IMF makes Ukraine it’s bitch

Ukraine parliament passes austerity bill required by IMF

RT: March 28, 2014

The Ukrainian parliament has adopted an anti-crisis bill proposed by the IMF to secure an international financial aid package. Ordinary Ukrainians will have to tighten their belts to help the coup-installed government keep the collapsing economy afloat.

It took two readings of the bill for 246 MPs out of 321 registered to approve the austerity measures outlined in the legislation dubbed “On prevention of financial catastrophe and creation of prerequisites for economic growth.”

Ahead of the vote, Ukrainian self-imposed Prime Minister Arseny Yatsenyuk told the Parliament that it had “no other choice but to accept the IMF offer,” as country fiscal gap in 2014 is projected to reach $26 billion. Ukraine’s Finance Ministry says it needs $35 billion over the next two years to avoid default.

“The country is on the edge of economic and financial bankruptcy,” Yatsenyuk said. “This package of laws is very unpopular, very difficult, very tough. Reforms that should have been done in the past 20 years.”

It is ordinary Ukrainians who will suffer the most under the new austerity measures as the floating national currency is likely to push up inflation, while spike in domestic gas prices will impact every household. Under the IMF conditions Kiev has to cut the budget deficit, increase retail energy tariffs, and shift to a flexible exchange rate.

The state-owned energy company Naftogaz already said that it will increase household gas prices by 50 percent starting May 1, while utility companies will see a 40 percent rise as of July. According to estimates, this year Ukraine’s economy will contract by 3 percent while inflation will rise to 14 percent. The government is not planning to raise minimum wages in response to inflation.

The law adopted on Thursday, in particular, introduces a permanent application of the basic rate of corporate income tax at 18 percent and VAT at 20 percent, according to RBC-Ukraine. The government will also cancel the VAT refund for grain exporters.

The bill also introduces a 15 percent tax rate on pension payments if they exceed 10 thousand hryvnas (about $900). This tax, however, won’t really hurt an ordinary Ukrainian pensioner since an average pension in Ukraine is $160 – which may be further cut by 50% for those still working.

A progressive personal income taxation scale has also been installed to charge individuals 15, 17, 20 and 25 percent depending on their earnings. Those persons who make over 1 million hryvnas will be charged 25 percent income tax.

Car enthusiasts will also suffer as taxes on new cars and motorcycles with engine capacity exceeding 0.5 liters will also be doubled. Those who shop online and use overseas retailers will now see lowering of the limit on tax-free imports from 300 to 150 euros.

Excise taxes on alcohol and tobacco will also go up. In 2014 spirits price will see a 39 percent increase, while tobacco products will see a rise of 31.5 percent. Beer lovers will suffer the most with a 42.5 percent rise.

The legislation also reduces the total number of personnel in law enforcement agencies. Almost 80,000 people will be dismissed in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Security Service, the Office of the State Guard, and the prosecutor’s office.

(Read the full article at )

—-
Alternative Free Press -fair use-

Ohio & New York 2014 Mumps Outbreaks Only Infect Vaccinated Population

AlternativeFreePress.com

The United States has already seen more than one outbreak of the mumps in 2014, but you can’t blame people who choose not to vaccinate. Outbreaks in both New York and Ohio have occurred on campuses which include a strict vaccine mandate.

At Fordham University in New York City all students are required to be vaccinated including the vaccination for mumps, measles, and rubella (MMR), but as of February 21st, 13 cases of the mumps had been reported with 100% of those infected having already been vaccinated.

In Ohio, as of March 24th there were 63 reported cases & 97% of those infected had been vaccinated.

Officials acknowledged that the vaccine is only 80-90% effective.

Dr Tetyana Obukhanych is an Immunologist who earned her PhD in Immunology at the Rockefeller University in New York and did postdoctoral training at Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. and Stanford University in California. In an interview with Catherine Frompovich, Dr Obukhanych explains why these outbreaks are occurring among the vaccinated population:

I think this is happening because vaccination does not engage the genuine mechanism of immunity. Vaccination typically engages the immune response—that is, everything that immunologists would theoretically “want” to see being engaged in the immune system. But apparently this is not enough to confer robust protection that matches natural immunity. Our knowledge of the immune system is far from being complete.

Dr Obukhanych describes natural immunity as: “in a way, a tautological expression because immunity can only be acquired naturally at this point, only through the exposure to an infected individual, although occasionally such exposure would go asymptomatic while still establishing immunity. Nevertheless, because there is a common misconception that vaccines also confer immunity, it is sometimes necessary to use a qualifier “natural,” when referring to immunity, to distinguish it from vaccine-based protection.

In the following video Dr Obukhanych explains how protective serum titers drop very quickly after the second MMR dose, meaning some vaccinated people do not receive any lasting protection from the MMR vaccine.

Here is a screenshot of the chart in the video highlighting the data which shows the MMR booster is not very effective & provides at best, leaky immunity.

The CDC says mumps typically begins with a fever, headache, muscle aches, fatigue and loss of appetite, followed by swelling salivary glands. People unfortunate enough to catch the mumps usually recover after a week or two, but occasionally the disease can cause serious complications.

Dr. Russell Blaylock, a board-certified neurosurgeon, author and lecturer who attended the LSU School of Medicine and completed his internship and neurosurgical residency at the Medical University of South Carolina explains how herd immunity is only truly obtainable through natural immunity:

In the original description of herd immunity, the protection to the population at large occurred only if people contracted the infections naturally. The reason for this is that naturally-acquired immunity lasts for a lifetime. The vaccine proponents quickly latched onto this concept and applied it to vaccine-induced immunity. But, there was one major problem – vaccine-induced immunity lasted for only a relatively short period, from 2 to 10 years at most, and then this applies only to humoral immunity. This is why they began, silently, to suggest boosters for most vaccines, even the common childhood infections such as chickenpox, measles, mumps, and rubella.

Then they discovered an even greater problem, the boosters were lasting for only 2 years or less. This is why we are now seeing mandates that youth entering colleges have multiple vaccines, even those which they insisted gave lifelong immunity, such as the MMR. The same is being suggested for full-grown adults. Ironically, no one in the media or medical field is asking what is going on. They just accept that it must be done.

Alternative Free Press has reported previously that 40% of the recent measles outbreak in California were also full vaccinated. 10 people were identified as likely sources of the measles outbreak having traveled to high risk areas, but it was not disclosed if any of the 10 were vaccinated or not. At the time we speculated “It’s likely safe to assume that if the majority of the ten people who visited an outbreak area were not vaccinated, we would be hearing about it. I’d guess that most people who are not vaccinated would avoid travel to an area with a large outbreak & it seems reasonable to assume that many of the ten people identified were vaccinated.” While we can only speculate about the measles, these recent mumps outbreaks are infecting vaccinated populations and were definitely not caused by people choosing to skip vaccinations.

Written by Alternative Free Press
Creative Commons License
Ohio & New York 2014 Mumps Outbreaks Only Infect Vaccinated Population by AlternativeFreePress.com is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Sources for this article:

1. Mumps outbreak spreads beyond Ohio State campus http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/24/health/ohio-mumps/

2. Fordham University mumps outbreak jumps campuses http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?id=9438450

3. Interview with PhD Immunologist, Dr Tetyana Obukhanych- part 1, by Catherine Frompovich http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2012/06/13/interview-with-phd-immunologist-dr-tetyana-obukhanych-by-catherine-frompovich/

4. Forced Vaccinations, Government, and the Public Interest >http://www.thenhf.com/article.php?id=1975

5. Dr Tetyana Obukhanych Talk At Aligned Chiropractic Kelowna B.C. March 2013 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Dts3ebwWlo

RELATED:
New Jersey mumps outbreak exclusively infecting vaccinated population

—-
Alternative Free Press

Obama’s Speech on Ukraine: Propaganda and Lies

By Patrick Martin
WSWS: March 27, 2014

The speech delivered by President Barack Obama in Brussels Wednesday was a call to arms for a US-NATO confrontation against Russia. With a series of lies and evasions, Obama presented a world turned upside down in which the US and European imperialists, who backed the coup in Ukraine spearheaded by fascistic forces, are the defenders of democracy and peace.

There was little in the speech that could convince working people, either in Europe or the United States, that a policy of open-ended conflict with Russia was in their interests. That was not the purpose of the speech, which consisted of one propaganda lie after another, uttered with the assurance that there would be no serious criticism, let alone opposition, within the ruling elites of the US and Europe or from their media mouthpieces.

Obama sought to elaborate the basis for a major turn in US foreign policy—what one of his foreign policy advisers called a “strategic pivot” towards confronting Russia, deliberately employing the same term that the White House has used to describe its systematic anti-China policy in the Far East.

One aim of this strategy of confrontation is to provide a new political axis for the US-dominated NATO military structure, which has visibly frayed in the absence of the old Cold War framework.

Much of the speech was devoted to rehashing long-discredited claims that American imperialism and its European allies represent democracy, freedom and the popular will. Obama invoked the conflict between democratic ideals and the authoritarian view that “order and progress can only come when individuals surrender their rights to an all-powerful sovereign.”

But the words rang rather hollow coming from a president who has claimed absolute and unreviewable power to order the drone-missile assassination of anyone he chooses, anywhere in the world, and whose government asserts the right to collect and store the e-mails, text messages and telephone calls of the entire human race.

The focus of the speech was an indictment of Russian actions in Crimea, which was annexed last week after a popular referendum in the region. “Russia’s leadership is challenging truths that only a few weeks ago seemed self-evident,” Obama declared, “that in the 21st century, the borders of Europe cannot be redrawn with force, that international law matters, that people and nations can make their own decisions about their future.”

Of course, these are precisely the principles that successive US governments have trampled on: the 1999 US-NATO bombing of Serbia that resulted in the redrawing of its borders by force and the secession of Kosovo; the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, in flagrant violation of international law; and countless instances in which the US tramples on the rights of “people and nations” to “make their own decisions” when those decisions come into conflict with the interests of American imperialism.

The Russian government of President Vladimir Putin has pointed to the hypocrisy of the US-European outcry over Crimea, citing many of these examples, and Obama sought to rebut Putin’s arguments by employing the technique of the big lie.

He rejected any comparison between Crimea and Kosovo, denying that Kosovo was an example “of the West interfering in the affairs of a smaller country.” Obama asserted, “NATO only intervened after the people of Kosovo were systematically brutalized and killed for years,” ignoring the responsibility of the United States and the European powers, particularly Germany, for fomenting the breakup of Yugoslavia along ethnic lines. In Kosovo, the US sponsored the gangsters of the Kosovo Liberation Army, who carried out tit-for-tat atrocities against the Serb population, and now, in power, persecute the Roma and other minorities.

“Russia has pointed to America’s decision to go into Iraq as an example of Western hypocrisy,” Obama continued. “Now, it is true that the Iraq war was a subject of vigorous debate, not just around the world but in the United States, as well.”

There was no significant debate or democratic discussion in the lead-up to the US invasion of Iraq. The war was the outcome of a political conspiracy. The Bush administration went to war on the basis of brazen lies about Iraq’s supposed possession of weapons of mass destruction and its nonexistent alliance with Al Qaeda. The mass demonstrations that showed the opposition of millions of Americans, and a majority of the world’s population, were simply ignored.

After claiming he had opposed the Iraq war, Obama sought to justify its conduct and outcome, claiming, “even in Iraq, America sought to work within the international system. We did not claim or annex Iraq’s territory. We did not grab its resources for our own gain. Instead, we ended our war and left Iraq to its people in a fully sovereign Iraqi state that can make decisions about its own future.”

The truth is that the war in Iraq was the greatest crime—up to now—committed in the 21st century. More than a million Iraqis lost their lives as a result of the US invasion and occupation, and Iraq was destroyed as a functioning society. The Bush administration openly declared that the Geneva Conventions and international law did not apply either to the war in Iraq or the previous conquest and occupation of Afghanistan, a position that the Obama administration continues to uphold.

Obama seeks to rally the world against the supposed crimes of Russia in Crimea, in which, as of this writing, two people have been killed (one Ukrainian soldier and one Russian), while opposing any prosecution of the American war criminals responsible for the immense bloodbath visited upon the people of Iraq.

Instead, the US president excused the monumental crimes of his own government with the statement, “Of course, neither the United States nor Europe are perfect in adherence to our ideals. Nor do we claim to be the sole arbiter of what is right or wrong in the world.”

Actually, the US government does claim that role. Administration after administration has declared the United States to be “the indispensable nation,” the sole superpower, the country whose military-intelligence apparatus must be the world’s policeman, and whose leaders are immune from any accountability for their actions.

Obama’s arguments were no less fraudulent when he addressed the specifics of the situation in Ukraine. “Yes, we believe in democracy, with elections that are free and fair, and independent judiciaries and opposition parties, civil society and uncensored information so that individuals can make their own choices,” he claimed.

But in Ukraine, the United States and the European Union rode roughshod over national sovereignty, intervening to foment a coup that overthrew Viktor Yanukovych, an elected president, and installing in power not the “choice” of the Ukrainian people, but the choice of Washington.

This was exposed by the notorious phone calls between State Department official Victoria Nuland and US Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt, in which they discussed the pluses and minuses of various Ukrainian politicians and made their selection of “Yats”—the newly appointed stooge prime minister, Arseniy Yatsenyuk—as the best option.

Obama dismissed the charge that the US is backing fascists in Kiev with a banal reference to his grandfather serving in Patton’s army fighting the Nazis in World War II, as though this had any significance. The US government has backed countless fascists and authoritarian killers since 1945, from Franco in Spain, to the Shah in Iran, to Pinochet in Chile, to the Egyptian military butchers of today—to name only a few.

Obama made no mention of Egypt in his speech, maintaining a guilty silence over the US support for the junta that has just sentenced 529 Muslim Brotherhood supporters to death after a two-day show trial. This was a deliberate and cynical omission, as Obama referred to democratic strivings in “Tunis and Tripoli,” but not in Cairo’s Tahrir Square.

Russian charges of US collaboration with fascists in Kiev are true. US officials have repeatedly met with leaders such as Oleh Tyahnybok, head of the ultra-right Svoboda party, which is a key component of the Ukrainian cabinet, as well as officials of the neo-Nazi Right Sector, which played the role of storm troopers in the fighting to overthrow the elected government of Ukraine. In all, the US State Department and other agencies have expended $5 billion to subvert pro-Russian governments in Ukraine since the breakup of the Soviet Union.

Obama’s speech in Brussels was an attempt to justify a policy towards Russia that is aggressive, provocative and incalculably dangerous. The real goal of US actions in this crisis was suggested in the US president’s sneering reference on Tuesday to Russia as merely a “regional power.”

(Read the full article at WSWS)

—-
Alternative Free Press -fair use-

The TSA PreCheck Extortion Racket

Adam Dick
The Ron Paul Institute For Peace & Prosperity: March 27, 2014

Transportation Security Administration Administrator John Pistole touted on Tuesday the expansion of TSA’s extortion racket-style program known as the PreCheck. Pistole’s comments were part of his testimony at the US House of Representatives before the Homeland Security Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee.

Under PreCheck, travelers in airports who have taken steps including paying $85, giving over their fingerprints, and obtaining TSA approval of their background checks have a chance — but no guarantee — that TSA employees will, over a five year term, harass them a bit less than other travelers.

Pistole recounts in his prepared statement some of the metrics of PreCheck’s expansion:

To accommodate TSA’s expansion of program eligibility to a greater number of low-risk passengers, TSA has taken the following actions: expanded the number of airports participating in TSA PreCheck from the initial 40 to 117 airports; increased the number of expedited screening lanes from 46 to 600, with each lane providing the capability for doubling hourly throughput; and increased the number of U.S. airlines participating in TSA PreCheck from six to nine in FY 2013, with plans of continued expansion as airlines are ready. Today, TSA provides expedited screening to over 35% of the traveling public.

PreCheck is just like the old extortion rackets of hooligans selling protection from themselves to store owners and raiders from the countryside demanding that residents of a town pay tribute. Dressed up in the language of law, regulation, and formal application procedures this abusive practice develops a veneer of legitimacy. At its heart, though, the practice is the same whether conducted by a street gang or the TSA: pay us money and do as we say so you may avoid being abused. In the case of the TSA, the offered benefit is limiting the extent of invasive frisking and property searches conducted without even the pretense of the probable cause required under the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution.

While it may sound extreme to call TSA’s regular airport activities criminal, and its PreCheck program thus an extortion racket, the US government recognizes that TSA’s regular activities would be criminal but for the special protection TSA has as part of the national police apparatus. When legislation to remove TSA employees’ protection from prosecution for their routine on-the-job offensive touches passed the Texas House and appeared about to pass the state Senate in 2011, the US Department of Justice responded with a threat to end all commercial passenger flights through Texas airports given that the legislation would make routine TSA activities illegal.

Fingerprinting, background checks, applications, and $85 are a price many people are willing to pay in the hopes of avoiding some of the enhanced harassment that infuriates travelers in American airports. Yet, once enough people have applied to the PreCheck program, we must wonder if the US government then will make PreCheck participation a requirement for all travelers while eliminating every bit of relief from harassment the program may now provide.

(This article originally appeared at The Ron Paul Institute For Peace & Prosperity where you can also find links to sources)

—-
AlternativeFreePress.com – fair use –

Canada investigates breach of residential school survivors’ info

Privacy watchdog investigates breach in residential school survivors’ claim

By Susana Mas
CBC News: March 27, 2014

Canada’s privacy watchdog is investigating a possible breach of personal information belonging to residential school survivors, after an adjudicator working for the agency handling their compensation claims filed a police report citing blackmail.

The Indian Residential Schools Adjudication Secretariat is the administrative body that manages the claims made by residential school survivors. It is an independent, quasi-judicial tribunal established in 2007 under the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement.

Indian residential school survivors can seek compensation for suffering “sexual or serious physical abuse or another wrongful act” through an independent assessment process managed by the agency.

A spokesperson for the agency told CBC News on Wednesday that “an individual contacted the Secretariat earlier this month” claiming to have information relating to claims made by residential school survivors.

“We have not determined if he actually has any confidential information,” said Michael Tansey, a senior communications officer with the Indian Residential Schools Adjudication Secretariat, in an email to CBC News on Wednesday.

“The adjudicator has made a report to the police, and indicated that blackmail was involved.”

The adjudicator, whose identity Tansey said can not be made public, is on a leave of absence for an undetermined period of time.

(Read the full story at CBC)

—-
AlternativeFreePress.com

First Crimea Joins Russia, Next Alaska?

‘Isle be back!’ Siberian mayor seeks return of ‘Holy island’ from USA

RT: March 26, 2014

The mayor of Yakutsk claims he has a proof a small island off the coast of Alaska had been given to the Russian Orthodox Church and it still has the rights to the territory.

Mayor Aysen Nikolayev and other officials from Russia’s Far Eastern Federal District have petitioned President Vladimir Putin, the heads of both chambers of the Russian Parliament, and the Russian Foreign Minister requesting the return of Spruce Island to the church.

Researchers from Yakutsk went to the Alaskan capital Juneau to study the archive belonging to the Russian bibliographer Mikhail Vinokurov who emigrated to the USA in 1917 after the Bolshevik revolution. They discovered a certificate issued by Russian government commissioner Captain Second Rank Aleksey Peshchurov, detailing the transfer of Russian territories in Alaska to the United States. According to this document, Spruce Island has been granted to the Russian Orthodox Church ‘for eternity’.
[…]
In 1867 the Russian Empire sold Alaska and the surrounding islands to the United States for $7.2 million in gold that the Tsar needed for financing the reforms caused by the abolition of serfdom. The 46-square-kilometer Spruce Island is a part of the Kodiak Archipelago, South of Alaska. Currently about 250 people live on the island.

(Read the full story at RT)

—-
AlternativeFreePress.com

How much does the war on drugs cost you?

Jason Reed, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
Politics.co.uk: March 26, 2014

Vienna recently played host to the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND), but the tone of this year’s event was noticeably different to previous sessions.

For many years the dialogue of ‘to legalise or not to legalise’ has been wholly hypothetical and taboo, but this year saw Uruguay nail its colours firmly to the mast by being the first state to fully regulate their cannabis market. This is in breach of the 1961 Single Convention, which is often viewed upon as set in stone, unremitting in its gospel rule over global drug policies.

Uruguay held fast to their rudder and steered their ship through choppy waters; the metaphor seems all the more applicable as it was more than suggested that Uruguay are now pirates in the hostile seas of the UN single convention.

In contrast to the Latin American state’s emboldened position on cannabis, the US was more notable in its silence. Usually one of the more dictatorial participants, the US seemingly handed the baton over to Russia to assert the enforcement tone of the CND. It doesn’t take much to see why the US took more of a backseat when Colorado and Washington, two states that have also fully commercially legalised cannabis, act as very large elephants in the UN’s designated room of conformity.

As delegates attended Vienna, a more domestic issue became ripe for debate, with the emergence of a cannabis café proposal for Thanet in Kent. A tale of a few cities presents itself.

As the smoke clears, what can we learn from the polarised models of cannabis regulation? And what can this imply for the UK’s necessary debate on cannabis reforms?
If we compare the antipodal cannabis models of Uruguay and Colorado, we soon see a picture emerge.

Uruguay reformed, somewhat unpopularly, based on their need to hinder and restrict trafficking routes given their geographic turbulence in being situated in a narco-region. Polls showed that the electorate were not in favour of legalising cannabis, but with the strong leadership of Nobel Peace Prize nominee, President José Mujica, the country embarked on the regulation of their cannabis supply to roadblock cartels and traffickers.

The state-run cannabis model will undercut the illicit trade’s price: the street market sells cannabis at $1.40 (85p) a gram, with the government proposing to sell at $1 (60p). This is intelligent taxation in action and only possible through regulatory methods.

Uruguay plans to sell five commercial cannabis strains, each with ‘genetic fingerprints’ so as to allow the ability to trace the product. Only a handful of commercial companies will be allowed to produce cannabis, which will then, essentially, be handed back to the state for distribution.

If we now look at Colorado, we see that the US has taken a more liberal stance and allowed commercialisation to play a part. Critics do worry that aggressive marketing could play a detrimental role in Colorado’s model, and this may have an effect as more states begin to fully regulate their cannabis supply.

What does spring out of Colorado’s model is that of the numbers: in the first month of commercial sales, the state collected $2 million (£1.21 million) in ‘recreational’ sales alone, with the tally rising to $3.2 million (£1.93 million) with existing medical marijuana dispensaries factored in.

What we have to be clear on is that Colorado remains a moving target, subject to copious amounts of caveats, but we can look at some forecasts to spot an interesting fiscal picture that’s now emerging. It’s estimated that cannabis outlets will take in around $750 million (£453 million) to $1 billion (£600 million) in the coming fiscal year, with tax adding $65 million (£39 million) – $125 million (£75 million) to the state’s coffers.

The proposal is that the tax revenue goes towards building schools, and more notably, investment into teen rehab and addiction programmes. Colorado’s crop forecasts also tell an interesting tale, with cannabis projected to be the third most valuable crop for the fiscal year of 2014-15: corn $947 million (£572 million), hay $863 million (£521 million), cannabis $777 million (£469 million).

Opponents of reform are hailing the tax projections as insignificant compared to previous promises; this cynical angle is simply no-win spin. If revenue streams came in at more than original estimates, then it would have been a certainty that an increase in usage would have been cited as a detrimental effect and then used as leverage by those that still wish for cannabis to remain a prohibited substance.

Turning attention towards our domestic picture, let’s assess how the UK fares on the numbers. Well, it’s not pretty, and anyone with a keenness for prudence should brace themselves. Each UK taxpayer spends £400 a year on maintaining our current drug policy; we can perhaps liken this number to a UK drug policy tax.

If we break things down further then we see that the costs to the police – on cannabis laws alone – stand at around £500 million. With the onset of ever more sophisticated methods and techniques in domestic cultivation, we could conceivably see this half a billion price tag inflate over the coming years. If we allow ourselves to explore our own regulatory models then recent research from the Institute for Social and Economic Research indicates that a reformed and regulated cannabis market in England and Wales could cut the deficit by £1.2 billion – and this is a conservative estimate.

It has been trumpeted that the use of cannabis is on the decline in the UK. This is a slightly disingenuous point given that an influx of ‘legal highs’, or New Psychoactive Substances (NPS), have taken a foothold in the UK consumer market and distorts accuracy.

With suitable scepticism over the use of cannabis falling we must also look at the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) figures for cannabis farms which has seen a 15% increase in domestic farms with 3,032 in 2008 compared to 7,865 in 2011. This is by no means a metric of success that our drug laws are working by way of enforcement.

(View the full article including links to sources at at Politics.co.uk)

Jason Reed is executive director Law Enforcement Against Prohibition UK (Leap UK). Leap is a global, UN-accredited organization of senior police and enforcement personnel who advocate health and regulatory alternatives to punitive drug laws.

—-
AlternativeFreePress.com

Chevron Bought a Newspaper to Mask its Record on Safety Abuses

Crude Journalism

By Thor Benson
Vice: March 26, 2014

Richmond is tucked into California’s western tricep, a former wine town with a population just over 100,000. Under the administration of Mayor Gayle McLaughlin, the town is the largest city in the United States with a Green Party mayor. It’s also an oil town—in 1901, Standard Oil set up an operation and tank farm, choosing the location for its easy access to the San Francisco Bay. Soon after, a western terminus of the Santa Fe Railroad was built in Richmond to handle the outflux of crude. Over the course of the 20th century, Standard Oil became the Standard Oil Company of California (SOCAL), and later, Chevron.

Throughout the 90s, the Richmond refinery was fined thousands of dollars for unsafe conditions, explosions, major fires, and chemical leaks, as the plant oozed chlorine and sulfur trioxide into Richmond’s atmosphere. In August of 2012, the Richmond refinery exploded after Chevron ignored the warning of corroding pipes from the local safety board. The disaster was linked to aging pipes, which were simply clamped instead of replaced altogether. 15,000 residents in the surrounding area were forced to seek medical treatment, and Chevron’s CEO, John Watson, got a $7.5 million dollar raise.

Now that some time has passed, Chevron has decided to modernize the refinery, and has simultaneously sponsored the creation of the Richmond Standard, an online newspaper that is decidedly positive about anything the company does. The paper, whose name is a sly reference to the company that Chevron grew out of, covers minimally reported local stories on crime, public meetings, and sports. It also features a section called “Chevron Speaks,” which works as a place for the company to put forth its ideology. According to SF Gate, “the idea of the nation’s second-largest oil company funding a local news site harkens back to an era of journalism when business magnates often owned newspapers to promote their personal, financial, or political agendas. Now that mainstream newspapers are struggling to survive, online news sites are testing ways to fund their operations.”

The founding of the Standard coincides with a modernization initiative at the Richmond plant, which would allow the facility to process fuel with higher percentages of sulfur, the key to the corrosion that resulted in the 2012 plant explosion. “They’re planning on doubling the sulfur content of the crude,” Andres Soto, the Richmond Community Organizer at Communities For a Better Environment, told me.

According to Andres, Chevron wants to go from 1.5% sulfur content to 3%. Outside of the fear of another explosion, there is a serious environmental problem with the modernization and the refinery in general. “They’re publically claiming there will be no net increase in emissions,” he says. “Our suspicion is they plan on releasing more greenhouse and particulate emissions, here in the local arena, in exchange for cap and trade.”

For those of you unfamiliar with cap and trade, it’s essentially when you let one of your refineries pollute above the federal limit in exchange for another refinery polluting below the federal limit. The differentials from “caps” are traded so that in the end everyone is supposed to be meeting requirements, on average. “It’s the single largest refinery on the West Coast of the United States. As a facility, it’s the single largest emitter of green house gases in California,” Andres says. He believes the refinery will cause serious pollution to the Bay Area, and that the company will start using the port of Richmond to export tar sands to China that aren’t legal for fuel in the United States because of the sulfur content.

As you may have heard in relation to the Keystone Pipeline proposals, tar sands are semi-solid petroleum and sand mixtures that are being harvested in Alberta, Canada. The process of extracting the petroleum wastes a lot of water, and a Yale article reported last year that a company extracting petroleum used 370 million cubic meters of fresh water in 2011. Chevron could export the sands to China for their needs and save Americans time and resources, but Andres points out the emissions from shipping and the emissions China will create will circle back to America with the winds.

Chevron is attempting to convince the public that the refinery is a good idea in the pages of the Richmond Standard, typically using the promise of more jobs and money. Andres says the company is buying every billboard in town. The billboards often depict people of color, likely in an effort to convince minorities that they can trust a multinational oil conglomerate.

(Read the full story complete with links to sources at Vice)

—-
AlternativeFreePress.com

Students who use cannabis do better at school than cigarette smokers

Pot-smoking students better at school than ‘marginalized’ tobacco-smoking peers

Andrea Janus
CTV : March 25, 2014

Students who only smoke marijuana do better at school than classmates who smoke just tobacco, or who smoke both tobacco and pot, says a new study, which tracked substance use among teens over 30 years.

Researchers from the University of Toronto’s Dalla Lana School of Public Health analyzed data from a survey administered to nearly 39,000 Ontario students between 1981 and 2011. The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health asked students in Grades 7, 9 and 11 about their tobacco and marijuana use, and their academic performance.

The study found that marijuana-only users did better at school than their counterparts who smoked only cigarettes or who smoked both cigarettes and marijuana. However, the findings reflect the fact that fewer students smoke tobacco today compared to 30 years ago, and those that do make up a very “marginalized, vulnerable” population, says lead study author Michael Chaiton, assistant professor in epidemiology and public health policy.

About 92 per cent of tobacco users also use marijuana, the study found. However, only 25 per cent of marijuana uses also smoke tobacco.

“It’s better relatively,” Chaiton says of marijuana-only users’ academic performance.

(Read the full article at CTV)

—-
AlternativeFreePress.com

v0.1