Skip to content

Cancun coolie coolie wash wash

12/12/2010

I don’t know about you guys, but the last time I had an all-night session, it involved a cocktail of alcohol and sex. And what ever arrangements that had to be ratified to allow the culmination of this ‘conference’ had been pretty much obliterated during the morning after throbbing headache and embarrassment. Mind you at the end of the session, we never penned a climate change direction.

The Cancun agreement is interesting. The summit in Copenhagen a year ago is called by many as ‘unsuccessful’ and it resulted in much embarrassment for Kevin Rudd who had doubled up and was hoping for a winning card. Many of the countries who had managed to turn the tables in Copenhagen in 2009, lead the battle in 2010. Interesting indeed.

The one country holding out this year was Bolivia. Apparently the representative of Bolivia made numerous anti-capitalist speeches in his tirade against the agreement. His concern was he wanted more money for poorer nations already affected by climate change.

Say what now?

That’s correct. Bolivia was not saying climate change was not happening. They were saying that the agreement was too weak to stop rising temperatures. In 2009 several countries ridiculed the science. In 2010, the science was no longer questionable.

Not one country in Cancun objected to the fact that climate change is real. Not one country argued that that climate change was not happening. This year, it was not about conjecture, but convention.

I remember in early 2000’s when political parties crowed about a 15% reduction in emissions by 2020. Some argued that that kind of reduction was not required. Some argued that a 15% reduction would be disastrous for the economy etc etc. The 2010 Cancun agreement ratifies much bigger emission cuts – 25% to 40% reduction by 2020.

Further, a fund is to be created to help poorer nations with the effects of climate change and it is to have at its disposal, $100 billion dollars in reserve.  China and the US made a deal. It allowed them to take a watered down emissions plan through Cancun. Further this agreement is not in any way legally binding. Just the way they like it.

The emissions reduction, despite ranging from between 25 to 40% does not in actually require any of the countries to commit to them. Further it did not extend the Kyoto agreement targets that are set to expire in 2012. All the delegates gave each other a rousing standing ovation. And so they should.

There is one reason why the democratic countries around the world are heading into deadlock. Hung parliaments it seems, while truly democratic in their nature, are the last thing any democratic countries want. In western democracies around the world, there has been a huge shift to green like ‘save the planet’ type parties. This would have continued to be the case had no Cancun agreement been made. Now major parties around the globe can now fend off the shift to the green by waving an agreement and saying they are doing stuff.

But are they? I mean how much are they really doing if they all signed off on a $100billion dollar fund designed to help poorer countries. Not with the possible effects of future climate change, but with CURRENT climate change effects.

So how far have we come since Rio.

Well this is where I switch the tact of my post to something completely different and not so at the same time – Wiki Leaks. Copenhagen failed it seemed partly to the deal struck by China and the USA.

The reason for the apparent failure of this summit was revealed in December 2010 as a set of United States diplomatic cableswere released by WikiLeaks. They showed that United States and People’s Republic of China, the world’s top two polluters,[12]joined forces to stymie every attempt made in the summit to reach an agreement. The secret framework for cooperation between two countries was outlined in May 2009 when John Kerry, chairman of the United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee met Prime Minister of China, Li Keqiang. It was revealed that in this meeting, Chinese were told that Washington could understand “China’s resistance to accepting mandatory targets at the United Nations Climate Conference, which will take place in Copenhagen” and “a new basis for ‘major cooperation’ between the United States and China on climate change” was outlined, effectively deterring world leaders from reaching a strong conclusion on climate change mitigation beyond 2012.[13][14

SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference

Coincidently the Cancun agreement succeeded because of an agreement between China and the USA. Getting my drift people?

This new agreement is historic. 18 years after been warned that climate change is an issue, all the countries have agreed to agree that this is the case. In maybe 30 years, we will have a plan to do something about it.

It’s all a little wishy washy to me.

So having appeased the tree huggers, lets move back to Wiki Leaks for a little bit.

I found this article very interesting re Julian Assange who is now the darling of those who want less secrets.

SOURCE: http://www.theage.com.au/national/portrait-of-the-hacker-as-a-paranoid-and-secretive-young-man-20101211-18thz.html

IT WAS 2am on October 6, 1994, when a 23-year-old Melbourne computer hacker, clattering at his keyboard in the glare of his screen, sent a furious message to a Melbourne filmmaker he believed had betrayed his confidence. The filmmaker’s sin, in the eyes of the hacker, was that he couldn’t keep secrets.

The hacker was Julian Assange, now the world’s most celebrated secret revealer. The filmmaker was Richard Lowenstein, then at the height of his fame as a director of award-winning music videos for the likes of INXS and U2 as well as the feature film Dogs in Space.

With hindsight, the subject of the message is heavy with irony: the failure of Lowenstein to protect information Assange regarded as confidential.

Their online encounter sheds light on the curious life, methods, motives and character of a man who has humiliated and embarrassed governments around the world by releasing massive files of secret and confidential US government documents.

Assange, in messages that started with formal legalese and descended into personal abuse, accused Lowenstein of failing to respect the confidentiality of ”off the record” conversations.

Their online encounters began on October 1, 1994, when the film director was researching a script on hackers. They ended when a furious Assange started relating details of Lowenstein’s intimate relationships, so the filmmaker stopped responding.

Irony? The man who wants the world to know get really pissed off when the world was told. Apparently there is a difference between confidentiality of private exchanges and confidentiality about his personal exchanges.

But lets be serious here. There is a serious journalism issue in regards to Wiki Leaks. That is, this guy has made a load of money from releasing information that someone else is looking at serious jail time for stealing. Further, I would very much doubt that the system that allowed the documents to be accessed in the first place will continue to exist. Therefore in Wiki Leaks desire to make governments more transparent, it in fact is making it more opaque.

While countries around the world accuse Julian Assange of being a terrorist, he denies it and then his lawyer adds that Assange is threatening to release certain information if ‘anything happens to him’. In fact he described Wiki leaks akin to a thermo nuclear device. Don’t know about you, but that kind of sounds like terrorism to me.

I’ve refrained from discussing Wiki Leaks, mainly because it is a duel edged sword. The purpose is a noble one. By releasing information businesses and governments do not want released, then apparently we are dragged into a new age of honesty. Truth, Justice and the <insert a nation of your choice here> way. But there is a problem with this much freedom. So much so that Assange encrypts phone calls to IP addresses.

Wait a minute. I mean why would he do that? Isn’t he an advocate of the right to know? Well yes he is – but not the right to know stuff he does not want people to know. I find it ironic that the champion of freedom of the press is so paranoid that he encrypts his life. Wiki leaks will NOT stop people from having secrets. What it will mean is that we encrypt it better.

So where am I going here? Well, it would be interesting would it not, to discover the money behind Wiki Leaks, especially if a major player would be say a software encryption company. But do not expect Wiki Leaks to release secret information : about it self anyway.

So let me finish with this little gem. Remember, information is one thing. Wisdom is something altogether difference. For example, did you know that Carbon is the anti-Christ?  This guy was not going to wait for Wiki Leaks to release it! All i can say is if Carbon is the anti-Christ, then we need an anti-Christ price NOW!

A. Ghebranious       2010           All Rights Reserved

Advertisements
Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: