The Climate War

Wars happen for all sorts of reasons; resources and religion being the most often cites ones. I would argue that Iraq and Afghanistan and the whole War on Terror (TM) is a resource war with religion playing second fiddle. I would say it is the first resource was of the end of the age of oil. With that in mind, an article in the Guardian pointed to another reason for war - related to resources - the conflict in about which the West seems so 'powerless' to act, yet whos consumor driven system has created; climate change...

Something fundamental has changed in this part of Africa, and it happened within a generation. From a state of sectarian innocence in which the dividing line between Arab and African was meaningless, something made people pick sides, and hardened their new sense of identity into ethnic hatred, all in the past two decades. What changed, the evidence suggests, was the climate....when a ferocious drought and famine transformed Sudan and the whole Horn of Africa. It killed more than a million people and laid waste livestock herds. Whether they maintained their way of life or tried to take up settled cultivation, the pastoralists of Darfur clashed repeatedly with its farmers. A string of conflicts broke out as both sides armed themselves, and those conflicts created the template for today's disaster.

Media Massacre

The media love a good story and nothing gets them going like a bit of human interest and killing. On 16th April 2007 on the campus of the Virginia Tech 32 people were killed and 29 were injured. This was the deadliest mass shooting in modern US history, a big news story.

On the same day in Iraq 35 people were killed and 21 were injured in various acts of murder and violence including a female student being shot by a sniper, two university lectures being shot and 13 Iraq Army soldiers being killed in a single attack on a check point. Now look at the difference in news coverage...


(from IraqSlogger)

Draw your own conclusions about news values.

Target Iran

This article, They Wouldn’t Really Attack Iran, Would They?, is a good analysis of the situation;

"Will they attack Iran sometime this or next year? If I were a betting man, I’d put my money on Washington standing down. It seems like too crazy a proposition even for Bush and Chenet at this point. But who knows? I didn’t think they’d invade Iraq at first and I’m not into prognostication. It’s not about the crystal ball."

Neo-Labour's Local Hypocrisy

I notice that Neo-Labour are trying to get in on the 'Bash Kiely' action over the privatisation of home care. The Neo-Labour Ashley candidate, Ricky Nelson, goes in for a bit of a dig writing in the spring '07 newsletter;

"The LibDems wouldn't listen to massive protests and have decided to to privatise home care. The women 'home helps' get £7 an hour but the Lib Dems don't mind if they get even less in the private sector. Labour wanted this fully debated at Council but they lost the vote..."

First off, the Lib Dems are totally wrong to privatise home care. It is a snide money saving trick that will backfire in the long run. But the CHEEK and audacity of Neo-Labour's propaganda is staggering. Totally staggering.

The first point that needs to be made is that the council tax only makes up about 25% of local government income. The rest comes from business rates and central government. So if the councils need more money the government could give it to them to help out. For example if they had not gone and spent £5 BILLION on the Iraq war – we might have more to spend on local services. Some people try to say that this issue is about local issues and national issues don't count. The reality is that they do. Taxation is a limited pot and when you are spending it on bombs, there is less for home care.

Second, a Neo-Labour complaint that somebody ignores massive protests? This total HIPOCRACY from the party who ignored the largest ever protest in UK history to take us into a genocidal war that has cost well over 600,000 lives and may cost over $2 TRILLION by the time it is done (if it is ever done?). Total hypocrisy.

Third – While the Lib Dems have quietly adopted privatisation, for Neo-Labour it is a front-rank policy. Notice they don't say that are opposed to the plan, only they wanted to 'debate' it some more. Seems to me it leaves the backdoor open for them to do the same if elected. Neo-labour's reign has been marked by mass privatisation of the huge areas of the public sector. Total hypocrisy.

On the subject of the local elections, I chatted to a canvaser from the Green Party in Ashley and he seems confident that they could actually win the seat following their doorstep chats. The Greens at least do openly say that they oppose privatization, although their one councillor abstained on the vote and seems to regret that choice. So he should.

There is an anti-privatisation protest on Friday, 20 April, 2pm, on St Marks Rd, Easton, BS5.

Fighting for Freedom?

US forces in Afganistan forced an Associated Press cameraman to delete images of their savage attack on civilians following a suicide bomb. This is a great example of the freedom that is being fought for! Hurah!

"Gaining much less coverage [in the media that the original attack] are the report’s comments on a nearly-forgotten aftermath of the apparent crimes, carried by E&P and other media outlets at the time: the U.S. military’s forced 'deletion' of images taken by Associated Press cameramen and others. A freelance photographer working for The AP and a cameraman working for AP Television News said then a U.S. soldier deleted their photos and video showing a four-wheel drive vehicle in which three people were shot to death about 100 yards from the suicide bombing. The AP lodged a protest with the American military. The military defended their action in a letter to the AP later, stating that images gathered by "untrained people" might "capture visual details that are not as they originally were."

What kind of Orwellian speak is that last part? "untrained people" might "capture visual details that are not as they originally were." 1984? Welcome to 2007.