Geert Wilders Interview

I recently did a post on Geert Wilders in which I felt that he may be more of a right winger than a libertarian. One of the problems involved with trying to assess a man like Wilders is the tendency of the press to concentrate only on the more negative or sensational aspects of the person.

The following is an interview with Wilders on Radio Netherlands which will allow the reader to assess him from his own words, instead of reading someone else's assessment of them, and their meaning. I got this from the Radio Netherlands website under the heading  "Cultural relativism makes me sick" by Chaalen Charif and Nicolien Den Boer.

All that I have left out is asides by the writers.

Geert Wilders, the leader of the Dutch Party for Freedom (PVV), is known for his anti-Islamic remarks, his striking blonde mane and the many death threats he has received. It's less well known that he spent most of his time on a kibbutz chasing girls and once named Syria as his favourite holiday destination. He even watches Arabic television channels every evening. Geert Wilders spoke to Chalaan Charif and Nicolien den Boer from RNW's Arabic desk.

Security
Mr Wilders, when we came in our bags were carefully searched. That is unusual for us, but you must be accustomed to strict security precautions. What kind of life do you lead?

"It's not a lot of fun. It's terrible for my family and me. And it shouldn't have to happen in a democracy, whether you're from the Party for Freedom or from Green Left. If you don't agree with me, approach me with your arguments not with death threats."

Aren't you becoming isolated from the rest of society?

"I'd love to be able to drink a beer in a bar again, something I haven't been able to do for three years. I do have less contacts than the average politician, but I communicate through my website a great deal. If you see how our party is doing the opinion polls, that doesn't smack of alienation."



Media
Your remarks seem to be getting more extreme. A couple of months ago you were talking about tearing out parts of the Qur'an, now you want it banned completely. Are you thinking: "what can I come up with next that will get me the most media attention"?

"No, it's not that. I've been engaged with Islam for more than ten years. I've visited a lot of Muslim countries, I've studied the Qur'an, I've spoken to professors here and abroad and I've finally come to the conclusion that freedom of worship is better served by banning a book which does not allow freedom. You know the Qur'an prescribes the death penalty for people who want to leave Islam, the so-called apostates. Of course, I'm not averse to media attention, I'd be lying if I denied it."

So why not ban the Bible too, or any other book full of violent passages?

"For Muslims the Qur'an is quite literally the word of God. Christians do not have that with the Bible. I realise perfectly well that banning the Qur'an is a drastic measure but if banning it ensures that one less homosexual get beaten up…"

"Of course, the Moroccan street terrorists who beat up on Amsterdam gays don't do it with the Qur'an under their arms. But when they get home it's lying there and they've grown up with the idea that homosexuals are lower than pigs. The government has a responsibility to give a clear signal that it's not okay to read that kind of book or to tell people that gays are inferior."

Radicalism
Research among radical Muslims in Amsterdam shows that some of them embrace radicalism because of the anti-Islamic atmosphere in the Netherlands. Doesn't that make you responsible for the increasing radicalism?

"That's a really ludicrous accusation. All I'm doing is pointing out existing radical behaviour: people abusing women or beating up homosexuals. I'm looking for a cause. I read the Qur'an and I see the connections. I point them out and I want them made illegal. I don't accept that I am doing anything to radicalise people, except standing up for the laws and constitution of this country. Moreover, I don't regard all Muslims as the same. I do make a distinction between people and religion. I think Islam is a terrible religion but I have nothing against people who act according to our laws and our values and that's not possible with that book in your hand."

If it were up to you, how would the Netherlands look in ten years time? We'll give you a couple of minutes….

"I would stop immigration from Muslim countries because I think it's watering our culture down too much. I want Dutch culture to be the dominant culture alongside the other cultures, which I would add are more than welcome. Many Dutch people feel as though they're living in a foreign country.

You shouldn't mock those people; you have to take them seriously. It also doesn't help the ethnic minorities here to integrate into society when you let in tens of thousands more each year. It's trying to fill a bucket with a hole in it. I wouldn't allow any more mosques, there are enough already. I would close all Islamic schools. I would promote a return to decency, I think it terrible that we want to cut 600 million euros on spending on the elderly and on disabled care, while money is being spent on leftwing games like the general amnesty (for illegal immigrants)."

Cultures
You believe Dutch culture is better than Islamic culture. Aren't you doing exactly the same as the fundamentalism in the Middle East that you despise so much? They too are afraid of outside influences and think their culture is better than so-called degenerate western culture?

"But I'm not afraid. Cultural relativism just makes me sick. You know the kind of thing: everyone is welcome; we'll be one big melting pot of cultures. It gives me goose bumps when I hear the prime minister talking that way. Of course, we shouldn't imitate everything in a culture we ourselves criticise. Just try walking down the street with a Bible in Saudi Arabia or calling yourself a Christian in Iran."

But you're doing exactly the same, aren't you?

"Exactly. The Arab countries don't want to become Christian or multicultural and, regardless of what I think of their culture, that is their right. They're independent states. I might criticise them for human rights abuses or for supporting terrorism, but it's not up to me to decide what culture or religion Saudi Arabia or Yemen should have."



How did you become so anti-Islam?

"I lived in Israel, in the West Bank, between the ages of 17 and 19. I wasn't at all political then, I was much more concerned with chasing girls. We were regularly shot at from the Palestinian side of the border and that made me decide to see the whole of the Middle East and to try and understand it. I've travelled all over the region; I did work experience and spent my holidays there as well. I discovered one constant in the region: the people are extremely friendly but the political and religious leaders are corrupt and immoral. They treat their own people like animals, I really feel for them.

"I also visited numerous think-tanks and research institutes in Germany and France. The dangers posed by radical Islam were recognized there long ago. But here in the Netherlands? Even after the 9/11 attacks and the bombings in Madrid and London, there is no sense of urgency here in the Netherlands. We don't like conflict or confrontations. This is a country of consensus; we sweep problems under the carpet. We would much rather hold hands and sing carols underneath the Christmas tree."

Middle East
How is it that, after so many visits to the Middle East, you still see Islam as the only problem?

"It's not the only problem, but it is the biggest. Look at the Middle East; the greater the role of Islam, the worse it is for the people there. Israel is still the only democracy in the region."

It has been suggested that you're an Israeli spy.

"Nonsense. I don't only get my information from Israel. I read Arab newspapers on the internet and I watch English language Arab broadcasters. I'm a bit of an information freak. A book like this (points to Qur'an) is so fascinating I can read it fifteen times."

“Libertarian APEC Protest.”

Photo courtesy of Jarrah Job and Lindsay Jones.

This is out of the ordinary. We normally tend to see international conferences marred by protests by the left, and other assorted looneys, often violent, and rabid.

Recently I found a post on the Australian Libertarian Society Blog, as follows: -

On Saturday morning the LDP will be holding a rally in support of free trade. If you are in Sydney, please do join us, as it should be fun. As I know 9am is an early start for most of you (i.e. those without young children), we will be handing out selling free trade coffee sourced from the lowest cost producer and doughnuts purchased from the most competitively priced local shop to brighten your spirits.

Crikey had this to say about our rally,

‘The APEC rally that has really got me interested is being organized by the wild and crazy libertarians of the Liberty and Democracy Party. I can’t make it to Sydney this weekend, but will stand on Smith Street, Collingwood, brandishing a copy of The Road to Serfdom in solidarity. It’s a pity I can’t get there, because I’m a little worried about the turnout. I’m reminded of these words from the philosopher, P J O’Rourke:

“How come,” I asked Andy, “whenever something upsets the Left, you see immediate marches and parades and rallies with signs already printed and rhyming slogans already composed, whereas whenever something upsets the Right, you see two members of the Young Americans for Freedom waving a six-inch American flag?”

“We have jobs,” said Andy.’

Posted by bloodypommy

I had serious doubts about the wisdom of this owing to the violence I have seen in the past, and the possibility of crazies attacking our members, however all went well and it sounds like the guys had a great time and got their message across.
I include the descriptions of the event by Terje Petersen, one of our more active members, and a great contributor: -

By Terje Petersen

I think it went really well. The police were confused about our sign “make poverty history - support capitalism” and asked if we were supporting the protesters or against them. We said we were not here because of George Bush or the war and so they seemed happy to leave us in the middle of the oncoming parade.

Then they decided to move us out of the oncoming action. But because we were so co-operative and peaceful in the end they actually asked us to stand in the thick of it again (go figure).

Compared with the call I got from the cops the day before they were very positive towards us on the day (until we tried to leave at which point they boxed everybody into Hyde Park for half an hour and would not let anybody out at all).

When the parade arrived we were standing in the thick of it up a few steps and against a statue and the crowd had to pass around us. A few people swore at us, a few people photographed us and a few people argued with us.

Some of the socialists even interviewed us with cameras. In fact when channel 9 interviewed me I thought they were students because their camera was so small and they did not identify themselves until afterwards. Pommy got interviewed by channel 7.

All up a pretty good day. We got some media attention, we made our statement and we avoided any direct physical confrontation. A lot still depends on how the media edit their footage. And I still don’t much know who was media and who was just people with a camera so I hope we put forward a positive message.

Several people approached me throughout the day to say things like “I don’t believe in free trade or neoliberalism but I respect you guys for having a go”. The crowd was actually quite encouraging in spite of the few individuals that yelled abuse at us.

And: -

At the end of the march the police imprisoned us all without cause. After they had done such a great job in keeping the peace it was quite disgusting. They were “just following orders” and I felt sorry for them as well as angry with them. We tried to leave via several routes and we were physically blocked.

Channel seven made mention of us during their broadcast on the day. They refereed to some pro-capitalist protesters that were probably antagonizing the left wing crowd. However there was no footage of us that I saw (other than one where we were in the background and our signs were obscured). As such I don’t think the party name or the URL of the LDP website made it onto TV.

However one guy approached us early in the morning and said he agreed with our counter protest and that he had heard about it on ABC radio.

These people deserve our gratitude for their effort, and in my opinion demonstrated no small degree of courage. Congratulations and thank you all. It may seem ‘over the top’ but I am reminded of the words: -

And gentlemen in England now-a-bed 

Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here, 

And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks 

That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

I kind of wish I had been there.

terje (say tay-a) is Terje Petersen. He is a dedicated family-man and runs an IT consultancy in Sydney.

“The Never-Never Declaration - An APEC Reality Check”.

By Viv Forbes

The Carbon Sense Coalition today called for a Royal Commission of Enquiry into the Scientific Evidence for Man-made Climate Change.

The Chairman of “Carbon Sense”, Mr Viv Forbes, said that the Sydney APEC Declaration was a clear signal that most APEC nations are not going to swallow the pseudo-science and economic poison being peddled by Dark Greens from yesterday’s states like Europe and New Zealand.

The APEC nations told Australia, as politely as possible “You may commit economic suicide if you wish, but we are not going to put our feet on the sticky paper.” This “Never-Never” declaration is a warning call that Australia should re-examine the basis for its enormous waste of money on “Global Warming”.

China and India recognise clearly that “Global Warming” is just another European plan to hobble economic competition from Asia. The Global Warming Scam would deny cheap clean power to millions of energetic Asians.

France closed its last coal mine in 2004 and is now heavily dependent on nuclear power. German coal mines are no longer economic, and even in Britain, fewer than 5,000 coal miners work the mines that once fuelled an empire. Thanks to their Dark Greens, Europe is now dependent on imported coal for steel production and gets its power from imported uranium and gas piped in from Russia and beyond.

France has always envied and feared the cheap and abundant coal of the Anglo American world. The world dominance of Britain and then America in steel, manufacturing, metals, steam, railways, electricity and naval power was fuelled by coal, supported later by oil. China and India are about to tread the same road. The Dark Greens of Europe, secretly supported by their decaying industrialists, fear the growing power, energy and competitiveness of these emerging giants.

This is not about climate – it is about using public hysteria to benefit certain countries, business interests and ideologies.

There was no declaration of carbon emission targets from last week’s Russian delegation to Queensland. Russian scientists are not sucked in by distortions, exaggerations, half truths and poor science being peddled by the likes of Al Gore and Bob Brown.

The Russians, the Arabs, the Indians and the Chinese cannot believe the apparent stupidity of the English speaking world. They have no intention of adding to their energy costs or forcing their businesses to waste money on dreamtime research such as carbon sequestration – they are cynically planning exploit the declining competitiveness of western industries and to milk stupid westerners of any “carbon offset credits” they can find or invent.

There is already a groundswell of opposition from well informed scientists, engineers and individuals all over the world to the lack of evidence supporting the Greenhouse Religion. A recent scientific conference in Melbourne organised by the Lavoisier Society drew scientists and delegates from all over Australia and South Africa. Even the PM’s own backbench contains well informed climate sceptics, and the ranks of scientific sceptics are growing all over the world.

A Royal Commission taking evidence from more than a few government or United Nations hacks would soon establish the facts that:

1934 was the hottest year of the twentieth century.

There was no global warming from 1940 to 1980, a time when CO2 emissions grew strongly.

There has been no global warming since 1998.

Current temperatures are not extreme or unusual.

Past records and scientific evidence show that changing surface temperature is more likely to be a cause (not a result) of increased CO2 in the atmosphere.

CO2 and water vapour have always been essential components of the atmosphere. Neither is toxic, both tend to retain some of the sun’s warmth, and both are absolutely essential and beneficial to all life on earth.

The most likely causes of variations in surface temperature are connected with solar cycles, variations in the heat output of the sun and eras of volcanic activity.

More CO2, water vapour and warmth in the atmosphere would be a boon to most of humanity.

There is empirical evidence to suggest that earth’s temperature is more likely to fall than rise – ice ages are more normal than today’s balmy climates.

There is significant scientific opposition to the proposition that man’s emissions of CO2 are causing global warming or any other harm.

Earth’s climate is always changing and we must do what every generation of our ancestors did - “adapt to whatever nature has in store for us”.

Our ability to adapt is severely reduced by crippling our economy and misdirecting billions of dollars of research funds into nonsense like carbon sequestration or rich man’s toys like windmills and solar panels.

While billions of dollars are being spent on naïve attempts to build ever more complex computer models of atmospheric heat circulation, our oceans are largely unexplored. The vast deposits of methane under our oceans are both a threat and a promise for future generations, but too little research is being done in this field. And the hundreds of thousands of undersea volcanoes, which may hold the key to past and future climate change, remain largely unmapped and un-monitored.

Australia, an island almost alone in the Great Southern Ocean which circles the globe, should take the lead in ocean research instead of letting scheming politicians from abroad mis-direct our research priorities to spurious questions.

Viv Forbes
Chairman
The Carbon Sense Coalition
MS 23
Rosewood Qld Australia
0754 640 533
info@carbon-sense.com

Disclosure of Interest:
Viv Forbes earns income from three carbon emitting industries, coal, cattle and sheep. He also uses cement, steel and electricity, buys diesel for his tractor, petrol for his car and gas for his barby. He uses trains and occasionally boards an aeroplane. He eats carbon based foods, pays taxes and uses government services funded by taxes on the carbon industries. All of these industries and services will be harmed by carbon taxes or emissions trading. He is also a scientist, investment analyst, computer modeller and political analyst. Like the great majority of Australians, he has a big vested interest in the outcome of this historic debate.

Ron Paul, Groupies, and Real Politics.

By Jim Fryar

I recently posted on the call by Saul Anuzis to Ron Paul libertarians to stay in the GOP if Ron misses out on the Republican nomination, and had what I call a “Dondero Experience”.

I was suddenly inundated with hostile replies indicating that the correspondents had no intention of doing so, along with abuse in some cases. This was directed mainly at Eric Dondero, whose radio show was the origin of the report, and Saul. I actually got off rather lightly, apart from “How can anyone quote a loser like Eric Dondero???” and possibly, “What a pitiful bitter little cipher of a man you are.” This may have been directed at Eric however.

I replied in part: -

I feel that it would be a good thing if Paul and other libertarian leaning candidates were to make a strong showing, as this would affect the ultimate policies that the election is fought on.

Fiscal conservatism has to make a strong showing in the primaries, as this is the worst area of the current administration, and a Democrat victory would only make matters worse.

My feelings for Ron Paul have had their ups and downs over the years, and while I respect his libertarian principles, I tend to regard him as one of the more eccentric libertarians, and his support for the 9/11-truther lunatics has ended my regard for him as a serious candidate.

It is important that the Paul supporters don't take their bats and balls and go home if they don't get their way as they can still make a substantial difference in the final result. Ask yourselves, if Ron Paul were to win the nomination, how well would he do if the supporters of Giuliani, Romney, and Fred Thompson were to get into a huff and refuse to support him.

This is too important for hissy fits. Ron’s supporters are the only ones talking this way, which probably is a reflection of the man.

I stand by this, however in retrospect I feel that the last paragraph may have been a little unfair to Ron Paul. He comes across as a person of quiet dignity and determination, and I feel that the actions by some of his groupies would be beneath him. At least I hope so.

One of the most problematic aspects of the libertarian persuasion is the belief in ownership of its followers, - Every libertarian has a concept of philosophical purity by which they judge every other libertarian and generally find them wanting. The trouble with this is that these concepts are different from person to person.

Instead of a person who accepts or advocates part of the belief being accepted as “substantially” or at least “partially libertarian” they are pilloried as impure, neo-lib, or some such. Libertarian purity is as great a myth as Hitler’s ideas on racial purity and should be dropped.

While there is a place for libertarianism as a pure philosophy, (in fact it is a necessity) it will only be accepted by the public as a gradualist proposition. Accept those who push a reasonable degree of your beliefs, and accept what they can get you for a start. These are the people who can get in and do some of it, unless you torpedo them.

Probably the craziest comment was to the effect that Ron Paul was the only reason to vote at all. Ron is not the most libertarian candidate in the election, Wayne Allyn Root is. The greatest shame of the current campaign is that WAR is standing as a Libertarian, not a Republican, and is therefore unelectable.

Wayne has an inspiring platform already and is the best of the candidates I have seen. Unfortunately I doubt that the purists will support him, some of the stuff he says has a dangerous degree of commonsense and independent thinking about it.

Meanwhile for all of you purists out there, don’t give up, the world is always more interesting for having eccentrics in it.

Pavarotti "aroused disgust"?

By Jim Fryar.

The following is from Expatia and is worth a comment: -

The life of Luciano Pavarotti was ‘one big opera’, De Telegraaf writes, about the tenor who died on Thursday. “The strongest voice in the world led a tragic life.” According to Trouw, Pavarotti aroused disgust with ‘the crazy merchandising surrounding his mega performances’. But ‘that phenomenal voice’ was still greatly admired.

In a photograph made by Anton Corbijn a tough and not the usual friendly or congenial Pavarotti is looking at the readers of De Volkskrant on the front page. The paper carries a report from Italy where Pavarotti’s voice can be heard all day on the radio. “In some respects Pavarotti was the personification of Italy, not only his voice and repertoire –Donizetti, Puccini, Verdi - but also the constant factors - opera , drama, pathos and pasta- with which he attracted publicity during his entire life.”

Pavarotti was always worth a listen but was not one of my favorites. I don't really have a favorite opera singer, it is not my favorite medium, although if in the mood I quite enjoy it. I tend to prefer the choruses, especially The Chorus of the Hebrew Slaves, it just melts me.

The problem I have with opera is the elitist attitude that goes with it, 'we are bloody good and therefore you yobbos should be taxed to pay our way, even if you don't like us',kind of thing. The people who go along feel that the world owes them, subsidies so they can get their highbrow entertainment.

Pavarotti always struck me as 'up himself', but had plenty of reason to be, he was one of the best and had plenty of acolytes to tell him so. I had a great deal of respect for him, but wouldn't want him as a friend.

One of the things I greatly admired about him was the fact that he and his mates, Carreras and Domingo did more to promote opera and to commercialise it than any one else, so why: -  Pavarotti aroused disgust with ‘the crazy merchandising surrounding his mega performances’. But ‘that phenomenal voice’ was still greatly admired?

It is as if it is a sin to be commercial, to pay your own way, to bring elitist entertainment out to the people and to attract them and let them enjoy it. They opened a whole new world to many and created a whole new mass entertainment.

The same applied to cricket, a favorite sport here, along with Rugby League and Australian Football, (you Americans and others have to see the latter to believe it). Cricket was in the doldrums, had lost a lot of its appeal when along came Kerry Packer, who, when he couldn't get approval for his ideas, bought players and created his own national teams, popularised it with the one day format, and created commercial cricket. It is now very popular and the elite players make money to die for.

You will still hear the purists bemoaning the fact that it is not still 'the old game' you played for the love of it. One of them was going on a while ago about how one of the greatest wicket keepers of all time had tatty old gloves as the pay they received on tour didn't allow him to afford new ones. What is so great, about a world class athlete being in that position.

Who cares what the pompous left wing elitists sneering down on the 'common man' and all he stands for, while maintaining they know best what is good for him, think?

Dangerous pocket Knife

The following is from the latest "Bob Barr Update", it seems to be a case of the nanny state and political correctness gone mad.

Atlanta, GA – Former Georgia Congressman Bob Barr today blasted school officials in Cobb County, Georgia, a northwest suburb of Atlanta, for seeking to bring felony charges against a 12th grade student, Wilford Ray Chandler, Jr., for simply having a small Swiss Army knife in his car in a school parking lot at Wheeler High School.

"The student posed no threat to anyone, and he was not using the knife in any threatening manner," Barr noted, "in fact, he was not using the knife at all - it was simply in his car." "Trying to ruin a student's career before it even begins, by treating such an innocuous activity as having a Swiss Army pocketknife in a car, is nothing short of an unthinking, stupid, and vindictive exercise of government power,” Barr, a former federal prosecutor, said.

Barr said he hoped the county's prosecutors, including District Attorney Pat Head and Solicitor Barry Morgan, would quickly drop any charges against the student, and thereby "exercise the common sense and understanding that county school officials and police apparently lack, as evidenced by the unyielding and ridiculous 'zero tolerance' program and the unreasonable application of the policy to a student with no criminal record or intent and who exhibited nothing that could be remotely viewed by reasonable people as criminal behavior."

Barr, a former Member of Congress (1995-2003), also served previously as a US Attorney and with the Central Intelligence Agency. He is a lawyer and currently works with national organizations on issues related to privacy and national security.

This is how it was reported in 'Decatur DeKalb.'

According to an arrest warrant, Wilford Ray Chandler Jr. had a pocket knife with a 2.5-inch blade on Aug. 29, a violation of the school district's weapons policy.

Jay Dillon, a Cobb schools spokesman, said Chandler left the Wheeler campus about midday — a violation of the school's rules. When he came back onto the grounds, a school resource officer searched him and his car, which is standard operating procedure when a student leaves campus without permission.

The blade, described in the warrant as a "multipurpose-type pocket knife," was found in the center console of the car.

I would find it hard to think of a knife less likely to be used in violence than a swiss army knife, it is a novelty item with some possible minor uses, but pretty impractical. All those fancy odds and ends on it are of limited usefulness. Crocodile Dundee would not pull one of those out and say, "Knife, thats not a knife, this is a knife".

In any case, it could hardly qualify as an offensive weapon in his car in the car park.

While my school days were a long time ago, none of the boys would have been seen dead without a pocket knife, it was just a required accessory. The really flash guys had a pouch for it, and if you had one with a pair of tweezers and a 'pricker' (for removing splinters etc), then you were top of the heap. Nobody ever used them in a fight, thats what fists were for.

I can't imagine what the loonies who come up with these rules are thinking of.

“Chasing a Will o’ the Wisp while Ignoring a real Monster in the Sky”.

Images are of Asian pollution Click for full resolution.

By Viv Forbes

The Carbon Sense Coalition today called on the State and Federal Governments to stop wasting community resources on useless schemes for carbon trading and carbon sequestration and focus on some real world pollution crises.

The Chairman of “Carbon Sense”, Mr Viv Forbes, said that the government and media focus on carbon dioxide emissions was totally misdirected and counter productive.

“All it will do is delay the spread of coal powered electricity to many areas now desperate for clean invisible power. It will also give an enormous boost to the demand for uranium fuel, which the Premiers of our big mining states will not allow us to mine or use.”

“There is already a groundswell of opposition from well informed scientists and engineers to the whole basis of the Greenhouse Religion. Even the PM’s own backbench contains well informed sceptics, and the ranks of scientific sceptics are growing all over the world.”

“This irrational and hysterical focus on carbon dioxide is diverting attention and resources from real pollution which is altering local climate and affecting many areas of the world”.

“For example, the “Asian Brown Cloud”, a haze of pollution about 3 km thick and sometimes covering an area as big as Australia, is causing real human health and safety problems. At times this cloud drifts right across the Pacific Ocean and is noticed in America.”

“China now emits more sulphur dioxide (SO2) than anywhere else in the world. This chokes their people, causes acid rain and damages buildings. This brown haze is already affecting local climate and melting glaciers in China and the Himalayas. In Arctic areas, soot is covering snow and absorbing more heat from the sun. Soon the brown haze will obscure the sun in some polluted Asian cities.”

“This pollution is caused by millions of cow dung cooking fires in India, coal cooking fires in China and North Korea, forest fires in Indonesia and millions of small obsolete and dirty wood, charcoal and coal stoves and furnaces all over Asia and Africa. Similar problems are obvious in places in South America.”

“The western world went through this pollution phase a century ago, and although improvements can still be made, we have banished the notorious smoke pollution of places like London, Manchester and Pittsburgh.”

“London smoke pollution was so bad that the city became known as “The Big Smoke”. Children developed rickets from the lack of sunshine, plants and animals died and lung disease was widespread. During its last and worst ever pollution event, “The Black Fog” of 1952, caused by a temperature inversion over London, visibility was reduced to less than a foot and 4,000 Londoners died from SO2 poisoning (50 in one small London park alone). This shock brought action - cooking and heating with open fires of wood and coal was banned in big cities. Clean electric power saved the forests and cleared the air.”

“The world’s worst pollution is caused by open air combustion of wood, dung and coal which produces not only the harmless greenhouse gases of water vapour and carbon dioxide, but also real pollutants such as soot, smoke, ash, dust and chemicals containing sulphur, chlorine, nitrogen, fluorine, and metals. In dilute quantities, these trace elements are not a problem, but when concentrated in city air, they can be toxic.”

“Ignoring this real monster threatening human health and the environment, the media and politicians are chasing the CO2 mirage.”

“Carbon dioxide puts the bubbles in your beer, the fizz in your soda water, the holes in your bread, the dry ice in your Esky and the gas in your fire extinguisher. It is colourless, odourless, and non-toxic and does not form polluting smog or acid rain. It encourages the growth of all plant life on land and in the oceans. The whole plant world breathes in CO2 during the growing season and releases much of it again when the leaves fall. It is the key recycler of organic matter for the whole food chain, including the human race.”

“Man’s emissions of CO2 are a miniscule factor in determining Earth’s temperature. But while are we are wasting time and money trying to catch and imprison this harmless Will o’ the Wisp, an ominous brown smelly choking cloud of real pollution is growing in our northern skies.”

“Removing most of the pollutants from combustion emissions is difficult but not impossible. Removing or burying all carbon dioxide emissions from the combustion of carbon fuels is an impossible dream. “Zero emissions” and “carbon sequestration” for key carbon fuels like coal, oil, gas and wood are nonsense goals, and their pursuit is diverting attention and truck loads of money from a worthy goal such as “Zero Pollution”.

“The western world has largely beaten its pollution with inventions such as the chimney, the stove, but most of all by a clean, silent, invisible energy called electricity, generated in clean, concentrated and remote power stations while delivering lighting, heating, cooling, cooking and motive power into the most humble home in the poorest suburb.”

“To fly over a clean modern coal-fired power station at say 10,000 m is to put it into perspective – a puny cooling tower or two emitting wisps of water vapour and a small amount of (invisible) carbon dioxide and which is dwarfed by any passing cloud, no matter how small.”


“This third world problem presents a real opportunity for Australian energy companies to make profits and clean up the environment by promoting clean non-polluting modern power stations burning high quality Australian coals. This will allow cow dung to be used for soil improvement and allow re-afforestation of areas denuded by centuries of scavenging for fire wood.”

“Invisible energy from coal has already banished most of the terrible pollution that affected cities such as London, Manchester and Pittsburgh, and allowed the regrowth of American forests.”

“The public has been misled on this issue by an unholy alliance of environmental scaremongers, funds-seeking academics, sensation-seeking media, vote-seeking politicians and profit-seeking vested interests.”

“Anyone with the real interests of ordinary Australians, Australian industry or the environment at heart would divert public attention and political action from the non-problem of carbon emissions and towards the world’s real pollution problems.”

“History shows that people cannot and will not live without energy in their homes. Unless we allow coal to supply clean silent invisible energy, they will continue to burn dung, wood, cardboard, trees, oil, charcoal or reject coal to get their warmth or cook their food.”

“Just one well designed, well scrubbed, modern Australian designed coal power plant running on natural fossil sunshine from the Sunshine State could provide the light, heating, cooling and entertainment silently and invisibly to the front door for about 3 million Asian homes, housing maybe 10 million people.”

Mr Forbes called on government and opposition to cease political grandstanding on the Greenhouse issue, where carbon taxes and carbon emissions trading will adversely affect most Australians, and focus on goals that will really benefit all of Australia and the environment.

“Do we wait for the re-appearance of rickets and lung disease before acting?


Viv Forbes
Chairman
The Carbon Sense Coalition
MS 23
Rosewood Qld
0754 640 533
info@carbon-sense.com

Disclosure of Interest:
Viv Forbes earns income from three carbon emitting industries, coal, cattle and sheep. He also uses cement, steel and electricity, buys diesel for his tractor and petrol for his car. He uses trains and occasionally boards an aeroplane. He eats carbon based foods, pays taxes and uses government services funded by taxes on the carbon industries. All of these industries and services will be harmed by carbon taxes or emissions trading. Like the great majority of Australians, he has a big vested interest in the outcome of this historic debate.

(More information on The Carbon Sense Coalition can be found on our web site at www.carbon-sense.com.)

“Carbon Sense” has responded to the Energy Policy proposals for Queensland “Climate Smart 2005”. It is entitled: “Look before you Leap”.

In it, The Carbon Sense Coalition accuses the Queensland Government of proposing draconian policies which will have no effect whatsoever on global temperature, but will, if pursued, do tremendous damage to most Queenslanders.

(The full text of “Look Before you Leap” can be downloaded from:

http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/look.pdf