Environmentalists say settlers working for traffickers aiming to launder money or build airstrips have burned down huge tracts Cocaine barons and farmers have been accused of cutting down swaths of Guatemala’s rainforest to carve out airstrips and to launder drug money, threatening biodiversity and ancient Maya ruins. More than a fifth of the 2.1m-hectare tropical forest – Latin America’s biggest after the Amazon – has been burned and cleared by settlers who are often working for drug traffickers, according to environmentalists and human rights groups. Official figures show the Maya biosphere reserve has lost 21% of its cover since being declared a protected zone in 1990, with impoverished peasants allegedly acting as an advance guard for wealthy drugs-linked farmers. Others put the number even higher. “The narcos use violence and poverty as tools to push into the reserve,” said Claudia Samayoa, director of Udefegua, a human rights advocacy group. “They cultivate land, put in some cattle, but often it’s just a front.” Poverty, malnutrition, unequal land distribution and the lack of state services gave many such communities little alternative, she said. A colour-coded map recently published by Guatemala’s National Council of Protected Areas (Conap) showed the western half of the reserve covered in orange and red blotches, representing areas burnt more than three times. Some 306,000 hectares were lost between 2001-06, it estimated. The incursions are threatening the habitats of hundreds of species of birds and mammals, including jaguars, pumas and tapirs, as well as 3,000 types of plants and Maya archaeological sites. “If left unattended, these threats could spread eastward, undermining the economic productivity of the reserve and deteriorating (its) crucial role as a biological corridor at the heart of the tri-national Maya forest of Guatemala, Belize, and Mexico,” said Roan Balas McNab, Guatamala programme director of the Wildlife Conservation Society. The reserve’s eastern half, comprising about 1m hectares and the main Maya ruins of Tikal and Mirador, has remained relatively unscathed thanks to greater protection. An earth-mound firebreak which divides the reserve has become a de facto “shield” which deters illegal interlopers entering the east. Nevertheless Jeff Morgan, executive director of the Global Heritage Foundation, said drug trafficking and cattle ranching could sabotage efforts to promote tourism and protect key archaeological sites. “Conservation of Mirador is critical for Guatemala and the world and provides the best alternative for legal jobs and income.” In the past three years Conap reclaimed 110,000 hectares on the eastern side from an alleged drug lord who “bought” the land from peasants who had been given a 25-year lease to cultivate crops in return for managing the forest. Incursions into the western side appear to be growing. Dozens, possibly hundreds of airstrips have been hewed from the jungle. Traffickers transfer cocaine from small planes to vehicles which cross into Mexico. Cattle ranches are the bigger threat. On the four-hour drive from Flores to El Naranjo there is no forest, only pasture and the occasional cow and horse. Two environmental groups, which declined to be identified for security reasons, said narcos use ranches to build roads and basic infrastructure and to launder money. Last month armed men massacred 27 labourers on a ranch because the owner, who was not there at the time, allegedly stole 2,000kg of cocaine from Mexico’s Zeta cartel. The state encouraged settlers to “tame” the forest in the 1960s before deciding it would be better to conserve it and promote tourism. A spokesman for Cofavic, a peasant rights advocacy group, said its members were being smeared to justify violent evictions. “They call us narco helpers but we are victims.” Guatemala Drugs trade Mexico Amazon rainforest Belize Rory Carroll guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Green groups react angrily to article by former FoE executive director Charles Secrett, insisting they remain ‘campaign-led’ • Read Charles Secrett’s article The green movement is “out-of-touch, ineffective and bureaucratic”, according to the campaigner who spent a decade leading Friends of the Earth in the UK , which celebrates its 40th anniversary on Wednesday. “Worryingly, in every major green group, managers, administrators, communicators and fundraisers outnumber campaigners and researchers. Interminable meetings, not action, are the order of most days,” wrote Charles Secrett, FoE executive director until 2003, in an article for the Guardian . He estimates UK groups like FoE, Greenpeace, RSPB and WWF, which have millions of members, spend over £100m a year. His comments have drawn an angry response from those leading today’s groups. With climate change having dropped down the international political agenda, and the global financial crisis prompting leaders and businesses to question green spending, the environmental movement is at an impasse, argued Secrett. He later told the Guardian: “The evidence of failure is there for all to see, as environmental problems are getting worse, not better.” Previous dips during recessions have seen the movement bounce back stronger than before, he said, but warned: “It is very tough now. There is no time left as the degradation of the environment has reached a tipping point.” Secrett praised new groups like UK Uncut, which has taken direct action on tax avoidance , and online campaigns like 38 Degrees . But he said groups, new or old, running their own single-issue campaigns in parallel would never achieve the critical mass needed to push humanity onto the path of sustainable development, by tackling global warming and the loss of habitats and the animals and plants in them. “If millions of people acted to hold politicians to account, that push would happen,” he said. “There is a crucial role for the environmental movement now in building a consensus for change. We can’t rely on politicians and business people to do that.” But he said current campaigners were too often “conservative and unimaginative”, adding “ambition is lacking through the fear of being seen to be too political”. Secrett’s comments prompted a strong reaction from the groups criticised, many of whom have been rethinking their campaign strategies this year. Ben Stewart, the head of media at Greenpeace, said: “I suppose I’m one of the PR people Charles is talking about. Right now I’m aboard one of our ships somewhere off the coast of Greenland where we’ve been hanging off an oil rig and stopping risky deep water oil drilling for several days. We’ve had 20 people arrested, more than half of whom are still in jail, and I know they’re very grateful for the staff back home, including the fundraisers, who made our campaign out here possible.” The current executive director of FoE, Andy Atkins, firmly rebuffed the criticism: “We’re not afraid to look at what we need to do differently: for 40 years we’ve been evolving so we keep winning campaigns. But some things haven’t changed – FoE was a campaign-led organisation when we started in 1971, and we remain so today. Together with our supporters we’ve been winning real victories [such as] getting the world’s first law to limit climate emissions , here in the UK, in 2008.” Other NGOs defended a more subtle approach to campaigning. Martin Harper, RSPB conservation director, said: “Shock tactics have their place, but no matter how loudly you shout, you will become background noise sooner or later. The most successful modern NGOs are those that know when to be a thorn in the side, and when to be a constructive partner. The RSPB is in the day-to-day job of conserving wildlife – and to do that we need to work closely with government and industry on a range of issues. ” However, Secrett’s attack was supported by some environmentalists. Author Mark Lynas said: “I agree the green movement is stuck in a rut, but I think the problem is deeper than mere professionalisation and endless strategy meetings in corporate NGO head offices. “Many ‘green’ campaigns, like those against nuclear power and GM crops, are not actually scientifically defensible, whilst real issues like nitrogen pollution and land use go ignored. The movement is also stuck in a left-wing box of narrow partisan politics, and needs to appeal to a broader mass of the public who are simply not interested in organic farming and hippy lifestyle choices. It needs to re-engage with science, as well as with the general public, if it is to remain relevant to the 21st century.” Secrett’s intervention also echoes comments made by another senior green figure, Jonathon Porritt, who earlier this year accused the green NGOs of “betrayal” over their lack of opposition to the proposed sell-off of public forests , now abandoned. “It demonstrates to me how completely out of touch our environmental NGOs have become,” he said. Greenpeace Activism Friends of the Earth Protest Damian Carrington guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Green groups react angrily to article by former FoE executive director Charles Secrett, insisting they remain ‘campaign-led’ • Read Charles Secrett’s article The green movement is “out-of-touch, ineffective and bureaucratic”, according to the campaigner who spent a decade leading Friends of the Earth in the UK , which celebrates its 40th anniversary on Wednesday. “Worryingly, in every major green group, managers, administrators, communicators and fundraisers outnumber campaigners and researchers. Interminable meetings, not action, are the order of most days,” wrote Charles Secrett, FoE executive director until 2003, in an article for the Guardian . He estimates UK groups like FoE, Greenpeace, RSPB and WWF, which have millions of members, spend over £100m a year. His comments have drawn an angry response from those leading today’s groups. With climate change having dropped down the international political agenda, and the global financial crisis prompting leaders and businesses to question green spending, the environmental movement is at an impasse, argued Secrett. He later told the Guardian: “The evidence of failure is there for all to see, as environmental problems are getting worse, not better.” Previous dips during recessions have seen the movement bounce back stronger than before, he said, but warned: “It is very tough now. There is no time left as the degradation of the environment has reached a tipping point.” Secrett praised new groups like UK Uncut, which has taken direct action on tax avoidance , and online campaigns like 38 Degrees . But he said groups, new or old, running their own single-issue campaigns in parallel would never achieve the critical mass needed to push humanity onto the path of sustainable development, by tackling global warming and the loss of habitats and the animals and plants in them. “If millions of people acted to hold politicians to account, that push would happen,” he said. “There is a crucial role for the environmental movement now in building a consensus for change. We can’t rely on politicians and business people to do that.” But he said current campaigners were too often “conservative and unimaginative”, adding “ambition is lacking through the fear of being seen to be too political”. Secrett’s comments prompted a strong reaction from the groups criticised, many of whom have been rethinking their campaign strategies this year. Ben Stewart, the head of media at Greenpeace, said: “I suppose I’m one of the PR people Charles is talking about. Right now I’m aboard one of our ships somewhere off the coast of Greenland where we’ve been hanging off an oil rig and stopping risky deep water oil drilling for several days. We’ve had 20 people arrested, more than half of whom are still in jail, and I know they’re very grateful for the staff back home, including the fundraisers, who made our campaign out here possible.” The current executive director of FoE, Andy Atkins, firmly rebuffed the criticism: “We’re not afraid to look at what we need to do differently: for 40 years we’ve been evolving so we keep winning campaigns. But some things haven’t changed – FoE was a campaign-led organisation when we started in 1971, and we remain so today. Together with our supporters we’ve been winning real victories [such as] getting the world’s first law to limit climate emissions , here in the UK, in 2008.” Other NGOs defended a more subtle approach to campaigning. Martin Harper, RSPB conservation director, said: “Shock tactics have their place, but no matter how loudly you shout, you will become background noise sooner or later. The most successful modern NGOs are those that know when to be a thorn in the side, and when to be a constructive partner. The RSPB is in the day-to-day job of conserving wildlife – and to do that we need to work closely with government and industry on a range of issues. ” However, Secrett’s attack was supported by some environmentalists. Author Mark Lynas said: “I agree the green movement is stuck in a rut, but I think the problem is deeper than mere professionalisation and endless strategy meetings in corporate NGO head offices. “Many ‘green’ campaigns, like those against nuclear power and GM crops, are not actually scientifically defensible, whilst real issues like nitrogen pollution and land use go ignored. The movement is also stuck in a left-wing box of narrow partisan politics, and needs to appeal to a broader mass of the public who are simply not interested in organic farming and hippy lifestyle choices. It needs to re-engage with science, as well as with the general public, if it is to remain relevant to the 21st century.” Secrett’s intervention also echoes comments made by another senior green figure, Jonathon Porritt, who earlier this year accused the green NGOs of “betrayal” over their lack of opposition to the proposed sell-off of public forests , now abandoned. “It demonstrates to me how completely out of touch our environmental NGOs have become,” he said. Greenpeace Activism Friends of the Earth Protest Damian Carrington guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media I’m not going to write much more on this topic. Yes, I was lied to also by Weiner when he made his denials, and I gave him the benefit of the doubt, and we know how that turned out. There are many questions being asked and that’s expected, but saying that, I was glad to see that CNN’s Reliable Sources did not vindicate Breitbart’s overall track record of bad behavior, simply because it was proven that Anthony Weiner did do many embarrassing and creepy things. The panel members as well as Howard Kurtz made some good points about the media’s role in all of this. Jane Hall explained that conservatives who say they hate the MSM, don’t need them to peddle their stories because the media transmits them anyway: Hall: Yes. You know, someone asked me if I thought this showed dissatisfaction with the mainstream media, that the person went to Breitbart. I said it showed absolutely how the mainstream media worked, which is you give it to Breitbart, Breitbart puts it out, it’s all over the place, and the media follow. If the media were acting responsibly, they would have investigated the allegations instead of waiting for Weiner to hold a presser so they can simply yell questions at him. I’m not writing this because it’s a Democratic politician caught up in this one, I’ve talked about this issue many times before. I know that’s part of every scandal, but really, can we have some investigating too? Every network has reporters, staffs and resources to actually practice journalism, but they choose not to much of the time until the feeding frenzy dies down. If the media were as focused on Anthony Weiner as they were on the allegations that led us into the Iraq war by the Bush administration that resulted in thousands and thousands of deaths, the public and the politicians would not have given Bush a free hand in starting that unjust war. The Scooter Libby trial also highlighted the corrupt nature between Beltway press figures, the people they cover, and the access they are given via D.C. cocktail parties. This delicious morsel about the “Meet the Press” host and the vice president was part of the extensive dish Cathie Martin served up yesterday when the former Cheney communications director took the stand in the perjury trial of former Cheney chief of staff I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby. Flashed on the courtroom computer screens were her notes from 2004 about how Cheney could respond to allegations that the Bush administration had played fast and loose with evidence of Iraq’s nuclear ambitions. Option 1: “MTP-VP,” she wrote, then listed the pros and cons of a vice presidential appearance on the Sunday show. Under “pro,” she wrote: “control message.” “I suggested we put the vice president on ‘Meet the Press,’ which was a tactic we often used,” Martin testified. “It’s our best format.” How embarrassing. I posted this Gloria Borger exchange when she caught Cheney in a lie using Meet The Press for his warmongering in a post: (The incredible C&L video archives comes through again. Via a post from 02/08/07 The Guide: How Dick Cheney uses “Meet the Press” to control the message ) In ‘01, Cheney said this on MTP: CHENEY: It‘s been pretty well confirmed that he did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April. on 6/19/04 CNBC, he said: GLORIA BORGER, TV SHOW HOST: You have said in the past that it was, quote, “pretty well confirmed.” CHENEY: No, I never said that. BORGER: OK. CHENEY: I never said that. BORGER: I think that is… CHENEY: Absolutely not. Dan Froomkin also wrote many great articles based on the trial and added this whopper: When then-vice presidential chief of staff Scooter Libby called Russert on July 10, 2003, to complain that his name was being unfairly bandied about by MSNBC host Chris Matthews, Russert apparently asked him nothing. And get this: According to Russert’s testimony yesterday at Libby’s trial, when any senior government official calls him, they are presumptively off the record. That’s not reporting, that’s enabling . There are so many stories I could use to illustrate my point. Not all of journalism is bad of course, but you know the score. That’s how Matt Drudge has ruled the world of MSM politics for so long online according to the Villagers. He was there for conservatives to gather around before there was a FOX News. Rush Limbaugh flashes his website on his computer during his daily show and when there’s something he feels juicy, he transmits it to his audience which is then picked up by FOX News. He’s waning in power now that blogs burst on the scene even if he’s still getting major GOP credit . he does move a lot of traffic. Drudge broke one story on the Clinton scandal and the rest is history. Ever since then the MSM viewed Drudge as the ‘ruler of our world’ For the last 15 years or so — since the early years of the Clinton administration — our public political discourse has been centrally driven by an ever-growing network of scandal-mongers and filth-peddling purveyors of baseless, petty innuendo churned out by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Matt Drudge, various right-wing operatives and, more recently, the right-wing press led by Fox News. Every issue of significance is either shaped and wildly distorted by that process, or the public is distracted from important issues by contrived and unbelievably vapid, petty scandals. Our political discourse has long been infected by this potent toxin, one which has grown in strength and degraded most of our political and media institutions. For anyone who thinks that that is overstated, the definitive refutation is provided by ABC News Political Director Mark Halperin and The Washington Post’s former National Politics Editor John Harris, who provided this description in their recent book about how their national media world operates: Matt Drudge is the gatekeeper… he is the Walter Cronkite of his era. In the fragmented, remote-control, click-on-this, did you hear? political media world in which we live, revered Uncle Walter has been replaced by odd nephew Matt. . . . Matt Drudge rules our world . . . With the exception of the Associated Press, there is no outlet other than the Drudge Report whose dispatches instantly can command the attention and energies of the most established newspapers and television newscasts. So many media elites check the Drudge Report consistently that a reporter is aware his bosses, his competitors, his sources, his friends on Wall Street, lobbyists, White House officials, congressional aides, cousins, and everyone who is anyone has seen it, too. This is why our political process has been so broken and corrupt. The worst elements of what has become the pro-Bush right wing have been shaping and driving how national journalists view events, the stories they cover, and the narratives they disseminate. Breitbart worked on The Drudge Report for many years and got his start there. Smearing the left has always been Drudge’s MO and Breitbart is just an extension of that except he’s taking it a step further. Drudge then helped launch Breitbart’s solo endeavors. Here’s an article from 2005 detailing their relationship : Drudge has shown little preference for any of the sites he links to. Until now. Since Aug. 17, when Breitbart.com launched, Drudge has routinely posted more story links from his protege’s site than any other news source. On Monday, for instance, seven of the 26 links posted on Drudgereport.com transferred readers to Breitbart.com. USAToday and the Financial Times were tied for second with two links apiece. Almost overnight, Breitbart.com went from obscurity to a site that boasted 2.64 million unique visitors in its first month of operation and 2.737 million in October, according to Nielsen/NetRatings. Breitbart.com slightly outpaced older and more established news sites, such as TheStreet.com (2.736 million) and Slate (2.726 million). The flood of traffic could mean big bucks for Breitbart if he attracts advertisers, which he says he has begun to do. I bet you wondered how Breitbart wound up on TV during Weiner’s presser? He happened to be in NY for his book tour, but it was a CBS reporter that told him to take the stage on live TV. As time still remained for the man of the hour to arrive, and “they said they couldn’t hear me,” Breitbart explained, until reporter Marcia Kramer told him to get on the stage. “I had no idea I was on television,” Breitbart explained earnestly, shutting down speculation that the moment was staged or in any way intended . Why is that of interest? Kramer is the same reporter who had the cops called on her after she was asked to leave Weiner’s Capitol Hill Office on June 3rd. So when Howard Kurtz asked Milbank if part of the media frenzy on this story was driven by the anger from the press at Weiner which became a bit excessive. KURTZ: Absolutely legitimate story, Dana Milbank, but how much of it has been driven by journalistic anger, exactly what Amy mentioned, which is that he lied to all these journalists at press conferences and television interviews? And is there a point where it just becomes excessive? I think a lot of people were angry at the Congressman, but the press should have an obligation to report and investigate the news, not take revenge. Kurtz then asks if the media has lowered the bar on what’s considered reportable: Kurtz: But Jane Hall, have the media set a new standard here? I mean, where you don’t have to have an affair, you don’t have to have a love child, you don’t have to be sleeping with someone on your payroll, but if you engage in stupid may have online — and he now says that this was reckless behavior — you get savaged. I mean, do we keep lowering the bar for what’s reportable? I think we agree that the bar was lowered during the Clinton years to its all time low and with tabloid news taking over cable, it’s never going to come back. Digby says this about the press: We’re Partying Like it’s 1998, Baby How many people in America even know about the Pentagon’s Military propaganda program to push for the Iraq war? It has now been more than ten days since the New York Times exposed the Pentagon’s domestic propaganda program involving retired generals and, still, not a single major news network has even mentioned the story to their viewers, let alone responded to the numerous questions surrounding their own behavior. This steadfast blackout occurs despite the fact that the Pentagon propaganda program almost certainly violates numerous federal laws ; both Democratic presidential candidates sternly denounced the Pentagon’s conduct ; and Congressional inquiries are already underway, all of which forced the Pentagon to announce that it suspended its program. Still, there has not been a peep from the major news networks at the center of the storm, the integrity of whose reporting on the Iraq war is directly implicated by this story. Even establishment media defender Howard Kurtz called their ongoing failure to cover this story “pathetic.” I wrote a lot about this NY Times story at the time and Howard Kurtz covered it quite extensively: Howard Kurtz covered the Military General propaganda story that the NY Times story uncovered last Sunday morning and did a very good job with it. Colonel Ken Allard, a former military analyst for NBC, said that there certainly were conflicts of interest that these former Generals held when they went on TV as pundits selling the positive side of the Iraq war. Lawrence DiRita, the former Pentagon spokesman under Secretary Don Rumsfeld, was on to offer the “other side” of the issue. DeRita was there to defend the program, but he looked like a hack: KURTZ: You sent over talking points, you tracked the appearances of analysts on different news channels and networks. Fox’s analyst John Garrett told me he always spoke his mind. But there was an email that he sent to the Pentagon where he said, please let me know if you have any specific points you want covered or that you would prefer to downplay. It sounds like you were kind of manipulating these folks. Col. Allard on the segment and admitted there was a huge conflict of interest: Allard levied the real charges against the Generals and the Pentagon when he admitted: KURTZ: Do you think it was a conflict of interest of some of your fellow former officers to be in that kind of a… ALLARD: I absolutely do, because the reason why you’re there is to offer the public, for whatever the reason you have, however good you are, whatever your opinion matters, is an honest opinion. You offer that without any hope of remuneration, without any hope of reward. That’s basically — the reward you’re getting is what CNN, Fox or NBC News pays you to be there. That’s it. KURTZ: Fox analyst Tim Eads was quoting as saying that when he talked about the war or terrorism on television, he held his tongue for fear that “… some four-star could call up and say, ‘Kill that contract.’” He was involved in military contracts. So here we are now. Anthony Weiner plans to go to rehab while calls for his resignation ring out. I find it interesting that the polls have broken in his favor for the time being even after Breitbart accidentally (cough, cough) leaked a picture that he said he would never do. The sad fact is the obsession of the tabloid news from the press and cable is depriving the nation of real news that’s important to the us all and that’s hurting the country.
Continue reading …
• Murray wins 3-6, 7-6 (7-2), 6-4 • Thousands queue for tickets for held-over final Andy Murray won his second Queen’s title after beating Jo-Wilfried Tsonga by two sets to one. The British No1 lost the first set 3-6, before winning a second set tie-break (7-2) and then clinching the final set 6-4. The final was held over from Sunday after a washout, and the tournament organisers made tickets available to the general public – with thousands being snapped up on Sunday night and the remainder all sold well before the 12.40pm start. Murray – seeded No2 – forced a break point chance in game three, but a somewhat fortunate net cord from a fierce volley saved Tsonga. In game five it was the Scot who found himself on the back foot, love-40 down. Tsonga, seeded fifth, made the most of the opportunity, correctly challenging a marginal line call, which gave the Frenchman the initiative. After allowing Murray brief hope in his next service game as the Briton rallied to deuce from 40-15 down, Tsonga powered his way further ahead at 5-2 as the world No4 laboured on the baseline. Murray finally found his range in game nine, mixing things up to force two break points – only for Tsonga to recover and claim the first set after a tame forehand into the net from the No2 seed. The second set went with serve through five games, which included fine net exchanges from both men. Murray had been sublime in his semi-final demolition of Andy Roddick, and slowly grew in composure, but was finding Tsonga a determined opponent as the Frenchman closed out his next service to love, levelling at 3-3. A 131mph serve put Murray ahead again, and he then forced two break chances in the next game, which Tsonga recovered only to concede another after a long return from the baseline. However, Murray again failed to take advantage as more chances were wasted with unforced errors before Tsonga eventually levelled again at 4-4. It was five apiece after a love service game from the Frenchman, who had beaten the Englishman James Ward in the semi-finals. Murray continued to be dogged by unforced errors as Tsonga was handed two break points, the second of which was saved by a fortunate net-cord ricochet. However, he pulled through to lead 6-5. Tsonga’s athleticism was impressive, diving to volley back Murray’s own acrobatic return from between his legs at the baseline as the second set went to a tie-break. Both men gained mini-breaks before Murray moved 5-2 ahead as Tsonga lost his range at the baseline and closed out the set 7-6 (7-2) to level the match. By the third set there was little to choose between the two men, who met in the quarter-finals at Wimbledon last year, as the decider moved towards a tense conclusion. The crowd found their voice again as Murray finally broke Tsonga’s resistance to lead 3-2 and then moved further ahead with the Queen’s Centre Court basked in sunshine. The 24-year-old Scot was now beginning to showboat, producing a drop-shot through his legs as he took control of the match for the first time at 5-3. Murray secured the championship on his next serve to love, completing the comeback in just short of two and a half hours. Andy Murray Tennis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Uninhabited island made famous by the BBC reality series is in ‘safe hands’ after being sold to a family on neighbouring Harris The uninhabited Hebridean island of Taransay, made famous by the reality television series Castaway, has been sold to a local family only a fortnight after going on the market for £2m. Taransay, with its herds of sheep and wild deer, as well as cottages and a bunkhouse, was put up for sale late last month by owners Angus and Norman MacKay, brothers who live on the neighbouring island of Harris. Taransay is one of the largest islands in Scotland left wholly in private hands. It was made famous by the BBC series Castaway in 2000, and has lochs “teeming” with trout, “first-class” coastal and sea angling and abundant deer stalking. The island, one of the least spoilt and most beautiful places in the Western Isles, appeared to be a perfect purchase for a rich buyer interested in country pursuits. But instead it has been snapped up by another family on Harris. They are friends of the MacKays and already have “a long association with Taransay”. John Bound, from the selling agents CKD Galbraith, said the new owners – who have not been named – had no plans to change Taransay’s current use, mainly for self-catering holidaymakers and sheep farming. “Given its exceptional beauty and outstanding setting, it was no surprise that Taransay attracted so much interest and been sold in less than two weeks. The existing owners know the purchaser and all involved are delighted with the outcome and the island passes into safe hands,” Bound said. “There will no doubt be a number of disappointed parties who would have liked to bid, but it is fitting that Taransay is now in the new ownership of somebody closely acquainted to the area who will preserve the current management of the island.” The island, which is effectively two smaller islands connected by a sandy isthmus on the edge of the Atlantic, comprises about 3,445 acres. Unusually, every part of the island and building is owned solely by the new buyers, including a recently upgraded farmhouse, the old school chalet and a bothy for holiday use. The BBC series transformed Taransay from a little-known holiday destination to one of the most recognised names in the Hebrides. Up to 9 million viewers watched for a year as an initial group of 36 “castaways”, including families with children, tried to survive unaided in the harsh landscape and grow their own food. The film-makers refurbished derelict buildings, allowing the MacKays to turn the properties into holiday lets after the series ended. Their father, John MacKay, bought Taransay in 1967 for £11,000. It was once home to hundreds of islanders and three townships but has been uninhabited for decades. Scotland Property Reality TV Television guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Attack by stone and bottle throwing youths hours after King Abdullah II announced political reforms is denied by government The motorcade of King Abdullah II of Jordan has reportedly come under attack from protesters throwing bottles and stones during a visit to a town in the country’s south. Abdullah was unhurt in the attack, which came hours after he bowed to popular demands for political reform, agreeing to have an elected prime minister from a parliamentary majority replace the current method of appointing the cabinet. An unnamed security official said young people attacked the motorcade in two different areas in Tafila, 125 miles south of the capital Amman. A government spokesman, Taher Edwan, later rejected the account. “This news is totally baseless,” he said. “There was no attack whatsoever with empty bottles and stones. “What happened is that a group of young Jordanians thronged the monarch’s motorcade to shake hands with him.” He said that when police “pushed them away, there was a lot of shoving”. A palace official who accompanied Abdullah gave a similar account: “It was a gesture of welcome, not an attack.” Abdullah was on a fact-finding trip to inspect infrastructure projects and hear his subjects’ demands. The king has agreed to elected cabinets but gave no timetable, saying that sudden change could lead to “chaos and unrest”. The move represented a big concession to demands from activists who have taken to the streets in six months of protests to demand a greater political say. Many Jordanians want the king to loosen his absolute grip on power, which includes appointing prime ministers and cabinets. In the televised speech on Sunday, marking his 12th year as Jordan’s ruler, Abdullah said future cabinets will be formed according to an elected parliamentary majority. He also promised further changes without giving much detail, saying that a royal commission is now exploring “possible amendments” to the constitution appropriate for Jordan’s “present and future”. When Abdullah became king in 1999, he floated the idea of a constitutional monarchy similar to the British system, but little has been said on the subject since. Jordanians have been demanding a new elected parliament that would replace one widely seen as docile. However, a small group of activists says it wants the king to relinquish all his power and become only a figurehead. But major political parties such as the powerful Muslim Brotherhood have rejected such proposals, calling the king a “stabilising influence”. Abdullah said the changes would be implemented based on the recommendations of a national dialogue committee, which recently proposed laws governing elections and political parties. The committee is also reviewing economic legislation to tackle official corruption, nepotism and bureaucracy. The Jordanian government has lifted restrictions on public assembly, allowing protesters to demonstrate freely. But it has said it needs time to enact laws on political freedoms, including those addressing election and political parties. Abdullah sacked his prime minister in February, responding to protesters’ complaints that he was insensitive to their economic hardships. Protests in Jordan have been relatively smaller and generally more peaceful than elsewhere in the Middle East, although one person died during a protest in March. One man burned himself badly in April after setting himself on fire outside the prime minister’s office . King Abdullah Jordan Middle East Arab and Middle East unrest Protest Mark Tran guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
NHS ‘listening’ tsar comes back with extensive rewrite of Andrew Lansley’s health and social care bill Experts recruited by David Cameron after the outcry over coalition plans to reform the NHS have recommended a series of key changes that will see the health and social care bill extensively rewritten. Prof Steve Field, chairman of the NHS Future Forum, said an overhaul of the plans was necessary after health secretary Andrew Lansley’s original blueprint to improve the NHS in England alarmed health professionals, patients and the public. He said that “the principles underlying the bill – devolving control to clinicians, giving patients real choices and control, and focusing on outcomes – are well supported”. But in remarks that underline the fear and confusion aroused by Lansley’s original bill, he added: “During our listening we heard genuine and deep-seated concerns from NHS staff, patients and the public which must be addressed if the reforms are to be progressed. Our recommendations represent important changes in future policy, crystallising those thousands of voices, as well as our own views.” The forum’s 16 recommendations include findings that: • The pace of the reforms, which had alarmed many critics in the NHS, should be varied so that the service carries them through only when it is able to do so. • The health secretary should retain ultimate accountability for the NHS in England, a responsibility that Lansley sought to abandon in his original bill. • Not just GPs but also nurses, specialist doctors and other clinicians should be involved in making local decisions about the commissioning of care – another rejection of a key element of the original bill. • “Competition should be used to secure greater choice and better value for patients. It should be used not as an end in itself, but to improve quality, promote integration and increase citizens’ rights.” • In addition, the restructuring of the NHS should be based not on the regulator Monitor’s duty to “promote” competition – which should be removed – but on citizens’ power to challenge the local health service where they do not feel their service offers meaningful choice or good quality. Field, the former chair of the Royal College of GPs, and the 44 other experts on the panel have spent more than two months talking to health professionals, patient groups and others after the bill was put on hold amid increasing political difficulty for the coalition. NHS Health Andrew Lansley Liberal-Conservative coalition Denis Campbell guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Melissa Bell and Elizabeth Flock at the Washington Post have the details on this elaborate hoax which went awry as skeptical people began noticing inconsistencies and started combing the internet for more information. Video above is from BBC Newsnight on Wednesday, featuring a woman from London who had hundreds of her Facebook images stolen so that MacMaster could create a more elaborate and convincing ruse. The photo at bottom is from Thomas J. MacMaster ‘s own Facebook page. MacMaster had lived in Stone Mountain, Georgia. In recent days, the world has followed closely the saga of Amina Araff, the blogger who presented herself online as “A Gay Girl in Damascus” and who drew attention with her passionate writings about the Syrian government’s crackdown on Arab Spring protesters. Those writings stopped last Tuesday, and a posting to the blog, ostensibly written by a cousin, said she had been hauled away by government security agents. News of her disappearance became an Internet and media sensation. The U.S. State Department started an investigation. But almost immediately skeptics began asking: Has anyone ever actually met Amina? Two days after her disappearance, images presented on her blog as being of Amina were revealed to have been taken from the Facebook page of a London woman. And on Sunday, the truth spilled out: The gay girl in Damascus confessed to being a 40-year-old American man from Georgia. The persona he built and cultivated for years — a lesbian who was half Syrian and half American — was a tantalizing Internet-era fiction, one that Tom MacMaster used to bring attention to the human rights record of a country with severe media restrictions that make traditional reporting almost impossible. On Sunday, MacMaster wrote an apology on his blog, “While the narrative voice may have been fictional, the facts on thıs blog are true and not mısleading as to the situation on the ground. I do not believe that I have harmed anyone — I feel that I have created an important voice for issues that I feel strongly about.” Dumbass. MacMaster (“Amina”) also had what was described in the media as a girlfriend in Montreal . Isn’t that just lovely…. enlarge
Continue reading …Open Thread: Should Gay Judge Have Recused Himself in California Prop 8 Case?
June 13, 2011 No CommentFor general discussion and debate about politics, the economy, sports, and whatever else tickles your fancy. Possible talking point: Should a gay judge have recused himself in California's Proposition 8 case ? A retired federal judge's long-term relationship with another man will be the subject of an unusual and possibly unprecedented court hearing Monday involving California's same-sex marriage ban. Lawyers for the sponsors of the voter-approved ban are asking the chief federal judge in San Francisco to vacate the decision issued by his predecessor last year that declared Proposition 8 an unconstitutional violation of gay Californians' civil rights. They maintain that former Chief Judge Vaughn Walker should have recused himself or disclosed his relationship status before trial because he and his partner stood to personally benefit from Walker's verdict. Thoughts?
Continue reading …