designer and manufacturer of world's first high-performance, clean tech motorcycle, Saietta R. The Saietta R, capable of achieving 0-60mph in 3.9 seconds, will be one of the most energy efficient vehicles on the road - equivalent to 386 miles per gallon. The motorcycle is set to launch in 2014, and is currently available for pre-order while a prototype of the Saietta R is currently on display at The National Motorcycle Museum, having previously exhibited at The London Science Museum. Agility CEO, Lawrence Marazzi said: We are delighted to have been chosen to represent Britain at such a prestigious event. The UK is at the forefront in key areas of research and development that solve the global pollution and emission problems that larger cities face. Increasing levels of investment are channelling into the sector - this presents an obvious and significant market opportunity for businesses like ourselves to create tangible solutions to shape a more energy-efficient future. We are passionate about design and technological innovation, which we aim to transmit through our products. The Colorado Mission represents an ideal outlet to further our networks and business relationships - principally with the US, but also the wider international marketplace. Clean and Cool Mission, which will be held in Colorado in December is a showcase for Britain's best cleantech innovators to explore business opportunities associated with tackling climate change. The Mission will see sixteen UK cleantech companies learn from key leaders in the field and network with potential investors in Boulder, Denver and Fort Collins - they will participate in the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL) Industry Growth Forum, the premier clean energy investment event in the U.S. Discussing the Mission, David Bott, Director of Innovation Programmes at the Technology Strategy Board, said: The U.S has one of the most innovative and dynamic cleantech ecosystems. The Mission will provide the participants with the opportunity to establish partnerships, secure investment and help launch their business to a large, continually expanding and thriving technology market. Simon Carter, Deputy Director, Head of Renewable Energy at UKTI, added: We are delighted to sponsor the Clean and Cool Mission to Colorado and support UK innovation internationally. Colorado is a fast and reliable gateway to the U.S and to global markets and the Mission will allow the firms to learn how to turn their innovations into tangible business opportunities. Colorado is the fastest-growing cleantech ecosystem in the United States and was recently ranked the second best state for entrepreneurship and innovation, according to CNBC. The week-long Mission was organised by the UK's innovation agency, The Technology Strategy Board, together with The Long Run Venture and UK Trade and Investment. ENDS About Agility Global http://www.agilitymotors.com/http://www.agilitymotors.com/ Agility Global is a British automotive designer and manufacturer of sustainable transport and electric vehicle powertrain components. Agility was founded in 2008 by entrepreneur and aerospace engineer, Lawrence Marazzi. Headquartered in London, Agility's mission is to successfully shape the future of transportation. It aims to introduce 'smart progress' to transportation infrastructure by applying F1 design and aerospace technology to increase product efficiency. Agility is designer
[Biofuel] Adbusters: Gift the limited-edition Epic Human Journey Box Set!
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 20:13:41 + To: ke...@journeytoforever.org From: Adbusters Media Foundation jamm...@mail.adbusters.org Reply-to: Adbusters Media Foundation i...@adbusters.org Subject: Gift the limited-edition Epic Human Journey Box Set! http://campaigns.adbusters.org/l/kpDCt3V6gaKNpWLv1GTHSg/xxQeN4Mau6Iapz4N8FUaKA/tPs1e8qx2tJEgMlMTvu1bQ Hey all you wild spirits out there, In a few short weeks, Adbusters #111 - the final installment of our Epic Human Journey series - will hit newsstands worldwide! We're all very excited as we've never created anything like this it's a futuristic and imaginative foray into one of the many possible scenarios that lie ahead for humanity, and an invaluable guidebook that everyone will need to navigate both the dark times and the opportunities which lie ahead. With the holidays just around the corner, we've bundled all five parts of this Epic Human Journey into a box-set in time for the season of gifting. The Epic Human Journey series is a http://campaigns.adbusters.org/l/kpDCt3V6gaKNpWLv1GTHSg/xxQeN4Mau6Iapz4N8FUaKA/tPs1e8qx2tJEgMlMTvu1bQlimited-edition, one-time-only Adbusters collectible item. Taking up two inches on your bookshelf, this series will keep you riveted throughout the holiday season and beyond with over 500 full-color pages of human history, revolution, geopolitical game-changers and spiritual epiphanies. Is it the fate of every successful species to wipe itself out? Will we use our strongest talents, resources and gifts to draw back before the abyss of self-inflicted eco disaster? http://campaigns.adbusters.org/l/kpDCt3V6gaKNpWLv1GTHSg/xxQeN4Mau6Iapz4N8FUaKA/tPs1e8qx2tJEgMlMTvu1bQOur first-ever five-issue series faces these questions and digs deep into the enigmas of the human experience. Who are we? Where did we come from? Where are we going? Can we summon the wild human spirit to avoid nightfall? This box-set makes a great collector's item for yourself or gift for others. http://campaigns.adbusters.org/l/kpDCt3V6gaKNpWLv1GTHSg/xxQeN4Mau6Iapz4N8FUaKA/tPs1e8qx2tJEgMlMTvu1bQGet it now online or call Wendee at 1.800.663.1243. We have only two hundred sets, so don't miss out! $125 includes shipping. You will also receive two complimentary copies of Adbusters full-color Year of the Horse 2014 wall calendar. http://campaigns.adbusters.org/l/kpDCt3V6gaKNpWLv1GTHSg/xxQeN4Mau6Iapz4N8FUaKA/tPs1e8qx2tJEgMlMTvu1bQTake the plunge! From all of us here at CJHQ http://campaigns.adbusters.org/l/kpDCt3V6gaKNpWLv1GTHSg/hpx3NTUK763D1zNtaWU10WtA/tPs1e8qx2tJEgMlMTvu1bQ http://campaigns.adbusters.org/l/kpDCt3V6gaKNpWLv1GTHSg/hpx3NTUK763D1zNtaWU10WtA/tPs1e8qx2tJEgMlMTvu1bQAdbusters.org | http://campaigns.adbusters.org/l/kpDCt3V6gaKNpWLv1GTHSg/fnABAkT2w7eh0h2Zwh892XZQ/tPs1e8qx2tJEgMlMTvu1bQSubscribe to the magazine Updates: http://campaigns.adbusters.org/l/kpDCt3V6gaKNpWLv1GTHSg/IvWFGVbsYrFSmrfNXBYraA/tPs1e8qx2tJEgMlMTvu1bQTwitter / http://campaigns.adbusters.org/l/kpDCt3V6gaKNpWLv1GTHSg/TFrVdj1PZOmYBCll7Kxy7A/tPs1e8qx2tJEgMlMTvu1bQFacebook / http://campaigns.adbusters.org/l/kpDCt3V6gaKNpWLv1GTHSg/afZ6bhVLjBVlbLUvSRwbAg/tPs1e8qx2tJEgMlMTvu1bQYouTube / http://campaigns.adbusters.org/l/kpDCt3V6gaKNpWLv1GTHSg/mS8A16e5rUo892Si0jn6KHHQ/tPs1e8qx2tJEgMlMTvu1bQTumblr / http://campaigns.adbusters.org/l/kpDCt3V6gaKNpWLv1GTHSg/b9vYHUbK1mXblNw763gNsGdQ/tPs1e8qx2tJEgMlMTvu1bQGoogle+ IMPORTANT: To ensure our messages reach your inbox, please add jamm...@mail.adbusters.org to your address book. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] 4 Foods That Could Disappear If New Food Safety Rules Pass
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/11/will-new-food-safety-law-small-farms-organic-FSMA 4 Foods That Could Disappear If New Food Safety Rules Pass -By Tom Philpott | Wed Nov. 6, 2013 When President Obama signed into law an overhaul of the nation's food safety regime in early 2011, it was clear that the system needed a kick in the pants. Recent salmonella outbreaks involving a dizzying array of peanut products and a half billion eggs had revealed a dysfunctional, porous regulatory environment for the nation's increasingly concentrated food system. The law, known as the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), was a pretty modest piece of work when it came to reining in massive operations that can sicken thousands nationwide with a single day's output. No surprise, since Big Food's main lobbying group, the Grocery Manufacturers Association, notes on its web site that GMA worked closely with legislators to craft the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act and will work closely with the FDA to develop rules and guidance to implement the provisions of this new law. (Food and Water Watch summarizes FSMA here; Elanor Starmer lists some of its limitations here.) Even for many supporters of food safety reform, one persistent question has long been whether the new rules would steamroll small and midsize farms. Obviously, what would be a light burden for a multinational giant like, say, Kraft Foods, could be a crushing one for a farm that sells its produce at a farmers market. To allay fears of one-size-fits-all regulations-which swirled in sometimes-wildly paranoid forms during the FSMA debate-Congress exempted most operations with sales of less than $500,000 from most of its requirements. But the proof of is in the rule-making-the process by which federal agencies, in this case the Food and Drug Administration, translate Congressional legislation into enforceable law. Congress intended its exemption to save small farms from overly burdensome regulation, but the question remained: How would the FDA put it into action? Finally, more than two years after Obama signed FSMA, the FDA's rule-making process appears to be nearing an end. And I'm disappointed to report that, according to decidedly nonparanoid, noncrazy observers, the proposed rules as currently written represent a significant and possibly devastating burden to small and midsize players. The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC), a highly respected lobbying and watchdog outfit, has come out with a list of Top 10 Problems with the Food and Drug Administration's Proposed Food Safety Regulations for Farmers and Local Food Businesses. If you'll excuse the gimmick, here are four foods that could go missing if the FDA sticks to the current version of its food-safety rules. 1. The local, organic carrots in your kid's school lunch program. Many farm-to-school programs are facilitated by what the US Department of Agriculture calls food hubs-operations that gather produce from small farmers and sell it, usually to buyers like schools, restaurants, and retailers. The USDA actively promotes them as strong and sound infrastructure support to producers across the country which will also help build a stronger regional food system. The USDA lists more then 100 active food hubs nationwide. The new rules imperil food hubs in two ways. The first is through the farms that supply them. The new law's less-than-$500,000 exemption applies only to farms that sell more than half of their produce directly to consumers. But a growing number of small farms earn a significant amount of their income selling to third-party local enterprises like food hubs and food co-ops-and if revenue from those sources exceeds half of total revenue, these farms would lose their exemption and become subject to costly requirements. NSAC points to the FDA's own economic analysis (see page 27) showing that more than 30,000 small and very small farms would be subject to regulation. The cost of compliance for these farms, USDA shows, will be 4 percent to 6 percent of total gross sales-enough to knock out half or more of a small operation's profits, and turn an operation that's scraping by into one that fails. Then there's the problem that the FDA's proposed rules have not settled upon a definition of very small business. If such a definition isn't spelled out, NSAC warns, operations like food hubs could be regulated well beyond their risk and with compliance costs too high for them to stay in business. 2. The kohlrabi in your farm-share box. You might be annoyed by the amount of kohlrabi (a grievously underrated vegetable) in your CSA, but probably don't want it to disappear altogether. But because the current proposal doesn't narrowly define manufacturing facilities, CSAs and other direct farmer-to-consumer farms that do light processing activities or include produce from another farm in their boxes will be
[Biofuel] Scientists Warn of Extreme Risk: Greatest Short-term Threat to Humanity is From Fukushima Fuel Pools
http://www.globalresearch.ca/scientists-warn-of-extreme-risk-greatest-short-term-threat-to-humanity-is-from-fukushima-fuel-pools/5357344 Scientists Warn of Extreme Risk: Greatest Short-term Threat to Humanity is From Fukushima Fuel Pools By Washington's Blog Global Research, November 08, 2013 We've long said that the greatest short-term threat to humanity is from the fuel pools at Fukushima. The Japanese nuclear agency recently green-lighted the removal of the spent fuel rods from Fukushima reactor 4?s spent fuel pool. The operation is scheduled to begin this month. The head of the U.S. Department of Energy correctly notes: The success of the cleanup also has global significance. So we all have a direct interest in seeing that the next steps are taken well, efficiently and safely. If one of the pools collapsed or caught fire, it could have severe adverse impacts not only on Japan but the rest of the world, including the United States. Indeed, a Senator called it a national security concern for the U.S.: The radiation caused by the failure of the spent fuel pools in the event of another earthquake could reach the West Coast within days. That absolutely makes the safe containment and protection of this spent fuel a security issue for the United States. Award-winning scientist David Suzuki says that Fukushima is terrifying, Tepco and the Japanese government are lying through their teeth, and Fukushima is the most terrifying situation I can imagine. Suzuki notes that reactor 4 is so badly damaged that - if there's another earthquake of 7 or above - the building could come down. And the probability of another earthquake of 7 or above in the next 3 years is over 95%. Suzuki says that he's seen a paper that says that if - in fact - the 4th reactor comes down, it's bye bye Japan, and everyone on the West Coast of North America should evacuate. Now if that's not terrifying, I don't know what is. The Telegraph reports: The operator of Japan's crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant will begin a dry run of the procedure at the No. 4 reactor, which experts have warned carries grave risks. *** Did you ever play pick up sticks? asked a foreign nuclear expert who has been monitoring Tepco's efforts to regain control of the plant. You had 50 sticks, you heaved them into the air and than had to take one off the pile at a time. If the pile collapsed when you were picking up a stick, you lost, he said. There are 1,534 pick-up sticks in a jumble in top of an unsteady reactor 4. What do you think can happen? I do not know anyone who is confident that this can be done since it has never been tried. ABC reports: One slip-up in the latest step to decommission Japan's crippled Fukushima nuclear plant could trigger a monumental chain reaction, experts warn. *** Experts around the world have warned that the fuel pool is in a precarious state - vulnerable to collapsing in another big earthquake. Yale University professor Charles Perrow wrote about the number 4 fuel pool this year in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists. This has me very scared, he told the ABC. Tokyo would have to be evacuated because [the] caesium and other poisons that are there will spread very rapidly. Perrow also argues: Conditions in the unit 4 pool, 100 feet from the ground, are perilous, and if any two of the rods touch it could cause a nuclear reaction that would be uncontrollable. The radiation emitted from all these rods, if they are not continually cool and kept separate, would require the evacuation of surrounding areas including Tokyo. Because of the radiation at the site the 6,375 rods in the common storage pool could not be continuously cooled; they would fission and all of humanity will be threatened, for thousands of years. Former Japanese ambassador Akio Matsumura warns that - if the operation isn't done right - this could one day be considered the start of the ultimate catastrophe of the world and planet: (He also argues that removing the fuel rods will take decades rather than months.) Nuclear expert Arnie Gundersen and physician Helen Caldicott have both said that people should evacuate the Northern Hemisphere if one of the Fukushima fuel pools collapses. Gundersen said: Move south of the equator if that ever happened, I think that's probably the lesson there. Harvey Wasserman wrote two months ago: We are now within two months of what may be humankind's most dangerous moment since the Cuban Missile Crisis. *** Should the attempt fail, the rods could be exposed to air and catch fire, releasing horrific quantities of radiation into the atmosphere. The pool could come crashing to the ground, dumping the rods together into a pile that could fission and possibly explode. The resulting radioactive cloud would threaten the health and safety of all us. *** A new fuel fire at Unit 4 would pour out a continuous stream of lethal
[Biofuel] Global Fail: Govts Pour $500 Billion Into Fossil Fuel Subsidies
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/11/07-8 Published on Thursday, November 7, 2013 by Common Dreams Global Fail: Govts Pour $500 Billion Into Fossil Fuel Subsidies Governments are 'subsidizing the very activities that are pushing the world towards dangerous climate change,' states new report - Andrea Germanos, staff writer While greenhouse gas emissions reach record levels, governments across the world are pouring hundreds of billions into fossil fuel subsidies, fostering perverse incentives to continue the race towards climate doom, a new report details. The report, Time to Change the Game http://www.odi.org.uk/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/8668.pdf, from the UK-based think tank Overseas Development Institute (ODI) explains how the subsidies-amounting to over $500 billion globally in 2011-are thwarting a switch to a low-carbon economy. The rules of the game are currently biased in favor of fossil fuels, stated report author Shelagh Whitley. The status quo encourages energy companies to continue burning high-carbon fossil fuels and offers no incentive to change. We're throwing money at policies that are only going to make the problem worse in the long run by locking us into dangerous climate change, stated Whitley. Though the subsidies pad the pockets of the industry, the report's Executive Summary states that if governments' aim is to avoid dangerous climate change, [they] are shooting themselves in both feet. They are subsidizing the very activities that are pushing the world towards dangerous climate change, and creating barriers to investment in low-carbon development and subsidy incentives that encourage investment in carbon-intensive energy. In addition to the U.S., the countries with the greatest fossil fuel subsidies include Russia, Australia, Germany and the UK. The inconsistencies between climate goals and energy policies are becoming increasingly stark, writes ODI director Kevin Watkins. Germany is providing lavish support for the construction of new coal plants. Britain offers generous tax concessions for oil and gas exploration, including bumper deals for companies involved in fracking. The United States spends heavily to subsidize gasoline and other fossil fuels. In all of these cases, bold climate-change targets are being undermined by business-as-usual subsidies. In some countries, including Pakistan, Venezuela and Bangladesh, fossil fuel subsidies are significantly greater than domestic health expenditures. And while some renewable energy subsidies exist, they're no match for those of fossil fuels. From the report: At a global scale, today's fossil fuel subsidies dwarf support for renewables. The IEA has estimated that for every $1 of support for renewables in 2011, $6 was spent on fossil fuel subsidies. Among the reasons the report lists for why subsidies exist are special interests. In the US, individuals and political-action committees affiliated with oil and gas companies have donated $239 million to candidates and parties since the 1990 election. Further: The benefits of these subsidies are often concentrated among specific actors, while the costs are spread across the general population. Eliminating the fossil fuel subsidies would not only be a better investments and climate approach, it would also have economic and social benefits, according to the report. To realize those benefits, the G20, responsible for 78% of global carbon emissions from fuel combustion in 2010, should end all fossil fuel subsidies by 2020. The report urges nations at the upcoming UN climate talks in Warsaw to take up the issue and to agree on a timeline for the phase-out. Eliminating fossil fuel subsidies would be the mother of all win-win scenarios, ODI director Kevin Watkins told the BBC. You'd have a win for taxpayers, a win for governments north and south and you'd have a win for the planet as well. * * * In tandem with the report, the ODI released a series of infographics including the ones below: http://thumbnails.visually.netdna-cdn.com/fossil-fuels_527ab7cbc9212_w587.jpg http://thumbnails.visually.netdna-cdn.com/emissions_527ab749884df_w587.jpg ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] The Founding Fables of Industrialised Agriculture
http://www.independentsciencenews.org/un-sustainable-farming/the-founding-fables-of-industrialised-agriculture/ The Founding Fables of Industrialised Agriculture October 30, 2013 by Colin Tudge Governments these days are not content with agriculture that merely provides good food. In line with the dogma of neoliberalism they want it to contribute as much wealth as any other industry towards the grand goal of economic growth. High tech offers to reconcile the two ambitions - producing allegedly fabulous yields, which seems to be what's needed, and becoming highly profitable. The high-tech flavour of the decade is genetic engineering, supplying custom-built crops and livestock as GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms). So it was that the UK Secretary of State for the Environment and Rural Affairs, Owen Paterson, told The Independent recently that the world absolutely needs genetically-engineered Golden Rice, as created by one of the world's two biotech giants, Syngenta. Indeed, those who oppose Golden Rice are wicked: a comment so outrageous that Paterson's own civil servants have distanced themselves from it. Specifically, Golden Rice has been fitted with genes that produce carotene, which is the precursor of vitamin A. Worldwide, approximately 5 million pre-school aged children and 10 million pregnant women suffer significant Vitamin A deficiency sufficiently severe to cause night blindness, according to the WHO. By such statistics a vitamin A-rich rice seems eminently justified. Yet the case for Golden Rice is pure hype. For Golden Rice is not particularly rich in carotene and in any case, rice is not, and never will be, the best way to deliver it. Carotene is one of the commonest organic molecules in nature. It is the yellow pigment that accompanies chlorophyll in all dark green leaves (the many different kinds known as spinach are a great source) and is clearly on show in yellow roots such as carrots and some varieties of cassava, and in fruits like papaya and mangoes that in the tropics can grow like weeds. So the best way by far to supply carotene (and thus vitamin A) is by horticulture - which traditionally was at the core of all agriculture. Vitamin A deficiency is now a huge and horrible issue primarily because horticulture has been squeezed out by monocultural big-scale agriculture - the kind that produces nothing but rice or wheat or maize as far as the eye can see; and by insouciant urbanization that leaves no room for gardens. Well-planned cities could always be self-sufficient in fruit and veg. Golden Rice is not the answer to the world's vitamin A problem. As a scion of monocultural agriculture, it is part of the cause. Syngenta's promotion of it is yet one more exercise in top-down control and commercial PR. Paterson's blatant promotion of it is at best naïve. For Golden Rice serves primarily as a flagship for GMOs and GMOs are very big business - duly supported at huge public expense by successive governments. It is now the lynch-pin of agricultural research almost everywhere. The UK's Agriculture and Food Research Council of the 1990s even had the words 'Agriculture' and 'Food' air-brushed out to become the Biotechnology and Biological Research Council (BBSRC). We have been told that GMOs increase yields with lower inputs and have been proven beyond reasonable doubt to be safe. Indeed, journalist Mark Lynas has been telling us from some remarkably high platforms that the debate on GMOs is dead; that there is now a consensus among scientists worldwide that they are necessary and safe. In reality, GMOs do not consistently or even usually yield well http://www.independentsciencenews.org/commentaries/roundup-ready-2-soybeans/ under field conditions; they do not necessarily lead to reduction in chemical inputs, and have often led to increases http://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/24; and contra Mark Lynas, there is no worldwide consensus of scientists vouching for their safety. Indeed, the European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Responsibility (ENSSER) has drawn up a petition that specifically denies any such consensus and points out that a list of several hundred studies does not show GM food safety. Hundreds of scientists are expected to sign. Overall, after 30 years of concerted endeavour, ultimately at our expense and with the neglect of matters far more pressing, no GMO food crop has ever solved a problem that really needs solving that could not have been solved by conventional means in the same time and at less cost. The real point behind GMOs is to achieve corporate/ big government control of all agriculture, the biggest by far of all human endeavours. And this agriculture will be geared not to general wellbeing but to the maximization of wealth. The last hundred years, in which agriculture has been industrialised, have laid the foundations. GMOs, for the agro-industrialists, can
[Biofuel] The Founding Fables of Industrialised Agriculture
___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] The Village Against the World
http://www.truthdig.com/arts_culture/item/the_village_against_the_world_20131108 The Village Against the World Posted on Nov 8, 2013 By Nomi Prins The Village Against the World A book by Dan Hancox The most expensive government on the planet-ours-was shut down over budget concerns, health insurance and passive-aggressiveness. The inane partisan squabbling most acutely affected those with the most to lose-the people at the bottom of the economic pile. Meanwhile, grossly unequal division of wealth and power is a growing blight on the face of humanity. Dangerous mechanisms of financial ruin are nurtured by governments while they spew rhetoric about helping citizens. A future in which reckless economic exploitation will diminish seems highly unlikely. But what if another world were possible? One in which the spoils of predatory capitalism, subsidized by central banks and federal policy, aren't rapaciously consumed by a tiny minority at the expense of the vast majority of global citizens? In his captivating new book, The Village Against the World, Dan Hancox shows, in lyrical and penetrating prose, that not only is it possible, but an observable fact. And so begins his tale of the alternative. Nestled in farmland about 60 miles from Seville, Spain, in the region of Andalucía, exists Marinaleda, a village of 2,700 people. The cry OTRO MUNDO ES POSSIBLE-another world is possible-adorns a metal arch over its main avenue. For 30 years, the citizens of this tiny pueblo have fought and won a struggle to create a utopia in which everyone has a job and a home. Communism seems too dismissive and combative a term for Marinaleda's ability to exist in defiance of a system that has shattered surrounding towns, and entire countries around the world. The year 2016, Hancox writes, will mark the 500th anniversary of Thomas More's Utopia But how do you go from a fevered dream, an aspirational blueprint, to concrete reality? The answer unfolds as Hancox takes us on a trip that inspires one's visual senses as he depicts the white-washed beauty of the village, one's taste buds as he describes simple meals capped with thick bread doused in fresh local olive oil, and invites us to envision a collective life freed-as much as possible-from global crises, acquisition and power plays. In Marinaleda, the Che Guevara stadium houses sporting events, oversized placards of doves decorate streets named for left-wing idols like Salvador Allende and Pablo Neruda, and profits from the local vegetable canning factory or olive oil co-op are used to enhance the village. Marinaleda's main housing development consists of 350 casitas-modest homes self-built by their inhabitants, with materials furnished by the village. Mortgages are 15 euro per month. The village has, and needs, no police force. For eight years, Hancox was fascinated with Marinaleda's miracle struggle, transforming from abject poverty in the late '70s (60 percent unemployment, and people going without food for days at a time) to the functioning utopia that it became. Beyond Marinaleda, the economic suffering of Spain at the hands of a speculative overdrive unleashed by big U.S. banks and adopted by European ones, remains acute. It is made worse by austerity measures that punish citizens, while providing banks and bondholders with EU subsidies. Youth unemployment sits at a sickening record high of 56.1 percent, second only to Greece's 62.9 percent. Spain's adult male unemployment at 25.3 percent tops all other EU countries. The Spanish housing market remains in tatters, after catastrophic levels of overbuilding and leverage, complementing America's housing bubble before it burst in 2007-2008. Just as in the U.S., Spanish banks foreclosed on slews of properties for which the population had been forced to overpay during the bubble, increasing homelessness. The current economic crisis has left Spain with 4 million empty homes, and ghost towns on the outskirts of Madrid. In contrast, Marinaleda brims with excitement and festivity during its famous annual ferias and carnivals, though most of the time, it is incredibly peaceful. No one there has experienced a foreclosure. Even before the crisis descended on Spain, the wealth gap in Andalusia was a chasm, Hancox informs us. It has been so forever. It is a region where mass rural pauperism exists alongside vast aristocratic estates-the latifundios. It's an oft-repeated bit of southern rural mythology that you can walk all the way from Seville, the Andalusian capital, to the northern coast of Spain without ever leaving the land of the notorious Duchess of Alba, a woman thought to have more titles than anyone else in the world. While 22.5 percent of her fellow Spaniards survive on only ¤500 a month, the duquesa is estimated to be worth ¤3.2 billion-and still receives ¤3 million a year in EU farm subsidies. It's important to note, as Hancox does
[Biofuel] Going Nuclear: An Environmentalist Makes the Case
TRUTHDIG RADIO Going Nuclear: An Environmentalist Makes the Case -- This week on Truthdig Radio in association with KPFK: The director of Pandora's Promise pitches nuclear power. Also: Bringing quality food to the poor, and bullying in sports. http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/going_nuclear_an_environmentalist_makes_the_case_20131107 Pandora's Promise (2013) Documentary - 15 November 2013 (UK) Ratings: 6.1/10 from 161 users Director: Robert Stone Writer: Robert Stone Stars: Stewart Brand, Gwyneth Cravens, Mark Lynas A feature-length documentary about the history and future of nuclear power. The film explores how and why mankind's most feared and controversial technological discovery is now passionately embraced by many of those who once led the charge against it. Operating as history, cultural meditation and contemporary exploration, PANDORA'S PROMISE aims to inspire a serious and realistic debate over what is without question the most important question of our time: how do we continue to power modern civilization without destroying it? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1992193/?ref_=fn_al_tt_8 A Conversation With Director Robert Stone of Pandora's Promise Posted: 11/07/2013 10:05 am Govindini Murty Filmmaker and Co-Editor of Libertas Film Magazine http://www.huffingtonpost.com/govindini-murty/a-conversation-with-direc_b_4232707.html Robert Stone goes nuclear November 06, 2013 7:00 am * DOUG MOE http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/columnists/doug-moe/doug-moe-robert-stone-goes-nuclear/article_5e614e3b-59d3-5323-b737-0752432069c5.html 'Pandora's Promise' director defends his controversial nuclear energy film By Robert Stone, Special to CNN November 8, 2013 http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/07/opinion/pandora-nuclear-stone-ifr-response/ --0-- http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/07/opinion/lyman-nuclear-pandora/index.html Scientist: Film hypes the promise of advanced nuclear technology By Edwin Lyman, Special to CNN November 7, 2013 Editor's note: Edwin Lyman, a physicist, is a senior scientist with the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington. For more of his critique of Pandora's Promise, see his blog post, Movie Review: Put Pandora's Promise Back in the Box. For more on the future of nuclear power as a possible solution for global climate change, watch CNN Films' presentation of Pandora's Promise, airing on CNN on Thursday, November 7, at 9 p.m. ET/PT (CNN) -- In his zeal to promote nuclear power, filmmaker Robert Stone inserted numerous half-truths and less-than-half-truths in his new documentary Pandora's Promise, which CNN is airing on November 7. One of Stone's more misleading allegations was that scientists at a U.S. research facility, the Argonne National Laboratory, were on the verge of developing a breakthrough technology that could solve nuclear power's numerous problems when the Clinton administration and its allies in Congress shut the program in 1994 for purely political reasons. Like the story of Pandora itself, the tale of the integral fast reactor (IFR) -- or at least the version presented in the movie -- is more myth than reality. In the final assessment, the concept's drawbacks greatly outweighed its advantages. The government had sound reasons to stanch the flow of taxpayer dollars to a costly, flawed project that also was undermining U.S. efforts to reduce the risks of nuclear terrorism and proliferation around the world. Read what Robert Stone has to say http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/07/opinion/pandora-nuclear-stone-ifr-response/index.html In the film, scientists who worked on the IFR program unsurprisingly sing its praises. For example, Charles Till, a former program manager, claimed that the reactor can't melt down and would therefore be immune to the type of catastrophes that occurred at Three Mile Island in 1979 and Fukushima in 2011. Others told Stone that the reactor, by recycling its own used, or spent, fuel, would conserve uranium resources and produce much less nuclear waste than conventional reactors. But the reactor's advocates didn't tell the whole story, and Stone did not include anyone in the film who could have provided a more balanced and realistic assessment. What did Pandora's Promise leave out? First, it does not clearly explain what a fast reactor is and how it differs from the water-cooled reactors in use today. Most operating reactors use a type of fuel called low-enriched uranium, which cannot be used directly to make a nuclear weapon and poses a low security risk. The spent fuel from these water-cooled reactors contains weapon-usable plutonium as a byproduct, but it is very hard to make into a bomb because it is mixed with uranium and highly radioactive fission products. Fast reactors, on the other hand, are far more dangerous because they typically require fuels made from plutonium or highly enriched uranium that can be used to make nuclear weapons. In fact, fast reactors can be operated as
[Biofuel] Climate Summit: Don't turn farmers into 'climate smart' carbon traders!
http://www.grain.org/article/entries/4811-climate-summit-don-t-turn-farmers-into-climate-smart-carbon-traders pdf: http://www.grain.org/article/entries/4811-climate-summit-don-t-turn-farmers-into-climate-smart-carbon-traders.pdf Climate Summit: Don't turn farmers into 'climate smart' carbon traders! La Vía Campesina | GRAIN | ETC Group | 07 November 2013 Climate Summit: don't turn farmers into 'climate smart' carbon traders! Farmers produce food, not carbon. Yet, if some of the governments and corporate lobbies negotiating at the UN climate change conference to be held in Warsaw from 11-22 November have their way, farmland could soon be considered as a carbon sink that polluting corporations can buy into to compensate for their harmful emissions. We are directly opposed to the carbon market approach to dealing with the climate crisis, says Josie Riffaud of La Vía Campesina. Turning our farmers' fields into carbon sinks - the rights to which can be sold on the carbon market - will only lead us further away from what we see as the real solution: food sovereignty. The carbon in our farms is not for sale! Carbon trading has totally failed to address the real causes of the climate crisis. It was never meant to do so. Rather than reducing carbon emissions at their source, it has created a lucrative market for polluters and speculators to buy and sell carbon credits while continuing to pollute. Now the pressure is increasing to treat farmland as a major carbon sink which can be claimed as yet another counterbalance to industrial emissions. The governments of the US and Australia, the World Bank and the corporate sector have long argued for this, and for the creation of new carbon markets where they can purchase land-based offsets in developing countries. Agribusiness is well positioned to profit from these, and some developing country governments hope that offering their forests, grasslands and farmland to polluters in the North could earn them revenue. The November United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) conference in Warsaw risks pushing us deeper into this carbon market mess. Marcin Korolec, Poland's minister of the environment and main organiser of the event, proudly announced that for the first time ever, representatives of global business will be formally part of the negotiations. A look at the list of official partners of the conference shows that they are amongst the most polluting industries of the world. Agriculture is a major contributor to climate change, but Henk Hobbelink of GRAIN points out that: It is the industrial food system - with its heavy use of chemical inputs, the soil erosion and deforestation that accompanies monoculture plantation farming, and the ever-growing drive to supply far away export markets - which is the main culprit behind the climate crisis. Rather than promoting this with carbon markets, the world's leaders should support peasant farming and agroecology as the solution. GRAIN's research has shown that a sustained focus on peasant-based agroecological practices oriented toward restoring organic matter to soils could capture 24-30% of the current global annual greenhouse gas emissions. A week after the climate negotiators have flown home from Warsaw, most likely without having agreed to any meaningful action on the climate crisis, the World Bank and the governments of the Netherlands and South Africa will convene an international conference in Johannesburg to promote climate smart agriculture, and set up a new alliance to achieve it. But a look at the proposals on the table shows that it entails nothing more than business as usual: new genetically modified seeds developed by biotechnology corporations, more chemical fertilisers and pesticides by the agrochemical giants, and more 'bio-intensive' industrial plantation farming. Climate smart agriculture has become the new slogan for the agricultural research establishment and the corporate sector to position themselves as the solution to the food and climate crisis, says Pat Mooney of the ETC Group. For the world's small farmers, there is nothing smart about this. It is just another way to push corporate controlled technologies into their fields and rob them of their land. At the same time, these very corporations are developing other high-risk technologies, ranging from synthetic biology, to nanotechnology and geoengineering. There is no clear understanding of their impacts and these new dramatic technologies will wreak more havoc on our already fragile planet than cure the climate and environmental crises. Agriculture's central role of feeding people and providing livelihoods to smallholders around the world should be defended, says Elizabeth Mpofu, from Vía Campesina. Rights over our farms, lands, seeds and natural resources need to remain in our hands so we can produce food and care for our mother earth as peasant
[Biofuel] The Anti-Empire Report #122
http://williamblum.org/aer/read/122 The Anti-Empire Report #122 By William Blum - Published November 7th, 2013 National Security Agency - The only part of the government that really listens to what you have to say The New York Times (November 2) ran a long article based on NSA documents released by Edward Snowden. One of the lines that most caught my attention concerned Sigint - Signals intelligence, the term used for electronic intercepts. The document stated: Sigint professionals must hold the moral high ground, even as terrorists or dictators seek to exploit our freedoms. Some of our adversaries will say or do anything to advance their cause; we will not. What, I wondered, might that mean? What would the National Security Agency - on moral principle - refuse to say or do? I have on occasion asked people who reject or rationalize any and all criticism of US foreign policy: What would the United States have to do in its foreign policy to lose your support? What, for you, would be too much? I've yet to get a suitable answer to that question. I suspect it's because the person is afraid that whatever they say I'll point out that the United States has already done it. The United Nations vote on the Cuba embargo - 22 years in a row For years American political leaders and media were fond of labeling Cuba an international pariah. We haven't heard that for a very long time. Perhaps one reason is the annual vote in the United Nations General Assembly on the resolution which reads: Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba. This is how the vote has gone (not including abstentions): YearVotes (Yes-No) No Votes 199259-2US, Israel 199388-4US, Israel, Albania, Paraguay 1994101-2 US, Israel 1995117-3 US, Israel, Uzbekistan 1996138-3 US, Israel, Uzbekistan 1997143-3 US, Israel, Uzbekistan 1998157-2 US, Israel 1999155-2 US, Israel 2000167-3 US, Israel, Marshall Islands 2001167-3 US, Israel, Marshall Islands 2002173-3 US, Israel, Marshall Islands 2003179-3 US, Israel, Marshall Islands 2004179-4 US, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau 2005182-4 US, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau 2006183-4 US, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau 2007184-4 US, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau 2008185-3 US, Israel, Palau 2009187-3 US, Israel, Palau 2010187-2 US, Israel 2011186-2 US, Israel 2012188-3 US, Israel, Palau 2013188-2 US, Israel Each fall the UN vote is a welcome reminder that the world has not completely lost its senses and that the American empire does not completely control the opinion of other governments. Speaking before the General Assembly, October 29, Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez declared: The economic damages accumulated after half a century as a result of the implementation of the blockade amount to $1.126 trillion. He added that the blockade has been further tightened under President Obama's administration, some 30 US and foreign entities being hit with $2.446 billion in fines due to their interaction with Cuba. However, the American envoy, Ronald Godard, in an appeal to other countries to oppose the resolution, said: The international community cannot in good conscience ignore the ease and frequency with which the Cuban regime silences critics, disrupts peaceful assembly, impedes independent journalism and, despite positive reforms, continues to prevent some Cubans from leaving or returning to the island. The Cuban government continues its tactics of politically motivated detentions, harassment and police violence against Cuban citizens. 1 So there you have it. That is why Cuba must be punished. One can only guess what Mr. Godard would respond if told that more than 7,000 people were arrested in the United States during the Occupy Movement's first 8 months of protest 2 ; that their encampments were violently smashed up; that many of them were physically abused by the police. Does Mr. Godard ever read a newspaper or the Internet, or watch television? Hardly a day passes in America without a police officer shooting to death an unarmed person? As to independent journalism - what would happen if Cuba announced that from now on anyone in the country could own any kind of media? How long would it be before CIA money - secret and unlimited CIA money financing all kinds of fronts in Cuba - would own or control most of the media worth owning or controlling? The real reason for Washington's eternal hostility toward Cuba? The fear of a good example of an alternative to the capitalist model; a fear that has been validated repeatedly over the years as Third World countries have expressed their adulation of Cuba. How the embargo began: On April 6, 1960, Lester D. Mallory, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American
[Biofuel] Scariest Christian Movie Ever?
I got sent this spam puff for a new end times movie, below, courtesy of its Email Marketing campaign. It has already scared several people to Christ which is good, the puff says. A movie that _scares_ people to Jesus? And it's good? My my. God ls love it says in the Bible. It only says it twice, but that's enough - it's all you need to know, IMHO. It's in the first epistle of St. John the Revelator, so beloved of end-timers, but there you go, consistency not required. I don't think it says anywhere that God is a scary terrorist (apart from nuking the odd ungodly city, but that was BC). It does say this though (also BC): For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity. All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again. Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth? (Ecclesiastes 3 19-21) Maybe they didn't read that bit, but what I'd like to know is, when all these faithful pre-Millennial Rapturist eschatological dispensational tribulationist nutters get themselves wafted on up to Heaven, leaving their clothes (and hopefully their wallets) behind, as allegedly promised by God the Scary, will their dogs and so on get wafted on up with them, leaving their collars behind, or will they all just crumble to dust like Dracula? Or will it be yet another re-run of the Mayan 2012 prophecy? (Excellent odds on the last bet.) 2012ology http://www.mail-archive.com/sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org/msg76691.html Anyway, I've said it here before and I'll say it again, sorry if it offends anyone: this is not Christianity, they got the wrong guy, it's an evil cult, and it's caused a huge amount of damage and suffering, a tribulation if ever there was one. A self-fulfilling prophecy, as usual, in exactly the opposite sense to what they believe, typical of neurotics. The movie gets top ratings at the Internet Movie Database - 8.6: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2710368/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 MRQE though, the excellent Movie Review Query Engine, while acknowledging its existence, has no reviews at all: [0 articles]. Rotten Tomatoes: No Reviews Yet... The movie was released nearly two months ago, so it probably isn't going to get any press reviews, good news. The Houston Chronicle's review that Pastor Mark quotes is no longer to be found online without a subscription, and the quote The filmmakers want to scare the living daylights out of non-Believers draws a blank at Google, but the Chronicle's review started like this: 13 Sep 2013 ... Instead of a new installment of the infamous Left Behind series from the past decade, Final: The Rapture is... Infamous. Methinks Pastor Mark isn't very honest. Bests Keith --0-- From: Final Outreach ma...@seefinal.com To: i...@journeytoforever.org Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2013 01:35:52 -0400 Subject: Scariest Christian Movie Ever? Trailer is inside The Rapture Discussion WARNING: This trailer for a new movie shows a very realistic portrayal of the Rapture. It has already scared several people to Christ which is good. The trailer ahas over 29,000 views! See it here: http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=16225062msgid=46528act=H7UQc=1394694destination=http%3A%2F%2FSeeFinal.comhttp://SeeFinal.com When this film was released last month in the theaters in Houston, it had the #3 highest per-screen average in the nation according to Box Office Mojo! I was at the theater where people were being SAVED in the LOBBY OF THE THEATER. I've never seen a more powerful, frightening, and realistic portrayal of the Rapture. 'Final: The Rapture' was shot in 6 countries and it's an EPIC, BIG-BUDGET look at what many pastors and leaders believe will HAPPEN SOON. Please support the film and the filmmakers! They have an advanced screener of the film that you can get now. The filmmakers have been supported by Campus Crusade for Christ, YWAM, Youth for Christ, Greg Laurie, Kay Arthur, Precept Ministries, Philip Yancey, CMA, Hillsong, and churches all over the world of all denominations. God bless, Pastor Mark To view the trailer, go here: http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=16225062msgid=46528act=H7UQc=1394694destination=http%3A%2F%2FSeeFinal.comhttp://SeeFinal.com Here is the poster: http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=16225062msgid=46528act=H7UQc=1394694destination=http%3A%2F%2FSeeFinal.com Some Reviews I've collected: Scariest Christian movie ever. Maranatha News 'Scariest Christian movie of the decade - Christian Post The filmmakers want to scare the living daylights out of non-Believers' - Houston Chronicle The most realistic Rapture movie ever - Pastor Steven Kay, Reach
[Biofuel] GMO Wars: The Global Battlefield
http://fpif.org/gmo-wars-global-battlefield/ GMO Wars: The Global Battlefield The case against GMOs has strengthened steadily over the last few years, even as the industry has expanded all over the world. By Walden Bello, October 28, 2013. This article is a joint publication of Foreign Policy In Focus and TheNation.com. The GMO wars escalated earlier this month when the 2013 World Food Prize was awarded to three chemical company executives, including Monsanto executive vice president and chief technology officer, Robert Fraley, responsible for development of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The choice of Fraley was widely protested, with 81 members of the prestigious World Future Council calling it an affront to the growing international consensus on safe, ecological farming practices that have been scientifically proven to promote nutrition and sustainability. Monsanto's Man The choice of Monsanto's man triggered accusations of prize buying. From 1999 to 2011, Monsanto donated $380,000 to the World Food Prize Foundation, in addition to a $5-million contribution in 2008 to help renovate the Hall of Laureates, a public museum honoring Norman Borlaug, the scientist who launched the Green Revolution. For some, the award to Monsanto is actually a sign of desperation on the part of the GMO establishment, a move designed to contain the deepening controversy over the so-called biotechnological revolution in food and agriculture. The arguments of the critics are making headway. Owing to concern about the dangers and risks posed by genetically engineered organisms, many governments have instituted total or partial bans on their cultivation, importation, and field-testing. A few years ago, there were 16 countries that had total or partial bans on GMOs. Now there are at least 26, including Switzerland, Australia, Austria, China, India, France, Germany, Hungary, Luxembourg, Greece, Bulgaria, Poland, Italy, Mexico, and Russia. Significant restrictions on GMOs exist in about 60 other countries. Restraints on trade in GMOs based on phyto-sanitary grounds, which are allowed under the World Trade Organization, have increased. Already, American rice farmers face strict limitations on their exports to the European Union, Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines, and are banned altogether from Russia and Bulgaria because unapproved genetically engineered rice escaped during open-field trials on GMO rice. Certain Thai exports-particularly canned fruit salads containing papaya to Germany, and sardines in soy oil to Greece and the Netherlands-were recently banned due to threat of contamination by GMOs. The Case against GMOs Gains Strength The case against GMOs has strengthened steadily over the last few years. Critics say that genetic engineering disrupts the precise sequence of a food's genetic code and disturbs the functions of neighboring genes, which can give rise to potentially toxic or allergenic molecules or even alter the nutritional value of food produced. The Bt toxin used in GMO corn, for example, was recently detected in the blood of pregnant women and their babies, with possibly harmful consequences. A second objection concerns genetic contamination. A GMO crop, once released in the open, reproduces via pollination and interacts genetically with natural varieties of the same crop, producing what is called genetic contamination. According to a study published in Nature, one of the world's leading scientific journals, Bt corn has contaminated indigenous varieties of corn tested in Oaxaca, Mexico. Third, a GMO, brought into natural surroundings, may have a toxic or lethal impact on other living things. Thus, it was found that Bt corn destroyed the larvae of the monarch butterfly, raising well grounded fears that many other natural plant and animal life may be impacted in the same way. Fourth, the benefits of GMOs have been oversold by the companies, like Monsanto and Syngenta, that peddle them. Most genetically engineered crops are either engineered to produce their own pesticide in the form of Bacillus thurengiensis (Bt) or are designed to be resistant to herbicides, so that herbicides can be sprayed in massive quantities to kill pests without harming the crops. It has been shown, however, that insects are fast developing resistance to Bt as well as to herbicides, resulting in even more massive infestation by the new superbugs. No substantial evidence exists that GM crops yield more than conventional crops. What genetically engineered crops definitely do lead to is greater use of pesticide, which is harmful both to humans and the environment. A fifth argument is that patented GMO seeds concentrate power in the hands of a few biotech corporations and marginalize small farmers. As the statement of the 81 members of the World Future Council put it, While profitable to the few companies producing them, GMO seeds reinforce
[Biofuel] Our Invisible Revolution
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/our_invisible_revolution_20131028 Our Invisible Revolution Posted on Oct 28, 2013 By Chris Hedges Did you ever ask yourself how it happens that government and capitalism continue to exist in spite of all the evil and trouble they are causing in the world? the anarchist Alexander Berkman wrote in his essay The Idea Is the Thing. http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/bright/berkman/iish/idea/ideathing.html If you did, then your answer must have been that it is because the people support those institutions, and that they support them because they believe in them. Berkman was right. As long as most citizens believe in the ideas that justify global capitalism, the private and state institutions that serve our corporate masters are unassailable. When these ideas are shattered, the institutions that buttress the ruling class deflate and collapse. The battle of ideas is percolating below the surface. It is a battle the corporate state is steadily losing. An increasing number of Americans are getting it. They know that we have been stripped of political power. They recognize that we have been shorn of our most basic and cherished civil liberties, and live under the gaze of the most intrusive security and surveillance apparatus in human history. Half the country lives in poverty. Many of the rest of us, if the corporate state is not overthrown, will join them. These truths are no longer hidden. It appears that political ferment is dormant in the United States. This is incorrect. The ideas that sustain the corporate state are swiftly losing their efficacy across the political spectrum. The ideas that are rising to take their place, however, are inchoate. The right has retreated into Christian fascism and a celebration of the gun culture. The left, knocked off balance by decades of fierce state repression in the name of anti-communism, is struggling to rebuild and define itself. Popular revulsion for the ruling elite, however, is nearly universal. It is a question of which ideas will capture the public's imagination. Revolution usually erupts over events that would, in normal circumstances, be considered meaningless or minor acts of injustice by the state. But once the tinder of revolt has piled up, as it has in the United States, an insignificant spark easily ignites popular rebellion. No person or movement can ignite this tinder. No one knows where or when the eruption will take place. No one knows the form it will take. But it is certain now that a popular revolt is coming. The refusal by the corporate state to address even the minimal grievances of the citizenry, along with the abject failure to remedy the mounting state repression, the chronic unemployment and underemployment, the massive debt peonage that is crippling more than half of Americans, and the loss of hope and widespread despair, means that blowback is inevitable. Because revolution is evolution at its boiling point you cannot 'make' a real revolution any more than you can hasten the boiling of a tea kettle, Berkman wrote. It is the fire underneath that makes it boil: how quickly it will come to the boiling point will depend on how strong the fire is. Revolutions, when they erupt, appear to the elites and the establishment to be sudden and unexpected. This is because the real work of revolutionary ferment and consciousness is unseen by the mainstream society, noticed only after it has largely been completed. Throughout history, those who have sought radical change have always had to first discredit the ideas used to prop up ruling elites and construct alternative ideas for society, ideas often embodied in a utopian revolutionary myth. The articulation of a viable socialism as an alternative to corporate tyranny-as attempted by the book Imagine: Living in a Socialist USA and the website Popular Resistance-is, for me, paramount. Once ideas shift for a large portion of a population, once the vision of a new society grips the popular imagination, the old regime is finished. An uprising that is devoid of ideas and vision is never a threat to ruling elites. Social upheaval without clear definition and direction, without ideas behind it, descends into nihilism, random violence and chaos. It consumes itself. This, at its core, is why I disagree with some elements of the Black Bloc anarchists. I believe in strategy. And so did many anarchists, including Berkman, Emma Goldman, Pyotr Kropotkin and Mikhail Bakunin. By the time ruling elites are openly defied, there has already been a nearly total loss of faith in the ideas-in our case free market capitalism and globalization-that sustain the structures of the ruling elites. And once enough people get it, a process that can take years, the slow, quiet, and peaceful social evolution becomes quick, militant, and violent, as Berkman wrote. Evolution becomes revolution. This is where we
[Biofuel] China, Gold Prices and US Default Threats
Gold Wars Kelly Mitchell's Pathbreaking Book By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts Global Research, October 25, 2013 http://www.globalresearch.ca/gold-wars/5355580 --0-- http://www.globalresearch.ca/china-gold-prices-us-default-threats/5355274 China, Gold Prices and US Default Threats By F. William Engdahl Global Research, October 23, 2013 RT Op-Edge 21 October 2013 In the very days when a deep split in the US Congress threatened a US government debt default, the gold price should normally jump through the roof, yet the opposite was the case. It is worth a closer look why. Since August 1971, when US President Richard Nixon unilaterally tore up the Bretton Woods Treaty of 1944 and told the world that the Federal Reserve 'gold window' was permanently closed, Wall Street banks and US and City of London financial powers have done everything imaginable to prevent gold from again becoming the basis of trust in a currency. On Friday, October 11, when there was no sign of any deal between US Congress members and the Obama White House that would end the government shutdown, the Chicago CME Group, which operates Comex - the Chicago Commodity Exchange, where contracts in gold derivatives are traded - announced that at 8:42am Eastern time the trading was halted for 10 seconds after a safety mechanism was triggered because a 2-million-ounce (56.7 million grams) gold futures sell order was executed. Something rotten in gold market The result of that huge paper gold sale was that at just the time when a possible US government debt default would send investors in a panic rush to the safety of buying gold, instead, the price plunged $30 an ounce to a three-month low of $1,259.60 an ounce. Market insiders believe the reason was direct market manipulation. David Govett, head of precious metals at bullion broker Marex Spectron, calls the sudden huge futures sale suspicious. These moves are becoming more and more prevalent and to my mind have to either be the work of someone attempting to manipulate the market or someone who really shouldn't be trusted with the sums of money they are throwing around. There are ways of entering and exiting a market so that minimum damage is caused and whoever is entering these orders has no intention of doing that, Govett said. UBS gold trader Art Cashin echoed the suspicion. if that happens once it could be an accident of technology, or it could be a simple error. But when it happens five times over a period of months, it does raise questions. Is it being done purposefully? Is somebody trying to influence the market? That 'someone' market sources believe is the Obama White House, in league with the Federal Reserve and key Wall Street banks that would be ruined were gold to really rise. In March 1988, five months after the worst one-day stock market plunge in history, President Ronald Reagan signed Executive Order 12631. Order 12631 created the Working Group on Financial Markets, known on Wall Street as the 'Plunge Protection Team' because its job was to prevent any future unexpected financial market panic selloff or 'plunge'. The group is headed by the US Treasury Secretary and includes the chairman of the Federal Reserve, the head of the Securities Exchange Commission, and the head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) which is responsible for monitoring derivatives trading on exchanges. Numerous times since 1988, reports have surfaced of secret interventions by the Plunge Protection Team to prevent a market panic selloff that could threaten the role of the US dollar. Former Clinton White House staff chief George Stephanopoulos admitted in 2006 that it was used to support the markets in the 1998 Russia/LTCM crisis under Bill Clinton, and again after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001. He said, They have an informal agreement among major banks to come in and start to buy stock if there appears to be a problem. Clearly stocks are not the only thing the government manipulates. Gold these days is a prime focus. The price of gold in recent years-since the eruption of the US dot.com IT stock bubble in 2000-has exploded from around $300 an ounce to a recent record high above $1,900 in August, 2011. Gold rose an impressive 70 percent from December 2008 to June 2011, after the Lehman Brothers collapse and the start of the Greek crisis in the eurozone. Since then, with no clear reason, gold has reversed and lost more than 31 percent, despite the fact that talk of a unilateral Israeli military strike on Iran and the US financial debacle combined with a euro crisis, and now, threat of US government default, created overall huge demand for investment in gold. This past April 10, the heads of the five largest US banks, the Wall Street 'Gods of Money' - JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America and Citigroup - requested a closed door meeting with Obama at the White House. Fifteen days later, on April
[Biofuel] Fukushima: A Nuclear War without a War: The Unspoken Crisis of Worldwide Nuclear Radiation
Fukushima: A Nuclear War without a War: The Unspoken Crisis of Worldwide Nuclear Radiation Global Research, October 25, 2013 http://www.globalresearch.ca/fukushima-a-nuclear-war-without-a-war-the-unspoken-crisis-of-worldwide-nuclear-radiation Fukushima - A Global Threat That Requires a Global Response By Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers Global Research, October 25, 2013 http://www.globalresearch.ca/fukushima-a-global-threat-that-requires-a-global-response/5355480 Melted Nuclear Fuel Sank into the Ground under Fukushima Reactors. Irradiated Groundwater Flowing into Ocean, it's too Late to do Anything about This : Japan Journalist By Global Research News Global Research, October 24, 2013 http://www.globalresearch.ca/melted-nuclear-fuel-sank-into-the-ground-under-fukushima-reactors-irradiated-groundwater-flowing-into-ocean-its-too-late-to-do-anything-about-this-japan-journalist/5355375 How Accurate Are The Instruments in Nuclear Reactors? By Maggie Gundersen, Lucas W Hixson, and David Lochbaum Global Research, October 22, 2013 http://www.globalresearch.ca/how-accurate-are-the-instruments-in-nuclear-reactors/5355165 Fuel Removal From Fukushima's Reactor 4 Threatens 'Apocalyptic' Scenario In November, TEPCO set to begin to remove fuel rods whose radiation matches the fallout of 14,000 Hiroshima bombs Phttp://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/10/24-3 ublished on Thursday, October 24, 2013 by Common Dreams Tsunami Hits Fukushima No Reported Damage: Nuclear Reactors Worldwide Vulnerable to Earthquakes Flooding By Global Research News and Washington's Blog Global Research, October 26, 2013 http://www.globalresearch.ca/tsunami-hits-fukushima-no-reported-damage/5355594 Fukushima Fraud and Corruption: Japanese Organized Crime Involved in Recruitment of Specialized Personnel By Prof Michel Chossudovsky Global Research, October 25, 2013 http://www.globalresearch.ca/japanese-organized-crime-involved-in-recruitment-at-fukushima/5355540 Special Report: Help wanted in Fukushima: Low pay, high risks and gangsters By Antoni Slodkowski and Mari Saito October 25, 2013 http://news.yahoo.com/special-report-help-wanted-fukushima-low-pay-high-050626106--sector.html 28 Signs That The West Coast Is Being Absolutely Fried With Nuclear Radiation From Fukushima By Michael Snyder Global Research, October 23, 2013 http://www.globalresearch.ca/28-signs-that-the-west-coast-is-being-absolutely-fried-with-nuclear-radiation-from-fukushima/5355280 ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] The Real Reason U.S. Targets Whistleblowers
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-real-reason-u-s-targets-whistleblowers/5355704 The Real Reason U.S. Targets Whistleblowers By Washington's Blog Global Research, October 27, 2013 Washington's Blog Hypocrisy as a Weapon U.S. leaders have long: * Condemned China for spying and hacking our computers But the Snowden leaks show that America is doing the same thing - on a much larger scale * Considered waterboarding to be a war crime and a form of torture, including when the Japanese did it in WWII (and see this). But when we did it, we insisted it was not torture * Proselytized other countries to follow free market capitalism. But we no longer follow free market capitalism in America. Instead, we have socialism for the rich and sink-or-swim capitalism for everyone else. Whether you call it crony capitalism, fascism, communist style socialism, kleptocracy, oligarchy or banana republicanism it ain't real capitalism * Labeled indiscriminate killing of civilians as terrorism. Yet the American military indiscriminately kills innocent civilians (and see this), calling it carefully targeted strikes. For example, when Al Qaeda, Syrians or others target people attending funerals of those killed - or those attempting to rescue people who have been injured by - previous attacks, we rightfully label it terrorism. But the U.S. government does exactly the same thing (more), pretending that it is all okay * Lambasted those who do not follow a rule of law as tin-pot tyrants. But the rule of law has broken down in America, and we now have less access to justice than in many parts of the world * Blasted oppressive regimes which do not allow free speech, a free press and other liberties for their people But have discarded most of those same liberties in our homeland * Scolded tyrants who launch aggressive wars to grab power or plunder resources. But we ourselves have launched a series of wars for oil (and here) and gas * Said that those who support terrorists should be treated as terrorists. But the U.S. government has long supported terrorists for cynical political purposes. * Sought to spread democracy around the world. But democracy is not being honored at home (more here and here) * Said that we must stamp out terrorism. But we are doing the exact same things we accuse the terrorists of doing (or worse) Can you spot a pattern of hypocrisy? Indeed, the worse the acts by officials, the more they say we it must be covered up for the good of the country. For example, Elizabeth Goitein - co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at New York University School of Law's Brennan Center for Justice - writes: The government has begun to advance bold new justifications for classifying information that threaten to erode the principled limits that have existed - in theory, if not always in practice - for decades. The cost of these efforts, if they remain unchecked, may be the American public's ability to hold its government accountable. *** The government acknowledged that it possessed mug shots, videos depicting forcible extractions of al-Qahtani from his cell and videos documenting various euphemistically termed intelligence debriefings of al-Qahtani. It argued that all of these images were properly classified and withheld from the public - but not because they would reveal sensitive intelligence methods, the traditional justification for classifying such information. The government did not stake its case on this time-tested argument perhaps because the details of al-Qahtani's interrogations have been officially disclosed through agency reports and congressional hearings. Instead, the government argued that the images could be shielded from disclosure because the Taliban and associated forces have previously used photos of U.S. forces interacting with detainees to garner support for attacks against those forces. Even more broadly, the government asserted that disclosure could aid in the recruitment and financing of extremists and insurgent groups. *** The government's argument echoed a similar claim it made in a lawsuit earlier this year over a FOIA request for postmortem photographs of Osama bin Laden. A CIA official attested that these images could aid the production of anti-American propaganda, noting that images of abuse at Abu Ghraib had been very effective in helping Al-Qaeda to recruit supporters and raise funds. The appeals court did not address this argument, however, resting its decision on the narrower ground that these particular images were likely to incite immediate violence. The judge in al-Qahtani's case showed no such restraint. She held that the photos and videos were properly classified because it (is) both logical and plausible that extremists would utilize images of al-Qahtani to incite anti-American sentiment, to raise funds, and/or to recruit other loyalists. When CCR pointed out
[Biofuel] America's Secret Wars in Over 100 Countries Around the World
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36648.htm America's Secret Wars in Over 100 Countries Around the World By Andrew Gavin Marshall October 25, 2013 Information Clearing House - Obama's global terror campaign is not only dependent upon his drone assassination program, but increasingly it has come to rely upon the deployment of Special Operations forces in countries all over the world, reportedly between 70 and 120 countries at any one time. As Obama has sought to draw down the large-scale ground invasions of countries (as Bush pursued in Afghanistan and Iraq), he has escalated the world of 'covert warfare,' largely outside the oversight of Congress and the public. One of the most important agencies in this global secret war is the Joint Special Operations Command, or JSOC for short. JSOC was established in 1980 following the failed rescue of American hostages at the U.S. Embassy in Iran as an obscure and secretive corner of the military's hierarchy, noted the Atlantic. It experienced a rapid expansion under the Bush administration, and since Obama came to power, appears to be playing an increasingly prominent role in national security and counterterrorism, in areas which were traditionally covered by the CIA.[1] One of the most important differences between these covert warfare operations being conducted by JSOC instead of the CIA is that the CIA has to report to Congress, whereas JSOC only reports its most important activities to the President's National Security Council.[2] During the Bush administration, JSOC reported directly to Vice President Dick Cheney, according to award-winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh (of the New Yorker), who explained that, It's an executive assassination ring essentially, and it's been going on and on and on. He added: Under President Bush's authority, they've been going into countries, not talking to the ambassador or the CIA station chief, and finding people on a list and executing them and leaving. That's been going on, in the name of all of us.[3] In 2005, Dick Cheney referred to U.S. Special Forces as the silent professionals representing the kind of force we want to build for the future... a force that is lighter, more adaptable, more agile, and more lethal in action. And without a hint of irony, Cheney stated: None of us wants to turn over the future of mankind to tiny groups of fanatics committing indiscriminate murder and plotting large-scale terror.[4] Not unless those fanatics happen to be wearing U.S. military uniforms, of course, in which case committing indiscriminate murder and plotting large-scale terror is not an issue. The commander of JSOC during the Bush administration - when it served as Cheney's executive assassination ring - was General Stanley McChrystal, whom Obama appointed as the top military commander in Afghanistan. Not surprisingly, JSOC began to play a much larger role in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.[5] In early 2009, the new head of JSOC, Vice Admiral William H. McRaven ordered a two-week 'halt' to Special Operations missions inside Afghanistan, after several JSOC raids in previous months killed several women and children, adding to the growing outrage within Afghanistan about civilian deaths caused by US raids and airstrikes, which contributed to a surge in civilian deaths over 2008.[6] JSOC has also been involved in running a secret war inside of Pakistan, beginning in 2006 but accelerating rapidly under the Obama administration. The secret war was waged in cooperation with the CIA and the infamous private military contractor, Blackwater, made infamous for its massacre of Iraqi civilians, after which it was banned from operating in the country.[7] Blackwater's founder, Erik Prince, was recruited as a CIA asset in 2004, and in subsequent years acquired over $1.5 billion in contracts from the Pentagon and CIA, and included among its leadership several former top-level CIA officials. Blackwater, which primarily hires former Special Forces soldiers, has largely functioned as an overseas Praetorian guard for the CIA and State Department officials, who were also helping to craft, fund, and execute operations, including assembling hit teams, all outside of any Congressional or public oversight (since it was technically a private corporation).[8] The CIA hired Blackwater to aid in a secret assassination program which was hidden from Congress for seven years.[9] These operations would be overseen by the CIA or Special Forces personnel.[10] Blackwater has also been contracted to arm drones at secret bases in Afghanistan and Pakistan for Obama's assassination program, overseen by the CIA.[11] The lines dividing the military, the CIA and Blackwater had become blurred, as one former CIA official commented, It became a very brotherly relationship... There was a feeling that Blackwater eventually become an extension of the agency.[12] The
[Biofuel] Another Nobel Peace Prize - Another Farce?
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/21-10-2013/125946-nobel_farce-0/ Another Nobel Peace Prize - Another Farce? 21.10.2013 Felicity Arbuthnot The Nobel Peace Prize brings another surprise - or farce, depending on your view. In relatively recent history, there has been Henry Kissinger (1973) architect supreme of murderous assaults on sovereign nations; the United Nations (2001) whose active warmongering or passive, silent holocausts (think UN embargoes) make shameful mockery of the aspirational founding words. In 2002 it was Jimmy Carter, whose poisonous Carter Doctrine of 1980 included declaring the aim of American control of the Persian Gulf as a US vital interest, justified by any means necessary. 2005 saw the Award go to the International Atomic Energy Agency, which promotes nuclear energy, creating the most lethal pollutants to which the planet and its population has ever been subjected. The nuclear waste from the industry the IAEA promotes, is now turned in to conventional, but never the less, nuclear and chemical weapons, by a sleight of hand of astonishing historical proportions.. Barack Obama (2009) has since declared himself executioner, by assassination in any form, any time, any place, anywhere, of anyone deemed by him (not judge or jury) connected to that now catch all phrase terrorism - half a world away. The Guantanamo concentration camp to which he unequivocally committed closing (17th November 2008,60 Minutes) asserting: I have said repeatedly that I will close Guantanamo and I will follow through on that. I have said repeatedly that America does not torture. And I'm gonna make sure that we don't torture ... those are part and parcel of an effort to ... regain America's moral stature in the world. Gulag Guantanamo remains with its prisoners, pathetic, desperate untried, or those ordered released, languishing year after year. America's moral stature has plummeted lower than the Nixon years, Libya lies in ruins, Syria barely survives, with the terrorists' backers aided via Washington's myriad back doors - and in global outposts, US backed or instigated torture thrives. 2012's Nobel lauded the European Union, which, since its inception, has crippled smaller trading economies, put barriers, unattainable conditions, or indeed, near extortion on trade with poorer countries (often former colonies.) EU Member States have also enjoined punitive embargoes against the most helpless of nations and enthusiastically embraced the latest nation target to be reduced to a pre-industrial age (correction: be freed to embrace democracy and the delights of rule by imposed despots, or a long, murderous, unaccountable foreign occupation and asset seizure.) Eminent International Law Expert, Professor Francis Boyle, called the EU Award: A sick joke and a demented fraud. This year's Peace Prize awarded, on Friday, 11th October, went to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) the Netherlands based organization, founded only in 1997, unheard of by most, charged with ridding the world of chemical weapons. The Award came ten days after an OPCW team arrived in Syria to eliminate the country's chemical weapons stock. A brief visit in August had them scuttling out, an apparent courage free entity, within days. President Assad had requested their investigations back in March, after it was claimed terrorist factions had used chemical weapons - insurgents now believed to be from some eighty three countries, backed primarily by the US, UK, Quatar and Saudi Arabia. The OPCW's return, on 1st October, is now touted as a breakthrough with an intransigent regime who had previously blocked them at every turn - rather than had the door open for them since March - the team, now billed as brave souls, working in a war zone - in which the Syrian people and government live - and die - every day - in a blood-soaked insurgency of that that famed international community's making. Is the annual Nobel justified anyway to an organization which has, in spite of the nightmare hazards to an entire population, agree to destroying an alleged 1,000 tons of highly dangerous chemicals (if we believe what we are told) in just months? In context, the US still has over three times as much chemical weaponry (estimated at over 3,100 tons) and has defied the specified April 2012 deadline for their disposal, on the basis that the dangers are so great that they cannot complete building the appropriate facilities until 2020 (some reports state 2023.) For the same reasons of technical and safety obstacles, Russia has a believed five times the US amount left to destroy.(i) Shameful double standards rule supreme. Wade Mathews, who worked on the U.S. chemical stockpile destruction, is uncertain that Syria can meet the deadline. He states that the U.S. disposal took billions of dollars, the cooperation of many levels of government - including
[Biofuel] US government, media silent on sacking of top nuclear officers
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/10/19/nuke-o19.html US government, media silent on sacking of top nuclear officers By Thomas Gaist 19 October 2013 A week has passed since the unprecedented back-to-back firings of two top US nuclear commanders, and the silence of the political and media establishment on the matter is deafening. While expert sources acknowledge that the firings of Vice Admiral Tim Giardina and Major General Michael Carey constitute an unprecedented crisis in the US military, the media have accepted the US military's presentation of it a matter of the two officers' personal problems. Air Force General Robert Kehler's assertion that both firings were the result of vaguely defined unfortunate behavioral incidents has been accepted, and the matter largely dropped. Such accounts are not only not credible, they entirely evade the issues involved in the sudden cashiering of officers controlling the most powerful nuclear arsenal on the planet, capable of destroying humanity many times over. As military sources or specialists of military affairs acknowledge, the firings reflect a deep crisis of the US military. In such a situation, neither the possibility of potentially catastrophic technical problems with the US nuclear arsenal nor of threatened military action against the US civilian government can be ruled out. A report on the firing of Vice Admiral Tim Giardina in the Marine Corps Times noted that such an event is exceedingly rare and perhaps unprecedented in the history of U.S. Strategic Command, which is responsible for all American nuclear war fighting forces, including nuclear-armed submarines, bombers and land-based missiles. Speaking to the WSWS, Peter Feaver, Professor of Political Science at Duke University and Director of the Duke Program in American Grand Strategy, observed: If you look over the last 4-5 years there have been quite a few senior officers who have been relieved for cause, quite a number of those in the last several years The military has been struggling to come to terms with why there are so many firings. Feaver's remarks point to anger in the military over the extraordinary number of high-ranking officers who have been sacked with little or no public explanation. Other top officers removed from command positions under Obama include General James Mattis, Maj. General Mark Gurganus, Maj. General Gregg Sturdevant, General Stanley A. McChrystal and General David Petraeus. McChrystal was removed as commander of US occupation forces in Afghanistan after making fun of Vice President Joe Biden in an interview with Rolling Stone, while Petraeus-a former commander of US forces in Iraq-was replaced, ostensibly due to a sex scandal. Carey was fired by the US Air Force on October 11. He commanded the 20th Air Force, including 450 intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in silos across the northern US. Carey was on an unspecified temporary duty assignment at the time of the alleged infraction. Though US officials suggested alcohol was involved, they also denied that Carey had an alcohol problem. It remains unclear why he was sacked. Vice Admiral James Giardina was second in command of the US Strategic Command, having previously commanded a squadron of 10 Trident submarines armed with nuclear warheads. He allegedly was dismissed for playing at a casino with $1,500 worth of fake gambling chips. As for Mattis, the commandant of the Marine Corps who infamously declared in 2005 that it was a lot of fun to shoot Afghans, he stepped down as head of US Central Command earlier this year, reportedly over differences with the White House over US war policy against Syria and Iran. Known for advocating an aggressive US strategy against Iran, he pressed for aggressive moves to cut off Iranian aid to the Syrian regime, declaring: Absent Iran's help, I don't believe [Syrian President Bashar] Assad would have been in power the last six months. It is significant that the sudden cashiering of Giardina and Carey follows the Obama administration's decision to postpone a war with Syria, which it nearly launched last month. More broadly, a decade of escalating US imperialist interventions across the Middle East and Africa has placed rising strains on the US military and its relations with civilian authorities. At the same time, the weight of the US military and security forces in the country's political life has grown immensely, as the White House relied on them to fight wars and promote the hysterical atmosphere of the war on terror. The risk of military rule in the United States was underscored by the unprecedented lockdown of the entire city of Boston by US security forces in April, after the Boston Marathon bombing. In a 2008 article Coming Soon: A Crisis in Civil-Military Relations, University of North Carolina Professor Richard Kohn bluntly wrote: The president elected in November will inherit a
[Biofuel] Monsanto's pesticides poisoning Argentina - report
http://rt.com/news/monsanto-argentina-health-problems-484/ Monsanto's pesticides poisoning Argentina - report Published time: October 21, 2013 Pesticides sold by Monsanto are behind health problems ranging from birth defects to elevated rates of cancer in Argentina, a report has revealed. A lack of regulations has led to widespread misuse of Monsanto's products in the Latin American nation. The Associated Press carried out a report that found a clear link between the use of pesticides sold by Monsanto and growing health problems in Argentina. Absence of regulations and their enforcement has led to widespread misuse of Monsanto's chemicals across the country. In turn, this has caused multiple health problems in the rural population. AP documented a number of occasions when toxic pesticides were used close to populated areas and consequently contaminated the water supply and caused health problems. Santa Fe Province, which is Argentina's number one producer of cereals, forbids the use of pesticides less than 500 meters from populated areas. However, AF uncovered evidence that toxic chemicals were used as little as 30 meters from people's homes. Schoolteacher Andrea Druetta who lives in Santa Fe told AP that her children had been covered in pesticides recently while swimming in the garden pool. In addition, studies show that cancer rates in the province are two to four times higher than the rest of the country, while in the neighboring province of Chaco birth defects have quadrupled since the introduction of biotechnology in the agricultural industry around a decade ago. Researchers also found high rates of thyroid disorders and chronic respiratory illness in Santa Fe. Deadly cocktails Monsanto's chemical pesticide, Roundup, contains a substance called glyphosate. While the substance has been deemed harmless, AP found that it is being used in a number of ways in Argentina that are unanticipated by regulatory science or specifically banned by existing law. Doctor Damian Vernassi from the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Rosario told RT's Spanish channel, Actualidad RT, that these chemical mixes could be responsible for the drastic increase in health problems. It could be linked to pesticides, he said. There has been analysis of the primary ingredient, but we have never investigated the interactions between the different chemicals that are being mixed. AP interviewed Argentine farmhand, Fabian Tomassi, who worked preparing a cocktail of chemicals to spray crops for three years. He now suffers from the debilitating neurological disorder, polyneuropathy, and is near death. I prepared millions of liters of poison without any kind of protection, no gloves, masks or special clothing, he said. I didn't know anything. I only learned later what it did to me, after contacting scientists. In response to the study, Monsanto issued a statement saying that it does not condone the misuse of pesticides or the violation of any pesticide law, regulation, or court ruling. Monsanto takes the stewardship of products seriously and we communicate regularly with our customers regarding proper use of our products, said spokesperson Thomas Helscher in a written statement. Argentina was one of the first countries to adopt Monsanto's biotechnology to increase its agricultural output. The multinational's products transformed Argentina into the world's third largest producer of soy. At present Argentina's entire soy crop is genetically modified, as is most of its corn and cotton. In addition, AP found that Argentine farmers use about 4.5 pounds of pesticide concentrate per acre, which is over double the amount used in the US. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] The NSA Isn't Foiling Terrorist Plots
http://fpif.org/nsa-isnt-foiling-terrorist-plots/ The NSA Isn't Foiling Terrorist Plots There's still no credible evidence that the NSA's massive digital surveillance has disrupted any terrorist plots. By Teun van Dongen, October 8, 2013. U.S. officials claim that the government's massive data collection has protected the country from terrorist attacks. After The Guardian's first revelations about the National Security Agency's digital surveillance programs, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and Rep. Mike Rogers, head of the House Intelligence Committee, jumped to the NSA's defense by pointing to two terrorist plots supposedly foiled by the organization's digital surveillance programs. Lawyers and policemen involved in these cases disputed these claims, but this did not keep NSA chief Keith Alexander from taking it up a notch by raising the number of foiled attacks to more than 50, and later to 54. These numbers are crucial for an informed debate about the digital surveillance programs. If the NSA's digital surveillance indeed prevented 54 terrorist attacks, the public can decide whether these 54 attacks are worth their privacy. This number would suggest that the NSA's programs are actually keeping the United States and Europe safe from terrorism. It is far from certain, however, that the NSA is getting its numbers right. Who Stops Terrorism? Contrary to what one would expect given the secretive nature of intelligence operations, we actually know quite a bit about how terrorist plots in the United States and Europe are foiled. Several attacks, for instance, were discovered after law enforcement agencies picked up on suspicious (non-digital) behaviors of the plotters. Samir Azzouz, the most prolific jihadist terrorist in the Netherlands, attracted the attention of the Dutch secret service when he tried to travel to Chechnya to join the jihad against the Russians. Other plotters gave themselves away by associating with known terrorists. For instance, a 2009 plot to attack the New York Stock Exchange came to light after one of the perpetrators contacted a Yemeni extremist who was under FBI surveillance. The plans of Mohamed Osman Mohamud, who was arrested just before he could execute his attack against a Christmas tree-lighting ceremony in Portland, were detected in a similar manner. The FBI started following Mohamud after he e-mailed a known terrorist recruiter. Since the FBI does not have mass digital surveillance capabilities, the person Mohamud contacted was likely already under surveillance. Najibullah Zazi's plans for an attack against the New York subway were thwarted this way, too. British intelligence informed their U.S. counterparts that Zazi had had e-mail contact with a Pakistani radical who was being watched for involvement in a British terror plot. A fourth example involves Abdullah Ahmed Ali, the ringleader of the cell that prepared the liquid bomb attacks against transatlantic flights in 2006. He first came to the attention of MI5 after he was seen interacting with known radicals. In other cases, the police uncovered terrorist activities after having arrested the perpetrators for unrelated crimes. A cell in London, for instance, attracted the attention of the police after its involvement in skirmishes with right-wing extremist youths. A more bizarre example concerns Ahmed Ferhani, who, apparently deeply enraged after an arrest for petty crime, told the police about his ambition to join the jihad. Several months later, he was arrested for planning an attack against a New York synagogue. Sheer luck sometimes plays a role as well. UK police disrupted a terrorist attack against a rally of the English Defense League, a right-wing extremist organization, after pulling over the perpetrators because of a problem with their car insurance. Sometimes it's not even the police that uncover terrorist plots. In the cases of planned attacks against the Fort Dix Army base in 2009 and against a shopping mall in Bristol in 2008, alert members of the public tipped off the police. What about the NSA? Admittedly we do not know how all terrorist plots have been detected. But going by what we do know, the conclusion is simple: terrorist plots have been foiled in all sorts of ways, few of which had anything to do with mass digital surveillance. True, in the case of the dismantlement of the Sauerland Cell in Germany in 2007, NSA information played a role. But whether the authorities got this information from digital dragnet surveillance or from more individualized and targeted monitoring is hard to tell. It might be tempting to give the NSA the benefit of the doubt, given that the organization speaks on the basis of information that we do not have. But such dubious claims about the effectiveness of the digital surveillance programs fit seamlessly into a pattern of misinformation and deceit. The
[Biofuel] Fukushima Workers Doused With Radioactive Water
Radiation Levels in Seawater Near Fukushima Spike to Two-Year High TEPCO admits cesium levels measured Wednesday were 13 times higher than day before Published on Thursday, October 10, 2013 by Common Dreams http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/10/10-3 No one at Fukushima seems to have any idea what they're doing WEDNESDAY, OCT 9, 2013 http://www.salon.com/2013/10/09/no_one_at_fukushima_seems_to_have_any_idea_what_theyre_doing/?source=newsletter Through Fukushima Lense, a Look at Looming US Nuclear Crisis Published on Wednesday, October 9, 2013 by Common Dreams http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/10/09-7 DOE Reveals Delays in Plutonium Disposition Program October 9, 2013 Friends of the Earth http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/10/09-2 --0-- http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/10/09-4 Published on Wednesday, October 9, 2013 by Common Dreams Fukushima Workers Doused With Radioactive Water Second mishap in a week marks ongoing nuclear disaster - Andrea Germanos, staff writer In what was just the latest in a long series of mishaps at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, six workers were splashed with radioactive water, plant operator TEPCO said on Wednesday. A leak occurred when workers accidentally detached a pipe connected to a desalination system and as much as 10 tons of radioactive water may have spilled, hitting workers and covering the floor. Shunichi Tanaka, chairman of Japan's nuclear watchdog, the Nuclear Regulation Authority, said that while he did not believe the workers were exposed to a seriously troubling dosage, he said that the fact that there has been a string of incidents occurring on a daily basis that could have been avoided-I think that is the large problem. Wednesday's mishap was the second to hit the plant this week. On Monday, a worker at Fukushima accidentally turned off power to pumps for a water cooling system. And just days before that, on Thursday of last week, TEPCO announced another spill at the crisis-hit plant released water 6,700 times more radioactive than the legal limit. The list of problems contributing to the ongoing Fukushima disaster are far from solved, as anti-nuclear activist Harvey Wasserman recently wrote: Massive quantities of heavily contaminated water are pouring into the Pacific Ocean. Hundreds of huge, flimsy tanks are also leaking untold tons of highly radioactive fluids. At Unit #4, more than 1,300 fuel rods, with more than 400 tons of extremely radioactive material, containing potential cesium fallout comparable to 14,000 Hiroshima bombs, are stranded 100 feet in the air. All this more than 30 months after the 3/11/2011 earthquake/tsunami led to three meltdowns and at least four explosions. A group of nuclear experts issued a letter in urgency to UN head Ban Ki-moon last month imploring him to coordinate international action to deal with the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] US Failing International Treaty as Chemical Weapons Stockpile Plagues Panama
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/10/09-8 Published on Wednesday, October 9, 2013 by Common Dreams US Failing International Treaty as Chemical Weapons Stockpile Plagues Panama As US maintains chemical weapons ultimatum over Syria, others point to US stockpiles - Jacob Chamberlain, staff writer As the U.S. continues to hold the threat of war over the Syrian government if it doesn't destroy its chemical weapons, a McClatchy article published Wednesday highlights the hypocrisy of that threat-the U.S. has left one of its own chemical weapons stockpiles sitting on an island off the coast of Panama for over 60 years. Following years of requests to the U.S. from Panama's government to abide by international law and clean up the chemical weapons mess it has left on the island of San Jose, as well as other parts of Panama, the Obama administration told McClatchy that it intends to send a team later this year to investigate the situation. But it remains to be seen if the U.S. will actually sign on to a proposed agreement that would tie them to that promise. As McClatchy reports: In May, Panama formally requested - through the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the international body based in The Hague, Netherlands, whose inspectors now are overseeing the destruction of Syria's arsenal - that the United States remove eight chemical bombs found there in a 2002 survey. The Obama administration declined to say whether the outlines of an agreement have been reached. We carried out a concerted effort to have these training sites cleaned up, recalled Jose Miguel Aleman, who was the foreign minister of Panama from 1999 to 2003-efforts that have thus far failed. Ramon A. Morales, who served for five years as Panama's ambassador to the United Nations until 2004, said that buried U.S. weapons remained a serious problem throughout the country, not just San Jose. Unofficially, it is known that there have been some 20 deaths by people who have handled this [unexploded ordinance], Morales said, referring to chemical and other weapons that have been left around the country during different eras of U.S. occupation. San Jose Island is a mini problem compared to the rest of the country, he said. It's very hard for a little country like Panama to shake out the information from the world's most powerful country. Meanwhile, the U.S. government continues to violate agreements of the intentional Chemical Weapons Convention treaty in other ways, as it continues to store well over 2,000 tons of chemical weapons within U.S. borders as well, including facilities in Kentucky and Colorado. Syria is believed to possess approximately 1,000 tons of chemical weapons and has thus far met deadlines set by the U.S. and the U.N. to disclose them. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] More Food Doesn't Guarantee Less Hunger
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/10/09-8 Published on Wednesday, October 9, 2013 by OtherWords More Food Doesn't Guarantee Less Hunger Increasing the world's food supply won't end hunger unless we address inequality and injustice. by Jill Richardson Every October, world leaders and corporate executives gather in Iowa to present the World Food Prize. Intended to celebrate those who make the largest contributions to increasing the world's food supply, the recipients are announced each year by the U.S. Secretary of State. On the same day that award is bestowed each year, so is another one. It's less well-known but, in my view, far more important. This alternative accolade is called the Food Sovereignty Prize. Like the World Food Prize, it deals with food and hunger, but in a very different way. The corporations that fund the World Food Prize may not entirely drive its agenda, but they certainly influence it. By focusing on the sheer volume of food in the world, they aim to reduce global hunger to a simple matter of science. Then they sell us on the idea that we need their products to increase the amount of food farmers harvest from each acre. But producing more food doesn't always mean feeding more hungry mouths. The Food Sovereignty Prize recognizes that ending hunger is not a simple matter of growing more food. It involves social science as well as physical science. When a farmer produces an extra ten bushels of crops from each acre of land, perhaps more people will eat - or maybe not. Americans don't have to travel around the world to see this, we must only ask our grandparents. During the Great Depression, farmers grew a great surplus of food, and food prices crashed. Both farmers and consumers suffered, as farmers went into bankruptcy while the urban poor starved. Today, we grow more food than we need - and then throw 40 percent of it away. Meanwhile, many Americans can afford to eat enough calories but only by buying cheap junk food that will ultimately make them sick. And that's just in America, a wealthy nation. What about poor countries? Smallholder farmers from around the world came together in 2007 and dreamed of a world where all peoples, nations and states are able to determine their own food producing systems and policies that provide every one of us with good quality, adequate, affordable, healthy, and culturally appropriate food. They called this idea food sovereignty. In the U.S., food sovereignty means that a North Carolina family won't wake up one day to find out their property value has tanked because a factory hog farm set up shop next door and the air smells like manure day in and day out. Or a small farmer in Maine who raises a few chickens for meat won't be told that she can't slaughter and sell them unless she first spends $30,000 on a government-approved facility for this purpose. In the rest of the world, it means that peasant farmers who have farmed their family's land for generations but lack formal land titles won't have their land sold out from under them to a foreign corporation by their own government. And it means that indigenous farmers in the Andes will not suddenly find that they can't grow their traditional potato varieties because the climate changed. This year's Food Sovereignty Prize goes to several Haitian groups who have together helped their nation's peasant farmers conserve traditional seeds, improve farming practices, recover from the country's massive 2010 earthquake, and alleviate poverty. Why are world leaders rubbing elbows with corporate executives at the World Food Prize ceremony instead of the Haitian peasants who won the Food Sovereignty Prize? Perhaps because advocates of food sovereignty understand that achieving their goal will upset the social order in which the 1 percent holds all the cards and the rest of us hope to be trickled down upon. And yet, if we aim to make any real progress toward ending poverty and hunger, we must start by challenging the inequality in our world today. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License Jill Richardson is the founder of the blog La Vida Locavore and a member of the Organic Consumers Association policy advisory board. She is the author of Recipe for America: Why Our Food System Is Broken and What We Can Do to Fix It. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Are Utility Companies Out to Destroy Solar's 'Rooftop Revolution'?
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/10/09-0 Published on Wednesday, October 9, 2013 by Common Dreams Are Utility Companies Out to Destroy Solar's 'Rooftop Revolution'? In California, customers who install solar systems and battery arrays are finding themselves cut off from grid - Jon Queally, staff writer In the nation's largest state, California, the major utility companies are trying to limit growth. Of rooftop solar panels, that is. According to reporting by Bloomberg, the state's three largest utilities-Edison International, PGE Corp. and Sempra Energy-are putting up hurdles to homeowners who have installed sun-powered energy systems, especially those with battery backups wired to solar panels, in order to slow the spread of what has become a threat to their dominant business model. The utilities clearly see rooftop solar as the next threat, Ben Peters, a government affairs analyst at solar company Mainstream Energy Corp., told Bloomberg. They're trying to limit the growth. According to Peters, as the business news outlet reports, the dispute between those with solar arrays and the utility giants threatens the state's $2 billion rooftop solar industry and indicates the depth of utilities' concerns about consumers producing their own power. People with rooftop panels are already buying less electricity, and adding batteries takes them closer to the day they won't need to buy from the local grid at all. Citing but one example, Bloomberg reports: Matthew Sperling, a Santa Barbara, California, resident, installed eight panels and eight batteries at his home in April. We wanted to have an alternative in case of a blackout to keep the refrigerator running, he said in an interview. Southern California Edison rejected his application to link the system to the grid even though city inspectors said it was one of the nicest they'd ever seen, he said. We've installed a $30,000 system and we can't use it, Sperling said. The utilities argue that customers with solar energy-storing batteries might be rigging the system by fraudulently storing conventional energy sent in from the utility grid, storing it in the batteries, and then sending it back to the grid for credit. The solar companies say there is no proof that this is happening. What environmentalists and solar energy advocates see is the utility companies putting barriers up to a decentralized system they will not no longer be able to control or profit from. As Danny Kennedy, author of the book Rooftop Revolution and co-founder of solar company Sungevity in California, said in an interview with Alternet earlier this year: Solar power represents a change in electricity that has a potentially disruptive impact on power in both the literal sense (meaning how we get electricity) and in the figurative sense of how we distribute wealth and power in our society. Fossil fuels have led to the concentration of power whereas solar's potential is really to give power over to the hands of people. This shift has huge community benefits while releasing our dependency on the centralized, monopolized capital of the fossil fuel industry. So it's revolutionary in the technological and political sense. As this Sierra Club video shows, the idea of a 'rooftop revolution' is fundamental to what many see as the most promising development in terms of undermining the dominance of the fossil fuel paradigm in the U.S.: The tensions between decentralized forms of energy like rootop solar or small-scale wind and traditional large-scale utilities is nothing new, but as the crisis of climate change has spurred a global grassroots movement push for a complete withdrawal from the fossil fuel and nuclear paradigm that forms the basis of the current electricity grid, these tensions are growing. As this segment from a PBS profile of the work of Lester Brown shows, a future of a society based on renewable energy shows what's possible: But the resistance to these changes is coming strongest from those with a vested interest in the status quo. With most focus on the behavior of the fossil fuel companies themselves, the idea that utility companies will be deeply impacted by this green energy revolution is often overlooked. Earlier this summer, David Roberts, an energy and environmental blogger at Grist.org, wrote an extensive, multi-part series on the role of utilities in the renewable energy transition, explaining why understanding the politics and economics of the utility industry (despite the grand tedium of the task) would be essential for the remainder of the 21st century. Roberts wrote: There's very little public discussion of utilities or utility regulations, especially relative to sexier topics like fracking or electric cars. That's mainly because the subject is excruciatingly boring, a thicket of obscure institutions and processes, opaque jargon, and acronyms out the wazoo. Whether PURPA
[Biofuel] The Anti-Empire Report #121
http://williamblum.org/aer/read/121 The Anti-Empire Report #121 By William Blum - Published October 7th, 2013 The War on Terrorism or whatever. U.S. hopes of winning more influence over Syria's divided rebel movement faded Wednesday after 11 of the biggest armed factions repudiated the Western-backed political opposition coalition and announced the formation of an alliance dedicated to creating an Islamist state. The al-Qaeda-affiliated Jabhat al-Nusra, designated a terrorist organization by the United States, is the lead signatory of the new group. 1 Pity the poor American who wants to be a good citizen, wants to understand the world and his country's role in it, wants to believe in the War on Terrorism, wants to believe that his government seeks to do good What is he to make of all this? For about two years, his dear American government has been supporting the same anti-government side as the jihadists in the Syrian civil war; not total, all-out support, but enough military hardware, logistics support, intelligence information, international political, diplomatic and propaganda assistance (including the crucial alleged-chemical-weapons story), to keep the jihadists in the ball game. Washington and its main Mideast allies in the conflict - Turkey, Jordan, Qatar and Saudi Arabia - have not impeded the movement to Syria of jihadists coming to join the rebels, recruited from the ranks of Sunni extremist veterans of the wars in Chechnya, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya, while Qatar and the Saudis have supplied the rebels with weapons, most likely bought in large measure from the United States, as well as lots of what they have lots of - money. This widespread international support has been provided despite the many atrocities carried out by the jihadists - truck and car suicide bombings (with numerous civilian casualties), planting roadside bombs à la Iraq, gruesome massacres of Christians and Kurds, grotesque beheadings and other dissections of victims' bodies (most charming of all: a Youtube video of a rebel leader cutting out an organ from the chest of a victim and biting into it as it drips with blood). All this barbarity piled on top of a greater absurdity - these Western-backed, anti-government forces are often engaged in battle with other Western-backed, anti-government forces, non-jihadist. It has become increasingly difficult to sell this war to the American public as one of pro-democracy moderates locked in a good-guy-versus-bad-guy struggle with an evil dictator, although in actuality the United States has fought on the same side as al Qaeda on repeated occasions before Syria. Here's a brief survey: Afghanistan, 1980-early 1990s: In support of the Islamic Moujahedeen (holy warriors), the CIA orchestrated a war against the Afghan government and their Soviet allies, pouring in several billions of dollars of arms and extensive military training; hitting up Middle-Eastern countries for donations, notably Saudi Arabia which gave hundreds of millions of dollars in aid each year; pressuring and bribing Pakistan to rent out its country as a military staging area and sanctuary. It worked. And out of the victorious Moujahedeen came al Qaeda. Bosnia, 1992-5: In 2001 the Wall Street Journal declared: It is safe to say that the birth of al-Qaeda as a force on the world stage can be traced directly back to 1992, when the Bosnian Muslim government of Alija Izetbegovic issued a passport in their Vienna embassy to Osama bin Laden. for the past 10 years, the most senior leaders of al Qaeda have visited the Balkans, including bin Laden himself on three occasions between 1994 and 1996. The Egyptian surgeon turned terrorist leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri has operated terrorist training camps, weapons of mass destruction factories and money-laundering and drug-trading networks throughout Albania, Kosovo, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Turkey and Bosnia. This has gone on for a decade. 2 A few months later, The Guardian reported on the full story of the secret alliance between the Pentagon and radical Islamist groups from the Middle East designed to assist the Bosnian Muslims - some of the same groups that the Pentagon is now fighting in the war against terrorism. 3 In 1994 and 1995 US/NATO forces carried out bombing campaigns over Bosnia aimed at damaging the military capability of the Serbs and enhancing that of the Bosnian Muslims. In the decade-long civil wars in the Balkans, the Serbs, regarded by Washington as the the last communist government in Europe, were always the main enemy. Kosovo, 1998-99: Kosovo, overwhelmingly Muslim, was a province of Serbia, the main republic of the former Yugoslavia. In 1998, Kosovo separatists - The Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) - began an armed conflict with Belgrade to split Kosovo from Serbia. The KLA was considered a terrorist organization by the US, the UK and France for years, with numerous reports of
[Biofuel] Cantaloupe vs. al-Qaeda: What's More Dangerous?
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/18715-cantaloupe-vs-al-qaeda Cantaloupe vs. al-Qaeda: What's More Dangerous? Sunday, 15 September 2013 00:00 By Michael Meurer, Truthout | Op-Ed One of the most important revelations from the international drama over Edward Snowden's NSA leaks in May is the exposure of a nearly lunatic disproportion in threat assessment and spending by the US government. This disproportion has been spawned by a fear-based politics of terror that mandates unlimited money and media attention for even the most tendentious terrorism threats, while lethal domestic risks such as contaminated food from our industrialized agribusiness system are all but ignored. A comparison of federal spending on food safety intelligence versus antiterrorism intelligence brings the irrationality of the threat assessment process into stark relief. In 2011, the year of Osama bin Laden's death, the State Department reported that 17 Americans were killed in all terrorist incidents worldwide. The same year, a single outbreak of listeriosis from tainted cantaloupe killed 33 people in the United States. Foodborne pathogens also sickened 48.7 million, hospitalized 127,839 and caused a total of 3,037 deaths. This is a typical year, not an aberration. We have more to fear from contaminated cantaloupe than from al-Qaeda, yet the United States spends $75 billion per year spread across 15 intelligence agencies in a scattershot attempt to prevent terrorism, illegally spying on its own citizens in the process. By comparison, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is struggling to secure $1.1 billion in the 2014 federal budget for its food inspection program, while tougher food processing and inspection regulations passed in 2011 are held up by agribusiness lobbying in Congress. The situation is so dire that Jensen Farms, the company that produced the toxic cantaloupe that killed 33 people in 2011, had never been inspected by the FDA. In the past 10 years, outbreaks of foodborne illness have affected all 50 states, with hundreds of food recalls annually involving many of America's leading brands, including Whole Foods, Trader Joe's, Taylor Farms Organics, Ralph's, Kroger, Food 4 Less, Costco, Dole, Kellogg's and dozens of others. There have been multi-state recalls of contaminated cheese, organic spinach, salad greens, lettuce, milk, ground beef, eggs, organic brown rice, peanut butter, mangoes, cantaloupe and hundreds of other popular foods. Since Sept. 11, 2001, foodborne pathogens have killed an estimated 36,000 people in the United States. During this same period, terrorism has killed 323 Americans worldwide. Imagine for a minute if food safety threats were marketed to the public in the same lurid fashion as terror threats. Here is a sample press release: WASHINGTON, DC - Homeland Security announced today that America is under attack by deadly terrorist cells. These terrorists often originate overseas. The threat to our security is credible. They can destroy our way of life and must be stopped. They have no respect for individual life or democratic freedoms. They operate on a cellular basis and hide in darkened spaces. They kill over 3,000 innocent Americans each year and are likely to strike again at any moment. These deadly operatives are masters of disguise, often concealing themselves in peanut butter sandwiches, spinach salads, hamburgers, milkshakes or gourmet cheeses. Their leaders have code names such as E-coli, Salmonella, Listeria, Staph Bacteria and Hepatitis A. We urge all Americans to be alert. With profound respect for the memory of the 2.997 people who lost their lives as a result of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Americans are 110 times more likely to die from contaminated food than terrorism, with 1 in 6 sickened every year at an annual cost to the economy of nearly $80 billion. Children and the elderly are the most vulnerable because their immune systems are weakest. The disproportion in risk versus spending when comparing terrorism and food-borne illness makes it clear that US threat assessment with respect to terror is irrational. It distorts the entire federal funding process and needs to be overhauled. Inflating the risk of terrorism is a $14 trillion business With only a few thousand al-Qaeda members worldwide, and an ideological leadership core now reduced to 300 to 400 individuals, few of whom operate outside the Muslim world, it is not far-fetched to suggest that delusional paranoia is driving US policy and budgeting in the War on Terror. Excluding September 11, 2001, fewer than 500 Americans have been killed by terrorism in the past 40 years. In a recent interview with the Wall Street Journal, Michael Morell, deputy director of the CIA, listed the top three security threats to the US as Syria, Iran and North Korea, in that order. Michael Cohen, a political and foreign policy fellow at the
[Biofuel] Japan PM Seeks Overseas Help on Fukushima Leak
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/japan-pm-seeks-overseas-fukushima-leak-20485100 Japan PM Seeks Overseas Help on Fukushima Leak TOKYO October 6, 2013 (AP) By MARI YAMAGUCHI Associated Press Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said Sunday that Japan is open to receiving overseas help to contain widening radioactive water leaks at the crippled nuclear plant in Fukushima, with leaks and mishaps reported almost daily. Abe made the comments in a speech at an international science forum in Kyoto in western Japan. We are wide open to receive the most advanced knowledge from overseas to contain the problem, Abe said in his English speech to open the conference on energy and environment. My country needs your knowledge and expertise, he said. Despite Abe's reassurances to the International Olympic Committee last month that the leaks were under control, many Japanese believe he was glossing over problems at the plant. Abe did not say whether he still thinks the leaks are under control, or give any specifics about foreign participation. His comments come just days after the plant's operator acknowledged that highly contaminated water spilled from a storage tank as workers tried to fill it to the top. Officials have acknowledged that the ground water contaminated with radioactive leaks has been seeping into the Pacific since soon after meltdowns following the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami. Recent leaks from storage tanks have added to public concerns. Japan has been criticized for its perceived reluctance in accepting foreign assistance to fight the problems at the plant, where the ongoing water leaks are hampering decommissioning work that is expected to last decades. Japan recently set up an organization among major utilities and nuclear experts to discuss decommissioning, including several advisers from countries such as France and Britain and Russia. The industry and trade ministry last month started accepting project proposals from private companies and groups to tackle the contaminated water problem, but English version was added only after criticisms that the Japanese-only notice signaled exclusion of foreign participation. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Cruzonomics: The Problem of Free Market Psychology
Er... re Adam Smith, see, e.g., http://www.chomsky.info/books/warfare02.htm - KA http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/19269-cruzonomics-the-problem-of-free-market-psychology Cruzonomics: The Problem of Free Market Psychology Monday, 07 October 2013 09:39 By Douglas T Kenrick, Psychology Today | News Analysis Senator Ted Cruz is a fan of the classic model of economic decision-making: sometimes called the Rational Man* view. On this view, every one of your decisions is designed to maximize utility - which translates loosely into personal satisfaction. If it feels good now, or will make you feel good later, choose it! Advocates of this position believe that we are, in general, pretty facile at processing information, and at coming to shrewd self-serving decisions. If you read the book Freakonomics, the authors explain how even seemingly senseless decisions, like changing one's occupation from computer technician to prostitute, or living at home if you are a drug dealer, are well explained by economic incentive structures. We are all, on this view, continuously operating like the high-roller in the movie Wall Street, who, while considering a shady deal, asks: What's in it for moi? Ask NOT what you can do for your country On this view, selfishness is not a bad thing. On the contrary, it is a virtue. The intellectual patron saint of free-market economics is Adam Smith, who argued that an invisible hand moves us toward mutually beneficial arrangements when everyone pursues his self-interest. For example, if consumers freely compare different fruit vendors at the market place, they will choose the one who charges the lowest price, but the price will not fall below the farmer's costs of production, or he will go out of business. But there are a few problems with the Rational Man view. One is that people often fail to act in ways that economists regard as perfectly rational. For example, there is a laboratory game called the Ultimatum Game. Imagine that an experimenter hands you $100 and instructs you to divide it between yourself and a stranger in the next room. You can divide it any way you want, but there is one stipulation: If the bloke in the next room doesn't like your offer, nobody gets anything. What should you offer? And if you happen to be the bloke on the receiving end of such an ultimatum, how low an offer should you accept? If you are being completely rational, the answer is easy: When you control the deal, keep most of it for yourself, and offer the person in the next room a smaller portion - maybe $10. Why? Because if the person in the next room says no, they end up with $0; whereas if they say yes, they are $10 richer. So it would be dumb of that person to refuse any offer. And yet, after watching thousands of subjects in countries all around the world play the ultimatum game, researchers find that players typically offer 40 percent of the pie (among American college students, a completely even 50-50 split is often the preferred choice). As Joe Henrich and his colleagues concluded after conducting ultimatum games in 15 different societies: We found that the canonical model - based on pure self-interest - fails in all of the societies studied. (http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/anthro/faculty/boyd/MacGamesBBSFinal.pdf) Not only do people in control typically make reasonably fair offers, but when the potential recipients are offered a small portion of the pie, they very often turn their nose up - walking away with $0 rather than taking the chance to make a free $10! Unfairness is naturally anger-producing In fact, the mind is exquisitely sensitive to unfairness, and economic injustice naturally triggers a lot of angry feelings. In recent years, behavioral economists like Henrich and his colleagues have begun studying the phenomenon of costly punishment - in which people spitefully give up their own rewards if doing so can take rewards away from someone else who is treating other players unfairly. All completely irrational! Why get angry instead of simply moving on to the next vendor in the market? From an evolutionary perspective, there are interesting questions about how costly punishment evolves, but it is clear that anger in response to an unfair negotiator can be adaptive - it sends a message - do not try to cheat me again! People's anger at selfish negotiators helps us understand one rather ironic finding: Economics students at Cornell, who are trained in the rational self-interest model, do especially poorly in laboratory economics games (Frank, Gilovich, Regan, 1993)! Why? Their selfishness pisses the other players off, and inhibits the cooperative spirit necessary to come to a mutually satisfactory deal. Rationality and Irrationality in Political Negotiations As Ted Cruz and the Tea Party have recently demonstrated, the rational model is alive and well in the political arena. The typical Tea Party member
[Biofuel] Bigger Than That: (The Difficulty of) Looking at Climate Change
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/19273-bigger-than-that-the-difficulty-of-looking-at-climate-change Bigger Than That: (The Difficulty of) Looking at Climate Change Monday, 07 October 2013 10:35 By Rebecca Solnit, TomDispatch | News Analysis Late last week, in the lobby of a particularly unglamorous downtown San Francisco building, a group of passionate but polite activists met with a bureaucrat who stepped forward to hear what they had to say about the fate of the Earth. The activists wanted to save the world. The particular part of it that might be under their control involved getting the San Francisco Retirement board to divest its half a billion dollars in fossil fuel holdings, one piece of the international divestment movement that arose a year ago. Sometimes the fate of the Earth boils down to getting one person with modest powers to budge. The bureaucrat had a hundred reasons why changing course was, well, too much of a change. This public official wanted to operate under ordinary-times rules and the idea that climate change has thrust us into extraordinary times (and that divesting didn't necessarily entail financial loss or even financial risk) was apparently too much to accept. The mass media aren't exactly helping. Last Saturday, for instance, the New York Times gave its story on the International Panel on Climate Change's six-years-in-the-making report on the catastrophic future that's already here below-the-fold front-page placement, more or less equal to that given a story on the last episode ofBreaking Bad. The end of the second paragraph did include this quote: In short, it threatens our planet, our only home. But the headline (U.N. Climate Panel Endorses Ceiling on Global Emissions) and the opening paragraph assured you this was dull stuff. Imagine a front page that reported your house was on fire right now, but that some television show was more exciting. Sometimes I wish media stories were organized in proportion to their impact. Unfortunately, when it comes to climate change, there is not paper enough on this planet to properly scale up a story to the right size. If you gave it the complete front page to suggest its import, you would then have to print the rest of the news at some sort of nanoscale and include an electron microscope for reading ease. Hold up your hand. It's so big it can block out the sun, though you know that the sun is so much bigger. Now look at the news: in column inches and airtime, a minor controversy or celebrity may loom bigger than the planet. The problem is that, though websites and print media may give us the news, they seldom give us the scale of the news or a real sense of the proportional importance of one thing compared to another. And proportion, scale, is the main news we need right now -- maybe always. As it happens, we're not very good at looking at the biggest things. They may be bigger than we can see, or move more slowly than we have the patience to watch for or remember or piece together, or they may cause impacts that are themselves complex and dispersed and stretch into the future. Scandals are easier. They are on a distinctly human scale, the scale of lust, greed, and violence. We like those, we understand them, we get mired in them, and mostly they mean little or nothing in the long run (or often even in the short run). A resident in a town on the northwest coast of Japan told me that the black 70-foot-high wave of water coming at him on March 11, 2011, was so huge that, at first, he didn't believe his eyes. It was the great Tohoku tsunami, which killed about 20,000 people. A version of such cognitive dissonance occurred in 1982, when NASA initially rejected measurements of the atmosphere above Antarctica because they indicated such a radical loss of ozone that the computer program just threw out the data. Some things are so big you don't see them, or you don't want to think about them, or you almost can't think about them. Climate change is one of those things. It's impossible to see the whole, because it's everything. It's not just a seven-story-tall black wave about to engulf your town, it's a complete system thrashing out of control, so that it threatens to become too hot, too cold, too dry, too wet, too wild, too destructive, too erratic for many plants and animals that depend on reliable annual cycles. It affects the entire surface of the Earth and every living thing, from the highest peaks to the depths of the oceans, from one pole to the other, from the tropics to the tundra, likely for millennia -- and it's not just coming like that wave, it's already here. It's not only bigger than everything else, it's bigger than everything else put together. But it's not a sudden event like a massacre or a flood or a fire, even though it includes floods, fires, heat waves, and wild weather. It's an incremental shift over decades, over centuries. It's
[Biofuel] Syria
An Israeli-Saudi-US conspiracy? Saudi Arabia's 'Chemical Bandar' behind the Syrian chemical attacks? By Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya The moralistic language coming out of Washington is despicable posturing. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36133.htm Russia Will Help Syria In The Event of a Military Strike, Putin By RT Putin: Syria chemical attack is 'rebels' provocation in hope of intervention' http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36136.htm Hezbollah, Iran and Syria Prepare for Counterattack By Mirella Hodeib The three players have agreed on a specific course of action if American missiles smash into Syrian territory. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36142.htm Yes, the Syrian Rebels DO Have Access to Chemical Weapons By WashingtonsBlog Multiple lines of evidence show that the rebels do have chemical weapons. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36130.htm US Gambles on Syria with Empty Hand By Finian Cunningham The Americans have a choice: either present your supposedly incriminating evidence against the Syrian government, or proceed with your plans and face international wrath for committing the supreme crime of aggression. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36139.htm Peace in Syria is Possible... Within The Week By Thierry Meyssan For a period of a little more than one week, there exists a window of possibility to stop the war. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36127.htm The U.S. is Fighting for Al Qaeda in Syria. By Prof Michel Chossudovsky Barack Obama and John Kerry are not fighting terrorism. Quite the opposite: They are actively supporting Al Qaeda terrorists in Syria. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36137.htm The US Government Stands Revealed to the World as a Collection of War Criminals and Liars By Paul Craig Roberts How can the American people and their representatives in Congress tolerate these extraordinary criminals? http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36135.htm Woman Informing Kerry, McCain's Opinions on Syria Also an Advocate for Syrian Rebels By Charles C. Johnson The woman whose opinion lawmakers are relying on to go to war in Syria is also a paid advocate for the war-torn country's rebels. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36129.htm Senators Authorizing Syria Strike Got More Defense Cash Than Lawmakers Voting No By David Kravets Senators voting Wednesday to authorize a Syria strike received, on average, 83 percent more campaign financing from defense contractors than lawmakers voting against war. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36128.htm Groundswell on Syria: The People Versus AIPAC By Philip Weiss We're at a defining moment in the history of the special relationship between the U.S. and Israel. Israel wants a war and the American people don't. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36140.htm What Happened to the Anti-War Movement? By David Sirota This is red-versus-blue tribalism in its most murderous form. It suggests that the party affiliation of a particular president should determine whether or not we want that president to kill other human beings. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36141.htm March on Washington to say Vote NO to War On Syria! Saturday, September 7 @ 12 noon and Monday, September 9 Gather at the White House + March to the Capitol Building. http://www.answercoalition.org/ Act Now! - Say No To War On Syria By ICH Here's the Best Way to Tell Congress Your Opinion on Syria. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36099.htm Peter Certo: On the Fence About Syria? Read This! http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/09/06-7 Options for Peace Ignored, As Obama Plans for Expanded Syria War http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/09/06-0 At G20, Push For War Isolates Obama From World Leaders http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/09/06-2 Dennis Kucinich: Top 10 Unproven Claims for War Against Syria http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/09/06-8 Sarah van Gelder: Syria: Six Alternatives to Military Strikes http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/09/06-3 George Lakoff: Obama Reframes Syria: Metaphor and War Revisited http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/09/06-1 Iraq Veterans Against the War: Post 9-11 Veterans Oppose U.S. Military Strikes in Syria http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/09/06-1 Pentagon Involvement in Syria Likely to Ramp Up as US Role in War Deepens Mark Karlin, BuzzFlash at Truthout: Forget about those assurances that the White House is just going to punch Assad's nose and that will be it. Plans are already fully underway for long term Pentagon involvement in the Syrian civil war. http://truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18181-pentagon-involvement-in-syria-likely-to-ramp-up-as-us-role-in-war-deepens ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org
[Biofuel] Freedom Is a Community-Based Economy
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36051.htm Freedom Is a Community-Based Economy We assume the existing hyper-structures of our centralized state-cartel economies will deliver us jobs, happiness, wealth, health and financial security. They will not. By Charles Hugh Smith Correspondent Simon H.'s insightful essay is not just a critique of our current centralized economies but an outline of a community-based alternative economy that offers freedom instead of dependence. Though his examples are drawn from the U.K., the dynamics are the same in America and other advanced state-cartel economies. Here is his essay. == Freedom as infrastructural independence from existing institutions By Simon H Why is it so hard to be productive and useful? To be productive and useful in our contemporary societies involves having a 'job' and being paid wages in a fiat currency and paying taxes on them. To be either economically or socially productive means that one has to enter into contracts and obligations demanded by our existing infrastructures and institutions. Looking at the very high levels of under and unemployment throughout Europe and the US some might say that the system is not working. One can come up with a far more radical hypothesis on this point when one makes the assumption that the system does not care if you or even it are productive or not. It simply needs you to be dependent upon it and the matrix of its infrastructures, institutions and bureaucracies. Indeed the more people the system can make entirely dependent upon it, the more secure that system becomes as those dependents will seldom bite the political and bureaucratic hands that are feeding and 'enabling' them in very limited terms. In the UK, if one is in receipt of Jobseeker's Allowance, the system is constructed to compel you to be as unproductive as possible. In order to receive the allowance you cannot work in a voluntary capacity as you have to be permanently available for paid work if it should ever materialize, nor can you easily ease into self-employment in a piecemeal or transitionary way. Only very limited, authorized forms of training are available and one certainly couldn't devise one's own training programme to learn computer programming or any other useful self taught skills or even set oneself a programme for studying one's own degree. To be independent, self-reliant and self-educating is systemically unacceptable and this forces us into systemic dependency upon the hyper-structures of educational and training institutions and the bureaucracy or cartel that manage their accreditations to suggest to a potential employer that we might have achieved something worthwhile. Welfare payments are only payable providing all your time is spent making a stipulated amount of job applications and the rest of the time you must be as unproductive as possible. Ideally you will sit morosely isolated in a cold room contemplating the existential misery of your hopeless situation. It will pay you benefits but it expects to extract the maximum amount of misery in return by making you socially useless and as parasitic and systemically meaningless as possible. Essentially the system maintains an elevated level of difficulty to becoming productive or useful as being self-employed or acting as an entrepreneur. It places far too many barriers, legal requirements and obstacles in the way to stop people from becoming productive and useful on their own terms. The distinctions in our societies between being a private citizen and a businessman or trader is systemically constructed and the gulf between them is far too difficult for the majority to cross legally. Consequently the easiest way to become entrepreneurial is to trade illegally. There is no red tape to stop one from setting up lucrative businesses as a drug trader, criminal or a prostitute. The persistence of crime in our societies is largely derived from the fact that it is so hard to bureaucratically establish oneself as a legitimate and fully regulated trader acting within all the rules and regulations. There are now, and there probably always have been, too many barriers to realizing and developing one's own productive potentials. One reads numerous complaints about welfare dependency - yet no one poses questions as to how and why such dependencies actually come about. As suggested above, a radical hypothesis here is that we are educated and systematically constructed or suspended within the hyper-structure in terms of strict dependency. Many find themselves dependent on welfare simply because it is so hard to become independently productive and self-reliant. The tendency in the media is to attack the non-productive as if they had brought this upon themselves but in reality it is a systemic construction. Why place any hurdles at all in the way of someone making themselves productive and
[Biofuel] The Anti-Empire Report #120
http://williamblum.org/aer/read/120 The Anti-Empire Report #120 By William Blum - Published September 3rd, 2013 Found at last! After searching for 10 years, the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction have finally been found - in Syria! Secretary of State John Kerry: There is no doubt that Saddam al-Assad has crossed the red line. Sorry, did I just say 'Saddam'? A US drone has just taken a photo of Mullah Omar riding on a motorcycle through the streets of Damascus. 1 So what do we have as the United States refuses to rule out an attack on Syria and keeps five warships loaded with missiles in the eastern Mediterranean? * Only 11% of the British supported a UK military intervention; this increased to 25% after the announcement of the alleged chemical attack. 3 * British Prime Minister David Cameron lost a parliamentary vote August 29 endorsing military action against Syria 285-272 * 64% of the French people oppose an intervention by the French Army. 4 Before acting we need proof, said a French government spokesperson. 5 * Former and current high-ranking US military officers question the use of military force as a punitive measure and suggest that the White House lacks a coherent strategy. If the administration is ambivalent about the wisdom of defeating or crippling the Syrian leader, possibly setting the stage for Damascus to fall to Islamic fundamentalist rebels, they say, the military objective of strikes on Assad's military targets is at best ambiguous. 6 * President Obama has no United Nations approval for intervention. (In February a massive bombing attack in Damascus left 100 dead and 250 wounded; in all likelihood the work of Islamic terrorists. The United States blocked a Russian resolution condemning the attack from moving through the UN Security Council) * None of NATO's 28 members has proposed an alliance with the United States in an attack against Syria. NATO's Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said that he saw no NATO role in an international reaction to the [Syrian] regime. 7 * The Arab League has not publicly endorsed support of US military action in Syria; nor have key regional players Saudi Arabia and Qatar, concerned about a possible public backlash from open support for US intervention. 8 * We don't even know for sure that there was a real chemical attack. Where does that accusation come from? The United States? The al-Qaeda rebels? Or if there was such an attack, where is the evidence that the Syrian government was the perpetrator? The Assad regime has accused the rebels of the act, releasing a video showing a cave with alleged chemical-weapon equipment as well as claiming to have captured rebels possessing sarin gas. Whoever dispensed the poison gas - why, in this age of ubiquitous cameras, are there no photos of anyone wearing a gas mask? The UN inspection team was originally dispatched to Syria to investigate allegations of earlier chemical weapons use: two allegations made by the rebels and one by the government. * The United States insists that Syria refused to allow the UN investigators access to the site of the attack. However, the UN request was made Saturday, August 24; the Syrian government agreed the next day. 9 * In rejecting allegations that Syria deployed poison gas, Russian officials have argued that the rebels had a clear motivation: to spur a Western-led attack on Syrian forces; while Assad had every reason to avoid any action that could spur international intervention at a time when his forces were winning the war and the rebels are increasingly losing world support because of their uncivilized and ultra-cruel behavior. * President George W. Bush misled the world on Iraq's WMD, but Bush's bogus case for war at least had details that could be checked, unlike what the Obama administration released August 29 on Syria's alleged chemical attacks - no direct quotes, no photographic evidence, no named sources, nothing but trust us, points out Robert Parry, intrepid Washington journalist. So, in light of all of the above, the path for Mr. Obama to take - as a rational, humane being - is of course clear. Is it not? N'est-ce pas? Nicht wahr? - Bombs Away! Pretty discouraging it is. No, I actually find much to be rather encouraging. So many people seem to have really learned something from the Iraqi pile of lies and horror and from decades of other American interventions. Skepticism - good ol' healthy skepticism - amongst the American, British and French people. It was stirring to watch the British Parliament in a debate of the kind rarely, if ever, seen in the 21st-century US Congress. And American military officers asking some of the right questions. The Arab League not supporting a US attack, surprising for an organization not enamored of the secular Syrian government. And NATO - even NATO! - refusing so far to blindly fall in line with the White House. When did that last
[Biofuel] Climate Change Fueling Spread of Crop-Killing Pests and Disease: Study
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/09/02-0 Published on Monday, September 2, 2013 by Common Dreams Climate Change Fueling Spread of Crop-Killing Pests and Disease: Study As planet warms global food security pushed further to the brink - Jacob Chamberlain, staff writer Diseases and pests that feed on crops are increasing at an alarming rate, decimating harvests in larger areas, adding to the long list of climate change factors that are threatening global food security, a study published this week in the journal Nature Climate Change warns. http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate1990.html According to the researchers, crop pests are spreading further towards the poles at an average rate of two miles per year. Among the reasons for this trend, the researchers found that warmer temperatures towards the far north and south, and at higher altitudes, are creating conditions conducive to the crop killers in larger areas. The researchers pointed to the global crop trade, which more easily spreads invasive species around the world as one of the main factors, but said that climate change has exacerbated the problem. The most convincing hypothesis is that global warming has caused this shift, Dr Dan Bebber from the University of Exeter and lead author of the study told BBC News. We detect a shift in their distribution away form the equator and towards the poles. One example is the Colorado potato beetle. Warming appears to have allowed it to move northwards through Europe to into Finland and Norway where the cold winters would normally knock the beetle back, said Bebber. BBC News reports: To investigate the problem, the researchers looked at the records of 612 crop pests and pathogens from around the world that had been collected over the past 50 years. These included fungi, such as wheat rust, which is devastating harvests in Africa, the Middle East and Asia; insects like the mountain pine beetle that is destroying trees in the US; as well as bacteria, viruses and microscopic nematode worms. Each organism's distribution was different - some butterflies and insects were shifting quickly, at about 12 miles (20km) a year; other bacterium species had hardly moved. On average, however, the pests had been spreading by two miles each year since 1960. Global food security is one of the major challenges we are going to face over the next few decades, Bebber added. We really don't want to be losing any more of our crops than is absolutely necessary to pests and pathogens. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] U.S. spy agencies mounted 231 offensive cyber-operations in 2011, documents show
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-spy-agencies-mounted-231-offensive-cyber-operations-in-2011-documents-show/2013/08/30/d090a6ae-119e-11e3-b4cb-fd7ce041d814_story.html U.S. spy agencies mounted 231 offensive cyber-operations in 2011, documents show By Barton Gellman and Ellen Nakashima 2013/08/30 U.S. intelligence services carried out 231 offensive cyber-operations in 2011, the leading edge of a clandestine campaign that embraces the Internet as a theater of spying, sabotage and war, according to top-secret documents obtained by The Washington Post. That disclosure, in a classified intelligence budget provided by NSA leaker Edward Snowden, provides new evidence that the Obama administration's growing ranks of cyberwarriors infiltrate and disrupt foreign computer networks. Additionally, under an extensive effort code-named GENIE, U.S. computer specialists break into foreign networks so that they can be put under surreptitious U.S. control. Budget documents say the $652 million project has placed covert implants, sophisticated malware transmitted from far away, in computers, routers and firewalls on tens of thousands of machines every year, with plans to expand those numbers into the millions. The documents provided by Snowden and interviews with former U.S. officials describe a campaign of computer intrusions that is far broader and more aggressive than previously understood. The Obama administration treats all such cyber-operations as clandestine and declines to acknowledge them. The scope and scale of offensive operations represent an evolution in policy, which in the past sought to preserve an international norm against acts of aggression in cyberspace, in part because U.S. economic and military power depend so heavily on computers. The policy debate has moved so that offensive options are more prominent now, said former deputy defense secretary William J. Lynn III, who has not seen the budget document and was speaking generally. I think there's more of a case made now that offensive cyberoptions can be an important element in deterring certain adversaries. Of the 231 offensive operations conducted in 2011, the budget said, nearly three-quarters were against top-priority targets, which former officials say includes adversaries such as Iran, Russia, China and North Korea and activities such as nuclear proliferation. The document provided few other details about the operations. Stuxnet, a computer worm reportedly developed by the United States and Israel that destroyed Iranian nuclear centrifuges in attacks in 2009 and 2010, is often cited as the most dramatic use of a cyberweapon. Experts said no other known cyberattacks carried out by the United States match the physical damage inflicted in that case. U.S. agencies define offensive cyber-operations as activities intended to manipulate, disrupt, deny, degrade, or destroy information resident in computers or computer networks, or the computers and networks themselves, according to a presidential directive issued in October 2012. Most offensive operations have immediate effects only on data or the proper functioning of an adversary's machine: slowing its network connection, filling its screen with static or scrambling the results of basic calculations. Any of those could have powerful effects if they caused an adversary to botch the timing of an attack, lose control of a computer or miscalculate locations. U.S. intelligence services are making routine use around the world of government-built malware that differs little in function from the advanced persistent threats that U.S. officials attribute to China. The principal difference, U.S. officials told The Post, is that China steals U.S. corporate secrets for financial gain. The Department of Defense does engage in computer network exploitation, according to an e-mailed statement from an NSA spokesman, whose agency is part of the Defense Department. The department does ***not*** engage in economic espionage in any domain, including cyber. 'Millions of implants' The administration's cyber-operations sometimes involve what one budget document calls field operations abroad, commonly with the help of CIA operatives or clandestine military forces, to physically place hardware implants or software modifications. Much more often, an implant is coded entirely in software by an NSA group called Tailored Access Operations (TAO). As its name suggests, TAO builds attack tools that are custom-fitted to their targets. The NSA unit's software engineers would rather tap into networks than individual computers because there are usually many devices on each network. Tailored Access Operations has software templates to break into common brands and models of routers, switches and firewalls from multiple product vendor lines, according to one document describing its work. The implants that TAO creates are
[Biofuel] The Brief, Tragic Reign of Consumerism-and the birth of a happy alternative
http://www.resilience.org/stories/2013-07-24/the-brief-tragic-reign-of-consumerism-and-the-birth-of-a-happy-alternative The Brief, Tragic Reign of Consumerism-and the birth of a happy alternative by Richard Heinberg, originally published by Post Carbon Institute | JUL 24, 2013 Our enormously productive economy demands that we make consumption our way of life, that we convert the buying and use of goods into rituals, that we seek our spiritual satisfaction and our ego satisfaction in consumption. We need things consumed, burned up, worn out, replaced and discarded at an ever-increasing rate. - Victor Lebow, Journal of Retailing, 1955 You and I consume; we are consumers. The global economy is set up to enable us to do what we innately want to do-buy, use, discard, and buy some more. If we do our job well, the economy thrives; if for some reason we fail at our task, the economy falters. The model of economic existence just described is reinforced in the business pages of every newspaper, and in the daily reportage of nearly every broadcast and web-based financial news service, and it has a familiar name: consumerism. Consumerism also has a history, but not a long one. True, humans-like all other animals-are consumers in the most basic sense, in that we must eat to live. Further, we have been making weapons, ornaments, clothing, utensils, toys, and musical instruments for thousands of years, and commerce has likewise been with us for untold millennia. What's new is the project of organizing an entire society around the necessity for ever-increasing rates of personal consumption. This is how it happened Consumerism arose from a unique historic milieu. In the early 20th century, a temporary abundance of cheap, concentrated, storable, and portable energy in the form of fossil fuels enabled a dramatic increase in the rate and scope of resource extraction (via powered mining equipment, chain saws, tractors, powered fishing boats, and more). Coupled with powered assembly lines and the use of petrochemicals, cheap fossil energy also permitted the vastly expanded manufacture of a widening array of commercial products. This resulted in a serious economic problem known as overproduction (too many goods chasing too few buyers), which would eventually contribute to the Great Depression. Industrialists found a solution. How they did so is detailed a book that deserves renewed attention, Captains of Consciousness by social historian Stuart Ewen (1976). Ewen traced the rapid, massive expansion of the advertising industry during the 20th century, as well as its extraordinary social and political impacts (if you really want to understand Mad Men, start here). Ewen argued that Consumerism, the mass participation in the values of the mass-industrial market . . . emerged in the 1920s not as a smooth progression from earlier and less 'developed' patterns of consumption, but rather as an aggressive device of corporate survival. In a later book, PR! (1996), Ewen recounts how, during the 1930s, the US-based National Association of Manufacturers enlisted a team of advertisers, marketers, and psychologists to formulate a strategy to counter government efforts to plan and manage the economy in the wake of the Depression. They proposed a massive, ongoing ad campaign to equate consumerism with The American Way. Progress would henceforth be framed entirely in economic terms, as the fruit of manufacturers' ingenuity. Americans were to be referred to in public discourse (newspapers, magazines, radio) as consumers, and were to be reminded at every opportunity of their duty to contribute to the economy by purchasing factory-made products, as directed by increasingly sophisticated and ubiquitous advertising cues. While advertising was an essential prop to consumerism, by itself it was incapable of stoking sufficient demand to soak up all the goods rolling off assembly lines. In the early years of the last century Americans were accustomed to paying cash for their purchases; but then along came automobiles: not many people could afford to pay for one outright, yet nearly everybody wanted one. In addition to being talked into desiring more products, consumers had to be enabled to purchase more of them than they could immediately pay for; hence the widespread deployment of time payments and other forms of consumer credit. With credit, households could consume now and pay later. Consumers took on more debt, the financial industry mushroomed, and manufacturers sold more products. Though consumerism began as a project organized by corporate America, government at all levels swiftly lent its support. When citizens spent more on consumer goods, sales tax and income tax revenues tended to swell. After World War II, government advocacy of increased consumer spending was formalized with the adoption of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as the nation's primary measure of
[Biofuel] Dr. Hansen, We Need You at Fukushima and Diablo Canyon
Nuke Plant to Shut Doors: Environmental Victory But Vital Work Still Ahead Communities celebrate, but demand corporate owners be held accountable for safe decomissioning process and 'just transition' for workers Published on Tuesday, August 27, 2013 by Common Dreams http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/08/27-4 --0-- http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/dr_hansen_we_need_you_at_fukushima_and_diablo_canyon_20130826/ Dr. Hansen, We Need You at Fukushima and Diablo Canyon Posted on Aug 26, 2013 By Harvey Wasserman The horrifying news from Fukushima worsens daily. It is an unparalleled global catastrophe that cries out for anyone and everyone with nuclear expertise to pitch in. Topping this list should be Dr. James Hansen. Hansen is a climate scientist and a hero of the global warming movement. He has courageously engaged in civil disobedience against mountaintop removal and the Keystone Pipeline. Hansen also claims some nuclear expertise, a credential he's used to justify his support for a new generation of Small Modular Reactors. Many of us in the No Nukes campaign find this advocacy profoundly mystifying. Even under the best of circumstances, there will be no SMR prototype for as long as a decade or more. The SMR's primary customer, the Tennessee Valley Authority, has now pushed back to 2015 the target date for submitting its construction permit application. Even if wildly successful, the SMR could not meaningfully affect climate change for another 20 years-this in the midst of a crisis Hansen and so many others see as critical and immediate. The SMR blueprint hinges on technologies that have already failed. The leading candidate for SMR production at this point seems to be Babcock Wilcox, which brought us Three Mile Island and Ohio's infamous Davis-Besse. It was there that boric acid ate through a pressure vessel to within a fraction of an inch of major disaster. Big questions remain unanswered about the SMR's health and environmental impacts such as on water, vulnerability to terrorism, its effects on waste disposal and much more. But the most obvious deal killer is economic. Even by current calculations, any new reactor design would have difficulty competing with renewable energy sources, especially solar panels that can be installed on rooftops, thus avoiding transmission costs. With the nuclear industry's half-century history of massive delay and cost overruns, we can expect the SMR to come in very late and billions over budget. As climate activist Bill McKibben told The Rumpus in December: Nuclear power, I mean-it's just too expensive. It really isn't going to happen. By contrast, the cost of renewables routinely drops, while rising in efficiency and speed of deployment. Germany has addressed the intermittency problem by balancing wind, solar and other sources into an effective baseload supply system. Every dollar diverted from that green-powered mix only worsens our vulnerability to climate disaster. Given all that, the sales pitch for new nuclear technologies is a dangerous diversion, like building an experimental garage while a raging radioactive fire forever contaminates our only home. A multimillion-dollar dis-infomercial called Pandora's Promise apparently (the producers have refused to send a review copy) promotes the SMR much like Disney pushed Our Friend the Atom-as a too cheap to meter miracle with can't-miss guarantees. Soon to air on CNN (supposedly without a balancing green point of view), the film was partly financed by billionaire Paul Allen, whose Microsoft cohort Bill Gates has invested heavily in new nukes. But even Pandora's mainstays waiver on today's reactors. In a riveting YouTubed debate http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/20/pandoras-promise-director-and-robert-f-kennedy-jr-debate-nuclear-options/?gwh=CC3B2BE159C9E22E7350FA57F8DD9EB7, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. calls Pandora an elaborate hoax. Director Robert Stone, in turn, terms the current generation of reactors 1960s technology. Hansen refers to it as that old technology and criticizes Japan http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/23/jim-hansen-presses-the-climate-case-for-nuclear-energy/?gwh=29C847E9CE90A8D51AF0C6223305771D for building Fukushima in a spot vulnerable to tsunamis. But California has two old technology reactors-at Diablo Canyon in an earthquake/tsunami zone in San Luis Obispo County. (It recently had four, but citizen action thankfully shut two at San Onofre in the southern part of the state.) Thousands of protesters practicing civil disobedience have been arrested trying to shut down Diablo. It's time Hansen joined us. We also need Hansen on the emergency team at Fukushima. Some 1,300 fuel rods are still stranded 100 feet in the air, threatening to spew thousands of times more radiation than was released at Hiroshima/Nagasaki. Fukushima's three melted cores have yet to be found. Steam bursts indicate
[Biofuel] The Prince: Meet the Man Who Co-Opted Democracy in the Middle East
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_prince_meet_the_man_who_co-opted_democracy_in_the_middle_east_20130826/ The Prince: Meet the Man Who Co-Opted Democracy in the Middle East Posted on Aug 27, 2013By Robert Scheer Now that the Arab Spring has been turned into a totally owned subsidiary of the Saudi royal family, it is time to honor Prince Bandar bin Sultan as the most effective Machiavellian politician of the modern era. How slick for this head of the Saudi Intelligence Agency to finance the Egyptian military's crushing of that nation's first-ever democratic election while being the main source of arms for pro-al-Qaida insurgents in Syria. Just consider that a mere 12 years ago, this same Bandar was a beleaguered Saudi ambassador in Washington, a post he held from 1983 to 2005, attempting to explain his nation's connection to 15 Saudi nationals who had somehow secured legal documents to enter the U.S. and succeeded in hijacking planes that blew up the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and crashed into a field in Pennsylvania. How awkward given that the Saudi ambassador had been advocating that U.S. officials go easy on the Taliban government in Afghanistan, where those attacks incubated. The ties between Saudi Arabia and the alleged al-Qaida terrorist attacks were manifest. The terrorists were followers of the Saudi-financed branch of Wahhabi Islam and their top leader, Osama bin Laden, was a scion of one of the most powerful families in the Saudi kingdom, which, along with the United Arab Emirates and Pakistan, had been the only three nations in the world to recognize the legitimacy of the Taliban government in Afghanistan that provided sanctuary to al-Qaida. Yet Bandar had no difficulty arranging safe passage out of Washington for many Saudis, including members of the bin Laden family that U.S. intelligence agents might have wanted to interrogate instead of escorting them to safety back in the kingdom. But the U.S. war on terror quickly took a marvelous turn from the point of view of the Saudi monarchy. Instead of focusing on those who attacked us and their religious and financial ties to the Saudi royal family, the U.S. began a mad hunt to destroy those who had absolutely nothing to do with the assaults of 9/11. Saddam Hussein in Iraq came quickly to mind, even though he had brutally crushed the al-Qaida efforts in his own country. But Hussein had earlier made the mistake of attacking the oil sheikdom of Kuwait, an acquiescent ally of the U.S. and Saudi Arabia. Suddenly, a second war against Iraq was in order. The result was to vastly increase the power of Iran in Iraq and the region, but mistakes happen. Now Iran is once again firmly established as the main enemy of freedom, despite the annoying fact that the Shiite leadership had nothing to do with those 9/11 attacks. And even though many of the folks attempting to overthrow the government in Syria are sympathetic to al-Qaida, the Assad government's connection with Iran trumps that concern for U.S. hawks. The Saudis have the wherewithal to buy our very expensive war toys; need we say more? It is now time for the Saudi Spring, and as The Wall Street Journal on Sunday detailed the monarchy's well-financed effort to shape the region's politics to its liking, ... Saudi Arabia's efforts in Syria are just one sign of its broader effort to expand its regional influence. The Saudis also have been outspoken supporters of the Egyptian military in its drive to squelch the Muslim Brotherhood, backing that up with big chunks of cash. That big chunk of cash, $12 billion from the UAE, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, is not aimed at stopping terrorism, if by that we mean the sort of attacks associated with 9/11 and al-Qaida. As the Journal story reminded, A generation ago, Prince Bandar, in a role foreshadowing his current one on behalf of Syrian opposition, helped the CIA arm the Afghan rebels who were resisting occupation by Soviet troops. That's how the Saudi bin Laden came to be in Afghanistan. Earlier, Bandar had been involved in the CIA's effort to deliver arms from Iran to the Contras in Nicaragua. Can you imagine the blowback from the prince's current efforts to get the United States to once again meddle madly in a region that we don't care to comprehend? Why not ask Republican Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham who, according to the Journal, met with Bandar in September to urge the Saudis to provide the Syrian rebels with more potent weapons. Or ask Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the Democratic chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who was among those courted by Bandar. As the Journal described the Saudi junket by members of the congressional intelligence committees, They [the Saudis] arranged a trip for committee leaders to Riyadh, where Prince Bandar laid out the Saudi strategy. It was a reunion of sorts, officials said, with Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) warmly scolding
[Biofuel] War on Syria: Twenty Pounds of Stupid in a Ten-Pound Bag
Military strikes on Syria 'as early as Thursday,' US officials say http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/27/20209022-military-strikes-on-syria-as-early-as-thursday-us-officials-say?lite Doctors Behind Syrian Chemical Weapons Claims are Aiding Terrorists By Tony Cartalucci Global Research, August 25, 2013 http://www.globalresearch.ca/doctors-behind-syrian-chemical-weapons-claims-are-aiding-terrorists/5346870 --0-- http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/18416-war-on-syria-twenty-pounds-of-stupid-in-a-ten-pound-bag War on Syria: Twenty Pounds of Stupid in a Ten-Pound Bag Tuesday, 27 August 2013 09:16 By William Rivers Pitt, Truthout | Op-Ed I'm just going to throw this out on the stoop and see if the cat licks it up: instead of attacking Syria, how about we don't attack Syria? Crazy, I know; this is America, after all, and our presidents like nothing more than to flip a few cruise missiles at other countries, combined with a few bombing sorties for good measure, because it's a hell of a lot easier than actual statecraft. Besides, it looks good on television, and all those meanies in Congress can't accuse the Commander in Chief of not doing anything. Oh, also, cruise missiles and bombs cost a lot, so if we pull the trigger on Syria, someone will get paid handsomely. What ho, this we call diplomacy, right? Flatten a few buildings, blow some children sideways out of their kitchens during breakfast, take a victory lap on the Sunday morning talk shows...what could possibly go wrong? Quite a bit, as it turns out. Once again, it is weapons of mass destruction at the crux of the matter. Unlike our Iraq debacle, however, there seems to be a fairly impressive body of evidence to suggest that chemical weapons were used in Syria. Doctors Without Borders seems pretty convinced it happened, despite the fact that the use of such weapons by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense, given the fickle nature of chemical weapons and how closely concentrated his own forces were near the area of the attack. A rogue military commander, perhaps? The rebels themselves? The answer to whether or not a chemical attack took place will soon be forthcoming, as UN inspectors have arrived at the scene to investigate after being greeted with sniper fire. If it is established that the Syrian government did this, enormous pressure will be brought to bear on President Obama to punish the Assad regime with a military attack of some kind. The short version of why such a course of action is an invitation to catastrophe: Syria is no paper tiger, and is very much capable of both defending itself as well as attacking American interests in the region if provoked. Syria and Iran are strategic allies and are pledged to each other's mutual defense, which means all the Iranian missile sites in the mountains above the Persian Gulf coast could launch their missiles in retaliation...and those Iranian missiles, by the by, are advanced enough to spoof Aegis radar systems, which means thousands of American service members currently manning our warships in the Gulf could very quickly be delivered into a watery grave. Russia is also a staunch ally of Syria, and could also be provoked into getting involved by backing Assad even more forcefully than they have to date. In essence, any attack on Syria could quickly escalate into a full-scale war that would further destabilize the region and quite probably lead to the kind of conflagration found in the last chapter of the Bible. Finally, and not for nothing, but if Mr. Obama and his generals manage to come up with the perfect military plan and successfully end the Assad regime, the folks who will take over Syria in his absence are exactly the kind of people we started this whole War On Terror to confront and destroy in the first place. Or so I was told. The story seems to change so often, doesn't it? An article published in Saturday's New York Times makes it very clear the degree to which American military action against Syria is a no-win scenario: Indeed, it would be disastrous if President Bashar al-Assad's regime were to emerge victorious after fully suppressing the rebellion and restoring its control over the entire country. Iranian money, weapons and operatives and Hezbollah troops have become key factors in the fighting, and Mr. Assad's triumph would dramatically affirm the power and prestige of Shiite Iran and Hezbollah, its Lebanon-based proxy - posing a direct threat both to the Sunni Arab states and to Israel. But a rebel victory would also be extremely dangerous for the United States and for many of its allies in Europe and the Middle East. That's because extremist groups, some identified with Al Qaeda, have become the most effective fighting force in Syria. If those rebel groups manage to win, they would almost certainly try to form a government hostile to the United States. Moreover,
[Biofuel] Your Steak Is Addicted to Drugs
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/08/beef-industry-addicted-drugs Your Steak Is Addicted to Drugs -By Tom Philpott Wed Aug. 28, 2013 Meatpacking giant Tyson recently grabbed headlines when it announced it would no longer buy and slaughter cows treated with a growth-enhancing drug called Zilmax, made by pharma behemoth Merck. Tyson made the move based on animal well-being concerns, it told its cattle suppliers in a letter, adding that there have been recent instances of cattle delivered for processing that have difficulty walking or are unable to move. According to The Wall Street journal, Zilmax (active ingredient: zilpaterol hydrochloride) and similar growth promotors are banned in the European Union, China, and Russia. The news sent shock waves through the beef industry. Merck denied any problems with its drug, but announced it would temporarily suspend sales of Zilmax in the United States and Canada pending a scientific audit of the product, which generated $159 million in US and Canadian sales in 2012, Merck added.. Soon after, Tyson's rivals, JBS, Cargill, and National Beefpacking, announced that they, too, would stop accepting Zilmax-treated cattle for slaughter, pending Merck's review. Together, Tyson, JBS, Cargill, and National slaughter and pack more than 80 percent of the beef cows raised in the US, according to University of Missouri researcher Mary Hendrickson (PDF). If they stick to their refusal to buy cows treated with the drug, it's hard to see how Zilmax has a future on America's teeming cattle feedlots. Is the US beef industry turning away from the practice of turning to drugs to fatten its cattle? Not so fast. Rather than wean themselves from growth promoters, the companies that produce cows to supply the likes of Tyson and JBS are instead shifting rapidly to a rival beta-agonist, this one from pharma giant Eli Lilly, called Optaflexx. The suspension of Zilmax sales has caused such a surge in demand for rival Optaflexx that Lilly is telling some new customers it cannot immediately supply them, Reuters reports. Close readers of this blog will recognize the active ingredient in Optaflexx: It's ractopamine, a drug wildly popular on factory-scale hog farms, and also highly controversial, as the excellent food-safety reporter Helena Bottemiller showed in a 2012 article http://thefern.org/2012/01/dispute-over-drug-in-feed-limiting-u-s-meat-exports/. Ractopamine mimics stress hormones, making the heart beat faster and relaxing blood vessels, Bottemiller reported. She added: Since the drug was introduced [in 1999], more than 160,000 pigs taking ractopamine were reported to have suffered adverse effects, as of March 2011, according to a review of FDA records. The drug has triggered more adverse reports in pigs than any other animal drug on the market. Pigs suffered from hyperactivity, trembling, broken limbs, inability to walk and death, according to FDA reports released under a Freedom of Information Act request. The FDA, however, says such data do not establish that the drug caused these effects. So why are the companies that fatten cattle for the big beef processors-known as cattle feeders-so intent on using controversial drugs like Zilmax and Optaflexx? The answer lies in meat industry's brutal economics. Cattle feeders are stuck between high recent prices for corn and soy feed-pushed up by last year's severe drought and also by high demand for corn from the ethanol industry-and the low prices offered to them for beef cows by the likes of Tyson and JBS. According to a recent report in Reuters, citing figures from the Denver-based Livestock Marketing Information Center, cattle feedlots lost on average about $82 per head of cattle sold to the meatpacking industry, the 27th straight month of losses. Using growth promoters like Zilmax and Optaflexx, which cause cattle to put on muscle rapidly without increasing their feed needs, mitigated those losses an estimated $30 or $40 per head. Apparently, Zilmax works a bit better than Optaflexx-both in terms of fattening cattle and helping feedlot operators trim losses. Quoting a feedlot operator, Reuters reports that Zilmax costs roughly $20 per head while generating between $15 to $30 worth additional meat for market ,while Optaflexx costs $8 to $10 but brings in just $10 to $12 in extra revenue. So why are the big meatpackers banning Zilmax when it hurts the bottom lines of their already-struggling suppliers? Frankly, Tyson's claim that it's all about animal well-being strains credibility. Tyson is also a massive pork producer, and it has shaken off years of pressure to abandon the practice of housing pregnant pigs in tiny crates, even as rivals Smithfield, Cargill, and Hormel have taken steps to do just that. In terms of stress-causing feed additives, Smithfield recently declared it would soon ensure that half of its pork comes from cows [sic] not
[Biofuel] Obama administration asks court to force NYT reporter to reveal source
Exclusive Glenn Greenwald Interview: I Won't Be Kept Out of My Country for Doing Journalism! Monday, 26 August 2013 10:14 By Jonathan Franklin, Truthout | Interview http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/18402-i-wont-be-kept-out-of-my-country-for-doing-journalism-exclusive-glenn-greenwald-truthout-interview --0-- http://www.theguardian.com/law/2013/aug/27/obama-administration-james-risen-no-privilege Obama administration asks court to force NYT reporter to reveal source Previous ruling said reporters have no privilege to safeguard confidentiality leaving Risen to reveal his source or go to jail Ed Pilkington in New York theguardian.com, Tuesday 27 August 2013 The Obama administration is trying to dissuade federal judges from giving the New York Times reporter James Risen one last chance to avoid having to disclose his source in a criminal trial over the alleged leaking of US state secrets. The Department of Justice has filed a legal argument with the US appeals court for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Virginia, in which it strongly opposes any further consideration of Risen's petition. Risen's lawyers have asked the court to convene a full session of the 15-member court to decide whether the journalist should be granted First Amendment protection that would spare him from having to reveal the identity of his source to whom he promised confidentiality. A three-member panel of the same court last month issued a 2-1 majority ruling in which they found that reporters had no privilege that would safeguard the confidentiality of their sources in a criminal trial. The judgement leaves Risen, a prominent investigative reporter specialising in national security issues, facing the prospect of having to break his promise to his source or go to jail. The legal crunch emerged from Risen's 2006 book, State of War, in which the author reveals details of the CIA's attempts to foil Iran's nuclear programme. James Sterling, a former CIA employee, is being prosecuted under the Espionage Act for the criminal disclosure of the information - one of seven officials to face the severe charges under the Obama administration including Chelsea Manning who has been sentenced to 35 years in military jail as the WikiLeaks source. In a 26-page filing, the US prosecutor Neil Macbride and his team argue that Risen has no grounds to be offered a full hearing of the appeals court because there is no such thing as a reporters' privilege in a criminal trial. They insist that the New York Times journalist was the only eyewitness to the leaking crimes of which Sterling has been charged and under previous case law has no right to claim First Amendment protection. Risen's eyewitness testimony is essential proof of the disputed identity of the perpetrator that cannot be duplicated or replaced by other evidence in the case, MacBride writes. The DoJ's robust attempt to block any further legal discussion about Risen's plight will add to the impression that the Obama administration is determined to stamp on official leaking regardless of its implications for press freedom - a syndrome that some critics have dubbed a war on whistleblowing. Risen's lawyers argue that the hardline approach conflicts with the Justice Department's own recent guidelines in which it talks of a need for balance between pursuing leakers while safeguarding the essential role of a free press in fostering government accountability in an open society. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] The FPIF Egypt Reader
Foreign Policy In Focus The FPIF Egypt Reader http://fpif.org/washington-and-the-egyptian-tragedy/ Washington and the Egyptian Tragedy Stephen Zunes The vast majority of Egyptians killed since the coup have been unarmed protesters struck down with American-made weapons by soldiers transported in American-made vehicles provided by the American taxpayer. http://fpif.org/egypts-muslim-brotherhood-reform-or-relapse/ Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood: Reform or Relapse? Mohamed Yousry and Michael Gasper If Muslim Brotherhood leaders think that this crisis is similar to others in their troubled history, they are badly mistaken. http://fpif.org/egypts-treacherous-road/ Egypt's Treacherous Road Adil E. Shamoo and Bonnie Bricker Washington should refrain from its interventionist instincts and acknowledge that this is a fight for Egyptians. http://fpif.org/the-new-rules-of-the-game-in-egypt/ The New Rules of the Game in Egypt Sarah Gold A look at Egypt's constitutional declaration suggests that the road out of military dictatorship is fraught with peril. http://fpif.org/a-familiar-script-in-egypt/ A Familiar Script in Egypt Sarah Gold Anyone who thinks military rule bends toward democracy in Egypt has misread the country's history. http://fpif.org/egypts-military-brings-neither-stability-nor-democracy/ Egypt's Military Brings Neither Stability Nor Democracy Ben Luongo Though the Egyptian military is painting itself as a guardian of stability and democracy, there is ample reason to believe it will bring neither. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] FPIF - The Stormy Pacific
Foreign Policy In Focus The Stormy Pacific http://fpif.org/beneath-the-surface-china-simmers/ Beneath the Surface, China Simmers Cindy Hwang China's broken and thuggish legal system is producing a new brand of terrorism. http://fpif.org/making-myanmar-work/ Making Myanmar Work Billy Tea Although known for decades for its oppressive behavior, Myanmar's government is capable of very little when it comes to conserving natural resources, promoting development, and protecting citizens. http://fpif.org/a-brewing-storm-in-the-western-pacific/ A Brewing Storm in the Western Pacific Walden Bello China's aggressive territorial claims, Washington's pivot to Asia, and Japan's hawkish bluster add up to a volatile brew in the Asia-Pacific. http://fpif.org/preventing-the-next-battle-of-okinawa/ Preventing the Next Battle of Okinawa Jon Mitchell As they rally against a planned military base on Henoko, the people of Okinawa need all the support they can get. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] The People Take on Fracking Corporation in UK-Wide Actions
Fracking - Britain's Next Revolution By Lesley Docksey Global Research, August 20, 2013 http://www.globalresearch.ca/fracking-britains-next-revolution/5346457 Cuadrilla Hit with Protests Across the UK, Campaigners Condemn Aggressive Policing August 19, 2013 http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/08/19-0 Is fracking all we have to worry about? MEL KELLY 20 August 2013 As protests against fracking rage on, are protesters ignoring a much greater industrial threat to the British countryside? http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/mel-kelly/is-fracking-all-we-have-to-worry-about Fracks and figures: the big questions about fracking Advocates say it is a safe solution to our energy problems. Environmentalists think it is a disaster waiting to happen. But how much do we really know about hydraulic fracturing? We dig into the tricky terrain to find out the answers John Vidal The Guardian, Monday 19 August 2013 http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/aug/19/fracks-figures-big-questions-hydraulic-fracturing --0-- http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/08/19-4 Published on Monday, August 19, 2013 by Common Dreams The People Take on Fracking Corporation in UK-Wide Actions Balcombe fracking protests spread nationwide as demonstrators shut down corporate headquarters, PR firm and drilling site - Lauren McCauley, staff writer In a rapid-fire succession of civil disobedience actions across the United Kingdom, anti-fracking protesters came out in force Monday against drilling company Cuadrilla, shutting down their headquarters, their PR company and their drill site in Balcombe. In an effort to suspend the sustained campaign of corporate misinformation being peddled by Bell Pottinger, beginning at 8 AM local time, six activists using superglue and reinforced arm tubes blocked the entrance company headquarters in London. Bell Pottinger is the PR company behind Cuadrilla's operation in Sussex where fracking already occurs. Reporting on the action, the group No Dash for Gas writes: Another activist climbed the building and unfurled a banner reading: 'BELL POTTINGER - FRACKING LIARS'. The campaigners used a sound system to play an undercover recording in which a Bell Pottinger spin doctor admits the company's pro-fracking PR offensive 'sounds like utter fucking bullshit.' By 9 AM, 20 activists in Lichfield-two hours north of London-shut down Cuadrilla's headquarters by blockading it with their bodies. According to No Dash for Gas, three people entered the building and successfully occupied 8 work stations using D-locks forcing the company to clear the entire floor of staff. We need to reclaim our energy system from the hands of corporations that will frack our countryside, crash our climate targets and send fuel bills through the roof, declared protester Debby Petersen. And in Balcombe, where Cuadrilla's test drilling site set off the nationwide protests, hundreds of protesters faced off with police as they locked arms around five activists who blocked the main gates by securing themselves with D-locks and superglue to a wheelchair. A larger group of activists reportedly blocked the surrounding road. Meanwhile, No Dash for Gas reports, a double-decker bus with children from the camp toured the area with the slogan Don't frack with our future emblazoned on the side of the vehicle. Elsewhere, activists placed a wind turbine blade on the roof of the constituency office of Balcombe MP and Cabinet member Francis Maude, who was targeted for his pro-fracking views. Reports of aggressive police tactics being used at the Balcombe protest have already drawn criticism and a formally filed complaint after a video surfaced of officers arresting a peaceful protester by kneeling on his head and pushing his face into the ground as other officers restrain him. Other police had reportedly charged, pushed and shoved protesters and forced one protester's head down with a bicycle wheel. Among the six demonstrators arrested by the Balcombe gates was Green Party MP, Dr. Caroline Lucas, who-along with her son-was forcibly removed from outside the test drilling site where she sat with her arms linked with other protesters. I'm proud of the people around me who have put their bodies where the police are, Lucas said. They have tried to use the democratic processes, tried to raise the issue through those democratic panels. The government isn't listening. Climate change is the greatest threat that we face and I think that people are right to try and take action against fracking. The actions follow three weeks of protests by the people of Balcombe against test drilling in the area which, protesters say, could lead to fracking to extract shale gas. As others have taken up the local fight, a growing 'climate camp' in Balcombe housed and fed roughly 800 people over the weekend as they prepared for their multi-front battle against Cuadrilla and the gas drilling
[Biofuel] As 300 Tons of Radioactive Water Leak From Fukushima, Never Believe The Nuclear Crisis Is Over
'A Huge Amount of Radiation' as Fukushima Crisis Worsens Fukushima crisis only continues to worsen as a new and separate leak of 'highly radioactive water' found Published on Tuesday, August 20, 2013 by Common Dreams http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/08/20-0 --0-- http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18150-as-300-tons-of-radioactive-water-leaks-from-fukushima-never-believe-the-nuclear-crisis-is-over Tuesday, 20 August 2013 15:51 As 300 Tons of Radioactive Water Leak From Fukushima, Never Believe The Nuclear Crisis Is Over MARK KARLIN, EDITOR OF BUZZFLASH AT TRUTHOUT When it comes to getting the truth from corporations and governments on nuclear power, forget about it. There is too much money and too many political careers tied up in a radiocative future to believe any statement -- such as the ones about the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant: Don't worry, the crisis is over or We've got it all under control. Mainstream media across the world today have blaring headlines, such as the New York Times: 300 Tons of Contaminated Water Leak From Japanese Nuclear Plant: Workers raced to place sandbags around the leak at the site to stem the spread of the water, a task made more urgent by a forecast of heavy rain for the Fukushima region later in the day. A spokesman at Tokyo Electric Power, the plant's operator, acknowledged that much of the contaminated water had seeped into the soil and could eventually reach the ocean, adding to the tons of radioactive fluids that have already leaked into the sea from the troubled plant. The leaked water contains levels of radioactive cesium and strontium many hundreds of times higher than legal safety limits, Tokyo Electric said. Exposure to either element is known to increase the risk of cancer The latest leak comes from one of the site's 1,000 tanks, about 500 yards inland, Tepco said. Workers discovered puddles of radioactive water near the tank on Monday. Further checks revealed that the 1,000-ton capacity vessel, thought to be nearly full, only contained 700 tons, with the remainder having almost certainly leaked out. As the fossil fuel industry races to destroy the planet in order to swill champagne bottles of profit as the earth's nurturing eco systems erode into toxic destructive forces, the nuclear industry rushes to justify even more nuclear power as the deadly impact of its current plants is still literally leaking into our environment: the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat from the oceans. A Reuters article broaches upon a key debate that has been at the center of the Fukishima horror since the initial meltdown: should a private corporation be responsible for the clean-up? It's kind of like putting the banks too big to fail in charge of restoring the economy that they crashed, except that nuclear radiation can literally kill us: Tepco has been criticized for its failure to prepare for the disaster and been accused of covering up the extent of the problems at the plant. In recent months, the plant has been beset with power outages and other problems that have led outside experts to question whether Tepco is qualified to handle the clean up, which is unprecedented due to the amount of radioactive material on the site and its coastal location. The government said this month it will step up its involvement in the cleanup, following Tepco's admission, after months of denial, that leaked contaminated water had previously reached the ocean. Fukushima Governor Yuhei Sato told an emergency meeting of prefectural officials on Tuesday it was a national emergency, and that the local government would monitor the situation more strictly and seek additional steps as needed. Massive amounts of radioactive fluids are accumulating at the plant as Tepco floods reactor cores via an improvised system to keep melted uranium fuel rods cool and stable. The water in the cooling system then flows into basements and trenches that have been leaking since the disaster. This is not just a national emergency; this is an international crisis that like Chernobyl is a stop sign for the further development of nuclear power. It's a bit disconcerting that we spend untold billions of dollars and lose lives in wars and violate our Constitution to allegedly chase down terrorists who might do us harm, but have our governments and corporations promote a form of energy that is clearly a longterm threat to our well-being. Furthermore, we have now seen that neither private industry nor governments are prepared to deal with the inevitable nuclear disasters that result from the annihilating genie in the bottle that they have and continue to create. Meanwhile, the NSA and hundreds and hundreds of other US government agencies and private contractors monitor us and potential terrorists while a nuclear threat is being promoted by governments around the world, including
[Biofuel] 'Ecological Debt Day' Reached: World in Resource Overdraft
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/08/20-6 Published on Tuesday, August 20, 2013 by Common Dreams 'Ecological Debt Day' Reached: World in Resource Overdraft We have now overshot the Earth's resources for the year, meaning all consumption from here borrows from future generations - Sarah Lazare, staff writer Tuesday, August 20 marks an unnerving annual milestone: Earth Overshoot Day-when humanity has used up all of the natural resources and waste absorption that the Earth can provide in a year, meaning that human consumption for the remaining 4.5 months of 2013 is borrowed from future generations. It is like having a bank account, Juan Carlos Morales of the independent think tank Global Footprint Network told Common Dreams. If you don't have money available, you have to take out credit. We are depleting resources faster than Earth can regenerate. The concept, originally developed by the New Economics Foundation and carried forward by the Global Footprint Network, reveals a disturbing trend. Earth Overshoot Day, also called Ecological Debt Day, is arriving earlier each year since it was first calculated in 1987, roughly three days earlier each year since 2011. Global Footprints says this trend is unequivocal since Human consumption began outstripping what the planet could reproduce in the mid-1970s. We are now operating in overdraft, reads a Global Footprints statement. For the rest of the year, we will maintain our ecological deficit by drawing down local resource stocks and accumulating carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Global Footprints calculates the day of overdraft based on analysis of consumption and production patterns of each country. Every scientific model used to account for human demand and nature's supply shows a consistent trend: We are well over budget, and that debt is compounding, reads an organizational statement. It is an ecological debt, and the interest we are paying on that mounting debt-food shortages, soil erosion, and the build-up of CO? in our atmosphere-comes with devastating human and monetary costs. Not all countries borrow equally, with Europe, North America, and Qatar consuming at notably destructive paces. According to Global Footprints, if everyone in the world consumed on par with the United States, it would take four Earths to sustain the international population. Regardless of consumption patterns, it is still a global problem that affects everyone, explains Morales. We all have responsibility to address it. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Mubarak to be Released Amid Growing Calls to Suspend Aid
Egyptian military junta moves to free Mubarak By Alex Lantier 20 August 2013 http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/08/20/egyp-a20.html Prince Saud: Arabs to cover any foreign aid cuts to Egypt Tuesday, 20 August 2013 http://www.arabnews.com/news/461777 Egyptians See Life Worse Now Than Before Mubarak's Fall August 16, 2013 http://www.gallup.com/poll/164015/egyptians-life-worse-mubarak-fall.aspx Military Madness: Has Our Species Become Insane? By Jim McCluskey August 19, 2013 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article35912.htm --0-- http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/08/19-0 Published on Monday, August 19, 2013 by Common Dreams Mubarak to be Released Amid Growing Calls to Suspend Aid EU officials meet Monday to 'urgently review' aid package to Egypt - Lauren McCauley, staff writer As violence continues to rage across Egypt between the state-run military and the largely Muslim Brotherhood pro-Morsi factions, reports reveal Monday that ousted President Hosni Mubarak will be released in the next two days-a move likely to be interpreted by many as a political ploy in these very volatile circumstances. Lawyers for ousted Mubarak announced Monday that he will be released from jail in the next 48 hours after being cleared in a corruption case, Reuters reports. In reaction to the news, the Guardian's Middle East editor Ian Black noted that in these very, very volatile circumstances after the overthrow of Morsi, Mubarak's release will be interpreted as a political and not a judicial move. It doesn't really matter what the legal reason is but the prosecutor who apparently made the decision is an old regime prosecution figure who had been replaced during the period that Morsi was in office, he continued. It's fairly clear that there's going to be some pretty angry reactions to the decision against the wider context of everything else that's going on. Adding that it seems the country is back where it started, FireDogLake's Daniel Wright notes, So Mubarak will be free as protesters are being massacred in the streets and killed in custody - some revolution Egypt has had. Correspondents on the ground continued to provide updates via Twitter: Condemning the violence which has killed nearly 1000 individuals since Wednesday's military massacre of pro-Morsi protesters, European officials announced Sunday intentions to urgently review their support of the government in light of the ongoing tensions in the country. The Guardian reports: EU foreign ministers are expected to meet in Brussels this week to discuss Egypt after the presidents of the European council and European commission, Herman Van Rompuy and José Manuel Barroso, warned jointly on Sunday that further escalation could have unpredictable consequences. The EU had pledged almost ¤5bn (£4.2bn) in loans and grants for 2012-2013. In a statement they said the EU would urgently review in the coming days its relations with Egypt. We regret deeply that international efforts and proposals for building bridges and establishing an inclusive political process ... were set aside and a course of confrontation was instead pursued, they added. As other western countries begin to speak out, the spotlight continues to intensify on the roughly $1.6 billion given annually to the country in U.S. aid, including $1.3 billion in sophisticated weaponry. On Sunday, warhawk and former presidential rival Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) criticized President Barack Obama for not sticking to our values, for his failure to follow through on a threat to cut off aid if there was a military coup in Egypt. Since the 1978 Camp David accords, the U.S. has continually funneled aid to Egypt as a means of maintaining a regional ally for Israel. On Monday, following the EU's announcement, an unnamed Israeli official criticized the proposed aid withdrawal saying, The name of the game right now is not democracy. Further, the Guardian reports, Sunday's [Egyptian] state TV broadcasts - tagged with an 'Egypt fighting terrorism' logo - ran repeated interviews with citizens agreeing with the government's rejection of foreign involvement. Meanwhile, the military crackdown against Morsi supporters and members of the Muslim Brotherhood continues to intensify. News Sunday night reported that 38 members of the Brotherhood were assassinated after taking a military police officer hostage during an attempted jailbreak from a transport truck headed to Abu Zaabal prison in northern Egypt. Further, the Associated Press reports that hundreds of Brotherhood members were arrested Sunday throughout the country as security officials conducted home raids aimed at disrupting planned rallies in support of Morsi. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Songdo Fallout: Is Green Finance a Red Herring?
http://fpif.org/songdo-fallout-is-green-finance-a-red-herring/ Songdo Fallout: Is Green Finance a Red Herring? With the latest green finance talks in Songdo, wealthy countries have taken another step toward financializing the world's response to climate change. By Oscar Reyes, July 16, 2013. From the 29th floor of Songdo, South Korea's jagged G-Tower, one can glimpse the endless construction sites and vacant parks of an emerging global business utopia, to use the city's adopted slogan. The newly built city, home to the UN's nascent Green Climate Fund (GCF), proudly promotes its green credentials, including an impressive network of underused bike lines. Unfortunately, these run alongside 10-lane boulevards ruled by Hyundai limos and Korean airline buses. Songdo, in short, is a monoculture plantation of skyscrapers, shorn of the diverse ecosystem that characterizes living cities. And the G-Tower is the symbol that tops the lot: a skyscraper with a Pac-Man-like cutaway, as though the institution is running from the ghosts of the World Bank and other multilateral development banks. Like the Fund itself-a centerpiece of the international climate finance regime, designed to fund climate mitigation projects in the developing world-it is currently empty. A few streets away from the G-Tower, Songdo's convention center recently played host to the fourth meeting of the GCF's governing board. There, the GFC's 24 board members (government officials selected on a regional basis) made several key decisions. These include how the Fund will be managed (should money ever arrive), by whom, and according to what rules. The most widely publicized decision taken during the meeting was the appointment of Hela Cheikhrouhou, a Tunisian national, as the Fund's first executive director. She comes to the GCF from the African Development Bank, where she led its work on energy, the environment, and climate change. Prior to that she had a five-year stint at the World Bank working on private-sector investment and infrastructure in Latin America, and had spent eight years at Citibank before that. Cheikhrouhou's biography reads like that of a candidate groomed by the multilateral development banks and private sector in the expectation that the GCF should become one of their own. But while her appointment is a conservative choice, it was arguably the least-bad option from a three-person shortlist that also included the Dutch former head of the European Climate Foundation and a Colombian official from the Inter-American Development Bank. The lack of high-profile candidates was notable, although not surprising, given the absence of any secured financing for the GCF and a requirement that appointees relocate to Songdo. Which private sector? New leaders win media headlines, but institutional design and rule setting tend to have more influence over time. The key structural decisions taken in Songdo concerned the GCF's Private Sector Facility (PSF), which was created to encourage private investment in projects that reduce both the causes of climate change (by mitigating greenhouse gases) and its impacts (by adapting to a warmer world). These decisions walked a diplomatic tightrope-advancing the creation of the institution while carefully avoiding debates over which private sector the Fund is actually meant to target. On one side, the developed countries represented on the GCF board advocate a PSF that appeals to capital markets, in particular the pension funds and other institutional investors that control trillions of dollars that pass through Wall Street and other financial centers. They hope that the Fund will ultimately use a broad range of financial instruments. There is a troubling circular logic underlying this, however. The complex repackaging of debt to hide systemic risk was a key contributor to the financial crisis in developed countries, resulting in huge bailouts that increased their indebtedness. As a result, many developed countries now claim that they have little money available for climate finance, and that the GCF should look to financial markets to make up this shortfall. On the other side, many developing countries and non-governmental organizations have suggested that the PSF should focus on pro-poor climate finance that addresses the difficulties faced by micro-, small-, and medium-sized enterprises in developing countries. This emphasis on encouraging the domestic private sector is also written into the GCF's Governing Instrument, its founding document. The purpose of the PSF remained unresolved in Songdo, but many of the rules needed to start its operations were agreed upon. A major dividing line related to whether or not the PSF would have its own governance structure. This was opposed by many developing countries amidst concerns that it would give the private sector the largest voice in determining how this part of the Fund is
[Biofuel] Climate Change Is Happening Faster Than You Think
Movements Without Leaders: What to Make of Change on an Overheating Planet Monday, 19 August 2013 10:32 By Bill McKibben, TomDispatch | Op-Ed http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/18271-movements-without-leaders-what-to-make-of-change-on-an-overheating-planet --0-- http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/18301-climate-change-is-happening-faster-than-you-think Climate Change Is Happening Faster Than You Think Tuesday, 20 August 2013 14:44 By The Daily Take, The Thom Hartmann Program | Op-Ed The scientists are wrong, but not the way you think. As global warming picks up, scientists and researchers are finally coming to grips with just how serious that problem is, and how quickly we're running out of time to solve it. For example, when it comes to sea level increases, scientists have notoriously underestimated how fast the waters are rising. As this chart shows, sea levels are rising much faster than IPCC projections over the last two decades. Scientists also underestimated the extent of ice melting in the Arctic. It's disappearing at a much faster clip than even the direst of projections. In just a few years, we'll have our first ice-free Arctic summer in roughly 700,000 years, well before the onset of humanity. On top of all of that, scientists have also consistently underestimated just how much CO2 we humans are dumping into the atmosphere, again with actual measurements outpacing projections over the last few decades. So what's with the history of underestimation? A team of researchers at the University of Alberta recently published a paper in the journal Global Environmental Change characterizing this dangerous trend of low-balling estimates of global warming. They note that, [T]he available evidence suggests that scientists have in fact been conservative in their projections of the impact of climate changeparticularly in IPCC assessments of the physical science[S]cientists are not biased toward alarmism but rather the reverse: toward cautious estimatesWe call this tendency 'erring on the side of least drama.' Why is this happening? It's simple: When going up against a well-funded, ruthlessly powerful special interest like the fossil fuel industry, scientists know that if they rock the boat too much, they might be targeted and discredited. Just ask Michael Mann, whose infamous Hockey Stick chart shows the recent extreme uptick in global temperatures since the Industrial Revolution. After releasing the hockey stick graph, he instantly became the target of smears and was mercilessly attacked by Conservatives and fossil-fuel industry shills. For far too long, our climate change debate has been focused on not ruffling feathers, on finding economically viable solutions, on depending on the oil companies to lead the energy transition. That hasn't worked, and the planet is getting hotter even quicker. The latest IPCC projection shows at least a 5-degree Celsius temperature increase by 2100, and even if countries around the world reduce carbon emissions, the planet will still warm over 2-degrees, which will have catastrophic consequences for life on Earth. But, given the history of low projections, the planet could be headed for even warmer temperatures. Fortunately, over the past year, some scientists have said, To hell with the right wingers. I'm going to tell the truth even if it does mean they will attack me! Now it's time for the rest of us, and our politicians, to also speak back to the big-money interests who don't seem to give a damn about planet Earth. Global warming and global climate change, whatever you call it, is real. It's caused by us, in large part. And we can stop it, if we act quickly enough. The time for dithering is over. It's time to act. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] What The US and Russia Are Really Quarreling Over: Pipelines
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/18293-what-the-us-and-russia-are-really-quarreling-over-pipelines What The US and Russia Are Really Quarreling Over: Pipelines Tuesday, 20 August 2013 10:18 By Steve Horn, Mint Press News | News Analysis Nearly two months ago, former National Security Agency (NSA) contractor-turned-whistleblower Edward Snowden handed smoking-gun documents on the international surveillance apparatus to The Guardian andThe Washington Post in what's become one of the most captivating stories in recent memory. Snowden now lives in Russia after a Hollywood-like nearly six-week-long stint in a Moscow airport waiting for a country to grant him asylum. NSA leaker Edward Snowden leaves Sheremetyevo airport outside Moscow on Thursday, Aug. 1, 2013, after being granted asylum in Russia for one year. (AP/Russia24 via Associated Press Television) Journalists and pundits have spent countless articles and news segments conveying the intrigue and intensity of the standoff that eventually resulted in Russia granting Snowden one year of asylum. Attention now has shifted to his father, Lon Snowden, and his announced visit of Edward in Russia. Lost in the excitement of this White Bronco Moment, many have missed the elephant in the room: the Great Game-style geopolitical standoff between the U.S. and Russia underlying it all, and which may have served as the impetus for Russia to grant Snowden asylum to begin with. What's at stake? Natural gas. Russia, of course, has its own surveillance state and has been described by The Guardian's Luke Harding as a Mafia State due to the deep corruption that reportedly thrives under Putin's watch. It all comes as the U.S. competes with Russian gas production thanks in part to the controversial drilling process known as hydraulic fracturing - fracking - transforming the United States into what President Barack Obama has hailed as the Saudi Arabia of gas. Russia produced 653 billion cubic meters of gas in 2012, while the U.S. produced 651 billion cubic meters, making them the top two producers in the world. Creating a Gas OPEC Illustrating this elephant in the room is the fact that when, on July 1, Russian President Vladimir Putin first addressed whether he would grant Snowden asylum, he did so at the annual meeting of the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF) in Moscow, which unfolded July 1-2. If he wants to stay here, there is one condition: he must stop his work aimed at harming our American partners, as strange as that sounds coming from my lips, Putin stated at GECF's annual summit. Paralleling the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) - The New York Times calls it a gas OPEC - GECF is a bloc of countries whose mission is to fend off U.S. and Western power dominance of the global gas trade. The 13 member countries include Russia, Iran, Bolivia, Venezuela, Libya, Algeria and several others. GECF has held informal meetings since 2001, becoming an official chartered organization in 2008 and dominated in the main by Russia. GECF Secretary General Leonid Bokhanovskiy is also the former VP of Stroytransgaz, a subsidiary of Russian oil and gas giant Gazprom. Depicting the close proximity between Putin's regime and GECF's leadership is the fact that Gennady Timchenko - a member of Putin's inner circle, according to The Bureau of Investigative Journalism - owns an 80-percent stake in Stroytransgaz. A 21st-century gas Cold War has arisen between the U.S. and Russia, with Edward Snowden serving as the illustrative protagonist. President Obama, upset over Russia's asylum offer to Snowden, recently cancelled a summit with President Putin. With access to the free flow of oil and gas resources a central tenet of U.S. national security policy under theCarter Doctrine, there's no guarantee this new Cold War will end well. Fracked gas exports fend off Russia, but for how long? Fracking is in the process of transforming the U.S. from a net importer of gas to a net exporter, with threeliquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals on the Gulf Coast already rubber-stamped for approval by the U.S. Department of Energy. Industry cheerleaders as well as President Obama and other like-minded politicians say there are 100 years of natural gas under the United States, a geopolitical game-changer to say the very least. But independent petroleum geologists and investors alike see it differently, concluding perhaps 15-20 years of gas exist at current diminishing, exploration treadmill rates of return. More and more wells must be drilled and operated to maintain production as the average productivity per well is declining, David Hughes, a Fellow at the Post Carbon Institute explains in his report Drill Baby, Drill. Since 1990, the number of operating gas wells in the United States has increased by 90 percent while the average productivity per well has declined by 38 percent. This means
[Biofuel] The Day Agents Came and Smashed Our Hard Drives
Outcry over detention of Glenn Greenwald's partner under terrorism legislation By Robert Stevens 20 August 2013 http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/08/20/mira-a20.html David Miranda: 'They said I would be put in jail if I didn't co-operate' Partner of Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald gives his first interview on nine-hour interrogation at Heathrow airport Jonathan Watts in Rio de Janeiro The Guardian, Monday 19 August 2013 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/19/david-miranda-interview-detention-heathrow Glenn Greenwald Defiantly Hints of More Illegal Spying Revelations After Maladroit US/UK Effort to Intimidate Him Monday, 19 August 2013 16:39 http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18149-gleen-greenwald-defiantly-hints-of-more-illegal-spying-revelations-after-maladroit-us-uk-effort-to-intimidate-him Greenwald partner sues Home Office as UK defends 'Miranda op' Published time: August 20, 2013 http://rt.com/news/greenwald-miranda-sues-uk-739/ --0-- http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article35913.htm Journalism Under Threat: The Day Agents Came and Smashed Our Hard Drives By Alan Rusbridger Guardian Editor David Miranda, schedule 7 and the danger that all reporters now face As the events in a Heathrow transit lounge - and the Guardian offices - have shown, the threat to journalism is real and growing August 20, 2013 Information Clearing House - The Guardian - In a private viewing cinema in Soho last week I caught myself letting fly with a four-letter expletive at Bill Keller, the former executive editor of the New York Times. It was a confusing moment. The man who was pretending to be me - thanking Keller for not giving a shit - used to be Malcolm Tucker, a foul-mouthed Scottish spin doctor who will soon be a 1,000-year-old time lord. And Keller will correct me, but I don't remember ever swearing at him. I do remember saying something to the effect of we have the thumb drive, you have the first amendment. The fictional moment occurs at the beginning of the DreamWorks film about WikiLeaks, The Fifth Estate, due for release next month. Peter Capaldi is, I can report, a very plausible Guardian editor. This real-life exchange with Keller happened just after we took possession of the first tranche of WikiLeaks documents in 2010. I strongly suspected that our ability to research and publish anything to do with this trove of secret material would be severely constrained in the UK. America, for all its own problems with media laws and whistleblowers, at least has press freedom enshrined in a written constitution. It is also, I hope, unthinkable that any US government would attempt prior restraint against a news organisation planning to publish material that informed an important public debate, however troublesome or embarrassing. On Sunday morning David Miranda, the partner of Guardian columnist Glenn Greenwald, was detained as he was passing through Heathrow airport on his way back to Rio de Janeiro, where the couple live. Greenwald is the reporter who has broken most of the stories about state surveillance based on the leaks from the former NSA contractor Edward Snowden. Greenwald's work has undoubtedly been troublesome and embarrassing for western governments. But, as the debate in America and Europe has shown, there is considerable public interest in what his stories have revealed about the right balance between security, civil liberties, freedom of speech and privacy. He has raised acutely disturbing questions about the oversight of intelligence; about the use of closed courts; about the cosy and secret relationship between government and vast corporations; and about the extent to which millions of citizens now routinely have their communications intercepted, collected, analysed and stored. In this work he is regularly helped by David Miranda. Miranda is not a journalist, but he still plays a valuable role in helping his partner do his journalistic work. Greenwald has his plate full reading and analysing the Snowden material, writing, and handling media and social media requests from around the world. He can certainly use this back-up. That work is immensely complicated by the certainty that it would be highly unadvisable for Greenwald (or any other journalist) to regard any electronic means of communication as safe. The Guardian's work on the Snowden story has involved many individuals taking a huge number of flights in order to have face-to-face meetings. Not good for the environment, but increasingly the only way to operate. Soon we will be back to pen and paper. Miranda was held for nine hours under schedule 7 of the UK's terror laws, which give enormous discretion to stop, search and question people who have no connection with terror, as ordinarily understood. Suspects have no right to legal representation and may have their property confiscated for up to seven days. Under this measure - uniquely
[Biofuel] The Anti-Empire Report #116
http://williamblum.org/aer/read/116 The Anti-Empire Report #116 By William Blum - Published May 3rd, 2013 Boston Marathon, this thing called terrorism, and the United States What is it that makes young men, reasonably well educated, in good health and nice looking, with long lives ahead of them, use powerful explosives to murder complete strangers because of political beliefs? I'm speaking about American military personnel of course, on the ground, in the air, or directing drones from an office in Nevada. Do not the survivors of US attacks in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan, Somalia, Libya and elsewhere, and their loved ones, ask such a question? The survivors and loved ones in Boston have their answer - America's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's what Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the surviving Boston bomber has said in custody, and there's no reason to doubt that he means it, nor the dozens of others in the past two decades who have carried out terrorist attacks against American targets and expressed anger toward US foreign policy. 1 Both Tsarnaev brothers had expressed such opinions before the attack as well. 2 The Marathon bombing took place just days after a deadly US attack in Afghanistan killed 17 civilians, including 12 children, as but one example of countless similar horrors from recent years. Oh, an American says, but those are accidents. What terrorists do is on purpose. It's cold-blooded murder. But if the American military sends out a bombing mission on Monday which kills multiple innocent civilians, and then the military announces: Sorry, that was an accident. And then on Tuesday the American military sends out a bombing mission which kills multiple innocent civilians, and then the military announces: Sorry, that was an accident. And then on Wednesday the American military sends out a bombing mission which kills multiple innocent civilians, and the military then announces: Sorry, that was an accident. Thursday Friday How long before the American military loses the right to say it was an accident? Terrorism is essentially an act of propaganda, to draw attention to a cause. The 9-11 perpetrators attacked famous symbols of American military and economic power. Traditionally, perpetrators would phone in their message to a local media outlet beforehand, but today, in this highly-surveilled society, with cameras and electronic monitoring at a science-fiction level, that's much more difficult to do without being detected; even finding a public payphone can be near impossible. From what has been reported, the older brother, Tamerlan, regarded US foreign policy also as being anti-Islam, as do many other Muslims. I think this misreads Washington's intentions. The American Empire is not anti-Islam. It's anti-only those who present serious barriers to the Empire's plan for world domination. The United States has had close relations with Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Qatar, amongst other Islamic states. And in recent years the US has gone to great lengths to overthrow the leading secular states of the Mideast - Iraq, Libya and Syria. Moreover, it's questionable that Washington is even against terrorism per se, but rather only those terrorists who are not allies of the empire. There has been, for example, a lengthy and infamous history of tolerance, and often outright support, for numerous anti-Castro terrorists, even when their terrorist acts were committed in the United States. Hundreds of anti-Castro and other Latin American terrorists have been given haven in the US over the years. The United States has also provided support to terrorists in Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Kosovo, Bosnia, Iran, Libya, and Syria, including those with known connections to al Qaeda, to further foreign policy goals more important than fighting terrorism. Under one or more of the harsh anti-terrorist laws enacted in the United States in recent years, President Obama could be charged with serious crimes for allowing the United States to fight on the same side as al Qaeda-linked terrorists in Libya and Syria and for funding and supplying these groups. Others in the United States have been imprisoned for a lot less. As a striking example of how Washington has put its imperialist agenda before anything else, we can consider the case of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, an Afghan warlord whose followers first gained attention in the 1980s by throwing acid in the faces of women who refused to wear the veil. This is how these horrible men spent their time when they were not screaming Death to America. CIA and State Department officials called Hekmatyar scary, vicious, a fascist, definite dictatorship material. 3 This did not prevent the United States government from showering the man with large amounts of aid to fight against the Soviet-supported government of Afghanistan. 4 Hekmatyar is still a prominent warlord in Afghanistan. A similar example is that of Luis
[Biofuel] New biodiesel book
Hello all I just finished the job I've been working on. Here it is: The Biodiesel Bible, by Keith Addison, Journey to Forever, 342 pages, 217 illustrations. Learn how to make top-quality biodiesel that will pass all the quality standards requirements every time. We haven't had a failed batch for 11 years! (But if you do have a failed batch we tell you how to rescue it - and how to improve your processing so it won't happen again.) Anyone can learn how to make their own biodiesel. You don't need to be a chemist or an engineer, all technical issues are clearly explained in easily understood terms. There's a lot to learn, but it's a smooth learning curve, you won't go wrong. The idea isn't that you should blindly follow the instructions and do what you're told, but that you should understand what you're doing and why you're doing it. Then you'll be empowered. This is the ONLY book that thoroughly covers the entire subject of making your own biodiesel. There's much more in it than at the Journey to Forever website. It's a pdf e-book. Copy it onto a CD, take it to your local print-shop and have them print it out. It doesn't have to be in colour (you can check colour images on-screen if you need to). Ask for double-sided printing and have them put it in a ring-binder, ideal for your workshop - it won't matter if it gets a little smudged. On-screen, you can use the search commands to find whatever you might be looking for much faster than with a printed book. The many blue underlined hyperlinks in the text are live: click on them and your browser will take you online to sources of chemicals and equipment, and resources on the Web that will make the whole job of making and using your own biodiesel fuel easier. Web usage researchers have found that reading on-screen is more difficult and more tiring than reading print on paper. For real reading you need a real book. If you send the pdf to a print-on-demand printer, you'll get a real book back, the same as you'd buy in a bookstore. To buy The Biodiesel Bible, pay US$38.50 to my PayPal account ke...@journeytoforever.org and I will email you a download link within 24 hours. Make sure to clear the email address ke...@journeytoforever.org in your spam filter, and add it to your address book. All best Keith ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Common Dreams 04.10.13
News Views | Featured... Norman Solomon: Time to Bell the Obama Cat http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/10-1http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/10-1 Headlines... Top Secret Intel Docs Betray Obama Claims on Drone Targeting http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/10http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/10 UN: Clean Energy Could Save Millions of Lives http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/10-3http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/10-3 'Time to Rise Up': Oklahoma Grandmother Bike-Locks Herself to KXL Pipeline Machinery http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/10-2http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/10-2 Tens of Thousands Descend on Capitol to Demand Immigration Reform http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/10-5http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/10-5 New Global Warming Education Plan Buries Role of Fossil Fuels, Industrialization http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/10-4http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/10-4 and more... Video... Legalizing Animal Abuse - Criminalizing Protest http://www.commondreams.org/video/2013/04/10http://www.commondreams.org/video/2013/04/10 The Way of the Knife: NYT's Mark Mazzetti on the CIA's Post-9/11 Move from Spying to Assassinations http://www.commondreams.org/video/2013/04/10-0http://www.commondreams.org/video/2013/04/10-0 Views... Alleen Brown: At Occupy the DOE, A Push for Democratic, Not Corporate, Education Reform http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/10-8http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/10-8 Inna Shevchenko: We Are Femen, The Naked Shock Troops of Feminism http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/10-0http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/10-0 Robert Borosage: The President's Budget: A Misguided Mission Statement http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/10http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/10 Janet Redman and Antonio Tricarico: Wall Street's Climate Finance Bonanza http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/10-6http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/10-6 Katrina vanden Heuvel: 'There Are Now States Where It's Not Safe to Be a Woman' http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/10-9http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/10-9 William Pfaff: Anonymous Murder from a Safe Distance http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/10-3http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/10-3 Robert Reich: Bi-Partisanship We Don't Need: The President Offers to Cut Social Security and Republicans Agree http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/10-5http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/10-5 Newswire... Food Water Watch Obama Administration Caves to Poultry Industry By Proceeding With Privatized Inspection http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/04/10-7http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/04/10-7 PEER:Federal Pipeline Safety Vacuum Magnifies Risks http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/04/10-6http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/04/10-6 Center for Biological Diversity: EPA's Climate Change Adaptation Plan Falls Short: Groups Urge Three Key Actions http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/04/10-3http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/04/10-3 ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] News Views | 04.11.13
News Views | 04.11.13 Featured... Bill Moyers and Michael Winship: Dr. King's Two Americas Truer Now than Ever http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/11-7http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/11-7 Headlines... 22-Foot Gash in Pegasus Pipeline Puts Gaping Hole in Safety Claims http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/11-0http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/11-0 The State of Nuclear Power in US: Bad and Worse http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/11-2http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/11-2 Despite Compromise, Bipartisan Consensus Remains: Assault Weapons OK http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/11http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/11 Fourth Radioactive Water Leak Found at Disaster-Plagued Fukushima Plant http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/11-1http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/11-1 Rep. Nancy Pelosi Under Fire from Progressives Over Proposed Social Security Cuts http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/11-3http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/11-3 and more... Video... Obama's Budget: A Deal with the Republicans? http://www.commondreams.org/video/2013/04/11http://www.commondreams.org/video/2013/04/11 Leak Reveals Egyptian Army's Hand in Torture, Killing of Arab Spring Protesters http://www.commondreams.org/video/2013/04/11-0http://www.commondreams.org/video/2013/04/11-0 Views... Amy Goodman: WikiLeaks' New Release: The Kissinger Cables and Bradley Manning http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/11http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/11 Russell Mokhiber: Avoiding Corporate Crime http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/11-8http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/11-8 Sadhbh Walshe: How America's Fast Food Industry Makes a Quick Buck http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/11-1http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/11-1 Robert C. Koehler: Drone World http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/11-2http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/11-2 Jeff Faux: Where's the Change? http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/11-5http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/11-5 Robert Parry: The Madness of NYT's Tom Friedman http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/11-3http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/11-3 Jamie Henn: Just a Few Reasons Why a Democratic Senate Hopeful is Backpedaling on Tar Sands http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/11-6http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/11-6 Newswire... Bradley Manning Support Network: Military Decrees Media Access is a Privilege, Not a Right http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/04/11http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/04/11 Witness Against Torture: As Guantánamo Hunger Strike Continues, Activists Rally Nationwide for Day of Action to Close Guantánamo End Indefinite Detention http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/04/11-4http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/04/11-4 PIRG: 'Don't Frack Our Elections' http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/04/11-2http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/04/11-2 and more... ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Margaret Thatcher's Criminal Legacy
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article34556.htm Margaret Thatcher's Criminal Legacy By Finian Cunningham April 09, 2013 Information Clearing House - Hours after the death of former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher, the history books are being re-written and the beatification of the Iron Lady is well underway. Current British premier David Cameron praised Lady Thatcher for having saved Britain and for making the has-been colonial power great again. Tributes poured forth from French and German leaders, Francoise Hollande and Angela Merkel, while US President Barack Obama said America had lost a special friend. Former American secretary of state Henry Kissinger and former Russian leader Mikhail Gorbachev also lamented the loss of an historic world figure. Polish ex-president Lech Walesa hailed Margaret Thatcher for having brought down the Soviet Union and Communism. Such fulsome praise may be expected coming from so many war criminals. But it is instructive of how history is written by the victors and criminals in high office. Obama, Cameron, Hollande and Merkel should all be arraigned and prosecuted for war crimes in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Pakistan, Somalia and Mali, among other places. Kissinger has long evaded justice for over four decades for his role in the US genocide in Southeast Asia during the so-called Vietnam War in which over three million people were obliterated in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. The British state is to give Thatcher, who died this week aged 87, a full military-honours funeral. The praise, eulogies, wreaths and ceremonies are all self-indictments of association with one of the most ruthless and criminal political figures in modern times. So, here is a people's history of Thatcher's legacy. She will be remembered for colluding with the most reactionary elements of Rupert Murdoch's squalid media empire to launch a war over the Malvinas Islands in 1982, a war that caused hundreds of lives and involved the gratuitous sinking of an Argentine warship, the Belgrano, by a British submarine. By declaring war, rather than conducting political negotiations with Argentina over Britain's ongoing colonial possession of the Malvinas, Thatcher salvaged her waning public support in Britain, and the bloodletting helped catapult her into a second term of office in Downing Street. Her political greatness that so many Western leaders now eulogize was therefore paid in part by the lives of Argentine and British soldiers, and by bequeathing an ongoing source of conflict in the South Atlantic. It wasn't just foreigners that Thatcher declared war on. Armed with her snake-oil economic policies of privatisation, deregulation, unleashing finance capitalism, pump-priming the rich with tax awards subsidised by the ordinary working population, Thatcher declared war on the British people themselves. She famously proclaimed that there was no such thing as society and went on to oversee an explosion in the gap between rich and poor and the demolition of social conditions in Britain. That legacy has been amplified by both successive Conservative and Labour governments and is central to today's social meltdown in Britain - more than two decades after Thatcher resigned. Laughably, David Cameron, a protégé of Thatcher, claims that she saved Britain. The truth is Thatcher accelerated the sinking of British capitalism and society at large. What she ordered for the Belgrano has in a very real way come to be realised for British society at large. During her second term of office in the mid-1980s, the Iron Lady declared war on the enemy within. She was referring to Britain's strongly unionised coal-mining industry. Imagine declaring war on your own population. That is a measure of her pathological intolerance towards others who did not happen to share her obnoxious ideological views - ideological views that have since become exposed as intellectually and morally bankrupt. For over a year around 1984, her Orwellian mindset and policies starved mining communities in the North of England into submission. Her use of paramilitary police violence also broke the resolve and legitimate rights of these communities. Miners' leader Arthur Scargill would later be vindicated in the eyes of ordinary people, if not in the eyes of the mainstream media. Britain's coalmines were systematically shut down, thousands of workers would be made unemployed, and entire communities were thrown on the social scrap heap. All this violence and misery was the price for Thatcher's ideological war against working people and their political rights. The class war that Thatcher unleashed in Britain is still raging. The rich have become richer, the poor decidedly more numerous and poorer. The decimation of workers' rights and the unfettered power given to finance capital were hallmarks of Thatcher's legacy and are to this day hallmarks of
[Biofuel] The Anti-Empire Report #115
http://williamblum.org/aer/read/115 The Anti-Empire Report #115 By William Blum - Published April 8th, 2013 Would you believe that the United States tried to do something that was not nice against Hugo Chávez? Wikileaks has done it again. I guess the US will really have to get tough now with Julian Assange and Bradley Manning. In a secret US cable to the State Department, dated November 9, 2006, and recently published online by WikiLeaks, former US ambassador to Venezuela, William Brownfield, outlines a comprehensive plan to destabilize the government of the late President Hugo Chávez. The cable begins with a Summary: During his 8 years in power, President Chavez has systematically dismantled the institutions of democracy and governance. The USAID/OTI program objectives in Venezuela focus on strengthening democratic institutions and spaces through non-partisan cooperation with many sectors of Venezuelan society. USAID/OTI = United States Agency for International Development/Office of Transition Initiatives. The latter is one of the many euphemisms that American diplomats use with each other and the world - They say it means a transition to democracy. What it actually means is a transition from the target country adamantly refusing to cooperate with American imperialist grand designs to a country gladly willing (or acceding under pressure) to cooperate with American imperialist grand designs. OTI supports the Freedom House (FH) Right to Defend Human Rights program with $1.1 million. Simultaneously through Development Alternatives Inc. (DAI), OTI has also provided 22 grants to human rights organizations. Freedom House is one of the oldest US government conduits for transitioning to democracy; to a significant extent it equates democracy and human rights with free enterprise. Development Alternatives Inc. is the organization that sent Alan Gross to Cuba on a mission to help implement the US government's operation of regime change. OTI speaks of working to improve the deteriorating human rights situation in Venezuela. Does anyone know of a foreign government with several millions of dollars to throw around who would like to improve the seriously deteriorating human rights situation in the United States? They can start with the round-the-clock surveillance and the unconscionable entrapment of numerous young terrorists guilty of thought crimes. OTI partners are training NGOs [non-governmental organizations] to be activists and become more involved in advocacy. Now how's that for a self-given license to fund and get involved in any social, economic or political activity that can sabotage any program of the Chávez government and/or make it look bad? The US ambassador's cable points out that: OTI has directly reached approximately 238,000 adults through over 3000 forums, workshops and training sessions delivering alternative values and providing opportunities for opposition activists to interact with hard-core Chavistas, with the desired effect of pulling them slowly away from Chavismo. We have supported this initiative with 50 grants totaling over $1.1 million. Another key Chavez strategy, the cable continues, is his attempt to divide and polarize Venezuelan society using rhetoric of hate and violence. OTI supports local NGOs who work in Chavista strongholds and with Chavista leaders, using those spaces to counter this rhetoric and promote alliances through working together on issues of importance to the entire community. This is the classical neo-liberal argument against any attempt to transform a capitalist society - The revolutionaries are creating class conflict. But of course, the class conflict was already there, and nowhere more embedded and distasteful than in Latin America. OTI funded 54 social projects all over the country, at over $1.2 million, allowing [the] Ambassador to visit poor areas of Venezuela and demonstrate US concern for the Venezuelan people. This program fosters confusion within the Bolivarian ranks, and pushes back at the attempt of Chavez to use the United States as a 'unifying enemy.' One has to wonder if the good ambassador (now an Assistant Secretary of State) placed any weight or value at all on the election and re-election by decisive margins of Chávez and the huge masses of people who repeatedly filled the large open squares to passionately cheer him. When did such things last happen in the ambassador's own country? Where was his country's concern for the Venezuelan people during the decades of highly corrupt and dictatorial regimes? His country'a embassy in Venezuela in that period was not plotting anything remotely like what is outlined in this cable. The cable summarizes the focus of the embassy's strategy's as: 1) Strengthening Democratic Institutions, 2) Penetrating Chavez' Political Base, 3) Dividing Chavismo, 4) Protecting Vital US business, and 5) Isolating Chavez
[Biofuel] BioDemocracy or Corporatocracy: The Food Fight of Our Lives
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_27261.cfm BioDemocracy or Corporatocracy: The Food Fight of Our Lives By Ronnie Cummins Organic Consumers Association, March 27, 2013 If you put a label on genetically engineered food you might as well put a skull and crossbones on it. - Norman Braksick, president of Asgrow Seed Co., a subsidiary of Monsanto, quoted in the Kansas City Star, March 7, 1994 Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA's job. - Phil Angell, Monsanto's director of corporate communications, quoted in the New York Times, October 25, 1998 For two decades, starting with the controversial introduction of Monsanto's recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) and Calgene's Flavr Savr tomato in 1994, polls have consistently shown that U.S. consumers are wary, indeed alarmed, about the new technology of genetic engineering (GE). Surveyed regularly, the overwhelming majority of Americans have repeatedly stated that they either want these Frankenfoods banned, or at least clearly labeled. In a March 2012 national poll, conducted by the Mellman Group, 91% of Americans said they wanted GMO foods labeled. When asked whether gene-altered foods were safe, 34% of consumers said they believed that gene-altered foods were definitely unsafe; 41% said they were not sure; while 41% said genetically engineered foods should be banned. Five counties and two cities in California and Washington have banned the growing of GE crops http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_27247.cfm. In addition, given the near total absence of FDA regulation, 19 states have passed laws restricting Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). Millions of consumers are purchasing over $30 billion of organic foods, and $60 billion worth of so-called natural foods, every year, in part because organic standards prohibit the use of gene-altered seeds or ingredients. But many consumers believe mistakenly that natural foods are GE-free as well. The biotech industry and Big Food Inc. are acutely aware of the fact that North American consumers, like their European counterparts, are wary and suspicious of GE foods. Even though most consumers don't fully understand the science of gene-splicing foreign DNA into plants or animals, they instinctively understand that they don't want to be guinea pigs in a biotech food safety experiment. They don't want their family's health or environmental sustainability decisions to be made by notorious chemical companies like Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, BASF, Syngenta or Dupont-the same corporations who have poisoned our communities and our bodies with toxic pesticides, DDT, Agent Orange, dangerous pharmaceuticals and PCBs. GE crops and foods have absolutely no benefits for consumers or the environment, only hazards. This is why biotech and Big Food corporations spent more than $46 million to defeat Proposition 37, a November 7, 2012 California ballot initiative that would have required mandatory labels on GMO foods, and put an end to the routine industry practice of marketing GE-tainted foods as natural. In the wake of a scurrilous barrage of TV, radio and direct mail ads falsely claiming that GMO labels would significantly increase food costs, hurt family farmers, increase the scope and intrusiveness of state bureaucrats, and benefit special interest groups such as trial lawyers, California voters narrowly rejected mandatory GMO food labels 51.5% to 48.5%. After Prop 37: Big Food Blinks But Big Food apparently now realizes that Proposition 37 was a hollow victory, an inconclusive, albeit fierce, preliminary battle in a war against consumer antipathy and consumer choice, a war they will inevitably lose. The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) immediately put a happy face on their narrow victory in California, reciting their standard propaganda: Proposition 37 was a deeply flawed measure that would have resulted in higher food costs, frivolous lawsuits and increased state bureaucracies. This is a big win for California consumers, taxpayers, business and farmers. But Jennifer Hatcher, senior vice-president of government and public affairs for the Food Marketing Institute, came closer to expressing the real sentiments of the big guns who opposed Prop 37, a measure she had previously said scared us to death. In her official statement following the election, she said: This gives us hope that you can, with a well-funded, well-organized, well-executed campaign, defeat a ballot initiative and go directly to the voters. We hope we don't have too many of them, because you can't keep doing that over and over again . . . But we are doing it over and over again. More than 30 state legislatures are now debating bills on GMO labeling. Public awareness of the hazards of GE has increased significantly. Controversy surrounding a
