Just another blog about achieving global peace, prosperity and sustainability
SIDEBAR
»
S I D E B A R
«
May 31st, 2010 by Syd Walker
Today Israeli commandoes boarded the main ship in the Gaza flotilla and opened fire, killing a currently unknown number of unarmed peace activists (highest reports so far 15) and injuring many more.
Israeli spokepeople seem to be claiming that members of the peace flotilla tried to sieze weapons from the troops.
Even if true – and that’s highly doubtful – it is surely irrelevant.
The ships were in international waters. Israeli troops had no right to board. To do so was piracy. Any resulting death is the responsibility of the Israelis undertaking a piratical act.
This will be a significant day in the annals of the struggle against Zionism.
Israel has shown itself, perhaps more conspicuously than ever before, to be a brutal murderer.
Even its international whitewash service will not be able to spin this story clean.
“The efficiency of our security services can only be impaired if their organisations and techniques are discussed in public.”
Was it the flashy trickster and war criminal Tony Blair perhaps? Or, Gordon Brown, mumbling stooge of the cryptocracy, who followed him into No 10 Downing St? The words do have a sinister Nu Labour ring…
Then again, could it have been Margaret Thatcher in militant ‘anti-terrorist’ mode? Or were these words spoken by a hard line American politician? Or even an Australian, such as Labor Prime Minister Kevin Rudd?
After all, only last week Rudd told reporters:
“There is a long-standing convention in Australian politics: because of significant national security reasons neither side of politics speculates on, comments on, the operation of our intelligence agencies”
While all these answers are possible, none of them are correct.
“The efficiency of our security services can only be impaired if their organisations and techniques are discussed in public“ are the words of none other than KIM PHILBY, once a high-ranking British ‘Intelligence Officer’, who defected from Britain to the USSR in the early 1960s where he was honoured by the KGB for services rendered.
In 1951, Guy Burgess and Donald MacLean, close colleagues of Philby’s in the British ‘Intelligence Services’, caused a major scandal when they made good their escape to Moscow as Soviet spies. Philby also came under suspicion at the time, but was never inconvenienced with an arrest or put on trial in Britain.
In this video from late 1955, Kim Philby helped establish a new benchmark in peddling cheeky lies to credulous reporters – who can still be relied upon, to this day, to stop asking questions whenever ‘national security’ is invoked.
There was muted outrage from the environment movement when Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd did a back flip a few weeks ago on his Government’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) – a term often used synonymously with ‘Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme‘ (CPRS).
Is this because environmentally-concerned people in our community have suddenly lost interest in climate change?
Have we joined the ranks of so-called ‘climate sceptics’: people so silly or arrogant they’d punt on their own hunch (or the hunch of their favourite shock-jock) about what’s necessary for biospheric security against the overwhelming consensus of the world’s professional scientists who’ve been researching – and freely discussing – the subject for years?
Dr Clive Spash - ex-CSIRO critic of the ETS, gagged by the Rudd Government
I don’t think so.
I’ll speak personally. By the time Rudd shelved the ETS as a legislative priority, I’d become so aghast at that revolting policy, the detail of which was developed by doyen of sneaky greenwash, ‘Climate Change’ Minister Penny Wong, that I saw it as worse than neutral.
Had the ETS gone ahead, in my opinion, it would have been a step backwards on grappling with climate change. That’s because it would have helped lock Australia into grossly unsustainable practices for a considerable period – and most likely would have ended in sheer fiasco, generating in the process widespread disillusionment about any kind of action on the crucial issue of climate change.
In other words, for me the ETS was not a CPRS at all. It was a fake. Doubtless emissions would have been traded under the scheme. But genuine emissions reduction? Once again, I think not.
To be even-handed, I’ll add that conservative Federal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott’s approach to the climate change issue is little more than ‘do nothing other than sneer and misrepresent the arguments’. That, of course, is seriously woeful. In Federal Parliament at present, the Australian Greens is the only politicial party to behave as though climate change is a real problem that requires genuine action.
Back in 2007, part of the promise of a Labor Government – after more than a decade of intellectual stultification under John Howard – was a more enlightened and open approach to public debate on important issues.
On climate change at least, it has not delivered this.
Not only did the Government develop a worse than useless policy – and squander yet more precious years failing to implement any significant changes to help shift our infrastructure and economy towards lower emissions.
It even persecuted informed voices that spoke out against its flakey policies.
The classic case is that of Dr Clive Spash, an environmental economist originally head-hunted by the CSIRO, then gagged and squeezed out of Australian academia when his work came to threaten the rose-tinted ‘consensus’ the Rudd Government was seeking to create around its proposals for an ETS.
Dr Spash’s work goes to the heart of what was, at the time, a crucial question. How effectively would an ETS reduce emissions and hence ameliorate climate change?
His conclusion was damning. It went beyond criticisms of detail in the Government’s policy (and needless to say, Senator Wong had made sure there was plenty of ‘devil in the detail’).
According to Dr Spash, the ETS is inherently flawed policy. It may have limited application in some cases, but as a general approach it would be a disaster.
Watch this video and judge his arguments for yourself.
Now ask yourself – whether or not you agree with the analysis presented by Dr Spash – what type of country gags voices such as his in the middle of a crucial policy debate?
It’s hard work keeping up with the Chickenhawks. The cast of lying clowns changes so quickly.
The video below is at least two years old now – but to my eyes it looks even more dated.
Politicians’ faces displayed are mostly yesterday’s war criminals, though the media chickenhawks are more durable.
Perhaps a mash-artist out there could update this late 1960s classic by Credence Clearwater Rivival with some new ‘face-overs’?
If you do, please let me know.
Lyrics of John Fogerty’s ‘Fortunate Son’…
Some folks are born made to wave the flag, Ooo, they’re red, white and blue. And when the band plays hail to the chief, Ooo, they point the cannon at you, y’all!
It ain’t me, it ain’t me, I ain’t no senator’s son, Son. It ain’t me, it ain’t me; I ain’t no fortunate one. No.
Some folks are born silver spoon in hand, Lord, don’t they help themselves, y’all! But when the taxman comes to the door, Lord, the house looks like a rummage sale.
It ain’t me, it ain’t me, I ain’t no millionaire’s son. No, no. It ain’t me, it ain’t me; I ain’t no fortunate one. No.
Some folks inherit star spangled eyes, Ooo, they send you down to war, y’all. And when you ask them, how much should we give? Ooo, they only answer more! More! More! Y’all.
It ain’t me, it ain’t me, I ain’t no military son, Son. It ain’t me, it ain’t me; I ain’t no fortunate one, one.
It ain’t me, it ain’t me, I ain’t no fortunate one. No, no, no. It ain’t me, it ain’t me, I ain’t no fortunate son. No, no, no.