Monday, June 30, 2003
"The [UK] government will today unveil a social revolution giving same-sex partners legal rights, which will make them married in all but name. The changes will give gay and lesbian couples rights over pensions, inheritance tax, property, social security and benefits which have long been taken for granted by married heterosexual people". Fine - but why not let them actually marry? This new set-up won't apply to heterosexual couples. If they want those rights, they must wed. So we still won't have an equal system. Surely, both same-sex couples and heterosexual couples should have exactly the same rights. Read the whole story.
"Ten Appalling Lies We Were Told About Iraq", writes Christopher Scheer on Alternet. Scheer refers to the dodgy goings on in the US, but Blair & Co are facing similar problems here in the UK.
Meanwhile, the US government continues to bully those countries who need its support:
"Forty-three of the world's poorest nations have caved in to American pressure and signed agreements not to send US citizens for trial at the International Criminal Court (ICC), which was set up last year to hear allegations of crimes against humanity". Read more.
"Ten Appalling Lies We Were Told About Iraq", writes Christopher Scheer on Alternet. Scheer refers to the dodgy goings on in the US, but Blair & Co are facing similar problems here in the UK.
Meanwhile, the US government continues to bully those countries who need its support:
"Forty-three of the world's poorest nations have caved in to American pressure and signed agreements not to send US citizens for trial at the International Criminal Court (ICC), which was set up last year to hear allegations of crimes against humanity". Read more.
Friday, June 27, 2003
Thursday, June 26, 2003
Its good to see that people across the Atlantic are standing up to protest about genetically modified/engineered crops. Dan Bacher reports that in Sacramento, demonstrating at the USDA Ministerial Conference, the United Farmworkers Union' Dolores Huerta said, ""This isn't about feeding people throughout the world. It's about Monsanto or other large corporations making profits from selling GE food. If they really wanted to feed us, they would feed us healthy food. In fact, a lot of food is thrown away in the U.S. because it's considered surplus."
She emphasized that the technology being proposed at the Sacramento Ministerial is part of the same unsustainable, unproductive and toxic agriculture that drives small farmers off the land in Mexico and other countries - and forces them to go to work in U.S. fields for low wages."
Huerta pointed out that genetically altered food has nothing to do with hunger, and everything to do with profit and control of the world's food resources - obvious when you think about how Monsanto are claiming intellectual property rights on stray seeds that have germinated on other people's land.
Bacher writes, "Independent research has revealed an alarming spread of GE corn genes in Mexico in fields many miles from where transgenic corn was planted. The drift of GE crop genes to fields planted with organic and conventional crops is something that is impossible to contain.
Monsanto has demanded that U.S. and Canadian farmers pay them for seeds spread onto their property by wind drift and bees, even though they didn't want the seeds in the first place. Monsanto contends it owns the "intelletual property rights" to the GE seed and crops.
Percy Schmeiser, a farmer from Bruno, Canada being sued by Monsanto for refusal to pay for GE seeds that drifted onto his property, announced at Monday's rally that his case against Monsanto would be heard in the Canadian Supreme Court in January. "This is about maintaining the rights of farmers throughout the world against big corporations like Monsanto," he stated."
How long before the air we breathe is patented?
She emphasized that the technology being proposed at the Sacramento Ministerial is part of the same unsustainable, unproductive and toxic agriculture that drives small farmers off the land in Mexico and other countries - and forces them to go to work in U.S. fields for low wages."
Huerta pointed out that genetically altered food has nothing to do with hunger, and everything to do with profit and control of the world's food resources - obvious when you think about how Monsanto are claiming intellectual property rights on stray seeds that have germinated on other people's land.
Bacher writes, "Independent research has revealed an alarming spread of GE corn genes in Mexico in fields many miles from where transgenic corn was planted. The drift of GE crop genes to fields planted with organic and conventional crops is something that is impossible to contain.
Monsanto has demanded that U.S. and Canadian farmers pay them for seeds spread onto their property by wind drift and bees, even though they didn't want the seeds in the first place. Monsanto contends it owns the "intelletual property rights" to the GE seed and crops.
Percy Schmeiser, a farmer from Bruno, Canada being sued by Monsanto for refusal to pay for GE seeds that drifted onto his property, announced at Monday's rally that his case against Monsanto would be heard in the Canadian Supreme Court in January. "This is about maintaining the rights of farmers throughout the world against big corporations like Monsanto," he stated."
How long before the air we breathe is patented?
Wednesday, June 25, 2003
George Monbiot has some suggestions about making global trade fair. He writes:
"The only thing worse than a world with the wrong international trade rules is a world with no trade rules at all. George Bush seems to be preparing to destroy the WTO at the next world trade talks in September not because its rules are unjust, but because they are not unjust enough. He is seeking to negotiate individually with weaker countries, so that he can force even harsher terms of trade upon them. He wants to replace a multilateral trading system with an imperial one. And this puts the global justice movement in a difficult position.
Our problem arises from the fact that, being a diverse movement, we have hesitated to describe precisely what we want. We have called for fair trade, but have failed, as a body, to specify how free that trade should be, and how it should be regulated. As a result, in the rich world at least, we have permitted the few who do possess a clearly formulated policy to speak on our behalf. Those people are the adherents of a doctrine called "localisation". I once supported it myself. I now accept that I was wrong".
When I saw the article my first thought was that localisation should be pursued, but having read the whole thing, I must admit Monbiot has made a very good point. While we should not be flying carrots around the planet, he puts a strong argument for the continuation of global trade in other commodities. Read it and see.
The Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, is visiting Britain at the moment, following in the tradition of Britain welcoming those with worrying human rights records. But as we all know, where there's a few quid to be made such things as torture and repression matter little. As The Guardian reports, "BP and Shell have just signed huge contracts for oil exploration in Russia, putting Britain in the unusual position of being the largest single investor in Russia and outstripping Germany, according to British officials. Mr Blair and Mr Putin will jointly open a big energy conference at Lancaster House tomorrow.
The two men will have only half an hour of private talks. They will cover Russia's insistence that pre-war oil contracts in Iraq be honoured, and its argument that pressure on Iran to open its nuclear programme to inspection should not prevent Russia from trading there.
Human rights advocates have been urging the prime minister to press the Russian leader to curb the repression of Chechen civilians by Russian forces. Human Rights Watch says Russia has ignored two resolutions by the United Nations commission on human rights, calling for the UN's special rapporteur on torture and extra-judicial executions to be allowed to visit Chechnya."
Lets all put on our best frocks and say hello to Vlad.
Of course, people's lives and wellbeing are not quite at the top of the list of priorities for our great Western leaders. Again from The Guardian, "The US and Britain were accused yesterday of "callous disregard" for the health of Iraqis and the fate of radioactive substances near a looted nuclear site south of Baghdad."
"The only thing worse than a world with the wrong international trade rules is a world with no trade rules at all. George Bush seems to be preparing to destroy the WTO at the next world trade talks in September not because its rules are unjust, but because they are not unjust enough. He is seeking to negotiate individually with weaker countries, so that he can force even harsher terms of trade upon them. He wants to replace a multilateral trading system with an imperial one. And this puts the global justice movement in a difficult position.
Our problem arises from the fact that, being a diverse movement, we have hesitated to describe precisely what we want. We have called for fair trade, but have failed, as a body, to specify how free that trade should be, and how it should be regulated. As a result, in the rich world at least, we have permitted the few who do possess a clearly formulated policy to speak on our behalf. Those people are the adherents of a doctrine called "localisation". I once supported it myself. I now accept that I was wrong".
When I saw the article my first thought was that localisation should be pursued, but having read the whole thing, I must admit Monbiot has made a very good point. While we should not be flying carrots around the planet, he puts a strong argument for the continuation of global trade in other commodities. Read it and see.
The Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, is visiting Britain at the moment, following in the tradition of Britain welcoming those with worrying human rights records. But as we all know, where there's a few quid to be made such things as torture and repression matter little. As The Guardian reports, "BP and Shell have just signed huge contracts for oil exploration in Russia, putting Britain in the unusual position of being the largest single investor in Russia and outstripping Germany, according to British officials. Mr Blair and Mr Putin will jointly open a big energy conference at Lancaster House tomorrow.
The two men will have only half an hour of private talks. They will cover Russia's insistence that pre-war oil contracts in Iraq be honoured, and its argument that pressure on Iran to open its nuclear programme to inspection should not prevent Russia from trading there.
Human rights advocates have been urging the prime minister to press the Russian leader to curb the repression of Chechen civilians by Russian forces. Human Rights Watch says Russia has ignored two resolutions by the United Nations commission on human rights, calling for the UN's special rapporteur on torture and extra-judicial executions to be allowed to visit Chechnya."
Lets all put on our best frocks and say hello to Vlad.
Of course, people's lives and wellbeing are not quite at the top of the list of priorities for our great Western leaders. Again from The Guardian, "The US and Britain were accused yesterday of "callous disregard" for the health of Iraqis and the fate of radioactive substances near a looted nuclear site south of Baghdad."
Tuesday, June 24, 2003
"The government yesterday faced severe embarrassment over arms dealing as Indonesia broke repeated assurances and deployed 36 British-made Scorpion light tanks as part of its intensifying campaign to crush separatists in the Aceh province", reports The Guardian. Is anybody surprised? What did the UK government expect Indonesia to do with that military equipment? Melt it down and make toys? Disable it and build a theme park?
"Indonesia traditionally has been a lucrative market for British arms exporters. When it invaded East Timor in 1975 it had several dozen Saladin armoured reconnaissance vehicles, Ferret armoured vehicles and Saracen armoured personnel carriers, all made by the Coventry-based firm Alvis, manufacturer of the Scorpions". Isn't it time this evil trade was STOPPED?!!!
I'm blogging at college today. I tried to post from home this morning, but although I solved one of the problems I was having with Internet Explorer (ie accessing secure sites), I still can't post to Blogger or open my Yahoo inbox. Any ideas anybody? I've only had problems since I had a broadband connection installed.
Oh well, at least I've got Harry Potter to keep me company. Usually I avoid hyped products, but having read the first four of J.K.Rowling's novels and thoroughly enjoyed them, I succumbed to the lure of the fifth. There is such a price war underway that it is easy to pick up a hardback of the book almost as cheaply as paperbacks are usually sold.
Right, just enough time left for a cup of tea before the afternoon session begins. Today we are looking at Equal Opportunities in the workplace, as part of the Trade Union Representatives training course I attend one day a week. (Better than working! - and I get paid for it.)
"Indonesia traditionally has been a lucrative market for British arms exporters. When it invaded East Timor in 1975 it had several dozen Saladin armoured reconnaissance vehicles, Ferret armoured vehicles and Saracen armoured personnel carriers, all made by the Coventry-based firm Alvis, manufacturer of the Scorpions". Isn't it time this evil trade was STOPPED?!!!
I'm blogging at college today. I tried to post from home this morning, but although I solved one of the problems I was having with Internet Explorer (ie accessing secure sites), I still can't post to Blogger or open my Yahoo inbox. Any ideas anybody? I've only had problems since I had a broadband connection installed.
Oh well, at least I've got Harry Potter to keep me company. Usually I avoid hyped products, but having read the first four of J.K.Rowling's novels and thoroughly enjoyed them, I succumbed to the lure of the fifth. There is such a price war underway that it is easy to pick up a hardback of the book almost as cheaply as paperbacks are usually sold.
Right, just enough time left for a cup of tea before the afternoon session begins. Today we are looking at Equal Opportunities in the workplace, as part of the Trade Union Representatives training course I attend one day a week. (Better than working! - and I get paid for it.)
Monday, June 23, 2003
Short-termism from Blair & Co - "Two official reports will be published within weeks claiming it is in Britain's economic and scientific interests to press ahead with planting GM crops and selling GM foods". The economic & scientific take precedence over the health of both people and the environment, it seems.
Other reports raise concerns about GM, but Blair doesn't want to know about those.
"The Royal Society, in its reports last year, said that the potential health effects of GM foods should be rigorously investigated before allowing them into baby food or to be marketed to pregnant or breast-feeding women, elderly people, and those with chronic disease. This was because GM "could lead to unpredicted harmful changes in the nutritional state of foods".
Any baby food containing GM products could lead to a dramatic rise in allergies, and unexpected shifts in oestrogen levels in GM soya-based infant feed might affect sexual development in children. Infants, the report said, are very vulnerable because they have such a narrow diet. If there were any nutritional deficiencies in their food, such as fewer fatty acids, their health would suffer, especially the infant bowel function since even small nutritional changes could cause bowel obstruction.
Similarly, the only human GM trial, commissioned ironically by the Food Standards Agency, found that GM DNA did in fact transfer to bacteria in the human gut. Previously many scientists had denied that this was possible. But instead of this finding being regarded as a serious discovery which should be checked and re-checked, the spin was that this was nothing new and did not involve any health risk - a Nelsonian putting the telescope to the blind eye if ever there was one".
Choike has some useful stuff on GM here.
Other reports raise concerns about GM, but Blair doesn't want to know about those.
"The Royal Society, in its reports last year, said that the potential health effects of GM foods should be rigorously investigated before allowing them into baby food or to be marketed to pregnant or breast-feeding women, elderly people, and those with chronic disease. This was because GM "could lead to unpredicted harmful changes in the nutritional state of foods".
Any baby food containing GM products could lead to a dramatic rise in allergies, and unexpected shifts in oestrogen levels in GM soya-based infant feed might affect sexual development in children. Infants, the report said, are very vulnerable because they have such a narrow diet. If there were any nutritional deficiencies in their food, such as fewer fatty acids, their health would suffer, especially the infant bowel function since even small nutritional changes could cause bowel obstruction.
Similarly, the only human GM trial, commissioned ironically by the Food Standards Agency, found that GM DNA did in fact transfer to bacteria in the human gut. Previously many scientists had denied that this was possible. But instead of this finding being regarded as a serious discovery which should be checked and re-checked, the spin was that this was nothing new and did not involve any health risk - a Nelsonian putting the telescope to the blind eye if ever there was one".
Choike has some useful stuff on GM here.
Friday, June 20, 2003
What a frustrating blogging week! On Wednesday the server at work was down, so I couldn't get online at all. And yesterday I was at home where I have a problem with Internet Explorer which means I can't post anything - or send email, or do any shopping! Grrr.
So...I hope this works today.
George Monbiot has written a couple of interesting articles to coincide with the publication of his new book, The Age of Consent. His ideas for global democracy are worth exploring. As he says, "Our task is not to overthrow globalisation, but to capture it, and to use it as a vehicle for humanity's first global democratic revolution".
I heard a report on BBC Radio 4 yesterday from the Environmental Justice Foundation about shrimp farming, highlighting the environmental and human rights abuses that are commonplace within the industry. Sign the petition.
The Independent reports on how "The White House has again angered the green lobby by censoring and re-editing a government report to play down the threat of global warming and the contribution made to it by industrial and vehicle emissions.
The report was commissioned in 2001 by Christine Todd Whitman, the outgoing head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), whose two years in the job have seen a string of disputes between an increasingly disillusioned agency and the pro-business Bush administration.
It is due to appear next week but only after initial drafts were altered heavily by the White House, eliminating suggestions that human activities were at least partly responsible for climate change and warnings of the danger this could pose to health and ecosystems.
The final version omits references to a widely accepted 1999 study showing how sharply temperatures had risen over the previous decade, compared with the 1,000-year pattern. It cites a controversial later study, partly financed by the oil industry, which disputes these findings."
Just as you would expect really!
Also from The Independent, "One of America's most powerful oil conglomerates looks likely to get its comeuppance in court over its overseas business practices after spreading a trail of misery through a small rainforest village in the Tenasserim region of Burma in November 1994.
When the Union Oil Company of California, or Unocal, started working on a gas pipeline project there, it con-tracted out security operations to the Burmese military regime; and that was when the horror began." In another Independent story, we read that while Aung San Suu Kyi is once again being detained by the military rulers of Burma, "The US is unambiguous in its condemnation of Burma, which it describes as a place where there is "no real freedom of speech, press, assembly, association, or travel" and where security forces regularly monitor citizens' movements and communications, search homes without warrants, and relocate persons forcibly without just compensation or legal recourse.
But as in Europe, there is no talk in Washington bringing about "regime change" in Burma. Rather it has been left to Congress to make the running in drafting modest sanctions." If the US is really "unambiguous in its condemnation", why isn't it doing something about the practices of US companies operating there? In fact, why are US companies there at all? Oh, yes, of course its oil & money! Silly me.
So...I hope this works today.
George Monbiot has written a couple of interesting articles to coincide with the publication of his new book, The Age of Consent. His ideas for global democracy are worth exploring. As he says, "Our task is not to overthrow globalisation, but to capture it, and to use it as a vehicle for humanity's first global democratic revolution".
I heard a report on BBC Radio 4 yesterday from the Environmental Justice Foundation about shrimp farming, highlighting the environmental and human rights abuses that are commonplace within the industry. Sign the petition.
The Independent reports on how "The White House has again angered the green lobby by censoring and re-editing a government report to play down the threat of global warming and the contribution made to it by industrial and vehicle emissions.
The report was commissioned in 2001 by Christine Todd Whitman, the outgoing head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), whose two years in the job have seen a string of disputes between an increasingly disillusioned agency and the pro-business Bush administration.
It is due to appear next week but only after initial drafts were altered heavily by the White House, eliminating suggestions that human activities were at least partly responsible for climate change and warnings of the danger this could pose to health and ecosystems.
The final version omits references to a widely accepted 1999 study showing how sharply temperatures had risen over the previous decade, compared with the 1,000-year pattern. It cites a controversial later study, partly financed by the oil industry, which disputes these findings."
Just as you would expect really!
Also from The Independent, "One of America's most powerful oil conglomerates looks likely to get its comeuppance in court over its overseas business practices after spreading a trail of misery through a small rainforest village in the Tenasserim region of Burma in November 1994.
When the Union Oil Company of California, or Unocal, started working on a gas pipeline project there, it con-tracted out security operations to the Burmese military regime; and that was when the horror began." In another Independent story, we read that while Aung San Suu Kyi is once again being detained by the military rulers of Burma, "The US is unambiguous in its condemnation of Burma, which it describes as a place where there is "no real freedom of speech, press, assembly, association, or travel" and where security forces regularly monitor citizens' movements and communications, search homes without warrants, and relocate persons forcibly without just compensation or legal recourse.
But as in Europe, there is no talk in Washington bringing about "regime change" in Burma. Rather it has been left to Congress to make the running in drafting modest sanctions." If the US is really "unambiguous in its condemnation", why isn't it doing something about the practices of US companies operating there? In fact, why are US companies there at all? Oh, yes, of course its oil & money! Silly me.
Monday, June 16, 2003
Lets have some more of this: "Energy pioneers have launched the world's first offshore tidal energy turbine off the Devon coast. The £3m turbine has been built into the seabed about a kilometre and a half (one mile) offshore from Lynmouth".
Browsing the BBC this morning, I found their section on the environment, which includes useful information about allsorts of environmental issues, from transport to genetically modifed crops. There are links to various sites, including the GM Public Debate site.
"Iraq needs a transitional administration within three weeks if it is to avoid a descent into chaos, the most prominent Iraqi leader acceptable to all sides told The Independent last night.
Adnan Pachachi, a highly regarded former Iraqi foreign minister who is expected to play a big role in a transitional Iraqi administration, criticised the heavy-handed US sweeps that have cost more than 100 Iraqi lives, calling them "an overreaction''. He said the Americans felt "very vulnerable and afraid''.
I wish them luck.
On Friday the BBC reported that "UN officials in Baghdad say they are very concerned that religious extremists are intimidating women and girls into wearing the veil", and "No statistics are available, but Iraqis say there has been a significant increase in rape".
Liberation, ain't it grand?
Adnan Pachachi, a highly regarded former Iraqi foreign minister who is expected to play a big role in a transitional Iraqi administration, criticised the heavy-handed US sweeps that have cost more than 100 Iraqi lives, calling them "an overreaction''. He said the Americans felt "very vulnerable and afraid''.
I wish them luck.
On Friday the BBC reported that "UN officials in Baghdad say they are very concerned that religious extremists are intimidating women and girls into wearing the veil", and "No statistics are available, but Iraqis say there has been a significant increase in rape".
Liberation, ain't it grand?
Sunday, June 15, 2003
Have you ever been to see the Taj Mahal? If you haven't, you have almost certainly seen a picture of it. The Times of India asks us to "Imagine a shopping mall as the backdrop of the Taj Mahal instead of the picturesque Yamuna."
I hope that doesn't get built. I visited the Taj several years ago, and I thought it was a truly breathtaking building.
I hope that doesn't get built. I visited the Taj several years ago, and I thought it was a truly breathtaking building.
Friday, June 13, 2003
Thanks to Daddy War Bush for bringing this to my attention. I like a bit of satire - stops me being a miserable old ranter.
Rep. Henry Waxman has written another letter, in his efforts to expose the untruths cooked up by Bush & co. He asks, "Since March 17, 2003, I have been trying without success to get a direct answer to one simple question: Why did President Bush cite forged evidence about Iraq's nuclear capabilities in his State of the Union address?". Do you think he'll get a straight answer?
And I just can't stay away from The Guardian, especially articles such as this,
"At least 5,000 civilians may have been killed during the invasion of Iraq, an independent research group has claimed. As more evidence is collated, it says, the figure could reach 10,000",
and this:
"The bitter dispute between the US and Europe over Iraq burst into the open again yesterday when the US threatened Belgium with a boycott and Germany and France registered protests at the UN about Washington's continued opposition to the international criminal court".
Rep. Henry Waxman has written another letter, in his efforts to expose the untruths cooked up by Bush & co. He asks, "Since March 17, 2003, I have been trying without success to get a direct answer to one simple question: Why did President Bush cite forged evidence about Iraq's nuclear capabilities in his State of the Union address?". Do you think he'll get a straight answer?
And I just can't stay away from The Guardian, especially articles such as this,
"At least 5,000 civilians may have been killed during the invasion of Iraq, an independent research group has claimed. As more evidence is collated, it says, the figure could reach 10,000",
and this:
"The bitter dispute between the US and Europe over Iraq burst into the open again yesterday when the US threatened Belgium with a boycott and Germany and France registered protests at the UN about Washington's continued opposition to the international criminal court".
Thursday, June 12, 2003
Interesting site here with lots of info about the reality of the war on Iraq and similar empire building activities.
I found this Robert Fisk article, which tells us that "Paul Bremer has ordered his legal department in Baghdad to draw up rules for press censorship. A joke, I concluded, when one of the newly-styled Coalition Provisional Authority officials tipped me off last week. But no, it really is true.
Two months after ‘liberating’ Iraq, the Anglo-American authorities and their boss Paul Bremer — whose habit of wearing combat boots with a black suit continues to amaze his colleagues — have decided to control the new and free Iraqi press. Newspapers which publish ‘wild stories’, material deemed provocative or capable of inciting ethnic violence will be threatened or shut down.
It’s for the good of the Iraqi people, you understand. A controlled press is a responsible press — which is exactly what Saddam Hussein used to say about the trashy newspapers his regime produced. It must seem all too familiar to the people of Baghdad".
And this article, which I could have found myself in the Guardian, but hey, its still a good thing to find a new source. David Teather writes that, "US military officials are making preparations for the trial and possible execution of captives held in Guantanamo Bay, including the construction of a "death chamber".
I found this Robert Fisk article, which tells us that "Paul Bremer has ordered his legal department in Baghdad to draw up rules for press censorship. A joke, I concluded, when one of the newly-styled Coalition Provisional Authority officials tipped me off last week. But no, it really is true.
Two months after ‘liberating’ Iraq, the Anglo-American authorities and their boss Paul Bremer — whose habit of wearing combat boots with a black suit continues to amaze his colleagues — have decided to control the new and free Iraqi press. Newspapers which publish ‘wild stories’, material deemed provocative or capable of inciting ethnic violence will be threatened or shut down.
It’s for the good of the Iraqi people, you understand. A controlled press is a responsible press — which is exactly what Saddam Hussein used to say about the trashy newspapers his regime produced. It must seem all too familiar to the people of Baghdad".
And this article, which I could have found myself in the Guardian, but hey, its still a good thing to find a new source. David Teather writes that, "US military officials are making preparations for the trial and possible execution of captives held in Guantanamo Bay, including the construction of a "death chamber".
Wednesday, June 11, 2003
This article is from 1999, written by Arundhati Roy about the Sardar Sarovar Dam project. It has been a controversial project for decades, but continues nonetheless. Friends of River Narmada tell us:
"Amongst the 30 large dams planned for the Narmada, the Sardar Sarovar dam is the largest. With a proposed height of 136.5 m (455 feet), it is the focal point of both the dam-builders plans and the Narmada Bachao Andolan's opposition. The Govt claims that the multi-purpose Sardar Sarovar Project (SSP) would irrigate more than 1.8 million hectares (mostly in Gujarat, some in Rajasthan) and quench the thirst of the drought prone areas of Kutch and Saurashtra in Gujarat. The opponents of the dam counter that these benefits are grossly exaggerated and would never accrue to the extent suggested by the Govt. Instead the project would displace more than 320,000 people and affect the livelihood of thousands of others. Overall, due to related displacements by the canal system and other allied projects, at least 1 million people are expected to be affected if the project is completed".
"Amongst the 30 large dams planned for the Narmada, the Sardar Sarovar dam is the largest. With a proposed height of 136.5 m (455 feet), it is the focal point of both the dam-builders plans and the Narmada Bachao Andolan's opposition. The Govt claims that the multi-purpose Sardar Sarovar Project (SSP) would irrigate more than 1.8 million hectares (mostly in Gujarat, some in Rajasthan) and quench the thirst of the drought prone areas of Kutch and Saurashtra in Gujarat. The opponents of the dam counter that these benefits are grossly exaggerated and would never accrue to the extent suggested by the Govt. Instead the project would displace more than 320,000 people and affect the livelihood of thousands of others. Overall, due to related displacements by the canal system and other allied projects, at least 1 million people are expected to be affected if the project is completed".
Tuesday, June 10, 2003
Life in Zimbabwe for those who oppose Mugabe is not getting any better. "Mr Tsvangirai, the leader of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), is facing a second charge of treason and remained in jail yesterday after his lawyers failed to win his release. The MDC claimed that 800 of its supporters had been arrested in the five-day national strike last week".
And in Burma, "Suu Kyi, who won the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize for her nonviolent struggle for democracy in Myanmar, has been kept under detention by the military government at a secret location since May 30, following clashes between her supporters and military backers in northern Myanmar". And she was elected by the Burmese people to lead the country.
Meanwhile, here in the UK, the government has, apparently, launched a national debate on the use of GM technology. George Monbiot points out that, "In March, Margaret Beckett began the licensing process for 18 applications to grow or import commercial quantities of GM crops in Britain. Her action pre-empts the debate, pre-empts the field trials designed to determine whether or not the crops are safe to grow here, and pre-empts the only real decisions which count: namely those made by the EU and the World Trade Organisation. The WTO must now respond to an official US complaint about Europe's refusal to buy GM food. If the US wins, we must either pay hundreds of millions of dollars of annual compensation, or permit GM crops to be grown and marketed here".
Hey-ho, dontcha just love democracy??
I'm in a rush today, hence relying on the Guardian for this morning's blogging. If I can prise my son from this keyboard tonight, I might browse a bit further.
And in Burma, "Suu Kyi, who won the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize for her nonviolent struggle for democracy in Myanmar, has been kept under detention by the military government at a secret location since May 30, following clashes between her supporters and military backers in northern Myanmar". And she was elected by the Burmese people to lead the country.
Meanwhile, here in the UK, the government has, apparently, launched a national debate on the use of GM technology. George Monbiot points out that, "In March, Margaret Beckett began the licensing process for 18 applications to grow or import commercial quantities of GM crops in Britain. Her action pre-empts the debate, pre-empts the field trials designed to determine whether or not the crops are safe to grow here, and pre-empts the only real decisions which count: namely those made by the EU and the World Trade Organisation. The WTO must now respond to an official US complaint about Europe's refusal to buy GM food. If the US wins, we must either pay hundreds of millions of dollars of annual compensation, or permit GM crops to be grown and marketed here".
Hey-ho, dontcha just love democracy??
I'm in a rush today, hence relying on the Guardian for this morning's blogging. If I can prise my son from this keyboard tonight, I might browse a bit further.
Monday, June 09, 2003
"Negotiations are taking place this week in Ghana to resolve an ongoing dispute between the government and an American mining company that is complicating an otherwise cooperative relationship between two countries with long historical ties", reports AllAfrica.com.
The problem, it seems is that "Valco is paying 1.1 U.S. cents per kilowatt-hour, while the cost of producing electricity in the country has risen to 6.5 cents. Kaiser disputes the government's cost calculation and says the price of 3.0 cents that Ghana is demanding would push the cost of producing aluminum above the world market price", and that "Ghana no longer has sufficient hydroelectric power to meet rising industrial and consumer demand and must generate electricity from thermal plants that burn petroleum, a more expensive process. In addition, Ghana has to import power from Cote d'Ivoire, Nduom said. The water level in Volta Lake has dropped to an unsustainably low level, and the lake needs healing, he said".
Don't they have sun and wind in Ghana? If US companies such as Valco want to be there using up the country's resources, wouldn't it be sensible to be more proactive in the generation of power?
But Valco appears to be in no position to provide investment; "One concern on the Ghanaian side is the fact that Kaiser Aluminum has been in bankruptcy for more than a year. According to Jones Day, the company's law firm, the action was caused by an "unusually weak aluminum market," as well as the cost of asbestos litigation and rising retiree pension and medical obligations. Kaiser has said the bankruptcy plays no role in the dispute with Ghana and will not affect its future in the country. The company's largest shareholder is Maxxam, a Houston holding company controlled by financier Charles Hurwitz".
The problem, it seems is that "Valco is paying 1.1 U.S. cents per kilowatt-hour, while the cost of producing electricity in the country has risen to 6.5 cents. Kaiser disputes the government's cost calculation and says the price of 3.0 cents that Ghana is demanding would push the cost of producing aluminum above the world market price", and that "Ghana no longer has sufficient hydroelectric power to meet rising industrial and consumer demand and must generate electricity from thermal plants that burn petroleum, a more expensive process. In addition, Ghana has to import power from Cote d'Ivoire, Nduom said. The water level in Volta Lake has dropped to an unsustainably low level, and the lake needs healing, he said".
Don't they have sun and wind in Ghana? If US companies such as Valco want to be there using up the country's resources, wouldn't it be sensible to be more proactive in the generation of power?
But Valco appears to be in no position to provide investment; "One concern on the Ghanaian side is the fact that Kaiser Aluminum has been in bankruptcy for more than a year. According to Jones Day, the company's law firm, the action was caused by an "unusually weak aluminum market," as well as the cost of asbestos litigation and rising retiree pension and medical obligations. Kaiser has said the bankruptcy plays no role in the dispute with Ghana and will not affect its future in the country. The company's largest shareholder is Maxxam, a Houston holding company controlled by financier Charles Hurwitz".
Sunday, June 08, 2003
Its really not surprising that the US government is trashing other people's countries, when it is doing the same thing to its own. As long as the dollars come rolling in, it doesn't seem to care that irreperable damage is being done to the environment. Here Jeffrey St. Clair discusses current moves to remove habitat protection:
"Then in May of 2002 the Bush administration, at the behest of the home construction industry and big agriculture, moved to rescind critical habitat designations and protections for 19 species of salmon and steelhead in California, Washington, Oregon and Idaho. The move covered fish in more than 150 different watersheds, clearing the way for timber sales, construction and water diversions.
The next move the administration made against critical habitat was to begin redrawing the existing habitat maps to exclude areas highly prized by oil and timber companies. Since 2001, the Bush administration has reduced the land area contained within critical habitat by more than 50 percent with no credible scientific basis to support the shrinkage.
The administration had practical motives. In coastal California, Norton ordered the BLM to speed up new oil and gas leases in roadless lands on the Los Padres National Forest near Santa Barbara, home to more than 20 endangered species, including the condor and steelhead trout. Where once the burden lay with the oil companies to prove that their operations would not harm these species, now it is reversed. Environmentalists must both prove that the listed species are present in the area and that they will be harmed by the drilling.
Next on the hit list was the coastal California gnatcatcher, whose protected habitat had already been shrunk to landfills and Interstate cloverleaves under Babbitt. Carrying water for California homebuilders, Norton lifted protections for the bird on 500,000 acres of habitat in order to "reevaluate its economic analysis" from the habitat protection plan released in 2000. The administration also moved to rescind protections for the tiny San Diego fairy shrimp.
If you want a case study on how endangered species flounder without benefit of critical habitat designations look no further than the mighty grizzly bear of the northern Rockies. The grizzly was listed as a threatened species in 1975, but it has never had its critical habitat designated because a 1978 amendment to the Endangered Species Act granted the Fish and Wildlife Service the discretion to avoid making the designation for species listed prior to that year. The provision was inserted in the law by members of the Wyoming congressional delegation at the request of the mining and timber industry.
Grizzly populations are lower now than they were when the bear was listed. Tens of thousands of acres of grizzly habitat have been destroyed by clearcutting, roads and mines. Within the next 10 years, grizzly experts predict that key habitat linkages between isolated bear populations will be effective destroyed, dooming the species to extinction across much of its range. Even biologists in the Bush administration now admit that grizzly population in the Cabinet-Yaak Mountains on the Idaho/Montana border warrants being upgraded from threatened to endangered.
Now the terrible of fate of the grizzly is about to be visited upon hundreds of other species thanks to the Bush administration's latest maneuver. "When opponents of the Endangered Species Act seek to gut the critical habitat provision, they are gut-shooting endangered species, in direct offense to national public policy and our system of majority rule," says Mike Bader, a grizzly specialist with the Alliance for the Wild Rockies. "In their zeal to fatten corporate profits, they seek to bankrupt our national heritage."
"Then in May of 2002 the Bush administration, at the behest of the home construction industry and big agriculture, moved to rescind critical habitat designations and protections for 19 species of salmon and steelhead in California, Washington, Oregon and Idaho. The move covered fish in more than 150 different watersheds, clearing the way for timber sales, construction and water diversions.
The next move the administration made against critical habitat was to begin redrawing the existing habitat maps to exclude areas highly prized by oil and timber companies. Since 2001, the Bush administration has reduced the land area contained within critical habitat by more than 50 percent with no credible scientific basis to support the shrinkage.
The administration had practical motives. In coastal California, Norton ordered the BLM to speed up new oil and gas leases in roadless lands on the Los Padres National Forest near Santa Barbara, home to more than 20 endangered species, including the condor and steelhead trout. Where once the burden lay with the oil companies to prove that their operations would not harm these species, now it is reversed. Environmentalists must both prove that the listed species are present in the area and that they will be harmed by the drilling.
Next on the hit list was the coastal California gnatcatcher, whose protected habitat had already been shrunk to landfills and Interstate cloverleaves under Babbitt. Carrying water for California homebuilders, Norton lifted protections for the bird on 500,000 acres of habitat in order to "reevaluate its economic analysis" from the habitat protection plan released in 2000. The administration also moved to rescind protections for the tiny San Diego fairy shrimp.
If you want a case study on how endangered species flounder without benefit of critical habitat designations look no further than the mighty grizzly bear of the northern Rockies. The grizzly was listed as a threatened species in 1975, but it has never had its critical habitat designated because a 1978 amendment to the Endangered Species Act granted the Fish and Wildlife Service the discretion to avoid making the designation for species listed prior to that year. The provision was inserted in the law by members of the Wyoming congressional delegation at the request of the mining and timber industry.
Grizzly populations are lower now than they were when the bear was listed. Tens of thousands of acres of grizzly habitat have been destroyed by clearcutting, roads and mines. Within the next 10 years, grizzly experts predict that key habitat linkages between isolated bear populations will be effective destroyed, dooming the species to extinction across much of its range. Even biologists in the Bush administration now admit that grizzly population in the Cabinet-Yaak Mountains on the Idaho/Montana border warrants being upgraded from threatened to endangered.
Now the terrible of fate of the grizzly is about to be visited upon hundreds of other species thanks to the Bush administration's latest maneuver. "When opponents of the Endangered Species Act seek to gut the critical habitat provision, they are gut-shooting endangered species, in direct offense to national public policy and our system of majority rule," says Mike Bader, a grizzly specialist with the Alliance for the Wild Rockies. "In their zeal to fatten corporate profits, they seek to bankrupt our national heritage."
"THEIR LIFE IS WAR. Their toys are guns. Their families are militias. Child soldiers are fixtures in ethnic conflicts worldwide. In Congo, boys as young as 8 fight, sometimes on the front lines". This is a heartbreaking story, courtesy of Revolutionary Moderation. What can be done? These children need to be shown that people can live peacefully together. The cycle of violence must be stopped. But I don't know how.
Some pertinent points about the goings on at last weekend's G8:
"Bush’s $15 billion AIDS fund was originally announced four months ago [See “Bush uses AIDS funding as an instrument of foreign policy” http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/feb2003/aids-f18.shtml] and has just been passed by Congress. As the World Socialist Web Site explained at the time, the $15 billion figure is spread over five years and next year only at most $2 billion will be made available. Although the law sets out a $3 billion a year provision the actual amount is subject to squeezes in aid budgets and will almost certainly be less. At the same time the White House has recommended cuts in other areas of US foreign aid spending—the US is already one of the lowest aid providers of all developed countries, donating only 0.12 percent of national income.
As AIDS campaigners have pointed out, a major beneficiary of the US initiative will be the American pharmaceutical industry. The US is blocking any trade deal that allows generic anti-AIDS drugs, costing a tenth or less of the drugs produced by the major corporations, to be widely sold in Africa and the underdeveloped countries. This initiative will enable the drug companies to continue selling at inflated prices.
Only $200 million from the total of Bush’s AIDS funding next year will go to the Global Fund to fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria that was set up through the United Nations in 2001. This is a mere 5 percent of the minimum needed by the Global Fund. Campaigners such as Global AIDS Alliance warn that the fund now faces a financial crisis and will be unable to meet even the limited commitments already made.
Most of the new US money will go to US bodies such as USAID and the Centers for Disease Control. They have no experience in dealing with HIV/AIDS in underdeveloped countries, but give a cover for US interventions. The real purpose of Bush’s AIDS proposal is certainly not a genuine humanitarian concern to tackle the AIDS pandemic. Instead the US funding will be targeted at a limited number of African countries where it can be used to boost US strategic interests".
Surely not?
And what about this: "Also demanded by the religious right is the stipulation that no funding goes to groups working with prostitutes and the inclusion of a provision that allows religious organisations to vet the anti-AIDS measures used by NGOs funded by the US", from the same article. So the women forced by poverty into prostitution, the women who need help, support, education, AIDS testing & treatment, are pushed out further onto the streets.
"Bush’s $15 billion AIDS fund was originally announced four months ago [See “Bush uses AIDS funding as an instrument of foreign policy” http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/feb2003/aids-f18.shtml] and has just been passed by Congress. As the World Socialist Web Site explained at the time, the $15 billion figure is spread over five years and next year only at most $2 billion will be made available. Although the law sets out a $3 billion a year provision the actual amount is subject to squeezes in aid budgets and will almost certainly be less. At the same time the White House has recommended cuts in other areas of US foreign aid spending—the US is already one of the lowest aid providers of all developed countries, donating only 0.12 percent of national income.
As AIDS campaigners have pointed out, a major beneficiary of the US initiative will be the American pharmaceutical industry. The US is blocking any trade deal that allows generic anti-AIDS drugs, costing a tenth or less of the drugs produced by the major corporations, to be widely sold in Africa and the underdeveloped countries. This initiative will enable the drug companies to continue selling at inflated prices.
Only $200 million from the total of Bush’s AIDS funding next year will go to the Global Fund to fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria that was set up through the United Nations in 2001. This is a mere 5 percent of the minimum needed by the Global Fund. Campaigners such as Global AIDS Alliance warn that the fund now faces a financial crisis and will be unable to meet even the limited commitments already made.
Most of the new US money will go to US bodies such as USAID and the Centers for Disease Control. They have no experience in dealing with HIV/AIDS in underdeveloped countries, but give a cover for US interventions. The real purpose of Bush’s AIDS proposal is certainly not a genuine humanitarian concern to tackle the AIDS pandemic. Instead the US funding will be targeted at a limited number of African countries where it can be used to boost US strategic interests".
Surely not?
And what about this: "Also demanded by the religious right is the stipulation that no funding goes to groups working with prostitutes and the inclusion of a provision that allows religious organisations to vet the anti-AIDS measures used by NGOs funded by the US", from the same article. So the women forced by poverty into prostitution, the women who need help, support, education, AIDS testing & treatment, are pushed out further onto the streets.
Friday, June 06, 2003
"For the first time since the Korean war the United States is to withdraw its troops from the border between North and South, a redeployment which raises the prospect of a US strike on Pyongyang's nuclear facilities.
The retreat from the 38th parallel - once described by Bill Clinton as "the scariest place on earth" - will take US soldiers out of the range of North Korean artillery", reports The Guardian.
The retreat from the 38th parallel - once described by Bill Clinton as "the scariest place on earth" - will take US soldiers out of the range of North Korean artillery", reports The Guardian.
John Pilger writes, "It was in Basra three years ago that I filmed hundreds of children ill and dying because they had been denied cancer treatment equipment and drugs under an embargo enforced with enthusiasm by Tony Blair. It was the one story Blair's court would never tell, because it put him, and his predecessors into the annals of perpetrartors of true crimes against humanity.
Up to July last year, $5.4billion in vital and mostly humanitarian supplies for the ordinary people of Iraq were obstructed by the United States, backed by Britain. All of it had been approved by the United Nations and paid for by Iraq. This epic scandal, verified with UN documents, was rarely reported. Professor Karol Sikora, head of the World Health Organisation's cancer treatment programme, who had been to the same hospitals in Basra that I saw, told me: "The excuse that certain drugs can be converted into weapons of mass destruction is ludicrous. I saw wards where dying people were even denied pain-killers."
Now come forward to a hot May day in 2003, and here is Blair in Basra - shirt open, a man of the troops, if not of the people - lifting a child into his arms, for the cameras, and just a few miles from where I watched toddler after toddler suffer for want of treatment that is standard in Britain and which was denied in the medieval siege approved and extended by Blair. Remember, the main reason that these life-saving drugs and equipment were blocked, which Professor Sikora and countless other experts ridiculed, was that essential drugs and even children's vaccines could be converted to weapons of mass destruction".
Blair should be ashamed.
Here is an interesting letter, via Truthout, written to the US Army by a Californian politician, questioning $500 million worth of contracts awarded to Halliburton for work in Iraq. Curiously, these contracts were arranged in 2001.
Up to July last year, $5.4billion in vital and mostly humanitarian supplies for the ordinary people of Iraq were obstructed by the United States, backed by Britain. All of it had been approved by the United Nations and paid for by Iraq. This epic scandal, verified with UN documents, was rarely reported. Professor Karol Sikora, head of the World Health Organisation's cancer treatment programme, who had been to the same hospitals in Basra that I saw, told me: "The excuse that certain drugs can be converted into weapons of mass destruction is ludicrous. I saw wards where dying people were even denied pain-killers."
Now come forward to a hot May day in 2003, and here is Blair in Basra - shirt open, a man of the troops, if not of the people - lifting a child into his arms, for the cameras, and just a few miles from where I watched toddler after toddler suffer for want of treatment that is standard in Britain and which was denied in the medieval siege approved and extended by Blair. Remember, the main reason that these life-saving drugs and equipment were blocked, which Professor Sikora and countless other experts ridiculed, was that essential drugs and even children's vaccines could be converted to weapons of mass destruction".
Blair should be ashamed.
Here is an interesting letter, via Truthout, written to the US Army by a Californian politician, questioning $500 million worth of contracts awarded to Halliburton for work in Iraq. Curiously, these contracts were arranged in 2001.
Thursday, June 05, 2003
Respect is due to Ray Gaston, vicar of All Hallows in Leeds. Standing by his principles, Ray could soon be swapping the pulpit for a prison cell. He is refusing to pay a fine levied on him by the courts for his part in an anti-war protest last year.
I'm not a Christian myself, but I'll give my support to a committed peace activist of any creed.
I'm not a Christian myself, but I'll give my support to a committed peace activist of any creed.
Wednesday, June 04, 2003
Read this interview with John Reid, leader of the House of Commons, about the allegations that Blair & his buddies exaggerated claims about Iraq's weaponry, from this morning's BBC Radio4 Today programme. It reminds me of the spoof interviews Bird & Fortune do (Brits will know who I mean). Amazing how politicians squirm & wriggle and do all they can to not answer questions.
Today the Guardian puts forward "Ten killer questions to put to Blair" over the war on Iraq and those missing WMD. There is now going to be an inquiry into the 'intelligence dossier' that Blair used to justify the war, although I must admit to being rather sceptical about the chances of any truth emerging. As the NY Times reports, "The problem lay not with intelligence professionals, but with the Bush and Blair administrations. They wanted a war, so they demanded reports supporting their case, while dismissing contrary evidence".
Tuesday, June 03, 2003
I was clearing out some stuff tonight, going through old boxes after decorating my bedroom and I found a folder of writing. So please forgive me a little self-indulgence if I share a poem with you that I wrote 7 years ago (where do the years go?).
Funeral for a kitten: Daisy 1/3/96- 30/4/96
She left on May-eve
hitched a ride with April's last shower;
she rests now beneath the hawthorn
wrapped in earth and purple silk.
Our whispered farewell was drowned in thunder.
It rained all the way home
canal banks
dripping
green;
the water shone,
circles within circles
in shades of grey.
The sky cried with us.
My cat gave birth to 3 kittens on my birthday. Two of them went to live with a woman in the next street when they were old enough, but little Daisy didn't make it. My son was only 6 at the time and I wanted to honour the first death he experienced. We took Daisy to one of our favourite spots down by the Leeds-Liverpool canal. The canal was once a busy thoroughfare, back in the days when Leeds was an important city for the textile industry. Now it is only used for pleasure crafts, but it has become an oasis of green running through the city. When you are walking along the towpath, as we often do with our dog, its easy to forget you are in the middle of a big city.
Funeral for a kitten: Daisy 1/3/96- 30/4/96
She left on May-eve
hitched a ride with April's last shower;
she rests now beneath the hawthorn
wrapped in earth and purple silk.
Our whispered farewell was drowned in thunder.
It rained all the way home
canal banks
dripping
green;
the water shone,
circles within circles
in shades of grey.
The sky cried with us.
My cat gave birth to 3 kittens on my birthday. Two of them went to live with a woman in the next street when they were old enough, but little Daisy didn't make it. My son was only 6 at the time and I wanted to honour the first death he experienced. We took Daisy to one of our favourite spots down by the Leeds-Liverpool canal. The canal was once a busy thoroughfare, back in the days when Leeds was an important city for the textile industry. Now it is only used for pleasure crafts, but it has become an oasis of green running through the city. When you are walking along the towpath, as we often do with our dog, its easy to forget you are in the middle of a big city.
Monday, June 02, 2003
I received an email today telling me that "The right-wing government of Denmark has already destroyed the formerly world-class wind energy sector in Denmark and is now threatening to demolish this beautiful, vibrant place". There is a petition you can sign to protest about the threatened destruction of Christiania.
The UN has now decided to send peacekeepers into Congo. But will that tackle the causes of the problems there?
"The most recent wave of fighting could be linked to the discovery - by none other than Bush’s old mates Bechtel who have worked hard since Mobutu’s demise to make themselves indispensable to DRC’s government - of vast stores of the mineral ore columbite-tantalite, better known as coltan. Coltan is vital to the manufacture of mobile phones, jet engines, night vision goggles, fibre optics, capacitors and computer chips. Coltan miners, working long hours in hazardous conditions, have no idea of the mineral’s value, but the rebel groups that employ them do, and hundreds of millions of dollars have been made from illicit sales to the US, Europe and Asia. Rather than making the huge investments required to mine coltan safely, corporations are all too happy to get knock down price ore directly from whichever group controls a particular mine, ensuring the situation remains volatile, and the price stays cheap.
And while the US has been preaching peace, the flow of arms and military training into the Congo, and its neighbouring countries has continued.
Last October, an independent panel of experts reported to the UN that 85 multinational companies based in Europe, the US and South Africa had illegally profited from the war in Congo. The panel’s investigations led to the conclusion that the war “has become mainly about access, control and trade” of minerals, predominantly coltan. Congo and the other 37 African states are all ‘benefiting’ from the US’s African Growth and Opportunity Act, introduced by Clinton and embraced by Bush, so who cares about a few war casualties as long as the minerals keep flowing. As Susan E. Rice former US Govt. Assistant Secretary for African Affairsplainly put it “The US is now Africa’s second largest industrial supplier. US companies have edged out European and Asian competition to complete major deals in the region.” In a world where profits are more important than people, western governments only seem to want to lend a helping hand to Africa when they are helping themselves to its resources", writes Schnews.
In Burma, the "military junta has isolated Aung San Suu Kyi, the opposition leader, and closed the offices of her National League for Democracy (NLD), after four people died in rioting at a political rally". In 1996 John Pilger made a documentary film about human rights abuses there. Not much has changed since then, with Aung San Suu Kyi still unable to take up her rightful place as elected leader.
"The most recent wave of fighting could be linked to the discovery - by none other than Bush’s old mates Bechtel who have worked hard since Mobutu’s demise to make themselves indispensable to DRC’s government - of vast stores of the mineral ore columbite-tantalite, better known as coltan. Coltan is vital to the manufacture of mobile phones, jet engines, night vision goggles, fibre optics, capacitors and computer chips. Coltan miners, working long hours in hazardous conditions, have no idea of the mineral’s value, but the rebel groups that employ them do, and hundreds of millions of dollars have been made from illicit sales to the US, Europe and Asia. Rather than making the huge investments required to mine coltan safely, corporations are all too happy to get knock down price ore directly from whichever group controls a particular mine, ensuring the situation remains volatile, and the price stays cheap.
And while the US has been preaching peace, the flow of arms and military training into the Congo, and its neighbouring countries has continued.
Last October, an independent panel of experts reported to the UN that 85 multinational companies based in Europe, the US and South Africa had illegally profited from the war in Congo. The panel’s investigations led to the conclusion that the war “has become mainly about access, control and trade” of minerals, predominantly coltan. Congo and the other 37 African states are all ‘benefiting’ from the US’s African Growth and Opportunity Act, introduced by Clinton and embraced by Bush, so who cares about a few war casualties as long as the minerals keep flowing. As Susan E. Rice former US Govt. Assistant Secretary for African Affairsplainly put it “The US is now Africa’s second largest industrial supplier. US companies have edged out European and Asian competition to complete major deals in the region.” In a world where profits are more important than people, western governments only seem to want to lend a helping hand to Africa when they are helping themselves to its resources", writes Schnews.
In Burma, the "military junta has isolated Aung San Suu Kyi, the opposition leader, and closed the offices of her National League for Democracy (NLD), after four people died in rioting at a political rally". In 1996 John Pilger made a documentary film about human rights abuses there. Not much has changed since then, with Aung San Suu Kyi still unable to take up her rightful place as elected leader.
