Welcome to the East Yorkshire Protectors
On Friday 9th May 2014 protectors arrived at Rathlin Energy’s West Newton well site in East Yorkshire.
On Sunday 11th May protectors arrived at Rathlin Energy’s Crawberry Hill site near Walkington, East Yorkshire.
The camps are in their infancy and help with calls for support are much appreciated.
Rathlin Energy have already drilled two wells, Crawberry Hill 2700m and West Newton 3250m. Both wells have drilled through and beneath the chalk aquifer of Yorkshire and down in to the Bowland Shale.
Rathlin Energy applied to the Environemnt Agency to conduct a mini frack on the Bowland Shale at both wells in Februay 2014. This was granted by the Environment Agency early May 2014. Rathlin Energy have to give 14 days notice to East Riding of Yorkshire Council before going back on either sites to do further work and tests
More info and link to site below … Get involved ans show your support:
via Welcome.
Could this be the first deaths caused by a Fracking Mudslide
Below are 3 news reports regarding this horrendous tragedy. Only one mentions oil and gas companies and only very briefly. The Youtube video above tells a whole different story. It seems very likely that the mudslide has been caused by hydraulic fracking.
http://www.nbcnews.com/…/three-missing-colorado…
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/26/us/colorado-mudslide/
If you have any further information or comments please do let us know and please share this story.
Dead Babies and Utah’s Carbon Bomb
A drilling rig operated by Nabers Co. drilling on land leased by the Bill Barrett Corporation from the federal government near Vernal, Utah, March 21, 2012. (Photo: Jim Wilson / The New York Times)
A sudden and extreme spike in neonatal mortality in Utah’s rural Uinta Basin is most probably related to the toxic air pollution related to the fossil fuel drilling/fracking frenzy in Eastern Utah. And the local poobahs want to kill the messenger.
Donna Young is a midwife in Vernal, Utah, with 20 years experience managing home births in Idaho and Utah. She lives in the Uinta Basin, the heart of the fossil fuel drilling/fracking frenzy in Eastern Utah. On May 8, 2013, she had her first stillbirth. At the funeral service a few days later, she noted what seemed like an extraordinary number of infant graves with recent dates at the cemetery. She decided to investigate.
She didn’t get any help from local authorities, but eventually information gleaned from obituaries and mortuaries revealed 12 cases of neonatal mortality (most of them stillborn, or death shortly after birth), in 2013. Looking back to 2010 revealed a modest upward trend, but then a huge spike in 2013. This is sparsely populated rural Utah. Vernal is a town of fewer than 10,000 people. But per capita, this is a neonatal mortality six times the national average. It is actually worse than it appears. National infant mortality rates have been dropping slowly and steadily for almost 50 years, including about a 10 to 15 percent drop in the last decade. Furthermore, most of Utah is about 50 percent Mormon, so the rate of drinking and smoking is less than the national average throughout the state. The minority population in rural Utah, like Vernal, is very low, and the percentage of Mormons is even higher, both of which should lower the infant mortality rates, all other things being equal
What is going on in Utah’s Uinta Basin to explain newborn babies dying? An abrupt surge in teenage mothers, drug, alcohol use? No evidence of that. Is there a genetic explanation? Genes don’t change that quickly. Is there a sudden onset of medical incompetence by the area’s health-care providers? No reason to think so. That leaves one other possibility. Is there something happening in the environment? As a matter of fact, yes.
Read on and Souce …. http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/23885-dead-babies-and-utahs-carbon-bomb
Russell Brand Wants to Know About Fracking Finances
Specifically in regard to why the Sun Newspaper should actually be promoting this dangerous and highly controversial practice. Of course he alludes to the money involved but just where does it fit in and how?
In response to various tweets he received he tweed this link:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genie_Energy
But this doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface and so a few of us from various Facebook Anti-Fracking pages have sent him a few more helpful links.
Firstly I sent him the link to this blog page which has now had over 6000 views, over 2000 Facebook shares and is still to top viewed post on the blog every day.
Still Wondering Why The UK Government Is Willing To Frack The Hell Out Of Us Despite Overwhelming Evidence Of The Horrendous Dangers?
Still Wondering Why The UK Government Is Determined To Frack
The next one for me was a really interesting on as I hadn’t seen it before:
http://www.wdm.org.uk/carbon-capital/nexus
I also invited Russell to Join our Facebook Page:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/BritishCelebsAgainstFracking/
Others are still tweeting Russel @rustyrockets and I will of course get back to you with any updates.
As always I would also welcome your comments and any shares or re-blogs to help spread the message about the horrendous dangers of fracking far and wide.
We CAN stop it in the UK if we rise up and stand together.
MORE LINKS SENT TO RUSSELL:
Frack You … I’m Alright Jack
MP Peter Lilley has received more than $400,000
in oil company share options
Analysis shows full extent of climate sceptic’s financial interests in oil industry and places committee role under further scrutiny
But first let’s watch Vanessa Vine of Bitain and Ireland Frack Free, tell Peter Lilley on national TV that, without a doubt he is a liar.
The Conservative MP Peter Lilley, one of only three MPs who voted against the Climate Change Act, has received share options worth at least $400,000 from an oil company, Guardian analysis has revealed.
Lilley’s links to the oil industry have long been declared by the former cabinet member. But the revelation about the full extent of his financial interests will place him under further scrutiny in his new role as a member of the Commons select committee on energy and climate change, which will be quizzing the energy and climate secretary, Ed Davey, about the energy bill on Tuesday.
Since 2006, Lilley has been a non-executive board member of Tethys Petroleum, a Cayman Islands-based oil and gas company with drilling operations in Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. In the register of MPs’ financial interests, Lilley has routinely declared that he receives a quarterly payment from Tethys for “attending meetings and advising on business developments”. The latest quarterly payment registered by Lilley on 1 October was £11,750 for 30 hours’ work, meaning he has received £47,000 over the past year.
But the Guardian has discovered Lilley has also been granted share options valued by the company at the time they were granted at $428,399, in addition to other share options that have not been given a clear financial valuation. Under parliament’s code of conduct, he is not required to disclose details about the precise value or volume of any shareholding.
Tethys’ financial public filing reports show that Lilley was granted $107,290 worth of share options in 2011, $194,350 in 2010, $57,040 in 2009, and $69,719 in 2008. In 2007, Lilley was granted 150,000 share options, but a financial valuation was not expressed in the documents.
Tethys is currently publicly listed on stock exchanges in Toronto, London and Kazakhstan. Its share price in London has fallen sharply since recording a record high in March. Tethys reported last week that it had “seen a substantial increase in oil production and revenue from the Doris oil field in Kazakhstan” in 2012, and that overall the company had seen a “46% increase in production revenues over the third quarter of last year”.
Lilley did not respond to the Guardian’s invitation to comment. A Tethys spokeswoman said: “We have no comment except that all of the options are currently out of the money and none have been exercised to date.” The term “out of the money” means the company’s stock price is currently lower than the share option’s “strike price” and would, therefore, result in a loss if exercised now.
As a new member of the Commons energy and climate change select committee, Lilley is expected to declare any relevant interests to the committee’s clerk upon his first appearance, which took place last week. Next Tuesday, the committee will recommence its inquiry into shale gas. The minutes of any interests or information declared by Lilley to the clerk is not expected to be published for at least a month, but the Guardian understands that, as a committee member, he is not obliged to declare anything beyond that required in the MPs’ register of financial interests.
When Lilley was appointed to the committee last month, Caroline Lucas, the Green party MP, said: “That Conservative MPs have voted Lilley, a senior oil industry figure and well-known climate sceptic, to serve on the parliamentary committee tasked with scrutinising the UK’s climate and energy policy is a clear sign that anti-green, anti-science forces are gaining ground.”
She added: “Lilley’s position as an oil executive means that he is likely to be far more concerned with the short-term profits of the dinosaur polluting fossil fuel barons than tackling the huge threat posed by climate change – or recognising the opportunities of switching to a green economy.”
Lilley recently wrote a report – which failed to declare his oil industry interests – for Lord Lawson’s Global Warming Policy Foundation, in which he criticised the “failings” of the influential Stern review of the economics of climate change published in 2006. In September, Lilley wrote to the BBC’s director of editorial policy and standards to complain about the broadcaster’s “systemic bias” in its climate change reporting.
Last week, a covert Greenpeace video was released showing Lilley calling Greg Barker, the Conservative energy minister and an enthusiastic backer of renewable energy, a “complete nutter”.
In the video, Lilley said that the chancellor, George Osborne, “wanted to get people into key [government] positions who could begin to get the government off the hook from the [climate] commitments it made very foolishly.” He added: “We could well see certainly amendments to the Climate Change Act, cease to make it legally binding, make it advisory.”
Lilley described the covert recording as “deplorable”. He added: “I would happily have given an interview making the same points if they had approached me honestly … I have never discussed climate policy with the chancellor or anyone speaking for him.”
• This article originally said “the term “out of the money” means the company’s stock price is currently higher than the share option’s “strike price””. Higher has been corrected to lower.
Frackings First Political Prisoner
Kate McCann – Frackings First Political Prisoner
BARTON MOSS ACTIVIST JAILED FOR SIX MONTHS WITHOUT TRIAL
“Unbelievable! Anyone would think he’d committed murder to be treated like this!”
Barton Moss protector, Kate McCannn, was remanded in custody for six months by a judge at Manchester Crown Court yesterday until his trial begins on October 9th.
| Kate McCann was one of the most prominent and passionate protectors active at the Barton Moss Community Camp in Salford, participating in lock-ons, slow lorry walks and educating people to the dangers of fracking.
Originally charged, like many others, with `aggravated trespass’ on Barton Moss Road which led to the IGas exploratory drilling site, Kate, like many others, was also bailed not to go back to the site by Greater Manchester Police. Most people who had these conditions attached to their arrest charges broke the bail conditions the next morning, in order to get their cases taken to court and get the conditions lifted. The Salford Star understands that Kate went back to the site on the final week of the Camp to help clear up and was also arrested for breeching bail conditions – but was remanded in custody, firstly for two and a half weeks, and, yesterday, for over five months, making a total of over six months until his trial on October 9th. The judge’s decision provoked outrage and shock, as the original offence apparently wouldn’t have carried anything like a six month custodial sentence, even if proved guilty. A Justice For Kate facebook site has been set up (see here), while supporters have taken to numerous social networking sites to voice their anger… “Unbelievable! Anyone would think he’d committed murder to be treated like this!” “Clifford convicted guilty by jury on multiple child grooming offences gets bailed pending sentencing. We have an innocent protector inside for trumped up charges…..With no perceived risk of breaching bail again as there is no fucking activities at the location…feel so angry…” “Cruel, wicked, wrong…” The Barton Moss Camp stated “An incredible travesty of justice! This is a political prisoner, incarcerated for protecting your land and your water. Please share this, please carry on making your voices heard. Let them know they cannot get away with this. Let them know we are outraged and disgusted by this deeply unjustified treatment of our peaceful protector. FREE KATE NOW! JUSTICE FOR THE PROTECTORS!” Simon Pook, of Robert Lizar Solicitors which are handling the case, added: “I’m concerned that this does seem extremely harsh and I’m fully committed to looking at the law and how we can bring about a positive resolution for him.” Bez is due to visit Kate in prison, while supporters are urging people to write their letters of support to Kate… K McCann * Please be aware that all letters are read by prison officers before being passed to Kate. People can also donate towards the Free Kate fund via the facebook site Justice for Kate – Barton Moss Fracktivist UPDATE 11pm – the Habeus Corpus application to free Kate tomorrow has been postponed due to developments in the case. |
Source: http://www.salfordstar.com/article.asp?id=2252
A word from me …
Kate you are an inspiration … a beautiful human being … you have been so wronged but the least we can do from this traversty is to raise even more awareness to the corruption, lies and horrendous greed that is Fracking … Always With Love … Denise ❤ xxx
Balcombe residents’ group vows to fight on after Cuadrilla wins planning permission
I watched this council meeting live and was mortified by the outcome.
29th April 2014
The Frack Free Balcombe Residents’ Association is considering a legal challenge to the decision by West Sussex County Council’s planning committee to grant permission to Cuadrilla to test the viability of its exploratory oil well.
View original post 483 more words
Fuck You and Fuck Your Mother Too (Not My Words!!!!)
Nick Grealy Tells Those Opposed to Fracking … Fuck You and Fuck Your Mother Too !!!!
Shale gas ‘expert’ Nick Grealy is invited to take the microphone at the protest against fracking outside Winter Gardens, Blackpool. He approaches a woman, asking if she is ‘Ewa Jasiewicz’. She says ‘no’ and he appears to be somewhat disgruntled by his mistake. When it is pointed out to him that he is wrong, responds with ‘fuck your shit’. He is then asked by a member of the public ‘why did you want to kn-‘ but interrupts and tells the public to ‘fuck off’ before heading back inside.
As he makes his way back, he is offered the chance to take the microphone and responds with ‘fuck you and fuck your mother too.’ When challenged about his outrageous and insulting language almost immediately afterwards via Twitter, he admits his disgusting comments and unbelievably tweets: ‘you missed the part where I said…and your father too.’
It is evident that this man seems unable to rein in his vile tirades against the public. He had an opportunity to take the microphone and tell people why he thinks anti-frackers are wrong. Instead, by insulting the public with his disgusting comments, he does nothing but prove his contempt for them and his inability to engage in any form of discussion without descending into vile insults.
Video and Source:
In A Nutshell Why Should We Not Allow Fracking in the UK
This very short film tells you from the heart of normal regular people like you and I why fracking in the UK would be disastrous.
Please, please watch and share with your loved ones, your neighbours, your fellow human beings.
If it’s not stopped, fracking WILL be happening on your doorstep!
Ex Mobil Oil Exec Confirms Fracking Technology is Dangerous and Untested.
Former Oil Exec Says Fracking is Not Safe, Retired Mobil VP confirms technology is dangerous and untested.
In a message “straight from the horse’s mouth,” a former oil executive on Tuesday urged New York state to pass a ban on the controversial practice of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, saying, ‘it is not safe.’
“Making fracking safe is simply not possible, not with the current technology, or with the inadequate regulations being proposed,” Louis Allstadt, former executive vice president of Mobil Oil, said during a news conference in Albany called by the anti-fracking group Elected Officials to Protect New York.
Up until his retirement in 2000, Allstadt spent 31 years at Mobil, running its marketing and refining division in Japan and managing Mobil’s worldwide supply, trading and transportation operations. After retiring to Cooperstown, NY, Allstadt said he began studying fracking after friends asked him if he thought it would be safe to have gas wells drilled by nearby Lake Otsego, where Allstadt has a home. Since that time, he’s become a vocal opponent of the shale oil and gas drilling technique.
“Now the industry will tell you that fracking has been around a long time. While that is true, the magnitude of the modern technique is very new,” Allstadt said, adding that a fracked well can require 50 to 100 times the water and chemicals compared to non-fracked wells.
He also noted that methane, up to 30 times more potent of a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, is found to be leaking from fracked wells “at far greater rates than were previously estimated.”
In response to Allstadt’s statement, the environmental group Food & Water Watch tweeted:
Straight from the horse’s mouth: Former #natgas executive speaks out against #fracking:http://t.co/EkM6mjM5sL.
— Food & Water Watch (@foodandwater) April 23, 2014
Elected Officials to Protect New York held the news conference to promote local initiatives to ban the practice in the state and to call on officials to push for more renewable energy sources. Protesters in New York have been pressuring Governor Andrew Cuomo not to lift the state moratorium on fracking, a move he said he would consider by Election Day 2014.
_____________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This article first appeared on Common Dreams.
Regulators Gag Doctors Treating Fracking Poisoning
Fracking Chemical Gagging Law
“If you’ve been exposed to dangerous fracking chemicals, your doctor can find out what these chemicals are—but can’t tell you! […]
So what if your physician believes you may be ill from fracking chemicals, but needs to know which ones to make sure your diagnosis and treatment are correct? A Pennsylvania law signed earlier this year allows physicians to access information about the proprietary chemicals being used (which are protected by trade secrets) so they can help their patients who are sick from the chemicals. But here’s the catch: they have to sign a confidentiality agreement that they won’t tell anyone else — not you their patients, and not even other doctors — what’s in those formulas.” — Alliance for Natural Health
Sources and Further Infirmation:
FoodFreedomNews: — http://bit.ly/Nfj1Fr
my Ecocidal Insanity album: — http://on.fb.me/mfJGCc
this page: — http://on.fb.me/Nullx0
World Socialist Website says Oppose Fracking at Barton Moss UK
Fracking Law Loophole … They Will Frack Under Your Homes … Watch Out For The Queens Speech In May
By SEP candidate Robert Skelton
24 April 2014
Over the last few months, protesters at Barton Moss in Salford, North West England, have been opposed by the full force of the state, while peacefully opposing shale gas test drillings operations being carried out by the IGas corporation.
Barton Moss has been chosen as one of many sites in the UK for a private corporation to carry out hydraulic fracturing. In recent years, this new oil and natural gas extraction technique, high-volume hydraulic fracturing, commonly known as “fracking,” has been employed extensively in a number of regions of the United States.
As with the Obama administration, the Conservative/Liberal Democrat government is a vigorous proponent of the fracking industry, even though it has not been proven to be a safe way of extracting energy.
Hydraulic fracturing involves the use of millions of gallons of water mixed with sand and a lethal brew of toxic chemicals, including compounds with known carcinogenic or severe health effects such as benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene. The “fracking fluid” is injected deep underground through a bore hole at high pressure to break open fissures in the shale and release the gas or oil trapped in tiny pockets within the rock.
A single vertical well can tap into only a limited area of the shale bedrock immediately surrounding the bore hole. The tremendous increase in the production potential of hydrofracking comes from this combination of vertical and horizontal directional drilling. This technique allows the drill bit to be turned horizontally once it has reached the depth of the shale formation. Drilling can then extend significant distances along the target bedrock layer and thus allow the fracking fluid to be spread across a vastly greater area than by vertical drilling alone.
Once the rock is shattered, the resulting mixture of fracking fluid and natural gas or petroleum is brought back to the surface and the fuel materials separated and stored for shipment.
Contrary to industry statements that fracking is safe, evidence demonstrates that it poses significant dangers to the environment and human health. Much but not all of the mixture of gas/oil and fracking fluid is brought back to the surface during the extraction process. Furthermore, in some cases, the used fluid is re-injected into the well as a disposal method. Therefore, a potential source of contamination will remain in the ground indefinitely after the well has been closed.
A photograph, taken on February 11 at Barton Moss, shows a truck entering the site carrying what appears to be radioactive material. These are Cesium-137, a gamma ray source with a half-life of 30 years, used to make rock density measurements, and Americium-241/Beryllium, a neutron source with a half-life of 432 years, used to detect liquids in the rock pores. These are the two most commonly used radioactive sources in well logging, and prolonged exposure to either could result in harm to humans.
Another major danger associated with fracking is the potential of earthquakes. Two earthquakes, of magnitude 1.5 and 2.2, hit the Blackpool area of the North West in 2011 after fracking had been carried out. Fracking was temporarily suspended in the UK and resumed after a government review decided the process was safe, if adequately monitored. But only this week, geologists in the United States conclusively linked earthquakes deep under Ohio’s Appalachian Mountains to fracking.
IGas began its testing last summer after signing a deal with Peel Holdings, owners of the nearby MediaCity and the Manchester Ship Canal, to search the land it owns in the North West for energy resources recoverable by fracking.
Oil services conglomerate Schlumberger was contracted by IGas to do the well logging. The company finished its exploratory drilling this month and is set to return to Barton Moss later this year after announcing that it had detected the gas in samples from its test well. The firm said it intends to map a 100-square-kilometre area of the North West to determine where else to drill for shale gas.
The protests against fracking at Barton Moss began last November with a camp set up on the road nearby the site. Peel Holdings quickly moved to evict the camp. They asked Manchester Civil Justice Centre for possession of the camp, and an order was granted by Judge Mark Pelling QC.
The protesters argued that the firm did not own the land where the camp is and had no right to evict them. The same month, lawyers for the protesters won a legal bid to prevent their eviction and have been granted a full hearing to decide if there are grounds for the right to appeal eviction. On July 16, the Court of Appeal will hear the case.
On March 9, more than 1,000 protesters marched in nearby Manchester city centre against the drilling at Barton Moss.
Throughout their time at the camp, protesters were subjected to a massive police presence costing more than £700,000, with numerous cases of police brutality alleged. In January, protester Sean O’Donnell suffered multiple injuries, including a broken metatarsal and suspected broken ribs, claiming he was thrown to the ground by police.
In February, a 15-year-old girl was arrested and subsequently held for six hours by police without being allowed access to her mother. She was only at the site because she was researching a geography project on fracking.
On March 17, another protester, Vanda Gillett, a mother of five, was alsoviolently arrested. She accused the police of assaulting her and acting like “a pack of wolves.”
In order to carry out over 100 arrests, Greater Manchester Police (GMP) claimed that the camp was on a public highway and charged many with obstructing it or obstructing a police officer. This anti-democratic procedure was overruled by a judge at Manchester Magistrates Court on February 12, who said that the camp was on a public footpath and not a public highway.
The authoritarian Terrorism Act 2000 was also used as a pretext by GMP to raid the camp on January 6. Police searched it under Section 43 of the Act, claiming they were acting in response to a flare fired from the camp at a police helicopter. The search did not produce any evidence related to a flare. Section 43 power does not require a warrant and can only be used only when a police officer ”reasonably suspects” a person might be a terrorist.
The use of anti-terror legislation to target peaceful protesters is confirmation that such measures are on the statute books primarily to silence any and all dissent against the policies of the government and their big business allies.
The SEP warns against placing any confidence in the Green Party to counter such assaults.
Last week, Green MP Caroline Lucas and four others were cleared of obstructing a public highway during an anti-fracking protest outside energy company Cuadrilla’s site in West Sussex last August.
Lucas claimed that her party would not cease campaigning until “our world is on the path to a clean energy future.” But while condemning fracking, the Greens make no such protests against the inexorable drive to war by the major capitalist powers that has been exposed in their provocations against Russia in Ukraine.
Indeed, in countries such as Germany where the Greens have significant political influence, they are beating the drums for militarism. Former Green foreign minister Joschka Fischer has demanded openly that the European Union adopt an aggressive imperialist foreign policy, indifferent to the fact that nothing poses a more immediate and catastrophic disaster for humanity and the planet than a third world war with nuclear weapons.
The development of a democratically decided “clean energy future” cannot be conceived of in isolation from the development of the international class struggle against capitalism.
The Socialist Equality Party opposes the uncontrolled application of fracking by private corporations whose sole aim is the maximisation of profits at any cost.
While fracking technology may provide an important source of energy in the future, the question of whether it can be safely employed can only be determined by careful scientific research, divorced from considerations of private profit and based on human need and the protection of the environment.
We call on those who agree with this approach to support the campaign of the SEP/PSG, vote for our candidates and join the fight for a Socialist United States of Europe.
For further information visit: www.socialequality.org.uk
Lincoln County Gas Well Explosion – 3 Mile Evacuation Zone
Lincoln County Oil Well Explosion … 3 Mile Evacuation Zone … No One knows how long it will take for the area to become habitable again
Tiny Wyoming Town Evacuated After Explosion at Natural Gas Plant
A small town in southwestern Wyoming was evacuated on Wednesday afternoon after an explosion and fire at a natural gas processing plant.
Lincoln County spokesman Stephen Malik told NBC Station KSL that there were no injuries from the blast, which occurred about 2 p.m.
“Everyone is being ordered to evacuate east of town,” Malik said. “We’re working on long-term sheltering plans.”
An area of about 3 miles outside the town was evacuated as a precaution, he said.
Opal, Wyoming, a town of some 100 residents 100 miles northeast of Salt Lake City, was completely emptied and nearby U.S. Highway 30 and State route 240 were closed because of the fire at the plant.
No structures in the town were damaged, however, officials said.
Plant officials said that all workers at the plant were accounted for. The plant is operated by the Oklahoma-based Williams Partners L.P.
The cause of the blast was still under investigation, and it was unclear how long the evacuation orders would remain in effect.
AND YET STILL WE PRESS ON WITH FRACKING IN THE UK!!!
Still Wondering Why The UK Government Is Determined To Frack
Still Wondering Why The UK Government Is Willing To Frack The Hell Out Of Us Despite Overwhelming Evidence Of The Horrendous Dangers?
Is this not conclusive evidence that the Government in the UK has agreed to Hydraulic Fracking, (when so many other countries have rejected it) strictly for their own gains. Not only the government, look at the banks, coporations and other bodies involved in this mass ecocide/genocide toxic soup.
WAKE UP PEOPLE … TELL THEM ALL NO FRACKING NOT HERE NOT NOW NOT EVER … SPEAK UP WHILE SPEECH IS JUST ABOUT STILL LEGAL IN THE UK!!!
FURTHER UPDATED INFORMATION ON THIS STORY FROM FRACK-OFF
The fracking interests at the heart of UK government:
* Lord Browne – Chairman of Cuadrilla Resources – installed by David Cameron’s Government as “lead non-executive director” at the Cabinet Office
* Ben Moxham – ex-Riverstone Vice President (who own a large chunk of Cuadrilla) – Cameron’s Energy Advisor from 2011-2013
* Tara Singh – former Centrica lobbyist (who invested in Cuadrilla a month after her appointment) – replaced Moxham in May 2013
* Baroness Hogg – non-executive at BG Group (who own substantial fracking interests in the US) – non-executive director at the Treasury
See the fully referenced research piece at Paul Mobbs’ website:
http://www.fraw.org.uk/mei/musings/2013/20130725-behind_every_picture_lies_a_story.html
Latest from Upton Community Protection Camp:https://www.facebook.com/UptonProtection?fref=ts
Latest News from Dart’s Daneshill site, Notts: http://frack-off.org.uk/category/daneshill
Read about Dart’s plans for Cheshire, Wrexham and Notts: http://frack-off.org.uk/dart-frack-attack-multi-well-program-in-midlands/
Latest from Upton Community Protection Camp:https://www.facebook.com/UptonProtection?fref=ts
New UK fracking licenses confirmed: http://frack-off.org.uk/new-uk-fracking-licenses-confirmed/
$3 Million Settlement in 1st Fracking Case To Ever Go To Court
Aruba Settles $3 Million Dollars in First Ever Fracking Case To Go To Trial.
When you present the evidence to six people who know nothing about fracking, they find fracking guilty.
TXsharon wrote a diary on Daily Kos when Lisa Parr’s doctor found drilling chemicals in her blood and lungs. That was back in 2010 when she still had hope that fracking could be done right. We’ve all learned since then that it can’t.
Today, a jury of their peers awarded Bob and Lisa Parr $3 million dollars in their fracking lawsuit against Aruba Petroleum. The Parr’s attorneys said this was the first fracking case to ever go to trial.
They were surrounded by gas wells.
Lisa’s suffered from
Breathing difficulties
Nausea
Rashes that left her scarred with pock-marks.
She had biopsies of the oozing welts on her scalp and the 4 ping-pong-ball-sized lumps on her neck.
Testing showed drilling chemicals in Lisa’s blood and lungs that match chemicals detected by the state in air testing outside her home.
She had a whole host of other ailments.
Bob and Emma also suffered various health impacts.
Tonight Lisa told me they won’t have to end up in the Cycle of Fracking Denial so they can speak openly about what happened to them. She said, “This was never about the money. This was about our land.”
The author has blogged extensively about the sins of Aruba Petroleum. From her view, they are one of the most irresponsible and reckless companies in a plethora of reckless and irresponsible companies.
Aruba intends to appeal the jury’s decision. That means it will go to the Texas courts where judges are soaked in oil and gas money.
HAPPY EARTH DAY!!!
UPDATE: Here is a blog post by one of their attorneys.
Fracking and the Un-Hoodwinking of America
This is a must watch video … sorry but I can’t seem to embed the video for some reason.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PyQ1I4pbug&feature=youtu.be
Published on 11 Apr 2014
Fracking and the Un-Hoodwinking of America By Sandra Steingraber, PhD
My task today is to speak to you about the collective state of mind in the United States in regards to fracking. The word I think of first is an old English verb: “hoodwink.” To hoodwink means to trick, cheat, or deceive, but the original meaning of the word, in William Shakespeare’s time, was to blind someone by placing a hood over their eyes …. [abridged here] With these emerging data, the real costs of fracking are coming into focus, and the un-hoodwinking of America is underway. But I would like to close with an apology, rather than a note of triumph. The environmental community in the United States, of which I am a member, took a conciliatory stance on fracking many years ago with the excuse that natural gas was somehow less bad than coal for health and the climate. It’s not. But by our silence, U.S. environmental groups enabled this harmful form of fossil fuel extraction to gather political power and speed. Fracking is my country’s worst export. You may not hear this from anyone else, but I am truly sorry, as an American, that fracking is now sowing misery across the Atlantic. It’s brutal, primitive technology that brings temporary riches to a few and permanent ruin to many. I pledge myself to your good efforts to halt fracking in the European Union and across the Mediterranean basin.
New Yorkers Against Fracking http://nyagainstfracking.org
Concerned Health Professionals of New York http://concernedhealthny.org
Americans Against Fracking http://concernedhealthny.org
A comprehensive citation database on the health effects of fracking has been compiled by Physicians, Scientists and Engineers for Healthy Energy: http://psehealthyenergy.org
Frack Free Chorlton
AS FRACKING COMES TO A LEAFY SUBURB NEAR YOU
Chorlton Green hold their 4th “GREEN” Festival this year. This was the scene in 2013 … Will the next image be the scene for 2014
Ann Power, a much respected resident of Chorlton rises up to stand with many others against the horrors of hydraulic fracking at Barton Moss. Being flanked by and often pushed and shoved by the police did not deter Ann from her aim of raising awareness to the horror that corporate greed is about to unleash on all of us here in the UK.
I was asked to write a 300 word article for the Chorlton Community Index about fracking, or anti-fracking, from the Chorlton perspective. This was what I came up with, but it was rejected because ‘it’s far too important a subject and it needs to be done justice.’ So the next issue will have no anti-fracking article in it apparently. I thought I’d put this here, because it was a much harder task than I’d thought trying to choose what to include to be relevant to the folk of Chorlton, most of whom seem to believe that fracking will never come here (that’s if they’ve heard of it at all). I thought it might help anyone who might be faced with a similar task trying to introduce their local community to wake up to fracking. here it is:-
The Unconventional Gas Industry-Will it affect Chorlton?
Many people in Chorlton will have learned through the mainstream media about the drilling going on by IGas at Barton Moss, seven miles from Chorlton, and the involvement of environmental campaigners and locals including Chorlton residents in protesting against the industry.
Opposition to fracking is growing in the US and Australia where huge areas of countryside and farmland can now be accurately described as gas fields. There are many adverse effects; to health caused by air and water pollution, hugely increased traffic; possible earthquakes; plummeting house prices; land poisoned and rendered useless; to name a few. Our population density is ten times greater than the US; fracking will affect more people. With 64% of Britain offered to companies for fracking, including several National Parks, and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty; can we be sure fracking won’t come to Chorlton? Maybe not; IGas’ next proposed site is at Davyhulme only 3.5 miles away, which is already an Air Quality Management Area.
Methane leaks are frequent in the fracking process; methane is a greenhouse gas with 20 times the effects of CO2. The United Nations panel have warned that emissions are rising and that targets will not be met. We need to combat climate change by reducing emissions and investing in renewables like solar and wind power.
If you’d like to join the opposition against this extreme form of energy production which threatens our environment and our health, please join Frack Free Chorlton. We have frequent meetings in Chorlton; details on our Facebook group, in the files section there are many links to useful informative articles and videos about fracking…we find that the more people learn, the more committed they become to joining the fight against this devastating process, which destroys our countryside just for a few years supply of gas.
Will The Barton Blockade Happen Come September
Can we save this land from the horror of being fractured and poisened
By Colin Gong (Please click link to go to original posts and comments and Facebook)
So the Ligas activity has pretty much abated for the time being and the dust has settled , and it is the last night on the moss for Olive and I …. we are poised ready to lift our anchor in the morning and set sails back towards our ‘normal’ life.
Colin and Olive at Barton Moss (left and right) … Image by Peter Yankowski
For the last 4 months our life has been pretty much spent on the moss so it has been home for us for this while , and we have done all we could see to do to defend it during our time here . It has been a pleasure and a privilege to stand with all you people here , locals and migrants alike .
With the easing of the intensity over these last days I have been assimilating and reviewing where things are now placed , in terms of the struggle to save this land from the horror of being fractured and poisoned .
All the signs we can read say that are igas are lining themselves up to return later in the year , and have their sights firmly set on doing what to me , and to many others , is simply unthinkable .
And sadly there are no signs visible that say Salford Council , our Government , the EA or the HSE are going to do anything other than be complicit with Igas in the crime of wilful ecocide .
So from where I am looking , right now the mosses and the communities around them are looking very very vunerable to the unthinkable – to having the living daylight fracked out of them .
Seeing this , I feel far from easy with leaving the area at this juncture… … but we have to go – the circumstances of life do not give us an option to stay. To moderate my dis ease at having to leave , I air these questions for the thinkers and strategists of the campaign , which must surely be ongoing :
What is going to happen when they return?
In the light of all recent evidence it would be niave or foolish to think the Government or the Council or EA or HSE might suddenly start doing their job properly and protect the mosses and the communities around them ….
….so who or what is going to protect when the frackers return? …
We can be fairly confident that Peel and Igas between them will make sure that a camp of incoming migrants can not land so easily this time … and who knows how many of them will be in a position to return then anyway? – other campaigns , jobs , some even in prison?
So the main thrust of the next phase will need a LOT more local people to be stirred and ready to act… the numbers of active locals who are sufficiently aware of the nature of the threat to be willing to stand (or sit) on the B M Road in defence of the community has slowly but surely risen over the course of the last 5 months …
….but it is still so far sure of where it will need to be in 5 or 6 months time .
How many would it take anyway ? 500? , 1,000? , 3,000?
Will the threat of fracking mean enough , to enough local folk by then ? … will the rising awareness have arisen enough by then? …. can we just sit back and hope/trust that will have happened by the time the frackers return? ….
or again , in the light of recent evidence , is that a naive and foolish way to go?
I have to say that if we were more ‘rooted’ here , and were set to be living here this year and next year and the one after , I don’t think I would be resting for more than a minute just now ….
….I would be calling together as a matter of urgency the biggest group of committed strategic thinkers I could muster …
… to ask the questions and brain-storm them , ‘how can enough local folk be sufficiently be informed and stirred so they are ready to step forwards to protect the community when the frackers return?’ ….
The Bentley Blockade is currently happening in Oz ….
And I think it may well come down to a point where NOTHING else is going to protect the Mosses and the nearby communities from the onslaught of this insanity , apart from the people of those communities themselves..
The BARTON BLOCKADE may well need to happen …
… and I don’t see it is going to happen out of nowhere … people get ready ….
Of course we will come if we possibly can .
The Secret Formula Behind Coca Cola and Fracking
Secret Recipe for Coca Cola, KFC and Fracking Fluid
So we’ve all known for a long time that KFC and Coca Cola and others are entitled to withold the contents of what they are offering up as edible “food” as it’s a secret recipe. Well OK we can choose NOT to eat their garbage, despite the millions they spend on advertising.
However, approximately 600 different checmicals go into the “Secret Recipe” of Hydraulic Fracking Fluid. This is the toxic poison that they pump by the 1000’s of gallon loads into the ground to create none renewable energy which they already know to be fatal.
For a while I have been looking for a list but have yet to discover one. In the meantime here is a link to the Top Ten Scariest (remember this is out of 600) Chemicals in Fracking Fluid and what they cause …
Unlike KFC and Coca Cola, you will have no choice whether to injest this or not. It will contaminate the water table from which all life is dependent upon.
TOP TEN SCARIEST CHEMICALS USED IN HYDRAULIC FRACKING FLUID
They WILL Frack Under Your Homes
This letter from a Warrington resident caused some alarm when I read it …
Fracking Law Loophole … They Will Frack Under Your Homes … Watch Out For The Queens Speech In May
I WONDER if any of your readers are aware of the new law being prepared for the Queen’s Speech in May. It does away with the old common law right of trespass under your home.
This new legal right will allow onshore unconventional gas extraction companies to drill under properties and ‘frack’ the ground for methane.
This is not proven technology and Blackpool has recently suffered earthquakes and property damage.
In addition many insurance providers are questioning their ability to provide cover for buildings insurance. No building insurance, nomortgage, no moving house.
Many councils have given planning permission for Coal Bed Methane extraction. This is the planning ‘in’ for companies such as Igas, Dart, Cuadrilla and many others.
‘Fracking’ or hydraulic fracturing is a process of drilling deep holes underground, sometimes for many miles horizontally under urban areas. Then a cocktail of many hundreds of thousands of litres of water coupled with slicas and some dangerous chemicals is pumped in to break up the shale formation releasing methane gas.
In Australia and America many wells are leaking both gas and chemicals into the ground and underground water aquifers.
The ‘flowback water’ approximately 400 tankers worth is then too radioactive to dispose of through the drains. It needs specialist treatment but there are no facilities to do this.
Warrington has a coal bed methane plant run by Igas at Doe Green, Penketh.
There are also two council planning permissions in place for unconventional gas extraction at Waterworks Lane, Winwick and off Manchester Road, Woolston.
The Government has already admitted fracking will not reduce your gas bills, so really we and our children have to suffer all these problems just to make some money for the companies and Government via their DECC licence sales.
As my son tells me, anti-fracking is really a ‘no-brainer’. But don’t take my word for it, please research it yourself. If you agree please join the Facebook group antifrackingwarrington where likeminded people are trying to do something about it.
It’s our childrens’ future at stake.
Pete Roberts Warrington
I have asked for links to direct sources but so far have only been given this by Pete Roberts “Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013,its buried(lol) with lots of other stuff “
I’m not really any the wiser really although I don’t doubt that this government will push anything they like through the back door while we work our collective butts off for a pittance and then drown our sorrows with wine while catching half an hour of mainstream media bull!
I mean just take a look at the Civil Liberties Act!
Civil Liberties
What are Civil Liberties? (Apart from none existent)
Civil liberties are basic rights and freedoms granted to citizens of a country through national common or statute law.
They include freedom of speech, freedom of movement, freedom from arbitrary arrest, freedom of assembly, freedom of association and freedom of religious worship.
Such rights and freedoms form the basis of a democratic society and are often denied to those living in a dictatorship.
Civil liberties are distinct from human rights in that the latter are universal rights and freedoms to which all people throughout the world are deemed to be entitled; however, the two often converge.
Background
In the UK the concept of civil liberties has evolved over several centuries through conventions, legal precedents and legislation.
The Magna Carta, drawn up in 1215, is usually cited as the first piece of legislation to guarantee certain liberties and rights, although its primary purpose at the time was to limit the power of the tyrannical King John by establishing that the monarch was also subject to the rule of law.
Of the original clauses, only three remain valid. The first supports the freedom, rights and liberties of the Church of England; the second confirms the liberties and customs of the City of London and grants liberties and customs to other cities, boroughs and towns. The third remaining clause is the most well-known. Originally written i
n Latin a modern translation reads:
“No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled; nor will we proceed with force against him except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land. To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice.”
It is this clause which has been interpreted widely as confirming the right to trial by jury and habeas corpus and its influence is seen in various pieces of subsequent legislation including the United States Constitution.
The Bill of Rights 1689 -“An Act declaring the Rights and Liberties of the Subject, and settling the Succession of the Crown” – further limited the power of the monarch and established the supremacy of Parliament.
Its clauses include provisions for free parliamentary elections, for parliaments “to be held frequently” and for freedom of speech within Parliament (parliamentary privilege). In relation to the courts, the bill stated that “excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
The Bill of Rights, which was drawn up at the time of the accession of William and Mary, remains in force today. Like Magna Carta, its influence can be seen in other legislation relating to the rights and freedoms of individuals, in particular the US Bill of Rights 1789, and also the UN Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the General Assembly in 1948, and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in force 1953, which includes both human rights and civil liberties.
The UK helped draft and is a signatory to the ECHR (formally the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) which is a binding international agreement. Signatories undertake to protect rights and freedoms within their own countries. Residents of these countries who have a grievance under the terms of the Convention may take their case to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Strasbourg.
This process, however, has often proved to be extremely lengthy and expensive. Consequently the Labour government introduced the Human Rights Act 1998 (in force 2000) which made rights from the Convention enforceable in UK courts, thus negating the need to petition the ECtHR.
Other recent legislation concerned with protecting rights and freedoms includes the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) which provides members of the public with a right to request access to information held by public authorities or by persons providing services for them.
These public bodies include government departments and local assemblies, local authorities, health trusts and hospitals, schools and colleges, and the police.
The present government has said it is committed to the FOIA, pointing out that the number of public bodies covered was extended in 2011 with work on further extensions ongoing. According to the Ministry of Justice, the FOIA “is key to the Government’s wider transparency agenda….and the increased accountability it brings is also important to the Government’s work to protect civil liberties.”
The Equality Act 2010 is also intended to protect civil liberties by prohibiting discrimination, harassment and victimisation in relation to nine protected characteristics: These are – age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnerships, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation. Unfair treatment is prohibited in the workplace, when providing goods, facilities and services, when exercising public functions, in the disposal and management of premises, in education and by associations (such as private clubs).
Following the May 2010 election, the new Coalition government said it believed the British state had become “too authoritarian” and promised to “implement a full programme of measures to reverse the substantial erosion of civil liberties and roll back state intrusion.”
A number of these measures were subsequently included in the Protection of Freedoms Act passed in May 2012 including a new framework for police retention of fingerprints and DNA data, a code of practice for surveillance cameras and a new regime for police ‘stop and search’.
The Government also established an independent Commission to investigate the possible creation of a new UK Bill of Rights which would “incorporate and build on all our obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights, ensure that these rights continue to be enshrined in UK law, and protect and extend our liberties.”
The Commission is to consult with the public, judiciary and devolved administrations and legislatures and report back no later than the end of 2012.
Controversies
The Labour government elected in 1997 was frequently accused of running a “nanny state”, but by the time of the 2010 general election, criticisms had increased to more serious accusations of excessive state interference and state control, infringements of civil liberties and a gradual erosion of the rights of the individual.
One of the main concerns was the enormous number of new criminal offences brought in by Labour. Between 1997 and 2009, 4,289 new criminal offences were created, approximately one for every day the party was in power; and the number continued to increase, rising from 27 new offences a month under Tony Blair, to 33 a month under Gordon Brown.
Several of the new laws were ridiculed for their absurdity; for example it was made an offence to offer for sale a game bird killed on a Sunday or Christmas Day; or to swim in the hull of the Titanic without the permission of a Cabinet minister.
The Liberal Democrats roundly condemned this “frenzied approach to law-making” and accused Labour of having “an obsession with controlling the minutiae of everyday life.”
Further concerns about infringement of civil liberties were raised by the passing of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA), dubbed the ‘snoopers’ charter’.
The Act creates a regulatory framework to govern the way public bodies, such as the police and security and intelligence services, use covert techniqes when investigating terrorist threats and other serious crimes, the purpose being to ensure investigatory powers are used in accordance with human rights.
These powers are: the interception of communications; the acquisition of communications data (e.g. billing data); intrusive surveillance (on residential premises/in private vehicles); covert surveillance in the course of specific operations; the use of covert human intelligence sources (agents, informants, undercover officers); and access to encrypted data.
Initially only nine organisations were allowed to use RIPA powers and attempts by the Government in 2002 to extend their use to hundreds more public bodies were defeated by civil liberties campaigners and cross-party MPs. Nevertheless, the number of public bodies using covert surveillance continued to grow.
In 2009 the Liberal Democrats reported that 795 bodies, including all 475 local authorities, were allowed to use RIPA powers, with councils using covert techniques originally designed to prevent terrorism, to “spy” on individuals suspected of trivial offences such as cases of dog fouling or checking whether a person resides in a school catchment area.
A Lords select committee recommended in 2009 that the Government introduce a system of judicial oversight for surveillance carried out by public authorities, and that compensation be made available to those subject to unlawful surveillance. The committee also urged the Government to take steps to ensure that these powers were “only exercised where strictly necessary, and in an appropriate and proportionate manner.”
There were numerous other measures introduced by Labour, claimed as necessary to fight the so-called “war on terror”, which were seen as a serious threat to civil liberties.
Tony Blair suffered his first defeat as prime minister in 2005 when MPs rejected his call for the pre-charge detention limit for terror suspects to be increased from 14 to 90 days. The move had attracted warnings of a possible infringement of habeas corpus. MPs later agreed on an increased time limit of 28 days. A further attempt in 2008 under Gordon Brown’s leadership to increase the time limit to 42 days was thrown out by the Lords.
The introduction of ID cards together with an accompanying national identity register was widely opposed, as was the increased retention of data on the DNA national database, particularly the decision to store the DNA of large numbers of innocent people.
Excessive use of stop and search powers also caused concern. Any police force authorised by the Home Secretary could randomly stop and search any person or vehicle on suspicion of terrorism under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000.
Both the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives criticised these measures when in opposition and the new Coalition government came to power in May 2010 promising to “restore the rights of individuals in the face of encroaching state power.”
True to their word, ID cards were scrapped and the National Identity Register destroyed.
The use of Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 which allowed police to carry out random stop and search acts – and which had been ruled unlawful by the European Court of Human Rights in January 2010 – was repealed by the Coalition and replaced with a more limited power under the Protection of Freedoms Act introduced in 2012.
Other measures in the Act include reducing the pre-charge detention of terrorist suspects to a maximum of 14 days; requiring schools to obtain parental permission before taking fingerprints of children; and ending the storage of DNA of innocent people.
The Coalition also stated that it was committed to stopping local authority use of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 unless it was for serious crime and approved by a magistrate. A review of RIPA was announced by the Home Office in December 2010 and a requirement for local authorities to obtain judicial approval was included in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.
However, not all civil liberties concerns have been addressed by the Coalition and the spectre of another ‘snoopers’ charter’ has raised its head in the form of the Draft Communications Data Bill published in June 2012.
The Bill proposes to allow security services access to all communications data – i.e. records of all emails, texts and phone calls – and for communications service providers (CSPs) to collect the data which will be stored for 12 months.
The proposals have attracted widespread criticism from a variety of sources. Liberal Democrat MP Julian Huppert warned: “The Home Office will have to satisfy Liberal Democrats – and others – that existing safeguards are being strengthened, that any extensions to collection powers really are necessary and are proportionate, and that any changes represent increased rather than weakened protection for civil liberties. If they can’t, then this will simply not pass.”
The respected pioneer of the World Wide Web, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, also expressed concern saying moves by governments to control or spy on the internet “keep me up most at night.” In an interview for the Guardian he described plans to routinely record information as “very dangerous”.
“It means that there will be information around which could be stolen, which can be acquired through corrupt officials or corrupt operators, and used, for example, to blackmail people in the government or people in the military. We open ourselves out, if we store this information, to it being abused,” he warned.
An e-petition against the proposals entitled “Scrap Plans to Monitor all Emails and Web Usage” has already attracted in excess of 10,000 signatures and the human rights organisation Liberty has launched a “say NO to the snoopers’ charter” campaign.
Liberty is also campaigning against the Justice and Security Bill published in May 2012 which, amongst other things, would allow national security cases to be heard in closed proceedings – so-called ‘secret courts’.
“Designed to keep the press and public in the dark, these proposals will have serious implications for media freedom and the rights of potential victims and their families seeking answers or reparation through the courts or inquest proceedings.” Liberty said. “They would not only overturn centuries of common law fair trial protections for those seeking to challenge the actions of the State, but also undermine the vital constitutional principle that no one is above the law, including the Government. “
The right to protest and the policing of protests is another issue which constantly raises questions about infringements of civil liberties, one current bone of contention being so-called ‘kettling’ where demonstrators are contained within a particular area by the police.
Campaigners claim that kettling stifles legitimate protests, is indiscriminate in that bystanders are often detained with the protestors, and that restricting freedom of movement in this way breaches fundamental rights under the ECHR. However, following a long-running legal challenge brought by protestors involved in a 2001 demonstration, the European Court of Human Rights in March 2012 finally ruled that kettling was lawful.
The ruling was criticised by civil liberties campaigners. But the Ministry of Justice defended the tactic saying: “We support the targeted and proportionate use of containment as a key police tactic to manage risks of violence and disorder at protests and the policing efforts to use containment in a way that minimises the impact on those protesting peacefully.”
The Ministry of Justice has also had to defend cuts to legal aid, included in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act passed in May 2012, a move which has provoked outrage from civil liberties campaigners, disability groups, the legal profession and others. Liberty warned that publicly funded legal advice and representation “will be put beyond the reach of vast swathes of the British population” and the Labour peer, Lord Bach, led a Lords rebellion against the cuts
However, the Ministry of Justice defended the cuts, due to be implemented from April 2013, saying the legal aid scheme had expanded considerably since it was established in 1949, putting considerable pressure on the legal aid fund. The MoJ said the reforms would ensure access to public funding “in those cases that really require it” and “protect those most in need of advice and assistance.”
Statistics
United Kingdom: World Democracy Profile
The table below shows the most recent World Democracy Audit scores and rankings achieved by the UK. Lower scores are preferable.
World Democracy Audit overall ranking: range 1-150 ranking 13
Political rights range 1-7 ranking 1
Civil liberties range 1-7 ranking 1
Press freedom range 0-150 ranking 16
Corruption range 0-149 ranking 13
Source: World Audit.org – 2012
Quotes
We will implement a full programme of measures to reverse the substantial erosion of civil liberties and roll back state intrusion.
We will introduce a Freedom Bill.
We will scrap the ID card scheme, the National Identity register and the ContactPoint database, and halt the next generation of biometric passports.
We will outlaw the finger-printing of children at school without parental permission.
We will extend the scope of the Freedom of Information Act to provide greater transparency.
We will adopt the protections of the Scottish model for the DNA database.
We will protect historic freedoms through the defence of trial by jury.
We will restore rights to non-violent protest.
We will review libel laws to protect freedom of speech.
We will introduce safeguards against the misuse of anti-terrorism legislation.
We will further regulate CCTV.
We will end the storage of internet and email records without good reason.
We will introduce a new mechanism to prevent the proliferation of unnecessary new criminal offences.
We will establish a Commission to investigate the creation of a British Bill of Rights that incorporates and builds on all our obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights, ensures that these rights continue to be enshrined in British law, and protects and extends British liberties. We will seek to promote a better understanding of the true scope of these obligations and liberties.
Source Politics.co.uk
HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Onshore shale oil and gas “too dangerous to proceed with”, Balcombe residents’ group warns government
12th April 2014
The Frack Free Balcombe Residents’ Association (FFBRA) has called for a block on all future onshore oil and gas licences in the UK. It also says Environmental Impact Assessments should be carried out on all existing licences.
View original post 794 more words
When The Earth Dies, You Will Die Too
“Someday the earth will weep, she will beg for her life, she will cry with tears of blood. You will make a choice, if you will help her or let her die, and when she dies, you too will die.” John Hollow Horn of the Oglala Lakota tribe (1932).
“Someday the earth will weep, she will beg for her life, she will cry with tears of blood. You will make a choice, if you will help her or let her die, and when she dies, you too will die.” John Hollow Horn of the Oglala Lakota tribe (1932).
In a highly evolved society, we wouldn’t even consider a technology that is harmful to life – especially human life – but we’re clearly not evolved as a species. Technology has finally outrun common sense, and respect…
What am I speaking about? The birth and recent boom of Hydraulic FRACKING, despite the active protests of many world citizens against it.
It is painfully self-evident to residents living near fracking wells that their water was safe to drink BEFORE the fracking companies turned up. After fracking, metals including arsenic, selenium and strontium made their way into the drinking water, and their lives were irrevocably harmed.
Listen to the hard-hitting interview with Carol Jean Moten on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5MPsw_rfDew
Water is our most precious gift. Let us make no mistake.
Our beautiful, blue planet is made up of vast oceans, lakes, rivers and streams. Our bodies are, similarly, made up of internal oceans and rivers that supply us with the vital energy we need to live. Indeed, all of the human body’s functions depend upon the “life-giving” properties of water:
“Every function of the body is monitored and pegged to be efficient flow of water. ‘Water distribution’ is the only way of making sure that not only an adequate amount of water, but it’s transported elements, hormones, chemical messages and nutrients, first reach the more vital organs.” Dr. Batmanghelid
Now we want to inject lethal poison directly into our veins as we allow the Oil and Gas Industry blight our landscape and poison our water.
If there’s any chance of man-made technology harming that which we call life, life should take precedence over commercial interests. It’s that simple!
Humanity, stand up for your right to live a life free from harm, and from fear. We must say ‘no’, and keep saying ‘no’, to those decisions which are clearly not in our best interests.
We have brilliant minds who can create green energy solutions but our governments aren’t listening…
Fracking is a core issue. It represents the fight of the people and Mother Earth (you and me), against the greed of government and the big corporations.
http://ecowatch.com/2013/lessons-from-us-countries-fracked/
We’ve been conditioned not to rock the boat – to not cause a fuss – but if we don’t ROCK THIS BOAT, then our BOAT IS GOING TO GO UNDER IN A VERY DRAMATIC WAY.
“Like” and share this message to keep hope alive – let’s turn “activism” into “education”! And let’s stop the Ecocide once and for all!
Jaime Tanna
Frackers are being offered licences to drill on the flooded Somerset Levels
Desmond Tutu calls for anti-apartheid style boycott of fossil fuel industry
Desmond Tutu: ‘We have allowed the interests of capital to outweigh the interests of human beings and our Earth.’ Photograph: -/AFP/Getty Images
Nobel peace prize winner calls for organisations to cut ties with industry and for investors to dump fossil fuel stocks
Archbishop Desmond Tutu has called for an anti-apartheid-style boycott and disinvestment campaign against the fossil fuel industry for driving global warming, just days ahead of a landmark UN report on how carbon emissions can be slashed.
In an article for the Guardian, the archbishop writes: “We live in a world dominated by greed. We have allowed the interests of capital to outweigh the interests of human beings and our Earth. It is clear [the companies] are not simply going to give up; they stand to make too much money.”
Tutu, one of the most revered figures of South Africa’s anti-apartheid struggle and a key backer of the economic and moral campaigns that helped end the system, says: “People of conscience need to break their ties with corporations financing the injustice of climate change. We can, for instance, boycott events, sports teams and media programming sponsored by fossil-fuel energy companies.”
The Nobel peace prize winner also called for investors to dump their fossil fuel stocks: “It makes no sense to invest in companies that undermine our future. Already some colleges and pension funds have declared that they want their investments congruent with their beliefs.”
The archbishop’s intervention, just before the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, due out on Sunday, is the strongest yet in a rapidly growing global campaign against oil, gas and coal firms that is uniting anti-global warming activists with financial institutions who want to avoid a trillion-dollar crash in fossil fuel stocks.
A leaked draft of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report states that, to avoid dangerous levels of warming, investment in fossil fuels must start falling by tens of billions a year.
The draft says emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses grew nearly twice as fast over the last decade as in the previous 30 years. Emissions grew 2.2% a year on average from 2000-2010, compared to 1.3% a year over the period from 1970-2010. In 2010-2011, global emissions from burning fossil fuels grew 3%.
The good news, says Tutu, is that a divestment campaign has begun, started 18 months ago in the US. And it has grown faster than campaigns that targeted apartheid, tobacco and arms manufacturers, according to Oxford University research.
The research has shown that past divestment campaigns succeeded by stigmatising their targets – using “moral pressure” according to Tutu – and exerting financial pressure.
In the UK campaigners are targeting the £5bn of fossil fuels stocks owned by UK universities and, last month, the country’s top doctors called for urgent divestment.
“Those who profess to care for the health of people perhaps have the greatest responsibility to act,” wrote Sabaratnam Arulkumaran, president of the British Medical Association, and Fiona Godlee, editor in chief of the British Medical Journal. “Firstly, we should push our own organisations – universities, hospitals, primary care providers, drug and device companies – to divest from fossil fuel industries completely and as quickly as possible and reinvest in renewable energy sources.”
Tim Ratcliffe, European divestment coordinator for the campaign group 350.org, said: “It was a turning point when physicians spoke out against investments in the tobacco industry. This should serve as a wake-up call to investors to pull their money out of high-carbon assets.”
Fossil fuel firms are also facing escalating pressure from investors, with some large pension funds having already divested. The world’s biggest sovereign wealth fund, itself built on oil and gas revenues, is nowformally considering dumping its fossil fuel stocks.
The Norwegian finance ministry, which manages the $850bn fund, said: “An expert group will evaluate whether the exclusion of coal and petroleum companies is a more effective strategy for addressing climate issues and promoting future change than the exercise of ownership and exertion of influence.”
Other investors, including the Ceres coalition which manages $3tn collectively, have demanded fossil fuel companies confront openly the risk of a “carbon bubble”, by either diverting their investment to clean energy or giving the money back to shareholders.
The bubble risk exists because only a third of the reserves currently on the books of fossil fuel companies can be burned if the world is to have a good chance of restricting climate change to 2C, a goal to which the world’s governments are already committed. If global action is taken to slash carbon emissions those reserves become worthless, or “stranded assets”.
However, fossil fuel firms still spend huge sums – about $650bn in 2013 – exploring for new oil, gas and coal to add to the stockpile, despitedeclining profits.
Citi bank, HSBC, Deutsche Bank and Goldman Sachs, as well as ratings agencies Standard and Poor’s and Moodys, are among the big financial players who have already warned investors of the carbon bubble risk.
The leaked IPCC draft, seen by the Guardian, says this trend of rising investment in fossil fuel extraction and power plants needs to switch into reverse, falling by $30bn a year until 2030, if carbon emissions are to be cut sufficiently to have a good chance of limiting climate change to 2C.
At the same time investment in low-carbon electricity supplies, such as renewables and nuclear, will have to rise by $147bn a year, while investment in energy efficiency in transport, buildings and industry will have to increase by several hundreds of billions of dollars a year.
The IPCC report also warns that cutting carbon emissions may devalue fossil fuel assets, especially coal. Stocks in most companies mining for coal, the dirtiest fuel of all, have already plunged steeply since 2012.
China, the biggest importer of coal, is taking action to curb its use in the face of appalling air pollution, and new research concludes that two in every five coal-fired power stations could become stranded assets in next 40 years.
In the US, five coal mining companies, equal to $4bn in assets, have filed for bankruptcy since 2007, while from 2011-2013 coal stocks in the US fell 60%. However, the shale gas boom in the US has been a significant factor in making coal uneconomic.
The world’s biggest oil company, ExxonMobil, was forced last month to publish a report explaining how it was going to adapt its business to a world in which emissions were limited. But while the shareholders that demanded the move welcomed the new transparency, ExxonMobil concluded it was “highly unlikely” that global governments would cut carbon sufficiently to keep climate change under the internationally agreed 2C limit.
“Investors now know that ExxonMobil is not considering a low-carbon scenario in its planning, which places shareowner capital at risk,” said Natasha Lamb, director of equity research and shareholder engagement at Arjuna Capital, which helped force the disclosure. “We want to engage the companies head-on so there is not a calamity, as we got with the tech bubble, the financial services bubble and the housing bubble. But if Big Oil can’t redirect capital to low-carbon energy alternatives, investors will [by divesting].”
BP, Shell and Total are all discussing the carbon bubble risk publicly to some extent but Chevron has refused to do.
“We have now called the bluff of the oil companies to indicate what carbon trajectory they are betting on,” said James Leaton, research director at the analysts Carbon Tracker, which has pioneered the financial analysis of the carbon bubble. “Now it is up to the investors to act on that.”
Carbon Tracker research suggests carbon capture and storage – which would clean up fossil fuel burning by burying its emissions – will be able to deal with just 4% of total global reserves.
“There is a momentum gathering,” Leaton said. “Whether it is investors in Australia or Norway, people have seen there is less upside to coal and the amount of capital expenditure going into coal seems to have peaked. We’re really pleased that there is now a recognition that doing nothing and hoping it will be all right is not an option.”
Source The Guardian
The Horrendous Truth Behind Fracking 
