For thousands of years the San people, of what is now called Botswana, lived out their lives as hunter-gatherers in Africa’s Kalahari desert.
Four years ago, the Botswana government decided it would be better for the Kalahari Bushmen to be moved to a reserve where they would have schools, clinics, and all the trappings of modern life. The government insisted the move had absolutely nothing to do with international companies itching to get their greedy paws on the diamond rich Kalahari desert.
The Bushman were forcibly removed from their land in January 2002, and since then have been fighting through the Botswana courts for the right to return.
Certainly, the reserve had more amenities than the desert. It also had isolation, boredom, and alcohol. Many of the San people succumbed to alcoholism.
This week, two of three judges decided their case was upheld. The Bushmen of the Kalahari are able to return to their homeland.
It’s one small step in the great scheme of things; one giant leap for the Bushmen. Perhaps those Botswana judges should be requested to adjudicate in the case between the Palestinians and Israelis. So far, no-one else on the planet has managed a fair judgement on the issue.
Ten thousand US scientific researchers, including 52 Nobel Laureates, have signed a statement protesting political interference in the scientific process and demanding a return to scientific integrity in government policy.
According to a recent BBC report, Dr Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment and Security said:
“It’s very difficult to make good public policy without good science, and it’s even harder to make good public policy with bad science. In the last several years, we’ve seen an increase in both the misuse of science and I would say an increase of bad science in a number of very important issues; for example, in global climate change, international peace and security, and water resources.”
“This science statement that has now been signed by the 10,000 scientists is signed by science advisers to both Republican and Democratic administrations dating back to President Eisenhower, stating that this is not business as usual and calling for this practice to stop.”
It seems the White House has been able to censor agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration because of assistance from a Republican-controlled Congress.
I refer you to an article published in the Guardian newspaper on August 24th, here 2006, clinic entitled, drugs “Peace Is For Wimps”. It is a report defining how the British government acts as an arms salesman for the major British manufacturers. It details aspects of the underlying corruption prevalent in the field; how legal loopholes are provided by government to sell arms, and their accessories, in what would otherwise be illegal transactions.
The report also highlighted a forty billion pound ($75 billion) arms deal with Saudi Arabia, brokered in 1985 by the then British prime minister, Margaret Thatcher. Evidence suggested that sixty million pounds ($110 million) was set aside by the British company BAE Systems, as a slush fund to “oil” that deal by greasing the palms of various members of the Saudi royal family – in everyday parlance, bribery.
As a result, the Serious Fraud Squad, started an investigation into these allegations but was stonewalled by successive British governments for the next fourteen years.
In August 2006, the British company, BAE Systems, announced the sale of seventy-two Eurofighters to Saudi Arabia. Saudi agreement to the deal was reached only on condition the investigations by the Serious Fraud Squad were terminated.
Today, in parliament the British Attorney General Lord Goldsmith announced the investigation was to be “discontinued” as there was “no case to answer”.
Lord Goldsmith told parliament the British prime minister, Tony Blair, had agreed that continung the investigation would cause “serious damage” to relations between Britain and the Saudis.
“Peace Is For Wimps”, by George Monbiot is available on the archives of his blog – HERE.
“Saudi Arabia has told the Bush administration that it might provide financial backing to Iraqi Sunnis in any war against Iraq’s Shiites if the United States pulls its troops out of Iraq, according to American and Arab diplomats.”
The Times also stated:
“Until now Saudi officials have promised their counterparts in the United States that they would refrain from aiding Iraq’s Sunni insurgency. But that pledge holds only as long as the United States remains in Iraq.”
Interesting, given that al Qaeda is supposedly behind the Sunni insurgency in Iraq, the leader of al Qaeda is a prominent and wealthy Saudi, and the majority of 9/11 terrorists were Sunnis from Saudi Arabia.
Underhand deals such as those conspired between BAE Systems, the British government and Saudi Arabia, are obviously commonplace. “Business” is no longer an honorable profession, but whether on this side of the Atlantic or in Europe, consists of an almost Mafia style network of corruption in which Saudi Arabia is a key operator.
George W Bush is now in a quandary. The Saudis have stymied any possibility of an American pull-out from Iraq, and George is – as the saying goes – between a rock and a hard place.
It begs the question:
Who really holds the reigns of power in this world?
