Sunday, July 26, 2009
News From Infoshop
July 23-Manila, PHILIPPINES — The rejection of nuclear power in Indonesia is another nail in the coffin of the nuclear industry, Greenpeace said today as it demanded the Philippine government to follow suit and abandon its dangerous nuclear power plans which it criticized as "backward and unproductive," and seemingly "reeking of less-than-noble intentions."
The environment organization had recently welcomed the decision of Indonesia's largest Muslim organization, Nahdlatul Ulama, (NU), that nuclear power is haram (forbidden) on the island of Madura, East Java. The announcement in Madura, close to Indonesia's second largest city of Surabaya, follows a similar decision by the Jepara, Central Java chapter of NU on 1 September 2007, when scholars and clerics concluded that the threat to the local communities from potential radioactive leaks and radioactive waste handling far outweighed any potential benefits.
"In Indonesia and in any part of the world including the Philippines, communities clearly do not want nuclear power as they will be the most at risk from its operations. This latest case of rejection of nuclear power is another nail in the coffin for the obsolete nuclear power industry. Our government must see this as a signal to stop wasting time and money on expensive and dangerous technology that no one wants nor needs, and keep the focus on developing investments in clean, safe renewable energy under a strong Renewable Energy Law," said Greenpeace Southeast Asia Campaigner Francis dela Cruz.
Worldwide, the nuclear industry is failing and still struggles with the same problems as it did forty years ago. Very few of the 435 operational nuclear power plants, as well as waste storage sites around the globe have been built within budget and on schedule. While there were reactors being built in 2008, many of these were delayed and no new reactors came online--compared to 27,000 megawatts of wind energy which came online in the same year. Indonesian President Yudhoyono had already announced that he was opposed to building a nuclear reactor as long as there are better alternatives. In June Indonesia's state energy utility, PLN, stated that it didn’t see nuclear power being part of Indonesia's future energy mix.
In the Philippines, however, the government seems bent on pursuing the costly and hazardous nuclear path with President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and the Department of Energy expressing support for nuclear power as an "alternative" energy source. This is despite strong opposition particularly on plans to revive the mothballed and obsolete Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP).
"There is no real benefit from nuclear power--only real economic losses and obvious danger. To pursue nuclear power when the country is ready to harness clean, safe and abundant renewable energy goes against all common sense. Greenpeace asserts that the government should focus on massively expanding our renewable energy capacity and promoting energy efficiency standards and technologies. Renewable energy is the safest and cheapest source of power available, aside from being a key solution to climate change and energy security," concluded dela Cruz.
The environment organization had recently welcomed the decision of Indonesia's largest Muslim organization, Nahdlatul Ulama, (NU), that nuclear power is haram (forbidden) on the island of Madura, East Java. The announcement in Madura, close to Indonesia's second largest city of Surabaya, follows a similar decision by the Jepara, Central Java chapter of NU on 1 September 2007, when scholars and clerics concluded that the threat to the local communities from potential radioactive leaks and radioactive waste handling far outweighed any potential benefits.
"In Indonesia and in any part of the world including the Philippines, communities clearly do not want nuclear power as they will be the most at risk from its operations. This latest case of rejection of nuclear power is another nail in the coffin for the obsolete nuclear power industry. Our government must see this as a signal to stop wasting time and money on expensive and dangerous technology that no one wants nor needs, and keep the focus on developing investments in clean, safe renewable energy under a strong Renewable Energy Law," said Greenpeace Southeast Asia Campaigner Francis dela Cruz.
Worldwide, the nuclear industry is failing and still struggles with the same problems as it did forty years ago. Very few of the 435 operational nuclear power plants, as well as waste storage sites around the globe have been built within budget and on schedule. While there were reactors being built in 2008, many of these were delayed and no new reactors came online--compared to 27,000 megawatts of wind energy which came online in the same year. Indonesian President Yudhoyono had already announced that he was opposed to building a nuclear reactor as long as there are better alternatives. In June Indonesia's state energy utility, PLN, stated that it didn’t see nuclear power being part of Indonesia's future energy mix.
In the Philippines, however, the government seems bent on pursuing the costly and hazardous nuclear path with President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and the Department of Energy expressing support for nuclear power as an "alternative" energy source. This is despite strong opposition particularly on plans to revive the mothballed and obsolete Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP).
"There is no real benefit from nuclear power--only real economic losses and obvious danger. To pursue nuclear power when the country is ready to harness clean, safe and abundant renewable energy goes against all common sense. Greenpeace asserts that the government should focus on massively expanding our renewable energy capacity and promoting energy efficiency standards and technologies. Renewable energy is the safest and cheapest source of power available, aside from being a key solution to climate change and energy security," concluded dela Cruz.
Abortion and North Dakota: The Latest Battle
North Dakota is once again ground zero in the abortion wars. Last spring the state briefly considered what is known as a "human life" definition bill, which would have defined a fetus as a human being.
North Dakota is an odd place for such a battle, because so few abortions are performed in the state. There is but one facility that provides abortion, The Red River Women's Health Clinic in Fargo. It would be a three-hour trek from western parts of the state, unless a woman would go to Billing, Montana for the procedure. There were a grand total of about 1,200 abortions in North Dakota. According to 2005 figures, all of New York State had the most that year at about 125,000. Abortion appears to be a big issue in this state. You can't go on the interstate without seeing anti-abortion billboards.
A new law, set to take effect in August requires that a woman considering an abortion be required to view an ultrasound and be exposed to an audible heartbeat of the fetus. This is to be done 24 hours before the procedure. Ultimately, it's an insulting law. It's predicated on the idea that no woman considering an abortion has thought it through sufficiently. It is premised on the idea, that if only women knew what they were doing, they would forswear consideration of this fact and fall down in a heap on the floor and beg forgiveness.
Here's the wording of the law from the bill's main sponsor, Robert Erbele of Lehr
It gives a person considering the abortion just a little bit more time to think about it and maybe by viewing the ultrasound it would make them aware of the reality of what they're doing… There is a real life there and a real person that they're dealing with.
The meaning is clear. Women seeking an abortion cannot possible know what they are doing.
The clinic is filing suit to stop the law. It is based around the clinic performing the procedure has to provide the ultrasound and the heartbeat. There are criminal charges attached to not performing the procedure highlighted in the bill.
The clinic is being backed by the New York based Center For Reproductive Rights. Right now, the clinic and the center are asking for an injunction. This would mean a temporary halt to the enforcement of the law, while the lawsuit is being evaluated.
Attorney General Wayne Stenhjem says he is planning to fight the lawsuit.
The clinic says that law is vague and confusing and if the clinic would have to provide the device to hear the heartbeats, would pose a financial hardship on the clinic.
There is an issue as to whether this law interferes with patient client relationships.
The center believes that this is first time the heartbeat test has been mandated by state law.
So, once again, North Dakota is in the center of abortion politics.
North Dakota is an odd place for such a battle, because so few abortions are performed in the state. There is but one facility that provides abortion, The Red River Women's Health Clinic in Fargo. It would be a three-hour trek from western parts of the state, unless a woman would go to Billing, Montana for the procedure. There were a grand total of about 1,200 abortions in North Dakota. According to 2005 figures, all of New York State had the most that year at about 125,000. Abortion appears to be a big issue in this state. You can't go on the interstate without seeing anti-abortion billboards.
A new law, set to take effect in August requires that a woman considering an abortion be required to view an ultrasound and be exposed to an audible heartbeat of the fetus. This is to be done 24 hours before the procedure. Ultimately, it's an insulting law. It's predicated on the idea that no woman considering an abortion has thought it through sufficiently. It is premised on the idea, that if only women knew what they were doing, they would forswear consideration of this fact and fall down in a heap on the floor and beg forgiveness.
Here's the wording of the law from the bill's main sponsor, Robert Erbele of Lehr
It gives a person considering the abortion just a little bit more time to think about it and maybe by viewing the ultrasound it would make them aware of the reality of what they're doing… There is a real life there and a real person that they're dealing with.
The meaning is clear. Women seeking an abortion cannot possible know what they are doing.
The clinic is filing suit to stop the law. It is based around the clinic performing the procedure has to provide the ultrasound and the heartbeat. There are criminal charges attached to not performing the procedure highlighted in the bill.
The clinic is being backed by the New York based Center For Reproductive Rights. Right now, the clinic and the center are asking for an injunction. This would mean a temporary halt to the enforcement of the law, while the lawsuit is being evaluated.
Attorney General Wayne Stenhjem says he is planning to fight the lawsuit.
The clinic says that law is vague and confusing and if the clinic would have to provide the device to hear the heartbeats, would pose a financial hardship on the clinic.
There is an issue as to whether this law interferes with patient client relationships.
The center believes that this is first time the heartbeat test has been mandated by state law.
So, once again, North Dakota is in the center of abortion politics.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
News From Indymedia
June 13-- Thousands of people around Australia rallied for emergency action on Climate Change on June 13, calling for 100% renewable energy by 2020 and demanding that Australia must make the shift from fossil fuels to wind, solar and other available renewable technologies. The National Climate Emergency Rally was held in capital cities around Australia, with people siting down outside Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's city office in Sydney and a sitdown protest in front of the Melbourne Town Hall where the ruling Australian Labor Party were holding their State conference.
This comes as progress on climate negotiations in Bonn, Germany, were blocked by the US Administration, with the US still talking about zero per cent reductions by 2020 on 1990 levels. "Industrialised countries need to assume their historical responsibility and pay back their climate debt. Developing countries must stay strong in calling for climate justice. By ignoring calls to repay their climate debt and hindering progress in these talks, rich countries are jeopardising the lives and livelihoods of millions of people." said Meena Raman, Honorary Secretary of Friends of the Earth Malaysia in a media release.
Climate IMC | Perth Indymedia | Melbourne: Report, Photos: 1, 2, Videos: 1, 2 | Sydney Report, Youtube Videos: 1, 2, 3 | Brisbane Report
The co-ordinated rallies ocurred in all capital cities around Australia and some regional towns and the demands included:
* 100% renewable energy by 2020. Australia must make the shift from fossil fuels to 100% renewable energy from wind, solar and other available technologies.
* Green collar jobs not job cuts. We can renew our economy by creating hundreds of thousands of 'green jobs' and supporting workers to make a fair and just transition to sustainable industries.
* Don't pass the Carbon Pollution law. We need climate policies that make the big polluters pay and not allow big companies to go on polluting. The CPRS won't reduce Australia's greenhouse pollution.
* Logging and clearing vegetation are major contributors to climate change as forests and woodlands are important carbon stores.
This follows a break in the environment movement over carbon trading where several environmental groups such as Greenpeace Australia, Friends of the Earth Australia and the Wilderness Society have refused to follow the Australian Conservation Foundation qualified endorsement of the Federal Government proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS), and have put forward a Plan "B", an agenda for immediate climate action.
Many activists criticised the proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) as giving too many free concessions to the fossil fuel industry, with minimal direction of capital to renewable energy projects. In other words, Business As Usual.
In December 2009, governments of the world will meet in Copenhagen to forge a critical new global climate change agreement. The Climate Emergency Rally sought to motivate people at the grassroots to pressure politicians to secure strong global action to cut emissions in time to avoid catastrophic climate change.
At the Melbourne protest a woman from Tuvalu, Emeretta Cross, spoke on the rising seas threat to her country and other low lying nations and spoke of the need of acting for the children and their future. (Watch Video)
Damien Lawson, National Climate Justice Co-ordinator for Friends of the Earth Australia, spoke on the need for a campaign of popular civil disobedience if politicians continue taking no action or ineffectual action to rapidly decrease carbon emissions. (Watch video - Climate Emergency: Damien Lawson calls for Civil Disobedience Campaign for action on Climate Change)
Read more on the Climate Action Centre website which organised the protest in Melbourne.
This comes as progress on climate negotiations in Bonn, Germany, were blocked by the US Administration, with the US still talking about zero per cent reductions by 2020 on 1990 levels. "Industrialised countries need to assume their historical responsibility and pay back their climate debt. Developing countries must stay strong in calling for climate justice. By ignoring calls to repay their climate debt and hindering progress in these talks, rich countries are jeopardising the lives and livelihoods of millions of people." said Meena Raman, Honorary Secretary of Friends of the Earth Malaysia in a media release.
Climate IMC | Perth Indymedia | Melbourne: Report, Photos: 1, 2, Videos: 1, 2 | Sydney Report, Youtube Videos: 1, 2, 3 | Brisbane Report
The co-ordinated rallies ocurred in all capital cities around Australia and some regional towns and the demands included:
* 100% renewable energy by 2020. Australia must make the shift from fossil fuels to 100% renewable energy from wind, solar and other available technologies.
* Green collar jobs not job cuts. We can renew our economy by creating hundreds of thousands of 'green jobs' and supporting workers to make a fair and just transition to sustainable industries.
* Don't pass the Carbon Pollution law. We need climate policies that make the big polluters pay and not allow big companies to go on polluting. The CPRS won't reduce Australia's greenhouse pollution.
* Logging and clearing vegetation are major contributors to climate change as forests and woodlands are important carbon stores.
This follows a break in the environment movement over carbon trading where several environmental groups such as Greenpeace Australia, Friends of the Earth Australia and the Wilderness Society have refused to follow the Australian Conservation Foundation qualified endorsement of the Federal Government proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS), and have put forward a Plan "B", an agenda for immediate climate action.
Many activists criticised the proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) as giving too many free concessions to the fossil fuel industry, with minimal direction of capital to renewable energy projects. In other words, Business As Usual.
In December 2009, governments of the world will meet in Copenhagen to forge a critical new global climate change agreement. The Climate Emergency Rally sought to motivate people at the grassroots to pressure politicians to secure strong global action to cut emissions in time to avoid catastrophic climate change.
At the Melbourne protest a woman from Tuvalu, Emeretta Cross, spoke on the rising seas threat to her country and other low lying nations and spoke of the need of acting for the children and their future. (Watch Video)
Damien Lawson, National Climate Justice Co-ordinator for Friends of the Earth Australia, spoke on the need for a campaign of popular civil disobedience if politicians continue taking no action or ineffectual action to rapidly decrease carbon emissions. (Watch video - Climate Emergency: Damien Lawson calls for Civil Disobedience Campaign for action on Climate Change)
Read more on the Climate Action Centre website which organised the protest in Melbourne.
These Are Good Blogs.....
Visit them....often...
Visit them...often....
Chavezian Airspace
Pharyngula
World O'Crap
Ken Jennings
North Decoder
Prairie Fire
From The Barricades
Visit them...often....
Chavezian Airspace
Pharyngula
World O'Crap
Ken Jennings
North Decoder
Prairie Fire
From The Barricades
Side Trips From The Monkees
In my mind, the Monkees were always unfairly bagged, for not playing their own instruments; or not writing their own songs, which is a peculiar lament in the world of pop music. It really was not a relevant concern until the Beatles and Dylan. No one bagged on Doris Day for not having written Sentimental Journey.
What counts is what is in the grooves ,and for my money the Monkees delivered very good pop/rock from a distinctive era.
The Monkees remain fertile ground for pop exploration. Both pre-and post Monkees careers can be investigated and these grounds. We could talk about the aborted New Monkees, that songwriters Boyce and Hart, along with Dolenz and Jones, tried to forge as Dolenz, Jones, Boyce and Hart, but we will confine ourselves to the Billboard Top 100 singles charts.
Davey Jones was a star and would have continued to have been so without the Monkees. He had a stage career because of Oliver! And was being molded into a safe, teen-boy idol. In his pre-Monkees career, he had a lower reaches of the charts hit with a jaunty vaudevillian number called, What Are We Going To Do? and was featured on some of the teeny-bopper TV shows of the day. Its not bad and gives a measure of what his career might have been without the Monkees. Post-Monkees, he tried to forge a bubble-gum career and only had one-charter with a nifty little bubble-gummer called Rainy Jane.
Perhaps the biggest Musician of the Monkees was Mike Nesmith. I will not discuss his pre-Monkees, rare-as-the-teeth-of-hens singles as Michael Blessing, but rather his post-Monkees chart action. With the First National Band, Mike put forth some credible country rock and got on the charts a few times with songs like, Joanne.
Mickey Dolenz is the oddest of this bunch. He did some recording pre-Monkees with a group, called the One-Nighters. During the end of the Monkees the label that had the rights to it, released it. Were there no Monkees, or had Mickey not made it in, it could have been a "lost" garage band single by a former child actor. The song, Don't Do It dented the Top 100.
The other Musician of the group, Peter Tork had a career that brushed by the Top 100 and deserves some mention. He hung out with the musicians that constituted most of the Lovin Spoonful. I have heard rumors that he dated Cass Elliot. Mickey Dolenz always said that Peter was his entrée into the bohemian counter-culture of the 60s. He was very much a Musician, and a very smart man. He was relegated to a role he hated, the dumb guy of the group, whereas, the others got to play extensions of themselves. Mickey was wacky, Mike was dry, and Davey was cute. Peter had to completely play against what he was. Alas, no Top 100 love for our Peter.
The Monkees are a gift that keeps on giving for the pop music fan. The hits and albums were good enough by any pop measure. The side trips are worthy excursions.
What counts is what is in the grooves ,and for my money the Monkees delivered very good pop/rock from a distinctive era.
The Monkees remain fertile ground for pop exploration. Both pre-and post Monkees careers can be investigated and these grounds. We could talk about the aborted New Monkees, that songwriters Boyce and Hart, along with Dolenz and Jones, tried to forge as Dolenz, Jones, Boyce and Hart, but we will confine ourselves to the Billboard Top 100 singles charts.
Davey Jones was a star and would have continued to have been so without the Monkees. He had a stage career because of Oliver! And was being molded into a safe, teen-boy idol. In his pre-Monkees career, he had a lower reaches of the charts hit with a jaunty vaudevillian number called, What Are We Going To Do? and was featured on some of the teeny-bopper TV shows of the day. Its not bad and gives a measure of what his career might have been without the Monkees. Post-Monkees, he tried to forge a bubble-gum career and only had one-charter with a nifty little bubble-gummer called Rainy Jane.
Perhaps the biggest Musician of the Monkees was Mike Nesmith. I will not discuss his pre-Monkees, rare-as-the-teeth-of-hens singles as Michael Blessing, but rather his post-Monkees chart action. With the First National Band, Mike put forth some credible country rock and got on the charts a few times with songs like, Joanne.
Mickey Dolenz is the oddest of this bunch. He did some recording pre-Monkees with a group, called the One-Nighters. During the end of the Monkees the label that had the rights to it, released it. Were there no Monkees, or had Mickey not made it in, it could have been a "lost" garage band single by a former child actor. The song, Don't Do It dented the Top 100.
The other Musician of the group, Peter Tork had a career that brushed by the Top 100 and deserves some mention. He hung out with the musicians that constituted most of the Lovin Spoonful. I have heard rumors that he dated Cass Elliot. Mickey Dolenz always said that Peter was his entrée into the bohemian counter-culture of the 60s. He was very much a Musician, and a very smart man. He was relegated to a role he hated, the dumb guy of the group, whereas, the others got to play extensions of themselves. Mickey was wacky, Mike was dry, and Davey was cute. Peter had to completely play against what he was. Alas, no Top 100 love for our Peter.
The Monkees are a gift that keeps on giving for the pop music fan. The hits and albums were good enough by any pop measure. The side trips are worthy excursions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
