Why does it take a French phrase to suppress free speech in Thailand … lese-majeste.
If a King or Queen is so infinitely wise and powerful why does he or she need to hide behind a foreign language for protection from their people’s words?
What is free speech? Let’s define this dangerous beast that is both air, sound and word…Freedom of Speech is the freedom to speak freely without censorship. The right to freedom of speech is recognized as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in international human rights law in the international Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
Yet the Head of the Thai Army finds it necessary to warn parties against mentioning the Thai Royal Family in their campaigns. Article 112 of the Thai Criminal Code concerns offences deemed to defame, insult or threaten the King, the Queen, the Heir, or the Regent. Thailand’s Computer-Related Crimes Act makes it an offense to post online comments that endanger national security or come in conflict with Article 112 of the Criminal Code. Under CCA and various emergency laws, tens of thousands of websites have been blocked in Thailand.
I focus on Thailand only because I know many Thais and Freedom of Speech is not a threat to the monarchy. It’s not a threat to any dictator --- tanks yes, world opinion yes, but in this day and age Freedom of Speech will come from within (if enlightened local government prevails) or from without (if dim local government in the norm). This should be taught day one in the “how to be a Dictator School”
Thailand is a constitutional monarchy, much like let’s say England. Yet the British Queen and the kids are ridiculed and praised by the rabble without imprisonment or torture. Why then are monarchs in such places as Arabia, Asia and Africa so dam sensitive? Perhaps is has to do with a fear of being exposed as being as common as the rest of us?
One startling life lesson I had when I was negotiating the performance on a contract -- in a country where the citizens are seriously reconsidering their governing class today – went like this: the counterparty who held a royal title leaned over the table at me and said “Peter what you want is for us to give and not you/your company to ask for.” I politely leaned back over the table and said “the contract says otherwise, you signed it, live by it or we can visit court (in an impartial jurisdiction).” The meeting ended and my company did receive their payment. But of course, we no longer do business nor visit the country.
On a closing note: how could it ever be right that a king/queen could say “you there are useless!” and the party of the royal’s attention could not look back and say “but you are useless on a royal scale?” If those who govern are clever they will know that no truth rests in their court, but outside the palace walls is where the air is clear and the sky is blue. Jester, Joker, Jokester, Fool. One notable trait beyond the eccentricities and need for attention is that of the Fool’s scepter known as a marotte --- is yet another French word…
Social Justice: Current Affairs, Business, Politics, and all the reasons in the world to Thrive on Creative Discontent!
Saturday, June 4, 2011
Friday, June 3, 2011
High Speed Trains dash into our future @ 220 MPH
The Gulf Cooperation Council (Saudi, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, & UAE); yes the people who bring you about 25% of the world’s oil on a daily basis, is racing ahead with a high speed rail that will run 1,400 miles starting in Kuwait with a final stop in Saudi Arabia that will likely be completed by 2017!
So if it is so abundantly obvious to major oil producers why they should have a high speed rail; then why do we suck our teeth endlessly in the USA? I have my own thoughts on the subject but rather than going off on a rant, let me share with you the abundant sense of the high speed rail project in California.
http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/getinvolved.aspx
First, the California High-Speed Rail Authority is designing their train system to run almost entirely on renewable power. “Hmmm, displace 12.7 million barrels of oil p.a. from unstable dictatorships… check in the box so far!!!”
The high-speed rail initiative has a $43bln cost and the promise of a 2hour 40 minute SF-LA ride costing $105 each way. By its tenth year of operation (2030), the Authority said ridership should be over 39 million (upside scenario 90 million p.a.) and ‘operating surplus’ (profits) should be $3.2bln plus (+) the avoided costs of congestion and lost time estimated at $20 bln. "Hmmm, sounds good to me!"
It will create about 54,000 permanent jobs and provide 600,000 positions over the course of building the project. "Not bad!"
If you like to run back of the envelope value estimates try these formulas (the GAO has independent metric or check European metrics for best practice figures):
Number of Riders times (Benefit per Rider minus Variable Costs per Rider) minus Fixed Costs.
Amount of Cargo times (Benefit per Ton minus Variable Costs per Ton) minus Fixed Costs.
So why the reluctance? "Could history shed some light?"
For the history buffs, “Yes Virginia there does seem to have been a conspiracy by auto manufacturers to dismantle efficient urban transportation systems.” During the period from 1936 to 1950 GM & other companies held National City Lines and Pacific City Lines that were involved in the conversion of over 100 electric surface-train systems into bus systems in 45 cities including Baltimore, Los Angeles (mainly the "Yellow Cars"), New York City, Oakland and San Diego.
Only a few US cities have surviving effective rail-based urban transport systems based on tram, metro, or elevated train; notable survivors include New York City and to a lesser extent Philadelphia, San Francisco, Boston, Washington D.C. and Chicago.
By the time of the 1973 oil crisis, controversial new testimony was presented to a United States Senate inquiry into the causes of the decline of transit car systems in the US. This alleged that there was a wider conspiracy—by GM in particular—to destroy effective public transport systems in order to increase sales of automobiles and that this was implemented with great effect to the detriment of many cities.
"Well, well have we learned anything from history or the Arab Spring?"
For my part, let’s dash ahead with and more environmentally sound approach to transportation => High Speed Rail. Click the link above to see how you can get involved.
So if it is so abundantly obvious to major oil producers why they should have a high speed rail; then why do we suck our teeth endlessly in the USA? I have my own thoughts on the subject but rather than going off on a rant, let me share with you the abundant sense of the high speed rail project in California.
http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/getinvolved.aspx
First, the California High-Speed Rail Authority is designing their train system to run almost entirely on renewable power. “Hmmm, displace 12.7 million barrels of oil p.a. from unstable dictatorships… check in the box so far!!!”
The high-speed rail initiative has a $43bln cost and the promise of a 2hour 40 minute SF-LA ride costing $105 each way. By its tenth year of operation (2030), the Authority said ridership should be over 39 million (upside scenario 90 million p.a.) and ‘operating surplus’ (profits) should be $3.2bln plus (+) the avoided costs of congestion and lost time estimated at $20 bln. "Hmmm, sounds good to me!"
It will create about 54,000 permanent jobs and provide 600,000 positions over the course of building the project. "Not bad!"
If you like to run back of the envelope value estimates try these formulas (the GAO has independent metric or check European metrics for best practice figures):
Number of Riders times (Benefit per Rider minus Variable Costs per Rider) minus Fixed Costs.
Amount of Cargo times (Benefit per Ton minus Variable Costs per Ton) minus Fixed Costs.
So why the reluctance? "Could history shed some light?"
For the history buffs, “Yes Virginia there does seem to have been a conspiracy by auto manufacturers to dismantle efficient urban transportation systems.” During the period from 1936 to 1950 GM & other companies held National City Lines and Pacific City Lines that were involved in the conversion of over 100 electric surface-train systems into bus systems in 45 cities including Baltimore, Los Angeles (mainly the "Yellow Cars"), New York City, Oakland and San Diego.
Only a few US cities have surviving effective rail-based urban transport systems based on tram, metro, or elevated train; notable survivors include New York City and to a lesser extent Philadelphia, San Francisco, Boston, Washington D.C. and Chicago.
By the time of the 1973 oil crisis, controversial new testimony was presented to a United States Senate inquiry into the causes of the decline of transit car systems in the US. This alleged that there was a wider conspiracy—by GM in particular—to destroy effective public transport systems in order to increase sales of automobiles and that this was implemented with great effect to the detriment of many cities.
"Well, well have we learned anything from history or the Arab Spring?"
For my part, let’s dash ahead with and more environmentally sound approach to transportation => High Speed Rail. Click the link above to see how you can get involved.
Thursday, June 2, 2011
LA Nina make room for Jose!!!
With gas storage tracking at the mid-point of the 5 yr average and an economic recovery varying from sputtering to fluttering, this year’s hurricane season might become interesting. Hopefully avoiding the damage and loss of life we’ve seen in the past but will inevitably contribute to some interruptions in critical energy infrastructure.
It began on 1 June and will end on 30 November with three major meteorological organizations agreeing that the 2011 hurricane season is expected to be unusually active.
Citing such factors as Atlantic Ocean water temperatures, a decreasing La Niña pattern, and even dust blowing in from Africa, AccuWeather, the Colorado State University Tropical Meteorology Project and Weather Services International are all calling for anywhere between 15 – 17 named storms, with three to five becoming major hurricanes.
Led by meteorologist and hurricane forecaster Paul Pastelok, AccuWeather’s team of hurricane center meteorologists is predicting as many as 15 named tropical storms. Of those, AccuWeather is predicting eight to strengthen into hurricanes, and three of those being ranked as a major hurricane.
Last year’s season ranked as the third most active season on record with a total of 19 named storms, but few of those impacted the U.S. coastline. This year, Pastelok said, things are expected to be different.
“It looks like we’re going to have more impact on the mainland of the U.S. coming up this year compared to last year,” Pastelok said. “We had a lot of storms last year, but not a lot of impact.”
Colorado State University Tropical Meteorology Project’s Phillip J. Klotzbach and William M. Gray are also predicting an unusually active season, including 17 named storms, nine hurricanes and five major storms.
The CSU team also believes the La Niña conditions will cease, allowing storms to more easily hit the United States.
“Because we are predicting an above-average hurricane season in 2011, the probability of U.S. and Caribbean major hurricane landfall is estimated to be above the long-period average. This forecast is based on an extended-range early December statistical prediction scheme that utilizes 58 years of past data,” the CSU report said.
Weather Services International, part of the Weather Channel, had virtually the same hurricane forecast as CSU, calling for 17 named storms, nine hurricanes and five strengthening to the “major” category of three or greater.
Todd Crawford, chief meteorologist at the Massachusetts-based forecasting firm, also cited the fact that, much like last year, ocean temperatures in the Atlantic are expected to be above normal and wind shear is predicted to be favorable for storm formation.
Crawford agreed that the Gulf Coast will be a likely target, comparing conditions to those that spawned devastating storms in years past.
“The forecast numbers are quite similar to those prior to the 2008 season when hurricanes Dolly, Gustav and Ike impacted Louisiana and Texas,” Crawford noted.
The storm names for the 2011 hurricane season will be:
• Arlene
• Bret
• Cindy
• Don
• Emily
• Franklin
• Gert
• Harvey
• Irene
• Jose
• Katia
• Lee
• Maria
• Nate
• Ophelia
• Philippe
• Rina
• Sean
• Tammy
• Vince
• Whitney
So if you’re a resident of the Gulf Coast plan for the worst – as if you hadn’t been handed that already...
If you’re a trader get your bets on the table.
Given the excitement the planet has given us to date in storms, tsunamis, earthquakes and volcanoes – this might be quite the ride!!!
It began on 1 June and will end on 30 November with three major meteorological organizations agreeing that the 2011 hurricane season is expected to be unusually active.
Citing such factors as Atlantic Ocean water temperatures, a decreasing La Niña pattern, and even dust blowing in from Africa, AccuWeather, the Colorado State University Tropical Meteorology Project and Weather Services International are all calling for anywhere between 15 – 17 named storms, with three to five becoming major hurricanes.
Led by meteorologist and hurricane forecaster Paul Pastelok, AccuWeather’s team of hurricane center meteorologists is predicting as many as 15 named tropical storms. Of those, AccuWeather is predicting eight to strengthen into hurricanes, and three of those being ranked as a major hurricane.
Last year’s season ranked as the third most active season on record with a total of 19 named storms, but few of those impacted the U.S. coastline. This year, Pastelok said, things are expected to be different.
“It looks like we’re going to have more impact on the mainland of the U.S. coming up this year compared to last year,” Pastelok said. “We had a lot of storms last year, but not a lot of impact.”
Colorado State University Tropical Meteorology Project’s Phillip J. Klotzbach and William M. Gray are also predicting an unusually active season, including 17 named storms, nine hurricanes and five major storms.
The CSU team also believes the La Niña conditions will cease, allowing storms to more easily hit the United States.
“Because we are predicting an above-average hurricane season in 2011, the probability of U.S. and Caribbean major hurricane landfall is estimated to be above the long-period average. This forecast is based on an extended-range early December statistical prediction scheme that utilizes 58 years of past data,” the CSU report said.
Weather Services International, part of the Weather Channel, had virtually the same hurricane forecast as CSU, calling for 17 named storms, nine hurricanes and five strengthening to the “major” category of three or greater.
Todd Crawford, chief meteorologist at the Massachusetts-based forecasting firm, also cited the fact that, much like last year, ocean temperatures in the Atlantic are expected to be above normal and wind shear is predicted to be favorable for storm formation.
Crawford agreed that the Gulf Coast will be a likely target, comparing conditions to those that spawned devastating storms in years past.
“The forecast numbers are quite similar to those prior to the 2008 season when hurricanes Dolly, Gustav and Ike impacted Louisiana and Texas,” Crawford noted.
The storm names for the 2011 hurricane season will be:
• Arlene
• Bret
• Cindy
• Don
• Emily
• Franklin
• Gert
• Harvey
• Irene
• Jose
• Katia
• Lee
• Maria
• Nate
• Ophelia
• Philippe
• Rina
• Sean
• Tammy
• Vince
• Whitney
So if you’re a resident of the Gulf Coast plan for the worst – as if you hadn’t been handed that already...
If you’re a trader get your bets on the table.
Given the excitement the planet has given us to date in storms, tsunamis, earthquakes and volcanoes – this might be quite the ride!!!
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
The Green Capitalist
And I don't mean greenbacks (dollars)!!!
In the sad, devastating and lasting disasters (Japan Nuclear and Deep Water Horizon Gulf of Mexico) that have taken and will take the lives of thousands we have a startling wake-up call to the urgent need to take renewables from the margins of our energy mix to dead (living) centre.
Today regulators around the globe are saying enough is enough. Coal, oil, and nuclear as we know them today have had their day. Like the filth that filled Dickens' London's skies from the sweaty coal fueled industrial nightmares of the 19th Century; the mix of coal, oil and nuclear has and continues to pose an ever increasing risk to the sustainability of our planet.
I do not call for their end today. Quite frankly that is not an option. So long as we all cling to modernity. I for one am not rushing to give up my morning latte or the convenience of a car versus a bike. BUT, I do believe better, more efficient, obviously smarter ways to use our planet stand right before us in the form of wind & solar power; ethanol blended fuels, and efficiency. If we simply focused on these technologies we would stop the growth of GHG but more importantly we would take a massive degree of health, environmental and safety risks out of our lives.
So let's get on with it... write to your regulators, the energy company you own stock in, the NGO that sponsors a green clean agenda.
There has always been money to be made in a paradigm shift. However not a single buggie whip maker became a car manufacturer...drive change by interrupting the present.
In the sad, devastating and lasting disasters (Japan Nuclear and Deep Water Horizon Gulf of Mexico) that have taken and will take the lives of thousands we have a startling wake-up call to the urgent need to take renewables from the margins of our energy mix to dead (living) centre.
Today regulators around the globe are saying enough is enough. Coal, oil, and nuclear as we know them today have had their day. Like the filth that filled Dickens' London's skies from the sweaty coal fueled industrial nightmares of the 19th Century; the mix of coal, oil and nuclear has and continues to pose an ever increasing risk to the sustainability of our planet.
I do not call for their end today. Quite frankly that is not an option. So long as we all cling to modernity. I for one am not rushing to give up my morning latte or the convenience of a car versus a bike. BUT, I do believe better, more efficient, obviously smarter ways to use our planet stand right before us in the form of wind & solar power; ethanol blended fuels, and efficiency. If we simply focused on these technologies we would stop the growth of GHG but more importantly we would take a massive degree of health, environmental and safety risks out of our lives.
So let's get on with it... write to your regulators, the energy company you own stock in, the NGO that sponsors a green clean agenda.
There has always been money to be made in a paradigm shift. However not a single buggie whip maker became a car manufacturer...drive change by interrupting the present.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)