[Biofuel] Japan - A cautious return to nuclear power
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/print/nn20130103f2.html A cautious return to nuclear power Though public is wary, new LDP-led government backs resumption of reactors, plant construction By MIYA TANAKA Kyodo Japan appears to be heading toward a gradual revival of nuclear power generation under a new government supportive of retaining it, but the outlook for the industry in 2013 is unclear, with antinuclear sentiment still lingering among the public amid the disaster at the Fukushima No. 1 atomic plant. The new government led by the Liberal Democratic Party has already signaled that it has no intention of following in the footsteps of the Democratic Party of Japan government, which was overthrown after the Dec. 16 election, when it comes to energy policy. The DPJ government aimed at phasing out nuclear power by the 2030s. We need to reconsider the previous government's policy of seeking zero operations of nuclear plants, Economy, Trade and Industry Minister Toshimitsu Motegi told a press conference shortly after assuming the ministerial post. He also said that completely giving up Japan's spent-fuel recycling policy, which would lose its role if nuclear power generation ends, is currently not an option, and that the government backs the resumption of reactors as long as they are deemed safe by the Nuclear Regulation Authority, the new atomic watchdog. The remarks are likely to encourage utilities, which have been desperate to restart idled reactors to boost their business. The minister's words also leave open the possibility of allowing utilities to install new reactors that have been planned but are not yet under construction. But the nuclear industry is not necessarily optimistic about its prospects due to the huge impact the Fukushima crisis has had on the public. The LDP won (the Dec. 16 general election), so will nuclear power be pursued? I don't think things are as simple as that, Takuya Hattori, president of the Japan Atomic Industrial Forum, told reporters, adding that the industry would lose more public trust if it returns to business as usual. The point is whether the nuclear industry can show how deeply it regrets the Fukushima accident and how far it will change itself, said Hattori, a former executive vice president of Tokyo Electric Power Co. 2012 was tumultuous for Japan's nuclear plant operators. From May, the country experienced a period without nuclear power for the first time in decades, as reactors that had been operating before the nuclear crisis started went offline for mandatory routine maintenance and were unable to be restarted without first undergoing stress tests. Two reactors in western Japan were reactivated in July after clearing provisional safety standards created by the government amid massive antinuclear rallies, which drew some 200,000 people near the prime minister's office in Tokyo at one point, according to the organizers. In addition to such a harsh climate of public opinion about atomic power, utilities may also face more headwinds now that the NRA is gearing up to assess the safety of reactors in the quake-prone country. Recently, the NRA has suggested it will be tough with utilities, warning that geological faults under two plants are likely to be active, assessments that will significantly affect the prospects for restarting the two plants' reactors. Motegi said the government will respect the safety assessments made by the independent NRA and added that reactors will not be allowed to restart unless they clear the new safety standards, which the NRA plans to craft by July to prevent a recurrence of the Fukushima crisis. Tadahiro Katsuta, an associate professor at Meiji University who is a member of a panel tasked by the NRA with devising the standards, said that high bars are expected to be set for utilities. But he also said he feels the plant operators are determined to meet the requirements at any cost and that there is no guarantee that the NRA can maintain its current tough stance against the companies. You don't know in what form pressure could be (exerted) on the NRA commissioners. Public opinion (skeptical about nuclear power) could also be a factor that is affecting them now, so if people start to become mum on the issue, the NRA's stance could change, Katsuta said. Some political experts said the new government is expected to carefully consider how to handle the nuclear issue, especially before the House of Councilors election, expected in July, because explicitly taking a pronuclear stance could trigger a public backlash. The LDP's landslide victory in the Lower House election may have made some ruling party lawmakers think there is less risk of pushing for the resumption of reactors. But they could still take a cautious approach until they win the Upper House election, opting to do what they really want to after that, said Koichi Nakano, a political
[Biofuel] Japan - New fossil fuel resources
LNG gains political value as Japan's needs soar Alaska looks to be key source if pipeline plan goes through http://www.japantimes.co.jp/print/nn20130103f1.html --0-- http://www.japantimes.co.jp/print/ed20130103a1.html EDITORIAL New fossil fuel resources While there have been heated discussions over what to do with Japan's nuclear power generation, it is important for the government not only to promote development of green energy sources but also to make serious efforts to exploit new fossil fuel resources, especially in the ocean, to operate the thermal power plants substituting for most of Japan's nuclear power plants now being kept offline. On Oct. 3, Japan Petroleum Exploration Co. extracted shale oil on a trial basis from 1,800-meter-deep bedrock in the Ayukawa gas field in Akita Prefecture. But the estimated total shale oil deposits in the prefecture is equivalent to slightly less than 10 percent of the oil Japan consumes in one year. The Natural Resources and Energy Agency says that the shale oil in the prefecture will not contribute much to improving Japan's energy self-sufficiency. In late November, a panel of the government's ocean policy headquarters came up with an interim draft report for the nation's new basic ocean policy. It said that the government should push the development of methane hydrate resources in the seas around Japan by setting numeral targets and timelines so that extracting methane from methane hydrate becomes a viable industry by 2025. In a low-temperature and pressure environment on the ocean bottom, water molecules exist in a cagelike structure. This structure confining methane molecules is methane hydrate. It is often called fiery ice because it looks like ice. If dissociated from water, methane can be collected as natural gas. It is estimated that methane hydrate deposits in the oceans around Japan are equivalent to nearly 100 years of Japan's natural gas consumption. It is not easy to extract methane from methane hydrate because the latter exists in the form of solid matter. But Japan has succeeded in getting methane from an underground methane hydrate layer in a test in Canada. In the test, the pressure inside the layer was lowered to let methane vaporize. Around mid-February in 2013, Japan, Oil, Gas and Metals National Corp. plans to start a test to dissolve methane hydrate in a layer some 1,300 meters below the sea surface off Atsumi Peninsula of Aichi Prefecture. Japan should develop methane hydrate resources in earnest. In doing so, it should work out an efficient method for extracting methane without causing environmental problems. Because Japan's territorial waters plus its exclusive economic zone are the world's sixth largest, serious efforts to exploit methane hydrate resources may help to give it an advantageous position in negotiations on imports of crude oil and liquefied natural gas. At present, Japan's power companies must import a large amount of LNG as fuel for thermal power plants. The government should accelerate the development of methane hydrate resources by providing sufficient financial support to the entities concerned. The Japan Times: Thursday, Jan. 3, 2013 ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Let's Give Up on the Constitution
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33506.htm Let's Give Up on the Constitution By LOUIS MICHAEL SEIDMAN January 02, 2012 NY Times -- AS the nation teeters at the edge of fiscal chaos, observers are reaching the conclusion that the American system of government is broken. But almost no one blames the culprit: our insistence on obedience to the Constitution, with all its archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil provisions. Consider, for example, the assertion by the Senate minority leader last week that the House could not take up a plan by Senate Democrats to extend tax cuts on households making $250,000 or less because the Constitution requires that revenue measures originate in the lower chamber. Why should anyone care? Why should a lame-duck House, 27 members of which were defeated for re-election, have a stranglehold on our economy? Why does a grotesquely malapportioned Senate get to decide the nation's fate? Our obsession with the Constitution has saddled us with a dysfunctional political system, kept us from debating the merits of divisive issues and inflamed our public discourse. Instead of arguing about what is to be done, we argue about what James Madison might have wanted done 225 years ago. As someone who has taught constitutional law for almost 40 years, I am ashamed it took me so long to see how bizarre all this is. Imagine that after careful study a government official - say, the president or one of the party leaders in Congress - reaches a considered judgment that a particular course of action is best for the country. Suddenly, someone bursts into the room with new information: a group of white propertied men who have been dead for two centuries, knew nothing of our present situation, acted illegally under existing law and thought it was fine to own slaves might have disagreed with this course of action. Is it even remotely rational that the official should change his or her mind because of this divination? Constitutional disobedience may seem radical, but it is as old as the Republic. In fact, the Constitution itself was born of constitutional disobedience. When George Washington and the other framers went to Philadelphia in 1787, they were instructed to suggest amendments to the Articles of Confederation, which would have had to be ratified by the legislatures of all 13 states. Instead, in violation of their mandate, they abandoned the Articles, wrote a new Constitution and provided that it would take effect after ratification by only nine states, and by conventions in those states rather than the state legislatures. No sooner was the Constitution in place than our leaders began ignoring it. John Adams supported the Alien and Sedition Acts, which violated the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech. Thomas Jefferson thought every constitution should expire after a single generation. He believed the most consequential act of his presidency - the purchase of the Louisiana Territory - exceeded his constitutional powers. Before the Civil War, abolitionists like Wendell Phillips and William Lloyd Garrison conceded that the Constitution protected slavery, but denounced it as a pact with the devil that should be ignored. When Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation - 150 years ago tomorrow - he justified it as a military necessity under his power as commander in chief. Eventually, though, he embraced the freeing of slaves as a central war aim, though nearly everyone conceded that the federal government lacked the constitutional power to disrupt slavery where it already existed. Moreover, when the law finally caught up with the facts on the ground through passage of the 13th Amendment, ratification was achieved in a manner at odds with constitutional requirements. (The Southern states were denied representation in Congress on the theory that they had left the Union, yet their reconstructed legislatures later provided the crucial votes to ratify the amendment.) In his Constitution Day speech in 1937, Franklin D. Roosevelt professed devotion to the document, but as a statement of aspirations rather than obligations. This reading no doubt contributed to his willingness to extend federal power beyond anything the framers imagined, and to threaten the Supreme Court when it stood in the way of his New Deal legislation. In 1954, when the court decided Brown v. Board of Education, Justice Robert H. Jackson said he was voting for it as a moral and political necessity although he thought it had no basis in the Constitution. The list goes on and on. The fact that dissenting justices regularly, publicly and vociferously assert that their colleagues have ignored the Constitution - in landmark cases from Miranda v. Arizona to Roe v. Wade to Romer v. Evans to Bush v. Gore - should give us pause. The two main rival interpretive methods, originalism (divining the framers' intent) and living
[Biofuel] World Bank 'Fights Poverty' by Investing in Five-Star Hotel
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/01/02-1 Published on Wednesday, January 2, 2013 by ProPublica World Bank 'Fights Poverty' by Investing in Five-Star Hotel by Cheryl Strauss Einhorn Accra is a city of choking red dust where almost no rain falls for three months at a time and clothes hung out on a line dry in 15 minutes. So the new five-star Mövenpick hotel affords a haven of sorts in Ghana's crowded capital, with manicured lawns, amply watered vegetation, and uniformed waiters gliding poolside on roller skates to offer icy drinks to guests. A high concrete wall rings the grounds, keeping out the city's overflowing poor who hawk goods in the street by day and the homeless who lie on the sidewalks by night. The Mövenpick, which opened in 2011, fits the model of a modern international luxury hotel, with 260 rooms, seven floors, and 13,500 square feet of retail space displaying $2,000 Italian handbags and other wares. But it is exceptional in at least one respect: It was financed by a combination of two very different entities: a multibillion-dollar investment company largely controlled by a Saudi prince, and the poverty-fighting World Bank. The investment company, Kingdom Holding Company, has a market value of $12 billion, and Forbes ranks its principal owner, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, as the world's 29th-richest person, estimating his net worth at $18 billion. The World Bank, meanwhile, contributed its part through its International Finance Corporation (IFC), set up back in 1956 to muster cheap loans and other financial support for private businesses that contribute to its planet-improving mandate. At the World Bank, we have made the world's most pressing development issue-to reduce global poverty-our mission, the bank proclaims. Why, then, did the IFC give a Saudi prince's company an attractively priced $26 million loan to help build the Mövenpick, a hotel the prince was fully capable of financing himself? The answer is that the IFC's portfolio of billions of dollars in loans and investments is not in fact primarily targeted at helping the impoverished. At least as important is the goal of making a profit for the World Bank. I reached this conclusion after traveling to Ghana-in many ways typical of the more than 100 countries where the IFC works-to see firsthand the kinds of problems the World Bank's lenders are supposed to tackle and whether their efforts are really working on the ground. I pored through thousands of pages of the bank's publicly available reports and financial statements and talked to dozens of experts familiar with its performance in Ghana and many other countries. In case after case, the verdict was the same: The IFC likes to work with huge corporations, funding projects these companies could finance themselves. Its partners are billionaires and massive multinationals, from oil giants like ExxonMobil to Grupo Arcor, the huge Argentine candy-maker. Its projects include not only glitzy hotels and high-end shopping malls, but also gritty gold and copper mines and oil pipelines, some of which end up benefiting the very corrupt, authoritarian regimes that the rest of the World Bank is urging to change. Nearly a quarter of the IFC's paid-in capital from member governments-now standing at $2.4 billion-came from U.S. taxpayers, and every president in the World Bank's 69-year history has been an American. But the United States has had little complaint with these practices, even when they have become a subject of public controversy. Not long ago, the World Bank's internal watchdog sharply criticized the IFC's approach, saying it gives little more than lip service to the bank's poverty-fighting mission. The report, a major 2011 review by the bank's Independent Evaluation Group, found that fewer than half the IFC investments it studied involved fighting poverty. [M]ost IFC investment projects generate satisfactory returns but do not provide evidence of identifiable opportunities for the poor to participate in, contribute to, or benefit from the economic activities that the project supports, the report concluded. In fact, it said, only 13 percent of 500 projects studied had objectives with an explicit focus on poor people, and even those that did, the report found, had a limited impact. The IFC did not dispute the conclusions. There is certainly need in countries like Ghana, whose per capita GDP ranks in the bottom third of the world, with life expectancy in the bottom 15 percent and infant mortality in the bottom fourth. The IFC committed about $145 million in loans and equity in Ghana just in fiscal year 2012. Yet Takyiwaa Manuh, who advises the Ghanaian government on economic development as a member of the National Development Planning Commission, told me she doesn't think of the IFC's investments as fighting poverty. Just because some people are employed, it is hard to say that is poverty reduction.
[Biofuel] Progressives: Washington's Fiscal Deal a Predictable, Terrible Mess
Fiscal Cliff Over, Now the Attack on the People Begins By Kevin Zeese January 02, 2013 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33504.htm Politicians Who Cut Social Programs Will Pay Price By Orson Aguilar January 02, 2013 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33500.htm The fiscal cliff deal 3 January 2013 http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/01/03/pers-j03.html Obama's Tax Threshold Concession Bodes Ill for Debt Ceiling Talks Wednesday, 02 January 2013 11:40 By Dean Baker, The Guardian | Op-Ed http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/13664-obamas-tax-threshold-concession-bodes-ill-for-debt-ceiling-talks Austerity: The Phony Solution to a Phony Deficit Crisis Wednesday, 02 January 2013 13:05 By Danny Weil, Truthout | Op-Ed http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/13668-austerity-solution-to-phony-deficit-crisis-largely-halted-for-now It Ain't Over Till It's Over: Wall Street Gears Up for Austerity Battles of 2013 by Mary Bottari Published on Wednesday, January 2, 2013 by PRWatch.org http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/01/02-6 --0-- http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/01/02-4 Published on Wednesday, January 2, 2013 by Common Dreams Progressives: Washington's Fiscal Deal a Predictable, Terrible Mess - Jon Queally, staff writer Agreement was widely shared across the progressive community on Wednesday that the deal reached in Washington in the first twenty-four hours of 2013 fell well short of what might have been possible had President Obama simply held strong to the leverage provided to him by a Republican Party hell bent on preserving lower taxes for the nation's wealthiest while simultaneously clamoring for cuts to popular social programs. Overall, most acknowledge, the whole process was a contrived distraction-one perpetuated by a pliant corporate media-designed to keep lawmakers from focusing on real solutions to the ongoing economic woes impacting the nation. Accepting that some decent elements were contained in the bill-such as an extension of unemployment benefits, preservation of the earned income tax credit, and ongoing funding for certain key programs-the overall assessment is that all of those elements could have been achieved through separate legislation and, given that a large majority of Americans support those policies, Democrats could have achieved a series of political victories if Republicans in Congress had continued to obstruct their passage. What follows is a sampling of these assessments. Robert Borosage, Campaign for America's Future, An Ugly Deal: http://blog.ourfuture.org/20130101/an-ugly-deal [The entire deficit and debt] debate is wrong-headed. You can't fix the debt without fixing the economy. And deficit reduction won't fix the economy. The recovery is too slow and too skewed to put people back to work. Deficit reduction can only slow it further. We need a big and bold debate about fundamental reforms needed to make this economy work for working people. That includes making big investments vital to our future at a time when we can borrow for virtually nothing - rebuilding and modernizing our decrepit infrastructure, funding RD, doing at least the basics in education. We need to balance our trade, and revive manufacturing, beginning with capturing a leading role in the global move to clean energy. We need to address inequality frontally. That requires much more than small marginal increases in taxes for millionaires. It includes raising the minimum wage, empowering workers to organize and bargain for a fair share of the profits they help to generate, limiting perverse CEO compensation schemes. It includes a financial transaction tax that might curb Wall Street gambling. We need to continue health care reform, taking on the entrenched lobbies - the drug and insurance companies, the private hospital complexes - that drive up our medical costs. If we paid per capita what other industrial countries pay for health care, we'd project surpluses as far as the eye can see. We have to fix our broken health care system. But Washington is talking about none of this. Instead the Congress and the President are going to continue to debate how much more to cut from public services as if that would fix the economy. That debate is likely to turn foul. Republicans use the debt ceiling to demand structural cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. They'll likely be willing to repeal or dilute the sequester as an incentive to focus on the core security programs. And they'll be convinced that the president will fold once more. Americans are struggling with mass unemployment, declining wages, increasing insecurity, Gilded Age inequality. Trimming the deficit addresses none of these, and is likely to slow growth, making things worse. We've had an ugly debate leading to a wretched agreement. And that agreement only insures that the debate will get uglier. Allison Kilkenny, The Nation, GOP Demands More Cuts
[Biofuel] As 2013 begins: A mood of anxiety in ruling circles
Pope calls for new economic model, more ethical markets Fri Dec 14, 2012 http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/14/pope-economy-idUSL5E8NE3OV20121214 Net worth of world's richest rose by $241B in 2012 Bloomberg index ranks wealthiest 100 individuals Bloomberg News 11:53 a.m. CST, January 2, 2013 http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/chi-net-worth-of-worlds-richest-rose-by-241b-in-2012-20130102,0,3779331.story Globalization is on the ropes By ROBERT J. SAMUELSON The Washington Post © 2012 Washington Post Writers Group The Japan Times: Thursday, Jan. 3, 2013 http://www.japantimes.co.jp/print/eo20130103rs.html --0-- http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/01/03/2013-j03.html As 2013 begins: A mood of anxiety in ruling circles By Nick Beams 3 January 2013 As the New Year begins, there is anxiety in ruling circles over the state of the world economy, increasing geo-political tensions, and the potential for major social struggles. As an editorial in the British magazine the Economist put it: From a showdown with Iran over its nuclear plans to a catastrophic break-up of the euro zone, it is not hard to think of disasters that could strike the world in 2013. The foremost cause of concern is the state of the world capitalist economy. Almost six years after the first signs of financial crisis and more that four years after the crash of 2008, recovery in the global economy is more remote than ever. Once again, in the words of the Economist: You might think that six years after the global financial crisis first broke, the downturn would be well behind us and the economy would be humming along. Instead, huge swathes of the world seem to be embarking on a Japanese-style experiment with long-term stagnation. The euro zone economy is contracting, the UK has experienced a double dip recession and could dip again after its worst recovery in more than 100 years, and Japan has seen seven quarters of negative growth out of the last 15. It is a measure of the extent of the crisis that the near-stagnant US, with growth at just 2 percent, is considered something of a bright spot among the major economies. At the same time, the hopes that China, India and other emerging markets could provide a new platform for growth have receded over the past 12 months. Commenting on the state of the world economy and the prospects for 2013, the Financial Times noted that the top two spots in the race for growth were likely to be filled by Libya and South Sudan, with resource-rich Mongolia in third place. The Economist told its readers if they wanted to take their mind off global gloom, they could look to the 14 percent growth rate expected for the gambling centre of Macau. While this was intended as an ironical comment, it was appropriate given the central role played by speculation in global capitalism. Last year ended with the central banks of the US, the UK, the European Union and Japan, covering more than 60 percent of the world economy, engaged in one or another form of quantitative easing-in effect, gambling that by printing endless supplies of money they would be able to stave off a financial crisis. But these measures, far from restoring economic growth, are only laying the basis for even deeper financial crises and the intensification of global currency and trade conflicts. The policies of the US Federal Reserve are particularly significant in this regard. Never before in the history of world capitalism has the central bank of the reserve currency, which forms the basis of the global financial system, set out to drive down the value of that currency. The deepening problems of the global economy will, in turn, exacerbate geo-political tensions. There are an increasing number of flashpoints with the potential to set off major political and possibly military conflicts. Last year saw a rapid increase in tensions throughout the East Asian region, as the Obama administration stepped up the anti-China push that forms the centre of its so-called pivot to Asia. Encouraged by the US, the Philippines and Vietnam have both been pushing their claims against China in the South China Sea. The political leaderships of both Japan and China have responded to worsening economic conditions by resorting to nationalism in an attempt to head off social unrest. The focus of these tensions are the disputed Sekaku/Diaoyu Islands claimed by both countries. So far, direct military clashes have been averted, but any conflict has the potential to rapidly escalate, especially under conditions where the US has made clear it will back Japan should there be an attack on its military forces. Pointing to frightening historical hatreds, the Financial Times recently warned that northeast Asia has not looked as scary in years. In the Middle East, an imperialist-backed attack on Syria will not only increase tensions throughout the region, but will have global ramifications. It
[Biofuel] Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns
Mysterious Court Appearance Proves Rendition Alive and Well Under Obama Three men were detained for months before appearing in Brooklyn court - Lauren McCauley, staff writer Published on Wednesday, January 2, 2013 by Common Dreams http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/01/02-7 --0-- http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/renditions-continue-under-obama-despite-due-process-concerns/2013/01/01/4e593aa0-5102-11e2-984e-f1de82a7c98a_story.html?wpisrc=nl_headlines Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns By Craig Whitlock, Published: January 2 The three European men with Somali roots were arrested on a murky pretext in August as they passed through the small African country of Djibouti. But the reason soon became clear when they were visited in their jail cells by a succession of American interrogators. U.S. agents accused the men - two of them Swedes, the other a longtime resident of Britain - of supporting al-Shabab, an Islamist militia in Somalia that Washington considers a terrorist group. Two months after their arrest, the prisoners were secretly indicted by a federal grand jury in New York, then clandestinely taken into custody by the FBI and flown to the United States to face trial. The secret arrests and detentions came to light Dec. 21 when the suspects made a brief appearance in a Brooklyn courtroom. The men are the latest example of how the Obama administration has embraced rendition - the practice of holding and interrogating terrorism suspects in other countries without due process - despite widespread condemnation of the tactic in the years after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Renditions are taking on renewed significance because the administration and Congress have not reached agreement on a consistent legal pathway for apprehending terrorism suspects overseas and bringing them to justice. Congress has thwarted President Obama's pledge to close the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and has created barriers against trying al-Qaeda suspects in civilian courts, including new restrictions in a defense authorization bill passed last month. The White House, meanwhile, has resisted lawmakers' efforts to hold suspects in military custody and try them before military commissions. The impasse and lack of detention options, critics say, have led to a de facto policy under which the administration finds it easier to kill terrorism suspects, a key reason for the surge of U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. Renditions, though controversial and complex, represent one of the few alternatives. In a way, rendition has become even more important than before, said Clara Gutteridge, director of the London-based Equal Justice Forum, a human rights group that investigates national security cases and that opposes the practice. Because of the secrecy involved, it is not known how many renditions have taken place during Obama's first term. But his administration has not disavowed the practice. In 2009, a White House task force on interrogation and detainee transfers recommended that the government be allowed to continue using renditions, but with greater oversight, so that suspects were not subject to harsh interrogation techniques, as some were during the George W. Bush administration. Scarce details in case The U.S. government has revealed little about the circumstances under which the three alleged al-Shabab supporters were arrested. Most court papers remain under seal. In a statement, the FBI and federal prosecutors for the Eastern District of New York said the defendants were apprehended in Africa by local authorities while on their way to Yemen in early August. The statement did not spell out where they were detained or why. The FBI made no mention of any U.S. involvement with the suspects until Oct. 18, when a federal grand jury handed up the sealed indictment. The FBI said its agents took custody of the men on Nov. 14, but the bureau did not specify where or from whom. A spokesman for federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of New York did not respond to a phone message and e-mail seeking comment. Defense attorneys and others familiar with the case, however, said the men were arrested in Djibouti, a close ally of Washington. The tiny African country hosts a major U.S. military base, Camp Lemonnier, that serves as a combat hub for drone flights and counterterrorism operations. Djibouti also has a decade-long history of cooperating with the United States on renditions. The Swedish Foreign Ministry confirmed that two of the men - Ali Yasin Ahmed, 23, and Mohamed Yusuf, 29 - are Swedish citizens and were detained in Djibouti in August. Anders Jorle, a spokesman for the ministry in Stockholm, said Swedish diplomats were allowed to visit the men in Djibouti and New York to provide consular assistance. This does not mean that the Swedish government has taken any
[Biofuel] New Year's Day Farm Bill Extension a Giant Step Backward
http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/01/02-2 January 2, 2013 Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) New Year's Day Farm Bill Extension a Giant Step Backward Prior Senate Gains for Healthy Food and Farms Lost Out to Big Ag Subsidies WASHINGTON - January 2 - Having failed throughout 2012 to complete a much-needed overhaul of federal farm programs, Congress wrapped a one-year extension of selected 2008 Farm Bill provisions into its 11th hour 'fiscal cliff' deal late last night. This move short-changed American farmers and consumers, according to Justin Tatham, senior Washington representative for UCS's Food Environment Program. Below is a statement by Tatham, who advocated all year for a new five-year Farm Bill that would give Americans the healthy food and farms they want and deserve: The Farm Bill extension included in the fiscal cliff package is a disgrace. For half a year, the Senate and House debated versions of a new Farm Bill that would have made some progress toward eliminating subsidies for Big Ag and shifting incentives to healthy food and smart, sustainable farming practices. But Republican leadership copped out at the last second. Support for healthy farms became agricultural runoff, while massive commodity subsidies remain in place. Incentives for fruit and vegetable production and much-needed programs that protect our air, water, and soil will now lose funding. The Farm Bill extension is a blow to farmers who want to grow healthy foods and the consumers who want to buy them. Real Farm Bill reform can't wait for the new September deadline. The incoming Congress owes it to farmers and consumers to start immediately on a new five-year Farm Bill - one that prioritizes conservation, healthy foods production and access, and research that furthers a sustainable farm future. Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) Links: http://www.ucsusa.org/ ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Thirty Foot Waves, Arctic Storm Batter Shell's Grounded Oil Rig
Greenpeace Statement on Shell's Arctic Drill Rig Kulluk Greenpeace January 2, 2013 http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/01/02 --0-- http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/01/02 Published on Wednesday, January 2, 2013 by Common Dreams Thirty Foot Waves, Arctic Storm Batter Shell's Grounded Oil Rig 'Shell stands to profit from drilling in the Arctic Ocean, yet we all bear the risks.' - Jon Queally, staff writer Thirty-foot seas and an arctic storm are preventing rescue or salvage of a Royal Dutch Shell oil drilling rig that ran aground in Alaska on New Year's Eve. The drilling rig, named the Kulluk, has not yet broken apart, but sits precariously just off Sitkalidak Island in the southeast part of the state. Reports indicate that the ship is intact, but worries are heightened that chances of spilling the vessel's 150,000 gallons of diesel fuel and other toxic lubricants increase with each passing hour. As the Associated Press reports Wednesday: A team of company, Coast Guard and local officials said they were mobilizing spill response equipment and preparing a plan in the event of a spill in the Partition Cove and Ocean Bay areas of the island. The area is home to at least two endangered species, as well as harbor seals, salmon, and sea lions. The storm eased Tuesday, with gusts up to 35 mph and waves up to 30 feet high, and similar conditions were expected Wednesday. Officials were hoping to get marine experts onboard to take photos and videos, and then come up with a more complete salvage plan once weather permits. This grounding should serve as the tipping point to show our government that we are not ready to drill in the Arctic Ocean, Susan Murray, Oceana deputy vice president, said in a statement issued Tuesday. Greenpeace campaigner Ben Ayliffe agreed. The grounding of Shell's Arctic rig, which contains tens of thousands of gallons of fuel oil, is yet another example of how utterly incapable this company is of operating safely in one of the planet's most remote and extreme environments, he said. Shell has lurched from one Arctic disaster to the next, displaying staggering ineptitude every step of the way. Were the pristine environment of the frozen north not at risk of an oil spill it would be almost comical. Instead it's tragic. We're moving closer to a major catastrophe in the Arctic and the US government appears unwilling to provide either the needed oversight or emergency backup the company's incompetence requires. Murrary continued by saying, Shell stands to profit from drilling in the Arctic Ocean, yet we all bear the risks. We hope that this accident will not become a major environmental disaster. The area in which the Kulluk grounded is critical habitat for endangered Steller sea lions and threatened sea otters; and there are important fisheries in the area that help provide livelihoods for Alaskans and support our economy. Rather than opening up the high north to oil firms we need to keep this fragile place off-limits to reckless industrialization, concluded Ayliffe. Greenpeace and the millions of people who have joined us to save the Arctic will be keeping a very close eye on developments in Kodiak. In a statement released Tuesday, US Congressman Ed Markey (D-MA), the minority chair of the House Natural Resources Committee, echoed sentiments of environmentalists and Arctic drilling critics by saying: Oil companies keep saying they can conquer the Arctic, but the Arctic keeps disagreeing with the oil companies. Drilling expansion could prove disastrous for this sensitive environment, he said. The Alaska Dispatch posits the question: Will Shell's grounded drilling ship impact US energy policy in Arctic? And reports: Shell has invested more than $4.5 billion since the mid-2000s in a quest to reignite a controversial Arctic drilling program that it started in the 1980s. But from lawsuits to mishaps like the grounding of its Kulluk drilling ship this week, the Netherlands-based oil giant has seemingly faced one problem -- one more delay -- after another. The $290-million Kulluk and its tug weren't operating above the Arctic Circle when the problems started late last week. And the Coast Guard's Alaska headquarters at Kodiak are located relatively nearby the grounded Kulluk, making response efforts easier than in the Arctic, where the agency has no base. What would happen if similar troubles ever occur in the much more remote Arctic Ocean? No one involved with the recovery would speculate Tuesday. We're learning that oceans, while beautiful, are dangerous and unforgiving, Michael LeVine, senior Pacific counsel for the environmental group Oceana, told the New York Times. Shell has demonstrated again and again that it's not prepared to operate in Alaskan waters. Reporting on the pattern of trouble encountered by Shell's drilling excursions in the last year, the Times adds: The grounding
[Biofuel] Free Syrian Army Claims It Can Make Chemical Weapons
New UN Report on Syria By Stephen Lendman January 02, 2013 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33510.htm Al Qaeda in Yemen offers bounty for U.S. ambassador DUBAI | Mon Dec 31, 2012 http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/31/us-yemen-us-qaeda-idUSBRE8BU02I20121231?utm_medium=emailutm_source=newsletterutm_campaign=cheatsheet_morningcid=newsletter%3Bemail%3Bcheatsheet_morningutm_term=Cheat%20Sheet --0-- http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33507.htm Free Syrian Army Claims It Can Make Chemical Weapons By Russian TV January 02, 2012 RT -- A prominent member of the Free Syrian Army claims the rebels have all the components to produce chemical weapons and have the know-how to put them together and use if necessary. If we ever use them, we will only hit the regime's bases and centers, the political adviser of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), Bassam Al-Dada, was quoted by Turkey's state-run Anatolia news agency. The adviser stressed that the Syrian opposition would only use chemical weapons if the ruling regime did so first. If President Bashar Assad threatens Syrian opposition fighters with chemical weapons, Al-Dada noted, he should know that the opposition also possess them. Al-Dada stated that their expertise came from army officers with technical knowledge who had defected from the government side. However, he did not mention anyone in particular. The media have quickly made links between the announcement and Major-General Adnan Sillu, who defected from the regime in July 2012 and who prior to that led the army's chemical weapons training program. In June 2012, Adnan Sillu was quoted by Al Arabiya that probably anyone from the Free Syrian Army or any Islamic extremist group could take them over. He claimed that the stores of mustard gas and nerve agents - such as in Homs, east of Aleppo and east of Damascus - were not properly secured. Earlier in December, he claimed that the Syrian regime's arsenal of chemical weapons almost matches Israel's. The EU, US and allied nations have repeatedly expressed their concern that the main threat from Syria's chemical weapons is that they could fall into the hands of terrorists who have infiltrated the ranks of the Syrian rebels. The concern increased significantly last month after Syria's United Nations ambassador, Bashar Jaafari, warned that the Syrian opposition might use chemical weapons against innocent civilians after they gained control of a toxic chlorine factory east of Aleppo, and try to blame President Assad's regime. Damascus officials have stressed on numerous occasions that Syria would not use chemical weapons under any circumstances, except against a foreign attack. Global concern over possible possession of chemical weapons by Syrian rebels first appeared in December 2011, when one of the Assad's representatives warned the world community that some of the extremist rebel groups possessed chemical weapons. Fear that Syria could also use chemical weapons against its neighbors was cited by Turkey as one of the reasons why it requested six Patriot missiles from NATO to be stationed on its border with Syria. The alliance approved the deployment. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] A Tale of Two Diplomatic Asylums: Julian Assange and Chen Guangcheng
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/13667-a-tale-of-two-diplomatic-asylums-julian-assange-and-chen-guangcheng A Tale of Two Diplomatic Asylums: Julian Assange and Chen Guangcheng Wednesday, 02 January 2013 11:37 By Danny Weil, Truthout | Op-Ed Two dissidents, two appeals for asylum, two very different approaches and outcomes. Julian Assange in London On June 19, 2012, Julian Assange sought asylum at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. The founder of WikiLeaks had just lost a court appeal in which he fought extradition to Sweden, where he faces questioning related to accusations of rape and sexual assault. It is widely believed by members of the international community that Assange's extradition to Sweden is a vindictive ruse to ultimately thrust him into the legal jurisdiction of the United States to face charges related to WikiLeaks' publication of hundreds of thousands of State Department documents. Sweden has consistently declined offers to interview Assange in Britain, reinforcing this perception. On August 15, Britain threatened to storm the Ecuadorian Embassy and arrest Assange if the Latin American country did not turn him over to the British authorities. Britain also sent a letter to the Ecuadorian Embassy threatening to strip the embassy of its diplomatic status. This is quite extraordinary, considering that Assange has not been formally charged with any crimes in connection with the Swedish inquiry. On August 16, Ecuador granted Assange asylum after neither the British nor the Swedes would assure that Assange would not be extradited to a third country - namely the US. British police now have the Ecuadorian Embassy in London surrounded and under siege and they vow to arrest Assange if he leaves, thereby violating Ecuador's right to grant diplomatic asylum. Chen Guangcheng in Beijing On May 19, 2012, Chinese dissident Chen Guangcheng, his wife and two children arrived at Newark, NJ airport after being granted asylum by the US government. They were accompanied from Beijing by two US State Department officials. Guangcheng is a blind self-taught lawyer from a Chinese village several hundred miles from Beijing. Guangcheng exposed forced sterilization and abortions of thousands of women by the Chinese government. Guangcheng was prosecuted by the Chinese government and served a four-year prison sentence for damaging property and organizing a mob to disturb traffic. After he completed his prison term in 2010, Guangcheng was placed under house arrest; he escaped in April 2012 and sought refuge in the US Embassy in Beijing. This was only the second case of a foreign diplomatic mission granting protective custody to a dissident in China. Guangcheng left the US Embassy after six days, reportedly following threats against his wife. Several days later, in May 2012, Guangcheng and his family were granted political asylum in the US following negotiations between the White House and the Chinese government. However, Guangcheng's nephew was arrested on April 27, shortly after Guangcheng escaped house arrest and he was convicted in November. He was sentenced to 39 months in prison in a case that was seen as retribution against Guangcheng. As the Washington Post reported on November 30: Chen Kegui, the nephew of blind legal activist Chen Guangcheng, was sentenced on Friday to 39 months in prison for injuring government officials who stormed into his home after searching for his uncle who had fled house arrest. The Obama administration swiftly condemned the sentence, calling it the result of a 'deeply flawed legal process that lacked basic guarantees of due process.'. The Obama administration eagerly argued that Chen Kegui was convicted in a summary trial at which he was not fully represented by legal counsel. State Department spokesperson, Victoria Nuland stated to the Post: Our concern is that this case did not meet the standard of international law. A Tale of Two Diplomatic Asylums The United States government has portrayed Guangcheng as a hero for exposing human rights abuses by the Chinese government at the same time it prosecutes Bradley Manning and hunts down Julian Assange for similar acts. Vice President Joe Biden went so far as to call Assange a high-tech terrorist before he was even accused of a crime. The Assange and Guangcheng cases demonstrate that the US government hypocritically promotes what they call human rights, government accountability and democracy abroad, but shies away from promoting anything similar domestically. US Senator Lindsey Graham even sponsored a Congressional resolution honoring Guangcheng while demanding the prosecution of WikiLeaks. The United States likes to criticize China for engaging in prosecutions that are deeply flawed and lack due process while it drives a stake in the very heart of due process through official US governmental conduct that includes extraordinary renditions,
[Biofuel] Details of Obama 'Kill List' to Remain in the Shadows, Court Rules
The Coming Drone Attack On America Drones on domestic surveillance duties are already deployed by police and corporations. In time, they will likely be weaponised By Naomi Wolf By 2020, it is estimated that as many as 30,000 drones will be in use in US domestic airspace. January 02, 2012 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33503.htm Why We Hate Them: Arabs in Western Eyes A new PBS documentary reveals how films and other media have shaped an anti-Muslim narrative. By Philip Giraldi January 02, 2012 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33509.htm --0-- http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/01/02-12 Published on Wednesday, January 2, 2013 by Common Dreams Details of Obama 'Kill List' to Remain in the Shadows, Court Rules Federal court rejects Freedom Of Information request - Jacob Chamberlain, staff writer Information surrounding the targeted killing of three American citizens by US drones in Yemen will remain secret for now, following a federal court decision to turn down a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the ACLU. The information, requested from the Department of Justice by the ACLU, includes a legal memorandum which allegedly gives legal and factual justification for the extrajudicial killings of U.S. citizens Anwar Al-Awlaki and Samir Khan in September 2011, and Al-Awlaki's 16-year-old son Abdulrahman in October 2011. Anwar Al-Awlaki was placed on Obama's executive Kill List. This ruling denies the public access to crucial information about the government's extrajudicial killing of U.S. citizens and also effectively green-lights its practice of making selective and self-serving disclosures, said Jameel Jaffer, ACLU deputy legal director. As the judge acknowledges, the targeted killing program raises profound questions about the appropriate limits on government power in our constitutional democracy. The public has a right to know more about the circumstances in which the government believes it can lawfully kill people, including U.S. citizens, who are far from any battlefield and have never been charged with a crime. The ruling, made in the Southern District of New York court, also included the denial of a similar FOIA request made by the New York Times. The ACLU plans to appeal the decision; however, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals is also considering a separate ACLU FOIA lawsuit for other information surrounding the Obama administration's targeted killing program in general, including its legal basis, scope, and number of civilian casualties caused by drone strikes. On the killings, the Center for Constitutional Rights explains: On September 30, 2011, U.S. strikes killed Anwar Al-Aulaqi, along with Samir Khan and three others. Two weeks later, the U.S. launched another drone strike at an open-air restaurant in Yemen, killing Anwar Al-Aulaqi's son, Abdulrahman, and six other civilian bystanders, including another teenager. These killings, undertaken without due process, in circumstances where lethal force was not a last resort to address a specific, concrete and imminent threat, and where the government failed to take required measures to protect bystanders, rises to a violation of the most elementary constitutional right afforded to all U.S. citizens - deprivation of life without due process of law. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
