More Inconvenient Truths

In a report sponsored by the UK government, and bearing his name, Sir Nicholas Stern, former chief economist at the World Bank stated that "our actions over the coming few decades could create risks of major disruption to economic and social activity, later in this century and in the next, on a scale similar to those associated with the great wars and the economic depression of the first half of the 20th Century". In the report he also warns that we are too late to prevent any damaging consequences from climate change.

Responding to the report, Richard Lambert, Director General of the Confederation of British Industry stated that “Provided we act with sufficient speed, we will not have to make a choice between averting climate change and promoting growth and investment”. While this conclusion could be accurate, it is based on the twin assumptions that growth rather than stability is the way forward and that we will act immediately, making the right moves and choices. It assumes that we can have our cake and eat it.

Our pursuance of growth at all costs is a major contributing factor in this mess. Growth should not be a non-negotiable factor in our economic policies. The end-game of growth is that companies have produce more and more, and consequently pollute more and more. Is the cost of growth really worth paying?

Whether or not we as a species can act sensibly is debatable and evidence so far is not good. The failure of the world of business in particular, and that of society in general, to take the threat of global warming seriously has already brought us to this impasse.

We continue to embrace, without question, the utterly wasteful concept of “planned obsolescence” first mooted by Brooks Stevens in the 1950’s. Although the average person will have nothing to lose by a return to manufacturing goods designed to last – and perhaps paying a little more for them – there is little impetuous to do so.

Few of us pay sufficient attention to energy wastage in our homes, despite the fact that remedying this waste will have minimal impact on our precious “quality of life”. Any recently produced piece of domestic electronic equipment will have an on/standby switch in place of on/off switch – forcing those who want to cut waste to unplug these devices from the wall socket. I can not see any evidence of public pressure to reintroduce the less wasteful but perhaps less couch-potato-friendly on/off switch.

Yet more of us choose, usually for infantile and ostentatious reasons, to drive fuel-guzzling four-by-four off-road vehicles even when those same vehicles will only ever be used to drive our increasingly obese children to school. Some people even believe that to be ‘free’ means having the right to consume as much as they wish and to pollute as much as they wish. Those same people are normally those who won’t even utter a whimper when their true freedoms are taken away under their noses.

We continue to tolerate the lunacy of shipping food and beverages thousands of kilometres when precisely the same food or beverage is available locally. Beppe Grillo, the Italian comic, gave an excellent example of this when he showed how bottled water produced in the south of Italy was being shipped to the north, where ample supplies of locally produced mineral water were already available. Some may defend this profligacy as ‘choice’, but in reality you are defending a choice between two things are for all intents and purposes identical – with the exception of labelling.

While I agree that it is impossible to avoid the deleterious consequences of climate change, I would suggest that to allow economics to dictate the remedies will hamper attempts to limit the damage. We can prevent our demise and that of the majority of species we share the planet with, and minimise the worst of the impact of global warming, but in order to do so we have to stop trying to fit our environmental action around established economic principles – putting the cart before the horse. Forget saving the planet – the planet will survive long after our demise – if we are to save ourselves and the world we live in now, we must act without compromise on the environmental front and then revisit the economics, shaping our future economic system around the steps we need to take to survive.

The long-term targets proposed by the Stern report may be sufficient to protect economic growth, but are unlikely to deliver the sort of environmental impact to stave off climate changes that will spell disaster for large swathes of populations in the developing world, and perhaps even for many of those in the developed world too.

Continue reading...

Summary only...

Media disinformation and the renewed demonisation of Russia

Over the past year, the previously understated but regular drip-feed of articles in the Western media critical of the Russian establishment has become more frenzied and purposeful, reflecting an increase in the level of hostility towards Russia from the powers-that-be in the West. Of course, no state is perfect and no state should be beyond criticism, but I can’t help but wonder why Russia is the target of such much condemnation when their ‘crimes’ whereas the absolute tyranny being imposed on the people of Uzbekistan by Islam Karimov goes relatively unreported.

Behind the media disinformation - the veiled allegations that President Putin was somehow complicit in the murder of Anna Politkovskaya; the deliberate misinterpretation of a deeply ironic remark made to the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert about Israeli President Moshe Katsav; the customary wailing about the “rolling back democratic reforms” in Russia; the endless fake outrage at Russian actions in Chechnya - lie the real reasons for the renewed vigour in the campaign to demonise Russia.

What has Putin done to draw fire from assorted mouthpieces of Western governments and various hacks in the Western media? The reason for their ire is that he has established an effective and solid resistance to the rape and pillage of Russia by the globalised forces of unfettered greed. Putin has come to the conclusion that the powers that be in the West, in other words, the trans-national corporations and their ultimate owners, don’t just want access to Russian oil, nor do they want control of Russian oil, they want total control of every aspect of the Russian economy. For them, nothing short of total economic submission will do.

Putin is guilty of the ultimate sin, that of economic nationalism. The sin is that of putting the needs of your country before those of international capital. It is the real reason why Salvador Allende was ousted and replaced with the despot Pinochet. It is the true motive for the ousting of Saddam Hussein. It is the reason why Hugo Chavez is dishonestly depicted as a tyrant. It will be the actual rationale for any future war against Iran, despite claims to the contrary. In the case of Russia and the Putin administration, this 'sin' has manifested itself in number of ways, each of which is discussed in detail below.

Control of NGOs
On April 17th of this year, a law passed by the Russian Parliament, the Duma, took effect. This law, vociferously denounced as ‘controversial’ and ‘retrogressive’ by the media in the West, imposes restrictions on domestic and foreign nongovernmental organizations operating in Russia. The law puts in place strict registration requirements and imposes rigorous financial oversight on the operations of NGOs. The law also provides for the dissolution of an NGO if its activities "threaten Russia's independence or sovereignty".

The motive for this legislation is not to deny freedom of speech or to attempt undermine the rights of citizens, but to protect Russia from the insidious activities of certain foreign-funded NGOs that are established to do precisely three things:

• undermine the governments of sovereign nations and in doing so subjugate their economies
• promote the bland, insipid and ultimately impotent brand of western democracy
• press for the market liberalisation that is in reality little more than legalised plundering and wholesale racketeering

Vladimir Putin seeks to prevent a repeat of the "colour" revolutions in Ukraine and Georgia, where anti-ultra-nationalist xenophobes were funded by NGOs set up by the likes of the US National Endowment for Democracy, ostensibly to free the countries from their Soviet past and to establish them as independent democracies. The reality of these pseudo-revolutions is somewhat different, however. Their purpose was solely to move the countries out of the sphere of influence of Russia and into that of the United States. Democracy - or at least the concept of democracy unadulterated with corporatist fundamentalism, electoral fraud and the threat of tyranny - played no part in the proceedings.

In the most ironic of all ironies, the most vituperative disapproval of this move to curtail the activities of foreign NGOs came from the United States, a country that had previously put in place two versions of the freedom-busting "Patriot Act". Piling insult on top of injury, the political class and media in the United States remain fierce critics of Russia and her apparent lack of freedoms, despite having descended into a deeper dystopic state following recent the signing into law of the Military Commissions Act.

Dollar Independence
On May 10th of this year, Vladimir Putin, in his State of the Nation speech to the Russian Duma (Parliament), announced that Russia would make the rouble a convertible currency, in order that it could be used for payment in oil and natural gas transactions. At the present time, oil sales are exclusively transacted in dollars and are made solely through the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMX) and the London Petroleum Exchange (LPE), both of which are owned by American investors.

Any move away from the denomination of oil in dollars will severely impact on the demand for the greenback on the global market and would result in billions of dollars flooding back into the United States, causing at the very least a severe economic slump and potentially resulting in total economic meltdown.

Like Saddam Hussein before him, the real threat Vladimir Putin poses to the United States is his desire to free his country and the sale of its resources from the shackles of the US fiat currency. In November 2000, Saddam Hussein had started selling oil in euros, thus threatening the absolute hegemony of the dollar. Up to this point, oil had never been transacted in euros - as Britain and Norway, two major oil producers, one of which is a member of the EU and the other a member of the European Economic Area (EEA) decided to retain their own currencies and to continue denominating the sales of their oil in dollars. The result of the insolence of Saddam Hussein in threatening the hegemony of the almighty dollar was illegal invasion of Iraq. The pretext for the invasion was a lie - a smokescreen. The impending destruction of Iraq would have nothing whatsoever to do with the dictatorial nature of the Hussein regime, or his attacks on the Kurds. The true motive for the invasion was solely because he threatened US supremacy and the domination of its currency.

Similarly, the real reason for the posturing on Iran has nothing to do with alleged plans on the part of the Iranians to develop nuclear weapons. It is because the Iranians have announced plans to establish an Iranian Oil Bourse (Market) transacting oil in Euros. The exchange would be based on Kish Island in the Persian Gulf, an Iranian duty-free and tax-free zone. The launch date for the bourse has been delayed, and when and if it does go into operation it will have to overcome the major obstacle that the current amount of euro currency in circulation is insufficient. However, any moves away from the use of the dollar, however putative, can be considered a threat to the long-term viability of the greenback. Those who dismiss such suggestions as conspiracy theory may like to explain why the privately-owned U.S. Federal Reserve has cancelled the publishing of the M3 monetary aggregate, a report that details the extent dollar holdings globally.

If President Putin continues with his plans to establish the rouble as a convertible currency and to transact all sales of Russian oil in the rouble, then expect the demonisation of Russia in general and Putin in particular to increase dramatically.

Conflict with Georgia
Georgian President, Mikail Saakashvili is frequently painted as being a nationalist, but as always the reality of his presidency bears little relationship to the propaganda. Although he has fought hard to have Russian bases removed from Georgian soil, he has quickly replaced them with those of another foreign power - The United States. Since the downfall of the Soviet Union, the United States and her allies have been busy cultivating lackies and establishing bases in the former Soviet states bordering Russia.

For the authorities in Moscow, the Caucasus region and other former satellite states are their geopolitical backyard and therefore critical to their national security. The United States has bases in 130 of 160 countries in the world, and Russia has every right to be concerned about the presence of forces from an increasingly hostile nation on their borders - and have rightly used this incursion into the region as a reason to renew investment in their military.

The publicly stated rationale for Western support for Georgia in their conflict with Russia is that Saakashvili is committed to democracy and that Putin is somehow the contrary. This is undiluted nonsense.

A report by OSCE Watch concluded that the March 2004 poll effectively produced a one party state in Georgia with a small nominal and utterly ineffective opposition. Since that time, Saakashvili has busied himself with appointing close relatives to important governmental posts and despite having stated that “it was unacceptable for the Georgian president to have an inflated staff or a luxurious residence” he is now constructing a veritable palace for himself on the outskirts of Tbilisi - having demolished the police headquarters and a considerable number of neighbouring dwellings. This palace is reported by the British Helsinki Human Rights Group to be larger in scale than the White House in Washington. It is amazing that such a small country could afford such a disproportionate display of wealth and status. Despite its new status as a ‘democratic nation’ Georgia continues to be mired by outright corruption, cronyism, political racketeering and murder. Life for ordinary Georgians has not improved one iota since the colour revolution, and in many respects has worsened considerably.

A scale model of the new palace
(Photo by the British Helsinki Human Rights Group)

The fascist and totalitarian credentials of Saakashvili are close to impeccable. Constitutional amendments that were hastily pushed through parliament in February 2004, shortly after Saakashvili took power, effectively confer unlimited powers on the president. Also, in a move redolent of similar events in Nazi Germany, Saakashvili decreed that the symbol of the National Movement would become the new flag of Georgia, effectively making the symbols of the state and the party one and the same.

From the behaviour of the victor of the Rose Revolution, it is apparent that Georgia is not a democratic state, at least not by any commonly accepted definition of the word. Georgia has become a mini-dictatorship in all but name, a regime tied to and governed by the interests of the United States. Given the deep-seated connections between Saakashvili and the United States administration, the recent arrest of four Russian officials in Georgia can only be seen as deliberate action designed to provoke Russia - so that the Russian rejoinder can be dissected, analysed, criticised and demonised in the Western media.

Support for Byelorussia
Like Georgia, Byelorussia is a state sharing a border with Russia. Unlike Georgia, Byelorussia is an ally to Russia, and that - along with a shared history- is the primary reason for the close relationship between the two countries. The relationship does not imply Russian approval of the methods Lukashenko uses to remain in power, but is simply an attempt by Russia to ensure that Byelorussia does not become the 131st country in the world to host U.S. military bases.

Like Russia, Byelorussia has curtailed the activities of foreign NGOs and probably for much the same reasons. While there is an undoubted need for reform in Byelorussia, if the NGOs have their way, the reforms will be similar to those imposed on Georgia and Ukraine, and will not have the effect of improving the quality of life of Byelorussian citizens or making their government more accountable.

Any guesses as to who is sponsoring this putative "revolution"?
(photo by the British Helsinki Human Rights Group)

Alexander Lukashenko does have (as he said himself) "an authoritarian ruling style" and there is cause for concern about human rights violations and the actions of the state against independent journalists, national minorities and opposition politicians. However the true extent of such violations - when compared against those of "friendly" authoritarian regimes, such as the new Georgian administration- are exaggerated by the usual interested parties.

Ironically, Byelorusssia has been criticised by various U.S. funded NGO's for retaining the death penalty for certain crimes, despite the fact that the biggest culprit in the terminal dispatch of criminals is the chief cheerleader in anti-Lukashenko lobby. Also, in another supreme irony, in a testimony to the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice labelled Belarus, along with five other nations, as one of the United State's list of "outposts of tyranny".

The dismantling of oligarchy
Putin, much to the annoyance of the global kleptocracy, has started making moves to bring oil and gas production back under Russian control. The moves against Khodorkovsky, the ousting of Royal Dutch Shell from the Sakhalin II gas fields on the grounds of their failure to meet environmental regulations and the creation of the super corporation Gazpromneft have all contributed to the process of wrestling back control of resources that were literally given away to foreign companies and investors by the Yeltsin government. Of course, some in Russia, such as the newspaper Газета (Gazeta), will paint this as "a rather peculiar system of power where the nation’s key economic assets are run on behalf of the state by a group of close associates", but remained strangely silent while a small group of ultra-wealthy foreigners looted what they could of Russia's natural resources.

Military resurgence and Security Co-operation
The Russian army, navy and air-force are showing signs of recovering from their former dilapidated state. Despite years of economic problems, Russia has remained very much at the forefront of military technology and Vladimir Putin has made it clear in May 2003 through his annual State Of The Nation address that he would strengthen and modernise the Russian nuclear arsenal in order to “ensure the defence and capability of Russia and its allies in the long term”.

Through the Collective Security Treaty Organisation, Russia has been working together with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan to bolster their collective defensive capability. On a broader front, Russia participates in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, whose members held war-games in Kazakhstan in August 2006. Russia has also signed a comprehensive military cooperation agreement with India, again in August of this year.

Conclusion
Without doubt, the rationale for the upsurge in anti-Russian propaganda in the Western media is triggered by the re-emergence of Russia as a global power and the decision of the Russian administration to put the strategic interests of Russia ahead of those of the United States. Indeed, the U.S. Council for Foreign Relations is urging George Bush to “stop regarding Russia as a strategic partner” because “Russia has become an increasingly authoritarian state with a foreign policy that is sometimes at odds with the interests of the United States and its allies”. It is true that the Russian administration is acting against the interests of the United States. After all, it is doing what any government should do… it should act in the interests of its own people. If clamping down on the Trojan Horses that are the western-funded NGOs is authoritarian, then I guess Russia is also authoritarian.

So, for once, it appears that the Council for Foreign Relations, a neocon think-tank that laughably describes itself as a “Nonpartisan Resource for Information and Analysis” has got something right.

Continue reading...

Summary only...

The Stakes

With all the subtlety of a sledgehammer, a recent Republican advertisment goes a long way towards threatening the American people with further terrorist attacks and potential nuclear annihilation... unless...of course.. they cast their vote for the GOP on the 7th of November. The spot, which recalls the infamous "Daisy" advert that was the brainchild of Lyndon Johnson, is a jumbled video montage of assorted terrorist-types vowing to attack the United States, backed by the sound of a ticking time bomb that morphs into a thumping heartbeat and finally becoming an explosion.

The sad truth is that this kind of electoral blackmail will probably work its peculiar charm on that sizeable percentage of the American popuplation who have given up the will to think for themselves, or who will always implicitly believe that the actions of government are by their very nature benign.

Of course it is debatable as to whether a victory for the GOP or for the Democrats will make even the slightest bit of difference, but my suspicion is that a win for the latter would at least bring a halt to the headlong slide into totalitarianism. Of course, for the oligarchs, kleptocrats and plutocrats who pull the strings behind the scenes, it does not matter one bit who the eventual victor is - as the underlying and unwritten agenda will stay unchanged no matter what the outcome.

The Republican blackmail advert is at least truthful in claiming that failure to act will drive the stakes higher than can be imagined. What it fails to be truthful about is the exact nature of those stakes, the true identity of those who pose a very real and present threat to the American people and also the corrective action that needs to be take in order to ensure that the stakes don't become higher.

Continue reading...

Summary only...

Scary Movie - Jesus Camp

Judging by the cuts shown in this news report, this movie is proof that radical, fanatical and ultimately dangerous fundamentalism comes in more than one flavour, each as utterly distasteful as the other.

It may be that the type of indoctrination practised at the "Kids On Fire" childrens camp is not particularly commonplace and so can be considered relatively insignficant, but it does seem like this type of ultra-fundamentalist worldview is on the up and up. This should give any rational person cause for concern about the sort of adults this wholesale indoctrination of children will produce.

Continue reading...

Summary only...

Essential viewing...

If you have not yet seen it, you should give Keith Olbermann’s commentary on the Military Commissions Act of 2006 a look.

Continue reading...

Summary only...

The 'sin' of omission

In an article earlier this month, the Northwest Evening Mail reported that a retired dentist in the Lancaster area had been arrested and charged with "being in possession of an explosive substance for an unlawful purpose" after "a record number of explosives" were seized. It is claimed that police found "rocket launchers, chemicals, British National Party literature and a nuclear or biological suit" in his house . This find appear came shortly after the discovery of twenty-two 'chemical components' at the house of his alleged accomplice, Robert Cottage, a former BNP election candidate, who lives in nearby Colne.

A further article, published by The Burnley Citizen, reported that local police superintendent Neil Smith had "moved to reassure residents and stressed: It is not a bomb making factory" before adding that the find was "not related to terrorism". Another local newspaper, The Nelson Leader reported on the first appearances by the two before magistrates courts.

Given the nature of the find, you would imagine that the national news media would be all over this story in no time. Wrong! Here we have a substantial haul of weaponry that would do real damage to real people, and it receives precisely ZERO coverage in the national media.

This is in stark contrast to the almost frenzied blanket coverage of the trial of Dhiren Barot, who is being tried for conspiracy to carry out terrorist acts, despite the fact that only evidence against him are some deranged scribblings he made on a notepad where he fantasised about carrying out terrorist attacks on major public buildings in the United Kingdom and United States. Never mind the fact that "The Crown could not dispute claims from the defence that no funding had been received for the projects, nor any vehicles or bomb-making materials acquired".

According to the mainstream media, Mr Barot, who has obvious mental-health problems, is the real terrorist - despite having no means whatsoever to bring his crazed ideas to fruition, and having no known connection with anyone who does. However, when presented with the largest haul of items likely to be used in terrorist acts, voices in the same mainstream media fall strangely silent.

Of course, the guilt or innocence of those arrested in Lancashire is up to a court to decide and they have a right not to be tried in the media. However, the same careful avoidance of publicly discussing matters that are sub-judice does not seem to have come into play in the case of Dihren Barot.

His guilt or innocence should be determined by a court of law, based on the evidence presented. The outcome of his trial should not depend upon or be in anyway influenced by the feverish salivating of the gutter press (or gutter TV news for that matter) , nor the selective reporting of the so-called quality media and their servile acquiescence to the relentless demonisation of selected groups. Regretably, it seems that large swathes of the mainstream media have already been happy to act as his judge, jury and executioner.

Continue reading...

Summary only...

An apple a day... the faulty rhetoric of Yabloko and the faux outrage of the 'international community'

During a recent visit to Germany, blame for the murder of the Russian journalist, Anna Politkovskaya, was laid at the feet of Vladimir Putin by a crowd of 2000 protesters, one of whom shouted "murderer!" as Mr Putin got out of his limousine.

Later Mr Putin publicly acknowledged her death for the first time during a joint press conference with the German chancellor, Angela Merkel. During the press conference, he stated that although Ms Politkovskaya was a journalist known to be critical of the authorities in Russia, her influence on political life in Russia was insubstantial. He also promised that the murder, which he described as a "dreadful and unacceptable crime" will be fully investigated and the perpetrators apprehended. During talks with Mr Putin, Angela Merkin is reported to have raised the concerns of the mythical 'international community' with regard to the possibility of state involvement in the murder.

The murder of Ms. Politkovskaya is without doubt a cause for concern, as would be any suggestion of state intimidation of the media. However, the assumption that the murder was carried out on the orders of Mr Putin is either the product of simplistic thinking or ulterior motives. As with any significant event of this type, the first question any sane person should ask is 'cui bono'?

Who benefits? Certainly not Vladimir Putin, who is - without any real evidence - being accused of using murder to suppress media freedoms. If the Russian state had wanted to do away with a vocal opponent, their demise would have been made to look like an accident. Whoever perpetrated this murder wanted it to be clearly seen as an execution - in order to once more make the Putin administration the focus of the faux righteous indignation and moral outrage so beloved of those who regularly instigate or perpetrate atrocities all over the world. Those who benefit from this murder are those who want to demonise and punish the current Russian administration for their strident economic nationalism and for their attempts to review the flawed privatisations of the Yeltsin era.

When asked for comment about the murder, Grigory Yavlinsky, leader of the opposition Yabloko party stated that "Russia is becoming an authoritarian and corrupt country". The reality is that Russia is less corrupt now than it was when Yeltsin was busy selling off the Russian family silver to a small number of ultra-greedy oligarchs.

He went on to say that "This killing opens a new phase when the physical elimination of political opponents becomes possible". He has obviously had his eyes closed while the oligarchs and other assorted criminals were busy ordering hits on each other in their drive to establish exclusive control over the natural resources that rightly belong to all of the Russian people.

While I do not for one minute believe that the administration of Vladimir Putin is blameless or free from mistakes, I am sickened by the hypocritical critique of those who point fingers at Russia for their actions in Chechnya while simultaneously committing far greater atrocities in the Middle East, or at least tacitly supporting them.

I also find it ironic that the leader of a party that espouses the kind of liberal economic policies that allowed Yeltsin to divest the Russian state of its natural resources and large industries has the audacity to bemoan the increasing corruption in the country. Mr Yavlinsky believes that these fundamentally corrupt privatisations should be deemed legal and should not be open to administrative review. It is clear from this that Mr Yavlinsky does not represent the interests of the Russian populace at large, but is far more interested in protecting the ill-gotten assets of a small clique of kleptocrats.

Continue reading...

Summary only...

Dalits seeking dignity

According to a report by the BBC, low-caste Hindus - otherwise known as Dalits, are converting to other religions, particularly Buddhism and Christianity. The Dalits, who number 167 million people and represent over 16% of the population of India, are considered to be the lowest-ranking members of Hindu society - and are limited to performing only the most absolutely menial of jobs. They are not even the lowest level of the obnoxious caste system, they are considered to be outside of and beneath it.

Even if Hinduism is not alone amongst religions in promoting racist or supremacist ideologies, the ugly, institutionalised racism that the caste system represents is probably the most clear-cut example of discrimination whose basis lies in religious belief. It is highly ironic that a religion which markets itself to western cultures as fluffy, huggy, tolerant and inclusive is in fact quite the opposite.

While India may be one of the world's fastest growing economies, a social order based on highly institutionalised discrimination can only ensure that the largely undeserving Brahmin caste will reap the benefits. Thankfully, the Dalits, who have long been an oppressed people, have also grown in political influence, particularly in northern India and steps are being taken to rid Indian society of this divisive and discriminatory concept.

Continue reading...

Summary only...

A word in your $hell...like...

The Irish Daily Mail, in their editorial comment from yesterday's edition, rails against the left-wing agitators who are attempting to stoke a conflict so they can revive a long-discredited ideology. The conflict in question is the long-standing protest over the Shell Corrib pipeline.

Precisely which long-discredited ideology the Daily Mail has in mind is left unsaid, but through the references later in the piece where the protesters are described as dreamers who seek to turn back the tide of internationalisation and global trade. Admittedly, there are two distinct threads to the protests against the pipeline and the tendency has been for the two to become intertwined. The first thread of the protests objects to the pipeline route on the grounds of public safety. The second objection is broader and encompasses the economics of the project, and in particular the lack of benefit to the Irish people - the beneficiaries will be Norway's Statoil - who own a 36.5% stake, Shell - who own a 45% stake and Marathon - who own the remaining 18.5%. That the government of Ireland has been selling off the national resources at bargain-basement prices is evident, when even the likes of Mike Cunningham, the former director of Statoil Exploration (Ireland) stated that "No other country in the world has given such favourable terms as Ireland."

The Irish media have largely been subservient to the corporate cause, liberally sprinkling their editorial comment with anonymous allegations claiming that protesters are only interested in violence and destruction.

For instance the Sunday Independent of July 17th, 2005 claimed that:

Paramilitary style death threats have been made against workers on Shell's controversial Corrib gas pipeline project in Co Mayo.

The article in the Sunday Independent went on to claim that:

Two Scottish workers employed by the Norwegian-owned Statoil corporation were approached by a gang of men outside a pub in Belmullet and told they would be shot "in the back of the head".

What the Sunday Independent article did not make clear in that article, or in any article on the subject since then, is that their owner, Tony O'Reilly, is also part-owner of an Irish exploration company, Providence Resources, in which he holds a 45 per cent stake. Through this company he is the part-owner, along with Exxon-Mobil, of oil and gas fields off the coast of County Clare.

He has even admitted that he (mis)used his position as a "media mogul" to access the most lucrative exploration licenses, when in September 1983, he told Forbes magazine that “Since I own 35 per cent of the newspapers in Ireland I have close contact with the politicians. I got the blocks he wanted". The "he" referred to in the statement is the geologist working for the company.

So the Sunday Independent can hardly claim to be neutral on this issue - leaving aside their obvious attachment to neo-liberal economic principles. Whether the The Irish Daily Mail and their sister paper, the Sunday Mail, have any fiscal interest in the project is open to question, but their religious belief in the legalised pillage that goes by the name of globalisation - and the attendant repressive legislation to stiffle protest most certainly is not.

Going back to the Irish Daily Mail editorial, the ideology to which they refer - which is best expressed as economic nationalism - is hardly long-discredited, despite how much their wags might like to think it is. It is the reason why Iraq was invaded (forget the toppling a repressive regime excuse - the coalition of the willing tolerate far more repressive regimes elsewhere). It is the reason why Iran is ripe for invasion. It is the reason why Hugo Chavez is being demonised. It is the underlying motive for the constant attacks on the administration of Vladimir Putin, despite the fact that his alleged "crimes" pale in comparison to those of the current U.S. administration.

This ideology is a straightforward concept that states that the exploitation of the natural resources of a country should directly benefit all the people of that country and not just line the pockets of a few vested interests, and it is rapidly gaining ground. Globalisation - the legalised and unhindered plundering of the assets of countries and the exploitation of their peoples by corporations - is, on the other hand, becoming increasingly unpopular - despite how many times the Daily Mail stamp their collective feet in opposition.

Despite the attempts by the likes of the Daily Mail to smear all opposition as "left wing", opposition to the dominance of corporations is far from exclusively left-wing territory, as anyone who reads the writings of the likes of Paul Craig Roberts - a former advisor to former U.S. President Ronald Reagan will conclude.

Continue reading...

Summary only...

Coffee & Cigarettes

Non fumer!

It seems that France has decided to follow the example set by Ireland in setting a date for a public smoking ban. From next February, smoking will be banned in airports, railway stations, schools, universities and offices throughout France. However, the traditional French breakfast of coffee and cigarettes will survive for a further year, as smoking in bars, restaurants and clubs will be banned from February 2008. In order to set an example, the tobacco kiosk in the parliament will cease selling cigarettes from the end of this year, according to health minister Xavier Bertrand, quoted in Le Journal du Dimanche. Quite how a public smoking ban will go down in a country where chain-smoking took on an air of cool, and whose citizenry have a healthy disrespect for imposed rules, is anybody's guess.

Continue reading...

Summary only...

Fancy a game of tag?

The BBC have reported that scientists working for a new research centre at University College London are busy developing the prototypes of an orwellian system that will represent yet another encroachment on the civil liberties of otherwise law-abiding citizens. Following on from the ludicrous frenzy stirred up by the patently fake 'liquid explosives plot', the device, an electronic tag, will be issued to passengers at check-in and will be used to “track the movement patterns of passengers deemed to be suspicious and prevent them from entering restricted areas”. The system will go through trials at Debrecen airport in Hungary and if successful it could be coming to an airport near you within two years.

Going by the statements of the designers in the BBC article cited above, this device will be fixed to the passenger in such a way as to be difficult to remove. In order to soften the blow to civil liberties this development represents, the scientists claim that “It could also aid airports by helping evacuation in case of a fire, rapidly locating children, and finding passengers who are late to arrive at the gate”. With such a soft and fluffy pedigree, presumably it will also help find lost puppies and retrieve kittens caught up trees.

Continue reading...

Summary only...

Criminalising speech

I believe it is counter-productive and contrary to basic human rights to seek to criminalise any form of speech, or at least any form of speech that does not directly incite violence against others. So I approach the decision of the French parliament to criminalise denial of the Turkish genocide against the Armenians with more than a little trepidation. Although I have no doubts that a genocide took place, I simply don't see how society benefits by forcing everyone to express just that one accepted viewpoint and no other.

For a start, using the law as a gag acts as an effective barrier to research by anyone seeking to clarify the circumstances and numbers involved or to ascertain for themselves the veracity of any claims made. It may stop people saying things, but it won't stop people thinking them. Indeed, it may have opposite effect to that intended.

The really worrying implication of this law is that it sets a precedent where any claim can be imbued with the status of 'fact', considered incontrovertible and beyond question - by the simple waving of a legislative wand.

Of course this may be a simple ruse to delay the entry of Turkey into the EU – but there are simpler ways of making opposition known – without compromising the right to free speech. For the record, I count myself amongst those who believe that Turkey does not belong in the EU – mainly because as a state they have some pretty ugly bedfellows amongst their allies.

Continue reading...

Summary only...

Hey Big Spender

Titled using a turn of phrase that would put the 1980's "Loadsamoney" culture in the UK to shame, the Irish newspaper "The Sunday Business Post" is organising a property exhibition in Dublin this month. The exhibition, quaintly called "Hey Big Spender" will no doubt be full of sharp-eyed wolves waiting to empty the wallets of those who have hit it big with the payouts on their state-sponsored investment accounts (otherwise known as SSIAs).

If the past is anything to go by, most of the exhibitors will, no doubt, be selling 'investment opportunities' in properties abroad... of course they are abroad, because no property in Ireland could be remotely considered an investment. The hyper-inflated Irish property market – where prices have been literally talked up to hyper-inflated levels by a small number of interested parties – offers no real investment opportunities. I believe there is moral dubiousness in treating residential property as an investment and not as a place to live, but I will leave that for another day.

Back to the overseas property people... in the absence of any real regulation of this burgeoning marketplace, the chances of encountering a cowboy are far higher than normal. Some of these companies have scant knowledge of the property law in the countries they are 'selling' - preferring to leave that to local legal experts. Having been accosted by staff from these 'overseas property' companies at shopping centres and other exhibitions, I gleaned that quite a few of them are staffed by people who possess no more than a rudimentary 'tourist' knowledge of the language of those countries they deal with. So caveat emptor! You have been warned.

In reality the “Hey Big Spender” exhibition and its vulgar moniker is but the tip of the iceberg. It is just another facet of the self-congratulatory, self-obsessed, morally vacuous, arrogant, uncaring, “me fein” country that Ireland has become since taxpayers in other EU countries and various international corporations decided to fund the so-called Celtic Tiger.

There is a certain irony in this overseas property boom that should not be lost on those who remember how Ireland was twenty years ago. I can remember families complaining bitterly in the media that the Germans were buying up so much property in the west of Ireland that people had to move away from the area they were born in to find affordable housing. Now that self-same media is busy urging us to price the Poles, Bulgarians, Romanians and assorted others out of their own property markets – and maybe even marketing these overseas properties to people who would probably object strongly to the Bulgarians and Romanians having the freedom to come here to live.

Continue reading...

Summary only...