Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Up in Smoke: The African Apocalypse

By Geoffrey Lean, The Independent UK. Posted November 24, 2006.


The continent burning into a desert Nowhere is the effect of global warming more dangerous than in Somalia, where the worst drought in 40 years is affecting the lives of 1.8 million people.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Geoffrey Lean

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

"I am 70 years old now, and the temperatures are getting hotter and hotter as the years go by," says Habiba Hassan, standing in a field of ruined crops near her village of Beniday in Somalia.

The winters where she lives, 200 miles northwest of Mogadishu, used to be "very hot during the day and cold at night", she adds. But now "we have to sleep outside at night, it is so hot."

Somalia's harvest, brought in last month, is almost 30 per cent lower than normal, the result of the worst drought in at least 40 years. The UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation says that the situation is "alarming," with a "severe food crisis," affecting 1.8 million people, persisting throughout the country for at least the rest of the year.

Around Habiba Hassan's home no one can remember a drought this severe. Children have been dying, and the land, in her words, is "turning to desert." She has no doubt about the cause: "It's global warming." How does she know? The people of her village had learnt about it from the BBC Somali service, heard on their £2.50 radios.

Hers is just one of the African voices in a searing report on the danger that the changing climate poses to the continent, published tomorrow by 22 British environment and development charities, pressure groups and academic institutes. It shows that the world's poorest continent -- the continent least able to cope with the impact of climate change -- is the most vulnerable to its effects.

The report comes the day before the unveiling of a top-level Treasury review into the effects and economics of global warming, which will herald a new government initiative on the issue, headed by the Chancellor and prime minister-in-waiting, Gordon Brown, And it is published only one week before the opening in Nairobi, Kenya, of the next, crucial round of international negotiations on what is to succeed the Kyoto Protocol.

The Stern review will tomorrow spell out the enormous consequences for the world of failing to control climate change and will take issue directly with President Bush's insistence -- at times apparently backed by Tony Blair -- that tackling it would be economically ruinous.

It will show, on the contrary, that refusing to take action would lead to the biggest worldwide economic crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s, with "catastrophic consequences" around the globe, whereas tackling it would be relatively inexpensive, and could, indeed, stimulate the world economy.

The 700-page review will call for immediate action, criticise the United States, take a swipe at the conventional economics that have dominated thinking for the past quarter of a century, suggest measures to cut pollution at home, and call for increased aid to help poor countries -- such as those in Africa -- cope with the effects of global warming.

Tomorrow's report -- by the Working Group on Climate Change and Development, an alliance of 22 bodies -- makes clear how urgent and necessary that will be. It is an update of a previous report by the group, "Africa -- Up in Smoke?" which helped to persuade Mr Brown of the importance of the issue.

Now Habiba Hassan is urging him, and the world, to act. And so are others from Africa's grassroots, or what is left of them. Paul Mayan Mariao, a chief in the drought-stricken Turkana area of north-eastern Kenya reports in "Africa -- Up in Smoke 2": "The weather is changing. We used to get heavy rains when the winds came from the west. Now the wind comes from the east, so it brings little or no rain."

And Sesophio, a Masai herdsman from Ngorongoro, Tanzania, blames "this development, like cars, that is bringing stress to the land ... We think there is a lot of connection between that and what is happening now with the droughts."

The report bears out their fears with hard facts. "Africa is steadily warming," it concludes. "It is becoming clear that in many places dangerous climate change is already taking place." The six warmest years ever recorded in Africa have all been since 1987, it says, and in many parts of the continent temperatures are expected to rise twice as fast as in the world as a whole. The result will be to drive its climate ever more towards extremes. Traditionally arid areas such as the north-east and south of the continent, and the Sahel on the fringes of the Sahara in west Africa, are becoming drier -- with increased droughts -- while rainy areas, such as equatorial Africa, are getting wetter, with more floods.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: drought, climate change, desert, temperatures, global warming, africa

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
You double-printed this story (NT)
Posted by: brunowe on Nov 24, 2006 6:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The sad history of Africa... looted by foreigners
Posted by: Ghoulman on Nov 24, 2006 7:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's so sad... Africa, like the middle east and caspian basin, is the most valuable land on Earth. It's the oil stupid.

Africa is being pulled like taffy between the West and the East, and Americans and Chinese could care less how many Africans die. In fact, the Africans have been dying horribly for decades in out and out genocide and just plain starving to death and what does the West do? Send in thier rock stars to make everyone feel better. China just didn't care as usual.

Rwanda is a prime example of a nation pulled by Western forces and left to rot by the West so oil companies can base in that country without opposition. There's always a reason like that. Send in UN Peace Troops? One call from Madeline Albright stopped any hope for UN relief in Rwanda.

This game has been going on for a long time, it will continue.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No, you fail the Test! Posted by: sofla100
War will result
Posted by: YogiBear on Nov 24, 2006 7:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Global Warming will result in minute changes in temperature that will lead to massive changes in local ecologies. Here it will get drier, there it will get wetter, leading to droughts and floods and ruined farmland and more snow and cold in one place and not enough permafrost in another. We're going to force evolution's hand in the next 100 or so years and the results ain't gonna be pretty.

Can we assume that areas that dry out will cause mass migrations of people? Our wars over territory will only get worse, I imagine.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: War will result Posted by: timebomb734
Whitey Did It(of course)
Posted by: edith on Nov 24, 2006 7:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not a shred of evidence other than the anecdote below that human caused actiivity regarding carbon dioxide caused, actually caused Somalia's drought. Not a word on wars, poor planting techniques, overgrazing and overpopulation that might have contributed to the drought. Instead colorful sympathetic characters are drafted for the "in" cause of human caused global warming "crisis" which in fact is no crisis at all. But here's the evidence from a non scientist that warrants, we assume, yet another bottomless pit of welfare for African, the Hopeless Continent:

"Habiba Hassan is urging him, and the world, to act. And so are others from Africa's grassroots, or what is left of them. Paul Mayan Mariao, a chief in the drought-stricken Turkana area of north-eastern Kenya reports in "Africa -- Up in Smoke 2": "The weather is changing. We used to get heavy rains when the winds came from the west. Now the wind comes from the east, so it brings little or no rain."

Do we know whether Sudan or kenya or Somalia ever had droughts before say 1980? No. Might be contrary evidence to the politics of climate change, don't you know.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Africa's History Posted by: Yogy
» RE: Africa's History Posted by: Yogy
» Try the precautionary principle Posted by: HeroesAll
» Why should they? Here's why Posted by: HeroesAll
Global warming denialists are comparable to flat-earth proponents
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Nov 24, 2006 6:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At this point, people who claim that the observed trend of global warming isn't happening, or that fossil fuels are not responsible, are really in the same scientific position as those who claim that the HIV virus has nothing to do with AIDS. Start talking about the problems of AIDS in Africa, and they'll demand that you produce detailed biomedical evidence that HIV causes AIDS.

If pharmaceutical companies had some fundamental vested interest in claiming that HIV doesn't cause AIDS, you can bet that you'd see that argument everywhere. The same applies to fossil fuel companies, which DO have a vested interest in claiming that either a) global warming isn't happening, or b) global warming isn't related to fossil fuels and CO2, or c) global warming brought on by fossil fuels will be a good thing. These claims are all false.

If you want more, here's a detailed scientific discussion of tropical glacier retreat world wide.

Here's more:
Snows Of Kilimanjaro Disappearing, Glacial Ice Loss Increasing Feb14, 2006
and also
Fabled Equatorial African Icecaps To Disappear
and more!
Ice Caps In Africa, Tropical South America Likely To Disappear Within 15 Years

And if you want to see a whole host of other climate problems in Africa, see http://www.climatehotmap.org/africa.html

For the dedicated 'skeptic' no amount of evidence is enough; after all, the vast majority of 'skeptics' are paid public relations people who work for the fossil fuel industry. You can find a little map of their operations at www.exxonsecrets.org

The science is very complicated, this is true. So is the science behind HIV and AIDs, as well as the scientific engineering principles that allow jetliners to fly through the air. The corporate media is owned by the same people who own the fossil fuel corporations, and they've been doing their best to bury the science and confuse the issue.

If you don't believe me, check out this PRblog link:http://www.desmogblog.com/slamming-the-climate-skeptic-scam:

"There is a line between public relations and propaganda - or there should be. And there is a difference between using your skills, in good faith, to help rescue a battered reputation and using them to twist the truth - to sow confusion and doubt on an issue that is critical to human survival.

And it is infuriating - as a public relations professional - to watch my colleagues use their skills, their training and their considerable intellect to poison the international debate on climate change."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» This won't make edith happy... Posted by: HeroesAll
» Yawn! Posted by: particle
Why global warming is happening
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Nov 24, 2006 9:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ever spend a night by the coast? If the day is warm, the night is also warm. Go to a desert and you'll experience blazing hot days and freezin nights. Why? The greenhouse gas, water vapor, traps heat and releases it at night. Above the desert there's very little water vapor, so it cools off rapidly at night.

Carbon dioxide behaves the same way, but the fact is we've added quite a bit of CO2 to the atmosphere over the past century due to combustion of fossil fuels. The results are evident and largely follow theoretical predictions: the poles and tropical glaciers will melt first. Now we are seeing that Greenland and portions of the Antarctic Ice Sheet are melting far faster then predicted just a decade ago.

This is all well understood in great detail, but the fossil fuel companies and their US corporate media are doing their utmost to prevent any action from being taken. The very same institutes that promoted the war in Iraq (the American Enterprise Institute, aka the Neocon Homeland, for example) have been funding anti-global warming propaganda as well. They work for billionaires like Scaife et al who profit from the status quo.

If you want an excellent introductory book on the complex science of climate, there is no better one than Spencer Weart's The Discovery of Global Warming.

There is a great deal of uncertainty over what the world will look like 50, 100 and 150 years from now - but the main uncertainty is human behavior; if we entirely revamp our energy system soon (like decades) we may head off the worst effects - but we're still in for a very rough ride. If we do business as usual? What do you do when Florida is an island and every coastal city is flooded? Go to war?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Onto your next talking point, is it? Posted by: thoughtcriminal
wind
Posted by: rsaxto on Nov 25, 2006 1:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Africa is blowing in the wind and is a harbinger of what is to come on all continents if we do not globally unite to fight this greatest enemy of mankind ever. Fight dust and heat not people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Showing your true colors at last Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» What a Laugh Posted by: edith
» Africans and HIV... Posted by: mjabele
A recent study shows more carbon dioxide than the last 600,000 years
Posted by: asilsfable on Nov 25, 2006 11:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This was done by taking 8 ice core samples and comparing them using a concept similar to rings in a tree to determine length of time. As far as global warming goes there's no doubt about it; problem is, it's happening faster than even the experts are predicting.

I believe the changes will be more dramatic. Warmer water and warmer earth means more geothermal activity which can trigger earthquakes. Imagine new land masses entirely.

Recently, for the first time in recorded history, there was a hurricane in the southern hemisphere on the Atlantic side. That would be comparable to a hurricane off the west coast of the United States--almost unheard of. It was determined to be indicative of MAJOR change in the seas. Something peaceful coastal towns should be wary of.

A solution: Well, short term is driving adapted diesel cars running on vegetable oil. Even though the carbon dioxide emitted is about the same, the carbon monoxide is virtually non-existent and vegetable oil releases an imbedded oxygen when burned. SO there is a balance in emissions. And much much less damaging to the enviroment. Also, not as complicated as a car to maintain.

There are cars that run on compressed air (see Paris car show 2000 known as the air car) and are now coming into being in a plant in Barcelona. India has an electric cars called the REVA that goes for about $6,000 US. So, things are definitely looking up as far as technology keeping up--problem is our government interfering with the new technology coming into the marketplace.

I think that we should circumvent the feds and go local. Go to the city councils and start enacting laws that will allows vegetable oil to be burned in cars and demand more stringent laws regarding emissions. I live in southern California--A third of the US cars are in California and most of them are in southern Cal. If we were to enact a law here, if would DEFINITELY impact the entire industry. Too bad Prop 87 didn't pass but we should definitely try again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» King Solomon I Presume? Posted by: edith
» So What? Posted by: edith
A little primer on climate science
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Nov 25, 2006 1:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You might be wondering why anyone claims to be able to predict the future climate, given that weather forecasts are unreliable after about a week or so.

Consider a casino with a roulette wheel. While noone can predict the outcome of an individual spin of the wheel, the house reliable makes money year in and year out. That's because they've got an extra slot on their side of the wheel. That's the secret of casinos - they load the odds in their favor. Oh, you can still win at times - but the house makes sure it wins more - otherwise they'd have gone out of business years ago.

Climate works the same way. I can't predict what the temperature or precipitation will be in a month, but I can tell you with great certainty that average temperatures in Boulder, CO will be far higher in July than in December.

If we were talking about the physical climate system on Mars or Venus, you wouldn't see this kind of discussion on Alternet - it'd be pretty cut and dry. Scientists would argue over details (that's what scientists do!) but you wouldn't see some massive propaganda apparatus trying to use these arguments to spin public opinion one way or the other.

Now, we humans are going to double the CO2 atmosphere of the atmosphere. What are the effects going to be? We warm the planet, since CO2 absorbs infrared radiation coming up from the warm Earth, and reradiates it in all directions - and if you add more CO2, that's like having a warmer blanket.

People claim that this is no big deal, since the dinosaurs enjoyed their warm planet - but it's the rate of change that's of concern. If it took ten thousand years to melt the ice caps - well, that's not really a concern. If it takes 100 years, then you are talking about a rapid change in climate - and rapid change is hard to deal with, especially when a huge percentage of world population lives in coastal regions.

Furthermore, there is the risk of more energetic storms and heat waves - which is to be expected when you store more energy in a dynamic system like the global climate. Katrina was a good example - it would have died out over the Gulf of Mexico, except that there was a huge, deep, warm tounge of water that had extended into the Gulf of Mexico from more tropical zones. That's a direct effect of global warming.

All the predictions made 20 and 10 years ago are coming true - the water vapor feedback effect ( a warm atmosphere can hold more water vapor than a cold one, increasing the greenhouse effect), the effects at both poles. There have been unexpected surprises as well - 20 years ago, there were no scientists who thought that the Greenland Ice Sheet could rapidly melt - but the data has proven them wrong.

See Greenland Ice Sheet Melting

That's just one example. There are many, many others. The only reason this isn't widely acknowledged in the USA, like it is everywhere else in the world, is that the corporate media is owned by the same people who own the fossil fuel companies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Danke, Herr Professor Posted by: edith
» Danke Posted by: edith
» Watch Out!!! Posted by: Douglas
» It's worth it, screw U kittle Posted by: Michiganman
» It's a he actually Posted by: AdamG
bicyclebarron
Posted by: Bicyclebarron on Nov 25, 2006 6:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is The United States of America we don't admit mistakes until we get pounded in the head with them. Bush is a great example we had to elect him twice before we could see that we elected a moron.
Global warming is no different until we see $4 a gallon at the pump no one will budge in the good old USA. It will continue to be a scientific theory not a fact until we get kicked in the ass ourselves.
I was a teenager during the first energy crisis and so much of what is happening today are due to lessons we refused to learn then. Once again we have to repeat a mistake rather than learn from our experience.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Some people don't like talking about fossil fuel propaganda.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Nov 25, 2006 8:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here is yet more evidence of how the fossil fuel public relations operation works:

Science Teachers’ Organization Refuses To Accept Copies of Inconvenient Truth, from ThinkProgress

"In tomorrow’s Washington Post, global warming activist Laurie David writes about her effort to donate 50,000 free DVD copies of An Inconvenient Truth (which she co-produced) to the National Science Teachers Association. The Association refused to accept the DVDs:

In their e-mail rejection, they expressed concern that other “special interests” might ask to distribute materials, too; they said they didn’t want to offer “political” endorsement of the film; and they saw “little, if any, benefit to NSTA or its members” in accepting the free DVDs. …

There was one more curious argument in the e-mail: Accepting the DVDs, they wrote, would place “unnecessary risk upon the [NSTA] capital campaign, especially certain targeted supporters.”

As it turns out, those supporters already include “special interests,” including Exxon-Mobil, Shell Oil, and the American Petroleum Institute, which have given millions in funding to the NSTA. And while the NSTA showed no interest in helping educators get copies of Al Gore’s movie (which scientists gave “five stars for accuracy“), it has distributed oil industry-funded “educational” content, like this video produced by the American Petroleum Institute..."


As far as all the 'population control', consider that the average American citizen uses 11 times as many resources as an average Chinese citizen, and about 150 times as many resources as an sub-Saharan villager.

Since the population argument is about resources, logically this means that for every American child born, we'll allow 11 Chinese and 150 Ethiopians to be born. That should sound ridiculous - and it is.

Fact is, if you want to keep population down, what you want to do is support women's rights and education around the world; notice how women who get a college education tend not to have ten kids each?

Otherwise, you're just talking about Nazi eugenics. Take a look at what edith had to say on this issue:

"I can't decide whether we should simply quaratine them to preserve this laboratory or put them out of their misery once and for all."

Goebbels couldn't have been clearer, could he?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» ??? Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» I have some ideas Posted by: AdamG
» Talk is cheap Posted by: AdamG
Global warming is the world's most serious long-term problem
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Nov 26, 2006 10:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is because the response time of the climate system is so long. Even if we stopped buring fossil fuels today, people have very little idea what would happen to CO2 levels Would they remain constant at today's levels? How long would it take for them to return to pre-industrial levels?

People are going to have to learn to live with this new situation, but we should also stop it from becoming much, much worse. If CO2 levels triple or quadruple, who knows what could happen? The IPCC report constructs such scenarios, and they're pretty grim.

There is a little positive news, in that methane levels (a powerful greenhouse gas) appear to have stabilized over the past seven years, perhaps due to better procedures by the fossil fuel industry (less release) or from some other, unknown mechanism.

If we look at the historical record, we find that human civilization has developed in a period of unusual climatic stability (the Holocene). We've done our best to disrupt this stability, and now we are entering a new climate regime that hasn't been seen in 3 million years.

The results will be economic catastrophe - see the British Stern Report on Economics of Global Warming

See also "Earth's Climate Warming Abruptly, WP

What you see in the public discussion, however, is a desperate attempt to head off any regulations on fossil fuel combustion and prevent the growth of the renewable energy industry. This effort is spearheaded by Exxon, Chevron, Shell and BP - the major international oil companies - and a whole host of paid think tanks and climate front groups whose funding can all be traced back to oil and coal billionaires. Read through this thread and you'll see what kind of tactics they use.

The US academic system is also in bed with these players - look for renewable energy programs with real funding anywhere in the system - The US spends far more on propaganda for the Iraq occupation than it does on renewable energy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Off the hook? Posted by: particle
Africa Does Not Yet Meet US Military/Strategic interests
Posted by: sofla100 on Nov 26, 2006 3:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When you have a President who does not even believe in Global Warming or thinks it is some kind of left wing conspiracy, of course you are not going to get any action from the USA. As for Africa, it's a land that the official US power structure could give a rat's ass about anyway. Put simply, their ain't enough OIL believed yet to be there (although the Chinese might think there is) and the USA is use to getting it (OIL) so far the easy way, where it flows out of the ground as in the Middle East (for now). The people in Africa are also too weak from hunger and drought that they cannot even be expected to work for the usual third world US corporate conglomerate for $1 per day (the "free trade" thing). So, for US economic, military and strategic purposes Africa is not yet a place for much empahsis or attention. Now, if Africa had what Sadaam had, some of the largest known oil reserves on the planet, it would be a different story.

-Oh, and paid right wing bloggers, don't try to tell me the USA toppled Sadaam because he was "a really bad guy," if you are stupid enough to really believe this, I will send you to Dobson's "Focus on the Family" and the "700 Club" reading rooms to get your propaganda facts straight!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Could It? Posted by: edith
» RE: Could It? Posted by: sofla100
Hot topic!
Posted by: ssmit355 on Nov 26, 2006 4:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can feel it; can't you?

Many people in cold, midwest states (my folks in MN for example) like global warming, are ignorant of potential cataclysmic effects, and enjoy warm weather.

Now, weather or not, I live in Utah now and I fear the future heat of summer and I miss the white bliss of winter. (Someday snow may be legend, so refine your story-telling skills.)

I like science, but I don't trust (fully) science's predictions of the future because, well, it's the future. But my senses tell my catastrophe is on the way--it tastes like smog, burns like exhaust. The chaos part of GW is the most intriguing because it gives everyone something to say (it's warming, no it's not, not here, it is here, no it's not, yes it is), and while they talk, they do nothing to prepare for change. Stop driving.

Learn to walk, run, swim--you really should set some minimum performance standards. Enjoy life the old ways; learn what's good to eat in the neighbor's garden. Stop driving. Relax. Don't go to war: with anyone. But learn to protect yourself. [You'll probably need to know how to stop feral dogs from gittin ya.] Each time you post: learn a new survival skill.

Either way it's upon us; we can make it easy. We can make it tough.

Stop using oil.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hot topic! Posted by: dnvrliz
A few examples of oil politics, murder and repression in Africa
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Nov 26, 2006 6:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Chad-Cameroon pipeline for oil extraction from the Sudan region, financed by the World Bank

This is important because almost none of the mainstream media reporting on the Sudanese genocide mentions the role that oil extraction plays in the crisis.

Nigerian Oil, Human Rights Abuses, and Corporate Profits

Again, you see a situation in which corporations like Shell and Chevron have essentially taken over a country, installed a military puppet dictator, and engaged in wholesale resource extraction while causeing massive environmental damage and ensuring that all the petrodollars go to the investment banks that control the oil companies - while the people of Nigeria get nothing.

These are more good reasons (besides global warming) for cutting off all foreign oil imports and switching to wind, solar, biofuels and energy conservation to make up the difference.

Back in 2003, Bush visited Nigeria and met with the Chevron people there; recall that Condi Rice is a Chevron Board of Directors member, where she'll likely find a berth after leaving the government. Drilling and Killing: As President Bush Meets with the CEO of Chevron Texaco in Nigeria, a Look at Chevron’s Role in the Killing of Two Nigerian Villagers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

FYI on the "National Anxiety Center"
Posted by: JohnF on Nov 26, 2006 10:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Alan_Caruba

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

majority rule in action
Posted by: Burton on Nov 29, 2006 10:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Since African countries are all majority rule, why don't the people simply vote to end global warming?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]