Of interest…

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/031205Y.shtml

The Control Orders are bound to be over used and wrongly used, alienating even more people. In Northern Ireland in 1972 (?) they rounded up 450 odd people from absolutley crap MI5 and Special Branch lists of "known terrorists", subjecting them to sensory deprivation. This was the latest fashion in ‘non-torture’ torture at the time and involved hooding, wall standing ie leaning forwards with outstretched fingers supporting the whole body at an angle for HOURS with white noise blasted at you - ring any bells? The panic in government then, was as it is now. Problem was, most of the arrestees were ordinary, but aggravated folk who hated the totally bent way society favoured protestants with housing and jobs etc - and the blatant gerrymandering. Besides the torrent of headlines about British torture around the world and a couple of government reports (Parker ‘72 & Bennet ‘79) slagging off the idiot security people, the other ‘benefit’ of this panic was a shot of cocaine into the arms of the real nutters who gained enough catholic public support and silent sympathy to develop and succour their insurgency with it’s pointless, sadistic, butchery for the next 30 years. Those with shorter memories may wonder why the McCartney murder witnesses don’t trust the NIPS, well, the roots are back there in 1972.

Here’s a quote from Gardener: "The blame for this sorry story, if blame there be, must lie with those who, many years ago, decided that in emergency conditions in Colonial-type situations we should abandon our legal, well-tried and highly successful wartime interrogation methods and replace them by procedures which were secret, illegal, not morally justifiable and alien to the traditions of what I believe still to be the greatest democracy in the world."

I anticipate a similar report on Control Orders in the future. By then, we will have probably aliented the Muslim community, along with most liberals, and buried many dead.

When politicians slime themselves off the hook by tipping their hats at an issue as serious as pollution in order to reassure the masses that they are doing something when in fact they are not, I see that as a backwards step not an advance. "Global warming? Don’t worry about that chaps, our government has signed up to Kyoto so we’ll be ok. Pity the Yanks and Chinese though, they haven’t signed it, poor fools."

Hubbert’s peak was predicated on a mathematical bell curve with 30% URR from any given oil field. North Sea oil has not produced such a peak, for example, the curve has been stretched into a bumpy plateaux as recovery technology has improved, pushing URR from wells to over 50%, albeit depending upon the geology. Besides technological advances Hubbert did not account for the effects of price and demand nor take adequate account of deep sea oil. For many years his ‘acolyte’, Campbell did not do so either. The latter has form for predicting the peak each year about a year ahead for many years. This is not to say he’s a false prophet, more to point out that oil reserve calculations are as much an art form as a science and that he lacks the skills of a Leonardo. His cries of warning began to sound like "Wolf, Wolf!" and have, to an extent, been counter-productive.

However, taking into consideration all the projections (I wasn’t aware Hubberts curve had been discredited, apart from by opponents of the Peak Oil theory) and bearing in mind that some of these "political strategies" will take time to come into force, and even more time to be amended and strengthened etc etc. The point is, Blair is merely trying to put in place the framework for later misuse - in the same way that Bill Clinton laid some of the groundwork for George Bush to ride so roughshod over the US Constitution. There will come a time, 10 years into the future, 25 years into the future, who knows exactly when, when the unruly and unwashed citizens will arise as prices skyrocket; it could only be 5 years if some projections are accurate. When that time comes the political and economic elite need to have the full force of "the law" behind them; this is merely one of the first steps.

This bill turns anyone who opposes the Government, or big business, into a terrorist who can be locked away indefinately without a chance to defend themselves. It turns a democracy into a police state. It destroys the basic rights that millions of people have fought and died for.

And the most sickening thing about it is that millions of people in this country think its a good idea

Recent Oil and Gas Journal articles suggest that Non-Opec producers will peak in 2005-2007, Former Soviet Union production will peak between 2008-2014 and OPEC production will peak in 2025-2030. The Saudis themselves have stated they’ll peak in 2035. BUT there are a lot of variables in play, demand fluctuates, supplies may be over or underestimated, technology has increased recovery from each field from 30 to 55% in some cases, the speed of take off - all these things play a role in calculations. That said, peak we will AND in the case of the light sweet crudes, sooner rather than later.

However, Peak Oil is not NO oil. It is ‘merely’ reaching the peak of the resource. At peak we will be half way through the supply that exists geologically. The price, once peak has been reached OR SEEN to be close to being reached, will rocket because supply is finite and cannot increase beyond that which the planet started with. (Abiotic dreamers aside). Some Peak Oilers, Campbell, Laherrere etc, think we may already have passed peak. Others, me included, think we’ll plateaux for a few years and that even if there is a peak we won’t know about it until we are well on the way down the other side of Hubbert’s supposed ( and discredited) bell-shaped peak. In reality no-one knows for sure as the reserves a nation holds are kept secret for strategic and economic reasons.

Peak Oilers also tend to ignore such well credited academics as Thomas Ahlbrandt of the USGS, Prof Linden and Prof Peter R Odell - the latter’s latest book claims that peak will not be reached until 2060 (NB PEAK OIL, NOT NO OIL). He counts in heavy hydrocarbons - oil tars, oil shale etc. nearly all of which is in North America (Canada and Colorado).

Peak Oil issues are why China and the USA are running around trying to secure oil supplies. There really is not, as you say, long, in human terms, to go before oil prices go bananas and stay there. 2035 is SOON. For my three ha’pence (in BP) 2015 will mark the peak of the liquid juice.

So your concern is well placed but your suggestion that the world will be uninhabitable in 25 years time is risible. You make the mistake of confounding PEAK oil with NO oil. I repeat, PEAK is half way through. At that stage prices will have gone ape and Green Peace will be begging for nuclear, (not much good for plastics, fertilizers, personal transport etc etc, I grant you that, but better than nothing).

Politicians will do little - tax air fares? Tax SUVs in the USA, reduce USA consumption (25% of total world use) - ha! A fuel crisis is effectively upon us.

PS Kyoto is flim-flam, Guardian reader gesture politics, and will do nothing to head this off.

PPS Natural Gas peaks soon after oil…..

The latest book on this is by Paul Roberts, The End of Oil. But DON’T ignore Odell’s view for balance, Peter Odell, Why carbon fuels will dominate the 21st century’s global energy economy.

Consider that oil is currently forecast to run out in around 25 years time. Consider also that 25 years isn’t a long time. Now factor into your considerations the thought that it isn’t the point where oil runs out that we have to panic - but the point at which it STARTS to run out. When demand exceeds supply and some people have to start going without.

This point is called PEAK OIL. And it is currently forecast to occur in between 5 and 10 years time. Look at the current situation; when bad weather in Central America disrupting the supply from Venezuela is enough to drive the oil price through the roof. How long is this situation going to continue before the price at the pumps starts to go up like an elevator?

At the same time we have unequivocal links between human activity and global warming; the planet is warming up at an alarming rate. We have the Americans refusing to do anything about emissions, Bush insisting it is a natural phenomena, and the Yanks running around the globe right now picking fights with anyone and everyone who has a few cans of oil hidden somewhere in their country. And Blair backing up pretty much everything he says.

Blair knows all this as much as anyone who cares to do a little research does. But he also knows that 80% of the countrys population doesn’t read anything beyond what they see in the headlines. And so if he can convince the population that he needs to control them FOR THEIR OWN GOOD then enough of them will believe it to allow him to get these measures through. And you can see from reading things like the Your Say page on the BBC news website on a daily basis that there are a large proportion of people who really do believe he should have that power.

That scares me! That there are people who are so blind that they will allow their (and our) freedom to be restricted FOR THEIR OWN GOOD by this madman. And don’t try to kid yourself that Tony Blair is too principled, too good a man to allow a blatant miscarriage of justice to occur. Make no mistake, if he had the power he’d tearfully be telling the country he had no choice even as he flicked the switch to the electric chair himself. Don’t forget, this is the man who lied to the country in order that he and his mate George Brush could go and bomb the shit out of a country already destroyed by 25 years of abuse by itself and by us. This is the man who denies the best guesses of most groups attempting the count the casualties of that war - apart fromn the lowest one. This is a man with blood on his hands - including that of Doctor David Kelly - and would stoop to any depth to protect his job and his place in the history books.

And that’s what this is about. His place in the history books is more important than coming clean to the country. About how Al Qaeda is little more than a convenient front, a decoy with which the government can scare the electorate into surrendering their freedom in preparation for the days in the not far off future when the rule of law breaks down.

Sounds a scary and depressing picture, doesn’t it? Won’t happen, I hear you say? Well, what are we going to use to power electric stations when oil runs out? What are we going to use to transport food around the world? Petrol for our cars?

Unless there is a massive investment - and soon - and deployment of renewable power supplies, and a massive massive (impossibly so???) decrease in emissions, in 25 years this planet is going to be all but uninhabitable. And this is all unlikely to happen unless someone can persuade the US to get on board Kyoto (for a start off). But who? Certainly not Blair - he’s signed on the same ticket to hell as Bush. The same is happening in the US; they’re imprisoning people at a rate faster than ever in history at the moment. The slightest little connection with drugs or terrorism (well the 2 obviously go hand in hand, don’t they?!) - however tenuous - and you’re in the slammer. That’s what Blair wants over here.

What do they know that we don’t? Could it possibly be that the whole "international terrorist conspiracy intelligence" is nothing more than the screams of poor innocents who got caught in the US dragnet and tortured in places like Afghanistan, Cuba, or Iraq?

Matthew Hopkins demonstrated in the Seventeenth Century that torture gets testimony - but we now know that this testimony is worthless.

Given Blair’s previous record on "dodgy intelligence", could this be the real problem?

It would also be useful for all to understand what the police and security services are actually doing - and being paid to do - apart from sitting in their (palatial) offices ‘advising’ and putting up pseudo justifications for more of the taxpayers’ cash.

Can all these highly trained and paid individuals not manage to provide proper evidence to convict without ‘compromising their sources’? Maybe it’s time to reconsider the role and function of these expensive and inefficient departments.

Of course the ‘urgency’ with which the matter now needs to be resolved is entirely down to failure. It has been known since the legislation was placed on the statute books that it had a finite date. As for any form of planning, we’re stumbling from shambles to crisis. This is yet another piece of engineered hysteria for purely political gain.

Nice to see some proper resistance at last. A bit more would be a good thing.