March 19th, 2011

CCNet's topical news items

CCNet – 17 March 2011 The Climate Policy Network

The Energy No-Fly Zone

Even if someone were to get the approvals to build a new nuclear facility tomorrow, or within the next five years, getting financing will be next to impossible and it's not like there are many governments with the political will or the chequebooks fat enough to fund these kinds of projects. What can only be termed a Black Swan event in the nuclear power world today is going to prove to be a positive inflection point for the natural-gas industry in the coming months and years. –Deborah Yedlin, Vancouver Sun, 17 March 2011

1) Terence Corcoran: The Energy No-Fly Zone - Financial Post, 17 March 2011
The world is about to enter a no-fly zone for energy policy, a period where nothing gets off the ground. Here we have a globalized economic system filled with unprecedented energy options, but where all options appear to be politically off-limits. If it comes to that extreme, as seems probable in the short-term wake of the Japanese nuclear meltdown, the battle will be fought with mind-spinning claims and counterclaims, distortions, lies, exaggerations, misrepresentations. At the end of the battle, the most likely winner will be the energy source that is cheapest, works best and offers the lowest risks. It will be hard to beat the fossil fuels we know and trust

2) Eric Reguly: Nuclear’s Loss Not A Worry: The New World Power Is Gas - The Globe and Mail, 17 March 2011
Not only is gas cheap, gas plants themselves are relative bargains. Mr. Hess said a typical nuclear plant takes 10 years and $6-billion to build, while a coal-burner takes thee years and $3-billion. A gas plant?: Two years and $1-billion. There is no denying that shale gas has radically altered the economics of power production virtually overnight. The Japanese disaster is not killing the nuclear industry, gas is, and it’s taking grubby coal down with it. That’s good news.

3) Richard Pollock: Japan’s Nuclear Crisis May Doom Global Warming Activists’ Dreams -Pajamas Media, 16 March 2011
Anti-nuclear critics may be celebrating the possible death of commercial nuclear power. But as U.K. energy expert Benny Peiser notes this morning, less nuclear power will mean most industrialized countries will increase their dependency on fossil fuels for electricity, not reduce them. This means global warming activists’ goal may be dying a quick death.

4) Climate Alarmists: Justifying Japanese Judgment Day - The Washington Times, 15 March 2011

5) Robert Bryce: America's Nuclear Dead End - The Daily Beast, 14 March 2011
Obama and the GOP keep pushing nuclear power, but for all their money and rhetoric, their proposals were doomed even before Japan. Robert Bryce on how natural gas killed domestic reactors

6) Jesse Walker: Resilient Japan: Three Lessons From The Week's Disasters - Reason Online, 16 March 2011
An 8.9 earthquake, a 33-foot tsunami, a series of crises at their battered nuclear plants: The people of Japan have withstood the last week with admirable tenacity. There's no shortage of lessons the rest of the world can learn from what we've been seeing. Here are three of them.

Thanks Dr Peiser GWPF

Recommended, House of commons oral EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE Energy and Climate Change Committee Shale Gas March 1

Imagine if reality was the rule of the day, we would be rushing for coal to get more CO2 into the air not for its wholly insignificant ability to offset the increase in cooling but for its ability to remarkably increase crop yield bearing in mind something like 10% of the world is at starvation level at any given time. Hurrah for the UN, a totally criminal and useless waste of space, time and money. Hurrah for the CO2 related laws, a big support for the scam of the millennia after fiat currencies and fractional reserve banking.
The only problem is that we have increased emissions year in, year out yet nature has stubbornly refused to leave them in the air. An average 2ppm is what nature dictates as leftover from the approx. 102ppm nature plus humans emit every year (humans = ~4ppm).

International war against Gaddafi and the Libyan armed forces

I really don't know what to say about the rightness or wrongness about the UN granting the UK and France permission to declare war against Libya. I've read a number of opinion pieces, most appeared to know few of the facts behind the decision for Cameron to be instructed to take out Gaddafi, note not Libya. Invading a nation's airspace with military equipment is an act of war. The warmongers have the globalists' UN permission to bomb without limitation.
I try to reverse the situation, a popular uprising against the tripartite EU representative gov't in the UK with unarmed protesters killed by police and armed forces in Downing St and Trafalgar Square, Libya coming in and bombing the forces with Arab League permission. Squeals of unfair from the various party leaders echoing Gaddafi's declaration that the UN resolution is wrong.
What is right, what is wrong? The forces against Gaddafi are armed seemingly by the US and the UK, possibly France too via Egypt. The uprising looks to have been provoked. Many of the rebels are non native. If all that proves true then the instigators need to be tried for interference in the affairs of another country and causing an armed uprising without legitimate reason.

Here are a few of the POV I've looked at:
Alex Jones is vehemently opposed to the international declaration of war.
New War: U.N. Authorizes Bombing of Libya He almost bursts a blood vessel in the accompanying video.

Bloodbath in Yemen: No UN Action for the Peace Laureate's Pal Chris Floyd of Empire Burlesque
This just in: spurred on by the United States and Saudi Arabia, the UN Security Council has just authorized immediate military intervention in Yemen to stop the government's wanton slaughter of innocent civilians engaging in peaceful protest.

U.S. Arming Libyan Rebels Via Egypt Tony Cartalucci at Prison Planet
After the corporate owned media’s failed attempt in February 2011 to portray the Libyan unrest as “unarmed protesters” being brutalized by Qaddafi, reports began trickling in of what was actually a full-scale rebellion with weapons coming across the border from Egypt. These reports are now confirmed, as large scale operations to supply the rebels with weapons have now been admitted by both the US and Egyptian governments.

Globalist Crimes Against Humanity Expanded Over Libya Tony Cartalucci at Prison Planet
In an unsurprising move that was all but inevitable, the UN has decided to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya to save the globalist-backed rebellion sputtering in failure and bordering on a “Bay of Pigs” disaster. Canadian, US, French, Arab, and UK jets are already reported to be preparing for the operation.
The Libyan rebellion began on February 17, 2011 after a call from London based Libyan opposition leaders of the NCLO for a “Day of Rage” (Arabic link: use Google Translator). The call was fashioned after the US State Department recruited, trained, funded, and supported uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt. The most recent admission of US involvement in the “Arab Spring” came from Hillary Clinton herself who admitted the US State Department, the Department of Defense, and the Broadcasting Board of Governors have been funding tech firms providing the revolutions with tools to circumvent cyber security employed by various Western targeted regimes.
Unlike in Egypt and Tunisia, Libya lacked the seditious “civil society” underlay to reinforce the ficticious narrative that the people merely wanted “freedom and democracy.” Indeed for Libya, this is just one of many foreign backed violent uprisings designed and supported by the West to oust Qaddafi over the last three decades.

Another Illegal War Of Slaughter Couched In “Humanitarian” Doublespeak
Paul Joseph Watson at Prison Planet
International Community Responds to Fukushima Crisis – By Bombing Libya
Those who were asking what the “international community” planned to do in response to the escalating global crisis surrounding the nuclear plant in Fukushima now have their answer – bomb Libya. As if the world wasn’t experiencing enough turmoil and devastation, another illegal war of aggression has been launched in a volatile region, couched in the retching Orwellian doublespeak of ‘no fly zones’ and ‘humanitarian’ rhetoric.

Israel Intervenes in Libya... for Gaddafi Gordon Duff Salem-News (Mentioned in an earlier post here)

AU’s opposition to military intervention in Libya ignored by UNSC, Obama
[...] The African Union (AU) has been slow to issue a response to the events in Libya which came in the form of a statement on March 10 expressing "deep concern" over the violence in Libya saying it poses "a serious threat to peace and security in that country and in the region as a whole, as well as to the safety and dignity of Libyans and of the migrant workers, notably the African ones, living in Libya".
The AU’s Peace and Security Council (PSC) also expressed solidarity with Libya and rejected "any foreign military intervention, whatever its form".
This was in sharp contrast to positions of the Arab League and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) which called for the imposition of a No-Fly Zone over Libya. Gulf Arab countries had also said Gaddafi’s government was no longer legitimate.
Western countries and NATO have initially insisted they will not intervene militarily in Libya without approval of regional organizations such as the Arab League and the AU and a UNSC clear mandate.
However, references to AU’s prior consent were later dropped and Western officials only spoke of Arab League decision.

Gaddafi says hell awaits foreign invaders Press TV news
Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi says foreign forces will receive an overly strict response, should they invade the North African country.
"If the world goes crazy, so will we!" Gaddafi said on Friday. "We will respond. We will turn their lives into hell."
The remarks come hours after the UN Security Council voted on Thursday to authorize a no-fly zone over Libya and take all necessary measures to protect civilians against the Gaddafi regime.
Colonel Gaddafi says the Security Council had no mandate for such a resolution. He made the remarks in an interview with Portugal's state television.
"This is not a war between two countries that permits the council to intervene," he added. "What is this racism, this hatred?" he asked. "What is this madness?"

'Saudis in Bahrain to defend US military' Press TV news
A veteran Iranian politician says Saudi Arabian forces have been sent to Bahrain to defend the US military and repress the uprising of the Bahraini people.
On March 13, Saudi Arabia and a number of other Persian Gulf states deployed their armed forces in Bahrain in response to Manama's call for military help to quell public protests.
“Saudi Arabia has fallen into the US trap and instead of using its military to defend the Muslim people of Palestine, it is attacking the Muslim people of Bahrain,” Fars New Agency quoted Secretary of Iran's Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei as saying.

Crisis In Libya; Saturday's Developments by Mark Memmott NPR
1 p.m. ET: The U.S., its NATO allies and members of the Arab League are today taking military action in a bid to stop Libyan leader Col. Moammar Gadhafi and forces loyal to him from further attacks on those Libyans who are trying to topple his regime. The first step: French fighter jets are patrolling the skies above the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi, to protect the people there from further attacks by forces supporting Gadhafi.
In this post, we followed developments as day turned into evening in Libya. We'll pick up the story again early Sunday. If you'd like to follow events between now and then,'s coverage is collected here.
Update at 12:50 p.m. ET. U.S. Did Not Act Unilaterally, Clinton Stresses:
"We did not lead this; we did not engage in unilateral actions," Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton just said as she continues to take questions from reporters in Paris and continues to make the point that the U.S. is supporting the call from many Arab nations and allies in Europe for military action. "But we strongly support" the action, she added.
[...] Update at 8:07 a.m. ET. Whose Fighter?
NPR's Eric Westervelt, and reporters from CNN, Sky News and other outlets, are reporting that opposition leaders say the fighter jet shot down over Benghazi earlier today was being flown by the rebels — not forces loyal to Gadhafi.
[Hypocrisy - The Arab League members:
Kuwait, Palestinian Authority, Qatar, Jordan, Bahrai, United Arab Emirates, Lebanon, Libya (booted 22 Feb 2011), Oman, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, Iraq, Comoros, Algeria, Sudan, Egypt, Yemen, Mauritania, Morocco, Djibouti, Somalia]

Libya summit threatens air strikes euronews
The international community closed ranks against Colonel Gaddafi in Paris on Saturday. The USA, Europe and the Arab League joined hands in condemning his attacks on civilians, and promised to enforce the UN Security council’s resolution against Gaddafi.
If he refuses to respect a ceasefire, his forces will be hit from the air.

[5:15pm Aljazeera - France invades Libyan airspace and fires on Libyan armoured truck, the first act of war]

We must not stand by as Muslim democrats battle the extremists Maajid Nawaz at DT
[...] Today, extreme Islamist groups in the UK have to work much harder to recruit British Muslims. Indeed, the most prominent of such groups have been virtually silent over the recent Middle Eastern turmoil. Despite the amount of “Muslim blood” that has been shed in Libya, Tunisia and Egypt, these organisations have nothing to say. A glance around the modern Middle East helps us understand why: in Libya, without any help from the West, Muslims are fighting and killing each other – some for democracy, others for despotism. In Iraq, Shia and Sunni politicians are concerned less with resisting the “US occupation” than with competing for power through the ballot box. In Bahrain, the only oppression of Muslims is being done by the country’s government with the help of its Saudi neighbours. Throughout the region, the battle cry of the youth is not “Death to America” – it is for democracy and political freedom, for accountable government and civil rights, for jobs, self-respect and the chance to live a decent life.
This is not fertile ground for any Islamist group that wishes to create a coherent narrative around the supposed intrinsic evil of the West. In today’s Middle East, and especially in Libya, the West is notable by its absence. But the Islamists’ silence stems from a deeper confusion as well. The truth is that groups such as those that recruited me in the Nineties are increasingly unsure about what they want. They still shout slogans such as “Islam is the answer”, but they are no longer confident about what these actually mean.

Libya and Gaddafi: This is the UN's moment

Telegraph View: The UN must seize the initiative and help to achieve the West's ultimate objective of securing Gaddafi's overthrow.
Better later than never would be the view of most people now that the UN Security Council has finally got down to the serious business of passing a resolution to deal with the Libya crisis. While the UN's tardy response has undoubtedly assisted the survival prospects of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's reviled regime, its involvement is vital if a credible plan of action is to be forthcoming.
[...] The Security Council's failure to provide proper authorisation for the invasion of Iraq in 2003 caused a highly damaging split in the Western alliance. And the understandable desire of politicians not to repeat the Iraq experience has undoubtedly hindered efforts to deal with Libya.

A Remarkable Precedent Marwan Muasher at NYT
While Qaddafi forces try to squash any resistance in Libya, the Arab League took the unprecedented step last weekend to call for the international community to impose no-flight zone over Libya. This is a remarkable and positive development.
The endorsement by the Arab League is the first time the group has ever voted unanimously to condemn or sanction a fellow Arab state. It only speaks to the extent of atrocity at the hands Qaddafi. The Libyan regime’s response to its domestic uprising is unacceptable and the Arab League has now acted accordingly. The call provides cover for international action — and it means that military intervention in the form of a no-flight zone should not be read as Western interference.

A Remarkable Precedent Marwan Muasher at NYT (via the globalist's Carnegie Endowment)
While Qaddafi forces try to squash any resistance in Libya, the Arab League took the unprecedented step last weekend to call for the international community to impose no-flight zone over Libya. This is a remarkable and positive development.
The endorsement by the Arab League is the first time the group has ever voted unanimously to condemn or sanction a fellow Arab state. It only speaks to the extent of atrocity at the hands Qaddafi. The Libyan regime’s response to its domestic uprising is unacceptable and the Arab League has now acted accordingly. The call provides cover for international action — and it means that military intervention in the form of a no-flight zone should not be read as Western interference.

Poland to stay out of Libya military campaign
“I will go [to Paris] with the information that […] Poland does not intend to take part in the military action in Libya,” Tusk said, adding, however, that the country is always ready “to provide solidarity to any NATO country which will find itself in danger.”
“But I want to make it loud and clear that Polish soldiers will take part in actions that safeguard the interests of Poland and NATO’s security only when they are in immediate danger,” Tusk exclaimed.

Leslie Gelb: Libya Is Arab League's Responsibility Market Watch (vid)
The Arab League, not the U.S., should be responsible for containing Moammar Gadhafi's ambitions in Libya, Council on Foreign Relations President Emeritus Leslie Gelb says. In the "Big Interview" with the Journal's John Bussey, Gelb also warns against deepening U.S. involvement in that country.

Last hope: send in the Egyptians Indy
You rightly note that the EU, G8 and Nato have all failed to reach a consensus on what to do about Libya, while the Arab League is capable of imposing a no-fly zone and yet "has submitted its request" to enforce such a measure "to the UN, where, more than a week later, it may well founder" (Leading article, 17 March).
Instead of trying to reach an agreement on a plan of action by going through international bodies such as the UN, it surely now makes more sense for western countries to encourage the Arab League itself to impose the no-fly zone over Libya, using the Egyptian air force, which has received tens of billions of dollars of American and European equipment and training ever since the Camp David accords.
[...] Meanwhile, members of the G8, EU and Nato should limit themselves to providing humanitarian aid, weapons and military intelligence to the Libyan rebels.
Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi, Cardiff

Libya says neighbors will respond to foreign attack Agence France-Presse
LONDON—Libya's deputy foreign minister Khaled Kaaim warned Saturday that any foreign intervention would prompt Libya's neighbors to rally behind Moammar Gadhafi, in an interview with BBC radio.
"If there is an attack from outside or a foreign intervention, you will not only see Libyans, you will see people from Algeria, from Tunisia, from Egypt... all of them, they will be part of fighting on the Libyan ground," he said.
Speaking before air strikes hit Libya's rebel stronghold of Benghazi on Saturday, Kaaim insisted that pro-Gadhafi forces were abiding by a United Nations demand for a ceasefire.
"The ceasefire is real, credible and solid," he said.

Libya: The perils of intervention Guardian
Barely had a new door to international action been opened by the UN resolution than it seemed to slam shut
[...] Paving the way for partition
Doubts were inherent in the reaction in Benghazi yesterday to the announcement that Gaddafi's forces would cease fire and comply with the UN resolution. It was a stalling tactic, said some. We should fight on, said others. They are right to be alarmed at the possibility that Gaddafi would comply with the resolution, or with subsequent demands from Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, that the regime's forces should pull back "a significant distance" from the east. Both imply that Gaddafi could live to fight another day. This falls far short of what this revolution is all about.

From what I've read it seems the official Al Qaeda position is to support the uprising. It also seems some members are mercenaries in Gaddafi's forces.

I guess my final position at this time is that when in doubt, hesitate. Cameron appears to be acting in the interests of other than the rebels of whom many appear to be non Libyan nationals.