Good article over here on Culture Change
Abundant evidence suggests industrial civilization must be "downsized" to curb damage to the ecosphere by the "technosphere." Trends behind this prospect include prodigious population growth, urbanization, cultural dependence upon ravenous use of fossil fuels and other nonrenewable resources, consequent air pollution, and global climate change. Despite prolonged Cold War distraction and entrenched faith that technology could always enlarge carrying capacity, these trends were well publicized. But there remain eminent writers who persist in denying that human carrying capacity (Earth's maximum sustainable human load) has now been or ever will be exceeded. Denials of ecological limits resemble anosognosia (inability of stroke patients to recognize their paralysis). Some denial literature resembles their confabulations (elaborately unreal stories concocted as rationalizations). Denial by opponents of human ecology seems to be a way of coping with an insufferable contradiction between past convictions and present circumstances, a defense against intolerable anomalous information. More
Friday, August 07, 2009
Thursday, August 06, 2009
Harry Patch his epitaph
Thousands of gallons of sentimental outpourings today from the corporate media about the nobility and courage of Harry Patch, the last British Great War veteran from the trenches. The journalists almost, but not quite, manage to quote his feelings about the futility of war. You can hear his words sticking in their throats. His comrade in experience, Henry Allingham, captured the philosophy of the old soldier, distilled from the charnel-house of the trenches into the line, "War is stupid. Nobody wins".
That is the only wisdom that a soldier can bring back from war. Mostly, they do not talk about it, they just shut it away in a locked tin trunk in the attic of their consciousness, knowing that people who have not seen war will not understand their views, and those who have seen war do not need to hear them.
The world does not want to know what the old soldiers know because the near-universal belief that war is inevitable, an irremovable part of political reality.
Three thousand years ago, the necessity of the regular and orderly sacrifice of human beings to propitiate the gods was also a universal belief. Then some began to question it. It began with those like Abraham, or like Kaveh, who had handed over their sons and daughters to the priests, and watched the golden knife slash the neck of their loved ones. They began to question the absolute wisdom of the priests. They began to think independently of the masses and the respected leaders of the time. They began to talk. Many of them would have been arrested for thinking irreligious thoughts, and no doubt many of the sceptics were sacrificed to the gods in their turn. The priests would have scorned them, and castigated them for undermining the very fabric of civilisation. "The gods will kill us if we do not give them the sacrifices that are due to them". Kings would have passed decrees outlawing any critics of human sacrifice.
But in the end, human sensibility defeated the artificial reasoning of the priesthood, and by the 6th century BC most human civilisations had got over the idea of the necessity of human sacrifice. But just as the old gods survived into Christianity redressed as saints, so also human sacrifice survives in the guise of warfare. Instead of ritualised killing of one or two a week, thousands of young men and women are initiated into the orderly rituals of the military parade, and then slaughtered in the chaotic mess of battle. Instead of being immolated on the altar of the nation's god, they are sacrificed on the altar of national security. Instead of obeying the psychotic ideation of some crazed arch-priest, they obey the orders stemming from the projected belief of George W Bush and Tony Blair that the demon Saddam Hussein was hiding weapons of mass destruction.
It doesn't have to be like this. As Harry and Henry said, wars always end in talks. Real talks can prevent war. Frameworks can be set up that make it more difficult for dictators to emerge. Separatist aspirations, which are behind about one in three of the wars burning in the world at the moment, can be discussed under the aegis and authority of the United Nations.
It will take a long time to break the power of the military industrial complex, just as it took a long time to prise the sacrificial knife out of the hand of the priests. It is a long journey to make, but the longest journey begins with a single step, and that first step is for us to stop giving head room to the belief that war is inevitable.
Let this be the epitaph of Henry Allingham and Harry Patch and all their comrades:
That is the only wisdom that a soldier can bring back from war. Mostly, they do not talk about it, they just shut it away in a locked tin trunk in the attic of their consciousness, knowing that people who have not seen war will not understand their views, and those who have seen war do not need to hear them.
The world does not want to know what the old soldiers know because the near-universal belief that war is inevitable, an irremovable part of political reality.
Three thousand years ago, the necessity of the regular and orderly sacrifice of human beings to propitiate the gods was also a universal belief. Then some began to question it. It began with those like Abraham, or like Kaveh, who had handed over their sons and daughters to the priests, and watched the golden knife slash the neck of their loved ones. They began to question the absolute wisdom of the priests. They began to think independently of the masses and the respected leaders of the time. They began to talk. Many of them would have been arrested for thinking irreligious thoughts, and no doubt many of the sceptics were sacrificed to the gods in their turn. The priests would have scorned them, and castigated them for undermining the very fabric of civilisation. "The gods will kill us if we do not give them the sacrifices that are due to them". Kings would have passed decrees outlawing any critics of human sacrifice.
But in the end, human sensibility defeated the artificial reasoning of the priesthood, and by the 6th century BC most human civilisations had got over the idea of the necessity of human sacrifice. But just as the old gods survived into Christianity redressed as saints, so also human sacrifice survives in the guise of warfare. Instead of ritualised killing of one or two a week, thousands of young men and women are initiated into the orderly rituals of the military parade, and then slaughtered in the chaotic mess of battle. Instead of being immolated on the altar of the nation's god, they are sacrificed on the altar of national security. Instead of obeying the psychotic ideation of some crazed arch-priest, they obey the orders stemming from the projected belief of George W Bush and Tony Blair that the demon Saddam Hussein was hiding weapons of mass destruction.
It doesn't have to be like this. As Harry and Henry said, wars always end in talks. Real talks can prevent war. Frameworks can be set up that make it more difficult for dictators to emerge. Separatist aspirations, which are behind about one in three of the wars burning in the world at the moment, can be discussed under the aegis and authority of the United Nations.
It will take a long time to break the power of the military industrial complex, just as it took a long time to prise the sacrificial knife out of the hand of the priests. It is a long journey to make, but the longest journey begins with a single step, and that first step is for us to stop giving head room to the belief that war is inevitable.
Let this be the epitaph of Henry Allingham and Harry Patch and all their comrades:
"War is stupid. Nobody wins".
Wednesday, August 05, 2009
To keep bees or not to keep bees?
The now buzz is about Bees. Bees are the bees knees. Someone has designed a Beehaus.
Government has given £10 million for bee research.
I'm all for more beekeepers. (It's not for me though - I am having enough trouble with slugs and blight, I don't want the death of 50,000 bees on my conscience).
However, I will provide a habitat for masonry bees, who seem to do most of the work around here anyway.
But there is an elephant in the hive that nobody is talking about.
Colony Collapse Disorder. Big threat to our honey bees, and if they go, big losses in agriculture due to lack of pollination.
What causes CCD? Nobody knows. But we have a clue: it began in the mid 1990s, after the introduction of the Neonicotinoid pesticides by Bayer. This does not "prove" anything. Not a thing, because in science, nothing is ever proven, only not-yet disproven. So Bayer will bay that "there is no proof that its product is responsible for CCD" and Government will grunt its assent, its snout comfortably in the trough of corporate generosity.
It took 20 years and 20,000 to get everyone to agree that smoking causes lung cancer. We do not have that kind of time.
So we need to do an experiment. Here's what to do:
Pull the neonicotinoids off the market. Recall all present stocks. And see what happens to the bees. If they recover, if CCD becomes a thing of the past, Bayer has some explaining to do. If CCD continues, woops, sorry Mr Bayer, here is your licence back, extended to cover the hiatus.
There is some evidence that banning neonicotinoids can help recovery. France banned some in 1999.
If so, recovery took a long time, but this would be because other pesticides are still operative, and because CCD is a systems failure, not a single cause and effect problem. Neo-nics affect bees' immune systems as well as their nervous systems, so their resistance to varroa goes down, so varroa is more plentiful, so more hives get infected, so Bayer and the DEFRA-duffers can put it all down to varroa or anything rather than a money-making product.
So is it reasonable to ban neonicotinoids? - yes. Liable to happen in the UK? - no.
Because Government officers and Ministers would rather wipe all of nature 100% totally and completely off the face of the earth, than be seen to be acting against the commercial interests of a big corporation.
Think that line is OTT? Then prove me wrong. Please.
Government has given £10 million for bee research.
I'm all for more beekeepers. (It's not for me though - I am having enough trouble with slugs and blight, I don't want the death of 50,000 bees on my conscience).
However, I will provide a habitat for masonry bees, who seem to do most of the work around here anyway.
But there is an elephant in the hive that nobody is talking about.
Colony Collapse Disorder. Big threat to our honey bees, and if they go, big losses in agriculture due to lack of pollination.
What causes CCD? Nobody knows. But we have a clue: it began in the mid 1990s, after the introduction of the Neonicotinoid pesticides by Bayer. This does not "prove" anything. Not a thing, because in science, nothing is ever proven, only not-yet disproven. So Bayer will bay that "there is no proof that its product is responsible for CCD" and Government will grunt its assent, its snout comfortably in the trough of corporate generosity.
It took 20 years and 20,000 to get everyone to agree that smoking causes lung cancer. We do not have that kind of time.
So we need to do an experiment. Here's what to do:
Pull the neonicotinoids off the market. Recall all present stocks. And see what happens to the bees. If they recover, if CCD becomes a thing of the past, Bayer has some explaining to do. If CCD continues, woops, sorry Mr Bayer, here is your licence back, extended to cover the hiatus.
There is some evidence that banning neonicotinoids can help recovery. France banned some in 1999.
If so, recovery took a long time, but this would be because other pesticides are still operative, and because CCD is a systems failure, not a single cause and effect problem. Neo-nics affect bees' immune systems as well as their nervous systems, so their resistance to varroa goes down, so varroa is more plentiful, so more hives get infected, so Bayer and the DEFRA-duffers can put it all down to varroa or anything rather than a money-making product.
So is it reasonable to ban neonicotinoids? - yes. Liable to happen in the UK? - no.
Because Government officers and Ministers would rather wipe all of nature 100% totally and completely off the face of the earth, than be seen to be acting against the commercial interests of a big corporation.
Think that line is OTT? Then prove me wrong. Please.
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
Peak Oil - someone has finally noticed there is an elephant in the room.
The Independent yesterday gave its front page over to Peak Oil. Fair play to them for bringing it into public consciousness - a mere 53 years after Hubbert first raised the science of oil field depletion. As Eyore said, Give Rabbit time, and he'll always get the answer".
Or if you prefer, it is 27 years since the Club of Rome published "Limits to Growth".
Jeremy Leggett, writing in the Indie, quotes Gillian Tett, writing about how the financial experts failed to notice what was going on with the derivatives market. Elites exert "ideological domination" to maintain power, and determine what can be discussed in the public sphere, and what will be dismissed as idealistic woolly hatted conspiracy theory nonsense.
For 30 years the Green Party have been speaking sweet reason about the need to challenge the world's manic belief that it is possible to expand forever in a limited space. We have to continue with this reason, but at the same time, we have to appreciate that our target audience of opinion formers is not in fact driven by reason, but by irrational short term self interest. The thing that will bring about change is not intellectual argument, but reality. The limits to growth will only be generally appreciated when the train actually crashes into the buffers at the end of the track.
.
Or if you prefer, it is 27 years since the Club of Rome published "Limits to Growth".
Jeremy Leggett, writing in the Indie, quotes Gillian Tett, writing about how the financial experts failed to notice what was going on with the derivatives market. Elites exert "ideological domination" to maintain power, and determine what can be discussed in the public sphere, and what will be dismissed as idealistic woolly hatted conspiracy theory nonsense.
For 30 years the Green Party have been speaking sweet reason about the need to challenge the world's manic belief that it is possible to expand forever in a limited space. We have to continue with this reason, but at the same time, we have to appreciate that our target audience of opinion formers is not in fact driven by reason, but by irrational short term self interest. The thing that will bring about change is not intellectual argument, but reality. The limits to growth will only be generally appreciated when the train actually crashes into the buffers at the end of the track.
Monday, August 03, 2009
BGG Road Closure facts
BIG GREEN GATHERING Road Closure Order dated 20th July
When is a road closure not a road closure?
The injunction to stop the Big Green Gathering cited the fact that the Big Green Gathering could not gain a Road Closure order in time for the event, despite the fact that the Highways Department had told the Big Green Gathering Chair, Brig Oubridge that it would be done. On Tuesday, 28th July, after the Big Green Gathering had been forced to cancel the event, a staff member found the Road Closure Order by a hedge on the Cheddar Road and subsequently another was found still pinned to a gatepost. Other signs appeared to have been taken down and evidence of the silver tape was still in place.
The Big Green Gathering surrendered its licence on the advice of its lawyers because it believed that it was impossible to obtain a road closure order in the time available. It now appears that the order was in place from 20th July 2009. We find it difficult to understand why the Council and the police did not check to ensure that the order had not been made before they issued their intentions to go to court at 6.54 p.m. on Friday, 24th July 2009. The Big Green Gathering on the other hand had no way of contacting the Highways Authority after the offices had closed for the weekend. The Big Green Gathering also finds it strange that no witness statement was received from the Highways Authority in support of the assertion that there was no road closure order in place. A copy of the road closure order appears below.
The Somerset County Council highways department are now saying that this was not a road closure order. "These physical notices are purely for information purposes and are adverts for proposed road closures and temporary speed limits, rather then a copy of a Temporary Traffic Order. They were required as part of the procedure for temporary road closure and restrictions."
The Big Green Gathering organisers recognise the tremendous disappointment this has caused to those who bought tickets, traders and the locals. The Big Green Gathering normally brings in the order of £2million to the local economy and many local businesses are suffering in these times of recession because of the cancellation of the festival. The BGG had already spent over £200,000 on police, security, infrastructure and site wages.
Ends: further information Penny Kemp 07711 760692
Hugo Charlton 07830 0349077
Photos of the road traffic order in situ are available
SOMERSET COUNTY COUNCIL
THE COUNTY OF SOMERSET (BIG GREEN GATHERING 2009)
(TEMPORARY TRAFFIC RESTRICTIONS) TEMPORARY NOTICE 2009
THE SOMERSET COUNTY COUNCIL in exercise of its powers under Section 14-16 of the Road Traffic regulation Act 1984 as amended, and of all other enabling powers, hereby makes the following Temporary Notice:-
1. This Notice shall come into operation on Monday 26th July 2009 and will continue in force until Monday 3rd August 2009.
The Following restrictions and prohibitions are made:-
A) To prohibit all traffic from proceeding along Nordrach Lane, from its junction with the B3134 to its junction with Cheddar Road, and Cheddar Road, from its junction with Nordrach Lane to its junction with the B3134
B) Temporary restriction of speed to 40mph on the B3134 from 500 meters South East of the junction with the B3371 in a North Westerly direction for a distance along said length of road of 2500 meters.
C) Temporary Prohibition of Waiting and Stopping of Vehicles on the B3134 from its junction with Old Bristol Road to its junction with Ubley Drove and the B3371 from its junction with the B3134 for a distance of 1250 metres.
These prohibitions are made by reason of the likelihood of danger to the public or of damage to the highway.
S Davidson-Grant
Corporate Director for the Environment
Dated the 20th July 2009
RL: So it looks as if there was incompetence and poor communication within and between the authorities. If they intended to help the BGG to take place, they would have done this competently. The fact that they did not supports the theory that they were minded to block the festival.
When is a road closure not a road closure?
The injunction to stop the Big Green Gathering cited the fact that the Big Green Gathering could not gain a Road Closure order in time for the event, despite the fact that the Highways Department had told the Big Green Gathering Chair, Brig Oubridge that it would be done. On Tuesday, 28th July, after the Big Green Gathering had been forced to cancel the event, a staff member found the Road Closure Order by a hedge on the Cheddar Road and subsequently another was found still pinned to a gatepost. Other signs appeared to have been taken down and evidence of the silver tape was still in place.
The Big Green Gathering surrendered its licence on the advice of its lawyers because it believed that it was impossible to obtain a road closure order in the time available. It now appears that the order was in place from 20th July 2009. We find it difficult to understand why the Council and the police did not check to ensure that the order had not been made before they issued their intentions to go to court at 6.54 p.m. on Friday, 24th July 2009. The Big Green Gathering on the other hand had no way of contacting the Highways Authority after the offices had closed for the weekend. The Big Green Gathering also finds it strange that no witness statement was received from the Highways Authority in support of the assertion that there was no road closure order in place. A copy of the road closure order appears below.
The Somerset County Council highways department are now saying that this was not a road closure order. "These physical notices are purely for information purposes and are adverts for proposed road closures and temporary speed limits, rather then a copy of a Temporary Traffic Order. They were required as part of the procedure for temporary road closure and restrictions."
The Big Green Gathering organisers recognise the tremendous disappointment this has caused to those who bought tickets, traders and the locals. The Big Green Gathering normally brings in the order of £2million to the local economy and many local businesses are suffering in these times of recession because of the cancellation of the festival. The BGG had already spent over £200,000 on police, security, infrastructure and site wages.
Ends: further information Penny Kemp 07711 760692
Hugo Charlton 07830 0349077
Photos of the road traffic order in situ are available
SOMERSET COUNTY COUNCIL
THE COUNTY OF SOMERSET (BIG GREEN GATHERING 2009)
(TEMPORARY TRAFFIC RESTRICTIONS) TEMPORARY NOTICE 2009
THE SOMERSET COUNTY COUNCIL in exercise of its powers under Section 14-16 of the Road Traffic regulation Act 1984 as amended, and of all other enabling powers, hereby makes the following Temporary Notice:-
1. This Notice shall come into operation on Monday 26th July 2009 and will continue in force until Monday 3rd August 2009.
The Following restrictions and prohibitions are made:-
A) To prohibit all traffic from proceeding along Nordrach Lane, from its junction with the B3134 to its junction with Cheddar Road, and Cheddar Road, from its junction with Nordrach Lane to its junction with the B3134
B) Temporary restriction of speed to 40mph on the B3134 from 500 meters South East of the junction with the B3371 in a North Westerly direction for a distance along said length of road of 2500 meters.
C) Temporary Prohibition of Waiting and Stopping of Vehicles on the B3134 from its junction with Old Bristol Road to its junction with Ubley Drove and the B3371 from its junction with the B3134 for a distance of 1250 metres.
These prohibitions are made by reason of the likelihood of danger to the public or of damage to the highway.
S Davidson-Grant
Corporate Director for the Environment
Dated the 20th July 2009
RL: So it looks as if there was incompetence and poor communication within and between the authorities. If they intended to help the BGG to take place, they would have done this competently. The fact that they did not supports the theory that they were minded to block the festival.
How about BBC catering for elders too?
Miss C McLoughlin CBE
Chair
Age Concern
FREEPOST (SWB 30375)
Ashburton
Devon
TQ13 7ZZ
Would it not be useful to older people if they had a regular weekly magazine programme, say on Radio 4 – devoted to issues affecting elders, containing a living history slot, where they can reminisce about life in past decades.
I am a GP, and my home visits have made me aware of how important broadcast media are to elders, as a form of company. As a GP, I often touch on people's individual personal history, and they are more than eager to talk, but at greater length than I can afford.
The effect of a dedicated programme for older people would be to increase self esteem among the elders generally. "We cannot be that useless, if they give us an hour of radio a week". After all, in cultures where older people are valued - as in Brittany - they are valued and listened to for their experience. A dedicated, regular radio programme would be the modern equivalent of that social respect.
For people who actually get on the programme, there is the kudos of being famous for a few days, which would be a tremendous emotional boost for them.
The living history part of the programme would elicit responses like "Yes, I remember that and what's more, we used to ...", so it would become self sustaining. The resulting material would create an important living history archive.
Who knows? Some young people might listen in, to discover that we did not always have traffic jams and central heating.
Over the years, I have put this proposal to local (Bristol) BBC on more than one occasion. They respond with a list of programmes that touch on age related matters, but they probably a worry that such a programme might offend younger people, who they need to attract for marketing reasons. I tried to put it to Joan Bakewell, but was unable to find a mailing address for her, and an email was returned by her office with a note to say that it was unread.
The idea will have to be fought for, but clearly it should be a part of the BBCs brief to "educate, inform and entertain" all parts of society.
I hope you find this of interest.
Regards
Dr Richard Lawson
Chair
Age Concern
FREEPOST (SWB 30375)
Ashburton
Devon
TQ13 7ZZ
Would it not be useful to older people if they had a regular weekly magazine programme, say on Radio 4 – devoted to issues affecting elders, containing a living history slot, where they can reminisce about life in past decades.
I am a GP, and my home visits have made me aware of how important broadcast media are to elders, as a form of company. As a GP, I often touch on people's individual personal history, and they are more than eager to talk, but at greater length than I can afford.
The effect of a dedicated programme for older people would be to increase self esteem among the elders generally. "We cannot be that useless, if they give us an hour of radio a week". After all, in cultures where older people are valued - as in Brittany - they are valued and listened to for their experience. A dedicated, regular radio programme would be the modern equivalent of that social respect.
For people who actually get on the programme, there is the kudos of being famous for a few days, which would be a tremendous emotional boost for them.
The living history part of the programme would elicit responses like "Yes, I remember that and what's more, we used to ...", so it would become self sustaining. The resulting material would create an important living history archive.
Who knows? Some young people might listen in, to discover that we did not always have traffic jams and central heating.
Over the years, I have put this proposal to local (Bristol) BBC on more than one occasion. They respond with a list of programmes that touch on age related matters, but they probably a worry that such a programme might offend younger people, who they need to attract for marketing reasons. I tried to put it to Joan Bakewell, but was unable to find a mailing address for her, and an email was returned by her office with a note to say that it was unread.
The idea will have to be fought for, but clearly it should be a part of the BBCs brief to "educate, inform and entertain" all parts of society.
I hope you find this of interest.
Regards
Dr Richard Lawson
Sunday, August 02, 2009
BBC NEWS: UK troops 'given too many tasks'
BBC NEWS UK troops 'given too many tasks': "The House of Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee says 'mission creep' had brought too many responsibilities, including fighting the drugs trade...The report said Britain's deployment to Helmand province was "undermined by unrealistic planning at senior levels, poor co-ordination between Whitehall departments and crucially a failure to provide the military with clear direction"...In the report Mr Gapes [the MP Select Committee Chairman] said the UK had taken on a "poisoned chalice" by assuming a lead role in counter-narcotics in partnership with the Afghan government.
He said the task had been "an impossible job for one country to do" and said it should be handed over to the International Security Assistance Force and the United Nations.
He added: "This issue of counter-narcotics, the heroin poppies, is a serious problem but it is not the main issue that we face in Afghanistan.
"The main issue is the security and the threat coming from, once again, becoming a terrorist base." "
Sorry, Mr Gapes, you and your "influential committee" are wrong, wrong and thrice wrong.
Narcotics is the key issue.
It is at the root of the insurgency, and hence security, since the Taliban are funded by narcotics, and it is at the root of corruption, which is one of the main complaints that ordinary Afghanis feel about the present disastrous situation.
And what do the Tories, the main Opposition have to say? Liam Fox wants it all to be more "joined up". Great.
Narcotics is the elephant in the room. It is amazing that all these politicians, with all the resources at their disposal, are unable to see that the way to join up all the NATO aims - security, neutralising Al-Qaeda, nation building, corruption, human rights, and getting the hell out of Afghanistan - all hinge on controlling the narcotics trade.
We get to control the trade by becoming the monopoly purchaser of the poppy crop, medicalising it and using it to relieve terminal pain in Africa. For more on this, hit the opium label below.
The Green Party has been advocating this policy, both in the UK and in Europe. The European Parliament has taken it up, as have the Afghan Red Crescent, the Italian Red Cross, and the International Council on Security and Development.
However, it is not something that the serried ranks of KK pundits, aka The Meejah, can get their collective brain around. If any MP in Westminster is even dimly aware of it, he has not spoken of it, and if he has spoken of it, it has not been reported.
Shame on the Government and the official Opposition. Shame on the shame ridden MPs. Shame on this ignorant and backward nation of ours, that invades another country without thinking things through. Shame on the lily livered cadres of journalists who preside over the so-called Public Debate.
The only way that the light of reason is going to shine again in Britain is after a process of radical reform of our entire political and economic system.
Go here to find what happens when farmers stop growing opium.
He said the task had been "an impossible job for one country to do" and said it should be handed over to the International Security Assistance Force and the United Nations.
He added: "This issue of counter-narcotics, the heroin poppies, is a serious problem but it is not the main issue that we face in Afghanistan.
"The main issue is the security and the threat coming from, once again, becoming a terrorist base." "
Sorry, Mr Gapes, you and your "influential committee" are wrong, wrong and thrice wrong.
Narcotics is the key issue.
It is at the root of the insurgency, and hence security, since the Taliban are funded by narcotics, and it is at the root of corruption, which is one of the main complaints that ordinary Afghanis feel about the present disastrous situation.
And what do the Tories, the main Opposition have to say? Liam Fox wants it all to be more "joined up". Great.
Narcotics is the elephant in the room. It is amazing that all these politicians, with all the resources at their disposal, are unable to see that the way to join up all the NATO aims - security, neutralising Al-Qaeda, nation building, corruption, human rights, and getting the hell out of Afghanistan - all hinge on controlling the narcotics trade.
We get to control the trade by becoming the monopoly purchaser of the poppy crop, medicalising it and using it to relieve terminal pain in Africa. For more on this, hit the opium label below.
The Green Party has been advocating this policy, both in the UK and in Europe. The European Parliament has taken it up, as have the Afghan Red Crescent, the Italian Red Cross, and the International Council on Security and Development.
However, it is not something that the serried ranks of KK pundits, aka The Meejah, can get their collective brain around. If any MP in Westminster is even dimly aware of it, he has not spoken of it, and if he has spoken of it, it has not been reported.
Shame on the Government and the official Opposition. Shame on the shame ridden MPs. Shame on this ignorant and backward nation of ours, that invades another country without thinking things through. Shame on the lily livered cadres of journalists who preside over the so-called Public Debate.
The only way that the light of reason is going to shine again in Britain is after a process of radical reform of our entire political and economic system.
Go here to find what happens when farmers stop growing opium.
Saturday, August 01, 2009
BGG: Inspector should swear affidavit to banish doubt
I have just sent this to Chief Inspector Paul Richards, who was involved in bringing down the BGG.
Dear Chief Inspector Richards
The Big Green Gathering (BGG) is a long-established, peaceful and principled festival with a strong emphasis on sustainability. This year's Gathering has been cancelled, to the inconvenience and frustration of many would-be attendees, and to the loss of many in Somerset who would have profited from the Gathering.
I am aware of the objections put by the Licensing Authority. When looked at closely, each of these objections becomes rather insubstantial. There has been an increasing insistence by the Licensing Authority year on year on ever-more expensive security, despite the historic lack of criminal activity at the BGG. This leads some to entertain the notion that the authorities would rather that the BGG did not take place at all.
It is within this context that an allegation by one witness has gained currency. The allegation is that you personally admitted after a meeting that you had been under political pressure to block the BGG this year.
A correspondent tells me that you have denied making this statement. The witness nevertheless stands by his or her statement.
I suggest that the most effective way for you to terminate the perception that A&S police received some kind of political pressure is for you to issue an affidavit to the effect that you have never in any way, neither by hint, innuendo, instruction or command, from politicians whether elected members of Parliament, Ministers, Government officials, or any other agent of government, encountered any encouragement, incentive or pressure to block, hinder, or bring about an injunction on the BGG 2009.
In that way, the perception that this ban on the festival would be banished from all but the most unreasonable minds.
I an most grateful to you for considering this suggestion, and await your reply with interest.
Yours sincerely
Richard Lawson
Dear Chief Inspector Richards
The Big Green Gathering (BGG) is a long-established, peaceful and principled festival with a strong emphasis on sustainability. This year's Gathering has been cancelled, to the inconvenience and frustration of many would-be attendees, and to the loss of many in Somerset who would have profited from the Gathering.
I am aware of the objections put by the Licensing Authority. When looked at closely, each of these objections becomes rather insubstantial. There has been an increasing insistence by the Licensing Authority year on year on ever-more expensive security, despite the historic lack of criminal activity at the BGG. This leads some to entertain the notion that the authorities would rather that the BGG did not take place at all.
It is within this context that an allegation by one witness has gained currency. The allegation is that you personally admitted after a meeting that you had been under political pressure to block the BGG this year.
A correspondent tells me that you have denied making this statement. The witness nevertheless stands by his or her statement.
I suggest that the most effective way for you to terminate the perception that A&S police received some kind of political pressure is for you to issue an affidavit to the effect that you have never in any way, neither by hint, innuendo, instruction or command, from politicians whether elected members of Parliament, Ministers, Government officials, or any other agent of government, encountered any encouragement, incentive or pressure to block, hinder, or bring about an injunction on the BGG 2009.
In that way, the perception that this ban on the festival would be banished from all but the most unreasonable minds.
I an most grateful to you for considering this suggestion, and await your reply with interest.
Yours sincerely
Richard Lawson
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
