[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] Newly discovered greenhouse gas '7, 000 times more powerful than CO2' | Environment | theguardian.com
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/dec/10/new-greenhouse-gas-powerful-chemical-perfluorotributylamine Newly discovered greenhouse gas '7,000 times more powerful than CO2' Perfluorotributylamine is an unregulated, long-living industrial chemical that breaks all records for potential climate impacts Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent theguardian.com, Tuesday 10 December 2013 16.17 GMT A new greenhouse gas that is 7,000 times more powerful than carbon dioxide at warming the Earth has been discovered by researchers in Toronto. The newly discovered gas, perfluorotributylamine (PFTBA), has been in use by the electrical industry since the mid-20th century. The chemical, that does not occur naturally, breaks all records for potential impacts on the climate, said the researchers at the University of Toronto's department of chemistry. We claim that PFTBA has the highest radiative efficiency of any molecule detected in the atmosphere to date, said Angela Hong, one of the co-authors. The study, published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, found PFTBA was 7,100 times more powerful at warming the Earth over a 100-year time span than CO2. Concentrations of PFTBA in the atmosphere are low – 0.18 parts per trillion in the Toronto area – compared to 400 parts per million for carbon dioxide. So PFTBA does not in any way displace the burning of fossil fuels such as oil and coal as the main drivers of climate change. Dr Drew Shindell, a climatologist at Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said: This is a warning to us that this gas could have a very very large impact on climate change – if there were a lot of it. Since there is not a lot of it now, we don't have to worry about it at present, but we have to make sure it doesn't grow and become a very large contributor to global warming.. He said a number of recent studies had drawn attention to other potential new greenhouse gases which, like PFTBA, pack a lot of warming potential in each molecule but are not very prevalent in the atmosphere. Such studies were a warning against increasing uses of such compounds without first understanding their impact on climate change, he added. From a climate change perspective, individually, PFTBA's atmospheric concentration does not significantly alert the phenomenon of climate change, Hong said. Still the biggest culprit is CO2 from fossil fuel emissions. But PFTBA is long-lived. The Toronot researchers estimated PFTBA remains in the atmosphere for about 500 years, and unlike carbon dioxide, that is taken up by forests and oceans, there are no known natural sinks on Earth to absorb it. It is so much less than carbon dioxide, but the important thing is on a per molecule basis, it is very very effective in interacting with heat from the Earth, she said. Individually each molecule is able to affect the climate potentially and because its lifetime is so long it also has a long-lasting effect. Hong said the discovery of PFTBA and its warming potential raises questions about the climate impacts of other chemicals used in industrial processes. PFTBA has been in use since the mid-20th century for various applications in electrical equipment, such as transistors and capacitors. The researchers said it was unclear how widespread its use was today. It belongs to an entire class of chemicals used for industrial applications whose effects on the atmosphere remain unknown. PFTBA is just one example of an industrial chemical that is produced but there are no policies that control its production, use or emission, Hong said. It is not being regulated by any type of climate policy. -- Darryl McMahon Failure is not an option; it comes standard. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Snowden document shows Canada set up spy posts for NSA - Politics - CBC News
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/snowden-document-shows-canada-set-up-spy-posts-for-nsa-1.2456886 [on-line article includes video (with commercials)] Exclusive Snowden document shows Canada set up spy posts for NSA CSEC conducted espionage activities for U.S. in 20 countries, according to top-secret briefing note By Greg Weston, Glenn Greenwald, Ryan Gallagher, CBC News Posted: Dec 09, 2013 9:03 PM ET Last Updated: Dec 10, 2013 3:59 PM ET A top secret document retrieved by American whistleblower Edward Snowden reveals Canada has set up covert spying posts around the world and conducted espionage against trading partners at the request of the U.S. National Security Agency. The leaked NSA document being reported exclusively by CBC News reveals Canada is involved with the huge American intelligence agency in clandestine surveillance activities in “approximately 20 high-priority countries. Much of the document contains hyper-sensitive operational details which CBC News has chosen not to make public. Sections of the document with the highest classification make it clear in some instances why American spymasters are particularly keen about enlisting their Canadian counterparts, the Communications Security Establishment Canada. CSEC shares with the NSA their unique geographic access to areas unavailable to the U.S, the document says. The briefing paper describes a close co-operative relationship between the NSA and its Canadian counterpart, the Communications Security Establishment Canada, or CSEC — a relationship both sides would like to see expanded and strengthened. The intelligence exchange with CSEC covers worldwide national and transnational targets. The four-page missive is stamped “Top Secret” and dated April 3, 2013. That makes it one of the freshest documents Snowden was able to walk away with before he went public in June. The briefing notes make it clear that Canada plays a very robust role in intelligence-gathering around the world in a way that has won respect from its American equivalents. Wesley Wark, a Canadian security and intelligence expert at the University of Ottawa, says the document makes it clear Canada can take advantage of its relatively benign image internationally to covertly amass a vast amount of information abroad. I think we still trade on a degree of an international brand as an innocent partner in the international sphere, Wark said. There's not that much known about Canadian intelligence. In that sense, Canadian operations might escape at least the same degree of notice and surveillance that the operations of the U.S. or Britain in foreign states would be bound to attract. The intimate Canada-U.S. electronic intelligence relationship dates back more than 60 years. Most recently, another Snowden document reported by CBC News showed the two agencies co-operated to allow the NSA to spy on the G20 summit of international leaders in Toronto in 2010. But what the latest secret document reveals for the first time is just how expansive Canada's international espionage activities have become. CSEC set up 'covert sites at the request of NSA' The NSA document depicts CSEC as a sophisticated, capable and highly respected intelligence partner involved in all manner of joint spying missions, including setting up listening posts at the request of the Americans. CSEC offers resources for advanced collection, processing and analysis, and has opened covert sites at the request of NSA, the document states. Thomas Drake, a former NSA executive turned whistleblower, says it's no surprise Canada would accede to the U.S. agency's requests: That's been the case for years. Just think of certain foreign agreements or relationships that Canada actually enjoys that the United States doesn't, and under the cover of those relationships, guess what you can conduct? These kinds of secret surveillance or collection efforts. Drake says he worked with CSEC on various projects while he was at the NSA, and the Canadians were extraordinarily capable. CSEC conducts much of its foreign cyber-spying operations from its headquarters in Ottawa, using some of the most powerful computing equipment in the country to intercept foreign phone calls and monitor internet communications in nations around the globe. Its American counterpart does the same, but is itself currently the target of a widespread internal probe by the U.S. administration in the wake of leaked documents from Snowden showing the NSA has been collecting masses of information on millions of ordinary Americans. Wark reviewed the leaked document at the invitation of CBC News, and says he isn't surprised CSEC would be asked by the NSA to set up covert foreign spying operations. He says it is not uncommon for embassies and consulates to be used as listening posts when a close proximity to targets is required. But he also points out it all comes with
[Biofuel] TSB says CN Rail failed to report hundreds of derailments, collisions - Canada - CBC News
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/tsb-says-cn-rail-failed-to-report-hundreds-of-derailments-collisions-1.2451186 [As more and more toxic and explosive 'oil' products are being shipped by rail in Canada, this information becomes even more disturbing. on-line article includes video (with commercials) and graphics] TSB says CN Rail failed to report hundreds of derailments, collisions Authorities first noticed discrepancies in 2005 By John Nicol, Dave Seglins, CBC News Posted: Dec 09, 2013 5:00 AM ET Last Updated: Dec 09, 2013 5:21 PM ET A continuing CBC News investigation into rail safety has found that Canada’s largest freight carrier CN Rail did not report to authorities more than 1,800 derailments and accidents, including 44 on key rail arteries. This came to light in 2005 when the Transportation Safety Board’s director of rail investigations says he became suspicious of a dramatic difference between CN’s accident numbers compared to other operators. “All of a sudden there became a wide discrepancy in the [derailment] numbers [compared with CN’s competitors],” recalls Ian Naish, who left the TSB in 2009. “You say ‘Well, OK, what’s going on here?’ ” The safety watchdog agency took an unprecedented step and issued a statutory summons in June, 2006 to CN Rail requiring it to turn over its complete safety records. The TSB found unreported over a six-year period: 1,700 non-main-track derailments. 44 main-track derailments. One main-track collision. 64 non-main-track collisions. One fire/explosion. One crossing accident. 32 other accidents. CN spokesman Mark Hallman told CBC News that the company’s failure stemmed from a disagreement over the types of minor accidents it must self-report to the TSB. “At no time did CN attempt to hide or under-report accidents,” Hallman said. “Following a series of discussions, CN and the TSB reached agreement on an interpretation for reportable equipment and track damage.” An ‘artificial’ increase: CN The first TSB discussions on CN’s reporting took place in September 2005. Naish told CBC News he “was not happy at all with someone from industry telling me what should be reported and what should not be reported.” The TSB sent a strongly worded letter in April, 2006, laying out the importance of including all CN accident occurrences in the national rail safety database for trend analysis to prevent major accidents. “We need to have insights into circumstances where something has gone wrong, even if there has been no substantial damage, injury or loss of life, so that trends can be detected and appropriate safety action considered,” wrote TSB’s David Kinsman on April 20, 2006. Ed Harris, CN’s executive vice-president of operation, responded by saying the TSB’s reporting criterion was subjective — it didn’t demand all derailments be reported, only those that “sustain damage that affects safe operation.” He encouraged the TSB to begin work revising its reporting regulations. CN insisted it reported its derailments and collisions the same way since the early 1990s, and to re-report subject to TSB demands would lead to an increase in their accident numbers. “This would put us in a position of having to defend to the media and public, an artificial increase in reportable accidents solely based on a perceived need and interpretation change by the TSB,” added Harris. The summons, issued a month later, elicited numbers that even surprised Naish, who feels that all of them should have been reported in the first place. While many of the unreported accidents were inside rail yards and were minor, some involved damaged rail cars, locomotives and track, including a 2005 derailment of a car on a main track near Fort Langley, B.C. that broke 11 rails and a damaged a switch. In 2002, seven cars derailed at a Toronto-area CN yard destroying a rail switch and damaging 110 metres of rail. ‘Numbers matter’: Chow The TSB entered the new CN data into its internal database but never publicly revealed, nor sanctioned CN, for its years of under-reporting. “If there’s no consequence from hiding the truth, why wouldn’t companies continue to hide?” Olivia Chow, federal NDP transport critic told CBC News after reviewing CN’s records. “I think we need to know, from 2007 on, to now, are there other accidents, especially derailments that Canadians need to know about,” Chow said questioning the continuing drop in all kinds of derailments in the TSB’s current data, which relies on ‘self-reporting’ by rail companies. Naish, who now works as a consultant, believes that CN’s system of bonuses and rewards could influence the reporting of lower accident rates. “I think the rewards system is ‘the less accidents you report, the better’,” said Naish, but that’s “not the way it should be in an optimal safety culture.” Amin Mawani, an associate professor at York University’s Schulich School of Business, reviewed public documents
