marahfreedom

Archive for January 19th, 2012|Daily archive page

Ban Ki-moon – A Record Of Failure And Betrayal – by Stephen Lendman – 20th September 2011

In Ethics, Justice, Law, Socialism, Technology on January 19, 2012 at 4:12 pm
The UN Charter’s Preamble states: “WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED — to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and — to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and — to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and — to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom….” The body affirms international support for tolerance, peace and security, and resolve to promote universal economic and social advancement.
However, since its 1945 founding, it’s failed on all counts, even though some of its agencies (like UNICEF, WFP, UNHCR and UNESCO) at times provide aid in areas of health, education, food assistance, refugees, social development and more. It’s never enough though, timely, or with resolve to support troubled people adequately in times of need. Moreover, global wars raged every year post-WW II to the present. The UN’s been unable or disinterested in stopping them. One of its fatal flaws is structure, hamstrung by its dominant member, America. It can and does veto measures other member states support, notably when contrary to its imperial interests. As a result, no action was taken when Indonesia invaded East Timor in 1975. Hundreds of thousands were slaughtered in a secretly US-authorized aggression. Its TNI forces were armed, funded and supported by Washington. In 1999, it was impotent again after East Timor voted for independence, after which TNI forces attacked and slaughtered thousands more. During South Africa’s border wars and invasion of Namibia in the 1960s and 70s, it was sidelined, as well as during a 36-year Guatemala state-sponsored genocide against its indigenous Mayan majority, following the CIA’s ouster of democratically elected Jacobo Arbenz Guzman. Dozens of other examples reveal a dismal record of failure and betrayal of its high-sounding principles and mandate to enforce them. It didn’t earlier or now, including by deploying Blue Helmets as peacekeepers. In fact, they’re hostile occupiers, serving imperial interests in Haiti, South Lebanon, Rwanda, Kosovo, Bosnia, DRC Congo, Sudan, Somalia, various other countries, and its initial UN Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) since 1948, failing to bring peace to Palestine. Yet it’s still there, performing no active role, opposing the interests of people they’re sworn to protect. During his tenure as Secretary-General, Kofi Annan (January 1, 1997 – December 31, 2006) was little more than an imperial tool, never achieving or working for peace anywhere. He never condemned or acted to end the devastating economic sanctions against Iraqis that killed up to 1.5 million defenseless men, women and children. He didn’t use his mandate to denounce Washington’s lawless 2003 war. No matter that it’s based on lies to permit slaughtering hundreds of thousands more and be able to plunder another occupied country. He was silent while war raged in Afghanistan and still does without end. He backed or failed to act against Israel’s illegal occupation, its worst crimes against Palestine, and its illegal 2006 Lebanon war. He took no action to denounce Washington’s failed attempts to oust Hugo Chavez, and showed a disturbing indifference to the pain and suffering of his own people throughout the continent of his birth. Instead, he dutifully served Washington, other dominant powers, and corporate predation of Africa’s riches and elsewhere. His entire tenure was a testimony to failure and betrayal. So is Ban Ki-moon’s since becoming Secretary-General on January 1, 2007. Ever since, he’s been a co-conspirator in war crimes and other abuses. In fact, one of his first acts was to reverse the UN’s longstanding opposition to capital punishment. It’s a barbaric practice often sentencing innocent people to death, notably in America. At the time, he dismissively said whether or not to enforce it “is for each and every member State to decide,” instead of forthrightly condemning it. Nor did his restructuring plan address the Security Council’s illegitimate veto power, giving one nation like America authority over all others. It’s abused the practice ever since.
Instead, it’s high time the body reflected majority rule, giving all nations equal say on issues affecting everyone. Ban’s overall silence, inaction, and support for wrong over right speak volumes. In fact, despite its own often deplorable record, Human Rights Watch (HRW) acknowledged Ban’s shamelessness. Its “World Report 2011: A Facade of Action” included criticism of his “quiet diplomacy facade of (in)action” for not taking forceful steps when needed. HRW’s executive director Kenneth Roth criticized his “use of dialogue and cooperation in lieu of public pressure….on abusive governments,” notably America and its imperial partners. In fact, said Roth, “(f)ar from condemning repression, Ban sometimes (goes) out of his way to portray repressive governments in a positive light.” He meant third world despots, not the world’s leading human rights abuser, waging lawless imperial wars and engaging in other scandalous actions. In response, Ban’s office disagreed, despite clear evidence of his complicity in grievous crimes of war and against humanity by indifference, silence, and support for Western aggression. Putting lipstick on that pig doesn’t wash. Nor have his spineless measures protected whistleblowers or prevented peacekeeper killings, rape, sexual exploitation, corruption and other crimes. In addition, he hasn’t defended human rights or condemned violations against them, notably by Western countries. Nor has he denounced aggressive wars and other lawless acts. How can he when he supports them, including Washington’s ouster of democratically elected Honduran President Manuel Zelaya on June 28, 2009. Or the Obama administration’s militarization of Haiti and complicity in rigging the electoral process to install stealth Duvalierist Michel (“Sweet Micky) Martelly, an anti-populist former Kompa singer supporter of powerful corrupt corporatist interests. Moreover, Ban backed regime change in Ivory Coast. He authorized a lawless French-backed military operation against Ivorian President Laurent Gbagbo, killing hundreds of civilians. He also echoed Washington’s call for Gaddafi’s ouster, saying he lost all legitimacy. At the same time, he backs cutthroat rebel paramilitaries, and supports lawless air strikes. They’ve laid waste to large parts of Libya and still do, killing and injuring tens of thousands. They also transformed Libya into a charnel house human rights disaster. Instead of condemning, stopping, or preventing wars, he authorized and cheerled them, betraying his mandate to support peace and human rights. Shamelessly serving Israel, not Palestine, he caused great harm in the process, including besieged Gaza denied flotilla aid from arriving. He even petitioned world leaders to back Israel’s demand to direct what it permits “through legitimate crossings and established channels” to prevent vital aid getting through or enough of it. By appointing his own commission to investigate Israel’s May 2010 Mavi Marmara massacre, he tried to whitewash his own Human Rights Council’s condemnation, as well as independent ones denouncing Israel’s cold-blooded murder of nine civilians and injuring dozens more in international waters. These were high crimes – piracy he should have forthrightly condemned, but he didn’t. Instead, he dutifully paid homage to Israel as he always does.
Despite representing 193 member states, Ban only serves Washington, Israel, and other dominant powers. He thumbs his nose at the rest, including majority General Assembly positions on numerous human rights and other vital issues. In other words, in derogation of his sworn mandate, he solely represents dominant interests. Notably they’re those of Washington, Israel, and their imperial partners, ravaging targeted countries to carve up their corpses for profit. As a result, he shares culpability with lawless predator states, harming billions worldwide by his contempt for human rights. In fact, the very notion’s not in his vocabulary, let alone concern for people in dire need. They’re on their own because Ban won’t observe his sworn mandate to help them. It’s a testimony to his deplorable record. It’s appalling enough to have earned him a second term last June, representing wealth and power for another five years at the expense of billions worldwide he scorns. It’s the mettle of a failed Secretary-General, a legacy history won’t let him forget or expunge. Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening. http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Many points brought up but :
1) In fact, one of his first acts was to reverse the UN’s longstanding opposition to capital punishment. It’s a barbaric practice often sentencing innocent people to death, notably in America. t the time, he dismissively said whether or not to enforce it “is for each and every member State to decide,” instead of forthrightly condemning it. Again with the hegelian dialectic. UN’s long standing opposition sounds like you said it was a majority thing. In the case that your intention was that ‘UN’s longstanding opposition’ in anyway meant ‘majority’ (I get that impression this is pitching majority mob-rule makes right – apologies if wrong), Spirit of Law should NEVER be considered the same as democratic MOB-rule. If the majority said that people had to all become Muslim, would that be democratic? Democracy does not mean majority. Democracy ALSO needs to consider Spirit of Law and Spirit of Justice. If the majority think in a way that is abusive or affects self determinism, it is still not democratic and thus inapplicable.
Hence it is not about who is wrong or right, it is Self Determinism rather than deadweight Majority that is politically correct. We are not in the feudal era, people are individuals and so too are states. But in this case killing criminals is against Spirit of Justice and thus wrong. The legal system is supposed to rehabilitate criminals, AND at the criminal’s free willed voilition. To cite majority as reason to impose, deny expression is wrong. What Ban Ki Moon said as individual rights of nations to decide on capital punishment, he was wrong as it is not in true Spirit of Justice to kill criminals who need to relearn who they are, in many cases they were forced by circumstances to be who they were.
2) Shamelessly serving Israel, not Palestine, he caused great harm in the process, including besieged Gaza denied flotilla aid from arriving. He’s not supposed to serve anyone. But he has not treated the Israel-Palestinian issue properly so far.
Are you afflicted by pro-Palestian (Muslim?!?) neurotech?
3) Nor have his spineless measures protected whistleblowers or prevented peacekeeper killings, rape, sexual exploitation, corruption and other crimes.
All these are too ‘micro-issue’ to address by Ban alone, but I am sure that he is familiar enough with the Korean peninsular to take down a government or 2 there. Parochial looking South Korea, and Phillipines or Vietnam look like a terrible hotbed of corruption from an unfamiliar person’s viewpoint. As for North Korea, IMHO, Kim Jong Il should relinquish all political power, entirely democratise, and open the nation and declare himself a Constitutional Monarch to receive a modest stipend at most, with UN and NAM and BRICs overseeing the transition from Junta to Constitutional Monarchy. If Gaddafi had done this very same action, Libya could very well have averted the chaos it is suffering now. Again as suggested for Korea, any transitional government for Libya should have not just UN oversight but NAM and BRICS oversight as well. 4) In addition, he hasn’t defended human rights or condemned violations against them, notably by Western countries.
Nor has (the Eminent Ban, one step above lots of not-too Excellent Presidents  . . . ) Ban denounced aggressive wars and other lawless acts. . . . As a result, he shares culpability with lawless predator states, harming billions worldwide by his contempt for human rights. In fact, the very notion’s not in his vocabulary, let alone concern for people in dire need. The stage is yours Ban. Speak to end wars and prove this accusation false. Or tell them to stick to conventional warfare at very least.
Advertisements

Mayor Bloomberg predicts riots in the streets – by Erin Einhorn and Corky Siemaszko – 16th September 2011

In hegelian dialectic, Plutocracy, USA, Wealth distribution on January 19, 2012 at 4:07 pm
Mayor Bloomberg predicts riots in the streets if economy doesn’t create more jobs – by Erin Einhorn and Corky Siemaszko – 16th September 2011 Mayor Bloomberg is sounding the alarm bell over the nation’s struggling economy. Mayor Bloomberg warned Friday there would be riots in the streets if Washington doesn’t get serious about generating jobs. “We have a lot of kids graduating college, can’t find jobs,” Bloomberg said on his weekly WOR radio show. “That’s what happened in Cairo. That’s what happened in Madrid. You don’t want those kinds of riots here.” In Cairo, angry Egyptians took out their frustrations by toppling presidential strongman Hosni Mubarak – and more recently attacking the Israeli embassy. As for Madrid, the most recent street protests were sparked by widespread unhappiness that the Spanish government was spending millions on the visit of Pope Benedict instead of dealing with widespread unemployment. Bloomberg’s unusually alarmist pronouncement came as President Obama has been pressuring reluctant Republicans to pass his proposed job creation plan.
“The damage to a generation that can’t find jobs will go on for many, many years,” the normally-measured mayor said. Bloomberg gave Obama kudos for coming up with a jobs plan. “At least he’s got some ideas on the table, whether you like those or not,” he said. “Now everybody’s got to sit down and say we’re actually gonna do something and you have to do something on both the revenue and the expense side.” And everybody’s got to share in the pain. The streets of Cairo erupted in violence this spring. (AP Photo) “When you start picking and choosing which groups do and do not, that’s when it becomes unfair in a lot of people’s minds,” the mayor said. “But we’re all in this together.” Obama didn’t create this economic mess, it developed “over long periods of time,” Bloomberg said. Obama’s approval rating has sunk along with the economy, but the ratings of the Republicans who have stymied his attempts repair the damage are even worse, most polls show. Already, House Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, has drawn a line on raising taxes on the rich to pay for Obama’s proposed $447 billion jobs plan, which aims to help the middle class.
csiemaszko@nydailynews.com
Monopoly Man (Too Damn Rich!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfr7YYAHlVUThey represent Man’s Too Damn Rich Party
People working ZERO hours a day, ZERO hours a week
Some destroying jobs – why?
The man is too damn rich!
The people they’re here to represent
make us can’t afford to pay their rent.’Cause the Man is too damn rich!
The plutocrats laying on right now
are eating our breakfast, lunch, or dinner!

Only a 401K-er, like the 99% of a country
can put everything in control.
The bottom line is, the economic state of plutocracy
has got to go, away to go!
To go, go, go, go!

They have increased the cost, they raised the rent up
but cut their taxes down!
And killed small business owners which now cannot hire people!
Now big franchise owners are the only ones which hire people!

That is it, nothing else to be said!
End of subject, there’s nothing else to talk about.
Some say, they’re devt slave causing candidates
But it all boils down to one thing!

What? RENT! Is too damn high!
The people they’re here to represent
make us can’t afford to pay their rent.
‘Cause rent is too damn high!

The plutocrats laying on right now
are eating our breakfast, lunch, or dinner!

Only a 99%ter, like a owner of a country
can put everything in control.
The bottom line is, the economic state of emergency
has got to go, away to go!
To go, go, go, go!

The Man is too damn rich!!
The Man is too damn rich. (too damn rich!)
The Man is too damn rich!!

The Man is too damn rich. (too damn rich!)
Too damn rich, too damn rich, too damn rich!
The Man is too DAMN rich!
The Man is too DAMN rich!

As a wealth distribution expert,
I will not talk about anyone up here.
Listen!
Someone’s child’s stomach just growled.
Did you hear it? Did you did you hear it?
Gotta listen like me.
Because our children can’t afford to live anywhere.
Once again, why?
You said it – The Man is too DAMN rich!

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Mayor Bloomberg is personally worth an obscene 19.5 billion alone or nearly 50,000 times 401K.
If 500 more plutocrats like Mayor Bloomberg ( . . . the Monopoly Men stereotypes if anything  . . . )  donate that wealth (leave 20 million for yourselves and no American would begrudge you ‘Mayor’) USA is in the black instantly – 10.25 Trillion . . . and you’d still have 500 people worth 20 million – still a big fat virtual 50 times of 401K.
But Mayor Bloomberg and his fellow plutocrat multi-billionaires would rather talk and cynically and insincerely keep their money in their pockets, letting all Americans down. In a riot, guess which rich folk who sequestered the wealth of USA will be targeted first? So think, the rioters won’t be going for the mom-pop shops but will target the plutocrats and mega-corp franchises, rioters know where the problems come from. Sequestration of wealth and collusive loopholes. It is unimaginable and unconscionable that any bureaucrat can be allowed to amass such wealth. Worse still they are cynically keeping wealthy while insincerely pretending to be concerned.
If you plutocrats were so concerned and so patriotic, write a cheque for all but 20 million, clear your own home cities of New York etc.. and neighbouring citys’ debts for a start. When times were good, the country and city nurtured you. When times are default level bad, you keep that wealth to yourself. Are you guys Americans?

Blackout: CNN, Fox, and MSNBC Ignore Thousands Of US Day Of Rage Protesters – by Jason Easley – 17th September 2011

In Plutocracy, Socialism, Uncategorized, Wealth distribution on January 19, 2012 at 4:00 pm
Most Americans are being kept in the dark about the US Day of Rage by the corporate cable news giants at CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC who have imposed a de facto blackout on the protest. Even though estimates have varied from hundreds to as many as 50,000 protesters flooded into Manhattan and others cities to take part in events around the country to, “nonviolently disrupt the disloyal, incompetent, and corrupt special interests which have usurped our nation’s civil and military power, spawning a host of threats to our liberty, lives and national security,” the three cable news networks have devoted no airtime to the story.
This is becoming an all too familiar scene. In Wisconsin hundreds of thousands of regular people took to the streets each weekend to protest the theft of their rights, and were completely ignored by CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC. Sarah Palin’s Iowa tea party speech was 1/50 as big as the Wisconsin protests, yet she was deemed worthy of national media coverage. The kowtowing of the corporate media to the conservative agenda continued last week as CNN climbed in bed with the Tea Party Express to host a Republican presidential debate that was chocked full of rhetoric about how taxes must be cut to protect the same “job creators” who crashed the US economy in 2008, and have continued to reap record profits by sitting on bailout money, and not hiring any new workers. CNN decided that the Tea Party was a worthy news partner, but covering a protest that is happening right under their very noses in New York City is not important to the American people. (In fact as I type this, CNN is running another self-congratulatory segment on their Tea Party Express debate/total sellout to the right).
No one expects the pro-business corporate propaganda/GOP propaganda mouthpiece Fox News to devote any coverage to the occupation of Wall Street, but the supposed progressive news network, MSNBC can’t “lean forward” long enough to turn off their true crime doc block to cover an event that is happening minutes away from their studios. The corporate cable news media ignored Wisconsin, and now they are ignoring the protests of regular Americans who want their democracy placed back into their hands. The corporate media have proven time and time again that they are an obstacle to, not a provider of truth.
Unlike the bogus tea party movement, the Occupy Wall Street protest features people of all ages, colors, shapes, sizes, and political affiliations. These people are protesting a broken system. They are protesting a loss of freedom. They are protesting inequality, and they are fighting for our rights. Whether or not the corporate media cameras are in attendance, the protests will go on. Americans will continue to march, and those who love their country will continue to battle to make it better. The conservative media bias of the cable news industry can and will be overcome. We don’t need video to feel the heart of America beat strong. (Note: The 50,000 was an estimated attendance. Other estimates place the number of attendees in NYC in the hundreds to the thousands. The title has been changed to reflect conflicting attendance estimates).
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
What does that featured picture on this site mean by picturing the words **’a touch’** of equality?
ALL SOVEREIGN CITIZENS of the world DEMAND as is their right as sentient/sapient beings, * FULL* UNCONDITIONAL EQUALITY and all the rights in the Human Rights Charter.

3 Articles on GMO danger, Ecology and Illegal Monopolies on Nature’s Gifts – various sources – Late September 2011

In GMO, Technology on January 19, 2012 at 3:56 pm
ARTICLE 1
Hybrid rice output hits record high – CCTV – 20th September 2011 CHANGSHA, Sept. 19
(Xinhua) — The yield of China’s hybrid rice breed, which is known as super rice, has exceeded 900 kg per mu (0.067 hectare), setting a new world record in rice output. The rice breed, DH2525 (Y two superior No. 2), produced a harvest of 926.6 kg per mu during its trial plantation in Longhui County in central China’s Hunan Province, according to the provincial academy of agriculture at a press conference on Monday. To ensure the accuracy of the yield, a team of experts under the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) randomly selected three out of the 107.9 mu trial field’s 18 plots and supervised the harvest on Sunday. However, the breeding can not be deemed a success until the new breed produces the targeted yield of over 900 kg per mu on at least 100 mu of farmland for two consecutive years, said the team’s leader Cheng Shihua. “We have another year to go,” he said. DH2525 was developed by Yuan Longping, known as the “father of hybrid rice,” who started developing hybrid rice in the 1960s. His research team reached the target unit yield of 700 kg per mu and 800 kg per mu in 1999 and 2005, respectively, setting world records both times. With skills honed by his team over several decades, Chinese farmers are estimated to have harvested 300 billion kilograms more in aggregate output. Their hybrid rice, therefore, has become known as super rice. Wang Huayong, a farmer who contracted the trial field, said the field had a yielded 841.6 and 872 kg of rice per mu over the past two years, respectively, and the yield finally exceeded 900 kg per mu this year. “The seed was further upgraded, new manure was used, and we also received the guidance of Mr. Yuan himself,” Wang said. Eighty-one-year-old Yuan visited the field in early September and checked the growth situation. “He issued a clear instruction on water management in the field,” said Wang.
Dr. Yuan Longping Food Prize Laureate, known as the “father of hybrid rice”, speaks at the press conference of Hunan Academy of Agriculture, in Changsha, capital of central China’s Hunan Province, Sept. 19, 2011. The yield of China’s hybrid rice breed, which is known as super rice, has exceeded 900 kg per mu (0.067 hectare), setting a new world record in rice output. The rice breed, DH2525 (Y two superior No. 2), produced a harvest of 926.6 kg per mu during its trial plantation in Longhui County of Hunan Province, according to the provincial academy of agriculture at a press conference on Monday. To ensure the accuracy of the yield, a team of experts under the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) randomly selected three out of the 107.9 mu trial field’s 18 plots and supervised the harvest on Sunday. (Xinhua/Zhao Zhongzhi) ] Yuan Longping(L), known as the “father of hybrid rice”, speaks at the press conference of Hunan Academy of Agriculture, in Changsha, capital of central China’s Hunan Province, Sept. 19, 2011. The yield of China’s hybrid rice breed, which is known as super rice, has exceeded 900 kg per mu (0.067 hectare), setting a new world record in rice output. The rice breed, DH2525 (Y two superior No. 2), produced a harvest of 926.6 kg per mu during its trial plantation in Longhui County of Hunan Province, according to the provincial academy of agriculture at a press conference on Monday. To ensure the accuracy of the yield, a team of experts under the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) randomly selected three out of the 107.9 mu trial field’s 18 plots and supervised the harvest on Sunday. (Xinhua/Zhao Zhongzhi)
ARTICLE 2
Monsanto Denies Superinsect Science — by Tom Philpott – 8th September 2011
Superinsect problem? Show me the evidence! As the summer growing season draws to a close, 2011 is emerging as the year of the superinsect—the year pests officially developed resistance to Monsanto’s genetically engineered (ostensibly) bug-killing corn. While the revelation has given rise to alarming headlines, neither Monsanto nor the EPA, which regulates pesticides and pesticide-infused crops, can credibly claim surprise. Scientists have been warning that the EPA’s rules for planting the crop were too lax to prevent resistance since before the agency approved the crop in 2003. And in 2008, research funded by Monsanto itself showed that resistance was an obvious danger. And now those unheeded warnings are proving prescient. In late July, as I reported recently, scientists in Iowa documented the existence of corn rootworms (a ravenous pest that attacks the roots of corn plants) that can happily devour corn plants that were genetically tweaked specifically to kill them. Monsanto’s corn, engineered to express a toxic gene from a bacterial insecticide called Bt, now accounts for 65 percent of the corn planted in the US. The superinsect scourge has also arisen in Illinois and Minnesota. “Monsanto Co. (MON)’s insect-killing corn is toppling over in northwestern Illinois fields, a sign that rootworms outside of Iowa may have developed resistance to the genetically modified crop,” reports Bloomberg.
In southern Minnesota, adds Minnesota Public Radio, an entomologist has found corn rootworms thriving, Bt corn plants drooping, in fields. Monsanto, for its part, is reacting to the news with a hearty “move along—nothing to see here!” “Our [Bt corn] is effective,” Monsanto scientist Dusty Post insisted in an interview with The St. Louis Post-Dispatch. “We don’t have any demonstrated field resistance,” he added, pretending away the Iowa study, to speak nothing those corn fields that are “toppling over” in Illinois and and Minnesota. But the company’s denials ring hollow for another reason, too. Bill Freese, science policy analyst for the Center for Food Safety, alerted me to this 2008 study, conducted by University of Missouri researchers and published by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on this precise question of Bt corn and rootworms. The first thing to notice about the study is that Monsanto is listed in the acknowledgements as one of the “supporters.” So this is Monsanto-funded research, meaning that he company would be hard-pressed to deny knowledge of it. The researchers found that within three generations, rootworms munching Monsanto’s Bt corn survived at the same rate as rootworms munching pesticide-free corn—meaning that complete resistance had been achieved. Takeaway message: rootworms are capable of evolving resistance to Monsanto’s corn in “rapid” fashion. But such concerns were nothing new by 2008. From the early days of Bt-based GMOs in the ’90s, everyone—Monsanto, the EPA, independent scientists—agreed that farmers would have to plant a portion of their fields in non-Bt corn to control resistance. The idea was that, as bugs in the Bt portion of the field began to develop resistance, they would mate with non-resistant bugs from the so-called “refuge” patch, and the resistant trait would be kept recessive within the larger bug population and thus under control. The contentious point involved how large these refuge patches would have to be. Monsanto insisted that 20 percent was adequate—that farmers could plant 80 percent of their corn crop with Bt seeds, and 20 percent in non-Bt seeds, and in so doing, avoid resistance. But the majority of a panel of scientists convened by the EPA countered that the refuge requirement should be 50 percent—which would have, of course, eaten into Monsanto’s profits by limiting its market. The reason for the scientists’ concern, Freese explained, was that the corn plants express the Bt protein toxic to root worms at a low dose, meaning that a large portion of the rootworms survive contact with the plants, leaving them to pass on resistance to the next generation. With just 20 percent of fields planted in non-Bt crops, the scientists warned, resistant rootworms would eventually swamp non-resistant ones, and we’d have corn fields toppling over in the Midwest. The minutes (PDF) of the committee’s Nov. 6, 2002, meeting on the topic documents their concerns. The majority of the committee’s members, the minutes state, “concluded that there was no practical or scientific justification for establishing a precedent for a 20 percent refuge at this time.” I asked Freese why Monsanto didn’t simply engineer a high-dose version of its rootworm-targeted corn, since that would have lowered resistance pressure and thus addressed the panel’s concerns.
“Well, from the start, the EPA pushed for a higher dose for the toxin,” he said. “My sense is that Monsanto came up with the best they could in terms of dose.” Freese stressed that industry rhetoric to the side, the genetic modification of crops turns out to be a rather crude process: The companies can’t always make the genes behave exactly as they want them to. Nevertheless, the EPA registered the rootworm-targeted corn in 2003—and defied the scientific panel it had convened by putting the refuge requirement right where Monsanto wanted it: at 20 percent. Jilted panel members, along with other prominent entomologists who hadn’t been consulted by the EPA, greeted the decision with anger and disbelief, as this May 2003 Nature article (behind a pay wall but available here) shows.”The EPA is calling for science-based regulation, but here that does not appear to be the case,” one scientist who served on the panel told Nature. Another added: “This is like the FDA approving a drug with flimsy science and saying to then do the safety testing… I don’t think that’s how you do science.” Eight years later, Monsanto and the EPA have been proven wrong, and their scientific critics have been vindicated. Monsanto, meanwhile, booked robust profits selling its corn seeds without the burden of a 50 percent refuge requirement—and continues to do so today even as the tehnology fails. http://motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2011/09/monsanto-denies-superinsect-science
ARTICLE 3
Scientists to Create a “Artificial Volcano” in an Attempt to Geoengineer Our Climate -by Paul Joseph Watson – 20th September 2011 (Infowars.com)
Despite the pseudo-science of global warming being discredited with each passing day, scientists are preparing to field test an “artificial volcano” which is eventually intended to lead to mammoth geoengineering programs which will inject sulfur particles in to the atmosphere at high altitudes, a process that other scientists have warned will cause widespread droughts and other drastic consequences. “Next month, researchers in the U.K. will start to pump water nearly a kilometer up into the atmosphere, by way of a suspended hose,” reports Scientific American. “The experiment is the first major test of a piping system that could one day spew sulfate particles into the stratosphere at an altitude of 20 kilometers, supported by a stadium-size hydrogen balloon. The goal is geoengineering, or the “deliberate, large-scale manipulation of the planetary environment” in the words of the Royal Society of London, which provides scientific advice to policymakers. In this case, researchers are attempting to re-create the effects of volcanic eruptions to artificially cool Earth.” Never mind the fact that the science behind global warming is only becoming more contentious, with Norwegian physicist and Nobel laureate Ivar Giaever this week quitting the American Physical Society because of its advocacy of the man-made climate change thesis, allowing scientists driven by the political agenda that global warming alarmism has become to conduct such dangerous experiments with the eco-system on such a massive scale is nothing short of insane. ARTICLE 4 Case Update: 270,000 Organic Farmers Sue Monsanto – 19th September 2011 This is an update to legal proceedings which has been released by the Organic Seed Growers & Trade Association (OSGATA). If you have not read our initial posting on this court case you can read all about it here The 83 family farmers, small and family owned seed businesses, and agricultural organizations challenging Monsanto’s patents on genetically modified seed filed papers in federal court (13th August 2011) defending their right to seek legal protection from the threat of being sued by Monsanto for patent infringement should they ever become contaminated by Monsanto’s genetically modified seed. The Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT) represents the plaintiffs in the suit, titled Organic Seed Growers & Trade Association (OSGATA), et al. v. Monsanto and pending in the Southern District of New York. The August 13 filings respond to a motion filed by Monsanto in mid-July to have the case dismissed. In support of the plantiffs’ right to bring the case, 12 agricultural organizations also filed a friend-of-the-court amici brief. “Rather than give a straight forward answer on whether they would sue our clients for patent infringement if they are ever contaminated by Monsanto’s transgenic seed, Monsanto has instead chosen to try to deny our clients the right to receive legal protection from the courts,” said Dan Ravicher, PUBPAT’s Executive Director. “Filings include sworn statements by several of the plaintiffs themselves explaining to the court how the risk of contamination by transgenic seed is real and why they cannot trust Monsanto to not use an occurrence of contamination as a basis to accuse them of patent infringement.” It is now virtually impossible for a U.S. farmer to grow crops of their choosing (corn, soybeans, canola, etc.) and remain GMO-free because of the numerous biological and human means by which seeds can spread. “Given the difficulties in minimizing GM contamination farmers must make numerous decisions about which steps are worthwhile for them and which steps are not. They are not able to make these decisions based on their own and their customers‘ interests, but must instead make these decisions with the threat of litigation from a giant corporation looming over their head,” Spiegel writes in the amici brief. “The constant threat of a patent infringement suit by Monsanto creates significant, unquantifiable costs for Plaintiff farmers and similarly situated farmers.” The plaintiffs can do everything possible to maintain non-contaminated seeds, and will very likely still become contaminated, and be placed under the threat of a lawsuit. As Monsanto’s domination of the seed industry grows, and the winds continue to disperse pollen from their GMO laced crops, the likelihood of contamination and lawsuits only increases.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
I’d stick to traditional/unmodified/ancient non-hybrid and non-GMO low yield strains and keep all lines separate as certain genetically ‘healing’ values of original strains may be lost when their purity is diluted through heavy interbreeding. Unnatural selection may lead to unnatural evolution and inedible or undigestible or non-healing rice in time to come. While the rest of the world is changing entire breeds of food and thus affecting human brain structrures, I really hope that the PRC will retain at least several working fields of original strains that may be re-propagated in the even heavy reliance on a specific ‘popular’ strain opens the same strain to bio-terrorism threats or natural (who knows GMO pests?) pests. The frinal article could be applied in the greening of the arid Western Regions in China or the Middle Eastern, Sub-Saharan and African dry land areas, though the sulphur content could be replaced with entirely natural organic fertilisers instead.

2 Articles and Response in Response pro-dr.Evil Propaganda – late September 2011

In 3rd Force, Abuse of Power, Bumiputera Apartheid, Democracy, Plutocracy, Wealth distribution on January 19, 2012 at 3:50 pm
ARTICLE 1
Mat Zain: Musa, Gani duped Dr M into sacking Anwar – by Shannon Teoh September 12, 2011 Dr Mahathir previously said he was not initially convinced of the allegations against Anwar. Sept 12
A former senior police officer today claimed that Tan Sri Musa Hassan and Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail had fabricated evidence against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, leading to his sacking from government by Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad in 1998. Former city criminal investigation chief Datuk Mat Zain Ibrahim claimed in an open letter to the Inspector-General of Police today that Musa, who was then Bukit Aman’s assistant criminal investigation chief, had stolen Anwar’s DNA to ensure that the sacked deputy prime minister would be convicted of sodomy. “I believe this happened because Tun was given information or a briefing that was manipulated and misleading,” said the policeman who led the 1998 probe into the black eye inflicted on Anwar by then police chief Tan Sri Rahim Noor. Mat Zain based his claim on “documentary evidence and statements that I have and are within my knowledge” as well as Dr Mahathir’s memoirs that were released earlier this year. The former prime minister had said that although he doubted claims that Anwar had committed sodomy, Rahim and Musa, who was the investigating officer, had told him that they had evidence and confessions from those involved. But Mat Zain noted that according to testimony by Hospital Kuala Lumpur doctor Dr Zahari Noor, Musa, who later rose through the ranks to become Inspector-General of Police, had “stolen” Anwar’s blood samples on October 15, 1998. “But at that point, Anwar was already charged in court and waiting for a hearing date. The process of gathering evidence should have been completed by then. “Musa owes the public an explanation as to what he briefed Tun Mahathir on, to the point the former prime minister was convinced that Anwar was involved in adultery and homosexuality,” he wrote. Mat Zain also pointed out that as current Attorney-General Abdul Gani was the prosecuting officer in the sodomy case, Musa’s actions “were under the orders and/or supervision of Gani Patail.” He also accused Musa and Abdul Gani of fabricating the case for their joint benefit but insisted that Dr Mahathir himself was not involved as he had repeatedly told the police, including Mat Zain during his investigations into the black eye incident, that there should be no cover up. The former police officer has repeatedly attacked Abdul Gani in recent months, calling on Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak to sack the A-G for failing to initiate charges in high-profile cases such as the death of DAP aide Teoh Beng Hock while being held by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission. He has also called for a royal panel to investigate Abdul Gani’s role in destroying public confidence in the police.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Smokescreen propaganda article. This simple article cannot hide dozens of policy indiscrepancies. Take Vehicular AP or Toll Concessions for instance or Forced Military Conscriptions. No way these could affect us if dr.Evil who was PM read the bills carefully those bills before approving. So shall we say he was careless and neglectful and no stateman at all? This also could indict these 2 characters and colluders mentioned here in fact. Bad article with bad intent backfires on itself.
ARTICLE 2
Thursday, 22 September 2011 22:22 Mahathir ticks off “disgusting BN”: No amount of money is enough Written by Malaysia Chronicle
Change your image and do not flash your wealth in order to change the perception that the ruling coalition is corrupt, former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad told BN leaders today. Addressing 400 of them in Kuala Selangor, including BN elected representatives, the veteran leader said the coalition would otherwise continue to be perceived as “disgusting”. “I find that many view (BN) as disgusting and that they openly state their rejection of the BN. “If we analyse this, we find this is because we no longer struggle to form the government, but to reap personal benefits,” Mahathir said. Besides flashing their wealth by suddenly building “RM7 or RM8 million houses”, which they previously could not afford, elected representatives also felt the need to “buy support”. Speaking at a BN State Assembly Backbenchers Club event, Mahathir said BN representatives said they needed to “get contracts and raise their income” as “their supporters demand money”. ‘To be popular, one buys people’ “To be popular, one buys people, but no amount of money is enough… and in the end, the society becomes corrupt. “The society then views Umno and other component parties (as) corrupt as the leaders got to where they are because of money,” he said.
A total of 240 BN elected representatives are in Kuala Selangor until Friday as part of BN’s plans to wrest power from Pakatan Rakyat in Selangor. Earlier, BN State Assembly Backbenchers Club president Nadzri Ismail said the representatives would stay with 300 families during the three-day retreat in an effort to “put the people first” and “be close to the rakyat”. Lauding this effort, Mahathir said, however, that sincerity might be lacking if the elected representatives went into the kampung in their luxury cars. “For example, there was a BN candidate who went to a kampung in his Mercedes Benz to look for the constituency that he was selected to contest in. He didn’t win,” he said in driving this point across. More parachute candidates needed Separately, in answering a question from former Perlis Menteri Besar Shahidan Kassim, the elder statesperson said the present situation called for more BN “parachute candidates”, although the approach must not be used on a wide scale. “Parachute candidates are needed to introduce changes to the party, like (former Finance Minister) Daim (Zainuddin), who was not too keen about politics but needed to get into the Dewan Rakyat. “So we asked the person in Merbok to step aside for (Daim), who wasn’t even from Merbok, but whose abilities were much needed. “There is a need for more parachute candidates now, so people with abilities can be in government and the cabinet, since there always are complaints that ministers don’t know much,” Mahathir said. He also reiterated his often made call for BN leaders to stop sabotaging one another during elections, simply because personal ambitions could not always be met. “(Prime Minister) Najib (Abdul Razak) said he will choose winnable candidates, but we may feel the candidate he choses is ‘unwinnable’ because we are the only ones who are winnable. So we make sure that candidate does not win, to prove that the leadership is wrong,” he said. He then called on all the elected representatives to be prepared if they are not selected this time around, even though most elected representatives “don’t want to quit (because) the pension is lower than the allowance”. “Most think they’re the most winnable candidates. This mindset needs to change from the start. Your responsibility is to be prepared not to be selected as a candidate,” Mahathir added.

 

 

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Half Indian on paternal side and considered Bumi while all other half Indians on paternal side are all non-Bumi and have no access to what you have? End the APARTHEID and stop lying here about the corruption that has made your sons BILLIONS worth. Talk about yourself and turn over the ill gotten wealth first before being all self righteous. What an insincere and fraudulent personality, even in old age. This is real life, not a movie, and if we voters all want to end even ALL TAXES, Quit Rents, or even IMPORT Duties, we can simply vote in the way below : NEITHER BN NOR PR.

Try the 3rd force. 3rd Force Coalition – SUPP, M0CS, KITA, MCLM, PCM, Borneo Front, Konsensus Bebas, HRP, PSM ! JOIN the 3rd Force Parties but still work with the non-Oligarchs and non-racists on either BN or PR !

End the APARTHEID ! Destroy the Oligarchs and nepotists in all political parties ! Here’s something that will help voters decide if candidacy is not their thing or too expensive : Barisan – Apartheid, Corrupt and Nepotistic-Oligarchs Pakatan – Corrupt and Nepotistic-Oligarchs (excepting PAS) 3rd Force – Corrupt Only Independents – Any citizen can be an independent and will not be held back by a political party ‘supremo’. Meaning indie politicians wlll be the least mob-mentality inspired, and least party biased in their policy proposals or treatment of issues. Vote only for MPs who believe in the below :

1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism

2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy.

3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution.

Fuel Cost By Car Size – posted by Winston Lim – 8th January 2010

In Uncategorized on January 19, 2012 at 3:44 pm
PETALING JAYA: The bigger your car, the more you will have to pay for petrol from May 1. This is because the Government is going to change the way fuel is subsidised. It is planning for a fuel pricing mechanism that will ensure only targeted groups, particularly those from the lower-income, will receive fuel subsidy. Also, foreigners who drive into the country to fill up their tanks will not be eligible for subsidy and will have to pay more for fuel. “The bigger the engine, the higher petrol will cost,” Domestic Trade, Cooperatives and Consumerism Minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob said yesterday.
The move was based on the assumption that those in the lower income group would normally drive a car with a lower engine capacity and thus be eligible for the subsidy, he said. “For RON95 petrol, the subsidy is 30 sen per litre. The current price of RON95 petrol is RM1.80 compared with the actual price of RM2.10. “Malaysians who are not eligible are those who drive a higher engine capacity car or non-Malaysians. They will have to pay RM2.10 or more for RON95,” he told a press conference after launching the new corporate identity of the F&N soft drinks division here yesterday. Besides introducing the new structure, the ministry also plans to make the use of MyKad compulsory when buying petrol. “There are some Thai nationals who drive into Malaysia to fill up their tank because petrol is such an expensive commodity in their country,” he said. In Muar, Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said the Government was in the final stages of drafting a policy on the fuel subsidy which will be a “win-win situation” for both the Government and the people. He said that the new policy would identify people who were eligible for subsidy. Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin had previously broached the subject about giving petrol subsidy to the right people. He said the subsidy must reach only the people who needed it most and giving subsidy across the board was a misallocation of funds. On the subsidies for flour, sugar and gas, Ismail said they would be retained. “Although the price for sugar has been increased by 20 sen, the Government is still providing subsidy for the commodity,” he said. Ismail food outlet operators should not take advantage of the increase in sugar price to mark up the price of their products. “Food outlet operators should not regard this as an opportunity to raise prices,” he said. source: The Star
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
The difference which they mad such a big deal about, is miniscule and NOT equitable, does not help distribute wealth at all. A person worth 100K in total will still feel the pinch while the man worth 100 million (10,000 times wealth of the 100K man) will laugh even at 21.00 (10 times only as opposed to his 10,000 times wealth more).
Use a VERY wide sliding scale as detailed below. For better wealth distribution (very generally), this below format which is USABLE WORLDWIDE :
Disposable Wealth of Owner determines what they will have to pay. Otherwise, price of fuel should be based on the size of car for those who do not want to declare assets.
Also no plates or numbers henceforth. The amount of personal assets one has determines the cost of fuel instead of any fixed rate. Fuel is free flowing AND citizens pay a flat 1% of the value of the value of personal asset in fuel yearly. This last version for fuel charge rates could be the fairest and easiest to implement. There will be no plates or plates for all vehicles at the user’s desire, but a scannable ID ‘bug/tracer’ will be attached to the car instead. ID-less cars can be stopped for individual ID checks. Scanner hacking or illegal scanners however will be a major issue (which should be punished with bans to all persons illegally using or holding).

Landowner wins right to bar ramblers access to natural Dartmoor attraction – by Lee Moran – 21st September 2011

In Allodial, England, Invasive Laws, Justice, Law, social freedoms on January 19, 2012 at 3:24 pm
Ramblers and climbers have been banned from accessing one of Dartmoor’s most historic sites. The beautiful Vixen Tor has now been closed off for good, after landowner Mary Alford won an eight-year battle to keep walkers off her land. Her victory comes after a long fight with walkers, who staged a series of mass trespasses to protest against its closure. No go area: The picturesque Vixen Tor, on Dartmoor, is now out of bounds to visitors after a planning inspector ruled for landowner Mary Alford A planning inquiry ruled in favour of Mrs Alford, who bought 360 acres of land around the site in 2003 and immediately closed off access to it by putting up fences and spraying parts of it with manure. She said she wanted to seal off the area because she was worried about insurance claims. It is the second inquiry that the landowner has won. A previous one, which is seen as one of the most important test cases for the Right to Roam legislation, ruled that the public did not have an automatic right of way. But Devon County Council insisted that two paths across the land should remain open, leading to this case. Out of bounds: Vixen Tor has been closed off to ramblers and hikers after an eight year battle Winner: Mary Alford has won her battle in keeping walkers off her land at Vixen Tor Inspector Mark Yates ruled in Mrs Alford’s favour, despite hearing evidence from hikers that they used the paths unimpeded for many years before 2003. He said there was not enough evidence to show that the paths had been a public right of way for an unbroken 20 year period. The order to open the path, which has now been rescinded, was made by Devon County Council who were supported by the Ramblers Association and the British Mountaineering Council. A total of 59 people gave oral or written accounts of using the paths in the 70s. But documents found by Mrs Alford suggested there had been times when the path had not been used.
Mr Yates added: ‘Overall I accept that people have walked to Vixen Tor and used routes through the enclosure. ‘However, I am not satisfied that, on balance, the evidence of public use of the order route, either in whole or part, presented to the inquiry is sufficient to demonstrate the dedication of this route at common law.’ A Devon County Council spokesman said: ‘The inspector has issued his decision not to confirm the order. ‘The decision can be viewed on the Planning Inspectorate website.’ The Tor is one of the highest and most dramatic on Dartmoor and its rocky peak has often been described as a naturally carved sphinx. It also has a Bronze Age kistvaen – or burial chamber – further down the slope.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
If the land has historic or tourist value places in it, it should not have been sold. Someone needs to sue the land planning commission or whatever they call it. England’s kistavens and tourist sights like the Vixen Tor, belong to everyone and sales of this sort that impede historical or tourist travel should not be allowed. Suggest that the specific 1-20 acres covering the Bronze age burial sites and Tor itself should have a single path (easement of access) for accessing these PUBLIC places of interest. A rare kistaven or a well loved geological form like a decades traveled to Tor, are common heritage of all English that need to be accessible to all, not a single family or a single owner. Spirit of Law remember? England is not about places that cannot be accessed, because of inflexible laws. Voters, better vote properly or this PC rubbish will get so bad that stepping out of your house at certain times will be deemed an offense as well. In fact it’s already happening in the worst of the 3rd world, so we need England’s example, before it turns into a 3rd world satrapy due to the English voter’s ignorant voting skills.

AirAsia X decision to axe London to hit over 14,000 students – Bernama – Friday, January 13th, 2012 14:22:00

In Uncategorized on January 19, 2012 at 9:56 am

LONDON: AirAsia X’s decision to axe its Kuala Lumpur-London route from March 30 is expected to affect over 14,000 Malaysian students pursuing their studies in the UK.

Since the route’s inception in March 2009, the budget long-haul airline had been the first choice to many of them to travel home from the UK because of its affordable fares and good services.

Chairman of the United Kingdom and Eire Council of Malaysian Students, Ahmad Syawal Hafriz Abdullah, said axing the routes would leave them with fewer choices, especially the ones that won’t hit their pockets.

“Many of us look forward to join our families and loved ones especially during the festive seasons,” he told Bernama.

A second-year student at the London School of Economics, said he hoped AirAsia X would lift the suspension and resume its flights to London soon.

Malaysian High Commissioner here, Datuk Zakaria Sulong, said Malaysian arrivals had increased following the introduction of AirAsia X to UK.

“These include Malaysian students in the UK who found going home during break affordable.

“There is no alternative low-cost carrier from Kuala Lumpur. The movements of the people between the two countries will be affected due to the closure,” he said.

Besides London, AirAsia X also announced Thursday it would suspend flights to Paris on March 31 and Mumbai and New Delhi on Jan 31.

The reason behind this suspension, according AirAsia X, was the implementation of the emissions trading scheme and air passenger duty taxes in the UK, which was due to increase in April.

Other reasons cited were budgetary concerns influenced by the global economic uncertainty and escalating jet fuel prices despite AirAsia X recording load factors of over 80 per cent for its London and Paris flights in 2011.

AirAsia X had only shifted station from London Stansted International Airport to Gatwick Airport last October.

It had also become the joint jersey sponsor of London football club, Queens Park Rangers, shortly after founder Tan Sri Tony Fernandes acquired the club last August.

 
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

So what if Tony F sells out to MAS? Anyone ready to set up an agenda free small craft airline, perhaps based on private land and private airstrips to these same places (London, France, New delhi Mumbai etc..)? Ex-pilots or air industry people wanna take over that “Now Everyone Can Fly” attitude to make viable again? Any bored millionaires ready to upstage Tony the Sellout with their own budget airline? From reports, Airasia seems to be getting quite expensive and nitpicking (aka Kutusamy bloodsucking for RM10 fees left and right . . . ) as well . . .

Maximising for 'Max(imum) Headroom'