Friday, November 07, 2003
More on GM foods
Thanks to Glenn for alerting me to this column on the field scale trials in the UK.
US "allies"
In the war on terror, the United States believes in pre-emption; Canada, like many other "allies", believes in pre-emptive surrender. These two strategies are incompatible.
Pete Stark
I never heard of Congressman Pete Stark before today. But, I just heard him on CNBC discussing the economy and politics. The language he used to describe the President was the kind of thing I would expect at a Paris anti-war rally.
Really made him seem like a fool and I stopped listening to whatever argument he was making.
Really made him seem like a fool and I stopped listening to whatever argument he was making.
Revisionist view of the war
"One need offer no apology for saying that the supreme virtue of this war is that Saddam Hussein was gotten rid of."
Those words come from Fawaz Turki, who was "vehemently opposed" to the war in Iraq, but is now wondering if it's "too early to adopt a revisionist view" of the war.
Found this link through Andrew Sullivan.
Those words come from Fawaz Turki, who was "vehemently opposed" to the war in Iraq, but is now wondering if it's "too early to adopt a revisionist view" of the war.
Found this link through Andrew Sullivan.
Bush's speech
I can't help thinking that President Bush's speech yesterday shames Mr. Chirac and Mr. Schroeder. This is (finally) the real reason for the Iraq war. The Middle East has to be transformed. It's a cesspit of injustice, backwardness and economic stagnation. And, these conditions are the source of the rise of Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism.
As long as there was a homicidal maniac ruling a key country in the middle of the region, real change was impossible. Iranians, Syrians, Saudis and others all would have feared being enslaved by Saddam. Now that he's gone, all of them can hope, can dream. This strategy of Iraq serving as a model towards which the rest of the Middle East should aspire is extremely noble and idealistic.
I never understood why so many Europeans were opposed to this vision. If life under tyranny is actually preferable to war, why did so many Europeans fight and die in the 1940s? And, it doesn't matter how the Middle East ended up as it is. All that matters is that the millions who live there must have transformed societies. They must have hope.
It's also irrelevant that Bush didn't over-emphasise this vision before the war. If he had, he would have scared off the more isolationist Americans (and I'm one) - those who tend towards pessimism and would admire the ideal, but presume that failure was the only possibility. But, I can't understand why Blair didn't make this his prime justification. I can't understand why the leaders of "old Europe" couldn't share in the dream and the vision of a transformed Middle East.
I'm sure the nitpickers will find what they don't like and tear into this speech {I'm not sure the Taliban destroyed "a proud and working society"}. But, the essential theme is impossible to oppose without wishing ill on the people of the Middle East.
Here's my favorite quote:
As long as there was a homicidal maniac ruling a key country in the middle of the region, real change was impossible. Iranians, Syrians, Saudis and others all would have feared being enslaved by Saddam. Now that he's gone, all of them can hope, can dream. This strategy of Iraq serving as a model towards which the rest of the Middle East should aspire is extremely noble and idealistic.
I never understood why so many Europeans were opposed to this vision. If life under tyranny is actually preferable to war, why did so many Europeans fight and die in the 1940s? And, it doesn't matter how the Middle East ended up as it is. All that matters is that the millions who live there must have transformed societies. They must have hope.
It's also irrelevant that Bush didn't over-emphasise this vision before the war. If he had, he would have scared off the more isolationist Americans (and I'm one) - those who tend towards pessimism and would admire the ideal, but presume that failure was the only possibility. But, I can't understand why Blair didn't make this his prime justification. I can't understand why the leaders of "old Europe" couldn't share in the dream and the vision of a transformed Middle East.
I'm sure the nitpickers will find what they don't like and tear into this speech {I'm not sure the Taliban destroyed "a proud and working society"}. But, the essential theme is impossible to oppose without wishing ill on the people of the Middle East.
Here's my favorite quote:
Sixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe, because in the long run stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty.I'd love to be able to be as optimistic as the President. News like this morning's feed my pessimistic instincts, but as long as I can read something positive from Healing Iraq, The Messopotamian and others I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
"Iraqi resistance"
Another new Iraqi blogger puts paid to the notion that those who are fighting the Americans are an "Iraqi Resistance". Here's the "resistance" for you:
My son could not go to school for three days this past week because of threats to bomb school children. Can you immagine that? I ask this question above all to our arab "brothers" who glorify the "valiant resistance", from such T.V. channels as AlJazeera, as some well known character, talking from his comfortable and safe London office often entertain us to that effect.Again, Tom Friedman's description of the Iraqi Khmer Rouge seems so appropriate.
Global warming
If today is a result of global warming, then I say "let's have some more, please". Temperatures in the mid 60s and not a cloud in the sky. Tremendous.
I cannot understand why more Irish people are not complaining about our government's support for the Kyoto Treaty. Of course, the Kyoto Treaty was based on flawed data, so I suppose that means that I cannot complain about the government's support for a treaty that's attempting to condemn Ireland to miserable weather in perpetuity. If the Earth is warming up due to increased solar activity, then there's nothing to stop us getting the Mediterranean climate we want.
The weather is so good that not even Paul Durkan's juvenile analysis of US politics on the Pat Kenny radio show this morning could dampen my spirits.
I cannot understand why more Irish people are not complaining about our government's support for the Kyoto Treaty. Of course, the Kyoto Treaty was based on flawed data, so I suppose that means that I cannot complain about the government's support for a treaty that's attempting to condemn Ireland to miserable weather in perpetuity. If the Earth is warming up due to increased solar activity, then there's nothing to stop us getting the Mediterranean climate we want.
The weather is so good that not even Paul Durkan's juvenile analysis of US politics on the Pat Kenny radio show this morning could dampen my spirits.
Thursday, November 06, 2003
Boston Irish & Puritans
I was going to leave the blog for today and not mention baseball for a few months (What?! I didn't tell you that the New York Yankees were beaten in the World Series? How neglectful of me.), but this article from CNN is too good to pass up or even delay posting. There are just so many good quotes here:
{Thanks to the Irish Elk for this. And, there's an Irish history angle too for those who are not really baseball fans.}
There are others. It's worth reading in its entirety.
- To be a Red Sox fan is to understand what it must be like to be the abused partner in a bad relationship.
- While this year's Red Sox were conspicuous for the camaraderie and closeness of the teammates, the Yankees, too, are like family. The Macbeths, the Borgias and the Mansons.
{Thanks to the Irish Elk for this. And, there's an Irish history angle too for those who are not really baseball fans.}
Death penalty
George Will is opposed to the death penalty. Will is one of the conservative writers I most trust. I had always assumed he was in favor. I'm also opposed to capital punishment, but I don't brag about it.
Unlike Will, I do believe that the death penalty provides some element of deterrence. And, it can occasionally directly save lives. If NY State had a death penalty in the 1970s and 80s, Prison Guard Donna Payant would more than likely have not been murdered as her killer would almost certainly have been put to death before she came in contact with him.
Still, I am against the death penalty. Probably, because I'm a squeamish, middle-class wimp. Believe me, agreeing with the Irish sanctimonious set doesn't make me happy.
{If you want the full story on Lemuel Smith and Donna Payant, read this. It's not pleasant.}
Unlike Will, I do believe that the death penalty provides some element of deterrence. And, it can occasionally directly save lives. If NY State had a death penalty in the 1970s and 80s, Prison Guard Donna Payant would more than likely have not been murdered as her killer would almost certainly have been put to death before she came in contact with him.
Still, I am against the death penalty. Probably, because I'm a squeamish, middle-class wimp. Believe me, agreeing with the Irish sanctimonious set doesn't make me happy.
{If you want the full story on Lemuel Smith and Donna Payant, read this. It's not pleasant.}
GM Foods
Back in August I asked for some real science to be brought to bear on the GM foods debate. When I wrote that, I didn't know that a 4 year farm scale study into some GM foods was nearing its end. The results were published in mid-October, but are not available online (at least not that I could find).
The first I saw about this was on RTE's web site on Oct. 16. I saw this and felt that perhaps GM foods are not all they're cracked up to be:
The Guardian's report from Oct. 17 provides a fuller picture. Apparently, the primary problem is that genetically modified beet and rape allow farmers to more effectively control weeds. This increased weed control leads to a reduction in the food supply for some birds and insects. However (and this is a big however), the opposite is the case with GM maize (corn to us Americans).
So, science does indicate that growing certain GM crops can have a negative effect on wildlife in the area where these crops are grown. Does this mean we should ban the growing of these crops? That depends. How badly do we want to improve our farmers' yields? How much of a decline in the populations of insects and birds should we expect if we allowed these crops to be grown? Could farmers grow GM foods in a way that would minimize this effect on birds and insects? And, is it possible that improvements in the herbicides used with conventional crops could have the same effect anyway?
Trevor Sargent claims that "contamination of conventional and organic crops can occur within a 16 mile radius of a GM trial site" according to the "latest UK scientific research". However, these field studies involved growing conventional crops side-by-side (fields were divided in half) with the GM crops and I would have imagined that if contamination was going to occur, it would have occurred in these fields. The Guardian doesn't mention anything along these lines, so presumably, Mr. Sargent's information is from some other report.
This investigation deals entirely with the impact that growing GM foods can have. Science still claims that eating GM foods is in no way harmful to people. This Royal Society report from 2002 indicates that
Two key questions arise with regards to genetically modified food:
The first I saw about this was on RTE's web site on Oct. 16. I saw this and felt that perhaps GM foods are not all they're cracked up to be:
campaigners against the growing of genetically modified crops have welcomed the results of field trials carried out in Britain over the past three years. They say they show the alleged benefits of GM do not exist. The field trials found that some GM crops were worse for wildlife than conventional crops.However, I never trust RTE, so today I decided to go back and see what I could find.
The Guardian's report from Oct. 17 provides a fuller picture. Apparently, the primary problem is that genetically modified beet and rape allow farmers to more effectively control weeds. This increased weed control leads to a reduction in the food supply for some birds and insects. However (and this is a big however), the opposite is the case with GM maize (corn to us Americans).
So, science does indicate that growing certain GM crops can have a negative effect on wildlife in the area where these crops are grown. Does this mean we should ban the growing of these crops? That depends. How badly do we want to improve our farmers' yields? How much of a decline in the populations of insects and birds should we expect if we allowed these crops to be grown? Could farmers grow GM foods in a way that would minimize this effect on birds and insects? And, is it possible that improvements in the herbicides used with conventional crops could have the same effect anyway?
Trevor Sargent claims that "contamination of conventional and organic crops can occur within a 16 mile radius of a GM trial site" according to the "latest UK scientific research". However, these field studies involved growing conventional crops side-by-side (fields were divided in half) with the GM crops and I would have imagined that if contamination was going to occur, it would have occurred in these fields. The Guardian doesn't mention anything along these lines, so presumably, Mr. Sargent's information is from some other report.
This investigation deals entirely with the impact that growing GM foods can have. Science still claims that eating GM foods is in no way harmful to people. This Royal Society report from 2002 indicates that
the risks to human health associated with the use of specific viral DNA sequences in GM plants are negligible. Given the very long history of DNA consumption from a wide variety of sources, it is likely that such consumption poses no significant risk to human health, and that additional ingestion of GM DNA has no effect.This report also discusses some of the risks associated with conventional plant breeding as a comparison with genetically modified.
Two key questions arise with regards to genetically modified food:
- Is it safe to grow?
- Is it safe to eat?
Iraq - where are we now
Christopher Hitchens restates the case for war based on what we know now and knew before.
Wednesday, November 05, 2003
Ireland as a model for Iraq
Before Shi'ite clerics move to make Iraq an Islamic state (a "Shi'ite state for a Shi'ite people"?), John Cullinan says that the Iraqi people could learn something from Ireland's experience.
Americans are too lenient
Another post from "Healing Iraq" — a blog I'm checking daily now. Life in the real world.
It could easily be "ugly" according to our models of democratic societies. Internment, repression and summary executions are more than likely going to be part of the scene in Iraq as old scores are settled and the unreconstructable are put out of business.
What the US (and the rest of the west) needs to do is not so much turn a blind eye as try to encourage greater openness and transparency in Iraqi justice as society settles down. It's almost a cliche now, but rather than looking at today's US and western Europe as models, it would be better to look at those western European and east Asian countries that today are thriving, just societies, but in the aftermath of World War II were just beginning the struggle to make that happen.
The Americans are more interested in being nice and all about human rights and free speech and stuff. We have our own Law and court systems which we can use but the CPA won't allow us to. They are being too lenient and forgiving on our expence. If you think that is what is required to build a successful democracy then you're too deluded. You don't know the first thing about the Iraqi society.I hope that Mr. Bremer and company are working to allow the Iraqis to make these decisions themselves. Iraqis need to decide how justice should work in Iraq.
It could easily be "ugly" according to our models of democratic societies. Internment, repression and summary executions are more than likely going to be part of the scene in Iraq as old scores are settled and the unreconstructable are put out of business.
What the US (and the rest of the west) needs to do is not so much turn a blind eye as try to encourage greater openness and transparency in Iraqi justice as society settles down. It's almost a cliche now, but rather than looking at today's US and western Europe as models, it would be better to look at those western European and east Asian countries that today are thriving, just societies, but in the aftermath of World War II were just beginning the struggle to make that happen.
Criminal justice system
There's a lot of outrage about the collapse of the Limerick murder trial in Dublin the other day. The Irish Times has a poll running on whether "you favour the use of the non-jury Special Criminal Court for gangland cases"? Nearly three quarters of respondents have said yes. I wonder how many of those are opposed to the US's use of Guantanamo Bay as a holding center for Al Qaeda operatives?
Poppies in Canada
Members of the Royal Canadian Legion are removing their custom from branches of the National Bank of Canada after these branches banned the sale of Poppies.
Tuesday, November 04, 2003
Middle East & Conspiracy Theories
It's difficult to assess the credibility of blogs. So, every word I read on a blog - particularly one apparently originating in Iraq - is treated as at least somewhat suspect.
Having provided that health warning, I found this translation effort reassuring and hopeful after a horrendous weekend.
Having provided that health warning, I found this translation effort reassuring and hopeful after a horrendous weekend.
One of the chief "war mongers"
Very interesting article on Paul Wolfowitz in Sunday's Washington Post
Euro-Barometer on War & Peace
The full report is now available. A lot of comment in the past week, first on EU attitudes towards the war (most believe it was not justified) and then on countries that pose a threat to world peace.
This poll (Question 2) presumes that all that needs to be rebuilt in Iraq is that which was damaged during the war. I'm still unsure if that's the case or is the US now attempting to help Iraq rebuild infrastructure suffering from neglect.
I don't find it surprising that a majority of Europeans do not feel that the war was justified. Nothing has really come out of post-war Iraq to change anyone's mind.
It's also not surprising to me that a majority of Europeans believe Israel is the biggest threat to world peace. I'm not sure I can agree with Prime Minister Berlusconi, who claimed that the question was "misleading".
It's not misleading if your first language is English (from what I can see, the poll was conducted in French & English only). I suppose it's possible that people whose first language is neither English nor French may have misinterpreted the question, but the results from the two English speaking countries (UK & Ireland) are consistent with the rest of the EU.
But, just because I didn't find it surprising that EU citizens feel this way, does not mean that it's not outrageous that so many Europeans should feel this way. Why Israel? Estimates of civilian casualties from Russia's 8 year war in Chechnya are between 40,000-100,000. Some even say it's closer to 200,000. North Korea starves its own people in order to pursue nuclear weapons despite a determined attempt to coax them away from this development. Saudi Arabia exports the most extreme version of Islam, which clearly represents a global threat.
I wish I could explain these views. It would be easy to blame anti-Semitism, but even if true, that's insufficient. I don't think Europeans really fear Jews today - at least not as they did in the 1930s. I actually think it has more to do with the EU's past 50 years during which Europeans never had to defend themselves. Living as a cosseted protectorate of the US, Europeans have allowed themselves to develop completely unserious views as to how democracies defend themselves. I'm not sure that's really right either, but these attitudes, although unsurprising, are difficult to explain.
{I did find it surprising that Romano Prodi condemned the results of the poll.}
This poll (Question 2) presumes that all that needs to be rebuilt in Iraq is that which was damaged during the war. I'm still unsure if that's the case or is the US now attempting to help Iraq rebuild infrastructure suffering from neglect.
I don't find it surprising that a majority of Europeans do not feel that the war was justified. Nothing has really come out of post-war Iraq to change anyone's mind.
It's also not surprising to me that a majority of Europeans believe Israel is the biggest threat to world peace. I'm not sure I can agree with Prime Minister Berlusconi, who claimed that the question was "misleading".
For each of the following countries, tell me if in your opinion, it presents or not a threat to peace in the world?A selection of countries are then listed (apparently in random order):
- Afghanistan
- Iraq
- North Korea
- Saudi Arabia
- Somalia
- Syria
- Iran
- Pakistan
- India
- Libya
- United States
- China
- Russia
- Israel
- European Union
It's not misleading if your first language is English (from what I can see, the poll was conducted in French & English only). I suppose it's possible that people whose first language is neither English nor French may have misinterpreted the question, but the results from the two English speaking countries (UK & Ireland) are consistent with the rest of the EU.
But, just because I didn't find it surprising that EU citizens feel this way, does not mean that it's not outrageous that so many Europeans should feel this way. Why Israel? Estimates of civilian casualties from Russia's 8 year war in Chechnya are between 40,000-100,000. Some even say it's closer to 200,000. North Korea starves its own people in order to pursue nuclear weapons despite a determined attempt to coax them away from this development. Saudi Arabia exports the most extreme version of Islam, which clearly represents a global threat.
I wish I could explain these views. It would be easy to blame anti-Semitism, but even if true, that's insufficient. I don't think Europeans really fear Jews today - at least not as they did in the 1930s. I actually think it has more to do with the EU's past 50 years during which Europeans never had to defend themselves. Living as a cosseted protectorate of the US, Europeans have allowed themselves to develop completely unserious views as to how democracies defend themselves. I'm not sure that's really right either, but these attitudes, although unsurprising, are difficult to explain.
{I did find it surprising that Romano Prodi condemned the results of the poll.}
Monday, November 03, 2003
Greenstar
It's always amazing to watch a monopoly service in action. Greenstar's monopoly hold on refuse collection in my area is a great case in point. {And, it seems to me that the publicly owned monopolies are not as bad as those that are privately held. A tough admission for me, a committed capitalist.}
This week we received a notice from Greenstar regarding the coming year. The first sentence of the letter says "We are writing to remind you that your 2004 subscription for domestic waste management services is due for renewal by Friday, December 12, 2004". Of course, this is no reminder. This is the first any of us in this area has heard about the due date. In all previous years, we paid for our refuse collection by January 31.
So, right away they're annoying me, the customer (who's supposed to be "always right" - don't make me laugh).
Then they explain that "excellent customer service" is one of the company's "key objectives". Puhleease.
Next, they explain that they are "introducing a dry recyclables service" to their Wicklow customers. Is this the service we have now (weekly refuse collections and an additional monthly recyclables collection) or the serivce they attempted to ram down our throats back in early October. Well, that remains to be seen. The letter explains that further details will be available as the "service reaches your area". But, what about those for whom the service has already been introduced?
A quick call to Greenstar solicited the answer: we are going to lose one refuse collection per month. For this privilege we are only being asked to cough up an additional €42 for a total annual charge of €372!
But, before I complain, I should know that "people in Kilkenny are paying upwards of €400 per year". Well, that's a pity for them, but I also know from listening to the radio in recent weeks that we are paying way above the average, particularly when compared with our neighbors in Dublin.
This week we received a notice from Greenstar regarding the coming year. The first sentence of the letter says "We are writing to remind you that your 2004 subscription for domestic waste management services is due for renewal by Friday, December 12, 2004". Of course, this is no reminder. This is the first any of us in this area has heard about the due date. In all previous years, we paid for our refuse collection by January 31.
So, right away they're annoying me, the customer (who's supposed to be "always right" - don't make me laugh).
Then they explain that "excellent customer service" is one of the company's "key objectives". Puhleease.
Next, they explain that they are "introducing a dry recyclables service" to their Wicklow customers. Is this the service we have now (weekly refuse collections and an additional monthly recyclables collection) or the serivce they attempted to ram down our throats back in early October. Well, that remains to be seen. The letter explains that further details will be available as the "service reaches your area". But, what about those for whom the service has already been introduced?
A quick call to Greenstar solicited the answer: we are going to lose one refuse collection per month. For this privilege we are only being asked to cough up an additional €42 for a total annual charge of €372!
But, before I complain, I should know that "people in Kilkenny are paying upwards of €400 per year". Well, that's a pity for them, but I also know from listening to the radio in recent weeks that we are paying way above the average, particularly when compared with our neighbors in Dublin.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)