Showing posts with label China. Show all posts
Showing posts with label China. Show all posts

Friday, August 1, 2008

If Cummunist China Can Do It Why Can't We?

China's 'rapid renewables surge'
By Mark Kinver
Science and nature reporter, BBC News

China's rapid investment in low carbon technologies has catapulted the nation up the global renewable energy rankings, a report shows.


The Climate Group study said China invested $12bn (£6bn) in renewables during 2007, second only to Germany.


However, it was expected to top the table by the end of 2009, it added.


The findings have been published as China faces criticism over its air quality ahead of the Beijing Olympic Games, which begin on 8 August.


The report, China's Clean Revolution, brings together the latest data on the country's burgeoning renewables sector in one publication.


Co-author Changhua Wu, The Climate Group's China director, said the rapid rise in investment was, in part, the result of the government realising that the western model of industrialisation was unsustainable.


"China has been experiencing similar problems during its industrial revolution that western nations saw during their period of rapid growth - pollution, environmental damage and resource depletion," she told BBC News.


"Domestically, we are being constrained in many ways; we do not have that many natural resources anymore.


"We have to rely on the international markets, so there is a big security concern there."


Uncertainty over future energy supplies has seen global fuel prices reach record levels, which has resulted in renewable technologies becoming a more attractive option.


The report said China's $12bn investment in renewables during 2007 was only just behind top-of-the-table Germany, which spent $14bn.


In order to meet its target of increasing the percentage of energy from low carbon technologies from 8% in 2006 to 15% by 2020, China is expected to invest an average of $33bn annually for the next 12 years.


This was going to result in China becoming the leading investor by the end of 2009, Ms Wu forecast.


Figures within the report showed that China was already the leading producer in terms of installed renewable generation capacity.


It has the world's largest hydroelectricity capacity since the controversial Three Gorges project began producing electricity, and the fifth largest fleet of wind turbines on the planet.


Although its installed capacity of photovoltaic (PV) panels is still relatively low, it is already the leading manufacturer of solar panels.


Ms Wu explained that the rapid growth of the sector was being driven by both government and business.


"In order to really drive towards a low carbon economy, policy incentives are crucial; but it is not always the case," she said.


"The wind sector's fast growth was mainly a result of domestic policies, because the government offered incentives to developments so that private and public sector entrepreneurs would jump on it.


"But the solar PV sector benefitted mainly from the international market, such as demand from the US and EU.


"Even today, the policy incentives are still not there, yet it still has grown to the level it is now."


Lingering legacy


However, despite the advances in low carbon technology, the legacy of rapid economic growth, which was primarily fuelled by burning coal, has been soaring greenhouse gas emissions.



In the final days before the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games in Beijing, there has been growing international concern over the air quality in the Chinese capital as the world's top athletes begin to arrive.


Organisers of the Games had promised that the city's notorious pollution would be cleaned up, so failure to deliver would be seen as an embarrassing environmental shortcoming.


City officials said that they would introduce emergency measures, such as banning the use of private cars and closing some factories, if conditions did not improve.


Although Beijing's troubles are currently under the media spotlight, air quality is a nationwide problem. According to figures from the World Bank, 20 of the planet's 30 most polluted cities are in China.


"In terms of total emissions, China is already the world's biggest emitter," Ms Wu said. "That's publicly available information, even the government is not denying it anymore.


"But if you look at emissions on a per capita basis, we are not the biggest emitters because we have 1.3bn people."


The report suggests that if China's population emitted as much as US citizens, its total emissions would be roughly equivalent to those of the entire planet's human activity.


"But just looking at numbers does not help tackle global climate change," Ms Wu added.


"In China, we are concerned about the speed of growth in emissions; it is really scary."


The report showed that China was only responsible for about 7% of greenhouse gases emitted in the period before 2002, when more than 90% of emissions from human activity were released.


But since the turn of the century, it added, China's portion has been growing steadily and now accounts for 24% of the global total.


The government is looking to stabilise its emissions by 2020, primarily through greater energy efficiency and the expansion of the nation's renewable energy infrastructure, including electric cars.


Ms Wu added that within the international climate negotiations, the Chinese were looking to developed nations to prove that they were serious about tackling climate change, such as delivering the mandatory cuts in emissions outlined in the Kyoto Protocol.


"If they are not able to do it with the technology available to them, then is it reasonable to expect China and India to do it?


"China does not commit itself to a number and then not deliver," she said, referring to whether China would sign up to legally binding targets in the ongoing UN climate negotiations about what system should replace the current Kyoto Protocol when it expires in 2012.


"If they commit, then they are very, very serious about; so they have to figure out what is possible."

Highlighting powered by ClearForest ©


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Tuesday, July 8, 2008

This has Stunk Of Deception From The Beginning....



There is too much about this that causes the hair on the back of my neck to stand up; a typical reaction to yet another Bushlie! Something is rotten, but it ain't in Denmark


Mark Karlin


Editor and Publisher- Buzzflash


July 8, 2008


A report from Swiss public radio that $20 million was paid to release three American hostages, Ingrid Betancourt, and 11 Colombian soldiers and police officers is being pretty much roundly ignored in the United States.



Not so the case in the UK, where the Times reported the allegation on July 4th:


But while she [Betancourt] was still in the air, the Swiss radio station RSR broadcast a report questioning the official version of the operation to free Ms Betancourt and 14 other hostages – saying that money, not cunning, had clinched their freedom.


According to Bogota, the hostages were freed in an elaborate ruse by Colombian intelligence agents who had infiltrated the Marxist Farc rebels holding them.


But RSR said that the 15 hostages “were in reality ransomed for a high price, and the whole operation afterwards was a set-up". Citing a source "close to the events, reliable and tested many times in recent years", it said that the United States – which had three citizens among those freed – was behind the deal and put the price at $20 million.


The Colombian Foreign Ministry furiously denied the allegations, with a spokesman calling them "completely false." He added: "They are lies".


General Freddy Padilla, head of the Colombian military, categorically denied they had paid "a single peso" to Farc.


"As the General Commander of the Armed Forces and on my military honour, I deny that the Colombian Government has paid a single peso, a single cent," he said.


Please note the plausible deniability in the statement of the Colombian Armed Forces Commander. One, if the U.S. paid the money, then he is correct to say that Colombia did not pay it. Two, the money may not have been paid directly to FARC, but paid through an intermediary, or paid as a bounty fee to defectors.


Far be it from BuzzFlash to claim first hand knowledge of such a $20 million dollar pay-off. But it wouldn't be the first time that the Bush Administration has claimed that it won't negotiate with terrorists and then paid ransom money behind the scenes.


The rescue also comes at a curiously propitious time for the Bush Adminsitration and its "made man" in Colombia, President Alvaro Uribe. He is seeking to pass a plebiscite to allow him an unprecedented third term. Furthermore, Uribe is being used by the U.S. as a proxy opponent to Chavez in terms of leadership in South America. In addition, let's not forget that the controversial Columbia "Free Trade Pact" is stalled in Congress. Finally -- and most curiously -- John McCain inexplicably showed up in Colombia around the time of the "rescue."


This is reminiscent of our hostages being released on the day Reagan was sworn in as president, Great political theater; until it all unravels years later, when no one cares anymore. Americans had better develop a finer sense of history. A country with no past has no future. If Americans had any sense of history at all and a working knowledge of the present, George W. Bush would have been laughed out of the presidential race in 2000.


BuzzFlash wants to make it clear that FARC is a motley and dreadful "guerilla force" that is as corrupt and reprehensible as the right wing Colombian death squads who are killing trade unionists -- with a wink and a nod from the government -- in that nation. We share in the joy of anyone receiving their freedom, particularly given the length some of these hostages were imprisoned in dire and harsh circumstances.


But the fact that the American media has once again unquestionably advanced a made-for-tv-movie narrative of the rescue proves, yet again, that our media -- particularly television -- has pretty much abandoned probing news for entertaining, government story lines. There are far too many unexplored details in the official Colombian-American-French rescue account, and no indication that the American press is exploring any of them to any significant degree.


That is a dereliction of journalistic duty.


One of the few exceptions regarding the ransom allegations was the LA Times, which posted an article on July 7th:


Colombian authorities sought over the weekend to discredit a Swiss academic and former intermediary in talks with a left-wing rebel group who has been linked to a disputed report that officials paid $20 million for last week's release of 15 high-profile hostages.


(Left wing? Sounds like they are born-killers and totalitarians. That doesn't sound like the so-called "Left-wing here.)


A Colombian government official who asked to remain unnamed said Sunday that authorities suspect Geneva-based Jean Pierre Gontard was the source for the Swiss radio report last week stating that officials paid a ransom for the release of the hostages.


Officials have denied any ransom was paid and said the rescue was based on subterfuge and infiltration of the rebel high command. The notion of paying ransom is extremely sensitive here, since U.S. and Colombian authorities have labeled the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, a terrorist group and have ruled out payments to terrorists.


Meanwhile, Colombian Defense Minister Juan Manuel Santos told the newspaper El Tiempo that captured rebel computer files name Gontard as the courier for $480,000 seized by Costa Rican police at the behest of the Colombian government this year from a FARC hide-out in San Jose, the Costa Rican capital.


What's interesting about the last paragraph, which we first saw in a Chinese publication of all places, is that the Colombian government is now trying to impugn the apparent source of the ransom allegation, even though he was apparently a sanctioned go-between at one time.


Finally, in an online New Zealand publication, we found this tidbit:


The French online news daily MediaPart yesterday contradicted the account put forward by the Colombian government, that its agents had infiltrated the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc) and freed Betancourt and 14 other hostages through a clever ploy.


MediaPart reported that it had learned that the hostages had actually been freed through an agreement between Bogota and the Farc, in exchange for political asylum for Farc members in France and the payment of a ransom.


"Shock and awe," "Made for TV Rescues," "Jessica Lynch Heroic Action Figure Tales": is there any difference between fictional war flicks and manufactured news anymore?


We can't conclusively say, because the corporate media isn't doing its job; it's just providing us with government-issued story lines that hold our interest by entertaining us with "heroic feats."


But what if the heroic feats are as finely tuned as a Hollywood script, but financed by our government -- as they publicly espouse the hypocrisy of not negotiating with "insurgents" -- instead of some LA moguls?


THE BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG




(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.


Saturday, October 27, 2007

BushCo Continues Push To WWIII

Deja Vu All Over Again.

Bush sanctions on Iranian military force, banks, and companies doomed to failure. Russia and China are pushing back on unilateral U.S. sanctions against Iran.

Turkey masses troops in Iraqi border. Bush Iraqi folly stands to unravel in wider regional conflict.



(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Friday, October 12, 2007

450 ppm. We've Already Passed It.

What can we do?

A key threshold crossed

An Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report to be released next month will show that the limit on greenhouse-gases scientists hoped to avert has already been surpassed.







In Ray Bradbury's science fiction novel "Fahrenheit 451," that number represented the temperature at which books would burn, a symbol of a disturbing future under a totalitarian government.

For climate scientists, a similar number, 450 parts per million (ppm), holds its own ominous meaning. It represents a dangerous concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere; a total that they were not expecting to be passed for at least another decade.

But a new UN-sponsored report, to be released next month, will show that as of 2005 the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere had already reached 455 ppm, according to Tim Flannery, a prominent Australian climate scientist who says he's seen the raw data that go into the document.

In an interview on Australian television this week, Dr. Flannery said that an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report will show that carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide, methane, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and other greenhouse gasses are at much higher concentrations than previously thought. Reuters quotes him:

"We thought we'd be at that threshold within about a decade.... We thought we had that much time. But the new data indicates that in about mid-2005 we crossed that threshold.... What the report establishes is that the amount of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere is already above the threshold that could potentially cause dangerous climate change."

About 75 percent of the total ppm represents carbon dioxide, associated with burning fossil fuels. The rest is a combination of the other gasses, he said.

On the Sierra Club website, blogger Pat Joseph explains the meaning of 450 ppm:

"450 ppm has long been held up as the threshold we dare not cross if we hope [to] avert the worst consequences of warming. Well, if Flannery is right, (and there's no reason to think otherwise) we crossed that line without even breaking stride."How did it happen? For one thing, countries such as China and India are actually "recarbonizing," Mr. Joseph says, meaning that their economies are becoming more energy-intensive "as they turn increasingly to [greenhouse-gas emitting] coal to feed their growth."

In May, the IPCC estimated current concentration of greenhouse gases at only 425 ppm, said a BBC report at the time. It noted that many scientists equated 450 ppm with a 2 degree C (3.6 degrees F.) rise in temperatures. Allowing temperatures to rise more than 2 C could lead to major impacts on the environment, scientists said. In the article, Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of the IPCC, explained the strategy this way:

"If you want to stabilise around 450 ppm, that means in a decade or two you have to start reducing emissions far below the current level.... So in other words, we have a very short window for turning around the trend we have in rising greenhouse gas emissions. We don't have the luxury of time."

But, says Flannery, named Australian of the Year for 2007, that window is closed. According to the Australian Associated Press he says that higher figure is due to miscalculating the potency of other greenhouse gasses, which are included in the 450 ppm figure and measured in terms equivalent to that of CO2. But he adds:

"[A]lso we have really seen an unexpected acceleration in the rate of accumulation of CO 2 itself, and that's been beyond the limits of projection ... beyond the worst-case scenario. We are already at great risk of dangerous climate change – that's what the new figures say.... It's not next year, or next decade; it's now."

A major UN climate change meeting in Bali, Indonesia, in December aims to set a course toward a new global agreement to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. The current Kyoto Protocol, signed by the majority of the world's nations but not the United States, expires in 2012. Flannery told Reuters that the 450 ppm figure adds to the urgency and importance of that meeting.

Meanwhile, Erwin Jackson, policy director of the Climate Institute, an Australian environmental group, told the Australian Associated Press that reducing greenhouse gas levels would be the only path to avoiding a catastrophe:

"The longer we stay above the kind of levels we're at at the moment, the more likely it is that we would start to see the loss of the Great Barrier Reef; you would actually start see the collapse of the great ice sheets and places like the Amazon starting to burn down."This weekly feature appears with links at csmonitor.com


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Wednesday, September 5, 2007

More Bushite Incompetence: China Hacks Pentagon

China flexes muscles of its 'informationised' army

· Pentagon attack part of long-running effort to breach US networks
· Hacking incidents seen as effort to develop computer warfare capability

  • The Guardian
  • Wednesday September 5 2007
The Pentagon

The Pentagon resisted attacks for months but finally succumbed.

When the presidents of the world's remaining superpower and the nation fast challenging for the title, George Bush of the United States and Hu Jintao of China, meet in Sydney tomorrow they had been scheduled to be talking about matters of mutual interest: trade and global warming.

Now, even if not on the formal agenda, both sides are likely to be considering the prickly issue of cyber- warfare, following the revelation that the Pentagon suffered a major breach by hackers reportedly working for the Chinese military earlier this year.

Disclosure by the Financial Times that the People's Liberation Army, or PLA, assaulted part of the Pentagon's system used by policy advisers to the defence secretary, Robert Gates, is the latest and potentially most serious breach and set alarm bells ringing across the US military.

The Pentagon reportedly resisted the PLA onslaught for several months, but was finally penetrated, forcing a shutdown of that part of its network for a week. A spokesman would not comment on the assault or its source, but emphasised that any information obtained would have been unclassified. The timing of the attack, and the apparent involvement of the PLA, points to an escalation of anxiety in governments across the world.

Cyber-warfare began with individuals, spread to criminal gangs, and is now reaching the realm of nation states.

The Chinese government denied the allegations but, tomorrow's presidential meeting aside, Beijing is already on the defensive over its cyber-activities. Last week Angela Merkel raised the issue of cyber-warfare on an official visit to China, exhorting the government to "respect a set of game rules".

The German chancellor's objections followed a report in Der Spiegel magazine that Chinese spying software had been found widely scattered through the networks of Germany's foreign and economic departments, and even in Mrs Merkel's private office.

Internet security experts have been tracking Chinese cyber-warfare for several years. In 2005, US officials revealed that sweeps of US intelligence, including flight software and aircraft plans, had been going on since 2003. The hackers, codenamed Titan Rain by US investigators, were believed to be in Guangdong, a province of China with a heavy concentration of PLA which was also identified by Der Spiegel as the origin of the invasion of German government networks.

Last November, the US navy reported a military computer had been attacked, probably by Chinese, though it was unclear whether the hackers were commercial or state-inspired. In July, the state department was reportedly investigating a break-in affecting its work across the world; it was suggested hackers had targeted anything relating to China and North Korea, though it is possible that criminal, as opposed to political or military, hackers were using that as a front to disguise their intentions.

The threat of state-sponsored hacking is dominating the thoughts of security officials around the world. Some suggest as many as 120 countries are actively pursuing cyber warfare. China has spelled out in a white paper that what it calls "informationised armed forces" are one of the three pillars of its military strategy, setting itself the target building a cyber army which could win such a war by 2050.

The extent of cyber warfare was underlined earlier this year when the Guardian revealed that Estonia had been almost overwhelmed by an attack believed to have originated inside Russia which rendered a number of government websites useless and was described by officials as a "very serious disturbance".

The US is particularly vulnerable, both because of the extent of interest in its activities around the world, and because of the sheer size of its systems. The Pentagon operates 3.5m computers across 65 countries, including 35 internal networks.

Its most sensitive network, Siprnet, is for secret information, and is thought never to have been hacked. Non-classified information passes through the less secure Niprnet; it is in one segment of this network the Chinese operation is believed to have pierced.

Though the Pentagon stressed that any emails intercepted would be unclassified, that does not inherently rule out disruption. Sami Saydjari, who worked as a Pentagon cyber expert for 13 years and now runs a private company, Cyber Defence Agency, said: "If someone is able to attack information that is needed by decision makers, or that is crucial to organising logistics and supply lines of an army on the ground, that means they can induce chaos in a nation."

It is not clear exactly how the hackers gained access to the Pentagon. It may be they deployed the principle of "elevating privilege", said Dan Haagman of the computer forensics company 7Safe. That would involve breaking into a single, unsecured computer used for mundane administrative tasks, then using its flaws to step across to other computers higher up the chain of command.

The pattern would be similar to that used by the British hacker Gary McKinnon, currently fighting extradition to the US after allegedly breaking into Pentagon and Nasa computers. In the German case, Der Spiegel said a so-called Trojan program implanted in Microsoft Word documents and PowerPoint files had been used to infect systems .

Other ways include viruses, worms, and "denial of service", where a computer system is bombarded with so much information it becomes inoperable. "We have gone well beyond teenagers who want their egos boosted. We're now into the organised kind of state activity that is truly serious," said Jody Westby, at CyLab based at Carnegie Mellon University.

The US strategic commander, General James Cartwright, this year gave a frank assessment in which he said that the military's defence against cyber warfare was disjointed, passive and "dysfunctional".


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Conservative in French does translate to effing insane.

French President Cautions Against Attacking Iran in Standoff Over Tehran's Nuclear Program
By Angela Doland
The Associated Press

Monday 27 August 2007

Paris - French President Nicolas Sarkozy warned Monday that it would be "catastrophic" to resort to military force in confronting Iran over its suspect nuclear program.

"For me, Iran having a nuclear weapon is unacceptable," Sarkozy said in his first major address on foreign policy, but he stressed that he opposed an attack on the Islamic regime and urged that the West rely on diplomacy.

He said Iran can choose between dialogue with the international community or more U.N. sanctions. "This tactic is the only one that allows us to escape from a catastrophic alternative: an Iranian bomb, or the bombing of Iran," he said.

Sarkozy also said Iran is entitled to use nuclear power for civilian needs, such as generating electricity.

If countries like Iran run out of fossil fuels, and "if they don't have the right to the energy of the future, then we will create conditions of misery and underdevelopment, and therefore an explosion of terrorism," Sarkozy said.

In other areas, the new president signaled a shift in tone from his predecessor, Jacques Chirac, casting himself as a "friend of Israel" and taking a tougher line on Russia and China.

But despite his admiration for the United States, Sarkozy said Chirac was right to oppose the war in Iraq, which he called a mistake.

Sarkozy took over from fellow conservative Chirac in May pledging to boost France's international stature. The energetic new leader quickly scored a few high-profile diplomatic coups, such as helping secure freedom for six Bulgarian medical workers jailed in Libya for nine years on charges of deliberately infecting children with AIDS.

Yet the diplomatic agenda he outlined Monday was relatively modest. He proposed, for example, a committee of great minds to reflect on the future of the European Union - an unassuming proposal for the EU, which Sarkozy nonetheless called France's "absolute priority."

He also eased his opposition to Turkey's bid for membership in the EU, which he previously vowed to block. On Monday, Sarkozy said he would not oppose new talks with the Muslim state, while adding the discussions should examine the idea of a weaker alliance than membership.

"A few months after taking the presidency, Nicolas Sarkozy is realizing that he has limited room for maneuvering," said Philippe Moreau-Defarges of the French Institute for International Relations.

Sarkozy's tough language about China and Russia set him apart from Chirac, who was often criticized for too-cozy ties with authoritarian leaders.

Sarkozy warned Russia against exercising its energy exports with "brutality." And he said China was "transforming its insatiable quest for raw materials into a strategy of control, notably in Africa."

While France has a history of close ties with the Arab world, Sarkozy said: "I have the reputation of being a friend of Israel, and it's true. I will never compromise on Israel's security."

Despite that, he said, the many Arab leaders who have visited him since his election know they can count on his friendship.

Sarkozy, who spent his summer holiday in New England and whose affection for the U.S. earned him the nickname "Sarko the American," sent his foreign minister to Iraq last week to smooth over ties that were strained when Chirac opposed the U.S.-led invasion.

But friendly relations do not mean there cannot be differences of opinion, Sarkozy said Monday.

"France was, and still is, hostile to the war," he said, calling for a timetable for the withdrawal of foreign troops.

Though he criticized the U.S. over Iraq, Sarkozy showed his commitment to the security effort in Afghanistan by pledging more troops to train the Afghan army - following months of speculation about France's commitment to that international force.

Closer to home, Sarkozy reiterated his proposal for a "Mediterranean Union" to bridge the divide between Europe and North Africa. The idea echoes a concept dear to Chirac, who called for a "dialogue of cultures" to counteract the forces of extremism.

Francois Heisbourg, a leading expert on French strategic and foreign policy, said that even when Sarkozy was sending a message of continuity, his style differed dramatically from Chirac's oratory flourishes.

Sarkozy is "clear talk - no punches pulled, no dancing around words. This was very deliberate," Heisbourg said.

"It's a message to the Iranians, but it's also a message to the Russians and the Chinese - that is, that if you want us to have a serious chance to try to avoid getting ... into this awful alternative, you'd better be serious in the Security Council."



(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Thursday, August 9, 2007

China Threatens Economic Nuclear Option

....and who among us is surprised by this?

The only thing surprising about it is that it has taken this long.

There is more than one way to skin a superpower.

China Threatens "Nuclear Option" of Dollar Sales
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
The Telegraph UK

Wednesday 08 August 2007

The Chinese government has begun a concerted campaign of economic threats against the United States, hinting that it may liquidate its vast holding of US treasuries if Washington imposes trade sanctions to force a yuan revaluation.

Two officials at leading Communist Party bodies have given interviews in recent days warning - for the first time - that Beijing may use its $1.33 trillion (£658bn) of foreign reserves as a political weapon to counter pressure from the US Congress.

Shifts in Chinese policy are often announced through key think tanks and academies.

Described as China's "nuclear option" in the state media, such action could trigger a dollar crash at a time when the US currency is already breaking down through historic support levels.

It would also cause a spike in US bond yields, hammering the US housing market and perhaps tipping the economy into recession. It is estimated that China holds over $900bn in a mix of US bonds.

Xia Bin, finance chief at the Development Research Centre (which has cabinet rank), kicked off what now appears to be government policy with a comment last week that Beijing's foreign reserves should be used as a "bargaining chip" in talks with the US.

"Of course, China doesn't want any undesirable phenomenon in the global financial order," he added.

He Fan, an official at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, went even further today, letting it be known that Beijing had the power to set off a dollar collapse if it choose to do so.

"China has accumulated a large sum of US dollars. Such a big sum, of which a considerable portion is in US treasury bonds, contributes a great deal to maintaining the position of the dollar as a reserve currency. Russia, Switzerland, and several other countries have reduced the their dollar holdings.

"China is unlikely to follow suit as long as the yuan's exchange rate is stable against the dollar. The Chinese central bank will be forced to sell dollars once the yuan appreciated dramatically, which might lead to a mass depreciation of the dollar," he told China Daily.

The threats play into the presidential electoral campaign of Hillary Clinton, who has called for restrictive legislation to prevent America being "held hostage to economic decicions being made in Beijing, Shanghai, or Tokyo."

She said foreign control over 44pc of the US national debt had left America acutely vulnerable.

Simon Derrick, a currency strategist at the Bank of New York Mellon, said the comments were a message to the US Senate as Capitol Hill prepares legislation for the Autumn session.

"The words are alarming and unambiguous. This carries a clear political threat and could have very serious consequences at a time when the credit markets are already afraid of contagion from the subprime troubles," he said.

A bill drafted by a group of US senators, and backed by the Senate Finance Committee, calls for trade tariffs against Chinese goods as retaliation for alleged currency manipulation.

The yuan has appreciated 9pc against the dollar over the last two years under a crawling peg but it has failed to halt the rise of China's trade surplus, which reached $26.9bn in June.

Henry Paulson, the US Treasury Secretary, said any such sanctions would undermine American authority and "could trigger a global cycle of protectionist legislation."

Mr Paulson is a China expert from his days as head of Goldman Sachs. He has opted for a softer form of diplomacy, but appeared to win few concession from Beijing on a unscheduled trip to China last week aimed at calming the waters.


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Wednesday, August 8, 2007

The Corporate Conspiracy Against Mother Earth

Boycott Exxon-Mobile along with the other corporate conspirators for Mother Earth

Boycott China for your own well-being and health.

Gore: Polluters finance research to cast doubt on global warming

August 7, 2007

SINGAPORE---- Research aimed at disputing the scientific consensus on global warming is part of a huge public misinformation campaign funded by some of the world's largest carbon polluters, former Vice President Al Gore said Tuesday.

''There has been an organized campaign, financed to the tune of about $10 million a year from some of the largest carbon polluters, to create the impression that there is disagreement in the scientific community,'' Gore said at a forum in Singapore. ''In actuality, there is very little disagreement.''

Gore likened the campaign to the millions of dollars spent by U.S. tobacco companies years ago on creating the appearance of scientific debate on smoking's harmful effects.

''This is one of the strongest of scientific consensus views in the history of science,'' Gore said. ''We live in a world where what used to be called propaganda now has a major role to play in shaping public opinion.''

After the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, made up of the world's top climate scientists, released a report in February that warned that the cause of global warming is ''very likely'' man-made, ''the deniers offered a bounty of $10,000 for each article disputing the consensus that people could crank out and get published somewhere,'' Gore said.

''They're trying to manipulate opinion and they are taking us for fools,'' he said.

He said Exxon Mobil Corp., the world's largest publicly traded oil company, is one of the major fuel companies involved in attempting to mislead the public about global warming.

Last year, British and American science advocacy groups accused ExxonMobil of funding groups that undermine the scientific consensus on climate change. The company said the scientists' reports were just attempts to smear Exxon Mobil's name and confuse the debate.

Gore said that with growing awareness of climate change, the world will see an acceleration in efforts to fight the problem, and urged businesses to recognize that reducing carbon emissions is in their long-term interest.

But while Washington should lead by example, he said developing nations also have to play a part.

''Countries like China, just to give an example, which will next year be the largest emitter in the world, can't be excluded just because it's technically a developing country,'' Gore said. ''When you look at the absolute amount of CO2 each year and going forward, China will soon surpass the U.S.''

Gore said that as the Asian giant's economy expands, China faces an increased risk from climate change and must leapfrog old, polluting technologies while maintaining growth.

The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency said in June that China overtook the United States in carbon dioxide emissions by about 7.5 percent in 2006. China was 2 percent below the U.S. in greenhouse gas emissions in 2005, the agency said.

Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Thursday, June 28, 2007

It Is Time to Boycott China!

It is past time to become alarmed, folks.

How many people have to be poisoned with cheap toothpaste, have their pets killed or, possibly, be killed on the highways by faulty tires before we say, ENOUGH!

How many Americans have lost their jobs to cheap overseas labor? We don't have the exact numbers, but suffice it to say, too damn many!

That's certainly bad enough. As a matter of fact it is unforgivable.

But now we find that either the oversight on goods coming from the very same countries that took the jobs, thanks to cheap-ass American corporations, is bad to non-existent or the Chinese, in particular, are trying to kill us all. Take your pick, the result is the same.

Maybe it doesn't matter to the Bush government, because the people who will likely be made ill or killed are poor and need to save every penny they can to pay the rent and the utilities bill.

It sure as hell should matter to the rest of us, whether or not we cut corners on toothpaste or tires, to save a few bucks.

It is time to boycott every damn product that is made in China, whether or not said product is made by an American corporations with factories in China.

Together we can find out who they all are and make them wish they had eaten a dozen tubes of poison toothpaste before we are through with them.

This is a call to action!

As John, at Americablog reports:

In this day and age, why do people have to die to highlight these problems? This latest case of tire recalls is only now going public because the importer of the cheap tires is being sued in connection with deadly road accidents that could be directly related to defective tires. The importer is alleged to have known about the problem two years ago but only came forward - to ask for help for funding the recall - after being sued. Until recently, the Chinese government has shown little interest in product quality and safety but then again, the importers have shown little interest either. Both parties have been happy because China has a fast growing export business and importers have cheap products that can provide comfortable margins when sold in quantity. The loser in all of this has been the consumer, who is asked to be the guinea pig in the process. At the same time we see the Bush administration aggressively trying to remove the rights of Americans to sue, dismissing all lawsuits as the "McDonald's coffee is hot" category. America can be excessive with lawsuits, but especially without safeguards for consumers as we see these days, there are few options left. Call me old fashioned, but I believe consumers in a country like the US should expect much more.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Monday, June 4, 2007

The Crazies Almost Got Us Into A Nuclear War With China

NeCons should be deported or something..

These people are NUTZ!

Defense Officials Tried to Reverse China Policy, Says Powell Aide
By Jeff Stein,
CQ National Security Editor

The same top Bush administration neoconservatives who leap-frogged Washington’s foreign policy establishment to topple Saddam Hussein nearly pulled off a similar coup in U.S.-China relations—creating the potential of a nuclear war over Taiwan, a top aide to former Secretary of State Colin Powell says.

Lawrence B. Wilkerson, the U.S. Army colonel who was Powell’s chief of staff through two administrations, said in little-noted remarks early last month that “neocons” in the top rungs of the administration quietly encouraged Taiwanese politicians to move toward a declaration of independence from mainland China — an act that the communist regime has repeatedly warned would provoke a military strike.

The top U.S. diplomat in Taiwan at the time, Douglas Paal, backs up Wilkerson’s account, which is being hotly disputed by key former defense officials.

Under the deliberately fuzzy diplomatic formula hammered out between former President
Richard Nixon and Chairman Mao Zedong in 1971, the United States agreed that there is only “one China” —with its capital in Beijing.

But right-wing Republicans in particular continued to embrace Taiwan as an anticommunist bastion 125 miles off the Chinese coast, long after their own party leaders and U.S. big business embraced the communist regime.

With the election of George W. Bush in 2000, some of Taiwan’s most fervent allies were swept back into power in Washington, particularly at the Pentagon, starting with Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld.

They included such key architects of the Iraq War as Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, Douglas Feith, the undersecretary for policy, and Steven Cambone, Rumsfeld’s new intelligence chief, Wilkerson said. President Bush’s controversial envoy to the United Nations, John Bolton, was another.

While Bush publicly continued the one-China policy of his five White House predecessors, Wilkerson said, the Pentagon “neocons” took a different tack, quietly encouraging Taiwan’s pro-independence president, Chen Shui-bian.

“The Defense Department, with Feith, Cambone, Wolfowitz [and] Rumsfeld, was dispatching a person to Taiwan every week, essentially to tell the Taiwanese that the alliance was back on,” Wilkerson said, referring to pre-1970s military and diplomatic relations, “essentially to tell Chen Shui-bian, whose entire power in Taiwan rested on the independence movement, that independence was a good thing.”

Wilkerson said Powell would then dispatch his own envoy “right behind that guy, every time they sent somebody, to disabuse the entire Taiwanese national security apparatus of what they’d been told by the Defense Department.”

“This went on,” he said of the pro-independence efforts, “until George Bush weighed in and told Rumsfeld to cease and desist [and] told him multiple times to re-establish military-to-military relations with China.”

Routine military ties had been suspended in early 2001 after China forced a U.S. reconnaissance plane down on Hainan Island off Vietnam.
Strong Denials

Feith, now teaching and working on a book at Georgetown University, responded that Wilkerson’s “remarks are not even close to being accurate. They are phrased so vaguely and sweepingly that it is impossible to deny them with precision, but they are not right.”
Rumsfeld’s former spokesman Lawrence DiRita called Wilkerson’s allegations “completely ridiculous—clear and simple . . . absurd.”

“The idea that there was some kind of DoD attempt to favor some faction in Taiwan, as described by Wilkerson ... is just crazy,” DiRita said in a brief telephone interview.
Wilkerson told a similar story in a recent critical biography of Rumsfeld by Washington-based British journalist Andrew Cockburn.

He elaborated on the episode during a May 7 panel, organized to discuss the controversy over Iraq intelligence at the University of the District of Colombia, as well as in subsequent conversations last week.

“It was a constant refrain of they said one thing, we said another thing for months on end,” Wilkerson said by e-mail. “They said, ‘Don’t worry, you are our allies and we will defend you—regardless.’ We said, ‘Do worry—if you declare independence, we may not be there; so be quiet and let sleeping dogs lie. . . .’ ”

Rewriting Bush

Another key character in the minidrama was Therese Shaheen, the outspoken chief of the U.S. office of the American Institute in Taiwan, which took on the functions of the American embassy after the formal 1979 diplomatic switch.

Shaheen, who happens to be DiRita’s wife, openly championed Chen and the independence movement, at one point even publicly reinterpreting Bush’s reiteration of the “one China” policy, saying that the administration “had never said it ‘opposed’ Taiwan independence,” according to a 2004 account in the authoritative Far Eastern Economic Review.

“Therese Shaheen . . . said don’t sweat it, the president didn’t really mean what he said,” Wilkerson said.

Coming from the wife of Rumsfeld’s spokesman, Shaheen’s remarks sent off angry alarms in Beijing.


Powell asked for her resignation.

Douglas Paal was then head of the American Institute in Taiwan, effectively making him the U.S. ambassador there. He backed up Wilkerson’s account.

“In the early years of the Bush administration,” Paal said by e-mail last week, “there was a problem with mixed signals to Taiwan from Washington. This was most notably captured in the statements and actions of Ms. Therese Shaheen, the former AIT chair, which ultimately led to her departure.”

Now retired, Paal said he, too, “received many first- and second-hand reports of messages conveyed to Taiwan by DoD civilians and perhaps a uniformed officer or two during that time that were out of sync with President Bush’s position.”

DiRita defended his wife, saying “she understood U.S. policy and executed it to the very best of her abilities and wasn’t trying to play games with” Taiwanese independence forces.

“That was always kind of a mythology of what happened over there,” he said.


Mushroom Clouds

“They are dangerous men who will lie about almost anyone or anything,” Wilkerson angrily responded by e-mail, singling out Feith, DiRita, Cheney and Rumsfeld for scorn.

He called back-stage encouragement of the Taiwanese “even more serious” than the alleged manipulation of Iraq intelligence, because it could provoke China to attack the island, triggering a U.S. response and the world’s first nuclear shooting war.

The independence issue, agrees China experts Richard Bush and Michael O’Hanlon, is Beijing’s third rail—touch it and you die.

“Even if the odds are fairly low of miscalculation leading to war, and war then bringing in the United States, this scenario is scary,” they recently wrote in The Washington Times.

A Taiwanese declaration of independence, they said, “could result in the first major war between nuclear weapons states in history, with no guarantee it would be successfully concluded prior to a major escalation.”

Jeff Stein can be reached at jstein@cq.com.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

China Has Cornered The Global Market In Vitamins...


It might not be the best idea on Earth for Americans to be depending on other nations for our food and drug safety when the Bushites have been busy building anti-American sentiment around the world.

By Tim Johnson
McClatchy Newspapers

SHIJIAZHUANG, China - If you pop a vitamin C tablet in your mouth, it's a good bet it came from China. Indeed, many of the world's vitamins are now made in China.

In less than a decade, China has captured 90 percent of the U.S. market for vitamin C, driving almost everyone else out of business.

Chinese pharmaceutical companies also have taken over much of the world market in the production of antibiotics, analgesics, enzymes and primary amino acids. According to an industry group, China makes 70 percent of the world's penicillin, 50 percent of its aspirin and 35 percent of its acetaminophen (often sold under the brand name Tylenol), as well as the bulk of vitamins A, B12, C and E.

In the wake of a pet food scandal, in which adulterated wheat gluten from China led to the deaths of thousands of pets in North America, and other instances of food and toothpaste tampering, China's vitamin producers are reaching out to reassure U.S. consumers that their vitamins are safe.

Whether that's true isn't clear, however. Foreign food-safety experts say China's larger companies have reputations to protect. The question is how they maintain quality control.

In this pharmaceutical hub, a two-hour train ride south of Beijing, managers at what may be the world's largest vitamin C factory said they're constantly improving quality control to keep pace with the tenfold increase in production this decade.

"We used to only comply with domestic standards. Now we must comply with international standards," said Liu Lifeng, an aide to the general manager at the Weisheng Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd.

Food and drug safety inspectors drop in at the plant from time to time.

"The authorities come unexpectedly without telling us," added Tian Yumiao, the senior director of the quality control department of Weisheng.

But the inspectors aren't exactly neutral guardians of public health. They work for the city government, which is a part owner of the parent company of Weisheng Pharmaceutical. That kind of relationship between food and drug inspectors and China's booming agricultural and pharmaceutical industries is coming to the fore as an issue in the food safety debate. The local government in this thriving city of 2 million people would suffer if it did anything to hurt the growth of local vitamin and drug producers, and local officials might be reluctant to admit that a public safety issue had arisen.

"That's a conflict of interest right there," said Kathryn Boor, a food safety expert at Cornell University. "You really need a disinterested party involved in inspections."

Issues of food and drug safety ripple across China today. The former chief of the state Food and Drug Administration, Zheng Xiaoyu, was given the death sentence Tuesday for taking $832,000 in bribes to let unsafe drugs on the market. One Zheng aide was sentenced to a 15-year jail term last autumn, and a second was accused in May in the bribery scandal.

A survey earlier this year said more than three-fifths of Chinese worry about whether the food they eat is contaminated or adulterated.

Observers of China's food and dietary supplements industry say many larger companies, such as Weisheng, are well-managed and obtain key global certifications.

At the sprawling Weisheng plant, uniformed employees bustle about on neatly swept walkways, entering production areas where assembly lines purr. Machinery seemed clean, although managers barred a visitor from taking photographs in factory areas. Only minor odors emanated from a water recycling area.

"The industry in China is bifurcated between top-notch companies that are highly skilled and do all the right things, and the second- and third-tier producers, some of which are just sloppy bucket shops," said Peter Kovacs, a food industry consultant based in Incline Village, Nev.
Foreign brokers concur that the low end of China's market has severe problems.

"Sometimes you enter a factory, and you say, `I can't believe they produce food here.' It's dirty and the machines are old," said Jan Willem Roben of Vision Ingredients in Shanghai, a broker of food additives for export.

Since U.S. laws don't require food and drug sellers to label products with the country of origin of ingredients, it's impossible for consumers to know where food or supplements are coming from, not to mention what factory produced them.

Vitamins fall into an area in China that straddles the food industry, comprising some 2 million businesses that exported $2.5 billion worth of goods last year, and the drug industry, which has 5,000 companies. Cases of adulterated or mislabeled products have hit both food and drug companies.

Fake drugs to treat impotency and help with weight loss are legion in China. Some African nations complain of fake Chinese medicines hitting their pharmacy shelves. Shady small pharmaceutical firms have exported bogus anti-malaria medication to Southeast Asia, where the illness is prevalent, allowing sick people to grow sicker.

"We really believe they are criminals," said Dr. Henk Bekedam, chief of the World Health Organization office in China, referring to producers of fake medicines.

Cheap labor has given China Inc. its edge in manufacturing. But pharmaceutical laboratories, which aren't labor intensive, benefit from subsidized rates on water and energy consumption, and often-lax oversight of environmental rules.

China's entry into vitamin C involved ingenuity - and an unwitting assist from the U.S. Department of Justice. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, several big Chinese drug companies, working with the government-backed Chinese Academy of Sciences, devised a method to cut the normal five-step process for making vitamin C to a two-step fermentation process, leaving European, U.S. and Japanese firms a step behind.

The new method cut costs and gave China a manufacturing edge. It wasn't until 1997, when U.S. attorneys broke up what they said was a price-fixing cartel of European and Japanese producers, that the door swung wide open for the Chinese producers.

Firms such as Weisheng, which had planned to produce 3,000 tons of vitamin C a year, stepped up its capacity to 30,000 tons a year by mid-2004, which it claims is the largest in the world. Another company across the city, Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., has a capacity of 20,000 tons a year. Together, the two companies make nearly half of the annual world production.

"The Chinese did a good job in this. They used their existing know-how and leveraged it in a clever way," said Alexander Filz, a spokesman for DSM, a Dutch chemical, nutritional and pharmaceutical company, which is the sole competition in Europe for vitamin C production.

But then Weisheng and three other big vitamin C producers appeared to take cues from their shattered competitors. Critics say the Chinese companies practiced predatory pricing, undercutting the remaining producers, with an eye to cornering the world market and making an eventual killing.

"They formed the cartel in December 2001 when the prices were under $3 a kilogram," said William Isaacson, a Washington, D.C., attorney. Isaacson represents clients who are suing the Chinese companies in federal court in Brooklyn, N.Y., for damages from current high prices.
Today, only one Western company still makes vitamin C - Dutch-based DSM - and as China monopolizes vitamin C production, prices have hit $6 a kilogram (2.2 pounds).

Managers at Weisheng brush off the price-fixing charges, which may come to a head at a June 5 court hearing in Brooklyn, and say potential contamination of vitamin C couldn't occur under their strict quality control system.

"It's impossible," said Zhang Heming, vice director of the umbrella Shijiazhuang Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. "I've done research on this pet food case."

"Our procedures, our facilities, even our air conditioners and water supply all comply with international standards," said Tian, the quality control department director.
An assistant brought in a pile of certificates showing the company had met stringent European and British quality standards, and said U.S. standards are similar.

Chinese food safety experts bristle at what they say is the West's exaggerated response to the pet food scare, in which melamine, a toxic chemical used in plastics, was added to wheat gluten, and the general "food fright" swirling around Chinese exports.

He Jiguo, a food safety expert at China Agriculture University, said it's difficult to deter companies with criminal or fraudulent intent before a mishap is reported.

"There are thousands of illegal things you can add to a product. The supervisory authorities can't literally test for each one of them," He said. "It is only after an accident happens that one finds out, just as a police officer can't arrest a thief before he commits a crime."

One Dutch expert said European and U.S. companies are reaping the benefits as Chinese companies reel from the fallout from food safety worries.

"There is an interest in the farm lobby in Europe and the United States to exaggerate. Everybody is always very happy when there's poor quality coming from the competition," said M.A. Keyzer, the director at the Centre for World Food Studies in Amsterdam.

Early reports indicate that Chinese food exporters already are experiencing a drop in sales.
Boor, the Cornell expert, said concerns about the safety of the global food trade are a useful wake-up call to U.S. consumers.

"I think we take an awful lot for granted here in the U.S. that people are doing their jobs all along the food chain," Boor said.

McClatchy special correspondent Fan Linjun contributed to this report.


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.