Saturday, September 24, 2011

Wolfensohn Foresees Chinese Agricultural Colonization in U.S.

Several weeks ago, James Wolfensohn spoke at a promotional event for his new book at the Center for the Arts.  I attended and unfortunately thought better of bringing a notebook and pen, for some reason?  Either way I do recall a few bits worth mentioning.

The most important things that I believe he referred are inextricably linked and have to do with our relationship with China.  One is the issue of water scarcity, and the other is the possibility that China will buy large swaths of U.S. land for agriculture.  Suffering from severe water problems, China faces social and health problems relating to the availability of clean water.  The common lore of China's economic miracle is merely a feel-good panacea, and it's only a mirage.  If China continues to pollute their water and air to no end, how do they expect to sustain their people in the future?

Well, buy land in the United States?  My generalized recollection of Wolfensohn's point weeks ago is that 'we live in a global world now, and when you look at China, a country of 3 billion people, expecting to swell substantially in coming years, there might be food shortages which will be met by perhaps the Chinese buying huge pieces of land in the U.S. for agricultural purposes.'  Wolfensohn also noted he believe there might be difficult political discussions about such a move, but his mention of "Chinese cities" in the U.S. brings to mind a number of questions.  Noting that Wolfensohn is a member of the International Advisory Council for China's sovereign wealth fund the China Investment Corporation, it would be interesting to see if such a topic gets swept up by the MSM in the near future.  What kind of dialogues are carried out about this within the China Investment Corporation?  They obviously know how big their water problems are. 

China's pollution problems have only been exacerbated by a decade of intensive industrial growth since their accession to the WTO in late 2001.  It is no rumor that wistful figures characterize Chinese figures, but what they are doing to the environment is effectively a slow-kill pill, eating away possibilities in the future due to a lack of legal regulations, technology, or, perhaps, concern. 

While it would be ideal for the Chinese to have no food supply issues, the momentum of quality water and land depletion seems to make such a task harder to accomplish.  As a policymaker, one needs to question the utility of a system that produces such daunting pollution.  It has been frequently asserted over the years that the cost of China's pollution is about 9% of GDP every years.  Given that their  GDP growth over the past decade has been an average of about 9%, not accounting for excessive bookkeeping and other creative measures, China's GDP growth seems quite mythical.  Let's be serious, the really valuable things in life are the ones that provide a basis for health and safety for both now and in the future.  However, for someone like Wolfensohn who has several chips on the world table, it would be nice to hear his reflection on the true value of water and how it affects this Chinese agri-colonization.

Friday, September 16, 2011

9/11 (Truth)

The celebrated 9/11 anniversary has passed, and left in its wake further alienation for some of us, and, for others, entrenched justification for dismal foreign policy and ponzi-economania.  However, the balance continues to shift in favor of those demanding 9/11 truth and justice.   A major milestone came this past weekend with the Toronto Hearings, where experts from numerous fields gathered to submit evidence in support of finding the truth as to what really happened on the day of September 11, 2001.

Here's the schedule:

(Subject to Changes)
Thursday, September 8, 2011
9:00 – 9:30 Moderators: Opening Remarks
9:30 – 9:45 James Gourley: Introduction to the Hearings and the Panel
9:45 – 10:15 Lorie Van Auken (Video): Statement by a Jersey Widow
10:30 – 12:00 Lance deHaven-Smith: 9/11 & State Crimes Against Democracy
1:00 – 2:30 David Ray Griffin: Inadequacies of the 9/11 Commission’s Report
2:45 – 4:15 Kevin Ryan: Inadequacies of the Reports by the National
Institute of Standards and Technology
4:15 – 5:00 Audience Question and Answer

Friday, September 9, 2011
9:00 – 9:15 Moderators: Overview of the Day’s Testimony
9:15 – 10:30 Jay Kolar: The Alleged 9/11 Hijackers
10:45 – 12:00 Paul Zarembka: Evidence of Insider Trading Before 9/11
1:00 – 1:35 Barbara Honegger: Eyewitnesses and Evidence of Explosions at the
1:35 – 3:10 Richard Gage: Evidence of the Demolition of WTC:
An Overview
3:30 – 4:45 Michel Chossudovsky: Global Consequences of 9/11
4:45 – 5:25 Cynthia McKinney: Attempts to Raise Questions about 9/11
5:25- 5:50 Audience Question and Answer

Saturday, September 10, 2011
9:00 – 9:15 Moderators: Overview of the Day’s Testimony
9:15 – 10:30 Graeme MacQueen: Eyewitness Evidence of Explosions at WTC
10:45 – 12:00 David Chandler: WTC 7:  A Refutation of the Official Account
1:00 – 2:15 Jon Cole: The Official Account and the Experimental Method
2:15 – 3:30 Kevin Ryan: Extreme Temperatures
3:45 – 5:00 Niels Harrit: Incendiary/Explosive Residue in the WTC Dust
5:00 – 5:30 Audience Question and Answer

Sunday, September 11, 2011
9:00 – 9:15 Moderators: Opening remarks and Moment of Silence
9:15 – 10:45 David Ray Griffin: Anomalies of Flights 77 and 93
10:45 – 12:00 Peter Dale Scott: 9/11 and Deep State Politics
1:00 – 2:00 Laurie Manwell: SCADs and Psychological Resistance to
Alternative Accounts
2:00 – 3:15 Senator Mike Gravel: State Deception in the Past and Today
3:30 – 4:15 Audience Question and Answer

A cursory glance at the schedule reads "Inadequacies..., Questions..., Explosions..., Demolition..., Deep State Politics."  The hearings included testimony from chemists, physicists, engineers, doctors, and scholars and I highly recommend watching some of the testimony here.

Laurie Manwell's presentation on State Crimes Against Democracy and Psychological Resistance to Alternative Accounts of 9/11 couldn't have been a better late than never introduction to the live hearings.  Having struggled with family and friends over 9/11 (truth), any insight into what makes it such a difficult topic to address is helpful.  For those who support 9/11 truth, there is plight in having to address the confounding subject.  
A question, though:  is addressing 9/11 (truth) the most effective means for treating our current socio-political dysfunctionality?  9/11 (truth) has some nasty implications (i.e. political violence, graft, fraud), which makes me ask (duh), what kind of larger, more treasonous threats do we face if 9/11 is someone's debut, inauguration, opus, if you will?   Are there motives which have yet to be uncovered behind the 9/11 facade, the obtrusiveness of which supersede any of our, what become, attempts to influence culture with the perhaps dim glow of 9/11 (truth).  Is 9/11 (truth) just in the past?  Is 9/11 (truth) a distraction from what is happening now?  

I saw James Wolfensohn speak at a promotional event for his book at the Center for the Arts a few weeks ago.  During the question and answer session of the talk, some young guy in the rear upper section of the auditorium stood up and asked, accusingly, how Bush and Obama were running free having been involved in egregious international crimes such as kidnapping and torture.  Wolfensohn's response; "I don't think anyone is going to drag them to the Hague."  Well, looks like no one Wolfensohn knows is dragging them to the pen.  Any other questions?